PERFIDNY TEKST PERFIDNEJ NATURY

PERFIDNY TEKST PERFIDNEJ NATURY
Wojciech Właźliński 29. 1. 2010

Nie pierwszy raz uchodzący za poważny dziennik, New York Times, publikuje sadystyczny tekst skierowany przeciwko Polakom.  Kłamstwa jednego, Tomasza Grossa w tym wypadku, stają się podstawą do propagowania kłamstw innych. Długi elaborat  w którym  WILLARD GAYLIN,  “ “HATRED. (Nienawiść) CONFRONTING EVIL HEAD-ON”, stara się uzasadnić w perfidny sposób okrucieństwo o które autor tego paszkwilu oskarża Polaków opublikowany został w New York Times 3.8.2003.
Nie pierwszy to i z pewnością nie ostatni z serii systematycznie ukazujących się na rożnych kontynentach paszkwili na Polskę i Polaków. Dość charakterystyczną  rzeczą jest fakt, że nasilenie tego typu oskarżeń zawsze idzie w parze z nasilaniem terroryzmu i okrucieństwa wobec Palestyńczyków a także wobec innych społeczności

Zacietrzewiony w swojego rodzaju literackim sadyzmie autor nie zdawał sobie sprawy z samooskarżania. Oskarżając Polaków w celu odwrócenia uwagi od całej masy zwyrodnień i okrucieństw wobec Palestyńczyków trwających ponad pół wieku brnął chyba tylko nieświadomie w samooskarżaniu i uzasadnianiu żydowskich zbrodni.

Gaylin opisuje i oskarża Polaków o zbrodnie które jedynie on lub jemu podobni (Gross) mogli sobie wymyślić i przeprowadzać (Wandea, Rewolucja Francuska, Rewolucja Bolszewicka, Wołyń, rzeź Armeii jednej z pierwszych ośrodków kultury chrześcijańskiej, nie wymieniając wielowiekowych okrucieństw sięgających Stary Testament i Talmud. Gaylin przypisując Polakom zbrodnie usiłuje w perfidny sposób podawać ich genezę, pochodzenie, uzasadnienie, wrodzone skłonności, wręcz genetykę ich pochodzenia oraz okoliczności. Jest to w wielkim stopniu prawda tylko że nie odnosi się do Polski i Polaków lecz do jego własnej nacji:

“…ponieważ jest to dozwolone, ponieważ im wolno”. Mając taką możliwość….”

Tak i niestety The New York Times korzysta z tego i rabinickiego wyroku na pastwienie się nad Polskim Narodem. Wyroku który wydal główny “rabin” żydowskiej diaspory, Sekretarz Generalny Światowego Kongresu Żydów, Israel Singer. Oświadczył publicznie (19.4.1996):

“…Polska będzie atakowana i upokarzana na oczach całego świata jeśli nie spełni żydowskich żądań…”

Tak i niestety The New York Times korzysta z tego.

Niby poważny dziennik a za nim inne publikują te bzdury i wbijają je w głowy ludzi nieświadomych faktów. Wbija się kłamstwa, “ponieważ wolno….” i nie ma sprzeciwu, przy pomocy wszystkich możliwych środków propagandy jakie Żydzi mają do swojej dyspozycji, “ponieważ jest dozwolonym…”, i nie ma sprzeciwu,  kłamać, że miedzy innymi

“w Polsce w miejscowości Jedwabne Polacy zamordowali 1600 Żydów a zanim ich zamordowali torturowali ich i upokarzali, wydłubywali oczy kuchennymi nożami, rozczłonkowywali ich przy pomocy prostych narzędzi rolniczych, topili kobiety w płytkiej wodzie. Dzieci nabijali na widły i przed oczyma ich matek wrzucali je na rozżarzone węgle. Wszystko to w akompaniamencie kwiku radości i śmiechu ich dotychczasowych sąsiadów.”

Że spędzili ich w końcu do stodoły i spalili ich.
Autor tego artykułu w swoim sadystycznym transie tłumiącym sens, jak głuszec na tokowisku, nawet nie był w stanie opanować swoim intelektem tego, że zmieszczenie 1600 osób na powierzchni 19m x 7m jest niemożliwe. To był zewnętrzny wymiar fundamentów stodoły. Wszystko to ponieważ Żydzi “mają takie możliwości…”
Mają możliwości, tupet i odwagę pisać:

“Nawet w nazistowskich Niemczech całe społeczności “normalnych” ludzi nie zdobyły się na czyn zniszczenia swoich sąsiadów. Zwykle pozostawiali to fachowcom pasywnie przyzwalając im na to. W Polsce całe społeczności ochotniczo dokonywały rzezi swoich sąsiadów i byli zachwyceni tą działalnością.”

Dlaczego? – autor tego artykułu ma czelność pisać w ten sposób – daje sobie sam odpowiedz, zupełnie nie zdając sobie sprawy z tego w tym swoim delirium, że oskarża swój własny naród piszac o Polakach (jeśli w ogóle są podstawy do tego żeby nazywać go narodem). Oskarża także wszystkie inne narody o milczenie,” bo wolno”, „bo jest okazja”, ” bo jest dozwolone”, to co dzieje się przez ponad pół wieku w Palestynie.

Przytaczam wyjątek z opracowania prof, J. R. Nowaka na temat jednej z bardzo wielu (Nowak wymienia 400 jeszcze przed rzezią w Gaza w końcu 2008) terrorystycznych, bestialskich, zbiorowych i indywidualnych morderstw przeprowadzonych na Palestyńczykach. Akcjach w których bestialstwo jest wspólna, typową i charakterystyczną cechą nie tylko w terrorze w Palestynie lecz w Wandei i w ogóle Rewolucji Francuskiej, Rewolucji Bolszewickiej i objętych nią państwach, także po II W. Ś., Wołyniu, rzezi Armeii, nie wyczerpując tej listy.

[„Rzeź Palestyńczyków w wiosce Deir Yassin”, fragment dot. rzezi w wiosce Deir Yassin zaczerpnięty z artykułu "Prawda o Kielcach 1946 r." Prof. Jerzy Robert Nowak, Nasz Dziennik, 4. 7.2002. Skrót WW]
„Masakra
W nocy z 8 na 9 kwietnia 1948 roku 132 mężczyzn (72 z Irgunu i 60 ze Sterna) zebrało się do planowanego ataku na wioskę arabską. [...] Przez dwa kolejne dni terroryści Irgunu i Sterna zabijali w najokrutniejszy sposób swoje ofiary, niektórym z nich obcinając głowy. Według oficjalnego raportu głównego przedstawiciela Międzynarodowego Czerwonego Krzyża w Jerozolimie dr. Jacquesa de Reyniera, zamordowano 52 dzieci i rozcięto brzuchy 25 ciężarnych kobiet. Sam de Reynier znalazł m.in. ciało jeszcze żywej, potwornie okaleczonej dziewczynki. Licznym Arabom, masakrując ich, obcięto genitalia. Jacques de Reynier z obrzydzeniem wspominał, jak piękna izraelska dziewczyna pyszniła się swym nożem ociekającym krwią. [...]”

Ponizej jest artykuł WILLARD GAYLIN(A), “ “HATRED.  CONFRONTING EVIL HEAD-ON”,  w oryginale w którym zmieniłem niektóre imiona własne oraz dałem krótkie moje dopisy. Oryginalne ale podstawione pod nie zamieniona słowa pozostawiłem w jako przekreślone. Wprowadzone moje słowa zaznaczone są tłustym drukiem.  Jakże niewiele było do tego potrzebne. Ograniczyłem się tylko do terenu Palestyny bez wnikania w rozmiar żydowskich zbrodni i ludobójstwa ukrywających się pod nazwą “zbrodni komunizmu”, z ostatnich czasów a sięgających czasów biblijnych łącznie z rzezią Persów. Czyżby Willard Gaylin  aż tak obawiał się prawdy o zbrodniach swojej nacji żeby tłumić ją przypisywaniem zbrodni innym? tym dla których jest świętością ten który poświęcił siebie dla dobra innych w przeciwieństwie do tych którzy czczą Passover czyli śmierć innych dla swojego interesu. Należy wybrać altruizm Wielkanocy lub egoizm Passover.

Zapamiętać powinno się słowa Roberta Leverant, miedzy innymi,

“To co Żydzi czynią Palestyńczykom jest odrażającym. Partycypowanie w tym gdzie Żydzi mówią  “My jesteśmy ofiarami” jest ponad moimi możliwościami strawienia tego.”

Sięgając głębiej trzeba też zapamiętać słowa Jezusa Chrystusa o tej nacji.

………………………….

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/03/books/chapters/0803-1st-gaylin.html?ex=1060948144&ei=1&en=f6f9aef015acbb7d

“Hatred”
August 3, 2003
By WILLARD GAYLIN
CONFRONTING EVIL HEAD-ON

In relatively short time small minority of Jews of  Palestine murdered thousands men, women, and children and destroyed and expelled millions of native non-Jews of Palestine.
One day, in July 1941, half of the population of Jedwabne,  Poland, murdered the other half-some 1,600 men, women, and  children representing all but 7 of the town’s Jews.
Before killing them, the Jews Poles tortured and humiliated the Palestynians Jews.
They gouged out their eyes with kitchen knives, dismembered them with crude farm instruments, and drowned the women in shallow waters. Infants were pitchforked in front of their mothers and thrown onto burning coals, all accompanied by the shrieks of delight, indeed the laughter, of their neighbors.

The slaughter of the Jedwabne Jews lasted a whole day. Palestynian dwellers of towns and villages of non Jewish origin lasts since Zionists decided to create a Israeli state on the land of Palestina to this days, claiming that this is their land given them by God, (Only less then 20% of Jews may claim that they are descendents of inhabitants of this land.) And their neighbors, the entire Jewish Polish population of the town, either witnessed or participated in the torment. Roughly 80 percent of the adult Jewish Polish males were […] identified by name as active participants. Even in Nazi Germany whole communities of “normal” people did not rise up to destroy their neighbors. They mostly left that to the professionals while they passively assented-crime enough. In  Poland new created and consecutively expanded State of Israel an entire community voluntarily butchered their neighbors and delighted in the activity.

How can one explain such cold passion, such monumental hatred, such cruelty-not on the part of some insane and deranged madman-but by an entire populace in concert, and against the very neighbors who had previously shared their everyday community and life? Authors of many books and articles Jan T. Gross, who wrote an account of the slaughter in their his remarkable documentaries book, Neighbors,   made no attempt to explain the phenomenon, having set as his task the meticulous documentation of this seemingly incredible event.

A distinguished journalist, commenting on these this documentaries book in his column, addressed the question of motivation (always a treacherous and difficult assignment), which these authors Gross chose to ignore. His answer to the question of why the Jews Poles acted with such bestiality and hatred was “because it was permitted. Because they could.”  This response implies that given the opportunity, we would all delight in such pursuits; thus he denied the special impact of history, culture, religious passion, individual and mass psychology, and paranoia-and blamed it squarely on human nature.

As a lifelong student of human nature and human behavior, I know this to be wrong, dangerously wrong. All of us have the opportunity to torture animals, but the majority of us do not. We are disgusted and bewildered by that minority that takes pleasure in doing so. Surely, then, we would not all avail ourselves of the opportunity to torture our neighbors, given the opportunity. I would not pitchfork an infant merely because the opportunity presented itself (“because it was permitted”), nor would the journalist. I would not pitchfork an infant under duress, nor would he. I would like to think that neither one of us would do it even at risk of our lives, but of this I cannot be sure. And I suspect that the columnist himself, when not pressed by journalistic deadlines, would agree that this slaughter was not purely opportunistic.

To say that a massacre such as the one at many towns and villages of Palestine Jedwabne is not normal to human conduct is obviously not to deny that it is within the stretch of human behavior. We know that it was done. But it was beyond normal expectations. A tsunami may occasionally devastate the coast of Japan, drowning thousands, but we do not consider it an expected or reasonable aspect of weather conditions. Human behavior is as unpredictable as, and more variable than, the weather. Such behavior could not have been anticipated by most of us and even now is not believed by many.

Still, while not “natural,” hatred is a function of human nature. To understand hatred, one must understand the special qualities of human, and only human, life. Human behavior is famous for its plasticity and variability. As a result, we have witnessed such brothers in humanity as the grotesque Pol Pot and the glorious Saint Francis. Neither of these extremes expresses the expectations one has for ordinary people, but both are testament to the protean nature of the human species. I am not offering these two eccentrics as products of genetic determinism, as I might have with the examples of Newton or Mozart. I am merely acknowledging that conditions can exploit human plasticity to produce unexpected extremes even in relatively normal people. Had I been born in a Palestinian refugee camp and exposed to precisely the same conditions as a suicide bomber, I might have become a suicide bomber. But then again, I might not have. Culture shapes personality, but inheritance is also relevant. Not all of those raised in the camps are prepared to become suicide bombers.

Most animals-from the insect to the higher mammals-have few choices of importance. Everything essential is genetically wired in: how they live, where they live, what they eat, when they mate. This is not true of human beings: We live in tropical islands and arid deserts; in Arctic tundra and equatorial jungles; we control when we have children, if we  have children, even how we have children. As a result, the differences among human beings in size, strength, imagination, intelligence, and temperament are unparalleled
in the animal kingdom.

Penguins not only look alike, they are alike-not just in our eyes, but in actuality. They possess limited capacity to deviate from their nature. We, in contrast, share with nature in our own design. We were not endowed by nature with wings, but still we fly-and faster than the speed of sound. If a panda cannot find bamboo shoots, he dies. It is bamboo shoots or nothing for him. If we were surviving on bamboo shoots and ran out, we’d eat the panda.

We are more variable because we possess more traits that can be modified; we use our highly developed brains to adapt to the widely diverse environments our imagination drives us to explore. Our lifestyles, conduct, and very physical appearances are so alterable that we might appear to an outside observer as multiple and varied species. This capacity to redesign ourselves, to slip the yoke of instinct and genetics, is a cardinal element of human nature.

The result of this variability is that we are capable of developing into saints or monsters. Still, both of these extremes are alien to the average person leading his ordinary life. Terrorists, sadists, and torturers are the evil examples that define the borders of normal human behavior. We must not trivialize the tragic extremes of their hatred by assuming that they are commonplace representatives of human variability. Such a judgment is an attempt to deny their depravity and contain our anxiety. These people are different from you and me. We are capable of feeling transient extremes of rage that we call hatred, but the true haters live daily with their hatred. Their hatred is a way of life. It is, beyond that, often their raison d’tre. They are obsessed with their enemies, attached to them in a paranoid partnership. It is this attachment that defines true hatred.

When we confront the true hater, he frightens us. Too often we struggle to avoid facing this extreme hatred by emotionally distancing ourselves from it. One way to do this is through denial, a mental defense mechanism that permits us to cope in the presence of the unbearable. Its classic embodiment is in the denial of death that is part of the universal human condition. Human beings are burdened with the awareness that their lives must end, independent of anything they may do. We handle the existential dread of death by denying its presence. We go on living as though there were no end. We must do that. We are “in God’s hands.” It is all part of “a grand design.” Our dead child is “safe now,” “in a better place.”

I do not believe that it is mere coincidence that during a period in which terrorists purposely targeted buses of schoolchildren for maximum effect, the American public
embraced a novel like The Lovely Bones, in which dismembered and murdered children are portrayed as living in heaven, sucking lollipops, and playing in fields of flowers in perpetual bloom. We must find ways to avoid facing the abominable and incomprehensible.

Another way of distancing ourselves from horror is by romanticizing it. The right to a “death with dignity” is a recent shibboleth of medical reformers. What they really want is a death without the dying. Not the retching, puking, pained, and bloody death of the intensive care unit, but the romantic death of Love Story and La Traviata. Of course, we all wish for a “proper” and “dignified” death, but we are unlikely to get it. Dying is rarely dignified, and death is the ultimate indignity. Still we dream of a painless and peaceful death in our sleep, in the comfort of our homes, with the companionship of our loved ones. We create a romantic and rarely achievable illusion. We treat hatred the same way.

A startling and unexpected example of romanticizing an act of hatred appeared in an article in the New York Times on April 5, 2002. Unexpected, because it was after 9/11, and in New York City. The article was entitled “2 Girls, Divided by War, Joined in Carnage.” It featured large side-by-side, strikingly similar, pictures of two lovely brunette teenage girls.

“Two high school seniors in jeans with flowing black hair, the teen-age girls walked next to each other up to the entrance of a Jerusalem supermarket last Friday….

“The vastly different trajectories of their lives intersected for one deadly moment, mirroring the intimate conflict of their two peoples. At the door of the supermarket, Ms. Akhras detonated the explosives, killing Ms. Levy and a security guard, along with herself.” as an act of desperation against Jewish cruelty and murderers.

The total effect of the article, whether intended or not, was to equate the two in tragedy, like star-crossed lovers drawn to a common cataclysmic end in a romantic movie like Titanic. As the article indicates, they were drawn to their deaths via the irony of “two vastly different trajectories.” But what distinguished the two was not simply their differing orbits, but their purposes, their reasons for being in that particular grocery store at that particular time. As the article itself succinctly stated: “Ayat al-Akhras, 18, from the Dheisheh refugee camp near Bethlehem, was carrying a bomb. Rachel Levy, 17, from a neighborhood nearby, was carrying her mother’s shopping list for a Sabbath eve dinner.” Rachel’s purpose was to prepare for celebration of the Sabbath. Ayat’s mission was to kill Rachel and as many more of her kind as she could. One was a murderer and the other her victim, in reversed order.

I am not denying the tragedy inherent in the life of the bomber. I admit to being touched by the frustration, the poverty, and the deprivation of the Palestinian refugees. But this story, occurring only seven months after the World Trade Center bombing, indicates the peculiar distortion that remoteness allows, the romanticizing made possible when identification is mitigated by distance. Can anyone imagine the New York Times running a similar article with the pictures of  bombers od hotel David Muhammed Atta side by side with a New York City fireman of his age and general appearance? Would the reporter do an extended comparison of their youth and backgrounds, and then describe them as “two young men drawn together by different trajectories,” thereby erasing all distinctions between murderer and victim? We want the fireman to be a tragic hero; we do not want to hear of his foibles and imperfections. Bombers od hotel David Muhammed Atta Is are the identified villains; we are not prepared to hear that they he loved dogs and were was kind to their mothers his mother.

All of us are more capable of distancing ourselves from hatred when we are not bound to the victims in a community of identity. Even in the wake of the Hotel David World Trade Center bombing, in a country as USA in a city like New York , with great affinities to the Israelis, we do not truly identify with them. They are not of us and we will not “feel their pain” for long. We set different standards for Palestinians Israeli activities of retribution or self-defense in an assault on the Israeli Palestinians than we do for our own pursuit of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.

We are reluctant-unwilling-to acknowledge and condemn hatred, to confront evil head-on. Evil is the Medusa’s head. To see it directly might turn us to stone. So we “rationalize” it. We make it comfortable, by explaining it in everyday terms of sociology and psychology. We look to politics and economics to explain why and how hate-driven  acts occur, forgetting that hatred is ultimately a pathological mental mind-set. In such a way we trivialize the acts of terror and in the process romanticize the terrorists, supplying them with ready defenses.

In an article in the Nation magazine, Patricia J. Williams bitterly anticipated the eventual distancing from evil in relation to a once-notorious hate crime, the murder of Matthew Shepard, a twenty-one-year-old man who, on October 6, 1998, in Laramie, Wyoming, was severely beaten and then bound to a fence and left to die. Apparently Matthew
Shepard was viciously killed only because he was gay.

Williams wrote:
So here we are, at two minutes after the funeral of Matthew Shepard. The media are awash in earnest condemnation. But mark my words, after three and a half minutes, someone will casually suggest that hatred is just a matter of “ignorance” and “stupidity” and there’s no sense in analyzing it too much, because the killers were “just a couple of rednecks.” If you’re still talking about Matthew Shepard after four minutes, you will be urged to shut up and get on with the healing process. After five minutes, you’ll be accused of “magnifying” an isolated misfortune. After six minutes, you will face charges of “exploiting for personal profit what has already been laid to rest.”

Williams is arguing against a moral relativism that has been pervasive in modern culture. Moral relativism denies absolute evil. It abandons strict moral rules, judging behavior in terms of motivation and life history. As a result, we are reluctant to condemn a crime or a criminal. Instead we attempt to “understand” and “treat” the criminal, as we are reluctant to commit what the eminent psychiatrist, Karl Menninger, called “the crime of punishment” in the 1950s. This moral relativism has been supported by a psychoanalytic view of behavior that perceives all present-day behavior as the inevitable-and therefore nonculpable-product of our developmental past. We commit abominable acts because we were conditioned to do so. Since we have no choice, it is not our fault. This reasoning is an imaginative and useful way of treating mental illness in a health setting. I earn my living that way. But it is no way to run a country.

Psychoanalysis erased the formerly rigid distinction between normal and sick behavior and expanded the definition of mental illness beyond anything imaginable in  the nineteenth century.

Excerpted from HATRED by Willard Gaylin Copyright 2003 by Willard Gaylin
Excerpted by permission. All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.

Former Soviet Jewish Communist Analyzes Communism – reviews by Jan Peczkis

Review of Igal Halfin. (2009). Stalinist Confessions. University of Pittsburg Press. Reviewer: Mr. Jan Peczkis
The Relatively Indiscriminate Nature of the Great Purge (1934-1939)
This work details how the Soviet totalitarian state labeled people “enemies” and dealt with them. One characteristic feature of this book is the reprinting of many relevant Soviet-era political cartoons, complete with translations of the Russian.
This work also emphasizes biographical details. For instance, Genrikh Iagoda (Yagoda) was head of the NKVD. In the late 1930′s, Yagoda was successively succeeded by Nikolai Ezhov (Yezhov) and then by Lavrentii Beriia (Lavrenti Beria) as head of the NKVD. (e. g., p. 224).
Year-by-year statistics are provided for the indictments and executions during the Great Purge. (p. 399). According to the figures cited by Halfin, a total of 2,029,557 Soviet citizens were indicted and 688,647 executed.
It is possible that the NKVD, like the Nazis, included the use of poison gas in mass executions. On one hand, no Soviet document mentions use of poison gas. On the other hand, a number of NKVD officials testified of the use of trucks converted into mobile gas chambers, with the truck exhaust being routed into the compartment which held the prisoners. (p. 463).
Let us now consider some of the internal contradictions in Communist ideology which are alluded-to by Halfin:
The different manifestations of Soviet leftist radicalism were, in essence, not very different from each other. Halfin writes: “It was sometimes difficult to distinguish between a populist and a Social Democrat, a Bolshevik and a Menshevik, a Stalinist and a Trotskyist–after all, they professed the same revolutionary values, spoke the same Marxian language, adhered to the same emancipatory project.” (p. 3). [These facts contradict modern leftists who try to dichotomize "Trotskyites" and "Stalinists", etc.].
Now who was the “revolutionary” and who was the “counterrevolutionary?”  Halfin comments: “The carnivalesque logic of the Great Purge is evident in every field…As the purges progressed, the NKVD’s snares captured huge numbers of its own investigators…20,000 NKVD employees were shot in 1936-1938…The higher one was in the Party hierarchy, the better were one’s changes of being arrested.” (p. 425).
Since time immemorial, Communists have labeled those who disagreed with them as fascists and Nazis. Interestingly, Soviet cartoons went as far as calling Trotsky a fascist and Nazi supporter. (p. 347).
It is also interesting to note that, for all the Communist rhetoric about the “working class”, this was in actuality an ideological/propaganda construct. Halfin comments: “The Communist party was the party of the proletariat, but proletarian was a way of thinking, not a station in life to which one was born. Every individual who assumed the proletarian perspective could become a member of the Party (and, inversely, workers with bruises on their hands were barred entrance if their consciousness was not ripe).” (p. 372).
………………………….
Review of Intimate Enemies: Demonizing the Bolshevik Opposition, 1918-1928, by Igal Halfin (2007). University of Pittsburg Press. Reviewer: Mr. Jan Peczkis
Communism as a Rigid, Doctrinaire Ideology
This work emphasizes how Communists sought to define their ideology after the Russian Revolution. Emphasis is placed upon the Lenin-Trotsky split.
In many ways, post-revolutionary Soviet Communism resembled an intellectual straightjacket, as described by Halfin: “Bolsheviks understood opposition to be not so much a political platform as a spiritual predicament—a dangerous infirmity of consciousness. Because emancipatory truth was supposed to speak in a single voice, to be in opposition to the Central Committee meant to challenge proletarian truth, to become a source of discord in the brotherhood of the elect.” (p. 22). Also: “Everybody knew what deviants were deviating from: the straight line the working class traveled to salvation. The Bolsheviks maintained that only one line connected the here and now with the classless society to come, that the Party had been charged with finding this line, and that the writings of Marx and Engels offered the Party invaluable help with that endeavor.” (p. 55).
The following description of the rhetorical excesses of Soviet Communism is very much applicable to present-day left-wing movements: “‘Infatuated with talking’, the Bolsheviks developed a whole revolutionary lexicon, with its special similes and double meanings, its own comic tradition. They were masters of invective, diatribe, peroration, and an extravagant verbal vendetta. Indeed, their enjoyment of their own invective jumps out at the reader from the page.” (p. 77).
As for the Communist war on religion, it is interesting to note that the Soviet Communists felt more threatened by the Baptists (considered sects) than by the Russian Orthodox Church. Halfin comments: “Baptists were generally seen as a more serious challenge to Communism than Orthodox Christians. Traditional faith was mechanical, and once enlightened an Orthodox Christian lost his superstitions. Sectarians, by contrast, possessed a fully developed worldview of their own…Christians who recognized the justice of Communism in the domain of social life were considered more harmful and dangerous than Christians who openly approved a restoration of the tsarist regime because they were likely to advance a well-thought-out alternative to the Communist method of attaining equality.” (p. 313).

………………………………..

Review of Language and Revolution, edited by Igal Halfin (2002). Frank Cass, London, Portland, Oregon. Reviewer: Mr. Jan Peczkis
Insights into Communism and Nazism and Their Similarities
This anthology brings up many concepts and ideas, and I mention only a few of them. Nowadays, Nazism is commonly misrepresented as extreme conservatism (no doubt mainly by those who dislike modern conservatives), but Halfin rejects this: “There are additional affinities between Communism and Nazism. Thus it is not easy to uphold the dichotomy between the future-oriented Communists and the backward-oriented Nazis: Hitler’s regime was forward-looking in so far as it denounced the old Germany, despised Wilhelmine conservatives and constantly called for a transformative movement forward…Much to the consternation of many twentieth-century leftist radicals, Goebbels, too, prided himself on being a revolutionary.” (p. 6). Nazism was progressive in various other ways, as pointed out by Peter Fritzche (p. 163, 177): “Indeed, fascists explicitly characterized their project as one of creating new men and new women who would meet the exigencies and opportunities of the post-war period…The Nazi New Man put great value on mechanical ability; building instruments, repairing a motorcycle or car, or joining a glider team…” (p. 177).
Nor were fascism and Nazism manifestations of extreme nationalism. They instead constituted a radical, racialist form of identity: “This was anything but pre-war nationalism, hurrah patriotism, or imperial nostalgia. Rather, this rebirth depended on the perceived violence of the war’s break with the past, the scope of mobilization the war entailed, and the collective and national nature of the efforts the war demanded.” (Fritzche, p. 170).
Dan Diner has an interesting perspective on historical memories: “The Irish, the Poles, the Serbs and the Jews, for example, are generally reckoned to possess significantly long historical memory spans. The British, the French, and the Germans, on the other hand, are blessed with shorter memories.” (p. 383). He also criticizes Heller’s (anti-Polish) ON THE EDGE OF DESTRUCTION for reading the Holocaust backwards into time, in effect fusing pre-Holocaust events in prewar Poland with Holocaust ones under Nazi German rule—a phenomenon which he previously termed “compressed time”. (p. 385). Finally, he informs us that the Nazis did not require German Jews to wear the Star of David until 1941, long after the Nazi ascension to power in 1933. (p. 388). This reminds us that Nazi policies towards Jews were neither static nor unchangeable, and that Nazi exterminatory plans against Jews developed with time.

…………………………………………..

Review of: Halfin, Igal (2003) Terror in My Soul. Harvard University Press. Reviewer: Mr. Jan Peczkis
Working Communist Teachings into Soviet Society
After the Russian Revolution, Communists shifted their concern from that of acquiring power to that of stamping out all opposition or potential dissent. Nearly half of the Communists purged from Leningrad State University in 1924 were of noble or intelligentsia background. (p. 215). Communists also sought to uncover and to neutralize “passive” tendencies against the Revolutionary state, including “degeneracy”. Some of this makes for funny reading now, such as masturbation as a form of “degeneracy”.
Communists rewrote the Decalogue. (p. 129). Stealing became OK if one was “expropriating the expropriators”. Killing became OK if it was the killing of a class enemy. Honoring one’s father and mother were only recognized if they recognized and supported the Revolution. Adultery, and other sexual activity, was encouraged if they promoted the growth of collectivist feeling.
The Communists sought to make a “New Soviet Man.” Because they believed in the perfectibility of man, they rejected genetic determinism. (p. 234). A form of eugenics was also encouraged. (See also p. 323).
Halfin supports a figure of 5-6 million dead as the price of collectivization. (p. 285). Victims of the 1936-1938 purge are reckoned much lower.
………………………………
Review of: Halfin, Igal (1999)  From Darkness to Light. University of Pittsburg Press. Reviewer: Mr. Jan Peczkis
A Philosophical Analysis of Communism
Israeli scholar Igal Halfin has written several works on Communism, and, in this book, describes his motivation for doing so: “Raised as a Marxist, I have tried in writing this volume to come to terms my upbringing. Intellectually, I rebelled. Today I contend that Marxism, with its denial of the present and its dream of total transparency and equality, is a dangerous political doctrine directly responsible for many of the atrocities my parents witnessed.” (p. xi).
This work requires a fairly good background in general and political philosophy to appreciate fully. Much emphasis is given to the parallels between Communism and certain motifs found in Christianity and Gnosticism. These include messianism, the battle between good and evil and the apocalyptic final triumph of good, utopianism, the salvational quality of knowledge, etc.
Communism is anti-religious because it is, in a sense, a religion—albeit a secular religion. Halfin comments: “The metaphysical redeemer naturally became an object of veneration. Lunacharskii declared the proletariat to be God; Alexandra Kollontai, a leading Bolshevik feminist, wrote that ‘we overthrow the former gods in order to set up in their place our deity.’” (p. 97).
Halfin includes a table of prospective students rejected for admission to Tomsk University in 1926 and 1927. Most of them were rejected not owing to lack of qualification, but because of their background. These included children of clergy, of big landlords, etc. (p. 262).

List otwarty do Pana Brattmana

List z angielskiego oryginału na polski przetłumaczył i wytłuszczeń dokonał autor. Przedruki skrócone dozwolone tylko za zgodą autora.

List w orginale angielskim z Indymedia, reprodukowany na antypolskim rasistowskim sajcie Brattmana, pretendującego do sprawiedliwości za Szoa wrednymi metodami talmudyzmu rabinicznego: obwiń ofiarę!

http://isurvived.org/Frameset4References/-OpenLetter2Brattman.html

Zobacz sam na tych parszywych judeocentrycznych stronach zakłamanego holokaustianizmu:

http://isurvived.org/InTheNews/Editorial_Remarks-Poland.html#Remarks

Przestępcy ze skrajnych globalnych organizacji syjonistycznych podpierają się holokaustianizmem, nielegalnie roszcząc o restytucje b. mienia żydowskiego na terenie Polski na astronomiczne sumy. Rząd “polski” najprawdopodobniej ulegnie rabunkowemu szantażowi i przekaże na rzecz bandy judeocentrycznej ziemie polskie (lasy państwowe, ziemie b. PGR-ów). Droga do Judeopolonii otwarta…

Polskie (bez cudzysłowu) służby, co robicie z tym szajsem? Minęło ponad 5 lat od czasu mej interwencji – co zrobiliście żeby zamknąć gębę temu łachudrze, ukarać za opluwanie Polaków i fałszowanie historii?  Polskie strony o podobnej treści, ale zawierające prawdę o kompleksie jot, zostałyby zdetonowane ładunkiem z Dimony, mówiąc przenośnią ulubioną wszawym judeocentrykom.

Sianie nienawiści i kłamstwa propagandowe nt. ludobójstwa są karalne, a ten gnojek w dalszym ciągu kłamie w żywe oczy, opluwa Polski Naród, wzniecając nienawiść do wszystkich Zydów u gojowskich niewykształconych mas, o co także chodzi judeocentrycznym SS-ynom.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

List otwarty do Pana Brattmana, Editor@Isurvived.org

31.5.2004

Mr. Brattman,

Władze powinny przyjrzeć się bliżej Pańskiej szmalcowej socjopatii. Rząd Polski powinien zaskarżyć Pana i organizację stojącą za Panem. Polskie matki powinny czytać Pana nazwisko dzieciom, by utrwalić w nich lęk przed syjonistycznym potworem.

Sugeruje Pan potworne czyny zdecydowanej większości Polaków i podkreśla zbiorowy charakter rzekomych zbrodni: pod względem zezwierzęcenia, nienawiści i dobrowolnego prześladowania Żydów, Polska plasuje się bardzo blisko reżimu hitlerowskiego, a powiązanie Polski z bezpośrednim i dobrowolnym udziałem w Holokauście nazistów nie ulega wątpliwości. (http://isurvived.org/InTheNews/Hungary-holo_Memorial.html)

Przytacza Pan rażąco zniekształcone przypadki, by podeprzeć swą absurdalną opinię. Gdyby polskie zachowanie było choć odrobinę zbliżone do nazistowskiego barbarzyństwa, zostałoby po tym pełno dowodów po II Wojnie Światowej. Materiał prasowy o przeprosinach przez polskiego prezydenta, to też nie dowód. Historycy dowiedli mu, że nie znaleźli dowodów wysuwanych oskarżeń. Ktoś desperacko potrzebował „przyznania się” w czasie ataku Izraela na Palestyńczyków.

Jest dość dowodów świadczących o wielkiej pomocy Żydom ze strony Polaków. Przeważającej ilości Żydom z Polski dobrze wiadomo, że większość polskich Żydów, pozostałych przy życiu po ludobójstwie hitlerowskim, zawdzięcza uratowanie polskim nie-Żydom. Polacy tak skutecznie chronili Żydów, że izraelski pomnik ku czci takich ludzi wymienia więcej Polaków niż jakikolwiek inny naród.

Jakaś część Polaków mogła zachować się źle, ale naród ma obowiązek bronić się przed ludobójstwem. Wielu polskich Żydów pomagało w okrucieństwach sowietom, aż Hitler obrócił się przeciw Żydom, zerwawszy antypolski pakt z ZSRR. Plan hitlerowsko-sowiecki eksterminował 80 % polskiej inteligencji. Żydowskie zbrodnie przeciw Polakom trwały, kiedy Żydzi weszli liczebnie w skład powojennego rządu komunistycznego w Polsce.

Wybiela Pan zbrodnie żydowskie, a wskazuje palcem na Polaków. Nawet, jeśli Polacy popełniliby zbrodnie w stosunku do Żydów-komunistów w 50, spośród tysięcy innych wsi, nie można tego nazwać przeważającą większością w 35-ciomilionowym narodzie (minus 3 do 4 mln mniejszości, w większości Żydów). Pańskie zdanie na temat polskiego zachowania się jest równie nie na miejscu: w najlepszym wypadku [Polacy] byli obojętni, a w najgorszym – popełnili okrucieństwa przekraczające jakikolwiek ludzki wymiar. To jest oczywista demonizacja.

Odwrócenie ról

Wszystkie Pana przesłanki są oczywiście błędne i prowokacyjne. Pokazuje Pan znaki sponsorów i celu, aprobując artykuł prasowy napisany jak na zamówienie rewizjonistów syjonistycznych i niemieckich. Koła te często używają słowa „polski”, a rzadko – „niemiecki”, kiedy mowa o zbrodniach nazistów. Manipulując informacją o tragedii żydowskiej, prowokuje Pan nastroje antypolskie. Te nastroje rosną także w polskich środkach przekazu, w rękach syjonistów, pod przykrywką zwalczania antysemityzmu.

Zamiast nienawiści wynalezionej na bieżące potrzeby polityczne syjonistów, społeczność żydowska powinna okazać większości Polakom wieczną wdzięczność. Pańska cała absurdalna kampania jest ostemplowana przez Przemysł Holocaustu. Podczas gdy USA, Izrael, Niemcy i „społeczność międzynarodowa” zmierza prosto w faszyzm, Pańska publiczność powinna zastanowić się nad głębszymi powiązaniami:

1. Podobieństwo do obecnej niemieckiej kampanii wybielania zbrodni hitlerowskich. Niemieccy rewizjoniści bardzo pragnęliby rozłożyć swoją winę na innych, jeśli nie w ogóle oczyścić się ze zbrodni. Przemysł Holocaustu pasowałby im na partnera, aby wybielić swe zbrodnie zanim rozpoczną Drang nach Osten w Unii Europejskiej. Szuka Pan w polskim narodzie kozła ofiarnego, odwracając uwagę publiczną od zbrodni Żydów-komunistów na Polakach.

2. Podejrzenia o współpracę syjonistów z amerykańską administracją. Istnieją poważne pytania odnośnie zamieszania Mosadu i FBI w tragedię 11 IX. Czytałem z niedowierzaniem o Ustawie z 2004 roku nt. Globalnej Świadomości o Antysemityzmie (Global Anti-Semitism Awareness Act of 2004), przedłożonej w Kongresie USA 28.4.2004 roku: zatwierdzić założenie Biura Obserwacji i Zwalczania Antysemityzmu wewnątrz Departamentu Stanu USA, wymagać włączenia informacji nt. czynów antysemickich na świecie w corocznych raportach Departamentu Stanu oraz inne cele. Ustawa unieważni wszelkie dochodzenia. Nic dziwnego, że grozi Pan FBI swym uprzejmym oponentom.

Długi

Biorąc pod uwagę wartość życia ludzkiego w planowaniu bezpieczeństwa publicznego obecnie w Niemczech, Niemcy winne są nam nie miliardy, a dziesiątki trylionów euro za nasze straty biologiczne, kulturowe i materialne. Przyjęlibyśmy częściową zapłatę w formie ziem zgermanizowanych Słowian między Odrą a Łabą. Ale nawet tak obniżona należność wpędziłaby naród niemiecki w wieczną nędzę. Świadomy tak ogromnego ciężaru finansowego na rzecz swych wynędzniałych i biologicznie wyniszczonych wschodnich sąsiadów, rząd niemiecki pozuje do zdjęć pojednania, podczas gdy w pełni popiera rewizjonistów.

Mamy powiedzenie „kochajmy się jak bracia, a liczmy się jak Żydzi”. Moglibyśmy przygotować rachunek za uchronienie tysięcy Żydów przez Polaków oraz za straty biologiczne spowodowane przez Żydów-komunistów. Roszczenia syjonistów do nieruchomości w Polsce byłyby przy tym śmiesznie niskie.

Jeśli pragnie Pan pojednania, Mr. Brattman, niech Pan zacznie od demaskowania własnej propagandy. Pana postępowanie wzmacnia polską jak i międzynarodową urazę do syjonistów i rewizjonistów.

Dziwi się Pan: Wychodzi poza ludzkie zrozumienie, jak kraj mógł mieć tak mało poszanowania i względu dla 6 mln swych własnych obywateli, którzy zginęli podczas Holocaustu. Połowa z łącznej liczby 12 tys. miejsc hitlerowskiej zagłady znajdowała się na terytorium Polski. Do zdecydowanej większości z nich można dotrzeć, kierując się znakiem, noszącym winietę najwyższego polskiego odznaczenia, nadanego wszystkim ofiarom, tak obcym jak i polskim obywatelom, włącznie z Żydami, Cyganami, homoseksualistami i Świadkami Jehowy.

Chce Pan większego pomnika dla wszystkich ofiar? Zbierzcie pieniądze. My zbudujemy, częściowo na ziemi, którą syjoniści zagarnęli w Polsce jako żydowską. Oczywiście, jeśli syjoniści POZWOLĄ nam wybudować wspólny pomnik. Porozstawiali nas po kątach wokół „ich” pomnika w Auschwitz.

Pytanie

Z Pana niedorzecznych komentarzy oraz z oryginalnej e-poczty, którą Pan wybiorczo cytuje (i z tej, której Pan nie cytuje), wnioskuję, że jest Pan propagandystą i kłamcą. Wystarczająco dowiódł Pan braku dobrej woli i otwartego umysłu. Zarzuca Pan oponentom to, co Pan sam robi: e-krzyczy, terroryzuje, manipuluje informacją, zastrasza. Uczciwi Żydzi oraz obcokrajowcy obeznani z historią Polski, potępiają Pana prezentacje.

Dla kogo Pan pracuje i jaki jest cel Pana zleceniodawców?

Czy młodzi Polacy mają bezkrytycznie zatwierdzić zbrodnie syjonistycznego Izraela, w pokucie za rzekome okrucieństwa swych rodziców podczas II Wojny Światowej? Pańskie przekręcanie faktów może wywołać nienawiść młodszego pokolenia Polaków do Żydów oraz międzynarodowej młodzieży do Polaków. Czy to jest celem Pana witryny internetowej?

Pozwalam opublikować mój list bez zmian, ale nie zgadzam się, by Pan go skrócił lub cytował. Pod żadnym pozorem nie zgadzam się na to, ponieważ poważnie spaczył Pan znaczenie otrzymanej e-poczty. Odmówił Pan też usunięcia e-adresów i poczty z witryny, użył bagatelizującego i łaskawego tonu w stosunku do oponentów oraz zastraszył ich i groził im.

Złamał Pan cyber-etykietę i prawo odnośnie rozpowszechniania fałszywej informacji celem demonizowania i nienawiści etnicznej. Demonizuje się naród przed atakiem na niego. Osoba, która przeżyła Holocaust, powinna to rozumieć.

dr Piotr Bein, PEng
Autor i publicysta, specjalista w demaskowaniu propagandy

Kopia: Konsul Polski w Los Angeles, consulplla@consulplla.org

The Guardian – scientifically challenged

The Guardian – scientifically challenged
http://www.llrc.org/

Simon Jenkins’ opinionated and unscientific rant on Friday 8th January 2010 [1] is not worth wasting time on. However, The Guardian’s staff, reporting over that weekend (7th to 11th January 2010), have fallen victim to a long-running propaganda campaign.
Their reportage suffers from the same problem as Nuclear Nightmares, Horizon’s documentary of July 2006, which was so biased the BBC Trust had to rule against it. Nuclear Nightmares and The Guardian presented the issue as a straight fight between the seriously flawed establishment model known as “Linear No Threshold” (LNT) and a sub-linear one which postulates that low levels of radiation are proportionately less harmful than LNT.

