|
News Report Issue
49
Index
1. Thought for the day - Neil
2. Opinion: Media priorities - Antonia.
3. Opinion: The lack of balance in a rationalist economy -
Antonia
4. Opinion: Branch stacking - Antonia
5. Opinion: The importance of families - Antonia
6. Opinion: Population policy- Antonia
7. Life Sciences: Fluoridation - Forwarded by
Veronica
8. Feedback: GM Foods - Frito Lay Consumers Affairs
9. Feedback: More Accountable Democracy - Jim
11. Feedback: A Royal Guide - The correct use of
impertinence - Richard
12. Feedback:
13. Feedback Contacts:
14. Editorial Policy:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Thought for the day:
"All political parties die at last of swallowing their own
lies". Dr. Arbuthnot (quoted in Garnett, Life of Emerson).
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Opinion: Media Priorities
Mozambique is drowning. Atrocities are happening in Chechnya. Tensions are running high in Kosovo. Week by week there are reports of more Australian companies closing with workers losing their jobs. There are still more bank closures in the bush. Farmers are becoming militant at the erosion of their traditional property rights. And the Weekend Australian, our only national daily broadsheet, sees fit to run a story about the prime minister's cat on the front page. Tha-tha-that's journalism in John Howard's prosperous and peaceful Australia, folks! Antonia +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Opinion:
The lack of balance in a Rationalist
Economy
"We believe that the victory of the free market ideology in the Cold War has upset the kind of balance between the market and the state that promoted unparalleled prosperity in the three decades that followed the end of World War II ... the balance can - and must - be restored." - "Business Week" analysts William Wolman and Anne Colamosca in the introduction to "The Judas Economy: The Triumph of Capital and the Betrayal of Work" (1997) That quote succinctly gives the reason for the current worldwide malaise: there's no balance any more. Ideologues run the show, and as they're ' winners', naturally enough they see no reason for change. Australia's genuine prosperity in the 1950's to 1970's was the result of a non-ideological mixed economy which supported free enterprise while simultaneously 'interfering' to ensure social services such as education and health were available to all. Yes, ALL. While there were certainly rich and poor, the gap was not as wide as now, and we didn't have pre-ordained winners and losers as now. Our mixed economy provided a range of employment for all Australians. Until economic rationalism took hold, most Australians enjoyed a good standard of living. For a start, as Dr Lucy Sullivan has tirelessly pointed out in many publications, even the poorest families were financially autonomous owing to an intelligent tax regime. But under this mean-spirited government and its "Labor" predecessors, Australian families' prosperity has withered to nothing, while the prosperity of Australia Inc has risen. Under current bipartisan policies, foreign investors are more important than Australian families. It's that brutal. All over the world this is happening. It's the real reason for the rise of grassroots nationalistic parties like One Nation in Australia, Reform in Canada, and Austria's Freedom Party. Invariably they are labelled by the mainstream media as 'racist', 'xenophobic', 'of the extreme right' etc. Why? The big boys and their backers don't want any real competition. So much for democracy. Anthonia ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Opinion:
Branch stacking Poor old One Nation has copped a lot of flak from disgruntled members over various internal issues. Well, compared with the big boys, One Nation is purer than the driven snow. Take branch stacking. One Nation hasn't been alive long enough to have perfected this tawdry art. News Weekly claims a large number of federal Labor MPs in safe seats owe their elections to ethnic and union branch stacking. Apparently some seats cost members up to $ 5,000 in paying membership dues for their silent partners. Some Sydney branches have up to 4,000 members - but fail to secure the quorum of 15 members for a meeting. Nice. And the scandal is not confined to Labor either. In Victoria, Kennett's championing of the Greek vote "has led to the drafting of large numbers of Greek Australians into the party who are now being used to prise out sitting members in safe seats." (News Weekly, 25 / 9 / 99). Of course Victoria can't hold a candle to NSW when it comes to branch stacking. But the writing may be on the wall for this despicable practice. Last year in a SA Supreme Court ruling, Justice Ted Mullhigan said the internal affairs of political parties are open to review by the courts. Consequently any disputed contest for a safe seat could end up in court. How potentially embarrassing it would be for a candidate pre-selected by ethnic branch stacking if members with little English and no knowledge of the party were subpoenaed. About time. Antonia ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Opinion:
