Behind the Headlines
Two-Cents Worth
Video of the Week
News Blurbs

Short Takes

Plain Talk

The Ryter Report


Bible Questions

Internet Articles (2015)
Internet Articles (2014)
Internet Articles (2013)
Internet Articles (2012)

Internet Articles (2011)
Internet Articles (2010)
Internet Articles (2009)
Internet Articles (2008)
Internet Articles (2007)
Internet Articles (2006)
Internet Articles (2005)
Internet Articles (2004)

Internet Articles (2003)
Internet Articles (2002)
Internet Articles (2001)

From The Mailbag

Order Books






Openings at $75K to $500K+

Pinnaclemicro 3 Million Computer Products

Startlogic Windows Hosting

Adobe  Design Premium¨ CS5

Get Your FREE Coffeemaker Today!

Corel Store

20 years

February 10, 2003

By Jon Christian Ryter
Copyright 2003 - All Rights Reserved
To distribute this article, please post this web address or hyperlink

n my book, Whatever Happened To America, I repeatedly argued that we can no longer afford to view our elected officials in terms of Party affiliation. Nor can we afford to label American politicians as conservatives, moderates or liberals since the most important political fight in the history of the United States--the battle to abrogate the Bill of Rights and, ultimately, to surrender America’s external sovereignty to an emerging world government--is being fought in the halls of the United States Congress at this time with nationalists pitted against globalists who are not, as you might imagine, evenly divided along Party, sociological, or philosophical lines. The nationalists on both sides of the aisle stoutly defend the Bill of Rights while the globalists have chosen to frighten us with dire warnings that al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein are planning another massive attack on the infrastructure of the United States. This strategy was utilized to make us roll over and tolerate the massive breach of liberty through legislation like the USA Patriot Act and the Homeland Security Act which passed Congress in the closing days of the 107th Congress.
     The American people witnessed a steady erosion of their Constitutional rights under the co-presidency of Bill of Hillary Clinton with the eager assistance of “me-too” ecoalarmist Vice President Al Gore, Jr. taking the globalist high ground that America could no longer survive and prosper in the world as an isolationist nation that hoarded both its jobs and its consumer spending base as it spewed tons of industrial toxins in the air. During that same period, the globalphites in the Immigration and Naturalization Service [INS] (which was eliminated with the creation of the new Department of Homeland Security) (see Minority Leader Requests U.S. Accept Mexican I.D.s) began to ease immigration regulations mandating that illegal aliens be immediately deported. This allowed those who successfully ran the UCoast Guard or US Border Patrol gauntlets to remain in the United States as they contested their deportation. During the Clinton years, the INS eagerly allowed thousands of illegal, non-desirable aliens (many of whom are dedicated to the physical destruction of the United States of America) to stay in the country on bureaucratic technicalities even after their penchant to destroy America became obvious. (No example of this bureaucratic stupidity is more prevalent than the INS approving an extension of Mohammad Atta’s student visa some ten months after he was identified as the ringleader of the suicide airline hijackers who crashed into the World Trade Center.) This was done because it is the view of the globalists working frantically to structure the global community of the next decade that the peoples of the world (and the industrialists who require the sweat equity of the human capital of the world for profit) should be allowed to move freely between the nation-states, unhindered by national borders, as the supra-sovereignty of the global village takes precedent over the nations themselves and the New World Order replaces the Old World Order of monarchs, presidents and prime ministers. 

    The Islamic world, which lives by a theological code of ethics mandated by its prophet, Mohammad, views the capitalist world of the Gentiles and the socialist world of the atheist with equal contempt since the Muslim sees life through the myopic rose-colored glasses of Islam. Those views permeate every aspect of life in the Muslim culture. While the Muslims claim that Islam is merely a set of religious principles by which their ethos is guided, it is in fact an extremely harsh and unforgiving political system as well as a religious philosophy.
     In the early 1960s the American globalists in the Rockefeller Foundation (headed by the richest man in the world, David Rockefeller*) with the help of the Bilderbergs, the Cecil Rhodes Foundation (The Society), the Club of Rome and the Council on Foreign Relations, initiated their third effort in the 20th century to create a world government controlled exclusively by them**. From a modest beginning during the administration of Dwight D. Eisenhower where only a handful of CFR members were appointed to key cabinet level slots, the Council on Foreign Relations and its companion Trilateral Commission, had a considerable amount of sway in the appointments of all first and second tier politicos of every presidential administration from John F. Kennedy to George W. Bush with the single exception of the administration of Lyndon B. Johnson. Every Treasury Secretary, Fed Board member, and the head of the Securities & Exchange commission was rubber stamped by the CFR before their nominations ever became public. The timeline for the finalization of world government had been established, and the clock was ticking***.
     One of the CFR’s stars, Robert Lovett joined Kennedy’s team during the 1960 campaign. Lovett was promised any job he wanted if Kennedy won. He chose the invisible role of “advisor.” As Kennedy’s key advisor, Lovett hand-picked most of the inner-circle policy wonks that filled the offices in the West Wing of the White House during the Kennedy years. Most of them were retained by Johnson until 1964. When he won his own right to sit in the Oval Office, Johnson dumped almost all of them and replaced them with people who would be loyal to him not the CFR. In doing so, Johnson incited the wrath of the globalists. Falling from grace, LBJ knew that the CFR would back whomever opposed him if he sought re-election in 1968. The CFR, which prefers liberal presidents, backed Nixon that year even though Johnson chose not to seek re-election.
     With the release of State Department Publication #7277 (Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World) shortly after the Bay of Pigs invasion a revised copy, called Publication 4, General Series 3 was issued by Lovett’s partner, John McCoy, on May 3, 1962. It was updated as Publication 5 in 1963. The following year McCoy was tapped for the leadership position in the newly created US Arms Control & Disarmament Agency. Publication #7277 explained Public Law 87-297 which was signed into law by John F. Kennedy in 1961. Title 22, USC 2551 called for the unilateral disarming of the United States. In addition, Public Law 87-297 called for the forced disarming of the American people by making gun ownership in America illegal. Title 22 violated the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution, but as far as Congress--and the industrialists and the money aristocracy that fills the campaign war chests of America’s politicians--were concerned, banning the private ownership of guns in America was a necessary precursor to global government since nations must lack the means to wage war before they can be trusted to refrain from waging war. Once brute force is eliminated from the equation of governance, economic force always prevails.
     In the 1960s, during the hottest days of the Cold War, the oligarchs in the Politburo in Moscow believed the capitalist industrialists and bankers in the West were decadent money-mongers who had enslaved the workers of the industrialized nations who unwittingly served the aristocrats of commerce as their personal resource of human capital. The last thing Moscow was prepared to do at that time was to reduce their weapons of mass destruction and allow the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers to bully them to submit to the global merchant princes of the West. Likewise, the Muslim world, which had been under the thumb of the Seven Sisters and Royal Dutch Shell since the turn of the century, were not willing to surrender their newfound economic sovereignty to their infidel oil partners in the United States or Europe--or to the Godless heathens in the Soviet Union with whom most of them were politically aligned because of American and British support of “Zionist Israel.”
     Just as the wealthiest banking families in the world joined forces to overwhelm the government of the United States with the creation of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 that surrendered not only the monetary policy but the actual right to create the money supply of the United States (from nothing)¶¶ to a handful of international bankers who manipulated the constitutional processes to remove the States from the equation of power in the United States as they saddled the people of this nation with the obligation to pay for the loans they granted to the politicians who would use the largess of the American taxpayer to finance the agenda of the merchant princes of the world to create a modular global society.
     The communist dictators in the Soviet Union, in China, in North Korea and in the Banana Republics of Central America and Africa opposed the creation of free enterprise systems within their controlled economies. Competitive entrepreneurialism and private ownership of business creates a multi-tiered economic system in which the growing middle class (which pays most of the taxes in any society) can then successfully challenge either the aristocrats or autocrats¶¶¶ who head the government. The Muslims, on the other hand, oppose capitalism because usury is forbidden by the Koran (Qur’an).

     The Arab world hates Israel. It is a hatred that dates back to the Age of the Patriarchs when Sarah (Abraham’s wife) caused Ishmael to lose the inheritance of the firstborn after the birth of Isaac; and Rebekah (Isaac’s wife) helped her favorite son, Jacob, steal the birthright of the firstborn from Esau. Ishmael and Esau fathered the Arab race. God’s gift to Jacob (Israel) through Abraham--and thus to the Jews--consisted of all of the land on the Arabian peninsula. In the minds of the Arabs, Ishmael and Esau were the rightful owners of all of the land God gave Abraham. And, they have possessed that land (which, while barren, is some of the most valuable real estate in the world because of the oil beneath the shifting desert sands) since the Jews were taken into captivity by Nebuchadnezzar in 686 BC. As Muhammad shaped the philosophy that became the Koran (Qur’an), his contempt not only of Sarah and Rebekah but his own wealthy wife, Khadijah, who refused to go into exile with him when he fell out of favor with the tribal chieftains at Mecca after Sheik Abu Talib (who protected him) died, is reflected in the bias Muslims have for women today.
     While that explains the contempt the Muslim world feels for the Jews, it does not explain why Muslim extremists have extended their eons old jihad against the Jews to include the United States, other than to claim that it is because the United States is helping Israel that the Jihad against the Jews has been extended to include the United States. The reason did not begin to become clear until Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda cell groups in the United States provided us with much better insight into the motives of the Islamic extremists for including not only the United States but the industrialized nations of the West in their Holy War. In 1993, the Blind Sheik, Omar Abdel Rahman ordered Islamic extremists to blow up the World Trade Center in New York.

