news

(Click on a red News Story title to go down to it, or just scroll down the page through them all)

Tell A Friend!
Type In Your Name: Type In Your E-mail: Your Friend's E-mail: Your Comments: Receive copy:

An influential global-warming expert who for nearly 20 years has pressed countries to cut emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases now says the emphasis on carbon dioxide may be misplaced. Instead, he and a team of scientists have concluded that the quickest way to slow warming is to cut other heat-trapping greenhouse gases first.

This strategy could help policy-makers overcome a fundamental conflict in the debate over global warming: Carbon dioxide, the main heat-trapping gas in the air, is an unavoidable byproduct of the burning of fossil fuels such as coal and oil -- and combustion of fossil fuels is the foundation of industrial societies.

The expert, Dr. James E. Hansen, and his colleagues conclude in a new analysis that the warming seen in recent decades was caused mainly by other heat-trapping emissions -- methane, chlorofluorocarbons, black particles of diesel and coal soot and compounds that create the ozone in smog. These are far easier to control than carbon dioxide, and some of them are already on the decline.

The team, which reported its findings last week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found that the burning of fossil fuels, although substantially raising carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, also produces a pall of particle haze that reflects as much of the sun's energy back into space as the release of carbon dioxide has trapped in the air, Hansen said.

The haze from combustion is likely to be cleaned up in coming years, removing its cooling, sun-blocking effect, said Hansen, who is director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies. And during the course of the century, he added, carbon dioxide levels will still have to be reduced to prevent further warming.

Meanwhile, emissions of carbon dioxide from human activities may be decreasing; he said they shrank slightly in 1998 and 1999, even as the global economy grew.

As a result, he said, the world may find it easier and less costly to slow climate change than he and other scientists had thought, at least in the short term.

Some climatologists greeted Hansen's new paper with dismay, saying they feared it would be misused by those who are skeptical about global warming or by critics of a proposed treaty, the Kyoto Protocol, which would commit industrialized nations to big cuts in greenhouse-gas emissions.

Representatives of industries most vulnerable to restrictions on carbon dioxide welcomed the findings, saying they raised provocative questions about the need for vigorous action on the climate.

In 1981, Hansen was a principal author of one of the first papers spelling out the links between rising atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide and rising global temperatures.

SCIENTISTS were last night embroiled in an argument over the extent to which ice is disappearing from the Arctic as a result of global warming.

An American researcher claimed that the ice cap at the North Pole had completely melted for the first time in 50 million years and that it had been replaced by a mile-wide area of ocean. But a leading British Arctic scientist said that the emergence of ice-free areas was nothing new and that it had been happening for thousands of years.

Dr Peter Wadhams, director of the Scott Polar Institute in Cambridge, said yesterday: "Claims that the North Pole is now ice-free for the first time in 50 million years is complete rubbish, absolute nonsense . . . What is happening is of concern but it is gradual, not sudden or stupendous."

He agreed that the extent of open water in the summer months was on the rise, as was the thinning of the Arctic ice.

The claim that the Pole is ice free for the first time came from Dr James McCarthy of the American Museum of Natural History and the director of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard University. On a trip to the Arctic, he witnessed the mile-wide ice-free cap and put out a press release which was picked up by the New York Times.

Chicago Sun-Times; 22 Aug 2000; Newsday
BY ROBERT COOKE

Just because the North Pole recently was covered by open water doesn’t mean the ice cap is melting.

What has always seemed like a rock-solid foundation of ice at the pole has disappeared, at least temporarily, a recent visit by a Russian icebreaker found.

The report of an ice-free area at the North Pole raised concerns about global warming, feeding into fears that massive climate change is occurring. Recent reports have also shown the ice cap becoming thinner and shrinking around its edges. But such changes may not be unusual, and changes in temperature may not be responsible.

Scientists advise everyone to calm down.

“This is what is called a polyna, a fissure in the pack ice. These are known to exist, including at the North Pole,” said George Kukla, a paleo-climatologist at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory.

“When you look at sea ice, it’s not just temperature that governs what it’s doing,” said arctic climate specialist Mark Serreze at the University of Colorado. “The winds are involved in blowing it around. You can have a large cyclone move into the area, which causes the ice to diverge, an opening in the pack ice. Polyna is a Russian word for an open area” in the ice.

Much of the measuring of polar ice is now done with satellites, and ice and clouds look similar from space. Estimates of ice thickness are also sketchy because the sampling has not been thorough.

Serreze, who did his dissertation on the subject, said “we’ve known for years that these open areas can develop” in the polar ice. “These are not by any means unknown. It’s happened before and will happen again.”

On the other hand, if the open water area was truly large, Serreze said “it would certainly be odd to see that.” But it still wouldn’t mean the ice cap is disappearing, he said.

There have been estimates that the North Pole has not been ice- free for 50 million years. But oceanographer Carl Wunsch, at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said that idea was pure speculation. “There have been periods within the past 100,000 years when the world was warmer than it is now,” and “what went on in the arctic then,” he said, is simply not known. Also, it is likely there have been other recent episodes with the pole occasionally being ice-free, other researchers said.

Nonetheless, there is no question that the whole Earth is gradually warming, Wunsch said.

“The world is getting warmer, it’s been getting warmer since people have been keeping instrumental records” of temperatures, he said. Also, in arctic regions “the ice is getting thinner, and the tundra is melting,” and both could be symptoms of global warming.

What is still not known, however, is whether all, part, or none of the warming is attributable to human activities, such as the burning of fossil fuels.

CHINAGATE: Navy to get Russian 'Sunburn.' Advanced missile's nuclear-warhead version already in China's hands

By Charles Smith
©© Aug, 2000 WorldNetDaily

The U.S. Navy has quietly announced a program to acquire a Russian anti-ship missile recently sold to China -- following the Clinton administration's decision to cancel the only U.S.-made missile that could do the same job.

The missile, the 3M82 Moskit, NATO code-named SS-N-22 "Sunburn," was recently purchased by China to arm two type 956 Sovremenny-class destroyers. Each of the new Chinese navy Sovremenny destroyers is armed with eight Sunburn missiles.

The ramjet-powered Sunburn is reportedly equipped with a nuclear warhead equal to 120,000 tons of TNT. Each Sunburn warhead is six times more powerful than the atomic bomb used on Hiroshima Japan.

WorldNetDaily confirmed the U.S. Navy's attempts to buy the Sunburn missiles with defense sources. The sources noted that the missiles purchased from Russia would not include nuclear warheads.

"The Russians should not be selling the Sunburn to anyone," stated Al Santoli, national security advisor to Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R.-Calif.

"This is an example of the criminal abandonment of essential military research and development by the Clinton administration," he said. "The Clinton administration is responsible for this lapse in critical research. We have known about the Sunburn for years. We could have, and should have, developed a counter before this."

"The Sunburn sales are most damaging to the U.S./Russian relations," added Santoli. "As long as communist China is the Clinton administration's 'strategic partner,' the Sunburn missiles will continue to be a threat."

Santoli also noted that Rohrabacher recently introduced a bill that would withhold debt re-scheduling with Russia unless the Russian military discontinues sales of the Sunburn missile to China.

"We have to be very concerned about the new Russian bi-polar turn toward China," Santoli told WND. "We urgently need to develop a defense against these deadly missiles. If the Navy purchase helps develop a defense, then so much the better," he said. "If the communist Chinese launch an invasion of Taiwan, then the number one threat to our aircraft carriers is the Sunburn."

Santoli is not the only defense analyst who is concerned about the new Sunburn missile. According to two top China experts, the Sunburn missiles and the new Russian destroyers are a significant threat to the U.S. Navy.

"Recently, the PLA Navy took delivery of its initial Russian Sovremenny-class destroyer. A second one will arrive in the fall, and there are ongoing negotiations for perhaps four more," said Edward Timperlake and William C. Triplett, in an article published April 13 in the Washington Times.

Triplett, a former China analyst at the CIA, and Edward Timperlake, a former Republican foreign policy aide in Congress, teamed up to write two books, "Year of the Rat" and "Red Dragon Rising."

"These ships were designed to be aircraft carrier 'killers,' as the PLA's principal newspaper noted on March 22. More ominously, the PLA's paper quietly confirmed that the SS-N-22 missiles carried aboard the Sovremenny can be 'nuclear capable,' " noted Timperlake and Triplett.

Last July, defense analyst Richard D. Fisher also wrote an evaluation of the Russian-built Sunburn missile being sold to China. Fisher, a former defense analyst for Rep. Chris Cox, R -Calif., now working for a Washington-based think-tank, says the U.S. Navy cannot stop the Sunburn.

"The Raduga Moskit (Sunburn) anti-ship missile is perhaps the most lethal anti-ship missile in the world," wrote Fisher in a review of the Chinese navy.

"The Moskit combines a Mach 2.5 speed with a very low-level flight pattern that uses violent end maneuvers to throw off defenses. After detecting the Moskit, the U.S. Navy Phalanx point defense system may have only 2.5 seconds to calculate a fire solution -- not enough time before the devastating impact of a 750-lb. warhead."

There is evidence supporting Fisher's allegations that the U.S. Navy cannot stop the Sunburn. The only U.S. missile capable of duplicating the Sunburn's blistering low-level performance is the Allied Signal Vandal. Vandal target drones reportedly penetrated U.S. Navy Aegis air defenses during trials. The Vandal program has been canceled by the Clinton administration.

