VNS Exclusives Archives

Public Schools, Home Schools,
and Private Schools
A History Lesson, and a Warning

by Virginia Birt Baker

Veritas News Service -- June 23, 2001 -- Many years ago someone observed that many parents raise their children but do not educate them. People sup together, play together, travel together, but they do not think together. Hardly any homes have any intellectual life whatsoever. The cause of this decay of the family's traditional role as the transmitter of tradition is the same as that of the decay of the humanities: nobody believes that the old books do, or even could, contain the truth. Fathers and mothers lack self-confidence as educators of their children and have lost the idea that the highest aspiration they might have for their children is for them to be wise. Most parents do not know what they believe and do not even have the self-confidence to tell their children of their values. Thus they cannot control the atmosphere of the home and have even lost the will to do so.

For the past fifty years the public school system has had an utter inability to distinguish between what is important and what is unimportant. This is promoted as a "failure," but the evidence shows that it is not an accident. The universities tell us that what students bring to their higher education, in passions, curiosities, longings, and especially previous experience, has changed, because their elementary and secondary education has changed. The objective of the public schools, under the pretext of education, is steering "the intended behavior of students into the way students are to act, think, and feel as the result of participating in some unit of instruction. . . It includes objectives which describe changes in interest, attitudes, and values, and the development of appreciations and adequate adjustment." 1

Almost every student entering the university believes, or says that he believes, that truth is relative. If this belief is put to the test, one can count on the student's reaction: he will be uncomprehending. The danger he has been taught to fear from absolutism (certainty, or exactness) is not error, but intolerance. Relativism ("one opinion is as good as another") is necessary to openness, and openness is the only essence which all primary education for more than fifty years has dedicated itself to inculcating.

Students of relativism, or openness, cannot defend their opinions, of course, when they have been indoctrinated to sustain many allegiances without contradiction. They cannot understand the issues, so they are easy to propagandize when "everything is open and relative." Consequently, there are various impostors whose business it is to appeal to the young, because the political regime always needs citizens who are in accord with its fundamental principle. Albert Shanker, the son of Russian immigrants, who spoke no English as a boy yet became president of the American Federation of Teachers and a member of the Trilateral Commission, put it this way: "Public schools do not exist to please Johnny's parents. . . They do not even exist to ensure that Johnny will one day earn a good living. . . In short, public schools exist to create citizens." 2

Remember Mikhail Gorbachev's book Perestroika which praised Lenin for his glasnost? Glasnost in Russian means, literally, "openness," and according to Gorbachev "is an effective form of public control." 3 He equated openness with the "socialism" (i.e., communism) that was under Stalin and Lenin, and with Russia's "democracy" today. It was Lenin who referred to the plan for taking over nations as outlined in Marx and Engels' Communist Manifesto (1848) as "the conquest of democracy." It was Lenin who coined the term "democratic centralism" to denote strict guidance 4 from a small center and broad participation of a large number of people flowing from this guidance. More and more we also hear our own political leaders and the media describe our Republic as a "democracy," while most people don't realize that one dictionary definition of democracy is openness." Our government is supposed to be a Republic 5, not a democracy. "Democracy is mob rule, such as that which crucified Christ. The February, 1993, Evangelical Methodist stated, Democracy is when two wolves and one sheep vote on what to have for lunch." 6

In the 1932 report of the National Education Association Committee on Social-Economic Goals of America, which functioned for five years, chairman Fred J. Kelly wrote, "The chief instrumentality to mold public opinion in the interest of national goals is education." In 1934 Willard E. Givens, Superintendent of Schools in Oakland, California, and Executive Secretary of the NEA the following year, had this to say: "Many drastic changes must be made. . . Subject matter will be considered instrumental and not an end in itself .. thus ending the narrow, academic, non-functional subject courses . . Attitudes are the desirable objectives. . . Controversial issues must be discussed in the schools." This was when communism was the controversial issue. Inasmuch as the socialist objectives are now established, any opposition to what is now being taught in the schools is "controversial."  7

In 1971 the federal bureaucracy defined to the states that all schools were day care facilities and defined what day care standards the states must adopt. 8 These standards linked increased school costs and unasked for, unwanted, yet mandatory programs through back door administrative guidance policies and procedures to federal requirements and made those mandatory guidelines a condition of funding. 9 The government then buried those conditions in the Social Security laws, and gave complete control to the White House without Congressional or public scrutiny, because the original Paperwork Reduction Plan Act of 1980 (44 USC 3501 and following) gave the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) the power to control the form and content of agency rule-making, and to keep information dealing with regulatory reviews secret from Congress and the public. 10

In addition, Executive Order 12291, which was signed by President Ronald Reagan, provided for presidential oversight of the regulatory process of present and future regulations "designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy [emphasis added] or describing the procedure or practice requirements of . . any agency specified under 44 USC 3502(1)." The Order stated that the Director of OMB shall have authority . . to prescribe criteria" for requiring any set of rules. The Director of OMB was subject to the Presidential Task Force on Regulatory Relief and was given wide authority under the Paperwork Reduction Plan Act and the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 4 USC, 601 ff. 11 Any effort that would require the OMB to make information dealing with all regulatory reviews available to Congress and the public or to restrict OMB's control was opposed by White House Chief of Staff John H. Sununu and White House counsel C. Boyden Gray. 12

Timothy McVeigh is NOT Dead!

This clip will blow your mind!

Video Stream

(40k Stream)

Audio Only Stream
(for slower connections)

(19k Stream)

Read all the articles written about the OKC bombing including the archived ones.

(You must have QuickTime 4 or 5 installed on your computer, If you have problems listening to the stream click here for help)

Veritas News Service -- Exclusive, June 14, 2001 -- The photo shows the hearse supposedly carrying Timothy McVeigh's body to the mortuary to be cremated. Notice the hearse has no license plate in defiance of the law, and no temporary tags which by law must be displayed in the back window. The car in front has Indiana plates. Who really owns the hearse and why were the plates removed? Was McVeigh's body delivered for cremation later in a van? Who can prove and who will swear that it was actually McVeigh's body that was cremated?

Oklahoma City Bombing
The Plot Thickens

By William Cooper All Rights Reserved

Veritas News Service -- Exclusive, June 11, 2001 -- We are NOT racist, white supremacist, Zionist, British Israel, Christian Identity, or anti-Semitic. We refute all racist and/or superior race philosophies. We believe that such beliefs are a plague upon the human race. We are loyal Americans interested in the truth. We believe in Liberty and Freedom for all People regardless of race, religion, or place of ancestral origin.

On April 19, 1310 fifty-four of the Knights Templars who had recanted after having confessed were condemned as relapsed and sentenced to be publicly burned on 12 May of the same year. The battles of Lexington and Concord opened the American Revolutionary War on April 19, 1775. That day was declared Patriot's Day. On April 19, 1943 German troops entered the Warsaw Ghetto to round up the remaining heroes of the Jewish uprising. Yom Hoshoa (Holocaust remembrance day) is April 19th. The federal takedown of the organization known as the Covenant Sword and Arm of the the Lord occurred on April 19, 1985. The final assault upon the Branch Davidians occurred on April 19, 1993. The bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building also occurred on April 19th. All of these events, and many more, have occurred on April 19th. Another very curious fact is that David Koresh and Timothy McVeigh were both 33 years old at the time of their deaths.

Our investigation of the Oklahoma City bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building has uncovered the following:

John Doe #1 is Timothy McVeigh.

John Doe #2 is Michael Brescia, an army buddy of Timothy McVeigh. Until recently he was in federal custody. The federal government has protected and hidden the identity of this criminal because he is an informant for at least one agency of the United States government. He is not a Nazi, white Supremacist, anti-Semite, or racist. When we asked the FBI to provide us with a photo of Michael Brescia for positive identification they refused. We obtained photos from Patriot law enforcement personnel within our organization. We positively identified Michael Brescia as John Doe #2 from those photos. 

John Doe #3 has been identified as Andreas Strassmier, a West German Intelligence operative. He is not a Nazi, white supremacist, anti-Semite, or racist. Sources in Germany claim Strassmier is Jewish. This information has been confirmed by two additional independent German sources.

John Doe #4 has been positively identified by the Intelligence Service as Gary Hunt. He has never been questioned by any law enforcement agency. Gary Hunt was also involved with the Waco Massacre in 1993. Gary Hunt is an informant for the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (BATF). Gary Hunt masquerades as an American Patriot. The ethnic and religious background of Gary Hunt is not known at this time.