     Why the World Trade Center?
     Because it was the world’s most prominent facade of capitalism. When al Qaeda planned its assault on Fortress America in 2001 (using a strategy formulated by Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein shortly after the Gulf War in 1991 to use suicide bombers piloting hijacked jet airliners as guided missiles to destroy the commercial and political infrastructure of the United States), they focused on bringing down the twin towers of the World Trade Center because it symbolized world banking and the world economy--global usury.
     While the world will never know for certain (because the FAA grounded all private and commercial flights in the United States on September 11, 2001 after United and American Airline flights 11, 77, 93 and 176 slammed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon), it is likely that al Qaeda also targeted Congress, the White House, the World Bank Building in Washington, DC, and quite likely, the UN Secretariat and the UN General Assembly buildings in New York on September 11, 2001. Quite likely, the Hoover Dam, the Golden Gate Bridge and other commercial targets around the nation including the Merchandise Mart in Chicago may also have been targeted. Al Qaeda had 100 suicide pilots boarding planes all over the United States on the morning of September 11. Using five terrorists per airliner, it is clear that al Qaeda had planned to hijack 20 airliners from at least two carriers that day. The only thing that thwarted their plan was quick thinking on the part of the FAA in grounding every private and commercial flight in the United States as soon as tragedy struck.
     Ground crews cleaning the normal debris left behind by disembarking passengers from several already boarded flights and flights prematurely aborted by the FAA order on September 11, 2001 discovered some unique debris that isn’t usually found among the clutter of newspapers, magazines and candy wrappers left behind by passengers at the end of a flight: boxcutters. An acquaintance, a ground crew supervisor at one of the major airline hubs in the southwest reported that his cleaning crews discovered and retrieved box cutters that had been stuffed into the pouches on the backs of seats on several of that carrier’s planes.
     What is unclear (since the cleaning crews removed the box cutters from their telltale locations and turned them in before anyone could determine the identities of the passengers who would have been in those seats) is whether the box cutters were discarded by passengers who somehow managed to get them through the metal detectors at the airport and ditched them in the airplanes when the flights were prematurely terminated, fearing that their plans had been uncovered or that passengers might be searched as they exited the planes.
     Or, were the box cutters surreptitiously planted at specific seats, waiting for terrorists to assume those seats and retrieve the weapons they would use to slash the throats of flight attendants in order to create the terror they needed to force the pilots of those planes to surrender control of their cockpits to the terrorists?
     If that is the case--and logic suggests it is--it is very likely that ground crew members who are politically aligned with the Islamic philosophy of the terrorists, used computer printouts of the seating assignments on those particular flights to plant the box cutters in the pouches on the backs of the seats where air travelers find the air safety, floatation and oxygen instructions. It is not likely those planning the events of September 11 could gamble on the likelihood that 100 terrorists at a dozen or more airports across the United States could successfully get box cutters through the security gate and onto the planes for which they held seats.
     The fact that scores of box cutters were found in the grounded United and American planes is at least indicative that as many as 16 other targets in the United States were planned on September 11, and those disasters were averted only because of the quick thinking of the FAA which ordered all planes out of the sky. But even more it suggests that--today--every airline in the United States and perhaps around the world must consider the political philosophies of current and potential employees when determining whether or not to give them access to planes on the tarmac since metal scanning devises and increased security inside the airport means nothing if the terrorists can simply bypass the scanners and go directly to the planes as they are being loaded on the tarmac. Of course, if the airlines did, there would be countless lawsuits filed by aggrieved employees who will claim they have been discriminated against because of their ethnic heritage or religious beliefs.

     Directly or indirectly, every war that has ever been fought in the history of mankind has been fought over the control of wealth--whether that wealth was in the use of land for political advantage, agricultural or societal development, for its mineral or water rights, or for the value of the sweat equity of the human capital found there, both as the workers and consumers of the merchant princes who controlled the economies of those lands or vast feudal estates. Regardless of the motives publicly expounded, the princes of commerce who financed every war ever waged intended to profit from those wars if their investments prevailed. Thus capitalism--and usury--have always played a key role in war since the princes of commerce loaned the money to the governments of the nations involved in those wars, and those same merchant princes profited from selling the wares of war to the participants on both sides of the conflicts.
     Moreover, it has always been the princes of commerce and not bureaucrats within the various governments, or the people of those nations who actually do the fighting and dying in those conflicts who actually determined when and why those nations went to war. During the days of chivalry, the nobility of the cause touted by those who profit from war shrouded the profit motives of those who determined when and why one nation attacked another. But today, the veneer of the aristocrats of commerce has worn so thin that the motives of the oligarchs and the barons of business and industry and the global merchant princes (who actually own the oil under the sands in the Mideast) show though for all who are not blind, to see.
     We think of World War I as a conflict in which the great nations--the United States, Great Britain, Russia, France and Belgium fought against the belligerent Austrian-Hungarian/German Empire in a war caused by the expansion greed of the Austrian monarch. The war began in the Balkans and then spilled, first, into central Europe and then a across the European continent. In point of fact, World War I was deliberately instigated by the money barons and merchant princes of Europe to create a borderless, tariff-free world economy. It engaged every of the nation-state in Europe and in the Middle East, as well as most of the nations in Asia and the colonial dynasties in Africa. World War I was a war for global economic domination by the international barons of business and industry as the world awakened to the incalculable natural wealth available in the Dark Continent, on the Arabian peninsula and in Southeast Asia. This wealth came in the form of oil, tin, iron, coal, gold, silver, diamonds, emeralds, rubies, rubber and hundreds of other minerals that would revolutionize industry during the 20th century and add incalculable trillions of dollars of wealth to those who controlled it.
     As the Austro-Hungarian confederation flexed its muscles in central Europe, their regional war conflict spilled over into Belgium and France. The Ottoman [Turkish] Empire, which had controlled much of the Balkans for 600 years, fought to retain its vast, far-flung Islamic empire. In addition to Spain, Albania, Macedonia, and what is now Bosnia, the Ottoman Empire controlled the oil-rich Arabian peninsula through military alliances with feudal tribal chieftains, most of whom erroneously claimed their tribal titles were based on hypothetical decendants from Saladin or Muhammad. To hold power, most of the tribal chieftains cultivated strong political and military alliances with Constantinople. When the Ottoman Empire began to collapse on the Arabian peninsula, Germany moved in to fill the void--followed by the British who were determined to protect the investments of the Rothschilds, the Nobels, the Samuels, and the Rockefellers and a handful of other American, French, Dutch and English oil speculators who owned most of the oil leases in the Middle East and in Southeast Asia.
     Help for the British came from the Jews in Palestine, who fought, side-by-side with the British to defeat the Germans, the Turks, and their ancient enemies, the nomadic Muslim tribal chieftains. When the Ottoman Empire collapsed and the World War I ended, Sir David Lord Balfour, the British commander issued the Balfour Proclamation that, when it was affirmed by the brand new League of Nations, created an official partitioned homeland for the Jews in Palestine. Palestine, at that time, became a British protectorate.
     Foreign travelers in the Holy Lands in 1923 saw the reverse of what the modern tourist in the Holy Lands sees in 2003. Palestinian and Arab Muslims dominated the landscape. The Jewish settlers were the minority in what we would construe to be Israel. Small, well-armed conclaves of tenacious Jewish settlers clung to the lands given to them by the British. Slowly the Israelis began expanding their toehold in their ancient kingdom. During the late 1920s and early 1930s, Jews from around the world began to migrate back to their ancient homeland. Many viewed the migration in a Biblical sense, believing that when the Jews returned to Israel, the Messiah would appear to restore Israel to its former glory under King Solomon. The Palestinian and the Arab allies of the American and British oil barons exerted pressure on the British to ban the further migration of their ancient enemies, the Jews, into the Holy Lands. The British, their Arab oil leases threatened, caved in to the demands of the Muslims. Further migration by European Jews to Palestine was forbidden.
     Today, as we watch what the liberal media calls Palestinian “freedom fighters” terrorize Israeli men, women and children, we are reminded by the international media that the Jewish freedom fighters terrorized the British in Palestine from the late 1930s until 1948. However, the Jewish freedom fighters who were attempting to gain an autonomous Israeli state in the land that God gave their ancestors, were not terrorists in the common understanding of the word. The Jews did not target British women and children in order to create fear in the British army. They attacked the British military and the British government dignitaries who served as the overlords, administrators and the military police of the British Crown.
     As the cauldrons of global war once again came to full boil the Arabs, who despised their capitalist business partners, sided with the Axis nations of Italy, Germany and Japan. Once again the Jews sided with the British (largely because only the British wanted them). This time to reward the Jews and, in due in a large part, because of the Third Reich’s attempt to erase the Jews from the face of the Earth, the British and Americans, using the newly formed United Nations as their compliant tool in 1946 to create a UN protectorate called Israel. Ezekiel’s Valley of Dry Bones was reborn as a nation in 1948. Never in the history of mankind has any nation been reborn a sixteen hundreds years after its demise.

