----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Myers"
myers@cyberone.com.au
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 12:23 PM
Subject: The Oligarchs, or How the Virgin Became a Whore, by URI AVNERY
1. Some of my Fan Mail
2. The Oligarchs, or How the Virgin Became a Whore, by URI AVNERY
3. - 5. Suspects Israel Has Spy at Pentagon

1. Peter Myers: Some of my Fan Mail
This letter has the subject-line "Jews":
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 18:02:18 +1000 From: "John Reisner" <...> To:
myers@cyberone.com.au
I don't understand your problem. Jews are not permitted to defend their
interests as they see them, is that it? In short, Jews are not permitted
human traits or failings, right? Is this so we can say Jews are not
human and so it's O.K. to try and get rid of them..... again? Now let's
see, what do we call this? Its the same old song.
The historical advantages of Jews has been completely eroded by the fact
of universal education. Modern society is a triumph of Jewish
educational values. Do you propose to un-educate the Western world so
you can keep people within the Church doctrine of "pray, pay and obey"??
Why can't Jews pusue their political, social or economic interests like
anybody else?
What is it that Jews do that is unfair, exactly?
Have you ever considered the fact that Jews mobilise themselves exactly
because other groups mobilise themselves in order to destroy them?
Muslim influence in Congress is not illigitimate but Jewish influence
is? How does this work?
America is the richest most powerful country in the history of the
world. And you say Jews run it. Why are people banging down the doors to
get into these places? Why aren't they trying to get into places where
there are no Jews, say like Saudia Arabia, Yemen, Sudan or Jordan?
Why the fuck don't you go and live in one of those places?
The premise that Jews improperly organise themselves (whatever that
means) to advance their causes or their perceived interests, just as any
other minority or other group does, is just plain racist bullshit
dressed up as some "intellectualised" crap about the detrimental
influence of Jews. It is just a Medaevil accusation of witchcraft
reworked for the present and trying to avoid all the laughter.
If Jews (and witches) were and are so powerful why the fuck are jerks
like you allowed to run around and stir up trouble for them and burn
them at the stake? Why don't you fear to bring up this drivel ? Because
its the exact opposite. You can't call Muslims the truth of what they
are, but about Jews you can say anything, particularly lies and not
worry about any reprisal risk. This is the truth and the consistency of
the Christian pre-occupation with contradiction by ascribing great
effort and moral courage where in fact there is none and where moral
weakness and depravity is touted as moral excellence and "intellectual
inquiry", because, you guys love to hate and hating is what you do best.
You just can't stand a society based upon meritocracy rather than race
or religion or some other group definition that preferences yourself
over others.
Apart from this I can't see what the fuck you are drving at, as if this
wasn't enough. What the fuck has Judaism ever done to you? I'll tell you
what, you owe it everything and you would be a bigger nothing without
it, that's why you hate it.
Peter Myers replies: my reply has the subject-line "swearing is no
substitute for debate":
John,
Thanks for your letter.
Well, Jews seem to largely run the US. Do you deny that? Why can't it be
said in public, without the accusation of "antisemitism"?
You say it's the richest country. What about the foreign debt? What
about the jobs shipped overseas?
2. The Oligarchs, or How the Virgin Became a Whore, by URI AVNERY
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 21:19:24 +0200 From: "Kristoffer Larsson"
kristoffer.larsson@flamman.se
Your interesting piece "History of the USSR" reminded me of this article
below by Uri Avnery. From time to time, he actually produces great
articles (even thought it might be seldom seldom) and this is definitely
one of those.
There´s no doubt the Jewish elite is powerful. But how has it managed to
get this powerful? As Avnery mentions in his piece, six out of seven
oligarchs are Jews. In the US, the situation isn´t much better. As my
good friend Israel Shamir writes in his great essay "The Shadow of Zog":
Jeff Blankfort writes, "Ardently pro-Israel American Jews are in
positions of unprecedented influence within the United States and have
assumed or been given decision making positions over virtually every
segment of our culture and body politic". And he quotes Benjamin
Ginsberg's "The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State":
"Jews played a central role in American finance during the 1980s, and
they were among the chief beneficiaries of that decade's corporate
mergers and reorganizations. Today, though barely 2 % of the nation's
population is Jewish, close to half its billionaires are Jews. The chief
executive officers of the three major television networks and the four
largest film studios are Jews, as are the owners of the nation's largest
newspaper chain and the most influential single newspaper, the New York
Times".
(
http://www.israelshamir.net/english/shadowofzog.html)
I can't provide You with the answer to my question above, since I don't
know the answer to it. However, we have to look at it from the bright
side - the Jewish elite will probably never be as powerful in the future
as it is today.
Best wishes Kristoffer Larsson Stockholm, Sweden
The Oligarchs Or How the Virgin Became a Whore
http://www.counterpunch.com/avnery08032004.html
By URI AVNERY
This is a TV series about Russia. But it could have been about Israel.
Or about the United States. It is entitled "The Oligarchs" and is now
being screened on Israeli television.
Some of its episodes are simply unbelievable--or would have been, if
they had not come straight from the horses' mouths: the heroes of the
story, who gleefully boast about their despicable exploits. The series
was produced by Israeli immigrants from Russia.
The "oligarchs" are a tiny group of entrepreneurs who exploited the
disintegration of the Soviet system to loot the treasures of the state
and to amass plunder amounting to hundreds of billions of dollars. In
order to safeguard the perpetuation of their business, they took control
of the state. Six out of the seven are Jews.
In popular parlance they are called "oligarchs"--from the Greek word
meaning "rule of the few".
In the first years of post-Soviet Russian capitalism they were the bold
and nimble ones who knew how to exploit the economic anarchy in order to
acquire enormous possessions for a hundredth or a thousandth of their
value: oil, natural gas, nickel and other minerals. They used every
possible trick, including cheating, bribery and murder. Every one of
them had a small private army. In the course of the series they are
proud to tell in great detail how they did it.
But the most intriguing part of the series recounts the way they took
control of the political apparatus. After a period of fighting each
other, they decided that it would be more profitable for them to
cooperate in order to take over the state.
At the time, President Boris Yeltsin was in a steep decline. On the eve
of the new elections for the presidency, his rating in public opinion
polls stood at 4%. He was an alcoholic with a severe heart disease,
working about two hours a day. The state was, in practice, ruled by his
bodyguard and his daughter; corruption was the order of the day.
The oligarchs decided to take power through him. They had almost
unlimited funds, control of all TV channels and most of the other media.
They put all these at the disposal of Yeltsin's reelection campaign,
denying his opponents even one minute of TV time and pouring huge sums
of money into the effort. (The series omits an interesting detail: they
secretly brought over the most outstanding American election experts and
copywriters, who applied methods previously unknown in Russia.)
The campaign bore fruit: Yeltsin was indeed reelected. On the very same
day he had another heart attack and spent the rest of his term in
hospital. In practice, the oligarchs ruled Russia. One of them, Boris
Berezovsky, appointed himself Prime Minister. There was a minor scandal
when it became known that he (like most of the oligarchs) had acquired
Israeli citizenship, but he gave up his Israeli passport and everything
was in order again.
