Your Influence Counts ... Use It! The SPOTLIGHT by Liberty Lobby

Reprinted from, home of The SPOTLIGHT archive

The SPOTLIGHT May 1, 2000

Noted Economist Blasts Globalist 'Bloodsucking'

A key insider indicts the IMF by accusing the global bankers of being a bunch of "bunglers" and worse.

By Martin Mann

Above and beyond the mass of protest marchers who rallied against this month's International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank meeting, the most devastating condemnation of the malignant power wielded by these international financial bureaucracies came from a respected insider.

He was Prof. Joseph E. Staglitz, one of the world's foremost economists, chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers from 1993 through 1996, and after that, a key global financial strategist.

"I was chief economist of the World Bank from 1996 until last November during the gravest economic crisis in a half-century," Stiglitz wrote in an essay published this month. "I saw how the IMF, in tandem with the U.S. Treasury Department responded. And I was appalled.

The IMF is "secretive," "undemocratic," "arrogant" and fraudulent when it is not merely wrong-headed, the essay revealed. Its cosmopolitan administrators often abuse their extraordinary powers. leading both the IMF and the World Bank into perpetrating irreparable bungles and on occasion into alliances with predatory speculators and crooked financiers.

In theory, both the IMF and the World Bank claim to "support democratic institutions...In practice, They undermine the democratic process by imposing policies," asserted Stigilz.

Moreover, the policies the international financial bureaucrats inflict on the nations under their thumb are often conceived in ignorance, tested on outdated or flawed economic models and pushed through in haste -- to disastrous effect, Stiglitz added.

The Globe-trotting "experts" of the IMF and the World Bank are much more likely to have first-hand knowledge of the five-star hotels in the countries under their tutelage than of the real economies they are expected to "adjust," he noted.

At times, the reforms" and "structural adjustments" enforced by the IMF are based on outright fakery, Stiglitz revealed.

He cited cases in which an IMF traveling team of experts copied a report written about on country and then simply substituted the name of another country before submitting it, saving themselves a lot of time and effort.


When corrupt politics and alien currency speculators triggered a catastrophic economic downturn in Indonesia and neighboring countries in the late 1990s, the "aid" offered by the IMF did more harm than good, the essay explained.

"Not only did the IMF fail to restore economic confidence in East Asia, its interference was undermining the region's social fabric," Stiglitz concluded.

In Russia, sunk in abysmal poverty, it was the mindless policy of post-haste privatization imposed by the IMF and the Treasury Department that enabled the crime syndicate of so-called "oligarches" to plunder the resources of the former Soviet heartland.

"The international financial bureaucrats claim their job is to heal the global economy when it's ailing," said business writer Enno Harmon. "In reality, they are casting a plague on it. Don't waste time trying to reform the IMF -- just kill it."

The SPOTLIGHT May 1, 2000

Protesters Force Reactions Inside IMF, World Bank

The publicity brought to the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank meetings forced globalists to take their schemes out into the open.

By James P. Tucker Jr

They heard everybody -- Pat Buchanan, Liberty Lobby, tie-dyed and tattooed environmentalists, black-clad anarchists and buttoned-down internationalists who want a kinder, gentler world government.

These protesters forced the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, meeting jointly in Washington April 16-17, to curb their actions while defending their existence.

In session after session, in formal speeches and at every news conference, the international bureaucrats felt compelled to argue that banking policies that enrich the rich and impoverish the poor will be "improved" and pollution-causing projects are not polluting.

But -- above all else -- IMF and World Bank officials argued that surrendering national sovereignty to international institutions is not surrendering sovereignty.

"Some have criticized the WTO as an organization that infringes on the sovereignty of its member governments," but "the WTO is basically a commercial court," said Michael Moore, director-general of the World Trade Association, in a speech April 13 at the National Press Club.

But, Moore said: "We have learned to live as citizens of the world . . . pollution crosses borders easily, so do criminals. Globalization is not a policy option" but a fact of "interdependence."

People "are protesting against globalization," said IMF Director and Bilderberg regular Stanley Fischer in a formal address. "So I will talk about globalization. Integration of the world economy is the best way."

The IMF "will do what it can to create a stable global economic environment" and make "the global financial system run better," Fischer said. "We are sharpening our surveillance of economic policies."

"Surveillance" is an IMF euphemism for dictating economic policies to once-sovereign nations for the benefit of international financiers and corporations.


In another victory for protesters, a planned trip to Red China for congressmen undecided about granting permanent favorable trading status was canceled because most of them decided against the trip.

Instead, they are spending the Easter recess at home.

The White House had hoped to have 20 congressmen travel with Commerce Secretary William Daley to China and another 20 travel later with Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman. Now, it is hoping to have 10 to justify the second trip scheduled to leave April 24.

Pat Buchanan helped make the trip impolitic for the congressmen when speaking to a rally of thousands of union members at the Capitol.

"I'd tell 'em, "You've sold your last pair of chop sticks in any mall in America,' " Buchanan said to the cheers of the workers.

Meanwhile, criticism of the World Bank and IMF continued unabated, not only on the streets, but in the offices of experts.

Kevin Danaher, who has written extensively and authored a book on the subject, said:

The World Bank takes our tax-payer money and uses it as collateral to issue bonds from major banks. That money is then used to create leverage over Third World elites.

The World Bank lends these Third World countries money -- on the condition that they will implement policies written in Washing ton and Wall Street. The bank is actually sucking money out of these countries.

"The World Bank and IMF, like the WTO, are using public funds -- yet are undemocratic, unaccountable and advancing the interests of the rich and powerful," said Daphne Wysham, coordinator of Sustainable Energy and Economy Network.

"Since the bank is not punished for defective projects . . . it has no incentive to improve the quality of its lending," said Catherine Caufield, author of a book on the IMF and World Bank.

In secret deliberations, both the IMF and World Bank guarantee loans to poor, uncreditworthy nations. Inter national financiers then make loans and investments with a potential for immense profits because of cheap labor and goods -- at no risk. Often, money publicly designated to a poor country goes straight to the banks as interest payments and is never touched by the "beneficiaries."

The practice of deliberating secretly to bail out big banks and international financiers was the main complaint of demonstrators.

The SPOTLIGHT May 1, 2000

World Bank, IMF, WTO -- Just What Are They?

The World Bank Group

Founded in 1944 at the Bretton Woods meeting, the World Bank Group was originally tasked with providing loans to assist in post-WWII reconstruction. It is made up of five institutions: the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the International development Association, the International Finance corporation, the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency and the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes. Since then, the World Bank has become a huge, bloated financial institution, lending nearly $30 billion to poor countries annually. Critics of the World Bank charge that the bank is managed by a staff of incompetents who operate in utter secrecy and answer to no one. By lending to debtor nations where criminal investors and international thieves wantonly pillage the financial systems, detractors say it wastes U.S. taxpayers' dollars and worsens the economies of countries.

International Monetary Fund

The IMF was created in 1994 at Bretton Woods as the so-called "guardian of the global economy," ensuring that nations' exchange rates pegged to the gold standard stayed within set values. but after Richard Nixon suspended the gold standard, the IMF lost its raison d'etre. Since then the Fund has primarily become a lender of last resort for cash-strapped countries. Much of the criticism of the IMF stems from its practice of conditioning loans on a country's willingness to abide by a set of strict economic conditions for broad sectors of its economy. This "restructuring" undermines a country's right to self government and opens it up to speculative feeding frenzies by international speculators such as George Soros. The IMF's international power grab has consistently been endorsed by the U.S. Treasury Department as a way of furthering U.S. economic foreign policy. The U.S. is the largest financial contributor to the IMF and has the largest share of votes -- 18 percent.

The World Trade Organization

The WTO sets, administers and enforces the rules of global trade. The group includes a legislature, called the Ministerial Conference, which consists of 135 nations, each with one vote. It also has an executive branch consisting of a director-general, and unelected multinational bureaucracy with a secretariat, committees, councils; dispute panels and review bodies; and a supreme court of trade, called the Dispute Settlement Board, that decides trade disputes but its rulings cannot be vetoed by any member nation. The United states has only one vote, as does Cuba, Haiti, Rwanda and Somalia. The majority of the member nations are dictatorships and are not friends of the U.S. They consider international organizations as vehicles to finance their socialist economies and ruling classes using of U.S. wealth and technology. Under the WTO, the member nations must abide by the judgments of the Dispute Settlement Board, which deliberates and votes in secret. The WTO can impose financial penalties and sanctions if WTO decides that our laws don't fully obey its dictates. Under WTO the multinational corporations may shift their operations anywhere in the world, where there are no fair labor or environmental regulations and 50 workers can be hired for the wage of one American and then enjoy duty-free access back to the U.S.

The SPOTLIGHT May 1, 2000

World Bankers Want Free Reign Over World

Treasury chief, bankers, GOP bigwigs scheme to refloat sunken Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI).

By James Harrer

U.S. Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, in an alliance with Republican congressional leaders, is trying to bring back the discredited Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) through a hidden trapdoor.

A congressionally chartered Washington braintrust, known as the International Financial Institution Advisory Commission(IFIAC) chaird by Prof. Allan Meltzer, an arch-conservative economist, has come up with a set of proposed reforms designed to "improve" the way the International Monetary Fund(IMF) and the World Bank operate. This comes just in time for the spring meeting of these two institutions.

Behind the closed doors of their Washington headquarters, the assembled global bankers held "intense" discussions of the changes proposed by the Congressional reform commission.

A pivotal measure proposed by the Melzer commission would mandate that in the future the IMF and the World Bank (whose name would be changed to World Development Agency) could extend loans or grants only to applicants that "pre-qualify) for funding.

To "pre-qualify," a nation must agree to lift all domestic curbs or regulatory limitations on the free flow of international investments, precisely the key issue on which MAI was floated by the global financial elites -- and sunk by opponents defending their national jurisdictions.


