PJ74
CHAPTER 15

REC #1 HATONN

WED., JULY 28, 1993 9:34 A.M. YEAR 6, DAY 346

WED., JULY 28, 1993


PROPERTY SEIZURE

James Madison: "It is NOT a JUST government, nor is prop­erty secure under it, where the property which a man has in his personal safety and personal liberty is violated by arbitrary seizures of one class of citizens for the service of the rest."

How can it be that you can continue to feel yourself to be secure when for the non-payment of a tax as small as a dollar, your property can be confiscated and sold? How can it be that, should a party place illegal substance on your property or within it, it can be seized and sold? How is it that a barrister (or a physician) who fails to pay his "CLUB" dues but knows the law and represents the people, can be thrown out of a courtroom, ar­rested and incarcerated for "practicing without a license" when NO LICENSE IS INVOLVED? Can you not see that the foreplay is over and the rape underway?

How can it be that a paper such as this must consider closing its presses for lack of funds because enough are not inter­ested to support its continuation?

How can the public continue to allow ones such as George Green and Joseph Pavlonski to have national and international audience on radio, etc., with money-making schemes and deals when Truth cannot sustain itself? How is it that incarcerated political prisoners continue in prison because we cannot raise enough money to continue court fees to have a hearing for them? How is it that authors who face the risk of life in prison for printing material revealing political corruption and actual murder of thousands cannot have living expenses covered be­cause not enough books will sell to allow the investment?

WHEN do you "believe"? Well, certainly, most of you do not believe until you read a thing we bring years prior, in a paper or from a conspiracy participant newsletter. Do I claim that newsletter writers are in conspiracy with the government?--NO, just against your best interests when it comes to YOUR money. You must understand that a "conspiracy" is two or more work­ing in conjunction to manipulate others, usually illegally, but not always so-to defraud or cover some deeds or truth of situa­tions. This can be in war, in investments, in politics, in crime (Mafia) or anything! When "they" do not wish it to be called "conspiracy", then it is usually called an Association, a Coali­tion or a Federation. If it be in the "churches" it is usually called Congregation for Unity, and so on. In the oil and dia­mond markets it is called Cartel. If books are written which are desired banned by the government or other "groups" it is called "Hate Crime", Racist and Copyright Infringement. And yet, if YOU allow this then you are receiving that which is equally de­served for, as the cycles revolve--it always comes spiraling back unto self.

Now the government considers recalling all money and using a debit system or worse. When this happens, readers, ALL FREEDOM IS GONE AND, THUS, IS HONEST MARKET CAPITALISM VANQUISHED.

Hans F. Sennholz: "The demand for money is subject to the same consideration as that for all other goods and services. People expend labor or forego the enjoyment of goods and ser­vices in order to acquire money. This is why individual de­mand and supply ultimately determine the purchasing power of money in the same way as they determine the mutual exchange ratios of all other goods." And then, of course comes the act of "acting": There are many persons coerced into acting, not as they would prefer, but as others want, through majority rule (democracy controlled) as through totalitarian dictatorship. Where are YOU, America?

Most of you recognize the name, Gary North. He has some ob­servations about money: "Money .... should ideally he the cre­ation of market forces. Whatever scarce economic goods that men voluntarily use as a means of facilitating market exchanges­--goods that are durable, divisible, transportable, and above all scarce--are sufficient to allow men to cooperate in economic production. Money came into existence this way; the state only sanctioned an already prevalent practice .... " and on banking: "Banking, of course, also provides for the creation of new money. But as Professor Mises argues, truly competitive bank­ing--free banking--keeps the creation of new credit at a mini­mum, since bankers do not really trust each other, and they will demand payment in gold or silver from banks that are suspected of insolvency." Well, the problem with BANKS is far beyond such a small statement. It is true, however, that along the way it became such that the citizens COULD NOT demand gold or silver in exchange for those notes you carry--but institutions could--until so much metal left the nation that there was not any to cover demand and with the onset of computer transfer it was done away with--except that foreign citizens, such as Israel, still demand much payment in GOLD! This depleted the coffers which were already empty by theft and transfer out of your country--right from, even, Fort Knox.