By the way, Berezovsky boasts that he caused the war in Chechnya, in
which tens of thousands have been killed and a whole country devastated.
He was interested in the mineral resources and a prospective pipeline
there. In order to achieve this he put an end to the peace agreement
that gave the country some kind of independence. The oligarchs dismissed
and destroyed Alexander Lebed, the popular general who engineered the
agreement, and the war has been going on since then.
In the end, there was a reaction: Vladimir Putin, the taciturn and tough
ex-KGB operative, assumed power, took control of the media, put one of
the oligarchs (Mikhail Khodorkovsky) in prison, caused the others to
flee (Berezovsky is in England, Vladimir Gusinsky is in Israel, another,
Mikhail Chernoy, is assumed to be hiding here.)
Since all the exploits of the oligarchs occurred in public, there is a
danger that the affair might cause an increase in anti-Semitism in
Russia. Indeed, the anti-Semites argue that these doings confirm the
"Protocols of the Elders of Zion", a document fabricated by the Russian
secret police a century ago, purporting to reveal a Jewish conspiracy to
control the world.
Moving from Russia to America--the same thing happened, of course, in
the US, but more than a hundred years ago. At the time, the great
"robber barons", Morgan, Rockefeller at al., all of them good
Christians, used very similar methods to acquire capital and power on a
massive scale. Today, it works in far more refined ways.
In the present election campaign, the candidates collect hundreds of
millions of dollars. George W. Bush and John Kerry both brag about their
talent for raising enormous sums of money. >From whom? From pensioners?
From the mythical "old lady in tennis shoes"? Of course not, but from
the cabals of billionaires, the giant corporations and powerful lobbies
(arms dealers, Jewish organiztions, doctors, lawyers and such). Many of
them give money to both candidates--just to be on the safe side.
All of these expect, of course, to receive a generous bonus when their
candidate is elected. "There is no such thing as a free lunch", as the
right-wing economist Milton Friedman wrote. As in Russia, every dollar
(or ruble) invested wisely in an election will yield a ten- or
hundred-fold return.
The problem is rooted in the fact that presidential candidates (and all
other candidates for political office) need ever increasing amounts of
money. Elections are mainly fought out on TV and cost huge sums. It is
not a coincidence that all the present candidates in the US are
multi-millionaires. The Bush family has amassed a fortune from the oil
business (helped by its political connections, of course.) Kerry is
married to one of the richest women in America, who was once the wife of
the ketchup king, Henry John Heinz. Dick Cheney was the chief of a huge
corporation that has garnered contracts worth billions in Iraq. John
Edwards, candidate for Vice President, has made a fortune as a trial
lawyer.
From time to time there is talk in America about reforming election
finances, but nothing worthwhile ever comes of it. None of the oligarchs
has any interest in changing a system that enables them to buy the
government of the United States.
In Israel, too, talk about "Money and Power" is now in vogue. Ariel
Sharon and one of his two sons have been suspected of accepting bribes
from a real estate magnate. An indictment was blocked by the new
Attorney General who happened to be appointed by the Sharon government
at the height of the affair. Another investigation into Sharon and his
sons is still pending. It concerns millions of dollars that reached his
election coffers by roundabout routes, crossing three continents.
Shimon Peres' connections with multi-millionaires are well-known, as are
the huge sums poured out by American Jewish multi-millionaires for
extreme right-wing causes in Israel. One of the Russian oligarchs is the
part-owner of the second biggest Israeli newspaper.
A political scandal concerning the Israeli Minister for Infrastructure
has mushroomed into an affair involving giant multi-national
corporations competing for contracts for supplying natural gas to the
Israeli Electricity Company, an affair of billions in which underworld
figures, politicians and private investigators play their parts. This
disclosure has made it clear to Israelis that here, too, politicians of
the highest rank have long ago been acting as mercenaries for powerful
financial interests.
These facts must alarm everybody who cares about democracy--in Israel,
Russia, the United States and elsewhere. Oligarchy and democracy are
incompatible. As a Russian commentator in the TV series said about the
new Russian democracy: "They have turned a virgin into a whore."
Uri Avnery is an Israeli writer and peace activist with Gush Shalom. He
is one of the writers featured in The Other Israel: Voices of Dissent
and Refusal. He is also a contributor to CounterPunch's hot new book The
Politics of Anti-Semitism. He can be reached at:
avnery@counterpunch.org.
3. Israeli Spy Scandal Erupting
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 09:05:11 -0400 From: "MER - Washington Scene"
MERL@middleeast.org
DOUG FEITH, TOP DEPUTY TO RUMSFELD AND WOLFOWITZ AT THE PENTAGON, HAS
EXTENSIVE PERSONAL CONNECTIONS TO ISRAEL AND THE ISRAELI/JEWISH LOBBY
MER - MiddleEast.Org - Washington - 27 August 2004:
This latest Israeli spy scandal has connections to the very top of the
Pentagon. The analyst involved is thought to have been hired by and
worked for non other than Douglas Feith, a man long considered by many
insiders to be a kind long-time Jewish lobby operative in Washington and
a man known to have long and deep connections to the Sharon regime in
Israel.
Now those who are familiar with MER know that we have for a long time
pointed culpability fingers at the extensive Israeli-Jewish lobby in
Washington; to the many ties between the Israelis and the top Jewish
neocons in the Bush government, including Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas
Feith at the Pentagon and Eliott Abrams at the N.S.C. No doubt they are
all working furiously now to contain and cover up this latest Israeli
spy scandal, as they have so many times before. And in all likelihood,
one way or another, they will succeed in doing so especially as neither
of the political parties will dare risk truly offending 'the lobby' and
Israel during this crucial pre-election season.
Many, most no doubt, of these kinds of things relating to Israel never
get out into the public domain; they are buried and sucked up into
official Washington where so many have so many reasons for always
wanting to hush such things up. But there should be no doubt that the
Israelis have infiltrated at many levels and greatly influenced in many
ways U.S. policies in the Middle East, especially of late the decision
to invade and occupy Iraq.
The following quick list of past Israeli spy scandals all of which were
covered up or sucked in one way or another include:
* Israeli Attack on U.S.S. Liberty - 1967 * Steve Bryent Israeli Spying
Scandal - 1982 * Jonathan Pollard Arrested outside Israeli Embassy -
1985 * AIPAC infiltration scandal, President forced to resign - 1991 *
Mossad bugging of Clinton and Monica - 1997 * Martin Indyk's Security
Clearances 'temporarily' suspended - 2000
FBI Probes Pentagon Spy Case
Aug. 27, 2004
(CBS) CBS News has learned that the FBI has a full-fledged espionage
investigation under way and is about to -- in FBI terminology -- "roll
up" someone agents believe has been spying not for an enemy, but for
Israel from within the office of the Secretary of Defense at the
Pentagon.
60 Minutes Correspondent Lesley Stahl reports the FBI believes it has
"solid" evidence that the suspected mole supplied Israel with classified
materials that include secret White House policy deliberations on Iran.
At the heart of the investigation are two people who work at The
American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a powerful pro-Israel
lobby in Washington.
