[Imc] Most Censored News Stories of 2001-2002 (fwd)

[Danielle Chynoweth]

Very interesting list.  We should compare this list to what we have
reported on this last year.

d
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Phillips"
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 7:51 PM
Subject: Press Release: Most Censored News Stories of 2001-2002


> Press Release
> Most Censored News Stories of 2001-2002
>
> August 28, 2002
> Sonoma State University
> Project Censored
> Contact: Peter Phillips or Trish Boreta
> 707-664-2500
>
>
> The media research group Project Censored at Sonoma State University
> announced today its list of the most under-covered "censored" news stories
> of 2001-2002. The censored news stories are published in the annual book
> Censored 2003 from Seven Stories Press. The Sonoma State University
> research group is composed of nearly 200 faculty, students, and community
> experts who reviewed over 900 nominations for the 2003 awards. The top 25
> stories were ranked by the Project's national judges including: Michael
> Parenti, Robert McChesney, Robin Andersen, Norman Solomon, Carl Jensen,
> Lenore Foerstel and some 20 other national journalists, scholars, and
> writers.
> "We define censorship as any interference with the free flow of
information
> in American Society," stated Peter Phillips Director of the Project,
> "Corporate media in the United States is interested primarily in
> entertainment news to feed their bottom-line priorities. Very important
> news stories that should reach the American public often fall on the
> cutting room floor to be replaced by sex-scandals and celebrity updates."
> Project Censored has moved to a new cycle for the release of their annual
> censored stories. The Censored 2003 book will be released in September to
> bookstores nationwide.
> The annual Project Censored awards ceremony will be held at Sonoma State
> University September 28 in Evert Person Theater at 7:00 PM. ($20 regular
> $10 students and seniors) Political Analyst/author Michael Parenti and
> cartoonist Dan Perkins aka Tom Tomorrow will be the keynotes speakers for
> the event. Davey D of KPFA's Hardknock radio will be MC for the evening.
> Authors of the years' most censored stories will speak and receive their
> awards.
> Press review copies of Censored 2003 are available by calling Seven
Stories
> Press at 212-226-8760 or e-mail greg at sevenstories.com To purchase a
> personal copy of Censored 2003 call 707-664-2500 or visit
> www.projectcensored.org. MC and VISA accepted.
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> * * *
> Top Most Censored News Stories
>
> # 1 FCC Moves To Privatize Airwaves
>
> Sources:
> London Guardian, April 28, 20001 and Media File Autumn 2001 volume 20, #4
> Title: "Global Media Giants Lobby to Privatize Entire Broadcast System"
> Author: Jeremy Rifkin
>
> Mother Jones, Sept/October 2001
> Title: "Losing Signal"
> Author: Brendan l. Koerner - bkoerner at villagevoice.com
>
> Media File, May/June 2001
> Title: "Legal Project to Challenge Media Monopoly"
> Author: Dorothy Kidd -  kiddd at usfca.edu
>
> For almost 70 years, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has
> administered and regulated the broadcast spectrum as an electronic
> "commons" on behalf of the American people. The FCC issues licenses to
> broadcasters that allow them, for a fee, to use, but not own, one or more
> specific radio or TV frequencies. Thus, the public has retained the
ability
> to regulate, as well as influence, access to broadcast communications.
> Several years ago, the Progress and Freedom Foundation, in their report
> "The Telecom Revolution: An American Opportunity," recommended a complete
> privatization of the radio frequencies, whereby broadcasters with existing
> licenses would eventually gain complete ownership of their respective
> frequencies. They could thereafter develop them in markets of their
> choosing, or sell and trade them to other companies. The few non-allocated
> bands of the radio frequency spectrum would be sold off, as electronic
real
> estate, to the highest bidders. With nothing then to regulate, the FCC
> would eventually be abolished. The reasoning behind this radical plan was
> that government control of the airwaves has led to inefficiencies. In
> private hands, the frequencies would be exchanged in the marketplace, and
> the forces of free-market supply and demand would foster the most creative
> (and, of course, most profitable) use of these electronic "properties."
> This privatization proposal was considered too ambitious by the Clinton
> administration. However, in February 2001, within months after a more
> "pro-business" president took office, 37 leading US economists requested,
> in a joint letter, that the FCC allow broadcasters to lease, in secondary
> markets, the frequencies they currently use under their FCC license. Their
> thinking was that with this groundwork laid, full national privatization
> would follow, and eventually nations would be encouraged to sell off their
> frequencies to global media enterprises.
> Michael K. Powell, FCC Chairman, and son of Secretary of State Colin
> Powell, in a recent speech compared the FCC to the Grinch, a kind of
> regulatory spoilsport that could impede what he termed a historic
> transformation akin to the opening of the West. "The oppressor here is
> regulation," he declared. In April 2001, Powell dismissed the FCC's
> historic mandate to evaluate corporate actions based on the public
> interest. That standard, he said, "is about as empty a vessel as you can
> accord a regulatory agency." In other comments, Powell has signaled what
> kind of philosophy he prefers to the outdated concept of public interest.
> During his first visit to Capitol Hill as chairman, Powell referred to
> corporations simply as "our clients."
> Challenges to this proposed privatization of airways have emerged from a
> number of sources. One group, the Democratic Media Legal Project (DMLP) in
> San Francisco, argues that even the existing commercial media system,
aided
> by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, is unconstitutional because it
> limits diversity of viewpoints, omits or misrepresents most social,
> political, and cultural segments, and is unaccountable to the public.
> Therefore, explains DMLP, advertising-based media and the 1996 Act, which
> encourages mergers and cross-ownership of media outlets to the exclusion
of
> the vast majority of people, have deprived the people of their right to
> self-governance- as self governance can occur only when we have the
> unimpeded and uncensored flow of opinion and reporting that are requisite
> for an informed democracy.
> The course of wireless broadcasting is approaching an unprecedented and
> critical crossroad. The path taken by the United States, and by the other
> industrialized nations that may follow our lead, will profoundly influence
> the ability of the citizenry of each country to democratically control the
> media.
> Faculty evaluator: Scott Gordon, Student Researcher: Laura Huntington
>
> # 2 New Trade Treaty Seeks to Privatize Global Social Services
>
> Source: The Ecologist, February, 2001
> Title: The Last Frontier
> Author: Maude Barlow - pperdue at canadians.org
>
> A global trade agreement now being negotiated will seek to privatize
nearly
> every government-provided public service and allow transnational
> corporations to run them for profit.