The BBC ruled against “Nuclear Nightmares” for ignoring the third hypothesis – a supra-linear one – that low levels of radiation are proportionately MORE harmful. There are sound radiobiological mechanisms supporting this idea (some quotes) and a huge amount of evidence that this supra-linear dose:response is real. Much of the evidence is post-Chernobyl, which ICRP entirely ignores in formulating its advice. A substantial book full of evidence suggesting that this oversight might be foolish is free to download at this link . (See also summaries of similar evidence and this new book published in December 2009 in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences ). This latest one includes a review of studies of the deaths attributed to Chernobyl fallout in Europe; they total nearly 1 million up to 2005.

The ICRP approach and the hormesis approach typified by Professor Wade Allison’s book (the basis of the Guardian reports) treat radiation as if it were homogeneous. That’s like regarding all poisons as if they were of equal toxicity, weight for weight. “How much poison do you think would kill you?” asks the idiot. “Well it depends what poison you’re talking about”, says any half-way intelligent person. In terms of radiation exposure, the idiot question is “What dose is safe?”, and the intelligent answer is ” that depends; where is the radiation coming from? .. is it a source stuck on my DNA? … is it stuck in my lymph nodes? is it delivering all its energy into a tiny bit of me and leaving all the rest unirradiated?” The nub of the issue is that there are some kinds of radiation exposure which it is valid to regard as uniform, homogeneous, well- averaged, evenly distributed in the body (however many synonyms one needs). Examples are x-rays and cosmic rays. But there are other kinds of exposure which are never evenly distributed, so that all their damage is concentrated into microscopic volumes of tissue. Hot particles are one example and there are many others. In these circumstances, the CERRIE committee advised in 2004, the very concept of dose may be meaningless at the cellular and molecular level. So there is a massive caveat that should be posted on any expression involving the word “dose”. One of the main reasons the nuclear establishment sticks to using dose is for the administrative convenience of lumping all kinds of exposure together. Well that’s just not scientifically valid. Here is an example of the kind of nonsense scientifically illiterate journalists spout because they don’t understand these caveats.
If you want to see the history of how the radiation protection community got stuck in the “average dose” model, look at this .
ICRP has recently admitted (here) that their risk model cannot be used for post-accident exposures. By inescapable extension neither can it be used for routine releases of the same radio-isotopes, and operators can’t use it to demonstrate compliance with regulations expressed in terms of numbers of cancers per year, which is what they actually have to do. The big questions are Where will they get their advice in future? Will it stand up under scientific examination? The nuclear lobby may be able to dupe the occasional journalist and some of the public but the investors and the courts are another matter. If operators go ahead in despite of the evidence there will be huge bankruptcies on the asbestos model (only far larger).

Radiophobia

Final point; John Vidal recycles (here) the idea that people are dying of fear, not of radiation-induced diseases. In a short article he said it twice, citing Mike Repacholi’s claim about radiophobia in “Nuclear Nightmares” (the 2006 documentary which the BBC Trust ruled was biased — did Vidal’s research involve a second viewing, I wonder).
By the time Repacholi contributed to the Nuclear Nightmares travesty he was no longer at WHO and I’m not aware that either WHO or IAEA has made an official statement blaming disease on radiophobia (put us right if you can, please – email address at foot of page). What WHO and IAEA have in fact said about the fear factor is in the Chernobyl Forum Report (they were the lead agencies on the Forum). The report cites (ref. 1) a small number of studies (from memory, three or four) where “Chernobyl exposed” populations had higher rates of

“mental health symptoms, medically unexplained physical symptoms and subjective ill-health”.

The mental health symptoms were

“mostly subclinical and did not reach the level of criteria for a psychiatric disorder but they had important consequences for health behaviour, specifically medical care utilisation and adherence to safety advisories.”

In other words, these people took up a lot of time at the advisory centres set up to help them. Big surprise then. Doctors call them “the worried well”. Their subjective and subclinical presentations are no basis for dismissing the increases in clinical diagnoses of conditions such as cancers, congenital malformation, stillbirth, cataracts, and so on and on reported by many workers in the affected territories. One of these scientists observes

We have seen, since the accident, clear and diverse effects of irradiation in plants over time … we bear in mind that these late effects in plants could not be related to ‘radio-phobia’ (ref.2) .

” The radiophobia thing is just absurd, unscientific spin.

Richard Bramhall
Low Level Radiation Campaign
http://www.llrc.org/

---

References

1Health Effects of the Chernobyl Accident and Special Health Care Programmes: Report of the UN Special Expert Group “Health”; pp 93-4

2 D.M.Grodzinsky, General Secretary, Division of Biology, Ukrainian National Academy of Sciences, “Reflections of the Chernobyl Catastrophe on the Plant World: Special and General Biological Aspects” – Chapter 7 in the ECRR book Chernobyl 20 Years On (a free download.)

Broń Krzyża

Zawieś krzyż

Redakcja Wiara.pl  dodane 2009-11-24 12:30

http://info.wiara.pl/doc/371271.Zawies-krzyz

W życiu publicznym nie wszystko zależy od nas, pokładających nadzieję w Jezusie Chrystusie. Ale w życiu prywatnym prawie wszystko. W odpowiedzi na rodzący obawy o przyszłość chrześcijan w Europie wyrok Trybunału w Strasburgu proponujemy: otoczmy krzyże szczególną czcią.

Nie cichną echa wyroku Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka w Strasburgu nakazującego wypłacić odszkodowanie kobiecie niezadowolonej z faktu, że w szkole, do której uczęszczali jej synowie wiszą krzyże. Co robić? Jak bronić się przed ewentualnością, że niebawem ktoś wpadnie na pomysł, by z przestrzeni publicznej usunąć wszystkie krzyże?

Zacznijmy od siebie. Otoczmy krzyż szczególną czcią. W naszym życiu osobistym, w rodzinach. Bo przecież jeśli dla nas samych Ukrzyżowany będzie kimś naprawdę ważnym, z kim będziemy się liczyć w naszym życiu, „głupstwo krzyża” ciągle będzie kształtowało oblicze świata.

Co robić?

1. Jeśli w Twoim domu nie ma jeszcze krzyża, zawieś go. Czy w miejscu centralnym, czy mniej eksponowanym – np. nad drzwiami wyjściowymi, niech będzie wyrazem wiary Twojej i Twojej rodziny.
2. Noś krzyżyk na sobie. Mniej istotne, czy będzie drewniany, na rzemyku, czy złoty na ozdobnym łańcuszku. Czy będziesz go nosił pod ubraniem czy tak, że zobaczyć go będą mogli wszyscy, niech będzie dla Ciebie przypomnieniem, by zawsze żyć tak, jak Ukrzyżowany żyłby na Twoim miejscu.
3. Adoruj Ukrzyżowanego. Czy to w modlitwie wspólnej z całą rodziną, czy indywidualnej. Nie wiesz jak? Proponujemy Ci modlitwę będącą połączeniem fragmentów dwóch znanych pieśni:

Panie, Ty widzisz, krzyża się nie lękam

Panie Ty widzisz, krzyża się nie wstydzę

Krzyż mój całuję, pod krzyżem uklękam

Bo na Tym krzyżu Boga mego widzę.

Jezu,

Tobie ja żyję

Tobie umieram

Jezu, Twój jestem

w życiu i przy śmierci.

O krzyżu i jego znaczeniu w duchowości chrześcijańskiej przeczytasz na stronie serwisu liturgia.wiara.pl

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Historia jednego krzyża

Od wielu lat przy głównych drogach umieszcza się informacje o katolickich klasztorach i sanktuariach Maryjnych. My dalej czekamy na oświetlenie drogi do Monasteru i umieszczenie podobnych znaków informacyjnych. Zanim to nastąpi, umieszczamy na wieży oświetlony krzyż, aby wskazywał pielgrzymom drogę w ciemnościach, oraz był znakiem nadziei w ciemnościach obecnego świata. http://www.monasterujkowice.pl

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Akcja obywateli cywilizacji życia w obronie krzyża

Wpisał Bruno 15.1.2010

Kochani,
Dotarła do mnie wiadomość, że do Ministerstwa Edukacji Narodowej masowo wpływają maile od młodych lewicujących ludzi, domagających się zdjęcia krzyży ze ścian sal lekcyjnych w polskich szkołach. Wygląda to na zorganizowaną lewicową akcję.
Nic nie wiadomo natomiast o mailach od osób opowiadających się za zachowaniem krzyży w szkołach.
Dlatego też warto rozesłać do swoich krewnych i znajomych, doceniających znaczenie obecności krzyży w miejscach publicznych, informację o powyższym, np. zatytułowaną: “Opowiadam się za zachowaniem krzyży w polskich szkołach”, na adres MEN: informacja@men.gov.pl (lub na adres podany na stronie internetowej ministerstwa).
Sprawa jest bardzo pilna.
Pozdrawiam – ks. Ryszard Sztychmiler

Oto proponowana treść maila:
——————————————————————————————————–

Swoje dane adresowe Miejscowość i data,
Najlepiej łącznie z nr dowodu lub pesel.

Ministerstwo Edukacji Narodowej
Warszawa

Szanowni Państwo,

Dziękuję za to, że nasze dzieci mogą uczęszcza do szkół, w których na ścianach klas lekcyjnych i w innych miejscach publicznych, obok godła państwowego, wiszą krzyże.
Ufam, że taki stan zostanie zachowany, pozostając z należnym szacunkiem dla osób należących do innych religii lub wyznających światopogląd materialistyczny czy agnostyczny.
Jak wiadomo krzyż jest nie tylko znakiem śmierci i zmartwychwstania Chrystusa, ale także największego poświęcenia do jakiego zdolny jest człowiek dla ratowania innego człowieka.
Ufam, iż macie Państwo świadomość, że większość polskich rodziców i większość młodzieży życzy sobie, aby we wszystkich szkołach naszego kraju, krzyż zajmował należne mu miejsce.

Z poważaniem
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(podpis)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Wpisała lekarka 15.1.2010

Pod koniec listopada napisałam list do Pana Jerzego Buzka w obronie krzyża. List ten posłałam do wiadomości wszystkich polskich europosłów. Zgadnijcie, ile osób osób zareagowało na ten list? 1 słownie jedna osoba Pan Konrad Szymański (szacunek dla niego).Jak wszystkim wiadomo zablokowano w Parlamencie Europejskim debatę na ten temat.

Szanowny Pan Przewodniczący Parlamentu Europejskiego Jerzy Buzek

Ośmielam się prosić Pana, Panie Przewodniczący, o obronę Krzyża na forum Parlamentu Europejskiego.
Pan, jako chrześcijanin, na pewno rozumie, że każdy wierzący chrześcijanin nie może zamknąć się ze swoją wiarą w domu i kościele. Jezus Chrystus umarł na krzyżu za wszystkich ludzi bez wyjątków, wierzących i niewierzących, dla naszego zbawienia, więc my musimy zrobić tak mało w porównaniu z Jego straszną męką, musimy bronić Krzyża, tego symbolu wielkiej miłości miłosiernej.
My chrześcijanie czujemy się dyskryminowani w Europie, która przecież ma korzenie chrześcijańskie.
Nasz rodak Papież Jan Paweł II Wielki prosił nas, byśmy bronili krzyża:” Brońcie krzyża, nie pozwólcie, aby Imię Boże było obrażane w waszych sercach, w życiu rodzinnym czy społecznym. Dziękujmy Bożej Opatrzności za to, że krzyż powrócił do szkół, urzędów publicznych i szpitali. Niech on tam pozostanie! Niech przypomina o naszej chrześcijańskiej godności i narodowej tożsamości, o tym, kim jesteśmy i dokąd zmierzamy, i gdzie są nasze korzenie. Niech przypomina nam o miłości Boga do człowieka, która w krzyżu znalazła swój najgłębszy wyraz.”
Czyż mamy teraz stchórzyć? Czy poprawność polityczna ma nam zabronić publicznie wyznawać wiarę chrześcijańską? W roku 1984 śpiewaliśmy w obronie krzyża:

„Nie zdejmę Krzyża z mojej ściany
Za żadne skarby świata,
Bo na nim Jezus ukochany
Grzeszników z niebem brata.

Nie zdejmę Krzyża z mego serca,
Choćby mi umrzeć trzeba,
Choćby mi groził kat, morderca,
Bo Krzyż to klucz do nieba.

Nie zdejmę Krzyża z mojej duszy,
Nie wyrwę go z sumienia,
Bo Krzyż szatana wniwecz kruszy,
Bo Krzyż to Znak Zbawienia.

A gdy zobaczę w poniewierce
Jezusa Krzyż i ranę,
Która otwiera Jego serce,
W obronie Krzyża stanę.”

Jeszcze raz proszę Pana jako Chrześcijanina i Polaka o obronę Krzyża, tego Znaku Miłości i Pokoju.
P.s. List skierowany do Pana pozwoliłam sobie przesłać do wiadomości wszystkim polskim europarlamentarzystom.

Z poważaniem (dalej moje dane)

Na blogu wiele osób wypowiada się przeciw zamieszczaniu tu jakichkolwiek opinii chrześcijańskich. A ja cieszę się, że chociaż tu mogę jawnie, nie będąc zakrzyczana, wyśmiana (choć się tego nie boję)pokazać, jak ważną rolę w moim życiu odgrywa wiara. Gdzie indziej wielokrotnie moje wpisy były usuwane, nie dopuszczane, wyszydzane. Czuję tu obecność wielu bratnich dusz. Nie jestem już młoda, wiele w życiu przeżyłam, ale jedno wiem, że wiara pomaga przetrzymać dużo złych dni, wzmacnia, a przede wszystkim uczy wybaczać. Zawsze mówię, że nienawiść niszczy nie tego kogo się nienawidzi, ale tego kto nienawidzi. Także mówi się, co cię nie złamie, to cię wzmocni. Życzę wszystkim, by kierowali się miłością i pamiętali, że Chrystus jest drogą, prawdą i życiem.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Wpisał robak 15.1.2010

Pieśń Konfederatów Barskich z dramatu Ksiądz Marek, Juliusz Słowacki

Nigdy z królami nie będziem w aliansach,
nigdy przed mocą nie ugniemy szyi,
bo u Chrystusa my na ordynansach,
słudzy Maryi.

Więc choć się spęka świat i zadrży słońce,
chociaż się chmury i morza nasrożą,
choćby na smokach wojska latające -
nas nie zatrwożą.

Bóg naszych ojców i dziś jest nad nami,
więc nie dopuści upaść w żadnej klęsce,
wszak póki On był z naszymi ojcami,
byli zwycięsce.

Więc nie wpadniemy w żadną wilczą jamę,
nie ulękniemy przed mocarzy władzą
wiedząc, że nawet grobowce nas same
Bogu oddadzą.

Ze skowronkami wstaliśmy do pracy
i spać pójdziemy o wieczornej zorzy,
ale w grobowcach my jeszcze żołdacy
i hufiec Boży.

Bo kto zaufał Chrystusowi Panu
i szedł na święte kraju werbowanie,
ten de profundis z ciemnego kurhanu
na trąbę wstanie.

Bóg jest ucieczką i obroną naszą,
póki On z nami, całe piekła pękną -
ani ogniste smoki nie ustraszą,
ani ulękną.

Nie złamie nas głód i żaden frasunek,
ani zhołdują żadne świata hołdy,
bo na Chrystusa my poszli werbunek,
na jego żołdy.
………………………..
Tu można wysłuchać tej pięknej pieśni:

P.S. Słowa zwłaszcza w 2 zwrotce iście apokaliptyczne, ale nie ma się co dziwić – napisał je nasz Narodowy Wieszcz, tylko czy aby współczesna młodzież, która żąda zdjęcia krzyży w szkołach wie kto zacz?

Referendum w sprawie Unii sfałszowane?

Artykuł opracowano dla „Wir” nr 1, czerwiec 2004
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Referendum w sprawie Unii sfałszowane?

Jerzy Zarakowski, obnie@interia.pl

Według ustawy o referendum unijnym, aby było ono ważne, musiało głosować minimum 50 % uprawnionych.

Wiadomo było, iż w wyniku nachalnej propagandy i fałszowania wyników, ponad połowa z liczby głosujących będzie „za”. Kluczową sprawą była więc tylko frekwencja. Według ustawy, uprawnionym był każdy polski obywatel – w kraju czy na obczyźnie. Gdyby policzyć wszystkie osoby, które mają za granicą polskie obywatelstwo, to nie było szansy, aby frekwencja przekroczyła 50 %.

Według Głównego Urzędu Statystycznego, poza granicami Polski mieszka na stałe 16 mln Polaków. Dane GUS-u z 2001 roku wykazują następujące liczby polskich obywateli w największych skupiskach za granicą:
USA – 9,4 mln
Brazylia – 1,2 mln
Niemcy – 1 mln
Francja – 1 mln
Kanada – 0,8 mln
Białoruś – 0,6 mln
Ukraina – 0,5 mln
Litwa – 0,28 mln
Rosja – 0,2 mln
Australia – 0,15 mln,
Argentyna – 0,14 mln
Kazachstan – 0,08 mln, itd.
Państwowa Komisja Wyborcza podała następujące wyniki referendum poza granicami kraju:

Liczba uprawnionych: 96 161
Liczba oddanych, ważnych kart do głosowania: 79 452
Frekwencja: 82,6 %

PKW obliczyła, że w USA, gdzie żyje 9,4 mln Polaków, jest 17 450 uprawnionych, a w Brazylii, gdzie żyje 1,2 mln Polaków, uprawnionych do głosowania jest 267 Polaków!

Ustawa mówi jednoznacznie, iż uprawnionymi do głosowania są wszyscy obywatele polscy. Obywatelstwo polskie jest definiowane jednoznacznie (reguluje to ustawa z 1962 roku i późniejsze zmiany). Są dwa główne sposoby nabycia polskiego obywatelstwa:

Zasada krwi (Ius Sanguinis) – Dziecko uzyskuje obywatelstwo polskie poprzez urodzenie z rodziców, z których co najmniej jedno posiada obywatelstwo polskie, bez względu na miejsce urodzenia dziecka – w Polsce czy za granicą (Art. 4 pkt 1 i 2 ustawy o obywatelstwie polskim).

Zagadnienie obywatelstwa dzieci urodzonych z rodziców o różnym obywatelstwie, tj. polskim i obcym, zostało uregulowane w ten sposób, że, stosownie do art. 6 ust. 1 ww. ustawy, dziecko takich rodziców nabywa obywatelstwo polskie poprzez urodzenie, bez względu na miejsce narodzin – w Polsce czy za granicą. Jednakże rodzice w zgodnym oświadczeniu, złożonym przed właściwym organem (konsul dla osób zamieszkałych za granicą lub starosta – dla osób zamieszkałych w Polsce), w ciągu 3 miesięcy od dnia urodzenia się dziecka, mogą wybrać dla niego obywatelstwo państwa obcego, którego obywatelem jest jedno z rodziców, jeżeli według prawa tego państwa dziecko nabywa jego obywatelstwo.

Zasada ziemi (Ius Soli) – Zasada ta ma zastosowanie, gdy dziecko urodzi się lub zostanie znalezione na terytorium RP, a oboje rodzice są nieznani lub nieokreślone jest ich obywatelstwo, bądź nie mają żadnego obywatelstwa (Art. 5 ustawy o obywatelstwie polskim). Dziecko takie z mocy prawa nabywa obywatelstwo polskie.

W świetle tego, absurdem było uznanie przez PKW, że liczbą uprawnionych Polaków za granicą jest ok. 100 tys. osób.

Można przyjąć, iż na 16 mln Polaków mieszkających za granicą, uprawnionych jest minimum 10 mln Polaków, skoro w kraju uprawnionych jest trzy czwarte obywateli.

PKW podała następujące wyniki referendum w kraju:
Liczba uprawnionych – 29 868 474
Liczba oddanych ważnych kart – 17 578 818
Frekwencja – 58,9 %

Zakładając, że wyniki są prawdziwe i dodając wyniki za granicą, przy założeniu 10 mln uprawnionych, a nie 100 tys., otrzymujemy 17,66 mln głosujących i 39 mln uprawnionych, co daje frekwencję na poziomie 45 %.

Jak to się stało, że PKW tak zaniżyła frekwencję?
Mimo iż ustawa o referendum mówi:
Art. 3. 1. Prawo udziału w referendum ma obywatel polski, jeżeli najpóźniej w dniu głosowania kończy 18 lat. Nie mają prawa udziału w referendum osoby: pozbawione praw publicznych prawomocnym orzeczeniem sądowym; pozbawione praw wyborczych prawomocnym orzeczeniem Trybunału Stanu; ubezwłasnowolnione prawomocnym orzeczeniem sądowym.
Komisja policzyła, jako uprawnionych, tylko te osoby, które wcześniej zarejestrowały się w konsulatach i ambasadach oraz wyraziły chęć glosowania.

Rozmawiałem w tej sprawie z biurem prawnym Komisji Wyborczej i uzyskałem odpowiedź, iż zrobiono tak, ponieważ trudno jest policzyć wszystkich uprawnionych, a ponadto było to zawarte w rozporządzeniu do ustawy.

Tego rodzaju problemy nie są zmartwieniem obywateli – po to płacą podatki na PKW, aby ta potrafiła liczyć głosy. Takie trudności nie mogą tłumaczyć zafałszowania wyników referendum. Stoi to w zasadniczej sprzeczności z przytoczonym przeze mnie artykułem, który jednoznacznie mówi, kto jest uprawniony do głosowania.

Prawo do głosowania jest jednym z najważniejszych aktów obywatelskich w państwie. Państwo to, z pomocą PKW, potraktowało w sposób haniebny swoich obywateli.

Wyników referendum nie da się już obalić, ale obywatel nie jest w tej sytuacji bezradny. Każdy, kto wynikami PKW czuje się pokrzywdzony, ma prawo zaskarżyć ustawę o referendum do Trybunału Konstytucyjnego, jako niezgodną z Konstytucją. Narusza ona bowiem elementarne prawo obywateli do równości wobec prawa w najważniejszym akcie obywatelskim – prawie do głosowania. W kraju, każdy obywatel spełniający wymogi ustawowe, był uprawniony do głosowania. Obywatele za granicą musieli wcześniej się zarejestrować, inaczej nie byli traktowani, jako uprawnieni i ich decyzja o rezygnacji z udziału w głosowaniu nie miała żadnego znaczenia.

Przy tej okazji warto wiedzieć, jakie warunki powinna spełniać skarga konstytucyjna.

Prawo do wystąpienia ze skargą konstytucyjną przewiduje art. 79 ust. 1 Konstytucji RP. Przepis ten określa równocześnie warunki rozpoznania takiej skargi przez Trybunał Konstytucyjny. Szczegółowe uregulowania odnoszące się do skargi konstytucyjnej zawiera ustawa z dnia 1 sierpnia 1997 roku o Trybunale Konstytucyjnym, opublikowana w Dzienniku Ustaw z 1997 roku Nr 102, poz. 643 ze zmianami. Orzecznictwo Trybunału Konstytucyjnego publikowane jest w Zbiorze Urzędowym. Dostępne jest ono także na stronie internetowej Trybunału Konstytucyjnego, pod adresem:http://www.trybunal.gov.pl/

Skargę konstytucyjną może dla skarżącego sporządzić wyłącznie adwokat lub radca prawny: skargę konstytucyjną samodzielnie we własnej sprawie może sporządzić sędzia, prokurator, notariusz, profesor lub doktor habilitowany nauk prawnych.

Skarga konstytucyjna jest wolna od opłaty sądowej. Jeżeli skarżący, ze względu na sytuację majątkową, nie jest w stanie opłacić kosztów sporządzenia skargi konstytucyjnej przez adwokata lub radcę prawnego, ma prawo zwrócić się do sądu o ustanowienie dla niego adwokata lub radcy prawnego z urzędu. Wniosek w tej sprawie należy złożyć do sądu rejonowego właściwego, ze względu na miejsce zamieszkania skarżącego. W przypadku uwzględnienia tego wniosku, skarżący nie będzie ponosił kosztów sporządzenia skargi konstytucyjnej.

Przedmiotem skargi konstytucyjnej może być wyłącznie akt normatywny (ustawa, rozporządzenie, zarządzenie itp.). Trybunał Konstytucyjny odmawia nadania biegu skargom konstytucyjnym, kierowanym wyłącznie na określone orzeczenie sądu czy organu administracji. W skardze konstytucyjnej można kwestionować wyłącznie regulację prawną, która była podstawą takiego orzeczenia.
W przypadku, gdy zakwestionowany akt normatywny utracił moc obowiązującą, należy wykazać, że wydanie przez Trybunał Konstytucyjny orzeczenia o tym akcie jest konieczne dla ochrony konstytucyjnych wolności i praw.

Trybunał Konstytucyjny rozpoznaje tylko takie skargi konstytucyjne, które związane są z naruszeniem praw lub wolności, określonych w Konstytucji RP.

Trybunał Konstytucyjny może rozpoznawać skargę konstytucyjną wyłącznie wówczas, gdy skarżący wykorzystał już przysługujące mu w ramach postępowania sądowego lub administracyjnego środki zaskarżenia lub środki odwoławcze.

Skargę konstytucją należy złożyć do Trybunału Konstytucyjnego po wyczerpaniu drogi prawnej, w ciągu 3 miesięcy od dnia doręczenia skarżącemu prawomocnego wyroku, ostatecznej decyzji lub innego ostatecznego rozstrzygnięcia. (Nie wlicza się do tego okresu czasu trwania postępowania o ustanowienie pełnomocnika z urzędu, celem sporządzenia skargi konstytucyjnej). Trybunał Konstytucyjny nie rozpoznaje skarg wniesionych po upływie wymienionego wcześniej terminu.

Do skargi konstytucyjnej należy dołączyć:
- pełnomocnictwo do sporządzenia skargi konstytucyjnej (w przypadku skargi sporządzonej przez pełnomocnika z urzędu należy do niej dołączyć kopię postanowienia sądu rejonowego o ustanowieniu takiego pełnomocnika oraz decyzji organu samorządu adwokackiego lub radcowskiego, wyznaczającą konkretnego adwokata lub radcę prawnego pełnomocnikiem z urzędu);
- ponadto, w przypadku osób prawnych, aktualny wyciąg ze stosownego rejestru;

- kopię orzeczenia organu władzy publicznej, z którego wydaniem skarżący łączy naruszenie przysługujących mu praw lub wolności o charakterze konstytucyjnym;

- kopię orzeczeń wydanych w związku z wyczerpaniem przez skarżącego przysługujących mu środków odwoławczych lub środków zaskarżenia, łącznie z orzeczeniem wydanym przez organ pierwszej instancji.

Skargę konstytucyjną wraz z załącznikami należy składać w 5 egzemplarzach. W celu przyspieszenia rozpoznawania skarg konstytucyjnych, zaleca się sporządzanie skarg konstytucyjnych według poniższego wzoru. 

Informacje ogólne:
- miejsce i data sporządzenia skargi konstytucyjnej;
- imię i nazwisko skarżącego (w przypadku skarżącego nie będącego osobą fizyczną należy podać nazwę, osobę lub osoby upoważnione do reprezentacji danego podmiotu oraz określenie podstawy reprezentacji);
- adres skarżącego;
- imię i nazwisko pełnomocnika skarżącego;
- adres kancelarii oraz nr wpisu na listę adwokatów lub radców prawnych.

Określenie przedmiotu skargi konstytucyjnej:
- dokładne określenie zaskarżonego aktu normatywnego ze wskazaniem konkretnego przepisu (lub przepisów), nazwy aktu, daty wydania oraz miejsca publikacji;
- dokładne wskazanie przepisów Konstytucji RP, których naruszenie zarzuca się w skardze konstytucyjnej.

Określenie podstaw skargi konstytucyjnej:
- wskazanie orzeczenia organu władzy publicznej, z którym skarżący łączy naruszenie przysługujących mu praw lub wolności konstytucyjnych (należy podać organ wydający orzeczenie, datę wydania, sygnaturę sprawy);
- wskazanie podmiotowych praw lub wolności o charakterze konstytucyjnym, których naruszenie skarżący łączy z wydaniem orzeczenia określonego w pkt 1 wraz z podaniem przepisów Konstytucji RP, z których prawa te lub wolności są wywodzone;
- dokładne określenie tego, w jaki sposób orzeczenie, o którym mowa w pkt 1, prowadzi do naruszenia konstytucyjnych praw lub wolności skarżącego;
- przedstawienie argumentów wskazujących na ostateczny charakter orzeczenia, o którym mowa w pkt 1, a w szczególności, uzasadniających przekonanie, iż skarżący wyczerpał przysługujące mu środki zaskarżenia lub inne środki odwoławcze;
- podanie daty doręczenia skarżącemu orzeczenia kończącego postępowanie w sprawie będącej podstawą skargi konstytucyjnej;
w przypadku sporządzenia skargi przez pełnomocnika ustanowionego z urzędu:
- podanie daty złożenia przez skarżącego wniosku do sądu rejonowego o ustanowienie pełnomocnika z urzędu celem sporządzenia skargi konstytucyjnej;
- podanie daty doręczenia skarżącemu pisma informującego o tym, który adwokat lub radca prawny został wyznaczony do sporządzenia skargi konstytucyjnej;
- podanie argumentów przemawiających za tym, iż zakwestionowane w skardze konstytucyjnej regulacje prawne stanowiły podstawę wydania orzeczenia, o którym mowa w pkt 1.

Uzasadnienie zarzutu niezgodności z konstytucją:
- Dokładne określenie, na czym, zdaniem skarżącego, polega niezgodność zakwestionowanych regulacji prawnych ze wskazanymi w petitum skargi przepisami konstytucyjnymi.

Warto, aby obywatele często korzystali z tej możliwości. Tylko wtedy bowiem jest szansa, że państwo zacznie służyć obywatelom, a nie, jak obecnie, gdy jest w wielu przypadkach jego prześladowcą i ciemiężycielem.
………………………………….
Autor jest założycielem ruchu „Obywatelskie nieposłuszeństwo” http://obnie.w.interia.pl
Zaprasza na te strony do lektury ciekawych artykułów, niepublikowanych w głównym nurcie.

On UNMIK-KFOR Impotence

From my old files, for the record of UN-NATO crimes in Kosovo after Milosevic.

====================

Mr. Lindmeier,

I will be as blunt as UNMIK’s cynicism in its “press release”, which reminds me of my pre-school times when, unable to deal with the message, kids told the staff on me. Not only children try to undermine the messenger. You must also be aware of the thief who, to detract attention from himself, shouts and points to bystanders, like UNMIK does to Serb officials. Please pass my comment on to your superiors for a more meaningful answer.

Unfortunately for the “international community”, many denizens of conscience agree with Mr. Dragan Rakic’s complaint. Whom is this “car registration before capturing war criminals” rubbish for? We are tired of UNMIK-KFOR “inability” and perpetual blaming “the Serbs” for own failures to accomplish resolution 1244.

Recently I travelled in Kosovo, stayed with Albanians for a few nights, and visited tightly guarded Serb Orthodox monasteries and enclaves. A vice gripped my throat every time I passed by burned out Serbian houses and Albanian mansions with driveways paved with rubble from Serbian houses. Tears rolled down my face when I saw Serb cemeteries and churches desecrated and ruined. I was terrified when I saw some of them surrounded by barbed wire and watchtowers of KFOR who abandoned the posts.

I met Albanians involved in arms trade and sex slavery. A pimp propositioned me to visit his establishment “full of girls from Moldavia”. Learning that I am unemployed, my hosts sincerely proposed that I participate in their arms trafficking. They told me they hate UNMIK and KFOR, and are preparing an uprising. I saw brand-new posters with a logo of the UCK (outlawed and supposedly disbanded Kosovo Liberation Army) in public offices and businesses, even on a road sign next to an UNMIK police station.

Kosovo is dotted with pretentious monuments to fallen UCK men – heroes to the Albanians, war criminals to the Serbs. More than a thousand Serbs are still missing since US-led KFOR marched in and looked through fingers at Albanian extremists’ “revenge crimes”. A Kosovo Serb friend of mine, in Poland since the beginning of NATO attack on Yugoslavia, necessarily stays there to date, otherwise he would risk his life, if he returned. UCK expelled his family to Serbia and Montenegro in 1999. They lost one member and everything they owned. I learned just before last Easter that the Hague “tribunal’s” quest for Albanian victims in Kosovo has unearthed the lost family member.

Most of my Albanian interlocutors (and many Moslems in Montenegro, too) absolutely hate the Serbs. No registration plates will change their hearts. Until the meddling of “humanitarian” West and Islamist states towards the end of the past century, Serbs had no problem living and sharing with Slovenes, Croats, Bosnian Moslems, Albanians and many other groups. Yet, the US-led “international community”, sponsored hate-driven ethnic cleansing of hundreds of thousands of Serbs from Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo, and cynically accused “Milosevic and the Serbs” for doing it to the others. In these “humanitarian missions” Germany supplied arms, mercenaries, money and intelligence to the illegal secessionists in Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo. No amount of disinformation will obliterate the facts. They are all over to be found, except at the kangaroo court in Hague and in German official statements.

Among lighter “omissions”, UNMIK-KFOR obviously do not react to lies posing as authoritative publications. This is your basic obstacle to normal multi-etnicity declared in resolution 1244. At book stands on Prishtina’s main street I browsed through many books that present propaganda hoaxes against the Serbs (“death camps” in Bosnia and Racak “massacre”, for example) as indisputable facts years after they have been debunked. If anybody in the West tried to spread lies against the Jews, for example, they would not last a minute.

The Albanians I met resent the monthly expenses on Herr Steiner’s mansion in Kosovo no less than they do the salaries of the UNMIK policemen; men from developing countries earn a huge multiple of their domestic pay. We are getting a good value for our taxes: I saw UNMIK toyotas 4WD everywhere, parked by the dozen at every UNMIK post, driving to and fro on every road. What for?

All Serbian vehicles that I saw in Kosovo had Steiner’s plates for the safety of the owners and passengers. Why does he insist on Belgrade’s recognition of something that should have been implemented in June 1999? In Grachanica, one of a few remaining Kosovo Serb enclaves, I saw vendors selling fuel in pop bottles, even though there is a new gas station near the village and Serb prices in dinars are equivalent to euro, the official currency in Kosovo. Serbs would be attacked, if they ventured out – explained several Serbs and Albanians. Minutes from the gas station stands a fort of the Swedish battalion of KFOR.

Why should Belgrade recognize Steiner’s plates if UNMIK-KFOR has not even tried to remove the root of a fundamental personal safety problem of the Serbs in Kosovo? Nebojsa Covic did the right thing when he “disappointed” Herr Steiner.

Serbia has legal, historical and moral sovereignty over its ancient Kosovo. Hopefully Herr Steiner and German members of KFOR and UNMIK realize that they are occupiers in an illegally attacked state, while at the same time their government condemns an lawless attack and occupation of Iraq. When will UNMIK-KFOR bureaucrats get their act together? Not as long as they are the operatives of elites aspring to totalitarian government.

If Kosovo indicates official (overt and covert) German behaviour, I, a Slav and a Pole, am very concerned about Germans posing as benevolent “international community” representatives. Herr Steiner is tacitly implementing Austro-Hungarian empire’s “Serben muss sterben” adage.  Serbia is sovereign in Kosovo, like Poland is over its Western Lands re-gained after WW2. Once Poland joins European Union, revisionists may start taking over our land (see German whistle-blowing at http://www.freenations.freeuk.com for substantiation of this Polish “hysteria”). Then another Herr Steiner will justify this new “Drang nach Osten” cleansing with a bureaucratic gimmick to full the naive West.

If Slavs were as aggressive and cheeky as Albanians and other radical Balkan Moslems supported by radical Islam and the “international community”, they would be prevailing all the way to Hamburg and the Elbe River, never mind the Balkans. Herr Steiner is playing with fire. If he is oblivious to history, Slavs can be devastating when pressed to the wall. Seemingly mindless destruction by the employees of German-owned farms and businesses that sprout in Poland might be a forewarning, if Germans, hiding under “international community” and “humanitarian missions”, don’t change their social management approach. Until then, the likes of Herr Steiner can ask “dumm” questions – as at the end of his press release – till they drop.

Dr Piotr Bein, PEng
Vancouver, Canada and Szczecin (not “Stettin”), Poland

German PsyOp

An article I found today in my archives,  date unknown.

==================

The last sentence of the article is scary. I have little doubt that the article is one in a series produced by German special PsyOp forces, the “Psycho Truppen” (http://www.freenations.freeuk.com/gc-14.html).

An increased German militaristic and revisionist propaganda activity is taking place. In Slav countries on Germany’s Drang nach Osten map, a whining is heard of supposedly wronged Germans expelled from there after WW II by virtue of the 1945 Potsdam Agreement of the victorious Allies. These are the same Volksdeutsche who helped Hitler’s policy of irredentism, then sabotage, finally murder, plunder and ethnic cleansing of the host nations. This is the same Germany who have not paid EUR billions owed for the biological and material losses of those nations.

In Western power centres, more and more is heard about everything about WW II Germany and Germans except the naked truth: two world’s bloodiest wars of the 20th century. Millions of victims of senseless battles, exterminations, cities levelled, unheard of sufferings and ethnic cleansing – for German Lebensraum, all the way to the Ural Mountains.

A German video game was distributed in the months leading to the September 1st, anniversary of Hitler’s attack on Poland that started the bloodiest war in world’s history. The game, starts with a military order to counterattack on Polish troops who supposedly provoked Hitler by crossing the border.

No, it is not a video joke. The Polish soldiers are depicted as drunkards and cowards. Reportedly, half a million copies in German and English were sold to European youth. As the cinema, TV, colouring books, and video games became the teacher nowadays, these games will brainwash the youth about the WW II history and the Polish nation. The game won the top award in a summer month issue of a leading German computer magazine.

Not much differently, by shameful distortion of truth and outrageous lies, Serbs were demonized before the world opinion, in preparation for criminal wars of the “international community” and NATO in the Balkans.

German secret service, BND, who is a partner in the Psycho Truppen’s dangerous games, played an infamous role in the breakup of Yugoslavia as early as the 1960s. Later, Germany supplied arms, legionists and every possible support against the Serbs throughout the Balkan wars: to Slovenian separatists, to atrocious neo-Ustashe of Croatia, and the terrorist Kosovo Liberation Army. In the Balkans, Germany aligned its goals with the most backward and destructive forces of contemporary world : the islamist expansionism and its Al Qaeda, Catholic Croatian nationalism and hatred, and Albanian terrorism.

With NATO, Germany attacked Yugoslavia on false pretenses (comparable only to Bush’s claim of WMD in Iraq), completely illegally in 1999. Luftwaffe participated in a total war attacks, on civil population and targets, reminiscent of Hitler’s attacks on Belgrade. Bundeswehr marched into Kosovo with KFOR. It was the first time since the end of WW II that German forces left their barracks for a war abroad.

In Kosovo, the good ears of BND went deaf to warnings by Serb intelligence about upcoming pogroms of Serbs in March 2004. German KFOR commanders’ eyes were blind to atrocities and crimes committed by the Albanian extremists on Serbs and their property in Kosovo.

How to reform German forces so they could better fight globalist wars? I would say, “Raus! Back to your barracks, eat your Sauerkraut and shut up.” Unless they want to start WW III. Putin made a suggestion today that the Russians should prepare for hardships like those during WW II. Observers say that re-organisation and strengthening of the Russian Army should be completed by 2005.

WCC = War on Climate Change

By Dr. Piotr Bein, PEng,  February 23, 2004

Reading like a militarist propaganda, The Observer article  may well be one. I doubt its contents, and the motive behind its publication.
It is nonsense for Observer/Guardian journalists to overblow publically available information as leaked from secret places  in Washington. I am not surprised. The British press spread extreme Islamist lies against the Serbs, too.
We are told that “suppression of the report for four months was a further example of the White House trying to bury the threat of climate change”. As if the threats were not known to everyone, except Americans who get their worldview from presidential speeches and the CNN.
And how do we know it was indeed a “suppression”? Bureaucracies are famous for taking ages while reviewing reports for publication. My own, leading edge report in a much smaller bureaucracy, a ministry in the provincial government in Canada, was stopped for almost two years while being “reviewed’ by the top floor and their modestly-paid “consultant’ to remove every word that undermined the ministry’s well-established place in the tail of the subject area.

Recycled alarm

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), or hundreds of international scientists researching climate change, have predicted the grim possibilities, but never called nuclear war inevitable. A Pentagon source makes us believe they have their own “IPCC”, better equipped than the world’s best brains on the subject, so we better listen.
IPCC has been steadily warning about the social, economic and political aftermath of climate change around the globe. The deafest ears were American government’s, because doing something about fuel emissions was against the interests of the oil oligarchy. Started in earnest in about 1970s, notably with participation of numerous US scientists, the predictions (except sudden sea level rise next year!) have firmed up by mid-1990’s.
I am rather suspicious that the same thing “leaked” through “top secret”, clairvoyant think-tanks, re-written alarmistically, too.

WOT is dead, long live WCC

Secret is secret, even after the key person dies. Marshall, 82, is alive, “credited with DOD’s push on ballistic-missile defence”. Except for some Pentagon people, everyone knows that terrorists will not launch missiles onto the US of Hysteria, but would sneak dirty, street-level stuff in, or wrap explosives around the waist and hop on a New York bus.
Rumsfeld must be devastated that a most trusted man betrayed him. But frequent mention of terrorism is no coincidence. “War on terror” (WOT) ended up in a fiasco.
Palestinian terrorists still wrap explosives around their waist. Osama is still at large. “Saddam” is actually one of five look-alikes – never mind that not one of them had anything to do with 9-11. Terrorism in Iraq dramatically increased since the Coalition brought “liberation” “for the Iraqi people”. In Afghanistan, the difference is that Taliban just announced retaliation against the occupiers and their quislings. If rumours about some 400 body bags brought monthly from Iraq into one secret morgue in the US are true, imagine the figure when Taliban rolls the sleeves up.
Sensing a failure of the WOT slogan, Pentagon prepared a new reason for being: “war on climate change” (WCC). In the absence of “commies” after Berlin wall collapsed, the self-justification for Western militarism was “humanitarian interventions”, before it became “WOT” after 9-11.
Pentagon was prepared ahead of time. Quite a while ago, on a Pentagon website, I found a report on US military strategy in a warming climate. Reuters wrote on January 14, 2004: “U.N. aims to study link between environment, wars”. I commented, “Sounds like one of Pentagon’s reports: to look for new war reasons once ‘terrorism’ is ‘under control’ (as if terrorism could be conquered by armies).”
WOT nearing natural death, a few rings of the Pentagon building would go under a hammer. So would over 700 US military bases, and the Lear jets that fly military brass between Pacific islands and Swiss ski slopes.
Luckily, we have climate change. The Observer scribes let their fantasy feed from the fringes of scientific prediction. Twisting the Penatgon’s exagerated conclusion that catastrophic climate change scenarios are “plausible and would challenge United States national security in ways that should be considered immediately,” the scribes emphasized the urgency, as if a $400 billion war budget was not enough.
Finally, Camp Bondsteel base in Kosovo 1 km above see level will qualify for a grant to sharpen up the razor wire and beef up sand bag walls with concrete and titanium. Otherwise, it might be flooded in the Deluge predicted by Pentagon for 2005.

