October 30, 2000
Subject: Elections in the U.S. and Canada: Hard Choices + A critical national issue + An Open Letter to Ralph Nader + Nader is a choice + Gore or Nader? + Swap Votes! Give Nader 5%, Keep Bush Out + Environmental pollution is causing disability and death + B17 Cancer therapy denied by the FDA + Renewed Offensive of the Ultra-Conservative Right on European Women + Election 2000 & well-being measurement + BRUSSELS SPROUTS
Major elections with far-ranging worldwide repercussions will be held in less than 9 days in the USA. The same thing will happen soon after in Canada. The debates are heating up into a frenzy in the U.S. as it looks as if the next president will be elected with only a very thin majority of a largely disaffected and disillusioned electorate. Since barely 46% of the eligible voters, according to some estimates, will actually vote (it was 49% four years ago), it means that whomever wins between Gore or Bush will in fact be elected by a mere 22% of the eligible voters. And they call it "democracy"!
In Canada, Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien has decided to call an early election in the hope of snatching a third term in office thanks to the high polls his party currently enjoys. But Stockwell Day, the rising star of the Alliance Party, recently founded on the ashes of Preston Mannings' rightist Reform Party, may cause some surprises although Chretien still has a comfortable lead in the polls.
In the U.S. the ugly specter of a rightist, anti-environment, pro-Big Business government is looming on the horizon, raising the fears of the worst possible scenario that would severely impede the slow progress towards peace and a sustainable future. But there is also an opportunity for powerful positive changes in this situation as people still can make sensible, high-minded positive choices that can mean a big difference for the future of their nation and indeed, the whole world.
If you have still not made up your mind - if you are a U.S. citizen - as to what this preferable choice could be for you, you will find below and in the forthcoming compilations lots of view points to consider.
Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator
P.S. Since I'll be leaving next Thursday for a short trip, I'll send you my usual 3 compilations at the beginning of this week. If you write to me after, I'll not be able to reply to you for at least a week. So better to wait till November 5 to write to me...
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000
From: "Jackie Alan Giuliano, Ph.D." <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Hard Choices
The Sierra Club is backing Al Gore. We all know he is imperfect and a
politician, but his opponent has clearly stated his agenda: set
environmental gains and women's rights back 50 years, use up our
children's future and put a gun in everyone's pocket.
Even though I am a Green Party supporter, I have decided that we need to
make sure Bush doesn't get in. Gore is a typical politician, but at
least he won't try to devastate the Earth as Bush will. We all need to
rally together for the next 4 years, strengthen the Green Party and find
it a candidate who can work the realities of the system and break into
Words don't express this well, but the Sierra Club has produced an
animation that is safe to run on your computer that helps say it all.
Check it out at http://www.sierraclub.org/twoworlds_animation/.
I wish you peace.
Jackie Alan Giuliano, Ph.D.
Professor for Space and Earth Science Education and
Multimedia Instructional Designer
The Space Foundation (www.spacefoundation.org)
From: Kathleen Gildred <Kgildred@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000
Subject: A critical national issue
I don't know how you feel about how this election is shaping up, but I'm very
concerned, and thought of you as someone who could help get information out
widely, if you feel the same way about it. Below is a letter I've been
sending around. If you choose to do so, please send this out to your list,
edit it, take parts of it, or, if you want, I can send you other information
on the subject.
Thank you -
I'm very concerned about the recent polling data on this election. The
possibility of waking up November 8th to Bush as our new Pres really scares
me! Having Bush in the White House for 4-8 years would be a disaster for the
issues we all care about, particularly the environment and women's rights.
With apologies to those supporting Nader, the 3-8% that he's polling in key
states could be the deciding factor in this election. He is drawing enough
votes to give the electoral votes to Bush in the "battleground" states of
Florida, Michigan, Missouri, New Mexico, Nevada, Ohio, Oregon, Washington,
Wisconsin, Minnesota, Maine and Pennsylvania.
The argument that if Bush wins this time the Democrats will move more towards
the Green Party just doesn't hold. If the Democrats loose, they are more
likely to move in the direction of the winning party, as has happened
historically. With a Republican President and Congress, we would loose all
progress made to protect the environment and women's rights in the last 30
years. In the words of Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber, "Do you want to make
a point, or do you want to make a difference?"