The importance of families These days, every year gets a label. I think last year's label was the Year of Older Persons, but I'm not really sure. It's all meaningless as far as most people are concerned. The Year of the Family was an excellent illustration of why the labels are rubbish. The word 'family' has a precise meaning as far as most people are concerned. It means mum, dad and the kids: the elite-loathed nuclear family. Instead of celebrating the family as the foundation of society, the whole year was given over to politically correct arguments about how we had to accept the diversity of family structures. Yes, voluntary single parent families were just as good as married couple ones. To its shame, even Sydney's Catholic Weekly agreed with this drivel. Pig-ignorant academics routinely claim the nuclear family is a relatively new phenomenon, and they waxed lyrical about the benefits and virtues of extended families. Well, in so far as they are referring to the British Isles, they are wrong. Despite all the feminist propaganda - as usual based on nothing more than wishful thinking - Peter Laslett's research has shown that in pre-industrial England nuclear families were the norm. Granny might have lived in the same village, but she definitely didn't live in her children's house. Pretty well the only exceptions to nuclear families were the great houses. In Elizabethan England, couples couldn't marry until a house was available, or until the local authority granted permission to build a new house. It doesn't get clearer than that. Antonia +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Opinion: Population policy Australia's population is back on the agenda with business calling for a big increase. Under current policies our population is expected to stabilise around 23 million, and business says this is unsustainable. It needs to be 50 million in the opinion of Richard Pratt. Bob Carr doesn't like the sound of this, as most of the migrants end up in Sydney. There are already 4 million people in the Sydney basin, and more would be intolerable. Supporting the push for more, the Australian's editorial (6 / 3 / 00) took the prize for silliness saying, "Australia receives only 80,000 migrants each year into a population of 19 million.... We accepted 150,000 immigrants a year after World War II." Meaning we should take more now. But we had a genuine booming economy then. As well, the government of the day had a policy of full employment with good wages. That's not the case now. Antonia ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Life Sciences:
You may like to pass this to anyone south of the border of
Queensland - they all drink plenty of fluoridated town water.
Veronica
IAHF LIST: Check this out, and stop drinking fluoridated water!! This proves how dishonest and unscientific the National Academy of Science is! At 01:46 AM 2/23/2000 -0500, you wrote: If you read the latest advice on fluoride from the Institute of Medicine (NAS/NRC 1999), then you already know how fluoride reduces dental decay ... and understand what "optimum" means in terms of milligrams per day. This new "Dietary Reference Intakes" (DRI) is probably the
most scientifically sound argument against water fluoridation to be found on the
Internet. One must simply separate the wheat from the chaff ... the logical from
the illogical ... the possible from the impossible.
Key segments of the DRI are quoted in the attached .txt file
and at
http://www.rvi.net/~fluoride/debunk.htm Examining the Water Fluoridation Sales Pitch
The following quoted material is taken from the Institute of
Medicine's On-Line
DIETARY REFERENCE INTAKES at www.nap.edu/books/0309063507/html/288.html p.288: "Fluoride is the ionic form of fluorine, a halogen and
the most electronegative of the elements of the periodic table. It is ubiquitous
in nature."
p.289: "80 percent or more is typically absorbed. ...
The elimination of absorbed fluoride occurs almost exclusively via the kidneys.
... For healthy, young, or middle-aged adults, approximately 50 percent of
absorbed fluoride is retained by uptake in calcified tissues, and 50 percent is
excreted in the urine. For young children, as much as 80 percent can be retained
owing to increased uptake by the developing skeleton and teeth. Such data
are not available for persons in the later years of life. ... Under most
dietary conditions, fluoride balance is positive. Whether it is positive or
negative appears to be due to the blood-bone fluoride steady state. When chronic
intake is insufficient to maintain or gradually increase plasma concentrations,
fluoride excretion by infants and adults can exceed the amounts ingested due to
mobilisation from calcified tissues."