> The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) is a proposed
> free-trade agreement that will attempt to liberalize/dismantle barriers
> that protect government provided social services. These are social
services
> bestowed by the government in the name of public welfare. The GATS was
> established in 1994, at the conclusion of the "Uruguay Round" of the
> General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). In 1995, the GATS agreement
> was adopted by the newly created World Trade Organization (WTO).
> Corporations plan to use the GATS agreement to profit from the
> privatization of educational systems, health care systems, child care,
> energy and municipal water services, postal services, libraries, museums,
> and public transportation. If the GATS agreement is finalized, it will
lock
> in a privatized, for-profit model for the global economy. GATS/WTO would
> make it illegal for a government with privatized services to ever return
to
> a publicly owned, non-profit model. Any government that disobeys these WTO
> rulings will face sanctions. What used to be areas of common heritage like
> seed banks, air and water supplies, health care and education will be
> commodified, privatized, and sold to the highest bidder on the open
market.
> People who cannot afford these privatized services will be left out.
> Services are the fastest growing sector of international trade. If GATS is
> implemented, corporations will reap windfall profits. Health care,
> education, and water services are the most potentially lucrative. Global
> expenditures on water services exceed $1 trillion each year, on education
> they exceed $2 trillion, and on health care they're over $3.5 trillion.
> The WTO has hired a private company called the Global Division for
> Transnational Education. This company plans to document policies that
> "discriminate against foreign education providers." The results of this
> 'study' will be used to pressure countries with public education systems
to
> relinquish them to the global privatized marketplace.
> The futures of accountability for public services, and of sovereign law
are
> at stake with the GATS decision. Foreign corporations will have the right
> to establish themselves in any GATS/WTO-controlled country and compete
> against non-profit or government institutions, such as schools and
> hospitals, for public funds.
> The current round of GATS negotiations has identified three main
priorities
> for future free-trade principles. First, GATS officials are pushing for
> "National Treatment" to be applied across the board. "National Treatment"
> would forbid governments from favoring their domestic companies over
> foreign-based companies. This idea already applies to certain services,
but
> GATS will enforce it to all services. This will create an expansion of
> mega-corporate access to domestic markets and further diminish democratic
> accountability. The economically dominant western countries would like to
> make it illegal for "developing" countries to reverse this exclusive
access
> to their markets.
> Second, GATS officials are seeking to place restrictions on domestic
> regulations. This would limit a government's ability to enact
> environmental, health, and other regulations and laws that hinder
> "free-trade." The government would be required to demonstrate that its
laws
> and regulations were necessary to achieve a WTO-sanctioned objective, and
> that no other commercially friendly alternative was available.
> Third, negotiators are attempting to develop the expansion of "Commercial
> Presence" rules. These rules allow an investor in one GATS-controlled
> country to establish a presence in any other GATS country. The investor
> will not only be allowed to compete against private suppliers for
business,
> but will also be allowed to compete against publicly funded institutions
> and services for public funds.
> This potential expansion of GATS/WTO authority into the day-to-day
> business of governments will make it nearly impossible for citizens to
> exercise democratic control over the future of traditionally public
> services. One American trade official summed up the GATS/WTO process by
> saying, "Basically it won't stop until foreigners finally start to think
> like Americans, act like Americans, and most of all shop like Americans."
> Faculty evaluator: John Kramer, Student researchers: Chris Salvano, Adria
> Cooper
> International media coverage: Toronto Star, 3/3/02, The Herald (Glasgow)
> 2/27/02, The Hindu, 11/17,01 The Weekend Australian, 8/25/01, The Gazette
> (Montreal) 6/15/01 The Financial Times (London)
>
> # 3 United States' Policies in Colombia Support Mass Murder
>
> Sources:
> Counter Punch. July 1-15, 2001
> Title: "Blueprints for the Colombian War"
> Author: Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair - counterpunch at erols.com
>
> Asheville Global Report, October 4, 2001
> Title: "Colombian Army and Police Still Working With Paramilitaries"
> Author: Jim Lobe
>
> Steelabor, May/June 2001
> Title: "Colombian Trade Unionists Need U.S. Help"
> Authors: Dan Kovalik and Gerald Dickey - dkovalik at uswa.org
>
> Rachel's Environment & Health News, December 7, 2000
> Title: "Echoes of Vietnam"
> Author: Rachel Massey - Rachel.Massey at tufts.edu
>
> Over the past two years, Colombia has been Washington's third largest
> recipient of foreign aid, behind only Israel and Egypt. In July of 2000,
> the U.S. Congress approved a $1.3 billion war package for Colombia to
> support President Pastrana's "Plan Colombia." Plan Colombia is a $7.5
> billion counter-narcotics initiative. In addition to this financial
> support, the US also trains the Colombian military.
> Colombia's annual murder rate is 30,000. It is reported that around 19,000
> of these murders are linked to illegal right-wing paramilitary forces.
Many
> leaders of these paramilitary groups were once officers in the Colombian
> military, trained at the U.S. Military run School of the Americas.
> According to the Human Rights Watch Report, a 120-page report titled "The
> 'Sixth Division': Military-Paramilitary Ties and US Policy in Colombia,"
> Colombian armed forces and police continue to work closely with right-wing
> paramilitary groups. The government of President Pastrana and the US
> administration have played down evidence of this cooperation. Jim Lobe
says
> that Human Rights Watch holds the Pastrana administration responsible for
> the current, violent situation because of its dramatic and costly failure
> to take prompt, effective control of security forces, break their
> persistent ties to paramilitary groups, and ensure respect for human
rights.
> Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair contend that the war in Colombia
> isn't about drugs. It's about the annihilation of popular uprisings by
> Indian peasants fending off the ravages of oil companies, cattle barons
and
> mining firms. It is a counter-insurgency war, designed to clear the way
for
> American corporations to set up shop in Colombia.
> Cockburn and St. Clair examined two Defense Department commissioned
> reports, the RAND Report and a paper written by Gabriel Marcella, titled
> "Plan Colombia: the Strategic and Operational Imperatives." Both reports
> recommend that the US step up its military involvement in Colombia. In
> addition, the reports make several admissions about the paramilitaries and
> their links to the drug trade, regarding human rights abuses by the
> US-trained Colombian military, and about the irrationality of crop
> fumigation.
