NEWS2U Articles & Comments
Critical Reporting

Sunday, December 31, 2006

Iraq: Who Might Be Shooting at Both Sides?

December 30th, 2006

UPDATED - OK, so the focus right now is on Saddam’s execution, the shallow justice meted out to one war criminal while his accomplices (nay, puppeteers) in successive US administrations escape reckoning — so far.

Quite apart from the abhorrent act itself, its indecent haste and cynical timing to coincide with the first day of Eid al-Adha will further sow enmity against the US and its kangaroo court of injustice in Iraq where Saddam’s crimes were not even properly reckoned. Congratulations, Saddam has become a martyr and his death has accomplished nothing.

Let me be clear: I am not overjoyed at Saddam’s hanging, I am appalled.

Meanwhile, the debacle in Iraq continues, and now, at last, we see a placing on the table of the crucial issue of just who is fomenting violence in Iraq in the article by Utley below.

With Saddam’s demise, just what is fuelling this extraordinary descent into violence apart from the most glaring fact of the US Occupation? This was recently broached at this site here and Robert Fisk has so far been one of the few to allude to this issue, as covered by the Fanonite.

For further reading on Saddam’s execution, see Robert Fisk’s A dictator created then destroyed by America in The Independent and for a broader look at this conflict disaster and its policy idiocy see Juan Cole’s piece on the Top Ten Myths About Iraq. For an always high voltage and thought-provoking dissenting counterweight to the corporate media see Kurt Nimmo’s piece. See also Michael Boldin’s ‘Saddam was Right and Bush was Wrong’ in the People’s Voice.

For my pick in the blogosphere, have a read of Can’t See The Forest’s two posts on the topic and of Junaman over at Incompetence Inc who rightly sees this as vengeance eclipsing justice: a revenge killing.

Have a read too of Ford’s embargoed (until his passing) interview held all of two and a half years ago in which he “very strongly” disagreed with BushCo’s justifications for invading Iraq and said he would have pursued sanctions much more vigorously. The comments were embargoed at his own request — wish he had the gumption of Carter.

In the article by Utley that follows, for the record I happen to think that the first group nominated — Al-CIA-duh — (as well as those at #4, 8 and 11) are not really players or as much involved as certain UK, US and Israeli operatives serving the war profiteers and Likudniks. I notice that Saudi Arabia hardly rates a mention, other than perhaps very indirectly at #8.

Utley does well however to offer a sensible examination of this important and urgent topic.

Iraq: Who Might Be Shooting at Both Sides?

Thirteen groups that favor chaos in Iraq

by Jon Basil Utley
December 26, 2006

It’s strange that little of the news coverage of Iraq addresses this question. Doesn’t it seem obvious that some groups are fomenting the chaos? Getting tribes to fight each other is often easy. Most of them have some past injustice to avenge. The British Empire ruled much of its colonial world in this way, balancing off or favoring different tribes to rule others. In most of the Old World, tribes hated their neighbors more than foreign conquerors. See “Tribes, Veils, and Democracy.”

Some 28 years ago I was in the Middle East with my mother, Freda Utley, author of Will the Middle East Go West?. In Beirut we met John Cooley, the well-known and long-respected reporter for the Christian Science Monitor. The civil war in Lebanon was just getting started, and cooler heads were trying to head it off. Cooley then told us that every time there was a cease-fire some shadowy elements appeared to be shooting at both sides in an effort to get the fighting started up again. They succeeded, and the subsequent war nearly tore the nation apart.

Today there is a similar situation in Iraq. Much of the slaughter doesn’t make sense among neighbors and friends. Peter Beinart of The New Republic wrote an excellent study of the past history of Iraq describing the unity of Sunnis and Shi’ites – indeed, the first Ba’athist leader was a Shia, though we think of Ba’athists, the party of Saddam, as all being Sunnis. But suppose some of the horrendous murder was being done by outsiders wanting to destroy Iraq by getting Sunnis and Shi’ites to wreak vengeance on each other. Tribal societies are particularly vulnerable to this kind of disruption.

With hindsight, one can argue that it was vital for Washington to prevent such a situation from occurring when the Army first occupied Baghdad, that the turning point was when the looting and chaos first started and U.S. forces did nothing to stop it. But today, for Washington to adopt a realistic policy, America must face the facts on the ground. Wishful thinking only brings disaster

Let’s look at all the groups with an interest in continuing the chaos.

1) First, of course, there is al-Qaeda. Bin Laden must be laughing every day to see America’s Army being hollowed out as the Army chief of staff describes. Further, every picture of Arabs being killed by Americans furthers bin Laden’s objectives. There are too many ways bin Laden is “winning” to describe here; for details, see “36 Ways U.S. Is Losing the War on Terror.”

2) Iraq’s neighbors. Neoconservatives and Bush virtually threatened that Syria and Iran were the next in line to be attacked by America. This stupidity gave them every reason to want to see America tied down and weakened in Iraq for as long as possible.

3) The Likud Party in Israel. Although most Israelis want peace, their electoral system gives overwhelming power to their aggressive minorities. It is not hard to imagine that many want Arabs to fight and weaken one another. Israeli agents are very active with the Kurds, even training them. The U.S. occupation brought in Israeli advisers to teach American soldiers how to suppress Arab resistance. Israel has Arab speakers who can easily “mix in,” as well as other resources. Dividing one’s enemies is the oldest strategy in the book. Some Israelis would like to see a massive Sunni-Shia war spread to other Muslim nations.

4) The Kurds. They want a divided and weakened central government so they can gain their independence and take over the oil wealth of northern Iraq.

5) Shia and Kurdish militias benefit greatly from being trained and supplied by America. The so-called Iraqi army and police are mainly composed of Shia and Kurds. The longer the strife continues, the better equipped they become for an eventual showdown against the Sunnis, who also bear the brunt of American “pacification.” Meanwhile, the Shia are gradually “ethnically cleansing” Baghdad of Sunnis.

6) Mercenaries, some paid as much as a thousand dollars a day. They want a good business to continue.

7) The Beltway Bombers and companies set up in Washington to hire retired commandos, Army Rangers, Navy SEALs. They have gained hundreds of millions of dollars in contracts from the Pentagon to help out in Iraq. There are indeed a reported 100,000 or so bodyguards, non-military consultants, advisers, support staff, etc., mostly paid by the U.S. Treasury.

8) Other oil-producing nations. All are happy to see most Iraq oil production off the market, which helps to keep the price of oil high. Russia certainly would benefit the most if other Mideast oil producers had “troubles,” too.

9) Weapons manufacturers in many lands selling millions and paying big commissions to all sides in wars.

10) Gangster elements in Iraq, criminals who are thriving on the lawlessness, from petty thieves to big-time smugglers of oil and weapons.

11) All the nations that want to see the U.S. weakened and humiliated. Russians are no longer friendly to America, and many fear us. The Chinese were once on notice from powerful Washington interests that they would be next, once America finished with the Muslim world. The Chinese understand that manufacturers of warships, missiles, and planes need a “real” nation with vast resources to justify spending for their products; fighting shoeless guerrillas in caves and cellars won’t cut it.

12) The Armageddon lobby in America, which sees chaos in Iraq as helping along their fantasies of hurrying up God to fulfill His prophecies (as they see them) to kill most of the human race while giving them a quick pass to Heaven.

13) Finally, there are smaller tribal elements in Iraq itself with their own agendas, which are almost impossible for Washington to discern.

Jon Basil Utley is associate publisher of The American Conservative and Robert A. Taft Fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute. A former correspondent for Knight Ridder in South America, Utley has written for the Harvard Business Review on foreign nationalism and was a commentator on the Voice of America. He is director of Americans Against World Empire.

Posted in Opinion, USA, Iraq, Justice, Human Rights, Iran, UK, Israel, Corruption, US Foreign Policy, International Relations, War crimes, Colonialism, Military-Industrial Complex, Empire, War and Terror, Hegemon-watch, Energy and Resources, MidEast General, Corp-watch, Lobby watch, Militarism general, Black flag ops, Propaganda and psy-ops.


Friday, December 29, 2006

Somalia: US Foreign Policy and Gangsterism

Why the US supports the warlords

by Justin Raimondo
December 29, 2006

In our Orwellian age, no one is surprised when American foreign policy takes a U-turn, and, suddenly, we are at war with Eastasia – because, you see, we have always been at war with Eastasia. Yet even the most jaded observers are bound to raise an eyebrow over our embrace of the Somalian warlords, whose disarmament and capture was our announced goal the last time we intervened. That failed effort, you’ll recall, was dubbed "Operation Restore Hope."

Now we are back, albeit semi-covertly – using Ethiopia, a major recipient of American arms and technical support, as our proxy – in a new project that ought to be named Operation Abandon All Hope Ye Who Enter Here. In the post-9/11 Bizarro World alternate universe that our leaders and policymakers seem to have slipped into, the Bad Guys have become the Good Guys, and the formerly fiendish Somalian warlords are now part of the "anti-terrorism coalition" that the U.S. is assembling in the region.

A little history: The failed UN/U.S. intervention of 1993 led directly to the triumph of the warlords, who plundered, raped, and murdered their way through the streets of Mogadishu, the Somalian capital, and reduced the country to Mad Max territory. In response, an "Islamic courts" movement sprang up to impose some sort of cohesion on a rapidly disintegrating social order. The business community and public opinion rallied behind these courts, which were and are all that stand between civilization and savagery in Somalia.

As I’ve pointed out before, the long history of U.S. intervention in Somalia is a veritable case study of how and why American foreign policy always manages to generate the deadliest, most horrific "blowback," as the intelligence professionals put it. Blowback, a concept exhaustively explored in Chalmers Johnson’s classic book of the same title, means the unintended consequences of our bumbling, culturally tone-deaf, invariably unsuccessful efforts to manipulate local proxies to maximize our alleged national interests. In the 1990s, the Americans intervened in the name of "humanitarianism," against the warlords; in the new millennium, we have tossed aside humanitarian concerns in favor of the ruthless pursuit of "terrorists," real or imagined. The former "warlords" hunted by U.S. troops and blamed for Somalia’s shocking degeneration into pure chaos are now aided and abetted by the Americans and their Ethiopian cohorts.

This latest American turnabout – flooding Somalian warlords with money and arms – came about largely as the result of an imaginary confrontation between U.S. officials and supposed "terrorists." It happened a year ago, when U.S. government personnel investigating possible terrorist infiltration of Somalia landed at a makeshift airport just outside Mogadishu. No sooner had their plane set down uneasily on the tarmac than they heard shooting, and, assuming they were under fire, beat an unceremonious retreat. As far as the U.S. government was concerned, this was clearly an ambush, pulled off by terrorist elements possibly associated with al-Qaeda.

In reality, however, the Americans had stumbled into a conflict involving two rival clans, one of which controlled the airport, and the other which had recently purchased a large tract of land bordering the road to the airport. The former were outraged that this purchase would cut into their very profitable extortion and protection racket, and that their control over the heavy road traffic would be challenged. This led to an escalating series of threats and counter-threats, eventually exploding, on January 13, 2006, into open violence just as the American visitors touched down.

The protagonists in this dispute were characterized by the Washington Postas follows:

"Abukar Omar Adan was a devoutly Islamic and heavily armed clan elder with ties to the strict neighborhood religious courts that had brought a semblance of order to a city without a government. His rival, Bashir Raghe, was a brash, younger man who had been a waste contractor with the U.S. military forces in Mogadishu before the United States pulled out."

Guess which one is the U.S. proxy.

No, it’s not the bourgeois businessman and city father whose stature in the community as a force for order advertises him as the natural and only logical choice – it’s Raghe, the street punk and gang leader, who, together with his fellow killers, has reduced Somalia to a kind of living hell.

When the warlords were driven out, the U.S. resorted to its ally in Addis Ababa to return its gangster-proxies to power. Washington has openly signaled its support for the Ethiopian invasion, which is shortly about to be billed as a "liberation" and a great "victory" in the "war on terrorism." The illusion can be maintained only so long as one squints one’s eyes sufficiently to blur the exact identity of these "liberators" – Somalian thugs and the army of Ethiopia’s dictator, "President" Meles Zenawi.

