Health Freedom USA url/Codex Alimentarius

http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/

Codex Alimentarius (89 Minute Movie)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5800206429960925518

Codex Alimentarius P1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmrF9KjlGsc

Codex Alimentarius P2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEqB41Ow0vU&feature=related

Codex Alimentarius P 3 of 5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3asBAmKBnE&feature=related

Codex Alimentarius P 4 of 5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l24wdZrtZqI&feature=related

Codex Alimentarius P 5 of 5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6-ccyvwgGY&feature=related

EO 13107

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo13107.htm

[Executive Orders]
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release December 10, 1998
EXECUTIVE ORDER 13107
- - - - - - -
IMPLEMENTATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS TREATIES
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and
the laws of the United States of America, and bearing in mind the
obligations of the United States pursuant to the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Convention Against Torture
and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), the
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
(CERD), and other relevant treaties concerned with the protection and
promotion of human rights to which the United States is now or may
become a party in the future, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Implementation of Human Rights Obligations. (a) It shall
be the policy and practice of the Government of the United States, being
committed to the protection and promotion of human rights and
fundamental freedoms, fully to respect and implement its obligations
under the international human rights treaties to which it is a party,
including the ICCPR, the CAT, and the CERD.
(b) It shall also be the policy and practice of the Government of the
United States to promote respect for international human rights, both in
our relationships with all other countries and by working with and
strengthening the various international mechanisms for the promotion of
human rights, including, inter alia, those of the United Nations, the
International Labor Organization, and the Organization of American
States.
Sec. 2. Responsibility of Executive Departments and Agencies. (a)
All executive departments and agencies (as defined in 5 U.S.C. 101-105,
including boards and commissions, and hereinafter referred to
collectively as "agency" or "agencies") shall maintain a current
awareness of United States international human rights obligations that
are relevant to their functions and shall perform such functions so as
to respect and implement those obligations fully. The head of each
agency shall designate a single contact officer who will be responsible
for overall coordination of the implementation of this order. Under
this order, all such agencies shall retain their established
institutional roles in the implementation, interpretation, and
enforcement of Federal law and policy.
(b) The heads of agencies shall have lead responsibility, in
coordination with other appropriate agencies, for questions concerning
implementation of human rights obligations that fall within their
respective operating and program responsibilities and authorities or, to
the extent that matters do not fall within the operating and program
responsibilities and authorities of any agency, that most closely relate
to their general areas of concern.
Sec. 3. Human Rights Inquiries and Complaints. Each agency shall
take lead responsibility, in coordination with other appropriate
agencies, for responding to inquiries, requests for information, and
complaints about violations of human rights obligations that fall within
its areas of responsibility or, if the matter does not fall within its
areas of responsibility, referring it to the appropriate agency for
response.
Sec. 4. Interagency Working Group on Human Rights Treaties. (a)
There is hereby established an Interagency Working Group on Human Rights
Treaties for the purpose of providing guidance, oversight, and
coordination with respect to questions concerning the adherence to and
implementation of human rights obligations and related matters.
(b) The designee of the Assistant to the President for National
Security Affairs shall chair the Interagency Working Group, which shall
consist of appropriate policy and legal representatives at the Assistant
Secretary level from the Department of State, the Department of Justice,
the Department of Labor, the Department of Defense, the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, and other agencies as the chair deems appropriate. The principal
members may designate alternates to attend meetings in their stead.
(c) The principal functions of the Interagency Working Group shall
include:
(i) coordinating the interagency review of any significant issues
concerning the implementation of this order and analysis and
recommendations in connection with pursuing the ratification of human
rights treaties, as such questions may from time to time arise;
(ii) coordinating the preparation of reports that are to be submitted
by the United States in fulfillment of treaty obligations;
(iii) coordinating the responses of the United States Government to
complaints against it concerning alleged human rights violations
submitted to the United Nations, the Organization of American States,
and other international organizations;
(iv) developing effective mechanisms to ensure that legislation
proposed by the Administration is reviewed for conformity with
international human rights obligations and that these obligations are
taken into account in reviewing legislation under consideration by the
Congress as well;
(v) developing recommended proposals and mechanisms for improving the
monitoring of the actions by the various States, Commonwealths, and
territories of the United States and, where appropriate, of Native
Americans and Federally recognized Indian tribes, including the review
of State, Commonwealth, and territorial laws for their conformity with
relevant treaties, the provision of relevant information for reports and
other monitoring purposes, and the promotion of effective remedial
mechanisms;
(vi) developing plans for public outreach and education concerning
the provisions of the ICCPR, CAT, CERD, and other relevant treaties, and
human rights-related provisions of domestic law;
(vii) coordinating and directing an annual review of United States
reservations, declarations, and understandings to human rights treaties,
and matters as to which there have been non-trivial complaints or
allegations of inconsistency with or breach of international human
rights obligations, in order to determine whether there should be
consideration of any modification of relevant reservations,
declarations, and understandings to human rights treaties, or United
States practices or laws. The results and recommendations of this
review shall be reviewed by the head of each participating agency;
(viii) making such other recommendations as it shall deem appropriate
to the President, through the Assistant to the President for National
Security Affairs, concerning United States adherence to or
implementation of human rights treaties and related matters; and
(ix) coordinating such other significant tasks in connection with
human rights treaties or international human rights institutions,
including the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the Special
Rapporteurs and complaints procedures established by the United Nations
Human Rights Commission.
(d) The work of the Interagency Working Group shall not supplant the
work of other interagency entities, including the President's Committee
on the International Labor Organization, that address international
human rights issues.
Sec. 5. Cooperation Among Executive Departments and Agencies. All
agencies shall cooperate in carrying out the provisions of this order.
The Interagency Working Group shall facilitate such cooperative
measures.
Sec. 6. Judicial Review, Scope, and Administration. (a) Nothing in
this order shall create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural,
enforceable by any party against the United States, its agencies or
instrumentalities, its officers or employees, or any other person.
(b) This order does not supersede Federal statutes and does not
impose any justiciable obligations on the executive branch.
(c) The term "treaty obligations" shall mean treaty obligations as
approved by the Senate pursuant to Article II, section 2, clause 2 of
the United States Constitution.
(d) To the maximum extent practicable and subject to the availability
of appropriations, agencies shall carry out the provisions of this
order.
WILLIAM J. CLINTON
THE WHITE HOUSE,
December 10, 1998.
30-30-30
var gaJsHost = (("https:" == document.location.protocol) ? "https://ssl." : "http://www.");
document.write(unescape("%3Cscript src='" + gaJsHost + "google-analytics.com/ga.js' type='text/javascript'%3E%3C/script%3E"));
var pageTracker = _gat._getTracker("UA-3263347-1");
pageTracker._initData();
pageTracker._trackPageview();
_uacct = "UA-3263347-1";
urchinTracker();

The US and UN are run by same people.

http://www.crossroad.to/text/articles/turfur12-98.html

Declaration on Tolerance
Trading US Rights for UN Goals
A report on President Clinton's Executive Order 13107:
"The Implementation of Human Rights Treaties", signed on December 10, 1998
Skip down to The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
Home


