News Capsules (November/December
Gramscian Strategy for Universal Coverage
On the evening news, I heard Dan Rather (July 6, 1999) talk about "the health care squeeze," and how the plight of the uninsured called for more government intervention.
Recalling Italian, Marxist radical Antonio Gramsci's cultural war strategy of gradual radicalization of society by changing its culture (by utilizing the arts, literature, churches, schools, newspapers, and other media organs), we should wonder if his strategy is at work here.
He wrote in his Prison Notebooks that a society such as America's, imbued with individualism and a capitalist way of life, can be made to accept and be transformed into a collectivist government-dependent society with the use of mass indoctrination using the available cultural organs of society. He wrote that progressive reforms can be imposed on a recalcitrant middle class by the liberal elite applying a "pincer strategy" of (a sort of dialetical materialism) pressure from above and below simultaneously. Pressure from above is applied by political and cultural elites proposing legislative reform and then militating for those proposals in the media, while pressure from below is applied by inciting "grassroot" radical groups (or orchestrating interviews of victims) --- all controlled by the same elites militating on behalf of the same "progressive" proposals. And this is always done in the name of "the people who have fallen through the cracks of society."
As politicians propose more laws and more government involvement to reform managed care or to alleviate the plight of the rising "43 million uninsured," Dan Rather used his media anchor podium to help make the news rather than report the facts. In this episode, he cites sources such as Ron Pollock of Families U.S.A., a leftist liberal group who has been advocating for nationalized health care since the great health care debate of 1992-1994. To complete the pincer strategy from below, the AMA journals are calling for universal coverage, and the Annals of Internal Medicine has not only echoed this proposal, but its editors have called for a 28th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to establish universal health care as a right.
And, as we have said before, don't be surprised if the managed care woes are now cited as the failure of the free market and as another reason to fully nationalize the health care system and finally use medicine as the keystone in the carefully constructed arch of socialism in America. (See also The New American in "Books In Brief," p. 204).
APA on Pedophilia and Deconstructing Fatherhood
The American Psychological Association's (APA) publication of an article in its journal, The Psychological Bulletin, suggesting that child molestation with "consenting" children may not be harmful, and may, in some cases be "reported as positive experiences," has caused a storm of protests.
While the APA initially defended the publication of this article which was a blatant attempt to interject politics in psychology and pander to the pederasts, on June 9, APA CEO Raymond D. Fowler wrote a letter to House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-TX) retreating from his previous stand and admitting that the article included opinions "inconsistent" with the APA's policy of child sexual abuse. Fearing that pedophile organizations such as the North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) would use the article to advance its pedophilia legalization program in the courts (as is happening in Canada), conservative groups such as the Family Research Council (FRC) has called for the APA to print a retraction of this article in the Bulletin.
The American Psychiatric Association (whose acronym is also APA) has fortunately denounced the article. In a letter to FRC, Dr. Stephen Marin, medical director of the American Psychiatric Association, wrote: "From a psychological perspective, sex between adult and child is always abusive and exploitative because the adult always holds the power in the relationship."
Yet, as of this writing, the American Psychological Association has not retracted the article in its Bulletin.
And if this episode wasn't enough of an outrage, in its July 1999 issue of The American Psychologist, the American Psychological Association published a report that purportedly confronts "the neo-conservative paradigm...that only marriage leads to responsible fathering."
Dr. Louise Silverstein and Dr. Carl Auerbach, authors of the article, "Deconstructing the Essential Father," claimed that the "privileging" of heterosexual marriage is used "to generate social policy that discriminates against mother-headed families, gay fathers, and lesbian mothers."
The authors further assert that "we do not believe that the data
support the conclusion that fathers are essential to child well-being and
that heterosexual marriage is the social context in which responsible fathering
is most likely to occur."
