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

Reprinted from, home of The SPOTLIGHT archive

The SPOTLIGHT August 7, 2000


Divide and conquer is the latest dirty trick being employed by the plutocratic media to derail Pat Buchanan's dynamic campaign. Reporter Thomas Edsall, writing in The Washington Post on July 23, painted the Reform Party as a once-innocent "centrist" and "secular organization" under siege by evil extremists such as the likes of Liberty Lobby, the populist institution that publishes The SPOTLIGHT.

The article told readers that the Reform Party is now a "magnet" for "leaders and activists" of a variety of so-called "extreme right organizations," Liberty Lobby among them.

The comments about Liberty Lobby were standard boilerplate lifted from press releases of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) -- a leading voice for the Israeli lobby -- and no real surprise. Quoting the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which is also a leading critic of Buchanan, the Post focused on the fact The SPOTLIGHT has been critical of the influence of the Israeli lobby.

However, in that The SPOTLIGHT is not alone. The list of Israel's critics in America is a glowing (and growing) lineup of luminaries not exclusively populated by "right wing extremists."

Some prominent critics of Israel have been liberals, among the most influential being former Sen. J. William Ful bright (D-Ark.), political mentor of Bill Clinton. Other liberal critics of Israel include former Sen. James Abourezk (D-S.D.) and two former senators from Illinois, Charles Percy, a Republican, and Adlai Stevenson, a Democrat.

Two former "liberal" presidential candidates, George McGovern, the Democratic candidate in 1972, and John Anderson, an independent in 1980, are critics of the Israeli lobby. Anderson is even a member of the board of the Council for the National Interest, which questions the viability of the U.S. relationship with Israel.

So contrary to what the Post is suggesting, criticism of Israeli influence on U.S. policy has little to do with political ideology, whether "right wing" or "left wing." It does, however, have a lot to do with American sovereignty and whether or not Americans will fight and die in yet another Middle East conflict revolving around Israel and its aggressive policies.

The point is that the Post is playing games with its readers and trying to suggest that only "right wing nuts" are critics of Israel. Nothing could be further from the truth. That's why the Post (and Buchanan's enemies) are scared. They realize that The SPOTLIGHT's position (and Buchanan's position) on this issue resonates with a large majority of American voters of all political parties and all political ideologies.

Criticism Of Israel is coming from not just the "right" but from the "left" and from everybody in between -- anybody, that is, who takes an honest look at the manipulation of U.S. foreign policy by the Israelis and what Pat Buchanan called their "Amen Corner" in America. What is interesting about the Post article is that several of the so-called "extreme right leaders" cited as supposedly backing Buchanan are known agents provocateur operating inside the "extreme right" although for the Post to mention that fact would ruin all the fun.

At least two of the so-called "groups" cited are actually one-man operations headed by informants for government agencies which have worked closely with the ADL in monitoring political dissidents. The media promotes these "groups" in order to steer people into their fold so the ADL (and its allies in the FBI, the CIA and the BATF) have a "handle" on their names and activities.

Another of the organizations (which does have some grass-roots membership support) is dominated at the top by a veteran CIA operative who maintained a cozy long-time relationship with Irwin Suall of the ADL, and by a Republican direct mail promoter who is a known informant for Morris Dees and the Southern Poverty Law Center.

So it was no surprise to learn from the Post that these "groups" are going out of their way to identify themselves with Buchanan. That plays right into the hands of the covert manipulators who use such "links" and "associations" to smear Buchanan with whatever label is convenient at the time.

Back when Pat still had his tactical alliance with left-wing Black activist Dr. Lenora Fulani, the Post had little to say about the fact that many of the very same persons it is now "linking" to Buchanan were actually criticizing Buchanan (just as the Post was doing) for his association with Fulani and thereby alienating many "right wingers" from the Buchanan campaign.

In any case, now that Fulani has left the Buchanan campaign, the Post has done an about-face. Rather than suggesting that Buchanan is somehow going off to the extreme left, the Post is saying Buchanan has gone off to the extreme right. If you're confused, it's because you are supposed to be. That's the game that the Post and other Buchanan critics are playing.

In our May 1 issue of The SPOTLIGHT we cited a number of dirty tricks operations aimed at Buchanan and warned that well-financed Buchanan haters were beginning an effort to divide and conquer the Buchanan campaign. So, again, none of this is any surprise.

Unfortunately, a few Buchanan supporters fell right into the trap laid by the Post. Most notable among them is Justin Raimando, one of Buchanan's most articulate supporters.

Raimando did just what the ADL and the Post wanted him to do: denounce the good patriots among SPOTLIGHT readers who have rallied behind Buchanan's campaign. And so he did. Raimando responded to the Post in Buchanan's defense by attacking The SPOTLIGHT and bragged how he has been critical of the support of SPOTLIGHT readers for the Buchanan campaign.

What is particularly pathetic is that he is actually quite a good writer and most of his commentary echoes The SPOTLIGHT down the line. We don't want to get Justin in trouble with the Anti-Defamation League, but the fact is Justin's views are hardly different from The SPOTLIGHT.

Yet, Justin is so fearful of being labeled as anti-something-or-another by the ADL that he quickly obliged both the Post and the ADL by grinding out a hurriedly-written and sloppy ad hominem attack on The SPOTLIGHT and its supporters. This column wasn't up to Justin's usual standards and the reason is obvious: Justin wasn't writing from his usual position of self-confidence and commitment to principle.

Instead, he was writing what he felt others wanted him to say. He wanted to protect himself from being subjected to the smears that the ADL has leveled at other Buchanan supporters. He wants to be a Buchanan supporter, on the one hand, but he wants to be able to decide which people are "nice" Buchanan supporters and which aren't.

Pat himself knows he will never neutralize long-standing hostility from the ADL. So it's fruitless for people like Justin Raimando to think that they are doing Pat a favor by denouncing Liberty Lobby in the same kind of terminology used by the ADL. It's unbecoming. It's foolish. It's naive. It just doesn't make good political sense. And it's just the latest example of dirty tricks used by the elite to drive a wedge between Buchanan and his supporters in order to divide and conquer.

The SPOTLIGHT August 7, 2000

U.S. Taxpayers May Pay for World Welfare State

The U.S. media is hiding a meeting of the General Assembly where UN representatives discussed plans to imposed international taxes on U.S. citizens to pay for the creation of a global welfare state.

By James P. Tucker Jr.

In still another dramatic but unreported grab for power to advance its role as a world government, the United Nations has called for a global "New Deal" type of social welfare system that would concentrate more power in the hands of the international elite.

This shocking development came when the UN General Assembly met in Geneva, Switzerland, in early July in closed sessions. The mainstream media made no effort to penetrate these meetings and mostly ignored the UN's laundered press releases.

Establishing a global "social services bureau" under the UN would drastically curtail national sovereignty, cost trillions of dollars and impose a world tax -- yet, all of that was planned at the unreported UN session in Geneva.

Representatives from 130 nations, including 10 heads of state and 11 prime ministers, participated in "The Second World Summit for Social Development: as speakers paraded to the podium and called for a global version of this country's department of Health and Human Services (HHS), to thunderous and apparently unanimous applause.

HHS Secretary Donna Shalala called for the UN to control "the distribution of health care at the global level" -- also to thunderous applause. She and others demanded "multicultural cooperative measures" and "global solidarity" that reflects "global interdependence."

No representative of any government at this session challenged those who demanded the end of "nation states." They assailed those on the outside who advocate national sovereignty as "provincial" and "unenlightened."

Inside this session, like so many of them, unelected UN officials and unelected "non-governmental organizations: met in secrecy to denounce nationhood and demand a world government. Being unelected, they are also unaccountable to the populace. The intend to press these globalist views until the public mind is conditioned to accept them as mainstream.

Because so many of these "outdated nation-states" will not or can not do so, participants said, the UN should provide a "basic income for all people."

They called for establishing a UN currency and a UN Central Bank with thousands of UN branch banks scattered throughout the world. These would distribute 250 "UN dollars" to every individual on earth and more to those in poverty. To make sure that no one missed the gravy train, a UN representative would be appointed for every 1,000 people on Earth.

Your local UN representative would be responsible for entering your personal information -- including gun ownership -- into a UN global computer system so you get all the money due. The theory is that since everybody get something, everybody will leap to cooperate.

All of this is to be financed by a global tax, something Bilderberg has been demanding for years. this UN session proposed a tax on all financial transactions that involve a currency exchange.

In past years, Bilderberg has called for a UN tax on oil at the wellhead, meaning virtually all Americans -- even those who don't drive cars -- would be UN taxpayers. Bilderberg also suggested a UN surcharge on all international air travel.

If the American public could read about this meeting in newspapers and if broadcasters gave it some attention, reactions would range from belly laughs by those who consider it an impossible pipe dream to outrage from those who have seen once-unbelievable views become mainstream views -- such as Americans fighting in far-away places wearing UN uniforms and commanded by foreign officers.

