SHEEP...PLEASE READ.: A HISTORY TIMELINE OF POPULATION CONTROL

Sunday, May 4, 2008

A HISTORY TIMELINE OF POPULATION CONTROL

The following excerpt was taken from an outline of a Government Project: The Wildlands Project.

...Humanity must drastically scale down its industrial activities on Earth, change its consumption lifestyles, stabilize and then reduce the size of the human population by humane means, and protect and restore wild ecosystems and the remaining wildlife on the planet."

The Wildlands Project

The Tartars had the idea of infecting the enemy by catapulting bodies infected with bubonic plague over the walls of the city of Kaffa. Some historians believe that this event was the cause of the epidemic of plague that swept across medieval Europe killing 25 million.

1763

The British during the French-Indian War. The Native Americans greatly outnumbered the British and were suspected of being on the side of the French. As an "act of good will" the British give blankets to the Indians, but the blankets came from a hospital that was treating smallpox victims and consequently smallpox raged through the Native American community and devastated their numbers.
1814

Andrew Jackson, whose portrait appears on the U.S. $20 bill today, supervised the mutilation of 800 or more Creek Indian corpses, the bodies of men, women and children that his troops had massacred, cutting off their noses to count and preserve a record of the dead, slicing long strips of flesh from their bodies to tan and turn into bridle reins. (Historian Ward Churchill, A LITTLE MATTER OF GENOCIDE; HOLOCAUST AND DENIAL IN THE AMERICAS, 1492 TO THE PRESENT (San Francisco: City Lights Books, 1997). ISBN 0-87286-323-9. pg.186) U.S. Presidents And The Masonic Power Structure
1911

Turkey established gun control. From 1915-1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
1918

The modern history of Biological Warfare (BW) starts in 1918 with the Japanese formation of a special section of the Army (Unit 731) dedicated to BW. The thought at the time was "Science and Technology are the Key's to Winning War and BW is the most cost effective."
1918-1919

Flu pandemic that killed over 20 million worldwide and over 500,000 here in the US.
1920's

Unlike the malignant twists of nature, ranging from bubonic plague through to potato blight, which have killed masses throughout the ages, both the beef and pituitary hormone CJD crises were manmade. Scrapie, the sheep equivalent of BSE and CJD, has been around for more than two centuries. Somewhat differently, human spongiform encephalopathy was unheard of before two German physicians, Creutzfeldt and Jakob, independently reported the initial cases in the 1920s. BSE, too, was unheard of until a decade after cattle (aka Mad Cow) began to be fed the protein-rich remains of scrapie-infected sheep to accelerate their growth.
1929

The Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, approximately 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
1930's

Less known to the public is that fluoride also accumulates in bones. "The teeth are windows to what's happening in the bones," explained Paul Connett, Professor of Chemistry at St Lawrence University, New York, to these reporters. In recent years, pediatric bone specialists have expressed alarm about an increase in stress fractures among young people in the US. Connett and other scientists are concerned that fluoride-linked to bone damage in studies since the 1930s-may be a contributing factor.
1931

Japan expanded its territory by taking over part of Manchuria and Unit 731 moved in to secure "an endless supply of human experiment materials." Essentially all prisoners of war were available for Biological Warfare (BW) experiments. Japanese WWII Veteran Admits Unit 731 Germ Tests
1931

Dr. Cornelius Rhoads, under the auspices of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Investigations, infects human subjects with cancer cells. He later goes on to establish the U.S. Army Biological Warfare facilities in Maryland, Utah, and Panama, and is named to the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. While there, he begins a series of radiation exposure experiments on American soldiers and civilian hospital patients.
1932

The Infamous Tuskegee Study
In recent history, we have seen the influence of occult population control advocates here in America. Nowhere is that influence better demonstrated than in the Tuskegee Study, a scientific research program in which 400 syphilis-infected black men were recruited by the U.S. Public Health Service back in 1932. The participants were all told that they would be treated for their infections, but instead of treating their illness, all medicines were withheld. The black men were then actively prevented from obtaining treatment elsewhere as their bodies, and the bodies of their wives and children, were systematically ravaged by disease.

