the fbi and eugenics

8/3/2019 The FBI and Eugenics

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-fbi-and-eugenics 1/24

Statement of Michael J. Ravnitzky

Before the Nazi War Criminal Records Interagency

Working GroupPublic Forum: Monday, September 27, 1999

U.S. District Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York City

Thank you Mr. Chairman. I am here today to represent not the archival or legal perspective, but rather the perspective of the press and of the citizen who files a Freedomof Information request. It is, after all, the press and the FOIA requester who reveal manyof the important stories to the public.

I congratulate the people who have guided the legislation that led to this working group,and those working so hard on implementing the declassification efforts, and in keepingthe public informed as to what is going on by meetings such as this, and the Working

Group's website.

The Working Group staff, and the FBI in particular also merit some appreciation for whatis undoubtedly a thankless job. I understand that the FBI is seeking to hire an officialBureau Historian-- I hope that this Historian*s expertise is rapidly and specificallyapplied to this very important effort.

I have encountered many unwarranted classification barriers during my requests for NaziWar Criminal Records or related documents under the Freedom of Information Act (5U.S.C. 552b), or the Mandatory Declassification Review provisions of Executive Order 12958, which covers handling of National Security Information. The primary problem is

that agencies often apply a presumption of continued classification to any documents bearing classification markings, even if those documents are over 50 years old. Sincemany of my more than 2000 FOIA requests address topics relating to the World War Two era, an area of some research interest for me, I have run into this problem a lot. Ialso encounter this problem working as a legal professional for a news mediaorganization.

Another problem is that some agencies, such as the U.S. Army Intelligence and SecurityCommand (INSCOM), simply refuse to conduct Mandatory Declassification Reviews,despite their obligation to do so under the Executive Order. The third problem is thatseveral agencies refuse to accept that the public interest may outweigh continued

protection of personal data regarding Nazi War Criminals. A fourth problem is that mostagencies require affirmative proof of death before releasing certain types of records or portions of records, even if those records are 50 or 60 years old and death can be inferredfrom the passage of time.

However, I am here today primarily to point out several collections of records that fallunder the definition of Nazi War Criminal Records yet almost certainly contain classified portions currently unavailable under FOIA, but may not have been identified or solicited



by the Interagency Working Group.

FBI, CIA/OSS and military intelligence files (including INSCOM*s InvestigativeRecords Repository) concerning various deceased Nazi civilian and military leaders, suchas Borman, Brandt, Goering, Goebbels, Hess, Himmler, Heydrich, Raeder, Doenitz,

Ribbentrop, etc. In other words, don't ignore agency records on the big fish which arelikely to be used by multiple researchers.

FBI and military intelligence files concerning American organizations acting on behalf of (or in association with) the Nazis. Even if the military has purged some of its recordssystems of domestic intelligence of this age and type, the FBI files still contain manysuch military intelligence records.

FBI, CIA/OSS, State Department, and military intelligence records on the major participants in the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial, including the American and British prosecution and judicial staff! Such names as Telford Taylor, Robert Jackson, Daniel

Margolies, John Harlen Amen, and Robert Story come to mind. Files on the prosecutorsand judges at Nuremberg are most definitely Nazi War Criminal Records if they reflecton the Nuremberg process, or political pressures for leniency or withdrawal of charges.

FBI Records associated with the Pioneer Fund, a eugenics research foundation begun byGeneral Frederick Osborn, Dr. Harry Laughlin, Wickliffe P. Draper and others in 1937and which still exists today. The Pioneer Fund allegedly had close connections and earlylinks with Nazi Germany and their scientists who conducted medical experimentation(including the infamous research on twins) and furthered Nazi War Crimes.

My website, at http://www.newstrench.com/01secret/01secret.htm lists the so-calledExceptional Case Files compiled in 1980. This list includes several Nazi War CriminalRelated files at the FBI, including their file numbers. However, those files are notidentified as Nazi War Criminal records; an experienced NARA staff member should firstreview the list.

The Investigative Records Repository (IRR), a huge repository of military investigationand intelligence records maintained at Fort George G. Meade, Maryland by the U.S.Army Intelligence and Security Command, is likely to be one of the most fruitful sourcesof extant records on Nazi War Criminals. I have encountered continuing classification onsome 1940s documents relating to denazification efforts by the Army in Germany.

The Defense Technical Information Center, DTIC, is a branch of the Defense Departmentthat has millions of reports, including thousands of classified reports from the World War II era, part of what is locally referred to as the *legacy collection*. DTIC holds manycaptured German and Japanese technical and industrial intelligence documents, many of which are still classified. Relevant reports include those on German rocket assembly plants (known to use concentration camp and other slave labor), German war material plants, captured German reports concerning technical activities in locations known toutilize wartime slave labor, experiments on ìhuman factorsî (i.e. immersion in cold water,



exposure to unprotected high altitude conditions, German ìtestsî of protective clothing,reports on biological and chemical warfare, etc. DTIC has three major collections of technical reports: AD, ATI and TIP. The relevant material (the ATI, TIP and the older AD reports) is more likely in the manual card indices not searchable by computer.

Last year, the DoD responded to my Mandatory Declassification Review for somerecords of this type by saying that foreign government information in U.S. GovernmentFiles was not subject to MDR. Upon appeal, the ISOO reversed this denial and orderedthe DoD to proceed with the review. But this process of appeal took over a year.

The book Trading With the Enemy: An Expose of the Nazi-American Money Plot, 1933-1949, by Charles Higham, is an important source of names of people and companies whoenables the Nazi War Crimes financial machine. The Working Group should retrieve fileson these companies and people at FBI, CIA/OSS, State Department, and the militaryintelligence agencies.

Krupp and I.G. Farben which utilized slave labor or otherwise contributed to thegenocide John Rogge, who worked for the Justice Department in the 1940s, was suddenlyfired after he gave a speech about Nazi collaborators in the U.S.

Victor Wohreheide, the Justice Department attorney responsible for preparing the treasontrials against U.S. collaborators to the Nazi regime arrested by the Army and placed inCivilian Internment Centers called Ashcan and Dustbin, suddenly and withoutexplanation or justification, ordered all of them released.

HIAG, a so-called veterans organization in Germany, actually was a neo-Nazi front groupsheltering former SS members.

Laszlo Pasztor was a Berlin diplomat during WW2 who represented the Arrow Cross, thegovernment of Nazi Hungary, which participated in the genocide, and later became a political figure in the United States.

