-Caveat Lector- [radtimes] # 138 An informally produced compendium of vital irregularities. "We're living in rad times!" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- How to assist RadTimes--> (See ** at end.) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Contents: --The Kidnap and Ransom Industry --BioApocalypse --Report on the Jan 27 Davos Protest --IMAGES FROM DAVOS --An Anarchist View of the Presidency of Bush, Jr. --Greenpeace uses riot police van in nuclear protest --Links to Davos, Switzerland articles --Bones Found During FBI O'Hair Probe =================================================================== The Kidnap and Ransom Industry <http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/DailyNews/kidnap010122.html> The Predators, The Prey and the Protectors Equal Millions in Business By Andrew Chang NEW YORK, Jan. 22 It's a multimillion dollar industry that unites men in three-piece-suits with kids carrying Kalashnikovs often with the kids giving orders to the suits. It has no industry leader, though some countries host more deals than others. Some of the world's wealthiest companies, like AIG, Chubb, and Lloyds of London, take part but news of this business rarely shows up in the Wall Street Journal. And Hollywood has only taken a look at it a handful of times most recently, in the movie Proof of Life. Insiders call it K&R, which stands for "kidnap and ransom." Dealing in the Shadows Specific information on K&R is rare and with good reason. Corporations or families who have had a loved one or employee kidnapped often won't go to police because they are "incompetent, corrupt, or in some countries, confederates of kidnappers," says Brian Jenkins, a Green Beret veteran of the Vietnam War and past chairman of Political Science at the Rand Corporation. In other countries, going to police may mean kidnappers will never get their money and the hostage will never be released alive. Italy, for example, passed a law in 1991 intended to reduce the number of ransom kidnappings by freezing the assets of a kidnap victim's family to prevent payment of a ransom. Even after the ransom is paid, the impulse to stay quiet remains. "You don't want to give kidnappers a number to aim for," says Jenkins. Yet, executives doing business overseas feel they face an increased risk of kidnapping nowadays, and many of them are purchasing insurance against it. "One of the few statistics that we see is about 60 percent of corporate America large companies, that is have purchased this type of coverage," says Terry D'Italia, a press officer for Chubb Executive Risk in Simsbury, Conn. Such executive risk insurance not only pays for ransom, but it also provides advice on how to stop kidnappers before they even get a hostage. More important, it pays for advisers when a ransom needs to be paid. New Overhead for Overseas Business The advisers are usually employees of organizations with innocuous names like Control Risks Group. But they are the best people in the world for what they do, drawn from the ranks of the world's elite law enforcement and military agencies. And they are very expensive. One can cost several thousands of dollars a day, and sometimes one is not enough. These advisers typically have had experience in kidnappings, have served in the country at issue, know the language, and have good contacts with government officials. In many cases, they will also know the local kidnapping gangs, and can form a list of suspects, and have a sense of their negotiating tactics and techniques. They'll also know the going rates for ransoms and whether a deal is reasonable or not. But they are not Rambo-types. "The gun-toting, cigar-chomping, scar-faced individual is an image built over the years from Hollywood," says Michael Grunberg, commercial adviser to Sandline, a private military company with headquarters in London that has been retained for K&R situations. In fact, he describes one his operatives, a former member of the Special Air Service the British special forces: "He's very diminutive, small, very small, quiet mannered this is what you need, someone's who cool and will think things through before taking action, someone who is prepared for acting as a member of a team." In worst-case scenarios, these advisers can also resort to a rescue operation but that is very rare. There are innumerable risks to a rescue operation, and they have to be planned out meticulously, Grunberg says. "There are more lives at risk than just individual captives." Sometimes kidnappers live among local villagers, "so when you mount one of these operations you put at risk innocent lives," he says. Grunberg says that in one of the few rescue operations he's aware of Operation Barras, where British forces earlier last year freed fellow troops in Sierra Leone the liberators had the area under surveillance for weeks before taking action. The troops reportedly even built a replica of the area to practice their assault. The Future of the Business With the increasingly global economy, and with more business people traveling farther and farther abroad, people like Grunberg, Jenkins and D'Italia might expect this business to grow. But the professionals are more circumspect on the future. "We're not talking about something that's a new crime," Jenkins says. Rather, Jenkins traces the boom in ransom kidnappings in certain areas to "a breakdown in law enforcement which may be a consequence of an ongoing guerilla war or