The UN Plan for Your
Mental Health
While Americans focused on more scintillating news, President Clinton quietly signed a new executive order titled "The Implementation of Human Rights Treaties." The media ignored it and our leaders didn't tell us. Yet we will pay the cost -- in freedom as well as dollars -- for the creation of a massive government bureaucracy to promote, monitor, and enforce compliance with human rights regulations mandated by the United Nations. Remember, this governing body shows only contempt for biblical values, American sovereignty, and the U.S. Constitution.Clinton's timing was perfect. An attack on Iraq had been planned. And after December's impeachment proceedings, Congress would adjourn for the holidays. Without its objection, the executive order would take effect within 30 days (not a hard and fast rule 1), and become a federal law. Once implemented, no one would be free to do or say anything contrary to the new global ideology.
Hard to believe? Before studying the executive order itself, take a look at the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It illustrates the deceptive meanings behind the noble words used to persuade the American people to accept unthinkable regulations. Even so, on December 10, 1998, President Clinton used its 50th anniversary to celebrate its ideals, to honor its late sponsor Eleanor Roosevelt, to announce his Human Rights Initiatives, and to sign this executive order.
Background Information
At the first glance, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights sounds good, as do all the intrusive UN human rights treaties. Article 18 upholds "the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion..." Article 19 affirms "the right to freedom of opinion and expression... and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."
But Article 29 states that "these rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations." In other words, these "rights" or "freedoms" don't apply to those who would criticize the UN or its policies. Your rights would be conditioned on your compliance. Only if your message supports official ideology are you free to speak it. As Andrei Vishinsky wrote in The Law of the Soviet State, "There can be no place for freedom of speech, press, and so on for the foes of socialism."[2]
The Convention on the Rights of the Child has not been ratified by the Senate. Yet, it would be included among "other relevant treaties" in this executive order which begins with these words:
"By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and bearing in mind the obligations of the United States pursuant to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other relevant treaties concerned with the protection and promotion of human rights to which the United States is now or may become a party in the future, it is hereby ordered."
Like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child uses manipulative and misleading language. According to Article 13, "The child shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers..." In other words, parents have no authority to keep a child from reading a sexually explicit magazine or visiting pagan chat rooms on Internet.
While parents lose their right to set safe boundaries for their children, the State assumes full power to "protect" the child and define the rules. Thus Article 13 concludes with: "This right may be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary for respect of the rights or reputations of others; or for protection of national security or public order."
Likewise, if parents restrict their child's "right to freedom of association" or their child's ambiguous rights to "privacy" or "conscience and religion" (Articles 14 -16), they would break this law and face the potential loss of their child to the state's "protection" services.
In the context of UN ideology, "national security or public order" refers to the concept of solidarity, a utopian community oneness based on shared values defined by globalist leaders. In their minds, anything less than social solidarity in every community could stir conflict or incite violence. In this context, dissenters become foes; facts or beliefs that clash with its vision of unity become threats; and the uncompromising truths of biblical Christianity become intolerable, even dangerous to public safety.
These "human rights" restrictions are already filtering into American culture. For example, any Christian website that promotes biblical standards for right and wrong could be targeted for censorship by Cyber Patrol, the world's most powerful Internet thought police. Owned by The Learning Company, America's "premier developer of educational software," it has formed some powerful "partners" around the world. These include AOL, AT&T, Bell Atlantic, CompuServe, IBM, Microsoft, Netscape, Scholastic Network, and others. Its website [3] shows the categories in its CyberNOT Block List, a list of offenses that determines which websites should be screened to protect schools and families that buy their service. These dangers include Violence/Profanity, Nudity, Sexual Acts, Intolerance, Satanic/Cult, Drugs, and Militant/Extremist.
Notice "Intolerance" amidst the more obvious threats. CyberPatrol warns us that "any picture or text that elevates one group over another" would be considered intolerant. Their filters now "protect" children and schools across the country from visiting American Family Association and other Christian websites simply because they present God-given warnings and view Christian truth and lifestyles as superior to pagan alternatives.
An international "Declaration on Tolerance," prepared by UNESCO and signed by its member nations, defines the new global standard for right and wrong. All nations would be responsible for fulfilling this international contract by teaching the "right" kind of tolerance and training their people to "respect" every kind of ritual and lifestyle -- no matter how contrary to God's Word. Though the U.S. didn't sign this anti-Christian Declaration 4, our leaders are fueling the transformation. Consider how its decrees would undermine our Bill of Rights:
"Tolerance is respect, acceptance and appreciation of the rich diversity of our world's cultures It is not only a moral duty, it is also a political and legal requirement."
"Tolerance involves the rejection of dogmatism and absolutism." [Biblical truth?]
"Tolerance... means that one's views are not to be imposed on others." [Would this end freedom to share the gospel with others? Could the UN still share its views?]
"Intolerance... is a global threat."
"Scientific studies and networking should be undertaken to coordinate the international community's response to this global challenge, including analysis of root causes and effective countermeasures, as well as research and monitoring... "
"Tolerance promotion and the shaping of attitudes of openness, mutual listening and solidarity should take place in schools and universities, and through non-formal education... at home and in the workplace."
"Promote rational tolerance teaching methods that will address the cultural, social, economic, political and religious sources of intolerance-- major roots of violence and exclusion."5
As you read on, you will see how the suggestions in the last three points are worked into President Clinton's Initiatives and Executive Order. But don't forget, the first four points provide the rationale for the last three points.
Clinton's Human Rights Initiatives
A White House Press Release, posted with the executive order at the White House website, explained that "on the historic anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, President Clinton announced several policy initiatives to advance human rights at home and abroad." These initiatives include the following:
1. "Signing of a Human Rights Executive Order, that strengthens our efforts to implement human rights treaties, and creates an Administration working group to coordinate these efforts." Its main points are listed below.
2. "Establishment of a Genocide Early Warning Center, jointly run by the State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency, to train intelligence resources on situations that could potentially lead to genocide."
The response of the liberal media and politicians to the bombing of the Oklahoma Federal Building gives us a clue to the rising hostility toward those who refuse to embrace the new global visions. Remember how Christian and conservative radio hosts were accused of "creating a climate of hate" that could incite violence. In this cultural atmosphere, such an Early Warning Center, using intrusive CIA surveillance technology to monitor those who dissent, could well lead to repression of contrary opinions.
In fact, that might be its main purpose. Remember UNESCO's Declaration on Tolerance which equates intolerance with biblical absolutes. Since "intolerance is a global threat," today's crisis calls for analysis "of root causes effective countermeasures" and "monitoring..."
When the US delegation signed the Action Plan prepared at the 1995 UN Conference for Women in Beijing, we agreed to "develop gender-sensitive databases, information and monitoring systems." These information systems would monitor every school, workplace, and home for compliance with "women's rights" to cast aside traditional gender roles in the home and assume 50-50 representation in business, entertainment, and political leadership. This massive global information management system would be controlled by the UN Social and Economic Council. 6
The technology needed for worldwide surveillance has been created. Existing databases are being linked and the information management systems completed. 7 The planned "unique personal identifier" is becoming reality, and the process of intrusive surveillance is under way. We are ready for the next step:
3. "Enhancing our response to human rights emergencies. The U.S. Agency for International Development will provide up to $8 million over the next five years to non-governmental organizations to enhance their rapid response capacities. Organizations can use these funds for a variety of purposes, including the creation of assessment teams, monitoring units or other means of addressing situations where human rights may be imminently threatened."
Whenever you see the open-ended word "other", beware. It could be interpreted to mean anything the authors might later include. 8
4. "Preventing youth hate crime through publication in January of a guide for schools entitled 'Protecting Students from Harassment and Hate Crimes,' developed jointly by the Department of Education and the National Association of Attorneys General. The guide provides suggestions to school systems for addressing the issue of school violence."
Remember, words such as violence and hate have been redefined to reflect a global perspective. They now include various forms of conflict, biblical "intolerance", and failure to comply with the new global standards for mental health, i.e. the attitudes, values, beliefs, behavior, and collective mindset required for community solidarity. (See "Zero Tolerance for Non-Compliance" and "Clinton's War on Hate Bans Christian values")
6. "encourage greater reporting to and cooperation with U.S. authorities in targeting abusers of human rights."
Assessing, monitoring, re-educating, and tracking every person around the world is key to the UN vision of global governance. 9 And, as President Clinton stressed at his 1997 White House Conference on Hate Crimes, "reporting" intolerant words and attitudes is the duty of every person in the community. The following executive order adds legal authority to this unconstitutional plan.
The Executive Order
The President summarized the scope of the executive order in its opening paragraph:
"By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and bearing in mind the obligations of the United States pursuant to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD), and other relevant treaties concerned with the protection and promotion of human rights to which the United States is now or may become a party in the future, it is hereby ordered."
Notice that it includes "other relevant treaties concerned with the protection and promotion of human rights..." In other words, it would apparently include such unratified treaties as The Convention on the Rights of the Child and other treaties "to which" we may "become party in the future." As you read its precepts below, consider whether this executive order protects human "rights" or oppressive "responsibilities."
Section 1(a) commits the U.S. "fully to respect and implement its obligations under the international human rights treaties to which it is a party, including the ICCPR, the CAT, and the CERD."
Don't assume that this EO only applies to ratified treaties. This section doesn't rule out all the other present and future unratified treaties included in the opening paragraph and in Sec. 4(vi).
While the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women has not been ratified, its values has been established as a cultural norm through the liberal media, education, and a variety of laws, rules and regulations. To speed the process, President Clinton established an agency to manage and oversee the implementation of the Beijing Plan for Action signed after the 1995 UN Conference for Women. It includes all the key provisions of the above Convention, such as 50-50 representation in influential positions.
"(b) It shall also be the policy and practice of the Government of the United States to promote respect for international human rights, both in our relationships with all other countries and by working with and strengthening the various international mechanisms for the promotion of human rights, including, inter alia, those of the United Nations, the International Labor Organization, and the Organization of American States."