A former pro-Albania communist and leader of the Tigray People’s Liberation Front, comrade Zenawi morphed into George W. Bush’s staunchest ally in the Horn of Africa. U.S. military aid increased by leaps and bounds. Zenawi’s trajectory parallels Somalia’s Mohamed Siad Barre, the former Soviet client and avowed Marxist, who seized power in 1969, immediately became a Soviet client, and eventually led his Somalian Socialist Revolutionary Party into a military and political alliance with the U.S. (The Soviets had championed Barre's Ethiopian arch-enemies in the ongoing dispute over the Ogaden region.) One of Africa’s most brutal despots, Barre enjoyed Washington’s full support right up until he was driven from the country, in 1991, by numerous local uprisings.

Zenawi is a budding Barre. In the summer of 2005, his U.S.-trained-and-equipped army fired on student protesters who objected to the blatant rigging of the recent election: over 20 were killed, and many wounded. This same army has now turned its guns on the Somalian people, violated Somalian sovereignty, and set up a puppet Somalian "government" that virtually no one in Somalia recognizes –again, with full American support.

Our complete misunderstanding of Somalia, its culture and unique politics, has led us into the trap of making decisions based on ideological constructs rather than anything related to the facts on the ground. The blundering into a local clan dispute and mistaking it for an armed attack on U.S. interests is emblematic of the problem: in the end, it seems, it’s always about us. A foreign policy founded in the spirit of hubris, and based on pretensions to "global hegemony," is inevitably blinded by a disabling narcissism.

That is what’s really frightening about U.S. foreign policy and the decision-makers who have such an adverse impact on the lives of people around the world. These guys are wandering around in the dark, utterly clueless: i.e. they’re typical government employees.

Policy is made not only with imperfect knowledge but with a complete disdain for knowledge, as such. That’s for the "reality-based community," as one White House advisor put it to Ron Suskind – those vulgar empiricists who insist that American policy must have some anchor in factual knowledge, as opposed to the neo-Trotskyite wet-dreams of various neoconservative gurus and White House speechwriters.

This anti-realist methodology is precisely what lured us into Iraq. In the case of Somalia, yet another quagmire beckons with its siren song of "fighting terrorism." How long before Ethiopia requires the presence of U.S. "advisors" – in addition to those already there – can probably be measured by the time it takes to post this piece. No doubt U.S. "emergency" aid to Ethiopia is being rushed to Zenawi even as I write, and you can bet we won’t hear much protest anywhere. Certainly not from most Democrats in Congress. Anyone who doubts that the U.S. is acting out of motives other than those that are proclaimed will immediately be smeared as an enabler if not outright supporter of "terrorism." Congress hasn’t got the gumption to cut off aid to the death squad "government" of "liberated" Iraq – and I doubt they’ll deprive murdering dictator Zenawi of his blood money as compensation for their cowardice.

I would love it, however, if I were to be proved mistaken, but I’m not going to hold my breath.

The Islamic courts movement was a logical response to the condition of Somalian society, and the complete absence of any law enforcement whatsoever. For the Americans to hold up this movement as proof that "terrorism" has taken power in Somalia is the best evidence that, as Michael Scheuer puts it, the U.S. government is Osama bin Laden’s one "indispensable ally." If al-Qaeda is credited with reversing the threat of a complete social breakdown in Somalia, and the gangster warlords we once held responsible for the country’s torment, in league with a foreign invader, is held up as the only alternative, then surely the terrorist leader is smiling somewhere in a deep dark cave, rubbing his hands together and chortling at his extraordinary good fortune.

Find this article at:

Monday, December 25, 2006

A Poignant Lesson in
Current Events Through
One Mans Life

Profile: John O'Neill

John O'Neill participated in the following events as an active participant:

Early 1997: CIA Unit Determines Bin Laden Is Serious Threat, But Cooperation Is Poor

By the start of 1997, Alec Station, the CIA unit created the year before to focus entirely on bin Laden (see February 1996), is certain that bin Laden is not just a financier but an organizer of terrorist activity. It is aware bin Laden is conducting an extensive effort to get and use a nuclear weapon (see Late 1996). It knows that al-Qaeda has a military committee planning operations against US interests worldwide. However, although this information is disseminated in many reports, the unit’s sense of alarm about bin Laden isn’t widely shared or understood within the intelligence and policy communities. Employees in the unit feel their zeal attracts ridicule from their peers. [9/11 Commission, 3/24/2004]

Some higher-ups begin to deride the unit as hysterical doomsayers, and refer to the unit as “The Manson Family.” Michael Scheuer, head of the unit until 1999, has an abrasive style. He and counterterrorism “tsar” Richard Clarke do not get along and do not work well together. Scheuer also does not get along with John O’Neill, the FBI’s most knowledgeable agent regarding bin Laden. The FBI and Alec Station rarely share information, and at one point an FBI agent is caught stuffing some of the unit’s files under his shirt to take back to O’Neill. [Vanity Fair, 11/2004]

Entity Tags: John O'Neill, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Alec Station, Michael Scheuer, Osama bin Laden, Richard A. Clarke, al-Qaeda, Central Intelligence Agency

May 22, 1997: FBI: Terrorists Are Operating in US With Capability to Attack

The Associated Press reports that senior FBI officials have determined that militant Islamic groups are operating in the US. FBI agent John O’Neill is quoted as saying, “Almost every one of these groups has a presence in the United States today. A lot of these groups now have the capacity and the support infrastructure in the United States to attack us here if they choose to.” [PBS Frontline, 10/3/2002]

Entity Tags: John O'Neill, Federal Bureau of Investigation

July 1998: CIA Discovers ‘Rosetta Stone of Al-Qaeda’ but Doesn’t Share with FBI

CIA operatives kidnap Ahmad Salama Mabruk and another member of Islamic Jihad outside a restaurant in Baku, Azerbaijan. This is part of a covert CIA program to arrest Islamic Jihad operatives in Albania, Bulgaria, and Azerbaijan, and send them to Egypt.
[Wall Street Journal, 7/2/2002]

Mabruk is the closest ally of Ayman al-Zawahiri, al-Qaeda’s number two leader. Mabruk’s laptop computer turns out to contain al-Qaeda organizational charts and vital information about Islamic Jihad members in Europe. FBI agent Dan Coleman later calls this “the Rosetta Stone of al-Qaeda.” However, the CIA will not turn this information over to the FBI. John O’Neill, head of the FBI’s New York office, tries to get around this by sending an agent to Azerbaijan to get copies of the computer files from the Azerbaijani government. When that fails, he persuades President Clinton to personally appeal to the president of Azerbaijan for the files. The FBI eventually gets the files, but the incident deepens the tensions between the CIA and FBI. [Wright, 2006, pp. 268-269]

The US monitored 67 phone calls between bin Laden and Azerbaijan from 1996 to 1998 (see November 1996-Late August 1998). Presumably, many of these would have been to Mabruk. Mabruk is sent to Egypt and given a long prison sentence. [Wall Street Journal, 7/2/2002]

Entity Tags: Ahmad Salama Mabruk, William Jefferson ("Bill") Clinton, John O'Neill, Dan Coleman, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Islamic Jihad, Central Intelligence Agency

Late 1998: Taliban Stall Pipeline Negotiations to Keep Western Powers at Bay

During the investigation of the August 7, 1998 US embassy bombings (see August 7, 1998), FBI counterterrorism expert John O’Neill finds a memo by al-Qaeda leader Mohammed Atef on a computer. The memo shows that bin Laden’s group has a keen interest in and detailed knowledge of negotiations between the Taliban and the US over an oil and gas pipeline through Afghanistan. Atef’s analysis suggests that the Taliban are not sincere in wanting a pipeline, but are dragging out negotiations to keep Western powers at bay. [Salon, 6/5/2002]

Entity Tags: Mohammed Atef, United States, Taliban, John O'Neill, al-Qaeda

Late 1998: Key Embassy Bombing Witnesses Are Beheaded Before They Can Talk to FBI

FBI counterterrorism expert John O’Neill and his team investigating the 1998 US embassy bombings are repeatedly frustrated by the Saudi government. Guillaume Dasquié, one of the authors of The Forbidden Truth, later tells the Village Voice: “We uncovered incredible things. ... Investigators would arrive to find that key witnesses they were about to interrogate had been beheaded the day before.” [Village Voice, 1/2/2002; Brisard and Dasquie, 2002, pp. xxix]

Entity Tags: John O'Neill, Federal Bureau of Investigation

October 14-Late November, 2000: Investigation Into USS Cole Bombing Is Thwarted

Barbara Bodine at a press conference days after the bombing of the USS Cole.Barbara Bodine at a press conference days after the bombing of the USS Cole. [Source: Reuters] FBI agent John O’Neill and his team of 200 FBI investigators enter Yemen two days after the bombing of the USS Cole in an attempt to discover who was responsible. However, they are unable to accomplish much due to restrictions placed on them and due to tensions between O’Neill and US Ambassador to Yemen Barbara Bodine. All but about 50 investigators are forced to leave by the end of October. O’Neill’s boss Barry Mawn visits to assess the situation. [New Yorker, 1/14/2002; Sunday Times (London), 2/3/2002; Miller, Stone, and Mitchell, 2002, pp. 237]

Mawn will later comment, “It became clear [Bodine] simply hated his guts.” After a ten day investigation, he concludes O’Neill is doing a fine job, tells Bodine that she is O’Neill’s “only detractor,” and refuses her request to recall him. [Wright, 2006, pp. 32]

But O’Neill and much of his team are pressured to leave by late November and Bodine will not give him permission to return any time after that. The investigation stalls without his personal relationships to top Yemeni officials. [New Yorker, 1/14/2002; Sunday Times (London), 2/3/2002; Miller, Stone, and Mitchell, 2002, pp. 237]

Increased security threats force the reduced FBI team still in Yemen to withdraw altogether in June 2001. [PBS Frontline, 10/3/2002]

The Prime Minister of Yemen at the time later claims that hijacker “Khalid Almihdhar was one of the Cole perpetrators, involved in preparations. He was in Yemen at the time and stayed after the Cole bombing for a while, then he left.” [Guardian, 10/15/2001]

The Sunday Times later notes, “The failure in Yemen may have blocked off lines of investigation that could have led directly to the terrorists preparing for September 11.” [Sunday Times (London), 2/3/2002]

Entity Tags: Khalid Almihdhar, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Barry Mawn, USS Cole, John O'Neill, Barbara Bodine

Early December 2000: Confession Brings FBI Close to Learning about Hijackers Coming to US, but CIA Withholds Key Information Again

Fahad al-Quso.Fahad al-Quso.
[Source: FBI] In late October 2000, al-Qaeda operative Fahad al-Quso was interrogated by authorities in Yemen, and FBI agent Ali Soufan was able to use that information to discover the identity of one of the USS Cole bombing masterminds, Khallad bin Attash (see Late October-Late November 2000). At this time, while most FBI investigators are having to leave Yemen, Soufan is given the chance to interrogate al-Quso directly. Soufan gets al-Quso to admit that he had met with bin Attash and one of the Cole suicide bombers in Bangkok, Thailand, in January 2000 (see January 8-15, 2000). Quso admits he gave bin Attash $36,000 and not the $5,000 for medical expenses that al-Quso had claimed when talking to the Yemenis the month before. Al-Quso says they stayed in the Washington Hotel in Bangkok, so Soufan checks telephone records to verify his account. Soufan finds records of phone calls between the hotel and al-Quso’s house in Yemen. They also find calls to both places from a pay phone in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The phone happens to be directly outside the condominium where an al-Qaeda summit was taking place a few days before al-Quso went to Bangkok (see January 5-8, 2000). Soufan sends a request to the CIA asking for more information and attaches a passport photo of bin Attash. He asks them about the phone numbers, the connection to Malaysia, details about bin Attash, and more. The CIA is very aware about the Malaysia summit meeting that Soufan remains ignorant of, and in fact considered it so important that CIA Director George Tenet and other CIA leaders were repeatedly briefed about it (see January 6-9, 2000). [Wright, 2006, pp. 330-331; New York Times, 4/11/2004]

The CIA even has photos from the Malaysian meeting of al-Quso standing next to hijacker Khalid Almihdhar, and other photos of bin Attash standing next to Almihdhar. [Newsweek, 9/20/2001]