The UN is planning another conference next year to consider global taxes. By then, all international banks will have systems that could administer a currency transaction tax.

The European Union, Canada, Britain, Switzerland and Finland have all expressed support for some kind of UN global tax.

The SPOTLIGHT August 7, 2000

Pat Buchanan Takes on Republicrats Over Sovereignty

Globalism has become the defining issue of the '90s that's going to make or break the United States. Republicans and Democrats fear that if they debate the Reform Party and Green Party candidates, their true globalist masters -- the corporate and plutocratic elite - will be exposed.

By James P. Tucker Jr.

Republican George bush and Democrat Al Gore are afraid to debate him, says Reform candidate Pat Buchanan, because they want to ignore national sovereignty as an issue.

But America's ongoing loss of sovereignty to international institutions ought to be the biggest issue in the presidential campaign, Buchanan told The SPOTLIGHT July 20.

If the national televised debates exclude him, as now planned, the "Republicrats" will succeed in muzzling sovereignty as an issue, Buchanan said.

Buchanan is suing to force the Commission on Presidential Debates to include him in the debates. Green Party nominee Ralph Nader is bringing a similar action. A win for either is probably a win for both, setting up a four-way debate.

Gore and Bush have long family and personal histories of being close to such groups as Bilderberg and the Trilateral Commission and have echoed their positions supporting world government over the years. Their safest political position is to keep sovereignty from becoming an issue -- thus their fear of confronting Buchanan, a sharp, quick-witted debater.

In his campaigns as a Republican candidate in 1992 and 1996, and again as a Reform candidate this year, Buchanan has assured The SPOTLIGHT that he would never appoint Trilaterals, Bilderberg participants or members of the Council on Foreign Relations to any post in his administration, acknowledging that U.S. foreign policy has been under their control for decades.

"I can't think of any of them who would support me," Buchanan grinned, when asked again this year.

But Bush, whose father was a member of the Trilateral Commission while in federal service and also as President Ronald Reagan's vice president, follows the line of the world shadow government.

Young Bush's top foreign policy adviser said July 20 -- the same day Buchanan was calling for making sovereignty the biggest issue of the campaign -- that he would revive efforts to extend "free trade" throughout the Western Hemisphere.

One of the Texas governor's first acts as president, said Condoleezza Rice, Bush's spokesperson, would be to ask Congress for "fast-track" power to negotiate a "Free Trade Area of the Americas," or FTAA. Extending NAFTA to include the entire Western Hemisphere and evolve into an "American Union" similar to the European Union has long been a Bilderberg-Trilateral goal.

Earlier, Bush had said directly, on a visit to Mexico, "I will work to create an entire hemisphere in free trade."

The FTAA effort, supported by 34 nations, has been stalled since 1998 when congress denied fast-track authority to President Clinton.

Many Trilateral and Bilderberg leaders are among the close advisers of Gore and Bush.

Gore's boss, President Clinton, was a long-time Trilateral member. When he appeared at the 1991 Bilderberg meeting at Baden-Baden, Germany, the obscure Arkansas governor's star began rising.

Buchanan has a convincing case in asking a federal court to order the Commission on Presidential Debates to include him in the televised confrontations in October.

Buchanan argues that he has met the qualifications set by Congress by polling 8 percent when a level of 5 percent is required and by being on the ballot in states with enough electoral votes to win the election. The commission exceeded its authority in raising the threshold, Buchanan said.

Sixty-four percent of Americans believe Buchanan should be included in the debate, according to several polls.

Calls for his inclusion came from across the political spectrum, including Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-N.Y.) and the Rev Jesse Jackson.

Syndicated columnist Nat Hentoff called for their inclusion because the debates would be a lot livelier with Pat and Ralph." Buchanan and Nader "could affect the outcome, pollsters and analysts say."

Other issues the two major parties want to leave out of the public debate include bringing American troops home from Kosovo, opposition to NAFTA and the World Trade Organization, and protecting America's borders, Buchanan said.

Buchanan dismissed criticism from "kennel-fed conservatives inside the Beltway" because they refuse to confront these issues.

Buchanan said he would debate his sole challenger for the Reform Party nomination, John Hagelin, if he promises to support the nominee and not to run in November. Hagelin is the nominee of the little-known Natural Law Party.

Buchanan won an overwhelming number of delegates in state campaigning. He expressed cynicism about the national mail-in primary. He told of people receiving unsolicited ballots. Ballots are available on request but are not to be distributed by mass mailings.

The SPOTLIGHT August 4, 2000

Oil Ticket' Faces Slippery Slope in Corruption Scandal

The GOP presidential ticket may be fending off questions from reporters concerning a Swiss investigation linking George W. Bush and Dick Cheney to big oil's bribes and pay-offs to foreign interests.

By Martin Mann

Gov. George W. Bush and Richard Cheney, the Republican presidential and vice presidential candidates, known in Washington as the "oil ticket" for their intimate connections to the petroleum industry, may face worse corruption scandals in coming months than the lewd, mendacious and cash-hungry Clinton administration ever did, The SPOTLIGHT has learned from European and U.S. investigative sources.

As Cheney, a millionaire petroleum executive who served as defense secretary in the administration of George Bush, the candidate's father, rose to accept the vice-presidential nomination from the cheering Republican convention in Philadelphia, Swiss prosecutors quietly moved to impound over $130 million in allegedly laundered funds deposited in Swiss banks.

According to the preliminary findings of the Swiss inquiry, the frozen funds represent under-the-table payoffs slip ped to the top government officials of Kazakhstan by giant U.S. petroleum companies seeking favored access to that oil-rich country, a former Soviet province that attained independence after the collapse of communism.

Advised by Swiss authorities that the suspect accounts -- more than $85 million found hidden in private numbered accounts controlled by Kazakh President Nursultan A. Nazarbayev in a single Geneva bank, Banque Pictet -- may violate the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, federal authorities in Washington launched an investigation of their own.

The U.S. probe quickly focused on James H. Giffen, head of the Mercator Corporation, known as an influential American financial adviser to Nazarbayev.

Last month, the Justice Department sent Swiss chief prosecutor Daniel Devaud a confidential memorandum naming Giffen and his public-relations company as the targets of a formal federal criminal investigation.

According to this memorandum, the Giffen probe was triggered by the findings of FBI agents indicating that the millions impounded at Banque Pictet and other Swiss money-centers represented illegal payoffs to Kazakh officials by three major U.S. oil companies: Exxon Mobil, BP Amoco, and Phillips Petroleum.

Giffen's alleged role was that of the go-between who secretly transferred these huge bribes from the U.S. oil corporations along circuitous international money-laundering routes to Kazakhstan's president and his top aides.

Spokespersons for Exxon Mobil, BP Amoco and Phillips Petroleum have denied any wrongdoing. Mark J. Mac Dougal, a Washington lawyer for Giffen, also denied the charges.

But the Swiss-American inquiry is continuing. If it turns up solid evidence of bribery by U.S. oil interests -- sources close to the case call it "the most likely outcome" -- the next time-bomb of a question will be: How many other petroleum potentates are soiled by this sordid affair?

Until he was offered -- and accepted -- the Republican vice-presidential nomination this month, Cheney served as president of the Halliburton Corporation, the world's largest oil-service, exploration and engineering outfit.

A number of Halliburton's field operations have been linked to Exxon Mobil's and BP Amoco's overseas ventures in recent years. Investigators are poised to explore whether these links involved any operations in corruption-riddled Kazakhstan.

Washington is buzzing with excited rumors that some major Bush campaign contributors -- long-time cronies of the presidential candidate -- will face not just stinging embarrassment but criminal indictment when these cases hit the headlines, especially if the Republicans fail to gain the White House this fall.

The SPOTLIGHT August 14, 2000

'Gay' Agenda Perverting America

By Joe Sobran

Early July saw "World Pride 2000," a huge homosexual rally in Rome timed to affront the Catholic Church during this Jubilee year marking the end of the second millennium of Christianity. The pope frankly expressed his "bitterness" at the timing and his disapproval of the celebration of what Christianity and Judaism have always recognized as a loathsome sin.

But of course even moral disapproval thereof is now called homophobia -- one of those synthetic agitprop words that buzz about us like hornets. It's a word Shakespeare, Dickens, and Orwell managed to do without, in fact, you can't even imagine them using it, or any other absurd ideological coinage of the sort.

If you disapprove of pedophilia, are you pedophobe? If you recoil from necrophilia, are you a necrophobe? If you oppose bestiality, are you a zoophobe?

The "gays" (if they're gay, why are they always complaining?) Called on the church to end its "hostility" to homosexuals. But to warn people against their sins for the sake of their immortal souls isn't hostility; it's charity. And sometimes charity has to be stern, as witness Christ and St. Paul.