Don't forget that ILO, the International Labor Organization, shows little concern for the rights of those who oppose its liberal, political, and global agenda.
Sec. 2 titled, "Responsibility of Executive Departments and Agencies" brings all these agencies together in a coordinated effort to follow UN guidelines for human rights and global solidarity.
Sec. 4 establishes "an Interagency Working Group on Human Rights Treaties for the purpose of providing guidance, oversight, and coordination with respect to questions concerning the adherence to and implementation of human rights obligations and related matters." It would be chaired by the "designee of the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs."
The functions of this Interagency Working Group would include:
"(i) coordinating the interagency review of any significant issues concerning the implementation of this order..."
"(iii) coordinating the responses of the United States Government to complaints against it concerning alleged human rights violations submitted to the United Nations, the Organization of American States, and other international organizations;"
"(iv) developing effective mechanisms to ensure that legislation proposed by the Administration is reviewed for conformity with international human rights obligations and that these obligations are taken into account in reviewing legislation under consideration by the Congress as well;"
Apparently, the United Nations and its Human Rights treaties would replace the U.S. Constitution as our main standard and filter for legal action.
"(v) developing recommended proposals and mechanisms for improving the monitoring of the actions by the various States, Commonwealths, and territories of the United States... for their conformity with relevant treaties, the provision of relevant information for reports and other monitoring purposes, and the promotion of effective remedial mechanisms;"
Remember UNESCO's Declaration on Tolerance. It, too, called for "analysis of root causes [of intolerance] and effective countermeasures, as well as research and monitoring...."
Just as the provisions of the unratified Biodiversity treaty are being implemented through the EPA regulations, executive orders, and environmental guidelines so unratified human rights agreements are being implemented through executive orders, reinterpretation of old laws, and a variety of local, state and national regulations that bypass Congress. However, the heart of the transformation is UNESCO's plan for Lifelong Learning, a psycho-social process of re-learning: replacing traditional beliefs, values, attitudes, and individual thinking with the new global ideology and collective thinking.
This program demands everyone's participation in the Hegelian dialectic (or consensus) process. Everyone must be willing to compromise in order to find "common ground". People from every cultural background must agree to dialogue to consensus over divisive social issues under the leadership of a facilitator trained in psycho-social manipulation.
"(vi) developing plans for public outreach and education concerning the provisions of the ICCPR, CAT, CERD, and other relevant treaties and human rights-related provisions of domestic law;"
The last sentence would include Clinton's hate-crimes initiatives and legislation as well as other prohibitions against any information that would be offensive to our politically correct thought police. That Christian websites are being tagged by the Cyber Patrol because they violate its guidelines on "tolerance" shows how "private" organizations, in partnership with our government, are implementing the international political agenda.
Remember the last two points in UNESCO's Declaration on Tolerance. They call for "rational tolerance teaching methods that will address the cultural, social, economic, political and religious sources of intolerance-major roots of violence and exclusion." No person would be free from the duty to conform to UN standards through its manipulative program for "shaping... attitudes of openness, mutual listening and solidarityin schools and universities, and through non-formal education... at home and in the workplace."
These two points summarize the UNESCO plan for re-learning" or "remediation" for adults as well as children. Tied to the national-international plan for School-to-Work signed into law by Clinton in 1998, this section probably means that no one would receive a work certificate without conforming to the new ideology and group thinking. 10
"(vii) coordinating and directing an annual review of United States reservations, declarations, and understandings to human rights treaties, and matters as to which there have been non-trivial complaints or allegations of inconsistency with or breach of international human rights obligations..."
A typical inconsistency would be churches that refuse to hire pagans or homosexuals. Such "separatism" could be challenged both on the bases of discrimination and refusal to enter into dialogue and seek "common ground." The UN vision of solidarity rules out such "separatism." Al Gore summarized this sentiment well at a 1991 Communitarian conference in Washington: "Seeing ourselves as separate is the central problem in our political thinking."
Clinton's Hate-Crimes Conference called for "some sort of club or organization at the school -- because if you think about it, your parents are still pretty well separated.... Most houses of worship are still fairly segregated. We have to find a disciplined, organized way out of this so that we reach every child in an affirmative way before something bad happens..."
But that isn't enough. Every person-young and old -- must be held responsible for reporting violations. As in Nazi Germany, children would have to report on parents, neighbors on neighbors, etc. Our president outlined the plan at his 1997 Hate-Crimes Conference,
"The Justice Department will make its own hate crimes training curriculum available. A lot of hate crimes still go unreportedº. If a crime is unreported, that gives people an excuse to ignore it."
"the real answer to our success in this endeavor is obviously that we all have to work together. And all of you can strike new energy into this entire endeavor around the country."
At the same conference, Attorney General Janet Reno added:
" ...the first line of defense is to prevent it. But then it is very important when you see hate to speak out against it immediately and strike it down. How can we in the federal government improve our coordination with local law enforcement, with the state authorities, and with groups such as the churches or other advocacy groups in the community, one, to get it reported, and two, to work with you so that the investigations and the prosecutions aredesigned with one objective in mind to eliminate hate..."
This executive order links Clinton's goals to the UN vision of controlled solidarity. For the Interagency Working Group would coordinate its efforts with "international human rights institutions, including the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the Special Rapporteurs and complaints procedures established by the United Nations Human Rights Commission."
Sec. 6, "Judicial Review, Scope, and Administration" gives an example of Clinton's ambiguous and misleading legal language: "(c) The term 'treaty obligations' shall mean treaty obligations as approved by the Senate pursuant to Article II, section 2, clause 2 of the United States Constitution."
This statement appears to be little more than a smoke screen, for the actual executive order extends far beyond ratified treaties or, rather, "our treaty obligations" (remember the first paragraph and Sec. 4 vi). Our president intends to create the American part of the United Nations' massive management system and monitoring process. He is betraying our nation into the hands of a global government with a newly established International Criminal Court with authority to prosecute its opposition. And he is ready to provide the technology the UN needs in order to track every person and community in the world. Once this monstrous system is in place, it may not matter whether human rights treaties are ratified or not. We will have yielded control of our lives and thoughts to an anti-Christian world government. Let's hope Congress will awaken to this threat, blocks this executive order, and refuse to fund any of its seditious programs.
Meanwhile, the deception grows. In his speech commemorating the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, our president gave a glimpse of the changing meaning of "rights" and "freedom":
"In the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded four essential human freedoms.
1. "The first is freedom of speech and expression -- everywhere in the world. 2. "The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way -- everywhere in the world. 3. "The third is freedom from want . . . . 4. "The fourth is freedom from fear . . . anywhere in the world . . . . The world order which we seek is the cooperation of free countries, working together in a friendly, civilized society."
The last two "freedoms", which apparently are now considered human rights, would require a totalitarian world government. The third "freedom" would require a global welfare system, and the fourth would require absolute control of human behavior -- no guns, no free speech, etc., except in the hands of elitist rulers.
Our Response
We shouldn't be surprised. The Bible tells us to prepare for a world government that would persecute all who refuse to conform to its ideology and group thinking. 11 Since Biblical Christianity is incompatible with the UN's global spirituality, Christians had better prepare to face persecution even in America.
Long ago, God showed us what to expect in this post-Christian era: "But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God. From such people turn away!"
Remember, separatism is intolerable to the UN. To "turn away" would violate its vision of social solidarity. So it's not surprising that the passage continues with this warning:
"...all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. But you must continue in the things which you have learned..." (2 Timothy 3:1-5,12-14)
It won't be easy to continue to stand firm in God's uncompromising Word when the world demands consensus. But there is no other safe position in this fast-changing world. Only our King can provide all the strength, wisdom, peace, and love we need for the battle.12 When we choose to follow Him, He strength becomes ours! His life in us will bring encouragement and hope to all around us. Remember, we are on the winning side. "Blessed is the people whose God is the Lord!"
The LORD is my light and my salvation;Whom shall I fear?The LORD is the strength of my life;Of whom shall I be afraid?"
Psalm 27:1
ENDNOTES
1. Apparently, some executive orders take effect immediately. Others provide more time for Congressional action. There seems to be a lack of agreement among Congressional aides on a clear standard or procedure.
2. Encyclopaedia Britannica (1968), Volume V, page 164.
3. http://www.cyberpatrol.com/cybernot/inqarea.htm [link now obsolete]
4. Deuteronomy 18:9-13, Romans 1:18-32 and I Corinthians 10:11.
5. The Declaration of Principles on Tolerance, adopted and signed by the Member States of the UNESCO on 16 November, 1995.
6. The Beijing Platform for Action, #258, #314. See also "A National Information System - Executive Order #13011, at www.crossroad.to/text/articles/eo13011-798.html
7. See "No Place to Hide" at www.crossroad.to/text/articles/NPHide10-98.html
8. In this case, "or other means of addressing." may refer to the UN plan outlined in a 1995 report titled Towards a Rapid Reaction Capability for the United Nations. Published by the Canadian government and written with the aid of an International Consultative Group, it calls for a "highly trained" UN Volunteer Force armed with America's latest surveillance and reconnaissance technology ready to carry out the "riskier operations" which national governments might forbid. Ponder some of its suggestions:
"This study's central objective is to recommend changes at all levels of the UN system which would give the UN an enhanced capability to respond rapidly to crisis situations...(p. iv)
"...the UN would need to create a database which could capture information provided by national authorities." (page 53)
"To enhance rapid reaction, the UN and Member States need to address... the management systems which should be put into place to ensure that national training programs are responsive to the UN's requirements." (page 54)
"The fact that the theoretically best solution is not at present politically feasible does not mean that the system must simply muddle on indefinitely in its present condition. A great deal can be achieved without constitutional change, by changes in such salient features as geography, legal mandates and behavior." Sir Brian Urquhart and Esrskine Childers (page 55)
"...surveillance technologies and information management systems could be integrated into an organization-wide system to enhance contingency planning." (57)
"Governments are sometimes reluctant to release their forces for duty... Even when Governments are disposed to concur the process of seeking authorization is often slow." (600
"As professional volunteers develop into a cohesive UN force, they can assume responsibility for some of the riskier operations mandated by the Council but for which troop contributors have been hesitant to contribute... Without the need to consult national authorities, the UN could cut response time significantly... As the 1995 Commission on Global Governance noted, "The very existence of an immediately available and effective UN Volunteer Force could be a deterrent."(62)
9. See "No Place to Hide," www.crossroad.to/text/articles/NPHide10-98.html
10. See "Workforce Development Means life-long Indoctrination."
11. Revelation 13.
12. Philippians 4:19.
Home Armor of God Christian Persecution His Word Articles