I urge you to support Gore, encourage those you know to vote for him, and, if
you have friends, relatives, or know organizations or different
constituencies in the key states mentioned above, please do what you can to
help get out the vote for Gore. Because of the extremely close nature of the
race, people even in states that are seemingly "safe" for Gore, such as
California, should pay close attention to the news in their state before
casting a vote for a third party candidate based on that assumption.
Following are some materials that help to make the point, including excerpts
from a letter to Nader from "Nader's Raiders." Please feel free to pass on
the information contained here. I'm collecting other such articles and
letters, including Robert Kennedys NY Times article, endorsements from the
Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth, Earth Day founder Denis Hayes, as well as
the piece I wrote, Reasons to Vote for Gore, etc. I would be happy to send
these to you to help make the case. This is the most critical election for
the environment and other issues we care about in years. Your help, in any
way, is really important!
Thank you -
- - - - - -
Letter to Nader from Nader's Raiders:
A dozen former Nader's Raiders have written a letter to Nader, urging him to
support Gore. Their main argument is that there ARE significant differences
between Gore and Bush on the issues, and that a vote for Nader threatens all
the economic and social progress America has fought for and secured over the
past 30 years. The complete letter can be found on the website,
"Don't vote for Nader" from the Portland Oregonian
Monday, October 16, 2000
By Erik Sten, Portland city commissioner, and Elizabeth Furse, former
Oregonians who vote for Ralph Nader could throw the national election to
George W. Bush. It's that close.
Nader claims there's no difference between a vote for Al Gore and a vote for
Bush. Many of Ralph Nader's friends, including national figures such as
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., former Congressman Toby Moffett and Earth Day founder
Denis Hayes have taken exception and are supporting Al Gore. They agree --
and so do we -- with the words Friends of the Earth used in endorsing Gore:
that there's a "Grand Canyon of difference" between the two candidates on
We all wish more could have been done on our issues the last eight years. But
we need to remember that the Vice-President was dealing with a Republican
Congress driven by Newt Gingrich's "Contract With America" and deeply hostile
to environmental values.
Al Gore has the backing of all leading environmental groups who can endorse
candidates, including the Sierra Club and the League of Conservation Voters.
Some 70 Oregon and Northwest environmental leaders have signed on in personal
support of Al Gore and Joe Lieberman.
Here are some of the reasons.
Al Gore has called for protecting all remaining roadless areas on our
national forests, including the Tongass in Alaska. Bush promised the Oregon
timber industry leaders who each contributed $100,000 to his campaign that
he'd increase the cut on our national forests.
Bush and his running mate Dick Cheney, both closely tied to big oil, have
promised to allow drilling in the pristine Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
Al Gore has pledged to protect it.
Gore has led this country's efforts to address the overriding threat of
global warming, against the resistance of a conservative Republican Congress.
Bush said he wasn't sure global warming existed until his staff prompted him
to retract the statement.
The next President will likely make three appointments for life to the
Supreme Court. Bush has said he admires conservative justices Antonin Scalia
and Clarence Thomas. If he were to appoint three others like these two, we
could expect a long list of important decisions to be overturned -- decisions
protecting civil rights, the environment and a woman's right to choose, just
to name a few.
Some people are considering a Nader vote to send a message. If Al Gore were
ahead by ten or twenty points, an environmentalist who cared might justify
such a vote. But every indication is that this election is going down to the
Eight years of George W. Bush, especially with one or both houses of Congress
in Republican hands, would be more than an unpleasant interlude for those who
care. Roadless forests would be mowed down, never to be restored. Species
would go extinct, never to be recovered. Extinction amounts to more than an
Bush's environmental agenda calls for repaving the tourist roads in Glacier
Park. While he's doing that, the rest of us can think up a new name for the
place because the park's glaciers are melting as the globe heats up.
Al Gore has proven himself to be an experienced and distinguished public
servant. One of us was privileged to work with him personally in the Congress
and found him a caring, intelligent man with a great love for people and the
environment. Environmentalists and other progressives need to give him their
undivided support, and so ensure his election to the presidency. When
president, he will finally have the chance to carry out his own environmental
vision. Al Gore has earned our votes.