"The global financial initiative known as MAI is their favorite project," said retired bond analyst Roger Luckman. "It would wipe out the limited authority governments may still possess to curb frenzied speculation, flim-flam junk bond swindles, market-rigging, currency manipulation and similar popular scams in their jurisdictions"

Under MAI, regulatory structures would be abolished or suspended to ensure that international capital enjoys unfettered free flow around the world. These banking regulations were administered by public officials whose job it is to maintain a measure of order and fairness in the financial markets.

But well aware that this would make them vulnerable to predatory hot-money schemes, raids by Wall Street speculators intent on wrecking the payments systems of smaller economies and other schemes of the global financial elites, enough nations opposed MAI to defeat the measure last year.

In response to the initiative, Dr. Walid Nashabi, a former World Bank economist, now financial adviser to a group of Lebanese financial firms in New York city, warned: "This is another cunning, underhanded 'cover and deception' operation by Larry Summers, the most devious American treasury chief I can remember. It must be resisted, just as MAI was."

James Harrer, an investigative journalist, has been covering global financial shemes for decades. He is presently living in New York City.

The SPOTLIGHT May 8, 2000

Stock Market Roller Coaster Fueled by Secret U.S. Program

Those wild stock market fluctuations that shook the world financial system recently are secretly being "stabilized" by a Treasury Department program using billions of your tax dollars.

By James Harrer

The torrent of round-the-clock news reports about the frenzied gyrations of the financial markets has failed to turn up a fundamental fact: If you are a taxpayer, all that fabulous new wealth raked in by hordes of stock speculators is, in reality, your money.

"That is the dirty secret of this so-called 'new economy,'" said Allison deMott, an economist and retired portfolio manager. "When the market goes up, the smart insiders collect big winnings. When it goes down, the taxpayers must eat the biggest losses."

Other expert market-watchers expressed similar views.

"What this system amounts to is, in reality, a giant wealth transfer," explained business writer Walter Dvorshak. "It gouges crippling taxes from the pay of working American men and women, and uses some of these public funds to prop up falling securities markets, bailing out, in effect, the billion-dollar bets of private speculators who would otherwise lose their shirts."

The :system," as Dvorshak called it, dates back to the stock-market crash of 1987.

To stop the hemorrhage, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and Edward corrigan, president of the New York Fed, turned to a stealthy tactic never tried before.

"They simply flooded the markets with money," related Tim Metz, a veteran financial reporter who was covering the securities markets for The Wall Street Journal at the time. "The lead stockbrokers, known as market makers, were offered open lines of credit and were told to stop dumping shares and instead begin buying them."

It worked, Metz later recounted in an interview with a reporter of this populist newspaper.

"I always thought that to rig the markets like this would take mountains of money,' he said. "But, in reality, a couple of billion worth of instant cash put up by the Fed and the Treasury did the trick."

This was the first full news expose on Establishment market-rigging. The Wall Street Journal fired veteran reporter Metz, rather than print the full scope of his findings.


But it did not go unnoticed. For one thing, experienced financial journalists immediately realized what was happening.

Crudele made it plain that he also knew behind the scenes "the government" was propping up the market.

"It's a very important story," Crudele said. "It need intense investigation."

But, as if by command, the Establishment media avoided the challenge. "If 'they' did intervene in a crisis, I would not call that a crime. I'd call it saving the market," commented one business-weekly editor privately.

But, of course, fixing share prices is a felony crime if attempted by a private individual of institution. Moreover such artificially manipulated exchanges no longer represent a true market, merely a government-subsidized trading post.

The dangerous consequences of covert official intervention in a "free" market soon appeared.


Large speculators began to inflate share prices recklessly, in the expectation that if a stock bubble burst, the government - which had set up a secretive task force know as the Working Group on Financial Stability within the Treasury Department - would re-inflate it quickly.

Legions of small investors, who came to believe that the prompt recovery of falling markets is now a natural law, followed suit. Millions borrowed heavily on their one major asset -- their homes - in order to become stock speculators.

By last March, an unprecedented 31.8 percent of U.S. household wealth was made up of stockholdings, a sharp 26 percent increase over 1998, the Fed's own quarterly "flow of funds" report revealed. Americans now hold a stunning $13.3 trillion in stock, much of it bought with borrowed money. So-called "margin debt" (the value of shares bought by investors with funds loaned by their brokerage houses) rose 75 percent last year, to $228.4 billion.

"Never before have households' fortunes been so intimately tied to the stock market, whose prices can soar and plummet like those of no other asset," warned Mark Zandi, chief economist of the RFA econometric institute in West Chester, Pennsylvania.

That means that although Fed Chairman Greenspan is clearly having anxious second thoughts about the financial furies his manipulative policies have unleashed, the Clinton administration has no other option but to continue secretly subsidizing a stock market now described as "manic" and "irrational" even by its most loyal mouthpiece, The New York Times.

"If the Democrats let the markets crumble at this stage, they will not just lose every election this year; there will be riots in the streets," warned Dvorshak.

The SPOTLIGHT May 8, 2000

Reno Given Broad Powers In Case of Emergency

President Clinton has given Janet Reno a new job that -- oddly enough -- is supposed to start just a few months before she is to leave office in January 2001.

By Mike Blair

Attorney General Janet Reno has been selected by President Bill Clinton to be the "lead federal official" in carrying out domestic programs during a time of national emergency.

On April 6, -- without media fanfare -- Clinton signed a "memorandum" that, beginning on Oct. 1, replaces the secretary of defense, William Cohen, as the key federal player in guiding the nation through a period of national turmoil, including a potential declaration of martial law.

The federal government has issued repeated warnings that at any time a Third World country or other "terrorist" entity could launch some type of catastrophic chemical or biological attack against the continental United States, Reno -- if she is still serving as attorney general -- will become the leading federal official in case of such an emergency.

Some observers have found the Clinton decision odd, considering that Reno is due to leave office just a few months after she assumes the new and powerful position.

Others, taking into account Reno's advancing state of Parkinson's Disease, question her ability to carry out such a complex and wide-range assignment.


Many have questioned her fitness to continue as the administration's leading law enforcement officer.

She has been criticized for the use of military and para-military and para-military forces to brutally settle domestic problems and the way in which she has shielded Clinton from criminal prosecution in repeated scandals.

Reno has been assailed for her role in the holocaust at the Branch Davidian church at Waco, Tex., early in the Clinton administration.

More recently, she has been criticized for her decision to use excessive force in snatching young Cuban refugee Elian Gonzalez from a private home in Miami over the Easter holiday weekend.

The emergency position was created by the 1997 National Defense Authorization Act, naming the defense secretary as the lead official.

According to the act, the lead official is responsible for providing to civilian personnel of federal, state and local agencies the training and expert advice regarding emergency responses to "a use or threatened use of a weapon of mass destruction or related materials."

Reno, in replacing Cohen, will also be responsible for testing and improving responses of such agencies to emergencies involving "chemical or biological weapons and related materials."

Clinton in the memorandum stated that his designation of Reno was pursuant to sections 1412(a) and 1415(d)(1) of the National defense Authorization Act for Fiscal year 1997 (Public Law 104-201).

The White House offered no prior announcements of the change nor has it responded to inquiries about the memorandum, other than to provide copies*

The SPOTLIGHT May 8, 2000

Exactly How Dumb Can We Get?

Not satisfied with reducing the quality of public school education in the United States to the level of many Third World countries, liberals are intent upon furthering the dumbing down of America.

By Mike Blair

U.S. Rep. Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) And socialist Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-Minn.) are introducing legislation to bar states that get federal funds from requiring students to pass standardized tests in order for them to graduate from high school.

Scott, a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, is attempting to address the problem of many students Virginia failing the Virginia Standards of Learning (SOL) tests. The widely-reported failures have led to a near crisis in the state's public school system.

Starting with the graduating class of 2004, Virginia students will have to pass at least six of 11 high school SOL tests to receive their diplomas. They will be able to take the tests an unlimited number of times until they pass.

The Scott-Wellstone solution is to cure the problem by essentially killing the tests.

Their legislation is a backlash against a growing call for accountability measures in schools across America. Rather than addressing the issue of today's poor quality schools, Scott and Wellstone hope to skirt the whole issue by making the tests essentially "un-failable."

At the present time there are about 25 states that require students to pass standardized tests in order to receive their diplomas. according the Denver-based Education Commission of the States.

In most states the leaders of minority groups -- who fare the worst on the tests -- are ratcheting up their opposition to the graduation requirements.

"If you find a school where you have people not passing, you ought no punish the students, you ought to fix the school," Scoot stated in announcing his intention to introduce the legislation.

Scott and Wellstone clearly subscribe to the liberal philosophy that everyone is not only entitled to an education but graduation as well, apparently regardless of their ability to pass courses that are required to get their diplomas.

Cheri P. Yecke, a 'deputy state secretary of education for Virginia, opposes the Scott-Wellstone legislation, stating the "instead of bad-mouthing the tests we need to understand that they are a thermometer for how well the students and schools are doing."

"The standards movement and the tests have resulted in better-quality education for students in all the states that have implemented those tests." she concluded*

Government Child Seizures

Don't think that communists are the only ones who contend children belong to the government.

By Tony Blizzard

Children as property has been much discussed by conservatives and patriots in the case of the Cuban boy, Elian Gonzalez. Fidel Castro himself said the boy was state property.

Americans who don't like Castro were rightly outraged by his comment. But their outrage is based on the assumption that children in the U.S. are not the property of the state; that here they are assured freedom. It is a false assumption which shows the power of double think.

How many conservatives and patriots support and praise the government owned and operated mind-twisting, propaganda mills functioning under the label "mandatory public education"?

How many have the faintest idea what is meant by the ever-changing acronyms of myriad school programs mandated by all levels of government from Congress down to the local school board?

STW for instance. "School to Work" does not mean that the schools are preparing your child to succeed in the vocation of his choice on graduation. Instead, STW means the state will decide what your child will do for his life's work; which corporation he will work for and where. Doesn't that make your child the property of the state -- a human resource of the state?