> Throughout these past two years, Colombian citizens have been the
> victims of human rights atrocities committed by the US-trained Colombian
> military and linked paramilitaries. Trade unionists and human rights
> activists face murder, torture, and harassment. It is reported that Latin
> America remains the most dangerous place in the world for trade unionists.
> Since 1986, some 4,000 trade unionists have been murdered in Colombia. In
> 2000 alone, more trade unionists were killed in Colombia than in the whole
> world in 1999.
> Another problem resulting from the Colombian "drug war" has been
> the health consequences of the US-sponsored aerial fumigation. Since
> January 2001, Colombian aircraft have been spraying toxic herbicides over
> Colombian fields in order to kill opium poppy and coca plants. These
> sprayings are killing food crops that indigenous Colombians depend on for
> survival, as well as harming their health. The sprayings have killed fish,
> livestock, and have contaminated water supplies.
> The US provides slightly over 1 billion dollars of military aid for
> what is known as "Plan Colombia," yet it is more a war against citizens
and
> those who are fighting for social justice. US aid is not improving
> conditions for the people of Colombia, but rather supporting the
government
> and right-wing paramilitary groups. According to an American member of the
> international steelworker delegation, Jesse Isbell, who recently visited
> Columbia, "The US says one thing to the American public when in reality it
> is [doing] something totally different. Our government portrays this as a
> drug war against cocaine but all we are doing is keeping an ineffective
> government in power."
> Faculty Evaluators: Jorge Porras, Fred Fletcher, , Student Researchers:
> Lauren Renison, Adam Cimino, Erik Wagle, Gabrielle Mitchell
>
> #4 Bush Administration Hampered FBI Investigation into Bin Laden Family
> Before 9/11
>
> Sources:
> Pulse, 1/16/02
> Title: "French book indicts Bush Administration"
> Author: Amanda Luker -  amandaonx at riseup.net
>
> Times Of India, November 8, 2001
> Title: "Bush took FBI agents off Bin Laden family trail"
> Author: Rashmee Z. Ahmed
>
> The Guardian (London) In cooperation with BBC television News Night
> November 7, 2001
> Title: "FBI and US spy agents say Bush spiked bin Laden probes before 11
> September"
> Author: Greg Palast and David Pallister - Greg at gregPalast.com and
> david.pallister at guardian.co.uk
>
> A French book Bin Laden, la verite interdite (Bin Laden, the forbidden
> truth) claims that the Bush Administration halted investigations into
> terrorist activities related to the bin Laden family and began planning
for
> a war against Afghanistan before 9-11.
> The authors, Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie, are French
> intelligence analysts. Dasquie, an investigative reporter, publishes
> Intelligence Online, which is a respected newsletter on economics and
> diplomacy. Brisard worked for French secret services and in 1997 wrote a
> report on the Al Qaeda network.
> In 1996, high-placed intelligence sources in Washington told the Guardian,
> "There were always constraints on investigating the Saudis." The authors
> allege that under the influence of US oil companies, George W. Bush and
his
> administration initially halted investigations into terrorism, while
> bargaining with the Taliban to deliver Osama bin Laden in exchange for
> economic aid and political recognition. The book goes on to reveal that
> former FBI deputy director John O'Neill resigned in July of 2001 in
protest
> over the obstruction of terrorist investigations. According to O'Neill,
> "The main obstacles to investigating Islamic terrorism were US oil
> corporate interests and the role played by Saudi Arabia in it." The
> restrictions were said to have worsened after the Bush administration took
> over. Intelligence agencies were told to "back off" from investigations
> involving other members of the bin Laden family, the Saudi royals, and
> possible Saudi links to the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Pakistan.
> John O'Neil died on 9/11 in the World Trade Center.
> An FBI file coded 199, which means a case involving national security,
> records that Abdullah bin Laden, who lived in Washington, originally had a
> file opened on him "because of his relationship with the Saudi-funded
World
> Assembly of Muslim Youth - a suspected terrorist organization." The BBC
> reiterated a well-known claim, made by one of George W. Bush's former
> business partners, that Bush made his first million dollars 20 years ago
> from a company financed by Osama's elder brother, Salem. It has also been
> revealed that both the Bushs and the bin Ladens had lucrative stakes in
the
> Carlyle Group, a private investment firm that has grown to be one of the
> largest investors in US defense and communications contracts.
> Brisard and Dasquie contend that the government's main objective in
> Afghanistan was to unite the Taliban regime in order to gain access to the
> oil and gas reserves in Central Asia. Brisard and Dasquie report that the
> Bush government began negotiations with the Taliban directly after coming
> into power and representatives met several times in Washington, Islamabad,
> and Berlin.
> There were also claims that the last meeting between the United States and
> Taliban representatives took place only five weeks before the attacks in
> New York and Washington.
> Long before the September 11th attacks, the United States had decided to
> invade Afghanistan in the interest of oil. In February of 1998, at the
> hearing before a sub-group of the Committee on International Relations,
> Congress discussed ways to deal with Afghanistan to make way for an oil
> pipeline. Jane's Defense News reported in March 2001 that an invasion of
> Afghanistan was being planned.
> Times of India reported that in June of 2001, the US Government told India
> that there would be an invasion of Afghanistan in October of that year. By
> July of 2001 George Arney, with the BBC, also reported the planned
invasion.
> Faculty evaluator: Catherine Nelson, Student researchers: Donald Yoon,
> David Immel
> Corporate media coverage: L.A. Times, 1/13/02 Part A-1, page 11
>
> # 5 U.S. Intentionally Destroyed Iraq's Water System
>
> Sources:
> The Progressive, September 2001
> Title: "The Secret Behind the Sanctions: How the U.S. Intentionally
> Destroyed Iraq's Water Supply"
> Author: Thomas J. Nagy - nagy at gwu.edu
> www.progressive.org
>
> During the Gulf War the United States deliberately bombed Iraq's water
> system. After the war, the U.S. pushed sanctions to prevent importation of
> necessary supplies for water purification. These actions resulted in the
> deaths of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians many of whom were young
> children. Documents have been obtained from the Defense Intelligence
Agency
> (DIA), which prove that the Pentagon was fully aware of the mortal impacts
> on civilians in Iraq and was actually monitoring the degradation of Iraq's
> water supply. The destruction of civilian infrastructures necessary for
> health and welfare is a direct violation of the Geneva Convention.