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000
Subject: Please send letter to Nader
In addition to contacting friends/associates/organizations/listserves, etc.
especially in key swing states to educate them on what's at stake and to get
out the vote, please also send a message to Ralph (see below).
Dear Friend of MoveOn,
It now looks like Nader could very possibly cost Gore the presidency. In key
swing states -- Washington, Oregon, Minnesota, Maine, New Mexico -- Nader has
garnered enough support to throw the electoral votes to Bush. And those
votes could very likely make the difference. Even in key battleground states
where Nader support is thin, like Florida, Michigan, Nevada and Pennsylvania,
he could take enough votes from Gore to swing the electoral votes to Bush.
Latest polls even show Gore at risk of losing California with Nader pulling
away 6% of the vote. With the election tightening in every state of the
union, no state is safe.
We've been flooded by emails asking what we can do. The Nader camp is deeply
divided over whether they should endorse Gore -- at least in swing states.
Many say they never got into the race to play the spoiler. What was
positioned as a safe protest vote has now become a kind of kamikaze vote.
The specter of a Bush presidency looms large.
Let Ralph Nader hear your feelings. His contact information:
Nader has a lot of power in this situation. What should he do?
Please carbon copy us on your email to Ralph Nader at
email@example.com. We want to know what you think.
As a sample, we've attached below an open letter that has been floating
around the net. However, a personalized message is always better.
- Wes Boyd
P.S. Here's are some of the latest state level poll results, so you can see
how close it is in these key races:
Gore Bush Nader Undecided Source
Washington 45% 43% 5% 7% 10/16 American Research Group
Oregon 40% 44% 7% 9% 10/12 KPAM-Radio
Minnesota 41% 44% 8% 6% 10/18 Minneapolis Star Tribune
New Mexico 42% 42% 5% 10% 9/28 NM State Univ.
Michigan 43% 43% 4% 9% 10/19 EPIC/MRA Poll
Florida 43% 44% 3% 9% 10/18 John McLaughlin and Assoc
Nevada 44% 43% 3% 9% 9/21 Public Opinion Strategies
Pennsylvania 43% 45% 3% 9% 10/19 Public Opinion Strategies
AN OPEN LETTER TO RALPH NADER
[Please sign this email with your own name and send it to Ralph Nader at
firstname.lastname@example.org. Then forward it to every person in your email
address book, to the newspapers and broadcasters in your area, and anyone
else you can think of. With the race so close and such a short time until
the election, it's time for action.]
Dear Mr. Nader:
Over the years you have done a great deal for the American people. Now you
are about to do great harm. Your candidacy in this election has been
important. You have raised serious issues that need to be addressed. But
now your message is out and it's time to set aside ideology and step aside.
If you don't you will ensure that George W. Bush is our next president. And
if he is elected with a Republican majority in Congress, the American people
stand to lose most of the social, economic and environmental progress we have
made in the last thirty years. If there is any question in your mind of
this, consider the following:
THE SUPREME COURT
Bush will appoint activist conservative judges who will actively seek to take
away a woman's right to choose.
They will also support the corporate interests you have been so gallantly
fighting against by promoting "tort reform" which, as you know, is another
way to disempower the average citizen and take away his or her right to sue
corporations who damage them or cause death.
And the Bush Supreme Court will be anti-environment and side with the
exploiters and polluters who so willingly sacrifice the public health and
safety on the alter of short term profit.
THE DEFICIT AND THE MIDDLE CLASS
While Gore intends to use the surplus to pay down the deficit, Bush plans to
refund a large part of it to the wealthy. He says it's their money and they
should get it back. Well, it's their deficit as well and they should help
pay it off.
At this time the nation is almost five trillion six hundred billion dollars
in the red. That's $5,600,000,000,000. Over the past ten years we have
paid over three trillion dollars in interest. This year we will pay an
estimated three hundred and sixty-two billion dollars in interest. That's
$362,000,000,000, Mr. Nader. About $1,400 for every man woman and child in
this country. Do you have any idea what that amount of money could do for
the environment and health care and education if it was not being wasted on
Next year we will pay even more. And the years after that still more. And
instead of paying down the deficit it will grow larger. Why? So Bill Gates
and Paul Allen and all the other multimillionaires can have their much needed
tax brakes. And if Bush is elected and then inheritance tax is eliminated,
the middle class will be asked to make up the hundreds of billions of dollars
in those lost revenues as well.
