April 26, 2001

Miscellaneous Subjects 78: 1. Manipulation Anyone + 2. A short note on globalization + 3. Democracy Trampled in Quebec City + 4. Getting Back to Basics + 5. Declaration of the Second People’s Summit of the Americas + 6. COMING OUT OF THEIR SHELLS + 7. Human cloning to be banned in genetic science 'revolution' + 8. FUNEREAL DISEAS & GROWTH ME OUT TO THE MAX + 9. More on NOVA/Frontline "Harvest of Fear" report on PBS last Tuesday

Hello everyone

I received several comments on the FTAA protests in Quebec - included below - and found some other relevant material for your consideration

BTW you should expect a lesser amount of material from me in the coming weeks as gardening and other work to do will demand more of my time.

For that same reason, and even more so, I would appreciate everyone to not forward me anything except extremely important/urgent stuff, and only with your personal explanatory comments as to why everyone should give a look at this.

Have a happy and wonderful day ;-)

Jean Hudon
Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator

"Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself."

- Tolstoy


From: "Hugh Perry" <hugis@cyberus.ca>
Subject: Manipulation Anyone
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001

Hi Jean:

I never write to newspapers, but after returned from Quebec I didn't feel I had a choice, so I've sent this off to the local newspaper in hopes . . . well you know the rest.

My contribution is amateur stuff compared to what‚s coming out but if you think it will help, please go ahead and include it in your newsletter.


Manipulation Anyone?

Would any of you enjoy being manipulated by your neighbour, or your boss? No one that I know of would allow this to happen at least not without a complaint, and yet there are those behind closed doors that are doing just that. But as long as we don‚t know who they are it's Ok. Right?

Had you been at the peace march in Quebec city you would have a new perspective on manipulation. You would likely react to the same degree as if a fellow worker stole from you. For example in Quebec City, some 1700 journalists were enticed inside the barricades to report on the niceties of the summit. According to their own accounts, while police flung tear gas, journalists were locked up inside, unable to report on events including the march itself. How convenient! This is why you heard and read so little facts about the biggest event happening in Canada. The Liberals created an excuse to confine the journalists, all under the disguise of keeping protestors at bay. Imagine the threat a handful of teenagers shooting insults at police who are fully armed and ready for action. Teachers on yard duty are more at risk.

So you were deceived into thinking that a misguided group of students spent the weekend having a fun time of destroying property. Isolated incidents did occur, but is this what you want to believe people from around the world gathered there for? I don't think so. Police reported 35,000 in a march that took almost 3 hours to pass. These numbers excluding the thousands of enthusiastic supporters watching from sidewalks, windows and bridges. Organizers figured 60,000, and what number did Conrad Black's collection of newspapers report? 30,000. Just a little more manipulation please. Well there is much more in store for our future.

Even those who are making the decisions affecting our lives are now mere pawns in this new regime made up of North American corporations. It may sound pessimistic to suggest that the future will not be as good for our own children as it has been for us, but this is already so. I had a much greater selection of job opportunities than my children have now. They accept their situation because this is all they know. Their children will accept their plight as well and for the same reason. So goes the slow degeneration of our lifestyle.

Ask yourself one question, will our children enjoy less wealth than ourselves? If so where did that wealth go? Was it directed to poorer nations to give them a more even standard of living with our own? No! . . Did it simple disappear? No! . . . Did it end up in the pockets of multinational corporations? Yes! . . . Does this explain their increased influence over strong Nations, to enforce an agreement that will have all of us dancing to their tune? Yes!

The large corporations need our silence to continue their practice. It comes down to individual choice. As consumers, we either support the continued theft of our freedoms or we do our best to support the values that align more with our own. Everything alternative already exist. It awaits our support.

Hugh Perry author of

Silent Partners . . . an eco-spiritual adventure


Note from Jean: Hugh has just sent me a complimentary copy of his book and it looks pretty interesting indeed, especially the way he was so powerfully prompted to begin writing it, spending 8 days in a row feverishly noting down all that was coming to him. You may want to give a look at his website above where you can download the first chapter for free.


