'Celebrating Freedom' Series

July 16, 2006
Breaking the Chains of Freedom


marty Kleva

Have you ever heard of the CIA Slide? Sounds a bit like a dance to me.

I first heard of this term in 2002 at a community gathering in Taos, New Mexico. The speakers were two retired CIA agents who told us of the use of the 'CIA Slide' and said that it works like this.

In order to create disinterest or apathy in the public, certain words are used to help. One of these words is 'conspiracy.' As soon as that word is used, the public will unconsciously slide certain brain synapses shut which prevent any further discussion of the topic that was brought up. The publics slides it into a closed brain cell, zones out the information, and never thinks to question the topic.

Many times the word is set up deliberately to create what results to be public apathy.

One such word that is presently used is any form of the word 'terror.' We all go numb and let it slide on by because the reality is too terrible to consider. Reference to September 11th is also used this way, especially by George Bush who brings it up all the time to remind us of that terrible day.

Other words are also used and have made their way into our everyday vocabulary. These are soft, feel-good words. Harmonization is one. Others include security, secure, safe, safety, protection, cooperative, sustainable development, balance, community, human rights, Faith-Based, new sense of purpose, global community, new world order, and family values.

These words and phrases are designed to create a multi-layered illusion of comfort and to keep the public free of anxiety. Yet presently, we have more anxiety centered disorders in our culture than ever before in history.

This is the first in a series of articles concerning some very disconcerting issues that I have been aware of facing the future of our country we call America. For a long time I have been uneasy about many things that I have read and see happening, both nationwide and locally. I have written about some of my concerns and have kept many of those uneasy feelings unvoiced because I have not felt that I could substantiate them enough to write about them responsibly.

Sometimes it takes me a while to put things together, but once I have hold of the constellating factor, and I know what is the ruling force, then everything else falls into place.

This is what has occurred for me recently, and finally I can put together some information in a cohesive manner to inform you, the readers of GFA. Some of this information is several years old. As a researcher, I will download material that I instinctively know is important, even if I don’t know how it fits into the scheme of things. Such is the case here.

I have been following the health issue of CODEX for several years, many times with a skeptical mind. The final piece has fallen into place for me in the last several days, and so I now feel that I can present it to you with some credibility and with integrity.

Due to the complex and wide-ranged nature of this subject, I will rely upon researched material I have collected from many sources. I have selected just a few to present the story behind CODEX, and provide websites for you to reference.

Please do not take my word for this. Check it out for yourself. I do urge you to not let it slide by though, because I really don’t know how much time is left to head this plan off.

Let’s begin with Government substantiated information:(note: areas bolded and italicized are mine to indicate quoted material)

Press Release from the White House dated March 31, 2006:

The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America: Progress (SPP). The SPP was initiated and launched in March 2005, at George Bush’s Crawford, Texas ranch, hosting the tri-lateral meeting with Mexico’s President Vincente Fox and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, where all three parties signed the partnership agreement.

At the close of the partnership meeting, President Fox and President Bush were pleased to accept, on behalf of their countries, Prime Minister Harper's invitation to host the next trilateral leaders meeting in Canada in 2007.

According to this, the SPP provides a framework for us to advance collaboration in areas as diverse as security, transportation, the environment and public health.

This collaboration began in June 2005 when, our three governments released detailed work-plans identifying key initiatives that form an ambitious agenda of collaboration. . . . to ensure that North America is the most economically dynamic region in the world and a secure home for our citizens. . . . . exchanging views with private sector leaders on how to enhance the competitiveness of North America.

Sounds good to me . . . even the part about the private sector being involved. Certainly this is a positive step to see our three governments getting together to ensure our security, and isn’t it about time? After all it has now been going on five years since September 11, 2001, what I have always called 911, and not 9-11.

The announcement goes further to outline five areas of priorities and initiatives:

Strengthening Competitiveness in North America. So we now have the NACC, North American Competitiveness Council, made up of the private sector from each country and which will provide us recommendations on North American competitiveness, including, among others, areas such as automotive and transportation, steel, manufacturing, and services.

North American Emergency Management. To take care of disasters, and to ensure that critical equipment, supplies and personnel can be deployed expeditiously throughout North America. . . . the three countries are committed to develop a common approach to critical infrastructure protection, coordinated responses to cross border incidents, and coordinated training and exercises, with the participation of all levels of government in our countries.

Avian and Human Pandemic Influenza. In order to ensure our safety, the three countries have endorsed a set of shared principles to underpin cooperative activities by our Governments in all stages of avian influenza and human pandemic influenza management: prevention; preparedness; response; and recovery. . . . and to make available human pandemic influenza vaccines, and develop a strategy to best facilitate the sharing of information to enhance the availability of vaccines.