The move by the U.S. Navy to seek the Sunburn was first reported April 17 by Aviation Week & Space Technology in an article titled "Sunburned." The Aviation Week article incorrectly noted that the deal would be similar to an earlier Navy effort in which it had "Boeing buy an air-launched version of the SS-N-22, the Ma-31, for use as an air-defense target."

WorldNetDaily has covered the U.S. Navy Ma-31 program, a target version of the Zvezda Kh-31A, NATO code-named AS-17 Krypton, supersonic missile. The sales of the Ma-31 to the U.S. Boeing Company are part of an ongoing deal between Boeing and Zvezda-Strela State Scientific-Industrial Center to deliver 2000 Ma-31 missiles over a 10-year period.

The Zvezda Ma-31 is not related to the SS-N-22 Sunburn, which is made by the Raduga Machine Design Bureau in Russia. According to official U.S. Navy sources, the 1,100-pound Ma-31 does not replicate the massive 9,920-pound Sunburn. According to official U.S. Navy statements, the Ma-31 missile can fly "only 16 miles on the deck" and cannot duplicate the Sunburn's performance of over 50 miles at low level.

However, the Zvezda missile deal with Moscow is reportedly flawed. The Ma-31 deal included an alleged kickback of over $200,000 per missile for the Russian Generals.

The Ma-31 purchase also left the U.S. Navy without a means to simulate the Sunburn anti-ship missile threat. The updated U.S.-made Vandal target drone, re-named the Sea Snake, was canceled last year by the Clinton administration in favor of purchasing the inadequate Zvezda MA-31.

The Sunburn sale comes after the Clinton administration denied the sale of Aegis missile ships to Taiwan. The Clinton administration denial of the Aegis missile system leaves Taiwan with no defense against the Sunburn-armed Sovremenny 956A warships now being deployed by China.

According to the U.S. Naval Institute, the first of two 8,480-ton Russian navy project Sovremenny 956A destroyers for China was originally built for the Soviet navy as the Vazhnyy in 1988. The ship was launched in May 1994 and renamed the Yekaterinburg before work was halted.

In 1996, the Chinese People's Liberation Army Navy negotiated to buy the Yekaterinburg and another 956A class destroyer named the Alexandr Nevskiy. The Yekaterinburg has been delivered to the Chinese navy and is currently deployed across the Taiwan Strait. The Chinese navy is scheduled to acquire the second type 956A destroyer by the end of 2000.

"It is our judgment that in the event of hostilities over Taiwan, China will declare these ships to be 'Strategic Nuclear Assets' in defense of their homeland," concluded Timperlake and Triplett. "When a 'Strategic Nuclear Asset' is threatened, the world is on the edge of a nuclear exchange."

U.S. helps Russia build better missile
Documents show Clinton permitting
development of anti-radar weapon

MA-31 Krypton missile

WorldNetDaily has obtained documents showing that the Clinton administration is helping Russia to improve a deadly new missile.

According to the newly released documents, obtained from the U.S. Navy through the Freedom of Information Act, the Clinton administration has an ongoing contract with Russian-based weapons-maker Zvezda Strella and U.S. weapons-maker Boeing/Douglas to develop jointly "pre-planned product improvements (P3I)" for the Kh-31 "Krypton" anti-radar missile. The deadly Krypton missile is designed to destroy American Patriot and Aegis radar systems.

"If true, this is worse than Loral or Hughes (security scandals)," commented a national security source inside Capitol Hill. "This is not a commercial satellite venture. The Krypton is a weapon."

The American improvements to the Russian Krypton, including design and fuel changes for "extended range," were given directly to the Russian missile contractor in a joint U.S./Russian "Foreign Technology Comparison Test" program. The documents show that since 1995, U.S. and Russian weapons engineers have worked together on the joint project to test and improve the advanced Krypton missile for use as a Navy target missile.

"We cannot deny the authenticity of the documents," said Russian Embassy press officer Mikhail Shugalian from his office in Washington, D.C. "Otherwise, I can provide no comment."

Last month, WorldNetDaily reported that American defense contractor Orbital Sciences won the U.S. Navy Supersonic Sea-Skimming Target drone contract, beating a combined team of Boeing and Russian contractor Zvezda that offered an "extended-range" Krypton missile. However, the Orbital Sciences target will not be ready for Navy testing until 2001 or 2002, resulting in a Navy shortage of target missiles.

To fill the gap, the Clinton administration has an active contract with Russia to provide as many as two hundred more MA-31 Krypton target missiles. Boeing spokesman Bob Alarotti confirmed that the U.S. Navy deal with Boeing and Russian contractor Zvezda to supply Krypton target missiles is continuing. Alarotti also confirmed Russian and U.S. engineers have tested the missile.

"We have an active contract with the Navy to supply MA-31 (Krypton) targets from Russia," stated Boeing spokesman Bob Alarotti. "There have been a whole series of tests done against the missile since the mid-1990s."

"Boeing is not able to comment on any improvements made to the Krypton," said Alarotti. "That information will have to be obtained through the U.S. Navy Department."

According to one Russian source, the Krypton missiles supplied to the U.S. Navy are a little more than a "hollow target shell." In 1995, Navy personnel quickly determined that the Russian Krypton target missiles couldn't be used to test anti-missile electronic counter-measures. The review document noted that the Russian Kryptons supplied to the U.S. Navy do not include the all-important radar "seeker" and guidance electronics from the weapon version of the missile.

"Removal of the seeker will preclude use of the MA-31 for testing the effectiveness of soft-kill EW (electronic warfare) systems and decoys," states the 1995 report.

Boeing spokesman Bob Alarotti confirmed for WorldNetDaily that the Russian Krypton missiles supplied to the U.S. Navy did not include the electronics and "seeker" head.

"The Russians supply the basic MA-31 Krypton vehicle only," stated Alarotti. "No Russian electronics. No Russian radar seeker."

Despite the allegations of direct assistance to Russia, the U.S. Navy intends to continue the Russian Krypton target program, and perhaps with good reason. According to defense analyst Richard Fisher, Russia has sold the weapon version of the Krypton to China.

"China recently signed a deal with Russia to co-produce the extended-range version of the Krypton," said Jamestown Foundation fellow Richard Fisher.

"The Chinese intend to produce the KR-1, their own version of the Kh-31p improved Krypton. In addition, the recent sale of Russian Sukhoi SU-30MK supersonic strike bombers to the Chinese air force also includes Krypton missiles. We can expect to see the Krypton to proliferate."

According to a July 2000 General Accounting Office report, "unless the Navy can improve the self-defense capabilities of its surface ships, these ships will be increasingly vulnerable to cruise missile threats."

"The threat to surface ships from sophisticated anti-ship cruise missiles is increasing," states the General Accounting Office report, titled "Comprehensive Strategy Needed to Improve Ship Cruise Missile Defense."

"Nearly 70 nations have deployed sea- and land-launched cruise missiles, and 20 nations have air-launched cruise missiles. Current anti-ship cruise missiles are faster, stealthier, and can fly at lower altitudes than the missiles that hit the U.S.S. Stark in 1987, killing 37 sailors. The next generation of anti-ship cruise missiles -- most of which are now expected to be fielded by 2007 -- will be equipped with advanced target seekers and stealthy design. These features will make them even more difficult to detect and defeat."

The problem-plagued Navy Krypton project is also dogged by allegations of improper financial activity. In 1999, Jane's Defense reported that each Krypton missile purchase included a 28 percent "fee" given directly to Russian generals. Navy documents obtained using the Freedom of Information Act show that each MA-31 missile costs $910,000. The extremely high price for the MA-31 is almost twice the cost of similar U.S. weapons.

The 28 percent fee per-missile amounts to over a quarter million dollars per missile paid directly to the Russian generals. U.S. Navy managers have previously denied any knowledge of allegations of corruption regarding kickbacks in the payments for the Russian missiles.

"We send the money to the Russians," stated Mr. G. Hotze the U.S. Navy program manager for the MA-31 program in October 1999, "What they do with it is their business."

According to the documentation, the American program to improve the Russian Krypton missile was intended to provide the U.S. Navy with a super-sonic target drone. Defense contractor McDonnell Douglas wrote a 1995 document, titled "MA-31 FOREIGN TECHNOLOGY COMPARISON TEST (FCT) PROGRAM REVIEW HIGHLIGHTS," showing that the Russian missile needed to be improved.

"The MA-31 target will need (pre-planned product improvements) P3I in order to meet the range and ground/surface launch requirements for the Supersonic Sea-Skimming Target program. The range of the MA-31 target in its FCT configuration is approximately 15 nm (nautical miles) at low altitude," states the review document.

According to the 1995 McDonnell Douglas review, one "extended-range option" given to the Russian contractor "adds an auxiliary fuel tank, a reduced-drag nose cone, changes the fuel to JP-10 (which has a higher specific energy content than the Russian fuel), and modifies the ramjet nozzle. The extended-range modification is intended to increase range to approximately 42 nm (nautical miles) at 10m (meter) altitude."

Another crucial design improvement given to Russia involved "Ground Jettison Testing" done by the U.S. defense contractor with the Russian missile. According to the 1995 program review document, the Russian-built AKY-58M missile launcher for the MA-31 was fatally flawed and could destroy the airplane, killing the pilot. This flaw was discovered and the Russian contractor was informed to make specific design changes to the missile launcher to correct the fatal flaw.