From: "Marsha Hanzi" <hanzibra@svn.com.br>
Subject: A short note on globalization
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001

What we need is globalization of information. We do not need globalization of economies because this makes all local economies dependent on factors outside their reach-- but within the reach of the trans-national corporations!

Globalization of the economy is not a fact of life nor a real necessity. It has not benefitted anyone, neither the rich countries nor the poor. It has benefitted a tiny handful of very powerful people, and it has fed greed through market speculation) of even "normal" people...

So, within the idea of positive focalization, we should visualize local people taking their lives into their hands. (This is what we do at the Permaculture Institute in Bahia, Brazil). It is a question of re-conquering personal power, a big factor in the New Paradigm.

A crucial area of local power is agriculture. Farmers in the United States are quickly losing their autonomy. Farmers in the Third World have not yet got to that point, but are being (mis)led in that direction. They are losing autonomy over control of seeds, biodiversity, local trading.

So a really powerful focalization would be to strengthen local agriculture and especially biodiversity-- in the fields and in Nature around those fields. Because agriculture, the way it is being practiced, is directly responsible for the loss of biodiversity and deforestation. If we could create a really powerful world-image of prosperous local farmers supplying to local markets, that would be a real contribution to one of the gravest world problems...

Finally, it is the consumer who finances the world. The trans-nationals have gotten to the point they have because someone is buying their products.

These are my suggestions. Thank you for your fine and powerful work!

Sincerely yours,

Marsha Hanzi
Instituto de Permacultura da Bahia


From: "Dave Hartley" <dave@earthcomp.net>
Subject: Democracy Trampled in Quebec City
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001

This is pretty hot stuff.

By Sinclair Stevens, Canada's minister of regional industrial expansion under Brian Mulroney, was an MP from 1972 to 1988.


Published on Tuesday, April 24, 2001 in the Toronto Globe & Mail

Democracy Trampled in Quebec City
by Sinclair Stevens

I never thought I'd be writing this article, surely not in Canada. There aren't many people in this country who view free trade as positively as I do. As industry minister in the Mulroney government, I participated in the 1985 Shamrock Summit that set the stage for our trade agreement with the United States. I was even responsible for replacing the Foreign Investment Review Agency with Investment Canada, a welcome mat for our partners to the South. There also aren't many people who view the maintenance of law and order as a higher priority than I do.

But this past weekend, I was shocked by events in Quebec City. Shocked by what I saw, and stunned by what my wife, Noreen, and I personally experienced. I believe Canada is right to view free trade as a model for democratic development in every corner of our hemisphere, and I was delighted to see us host the Summit of the Americas. But our government is dead wrong to behave in a manner that suggests we have forgotten what democracy is all about.

Noreen and I arrived in Quebec City last Friday at about 5 p.m. We had heard about the so-called security fence and wanted to see it firsthand, to walk along beside it. My first view of the fence was in front of the Château Frontenac. It brought back memories of many happy visits to that hotel. But, this weekend, I could not enter: The hotel was inside the fence, I was outside.

As we walked around the perimeter, a 40-year-old chap passed us, and asked: "Where is your gas mask?" I asked what he meant. He said: "There is gas farther on -- watch out." We continued until we saw our first contingent of riot-geared police lined up three deep behind a closed gate. They were an intimidating sight -- in battle dress, with helmets, masks, shields and assorted elaborate weapons. I was glad, this time, that they were inside the fence and we were outside. Farther on, just before we got to Dufferin Street, there were perhaps 50 people -- protesters, it turned out -- who were standing or sitting on a small side road. At the end of the road, we saw a much larger group of riot police standing shoulder-to-shoulder, several rows deep. The road was well away from the security fence. In fact, the fence was nowhere in sight.

I spoke with many of the people in the street, asked them why they had gathered, why they opposed the free trade proposals. It was a lively but friendly exchange.

We were interrupted as the police down the road began an eerie drumming, rattling their riot sticks against their shields. Slowly, in unison, one six-inch step at a time, they began marching toward us. Noreen and I moved to the side of the street, as the protesters remained stationary. Some formed V signs with their fingers.