simply, underpaid, poorly equipped and in some cases, corrupt police." For example, Latin America accounts for as much as 80 percent of kidnappings for ransom. But no more than 5 percent of kidnap cases there are ever resolved making it a crime with high payoff and little risk. "If you look back through history there are periods and places where kidnapping became endemic," Jenkins says. Julius Caesar and Cervantes were both kidnapped for ransom, he says, and at the beginning of the 19th century, pirates in North Africa had more kidnap-for-ransom hostages than in the world today. Even today, the K&R business "has its ups and downs," says D'Italia. The global economy may help increase ransom kidnappings but doesn't drive it, says Jenkins. "This is a crime, and a very primitive crime with considerable history. It's not like cybercrime, money laundering or airline hijacking," he says. --- <snip> ---- The Rules Of The Business In some regions of the world, the K& R industry has almost become institutionalized, with an established protocol by which the negotiators and kidnappers operate. The first step is always to establish a dialogue, and find out what the kidnappers want. "Typically you have to find and establish the contact, make sure he's at the right level, make sure they're the right people with the mandate to talk," Grunberg says. But even that's harder than it seems. Grunberg says there have been cases where kidnappers had no demands, but just wanted to hurt the companies their hostages worked for. Then, negotiations begin and so does the wait. Kidnappings have no set time frame they can last from hours to years. In all cases though, negotiators will tell you they would rather deal with professionals than amateurs. The professionals will be tougher about their demands, but "they'll know what they are doing, what requirements they will have to meet at end of day, and if they're paid the ransom they generally will release the hostage," says Jenkins. With amateurs, he says, "when the time comes they may think the safest thing to do is get the ransom, kill the hostage and run off to the Bahamas." "In some sense, you have to conduct a tutorial along the way to help insure things don't get screwed up." And one of the things the negotiators will have to teach is the "proof of life" some type of proof the hostage is still alive. "Each conversation is preceded by another proof of life," Jenkins says. After that, it's a game, with the negotiator trying to meet the often astronomical ransom demands by talking them down. Grunberg says he knows of one time when some rebel kidnappers were demanding millions of dollars, but eventually settled for radios and a generator. "Individuals in the bush require different things," he said. "Two million in a Swiss bank account may satisfy the leader, but that is extremely rare. Typically what they want will allow them to perpetuate their existence and maintain their stand and fight." =================================================================== --BioApocalypse Detailed history of vaccines, covert ops, and viral diseases. Article by Dr. Leonard Horowitz in New Dawn http://www.newdawnmagazine.com.au/Articles/BioApocalypse.html =================================================================== Report on the Jan 27 Davos Protest >From: Doc Rosen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: (en) Report on the Jan 27 Davos Protest > >Today we drove by car from Klosters up to Davos. Davos >is about 7000 meters >above Klosters, a veritable fortress, easily protected >from unwanted entry >through its single small pass. As we headed up the >Wolfgang Pass, we had to >pass thru a police checkpoint. The car two cars ahead >of us was refused >entry and sent back the way it had come. There were >four adults in the car. >They did not look like trouble-makers. As we drove a >bit further, we saw a >truck parked and several men with rifles fitted for >rubber bullets and tear >gas were beginning to climb the hill near the truck to >gain a better vantage >point to watch cars coming up the hill. At the next >little intersection we >encountered a policeman in full riot gear standing >there. > >When we entered Davos, we found police standing at >every intersection. Many >roads were completely blocked by barricades to prevent >cars from traveling >through town. The entire city was guarded with a huge >force of police and >army and there was heavy equipment parked around town. >We found out later >what that was for. > >As we drove up to the Dutch Asthma Clinic where our >alternative (and legally >OK'ed) conference was being held, we saw that the >police were stopping >pedestrians who were on their way to the conference >(walking, by the way, in >a totally different direction from the WEF conference). >Police were checking >papers, taking names, asking what the people were doing >here--were they >working for an organization, for the media, etc. The >ambience was very >disconcerting. Folks couldn't believe how their rights >were violated. > >The hall of the Asthma Clinic was filled; about 150 >people were listening to >a panel. More folks were out in the lobby. All were >dressed nicely and were >clean cut. Few were under age 30. > >The total number of protesters which were able to make >it to the protest in >Davos later that afternoon was somewhere around 300. >Official estimates were >even less. Those who got stopped in Landquart at the >bottom of the mountain >were