Are the minds of American conservatives and patriots so manipulated they cannot see that the term "human resources," a term coined by German philosopher G.W.F. Hegel to describe government assets, means what it says? That citizens are considered another resource, such as water, timber or coal, to be used by the state -- or the corporation -- as either sees fit? How does this really differ from Castro's Cuba?

Worse for American children, we now have in every state -- and always with federal financing -- a governmental bureaucracy named "family services," or some similar title. Family services agencies have proven to despise natural families. Removing children from their homes justifies these agencies' existence. There must be a case load to guarantee the job.

Moreover, low-level bureaucrats get to play God in a manner few humans other than state dictators, like Fidel Castro, have ever had the power to do. On any pretext -- an anonymous phone call, a doctor's diagnosis (or misdiagnosis), a self-important teacher's suspicion, a malcontent neighbor's viciousness, even someone's belief that the family is "too religious" -- these "protectors of children's rights" will swoop down on a family, with armed police escort but without any need for a legal warrant or even lawful probable cause, and forcibly take the children away in the name of the state.

It is then up to the parents to prove their innocence against whatever nebulous, usually anonymous, charge may have been leveled against them which justified taking their children. This usually drags on for months, even years, of battling courts which are highly structured for the benefit of the system -- and often corrupt.

All this time the children are in state custody, away from the love of their families and, more often than not, put through various hells unfathomable to those who have never been institutionalized. Often small children are browbeaten and brainwashed by some family service, power-mad pervert accusing their own parents of all kinds of abuse, justifying the taking of them in court, where the parents' word holds little sway against that of the family service bureaucrat "expert."

A few courageous souls are exposing court condoned state and foster "care" which runs the gamut from children murdered under state supervision to deadbeat foster parents who take the money and abuse the children if they get in their way. In between are such unsavory practices as selling children on the black market, using them for pornography and prostitution, adopting them to homosexuals and lesbians and arbitrarily taking the children of parents who happen to be a thorn in the side of government, especially the courts. See "A Voice for Children" at for some specific cases which expose government stone walling, deceit and criminal acts against citizens who have attempted to fight the system to bring their children back into the home.

Alma Kidd, a mother from Washing ton state, was called by her frantic teen-age daughter screaming that she had been raped and kept naked on a dog collar and chain by the lesbian couple she was "fostered" to. When Alma gave this information to a state prosecutor he told her that if those who raped her daughter were men he would prosecute. The girl is still in the custody of the lesbians.

This desperate and outraged mother dug into her jurisdiction and discovered that Washington state had taken almost 30,000 children from their parents in one year. It is not known if this reflects a national average or how many parents ever get their children back again, but some who have will tell you that they have been severely damaged during their absence from the family home.

For details of just one real American horror story contact Alma at

The SPOTLIGHT May 8, 2000

English Still the Best Says Colorado Initiative

Colorado could become politically incorrect if a pro-English language proposal is adopted.

F.C. Blahut

U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) is spearheading an effort to get a measure on the ballot this fall that would nearly eliminate bilingual education in Colorado's public schools.

Tancredo and Linda Chaviz of the Washington, D.C.-based One Nation Indivisible are working on language for petitions to get the measure on the November ballot.

Needless to say, culture distorters are apoplectic.


For instance, Pam Martinez, director of a group called Padres Unidos that has championed bilingual education in Denver, called the proposal a "very narrow, bigoted point of view.

"It does not value the benefit of learning many languages," she said.

Proponents said it values the English language as the language of the United States.

Under the proposal, non-English speakers would get one year of intense English instruction before being mainstreamed into regular classes. Now, students are taught in two languages while they gradually move into English-only classes over a period of several years.


Students could stay in bilingual programs by getting a waiver or by enrolling in charter schools with bilingual education programs.

"The best thing we can do is to get children competent in English as quickly as possible," said Tancredo, who is leading the effort to amend the state constitution.

Supporters of the plan said bilingual programs often continue long after student should have become fluent in English, costing taxpayers millions of dollars and condemning the students to poverty.

A similar initiative implemented in California has met some success. Not unexpectedly, it has been criticized as anti-immigrant.


The SPOTLIGHT May 15, 2000

Urgent Request For Help!

For thirty years SPOTLIGHT Intelligence Operatives have penetrated air-tight Bilderberg security barriers to bring you reports from inside annual meetings of planet earth's self-appointed rulers.

But this year the Bilderbergs, weary of being exposed, have beefed-up security, purged scores of members suspected of leaking secrets to The SPOTLIGHT and switched meeting sites to baffle our previously successful super-slueths.

THIS IS WHY WE NEED YOUR HELP! If you know or have contact with ANYONE who might possibly know to where the Bilderberg's early June meeting was switched, please contact us immediately. We've got the Bilderbergs on the run; please help us keep these criminals sweating. Call 202-546-5611 if you have any facts or good hints. Ask for the editor, Mr. Chris Petherick.

The SPOTLIGHT May 15, 2000

Media Protects Bilderberg

Henry Kissinger, David Rockefeller and other Bilderberg luminaries frequently and gushingly thank the media attending their secret meetings for covering up their global conspiracy.

Exclusive to The SPOTLIGHT

By James P. Tucker Jr.

Each spring, when Bilderberg meets behind closed doors at a remote luxury resort sealed off by armed guards, police and, frequently, the host nation's military, luminaries from the world's major newspapers and broadcast outlets attend on vows of secrecy.

Thus, Bilderberg makes the mainstream press part of the conspiracy of silence, causing them to ignore a major story. Over the years, Bilderberg coverage by the SPOTLIGHT has resulted in advance stories on the end of the Cold War, the downfall of Margaret Thatcher and other earth-shaking events.

Often, the gratitude is expressed individually during cocktail-sippings, with Kissinger, Rockefeller and others thanking Donald Graham, publisher of The Washington Post, and high officials of The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Wall Street Journal and other newspapers and network television anchors.

But secrecy is so crucial that the collaborating press is often thanked as part of the formal proceedings, too.

A source who attended the 1991 Bilderberg meeting in Baden Baden, Germany related the following comments to The SPOTLIGHT and attributed them to mattoid David Rockefeller.

We are grateful to The Washington Post, New York Times, Time magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost 40 years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years.

But the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march toward a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.

The high-ranking State Department official, who has been a reliable source on Bilderberg for more than a decade, went on to say: "I am unable to confirm those precise words, but I have absolute knowledge that Kissinger, Rockefeller and the others always express their gratitude to the collaborating media, many times as individuals and sometimes during a formal meeting."

Henry Kissinger reportedly made similar remarks during the Bilderberg meeting in Evian, France in May 1992:

Today Americans would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow, they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there is an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will pledge [sic] with world leaders to deliver them from this evil.

The one thing that every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being by their world government.

The SPOTLIGHT reported on this meeting on June 8, 1992, saying that Bilderberg was determined on "conditioning the public -- especially 'those stubborn Americans' -- to accept the idea of a UN army that could, by force, impose its will on the internal affairs of any nation."

The SPOTLIGHT May 15, 2000

More People Say: Reno Must Go

Is Attorney General Janet Reno out of control?

By Mike Blair

More and more People, from the man on the street, to public officials in Washington are questioning whether it's time for the chief law enforcement officer of the nation to resign or be fired by her boss, President Bill Clinton.

Attorney General Janet Reno, her body wracked and uncontrollably trembling with incurable Parkinson's Disease, is acting more and more as if she is becoming totally out of control.

Only last week, The SPOTLIGHT revealed in an exclusive front page story that Reno had been selected by Clinton to take over on Oct. 1 as the lead federal official in the event of a terrorist attack with a weapon of mass destruction inside the United States.

Now, however, The SPOTLIGHT has learned that Miss Reno has jumped the gun, even flaunting the authority vested in Clinton's executive order, by already taking over the job, which grants her sweeping new powers.

The SPOTLIGHT has learned that Miss Reno has taken the lead by ordering a test of how three major U.S. cities would react in the event of such an attack in what is being called, "Operation Topoff."

Slated for sometime in the next 30 days, the actual time of the test run is being kept secret by federal, state and local agencies. Emergency crews in Washington, Denver and Providence will be notified that such attacks have occurred and their ability to respond will be measured by Reno.

"It could happen in an hour, it could happen 30 days from now, but it is going to happen." Colorado Gov. bill Owens (R) said. "We are literally waiting hour by hour for the test."

It is obvious that Reno is physically impaired, but the question is, is her physical impairment affecting her mental agility to handle the responsibilities that she has assumed?

Over Easter weekend, Reno created her latest controversy - or "crisis" -- by using heavily-armed federal agents to "invade," without a proper court order, the Miami home of a Cuban exile family attempting to keep six-year-old Elian Gonzalez from being sent back to communist Cuba with his devoutly Marxist father.

Legal scholars, liberal and conservative are condemning the action as unconstitutional.

Of course, Miss Reno is no stranger to using brute force on kids, being responsible for sending a similar paramilitary and military assortment of federal storm troopers against the Branch Davidian church in Waco, Tex. Dozens of children, some younger than Elian, perished in the conflagration that erupted after the tragic assault.

According to Mike McNulty, producer of the video tape Waco: A New Revelation, Miss Reno was acting on orders of First Lady Hillary Clinton, who headed at the time a Waco "crisis group."(1)

A special counsel is currently investigating the Waco holocaust. As this paper goes to press, the Senate and House have plans to investigate the Elian affair.


Meanwhile, Ted Gunderson, former senior special agent in charge of the Los Angeles office of the FBI, claims that he has been informed by three sources, one of whom works out of CIA headquarters in Langley, Va., that the CIA "is sending assassination Mexico, Honduras, El Salvador and assassinate 400 U.S. military, Mexican and American civilian personnel who have direct knowledge of CIA drug activity in Central America and Mexico, as well as the Iran-Contra drugs for arms operation in the past."

"Among those targeted," Gunderson claims, "are Mexican President-elect Laba Stida."

After their dirty work is completed in Mexico, Gunderson said he has been told by his sources, "the assassination squads will return to the United states in July and during the months of July and August will assassinate approximately 100 Americans who have been publically critical of the CIA, George Bush and Bill Clinton."