"An anomaly was encountered during testing of the emergency jettison sequence," states the 1995 review document. "In three emergency jettison tests, the lanyard stayed with the launch rail instead of with the target. In all cases, the booster would have been armed, and ignition could have occurred for any of several reasons. MDAC (McDonnell Douglas) has determined that use of a longer lanyard and slower separation velocity would allow proper operation of the emergency jettison sequence. The problem has been turned over to the Russians for resolution."

There is an odd, fascinating beauty about them, these primitive, spiral-shaped forms we would never see at all if they were not magnified 50,000 to 60,000 times. They are borrelia burgdorferi, the germs that cause Lyme disease.

Arno Karlen has written Biography of a Germ about borrelia burgdorferi, because its story helps to answer the question: How come so many strange new diseases seem to be appearing out of nowhere? CBS News Sunday Morning Correspondent Martha Teichner reports.

"Borrelia burgdorferi has an ancient lineage, far older than ours, and despite all the vaccines and antibiotics we devise, it has a more promising future," according to Karlen's book. "It preceded people and will doubtless survive us. For that reason alone, it deserves respectful biographers."

Something called an arenavirus has just made its appearance in the United States, killing three people in California.

Last summer, West Nile virus, which is transmitted by mosquitoes, put New York City in a panic. Public health officials realized that hundreds of birds, dropping out of the sky and dying, had the same disease as a growing number of people reporting mysterious flu-like symptoms, high fevers and even paralysis.

A total of 62 people were hospitalized. Seven died.
Ignoring environmental concerns, the city began extensive insecticide spraying, hoping to contain the disease. But scientists couldn't help but wonder whether the West Nile virus would survive the winter.

The answer, we now know, is yes.

Dr. Ward B. Stone, New York State's wildlife pathologist, sees the disease spreading as far and as fast as birds fly. He believes it is only a matter of time before the West Nile virus is all over the continent.

And Dr. Stone and his staff are swamped. Every couple of hours, a UPS truck shows up at their lab outside Albany loaded with picnic coolers containing dead birds, mostly crows and blue jays. Dead birds are arriving at a rate of more than 500 a day.

Each time the West Nile virus is the cause of death, and sd another bird species is affected, Dr. Stone becomes more alarmed. He worries that the bald eagle, the U.S. national symbol, could be wiped out.

So far this summer, only three people have been diagnosed with the disease. No one has died.

How did the West Nile virus get so far? It was first discovered in Uganda in 1937. Scientists speculate it reached the United States by airplane, thanks to a stowaway mosquito with the virus, or even an infected passenger. Every year, more than 2 million people fly into New York from places where the West Nile virus is found.

Says Karlen, "Look. Before you had modern transport, no epidemic could move faster than a person could walk."

Ask Karlen why there are so many new, scary diseases, and he'll tell you: It's how we live. This is what happens when we mess with Mother Nature, disturbing the live-and-let-live truce a germ and the animal it occupies have worked out over tens of thousands of years.

He explains, "Because of our technology, or a change in our lifestyle, now suddenly we're exposed to it, and it becomes a human epidemic. Also, because it's new to us, we don't have defenses. When any host meets a germ that it isn't accustomed to, the result is really an acute infection, and that's what we get with Lyme disease, borrelia burgdorferi."

That's why a deer that's carrying Lyme disease won't get sick with it. But you probably will. Last year, about 16,000 cases of Lyme disease were diagnosed across the United States. The number keeps going up.

Block Island, a busy summer resort off the coast of Rhode Island, is one of the United States' Lyme disease hot spots and a classic example of how messing with Mother Nature can make people sick.

It began when deer were brought to the island in 1967, because residents believed hunting would be good for the economy.

Soon after Dr. Peter Brassard arrived in the mid-'80s, he started seeing patients with what turned out to be Lyme disease.

"It was a gold mine of research," says Dr. Brassard. "Look. I got an island with a moat around it. I was the only doctor, and they couldn't go anywhere else."

Block Island proved to be the perfect laboratory. Posters caution hikers to check for the tiny deer tick, no bigger than a poppy seed, that spreads the disease.

In a referendum four years ago, Block Islanders voted 3-to-1 for a drastic reduction of the herd. Many would like the island's deer eliminated altogether.

Town council members are constantly reminded of campaign promises to undo what was done by bringing deer to the island.

"When you change an ecosystem," explains Karlen, "you are going to have more changes than you anticipate. Be ready for surprises."

Surprises like Lyme disease and West Nile virus, which stalk humans faster than modern medicine can cope.

Karlen notes, "The ability to cure or prevent many diseases has provoked fantasies of life without infection, a glistening sterile future from which microbes had vanished. But it was always absurd to think that we could or should keep germs out of our lives."

So we remain permanently vulnerable to that next new disease.

"One thing lingers on the horizon, and it's nasty," according to Karlen. "There are good reasons to expect that somewhere in the vaguely foreseeable future, whether it's 10 or 50 or 100 years, we are very possibly going to have one enormous and very lethal epidemic. It's very possible that it will be a germ we don't even know yet. It's out there. It hasn't met us yet."

We can peer at a pond and look for danger or beauty. We can marvel at the millions of microorganisms that exist there.

As Karlen writes: "Only a small minority can make us sick, and most of those die trying. Pathogens lack malice. They are just trying to survive, and sometimes they must do so at other creatures' expense. The same could be said of humans."

Prostitutes killed in bid to 'cleanse Holy Land'
Religious fanatics suspected of waging war on sex trade

Prostitutes burnt to death in Tel Aviv arson attacks
20 August 2000; © 2000 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd.
By Eric Silver in Tel Aviv

The ninth of the Hebrew month of Av, when Jews lament the destruction of the temples of Solomon and Herod, is second only to Yom Kippur among their solemn fasts. Six days later, the calendar swings from sackcloth to ecstasy with the local equivalent of Valentine's Day, celebrated by guitar-toting young Israelis with all-night rock and romance beneath the stars.

This year, the week, beginning on 10 August and ending on the 16th, was marked by more zeal than love. A vicious campaign against the sex trade in sleazy south Tel Aviv started on the fast day itself, when four escort services and sex shops were set ablaze. It climaxed with an early morning fire in a ground-floor brothel at 51 Golomb Street, near a decaying old bus station haunted by drug pushers, footloose foreign workers and homeless Israelis sleeping rough.

The charred bodies of four prostitutes who had been asphyxiated by smoke were found trapped between the buckled steel door and the barred windows of the shabby concrete building. All the signs pointed to arson. Two more escort services were attacked the same night, although there were no other casualties.

Police launched a murder inquiry into the deaths of the four women, a mixture of Russian immigrants and veteran Israelis, and stepped up security on the 150 brothels and sex shops of Israel's "Sin City".

By this weekend no arrests had been made. The timing of the attacks points towards religious fanatics trying to cleanse the Holy Land of vice. "Modesty patrols", more common in Jerusalem than Tel Aviv, often attack women for showing too much leg or even elbow, and set fire to bus shelter adverts for swimwear or cosmetics. But the Tel Aviv police chief, Commander Shlomo Aharonisk, said: "We do not rule out any possibility, from ultra-Orthodox Jews to turf wars between rival gangs."

Yael Dayan, chairperson of the parliamentary women's rights committee, who has often criticised the police for not taking sex crime seriously enough, said yesterday: "They are putting a lot of work into it this time. I expect to see results within a few days."

Police are hunting a serial arsonist, acting alone or with a team. His summer offensive has renewed pressure, from women's and human rights groups, for the government to crack down on the highly organized flesh trade run by local criminals and a newer Russian element.

According to police, about 1,000 prostitutes work in Tel Aviv. Hundreds of women are smuggled into Israel every year from the former Soviet Union and its satellites. Some know they are to work as prostitutes; others think they are coming to be waitresses, dancers or nurses.

The gangs take their passports. Pimps buy and sell the women for $3,000-$20,000 each, pay them badly, if at all, and keep them in conditions akin to bonded labour. They insist that they cover the gangs' investment, receiving up to 20 clients a day, before they see any money. If the women complain to the police or are picked up in raids, they are sent home penniless. "These pimps are so greedy," a woman identified as Alina told the Israel Women's Network before she was deported to Ukraine.

In May, Amnesty International accused Israel of failing to take action to stamp out the trade. "This is so even though many of the women have been subjected to human rights abuses such as enslavement or torture, including rape and other forms of sexual abuse, by traffickers, pimps, or others involved in the sex industry," it said.

Spurred by the Amnesty report, the Knesset outlawed trafficking and pimping, although prostitution itself is still legal. Offenders convicted of smuggling and selling women face up to 16 years in prison, pimps between seven and 10 years. The police have set up a special unit, working with Interpol.

Boris Yasser, an 18-year-old from the port city of Ashdod, was arrested in June, accused of helping his father to smuggle four women into Israel from Ukraine. He is now on trial charged with kidnapping, threats, forgery, assault, pimping, rape and holding prisoners.

"The police are taking these things very seriously now," Yael Dayan acknowledged.

Too late, though, for the four blackened victims, one of them still unidentified, of Tel Aviv's Valentine's Day inferno.

SANTA FE ---- The sister and friends of a woman who died last week kept her body in an apartment room for four days, hoping for reincarnation, police said.
"They all believe in spiritual healing, and they were all waiting for that healing to occur through reincarnation," Deputy Police Chief Beverly Lennen said Thursday.

"They believed that their religion rather than medication would heal them," Lennen said. "Upon the one female's death, they gave her a period for reincarnation to occur, and when that did not occur, they notified us."

Linda Washburn, 50, is believed to have died of natural causes last week, but Santa Fe police were awaiting the results of an autopsy.