The evil men who conceived that Nazi-style study justified their atrocity by alleging that scientists needed to learn how untreated syphilis progressed in the human body. For a period of forty years, between 1932 and 1972, the genocidal Tuskegee Study continued. It was not until 1972, when one newspaper finally had the courage to break the story to the public, that the Tuskegee Study was finally terminated. The Population Control Agenda
1934

The original lesson about the infectious nature of these brain diseases ("mad cow disease" or bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in cattle, and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) in humans) came from a 1934 vaccine catastrophe in the UK which brought scrapie, or "mad sheep disease", to almost 5,000 out of 18,000 lambs within two years of their immunization against louping-ill virus infection.

Tracing back, scientists discovered that the vaccine serum was prepared from a number of lambs whose dams had subsequently developed scrapie, but the significance of scrapie passing vertically from ewes to their lambs, and horizontally from lamb to lamb by virtue of the vaccine injections, was kept from international eyes by a series of egotistical carry-ons which prevented the data from reaching the pages of the scientific literature for a further 15 years.
1935

The Pellagra Incident. After millions of individuals die from Pellagra over a span of two decades, the U.S. Public Health Service finally acts to stem the disease. The director of the agency admits it had known for at least 20 years that Pellagra is caused by a niacin deficiency but failed to act since most of the deaths occurred within poverty-stricken black populations.
1935

China established gun control. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
1938

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 6 to 7 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, the mentally ill, and 12 million Christians who were unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
1939

Margaret Sanger organized her "Negro project," a program designed to eliminate members of what she believed to be an "inferior race." Margaret Sanger justified her proposal because she believed that:
- "The masses of Negroes ...particularly in the South, still breed carelessly and disastrously, with the result that the increase among Negroes, even more than among whites, is from that portion of the population least intelligent and fit..."
1940

Four hundred prisoners in Chicago are infected with Malaria in order to study the effects of new and experimental drugs to combat the disease. Nazi doctors later on trial at Nuremberg cite this American study to defend their own actions during the Holocaust.
1941

Japanese planes sprayed bubonic plague over parts of China. At least 5 separate instances of this occurring have been documented. In 1942 "bacterial bombs" were deployed on mainland China but these attacks were determined to be ineffective.
1942

The United States (US) becomes aware of the Japanese efforts in Biological Warfare (BW) and decided to start its own program. These acts were not the only atrocities committed, however. The Japanese released thousands of plague infested rats prior to their surrender, with unknown consequences. They also tested on American POW's during the war and the U.S. Government apparently knew about it, but did nothing (perhaps a worse atrocity). These people killed over 3000 POWs, including many Americans, in a variety of grisly experiments. What they did instead was to offer immunity to would-be war criminals in exchange for the information the Japanese learned from these experiments!
1942

Chemical Warfare Services begins mustard gas experiments on approximately 4,000 servicemen. The experiments continue until 1945 and made use of Seventh Day Adventists who chose to become human guinea pigs rather than serve on active duty.
1942

Great Britain was also developing a program in Biological Warfare (BW). The program focused on anthrax spores and their viability and "range of spread" when delivered with a conventional bomb. The fateful Gruinard Island off the coast of Scotland was chosen as the site for this testing. It was thought that it was far enough off the coast as too prevent any contamination of the mainland, which later turned out to be false. The data gathered from these experiments was used by both Great Britain and the U.S. to develop bombs that were better able to effectively disperse spores.
1943

After an outbreak of anthrax in sheep and cattle in 1943 on the coast of Scotland that directly faced Gruinard, the British decided to stop testing. A tragic consequence of this testing is that even today Gruinard Island is contaminated with Bacillus anthracis spores. The original idea for decontamination was to start a brushfire that burned off the top of the soil and killed all traces of the organisms. Unfortunately, the spores unexpectedly embedded themselves in the soil so total decontamination of the island was/is impossible. As long as no ground is disturbed, we are supposedly safe, but birds that travel back and forth from mainland to island probably don't know this!
1943