In this case, Where is Reno?

Coming from a senior FBI special agent, this is information to take seriously. As chief law enforcement officer for the U.S., The SPOTLIGHT hopes that the Attorney general is doing so, not spending time covering up the Clinton administration's deep secrets such as who was involved in the death of Vince Foster, the suspicious deaths of people surrounding the Clintons, the importation of tons of illegal drugs every day, the involvement of the Federal Reserve and the nation's banks in the drug trade, etc.

Does Reno know so much that she has become an "untouchable" of criminality?

(1) For the whole story on Hillary Clinton's role in the Waco tragedy and more, order Waco: A New Revelation, produced by Mike McNulty.

The SPOTLIGHT May 15, 2000

Bush & Gore Selling out U.S. Sovereignty

Texas Gov. George W. Bush announced that he has plans to sell the country further down the river -- and he hasn't even become president, yet.

By James P. Tucker Jr.

George W. Bush has publicly said as president he would carry out Bilderberg's plan of creating political and economic unity in the Western Hemisphere, leaving Reform Party presidential hopeful Pat Buchanan the only border-protecting candidate.

On April 14, in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, the Texas governor endorsed the next step toward creating an American Union patterned after the European Union superstate.

According to the European Parliament's charter, laws are imposed on member nations and the European court nullifies laws passed by the once-sovereign member nations.

George W. told a crowd at a ceremony opening a bridge between the two nations: "I will work to create an entire hemisphere in free trade."

Appearing with Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo, George W. spoke partly in Spanish, saying: "I will work to extend the benefits of NAFTA [North American Free Trade Agreement] from northernmost Alaska to the tip of Cape Horn."


A newly-formed, 90-man commission established among the original NAFTA nations -- the United States, Canada and Mexico -- would expand accordingly as more nations are admitted. It would evolve into the American Union Parliament, similar to the European Parliament.

While George W. was backing NAFTA expansion in his Mexico speech, back home his campaign issued a policy statement saying he would support admission of Red China to the World Trade Organization, also high on the Bilderberg-Trilateral agenda.

"As president, Gov. Bush will work to open the China market -- and other key export markets -- for America's farmers and ranchers," the statement said.

George W.'s commitment to world government is hereditary. His father, former President George Bush, is a long-time member of the Trilateral Commission. Bush spoke to the group in March 1981 as a newly-minted vice president.

David Rockefeller, a Bilderberg power who founded the Trilateral Commission, said during a special interview on the NBC-TV talk show The McLaughlin Group that NAFTA would expand to include all nations in the Western Hemisphere.

George Bush pushed for so-called "fast-track" negotiating power to expand the free trade pact while president. President Clinton, a Bilderberg member, has also been seeking this.

Under "fast-track," a president can negotiate a trade deal which Congress can vote up or down but not change.

Vice President Al Gore, the Democratic nominee-in-waiting, joined Clinton in calling for such NAFTA expansion years ago.

Buchanan is the only major presidential candidate who says he will stop free trade expansion, block China's entry into the WTO, oppose permanent favored-nation trade status for the communist state and protect national sovereignty and independence.

The SPOTLIGHT May 22, 2000

Bilderberg Location Still a Secret

Mafia-like, the shadowy group of plutocrats known as Bilderberg has gone even deeper underground. It has so far managed to keep its June 1-4 location of meetings a secret even to the world's most ardent Bilderberg hunter, The SPOTLIGHT's own Jim Tucker.

By James P. Tucker Jr.

Fearing outraged protesters, Bilderberg has been forced to reduce its ranks and hide in a deeper hole this year.

Bilderberg is concerned that throngs of young people from North America and Europe may converge on the plutocrats' annual confab to protest their secret actions. Visions of Seattle, Washington, D.C., and Geneva, Switzerland, dance in their nightmares.

Bilderberg will meet June 1-4 somewhere convenient to Brussels, Belgium. But precisely where is being covered up like never before, prompting a "global Bilderberg hunt."

The planes will be landing in Brussels for the meeting, but in that tiny country helicopters could easily pop the luminaries into France, Holland, Luxembourg or Germany.

Bilderberg's smaller group might use a different name publicly, perhaps calling itself "The International Flower Lovers' Association" when sealing off whatever facility they use.

Bilderberg had first planned to meet at a resort atop a high mountain in the tiny town of Telfs, a few miles from Innsbruck, Austria, where it had met in 1988. A call to the Interalpine Hotel confirmed that Bilderberg had been scheduled to meet there but had canceled because of Israel's hostile reaction to the results of Austria's democratic election.

There were moments of panic when Bilderberg discovered it is difficult to locate an exclusive, remote resort willing to cancel all reservations for a week while armed guards seal off the grounds.

For weeks, most Bilderberg participants were not told the site had changed and still thought they were going to Telfs (Bilderberg kept the original meeting dates). Some who were told not to come, as Bilderberg cut back participation from the traditional 120 to about 70, still think they will be going to Telfs.

"It was going to be in Austria, but they have moved it -- to Belgium, I think,"
James Wolfensohn, president of the World Bank and Bilderberg regular, told The SPOTLIGHT at a reception March 14. The following day, and for a month, Wolfensohn's scheduling office still thought Telfs.

Similarly, Stanley Fischer, acting director of the International Monetary Fund and also a Bilderberg regular, thought it was Austria deep into the month of May.

By mid-May, the staffs of Wolfensohn, Fischer and Richard Holbrooke, U.S. ambassador to the UN, all knew their bosses were flying to Brussels but not where they would proceed after landing.

The dramatic cutback in participants hit the famous and lesser-knowns alike. Treasury Secretary Larry Summers told The SPOTLIGHT at another Washington function on May 3 that he is not going, doesn't know who from his department will and has no idea of the location. Michelle Smith, deputy secretary for public affairs, later confirmed that no one from Treasury would attend.

"I don't think I've been invited," Summers said. This is a dramatic back-down for Bilderberg.

Lloyd Bentsen, as treasury secretary, always attended Bilderberg. Summers attended on behalf of his boss, Robert Rubin of Goldman Sachs, who was then secretary. Summers missed last year because his confirmation hearings were in progress. High treasury officials always attended Bilderberg.

Another prominent Bilderberg member who will be absent is Jim Hoagland, the associate editor of The Washington Post. Post publisher Donald Graham will attend but refused to reveal the location.

Another casualty of the cutback is Laura Tyson, Ph.D., dean of the Haas School of Business at the University of California at Berkeley, a lesser-known Bilderberg participant in recent years.

She first said the meeting would be in Telfs. When told of the change, she said her information dated back to March 1. She is not attending, she said, because they want the meeting to be smaller and "less conspicuous" this year.

It is public awareness that frightens Bilderberg and forces it deeper underground. As the public becomes more knowledgeable about their evil acts conducted in secret, protests grow and their agenda is jeopardized.

For decades, Bilderberg insisted it did not exist -- it was only a creature of the "right-wing imagination." When smoked out, they took the position that they are a dull bunch of old men who do nothing significant. Thus, they are "not newsworthy."

As the record of their evil acts grew -- dumping Lady Thatcher as prime minister of Britain for refusing to surrender national sovereignty to the European Union, raising American taxes and spilling American blood, among others -- outrage among the informed grew.

There had always been a smattering of publicity as local media would join The SPOTLIGHT at Bilderberg gates.

But the publicity breakthrough came from efforts of the Liberty Lobby Board of Policy members, not, embarrassingly, from the Washington staff of The SPOTLIGHT.

In 1994, members in Finland read that Bilderberg would meet near Helsinki. They called and volunteered to inform the local press and broadcast outlets. They met many times with this SPOTLIGHT reporter during his Helsinki visit. Bilderberg members were dazed and shocked to find TV cameras and newspaper reporters greeting their airplanes. I was interviewed extensively, and the story of Liberty Lobby and The SPOT LIGHT's pursuit of Bilderberg was widely covered for the first time.

In the years since, SPOTLIGHT has advised local readers when learning where Bilderberg would meet. They, in turn, would alert the media. Crowds gathered at the Bilderberg gates.

In the following meetings -- Burgenstock, Switzerland, in 1995; near King City, Ontario, in 1996; near Atlanta in 1997; at Turnberry, Scotland, in 1998; and near Lisbon, Portugal, last year -- Bilderberg has faced a blizzard of publicity, even in the mainstream press.

The coverage itself became stronger, outgrowing earlier tendencies to exhilarate over world-famous people, and raising hard questions about Bilderberg's extreme efforts at secrecy and the significance of their hidden agenda.

In those years, Bilderberg hysteria mounted. My hotel room was bugged -- the device was found and presented to me by readers familiar with spying techniques. Last year, my car was followed by Bilderberg security and I was stalked constantly around Sintra, Portugal.

The highly secretive and very elusive Bilderberg group will be meeting June 1-4 and The SPOT LIGHT's own ace reporter Jim Tucker will be there.
The Bilderberg group, an organization of some of the western world's leading movers and shakers, will once again convene to decide the future of the already stressed-out consumers, taxpayers and voters.

The SPOTLIGHT has covered the Bilderberg meetings since 1976. And Liberty Lobby, publisher of The SPOTLIGHT, has covered the annual event since 1971, beginning with the meeting in Woodstock, Vt. The full story appeared in Liberty Lowdown, at the time Liberty Lobby's special report for members of the Board of Policy of Liberty Lobby.

The press is the only profession whose work is constitutionally protected. The First Amendment guarantees a press free from any strictures placed on it by Congress. Thomas Jefferson cautioned that only a free press could assure that America's government would be free. A corrupt and controlled press would lead to a government controlled by sinister forces about which the Founding Fathers warned.

What the Founding Fathers did not foresee was the takeover of all newspapers, newsmagazines, radio and television by enormously powerful and conspiratorial plutocrats and foreign interests -- the situation today.

