October 17, 2000

Subject: Miscellaneous Subjects #30: Nationally televised presidential debate featuring six of the seven qualified presidential candidates on October 20 + Ten question survey of presidential candidates on nuclear weapons and disarmament + San Francisco boycotts World Bank Bonds + OIL FOR FOOD: THE TRUE STORY + A Campaign to End the Economic Sanctions Against the People of Iraq: Myths and Realities Regarding Iraq and Sanctions + BETTY MARTINI BLITZES BRITAIN + More on CELL PHONES' Health issue + Response to "Sinister Side of Suncreens"

Hello everyone

Let us pray and *keep meditating* for a positive outcome of the last-ditch effort in Egypt to break the escalation of violence and re-establish a political and social peaceful environment where true peace negotiations and a comprehensive peace agreement may flourish.

I've put together tonight another compilation from complementary material and feedbacks received in response to the last post. And I'm also now recommending to your attention an issue which has got very little media coverage despite - and probably because of - the fact that the West is responsible (according to a recently published book - see the "Campaign to End the Economic Sanctions Against the People of Iraq") for the death of hundreds of thousands of lives, many of them children under five, in Irak as a result of the UN sanctions following the Gulf War.

Sobering reading, once again

Jean Hudon
Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator

From: what@mindspring.com
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000
Subject: Re: Miscellaneous Subjects #29

Hello Jean,

Thanks for your updates! Especially the Michael Moore piece on Nader.

Speaking of which, I just emailed my local Fox affiliate, saying that the following would be something the public would be VERY interested in viewing. Perhaps we should all email Fox and let them know how we feel. It would be nice if the REAL debate would be on "free-access" television, since not everyone has cable and CSPAN.


- Morgan Jones

Press Release from the Judicial Watch website:

On Friday, October 20, from 8:00 to 9:30 p.m. Eastern time, Judicial Watch will host a nationally televised presidential debate featuring six of the seven qualified presidential candidates. John Hagelin, Al Gore, Ralph Nader, Pat Buchanan, Harry Browne, and Howard Phillips have all accepted--only George W. Bush has declined.

C-SPAN has committed to televising the debate, and Fox TV and American Voice Radio are considering coverage. The debate will be moderated by a highly respected journalist, and the panel will be composed of other journalists from well-known national newspapers--both liberal and conservative.

Seven lecterns will be set up on stage--no matter who attends the debate. Each candidate will give an opening and closing statement and will be asked questions by the panel in rotating order.

The questions, while not set in advance, will reflect Judicial Watch concerns about ethics in politics--bribery laws, corporate control of government, independent counsel issues, etc.

About 600 people have been invited to the debate and to a reception immediately following, including over 30 Ambassadors and their seconds-in-command, as well as the entire Washington press corps.

We urge everyone to watch this debate, which certainly promises to be the most interesting and representative presidential debate of the season. As always, please check your local listings for up-to-the-minute scheduling; TV and radio news stations reserve the right to make last-minute changes.

NOTE FROM JEAN: The fact that none of the other major media has even mentioned (so far) this upcoming televised debate and the fact also that they most probably won't show it says a lot about the very tight control of the US misinformation media by the elite that controls Dubya Bush...

From: "Virginia Heick" <vheick@nci.netonecom.net>
To: "jean hudon" <globalvisionary@cybernaute.com>
Subject: Re: Miscellaneous Subjects #29:

Jean, This survey shows where the candidates stand on
NUCLEAR issues. It should be mandatory reading
for anyone before they vote. At web site (below) scroll
down to Sept. 8 and find survey.

Virginia Heick
Boyne City, MI


Bush and Gore Fail to Answer Morality Question

WASHINGTON, DC – On behalf of 48 religious leaders from a cross-section of faith groups, Catholic Bishop Thomas Gumbleton and United Methodist Bishop C. Dale White have released a new ten question survey of presidential candidates on nuclear weapons and disarmament.

Replies from George W. Bush, Al Gore, and Ralph Nader reveal policy differences on several
issues. Only Nader answered all ten questions of the survey. Neither Reform Party candidate responded. The complete survey results are available online

at http://www.umc-gbcs.org/whatsnew.htm .

[CONTACT: Adam Eidinger or Howard
Hallman, 202-986-6186 or 301-896-0013.]

From: Sh0shanna@aol.com
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000
Subject: San Francisco boycotts World Bank Bonds......YES!!

From: tegbar@juno.com

World Bank Bonds Boycott

"We need to break the power of the World Bank over developing countries,
as the divestment movement helped break the power of the Apartheid regime
over South Africa; this is why we support the boycott of World Bank bonds."