However, the CIA does not share any of what they know with Soufan, and Soufan continues to remain unaware Malaysia meeting even took place. Author Lawrence Wright will later comment, “If the CIA had responded to Soufan by supplying him with the intelligence he requested, the FBI would have learned of the Malaysia meeting and of the connection to Almihdhar and Alhazmi. The bureau would have learned—as the [CIA] already knew—that the al-Qaeda operatives were in America and had been there for more than a year. Because there was a preexisting indictment for bin Laden in New York, and Almihdhar and Alhazmi were his associates, the bureau already had the authority to follow the suspects, wiretap their apartment, intercept their communcations, clone their computer, investigate their contacts—all the essential steps that might have prevented 9/11.”
[Wright, 2006, pp. 330-331]

Meanwhile, FBI head investigator John O’Neill correctly believes that al-Quso is still holding back important information (at the very least, al-Quso is still hiding his participation in the Malaysia summit). However, O’Neill had been kicked out of Yemen by his superiors a week or two before (see October 14-Late November, 2000), and without his influential presence the Yemeni government will not allow any more interrogations. After 9/11, al-Quso will finally admit to meeting with Alhazmi and Almihdhar. One investigator calls the missed opportunity of exposing the 9/11 plot through al-Quso’s connections “mind-boggling.” [PBS Frontline, 10/3/2002]

In April 2003, al-Quso will escape from a Yemeni prison and apparently remains free. [Associated Press, 4/11/2003]

Entity Tags: John O'Neill, Khalid Almihdhar, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Central Intelligence Agency, Fahad al-Quso, Nawaf Alhazmi, Ali Soufan

July 8-19, 2001: Atta, Bin Al-Shibh, Alshehhi, and Others Meet in Spain to Finalize Attack Plans

Mohamed Atta travels to Spain again (his first trip was in January). Three others cross the Atlantic with him but their names are not known, as they apparently use false identities. [El Mundo (Madrid), 9/30/2001]

Ramzi Bin al-Shibh, a member of his Hamburg terrorist cell, arrives in Spain on July 9, and stays until July 16. [New York Times, 5/1/2002] Hijacker Marwan Alshehhi also comes to Spain at about the same time and leaves on July 17. [Associated Press, 6/30/2002]

Alshehhi must have traveled under another name, because US immigration has no records of his departure or return. [US Department of Justice, 5/20/2002]

Investigators believe Atta, Alshehhi, and bin al-Shibh meet with at least three Unknown others in a secret safe house near Tarragona. [Los Angeles Times, 9/1/2002; Associated Press, 6/30/2002]

It is theorized that the final details of the 9/11 attacks are set at this meeting.
[Los Angeles Times, 9/1/2002]

Atta probably meets with, and is hosted by, Barakat Yarkas and other Spanish al-Qaeda members. [International Herald Tribune, 11/21/2001]

One of the unknowns at the meeting could be Yarkas’s friend Mamoun Darkazanli, a German with connections to the Hamburg al-Qaeda cell. Darkazanli travels to Spain and meets with Yarkas during the time Atta is there. He travels with an unnamed Syrian Spanish suspect, who lived in Afghanistan and had access there to al-Qaeda leaders. [Los Angeles Times, 1/14/2003]

The Spanish newspaper La Vanguardia later reports that Atta also meets with fellow hijackers Waleed Alshehri and Wail Alshehri on July 16. [Associated Press, 9/27/2001]

Strangely enough, on July 16, Atta stayed in the same hotel in the town of Salou that had hosted FBI counterterrorist expert John O’Neill a few days earlier, when he made a speech to other counterterrorism experts on the need for greater international cooperation by police agencies to combat terrorism. Bin al-Shibh arrived in Salou on July 9, which means he would have been there when the counter-terrorist meeting took place. [Miller, Stone, and Mitchell, 2002, pp. 135]

Entity Tags: Mohamed Atta, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, Wail Alshehri, John O'Neill, International Herald Tribune, Marwan Alshehhi, Mamoun Darkazanli, Barakat Yarkas

Mid-July 2001: John O’Neill Rails Against White House and Saudi Obstructionism

FBI counterterrorism expert John O’Neill privately discusses White House obstruction in his bin Laden investigation. O’Neill says, “The main obstacles to investigate Islamic terrorism were US oil corporate interests and the role played by Saudi Arabia in it.” He adds, “All the answers, everything needed to dismantle Osama bin Laden’s organization, can be found in Saudi Arabia.” O’Neill also believes the White House is obstructing his investigation of bin Laden because they are still keeping the idea of a pipeline deal with the Taliban open (see July 21, 2001). [CNN, 1/8/2002; CNN, 1/9/2002; Irish Times, 11/19/2001; Brisard and Dasquie, 2002, pp. xxix]

Entity Tags: John O'Neill, Bush administration, Taliban, Osama bin Laden

August 22, 2001: O’Neill Quits FBI in Frustration; Misses Important Warnings

Counterterrorism expert John O’Neill resigns from the FBI. He says it is partly because of the recent power play against him, but also because of repeated obstruction of his investigations into al-Qaeda. [New Yorker, 1/14/2002]

In his last act, he signs papers ordering FBI investigators back to Yemen to resume the USS Cole investigation, now that Barbara Bodine is leaving as ambassador (they arrive a couple days before 9/11). He never hears the CIA warning about hijackers Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid Almihdhar sent out just one day later. He also apparently is not told about the arrest of Zacarias Moussaoui on August 15, 2001 [PBS, 10/3/2002]

; nor does he attend a June meeting when the CIA reveals some of what it knows about Alhazmi and Almihdhar. [PBS Frontline, 10/3/2002]

ABC News reporter Chris Isham will later say, “John had heard the alarm bells, too, and we used to talk about it. And he knew that there was a lot of noise out there and that there were a lot of warnings, a lot of red flags, and that it was at a similar level that they were hearing before the millennium, which was an indication that there was something going on. And yet he felt that he was frozen out, that he was not in a capacity to really do anything about it anymore because of his relationship with the FBI. So it was a source of real anguish for him.” [PBS Frontline, 10/3/2002]

Entity Tags: Chris Isham, USS Cole, Zacarias Moussaoui, Barbara Bodine, Central Intelligence Agency, John O'Neill, Nawaf Alhazmi, Federal Bureau of Investigation, al-Qaeda, Walid Arkeh, Khalid Almihdhar, Ken Williams

August 23, 2001: O’Neill Begins Job as Head of Security at the WTC

John O’Neill begins his new job as head of security at the WTC. [New Yorker, 1/14/2002]
A friend says to him, “Well, that will be an easy job. They’re not going to bomb that place again.” O’Neill replies, “Well actually they’ve always wanted to finish that job. I think they’re going to try again.” On September 10, he moves into his new office on the 34th floor of the North Tower. That night, he tells colleague Jerry Hauer, “We’re due for something big. I don’t like the way things are lining up in Afghanistan” (a probable reference to the assassination of Afghan leader Ahmed Shah Massoud the day before). O’Neill will be killed in the 9/11 attack. [PBS, 10/3/2002]

Entity Tags: Jerry Hauer, World Trade Center, John O'Neill, Ahmed Shah Massoud

John O'Neill participated in the following events as a passiveparticipant:

January 6, 2000: CIA Informs FBI Leaders about Al-Qaeda Malaysia Meeting but Fails to Mention One Attendee Has US Visa

FBI Director Louis Freeh and other top FBI officials are briefed about the ongoing al-Qaeda meeting in Malaysia (see January 5-8, 2000) as part of their regular daily update. They are told the CIA is in the lead and that the CIA promises to let the FBI know if an FBI angle to the case develops. But they also are not told that the CIA just found out one of the participants, Khalid Almihdhar, has a US visa. [9/11 Commission, 1/26/2004]

One FBI official familiar with the case will later complain, “[The CIA] purposely hid [Almihdhar] from the FBI, purposely refused to tell the bureau. ... The thing was, they didn’t want John O’Neill and the FBI running over their case. And that’s why September 11 happened. ... They have blood on their hands.” [Bamford, 2004, pp. 224]

Jack Cloonan, an FBI agent in the I-49 squad that focused on al-Qaeda, later says: “If that information [got] disseminated, would it have had an impact on the events of 9/11? I’m telling you that it would have.” [ABC News, 5/10/2004]

Entity Tags: Jack Cloonan, Louis J. Freeh, Khalid Almihdhar, Central Intelligence Agency, John O'Neill, Federal Bureau of Investigation

August 19, 2001: FBI’s Best al-Qaeda Expert Under Investigation for Trivial Issue, His Resignation Soon Follows

John O’Neill. John O’Neill. [Source: FBI] The New York Times reports that counterterrorism expert John O’Neill is under investigation for an incident involving a missing briefcase. [New York Times, 8/19/2001]

In July 2000, he misplaced a briefcase containing important classified information, but it was found a couple of hours later still locked and untouched. Why such a trivial issue would come up over a year later and be published in the New York Times seems entirely due to politics. Says The New Yorker, “The leak seemed to be timed to destroy O’Neill’s chance of being confirmed for [a National Security Council] job,” and force him into retirement. A high-ranking colleague says the leak was “somebody being pretty vicious to John.” [New Yorker, 1/14/2002]

John O’Neill suspects his enemy Tom Pickard, then interim director of the FBI, orchestrated the article. [PBS Frontline, 10/3/2002]

The New Yorker later speculates that with the retirement of FBI Director Freeh in June, it appears O’Neill lost his friends in high places, and the new FBI director wanted him replaced with a Bush ally. [New Yorker, 1/14/2002]

O’Neill resigns a few days later.

Entity Tags: Louis J. Freeh, Thomas Pickard, John O'Neill


When Resolve Turns Reckless

By John F. Kerry
December 24, 2006

There's something much worse than being accused of "flip-flopping": refusing to flip when it's obvious that your course of action is a flop.

I say this to President Bush as someone who learned the hard way how embracing the world's complexity can be twisted into a crude political shorthand. Barbed words can make for great politics. But with U.S. troops in Iraq in the middle of an escalating civil war, this is no time for politics. Refusing to change course for fear of the political fallout is not only dangerous -- it is immoral.

I'd rather explain a change of position any day than look a parent in the eye and tell them that their son or daughter had to die so that a broken policy could live.

No one should be looking for vindication in what is happening in Iraq today. The lesson here is not that some of us were right about Iraq or that some of us were wrong. The lesson is simply that we need to change course rapidly rather than perversely use mistakes already made and lives already given as an excuse to make more mistakes and lose even more lives.

When young Americans are being killed and maimed, when the Middle East is on the brink of three civil wars, even the most vaunted "steadfastness" morphs pretty quickly into stubbornness, and resolve becomes recklessness. Changing tactics in the face of changing conditions on the ground, developing new strategies because the old ones don't work, is a hell of a lot smarter than the insanity of doing the same thing over and over again with the same tragic results.

Half of the service members listed on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial died after America's leaders knew that our strategy in that war was not working. Was then-secretary of defense Robert McNamara steadfast as he continued to send American troops to die for a war he knew privately could not be won? History does not remember his resolve -- it remembers his refusal to confront reality.

Clark Clifford, the man who succeeded McNamara in 1968, was handpicked by President Lyndon B. Johnson because he was a renowned hawk. But the new defense secretary reviewed the Vietnam policy and concluded that "we cannot realistically expect to achieve anything more through our military force, and the time has come to begin to disengage." By the time he left office, he had refused to endorse a further military buildup, supported the halt in our bombing, and urged negotiation and gradual disengagement. Was Clifford a flip-flopper of historic proportions, or did he in fact demonstrate the courage of his convictions?

We cannot afford to waste time being told that admitting mistakes, not the mistakes themselves, will provide our enemies with an intolerable propaganda victory. We've already lost years being told that we have no choice but to stay the course of a failed policy.

This isn't a time for stubbornness, nor is it a time for halfway solutions -- or warmed-over "new" solutions that our own experience tells us will only make the problem worse. The Iraq Study Group tells us that "the situation in Iraq is grave and deteriorating." It joins the chorus of experts in and outside of Baghdad reminding us that there is no military solution to a political crisis. And yet, over the warnings of former secretary of state Colin Powell, Gen. John Abizaid and the entire Joint Chiefs of Staff, Washington is considering a "troop buildup" option, sending more troops into harm's way to referee a civil war.

We have already tried a trimmed-down version of the McCain plan of indefinitely increasing troop levels. We sent 15,000 more troops to Baghdad last summer, and today the escalating civil war is even worse. You could put 100,000 more troops in tomorrow and you're only going to add to the number of casualties until Iraqis sit down together at a bargaining table and compromise. The barrel of a gun can't answer the question of how you force Iraqi nationalism to trump sectarian loyalty.