Planning began in 1943 with the appointment of a special New York State Health Department committee to study the advisability of adding fluoride to Newburgh's drinking water. The chairman of the committee was, again, Dr Harold C. Hodge, then chief of fluoride toxicity studies for the Manhattan Project. Subsequent members of the committee included Henry L. Barnett, a captain in the Project's Medical Section, and John W. Fertig, in 1944 with the Office of Scientific Research and Development-the super-secret Pentagon group which sired the Manhattan Project.

Their military affiliations were kept secret. Hodge was described as a pharmacologist, Barnett as a pediatrician. Placed in charge of the Newburgh project was David B. Ast, chief dental officer of the New York State Health Department. Ast had participated in a key secret wartime conference on fluoride, held by the Manhattan Project in January 1944, and later worked with Dr Hodge on the Project's investigation of human injury in the New Jersey incident, according to once-secret memos.
1944

A Manhattan Project memorandum of 29 April 1944 states:
- "Clinical evidence suggests that uranium hexafluoride may have a rather marked central nervous system effect... It seems most likely that the F [code for fluoride] component rather than the T [code for uranium] is the causative factor."
The memo, from a captain in the medical corps, is stamped SECRET and is addressed to Colonel Stafford Warren, head of the Manhattan Project's Medical Section. Colonel Warren is asked to approve a program of animal research on CNS effects.
- "Since work with these compounds is essential, it will be necessary to know in advance what mental effects may occur after exposure... This is important not only to protect a given individual, but also to prevent a confused workman from injuring others by improperly performing his duties.
The author of the 1944 CNS research proposal attached to the 29 April memo was Dr Harold C. Hodge - at the time, chief of fluoride toxicology studies for the University of Rochester division of the Manhattan Project.
1944

When a severe pollution incident occurred downwind of the E.I. DuPont de Nemours Company chemical factory in Deepwater, New Jersey. The factory was then producing millions of pounds of fluoride for the Manhattan Project whose scientists were racing to produce the world's first atomic bomb. The farms downwind in Gloucester and Salem counties were famous for their high-quality produce.

Their peaches went directly to the Waldorf Astoria Hotel in New York City; their tomatoes were bought up by Campbell's Soup. But in the summer of 1944 the farmers began reporting that their crops were blighted: "Something is burning up the peach crops around here." They said that poultry died after an all-night thunderstorm, and that farm workers who ate produce they'd picked would sometimes vomit all night and into the next day.
- "I remember our horses looked sick and were too stiff to work," Mildred Giordano, a teenager at the time, told these reporters.
Some cows were so crippled that they could not stand up; they could only graze by crawling on their bellies. The account was confirmed in taped interviews with Philip Sadtler (shortly before he died), of Sadtler Laboratories of Philadelphia, one of the nation's oldest chemical consulting firms. Sadtler had personally conducted the initial investigation of the damage.

The farmers were stonewalled in their search for information about fluoride's effects on their health, and their complaints have long since been forgotten. But they unknowingly left their imprint on history: their complaints of injury to their health reverberated through the corridors of power in Washington and triggered intensive, secret, bomb program research on the health effects of fluoride.
1944

U.S. Navy uses human subjects to test gas masks and clothing. Individuals were locked in a gas chamber and exposed to mustard gas and lewisite.
1945 May

Newburgh's water was fluoridated, and over the next 10 years its residents were studied by the New York State Health Department.
1945-1955

Much of the original proof that fluoride is safe for humans in low doses was generated by A-bomb program scientists who had been secretly ordered to provide "evidence useful in litigation" against defense contractors for fluoride injury to citizens. The first lawsuits against the American A-bomb program were not over radiation, but over fluoride damage, the documents show. Human studies were required. Bomb program researchers played a leading role in the design and implementation of the most extensive US study of the health effects of fluoridating public drinking water, conducted in Newburgh, New York, from 1945 to 1955.