"There is no indication whatsoever of foul play," Lennen said. "In this case, all were adults and all appeared to be able to take care of themselves. But once all the results are received, it will be reviewed to assure us that there is nothing to suggest either neglect or foul play."

Officers learned of the woman's death Sunday, when a woman called police to say her sister was dead "next to her in bed." The caller later was identified as the dead woman's sister, Ann Washburn, 52.
The officers then were told "the approximate time of death would have been some time on the previous Wednesday (Aug. 9)," Lennen said.

Ann Washburn and the dead woman's roommate, Mark Angell, 29, said they hadn't notified authorities "because they wanted to see if Linda would be reincarnated. They reported the death on Aug. 13, after a four-day wake period," a police report states.

"There was an issue on the condition of the body so they gave up hope of reincarnation and felt they needed to contact us already," Lennen said. "There was an odor in the room; decomposition had begun."

Investigators collected items that could indicate some type of "religious activity" took place, Lennen said. She would not disclose the items.

Heroin-shooting gallery gets OK. First Heroin Injecting Room Approved.
Updated 11:54 AM ET August 18, 2000 -- Reuters

CANBERRA (Reuters) - Australia's first approved heroin shooting gallery will be opened later this year after the Uniting Church officially received a state operating license for such a premises in Sydney on Friday.

Announcing the license, New South Wales state's Special Minister of State John Della Bosca said he expected the 18-month trial to start in October.

The church had originally hoped to have the safe injecting room open by now but was stalled as it waited for official approval.

Uniting Care executive director Reverend Harry Herbert said the first step was to renovate the proposed center, a former pinball parlor, in Sydney's inner-city Kings Cross district and recruit staff.

Herbert was skeptical about opening in October with building work around Sydney expected to be affected for at least two weeks by the Olympics which start in the city on September 15.

Della Bosca dismissed talk of a deliberate delay until after the Olympics to avoid any adverse international publicity.

The director of the injecting room, Dr Ingrid van Beek, said the trial would be of benefit to the community and drug users.

"Many drug users die simply because they collapse alone in back alleys, parks or dingy rooms and are not found until it is too late to resuscitate them," van Beek told reporters.

She said around 360 people died of heroin overdoses in Australia in 1998, up from 292 in the previous year.

Australian Prime Minister John Howard has warned New South Wales that any "shooting gallery" plan would contravene the 1961 Convention on Narcotics Drugs.

!THE NEW WORLD DISORDER!
U.N. rapid reaction force; House bill pushes for United Nations standing army

A measure that would create a United Nations Rapid Reaction Force, calling for the U.S. representative to the U.N. to push for the creation of a 6,000-man force capable of deploying to trouble spots on a moment's notice, has been introduced into the House of Representatives. The bill, HR 4453, titled the "United Nations Rapid Deployment Police and Security Force Act of 2000," was referred to the House Committee on International Relations May 15. First reported nationally by the Asheville Tribune, the measure was sponsored by Rep. James P.McGovern, D-Mass., and to date has garnered 19 cosponsors.

According to a bill summary, key portions of the measure require the president to direct the U.S. representative to the United Nations to use the voice, vote and influence of the United States to urge the U.N. to:

· establish a United Nations Rapid Deployment Police and Security Force under the authority of the Security Council that is trained to standardized objectives;

The bill would require lawmakers to establish clear mission statements as to when, where and how the force would be used, "including when the Security Council determines that an imminent threat to the peace requires a preventive deployment or that ongoing gross violations of human rights or breaches of the peace require rapid intervention."

The bill also sets a 6,000-man limit on the number of forces that would constitute such a unit, made up of "volunteers from U.N. member nations who will be deployed only by Security Council resolution."

Finally, the measure limits deployments to six months and "requires [the forces'] basing and infrastructure service to be leased from existing member nations' institutions.

According to lawmakers, the bill is in response to Presidential Decision Directive 71, which, according to a bill summary, "calls for a stronger United States response to maintaining order in societies recovering from conflict." If passed, the bill would "improve coordination of United States efforts and ... enhance the ability of other countries, the United Nations, and regional organizations to plan, mount, and sustain operations in support of the rule of law."

It would not, however, support deployment of a rapid reaction force to an area where "peace has been restored to a region but the rule of law has not yet been reestablished."

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who reportedly favors the bill, said Feb. 24 in response to delayed deployment of U.N.-sponsored police forces to Kosovo, that "present international capabilities are not adequate" to deal with such demands.

"In response, we must recognize that old models of peacekeeping don't always meet current challenges," Albright said. "Peace operations today often require skills that are neither strictly military nor strictly police, but rather, a combination of the two.

"The international community needs to identify and train units that are able to control crowds, deter vigilante actions, prevent looting and disarm civilian agitators while, at the same time, winning the trust of the communities in which they are deployed," concluded Albright.

In his April 2000 report, "We the Peoples: The Role of the United Nations in the 21st Century," Annan said the process the U.N. implements in launching peacekeeping missions "has sometimes been compared to a volunteer fire department," a description he said was often "too generous."

"Every time there is a fire, we must first find fire engines and the funds to run them before we can start dousing any flames," Annan said. "The present system relies almost entirely on last-minute, ad hoc arrangements that guarantee delay, with respect to the provision of civilian personnel even more so than military."

The House summary also noted that in "July 1999, 4,700 civilian police officers were requested to be deployed to the Serbian province of Kosovo, but as of April 17, 2000, the United Nations has deployed only 2,901 of the requested police officers, resulting in the breakdown of law and order and the escalation of unrest in Kosovo."

And legislators supportive of a U.N. rapid reaction force say that in the case of Sierra Leone earlier this year, in Srebrenica, Bosnia, on July 11, 1995, and in a few other recent cases, U.N.-backed troops and civilian law personnel have been chased out of their assigned duty areas, sometimes leaving behind equipment and supplies, stolen and used by warring factions.

Lawmakers also complain that U.N.-sponsored peacekeeping missions are staffed, almost by design, by "undertrained" personnel, and that such missions are routinely "understaffed."

Though the measure states that Congress and the U.S. government would retain the right to back out of any U.N. Security Council decision to undertake peacekeeping missions "not in the interests of the United States," critics worry nonetheless that U.S. interests could too easily be undermined by a supranational world body with no accountability to the American people.

The measure will likely face stiff opposition in the Senate, where it would ultimately end up at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, chaired by vehement U.N. critic Sen. Jesse Helms, R-N.C.

In a speech to the U.N. Security Council in Washington, D.C., on March 30, Helms offered to work with the U.N. to improve the U.S.-U.N. relationship, but said, "others want the U.N. to travel down a very different path" anathema to U.S. national interests.

"They envision a United Nations which has the sole authority to legitimize the use of force, and to insist on the authority to sit in judgment of the foreign policy decisions of the United States," said Helms. "They are pressing for an International Criminal Court that purports to hold American citizens under its jurisdiction, even if the United States has neither signed nor ratified the treaty. They see the U.N. as the central authority of the new international order of global laws and global governance."

Helms added, "Improved U.S. relations with a U.N. that travels down this path will be difficult, if not impossible."

By Henry Lamb
©© 1999 WorldNetDaily.com

Where was the mainstream news media when Hillary Clinton introduced Walter Cronkite to the World Federalist Association on Oct. 19? Television cameras focused on Hillary's baseball cap; it is far more important that voters know where she stands on the issue of national sovereignty. Not until WorldNetDaily reported the Cronkite speech Nov. 30, did Americans discover that both Hillary and Walter are avid advocates of world government.

Cronkite says, "democracy, civilization itself, is at stake," unless the "basic structure of our global community" is changed in the next few years. Cronkite's appeal for world government came only five days before the release of the Charter for Global Democracy which embodies the version of world government preferred by the United Nations Association.

Both the UNA and the WFA have been promoting world government for years. Cronkite's group, the WFA, prefers a "federalist" system which would create a weighted system of voting in the U.N. General Assembly to create a legislative body roughly akin to the American Congress. The UNA prefers a "consensus" process that takes into account recommendations offered by civil society (non-government organizations accredited by the U.N.).

Both organizations want to elevate the U.N. to world government status and empower the U.N. to enforce all international law. In fact, in 1986, the WFA filed suit against the United States over U.S. foreign policy, arguing that Article VI of the U.S. Constitution made the U.N. Charter as well as other U.N. treaties, the "supreme law of the land." The courts ruled against the WFA in 1989.

Hillary's presence at the WFA meeting, and her introduction of Cronkite, directly aligns her with the world government movement, and particularly with the WFA's world government aspirations.

Cronkite called for the "revision" and limitation of the veto power of permanent members of the U.N. Security Council. The Commission on Global Governance and the Charter for Global Democracy call for the elimination of both the veto and permanent member status on the Security Council. This latter recommendation will be presented as the needed "reform" to the Millennium Assembly next September. Cronkite's more timid approach, as well as his "federalism" ideas have been overwhelmed by the U.N.'s "consensus" process now on a fast track toward adoption.

Cronkite called for the immediate ratification of a laundry list of U.N. treaties, including the infamous Convention on the Rights of the Child; the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW); and, "most important," Cronkite says, the International Criminal Court, which empowers the U.N. to prosecute American citizens whether or not it is ratified by the Senate.

Hillary made her support for these positions clear when she attended the U.N. Beijing Conference on Women in 1995.

Cronkite said in order to achieve world government, "Americans will have to yield up some of our sovereignty." He said, "the notion of unlimited national sovereignty means international anarchy."