The only hope for stability lies in pushing Iraqis to forge a sustainable political agreement on federalism, distributing oil revenues and neutralizing sectarian militias. And that will happen only if we set a deadline to redeploy our troops.

Last May, Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the head of U.S. forces in Iraq, and U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad gave the new Iraqi government six months to make the necessary political compromises. But a deadline with no teeth is only lip service. How many times do we have to see that Iraqi politicians respond only to firm, specific deadlines -- a deadline to transfer authority, deadlines to hold two elections and a referendum, and a deadline to form a government -- before we understand that it's time to make it clear that we are leaving and that we will not sacrifice American lives for the sake of squabbling Iraqi politicians?

Another case where steadfastness long ago gave way to stubbornness is our approach to Iraq's neighbors. Last week in Damascus, Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut and I met with Syrian president Bashar al-Assad. We were clear about U.S. expectations for change in his regime's policies, but we found potential for cooperation with Syria in averting a disaster in Iraq -- potential that should be put to the test. Washington can't remain on the sidelines, stubbornly clinging to a belief that talking to our enemies rewards hostile regimes.

Conversation is not capitulation. Until recently, it was widely accepted that good foreign policy demands a willingness to seize opportunities and change policy as the facts change. That's neither flip-flopping nor rudderless diplomacy -- it's strength.

How else could we end up with the famous mantra that "only Nixon could go to China"? For decades, Richard Nixon built his reputation as a China hawk. In 1960, he took John Kennedy to task for being soft on China. He called isolating China a "moral position" that "flatly rejected cowardly expediency." Then, when China broke with the Soviet Union during his presidency, he saw an opportunity to weaken our enemies and make Americans safer. His 1972 visit to China was a major U.S. diplomatic victory in the Cold War.

Ronald Reagan was no shape-shifter, either, but after calling the Soviet Union the "evil empire," he met repeatedly with its leaders. When Reagan saw an opportunity for cooperation with Mikhail Gorbachev, he reached out and tested our enemies' intentions. History remembers that he backed tough words with tough decisions -- and, yes, that he changed course even as he remained true to his principles.

President Bush and all of us who grew up in the shadows of World War II remember Winston Churchill -- his grit, his daring, his resolve. I remember listening to his speeches on a vinyl album in the pre-iPod era. Two years ago I spoke about Iraq at Westminster College in Fulton, Mo., where Churchill had drawn a line between freedom and fear in his "iron curtain" speech. In preparation, I reread some of the many words from various addresses that made him famous. Something in one passage caught my eye. When Churchill urged, "Never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never -- in nothing, great or small, large or petty, never give in," he added: "except to convictions of honour and good sense."

This is a time for such convictions.

John F. Kerry is a Democratic senator from Massachusetts.


Saturday, December 23, 2006



By Christopher Story FRSA
International Currency Review
December 7, 2006


1. Without the Iraq War, which started as a bank raid, there is no way they can continue hiding the illegal money.

2. Without the $4.5 trillion payment to Ambassador Leo Wanta/his Virginia-based AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc., there is no way they can make use of the illegal monies they have ‘earned’.


We are now in a position to provide the international financial community with a summary of some of the key developments in the dollar crisis, which are not being report in the ‘mainstream’ media. The crisis, which is now almost certain to become the biggest financial catastrophe in human history, has arisen specifically and solely because the criminal operatives holding past and present high office in the United States thought they could continue their off-balance sheet fiat money scamming operations as though it is ‘Business as Usual’, and avoid remitting Ambassador Leo Wanta and his Virginia-based AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc., the $4.5 trillion tagged and earmarked in their names, and illegally retained at Goldman Sachs.

Apart from the $1.0 trillion worth of US currency held by the Chinese in their foreign exchange reserves, and lesser amounts held as official reserves with other key central banks, the Ambassador’s $4.5 trillion are the ‘only’ hard dollars cash available. Because of the impact of our last report [3rd December 2006], and in the context of the horrifying developments reported below, and other horrendous developments not reported here, the Chinese cannot even change these dollars into other convertible currencies on the scale that they need to do, if they are not to lose almost the entire value of them, when the US dollar collapses, as is about to happen.


Here is what has taken place in recent days. Using the money stolen via the deceitful, fraudulent Treasury ‘data burst’ of 17th November 2006 as explained in our posting on this website on 3rd December [see ARCHIVE], plus funds that the official US criminal operatives have been siphoning offshore through their fraudulent trading operations, the criminal operatives (who are named below) ALSO borrowed against CREDIT DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS, creating a pool of funds with which to buy US dollars and sell the EU Collective Currency, with a view to taking the profits (usually ranging between 10% and 15%) between the values.

The resulting profit pool was being run by Deutsche Bank in Berlin, Geneva and Frankfurt and was being used to drive down the overall valuations of UBS, Credit Suisse and key French banks – the objective being to create such profound economic and financial problems for these banks that their valuations would be reduced to such a marked extent that Deutsche Bank, in particular, could then buy them up cheaply.

This confirms our own suspicions, which have become clearer in recent months, that the Swiss institutions, have understood the geopolitical objectives of Deutsche Bank, which is allegedly the primary institution used by Deutsche Verteidigungs Dienst (DVD), Dachau, in craven pursuit of its Nazi Continuum global hegemony strategy. The Pan-German Nazis appear to have become rather disillusioned with the Swiss instinct for eternal independence, and the Swiss institutions have become aware of long-range German strategic intentions with respect to Switzerland’s prized and ancient political independence.


A very senior European banker, well known to Ambassador Wanta and to Michael C. Cottrell, the Treasurer of AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc, strenuously warned the criminal operatives concerned (see below) not to create AN ARTIFICIAL NAKED SHORT AGAINST THE US DOLLAR by using borrowed money for the purpose – i.e., naked gambling the integrity of the dollar: but these madmen went ahead with this scheme anyway. The European banks, being no fools, figured out what they were up to; and when Ambassador Wanta was again NOT PAID the $4.5 trillion on 20th November 2006, the European banks took immediate action to dump their dollars on a large scale.

When a gambler undertakes a NAKED SHORT, he loses BOTH the money contributed for the gamble AND the money borrowed as well. In other words, a NAKED SHORT gambler LOSES TWICE HIS MONEY, or far more than that, depending on whatever leveraging input he was using.

And that is what happened, following dissemination worldwide of our posting dated 3rd December 2006. So when George Herbert Walker Bush Sr. was televised weeping at a podium in Florida, guess why he was weeping?



The perpetrators (culprits) who perpetrated this historically unprecedented coup AND LOST THEIR SHIRTS, leaving the wretched United States and the whole world vulnerable to an imminent meltdown, include the following conspirators:

• President George W. Bush Jr.
• Former President H. W. Bush Sr.
• Former President W J Clinton.
• Senator Hillary Clinton
• John Negroponte, Director of National Intelligence
• General Michael Heyden, Director of Central Intelligence
• Secretary of the Treasury Hank (‘Conflict-of-Interest’) Paulson
• Federal Reserve Board Chairman Dr Ben S. Bernanke, and key Board Members
• Wachovia Bank/First Union Bank, New York
• Bank of America, Los Angeles
• HSBC, United Kingdom
• The Bank of England
• Deutsche Bank, Frankfurt, Berlin and Geneva.

The conspirators got caught in mid-play, and lost their shirts and trillions upon trillions of dollars, as a direct consequence of our authorised posting dated 3rd December 2006 [see ARCHIVE]. Their NAKED SHORT transaction failed.


While former President George H. W. Bush Sr. wept for himself and on behalf of the DVD, of which he is allegedly the head, before the television cameras, one of the key investigators working with the Ambassador brought in the CIA (under USA Patriot Act etc legislation) to undertake certain measures to stave off the bankruptcy of Wachovia Bank and Bank of America (which is in fact the CIA’s main banking arm).

At midnight European time on 5th-6th December, the Bank of Spain and Santander Bank agreed to get their representatives together in Geneva, with representatives of the Federal Reserve and, it is believed, the Treasury. The purpose of the gathering was to be to ‘work out’ means of enabling the Federal Reserve, the Treasury and key US institutions to ‘stay solvent’.

On 6th December, the Boards of Directors of Wachovia Bank and Bank of America met to plan a merger, but essentially only agreed to agree to come to a decision. They may have no time even to prepare the relevant documents before their respective roofs fall in. Tiles were already crashing to the ground all day on the 6th.


Meanwhile, ALL OF A SUDDEN, funds appeared from OFF THE BOOKS (please make a note of this, in view of what follows) at Santander Bank, which were available to collateralise a transaction through Union Bank of Switzerland and Credit Suisse ostensibly to facilitate payment of the $4.5 trillion to Ambassador Leo Wanta, via a syndication of large banks consisting of Bank of America, Wachovia Bank and J. P. Morgan, to be arranged by Banco de Espana (Central Bank of Spain). This crazy bank syndication is being put together ‘as we speak’.

According to European bankers who are in a position to gauge the situation accurately, the reverberations of the NAKED SHORT catastrophe will hit the United States this Friday, 8th December 2006.

The syndication arrangement is being put together in extremis and under duress by the conspirators, in order to save their backsides and all other parts of their anatomies. They choose to overlook the fact that the Ambassador/AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc, are the only parties on the stage owning legitimate money. All other parties are dealing in illegitimate fiat ‘funny’ money which is derivatives-based, collateralised, and hypothecated out to infinity.


While it is complacently alleged by some that the volume of derivatives contracts outstanding is worth anything from $370 trillion (the volume putatively owned before the NAKED SHORT fiasco by George Bush Sr. (DVD)), and other estimates put the derivatives overhang at around $770 trillion, the actual volume of the overhang is estimated by Ambassador Wanta and Mr Cottrell as being of the order of $1,140 trillion.

However since these transactions are untaxed and handled off-balance sheet, there is no way to prove the aggregate amount outstanding. The entire derivatives ‘Ponzi Game’ pyramid is now at risk, and in any case, only those in at the base of the pyramid have a melting icicle’s chance in hell of ever getting paid.

And hell is where we are all now headed, thanks to the rampant, uncontrolled criminality of the perpetrators listed above, their criminalised intermediary associates, and the corrupt banks which thought the music would never stop.



Let us briefly review what is ‘wrong’ with the ‘deal’ that the perpetrators intend to ‘impose’ upon the Ambassador as a ‘fait accompli’:


• NUMBER TWO: When the first tranche is duly stopped, the criminal operatives will say: ‘OH, GEE, WE PAID YOU. WHAT A PITY YOU DON’T HAVE ANY MONEY’. That is the intention, and the purpose of this posting is to make it quite clear to the international financial community that the Ambassador and Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., will have NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS DESPERATE SCAM WHATSOEVER. If asked, Mr Cottrell will advise the conspirators where to put it.

• NUMBER THREE: The transaction is not intended to be paid into the Leo Wanta/AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc.'s securities account with Morgan Stanley, New York, but rather to the custody of a bank: and neither of the Principals will deal with defrauding bankers. The history of their recent behaviour speaks for itself.

By way of an interjection here, on 1st December 2006, President George W. Bush Jr. demanded that certain foreign Ambassadors to the United States be recalled to their home capitals. The foreign powers concerned responded, in unison, that they would not adhere to this demand. In other words, the President was given a ‘flea in his ear’.

The Ambassadors that George Bush II wanted out of the way were – SURPRISE, SURPRISE, SURPRISE – the Ambassadors who have been talking to Leo Wanta.


Having been notified of this latest Bush II Administration payment scam, AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc, has asked to speak directly to the relevant Chinese official parties. The Chinese now face the severe risk that the value of their $1.0 trillion, which they cannot dump anywhere in any quantity, will be reduced to a paltry amount in the near future, as a direct consequence of this rolling criminal financial crisis.

Mr Paulson, who has signature authority over the REAL HARD CASH $4.5 TRILLION THAT IS OWNED, TAGGED AND EARMARKED FOR Ambassador Leo Emil Wanta and his AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc, is continuing, like an automaton, to drive the dollar downwards, hoping to stitch up some kind of deal next week in Beijing.

The Ambassador and his Treasurer, Michael C. Cottrell, M.S., await the Chinese parties’ response. If they are to hang on to the value of their $1.0 trillion, they will need to avoid the familiar temptation to countenance any delay. Otherwise they, like the rest of us, will be crucified.