- Dennis Brutus, Patron, Jubilee 2000 South Africa

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Rosalyn Fay/Laura Livoti
October 4, 2000
Neil Watkins

San Francisco Board of Supervisors Votes Unanimously to Boycott World
Bank Bonds

City Joins Oakland, Communications Workers of America, Citizens Funds in
Growing Grassroots Campaign

Washington, DC - On Monday, October 2, 2000, the San Francisco Board of
Supervisors unanimously passed a resolution which commits the city not to
purchase bonds issued by the World Bank. By joining the international
boycott of World Bank-issued bonds, the City of San Francisco is
continuing its legacy of supporting social and environmental justice -
including its support for selective purchase campaigns against Apartheid
South Africa and the military junta in Burma.

The President of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, Tom Ammiano,
stated, "Passage of this resolution and the recent protests against the
WTO and the World Bank go to show that when people in local communities
take a stand they can have a positive effect of impacting policies with
these institutions."

The San Francisco resolution is part of an international campaign against
the World Bank and its sister organization the International Monetary
Fund (IMF), whose projects and policies have caused enormous
environmental destruction and displaced and impoverished upwards of ten
million poor and indigenous people. It is also part of a growing,
nationwide grassroots movement of activists seeking to encourage their
local and state governments to use their purchasing and investment power
to advance a more just global economy.

Sponsor of the resolution Supervisor Michael Yaki stated, "We, the City
of San Francisco, should not invest in development banks that do not
support sustainable economic development models."

"This is an important and exciting initial step in halting global,
economic institutions such as the World Bank whose claims of
"development" and poverty alleviation have, in reality, meant increased
poverty and desperation for millions of people worldwide," states Rosalyn
Fay, a member of Economic Justice for Africa Now, a Bay Area economic
justice advocacy group which generated support for the resolution.

The Cities of Oakland and Berkeley, California; the Communications
Workers of America; the United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers of
America (UE); Citizens Funds; and the Sisters of Loretto have also
committed - through resolution or statement of policy - not to purchase
bonds issued by the World Bank. Coalitions of human rights and social
justice groups in cities and on university campuses across the country
are organizing additional boycott resolutions.

The boycott was launched because, while the World Bank has
adopted new rhetoric, its policies on debt and structural adjustment --
austerity programs imposed on indebted countries -- have remained largely
unchanged, plundering environments and economies of poor countries. The
campaign demands that the World Bank halt its devastating structural
adjustment lending and cancel debt claims it has on countries in the
Global South. The World Bank gets 80% of its financing through bond
sales on private financial markets to institutional investors and others.
The World Bank Bonds Boycott was launched in April at the time of the
spring meetings of the IMF and World Bank in Washington. Human rights,
environmental, labor and development groups in over 35 countries support
the campaign.


A debt of dishonour *


During the Gulf war in 1991 the US deliberately targeted Iraq's
drinking water supply in violation of the Geneva convention on war
crimes. The media have ignored recent research by a US academic
which confirms a deliberate strategy to destroy the whole country.
Ten years after the end of the conflict the Iraqi people are still
paying for the intransigence of both the US and Saddam Hussein.
Despite the recent direct flights from Moscow, Paris and Amman to
Baghdad, flouting the embargo, there is no sign of Washington
yielding any ground. On the contrary, the presidential election
campaign has raised the odds. Meantime, the pillaging of Iraq
continues, as shown by the work of the UN Compensation Commission -
a secretive body which operates on a distinctly shaky legal basis
and creams off a third of Iraq's oil revenue.

How the UNCC works


The unread reports


Voices in the Wilderness

A Campaign to End the Economic Sanctions Against the People of Iraq

Myths and Realities Regarding Iraq and Sanctions

[Taken from Iraq Under Siege: The Deadly Impact of Sanctions and War, ed. Anthony Arnove (Cambridge: South End Press, 2000), pp. 67-75.

To order, call 1-800-533-8478, email southend@igc.org, or visit

Myth 1: The sanctions have produced temporary hardship for the Iraqi people but are an effective, nonviolent method of containing Iraq.

Sanctions target the weakest and most vulnerable members of the Iraqi society-the poor, elderly, newborn, sick, and young. Many equate sanctions with violence. The sanctions, coupled with pain inflicted by US and UK military attacks, have reduced Iraq’s infrastructure to virtual rubble. Oxygen factories, water sanitation plants, and hospitals remain in dilapidated states. Surveys by the United Nation’s Children’s Fund (Unicef) and the World Health Organization (WHO) note a marked decline in health and nutrition throughout Iraq. (1)

While estimates vary, many independent authorities assert that at least 500,000 Iraqi children under five have died since 1990, in part as a result of the sanctions and the effects of the Gulf War. An August 1999 Unicef report found that the under-five mortality rate in Iraq has more than doubled since the imposition of sanctions. (2) Former UN humanitarian coordinator for Iraq Denis Halliday has remarked that the death toll is "probably closer now to 600,000 and that’s over the period of 1990-1998. If you include adults, it’s well over 1 million Iraqi people." (3)

The United Nations recently observed:

In addition to the scarcity of resources, malnutrition problems also seem to stem from the massive deterioration in basic infrastructure, in particular in the water-supply and waste disposal systems. The most vulnerable groups have been the hardest hit, especially children under five years of age who are being exposed to unhygienic conditions, particularly in urban centers. The [World Food Program] estimates that access to potable water is currently 50 percent of the 1990 level in urban areas and only 33 percent in rural areas. (4)

The UN sanctions committee, based in New York, continues to deny Iraq pencils, computer equipment, spare parts, and air-conditioned trucks, all necessary elements to sustaining human life and society. (5) Agricultural and environmental studies show great devastation, in many cases indicating permanent and irreversible damage. (6)

Others have argued that, from a North American perspective, sanctions are more economically sustainable than military attacks, since sanctions cost the United States less. In fact, hundreds of millions of US tax dollars are spent each year to sustain economic sanctions. Expenses include monitoring Iraqi import-export practices, patrolling the "no-fly" zones, and maintaining an active military presence in the Gulf region. (7)

Sanctions are an insidious form of warfare, and have claimed hundreds of thousands of innocent lives.

Myth 2: Iraq possesses, and seeks to build, weapons of mass destruction. If unchecked, and without economic sanctions, Iraq could, and certainly would, threaten its neighbors.

According to former United Nations Special Commission (Unscom) chief inspector Scott Ritter, "[F]rom a qualitative standpoint, Iraq has been disarmed. Iraq today possesses no meaningful weapons of mass destruction." While it is certainly possible that Iraq has the seed stock to rebuild its purported arsenal, Ritter has said that Iraq does not currently possess the capability to produce or deploy chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. (8)

The United States only became concerned with Iraq’s military potential in 1990, after the invasion of Kuwait. The US supplied Iraq with most of its weapons. Just one day before Iraq invaded Kuwait, then-President George Bush approved and signed a shipment of advanced data transmission equipment to Iraq. The United States and Britain were the major suppliers of chemical and biological weapons to Iraq in the 1980s during the Iran-Iraq War, in which the United States supported both sides with weapons sales. (9)

Finally, the United States possesses, and keeps on alert, more nuclear weapons than the rest of the world combined. Many Iraqis feel that it is disingenuous of the United States-sitting atop the world’s largest nuclear arsenal, refusing to comply with international treaties or allow its weapons programs to be inspected by international experts, and being the only nation in the world ever to drop an atomic bomb-to tell Iraq what it can and cannot produce. In 1998 and 1999, the United States bombed four countries-Serbia, Iraq, Sudan, and Afghanistan-all in violation of international law.

Myth 3: Iraq has acted in violation of UN resolutions, while the United States has not.

UN Resolution 687, paragraph 14, calls for regional disarmament as the basis for reducing Iraq’s arsenal. By arming Iraq’s neighbors in the Middle East, the US is contravening the same UN resolution with which it maintains arguments for sustaining the sanctions. Israel possesses more than 200 thermonuclear weapons and has violated scores of UN mandates, yet the US remains silent on the UN floor with regard to this violation of international law. (10)

While the United States claims to be encouraging peace in the Middle East by destroying Iraq’s arsenal, it continues to arm Iraq’s neighbors. The list of consumers of American military technology-in the Middle East and elsewhere-reads like a "who’s who" of international terrorists, human rights violators, and dictators. The US supplies Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Iran with weapons and technology. All are Iraq’s neighbors and could potentially threaten its borders. US contractors also supplied most of the weapons used by the Indonesian military in its invasion and occupation of East Timor. (11)

Myth 4: The Iraqi government has weakened and undermined the UN weapons inspection program, in part by kicking out inspectors in December 1998, thus forcing the US and UK to undertake "Operation Desert Fox."

The Iraqi government, knowing that the United States favors Saddam Hussein’s ouster and will impose sanctions until a "regime change," has no incentive to cooperate with the United States or intrusive inspections. Top Clinton administration officials-notably Secretary of State Madeleine Albright-have said publicly that sanctions will remain intact until Saddam Hussein is out of office. (12) This is not stipulated under the UN resolutions enforcing the sanctions.

Unscom director Richard Butler removed inspectors from Iraq prior to the December 1998 bombardment of the country, contrary to what is commonly reported. The US government claims Iraq "threw out" inspectors. In fact, the opposite occurred. According to Butler’s own records, his team of weapons inspectors made numerous unimpeded visits the week before the December bombing. On only a few intentionally provocative visits was he prevented from inspecting a site. (13)

In February 1998, former weapons inspector Raymond Zilinskas stated that "95 percent of [Unscom’s] work proceeds unhindered." He wrote in the Chicago Tribune, "Although it has been theoretically possible for the Iraqis to regain such weapons since 1991, the duplicity would have been risky and expensive, and the probability of discovery very high." (14)

Butler himself confirmed that he was in constant communication with the US military the week before the bombing. He often took his cues from Washington. Furthermore, the US government admitted (after an embarrassing Washington Post story) that it had been using Unscom to spy on Iraq. Iraq had previously charged Unscom with spying-a claim vehemently denied by the US government. (15) The ultimate irony is that Iraq pays for the entire UN operation in Iraq through oil revenues, thus financing workers to spy on behalf of the United States.

Efforts at negotiation and conciliation, such as UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s February 1998 visit to Baghdad, have produced cooperation and an opening for dialogue. Establishment of a clear timetable for ending inspections and recognizing progress made by the Iraqi government would provide clear incentive for future dialogue and compliance.

Myth 5: The Iraqi government is deliberately withholding and stockpiling food and medicine to exacerbate the human suffering for political sympathy and to draw attention to the need to lift sanctions.

The US State Department alleges in its September 1999 report Saddam Hussein’s Iraq that Iraq appears to be warehousing and stockpiling medicines, with malicious intent. (16)

The warehousing of medicines is heavily monitored by the United Nations and is acknowledged by local UN administration and staff to be caused by logistical problems stemming from nine years of sanctions and lingering Gulf War damage. Periodic UN reports on the humanitarian programs in Iraq list many technical issues that complicate providing medicine to a country of 22 million people. Obstacles to efficient distribution include low wages of Iraqi warehouses workers, insufficient transport, and the poor condition of Iraqi warehouses in the provinces.

The United Nations conducts frequent inventories of the food and medicine stored in Iraq. Former humanitarian coordinator Hans von Sponeck and his deputy, Farid Zarif, have repeatedly called for the "depoliticization" of distribution, arguing that stockpiling is the result of Iraq’s damaged infrastructure, rather than malice on the part of the Iraqi government. (17)

There is a serious problem, which von Sponeck has referred to as "uncomplimentarity." In many cases, Iraq must purchase goods from foreign suppliers. Items come in pieces; for example, dental chairs arrive but compressors must be ordered from another company, or syringes arrive but needles take longer. Thus, some shipments must be held in Baghdad until they are complete. This happens, von Sponeck explained, with about one-half of the orders. (18) Moreover, the UN sanctions committee takes longer to approve some orders than others, thus forcing Iraq to keep medicine in storage until the complements are approved.

Temperatures in Iraq during summer often reach 130 degrees Fahrenheit. Air-conditioned trucks are therefore essential for shipping perishable goods, including cancer medication, surgical gloves, and foodstuffs. Yet air-conditioned trucks are practically nonexistent in Iraq, since the sanctions committee has barred them under "dual use" considerations. (19) While it is certainly true that air-conditioned trucks could be used for military purposes, they are also necessary to ship medication.

The infrastructure is so degraded throughout Iraq that medicine and even spare parts are "Band-Aids to a huge problem," according to von Sponeck. (20) There are electrical shortages in every city, including Baghdad. Water and sanitation facilities have collapsed. Oxygen plants have fallen apart. Denis Halliday stated that Iraq would need at least $50 billion to rebuild its agricultural, medical, and social infrastructure. (21)

After allocations are taken out of Iraq’s oil revenues to finance Gulf War reparations, and UN administrative costs, and other mandated expenses, the amount of money which trickles down to the average person in Iraq is completely insufficient. Iraq cannot afford to rebuild its infrastructure under the oil-for-food program. Water sanitation facilities, electrical grids, communication lines, and educational resources will remain permanently degraded until the sanctions are lifted.

Myth 6: The Iraqi leadership uses money intended for humanitarian purposes to build palaces and enrich itself.

The New York Times claims that "with oil sales blocked, [Saddam Hussein] chose to spend what money was available on lavish palaces and construction projects." (22) In the years before oil-for-food, it’s important to recall that the Iraqi government was distributing food to its civilian population. The UN Food and Agriculture Organization said in 1995 of the rationing system that began in September 1990: "The food basket supplied through the rationing system is a life-saving nutritional benefit which also represents a very substantial income subsidy to Iraqi households." (23)

Iraq is pumping as much oil today as it did before the Gulf War, but is making less money because of the change in oil prices and the dramatic rise of inflation since 1990. When one considers that three Iraqi dinars could buy $1 in 1990, and today it takes more than 2,000, the difference in oil sales between 1990 and today is significant. While Iraq is permitted to sell more than $5.26 billion of oil every six months, these funds are not at the discretion of Saddam Hussein, but are kept in a UN escrow account with the Bank of Paris in New York City.

The sanctions, though intended to weaken Iraq’s elite ruling class, only strengthen its political hegemony. With Iraq’s population decimated by hunger, disease, and fear of US and UK bombs, the development of civil society is hampered, as are hopes for pluralism. Iraq’s elite is empowered by a lucrative black market. With sanctions taking thousands of lives each month, the Iraqi government can better rally popular support and bitterness against the US government.

Myth 7: The distribution in northern Iraq-where the UN is most heavily involved-is better than in the south, proving that the Iraqi government is failing to adequately distribute food and medicine to its people.

Sanctions are simply not the same in the north and south. Differences in Iraqi mortality rates result from several factors: the Kurdish north has been receiving humanitarian assistance longer than other regions of Iraq; agriculture in the north is better; evading sanctions is easier in the north because its borders are far more porous; the north receives 22 percent more per capita from the oil-for-food program than the south-central region; and the north receives UN-controlled assistance in currency, while the rest of the country receives only commodities. (24)

Myth 8: The international community is united in its opposition to Iraq, and favors economic sanctions.

France, China, and Russia are three countries among many that have criticized the economic sanctions against Iraq. As permanent members of the UN Security Council, they have challenged the US and UK position on sanctions and have questioned military strikes. (25) The Pope, more than fifty US bishops, numerous religious leaders, and scores of organizations have condemned and protested both sanctions and military strikes. Two Nobel Peace laureates and five congressional staffers traveled to Iraq in 1999 to promote international concern and understanding for the conditions found in Iraq today. The Arab League has called for the immediate lifting of the economic sanctions. (26)

Myth 9: The US and UK fighter planes patrolling the "no-fly" zones are protecting Iraqi minority groups. Since the end of the December 1998 bombing campaign, there has been no "collateral damage" in these regions.

Since the December 1998 bombing campaign against Iraq, US and UK fighter planes have flown thousands of sorties over the northern and southern "no-fly" zones, allegedly to protect northern Kurds and southern Shiites. They patrol the Iraqi airspace, they say, so that Iraq cannot attack its own people, as it did during the 1980s. While UN resolutions do call for the protection of Iraqi minorities, there is no stipulation for military enforcement of the zones. (27)

According to the UN Office of the Humanitarian Coordinator for Iraq, the US and UK planes have killed dozens of innocent civilians, and injured many more. (28) For example, on January 25, 1999, a guided missile killed more than ten people in Basra when it struck a civilian neighborhood. While the Pentagon denies any civilian casualties, eye-witness accounts describe encounters with scores of children and families wounded and killed when US and UK bombs missed their targets. (29)

While the US claims to be protecting northern Kurds from the Iraqi government, the US is silent when Turkey flies into Iraq, over the "no-fly" zone, to bomb Kurdish communities, because Turkey is a US ally. (30)

The bombing also complicates the humanitarian efforts of the United Nations. Aid workers have been forced to cancel trips into Kurdish and Shiite regions, and many civilians have been accidentally wounded, further burdening hospitals that are struggling to cope with daunting incidences of illness and preventable disease.



Read the Notes, a book review and much much more at http://www.southendpress.org/books/iraq.shtml
where we can also find...

"This book (Iraq Under Siege) gives us a key to understand the New World Order, and warns about how Iraq’s tragedy may be a model for global bullying and global impunity in coming times."

— Eduardo Galeano

"By documenting the impact of the sanctions, exposing the fallacies and distorted arguments of the establishment and the bias of the media, this book makes a valuable contribution to breaking the silence and complacency that surround the humanitarian crisis in Iraq. It is bound to contribute to the mainstreaming of the growing anti-sanctions movement, which is dedicated to helping the Iraqi people reclaim their destiny."

— Hala Maksoud, President, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee

From: LONDAF1@aol.com
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000

PRESS RELEASE 29th September 2000

BETTY BLITZES BRITAIN: Aspartame Awareness

SHELF IN AMERICA" Howard M Metzenbaum, US Senator, Feb 3 1986 (Letter to
Orrin Hatch, Chairman, Senate Labour and Human Resources Cttee)

In her first UK Lecture Tour this early Autumn (locations in Scotland, West
Midlands, Essex and London) BETTY MARTINI, Founder of Mission Possible
International, successfully completed a series of speaking engagements on
Health Aspects of Aspartame. The final Lecture in London brought together
representatives from industry, regulatory agencies, representatives from
specialist support groups etc. At this meeting too, the latest position
papers from US doctors regarding aspartame and the
hypothalamus were available.

Aspartame is an artificial sweetener (E951) that is put in diet products,
carbonated beverages, dilutable squashes, desserts (eg yoghurts), chewing
gum, some multivitamins and medications. It is often used in combination
with other sweeteners such as acesulfame K and saccharin. Major
manufacturers are currently in approval processes for further sweeteners such
as Neotame. Aspartame and monosodium glutamate (MSG - E621) are termed
excitotoxins. Eminent US specialists state that these chemicals have a
synergistic neurotoxic effect on the brain as well as having other health
effects. Dr H J Roberts MD FACP, FCCP (world reknowned endocrinologist)
states in Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients about Betty Martini:
"I had no inkling about the enormous energy and wide scope of this short
blond dynamo until she went into high gear."

BETTY MARTINI'S visit to the UK included live and pre-recorded interviews and
photo sessions (and a live interview ahead of her coming to the UK). There
has been publicity across the UK through national, regional and local print
media, BBC regional and national independent radio and phone ins. Media
interest has continued in the wake of her visit.

Betty Martini's phenomenal style and stamina can be matched by few people;
her knowledge and delivery on this subject matter is first rate. Her
statements are backed by top specialist doctors and documentation by
recognised authorities including the Congressional Record. She has collected
thousands of case histories. And now UK sufferers' stories are being reported
that tell of the same symptoms as suffered by many in America and elsewhere.

In America the controversy has raged before, during and since approval of
this chemical sweetener was gained - nearly 20 years ago.

The campaign against aspartame has come out of America and is internet
driven. Mission Possible International now has members and links with groups
around the world. The award winning 600 page website www.dorway.com leads
the way in no holds barred information on the history of how approval was
gained in the States (and then round the world); transcripts of original
documentation as well as links to many other related websites.

Awareness about aspartame in the UK has been growing steadily. This subject
matter is said by campaigners to mirror that of genetic engineering - big
business involvement and the regulatory processes that have allowed such
practices. A UK survivors' support group - Additives Survivors' Network (UK)
is now in operation.


1. The newly formed International Food and Health Forum (IFHF) intends to
bring the work and views of key alternative specialists to the forefront of
public awareness - to offer debate and to promote the controversial messages
that will counter established opinion

2. Professional photographs available.

UK londaf1@aol.com
US Mission-Possible-USA@Altavista.net

From: "Hans Karow" <core@vip.net>
Subject: Re: Miscellaneous Subjects #29 : CELL PHONES' Health issue
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000

Regarding your recent article:
Check also "CELL PHONES: Cause for Concern? Manufacturers will now
disclose how much radiation they emit" at

I recommend everyone to check the unbiased and independent web site:


and click on "cell phone"and "research".

There you find more than just trhe tip of the ice berg you never will read/hear about in the media!

Hans Karow
S 32 / C 6, RR # 1
Tel.: (250) 498 3135
Fax: (250) 498 3183
E-mail: core@vip.net

Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000
From: Chere Rae <heartvisions@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Response to "Sinister Side of Suncreens"

Dear Jean, Sunrider has a safe Suncreen SPF 25 without OMC. It will not
keep people out of the sun however. The downside is one must re-apply.
It is non-toxic and effective with insect repellent to boot! There is
much high dollar junk out there. After over 6 years doing my own
research and having witnessed besides myself, my family, friends and
pets benefit and regenerate, I have come to trust the integerity of the
Dr. Chen's and their products.

Health and Wellness,

Chere Rae