Everyone has known spoiled children who, when scolded for anything, wail, "You don't love me!" We see the same childish reflex in those homosexuals who insist that they are the victims of "hate" whenever others choose not to associate with them.

Reducing our freedom of association is, in fact, the "gay agenda." The militants want new laws forcing others to accept them on their own terms. Such compulsory association is what is now meant by civil rights. Our political language is being perverted along with our morals. Orwell would understand.

Homosexual claims are always made in the name of "tolerance" and "Pluralism." Not that the gay movement itself is long on tolerance; but that's okay. Under the new rules, gays promote tolerance by demanding it for themselves, not by extending it to others. by contrast, "pluralism" requires Catholicism and the Boy Scouts, for example, to give up their core convictions.

The underlying principle of the "pluralistic" society is that designated "reactionaries" must always yield - or be forced to yield -- to designated "progressives." Institutions must be overhauled, creeds revised, traditions abandoned, "offensive" words weeded out. And the centralized state is to lead the process, in the manner of the "revolutionary vanguard" of the old Soviet system.

Far from offering critical opposition to the New Order, the media are its enthusiastic agents, providing constant propaganda support. "Gays" receive only positive coverage; the participation of pedophiles in the gay movement is airbrushed out, lest it embarrass the holy cause of Sexual Freedom. Have you ever seen a report on a "gay pride march" that even mentioned, let alone highlighted, the marchers under the banner of the North American Man-Boy Love Association?

Of course not. Homosexual gatherings are always portrayed as happy, innocuous events, as wholesome as state fairs. Who could possibly object? Only a "homophobe." After all, these oppressed people are victims of "discrimination" (that is, free choices the Now Order frowns on). They're only asking for the same rights everyone else has!

These rights include the right to marry (that is, to "marry" a member of your own sex), the right to compel others to accept you (and pay the medical bills your unsanitary "lifestyle" incurs), and of course the right to an apology from the Catholic church -- the same rights we all enjoy.

How do you satirize a movement like this, which is so far beyond anything Jonathan Swift could have imagined? Maybe the Roman satirist Juvenal could have done it; but his Second Satire,which describes the homosexuals of his own day in uproariously gross terms, would probably have been rejected by any respectable publisher in our time. As so often happens, we have to go to the classics to read things the New Order wouldn't permit.

Most great satirists, from Aristophanes to Tom Wolfe, have been conservatives, or reactionaries, who managed to keep their heads amid contemporary fads. They generally seem "behind the times" because they stubbornly hold to permanent moral standards, even when they write obscenely.

But it's often the biting reactionary who has the last word on his own time. Juvenal, thou shouldst be living at this hour!*

The SPOTLIGHT August 14, 2000

Americans Denied Health Freedom

Freedom of choice is the clarion call of the lucrative abortion industry in America. The major press loudly and consistently trumpets "freedom of choice" on the issue of abortion and grandstanding politicians declare the sight to terminate the life of an unborn child as some sort of constitutional liberty.

However, when it comes to the issue of freedom of choice in health care, the so-called "mainstream{ press condemns those who advocate alternative therapies in such areas as cancer and heart disease as "quacks" and Profiteers who exploit the sick."

At the same time, politicians -- who are on the receiving end of vast contributions from the political action committees of the American Medical Association and major pharmaceutical manufacturers (which also spend billions of dollars in advertising in the major media) -- are quick to pass legislation to curtail health freedom to ensure continuing profits for the medical establishment.

Meanwhile, "revolving door" government bureaucrats at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) work overtime to prevent new, inexpensive alternative therapies -- even possible cures - for cancer and other devastating diseases from being developed. then, after their dirty work in sone, many of these same bureaucrats leave "public service" and go on to highly paid positions in the very industries whose interests they protected while working in the government.

There are no laws to prevent this kind of outright bribery. Those who dare to raise questions about this rank corruption are dismissed as "political extremists."

Even the American Cancer Society (ACS) is part of the problem. While publicly posturing as a leader in the war against cancer, the ACS actually plays an integral part in the "cancer cover-up" and act as a buffer for the medical establishment in suppressing alternative cancer therapies.

What is so amazing about all of this is that although most Americans have had friends or family members stricken with cancer they have no idea that there are inexpensive ( and reportedly successful) alternative cancer therapies that do not involve the "slash-cut-and-burn" processes of surgery, radiation and chemotherapy.

Most Americans are not aware that thousands of their fellow citizens have had to leave the United States to obtain alternative therapies.

As recently as June 26, The SPOTLIGHT told the story of four-year-old Thomas Navarro whose parents took him overseas in order to obtain what has apparently proven in other cases to be a successful treatment for brain cancer. The FDA refused to permit Thomas to undergo the therapy until he had bee first subjected to "conventional" treatments with harmful side effects. Unfortunately, the Navarro family's story is just one such example.

What is perhaps even more astonishing is that even when many Americans do learn of these alternatives, they are convinced by their physicians to avoid these therapies that the medical establishment defames as "quackery."

Since its inception in 1975, The SPOTLIGHT has been a strong advocate of individual freedom of choice in health care and, over the years, has brought readers the latest news on little-known alternative therapies and on wholistic and homeopathic health treatments that has been suppressed (if not denounced) by the mainstream media.

Famed health freedom writers such as Maureen Kennedy Salaman (among many others) have been featured regularly in The SPOTLIGHT. Dr. Clyde Reynolds, an outspoken "sparkplug" in the health freedom movement, has been a longtime member of the Board of Policy of Liberty Lobby, the populist Institution that publishes The SPOTLIGHT.

In its issue No. 33 for 1979 (Aug. 13), The SPOTLIGHT tackled the ACS "one of the biggest rackets in the United States."

Like other advocates of health freedom, Dilling, time and again, saw first hand how the ACS, despite its vast budget and high public profile, had helped wage war against those who have sought to bring alternative cancer therapies to suffering victims across America.

The SPOTLIGHT has repeatedly told its readers of bizarre cases of the Justive Department, in league with the FDA, bringing criminal cases against practitioners of alternative therapies, even while hundreds of their satisfied patients protested outside the courtrooms where they have been on trial.

The case of Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski of the Burzynski Clinic in Houston, Tex., is perhaps the most notable of recent cases. The FDA twice brought Burzynski to trial for the sole crime of developing a cancer treatment that shows consistent signs of success.

The first trial resulted in a hung jury.

But the FDA pressed on and Burzynski went to trial again. This time, however, a jury acquitted him, much to the delight of his patients and their families. The SPOTLIGHT reported on the Burzynski case in the Nov. 15, 1999, issue.

Another of the major therapies first publicized nationally by The SPOTLIGHT is an alternative to heart bypass surgery known as chelation therapy.

Chelation is a procedure to clean out the arteries, painlessly and with no side effects. It is done by injecting a fluid into the bloodstream the dissolves the buildup of calcified deposits.

The medical establishment opposes chelation for the simple reason that heart bypass surgery is one of the greatest ripoffs in America and, as a consequence, has been quite lucrative.

In 1986 there were at least 210,000 bypass operations in America, with the average cost of $25,000 to the patient or his insurance company. In addition, statistics showed that two-thirds of those who have had bypass surgery have had to undergo a second operation for the same thing. Of those who undergo this surgery, 47 percent find that their bypass is blocked again in only 12 months. These statistics came from the respected Mayo Clinic -- not from chelation advocates.

The SPOTLIGHT has also been in the forefront of the fight against the fluoridation of America's water supply.

For years the American Dental Association and others have argued that anyone who opposed fluoridation was a quack, but hard-driving independent scientists such as Dr. John Yiamouyiannis and others used scientific evidence to prove that fluoride caused cancer.

It's a fact, Fluoride is dangerous. It is the chemical equivalent of rat poison and is a financially lucrative by-product of the aluminum smelting business -- which actually financed the first "study" showing the supposed benefits of fluoridation - and the fertilizer industry.

More and more people know about the dangers of fluoride, thanks in part to the efforts of The SPOTLIGHT. As a result, many American communities are saying "thanks but no thanks" when it is suggested that their water supplies by fluoridated.

The SPOTLIGHT remains committed to health freedom for all and in its regular six-times-yearly special report, Here's to Your Health, continues to bring the health news that Americans need.

The SPOTLIGHT August 21, 2000

Pat Buchanan Preventing Reform Party Suicide Mission

Followers of Ross Perot at the National Convention on Aug. 10 preferred political suicide over nominating Pat Buchanan.

By Clayton Potts

LONG BEACH, Calif. -- Pat Buchanan has claimed the Reform Party's presidential nomination -- with 410 of the total 595 delegates -- despite a rowdy derailing attempt by Ross Perot followers who, rather than accept defeat graciously, are still trying to destroy the movement.