> After the Gulf War, the United Nations applied sanctions against Iraq,
> which denied the importation of specialized equipment and chemicals, such
> as chlorine for purification of water. There are six documents that have
> been partially declassified and can be found on the Pentagon's web site at
> www.gulflink.osd.mil. These documents include information that prove that
> the United States was fully aware of the costs to civilians, especially
> children, by upholding the sanctions against purification of Iraq's water
> supply.
> The primary document is dated January 22, 1991 and is titled, "Iraq Water
> Treatment Vulnerabilities." This document predicts what will take place
> when Iraq can no longer import the vital commodities to cleanse their
water
> supply. It states that epidemics and disease outbreaks may occur because
of
> pollutants and bacteria that exist in unpurified water. The document
> acknowledges the fact that without purified drinking water, the
> manufacturing of food and medicine will also be affected. The
possibilities
> of Iraqis obtaining clean water, despite sanctions, along with a timetable
> describing the degradation of Iraq's water supply was also addressed.
> The remaining five documents from the DIA confirm the Pentagon's
monitoring
> of the situation in Iraq. In more than one document, discussion of the
> likely outbreaks of diseases and how they affect "particularly children"
is
> discussed in great detail. The final document titled, "Iraq: Assessment of
> Current Health Threats and Capabilities," is dated, November 15, 1991, and
> discusses the development of a counter-propaganda strategy that would
blame
> Saddam Hussein for the lack of safe water in Iraq.
> The United States' insistence on using this type of sanction against Iraq
> is in direct violation of the Geneva Convention. The Geneva Convention was
> created in 1979 to protect the victims of international armed conflict. It
> states, "It is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove or render useless,
> objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population such as
> foodstuffs, crops, livestock, drinking water installation and supplies,
and
> irrigation works, for the specific purpose of denying them for their
> sustenance value to the civilian population or to the adverse Party,
> whatever the motive, whether in order to starve out civilians, to cause
> them to move away, or for any other motive." The United States, for nearly
> a decade, has "destroyed, removed, or rendered useless" Iraq's "drinking
> water installations and supplies."
> Although two Democratic Representatives, Cynthia McKinney from Georgia and
> Tony Hall from Ohio, have spoken out about the degradation of Iraq's water
> supply and its civilian targets, no acknowledgment of violations has been
> made. The U.S. policy of destroying the water treatment system of Iraq and
> preventing its re-establishment has been pursued for more than a decade.
> The United Nations estimates that more than 500,000 Iraqi children have
> died as a result of sanctions and that unclean water is a major
contributor
> to these deaths.
> Faculty evaluator: Rick Luttmann, Student researchers: Adria Cooper, Erik
> Wagle, Adam Cimino, Chris Salvano
>
> # 6 U.S. Government Pushing Nuclear Revival
>
> Sources:
> Bulletin Of The Atomic Scientists, July/August 2001
> Title: "The New-Nuke Chorus Tunes Up"
> Author: Stephen I. Schwartz  - sschwartz at thebulletin.org
>
> The US Government is blazing a trail of nuclear weapon revival leading to
> global nuclear dominance. A nuke-revival group, supported by people like
> Stephen Younger, Associate Director for Nuclear Weapons at Los Alamos,
> proposes a "mini-nuke" capable of burrowing into underground weapon
> supplies and unleashing a small, but contained nuclear explosion. This
> weapons advocacy group is comprised of nuclear scientists, Department of
> Energy (DoE) officials, right wing analysts, former government officials,
> and a congressionally appointed over-sight panel. The group wants to
ensure
> that the U.S. continues to develop nuclear capacity into the next half
> century.
> Achieving this goal of nuclear dominance will take far more than just
> refurbishing existing weapons and developing new ones. A decade long
> effort, that would cost in the $8 billion range, would be needed just to
> bring old production sites up to standard. Billions more would be needed
to
> produce and maintain a new generation of nuclear weapons. This plan has
not
> been presented to the public for their consideration or approval.
> Part of the plan includes the building of "mini-nukes," which would
> have a highly accurate ability to penetrate underground stockpiles of
> weapons and command centers. The recent interest in such weapons is based
> on two premises. First, the belief that only nuclear weapons can destroy
> these underground networks, so the "mini-nuke" would deter other countries
> from using these underground systems. Second, these new bombs would give
> government the option to launch a nuclear strike to take out a small
target
> while delivering minimal civilian casualties. It is believed that these
> bombs could specifically target underground headquarters or weapon
> stockpiles in Korea, Iraq, or Iran.
> Princeton theoretical physicist Robert W. Nelson has studied the
> question for the Federation of American Scientists. Nelson concluded, "No
> earth-burrowing missile can penetrate deep enough into the earth to
contain
> an explosion with a nuclear yield even as small as 1 percent of the
> 15-kiloton Hiroshima weapon. The explosion simply blows out a massive
> crater of radioactive dirt, which rains down on the local region with an
> especially intense and deadly fallout." Nelson used data from the
> Plowshares program of the 1960s and from the 828 underground nuclear tests
> conducted in Nevada. The two sources show that full containment of a
> 5-kiloton explosion is only possible at 650 feet or more, while a
1-kiloton
> explosion must take place at least 450 feet into the earth. These figures
> are taken at optimum conditions, where weapons are placed in a specially
> sealed shaft in a well understood geological environment. The "mini-nukes"
> will be expected to penetrate into deeply hardened targets in unyielding
> conditions. Nelson also concludes that a 10-foot missile could only be
> expected to penetrate 100 feet into concrete and steel, a depth far too
> shallow to contain even a very small explosion.
> The Panel to Assess the Reliability, Safety, and Security of the
> United States Nuclear Stockpile has recommended spending $4 billion to $6
> billion over the next decade to restore the production capabilities of
> plutonium pit plants in the U.S. The DoE is currently spending $147
million
> on pit production at Los Alamos this year and is requesting $218 million
> for 2002. A renovated Los Alamos will be capable of producing up to 20
pits
> a year by 2007. Last year the DoE received $2 million to design a new pit
> plant capable of producing 450 cores of plutonium a year. This would
> generate approximately half the amount of plutonium produced during the
> latter period of the Cold War. The facilities at some of these nuclear
> production plants are in drastic states of disrepair.