TESTING AND THIS JOURNALIST. HATONN
There are ones who have not studied, by far, MOST of that which we present--and yet are Biblical scholars and even repre­sent that which they call "messengers" with "disciples" who now present that Hatonn is the "third angel" and/or the "testor" to your place. NO! I may well be a messenger who efforts to support you so that you can confront and win against "the testor" but THAT testor you present--Is MY ENEMY! I appre­ciate and respect that enemy for the gifts he brings in which we can grow, build, and rise above the temptations presented by that "testor". Rev. 9: 10: The third angel blew, and a great flaming star fell from heaven upon a third of the rivers and springs. The star was called "Bitterness: because it poisoned a third of all the water on the earth and many people died." That referred to planet is called Wormwood, Herculobos, etc.

No, readers, I am NOT any of those angels, beings, prophets or seals. I am Aton, the One Light, and I come near with the mes­sengers sent to fulfill the prophecies in these days of transition as if being manifest in the way of Revelation and Prophets of all time and ages. There are as many claiming to speak FOR ME as there are false Christs abounding in your place. My place is as "overseer" and Command of the Hosts sent as prophecy pro­jects against the day of tribulation to sound the trumpet and awaken the people of God unto their "way home"! We ARE blowing as hard as we can and yet millions sleep on--following this or that which offers seemingly better circumstances. There ARE NO BETTER CIRCUMSTANCES--for goodness sakes, we offer you a way into higher expression and a chance to re­claim physical freedom for a more blessed and wondrous ex­pression of human form in radiance. I present ONLY as a mes­senger and guide--if you be tested by that which I bring, it is be­cause you are steeped in that which came before and feel you must reconcile ME to FIT YOUR portfolio. When you have studied ALL (EVERY) presentation I have offered (even as some have studied the "Holy" books), then and only then will I accept any label as projected by any human individual.

In the higher realms of Truth--we do not have hierarchy as you perceive or accept in definition. We have "jobs" and for YOUR identification ease we will label ones as Commanders, etc. But it does not mean that we come as with Captains (except the true captain of a ship), Admiral, Sergeant and so on. YOU need those things and some would have a Colonel to lead--why?? IS GOD NOT ENOUGH? THE SERVANTS ON EARTH ARE EXACTLY THAT; HUMBLE, WITHOUT EGO NEEDS, PRESENT WHAT IS OFFERED AND DESIRE TO "LEAD" NOTHING-- THEY ARE EMBARRASSED BY EVEN THE THOUGHT OF SUCH. Be most careful when you are given this kind of input from what you perceive as "higher resource" and "energy form"--it is 99% false speakers!! "Bunches" of speakers are more confusing than none at all. Certainly in a given "Command" there is NO NEED FOR BUNCHES OF SPEAKERS OR EVEN "OTHER" SPEAKER. If Truth is flowing--why would another speaker be "more truthful"? Be careful, lambs, lest you follow the wrong herdsman. Note "little" things which often elude even the receiver. I had, yes­terday, a message from one who claimed Haton speaking and was quite adamant about confusing the situation with George "Merkle". There is no problem with George Merkle--it is EX­ACTLY as it should be--why do you need to meddle in it? My name is not Haton--it is Hatonn and I did NOT give such a mes­sage. Then this one moved on to Sananda who disclaimed ever speaking through one Desiree; that is false receiving. Sananda, the Christ now returning, certainly DID SPEAK THROUGH AND TO DESIREE--further, why would one LIMIT GOD IN WHAT HE WOULD OR WOULD NOT DO? Next; there was a speaking by Commander Ashtar. There is no Commander "Ashtar" as such. There is A Commander of the Ashtar Com­mand. The Ashtar Command is a record-data base of computer capability to surpass anything else in the universe. The purpose of that Command is not to COMMAND this transition but to be available with every being located and "wired" in case of mas­sive lift-off of species from your planet. So many seem to want some twin flame or duality WITH Ashtar--even in physical manifestation, if it were so, how could you have duality with a computer data base?