John Doe #5 has been positively identified by the Intelligence Service as Daniel Spiegelman (a.k.a. William Taylor), a fund raiser for the Oklahoma City bombing operation. He was arrested and imprisoned in the Netherlands when he attempted to sell historic documents that were stolen from Columbia University for the purpose of financing the OKC bombing. Spiegelman was extradited from the Netherlands to the United States on the condition that he would not be charged with a capital crime for which he could receive the death sentence. United States District Judge Lewis Kaplan, a Zionist, sentenced Spiegleman to 60 months in jail, 3 years probation, 300 days of community service in an adult literacy education program, and restitution to Columbia in an amount not yet determined. Daniel Spiegelman's conviction will most likely be set aside because his defense lawyer Paul Kurtz was discovered to be a fake lawyer. Paul Kurtz, 56, of Bethesda, Md., was charged in a 41-count indictment issued by a Manhattan federal jury for claiming to be a licensed attorney and defending clients including Daniel Spiegelman who was convicted of stealing rare manuscripts from Columbia University. Spiegelman was sentenced in April 1998. Daniel Spiegelman is Jewish.

John Doe #6 remains unidentified at this time. We have a video tape of John Doe #6 in the company of Gary Hunt (John Doe #4) walking away from the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building within 10 minutes after the bombs detonated. Both men in the video tape are carrying transmitters in their hands.

Mike Vanderboegh of the "John Doe Times" is an agent of the Anti Defamation League masquerading as a Patriot commander of the Alabama 1st Calvary (Militia). The Militia which he claims to command does not exist... it is a fraud. His purpose is to place the blame for the Oklahoma City bombing on Patriots and the Lawful Militia attributing a motive of white supremacist anti-Semitism and racism. A charge that cannot be true in light of the ethnic identity of several John Does.

The Branch Davidians were a racial mix of mostly Black, Hispanic, Asian, and a couple of Jewish members. A very small minority of the Church was Caucasian (white). Racist white supremacist anti-Semites would have rejoiced at their death not planned revenge. Racist white supremacist anti-Semites do not avenge the death of Blacks, Hispanics, Orientals, and Jews.

The People who worked in the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building were mostly Caucasian (white) and could not have been the target of racist white supremacist anti-Semites. Racist white supremacist anti-Semites do not murder whites.

The KKK and white supremacist groups expressed dissatisfaction with the manner in which the BATF and FBI were handling the Branch Davidians and called for an assault by the government to end the stand-off. A contingent of KKK white supremacists traveled to Waco to offer their services to the BATF and FBI in order to affect the arrests of the Branch Davidians. If the KKK was for the takedown of the Davidians how and why would they seek revenge for their deaths?

Prominent members of the Anti Defamation League made public statements which were carried by the major news networks (recorded and placed in safekeeping) that disclosed the ADL had the perpetrators under surveillance for as long as two years. The spokesmen stated that they knew the bombing was going to happen well in advance. Prominent members of the ADL were instrumental in fomenting the attack upon the Branch Davidians in Waco Texas in 1975.

John Doe #7 is the leader of Elohim City Rev. Robert G. Millar an ADL, FBI, and BATF informant who was instrumental in bringing down the Covenant, Sword, and Arm of the Lord on April 19, 1985. It is because of Millar’s status as an informant Elohim City has developed the reputation as a safe haven for racist criminals in America.

John Doe #8 is Michael Fortier by his own admission. He made an agreement with the feds to turn State's evidence against Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols. In return Fortier was prosecuted for prior knowledge but not as an accomplice to the bombing.

John Doe #9 is Terry Nichols. Terry is another army buddy of McVeigh. Nichols claims innocence but was convicted as an accomplice.

Carol Howe was a BATF informant and disclosed the plans of the bombing and those involved to the BATF. After the bombing Carol Howe disclosed this information to the public and the press. The BATF attempted to imprison Carol Howe in order to silence her but lost their case. She maintains that the BATF knew the culprits and the target (a government building) well before the bombing occurred.

Governor Keating, Keating's brother, Representative Ernest Istook (R) Oklahoma, Anti Defamation League, FBI, BATF, United States Marshall Service, Oklahoma City Fire Department, Oklahoma City Police Department, and the Oklahoma City Bomb Squad knew the bombing would occur well in advance of April 19, 1995.

The American Intelligence Community knew of the plans to detonate a bomb in the "heartland" of America as early as 1971 and wrote of it in a Top Secret document called MAJESTYTWELVE which contains the plan for the disarmament of the American People and implementation of a world socialist totalitarian government.

The Oklahoma City bombing was a joint operation involving intelligence operatives of the United States, Germany, and Israel. The purpose of the bombing was to strike terror into the heartland of America destroying the illusion of safety and security in America. Those responsible set the propaganda wheels in motion to blame Patriots, Militia, and religious fundamentalists in order to prepare American Citizens to accept personal disarmament in preparation for world socialist government. Right after the bombing Congress passed a draconian and unconstitutional anti-terrorist bill.

During his tenure as Director of the FBI William Steele Sessions created the National Security Threat List, which was approved by the Attorney General in 1991, it changed its approach from defending against hostile intelligence agencies to protecting U.S. information and technologies. It thus identified all countries--not just hostile intelligence services--that pose a continuing and serious intelligence threat to the United States. It also defined expanded threat issues, including the proliferation of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons; the loss of critical technologies; and the improper collection of trade secrets and proprietary information. During a press conference in 1993 (during the Waco fiasco) FBI Director William S. Sessions warned the nation of a Jewish underground which threatened the National Security of the United States of America. He was immediately politically attacked by AIPAC interests and its political stooges. He appeared on television two weeks later to announce his resignation as Director of the FBI with his arm (broken) in a sling.

Ari Shavit, an Israeli columnist, wrote in an essay reprinted in the May 27, 1996 issue of the New York Times from the Israeli paper Haaretz, while reflecting sorrowfully on the wanton Israeli killing of more than 100 Lebanese civilians in April, that:

"We killed them out of a certain naive hubris. Believing with absolute certitude that now, with the White House, the Senate, and much of the American media in our hands, the lives of others do not count as much as our own..."

Joseph Sobran, in a June 13, 1996 edition of The Wanderer said, "In a single phrase - 'in our hands' - Shavit has lighted up the American political landscape like a flash of lightning."

The admission confirms what has been labeled "an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory". Sobran admits in his article that this "theory" is held my many Israelis.

Sobran wrote:

"Charges of anti-Semitism and a quiet but very effective boycott will be the reward of any journalist who calls attention to his own government's - and his own profession's - servitude to Israeli interests. Shavit states as an obvious fact what Americans can say publicly only at great risk. It is surprising and refreshing to find such candor in an American newspaper.

"The prescribed take on this subject is that Israel is a 'reliable ally' of the United States, despite Israel's long record of double-dealing against this country, ranging from the killing of American sailors to constant espionage and technology theft. The word 'ally' implies that the relationship exists because it's in the interests of this country, though Israel's lobby is clearly devoted to the interests of Israel itself, and it's childish to suggest otherwise.

"You expect that from the Israeli lobby: lobbies are lobbies, after all. But it's unnerving that the White House, the Senate, and much of the American media should be 'in our hands,' as Shavit puts it. Bill Clinton, a lover of peace since his college days, raised no protest when the Israelis drove 400,000 innocent Lebanese out of their homes in 'retaliation' for rockets launched into Israel (wounding one Israeli) by a faction over whom those 400,000 had no control. 'Congress, of course, was supine as usual at this latest extravagance of Israeli defense.' Congress too is 'in our hands'.

"A recent article in The Washington Post likened the Israel lobby's power to that of the gun and tobacco lobbies. But there is one enormous difference. Newspapers like the Post aren't afraid to criticize the gun and tobacco lobbies. They will say forthrightly that those lobbies seek goals that are dangerous for this country. They don't dare say as much of the Israeli lobby.

"but much of the press and electronic media are 'in our hands' in a more active sense: They supply misleading pro-Israel propaganda in the guise of news and commentary, constantly praising Israeli 'democracy' and ignoring Israel's mistreatment of its non-Jewish minorities - mistreatment which, if any government inflicted it on a Jewish minority, would earn it the fierce opprobrium of our media.

"Very few in America are doing anything to change this sorry state of affairs. Shavit wrote his article in the desperate hope of turning back his countrymen and his government from a morally and politically perilous course. At least he can hope. It's harder for us, when our own government isn't in our hands."

The importance of this information is that the bombing of the Oklahoma City Murrah Federal Building could NOT EVER have been the racist actions of White Supremacists exacting revenge for the massacre of the Branch Davidians at Waco, Texas.

Oklahoma City Bombing Cover-Up
A Preponderance of Evidence

by Michael Rivero

Veritas News Service -- Exclusive, June 6, 2001 -- Let's get one thing straight. There has been a cover-up in the Oklahoma Bombing. The moment the FBI admitted that it had withheld evidence in the case from the lawyers, the Grand Jury, and the public, evidence the FBI admits it should have turned over long ago, then we had, by any definition of the word, a cover-up. The cover-up is not an accident, but deliberate, both because according to CNN and the Los Angles Times, all of the evidence on McVeigh's accomplices are in the withheld materials, but the FBI lied about when it knew about the withheld evidence, first claiming only recent awareness, then admitting they had known about the withheld evidence last year.