> Only 26 percent of the weapons complex buildings are in excellent or good
> condition. One laboratory building at Los Alamos wraps pipes carrying
> radioactive waste in plastic bags to prevent leakage. The roofs at other
> facilities are allowing rainwater to seep into the rooms where nuclear
> weapons are inspected and repaired.
> Faculty Evaluator: Sasha Von Meier, Student Researcher: Erik Wagle
> Corporate News Coverage: Los Angeles Times, March 17, 2002. USA Today,
> March 18, 2002.
>
> # 7 Corporations Promote HMO Model for School Districts
>
> Sources:
> Multi-National Monitor, January/February 2002
> Title: "Business Goes to School: The For-Profit Corporate Drive to Run
> Public Schools"
> Author: Barbara Miner -  barbaraminer at ameritech.net
>
> The Progressive Populist, November 15, 2000
> Title: "Dunces of Public Education Reform"
> Author: Frosty Troy - ftroy at keytech.com
>
> North Coast Xpress, Winter 2000
> Title: "Corporate-Sponsored Tests Aim to Standardize Our Kids"
> Author: Dennis Fox - df at dennisfox.net
>
> In These Times, June 2001
> Title: "Testing, Testing: The Miseducation of George W. Bush"
> Author: Linda Lutton
>
> For decades, public schools have purchased innumerable products and
> services from private companies-from text books to bus transportation.
> Within the last decade, however, privatization has taken on a whole new
> meaning. Proponents of privatized education are now interested in taking
> over entire school districts. "Education today, like healthcare 30 years
> ago, is a vast, highly localized industry ripe for change," says Mary
> Tanner, managing director of Lehman Brothers, "The emergence of HMOs and
> hospital management companies created enormous opportunities for
investors.
> We believe the same pattern will occur in education." So while the aptly
> named Educational Management Organizations (EMO's) are being promoted as
> the new answer to impoverished school districts and dilapidated
classrooms,
> the real emphasis is on investment returns rather than student welfare and
> educational development.
> According to some analysts, Bush's proposal for national standardized
> testing is helping to pave the way for these EMO's. Bush wants yearly
> standardized testing in reading and math for every student in the country
> between the third and eighth grades. "School districts and states that do
> well will be rewarded," Bush states in his education agenda, No Child Left
> Behind, "Failure will be sanctioned." The effect of Bush's testing plan
> will be nothing less than a total reconstruction of curriculum and
> instruction across the country. Perversely, schools with already limited
> resources, serving poor and minority communities, will be those under the
> greatest pressure to boost scores or face loss of funding.
> Additionally, standardized testing funnels public dollars directly to
> non-public schools, including religious schools, through
taxpayer-supported
> vouchers. School vouchers, proposed by Bush in his education plan to
> increase federal education spending, will reward schools that do well on
> annual standardized tests. Vouchers shunt kids out of the public schools
> system and into private for-profit institutions. Since only public school
> students take the standardized tests, kids whose parents can afford
private
> schools don't have to agonize year after year about potential failure.
> Standardized testing hits immigrant students especially hard. Bush wants
to
> freeze funding in 2002, despite surging enrollment of students speaking
> limited English. Angelo Amador, a national policy analyst for the Mexican
> American Legal Defense and Education Fund, says, "With the pulling of
> bilingual education funding, states with high-stakes testing are pushing
> low-performing Latino students into special education classes or out of
> school altogether in an effort to keep their test scores high."
> Critics charge that standardization's real goal is not to improve public
> education but to disparage it while building support for privatized,
> union-free alternatives. Proponents of corporate-run education claim that,
> by cutting the "fat" out of the system, they can improve student
> achievement with the same amount of money, and still turn a profit
> (Ignoring the fact that the U.S. is ranked ninth globally in terms of
money
> spent on education). The reality is that, though most EMO's have yet to
> show investors a profit, they generally cut teacher salaries, eliminate
> remedial, special, and bilingual education programs (mandated for public
> schools), and consistently perform at or below the level of surrounding
> schools in test scores.
> Privatization opponents say that public education should serve and be run
> by the public, especially teachers and parents, as opposed to shareholders
> who run the for-profit companies.
> Faculty Evaluators: Perry Marker, Tom Ormond, and Elaine Sundberg
> Student Researchers: Lauren Fox, Derek Fieldsoe, Joshua Travers
>
> # 8 NAFTA Destroys Farming Communities in U.S. and Abroad
>
> Sources:
> Fellowship of Reconciliation, Dec. 2000/Jan. 2001
> Title: NAFTA's devastating effects are clear in Mexico, Haiti
> Author: Anita Martin
>
> The Hightower Lowdown, September 2001
> Title: NAFTA gives the shafta to North America's farmers
> Author: Jim Hightower - info at jimhightower.com
>
> The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the International
> Monetary Fund (IMF) are responsible for the impoverishment of and loss of
> many small farms in Mexico and Haiti. NAFTA is also causing the economic
> destruction of rural farming communities in the United States and Canada.
> The resulting loss of rural employment has created a landslide of
> socio-economic and environmental consequences that are worsening with the
> continued dismantling and deregulation of trade barriers.
> When NAFTA came before Congress in 1993, US farmers were told that the
> agreement would open the borders of Mexico and Canada, enabling them to
> sell their superior products and achieve previously unknown prosperity.
> Corporations who operate throughout the Americas, such as Tyson and
> Cargill, have since used the farming surplus to drive down costs, pitting
> farmers against each other and prohibiting countries from taking
protective
> actions. These same corporations have entered into massive farming
ventures
> outside the U.S. and use NAFTA to import cheaper agricultural products
back
> into this country, further undermining the small farmers in the U.S. Since
> the enactment of NAFTA, 80% of foodstuffs coming into the U.S. are
products
> that displace crops raised here at home. NAFTA has allowed multinational
> mega-corporations to increase production in Mexico, where they can profit
> from much cheaper labor, as well as freely use chemicals and pesticides
> banned in the U.S.
> In both Mexico and Haiti, NAFTA policies have caused an exodus from rural
> areas forcing people to live in urban slums and accept low paid sweatshop
> labor. Farmers in Mexico, unable to compete with the large-scale
> importation and chemical-intensive mass production of U.S. agricultural
> corporations, are swimming in a corn surplus that has swelled
approximately
> 450% since NAFTA's implementation. Haiti's deregulation of trade with the
> U.S. has destroyed the island's rice industry in a similar manner. Urban
> slums, engorged with rural economic refugees, are contributing to the
> breakdown of cultural traditions and public authority, making the growing
> masses increasingly ungovernable.