Alcohol Consumption and Breast Cancer
Politicized science is not invested with the certainty it once promised. While the National Cancer Institute and the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) have reported studies purporting to show a relationship between alcohol consumption and breast cancer in women, many other studies refute this finding. These contradictory conclusions have needlessly caused a lot of psychological uneasiness in countless women and have needlessly scared them from the biological benefits of drinking in moderation. For example, the prospective Framingham, Mass. study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology (January 1999) concludes light to moderate alcohol consumption is not associated with a higher incidence of breast cancer. Commenting on this finding, Morris E. Chafetz, M.D., founding director of NIAAA, opined in The Washington Times (05/05/99): "Believe it or not, the biggest cause of cancer is old age. At the beginning of this century when life expectancy was 47, the incidence of all cancers was unknown. At the end of this century as life expectancy approaches age 80, the sky is the limit...Women are being manipulated by science and statistics to heighten their greatest fear: breast cancer."
This "Junk Science Tyranny," as Dr. Chafetz
entitled his editorial, illustrated senior editor of Reason magazine,
Jacob Sullum's dictum (Medical Sentinel, May/June 1999), that "the
new enemies of public health come from within: the aim is to protect people
from themselves rather than each other...Having vanquished most true epidemics,
they have turned their attention to metaphorical 'epidemics' on unhealthy
AIDS vs. Cancer
In the Summer 1997 issue of the Medical Sentinel, we had an interesting exchange between Dr. Stanley Monteith, Michael Fumento, and Dr. Peter Duesberg. I thought it would be of interest to revisit this subject and Dr. Don Printz who has an interest in epidemiology and AIDS has kindly compiled this brief report:
As of March 1999, there have been 700,000 cases of AIDS reported since January of 1981, the year used as the time the epidemic began; there are just over 400,000 known dead. There are an estimated 600,000 individuals in addition who are infected with HIV in the United States, ranging from people who were infected yesterday, to those with full-blown AIDS who have not yet been reported. Thus, in the entire 18-year history of the epidemic in the United States, 1.3 million people have been infected (approximately 0.5 percent of the population in 18 years). Last year there were about 48,000 new cases reported and approximately 20,000 deaths. One might note that since 1995, the deaths have declined from 50,000 annually to the present 20,000 largely due to improved treatment. In addition the number of new cases of AIDS reported has declined from a high of 104,000 reported in 1993 to last year's 48,000.
I also found last year there were 178,800 cases of breast cancer reported, with 43,500 deaths. And 184,500 cases of prostatic cancer reported, with 39,200 deaths in 1998.
Since there are no cumulative data on these diseases which antedate organized statistical compilation, one can note that the number of new cases of breast cancer has remained fairly constant, while the death rate has declined modestly. Thus multiplication of the 1998 figures by a factor of 18 would give one a ballpark figure for the analogous time period from 1981 to 1998 for these diseases.
And yet, despite all the dismal statistics, deaths and suffering from AIDS, the public health establishment has declined to apply the public health model to the AIDS epidemic (i.e., contact tracing, universal testing, etc.) because it's politically expedient not to do so. Yet, they have attempted unsuccessfully to use this model for gun [control] research (calling it a gun and violence "epidemic"), a societal and criminologic issue to which this public health model does not apply.