The approach to the Chinese parties was made on 4th December, when AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc. submitted a formal request for assistance to the People’s Republic of China, in the mutual interest, so as to ensure that both the United States and China do not suffer the same fate in the immediate future. The formal request contains the following statement, which the Editor of International Currency Review is authorised to cite verbatim:

‘Our efforts since June 2006 to secure this economic receipt via the Department of the US Treasury have proven to have been futile’.


This latest scam, together will all the earlier scams, and the naked short operation, are and have been associated with the perpetrators’ continuing intention not to pay the Ambassador the $4.5 trillion formally agreed on 12th December 2005, and signed off by President Bush Jr. himself, by the US Treasury Secretary du jour, by the Federal Reserve Chairman du jour, by Supreme Court Justices, and by leading US legislators. The signatures of all these people have turned out to be WORTHLESS AND FRAUDULENT, as all are in breach of the formal agreement in question.

By reneging on their formal, signed undertakings, these officials and legislators have jointly and severally destroyed the ‘Full Faith and Credit of the United States’. No-one can trust anything that US Treasury Secretary Paulson says or does any more, not least since he presides over the most outrageous and culpable conflict of interest in world financial history.

As the former CEO of Goldman Sachs, he holds signatory power over the Ambassador’s tagged and earmarked $4.5 trillion, and has chosen to enable his former institution to hold on to the money. This is a criminal act, and implies that the State of Israel, along with Germany (because of the reckless agenda of DVD, Dachau), are the United States’ real, unrecognised enemies. Perhaps this crisis will force Americans to understand this reality at last, and to take the necessary steps to bring the de facto enmity of these two powers to a peremptory end.

The Editor, of International Currency Review, who has always been favourably disposed towards Israel, points out that if the American people get to understand the above reality, there will be a violent anti-Jewish backlash – something that Goldman Sachs appears to have overlooked in its greed to hold on to the Ambassador’s real $4.5 trillion.


Most informed observers ‘on the inside track’, tell us that if, for instance, the Chinese stall in their response to the Ambassador until next week - or Paulson does not release the $4.5 trillion which he and Goldman Sachs have effectively stolen, by next week - there will be an almighty Day of Reckoning beginning on the foreign exchange markets, triggering the dreaded global derivatives overhang implosion, and rocking stock markets all around the world. It is never possible to be sure when such developments happen, but what is usually the case is that one or a combination of events triggers a systemic cascading effect, which is what is now expected.

The fact that the ‘mainstream’ media are not covering this millennial crisis is not interesting.

Whether financial journalists other than poor Bill Plante, of CBS News (see 3rd December posting) are being intimidated by the Bush Administration’s thugs, is not known. What the events since June 2006 demonstrate in our context is that the ‘mainstream’ media is completely irrelevant. It has missed the boat and, like the rest of us, will be left to pick up the pieces.

Its editors will want to know why this crisis has been ignored by their brainwashed writers, and will get no coherent answers.


It is understood that representatives from Wachovia Bank, Bank of America and JP Morgan Chase, are flying urgently to Spain, to stitch this latest scam together with the Bank of Spain and Santander Bank. This posting puts all parties on notice that the scam will not ‘fly’ and that the Ambassador and his Treasurer will not be parties to it. It cannot be imposed upon them without their consent, and this consent is withheld.


• US intelligence operatives admitted on 6th December that the National Security Agency (NSA) has been systematically attacking and shutting down the computers of Ambassador Leo Wanta and Michael C. Cottrell, M.S.. In fact the Editor is aware that the NSA has been attacking Mr Cottrell’s computers non-stop since April, this year, if not much earlier. The way this is done, and the use of NSA computer-targeting ops to steal business, are described in the recently published double issue of International Currency Review, which has exposed a great deal of the illegal activity which is now on its last legs. It’s too bad these criminals didn’t clean up their act sooner.

• Our posting dated 3rd December, which stated the facts then known accurately, is directly responsible for triggering these latest ramifications. It must therefore be sharply pointed out that the chaos which is now ensuing or imminent is directly and exclusively the consequence of criminal financial operations conducted inter alia by the perpetrators named above. We are merely observers and reporters.

• Tony Blair, the British Prime Minister, is visiting Washington ‘as we speak’. He is reported to be aware of the situation, but is not equipped to have a clue what to do about it. The Chancellor of the Exchequer’s staff failed to communicate with the Editor of this service last week, as reported in our posting dated 3rd December. This was a grave error on their part.

• US television viewers were denied, on 5th-6th December, grim scenes that were broadcast on Britain’s ITN Seven O’clock News on 5th December. Specifically, Jon Snow, the anchor, appeared in Baghdad, where he was televised under the ‘crossed swords monument’, among a very large column of stationery US military vehicles. American troops were pictured lolling against their vehicles, chewing gum and picking at their teeth with toothpicks. Jon Snow explained that the column could not risk travelling along the airport road in the daytime, and so was sitting there immobilised until very late at night, when travelling to the airport would be safer.

• If this is the situation now, in two weeks’ time, the armoured vehicles and troops will ironically be stuck, immobilised beneath Saddam’s ‘crossed swords monument’, where of course they are a sitting target. It follows that the various documents being generated in Washington to yank the President off the hook on which he has impaled himself, and to salvage this catastrophic situation, are a complete waste of time.

• The catastrophic failure of American power in Iraq coincides with the catastrophic failure of the Bush II Administration to order payment of Leo Wanta’s REAL HARD CASH $4.5 trillion , which will be used to provide the basis for a REFUNDING of the United States’ financially decadent (because debt-funded) economy. The awful combination of these two extreme crises, and their coincidence, spells the end of US military power and threatens to inflict a massive and very rapid decline in the standard of living of most Americans – which could have revolutionary consequences.

• The attack on Iraq was a bank raid. Among its key objectives were (a) to seize control of the Central Bank of Iraq and to seize its gold. We were informed two years or so ago that about 100 special operatives involved in this operation were killed when they were deliberately left ‘in harm’s way’ by the US military; but we now understand that this figure was much higher. These people were sacrificed so that they would not survive to report what happened. Knowledge of this assault, giga-theft and atrocity exists because the events were recorded by several Iraqi sources. The second objective (b) was to obtain control over Saddam Hussein’s ‘personal’ bank, Rafidain Bank, so that the General Management could be changed and then instructed to grant access to what we were told amounted to $17 trillion of assets, but which we now understand is a far higher figure. These assets are reported to be held at the London branch, and may have been frozen or stolen by the British authorities, who appear to be heavily involved in these scams.

• The Rest of the World, led by China, will go down the toilet with the United States as a direct consequence of these criminals’ behaviour. The EU Collective Currency will be unable to handle the pressure, and will itself implode, after an appreciation against the degraded US dollar which will blow the European Union Collective apart.

Wanta Plan Google

International Currency Review Archives


Thursday, December 21, 2006


By Daneen G. Peterson, Ph.D.
December 7, 2006

On October 17, 2006, 'a date which will live in infamy' . . . there were two acts of tyranny committed. The first was a public signing of the 'Military Commissions Act of 2006' which suspended habeas corpus allowing the president to declare you an 'enemy combatant' and end your rights to seek legal or judicial relief from unlawful imprisonment.

The second act of tyranny took place in a private Oval Office ceremony, in which the president signed into law the 'John Warner National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2007' which essentially eliminates the protections of the Posse Comitatus Act and re-wrote the Insurrection Act. The NDAA will allow the president to declare a 'public emergency' and take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of the governor or local authorities, in order to 'suppress public disorder'!

About The Military Commissions Act of 2006 . . .

"A writ of habeas corpus which is Latin for 'you have the body' [as proof] is a judicial mandate to a prison official ordering that an inmate be brought to the court so it can be determined whether or not that person is imprisoned lawfully and whether or not he should be released from custody."(1)

"The writ of habeas corpus serves as an important check on the manner in which state courts pay respect to federal constitutional rights. The writ is 'the fundamental instrument for safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary and lawless state action'."(1)

Expressing the pessimist's view was law professor Jonathan Turley who wrote: "The Congress just gave the president despotic powers and you could hear a yawn across the country [. . . ] People clearly don't realize what a fundamental change it is about who we are as a country. What happened today changed us. And I'm not too sure we're going to change back anytime soon."(2)

Turley also said that: "What, really, a time of shame this is for the American system. What the Congress did and what the president signed today essentially revokes over 200 years of American principles and values."(3)

You can watch this MSNBC video where Keith Olbermann and guest Jonathon Turley, Constitutional Law professor at George Washington University discuss the Military Commissions Act here.

About the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2007 . . .

The NDAA essentially eliminated the Posse Comitatus Act and re-wrote the Insurrection Act so that the president can declare a 'public emergency' and take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of the governor or local authorities, in order to 'suppress public disorder'!

"The historic and ominous re-writing of the Insurrection Act, accomplished in the dead of night, which gives Bush the legal authority to declare martial law, is now an accomplished fact."(4)

"In a stealth maneuver, President Bush has signed into law a provision which, according to Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), will actually encourage the President to declare federal martial law. It does so by revising the Insurrection Act, a set of laws that limits the President’s ability to deploy troops within the United States. The Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C.331 -335) has historically, along with the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C.1385), helped to enforce strict prohibitions on military involvement in domestic law enforcement. With one cloaked swipe of his pen, Bush is seeking to undo those prohibitions."(4)

The Signing of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2007

What 'Rights' Have Been Taken From You?

"On September 28, by a vote of 65-34, the Senate formally passed S. 3930, the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA). The next day, the House of Representatives followed suit, passing the act by a vote of 250-170, . . . [whereby] "alien unlawful enemy combatants ... [to be] subject to trial by military commissions" without the constitutional safeguards American citizens possess against illegal detainment and judicial railroading."(5)

As far as an American citizen is concerned the definition of the term 'unlawful enemy combatant' has ominous import for them. The law states: "(i) a person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the Taliban, al-Qaeda, or associated forces); or (ii) a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the president or the secretary of defense."(6)

"Notice that this definition contains no exception for Americans; it throws the blanket over citizen and alien alike by using the word 'person' rather than 'alien'."(5)

'The Military Commissions Act of 2006' is a violation of Article 1, Section 9 of the U. S.Constitution which states: "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it." Is there an invasion? Yes! Our country has been invaded by 30 million illegal aliens. Does the president or our Congress intend to do anything about the invasion? No!

Ominously, the full text of the 'Military Commissions Act of 2006' was published by the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations). The fact that the CFR published the 'Act' would appear to be prima facie evidence of the Shadow Government's support for its genesis!(6)

The Center for Constitutional Rights commented that the: "Congress is now rubber-stamping a bill that was written by the President which gives the President expansive power to detain without judicial oversight. If the Military Commissions Act is passed, it will grant the President the privilege of kings, allowing him to imprison any critics as alleged ‘enemy combatants,’ never to see the inside of a court room or to have the chance to challenge their detention or their treatment. What would we say if another country passed a law making it legal to snatch U.S. citizens and detain them indefinitely?”(7)

Sadly, the American Forces Press Service, propagandized the signing by utilizing the most common form of deception . . . omission. Read how they announced the signing but uttered not one peep about the potentially devastating future it has unleashed.(8)

Senator John Warner

Martial Law Now Stalks America . . .

On October 17, 2006, "Public Law 109-364, or the 'John Warner National Defense Authorization Act of 2007' (H.R.5122) (2), which was signed by the commander in chief on October 17th, 2006, in a private Oval Office ceremony, allows the President to declare a 'public emergency' and station troops anywhere in America and take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of the governor or local authorities, in order to 'suppress public disorder'.”(5)

What the National Defense Authorization Act does is end the Posse Comitatus Act of 1787. Posse Comitatus is Latin for 'power of the country.' It WAS a "law, [that] was championed by far-sighted Southern lawmakers in 1878. They had experienced a fifteen year military occupation by the US Army in post-Civil War law enforcement. They understood the heel of a jackboot."(9)

"In a nutshell, this act bans the Army, Navy, Airforce and Marines from participating in arrest, searches, seizure of evidence and other police-type activity on U.S. soil. The Coast Guard and National Guard troops under the control of state governors are excluded from the act."(9)

All these new tyrannical laws have been created obsessively to combat the amorphous concept of 'fighting terrorism' . . . an undefined and ever present boogey man. So not only is the military now permitted to be used around the country, the president can take over the National Guard and the Coast Guard too. It can happen under ANY pretext, at which time the president will become the dictator-in-chief.