Do I say these things to belittle or bring embarrassment? Cer­tainly not--it is to warn ones that they are playing in a dangerous game wherein THEY are the pawns and are being deceived.

ARE THERE NO OTHER RECEIVERS? OF COURSE THERE ARE--BUT THEY DO NOT COME FORTH WITH CONFUSING OF THE ISSUES. THE TIME IS SO SERIOUS UPON YOUR PLACE THAT ONES NOW HAVE MISSIONS AND TASKS WHICH ARE SPECIFIC. ALL MUST BE HEARING INNER GUIDANCE--DO NOT CONFUSE IT WITH RECEIVING INSTRUCTIONS TO PASS ON TO FRACTURE THAT WHICH IS ALREADY IN PERFECT WORKING CONTROL.

This neither means that I am telling YOU what to do or what not to do--I say, take special care and see what you are doing for enlightenment does not fall all over you like a snowstorm--it takes study, work and growing. It certainly does not feed into the "druthers" of individuals as to what they "want" to do. You do anything you wish--why would you BLAME a voice from outer ethers and another's brain wave for that which you do? God FIRST gave you REASONING and he expects you to use it--all we are basically doing--is CAUSING YOU TO REMEMBER! YOU HAVE FREEDOM TO DO THAT WHICH YOU WILL.

In the line of "remembering", I am now a bit irritated at you who so quickly forget what we said at onset of the Institute. In all the fracas over gold and theft and receivership and other claims and accusations--you have forgotten WHY you even in­vested your participation. We wrote many, many hours on what was anticipated in the market place and what kind of a "deflationary" depression or collapse you could expect. George Green may well have had other fish to fry but WE DID NOT. The participation is becoming more valid every day that passes. It was neither "short term" nor to "clean up" in the market. It was to give some security to assets, provide collateral for our work-such as the paper, publications and projects. There are not two out of a hundred investment managers who would not recommend gold as a partial investment and hedge. We do also recommend a small amount of assets into self-held security in coins or something--but, as in 1933, GOLD WILL BE CON­FISCATED WHEN THE ASSETS ARE DESIRED BY THE GOVERNMENT. We do not HOLD GOLD for the heck of buried treasure. The gold is collateral to be BORROWED against for working funds.

Now, was I simply a "crazy alien" to suggest that gold would double from its low of the last four years? Crazy? Let me share with you an article from the San Francisco Chronicle "Business" section, Thursday, July 22, 1993:

Herb Greenberg, Business Insider:

IS GOLD HEADED FOR $1,500-PLUS AS
DEFLATION HEDGE?
From the anything-is-possible department: Gold is often thought of as an investment hedge against inflation, but Boston money manager Paul Stuka and others are buying it as a hedge against deflation. Stuka is one of the few willing to go on the record with projecting that gold will rise to $1,500 to $2,000 an ounce in the next three to five years.

Before you write Stuka off as a tarnished kook, consider that from 1985 to mid-1986 he managed the Fidelity OTC Portfolio. The fund gained 69 percent in 1985 and another 11 percent in 1986. He now runs his own investment firm, Stuka Associates, where gold options and stocks (a long list that includes Ameri­can Barrick and TVX Gold) have been a growing part of his portfolio for the past two years.

Stuka's target of $1,500 plus is about three times the near-­term target of most gold bugs, but that doesn't faze him. "Anyone who saw the Dow at 750 in 1982 would have thought you were crazy if you said it would rise to 3,000," he says. "Bull markets always go much farther than anyone thinks."

What makes Stuka's projection so noteworthy is its deflation­ary twist at a time when many economists are obsessed with the prospect of inflation (which is one reason many people have been buying gold.)

According to the deflationists, steadily falling prices in de­partment stores and other parts of the retail economy are just the start of a series of events which will culminate in deflationary fireworks when stock prices fall.