Cancer in Louisiana
The April 1998 Journal of the Louisiana Medical Society reported a study conducted by researchers at Louisiana State University Medical Center on solving the conundrum that although people in the area get cancer less often than average, they die more frequently from it. Although there was significant chemical emissions in the parishes along the Mississippi River from New Orleans to Baton Rouge, the amount of chemicals released by the industrial plants were too low to pose a significant cancer risk. Rather than harmful chemicals in the water, what had caused the increased cancer mortality was the increased poverty and decreased standard of living. Arguing that blacks and minorities have higher environmental exposure to chemicals, activists had stopped the construction of a chemical plant in St. James Parish. Cessation of the construction of the chemical plant in that area had increased poverty and decreased the standard of living in the area contributing to a higher mortality from cancer. The plant would have provided 700 jobs, improving incomes and access to medical care for workers and their families. (National Center for Policy Analysis, July/August 1999)
Fraud and Abuse --- The Yoke Is On You
The AMA House of Delegates this summer expressed the sense of physicians that "federal law enforcement efforts are turning physicians against patients and unfairly tearing the profession." AM News reported (July 19, 1999) that delegates also called on state and federal investigators to give physicians notice before visiting their medical offices. AMA delegates asked that "law enforcement agents identify themselvesin a quiet and confidential way that allows the physician to comply in a manner that is least disruptive and threatening to the patients in the medical office." Delegates also expressed opposition to the federal government's proposed Health Care Integrity and Protection Data (fraud) Bank. The Inspector General is proposing this fraud bank as part of its crackdown on fraud and abuse among physicians. Some delegates express the feeling that the fraud bank is one more attack on the nation's physicians and the profession.
California alternate delegate Richard Frankenstein, M.D. said, "This is just the newest wrinkle in Big Brother's endless need to fill its computer with something, and it will be a hundred times worst than the National Practitioner's Databank."
Yes, indeed. The inception of the Databank was an open affront to physicians launched as a frontal attack against the profession. Recognizing this aberration for what it is, I dedicated chapters in my books, Vandals at the Gates of Medicine and Medical Warrior: Fighting Corporate Socialized Medicine, to this subject. This is a topic dear to my heart because as a delegate to the Medical Association of Georgia, I introduced and successfully passed resolutions for the abolition of the National Practitioner's Databank. And, in fact, such resolution by another author actually passed during the Interim AMA House of Delegates in 1991. How and why the Board of Trustees of the AMA did not respond to the wishes of the AMA membership (and House of Delegates) is something I discussed in my book, Vandals at the Gates of Medicine.
Interestingly, my book was reviewed in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (August 1996) by Paul L. Schnur, M.D., who was actually the author of an alternate floor resolution which was watered down and called for a $30,000 floor for inclusion in the databank. I called this effort "anemic, effete, and spineless." In any event, it appears my admonitions have proved correct. The government has used the databank to infringe on the rights of physicians and now wants to extend its control and its power of coercion and establish a fraud bank, a more egregious form of a database bank of physicians, which AMA delegates correctly warned is just "one more attack on the nation's physicians."
At least two of the reviews of my books have centered on my writings on the adverse effects of the infamous databank on practicing physicians.
The AMA should have stood firm for the abolition of the databank in 1991, as it should stand today for abolition of the abominable fraud bank of physicians.
I concluded: This 1984-Orwellian agency is in business to track physicians
and other health care providers, despite the fact that medicine is already
the most scrutinized and policed profession in America. Physicians are being
sued, regulated, sanctioned, intimidated, harassed, and blacklisted, and
frankly, I see no end in sight to these offenses and civil rights violations.
I suspect that this harassment will continue inexorably, as it is a deliberate
attempt to force the capitulation of physicians and compel them to swallow
the bitter pill of socialized medicine... (Vandals at the Gates of
Medicine, pp. 229-230.)
Physicians Fingerprinted in Florida
A new Florida law requires all physicians to undergo background checks and fingerprinting as a condition for renewal of their medical licenses. The Florida state department of health began sending fingerprinting cards in July 1999 to 60,000 physicians and chiropractors so that the FBI can begin criminal background checks on all "providers" in the state.
The new law was mandated after one doctor with "an extensive criminal record" was found to be practicing in Florida. While Florida physicians were previously required to do self-reporting, they are now mandated to be fingerprinted as a condition for licensure. Because of one, all "providers" are now suspect and guilty until they prove themselves innocent.
What about fingerprinting for politicians and lawyers. What about fraud
banks for politicians and lawyers. As I also warned years ago with the inception
of the databank the civil rights of physicians are being systematically
obliterated, while the more criminal elements in our society are free to
wreak havoc among the law-abiding. The many law-abiding are losing their
freedom and are being terribly punished for the crimes of the few.