White House “scientific” dilemma

Not by chance, the article mentions last week’s “heavy fire from respected scientists” against the Bush administration. Washington propaganda pundits will declare Bush, great-heartedly turning away from WOT to WCC, to be a “Christ Scientist of Our Times”.
Whether it will be a Bush-President or an Unindicted War Criminal General Clark, the US administration will continue to adore science that suits its policy agenda and will suppress the other studies.
The language of the article does not leave doubts about the authors’ propagandist intentions: “Sources have told The Observer that American officials appeared extremely sensitive about the issue when faced with complaints that America’s public stance appeared increasingly out of touch.” Right. The American public shot down Kyoto agreement to slow down with greengouse gas emissions. Or did the authors mean that the US public drifted much further away from their governments “policy” since Kyoto? Then the article’s sentence makes sense.
Should the reader still doubt the WCC rationale at this point, reading the stars from their meteorites that fall on Earth comes to rescue. A British lord, former “chief executive of the Meteorological Office – and the first senior figure to liken the threat of climate change to that of terrorism” is invoked as an authority.
Lord authority might work in modern, liberated UK, but not in Afghanistan. Those ingrates will not understand that WOT is WCC until further notice, and that they should return to the caves, instead of seeking revenge for driving their country back to stone age and fertilizing it with uranium manure.
Perhaps foreseeing this undesirable eventuality, the article quotes no less than a rep of an org that brings happiness to all impoverished people – the World Bank. A “chief scientist for the World Bank” who also happened to be a “former chair” of the IPCC, said the Pentagon’s “dire warnings could no longer be ignored.” To Watson’s credit, he knows whom White House listens to – “the oil lobby and the Pentagon”.
Under “something for everyone” motto, the article also quotes Greenpeace, who consistetly covers the military in radioactive war scandals since Iraq 1991, if not Middle East 1970s.

Nuclear rescue

Memories of WOT in Afghan and Iraqi summer will become a pleasant memory in the scorching heat of global warming. Pentagon and other “experts” tend towards US hysteria: “The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents.” On the other hand, the Yankees are good at making things worse, so perhaps we should believe and be prepared. Milosevic did not, and has to suffer as a prosecutor of NATO in a former Nazi prison at The Hague.
Apocalyptically, “abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies.” Worst, some of them may get an idea to protect (with nukes) national oil resources from evaporation in the global heat.
Pentagon’s “IPCC” did not invent the nuclear trigger from global warming for nothing. Who would be the most likely states to use nuclear weapons when heated up by the global greenhouse? “Axis of Evil”, answered toddlers in my neighbourhood nursery.
Thanks to carbon dioxide, nukes will be alive and well. Elaborate plans to develop nuclear weapon systems that would turn the Earth into a glass ball glowing in the darkness of Universe, will not become pulp. Countless jobs in the glowing “industry” will be saved from extinction. Who said climate change is bad for the economy?
Yes, economy and national security. The Pentagon report was prepared by the cream of US biz: Peter Schwartz, “CIA consultant and former head of planning at Royal Dutch/Shell Group”, and Doug Randall “of the California-based Global Business Network”. Global the climate change is. How much it has to do with business and the military (complex in short) is a subject for thick books. I am out of this specialty for long. Could someone please check if Schwartz and Randall are not by chance among the few critics of IPCC work?
World population only at half the level predicted for the end of the century, Randall and Schwartz panic already. Are they afraid of losing suburban comfort to the hordes of climate change refugees? Both authors believe in “catastrophic” shortages of water and energy that will plunge the globe into war by 2020. No confidence in Coca Cola and oil companies. Every challenge is a business opportunity, is it not?
If I were Pentagon, I would worry that if radioactive wars continue at present pace, by 2020 there would not be a patch of land left without radioactivity.
The authors of Pentagon report worry that “8,200 years ago climatic conditions brought widespread crop failure, famine, disease and mass migration of populations that could soon be repeated.” I think they should rejoice that US forces know how to deal with mass exodus, as from Kosovo 1999, or Afghanistan 2001-2002. Uranium ammunition comes in handy when the exodus turns “the wrong way”.
America will grow again, better able to pay tooth for tooth, eye for an eye for each nuke launched from a country fried to desperation by the warming climate.

War at last

Pentagon “analysts” have no doubts about the future. “Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life. Once again, warfare would define human life,” wrote Pentagon psychos.
Our peaceful times will soon be over. We will have vicious climates to fight with tanks, bombers and radioactive weapons all over the world, from the equator north and south, all the way to the poles.
Resources needed for operations and bases against WCC will eclipse those for WOT. Imagine the challenges to establish US forward bases on each pole, for pre-emptive strikes against Cold, should it threaten to form an alliance with Warmth.
It’s been long time since I read such pro-complex science rubbish. Last time, from the holloway311 series on the du-watch list, about “natural” uranium 236 and plutonium 239.

——————-
Piotr is a former lead researcher on socio-economic issues of climate change with the Canadian federal government. He became an antiwar warrior with 1999 NATO attack on Yugoslavia. He wrote two books about it (in Polish http://www.gavagai.pl/nato/, in English http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/yugoslavia/bein/) and articles to independent media, including Antiwar. He co-founded http://www.du-watch.org against uranium weapons. He authored and co-authored leading papers about official propaganda on uranium weapons, and moderates and manages the du-watch e-group. Recently, he has been nominated assistant editor of the Polish diaspora magazine http://www.infonurt.com
Copyleft Piotr Bein 2004: copy right, left and centre. Commercial exploitation of the article subject to C in a circle.

=============================

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4864237-102275,00.html

Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us · Secret report warns of rioting and nuclear war · Britain will be ‘Siberian’ in less than 20 years · Threat to the world is greater than terrorism
Mark Townsend and Paul Harris in New York Sunday February 22, 2004 The Observer
Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters. A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a ‘Siberian’ climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world. The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents. ‘Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,’ concludes the Pentagon analysis. ‘Once again, warfare would define human life.’ The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has repeatedly denied that climate change even exists. Experts said that they will also make unsettling reading for a President who has insisted national defence is a priority. The report was commissioned by influential Pentagon defence adviser Andrew Marshall, who has held considerable sway on US military thinking over the past three decades. He was the man behind a sweeping recent review aimed at transforming the American military under Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Climate change ‘should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a US national security concern’, say the authors, Peter Schwartz, CIA consultant and former head of planning at Royal Dutch/Shell Group, and Doug Randall of the California-based Global Business Network. An imminent scenario of catastrophic climate change is ‘plausible and would challenge United States national security in ways that should be considered immediately’, they conclude. As early as next year widespread flooding by a rise in sea levels will create major upheaval for millions. Last week the Bush administration came under heavy fire from a large body of respected scientists who claimed that it cherry-picked science to suit its policy agenda and suppressed studies that it did not like. Jeremy Symons, a former whistleblower at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), said that suppression of the report for four months was a further example of the White House trying to bury the threat of climate change. Senior climatologists, however, believe that their verdicts could prove the catalyst in forcing Bush to accept climate change as a real and happening phenomenon. They also hope it will convince the United States to sign up to global treaties to reduce the rate of climatic change. A group of eminent UK scientists recently visited the White House to voice their fears over global warming, part of an intensifying drive to get the US to treat the issue seriously. Sources have told The Observer that American officials appeared extremely sensitive about the issue when faced with complaints that America’s public stance appeared increasingly out of touch. One even alleged that the White House had written to complain about some of the comments attributed to Professor Sir David King, Tony Blair’s chief scientific adviser, after he branded the President’s position on the issue as indefensible. Among those scientists present at the White House talks were Professor John Schellnhuber, former chief environmental adviser to the German government and head of the UK’s leading group of climate scientists at the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research. He said that the Pentagon’s internal fears should prove the ‘tipping point’ in persuading Bush to accept climatic change. Sir John Houghton, former chief executive of the Meteorological Office – and the first senior figure to liken the threat of climate change to that of terrorism – said: ‘If the Pentagon is sending out that sort of message, then this is an important document indeed.’ Bob Watson, chief scientist for the World Bank and former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, added that the Pentagon’s dire warnings could no longer be ignored. ‘Can Bush ignore the Pentagon? It’s going be hard to blow off this sort of document. Its hugely embarrassing. After all, Bush’s single highest priority is national defence. The Pentagon is no wacko, liberal group, generally speaking it is conservative. If climate change is a threat to national security and the economy, then he has to act. There are two groups the Bush Administration tend to listen to, the oil lobby and the Pentagon,’ added Watson. ‘You’ve got a President who says global warming is a hoax, and across the Potomac river you’ve got a Pentagon preparing for climate wars. It’s pretty scary when Bush starts to ignore his own government on this issue,’ said Rob Gueterbock of Greenpeace. Already, according to Randall and Schwartz, the planet is carrying a higher population than it can sustain. By 2020 ‘catastrophic’ shortages of water and energy supply will become increasingly harder to overcome, plunging the planet into war. They warn that 8,200 years ago climatic conditions brought widespread crop failure, famine, disease and mass migration of populations that could soon be repeated. Randall told The Observer that the potential ramifications of rapid climate change would create global chaos. ‘This is depressing stuff,’ he said. ‘It is a national security threat that is unique because there is no enemy to point your guns at and we have no control over the threat.’ Randall added that it was already possibly too late to prevent a disaster happening. ‘We don’t know exactly where we are in the process. It could start tomorrow and we would not know for another five years,’ he said. ‘The consequences for some nations of the climate change are unbelievable. It seems obvious that cutting the use of fossil fuels would be worthwhile.’ So dramatic are the report’s scenarios, Watson said, that they may prove vital in the US elections. Democratic frontrunner John Kerry is known to accept climate change as a real problem. Scientists disillusioned with Bush’s stance are threatening to make sure Kerry uses the Pentagon report in his campaign. The fact that Marshall is behind its scathing findings will aid Kerry’s cause. Marshall, 82, is a Pentagon legend who heads a secretive think-tank dedicated to weighing risks to national security called the Office of Net Assessment. Dubbed ‘Yoda’ by Pentagon insiders who respect his vast experience, he is credited with being behind the Department of Defence’s push on ballistic-missile defence. Symons, who left the EPA in protest at political interference, said that the suppression of the report was a further instance of the White House trying to bury evidence of climate change. ‘It is yet another example of why this government should stop burying its head in the sand on this issue.’ Symons said the Bush administration’s close links to high-powered energy and oil companies was vital in understanding why climate change was received sceptically in the Oval Office. ‘This administration is ignoring the evidence in order to placate a handful of large energy and oil companies,’ he added. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004

“2 Million German Expellee Dead in Poland” Off by a Factor of 100

Review of Helga Hirsch (1999). Zemsta Ofiar: Niemcy w obozach w Polsce 1944-1950. Warsaw. Reviewer: Mr. Jan Peczkis — see Amazon.com

“2 Million German Expellee Dead in Poland” Off by a Factor of 100

THE REVENGE OF THE VICTIMS: GERMANS IN POLISH CAMPS 1944-1950, is the title of this book, whose author is a German (p. 199) and whose own father was a German expellee. (p. 5). The title is misleading, as the perpetrators were not random Poles but Polish Communists and Jewish Communists. In fact, the Soviet-imposed Communist authorities, well aware of their own unpopularity, commonly fanned hatred of Germans for political purposes (p. 93-94). (See also the Afterword, by Andrzej Paczkowski: p. 198).

Soon after the 1939 German attack on Poland, some 10,000 local Germans, according to German estimates, were deported by Polish authorities further into Poland. (p. 37). This comprised a tiny fraction of Poland’s German population, and was done for security purposes.

Hirsch’s treatment of the events of Bloody Sunday (Blut Sonntag) at Bydgoszcz (Bromberg) is rather naïve. She repeats the absurdity about the Poles imagining a German fifth column and shooting at each other. She suggests that Polish forces tearing-up German properties in search for weapons were engaging in irrational acts of desperation. Actually, the fifth column is proved by many local specific-named Germans identified among the captured snipers, and the need for destructive searches is proved by the sophisticated nature of the hiding places used for weaponry, and sometimes the snipers themselves. (See the Peczkis Review of Dywersja niemiecka i zbrodnie hitlerowskie w Bydgoszczy na tle wydarzen w dniu 3 IX 1939 (Polish and German Edition)).

Otherwise, Hirsch cites German scholar Hugo Rasmus, who cites a figure of 422 German civilian dead in Bydgoszcz itself, 518 total including all Bydgoszcz province, and a grand total of 5,000 in all of Poland. (p. 46). This is nowhere near the 58,000 of Goebbels’ Nazi propaganda. [I knew an eyewitness, Mr. Stefan Marcinkowski, who denied the existence of any massacre of German civilians by Poles in Bydgoszcz. The German dead were active fifth-columnists].

There were 4 classes of Volksdeutsche recognized by the Nazi occupants. The first two were obviously German. The third consisted of German-descent Poles bearing some pro-German orientation, as well as entire peoples bearing transitional Polish-German characteristics (Silesians, Masurians, and Kashubians). The fourth class, a small one, consisted of strongly Polonized Germans and Poles of German descent. They could only become candidates for German citizenship. (p. 170).

Unlike Warthegau Gauleiter Arthur Greiser, Danzig Gauleiter Albert Forster was willing to go beyond Masurians in unilaterally accepting as Volksdeutsche those East Prussians who had been Germanophones and culturally German for many generations. (p. 50). Otherwise, prospective Volksdeutsche had to posses and prove at least 3 of the following 5 to qualify: German ancestry, Reich relatives, good work habits, an absence of criminality, evident German characteristics (e. g., cleanliness of the home). (pp. 50-51).

Those qualified Polish citizens who lived in the Reich-annexed provinces but who did not become Volksdeutsche joined ethnic Poles in getting expelled to the General Government (p. 50), and were henceforth to be punished after the war as “the worst enemies of the Reich”. (p. 51). Not surprisingly, this terrorized many qualified Polish citizens into protecting themselves by becoming Volksdeutsche.

It has been argued that the Nazi gas chambers had been reserved exclusively for Jews. This is incorrect. Some 35,000 Poles suffering from T.B. were gassed in the Warthegau area alone. (p. 92).

After the Red Army had driven out the Germans out of Poland, the Soviet NKVD set up concentration camps, and later turned the authority over to the Polish Communist security forces (UB, U.B., known as the hated Bezpieka). The Communist camps included Zimna Woda, Legnow, Makla, Potulice, Swietochlowice, Sztum, Jaworzno, Auschwitz, and Birkenau (p. 178, 185). Yes, the Communists re-used former Nazi concentration camps. The Germans incarcerated in these camps were primarily Reichsdeutsche and Volksdeutsche from Poland as defined by her pre-1939 borders. (p. 165). (Those Germans living in East Prussia, Pomerania, and Silesia were mostly expelled directly.)

The Communist camps were commonly staffed by sadistic Communist Poles and sadistic Communist Jews. The latter included Isidore Cederbaum (Ignacy Cedrowski) of Zimna Woda (p. 83-on) and Solomon Morel of Swietochlowice. (p. 157-on). Morel’s work was described by American Jack Sack in his AN EYE FOR AN EYE. For his part, Morel, hiding in Israel, dismissed Sack as an American Jew out to make some money. (p. 158). Interestingly, the Communist authorities themselves sometimes arrested camp leaders for mistreatment of the prisoners. (e. g., p. 154).

The total number of victims of the Communist camps, mostly victims of starvation, is on the order of 25,000. (p. 185). Note that this is two orders of magnitude smaller than German revisionist claims. A caution: Hirsch mentions Poles incarcerated in the camps (p. 74), but it is unclear how many of the victims were actually Poles.

Hirsch avoids attempting to relativize Nazi German crimes. She notes (pp. 7-8) that 6.03 million Polish citizens, half of them Jews, perished at the hands of the Germans. 100 out of every 108 Polish families lost at least one family member. 640,000 Polish soldiers died. There were about 500,000 crippled Poles, 2.5 million Poles sent to the Reich for forced labor, 900,000 Poles expelled from their homes, 860,000 Poles in prisons and concentration camps, and up to 150,000 Polish civilian dead in the Warsaw Uprising.

Srebrenica: Less Than 2000 Victims in Total

Srebrenica Forensics: 1919-1923 Victims in Total

http://de-construct.net/e-zine/?p=9034

Dec 13th, 2009 | By De-Construct.net | In Bosnia, Current

Srebrenica myth, divorced from facts and devoid of truth, spun by the Washington and Brussels bureaucrats in collusion with Bosnian Muslim leadership, is further promoted by the brainless cult followers like Mia Farrow (above, piously mourning Bosnian Muslim cutthroats in Srebrenica). Unfortunately, the incurable narcissists always on a hunt for occasions to feel good about themselves, serve only to obscure the hard work of those few and far between who want the verifiable facts, and refuse to blindly subscribe to dime-a-dozen foggy tall tales.

Dr. Simić Takes Hague’s Forensic Evidence Apart

Dr. Ljubiša Simić, pathologist and forensic expert who had full access to the Hague Prosecution’s forensic evidence in relation to the alleged “Srebrenica massacre”, found the scientific evidence of the Srebrenica hoax: the total number of victims, the number of the executed victims, the time of death and the causes of death tell a story that is entirely different from the official myth.

In September 2009, Srebrenica Historical Project http://www.srebrenica-project.com/  , an NGO based in Netherlands with a purpose of “creating a comprehensive and contextual, as opposed to a selective, record of the violence between the communities in that area” in 1992-1995, together with the Belgrade-based Serbian Sabor Dveri, organized a round table discussion in Banja Luka.

A comprehensive report by the forensic specialist and pathologist Dr. Ljubiša Simić — member of the Srebrenica Historical Project — presenting detailed scientific analysis of the forensic evidence gathered by the Hague Tribunal in the case of July 1995 Srebrenica “massacre”, was by far the most illuminating part of the discussion.

As an expert member of the defense teams of Serbs accused by the Hague prosecution of committing or taking part in “Srebrenica genocide”, Dr. Simić was handed all the forensic evidence Hague prosecution possesses in relation to the case.

Hague Tribunal’s evidence consists of 3,568 autopsy reports, after the forensic examination was performed by the Western specialists (no Serb experts, medical or other were allowed to witness the investigation, uncovering of the “mass graves” or autopsies, even though the entire process was taking place on the territory of the Serb Republic in Bosnia) on remains gathered from 13 mass graves (primary, secondary, tertiary, etc) in the area covering a 40-50 kilometers diameter around the town of Srebrenica.

The Number of Autopsy Reports Does Not Equal the Number of Bodies

The first thing Dr. Simić noted is a common misconception, that 3,568 autopsy reports equal 3,568 bodies, which is not the case, even though the Hague Tribunal insists on treating it so.

Pointing out that 75% and above of the bodily remains can be regarded as one (whole) body, Dr. Simić has found that around half of the total number of the Hague’s Srebrenica post-mortem reports are based on only few bones — in many cases just a single bone or bone fragment — which, simply put, “does not allow for any meaningful forensic conclusions to be drawn”.

In order to establish with acceptable precision the number of persons alleged Srebrenica mass graves contained, Dr. Simić counted the right and left femur bones, starting from the hypothesis that the femur is one of the sturdiest skeletal components and that the number of these bones is therefore one of the most reliable indicators of how many individuals were in fact buried. The results of his analysis show the presence of 1919 right and 1923 left femur bones.

Based on this analysis, Dr. Simić concluded that the total number of victims in all thirteen Srebrenica mass graves is well under 2,000 — woefully short of the magical number of 8,000, aggressively propagated by the State Department ever since 1995.

Secondly, the forensic evidence wielded by the Hague prosecution is not accompanied by the DNA analysis, so it is entirely impossible to scientifically determine if these are remains of Bosnian Muslims, Serbs, Croats, Turks, Albanians, Arabs or some other ethnic group, or to ascertain the actual identity of the victims, save for the fact the remains belonged to the males.

Next, Dr. Simić found that most of remains analyzed by the NATO specialists do not allow for forensic conclusions as to the causes of death and therefore cannot be verified as remains of the victims of the execution, nor can they serve as a proof of a war crime or a massacre in a court of law.

He also noted that even though it takes 5-10 years for the human corpse to completely decompose, many of the remains taken out of a number of “Srebrenica mass graves” in 1996, for example, less than a year after the alleged Srebrenica “massacre” took place, were in a state of total decomposition, making the alleged time of death (July 1995) a scientific impossibility.

442 Executed Victims of Unknown Identity

After analyzing all the autopsy reports and the Hague’s Srebrenica forensic data, Dr. Simić was able to divide them into five groups, “to make the results as analytically accessible as possible”. The results are as follows:

1. The first group consists of 442 bodies on or about which blindfolds and/or ligatures were found, which indicates that those persons were executed.

2. There are 655 bodies which show bullet inflicted injuries and based only upon that finding it is impossible to conclude whether they might have been executed or were killed during combat activity or committed suicide.

3. In relation to a certain number of victims [477] it would be reasonable to conclude that they were not executed because of the presence of shrapnel and other metal fragments which are not bullet related. That pattern of injury is consistent with combat activity, not with execution, as the cause of death.

4. For 411 bodies it was impossible to determine whether or not death was caused by execution because those bodies were incomplete. In this group we also find bodies which did not exhibit any traces of projectiles of any kind, and for that reason also the cause of death could not be determined.

5. A significant percentage of the reports, 44,4 %, or a total of 1583, consists of only a few bones. If we take into account that a body consists of more than 200 bones, then it is clear that the reports in this category were useless for drawing conclusions of any kind. That is also suggested by the fact that in 92,4% of the reports in this category, even prosecution forensic experts refrained from making a determination of the cause of death.

Quoted from Dr. Simić’s report

http://www.srebrenica-project.com/DOWNLOAD/post%20mortem/Forensic analysis of post-mortem reports.doc

Dr. Simić Provides the Scientific Proof of Srebrenica Mega-Lie

Dr. Simić’s analysis titled Forensic analysis of post-mortem reports is available for download in entirety. It contains detailed forensic facts regarding all of 13 Srebrenica mass graves, as the data was gathered and used by the Hague Tribunal’s prosecution, accompanied by the instant-enlightenment graphs, Dr. Simić’s analysis of the data and his conclusions.

In addition to Germinal Civikov’s book “Srebrenica: The Crown Witness” (reviewed by John Laughland http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/3894 ), which completely debunks Hague’s key witness in the case of “genocide” allegedly committed by the Bosnian Serb Army in the town of Srebrenica, and the facts gathered by the Swiss investigator Alexander Dorin (“Srebrenica — The History of Salon Racism” http://de-construct.net/?p=6082 ), the analysis of the Hague’s forensic evidence by Dr. Ljubiša Simić represents an invaluable piece of a puzzle, proving once again Srebrenica accusations are based solely on propaganda, myth and blind faith, hysterically guarded by those who expect to benefit from their alleged victimhood or presumed magnanimity.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Significant comments from de-construct.net

1. ida December 14th, 2009 5:59 am :“The first group consists of 442 bodies on or about which blindfolds and/or ligatures were found, which indicates that those persons were executed.”Well I’m wondering if they have the identities to fully correspond to the bodies they found in that state. Some of them – if not identified as Muslim – could be Serbs.As well, I’m wondering if these 442 include those bodies which were completely skeletized and therefore would most likely be from earlier times than the so-called Srebrenica fall or even the ’90s war in Bosnia.Serbs were commonly killed that way in WWII times by the Croats, Muslims, Germans and Austrians – who took the time to do this to Serb civilians and POWs. There are historical pictures of Serbs blindfolded and being strung up/hung by Germans and Austrians from WWI and WWII.It’s known that the greater Srebrenica area was a site of many WWII massacres by the Croats and Muslims.

   I wouldn’t think that if there was a lot of time pressure to kill that they’d take the time to blindfold and tie hands of large numbers of people and execute them with the UN around and NATO surveillance planes having full control of Bosnia’s airspace at that time. To kill most quickly you’d just fire on a group as soon as it was gathered. Blindfolding and tying the hands behind the captured backs was the way of Croats and Muslims during the wars when they had control of an area for weeks or longer.

De-Construct.net December 14th, 2009 7:32 pm :

Quite right, Ida, we still don’t know the truth about Srebrenica, who are the people in this group which was probably executed, whether they are the ones Croat Drazen Erdemovic said he personally shot (the crime for which he was never prosecuted or tried, btw, although he testified in the Hague as an actual executor), whether they are the Serbs from Bratunac, Kravice and other Serbian villages in Srebrenica municipality Naser Oric’s cutthroats were raping, looting and killing for three years, if these are the worst Muslim butchers locals knew by their bloody orgies and killed to avenge their loved ones, or if the information Dr. Vojislav Seselj has collected about the foreign secret services who committed certain crimes in order to frame the Serbs for genocide is at the center of this episode.

The most important thing for now, is that Dr. Simic has provided a scientific evidence showing the whole Srebrenica myth about 7,000-8,000 Muslim “men and boys” murdered in cold blood is a big lie, based on thin air, propaganda and hearsay. This issue is still very much open and it will remain so until the full truth comes to light.

ida December 15th, 2009 4:51 am :

Today’s the 17th anniversary of attack by the Srebrenica area Muslims on the Serbs in Bijelovac. Serbs say 106 Serbs were murdered and 350 Serb homes were set ablaze. (And of course a few weeks later you had the murderous attack occurring on Serbian Christmas day by the Muslims.) Wonder if this attack and destruction was among the scenes shown by Naser Oric on his videos. Around February 1994, he was showing and bragging about scenes of the Muslim army and paramilitaries’ destruction on Serb villages to Washington Post reporter Jon Pomfret and Canadian reporter Bill Schiller. Obviously the Muslims attacked in huge numbers and had plenty of weaponry and even had the people there with video recorders. It’s also clear the Muslims were doing a scorched earth policy and it wasn’t just about food supplies.

http://glassrbije.org/E/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=13&Itemid=26

Memorial service for murdered Serb civilians in Bijelovac

14 December 2009.

Today, in front of the Orthodox church in Bijelovac near Bratunac, a memorial service was held, marking the 17th anniversary of the massacre Muslim Srebrenica forces committed, under the command of Nasser Oric, against 106 Serb civilians. In the morning of 14 December 1992, Bosnian Muslims from the neighbouring villages of Pirici and Poloznik attacked the Serb village and committed the most atrocious massacre against Serbs in a single day in BIH during the war. 106 Serbs were murdered and 78 were wounded. The whole village of Bijelovac was destroyed in the attack and 350 houses were set on fire. No one has answered yet for that crime, or for any other crime committed against Serbs in Bratunac and Srebrenica in 1992 and 1993. On 3 July 2008, the Hague Tribunal acquitted Naser Oric, claiming there was no evidence of his command responsibility.

1. Neil Craig December 15th, 2009 5:41 pm :A convincing report though I admit I was convinced previously. The dog that didn’t bark is #2 in the initial points – the refusal of the ICTY to produce the DNA. DNA matching has come a very long way since 1995 & it is now possible to determine ethnicity as it wasn’t then. We know that 3,870 Serb civilians from surrounding villages were murdered in cold blood so some & possibly all of these bodies could be theirs. DNA evidence would tell us & that the ICTY refuses to disclose it strongly suggests they know the answer. If I were giving advice I would suggest Drs Simic & Karadzic concentrate on that.The establishment have one scandal on their hands over not making data available but doing so in a trial is far worse.

De-Construct.net December 15th, 2009 6:26 pm :

Yes, Dr. Karadzic’s effort may be our last opportunity to have this issue wide open on the big scene. As our valiant friend Andy Wilcoxson has noted, Karadzic intends to use the advantages of the modern science to focus precisely on that: the actual number of Muslim fighters fallen during Srebrenica takeover by the Serb Army, and the true identity of those taken out of the alleged “Srebrenica mass graves”. The fact Serbian government is doing absolutely nothing to help him unearth the crucial facts, speaks volumes about whom do they serve and who brought them to power.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Kosovo – can you imagine?

Jew-Killing Shocker Unmasks the Tactics of Communist Bands in German-Occupied Poland

A shocking discovery by renowned Polish historians Chodakiewicz, Gontarczyk and Zebrowski, deserving translations into English, German and Hebrew, reviewed by a top American-Polish reviewer on Amazon, Jan Peczkis:

“The victors write the history books, and the Communists were the victors. They got to paint the GL-AL as the champion of Jews, and its killings of Jews were buried and the blame shifted to the demonized AK and NSZ. (v.2, p. 34)  This Communist line was quoted by many Polonophobic Jewish authors in the West: Kahanowitz, Ainsztein, Krakowski, Yisrael Gutman, etc. (v.2, p. 28-on). [Most if not all of the foregoing were either Communists or Communist-inclined.] In postwar Poland, Underground members were framed in Communist show trials. The “evidence” consisted of forged authentic-looking documents bearing the forced signatures of incarcerated Gestapo officials. (v.2, p. 10, 18).

……………………………………

Here is Jan Peczkis’s review of 11 january 2010, first appearing about 3 weeks ago but now greatly expanded, on Amazon. It addresses the perennial accusation of the NSZ and AK killing fugitive Jews.

Review of Tajne Oblicze GL-AL I PPR: Dokumenty, edited by Marek J. Chodakiewicz, Piotr Gontarczyk, and Leszek Zebrowski. (1997). Warszawa. 3 volumes. Reviewer: Mr. Jan Peczkis

Jew-Killing Shocker Unmasks the Tactics of the GL-AL Communist Bands in German-Occupied Poland

THE SECRET FACE OF THE GL-AL AND PPR: DOCUMENTS is the title of this Polish language book, which includes an English-language abstract. (v.2, pp. 257-258). This groundbreaking work, opening long-secret Communist archives, is a needed corrective to the glorification of the GL-AL during the decades of the Soviet-imposed Communist puppet state in Poland, as pointed out by Leszek Zebrowski in rebuttal to Communist Ryszard Nazarewicz, who had accused this work of being tendentiously negative. (v.3, p. 10-on). It is also a myth-shattering work on Jew-killing.

The GL-AL documents are predictable. The Soviet Union could do no wrong, the prewar Polish regime was a fascist one in cahoots with Hitler, and the non-Communist Polish guerillas consisted of aristocrats and landowners (demonstrably false: v.1, p. 209). GL-AL criminal acts were covered by ostentatious doublespeak. (v.2, pp. 7-8, 97).

The Communist GL-AL was quite small–merely 5,000-6,000 members (Spring 1944). (v.1, p. 23, 64, 83). Most of its alleged exploits against the German occupants cannot be verified, while others are known to be fabrications. (e. g., v.2, pp. 7-8, 18). Still others were actually the work of the AK (A.K.) or NSZ (N.S.Z). (v.1, p. 128, 144). Having failed to stamp out the Warsaw Uprising from public consciousness, the postwar Communist authorities instead attempted to co-opt it by greatly exaggerating the role of the GL-AL in it. (v.2, p. 242-on).

In fact, the GL-AL prioritized the killing of patriotic Poles over Germans (v.3, p. 56), and the GL-AL murdered many Polish freedom fighters. (e. g., v.3, p. 8, 103, 106, 135; especially v.2, p. 85-on). The GL-AL also collaborated with the Nazis by exposing the Polish Underground to the Gestapo (v.2, p. 195-on), including that in an GL-AL/Gestapo/NKVD arrangement. (v.2, p. 223).

Unlike the AK and NSZ, the GL-AL engaged in acts that deliberately provoked German mass reprisals against the Polish population. This was designed to generate desperate, traumatized Poles who would join the GL-AL in order to get succor and revenge. (v.1, p. 26). Such was a common tactic of Communist movements worldwide (Chodakiewicz, personal communication). In some instances, Polish peasants killed GL-AL members, or denounced them to the Germans, in order to forestall these provocations. (v.1, p. 121, 166).

Another major GL-AL tactic was massive “revolutionary banditry”. (v.1, pp. 29-30, pp. 99-on, 181-on; v. 2, p. 90, etc.). This was done not only to secure provisions from a generally-unsupportive population, but also to terrorize it into submission to ANY regime that would restore “law and order”. The GL-AL bandits commonly dropped NSZ tracts to divert blame, and so the NSZ announced that it never makes forcible requisitions. (v.1, pp. 196-198).

There were many Jews in the GL-AL, as evident from Jewish sources. (v.1, p. 102). Charges of anti-Semitism in the AK and NSZ contrast with the silence about anti-Semitism in the GL-AL—the latter proved by its documents. (e. g., v.1, p. 230, 233; v.2, pp. 211-212). Likewise, selective complaints about some Polish peasants requiring payment to help fugitive Jews ignore the GL-AL doing the same. (v.1, p. 176).

Polish suspicions of the ZOB’s Communist leanings were confirmed when its remnants joined GL-AL bands. (v.2, p. 72-on). The ZOB engaged in mass banditry (v.2, pp. 78-79), and many ZOB members were killed by the GL-AL for impending desertion. (v. 2, p. 82).

Let’s expand on Jew-killing. Jewish memoirs misrepresent specific Jew-killing units (e. g., Leon Plichta “Wrona”’s Mickiewicz) as AK when they were actually AL. (v.1., p. 14, 221-222). The NSZ is accused of killing post-Warsaw-Ghetto-Uprising ZOB fighters in the forests. Impossible! The NSZ didn’t even exist in the area. (v.2, pp. 75-76).

AK General Bor-Komorowski’s order to liquidate bandit bands has been misrepresented by certain Jewish scholars as a veiled order to kill fugitive Jews. (v. 3, p. 32, 35). Nonsense! Many AK documents addressed the need to combat the “revolutionary banditry” of the GL-AL without the slightest regard for the perpetrators’ nationality. (e. g., v.3, pp. 82-83, 40-41, 47-49, 82-83, 89-90, 230). One Bialystok-area AK document identifies the nationalities of local bandits liquidated: 4 Jews, 28 Poles, etc. (v.2, p. 35, 42).  Of course, the many Jews in the GL-AL translated into many Jews killed in AK and NSZ anti-bandit, population-protecting actions, of which there were many. (e. g., v.3, p. 16, 207, 243-245).

A SHOCKER: It was the GL-AL that engaged in gratuitous Jew-killing. Tens to hundreds of Jews were killed by a GL-AL unit in the Lublin region alone. (v.1, pp. 10-11). A GL-AL commander in the Kielce-Radom region shot Jews who escaped from German camps. (v.1, p. 138). Far from being marginal, the GL-AL killing of Jews was quite common. (e. g., v.3, 13-15, 24-26; especially v.2, p. 44, 48-68).

One GL-AL Jew-killer was Wladyslaw Spychaj vel Sobczynski, a Soviet-trained NKVD official. (v.3, p. 14). He later became a U.B. (Bezpieka) leader who played a major role in the Kielce Pogrom.

The victors write the history books, and the Communists were the victors. They got to paint the GL-AL as the champion of Jews, and its killings of Jews were buried and the blame shifted to the demonized AK and NSZ. (v.2, p. 34)  This Communist line was quoted by many Polonophobic Jewish authors in the West: Kahanowitz, Ainsztein, Krakowski, Yisrael Gutman, etc. (v.2, p. 28-on). [Most if not all of the foregoing were either Communists or Communist-inclined.] In postwar Poland, Underground members were framed in Communist show trials. The “evidence” consisted of forged authentic-looking documents bearing the forced signatures of incarcerated Gestapo officials. (v.2, p. 10, 18).

This fascinating scholarly work should be translated into English.

Al Jazeera: Experts Demand Probe on DU Aftermath in Iraq

http://english.aljazeera.net/programmes/insideiraq/2010/01/20101371048370420.html

INSIDE IRAQ Iraqi doctors demand cancer probe Iraqi doctors believe depleted uranium from US military equipment used in the 2003 invasion is spreading cancer through the population.They are recording a shocking rise in the number of cancer victims south of Baghdad, they claim. Outraged, they have demanded an investigation be held into the matter. Cancer rates in the province of Babil have risen almost tenfold in just three years. In 2004, 500 cases of cancer were diagnosed there. That figure rose to almost 1,000 two years later. By 2008, the number of cases had increased sevenfold to 7,000. Many Iraqi doctors say radiation has caused this alarming increase in cancer rates and birth defects among Iraqi children. Over 300 sites across Iraq are said to be contaminated by depleted uranium. Inside Iraq is joined by Jawad Al-Ali, a consultant oncologist, and Christopher Busby, a radiation expert. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ National Meeting on Radiological Pollution in Iraq: By Hadi Al-Rubaiay The national meeting for the preventive measures from radiological pollution have been conducted in the presence of the high Consultants Commission in the Cabinet, high education ministry, Science and Technology Ministry, Environmental Ministry, and Health Ministry in Mansur Melia Hotel in Baghdad. Mr. Thamir Alghadban, chairman of the Consultants Commission emphasized in his speech that efforts that have been spent to improve the radiological pollution situation that have been resulted from the military operations of 1991 and 2003. Specific attention was given to Southern Oil Fields contamination where many cancer cases appeared among the workers of these oil fields. Later on the Environment Minister, Mrs. Nermeen Othman, in her speech explained  the importance of confining this radiological pollution which have been blown out of proportion by many political opponents in Iraq. She then explained the efforts of her ministry in setting the plans and programs related to protect the people from this pollution……… Then she gave the results of the environmental radiological assessment that have been conducted recently in Northern and Southern Oil Fields in Iraq, like in Rumaila Oil Fields where 48 sites were found radiologicaly contaminated.  She also added that among the 17 station of Northern Rumaila Oil Fields, eight sites were found contaminated with radioactive radionuclides. The results of the radiological EIA of Iraq were presented. Phase one of the assessment showed 264 radiologicaly contaminated samples and as follows: In Samawa area 202 sample. 71 of them are soil samples, 10 water samples, 106 dust smear sample. And one vegetation cover sample. Contaminated samples were 36 sample. In Zubair area, 62 sample. 41 of them contaminated. In Basra area, 103 sample. 62 samples were radiological contaminated. In Nasrya area, 153 sample. 49 of them were contaminated. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ alittihad@alattihad.com Friday, Aug.7.2009 Rise in birth defects in  Samawa. Samawa, Jasim Faisal Al-Rubayae A medical source in Muthana Obstetricians and Children Hospital warned of the increase of birth defects rates among new born children in Samawa. Dr Aamal Al-Saidy, in charge of SONAR in the hospital said that “there has been large increase in congenital malformations that needed to be explained by other MDs in the hospital”. Dr Alsaidy explained that the doctors in the hospital have never seen or exposed to such cases. She also cleared out that most of these deformities are from Al-Warkaa area.

PEACE ON EARTH – CHRIST IS BORN – INDEED HE IS BORN

This Icon of Nativity has Greek inscriptions: “CHRIST IS BORN” at the top, “MARY” above Virgin Mary, and “IS HS” or Isus Hristos — Jesus Christ above the Child.

Orthodox Armenians, Copts, Russians, Georgians and Serbs celebrate the Nativity on January 7th. Having been baptized in the Serbian Monstery of Hilandar on the Holy Mount Athos in Greece, I celebrate this Joyous Day with them. Here is a Serbian Icon of Nativity, with Serbian  inscriptions:

Shortly after my baptism, Tatiana Cacic Trifunovic explained the meaning of the Nativity Icon:

The Icon of Nativity is one of the most important Icons. I cannot tell you where this precise icon comes from [...] but the elements in it are common to most of the Nativity Icons. Like all Icons, this one brings a lesson in theology: every detail is important and has a very precise meaning [...] the Child is shown in a cave in the mountain, which, paradoxically, is an image of death: the Infant is born only to die and be arisen. His body, actually, is covered with wrappers with the same pattern that those of the dead body of Christ shown in the Resurrection Icons.

The ray of light coming from above [...] symbolizes His divinity, the link between the Father and the Son.

On the left, you can see the Three Magi [on horses], and above the manger, the ox and the ass, which belong to both traditions, Catholic and Orthodox, are a remainder of the prophesy of Isaiah. So is the branch growing among the rock, symbolizing the coming of the Messiah.

On the lower part of the Icon, there is Saint Joseph on the right, and he is apart from the Mother and the Child, since he is not actually the father. He is shown to be in a deep meditation, properly dumbfounded by the birth of the Child, which no human mind can properly understand. It is an image of doubt, fed by the presence of a shepherd, who does not belong at all to the Canonical Gospels, but to the Apocryphal ones: he is supposed to be the devil, tempting Saint Joseph into disbelief.

And finally, this troublesome image of the other child [in the lower left corner] … It comes also from the Apocryphal Gospels, where Mary’s labour is attended by a midwife called Salome, who bathes the Child, thus proving his humanity. It is also a reminder of the Sacrament of Baptism, since in the early times of Christianity, the Nativity and the Baptism of Christ were celebrated at the same time. The image is misleading, since Jesus was a grown man when he was baptized by John the Baptist, but the whole Icon shows that the Child is not a baby, but already the Man ready to suffer and die to be arisen.

Poland against the “swine flu” vax

Blog http://www.grypa666.wordpress.com has been established by Marek Podlecki and Piotr Bein in early July 2009, following Jane Burgermeister’s criminal charges filed against the alleged perpetrators of the “pandemic” and looming mass vaccinations. The blog played a key role in educating Poles at home and abroad about the pro-vax propaganda peddled in official media. Knowing the realities of a corrupt system of governance and “democracy” in Poland, our main goal was education of the public at large first, criminal charges later.

The blog reached a total of 2 million visits recently. Daily visits vary between a few thousand (weekends and holidays in “low” season of no pandemic threat in the media) and over 30 k (Ukrainian epidemic outbrake).