at least 600, including many buses. They held >their own protest there, >closing the highway and stopping the railway as well >for some time. Police >used tear gas on them. After leaving Landquart about >300-400 of the >demonstrators held a further demonstration this evening >in Zurich, where an >alternative conference had also been held today. > >The weather had turned snowy and blowy in Davos. Not a >lot of fun to be out >in. Those of us in Davos who marched, basically >consisted of two groups: >young activists and church groups. The young people >chanted slogans and the >older folks sang peace songs. There were only a few >banners because they >were next to impossible to get through security. I had >written a couple of >messages on notebook paper which got widely >photographed. I wrote: Democracy >Suspended in Davos (a slogan coined by Tony Juniper of >Friends of the >Earth-UK. I also wrote No Global Rule without >Transparency, Accountability >and Democracy. I was interviewed at one point by Time >Mag. I told the >reporter that I was a member of Reclaim Democracy and >Alliance for Democracy >and that I came from Boulder, CO. > >We were able to march from the train station to about >half way to the >Congress Center where the WEF was meeting. The police >had barricaded the WEF >so well throughout the entire week that the street in >front of the Congress >Center has been totally deserted. I think most of the >invitees had no idea >that a protest was even planned for today or noticed >that it was even >happening. > >When the police stopped us at a barricade several >blocks away from the >Congress Center, they pulled up one of those large >pieces of equipment we had >seen earlier. They warned us in several languages that >they were going to >shoot their water cannon at us, and then they proceeded >to do it; shooting >fifty-foot-high, well- aimed long-distance volleys in >all directions. The >poor guy from Time Mag. who was talking to me got >drenched. We pulled back a >bit and stood around for about a half hour. Speeches >got made. But there >was a lot of milling around. Then another of those >water cannon vehicles >appoached our group from the opposite direction and I >was afraid we were >really in for it. But soon, he backed off and left, >and the march reversed >its steps back to the train station. About that time >the sun came out. After >a few thrown snowballs at a line of police standing in >front of a hotel, >armed with guns and rattan shields, the protest group >eventually disbursed >The trains and buses were stil not running by the time >Roger and I >rendez-vous'ed and headed out of town, but the police >were starting to take >down some of their blockades. =================================================================== IMAGES FROM DAVOS >IMAGES FROM DAVOS : AGAINST WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM > >http://www.ecn.org/agp/index1.html > >greettings from Switzerland > >Movimiento WIPE OUT WEF =================================================================== January 27, 2001 An Anarchist View of the Presidency of Bush, Jr. By Brian Oliver Sheppard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Anarchists have a saying: "No matter who you vote for, the government will get in." For the 2000 Presidential Election this adage needs a little revision: "No matter who you voted for, Bush got in." It is true that anarchists have proclaimed, for centuries now, the folly of humans entrusting themselves into the guidance of nation-states. It is true that we see nation- states as no longer benefiting humanity in any meaningful way; we feel they serve, rather, to impede the free development of humanity's powers, corralling people into regimented lives of misspent energy in the service of more powerful humans. Nation-states are mazes of man-made laws that ensure some powerful people will be able to rule over others, and that an economic system that safely perpetuates this sort of hierarchy will function indefinitely, all at public expense. So it is that when George W. Bush assumed the mantle of President of the USA, to many anarchists it was the coronation of just another figurehead, replacing all the other figureheads of the past, who, like so many inter- changeable parts, simply ensure that the nation-state will lurch forward as a legitimate social phenomenon. What's so remarkable about George W. Bush, then, if he is merely the inheritor of an office that anarchists see as illegitimate no matter how it is won? What's remarkable is that, even by the standards of those who do accept states, and who think rulers are tolerable inasmuch as they are popularly chosen - even by these minimal standards, George W. Bush falls short of the mark of acceptability. With a disarmingly dopey, and even playful, demeanor, the unelected Bush waltzed into the highest political office in the land, serenaded by the vapidity of Ricky Martin, Lee Greenwood, and other symbols of cultural mediocrity, in a showbiz extravaganza inauguration. And while his outward appearances so far have been marked by speeches consisting largely of vague platitudes and vacuous, nice-sounding political buzz phrases, he has been hard at work behind closed doors, signing a flurry of executive orders and appointing reactionary cabinet members. These actions betray his true intentions more than any lip service he has paid to being a "uniter" and a "compassionate conservative." BEDTIME FOR DEMOCRACY Even by