They are causing, at most, a minor inconvenience. Court challenges threaten to delay disbursement of $12.6 million in Federal Elections Commission funds due the Buchanan campaign. However, a quick decision for Buchanan is likely because courts normally expedite these proceedings.

Another inconvenience is John Hagelin, nominee of the little-known Natural Law Party who also sought the Reform Party nomination, supported by the Buchanan bashers. Hagelin will run as the Natural Law candidate and likely claim that he's the Reform "nominee" based on actions by dissidents who walked out of the proceedings.

But Hagelin and his Reform rump bunch amount to no more than a gnat bite on the body politic. Hagelin and his Natural Law Party will be on the ballot in few, if any, states. The Reform rump will be on the ballot in no state.

It's hard for voters to take Hagelin seriously; he advocates transcendental meditation as the cure for mankind's ills.

The "anybody-but-Buchanan" forces collapsed during a meeting of the Reform Party's National Committee on the eve of the convention.

The National Committee nullified an action by Buchanan bashers on the Executive Committee to knock him off the ballot and assure Hagelin's nomination. Two members who voted for Buchanan's ouster had been recalled and were disqualified.

"It's over now," said Angela "Bay" Buchanan, the candidate's sister and campaign manager, after the executive committee's overwhelming vote and walk out by rump members.

"It is Pat Buchanan's nomination," she said. "They needed to win in there and they did not have the numbers. We've won fair and square."

Buchanan bashers, led by Reform Secretary Jim Mangia, are "a handful of dissidents who refused to accept the fact that Pat Buchanan beat them fair and square in state convention after state convention across the country," she said.

Mangia led the walkout of about 30 people and called a separate, rump "national committee" meeting at a hotel two blocks away where, anticipating defeat, facilities had been reserved in advance.

Mangia talked of a "counter-convention" and suing Buchanan and his campaign for "fraud" without specifying any improprieties.

"I think what you are seeing is two separate tracks and two separate conventions," Mangia said.

Gerald Moan, Reform Party chairman, remained neutral in the nominating contest but upheld Buchanan on procedural issues. He said "there will be no hijacking of the Reform Party" and Mangia and his backers will fail.

"I'm the convention chairman recognized by the Federal Election Commission," Moan said. "I'm the chairman recognized by the FEC. And I will certify who the candidate is from this party."

The convention officially opened Aug. 10 with Buchanan holding more than the two-thirds majority required to nail down the nomination. That majority is enough to override a national email poll, although Buchanan was expected to win the "beauty contest," too.

"These little tiffs and disputes will be behind us by Sunday," Buchanan told cheering supporters. "We're going to get into the debate and give Albert and W. the fight of their lives."

The SPOTLIGHT August 21, 2000

Outspoken Ohio Rep. Airs Reno's Dirty Laundry

Jim Traficant has accused Attorney General Janet Reno on national news of committing heinous offenses by leading a trigger-happy Justice Department, covering up crimes committed by the Clinton administration and even soliciting a prostitute.

By Mike Blair

Rep. James Traficant (D-Ohio) charges that Attorney General Janet Reno has repeatedly refused to investigate the connection between the Clinton-Gore political fund-raising in 1996 and the Red Chinese military and their intelligence services.

Such an investigation should be conducted by a special counsel appointed by Reno, Traficant said during a cable news program in Washington.

Hounded for years by the Justice Department, Traficant has launched his own investigation of Reno and the department, utilizing the resources of his Washington office.

"We have a Red dragon with missiles aimed down our throat and we haven't had as much as a high school debate," he pointed out.

Traficant claimed he has affidavits from witnesses that support his charges. The witnesses are willing to come forward "in a court setting or before the appropriate committee of Congress" to give public statements, he said.

Long before she took office as attorney general in the early days of the Clinton administration, Reno served as prosecutor in Dade County, Fla. She was initially appointed to the post "as a favor to the mob," Traficant said.

Traficant said Reno is a lesbian and had a relationship with a call girl. The mob possessed tapes of the affair and used them as potential blackmail against the attorney general.

According to the congressman, he also has evidence that five police officers in Florida stopped Reno for driving under the influence of alcohol.

When President Clinton chose Reno to be attorney general, the usual 72-hour background check by the FBI was waived. Details of Reno's sordid past were simply ignored, Traficant said.

The Justice Department is "out of control" under Reno, Traficant said, adding that the agency practices selective prosecution and goes after the administration's potential enemies.

Traficant said he invites Reno to sue him if she feels his charges against her are untrue.

"Let's bring all of this into a court atmosphere," he said. "Come on Janet Reno, sue me."

The SPOTLIGHT August 21, 2000

INS 'Created' Citizens For 1996 Elections

Democrats are pushing Clinton's prediction of a non-white America by 2050.

By William Carmichael

Thousands of foreigners waiting to be naturalized as American citizens -- some with criminal backgrounds -- were rush ed through in 1996 without proper investigations.

That was the conclusion of a special report by the Justice Department's inspector general. Justice also took pains to excuse Vice President Al Gore of any wrongdoing in the affair.

But officials of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) said they understood they had a deadline from "above" -- and it was prior to the 1996 November elections.

The report revealed that the rush to naturalize got an early push from the
National Performance Review Office (NPRO), Gore's invention to "improve

One of Gore's "improvements" -- erasing a massive backlog of citizenship applications -- "produced such confusion that thousands of people became citizens without adequate background checks," the Justice Department says.

The rush to naturalize 1.2 million new citizens in fiscal year 1996 "compromised the integrity" of the process at the INS, according to the report, released July 31 by the Justice Department's inspector general.

Although the report said there is no evidence that the 1996 presidential election motivated the crash program, at least one official in Gore's government-reinvention office told investigators he felt pressure to have the backlog erased in time for the new citizens to vote in November.

Still, the Democratic administration's Justice Department excused the Democratic administration and its NPRO of any wrongdoing.

The 684-page report concluded that even though all those foreigners were to become citizens in time to vote, there was no evidence to support critics' claims that the crash "Citizenship USA" program was designed to influence the election or "further inappropriate political ends."

About 1.2 million people were given citizenship from October 1995 to September 1996 under the program that eliminated a massive backlog of nearly 500,000 citizenship cases at the INS. At the time, the waiting period for citizenship was as much as three years.

Critics complained that the rush program was aimed at producing hundreds of thousands of new voters who were likely to vote Democratic in the 1996 presidential election in November. The program succeeded in erasing the backlog by Sept. 31, 1996.

The NPRO was "aggressively involved in pressing for a speedup of applications at INS early in the program," the report said.

The investigation, involving 1,800 interviews and review of 80,000 pages of documents, confirmed media reports at the time that the INS had processed applicants so quickly that in many cases citizenship was granted before the INS received criminal background checks from the FBI.

Investigators found at least 1,300 such cases in Chicago, 2,500 in Los Angeles and nearly 1,000 in Miami.

There likely were tens of thousands of cases where applications were approved without complete background checks, according to the investigators. But the report said there was no way to determine how many unqualified individuals might have gained citizenship.

All indications are that the policy and performance of the INS since 1996 has not improved. In fact, there are many indications that it has become much worse, as illegal Mexicans flood across the border, Chinese are sneaked into U.S. ports in containers and "refugees" from Africa, etc. are given asylum. No one knows how many illegal third worlders are now in America, and both Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Al Gore are after them for votes, as was so apparent by the multicultural extravaganza in Philadelphia, called the Republican National Convention.

Another fact about American immigration that no one wants to mention is that the INS practices a de facto policy of racial discrimination against Caucasians.

White Europeans trying to immigrate are required to fulfill every rule to the letter, including waiting periods and bureaucratic red tape. The INS, under Clinton, has made it difficult or impossible for whites to become citizens but non-whites are welcomed with open arms. Clinton has happily noted that by 2050 whites will be one of the minorities in the United States -- which will be the nation of minorities. Already California is majority non-white and Texas will be so in 2010.

The SPOTLIGHT August 21, 2000

U.S. Genocidal Policy Killing Iraqi Children

Economic sanctions and bombing have destroyed the lives of millions of Iraqi men, women and children. But the genocidal policy, which is clearly ineffective and detrimental to American interests, remains in effect. Why?

By Christopher Bollyn

The economic sanctions on Iraq, which have caused the deaths of more than 500,000 children under age 5 and have a "genocidal impact" on Iraq, according to UN Assistant Secretary General Denis Halliday, were the subject of a protest in Washington Aug. 5-7.

The National Mobilization to End the Sanctions organized the event to mark the 10th anniversary of the UN and U.S. embargo on Iraq. The SPOTLIGHT, along with 70 grassroots organizations, endorsed the protest, which culminated with "direct action" in front of the White House, when nearly 100 protesters were arrested for refusing to leave.

Earlier the protest march had massed in front of the Treasury Department. Peace activists who had brought medicine and aid to Iraq turned themselves in to be arrested for having violated the sanctions and breaking U.S. law. The police barred the door and no arrests were made.