Each year when the Bilderberg group meets, only The SPOTLIGHT has the guts to report it. Neither the plutocratic owned Washington Post nor the Moonie owned Washington Times bothers to cover the Bilderberg meetings even though these newspapers may not only know about them may also have high ranking business and editorial executives in attendance at the meetings.

We have asked SPOTLIGHT subscribers and BOP members to ask their local newspaper editors and publishers why they failed to cover the Bilderberg meetings. Responses have run from denials that the Bilderbergers exist to the excuse that their meeting was private and therefore closed to the press!

In 1957, when the legendary Hearst writer Westbrook Pegler queried Ralph McGill, editor of The Atlanta Constitution, about the latter's attending a Bilderberg meeting at St. Simon's Island, off the coast of Georgia, McGill averred that he had put aside his journalistic nature and decided to treat the meeting as confidential and report nothing about it.

To this day, journalists and editors attending the Bilderberg meetings have made the same decision as the super-liberal internationalist McGill made 43 years ago.

Unlike the McGills of the world, the writers and editors of The SPOTLIGHT intend to exercise their right to publish the news freely and unfettered. If the press does not exercise its right to operate freely it surely will lose that right.

Although the American press has taken seriously the pledge not to break silence on the Bilderberg meetings, the European press in Finland, Portugal and even the Canadian press in Toronto have published major coverage of the Bilderberg meetings.

Some foreign journalists are not afraid to report gutsy hard-hitting news stories, although it appears that all American journalists are fearful, except for The SPOTLIGHT. That's why they have admired the work of The SPOTLIGHT throughout the years. A foreign film crew was so excited about covering Tucker's coverage of the Bilderberg meeting that they not only came to Washington to meet and talk to Jim and the editorial staff but also followed him around the Bilderberg meeting grounds in Portugal last year.

Their attitude was one of enthusiasm. The American media would have ignored Tucker completely or attacked his efforts and those of Liberty Lobby and The SPOTLIGHT.

Members of Congress clam up or feign ignorance when asked about Bilderberg meetings. The unique role of their American worthies is adequately ex plained and examined in the pages of this newspaper.

Once you discover that your representative and senators have only the responsibility but not the authority to govern, your idealistic view of democratic government will take on an entirely new and dynamic perspective.

Once you learn that in this American plutocracy, a secret government literally runs our nation and the world, your life will never be the same again.

It may seem unnecessary to some of our longtime readers for us to repeat the Bilderberg story every year but it is too important to ignore because The SPOTLIGHT knows what is real news even if the corrupt and controlled media does not.

Once you come to know that there is a secret Bilderberg group, you will know that all the issues which the public discusses and sometimes votes on come down from the top. Debate and discussion are controlled. Stooge politicians have the responsibility to govern but the authority is vested in the Bilderbergers and those with the power. The public may think they are voting this or that group out of power but their replacements are from the same controlled stockpile, with rare exceptions such as Pat Buchanan.

One way this ignorance on the part of the public can be cured is with a big infusion of truth. That truth is found in the pages of every issue of The SPOTLIGHT. For example, this week Martin Mann in a front page story tells you the truth behind the news about Israel's monitoring White House telephone conversations. Stories like this are found only in The SPOTLIGHT.

Now The SPOTLIGHT has to in crease its circulation in order to reach a goal of 1 million subscribers. And with your help we can reach that goal.

Here's how. Become a SPOTLIGHT distributor. It's fun, it's easy and it can be profitable.

You can buy five copies per week for only 25¢ each. You can sell each of these copies for the cover price of $1.50 or for any amount less. It's up to you. If you are a SPOTLIGHT subscriber at the rate of $59 a year, for only $65 a year you can be a distributor. (That's just $6 more.)

If you order 10 copies per week, your price drops to $2.10 per week or 21 cents per copy. Selling at $1.50 per copy will give you a profit of $1.29. There is a 50 percent commission on subscription sales which applies to special and introductory offers, too.

Remember: Your influence counts. . . . Use it!

The SPOTLIGHT May 22, 2000

'Best Ally' Accused of Spying on U.S. -- Again

An Israeli spy agency has been caught using highly-advanced technology to tap right into White House and State Department phone and modem communications, transferring them directly to eavesdroppers in Tel Aviv, the country's capital.

By Martin Mann

After interminable official denials, the hard facts of what may be the most outrageous national security scandal of the Clinton era are coming to light with new evidence confirming that alien espionage agents have intercepted secret electronic communications of the White House, the State Department and other agencies for years.

A well-researched story by two well-known Washington investigative writers, J. Michael Waller and Paul M. Rodriguez, reported in Insight magazine that "FBI counterintelligence is tracking a daring operation to spy on high-level U.S. officials by hacking into supposedly secure telephone networks."

The espionage operation "may have serious ramifications because the FBI has identified Israel as the culprit," revealed the two newsmen. "It risks undermining U.S. public support for the Jewish state at a time when Israel is seeking more billions of dollars [in U.S. 'aid'] for the return of land to Syria."

The discovery that the Mossad, Israel's secret service, has been eavesdropping on the confidential phone conversations of top Washington national security officials is not news in itself.

During the Clinton impeachment hearings, this populist newspaper reported that Mossad operatives had acquired electronic intercepts of Clinton's lascivious "phone sex" chats with his secret paramour, Monica Lewinsky. Mossad agents used them as bargaining chips to extort various concessions from the White House.

Foreign envoys in Washington and at the UN in New York have long complained to this populist newspaper's diplomatic correspondent that Israeli espionage had the ability to come up with real time accounts of "secure phone" exchanges between Islamic diplomats and American policymakers.


But the most recent report by Waller and Rodriguez broadens the scope of this unprecedented breach of U.S. national security.

"More than two dozen U.S. intelligence, counterintelligence, law enforcement and other officials have told us that the FBI believes Israel has intercepted telephone and modem communications on some of the most sensitive lines of the U.S. government on an ongoing basis," the two experienced newsmen related.

The FBI, moreover, faces the thorny problem of "damage control," of "how to deal with the potentially sweeping espionage penetration of key U.S. telecommunications systems, allowing foreign eavesdropping on calls to and from the White House, the National Security Council (NSC), the Pentagon and the State Department," Waller and Rodriguez explained.

For nearly a year, FBI agents have been tracking an Israeli businessman working for a local phone company. The man's wife is alleged to be a Mossad officer under diplomatic cover at the Israeli embassy in Washington, investigators found.

According to the report, this suspect and other Mossad operatives used telephone company equipment at remote sites to track calls placed to or received from high-ranking government officials, including the president himself. A key method used was to utilize a private company that provides record-keeping software and other support services for major telephone utilities in the United States.

The FBI uncovered what appears to be highly sophisticated means enabling Israeli agents to not just listen in on classified conversations in Washington, but to transmit them live directly to Mossad eavesdroppers in Tel Aviv, the two investigative writers revealed.

"It's a huge security nightmare," a top U.S. counterintelligence official acknowledged.

Other sources warned that in Washington, "everything involving Israel on this particular matter is off limits. It's that hot."

Israel itself "appeared stunned" by the Waller-Rodriguez report, according to a late dispatch in the Middle East News line of The World Tribune.

Revealingly, there were no immediate, categorical denials from senior Israeli officials. Instead, they claimed that the story of Mossad wiretapping was "leaked by Clinton administration officials as part of a pressure campaign to stop Israeli arms sales to China."

In Washington, seasoned counterintelligence officials were not unduly surprised.

"The Israelis conduct intelligence as if they are at war," confirmed David Major, a retired FBI supervisory special agent, who also served as director of counter-intelligence at the NSC. "That's something we have to realize, but it doesn't excuse it."

Ironically, Israel has solemnly pledged for decades that it will never conduct espionage operations in or against the U.S., a covenant occasionally cited in wist ful tones by White House spokesmen.

"If anything, this case has settled the question of just what Israel's word is worth," commented James Hanrahan, a former FBI inspector of embassies.

The Associated Press quoted an un named source in the Janet Reno Justice Department saying there is no Israeli spying. AP quoted an Israeli official as denying any spying. Israel is still trying to get convicted spy Jonathan Pollard out of prison.

The SPOTLIGHT May 22, 2000

Washington Hobbles Border Patrol

A union representative for Border Patrol agents blasts the federal government for undermining those who protect our borders.

By Tom Farley Union Steward, Local 3725 National Border Patrol Council

On March 14, two Mexican military vehicles carrying troops working as part of an anti-drug task force crossed the border into Santa Teresa, N.M., 20 miles west of El Paso, where they were intercepted by Border Patrol agents on horseback (SPOTLIGHT, April 10).

Two shots were fired from one of the vehicles as it sped back into Mexico. The second vehicle continued to pursue the agents a mile into U.S. territory where a very intense standoff took place. Eventually local police units and other Border Patrol back-up units arrived and took the nine Mexican soldiers into custody.

Following the capture of the rogue Mexican soldiers, Chief Louis Barker not only voluntarily returned the Mexican soldiers to Mexico, he also returned the automatic weapons and vehicles, used in the attempted murder of Border Patrol agents.

This is not the first time this has happened. According to data from the office of Rep. Duncan Hunter, (R- Calif.), the Mexican army strayed into U.S. territory 63 times between 1995 and 1999. But this is the first time they have opened fire since the days of Pancho Villa.

This kind of craven cowardice and capitulation will only lead to more incursions and attempts on the lives of Border Patrol agents, further adding to the current trend of Mexican army assistance to known drug smugglers (everyone knows it is happening). Let us also remember that when Border Patrol agents stray into Mexico, they are held and often beaten, prior to release. I have been in a Mexican jail myself and believe me they don't bring in Geraldo Rivera to see if your rights were upheld.

Border Patrol officials confirmed that the Juarez cartel, one of Mexico's biggest drug gangs, had placed a $200,000 bounty on U.S. law enforcement officers. The cartel is based in Juarez, just across the Rio Grande from El Paso.

The fault in this matter does not entirely rest with Barker as he is a victim of the politically correct line emanating from the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) central office in Washington, which is more concerned with acquiring cheap labor for the free traders than guarding the sovereignty of a nation. It reminds me of a Latin passage, Cuid Custodist Ipsos Custodes -- who shall guard the guardians? The Romans.