If everything goes like clockwork real estate prices will also resume their decline. "Then you'll have the worst of all worlds­-deflation in tangible assets and deflation in paper assets," says Bob Hoye, a devout deflationist, who runs Quantum Economics in Vancouver.

Which brings us to gold: Deflationists say it will be a safe haven if prices of everything else really do collapse. The last big round of deflation in the United States started in 1929. Al­though the price of gold was fixed at the time, Hoye says its purchasing power increased for 17 years.

"If you consider that gold is money, and in deflationary peri­ods the purchasing power of money increases, then the pur­chasing power (or price) of gold will increase," Hoye says.

What could derail this scenario? The government's ability to print enough money to keep the economy going, Stuka says, "and then we enter this wonderful world" of 2 percent economic growth and 2 percent inflation. "But it's really more of a ques­tion of how long you can hold it in that environment," he adds. "We believe 2 percent inflation is just a point you pass through on your way from 15 percent (in 1980) to a negative 10."

* * *
Now with this in mind I can only suggest you get, as quickly as possible, several JOURNALS--regarding economic circum­stance, how to protect yourself and how to grow while main­taining security and privacy. I personally offered you at least four such JOURNALS. Perhaps the staff will list them for you here. [JOURNALS #4 SPIRAL TO ECONOMIC DISASTER, #10 PRIVACY IN A FISHBOWL, #16 YOU CAN SLAY THE DRAGON AND #17 THE NAKED PHOENIX]

For you who would like to see this paper and publications con­tinue but cannot see your way to simply "gift" funds--please consider participation in this plan of loaning the money to this business group through the Institute (now protected under law from raiders) so they can purchase gold at this price, borrow against the collateral (always the note itself is covered with the lending bank) and continue to wait for the price of gold to in­crease. IT WILL!! I expect it to go to $5,000 at some point as the Elite try to bring it under control. This means that, how­ever, the holding of gold assets personally is VERY, VERY DANGEROUS FOR THE GOVERNMENT WILL CONFISCATE IT, MOST CERTAINLY, AT THAT PRICE. THEY WILL CONFISCATE COLLATERAL ASSETS FROM THEIR OWN BANKS--LAST!!! Is this a guarantee of some kind? What mean you? What guarantees do you have in this world'? This is as nearly careful planning and hedging as you are going to find anywhere--but the One World Government PLANS TO HAVE IT ALL--SO MIGHT IT NOT BE WISE TO USE SOME OF YOUR ASSETS WHILE YOU YET CAN-­-AGAINST THE POSSIBILITY OF GETTING THE PUB­LIC INFORMED IN TIME TO POSSIBLY CHANGE THIS BEAST COME AGAINST YOU? It is, as always, YOUR choices. I would suppose that a special "publication" fund could be specifically set forth and it becomes a WIN-WIN project in­stead of everybody is going to lose--as it is going.

PEROT POWER
Ones ask me "why" Perot?--when he seems to be a big money person and we don't really want him for president. Why? He has shown that HE WILL LISTEN TO YOU--AS CITIZENS. You have to understand that sometimes the "higher" you get in the morass of Elite, the less you REALLY know. You have to have SOMEONE that could win, don't you? Who else do you have with even the possibility of being noticed, much less UP­SET the two party FIXED SYSTEM?

This, also, is a place WHERE YOU CAN GET INVOLVED AND NOT BE SINGLED OUT FOR "TAKING-OUT". The "smart money" (whatever that means) says he'll never be presi­dent. That may well be but if he can't pull it off--nobody can. However, it looks more and more like the "smart money" just may be wrong.

Here is an article which was printed in U.S.A. Weekend, July 16-18, 1993. I think it worthy of your undivided attention. If you have no leader to place in the harness, you have no way to pull the team.

From the smoke-filled rooms of the Capitol to the smoke-free offices or the Clinton White House, Washington, D.C., insiders are finding it hard to accept the fact that Ross Perot, like Elvis Presley and rock 'n' roll, is here to stay.