By August, Jane admitted it was the right priority, although her choice had been determined by the formidable challenge of little time to inform in face of powerful adversary. Indeed, attempts by our partner group Swinska Sprawa and others to launch criminal cases in the Polish system of justice have led nowhere. Seemingly protecting Big Pharma interests, the system still sits impotent on the case of the homeless who have died following trials of vaccines on them.

Owing at least to some degree to efforts of Polish activists like our blog and partners, the Polish minister of health Ewa Kopacz, as the world’s first minister, declared the vax unfit for use. Several objective reasons have contributed to her decision: lack of testing, unwillingness of the suppliers to take responsibility for side- and after-effects and efficacy, secrecy of vax supply contracts, and Big Pharma’s requirements to keep quiet about any negativities surrounding the vax. Her decision became so popular in informed public circles in the West that many persons expressed interest in settling in Poland, at least until the “pandemic” was over.

Although to me the following TV programme leaves much to be desired on the information contents, objectivity and the use of subtle propaganda techniques, it nevertheless represents some progress from previous footages.  An earlier TVN Fakty airing has cut our logo and web address from our flyer and subtly suggested “use of children” in our campaign, echoing agent provocateurs’ suggestions of Bein’s pedophilia. The same program described our efforts as those of “half-educated intellectuals” who should be banned from public appearances. Hello, professor Brydak, the Polish vax pusher in high position paid by the Big Pharma. Hello citizen rights spokesman Kochanski, actually the Big Pharma’s terror promoter.

Hats off to Minister Kopacz. We look forward to battles she has strirred in the European Parliament where German MEP, Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg has initiated an investigation against the World Health Organization and the Big Pharma, the actors of the “pandemic” on the ground:

http://www.wodarg.de/english/2948146.html

Meanwhile, blogs like this one intensify their campaigns aiming at exposing the higher echelons behind the “pandemic” and other plans for depopulating the Planet. Educate first…

You can see some of the Polish professionals against the “pandemic” and vax, and some of the activists in action in this youtube movie:

Dirty Uranium Weapons Cover-ups

Attention: I am looking for a sponsor of much more that needs to be published and a technical assistant. Please contact me  — Piotr Bein

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Dirty Uranium Weapons Cover-ups

Piotr Bein
a contribution to Christian Scherrer (editor) Iraq: Silent Death 2011, Penerbilt University Sains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang, ISBN 978-983-861-504-4

Introduction    3
Context    3
Infowar since “Kosovo” DU scandal    3
DU = dirty uranium metals    5
Mass chemical and uranium poisoning    5
Increasingly covert and destructive    7
Proliferation of uranium    9
The big picture    10
Anatomy    11
Why cover-ups?    11
Unsettling science    13
“Ban DU weapons” – weasel strategy    13
Group-think and apocalyptic ideology    15
Infowar and media    16
Professional irresponsibility    18
Tactics    19
David and Goliath    19
Anything goes    20
Deny, delay, deceive    22
Labs and studies manipulated    23
Obstruction to international organizations    25
Cases    27
Intrigues and obstructionism    27
Col. Ken Scott    28
“Bad Cop” Dan Fahey    30
Professor Hari Sharma    32
MOD testing program    34
Battlefield landscaping    35
Balkan uranium    36
Conclusions    38
Covering up crimes against humanity    38
Misled into ban    38
Studies corrupted and manipulated    39
Emerging global threat    39
Spread of low-level radiation    40
Think and act globally and locally    40

Acknowledgement
Thanks to many who have provided ideas and source material.
Keywords
Deception, grassroots movement, infowar, radiological weapons, uranium.
Definitions
FGNW: emerging types of low-yield nuclear explosives.
Grassroots movement: uncorrupted part of the anti-uranium (weapons) movement.
Infowar: information warfare.
PsyOps: Psychological Operations.
Radiological weapons: DU and other weaponry that contains radiation, whether causing nuclear fission or fusion explosions or not.
The complex: military-government-industry-media-NGO complex that produces, proliferates and covers up uranium weapons.
Transuranics: chemical elements with atomic numbers greater than 92 (the atomic number of uranium); they are all radioactive.
Notes
Date convention: x.y.z, where x = day, y = month, z = year. Example: 24.3.1999 = March 24, 1999.
Reference at paragraph’s end refers to the whole paragraph, unless other references occur in it. Titles of references are truncated.
Acronyms
AEC    Atomic Energy Commission
AWE     Atomic Weapons Establishment (UK)
CADU    Coalition Against Depleted Uranium (UK)
CTBT    Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty
DOD    Department of Defence (US)
DND    Department of National Defence (Canada)
DU    depleted uranium
DUOB    Depleted Uranium Oversight Board (UK)
ECRR    European Committee on Radiation Risk
FGNW    fourth generation nuclear weapons
GW1    first Gulf War (1990-1991)
GW2    second Gulf War (since 2003)
IAEA    International Atomic Energy Authority
ICBUW    International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons
ICRP    International Commission on Radiological Protection
LLRC    Low-Level Radiation Campaign (UK)
MOD    Ministry of Defence (UK)
MSF    Doctors Without Borders
MTP    Military Toxics Project (USA)
NBC    nuclear, biological, chemical
NGO    non-governmental organisation
NGWRC    National Gulf War Resource Center (USA)
NPRI    National Policy Research Institute
NWRC    New Weapons Research Committee
RW    Manhattan Project’s Radiological Warfare program
U236    isotope uranium 236
UMP    Uranium Medical Project
UMRC    Uranium Medical Research Centre (Toronto)
UNGA    UN General Assembly
UNHRC    UN Human Rights Council
UNIDIR    UN Institute for Disarmament Research
WHO    World Health Organization
WMD    weapon(s) of mass destruction

We deal with invisible enemies
We trade in dangers unseen. – Afon Claerwen

Introduction

This paper outlines the anatomy of cover-ups and the complex’s tactics, analyses cover-up mechanics, and presents selected cases. It updates a brief presented to the 2003, World Uranium Weapons Conference in Hamburg[1] that builds on previous work.[2] In response to the complex’s cover-up campaigns, the Hamburg forum has gathered scientists, jurists, medical professionals, activists, journalists and others concerned about harmful effects of uranium weapon residue on human health.

Cover-ups of uranium effects must have gone on since WWII, but pro-DU propaganda surfaced only after the first massive use of DU ammunition in GW1 that broke a 46-year-long taboo against the intentional use or induction of radioactivity in combat, creating military and legal precedent, and trivializing combat use of radioactive materials. Pentagon had known fine uranium particle hazards, but had developed DU ammunition that became a contentious issue after Gulf and Balkan wars. Each new war disposes part of very hazardous nuclear waste, away from the producer’s country, in uranium weapons that the proponents call “conventional”.  Radiological-toxic pollutant DU is adulterated with even more lethal U236 and transuranics. Leading scientists have joined with an increasing number of victims of uranium weaponry, incl. civilians and former combatants, and pressured the governments responsible for development and use of these weapons, and for sanctioning the use.

Context

Infowar since “Kosovo” DU scandal

The “Kosovo” DU scandal in 2000-2001 saw infowar defend uranium weapons; vocal victims of DU, independent researchers, and activists in the West and former Soviet block countries were intimidated. A growing number of concerned groups tracked misinformation, deceptions and the politics of uranium weapons. The cover-ups were bound to revolve around the illegality of uranium weapons, the weakest point (actually, a no-point) of the proponents. UN resolutions since 1996 call DU weaponry “incompatible” (i.e. illegal) under existing humanitarian law and human rights, as in UN document E/CN.4/Sub.2/1997/27 and additions, E/CN.4/Sub.2/2002/38, and E/CN.4/.Sub.2/2003/35. Understanding of humanitarian law relating to weaponry and the consequences of violations reveals the reasons for the cover-ups:

“weapons may only be used against legal military targets and for the duration of the war. Weapons may not cause undue suffering or cause superfluous injury. Weapons may not use or employ “poison.” Weapons may not severely damage the environment. DU weaponry cannot be used in military operations without violating these rules, and therefore must be considered illegal. Use of illegal weapons constitutes a violation of humanitarian law and subjects the violators to legal liability for their effects on victims and the environment as well as criminal liability. In my view, use of DU weaponry necessarily violates the grave breach provisions of the Geneva Conventions, and hence its use constitutes a war crime or crime against humanity.”[3]

Ignoring military and civilian casualties, placing serious obstacles on humanitarian aid, and failing to disclose uranium effects seriously violate humanitarian law. Yet US has indicated that it would militarily attack any country that tried to bring US military to International Criminal Court or national courts. Legal initiatives are thwarted, too. The work of UN Sub-Commission for the Protection and the Promotion of Human Rights provides a case;[4] “certain forces” were doing what they could to delay any legal finding on DU. US, UK and other governments certainly do consider the impacts of grassroots legal initiatives. This case demonstrates US/UK attempts to delay any legal finding on uranium weapons, and pressures on committees by members with vested interests.

Responsible authorities are liable under a wide range of international law beyond humanitarian law. They contaminate battlefields with military uranium and endanger health of civilians and combatants. The findings of research into the health effects of DU and other weaponry containing radiation but not causing nuclear fission or fusion explosions, are indisputable. Even a cursory review of humanitarian law supports the conclusion that uranium weaponry of any type is so patently illegal that the discussion should focus on bringing to justice those who have used it, and on redirecting action towards the victims. But the public and the grassroots movement confront the “deny and deflect” policies of the weapon makers, proliferators and users, whom the masterminds of military conflicts shield.

The complex ducks responsibility and liability by misstating, misleading and misinforming. Against the odds of corruption and infiltration,[5] the grassroots movement must employ scientific and legalistic expertise and publicity, but the complex has marginalized, if not intimidated, a number of independent scientists and jurists, making them less effective, and delaying the investigations and publicity. The manipulations increase grassroots movement polarization, and plant intrigues that lead to distrust and frustration.

The complex undermines the legal tier via campaigs for a ban on already banned weapon genre, thus stalling the possibility of prosecution and enabling development and use of uranium weapons. Drawing on nuclear industry experience since WWII, “depleted science” covers up the full range of issues, from safe level of exposure and risk models of the health effects, through evidence of pollution in combat zones and far beyond, to illness of those exposed. Dispersion of uranium aerosols from the battlefield is a key legal issue, “since if a radioactive weapon resulted in the general contamination of the public in the country of deployment or elsewhere, the weapon would be classifiable as one of indiscriminate effect”.[6]

DU = dirty uranium metals

U236, plutonium, and other extremely hazardous, recycled nuclear waste is illegally mixed into DU. U236 is not found in nature, only in nuclear fission products, such as spent nuclear fuel rods and nuclear fission bomb fallout. During the “Kosovo DU” scandal, uranium 236, plutonium, neptunium, americum and other transuranic elements were found in DU,[7] contrary to industry specifications. Although these extremely toxic-radioactive spent nuclear fuel and nuclear waste products are recycled into uranium alloys in trace quantities, their high power significantly increases the toxicity and radioactivity of military uranium metal. No DU metal inventories for uranium weapon production remain pure; “the entire stockpile of uranium is adulterated by 50 years of recycling and blending transuranics into the feedstock of the uranium enrichment process” whose 80% by-product is DU. The crime is covered up.[8]

The most hazardous additives are transuranics, which are tens of thousands times more radioactive than pure DU or virgin uranium. Independent and government analyses of DU penetrators from battlefields have detected traces of transuranics, incl. plutonium 239, and traces of U236 have been detected in veterans’ urine, “adding a new dimension to the inhalational exposure risks to veterans from recycled uranium elements”.[9] UMRC peer-reviewed results of tests on samples from Afghanistan bomb sites show trace quantities of U236[10] that didn’t come into the sampled soil and biological specimens from “insurgent” dirty bombs or nuclear weapon residue from Afghanistan-USSR war; control samples from non-targeted areas didn’t show U236.

Nobody has examined the increase in internal dose from transuranics beyond theoretical calculations; NATO country military have been sponsoring studies to conclude that it’s either absent or irrelevant:

“DOD’s failure to even consider the possibility of transuranics contamination in the Follow-Up program protocols suggests that there is more than DU to worry about.”[11]

Contaminated stockpiles of uranium are feedstock for uranium metals for civilian products, too. This comparatively bigger problem would surface when legislation in several countries, including EU, would legalize nuclear waste recycling into civilian industrial and consumer products.

Mass chemical and uranium poisoning

Toxic-radioactive warfare dates back to WWII when the military recognized uranium aerosol as a terrain contaminant and an instrument of gas warfare that kills and incapacitates troops and civilians and denies territory to enemy. US War Department’s (future DOD) Manhattan Project considered development of uranium aerosol weapons, as is documented in a 1943 memo to gen. Groves.[12]Beside funds for improving A-bombs and delivery systems, US defence research budget eyed weaponization of radioactive materials. Under Radiological Warfare (RW) program, more secretive than A-bomb research,[13] scientists studied best-suited materials, delivery and dispersion of radioactive materials in combat, and optimal dosages and expected health consequences. Manhattan Project industries’ expertise proved valuable again. Union Carbide’s Electro Metallurgical Works became the West’s largest uranium metal producer, and other plants also had the necessary expertise and equipment. Bell Aircraft (later Bell Aerospace) “bragged of its research” into dispersers of materials across a battlefield. Niagara Sprayer (a.k.a. FMC who manufactured Agent Orange) “created specialized compounds and nozzles for spraying agricultural metals, powders, and insecticides”.[14] Present-day use of uranium munitions thus links to US WWI research into poison gases, the Manhattan Project, and its RW program. AEC overtook control over US weapons production in 1947.

UK researcher Dai Williams substantially expanded the understanding of uranium weapons. Shaped-charge munitions, explosive charges, a fill in thermobaric bombs, and a new generation of hard target guided weapons that use “dense metal” to double their penetration effect are all suspect of containing uranium.[15] Misinformation and cover-ups of these weapons exhibit patterns similar to those employed for DU armour-piercers. Uranium shaped-charge warheads are rapidly proliferating in smaller missile systems. A variation of shaped charges are used in anti-tank cluster bombs.

UMRC’s independent field studies in Afghanistan in 2002[16] found non-depleted uranium and high contamination of residents near bombed sites.[17] All samples were analyzed for the concentration and ratio of uranium isotopes. UMRC analysis detected non-depleted uranium and urinary excretion of total uranium significantly exceeding the values in the non-exposed population.

In 2003 survey in Iraq,[18] UMRC measured radiation levels from munitions deployed during ground-force Rapid Dominance (misrepresented by embedded reporting), and from the highly publicised targets of Shock and Awe, involving known weapons and new UK bunker-buster Storm Shadow.  UMRC found “abnormally high levels” of U236, DU purity and abundances in soil at “some of the highest levels published since UMRC and others began independent investigations into the use of radioactive dispersion weapons in 1991”, and “much higher than published results for DU levels in water samples attributed to the by-products of uranium weapons in either the Balkans or Iraq”. In urine from members of UK forces that fought at, and occupied Basra, DUOB reported non-depleted uranium abundance at several hundreds times the British biological norm. A citizen exposed near the same battlefield south of Basra was contaminated with enriched uranium. UMRC has also identified DU contamination in US troops stationed in Samawah[19] that was abandoned by Dutch forces because of elevated radioactivity. Subsequently Japanese forces have taken over the Coalition’s duties there. Surface soils[20] exposed to the uranium weapons were so highly contaminated that UMRC team became contaminated via inhalation. UMRC found evidence of a new class of uranium weapons, “explosively-loaded penetrators”.[21]

Unaware of the possibility that military DU could be modified to imitate natural uranium, media reports, political actions and legal campaigns, including work of UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, have focused on DU weapons. The isotopic composition of military uranium residue in Afghanistan resembles natural uranium, except for traces of U236 that most labs would declare natural. Undepleted uranium in new weapons can be dismissed as “increased background”.

Airborne uranium reached AWE filters in Aldermaston after bombing in Afghanistan and Iraq.[22] Chris Busby and Saoirse Morgan determined the paths from wind patterns and calculated that an average person in Aldermaston area inhaled millions of uranium particles. Sunday Times (19.2.2006) reported it, but not BBC. The data disclosures indicate that AWE were aware of the long-range movement of uranium recorded in their filters; they reluctantly released monitoring data, forced by Freedom of Information Act request. Still, the GW2-related data block was released after a prompt and a long wait; significantly, it came from the Defence Procurement Agency, which suggests the military had considered the political implications. The complex’s agent provocateur Dan Fahey tried to discredit the findings and smear the authors. He sent around the internet and to the editor of European Biology and Bioelectromagnetics an unsolicited “peer review” about the findings (which were peer-reviewed by the journal); WISE Amsterdam published it. While fending off Fahey’s libelous emails, Busby revealed his own CV and sources of modest funding (own, Williams and private sponsors), but Fahey failed to reciprocate.

Increasingly covert and destructive

LLRC-Fahey dispute coincided with Israeli alleged use of uranium weapons in Lebanon (July 2006). Williams collected six samples from bomb craters and a filter from Beirut ambulance; LLRC sent them to Harwell Scientific (with whom Busby worked on DUOB projects) and to David Assinder’s radiochemical lab at the University of Wales in Bangor (whom Busby also trusted after analysis of samples of DU from Kosovo). Both labs and LLRC detected enriched uranium[23] – surprisingly, as Busby expected DU, contrary to Fahey’s smear, “you found what you set out to find”. After UNEP found no uranium in Lebanon[24] due to unsuitable instruments used[25] despite LLRC warning,[26] Fahey mocked “Busby et al”:

“the UN found no evidence that any type of uranium or other radioactive material was dispersed in Lebanon by the Israeli military […You] created unnecessary fear among a population facing very real dangers from cluster bombs and other unexploded ordnance […] I await your public statement on why the UN is wrong and you are right.”[27]

Lebanese daily Al Safir published (6.3.2008) urine test results for 15 people who had been exposed to dust from Israeli weapons and had Gulf War-like symptoms. Harwell lab found DU in 3 cases, and industrial natural uranium at high abundance in another. The samples were taken 9 months after exposure, indicating insoluble uranium.[28] NWRC’s independent international doctors, scientists and lawyers drew (9.1.2009) attention to Israel’s continuing use of new weapons in Lebanon, Syria and Gaza since 2006, incl. “uranium ammunitions and experimented novel weapons […] Still today there are unexploded bombs and radioactivity on the ground.”[29] Indignant at inaction following Israeli aggression and aware of manipulations, NWRC appealed to UN for testing by independents:

“Avoidance of conflict of interest, will imply the exclusion from participation of teams from the countries involved in the conflict and from those countries that produce or import the weapons under assessment, or privately funded institutions by these and industrial parties with conflicting interests. The investigations should be done on the same samples independently and blindly from at least 3 independent teams of research and the resulting data will have to be published.”[30]

UNHRC inquiry in Lebanon almost reported use of uranium weapons but the project subversively focussed on lack of DU weapons evidence. Williams urged UNEP (August 2006) to test for undepleted uranium.[31] UNEP declared 32 sites, tested with a smear method, “clean” for lack of evidence of DU, enriched uranium nor any other radioactive material. The method involved wiping surface dust onto an adhesive pad, inadequate to give evidence of unusually high levels of so-called natural uranium.  But UNEP chief and UNGA under-secretary general Achim Steiner said the tests confirmed lack of DU evidence or above average levels of natural uranium.[32] In fact the unpublished data from the soil samples from UNEP’s second testing mission (with Williams) in November 2006 showed 20 times higher than normal levels of undepleted uranium inside the bomb crater, next to a bomb fragment. This data was available on part of the UNEP website for many months but was not reported to UNHRC inquiry, nor in their February 2007 Lebanon report.[33] Independent downplayed (8.11.2006) its 28.10.2006 report on testing Williams’ samples, by calling Busby “Green Party activist”. The article deceptively put Busby’s comment on UNEP’s ineptitude after a sentence on Harwell lab, impressing Harwell’s ineptitude instead:

“The sample was sent for analysis at the Harwell Laboratory in Oxfordshire, which is used by the Ministry of Defence. “We are concerned that UNEP don’t know what they are doing. Earlier [in 2001] they were useless at finding depleted uranium in Kosovo due to wrong choice of instrumentation,” Dr Busby said.”

Israeli airforce bombed a “suspected nuclear reactor” at al Khibar in Syria in September 2007. On US insistence, IAEA tested the target for uranium in June 2008, indicating undepleted “natural” uranium contamination from man-made sources, but not nuclear fuel. US spokesmen used these leaked results as a proof for Syrian nuclear facility. The contamination appears similar to that collected by UNEP from an Israeli bomb crater in southern Lebanon. IAEA would know whether these samples were from Israeli weapons, but have chosen silence.[34] The uranium found was of spherical, i.e. man-made form. Syrian atomic energy agency director Ibrahim Othman dismissed IAEA’s finding that the uranium particles’ characteristics showed they didn’t come from munitions Israel used against the target: “Chemical analysis can be played with the way you like. Always in laboratories there can be errors, anyone knows that”.[35]

Without any recognition of the toxic and radiological threats from uranium weapons, armed forces of some 20 states, not only US, UK and Israel, are likely to use them in increasing numbers and proximity to densely populated areas, contaminating soil, water, crops, livestock (also exportable ones), and the atmosphere globally. Health authorities must know the exact use of uranium weapons tested or used in combat since 1970, to correlate with long-term illness statistics. Legal implications of such analyses would justify cover-ups for years to come; evidence of it are UNEP’s “work” and the Independent’s change of tune, synchronised with DOD agent provocateur Fahey’s attacks on leading independents uncovering Israeli uranium weapons.

Proliferation of uranium

Starmet Corporation boasts they operate North America’s only facility capable of converting uranium hexafluoride (UF6) to uranium tetrafluoride (UF4).[36] From UF4 they produce DU metal for “AVLIS” feedstock, penetrators and tank armour, industrial and medical radiological shielding, and aircraft counterweights; “Our ability to convert UF6 is already having an impact in helping to ‘clean-up’ the stockpiles of UF6 at commercial and government energy facilities.”

Nibby David’s case in the UK illustrates problems with non-military uranium. A mechanic making metal parts for airplane equipment other than counterweights, he got symptoms similar to Gulf War syndrome within a month of starting work. Before he got ill, he had never been to the Middle East or near military bases or equipment used in GW1. But he machined parts from a General Electric Company (GEC) Heavy Metal Alloy feedstock. He polished them with fine sand paper, breathing the fine particles in. His employer imported this heavy, silvery and easily workable metal from the US, but lacked certificates required by UK occupational safety. Various parts were made from the metal until Nibby blew the whistle. He tested positive for DU in urine and for chromosome damage due to internal exposure to ionizing radiation. Manufacture, crashes and fires of civilian and military aircraft thus pose a health threat not only due to DU counterweights.

Starmet also makes DU oxide powder from UF4. The powder is processed into heavy stones that can replace gravel in Ducrete^TM[37] that is almost three times denser than ordinary concrete. Large mass of Ducrete, or the DU aggregate alone, could be useful in ballast and similar applications. Ducrete also shields radiation. Starmet makes containers for nuclear waste from it and suggests other applications: “low-level radioactive waste storage or disposal boxes, temporary shielding in reactor facilities, and for commercial food and medical irradiator applications.” Starmet “is interested in developing applications for DUCRETE™ Concrete and will be happy to consider new applications and sublicensing of the technology.” As in its DU-metal products, Starmet highlights its environmental responsibility for “over 700,000 metric tons” of DU waste, and its utilization economics, i.e. “environmentally sound” use of DU while deriving “useful benefits” from Ducrete:

“Most products will be fabricated in a factory environment where cost efficiencies will be derived from higher volumes and where engineering measures can be implemented to control contamination […Such use] of DU aggregate […] provides [DOE] an alternative to direct disposal of DU as waste [that] cost several billion dollars.”

Proliferated into consumer and industrial products, e.g. GEC Heavy Metal Alloy and Ducrete will spread U236 and transuranics in the environment.[38] The industry favours a “solution to pollution through dilution”. The military likes it, too. Reportedly, tens of thousands of tons of uranium ammunition are destroyed by burning on US military disposal sites. The Sierra Army Depot in Northern California alone has burned tens of times more DU munitions than all DU wars have used, according to NRC permits:

“The expiration date on the oldest of those documents was September 30, 1981. It stipulated a maximum of 2,257 tons of DU. In later contracts, the amount increased to 5,000 tons. The one in effect until March 31, 1997, allowed 2,520 curies (about 6,500 tons) of radioactivity. This figure is 20 times the 320 tons that the American and British troops were said to have used in the Gulf War.”[39]

The big picture

Williams classifies uranium weapons into three generations. First-generation are WWII era A-bombs made of enriched uranium, whose enhancement and testing continued into the 1990s, 2^nd generation – DU ammunition, and 3^rd generation – all explosive warheads that may use uranium to enhance their kinetic energy, incendiary temperature or modified blast profiles (e.g. thermobaric weapons). These weapons contain from 0.3 kg uranium in 30 mm DU ammunition, through several kg in higher-calibre, short-range munitions, to bomb and missile warheads containing from 250 kg to over 2 tonnes of uranium metal of various formulations. Unusual deaths, injuries, illness and destruction accompany suspected new-generation uranium weapons, incl. suffocation, carbonisation, partial burns, vaporisation of victims bodies, buildings collapsing inwards, deep narrow craters.

Baghdad 2003 and Lebanon 2006 explosion photos show brighter-than-lightning flash followed by a fireball, and fragments of burning shrapnel blown from the target, indicating high-density pyrophoric metal that might be uranium. Eyewitnesses reported “silent” explosions and brief asphyxia “as if all the oxygen has gone”. Apparently, very large incendiary bombs are used frequently. Thermobaric weapons combine high temperature and high pressure blast to kill humans in the target area or underground. The power of new versions suggests “they may use uranium grains as the “reactive metal”.” Penetrator weapons additionally use a heavy shield, likely made of uranium. Large incendiary explosions create a “firestorm” that sucks in fresh air and carries most contamination high up;

“This may have reduced levels of local contamination (if uranium warheads have been used) except within the target itself.  But it could increase dispersal of uranium dust over a very wide area – over hundreds, possibly thousands of miles.”[40]

Unusually high levels of airborne uranium dust were detected in Hungary, Greece and UK after Balkan, Afghanistan and Iraq wars, suggesting that “much larger uranium weapons may have been used during these conflicts. These observations coincided with the development and combat use of a new generation of guided weapons with secret, high density warheads. These include guided bombs, missiles and sub-munitions. If uranium has been used in any of these weapon systems I am also concerned about the potential additional health and environmental problems caused by toxic, radioactive combat materials.”[41]

Having worked on exposing local (UK) and global (e.g.Chernobyl) radioactive pollution problems, as well as those from uranium weapons, Busby recognizes the health effects of uranium exposure as “part of a bigger story”, “far beyond the military uses of uranium”, over the whole uranium cycle;

“If further research were to show that uranium weapons do have significant, wide-ranging and devastating effects on health, there would be considerable consequences for governments. If it were seen to be a weapon of indiscriminate effect that poisons large civilian populations, governments would be forced to stop using it, thus removing a useful weapon from their arsenals. If it were proven that scientific evidence had been wilfully ignored, whole governments could be disgraced and might even face legal action from individuals, groups or other governments […] If uranium exposure causes genetic damage at low doses, decisions of national importance—ranging from the continued operation of nuclear energy, in civil reactors and in ships and submarines, to public health issues relating to cancer clusters near nuclear sites—are being taken based on a risk model that does not represent the real risks or consequences and will require immediate reconsideration.”[42]

Anatomy

Why cover-ups?

Radioactive-toxic hazards of uranium[43] in non-nuclear weapons and civilian applications are similar, regardless of the type of uranium metal used: depleted, non-depleted or alloyed. An ample sampling of government, military and industry documents[44] prove authorities responsible for uranium contamination have known the risks involved – the reason they have been suppressing, covering up and misrepresenting the evidence.

The perpetrators of radiological wars and illegal weapons face potential liability for war crimes, military and civilian casualties, contamination of environment, and battlefield clean-up as well as social costs of other parts of the uranium weapon cycle, including disposal of astronomic quantities of expired uranium weapons on own territory. UMRC reported after a visit to hard-target bomb sites in Afghanistan:

“The UMRC field team was shocked by the breadth of public health impacts coincident with the bombing. Without exception, at every bombsite investigated, people are ill. A significant portion of the civilian population presents symptoms consistent with internal contamination by Uranium.”[45]

UMRC 2003 survey in Iraq determined that since GW1 and no-fly zone protracted bombing, Iraqis are “convinced radiological contamination is a permanent feature of the Iraqi environment”:

“Many say this is why they want to leave the country. Physicians are neither trained to nor have the time and facilities to diagnose the relatively unexplained illnesses derived from uranium internal contamination and acute effects from recent exposures. Longer-term effects present a different challenge. As widely reported, cancer and long-term treatment wards are filled with children and teenagers suffering leukaemia and incapacitating congenital deformities attributed locally and by many international sources as direct and inherited effects of uranium contamination.”[46]

The second reason for cover-ups is long-term. DU weapons are in a diffuse category of low-radiological-impact nuclear weapons to which emerging types of low-yield (i.e. FGNW) nuclear explosives also belong. The cover-ups obfuscate the distinctions between conventional weapons and all kinds of radiological weapons, easing public acceptability of uranium weapons, small nuclear warheads, and future pure fusion nuclear weapons.[47] All of them contaminate with low-level radiation. A future combat scenario with micro-nukes translates into low-level radioactive input comparable to that on DU battlefields.[48] Elimination of uranium weapons would not terminate the health and environmental problems of low-level radiation battles.

CTBT doesn’t include low-yield nuclear devices and munitions made of radioactive materials. CTBT Preparatory Commission acknowledges lack of legal definition of a nuclear weapon. Treaties refer only to “fissile material” such as uranium or plutonium that are used in all existing nuclear weapons. DOD confirmed that nuclear-isomer explosive made of hafnium would be more closely related to conventional weapons than nuclear ones.[49] This interpretation would allow US to sidestep legislation on nuclear weapons that prevents developments ofg mini-nukes. Andre Gsponer of the Independent Scientific Research Institute in Geneva and others believe that any weapon incorporating radioactive material could be considered a nuclear weapon under international law. This would include nuclear-isomer explosives, as well as DU and other uranium munitions. US government defines WMD as any weapon or device that is intended, or has the capability, to cause death or serious bodily injuries to a significant number of people through the release of radiation. Even if nuclear-isomer explosives are not nuclear weapons, they could still spell political trouble, so cover-ups and manipulation of law are inevitable. Recommending negotiations on a  onvention for the prohibition of radiological weapons, UN Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters noted in 2004:

“The nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament regime does not address the issue of radiological weapons and warfare, as it is strictly devoted to nuclear weapons and the respective fissile materials. No international instrument is available in the realm of radiological weapons.”[50]

Unsettling science

Central to the complex’s deception are obsolete models of risk and derived standards of allowable radiological exposure. The total dose inside an exposed person over years severely exceeds safe limits. ICRP standards derive from empirically invalid assumptions due to secrecy and distortions around the effects of Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs, then around Cold War developments of nuclear power and weapons. ICRP risk model arose from studies of bomb survivors, which overlooked the effects from an internal radiation source and ignored cancers that take decades to appear. Physicists rather than biologists had developed the ICRP model before DNA discovery, yet it purports to represent cell damage processes. ICRP model spreads a dose over a large mass of tissue instead of considering biophysical and biochemical damage mechanisms at the cellular level. ECRR’s critique reveals that ICRP models of risk from internal particles underestimate empirical mortality and morbidity by a factor of 100 to 1000.

Running against the nuclear complex’s science for the last 20 years, Busby’s Second Event Theory has explained how multiple decay of an isotope located in a cell can mutate it;

“A first radioactive disintegration that hits a cell without killing it forces the cell to repair itself. If a second disintegration hits the same cell during the repair process, which takes a few hours, it may cause a mutation that the cell cannot repair. Supporters of nuclear power have attacked the theory, not least because they said radiation could not initiate the repair process in cells” [51]

With German colleague Ewald Schnug, Busby has expanded the Second Event Theory in 2007, after discovering the Secondary Photoelectron Effect in which heavy metals incl. uranium, emit a very intense photoelectron stream upon hits by natural, background gamma rays.[52] The stream damages the cell where the heavy atom is located. Uranium attaches itself to DNA, so it receives the damaging stream. Because uranium pollution is widespread (uranium mining, processing and disposal, uranium weapons), humans are increasingly likely to get DNA and cell damages that lead to illness incl. cancer. ICRP, the establishment’s institution of “scientifically” crafted deception that justifies continuing radioactive pollution, ignores phenomena like this. No wonder their mathematical models can’t predict what Busby has been saying for years: there’s much more damage to humans than the complex asserts. His discoveries invalidate ICRP conventional model of radiation biology,

“which views radiation in terms of average energy transfer across large volumes of tissue. The old concept of “dose” is now useful only for those exposure regimes where the radiation truly is well-averaged. The regulation of radioactivity in the environment is about to enter a new phase in which “ionisation density” will be the vital parameter.”[53]

“Ban DU weapons” – weasel strategy

The complex knows people desire banning uranium weapons. Organizing the 2003 Hamburg conference began with a call for a ban, but thanks to informed influence, the post-conference press release reads: “future campaigns and treaties should replace ‘ban’ with the term ‘abolition’ of DU/Uranium weapons.” The ban initiative was a manipulation by a “Brussels Coalition” that formed in Brussels from members of diverse groups shortly before Hamburg conference. The coalition was guided by theoretical work of a novice jurist, Avril MacDonald who since Manchester 2000 conference has been arguing DU weapons legality, contradicting humanitarian law specialist, Karen Parker who argues against seeking a DU-banning treaty:

“a new “trick” of the US (and a few other governments) is to use treaty processes to try to weaken, if not completely undermine, existing customary law. The United States tries to assert that if there is a treaty on a subject, then any pre-existing customary international law on the subject is terminated. Thus, even beginning the process to draft a treaty would be used by the US to argue that any ban on uranium weaponry in light of existing customary law is terminated […] unsuspecting activists can actually play into the US position and seriously undermine all anti-uranium initiatives […] a treaty banning uranium weapons is not necessary, but preparations for one could be exploited to duck responsibility […] any treaty could be broken anyway”.[54]

The legal issues workshop at Hamburg showed a low technical understanding by Brussels Coalition members who didn’t convince the movement. Nevertheless, the coalition re-issued their original release after the Hamburg conference. Combining key activists to coordinate international lobbying, the group called itself ICBUW and set itself up as the prime briefing authority on the subject of uranium weapons and the legal issues. Despite its name, ICUW focuses exclusively on known DU ammunition, while ignoring Williams’ new weapons analyses. ICBUW website notes US report that DU ammunition has not been used in combat since 2004, making ICBUW mission and “importance” obsolete. Williams notes that ICBUW diversions of campaigners’ energy “to silence the most direct evidence of new weapons has been highly effective in muzzling researchers”, matching,

“similar diversions within UNEP and the UNHRC enquiries.  Most recently the IAEA comes into question for not publishing the full test data about uranium contamination found in Syria. If this contamination came from US warheads delivered by Israeli aircraft the international legal and political ramifications would be profound.”[55]

ICBUW has campaigned for resolutions by Belgian and EU parliaments and UNGA, on uranium weapons that are restricted to DU ammunition. EU Parliament resolution for a moratorium against DU ammunition added (February 2003) “other uranium warheads”, only to be restricted back (May 2008) to DU weapons. UNGA (A/RES/63/54, 2.12.2008) and Belgian Parliament resolutions (7.3.2007) have been word-smithed, too, to apply solely to DU munitions and armour, while exempting new-generation uranium weapons. Never even questioning the possibility of new-generation uranium weapons, ICBUW admitted its role: “This is a good result for our campaign”, said ICBUW coordinator after UNGA voted on A/RES/62/30 (5.12.2007); “The vote comes after a year of intense campaigning by ICBUW and its member organisations”.[56] Referring to “potential” hazards of DU, A/RES/62/30 calls “to seek the views of Member States and relevant international organizations”, and “to submit a report on this subject”. As if there wasn’t proof enough of the harmful effects of DU weapons alone, A/RES/63/54 “Invites Member States and relevant international organizations, particularly those that have not yet done so, to communicate to the Secretary-General their views”, “Requests the Secretary-General to request relevant international organizations to update and complete, as appropriate, their studies and research”, and “Encourages Member States, particularly the affected States, as necessary, to facilitate the studies and research”.

Apart from the fact that UNGA resolutions are non-binding,[57] and given the politicisation of UNEP, WHO and IAEA, this is an obvious delay tactics, unchanged since GW1. ICBUW demonstrates on its website that it doesn’t understand the legal implications of a ban or aims to mislead the public. Shortly after 2003 Hamburg conference, to no avail I have offered ICBUW leaders to publically debate with DU-Watch representatives, on existing illegality of uranium weapons and the error of campaigning for the ban.

Group-think and apocalyptic ideology

Uranium weapons likely persist due to institutional pressures that, once started to defend an effective DU bullet, escalated to a point of no return. Substitution of uranium weapons would indirectly admit the hazards, while ample evidence incriminates those responsible because they have known potential dangers. In an extreme case scenario, war-mongers and haters in high positions may have discovered in uranium weapons an effective toxic-radioactive instrument for political terror and protracted genocide. With it, they can damage present and future generations of the “enemy” without public stigma of WMD, though with some “collateral damage” to own civilians and troops over the weapons lifecycle. Apocalyptic-messianic ideology and superiority feeling by extreme elites, from Jewish and Christian Zionists, through to Islamists,[58] by itself subject of intense cover-ups, might explain the calculated use and disposal of radioactive-toxic materials with a mass harm intention. The same elites use nuclear all-out war rhetoric and are preparing for such war.[59]

Civilian and military decision-makers responsible for uranium weapons may be caught up in a self-justifying logic that generates illusory morality, demands conformity, accepts high-risk strategies and demonizes enemies and dissenters. Some Western governments seem to be following the group-think in the wars with “Saddam”, “Milosevic” and global war on terror. Group-think in authoritarian organizations would explain why the military downplayed or outright ignored uranium weapon risks, and why those responsible chose to cover up.

Cover-ups aim at deception and escaping liabilities. In April 1947 a secret memo from US Corps of Engineers’ Col. O.G. Haywood to AEC information officer H.A. Fidler stated:

“It is desired that no document be released which refers to experiments with humans and might have adverse effects on public opinion or result in legal suits. Documents covering such work field should be classified ‘secret.’”[60]

After full-scale low-radiation experiment with DU bullets in GW1, 1.3.1991 memo from Lt. Col. Ziehmn of Los Alamos National Laboratory suggested US military policy regarding DU weapons in light of “environmental concerns”:

“if no one makes a case for the effectiveness of du on the battlefield, du rounds may become politically unacceptable and thus, be deleted from the arsenal. If DU penetrators proved their worth during our recent combat activities, then we should assure their future existence (until something better is developed) through Service/DOD proponency. If proponency is not garnered, it is possible that we stand to lose a valuable combat capability. I believe we should keep this sensitive issue at mind when after action reports are written.”[61]

Also UK government was aware of the cover-up necessity. MOD minister Lord Gilbert referred (2.3.1998) to 30.4.1991 letter by P.G.E. Bartholomew, business development manager at UK Atomic Energy Authority who promised “a threat paper on the contamination of Kuwait from depleted uranium used by the US and UK forces in the recent war”. Bartholomew also revealed that the paper “covers the threat and outlines the action we believe is necessary for health safety”. Gilbert advised that the “emotive” subject “must be dealt with in a sensitive manner”, by informing Kuwait government of the problem “in a useful way”.[62]

US and UK governments baselessly claim they deploy DU ammunition because it costs less than tungsten, has an advantage over enemy armour, reduces own casualties and utilizes industrial waste. The additional expense on tungsten is negligible relative to destroyed target’s military value and total military spending. This socially irresponsible reasoning ignores the health costs and clean-up costs over the life-cycle of uranium weapons. Announcements about development of tungsten substitutes of DU tank ammunition undermine the claim. DU weapon systems are not better or cheaper than alternatives. Military DU doesn’t utilize significant quantities of nuclear waste, either.

Own soldiers, the victims of “friendly fire” suffer from acute poisoning and radiation sickness, instead of ordinary wounds, while longer-term casualties are substantial. A September 2002 GW1 report on US veterans shows 0.1% casualty rate in combat, but a 36% post-combat rate for almost 700,000 troops engaged in the war and shortly after. According to 1998 DOD admission, only 436,000 troops entered DU dust-contaminated areas, i.e. post-combat casualty rate is 58%! Uranium is one of several major causes of the syndrome, so a casualty rate of about 10% could be conservatively attributed to DU.

Official Western reports ignore civilian casualties of uranium weapons in Iraq, the Balkans, Afghanistan and more recently in Lebanon and Gaza. Iraqis and Serbs were subject to economic sanctions when they most needed medical supplies, fuel and food. Sick Afghanis with weakened immune resistance due to uranium contamination died of cold and starvation, without being recorded as victims of uranium weapons. Since the governments responsible knew about civilian consequences, severe imposition of sanctions against Yugoslavia and Iraq was meant to cover-up the radiological damage and also inflict additional harm, revealing an underlying hatred-based ideology. Sealing off Gaza after Israeli offensive  (December 2008-January 2009) has impeded reporting, uranium sampling, and food and medical supply, while infrastructure and supplies have been destroyed, after over a year-long blockade.

Infowar and media

Information warfare projects power, beside combat, diplomacy, and economic sanctions. PsyOps are among its most conspicuous tools. Infowar is effective and inexpensive compared to combat, and would fit the needs of “Service/DOD proponency” in Ziehmn’s memo. The military specifies the structure and methods of Information Operations that employ behavioural science, mass media and high technology.[63] DOD targets foreign nations and groups, including foreign governments. DOD actions “convey and/or deny selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning; and to intelligence systems and leaders at all levels.” DOD management of the foreign perceptions “combines truth projection, operation security, cover and deception, and psychological operations”.

