follow-up: info on Chechnya, Toronto dollars, Monsanto


Jan Slakov

Dear RN list,                        Oct. 14

I can't help Chris Granner with his request for source information re: US
involvement in the Chechnya debacle. If anyone can help, please let Chris
(and me) know!

all the best, jan

Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 07:11:49 -0500
From: Chris Granner <•••@••.•••>
To: rn <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: US Aids Russian crimes in the Caucasus

I've enjoyed reading your postings.  This list is a great source of info
that I certainly don't see in the mainstream media.

I followed your link to's story by Eric Margolis about US
involvement with Chechnya earlier this decade.  While the entire story
is PLAUSIBLE in the context of current trends of globalization, could I
get some DOCUMENTATION of SOURCES?  For instance, Margolis claims that
in 1994 "Clinton lent Yeltsin $11 billion to finance the operation [the
invasion of Chechnya]."  This is completely PLAUSIBLE.  But is that 11
billion a line item in some budget my congressman voted for?  Is there
any paper trail?  Margolis doesn't quote ANYBODY!  This makes this sort
of piece difficult to use as arguments with thoughtful people about the
effects of globalization, which I feel strongly about but about which I
don't get much documentable evidence (besides the evidence of my own
senses & sensibilities, which I'm not discounting...)

Please keep up the good work, and please try to provide more source
information in the future.

Thank you,

Chris Granner
Evanston, Illinois

"Let the bosses -- take the losses -- " -Sal Martirano
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 22:12:09 -0300
To: •••@••.•••
From: earthsea <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: RN: SAND IN THE WHEELS #2 (excerpts)

RE: the Toronto Dollar project. Genius? Here is place where one has to ask
who is winning what. If successful, the project "taxes" the community at
10% to provide basic services and employment programs for those in very
great need. Laudable in that someone gets helped, but deplorable in that
the government is then off the hook for providing exactly what government
is supposed to provide with the taxes it will continue to collect and

I'm sure there must be a two footed approach to the problem and the project
is one foot. The other foot needs to be something like a campaign to make
the 10% "voluntary tax" deductable as a charitable donation at 100% from
participants personal income taxes and/or property tax.



                     Check out our Website for
      wicked Psycho-Spiritual Adventures, Shamanic Counselling,
      Spirit-Guided Living programs and Cross-Cultural events!


David Cameron * EarthSea *Box95 * Riverport * NS * Canada * BOJ 2WO

                             902 766-4129

   If you find our comments useful you might be interested in a
 Free Sample E-Issue of NUZE 2 U--EarthSea's monthly (sorta) zine.
 It covers a lotta ground and helps The Memes of Change get around!
From: •••@••.•••
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 15:18:37 EDT
Subject: Re: Fwd/RN: Monsanto a candidate for corporate charter revocation
To: •••@••.•••, •••@••.•••

To whom it may interest,
      I concur, on Monsanto.  5,000 copies of a pamphlet on how to close a 
bad corporation will soon be available, based on the Unocal model in 
California.  I am simply putting this in my revocation-candidates file and 
would appreciate anyon's guidance or leadership on it.  Ronnie Dugger

In a message dated 99-09-30 13:37:07 EDT, you write:

<< Subj:     Fwd/RN: Monsanto a candidate for corporate charter revocation
 Date:  99-09-30 13:37:07 EDT
 From:  •••@••.•••
 To:    •••@••.•••, •••@••.•••, •••@••.•••
 Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 23:10:07 -0300
 From: •••@••.••• (Jan Slakov)
 Subject: rn- Monsanto prime candidate for revoking of corporate charter
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 13:23:15 -0700
Subject: Re: Fwd/RN: Monsanto a candidate for corporate charter revocation
From: Nancy T Price <•••@••.•••>

yes, revoking Monsanto's charter may be a good way to spend our time and
energy simply as a tool for public education on the issues.

One issue would be how govt and taxpayer money is used as "corporate
welfare" often to develop technology and products that run counter to
public health,safety, and threaten development of a sustainable
environment and agriculture to the benefit of the people and not the CEOs
and corporations. 

  In the most recent news about Monsanto, I think I remember correctly 
that it was USDA in consort with Delta Pine & Land Company, one of the
largest seed companies, that together used public taxpayer and private
money  to develop the "Terminator" seed technology. Then Monsanto bought
DP & L, one of the reasons they have had financial troubes trying to pay
off their past years binge of purchases.  As for the figure spend by
USDA, I don't know at this writing.
Nancy Price
Alliance for Democracy