I Feel a Draft, Again
by Paul Hein~ is semi-retired from the practice of medicine (ophthalmology) in St. Louis, author of All Work and No Pay
I suppose that if you live long enough in Wonderland, you grow accustomed to the sight of
rabbits with timepieces, or grinning cats. Perhaps that explains the total lack of reaction to
the recent trial balloons about the reinstitution of the draft.
The basic premise explaining the operation of all governments is that they possess all
property and all persons within their jurisdiction--which they, incidentally, determine. For
example: all income is considered government property, and must be returned to them;
hence the terms "tax return," or "return of income." The individual may keep a certain
percentage, as determined by the property owner (i.e., the government).
You may live in your home, and drive your automobile, so long as you pay annual tribute to
their real owner. Should you fail to do so, ownership will revert to government. Moreover,
this is not regarded as extraordinary or remarkable, but routine and expected.
You, yourself, are government property. You must behave according to government rules, or
suffer the consequences. You earn your living as a privilege granted by government; thus, a
portion of that living is the government's as an excise. Thus, whether income is considered
property or a transaction, it reverts to its owner one way or another, or, more accurately, by
hook or crook. But the clearest and most undeniable proof of government ownership of
populations is the draft.
Suppose that your son were drafted to serve in Afghanistan. You objected. You could see no
U.S. interest in Afghan affairs, and no threat to this country from Afghanistan. So you
ordered your son to remain at home. Uncle Sam, on the other hand, has ordered him to
report to camp. Who will win that argument? Who is sovereign over your own flesh and
blood? The very basis of conscription is that the corporation called government has control
of your son, which control supersedes your own as his parent. Your son may seek to honor
your wishes by defying the draft and going to jail, but that is still a victory for government, in
that he will be doing what government demands, when it demands it, eating what it serves,
where and when it serves it, wearing what it provides, and staying where it dictates, while
risking a bullet if he leaves. Just like the armed services, but without the cachet of patriotism.
Moreover, the very existence of a draft, except in wartime, is never questioned. Can it be
"wartime" if Congress has not declared war? Oh, of course, that is a niggling question, but if
the men and women who comprise the government take an oath to uphold the Constitution,
is it nit-picking to ask that they do so? Why can they ignore their clear and obvious duty,
while expecting others to do the "duty" which they unlawfully impose upon them?
If our young people are going to be asked to fight, they ought to have a clear understanding
of who the enemy is, and direct their weapons accordingly.
January 28, 2002
Exposing Your Superiors For the Bunch of Rapacious, Lying Weasels That Theatre
A Practical Guide: Would you be ready to blow the whistle?
By Susan Orenstein, April 2002 Issue
Back in 1995, Mark Graf, a security specialist at the Rocky Flats nuclear
facility outside Denver, became alarmed about the temporary removal of 450
kilograms of plutonium oxide from a vault-like room to a "soft room" protected
by drywall that you could punch a hole through. "It was insane," says Graf,
who was ordered to help install a temporary alarm system in case anyone tried
to steal the radioactive material. "I'm talking 1,000 pounds of plutonium,"
he says. For comparison, it took 10 pounds of plutonium to make the bomb that
was dropped on Hiroshima.
So Graf spoke up to his superiors. And soon there were few moments when he
wasn't thinking about Rocky Flats. He wasn't sleeping. He became obsessed
with doomsday scenarios. He penned letter after letter. He sought out
lawyers. He started taping many of his conversations. He burned through
$15,000 of his own savings. His wife threatened to leave him. In short, he
had become a typical whistle-blower.
The Enron scandal, replete with one executive after another claiming to have
known nothing of the company's devious accounting, has sparked a celebration
of whistle-blowers -- particularly Sherron Watkins, the former Enron employee
whose nationally televised congressional testimony brilliantly eviscerated
that company's top executives. But being a whistle-blower has more to do with
stamina than stage presence. Long before folks like Graf and Watkins catch
the media's attention, they grapple with complex feelings about work and
loyalty and confront a slew of practical decisions about whom to trust, how
to protect themselves against retaliation, and when to go public. It can be a
grueling, emotionally difficult path, but if you feel compelled to flag an
injustice, Graf's story may hold invaluable lessons -- and even a smidgen of
hope.
First of all, forget the Norma Rae images of an outspoken crusader.
Whistle-blowers tend not to be rebels or reformers; strangely enough, they
can be corporate loyalists who genuinely look for the company to remedy ills.
Graf fits that profile. He grew up in a suburb of Denver and was "very close
to law enforcement," as he says. (His best friend's father was the local
sheriff.) "I was a Young Republican, for God's sake," Graf says.
No matter how deeply you may believe in God, country, and your company, do
your homework before you lurch forward with complaints. Find out how other
gadflies have been treated by your organization in the past. Seek advice from
a professional, such as an advocacy group or attorney. The toughest call can
be whether to take your gripes to the higher-ups or to go straight to a law
enforcement agency -- or even the press. Graf started on the inside, where he
quickly encountered resistance. But most experts say that this is the
preferred route; it gives you more credibility in the long run and allows the
organization a chance to respond.
If the insider path doesn't work, it's time for tougher tactics -- which is
where we enter real whistle-blower country. Graf was lucky enough to find an
ally in a higher-up who shared his concerns. Together they wrote a letter to
then-Congressman David Skaggs of Colorado; although it prompted an
investigation by the Department of Energy, the probe largely failed to
substantiate Graf's claims. His lawyers called the investigation a
"whitewash."
Graf wanted to do more about the plutonium security problems but now faced
the inevitable risk of reprisal that comes with whistle-blowing. In 1996, his
company gave him a 12-hour shift and forced him to work 260 overtime hours
without pay, according to a lawsuit he later filed against Wackenhut
Services, the private security firm that employs him at Rocky Flats. He
eventually brought the security breaches to the attention of the Defense
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board and spoke to the press.
In January 1998, Wackenhut put Graf on administrative leave (he was still
being paid) and forced him to see three government shrinks because of a
"preoccupation with security safeguards," his court documents say. By this
time his family was falling apart too. "I wish I had woken up a little sooner
and taken care of my family," Graf says.
So where's the smidgen of hope? Graf's measure of vindication came when a
judge reinstated him and awarded him $5,000. And Rocky Flats -- where Graf is
still employed -- has taken steps to beef up security, such as installing
night-vision devices, which should help until the facility is shut down in
2006. Was it all worth it? Asked if he would do it all over again, Graf
responds, "In a heartbeat."
Insoluble toxic metals and fluorides, via a pneumonia like dust in lung process, concentrate
in lymph nodes and cause foreign body granuloma damage to node macrophages, leading
to false cytokine stimulation, then rising viral waste damage to mitochondria, and this
leading to illnesses. See the analysis at
In the 1980's, Oak Ridge managers established a national alliance of DOE friendly
supplanted activists and old DOE scientists to mislead gullible fluoride affected sick
workers and communities in order to fabricate a health mystery and avoid the extreme
liabilities of the fluorides health damage to uranium gas diffusion chemical plant workers
and communities. Don't let DOE and its minions stone wall known disease processes
known for millenia and involved in religion icon imagery.
Other websites of interest:
The photo below is from Newsweek October 26, 2002. Please get a copy of the magazine for a better image.
What was the Bush family up to election night at the Florida governor's mansion??