Official documents reporting additional unexploded bombs in the Murrah Building

Hunger Strike Against Tyranny of IRS

Veritas News Service -- June 11, 2001 -- On July 1, 2001, Bob Schulz, Chairman of the We The People Foundation for Constitutional Education, will begin a fast which will continue until he dies or until IRS Commissioner Charles O. Rossotti delivers to him a list of the government's experts who will meet on September 18, 2001, in a public forum, at the National Press Club in Washington DC, with tax law researchers from the tax honesty movement, to argue against the conclusions of those researchers.

This comes as a result of the government's continued evasion of opportunities the Foundation and others have provided to the government over the past two years to discuss the allegations of fraud and illegal operations of the income tax system. The allegations include the following: 1) in 1913, the 16th Amendment (the "income tax" Amendment) was fraudulently and illegally declared to be ratified by a lame-duck Secretary of State just days before leaving office; 2) there is NO LAW requiring most Americans to file a tax return, pay the federal income tax nor have the tax withheld from their earnings; 3) people who file a Form 1040 "voluntarily" waive their 5th Amendment right not to bear witness against themselves; 4) the IRS routinely violates citizens' 4th Amendment rights against illegal search and seizure, without a warrant issued by a court upon probable cause and supported by oath and affirmation; and 5) the IRS, as standard operating procedure, routinely violates citizens' due process rights in its administrative procedures and operates far outside the law.

On February 10, 1999, Joseph Banister, a Special Agent of the Criminal Investigation Division of the IRS submitted his 95-page research report to his superiors in the San Jose office of the IRS. The report contained these allegations and supporting evidence and respectfully requested some answers. Mr. Banister was concerned that he was enforcing the Internal Revenue Code as though payment was compulsory, when his research showed it to be voluntary. Instead of answers, Mr. Banister was asked to resign!

This Foundation respectfully, and properly, invited the leaders of the Executive and Legislative branches to have their most knowledgeable experts on the subject participate in academic symposiums and conferences the Foundation sponsored at the National Press Club in July and November of 1999 and in April and June of 2000. We received no response, not even an acknowledgement of the receipt of the invitations!

On April 13, 2000, while a delegation of people representing all 50 states waited outside, Mr. Banister and Mr. Schulz, and a videographer, met in the White House with Jason Furman, the Executive Director of the National Economic Council. He accepted, for President Clinton, a Remonstrance on the subject, he promised to have the staff of the NEC and White House lawyers and historians review the evidence, and he expressed his agreement to have the government's experts participate with Mr. Banister and other tax law researchers in the June 29, 2000 conference the Foundation was arranging for that purpose. Mr. Banister and Mr. Schulz then proceeded to a meeting in the capitol with Dr. William Koetzle, representing Speaker Hastert's policy office, and then to a meeting with Keith Hennessey, Senator Lott's policy director. They accepted the Remonstrance for Mr. Hastert and Mr. Lott, promised to have the experts at the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee review the evidence, and expressed their agreement to have those experts participate in the upcoming June 29th conference. However, on June 2nd, Mr. Furman told Mr. Schulz, "The legality of the income tax is not a high priority item at the White House and we will not be participating in any conference on the subject." A similar response was received from Dr. Koetzle and Mr. Hennessey.

At a cost of $252,000, the Foundation then published full-page educational messages in USA TODAY on July 7, 2000, February 16, 2001, March 2, 2001 and March 23, 2001, featuring the photographs and names of three of the principal tax law researchers and their allegations, three former IRS agents who have come to believe the researchers are correct, and five employers who have stopped withholding the income tax from the paychecks of their employees because they also have come to believe the researchers' allegations are correct.

On April 5, 2001, the Senate Finance Committee held a hearing featuring large blow-ups of the Foundation's USA TODAY messages, mounted on easels. THE FOUNDATION WAS NOT ALLOWED TO TESTIFY AT THE HEARING. Two days prior to the hearing, Senator Grassley was quoted in the Saint Petersburg Times saying," We will not allow the We The People Foundation to testify at the hearing because their message will detract from the message we are trying to convey." The message the Committee conveyed was that those people who question the validity of the income tax laws are "tax cheats, schemers, scammers and cons They must be kept off the Internet, and will be dealt with harshly!"

On April 9, 2001, hundreds of citizens from across the country gathered outside the main entrance of the IRS headquarters building. Three weeks earlier, on March 19th, a letter was delivered to IRS Commissioner Rossotti, letting him know that the citizens would be there and respectfully requesting that he address the group at 11:30 a.m., to let them know when his experts would be available to meet with the tax law researchers in a public forum to discuss the allegations. On April 9th, he refused to address the citizens, choosing instead to schedule an interview with a reporter from The New York Times at 11:30 that day. The Times' article ran on April 16th. In its first paragraph it said, "As a few protestors gathered in front of the Internal Revenue Service building on a warm April day, Charles O. Rossotti was cool and relaxed in his third-floor office, reflecting on his three and a half years running the agency."

On April 11, 2001 USA TODAY informed the Foundation of its decision to stop publishing the Foundation's full-page educational messages about these issues, and the government's failure to address them, because "the ads could be misleading." The Foundation offered to meet with USA TODAY's legal department to discuss the veracity of the Foundation's messages. They refused!

On May 2, 2001, the home and business of one of the employers who has stopped withholding was raided by scores of government agents, at gunpoint. As of this day, those agents have not provided a list of the charges. Nor have they specified the probable cause for the search warrant. They have, however, asked the judge who signed the warrant for 45 days to analyze the computer hard drives, papers and effects that were seized during the raid before they specify the charges and probable cause. The judge granted the request!

The tax law research provides a substantial amount of very credible evidence that since 1913 the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches have been cooperating to deprive the People of a large percentage of the fruits of their labor by enforcing laws and regulations that are prohibited by the Constitution and which do not exist under the Internal Revenue Code. The evidence shows that the Code and regulations have intentionally been written in such a deceptive way as to obscure and obfuscate so as to give citizens the false impression that they are required to pay.

As a result of the Foundation's four messages in USA TODAY, and its other educational efforts, a growing number of people are becoming familiar with the facts of this research and now realize that Congress is prohibited by the Constitution from requiring individual citizens of the fifty states to file and pay the income tax or a social security tax as they currently operate. More and more citizens now believe that it is precisely because of the absence of proper constitutional authority that Congress has not passed any law requiring most Americans to file and pay an income tax.

So far, the IRS has responded with armed raids and with increased threats and saber rattling, but with no attempts to discuss in a rational way the allegations about the laws and regulations.

Journalists from the dominant media, including David Cay Johnston of The New York Times, have responded as apologists for the IRS by portraying individuals and employers who question the legality of the federal income tax laws as "tax cheats," even though those individuals often have a history of intelligent, rational and professional attempts to get their federal representatives and IRS officials to answer legitimate questions about the legal authority of the IRS to force the collection of the federal income tax.

Obviously, the current situation must not continue.

The question is: What can a free People do when faced with a government that has apparently stepped outside the boundary drawn around its taxing power by the Constitution and by its own laws, and refuses to justify its behavior, evades all requests by citizens to answer legitimate questions, and uses a heavy handed, steel-fisted approach to enforcing the income tax -- as though its payment by most Americans was compulsory when, in fact, most citizens apparently are not liable -- and when the dominant media will not allow the people to purchase space to tell their story?

Answer: We the People must educate one another about the discrepancies between the way the Constitution and the tax law are written and the operations of the IRS. Knowledge is power. Only a well-informed citizenry will bring the federal tax policies and programs back under the control of the People and their Constitution.

Education can take many forms.

Bob Schulz prays that his stand in defense of the Constitution and the rule of law, and his death, should it come to that, will help to educate citizens about the apparent discrepancy between the government's behavior in enforcing the federal tax laws and the legality of those laws, the government's recalcitrance and refusal to reconcile the discrepancy, and the importance of keeping the government within the boundaries the people have drawn around its power. His act should not be seen as one of frustration or despair, but as a measure of his devotion to our sacred constitutional principles for which so many others have laid down their lives.

On June 11, 2001, a letter will be delivered to President Bush, to the leaders of the Congress and to Commissioner Rossotti to inform them of Mr. Schulz's decision to do this. A copy of the letter can be viewed on the Foundation's web site at Also on the web site are the Foundation's educational messages as published in USA TODAY and other educational materials on the subject.

Bob's motto is ACTA NON VERBA. His deed is part of an overall action plan put together by the Foundation under the heading of PROJECT TOTO, the goal of which is to develop a critical mass of citizens demanding answers to the questions of the tax law researchers, regarding the fraudulent and illegal operations of the federal income tax system.

