Another reminder: ETS! attempts to fix its chronic disorganization at incorporating new volunteers--and providing chances for existing ETS!ers to get together and hang out--by hosting an Eat the State! Volunteer Potluck and Fair this Saturday, November 9 from 1-5 PM. It'll be in Wallingford, at the home of ETS! layout/ad whiz Lance Scott (4302 N. Wallingford, 206-632-2602). Come for whatever part you like, bring (vegetarian) food as you like. Hang out, meet people, plug in (or not) as you like. The more fun we have, the easier it'll be to keep putting out this fine paper every other week. Saturday Nov. 9--be there! --Eds.

The British press, again one step ahead of the US press, has reported that the US has its own secret bioweapons program. Two scientists in the US and UK, Mark Wheelis (lecturer in microbiology at the University of California) and Malcom Dando (professor of international security at the University of Bradford in England) have written an article that will appear in a forthcoming issue of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists detailing US government projects that verge on illegal activity under the UN Bioweapons Convention. Wheelis and Dando assert that, by working on these secret projects, the US encourages other nations to break the treaty. Remember, last July the US government unilaterally scuttled a very important effort at the UN to strengthen the Bioweapons Convention, which would have added mandatory inspections to verify that no nations were developing illegal bioweapons. Wheelis and Dando assume that the Bush administration was motivated to protect these highly secret projects from the eyes of the world.

The projects include a CIA effort to copy a Soviet biological cluster bomb, a Pentagon program to build a bioweapons lab from commercially available materials (ostensibly to prove that anyone could make one, including terrorists), a very scary Defense Intelligence Agency project to genetically engineer an antibiotic-resistant strain of anthrax, and a program to produce large quantities of dried and weaponized anthrax spores.

The US government argues that these projects are meant to test the US biodefense system, but each program crosses the line into offensive applications, particularly the anthrax research.

In addition, the US Justice Department is conducting research on "non-lethal" weapons and gases--including opiate gases similar to the one used by the Russian military to end the Moscow theater siege--for riot control purposes. Wheelis and Dando point out that this "non-lethal" weapon research is being funded by the Pentagon. They also mention that signatories to the Bioweapons Convention are required to make annual declarations to the UN on their biodefense programs; however, the US has never mentioned any of these programs in its annual report.--Maria Tomchick. Sources: "US weapons secrets exposed," The Guardian, 10/29/02, www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,821241,00.html and "US 'has secret bioweapons programme,'" The Manchester Guardian Weekly (print), 10/31 - 11/6/02, p 1,

SEC Chairman Harvey Pitt is in deep trouble. The Securities and Exchange Commission, which oversees the books of corporate criminals like Enron, Worldcom, Tyco International, and Qwest, has been given the task of setting up the new Accounting Oversight Board, which will regulate and discipline accounting firms. But Harvey Pitt and his four commissioners at the SEC passed over three good candidates for the job of running the new board and instead chose William Webster, former head of the FBI and CIA.

The 78-year-old Webster is yet another conservative fossil dug up from the depths of retirement to satisfy the Bush administration's thirst for promoting criminals to higher office. Webster has absolutely no accounting experience (but he does have a lot of experience keeping secrets).

The vote for Webster was close (3-2, with Harvey Pitt casting the tie-breaker). The day after the vote, information was leaked to the press that was available only to Pitt, but not the other commissioners. Namely, Webster sat on the board of two companies in the midst of legal battles: one (US Technologies) is currently undergoing SEC investigation, and the other (Nextwave Telecommunications) is in the midst of Chapter 11 bankruptcy and undergoing litigation with the federal government over spectrum licenses. During Webster's tenure at US Technologies, he sat on an audit committee that oversaw activity by the CEO, Gregory Earls. A Delaware judge said Earls' financial schemes "may rise to the level of criminal conduct." Earls is enthusiastic about Webster's complicity in crime: he describes Webster as "a hands-on guy." The day this information leaked to the press, Pitt's own four commissioners demanded an investigation into the nomination and selection of Webster for the post. Pitt gave in and referred the investigation to the SEC's in-house inspector general. There are two more investigations underway--one by Congress' General Accounting Office, and the other by the Senate Banking Committee, chaired by Democratic Senator Paul Sarbanes (who co-sponsored the new corporate accountability legislation). In addition, Congressional Democrats are calling for Pitt's head on a platter. Pitt has deflected a lot of criticism of late over his past job as an accounting industry lawyer who defended all of the big six accounting firms in court.

While Pitt has argued that he's independent of outside influence and absolutely impartial, the appointment of Webster proves that he's not. Pitt must go, and Webster, too. But more importantly, the investigation into this incident must go all the way to the White House, which has obviously put pressure on Pitt to overlook all the well-qualified candidates in favor of a loyal Republican dinosaur.--M.T.

Genetically modified American corn, illegally imported into Mexico has been reportedly contaminating native corn stocks. Mexico, where corn was developed, hosts hundreds of local varieties adapted to a wide range of conditions. Genetic contamination of these ancient strains could destroy the communities that rely on them to survive.

The US agricultural industry admits that some GM corn was been "inadvertently" shipped into Mexico, but denies there is proof it has contaminated the local corn. In 2001, the scientific journal Nature published a report by two University of California researchers, David Quist and Ignacio Chapela, concluding that the Mexican maize genome had been contaminated with GMOs. Biotech advocates attacked the researchers' methods and their findings. Nature reversed itself and decided the paper's findings were wrong. Since Nature is supposed to scrutinize its submissions' science before it ever publishes them, the magazine's reversal raised suspicions among environmental advocates on both sides of the border.

Now the magazine has rejected a paper submitted by scientists hired by the Mexican government, which also found GMO contamination of Mexico's corn. One of the reviewers recommended rejecting the paper because its findings were "obvious," while another criticized the results as being "so unexpected as to not be believable."

Nature editor-in-chief Philip Campbell said the paper was rejected on "technical grounds" and said "the conclusions of the paper could not be justified on the grounds of the reported evidence."

Nature's consistent inconsistency on the subject strikes many observers as being motivated by the biotech advertising that loads its pages.

"The authors of the new Mexican government study were extra careful with their methodology, said Dr. Peter Rosset, co-director of Food First. "They actually took into account every scientific critique of the first study, and their results are crystal clear. At worst the new paper suffers from some lack of clarity in explaining all of their methods and conclusions, but a scientific journal would normally respond in such cases by requesting a rewrite."

As happened with the findings of GM corn's harmful effect on Monarch butterflies, apparent problems with the initial study were used to shut down the debate entirely. The manufacturers of junk agriculture use the accusation of junk science to attack any study not to their liking. Apparently even scientific objectivity is for sale these days.