     As long as the Cold War festered, the Muslims felt reasonably secure because the two of the three major political ideologies in the world: capitalism and socialism held each other at bay, leaving the third political ideology, Islam, to promulgate its theocratic fundamentalism throughout the world without too much interference from the transnationalist industrialists and merchant princes who needed the Arab sheiks almost as much as the tribal chieftains needed them. Rebounding from political obscurity after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in 1918, the tentacles of Islam began to spread around the world once again, penetrating every nation on earth and taking root at every level of society within most of those cultures. Oil was the glue that fused new Islamic alliances during the 1970s and provided the Muslim world with economic clout. The global money barons and merchant princes who controlled the governments of the industrial world and influenced the others, needed that oil to grease the wheels of commerce worldwide. But, just as much, they needed stability in the price of oil. Standard Oil became the most powerful corporation in the world and the Rockefeller family the wealthiest family in the world because John D. Rockefeller, Sr. managed, single-handedly, to stabilize the price of crude at the well, the cost to transport crude to the refinery, the cost to refine crude into kerosene, heating oil and later, gasoline. And finally, he was able to control distribution from the wholesaler to the consumer holding prices at the consumer level as well. Rockefeller used that knowledge to destroy his competition and assume control of their operations. By 1885, Rockefeller controlled 85% of the oil production in the United States. Collectively, the Rockefellers, the Rothschilds, the Samuels and the Nobel Brothers controlled 90% of the world’s oil production and distribution by 1900.
     As Rockefeller’s enemies in the US Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1896 specifically to break up Standard Oil, major oil strikes were suddenly happening all over the world. Where most Standard Oil geologists had previously believed that oil existed in abundance only around the Caspian Sea in Russia, in Pennsylvania and in the Ohio Valley in the United States as well as in a few of the South Pacific island groups, wildcatters drilled successful wells in Louisiana, Texas, and Oklahoma. Rich oil strikes began to happen with such frequency and at such varied locations that Standard Oil, even with all of its financial resources and political connections, was powerless to control the new oil companies. Had the US government not filed an antitrust action against Standard Oil in 1912 it is likely that, one by one, Rockefeller would have destroyed his new American competitors before they ever got refinery and distribution systems of their own established.
     As World War I came to a close, the British seized the oil wells in the Mideast and American and British forces seized the Baku oil fields near the Caspian Sea from the Bolsheviks and held them until a Bolshevik counter attack drove them out of Baku on April 28, 1920--16 months after the official end of World War I. Questions were raised in the United States why the American army was fighting Standard Oil’s private war against the Bolsheviks who took $50 million from Rockefeller, Carnegie, J.P. Morgan and the American International Corporation to overthrow Tsar Nicholas II but failed to live up to the bargain struck with the capitalists in return for their financing. But, no protest was launched in Europe why the British Army was fighting the Rothschild, Nobel Brothers, Samuels and Rockefeller war against the remnants of the Ottoman Empire to secure their oil leases in the Mideast against the Turks, the Germans, and the Muslim chieftains who sought to fill the power vacuum left with the fall of the Ottomans in Constantinople.
     The Muslim nations watched with alarm as the world, led by the British and financed largely by Cecil Rhodes, Rockefeller, the Rothschilds, the Nobels, the Carnegies and the merchant princes in the United States and Europe set about to create a capitalist world government managed by themselves. However, the fledgling League of Nations remained a powerless paper tiger until it was remodeled and dressed up in a brand new red, white and blue suit of clothes, and was renamed the United Nations at the end of World War II.
     To keep the Muslims in check, the original oil barons (Rockefeller, Rothschild, the Nobels and the Samuels) along with the newest members of the black gold club struck lucrative deals with the tribal chieftains in the Gulf States to guarantee the the Sheiks not only immense wealth, but political and military alliances and trade deals that provided the oil sheiks with modern weapons of war to protect their regimes from their jealous or greedy neighbors.
     In 1946, when America awakened to the magnitude of the Holocaust that had taken place in the Nazi extermination camps, there was a demand from within the United States to provide the Jews with a homeland in the Mideast. The politicians could not ignore the demand and remain in office. Since the British, under the Balfour Proclamation in 1919, had provided the Jews with a homeland in Palestine, it was an easy decision to re-establish the nation Israel in that protected area so that the world’s Jews would have an official country to call their own.
     The Arabs, who hated the Jews even more than the Nazis did, showed their displeasure by threatening to seize the financial assets and nationalize the companies of their capitalist partners who had originally agreed to colonize Palestine with European Jews. The British Empire, which had more colonial outposts in Muslim nations than any of the other great European nations--and had the most to lose from a new Holy War--reversed themselves and attempted to ban the further migration of Jews into the Holy Lands. The United States, which had no colonies or colonial ambitions, was not deterred. Finding a homeland for the Jews was good for votes in the United States--providing, of course, that homeland was not the United States. America still remembered that the European Jews who migrated to the New York City area at the turn of the century were Bolsheviks who attempted to create their own socialist revolution in America through two cell groups operating in New York. One of those two cells was funded by Julius Hammer, the father of communist spy-recruiter Armand Hammer, the patron of the Gore family.
     The Muslims turned to the Soviet Union for military assistance in 1948 shortly after Israel, using American and British aircraft, tanks and other weapons of war, defeated the Arab League nations and established itself as a free and autonomous nation. Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Yemen and the United Arab Emirates entered into economic and military alliances with the Soviet Union. Fearing that the Arabian peninsula would fall into the Soviet sphere of influence, the United States aligned itself with Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. As long as the Cold War continued capitalism held communism in check, and visa versa. Islam, which was--and still is--viewed in the religiously-tolerant West as a religious rather than a political system, was welcome not only in America but in theologically diverse Europe as well. Resistance to Islam was fiercest in Southeast Asia where the Muslims, sensing the governments of that impoverished region of the world could easily be overthrown/ The Muslims openly clashed with the Taoists, Buddhists, Catholics, Sikhs, Hindus, Jainists, Brahamists, Shintoists, or whatever theology prevailed, in an attempt prove that the religious philosophy of Mohammad was superior by force of arms.
     The mainstream media, which is owned by the same global bankers and oil barons who partnered with the Muslim oil sheiks in the Mideast to divide the wealth of the world between them, has deliberately mitigated the sins of the Muslims as they label the Jews as heartless terrorists. The extreme volume of slanted news coverage has turned public opinion against Israel. When the Iron Curtain fell and the Berlin Wall was shattered into pieces and sold around the world and over the Internet as souvenirs, two major economical-political systems remained: capitalism and Islam (the antithesis of capitalism)**¶.
     As the Muslim world began to flex its newly-found economic muscle during the late 1970s, the transnational bankers, industrialists and merchant princes discovered a power that rivaled their own. The Arab nations and the third world oil exporters who had previously been at the mercy of the World Bank and the IMF formed OPEC and began to leverage the oil industry much to the dismay of the Rockefellers who, in collusion with the Rothschilds and the other global oil moguls, had virtually controlled the price of crude at the wellhead since 1875. Rockefeller taught the Sheiks well. They used Standard Oil’s own tactics to cripple the economy of the United States and the other industrialized nations which consumed the bulk of the world’s oil.
     Using oil as a bargaining chit in 1979, the Arabs forced the Carter Administration (through the Council on Foreign Relations which is controlled by the Rockefeller and Cecil Rhodes Foundations and the Carnegie Trust) to depose the Shah of Iran. Iran was the only pro-American democratic Muslim nation in the Mideast. Carter’s State Department forced the cancer-stricken Shah, Reza Pahlavi, to abdicate. Islamic extremists grabbed the mantle of government and replaced the Shah with Shi’ite extremist, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Overnight, Iran became America’s most fervent enemy. Khomeini’s militants seized the US Embassy in Tehran and held 380 American embassy employees and diplomats captive until 12:15 p.m. on Jan. 20, 1981. The minute Ronald Reagan was sworn in as the 40th president of the United States,
Khomeini released the hostages.
     While most conservative Americans believed Khomeini freed the hostages because he was afraid of what Reagan might do, hindsight suggests secret diplomacy and pre-election secret concessions played a major role in Khomeini’s decision. Iran was engaged in a war with Iraq and the Iranian military used American war machines. Any spare parts they needed had to come from the United States. Quite simply, the release of the American Embassy hostages was a swap--plane parts for hostages.
     Before Reagan’s first term in office expired a transformation was taking place in the United Nations: most of the key slots that had previously been held by Americans were being assumed by diplomats from third world countries. When Austrian UN General Secretary Kurt Waldheim sought a third term, he was denounced as a Nazi. He was replaced with Venezuelan Javier Perez, an OPEC member. In 1992 Perez was replaced by an Egyptian Muslim, Boutros Boutros-Ghali--a concession to the Muslim world by George H.W. Bush. Boutros-Ghali was replaced by another Muslim, Kofi Annan, the current UN Security General. During the Clinton years another change was taking place in the UN as well. Many of the key slots in the UN hierarchy were being filled with Muslims. When Bill Clinton ran for re-election in 1996, the United States did not hold a single key chair in the UN. While the United States is one of the five permanent Security Council members with veto-power, the United Nations no longer serves the needs of the industrial nations. It is an instrument that functions to promote the agenda of the third world nations--but only inasmuch as it served the needs of the transnational merchant princes.
     As the globalists moved in the mid-1970s to launch the first phase of a world governing infrastructure which they expected would be implemented by the year 2000, the Arabs did not hesitate to express their contempt for the idea of either an interlinked global economy or a world government led by anyone except themselves. And, they took great pains to make sure the emissaries and leaders of the industrial nations clearly understood their message: the Muslim world would never submit to a global government that was not Muslim-controlled and Islam-inspired. When it appeared that the free world was not listening, Islamic terrorists began making very dramatic statements that captured the attention of the world as dead bodies of infidels and Jews were pulled from bombed-out buildings or bullet-ridden buses not only in the Mideast but throughout Europe. Islam made it clear it would not kowtow to the whims of the oil barons or the merchant princes who controlled the ever-expanding world economy.
     The Arabs made it clear they were willing to share power but would never submit to it.
     And, while the global bankers and transnational merchant princes and industrialists behind the New World Order knew that global terrorism was directed specifically against the principles of capitalism as well as their land feud with the Jews over the ancestral title of entire Arabian peninsula, they made it appear in the global media that Muslim terrorism, wherever it is found, is based on the generational hatred the Arabs feel for the Jews, and that the United States and her allies are being attacked only because they support the right of Israel to exist as a nation.
     David Rockefeller (who never held public office), John D. Rockefeller, Jr., William Rockefeller (brother of the founder of Standard Oil) and old John D., Sr., were all very vocal Republicans until the barons of wealth jumped ship from the scandal-ridden Party of Lincoln and joined the Party of Jackson. It is important to understand that, to real money, political party affiliations mean little, and the political pedigree of the man in the White House means even less. What matters most is whether or not he “shook hands” with them prior to the election. In the case of Ronald Wilson Reagan, the fact that he “shook hands” with David Rockefeller during the early summer of 1980 meant little because Rockefeller’s man that year, George H.W. Bush, had been knocked out of the saddle even before the political season started when “Reagan-fever” caught the nation. The liberal media (which is owned by the money barons and merchant princes) tried to turn it around by including Bush in the political equation whenever they interviewed Reagan, asking the California governor what he thought about Bush’s positions on issues.
     Reagan never nibbled at the bait, and Bush’s chance to become the GOP standard-bearer in 1980 never materialized. Realizing he could not keep Reagan out of the White House without allowing Carter a second term, Rockefeller cut a deal with Reagan. Reagan the Patriot, who fervently campaigned against the influence of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission in the federal government, suddenly stopped badmouthing the CFR. And Bush, the trilateralist with the impeccable CFR credentials, became his running mate.
     Seventy days of taking the oath of office for the presidency, the man Rockefeller didn’t want in the White House was shot by John Hinckley as he left the Washington Hilton on March 30, 1981***¶. Had Reagan died from his wounds, the man David Rockefeller wanted to be president in 1980 would have become the President of the United States in 1981 instead of 1988.
     Reagan joined an illustrious group of Americans, beginning with Andrew Jackson who were targeted for assassination by powerful but shadowy, faceless political or economical forces. In Jackson’s case, the agent with the gun was a house painter, Richard Lawrence who, like Hinckley, had no political ax to grind against the target he intended to assassinate. On January 30, 1835 Lawrence went to the National cemetery where Jackson was attending the funeral of a deceased Congressman. At Lawrence’s trial, the painter testified under oath that his only reason for trying to kill Jackson was that he was hired by Nicholas Biddle, the president of the Second National Bank, to assassinate him--for money. Biddle, of course, denied the allegation. Found guilty of attempting to assassinate the President of the United States, Lawrence was confined to a mental hospital where he spent the rest of his soon-to-be-concluded life in total isolation. In Hinckley’s case, someone convinced the Taxi Driver movie groupie that if he was successful in killing Reagan he would win the affections of Jodie Foster, who played a teen-aged hooker in the movie. Hinckley tried to recreate Robert DeNiro’s role on the stage of real life and was convinced in his own mind that he would not be held accountable for his actions. And, found not guilty of the attempted assassination of Reagan by reason of insanity, he was not.