North American Energy Security. Our governments renew their commitment to trilateral cooperation on clean energy technologies, conservation, and market facilitation as a means to meeting our shared goals of energy security and sustainable development.

North American Smart, Secure Borders. Our vision is to have a border strategy that results in the fast, efficient and secure movement of low-risk trade and travelers to and within North America, while protecting us from threats including terrorism. This vision encourages innovative risk-based approaches to improving security and facilitating trade and travel. These include close coordination on infrastructure investments and vulnerability assessments, screening and processing of travelers, baggage and cargo, a single integrated North American trusted traveler program, and swift law enforcement responses to threats posed by criminals or terrorists, including advancing a trilateral network for the protection of judges and officers.

According to the website, SPP intends to do this with greater cooperation and information sharing. . . . stating that they want to ensure that North America is the safest and best place to live and do business.

This site states that the United States, Mexico, and Canada will work together, and in consultation with stakeholders to: * Improve Productivity * Reduce the Costs of Trade * Enhance the Quality of Life, and goes on to say how each of the three countries has established “working groups” to implement the plan and consult with stakeholders; set specific, measurable, and achievable goals and implementation dates; and identify concrete steps the governments can take to achieve these goals. An initial report is due to Heads of Government on June 23 with semi-annual progress reports thereafter.

There are groups whose goals are to lower costs for North American businesses, producers, and consumers and maximize trade in goods and services across our borders by striving to ensure compatibility of regulations and standards and eliminating redundant testing and certification requirements.

The Energy Working Group will work to streamline and update regulations; and by promoting energy efficiency, conservation, and technologies such as clean coal.

The Transportation Working Group will improve the safety and efficiency of North America's transportation system by expanding market access, facilitating multimodal corridors, reducing congestion, and alleviating bottlenecks at the border that inhibit growth and threaten our quality of life (e.g., expand air services agreements, increase airspace capacity, initiate an Aviation Safety Agreement process, pursue smart border information technology initiatives, ensure compatibility of regulations and standards in areas such as statistics, motor carrier and rail safety, and working with responsible jurisdictions, develop mechanisms for enhanced road infrastructure planning, including an inventory of border transportation infrastructure in major corridors and public-private financing instruments for border projects).

The Environment Working Group has a goal to Enhance partnerships and incentives to conserve habitat for migratory species, thereby protecting biodiversity.

The Movement of Goods Working Group will lower the transaction costs of trade in goods by liberalizing the requirements for obtaining duty-free treatment under NAFTA, including through the reduction of "rules of origin" costs on goods traded between our countries.

And finally the Health Group will build upon the cooperative efforts under the International Conference on Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use, work towards the identification and adoption of best practices relating to the registration of medicinal products.

IN this article, I’ll begin with the Health Group. If you are not already aware, there is a global effort to bring ALL drugs, dietary supplements, herbs, tonics, vitamins, tinctures, essences, neutriceuticals, bio-identical hormone creams, and basically anything that we can now buy via the web and off the shelf at the drug or grocery store, under strict regulation.


To help me get this information out to all GFA readers, I am using material that I have collected on my hard drive for several years. Up to now, I have distributed this information privately as a health professional, both as researcher and teacher.

Many people have not only doubted the validity of this material but they have also replied back to me with words like: “It will never happen in this country!”

One thing I appreciate is anyone who is willing to question. However, there is a difference between the person who does his/her own checking up, and the person who simply likes to mouth off words like “conspiracy” without knowing what they’re talking about.

There is no conspiracy folks! It’s simply a matter of ideology differences. This is the way some people truly believe, and it so happens that these are the ones who have taken the helm while we others have been asleep.

So back to the Health Group and HARMONIZATION. Another word for it is CODEX, or CODEX ALIMENTARIUS (food code). Presently, it sets the supplement standards for all countries in the World Trade Organization (WTO).

You remember the WTO. According to its website: The WTO is run by its member governments. All major decisions are made by the membership as a whole, either by ministers (who meet at least once every two years) or by their ambassadors or delegates (who meet regularly in Geneva). Decisions are normally taken by consensus.

In this respect, the WTO is different from some other international organizations such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. In the WTO, power is not delegated to a board of directors or the organization’s head.

When WTO rules impose disciplines on countries’ policies, that is the outcome of negotiations among WTO members. The rules are enforced by the members themselves under agreed procedures that they negotiated, including the possibility of trade sanctions. But those sanctions are imposed by member countries, and authorized by the membership as a whole. This is quite different from other agencies whose bureaucracies can, for example, influence a country’s policy by threatening to withhold credit.

