SPOTLIGHT EMAIL NEWSLETTER #26


Bank Scam Branches Across Atlantic

Forty billion dollars stolen from U.S. taxpayers are only the "tip of the
iceberg."

EXCLUSIVE TO THE SPOTLIGHT

By Gregory Douglas

What international law enforcement agencies now call the biggest criminal
money laundering scandal in history has its roots in official Washington
idealism and Russian criminal greed.

While none of American idealism ever penetrated into the former Soviet
Union, high level of Russian criminal greed quickly found its way inside the
Washington Beltway, where it was embraced at the highest levels.

What American investigative officials term the tip of the iceberg of theft,
graft and corruption, appears in the investigations into the activities of
the once-reputable old Bank of New York. In spite very high level attempts
on the part of the Clinton administration to suppress it, the entire iceberg
is slowly surfacing.

Initial reports of "possibly $2 million" in laundering money has grown to
"at least $40 billion" according to Swiss and American investigators, many
of whom have revealed inside details on condition of strict confidentiality.

Much of the documentary information about this wholesale theft has come from
Swiss banking sources and has been made available to members of the American
media. Almost none of it has been used

Critics contend the thrust of the media is to downplay the identities of the
players in the massive criminal operation in the Russian Republic and in the
United States.

The bulk of the billions involved are American taxpayer dollars, most of
which were aggressively sought by the Clinton administration, pushed through
a Congress kept ignorant of the insolvency of Russian and distributed to
eager hands in Russia by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World
Bank.

This money, ostensibly, intended to assist a new, free Russia, was intended
for the benefit of the Russian economy in general and the people of Russia
in specific.

What happened in fact was that a pervasive group of Russians, with ties to
Swiss banks and Israeli intelligence organs managed to use the money to gain
control of major blocks of former Soviet business concerns.

Instead of using the money to rebuild the shattered socialist economy, this
clique of young businessmen proceeded to sell off the assets they acquired
and ship the money out of the country as quickly as possible.

Although initial American hopes for a rebuilding of a free Russian economy
were quickly dashed, the flood of looted money flowing into the United
States through Western banks was not unwelcome in administration circles.

 The official posture was that great success anticipated for the prospect of
a new Russian free market just around a mythical, and ever distant, corner.
Critics contend members of the Clinton administration quickly became aware
of the immense flood of stolen money being laundered into the United States.

Efforts to pump more money into Russia are, as of this writing, still being
frantically endorsed by Treasury and State Department officials in spite of
an extensive number of highly negative reports from American, British and
Swiss government agencies and financial institutions.

A significant amount of stolen money entering American banks has found its
way into the pockets of top U.S. officials. Vice President Al Gore has been
one of the most powerful advocates of the Russian bail-out programs.

Gore has gone to great lengths to ignore and suppress any public criticism
of its dismal failure. Critics say the vice president cannot copy Clinton's
eager solicitation of Red Chinese intelligence agency money, so he has
turned instead to his friends in the New Russian criminal oligarchies.

The present criminal scandal also has three major points to its composition.
The first point in this triangle of immense theft and corruption is in
Moscow, the second in Washington and the third in Tel Aviv.

The Swiss have become increasingly angry at the American Jewish community
for its savage extraction of money from the country. The Swiss are, quite
simply, engaging in "payback" by investigating the criminal activities of
Russian and Israeli financial entities in their country.

The Russians are outraged that money intended to rebuild their shattered
economy is being looted by what they call "internationalist" thieves.

Leaks from American sources stem from a growing disgust on the part of
honest U.S. law enforcement agencies at the growing, criminal activities of
those who now control the government of both republics.


Study Finds Local Cops Are Armed, Prepared for War

Police sporting combat boots, full-body armor, "ninja"-style hoods, grenade
launchers and fully automatic weapons? No, this is not war-torn Yugoslavia,
or drug-infested Colombia. It's the United States. And as one researcher put
it: "It's the militarization of Mayberry."

EXCLUSIVE TO THE SPOTLIGHT

By Christopher J. Petherick

A 911 police dispatcher at the sheriff's office in Jasper, Fla., with a
population of 3,000, gets a call about a possible drug-related shooting. Not
wanting to take any chances, four of the town's seven officers from the City
Police Department arrive on the scene with fully-automatic M-16s provided by
the federal government to investigate.