     The money barons of America, beginning with the success achieved by John D. Rockefeller and Henry Flagler when they formed the Alleghany Transportation Company (the precursor to Standard Oil ), began transacting millions of dollars of business with handshake contracts to guarantee that the public would never be privy to the secret deals of the elite. In order to manipulate the price of transporting crude from the wellheads to the refineries and thereby exercising a degree of control over the fledgling oil industry in America, Rockefeller and Flagler entered into a deal with financier Jay Gould, who was trying to gain control of the railroad industry. Because what they were doing was both illegal and unethical, no contractual agreements between Alleghany and the railroads Gould was manipulating were ever written. The backroom deals were all oral, beginning a century-old practice of binding oral contracts between the ultra-rich to make sure no evidence that they regularly contrived to control prices existed. These secret deals also prevented up-and-coming legitimate entrepreneurs from competing on a level playing field with Rockefeller. Over the years, that practice of handshake contracts increased in the transnational realm. In many cases, the transnational deals were legalized through international trade accords and formal treaties that were actually enforced by the nations themselves***¶¶.
     Today, with the spoken word, the economic oligarchy of the ultra rich can make or break any man, in any station of life, not only in the United States but in any nation (which has a privately-owned central bank)--including the former Soviet Union. Obscure politicians rise overnight to become national figures...and prominent, well-liked political figures, suddenly die on the vine or are unexpectedly defeated when they seek reelection. Many, for reasons never adequately explained, decide not to seek reelection when they are at the peak of power because--they would like us to believe--they are suddenly tired of being powerful and admired and because they were offered positions as college or university presidents at institutions of higher learning funded by the Rockefeller Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Pew Foundation, or the Carnegie Trust, and they decided to retire from political life. In reality, I believe, each of these tenured politicians have been very subtlety told it is time for him (or her) to retire and enjoy the fruits of his political labors with a soft berth on the lecture circuit or by becoming a treasured member of the academic world--or perhaps by building houses for the poor. Those who ignore the advise find they will experience the toughest reelection campaigns of their careers and, if they somehow succeed, it will be at the expense of their families and their dignity. And, once reelected, they will discover they have lost their political clout on Capitol Hill. Like Congressman Wright Patman who crossed horns with the money barons but won reelection in 1974 after a hard-fought, very close campaign, those who fail to heed the silent message that their careers are over and manage to win reelection, will spend what will most certainly be their last term in office with less power than the most junior newcomer on the Hill***¶¶¶.
     By the time an American politician become tenured--and join his or her peers on the cusp of the power zone--he or she will have learned who actually controls the real power of governance--and it isn’t the political leaders on the Hill, nor is it the man in the Oval Office since economic force always trumps political power--except in the Muslim world. Outside of the Muslim world, the invisible money emprey now exercises increased control over modern theological authority thanks to several Supreme Court decisions since 1946 that have diluted not only the unabridged freedom of speech guaranteed by the 1st Amendment, but the right to worship God without interference from the State. The federal government now interprets the privileges allowed under the 1st Amendment’s freedom of religion clause more like the conditional rights allowed to quasi-free people under the UN Declaration on Human Rights than as the unconditional, inherent rights that are mandated by the Constitution as the foundational cornerstone of liberty. In our modern politically-correct world, religion has been institutionalized as an “industry” that, like any other commercial venture that is regulated by the government, requires the wheels of theological commerce be liberally greased with money to work.
     It is only in the Muslim world where the Koran (Qur’an) preaches against usury that theological authority trumps economic power. And thus the reason for the Muslim jihad against America and the industrialized nations of the world that are controlled by an invisible emprey of bankers and merchant princes who are determined to create a world government controlled by them.
     The decision of the money barons, led by Astor, Carnegie, Rockefeller, Cyrus McCormick, Cornelius Vanderbilt, Jay Gould and the other industrial titans in America to desert the Republican Party and leave it floundering on the shoals of political uncertainty for a few decades was motivated by three things. First, when the Credit-Mobilier scandal broke on the front page of the New York Times and the other leading newspapers in America (which were not, at that time, owned by the money barons), the invisible money power behind the seats of government became suddenly visible to the American people--and it was not a pleasant sight. Demands were made by the voters to curb the power of the elite and to punish the politicians who accepted their graft by charging them with accepting bribes and prosecuting the money barons for bribery. (While several politicians had their careers cut short, only the 19th century corporate raider Jay Gould was prosecuted for bribery. He was not convicted.) During the era of reconstructionism at the end of the Civil War, the Jacobin Republicans led by Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase, Edwin Stanton (Lincoln and Johnson’s Secretary of War), Senator Charles Summers and Congressman Thaddeus Stevens attempted, through the assassination of both Abraham Lincoln and the planned assassination of Andrew Johnson (who was also supposed to be killed on the night of April 14, 1865), intended to assume power by declaring a new national emergency from which the nation would not emerge****. It would be a government in which Stanton would be the president. It would be created on the ashes of the American Republic. While Rockefeller, McCormick, Astor and Carnegie would have favored a government that greatly stifled free enterprise through burdensome and costly regulations, there was a growing concern among the banking elite who signed on to eliminate Lincoln (after the president announced he intended to issue a proclamation readmitting the Confederate States into the Union if they renounced the debts owed by them to the central bankers of Europe who financed the Confederacy’s war) that if a dictatorship was formed in which the nation’s leaders no longer answered to the electorate, they would become too powerful. It was time to crush the power of the Jacobins in Congress. It would take the money barons almost twenty years to achieve their goal. And third, the Democrats, with the cry of the public over the Credit-Mobilier scandal still ringing in their ears twenty years later, tried to enact legislation to curb the power of the merchant princes and banking barons. In 1896, after trying for a decade, they managed to enact the Sherman Anti-Trust Act which was signed into law by a Republican, Benjamin Harrison, specifically to curb the growing power of John D. Rockefeller and Standard Oil.
     It would be 1906--and John Pierpont Morgan--before the bankers mastered the art of buying the hearts and souls of the politicians they needed to promulgate their economic agenda without congressional interference. By that time Rockefeller, who watched J.P. Morgan steal control of one company after another by sucking them into syndicates that were financed and controlled by J.P. Morgan & Company, joined the bankers he previously detested when he bought National City Bank. His brother, William, bought into The Chase Bank of New York. Rockefeller and the merchant princes mainstreamed the campaign war chest spoils system that Morgan created, and the wholesale funding of the professional politician began. It would be a godsend for Rockefeller because when the Supreme Court finally ruled in United States v Standard Oil in 1911 and broke Standard Oil up into seven smaller corporations, Rockefeller was allowed to retain ownership of all of the smaller entities that were dubbed the Seven Sisters by the media of the day. The Seven Sisters became a dozen companies: Standard Oil of New Jersey, Amoco, Sunaco, Conoco, Mobil, Exxon, Chevron, Atlantic Richfield, Sohio, and Texaco--and Chesebrough Ponds (which manufactured Vasoline Petroleum Jelly). All of them were owned by John D. Rockefeller and the investors of Standard Oil. By the end of World War I, John D. Rockefeller was undisputedly the richest and most powerful man in the world. Today, Standard Oil owns a substantial block of shares of every major oil company in the world. In many cases, Standard Oil sits on the boards of its competitors. In some cases, Standard Oil owns enough stock in those companies that it virtually controls them.
     The GOP, which had controlled both Houses of Congress and the White House unabated for 24 years, suddenly discovered its power was gone. The Democrats, who supposedly represented the views of the working man and not the bosses, were now in control of the House of Representatives. The money barons now controlled the federal government. Between 1909 and 1913, the money barons discovered how to have their cake and eat it, too. They played the Democrats against the Republicans...and funded both parties. Whichever party won meant little since they owned the men who had been elected by the people.
     The working class still believed that the Democrats faithfully represented their interests before the federal government. The Republicans remained loyal to the industrialists and were determined to prove themselves worthy of Rockefeller, Morgan, and Carnegie largess. The Republicans, who still controlled the Senate during the first two decades of the 20th century, did not like their new role as the underdogs in the House. When the 16th and 17th Amendments were proposed there was more than enough votes on both sides of the aisle in the bicameral legislature to send them to the States for ratification. And, even though there were not enough votes at State level to legally ratify either the proposed national income tax (the 16th Amendment) or the petition to strip all power from the States and give it to the bureaucracy in Washington (the 17th Amendment), there was no protest in Congress--or from the States--when Secretary of State Philander Knox and Solicitor General Reuben Joshua Clark ignored blatantly disqualifying errors in almost every petition filed by every State and declared both amendments to the Constitution to be legally ratified when they were not. (Whatever Happened To America?)
     The global agenda of the money barons was now on track. All that was needed was a central bank in the United States that the money barons could call their very own. The Federal Reserve Act was enacted by Congress on December 23, 1913 and couriered to the White House where it was signed into law that evening. The money barons finally won a war that begin in 1787 when the Founding Fathers penned into the Constitution a provision that legally prevented Congress from surrendering the right to create the nation’s money supply to private bankers. By 1913 Congress learned it could violate the Constitution at will simply by ignoring the precepts dictated by the Founding Fathers, or by arguing they were not doing what they obviously were. They knew if the new laws they passed were not challenged before they were codified, the laws would be construed by the Supreme Court as legal--even if they was not. Every federal law that has ever been passed that restricts the right of the American people to own firearms--any types of firearms--violates the Constitution. Every law that restricts the free exercise of religion--anywhere--violates the Constitution. And any law that surrenders to private bankers the right to create the nation’s species--whether coin or currency--violates the Constitution. But, constitutional or not, those laws are now codified, and if you violate them, you will be charged with a crime, placed on trial, and, if you are found guilty by a jury of your peers, you will be sent to prison.
     At the end of World War I, Woodrow Wilson (using the globalist Big Brother model created by Col. Edward Mandell House) proposed a world government called the League of Nations. The League charter was buried it in the Treaty of Versailles that ended the war with Germany. All signatory nations would be required to surrender their external sovereignty to the global government in the Hague. The United States refused to sign the Treaty of Versailles since it would have meant the United States would become one “state” in the global nation that was being forged by the invisible money barons who needed a stateless global community to guarantee the creation of their planned transnational economic union. Because the US failed to sign on, the League of Nations failed. It remained a paper tiger for its entire 26-year history.
     On August 10, 1941 President Franklin D. Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill dressed the League of Nations in a brand new suit of red, white and blue clothes and renamed it the United Nations when they met in Placentia Bay off the coast of Newfoundland. They signed what would become known as the Atlantic Charter. Buried in the Atlantic Charter were the plans for the renovation of the League of Nations. Buried also in the Atlantic Charter was a provision that placed an American, Gen. Douglas MacArthur, over all British military forces in the Pacific theater of operation--even though only the British were at war with the Axis. As Roosevelt delivered his weekly “fireside chats” to America, he reassured the American people that he would not involve them in Europe’s war. He never told them that an American general already commanded a British in a theater of war. Nor did he tell them that the Atlantic Charter discussed the political divisions of post-war Europe and Asia even though the United States would not be at war for another four months. Nor did he tell the American people that he had just assured the British that once the League of Nations was “Americanized,” he would deliver the United States to the transnational money barons. Nor, on November 26, 1941 would Roosevelt alert his own Department of War that Churchill had just told him, in a late evening telephone call, that the Japanese would attack Pearl Harbor at 8 a.m., Monday, December 8, 1941 Tokyo time (8 a.m., Sunday, December 7, 1941 Pearl Harbor time).
      America was about to experience the second “war to end all wars.”
     It was this dichotomy of events that led President Dwight D. Eisenhower, as he was preparing to leave office in January, 1961, to warn the American people to beware of the industrial-military complex. Eisenhower, a mediocre general who successfully led the American invasion of Europe through Normandy as Commander-in-Chief of Allied Forces in Europe--like General Andy Jackson a hundred years before--clearly and vividly saw the invisible power behind the American government. Neither man liked the view. Both warned the American people. And, both times, the American people ignored their warnings.