For a discussion of PROJECT TOTO and what you can do to help, please visit the Foundation's web site at

Bob Schulz
We The People Foundation
for Constitutional Education, Inc.
2458 Ridge Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
(518) 656-3578 Phone
(518) 656-9724 Fax

An Intolerant End of the Affair

by Carl Pearlston

Veritas News Service -- June 6, 2001 -- Just like Senator Jeffords, who resigned from the GOP because of what he perceives as intolerance to diverse viewpoints, I have had my own problem with intolerance. My love affair with the ADL began almost 25 years ago. It has just ended with a curt note from the Board President advising me that I haven't shown a sufficient "demonstration of commitment to the ADL" to warrant retention on the Executive Committee or the Regional Board. How did it come to this?

I had been nominated to the Board by a judge with whom I had worked during the heady civil rights years, and then to the Executive Committee by the head of the Speakers Bureau, for which I was very active. Not that the romance had not been rocky. I had always known that my conservative Republican political views were barely tolerated by my overwhelmingly liberal colleagues, and I was tempted to keep them to myself. We were nominally a non-partisan organization, but our meetings frequently felt uncomfortably like those of a Democratic Party club in which it was assumed that all shared a common liberal or "progressive" political world-view and none could, or wanted to, hear a differing or conservative viewpoint.. Just after the recent election, our Director accosted me at a meeting with a vehement "You stole the election!" Our positions were usually those of the liberal wing of the Democratic party on issues like abortion, school choice, teacher pay, bilingual education, affirmative action, the homosexual agenda, gun control. I once cited the comprehensive study of Yale University Law School's Dr. John Lott on gun laws to the effect that in those states where people could legally carry concealed weapons, crimes against people actually declined, since criminals do not want to take a chance that their victim may be armed. I was met with the sarcastic and dismissive response that "Only John Lott, Larry Elder [Libertarian talk show host], and you believe in that study."

There was not a great tolerance for diversity of viewpoint nor introduction of new information. I was barred from distributing written material which was germane and relevant to issues under discussion; only material from staff could be disseminated. A member did once tell me that at least I kept them honest, i.e. they were forced to at least be exposed to, even if not to consider, a different view. But, it was an uphill struggle. When I once confessed to our National Director, Abe Foxman, my feelings of just spinning my wheels, he candidly told me that I would have to realize that over 95% of those involved were liberal and would be unsympathetic to my conservative views.

Lack of sympathy frequently translated into lack of civility. For example, at several meetings, there were objections that Dr. Laura Schlesinger's radio program and planned TV program was offensive and insensitive. to homosexuals. I pointed out that her views enunciate traditional Jewish values which deserve the support of a Jewish defense organization, and was greeted with derision and intemperate, hostile responses. When it came to the issue of homosexuals versus the Boy Scouts, ADL chose the homosexuals, all the way to the Supreme Court. Then, in its otherwise commendable nationwide partnership with Barnes and Noble in the program Hate Hurts, which sponsors books and educates teachers and young children to fight hate, it endorsed the books Heather Has Two Mommies and Steve Has Two Daddies as suitable tools for teaching tolerance to young children. Teachers' workshops and children's reading groups were organized, using these and other book in conjunction with the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which had earlier achieved a certain notoriety for its own school workshops wherein teenagers were taught the fine points of "fisting" and other homosexual practices. In this manner, fighting "hate" became a euphemism for an attack on sexual morality, the traditional family, and the Jewish view that children deserve a loving father and mother, not two fathers or two mothers. It is only through a perverse notion of "tolerance" that support for traditional teaching about the family is intimidated, and condemned.

When Dennis Prager participated by invitation in a panel discussion on church-state issues, some members actually hissed and booed his remarks in a hostile display of intolerance. A respected board member persistently repeated to all who would hear that Prager was insane.

When the organization published its harsh attack on the Religious Right in 1994, I was distressed as were many politically conservative Jews who do not share the ADL view that politically-active conservative Christians are our enemy. As (Jewish) syndicated columnist Mona Charen wrote, "The ADL has committed defamation. There is no other conclusion to be reached after reading its new report, The Religious Right: the Assault on Tolerance and Pluralism in America. It is sad than an organization with a proud history of fairness should have descended to this kind of character assassination and name calling." A Board member of another affiliate was forced to resign because he publicly expressed disagreement with that report. It seems that the term "religious right" is a talisman used to invoke a reflexive response of hostility without thought. So deep was the antagonism that when Ralph Reed, then head of the Christian Coalition, appeared at an ADL leadership conference and gave a heartfelt apology for past insensitivity, prejudice, and discrimination by Christians toward Jews, the private response by most members to his apology was hostility and distrust.

There was a particular intolerance on the issue of church-state. The theory that freedom of religion require "strict separation of church and state" was transformed into hostility to any public display of religion in general, to Christianity in particular, and even to Judaism. I do not understand the logic of a Jewish organization expending its time and resources to forbid the public display of the chief gift of the Jews to civilization-- The Ten Commandments. Nor does it seem appropriate for us to engage in litigation to forbid another Jewish organization (Chabad) from displaying a Menorah on public property. I was told that such a display would encourage other religious groups, including Moslems, to exercise their right to similar displays. Well, why shouldn't they? It is implicit in the meaning of freedom of religious expression and religious diversity, a freedom we have so long struggled to attain for ourselves. It is not in our country's interest for us to demand a naked public square, devoid of any reference to God. Our cramped view of religious expression led us to oppose even the observance of a moment of silence in schools as being likely to encourage prayer.

The issue of parental choice in education, either by tax credits or vouchers, met with unwavering opposition based on what I believe is an erroneously perceived constitutional doctrine of "separation of church and state", along with a strong commitment to the teacher's unions. At one meeting, I questioned Abe Foxman as to what the ADL would do in the likely event that the US Supreme Court would upheld the constitutionality of school vouchers. He said the ADL would never agree and would continue to press the court until the decision was reversed and the ADL viewpoint was adopted.

Then, as he passed the table where my wife and I were sitting, he said to me, "You shouldn't have asked that question." I then realized that the bloom was really off the romance.

I had always strongly believed in the ADL's mission, as defined on a banner frequently displayed at the front of our meetings: "... to stop the defamation of the Jewish people, and secure justice and fair treatment to all citizens alike...." Our efforts against anti-Semitism were without peer. We were a Jewish organization primarily concerned with issues affecting the Jewish community, and secondarily with equality and fair enforcement of laws for everyone. I recall that many times in days past we deferred action on an item on the grounds that it was not related to Jewish community, and was thus beyond our purview. As years passed, the purview kept increasing along with the budget. While overt, and even latent, anti-Semitism was decreasing, our traditional mission as defender of the Jewish community was expanded to defender of all. We have become just another of many leftist "rights" organizations. This realization was confirmed when I saw a new banner, displaying an unfamiliar mission statement: "...dedicated to translating democratic ideals into a way of life for all Americans in our time."

This grandiose expansion of mission has had other consequences. The curbing of defamation---an action-has expanded to curbing of hate--a feeling, or emotion, or state of mind. If we can change people's minds and the way they think, we will not have to control their actions. The program for changing hearts and minds, A World of Difference, was created in 1985 to change prejudiced feelings through "sensitivity training". It is reportedly very successful, highly commended, and widely used by governmental agencies and many companies. Unfortunately, my exposure to the program at a leadership conference indicated that teaching the values of diversity, multiculturalism, and cultural relativism resulted in denigrating the values and achievements of Western civilization and the desirability of a common American identity. There is now a nationwide industry of multicultural activists teaching various "sensitivity" programs which increase awareness of racial identity, and result in racial separation and racial hostility.

This focus on eliminating "hate" logically led to the creation of "hate crimes", in which, a two-tier system of criminality was created: 1) those who commit crimes of violence for any reason other than hate, and 2) those who do injury solely because they hate the status or class of the victim (race, sex, nationality, religion, disability, occupation, sexual orientation, etc), Criminals of the latter class are punished more severely than those of the former, even though both may commit the same violent crime. The punishment is levied on the thought, or feeling, or state of mind of the criminal and not the action, in keeping with the emphasis on eliminating and punishing hateful thoughts and feelings. Creating preferred classes of crime victims is not a proper function of the American criminal justice system. Nor does it seem desirable to federalize and supplant state criminal law enforcement, which is what results from enacting "hate crime" legislation at the federal level.