Sound like the delusions of some paranoid nut?

Not according to a new report by Diane Cecilia Weber for the Cato Institute,
a Washington-based think tank, called Warrior Cops, The Ominous Growth of
Paramilitarism in American Police Departments.

"Over the past 20 years Congress has encouraged the U.S. military to supply
intelligence, equipment and training to civilian police. That encouragement
has spawned a culture of paramilitarism in American law enforcement," Weber
said.

Evidenced by recent events such as the siege at Waco, where participation by
federal law enforcement with the assistance of U.S. military and National
Guard resulted in the death 76 Americans, police across the country are
slowly being transformed from your friendly, neighborhood peace officers
into a well-trained soldiers, the report concludes.

But it's not just the equipment that is changing police says Weber. It's
their whole manner of thinking that is shifting.

Special police units now regularly train with U.S. Special Forces such as
Navy Seals and Army Rangers.

The problem with this is that police are now trained in a military
mentality. Police traditionally have been taught to de-escalate situations,
using minimum force to deliver a suspect to a court of law. Now, special
tactics units are instructed as a soldier during boot camp, "to use maximum
damage on enemy personnel."

Weber writes:

State and local police departments are increasingly accepting the military
as a model for their behavior and outlook. The sharing of training and
technology is producing a shared mind set. The problem is that the mind set
of the soldier is simply not appropriate for the civilian police officer.
Police officers confront not an "enemy" but individuals who are protected by
the Bill of Rights.
Confusing the police function with the military function can lead to
dangerous and unintended consequences-such as unnecessary shootings and
killings.
And your little town is not immune.

Weber cites a 1997 study of SWAT teams by Peter Kraska and Victor Kappeler
out of Eastern Kentucky University. According to their report, nearly 90
percent of police departments in towns with populations over 50,000 maintain
special weapons and tactics units (SWAT). Seventy percent of law enforcement
units in town under 50,000 also have them.

Surveys circulated among law enforcement officials by Kraska and Kappeler
reveal a frightening trend. Since police forces keep SWAT teams on staff,
"mission creep" or the urge to use special tactical weapons units in regular
policing is on the rise.

Kraska and Kappeler asked police officials if they use SWAT to patrol
communities. One-hundred-seven responded that they do. Sixty-one percent
thought it was a good idea. And 63 percent responded that SWAT teams "play
an important role in community policing strategies."

One official responded to the survey stating:

We're into saturation patrols in hot spots. We do a lot of our work with the
SWAT unit because we have bigger guns. We send out two, two-to-four-men
cars, we look for minor violations and do jump-outs, either on people on the
street or in automobiles. After we jump-out the second car provides
periphery cover with an ostentatious display of weaponry. We're sending a
message: If the shootings don't stop, we'll shoot someone.

PARAMILITARY POLICE

Between 1995 and 1997, the Department of Defense gave 1.2 million pieces of
military equipment to police across the country, including 73 grenade
launchers, M-16 rifles and 112 armored personnel carriers, writes Weber.

The marriage of the Justice Department and the Defense Department has
brought more sophisticated equipment in to the hands of the modern police
officer. New items include: armored personnel carriers, automatic weapons
with laser sights; laser surveillance equipment; a gas-launched, wireless,
electric stun projectile; pyrotechnic devices such as flash bang and smoke
grenades; and kevlar body armor.

The most alarming element to the issue of militarizing the police is that
this has all been occurring with the support of Congress.

The Founding Fathers, having suffered under the tyranny of their former
British rulers, sought to avoid a military-police state. In drafting the
Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, they
wanted civilians to be "separate and superior" to the military.

It was the landmark Posse Comitatus bill, signed into law by President
Rutherford B. Hayes in 1878, that kept the military out of American affairs.

The legislation reads: "Whoever, except in cases under such circumstances
expressly authorized by the Constitution or by Act if Congress, willfully
uses any part of the Army as posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the
laws shall be fined no more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than two
years, or both."

But the U.S. war on drugs effectively changed all this, says Weber.
In 1981, Congress introduced a series of bills-HR. 1806, H.R. 2532 and H.R.
3470 and S. 441-advancing military cooperation with law enforcement.