A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.~Herm Albright~

July 4th, 2009 -Iraq War Ends

http://www.nytimes-se.com/


Saturday, July 4th, 2009 Last Update: 8:42 AM ET
Today's Paper Video
Get Home Delivery Looking up 72°F

Iraq War Ends

U.S. Army helicopters begin moving troops and equipment from Saddam Hussein's former Baghdad palace. (COURTESY ARMY.MIL)
Ex-Secretary Apologizes for W.M.D. Scare
300,000 Troops Never Faced Risk of Instant Obliteration
By Frank Larimore
Ex-Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice reassured soldiers that the Bush Administration had known well before the invasion that Saddam Hussein lacked weapons of mass destruction.
Comments (36)
Court Indicts Bush on High Treason Charge
By Bart Garzon
George W. Bush, the 43rd President of the United States, was indicted Monday on charges of high treason.
Comments (135)
Troops to Return Immediately
By Jude Shinbin
Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom were brought to an unceremonious close today.
Comments (170)
Streets Come Alive as Relief and Exuberance Greet End of Conflicts
By Schuyler Frank
Thousands take to the streets to celebrate the announced end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.Comments (21)
After the War
Last to Die in Battle Remembered, American and Iraqi
Torture, Rendition "Not Such Good Ideas After All"
War Brides (and Husbands) Find Their Place in a New Iraq
A New New Deal for the 21st Century
Nation Sets its Sights on Building a Sane Economy
By T. Veblan
President Barack Obama has called for swift passage of his administration’s Safeguards for a New Economy (S.A.N.E.) bill. The omnibus economic package includes a federal maximum wage, mandatory "True Cost Accounting," a phased withdrawal from complex financial instruments, and other measures intended to improve life for ordinary Americans.
Comments (43)
The Economy
Maximum Wage Law Passes Congress
By J.K. Malone
Congress limits top salaries to fifteen times the minimum wage.
Comments (57)
Nationalized Oil To Fund Climate Change Efforts
By Marion K. Hubert
Congress has voted to place ExxonMobil, ChevronTexaco, and other major oil companies under public stewardship.
Comments (20)
Labor Dept. Launches Job Creation Program
By Robert Owen
The Department of Labor is scrambling to propose new standards that will affect every American worker.
Comments (23)
Education
Education Department Plans National Tax Base for Schools
By M.M. Bethune
Twenty-three states following the lead of a landmark decision in Ohio.
Comments
Congress Returns Civics to High School Curriculum
By Joseph Bristello
Congressional spokespeople announced a funding appropriation to return the subject of civics to high school curricula nationwide.
Comments (16)
All Public Universities To Be Free
By Mary K. Rawlings
A bill to eliminate tuition at public universities is making its way through Congress and is expected to pass within days.
Comments (18)
Infrastructure
Crumbling Infrastructure Brings Opportunities
By Charles Hochmanks
Advocates seek to focus investment on proven, sustainable technologies to help move the country away from its dependency on fossil fuels.
Comments
High-Speed Internet Hits Fast Track to Appalachia
By B. Vannevar
Massive public support pushes the Internet Freedom Preservation Act through both houses of Congress.
Comments (13)
New York Bike Path System Expanded Dramatically
By Mede Sivrac
Ninth Avenue and beyond.
Comments (16)
Society & Politics »
National Health Insurance Act Passes
The United States National Health Insurance Act is expected to be signed into law shortly.
Comments (23)
Popular Pressure Ushers Recent Progressive Tilt
Grassroots advocacy the source of sweeping legislation, study says.
Comments (12)
USA Patriot Act Repealed
The controversial USA PATRIOT Act was repealed by Congress by a vote of 99-1 in the Senate and 520 to 18 in the House.
Comments (21)
Opinion »
Friedman: The End of the Experts? Comments (114)
Editorial: Special Edition Comments (13)
Editorial: A Baboon Study Remembered Comments (10)
Editorial: Lobbyists are Citizens Too Comments (12) Video: NY Times Special Edition hits the streets
Business »
Big Boxes Appeal Eviction from Low-Income Neighborhoods
Wal-Mart, Costco, Sam's Club, K-Mart, and Target are challenging the Economic Independence Act which requires "big box" stores to phase out outlets in or near low-income neighborhoods
Comments (13)
More Business
Harvard Will Shut Business School Doors
Senate Gets Tough On "Limited Liability" to Rein in, Humanize Corporations
Public Relations Industry Forecasts a Series of Massive Layoffs



U.S.
World
U.S.
N.Y. / Region
Business
Technology
Sports
Science
Health
Opinion
Arts
Style
Travel
Education
http://www.nytimes-se.com/2009/07/04/court-indicts-bush-on-high-treason-charge/

Court Indicts Bush on High Treason Charge
By Bart Garzon Published: July 4th, 2009

WASHINGTON (AP) — George W. Bush, the 43rd President of the United States, was indicted Monday on charges of high treason. The charges, filed by Attorney General Russ Feingold late in the evening, allege that Mr. Bush, knowing full well that Iraq possessed no weapons of mass destruction, falsified information in order to pursue the disastrous Iraq War. (See “U.S. Knew No W.M.D.s in Iraq,” on Page A1, and the petition at www.democrats.com/pardon.)

The former President appeared perturbed by his own charges against him. (GAVIN BELLOWS/BOSTON GLOBE)

Source: New York Times/CBS News poll
Federal District Judge Michael Ratner denied Mr. Bush’s request to represent himself. Ratner is the former president of the Center for Constitutional Rights.
High treason is usually defined as participation in a war against one’s own country; attempting to overthrow its government; spying on its military, its diplomats, or its secret services for a hostile and foreign power; or attempting to kill its head of state.
“In this case, high treason has been interpreted to include pursuing an illegal and devastating war that has cost hundreds of billions of dollars and the lives of over 4,000 Americans and perhaps a million Iraqis, for essentially insane ends,” said Vincent Bugliosi, a former federal prosecutor whom Feingold named lead special prosecutor in the case. “In effect, the Iraq War amounted to a war against America,” added Bugliosi, who is also the author of the book, The Prosecution of George Bush for Murder.
Although the treason indictment came as no surprise to most observers, what was completely unexpected was the party who brought it.
“The case is highly unusual in a number of ways,” said Bugliosi, “not the least of which is that the defendant is actually accusing himself.”
In a press conference held close to midnight yesterday at his Crawford, Texas ranch, former President Bush cited his renewed Christian faith as the catalyst for this unprecedented action. “Last month, I had a conversation with Jesus Christ. A new conversation. And I’ve been very blessed to have been born again, again. This time, for real,” Mr. Bush read in a prepared statement to half a dozen stunned reporters.
“It’s taken a lot of soul searching, or more like deep-soul diving, I think is the term. But now I see that it was wrong to lead our nation to war under false pretenses. Millions have suffered for my sins, and I see now that it is only fitting that I should suffer as well.”
Mr. Bush’s self-accusation seems largely to have been plagiarized from years of accusations made against him in the press. It refers to his “political propaganda campaign to sell the war to the American people,” and describes how he and his team attempted to make the “W.M.D. threat and the Iraqi connection to terrorism appear certain, whereas in fact we knew there wasn’t one at all.”
“The death and economic collapse that resulted has been completely devastating to our nation and, most of all, to me,” read Mr. Bush’s indictment. “I want to make amends, and it is for this reason that I am requesting that I be indicted for high treason. I thank the court for allowing me to right my grave wrongs. Bring it on!”
Some analysts suggest that Mr. Bush’s self-indictment is part of a strategy to avoid the death penalty. Although treason carries a potential death sentence, Mr. Bush and his team of attorneys are seeking a triple life sentence without possibility of parole.
“We don’t want to be too cynical about Mr. Bush’s motives,” said a spokesperson for AfterDowningStreet.org, one of the main groups that had been pursuing Mr. Bush’s indictment. “But even if it doesn’t get moved to the I.C.C., requesting his own conviction is so unusual it could move some jurors, or even help with an insanity plea.”
A friend of Mr. Bush, speaking on condition of anonymity, revealed that Mr. Bush would attempt to move the case to the International Criminal Court, which does not have a death penalty, and was quietly pressing Secretary of State Naomi Klein to bring the U.S. under the court’s jurisdiction. In 2002, then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld rejected the I.C.C.’s jurisdiction, saying it was “unaccountable to the American people.”
Mr. Bush maintained his characteristically jovial manner throughout the proceedings. “I could be executed, but what good would that do anybody? Especially me. I think the nation would rather I spend a good long while considering what happened — not only the tragic end of hundreds of thousands of lives, but the end of American capitalism, that I liked, I sincerely liked,” Mr. Bush said. (See also “An Exclusive Interview With George W. Bush,” on Page A9.)
The treason charge does not address compensation for the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed in the war. It is expected that surviving family members of fallen American soldiers will file thousands of civil lawsuits alleging wrongful death.

http://www.nytimes-se.com/2009/07/04/senate-gets-tough-on-%e2%80%9climited-liability%e2%80%9d-to-rein-in-humanize-corporations/
Senate Gets Tough On “Limited Liability” to Rein in, Humanize Corporations
By Carlton Donally Published: July 4th, 2009
Digg
del-icio-us
technorati
Facebook
Yahoo!
Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, has launched a bold new “tough on crime” initiative that would imprison or fine shareholders for corporate crimes committed in their name. Punishment would depend on the severity of the crime and the number of shares owned.