Under the world government scheme embodied in the Charter for Global Democracy, any individual nation could wield only the power assigned to it by the U.N. National armies would be disarmed to the level of a national police force. The U.N. would maintain a "directly recruited" standing army under the direct authority of the U.N. Secretary-General. Private citizens would be disarmed, and the U.N. would control the manufacture, sale, licensing and distribution of all firearms.

To finance this expanded world government, the U.N. would be given the authority to impose taxes on the exchange of currency, on the use of resources, including the air, outer space, and the seas. Taxing authority is seen not only as the source of unlimited revenue, but also as a way to force a reduction of natural resources, especially fossil fuels, water, trees, and minerals.

Like the Clinton administration, and other world government advocates, Cronkite demeans opponents. He says that like America's rejection of the League of Nations, current opposition to world government is "led by a handful of willful senators who choose to pursue their narrow, selfish political objectives at the cost of our nation's conscience."

He goes even further to single out the "Christian Coalition and the rest of the religious right wing" as the culprits who have kept the world in a state of sovereign anarchy and prevented the emergence of a "civilized force of law" administered by the United Nations.

The fact that people of the stature of Hillary Clinton and Walter Cronkite are now willing to publicly advocate world government is an indication of their confidence that the world is now ready to accept their plan. World government is no longer the exclusive domain of the "black helicopter crowd." Finally, the sinister plans to rule the world are being exposed by those who expect to rule.

The timeline is, indeed, short. After decades of silent and denied preparation, the United Nations has made public the millennium year agenda which is crowned by the largest gathering of heads of state in the history of the world next September.

World government, called "global governance" by the U.N., will not occur on any certain day. It is a process that has been underway for years. The Millennium Assembly and summit next September, with the adoption of the Charter for Global Democracy, is seen to be the point from which there is no turning back.

The only way to stop world government at this late date, is for the American people to send a government to Washington in the next election that can muster the courage to just say, "No."

By Mary Jo Anderson
©© 1999 WorldNetDaily.com

World leaders convened in San Francisco at the posh Fairmont hotel last week for the fifth annual State of the World Forum. The Forum is a project of the Gorbachev Foundation whose mission statement reads, "To serve as a non-partisan forum for addressing the central concerns facing humanity at the beginning of the new millennium." The overarching theme of this year's Forum was the establishment of a planetary government empowered to "enforce human rights."

As the chic leftists, with their new age gurus in tow, feasted sumptuously on $100 per plate dinners their chatter decried the plight of the poor. Enforcing equitable distribution of the world's resources demands global adoption of "sustainable development," as part of the "environmental rights" of all men.

We might laugh it off as the final utopian scheme of the millennium were it not for the deadly serious intent of some very influential people. Past and present speakers at the Forum include: George Bush, Margaret Thatcher, James A. Baker, III, media mogul Ted Turner, Jean Houston, Desmond Tutu, futurist John Naisbitt, Carl Sagan, Jesse Jackson, Deepak Chopra, alternative medicine star, Andrew Weil, Queen Noor of Jordan, Earth Council president Maurice Strong, primatologist Jane Goodall and Yashuhiro Nakasone. These luminaries were joined by U.S. senators and business leaders (namely, David Rockefeller and Steve Kirsch, CEO of Infoseek), Nobel laureates, spiritual gurus, indigenous peoples' representatives and world-class scientists. World peace, nuclear disarmament, and ecology rounded out the six-day agenda, but the centerpiece was a call for a "new world spirit" which recognizes the "unity of the human family" and the necessity of a world federation to keep peace in the family.

The $5,000 registration fee and scant promotional information ensured that only leftist guests and liberal-pedigreed participants were in attendance.

A roundtable discussion, "The United Nations in Ten years; The United Nations in One Hundred Years," admitted that the U.N. as it stood was only a foundation for the world federation which would require a voluntary army to "deter human rights abuses." Moderated by Tad Daly, director of Global Security Programs for the State of the World Forum, the discussion featured senator Alan Cranston and Tom Spencer, chairman of the Foreign Affairs Security and Defense Policy Committee of the European Parliament. The two were joined by various academics and diplomats who advocated abolishing the veto power of the U.N. Security Council -- a dated mechanism favoring the winners of World War II -- adopting instead a "Parliament of Humankind." World peace was possible if a "planetary patriotism" for the "Federal Republic of Earth" supplanted nationalism. The U.N. must also restructure the General Assembly, instituting a weighted voting process in place of the one country, one vote system now employed. This proposal would provide an equitable sharing of power among the more populous nations such as China and India.

Proponents of world government welcomed the advent of the International Criminal Court (ICC) as the framework for "enforceable world law" which would have juridical power over individuals as well as nations. Despite Oxford and Harvard degrees, none had an answer for a journalist who inquired who would police the peacekeepers and the planetary judges.

The roundtable was studded with members of the World Federalist Association, an organization with "consultative" status at the United Nations.

One late night "Socratic dialogue" explored "Worldviews by which we live" which served to deconstruct the Western Christian worldview in favor of a new hybrid which combines adulterated Hinduism, Buddhism and New Age silliness. Discussion leaders included Daniel Sheehan the director of "New Paradigm Initiative" for the State of the World Forum, pantheist biologist Rupert Sheldrake, a Tibetan chant scholar and Jose Arguelles, the author of "The Mayan Factor and Earth Ascending." The last evening's Socratic dialogue addressed quantum physics and its theological implications. Led by "mystics" interpreting physics, including Jean Houston and Margot Anand ("Everyday Ecstasy"), the session was preceded by an "ohmmmmmn" meditative chant while Houston read in a hypnotic tone a "prayer" for world unity of consciousness. The transfer of what remains of the Christian foundation of Western Civilization to a pop amalgamation of "the best of the wisdom traditions " was the goal of the dialogues.

Little imagination is required to see how clever a scheme it is to make "world unity" a "spiritual imperative."

Such global unity of mind, spirit and purpose forges a "cosmic consciousness" to be directed at the environment, at equitable distribution of planetary resources and at fostering voluntary sustainable development as defined by the one-worlders. One need but recall the distribution of environmental action kits to thousands of American churches and synagogues last year by the National Religious Partnership for the Environment to appreciate their victory. The NRPE mission? "Our goal is to integrate commitment to global sustainability and environmental justice permanently into all aspects of religious life."

The State of the World Forum, as the most visible arm of those shadowy hands on the levers of world power, has devised a masterful non-violent approach to achieving global government: Seduce the churches into promoting planetary citizenship where national borders are obliterated in the name of "environmental justice," a human right.

Americans who still find wisdom in nationhood as mediator between the individual and a "One World Destiny" the world federalists have outlined cannot comfortably dismiss the Forum as a collection of talking heads. The State of the World Forum and the United Nations will convene a joint special assembly in September 2000.
_____________________

On April 2, Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright ridiculed critics of the United Nations who say the world body is a threat to U.S. sovereignty.

"There are some who believe the U.N. is a sinister organization" with "a fleet of black helicopters which may, at any moment, swoop down into our back yards and steal our lawn furniture," she told a meeting of the American Society of Newspaper Publishers.

Ha, ha, ha. Pretty funny, huh? The assembled members of the media elite certainly thought so. They yucked it up at all the punchlines and gave Albright a standing O.

A day later, the U.N. Commission on Human Rights urged abolition of the death penalty globally, while one of its top investigators specifically singled out for criticism the United States' policies on executions. Waly Bacre Ndiaye of Senegal, who traveled the United States studying the use of the death penalty, said U.S. policy "seems to continue to be marked by arbitrariness."

A week later, the U.N.'s World Court intervened for the first time in a death penalty case, ordering the United States to spare the life of a Paraguayan facing execution in Virginia this week. The court doesn't contend, by the way, that the murderer, Angel Francisco Breard, is innocent of the crime. Rather, it found that his rights were violated because he wasn't informed of his right to assistance from the Paraguayan consul. In other words, he wasn't read his international Miranda rights.

If I wasn't seeing black helicopters before Albright's speech, I sure would be seeing them now. I hope this attempted intrusion into U.S. domestic affairs by the U.N. serves as a wakeup call to all Americans.

It's not just the U.N. we should be worried about. U.S. politicians like Albright and her boss are the bigger threat. They are literally rolling out the red carpet for this kind of attack on American constitutional self-government.

On March 30, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the appeal of a U.S. soldier facing a bad-conduct discharge for refusing to wear a U.N. shoulder patch and blue beret in a Macedonian "peacekeeping" mission. Army Spc. Michael New had argued, sensibly, that he is entitled to an honorable discharge because the order he disobeyed would have violated his oath of enlistment and turn him into a U.N. soldier.

"I have never taken an oath to the United Nations, but I have taken the required oath to support and defend the Constitution," New explained.

The Supremes didn't buy it. But maybe now, with the World Court pushing its weight around, they're not really the Supremes anymore.

There are other ominous signs on the horizon, and you don't have to be part of what Albright derisively calls "the black helicopter crowd" to see them.

If the U.N. has its way, the United States will soon be offering more than U.S. soldiers up as sacrificial offerings. Last July the U.N. Security Council voted to encourage members "to make appropriately trained police available to the organization at short notice, if possible through standby arrangements." It also agreed "to promote a standardized approach to the training and recruitment of civilian police."