The FBI investigation, headed up by Dave Szady, has involved wiretaps,
undercover surveillance and photography that CBS News was told document
the passing of classified information from the mole, to the men at
AIPAC, and on to the Israelis.
CBS sources say that last year the suspected spy, described as a trusted
analyst at the Pentagon, turned over a presidential directive on U.S.
policy toward Iran while it was, "in the draft phase when U.S.
policy-makers were still debating the policy."
This put the Israelis, according to one source, "inside the
decision-making loop" so they could "try to influence the outcome."
The case raises another concern among investigators: Did Israel also use
the analyst to try to influence U.S. policy on the war in Iraq?
With ties to top Pentagon officials Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith,
the analyst was assigned to a unit within the Defense Department tasked
with helping develop the Pentagon's Iraq policy.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has been made aware of the case. The
government notified AIPAC today that it wants information about the two
employees and their contacts with a person at the Pentagon.
AIPAC told CBS News it is cooperating with the government and has hired
outside counsel. It denies any wrongdoing by the organization or any of
its employees.
An Israeli spokesman said, "We categorically deny these allegations.
They are completely false and outrageous." The suspected spy has not
returned repeated phone calls from CBS News.
4. Israeli spies
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 08:49:03 EDT From:
Hudsonmi@aol.com To:
thomas.naylor@mcgill.ca
Dear Tom,
Can you not have heard the news? Last night CBS's lead item by Diane
Sawyer was that the FBI had found a spi from Israel in the Pentagon, in
Douglas Feith's office, who passed secret information on to AIPAC which
in turn passed it onto Israel, and sought to influence US policy toward
Iran. Today's New York Times adds that there were a number of espionage
cases that were hushed up as a result of political pressure from Israel,
and that the official involved met with America's old arms-dealer
contacts from the Iran-Contra scandal.
Why is this information being released right now? Ostensibly, it would
seem because this shows that Bush's neocon team was influenced by a
foreign government (despite CBS's and the NYT's protestations that
Israel was our closest ally).
But it seems to me that this will really put Kerry on the spot. AIPAC
has given him a 100% rating -- in other words, in every single vote
concerning Israel, he has voted the Likud line. In a speech last month,
Kerry praised Sharon and the Wall, which the rest of the UN has
condemned, and so forth.
This suggests that the anti-war group in the US, who would erstwhile
vote for Kerry, may see his silence in not pursuing this election-season
scandal as complicity, and simply stay home. For him NOT to seize upon
this and make it the center-piece of his campaign -- thereby making the
entire campaign's focus the disastrous war in Iraq -- will be the
equivalent of the "dog that did not bark."
It also will show the Europeans where things stand in the US. And it
even will give the Republicans a chance to say, "See, Kerry's on our
side, as Bush Lite."
Michael Hudson
5. FBI Suspects Israel Has Spy at Pentagon
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 09:54:26 EDT From:
Medialightning@aol.com
FBI Suspects Israel Has Spy at Pentagon
Officials Trying to Determine Whether Analyst Passed Secrets on Iran
By CURT ANDERSON, AP
WASHINGTON (Aug. 28) -- In a spy investigation that could strain
U.S.-Israeli relations and muddy the Bush administration's Middle East
policy, the FBI is investigating whether a Pentagon analyst fed to
Israel secret materials about White House deliberations on Iran.
No arrests have been made, said two federal law enforcement officials,
speaking on condition of anonymity because of the continuing
investigation. A third law enforcement official, also speaking
anonymously, said an arrest in the case could come as early as next
week.
The officials refused to identify the Pentagon employee under
investigation but said the person is an analyst in the office of Douglas
J. Feith, undersecretary of defense for policy, the Pentagon's No. 3
official.
The link to Feith's office also could prove politically sensitive for
the Bush administration.
Feith is an influential aide to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld who
works on sensitive policy issues including U.S. policy toward Iraq and
Iran. Feith's office includes a cadre assigned specifically to work on
Iran.
Getty Images
The Israeli Embassy in Washington, D.C., has denied the allegations of
espionage, calling them "false and outrageous.''
He also oversaw the Pentagon's defunct Office of Special Plans, which
critics said fed policy-makers uncorroborated prewar intelligence on
President Saddam Hussein's Iraq, especially involving purported ties
with the al-Qaida terror network. Pentagon officials have said the
office was a small operation that provided fresh analysis on existing
intelligence.
The Pentagon said in a statement that the investigation involves an
employee at ''the desk officer level, who was not in a position to have
significant influence over U.S. policy. Nor could a foreign power be in
a position to influence U.S. policy through this individual.''
One of the law enforcement officials said the person was not in a
policy-making position but had access to extremely sensitive information
about U.S. policy toward Iran.
The investigation centers on whether the Pentagon analyst passed secrets
about Bush administration policy on Iran to the main pro-Israeli
lobbying group in Washington, the American Israel Public Affairs
Committee, which then was said to have given the secrets to the Israeli
government, one official said. Both AIPAC and Israel deny the
allegations.
President Bush has identified Iran as part of an ''axis of evil,'' along
with North Korea and the Iraqi government deposed by the U.S.-led
invasion last year.
Yet his administration has battled internally over how hard a line to
take toward Iran. The State Department generally has advocated more
moderate positions, while more conservative officials in the Defense
Department and some at the White House's National Security Council have
advocated tougher policies.
Israel, one of the United States' strongest allies, has worked behind
its conservative prime minister, Ariel Sharon, to push the Bush
administration toward more toughness against Iran. The Israeli tactics
have raised questions whether inside information may have been used to
try to influence U.S. policy.
David Siegel, a spokesman for the Israeli Embassy in Washington, said:
''We categorically deny these allegations. They are completely false and
outrageous.''
AIPAC said in a statement that the lobbying group was ''fully
cooperating with the governmental authorities and will continue to do
so.''
It said any allegation of criminal conduct by the group or its employees
was ''baseless and false,'' adding that it ''would not condone or
tolerate for a second any violation of U.S. law or interests.''
Pentagon officials refused to comment, referring all questions to the
Justice Department.
The Pentagon investigation has included wiretapping and surveillance and
searches of the suspected Pentagon employee's computer, the law
enforcement officials said.
Israel and Iran have been in an increasingly harsh war of words in
recent months. Senior Israeli officials have left open the possibility
of an Israeli attack on suspected Iranian nuclear weapons development
sites.
In response, Iran threatened last week to destroy Israel's Dimona
reactor should Israel carry out such an attack.
In 1981, Israel destroyed a nuclear facility in Iraq after becoming
suspicious that Saddam was developing a nuclear weapons capability.
Rep. Ike Skelton of Missouri, top Democrat on the House Armed Services
Committee, said he received information about the investigation before
news of it became public Friday and was ''deeply concerned and
angered.''
''This is a very, very serious allegation, and we just can't tolerate
anything like this at all,'' Skelton said.
Despite the close U.S.-Israeli relations, this is not the first
allegation of spying on Israel's behalf.