The concept of "hate crimes" inevitably leads to that of "hate speech", in which offensive, insensitive, or hurtful speech is legally banned, as it is in Canada where the criminal law punishes offensive speech as a form of group defamation. A minister was arrested there for publicly preaching, in accordance with the tenets of his faith, that the practice of homosexuality was immoral. The ADL has properly rejected repeated demands by some of its leaders for adoption of similar group defamation laws as violating our free speech guarantees. At the same time, the ADL has led the effort to abate hateful speech not only in the public, but even the private forum in the interest of "tolerance". There have been repeated condemnations of various incidents of speech deemed hateful, hurtful, insensitive, or embarrassing to particular groups. All too frequently, however, free speech and the expression of religious belief have been the targets of these condemnations, such as religious references by political candidates, Christian prayers at the inauguration, religious symbolism in comics, expressions of religious beliefs by sports figures, or even expressions of the politically incorrect, as was the case when conservative activist David Horowitz was condemned as racially insensitive for placing ads in college papers denying the wisdom, fairness, and practicality of the growing movement for Slavery Reparations. The ADL has illogically compared those ads to ones denying the Holocaust, while ignoring the issue of free speech curtailment in the violent reactions by students and compliant acts by college administrators to censor the ads and prevent intelligent discussion of the significant issue involved.

The ADL has always been a firm and loyal supporter of Israel, but it was also an early and naive advocate of the now-defunct Oslo peace process, to the ultimate detriment of actual peace. I frequently complained that we concentrated more on the process than the substance of peace, and that true peace was unlikely to occur since the root problem was not how much land Israel would give up, but Arab refusal to accept a viable Jewish state. All of our "insider" briefings on the Mideast downplayed the risk to Israel posed by an armed Palestinian Authority or Palestinian state, and held out rosy and unrealistic prognostications of peace. For example, at a leadership conference, we were treated to a talk by an Arab Ambassador urging us to take steps for peace, which translated into urging support for the election of Labor (Peres) over Likud (Netanyahu) in the coming election. It was portrayed, and accepted by many attendees, as a last chance for peace that was almost within our grasp. Most of us now see, in light of the past year's warfare, that the "peace" being urged was illusory and chimerical. So blinding was this hope for peace that, as reported, ADL had complimented the PA on their new school textbooks without even having read them, completely overlooking the virulent anti-Semitism contained therein. When I questioned our National Director about this, I became the target of attack and public humiliation for bringing up the matter. Nor did I endear myself by dwelling on our National Director's central role on behalf of the ADL in devising and wangling a pardon for criminal fugitive tax-evader Marc Rich.

When I expressed my views on some of these matters in various letters and articles, in which I was not identified as an ADL Board member, I was rebuked in a stern letter from our President advising that I had publicly taken positions contrary to ADL policy, which was not permitted. I had not realized that, as the price of Board membership, I had given up my freedom of speech on issues on which the ADL had taken a position.

This was much like the old Leninist doctrine of "democratic centralism", in which debate is allowed only before a policy is adopted, and no dissent is tolerated thereafter. It seems odd that an organization which boastfully espouses and teaches "tolerance" and "diversity", will not tolerate a bit of dissent and diverse viewpoint in its own lay leadership.

Idaho Impasse: 'American Tragedy in the Making'

Edgar J. Steele

Veritas News Service -- Thursday, May 31, 2001 -- The McGuckin family home and the 40 acres upon which it stands were recently sold for a pittance by the county government for past-due taxes. It brought only $50,000, while the property is in prime territory, with fully half of Beaver Lake on its eastern edge.

Dad died recently, after a long and valiant struggle with multiple sclerosis, not of "malnutrition and dehydration," which has widely and falsely been reported as the cause of death. Just a couple days after this tight-knit family buried Dad, county government lured her out with a promise of money and free groceries, then arrested her, leaving them only to have to deal with the kids. That was a mistake, of course, but not their first.

Rather than allow this tightly-knit family a decent period to grieve the loss of their beloved husband and father, the county government instead is doing its best to make the family's worst nightmare come true.

For years, Mrs. McGuckin has been fearful of the government taking her property and her kids. Today, that fear is realized, with the issuance of an order through Child Protection Services, making the six children its wards. Of course, the Sheriff can't get near the house to make good on that order.

She has been jailed on a charge of felony child endangerment, allegedly for not providing a proper home for the children, including food, hygiene and education.

Well, admittedly the running water is off temporarily, because the well pump broke and, what with Dad's severe condition as his days drew to a close, they just didn't have the time or the money to deal with it properly. So, they drew water from the crystal-clear lake on their property for washing and to flush their toilets with. And, yes, the laundry did pile up, but what family doesn't have a few domestic backlogs when it loses its patriarch?

And the children are home schooled, fact which makes them politically incorrect, even by North Idaho standards.

But, they do have food, contrary to reports, and the power was hooked up and paid for when Mrs. McGuckin was arrested.

Are they armed? Who knows? Nobody has seen any weapons and no gunshots have been fired. Sheriff Jarvis has shown great prudence in executing the orders he is lawfully obligated to follow. He did not cut off any essential services, as has been reported. He has vowed to keep his men well away from the house and allow us time to effect a peaceful resolution to this crisis.

That resolution must begin with the release from custody of JoAnn McGuckin and the rescission of the order giving custody of her children over to the government. Friends and family stand ready to accept responsibility for the children while Mrs. McGuckin puts her life in order and proves the outrageous charges against herself to be false. However, the demand by the county Prosecuting Attorney that the bail, initially set for $10,000, be elevated to $100,000, effectively guarantees that Mrs. McGuckin will not be given that opportunity.

We are now asking the court for a reduction in the bond requirement and will then seek a modification to the CPS order, whereby the children are given over, as a single unit, to the custody of a trusted family friend. Then, we will take on these outlandish charges and give them the ignominious end that they deserve. We are also investigating this highly-questionable attempted seizure of the McGuckin family home.

Donations to the family can be made to: McGuckin Family Trust, PO Box 1255, Sagle, ID 83860.

Could this be the next Waco?

Story One:

SANDPOINT, Idaho -- A house full of gun-toting children and vicious dogs in rural Sandpoint, Idaho are holding at bay sheriff's deputies who want to put them in the custody of welfare workers, authorities said.

Hungry and armed, the six children, ages 8 to 16, have holed up in their home, releasing a pack of 27 vicious dogs on the officers who had earlier Tuesday arrested their possibly mentally ill mother, the Bonner County sheriff said. Wednesday morning, officers were still trying to figure out how to get the kids out without anyone getting hurt.

"I told them, 'We're just going to defuse it, we're leaving,'" Sheriff Phil Jarvis said Tuesday night.

"I'm not going to get into a Randy Weaver thing," he added, referring to the 1992 Ruby Ridge, Idaho standoff with federal agents that left a woman and her young son dead.

On Tuesday, deputies arrested the children's mother, Joann McGuckin, 46, on a warrant charging felony injury to a child. Authorities believe McGuckin is mentally ill, and her husband died about a week ago, Jarvis said.

McGuckin had stopped coming out of the house since late May, when she agreed to keep her pack of nearly feral dogs in the basement after they attacked a deputy and a woman who was walking by the house. The woman, Stephanie Almy, was hospitalized with 17 stitches.

"They hunt. They pack like wild animals," Jarvis said. "They took down a moose a little while ago."

To effect the warrant Tuesday, the sheriff's office had to come up with a ploy, Jarvis said.

"We know there are six children in there and guns in the house. The kids are trained to use the guns," he said. "We've been working for four or five days trying to figure out how to get the mom off the property and get her in a mental hold."

The stratagem was to have deputies bring McGuckin some money in the hopes she might leave the house to get groceries. The house has no power, heat or water, and the family is "absolutely stone broke," Jarvis said.

After the money was delivered, McGuckin agreed to go with a deputy to Garfield Bay to make a call. At about 4 p.m., McGuckin was taken into custody at Garfield Bay.

Deputies returned to the home to get the children and put them in the custody of state Department of Health and Welfare.

As a deputy was explaining the situation to the 15-year-old boy, he "runs back to the house and yells, 'Get the guns,' " Jarvis said. "They let all the dogs out of the basement. The dogs were attacking again."

After warding off the dogs with gunshots, officers used a loudspeaker to try to talk the kids out of the house.

"We were trying to convince them that we weren't there to hurt them, and that we were there to assist them, to get them housing and food," Jarvis said.

At about 7 p.m., the officers left.

The children, who were home-schooled, are in the care of their 16-year-old sister, Jarvis said. A 19-year-old sister who left home some time ago has been assisting the sheriff's department.

"The children are no worse than they were night before last," Jarvis said.

Story Two:

SANDPOINT, Idaho -- Six children, believed to be armed, refused to leave their rural home and instead released a pack of dogs on sheriff's deputies who had arrested their mother, authorities said.

Deputies retreated from the house after a two-hour standoff Tuesday and were pondering their next move Wednesday.

"I told them, 'We're just going to defuse it, we're leaving,'" Sheriff Phil Jarvis said. "I'm not going to get into a Randy Weaver thing."

In 1992, at nearby Ruby Ridge, the wife and son of white separatist Randy Weaver were killed during a standoff with federal agents.

The children, ranging in ages from 8 to 16, would not respond to calls from social workers or law enforcement officers. A 19-year-old sister who left home has been assisting authorities.