It was widely assumed that the little Dallas billionaire would ride off into the sunset after last fall's presidential election, having made his point, spent his money and enjoyed his 15 min­utes of political fame.

Democrats and Republicans alike have been eager to see Perot go away so they can get down to the task of appealing to and divvying up his supporters. Bill Clinton, who may well have won the presidency because of the votes that Perot denied to George Bush, even suggested that his success could be gauged by his ability to appeal to the 19 million voters who in the election became the "Perot vote".

So far, however, Clinton's appeal to these voters appears virtually non-existent. Even after taking his message directly to Perot country with his "town meetings", polls show that Perot voters neither believe nor agree with the president, while Perot himself dismisses Clinton as a "middle manager". Republicans, sensing Clinton's lack of appeal to these voters, are trying to sound like Perot. They've been burning up the telephone lines to Texas in the hope that he'll actually say something nice about them, and then disappear.

"I'm less concerned about Perot than about the 19 million Americans who voted for him," says Haley Barbour, the Re­publican Party chairman. "Most of these had voted for Bush in 1988 and Reagan before that. In 1992, they were dissatisfied because they didn't think we'd adhered to traditional Republican principles. Our goal is to win back their confidence."

A worthy goal. But the interesting aspect of the Perot para­noia sweeping Washington is that even the most fearful discount the idea that Perot might deny the White House to both major-­party candidates in 1996. Both the Republicans and the Democrats believe they need the "Perot vote" to win a two-way contest the next time and both fear that, in a three-way race. Perot might hurt their candidate. But few take seriously the idea that he might actually win such a race.

They should.

If the current trend keeps up, Perot and his "volunteers" may soon be in position not only to challenge, but actually to topple, the president and the two-party system as we know it. [H: See, right here, is the way to go--they have said it--it certainly CAN be done and then, by popular demand the man himself WILL listen to you-the-people. It also becomes evident that the stronger the man becomes the harder it is for the adver­sary to do anything to him or take him out by force or vio­lence. It is up to YOU to see that he stays safe, open and POPULAR!] The inability of the Washington establishment to realize its endangered status is itself a testament to its isolation from the needs and desires of the American public.

True, it is extremely difficult for a third-party or independent contender to win the presidency. Our system was put together to favor two parties and make it difficult for minor parties to break through at the national level.

The Electoral College alone consigns most such efforts to political oblivion before they even get off the ground.

But more Americans conclude that, as former third-party candidate George Wallace once put it, "there ain't a dime's worth of difference" between Democrats and Republicans.

Perot, 63, is being taken more and more seriously outside of Washington. That comes through strongly in a poll commis­sioned by this writer for this article, conducted by Market Strategies, A GOP-aligned firm that polled for Bush's 1992 campaign. "The depth of Perot's support signifies more than his emergence as a third-party candidate," says Market Strategies' Steven Lombardo. "It may be the emergence of a three-party system in America again."

Historically, successful third parties have emerged when large numbers of people become convinced that neither major party is addressing serious problems. That is what happened be­fore the Civil War, when the Democrats and Whigs were un­willing to come to grips with the growing public demand that slavery be abolished.

[H: The one thing to hold in your mind as you read this and nod your head in agreement. The two parties involved in YOUR NATION have no intention of ever having another election under your present form of government. If you overlook this primary point you are setting yourself up for betrayal. Is Perot a possible player in "that" game? It must not matter to you as citizens--you must have an alternative with which to unify and rally for if you are ALL DIVIDED at the time of collapse--you will never unify enough from the pressures which will befall you, to recover in your lifetime--­or for many generations to come. Will the world last long enough? That also matters not--you must continue to con­tinue as if there is all the "time" in the universe--you KNOW you will perish as will freedom as a way of life as you are going.]

The result was that a new party emerged quickly, the Whigs went the way of Tyrannosaurus rex, and within a few years a Republican, Abraham Lincoln, was in the White House. Few Whigs or Democrats had believed it could happen. Then as now, established politicians were among the last to believe radi­cal change was possible.