As governor of Texas Bush has put the polluters in charge of the state's
environmental program with the result that Texas is now an environmental
disaster. Although he doesn't dare articulate it during the campaign, the
Republican agenda includes doing away with the Environmental Protection
Agency. If it's not eliminated completely it will be emasculated to the
point where it exists in name only.
And in service of his major contributors, the Oil and Coal conglomerates,
Bush and the Republicans will encourage oil exploration in environmentally
sensitive areas and the burning of fossil fuels to produce electricity etc.
If you think global warming is bad now, just give a Bush administration a few
years to pay of its debt to these special interests.
And whether you want to admit it or not, Mr. Nader, Al Gore has been one of
the strongest advocates for environmental protection. He recognized the
danger of global warming before most people had heard the term. And he
almost single handedly, and against the advice of all his political advisors,
saved the Kyoto Accords. But a rabid Republican Congress has blocked their
implementation along with almost every other environmental effort put forth
by the Clinton Administration. You're correct. Clinton/Gore haven't got a
lot done. But if you'd been president these past eight years, neither would
CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM
You warn us of the growing power and influence of the corporations on our
lives and our democracy yet you threaten to help defeat the only candidate
with any chance of doing the one thing that will help solve this problem.
You know Bush and the Republicans will not support Campaign Finance Reform.
But Gore has promised that he will work with John McCain in his mission to
bring about the reform we need. Why on earth would you actively work to keep
this from happening?
You know Bush plans to divert hundreds of billions of dollars to Wall Street.
It seems like a great scheme while the market is going up as it has been for
the past several years. But what goes up also comes down. While this risky
scheme may put a few billion in the pockets of the brokers and underwriters,
it will turn Social Security into Social Insecurity and endanger the
retirement of many people who unfortunately don't have as much money as you
Mr. Nader, you have stated publicly that you would rather see Bush win than
Gore. You seem to believe that Bush will make things so bad that the country
will rise up. This reminds me of the days when doctors bled patients in
order to cure them. The problem was the patients often died from the
treatment rather than the disease.
As someone who agrees with you on so many things and would love to see you
continue your campaign to educate and enlighten us about the things for which
you care so much, I ask you to do the right thing. The election is too close
and now is the time for you to throw your support behind Gore. If you help
Bush win you will have single handedly done more damage than any well meaning
person could possible conceive of. Please don't let this happen.
This is a message from MoveOn.org
BUT OF COURSE NOT EVERYONE AGREES WITH THE ABOVE!!
From: "Karen Revell" <email@example.com>
Subject: Nader is a choice
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000
This was sent to me, and I think it gives us hope that we can have a new President without all of the leftover promises and commitments to the Global corporate establishment. As Phil Donahue said 10-27 on the Today show, Nader is a choice rather than Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dumb(er). If we allow the scare tactics of the two party system to stop us from voting what is in our hearts, we will never have a fair government. We will be sold to the highest bidder of the Global Corporations.
When Clinton was being Impeached, many of us said "Enough is Enough". Now is the time to stand up and change the old party ways.
I think these Vermont Green Party folks have a great idea. If we all do
our bit, there's no telling WHAT could happen on November 7...
Our group needs your help. We believe Ralph Nader should be elected and
that this is a tool to help achieve it. There is still time!
Please check it out and make your pledge. the website is:
If it doesn't work, use http://www.nader.gemm.com by Weds. 10/25,
http://www.pledgenaderladuke.net is a mechanism by which people can stop
fearing that a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush, and rather realize that
we can all stand together now, pledge our vote for Nader, and be an ever
building force for encouraging all to join us!
Jesse Ventura had 7% of the vote 2 weeks before the election, and he won.
There is nothing to stop Ralph from winning.
Don't be afraid, simply join us and Ralph will win. This website is the
result of a late-breaking idea, combined with some great people in
central Vermont who were receptive to it and worked to make it a reality!
It has just started and the momentum is already building. Stand unified
If Nader can draw at least 5 percent of the national vote, the Green
Party will gain major-party status -- something only the Democratic,
Republican and Reform parties have.