"We know there are six children in there and guns in the house. The kids are trained to use the guns," Jarvis said.

More than 20 dogs have been running free at the scene, Jarvis said

"They hunt. They pack like wild animals," Jarvis said. "They took down a moose a little while ago."

The home lacks power, water and heat. The children are in the care of their 16-year-old sister, Jarvis said.

The incident was triggered by Tuesday's arrest of the children's mother, Joann McGuckin, on a warrant charging felony injury to a child.

Authorities believe McGuckin, 46, is mentally ill. Her husband died more than a week ago, Jarvis said.

Deputies returned to the home to get the children and put them in the state custody, but one of the boys ran to the house and yelled, "'Get the guns,'" Jarvis said. "They let all the dogs out of the basement."

Jim Jefford "flips off" voters... that's what's really happened!

by William Cooper

Veritas News Service -- Exclusive, May 24, 2001 -- Oh poor republican party, boo hoo, everyone is happy or angry that Jim Jefford toppled the balance of power. Republicans were expecting a democrat to defect. Poor republican party, boo hoo, and how lucky those Democrats. If only the shoe were on the other foot, gnashing of teeth, wailing, hair pulling, boo hoo. What perfect irony... if it had been the other way around... well! But it's not really about that. It's about another socialist coming out of the closet flipping-off the voters, the treasonous betrayal of the people who put Jim Jefford in office. Not one of them voted for a Democrat or the democratic party's agenda. And no one is saying a word about that fundamental and most terrible betrayal. Jim Jefford is a two-faced, forked-tongued, lying, ungrateful snake who has betrayed his constituents. If the voters in his State have the means they should get an initiative on a ballot immediately to recall Jim Jefford posthaste.

"It sometimes appears that to become the Prime Minister of Israel, it helps to have a massacre to your name." - Israel Shamir

April is the Cruelest Month

by Israel Shamir

Veritas News Service -- May 17, 2001 -- On a beautiful spring day, when the skies of the Holy Land are tender blue and the grass is a verdant green, air-conditioned buses ferry tourists from the City of the Plain to the City in the Mountains. A small distance past the halfway point, just beyond the reconstructed Ottoman inn of Bab al-Wad, the Gate of the Valley, the bus drives by the red-painted skeletons of armored vehicles. This is where the tour guides make their routine pitch. "These vehicles are in memory of the heroic break-through of Jews relieving the blockade of Jerusalem imposed by the aggression of nine Arab states". The number of Arab states varies with the mood of the guide and how they size up their audience.

The battle for the road to Jerusalem was a high point of the 1948 Civil war in Palestine, and it ended with the Zionist Jews of the Plain capturing the prosperous West End of Jerusalem with its white stone mansions of Arab nobles and German, Greek and Armenian merchants. In the course of these battles they also subdued the neutral, non-Zionist Jewish neighborhoods. Zionists expelled the Gentiles in a massive sweep of ethnic cleansing and contained the local Jews in the ghetto. In order to achieve this feat, they razed to the ground the Palestinian villages on their path to the city.

The rusted junk is barely an adequate backdrop for the standard Israeli narration, and they would not qualify for a realistic film production. It is a staged scene that lacks the authentic look needed by movie directors. The story of the blockade and aggression is a theater play, not a cinema script. It is an encore performance for the tourist receiving indoctrination on the non-stop trip to the Wailing Wall and the Holocaust Museum.

The war for this road was over in April 1948, weeks before Israel declared independence on 15th of May, before the hapless rag-tag units of Arab neighbors entered Palestine and saved what remained of the native population. As T.S. Elliot observed, April is the cruelest month. And so it was on that fateful April when the Palestinians were doomed to start a journey to five decades of exile. Its apotheosis was reached near the entrance to Jerusalem, where the Sacharov gardens lead to a cemetery, to a lunatic asylum and to Deir Yassin.

Death has many names. The Czechs call it Lidice, the French word is Oradur, in Vietnamese they use My Lai, for every Palestinian, it is Deir Yassin. On the night of the ninth of April 1948, the Jewish terrorist groups Etzel and Lehi attacked the peaceful village and massacred its men, women and children. I do not want to repeat the gory tale of sliced off ears, gutted bellies, raped women, torched men, bodies dumped in stone quarries or the triumphal parade of the murderers. Existentially, all massacres are similar, from Babi Yar to Chain Gang to Deir Yassin.

Yet, the Deir Yassin massacre is special for three reasons. One, it is well documented and witnessed. Other Jewish fighters from the Hagana and Palmach, Jewish scouts, Red Cross representatives and the British police of Jerusalem left complete records of the event. It was just one of many massacres of Palestinians by the Jews during the war of 1948, but none received as much attention. This is probably due to the fact that Jerusalem, the seat of the British Mandate in Palestine, was just around the corner.

Second, Deir Yassin had dire consequences, beyond its own tragic fate. The horror of the massacre facilitated the mass flight from nearby Palestinian villages and gave the Jews full control over the western approaches to Jerusalem. The flight was a prudent and rational choice for the civilian population. As I write this, my TV glares with the image of Macedonian peasants fleeing a war zone. My mother's family escaped from a burning Minsk on June 22, 1941, and survived. My father's family remained and perished. After the war my parents could return like other war refugees. The Palestinians, however, have not been allowed to come back, until this very day.

Three, the careers of the murderers. The commanders of the Etzel and Lehi gangs, Menahem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir eventually became Israeli prime ministers. None of them expressed any remorse, and Menahem Begin lived the last days of his life with a panoramic view of Deir Yassin from his house. No Nuremberg judges, no vengeance, no penitence, just a path of roses all the way to a Nobel Peace prize. Menahem Begin was proud of the operation, and in his letter to the killers he congratulated them for fulfilling their national duty. "You are creators of Israel's history", he wrote. Yitzhak Shamir was also pleased that it helped to achieve his dream: to expel the nochrim (non-Jews) from the Jewish state.

The field commander of the operation, Judah Lapidot, also had quite a career. His superior, Menahem Begin, appointed him to run the campaign for the right of Russian Jews to immigrate to Israel. He called for compassion and family reunion; he orchestrated the demonstrations in New York and London, with that memorable slogan 'Let My People Go'. If you supported the right of Russian Jews to immigrate to Israel, maybe you came across this man. By then the blood stains of Deir Yassin had presumably washed off. For the political indoctrination of Russian immigrants, he even published a Russian-language 'version' of 'Oh Jerusalem', a best seller by Lapierre and Collins, expurgating the story of Deir Yassin.

But there is yet another reason why this event was historically significant. Deir Yassin demonstrated the full scope of Zionist tactics. After the mass murder became known, the Jewish leadership blamed the Arabs. David Ben Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel, announced that the Arab rogue gangs perpetrated it. When this version collapsed, the Jewish leaders began the damage control procedures. They sent an apology to Emir Abdallah. Ben Gurion publicly distanced himself and his government from the bloody massacre, saying it stained the name of every honest Jew and that it was the work of dissident terrorists. His public relations techniques remain a source of pride for the good-hearted pro-Zionist 'liberals' abroad.

"What a horrible, dreadful story", a humanist Jew told me when I drove him by the remaining houses of Deir Yassin, then he added "But Ben Gurion condemned the terrorists, and they were duly punished".

"Yes", I responded, "they were duly punished and promoted to the highest government posts".

Just three days after the murder, the gangs were incorporated into the emerging Israeli army, the commanders received high positions, and a general amnesty forgave their crimes. The same pattern, an initial denial, followed by apologies, and a final act of clemency and promotion, was applied after the first historically verifiable atrocity committed by Prime Minister Sharon. It was at the Palestinian village of Qibya, where Sharon's unit dynamited houses with their inhabitants and massacred some 60 men, women and children. After the murders became public, Prime Minister Ben Gurion, at first, blamed rogue Arab gangs. When that did not wash, he blamed Arab Jews, who, he said, being Arabs by their mentality, committed the unauthorized wild raid of vengeance and killed the peasants. For Sharon, it was the usual path of roses all the way to the post of Prime Minister. It sometimes appears that to become the Prime Minister of Israel, it helps to have a massacre to your name.

The same pattern was repeated after the massacre of Kafr Kasem, where the Israeli troops lined up the local peasants and machine-gunned them down. When the denial failed, and Communist MPs disclosed the gory details, the perpetrators were court-martialed and sentenced to long prison terms. They were out before the end of the year, while the commander of the murderers became the head of Israel Bonds. If you ever purchased Israeli Bonds, maybe you met him. I am certain he washed the blood off his hands by the time he shook yours.