Then, in a classified operation code-named "Program F", they secretly gathered and analyzed blood and tissue samples from Newburgh citizens with the cooperation of New York State Health Department personnel. The original, secret version (obtained by these reporters) of a study published by Program F scientists in the August 1948 Journal of the American Dental Association shows that evidence of adverse health effects from fluoride was censored by the US Atomic Energy Commission (AEC)-considered the most powerful of Cold War agencies-for reasons of "national security".

The bomb program's fluoride safety studies were conducted at the University of Rochester-site of one of the most notorious human radiation experiments of the Cold War, in which unsuspecting hospital patients were injected with toxic doses of radioactive plutonium. The fluoride studies were conducted with the same ethical mindset, in which "national security" was paramount.

Hitler claimed to have gotten his inspiration for the "final solution" from the extermination of Native Americans in the U.S.
1947

By then, as the 1950s dawned, mad sheep disease was shown in the United States to jump the species barrier when a scrapie-infected food supplement brought a similar brain illness to farm-raised mink in 1947. By this stage, the medico-scientific fraternity was intensely preoccupied with another incurable brain illness, kuru, which had reached epidemic proportions amongst the Fore people living in the highlands of New Guinea.

Anthropologists from the University of Adelaide unraveled a chain of events to trace the origin of kuru back to the reverent consumption of deceased tribal members' bodies. Kuru was essentially eradicated by New Guinean authorities acting in 1959 on the anthropological clue to outlaw the eating of human flesh.
1947

The CIA begins its study of LSD as a potential weapon for use by American intelligence. Human subjects (both civilian and military) are used with and without their knowledge.
1949

U.S. Army begins 20 years of simulated germ warfare attacks against American cities, conducting at least 239 open air tests. see Chemtrail's
1950 Sept. 20-26

One of the biggest experiments involved the use of Serratia marcescens and bacillus globigi being sprayed over 117 square miles of the San Francisco area, causing pneumonia-like infections in many of the residents. The family of one elderly man who died in the test sued the government, but lost. To this day, syraceus is a leading cause of death among the elderly in the San Francisco area.
1950

Department of Defense begins plans to detonate nuclear weapons in desert areas and monitor downwind residents for medical problems and mortality rates
1953

U.S. military releases clouds of zinc cadmium sulfide gas over Winnipeg, St. Louis, Minneapolis, Fort Wayne, the Monocacy River Valley in Maryland, and Leesburg, Virginia. Their intent is to determine how efficiently they could disperse chemical agents.
1953

CIA initiates Project MKULTRA. This is an eleven year research program designed to produce and test drugs and biological agents that would be used for mind control and behavior modification. Six of the subprojects involved testing the agents on unwitting human beings.
1955

Another case was the joint Army-CIA BW test in 1955, still classified, in which an undisclosed bacteria was released in the Tampa Bay region of Florida, causing a dramatic increase in whooping cough infections, including twelve deaths.
1956

The Soviet Union accused the U.S. of using biological weapons in Korea, which lead them to threaten future use of Chemical and Biological weapons. This changed the focus of the U.S. program to a more defensive one. Before this, the bulk of the research was based at Ft. Detrick and used "surrogate biological agents" to model more deadly organisms. Most of the offensive tests were based on "secret spraying" of organisms over populated areas. This program was (supposedly) shut down in 1969.
1956

Cambodia established gun control. From 1975 to 1977, one million "educated" people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
1956

U.S. military releases mosquitoes infected with Yellow Fever over Savannah, Ga and Avon Park, Fl. Following each test, Army agents posing as public health officials test victims for effects.
1958

LSD is tested on 95 volunteers at the Army's Chemical Warfare Laboratories for its effect on intelligence.
1960