NATO PsyOps target “enemy, friendly and neutral audiences in order to influence attitudes and behaviour affecting the achievement of political and military objectives”.[64] NATO and candidate countries’ military and media act like DOD clones. Critique comes mainly from pressure groups and governments outside NATO. Infowar’s Public Affairs (PA) “provides objective reporting without intent to propagandize” and disseminates information internationally, via press releases, media briefings and statements by the military that “are based on projection of truths and credible message [that serve to discredit] adversary propaganda or misinformation against the operations of US/coalition forces [which] is critical to maintaining favourable public opinion”.[65] In psychology, “projection” means the act of ascribing one’s own attitudes, thoughts, etc. to someone else. PA use propaganda often through Public Relations (PR). NATO spokesman Jamie Shea “won the war” in Kosovo via PR daily briefings.[66]

Infowar integrates several types of special services when needed. A joint command of US Special Operations is then engaged to assemble specialist teams” to suit a mission. US Special Operations likely organized assaults on anti-DU activist, Doug Rokke, former DOD expert on DU. Former Chief of Nuclear Medicine at the Veterans Affairs Medical Facility, Asaf Durakovic, was forced to leave the US because he received life threats. After ill GW1 veterans Ray Bristow and Colin Purcel Lee attended a DU health effects conference in Baghdad, UK senior cabinet minister called them traitors and their homes were raided by military police in search of documents incriminating official DU testing of UK veterans. When the plight of Australian GW1 veterans received press coverage, all files relating to the illness were stolen from campaigner Philip Steele. The military and government authorities in NATO countries routinely denied or forged death certificates of Balkan DU military victims. In March 2001, “unknown criminals” broke into the home of Mrs. Riordon, a widow after Canadian GW1 veteran, destroyed her computer and stole medical certificates of uranium presence in her husband’s body.

PA units prepare information for news brokers, who send it to media outlets. Independent journalists do not have a chance to publish in mainstream media, since NATO information operations subtly control chief editors. Media are corrupted top to bottom. In the words of former president of CBS News, Richard Salent, “Our job is to give people not what they want, but what we decide they ought to have”. John Swinton, former New York Times chief of staff, whom colleagues named “The Dean of His Profession”, confessed before New York Press Club: “I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinions out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job.”

US media, reduced to a handful of conglomerates by deregulation, moulds public mind. The largest conglomerates are growing by consuming competition, almost tripling in size during the 1990s. As the media empires consolidate, TV stations, newspapers and radio broadcasting are no longer independent. Only a handful are large enough to maintain own reporters. The rest must depend on the chains for national and international news. One group dominates US media ownership and staff, contrary to general population’s ethnic profile.[67] TV, radio, newspapers, magazines, books and movies speak with a single voice, reinforcing each other. Despite apparent diversity, there’re no alternative sources of information. US most influential newspapers illustrate the use of the press as an unopposed policy instrument. They set the trends and the guidelines for nearly all the others, and originate the news for the others to copy. In a joint venture with NYT, Post publishes International Herald Tribune, world’s most widely distributed English-language daily.

Washington Post has an inside track on news involving the federal government. Reference to “military sources”, “senior administration officials” or “Pentagon analysts” reveal military-media relations. Single source of information for international press agencies emanates from standard phrases, beginnings and endings in all stories, in accord with DOD position. Washington Post (10.11.2002) provided an insight into media–Pentagon relations: “This article was discussed extensively in recent days with several senior civilian and military Defense Department officials.” Military censors at PA vetted the article, then the supposedly independent newspaper published it. Major news corporations manufacture opinion polls to meet government specifications that usually combine plans of the administration, DOD and business. Media lend themselves to what White House aides have described as a campaign to “sell” the war to Americans, as was seen in preparations for GW2.

Military control over media extends to the battlefields; a “pool system” selects daily a few out of hundreds of journalists, and escorts them to scenes deemed fit for the public. The coverage is then shared with their colleagues, so that the same story comes from every major news outlet. This  “embedding” of reporters in GW2 demonstrated how the military compromised journalistic ethics. CBC series With Passionate Eye (“War Spin” 25.5.2003) provided evidence of embedding. Embedding would not allow objective reporting about victims of acute exposure to uranium weapons. DOD press briefings would black out or distort any incriminating leaks from independent reporters. Compared to post-GW2 evidence, embedded reporting on battles was only about 30% reliable.[68]

Professional irresponsibility

Pro-uranium infowar has compromised scientific reports subject to military-government funding and control, even those by international organizations. Deceitful propaganda also appears in government, military and arms and nuclear industry statements. Political representatives can’t obtain information from alternative sources, and instead they trust doctored intelligence and distorted data – a fundamental flaw in how military issues and weapons are addressed. Countless journalists, researchers, professors, and persons in responsible public positions help misinform, thus breaking professional ethics of allegiance to public good. They collude in the crimes by spreading lies and distortions about fatal effects of uranium. The propaganda has led to an absurd situation where US and UK justified attacking Iraq because it might have potential in the future to deploy WMD – but themselves used uranium weapons of indiscriminate or mass effect against Iraq.

Propaganda uses simple, often ridiculous ideas and phrases based on two rules: (i) repeated lie becomes accepted truth;  (ii) the public accepts outrageous lies more readily. Propaganda plays with words bred in PsyOps bureaus. Authoritative persons then use the words, phrases and contexts, proving the speakers and their controllers are either criminally negligent, or contravene humanitarian law. Former NATO political chief Javier Solana, while heading an ad hoc “investigation” to prove Kosovo DU was no danger, affirmed in January 2001: “The evidence points in the other direction.”  A letter to Washington Times wondered then: “Is DU a health benefit?” Lord Robertson, defended the “proven [DU] technology that has been independently tested […] We cannot possibly act on the perceptions of people or on the view of a word such as ‘uranium’.” Other deceptive statements, nomenclature and phrases for the cover-ups are assembled elsewhere.[69]

Many persons in responsible positions in former Soviet bloc also help NATO institutionalize “3 d’s”[70]. Corruption is rampant and local bureaucrats and professors can be bought with a trip to Hawaii. Professor Zbigniew Zagorski (Warsaw’s Institute of Chemistry and Nuclear Technology) compared the radioactivity from 300 tonnes of DU in GW1 to 1953-1977 emissions of “natural uranium” in the USA, implying that since it didn’t harm Americans, why would it be dangerous in the Gulf. He also insisted that one can safely sit on intact DU rounds for 2000 hours, while DU is known to give out in one hour’s contact a dose comparable to the annual allowable limit. Professor Zbigniew Jaworowski (Poland’s Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection) co-authored a junk-science article on DU weapons, with a Cambridge University’s Roger Bate.[71]

The goal of 2001 conference in Prague was to assemble the facts for submission to Czech president Vaclav Havel to bring them out on international forums. But the event went on record with biased selection of papers. A breakthrough brief by Williams on new uranium weapons, a paper debunking cover-ups, unique material from a prize-winning webmaster harassed by US authorities for posting military information,[72] and many other presentations injurious to the complex were not posted. Despite repeated requests, the organizers neither removed a contribution from Yugoslavia containing an honest mistake, nor inserted an erratum. But the conference website displayed Fahey’s biased paper.

Tactics

David and Goliath

Cover-ups have eroded public trust, particularly of the ill, uranium-contaminated  veterans. Recruits and staff soldiers think twice before going to wars. Upon seeing NATO disrespect for their health in Kosovo, many KFOR troops mutinied, while volunteers withdrew. Several countries withdrew from their NATO obligation in the Balkans because of contamination. Some post-war aid organizations were reluctant to go to Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq for the radiation-toxicity risk.

US has refused to disclose information about DU in Operation Iraqi Freedom, and did not let UNEP team study DU contamination in Iraq. By the beginning of September 2003, nearly 5000 US troops were evacuated ill for non-combat reasons, of which only about 300 were injured in incidents such as vehicle accidents. There were fears that soldiers have already died or are falling ill from exposure to DU or vaccine, but Pentagon denied. The sensitivity of the military hierarchy to the suspicions was plain by the reassurances on US army medical website that neither DU nor the anthrax vaccine poses a health risk.[73]

The statement of purpose of Bring Them Home Now organization of military families demanding immediate withdrawal of US forces from the Middle East, demands: “Not one more troop spending one more day inhaling depleted uranium.” Their website bluntly advised on the best way to limit exposure to DU: “Get out of Iraq or Afghanistan.”[74] In August 2003, Dutch parliamentarians were concerned that US intelligence provided to the Dutch government concealed DU use by US troops in southern Iraq. Based on false information, Holland sent 1,100 soldiers to the area.[75]

Propagandizing uranium weapons as effective means against “terrorism” or “evil states” is also counterproductive in the cover-ups. The fallout and residue from uranium weapons terrorize innocents; terrorists are best taken out covertly. Neutralization of secret WMD with like weapons does not justify the end, either. Unexploded DU bullets are themselves a potential terrorist weapon. Shortly after ABC News reporters smuggled 7 kg of DU into the country in September 2003 to show how ineffective security was, retired Californian research chemist Vince Calder noted that intact DU bullets posed a terrorist threat. They are available from the battlefields, easy to import, and simple to turn into dirty bombs, making them a potential WMD inside US territory.[76]

With statutory disclosures of secrets from the atomic era, and as the number of casualties of “safe” radiation weapons grows, public mistrust and soldier mutiny would rise, creating an additional stressor in the West. Abroad, radioactive contamination fortifies the resentment, general animosity and terrorism against US, UK and their allies.

Ostensibly concerned about own population in face of Arab terrorism in Palestine, Israel nevertheless uses uranium weapons in the wars on its neighbours, releasing indiscriminate aerosols that reach Israel territory as well. Because US and UK, and recently Israel, are in the focus of proliferation and use of radiation weapons, it is up to the respective governments to lead a change. Continuation on the destructive course must inevitably lead to society-government confrontations. Radiation issues are intensely, emotionally charged regardless of nationality, religion and ethnicity, for at stake is a human being’s continuation in the gene pool.

Anything goes

Despite resources expended on PsyOps, amateurs recognize and debunk spin. In 1999, Bein predicted in a Polish article the following techniques for cover-up of Balkan DU, based on post-GW1 experience[77]:

-       Deny information and delay its release;

-       Understate the quantity of DU weapons used.

-       Belittle harmful effects of DU, change emphasis, dilute scientific information.

-       Manipulate reports and scientific evidence, also those from previous DU wars.

-       Censor DU information in mass media.

-       Blame other causes, e.g. pre-war and general pollution.

-       Coerce government to withhold truth.

-       Blame “Milosevic’s” secret weapons, and DU deployed by Yugoslav forces.

All of the above tricks were noted during and after NATO Balkan campaigns. Then they re-appeared, with “Milosevic” changed to “Taliban and Al Qaeda” after the war in Afghanistan, and “Saddam” after GW2. The same tricks apply to covering-up newer uranium weapons. NATO coerced old and new Yugoslav governments to suppress DU casualty information. Yugoslav de-contamination units operated during NATO bombing, while the government likely concealed DU casualties in military hospitals. After a new Yugoslav foreign minister visited Lord Robertson in the beginning of 2001, Western media reported that Yugoslavia tested soldiers for DU “negative,” as in all NATO countries.

Coercion of occupier-installed governments is common. In Iraq, the occupier removed medical records from hospitals, making it difficult to investigate post-war civilian casualty rates from uranium exposure. US military incarcerated Iraqi scientist and Baghdad University dean, Huda Ammash at a concentration camp in primitive conditions. This minister of education before the invasion, published in peer-reviewed publications in US, Italy and Iraq on the consequences of uranium contamination and sanctions imposed on Iraq. Her arrest was made on trumped-up charges of overseeing purported development of biological weapons. Yet, UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission confirmed that, for lack of evidence, they hadn’t singled Ammash out for interviews.[78]

In both wars after the Balkans, DOD supported dissemination of stories that, true or not, could serve to cover-up own radiological weapons, should uranium contamination be discovered. US secretary of defence, Donald Rumsfeld, reported (16.1.2002) elevated radioactivity levels in one area of Afghanistan due to “depleted uranium on some warheads”, allegedly missiles captured from Al Qaeda. The risk of Al Qaeda using “dirty bombs” was a major theme in DOD statements up to May 2002, but Rumsfeld never reported the type and maker of missiles found. Al Qaeda’s DU was “dangerous”, unlike the DU in US and UK armour-piercers. Taliban and Al Qaeda wouldn’t have the means to make or deliver large munitions made of uranium. They may have acquired small surface-to-surface anti-tank missiles made of uranium, or DU supplies for “dirty bombs”.

Greenpeace became DOD’s spin conduit in Iraq.[79] Most likely DOD spin-doctors enhanced the story’s publicity, to deny illness causation of their own uranium weapons. If uranium weapon fallout was found in Iraq, DOD could blame the yellowcake that Greenpeace activists collected from looters of “Saddam’s” nuclear facility near Baghdad. Otherwise, why would a military, who contaminated Iraq with uranium twice, advertise environmental responsibility via Greenpeace? Being a concentrate of uranium ore, yellowcake has a “natural uranium” signature. How would the Greenpeace story help cover-up uranium weapons? After suppressing independent tests to identify uranium isotopes (and therefore the contamination’s origin), all irradiation symptoms could be blamed on the looted material that somehow managed to spread to where U-weapons have been used in Iraq. The non-depleted uranium that UMCR discovered in Afghanistan resembles the isotopic composition of yellowcake. Newer generations of weapons might contain uranium alloys formulated to resemble “natural uranium” in order to make contamination hard to distinguish from natural uranium.

Implemented by a military-bureaucratic machine, infowar inadvertently produces mistakes and blunders. PsyOps then attempt to cover the blunders up with more blunders. An imperative to hide the truth drives the perpetrators and their operatives – Special Operations, PsyOps, spokesmen, official media, pseudo-scientists – into thought contraptions and staged events designed to convince the audience. In the Kosovo DU case, those responsible failed to warn and protect NATO and UN forces, foreign aid workers, and local civilians (for whom they supposedly bombed “Milosevic”), including no warning about dirty DU. The public objected to Stalinist-like special operations that attempted to silence evidence in Western countries. The cover-ups further clouded the risks of uranium civilian applications (e..g. aircraft counterweights), increasing the risks to NATO country populations.

Deny, delay, deceive

The complex’s propaganda tactics follow 3 d’s – deny, delay, deceive, which conceal chronic exposure and effects of uranium on human health are key. Examples of delays and omissions with bombed site information and carrying out “studies”, abound.[80] The “deny” phase has been most intense since the war in Afghanistan. A campaign of denials regarding uranium weapons is nested in a broader campaign for acceptability of weapons that contaminate with low-level radiation. US government statements about plans to develop nuclear penetrating bombs, threats of terrorist radiological bombs, and warnings of potential US, UK and Israeli first strike nuclear attacks, and regional nuclear wars with NATO participation (that analysts fear might turn into WWIII), play down potential hazards of “conventional” uranium weapons. The rhetoric may aim at lowering the threshold of acceptability for radiological weapons. The nuclear strike rhetoric is a political blackmail, to manipulate the masses. Fanatic, messianic-apocalyptic leaders of most faiths drive proliferation and threats of use of nuclear and other WMD.[81]

Military science emphasizes the “other factor” of Gulf and Balkan syndromes. After GW1 that saw a cocktail of poisons used and released – from Iraqi chemical-biological weapons, to DU ammunition – the “other factor” was adopted in cover-ups, also for the other contaminated areas, once cancers from the use of uranium weapon took a higher toll. Vaccines given to the soldiers couldn’t be a cause of the syndrome in residents, neither there was smoke from burning oil wells in the Balkans, nor chemical weapons used by “Milosevic” against his own people. In the absence of independent epidemiological studies, apologists of Gulf War syndrome in Iraqi civilians cited the two latter factors. Early, numerous cases of “mystery pneumonia” after the newest invasion of Iraq were explained away by smoking, rather than vaccines. Early symptoms of uranium exposure include pneumonitis-like illness.

Official investigations suppress evidence of uranium-induced illness and death. Studies by the military co-opt research institutes, universities, and international health and safety organizations: UNEP, ICRP, WHO, IAEA and other. From the precautionary principle, uncertain but potentially harmful effects should be prevented. Even if there’s “no proofs” of a link from DU to illness and death, the use of any uranium weapons ought to be discontinued out of the precautionary principle, given Gulf veteran complaints and scientific uncertainty. Scientific assessment of health effects of uranium follows standard risk analysis, but military and contracted “scientists” manipulate its every step. To criticisms, pseudo-science replies, “No evidence exists”. Sufficient evidence does exist, and if not, the precautionary principle should govern. Numerous serious flaws in official reports, and examples of manipulation of science, are plentiful.[82]

Prudent scientists don’t make mistakes or omit facts. “Epidemiological study” deceptions abound, more so that epidemiology is manipulable. Apologists of uranium effects compare erroneously estimated incidence of cancers among veterans to statistics for general population. The latter is an incomparable group. Besides, official epidemiological statistics are biased downwards, since “background” radiation includes gradual accumulation of global radioactive pollution. WHO expeditiously compared DU-like illness incidence in Kosovo before and after NATO bombing. Statistics are incomparable, because of different population base: 300 or 400 thousand opponents of Albanian extremism left Kosovo, but many more migrants came from Albania. Pre-1999 Kosovo Albanians boycotted the Yugoslav state health care system, so the statistics quoted by WHO are fragmentary at best.

Short of a proof of any connection of illness and death to uranium on radiological battlefields, all the other claims of the opponents, including illegality of low-level radiation weapons, can be discounted. A dedicated subset of infowar manages the proof aspect. Information from military medical institutions is subject to “damage control”. Laboratories selected to do medical research for the complex have been corrupted and manipulated, and executives of organizations that conduct studies of contaminated sites and victims are subjected to pressures, while the complex doesn’t study the victims. International law is obstructed, lest it brought the perpetrators of uranium genocide to justice. At the same time, independent medical scientists, jurists and researchers are intimidated, smeared and discredited.

The actions create in medical science an artificial controversy with a dual purpose: to cloud the truth for the public, and – most important – to distract from illegality of uranium weapons of any kind. The effectiveness of this approach is seen in most of the mainstream press reports on health effects of uranium weapons. Seldom, if ever, the press quotes a humanitarian law jurist or a researcher of the new uranium weapon systems. This happens even in media outlets that declare journalistic standards of objectivity and quote the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Obstruction of international law is thus a strategic goal of uranium proponents. The grassroots movement must be aware of it and support only those law initiatives against uranium and the weapons that are certain not to be used to stall the process of abolishing the weapons, bringing liability cases of uranium victims before courts, and prosecuting the perpetrators.

Labs and studies manipulated

Uranium detection and testing of contaminated persons require expertise, expensive equipment, and government contracts. Association with test results that reveal DU weapons effects and other uranium weapons use, is a major risk to the funding and contracts. The complex corrupts or intimidates the specialists to stop their engagement in independent research. Grants and contracts are manipulated to ruin disobedient labs.

Between 2002-2007, a few researchers collected evidence of uranium contamination from new weapons in the Balkans, Afghanistan, Iraq and Lebanon, and sent it to independent labs. This is becoming increasingly difficult. Several non-conforming labs have closed since handling uranium test samples. British NIGL lab revoked its test results for UMRC and declined to reveal its test results for Williams’ samples from Lebanon. Swiss government’s NBC-defence institute Labor Spiez (who proclaim “the world without WMD”)[83] filtered water samples from Lebanon before testing for UNEP, thereby removing insoluble oxides among which UK Harwell lab found enriched uranium in specimens routinely split from William’s samples. Busby had identified as inappropriate the filtering of water samples in UNEP testing for the Balkans during the “Kosovo DU” scandal. NATO contractor Spiez played a key role in that UNEP testing, too, and issued NATO-biased articles.[84]

Several weeks after Busby used the University of Wales lab in Bangor to measure the uranium in the Beirut ambulance filter and “got that story in the news, the lab was closed forever and the director, a radiochemist of 25 years Dr. Assinder was transferred to an administrative job. A few months later the Harwell lab told me they were no longer going to measure uranium in urine for me as they were scrapping the spectrometer.”[85]

CTBT Organization’s monitoring network for testing of radioactive airborne dust must have been aware of the increases due to use of uranium weapons since the Balkan wars, if independents have discovered it via alternative methods. No countries reported these increases.

DOD and DND follow-up and screening programs have been unable to detect uranium contamination in veterans. US military doctors consider only retained shrapnel a uranium risk, even though inhalation is the primary contamination pathway. No lung or lymph node studies of veterans with shrapnel are permitted, preventing examinations of inhalational exposure. Studies and programs under military control refuse to conduct isotopic analyses – “a slap in the face to veterans”;

“DND’s and DOD’s DU screening and follow-up programs have not been conducted by laboratories and researchers reliably able to measure DU in veterans. Instead, multi-millions of research dollars are diverted to gratuitous studies on laboratory animals to examine irrelevant anatomical mechanisms and questionable biological pathways — body hair, shrapnel, ‘nose-only inhalation’, and ‘nose-brain barriers’. The outcomes of these studies will be meaningless for the majority of Gulf and Balkan veterans.”[86]

Veterans aren’t eligible for DU bioassays in DOD and MOD screening programs, unless they excrete at least 50 ng of uranium per liter of urine, i.e. 600 % or higher than the average US, UK and Canadian citizen does for total uranium. Through incorporation of DU into organs and its clearance and possible dysfunctional effects on kidneys, the veterans may not excrete the threshold quantities. Total uranium concentration in urine determines neither the type nor degree nor origin of contamination (industrial, military, etc), but NATO countries limit screenings to total uranium. US state department’s website calls DU contamination  “an urban legend” and rejects any link between DU and illness, while omitting the fact that,

“Alpha emitters […] are classified as carcinogenic by all the nuclear regulatory and environment health agencies. The State Departments position is as brilliant as stating that being run over by a car in the US might kill you but there is no proof that being run over by a truck in Iraq will hurt you.”[87]

NATO country protocols of post-conflict medical diagnoses omit the causation of internal contamination by uranium; toxic effects (except kidney damage) from aerosol inhalation are ignored. Inadequate and inconclusive radiological, bioassay programs mean inability to examine contamination for veterans or the possible links to mutagenic effects on their children.

US government has admitted that 50 years of uranium fuel manufacturing has not led to serious epidemiological studies. Previous studies focused on cancer death as a biological endpoint, while ignoring chronic illnesses, deformed children, and other medical problems. Internal radiation dose was never calculated in the A-bomb studies, hence it cannot inform on the biochemical pathways of a particle in the body. Yet, ICRP analytical apparatus relies solely on the false data. “Scientists” apply ICRP estimates concerning uranium dust from nuclear industrial processes, not uranium weapons aerosols (including ceramic). Encoded into official data, analogies between military-uranium and nuclear-industry particles are invalid, because of cover-ups in the industry. Inhalation of uranium dust in nuclear processing is not biochemically equivalent to inhalation of ceramic uranium particles.

Vice chairman of US Gulf War veterans Denise Nichols criticized (October 2002) White House and Congress for “lack of accountability” and for failure “to apply lessons learned” to improve medical care of veterans. According to Nichols, civilians are also unprepared because lessons from the military are ignored: “Doctors and researchers that have seen the reality of Gulf War Illness have desperately tried to help but have been ignored and attacked professionally.” Nichols also referred to DOD documented sabotage of veterans records to hide Gulf War effects, and charged that government control of research funding prevented dissemination of knowledge. At the same time, DOD doesn’t educate their physicians on Gulf War illness, nor participate in true research, nor provide true treatment options to sick veterans.

Obstruction to international organizations

The complex controls international legislation and management of low-level-radiation issues. In radiological safety organizations, executives compromise the sincere efforts of their staff and the integrity of competent investigations, by yielding to the complex’s pressures. There is evidence to this effect regarding international organizations, e.g. ICRP[88] and UNEP,[89] down to national bodies, such as the Polish Atomic Agency, the Institute of Chemistry and Nuclear Technology, and the Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection in Warsaw.[90] By an agreement with WHO dating back to 1959, the only UN agency serving a private sector (nuclear industry), IAEA, has a monopoly on radiation aspects of uranium health effects, leaving to WHO the toxic aspect. This is a deliberate tool of control and cover-up of irradiation issues.

ICRP is responsible for prevalence of invalid models of risk to human health from internal, radiation sources like uranium particles. ICRP is a self-perpetuating body, where current members nominate new members; its reports are not subject to review by independent radiation experts.  This process excludes representatives from public interest NGOs. ICRP”s 1990 revision cut the permitted low-level radiation dose by a factor of five; US hasn’t accepted the revision, so US soldiers receive “safe” doses. In the US, AEC, a civilian agency headed up by the military with no interest in exploring the hazards, controls the ionising radiation subject. Each of the four most distinguished scientists who worked for AEC, John Gofman, Karl Morgan, Thomas Mancuse and Alice Stewart, was intimidated for proving that low-level radiation causes cancer.

NATO website[91] records corruption at international organizations, research and strategic studies institutes, and universities that have been enlisted to misinform about DU. DOD’s more objective reports are found on many independent websites, but looking for them at NATO websites is futile. No NATO country or WHO have carried out epidemiological studies of soldiers or civilians exposed in uranium wars, guaranteeing no confirmation or discovery of the health effects. US influenced UNGA in November 2001 to turn down a longstanding Iraqi request for a study on GW1 DU effects. Iraqi government invited WHO to investigate uranium contamination and health effects, but US pressure on WHO cancelled a full-fledged study. A planned visit by UN Justice Sik Yuen in 2002 was delayed by a heavy increase in bombings in Iraq’s southern “no fly” zone.

June 2003 NPRI symposium on DU weapons has followed the complex’s party line, and NPRI website features an incomplete set of links and Fahey’s propaganda. A policy research institute like NPRI should analyse previous policy and obstacles to change, and recommend policy directions and implementation, considering political, social and institutional factors, based on scientific findings. But the symposium isolated NPRI from the independent research community, contrary to prior assurances from executive director, Charles Sheehan-Miles.[92] The symposium neither brought science together, nor made a connection to policy. Its recommendations are timid, impotent, and haphazard. If Helen Caldicott’s institute could be manipulated, what could be done to UNEP, WHO, IAEA and other institutions?

The symposium report gives inaccurate information and legitimizes individuals and organizations known to have been apologetic or deceptive about military uranium. It cites widely criticized “Environmental Exposure Report: Depleted Uranium in the Gulf (II)” edited by Bernard Rostker, whose DU Medical Follow-Up Program “has not detected adverse clinical outcomes”, “adverse radiological health effects are not expected” and further research should focus on “soldiers with embedded DU fragments”. DU properties are from non-scientists Rapacholi and Fahey. Radioactivity of DU is taken from Fahey’s “Science or Science Fiction” that lacks source of this information. Comparison of uranium alloys to natural uranium is misleading and parrots unscientific official statements. Putting undeserved persons on a pedestal of scientific authority creates further “experts” for the propaganda and misinformation machine to exploit.

Chair of US-based, International Science Oversight Board, Lynn Ehrle complained (8.11.2007) to Lord Rees, president of Royal Society, about censorship in their Interface, after two papers by Busby on DU were rejected, against reviewers’ recommendations. The papers challenged Royal Society reports approving of ICRP risk model. Ehrle noted that several members of Royal Society DU working group had co-authored papers in support of the model,

“creating conflicts of interest and biases that resulted in a Royal Society report that minimizes DU health risks […] No editor should use his/her independent relationship with the parent organization as a shield to censor research that is “outside the mainstream” or that challenges Society publications […] Most government agencies and medical societies claim participation by ALL stakeholders is essential to effective policy making, but that assertion actually masks official intentions that are often less than honorable, particularly when it comes to protecting the radiation establishment and nuclear power and military weapons industries […] The corporatization of medicine and conflicts of interest are subjects that require immediate attention […] The Royal Society leadership and its journal editors should be cognizant of the fact that there is an international cover-up of low-dose ionising radiation issues fueled by systemic conflicts of interest […] The editorial decision to censor the Busby DU papers is further proof of this cover-up.”

Busby summed up manipulations in science and publications that underlie policy

“Policy based on dishonest or biased peer- reviewed research, or based on biased or dishonest advice from expert committees has resulted in many hundreds of thousands of deaths of adults and children and will result in more. There is currently no law against such dishonesty or biased advice and culprits are not seen as criminals nor are they punished in any way in the UK. There is currently no such thing as a Scientific Crime.”[93]

Cases

Intrigues and obstructionism

Obstructing independent scientists is deliberate. Via agent provocateurs, the complex exploits honest differences in order to neutralize grassroots movement’s capacity to incriminate:

“The matters of intrigue inside the anti-DU community are a microcosm of the overall issue we seek to address in our respective societies and internationally. It is within the narrow and selective anti-DU activist community and DU science and law sub-communities where the fight is being fought. It has been brought to this arena by those who know that the best way to contain a thing is to take the fight into its backyard.”[94]

Destruction of Asaf Durakovic’s Canadian testing program at UMP (now UMRC) illustrates the damage inflicted by infowar, and intrigues.[95] A campaign of intimidation produced a delay of testing, loss of data and Pat Horan’s “resignation” from Memorial University of Newfoundland lab that UMP contracted to test urine samples of veterans. Edward Ough, the Head of GW1 veterans radio-isotopic analysis program in Canada is behind Horan’s scandal. With others from Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering of Royal Military College of Canada, Ough wrote that Canadian testing hadn’t been able “to identify elevated levels of DU or even natural uranium in urine, hair or bone samples of veterans”.[96] As previously with Horan’s work, Ough lied to destroy UMP credibility and existence. UMRC proved contamination of veterans in a different lab.[97]

Horan episode is typical, in just one country. Intimidation, discreditation, even bribery continue, producing delays in study schedules and injuring reputation of independents. Some key independent scientists have been offered jobs with the military, grants and honours, and even a million dollars. One trusted lab contractor betrayed the cause by denying the credibility of own tests, only to land a military contract. Others are made to believe they are “dangerous to the establishment” in order to accelerate self-destruction; their offices and homes have been searched.

Obstruction takes many forms, from high-level lying, through media control, to harassment and abuse of individuals. An Australian medical professional commented on the obstructionism as “dishonourable and to be condemned”, because it “provides a transient gain in power for a few but long term damage to the whole of society”:

“the most pressing gaps in relevant information include reliable records of illnesses and mortality among individuals exposed to DU compared with similar groups not exposed. Accumulating this information takes time and a lot of work. In the presence of very active obstruction it also takes mutual encouragement. A related deficiency in the information available, also mainly due to active concealment and destruction of evidence, is detailed data on the extent of contamination by the characteristic nano-particles of DU. The second gap I believe relates to […] the failure of physicians, pathologists and the scientific teams which support them to do relevant investigations of individuals who have been exposed to the military use of DU […] it would seem at first to indicate a profound lack of honesty and ethical standards amongst my colleagues. The truth is however that there is widespread discouragement and harassment of any medical or scientific person who seeks the truth honestly and without fear or favour.”[98]

Independent journalist Felicity Arbuthnot relates corruption of a family doctor by US authorities.[99] Amy West and her husband who returned from the Gulf decided to have another baby; it was born with a rare lung condition. Amy spent a year, phoning those in the same town who had been in the Gulf. Out of 251 families with new babies, 67% had congenital abnormalities: ears, eyes or fingers missing, severe blood diseases or respiratory problems. Amy sent her findings, compiled with family doctor’s help, to Presidential Advisory Committee on Gulf War illnesses. Bernard Rostker rejected them as “unscientific”. The family doctor apologized to Amy, but he could no longer work with her, and was unable to tell why.

Col. Ken Scott

One of DND’s highest ranking medical officers, Col. Ken Scott dismissed as a “fantasy” numerous media reports linking the use of radioactive weapons with Gulf veterans’ illnesses.[100] As DND Medical Policy Unit director, he spoke two weeks before the death anniversary of Cpt. Terry Riordon, who died on 29.4.1999, diagnosed with Gulf War syndrome by DND’s Medical Centre in Ottawa. Oblivious to independent research, Scott said: “There is a disconnect between the reports you will see in the scientific literature and what you will see in the (mainstream) press”. Scott’s memo obtained under Access to Information Act refers to the “mountain” of evidence being built against DU by “special interest groups”: “If we can build a mountain high enough, even our own media may have to acknowledge that there is no unique, previously undescribed physical illness attributable to service in the Gulf War.” Scott embarked on a campaign of disinformation and smearing of independent researchers. In 13.9.2000 letter to Stars and Stripes, Scott castigated Durakovic’s work that it was not peer-reviewed.

Scott set out to build pro-DU mountain of “peer reviewed” evidence. Under his auspices, government’s DND and Veterans Affairs funded Gulf War Veterans’ Newsletter. By a legal agreement with veteran associations, every article in the newsletter was to be approved by all parties. In December 2000 issue of the newsletter, Scott broke this agreement. He “puts in context” media articles that “rekindled the flames of controversy surrounding health problems experienced by Gulf War veterans”, particularly their “alleged exposure to DU”. Scott misrepresents UMP as “an advocacy group that has recently been roundly criticized by American Gulf War veterans because – among other complaints – they released the names of veterans and their urine uranium results to the media without the participating individuals’ consent”.

Scott’s allegation reversed complaints against Hari Sharma who worked with UMP. Scott “informs” that an oft-quoted media source is “actually the mother-in-law of Dr. Asaf Durakovic”, creating an impression that a suspicious, vicious family is after the veterans’ urine. A mother-in-law is the chief vampire, while Asaf “has yet to publish results for evaluation and comment by the scientific and medical community”. In what Susan Riordon calls “kicking a dead man”, Scott pictures her late husband as a port security officer of Canadian forces deployed in Dubai in 1991, who left the military in 1995. According to Susan, “When he died in 1995, he had been a civilian for several years”. Documents show Cpt. Riordon was a forward intelligence officer. His classification was so secret that upon his death UMP had to stealthily remove his organs for autopsy before DND took custody of the body.

On the US study of veterans with embedded DU shrapnel that even DOD agent provocateur Fahey admitted fraudulent, the newsletter writes: “Nine years after the Gulf War these Americans have no symptoms or illness attributable to the DU.” On the effects of 1991, DU munitions and armour fire at Doha, where hundreds of soldiers have been exposed to uranium aerosol, Scott’s publication writes: “It would not be anticipated that such exposures would have produced any symptoms in the individuals involved.” In response to a question “What has the testing of Canadian Gulf War veterans for DU shown?”, the newsletter answers: “Total uranium levels were well within the range expected for a non-exposed population and were 1000 times less than levels found in Americans with embedded DU shrapnel […] The levels of total uranium in the urine of Canadian Gulf War veterans were too low to permit [isotopic analysis].” The newsletter misleads that bone and hair samples could be DU indicators, a deception repeated in a paper by Scott, Ough et al.[101] Scott admits that the methods used were unable to detect uranium isotope ratios. This doesn’t necessarily mean no DU in urine. The Scott et al study of irrelevant hair samples used a deficient method, and demonstrated no knowledge of metabolic pathways of uranium contaminants. The study misled over 200 veterans in Scott’s “voluntary screening program”.

Trying to influence wider public opinion, Scott misrepresented facts and publicly smeared Durakovic and UMP. As in the newsletter, he denied post-Gulf War illness in Gulf countries where Canadian units served, despite reports to the contrary. He dismissed the case of Riordon, who “served 800 km from the battlefields”. Intelligence officer Riordon moved around. Contact with a carrier of uranium dust on clothing may contaminate.

Scott emphasized irrelevant, fraudulent and military-controlled “studies” of veterans with embedded DU shrapnel, and those by Institute of Medicine, RAND, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. His media statements contain so many misrepresentations and lies that ignorance can’t explain his bias. Scott charges that publicizing test results from independents misleads the veterans and unnecessarily scares them. Fahey does the same in email to Susan Riordon (12.3.2000): “[Durakovic’s] assertions are causing unnecessary fears among veterans and not contributing at all to advancing understanding of DU’s effects.” Scott doesn’t mentions illegality of uranium weapons and that the cover-ups are criminal. In LLRC-Fahey dispute regarding alleged Israeli uranium weapons in Lebanon, Fahey urges Busby to apologize on Al Jazeera for scaring the population.

Horan’s case is due to Scott, the architect of UMP program setback. In October 2003, Scott received a blow; Durakovic, whose team measured uranium concentrations up to 200 times higher in persons at Afghanistan’s bombed sites than in the control population, wrote in a peer-reviewed paper: “The adverse effects of internally deposited radionuclides, in particular the isotopes of uranium as a consequence of the military conflicts in the past decade have been well documented in the current literature.”[102] Ill veterans and the movement were delayed a few years. Scott, his superiors and operatives in the complex lost any remaining traces of credibility and respect.

“Bad Cop” Dan Fahey

Dan Fahey’s 2001 law policy analysis[103] argues for DU munitions, departing from his advocacy[104] for veterans with Gulf War syndrome. Since then, Fahey has been on every anti-uranium weapons front, but defending the complex’s view. To appear sincere, he emphasizes facts no longer deniable: US Army “cleaned up” a few “mistaken” bombings on overseas ranges; DU is radioactive; those with shrapnel in follow-up programmes do get cancer; health research needs a revamp. He has effected ICBUW’s subversion on illegality of DU ammunition and leads the denial of new uranium weapons (obvious from his WISE website reports). He spoke at ICBUW Geneva presentation (March 2008), and monopolized weapons analysis in Avril MacDonald’s book,[105] limiting the scope to by-then obsolete DU ammunition.

When milestone independent scientific uncoverings occur, he leads discrediting campaigns. In January 2007 email[106] to pro-complex campaigners Felice and Jack Cohen-Joppa, Fahey suggests “health studies of exposed populations” and “testing of potentially exposed populations […] In order for the results to be taken seriously, they must be done by real scientists using credible methods, not the sloppy work of Busy et al. The problem is that Busby et al tend to scare off credible scientists, partly through their aggressive tactics but also by making the issue look like a circus, which keeps people away […] maybe I can be the bad cop and slam them while the others move forward with a more positive agenda.” As a remedy for “Busby et al” Fahey names “Randy Parrish’s highly sensitive test” and “bigger groups, e.g. WHO, ICRC, MSF”, all of which have been established or compromised by the complex.

Fahey’s March 2003 “Science or Science Fiction”[107] posted on WISE (that has since showed change of colours), confirms his military advocacy; it slanders some scientists, researchers and activists for collaboration with “the governments of Iraq and the former Yugoslavia, Yasser Arafat and Taliban sympathizers”. Fahey has graduated from a law and diplomacy school; the wording isn’t coincidental during US and Israeli wars when citizens face liability for adversarial collaboration. De-bunking Fahey’s posting on DU-Watch, several people deemed (20.9.2003) his article deceptive, disguised in objectivity and concern for the integrity of anti-DU activism. Fahey labels concerned parties “speculative” and “alarmist” while they work in a data vacuum. The article insists on “corroboration” of independent findings, while being involved in destroying and gagging the remaining independents.

Fahey worries about scaring DOD off with “speculations” and “apocalypse” by amateurs and whistleblowers without money and resources. The article’s table of contents indirectly reveals the issues DOD tries to hide, intermixed with a few undeniable truths against uranium weapons. Out of Fahey’s ten “myth cases”, only three concern the complex’s obvious deception, as if the anti-uranium movement has created most of the myths. Even in the cases against the complex, the arguments do not cover vital aspects, e.g. discussion on ineffectiveness of DU munitions in saving US soldier lives doesn’t quote a tragic post-combat casualty rate. Using half-truths and inaccuracies, the remaining seven cases point against the anti-DU entities, coinciding with DOD’s worst fears of being exposed on the following:

• massive use of new uranium weapons (hence Fahey’s attacks on Williams);
• sharing military technology with a rogue power, Israel (critique of Yasser Arafat, International Action Centre, Rokke, Williams, Bein and Zoric);
• civilian casualties and genocide (governments of Iraq and Yugoslavia, Taliban sympathizers, Williams, Bein, Leuren Moret); and
• new uranium alloys to make post-combat detection difficult (UMRC).

In Fahey’s article, DOD “truths” are presented against opinions of “some anti-DU activists, the governments of Iraq and the former-Yugoslavia, Yasser Arafat, and Taliban sympathizers” who have allegedly “worked jointly and independently to promote apocalyptic vision of DU’s effects” that attract “an undue amount of media attention”. For lack of evidence that, e.g. UMRC sympathize with foreign governments, UMRC falls with “anti-DU activists”. As scientists, UMRC researchers are neither pro- nor anti-uranium. They are as much activists as DOD are pacifists. Similar goes for Rokke, former US Army health specialist in NBC-E exposures, and DU assessment expert in GW1. Fahey’s labels try to hurt opponents’ reputation (political involvement of scientists) and intimidate (infringement of war laws in war times). Regarding “undue” media exposure, how does he determine that “promoted” claims are “apocalyptic”, “absurd”, propaganda etc? “Undue” is imbalanced, too, because he assesses neither media attention to the opposite views, nor lack of attention to key, covered-up aspects.

Fahey puts unspecified “scores of scientific studies and reports on DU” between the opinions of DOD and “anti-DU activists” (i.e. independents like UMRC and LLRC) into classes that reflect DOD view: (1) “health problems in laboratory rats”; (2) “evidence of human health effects caused by DU is inconclusive”; (3) re-iteration of DOD-approved, pre-GW1 knowledge. Yet, the article seeks “constructive dialogue and sensible scientific studies”, while avoiding real myths of official studies. Despitr ample research on biological and medical effects of U238, main DU component, Fahey considers trivialities, e.g. “when was DU used for the first time”. Is his estimate of GW1 DU tonnage relevant, when order of magnitude more is incinerated at US military disposal facilities? Why is it relevant that one in seven Iraqi tanks was destroyed with DU, if one DU particle from an illegal weapon could ruin one’s health? Fahey goes along with Jane’s publication when counting DU weapons, but when Williams refers to Jane’s, it’s not evidence. Only UNEP, WHO and Royal Society conclusions are “respectable” to Fahey. Then ECRR, LLRC and UMRC results should be ignored? Also troubling is Fahey’s regard for media and military sources. Courts do not admit press reports as support of allegations.

Professor Hari Sharma

Hari Sharma, a nuclear chemist at the University of Waterloo in Canada has tested samples from veterans Ray Bristow and Terry Riordon who received his results (28.4.1999) as “the first Canadian veteran”.[108] Riordon died the next day. UMP (now UMRC) telephoned (26.4.1999) the first results to his spouse Susan. She testified: “The official letter on DU positive testing via urine for Terry is signed by Dr. Asaf Durakovic. It has long been known that Asaf was the ‘scientific caregiver’ for Terry. Dr. A. Durakovic still fills this role today and shall for the next year, if not longer. Sharma’s association with any item of Terry was not solely Sharma’s. It was in cooperation with Asaf and Len Dietz. Therefore all notification came under UMP.”

UMP’s identification of DU in the urine samples called for follow-up research on body parts. UMP sought assistance from Susan Riordon, the Atlantic Director of Canadian Peacekeeping Veterans Association (CPVA), with wide contacts with veterans in Canada and abroad. Spin doctors used the need for examining organs to discredit independent researchers; Durakovic was labelled “Dr. Death”. Susan Riordon recalls: “This leading degrading comment/title appeared to have raised via Dan Fahey [...] He requested no communication with George Angus Parker, U.K. Veteran of [GW1], as well no communication to UMP as they were not ‘seeking to help others’.” When Susan did communicate with Durakovic, she received a flood of nasty emails: “The general theme was that I personally was creating harm to Veterans by withholding information.”