Now, with the passing of 50 years, the Jewish establishment had decided to, once again, take a stab at "Deir Yassin" revisionism. The Zionist Organization of America pioneered the art of denying history and published, at the expense of American taxpayer, a booklet called 'Deir Yassin: History of a Lie'. The ZOA revisionists have utilized all the methods of their adversaries, the 'Holocaust deniers': they discount the eye-witness accounts of the survivors, the Red Cross, the British police, Jewish scouts and other Jewish observers, who were present at the scene of massacre. They discount even Ben Gurion's apology, since after all, the commanders of these gangs became in turn prime ministers of the Jewish state. For ZOA, only the testimony of the murderers has any validity. That is, if the murderers are Jews.

Still, there are just people, and probably because of them the Almighty does not wipe us off the face of the earth. There is an organization called Deir Yassin Remembered, which fights all attempts to erase the memory. They publish books, organize meetings, and they are working on a project to build a memorial at the scene of the massacre, so the innocent victims will have this last comfort, their name and the memory saved forever (Isa 56:5). It will have to do, until the surviving sons of Deir Yassin and neighboring villages return from their refugee camps to the land of their fathers.


Israel Shamir is a Russian-Israeli writer and journalist. Permission from the author should be sought for hardcopy publication. Israel Shamir can be emailed at, or written to at P.O.B. 23714 Tel Aviv 61236.

Warning - Women Beware!

by William Cooper

Veritas News Service -- Exclusive, May 15, 2001 -- Eli Lilly, one of the largest drug companies, has mounted one of the greatest consumer deceptions in pharmaceutical history. Lilly is promoting what it calls a new drug, Serafem, for treatment of Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder, or PMDD in women. The drug is not new. It has been renamed and repackaged. Serafem is Prozac, the controversial drug that may have caused many People to do some very terrible things, including murder.

Prozac is controversial and unpopular. Many people refuse to take Prozac because it has been, rightly or wrongly, linked to violent crimes. In addition the Eli Lilly patent on Prozac will expire in August of 2001. It is speculated that Eli Lilly developed Serafem with exactly the same molecular makeup of Prozac in order to be able to obtain a new patent and sell the same drug, Prozac, under a new name to treat women with PMDD.

When Lilly's patent expires profits on Prozac will fall off in steep decline Other drug companies will manufacture generic versions of Prozac making it available at very low cost. Doctors will prescribe cheap generic Prozac for the traditional uses of the drug.

Doctors will prescribe the newly patented and very expensive Serafem for women with PMDD. The Doctor's and the women will think that Serafem is a new drug and will pay a very high price.

Some speculate that Eli Lilly hopes to escape the controversy and possible danger that has been linked to Prozac. Can you imagine what might happen to a woman with PMDD, a much more severe form of PMS, who is prescribed Serafem, really Prozac a drug that has been linked to the commission of violent crimes including murder?

I believe we all have a right to know what we are taking, the dangers involved, and any controversial facts involved with the drugs we take especially if it has been speculated to cause violence in otherwise non-violent people. We should also know if there is a cheaper alternative available. Women should think twice, maybe even three times, before taking Serafem.

Animal Pharm

by Mark Purdey, Somerset, UK

As an organic farmer, Mark Purdey resisted the order to spray his cattle with organophosphates for warble fly and went to court for a judicial review; he won and was exempted from using the spray. No cows born in his herd developed BSE (mad cow disease). He has contributed numerous articles on the subject of BSE to scientific journals. He farms in Somerset, UK. This article appeared in Wise Traditions in Food, Farming and the Healing Arts, the quarterly magazine of the Weston A. Price Foundation, Spring 2000

As the first snowstorm of winter hit the isolated hill where I farm, I pitched out the last forkfuls of hay to my cattle before nightfall. Much like the whirlwinds of snow surging all around me, my brain was turning over and over the catalogue of injustices that successive governments had levied onto the farming community over BSE. I felt paralyzed and powerless in the encroaching snowstorm.

My confidence to carry on was battered to pieces by the recent ban on beef-on-the-bone. The announcement-based on the whims of a mere handful of government "experts"-renders my hard graft over the last twenty years in farming into pathetic insignificance. But how can there be any true "experts" from academia when the most basic facets of the Bovine Spongiform Encephalitis (BSE) disease process remain a total mystery? One would have thought that all of those farmers and independent vets living and working in the front line with BSE cattle would have been the first to be consulted. But strangely, their observations have been completely ignored by officialdom.

Cows frequently partake in the bizarre habit of eating their colleagues' afterbirths after calving, and I was particularly intrigued to watch my own home-reared, BSE-free cows positively relishing the delicacies of afterbirth tissues derived from a group of pedigree cows that I purchased into my farm in 1989. As the majority of these imported cows went on to develop BSE, it is interesting that BSE has not surfaced in my home-reared cows, despite their overzealous exposure to the allegedly "infectious" blood and lymph found in the afterbirths of the BSE cows. Other farmers sharing the same experience report the same outcome.

Another anecdote hails from the farming community of Shetland, where the island folk are free of Creutzfeld-Jakob disease (the human form of BSE), despite their ancient custom of eating "potted sheep's brain." Interestingly, the equivalent of BSE in sheep, called scrapie, has been rife in the sheep flock on Shetland for centuries.

The anecdotes are ever flowing, and all point to a hypothesis based upon some environmental causal factor that falls a long way short of the current government's nightmare infectious "ingestion" scenario. If the spongiform agent is as infectious as the authorities would have us believe, why has chronic wasting disease (the BSE equivalent in deer) remained uniquely confined to a small cluster zone in the Rocky Mountains for thirty years now, without spreading across to the neighboring deer herds roaming the rest of the Rockies? Why has no spongiform developed in the various predators of those affected deer?

From the very beginning of the crisis, the farming community has been the unfortunate victim of the whole BSE campaign. Yet, ironically, the same presiding authorities who are responsible for foisting off the burden of BSE are, no doubt, totally oblivious to the fact that more farmers have committed suicide as a result of official BSE blunderings than people have died of new variant Creutzfeld-Jakob disease (nvCJD).

A body of government experts was quick to take exclusive control of BSE research, and very rapidly the cause of the disease was attributed to the feeding of scrapie-diseased sheep brains to cattle. In other words, scrapie was said to jump from sheep to cattle by virtue of some sort of infectious agent. And it naturally followed that this same assumption of disease cause was extrapolated into the human CJD context-the presumed "microorganism" had now jumped from cows into humans. But this was no more than unproven hypothesis, and it still remains that way today.

Not surprisingly, only a handful of folk had insight into the unsavory world of the meat and bone meal (MBM) rendering business. But for anyone who had scratched the mere surface of the global distribution of British MBM products, it became strikingly obvious that the very mainstay of the official hypothesis was radically flawed. For instance, during the 1980s thousands of tons of this very same incriminated MBM were exported to cattle farms in BSE-free countries such as the Middle East, Malta and South Africa. Officials have always brushed this challenge aside, arguing that the cattle in these countries did not receive sufficiently large doses of scrapie to contract BSE. But this contradicts their current official explanation for the 30,000-plus cases of BSE that have developed in cattle born after the 1988-ban on MBM, where government scientists conveniently claim that leakage of micro amounts of MBM (destined for pig and poultry feed) into the cattle rations, caused the 30,000 cases.

Furthermore, USA and Scandinavian rendering systems duplicated exactly the same prerequisites that were supposed to kick off BSE in Britain-scrapie affected brains being milled into feed-yet their livestock remained BSE-free.

Nor were we told of the numerous unsuccessful attempts by US scientists to induce BSE in cattle that had been experimentally fed or injected with massive amounts of scrapie brain material. Apparently, the cattle either just "got fat" or went down with a sickness more akin to motor neurons disease than BSE.

Despite millions of pounds worth of scientific research failing to ascertain a link between BSE and scrapie, the whole propaganda myth that BSE was caused by scrapie became gospel in mainstream public mentality.

The media loved the theory because they could drum up a viral holocaust-horror scoop. The vegetarian and green lobbies found themselves landed with a powerful propaganda weapon on their plate- turning cows into cannibals. And the UK scientific establishment could go on drawing generous grant funding for their viral witch-hunt without the embarrassment of having to account for years of barking up the wrong tree. And then the government could foist the blame of BSE onto a naturally occurring agent for which no significant vested interest or official body could be held accountable. Whilst the maligned renderers and feed merchants got the full brunt of blame for BSE, it surprises me that neither was held accountable for the financial damages of the crisis. Instead, they all received generous compensation payments to the tune of millions.

Almost on a weekly basis we are now finding ourselves listening to the same experts regurgitating the same stereotype claims of how BSE has now jumped from cattle into humans. On Channel 4 Dispatches (last December), despite no reported cases of BSE in the British sheep flock, it was assumed that sheep must be affected with BSE because they had eaten meat and bone meal. We are now warned of the danger of eating sheep. Professor Blakemore summed up the program by saying that we should all eat chicken avoiding beef and mutton. But as poultry received their fair share of meat and bone meal as well, should we not be cutting chicken out of our diet too, according the dictates of the official theory?