Earlier this year, the United Nations held a "firearms workshop" in New Delhi, India, for the purpose of developing a "U.N. Universal Declaration of Principles." Needless to say, there were few advocates of inalienable gun rights at the meeting. "The right to possess firearms was discussed and the general consensus was that there was no right to possess firearms," explained delegate M.K. Shula. "I strongly believe that the possession of firearms for hunting should be totally prohibited." The kind of "universal declarations" under discussion at this meeting, once approved, are normally followed by a convention or "treaty." A treaty, by the way, becomes domestic law in America by a simple vote of the Senate.

Let's see: No death penalty ... U.N. busybodies traveling around the country studying our archaic ways ... U.S. soldiers under foreign command ... civilian cops trained for U.N. duty ... an end to the right to bear arms ... and we get to pick up most of the tab. What a bargain our U.N. membership is, huh? Anyone who doesn't like what they see gets ridiculed by our own secretary of state ... and laughed at by the know-nothing, pro-establishment press.

By Mary Jo Anderson
©© 2000 Mary Jo Anderson

Reports of transgressions perpetrated by the United Nations are routine, from Peru to East Timor to Kosovo. Not a day ticks by that some new story doesn't surface detailing the United Nations' mishandling of operations or outright abuse. Typically these assaults present themselves as peacekeeping interventions, humanitarian aid, education or human rights enforcement. Thus far the United Nations has escaped official sanction. That may soon change.

Suit has been filed on behalf of two Rwandan women who charge the United Nations with complicity in the 1994 genocidal massacre of 800,000 Tutsi people, approximately 75 percent of Rwanda's population. The suit is the first ever in the history of the United Nations. As countries move toward ratification of the International Criminal Court (ICC) treaty with its sweeping powers to indict individuals and nations, this suit raises a grave question: who will police the United Nations' police?

According to a Jan. 11 story carried by Independent News (UK), the Rwandan women are represented by Michael Hourigan, who has resigned from his position with the U.N.'s International Criminal Tribunal. Hourigan, a former South Australian crown prosecutor working in Kigali, became frustrated by attempts to block his official investigation of the Hutu assault on the Tutsis. He is joined in the suit by Geoffrey Robertson, an Australian human rights attorney. The Independent reports, "The women -- the widow of a former Rwandan Supreme Court judge and the sister of a Tutsi former cabinet minister -- accuse U.N. soldiers who were meant to defend their families of either handing them over to their killers or running away." Hourigan, interviewed by Melbourne Age, noted the murders were "caused by the cowardice, negligence and bungling of U.N. forces."

The suit comes on the heels of an internal investigation of the U.N.'s activity during Rwandan conflict. Chaired by former Swedish Prime Minister, Ingyar Carlsson, the assessment panel concluded that the U.N. peacekeeping forces in Rwanda failed to respond to reports of genocide. One of the plaintiffs, Anonciata Kavaruganda, widow of Rwandan Supreme Court judge, Joseph Kavaruganda, claims her husband was murdered "because he sympathized with the Tutsis." According to the Independent, Kavaruganda reports that "U.N. troops from Ghana, responsible for protecting her family, drank and socialized with Hutus while she and her children were being tortured."

Rony Braunam, former president of Doctors Without Borders, confirmed the failure of the peacekeeping efforts. His group reported: "The humanitarian intervention, far from representing a bulwark against evil, was in fact one of its appendages. ... The social and political role of humanitarian aid was simply to state-manage goodwill, to organize the spectacle of compassion."

U.N. secretary general, Kofi Annan conceded with "deep remorse" that the U.N. had failed to respond appropriately to the genocide. Annan was head of U.N. peacekeeping operations at the time of the Rwandan massacre. According to the Sydney Morning Herald, documents indicate Annan ignored warnings of genocide sent to the U.N.'s New York Headquarters by U.N. commander in Rwanda, General Romeo Dallaire of Canada. The cables Dallaire sent under "most immediate" status just three days before the General Assembly met to discuss the crisis in Rwanda were not made available to the Assembly. Documents given to Melbourne Age include cables that requested additional troops and insisted U.N. troops would stand by as Tutsis were handed over "for inevitable killing rather than use their weapons to save local people," and that government controlled radio was "exhorting the population to destroy all Tutsis." Annan did not forward the cabled information to the U.N. Security Council.

This suit and similar events serve as stark reminders that the U.N. and its agencies are not infallible or even consistently trustworthy. Credible voices have presented evidence of a distinct U.N. agenda at odds with many American legal traditions and cultural values. The International Criminal Court treaty is awaiting ratification by the nations. It places foreign judges, with no particular allegiance to the American Constitution, over American citizens. Recall the 1997 report to the U.N. Human Rights Commission written by the committee's "special rapporteur," that decried the "arbitrary" use of capital punishment in the U.S. Once the ICC is ratified, pressure on the United States to conform to world judicial norms set by the United Nations will increase.

Sober questions must be posed to all nations before they yield sovereignty in exchange for both a United Nations global peacekeeping force and its global tribunal, the International Criminal Court (ICC).

There is no restraining mechanism to check abuse of these proposed planetary powers. While cautious voices debate the merits of the U.N. as the world's peacekeeping body, and the proper jurisdiction of the ICC, pro-globalist forces such as the World Civil Society Conference push tirelessly to establish "conditions for global governance," including a world police force. The balance tips in their favor: Kofi Annan, now U.N. General Secretary, in his keynote address to WOCSOC in December, referred to the organization as representative of "global people power" and implored them to agitate governments when they "are unwilling to act."

Annan's remarks are the prelude to the Millennium Forum at the United Nations in May. Forces within the inner circle of U.N. and Non-Governmental Organizations are poised to present a "People's Assembly" to join the United Nations. (NGO's are non elected, non accountable lobbying groups -- many funded by corporate foundations.) This People's Assembly was also referred to as a "Parliament of Humankind" during the State of the World Forum in San Francisco in October. The State of the World Forum, a creation of Mikhail Gorbachev, drew the world's liberal glitterati to a posh six-day confab where world governance, as an expansion of the U.N. and a "global means of enforcement," was touted at a session led by the World Federalist Association.

Each year the State of the World Forum gathers marquee names from the ranks of Nobel laureates, ambassadors, politicians, actors, and even a psychic or two. Past speakers have included Ted Turner, Desmond Tutu, Earth Council president, Maurice Strong, David Rockefeller, Queen Noor of Jordan, John Naisbitt, Jane Goodall, Carl Sagan, the witch "Starhawk and a covey of U.S. congressmen. Yet, despite the prophecy of Infoseek CEO, Steve Kirsch, the nude parade of Patch Adams and Helen Caldecott, the cosmic healing advice of Deepak Chopra or the posturing of Jesse Jackson, not a whisper of this year's Forum was heard from the major networks.

The media blackout left unreported such roundtable sessions as, "The United Nations in Ten years; The United Nations in One Hundred Years," which conceded that the U.N. was only a foundation for the world federation which would require a voluntary army to "deter human rights abuses." The moderator, Tad Daly, director of Global Security Programs for the State of the World Forum, was joined by retired senator Alan Cranston and Tom Spencer, chairman of the Foreign Affairs Security and Defense Policy Committee of the European Parliament. Participants advocated abolishing the veto power of the U.N. Security Council -- a dated mechanism favoring the winners of World War II -- adopting instead a "Parliament of Humankind." World peace was possible if a "planetary patriotism" for the "Federal Republic of Earth" supplanted nationalism. Far removed from open public debate, these planetary patriots proposed a restructured U.N.: The General Assembly should abandon the one country one vote system in favor of a weighted voting process. This proposal would provide an "equitable sharing of power" among the more populous nations such as China and India.

Do Americans believe it wise to permit a greater share of U.N. deliberative power to accrue to Communist China than to the United States? Does anyone believe such a provision would increase world peace?

Two days after the State of the World Forum closed at the glitzy Fairmont of San Francisco, president Clinton stood before the Forum of Federations inaugural conference at Chateau Mont-Tremblant, in Canada. He said, "... I see the whole concept of federalism emerging internationally. ..." Clinton claimed the U.S. was working to "redefine federalism for the 21st century." Careful to make a limited concession to sovereignty, Clinton admitted there were no easy answers for arranging powers to protect the responsibilities of member states. In other words, there are no guarantees that nations will be allowed to meet their responsibilities to defend and protect their citizens. He noted, "... We become more of a federalist world when the United Nations takes a more active role in stopping genocide."

The genocide complicity suit filed against the U.N. on behalf of the two Rwandan women bears close scrutiny. Since the "federalist world" the global elites envision for us is about as likely to protect certain ethnic populations or political groups as Kofi Annan's troops were in protecting the Tutsis from genocide, the question remains: If we forfeit sovereignty with the advent of global governance, who polices the "peacekeepers"?

WBSG Note: This blasphemes the blood of Christ on the cross, as well as offering Pagan sacrifice. In the name of 'Ecumenism' (unity of different religions and denominations), many sins against God Himself are commited by the clergy who have become corrupted in thier methods and have lost sight of the Word of God that they have sworn to uphold and teach.

The average Christian is unaware that Pagan practices have crept into certain Christian denominations (the Roman Catholic Church being by far the worst offender). Below is a recent newstory that illustrates the corruption of church traditions into Pagan sacrifice. This is just one example that we can understand because it is happening in our present time. Many other practices that have crept into mainstream Christianity have been in oplace for centuries and we think that they are OK and that that is how it is supposed to be. Yes, this can happen in our own time! What does the Bible say:

LONDON, (ZENIT).- After leading the first expedition to explore the bottom of the Dead Sea, Michael Sanders is convinced that he has discovered the lost cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, which were destroyed by God for their wickendess according to the Bible. The Biblical scholar led an international team of researchers; they discovered what appear to be the salt-encrusted remains of ancient settlements while studying the seabed from a mini-submarine, according to the "Daily Telegraph."