To my horror, the police then fired tear gas canisters directly at those sitting or standing on the road.

As clouds of gas began to spread, Noreen and I felt our eyes sting and our throats bake. We pulled whatever clothing we could across our mouths. One young woman, who had been among the protesters, offered us some vinegar.

"What's that for?" I asked. "It takes away the sting," she said. And it did help. The police, however, kept advancing. One large policeman with the number 5905 on his helmet, pressed right against me and ordered me to get behind a railing. "I haven't done anything," I protested. "Why?" He simply replied: "Get behind the rail." Then he added, "and get down." I did so.

I shook my head. I never thought I would ever see this kind of police-state tactic in Canada. What we witnessed that night was mild compared to events the next afternoon.

This time, we walked along the fence until we reached the gate at René Lévesque Boulevard, where a great crowd had gathered that included TV cameras and reporters. I was asked for an interview by a CBC crew but, before we could begin, dozens of tear gas canisters were fired, water cannons were sprayed and rubber bullets began to hit people nearby. Three times, I felt could not breathe, my eyes were sore and all I could do was run. In the bedlam, my wife and I were separated for almost three hours. She said she had almost passed out from the gassing. We lost something else, besides each other, last weekend in Quebec: our innocence. This government, and some reporters, like to brand the Quebec City demonstrators as "hooligans." That is not fair. I talked to dozens of them, mostly university students, aged about 20. They came to Quebec, not to have "a good time," as some suggest, but to express their well-thought-out views on a subject that is important to them, to all of us.

I may not have agreed with their position, but I sure believe in their right to express it. The police had no cause to violently suppress it. Some will say that a handful of demonstrators got out of hand and forced the police to take collective action. I can't agree. The police action in Quebec City, under orders from our government, was a provocation itself -- an assault on all our freedoms.

Sinclair Stevens, minister of regional industrial expansion under Brian Mulroney, was an MP from 1972 to 1988.



Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001
From: Trevor <wharmony@iinet.net.au>
Subject: Getting Back to Basics

Hello Jean,

I've just been moved to write to you about something I am very passionate about, i.e. "getting back to basics" as this allows one to change things they no longer prefer. So here goes:

Every subject starts off with a core belief (a supposition). That subject then evolves from that core belief by creating further beliefs. This new subject is in fact, nothing more than a new belief system (a new paradigm) that is based on the original core belief . Accordingly, everything within that subject is "provable" because that's where it all came from. In other words:


An analogy of this would be making a plain cake (no fruit). Whatever ingredients go into that cake will determine the outcome of that cake. There could be an infinite number of ways the cake could be made depending on the how much of each ingredient was mixed in. However, no number of combinations will turn it into a fruit cake, right? If one then examines the plain cake to find out what it's made of one will discover all the individual ingredients. In addition if someone then examined the fruit cake they would eventually discover the fruit, right? One could argue for all eternity about which one was true. The point here is both are true but are different cakes! The same applies to belief systems... they are all true, and all create different realities*. This applies equally on a microcosmic scale and on a macrocosmic scale. Some realities are collective realities, eg. like our global economic system, or smaller ones like religious systems, or they can be our individual realities, i.e. what is true to us individually.

Once one realises and understands this fundamental principle then one can go back and examine the original supposition of any reality, subject, technology, ideology, system, etc. If you find it is not what you now prefer, then you can start again from a new premise, a new supposition, a new core belief and create a new reality. This is currently happening in all walks of life in this our transformational age. Many of us are now choosing to believe we can create a better world; a world where we can live and work in harmony with nature. From that belief we are creating further beliefs and building upon that new base.

One of the keys here is to understand the old belief structure has nothing to do with the new one... it is another cake, a different cake. To make a fruit cake you are not going to try to pull the old plain cake apart (correct it because it was wrong). No, you simply start afresh and start finding the required ingredients and, once that is done, start making the new fruit cake. It is also important to realise there was nothing wrong with the plain cake; it served its purpose and fed you. In other words, do not invalidate (judge) our old system (way of life); it got us to where we are today... so acknowledge, honour and validate that. By doing so, allows one to let go of it and start concentrating on the new cake; the new world we are starting to build, that incidentally can coexist with the old one, without conflict... if we let it! This will allow others who are in the old system to see what we are doing and join us if, and when, they chose to!