     The American people have been tragically apathetic when it comes to safeguarding freedom. They have not been good stewards of their liberty. They have taken freedom for granted for so long that they assume the privileges they enjoy as Americans are so carved in stone that they can never be stolen by a mischievous government. After all, is not the US Supreme Court the silent sentinel that safeguards our liberty by curbing the overzealous legislative and executive branches when they infringe upon our rights? At least, that’s what we are told by that very same overzealous government.
In reality, nothing could be farther from the truth.
     An excerpt that makes my point can be found on page 464 of my book, (Whatever Happened To America?) You need look no farther than the 1st Amendment to see it. The distinction I am referring to can best viewed by comparing the language in the Bill of Rights with the parallel rights in the U.N. Declaration on Human Rights.
     "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." (1st Amendment, the Constitution of the United States.) Note first, the Founding Fathers placed all of the restrictions on the government. Of course, somewhere along the road to the toll bridge to Utopia, the meaning of the 1st Amendment became fuzzy, because now all of the restrictions are placed on the citizen who no longer possesses an inherent right to practice the free exercise of religion. In fact, the Supreme Court now interprets the exercising of religious freedom more in the manner of the privileges described in Article 18§3 of the UN Declaration on Human Rights: "Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations that are prescribed by law..." For this reason alone any sitting federal judge or Supreme Court Justice who rules in this manner should be impeached and removed from the bench. The Justices are sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States, not the declarations of the UN.
     The 1st Amendment further guarantees the American citizen the right to free speech when it declares: "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech...or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Article 19 of the Human Rights Covenant deftly abridges those rights while appearing to grant them: "The right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas carries with it special duties and responsibilities, and may therefore be subject to certain penalties, liabilities, and restrictions, but these shall be only as such as are provided by law."
     One need look no farther than the 1st Amendment to see a clear distinction between the quality of freedom guaranteed under the Bill of Rights and that promised by the International Covenant on Human Rights. One applies to the individual, the other to a collective society. Yet, the United States Supreme Court, which is the court of last resort in this nation, arbitrarily abridged our constitutional rights in that period of time when the globalists were fashioning a new utopian society governed by a New World Order comprised of the merchant princes and the bureaucrats, merging capitalism and socialism to form what the British call “the third way.”
     It is the secular, economic-driven New World Order that frightens the Islamic fundamentalists in the Muslim world.
     When the Islamic extremists executed the first stage of their Jihad (Holy War) against the Great Satan (the commercial center of the United States), the target they chose first was the symbol of commercial usury in America. The twin towers of the World Trade Center were viewed by the Muslim extremists as the Mecca of the merchant princes since New York is viewed by the merchant princes in the world as their financial Babylon. The Pentagon was most likely a secondary target. It is more probable that the hijacker behind the stick in Flight 176 would have preferred hitting either the White House or Congress but probably wasn’t proficient enough to take the 757 around for another run down Pennsylvania Avenue. The box cutters that were found by the airline cleaning crews is evidence that that other targets were scheduled to be hit on September 11. Which targets are anyone’s guess...and one guess is just as good as another. Likely targets: the White House, Congress, the UN Building in New York, the Merchandise Mart in Chicago, the New York Stock Exchange, Hoover Dam, the Golden Gate Bridge or the Los Angeles freeway during rush hour. It appears that 20 hijackings were planned to take place and likely would have if the FAA had not grounded all commercial and private flights in the United States.
     Within two days of the Twin Towers disaster, while America was still mourning for 3,000 lost souls in the World Trade Center, American Airlines Flight 587 took off from JFK International airport, heading to the Dominican Republic. Within 114 seconds of lift-off, Flight 587 was in trouble. The Airbus 300 began to vibrate. One of the turbo jet engines was wretched from the metal skin of the wing and fell to the ground below. The first engine landed in the front of a gas station in Queens. Thirteen seconds later the second jet engine fell. Within the next 23 seconds--2 1/2 minutes after Flight 587 took off--the tail stabilizer was ripped from the fuselage and the plane spiraled into the Queens neighborhood of Rockaway, killing all 262 people on board and injuring 16 people on the ground. Terrorism was immediately suspected. Within minutes of the crash, the UN Building was emptied and the Empire State Building was put on immediate lockdown. The federal government feared a repeat of September 11.
     While it was the public’s consensus was that sabotage brought Flight 587 down, the National Transportation Safety Board ruled that wake turbulence caused Flight 587 to break up and fall to the earth. The last thing either the airline industry or the federal government of the United States wanted was the American people losing faith in the ability of the federal government to provide the security needed to guarantee that airplanes flying over America’s cities were safe. But not even the assurances of the federal government calmed the fears of the American people. America was under attack by terrorists. The NTSB’s claim that Flight 587 flew into the wake of a Japan Airways Boeing 747 caused the crash was a stretch that only the government could make. In the government’s version of events, the tail stabilizer was torn from the plane by the severe turbulence with the engines coming off as the Airbus spiraled to the earth since wake turbulence could not tear the engines off the Airbus first. Eyewitness accounts disagree with the official NTSB view. Those who watched from the ground remember that the engines fell off first and the tail stabilizer tore off as the plane plummeted earthward. The NTSB, in grabbing at straws, remembered a conclusion it had reached in 1994 when the unexplained crash of US Air Flight 427 near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania that claimed 132 lives was blamed on wake turbulence.
     But, when the Bush Administration was pushing for the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, Flight 587 was linked to September 11--and not just because 60 of the firemen and police officers that died in the World Trade Center lived in the Rockaway section of Queens. Flight 587 was a crash that could not be explained.
     The bloody scenes of terrorism from the Mideast that Americans had been watching on the evening news from the safety of their living rooms--bombed-out buildings and flashing visions of bloodied women and children--the victims of suicide bombers or fanatics with automatic weapons spraying innocent shoppers in the open air markets or commuters traveling in buses from city to city in Israel, or worse--Islamic terrorists shooting innocent school children on their way to or from classes--had now come, in living panorama horror, to a neighborhood near them in the United States of America. The United States was no longer an island of security in a global sea of cultural diversity. On top of the World Trade Center disaster and the disintegration of American Flight 587, America discovered that the same types of fanatical Islamic suicide events that had reach epidemic proportions in Israel and had taken their toll in Europe and Southeast Asia, had now visited American soil.
     The World Trade Center tragedy was merely the opening volley of an Islamic Jihad against the United States and the emerging New World Order. In late September, 2001, the CIA received an alert that Osama bin Laden had purchased tons of radiological waste in Argentina. They were also told that Al Qaeda had managed to smuggled the radioactive waste from Argentina into Mexico, and using the open border policies of NAFTA, was planning to smuggle the radiological waste into the United States through Mexico. Roadblocks were set up on every Interstate in the United States and the cargo on every tractor trailer or large enclosed van was checked. After a week when nothing was found, the roadblocks were removed and Mexican trucks once again had access to America’s interstate system. If the information received by the CIA was accurate, then it is likely that an Al Qaeda cell group somewhere in the United States has in its possession a ton or more of radioactive waste material that only requires an explosive triggering devise to create a radioactive dirty bomb.
     Several other terrorist-related events were taking place simultaneously. First, and most deadly, were the three anthrax-laced letters that resulted in the deaths of several Americans who were exposed to what appeared to be very fine, military grade anthrax. The first letter was sent to American Media, the publishers of the National Enquirer on September 18--only one week after the World Trade Center disaster. One man died. The second and third were sent to Tom Brokaw, the senior editor for NBC News and Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle. A fourth letter, also directed at to a member of Congress, was diverted before it arrived. The Daschle letter contained such deadly, high grade anthrax spores that the Brentwood regional postal center in Washington, DC where the letter was received, remains closed. A final sanitizing on that building is being undertaken at this time and it is believed that when it is completed that the Brentwood Center will be reopened although it is doubtful that the USPS will find postal employees willing to work there. When the Daschle letter, which contained the finest military grade anthrax spores, people in the Brentwood Postal Center began to die. Before the crisis passed, 18 people between Connecticut and New York were infected with anthrax. Nine died.
     Completely at a loss for suspects (but claiming to the media and the nation that they had 30 suspects), the FBI centered it attention on one man: Dr. Stephen Hatfill, a researcher at the Fort Detrick Maryland chemical and biological weapons laboratory. In running a deep background check on Hatfill the government learned he had lied on his resume. He claimed to have a doctorate in biochemistry. The government said he did not. He also claimed to have been in the Special Forces. The FBI said that was a lie as well. And the FBI set about convicting Hatfill in the press--the same way they went after security guard Richard Jewell during the 1996 summer Olympics in Atlanta, Georgia.
     The FBI did not learn from its experience with Richard Jewell. Over-zealous persecution is still the FBI’s first line of defense when they don’t have a real suspect and are under intense scrutiny to close a high profile case. Their strategy has always been to leak stories to the media who their primary suspect is and then, lacking any concrete proof of guilt, let the media rather than sound, tangible evidence, convict them. Once condemned, the FBI steps in and arrests the suspect, hoping to plead the case to avoid a trial they will lose. Hatfill, however, did not roll over. He hired a good lawyer and counterattacked, threatening the FBI agents themselves for defamation and slander. Today, the FBI will acknowledge it has no suspects in the anthrax mailings.
     About the same time, the FBI announced it had taken Zacharias Mouusaouri, whom they described as the 20th 9-11 suicide terrorist, into custody. (Mouusaouri was already in jail, being held by the INS for deportation. Mouusaouri tried to negotiate the rate he was to pay for jet pilot training when he told the flight school he was attending that he should get a partial refund since he did not have to learn to take off and land a 747--he only needed to learn how to maneuver it in flight.) Mouusaouri, who tried to plead guilty and confess to his Al Qaeda role with Al Qaeda (but whose confession was quashed by the court) is currently on trial in Northern Virginia as a terrorist. On Friday, February 7, 2003 the Bush Justice Department asked the US District Court to delay his trial. On top of the arrest of Jose Padilla came the arrest of British citizen Robert Colvin Reid, the shoe bomber. Reid pleaded guilty to attempting to ignite C-4 in his sneakers while in flight over the Atlantic. He is now serving a life sentence for terrorism. These events were followed on May 5, 2002 with an attempt by a 15-year old teenager, Charles Bishop, a self-proclaimed Muslim zealot, of attempting to replicate the World Trade Center disaster when he flew a stolen Cessna 172 into the 28th floor of the Bank of America building in Tampa, Florida.
     On July 4, after sending his wife and son to Egypt, Egyptian national Hersham Mohamed Hadayet went to Los Angeles International Airport, went to the El Al ticket counter and opened fire, killing a 25-year old Israeli ticket clerk and wounding two security guards before he was killed himself. Hadayet arrived at LAX with two handguns and a hunting knife.
     America was under attack by a new type of enemy--Al Qaeda. And, America was was now fighting a completely different, completely unorthodox type of war. While the Jihad being waged on American soil seemed to take the federal law enforcement agencies completely by surprise, the tactics used by the terrorists who were attacking America’s infrastructure were described in a US Senate white paper called “Fourth Generation Warfare” that was authored by William Lind, the military affairs advisor to Senator Gary Hart [D-CO]. Lind’s view was that the next generation of soldier would attack its enemy from within the nation, destroying the country’s infrastructure, its financial centers, and its centers of commerce, collapsing the nation’s economy. Hart tried to get the first Bush Administration to take his views and those of Lind, seriously, but the Department of Defense (headed by now Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Colin Powell, who was then the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs) ignored Hart’s report believing what Hart and Lind proposed could not happen in the United States.
     Determined to spark debate on what he and Hart envisioned to be the next generation of warfare, Lind’s white paper was printed in 1989 in the Marine Corps Gazette. Lind, who is now associated with Paul Weyrich’s Free Congress Foundation, told Insight on the News magazine in a December, 2002 interview that the DoD still does not get the picture.
     In point of fact, it does.
     But it took the deaths of 3,000 Americans before it happened.
     That is not to say that George W. Bush was not conscious of the need to create a Department of Homeland Security when he assumed office--almost nine months before on September 11. He appointed Gov. Tom Ridge as Homeland Security Czar in June, 2001 as he pushed Congress to realign the existing bureaucracy and create a new supra-cabinet post to prepare for the new generation of warfare--terrorism. Although al Qaeda fired its initial warning shots over the bow of the U.S.S. United States during the Clinton years, and even tried to bring down the World Trade Center in 1993, Bill Clinton refused to engage the enemy because he was convinced that doing so would harm his reelection chances. When the Monica Lewinsky scandal threatened to bring an end to Clinton’s presidency, he engaged in a surreal “wag-the-dog” war with Osama bin Laden by bombing an aspirin factory in the Sudan more for its public relations value than any real attempt to get bin Laden. No evidence was ever found to confirm Clinton’s contention that the aspirin factory produced weapons grade chemical or biological agents or, for that matter, anything more lethal than aspirin.
     When Bush assumed office, Ridge, FBI Director Robert Meuller and Attorney General John Ashcroft became the frontline of defense against al Qaeda in the United States as Bush fought Congress to approve a new cabinet post that many civil libertarians believed would ultimately prove to be as dictatorial as Adolph Hitler’s Gestapo or SS. The USA Patriot Act, with its loyal sounding name, was nothing more than a new generation version of the failed aspects of H.R. 666 (The Anti-Terrorist Act of 1995) as it was originally introduced in the House of Representatives.
     H.R. 666 abrogated the following rights: under the 1st Amendment, loss of free expression of religion, loss of free speech, loss of the right to petition and under extraneous circumstances, the government’s right to censor of the media. Under the 2nd Amendment, loss of the people’s right to own firearms. Under the 3rd Amendment, the right of the government to use of the military to aid local police. Under the 4th Amendment, the loss of the right to privacy from unreasonable search and seizure, and the repeal of habeas corpus. Under the 5th Amendment, the suspension of due process. Under the 6th Amendment, the loss of the right to face one’s accuser, and the enhanced right of the State to hold anyone accused of either committing or even planning a crime to be held for an indefinite period of time without a trial--or, without specific charges even being filed. And finally, using the compelling interest facet of the 9th Amendment, H.R. 666 would have legislatively abolished the 10th Amendment. The Senate version of the Anti-Terrorist Act of 1995, S.735, flew through the Senate with no opposition and was enacted with a voice vote. (Nobody in the Senate wanted to leave their fingerprints anywhere where it could cost them votes in 1996. But the Senate had no problem attempting to legislate the Bill of Rights out of existence even though it requires a constitutional amendment that has been ratified by 3/4 of the States to alter the Constitution.
     Using the fear of the American people as cover, Congress dusted off the failed aspects of the original Anti-Terrorist Act of 1995 (which had been sufficiently diluted to protect the Bill of Rights before it was enacted that year), renamed it the USA Patriot Act and raised it up the flagpole to see if it would fly. America was sufficiently frightened to believe that certain infringements on their rights were necessary to protect them from terrorism--or at least, that’s what the media told them. Further, the USA Patriot Act allows the president to define terrorism after-the-fact. This was a right Bill Clinton sought but was denied--the right to define crime after-the-fact--because the American people did not trust him. America trusts George W. Bush. But, what about the presidents who follow him into the White House? What about...say...Hillary Rodham Clinton, Al Gore or Lord protect us... Al Sharpton or another Bill Clinton disguised as someone like ambulance chaser John Edwards?
     As a private citizen, you could be engaged in what was legally construed as a free speech right--perhaps in the form of a vocal protest against the World Trade Organization or some other globalist function. Under the Patriot Act, the government can construe your specific protest as an act of terrorism and arrest you even though that protest was not construed as an act of terrorism prior to the protest. You can, in other words, be arrested for a crime that was not a crime when you did it. The USA Patriot Act, like the failed portions of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1995 gives the government a dangerously broad right to define unlawful activity after-the-fact. Tragically, the USA Patriot Act it will come back to haunt the American people when the United States government decides to use the Patriot Act against the American people. And, it will.
     When the Trading With the Enemy Act of 1917 was enacted during World War I, it provided fines and imprisonment for those who conducted “unauthorized” commerce with enemy nations or allies of enemies without the consent of Woodrow Wilson. The Act, when it was written, expressly exempted private American citizens from its tenets. However, in 1933 when Congress enacted Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Emergency Banking Relief Act, it amended the Trading With the Enemy Act of 1917 to apply the punitive aspects of that legislation specifically against the American people, and effectively making the people of the United States enemies of its government. It was a slight of hand few noticed but was needed by Roosevelt to seize the gold coins and gold certificates owned by the American people. The Emergency Banking Relief Act of 1933 sped through Congress in one day, with 40-minutes of debate from each side of the aisle. Most of that time was consumed arguing that Congress had not been allowed to even see the bill they were being asked to vote on. The Democratic majority in both Houses rammed the bill through, and by the evening on March 9, 1933 it had been entered, debated and enacted. Before he went to bed that evening, FDR signed it into law. Now, 70 years later, with the negative connotations of that legislation duly codified into law, the American people remain enemies of their own government.
     Today the federal government liberally applies the provisions of RICO--a law enacted solely to seize the financial assets of known mobsters and drug dealers--against any high profile person they arrest. RICO violates the 4th Amendment prohibition from unlawful seizure because it seizes the assets of the accused, not the guilty. And, it hinders the accused from securing adequate legal representation by seizing the funds the accused would use to pay for an attorney. The USA Patriot Act further allows the president to set up military tribunals by Executive Order and determine who will come under their jurisdiction. Also allowed is the retention of suspects without charge--even when no crime has been committed--for unspecified periods of time. Even worse is the relaxing of FBI surveillance guidelines with respect to political activity in America.
     When Homeland Security became a reality, the second Bush Administration called a key GOP player out of retirement to head up one of the most sensitive, critical programs to be created by the Homeland Security Act: Total Information Awareness [TIA]. That man was Admiral John Poindexter. Bush liked Poindexter for two reasons. First, Poindexter was the man whose brain spawned Iran-Contra, in which the Reagan Administration swapped airplane parts to Iran for the cash to arm the Contras. Second, Poindexter shielded President Ronald Reagan and took the fall. Poindexter, like Marine Lt. Col. Ollie North, was convicted with immunized testimony. Both men were exonerated on appeal when their convictions were overturned. Poindexter’s new assignment, TIA, authorizes the federal government to build an electronic dossier on the personal lives of all Americans. The new databases will be filed in the new top secret National Identification Center in Virginia. The Center was covertly funded by the first Bush presidency and built by Bill Clinton. It existence was first revealed by former House Appropriations Chairman Neal Smith [D-IO] who was defeated for reelection in 1994 by GOP neophyte Dr. Greg Ganske when the Republicans captured control of Congress for the first time since the late 1940s.
     Civil libertarians and both conservative and liberal privacy-rights advocates fought the passage of the USA Patriot Act, the Financial Anti-Terrorism Act which expanded the government’s right to dig into the personal financial holdings, bank records, and financial transactions of every American, and many of the more dangerous aspects of the Homeland Security Act that gives the president dictatorial powers and allows Homeland Security to function as the president’s personal Gestapo or KGB. Just as they did when Congress tried to abrogate the Bill of Rights in 1995, liberal and conservative personal liberty advocates joined forces to fight the bureaucracy that was attempting to steal their liberty. But this time, foreign terrorists had successfully penetrated America’s illusionary shield of security and committed not one but several acts of terrorism on American soil.
     The Nation, long a magazine that championed the pro-communist left, rightly denounced the USA Patriot Act as an unconstitutional piece of legislation. The San Francisco Chronicle declared that the Bush Administration was “...fighting terrorism by terrifying US citizens.” The Washington Post--the second most liberal newspaper in the United States--called the legislation “Orwellian,” equating it with George Orwell’s “1984.” Information about the Total Information Awareness initiative became public information when the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Pentagon’s central research and development section) began soliciting proposals in March, 2002. But not even the media paid any attention to its significance until Congress began debating the Homeland Security bill in November and New York Times columnist William Safire attacked the TIA initiative it as “...George Orwell’s 1984 come to life.” Safire said: “To this computerized dossier on your private life from commercial sources, add every piece of information that government has about you--passport application[s], driver’s license and bridge toll records, judicial and divorce records, complaints from nosy neighbors to the FBI, your lifetime paper trail plus the latest hidden-camera surveillance--and you have the supersnoop’s dream...” When it was revealed that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had hired Poindexter, Sen. Charles Schumer [D-NY] in a television interview, demanded that Rumsfeld fire him.
     In 1995 it was conservatives like Helen Chenoweth Hage, Bob Barr, Ron Paul and Tom DeLay in the House of Representatives that fought the unconstitutional aspects of H.R. 666 and caused a modified bill, H.R. 2703, to be enrolled as the Anti-Terrorist Act. It was H.R. 2703 that finally passed. The liberals, solidly behind the Clinton anti-terrorism bill, fought hard to unconstitutionally abolish the Bill of Rights legislatively.  They were defeated.
     Today, the roles have flip-flopped. When the USA Patriot Act and the Homeland Security Act were debated in Congress, it was the GOP (under pressure from the Bush White House) who was eager to legislatively abolish the Bill of Rights, and it was the Democrats who fought to protect the civil liberties and personal freedoms of the American people. This time, the people lost. The bills were enacted and signed into law.
     Aside from the members of Congress on both sides of the aisle who fought for, or against, the legislation, it was a strange coalition of left-wing activists, right-wing gun rights advocates, Islamic terrorist sympathizers and both pro- and anti-Zionists who collaborated to defeat a bill that would greatly restrict personal liberty in America. The coalition itself raised questions of whether it was time for the American people (as had the peoples of most of Europe’s democracies prior to the start of World War II) to ask just how much liberty could they afford to surrender in exchange for living safe and secure.
     It was a question that is a very sharp, two-edged sword. Any voluntary abrogation of liberty is very likely the first step to the total abrogation of real personal freedom based on the utopian notion that “personal rights” are not inherent, but are merely grants from a benevolent government. If our rights are conditional, then whenever it is necessary for the security of the nation, the government possesses the right to withdraw, or limit, those liberties. The people living under every totalitarian regime in the world are “secure” only as long as they don’t step outside the narrowly-defined boundaries their limited freedom provides.
     On the other side of that sharp, two-edged sword, the only way to prevent another World Trade Center disaster, is for the federal government to be proactive. The federal and State law enforcement agencies must ferret out terrorist cell groups before they blow up buildings, and maim and kill, or before they release Sarin gas in a subway or a crowded mall, or explode a radiological bomb in a metropolitan area during rush hour. To do this, the FBI, the BATF, FEMA and State, county and local police agencies must have the legal right, with probable cause, to covertly investigate those suspected of planning terrorist acts, or those who may be aiding and abetting terrorism by knowingly providing those engaged in the planning or perpetuation of terrorism (whether foreign or domestic) with safe harbor.
     The problem with the current anti-terrorism legislation is that the abrogation of privacy rights is far too broad. The Homeland Security Act allows the federal government to amass a plethora of information on every person in the United States simply for the purpose of amassing a gargantuan database on everyone, but does not change the decade-old perception that profiling those who characteristically will be most likely to commit a terrorist act--Muslims--is wrong when the Jihad against America and the industrial nations of the world was launched by Islamic extremists, and all of the “soldiers” in this war are Islamic.
     Tragically, the Democrat’s defense of the Bill of Rights was not launched to protect the traditional rights of the traditional middle class American. Rather, their fight was initiated to protect the special rights of the politically correct Americans. And, for that reason they lost.
     We, the American public, allowed a cadre of wealthy elites to buy the allegiance and loyalty of those we elected to represent our interests before the government of the United States. We, the American public, turned our heads as those politicians enacted legislation specifically to benefit the money barons and hamstring those attempting to compete with them in the free enterprise arena until the money barons became so powerful they could not be stopped. And, when the money barons decided that a global economy, managed by a global government controlled by them, was in the best interests of the world, we stood silently by as money purchased the judges needed to judicially reinterpretation of our “franchise” under the Bill of Rights, abridging our rights and our liberty until we can no longer legally protest the abrogation of our freedom, nor can we effectively petition government to address our grievances.
     As the antiwar doves, the gun-rights advocates, the privacy rights groups, and the bleeding heart liberals wanting to protect the rights of the Islamic terrorists who have not yet attached bomb belts to their waists, vehemently protest the newest abrogation of the Bill of Rights, we are obligated to examine a complex issue that should not require debate. Had we been good stewards of our liberty for the past 100 years, we would not need to.
     America is now under siege.
     Because al Qaeda and Muslim extremists in the Iraqi and Syrian governments helped plan and execute the attack on America on September 11, 2001, the United States is obligated to wage war on those who brought death and destruction to American soil. If we do not, this nation--and the American people--will never be safe. It is unfortunate that we have been caught up in a dichotomy of events that will ultimately set the stage for final showdown of mankind in the Valley of Megiddo. But first will come the defeat of Iraq and, with the help of the peacemaker, King Abdullah of Jordan, breakthrough peace in the Mideast.