Sanders, a Briton living in the United States, is planning a follow-up expedition to cut through the salt to be able to study the ruins. He says that he is "immensely excited." "The evidence cannot be ignored. I predicted there must be something extraordinary there and, lo and behold, there was. What we found matches exactly what the remains of an ancient city might look like."

While some archeologists dismiss the Biblical story as a metaphor, many others have theorized that the cities actually existed in the Dead Sea region. Sanders, along with other experts, is convinced that the cities were destroyed by an earthquake that threw up flaming pitch, about 5,000 years ago. Adding to the evidence are the mass graves discovered on a peninsula in the Dead Sea in the 1960s, and the sulphur (brimstone) deposits in the nearby mountains.

BRITAIN: Modern humans are not descended from Neanderthals but coexisted with them about 40,000 years ago, scientists said Tuesday

An analysis of DNA extracted from the ribs of a 29,000-year-old Neanderthal infant buried in a cave in southern Russia showed it was too distinct to be related to humans.

"There Wasn't much, if any mixture, between Neanderthals and modern humans," said William Goodwin, of the University of Glasgow "Though they coexisted we can't find any evidence of genetic material being passed from Neanderthals to modern humans."

The study reported in the science journal Nature, also supports the "Out of Africa" theory of modem human evolution-- that modern humans evolved from a common ancestor in Africa and spread across the world around 100,000 years ago.

DNA comparisons also showed that different ethnic groups do not have any links to Neanderthals, Goodwin said.

*WBSG Comment: The significance of this story is in the fact that it comes through the secular press from the often times anti-God/anti-creationism scientific community. While every Christian knows that God created man just they way they are today: "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." [Gen 1:27], many in the scientific community have been pushing the "evolution lie" on us for a long time. God says: "in the image of God", the scientific community said: "in the image of Apes and Amebas". I believe God. The Neanderthal "Man" is an extinct species of ape! Nothing more, nothing less.

And while this article does remove one of the falsehoods about the so-called Evolution Theory, it still hasn't got it all the way right yet. For this article, after conceding that humans did not descend from the Neanderthal Man (Ape), they still hang on to the incorrect notion that the descendants of man go back over 100,000 years. But hey, they're coming around.

It is difficult for men who consider themselves to be the "geniuses" of our time to admit that they have fallen for a deception that comes strait from satan's camp - the so-called Evolution Theory of man descending from Apes and even further back in time from single cell Amebas. Even worse than their own confusion, they have pushed the unsupportable lie on generations of school children who believed it because the "scientists" said it was so.

You are hard pressed today to find a creditable scientist to go on the record supporting the Theory of Evolution. But hey, we Christians knew the truth long ago, we read it in our Bibles and we believed God over the predominantly Heathen scientific community.

We have on our website a Bible study called WHEN WAS THEE BEGINNING and it shows what God tells us in the Bible about the beginning of the earth and mankind. Perhaps you might enjoy it. In addition to exposing the Evolution Theory as the lie that it is, the study also explains the three earth ages (not reincarnation!!!- God forbid!) But the three earth ages, our present one, Heaven (which will be the third), and the age before this one in which the dinosaurs lived. It also covers the dinosaurs of the first earth age as mentioned in the Book of Job.

God bless! And we will continue to keep a watchful eye out for future concessions from the "scientific geniuses" as they come to the final logical conclusion that the Theory of Evolution is not sound. They will, and as we speak, they are.

There weren't many surprises at the Academy Awards presentation -- especially since the Wall Street Journal had polled members and predicted most of the winners accurately.

Oh, it was glitzy as usual. It was mildly entertaining with Billy Crystal as the host. But there was something missing at Sunday night's big Hollywood show.

In past years, actors, actresses, writers, directors and producers have used the event to promote issues bigger than themselves. Hollywood celebrities attempted to show the world that they were serious people -- involved, concerned, engaged.

Only once during this year's festivities do I recall anyone making a political point -- author-screenwriter John Irving talking about how important it was that his film, "The Cider House Rules," made a pro-abortion statement. He even thanked Planned Parenthood, known in some circles as Abortion Inc.

However, of most interest about the Oscar show was not so much what was said as what wasn't.

I think it's an indication -- as if we needed another -- that Hollywood, as an industry, is further from mainstream American values and morality than ever before.

After all, these people had no doubt given considerable thought to what they would say in the event they were presented with an award. Many of them even brought notes. But somehow it never occurred to them that their Creator should be shown any thanks for their ascent to the top of their fields -- even though they were reaching a worldwide audience of untold millions.

Not one of them thought it would be appropriate to acknowledge God. It's almost unbelievable. It's almost mystifying.

I know that in past awards presentations, some brave souls in Hollywood have thanked God -- not in a profane manner, but in a sincere, heartfelt way.

It would be worse, of course, if Hollywood stars took God's name in vain the way so many do in the movies they make. It's easy to do that when you add God as an afterthought to a laundry list of people responsible for an achievement (the producer, the director, the screenwriter, the cinematographer, the key grip and, oh yeah ... God). Yet, incredibly, God didn't even come up in a profane manner in this awards ceremony.

I've watched Grammy Awards shows and other similar presentations where artist after artist gave thanks to God. But it's no longer in fashion, apparently, at the Oscars.

Interesting. Especially because millions of Americans still bow their heads to give thanks and plead for grace and mercy -- when they wake up in the morning, when they eat their meals, before they go to bed at night. Many Americans with far less in the way of material success and worldly achievement thank God daily for what they have been given.

It's no wonder millions of us in America find so little of what comes out of Hollywood entertaining, uplifting, redemptive or of merit in any other way.

Whom do I blame for this spiritual vacuum that has formed inside the most important entertainment industry in the world? This might surprise you.

You see, until 1968, the Catholic Church and the major Protestant denominations had profound impact on Hollywood. Every script to be made into a motion picture by the major studios was first approved by representatives of the Christian churches in Hollywood. The churches had real clout and helped Hollywood throughout its Golden Age produce some of the finest movies ever made. The industry loved it because it had institutions looking over its shoulder -- institutions that had a finger on the pulse of a very spiritual nation.

But the churches abandoned Hollywood -- just as they have abandoned many of the world's institutions. They removed the salt. And the result is a rapidly rotting cultural corpse.

As glitzy as the spectacle may have been this year, the Oscar pageant illustrates how deeply out of touch the movie business is with mainstream American values, morality and ethics. Now you know why. God, apparently, has nothing to do with it.

YOUR PAPERS, PLEASE ...
Big Brother gets under your skin Ultimate ID badge, transceiver implanted in humans monitored by GPS satellites

New implant technology currently used to locate lost pets has been adapted for use in humans, allowing implant wearers to emit a homing beacon, have vital bodily functions monitored and confirm identity when making e-commerce transactions.

Applied Digital Solutions, an e-business to business solutions provider, acquired the patent rights to the miniature digital transceiver it has named "Digital Angel®®." The company plans to market the device for a number of uses, including as a "tamper-proof means of identification for enhanced e-business security."

Digital Angel®® sends and receives data and can be continuously tracked by global positioning satellite technology. When implanted within a body, the device is powered electromechanically through the movement of muscles and can be activated either by the "wearer" or by a monitoring facility.

"We believe its potential for improving individual and e-business security and enhancing the quality of life for millions of people is virtually limitless," said ADS Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Richard Sullivan. "Although we're in the early developmental phase, we expect to come forward with applications in many different areas, from medical monitoring to law enforcement. However, in keeping with our core strengths in the e-business to business arena, we plan to focus our initial development efforts on the growing field of e-commerce security and user ID verification."

Dr. Peter Zhou, chief scientist for development of the implant and president of DigitalAngel.net, Inc, a subsidiary of ADS, told WorldNetDaily the device will send a signal from the person wearing Digital Angel®® to either his computer or the e-merchant with whom he is doing business in order to verify his identity.

In the future, said Zhou, computers may be programmed not to operate without such user identification. As previously reported in WND, user verification devices requiring a live fingerprint scan are already being sold by computer manufacturers. Digital Angel®® takes such biometric technology a giant step further by physically joining human and machine.

But e-commerce is only one field to which Digital Angel®® applies. The device's patent describes it as a rescue beacon for kidnapped children and missing persons. According to Zhou, the implant will save money by reducing resources used in rescue operations for athletes, including mountain climbers and skiers.

Law enforcement may employ the implant to keep track of criminals under house arrest, as well as reduce emergency response time by immediately locating individuals in distress.

The device also has the ability to monitor the user's heart rate, blood pressure and other vital functions.

"Your doctor will know the problem before you do," said Zhou, noting peace of mind is possible for at-risk patients who can rest in the knowledge that help will be on the way should anything go wrong.

"Ideally," the patent states, "the device will bring peace of mind and an increased quality of life for those who use it, and for their families, loved ones, and associates who depend on them critically."

Referring to the threat of kidnapping, the patent goes on to say, "Adults who are at risk due to their economic or political status, as well as their children who may be at risk of being kidnapped, will reap new freedoms in their everyday lives by employing the device."

Digital Angel®®'s developer told WND demand for the implant has been tremendous since ADS announced its acquisition of the patent in December.