the logic that allows American power to credibly refer to the country as a representative democracy - a republic - the Bush presidency represents a step backward. It represents a step backward to a time when coteries of aristocrats installed leaders into power openly, and the public accepted it because such was their lot in life. As people in history became more unmanageable, more "curious and arrogant" about the machinations of the State (to para- phrase a statement often quoted by Noam Chomsky), elites felt compelled to ensure that their representatives were chosen through more indirect, less noticeable means. Campaign finance, saturation of political ads across all kinds of media, control over the Federal Election Commission, the Electoral College - these are some of the indirect ways that elites ultimately retain their power over the country today. The placing of Bush and his big business administration into power shows that the business community feels confident enough to step out of the shadows and openly place into office one of their representatives, even without the public ratification that used to be, at least superficially, necessary. What are some of the reasons that the Bush presidency fails to carry any legitimacy, even given the criteria for assuming power that is inherent to a republic? * Shortly after the election in November, 2000, it was estimated by most that Al Gore, Bush's main opponent, had won the national popular vote by about 300,000 votes. In December the New York Times, Associated Press, and others came out with figures that revealed this to be short of the mark: Gore had actually won the national popular vote by at least 500,000, they reported, after all state returns had been certified. * Bush had the largest war chest of any presidential candidate in history. Wall Street and other sectors of the moneyed elite backed him overwhelmingly. His loss of the Presidency would have amounted to a failed investment for them. As the most well-connected of candidates, and with so much of an investment riding on his success, he had the benefit of society's most powerful as allies, able to pull strings to help him come through when things looked grim. To wit: Business Week's December 11 issue stated that "Bush has hooks everywhere. He has Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, who certified his election two weeks ago and who just happened to be his state campaign co-chairman. He has his brother, the governor of Florida, to certify a slate of Bush electors.... He has both houses of the Florida legislature and the US House of Representatives.... And, it seems, he has five justices of the US Supreme Court, all of whom were either appointed by his daddy or by Ronald Reagan, his daddy's old boss." * Recounts that probably would have overturned his victory were halted by the intervention of a Supreme Court stacked with appointees from Bush family administrations. These "justices" said the recount was stopped because allowing it to go forward would cause "irreparable harm" to Bush's chances of winning. Indeed, it would have. * As the newspaper Haiti Progres noted shortly after the election in November: "Fraud, corruption, voter intimidation, confusing ballots, racial profiling, lost ballot boxes, destroyed ballots, incompetent and abusive polling site supervisors, polling sites closing early, and many other irregularities" all played a part in the election. The butterfly ballot alone caused many elderly Jews to vote for anti-Semite Pat Buchanan. * In many states in the US, a criminal conviction means that the State strips you of your "right" to vote for the rest of your life. Florida is such a state. This sort of voter dis- enfranchisement (which acts upon the assumption that the legal process under which one is branded a criminal is fair and just) has resulted in one out of every three African- American men in Florida being unable to vote. Republicans hired Database Technologies Inc., a subsidiary of ChoicePoint, to determine which ex-convicts should not be allowed to vote. A "scrub list" of 173,000 persons was generated. Katherine Harris distributed this to county election officials. It was presumably felt that ex-cons, which tend to be ethnic minorities and poorer white people, would probably not vote for Bush. There are some other failsafe devices built into the process: the fact that a state legislature can override voting outcomes and choose a state's electors itself, electors who will be present in that undemocratic institution, the Electoral College, which really chooses the President. Also of interest is that Bush, who has played up the traditional Republican motif of "giving powers back to states" and away from the federal government, decided not to respect the decision of the Florida State Supreme Court, but went over its head to the federal Supreme Court. He also came out against hand recounts despite his having signed legislation approving hand recounts while governor of Texas. Ironically these moves, which run counter to his professed ideals but which were the only options left if he wanted to be President, ultimately saved him. This simply shows that those who make their careers by ruling others have very flexible, supple ideologies that tend to accommodate, above all else, their desire for power. This isn't particular to Bush or to Republicans in the least. It is the nature of all rulers, no matter their affiliation. NO MATTER WHO YOU VOTE