Sanctions History

On Aug. 6, 1990, the most comprehensive sanctions ever imposed on a country were applied by the United Nations Security Council on Iraq in response to its invasion of Kuwait.

Under the embargo, Iraq is not allowed to sell its oil nor is it permitted the essentials necessary to support life in a nation of 22 million. Due to the scarcity of food, clean water and medicine nearly 2 million people have died.

The sanctions have affected children most and devastated a whole generation. Millions of children are chronically malnourished, stunted and wasted. Child hood illnesses and disease claim hundreds of victims every day since the most basic medicines are unavailable.

Richard Butler, the UN's former chief weapons inspector in Iraq, said in June that sanctions "are a failure but because they still exist today they are deeply harming 22 million people."

Originally sanctions were imposed to force Iraq to withdraw from Kuwait and to give up its weapons of mass destruction. Although these conditions were met years ago, the sanctions continue.

"Our job was to disarm Iraq as quickly as possible . . . If you disarm Iraq, you lift the sanctions," Scott Ritter, a former weapons investigator in Iraq for the United Nation's Special Commission (UNSCOM) told Fellowship of Reconciliation, one of the endorsing groups. "The last thing the U.S. wanted to do was lift sanctions."

Ritter spoke at a rally against the sanctions in Detroit in May. "The termination of economic sanctions must be our number one priority," he said. "It is a sad fact that 500,000 babies dying hasn't moved the American people."

The horrific effects of the sanctions policy have not been widely reported in the mainstream media.

Famed academics Edward Said (of Columbia University) and Noam Chomsky (of MIT) and others wrote in an open letter on the U.S. war and sanctions on Iraq: "For the most part, the American people do not know what evil is being carried out in our name."

Although no more Iraqi weapons of mass destruction were found, and its industrial and civil infrastructure lay in ruins, the sanctions were maintained and the conditions for removing them were changed.

Genocide As Policy

Although the sanctions have been called "infanticide masquerading as policy" by Democratic Whip and close Clinton ally Rep. David Bonior (D-Mich.), President Clinton is unwilling to remove them.

"Sanctions will be there until the end of time, or as long as [Saddam Hussein] lasts." President Clinton told the New York Times in 1997.

When former U.S. Ambassador to the UN Madeleine Albright was asked by Leslie Stahl of 60 Minutes whether she thought the half million dead Iraqi children was a price worth paying, Albright answered, ". . . yes, we think the price is worth it."

Later, as secretary of state, Madeleine Albright said, "We don't agree with the nations who argue that if Iraq complies with its obligations concerning weapons of mass destruction, sanctions should be lifted."

One of the only organizations that has openly worked to maintain the brutal sanctions on Iraq is the Israeli lobby, American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

While numerous congressmen, like Bonior and Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), wrote letters demanding that the sanctions be lifted, AIPAC campaigned to "keep the sanctions" in place and circulated a letter for the president and among its loyal supporters in Congress, like Rep. Tom Lantos (D-Calif.).

Iraq has been a bitter enemy and an implacable foe of Zionism in the Middle East and has been described as "the only Arab country that could deliver on its threats."

The pan-Arab nationalist Ba'ath Party in Iraq offered only uncompromising resistance to Israel and was a major military threat to the Jewish state.

"The principal proponents of the genocidal sanctions on Iraq are the Israeli lobby in the U.S. and the politicians they have purchased," Hussein Ibish of the Arab American Anti-Discrimination Campaign (ADC) told The SPOTLIGHT.

Ibish called the sanctions policy "Carthaginian," after the devastation visited by Rome on Carthage. He said that the goal of the sanctions is "the calculated destruction of an entire society."

The SPOTLIGHT August 21, 2000

Multiculturalism Brings Tyranny, not Liberty

By Vince Ryan

The American people were at one time a people of faith, always willing to give the other guy the benefit of the doubt or the proverbial extra mile. This act of faith in one's fellow man has in recent years begun to show signs of waning.

There was a time when elected political leaders, especially members of Congress and other high officials, were genuinely trusted and respected.

Perhaps this faith in public figures was misguided or the result of a citizenry manipulated by the media and a master politician like FDR, who managed to convince the people of the righteousness of his nefarious agenda to the extent that he was elected four times. Bill Clinton, another master politician, has gotten away with his deviant behavior because of his ability to charm and increasingly cynical public.

With today's instant communications, such as the Internet, cellular phones, satellites, television and radio providing live and on-the-spot coverage of a particular event, people have lost a lot of their child-like faith in their fellow man, who include not only politicians, family and friends, but also the plutocrat-controlled press, both print and electronic.

There is a newspaper that is different and tells the truth. That newspaper is The SPOTLIGHT, published by Liberty Lobby. It is unique among newspapers because it makes up for this loss of faith in the media by boldly publishing its creed on page two of every issue: "You can trust The SPOTLIGHT to give you 'the other side of the news' -- to report on events which are vital to your welfare but which would otherwise be hushed up or distorted by the controlled press."

I The SPOTLIGHT you will find no stories promoting the dubious joy of multiculturalism as promoted by change agents and culture distorters. These change agents style themselves as intellectuals. Their backgrounds are alien and Marxist. And their efforts are aimed at destabilizing the United States.

Their idealistic goal, they say, is one country with many cultures and races all living together in peace and harmony. But the fact is that theonly way diverse races and peoples can have a semblance of living together is in a police state. Czarist Russia, Soviet Russia and present day Russia come immediately to mind.

The quickest way to a police state in America is through diversity. Diversity permits no consensus. The common destiny or vision of the country is lost. Faith in one's fellow countryman is totally destroyed. America as our Founding Fathers envisioned it -- a nation based on its European heritage -- is fast slipping away.

In 1964 Congress passed the (Edward Kennedy -(Aufustus) Hawkins immigration bill which ended the immigration flow into this country from Western Europe and gave priority to immigrants from non-European countries and territories.

Demographers recount that during the 1990s, immigrants entered the country at the rate of one million per year. This included legal and illegal immigrants. The Census Bureau forecasts that by 2050, because of this rate of immigration, the U.S. population will jump from the current 270 million to more than 400 million.

At the turn of this century the feign born population is 27 million or 10 percent of the population. The Immigration and Naturalization Service estimates that 6 million of these are illegal.

Keep in mind that these figures are much larger than stated.

Demographic experts point out that large parts of the Northeast, Midwest and Rocky Mountain states are becoming whiter as a arc of states from North Carolina to California become browner or increasingly minority. Minority populations are growing in communities along the East, West and Gulf coasts.

California is the firs majority "minority" state, reaching this "exalted status this year. Texas will get there by 2010, the same year that Hispanics will become this country's largest minority. by 2050 whites will become a minority in the United States.

In 1996 and again in 1999, the Gallup polling organization asked an unspecified sampling of voters whether they would vote for or against a law that would stop almost all legal immigration into the United States for the next five years.

In 1996, 50 percent said they would vote for such a law and 46 percent against it, while 4 percent had no opinion. In 1999, only 39 percent were for it, 58 percent against it and 3 percent had no opinion.

So, according to Gallup, the American people think immigration is just fine.

Who were asked the questions? Did the people questioned truly know the effects of immigration? Did they know that unrestricted immigration causes the United States to lose its sovereignty over its borders by allowing immigrants, especially those in the West and Southwest, the right of dual citizenship, giving Mexico a claim to U.S. territory?

This is an election year. Let those contending for congress in your area know where you stand on immigration. Vote where you stand on immigration. Vote only for those candidates who will do what you, the people want.

Remember: Your influence counts...Use it.

The SPOTLIGHT August 28, 2000

Buchanan Ready to Send Bush, Gore Running for Cover

Contrary to what the Establishment press wants you to believe, the Reform Party's rump convention was a highly organized attempt on the part of the "wrecking crew" to undermine the nomination of Pat Buchanan as the party's presidential candidate.

By Christopher Bollyn

Patrick J. Buchanan, now officially the Reform Party's presidential nominee, is carrying his America-first message throughout the country, greeted at all stops by cheering patriots.

His campaign expects every American in every state to be able to cast a Buchanan vote in November that could turn the country around.

"We will reclaim every ounce of American sovereignty," Buchanan said in his acceptance speech Aug. 12.

"We will lead this country out of the WTO, out of the IMF and I will personally tell Kofi Annan: 'Your UN lease has run out; you will be moving out of the United States and if you are not gone by year's end, I will send you 10,000 Marines to help you pack your bags.' "

Buchanan also promised to bring all U.S. military forces home and redeploy them along the border with Mexico.

"We will start putting America first," Buchanan said to rousing cheers.

Buchanan won an overwhelming victory among delegates at the Reform Party National Convention in Long Beach, Calif., on Aug. 11.