These spokespeople would do better to start questioning the entire foundation of their hypothesis, rather than squeezing the last drop of "infected" blood out of the sinking stone. What is more, the conventional consensus on BSE is ignoring that well-recognized academic yardstick, Koch's postulates, employed for assessing the cause of disease. The first postulate dictates that a theory begins to carry weight once the hypothetical causal agent can be identified in every victim of the disease in question. The conventional hypothesis on scrapie/BSE/CJD certainly fails to fulfill the basic postulate on several counts. In this respect it is particularly interesting that spongiform disease has been experimentally induced in animals after receiving injections of brain tissue derived from people who have died of Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease. Why is nobody freaking out about Alzheimer's disease?

In the case of BSE where no viral cause has been identified, it is illogical to assume that one animal has to eat another in order to catch the same disease. Initially, the direction of any epidemiological research program should follow elementary logic and investigate the most likely assumption that the various different species of mammals suffering from the same disease have all been exposed to the same causal factor in the environment. But it seems that nobody has investigated this route. Sheep did not cannibalize each other in order to catch scrapie, nor did wild deer in the Rocky Mountains cannibalize each other in order to catch their BSE-equivalent disease, chronic wasting disease.

The reductionism mindset of government scientists is betrayed by the narrow scope of questions that have been put to the relatives of the new variant Creutzfeld-Jakob disease victims. The questionnaire is almost entirely focused on the carnivorous perspective of the victims' diets, and therefore tailored to suit their own hypothesis from the outset. The Establishment's assessment of nvCJD etiology seem to have completely ignored the fact that adolescent CJD was recorded well before the 1980s. And why do they move the goal posts every time a new challenge confronts their theory-like extending nvCJD's incubation period to tally with the long-term vegetarian victim from Kent? Take note that they have completely ignored the case of the lifelong vegetarian nvCJD victim from France.

The British government's Spongiform Encephalitis Advisory Committee (SEAC), seems to have thrown aside one of its most relevant long standing observations on CJD epidemiology-people who are occupationally involved with pets and farm animals are at greater risk of developing CJD. And it is this observation that may well hold the key to the true cause of these diseases. During the 1980s and early 1990s, cattle and cats (the species of animals that have developed BSE) were exclusively treated with systemically acting types of Organophosphate (OP) insecticide which were designed to penetrate the entire physiological system of the animal, transforming the bloodstream into a toxic medium so as to kill off any unwanted parasites present. In the context of cattle, the use of these systemic OP's was subject to a compulsory government order for the eradication of warble fly. The UK government was unique in compelling a substantially higher biannual dose of this OP by comparison with the few other countries around the world that were following similar, less intensive measures to control this fly. Interestingly, these other countries, including Switzerland, France and Ireland, comprise the few other countries that are suffering from very small epidemics of BSE in their home-reared cows.

The National Farmers Union, the Meat and Livestock Commission and The British Veterinary Association formed a united front with MAFF (Ministry of Agriculture, Fish and Forestry) to ensure that all farmers complied with the law and treated their cattle. Systemic OP's are recognized as exerting their toxic effect by entering the central nervous system and deforming the molecular shape of various nerve proteins. These chemically mutilated mutant proteins are subsequently rendered inapable of performing their proper function in the nerves.

The known toxic effects of OP's lead me to wonder whether the use of systemic OP's on British cattle have caused the malformation of another newly discovered brain protein called prion protein-the phenomenon that US scientists have proposed as the cause of spongiform encephalopathies. Whilst some types of spongiform disease have been attributed to genetically acquired damage to the shape of the prion protein, the underlying cause of protein damage in the BSE and new variant CJD strain of the disease remains a mystery-amongst "open-minded" scientific circles, at any rate. OP's are known to generate a highly reactive type of "free radical" in the tissues that they intoxicate. And it is this free radical legacy of OP poisoning which is capable of instigating a chain reaction of lethal attacks on nerve membranes and proteins in the central nerves of susceptible individuals.

Once tissues become 'infected' with free radical chain reactions, the introduction of freezing, heat or radioactive conditions to the affected cells does not arrest such an 'infection.' In fact, irradiation, heating and homogenizing of such tissue (brain tissue from spongiform affected animals is homogenized before it is inoculated into healthy animals in transmission trials) actually proliferates the free radical phenomena. This suggests that these free radicals may constitute the as yet unidentified "infectious" transmissible agent of these diseases.

Concerned members of the public helped me to fund a £14,000 experimental research project at the Department of Neuroscience, Institute of Psychiatry in London, where living tissue culture cells which express the prion protein were exposed to low doses of the OP chemical; so as to stimulate the context of a living cow undergoing OP treatment. Significantly some of the recognized changes of the prion protein that appear in the early stages of spongiform disease were induced in these OP-treated cells.

Clearly, these results go some way towards proving that OP's represent a primary or partial cause of BSE. Yet it was this very same simple test that the government had always assured me was too expensive for the taxpayer to fund and, besides, impossible to set up anyway, even with the most updated lab technology.

In December 1996 Lord Lucas, MAFF's spokesman in the House of Lords, gave a written answer stating that the government had asked the SEAC committee to revisit the OP-BSE theory as a result of the recent research findings conducted at the Institute of Psychiatry.

After being invited to deliver my thesis to a SEAC meeting in April, 1997, I was disturbed that at no stage during the protracted enquiry that followed was the experimental evidence of the Institute's work addressed-the prime purpose behind this hearing. The committee dismissed the evidence that I presented, which had been drawn from independent peer-reviewed, published science literature. I was not surprised to learn that the outcome of this enquiry-the proceedings of which were described as "confidential" to any enquiring journalist-was a recommendation to government that any applications for funding research into the OP-BSE theory should not be supported.

I still shudder each time I visit our local farm stores and see the canisters of systemic OP products up for sale. Although the warble fly is eradicated and BSE is on the wane, farmers can still apply these chemicals in a voluntary capacity for controlling lice and other pests. I shudder further when I see the bottles of OP head lice shampoo and OP systemic for pets and gardens still in the shops for human use.

The real madness of the mad cow fracas would seem to lie with the deadlock that has kept these products on the open market for a full year since experimental evidence first linked their use to the cause of BSE. Perhaps the government is so scared of compensation claims that it employs everything at its disposal to prevent any degree of acceptance of the idea that their compulsory warble fly program caused the biggest catastrophe in the history of British agriculture.

The brave new SEAC committee appears to be totally preoccupied with "effect" rather than "cause." Such a back-to-front approach betrays their sensitivity with anything to do with "cause." But how can any government program seriously hope to eradicate BSE or nvCJD if it has failed to eradicate, let alone recognize, the disease's true cause?


Those in charge of public health policy in the US do not really understand what I am demonstrating about bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSA) and Creutzfeld-Jakob Disease (CJD). They get the main linchpin of the work wrong by stating "manganese deficiency" instead of "manganese excess." Then they seem to marginalize my position in the BSE debate by falsely suggesting that I am at odds with Stanley Prisiner's prion concept that has now been accepted as mainstream.

Ironically, both my own studies and those of Dr. David Brown largely open up the final door of evidence in support of Prisiner's concept. We have shown what causes the prion protein to transform into its protease-resistant form (the disease-associated form). Prisiner first identified the abnormal prion as the hallmark of the BSE-diseased brain and he hypothesized that his abnormal protein somehow caused the disease. Where I do differ from the Prisiner brigade is only in one point-I don't believe that the "prion" is highly infectious as they are suggesting; that is, I don't believe that it can infect those who eat prion-contaminated meat. I believe that it is the manganese 3+ attached to the prion that is the infectious agent and only when it is transmitted by injection, etc., into susceptible genotypes. Prisiner himself is skeptical of "the-BSE-feed-caused-new-variant-CJD" hypotheses. He was the only person (apart from myself) who suggested this to the BSE inquiry!

I just hope that the beef industry in America realizes that we're not as "way out" as has been suggested. The industry is shooting itself in the foot by rejecting the link to toxic mineral excess and organophosphate pesticides. We have accumulated so much hard evidence now-more than all other theories.

I have been to Calabria in Southern Italy looking at the case of 20 CJD victims in a hamlet of 150 population since 1995. Intriguing stuff! But I was warned that the Mafia controls the property market and meat market in this part of Italy and would be hostile to me. So I was unable to get soil samples at that time.

Things are so desperate in farming in Europe at present. We are so concerned by the totalitarian, global control that is molding the direction of agriculture into complete ecological and economic crisis. The "arable aid payments scheme" has caused acres of former livestock grassland to be ploughed up. The global warming flash flood storms have caused an unprecedented degree of soil erosion, with its attendant self-perpetuating drain on human reserves.

VNS Exclusives Archives - April 2001


[Blue Ribbon Campaign icon]

  Home | 
   © 1999-2002, HOTT All rights reserved.