Jonathan Pollard, a former naval intelligence officer, was convicted of
giving top-secret documents to Israel in the mid-1980s. He continues to
be a point of contention in U.S.-Israeli relations. The Israeli
government has repeatedly pressed for his release, but intelligence
officials have called the information he passed to the Israelis highly
damaging.
Pollard was caught in Washington in November 1985, and was arrested
after unsuccessfully seeking refuge at the Israeli Embassy.
08-28-04 0716 EDT
Copyright 2004 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP
news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise
distributed without
http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20040827193309990002
[UGLY] Israeli spies
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:38:59 EDT From:
Hudsonmi@aol.com To:
sam.noumoff@MCGILL.CA
Dear Sam,
Yes, the timing would seem to be to embarrass Bush, and especially
Rumsfeld now that he denies that anyone was abused by interrogators in
Abu G.
But to be an embarrassment, someone on the other side has to hammer on
the point. What will Kerry do? He can't really hammer on it without
losing the support of AIPAC and pulling the whole Israel connection into
the Iraq war and current plans to extend the war to Syria and Iran. In
fact, Kerry is calling for a buildup of forces rather than withdrawal,
and for Europe and Asia to "share the burden" (and presumably suffer a
Spanish-style electoral defeat).
It looks to me like the key will be Europe, especially in view of the UN
vote against the Palestine Wall last week. This could be what fractures
the alliance.
But to do this, it is necessary for a major politician to ask
(1) what are the other instances of Israeli espionage that have been
hushed up in recent years, according to the New York Times;
(2) is AIPAC an agent of a foreign government;
(3) are neocons with joint-Israeli citizenship security risks?
(4) has AIPAC funding to politicians aimed at distorting the electoral
process (imagine if they were Chinese! Think of the last such instance.)
(5) did AIPAC/Israel provide false information regarding Iraq for its
own national purposes?
(6) is it doing so with regard to Iran and Syria?
(7) what should Europe's and Asia's position be with regard to financing
a new U.S. war against these two countries?
Michael Hudson

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 12:22 PM
Subject: The King & the NWO - the Final
Act of the Play, when we meet God
I have just returned from a 2-day
conference in Sydney, where I did an
unscheduled 15-minute presentation on the Three Factions of the One
World Conspiracy.
Of the 60 or so attendees, about half were supporters of the "White
Australia" policy. The others, like me, were more comfortable with
Multiculturalism and Aboriginal issues, but concerned about the
destruction of our Economy and the descent into Decadence.
In contemporary Newspeak terms, this conference would be branded
"Far
Right"; yet in the 1950s, many of the attendees would have been
branded
"Left" - that is, "Old Left".
One of the features was the showing of a film on 9/11 by Eric
Hufschmidt, called Painful Questions: An Analysis of the September
11th
Attack. This film likens 9/11 to the Reichstag fire.
I have the book that goes with the film, and will do a feature on
it,
plus provide details of how to buy a DVD or videotape copy. Not to
be
missed.

1. The King and the NWO - the Final Act of the Play, the moment
when we
meet God
2. "911 In Plane Site" - NOW
AVAILABLE WORLDWIDE!
3. Timeline for War, by John F.
Mahoney - NOT "A Must Read", BUT
"Rubbish"

1. The King and the NWO - the Final Act of the Play, the moment
when we
meet God
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 06:44:22 -0700 (PDT) From: anton kasa
<antonkasa@yahoo.com>
I was reading in Internet the webpage :
http://www.users.cyberone.com.au/myers/hiding.html
Are very interesting thoughts what you write there but still is
unclear
the origin of the Protocols and their prediction of what happen in
the
last century and today.
You go back in the Religion of Zoroaster and see it as a base for
all 3
religions and after as base of Communism and Nazism. The New Age is
different in looking at two forces positive and negative as one, the
same as in Budhism.The truth is that God, (or Nature, or Universe)
is
seeing from different points of view. You can see Him as two forces
in
one and as two separate forces and try to be in one of them. An
example
is Communism and Nazism, left and right wing forces. You can stand
from
one point of view and look at the other. What was better ? What was
worse? Sparta or Athens? Left or Right? East or West? We see them as
separate parts of the aisberg above the water but we dont see
anything
under the water, their base. It is just one under the magic of the
water.
The base is the same; they are parts of one Power that changes. We
all
are parts of it.
Who wrote the Protocols this is still unknown, but the two most
clever
groups that can write such things, so perfect in thoughts and
prediction
are ; Jesuits and Jews. They are so important now as they were in
the
last century, in which so many things happen as were predicted or
planed. It looks like they were writen from one point of view, the
jew's
view. In two forces one as light and other as darkness we see only
one,
the light. But still we dont know the truth who wrote them; jews or
jesuits or both. You can see one but you dont see the other one
playing
in the shadow. The world was and it is a war field and every player
has
played his role in it.There is blood and destruction everywhere. It
is a
Big Jungle. So it was since the Man was created. Man was the other
animal. Animals kill each other. Humans too. But still there are
changes. This means that there can be a point when the human animas
can
change and in stand of destroying and killing they can find a way
just
to build and perfect and live without killing and destroying each
other,
without the war, which before was open and now is more hidden.
Nations
can collapse the next day without understanding how did that happen.
Before, the nations where prepared for war, they were fighting and
they
understood in the end their fate. Today they dont. The world is
changing
fast and some forces help to stir it. Why? Because there is a New
Big
Transformation to come, as a new critical point and that is the NWO
and
the King who lead in it. These are the most important new things to
come
to the Scene. It is the Final Act of the Play. It is part of the
creation, its conclusion. All the story of human animals served for
this
that now is comming or is waiting for us to meet that point when the
big
Change and Transformation will happen. What will happen? Here is the
Picture of the NWO;
Imagine a world that has no real borders and looks like one big
modern
city where everywhere are nice glass buildings and all people have
their
apartment- homes in them and there are no businesses but the
factories
and robots which produce the goods that people design and want to
produce to perfect their life and their planet. This can be done
with
the intelect and the energy of the big human population and the
world
resources. There is not needed an overpopulation and a destruction
of
the world resorces. This has happen and it is happening because
there is
not the King and the NWO.
Let's talk now about the King. This point is very important because
it
is like the moment when we meet God. The King is like the God, where
the
two opposite forces that fight and change are as one. So we meet
someone
who is full one being and not as humans who are half of the full
one.
The human halfs fight each other like the separate jin and jang. The
King is both of them as one. He knows humans but they dont know him.
Look at the Cross. It is the symbol of four direction, or the Sun or
the
Star or the Circle.
That is the full oneness and humans are not like crosess but like
parts
of it. Some or horisontal and other are the vertical parts of the
Cross.So is their Athens and Sparta. So is their East and West. So
is
their left and right wing, their rich and poor, their man and woman.
Remember one is light and other is dark. One you like and other you
dont. One you see and other is hidden. But they are One. Their base
is
One. Human animals stand in one of them (half) and act as parts of
them.
The King is One (two halfs) and what people do is well know by him,
because He has all of them in him. He is an outsider but he is like
the
world and for that he know the world well and he know how to unite
it,
perfect it, change it, save it, transform and lead it. Human animals
can't do what He can do. They do the opposite. So without this King
there is no Salvation and Transformation that people wish for.