The delegates elected Buchanan in a near unanimous vote during the national convention that the Los Angeles Times called "the battle for the soul of the Reform Party" and described as "the real thing" and "democracy in action."

The delegates had voted earlier to discard the mail-in primary, before even knowing the results, and to nominate the party's presidential candidate on the second day of the convention.

State chairmen followed one after the other and announced their state delegation's total support for Buchanan with only a few delegates abstaining and a handful of votes for Charles Collins of Florida.

The results of the mail-in primary balloting revealed a 2 to 1 victory for Bu chanan over John Hagelin, a former professor at the Maharishi University in Fairfield, Iowa. A long-time Reform Party National Committee member described Hagelin as the "giggling guru" and "a self-proclaimed doctor at a self-created school."

Buchanan dismissed Hagelin saying, "John Hagelin is a log that has been thrown on the railroad tracks of a runaway train, and he will not even slow us down."

The victorious Buchanan told cheering delegates as confetti filled the hall, "We march out of Long Beach and we take America back!"

Buchanan chose Ezola Foster, a black woman, as his vice presidential running mate because she agrees with him on all the major issues. Foster, an educator and anti-immigration activist, served as Buchanan's campaign co-chair in 1996 and 2000.

"She is a lifelong Christian. She believes in the Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount," he said. "She has spoken of the terrible mistake it was to take God out of the public schools. This campaign is committed to bringing God back to the public schools."

"Our campaign is the French Foreign Legion of American politics," Buchanan told the delegates. "We don't care what party you came from, where you've been or who you are running away from. If you want to join us and look out for America first, American sovereignty, traditional values, faith and family and country, come with us. You are welcome in our party."

A small group of supporters of Hagelin, founder of the Natural Law Party, walked out of the convention and held a rump convention in a nearby hotel. However, Hagelin's membership in the Natural Law party made it illegal, by state law, for Reform Party delegates in 43 states to even consider him as a candidate.

Reform Party Chairman Gerry Moan referred to the small group of "anyone-but-Buchanan" delegates who walked out of the convention as "the wrecking crew."

Jim Mangia, secretary of the Reform Party, led the walkout during a meeting of the National Committee, which had convened at the Westin Hotel in Long Beach on Aug. 8.

Mangia had contested the credentials of nearly every National Committee member, whom he had invited to the convention as party secretary, and declared, "this is a non-meeting." When the chairman, Gerry Moan, took control of the meeting, Mangia called his supporters to walk out.

The walkout appeared to have been orchestrated by Russell Verney, former Reform Party leader, who tried to force his way into the assembly with four or five very large men behind him at the same time that Mangia and his group were breaking out.

National Committee members reported that Mangia's ally, Dror Bar-Sadeh, orchestrated the walkout along with others who wore earpieces and seemed to be listening carefully to instructions coming from Verney, who was outside the room.

Dror Bar-Sadeh served as state chairman for North Carolina and as webmaster for Reform Party USA. As webmaster for the national party he was often accused of censoring communication between party members.

Last winter, when Bar-Sadeh was asked whether he was a dual national citizen, he admitted to having close ties to Israel, and that his children were born there. Some Reform Party members suspect him of working for the Israeli intelligence agency, Mossad, to sabotage the Buchanan campaign from within the Reform Party.

Buchanan has long been vilified by the Anti-Defamation League and other groups for his criticism of "the Israeli lobby" and America's one-sided policies in the Middle East.

Mangia was ousted as the party's secretary by the national convention for numerous reasons, which included his having openly supported Hagelin, which is a violation of his impartiality oath to the Reform Party.

When the motion was made to recall Mangia, Chairman Moan broke down in tears and excused himself from the podium. "We worked together for eight years building this thing," Moan said later. "It's hard."

The Federal Election Commission is expected to quickly dismiss what is viewed as a frivolous attempt by the dissidents to claim that Hagelin is the Reform Party nominee.

Buchanan campaign headquarters is "99.9 percent confident of winning the battle for the money." The Buchanan Brigade is also confident that federal courts will back the FEC and the $12.6 million in federal campaign funds should be available, they say, within a couple of weeks.

The SPOTLIGHT August 28, 2000

Buchanan Accepts Reform Party Presidential Nomination; Blasts 'Republicrats'

Pat Buchanan announced his acceptance of the Reform Party's presidential nomination at the convention on Aug. 11. The following is an excerpt from his speech. The full text version can be found on our web site.

By Pat Buchanan

I began my campaign, 18 months ago, in a tiny steel town in West Virginia called Weirton. Even though the U.S. economy was booming and U.S. companies were crying out for steel, Weirton steel was laying off workers, and Weirton was dying. Why? Because cheap steel was being dumped into the United States from Russia, Korea, Brazil, and Indonesia so those bankrupt regimes could raise the cash to pay off the international banks. The workers of Weirton and their families were being betrayed by Bill Clinton and sacrificed to the gods of the Global Economy.

Let me tonight lay out the great issues where our New Reform Party stands apart from both Beltway Parties.

Last year, at the close of Clinton's War, I was given a small party by Serb-Americans who wanted to thank me for opposing the war. They told me of a woman who had desperately wanted to be there, but was not, because she had to go back to Serbia to bury her parents, who had been killed in the American bombing. Mr. Bush said his only complaint about that war on Serbia was that we did not fight it "ferociously enough." Mr. Bush, tell that to that Serb-American woman who lost her mother and father.

Why did we do this? Why did we bomb this little country for 78 days when it never threatened or attacked the United States?

Yes, there was a nasty guerrilla war going on in Kosovo, with terrorist attacks on Serb soldiers by the KLA, and ugly reprisals. But in one year, there had been 2,000 casualties on all sides. Yet, look at the disaster we wrought, after Clinton launched his war. Thousands dead, a million Albanians driven out of their homes; now, a quarter million Serbs ethnically cleansed in KLA counter-terror. Serbia is smashed. Kosovo is destroyed. Russia has been driven into the arms of China; and American troops are tied down in a Balkan peninsula that has nothing to do with the vital interests of the U.S.

My friends, I count myself a patriot. I love this country. But what in God's name are we doing? Milosevic is a thug and a tyrant. But that is not his country we destroyed. That is their country; and the Serb people have always been friends of the United States.

Saddam Hussein is another wicked tyrant who has launched aggressive war and murdered his own people. But who has killed more innocent Iraqis? Saddam Hussein, or U.S. sanctions? When Madeleine Albright was told on a television show that a UN study had found that 500,000 Iraqi children may have died because of our ten years of sanctions, Albright said: "We believe it was worth it." Worth it? When did the greatest nation on earth start waging war on children?

After Mr. Clinton launched one of his drive-by shootings with cruise missiles, Ms. Albright was asked to justify it. "If we have to use force," she said, "it is because we are America. We are the indispensable nation. We stand tall. We see farther into the future."

Talk about the arrogance of power. George III could not have said it better. Friends, I am ashamed to say it, but we have begun to behave like the haughty British empire our fathers rose up against and threw out of this country.

Yet, both Beltway parties today conspire to kill our beloved republic. Both colluded to create the WTO. Both voted $18 billion more for the IMF to make the world safe for Goldman Sachs. Last year, a new UN international war crimes tribunal was established with the power to arrest and prosecute our soldiers. This year, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan thundered that we Americans do not pay our fair share of foreign aid. Last fall, the most trusted man in America, Walter Cronkite, said Americans must have the courage to surrender their national sovereignty to a world government. Let me tell you where the Reform Party stands.

We believe in "independence forever." We will reclaim every lost ounce of American sovereignty. We will lead this country out of the WTO, out of the IMF, and I will personally tell Kofi Annan: Your UN lease has run out; you will be moving out of the United States, and if you are not gone by year's end, I will send you 10,000 Mar ines to help you pack your bags.

Friends, I am called many names. Isolationist is one of the sweeter ones. But the truth is: We are not isolationists. We do not want to isolate America from the world. We Americans come from all countries and continents, and want to trade with and travel to all countries, and have commercial, cultural, and diplomatic contact with every nation on earth. But we will no longer squander the blood of our soldiers fighting other countries' wars or the wealth of our people paying other countries' bills. The Cold War is over; it is time to bring America's troops home to the United States where they belong -- and end foreign aid. And when I step out on that inaugural stand to take the oath -- when my hand goes up, their New World Order comes crashing down.

Bill Clinton understands this issue of sovereignty. Al Gore, he understands it. George W, he doesn't understand it; but, don't worry, he is still being home-schooled by Condoleeza Rice. We are the one party with a chance to win that is sworn to fight World Government abroad -- and Big Government at home.

Yet, look at the record of this Congress that has the nerve to call itself conservative. In two years, not one federal agency has been abolished, not one program ended. Federal spending is rising at the fastest rate since "Tip" O'Neill was speaker of the House. Both parties are so steeped in pork they have to be checked every six months for trichinosis.