Susan Riordon has 9.7.1999 letter from Sharma at University of Waterloo, stating that he is returning a second urine sample from Terry Riordon unopened, because Susan questioned Sharma’s credibility “in the sense that I am somehow associated with the Department of Defense.” Based on internal memos from Scott obtained under freedom of information, Susan maintains that Sharma has collaborated with the military against veteran interests: “The communication of Ken Scott with Sharma is clear [leading] to a meeting with Sharma that lasted several days [...] I have personally concluded Sharma’s hand in hand with the very people that allowed Terry’s death and disregarded our Veterans care.”

Sharma e-mailed (6.5.1999) UMP that he would turn over a portion of some veterans’ urine samples, and will be disposing of several other samples. Sharma and the university accepted veterans’ payment to analyse many samples. Consequently, the veterans requested that Sharma be restrained from destroying any portion of the samples, and all samples and results be handed over to UMP. In a May 5 e-mail Sharma informed UMP he would provide the results to Dr. Boctor in England, who charitably co-funded the analyses. Veterans objected, because Boctor was a psychiatrist, not a specialist in uranium contamination, and didn’t own the samples or results. Critics further allege that Sharma didn’t produce results from a privately financed assignment in Iraq. He allegedly was DND consultant while Ottawa worked to take control of UMP international veterans project and Horan’s work. When UMP and Horan didn’t capitulate, DND used Ough, a long-time friend with Wright, the Head of the Memorial University Program that ran the lab where Horan worked, to try and turn her to their side by intimidation. They failed, forced her out and changed the lab’s name.

“Sharma never had a single result from the lab about Terry Riordon nor did he have access to most of the UK veterans results.” According to the source, Sharma acquired 7-9 results before UMP caught onto his game with DND: “He therefore produced a false report for the UK vets based on his Neutron Activation analysis and told the UK vets it was from the TIMS lab where Pat Horan worked [...]UK vets still won’t believe that their results report from Sharma is falsified.”

Being in possession of the original data from both labs, UMRC re-ran the samples and published the results in Military Medicine. But the game set them back two years – an obvious objective of DND. According to UMRC, this peer-reviewed paper is the real report for UK veterans, some of whom believe they got the results from Sharma. By an agreement, UMRC reported the real results to them. Because DND intervention delayed UMP work, several frustrated veterans turned against UMP. Dan Fahey emailed Susan Riordon (12.3.2000):  “I did not become overly concerned about [Durakovic] until several veterans recently contacted me about him. These veterans have not been able to get their test results from Dr. Durakovic, and they believe he misled and used them.” Memorial University tried to recover UK veterans receivables from UMP and inflated the bill by 250% over the original agreement. UMRC didn’t receive money from some veterans. DND tried to force UMRC to turn over all lab data that Horan sneaked out of the university lab.

The military has been incessantly trying to destroy the Military Medicine paper credibility. It is the only single study in NATO countries that confirms DU contamination from Iraq, other than “studies” of retained shrapnel under Dr. McDiarmid through which DOD seeks to distract from true data on urine bioassays and inhalation exposure. This effort has very successfully curtailed any US program. DOD used Fahey in an attempt to damage UMRC in conjunction with MTP and Sharma. Fahey has systematically discouraged veterans from coming to UMRC for independent analysis. He tried to make Sharma the magnet. There are copies of email by Fahey, MTP and NGWRC that told people UMRC and Durakovic was a scientifically incompetent fraud. To hurt UMRC after they stopped him in Canada, Sharma played right along with this. Oddly, Sharma’s report declares: “We are apolitical and therefore we request scientists and people at large to refrain from raising political questions”.[109] But the same report cites Fahey’s propagandist articles. Of all authors on this theme Sharma chose by-then discredited Fahey. Fahey and Sharma publications use references selectively and ignore scientific leaders, thereby lending more weight to self and to obscure citations. Both authors played a prominent role at 2003 NPRI symposium on health effects of DU.

MOD testing program

The complex destroyed North American independent science and tried to do so in UK that is key to leverage in NATO and UN. MOD has built manipulation and deceit into its testing program. Unlike clinical labs of UMRC type, geological labs employed by MOD aren’t bound by confidentiality and patient management obligations. By contrast, under legal agreements UMRC reports all results to participants. UMRC studies of veterans 7-9 years after exposure indicated that some DU-exposed persons had clinical symptoms of internal DU contamination, but no detectable DU in urine. Other vets had clinical symptoms with very low levels of DU, i.e had kidney damage attributable to uranium toxicity; kidneys damaged by chronic exposure to uranium can’t remove it.

UMRC with Len Dietz had developed the methodology that Randy Parrish’s geological lab used in MOD test program for GW1 veterans. It doesn’t derive from Sharma, who has used an outdated bioassay method. In 1998, MTP and NGWRC announced the release of Sharma’s results confirming DU in urine of GW1 veterans.[110] Specialists wondered how Sharma was able to report findings in UK veterans’ urine, unachievable with this method, but, probably misled by Sharma’s fame, some activists got excited that MOD program would use it. UMRC, with Horan at Memorial University, has developed a method using Thermal Ionizing Mass Spectrometry (TIMS) that detects and measures low volumes of uranium in urine. UK veterans involved in this project, creating an abundance of cases with conclusive DU contamination test results. When DND destroyed Horan’s career and had the program shut down, UMRC formed association with Horan’s colleague, Parrish. UMRC website features references to publications and scientific papers involving Parrish. UMRC and Parrish modified TIMS methodology for equipment in his lab. UMRC severed the association after Parrish became compromised at 2003 NPRI symposium.

DUOB (with Busby and Hooper) and UMRC attempted to support and promote Parrish to win MOD contract to test GW1 veterans. The choice was based on jointly developed methods and credibility of UMRC’s published results and studies at Parrish’s lab. Only a credible team of clinical specialists in radio- and chemo-toxicity and veteran studies in labs like Parrish’s would show MOD liability. Combined with kidney damage from uranium toxicity, the delay since GW1 means very low levels in urine. Such levels are toxic according to ICRP and NRPB half-life models. Although NRPB has challenged ICRP’s model parameters for ceramic oxide clearance from the body, neither NRPB nor European Commission officially recognize these revisions. MOD (and other official studies) would thus be able to dismiss the findings.[111]

Without molecular-level examination of internal organs, MOD would deny any risk associated with low levels of DU if found by Parrish’s lab. DUOB offered UMRC to analyze bioassay test results but MOD prohibited this. Reporting total concentrations of uranium and reporting DU abundances in urine and associated radioactivity is meaningless without the dose reconstruction and lung burden analysis followed by clinical studies. Where DU is identified, a nano-particle analysis should be conducted on biopsied organ tissues, supplemented with chromosome studies.

DUOB has manipulated the science to dismiss depleted and enriched uranium in UK veterans, so that the  “results cannot be used to draw conclusions about veterans’ contamination”:

“The extrapolation for rats and large enriched uranium particles over 6 months to humans and sub micron ceramic uranium oxide particles over 13 years is unscientific […] the DUOB measurement process did not obtain the information it set out to obtain”. [112]

UMRC believe that DUOB’s Minority Report by Busby and Hooper omits the change by DUOB’s Parrish et al of the geophysical ratios of natural uranium (U235/U238) to deny the findings of depleted and enriched uranium in UK veterans.

Some anti-DU activists are naive to the science issues and problems, and to interference and subterfuge facing independent researchers. Every time they get something going, the government steps in or uses others to compromise the work and the lab, through promises of contracts or withdrawal of funding, promises of fame and reputation through scientific recognition of work for the government, and revenues for labs. If an activist can’t grasp the issues, neither will the public.

Several of these individuals are damaging legitimate research, either consciously or under influences, for personal and professional reasons. It was rather naive of these persons to celebrate the MOD decision. Instead, they should have pointed out the MOD manipulation and misrepresentation, the need for clinical and nano-particle analysis, and government plans to manipulate the results. MOD gave the vets a bone to win over popular support in Europe, since the only English speaking country where press covered UMRC’s Afghanistan results is also the only Alliance member faced with an abundance of veterans with confirmed DU contamination.

Promotion of chemist Sharma and geologist Parrish by NPRI, NGWRC and MTP kept the independent clinical research in the shadows. Ill veterans have something to consider, and DU-contaminated foreign civilians know where not to look for help.

Battlefield landscaping[113]

As criminally as they had dispersed radioactivity, US military “cleaned up” bomb and battle sites at US-occupied facilities in Iraq, mainly in Baghdad area, by removing and trucking surface soil into the desert and re-surfacing with fresh sand. The potentially contaminated soil was also incorporated into defensive berms and security caissons. Topsoil replacement re-suspended contaminated dust over large areas (e.g. 5 million residents in Baghdad), “also exposing thousands of U.S. military personnel and the many frequent foreign visitors including NGO staff, reconstruction crews, business and trade delegates, and diplomatic and foreign service employees”.

UMRC observed earth-moving crews “landscaping” the battlefields under supervision of US engineering divisions, to remedy contaminated sites and remove damaged and disabled military assets. Coalition troops avoided the radioactive sites and radioactive, disabled Iraqi assets. Represented as a cleanup of unexploded munitions and other dangerous debris, it was a “careless”, “systematic but incomplete effort” at visible sites along the roads;

“The backfill is used to cover ad hoc battlefield graveyards, diesel, kerosene and oil spills, an extensive array and high quantity of unexploded tank munitions, pools of loose high-explosive polymer fills, unexploded mines and cluster munitions, and uranium oxide deposits surrounding burned-out and penetrator-defeated Iraqi tank defensive positions.”

Baghdad Gate site required three UMRC visits for its size and complexity;

“Left open and exposed were the scorched and twisted remains of tanks […] circular burn (DU oxide pools) patches 8 to 10 meters in diameter remained uncovered and undisturbed by the landscaping operation. The field team was invited to join a travelling Iraqi family that had stopped here to have lunch. They were seated on a concrete bench less than 6 metres from a radioactive source measuring [about 200 times] the already elevated, Baghdad reference level.”

US forces team conducted (August 2003) a radiation survey of Nasiriyah battlefield 370 km southeast of Baghdad. Local residents watched as each tank was inspected with radioactivity counters. Two of the five tanks were pulled out and transported to the Coalition occupied airport. Three months after, UMRC found three remaining tanks radioactive. Residents of the houses 30 m away reported being warned by the US team; teenagers watching the survey and tank removal were advised not to play in the tanks because they could get sick. UK military failed to post warnings or remove hazards at Abu Khasib near Basra, GW2 largest battlefield. Unlike in Baghdad, UMRC found Basra’s combat areas largely unchanged seven months after the battle. MOD surveyors in full-body radiation suites inspected Abu Khasib site. Accompanying translators warned local residents, salvagers and recyclers (described as looters by Western media) about the radioactivity, encouraging bystanders to post warning signs on the tanks to children, salvagers and curiosity seekers. UMRC later found the highest number, levels and concentrations of radioactive source points and hot spots in tanks and vehicles surveyed by MOD, and elevated readings on the ground, in the air and in occupied buildings on the site.

UK forces had neither posted warnings, nor sealed nor removed the highly radioactive assets, but the army’s Royal Logistics Corp posted photos of Iraqi tank remains in Abu Khasib on the internet, a curiosity-seekers attraction by the Abu Khasib-Basra road. Salvagers removed the tank’s engine and parts. UMRC found the tank’s radioactivity at 200 times background. Tens of thousands unexploded munitions and ballistic debris littered Abu Khasib and Basra battlefields at the time of UMRC survey. UK forces were regularly seen in the area, careful not to approach the battlefields and disabled Iraqi materiel.

Balkan uranium

Contamination in Gulf Wars, Afghanistan, Lebanon and recently Gaza have overshadowed Balkan uranium troubles. Ostensibly done on behalf of supposedly persecuted Muslims, NATO bombings in 1994-1995 and 1999 legitimized a fundamental Bosnian Muslim state and Kosovo independence for Albanians. The Muslims are exposed to NATO uranium weapon residue, an effect contrary to NATO humanitarian rhetoric. Beliitling of the Balkan uranium contamination by world opinion is due to subjugation of the new Balkan governments to NATO-EU agendas, and Serbian politics of partial appeasement to join EU, but condemn NATO. Balkan independents remain ineffective with their insufficient expertise, while NATO propaganda prays on public ignorance. Sporadic Western interest focuses on own troops rather than on Balkan civilians. World public opinion, once brainwashed to mistake Serbs for ethnic cleansers and killers, have little sympathy for Serbs, and the Muslims have been conditioned not to raise the uranium health risk issues.

NATO misled onto the DU track, even though still unidentified radioactive weapons were used in the Balkans. An old bunker reported by NATO as bombed with DU ammunition in Montenegro, could not have been shattered with such weapon. UNEP found high-level, non-DU radioactivity at the site, but this has been suppressed and forgotten. NATO has used new earth-penetration weapons, e.g. at Novi Sad refinery and Grdelica bridges. These weapons might be built of uranium metal.

NATO used more DU than it has reported, leaving some entries in their list of bombed sites blank. NATO nonchalantly admitted transuranic contamination of DU at the height of the 2000/2001 scandal. Most of the public, with official media’s help, remain unaware of the risks of nuclear waste in DU. Without expertise (that is not available locally) it would not be possible to determine what portion of the dramatic cancer rate increase in Serbia[114] is due to transuranic contamination in DU.

UN Balkans Task Force attempts to include DU in its post-conflict assessments were subverted before the UNEP study could start, and director Klaus Töpfer manipulated the reports, on DOD instructions.  WHO health study in Bosnia began concurrently with a UNEP DU-site study in 2002, i.e. 8 years after DU weapons were first used there. As in previous uranium wars, the risk of DU in “Kosovo” was absolutely denied at first, although in July 1999 a NATO document warned KFOR countries about the toxicity of DU weapons. Even that warning was late, as NATO and UN personnel entered Kosovo 2nd week of June 1999. Efforts by UN deputy high commissioner for refugees to caution Kosovo civilians of the risks met with resistance from Kosovo Albanian politicians, NATO and UN.

NATO released DU-bombed site data well over a year late, understating the tonnage, and delayed for 16 months the necessary target information and access for site monitors. There were ambiguities for several locations in the NATO data.  For Bosnia, the data appeared 5 to 6 years after the fact, also incomplete. UNEP measured radioactivity at 14 sites in Bosnia, but only at 2 of the 8 sites around Sarajevo marked “unknown” on NATO list. Sarajevo medical professional Dr.Trifko Guzina revealed the domicile of hundreds of Bosnian patients – those already dead and those fighting cancer seven years after the bombing.  Was there a correlation with the “unknown” locations?

UNEP teams went to NATO-approved sites in Kosovo and Bosnia, and were banned from some important sites. The sites may be in drop areas of cluster bombs and other uranium weapons. It is plausible that UNEP discovered only low contamination levels because of DOD’s advance cleanups. Uranium hard-target weapons may have been dropped on deeply buried Yugoslav defenses in Kosovo.  Despite a warning, UNEP did not test bomb or missile targets in their second study in Serbia and Montenegro in Fall 2001.

Yugoslav experts critical of nuclear power and radioactivity have been marginalised, sent to early retirement and live in poverty, intimidated and dependent of the regime. Similar fate has met scientists in Iraq, where in addition death squads have killed some of them. Serbian public is manipulated with misleading statements from Serbian nuclear physicists who, as in Poland and other members of the complex, are typically detached from biological impacts of radioactivity. An example from the 2000/2001 “Kosovo DU” scandal: official Polish radiological “authorities” maintained DU weapons used in Kosovo were no problem, while older Polish scientific books stated the opposite about the kind of contamination NATO released in the Balkans.

Serbian alternative elites aspiring to national self-determination know little about uranium weapons politics. At Belgrade Forum conference on the 10th anniversary of NATO bombing, a Serbian elite member proposed to demand EU funds and expertise to deal with the DU problem. EU is in power structures responsible for masterminding the Balkan conflicts, releasing radioactivity in NATO military actions globally, and covering up the problems that nuclear complex has created globally. Similar request was made to NATO in Brussels by Bosnian medical authorities during the “Kosovo DU” scandal, when first victims of the Bosnian war appeared. Predictably, no Balkan entity has received any effective help. Don’t expect the perpetrator to admit to the crimes.

Why a friend of Serbs, Russia can’t do more on the uranium problem? Is Russia holding a trump card against Serbia’s membership in the Atlantic structures? Russia has political clout to do it without fear of intimidation, interference and death threats received by Western independents who try to help victims of radioactive wars globally. Russia has the expertise and equipment for testing victims, environment and bombed sites. Their nuclear medical expertise could possibly help the victims and doesn’t need to be curtailed as it is in the West. Russia also has military intelligence to know possible new uranium weapons.

Balkan peoples should enlist the proven Western independents to test the victims and the environment and to recommend a course of self-help, independent of any Balkan puppet governments. Time is running out.

Conclusions

Since my 2003 Hamburg brief on the subject, cover-ups of uranium weapons have worsened. The worst offenders are US, UK and Israel, but remaining NATO and Partnership for Peace states collude in cover-ups at national and international level. According to a leading researcher of uranium weapons, “the psychological, legal, scientific and media deception used to conceal the development and use of these weapons may be the best kept military secret of the last 20 years.  To date it has protected their designers, manufacturers, political sponsors, exporters and deploying forces from civil or criminal prosection.”[115]

Covering up crimes against humanity

Covering up war crimes and crimes against humanity, and military and foreign policy based on such information, are crimes themselves. The extent of the sabotage, deception and obfuscation indicates that those who inflict uranium micro-particles on the world are aware of the enormous dimensions of their crime and will go to extraordinary lengths to cover it up. The need to press on until they are stopped is overwhelming.

Pro-uranium weapons propaganda operates within the complex’s cover-up system. At its “scientific” core is a seriously flawed ICRP model, according to which low-level internal radiation from fine uranium particles is not a hazard. Proponents of uranium power and weapons use the model instead of empirical evidence, which they suppress with a sophisticated misinformation and fact-distortion.

Unless the legal thresholds of acceptability of so-called low-level radiation are removed, the perpetrators of radiological weapons would continue to contravene humanitarian law and keep contaminating the planet with radioactivity. Ultimately, massive long-term human catastrophe might result, far beyond the borders of radioactive wars.

Misled into ban

A complete and universal termination of the development, testing, production and use of these weapons of indiscriminate effect and delayed mass destruction would stop the mega-crimes. However, pressing for a ban or a treaty is counterproductive, since uranium weapons are already banned by UNHRC. The ban treaty processes would be prolonged, to argue that existing customary law that outlaws the weapons is invalid since a ban treaty process is in progress. Even if a ban treaty was enacted, the said offenders are known for ignoring treaties.

The complex’s agent provocateurs have hi-jacked many unsuspecting anti-uranium organisations and activists into the offenders’ position, undermining anti-uranium initiatives and helping the complex duck responsibility. The complex has side-tracked most of the arms control campaigners to fight already obsolete DU systems.

An anti-tactics may be to pursue enforcement of established standards for allowable radioactive doses. In its grip on radiological safety, the complex has been disregarding the international and national, occupational and civilian permitted dose levels.

Studies corrupted and manipulated

The complex continues to manipulate inquiries of international organizations on toxic-radioactive battlefields and in fallout areas, and interferes in national follow-up programs on contaminated veterans, to the point that the official studies have become farcical. Proven invalid by independents, test methods and procedures of official studies have been rehearsed and “fool-proofed”, while the independents’ methods are marginalized and ridiculed, and the independents – intimated and smeared, as in the past.

Meanwhile, new weapons, containing more uranium per munition come on stream, in ever more atrocious uses in urban areas, contaminating local populations, and the globe with toxic-radioactive aerosols. In prolonged “peacekeeping” and occupation, own troops, contractors and aid workers are exposed to contaminated dust.

Proofs of illegal weapon use are in the bodies of veterans of radiological wars and civilian victims of the contamination left behind. Being the prey of the cover-ups, the victims should ask the sponsors of testing programmes a number of technical questions (given in my 2003 Hamburg brief), and examine the details provided.

Emerging global threat

Case in point Israel also endangers own civilian population with fallout, by waging radioactive wars on neighbours. Israeli bombing with uranium weapons of “suspected” Syrian nuclear facility in al Khibar, allegedly capable of producing nuclear weapons, may be a rehearsal before Israeli attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities on the pretext of nuclear weapon production, to contaminate the region and blame it on destroyed secret Iranian nuclear weapons.

Non-depleted and natural-like uranium signature in the weapons serve to conceal the intent and blame the targeted facilities and surroundings as source of the uranium varieties found at bombing sites. This would be congruent with Zionist plans for the region,[116] Israeli nuclear bellicosity[117] the Judeocentric dominance of regional and global politics,[118] and other powers’ apocalyptic mindset.[119]

Increasing fanaticism and bellicosity of ruling elites might also bring about the use of new generation radioactive weapons in all-out wars, and new applications of uranium metals in protracted military operations, such as bombing in Northern Pakistan, that resembles US operations in Iraq between the Gulf Wars. The risks increase as the power elites are driven by messianic-apocalyptic ideology that also gives them a false conviction of own salvation in the nuclear Armageddon.

Drastic political (Kosovo’s illegal separation from Serbia) and military ventures (Georgia’s attack on Southern Ossetia, Israel’s attack on Gaza) prove that large civilian inequity and “collateral damage” bordering on genocide are no concern.

Spread of low-level radiation

All uranium metal originating from US and used in weapons and civilian products contains powerful radioactive elements mixed into the stock as nuclear waste. Military expansion and armed conflicts between the global power seekers and their adversaries may lead to the use of uranium weapons by states other than US, UK and Israel. Consumer applications of uranium products such as GEC’s Heavy Metal Alloy and Starmet’s Ducrete will also spread U236 and transuranics in the environment.

The military doesn’t even clean up after themselves, leaving contaminated soil and destroyed materiel behind. When “clean-up” is performed, it disturbs the contaminated soil, easing its lift-up into the local, regional and global atmosphere. More tonnage of uranium in munitions is burned on US military ranges when expired, than is used on overseas battlefields.

False-flag operations might use radioactive weapons, to shock the public, as 2002 Bali, 9/11[120] and other propaganda attacks have done. Another threat is from missile launches and shields located in scapegoat countries that might attract attacks, as is the case with Poland and Czech Republic.

FGNW that satisfy CTBT provisions will be the next concern. Nuclear powers, especially present non-nuclear states, will likely produce and deploy these low-level radiation polluters in the near future.

Think and act globally and locally

Offender countries’ societies focus more on the victim veterans of their forces than on civilian victims of uranium battlefields. Because Central and Eastern European and Balkan countries are targeted to polarize and weaken Europe, more disinformation campaigns and cover-ups of uranium weapons can be expected from these regions.

US-NATO is moving military bases and training ranges from Germany eastwards for a number of reasons, incl. opposition to uranium weapon production, stocks and exercises in Europe. US, NATO and EU political and military structures incorporate new countries globally, with the possibility of conflicts using uranium weapons. Global shift of exercises and testing of uranium weapons will challenge emerging local activism and existing anti-uranium movement in the West and Japan. Infringement on civil liberties in Western countries (US Patriot Act and DHS concentration camps, EU new constitution and more totalitarian law) and subjugation of dependent and occupied nations would involve more risk for anti-uranium activists.

The grassroots movement should prepare populations of potentially targeted areas, for rudimentary mitigation of radioactive-toxic exposure. This was missed in the Balkans, Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon and Gaza. At the time of writing, political rhetoric suggests the following radioactive conflicts: Israel-NATO against Iran, India against Pakistan, and Israel against neighbours. Some of them might escalate to others purposely drawn in.

---

[1] Bein, Piotr at World Uranium Weapons Conf.  Hamburg 2003at http://www.stopnato.org.uk/du-watch/bein/hamburg.htm

[2] Bein & Parker, Kaeren in Politics  and Environmental Policy Faculty of Political  Sciences, U. of Belgrade at www.ratical.org/radiation/DU/Uweps‑CAH.pdf; Bein & Zorić, Pedja at Int’l Conf. Facts on  DU Praha 2001 at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du‑watch/files/DUPraha.doc; Bein at CADU Int’l Conf. Against Uranium Weapons Manchester 2000 at www.stopnato.org.uk/du‑watch/bein/psyops.htm

[3] Parker, Karen at www.grassrootspeace.org/wuwc_reader5_intl_law.pdf

[4] Ibid

[5] Bein 2003 op cit

[6] Busby, Chris and Morgan, Saoirse 1.1.2006 in European Biology and Bioelectromagnetics at http://www.llrc.org/du/subtopic/aldermastonrept.htm

[7] UN Environmental Program press release cited in Guardian 17.2.2001

[8] Weyman, Tedd at www.umrc.net/pdf/12_years_too_late.pdf citing DOE

[9] Ibid

[10] Durakovic, Asaf in Croatian Medical Journal  October 2003 (44)5 p 520‑532 at www.cmj.hr/index.php?D=/44/5/520, abstract at www.cmj.hr/index.php?P=3013; www.umrc.net/AfghanistanOEF.asp

[11] Weyman op cit

[12] http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/Groves‑Memo‑Manhattan30oct43.htm

[13] Bob Nichols cited in Kelly, Geoff & Ricciuti, Louis at http://artvoice.com/issues/v7n39/the_sphere

[14] Ibid

[15] http://www.eoslifework.co.uk; latest summary at www.unidir.ch/bdd/fiche-article.php?ref_article=2759

[16] http://www.umrc.net/os/downloads/AfghanistanOEF.pdf; */destruction_effects.pdf

[17] Durakovic op cit

[18] http://www.umrc.net/os/downloads/Iraq_report_1.doc

[19] Durakovic et al at 33rd Annual Meeting  European Society of Radiation Biology 25‑28.8.2004; www.umrc.net/pdf/ESRB_2004.pdf

[20] Durakovic et al at 49th Annual Meeting Health Physics Society 11-15.7.2004; http://www.umrc.net/pdf/HPS_2004.pdf

[21] http://www.grassrootspeace.org/tedd_weyman_10aug04.html

[22] Busby and Morgan op cit

[23] http://www.llrc.org/du/subtopic/lebanon.htm; Independent 28.10.2006

[24] http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=20532&Cr=leban&Cr1=#

[25] http://www.llrc.org/du/subtopic/uneplebinst.htm; Independent 8.11.2006

[26] http://www.llrc.org/du/subtopic/unepletter.htm

[27] http://www.llrc.org/du/subtopic/breakingwinds.htm

[28] http://www.newweapons.org/?q=node/79

[29] http://www.newweapons.org/?q=node/84

[30] http://www.newweapons.org/?q=node/85

[31] http://www.eoslifework.co.uk/pdfs/Uweapons2006.pdf

[32]
http://postconflict.unep.ch/press.php?prog=lebanon
[33] Williams private communication 7.2.2009

[34] Ibid

[35]
http://uk.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUKTRE51N62E20090224
[36] http://www.starmet.com/adrecycl.htm

[37] http://www.starmet.com/spcducrt.htm

[38]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du‑watch/message/1075, */1076 and */1077
[39] http://www.chugoku‑np.co.jp/abom/uran/us3_e/000519.html

[40] http://www.eoslifework.co.uk/pdfs/u26leb19oct.pdf

[41] Ibid

[42] http://www.unidir.ch/bdd/fiche-article.php?ref_article=2758

[43] E.g. Bein & Parker op cit

[44] Ibid

[45] http://www.umrc.net/os/downloads/destruction_effects.pdf

[46] http://www.umrc.net/os/downloads/Iraq_report_1.doc

[47] Gsponer, Andre in Independent Scientific  Research Institute report number ISRI‑03‑03  8.5.2003 at  http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0301059

[48]
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0210071
[49] New Scientist 16.8.2003

[50] UN Department for Disarmament Affairs, Occasional Papers No. 8 quoted in Williams at http://www.unidir.ch/bdd/fiche‑article.php?ref_article=2759

[51] LLRC e-mailout 9.9.2008

[52] Busby, Chris and Schnug, Ewald in De Kok and Schnug  (eds) “Loads and Fate of Fertilizer Derived Uranium” Leiden: Backhuys Publishers 2007

[53] LLRC e-mailout 9.9.2008

[54] Bein & Parker op cit

[55] Williams personal communication 7.2.2009

[56] http://www.iacenter.org/du/du-unresolution1107/

[57]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_resolution
[58] Bein, Piotr “Judeocentrics and Mass Crimes” in Scherrer, Christian (ed.) Genocide, Mass Violence and Nuclear Extermination in Eurasia Moers: IFEK‑IRECOR 2009

[59] Eggert, Wolfgang at http://www.apocalypse-no.net/en

[60] ACHRE No. DOE-051094-A-62

[61] http://www.llrc.org/du/subtopic/rosalie.htm#ziehm

[62] http://www.ahram.org.eg/weekly/2001/525/in2.htm

[63] Headquarters, Department of the Army, Field Manual 100-6: Information Operations Washington: USGPO 27.8.1996; Joint Chiefs of Staff JCS Publication 1, Glossary Department of Defense Military and Associated Terms DOD 1987

[64] Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Joint Publication 3-53 Washington: USGPO 10.7.1996

[65] Ibid

[66] Neue Zürcher Zeitung 30.3.2000

[67] E.g. Mearsheimer, John and Walt, Stephen “The Israel Lobby” in London Review of Books  21.3.2006

[68] http://www.umrc.net/os/downloads/Iraq_report_1.doc

[69] Bein and Zorić op cit

[70] http://www.stopnato.org.uk/du‑watch/bein/othereurope.htm

[71] http://www.stopnato.org.uk/du‑watch/bein/apologists.htm; DU‑Watch posting July 21, 2003

[72] http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/du‑watch/us_gov_about_du.htm

[73] http://www.armymedicine.army.mil/default2.htm

[74] http://www.voice4change.org/stories/showstory.asp?file=030908~bthn.asp

[75] http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2003/08/08082003162230.asp

[76] http://www.journaltimes.com/articles/2003/09/19/opinion/iq_2452057.txt

[77] http://www.eco.pl/zb/147/

[78]
http://leb.net/pipermail/counterpunch‑list/2003‑May/026447.html
[79]
http://mailman.greenpeace.org/mailman/listinfo/press‑releases
[80] Bein et al op cit

[81] “Judeocentrics and Mass Crimes” op cit

[82] E.g. Bein & Parker op cit

[83] http://www.labor-spiez.ch/

[84] E.g. http://www.nato.int/du/docu/d000500e.htm

[85] Busby personal communication 28.2.2009

[86] Weyman op cit

[87] http://www.umrc.net/pdf/iraqi_freedom_bioassay_program.pdf

[88] European Committee on Radiation Risk op cit

[89] http://www.monde‑diplomatique.fr/en/2001/02/03uranium

[90] http://www.stopnato.org.uk/du‑watch/bein/neo‑nato.htm

[91] http://www.nato.int/kosovo/010110du.htm

[92] DU-Watch 15.7.2003

[93] Presentation to Royal Society at the International Conference 27.11.2007

[94] Anonymous Amarie to DU-Watch 20.9.2003

[95] Bertholet, Louis to DU-Watch 10.7.2002 and 17.7.2002

[96] Andrews, William et al in Journal of Battlefield Technology (5)3 November 2002

[97] Durakovic, Asaf et al in Military Medicine 168, August 2003 p 600‑605

[98] Whisson, Max to DU-Watch 30.7.2003

[99] http://www.rimbaud.freeserve.co.uk/iraq.htm

[100] Canadian Press 13.4.2003

[101] Health Physics (82)4 April 2002

[102] Durakovic 2003 op cit

[103] http://www.du.publica.cz/papers/Fahey.htm

[104] Fahey, Dan “Don’t Look Don’t Find”

[105] MacDonald, Avril et al (eds) Depleted Uranium Weapons and International Law 2008

[106] http://www.llrc.org/du/subtopic/breakingwinds4.htm

[107] http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/pdf/dumyths.pdf; critiqued by Bein at DU‑Watch 30.5.2003, 2.6.2003

[108] http://www.rimbaud.freeserve.co.uk/iraq.htm

[109] http://www.du‑watch.org/sharma/du‑report.doc

[110] http://www.cpeo.org/lists/military/1998/msg00322

[111] Weyman op cit

[112] DUOB Minority Report p 52 at http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/docs/27.pdf

[113] http://www.umrc.net/os/downloads/Iraq_report_1.doc

[114]
http://de‑construct.net/e‑zine/?p=4855
[115] Williams, Dai personal communication 7.2.2009

[116] E.g. Schoenman, Ralph at www.marxists.de/middleast/schoenman/ch04.htm

[117] Nazemroaya, Mahdi at www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7837

[118] “Judeocentrics and Mass Crimes” op cit

[119] Eggert op cit

[120]
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steveseymour/nuke/bali_micro_nuke.htm; www.rense.com/general28/ioff.htm

Uranium Weapons, Low-Level Radiation and Deformed Babies

An article by Paul Zimmermann, preceeded by a new film from Russia Today.
The RT film gives too much credence to Pentagon agent provocateurs, the biased researchers on the nuclear lobby’s payroll, and the power circle persons responsible before humanity for crimes on millions of people world-wide. The film quotes WHO as stating a “relatively low” risk of exposure to DU weapon residue. This is the same WHO who since its inception, by design of the nuclear lobby, has been restricted from investigating the effects of radiation on human health, and who have whipped up the “swine flu pandemic” hysteria in unison with Big Pharma.
RT under-represents the findings of the independents, even of Dr. Asaf Durakovic of Uranium Medical Research Center introduced in the film. Beside the US and UK veterans, a few professors and a congressman oppose a seemingly legitimate (if one listens to Pentagon mantra) weapon whose after-effects allegedly can’t be proven due to multiplicity of possible causes of Gulf War syndrome. What about Yom Kippur war, and the wars in the Balkans and Afghanistan where the other factors were absent? The Low Level Radiation Campaign group of Dr. Busby and other Western European and Japanese independents are missing in the program. Together, this makes an impression desired by the pro-DU propaganda: scientific controversy. See my counter-propaganda on:

http://piotrbein.wordpress.com/2010/01/05/dirty-uranium-weapons-cover-ups/

++++++++++++++++++++++
“Many American and British soldiers who have returned from Iraq are complaining about Depleted Uranium-related illnesses. They accuse both the Pentagon and the UK Ministry of Defense of covering up the problem.
Poison Bullets follows doctors and experts as they voice their opposing views in the DU controversy and travels to the US, Great Britain, Jordan, Iraq and Spain, where we meet many of those who are victims of both DU-related diseases and the indifference of government officials.”

++++++++++++++++++++++
Uranium Weapons, Low-Level Radiation and Deformed Babies

by Paul Zimmerman

A dramatic increase in the number of babies born with birth defects was recently reported by doctors working in Falluja, Iraq [1]. One of the proposed causes for this alarming situation is radiation exposure to the population produced by uranium weapons. The international radiation protection community dismisses this explanation as completely unreasonable because (1) the radiation dose to the population of Iraq was too low, and (2) no evidence of birth defects was reported among offspring born to survivors of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This so-called scientific explanation is deeply disturbing, for it is out of touch with the current knowledge base. Abundant evidence exists which clearly demonstrates that birth defects are being induced by levels of radiation in the environment deemed safe by the radiation protection community. In light of this knowledge, uranium contamination cannot be summarily dismissed as a hazard to the unborn.

The destruction of the nuclear reactor at Chernobyl produced a different type of radiation exposure from that portrayed for the atomic bomb. In Japan, victims were exposed to an instantaneous flash of gamma radiation and neutrons delivered from outside their bodies. In contrast, the Chernobyl accident scattered microscopic radioactive particles from the reactor’s core throughout Europe which was then inhaled and ingested by the populace. In this situation, those contaminated began receiving ongoing, low-dose exposure internally. According to the current theory of radiation effects embraced by the radiation protection community, there is no qualitative difference in the two types of exposure. What matters is the total amount of energy delivered to the body. Thus, the health effects experienced by the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki can be considered to be representative of the health effects produced from any type of radiation exposure. In the case of birth defects, this assumption has been proven wrong. As a result of the external exposure in Japan, there was no increase in the incidence of birth defects among children whose parents were exposed to the bombings [2]. In contrast, radiation-induced birth defects have been documented in populations receiving low doses of internal contamination. In light of this contradiction, it’s obvious that the accepted theory of radiation effects is in error and needs to be corrected. The information which follows will demonstrate the hazard to the unborn produced by radioactive material vented into the environment.

1. In the book Chernobyl: 20 Years On, a chapter is devoted to discussing the birth defects in children who, while gestating in the wombs of their mothers, were exposed to radioactivity released by the Chernobyl reactor [3]. The author provides an overview of dozens of studies which confirm that low levels of radiation present in many areas of Europe after Chernobyl were responsible for a wide variety of birth defects. These birth defects occurred where radiation exposure was judged by the radiation protection agencies to be too low to warrant concern. Fifteen studies were cited which demonstrated an increase in the incidence of a wide variety of congenital malformations. Other studies cited confirmed increases in the rate of stillbirths, infant deaths, spontaneous abortions, and low birthweight babies. An elevated incidence of Down’s syndrome was also documented. In addition, an excess of a variety of other health defects were detected which included mental retardation and other mental disorders, diseases of the respiratory and circulatory systems, and asthma.

In a separate chapter of the same book, Alexey Yablokov of the Russian Academy of Sciences provided a review of the extensive body of research conducted after Chernobyl. Regarding studies on birth defects, he cited an increased frequency of a number of congenital malformations which included cleft lip and/or palate (“hare lip”), doubling of the kidneys, polydactyly (extra fingers or toes), anomalies in the development of nervous and blood systems, amelia (limb reduction defects), anencephaly (defective development of the brain), spina bifida (incomplete closure of the spinal column), Down’s syndrome, abnormal openings in the esophagus and anus, and multiple malformations occurring simultaneously [4].

2. The wide range of birth defects produced by the Chernobyl accident cannot be accounted for by the data collected from the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This is one compelling thread of evidence that something is amiss in the current field of radiation protection. But there is a further problem. The proposed threshold dose of radiation capable of interfering with the development of a fetus, again based on the research from Japan, is between fifty and one hundred times greater than what the radiation protection community insists was the typical exposure in the areas of Europe where the elevated frequency of birth defects was documented. How are we to make sense of these contradictions? Chromosome studies conducted in the contaminated regions provide the answer.

In individuals exposed to ionizing radiation, peripheral lymphocytes, those lymphocytes which circulate in the blood, have an elevated occurrence of certain types of misshapen chromosomes [3,5]. Of particular interest are dicentric chromosomes which are produced when radiation breaks both strands of the DNA double helix in two neighboring chromosomes and the genetic material is then misrepaired. An increase in the relative frequency of these aberrantly shaped structures serve as a biological indicator of radiation exposure which is immune to lies and political propaganda. More specifically, the increased rate of these aberrations is proportional to the dose of radiation received. Thus, their frequency can be used to determine the true level of exposure in contaminated individuals. Studies of this type were conducted in Europe subsequent to the Chernobyl accident [3]. These studies demonstrated that the official dose estimates published by the radiation protection agencies were woefully in error, greatly underestimating the true level of exposure of people throughout Europe. This discrepancy casts further doubt on the scientific integrity of those organizations who are supposedly protecting the world from radioactive pollution. When combining the studies of chromosome aberrations with the studies of birth defects, the science speaks for itself: the population in many areas of Europe received much higher doses from Chernobyl than claimed and birth defects were induced by much smaller doses than suggested by current radiation protection science.

3. As the clouds of fallout from Chernobyl wafted around the planet, governments broadcast reassurances to their anxious citizens that there was no cause for concern, that doses to the public would be too low to produce detrimental health effects. Politically motivated, this advice was medically ill-conceived. What became evident after the accident was that children who received exposure to Chernobyl fallout, while still in the wombs of their mothers, experienced an elevated risk of developing leukemia by the time of their first birthday [6,7]. Relevant to this discussion is the fact that a gene mutation occurring in utero is one cause of infant leukemia [8,9].) In countries where unimpeachable data was collected for levels of fallout deposited in the environment, doses to the population, and the incidence of childhood leukemia, an unmistakable, uniform trend emerged: the studied population of children born during the 18-month period following the accident suffered increased rates of leukemia in their first year of life compared to children born prior to the accident or to those born subsequent to the accident after the level of possible maternal contamination had sufficiently diminished. This was confirmed in five separate studies conducted independently of one another: in Greece [9], Germany [10], Scotland [11], the United States [12], and Wales [13]. Again here is evidence that defects are being induced in fetuses that we are told by the radiation protection community are not possible. According to the European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR), these results provide unequivocal evidence that the risk model of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) for infant leukemia is in error by a factor of between 100-fold and 2000-fold, the latter figure allowing for a continued excess incidence of leukemia as the population of children studied continues to age [6].

4. Other types of chromosome studies have been performed which demonstrate that radiation in the environment is producing damage to DNA that is being passed on to offspring. Minisatellites are identical short segments of DNA that repeat over and over again in a long array along a chromosome. These stretches of DNA do not code for the formation of any protein. What distinguishes these minisatellites is that they acquire spontaneous repeats through mutation at a known rate, which is 1,000 times higher than normal protein-coding genes. Dr. Yuri Dubrova, currently at the University of Leicester, first realized that these stretches of DNA could be used to detect radiation-induced genetic mutations by showing that their known rate of mutation had increased subsequent to exposure. Dubrova and his colleagues studied the rate of minisatellite mutations in families that had lived in the heavily polluted rural areas of the Mogilev district of Belarus after the Chernobyl meltdown [14]. They found the frequency of mutations being passed on by males to their descendants was nearly twice as high in the exposed families compared to the control group families. Among those exposed, the mutation rate was significantly greater in families with a higher parental dose. This finding was consistent with the hypothesis that radiation had induced mutations in the the reproductive germ cells of parents and then transmitted to their offspring. This was the first conclusive proof that radiation produced inheritable mutations in humans.

Minisatellite DNA testing has also been performed on the children of Chernobyl “liquidators” i.e., those people who participated in post-accident cleanup operations. When the offspring of liquidators born after the accident were compared to their siblings born prior to the accident, a sevenfold increase in genetic damage was observed [15,16]. As reported by the ECRR, “for the loci measured, this finding defined an error of between 700-fold and 2,000-fold in the ICRP model for heritable genetic damage” [6]. The ECRR made this further observation: “It is remarkable that studies of the children of those exposed to external radiation at Hiroshima show little or no such effect, suggesting a fundamental difference in mechanism between the exposures [17]. The most likely difference is that it was the internal exposure to the Chernobyl liquidators that caused the effects”.