John McCain reclaims “maverick” status with strict new sentencing to put corporate criminals behind bars.

An old prison being remodeled for white-collar criminals.
Mr. McCain outlined his unique two-tiered punishment program, which would punish corporations for legal infractions according to their severity. Mr. McCain explained that there would be two “suites” of punishment, for levels of crime roughly corresponding to misdemeanors and felonies.
In one “suite” — for “misdemeanors” like bilking taxpayers of seven-figure dollar amounts, overcharging consumers, attempting monopolies, and contributing to simple human troubles like asthma and brief bouts of homelessness — punishment would take the form of short- or long-term share confiscation. Dividends of confiscated shares would pay for remedial action, where possible, as well as public-good programs like health care.
“I know a number of people whose companies were players in the Savings and Loan scandal,” Mr. McCain said, “and they’re prepared to face the consequences. Remedies for serious problems are never easy, especially when they hit at the root.”
The second punishment “suite,” for “felonies” — spreading diseases, committing homicide or manslaughter, contributing to national disasters in the U.S. or abroad, large-scale bilking of taxpayers, etc. — would involve direct punishment of the shareholders in question.
Mr. McCain used Union Carbide’s 1984 Bhopal massacre, in which thousands of Indian villagers were killed by lethal gas, as an example of a crime that would be classified as a felony. While retroactive prosecutions based on new laws are usually not permissible, in such extreme cases they would be, as they were in the Nuremberg prosecutions of 1945.
In the Union Carbide example, Mr. McCain noted that each death would cost the company a “negligent homicide” charge, for approximately twenty years of incarceration each. Twenty years multiplied by 2000 equals 40,000 years in prison, with aggravating factors such as a demonstrated lack of remorse or compassion tripling the total.
This penalty would be divided among Union Carbide shareholders, each of whom could expect to spend from a few weeks to several years in prison, depending on the size of investment. A minimum penalty could be set by a judge — so that an investor with even a fraction of a share would be liable for, say, two weeks in jail. This would apply even to those who had invested via mutual funds, without knowing the precise direction of their investments.
Mr. McCain said that while “tough on crime” policy has been shown to be useless with humans, it would work with corporations. “Corporations are just machines, not like teenage kids. They can be forced to act as if they knew right from wrong.”
“Corporate behavior has become a very loud cry for ‘tough love,’” the governor said. “We’ve got to adapt to a changing world, and sometimes that means changing laws.”
“Fines are not punishment, they do not build character,” Mr. McCain said. “What’s a ten-million-dollar fine to a giant corporation? Fines seldom if ever affect the pocketbooks of shareholders or managers, those who make the decisions or power the machine. Hitting pockets and people directly is a different thing.”
Mr. McCain admitted that several major problems remain to be solved. The death penalty, for example, while often merited in corporate crime cases, had no obvious application — “We can’t talk about ‘little deaths’ here,” said Mr. McCain, making an obscure bilingual pun better left unexplained.
Also, the issue of global markets poses some problems, Mr. McCain said. “These penalties will eventually have to be agreed on by a global governing body like the W.T.O., not only here at home in Arizona or the U.S. Otherwise we may create a better market here, but the changes will be irrelevant in the bigger picture. And influencing such a powerful and state-independent body as the W.T.O. is a very involved process.”
The ultimate aim of the program, Mr. McCain said, is to help corporations achieve their long-term goals. “Corporations have spent the last century and a half trying to obtain all the legal rights of people,” Mr. McCain said. “They’re now technically persons, but they’re not really human. We owe it to them — and to our species — to help them finish their quest.”
Mr. McCain went on to explain that corporations still, even today, lack one distinguishing human characteristic: a conscience. “Corporations were invented to keep investors innocent of crimes committed with the help of their money, accidentally or not. But now that corporations have become legally almost human, they have to be taught that their actions have consequences.”
Mr. McCain called corporate efforts to obtain the legal rights of humans “compassionate greed,” and said that it was “not entirely about getting richer.”
“You’d have to be very cynical to think that corporations, when they won protection as ‘persons’ under the ‘Freed Slave’ Amendment, were thinking only of their own wealth,” Mr. McCain said. He was referring to the 14th Amendment, which had been designed to protect the rights of freed slaves, and which was used in 1886 to establish corporations as “natural persons” under the law.
“It’s clear that corporations just admire humans and what we have. We should be good hosts and help them however we can. Right now, that means making them responsible and responsive.”
While most experts scoff at the idea that corporations could actually become human beings, most agree that punishing corporations for the crimes they commit will at the very least have a positive effect on the world. “If each shareholder is personally responsible for corporate crimes, then you’ve got real controls — and without regulation!” said Mr. McCain.
Mr. McCain dismissed concerns that personal liability for corporate crimes might discourage individual investors from taking a risk. “People love to gamble,” he said, “and this will make it all very real.”
For those who do not thrive on such risks, Mr. McCain suggested that the mutual fund industry would easily adopt new decision-making processes, just as it has in the past. “The prime mechanism of regulation will be shareholder judgement. If investment in one company is likely to land you in jail, you’ll invest in another instead. Mutual fund companies will find it an exciting challenge to obtain and keep investor confidence. It will reinvigorate the industry, and in fact the whole concept of investment.”

Blog Talk on Friday nights 8:30PM/646-652-2633

Politics & News with AJA Talk Show From the Calendar of no_iraq_war_az
Date:
Friday November 14, 2008
Time:
8:30 pm - 9:30 pm
Author:
talkwithaja
Repeat:
This event repeats every Monday through Friday.
Type:
Appointment (Private)
Location:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/aja
News and political talk main stream media does not make public or will not say - live at 11:30 PM EST Monday through Friday nights, http://www.blogtalkradio.com/aja .Live callers; please call in during the show at (646) 652-2633.

Codex Alimentarius

Codex Alimentarius P1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmrF9KjlGsc

http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/2004/11/02/stop_codex_rath_protests_plans_for_supplements.htm