Here are a couple of items from our $2 trillion federal budget: $500,000 for a study of swine waste management, $1.75 million to study the handling and distribution of manure. Do these guys have enough sense to cross the street? Apparently not, because this year Congress voted $1 million for a study in Utah on -- you guessed it -- how to cross the street. My friends, it is time to pick up the pitchforks and go down and clean out the pigpen. If you want real reform, vote Reform.

Back in 1991, I challenged a president named Bush because he broke a pledge not to raise taxes. He said he had to do it to balance the budget. Bill Clinton raised taxes again, he said, to balance the budget. Well, the budget is balanced; and it is time to repeal both the Clinton tax hike and the Bush tax hike and give the surpluses back to the people -- because that money does not belong to the politicians; it belongs to the people; and I will give it all back. Here is how:
We will eliminate all death taxes and end the government's role as federal grave robber of the American family. We will end the marriage penalty and cut income taxes for all Americans. And we will impose a 10 percent tariff on imports, and use the money to end all taxes on small businesses. And we will chop down the IRS until it is so small all the IRS agents will fit into the building that is being vacated by the National Endowment for the Arts.

As for Communist China, we will no longer accept one-sided trade deals, where we buy 40 percent of their exports and they buy 1 percent of ours. And I will tell them: Fellas, either you stop this persecution of Christians, and these threats to our friends on Taiwan, and rattling missiles at the United States, or you fellows have sold your last pair of chopsticks in any mall in the United States of America.

Up at [the Republican National Convention in] Philadelphia, did you hear Mr. Mc Cain denounce those who want to reform our immigration laws by saying that walls are for cowards? Well, let me tell the senator a story about a woman who lives in his own home state. Her name Is Teresa Murray. She is 82, has arthritis, and lives in Douglas, on the border. When I visited her ranch last winter, she was confined to her home. Around her small house is a chain-link fence. On top of that fence sits rolled razor wire. Every door and window of her home had bars on it, and Ms. Murray's two guard dogs are dead, killed by thugs who threw meat over the fence with cut glass in it. She sleeps with a gun on her bed table because she has been burglarized 30 times. Senator Mc Cain, go down to Douglas and tell Teresa Murray that fences are for cowards.

Teresa Murray is an American woman living out her life in a maximum security prison in her own home in her own country -- because of the real cowardice, the cowardice of politicians who refuse to do their duty and defend the borders of the United States. I am tired of reading about U.S. troops defending the borders of Kosovo, Kuwait, and Korea. I don't live in Kosovo, Kuwait or Korea; I live in the United States of America. And when I become president, all U.S. troops will come home from Kosovo, Kuwait and Korea; and I will put them on the borders of Arizona, Texas and California; and we will start putting America first.

But we will never restore a republic unless we replace the "commissars" of the Supreme Court, those unelected judges, appointed for life, who answer to no one, and who have begun to erect a judicial dictatorship in America.

Mr. Bush holds up his hands and he has no litmus test for the Supreme Court. Well, I do. When Supreme Court vacancies open up, only constitutionalists who respect the inalienable right of life of all Americans, and our religious heritage will be nominated -- and no liberal judicial activists need apply.

Let me turn now to the signature issue of the Bush campaign: education. Mr. Bush is so enthusiastic about it, he gets carried away. He told a baffled audience in Florence, South Carolina, and I quote directly: "Rarely has the question asked: Is our children learning?" Is our children learning?

Well, our children "is" certainly not learning in Texas, governor. Like Mr. Gore, Mr. Bush believes the solution to the education crisis lies in expanding the power of the Department of Education. We believe differently: We believe the Department of Education is the problem.

The Democratic Party will never reform education because it is held hostage by the teachers' unions. Republicans will never shut down the IMF, because if they did, the corporate lobbyists would cut off their room, board, tuition, beer and gas money. Neither Beltway party will drain this political swamp, because to them it is not a swamp; it is a protected wetland, their natural habitat. They swim in it, feed in it, spawn in it, and are as happy there as B'rer Rabbit was in his briar patch.

The Reform Party can reform American politics, because no one has a hook in us. And I give you my word: We will outlaw the glorified bribery they call "soft money" and put term limits on every member of Congress and federal judge. If eight years was enough for George Washington and Ronald Reagan, it is long enough for Teddy Kennedy and Barney Frank.

"But why are you doing this?" people ask me. I will tell you. Because there has to be one party that has not sold its soul for soft money. There has to be one party that will stand up for our sovereignty and stand by our workers who are being sacrificed on the altar of the Global Economy. There has to be one party that will defend America's history, heritage and heroes against the Visigoths and Vandals of multiculturalism. There has to be one party willing to drive the money-changers out of the temples of our civilization.

What are we fighting for? To save our country from being sold down the river into some godless New World Order, and to hand down to our children a nation as good and as great as the one our parents gave to us -- forever independent, forever free. That's what this Gideon's Army is fighting for; and we will fight on and on and on and on -- until God Himself calls us home.

The SPOTLIGHT August 28, 2000

Pat Sticks Up for Liberty Lobby on National TV

Reform Party presidential nominee Pat Buchanan didn't back down to NBC talking head Tim Russert on Russert's Sunday morning political talk show.


Tim Russert, host of the widely watched "Meet the Press" Sunday television talkie, tried unsuccessfully to pressure Reform Party presidential nominee Pat Buchanan into denouncing Liberty Lobby, publisher of The SPOTLIGHT.

"Mr. Buchanan," said Russert on Aug. 13, "The Washington Post had a piece the other day, said [sic] that your campaign is now being supported by anti-black, anti-Jewish, anti-immigration groups.

"They refer specifically to the Liberty Lobby, which has been branded the most anti-Semitic organization in the country by the Anti-Defamation League [ADL] . . . will you renounce their support this morning?"

"Well, first the ADL has called me every name in the book, and the ADL, run by Mr. Abe Foxman, is what my late friend Murray Rothbard called the 'smear bund' in American politics," responded Buchanan. "It digs up material on individuals, some of it from the FBI and police files in San Francisco, and it smears individuals who take an independent stand, for example, on the Middle East conflict when they support a Palestinian state -- "

"But what about the Liberty Lobby?" Russert interrupted.

" -- and disagree with the Israeli lobby," continued Buchanan, who responded:

"Well, let me talk about that. The Liberty Lobby, as I understand it, is putting out a publication that is pro-Buchanan. I have not read the publication, but apparently it is inoffensive in and of itself.

"We have been told by our lawyers that we can't even communicate -- people who are running independent campaigns can't communicate with them for us or against us."

The repeated pressure on Buchanan to denounce Liberty Lobby is characteristic of the mainstream's relentless efforts over 45 years to smear the Institution.
Examples abound. After the bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City, the mainstream press swarmed all over Liberty Lobby's building on Capitol Hill, trying in some way to link the Institution to the tragedy and to "anti-Semitism."

Anne Groer, a Florida reporter who once worked on the same Washington news paper as SPOTLIGHT correspondent Clayton Potts, was very vigorous.

"Isn't [SPOTLIGHT publisher] Willis Carto anti-Semitic?" Groer demanded.

"I've known the man for more than 20 years and he is not," Potts replied.

"Don't you people believe the world is controlled by international Jewish bankers?" she persisted.

"We have criticized David Rockefeller, but he's Baptist, not Jewish," Potts replied.

Groer was disappointed that nobody stepped in her traps.

Also typical is the technique of using an interview-ending "surprise" question. At the end of an hour-long television interview on a completely unrelated topic, came the question: "is Liberty Lobby anti-Jewish?"

"No, Liberty Lobby is not anti-Jewish but pro-American," came the response. "Israel's interests are not always the same as those of the United States."

The SPOTLIGHT August 28, 2000

Here's to Your Health

A Grocery Bag Full of Trouble

A new study by the FDA shows that a common fat in everyday groceries could be responsible for thousands of heart attacks annually.

By Tom Valentine, SPOTLIGHT Health Editor

When you go into the supermarket or convenience store to buy some cookies, crackers, bread or cake -- which millions of Americans do every day -- the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is now saying that your are literally increasing your chances of dying from a heart attack.

The dangerous ingredient, the FDA now admits, is a manmade fat that makes vegetable oils act more like butter and helps preserve the packaged baked goods as well as make it easier for the bakers to mass produce. This killer ingredient is called a "trans fatty acid" and it is created when food processors treat vegetable oils with a process called "hydrogenation."

On the labels for these foods it will generally say "partially hardened" or "partially hydrogenated oils" are included. News about an FDA study clearly outlining this danger came out June 5, and it should have resulted in banner headlines all across America. but it did not.

Earlier this summer, at the June 5-6 conference of the American Heart Association in Reston, Va., a poster research study from the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition was presented. The study is titled: "Dietary Fatty Acids and Cardiovascular Health Dietary Recommendations for Fatty Acids."