During the annual meeting this past July, the AMA scored a victory by having Iowa become the eighth state to sign on AMAP. Nevertheless, AM News (July 19, 1999) reports, "[AMAP's] biggest accomplishment was avoiding any serious backlash from delegates for the first time since its inception."
The AMA has invested three years and spent $11.7 million on AMAP. So far, 3,441 applicants have sought the seal of AMAP approval. But only 1,250 physicians (all from the state of New Jersey) have been accredited with a 75 percent approval rate.
Although the program has taken "longer to get off the ground than expected," the AMA's outgoing vice president of Quality and Managed Care Standards said that "a long list of plans are waiting on that [health plans using AMAP for accreditation] to come on board."
So far, AMAP accreditation has centered only on physician's credentials and qualifications for practice. "Measurement of doctor's clinical performance and patient care have yet to be incorporated."
AM News did report that despite AMA leadership enthusiasm for the program, "for some doctors though, the potential for conflict argues for abandoning AMAP altogetherOne Miami doctor warranted that accreditation would pit AMA members against each other and he said he hopes the program never comes to Florida." This physician, which AM News described as being part of a "vocal minority," was Miguel A. Machado, M.D. who said, "AMAP will create second-class physicians, but the AMA doesn't represent only first-class physicians, but all good doctors. AMAP should never have been started."
The fact is that for many physicians, AMAP sounds the alarm bells as Dr. Jane Orient has written, "The power to accredit also means the power to discredit, plus the power to dictate the standard of care and define what is meant by quality." Moreover, Dr. Orient writes, "There are unavoidable conflicts of interest in the proposal. The AMA is by no means a disinterested outside agency. No businessman would care to be subjected to accreditation by potential competitors"
There is no question that AMAP favors large group
practices which it can more easily control. AAPS believes that the ultimate
judge of medical care is the patient - and that the best way to assure quality
is free competition, with patients free to choose from a large number and
variety of physicians and treatments. (See "News and Analysis,"
Medical Sentinel, March/April 1998 for our position on this issue.)
Director of NCIPC Resigns
Writing to his colleagues at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Dr. Mark L. Rosenberg, assistant surgeon general and director, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control of the CDC, has resigned from his post and accepted a position of Science Director at the Collaborative Center for Child Well-being (CCCW). In explaining his new position, Dr. Rosenberg wrote, "[The CCCW] is committed to taking all we know about healthy child development and applying it in a proactive, preventive way to see how much we can improve the ultimate well-being --- both physiological and psychological --- of children. This is a unique opportunity"
Expounding on his accomplishments, Dr. Rosenberg
wrote, "The CDC now has a solid foundation and the injury control (NCIPC)
budget has grown from approximately half a million dollars in 1993 to $108
million for fiscal year 1999," and that the World Health Assembly has
made violence prevention and injury control a public health priority. What
Dr. Rosenberg forgot to mention was that under his leadership the NCIPC
also became a controversial and in many ways discredited agency because
of the biased, politicized, result-oriented gun research conducted in the
name of public health. (See Medical Sentinel, "The Perversion
of Science and Medicine," Spring and Summer 1997).
Bruce Bartlett of the National Center for Policy Analysis (July/August 1999) reports that "over the 1948-1955 period unemployment averaged 11.3 percent for black teen-age males and 11.6 percent for whites.
"Beginning in 1956, however, when the minimum wage was raised from 75 cents to $1, unemployment rates of the two groups began to diverge. Soon unemployment rates were significantly higher for both black and white teen-age males, but more for blacks."
Minimum wage laws traced back to their inception in 1938, demonstrate that the higher they are raised by Congress, the more they push up the unemployment rates for blacks. "By 1981, the unemployment rate for black teen-age males averaged 40.7 percent --- four times its early 1950s level, when the minimum wage was much lower and its coverage less extensive."