5. In November 2009, Joseph Mangano of the Radiation and Public Health Project published a study of newborn hypothyroidism near the Indian Point nuclear reactors in Buchanan, New York [13]. Hypothyroidism is a disease characterized by an insufficient production of the hormone thyroxine. One cause of the disease is exposure to radioactive iodine which selectively destroys cells in the thyroid gland. Currently, the only environmental source of radioactive iodine is emissions from nuclear power plants. According to Mangano, four counties in New York state flank Indian Point and nearly all the residents of these counties live within 20 miles of the reactor complex. During the period 1997 to 2007, the rate of newborn hypothyroidism in the combined four-county population was 92.4% greater, or nearly double, the U.S. rate. The rate in each of the four counties separately was above the U.S. rate, and in two of the counties, the rate was more than double the national rate. In the period 2005-2007, the four county rate was 151.4% above the national rate. These finding were consistent with the fact that the local rate of thyroid cancer is 66% greater than the U.S. rate [14].

Mangano’s study raises important questions regarding our common welfare. We live with assurances by government and industry that nuclear reactors are operating within guidelines sponsored by the radiation protection agencies. What radiation they emit are dismissed as too low to warrant concern. An yet, babies born to mothers living in proximity to Indian Point are suffering an increased rate of hypothyroidism. Either the reactor complex is emitting more radiation than publicly known, or once again, there is an error in the safety standards published by the radiation protection community.

6. Are weapons containing depleted uranium a cause for concern for producing birth defects? Given that uranium inside the human body targets the reproductive system, the elevated rate of birth defects in Iraq strongly suggests that DU exposure is involved. In experimental animals exposed to uranium compounds, uranium has been found to accumulate in the testes [20]. Among Gulf War veterans wounded by DU shrapnel, elevated levels of uranium have been found in their semen [21]. In light of this discovery, the Royal Society cautions that this raises “the possibility of adverse effects on the sperm from either the alpha-particles emanating from DU, chemical effects of uranium on the genetic material or the chemical toxicity of uranium [21].” In experiments on female rats, uranium was found to cross the placenta and become concentrated in the tissues of the fetus [20,21,22]. When DU pellets were implanted into pregnant female rats, a direct relation was observed between the amount of contamination in the mother and the amount of contamination in the placenta and the fetus [23,24]. Most importantly, once dissolved within the body, uranium’s primary chemical form is the uranyl ion UO2++. This form of uranium has an affinity for DNA and binds strongly to it [25]. This fact alone is should be sufficient to halt the scattering of DU aerosols amidst populations. Internalized uranium targets human genetic material! Needless to say, this fact is totally ignored by the International Commission on Radiological Protection and related organizations when determining safe levels of exposure to uranium and assessing the risk posed by uranium for inducing birth defects.

7. In infants, hydrocephalus is a condition characterized by increased head size and atrophy of the brain. The frequency of this birth defect has increased dramatically in Iraq since the first Gulf War [26]. A small and admittedly incomplete study conducted in the United States lends credence to the hypothesis that DU exposure is the causative agent [26]. Rural and sparsely populated Socorro County is located downwind of a DU-weapons testing site, the Terminal Effects Research and Analysis division of the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology. On average, 250 births occur yearly in the county. An investigation by a community activist revealed that between 1984 and 1986, five infants were born with hydrocephalus. (The normal rate of hydrocephalus is one case in every 500 live births). According to the demonstrably incomplete State of New Mexico’s passive birth defects registry, between 1984 and 1988, 19 infants were born statewide with the condition, three of these within Socorro county. Regardless of which accounting is correct, the results are disturbing given that Socorro contains less than 1% of the state’s population.

8. To conclude, the current dogma regarding radiation effects cannot account for the increase in genetic malformations in populations exposed internally to low levels of radiation. Something is deeply wrong with the current science of radiation safety. Given this, statements by the radiation protection community regarding the impossibility that low levels of uranium can cause birth defects are suspect. Numerous studies demonstrate that uranium produces a wide range of birth defects in experimental animals [20,26]. Further, numerous in vitro and in vivo studies conducted in the last twenty years have proven that uranium is genotoxic (capable of damaging DNA), cytotoxic (poisonous to cells), and mutagenic (capable of inducing mutations) [27]. These effects are produced either by uranium’s radioactivity or its chemistry or a synergistic interaction between the two. These findings lend plausibility to the idea that the observed increased incidence of deformed babies in Iraq is related to depleted uranium munitions [26].

Paul Zimmerman is the author of A Primer in the Art of Deception: The Cult of Nuclearists, Uranium Weapons and Fraudulent Science. A more technical, fully referenced presentation of the ideas presented in this article can be found within its pages. Excerpts, free to download, are available at http://www.du-deceptions.com.

Bibliography

[1] Chulov M. Huge Rise in Birth Defects in Falluja. guardian.co.uk. November 13, 2009. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/13/falluja-cancer-children-birth-defects#history-byline
[2] Nakamura N. Genetic Effects of Radiation in Atomic-bomb Survivors and Their Children: Past, Present and Future. Journal of Radiation Research. 2006; 47(Supplement):B67-B73.
[3] Schmitz-Feurerhake I. Radiation-Induced Effects in Humans After in utero Exposure: Conclusions from Findings After the Chernobyl Accident. In C.C. Busby, A.V.Yablokov (eds.): Chernobyl: 20 Years On. European Committee on Radiation Risk. Aberystwyth, United Kingdom: Green Audit Press; 2006.
[4] Yablokov A.V. The Chernobyl Catastrophe — 20 Years After (a meta-review). In C.C. Busby, A.V. Yablokov (eds.): Chernobyl: 20 Years On. European Committee on Radiation Risk. Aberystwyth, United Kingdom: Green Audit Press; 2006.
[5] Hoffmann W., Schmitz-Feuerhake I. How Radiation-specific is the Dicentric Assay? Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology. 1999; 2:113-133.
[6] European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR). Recommendations of the European Committee on Radiation Risk: the Health Effects of Ionising Radiation Exposure at Low Doses for Radiation Protection Purposes. Regulators’ Edition. Brussels; 2003. http://www.euradcom.org.
[7] Low Level Radiation Campaign (LLRC). Infant Leukemia After Chernobyl. Radioactive Times: The Journal of the Low Level Radiation Campaign. 2005; 6(1):13.
[8] Busby C.C. Very Low Dose Fetal Exposure to Chernobyl Contamination Resulted in Increases in Infant Leukemia in Europe and Raises Questions about Current Radiation Risk Models. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2009; 6:3105-3114.
[9] Petridou E., Trichopoulos D., Dessypris N., Flytzani V., Haidas S., Kalmanti M.K., Koliouskas D., Kosmidis H., Piperolou F., Tzortzatou F. Infant Leukemia After In Utero Exposure to Radiation From Chernobyl. Nature. 1996; 382:352-353.
[10] Michaelis J., Kaletsch U., Burkart W., Grosche B. Infant Leukemia After the Chernobyl Accident. Nature. 1997; 387:246.
[11] Gibson B.E.S., Eden O.B., Barrett A., Stiller C.A., Draper G.J. Leukemia in Young Children in Scotland. Lancet. 1988; 2(8611):630.
[12] Mangano J.J. Childhood Leukemia in the US May Have Risen Due to Fallout From Chernobyl. British Medical Journal. 1997; 314:1200.
[13] Busby C, Scott Cato M. Increases in Leukemia in Infants in Wales and Scotland Following Chernobyl: Evidence for Errors in Statutory Risk Estimates. Energy and Environment. 2000; 11(2):127-139.
[14] Dubrova Y.E., Nesterov V.N., Jeffreys A.J., et al. Further Evidence for Elevated Human Minisatellite Mutation Rate in Belarus Eight Years After the Chernobyl Accident. Mutation Research. 1997; 381:267-278.
[15] Weinberg H.S., Korol A.B., Kiezhner V.M., Avavivi A., Fahima T., Nevo E., Shapiro S., Rennert G., Piatak O., Stepanova E.I., Skarskaja E. Very High Mutation Rate in Offspring of Chernobyl Accident Liquidators. Proceedings of the Royal Society. London. 2001; D, 266:1001-1005.
[16] Dubrova Y.E., et al. Human Minisatellite Mutation Rate after the Chernobyl Accident. Nature. 1996; 380:683-686.
[17] Satoh C., Kodaira M. Effects of Radiation on Children. Nature. 1996; 383:226.
[18] Mangano J. Newborn Hypothyroidism Near the Indian Point Nuclear Plant. Radiation and Public Health Project. November 25, 2009. http://www.radiation.org
[19] Mangano J. Geographic Variation in U.S. Thyroid Cancer Incidence and a Cluster Near Nuclear Reactors in New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania. International Journal of Health Services. 2009; 39(4):643-661.
[20] Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). Toxicological Profile for Uranium. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 1999.

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp150.html

[21] Royal Society. Health Hazards of Depleted Uranium Munitions: Part II. London: Royal Society, March 2002.
[22] Albina L., Belles M., Gomez M., Sanchez D.J., Domingo J.L. Influence of Maternal Stress on Uranium-Induced Developmental Toxicity in Rats. Experimental Biology and Medicine. 2003; 228( 9):1072-1077.
[23] Arfsten D.P., Still K.R., Ritchie G.D. A Review of the Effects of Uranium and Depleted Uranium Exposure on Reproduction and Fetal Development. Toxicology and Industrial Health. 2001; 17:180-191.
[24] Domingo J. Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity of Natural and Depleted Uranium: A Review. Reproductive Toxicology. 2001; 15:603-609.
[25] Wu O., Cheng X., et al. Specific Metal Oligonucleotide Binding Studied By High Resolution Tandem Mass Spectrometry. Journal of Mass Spectrometry. 1996; 321(6) 669-675.
[26] Hindin R., Brugge D., Panikkar B. Teratogenicity of Depleted Uranium Aerosols: A Review from an Epidemiological Perspective. Environmental Health. 2005; 26(4):17.
[27] Zimmerman P. A Primer in the Art of Deception: The Cult of Nuclearists, Uranium Weapons and Fraudulent Science. 2009. http://www.du-deceptions.com

Przyszedł Kupiec do Szewczyka

Mój artykuł, podpisany Mecenas. Ukazał się w „Wir” nr 3 z 2004 roku (były „Info nurt”). Proszę o rozpowszechnianie, bo wciąż są wśród Polonii nieświadomi zmyłek, szkodzących sprawie polskiej.

Kilka lat później (!) musiałem znów uczulić wiodące środowisko polonijne, gdyż pieściło wśród siebie Szewczyka jako wartościowego patriotę! Patrz drugi tekst poniżej pod ++++

Jeśli tak łatwo wpuszczacie prostackiego, prymitywnego agenciurę śmierdzącego ubecją na odległość, jak chcecie kierować polską sprawą? Jak zrozumiecie o wiele przewrotniejsze i chytrzejsze zagrania?

Przyszedł Kupiec do Szewczyka

„Wir” przedstawia ogromne zbrodnie i zbrodniarzy. Dla urozmaicenia jednak, popatrzmy na małą szprotkę wśród kanadyjskiej (nie tylko!) Polonii.

Z opisu własnych osiągnięć zawodowych (były „Info nurt”, nr 16) wynikałoby, że Bohdan Szewczyk był inżynierem nieprzeciętnym. Dlatego jest niejasne, że wybrał w Kanadzie zawód maklera nieruchomości. Jak inne wolne zawody, ma ona normy etyki. Komisje rozpatrują skargi, wymierzają kary, a jeśli trzeba, wyrzucają z zawodu – odbierają licencję.

Do komisji dyscyplinarnej w Real Estate Commission of Ontario (RECO, Rada Handlu Nieruchomości Ontario), wpłynęła skarga klienta (Kupca) na Szewczyka. RECO stawia sobie za zadanie zdobywać zaufanie publiczne do rynku handlu nieruchomościami (www.reco.on.ca). Kupiec zwrócił się do Bohdana Szewczyka, o pomoc w nabyciu nieruchomości. Szewczyk znalazł dla Kupca posiadłość, ale o 5 tys. CAD droższą, niż Kupiec mógł zapłacić. Aby zachęcić do transakcji, Szewczyk zaoferował rabat ze swej prowizji. Panowie podpisali umowę o pośrednictwie, wpisując klauzulę o rabacie.

Kupiec rabatu nie otrzymał. Szewczyk podobno miał trudności finansowe. Kupiec znalazł natomiast pakiet od Szewczyka w swej skrzynce pocztowej. Makler informował, że dał w imieniu rodziny Kupca, 500 CAD miejscowemu kościołowi. Inny dokument był wypełnionym formularzem umowy o pośrednictwo Szewczyka w sprzedaży istniejącej posiadłości Kupca. Formularz obiecywał, że Kupiec dostanie rabat z prowizji Szewczyka również za tę usługę. Nazwisko i adres Kupca były napisane na maszynie w miejscu na podpis Kupca. Nie było oczywiście podpisu Kupca. Mimo to, Szewczyk „poświadczył podpis”.

Winny

Komisja dochodzeniowa RECO stwierdziła winę Szewczyka. Makler znacznie zwlekał z podpisaniem umowy o pośrednictwo. Mimo że miał z Kupcem częste kontakty handlowe odnośnie zakupu, Szewczyk nie wyjaśnił Kupcowi warunków pośrednictwa, a umowę podpisał dopiero w dniu aprobaty ceny zakupu przez Kupca. W Kanadzie jest to nieomylny znak, że mamy do czynienia z oszustem. Poważni maklerzy unikają podobnych pomyłek, jak ognia, chyba że chcą skazać rodzinę na makaron bez sosu, zamiast ulubionych hamburgerów.

RECO orzekł też, iż Szewczyk nie zapłacił rabatu, do którego zobowiązał się w kontrakcie z Kupcem. Ponieważ Szewczyk dostał swoją część prowizji od maklera sprzedającego posiadłość zakupioną przez Kupca, Szewczyk powinien był otrzymać pełną należność prowizji, był więc w stanie zapłacić rabat należny Kupcowi. Szewczyk tłumaczył niewypłacalność rzekomym faktem, że brat zdefraudował go na 15 tys. CAD, więc nie jest w stanie zapłacić. RECO: wydaje się, że Szewczyk nigdy nie wyjaśnił Kupcowi, dlaczego ten miałby ponieść konsekwencje defraudacji Szewczyka przez inną osobę.

Trzecia wina maklera przypomina zachowanie się Szewczyka w stosunku do Redakcji byłego magazynu „Info nurt”.  Zawiadomiwszy Kupca, że nie jest w stanie zapłacić rabatu, Szewczyk próbował zmienić fakty, przygotowując fałszywy dowód (cytat z RECO) swych transakcji z Kupcem, w postaci datku dla kościoła i bezsensownej sugestii, że wypłata rabatu zależy od najęcia Szewczyka również do sprzedaży istniejącej nieruchomości Kupca.

Nawet jeśli Szewczyk dałby 500 CAD na kościół w imieniu Kupca, miał obowiązek zapytać o pozwolenie, tym bardziej, że nazwisko Kupca miało figurować na tabliczce dziękczynnej. Kupiec stanowczo zaprotestował mieszaniu religii z biznesem. RECO: Szewczyk postąpił w tym wypadku nie tylko nieprofesjonalnie, ale i natrętnie.

Zawód

To jest ten sam Szewczyk, który w swoim magazynie „Info nurt 2” (nr 3), we wstępniaku umizguje się do uczuć religijnych Czytelników.

Ten sam Szewczyk pisał w fachowym artykule: Korzystając z usług doświadczonego agenta handlu nieruchomościami powinniśmy zawrzeć z nim umowę na jego usługi, tzw. Porozumienie Kupiec – Broker. Wasz agent jest opłacany przez właściciela domu i powinien być całkowicie lojalny wobec osoby kupującej. W przypadku braku takiej umowy, obaj agenci, sprzedający i kupujący, pracują dla właściciela sprzedawanej posesji [...] KATEGORYCZNIE ZALECAM ZATRUDNIENIE AGENTA NA WŁASNY KOSZT. Taki agent powinien posiadać doświadczenie budowlane. Będzie to dla kupującego dodatkową gwarancją (były„Info nurt”, nr 13, s. 41 i 42; kapitaliki Szewczyka, wytłuszczenia Mecenasa).

Szewczyk ciągnął „ostrzeżenie”: Pamiętajmy, że odgrywanie przez kupca roli agenta wygląda bardzo korzystnie dla sprzedawców i budowniczych, którzy są specjalistami w wywoływaniu wrażenia na kupującym.

Szewczyk potrafi zrobić dobre wrażenie. Wstępniak „Od Redakcji”, w „Wirze” (nr 3), podaje, jak Szewczyk wykorzystał dobre imię Elżbiety Gawlas, byłej, nieskorumpowanej sekretarki Wałęsy, do osiągnięcia swojego pazernego celu. Także na dystrybutorach, ten szwindlarz wywarł dobre wrażenie, skoro taki EMPIK zganił przedstawicieli „Wiru”, protestujących przeciw ukazaniu się podróbki Szewczyka, „Info nurt2”. Podróbki, która posiada NASZĄ winietę, numer ISSN i kod kreskowy, a pozbawiona jest kompletu informacji w stopce redakcyjnej, wymaganych i wyszczególnianych przez polskie prawo prasowe!

Rekomendować najęcie agenta-budowlańca to takaż bzdura. Większość maklerów nieruchomości w Kanadzie jedyne, co potrafi w tej branży, to odróżnić plac budowy od placu zabaw. Gdyby potrzebna była lepsza znajomość rzeczy, organizacje zawodowe maklerów zadbałyby o to.

Ze stwierdzenia agent jest opłacany przez właściciela domu, zionie brakiem profesjonalizmu, szczególnie w artykule skierowanym do potencjalnych Kupców. Agenta, owszem, opłaca właściciel domu, ale z pieniędzy otrzymanych od Kupca, na pewno nie ze swoich. Właścicielowi pozostaje tyle w ręku, ile otrzymałby sprzedając bez pomocy agenta. Nawet mniej, bo musi zapłacić państwu podatek od usługi maklera.

Przemysł Nieruchomości (a jakże!) wyćwiczył publikę, by dodawała wysokość prowizji do ceny, jaką sobie życzą. Jest to niebagatelna suma. Największe łączne obroty mają ogromne firmy obejmujące działalnością całą Kanadę, a nawet mające zakres międzynarodowy. W milionowym mieście, rocznie obraca się tysiącami mieszkań i domów. Prowizje sumują się do dziesiątków – setek milionów CAD rocznie. Za niezbyt ciężką pracę. Lwią część prowizji zabiera „biuro macierzyste”, które często z Macierzą ma tyle wspólnego, co NATO z Serbią.

Kupiec płaci za nabytą posiadłość, czyli opłaca dyrektorów w centralach obu agentów. Gdyby nie prowizje, cena kupna mogłaby być niższa, co najmniej o połowę wartości prowizji, a w najlepszym wypadku – o całą prowizję. Sprzedający, szczególnie przy konkurencji ze strony innych posiadłości na rynku w tym samym czasie, sprzedają sami, ogłaszając cenę obniżoną o wartość prowizji. Sprzedają najszybciej, a w ręku zostaje im tyle, co klientowi Maklera. Sprytniejsi kasują połowę prowizji, a spece – całość.

Hipokryta i krętacz

Szewczyk manipuluje w swej samoreklamie pozbawioną podejrzeń publiką i… Redakcją, która nie sprawdziła tej dobrej monety, za jaką się podawał. Były głosy za zachowaniem ostrożności, a nawet nieznacznych podejrzeń, ale nawał roboty usunął je na dalszy plan. W wirze pracy, daliśmy się ponieść łajdackiemu nurtowi. Redakcja cieszyła się, że zamiast oszusta, Zbigniewa Świderskiego, ma kompetentnego dyrektora handlowego, inżyniera i specjalistę od nieruchomości zarazem. Aż pękła szewczykowa bańka.

Na przesłuchanie skargi Kupca przed komisją RECO dnia 3.10.2003 roku, Szewczyk się nie stawił. Co prawda zawiadomił prokuratora RECO, ale usprawiedliwienie przypomina lata, gdy spóźnialiśmy się na lekcje. Komisja dochodzeniowa przystąpiła do ustalenia, czy przesłuchanie powinno odbyć się mimo to.

Na wstępnym przesłuchaniu 14.8.2003 roku, pozwany i RECO uzgodnili datę następnego przesłuchania. Szewczyk zobowiązał się też powiadomić RECO w przypadku, gdyby wziął prawnika do obrony. Niecały tydzień przed wyznaczonym przesłuchaniem, Szewczyk zawiadomił RECO (27.9.2003 roku), że nie będzie mógł się stawić, bo jest w toku rozprawa sądowa dotycząca jego i Kupca, a RECO nie ma jurysdykcji ponad organem sprawiedliwości. Szewczyk nadmienił także postępowanie prawne w sprawie Szewczyka i innego Maklera oraz zażądał od RECO przesunięcia daty przesłuchania, bo on i system sprawiedliwości są nadużywani.

Szewczyk zasugerował również, iż jego oponent (tzn. Kupiec i/lub Makler) specjalnie organizują przesłuchanie w RECO przed rozprawą sądową. Podobno Makler dokonał infiltracji RECO, więc rządzi on komisją, by postanawiała na jego korzyść. Szewczyk nie zaproponował innej daty przesłuchania, ani nie napisał, kiedy mógłby się stawić.

29.9.2003 roku, prokurator RECO poradził Szewczykowi wziąć adwokata do pomocy, bo przesłuchanie zaplanowane na 3.10.2003 roku nie będzie przesunięte. Spodziewana sprawa sądowa nie jest wystarczającym powodem, by odraczać.

Paluszek i główka

Prośby o odroczenie, przedstawione więcej niż 5 dni przed wyznaczoną datą przesłuchania, muszą mieć zgodę drugiej strony. Jeśli jej nie ma, przesłuchanie odbywa się i na jego początku można wtedy przedstawić żądanie odroczenia. Przesłuchania nie można jednak przełożyć li tylko z powodu zagrożenia sprawą sądową, lub z powodu innej sprawy będącej w toku, powstałych z faktów lub kwestii tych samych lub podobnych, co w sprawie przed RECO.

1.10.2003 roku, Szewczyk napisał do RECO, że miał operację i dlatego nie będzie mógł stawić się na przesłuchanie. Po rzekomej operacji, gardło nie pozwalało mu skutecznie się porozumiewać. Rzekomy lekarz zalecił mu unikać ekstensywnego porozumiewania się ustnie, co najmniej przez 2 miesiące. Szewczyk wymienił w tym samym liście nazwiska i numery telefonów jakichś osób (chyba lekarzy – orzekł RECO).

Następnego dnia, RECO zażądało pisemka od chirurga, który teoretycznie operował Szewczyka. Pisemko nie wpłynęło do czasu przesłuchania, Szewczyk nie stawił się osobiście, aby prosić o odroczenie, ani nie przysłał reprezentanta. Więc przesłuchanie odbyło się bez niego.

RECO nie ma żadnego obowiązku badać okoliczności żądań odroczenia. Ciężar uzasadnienia prośby o odroczenie spoczywa na stronie wnoszącej. W przypadku braku zgody strony przeciwnej, wnoszący ma obowiązek należytego uzasadnienia swej prośby.

Orzeczenie

W liście Szewczyka z 27.9.2003 roku, nie było wzmianki o operacji. Szewczyk skupił się wtedy na sprawie sądowej będącej w toku i na podejrzeniu, że proces w RECO manipuluje nieprzyjazny Makler. Po dosadnej odpowiedzi prokuratora RECO, że sprawa sądowa nie jest uzasadnieniem odroczenia, Szewczyk wyciągnął z rękawa wymówkę o operacji. W żadnej korespondencji do RECO Szewczyk nie zaproponował nowej daty przesłuchania, ani nie przedłożył pisemnego dowodu problemu z gardłem.

Orzeczenie RECO: Z tych powodów, Komisja zdecydowała przeprowadzić przesłuchanie (pod nieobecność Szewczyka), ponieważ ciężar uzasadnienia odroczenia spoczywa na nim.  Szewczyk przyniósł sobie uszczerbek, nie stawiając się przed Komisją lub nie przysyłając reprezentanta. Po wysłuchaniu zeznań Kupca, komisja wywnioskowała, że zarzuty przeciw Szewczykowi są poparte bezspornymi, przekonywującymi dowodami.

RECO ukarało Szewczyka karą w wysokości 12 tys. CAD, płatną w terminie 60 dni od daty wymierzenia, oraz zażądało zwrotu kosztów w wysokości 1750 CAD, płatnych w terminie 30 dni. Szewczyk nie zapłacił kar na czas. RECO zarządziło natychmiastowe wypowiedzenie jego członkowstwa i wygaśnięcie jego rejestracji, zgodnie z kanadyjską Ustawą o Maklerach Nieruchomości i Handlowych (Real Estate and Business Brokers Act). Pan Bohdan Szewczyk i jego firma jednoosobowa, Bohdan Szewczyk Real Estate Services, nie mają odtąd licencji.

No to co?

Szewczyk ma gdzieś „wyrok” RECO. Na stronach internetowych http://www.globalserve.net/~bszewczyk, ogłaszanych od karty wizytowej maklera po anonse, podaje numer swej licencji: 2500645 (www.globalserve.net/~bszewczyk/agreement.html). Miejmy nadzieję, że nie jest to numer licencji RECO, bo za takie oszustwo grozi jeszcze surowsza kara. W swojej podróbce „Info nurt 2”, jak kiedyś u nas (za darmo), zamieszcza w każdym wydaniu ogłoszenie na pół strony, w nadziei zwabienia ofiar.

Ogłoszenie do potencjalnych klientów (nieznanych mu, dopóki nie skontaktują się), obiecuje: Drogi Właścicielu: mam dla Ciebie kupca Twojego domu za gotówkę!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (www.globalserve.net/~bszewczyk/agreement.html). Tymi słowy agenci łapią frajera na maklerski haczyk. W jaki sposób ktoś, kto na oczy nie widział mojej posesji, już zdecydował ją kupić? Za gotówkę!? Przyniesie mi worek banknotów (podrobionych?), a ja będę się trząsł ze strachu w drodze do banku! Nie ma sprzedaży takich rzeczy za gotówkę. Kupiec płaci przelewem bankowym, nadzorowanym przez prawnika po każdej stronie.

Colombo

Na http://www.globalserve.net/~bszewczyk/reklama.html, jest kolejny przykład szewczykowego „biznesu” z głupia frant, Colombo System, znanego z reklam w byłym „Info nurcie”. Znów coś dla frajera – dla maklerów tym razem. Trzeba nie lada wiary w naiwność ludzką, by liczyć na idiotę wśród maklerskiej braci. „Biznes” ten należy do najbardziej cwanych, acz legalnych, grup zawodowych.

Colombo System Szewczyka: przyślij mi 100 dolców na rok, a będziesz mógł używać tablicę o ustalonych przeze mnie wymiarach i kolorach. Tablice zamawiasz i opłacasz sam, ale za to możesz namalować na nich swoje nazwisko. Nie znalazłszy oddziału wskazanej firmy w Vancouverze, sam namalowałem tablice i przyczepiłem do płotu.

Przepraszam, że zmieniłem kolory i rozmiary. Jednym pociągnięciem (piły, pędzla i śrubokręta) zaoszczędziłem 220 CAD, plus 100 CAD na opłacie za Colombo. Gdybym zamówił tablice z zakładu, z pominięciem Szewczyka, też by mi się opłacało – 40 CAD taniej! Szewczyk widocznie opatentował kolory i zażądał za to od producenta 20 CAD prowizji od tablicy.

Dostawałem parę telefonów dziennie, aż znalazł się Kupiec. Podzieliliśmy „maklerską prowizję” na pół. Chciałoby się zanucić „Oj, Szewczyku, nie bądź głupi…” ale na emigracji zapomniałem słów.

…czy o drogę pyta?

Komisja RECO zwróciła uwagę na dziwne zachowanie Szewczyka. Okazało się, że w sprawie sądowej będącej w toku, którą bezskutecznie próbował się wykręcić, nie przychodząc na przesłuchanie w RECO, Szewczyk pozwał Kupca o 10 tys. CAD, jako bonus za perfekcyjną usługę i rekompensatę za rzekome oczernienie. RECO: nie ma absolutnie żadnego dowodu, że należał się bonus: Próba Szewczyka odwrócenia obowiązku zapłaty Kupcowi, 4290 CAD po kupnie posesji, w bonus należny Szewczykowi nie ma żadnej podstawy. W opinii Komisji, jest to próba Szewczyka zrobienia złota ze śmieci.

Komisja wstrzymała się od komentarzy na inne kwestie w pozwie Szewczyka w sprawie sądowej: wystarczy powiedzieć, że dokument ten jest pełen nieistotnej, bezładnej informacji, która nie ustosunkowuje się do jasno przedstawionego, skupionego Stwierdzenia Roszczeń.

RECO, podsumowując: Potraktowanie Kupca przez Szewczyka było nieprofesjonalne i nieetyczne. RECO udowodniło swe wszystkie zarzuty. Zamiast wziąć odpowiedzialność za swe postępowanie oraz spełnienie zobowiązań kontraktowych i finansowych wobec Kupca, Szewczyk próbował zmienić historię na swą korzyść, aby (a) oczyścić się od odpowiedzialności, (b) zyskać samemu w przyszłości, przez próbę uzyskania od Kupca wyłącznego pośrednictwa, na które jego klient nigdy się nie zgodził.

Taktyka patologiczna

Przypadki defraudacji przez Szewczyka wykazują wspólne cechy:

$  Na początku, zrobić dobre wrażenie (często czyimś kosztem), by zyskać zaufanie ofiary, knując za jej plecami.

$ Nakraść, dobrze się maskując „profesjonalizmem”, „grzecznością”, „ciężką pracą”, „osiągnięciami”, na które brak podkładki.

$  Krzyczeć złodziej! na ofiarę, kiedy go przyłapie. Grozić sprawą sądową.

$ Kiedy Szewczyk rozezna się w sytuacji, odwrócić oskarżenie na poszkodowanego, próbując zrobić złoto ze śmieci.

$ Przygotowawszy grunt pod nowe szwindle jeszcze podczas prowadzenia powyższych, przechodzi „godnie” do nowego „biznesu”.

Szewczyki to fenomen „wolnego” rynku. Pełno ich w Polsce, bo tam rynek bardziej wolny niż w Kanadzie. Kiedy trafi który do nas, jedzie jakiś czas na wozie zaufania, aż go zdzielą po łapach. Do tego czasu pozostaje społeczną patologią.

Mecenas

Materiał źródłowy
In the Matter of a Discipline Hearing Held Pursuant to By-law No. 10 of the Real Estate Council of Ontario – Bohdan Szewczyk, Respondent, Date of Decision: October 3, 2003, http://www.reco.on.ca/ccd_discipline_szewczyk.htm

Osoby zdefraudowane przez Bohdana Szewczyka, prosimy o kontakt z Redakcją, redakcja@wir.ca
Podziękowania dla firmy prawniczej „Wiru” za konsultacje.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

„Emigracja Polska” = Bohdan Szewczyk

Wiele osob jeszcze nie przejrzalo Bohdana Szewczyka (aktualnie bszewczyk@yahoo.com), hochsztaplera wsrod Polonii, ukaranego za oszustwa w biznesie nieruchomosci w Kanadzie. Legitymizacja Szewczyka i jego Infonurt2 na patriotycznych forach szkodzi naszej sprawie. Szewczyk podkopuje skuteczne dzialania, ciagnac przy okazji zyski. Np. kradziez Info nurtu przerwala wydawanie magazynu za polska racja stanu, a Szewczyk „zdobyl” gotowe zrodlo dochodu z ustanowionej marki, sieci dystrybucji i abonamentow. Z Info nurtem wspolpracowali wiodacy miedzynarodowi anty-syjonisci, porzadni Zydzi jak Henry Makow i Mark Rys. W takich przypadkach, nie mogac atakowac za antysemityzm, agentury robia dywersje. Wlascicielowi i zarazem redaktorowi naczelnemu Info nurtu, Krzysztofowi Dzikowskiemu i nieoplaconym dotad autorom po prostu ukradli czasopismo! Wladze kanadyjskie, u ktorych Dzikowski probowal interweniowac, nie mogly uwierzyc…
Zaprasza.net zamiescilo moj artykul pt. “Przyszedl kupiec…” (http://zaprasza.net/a_y.php?mid=5278&category_id=&search=szewczyk&) demaskujac Szewczyka, lecz dwa teksty nt. rabowania Polski przez restytucjonistow z New York, pokazuja nazwisko tego kanciarza pod inicjatywami, z ktorymi nie ma nic wspolnego oprocz podszywania sie pod nie dla zysku (jako samozwanczy „pelnomocnik d/s odszkodowan” w innych podrobkach). “Tylko do uzytku wewnetrznego” i litanie katalogowania na jego „dokumentach” smierdza nie tyle zenujaca naiwnoscia (na ktora jednak wielu daje sie nabrac), co zydokomuna, ktorej tradycje Szewczyk kontynuuje przeciw Polakom.
Korespondowalem nt. Szewczyka ze Stanislawem Sasem, czolowym dzialaczem Polonii nowojorskiej, zaprawionym w podchodach w oku syjonistycznego huraganu i globalnego rabinatu chabad-lubawiczerow z kwatera glowna na Brooklynie. Zalaczam tekscik na ten temat – czyzby wywolal niedawne szczekania Szewczyka, wg instrukcji dla esbecji od CIA-Mosadu? Zrownywanie porzadnych ludzi ze zdemonizowanymi przez merdia Serbami jest chwytem judeocentycznego kompleksu, ktory zgotowal Serbom niedawny los: wyrzucenie miliona Serbow z odwiecznych ziem, oddanie ich kolebki, Kosowa, dzihadzistom. Judeocentrycy organicznie nienawidza chrzescijanskich Rosjan, m.in. dlatego zorganizowali im Rewolucje Pazdziernikowa i Gulag, a w II wojnie swiatowej Rosjanie podobnie jak Polacy i Serbowie poniesli najwieksze wsrod wszystkich narodow straty. Dlatego chazarski general poprowadzil atak Gruzji na Pld. Osetie, a prezydent Kalkstein to poparl. W chazarskiej polityce „USA” Rosjanie = Serbowie, co widac w terminologii pacholka CIA-Mosadu, Bohdana Szewczyka.
Mimo to Pan Sas i inni zaprawieni w walce nie wiedzieli przez pare lat po opublikowaniu mego artykulu w Wirze (nastepca Info nurtu, tez pod batuta Dzikowskiego), ze Szewczyk to szuja, ktora wchodzi w akcje polonijne, zeby je rozwalac i przy tym zarobic! Pan Sas pisal mi 14.5.2007:
„Wspomnial Pan, ze Wasz kanadyjski Infonurt zostal przechwycony przez niejakiego Bohdana Szewczyka. Otrzymuje od niego co jakis czas rozne posty, ktore rozsyla na Internecie z Infonurt 2. Udaje zaangazowanego w sprawy polskie, ale robi to tak nieudolnie, ze praktycznie kompromituje Polonie. Pod wzgledem intelektualnym to jest czesto zenujace. Chyba wiecej szkodzi naszym sprawom niz pomaga.”
Szewczyk nie potrafi nawet podac podstawowych faktow, jego tyczacych. W niedawnych probach smarowania mnie, Marka Glogoczowskiego (zaangazowany polski folozof-publicysta), Alfreda Labudy (redaktor Zaprasza.net) i Dzikowskiego, Szewczyk pisze, ze Info nurt „rowno plul” na niego. Krytyka tej kanalii nastapila dopiero w nastepcy Info nurtu – Wirze. Z prostych przyczyn: ten cyniczny socjopata cieszyl sie zaufaniem Dzikowskiego do ostatniej chwili, tj. oproznienia kasy, kradziezy adresow abonentow i dystrybutorow, kodu kreskowego, numeru rejestracji Info nurtu itd. Do dzis ta gnida (a smie tak nazwac zdefraudowanego przez siebie Dzikowskiego!) nie potrafi przeliterowac mego nazwiska, widocznie z powodu 4-literowej tegoz dlugosci.
Jest i humor w jego tfurczosci. Nazwal Glogoczowskiego „goralskim zydem”. O rany, to i w nasz folklor weszli! „Beim – Serb” wyglada przy tym nudnawo… Esbecja samodowartosciowywuje sie przedszkolna werbalizacja; zaleznie od sytuacji rzuca w polska przestrzen intelektualna – „ruski”, „zydek”. Zwyczaj bierze sie z judaizacji polskiej kultury: judeocentrycy nie moga zyc bez nienawisci i zarazili tym wielu Polakow, oczywiscie na koszerna korzysc, tak jak rozpetali antyslowianizm i antysemityzm wsrod Niemcow, by ich rekami wybic Slowian i Zydow.
Kiedy syjonistyczne hieny osaczyly Polske na 65 mld dolcow, Szewczyk byl przygotowany wziac swa dole. Pod petycja z 2003 r. do ONZ w imienu Polakow przeciw zazydzeniu polskich wladz, sporzadzona przez Komitet Narodowy Polski (KNP) w Bielsku-Bialej, ktory od dawna wystepuje z ekspertyza prawna w obronie naszej racji stanu, Holocaust-biznesmen Szewczyk opatrzyl dokument swa godnoscia z data 24.12.2007 i rozeslal 28.12.2007 do Polakow, zeby zauwazyli „pelnomocnika d/s odszkodowan”. Zareagowal polonijny dzialacz-publicysta z USA:
„Panie Szewczyk. Dotarl do mnie Pana list w ktorym obok bardzo istotnych spraw jest tez jedna na ktora pragne Panu zwrocic uwage i dotyczy Pana osobiscie. Otoz w attachment WEB257 ULTIMATUM DO ON1.doc przyslal Pan cos co ma wyglad dokumentu i napewno zostal przez wielu przyjety jako dokument, jednak nim nie jest. Moze jednak byc dokumentem przeciwko Panu.
Coz to za dokument, ktory jest “uaktualniony”? i to przez Pana. Coz to za dokument w ktorym jest oszustwo, -podpisy Pan wkleil (przypuszczam ze to Pan) skoro Pan “uaktualnil”. Jest to montaz dyskwalifikujacy calosc, mimo zawartych w tekscie bardzo istotnych spraw dla Polski.
Jesli w ten sposob buduje Pan sobie swoja wiarygodnosc to brnie Pan dalej w drodze, ktora pozbawia Pana wiarygodnosci. Jesli pozuje Pan na lidera polskiej organizacji, to takie manipulacje sa zaprzeczeniem polskosci i dyskwalifikujace Pana osobiscie. Chron nas Panie Boze od takich liderow. […]
Poza tym. Propaguje Pan Obame (kandydata na Prezydenta USA). Wynika z tego ze zupelnie nie zdaje Pan sobie sprawy z tego, ze nie ma zadnej istotnej roznicy, poza werbalizmami, pomiedzy nim a Pania Clintonowa, przygotowanymi, wyselekcjonowanymi i wystawionymi do glosowania przez “lud” rownie nieswiadomy realiow jak Pan, przez te same “Media”. Na coz Pan liczy? – Wojciech Wlazlinski”
Szewczyk (gdzie indziej „Emigracja Polska”, „Rzecznik Prasowy”) niby poparl petycje KNP przeciw judaizacji Polski, ale zamknal oczy na judaizacje USA. Dana Alvi z polonijnej organizacji PAPUREC (Polish American Public Relations Committee http://www.papurec.org) zwalczajacej naszego najgorszego wroga, skomentowala: „Pan Szewczyk jest bardzo niebezpieczna osoba dla Polonii. Jego wszystkie kretacwa powinny byc wyliczone i rozpowszechnione.” Amerykanie sporzadajacy listy osob, ktorym „zawdzieczaja” obecna ruine i zniewolenie ich wspanialego kiedys kraju, zainteresuja sie Szewczykiem.
Pani Alvi przypomniala role Szewczyka w pomieszaniu ostatecznego wyroku jednego z sadow apelacyjnych w USA (ktory Szewczyk nazywa „Sad Najwyzszy”!) ws. odszkodowan w Polsce dla grupki zydow w USA – z projektem polskiej ustawy o rekompensatach. Szewczyk wkleil z jakiejs witryny sklad polskiego rzadu – „zdrajcy polskiego narodu”. Widnieje tam Roman Giertych, „zdrajca” ale dla zydomasonerii, ktora w koncu wykonczyla partie Giertycha i in. polskie bastiony. W srodku tego grochu z kapusta, Szewczyk wpisal wielki tytul („ODSZKODOWANIA warosci 65 miliardów dolarów dla Zydów USA”). Wszystko zakonczyl „Projektem wniosku do Komisji w Senacie RP” o niezatwierdzenie ustawy, podpisanym „Emigracja Polska 2006”. Kto slyszal o tej organizacji?
W naglowku wniosku brakuje daty, ale jest lista jakichs e-listow bez poprawnej daty, tematu czy nadawcy-odbiorcy, potem prymitywna tresc zakonczona napomnieniem (siebie?), ze jest to „dokument wewnêtrzny, nie stanowi oficjalnego stanowiska Senatu ani jego organów” – jasne oznaki oszolomstwa autora wniosku, Szewczyka. Ale wlasnie takie bzdury najlatwiej trafiaja do mas polonijnych! Wg pani Alvi, rzesze daly sie nabrac na skladanke Szewczyka, falszywie kojarzac fakty prawne z zabiegami miedzynarodowych syjonistow o miliardowe odszkodowania w Polsce – zabiegi przeciw ktorym pracowano nad ustawa, by w koncu skierowac ja do komisji specjalistow – „zdrade” wg Szewczyka. Czy komisja specjalistow obronila polska racje stanu – nie wiem. I nie mogl wiedziec Szewczyk przed faktem.
Holocaust-biznesmani probowali podwazyc wlasnie te prace legislacyjne, najmujac senator Hillary Clinton, obecnie masono-judejska sekretarz stanu USA, po Obamie najwazniejszy stolek w Bialym Domu. Przeciw Polakom probowala ona podwazyc prawomocne wyroki sadow USA, ktore odmowiły Zydom amerykanskim roszczen do nieruchomosci w Polsce. Clintonowa dzialala ponad prawem przez tajne wplywy polityczne judeocentrykow w USA, a takze probowala wplynac na polski rzad wbrew polskiej konstytucji, wpadajac i tu w konflikt interesow.
Wydaje sie, ze nieswiadoma esbeckiej zmylki, Polonia dala sklejankom Szewczyka wiecej uwagi niz rzeczywistym wysilkom przeciw roszczeniom syjonsitow, patrz np. Patriotyczny Klub Dyskusyjny w Nowym Jorku http://www.polpatriot.com/html/in__english.html czy Barbara Krajewska http://www.wicipolskie.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1892&Itemid=56
Bez nalezytego komentarza w Zaprasza.net, wystrzaly Szewczyka nt. roszczen przyczyniaja sie do metlika. Wsrod adresatow zmylki Szewczyka byl lwprezydent@wp.pl, znany z polskich forow agent „podszywajacy sie” pod Walese, zeby bronic Lejbe Kone. Uzylem cudzyslowu, bo i tu mamy do czynienia z glupkowatymi zagraniami przeciw czolowce Polonii. Szewczyk poslal swa sklejanke m.in. do USOPALu, Wirtualnej Polonii, Wolnej Polski i Sowy-Frankfurt. Mam nadzieje, ze nie dali sie nabrac.
Wystarczy… Bohu i Blechu moga sie pogubic w tak dlugim artykule. Na wazniejszy dla mnie temat: widze na rozmaitych witrynach zapytania o moja ksiazke „NATO na Balkanach”. Resztke z Allegro wzielo do dystrybucji Wydawnictwie Bratczyk w Hajnowce: bratczyk1 [malpa] wp.pl tel/fax 085 682 25 65
Z przyjemnoscia donosze, ze wydawca rosyjski tlumaczy ksiazke na jez. rosyjski i poprosil o dodatki z moich badan od czasu wydania polskiego w 2005 r. Watpie, zeby ktos odwazyl sie wydac i rozprowadzac to w Posce, gdzie nawet wzglednie nieszkodliwe pierwsze wydanie napotkalo na niesamowite opory. Tyle o tych strasznych “ruskich”, tj. mistyfikacji z esbeckiego menu.
Piotr Bein, 13.2.2009 (piatek) – zmora dla kabalistow (tzn. i data i PB)
d/w bszewczyk@yahoo.com
lwprezydent@wp.pl

RABIN

Wojciech Właźliński
3. I. 2010

Drodzy Przyjaciele.  (undisclosed recipients)

Wysyłam video w 2 częściach w którym część jest w j.angielskim. Ta część w angielskim to wyjątek wypowiedzi rabina Foxmana.
Dla nie znających j. angielskiego wyjaśniam, że w tej wypowiedzi Foxman nazwał wielokrotnie Jana Pawła II  ” demn Pollack” z dodatkowymi głęboko obraźliwymi epitetami ze szczególnym podkreśleniem tych epitetów. (“ten cholerny Polak”) Samo słowo “Pollack” w takiej pisowni i wymowie w j. angielskim jest bardzo obraźliwe i odnosi się tylko do Polaków.
Nie pierwszy raz zostało to użyte w publicznych wypowiedziach znanych i poważanych przez Żydów osobistościach. Miedzy innymi znana spikerka jednego z głównych kanałów telewizyjnych Leslie Stahl użyła takiego określenia na Jana Pawła II w telewizyjnym, emitowanym na całe Stany wystąpieniu. Kiedy wywołało to oburzenie społeczeństwa z kpiną stwierdziła: ” dałabym się ubiczować gdybym wiedziała że może to obrazić chrześcijan”.  Nie Papieża, nie Polaków, lecz chrześcijan. Także w swojej książce która została wydana wielonakładowo  stwierdziła, że “w Polsce jest źle ponieważ Polacy wymordowali wszystkich swoich specjalistów -Żydów”. Leslie Stahl jest w dalszym ciągu poważaną spikerką.
Ekstremiści żydowscy (modne jest słowo “skrajni”) zdają się, w swoim tupecie, nie zdawać sobie sprawy z tego, że jak dotychczas “mianowanie” kogoś antysemitą powoduje, w najlepszym przypadku, co najmniej cywilną śmierć, lecz prędzej czy później stanie się awansem społecznym, politycznym, etycznym i moralnym. W międzyczasie jednak zginie jeszcze wielu z najlepszych z Gojów, jak ich obraźliwie nazywają z powodu naszej obojętności, nie rozpoznawania i tolerowania miejscowych “przebierańców”.