Subject: Gore or Nader?
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000
From: Igor Korneitchouk <firstname.lastname@example.org>
I came across an interesting idea today, though, at the "Nader Trader" Web
site: http://www.nadertrader.org/. Their suggestion is, if you are a Nader
voter in states that are a toss-up, find a Gore-voting friend in a state
that is firmly for Bush (e.g., Texas, or Virginia) and informally agree to
trade votes with him/her. This would allow me to vote for Nader
(indirectly), helping to ensure that the Green party gets the 5% of the vote
it needs in order to qualify for matching funds in the 2004 election, while
still expressing a preference for Gore over Bush. It is a very cool idea
and I am thinking about who I know well enough to trust with a vote-swap who
lives in a Bush-leaning state.
NOTE FROM JEAN: I also received a note about another similar system originally sent from email@example.com
It was entitled "Swap Votes! Give Nader 5%, Keep Bush Out"
Unfortunately, there is not enough room left in this compilation to include it all. But it seems a great idea, just as this other one above.
Check it out at http://www.voteswap2000.com
From: Allene R Wahl <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000
Subject: Re: GMO Update #32: A feedback + The Campaign Against GMO website recommended + YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE A STARLINK, BABY, TO BE IN MY SHOW + DON'T MESS WITH THE MISSIONARY BRAND + The Sinister Side Of Sunscreens + UK Insurance Firms To Screen Clients For Genetic Illness + Doomsday Danger + SCORN FLAKES
Most American voters are unaware of the fact that environmental pollution
is causing disability and death to frightening numbers of unsuspecting
citizens. For instance, the CDC in Atlanta has been reporting for
several years that there is a 42% increase in pediatric asthma in the
major metropolitan areas and they aren't sure why. We know that they
have been repeatedly advised that it is due to pollution. So is it not
clear that the CDC have been told not to step on the toes of the
corporate polluters who contribute to political campaigns? With the
explosion in population, which demands more energy, that energy can no
longer be from fossil fuels!
Although the President's adversaries have tried to convince voters that
we do not have an energy policy, the President tried to budget for
alternative fuel research such as fuel cell technology; the Republican
led Congress has consistently shot those appropriations down. The
reason, of course, is the close ties the Republican politicians have to
the fossil fuel industry. The Republican candidates claim's to be pro
life but that is not their true agenda as they only want to get the
religious voters to support them on election day. The anti-environment,
anti-health agenda has led the Republican party politicians to make
enormous efforts in the Congress to do away with the much needed
environmental pollution laws for the last twenty years. Figures on these
facts can be seen in the new book "Toxic Deception" and, of course, all
historical research can be done at your local library by inquiring at the
library's reference desk.
These red flag issues should leave no voter in a quandary as to whom they
should cast their vote in November. If these facts alone aren't
sufficient reason for Campaign Finance Reform, I don't know what is. We
don't have much time left to save the health of the Earth's environment
which definitely coincides with human health and existence. Anything
else verges on global treason, including the supporters of those
Wake up America!,
Allene R. Wahl, Ph.D., C.N.C.
Int'l. Resource Center for Chemically Induced Immune Disorders
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000
"Individuals have an Inherent Right to vote directly on Policies of
government." - Triaka
From: AnnEastP@webtv.net (ann's 10 cents)
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000
Subject: B17 Cancer therapy denied by the FDA
I think today, cancer is the #1 cause of death. (my own
observation...lost 3 of my friends just last month, by cancer).
About 15 years ago, I was associated with a small group of people,
calling for "freedom of choice in Cancer Therapy". Who were simply
advising the Vitamin B17 and natural fruits & veg. as a way to avoid
Cancer. Well, to shorten this letter, B17 was banned, confiscated off
the health-food stores shelves and any parent who wanted to at least try
this for their minor kids, could be put in jail as child
This therapy was being adopted in Europe & Mexico,(and with good
results, similar to ulsers that can be at least,lived with)) but our
FDA dis-allowed the citizens here that wanted a CHOICE (in how to live
or die)@@##@$%%$$@ This is disgraceful & CRIMINAL.