* Question: Who warns the people with undiagnosed
kidney disease ... or the poor children with diabetes? Will the water utility
supply these people with bottled low-fluoride water?
p.290: "The cariostatic action of fluoride on erupted teeth
of children and adults is due to its effects on the metabolism of bacteria in
dental plaque and on the dynamics of enamel de- and remineralisation during an
acidogenic challenge. Plaque fluoride concentrations are directly related to the
fluoride concentrations in and frequencies of exposure to water, beverages,
foods, and dental products. Fluoride can be deposited in plaque by direct uptake
from these sources as well as from the saliva and gingival crevicular fluid
after ingestion and absorption from the gastrointestinal tract. Its effects on
plaque bacteria involve inhibition of several enzymes, which limits the uptake
of glucose and thus reduces the amount of acid produced and secreted into the
extracellular plaque fluid. These effects attenuate the pH drop in plaque fluid
that would otherwise occur and, hence, the severity of the acidic challenge to
the enamel."
* If the fluoride from all these sources works just as well
in preventing cavities, and works in exactly the same way - and we're already
ingesting more than a milligram per day in non fluoridated areas - why add it to
our drinking water?
p.291, p.292: "In a study of fluoride intake by 225 children
aged 2 to 10 years, Pang et al. (1992) reported that total fluid intake ranged
from 970 to 1,240 ml / day. Consumption of soft drinks, juices, tea, and other
beverages accounted for more than 50 percent of fluid intake and ranged from 585
to 756 mg / day. The fluoride concentrations ranged from non-detectable to 6.7
mg / litre."
* Not long ago a petition appeared in the Federal Register
for an increase in the allowances for fluoride in pesticide residues on fruits
and vegetables. According to this document, "EPA has estimated previously that
levels of fluoride in/on food from the agricultural use of cryolite plus
fluoride levels in U.S. drinking water supplies results in a daily dietary
intake of fluoride of approximately 0.095 mg / kg / day." Federal Register:
August 7, 1997
* NAS / NRC has commented more than once that during the
years prior to 1945, water was virtually the only source of ingested fluoride.
The typical U.S. diet provided about one quarter milligram of fluoride
daily.
* According to McClure, the only reference cited in Dietary
Reference Intakes, adults ingested 0.02 mg / kg / day in an "optimally
fluoridated area" during the 1940s. For a 70 kilogram man (154 pounds) that's
1.4 mg / day. Now, it appears to be 6.65 mg / day ... far more than the original
"optimum" daily intake for maximum benefits and minimum risk.
* In 1993 NAS / NRC commented on evidence that excess
fluoride may be responsible for increased dental decay in some areas. More
recently, the head of preventive dentistry at the University of Toronto, Dr.
Hardy Limeback, a former pro-fluoridationist, said that in his practice, and
among his colleagues, cosmetic dentistry is taking more time than dental decay
... and more money.
* For a discussion of the Surgeon General's role in promoting
fluoridation, see www.rvi.net/~fluoride/naep.htm
"The Cover-up at the U.S.E.P.A." in Applying the NAEP Code of
Ethics to the Environmental Protection Agency and the Fluoride in Drinking Water
Standard, written by EPA scientist witnesses.
p.297: "Both the inter-community transport of foods and
beverages and the use of fluoridated dental products have blurred the historical
difference in the prevalence of dental caries between communities with and
without water fluoridation. ... The overall difference in caries prevalence
between fluoridated and nonfluoridated regions in the United States was 18
percent .."
* At the same time, according to NAS / NRC, dental fluorosis
rates (for the milder variety) have been reported to be as much as eight times
higher than in 1940.
p.298: According to (Dean 1942) ... "reduction in the number
of dental caries per child was nearly maximal in communities having water
fluoride concentrations close to 1.0 mg / litre. This is how 1.0 mg / litre
became the 'optimal' concentration."
p.301: "Although the total amount of fluoride ingested daily
by older children and adults is greater than by infants or young children, it is
generally lower when expressed in terms of body weight. As noted earlier,
average dietary fluoride intakes by adults living in fluoridated communities
have ranged from 1.4 to 3.4 mg / day, or from 0.02 to 0.05 mg / kg / day for a
70 kg person."