For the past few decades many of us have been looking for, and finding, the new ingredients for our new world. We now have enough of them so are feeling it is time to start acting. I, personally have been working on the recipe... the blueprint of what it is, we are all intuitively wanting to create. This blueprint is almost complete and will be published in fairly soon (in perfect timing). The name I was guided to give it was World Harmony. What I have been doing is tapping into our collective (sub) consciousness. What I perceive is we (humanity) collectively chose this new course several decades ago. We have allowed ourselves until around 2012-13 to complete our personal exploration of the old paradigm, the old limiting, negative cycle. Remember, without negative there can be no positive. Now we are getting ready to explore the positive side of the human coin. Also remember, we are spiritual beings having a human experience, not human beings having a spiritual experience. So, validate your own innate God-given power to create whatever it is you now prefer.

This is all very exciting. Can you imagine what it is going to be like when we start lifting our limitations upon ourselves individually and collectively? Be honest with yourself and start to focus on that limitless-self; use your imagination and see yourself in this new world where everyone is supported in doing the things that bring them joy, with trust, integrity, compassion and love. In support of this paradigm, many new discoveries are coming out of the woodwork, like Zero-Point Energy (ZPE) that promise to provide us with all the clean energy we require, with the complements of our creator. We have a whole range of new technologies emerging that will support this new world that are not merely environmentally friendly but are environmentally beneficial. In other words they not only supply our new needs but resolve the old problems in the process. There are many, many examples and I could go on and on.

Needless to say, there is a lot more where that came from if you would like me to write some more?

Love & Blessings... Trevor

* The definition of REALTY is: The agreed upon apparency of existence!



Declaration of the Second People’s Summit of the Americas
Québec, April 19, 2001


We, the delegates of the Second People’s Summit of the Americas, declare our opposition to the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) project concocted secretly by the 34 Heads of State and government hand in hand with the American Business Forum.

Who are we? We are the Hemispheric Social Alliance, the voices of the unions, popular and environmental organisations, women’s groups, human rights organisations, international solidarity groups, indigenous, peasant and student associations and church groups. We have come from every corner of the Americas to make our voices heard.

We reject this project of liberalised trade and investment, deregulation and privatisation. This neo-liberal project is racist and sexist and destructive of the environment. We propose to build new ways of continental integration based on democracy, human rights, equality, solidarity, pluralism and respect for the environment.


Since the 1994 Miami Summit, the Heads of State and government have committed themselves to reinforce democracy and human rights, to support education and to reduce poverty in the Americas. For seven years nothing has been done. The only issue that has moved forward, taking advantage of deficit in democracy, is the negotiation of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA).

This is not the first time that presidents and Heads of State have promised a better world. This is not the first time that the people of the Americas have been told to wait for the fruits of free trade to come. This is not the first time that we are forced to take note that the Heads of State have broken their promises.

The FTAA project is a charter of investors’ rights and freedoms, sanctions the primacy of capital over labour, transforms life and the world into merchandise, negates human rights, sabotages democracy and undermines state sovereignty.


Indeed, we live in an Americas marked by intolerable inequalities and unjustifiable political and economic asymmetries. Half of the population of 800 million, of whom almost 500 million are Latin American, live in poverty. The south has a debt of $792 billion US to the north, resulting in a debt servicing of $123 billion US in 1999 alone. Capital, technologies and patents are concentrated in the North. Canada and the United States hold 80% of the economic might. Many new jobs are in the informal sector, where labour rights are constantly flouted.

Free trade agreements aggravate inequalities between the rich and the poor, between men and women, between countries of the north and countries of the south, and destroy the ecological links between human beings and the environment. 20% of the world population consumes 80% of the natural resources of the planet. These free trade agreements prioritize exports at the expense of the needs of local communities. We are witnessing the consolidation of economic and legal corporate power at the expense of popular sovereignty.