"We have received requests daily from around the world for the product," Zhou said, mentioning South America, Mexico and Spain as examples.

One inquirer was the U.S. Department of Defense, through a contractor, according to Zhou. American soldiers may be required to wear the implant so their whereabouts and health conditions can be accessed at all times, said the scientist.

As of yet, there is no central Digital Angel.net facility that would do the job of monitoring users -- the task will most likely fall to the entities marketing the device, said Zhou. For example, if a medical group decides to market Digital Angel®® to its patients, that group would set up its own monitoring station to check on its device-users.

Likewise, militaries employing the implant will want to maintain their own monitoring stations for security purposes.

But for critics, military use of the implant is not at the top of their list of objections to the new technology. ADS has received complaints from Christians and others who believe the implant could be the fulfillment of Biblical prophecy.

The Book of Revelation states all people will be required to "receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark." (Rev. 13: 16-17)

In an increasingly cashless society where identity verification is essential for financial transactions, some Christians view Digital Angel®®'s ID and e-commerce applications as a form of the biblical "mark of the beast."

"I am a Christian, but I don't think [that argument] makes sense," he told WND. "The purpose of the device is to save your life and improve the quality of life. There's no connection to the Bible. There are different interpretations of the Bible. My interpretation is, anything to improve the quality of life is from God. The Bible says, 'I am the God of living people.' We not only live, we live well."

Sullivan, responding to religious objections to his product, told WorldNetDaily no one will be forced to wear Digital Angel®®.

"We live in a voluntary society," he said. According to the CEO, individuals may choose not to take advantage of the technology.

Zhou alluded to some Christians' objection to medicine per se, adding such opposition wanes when the life-saving, life-improving benefits of technology are realized.

"A few years ago there may have been resistance, but not anymore," he continued. "People are getting used to having implants. New century, new trend."

Zhou compared Digital Angel®® to pacemakers, which regulate a user's heart rate. Pacemakers used to be seen as bizarre, said Zhou, but now they are part of everyday life. Digital Angel®® will be received the same way, he added.

Vaccines are another good comparison, said the scientist, who noted, "Both save your life. When vaccines came out, people were against them. But now we don't even think about it."

"Fifty years from now this will be very, very popular. Fifty years ago the thought of a cell phone, where you could walk around talking on the phone, was unimaginable. Now they are everywhere," Zhou explained.

Just like the cell phone, Digital Angel®® "will be a connection from yourself to the electronic world. It will be your guardian, protector. It will bring good things to you."

"We will be a hybrid of electronic intelligence and our own soul," Zhou concluded.

In the process of merging with Destron Fearing Corp., a manufacturer and marketer of electronic and visual identification devices for animals, DigitalAngel.net is scheduled to complete a prototype of the dime-sized implant by year's end. Company executives hope to make the device affordable for individuals, though no cost projections have been made.

ADS, DigitalAngel.net's parent company, received a special "Technology Pioneers" award from the World Economic Forum for its contributions to "worldwide economic development and social progress through technology advancements."

The World Economic Forum, incorporated in 1971 with headquarters in Geneva, is an independent, not-for-profit organization "committed to improving the state of the world." WEF is currently preparing for its "China Business Summit" in Beijing next month for the purpose of forging new economic alliances with the communist nation.

UNITED NATIONS, March 20 (UPI) -- A United Nations University study of NATO 's intervention in Kosovo said Monday a profound change in world politics has emerged, mainly that sovereignty can be forfeited on humanitarian grounds.

But the study co-edited by the Tokyo-based institution's vice rector, Ramesh Thakur, and Albrecht Schnabel with contributor Ray Funnel, a retired Australian air marshal, warned the precedent will have dangerously undermined international order unless world powers can agree on principles to guide future interventions, in similar circumstances. "Kosovo and The Challenge of Humanitarian Intervention" is billed as a "compendium of authoritative viewpoints on many dimensions of the 1999 crisis" and on recommended follow-up steps.

Those steps include promotion of "an international consensus about the point at which a state forfeits its sovereignty," and removal of veto power in the Security Council in exceptional circumstances "so that the support of a majority of the great powers is all that is required to permit states to engage in humanitarian war."

"Kosovo confronted us with an abiding challenge of humanitarian intervention: namely, is it morally just, legally permissible and militarily feasible?" asked Thakur. "In today's dangerously unstable world full of complex conflicts, concerned countries and citizens face the painful dilemma of being condemned if they do and damned if they don't.

"To use force unilaterally is to violate international law and undermine world order. Yet to respect sovereignty all the time is to be complicit in human rights violations sometimes. To argue that the U.N. Security Council must give its consent to humanitarian war is to risk policy paralysis by handing over the agenda to the most egregious and obstreperous."

"The bottom line question for us is this: Faced with another Holocaust or Rwanda-type genocide on the one hand, and a Security Council veto on the other, what would we do?" Thakur asked. "A new consensus on humanitarian intervention is urgently needed."

Contributors, the authors said, cited the need to reform the Security Council, including possible removal of veto power in such circumstances as those present in Kosovo.

The U.N. General Assembly has been wrestling with council reform for years now, including the status of veto for the present five permanent members of Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States as well as any possible additions to the select club.

"The permanent members and their interests should not prevent the Security Council from getting involved and stall the U.N.'s attempts to provide assistance to those in need. Otherwise we might see more NATO-style actions with less or no UN involvement - and thus less order and less justice in our global community," said Schnabel, the other co-editor.

"It is good that the international system can tear down the walls of state sovereignty in cases where states kill their own people," he said. "Organizations like the U.N., however, need to be willing and able to confront these catastrophes wherever they occur."

Russian and Chinese opposition to military intervention in Kosovo prevented the Security Council from acting so NATO decided to intervene on its own.

Thakur said, "Many of today's wars are nasty, brutish and internal. The world community cannot help all victims, but must step in where it can make a difference. Selective indignation is inevitable, for we simply cannot intervene everywhere, every time. But we must still pursue policies of effective indignation. Humanitarian intervention must be collective, not unilateral. And it must be legitimate, not in violation of the agreed rules which comprise the foundations of world order."

The study, released at U.N. headquarters in New York, said, "continuing fallout from Kosovo has the potential to redraw the landscape of international politics, with significant ramifications for the UN, major powers and regional organizations, and the way in which world politics are understood and interpreted."

That fallout was from parties involved in the conflict, NATO allies, the immediate region surrounding the conflict, and further.

"Any possible argument that NATO might underwrite European stability has lost validity for Russia," the study said.

China's concern over what happened in Yugoslavia may be repeated in Asia, was also addressed.

"The problem of using force by the strong against the weak will only create disorder. While China does not want to challenge or compete with U.S. superiority, it rejects U.S. domination or hegemony," the UNU study said.

Many in Islamic countries argued that NATO committed strategic mistakes. Among them: not intervening earlier, refusing to deploy ground troops to put a decisive end to the conflict, and not anticipating President Slobodan Milosevic's resort to the eviction of hundreds of thousands of Muslims from Kosovo, the study said.

It pointed out many in those countries supported the war because they identified with the Muslim victims in Kosovo.

Reflecting the positions of the Non-Aligned Movement and the Organization for African Unity in particular, according to the South African government, concluded that unilateral intervention, no matter how noble the motive, is not acceptable, said the study. A broad, non-discriminatory multi-lateralism (in all areas, including trade and security) is the best safeguard for the developing world against unilateral misuse of power by the strong.

"For many developing countries, the international community runs the danger of becoming hostage to the machinations of a few privileged and powerful countries," the study said. "Many developing countries may feel compelled to move toward ensuring greater security for themselves through acquisition of more weaponry. There is almost total unanimity in India that the country needs to strengthen itself militarily to the extent that there can be no scope for any interference in the affairs on the sub-continent."

Critics of NATO's Kosovo action said in the study that international efforts to contain the conflict were "modest and hesitant. Later, faced with a brutal and rapidly escalating war, the international community reacted with consternation and confusion."

Said the study, "What was at stake was not only the fate of the Albanian population of Kosovo. It was also the standing and reputation of the major democratic countries involved in the NATO operation and the credibility of NATO itself."

(The study is available at www.unu.edu and UNU Press plans to publish a book based on the study later this year.)

* NOTE : While we do not in any way represent another Ministry on TV with Pastor (A fine Christian Minister) , it is where we at Watchmen Bible Study Group enjoy to study. If you would like to check it out, "The Shepherds Chapel" is on over 250 television stations in the United States, and can be found by that name in any TV guide. It is also on satellite: Galaxy 6 Trans 16. On Direct TV on channel #373 (The Word channel). Also on short wave radio: WHRI & KWHR from Indiana (17.780 MHz @ 0500-0600Hrs, 5.745 MHz @ 0700-0800 Hrs, 13.760 MHz @ 1700-1800Hrs. (All times Universal Time). They also have a website @: www.shepherdschapel.com. Introductory Offer: (another Ministry on TV) has a free introductory package which includes the Mark of the Beast tape which is available to all new students - from the United States, Canada and Mexico call (800) 643-4645 or (501) 787-6026 or write to: The (another Ministry on TV); P.O. Box 416, Gravette, AR 72736 USA.

Tell A Friend!
Type In Your Name: Type In Your E-mail: Your Friend's E-mail: Your Comments: Receive copy:

NOTE: To insure quality and content integrity, these In-depth Bible Studies are © copyrighted and may only be downloaded for study and shared private use. They may not be reproduced or distributed for sale or publication without prior written approval. Other Web sites are welcome to link up to this Web site.