The authors of the study are Kathleen M. Koehler, David J. Zorn and Clark Nardinelli, all scientists with the U.S. government.

The one-page abstract poster study concluded with this astounding news: "removing trans fatty acids from all margarine would prevent 6,300 heart attacks and 2,100 deaths each year and as many as 5,600 deaths and 17,100 heart attacks could be prevented each year" if the food industry is forced to label trans-fatty acid content truthfully in margarine and baked goods and the public then reacts by not buying and eating foods that contain trans-fatty acids."

And that is just the beginning. they also concluded that "money savings" wrought by telling the truth about trans fatty acids and thereby reducing consumption of them could be as much a $7.9 billion-a-year. Since respected and credible government scientists who work for the National Institutes of Health, are saying this about the dangers inherent in our consumption of manmade trans-fatty acids, we must assume it is true.

This, finally supports the stance of health advocates who have complained about danger in hydrogenation of edible oils for decades. More importantly, it sounds an alarm that should be going off loudly in the establishment's ear. Instead it is a silent alarm that will allow the establishment and the food institutions to slowly back away from an egregious and deadly food-production error.

We are reprinting an excerpt from the poster paper, but first we must prepare you for some culture shock.

The complete technical paper is a combination of epidemiology and economics with some standard assumptions about cholesterol being the prime cause of heart attacks tossed in. The paper is admittedly "scenarios" based upon calculations and assumptions.

Nevertheless, these are qualified FDA scientists who are doing their best with data available to them, and what they have to say is big news"

The Food and Drug Administration has proposed that the amount of trans-fatty acids be listed in the Nutritional Facts panel of food labels and that trans fat content be limited whenever there are limits on saturated fat in nutrition label claims.

FDA concluded that trans fat consumption in the United States contributes to increased serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol(LDL-C) and that addressing trans fat in food labels is important to public health. The purpose of this study was to estimate the likely health benefits of trans fat labeling in order to compare benefits with estimated costs of the proposed rule.

This is serious business. We see 5,600 deaths per year according to the FDA statistics. When does this become a national tragedy? Why is the vaunted "public health sector" not mobilizing rapidly to save lives? Can anyone take the institutionalized health sectors of our society seriously?

The SPOTLIGHT August 28, 2000

Quack Doctors Drugging America's Children

We told you so: Drugging of American children is out of control.

By F.C. Blahut

Are 10 percent of American children mentally disturbed?

If you think not, then why are 10 percent of American children being subjected to psychotropic drugs?

The drug in question is Ritalin, an amphetamine-like substance used to treat ADD, or attention deficit disorder. It is prescribed to an estimated 4 million American schoolchildren each year.

If you disagree with the drugging of our country's youth, you're not alone.

In fact, a class-action lawsuit against Ritalin manufacturer Novartis, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and the parents' group Children and Adults with Attention Deficit Disorder (CAADD) alleges the company fraudulently over-promoted the diagnosis of ADD/ADHD in collusion with the two organization to boost drug sales.

The action was filed in a state court in Brownsville, Tex. in May, but is just now getting national publicity. It seeks unspecified damages against Novartis.

It charges, among other things, that the Basel, Switzerland-based company failed to adequately warn the public of Ritalin's impact on children's cardio-vascular and nervous systems.

Several hundred Texas parents have signed on as plaintiffs, but are not discussing the case with the press.

According to published reports, the conflict with doctors and educators reflects a growing controversy about whether ADD and its variant, attention deficit (hyperactivity) disorder (ADHD), are being over-diagnosed-causing children to be drugged for no reason.

The Texas suit alleges that the APA has expanded the definition of ADD/ADHD in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual IV, the handbook of psychiatric diseases, over tome so that more and more children would fall into this category.

Additionally, it claims the drug company encourages the diagnosis of ADD/ADHD and its treatment with Ritalin by economically supporting CHADD and the psychiatric association.

In a written statement to a network television news division regarding these allegations, the company said it would defend itself vagariously against the suit, adding: "Novartis has support educational programs sponsored by the American Psychiatric Association, as is standard industry practice, and as do most pharmaceutical companies with a therapy in the psychiatric area.

"The notion that Novartis improperly influenced the APA has no merit."

The company responded: "Novartis is proud to help CHADD and other credible third-party organizations that valuable information to many people. Novartis rejects the notion that these unrestricted educational grants to credible third parties creates improper influence upon them."


CHADD declined to comment to network reporters on the case. Statistics do show an increase in the number of cases of ADD/ADHD and a rise in drug prescriptions.

In fact, ADHD is the most commonly diagnosed behavioral disorder of childhood, affecting 10 percent of school-age children in the United States, according to a 1999 Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) report.

IMS Health, a health information company in Plymouth Meeting, Pa., reports that prescription rates for Ritalin have increased 390 percent in the last five years as of June.

The psychiatric group says it develops its diagnostic manual based on the research and input of thousands of experts from around the world. Representatives declined to comment further on the case.

Psychiatrists say the proper diagnosis of ADD/ADHD takes time and careful evaluation. Dr. David Fassler, chairman of the Council on Children Adolescents and Their Families for the APA, emphasizes it is important to ensure a child has received a comprehensive professional evaluation, including family, school and medical history, before being diagnosed with a disorder.

According to published reports, some critics blame the diagnosis' popularity on the "pencil/paper diagnostic exam," a form that teachers or other school authorities fill out. Schools routinely base recommendations for further medical evaluation on the test, but critics say it is to subjective and inclusive.

In fact, according to psychiatrist Dr. Peter R. Breggin, author of Talking Back to Ritalin and Reclaiming Our Children, behaviors listed on the form should be considered normal. Breggin is a medical consultant to the plaintiffs' attorney in the lawsuit.

Behaviors on the diagnostic exam for ADD include:

"Often fails to give close attention to details or makes careless mistakes in school work."

"Often avoids, dislikes, or is reluctant to engage in tasks that require mental effort (such as schoolwork or homework."

Symptoms for ADHD on the list include:

"Often fidgets with hands or feet or squirms in seat."

"Often has difficulty playing or engaging in leisure activities quietly."

According to published reports, Dr. Fred Baughman, an El Cajon, Calif, neurobiologist, has been following ADD/ADHD research for 20 years and believes the disorders are "a colossal fraud." He says there is no evidence of a physical or chemical abnormality in people diagnosed with ADD or ADHD.

The SPOTLIGHT August 28, 2000

Vaccines Linked to Increase in Alzheimer's

The incidence of Alzheimer's has increased epidemically throughout the last decade and the rate is expected to quadruple in coming years.

By Ingri Harkins

According to a July 2000 Associated Press article, one in 10 people over 65 have Alzheimer's disease and one in two over the age of 85 have Alzheimer's. it costs our healthcare system $100 billion a year to care for Alzheimer's patients. The estimated cost to care for one Alzheimer's patient over his lifetime is $174,000.

The Clinton administration has just allotted $50 million over the next five years for research into the prevention and treatment of Alzheimer's disease.

Maureen Reagan, representing the Alzheimer's Association and the daughter of former President Ronald Reagan who is afflicted with this disease, is requesting $100 million for research for the following fiscal year.

And just what is their concept of prevention and treatment? You got it -- development of an Alzheimer's vaccine.

AP States:

"Elan Pharmaceuticals' experimental vaccine raised hopes last year when the company discovered that, in mice, the compound could ward off and even reduce the brain-clogging plaque that is a hallmark of Alzheimer's disease. Elan has begun small studies in people to see if the vaccine is safe. If so, the company hopes to launch larger studies, possibly by the end of 2001, to test whether the vaccine might slow progression of mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease."

I remember studying nutrition and the value of hair analysis is a diagnostic tool 20 years ago. At the time, many studies had been released showing that Alzheimer's patients displayed elevated levels of aluminum in their bodies as determined through hair analysis.

Many fo us are unaware of the numerous everyday product which are sources of aluminum such as: Baking powder, salt (added as an anti-caking agent), antiperspirants, Teflon pans, antacids, numerous prescription and non-prescription drugs and vaccines (aluminum phosphate is added to many as a preservative).

Why is the federal government not interested in eliminating the obvious causes of Alzheimer's disease, especially given the astronomical cost to our health care system?

According to Ted Koren, a chiropractor:

"According to Hugh Fundenberg, MD, the world's leading immunogeneticist and 13th most quoted biologist of our times (nearly 850 papers in peer reviewed journals), if an individual has had five consecutive flu shots between 1970 and 1980 ( the years studied) his/her chances of getting Alzheimer's disease is ten times higher than if they had one, two or no shots. I asked Dr. Fudenberg why this was so and he said it was due to the mercury and aluminum that is in every flu shot (and most childhood shots). The gradual mercury and aluminum buildup in the brain causes cognitive dysfunction. Is that why incidence of Alzheimer's is expected to quadruple over the next several years?"