The Army Assistant Chief-of-Staff for Intelligence (ACSI) authorizes field testing of LSD in Europe and the Far East. Testing of the European population is code named Project THIRD CHANCE; testing of the Asian population is code named Project DERBY HAT.
1963

The mass vaccination campaigns of the 1950s and '60s may be causing hundreds of deaths a year because of a cancer-causing virus that contaminated the first polio vaccine, according to scientists. Known as SV40, the virus came from dead monkeys whose kidney cells were used to culture the first Salk vaccines. Doctors estimate that the virus was injected into tens of millions during the vaccination campaigns, including several million in Canada, before being detected and screened out in 1963. Those born between 1941 and 1961 are thought to be most at risk of having been infected.
1964

Guatemala established gun control. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
1965

Aspartame is the technical name for the brand names, NutraSweet, Equal, Spoonful, and Equal-Measure. Aspartame was discovered by accident in 1965, when James Schlatter, a chemist of G.D. Searle Company was testing an anti-ulcer drug. Aspartame was approved for dry goods in 1981 and for carbonated beverages in 1983.
1965

CIA and Department of Defense begin Project MKSEARCH, a program to develop a capability to manipulate human behavior through the use of mind-altering drugs.
1965

Prisoners at the Holmesburg State Prison in Philadelphia are subjected to dioxin, the highly toxic chemical component of Agent Orange used in Viet Nam. The men are later studied for development of cancer, which indicates that Agent Orange had been a suspected carcinogen all along.
1966

CIA initiates Project MKOFTEN, a program to test the toxicological effects of certain drugs on humans and animals.
1966 July 7-10

The virus Bacillus subtilis was released throughout the New York subway system, conducted by the U.S. Army's Special Operations Division. Due to the vast number of people exposed it would virtually impossible to identify, let alone prove, and specific health problems resulting directly from this test.
1967

CIA and Department of Defense implement Project MKNAOMI, successor to MKULTRA and designed to maintain, stockpile and test biological and chemical weapons.
1968

CIA experiments with the possibility of poisoning drinking water by injecting chemicals into the water supply of the FDA in Washington, D.C.
Often/ Chickwit -1967 or 1968

Project OFTEN/CHICKWIT was initiated by the Army Chemical Corps and the CIA's Office of Research and Development to create new drug compounds "that could be used offensively." Hallucinogens were tested on inmates in Pennsylvania, but very little is known about the experiments.
- "CIA documents mention 'several laboratory accidents' in which a drug designated as EA-3167 produced 'prolonged psychotic effects in laboratory personnel' "
U.S. Army dispenses Bacillus subtilis variant niger throughout the New York City subway system. More than a million civilians are exposed when army scientists drop light bulbs filled with the bacteria onto ventilation grates. It would appear that the CIA's drug testing continued throughout the 1970s since, "A CIA memo dated March 8, 1971, indicates that a backlog of more than twenty-six thousand drugs had been acquired 'for future screening'"
1968 - 69

The Hong Kong flu, which was influenza A type H3N2, killed over 30,000 people in the U.S. alone. That was a fortuitous learning event for some because it taught them that the flu could still conceivably be used to wipe out a population. But at the same time, it pointed out the need to precondition the populace so that those who might normally be resistant could be rendered susceptible. Hence the development of the vaccine program and the aerial spraying procedures to condition the population. The purpose of the chemicals in the chemtrail's is to help the viral envelope fuse with lung cells, permitting easier penetration and infection.
1969

At a House Appropriations hearing, the Defense Department's Biological Warfare (BW) division requested funds to develop through gene-splicing a new disease that would both resist and break down a victim's immune system.
- "Within the next 5 to 10 years it would probably be possible to make a new infective micro-organism which could differ in certain important respects from any known disease-causing organisms. Most important of these is that it might be refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious diseases."
The funds were approved. AIDS appeared within the requested time frame, and has the exact characteristics specified.
1970

Uganda established gun control. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
1972