Free trade agreements favour the commodification of public goods and the planet (water, genetic heritage, etc.). The neo-liberal logic reduces the citizen to a mere consumer and ultimately to a product. It favours short term gains without considering the social and environmental cost of goods and services.

Under the pressure of large agribusinesses and dumping policies, free trade agreements threaten local small-scale agriculture, mostly performed by women, putting food security in danger.

Free trade agreements encourage the systematic privatisation of public goods such as health, education and social programs along with of Structural Adjustment Programs in the South and budget cuts in the North. These agreements rely on women to take up the collective tasks now abandoned by the state.

Free trade agreements foster the marginalisation of indigenous people and the appropriation and subsequent marketing of their knowledge.

Free trade agreements lead to an increasing feminisation of poverty and an exacerbation of existing inequalities between men and women. For example, women get paid less, work in hard and often degrading conditions without union rights, undertake unpaid and unrecognised work for the family and community, suffer the commodification of their bodies -- now the third most lucrative trafficking after drugs and arms, and are subjected to increased domestic violence and violation of their fundamental rights.

Free trade agreements are accompanied by the militarisation of entire societies through schemes such as Plan Colombia and are also related to arms trafficking.

There is no possible fair agreement in such a context.


We want to build bridges between the peoples of the Americas, draw on the pluralism of our histories and our cultures and to strengthen each other in the exercising of a representative and participatory democracy. We want to share the same passion for an absolute respect of human rights and the same commitment to have these rights respected. We want to live together a true equality between men and women, to take care of all our children and to share the wealth fairly and in solidarity.

We want complete respect for workers rights, trade union rights and collective bargaining.

We want to ensure the primacy of human rights and collectives rights as defined in international instruments over commercial agreements.

We want states that promote the common good and that are able to intervene actively to ensure the respect of rights. We want states to strengthen democracy, to ensure the production and distribution of wealth, to guarantee universal and free access to quality public education, and to health care particularly concerning women’s reproductive rights. We want states to eliminate violence against women and children and to ensure respect for the environment on behalf of the current and future generations.

We want socially productive and ecologically responsible investment. The rules applied across the continent should encourage foreign investors who will guarantee the creation of quality jobs, sustainable production and economic stability, while blocking speculative investments.

We want fair trade.

We welcome the conclusions of the deliberations of the different forums in the People’s Summit. These reflections will be integrated into the Alternatives for the Americas document.

We call upon the peoples of the Americas to intensify their mobilisation to fight the FTAA project and to build other integration alternatives based on democracy, social justice and sustainable development.



19 Apr 2001

More than a million Olive Ridley turtles came ashore to nest and lay eggs last month on India's eastern coast and hatchlings are now filling the beaches, providing some hope that the turtles may be back from the brink of extinction. (Sobering stat: Generally, only one out of every 1,000 hatchlings reaches adulthood.) Last year, about 700,000 turtles nested on the beaches. In 1997 and 1998, however, the turtles skipped the return home altogether and no mass nesting occurred. Turtle news is more grim across the world on the Baja peninsula in Mexico, where sea turtle meat is a delicacy and Easter is the biggest turtle-BBQing holiday of the year. Turtle eating remains common in Baja even though it has been illegal in Mexico for a decade.

Planet Ark, Reuters, 17 Apr 2001

Newsweek, Alan Zarembo, 23 Apr 2001 issue

Take action against a proposed resort in Mexico that would threaten sea turtles


From: http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/science/story.jsp?story=67472

Human cloning to be banned in genetic science 'revolution'

19 April 2001

Britain is to become the first country in the world to ban human cloning under government plans to ease public fears about genetic technology.

Alan Milburn, the Secretary of State for Health, announced today that he will bring forward legislation within months to outlaw the practice, which is currently restricted to those granted licences.

Mr Milburn declared in a speech to scientists and doctors in Newcastle upon Tyne that the human genome project offers huge potential benefits to NHS patients and announced plans to build on British advances in the field.