Mr. Bartlett concludes minimum wage is a teen-age job killer because
raising the minimum wage causes unemployment particularly in the poor and
the black community. The federally mandated Minimum Wage Study Commission
concluded in fact "each 10 percent rise in the minimum wage reduces
teen-age employment by between 1 percent and 3 percent."
NEJM Editor Ousted
Jerome P. Kassirer, M.D., editor of The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) was ousted from his post July 25, 1999 over whether the Massachusetts Medical Society (MMS) could use the journal's brand name to sell new products and reach a wider audience. Dr. Kassirer had been editor since 1991 and had argued that the use of the NEJM in commercial ventures would tarnish the journal's reputation. The Massachusetts Medical Society stated one of its first priorities would be to bolster the NEJM website and expand to "fend off competition" from internet-based, medical upstarts.
According to The Wall Street Journal (July 27, 1999), "In April, Dr. Kassirer's bosses at the medical society told [him] they wanted to renegotiate his three year contract, which was set to expire in March 2000."
When Dr. Kassirer tried to renegotiate his contract, he was asked to resign and sign a non-disclosure agreement. NEJM's executive editor, Marcia Angell, M.D., commented, "I am sorry the Massachusetts Medical Society took this course. It will be a great loss." Two members of the editorial board have resigned in protest.
"Another big issue is whether the medical society will be able to sign on Marcia Angell, the journal's well-respected executive editor, to be an interim editor until a replacement is found. Dr. Kassirer will go on a paid sabbatical September 1 until his contract expires March 31."
While Dr. Kassirer had his supporters, he also had his detractors. Reacting to the news, Medical Sentinel editorial board member and now president-elect nominee of AAPS, Dr. Robert J. Cihak, commented: "I also failed to see how Dr. Kassirer has claim to the high road of science when he routinely publishes articles ignoring other sciences, such as political science and economics. The [NEJM] editors are extremely narrow-minded and incomplete when it comes to considering all the pertinent facts, e.g., in articles directly addressing medical decisions, perhaps one-fourth even allude to patient autonomy, and then almost always dismiss the consideration."
Dr. Miguel A. Faria, Jr., M.D., Editor-in-Chief of the Medical Sentinel, also opined that while Dr. Kassirer was probably correct on this issue of the NEJM's commercial endorsements, he was also a staunch supporter of government intrusion into medicine and a draconian gun control advocate. Kassirer once stated that when it comes to assault weapons, "Data on their risks are not needed, because they have no redeeming social value. Thus, even a single death or injury from them is excessive...Nothing I have received persuades me to retract my call for national control of firearms. On this issue, I stick to my guns." (Correspondence NEJM 1992;326(17):1161.) In another editorial, Dr. Kassirer, rather than seriously analyzing the failures of specific gun control measures (e.g., gun ban in Washington, DC rather than crime control), wrote that if "a little gun control does not work, then, certainly more gun control is needed." ("Guns in the Household," NEJM 1993;329(15):1117-1118. See also "Perversion of Science and Medicine," Medical Sentinel, Summer 1997, p. 83.)
While Kassirer defended the ethics of Hippocrates, his solution was Canadian-styled, single-payer system of medical care, although different in temperament and approach from Dr. Lundberg, he was cut from the same political cloth and held the same views on academic freedom. This is censorship of opposite views. (See "Medical Sentinel --- A Breath of Fresh Air," Medical Sentinel, May/June 1999, p. 97.)
No Refund for Bogus Research
The Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory is objecting to refunding money for bogus research. The laboratory is protesting demands by the National Cancer Institute to repay more than $800,000 in federal grant money it received to conduct studies on possible links between electromagnetic fields and cancer. The researcher involved in the studies reportedly falsified data, leading to the erroneous conclusion that, yes, such fields surrounding high-voltage power lines do cause cancer.
The Office of Research Integrity within the Department of Health and Human Services charged that Robert P. Liburdy committed "scientific misconduct" by "intentionally falsifying and fabricating" data in two articles he wrote.