November 02, 2004
Print this article
'Stop Codex' - Rath Protests Plans For Supplements
Categories
Health
Legislation
The Nutrition Committee of Codex Alimentarius, an international standard-setting body of the UN's Food and Agricultural Organization, is deliberating harmonized world-wide guidelines for vitamin and mineral supplements in Bonn, Germany this week, starting Monday, 1 November. The proposal goes back ten years and was introduced by the German delegation to the committee. At the time the text seemed extremely restrictive, prompting me to comment in a rather critical way. Since then, the proposal has inched its way through the legislative machinery of the international agency. A major change was to advocate "scientific risk assessment" instead of RDA dosage limits for vitamins and minerals, but detractors say that the rules are a ploy to drastically limit supplement use.
Pro-supplements protest at Codex assembly, Bonn
By far the most vociferous critic is a German medical doctor Matthias Rath who says that vitamins, if used properly in combination with other nutritional elements, could practically wipe out heart disease and prevent a number of other degenerative illnesses. Two British researchers, Steve Hickey and Hilary Roberts agree. They argue that vitamin C in high doses could be used to prevent and fight heart disease, infections and even cancer, if only used in proper dosage. They strongly challenge the science behind RDAs, the recommended dietary allowances, which are set at 60 to 90 milligrams a day, depending on what country you live in. Vitamin C in fact strengthens the collagen fibres that make up a good part of our body structure. Collagen also ensures the flexibility of blood vessels and supplying the nutrient in copious amounts is said to have a protective effect.
Dr. Rath has worked closely with Linus Pauling, the double nobel laureate who advocated use of vitamin C in dosages of several grams a day - Pauling died some years ago at age 92. When Rath first discovered that vitamin C could potentially eliminate heart disease, his first trip was to Switzerland, to offer the discovery to Roche, one of the principal producers of vitamin C. He says he was told that the proposal would interfere with drugs being introduced at the time. In fact, statin drugs have become a huge source of revenue for pharmaceutical giants, netting the companies billions of dollars every year. Lipitor, one of these drugs, is an absolute blockbuster drug, but it is plagued with important side effects - muscle pains and in some cases a breakdown of tissue leading to death.
Close to city of Bonn, the former capital of Germany, where the Codex deliberations are hosted by the German government, several hundred of Rath's supporters gathered to protest the proposed limitations on vitamin and mineral availability on the eve of the deliberations. Such protests are almost a fixture that characterizes the yearly meetings as much as the diversity of delegates, who come from every continent.
Charging that pharmaceutical companies profit from the continuation of disease, rather than providing the nutrients needed to prevent health problems, Rath painted a provocative history of big pharma, linking the IG Farben chemical cartel to World War II as well as to more recent armed conflicts.
On Monday, Rath supporters staged a street demonstration sporting colored balloons and angry speeches, calling on several hundred delegates from some 50 countries to abandon plans to control nutritional substances. "Health is a human right" and "Stop Codex" were slogans, chanted outside the conference center, provoking one pharma delegate's reaction: "This man is a criminal. He gives people false hope, making millions in the process. We would love to supply all those vitamins, but the science just does not support what Rath claims. We have studied vitamins and they just don't work in the way we hoped they would."
Certainly there is a clash of opposing philosophies, if not personalities. But we may yet find out who is right - because the Codex guideline, which may pass the Committee today, does mandate a review of vitamin science. Risk assessment will have to examine both sides of the coin, not only the potential dangers but also the claimed benefits. So while finding out whether vitamins are indeed as safe as many consumers and doctors say, we might also find some surprising news about their effectiveness in keeping us healthy.
Stay tuned.
.
Here is a report on a protest event organized by Dr. Rath on the eve of the Codex meeting, and the speech given by Dr. Rath on the occasion. Rath does not mince words when it comes to pointing out who is responsible for much of what's wrong in the world today. In a fast-paced and gripping account he traces the history of big pharma's involvement in world events and - ultimately - the current trend of war and erosion of personal freedom.
Health is an inalienable human rightFirm protest in Bonn against Codex plans
On Sunday 31 October the Dr. Rath Health Foundation welcomed an international audience to the large auditorium of Bad Godesburg municipal hall in Bonn. "Stop Codex" was the urgent appeal, with the message: "We say 'No' to the unscrupulous plans of the Codex Alimentarius Commission to prohibit free access to natural remedies and information about them." Since Monday 1 November the Commission has been meeting again in Bonn, under German patronage, to drive forward goals which wholly disregard human needs and rights.
Dr. Matthias Rath left no doubt about who is responsible for the Codex plans: none other than the pharmaceutical cartel, which for countless years has been promising health but spreading illness. The profits of the pharmaceutical investment industry depend on the continued survival and expansion of its markets in patented drugs, genetically modified foods and synthetic food additives - despite the fact that there is an alternative to ineffectual pharmaceutical medicine, embodied in scientifically based, effective natural remedies without side effects, such as Cellular Medicine.
The large audience attending the event at Bad Godesberg municipal hall clearly demonstrated that it was composed of people intent on taking responsibility themselves: responsibility for preventing the pharmaceutical cartel from continuing to turn the human body into a market place for its "business with disease".
Dr. Aleksandra Niedzwiecki, director of the Dr. Rath Research Institute in California, gave information about Cellular Medicine's latest, encouraging research results, highlighting the fact that the strength of this natural approach to medicine lies in its scientific foundation.
Dr. Wong Ang Peng from Malaysia gave a committed and passionate lecture on the successes he has been able to achieve with the help of Cellular Medicine in combating endemic diseases such as high blood pressure, stroke, diabetes and cancer.
Paul Taylor, as British expert on the "Codex Alimentarius", supported Dr. Rath's appeal to protest actively against the Codex plans. He encouraged the audience and people throughout the world to send e-mails and, in particular, letters and faxes to members of the German and European parliaments, and decisively reject plans to prohibit free access to natural remedies. "All of us must act. Just think about it: the life you save might be your own," said Taylor, giving the audience something to ponder.
Adv. Anthony Brink, high court advocate and former magistrate from South Africa, reported on his battle against the pharmaceutical drug business based on AIDS. Expensive, ineffective anti-AIDS drugs are sold there – a medical catastrophe which harms whole generations of socially disadvantaged AIDS patients.
The programme of accompanying events in the municipal hall's foyer met with a very warm response. At the Dr. Rath Health Foundation stand, hundreds of signatures were collected against the Codex Alimentarius plans. Werner Pilniok spoke of the aims of his patient association, which include providing a communication forum for patients harmed by pharmaceutical medicine.
On Monday 1 November a large crowd of people gathered at the Brotfabrik cultural centre in the Beuel district of Bonn, in order to join a protest march with Dr. Rath past the building in which the Codex Commission had on the same day begun its meeting to realise its unscrupulous aims. Banners showed their absolute determination to continue the protest against the plans, regulations and laws being driven forward to protect the global pharmaceutical market. "Stop Codex, free access to natural remedies" declared this group of critics battling for a healthy world. When the protesters reached their destination there were several addresses, in which Dr. Rath, Dr. Niedzwiecki and other committed doctors and members of the Dr. Rath Health Alliance gave their solid vote in favour of free access to vitamins and natural remedies. They appealed to Codex delegates not simply to implement the profit-orientated guidelines of the pharmaceutical cartel, but to listen to their own conscience. For health is an inalienable human right that no one has the right to curtail.
Dr. Rath speech Codex 2004Responsibility for Health, Peace and Social Justice
We meet here today to raise our voices against one of the greatest crimes in human history: the attempt to deny the right of free access to natural health, the right to health itself.
Global economic interests of a whole branch of industry, the pharmaceutical industry, aim to deprive us of this right. The commercial basis of this branch of industry is the perpetuation and spread of illnesses as a billion-dollar market for the sale of its investment commodities - thousands of pharmaceutical drugs - which are synthetic, patentable and associated with severe side effects.
Yet the unscrupulous Codex plans are not a sign of the pharmaceutical cartel's strength. They are a direct reaction to a breathtaking breakthrough in vitamin research and Cellular Medicine, which lays the foundation for the eradication of today's endemic diseases.
Never before in human history has a single medical breakthrough been able to eradicate so many endemic diseases at one time, and save so many human lives, as the discovery of the importance of vitamins, minerals and other vital factors of cell metabolism in preventing cellular deficiencies and illnesses.
Never before in human history has a single medical breakthrough been able to help reduce the major causes of death, both in industrialised countries and also developing countries, to a fraction of their current level. In industrialised countries, heart attack, stroke, high blood pressure, cardiac insufficiency, cancer, osteoporosis and other endemic diseases are being successfully combated; in developing countries this extends to the consequences of malnutrition and susceptibility to tuberculosis, Aids and other infectious diseases.
Never before in human history has the goal of attaining a world without disease been as close as it is today. The most important obstruction on the path to this goal is the opposition of the pharmaceutical industry - a branch of industry based on the perpetuation of endemic diseases.
Never before in human history has an industry risked the health and lives of millions of people for as long and as systematically as the pharmaceutical industry, with the aim of making billion-dollar profits from the continued suffering and misery of millions of patients.
Never before in human history has there been a more comprehensively fraudulent business than the 'pharmaceutical business with disease".
The pharmaceutical cartel promises to deliver the commodity "health", cashes in to the tune of billions and just delivers more and more illness. As compelling proof of this global deception, one can cite the fact that not a single endemic disease has been eradicated over decades. On the contrary, the billion-dollar costs of perpetuating these illnesses are ruining private and public budgets worldwide. The pharmaceutical cartel's Codex plans are, more than ever before in human history, an unscrupulous attempt to sustain a multi-billion, global system of fraud and deception by misusing governments and national and international parliaments to pass protection and muzzling laws, and to prevent affordable health care based on natural, non-patentable remedies.
Never before in human history has a greater responsibility fallen on ageneration's shoulders than on ours here and today. Either we will nowsucceed in liberating humanity from the scourge of the "business withdisease", or this unscrupulous branch of industry will continue toenslave humanity for generations to come.
We have come here today to show our strength and our resolve: no one has the right to prevent our free access to natural remedies. No one has the right to endanger our health intentionally by withholding vital information. Health is a human right for us and for people the world over!
From tomorrow on, representatives of the pharmaceutical cartel's global operations and its political henchmen will meet here in Bonn behind closed doors, under the patronage of the German federal government. The aim of this meeting is, once again, to try to enforce a global prohibition on effective natural remedies which are free of side effects. This first worldwide protection law of the globalisation era aims to defend a whole branch of industry from collapse. For it has long been clear that vitamin therapies and other non-patentable natural remedies have become effective and economical alternatives to pharmaceutical medicine.
In order to implement these pharmaceutical cartel protection laws, the cartel and its political henchmen are spreading the myth of the supposed side effects of vitamins and other natural remedies, deceiving citizens into believing that the Codex Alimentarius is a kind of "consumer protection regulation".
This threadbare claim is the reverse of the truth. No one has yet died from the non-existent side effects of vitamins and other natural remedies. But by contrast over a million people die each year from the known fatal side effects of prescribable pharmaceutical drugs. The pharmaceutical drug VIOXX, which has now been withdrawn, was taken by over 80 million people throughout the world. Even after withdrawal of this drug, the time bomb of long-term side effects is ticking on in these people. According to the US drug registration authority, umpteen thousand patients will die of VIOXX-induced heart attacks in the next few years, although they have long since stopped taking it.
In view of the Lipobay and Vioxx scandals, it is incomprehensible that the governments of the world do not step up the search for natural alternatives, but continue to back the fraudulent pharmaceutical business with disease.
We say: we need consumer protection against the side effects of pharmaceutical pills, and not against the supposed side effects of vitamins!