According to Gen. Tommy Franks, martial law will replace the Constitution after the next terror attack. In an interview with Cigar Aficionado he said: “It means the potential of a weapon of mass destruction and a terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western world – it may be in the United States of America – that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event. Which in fact, then begins to unravel the fabric of our Constitution. Two steps, very, very important.”(10)

Written Dissent to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2007:

No matter your opinion of Cynthia McKinney, her 26 page dissent of the NDAA of 2007 is very compelling and highlights the damage and erosion, of tasks and performance, taking place between the police and the military in direct contradiction of our Constitution. The following excerpt is from the section concerning the issue of Posse Comitatus [pp. 30-31 .pdf (pp. 528-529)] which can be found here: (11)

This Authorization should also have reaffirmed the principle of Posse Comitatus for military forces, police and contracted security or combat forces. This Constitutional principle creates a bright line between military and police functions.

In the wake of the attacks on September 11, 2001, the Bush administration has continued to make widespread and unnecessary changes in laws and administrative powers that undermine the most basic Constitutional principles and protected rights of citizens in a democracy [ours is a Constitutional Republic].

Recently, both President Bush and Senator Mark Warner (VA) have renewed calls to undermine or reverse the Posse Comitatus Act of 1867 [sic - i.e.,1878], which re-established the Constitutional principle and practice of separating military and police functions in a democracy [ours is a Constitutional Republic].

The experience of the founding fathers with the British model that combined the functions was enough to cause them to set that division sharply in administrative powers and civilian command of the military.

The principles began to be eroded in the period following the end of the Civil War, and the effective occupation of areas of the south by federal troops who were holding military tribunals, carrying out executions of citizens and usurping local police and judicial control. Their excesses came to the attention of the post-war Congress and they passed the Posse Comitatus Act to forbid the military being used to enforce laws.

Further erosion followed the end of the Vietnam War, when police departments were increasingly militarized in training and equipment as well as employing a large number of returning war veterans. SWAT teams were created, a clearly militarized police function, getting training on military bases with advanced weapons.

When President George H.W. Bush came into office in the 1980s, his programs made increased use of military troops and equipment in the war against drugs, supporting police and collecting intelligence in regard to civilian crimes. Joint Military Task Forces were created that combined DoD, FBI, SWAT, ATF and local police in sieges at Wounded Knee, Waco, Texas and against MOVE in Philadelphia, using tanks and military explosives.:,

President Bush has ample authority under provisions of existing laws on disaster response to mobilize and command any and all federal assets, including military forces. State directed National Guard units have always worked in conjunction with federal troops without being put under federal control themselves. Both National Guard and regular military forces are authorized under federal and state laws to use force to protect lives, property and public safety during a declared emergency. Police functions have been wisely left to local police and state National Guard forces, except when the situation was so dire they could not function.
Executive Orders and PDDs Say How They Will Do It!

Once martial law is invoked, then the Executive Orders (EOs) concerned with national security or defense issues are then ALSO invoked. These were previously known as National Security Directives. Under the Clinton Administration, they were renamed 'Presidential Decision Directives' commonly known as PDDs.

For example PDD 63, issued in 1998 that speaks to protecting America's critical infrastructure "including telecommunications, banking and finance, energy, and transportation-that supports the U.S. economy, government, and military."(12)

"The aim of PDD 63 was to introduce an improved information system infrastructure that is secure and interconnected by the year 2003, and to significantly increase security to government systems by the year 2000. PDD 63 designed a new configuration to protect the country's critical infrastructure. Some of the components are as follows:

* A national coordinator to handle critical infrastructure, as well as foreign terrorism and domestic mass destruction;

* The National Infrastructure Protection Center at the Federal Bureau of Investigation to bring together representatives from various agencies for information sharing and collaboration;

* Information Sharing and Analysis Center to be set up by the private sector in cooperation with the government;

* A National Infrastructure Assurance Council made up of private sector leaders and state/local officials to provide advice for a national plan; . . ."

Why and who will be those from the 'private sector' running our government in a time of crisis. Will it be those international bankers and industrialists? It gives no parameters. It is concerning that they could ALL be the very people who want a One World Monopoly and the creation of the North American Union. What better, quick and efficient way to enforce their plans than to have them spring forward using a domestic tragedy like 9/11. But then that has always been their game plan.

Executive Orders (EOs) are legally binding orders given by the President, acting as the head of the Executive Branch, to Federal Administrative Agencies. Executive Orders are generally used to direct federal agencies and officials in their execution of congressionally established laws or policies. However, in many instances they have been used to guide agencies in directions contrary to congressional intent.

Executive Orders do not require Congressional approval to take effect but they have the same legal weight as laws passed by Congress. The President's source of authority to issue Executive Orders can be found in the Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution which grants to the President the "executive Power."

Section 3 of Article II further directs the President to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." To implement or execute the laws of the land, Presidents give direction and guidance to Executive Branch agencies and departments, often in the form of Executive Orders."

But Today's Executive Orders Go FAR Beyond Those Rules As These Quotes Attest . . .

"Stroke of the pen. Law of the Land. Kinda cool."

Paul Begala, former Clinton advisor, The New York Times, July 5, 1998 (13)

"We've switched the rules of the game. We're not trying to do anything legislatively."

Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt, The Washington Times, June 14, 1999 (13)

Read over the following Executive Orders so you can understand what TOTAL, COMPLETE,
and DICTATORIAL POWER these orders will invoke. Go here to search for the actual text for the Executive Orders as well at the current disposition of those Executive Orders: (14)

Go to that Federal Register and check out the following Executive Orders: 13010, 13130, 13228, 13231, 13234, 14284, 13284, 13286 (transfers control of 12919 to DHS).

Pay Particular Attention to Executive Order 12919 . . .

The president of the United States, with the help of federal agencies, will have control over the following, as annotated by Paula Demers in 1996: (15)

(a) All transportation, "regardless of ownership." This means that if they need your car, they’ve got it. They will control all public transportation also.

(b) All forms of energy, including "petroleum, gas (natural and manufactured), electricity, solid fuels (including all forms of coal), atomic energy, and the production, conservation, use, control, and distribution (including pipelines)." This means the federal government will have complete control over who will have power (electricity, etc.) and who won’t. They will be able to "pull the plug" on us at their discretion

(c) All farm equipment. Farmers will not have to be part of "the production or preparation for market use of food resources." They did this in Russia. The farmers worked for the government

(d) All fertilizer. This means that any product, or combination of products that contain one or more of the elements--nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium--will be able to be confiscated by the government. The reason they have this combination is because it includes anything that can be used as a plant nutrient. If you want a garden, forget it.

(e) All food resources. ALL means ALL. This includes all "commodities and products, simple, mixed, or compound, or complements to such commodities or products that are being ingested by either human beings or animals...." This includes all "starches, sugars, vegetable and animal or marine fats and oils, cotton, tobacco, wool mohair, hemp, flax fiber, and naval stores." That means they can come into your house and take all your food. Period. Catherine Bertini, the executive director "UN World Food Program" made an interesting comment in Beijng, China, at the UN 4th World Conference on Women in September, 1995. She said, "Food is power. We use it to change behavior. Some may call that bribery. We do not apologize." [Henry Kissinger has infamously said: 'Food can be used as a weapon!']

(f) All food resource facilities. This means "plants, machinery, vehicles (including on farm), and other facilities required for production, processing, distribution and storage (including cold food storage)." They go on to say that it includes "livestock and poultry feed and seed." In other words, they will control anything that has to do with food.

(j) All health resources. This means EVERYTHING. They will have control over all "materials, facilities, health supplies, and equipment (including pharmaceutical, blood collecting and dispensing supplies, biological, surgical textiles, and emergency surgical instruments and supplies)." They will be able to come into your home and take your medicines.

(k) All metals and minerals. [Think gold and silver confiscation]

(m) All water resources. ALL usable water from all of the sources within the jurisdiction of the United States. All the water that can be "managed, controlled and allocated to meet emergency requirements." Not only will they be able to turn off your water supply, they can come and take any water you have stored in your house.

Speaking of Water . .

Did you know that some senators in the state of Washington were working to get a bill passed that would require you to obtain a permit in order to collect rainwater on you own property? Who were the sponsors of such an absurdity? Why they included a Rockefeller of course, who else? What did Senator Dick Boxlightner have to say about such insanity: "What's next, a permit for collecting strawberries off plants in your garden?" Little does Senator Boxlightner know that's EXACTLY where they are heading.(16)

The Monopolists Want to Control ALL Seed Production . . .

Huge monolithic corporations like Monsanto are viciously going after farmers whose crops became genetically modified when the WIND cross-pollinated their crops with the PATENTED (monopolized) crops planted by Monsanto. Companies like Monsanto have created, and then deliberately left unidentified, where their test plots of patented crops are growing all across America. That way they can know where and who you are, but you cannot protect yourself from them until they claim your crop is contaminated with their patented technology and sue you for illegally using their patented materials. In fact, Monsanto has sued so many farmers that there is now a national hotline (1-888-FARMHLP) set up to assist them.

Monsanto employees will walk right onto your land without your permission and take samples of your crops off to their labs for investigation, then they'll haul you into court for stealing and not paying for their genetically modified products. You will be deliberately ruined financially AND psychologically. Your farms that have been in your family for generations will be taken from your by extortion and threat of a mega-lawsuit OR when they win their court suit against you. In the legal process they can ruin you financially or psychologically before you ever get your day in court. It's happening all across America and Canada. Get the picture? Educate yourself!

If you disbelieve such claims . . . you should watch all the YouTube and Google videos on genetically modified seeds, in particular the ones about Percy Schmeiser a Canadian farmer. Or, you can purchase the DVD by Deborah Koons Garcia titled: The Future of Food: There's a revolution happening . . . Educate yourself about how the One World Monopolists are already working hard to take over ALL seed production via monopolistic patents.

FYI . . . The Monopolists ALREADY Control the Seed Production in Iraq

Before the U.S. invasion, agriculture in Iraq was the product of centuries of culling and refining heirloom seed collections so that the best seeds suited for a given location, weather, soil and water source were saved and used. The war in Iraq conveniently destroyed the country's seed industry, putting the country's domestic food supply at risk.

May 11, 2003 - June 28, 2004 Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq

The solution to the seed problem was solved by U.S. Ambassador Paul Bremer to Iraq when he delivered some 100 written orders for governing Iraq. As Administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), Bremer issued the following CPA Order #81 about Iraqi seed production:

"Pursuant to my authority as Administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) and under the laws and usages of war, and consistent with relevant U.N. Security Council resolutions, including Resolution 1483 and 1511 (2003) . . .

Recognizing that companies, lenders and entrepreneurs require a fair, efficient, and predictable environment for protection of their intellectual property, [and] Noting that several provisions of the current Iraqi Patent and Industrial Design Law and related legislation does not meet current internationally-recognized standards of protection,

Recognizing the demonstrated interest of the Iraqi Governing Council for Iraq to become a full member in the international trading system, known as the World Trade Organization [WTO], and the desirability of adopting modern intellectual property standards,

Acting in a manner consistent with the Report of the Secretary General to the Security Council of July 17, 2003, concerning the need for the development of Iraq and its transition from a non-transparent centrally planned economy to a free market economy characterized by sustainable economic growth through the establishment of a dynamic private sector, and the need to enact institutional and legal reforms to give it effect, . . ."(17)

"The important information about Iraqi Order 81 is that it was designed to have a major impact on the way farming is done in Iraq. This order prohibits Iraqi farmers from using the methods of agriculture that they have used for centuries. The practice of saving seeds from one year to the next is now illegal in Iraq. Order 81 wages war on Iraqi farmers. They have lost the freedom to choose their own methods of agriculture. The legalese in which the orders are written creates confusion about their exact meaning, but the desired result is obvious. Order 81 prohibits the farmers from using their own seeds, on their own farms, to grow their own crops."(18)

"In the name of agricultural reconstruction this new law deprives Iraqi farmers of their inherent right, exercised for the past 10,000 years in the fertile Mesopotamian arc, to save and replant seeds. It enables the penetration of Iraqi agriculture by Monsanto, Syngenta, Bayer, Dow Chemical and other corporate giants that control the global seed trade."(19)

How will they enforce such a diabolical order? They will probably use 'Terminator Seed'
technology to do so.

What Exactly ARE 'Terminator Seeds' You Ask?

To fully understand the truly 'dark side' of a monopoly, how about using "food as a weapon" as was once declared by Henry Kissinger. All food starts with seeds and there is now a patented technology invented by a company called Delta & Pine Land, which is about to be acquired by Monsanto, because they engineered a 'Terminator' seed which cannot be used for the next year's crop because it automatically self-destructs at the end of the growing season. How sick is that?

In a well researched and documented story you will find a litany of twisted devious financial and political connections concluding with three paragraphs that state: "The key scientific member of the Delta & Pine Land board since 1993 has been Dr. Nam-Hai Chua. Chua, 62, is also head of the Rockefeller University Plant Molecular Biology Laboratory in New York, and has been for over 25 years. The labs are at the heart of the Rockefeller tax-exempt Foundation’s decades-long support which has spent more than $100 million of its own research grant funding to create their Gene Revolution." Chua heads a laboratory staff of twenty-one predominately Asian workers.(20)(21)(22)

Rockefeller University - NY

Until 1995, Chua was also a scientific consultant to Monsanto Corporation, as well as to DuPont’s Pioneer Hi-Bred International. Chua is at the heart of Rockefeller’s Gene Revolution. And, clearly, Delta & Pine Land and their research on Terminator [seed] have been in the center of that work."(20)(21)

How Did America Become What it is Today?

If you think about it . . . by sending our manufacturing base to Mexico or off-shoring to other foreign countries, using H-1B visas and others to insource workers, and while at the same time out-sourcing jobs. By doing so, the One World Monopolists (OWM) have FORCED America into becoming global. All has been done in the name of 'profits' when in the past we were self-contained and produced all we needed for ourselves and exported our excess around the world. Now we are dependent on countries like Communist China, etc., to supply stores like Wal-mart with nearly all its merchandise. Thus we have become a de facto global economy without our consent and strident calls for it to stop. They are killing America slowly but surely.

In fact . . . you will find that the cabal working towards the NAU has gone one step further and created non-profit foundations to develop many of the road and infrastructure projects that are planned under NAFTA 'plus' called the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP). This means that NO TAXES will enter the coffers of America's government till. Even worse . . . you will find that they are using all manner of federal tax dollars to fund some of the 'non-profit' projects that are already in place. Clever by half, wouldn't you say. Take taxpayer dollars, make money but pay no taxes in return, while America, by default, becomes the North American Union.

Military Working with Police

Are You Angry Yet? Have You Any Fear Yet? If Not . . . Read On . . .

"EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921 allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution, of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. financial institutions in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when a state of emergency is declared by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months. The Federal Emergency Management Agency has broad powers in every aspect of the nation. General Frank Salzedo, chief of FEMA's Civil Security Division stated in a 1983 conference that he saw FEMA's role as a 'new frontier in the protection of individual and governmental leaders from assassination, and of civil and military installations from sabotage and/or attack, as well as prevention of dissident groups from gaining access to U.S. opinion, or a global audience in times of crisis'."(23)(24)

The Escalating Role of the Military . . .

"The Pentagon, as one might expect, plays an even more direct role in martial law operations. Title XIV of the new law, entitled, Homeland Defense Technology Transfer Legislative Provisions, authorizes the Secretary of Defense to create a Homeland Defense Technology Transfer Consortium to improve the effectiveness of the Department of Defense (DOD) processes for identifying and deploying relevant DOD technology to federal, State, and local first responders.”(4)

"In other words, the law facilitates the 'transfer' of the newest in so-called 'crowd control' technology and other weaponry designed to suppress dissent from the Pentagon to local militarized police units. The new law builds on and further codifies earlier “technology transfer” agreements, specifically the 1995 DOD-Justice Department memorandum of agreement achieved back during the Clinton-Reno regime."(4)(25)

Are You a Border Crosser Listed in the Automated Targeting System (ATS)?

"Americans and foreigners crossing U.S. borders since 2002 have been assessed by the Homeland Security Department's computerized Automated Targeting System, or ATS . . .
[using an] unannounced assignment of terrorism risk assessments to American international travelers by a computerized system managed from an unmarked, two-story brick building in Northern Virginia."(26)

"The travelers [you] are not allowed to see or directly challenge these risk assessments, which the government intends to keep on file for 40 years. Some or all data in the system can be shared with state, local and foreign governments for use in hiring, contracting and licensing decisions. Courts and even some private contractors can obtain some of the data under certain circumstances."(26)

"It is simply incredible that the Bush administration is willing to share this sensitive information with foreign governments and even private employers, while refusing to allow U.S. citizens to see or challenge their own terror scores," Leahy said. This system 'highlights the danger of government use of technology to conduct widespread surveillance of our daily lives without proper safeguards for privacy'."(26)

Secretary of the Air Force - Michael Wynne

Some Examples of Military Technology and Tactics Already Being Used On YOU!

According to Sec'y of the Air Force Michael Wynne: "Nonlethal weapons such as high-power microwave devices should be used on American citizens in crowd-control situations before being used on the battlefield . . . The object is basically public relations. Domestic use would make it easier to avoid questions from others about possible safety considerations, said Secretary Michael Wynne."(27)

What 'others' does he mean? We American citizens? Certainly not the news media because they are in league with the monopolists!

"If we're not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens, then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation," said Wynne. "(Because) if I hit somebody with a nonlethal weapon and they claim that it injured them in a way that was not intended, I think that I would be vilified in the world press."(27)

Oh, so now we know . . . he is not concerned with complaints from 'We the People' . . . only those in the 'world press.'

Lastly . . . "The Air Force has paid for research into nonlethal weapons, but he said the service is unlikely to spend more money on development until injury problems are reviewed by medical experts and resolved."(27)

That's a backhanded admission that people ARE injured by use of 'non-lethal' weapons. Don't you wonder if they will do a five year study to determine if there are any long term effects to being microwaved? That's probably not in their plans. They could care less about Americans. If injury does result in future medical problems they can do what they have always done and deny there was any 'cause and effect' as in 'Agent Orange' or depleted uranium (DU). Their only concern is about being 'vilified in the world press'. Comforting isn't it?

Then there was the school safety drill . . .

In Wyoming, Michigan there was a 'school safety drill' that included police officers in riot gear with weapons.

"Students, who were unaware police were conducting a drill, were taken from the classroom into the halls, patted down by officers and asked what they had in their pockets . . . Officers wore protective gear, including vests and helmets, and carried rifles that were unloaded and marked with colored tape to indicate they were not live weapons . . . "(28)

Diana Silva, a parent of an eighth-grade student, said the drill went too far. "My child was with his face to the wall in the hallway of the high school . . . I certainly don't want anything like this happening to my child."(28)

"Principal David Britten said students weren't told ahead of time to make the drill as realistic as possible. Teachers were informed moments before it took place, he said. "I think this is the best way to do it," [School Principal] Britten said. "We're not looking to scare anyone, but we want a sense of urgency."(28)

"But Wyoming Police Chief James Carmody said his officers were not aware students and parents were not told. He said his department will mandate that parents be notified ahead of time in the future."(28)

Just more practice done on the unsuspecting public. Children, some of whom "were so scared, they just about wet their pants . . . "(28)

Surprise . . . the Military was Ready Even BEFORE the NDAA Bill Was Signed . . .

In "April 2002, Defense Dept. officials implemented a plan for domestic U.S. military operations by creating a new U.S. Northern Command (CINC-NORTHCOM) for the continental United States. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld called this 'the most sweeping set of changes since the unified command system was set up in 1946'."(29)

"The NORTHCOM commander, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced, is responsible for 'homeland defense and also serves as head of the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD).... He will command U.S. forces that operate within the United States in support of civil authorities. The command will provide civil support not only in response to attacks, but for natural disasters'."(29)

Take, for instance . . . Hurricane Katrina in Sept. 2005. According to the Washington Post: "White House senior adviser Karl Rove told the governor of Louisiana, Kathleen Babineaux Blanco, that she should explore legal options to impose martial law 'or as close as we can get'. The White House tried vigorously, but ultimately failed, to compel Gov. Blanco to yield control of the state National Guard."(29)

Even then the Bush administration was pushing for martial law. Some have said that FEMA's spectacular failure to respond to Katrina resulted from the White House policy to cut back FEMA and head the department with someone totally unqualified for the job was done in order to strengthen the proposal and funding for a military response to disasters. Thus the multi-million funding for detention facilities will give substance and support for expanding NORTHCOM's ability to respond to any domestic disorders.

The New York Times Chimes in with Their Propaganda:

"As criticism of the response to Hurricane Katrina has mounted, one of the most pointed questions has been why more troops were not available more quickly to restore order and offer aid. Interviews with officials in Washington and Louisiana show that as the situation grew worse, they were wrangling with questions of federal/state authority, weighing the realities of military logistics and perhaps talking past each other in the crisis."(30)

"To seize control of the mission, Mr. Bush would have had to invoke the Insurrection Act, which allows the president in times of unrest to command active-duty forces into the states to perform law enforcement duties. But decision makers in Washington felt certain that Ms. Blanco would have resisted surrendering control, as Bush administration officials believe would have been required to deploy active-duty combat forces before law and order had been re-established. "(30)

You did notice that it was Ms. Blanco and not Gov. Blanco whose title denotes the right to call out and control the National Guard of her state of Louisiana? Subtleties abound when propaganda is concerned.

The New York Times article go on to say: "At a news conference on Saturday, Mr. Chertoff said, 'The unusual set of challenges of conducting a massive evacuation in the context of a still dangerous flood requires us to basically break the traditional model and create a new model, one for what you might call kind of an ultra-catastrophe'."(30)

Chertoff's announcement is actually calling for an end to the 'traditional model' of Posse Comitatus and 'creating a new model' by overriding the Insurrection Act. His propaganda has left unsaid the damage that will be inflicted by ending your centuries-old rights and protections. Once the 'new model' is law . . . THEN, too late, you will understand that your important Constitutional protections are gone forever.

Was FEMA Really Incompetent or Was It ALL About Promoting the Need For Martial Law?
Why was FEMA so late, ineffective and accused of dragging their feet, cutting communication lines used by local first responders, turning back truckloads of water and supplies as well as refusing to let volunteer local boat owners, of which there are many in that area of the country, go in and rescue people. You don't suppose FEMA's 'problems' were just a really opportune way to promote and get the National Defense Authorization Act of 2007 signed, sealed and delivered?(31)

You can find a list of FEMA's blocking of relief efforts with clickable URLs to the source material here: (32)

There are many, including this author, who believe that the use of the National Guard to enter and confiscate the lawfully possessed weapons from homeowners in New Orleans after Katrina was simply a 'trial run' to discover how or IF the American citizens would react to such a blatant violation of their Constitutional rights!

You can watch the video of the National Guard Confiscating Guns in New Orleans on the Stop the North Ameican Union 'Videos' webpage found here to see how they violated and infringed our 2nd Amendment Constitutional right "to keep and bear Arms." Or . . . you can purchase and donate to the NRA at the same time by purchasing their video Never Again! A Shocking Story of Gun Confiscation in America.

How did we arrive at this sorry state of affairs? There is a solid article written in 1996 titled Mission creep: the militarizing of America. Unfortunately, it is not referenced, but it will guide you through the maze of events that brought into being these outrageous rights-stealing new laws.(33)

Sadly . . . Carl Rove Got His Desired Martial Law!

As part of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act of 2007, the Pentagon is provided an additional $500 billion plus to enable the president to employ the "Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies . . . [such as] interference with State and Federal law . . . the President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of (”refuse” or “fail” in) maintaining public order, “in order to suppress, in any State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy.”(4)

Once Arrested for 'Insurrection' or 'Domestic Violence' Where Will You Be Incarcerated?