     *David Rockefeller, the great grandson of John D. Rockefeller, Sr. heads the Rockefeller family’s Standard Oil dynasty. While Standard Oil and the Seven Sisters is the richest corporate conglomerate in the world, and the Rockefeller family is the wealthiest family in the world, Microsoft founder Bill Gates heads the Fortune 500 list which is actually limited to the “poor rich” in the United States and around the world. The poor rich are those who have not accumulated enough real wealth and power to become invisible to the scrutiny of both Congress and the common man. John D. Rockefeller who, like financier J.P. Morgan, was the most hated man in the world from 1880 until his death because of his competitive tactics, spent the last decades of his life trying to make his business dealings invisible. The world’s wealthiest bankers and industrialists all suffered from the same types of transparency issues since all of them were engaged in business dealings around the world--many times with enemies of the United States--that would appear questionable if the facts of their financial activities became public. In the United States, Rockefeller, Morgan, Carnegie, and most of the business tycoons of the 19th century came under fire from one Congressional committee or another more times than they cared to. The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1894 was enacted specifically to curb the financial excesses of John D. Rockefeller and Standard Oil. To them, invisibility was worth its weight in gold. Today, the founders of the New World Order--the wealthiest families in the world who share the ownership of the world’s central banks--have succeeded in becoming totally invisible. [Return]

     **The first attempt to create a world government occurred with the creation of the League of Nations at the end of the first world war. One of the provisions of the League charter was that all signatory nations would be obligated to surrender their external sovereignty to the world governing body, the League in the Hague. When the League was created, all nations in the world would then become vassal states of the supra-global government in Brussels. [Return]

     ***While a good many Americans poophah the notion that any group of people, regardless how wealthy they may be, had enough power to overwhelm the governments of the nations of the world and create a global government controlled exclusively by them or their agents, it is important to remember that in 1908 a small group of powerful bankers with the aid of a handful of American Congressmen and Senators headed by John D. Rockefeller, Jr.’s father-in-law, Senator Nelson Aldrich [R-RI] creating a bank panic that collapsed the banking system of the United States, and then pushed the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 through Congress that gave those bankers complete and arbitrary control over the creation of the money supply of the United States in which they would be allowed to create America’s currency from nothing--and then charge the government interest for borrowing the money they created from nothing. Further, it is incomprehensible that this same group of bankers could successfully foist two Constitutional amendments on the American people that had never legally been ratified. The 16th Amendment (which created the income tax) and the 17th Amendment (which took all power away from the States and gave it to the federal bureaucracy) were fraudulently ratified. This was acknowledged by US Assistant Attorney General David Brown on May 23, 1985 in the case United States v George and Marion House. After examining documents submitted by the Houses’ attorney, Lowell Becraft, Brown admitted that Secretary of State Philander Knox and Solicitor General Joshua Reuben Clark committed a crime by declaring these amendments as ratified, but that because 72 years had passed since the crime had been committed, it was not the government’s problem since they had made thousands of judicial decisions based on their belief that they had been properly ratified. In other words, he maintained because the government accepted the ratification on good faith, a 72-year old fraud on the part of a long dead Secretary of State was inconsequential, and the government was not obligated to create a red herring by investigating it.” (WHATEVER HAPPENED TO AMERICA?; Jon Christian Ryter; Hallberg Publishing © 2000; pg. 139.) [Return]