The point, of course, is that what starts out as a protest can grow into something far more important if it is ignored or un­derestimated. Perot's success in harnessing the rage of average Americans--who have come to believe that Democrats and Re­publicans in Washington are more interested in their own perks than in solving real problems--should have been taken as a wake-up call to the leaders of both parties. But it wasn't. Clinton rode the same wave that fueled the Perot candidacy. But so far he has failed to translate his campaign rhetoric into reality.

The predictable result: The fires of grassroots outrage have been fueled, not put out. Politicians rarely realize that every broken promise alienates more and more voters, who either don't vote next time or begin actively looking for Electoral al­ternatives.

As Perot travels the nation, organizing his followers, and honing his anti-establishment message, he is building on a foun­dation that, thanks to the shortsightedness of his Washington critics, could make his United We Stand America a major factor in the 1994 congressional elections--and win him the White House in 1996.

True, his popularity has dropped in some recent polls, and Washington has started to conclude that, in political terms, Perot has "peaked", But that ignores his solid base of support and the willingness of voters to back United We Stand America candi­dates, "His numbers have been up and down over the past sev­eral months," says Lombardo, the Market Strategies pollster, who points out that Perot's high ratings in this poll might be as much a reflection of the president's unpopularity than of Perot's popularity. [H: And remember--polls are intended to present exactly what is desired be presented!] "But the essence of Perot's message is still attractive to a significant group of the electorate." Half of those polled said that they considered Perot's criticisms of Clinton fair, while just 35 percent said they considered it unfair.

Given the bipartisan nature of his support, Perot might be ex­pected once again to mount an independent campaign if he de­cides to run again in 1996. But it is possible--prepare yourself for another idea that the political establishment will hoot at--that the Texan will convert his troops into a boarding party that could challenge the Republican leadership in the primaries and win the party's presidential nomination. Remember: Six million Republicans voted for Perot last November, and the number of Republicans who support him has increased since then.

[H: What you MUST remember is that the computer was FIXED and PEROT swept the nation with votes which were not reflected in the already "decided' election results. Even Bush ran, in the end, AGAINST HIMSELF! How short are your memories!]

That number is enough to win the Republican primaries in New Hampshire and Iowa, especially if the field is crowded--as it appears it will be--with U.S. Sens. Dole, Gramm and Lugar; U.S. Rep. Dornan; former Bush Cabinet secretaries Alexander Bennett, Martin, Kemp and Cheney; and Govs. Campbell (S.C.), Thompson (Wis.) and Voinovich (Ohio) as well as Pat Buchanan, Pat Robertson and Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf.

None of them has more support among Republican voters than Perot. And the results of the Market Strategies poll, showing that a Republican ticket headed by Perot would trounce Clinton in a two-way contest, should give both parties pause. "If he got serious, he would be a strong GOP candidate," says Jeff Bell, a Republican analyst. "But I'm not sure he is tem­peramentally suited to go through a grueling primary process. In his favor, he could successfully portray the other GOP candi­dates as part of the problem. The system is going to be even more vulnerable in 1996 than in 1992: The centralized forces in Washington will be under more suspicion."

If both parties can't soon find better answers for increasingly angry voters, Perot may be their answer in '96.

* * *
Col. Gritz called me a "Judas-goat" at the time of the last elec­tion when I asked you to unify as "independents" and over­whelm the computer ballot system by voting for Perot. Not one of the "independent" candidates was willing to forego the ego trip to do such a thing. YOU HAVE NO RESOURCE STRONG ENOUGH TO WIN AN ELECTION FROM THESE NEW WORLD ORDER CONTROLLERS. THE REAL CON­TROL COMES FROM THE COMMITTEE OF 300 WORLD ELITE WRAPPING UP THEIR ONE WORLD GOVERN­MENT TO ENSLAVE THE NATIONS OF THE PLANET. YOU CAN SEE IT EVERYWHERE YOU LOOK AT HOME AND ABROAD--ANYWHERE!