> The Mexican government clashes violently with any organized protest of
> NAFTA. Dissent in Chiapas and in Central Mexico has lead to the reported
> arrests, injuries, and deaths of dozens of activists. Community leaders
> like Minister Lucius Walker, executive of the Interreligious Foundation
for
> Community Organization, state that, "The biggest challenge facing all of
us
> in this new millennium is to build a citizens' movement to counter the
> corporate captivity of the Americas."
> The1993 NAFTA agreement desolated small farming communities in the U.S.
and
> in Mexico and Haiti. With the scheduled 2009 lift on tariffs and import
> restrictions, as well as Bush's proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas
> (FTAA) adding 31 more countries to the NAFTA agreement, many additional
> farming communities are in danger.
> Faculty Evaluators: Tony White, Al Wahrhaftig
> Student researchers: Adam Cimino, Erik Wagle, Alessandra Diana
>
> #9 U.S. Faces National Housing Crisis
>
> Source:
> In These Times, November 2000
> Title: "There's No Place Like Home"
> Author: Randy Shaw -  randy at thclinic.org
>
> The national housing crisis affects nearly 6 million American families and
> is growing worse. Over 1.5 million low-cost housing units have recently
> been lost, and millions of children are growing up in housing that is
> substandard, unaffordable and dangerous.
> A new crisis in affordable housing is spreading across America. What was
> once a problem relegated to low income families along the east and west
> coasts, is now affecting the middle-class all across the country.
> Middle-class working Americans are having just as much trouble finding
> affordable housing as low-income families did ten years ago.
> In San Francisco, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
> subsidizing housing for public school teachers. California business groups
> complain that the State's housing shortage hinders their ability to
attract
> skilled workers, and chambers of commerce link lack of affordable housing
> to a resultant slowdown in economic growth.
> Julie Daniels earns $28,000 a year working full time as a certified
nursing
> assistant for Stamford, Connecticut. A member of local 1199, Daniels and
> her three children have been unable to obtain affordable housing within
> traveling distance of her job. The family's only available housing option
> has been a homeless shelter, and the prospects that Daniels will obtain
> safe and affordable housing are unlikely.
> Still, politicians refuse to add federal funded housing to the U.S.
budget.
> Low-cost housing programs are slowly being drained of funding. More than
> 100,000 federally subsidized units have been converted to market-rate
> housing in the past three years. While the $5 billion Federal Housing
> Administration surplus is tied up in Washington, neither major political
> party seems responsive to the current housing crisis. Neither party is
> addressing issues of living wage, adequate health care, or affordable
> housing.
> Homelessness has become the result for many families across the nation.
The
> economic slowdown, the welfare reform of 1996, and the events of September
> 11 are pushing hard working Americans into the street. In New York alone
it
> is estimated that 30,000 people are living in shelters, and many thousands
> more live on the street.
> In Chicago, over 20,000 units of public housing units have been removed
> from service and some 50,000 people now reside in the streets.
> In an era when there is only one apartment for every six potential renters
> in this country, Congress has taken no action to address this problem.
> Corporate media has only covered this issue locally and few corporate
media
> reports have recognized this as a national crisis.
> Faculty Evaluator: Susan Garfin, Student Researcher: Eduardo Barragan,
> Catherine Jensen
> Corporate media coverage: U.S. Newswire, 1/18/02
> Other corporate coverage mostly limited to local and regional housing
issues
>
> #10 CIA Double Deals In Macedonia
>
> Sources:
> www.globalresearch.ca, June 14, 2001
> Title: "America at War in Macedonia"
> Author: Michel Chossudovsky - chossudovsky at videotron.ca
>
> www.globalresearch.ca, July 26, 2001
> Title: "NATO Invades Macedonia"
> Author: Michel Chossudovsky
>
> The CIA destabilized the political balance in Macedonia to allow easier
> access for a US-British owned oil pipeline, and to prevent Macedonia from
> entering the European Union (EU), thereby strengthening the US dollar in a
> German deutschmark dominated region.
> Without Macedonia in the EU, British and US oil companies have an
advantage
> over European counterparts in building oil pipelines. Actions toward
> destabilization intend to impose economic control over national
currencies,
> and protect British-US oil companies such as BP-Amoco-ARCO, Chevron, and
> Texaco against Europe's Total-Fina-Elf. The British-US consortium controls
> the AMBO Trans-Balkin pipeline project linking the Bulgarian port of
Burgas
> to Vlore on the Albanian Adriatic coastline. The power game is designed to
> increase British-US domination in the region by distancing Bulgaria,
> Macedonia, and Albania from the influence of EU countries such as Germany,
> Italy, France and Belgium. It's an effort supported by Wall Street's
> financial establishment, to destabilize and discredit the deutschmark and
> the Euro, with hopes of imposing the US dollar as the sole currency for
the
> region.
> The Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) and the National Liberation Army (NLA)
> were trained in Macedonia by British Special Forces and equipped by the
> CIA. British military sources confirm that Gezim Ostremi, NLA Commander,
> was sponsored by the UN and trained by British Special Forces to head the
> Kosovo Protection Corps (KPC). When Ostremi left his job as a United
> Nations Officer to join the NLA, the commander remained on the UN payroll.
> Attacks within Macedonia by the NLA/KLA last year, coincided
> chronologically with the process of EU enlargement and the signing of the
> historic Stabilization and Association Agreement (SAA) between the EU and
> Macedonia. These attacks paved the way for further US military and
> political presence in the region.
> In a strange twist the CIA, NATO, and British Special Forces provided
> weapons and training to the NLA/KLA terrorists, while at the same time,
> Germany provided Macedonia's security forces with all-terrain vehicles,
> advanced weapons, and equipment to protect themselves from NLA/KLA
attacks.
> US military advisers, on assignment to the KLA/NLA through private
> mercenary companies, remained in contact with NATO and US military and
> intelligence planners. It was Washington and London who decided on the
> broad direction of KLA-NLA military operations in Macedonia.
> Following the August, 2001 Framework Peace Agreement, 3,500 armed NATO
> troops entered Macedonia with the intent of disarming Albanian rebels.