     Interestingly, the CFR backed conservative Ronald Reagan in 1980 instead of their prize president, Jimmy Carter (who caved in to them completely on socialist foreign policy issues) because the CFR was not sure they could stop the Reagan express. And, because he was not sure he could win without their backing, Reagan cut a deal that placed an inner circulate CFR member, George H.W. Bush, on his ticket. Reagan also allowed the CFR to select most of his key appointees. Nevertheless, the CFR continued to mistrust Reagan because he mistrusted them and he initially campaigned against both the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission. Three months after his inauguration, John Hinckley appeared out of nowhere, and as Reagan left the Washington Hilton after delivering a speech, shot him with a .22 caliber pistol, narrowly missing Reagan’s heart. [Return]

     ¶¶Counterfeiting is a crime punishable by imprisonment for from 20 years to life. Why? We have been told by our government that it is because the counterfeiter who clones the currency of the realm creates a replica of the monetary unit that has no inherent value because it is not backed by anything. Yet, on December 23, 1917 the Congress of the United States surrendered the power to create, and print, the currency of the realm to seven key banking families in the United States and around 200 banking families around the world. When the Emergency Banking Relief Act of 1933 was enacted on March 9, 1933 and America’s monetary system was removed from the gold standard, the currency of the United States--like any counterfeit dollar in circulation at that time--was redeemable for nothing. [Return]

     ¶¶¶That is precisely what happened after the made-for-TV spectacle that history remembers as August, 1991 coup that theoretically brought about the collapse of the Soviet Union. When “hardliners” took Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev and his family captive at their dacha on the Black Sea, and Moscow mayor Boris Yeltsin (in a scene reminiscent of Massachusetts governor Michael Dukakis on the national guard tank) jumped on the turret of a T-45 Soviet tank and stood down the Politburo, bringing an end to the Cold War few people realized that even though the hardliners had supposedly declared a news blackout, CNN recorded the event for posterity--and broadcast the fall of communism live all over the world. With the introduction of “competitive” free enterprise in the former Soviet Union, there is a rising oligarchy of merchant princes in Russia. Unfortunately, all of them are former members of the Politburo. The free enterprise system in Russia is a sham. Only the “favored” are allowed to participate in the dream of equality even though all are ostensibly offered the opportunity to compete. [Return]

     *¶As hard as it is to believe, all of the industrialized nations enacted legislation during World War I that allowed a very select group of multi-national merchant princes to profit by selling not only food stuffs, clothing, and other essential and non-essential goods, but the machinations of war as well to enemies and allies of enemies who were engaged in conflict against them. In the United States that legislation was called the Trading With the Enemy Act of 1917. While the title of the bill suggested it was a piece of legislation that would aggressively punish any American company that traded with Austro-Hungary or Germany during the war, in reality, it merely banned small national companies in the United States from competing for business with enemy nations or with allies of enemy nations during times of war. The Trading With the Enemy Act of 1917 allowed the President of the United States to give waivers to any company he desired. Those corporations were allowed to trade with enemy states with impunity. Woodrow Wilson regularly exempted giant American corporations like Standard Oil, J.P. Morgan, Carnegie Steel, DuPont, McCormick, and hundreds of others whose trade deals with belligerent nations continued uninterrupted throughout the war. At the end of World War II, the British parliament discovered that the privately-owned Bank of England (which is the central bank of Great Britain) had granted extensive loans to the Third Reich. What that meant was that the tax payers of Great Britain financed the V-2 bombs that had been dropped on London during the war. The discovery angered the House of Commons so much that, in 1946, Parliament revoked the charter of the Bank of England and assumed ownership of the bank. Fearing that the private bankers of the world’s strongest central banks would collapse the economy of England--and pressured to do so by the Federal Reserve of the United States and J.P. Morgan & Company which acted as the official financial voice of the Harding and Coolidge administrations--the British government surreptitiously reinstated the private ownership of the Bank of England to the money Mafia. [Return]

     **¶Most people do not realize that both the United States and the Soviet Union were economic systems based on capitalism. Capitalism and communism were words that were erroneously associated with political systems. America, was a free enterprise economic system. The Soviet Union was a state-controlled economic system Both were based on capitalism. In the Soviet Union all capital was owned by the State. In a free enterprise system, the capital is owned by the entrepreneurs who invested it in capital operations. Inherent to the free enterprise system is commercial and investment banking that provides the capital incentives for economic growth. Under Islam, usury is a violation of the Qur’an (Koran). The “modern” Islamic society today remains an ancient feudal society in which tribal chieftains are the law, and the people remain as much their chattel as fiefs in medieval days during the Dark Ages belonged to the Manor born. [Return]

     ***¶Over the years, several conspiracy authors (all of them self-published) have written books suggesting that Hinckley’s parents were friends of George H.W. Bush and that a conspiracy existed in which George H.W. Bush--or an underling working for him--convinced young Hinckley that he could win the affection of actress Jodie Foster if he successfully assassinated Reagan. While it is obvious that someone approached Hinckley and convinced him that Foster would admire him if he was successful, it was not Bush...nor was it anyone connected with the 41st president. It is obvious based on the fact that Hinckley was allowed to get inside the security perimeter and walk up to Reagan’s limousine--with a Secret Service agent at the wheel, lean over the roof of the limo, aim a .22 caliber revolver and fire six shoots before he was brought to the ground. The conspiracy writers who have written on the subject claim there was a close personal relationship between the Hinckleys and the Bushes. That may or may not be true. If there was such a friendship, logic suggests Hinckley would have been the last person Bush or someone working for him would have approached to commit such an act since the family friendship would be quickly revealed by some hotshot reporter looking for a Pulitzer. It never happened. There is no doubt there was a conspiracy in the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan. But, the primary conspirator was not George H.W. Bush. Nor was it anyone working for him. Nor did he have an inkling such a thing was “scheduled” to happen on March 30, 1981. [Return]

     ***¶¶When Lenin reneged on his deal with Rockefeller, Carnegie and the American International Corporation and took $50 million from them but refused to give Rockefeller promised control the Baku oil fields, Rockefeller used his influence to keep American troops fighting in Russia for 16 months after World War I had concluded. American Expeditionary forces and the British army captured the Baku oil fields and held them under April 28, 1920 not because there was a military or political objective that was vital to the national security of the United States or England, but because Standard Oil was convinced it had paid for the oil in 1917...and they (and the British who had controlled those oil fields under Tsar Nicholas II) wanted it. [Return]

     ***¶¶¶It is a safe bet that former GOP Senator Majority Leader Trent Lott [MS], who fell from grace shortly after the GOP regained control of the US Senate in 2002 will not seek reelection in 2006. [Return]

     ****Lafayette C. Baker was handpicked by Edwin Stanton to head the collections division of the Internal Revenue Service when it was created in 1862. The IRS was used to seize the assets of “Southern sympathizers” in the Union, and to dispose of the property of Southerner plantation owners at the end of the war to punish them for choosing the wrong side in the conflict). With the rank of full colonel in the Union Army, and reporting directly to Stanton, Baker was also named to command the White House detail of the Secret Service whose job it was to protect the life of the President and Vice President. Prior to the creation of the Secret Service, the Pinkerton Detective Agency held that responsibility. Baker, in his deathbed confession (sequestered in the Library of Congress even though an 8-page addendum that named 88 fellow-conspirators who share culpability in the assassination of Lincoln, was removed and no longer exists) named Stanton, Chase, Summers and Stevens as the ringleaders with whom he had personal knowledge. John Wilkes Booth, Baker said, was promised $85,000 to carry out the assassination of Lincoln at Ford’s Theater According to Baker, minutes before Booth entered Lincoln’s private box, he removed the Secret Service detail, giving Booth unfettered access to Lincoln. It is unclear who was supposed to murder Andrew Johnson at the same time. [Return]




Just Say No
Copyright 2009 Jon Christian Ryter.
All rights reserved