The World Health Organization (W.H.O.) published a similar proposal:
- "An attempt should be made to ascertain whether viruses can in fact exert selective effects on immune function, e.g., by ...affecting T cell function as opposed to B cell function. The possibility should also be looked into that the immune response to the virus itself may be impaired if the infecting virus damages more or less selectively the cells responding to the viral antigens."
(Bulletin of the W.H.O., vol. 47, p 257- 274.) This is a clinical description of the function of the AIDS virus.
1972

It was discovered that black children as young as age five were having psychosurgery performed on them at the University of Mississippi in Jackson in order to control "hyperactive" and "aggressive" behavior. Their brains were being implanted with electrodes that were heated up to melt areas of the brain that regulate emotion and intellect. When we first opposed these experiments, and eventually stopped them, we did so despite resistance from organized psychiatry and the research community.
Mid-1970's

The incidence of AIDS infections in Africa coincides exactly with the locations of the W.H.O. smallpox vaccination program in the mid-1970's (London Times, May 11, 1987). Some 14,000 Haitians then on UN secondment to Central Africa were also vaccinated in this campaign. Personnel actually conducting the vaccinations may have been completely unaware that the vaccine was anything other than what they were told.
1975

Two neuroscientists, Laura and (the late) Eli Manuelides, from Yale University in the US, went on to illustrate by 1975 that injections of human blood, like injections of brain taken from kuru and CJD victims, transmitted the disease across the species barrier to laboratory animals. Their prophetic, but unheeded, message implied that blood was the vehicle that carried the agent of CJD around the body until it chanced upon an hospitable residence like the brain. This meant that the blood route was the key to the transmission of CJD from a primary host to a secondary host.
1975

The virus section of Fort Detrick's Center for Biological Warfare Research is renamed the Fredrick Cancer Research Facilities and placed under the supervision of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) . It is here that a special virus cancer program is initiated by the U.S. Navy, purportedly to develop cancer-causing viruses. It is also here that retrovirologists isolate a virus to which no immunity exists. It is later named HTLV (Human T-cell Leukemia Virus).
On October 5, 1976
- ...just as the so-called "SWINE FLU" inoculation program was getting under way, news reports suddenly told us that we were experiencing fallout from an alleged Chinese atmospheric nuclear blast on September 26. Oddly enough, the initial reports about this came from the East Coast, especially Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, and Connecticut; but certain areas of the Pacific Northwest were soon mentioned as being affected too.
  
  We were told that radioactive iodine-131 was showing up in milk at various locations; but we were also assured, as we invariably are whenever any radioactive hazard appears, that there was really no danger. In the days that followed we continued to hear about the supposed Chinese fallout, but other things probably seemed even more worrisome. For example, elderly people began dying of heart attacks shortly after taking swine flu shots, causing widespread alarm at first. But the Government quickly assured us that their deaths didn't really matter at all, that they would have died anyway; and the swine flu inoculation program went right back into high gear.
  
  Dr. Peter Beter
1976

The joint KGB-CIA chemical warfare experimentation program began in Philadelphia at the American Legion Convention. A convenient test group was assembled, and it was exploited. Data was desired for the effects of a formulation of the new family of poisons on older men in particular, and the American Legion Convention was chosen as the perfect target. Aerosol spray cans containing poisoned room freshener were used to selectively saturate the atmosphere of the Legionnaires. Afterwards the special spray cans were taken from the hotel, leaving the city by airplane from a small airport on the northwest side of Philadelphia. Two of the active ingredients in the poison that produced the Legionnaires Disease were plutonium and zirconium. Dr. Peter Beter
August 1976

About a month after the Legionnaire episode, and had quite a different purpose; and so a different poison formula was used. Plutonium was again an ingredient, as it is in the entire line of chemical warfare agents now being tested; but this time the formula was designed for very rapid effect with the victims receiving a massive dose. On a day late in August two Air Force C-141 Starlifter transport aircraft that were preparing to leave McGuire Air Force Base in New Jersey on flights over the Atlantic were sabotaged by the placement in their cockpits of concealed canisters of poison gas, rigged so that the gas would be released in flights without being detected.