> Washington's humanitarian efforts for the NLA/KLA suggested its intent to
> protect the terrorists rather then disarm them. Vice President Dick
> Cheney's former firm, Halliburton Energy, is directly linked to the AMBO's
> Trans-Balkans Oil Pipeline.
> Last year's conflict in Macedonia is a small part of a growing rift
between
> the Anglo-American and European interests in the Balkans. In the wake of
> the war in Yugoslavia, Britain has allied itself with the US and severed
> many of its ties with Germany, France, and Italy. Washington's design is
to
> ensure the dominance of the US military-industrial complex, in alliance
> with Britain's major defense contractors, and British-US oil. These
> developments establish significant control over strategic pipelines,
> transportation, and communication corridors in the Balkans, Eastern
Europe,
> and the former Soviet Union.
> Faculty evaluators: Elizabeth Burch, Phil Beard, John Lund
> Student researchers: Alessandra Diana, David V. Immel
>
>
>
> #11 Bush Appoints Former Criminals to Key Government Roles
>
> The Nation, May 7th 2001
> Title: "Bush's Contra Buddies"
> Author: Peter Kornbluh
>
> In These Times, 06 August 2001
> Title: "Public Serpent; Iran-Contra Villain Elliott Abrams is Back in
Action"
> Author: Terry Allen -  tallen at aiusa.org and tallen at igc.org
>
> Extra, September/October 2001
> Title: "Scandal? What Scandal?"
> Author: Terry Allen
>
> The Guardian, February 8,  2002
> Title: "Friends of Terrorism"
> Duncan Campbell -  Duncan.Campbell at guardian.co.uk
>
> 18 February 2002
> "No More Mr. Scrupulous Guy"
> Author: John Sutherland
>
> Washingtonian, April 2002
> Title: "True or False: Iran-Contra's John Poindexter is Back at the
Pentagon"
> Author: Michael Zuckerman
>
> Since becoming President, George Bush has brought back into government
> service several men who were discredited by criminal involvement in the
> Iran-Contra affair, lying to Congress, and other felonies while working
for
> his father George Bush senior and Ronald Reagan
>
> #12 NAFTA's Chapter 11 Overrides Public Protection Laws of Countries
>
> The Nation, October 15, 2001
> Title: The Right and US Trade Law: Invalidating the 20th Century"
> Author: William Greider -  wgreider at att.net
>
> Terrain, Fall 2001
> Title: Seven Years of NAFTA
> Author: David Huffman - huffman at econ.berkeley.edu
>
> Certain investor protections in NAFTA (the North American Free Trade
> Agreement) are giving business investors new power over sovereign nations
> and providing an expansive new definition of property rights.
>
> # 13 Henry Kissinger and Gerald Ford Lied to the American Public about
East
> Timor
>
> Asheville Global Report, 12/13/2001
> Title: Documents Show US Sanctioned Invasion of East Timor
> Author: Jim Lobe, (IPS) - jlobe at starpower.net
>
> The release of previously classified documents makes it clear that former
> President Gerald Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, in a
> face-to-face meeting in Jakarta, gave then President Suharto a green light
> for the 1975 invasion of East Timor.
>
> # 14 New Laws Restrict Access to Abortions in US
>
> Mother Jones, September/ October 2001
> Title: "The Quiet War on Abortion"
> Author: Barry Yeoman -  byeoman at duke.edu
>
> A quiet war against abortion rights is being conducted by many local
> governments in the United States. Cities and counties are placing
> repressive legal restrictions on abortion providers under the guise of
> women's health laws. These restrictions can include: width of hallways,
jet
> and angle type of drinking fountains, the heights of ceilings, and how
long
> one must wait between initially seeing the doctor and when the procedure
> can be performed.
>
> #15 Bush's Energy Plan Threatens Environment and Public Health
>
> www.TomPaine.com, Alternet, www.alternet.org, February 15,2002
> Title: The Loyal Opposition: Bush's Global-warming Smog
> Author: David Corn -  Dacor at aol.com
>
> Environment News Service, July, 2001
> Title: Bush Energy Plan Could Increase Pollution
> Author: Cat Lazaroff -  cat at ens-news.com
>
> The Progressive Populist, March 15, 2002
> Title: Smog Screen
> Author: David Corn
>
> The Bush administration's energy plan will actually increase air pollution
> in the United States. The plan calls for increased fossil fuel
consumption,
> and for decreased funding for research into renewable, clean energy
> development.
>
> # 16 CIA Kidnaps Suspects for Overseas Torture and Execution
>
> Weekend Australian, February, 23, 2003, p. 1
> Title: Love Letter Tracks Terrorist's Footsteps
> Author: Don Greenlees - austjak at attglobal.net
>
> World Socialist Website:
> http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/mar2002/cia-m20_prn.shtml
> March 20, 2002
> Title: U.S. Oversees Abduction, Torture, Execution of Alleged Terrorists
> Author: Barry Grey
>
> Original U.S. Source: *
>
> The Washington Post
> March 11, 2002, pg. A01
> Title; U.S. Behind Secret Transfer of Terror Suspects"
> Authors: Rajiv Chandrasekaran and Peter Finn, W.P. Foreign Service, March
> 11, 2002, pg. A01
>
> U.S. agents are involved in abducting people they suspect of terrorist
> activities and sending them to countries where torture during
interrogation
> is legal.
>
> # 17 Corporate Media Ignores Key Issues of the Anti-Globalization Protests
>
> Columbia Journalism Review JR, September/October 2001
> Title: Smoke Gets In Your Eyes: The Globalization Protests and the
> Befuddled Press
> Author: John Giuffo -  jjg151 at columbia.edu
>
> The U.S. press failed to inform the public of the core underlying issues
of
> the major anti-globalization protests of recent years.
>
> #18 World's Coral Reefs Dying
>
> Harpers, January 2001
> Title: Shoals Of Time: Are We Witnessing The Extinction of the World's
> Coral Reefs?
> Author: Julia Whitty -  julwhitty at aol.com
>
> One-quarter of all coral reefs have been destroyed by pollution,
> sedimentation, over-fishing, and rapid global climate change
>
> # 19 American Companies Exploit the Congo
>
> Dollars and Sense, July/August 2001
> Title: The Business of War in the Democratic Republic Of Congo: Who
benefits?