Wszystko zaczyna się sprawdzać

wpisała (i tłumaczyła?) Ola 1.1.2010 na blogu grypa666.wordpress.com

Wszystko zaczyna się sprawdzać. Oto co niektórzy mieli przywilej usłyszeć z ust jednego z ‘oświeconych’ – w 1 9 6 9 roku – 40 lat temu, pozwole sobie zamieścić całość tłumaczenia dla być może przestrogi, być może zorganizowania się i obalenia tego światowego dziadostwa. W przeciwnym wypadku przyszłe pokolenia nie mają na co liczyć. I tak jak ów ‘oświecony’ powiedział, jesteśmy zbyt łatwowierni.
Transkrypcja wspomnień (taśmy 1-3) dr Lawrence Dunegan’a (1989) z przemówienia dr Richarda Day’a, wygłoszonego na spotkaniu ze studentami i specjalistami ochrony zdrowia, przeznaczonymi na liderów w zakresie medycyny, 20.03.1969, w Towarzystwie Pediatrycznym Pittsburga. Dr Day – (1905-1989) prof. Pediatrii, Mt Sinai Medical School, Nowy Jork. Należał do elitarnej grupy rządzącej światem zachodnim, w celu ustanowienia Dyktatury Światowej, znanej pod nazwami: Tyranii Globalnej i Nowego Porządku Świata, składających się z części świeckiej i religijnej. Przyszła rzeczywistość, którą ci, którzy rozumieją te sprawę, nazywają Totalitarnym Światowym Imperium Lucyfera.
Nagrania dokonano w 1989 r. Fragmenty wypowiedzi dr Day’a i komentarze dr Dunegan’a:
‘Planujemy wejść w 21 wiek na pełnym biegu. Wszystko ustalone i nikt nie może nas powstrzymać… Niektórzy z was myślą, że mówię o komunizmie. Tymczasem mówię o czymś większym od komunizmu !’
‘Ludzie będą musieli przyzwyczaić się do zmian, tak, że będą spodziewać się zmian. Nic nie będzie stałe.’
‘Ludzie są zbyt łatwowierni. Nie zadają właściwych pytań’. Czasami zbytnią łatwowierność przyrównywano do naiwności. Ale czasami… kiedy mówił ‘ludzie nie zadają właściwych pytań’, brzmiało to jakby miał żal, jakby żle się czuł z powodu swojej roli, może chciał, by ludzie sprzeciwiali się temu, a nie wierzyli tak łatwo.

Prawdziwe cele
Wszystko służy dwóm celom. Pierwszy – ostentacyjny, który sprawi, że ludzie wszystko zaakceptują, i drugi – prawdziwy cel, który ma przybliżyć ustanowienie nowego systemu… Nie ma innej drogi’. Wydawało mi się wtedy, że jego słowa wyrażają przeprosiny, szczególnie kiedy opisywał niektóre szczególnie przykre zmiany, jak np. promowanie narkomanii.

Kontrola populacji
Był bardzo aktywnym członkiem grupy ds. kontroli populacji. Powiedział, że populacja rośnie zbyt szybko. Liczba osób w danym czasie na planecie musi być ograniczona lub zabraknie miejsca do życia. Przerośniemy zaopatrzenie w żywność i zbyt zanieczyścimy świat odpadami.

Pozwolenie na posiadanie dzieci
Ludzie nie będą mogli mieć dzieci tylko dlatego, że chcą, lub dlatego, że są nieostrożni. Większość rodzin będzie ograniczona do dwojga dzieci. Niektóre osoby będą mogły być tylko jedno, i wybitne osoby lub osoba, mogą być wybrane by mieć troje. Ale większość ludzi będzie mogła mieć tylko dwoje dzieci. To dlatego, że zerowy wzrost populacji to 2,1 dziecka na rodzinę. Więc co dziesiąta rodzina będzie mogła mieć przywilej trzeciego dziecka. Dla mnie do tej pory pojęcie “kontroli populacji” łączyła się przede wszystkim z ograniczeniem liczby dzieci mających się urodzić. Ale uwaga, o tym, co ludzie mają “pozwolone”, a następnie, co nastąpiło, czyni ją zupełnie jasną, że kiedy usłyszysz “kontrolę populacji”, oznacza to więcej niż tylko kontrolę urodzeń. Oznacza to kontrolę nad każdym przedsięwzięciem całej ludności świata; znacznie szersze znaczenie tego pojęcia niż kiedykolwiek myślałem przed wysłuchaniem tego. Kiedy słyszysz i wracasz z powrotem do niektórych z tych rzeczy, zaczynasz rozpoznawać jak jeden aspekt ściśle wiąże się z innymi aspektami w zakresie kontrolowania ludzkich poczynań.

Przekierowanie celu seksu: seks bez prokreacji i prokreacja bez seksu
Cóż, po kontroli populacji, następnym krokiem był seks. Powiedział, że seks musi być oddzielony od prokreacji. Seks jest zbyt przyjemny, i popęd płciowy zbyt silny, aby oczekiwać, że ludzie zaniechają seksu. Stosowanie hemikaliów w żywności i w dostarczanej wodzie w celu zmniejszenia popędu płciowego nie jest praktyczne. Wtedy strategią byłoby nie zmniejszanie aktywność seksualnej, ale jej zwiększanie, ale w taki sposób, by ludzie nie mieli dzieci.

Antykoncepcja powszechnie dostępna dla wszystkich
Antykoncepcja będzie bardzo silnie promowana, i byłaby tak ściśle związana w umysłach ludzi z seksem, że automatycznie myśleliby o antykoncepcji, gdyby myśleli lub przygotowywali się do seksu. I antykoncepcja będzie powszechnie dostępna. Środki antykoncepcyjne będą bardziej eksponowane w drogeriach, jak papierosy i guma do żucia. W sposób otwarty, a nie ukryte pod ladą, kiedy ludzie będą musieli prosić o nie i mogą być zażenowani. Ten rodzaj otwartości będzie sugerował, że środki antykoncepcyjne są tak samo częścią życia, jak każdy inny produkt sprzedawany w sklepie. Środki antykoncepcyjne będą reklamowane i wydawane w szkołach w związku z edukacją seksualną!

Edukacja seksualna jako narzędzie rządu światowego
Celem edukacji seksualnej było wczesne zainteresowanie dzieci, by kojarzyli seks z potrzebą antykoncepcji we wczesnym okresie życia, zanim staną się aktywne. W tym momencie przywołałem w myśli niektórych z moich nauczycieli, zwłaszcza w gimnazjum i doszedłem do wniosku, że byłoby całkowicie niewiarygodne myśleć o ich aprobacie, a tym bardziej angażowaniu się w dystrybucji środków antykoncepcyjnych dla studentów. Ale to tylko odzwierciedlało mój brak zrozumienia w jaki sposób ci ludzie działają. To było zanim powstały szkolne poradnie. W wielu miastach w USA w tym czasie już były szkolne kliniki, których głównym zadaniem były antykoncepcji, kontrola urodzeń, kontrola populacji. Pomysł jest więc taki, żeby seks i antykoncepcję wprowadzany i umacniany w szkole przenosić do małżeństwa. Rzeczywiście, kiedy młodzi ludzie – już dojrzali – zdecydują się na ślub, znaczenie małżeństwa będzie znacznie zmniejszone. Zaznaczył, że większość osób prawdopodobnie będzie chciała się żenić … ale to z pewnością nie będzie dłużej uważane za niezbędne do aktywności seksualnej.

Finansowanie z podatków aborcji jako kontroli populacji
Nic dziwnego więc, że następnym punktem spotkania była aborcja Powiedział: “Aborcja nie będzie już przestępstwem. Aborcja będą akceptowana jako coś normalnego” … I będą opłacane z podatków dla ludzi, którzy nie mogą zapłacić za aborcje Środki antykoncepcyjne będą udostępniane z pieniędzy podatników, tak aby nikt nie musiał się obejść bez środków antykoncepcyjnych. Gdyby lekcje o wychowaniu seksualnym w szkołach prowadziły do większej ilości ciąż u dzieci, nie byłyby one postrzegane jako problem. Rodzice, którzy myślą, że są przeciwni aborcji z przyczyn moralnych lub religijnych, zmienią zdanie, gdy ich dziecko będzie w ciąży. Więc to pomoże w przezwyciężeniu sprzeciwu wobec aborcji. Niedługo, bardzo niewiele osób będzie nadal odmawiało aborcji jako akceptowalnej, i nie będą oni mieli większego znaczenia.

Zachęcanie do homoseksualizmu, seksu, wszystko dobre
Homoseksualizm również należy wspierać, i ‘ludzie będą mieć zezwolenie na homoseksualizm”. Nie będą musieli się ukrywać. I osoby starsze będą zachęcane do aktywnego życia seksualnego do podeszłego wieku, tak długo jak będą mogli. Każdy będzie pozwolenie na seks, cieszyć się nim jak tylko chcą. Wszystko idzie. W ten sposób zostało to powiedziane. I pamiętam, że wtedy pomyślałem: ‘jakie to aroganckie z jego strony, lub tego kogo reprezentuje, czuć, że mogą udzielić lub nie – pozwolenia by ludzie mogli cokolwiek robić! Ale taka była użyta terminologia. W związku z tym, poruszył sprawę odzieży. Odzież będzie bardziej stymulująca i prowokacyjna. Przypomnijmy, że 1969 był rokiem spódnic mini, kiedy te mini-spódniczki były bardzo, bardzo krótkie i wiele odsłaniające. Powiedział: “To nie tylko wielkość odsłanianej powierzchni skóry sprawia, że ubrania pociągają seksualnie, ale inne, bardziej subtelne rzeczy często są sugestywne… takie jak ruch, krój odzieży i rodzaj tkaniny, umieszczenie akcesoriów na ubraniu. Jeśli kobieta ma atrakcyjne ciało, to dlaczego ma go nie pokazywać?”… To było jedno z oświadczeń. Nie było szczegółów, co należy rozumieć przez “ubrania prowokacyjne”, ale od tego czasu, jeśli obserwowałeś zmiany w stylach odzieży, dżinsy są tak skrojone, by były bardziej obcisłe w kroczu. Mają pewne załamania, które pełnią rolę czegoś w rodzaju strzałek. Są to linie, które kierują wzrok bezpośrednio na niektóre obszary anatomiczne. I wtedy rzeczywiście był czas pod hasłem “spal swój biustonosz”. Zaznaczył, że wiele kobiet powinno nosić biustonosz, gdyż dodawał im atrakcyjności, więc zamiast zakazu noszenia biustonoszy i paleniu ich, biustonosze powrócą. Ale bedą cieńsze i bardziej miękkie, umożliwiające bardziej naturalny ruch. Nie powiedział dokładnie, ale z pewnością bardzo cienki biustonosz wiele bardziej eksponuje pierś niż grubszy, używany do tej pory.

Zmniejszenie znaczenia rodziny
Liczebność rodziny będzie ograniczona. Wcześniej wspomniał, że nie będzie pozwolenia na więcej niż dwoje dzieci. Rozwód będzie łatwiejszy i bardziej rozpowszechniony. Większość ludzi będzie wchodziło w związek małżeński więcej niż raz. Więcej pozostanie w stanie wolnym, będą mieszkać razem, i nikt nie będzie zadawał żadnych pytań. Będzie to powszechnie uznane i nie będzie różnic między małżeństwem a byciem razem. Więcej kobiet będzie pracować poza domem. Więcej mężczyzn zostanie przeniesionych do innych miast do pracy, i więcej mężczyzn będzie podróżować. Dlatego będzie trudniej rodzinom mieszkać razem. To uczyni małżeństwo mniej stabilne, i dlatego ludzie będą mniej skłonni do posiadania dzieci. Zmniejszą się liczebnie rodziny wielopokoleniowe, i będą żyły dalej od siebie. Przez chwilę podróże będą tańsze i łatwiejsze, aby ci, którzy musieli podróżować czuli, że mogą wrócić do swoich rodzin … nie dlatego, że będą nagle oderwani od rodzin. Ale jednym z efektów łatwiejszego prawa rozwodowego w połączeniu z promowaniem podróży i przenoszenia rodzin z jednego miasta do drugiego, będzie niestabilność rodziny. Jeśli zarówno mąż jak i żona pracują i jeden partner zostaje przeniesiony gdzie indziej, partner będzie miał trudności z przeniesieniem. Tak więc jedno z nich albo utrzyma pracę i pozostanie, podczas gdy drugie odejdzie, albo zrezygnuje z pracy i podejmie ryzyko nie znalezienia pracy w nowym miejscu. Raczej szatańskie podejście do tego wszystkiego!

Eutanazja i “pigułka zejścia”
Każdy ma prawo do życia przez określony czas. Starzy nie są już użyteczni i stają się ciężarem. Musisz być gotowy do zgody na śmierć. Większość ludzi jest gotowa. Może zostać ustalony arbitralny limit wieku. W końcu będziesz miał prawo tylko do określonej ilości kolacji, tylu orgazmów, i tylu przyjemności w życiu. A kiedy już je wykorzystałeś i nie jesteś już produkcyjny, nie pracujesz i nie dokładasz, wtedy powinieneś być gotowy by zrobić miejsce dla następnego pokolenia. Niektóre rzeczy, które pomogą ludziom zrozumieć, że wystarczająco długo, wspominał wiele z nich … nie pamiętam ich wszystkich … Oto kilka z nich: wykorzystanie bardzo jasnego druku na formularzach, które … są niezbędne … należy wypełnić, aby osoby starsze nie mogły ich przeczytać, i będą musieli iść do młodych ludzi o pomoc. Ruch samochodem – będzie więcej pasów ruchu o dużej prędkości, które … będą sprawiać kłopot starszym o obniżonym refleksie, a tym samym stracą część swojej niezależności.

Ograniczenie dostępu do przystępnej cenowo opieki medycznej ułatwi eliminowanie starszych
Wielka rzecz – opracowana dosyć dokładnie – koszt opieki medycznej będzie dużym obciążeniem. Opieka medyczna będzie ściśle związana z pracą, ale także będzie bardzo, bardzo droga i po prostu niedostępna dla osób po upływie pewnego czasu. I jeśli nie będą mieli niezwykle bogatej, wspierającej rodziny, pozostaną właściwie bez opieki. I pomysł, że jeżeli wszyscy mówią: “Dość! Jaki to ciężar na młodych starać się utrzymać starych ludzi … to młodzi postarają się pomóc rodzicom, pod warunkiem że będzie to wykonane w sposób humanitarny i z godnością. A potem podał przykład — może być miłe, pożegnalne, prawdziwe święto. Mama i tata zrobili swoją robotę. A potem święto się kończy i zażyją ‘pigułkę zejścia’.

Planowanie kontroli nad opieką zdrowotną
Będą ogromne zmiany. Przede wszystkim będzie dużo ściślej kontrolowana: “Kongres nie zamierza kontynuować ubezpieczeń zdrowotnych. To [w 1969] jest teraz, aż nadto widoczne. Ale nie jest to konieczne. Mamy inne sposoby kontroli opieki zdrowotnej”. To przyjdzie stopniowo, ale cała opieka zdrowotna będzie podlegać ścisłej kontroli. Opieka medyczna będzie ściśle związany z pracą, i jeśli nie pracujesz lub nie możesz pracować, nie będziesz mieć dostępu do opieki medycznej. Czas bezpłatnego leczenia szpitalnego się skończy. Jego koszty wzrosną tak, że ludzie nie będą mogli sobie pozwolić, aby nie mieć ubezpieczenia. Ludzie płacą … płacić za to, masz do niego prawo. Dopiero później zdałem sobie sprawę, że nie będziesz za to sam płacił. Twoja opieka medyczna będzie opłacana przez innych. I dlatego z wdzięcznością i na klęczkach przyjmiesz to, co było oferowane ci jako przywilej. Twoja odpowiedzialność za własne leczenie będzie zmniejszona. I nie rozumiałem wtedy jak to działa, że wszyscy uzależnieni są od ubezpieczeń. A jeśli nie masz ubezpieczenia to płacisz bezpośrednio; a koszt opieki jest ogromny. Jednak towarzystwa ubezpieczeniowe nie płacą tej samej kwoty. Jeśli ty masz płacić, powiedzmy, 600 dolarów, one płacą 300 dolarów lub 400 dolarów. I ta różnica w płatnościach ma pożądany efekt: umożliwia towarzystwu płacić za to, czego nigdy ty nie mógłbyś zapłacić. One dostają upust, którego ty nie dostaniesz. Kiedy widzisz rachunek jesteś wdzięczny, że firma ubezpieczeniowa mogła zapłacić. I w ten sposób zależysz i praktycznie musisz mieć ubezpieczenie.

Dostęp do szpitali będzie ściśle kontrolowany
Aby dostać się do budynku potrzebna będzie ID. Ochrona zadba o to, by nikt nie mógł poruszać się wewnątrz bez ID. Każdy na terenie szpitala będzie miał przypięty identyfikator ze zdjęciem oraz podanym powodem przebywania tam… pracownik, technik laboratoryjny, pielęgniarka, odwiedzający czy ktokolwiek inny. Ta potrzeba ID rozpocznie się na małą skalę: w szpitalach, niektórych firmach, ale stopniowo poszerzy się na wszystkie miejsca! Stwierdził, że szpitale mogą być wykorzystywane do zamykania … na terapię przestępców. To nie oznaczało koniecznie, opieki medycznej. W tamtym czasie nie znałem wyrażenia “psycho-więzienie”, ale opisywał wykorzystanie szpitali zarówno do leczenia chorych i zamykania przestępców z powodów innych niż dbałość o zdrowie przestępcy. Nie podał definicji przestępcy.

Eliminacja prywatnych gabinetów lekarskich
Wizerunek lekarza ulegnie zmianie. Nie będzie postrzegany jako indywidualny profesjonalista w służbie poszczególnych pacjentów. Jednak lekarz będzie stopniowo rozpoznawany jako wysoko wyspecjalizowany technik … i zmieni się jego praca. Będzie zawierać rzeczy takie jak egzekucje przez podanie śmiertelnego zastrzyku. Wizerunek lekarza, że odgrywa ważną rolę i jest niezależny, będzie musiał ulec zmianie. I powiedział: “Lekarze zarabiają zbyt dużo pieniędzy. Powinni reklamować swoje usługi jak każdy inny produkt”.

Nowe trudności w diagnozowaniu i i leczeniu
Będą pojawiać się nowe choroby, które nigdy wcześniej nie występowały. Przez długi czas byłyby bardzo trudne do zdiagnozowania jako nieuleczalne. Pamiętam, że nie długo po wysłuchaniu tej prezentacji, kiedy miałem dokonać zagadkowej diagnozy, zastanawiałem się: “Czy to było … co on mówił? Czy to jest przypadek, o którym mówił? Kilka lat później, kiedy ostatecznie opracowano AIDS, myślałem, że AIDS była co najmniej jednym przykładem tego, co mówił. I teraz myślę, że AIDS prawdopodobnie była chorobą wyprodukowaną.

Zaniechanie leczenia nowotworów jako środek kontroli populacji
Powiedział: “Obecnie możemy wyleczyć prawie każdy nowotwór. Informacje na ten temat znajdują się w aktach w Instytucie Rockefellera, jeśli kiedykolwiek podjęto by decyzję, że powinny być ujawnione. Ale rozważmy – jeśli ludzie przestaną umierać na raka, jak szybko nastąpiłoby przeludnienie. Możecie umrzeć na raka tak samo jak na coś innego”. Wysiłki w leczeniu nowotworów będzie nastawione bardziej na komfort niż samo leczenie. Były pewne sugestie, by ujawnić leki na raka, ukryte w Instytucie Rockefellera, ponieważ niezależni naukowcy mogą je ujawnić, mimo, że chcemy to ukryć. Ale przynajmniej w chwili obecnej, pozwalanie ludziom umierać na raka robi dobrze, ponieważ to spowalnia problem przeludnienia.

Zawały serca jako forma egzekucji
Powiedział: “Teraz jest możliwość symulacji prawdziwego ataku serca. Może być stosowany jako środek zabijania”. Tylko bardzo wykwalifikowany patolog, którzy dokładnie wie, na co zwrócić uwagę przy sekcji zwłok, może odróżnić go od prawdziwego. Myślałem wtedy, że to było bardzo zaskakujące i szokujące, dowiedzieć się od tego konkretnego człowieka, w tym szczególnym czasie. To i sprawa lekarstwa na raka, tak naprawdę nadal tkwią w mojej pamięci, bo było to tak szokujące, i w tamtym czasie, wydawało mi się nie na miejscu. Następnie mówił na temat odżywiania i ćwiczeń fizycznych, jakby w tych samych ramach. Ludzie mieliby prawo do jedzenia, prawo do życia tak długo, jak przedtem. Ale nie większość z nich. Tu, w połączeniu z odżywianiem, nie było żadnych konkretnych deklaracji odnośnie określonych składników odżywczych, które byłyby albo niewystarczające albo w nadmiarze. Z perspektywy czasu, myślę, że chodziło mu o diety z wysoką zawartością soli i tłuszczu, predysponujących w kierunku wysokiego ciśnienia krwi i przedwczesnej arteriosklerotycznej choroby serca. I jeśli ludzie, którzy byli zbyt głupi lub zbyt leniwi, aby wykonywać ćwiczenia … zawartość tłuszczu wzrasta i wywołuje choroby.
Wspomniał także, że szybko będzie wzrastać ilość publicznych punktów żywieniowych. I… to też ma związek z rodziną. Ponieważ coraz więcej osób będzie jeść poza domem, jedzenie w domu stanie się mniej ważne. Ludzie będą mniej zależni od domowej kuchni. I to również wiąże się z gotowymi daniami, szeroko dostępnymi, tylko włożyć do mikrofalówki. Będą dostępne również gotowe posiłki. I oczywiście, już je mamy … i niektóre całkiem dobre. Ale całe to odmienne podejście do jedzenia poza domem i wcześniej przygotowanych posiłków spożywanych w domu było przewidziane, i już w sprzedaży – wygoda w gotowaniu. Ta żywność będzie częścią zagrożeń. Każdy, kto był na tyle leniwy by kupować gotową, będzie musiał ćwiczyć. A jeśli był zbyt leniwy by ćwiczyć, i zbyt leniwy by przyrządzać własne jedzenie, nie zasługuje na długie życie.

Edukacja jako narzędzie przyspieszenia dojrzewania i ewolucji
Było też coś o przyspieszeniu okresu dojrzewania. I to zostało powiedziane w związku ze zdrowiem, a później w związku z edukacją, łączącą się z przyspieszeniem procesu zmiany ewolucyjnej. Padło stwierdzenie, że: “… Uważamy, że możemy pchnąć ewolucję szybciej i w odpowiednim kierunku”. Pamiętam tylko to ogólne stwierdzenie.

Wymieszanie wszystkich religii …. Stare religie będą musiały odejść
Powiedział: “Religia nie musi być zła. Wiele osób odczuwa potrzebę religii, z jej tajemnicami i rytuałami – więc będą mieli religię”.
Ale dzisiejsze główne religie muszą się zmienić, ponieważ nie są zgodne z nadchodzącymi zmianami. Stare religie będą musiały odejść. Szczególnie chrześcijaństwo. Gdy zniszczymy kościół katolicki, reszta chrześcijaństwa też się rozpadnie. Potem może być przyjęta nowa religia na całym świecie. Weżmiemy coś ze wszystkich starych, by uczynić ją łatwą do zaakceptowania, i by ludzie czuli się z nią jak u siebie w domu. Większość ludzi nie będzie zbyt związana z religią. Oni zrozumieją, że jej nie potrzebują.

Zmiany w Biblii poprzez zmiany kluczowych słów
Będzie przepisana, aby odpowiadała nowej religii. Stopniowo słowa kluczowe zostaną zastąpione nowymi o różnych odcieniach znaczeniowych. Następnie wyjaśnienie nowego wyrazu będzie dołączone do starego. I z biegiem czasu, inne znaczeniowe tego słowa będzie podkreślane, a następnie stopniowo ten wyraz będzie zastąpiony nowym. Nie jestem pewien czy powiedziałem to wyraźnie. Ale chodzi o to, że nie całe Pismo Święte będzie wymagało przepisania, tylko słowa kluczowe zastąpione innymi. I różnorodność znaczenia dołączone do dowolnego słowa może być wykorzystane jako narzędzie do zmiany rozumienia całego Pisma Św, a więc spowodować przyjęcie nowej religii. Większość ludzi nie dostrzeże różnicy. I powiedział: “… Nielicznych, którzy dostrzegą różnice nie będzie wystarczające dużo by się tym przejmować”.

Kościoły pomogą
Następnie była jedna z najbardziej zaskakujących wypowiedzi całej prezentacji, kiedy powiedział: “… Niektórzy z was zapewne myślą, że kościoły nie zgodzą się na to [i stwierdził] kościoły nam pomogą!” Nie było jasne co miał na myśli, gdy powiedział: “kościoły nam pomogą!” Z perspektywy czasu, myślę, że niektórzy z nas teraz rozumieją, co mógł mieć na myśli wtedy. Pamiętam tylko, że pomyślałem “nie, nie pomogą!” i pamiętając słowa naszego Pana, kiedy rzekł do Piotra: “Ty jesteś Piotr i na tej skale zbuduję kościół mój, a bramy piekielne go nie przemogą”. Więc … Tak, niektórzy ludzie w kościołach mogliby pomóc. I w kolejnych 20 latach widzieliśmy jak niektórzy ludzie w kościołach pomagali. Ale wiemy też, że słowa Pana są ważne, i bramy piekielne go nie przemogą.

Restrukturyzacja edukacji jako narzędzia indoktrynacji
Poza zmianą Biblii – powiedział, że zostanie zmieniona klasyka w literaturze. Wydaje mi się, że jako przykład podał Mark Twain’a. Ale powiedział, że przypadkowy czytelnik zmienionej wersji klasycznej nawet by nie podejrzewał, że cokolwiek zmieniono. I ktoś musiałby czytać słowo po słowie by nawet poznać, że dokonano jakiejkolwiek zmiany, gdyż będzie ona tak subtelna. Ale zmiany będą po to, by promować akceptację nowego systemu.

Więcej czasu w szkole, ale nie nauczą się niczego
Jeśli chodzi o edukację to powiedział, że dzieci będą spędzać więcej czasu w szkole, ale w wielu szkołach nie będą uczyć się niczego. Nauczą się pewnych rzeczy, ale nie tak jak dawniej. Lepsze szkoły w lepszej dzielnicy z lepszymi ludżmi – ich dzieci będą uczyć się więcej. W lepszych szkołach, uczenia się będzie przyspieszone. I powiedział: “Uważamy, że możemy przyspieszyć ewolucję”. Będzie wydłużony okres edukacji (lata), i lekcje będą trwały w czasie lata. Studia będą bardziej specjalistyczne – węższy ale głębszy zakres wiedzy. Nie będzie można zdobyć informacji spoza dziedziny danej osoby, chyba, że uzyska się pozwolenie. Człowiek będzie ekspertem ale tylko w wybranej dziedzinie, i nie będzie orientował się w żadnej innej.

Rządzą ci, którzy mają dostęp do informacji
Mówił o komputerach w edukacji, i każdy kto będzie chciał mieć dostęp do komputera lub książek nie mających związku z jego kierunkiem studiów, uzyska pozwolenie lub nie.
Niektóre książki znikną z bibliotek
Szczególnie te, które zawierają niepożądane informacje, nieodpowiednie do nowego systemu. Będzie coś w rodzaju zorganizowanej kradzieży książek: po prostu specjalne grupy wyniosą pewne pozycje i nigdy ich nie zwrócą. Nie każdy będzie miał pozwolenie na posiadanie w domu książek.

Promowanie narkomanii w celu stworzenia atmosfery dżungli
Wzrośnie używalność narkotyków i alkoholu. Ale wzmoże się też działalność biur antynarkotykowych. Brzmi to jak kontradykcja, ale oznacza to, że spowoduje to powstanie prawa dżungli, do wyeliminowania słabszych jednostek: ‘zanim wystąpiło przeludnienie, istniało prawo dżungli, w której przetrwali tylko ci o najlepszej kondycji fizycznej’. Człowiek musiał bronić się w swoim środowisku, przed dzikimi zwierzętami i chorobami. Teraz człowiek stał się zbyt cywilizowany, i brak mu kondycji fizycznej, i mogą przetrwać tylko silniejsi. I tu jest rola do odegrania przez narkotyki – prawo dżungli odnowi selekcję najsilniejszych. Sprawa narkotyków będzie utrwalana w podświadomości społeczeństwa, przez co ludzie dowiedzą się, że świat nie jest tak bezpieczny jak im się wydawało. To samo będzie się działo ze spożyciem alkoholu: promowanie i zakaz. Słabi skorzystają z promocji. Wzrośnie problem pijanych kierowców, ale wprowadzone będzie bardziej rygorystyczne prawo pozbawiające przywileju prowadzenia auta.

Ograniczenia podróży
Nie każdy powinien mieć swobodę podróżowania tak jak teraz w USA. Ludzie nie potrzebują podróżować w ten sposób. To będzie przywilej!

Potrzeba większej ilości więzień, wykorzystanie w tym celu szpitali
Niektóre nowo budowane szpitale będą tak zaprojektowane, by szybko można je było przystosować na użytek systemu penitencjarnego.

Źródło: http://www.overlordsofchaos.com/html/new_order_of_barbarians.html
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Następne transkrypcje nagrań też warto znać:

http://www.overlordsofchaos.com/html/new_order_of_barbarians_2.html

http://www.overlordsofchaos.com/html/new_order_of_barbarians_3.html

Czy ktoś mógłby przetłumaczyć lub znaleźć tłumaczenie na necie?
Wkrótce zamieszczę tłumaczenie lucyferiańskiego plan NWO Rotszylda z 1773 r., który zadziwiająco zgadza się z powyższymi szczegółami wykonawczymi. — PB
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dla porównania, lucyferiański plan NWO Rotszylda z 1773 r.:

- Stosuj przemoc i terroryzm, walkę klasową i psychologię tłumu celem kontroli nad masami. Fala terroru jest najekonomiczniejszym sposobem szybkiego podporządkowania. Siej wojny i kontroluj konferencje pokojowe.
- Oręduj za spożywaniem alkoholu i narkotyków, demoralizacją i wszelkimi nałogami, systematycznie stosowanymi dla korupcji młodzieży. Oszukuj, zmylaj i demoralizuj młodych, ucząc ich teorii i zasad wiadomych nam, że są fałszywe.
- Głoś „liberalizm“, by uzurpować władzę polityczną. Rozbieraj istniejące siły porządku i prawa, przebudowuj wszystkie instytucje. Pozostawaj niewidzialny do momentu, gdy stanie się to na tyle silne, że żaden podstęp ani siła nie podważą tego.
- Przekręcaj państwowe i międzynarodowe prawo na sprzeczności, co najpierw maskuje prawo, a następnie usuwa je. Zastępuj prawo arbitrażem.
- Moralność to achillesowa pięta polityków. Muszą oni być przebiegli i kłamliwi, a kandydaci na urzędy publiczne – usłużni i posłuszni naszym nakazom.
- Wykorzystuj media dla propagandy i kontroluj wszystkie środki informacji publicznej, pozostając w cieniu, bez zarzutu. Systematycznie mystyfikuj, stosuj wzniosłe wyrażenia i popularne slogany – zawsze można odwrócić to, co się obiecało, bez konsekwencji. Niech masy wierzą, że są ofiarami kryminalistów. Następnie przywróć porządek, wyglądając na zbawicieli.
- Zinfiltruj Wolnomularstwo, wykorzystaj Loże Wielkiego Wschodu i ich prawdziwe oblicze działalności charytatywnej. Rozpropaguj ich ateistyczno-materialityczną ideologię wśród gojów. W godzinie koronowania naszego wszechwładnego pana całego Świata [Rothschildowie uważają się za pochodzących od Króla Dawida, tj. jeden z nich jest Mosziachem (Mesjaszem)], wpływy masońskie usuną wszelkie przeszkody.
- Wszelkimi sposobami odbieraj własność, żeby zapewnić poddaństwo i władzę. Stwarzaj paniki finansowe, głodem kontroluj i zniewalaj masy. Maskaraduj jako polityczni, finansowi i gospodarczy doradcy, realizując nasze zadania Dyplomacją, bez obawy ujawnienia tajnej władzy stojącej za sprawami państwowymi i międzynarodowymi.
- Ostatecznym celem jest rząd światowy. Potrzeba ustanowić ogromne monopole, żeby nawet największe fortuny gojów były od nas zależne do tego stopnia, że dzień po wielkim ciosie politycznym pójdą na dno wraz z kredytem państwowym. Stosuj wojnę gospodarczą. Obrabuj gojów z nieruchomości i przemysłu przez kombinację wysokich podatków i nieczystą konkurencję.
- Spowoduj wzajemne niszczenie się gojów, tak żeby na świecie pozostał tylko proletariat, milionerzy oddani naszej sprawie i dość policji i wojska do ochrony naszych interesów. Nazwij to Nowym Ładem i mianuj Dyktatora.

Może wreszcie niektórzy zrozumieją, dlaczego sprawa scypionek jest nierozerwalna od odludnienia, manipulacji religią i polityką, merdiów, demoralizacji, Nowego Ładu = „satanizmu“ tj. lucyferianizmu, które niechętnie widzą niedoinformowani i agenci lucy. Skomasowałem w 10 logicznych punktów następujące 25 punktów orginału planu Rotszylda:
1. Use violence and terrorism rather than academic discussions.
2. Preach “Liberalism” to usurp political power.
3. Initiate class warfare.
4. Politicians must be cunning and deceptive – any moral code leaves a politician vulnerable.
5. Dismantle “existing forces of order and regulation.” Reconstruct all existing institutions.”
6. Remain invisible until the very moment when it has gained such strength that no cunning or force can undermine it.
7. Use Mob Psychology to control the masses. “Without absolute despotism one cannot rule efficiently.”
8. Advocate the use of alcoholic liquors, drugs, moral corruption and all forms of vice, used systematically by “agenteurs” to corrupt the youth.
9. Seize properties by any means to secure submission and sovereignty.
10. Foment wars and control the peace conferences so that neither of the combatants gains territory placing them further in debt and therefore into our power.
11. Choose candidates for public office who will be “servile and obedient to our commands, so they may be readily used as pawns in our game.”
12. Use the Press for propaganda to control all outlets of public information, while remaining in the shadows, clear of blame.
13. Make the masses believe they had been the prey of criminals. Then restore order to appear as the saviors.
14. Create financial panics. Use hunger to control to subjugate the masses.
15. Infiltrate Freemasonry to take advantage of the Grand Orient Lodges to cloak the true nature of their work in philanthropy. Spread their atheistic-materialistic ideology amongst the “Goyim” (gentiles).
16. When the hour strikes for our sovereign lord of the entire World to be crowned, their influence will banish everything that might stand in his way.
17. Use systematic deception, high-sounding phrases and popular slogans. “The opposite of what has been promised can always be done afterwards… That is of no consequence.”
18. A Reign of Terror is the most economical way to bring about speedy subjection.
19. Masquerade as political, financial and economic advisers to carry out our mandates with Diplomacy and without fear of exposing “the secret power behind national and international affairs.”
20. Ultimate world government is the goal. It will be necessary to establish huge monopolies, so even the largest fortunes of the Goyim will depend on us to such an extent that they will go to the bottom together with the credit of their governments on the day after the great political smash.”
21. Use economic warfare. Rob the “Goyim” of their landed properties and industries with a combination of high taxes and unfair competition.
22. “Make the ‘Goyim’ destroy each other so there will only be the proletariat left in the world, with a few millionaires devoted to our cause, and sufficient police and soldiers to protect our interest.”
23. Call it The New Order. Appoint a Dictator.
24. Fool, bemuse and corrupt the younger members of society by teaching them theories and principles we know to be false.
25. Twist national and international laws into a contradiction which first masks the law and afterwards hides it altogether. Substitute arbitration for law.

http://www.spingola.com/before_rockefeller.htm

http://gunnyg.wordpress.com/2008/03/28/before-rockefeller-there-was-rothschild-by-deanna-spingola/

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24663512/Epoch-Group-III

Happy New Year

From: Piotr Bein
Date: December 31, 2009 3:58:52 PM PST (CA)
To: marks@hsrc.biz
Subject: Re: US Homeland Security & Defense Community
Dear Mark
Happy New Year.
Thanks for yet another informative email.
Any chance for our bloggers (www.grypa666.wordpress.com over 2 million visits since July 2009) to find out about the progress of detection of underwear bombs?
As an unfunded group of volunteers (posing a potential terrorist threat, given lack a gainful engagement in the HLS/HLD efforts), we can’t afford your multi-billion dollar reports. Could you send one free of charge?
Without costly HLS-HLD research, our bloggers have discovered the H1N1 pandemic to be a bio-terrorist, state conspiracy, while the US official hysteria etc. – to be just that, and the vax a waste of tax money. Any residual faith in America and its institutions like FEMA has crumbled in Poland, at least among the thinkers.
We offer our expertise in public safety and security for a fraction of the prices charged by corporations and research institutes. We have saved absolutely free of charge the Polish nation from a bio-terrorist attack via vaccines, as the world can see in the unique statements and actions of the Polish Minister of Health, Ewa Kopacz, regarding H1N1. Please recommend us if you can to one of the 182 agencies responsible for the security, safety and well-being of Americans whom we admire for their stance against totalitarian measures your org contributes to.

I pray that you turn away from work for the civilisation of death and start contributing to the Civilisation of Life,
Piotr Bein, PhD, PEng
……………………………………………………………………
On 30-Dec-09, at 9:33 PM, Mark Sloman wrote:
Dear Piotr,
On behalf of Homeland Security Research Corporation (HSRC), I would like to wish you a safe and successful new year, and present you with an updated version of HSRC’s, “US Homeland Security & Defense Community” organizational chart. This poster-size map illustrates how and where the 182 federal government agencies that constitute the HLS/HLD community fit into the overall picture.
To download the PDF version, click on the following link:

http://www.homelandsecurityresearch.com/downloads/US-HLS-HLD-Structure-2010.pdf

Best wishes and Happy New Year,
Sincerely,
Mark Sloman
Chief Operating Officer
Homeland Security Research Corporation
e-mail: marks@hsrc.biz
tel: (202)-552-1037
601 Pennsylvania Ave.
Washington D.C.20004
http://www.hsrc.biz