The two planes left McGuire at nearly the same time, and crashed within hours of one another when approaching separate destinations in Greenland and England. The very next day, with the wreckage of the aircraft hardly cooled, a Pentagon spokesman said, quote:
- "Sabotage does not appear to be a factor. It's not even being considered as a factor."
Officials also said there was no apparent connection between the crashes. Apparently leaving the same Air Base at practically the same time and then crashing almost simultaneously without warning is not supposed to suggest the possibility of anything but coincidence. No doubt it is also coincidence that McGuire Air Force Base, the origin of these two strange fatal flights, is right next door to Fort Dix where the whole swine flu cover-up scare originated!

Dr. Peter Beter
1976

Nobel Prize went to American scientist Carleton Gajdusek for his experiments demonstrating that injections of kuru brain (1967) and CJD brain (1969) reproduced similar illnesses in chimpanzees.

A striking feature of AIDS is that it's ethno-selective. The rate of infection is twice as high among Blacks, Latinos and Native Americans as among whites, with death coming two to three times as swiftly. And over 80% of the children with AIDS and 90% of infants born with it are among these minorities. "Ethnic weapons" that would strike certain racial groups more heavily than others have been a long-standing U.S. Army BW objective. (Harris and Paxman, p 265)

The "discovery" of the AIDS virus (HTLV3) was announced by Dr. Robert Gallo at the National Cancer Institute, which is on the grounds of Fort Detrick, Maryland, a primary U.S. Army biological warfare research facility.
1977

Senate hearings on Health and Scientific Research confirm that 239 populated areas had been contaminated with biological agents between 1949 and 1969. Some of the areas included San Francisco, Washington, D.C., Key West, Panama City, Minneapolis, and St. Louis.
1978

The Hepatitis B vaccine study appears to have been the initial means of planting the infection in New York City. The test protocol specified non-monogamous males only, and homosexuals received a different vaccine from heterosexuals. At least 25-50% of the first reported New York AIDS cases in 1981 had received the Hepatitis B test vaccine in 1978. By 1984, 64% of the vaccine recipients had AIDS, and the figures on the current infection rate for the participants of that study are held by the U.S. Department of Justice, and "unavailable."
1978-1987

Even as the understanding of spongiform encephalopathy increased, various human pituitary hormone programs in countries such as Australia, France, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and United States were attracting hefty government sponsorships. Few of the programs' stalwarts caught on to the implications of the Manuelides' experiments, and unsuccessful attempts between the years of 1978 and 1987 to filter the CJD agent out of the pituitary hormones being injected into unsuspecting short-statured children and infertile women were left to one of this era's rare visionaries, British scrapie expert Alan Dickinson.

At about the same time, a British Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution in 1979 raised the possibility that the unregulated cycling of protein-rich sheep remains back into animal feed might spread scrapie to cattle, as it had done to farm mink in the US three decades beforehand, via the oral route.
1979

There was an explosion at a Soviet plant in Sverdlosk and an outbreak of anthrax followed. At the time, all accusations of BW research were vigorously denied by Soviet officials, with the explanation that anthrax outbreaks can occur naturally and that the explosion was merely a coincidence.
1979 June

A well-dressed, articulate stranger visited the office of the Elberton Granite Finishing Company and announced that he wanted to build an edifice to transmit a message to mankind. He identified himself as R. C. Christian, but it soon became apparent that was not his real name. He said that he represented a group of men who wanted to offer direction to humanity, but to date, almost two decades later, no one knows who R. C. Christian really was, or the names of those he represented. Several things are apparent.