In 23 years with the Border Patrol, I have seen the INS voluntarily relinquish its authority to enter on farmland, severely curtail our ability to raid construction sites and now they are talking about avoiding neighborhoods and scaling back operations during the census. Are we moving into a situation where the average Border Patrol agent stands on the international boundary with a white flag and hands out lunch sacks? How can a government that cannot control its own borders be called a government?

The varying temporary protection status list whereby aliens from various countries are given temporary relief here continues to grow every time a country suffers a revolution or a natural weather calamity. It would be much easier to produce a list of which aliens can be arrested. Such a list would be much shorter.

The number of forms required to process an alien is an ever growing monster. They are increasing exponentially to the point I fear that soon there will not be a tree left on the planet.

Increasing the paperwork on an alien has long been a tactic of INS planners. I personally think the INS feels that the larger the burden of paperwork placed on individual agents, the fewer aliens they will apprehend. They are after all a government bureaucracy and the path to expansion by INS is more illegal aliens in the country, not fewer. A trend that is breeding a more hostile public reaction, if the people I have been encountering are valid indicators. Under the Carter administration, in Yuma, Ariz., we were told there was no gas for the vehicles for about two weeks.

At present, the Mexican consul must be contacted to interview every alien we arrest in Orlando and Miami sector stations to verify that his arrest was handled in a satisfactory manner. The bulletin board contains envelopes for mailing to INS central office to aid this process. There are plans to allow the consul access to our computers. I have seen agents given days off duty for a simple slip of speech. Can you imagine what would happen to agents found a mile inside Mexico firing on Mexican agents? They would be fired and facing prison time. Hordes of FBI and State Department people would be on the scene along with Geraldo Rivera.

The planners of the Constitution did not intend the phrase, "We the people of the United States," to be defined as anyone who had just illegally crept through a hole in a barbed wire fence. I am not an attorney, but this should be painfully clear to anyone with a room temperature IQ. An infant born just inside the border is considered an American citizen.

By conservative estimates, the current U.S. population will double in 50 years and soon thereafter reach the size of current day China, where survival sometimes dictates infanticide and the ability to survive on pig intestine soup. This is all happening when polls indicate Americans do not want any more immigration. I don't think the average American is willing to make this sacrifice in order to get a few chickens plucked. Sadly the average American seems to have little voice in his future other than when he or she is willing to be disarmed.

Another tragic consequence of replacing Americans by desperate aliens who will work for less money is the staggering amount of documented disease they bring with them -- such as strains of drug-resistant TB, HIV, Dengue fever, Rubella and Bubonic plague. This seems to be of little concern to Washington and the free traders. I guess the feeling is that if they all die, they can always bring in somebody who works cheaper.

The United States does not exist primarily for the benefit of multinational corporations who have no allegiance to any country nor the rule of law and consider themselves endowed by divine right to deny people a living wage. If they do not wish to conduct their affairs in a civilized manner, let them move to other countries, but let them pay a tariff to dump their products into the United States. If the people responsible for the policies I have just enumerated call them selves Americans, then I am ashamed to call myself one.


We do have many responsible political leaders who do not espouse the politics of nation breaking and the sort of territorial aggrandizement in reverse, whereby current politicians actually encourage the encroachment of hostile foreign hordes to usurp the living space of the locals. They include: Reps. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), Lamar Smith (R-Tex.), Joe Scarborough (R-Fla.), Charles Cana dy (R-Fla.), Dave Weldon (R-Fla.), Mark Foley (R-Fla.), Bob Barr (R-Ga.), Harold Rogers (R-Ky.), Thomas Delay (R-Tex.) and Ron Paul (R-Tex.), plus Pat Buchanan, the Reform Party presidential candidate.

Rep. Brian Bilbray (R-Calif.) has sponsored an amendment which will deny citizenship to the children of illegal aliens born on American soil.

Many Americans do not understand that someone can walk through a hole in the fence along the international boundary, have a child and declare it an American citizen. This bill is about 200 years overdue.

I urge you to separate the Border Patrol from the Immigration and Naturalization Service and place it under leaders who at least have a concept of the problems on America's borders and the responsibilities of a federal law enforcement agency. The Border Patrol has a serious retention problem.

We have asked for an investigation of why agents are being fired upon and their attackers released. It has been two months and we have heard absolutely nothing concerning this matter. We are going to do our best not to let this be swept under the carpet. I am prepared to take this matter up with anyone who will listen until we get some logical answers.

There are many remedies available. Mexico can put its rogue soldiers in prison, we can stop supplying their entire country with electricity at no charge, or we can put up an impenetrable wall on the border, a solution I wholeheartedly favor.

These attempts to bend over backwards to appease a rogue narco state are making the United States appear to be the laughing stock of the world.

The SPOTLIGHT May 22, 2000

China Ready to Nuke LA To Recapture Taiwan?

Red China warns that it will not deter its plans to ultimately take over and reunite the Republic of (Free) China on Taiwan with the communist mainland. Even if it means "nuking" U.S. cities, such as Los Angeles.

By Mike Blair

As China continues spreading its power and influence throughout the western world, including the development of a major deep water navy, high-ranking Chinese leaders make it very clear to Washington officials that they will not tolerate any military plans by the United States to block their takeover, even by force, of Taiwan.

Red China hasn't ruled out "nuking" U.S. cities, such as Los Angeles, with long-range missiles.

Leading the pack of Chinese military leaders rattling their sabers is Lt. Gen. Xiong Guangkai, deputy chief of staff of the People's Liberation Army (PLA).

During his visit in Washington earlier this year, Xiong reiterated China's intention to reunite Taiwan with the mainland.


Xiong made that perfectly clear four years ago. The PLA created a major crisis when it fired nuclear-capable missiles directly over Taiwan, forcing the Clinton administration to send a carrier task force to the area.

"Taiwan is a matter of vital interest to us," Xiong told Assistant Secretary of Defense Charles Freeman.

Xiong pointed out that there was a time when the U.S. military could intimidate China.

"The U.S. could do that then because U.S. officials knew we could not retaliate," Xiong warned. "Now we can. In the end, you care a lot more about Los Angeles than you do about Taipei, the Taiwanese capital."

The bold threat was three years before the so-called Cos Report, undertaken by Congress, revealed that China had obtained nearly all of America's nuclear secrets, either as outright "gifts of the Clinton administration or through spying and stealth.

The same year Xiong issued his bellicose statements, he sent his deputy, Gen. Gi Shengde, to meet with then-Democratic Party fund-raiser Johnny Chung. He told Chung: "We like your president. We want him re-elected."

The Chinese Communist general then offered Chung $300,000 for Clinton's 1996 re-election campaign.

U.S. military officials are worried that Clinton cannot stomach standing up to his Red Chinese "benefactors in a showdown over Taiwan. The most dangerous period is during Clinton's final days in office, they said.

Bilderberg Meeting Location Found!

Flash Update!

10 a.m., Washington D.C.

May 19, 2000


The SPOTLIGHT can definitely confirm that the Year 2000 secret meeting of the international Bilderberg organization will beheld June 1-4 at the Chateau du Lac hotel, 9 miles south of the Brussels, Belgium airport.

This meeting has been planned under the strictest security in the 30-year history of the Bilderbergers. Thanks to a team of patriotic nationalists in the U.S., Belgium and other countries, the secret meeting was finally located yesterday just minutes before the May 29 issue of The SPOTLIGHT was scheduled to go to press. Page 1 of the paper had to be re-made for this news, which will be delivered to subscribers this coming week and is already in newsstands all over Washington.

The Bilderbergers are afraid that there will be demonstrations at the Chateau du Lac similar to the ones at Geneva, Seattle and Washington D.C..

Every year, the Bilderbergers meet at a different location in Europe or the U.S., always closely guarded by hundreds of officers and usually by the army of the host country, making it impossible to gain entrance. All discussions are kept secret. Bilderberg decisions concerning strategy to install a world government (New World Order) are communicated to the American Congress and the parliaments of other countries by the super-powerful plutocrats, politicians, journalists, and propagandists who attend.

For the past 25 years of its existence, only The SPOTLIGHT has reported every year on this event. No other American newspaper will touch the subject; in fact, most of them deny that such an organization even exists.


The Chateau Du Lac Hotel Web Page:


The Chateau Du Lac Hotel
Avenue Du Lac 87

Phone: 02-6557111

Fax: 02-6557444

All are invited to join the welcoming committee that is going to be there!*

The SPOTLIGHT May 29, 2000

Bilderberg Elite Gathering At Posh Belgian Resort

Environment on Bilderberg Agenda

At this year's Bilderberg meeting, formulating global environmental policy is high on its agenda.

By James P. Tucker Jr.

Minutes before this edition of The SPOTLIGHT went to press, sources revealed that Bilderberg will be meeting June 1-4 at the Chateau du Lac, a fabulous resort approximately 20 miles outside of Brussels, Belgium.

High on their agenda will be promoting a global environmental agency as a building block for the emerging world government.

The SPOTLIGHT investigative team has learned of even more extraordinary security measures being undertaken by Bilderberg, even beyond its usual procedure of sealing off the location and deploying guards and the military.

"Bilderberg is terrified that there would be a demonstration such as in Seattle and Washington and has hired an international security company and have totally changed security procedures. And they have changed their name for the meeting."

Bilderberg participants themselves do not know precisely where they are going, another source said. He said the letter inviting Bilderberg participants reads:

"We will have a secure facility adjacent the airport, with a reception committee in attendance to greet you. Limousines will be standing by to speed all guests to the meeting place."

The Bilderberg agenda was laid out at a private meeting of the Aspen Institute -- one of the many arms of Bilderberg -- Feb. 18-20 in San Juan, Puerto Rico. Details of the meeting were provided to The SPOTLIGHT by a high State Department official who has been a reliable Bilderberg source for more than 10 years.