When you realize in India, they die cause of malnutrition or
non-sanitary reasons, And in America where we fight starvation/or
un-sanitary conditions, but instead do this to it's people, it is
horrendous!!! Thanks for the message and your efforts to alert the
From: "Star Saffa" <email@example.com>
Subject: Can you mention this?
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000
I am very concerned that there is a concerted effort from world leaders to
start eroding the gains women have made in the last four decades through
organizations set up internationally under the auspices of gaining equal
rights for women in the world. What they are in fact doing is taking
funding away from what does work and put into anti-abortion (which is just a
'hot' issue to strip women of all their gains [since they won't have funding
to talk about other issues of greater importance]}. The article is at:
Renewed Offensive of the Ultra-Conservative Right on European Women
By Maj Britt Theorin, Chairwoman of the Committee on Women's Rights of the
NOTE FROM JEAN: Concidentally (!!) the next email I received in my INbox after Star Saffa's email above was this one. Anyone with relevant info or who wants to assist this "women development organisation" in Bangladesh will be - I'm sure - very much welcomed...
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000
Subject: MAILING LIST
Dear Sir/ Madam
Nari Unnayan Shakti (NUS) (Development Power for Development) is a women
development organisation lead by women. Our activities are mentioned bellow-
We are requesting you to put our organisation's name in your mailing list
and send your publications for our small library for women development
Nari Unnayan Shakti
823/A, Khilgaon, Dhaka-1219
Phone: 880 2 7216270
NAME OF THE ACTIVITIES
(To get the list of their activities please write to firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000
From: Mike Nickerson <email@example.com>
Subject: Election 2000 & well-being measurement
The election in Canada is offering an opportunity to move the issue
of how we Measuring Well-Being into public view.
Below is a question that anyone can ask at an All Candidates
Meeting. The more places this is asked, the more MPs will eventually
recognize the issue when they arrive at the House of Commons.
You will find a variety of additional materials, including another
key question, at the "Election 2000" link on our web site.
Included at that index is a full update on the progress of the
"Canada Well-Being Measurement Act".
I'm off in a couple of hours until November 5th at which point I
will be ready and eager to work with any of you who want to use this
election to make some progress toward clearly defining what we need to pay
attention to maintain an adequate level of well-being in Canada.
Yours, Mike Nickerson
(Question #1, 129 words)
Question for Candidates on Measuring Well-Being
GDP is not a measure of progress.
It only measures money.
It does not distinguish between money spent cleaning up our
failures and money spent on useful goods and services.
It counts unpaid work in our families and communities as worthless
and it is blind to resource depletion and pollution.
The Canada Well-Being Measurement Act would establish measures
where money spent dealing with problems which we should have solved is
tallied separately from that spent on useful goods and services. It would
recognize unpaid work for the benefits it provides and it would keep
natural resource accounts and pollution inventories so that we can monitor
our position in the ecology.
My question for the candidates is:
If elected, will you support the Canada Well-Being Measurement Act?
"There is only one power available to citizens
which does not require great wealth or the use of violence.
It is the power of collective persuasion.
It works on the subtle levels of thought and conversation
and it works directly through democracy."
Sustainability Project - Inviting Debate
P.O. Box 374, Merrickville, Ontario
IMAGINE THAT THE FOLLOWING WOULD HAPPEN IN NORTH AMERICA...
October 25, 2000
News summaries from GRIST MAGAZINE
The prime minister of Belgium set a goal yesterday of increasing the
number of organic farms in his country by 60 percent a year for the
next four years, with the aim of having at least 4 percent of the
country's agricultural land farmed organically. The target is part
of a comprehensive sustainable development plan unveiled yesterday by
the government that also would cut energy consumption in the country
by 10 percent below 1990 levels by 2010 and greenhouse gas emissions
by 7.5 percent. Renewable energy would provide 2 percent of the
country's power by 2010 and nuclear power would gradually be phased
out. State Energy Secretary Olivier Deleuze said the plan was based
on goals set at the 1992 U.N. Earth Summit in Rio de Janiero.
"Belgium is the first country to have put forward such a global
strategy to match the agreements first struck at the Rio conference,"
straight to the source: Planet Ark, Reuters, 10.25.00
From: "Harmonia" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
BACK TO THE FIRST HOME PAGE OF THIS SITE