24 Apr 2001

Pyres of animals being burnt in the U.K. because of the
foot-and-mouth disease are producing more dioxin than all of the
country's factories combined. The burning has put the country on
pace to double its annual dioxin emissions. Meanwhile, the
government has admitted that it hasn't conducted an assessment of the
health effects of the burning and it isn't systematically monitoring
the pollution coming from the pyres. Environmentalists fear that the
pollution from the pyres will make nearby farmland unusable for years
to come. Some residents are up in arms over the burning; in one
instance about two weeks ago, protesters caused the government to
abandon a pyre designed to burn 3,000 animals a day.

London Independent, Geoffrey Lean, 22 Apr 2001

London Independent, Marie Woolf, 19 Apr 2001

Things sure aren't looking good for Mama Earth. We humans have done
our darndest to screw up, and now we seem to be running into the
limits of growth. Should we give up hope? Not a chance, writes
Donella Meadows, in a posthumous column. There is too much bad news
to justify complacency. There is too much good news to justify
despair. Read more on the Grist Magazine website.

Read it only in Grist Magazine: The state of the planet is grim.
Should we give up hope? -- by Donella Meadow



The transcript is usually available within a week at http://www.pbs.org

Here is an excerpt from the material already available at:


Harvest of Fear


But others aren't so sure. Concerned about the unknown hazards genetically altered foods may present, many of the world's so-called "green movements"-including such groups as Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, and the Union of Concerned Scientists-have mounted a vocal opposition campaign that has effectively stopped the development and use of genetically modified foods in Europe. Critics say modern scientists are playing with fire, creating new organisms with little thought to how these new hybrid plants will affect the environment or mankind.

"We feel that this is a mass genetic experiment that's going on in our environment and in our diets," says Charles Margoulis, who heads Greenpeace's anti-GM campaign. "These genetically engineered foods have never been subject to long-term testing and yet there are millions of acres of them growing in the United States and pervading the food system here."

By putting new genes into plants, opponents say, mankind runs the risk of these genes migrating to other plants not intended to receive them. New, potentially lethal toxins, allergens, and resistant organisms could be created, they argue, while the safety of the world's food supply could be dangerously compromised.

Critics also fear that genetically modified crops grown outside in uncontrolled environments could prove harmful to "non-target organisms"-animals, insects, or other wildlife that may come in contact with these experimental plants. Moreover, by favoring mass production of a few lucrative cash crops, they say, genetically altering foods could result in reducing the world's biodiversity.

What's more, opponents say, genetically modified food is only the beginning. "In the next few years, they want to introduce not just genetically engineered foods, but genetically engineered grasses, ornamental plants, trees," warns environmental activist Jeremy Rifkin, "They want to re-seed the planet with a second Genesis."

In "Harvest of Fear," farmers and scientists say such alarm is unfounded. Noting that genetically modified crops and food are the most regulated on the market-coming under the control of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Food and Drug Administration-supporters say the world's food supply has contained genetically modified ingredients for years. Virtually all breads, cheeses, sodas, and beer, for example, are made with genetically engineered enzymes.

"Food companies have learned that the [anti-GM] groups are not intent on having a reasoned debate about biotech or helping consumers find out about biotech," says Gene Grabowski of the Grocery Manufacturers of America. "It seems that their motive is to scare people."

"Harvest of Fear" contains footage of anti-GM demonstrations, including one at Kellogg's "Cereal City," where a demonstrator-dressed as a mutated Tony the Tiger-bemoans what genetic engineering has done to him. (A security guard arrives swiftly and blocks the camera.) But not all protests are so amusing: Some farmers have had their genetically modified crops hacked away during the night by "eco-terrorists." Members of the Earth Liberation Front, meanwhile, claimed responsibility for a fire at Michigan State University that destroyed a building being used for work related to agricultural biotechnology.

"Companies are not going to listen to morals," says Earth Liberation Front spokesperson Craig Rosebraugh. "If you cause them enough economic damage or economic sabotage to their industry, hopefully they'll see that it's in their best interest to stop their unjust acts."

Such demonstrations and protests have yet to deter the technology's most fervent supporters. Pandora's box has been opened, they say, and no amount of protests or alleged scare tactics will be able to put the lid back on.

"We will not be able to stop this technology," says USDA Secretary Dan Glickman. "Science will march forward."