> Authors: Dena Montague, Frieda Berrigan -  MontD033 at newschool.edu
>
> Voice (Pioneer Valley, MA), March/April, 2001
> Title: Depopulation and Perception Management (Part 2: Central Africa)
> Author: keith harmon snow - lilyfairies at hotmail.com
>
> Western multinational corporations' attempts to cash in on the wealth of
> Congo's resources have resulted in what many have called "Africa's first
> world war," claiming the lives of over 3 million people.
>
> # 20 Novartis' Gene Research Endangers Global Plant Life
>
> The London Observer, October 8, 2000
> Title: Gene Scientists Disable Plants' Immune Systems
> Author: Antony Barnett - a.barnettt at worc.ac.uk
>
> Scientists working for Swiss food giant Novartis have developed and
> patented a method for 'switching off' the immune systems of plants, to the
> outrage of environmentalists and Third World charities who believe the new
> technology to be the most dangerous use so far of gene modification.
>
> # 21 Large U.S Temp Company Undermines Union Jobs and Mistreats Workers
>
> The Progressive Populist, June 1, 2001
> Title: Temps are Ready for Organizing If AFL-CIO Provides the Muscle
> Author: Harry Kelber - Hkelber at igc.org
>
> Labor Ready Inc. is a national temporary employment agency that employed
> over 700,000 people in 2000. Labor Ready has 839 offices in 49 states and
> in Canada, and stands ready to place temporary workers as strikebreakers
in
> union labor disputes.
>
> # 22 Fish Farms Threaten Health of Consumers and Aquatic Habitats
>
> Mother Jones Magazine, November / December 2001
> Title: Aquaculture's Troubled Harvest
> Author: Bruce Barcott -  westisbest at worldnet.att.net
>
> PEW Oceans Commission Report on Marine Aquaculture, 2001
> www.pewoceans.org
> Title: Marine Aquaculture in the United States: Environmental Impacts and
> Policy Options
> Authors: Rebecca J. Goldburg, Matthew S. Elliott, Rosamond L. Naylor
>
>
> Farmed fish provide one-third of the seafood consumed by people
> worldwide. In the US, aquaculture supplies almost all of the catfish and
> trout as well as half of the shrimp and salmon. Unfortunately,
> aquaculture's harm to people and surrounding environments may be greater
> than its highly anticipated benefits.
>
> #23 Horses Face Lives of Unnecessary Abuse for Drug Company Profits
> The Animals' Agenda
> March/April 2001
> Title: Pissing their Lives Away
> Author: Susan Wagner - equineadvocates at mindspring.com
>
> Faculty Evaluator: Wendy Ostroff
> Student Researchers: Kelly Hand, Adam Cimino, Haley Mueller
>
> Pregnant horses are four legged drug machines-being repeatedly impregnated
> and confined to narrow stalls as their urine is collected to produce
> Permarin a drug used by millions of menopausal women.
>
> #24 Wal-Mart Takes Union Busting to the State Level
>
> Madison Capital Times, August, 2001
> Title: Wal-Mart Ravages Workers' Rights
> By John Nichols -  jnichols at madison.com
> Reprinted In Asheville Global Report 9/6/01
>
> Wal-Mart has been pouring a considerable amount of money into a state
level
> political campaigns supporting right to works law that reduce the wages
and
> benefits for workers.
>
> #25 Federal Government Bails Out Failing Private Prisons
>
> The American Prospect , September 10, 2001
> Title: Bailing Out Private Jails
> Author: Judith Greene -  greenej1 at mindspring.com
>
> Private prisons have been rife with more abuse and lawsuits than state run
> prisons, leading to a decline in state level support, but the federal
> government is stepping in to bail them out.
>
>
> PROJECT CENSORED 2003 NATIONAL JUDGES
>
> Prof. Robin Andersen, Fordham University , media studies
> Richard Barnet, author
> Liane Clorfene-Casten, journalist, president, Chicago Media Watch
> Dr. George Gerbner, School of Communications, Univ. of Pennsylvania.
> Lenore Foerstel, Progressive International Media Exchange
> Prof. Robert Hackett, School of Communications, Simon Fraser University;
> director of News Watch Canada
> Dr. Carl Jensen,  author,  founder and former director of Project Censored
> Prof. Sut Jhally,  Media Education Foundation, University of Massachusetts
> Prof. Nicholas Johnson,  University of Iowa law school; FCC Commissioner,
> 1966-1973.
> Norman Solomon, author
> Rhoda H. Karpatkin, president, Consumers Union
> Charles I. Klotzer, editor, publisher emeritus, St. Louis Journalism
Review
> Nancy Kranich, dean, NY University Libraries, past president of American
> Library Association.
> Judity Krug, director, Office for Intellectual Freedom, American Library
> Association.
>  Prof. Robert McChesney, author, member of Institute of Communications
> Research and the Graduate School of Library and Information Science at the
> University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
> Prof. William Lutz, Rutgers University English department
> Julianne Malveaux, Ph.D., economist, columnist, King Features, Pacifica
radio.
> Prof. Jack Nelson, Rutgers University, education.
> Michael Parenti, author
> Dan Perkins, political cartoonist, creator of Tom Tomorrow
> Barbara Seaman, author
> Prof. Erna Smith, San Francisco State, journalism
> Norman Solomon, Columnist and Author
> Sheila Rabb Weidenfeld, president, D.C. Productions, Ltd.; former press
> secretary to Betty Ford
>
> Project Censored
> Sonoma State University
> 1801 East Cotati Ave.
> Rohnert Park, CA 94928
>
> Tax deductable donations accepted at:
> http://www.projectcensored.org/contacts/donor.htm
>
>
>
> Peter Phillips Ph.D.
> Sociology Department/Project Censored
> Sonoma State University
> 1801 East Cotati Ave.
> Rohnert Park, CA 94928
> 707-664-2588
> http://www.projectcensored.org/
>
>
>
>
>



###############################################

This  majordomo list has been formed to continue discussion
generated at  the Madison GRC-5 and the subsequent GRC
conferences.  Subscribers to  <grc at peak.org> may  choose to
receive a digest format where several posts are bundled
together in a single email .

Consensus is that news items do NOT belong in the
grc list unless they relate to the GRC mission.

Those seeking subscribe/unsubscribe -and other information may post the
message  --   intro grc  --to  <majordomo at peak.org>.