The messages engraved on the Georgia Guidestones deal with four major fields:
- (1) Governance and the establishment of a world government,
- (2) Population and reproduction control,
- (3) The environment and man's relationship to nature, and
- (4) Spirituality.
In the public library in Elberton, I found a book written by the man who called himself R.C. Christian. I discovered that the monument he commissioned had been erected in recognition of Thomas Paine and the occult philosophy he espoused. Indeed, the Georgia Guidestones are used for occult ceremonies and mystic celebrations to this very day. Tragically, only one religious leader in the area had the courage to speak out against the American Stonehenge, and he has recently relocated his ministry. The Georgia Guidestones
1981

Aspartame was invented by the G D Searle Co. acquired by Monsanto in 1985. For 16 years FDA refused to approve it until 1981 when Commissioner Arthur Hayes overruled the objections of a Public Board of Inquiry and the protests of the American Soft Drink Association and blessed it. The tests submitted by Searle were so bad the Department of Justice, initiated prosecution of Searle for fraud. Then the defense lawyers hired the prosecutors, Sam Skinner and Wm. Conlon, and the case expired when the statute of limitations ran out. Aspartame/Nutrasweet, a toxin that blinds, drops intelligence, eradicates memory, grows brain tumors and other cancers, brings fatigue.

Depression, ADD, panic, rage, paranoia, diabetes, seizures, suicide and death. This toxin is supported by unlimited advertising and the manufacturers pay off the American Diatetics Association, the American Diabetics Association, the AMA, and whomever else, to convince us its safe as rain. These lies are backed by a Federal Bureaucracy knowing it may kill your child, but the bureaucrat who approved the poison got a fat job as have many of his successors. Suppose this government watchdog, ignoring thousands of consumer complaints, has become an Attack Dog protecting corporate corruption.

This is the bitter reality of Aspartame/Nutrasweet, Monsanto, the FDA, Coca Cola, Pepsi, and the hundreds of food, drink and drug makers who add to their products a known poison Conceived in Fraud and Dedicated to the Proposition that Profit is all that Matters! (They're Poisoning Our Kids - Aspartame Warning The Facts From Betty Martin Mission-Possible-USA@altavista.net)

Dr Miguel A. Baret of the Dominican Republic removed milk from 360 children's diets, because cow's milk has a specific protein that can cause diabetes, especially in children. They drank juice laced with aspartame instead and many developed
- "abnormal restlessness, lack of concentration, irritability and depression."
When Dr Baret removed it:
- "The results were astonishing. Their symptoms disappeared in 4-6 days in ALL of them!"
Thank you, Dr Baret, for this study showing what aspartame does to the brains of our kids!
1984, July 4

The first detailed charges regarding AIDS as a BW weapon were published in the Patriot newspaper in New Delhi, India. It is hard to say where the investigations of this story in the Indian press might have led, if they had not been sidetracked by two major domestic disasters shortly thereafter: the assassination of Indira Gandhi on Oct. 31 and the Bhopal Union Carbide plant "accident" that killed several thousand and injured over 200,000 on Dec. 3.
1985

The first of the fatal legacies of this form of medical madness emerged with four cases of CJD in human pituitary growth hormone-treated children.
1986

According to the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (83:4007-4011), HIV and VISNA are highly similar and share all structural elements, except for a small segment which is nearly identical to HTLV. This leads to speculation that HTLV and VISNA may have been linked to produce a new retrovirus to which no natural immunity exists.
1987

Dr Louis Elsas, Professor of Pediatrics & Genetics at Emory University, testified before Congress;
- "Aspartame is in fact a well known neurotoxin and teratogen [triggers birth defects] which in some undefined dose will irreversibly in the developing child or fetal brain, produce adverse effects I am particularly angry at this type of advertising that is promoting the sale of a neurotoxin in the childhood age group." [Nov 2, 1987]
Neurosurgeon Russell Blaylock, MD, declares Aspartame is a toxin like arsenic and cyanide that causes confusion, disorientation, seizures, cancer, pancreatic, uterine, ovarian and brain tumors and leads to Alzheimer's. Read Excitotoxins, the Taste That Kills [505-474-0303]. