MAY PEACE PREVAIL ON EARTH
March 19, 2003
Miscellaneous Subjects #179: System Change and Various Important news
Because of continuing serious malfunctions with the listserver system provided by my IPS, I've decided to switch over to a new more efficient system and have set up last night a new automated listserver at Riseup.net. I've transferred all the current subscribers to this new system which will dispatch from now on my compilations. Please take a minute to review the permanent footer at the bottom of this compilation to review the new relevant operational procedures. Also some of you reported not receiving - again because of delivery problems with my IPS - my last compilation, The Light Series #48: Tense Lull Before the Storm - I recommend it to your attention at http://www.EarthRainbowNetwork.com/Archives2003/LightSeries48.htm
As you may imagine, with the imminent war, I'm absolutely overwhelmed with hundreds more emails than I can possibly process (6225 unprocessed ones in my INbox right now!) and there are LOTS of news articles and stuff I'd love to include in my compilations. So it is very hard for me to keep up. So I'd really appreciate some email restraint (except for personal feedbacks) from all those who frequently send me stuff.
Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator
This compilation is archived at http://www.EarthRainbowNetwork.com/Archives2003/MiscelSubjects179.htm
as well as at http://lists.riseup.net/www/arc/earthrainbownetwork/2003-03/msg00000.html
1. Following orders is not an excuse
2. Rachel Corey (ISM) killed in Gaza Strip by bulldozer VIGIL NOW
3. The Death of Rachel Corrie
4. We Are As Others See Us
5. Virus causing deadly pneumonia revealed
6. Airline Passengers Are Sprayed for Bugs
7. I'd Rather Go Naked
Mr. Bush - This War Is Not a Sign of Strength, But of Desperation!
Tons of links are provided at the URL above throughout this article
720% increased risk of breast cancer from Paxil (March 17)
Nearly One Million Seals to be Killed in Canada
Date: 18 Mar 2003
From: "B. Pramana" <email@example.com>
Subject: Following orders is not an excuse
In GWB speech giving Sadam the ultimatum to leave Iraq within 48 hours he also warned the Iraqi army not to use WMD because they will be prosecuted as committing a crime against humanity.
And "following orders" is not an excuse to get them off the hook.
I wonder if the same rule also apply for the US, UK and Australian army getting ready to drop 3000 missiles within the first 48 hours of the strike against the Iraqi people.
It is also a crime against humanity and 'following orders' is not an excuse.
From: "Mark Graffis" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Gush Shalom (Israeli Peace Bloc)
Sent: March 16, 2003
Rachel Corey (ISM) killed in Gaza Strip by bulldozer VIGIL NOW
Ha'aretz, Sunday, March 16, 2003
Adar2 12, 5763 Israel Time: 18:58 (GMT+2) _
American woman peace activist killed by IDF bulldozer in Gaza
By Arnon Regular, Haaretz Correspondent, and Agencies
An American woman peace protester was killed Sunday by an IDF bulldozer, which ran her over during the demolition of a house at the Rafah refugee camp in the southern Gaza Strip. Another activist was wounded in the incident. Rachel Corey, 23, from Olympia, Washington, was killed when she ran in front of the bulldozer to try to prevent it from destroying a house, doctors in Gaza said. "Corey was killed in the al-Salam neighbourhood when an Israeli bulldozer covered her with sand as she stood in front of a bulldozer," said Dr Ali Musa, a doctor from the al-Najar hospital in the southern Gaza Strip. He said she died from skull and chest fractures. The IDF said it was checking the report. The U.S. State Department had no immediate comment. Greg Schnabel, 28, from Chicago, said the protesters were in the house of Dr. Samir Masri. "Rachel was alone in front of the house as we were trying to get them to stop," he said. "She waved for bulldozer to stop and waved. She fell down and the bulldozer kept going. We yelled 'stop, stop,' and the bulldozer didn't stop at all. It had completely run over her and then it reversed and ran back over her." Since the start of the Intifada, groups of international protesters have gathered in several locations in territories, setting themselves up as "human shields" to try to stop IDF operations. Corey was the first member of the groups, called "International Solidarity Movement," to be killed in the conflict. Schnabel said Corey was a student at Evergreen College and was to graduate this year. He said there were eight protesters at the site, four from the United States and four from Great Britain. "We stay with families whose house is to be demolished," he told the Associated Press by telephone from Rafah after the incident.
TO SEE HOW IT HAPPENED GIVE A LOOK AT
Photo story: Israeli bulldozer driver murders American peace activist
Date: 16 Mar 2003
From: "Starhawk" <email@example.com>
Subject: The Death of Rachel Corrie
March 16, 2003
Today a young woman was killed in Gaza. Young women, but more often young men, get killed in Gaza and the West Bank every day, and the world pays no attention. What was different today is that Rachel Corrie was an American, an activist with the International Solidarity Movement, the group that I'm here with in occupied Palestine. And her death is a particularly horrifying example of the cold-blooded dehumanization that characterizes this occupation.
Rachel was trying to stop the demolition of a Palestinian home. According to the other activists who were with her, she was in dialogue with the operator of the bulldozer. She was working in the spirit of nonviolence that is a guiding principle of the ISM, which provides support for Palestinian civilians and for nonviolent efforts to bring about justice for Palestine. Rachel climbed up on the bulldozer to talk to the soldier in the cockpit. She climbed down. She sat in front of the bulldozer. The soldier in control of the huge machine drove it deliberately over her. He then backed up, and ran over her again. Rachel was twenty-three years old.
I am trying to fathom the mind that could pull the levers and gun the motor to crush the life out of her young body. That choice, that deliberate act of murder that ended her sweet life, seems incomprehensible. But here in occupied Palestine, that murder is a logical outgrowth of the system of total dehumanization that controls every aspect of life, that cannot see the human being in the Palestinian, that claims to be fighting terror by institutionalizing it. Please register your outrage -- at Rachel's murder, at the home demolitions that she was trying to stop, at the illegal occupation that can only be defended by brutalizing a whole people.
Call the Israeli Ministry of Defense 972-3-69-55476 (011-972-3-69-55476 from the US) and 972-3-69-75220 (011-972-3-69-75-220 from the US)
Fax the Israeli Foreign Office 972-2-53-03506
(011-972-2-53-03506 from the US)
General Director: Phone 972-2-530-7704
(011-972-2-530-7704 from the US)
Call, or demonstrate, or shut down your local Israeli Embassy or your local Consulate office.
If you are from the US, call or write your Senators and Congressional Representative.
From: Mark Elsis <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: We Are As Others See Us by John Kaminski
Date: 16 Mar 2003
Connecting Through 1000+ EcoHumanePolitical Websites
http://Lovearth.net / http://Network.Lovearth.net
We Are As Others See Us
by John Kaminski <email@example.com>
We are not who we say we are. To insist we are is to say that the rest of the world doesn't count, that the opinions of our friends don't matter, that their honest attempts at objectivity are not really important to us.
We are not who we think we are, or claim to be. We are what others say we are, which is why in courts and schools and businesses, we don't accept what people claim about themselves; we ask witnesses, teachers and references. We are who others say we are.
If we continue to say that our opinion of ourselves is all that matters and everything that others say is mere envy, we are practicing a demented, paranoid self-centeredness, and will never be good neighbors to anyone, nor legitimate citizens of the world. This behavior is justifiably ostracized and ridiculed - and often treated medically - in most polite society.
Yet this is the course America is on, ignoring all the criticism from people who have proven they're our friends, and following our own selfish hearts without ever admitting that because of our behavior, the world is bleeding.
Recently, the august and enigmatic nation of France has tried to show us the error of our ways, and to show our gratitude we responded with ethnic slurs and insults. The French have probably been our most consistent allies over time; they even helped us fight the British on occasion. They are our friends. But now, in our self-assured, insular and arrogant ignorance, we castigate them for advocating the elementary rules of civil civilization.
Germany, Russia, Turkey, Chile and even Cameroon have out-achieved the United States in the category of basic humanity and civilized behavior in recent weeks, but Americans only scoff at their unsophisticated naiveté. How could they dare preach peace when America has its heart set on war, no matter how unjust or predatory? Who do they think they are, Americans demand to know, when the United States has already decided what is best for the entire world?
Then, consider China's recent assessment of the United States, as furnished in a report from the Xinhua News Agency.
Now you can say China is our adversary, and that everything the Chinese say about us is mere propaganda. Or, you can try to be honest, and accept their observations as the semi-objective facts they are. You tell me - and yourself - as to whether this report has the ring of truth.
The U.S. always issues reports about the state of democracy around the world but never reports objectively about itself. True or false?
The six-part Xinhua article challenges the myth of "American Democracy," citing such human rights violations in the U. S. as widespread violence, suspicious judicial decisions, a widening gap between rich and the poor, systemic gender and racial discrimination, and pervasive interference and exploitation in the affairs of other nations. Are these assessments untrue?
"Under the pretext of safeguarding this kind of democracy," the report states, "the United States continues to make rash criticisms of other countries and interferes in their internal affairs. "Nevertheless," the article noted, "well-informed people know that the so-called democracy has been nothing more than a fairy tale since the United States was founded more than 200 years ago."
Consider the facts this Chinese article uses to critique American society. And ask yourself - without making any defensive judgments about the motives of China to obscure the credibility of what is being said -- if these assertions are not true. Then ask yourself why these questions are not being asked by the very people who should be asking them -- namely ourselves.
The 2000 election debacle further exposed the glaring flaws of the so-called democratic election system in the United States. Fifty million voters cast ballots, less than one-fourth of the 205 million eligible voters in the nation, a record low in U.S. election history. Is democracy only a fairy tale? Xinhua asked. True or false?
The reports quotes Larry Makinson, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group that studies money and campaigns. "The depressing thing about American democracy is I can check the fund-raising balances at the Federal Election Commission and tell you what the election results will be before the election."
The article also says the judicial system in the U.S. is extremely unfair: 90 percent of the persons on Death Row have been victims of sexual abuse and assaults. Most who were sentenced to death were too poor to hire their own attorneys. And it quoted a Columbia University study insisting that in 68 percent of death penalty cases in the U.S., the sentence did not fit the crime. Sound familiar?
The Xinhua report also notes that spending for prisons far exceeds the budget for education.
And that the gap between the rich and poor in the United States has widened at the same pace as overall economic growth.
"Statistics show that the richest that account for one percent of the U.S. citizens are in possession of 40 percent of the total property of the country, while over 32 million citizens, or 12.7 percent of the total population of the country, live under the poverty line," Xinhua asserted.
Do we dare ask ourselves if this a real picture of democratic America? Or is China just waxing propagandistic?
Is China correct when it insists that America "stop arrogantly ordering other countries around on the pretext of human rights" that the U.S. itself doesn't really practice? Or are we just going to insist, along with our very religious president, that China merely envies our freedom?
And what do we make of it when someone who is our erstwhile enemy speaks to us more honestly than our own government? What kind of condition are we in when that happens?
When we encounter opinions about ourselves that may not coincide with our own observations, we rightly must ask who is correct: them or us? But we must be objective, or else the question is useless. So we turn to other sources for verification and decision, and in this case, one more favorable to our own need for self-respect, namely that quintessential American newspaper, The New York Times.
The recent report by Roger Morris on how Saddam Hussein first came to power in Iraq is especially enlightening.
He writes: "Forty years ago, the Central Intelligence Agency, under President John F. Kennedy, conducted its own regime change in Baghdad, carried out in collaboration with Saddam Hussein."
In 1963, the tyrant of the day who was seen as a threat to the West was Abdel Karim Kassem, a general who five years earlier had deposed yet another Western-installed monarchy, Morris reports.
The Eisenhower administration's tolerance of Kassem as a counter to Washington's Arab nemesis of the era, Nasser of Egypt, was much like Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush behaved toward Saddam in the 1980's against the common foe of Iran. By 1961, the Kassem regime began threatening and talked openly of challenging the dominance of America in the Middle East - all steps Saddam was to repeat in some form. Kassem's days, like Saddam's are now, became numbered.
In 1963, Kassem was overthrown and executed. The U.S. -installed successor was the anti-Communist Baath Party, and a key U.S. liaison in the conspiracy was Saddam, then a 25-year-old who figured prominently in the bloodbath that followed. In 1968, in another coup assisted by the U.S., Saddam came to power, by then, a good friend of the CIA.
To knowledgeable people in the Middle East and Europe, this history is well-known. Most Americans have no clue about it. So when America preaches about the nobility of its motives today in Iraq, much of the rest of the world knows what vicious horsepoop it is.
George W. Bush is simply repeating a cynical pattern that the U.S. has followed in Iraq and other Arab countries for decades on end, but most Americans remain, in their trivia-dominated self-centeredness, clueless.
And this is where we are today, as a nation. Will we listen to what the people of the world are telling us about ourselves, or continue to act out our own self-deluded fantasies of messianic and racist superiority?
For God's sake, the key to integrity is admitting our faults, confessing our sins. Everybody in the whole world realizes this. Yet America admits no faults, and by this megalomaniacal act, reveals to the world it has no integrity, and is not to be trusted by its neighbors, nor by the people of the world.