A spokesman for the laboratory contends "that is was brave enough to question the validity of some findings" and a return of the money "would be a chilling message to other institutions who are expected to police themselves."
For more on Federal Science Research visit http://www.ncpa.org/pd/budget/budget-7.html.
Congressman Barr Calls for New Waco
On August 26, 1999, U.S. Representative Bob Barr (R-GA) released a letter urging House Government Reform Committee Chair Dan Burton (R-IN) to convene new hearings into the federal siege of the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, that left David Koresh and over 80 followers dead in 1993. Barr's letter is based on new evidence indicating Administration officials may have lied about whether shots were fired and about whether pyrotechnic or incendiary devices were used against the Branch Davidians.
Barr also sent a letter to Attorney General Reno calling for an investigation into whether federal agents misled Congress in 1995 testimony that no shots were fired into the compound, that no incendiary devices were used, and that there was no military involvement in the assault.
"Government admissions that incendiary devices were used at Waco by federal agents raise serious questions about who is responsible for the deaths of over 80 American men, women, and children. Additionally, this new evidence casts doubt on statements of Administration officials, and could lead to charges of perjury," said Barr. "If federal officials have been lying about these elements of the siege, their testimony on other matters should also be examined. New evidence indicates the government fired into the compound, and that military forces may have been involved in the assault. These and other matters deserve the attention of Congress and the courts," Barr continued.
The next day, Rep. Barr posed a series of questions to President Clinton regarding military involvement during a 1993 attack in Waco. In a letter to the president, he wrote:
"I am disturbed to learn your Department of Justice has apparently spent the past six years lying to Congress and the American people about whether incendiary devices were used in the Waco attack. However, this issue pales in comparison to emerging evidence indicating the Administration may also have lied about the involvement of military special operations forces in the assault on April 19, 1993.
"The Texas Depart-ment of Public Safety, and a former CIA official have indicated military forces were deployed as forward elements of the assault. Additionally, there is further evidence, such as videotapes and Defense Department documents, that corroborate this evidence.
"As you know, using military forces for domestic law enforcement is expressly illegal under U.S. posse comitatus law. For this reason, I urge you to reveal all the facts regarding military involvement at Waco immediately, so those responsible for any legal violations can be swiftly disciplined and prosecuted"
Congressman Barr then posed seven tough questions to the president and asked for an immediate reply. You can read the full text of his letters by visiting his website at http://www.house.gov/barr.
Barr, a former federal prosecutor, serves on the House Judiciary and
Government Reform Committees.
Back to Federalism
James J. Kilpatrick, a long-time observer of the judicial system, writing in Human Events (August 20, 1999) states the Tenth Amendment "ignored for so many years as a 'truism' is making a comeback." He responds to the jeremiad by noted New York Times columnist Anthony Lewis who resents the notion the Supreme Court might be restoring the Constitution to its original intent, that is, as our Founding Fathers intended in Philadelphia in 1787.
Lewis claims, "A band of radical judicial activists [are] determined to impose on the Constitution their notion of a proper system of government. That was the import of three cases decided last week by identical 5-to-4 majorities forthe five justices in the majority changed the structure of American government. And they did so without a word of support in the text of the Constitution."
Kilpatrick answers, "Ours is a nation of 50 sovereign states. Further, that the states have residuary powers that cannot be abrogated by a wave of the congressional wand."
Radical judicial activism for Lewis is the return of the Supreme Court to read the Constitution as intended by our Founding Fathers.
Indeed! Writing for one of these cases, Justice Anthony Kennedy was cited, "Congress has vast powers but not all power...Congress must accord the states the esteem due them as joint participants in a federal system, one beginning with the premise of sovereignty in both the central government and the separate states. Congress has ample means to ensure compliance with valid federal laws, but it must respect the sovereignty of the states."