Animals
want to change and become real men and now the time for the change
has
come. This means that humans are not Man yet. The King is the Man.
The
humans are between the animal and the Man. Real Man is closer to
God.
Human animals are not. Still human animals are called Man because
that
is their mission to become Man.
Finally we have to say that the time has come for these animals to
meet
their King, the Man and this means that they must not kill him but
be
ruled and lead by him, by this Teacher of the human animals. The
Teacher
is the God energy that has enter to a man who looks and live as
human
animals. Of course there must be a very terrific thing to do this.
Imagine people start living with animals of the jungle and acting
and
living like them in the beasts enviroinment.
So is for God to become one between the human animals and live with
them, like them.
What happen when a man enter the jungle and live like Tarzan with
the
animals. The same thing happen to the King. This means that the King
is
here in the Jungle of the human animals and in the moment that he
becomes the King of the Jungle, we will get what we are looking for.
As
Tarzan that grow in the jungle so did this King grow and live.
God has created the perfect Picture, the Jungle and the King in it.
The
Jungle is going to be NWO and the King will be its ruler. So there
you
have two creations in one. They are made for each other. They just
need
to be one in the proper moment which is comming.
When that moment comes, human animals will see the finalization of
the
picture, of the God's Creation and they will see that which they
thought
was imposimble is possible, that which they called utopia is
realitet
and that which they called a myth, a dream, a lie is infact true.
People
can't believe what will happen because they coudn't do for centuries
what will be done for a short time. They will call it a miracle. The
fact is that there is no miracle but something normal. What did
happen
in the people's world was not normal. These means that what was
inside
the people minds and souls and acts was not normal, was crazy,
beastly
or unperfect, the same as comparing human with animal lifes. What we
find out when we analize them? Big Differences.
So is the King compare with the humans. But there is more
difference.
Remember we said that God's energy which is perfectness came to the
human body to grow the Tarzan or Hercules or Christ, the King who
live
with unclean, unperfected animals of the Human Jungle. This means
that
the King is the bridge between the Jungle and God, the unperfection
and
perfection. This means that the King is part Jungle and part
God.This
means that the King hate his part Jungle. He knows that he has to be
that way to rule and serve as the bridge to make the unperfect
perfect.
But he know what is the perfect.
To be so he has to make all human animals so to finish his mission
and
be clean again.
So the time has come for animals to be gods. First they have to be
humans. The king is the Human, the Man. Is he going to be in his
throne
soon? Do the animals let him be their king? Will they let him change
them? Will they approve their change, their salvation and
transformation? Will they stop being animals and starting to be
human
and gods? What is going on in the Jungle today? Is the proper moment
for
human animals to be real human as the King? Are they ready to enter
the
bridge to become perfect as God?
Look to the world and find out who is ready to walk first in that
bridge? The Europeans? The Asians? The Americans? The Africans? Who
? It
is said that they will enter all at once. This means that there is
waiting an open door for them. There is a king ready for them who
will
lead them in that door as sheeps who go back to enter their home,
the
NWO. This means that you will not have sheeps at home without him
who is
going to call and bring them home. When they hear his voice they
will
know that the time has come to go back where they came from. So keep
attention now. It is time for the call.
2. "911 In Plane Site" - NOW AVAILABLE WORLDWIDE!
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 21:12:50 EDT From:
Medialightning@aol.com
Video & Photographic Evidence of the Largest Cover up In Modern Day
History. <http://www.911inplanesite.com/>
*
*PRODUCER:* Dave vonKleist *DIRECTOR:* William Lewis
Folks:
My DVD copy of "911 In Plane Site" arrived a few days ago. I went to
our
family room and slipped it into our DVD player. Two of our sons,
Thomas
(7) and Andrew (2) were back there at the time. For a second I
almost
refrained from playing the DVD, but on second thought I decided to
go
ahead and play it while they were with me.
Born just 9 days after 9/11, Andrew of course is too young to make
any
sense of the event, much less the underlying images and message, but
you
would be surprised how open and refreshingly curious Thomas -
despite
his apostolic name - was as the production continued.
Thomas is an extremely attentive-aware 7 year old. He has an
incredible
eye for finding pretty much anything anywhere at anytime. From
quarters
to dollars to toys to even finding a way to recently hit over the
impossible three plastic cups at Six Flags Great America to win THE
biggest stuffed whale fish at the park.
About three quarters of the way through the DVD Thomas had assembled
a
mock wooden-block version of one of the twin towers and was playing
with
what seemed to be a very realistically sized toy plane, making
sounds of
the explosions, etc.
When it came to the video evidence of the missiles being fired into
each
of the two towers immediately prior to making impact Thomas jumped
up
and pointed his finger saying "see Dad, look at the fire from the
missle....it's right there!!!!"
I have heard it said - but I can't remember the exact quote - that
children have a way of seeing and saying the truth in a very open
and
plain way which not only disarms, but transcends the biases of our
conditionally-egoic adult understanding. And if Thomas' comments
where
any indication, I strongly believe that the children of our world
should
not only be exposed to this video evidence, but they also should
have a
lot more to say about what went on during 911. After all didn't
President Bush take the time to continue reading to children while
the
events of 911 "rolled."
For unless you want to be unnaturally cruel, it's very hard to
disarm a
child's innocence and the acutely simple and powerful awareness that
comes with such innocence.
"911 In Plane Site" is a video/DVD which everyone in the entire
world
should see NOW!! Men, women, fathers, mothers, children....the more
the
merrier. For the more individuals that get exposed in a positive way
to
the Keep It Simple and Smart truth behind 911 the sooner We The
People
of the world are going to to transcend and rise above all this
insane
"claim, blame, shame and fear-based" darkness that's running rampant
through the streets and alleys of our communities and throughout our
individual and collective imaginations.
Thanks to the "911 In Plane Site" producers, I will be receiving
15-20
extra DVD copies of "911 In Plane Site" which I plan to distribute
personally to Chicago-based religious and media leaders. I also plan
on
showing the DVD at our local public library.
In fact, the more I review the events of 911 the more I see a
massive
opportunity to turn this tragedy into a glowingly redemptive process
which can be used on a worldwide basis to redress the grievances of
a
world tired and weary of all the pain, bloodshed and wars that have,
unfortunately, been accepted as a common fact of life. 911 could and
should become THE final capstone example of We The People's right to
petition our servant government(s) for a redress of our grievances.
Viewing and sharing "911 In Plane Site" video/DVD is a great Keep It
Simple and Smart first place to begin this process.
For the tragedy and fraud that's laced through the events of 911 is
part
of the same fabric of corruption that continues to cast a dark
spiritual
cloud of fear and uncertainty over our wonderful world. The events
of
911 had the effect of installing a spiritual mind-control program
that
has given "the powers that be" a blank check to engage in another
round
of these undeclared preemptive illusory campaigns that attempt to
mask
and justify the killing and bloodshed of thousands of innocent
individuals worldwide.
It's time to expose the digital-video evidence of 911 - which has
been
covered up by the major media - to our families and children
worldwide.
It's time to allow the divine light of truth and goodness to shine
and
manifest actions which help and serve others inside this dark cave
energy that focuses on fear and bloodshed. As I have written many
times
before, it's time to EXIT these Wizard of Oz-like Castles that have
tried to enslave mankind with a drumbeat of claims that shame, blame
and
control us while instilling pain and fear.
Please join me and millions of others in viewing this transcendently
powerful digital evidence of 911 by visiting this link and ordering
your
own copies for a $15 donation plus $5 shipping and handling:
http://www.911inplanesite.com/
Or you can call their toll free *_Special Phone Order Line for the
DVD/VHS at _ *_866-773-9469. _
Peace and God Bless,
Fred Smart Evanston, Illinois 847-878-8090
PS. Special thanks to
PLANETNEWS@aol.com for continuing to pass this
information along. *
3. Timeline for War, by John F. Mahoney - NOT "A Must Read", BUT
"Rubbish"

RePorterNoteBook sent out this bulletin, Timeline for War, by
John F.
Mahoney, calling it "A Must Read".
Yet at the date Sept 11, 2001 - says the Arabs did it, and writes
out
the 5 Israelis videoing & celebrating.
It regularly speaks of "Al Quaeda" as a sort of worldwide Comintern
co-ordinating Islamic resistance. Yet we rely, for our belief in its
existence, on Intelligence Agencies, the same agencies whose
deceptive
intelligence led us into the Iraq War.

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 12:17:31 EDT From:
RePorterNoteBook@aol.com
Timeline for War
http://www.ameu.org/summary.asp
by: John F. Mahoney September - October 2004 The Link - Volume
37,
Issue 4
The U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee's report on the Iraq war
concluded that the major reasons the Bush administration gave to
justify
the war were baseless, and it laid most of the blame at the door of
the
CIA. Missing from the committee's report was a section dealing with
the
pressure administration officials put on intelligence officers to
come
up with the information they wanted. This part of the report is not
due
for release until after the November elections. Our
September-October
issue of The Link aims to provide that information now, in advance
of
the November elections.
Unless otherwise noted, the sources for this timeline come from the
following: "A Pretext for War" (Doubleday) by James Bamford; "Plan
of
Attack" (Simon & Schuster) by Bob Woodward; "Rise of the Vulcans"
(Viking) by James Mann; "Against All Enemies" (Free Press, Simon &
Schuster) by Richard Clarke; "The 9/11 Commission Report" by The
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks against the United States;
and
"The Path to War" an article that appeared in the May 2004 issue of
Vanity Fair.
A Reader's Guide on pages 8 & 9 offers background information on
persons
who enter prominently in the timeline; it is based on two articles:
"The
Men From JINSA and CSP" by Jason Vest in the Sept. 2, 2002 issue of
The
Nation, and "Serving Two Flags: Neocons, Israel and the Bush
Administration" by Stephen Green in the May 2004 issue of The
Washington
Report on Middle East Affairs.
While the timeline was being constructed, the U.S. Senate
Intelligence
Committee released its 511-page report on why we went to war against
Iraq. The report concludes that the major reasons the Bush
administration gave to justify the war were baseless. Most of the
blame
is placed on the CIA, but, as Senator Jay Rockefeller noted, the
report
does not explain the environment of intense pressure in which
intelligence officials were asked to render judgments on Iraq, when
policy officials had already forcefully stated their own conclusions
in
public. This part of the committee's investigation is expected later
this year, most likely after the November presidential elections.
Our timeline aims to fill the gap left in the Senate Committee's
report.
Recognizing that the information was wrong is one thing;
acknowledging
how and why it was wrong is quite another - and too important to
leave
for post-November 2 reading.
===============================
Timelinefor War
http://www.ameu.org/summary.asp
by: John F. Mahoney September - October 2004 The Link - Volume
37,
Issue 4
The Timeline was written by AMEU executive director John Mahoney,
with
considerable input and editing from AMEU board members and staff.
March, 1992: The Pentagon. Paul Wolfowitz, undersecretary of
defense for
policy for President Bush, drafts an update of America's overall
military strategy called the "Defense Planning Guidance" In it he
argues
that the U.S. might be faced with taking preemptive military action
to
prevent the use or development of WMD. The official ultimately
responsible for the document is Bush's defense secretary Dick
Cheney.
The draft is actually written by Wolfowitz's protEge and top
assistant
Lewis Libby.
Sept. 1, 1992: New York. Ramzi Yousef, the nephew of Khalid
Shaikh
Mohammed, arrives at JFK Airport. Born of a Palestinian mother, his
goal
is to punish the United States for its support of Israel, knowing
that
the U.S. government every year sends military and financial aid
worth
billions of dollars to Israel. Ramzi says that he and his uncle, an
engineer who had studied higher mathematics and jet propulsion in
the
U.S., have been planning to bring down the towers of the World Trade
Center, the ultimate symbol of America's worldwide financial muscle.
Feb. 26, 1993: New York. Ramzi Yousef, with others, sets off
explosives
at the World Trade Center. Later in the day he flies out of JFK for
Karachi, disappointed that both towers were still standing and
determined to bring them down at another time.
Feb. 27, 1993: New York. A group calling itself the
"Liberation Army"
sends a letter to The New York Times saying the World Trade Center
bombing was in retaliation for American support for Israel, and
warning
that if America did not change its Middle East policy, more
terrorist
missions would be carried out, some by suicide bombers.
April 15, 1993: Kuwait. Kuwaiti police say they have
prevented an
assassination attempt on former President George H. W. Bush, his
wife,
two sons, and daughter-in-law Laura. Most in the CIA promptly point
the
finger at Saddam Hussein; others, including investigative journalist
Seymour Hersh, doubt the Iraqi president had any involvement in the
plot.
Jan. 7, 1995: Manila. Ramzi Yousef and a colleague, Abdul
Hakim Murad,
accidentally set off an explosion in their apartment. Murad is
captured
and, under torture, tells the Philippine police of a plan to board
an
American commercial aircraft, hijack it, control the cockpit, and
dive
the plane into the CIA headquarters. The Chief of Intelligence
Command
for the Philippine National Police tells the Associated Press that
its
office shared the information immediately with FBI agents in Manila,
along with the message they found on Yousef's laptop explaining why
they
were doing it: "If the U.S. government keeps supporting Israel â*|
then
we will continue to carry out operations inside and outside the
United
States"
April 18, 1996: Lebanon. Israel attacks a U.N. refugee camp
at Qana,
killing women and children. Israel says it was a mistake. The U.N.
and
Amnesty International say it was intentional. Shortly afterwards,
Osama
bin Laden moves to the mountains of Afghanistan, where he uses the
Qana
massacre to recruit fighters in a war against the U.S. and Israel.
July 9, 1996: Washington, DC. Douglas Feith, the Washington,
DC partner
of an Israeli firm soliciting American business for Israel's
right-wing
settler movement, joins with other pro-settlement supporters Richard
Perle, David Wurmser and Wurmser's wife, Meryav, to develop a
foreign-policy position paper for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu. Titled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the
Realm"
it calls for Israel to overthrow Saddam Hussein and put a pro-Israel
regime in his place. Netanyahu rejects it.