FOR... Truth be told, Gore would not be much better than Bush. They are both men dedicated to preserving the basic framework of our system, which is a system that depends upon class division, exploitation, and varying degrees of racism and sexism, simply to exist. With Gore we would have gotten this same old program, albeit swathed in political correctness and an occasional bone tossed to the poor. With Bush we will have the same program of state-subsidized capitalism without any of the sugar coating. Gore did contest the election up to a certain point. But he held back from taking the fight in a direction that would "irreparably damage" the country, he and his officials told us. And this says it all - because what constitutes "irreparable damage" to elites and their institutions is what is actually in the public's best interest. The irreparable damage would have been the tarnishing of the sanctity of some of America's most entrenched political institutions. The nearly mystical aura that surrounds such processes as the electing of "the leader of the free world" would have been dragged through the mud; perhaps these institutions would never have been able to recover their credibility in the eyes of the American people. However, it is precisely such a thorough examination that needs to happen if we are to take notions like "freedom" and "democracy" seriously. Politicians like Gore would rather make sacrifices in their own careers than shine too bright a light on some of the ways in which our system is inherently corrupt. Taking a fight for the White House too far would damage the eventual winner's ability to govern effectively - and this ability to govern, above all else, must be preserved. Because it ultimately matters not so much who governs, as that someone is allowed to govern, and is able to do so in a manner that is meaningful to the wealthy. A "crisis in governance," in which elites cannot command the obedience necessary to push forward their agendas, would be destructive from their point of view. From the point of view of the governed, however, averting a "crisis in governance" merely guarantees that the old order continues - an old order that means there is still ruler and ruled, employer and employed, rich and poor, and all the other changeable, man-made disparities in society that people have let themselves become too apathetic to challenge. There are many people that know Bush lost the national popular vote; they know that his victory in Florida was questionable - but they simply don't care. For some, he was their man, and so if he won, no matter how, democratically or not, it is welcomed. His victory, for them, is more important than the integrity of any process used to boost him into power. And, from their standpoint, if you have a problem with Bush being an unelected President you are simply a "whiner" or a "sore loser" or any other thing that implies that a political victory, no matter how unjustly attained, is something you should just shut up and accept. For others, for perhaps the vast majority of the American public that didn't even vote, a Bush win or loss is not worth any fuss because it doesn't matter. They know, perhaps only on an intuitive and inarticulate level, that no matter who assumes the office of the President of the United States, the President will act as he has to act in such a role, and that nothing substantial, nothing fundamental, will ever really change. They will still wake up in the morning and have to go to work, they will still have bills, and they will still have the same day to day worries and concerns they have always had. Anarchists are often told that eliminating positions of authority, while a "nice idea," is dangerous because people are too dumb to manage things for themselves. Bush is an excellent response to this objection. With Bush we see that, as an alternative to dumb people running their own lives, we can have an exceedingly dumb person as our leader, vested in all the raiments of statehood that will enable him to magnify and extend the power of his stupidity the world over. =================================================================== Greenpeace uses riot police van in nuclear protest <http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=9623> NETHERLANDS: January 28, 2001 DODEWAARD, Netherlands - Greenpeace activists duped police at a Dutch nuclear plant on Thursday, driving through a cordon in a second-hand riot police van to try to block a convoy of nuclear waste. The 11 protesters then chained themselves to the van, four of them to its wheels, as well as to a bridge forming the only access point into the Dodewaard nuclear power plant in the eastern Netherlands. "We made it look like a real police bus. We fooled them," Greenpeace spokeswoman Annemiek van der Molen told Reuters from the site. "It was a surprise," a police spokesman conceded. "It looked like a police van so it was let through. Then it became clear it wasn't ours." The spokesman said that they arrested all 11 activists and a photographer and detained a further 10 protesters on the convoy's route. He said that the waste convoy was delayed by the protest, but was approaching the Dutch port of Flushing by early afternoon. The Dodewaard nuclear power plant has been closed, but nuclear waste including spent fuel rods was to be taken to Britain's Sellafield to be reprocessed. Greenpeace said it was protesting against the practice of reprocessing nuclear