Steve Charnovitz of Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering law firm stated the goal clearly by citing, approvingly, Renato Ruggiero, former head of the World Trade Organization, who "raised the question in several speeches of whether a World Environment Organization should be created."

Charnovitz said "moving ahead with good international economic and environmental policies will require a lot more coordination in the future than was ever needed in the past."

The meeting, which included 23 members of Congress, was funded by the Rockefeller Foundation and Ford Foundation. Both have close ties to Bilderberg and its brother group, the Trilateral Commission.

While holding forth on the subject "International Environmental Treaties and Institutions," Richard Benedick, a former deputy assistant secretary of state, said that "no matter how compelling the issue" negotiating a treaty is difficult.

"One hundred and 80 countries or more may be involved -- each with its sovereign interests, each proud of its culture and history. . . ." implying that such barriers should be overcome.

"No one should underestimate the challenge of securing U.S. support for international treaties and institutions," Benedick said. "Support in Congress is not always widespread or certain [be cause of] ideology, isolationism, moral convictions, politics and questions of sovereignty.

"All these and more have gotten in the way recently and will continue to hinder Congress' ability to deal with a range of environmental and population problems, especially family planning assistance," he said.

After denouncing the problems of "ideology, moral convictions" and "questions of sovereignty," Benedick saw hope in the World Trade Organization: "In one instance involving a gasoline additive, a WTO panel ruled against the United States, causing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to change a regulation intended to protect air quality."

Global peace and prosperity are in the interests of America but cannot be achieved "in isolation, independently of what is going on in the outside world" and are dependent on events beyond its shores."

"Ecological interdependence is even more pervasive than economic interdependence," Benedick said, and denounced nations that "defend their sovereign right to fell their forests, to excavate their minerals, to harvest their fisheries. . . ."

Among legislators attending were Reps. Gary Ackerman (D-N.Y.), Tom Allen (D-Me.), Eva Clayton (D-N.C.), Julian Dixon (D-Calif.), Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.), Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.), Tillie Fowler (R-Fla.), Gene Green (D-Tex.), James Greenwood (R-Pa.), Edward Mar key (D-Mass.), Jim McDermott (D-Wash.), Connie Morella (R-Md.), David Obey (D-Wis.), Donald Payne (D-N.J.), John Porter (R-Ill.), Deborah Pryce (R-Ohio), Tom Sawyer (D-Ohio), Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) Pete Stark (D-Calif.), Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Frank Murkowski (R-Alaska).

The SPOTLIGHT May 29, 2000

Israeli Admits Assassination Is National Policy

Washington. D.C.'s top cops are in tense talks after an Israeli military official concedes the country's assassination tactics.

By Martin Mann

In a soundproof conference room adjoining the office of David Carpenter, head of the State Department's Diplomatic Security division, officials from the Secret Service, the FBI and Carpenter's own staff discussed the latest headache handed them by a top Israeli official, who confirmed that "liquidating" anyone considered a "danger" to Israel was the "legitimate and appropriate" policy of its government.

That the ministate maintained dozens of hit squads made up of widely traveled military and civilian triggermen has long been a silently acknowledged fact of life to U.S. security officials. Every Israeli prime minister in the last quarter-century has committed political murder with his own hands as a sort of entrance test for national office.

But officially, Israel has never before acknowledged its determination to exterminate troublesome opponents abroad. That veil was lifted late last month at the retirement ceremonies of Gen. Shabtai Ziv, a former military judge who served as general counsel of the Shin Beth, Israel's internal security service for the past dozen years.

It was an ornate occasion, with Israeli Supreme Court President Aharon Barak and Attorney General Elyakim Rubinstein in attendance as Ziv delivered his farewell address.

"As a jurist, I had to distinguish between hostile elements within the territory of the state of Israel and those who act outside the state and cannot be arrested or brought to trial," Ziv explained. "As for the latter [enemies abroad], it is perfectly legitimate to strike at anyone who is a danger to the state's security. . . . I will authorize a liquidation of someone like that anywhere, provided I get a clear and specific order from the political level."

What troubles American security officials is that the concept of just who is a "danger to the state" is subject to volatile and bellicose interpretation among Israeli leaders. The ministate's chief rabbi, Ovadia Yosef, is currently under criminal investigation for publicly urging the execution of a government minister participating in the current Mideast peace talks which involve returning some territory unlawfully occupied by Israel to its neighbors -- a concession considered treason by many Zionist militants and fundamentalist rabbis.

"Trouble is, the real promoters of these controversial Mideast settlement talks are Clinton and his top people," says Lt. Col. Tom Hoskins, a U.S. Marine counter-terrorist expert. "If Zionist fanatics want to kill their own leaders for going along with Clinton, who can tell when they will turn their attention -- and their hit squads -- toward Washington?"


U.S. security and counterintelligence officials are also troubled by the inroads an alien lobby is making among this nation's law-enforcement and intelligence agencies. In New York City, Police Commissioner Howard Safir announced this month that the Simon Wiesenthal Foundation, based in California, was setting up a center in Manhattan where city and state police officers will be trained how to handle "interracial" relations.

Simultaneously, the Justice Department announced that it was, after a long delay and an attempted cover-up, opening a criminal inquiry into the security violations reportedly committed by former CIA director John Deutch -- known for his deep ethnic, emotional and political ties to the state of Israel -- while serving as the nation's top ranking spymaster.

"There are ways for dealing with suspected terrorists, especially if they are of the Muslim kind," said a former FBI agent. "You harass them, bug them, defame them, infiltrate them and throw them in jail. But Israel is different. You make the wrong move, and you will find yourself out of a job and blacklisted -- federally unemployable, so to speak."

What also worries U.S. experts, who are responsible for the security of senior American officials as well as Washington's many-hued diplomatic corps, is that a number of top Israeli leaders, among them President Ezer Weizman, Prime Minister Ehud Barak and his predecessor, former Premier Benjamin Netanyahu, are under criminal investigation for offenses ranging from money-laundering to bribery and electoral fraud.

According to Hitler's Secret Conversation, a stenographic account of personal discussions with Adolf Hitler, even the head of Nazi Germany thoroughly rejected assassination as a tool in political struggles.

The SPOTLIGHT May 29, 2000

Blatant corruption, Influence, Peddling Exposed Behind Red China Trade Deal

Companies pushing Congress to pass the China trade legislation have worked behind the scenes to ensure soft investigations and mild rebukes for repeated U.S. arms export violations. In return, they've become the "cash cows" for key U.S. officials and their kin.

By Tom Flocco

An examination of Federal Election Commission (FEC), Center For Responsive Politics (CRP) and Justice Department agents of foreign principals lobby records regarding contributions to House and Senate members reveals startling conflicts of interest among legislators charged with oversight of communist China's obtaining American military research and development secrets.

McDonnell-Douglas (Boeing), Lock heed Martin, Loral Space (Lockheed) and Hughes Electronics (General Motors) are all under indictment, awaiting indictment or under current investigation by the Justice Department for illegally passing rocket and satellite technology to China.

But the illegalities may have little effect upon the outcome of the looming vote to extend permanent most favored status to China -- now called permanent "normal" trade relations (PNTR).

Each company also plays a significant role in the political dealings and donor machinations of representatives who must now return favors connected to the PNTR vote -- legislators who are also charged with investigating espionage and campaign finance scandals related to China.


Sen. Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.), chair man of the Senate Government Affairs Committee charged with investigating the illegal Chinese political campaign contributions, was criticized by some for his soft probe, hastily shutting down his hearings in late October, 1997.

The suspension of Thompson's failed campaign finance hearings occurred at a time when a variety of revelations were building momentum which would result in the impeachment of President Clinton. But on Oct. 30, 1998, at the apex of the House impeachment proceedings, the Tennessee senator's son, Fred D. "Tony" Thompson Jr., was hired as a congressional lobbyist for Lockheed Martin. Other Lockheed lobbyists were making six-figure salaries at the time.

Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore's former key staff member and Clinton-Gore DNC fund-raiser, Peter Knight, is also listed with Thompson's son as a current Lockheed lobbyist. Federal election documents list Lockheed as the Tennessee Senator's top contributor with $27,000 in 1996 and $16,000 in 1998 -- both substantial sums for an individual company in an election cycle.

Clinton-connected political appointments began falling into the laps of family members of key Republican legislators. Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) let his wife Joan accept a six-figure appointment directly from Clinton just six months be fore the impeachment vote. Mrs. Specter would conveniently be serving with Democratic National Committee Chair man Steven Gross man's wife on the National Endowment for the Arts Board.

Then influential House Republican anti-impeachment leader, Rep. Chris Shays (R-Conn.), was able to avoid public notice when his wife Betsy quietly accepted a six-figure appointment as director of Ameri-Corps from close Clinton confidant and early damage-control aide Mark Gearan, now director of the Peace Corps. The job came through on Oct. 8, 1998 -- just four weeks before the House impeachment vote.


Lockheed is also under contract to manage the Oak Ridge National Energy Labs in Tennessee, a subject that House Select Chinese espionage investigation committee chairman Christopher Cox (R-Calif.) and ranking minority member Norman Dicks (D-Wash.) declined to comment upon during a C-SPAN-televised Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.

The two legislators had been asked by Specter about security problems similar to those at New Mexico's Los Alamos Labs. Specter never pressed the issue.

Tony Thompson's main area of congressional lobby responsibility is reportedly related to the Oak Ridge National Energy Laboratories.

On April 19, the State Department announced that it would accuse Lockheed Martin of 30 separate export violations for transferring satellite technology to China. The Washington Post reported that Lockheed violated the Arms Export Control Act -- a separate law governing the State Department licensing of military exports. State Department officials did not report whether Lockheed had also transferred any Oak Ridge Labs-related technology to China.

Former Reagan defense official Larry M. Wortzel asserted that China improved its ballistic missile technology through dealings with Lockheed and two other heavy political contributors, Hughes Electronics Corporation and Loral Space and Communications. The Cox committee maintained that Lock heed scientists discussed technology issues with Chinese scientists without defense department monitors present.