July 25, 1996: Al Khobar, Saudi Arabia. A truck bomb rams a
high-rise
complex housing U.S. airmen. Nineteen are killed. The bombing is
blamed
on Hezbollah and its Iranian sponsors, although the U.S. commission
investigating the 9/11 attacks will later conclude that Osama bin
Laden
may have had an involvement - but not Saddam Hussein.
Aug. 23, 1996: Afghanistan. Bin Laden, with his new
mastermind for
worldwide operations, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, issues a call to
action:
"My Muslim Brothers of the worldâ*|Your brothers in Palestine and in
the
land of the two Holy Places [Saudi Arabia] are calling upon your
help
and asking you to take part in fighting against the enemy - your
enemy
and their enemy - the Americans and the Israelisâ*|The horrifying
pictures of the massacre of Qana in Lebanon are still fresh in our
memory...They [Americans] are not exonerated from responsibility,
because they chose this [their] government and voted for it despite
their knowledge of its crimes in Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq and in
other
places"
Jan. 26, 1998: Washington, DC. Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz,
Donald
Rumsfeld, Richard Armitage, and 14 others send letter to President
Clinton urging regime change in Iraq and a more aggressive Middle
East
policy. The letter is sponsored by the Project for the New American
Century (PNAC), founded by William Kristol, editor of The Weekly
Standard.
July 31, 1998: New York. David Wurmser meets with Israel's
permanent
representative to the U.N., Dore Gold, in an effort to get Israel to
put
pressure on the American Congress to approve a $10 million grant to
Ahmed Chalabi â*~s Iraqi National Congress, an exile group based in
London with a guerilla army based in northern Iraq, whose purpose is
the
overthrow of Saddam Hussein.
Aug. 7, 1998: Tanzania and Kenya. Suspected Al Qaeda cells
bomb U.S.
embassies in both countries, killing 258, including 12 Americans.
Aug. 20, 1998: Afghanistan and Sudan. President Clinton
orders missile
attack against Al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan and a pharmaceutical
plant
in Sudan said to produce nerve gas and to be linked to bin Laden.
Bin
Laden survives and doubts are raised about the pharmaceutical plant,
which Sudanese say produced infant formula. Shortly after, bin Laden
tells ABC News that, if the liberation of the Al-Aqsa mosque in
Jerusalem and the Ka'aba in Saudi Arabia is a crime, he indeed is a
criminal.
Feb.-March, 1999: Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden summons Khalid
Shaikh
Mohammed to tell him that his proposal to use aircraft as terror
weapons
against the U.S. has the full support of Al Qaeda.
Sept. 28, 2000: Jerusalem. Israeli prime minister Ariel
Sharon, flanked
by 1,000 armed police, visits site of the Al Aqsa Mosque. Bin Laden
reacts by asking that the planned attacks against the U.S. be moved
up.
Oct. 12, 2000: Yemen. The USS Cole is attacked; 17 sailors
are killed
and 39 wounded. Bin Laden, the suspected mastermind, praises the
suicide
attackers, then reads a poem he wrote in honor of Palestinian
children
killed in their struggle against Israel's occupation of their land.
Jan. 1, 2001: Washington, DC. David Wurmser recommends to
President-elect Bush that America and Israel join forces to "strike
fatally, not merely disarm, the centers of radicalism in the region
-
the regimes of Damascus, Baghdad, Tripoli, Tehran, and Gaza" and he
suggests that "crises can be opportunities" to implement this plan.
Jan. 30, 2001: The White House. President Bush holds his
first
high-level National Security Council meeting. Two topics are on the
agenda: Israel and Iraq. He says he plans to "tilt it [U.S. policy]
back
toward Israel" and - in what turns out to be the prime focus of the
meeting - he says he wants to remove Saddam Hussein. Condoleezza
Rice
explains: "Iraq might be the key to reshaping the entire region"
Feb. 5, 2001: The White House. Rice chairs a principals'
committee
meeting to review Iraq policy. All agree that the sanctions were
only
hurting the Iraqi people, not Saddam. Powell proposes stricter U.N.
sanctions on Saddam's military programs.
April, 2001: The White House. Cabinet deputies meet to review
terrorism
policy. Richard Clarke warns that the network of terrorist
organizations
called Al Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden, presents an immediate and
serious threat to the U.S., and that the U.S. had to target bin
Laden
and his leadership by reinitiating flights of the Predator drone.
Wolfowitz replies that Iraq is just as much a terrorist threat.
Clarke
says he is unaware of any Iraqi-sponsored terrorism directed at the
U.S.
Deputy CIA director John McLaughlin backs up Clarke. Wolfowitz tells
Clarke he gives bin Laden too much credit and that he had to have a
state sponsor. Clarke replies that bin Laden has made plain his
terrorist aims and, as with Hitler in Mein Kampf, you have to
believe
these people will actually do what they say. Wolfowitz responds that
he
resents comparing the Holocaust to "this little terrorist in
Afghanistan" Clarke replies: "I wasn't comparing the Holocaust to
anything. I was saying that like Hitler, bin Laden has told us in
advance what he plans to do and we would make a big mistake to
ignore
it"
June 21, 2001: Afghanistan. Bin Laden aide Ayman al-Zawahiri
announces
over the Middle East Broadcasting Company that, "The coming weeks
will
hold important surprises that will target American and Israeli
interests
in the world"
Aug. 6, 2001: Crawford, Texas. President Bush receives a
President's
Daily Brief entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S" It
warns
that the FBI has intelligence indicating that terrorists might be
preparing for an airline hijacking in the U.S. and might be
targeting a
building in lower Manhattan. No action is taken.
Sept. 4, 2001: The White House. Counterterrorism czar Richard
Clarke
meets with the President to walk him through a proposed National
Security Presidential Directive, whose goal is to eliminate bin
Laden
and Al Qaeda leaders. Clarke had asked for the meeting, calling it
"urgent" back in January, but only now is allowed to see him. He
tells
Bush that the use of minimum-wage rent-a-cops to screen passengers
and
carry-on at airports has got to stop. The President agrees.
Sept. 11, 2001: New York, Washington, DC, Pennsylvania.
Nineteen Middle
Eastern hijackers, 15 from Saudi Arabia, commandeer four commercial
airplanes, crashing two into the World Trade Towers in Manhattan,
one
into the Pentagon in Washington, and one in a field in Pennsylvania.
Nearly 3,000 are killed. Rumsfeld directs Pentagon lawyer to talk to
Wolfowitz about Iraq's connection to the attacks.
{No mention of 5 Israelis}
[Fredrick Töben - No mention of UN
Durban Conference on Racism, Xenophobia and related matters, 28
August-7 September 2001, where Israel universally condemned as a
terrorist, Zionist, apartheid, racist state.]