* During the 1940s, according to the only reference cited
here, it was 0.05 mg / kg / day for children age 1-3; 0.04 mg / kg / day for
children aged 4-9; 0.03 mg / kg / day for children aged 10-12; and 0.02 mg / kg
/ day for adults.
The 1.4 figure above refers to the dosage delivered in
optimally fluoridated areas during the 1940s. The other figure refers to a study
published in 1974.
* The DRI uses the figure 0.05 mg / kg / day, which applies
to fluoride intake at age 1-3, and is taken from a table in McClure's article of
1943. However, they applied that figure to all ages ... resulting in an
incorrect 3 to 4 mg / day for adults age 19-70. This error is the foundation for
their new "adequate" intake of fluoride.
Ironically, according to the only reference cited regarding
the tolerable upper limit for safety, even smaller daily doses of fluoride -
0.04 mg / kg / day - could result in phase 3 skeletal fluorosis after 55 to 96
years. (Roholm: 0.2 to 0.35 mg / kg / day resulted in phase 3 crippling skeletal
fluorosis after 11 years)
p.306: "The primary adverse effects associated with chronic,
excess fluoride intake are enamel and skeletal fluorosis."
p.307: "Stage 1 skeletal fluorosis is characterized by
occasional stiffness or pain in joints and some osteosclerosis of the pelvis and
vertebra."
"The clinical signs of stages 2 and 3, which may be
crippling, may include dose-related calcification of ligaments, osteosclerosis,
exostoses, possibly osteoporosis of long bones, muscle wasting, and neurological
defects due to hypercalcification of vertebra."
"The development of skeletal fluorosis and its severity is
directly related to the level and duration of exposure."
p.308: "Crippling skeletal fluorosis continues to be
extremely rare in the United States (only 5 cases have been confirmed during the
last 35 years), even though for many generations there have been communities
with drinking water fluoride concentrations in excess of those that have
resulted in the condition in other countries. This puzzling geographic
distribution has usually been attributed to unidentified metabolic or dietary
factors that rendered the skeleton more or less susceptible."
* No studies on the long-term arthritic effects of fluoride
have been published in which the researchers used appropriate methods, but
failed to find evidence of harm. Please read the symptoms of phase 1, 2, and 3
skeletal fluorosis above. Are there more than 5 cases? Not being fatal or
contagious, skeletal fluorosis is not a "reportable" disease. That does not mean
it does not exist in the United States.
p.313: "Studies are needed to define the effects of metabolic
and environmental variables on the absorption, excretion, retention, and
biological effects of fluoride."
* Do we have the right to refuse to participate in medical
experiments? Does
the government have the right to use our children in medical experiments? * If so, how do we avoid fluoride in foods, beverages,
etc.?
* Keep in mind that when the Dietary Reference Intakes was
released during a press conference in the early fall of 1997, a representative
of the American Dental Association read the segment on fluoride, as though he
wrote it himself. The man in charge of determining the tolerable upper limit of
fluoride is a representative of the American Council on Science and Health ..
a tax-exempt group which receives most of its funding from Monsanto and
other similar interests. Fluoridation saves billions of dollars for industries
with fluoride pollution problems.
* If one were to correct the errors in arithmetic in Dietary Reference Intakes, the material quoted above would not only fail to support a proposal to add more fluoride to our children's or our own diet - it would show clearly that fluoridation can no longer be considered "safe" or "effective." * See the errors in arithmetic, at
along with seven fraudulent or misleading statements from the
Institute of Medicine. Articles Forwarded by
Veronica Griffin Ph.D..
Kerawa Qld.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Feedback:
GM Foods
Thank you for contacting Frito-Lay. We are always
pleased when our consumers take the time to share their thoughts with
us.