waste at Sellafield, which it said causes large radioactive emissions into the air and sea. The organisation is also calling on Dutch Environment Minister Jan Pronk to halt the transport of Dutch waste to Britain. =================================================================== Major Human Rights and Free Speech Violations in Davos, Switzerland AFP: Swiss Condemn Police Crackdown on Davos Protests - http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0128-02.htm "Police mobilization like in a dictatorship" ran the headline in the German-language weekly Sonntagsblick, the day after used water cannons, tear gas and rubber bullets to break up a demonstration in Zurich, and imposed tight security to prevent protests in Davos. Among intellectuals, sociologist Jean Ziegler denounced in an open letter to the government "the shameful face of the Swiss," while the socialists took an even harder line. "I wouldn't have believed that possible in Switzerland. The police have trampled on state law," Franco Cavalli, head of the Socialist Party in parliament, said in an interview in Sonntagsblick. The police defended its actions, saying they used "moderate, exemplary intervention." However, in a Sonntagsblick editorial, Frank Meyer blamed politicians: "The police would not have been able to play this game, if politicians respectful of democracy and their responsibilities had taken things in hand." Meyer said "the police force coup had inflicted more damage on the global salon" of WEF founder Klaus Schwab than the anti-globalization protestors had dreamed of with their demonstrations. "If it was damage to private party that one wanted to spare, I wonder: 3,000 men (police and army) during five days, that makes 10 million Swiss francs (six million euros, 5.5 million dollars), without counting additional expenses," wrote editorialist Gerard Delanoye. ---- NGOs threaten Forum withdrawal - http://www.swissinfo.org/sen/Swissinfo.html?siteSect=1004&sid=557850 (This is from on of the heads of the World Economic Forum (WEF)) The managing director of the Forum, Claude Smadja, was at the briefing to answer its critics and said the organisation would not be pushed into giving any group equal representation. "We invite whoever *we believe is relevant* to open dialogue. We are not the United Nations, we are a *private organisation*," Smadja said. Smadja said the security operation had become a logistical nightmare in recent years and backed the Swiss governments decision to *ban demonstrations* for the Forums duration. He said peaceful protesters had become a front for violence. "Whatever their good intentions and good faith, they have become convenient covers for professional trouble-makers." ---- Condemnation of Swiss Police Pour in from Major Media, Civil Society - http://davos.indymedia.org/display.php3?article_id=1113 "Many people were shocked to learn that the police were planning to use *liquid manure* on protesters. In fact, the police were unable to obtain the substance - which could be classified as biological warfare material posing severe health hazards - because Swiss farmers would not give any to the police and criticezed the idea of using manure on protesters as crazy." ---- From an news release prior to Saturday's demonstrations - http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010125/wl/forum_leadall_dc.html ``No decision has been made. Police are reviewing various means that could be used, for example rubber shotgun pellets or tear gas or water or manure,'' cantonal police spokesman Alois Hafner told Reuters. (http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010125/wl/forum_leadall_dc.html) =================================================================== > JANUARY 27, 2001 > > Bones Found During FBI O'Hair Probe > > By MICHELLE KOIDIN > Associated Press Writer > > CAMP WOOD, Texas (AP) - Federal agents unearthed human bones Saturday > during a search of the ranch where missing atheist leader Madalyn > Murray O'Hair and her family are believed to have been buried more > than five years ago, the FBI said. > > Full story: > <http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=NATIONAL&STORYID=APIS79PPUE00> =================================================================== "Anarchy doesn't mean out of control. It means out of 'their' control." -Jim Dodge ====================================================== "Communications without intelligence is noise; intelligence without communications is irrelevant." -Gen. Alfred. M. Gray, USMC ====================================================== "It is not a sign of good health to be well adjusted to a sick society." -J. Krishnamurti ______________________________________________________________ To subscribe/unsubscribe or for a sample copy or a list of back issues, send appropriate email to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. ______________________________________________________________ **How to assist RadTimes: An account is available at <www.paypal.com> which enables direct donations. If you are a current PayPal user, use this email address: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, to contribute. If you are not a current user, use this link: <https://secure.paypal.com/refer/pal=resist%40best.com> to sign up and contribute. The only information passed on to me via this process is your email address and the amount you transfer. Thanks! <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