"There [are] over 800 prison camps in the United States, all fully operational and ready to receive prisoners. They are all staffed and even surrounded by full-time guards, but they are all empty. These camps are to be operated by FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) should Martial Law need to be implemented in the United States and all it would take is a presidential signature on a proclamation and the attorney general's signature on a warrant to which a list of names is attached." (23)

"The Rex 84 Program was established on the reasoning that if a "mass exodus" of illegal aliens crossed the Mexican/US border, they would be quickly rounded up and detained in detention centers by FEMA. Rex 84 allowed many military bases to be closed down and to be turned into prisons."(23)

"Operation Cable Splicer and Garden Plot are the two sub programs which will be implemented once the Rex 84 program is initiated for its proper purpose. Garden Plot is the program to control the population. Cable Splicer is the program for an orderly takeover of the state and local governments by the federal government. FEMA is the executive arm of the coming police state and thus will head up all operations. The Presidential Executive Orders already listed on the Federal Register also are part of the legal framework for this operation."(23)

"The camps all have railroad facilities as well as roads leading to and from the detention facilities. Many also have an airport nearby. The majority of the camps can house a population of 20,000 prisoners. Currently, the largest of these facilities is just outside of Fairbanks, Alaska. The Alaskan facility is a massive mental health facility and can hold approximately 2 million people."(23)

Kellogg Brown and Root, a Halliburton subsidiary, received a $385 million contract from the Department of Homeland Security to provide “temporary detention and processing capabilities” in January 2006.(34)

The Propaganda Is That They Are Being Built For Rounding Up Illegal Aliens . . .

It has been REPEATEDLY stated by government sources that it is not "practical or feasible" to deport millions of illegal aliens. However, our government apparently has plans to transport millions of Americans across the country and imprison them in concentration camps, or gulags or 'detention centers.' For what purpose or reason? For more details and locations see "FEMA Concentration Camps: Locations and Executive Orders here, including a word of caution from a Canadian Lady who questions some of the Canadian locations because of weather conditions, not by sightings]: (23)(35)

If you live near any of those alleged FEMA camps, it is your civic DUTY as American citizens to go to the locations mentioned in the 'FEMA Concentration Camps' report and determine for yourself, and others, if the report is accurate or not. If you find that these locations are not as identified, then you MUST report that to the website and others. If they ARE as stated then further their knowledge base with photographs and any other evidence you may obtain.

"In September [2005], NORTHCOM conducted its highly classified Granite Shadow exercise in Washington. As William Arkin reported in the Washington Post, 'Granite Shadow is yet another new Top Secret and compartmented operation related to the military's extra-legal powers regarding weapons of mass destruction. It allows for emergency military operations in the United States without civilian supervision or control'."(29)

Still Don't Believe It's True? Then Read This . . . (36)

Another Surprise! . . . the SAME DAY that the John Warner NDAA was signed the Army was ready:

U.S. Army North, the Army’s newest service component command reached full operational capability Monday, which means that it is fully manned, equipped and ready to assume its mission.

As part of Army transformation, USARNORTH was formed to become the dedicated Army service component command to Northern Command, the unified command responsible for defending the homeland and coordinating defense support of civil authorities.

Located at Fort Sam Houston, Texas, USARNORTH achieved initial operating capability in September 2005, and is responsible for specific missions, including:

• Execute homeland defense and defense support of civil authorities missions.

• Provide training and readiness oversight of certified weapons of mass destruction—[for] civil support teams.

• Conduct the Army-to-Army portion of the theater cooperation mission with Canada and Mexico.

• Coordinate the activities of defense coordinating officers and their elements assigned in each Federal Emergency Management Agency region.

• Organize up to two task forces that, with augmentation, can become joint task forces and deploy within the operational area to command and control Department of Defense forces responding to homeland defense or civil support operations.

For the past 12 months, USARNORTH has been building its organization, readiness and mission capability. USARNORTH officially assumed the Army component command duties from Forces Command on Oct. 1.(37)

And . . . Where Will the Army Practice its Defense of the Homeland?

After all the uproar over the nationwide military base closings under BRAC, the "U.S. Army is eyeing another MILLION ACRES of southeastern Colorado ranch and croplands for additional training grounds for its modernized Army, and landowners who don't want to lose their homesteads could be facing condemnation proceedings. . . The protest group said Las Animas County likely will be the most impacted by an army site expansion, and there are 567 farms and ranches with crop sales of $761,000 and livestock sales of more than $20 million that would be endangered."(38)

Those that are fighting to keep their land out of the clutches of the military-industrial complex have said: "Agriculture is one of the cornerstones of society, even though many people take it for granted, it is very much a national security issue. The United States is already dependent on foreign oil, what will happen if we become dependent on foreign countries for our food supplies as well? . . . We also hold firm to the belief that our national security relies as much on our efforts to produce food as it does on a good national defense, The group said entire towns would be removed from existence, 'except as maybe [those that are useful as] urban warfare training sites'."(38)

In a 'dodge' by the military's spokeswoman Karen Edge at the Fort Carson Army Base, it was stated that those concerns were premature. 'All we've done is identify a training land deficit,' . . . There currently is a moratorium on acquiring more land, so the Army will have to ask the Department of Defense for a waiver, and move forward from there.(38)

"Army officials said the base needs to have 'a dynamic, fully integrated battlefield environment' to train soldiers who are able to operation [sic] in smaller units and still control 'significantly greater battle space'." This quest for land is in addition to the 234,000 acres currently existing at Fort Carson.(38)

Lastly, a peek into your future . . .

In the small town of Morristown, TN: "The khaki-clad state troopers hup-hupped into formation on opposite sides of the courthouse lawn, wearing riot gear and clutching batons. About 100 state and local officers stood on the square this summer, some carrying M-16 rifles. They were more than a match for an equal number of mostly middle-aged locals arriving for the anti-illegal immigration rally. It was one of the most confounding spectacles this little town of 25,000 had ever seen. The only way to step on the lawn between the rows of troopers was through a security checkpoint, surrendering anything that looked like it could be used as a weapon. Ted Mitchell and his flag never made it in."(39)

"'It's an American flag!' Mitchell sputtered. You can bring the flag into the rally, a police officer explained, but you have to leave your flag pole. Mitchell's face got redder. His yelling got louder. In an instant the 62-year-old man was scuffling with the police. They pushed him to the ground, cuffed him and carted him off in a police car."(39)

Just where will they take the future, perhaps MILLIONS of flag waving patriots like Ted Mitchell? Watch this video detailing the preparations for the coming gulags or as they are euphemistically known as, 'detention centers' here on the Stop the North American Union (NAU) website's 'Videos' webpage.

The Conclusion . . .

The goal of the One World Monopolists is to gain total and complete world domination. An oligarchy of monied elites who believe they are destined to rule and that you are destined to be ruled. They will answer to no one and run the world as they see fit.

According to Antony Sutton, a research fellow for the Hoover Institution for War, Revolution, and Peace at Stanford University: "While monopoly control of industries was once the objective of J.P. Morgan and J.D. Rockefeller, by the late nineteenth century the inner sanctums of Wall Street understood the most efficient way to gain an unchallenged monopoly was to go political and make society go to work for the monopolists-- under the name of the public good and the public interest."(40)

"Frederick C. Howe revealed the strategy of using government in a 1906 book, Confessions of a Monopolist: These are the rules of big business . . . Get a monopoly; let society work for you; and remember that the best of all business is politics . . . "(40)

Are we moving from . . . Freedom to Fascism as the Aaron Russo's documentary video claims. You can watch his film which is archived on the Stop the North American Union 'Videos' webpage found here and judge for yourself!

The 'Shadow Government' working in plain sight, to create the North American Union using the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP). They are well on their way to a One World Monopoly and they have begun their final mad dash to the finish line.

The oligarchs have become ever more arrogant and bold. They have concluded you are either asleep or brainwashed and propagandized into complacency. They are so close to complete conquest that they are now blatantly abusing our Constitution, Bill of Rights and laws in more ways than you can imagine in your wildest of dreams.

If the One World Monopolists succeed . . . they will consign us all to a living hell on earth!
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be. ~ Thomas Jefferson

Note 1: All bracketed [ ] notations within the quotes, are added for clarification.

Note 2: All underlining, bolding, color and italics within the quotes and elsewhere, are done for emphasis.

Note 3: Melvin Sickler, The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the Trilateral Commission: The two organizations that run the United States,

Sources & References:
1., habeas corpus: Defined and Explained, Accessed October 26, 2006,,

2. Doug Hornig, The Passing of Habeas Corpus, Accessed November 15, 2006,,

3. Robert Longley, Bush and Lincoln both Suspended Habeas Corpus, Accessed on November 7, 2006,,

4. Frank Morales, Bush Moves Toward Martial Law, October 27, 2006,,

5. Joe Wolverton II, J.D., Are YOU the Enemy?, October 30, 2006, The New American,

6. Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Military Commissions Act of 2006, Accessed November 14, 2006,,

7. Anup Shah, Military Commissions Act 2006 -- Unchecked Powers?, October 2, 2006,,

8. Jim Garamone, President Signs 2007 Defense Authorization Act, October 17, 2006, News Service,

9. Michael G. Leventhal, 1878 Military Law Gets New Attention, November 21, 2001,,

10. John O. Edwards, Gen. Franks Doubts Constitution Will Survive WMD Attack, November 21, 2003,,

11. Cynthia A. McKinney, Dissenting Views in the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act of 2007, Accessed November 29, 2006, .pdf pp. 12-36 (Document pp. 511-534),

12. Regulations & Standards, US Laws and Executive Orders, PDD 63: Protecting America's Critical Infrastructures,,

13. Jeffrey C. Fox, What is an Executive Order?, Accessed August 7, 2006,,

14. The Federal Register, Executive Orders Disposition Tables Index, Accessed December 5, 2006,,

15. Paula Demers, The Executive Order Above All Executive Orders, Accessed July 2, 2006,,

16. NewsWithViews, Permit Required To Collect Rainwarter In Washington State?, January 21, 2005,,

17. Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) Order 81, Patent, Industrial Design, Undisclosed Inormation, Integrated Circuits and Plant Variety Law, April 26, 2004, CPA,

18. Rosemarie Jackowski, IRAQ: CPA Order 81 Is Even Worse Than Originally Reported, August 12, 2005,,

19. Michael Meacher, My sadness at the privatisation of Iraq, August 12, 2005,,,1072-1731547,00.html

20. F. William Engdahl, Monsanto Buys 'Terminator' Seeds Company, August 27, 2006, Global Research,

21. Daneen G. Peterson, Ph.D., Treason Abounds, Gov't Cabal Plots North American Unioin (NAU), September 4, 2006, Updated November 4, 2006,,

22. Rockefeller University, Members of the Laboratory of Plant Molecular Biology, Accessed December 4, 2006,,

23. Friends of Liberty, FEMA Concentration Camps: Locations and Executive Orders, October 6, 2006,,

24. Gerald R. Ford, Executive Order 11921: Adjusting Emergency Preparedness Assignment to Organization and Functional Changes in Federal Departments and Agencies, June 11, 1976,,

25. Technology Transfer from defense: Concealed Weapons Detection, National Institute of Justice Journal, No 229, August, 1995, pp.42-43.

26. Michael J. Sniffen, U.S. Gov't Terror Ratings Draw Outrage, December 2, 2006,,,13319,119898,00.html

27. Associated Press (AP), Air Force chief: Test Weapons on testy U.S. mobs, September 12, 2006, The Seirra Times,

28. Associated Press, School Safety Drill Upsets Some Parents, October 28, 2006,,

29. Peter Dale Scott, Homeland Security Contracts for Vast New Detention Camps, February 6, 2006,,

30. Eric Lipton, Eric Schmitt, Thom Shanker, Political Issues Snarled Plans for Troop Aid, September 9, 2005, The New York Times,

31. Joseph Watson & Alex Jones, FEMA Deliberately Sabotaging Hurricane Relief Efforts, September 6, 2005,,

32., FEMA's Blocking Of Relief Efforts -- An Amazing List, September 8, 2005,,

33. Sam Smith, Mission creep: the militarizing of America, March 1996, Progressive Review,

34. Katherine Hunt, KBR awarded Homeland Security contract worth up to $385M, January 24, 2006,,

35. Canadian Lady, Re: FEMA Concentration Camps: Locations and Executive Orders, October 6, 2006,,

36. What Really Happened, Concentration Camps in America: Are They For You?, Accessed August 2, 2006,,

37. Staff report, U.S. Army North up and running, October 17, 2006,,

38. World Net Daily, Army eyes 1 million acres for warfare training; Landowners unwilling to sell could face condemnation proceedings, November 7, 2006,,

39. Kim Cobb, Our Town -- The Rally: More immigrant arrivals mean more fears in Appalachia, October 23, 2006, Houston,

40. William Blase, The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the New World Order, 1995,,