Now that there is a renewed interest in biotechnology by regulatory agencies and some consumer concern exists, we did not feel it appropriate to ask our growers to include Bt crops in what they sell us. Just like other food companies, Frito-Lay relies on and supports the regulatory agencies charged with safeguarding our food supply when sourcing ingredients for our products. These agencies continue to report that genetically modified ingredients are perfectly safe. Since we are also a large buyer of agricultural commodities, and more than a quarter of the North American crop is derived from biotechnology, just like other food companies, we could have biotechnology ingredients in our products. Thank you for taking the time to contact Frito-Lay. We hope this information is helpful. Frito-Lay Consumer Affairs +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Feedback:
More Accountable Democracy
Hi Dave, and thanks Nic for spreading the word on MAD (More
Accountable Democracy) and its tax links
I'll also CC Andrew & Stewart who also followed up Nic's message, and a few others, and want to make a few key points and get some feedback. Also please feed-forward to others who may have the time and interest to read on. 1. While I have been considering my own MAD e-mail list, I need to work on it to decide if and how, as I've never had one, and am myself receiving more e-mail than I can read. So far I've been sending to existing lists like the News Report of Neil Baird & Antonia Feitz (I'll also CC Neil). 2. My 1st preference is for '2-way' lists like Neither mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] so all can participate directly, but they can get very busy. Also I don't know how to set one up, but we could have a topic with-in Neither, or similar service (in NZ?). Its worth knowing that Neither's advertisements around Oz in September 1998 explained the law behind 'Oztracism'. I'll CC this to the list. 3. I am specially keen to get Kiwi (and other Commonwealth) interest for two reasons. 1st Oz media, specially broadcasters, are still suppressing the truth of election rigging generally, and the 'Canberra Dodge' in particular. It may be easier to get Oz stories into NZ media and vice-versa. What do you think? I also made the attached 'case for removing or reducing Commonwealth control of ABC funding to get genuine public accountability?' to our Productivity Commission inquiry into broadcasting last month, but have yet to decide the next step. The key aim, whether the JCEM report is honest or if it suppresses the 'Canberra Dodge', is to maximise publicity by linking it to the ILLEGAL origins of the GST. 4. The 2nd reason is to call the Monarchy in to the issue of ILLEGAL parliaments and ILLEGITIMATE governments in Oz (& NZ, from what I've read in the new INVESTIGATE) There are already UK (and UN) matters gathering momentum and election fraud will add to this. I have already started on this via our Australian Monarchist League, and I'll attach my recent e-mail to Philip Benwell, its National Chairman mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] and hope others who may not be on his mailing list will follow up my suggestion to contact the JCEM secretariat mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] and ask for copies of its 1998 election inquiry submissions and report. Tell them you also want to provide copies to HM (and others)! And ask Phillip if 'MONARCHY 2000 IN ACTION' will help get QEII's (discreet) help during 2000 and before CHOGM in 2001, to head off more harmful and less dignified resistance in OZ (& NZ?)! 5. Two other electoral reform organisations in Oz are and the HS Chapman Society, which has recently launched into the UK, and has been making submissions to the JCEM for years. It should welcome a NZ counterpart (HS Chapman, a barrister, defended the 'Eureka Stockade' rebels in 1856, and then produced the secret ballot legislation in Victoria) Contact Peter Brun, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] The Proportional Representation Society of Australia http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~lee/prsa/index.html also needs to face the truth that Oz electoral law has been corrupted to ILLEGALLY entrench 'worst-past-the-post voting. 6. My final point is that Nic got my 'Oztracism' message wrong. Australia does NOT have a First-Past-The-Post Electoral system. It expressly needs ABSOLUTE majorities, or failing that writs for NEW elections and candidates! The 'Canberra Dodge' used in 1998 to blackmail and bribe voters and parties is illegal and the JCEM knows it!! At least a million votes were corrupted by this deception in October 1998, and maybe $1.5 million of taxpayers' money was used to 'bribe' One Nation officials alone! If you have any doubt re-read the following until it eventually HITS you (and remembering the law doesn't and cannot ENFORCE preferences/votes FOR candidates): Once there are at least three candidates it is arithmetically inevitable that unless 'exhausted' ballots are removed from the final count (typically by illegal means), it is possible that neither of the last two left will get the 'absolute' majority required for election, and a new election will be needed! So 'Oztracism' is NOT reforming the Oz electoral system, its been the law for 80 years, and its time we all know and use it - not just to stop an ILLEGAL GST in 2000, but kick start MAD and REAL tax reform! Well if you all read this far, I and the JCEM, may get more feedback than we can handle, so I'll finish here with the observation that JCEM Chairman Gary Nairn's opposition to '1st-past-the-post' at the Brisbane hearing (see transcript at was genuine so he would really like to announce the truth of
'Oztracism', and expose the per-petrators of the 'Canberra Dodge'. The
more e-mail he gets at
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] the more encouraged he will be to do the honourable thing
with the report! Whether that could help NZ depends if there is still any
requirement for absolute majorities in your elections, or whether enough Kiwis
like the more accountable democracy of 'Oztracism'.
Regards, thanks for your support, and looking forward to your replies Jim Stewart +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Feedback:
Republic v. Monarchy
With the royal Visit only eleven days
away, the media have already stared to spew out their republican misinformation
as you will see from the following article appearing in today's Sydney Morning
Herald.
The email address for Letters to the Editor is: [EMAIL PROTECTED] There is no need, I am sure, to point out
the inaccuracies and untruths in this article. Please give every
consideration to writing a letter of protest at this type of continuing
propaganda and emailing it to the above address.
Many thanks,
Richard Wood Richard J. Wood A royal guide: the correct use of
impertinence
All toadying aside, how should republicans behave during Liz's sojourn down under? Peter FitzSimons provides some answers. HOLD the phones and pass the port. The Queen of England will be here shortly. This presents a very embarrassing problem, and I don't just mean Phil. I mean: how should all good republicans behave if they happen upon her? Monarchists don't have this quandary of course, for it is simply in their bones that correct form is to curtsy and bow on the way down to lying prostrate in the hope of having your tummy tickled with the royal foot. But for the rest of us it's not so easy. If one wants to remain essentially polite - and that actually describes most of us republicans - it means you simply can't bare your bottom in the classic fashion, and must therefore fall back on more regular forms. With that in mind - after much thought and consultation with my good mate, Kevin Brumpton - please find following, a rough post-referendum guide on How to Behave When Around Mrs Kwin ... Rule 1: don't mention the
referendum. Rule 2: Don't ask why it's taken so long
to visit. Rule 3: Don't curtsy.
Rule 4: Don't fondle the
Queen. Rule 5: Don't ask why Her Majesty isn't
coming to the Olympics. Rule 6: Don't ask why she brought HRH
The Duke of Edinburgh with her. Rule 7: Don't ask anything remotely
political. Rule 8: Don't mention the
flag. Rule 9: Don't ask why we're footing the
bill. Rule 10: Don't ask when one of her
grandchildren will be schooling in Australia. Rule 11: Don't ask stupid
questions. Let us know what you think. Feedback is important. Comments
on articles read would be of value. Do you agree / disagree? Can you add more or
a different perspective. Your contributions are greatly appreciated.
Send this email on to as many as you can.
The more that read it the merrier. In time email communication will make
government censorship impractical and the newspapers will have to start
reporting it as it really is, rather than the smoke and mirrors tricks they
currently indulge in, or loose readership, and therefore advertising monies.
While we have a long way to go before that happens, each epic journey
must start with a single step.
Antonia Feitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Editorial Policy
If you wish to raise an issue without being
identified as such, please make it clear that this is your wish, either by
marking the correspondence Private & Confidential, in which case nothing
will get printed, or by just stating that while the issue can be raised, your
name is not to appear with it. Failing which all items received relating to the
News Report are considered publishable (subject to a common sense
test).
Disclaimer.
Opinions posted on the News Report are those of
the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the News
Report or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright
law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted
works. |