Will we risk the future of all life on this planet for the schemes of a few powerful men who are trying to steal money they don't really need from all of the rest of us who genuinely do?
These are men who don't listen to anybody and truly fit the description of both schoolyard bullies and paranoid delusionals. One day, they'll really get what's coming to them. We can't let them force us to share the same fate that awaits them, and if we'd read a little history and listened to the opinions of our friends, we surely wouldn't.
John Kaminski is writer who lives on the coast of Florida and occasionally has doubts about his own thoughts, but in such cases usually relies on the opinions of his friends to determine if he's right or wrong.
This article will be published on: http://The-United-States.net
Forwarded by "Mark Graffis" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Virus causing deadly pneumonia revealed
11:07 19 March 03
NewScientist.com news service
The mystery respiratory illness that has caused worldwide alarm and killed 16 people belongs to the paramyxovirus family, tests on patients in Germany, Hong Kong and Singapore strongly suggest.
But although the identification of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) will come as an enormous relief to public health officials, there are no effective drugs to treat it.
"Everyone will be relieved it's not from a completely unknown taxonomic group," says Yvonne Cossart, an infectious diseases expert at the University of Sydney, Australia. "But the antivirals we have at our disposal will not be useful against it."
Late on Tuesday, researchers in Frankfurt revealed that throat swab and sputum tests from three patients contained particles resembling paramyxoviruses - a family of viruses related to influenza, and which includes measles.
Then on Wednesday, microbiologists at the Chinese University of Hong Kong and the Prince of Wales Hospital in Hong Kong reported that electron microscopy and molecular tests had detected an unidentified member of the paramyxovirus family in samples from local patients. This result was soon corroborated by the findings of experts at the Singapore General Hospital and the country's Defence Medical Research Institute.
Based on patients' symptoms, and the observation that the illness is highly infectious only at close quarters, microbiologists had considered a paramyxovirus a possible cause of SARS.
"The fact that the same family of virus has now been found in separate localities provides reasonably strong evidence" of its identity, says Peter Collingnon, director of microbiology and infectious diseases at Canberra Hospital, Australia.
Many recently emerged viruses have been paramyxoviruses. For example, the Hendra virus, first described in Australia in 1994, was a paramyxovirus that jumped from horses to infect people. But all victims appeared to contract the virus following close contact with bodily fluids from horses. In contrast, SARS is transmitted from person to person. But, as with measles, close proximity is required. Most of the victims reported to date are doctors or other medical staff.
"And one fact that should allay fears is that since hospitals in Hong Kong instituted a policy of using ordinary protective masks, there has been no more cross-infection in those hospitals," says Collingnon. "So there seems to be a simple intervention that stops it from spreading."
If SARS is confirmed as a paramyxovirus, the next step will be to work out where it came from. "The question will be: is it a virus already known to affect humans that has acquired DNA or RNA and increased its virulence as a result, or is it something that has jumped from animals?" says Collingnon. Paramyxoviruses can infect a wide range of animals, including birds. "If they are migratory, you would be particularly worried," Cossad says. The 250 recent cases of SARS around the world stem from a single traveller who visited China, Vietnam and Hong Kong. An earlier outbreak in China's Guangdong province, which resulted in over 300 cases of illness and five deaths, is believed to be linked.
Five people in Hong Kong, two in Vietnam, two in Canada and two more in China are thought to have died from the illness. Singapore has had many cases, though no deaths. Other countries that have now reported cases following the arrival of airplane passengers from affected areas are Australia, UK, Ireland, Romania, Slovenia, Germany, Israel, Brunei, Thailand, Taiwan and Japan.
Emma Young, Sydney
Forwarded by Sraosha <email@example.com> on March 18
From: PANUPS <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003
P A N U P S - Pesticide Action Network Updates Service
Airline Passengers Are Sprayed for Bugs
March 17, 2003
An airline flight to the tropics may involve greater health risks than a dose of airline food--pesticides are routinely sprayed in aircraft cabins by U.S. airlines sometimes over the heads of passengers during flight. "Disinsection" is the industry term for this practice, which continues despite clear evidence of risk to passengers and crew. People more vulnerable to the effects of pesticides, such as infants, pregnant woman or asthmatics are informed, if at all, only just prior to spraying. Airline flight attendants unions argue that chemical spraying is unnecessary because mechanical methods could be applied instead.
No U.S. agency requires pesticide use on planes. The US Department of Transportation website lists the countries that require in-flight spraying, and those that will accept the "residual" treatment as an alternative. Six countries currently require pesticide spraying on all inbound flights: Grenada, India, Kiribati, Madagascar, Trinidad and Tobago and Uruguay. The application method varies by country and airline. Typically, a pressurized spray containing 2% phenothrin is sprayed over the passengers' heads during the flight (also called "top-of-descent") or upon arrival, but while the doors are closed. Alternatively, cabin crew may spray the occupied cabin prior to departure after the doors have been closed ("blocks away"). A member of the crew will announce the procedure shortly before they spray.
Another six countries: Australia, Barbados, Fiji, Jamaica, New Zealand and Panama require the use of residual pesticides. In this case applicators board the aircraft and spray every surface in the cabin with a solution that contains 2% permethrin. This process takes place shortly before crew and passengers board, without their knowledge. Babies and children are said to be more sensitive to the effects of permethrin. Once an aircraft has been residually treated, foreign quarantine officials will allow it to land without additional pesticide treatment for the next 56 days.
Passengers flying on US domestic flights may find themselves on an airliner that has recently been sprayed. United Airlines, for example, treats all of its 747-400 aircraft in Hong Kong. These aircraft are not restricted to the South Pacific routes; they are simply scheduled to fly to Australia or New Zealand during the next 56 days, but in the meantime, can be flown on both international and domestic routes.
The International Civil Aviation Organization reports that most airlines use permethrin and pyrethroid, both are suspected endocrine disruptors, and permethrin may be a carcinogen. The Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides (NCAP) points out that pesticides cause even greater harm on airplanes, where up to 50% of the air in the cabins is recycled. "Pesticides break down slowly in the enclosed, poorly ventilated aircraft," says a NCAP spokesperson.
The airlines are not required to inform passengers at ticket purchase of flight sprays, and there is also no control over how much pesticide is applied on the aircraft. The Association of Flight Attendants reported in 2001 that one airline used 50-60% more pesticide than the maximum recommended by the World Health Organization. Between 2000 and 2001, one cabin crew union received complaints of pesticide-related illness on more than 200 flights. Many complaints cite damp surfaces and pesticide odors in crew rest compartments. Crews and passengers have reported sinus problems, swollen and itchy eyes, cough, difficulty breathing, hoarseness, skin rashes/hives that vary in intensity, severe headaches and fatigue, and heightened sensitivity to other chemicals. Some crew members have medical documentation of reactions consistent with nerve gas exposure, such as blood, optic nerve, and nervous system abnormalities.
Alternative methods to control insects on aircraft are already in use. Since the 1980s, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has used curtains made of overlapping strips of plastic to successfully keep Japanese Beetles off aircraft destined for the western states during the summer. Chemically treated mosquito netting and blowers in jetways may also be used as alternatives. A variety of mechanical means should be tested.
The Association of Flight Attendants suggests that passengers contact the airline to find out if pesticides will be sprayed on their flight, or if they will be boarding a "residually sprayed" craft. The U.S. Department of Transportation website also lists countries that require spray at, (http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/policy/safety/disin.htm)
Sources: Danger in the Air, Karen Winegar, Mother Jones Magazine, July/August 1998, http://www.motherjones.com/mother_jones/JA98/winegar.html, Association of Flight Attendants, http://www.afanet.org/pesticides.asp, http://www.pesticide.org/AirlineSpray.pdf
Back issues of PANUPS are available online at: http://www.panna.org/resources/panups.html
Sraosha <email@example.com> also wrote:
Think about the "synchronicity" of the issue raised by PANUPS, which I sent you earlier today (Airline Passengers Are Sprayed for Bugs), .... hmmm ...
Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) - Multi-country outbreak
(SARS) Update 1 (March 16)
(SARS) Update 2 (March 17)
AND IF WE WANT TO THINK ABOUT IT, CHECK THESE URLs
Biological Weapons for Waging Economic Warfare
Forwarded by Mark Elsis <firstname.lastname@example.org>
I'd Rather Go Naked
by Mary Starrett
March 13, 2003
Fashion designers from New York to Milan have filled the runways in recent weeks with all the latest Spring looks. Hemlines are up, heel heights are down and pink is all the rage. But regardless of what you think of this season's haute couture you should be made aware of a trend that's catching on... it could make you think twice before buying new clothes. Tiny specks capable of tracking virtually every single item are now being imbedded by manufacturers. This Orwellian technology, called RFID (radio frequency ID) will now be used by Italian clothing designer Benetton in the form of trackable chips woven into it's apparel. The chips, which function as itty bitty radio transmitters will be inserted when the clothes are made and will remain intact throughout the life of the garment. According to chip manufacturer Philips Electronics, the devices will be "imperceptible" to the wearer.
Sound like something out of a futuristic sci-fi thriller? Welcome to your brave, new world.
Benetton is not alone in implementing this frighteningly invasive technology. Gillette has already purchased 500 million of these tracking devices and starting in July will imbed them in shaving cream and razors sold at Wal Mart stores. The chipped items will sit atop "smart" shelves that will work in unison with the chipped products to tell Gillette and Wal Mart all kinds of things; and the info-gathering doesn't end there. As an extra added bonus ,when shoppers take their Big Brother -branded purchases home (and wherever RFID "readers" are located,) their purchase will be tracked. RFID Journal touts the technology as a way to eliminate bar codes, cut down on labor costs and theft and says it will be a boon to inventory control.
The founder and director of a group called C.A.S.P.I.A.N. (Consumers Against Privacy Invasion And Numbering) sees it differently. Katherine Albrecht, a Harvard University doctoral candidate says what Benetton, Gillette and over 90 of the world's biggest corporations are doing, in essence, is "registering" those products to you. Albrecht has been warning us about this for years. She says consumers have no idea that these RFID chips actually track the owner .. " then anytime you (go) near an RFID reader device the (product) would beam out your identity to anyone with access to a database - all without your permission".
Think this is waaaay out there? It's not. According to a 2001 INFORMATIONWEEK article on the RFID scheme, proponents are looking ahead to a seamless, network of millions of RFID receivers in airports, stores and even your home. And remember, you can't turn these things off.
Benetton, which had sales of over $2 billion last year apparently thinks spending the 25 cents to 50 cents per chip will be money well -spent. The company has ordered 15 million chips for starters. So along with your mock turtleneck you'll be getting an RFID gizmo which operates at 13.56 MHz, and stores 512 bits of information. RFID Journal says "unless there is a big public outcry, Benetton is not going to be the last retailer to adopt RFID".
Did you get that? IF NOBODY GETS UPSET ABOUT THIS IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN! Don't just SIT there, DO something...Be part of that "big public outcry" they doubt will happen 'cause you're either catatonic from too much TV, or you just plain don't care.
Know that the likes of Kimberly Clarke, Coca- Cola, Philip Morris, Target, the U.S. Department Of Defense and the United States Postal Service (just think of the implications of THAT!) are watching this Benetton thing very carefully. They're poised to begin their own chipping programs in the not-too-distant future.
Where is all this technology coming from? From the brilliant minds at MIT's Auto-ID Center. In just a few years the center has raked in tons of money from some heavy-duty global corporations who are raring to go on this. The effects of this RFID technology are truly chilling. Consumers wouldn't be able to escape the watchful eye of manufacturers, retailers and marketers. Law enforcement would have a field day with this as well. Individual's behavior could be monitored to the nth degree.
So what can YOU do about it?
Spread the word. Boycott Benetton.... (Gillette, too, while you're at it) and make sure they know you've stopped buying their products and WHY.
Get educated, a good place to start is C.A.S.P.I.A.N.'s web site: at: http://NocCards.org
Call your local media (radio talk show hosts, newspaper editors, TV stations).
And think about going naked. Katherine Albrecht has. She says "I'd rather go naked than wear clothes with spy chips".
As for me, I have no problem wearing the old stuff I have hanging in my closet. I might not make any new fashion statements but I'll be making a statement that doesn't ever go out of style in a free society. My statement's summed very well in something called the 4th Amendment.
Mary Starrett was on television for 21 years as a news anchor, morning talk show host and medical reporter. For the last 5 years she hosted a radio program. Mary is a frequent guest on radio talk shows. eMail: M123STAR@aol.com
Benetton Clothing To Carry Tiny Tracking Transmitters
Auto-ID: Tracking Everything, Everywhere
Radio ID Tags: Beyond Bar Codes
The home of Radio Frequency Identification
Radio Frequency Identification for Business
SUBSCRIPTION TO THE EARTH RAINBOW NETWORK E-LIST
If you would like to subscribe to the Earth Rainbow Network automated listserver and regularly receive similar compilations covering a broad range of subjects, including each new Meditation Focus issued every two week, simply send a blank email at email@example.com from the email account to which you want to receive the material compiled and networked by the Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator. Subscription is FREE!
BACK TO THE FIRST HOME PAGE OF THIS SITE