Participants at the Codex Alimentarius conference here in Bonn next week bear responsibility for the continued deaths of millions of people from diseases which should long ago have been relegated to the past.
We reject any democratic legitimacy which the Codex Alimentarius may claim to have. With the exception of a few independent participants - some of whom are here amongst us today - most members of this so-called commission of experts are arbitrarily appointed representatives who promote the interests of the global pharmaceutical cartel.
We reject the right of Gerhard Schröder, as patron of this unscrupulous event, to ignore the health and vital interests of 80 million people in Germany, and to misuse millions of euros from German taxpayers to fund an event organised by the global pharmaceutical lobby. We condemn him for helping to implement the pharmaceutical cartel's Codex plans to keep people throughout the world in submission to its yoke.
We also reject any legitimacy the UN may claim to have to implement bsuch unscrupulous plans, supposedly on behalf of the world's citizens, which will lead to the predictable death of hundreds of millions of people. With its decision in June of this year to retrospectively legitimise the invasion of Iraq, a war declared to be an infringement of international law has been justified after the event. With this fatal decision the 16 members of the World Security Council - including Joschka Fischer - have knowingly destroyed the UN charter and the international legal system based on it. From now on any country is fair game for global commercial and military interests, and the UN charter, the sole protection for 150 small countries, has been irredeemably destroyed.
In view of these sobering facts, we have to ask: What legitimacy can we still accord to UN organisations - WHO and FAO - in whose name the unscrupulous Codex plans are to be implemented? The plain answer is that the destruction of the UN charter in June of this year has also destroyed the legitimacy of UN organisations, which are all based on this charter.
And that is why all decisions which the Codex Alimentarius Commission takes next week will have no international legality, and why no country in the world will be obliged to adhere to them.
In contrast to the undemocratic Codex event, we represent the interests of millions of people in Germany, Europe and the whole world. We are not here today for ourselves alone, but in order to represent the health and vital interests of 6 billion people, who are directly threatened by the Codex Alimentarius plans. The fact that the great majority of these people have not yet heard of the Codex Alimentarius is further evidence of the fact that the pharmaceutical cartel and its henchmen can only operate in the shadows and behind closed doors, and - like vampires - avoid daylight.
On behalf of the world's people we now urge the members of the Codex Alimentarius Commission to relinquish the pharmaceutical cartel's unscrupulous Codex plans immediately.
Free access to natural remedies must not be restricted, but instead promoted.
Natural health is a human right and must be anchored in law in all countries of the world.
We have been accused of labouring under a mistaken conspiracy theory in our battle against the Codex Alimentarius. This argument is easy to refute: one only has to take a clear look at the tendencies at work in the pharmaceutical business with disease, and be familiar with the history of this branch of industry's systematic development through the course of the 20th century.
Let us look firstly at the tendencies underlying the pharmaceutical investment industry. These can be summarised in a few points:
1. The pharmaceutical industry is an investment industry which does not profit from promoting the health of human beings but from the perpetuation and spread of diseases.
2. The speculative commodities of this branch of industry are synthetic molecules which are patentable. It is these patent fees which determine "return on investment", i.e. the profit margin.
3. The prevention and the eradication of diseases destroy multi-billion sales markets for the pharmaceutical industry and are thus combated by the latter. That is why over 80 percent of the pharmaceutical drugs marketed today are not proven to cure, but just repress symptoms.
4. In order to conceal and perpetuate this multi-billion fraudulent business, the pharmaceutical industry primarily invests its profits in making whole social domains such as medicine, the media and politics dependent upon it. The biggest fraudulent business in human history functions in an astonishingly simple way: millions of people are promised the commodity "health", but what is delivered is in fact just more and more illness - thus creating ever new sales markets.
5. Vitamins and other scientifically based natural remedies threaten the survival of the multi-billion pharmaceutical investment industry for two reasons: firstly they are not patentable and are thus unsuited as an investment industry's speculative commodities. Secondly, and still more importantly, they eradicate the cellular causes of endemic diseases and thus prevent the perpetuation of these endemic diseases as multi-billion sales markets for pharmaceutical drugs.
6. The pharmaceutical investment business with disease and the worldwide use of vitamin therapies to eradicate illnesses are mutually incompatible. It will be either the financial interests of a handful of pharmaceutical shareholders that win the day - or the health interests of six billion people. Both together will not work.
7. Illnesses will continue to exist for as long as there is a branch of industry which earns multi-billion profits from the continued existence of these illnesses. Only by getting rid of the pharmaceutical business with disease will humanity succeed in freeing itself from today's endemic diseases.
Now let us turn briefly to a short survey of the history of the pharmaceutical industry:
At the end of the 19th century, the patentability of synthetic molecules was developed as the foundation of the pharmaceutical investment industry. Aspirin and other chemical substances were the first medicines representative of this new investment business with disease.
In 1915 the oil billionaire Rockefeller established the Rockefeller Foundation, using its charitable status as a cover for targeted investment in the development of a new multi-billion industry, the pharmaceutical industry.
The global greed of the US Rockefeller cartel and the German IG Farben cartel - the latter consisting of Bayer, BASF and Höchst - increasingly collided. On 9 November 1929 an historic agreement was signed: the two cartels divided the world between them. The Rockefeller Group was promised the global oil industry, while IG Farben took the global chemical industry for itself.
But IG Farben did not keep this agreement, for it still had an ace up its sleeve. Bayer, BASF and Hoechst became the biggest election donors for Hitler's rise to power. IG Farben's investments in these politicians initially seemed to have paid off. Whenever the Wehrmacht invaded a European country, IG Farben was already in the passenger seat and seized the chemical industries and oil fields of Europe free of charge.
Isn't it astonishing? Today's rulers want to convince us, the people of Germany and the world, that the Second World War was a kind of accident of history, triggered by a psychopath named Hitler. The fact is, however, that wars, both now and in the past, have always had primarily economic motives. The Second World War was no exception.
At the Nuremberg war crimes trial against 24 IG Farben bosses, the chief US prosecutor Tellford Taylor said that without the financial interests of IG Farben, Hitler's rise to power and the Second World War would not have been possible. Fritz Ter Meer and other IG Farben executive board members were sentenced to imprisonment for many years.
But instead of a wholesale break-up of the IG Farben cartel, the Rockefeller Group's influence amongst the victorious powers succeeded in papering over the cracks. The Rockefeller Group - in other words, its former competitor - took over the share package of IG Farben.
Former war criminals such as Ter Meer took on directorship of the resurrected pharmaceutical and chemical Groups Bayer, BASF and Hoechst. A certain Ludwig Erhard played a leading role in these brazen staff appointments. He publicly declared that the choice of post-war directors was made on the basis of the specialist knowledge and experience of the IG Farben managers in the "commercial and chemical-technical field".
And since back-scratching is mutual, the former IG Farben man Ludwig Erhard was soon appointed finance minister in post-war Germany, and even German Chancellor in 1963.
As well as being the year when Ludwig Erhard became Chancellor and Fritz Ter Meer resumed chairmanship of the Bayer Group's board of directors, 1963 was also when the German government took over chairmanship of the UN's so-called "experts' commission" to protect worldwide pharmaceutical interests. This was given the as yet unknown name of "Codex Alimentarius".
The Codex Alimentarius meeting in Bonn next week is thus embedded in a long historical tradition of forces which have never shown any concern for the interests of human beings, but have always only been serviceable political puppets of their cartel masters.
In 1982, a former pharmaceutical spokesman of BASF seized the top job in the German federal government through a so-called constructive vote of no confidence. His name was Helmut Kohl. The pharmaceutical cartel had given Kohl a leg-up from being an ordinary BASF member of staff to someone who occupied the central corridors of power. For 16 years Helmut Kohl promoted the pharmaceutical cartel's global political interests from the Chancellor's office of the Federal Republic of Germany.
On 21 June 1997, all these links and the role of Kohl - who was still Chancellor - as the puppet of the pharmaceutical cartel, were revealed for the first time. In my talk at Chemnitz municipal hall, I also pointed out that the pharmaceutical cartel is itself the biggest obstacle to humanity's self-emancipation from endemic diseases. This talk and its circulation in the context of the incipient Health Alliance, was the start of a process of awakening in Germany, which culminated initially in the impressive election defeat of Chancellor Kohl one year later, in September 1998.
With the election defeat of its political henchman Helmut Kohl, pharmaceutical investment circles, mainly coordinated through Deutsche Bank, sought a new home. Their choice fell on the USA, where a certain George Walker Bush was starting to coordinate the global interests of the Rockefeller Group via the White House and the Pentagon.
In order to facilitate this enormous transfer of the pharmaceutical investment industry from its former stronghold in Germany to its new stronghold in the USA, it was decided that Deutsche Bank would merge with the Bankers Trust of America, one of the biggest US investment banks. Everything had been perfectly prepared, but then it happened:
US government official Alan Hevisi, who was responsible for financial mergers in New York, threatened to blast the multi-billion merger sky-high by arguing that Deutsche bank had not yet paid compensation for its past transgressions in financing the Nazi rise to power, the Second World War and construction of Auschwitz concentration camp.
To enable the pharmaceutical investment industry to move to the USA nevertheless, a diversionary manoeuvre had to be instigated which would distract the attention of the media and the international public until the investment bank merger had been signed and sealed.
This was the beginning of the Kosovo war. Schröder and Fischer became the engines driving this war forwards. When Oskar Lafontaine - then the third most powerful man in German political corridors - refused to countenance the war, he had to go. On 24 March 1999 the first bombs fell on Kosovo.
Three months and more than 10,000 dead later, on 4 June 1999, the Kosovo conflict was declared over in a triumphant statement by Federal Chancellor Schröder in Cologne. On the same day, 4 June 1999, Deutsche Bank announced that its deal with Bankers Trust of America had been signed and sealed. Gerhard Schroeder allowed his name to be celebrated: the Kosovo peace declaration was given the name "PaxSchroeder".
Under cover of the Kosovo war, the whole pharmaceutical investment industry had transferred from the home of the defeated pharmaceutical puppet Kohl to that of the new pharmaceutical puppet George W. Bush.
It was not only the pharmaceutical investment industry which moved with Deutsche Bank, but also the whole know-how for bringing governments to power against the will of the people, and stage managing wars and crises in order to pass emergency legislation which then open the doors wide for cartel interests. The parallels between the Reichstag fire in Berlin in 1933 and 11 September in New York are not a matter of coincidence.
The day after tomorrow, on 2 November 2004, the new political puppet of the pharmaceutical cartel will stand for re-election. If he is elected, emergency legislation to shore up the global power of the pharmaceutical cartel will be implemented, if need be with military force.
Humanity is currently undergoing one of the most critical phases in its history. Only those who see what is happening, who are willing to learn more, will be able to stand up to these powers.
The Dr. Rath Health Foundation and the members of our Health Alliance have seen that these are the same interests which, on a global scale, are responsible for illness and war. We are working to promote a healthy, peaceful and just world. If you believe that you too must do something, talk to us and commit yourself.
We appeal to the world's people to join us with the aim of liberating the earth from today's endemic diseases. Help us to make health an inalienable human right. No one has the right to withhold vital health information from us.
We urge the world's politicians to combat the pharmaceutical industry's plans to pass laws which prohibit dissemination of vital health information on vitamin therapies and natural remedies. We say "No" to the pharmaceutical cartel's Codex plans!
Together let us use the breakthrough in natural medicine research and Cellular Medicine to eradicate endemic diseases for this and all future generations. Let us work together for a healthy, peaceful and just world!
Many thanks.
See also related:
Emergency Citizens Petition to U.S. CODEX Office and other actions you can take to thwart the Codex Alimentarius agenda of controlling and progressively eliminating preventive and curative food supplements as a personal health option.
Researchers: Vitamin C Deficiency Widespread - Link to Heart Disease, Infections, Cancer
Codex - The Facts by James Gormley - Citizens for Health
Codex Commission Agrees on Supplement Safety Approach
Codex and the Titanic's Deck Chairs