The Seamless Steel Equipment Corp., the Silesian-American Corporation, the Holland-American Trading Corp. and the Hamberg-Amerika Line, all seized for aiding NaziGermany and the latter used as a cover for Nazi espionage in the United States.

According to numerous sources, including the official history of Fort Detrick, written by Norman Covert, and Factories of Death: Japanese Biological Warfare 1932-45 and TheAmerican Cover-up, by Dr. Sheldon Harris, Japan committed heinous war crimes by theuse of traditional biological warfare agents like botulism and anthrax, in lethal open air testing on Chinese and American prisoners and at their work benches of the officiallynamed "Water Purification Unit 731" near Harbin, a remote, desolate area on theManchurian Peninsula. Fort Detrick sent several investigators to Japan after the war tointerrogate captured Japanese scientists and obtain their research materials. Leading theteam was Dr. Norbert Fell and Lt. Col. Arvo Thompson. Working with Gen. DouglasMacArthur's intelligence team at Supreme Commander Allied Powers (SCAP), Dr. Fell



and Thompson learned the full extent of the Japanese program headed by Lt. Gen. ShiroIshii. Several members of Unit 731 were brought to the United States and interviewed,and in general granted de facto amnesty. For many years, the military has been loathe todeclassify historical records concerning the Unit 731 war criminals and their interactionwith Army biological warfare experts. The names of the Unit 731 Japanese scientists are

readily available in the public domain. Though I realize that war criminal records fromAsia have been placed into a different priority level in this review, please do not omit theUnit 731 records.

The Chemical and Biological Information Analysis Center (CBIAC) recently completed amajor study of the history of biological and chemical warfare material, under their TAT(Technical Area Task) for the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA). The mostrecent TAT relating to this project is TAT # 295. The results of the study was a classifieddatabase controlled by Lt. Col. Dennis Perry, at 703-325-1029, and a large database of reports referenced therein that reside at CBIAC itself. CBIAC is the Defense Dept. focal point for information related to biological and chemical weapons technology, and is run

by the Battelle Memorial Institute for the Defense Technical Information Center at FortBelvoir. This history of biological and chemical warfare (and the associated bibliographicdatabase and reports) contain a large amount of material on horrific German and Japaneseexperimentation. Examination by an expert in this subject area could identify thatmaterial. To date, CBIAC has refused to release this data, nor allowed anyone to sortthrough it looking for such material. While it is important to protect technical informationon biological and chemical warfare, unfortunately that has been used as an excuse tocover up important documentation on WW2 experimentation war crimes.

The Defense Visual Information Center (DVIC) is the Defense Department*s collectionof motion picture film footage. DVIC still holds classified motion picture film footageconcerning Nazi War Crimes, Japanese War Crimes, and related topics. Much of theolder DVIC movies and film footage has been transferred to the National Archives or storage facilities, yet nevertheless remains classified, and further it often remains unclear who is responsible for its declassification and eventual review. I believe that the WorkingGroup has not yet addressed the area of motion picture film in its assessment.

The Air Force Historical Research Agency, at Maxwell Air Force Base, holds millions of classified and unclassified records going back to the turn of the century. Based on previous research inquiries, I believe that it is highly likely that classified recordsconcerning subjects relevant to this inquiry reside at AFHRA.

The Gold Transaction Summary Ledgers at the Federal Reserve Bank of NY are notreadily available for public inspection. They remain classified in the sense that no one is permitted to photocopy these records for off-site study. It is generally believed that theFederal Reserve Bank has additional relevant records on subjects that would contribute tothe Nazi War Criminal dialogue. Given the secrecy of the Federal Reserve Bank of NYon other related issues, I hope that the Working Group once again approaches this entity.

The FBI files and reports on the Special Intelligence Service (SIS) activities in Latin



America, involving Nazi and axis activities. Records likely include data on the postwar escape and relocation of war criminals into South American countries. Most of thismaterial remains classified even today.

Based on the experience of previous declassification projects, the Library of Congress

closed manuscript collections may bear relevant records for this project.

The Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) of the U.S. Department of State is likelyto hold valuable records relating to this subject.

For the first time, the Secretary-General of INTERPOL is an American. The U.S. arm of Interpol is the little known DOJ component called the Central National Bureau. It is alsolittle known that the Nazis seized control of the Austrian - based International PoliceOrganization known as Interpol during WW2, and had full access to Interpol records, andused them wherever possible in their search for genocidal solutions. Perhaps theSecretary General of Interpol as well as the Central National Bureau could be prevailed

upon to aid in the search for Nazi War Criminal records, whether designated as such or not.

Finally, ending secrecy regarding Nazi War Criminal Records should begin right hereand now. The Working Group should make public the Agency Status Reports andImplementation Plans, received from each agency the Working Group has surveyed.

I trust that the Working Group will carefully read the Final Report of another groupwhich led a similar unilateral declassification effort when the normal mechanisms of review failed the American people: the ARRB. As you may be aware, the ARRB FinalReport described several agencies that were initially less than forthright with the Board,and some which simply refused to provide particular records and by waiting out theBoard*s brief lifespan were able to keep these records classified and concealed. I hopethat this does not happen with regard to the Nazi War Criminal Records.

In closing, I would ask the Working Group to contact each agency FOIA Office, eachFOIA Appeals Office, the Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO), the InformationSecurity Classification Appeals Panel (ISCAP) to ask them to apply the Nazi War Criminal Records Act wherever applicable.

I would be pleased to entertain any questions you might have concerning my remarks.

Michael Ravnitzky is the Director of Legal Administration for APBnews.com, a national news organization for law enforcement and

criminal justice information whose slogan is *you have the right to know*. He spoke at the Nazi War Criminal Records InteragencyWorking Group on his own behalf; his views do not represent those of APBnews. Ravnitzky holds a Bachelors degree from CornellUniversity and a law degree from William Mitchell College of Law. He has written extensively on Freedom of Information andDeclassification Policy issues.

Source: http://www.archives.gov/iwg/research-papers/ravnitzky-statement-september-1999.html

http://www.archives.gov/iwg/research-papers/ravnitzky-statement-september-1999.html






FBI Plans Precrime Biometric Idenfication System

Posted: 2007-05-29

FBI technologists are planning for upgrades that will buttress the law enforcementcommunity’s limited ability to use DNA as a forensic tool, according to a recent briefingthe bureau offered on plans for its Next Generation Identification system. NGI isdesigned to incorporate improved technology into the bureau’s Integrated AutomatedFingerprint Identification System (IAFIS).

The bureau plans within the next few weeks to request proposals from vendors to build NGI. The agency already has described a phased plan to roll out the upgrades to itsexisting biometric repository during the next several years.

“DNA has definitely proven its ability to be fabulously accurate,” said Jim Loudermilk,

deputy assistant director at the bureau’s Information Technology Operations Division. Hecited instances in which DNA evidence has exonerated prisoners, some of whom had been held for decades or faced possible execution.

Many in the general public now believe that law enforcement agencies can routinely useDNA to investigate crimes, Loudermilk told an audience of vendor and governmentexecutives at an Industry Advisory Council briefing.

But legal and policy barriers to widespread DNA biometric use work together with the process’ high cost to limit its usefulness, he said.

Another barrier is that existing DNA biometric repositories, including IAFIS, simplydon’t hold enough information to compete with the more familiar fingerprint data, hesaid.

The costs for DNA sequencing now can range into the thousands of dollars for a singleforensic sample, Loudermilk said.

But FBI biometric experts estimate that the cost for collecting and sequencing a DNAsample could fall well below $20 in about 15 years, Loudermilk said.

Increased use of DNA as a biometric identifier also raises privacy issues, the FBI official

said.

“We are adding a palm print system,” [as part of the NGI upgrade] Loudermilk

said. He said the forensic community’s experience with crime scenes has shown that

palm print evidence is frequently available. “The Japanese [police] have found palm

prints very useful.

“As for the other exotics, such as earlobe shape [and voice prints and gait analysis], the



Loudermilk said existing technology for reliably matching the mug shot photographs that police agencies take of people they arrest is nowhere near as mature as fingerprint-matching technology.

IAFIS’ original design called for the system to process 62,500 fingerprint matches daily.

As a result of increased demand — especially for background checks mandated by civillaws covering employees in the financial, child-care and educational fields — amongothers, IAFIS’ busiest day called for the system to process about 114,000 checks.

Source: http://www.thought-criminal.org/2007/05/29/fbi-plans-precrime-biometric-idenfication-system

http://www.thought-criminal.org/2007/05/29/fbi-plans-precrime-biometric-idenfication-system






Selective Arrests, an Ever-Expanding DNA Forensic Database

and the Specter of an Early 21st Century Equivalent of

Phrenology

Troy Duster New York University and the U. of California, Berkeley

We can all celebrate the use of DNA technology to free the more than one-hundredwrongly convicted prisoners, some whom were on death row, and others who serveddecades for rapes they did not commit (Dwyer, et al, 2000).1 Similarly, when lawenforcement can score a “cold hit” and catch a rapist because his DNA was on file, thereare reasons to applaud. The use of this technology in high profile cases has led to a fullset of arguments for widening the net of the DNA database, so that more and more

samples can be included, ranging from convicted felons to arrestees – from suspects tothe whole population (Stevens, 2001; Puri, 2001). There are currently about 1.5 million profiles in the national database, but in early 2002, the Attorney General of the UnitedStates ordered the FBI to generate a plan that is supposed to expand this to 50 million profiles. What more objective way could there be of exculpating the innocent andconvicting the guilty? However, this conflates three quite distinct strategies and practices of the criminal justice system that need to be separated and analyzed for their disparate impact on different populations.

The first is the use of DNA in post-conviction cases to determine whether or not therewas a wrongful conviction, the kind of situation that would help to free the innocent. The

second is the collection of DNA from “suspects” or arrestees in pre-trial circumstances toincrease the DNA database – which in turn is designed to help law enforcement todetermine if there is “match” with tissue samples left at some unsolved crime – the net tocatch the guilty. The third is the advocacy of increasing the collection of DNA from awider and wider band of felons and misdemeanants in the post-conviction period, so thatthere is a record on file in the event of recidivism. Much like the current situation inwhich the police can stop a driver and determine whether there are outstanding warrantsor traffic ticket violations that have piled up, the new technology would permit authoritiesto see if the DNA of the person stopped and arrested “matched the DNA” on file for someone at an unsolved crime scene.

To demonstrate that this is not just hypothetical, in early 2000 the New York PoliceDepartment began a pilot project experimenting with portable DNA laboratories (Flynn,2000). The police take a buccal swab – some saliva from inside the cheek of the personstopped – and place it on a chip the size of a credit card. They then put this card througha machine no larger than a hand-held compact disc player, where the DNA is read via alaser in two minutes, isolating about 13 DNA markers to create a profile of the suspect.When this task is completed, the police can then transmit these data to a central database,where it currently requires about twelve minutes to determine if there is a “match” with a



1950, the ratio had increased to approximately four times; in 1960; in 1970, it was sixtimes; and in 1989, it was seven times that of whites.

[Table and Graph on Incarceration Rates inserted here]

However dramatic these figures are, incarceration is but one end of the long continuum of the criminal justice system that starts with being stopped by the police, arrested, held for trial, and convicted.

The War on Drugs played the dominant role in this story. While racial profiling seemsoften to be characterized as a local police practice, the phenomenon of young minoritymales being “just stopped by the police” was actually a national strategy first deployed bythe Reagan administration. In 1986, the Drug Enforcement Administration initiatedOperation Pipeline, a program designed in Washington, D.C., that ultimately trained27,000 law enforcement officers in 48 participating states over the ensuing decade. The project was designed to alert police and other law enforcement officials of “likely profiles” of those who should be stopped and searched for possible drug violations. Highon the list was young, male, African Americans and Latinos driving in cars that signaledthat something might be amiss. For example, a 19-year-old African American driving anew Lexus would be an “obvious” alert, because the assumption would be that the familycould not have afforded such a car, and the driver must therefore be “into drugs.”

According to the government's own best statistics, during the height of the intensity of theDrug War, Blacks constituted only 15-20 per cent of the nation's drug users (Flanaganand Jamieson, 1990; NIDA, 1990), but in most urban areas, they constitute approximatelyhalf to two-thirds of those arrested for drug offenses. Indeed, in New York City, AfricanAmericans and Latinos constituted 92 per cent of all those arrested for drug offenses(Clark Foundation, 1992). In Florida, the annual admissions rate to the state prisonsystem nearly tripled from 1983 and 1989, from 14,301 to nearly 40,000 (Austin andMcVey, 1989:4). This was a direct consequence of the "War on Drugs," since well over two-thirds of these felonies are drug-related. The nation gasped at the national statisticsreported by the Sentencing Project in 1990, citing the figure that nearly one-fourth of allyoung Black males 20-29 years of age were either in prison, in jail, on probation or parole on a given day in the summer of 1989.2 This figure has been recited so often thatinured so many that there was (relatively) a collective yawn that greeted anannouncement in mid-1992, that a study of Baltimore revealed that fifty-six per cent of that city's young Black males were under some form of criminal justice sanction on any given day in 1991 (Miller, 1992). Indeed, of the nearly 13,000 individuals arrested on

drug charges in Baltimore during 1991, more than 11,000 were African Americans.

The explanation for this extraordinary imbalance between patterns of drug consumption by race, and arrest statistics derived from the point of the sales transaction is notdifficult. It is the selective aim of the artillery in the Drug War. Interviews with PublicDefenders in both the San Francisco Bay Area and Atlanta reveal that over half of their caseload is of young, overwhelmingly Black males who are arrested through "buy and bust transactions" by the police.3 Most of these transactions of quantities of cocaine at a



value of less than $75.00. In contrast, drug sales in the fraternity houses or "in the suites"routinely escape the net of the criminal justice system.4 It is the street sales that are mostvulnerable to the way in which the criminal justice apparatus is currently constituted andemployed.

Some judges began to throw out cases in which there was obvious racial bias inadministering drug laws so unevenly across the population. A white Manhattan judgeallowed crucial evidence to be suppressed in a drug-arrest case at the Port Authority BusTerminal on the grounds that the drug enforcement efforts were aimed exclusively atminorities.5 It is a well-known and accepted police practice to intercept citizens who fit a"profile" of a likely offender. That profile increasingly took on an overwhelmingly racialdimension. When a Superior Court judge was informed that eighty per cent of all illegaldrug transactions involve whites, he replied in astonishment that he thought it was theopposite.6

The Drug War affected the races quite differently with regard to respective prison

incarceration rates. The most striking figure showing this is the shift in the racialcomposition of prisoners in the State of Virginia: In 1983, approximately 63 per cent of the new prison commitments for drugs were white with the rest, 37 per cent, minority.Just six years later, in 1989, the situation had reversed, with only 34 per cent of the newdrug commitments being whites, but 65 per cent minority. It is not just the higher rate of incarceration, but the way in which the full net of the criminal justice system all the waythrough mandatory sentencing falls selectively on Blacks. For example, powder cocaineis most likely to be sold and consumed by whites, while Blacks are more likely to sell andconsume crack (Flanagan and Jamieson, 1990; NIDA, 1990).

Moreover, federal law is not race-neutral on these two very much related chemicalsubstances: Possession with intent to distribute five grams of cocaine brings a variablesentence of 10 to 37 months; but, possession with intent to distribute five grams of crack brings a mandatory minimum five-year sentence.7 A study by the Federal Judicial Center in Washington, D.C. revealed that the mandatory minimum sentencing in drug cases hashad a dramatically greater impact on Blacks than on whites (Meierhoefer, 1992). In1986, before the mandatory minimum sentences became effective, for crack offenses, theaverage sentence was six per cent higher for Blacks than for whites. Just four years later in 1990, the average sentence was 93 per cent higher for Blacks.8 While these figures aremost shocking for crack, the shift towards longer sentences for Blacks also includes other drugs. In the same time period, from 1986 to 1990, the average sentence for Blacks vis-a-vis whites (for offenses related to powder cocaine, marijuana, and the opiates) went upfrom 11 per cent to 49 per cent greater (Meierhoefer, 1992:20).

The charge of police profiling by race those that they subject to stops and searches hasnow reached the highest circles of government. Attorney General John Ashcroft, nocrusading hero of civil liberties, has gone on record as opposing the practice, and promising to root it out and end it as he uncovers and discovers remnants of those policies. But there are still some that contest whether there really has been somethingcalled “racial profiling” – related to the “offense” of “driving while Black.” So it is



instructive to present some compelling data on the topic, gathered by the Maryland state police department. The data reflect the way in which the Maryland State Police stoppeddrivers, by race, along the I-95 corridor, from January, 1995 to September, 1996. Notethat while drivers in all categories have a high percentage of violations that could be thesource of being asked to “pull over” (from lane-changing without signaling to speeding),

the minority drivers were stopped at a rate that can produce the reasonable conclusion of selective profiling.9

(Insert data from Two Maryland graphs here)

Background to “ethnic-affiliation-markers” at the DNA level

At the level of the DNA, we have now been told repeatedly by the mappers andsequencers of the Human Genome that all humans are 99.9 per cent alike. However,there is an unannounced 800-pound gorilla hovering around the FBI national DNAdatabase for forensic investigation. The gorilla has a name, “race” – although it hasrecently applied for and received a name-change, and now prefers to be called more politely “ethnic-estimation based upon allele frequency variation.” The official line fromthe disciplines of molecular biology, physical anthropology, hematology, theneurosciences, and a dozen other scientific fields is that “the concept of race has noscientific meaning, and no scientific utility” (Katz, 1995; Cavalli-Sforza, in Smith &Sapp 1997:55).). On the surface, this is of course correct. There are no biological processes (circulation of the blood, patterns of neuro-transmission) that map along anysystem for classifying humans that we can dredge from the past or invoke from the present, and as we shall see, the future belongs to a whole newly evolving nomenclature.

But if humans are 99.9 per cent alike and “race” is purportedly a concept with noscientific utility, what are we to make of a series of articles that have appeared in thescientific literature over the last decade, looking for genetic markers of population groupsthat coincide with common-sense, lay renditions of ethnic and racial phenotypes? It isthe forensic applications that have generated much of this interest. Devlin and Risch(1992a) published an article on “Ethnic Differentiation at VNTR Loci, with SpecificReference to Forensic Applications” – a research report that appeared prominently in the American Journal of Human Genetics.

The presence of null alleles leads to a large excess of single-band phenotypes for blacks at D17S79 (Devlinand Risch, 1992b), as Budowle et al. (1991b) predicted. This phenomenon is less important for the

Caucasian and Hispanic populations, which have fewer alleles with a small number of repeats (figs. 2-4). p.540

…it appears that the FBI’s data base is representative of the Caucasian population.Results for the Hispanic ethnic groups, for the D17S79 locus, again suggest that the data bases are derived from nearly identical populations, when both similarities and expected biases are considered (for approximate biases, see fig. 9). For the allele frequency



distributions derived from the black population, there may be small differences in the populations from which the data bases are derived, as the expected bias is .05. (p. 546)

When researchers try to make probabilistic statements about which group a person belongs to, they look at variation at several different locations in the DNA -- usually from

three to seven loci.10 For any particular locus, there is an examination of the frequencyof that allele at that locus, and for that population. In other words, what is beingassessed is the frequency of genetic variation at a particular spot in the DNA in each population.

Occasionally, these researchers find a locus where one of the populations being observedand measured has, for example (let’s call them) alleles H, I and J and another populationhas alleles H, I and K. We know that there are alleles that are found primarily amongsub-populations of Native American Indians. When comparing a group of NorthAmerican Indians with a group of Finnish people, one might find a single allele that was present in some Indians but in no Finns (or it is at such a low frequency in the Finns that

it is rarely, if ever seen). However, it is important to note and reiterate again and againthat this does not mean that all Native American Indians, even in this sub-population, willhave that allele.11 Rather, we are referring to the probability of the frequency of theappearance of that allele. Indeed, it is inevitable that some will have a different set of alleles, and that many of them will be the same alleles as some of the Finns. Also, if comparing North American Indians from Arizona to North American Caucasians fromArizona, we would probably find a low level of the “Indian allele” in the so-calledCaucasians, because there has been "interbreeding". Which leads to the next point.

It is possible to make arbitrary groupings of populations (geographic, linguistic, self-identified by faith, identified by others by physiognamy, etc.) and still find statisticallysignificant allelic variations between those groupings. For example, we could simply pick all of the people in Chicago, and all in Los Angeles, and find statistically significantdifferences in allele frequency at some loci. Of course, at many loci, even most loci, wewould not find statistically significant differences. When researchers claim to be able toassign people to groups based on allele frequency at a certain number of loci, they havechosen loci that show differences between the groups they are trying to distinguish. Thework of Devlin and Risch (1992a, 1992b), Evett et al (1993, 1996), Lowe et al (2001) andothers suggest that there are only about ten per cent of sites in the DNA that are "useful"for making distinctions. This means that at the other ninety per cent of the sites, theallele frequencies do not vary between groups such as "Afro-Caribbean people inEngland" and "Scottish people in England." But it does not follow that because we cannot find a single site where allele frequency matches some phenotype that we are tryingto identify (for forensic purposes, we should be reminded), that there are not several(four, six, seven) that will not be effective, for the purposes of aiding the FBI, Scotlandyard, or the criminal justice systems around the globe in highly probabilistic statementsabout suspects, and the likely ethnic, racial, or cultural populations from which they can be identified – statistically.

So when it comes to molecular biologists asserting that “race has no validity as a



scientific concept,” there is an apparent contradiction with the practical applicability of research on allele frequencies in specific populations. It is possible to sort out and makesense of this, and even to explain and resolve the apparent contradiction – but only if wekeep in mind the difference between using a taxonomic system with sharp, discrete,definitively bounded categories, and those which show patterns (with some overlap), but

which may prove to be empirically or practically useful. When representativespokespersons from the biological sciences say that “there is no such thing as race” – they mean, correctly, that there are no discrete categories that come to a discrete beginning or end, that there is nothing mutually exclusive about our current (or past)categories of “race”, and that there is more genetic variation within categories of “race”than between. All this is true. However, when Scotland Yard or the Birmingham,England police force, or the New York police force, wants to narrow the list of suspectsin a crime, they are not primarily concerned with tight taxonomic systems of classification with no overlapping categories. That is the stuff of theoretical physics andlogic in philosophy, not the practical stuff of helping to solve crime or the practicalapplication of molecular genetics to health delivery via genetic screening -- and all the

messy overlapping categories that will inevitably be involved with such enterprises. Thatis, some African Americans have Cystic Fibrosis even though the likelihood is far greater among Americans of North European descent, and in a parallel if not symmetrical waysome American whites have Sickle Cell Anemia even though the likelihood is far greater among Americans of West African descent. But in the world of cost-effective decision-making, genetic screening for these disorders is routinely done based on common-senseversions of the phenotype. The same is true for the quite practical matter of namingsuspects.

In the July 8, 1995 issue of the New Scientist entitled, "Genes in Black and White," someextraordinary claims are made about what it is possible to learn about socially definedcategories of race from reviewing information gathered using new molecular genetictechnology. In 1993, a British forensic scientist published what is perhaps the first DNAtest explicitly acknowledged to provide "intelligence information" along "ethnic" linesfor "investigators of unsolved crimes." Ian Evett, of the Home Office's forensic sciencelaboratory in Birmingham, and his colleagues in the Metropolitan Police, claimed thattheir DNA test can distinguish between "Caucasians" and "Afro-Caribbeans" in nearly 85 per cent of the cases.

Evett's work, published in the Journal of Forensic Science Society, draws on apparentgenetic differences in three sections of human DNA. Like most stretches of human DNAused for forensic typing, each of these three regions differs widely from person to person,irrespective of race. But by looking at all three, the researchers claimed that under selectcircumstances it is possible to estimate the probability that someone belongs to a particular racial group. The implications of this for determining, for practical purposes,who is and who is not “officially” a member of some racial or ethnic category are profound.

A year after the publication of the UNESCO statement (Katz, 1995) purportedly buriedthe concept of “race” for the purposes of scientific inquiry and analysis, and during the



same time period that the American Anthropological Association was deliberating andgenerating a parallel statement, an article appeared in the American Journal of HumanGenetics, authored by Ian Evett and his associates, summarized thusly:

Before the introduction of a four-locus multiplex short-tandem-repeat (STR) system into casework, anextensive series of tests were carried out to determine robust procedures for assessing the evidential value

of a match between crime and suspect samples. Twelve databases were analyzed from the three mainethnic groups encountered in casework in the United Kingdom; Caucasians, Afro-Caribbeans, and Asiansfrom the Indian subcontinent. Independence tests resulted in a number of significant results, and the impactthat these might have on forensic casework was investigated. It is demonstrated that previously publishedmethods provide a similar procedure for correcting allele frequencies – and that this leads to conservativecasework estimates of evidential value. (Evett, et al., 1996:398)

In more recent years, the technology has moved along, and forensic scientists are nowusing VNTR loci, and investigating 12-15 segments of the DNA, not just the earlier 3-7.Recall that in the opening section I referred to the pilot program of the New York Police

Department, locating 13 loci for identification purposes. The forensic research reportedabove occurred before the current computer chip revolution, which will permit research

on specific populations to achieve a Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (or SNP) profile of such a group (Hamadeh and Afshari, 2000). There is a dangerous seduction whendeploying the technology in this fashion. The computer will inevitably be able to findsome patterns for a group of, say, 3,000 burglars. But this is a mere correlation of markers, and it is far from anything but a spurious correlation that will explain nothing – while it will have the seductive imprimatur of molecular genetic precision.

The dangerous intersection of “allele frequencies in special populations” and “police

profiling via phenotype”

The conventional wisdom is that DNA fingerprint is just a better way of getting a

fingerprint. That is wrong. The traditional physical imprint of your finger or thumb provided only that specific identifying mark, and it is attached to you and you alone.12 Quite unlike the actual fingerprint, the DNA contains information about many other aspects than simply a marker for identification. It contains information about potential or existing genetic diseases or genetic susceptibilities one may have, and also containsinformation about your family. These can involve data of interest to one’s employer andof course, to insurance companies. For these reasons, law enforcement officials claimthat they are only interested in that part of the DNA that will permit them to provideidentifying markers that are not in coding regions. Coding regions are only ten per centof the DNA, and it is in these regions that the nucleotides code for proteins that mightrelate to a full range of matters of concern to researchers, from cancer or heart disease –

to neuro-transmission and thus, for some, to possible “coding” for “impulsivity” or biochemical outcomes that might relate to violence.

While the FBI and local and state law enforcement officials tell us that they are onlylooking at genetic markers in the non-coding region of the DNA, twenty-nine states nowrequire that tissue samples be retained in their DNA data banks after profiling is complete



(Kimmelman, 2000:211). Only one state, Wisconsin, requires the destruction of tissuesamples once profiling is complete.

The states are the primary venues for the prosecution of violations of the criminal law,and their autonomy has generated considerable variation in the use of DNA databanks

and storage. Even as late as the mid 1980s, most states were only collecting DNAsamples on sexual offenders. The times have changed quite rapidly. All fifty states nowcontribute to the CODIS system. Moreover, there has been rapid change in the inter-linking of state data bases. In just two years, the database went from a total of ninestates cross-linking “a little over 100,00 offender profiles and 5,000 forensic profiles” to32 states, the FBI, and the US Army now linking “nearly 400,000 offender profiles, andclose to 20,000 forensic profiles.” (Barry Brown’s presentation) States are nowuploading an average of 3,000 offender profiles every month. If this sounds daunting,recall that the computer technology is increasingly efficient and extraordinarily fast. Ittakes only 500 microseconds to search a database of 100,000 profiles (again, BarryBrown’s presentation).

As we increase the numbers of profiles in the databases, there will be researchers proposing to provide SNP profiles of specific offender populations. Twenty statesauthorize the use of databanks for research on forensic techniques. Based on thestatutory language in several of those states, this could easily mean assaying genes or locithat contain predictive information. Tom Callaghan, Program Manager of the FBI’sFederal Convicted Offender Program, refused to rule out such possible uses by behavioral geneticists seeking a possible profile for a particular allele among specificoffender populations, including especially violent offenders and sexual offenders(Kimmelman, 2000). It is useful to note here that this is the wedge, and then theexpansion via “function creep” (explained in the ACLU presentation in this volume) toother crimes and even misdemeanors. Indeed, Louisiana is the first state to pass a law permitting the taking of a DNA sample for all merely arrested for a felony.

Seven states now require DNA databanking on all felons, including white-collar felonies. In the fall of 1998, Governor Pataki proposed that New York state includewhite collar convicts into the DNA database, but the state legislative assembly balked andforced him to jettison the idea. Perhaps they were concerned that some saliva might beleft on the cigars in those backrooms where price-fixing and security-exchange fraudoccur. Today, nearly half the states include some misdemeanors in the DNA databank.So we can now see that what started as “sex offenders” has now graduated tomisdemeanants and arrestees. While 39 states permit expungement of samples if chargesare dropped, almost all of those states place the burden on the individual to initiateexpungement.

Population-Wide DNA Database

It is now relatively common for scholars to acknowledge the considerable anddocumented racial and ethnic bias in police procedures, prosecutorial discretion, juryselection, and sentencing practices -- of which racial profiling is but the tip of an iceberg.



(Mauer, 1999) Indeed, racial disparities penetrate the whole system and are suffusedthroughout it, all the way up to and through racial disparities in seeking the death penaltyfor the same crime. If the DNA database is primarily composed of those who have beentouched by the criminal justice system, and that system has provided practices thatroutinely select more from one group, there will be an obvious skew or bias towards this

group. David Kaye, in one of the contributions to this volume, takes this position that theway to handle the racial bias in the DNA data-base is to include everyone. But this doesnot address the far more fundamental problem of the bias that generates the configurationand content of the criminal (or suspect) database. If the lens of the criminal justicesystem is focused almost entirely on one part of the population for a certain kind of activity (drug-related, street-crime), and ignores a parallel kind of crime (fraternitycocaine sales a few miles away), then even if the fraternity members’ DNA are in thedata bank, they will not be subject to the same level of matching, or of subsequent allelefrequency profiling research to “help explain” their behavior. That behavior will not have been recorded . That is, if the police are not stopping to arrest the fraternitymembers, it does not matter whether their DNA is in a national database or not, because

they are not criminalized by the selective aim of the artillery of the criminal justicesystem.

Thus, it is imperative that we separate arguments about bias in the criminal justice systemat the point of contact with select parts of the population from “solutions” to bias about“cold hits.” It is certainly true that if a member of that fraternity committed a rape, lefttissue samples at the scene, and – because he was in a national DNA database – the policecould nab him with a “cold hit,” that would be the source of the justifiable applause withwhich I opened this paper. But my point here is that by ignoring powder cocaine andemphasizing street sales of cocaine in the African American community, the mark of criminality thereby generated, and this is not altered by having a population-wide DNAdatabase. However, the surface fiction of objectivity will lead to a research agenda onthe DNA database about which I would now like to issue a warning.

There is a serious threat of how these new technologies are about to be deployed that ismasked by the apparent global objectivity of a population-wide DNA database. I amreferring to the prospects for SNP profiling of offenders. As noted, even if everyonewere in the national database, this would not deter the impulse to do specific and focusedresearch on the select population that has been convicted, or who are, in Etzioni’s phrase,legitimate suspects.

An article appeared in the American Journal of Human Genetics in 1997 that made thefollowing claim:

…we have identified a pnael of population-specific genetic markers that enable robust ethnic-affiliationestimation for major U.S. resident populations. In this report, we identify these loci and present their levelsof allele-frequency differential between ethnically defined samples, and we demonstrate, using log-likelihood analysis, that this panel of markers provides significant statistical power for ethnic-affiliationestimation (Shriver, et al, 1997:957).

As in the earlier work by Devlin and Rich (1992a), one of the expressed purposes of this



research is its “use in forensic ethnic affiliation estimation” (Shriver, et al, 1997:957;Lowe, et al, 2001). This research agenda is likely to produce a significant challenge tothe communitarian claim of a common public safety interest.

DNA profiling and the fracture of “Community” One of the papers for this symposium is authored by the leading figure in thecommunitarian movement, Amatai Etzioni. Perhaps the central thesis of the paper, if notthe movement, is that we need to keep a better balance between the individual rights andcommunity interests. That is laudable when it is possible to determine a generalconsensus of community interest based upon the common health, the commonweal(th),and the common interest. Normally, the public health is just such an issue. The right of the individual to remain in a community while s/he has a contagious disease such assmallpox or tuberculosis is trumped by the state’s right to protect the general publichealth of the citizenry. But molecular biology has played a powerful role in fracturingthe public health consensus. While we could all agree that it is in our common interest to

mainly rid us of cholera, yellow fever, tuberculosis, infectious meningitis, and small pox,this communitarian consensus has been dramatically undermined as we have learned thatsome groups are at higher risk for a genetic disorder than others. Cystic fibrosis is agenetic disorder that can affect the upper respiratory system in a life-threatening manner, but only those from north European ancestry are at significant risk. Beta-Thalassemia isa blood disorder primarily associated with persons with ancestors from the southernMediterranean region. Sickle cell anemia is primarily associated, in the U.S., withAmericans of West African descent. And so it goes. In the 1970s, the public healthconsensus about general health screening was disrupted by this development, as groupinterests began to emerge to demand more funding for research and genetic testing of thegene disorder most associated with “their group” (Duster, 1990).

If molecular genetics and the emergence of group-based research agendas fractured the public health consensus, we can expect an even more dramatic parallel developmentwhen it comes to discussions of the public safety. It is almost inevitable that a researchagenda will surface to try to find patterns of allele frequencies, DNA markers, andgenetic profiles of different types of criminals. One could do a SNP profile of rapists andsex offenders, and find some markers that they putatively share. As noted above,“ethnic-affiliation estimations of allele-frequencies” is high on the research agenda inforensic science. In the abstract, there is a public consensus about the desirability of reducing crime. However, when it comes to the routine practices of the criminal justicesystem, a demonstration of systematic bias has (and will further) erode(d) the publicconsensus on how this is best achieved. The War on Drugs began with a broad

consensus, but the fracture occurred with the practices briefly outlined above, andthoroughly documented in the literature (Reinarman and Levine, 1997; Mauer, 1999;Cole, 1999; Miller, 1996). This will be exacerbated by the inevitable search for geneticmarkers and seductive ease into genetic explanations of crime.

But like the phrenology of the 19th century, these markers will be precisely that,“markers” and not explanatory of “the causes” of violent crime. Even if the many causesof criminal violence (or any human behaviors) are embedded in the full range of forces



that begin with protein coding, there is interaction at every level, from the cellular environment all the way up through embryological development – to the ways in whichthe criminal justice system focuses on one part of the town and not another when makingdrug busts. We are bemused today about tales of 19th century scientists who soughtanswers to criminal behavior by measuring the sizes and shapes of the heads of convicted

felons. The new IBM computers can make 7.5 trillion calculations per second for biological chip analysis. These are sirens beckoning researchers who wish to do parallelcorrelational studies of “population-based allele frequencies” with “ethnic estimations”and groupings of felons – a recurring seduction to a false precision. A higher and moredetermined vigilance of these developments is necessary if we are to avoid repeating themistakes of the late nineteenth century.

References

Austin, James S. and Aaron David McVey, "The Impact of the War on Drugs," Focus,San Francisco, CA: The 1989 National Council of Crime and Delinquency Prison

Population Forecast, 39 (December, 1989:1-7).

Cavalli-Sforza, Luigi Luca, “Race Difference: Genetic Evidence” in Smith, Edward, andWalter Sapp, eds., Plain Talk About the Human Genome Project, Tuskegee, AL:Tuskegee University, 1997, 51-58

Clark, Edna McConnell Foundation, Americans Behind Bars, New York, May, 1992

Cole, Simon A., Suspect Identities: A History of Fingerprinting and CriminalIdentification, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001

Cole, David, No Equal Justice: Race and Class in the American Criminal Justice System, New York: The New Press, 1999

Devlin, B., and Neil Risch, “Ethnic Differentiation at VNTR Loci, with SpecificReference to Forensic Applications,” American Journal of Human Genetics, 51:534-548,1992a

Devlin, B., and Neil Risch, “A Note on the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium of VNTR data by using the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s fixed-bin method, American Journal of Human Genetics, 51:549-553, 1992b

Duster, Troy, Backdoor to Eugenics, New York: Routledge, 1990

Dwyer, Jim, Peter Neufeld and Barry Scheck, Actual innocence: Five Days to Executionand Other Dispatches from the Wrongly Convicted, New York : Doubleday, 2000

Evett, I.W., I.S. Buckleton, A. Raymond, and H. Roberts, “The Evidential Value of DNAProfiles,” Journal of the Forensic Science Society, 33 (4): 243-244, 1993



_________,P.D. Gill, J.K. Scranage, and B.S. Wier, “Establishing the Robustness of Short-Tandem-Repeat Statistics for Forensic Application,” American Journal of HumanGenetics, 58: 398-407, 1996

_________, “Criminalistics: The Future of Expertise,” Journal of the Forensic Science

Society, 33 (3):173-178, 1993

Flanagan, Timothy J., and Kathleen Maguire, eds., Sourcebook of Criminal JusticeStatistics 1989. U.S. Department of Justice Statistics, Washington, D.C: USGPO, 1990

Flynn, Kevin, “Police Gadgets Aim to Fight Crime with 007-Style Ingenuity,” New York Times, March 7, 2000. (A21)

Hacker, Andrew, Two Nations: Black and White, Separate, Hostile, Unequal, New York:Scribner's, 1992

Hamadeh, Hisham, and Cynthia A. Afshari, “Gene Chips and Functional Genomics,”American Scientist, 88, 508-515, November-December, 2000

Katz, Solomon H.,. "Is Race a Legitimate Concept for Science?" The AAPA RevisedStatement on Race: A Brief Analysis and Commentary, University of Pennsylvania,February, 1995

Kimmelman, Jonathan, “Risking Ethical Insolvency: A Survey of Trends in CriminalDNA Databanking,” Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics, vol 28: 209-221, 2000.

Lowe, Alex L., Andrew Urquhart, Lindsey A. Foreman, Ian Evett, "Inferring EthnicOrigin by Means of an STR Profile," Forensic Science International, 2001, 119:17-22

Mauer, Marc, Race to Incarcerate New York: New Press: Distributed by W.W. Norton,1999.

Meierhoefer, Barbara S., "The General Effect of Mandatory Minimum Prison Terms: ALongitudinal Study of Federal Sentences Imposed," Federal Judicial Center, Washington,D.C., 1992

Miller, Jerome G., Search and Destroy: African-American Males in the Criminal JusticeSystem, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996

______________., Hobbling A Generation: Young African American Males in theCriminal Justice System of America's Cities: Baltimore, Maryland, National Center onInstitutions and Alternatives, Alexandria, Virginia, 1992

Nelkin, Dorothy M. and Susan Lindee. The DNA mystique: The Gene as a Cultural Icon, New York : Freeman, 1995.



Puri, Allison, “An International DNA Database: Balancing Hope, Privacy, and ScientificError,” Boston College International and Comparative Law Review, Spring, 2001

Reinarman, Craig and Harry G. Levine, Crack in America: Demon Drugs and SocialJustice, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997

Shriver, Mark D., Michael W. Smith, Ji lin, Amy Marcini, Jousha M. Akey, RanjanDeka, and Robert E. Ferrell, “Ethnic Affiliation Estimation by Use of Population-SpecificDNA Markers,” American Journal of Human Genetics, 60: 957-964, 1997

Stevens, Aaron P., “Arresting Crime: Expanding the Scope of the DNA Databases inrica,” Texas Law Review, March, 2001

Source: http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:ea1ocrAKopkJ:www.ksg.harvard.edu/dnabook/Troy_Duster_paper_2-4-

03.doc+eugenics+FBI&hl=nl&ct=clnk&cd=45&gl=nl

http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:ea1ocrAKopkJ:www.ksg.harvard.edu/dnabook/Troy_Duster_paper_2-4-03.doc+eugenics+FBI&hl=nl&ct=clnk&cd=45&gl=nl








Excerpt from an interview with author Dr. Leonard Horowitz

Neela: In the book, you discuss the significance of the book's cover art, a painting by

Leo Tanguma. What made you choose this particular painting? Can you elaborate

on that and also discuss the idea of eugenics and its role in public health policy?

LH: The cover art, and sixteen page color gallery of related works, many done by artistEdward Keinholz and published by the Whitney Museum, tells the whole Death in theAir story. Each piece of "art" tells far more than a thousand words bearing on our current predicament. I have told many people that these color prints and legends alone are worthfar more than the price of the book. Nearly half of the people who review these sixteen pages of so-called "art" have tears well-up in their eyes. They cry for the truth depictedwhich explains the ongoing global genocide that they know in their hearts is happening.

The cover depicts a Nazi-gas-masked-alien sticking the dove of peace-a Christiansymbol-with a Muslim saber. His backdrop projects the horrific images of genocide

particularly affecting Black and Hispanic populations. Jews are targeted for death on anearby mural as are American natives.

The Nazi alien symbolizes the Nazi-fascist links between contemporary populationcontrollers and the military-medical-petrochemical-pharmaceutical cartel largelyaccountable for Hitler's rise to power. Elite global industrialists, including the Rockefeller family in America and the Royal Family of England, were primarily responsible for whatwas, in Hitler's day, called "eugenics." It was a political movement based on Darwin'stheory of "evolution of the fittest," and alleged genetic science pioneered in Rockefeller University labs. This is how the first "racial hygiene" experiments began in Americatargeting Black and mentally retarded people prior to World War II and the holocaust.The Nazi death camps were later operated by Rockefeller partner and Bayer (aspirin)corporation president Hermann Schmitz.

The Nazi-alien's sword swatch produces a lingering beautiful rainbow of air pollution,falling over dying populations-symbolic of both chemtrails and a full spectrum of energycapabilities consistent with the government's space-based weapons and terrestrial weather control systems described in the book.

The development and use of chemical sprays and nerve gasses for "pest control" andchemical warfare, likewise, evolved largely from the twentieth century efforts of Germany's leading industrial organization: the Bayer-I.G. Farben-Rockefeller petrochemical cartel.

The "alien phenomenon," as described in quoted Masonic documents, helps establish aglobalist agenda to enroll people around the world in a war against a contrived commonthreat. This, along with ongoing worsening environmental pollution, according to population planners, helps fuel global economics and distracts the remaining medicallydependant populace from identifying the real earthly enemies.



Regarding the impact of the original "eugenics" movement on contemporary publichealth policies, simply put, the Tuskeegee syphilis study conducted by federal healthofficials who watched the demise of hundreds of Black men and co-infected women andchildren for which President Clinton ultimately apologized is simply the tip of theiceberg. Ample evidence referenced in Death in the AIR strongly links veteran

population controllers to many other modern public health programs, including water fluoridation and toxic water "purification" methods, deadly pesticide spraying campaignsheavily targeting elderly and ethnic groups; "maternal and child health" programs hereand abroad, and "family planning" activities. Here, for instance, infant formulas and birthcontrol devices undermine neonatal development and the health of women and children.This genocide is politely called "population management" in public health policy circles.

Source: http://www.bookwire.com/MeetTheAuthor/Interview_Leonard_Horowitz.htm

http://www.bookwire.com/MeetTheAuthor/Interview_Leonard_Horowitz.htm

http://www.bookwire.com/MeetTheAuthor/Interview_Leonard_Horowitz.htm

the fbi and eugenics

Documents