Sept. 12, 2001: Germany. Seven members of Rumsfeld's brain
trust meet at
an airport in Frankfurt and board an Air Force refueling plane sent
to
ferry them back to Washington. Group includes Douglas Feith, now
undersecretary of defense for policy. On the flight back they sketch
out
a plan for the defense secretary according to which the U.S. would
first
topple the Taliban government of Afghanistan, then go after other
terror
states, including Iraq. Feith appoints David Wurmser to put together
a
secret intelligence unit in his Pentagon office that will bypass the
normal channels and report directly to him; called the Policy
Counterterrorism Evaluation Group, its purpose is to find loose ties
between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda in order to counter the CIA,
whose
analysts had found no credible links between the two. Later in the
day,
counterterrorism coordinator Richard Clarke attends White House
meetings
of the inner circle of Bush's war cabinet and is stunned to learn
that
Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were going to take advantage of the national
tragedy to promote their agenda about Iraq. Rumsfeld specifically
asks
if the attacks did not present an "opportunity" to launch war
against
Iraq.
Sept. 15, 2001: Camp David. Bush gathers closest advisers.
Much
discussion is on Afghanistan, but Wolfowitz advocates attacking
Iraq,
maybe even before Afghanistan. He says there's a 10 to 50 percent
chance
Iraq was involved in 9/11. Bush sends note to Wolfowitz saying he
doesn't want to hear more on Iraq that day. Cheney, Powell,
Wolfowitz,
and Rice vote against hitting Iraq first; Rumsfeld abstains. Powell,
who
is appalled at the idea of hitting Iraq, finds Rumsfeld abstention
interesting. Richard Perle, who is also present, says Wolfowitz
planted
the seed.
Sept. 16, 2001: Washington, DC. Richard Perle and other
neoconservatives
send letter to Bush urging him to focus immediately on a war with
Iraq,
whether or not a connection with 9/11 can be shown.
Sept. 17, 2001: The White House. Bush signs a Top Secret
order that lays
out his plan for going to war in Afghanistan and directs the
Pentagon to
begin planning military options for an invasion of Iraq.
Sept. 19, 2001: The Pentagon. Perle convenes a two-day
meeting of the
Defense Policy Board, a group that advises the Pentagon. He
introduces
two guest speakers: Prof. Bernard Lewis of Princeton, a longtime
friend
of Cheney and Wolfowitz, who says U.S. must respond to 9/11 with a
show
of strength, and must support such democratic reformers in the
Middle
East as Ahmad Chalabi. The second speaker, in fact, is Ahmad Chalabi,
who tells the group that Iraq does possess WMD, although, as yet,
there
is no evidence linking Iraq to 9/11.
Oct. 7, 2001: Afghanistan. U.S. and U.K. planes bomb Taliban
bases; the
war against Al Qaeda begins.
Nov. 13, 2001: Afghanistan. The capital, Kabul, falls. Most
of the
Taliban leaders flee.
Nov. 21, 2001: The White House. At the end of a National
Security
Council meeting, President Bush secretly directs Rumsfeld to prepare
for
war on Iraq.
Nov. 27, 2001: Florida. Rumsfeld flies to see General Franks
at CENTCOM
headquarters in Tampa and tells him to update the Top Secret
Operation
Plan on attacking and invading Iraq.
Dec. 4, 2001: The Pentagon. Franks presents a slightly
revised plan on
invading Iraq. Estimated force level is reduced from 500,000 to
400,000.
Rumsfeld thinks fewer forces will be needed in light of the
Afghanistan
success. Franks agrees.
Dec. 12, 2002: The Pentagon. Franks returns with updated
plan. Rumsfeld
tells him he has to look at a plan that he could do "as early as
April
or May"
Dec. 20, 2001: New York. The New York Times reporter Judith
Miller has
front-page interview with Iraqi defector Adnan Ishan Saeed al-Haidere,
who says he has recently been working in Baghdad in secret
facilities
for biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons. Miller secures the
interview through Ahmed Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress, which has
close contacts with Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle, and Douglas
Feith.
Miller will later say that it is Chalabi who provided most of the
front
page exclusives on WMD to The New York Times.
Dec. 28, 2002: The White House. Franks tells Bush that, with
support
from other Muslim countries, Iraq could be invaded with an initial
105,000 U.S. forces, but 230,000 eventually would be needed.
Jan. 2002: The White House. Bush's top speechwriter, Michael
Gerson,
gives instructions to David Frum, a Canadian, to write a speech
making
the best case for war in Iraq.
Jan. 29, 2002: Washington, DC. Bush gives State of the Union
address; he
calls North Korea, Iran, and Iraq an axis of evil and pledges not to
wait while dangers gather.
Feb. 1, 2002: The Pentagon. Franks tells Rumsfeld a
unilateral U.S.-only
invasion of Iraq could be readied in 45 days with an initial force
of
105,000; ultimately, 300,000 would be needed to stabilize Iraq after
it
fell.
Feb. 7, 2002: White House Situation Room. Rumsfeld introduces
notion of
shock and awe, i.e., building up such a carrier force and bombing
onslaught that it might, by itself, trigger regime change.
Feb. 12, 2002: Washington, DC. Powell tells the Senate Budget
Committee
there are no plans to go to war with Iran or North Korea, but U.S.
is
looking into ways of bringing about regime change in Iraq.
Feb. 16, 2002: White House. The National Security Council
ratifies
Policy Directive on Iraq, committing the U.S. to examining ways of
bringing about a CIA-backed coup and providing military support for
Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress.
Feb. 20, 2002: Iraq. CIA survey team secretly enters northern
Iraq to
prepare for deployment of CIA paramilitary teams.
Feb. 28, 2002: Pentagon. Franks brings Rumsfeld a list of
nearly 4,000
possible bombing targets in Iraq. Rumsfeld tells him to prioritize
the
list.
March 6, 2002: The White House. In preparation of his
upcoming visit to
the Middle East, Cheney is briefed by Franks, who tells him what the
U.S. will need in its invasion of Iraq from other Arab and Muslim
countries. When he does go to the Middle East, the vice president is
surprised to learn that Israel's occupation of the West Bank and
Gaza is
seen by Arab leaders as a greater threat to the region than Saddam
Hussein.
March 9, 2002: Washington, DC. CIA tells the White House
reports that
Niger was supplying Iraq with uranium were investigated by
Ambassador
Joseph Wilson and were found not to be credible.
March 14, 2002: The White House. The Joint Chiefs of Staff
report that
an invasion of Iraq "would place severe strains on personnel and
cause
deep shortages of certain critical weapons"
April 20, 2002: Camp David. Bush tell Franks he wants the
invasion of
Iraq done "right and quickly"
April 24, 2002: Doha, Qatar. Franks tells his major
commanders to do
whatever it takes to prepare for an invasion, no matter the costs.
May 11, 2002: Camp David. Franks presents a five-front war
plan to Bush.
June 19, 2002: The White House. Franks tells Bush he could do
the
invasion within 30 days with a little over 100,000 ground assault
troops. ...

Peter Myers, 21 Blair St, Watson
ACT 2602, Australia ph +61 2 62475187
http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers Mirror:
http://mailstar.net/index.html
To unsubscribe, reply with "unsubscribe" in the subject line; allow
1
day.
Back
|