Reaching decisions by consensus among some 150 members can be difficult. Its main advantage is that decisions made this way are more acceptable to all members. And despite the difficulty, some remarkable agreements have been reached. Nevertheless, proposals for the creation of a smaller executive body — perhaps like a board of directors each representing different groups of countries — are heard periodically. But for now, the WTO is a member-driven, consensus-based organization.

The U.S. is a member of the WTO and therefore bound by its policies.

** According to an article by Paul Taylor, at the Dr. Rath Health Foundation:

“Groundwork for the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) was done in 1994, when leaders from the U.S., Latin America, Canada, and the Caribbean met at the First Summit of the Americas in Miami.

The text of the FTAA agreement has gone through several revisions since its inception. The current draft is the third of the series, and like the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) Agreement it shows quite clearly that FTAA Members will be subject to the harmonized standards, guidelines and recommendations of the ‘relevant international organizations.'

The Codex Alimentarius Commission is the international body charged with setting global food standards, and is jointly sponsored by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO). Codex Alimentarius literally means "food code", and the Commission was established in 1963 following resolutions passed at the Eleventh Session of the Conference of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in 1961, and at the Sixteenth World Health Assembly in 1963.

The legal basis for enforcement of the food standards and guidelines created by Codex comes from the ‘Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures' (SPS Agreement) and the ‘Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade' (TBT Agreement). Both the SPS Agreement and the TBT Agreement were included among the Multilateral Agreements on Trade in Goods, which was annexed to the 1994 Marrakech Agreement that established the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Although Codex standards and guidelines are theoretically voluntary, the WTO uses them as a means of resolving international trade disputes, and WTO Members are legally obliged to abide by WTO rulings.

There are currently a total of 27 different active Codex committees and Task Forces; each one of which is tasked by the Codex Alimentarius Commission to set standards and guidelines for different aspects of the global food trade. For example, Codex committees are currently engaged in the act of setting global standards for foods including fruits and vegetables; fruit and vegetable juices; fats and oils; meat and poultry; fish; cereals, pulses and legumes; milk and milk products; natural mineral waters; sugars; cocoa products and chocolate, amongst others.

Similarly there are other Codex committees who are tasked to deal with areas such as food hygiene, food labelling, pesticide residues, residues of veterinary drugs found in foods, food additives, regional coordination work, and so on.

Of all of these committees, it is the work of the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses that is arguably amongst the most controversial of all, as it has recently completed work on a set of guidelines to govern the sale of food supplements.

These guidelines, the Draft Guidelines for Vitamin and Mineral Food Supplements, are due to be adopted at the next meeting of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, which will be taking place in Rome from 4-9 July 2005. If the Commission decides to adopt these vitamin and mineral guidelines, and it currently seems almost certain that they will, then restrictions along the lines of those contained in the European Union's Food Supplements Directive could in time have to be adopted by all countries that are members of the World Trade Organization.

The European Union's Food Supplements Directive was the blueprint for the Draft Guidelines for Vitamin and Mineral Food Supplements, and was passed by the European Parliament on 13th March 2002. Due to be fully implemented on 1st August 2005, it could have the effect of prohibiting around 300 nutrient sources and an estimated 5000 products from the UK alone.

The text of the Codex Draft Guidelines for Vitamin and Mineral Food Supplements bears some notable resemblances to that of the Food Supplements Directive, thus raising the possibility that its eventual global effect could in time be similarly restrictive.

Are countries obliged to implement Codex standards and guidelines?

A great deal of discussion is currently taking place within the natural products industry, both in the United States and elsewhere, as to whether or n
ot countries are actually obliged to adopt Codex standards and guidelines.”

This article is excellent and can be found in it's entirety here.

Now if you go to urban legend sites you find them saying that this claim is “false” and considers it a “moot” point due to “outdated information” citing two bills back in 2003 that proposed regulation of dietary supplements but that were never passed.

What it fails to say about the reason those bills never passed, is because of the uproar created by the American public with the Congress. The same thing happened in 1993 when the FDA and drug companies tried to put all supplements under restriction and prescription, but over four million Americans told congress and the president to protect their freedom of choice on health supplements.

The DSHEA law was passed in 1994 gives us the freedom to choose our health supplements, but this will be overruled by CODEX and the WTO when CODEX goes into effect.

Further, about the subject of CODEX, Snopes says, “It (CODEX) has no power to force its will on any nation. Codex standards are voluntary, which means if the U.S. doesn't adopt them, they will not govern the regulation of vitamins, minerals, or dietary supplements in the USA.”