Books in Brief
The Best Defense by Robert A. Waters. ISBN: 1-888952-97-0, $14.95 (Soft cover), Nashville, Tennessee, Cumberland House, Inc., 1998, pp. 212.
This book recounting true stories of intended victims who defended themselves with firearms is a must read for the millions of Americans who own firearms for self-protection.
In addition to the fascinating human interest stories contained in this book, heroic tales of individual citizens defending themselves with firearms (as well as interesting stories of shop owners, bankers, etc. defending themselves in the workplace), it also has cliffhanging stories of citizens defending themselves and their families against serial killers and sundry vicious predators, stalkers, etc.
While these easy to read chapters make gripping stories, they also provide didactic lessons in citizen self-protection, factual information on why law-abiding citizens must be capable of protecting themselves and their families from vicious predators and criminals, because, as these stories clearly demonstrate, the police simply cannot be there to protect every citizen every time a crime occurs.
Some of the other valuable lessons we learn:
° Why a father (and sometimes a mother) must be able to defend the home and family.
° Why a private citizen may need heavy fire power with high capacity magazines and even the semiautomatic, so-called assault weapons to protect not only himself but help the police in times of crisis.
° Why a woman defending herself against a robber in her own home may need a high caliber gun to protect herself from a large, determined assailant.
° Why a couple doing business in a thriving community and tourist city like Orlando, Florida may be unexpectedly attacked by thugs and have to defend themselves to protect their lives and property.
° Why concealed carry laws are needed in states that don't have them.
° Why proper gun training and safety may be lifesaving.
The "Last Ride of the Dixie Mafia" keeps you at the edge of your seat as you read about two aging criminals who attempt to rob a fashionable jewelry store, but instead, find themselves confronted by a determined, security-conscious store owner and staff who were well prepared for such an event.
The book should be read not only by all citizens who own firearms for self- and family protection, but also by those who don't - particularly, gun-banning politicians who believe the Second Amendment is outdated and intended only for duck hunters.
The Mitzvah by Aaron Zelman and L. Neil Smith. ISBN: 0-9642304-3-7, $10.95 (Soft cover), Hartford, WI, Mazel Freedom Press, Inc., 1999, pp. 245, http://www.jpfo.org.
This is the story of a liberal Catholic priest who gets mugged with reality when he finds out he's actually a Holocaust orphan survivor. Suddenly, his life is turned upside down, but supported by a coterie of old and new friends, he learns the fundamentals of the Jewish faith. He goes on a soul searching trip to the Holy Land, where he figuratively and literally learns of man's God-given right to protect oneself from unimaginable evil acts. This book is highly recommended, as the subtitle stated, "For those who love freedom and for those who should."
Periodicals: The New American. In the June 21, 1999 issue of The New American, I was given the colorful cover with the article "Health Care Socialist Overdose" in which I summarized the inroads socialism has made in American medicine.
The subsequent July 5, 1999 issue is a superb special report on the Gramscian strategy for subverting America, which I also strongly recommend. In numerous articles, the authors explain how America is being transformed step-by-step into a collectivist state following the Marxist tenets of Italian radical Antonio Gramsci's strategy of transforming an individualist society into a collectivist one by changing its culture. You must obtain a copy and read it.
The New American is a biweekly magazine which holds to its principle that "freedom shall not perish." I recommend this publication for all Americans who want to remain abreast of developments taking place in America today and seek an explanation why our nation is headed down the bumpy road of authoritarianism, domestic collectivism, and global socialism.
You can visit their web site at http://www.thenewamerican.com or call them at (920) 749-3784. The New American is published biweekly by American Opinion Publishing, Inc., 770 Westhill Blvd., Appleton, WI 54914.
This edition of News Capsules was compiled by Miguel A. Faria, Jr.,
M.D., Editor-in-Chief of the Medical Sentinel of the AAPS. It appeared
in the Medical Sentinel 1999;4(6):199-205. Copyright©1999 Association
of American Physicians and Surgeons.