Although Loral and Hughes have not yet been formally charged, they are still under investigation for allegedly sharing a scientific evaluation report of a Chinese made satellite motor with Hong Kong-based client, Asia Satellite Telecommunications, without informing the Department of Defense.

According to the Post, the military information Loral and Hughes transferred to China was so sensitive that 45 of the report's 50 pages were blacked out and shielded from public scrutiny.

Lockheed's military technology ties to China became even more visible when Loral president and heavy Clinton-Gore donor Bernard Schwartz was tapped as vice president of Lockheed after the company bought out most of Loral in early 1996.

On Oct. 19, 1999, a federal grand jury issued a 16-count indictment accusing another pro-China-trade defense corporation, McDonnell-Douglas, along with a Chinese-run company, of conspiring to violate U.S. export laws in the sale of aerospace equipment that wound up at a Chinese military plant.

In 1994 McDonnell sold the China National Aero-Technology Import and Export Corporation (CATIC) 13 pieces of sophisticated machining equipment used to build aircraft parts -- used in some applications with Silkworm missiles. CATIC is a Chinese-run defense firm that is the Chinese military's main purchasing arm.

The indictment alleged that CATIC intended to "divert the equipment to the military plant and that McDonnell-Douglas acted with 'willful blindness' in arranging the sale." The indictment also charged a history of false statements and omissions on the part of McDonnell.

If convicted of the charges, the corporation could be fined millions of dollars and the individuals involved could face up to five years in prison.

According to FEC and CRP records, Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.), chairman of the highly sensitive House Armed Services Subcommittee on Military Research and Development, also serves as an example of how soft investigations and mild rebukes could seem suspect when legislators charged with protecting national security have conflicts of interest.

Weldon accepted $170,000 in campaign contributions during the same time period from the same corporations now either under federal indictment or investigation for shipping military secrets to China. Contributions included many subsidiary companies doing subcontract work for the companies in question.

As a member of the House Select Committee investigating Chinese espionage chaired by Cox, Weldon received political contributions from corporations that were represented by FARA-registered U.S. foreign lobbyists, Cassidy Associates -- a firm which employed Maeley Tom, a China-tied Lippo Group operative-consultant, as vice president.

Cassidy Associates is the largest congressional lobby firm in the United States and one of the top political cash cows.

Five Cassidy lobby representatives periodically contributed small personal checks totaling $5,750 to Weldon in addition to the money he received from the Cassidy-represented corporations either indicted or under investigation.

Cassidy also sent Ms. Tom to Indonesia with Commerce Secretary Ron Brown on a trade mission, accompanied by White House "bag-man" Charlie Trie and DNC donors Pauline Kanchanalak and Nora Lum. All three have been investigated. Trie and Lum were convicted regarding illegal foreign contributions.

Center For Responsive Politics documents reveal Cassidy's income as $18 million in 1997 and $20 million in 1998. The firm's substantial total of $416,700. in legislative contributions to key Republican and Democratic congressman occurred during the important 1995-96 election cycle from which many of the national security allegations sprang.

However, no congressional committee has yet questioned the source of Cassidy's money, given the various Chinese campaign finance scandals, Peking espionage, congressional links and the suspect handling of national security at the State Department building.

Cassidy, as Justice Department-registered "agents of foreign principals," represents three military technology corporations extremely interested in "permanent normal trade relations" with China. The lobby firm has donated princely sums to influence congressmen like Weldon regarding defense contracts and military exports as they relate to China policy: i.e. Lockheed Martin and Loral subsidiary, United Space Alliance ($460,000 in 1998), McDonnell-Douglas parent company, Boeing ($340,000 in 1997 and $400,000 in 1998) and Lock heed Defense Systems' (combat vehicles) and Armament Systems (gun systems) parent company, General Dynamics ($600,000 in 1997 and $440,000 in 1998).

Weldon contributors such as Hughes, Raytheon, TRW, Madison Research, Texas Instruments, Teledyne, Northrop-Grumman and Rockwell have ongoing co-mingled defense and missile projects that require them to work together on a contractor/subcontractor basis to develop their highly sophisticated military projects.

Ms. Tom had recommended Clinton-Gore fund-raiser and Lippo Group employee John Huang for a Commerce Department position.

The Senate Government Affairs Committee on Aug. 6, 1997, identified Huang as "the political power that advises the Riady family (Lippo Group) on issues and where to make contributions," and the Riady family's "top priority for placement because he is like one of their own."

The Riadys, a Chinese family based in Indonesia, were one of the largest benefactors to Clinton's campaign in 1996.

In June 1997, House Rules Chairman Gerald Solomon (R-N.Y.) alleged publicly what committee staffs were saying privately -- that intelligence intercepts of Huang's phone calls while at the Commerce Department revealed that he had "committed economic espionage and breached our national security."


Some might question whether there is anyone left to depose legislators under oath who would never subpoena themselves to offer explanations for their conflicts of interest.

Chicago Sun-Times/CNN political analyst Robert Novak reported on Aug. 2, 1999 that the Reno Justice Department may be blackmailing some Republicans by holding the threat of indictment and/or further investigation of campaign contributions over their heads.

While every import from China is made under conditions not subject to American law, Congress is attempting to offer PNTR to China when their workers don't pay a penny into our Social Security and Medicare programs, or into U.S. school districts, streets, highways and defense.

American companies that build factories in China to make goods to send here are evading U.S. laws and taxes. With the help of a docile American citizenry, Congress is planning to give China the equivalent of billions of dollars in foreign aid at taxpayer expense while our ballooning China trade deficit accounts for losses in production, income, wealth, jobs, higher living standards, savings, capital formation and tax revenue.


For more on the China connection and the role the Riadys played in getting Bill Clinton into office order Year of the Rat by Edward Timperlake and William C. Triplett II, and Betrayal: How the Clinton Administration Undermined American Security by Bill Gertz.

The SPOTLIGHT May 29, 2000

What U.S. Workers Don't Know Can Hurt Them; U.S. Jobs Being Sacrificed

U.S. workers may not yet be aware that they are the unwitting sacrifice to the gods of the global economy. But they're learning.

By Patrick J. Buchanan

In the tiny West Virginia town of Weirton, population 22,000, thousands marched to save Weirton Steel, the heart of their community. If the steel plant goes under, and its 4,400 workers lose their jobs, the town dies. It is as simple as that.

What is threatening Weirton Steel and every other steel plant in the U.S.? In a word, imports, which in August equaled 35 percent of U.S. steel consumption, up 50 percent from a year ago.

Who is dumping into our market to save their steel industries by killing ours? Japan, South Korea, Russia, Indonesia and Brazil.

Yet, as those folks marched through Weirton to petition their government for help, our government was racing to rescue -- Brazil. That's right.

As the president was clucking his sympathy for U.S. steelworkers, the treasury secretary was wrapping a ribbon around a $41.5 billion bailout of a bunch of wastrel politicians in Brazil.

Even more than Moscow's rip-off of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), this Brazilian bailout reveals the corruption and fraud that are now essential to maintaining the fiction of a global economy.

Look at the agencies coughing up the bailout billions. The U.S. Exchange Stabili zation Fund, created to defend the U.S. dollar, not Brazil's currency, is in for $5 billion. The World Bank and Inter-American Development Bank have put in $9 billion, though they are supposed to fund development projects, not bail out bankrupt regimes.

The IMF, established to defend an exchange-rate system that died in 1971, is in for $18 billion. Each of these institutions is being corrupted and perverted so a global corporate and political elite will not have to face the consequences of its own malfeasance, The fraud here is monstrous. With Brazil's Fernando Cardoso running a deficit of 8 percent of gross domestic product and his central bank pegging interest rates near 50 percent to keep money from fleeing the country, the markets have declared Brazil a terrible risk. Investors got the message and have pulled out $30 billion of Brazil's hard currency since July.

Why would the United States and the IMF drop $41.5 billion on a regime on the precipice of devaluation and default? Answer: To keep the free market from doing its work, lest bankers and investors who pumped all that money into Brazil lose their Turnbull & Asser shirts.

The folks marching through Weirton don't know it, but they are being sacrificed to the gods of the global economy. Their taxes are backing $160 billion in loans to Indonesia, South Korea, Russia and Brazil, even as those countries dump steel into the U.S. market and kill the jobs of the men and women who work in Weirton.

The Treasury Department and the IMF defend the Brazilian bailout by insisting that Cardoso has a tough austerity plan to slash the deficit. But a glance at Cardoso's plan shows it is mostly blue smoke and mirrors.

It is based on a budget that projects growth, but thanks to those 50 percent interest rates, Brazil is headed into recession. The tax hikes proposed will only deepen that recession and expand the deficit, and the proposed budget cuts will never pass Brazil's leftist Congress.

As in the Russian bailout, where Boris Yeltsin's "reformers" lied to the IMF and the IMF knew they were lying, both sides here know exactly what is going down. The Brazilians know that if the IMF is given some political cover, the money will be on the way, because it isn't Brazil that is the real beneficiary of the $41.5 billion. The real beneficiaries are the global investors whose huge gamble in Brazil was in imminent danger of being wiped out.

To most Americans, these bailouts have nothing to do with them. After all, the U.S. economy is perking along, and the Dow is back near record territory. So, who cares?

But around the world, it is dawning on people who it is who is growing rich and who is being sacrificed to keep the global casino going. And nations are beginning to act in their own interests.

Moscow is walking away from billions in debt and printing money to pay back Russians, not western banks. In Indonesia, mobs of unemployed are rioting. Malaysia is imposing capital controls. Many Third World regimes have simply stopped servicing debts. When a U.S. trade official accused Japan of trying to export its way out of recession, the Japanese told her to get lost.

Nations in trouble look out for themselves first, and it is only America's elite that still seems enthralled by a globalist ideology.

One day, American workers will wake up and realize that their jobs and factory towns have been sacrificed -- to save the bacon of the "investment community."

When they do, the day of reckoning will be at hand. As for this latest $41 billion bailout, it has only postponed that day.