posted by Sepp Hasslberger on Tuesday November 2 2004updated on Saturday September 24 2005
Print this article
TrackBack
URL of this article:http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/2004/11/02/stop_codex_rath_protests_plans_for_supplements.htm

Related Articles
Codex Alimentarius – A threat to your vitamin supplements?Codex Alimentarius is an international standard-setting body dealing with how to safely process and store food products, avoiding hazards to our health. For about ten years, the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses has been mulling over a guideline for vitamin and mineral supplements, originally proposed by the German delegation to this committee, presumably to eliminate dangers from these additions of vital nutrients to our nutrition.... [read more]March 22, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger
Codex Nutrition Committee: Supplement Guidelines FinalTuesday 2 November 2004 - The Codex Alimentarius Nutrition Committee sitting in a week-long conclave here in Bonn, formerly the capital of Germany, has concluded its deliberations of proposed international Guidelines for Vitamin and Mineral Supplements. I am sitting in this meeting together with Scott Tips and Paul Taylor of the National Health Federation, one of the only consumer-centered bodies allowed in the meetings, and certainly the only NGO that... [read more]November 03, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger
Codex: WHO/FAO Told Nutrient Risk Assessment Must Consider BenefitsIn a submission to the FAO/WHO nutrient risk assessment project, Dr. Robert Verkerk, Director of the Alliance for Natural Health charges that assessment of the possible risks of nutrient overdose must also consider the beneficial effects of nutrients. He says that risk assessments undertaken to date "are not based on a sufficiently rational scientific platform" and "will provide misleading information for policy decision-makers". At stake is the continued availability of... [read more]December 16, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger
South Africa Opposes Codex Rule on Food Health InformationThe international food standard setting body, Codex Alimentarius has been deliberating a giudeline to determine what information food product labels may contain. The draft guideline, which is ready to be adopted at the next meeting of the Codex Alimentarius Commission in Geneva, Switzerland, to be held from 28 June to 3 July 2004, says that no information may be given regarding any food's effects for the prevention, alleviation or cure... [read more]June 12, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger
Pharmaceutical corporations accused of Genocide before ICC in The HagueJune 14, 2003 - The Hague Pharmaceutical corporations and individual executives have been accused of genocide and crimes of war before the International Criminal Court in The Hague. The charges, which also involve accusations of war crimes against US President George W. Bush, UK Prime Minister Tony Blair and other top political figures, are contained in a detailed complaint filed with the ICC by Dr. Mathias Rath. Pharmaceutical companies including... [read more]June 23, 2003 - Sepp Hasslberger
Codex: Labelling Committee Asked to Allow Information on Food Preventive EffectsThe Codex Alimentarius Committee on Food Labelling in its recent meeting in Montreal, Canada, heard a proposal of the Republic of South Africa, to re-think its rules which prohibit food manufacturers saying or implying that a food may aid in the prevention or cure of a disease. Although various foods clearly do prevent and even cure diseases, any claims for such effects are strictly limited to pharmaceutical products registered as... [read more]May 25, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger

Readers' Comments
I am a user of vitamins and other nutritional supplements. I strongly disagree with CODEX. I beleive that their intension of taking supplements off our counters is simply for money purpose's, everything is. They just want to take away our natural ways of getting cured because its the best and it works. They plan on keeping people sick because that is how they will make their money. It's like this:sick people equals money, healthy people equals no money! I honestly think that everyone needs to spread the word, and stop CODEX from happening.
Posted by: Marisol Avila on April 10, 2005 01:39 AM

What I don't understand with this is how come the supplements/vitaminscompanies that do real good business in the US don't seem to be concerned with this. I have emailed two major vitamins & supplements makers with an article about CODEX ALIMENTARIS and never received anything from them...not even an acknowledgemen of receipt.
If this passes and becomes law here in the US, it will destroy a very profitable and useful industry.
Why is there no one standing up and creating an awareness of the matter? The doctor who wrote the article emailed me back and told me it will start being implemented in June and become full on in August. And yet, no vitamins makers is doing anything about it.
Boggle the mind, doesn't it?
Posted by: Yves Vincent on April 12, 2005 12:12 AM

Yves,
Codex is not immediately applicable in the US. It is an international agreement to set standards for foods, and is more an example for countries to follow rather than a directly enforceable law.
Nevertheless, Codex is part of a trend of international harmonization which also is present in the US. The FDA would only be too happy to limit supplement access in the US, but it has to go through Congress to do so. The aim seems to be eliminating competition for big pharma.
Codex is the red flag that gets raised before the storm and yes, as you say, the vitamin companies are not up to speed on the issue. They are still "stuck in a win" of the 1994 DSHEA and the feeling seems to be that nothing can ever happen to the mighty supplements industry in the U.S.
See this article by Tim Bolen: http://www.quackpotwatch.org/opinionpieces/Codex.htm
Posted by: Sepp on April 12, 2005 12:56 PM