The act urged local, state and federal police to take advantage of military
equipment, facilities, training and expertise. It also encouraged the
military to take an active role in helping law enforcement keep drugs from
entering the country.

As the drug war grew, Weber writes, Congress and the White House joined in
invalidating Posse Comitatus.

The Reagan administration in 1986 jumped into the fray, declaring drugs "an
official threat to national security."

In 1988, Congress directed the National Guard to help police in fighting
drugs, using helicopter surveillance to search for marijuana fields.
President Bush in 1989 created six regional joint task forces within the
military to coordinate between the military and police units in the drug war.
And in 1996, President Clinton appointed Gen. Barry R. McCaffrey to head up
the U.S. drug war as director of Office of National Drug Policy.

A few police forces have disbanded their SWAT units, in response to
accidental shootings.

The police department in Dinuba, Calif., a town of 15,000, dissolved its
special weapons unit after an innocent man was killed and the small town was
forced to pay $12.5 million in a police brutality suit.

Albuquerque, N.M., also closed down its SWAT team and fired the police chief
after an independent study showed the rate of killings by SWAT teams in the
city was excessively high.

Others have turned down requests to form elite units.

"I was offered tanks, bazookas, anything I wanted, " said former New Have,
Conn., police chief Nick Pastore. "I turned it all down because it feeds the
mentality that you're not a police officer serving a community, you're a
soldier at war."


Spotlight Dodges a Bullet

The Constitution is alive and well in New Mexico.

EXCLUSIVE TO THE SPOTLIGHT

By SPOTLIGHT STAFF

The First Amendment won an important victory in Deming, N.M., recently when
library officials decided to keep a newspaper in circulation in spite of a
complaint by a local man.

The newspaper is The SPOTLIGHT. The local man, Marty Holtzman, claimed the
newspaper as "a soft-core anti-Semitic publication" and described it as
"Holocaust denial."

The Marshall Memorial Library board of trustees said removing The SPOTLIGHT
would set a precedent form removing other material some considered
objectionable.

"The library is a learning center," trustee Kathleen Cook "I may be totally
against something but removing it would be censorship."

The Marshall Memorial Library is a member of the American Library
Association (ALA). The ALA's Bill of Rights states:

In no case should any book be excluded because of the race or nationality or
the political or religious views of the writer.
 . . . there should be the fullest practicable provision of material
presenting all points of view concerning the problems and issues of our times.
When reporters in New Mexico contacted The SPOTLIGHT, Editor Andrew Arnold,
asked them exactly what was supposed to be anti-Semitic. They could not answer.
The newspaper has never denied the Holocaust.

When Holtzman contacted Library Director Margaret Becker, she asked him to
fill out a form stating why he objects to the newspaper. He refused. "Why
should I fill out a form when it's about Holocaust denial?" Holtzman said in
The Las Cruces Sun-News .

A spokesman for the New Mexico region of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL)
told The Deming Headlight that The SPOTLIGHT shouldn't be displayed with
other newspapers.

Arnold asked a Headlight writer what the ADL found objectionable. "They
didn't say," she answered.

"We're not against Jewish people in any shape or form," Arnold said. "Our
publisher, Liberty Lobby, is against foreign aid, because Israel receives
most of the U.S. foreign aid, some articles could possibly be interpreted as
anti-Israel. I would call it pro-American."

Ms. Becker told the trustees, prior to Holtzman, no one had ever protested
The SPOTLIGHT. "We have people who wait for it to come out," she added.
Arnold had some advice for Holtzman, "If he finds it offensive, he doesn't
have to read it."


****************************************************************************

Subscribe to THE SPOTLIGHT!

Only $59.00 for 1 year or $99.00 for 2 years. Every week, get the important
stories
that the popular media either miss... or ignore. For around $1.00 per issue,
THE SPOTLIGHT is a steal! Don't wait any longer. Make sure that you never
miss another issue. Subscribe now!

To subscribe online, visit our SECURE server at www.spotlight.org.
You can also mail your subscription to THE SPOTLIGHT, 300 Independence Ave.
S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003. OR CALL 1-800-522-6292
****************************************************************************
If you wish to unsubscribe from this newsletter, send an email to
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" (without the quotes) and type in the body
of the email "unsubscribe spotlist" (also without the quotes).



Reply via email to