Even if the whole government continues to decline, just to have unification under Perot gives you working power to hold against the thugs in power. Remember, the adversary MUST work in the dark in deceit and with lies. He cannot do well if the actions bring attention as with the North American Free Trade Agree­ment bounced off him and you by Perot. It becomes a force of people with which to he reckoned. Every ray of light shone on the puppets playing in the government is a shot in the heart of the beast.

Look, for goodness sakes, what the government pigs are doing to the people in the flooded areas of the Mid-west. No help, no votes, lingering pain and agony--while aid is being dished out without recourse or charge to every country in the world! You have been sold-out, America--betrayed by the treasonists! The whole thing, from the floods to the lack of AID is a fully planned and orchestrated event. Let me share with you some­thing shared with us.

"Did everyone catch Elizabeth Dole's major slip on TV last week? She was commenting on what the Red Cross was pro­viding the flood victims and reminded everyone that the Red Cross works on public donations. Then she said (this is NOT an exact quote, but it's close), "We're going to need a lot of do­nations, not just for this disaster, but for the other disasters this summer." The newscaster asked, "Are you expecting more disasters this summer'!" She replied: "That is what we've been told." How interesting--in advance disasters? Well, with what is going on I suggest you WILL HAVE MORE DISASTERS, there have even been earthquakes along the Edwards Fault in San Antonio, Texas, we are told--and that, chelas, is an INACTIVE fault.

This friend also writes that there is an outbreak of tuberculosis in San Antonio. The health official interviewed on TV said it was a virulent, antibiotic-resistant strain, and he said the outbreak was not UNEXPECTED....

Probably one of the most heart-clutching events, however, would at first SEEM to be the least important:

In July, 1992, I went to the public library (Main branch) in search of information on surviving a nuclear attack. There was no government publication on the subject available (in a city with 5 military bases!) and at that time I was told that: "Those publications were pulled from the shelves a year ago." It was suggested that I try the military libraries, which I did--only one had any information at all on preparing for a nuclear attack, but it dated back to the late 50s-early 60s and so was no longer relevant (i.e., use a door to make a lean-to against the outside of a building and crawl behind for shelter). Last week, July, 1993, I went to the library again to see if anything had changed. Nope, the only book in the entire library was Nuclear War Sur­vival Skills IN THE HISTORY SECTION. I checked the gov­ernment publications again, and found that NO information on nuclear survival has been published by the government since 1991 (and, of course, the one publication done in 1991 is still not available)".

If this is universally true then we will have to offer a portion of our paper to offering you that information. I can suggest our own JOURNAL, SURVIVAL IS ONLY TEN FEET FROM HELL and Arthur Robinson's Fighting Chance. There are also some excellent survival books, one I especially recommend is Janowsky's SURVIVAL.

However, you must be prepared for "rapid Make-do" and as of year before last we got material published by the Oregon Insti­tute of Science and Medicine, Cave Junction, Oregon. The book in point is called Nuclear War Survival Skills, Updated and Expanded 1987 Edition, by Cresson H. Kearny. You can also get "tapes". Also, we just received a full packet of information exactly directed to this subject from a reader petitioning us to run the material, it being non-copyrighted and it would only need reproduction for such a purpose as a newspaper. I shall discuss it with the staff and consider the possibility of devoting a whole paper issue to the subject. My wish for all of you who have property enough for a common "root cellar" to consider digging same. You can store supplies in a temperature regulated environment and have the facility for emergency quarters also. It could be deep enough that with a cover you can plant your bedding flower garden or even your garden with food products ON TOP of it. This could be landscaped and be made into a veritable hidden facility so that it could be most pleasing in the scheme of a garden. You could even run water to the given area and have an imitation rock garden with flowing recycled water and a small decorative pond, etc. Or if you like, simply a root cellar of any kind. If you cannot do that--then you could build a "trench" shelter for absolutely short-term cover and this could be placed under a gazebo or simply instead of a flower bed with just enough room to go within, have some stored water and potty facility and "sit" it out. I do believe we should offer you reminders of emergency care.

This chapter is getting too lengthy so please allow us a break. Thank you. Salu.