As to the ability for WTO agreements to override US laws, Snopes says, “United States law governs trade within the United States. Codex standards come into play only when American manufacturers of dietary supplements look to vend them on the international market, and even then only when the other nations involved have incorporated Codex guidelines into their food laws.”

Clearly, someone has failed to do the homework on the subject of the power of the WTO. We were subject to WTO sanctions in the U.S. balk about the Dubai Ports Deal, but due to the fact that Dubai Ports pulled out of the agreement, the sanctions never came about. This is only one example of WTO sanctions.

Read the Congressional Oversight Letter by Ron Paul Rep. from Texas to see what he has to say about how much power the WTO has over the US.

You have read reference to the date of the CODEX meeting in Rome from July 4-9, 2005, and that date has come and gone without any US restrictions. Here is one explanation provided by Dr. Rima Laibow, MD.

“Out of the blue, three countries, China, Australia and Venezuela, have suddenly announced that they will be pushing for small, bureaucratic changes in the Vitamin and Mineral Guideline (VMG) before its ratification next month in Rome, even though they are not opposing the VGM.

The changes they are requesting are single words here and there, and it seems that they are serious about the changes going through.

Here's the incredible part of this sudden event: the pressure by China, Australia, and Venezuela to make changes to the wording of the CODEX documentation could send the VMG back to committee for further revision! This could del
ay the ratification of the destructive CODEX Vitamin and Mineral Guideline by up to (or even more than) one year!”

To this day, have any of you heard one report in the mainstream news?

Did I forget to mention that here we have another CIA slide phrase, “mainstream news.”

** According to John Hammell and the International Advocates for Health Freedom (IAHF), who has attended CODEX meetings in Europe and met with US Congressional legislators:

“Behind the Codex Alimentarius Commission is the United Nations and the World Health Organization (WHO) working in conjuction with the multinational pharmaceutical cartel and international banks. Its initial efforts in the US with the FDA were defeated, so it found another ally in the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Now Codex, with the FTC and the pharmaceutical cartel behind it, threatens to become a trade issue, using the campaign of Operation Cure All to advance its goals.

Pharmaceutical interests stepped in and began exerting their influence. Instead of focusing on food safety, Codex is using its power to promote worldwide restrictions on vitamins and food supplements, severely limiting their availability and dosages.

Real Goals of Codex

This is to bring about international 'harmonization.' While global harmony sounds benign, is that the real purpose of this plan? While the stated goal of Codex is to establish unilateral regulations for dietary supplements in every country, the actual goal is to outlaw health products and information on vitamins and dietary supplements, except those under their direct control. These regulations would supercede United States domestic laws without the American people's voice or vote in the matter.

** Reminder About What CODEX REALLY Is

Dr. Rima E. Laibow, MD, Medical Director of Natural Solutions Foundation and HealthFreedomUSA is someone who has personally read the entire CODEX document. She says in an e-letter:

CODEX ALIMENTARIUS (Latin for "Food Rules”) March 23, 2005

“Let me ask you if you know anyone who has actually read all 15,000+ pages of the working documents of the Codex Alimentarius Commission? Well, I have. As such, allow me to attempt to put an end to any confusion you may have about Codex Alimentarius by sharing what I have learned and what I believe to be a reasonable and appropriate level of concern.”

Following is a summary of what Dr. Laibow found in reading all 15,000+ pages.

“The World Trade Association (WTO) is very close to taking away our right to buy, sell or use almost all nutritional supplements. In addition, the ability of physicians to legally practice environmental or natural medicine and the rights of patients to chose these treatments are about to be criminalized here in the United States.

Currently in the U.S. nutrients are classified as foods [under the 1994 Dietary Supplements Health and Education Act (DSHEA)] and any substance not explicitly forbidden is permitted as a nutrient. Under CODEX, any substance not explicitly permitted by CODEX policy is banned as a nutrient. The CODEX preamble specifies that supplements and nutrients "may not be used to prevent, treat or cure any disorder."

Natural health options will become illegal if either of the following occurs:

1) the United States is "harmonized" with the WTO this spring while compliance with CODEX is still "voluntary"

2) total compliance becomes mandatory, as it will be after the next CODEX Commission meeting in Rome July 4-9, 2005. (see note above)

Once CODEX is implemented, either through "harmonization" or mandatory compliance, we will be forced to follow the European CODEX model in which it will be illegal to manufacture, buy, sell, recommend, or use any but 28 ultra-low dose nutrients whether you are a consumer or a licensed health professional. Only synthetic versions of that short list will be allowed and natural supplements, herbs, enzymes and other non-pharmaceutical treatments will be banned. The only legal health option left will be the pharmaceutical one.

CODEX regulations have been "harmonized" (i.e., approved) in the EU, Canada and Australia. The United States is next unless we act decisively and act now.

On August 1, 2005, 75 percent of the natural substances currently available in health food stores and pharmacies in Europe will become illegal as a direct result of CODEX.

Once implemented, CODEX ALIMENTARIUS does the following:

: The European Supplements Directive is the model administrative agency for CODEX and permits a total of 28 ultra-low dose nutrients. All other nutrients, for example, alpha lipoic acid, CoQ10, fish oil, and curcumin are banned. Vitamin C, for example, at any dosage higher than 200 mg per day will be illegal. CoQ10 will be totally forbidden at any dose.

Only synthetic forms of permitted nutrients will be available. All natural versions will be illegal substances. Only synthetic nutrients (at ultra-low dosages) manufactured by pharmaceutical companies will meet the molecular standards for use in humans or animals.

: The European Supplements Directive has produced a very short list of herbs which may be used and the conditions for which they may be used (another short and very trivial list).

All other applications of herbs and any other herbs besides those listed are strictly forbidden.

: CODEX stipulates which conditions may be treated using herbs and allows only minor, self-limited conditions. Treating any other conditions with herbal remedies will constitute a crime.

Ayurvedic, Tibetan, tribal and other traditional medicines which use herbs and natural substances will be forbidden world-wide.

Herbal, shamanic, energy based (e.g., Reiki and acupuncture) medicine are forbidden forms of treatment.

: CODEX makes the un-labeled use of GMOs legal in all foods under all circumstances.

Farmers in Iraq, for example, must purchase their seeds from Monsanto and are forbidden from retaining seed crops under the new Iraqi constitution. Similar laws exist in other places.

: CODEX sets permissible upper limits for pesticide residues, toxic chemicals, hormones in food and other environmental contaminants that are many times higher than levels advocated by chemical and pesticide industry lobbying groups.

: CODEX mandates that all animal feed must be treated with antibiotics, hormones and growth stimulants world wide.

Organic, free range and biodynamic farming will become illegal.

CODEX mandates irradiation of food under circumstances now hotly contested by food safety advocates.

The standards which comprise CODEX are virtually complete: final ratification of the entire package is expected at the Codex Alimentarius Committee meeting in Rome July 4-9, 2005.

U.S. CODEX Office Policy on CODEX ALIMENTARIUS is Illegal

As I've explained in my blog, the U.S. has declared its intent to support the restrictive, illness-promoting CODEX ALIMENTARIUS Vitamin and Mineral Guideline (VMG) at the CODEX ALIMENTARIUS meeting in Rome next month, despite the fact that this position is illegal under U.S. law. Title 19 USC 3512 prohibits America from harmonizing with any international standard that violates U.S. laws. The CODEX Vitamin and Mineral Guideline would violate DSHEA (the 1994 law which treats supplements as foods).

CODEX would reduce and ultimately eliminate your access to nutritional supplements, traditional remedies and clean, unadulterated foods.

CODEX has nothing whatsoever to do with consumer protection (regardless of the disinformation) - CODEX has everything to do with boosting the profits of massive multi-national interests, especially the pharmaceutical and chemical industries.

CODEX is based on the Napoleonic legal code which forbids anything that is not explicitly permitted, which means that government would have a blank check to dictate everything you put in your mouth.

CODEX applies the science of "Risk Assessment" - which is used to analyze toxins such as mercury, arsenic, pesticides and other poisons - to nutrients!

The science of Risk Assessment as applied to nutrients is junk science, because nutrients are not toxins. The real science of nutrients is biochemistry, but CODEX dismisses the principles of biochemistry in favor of Risk Assessment.

Why? Because treating nutrients as toxins allows CODEX to dictate upper limits for nutrients, and thus, limit their availability in the marketplace (which would be a boon for the pharmaceutical industry).

CODEX ALIMENTARIUS is based on improper science - it is indeed junk science when one treats essential, non-toxic nutrients such as Vitamin C just as one would treat mercury, arsenic and other killer poisons.”

Sounds pretty unreal and even implausible to the rational mind. By itself, I could not fathom the motive or agenda behind it albeit I could see some rationale for the business end of it. This is what I have contemplated on for several years, without a real understanding that made sense to me in all aspects.

The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America: Progress (SPP)
that I began the article with is a very big part of CODEX and other projects and policies that have been quietly implemented in the U.S. Also included is the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) and The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), as is the European Union (EU).

More to come on these different but related subjects in the next part of this series, Celebrating Freedom. Until then my friends, consider carefully about your freedom to choose regarding how you treat your health, even if it is using mainstream medicine.

in buona salute!

~ mek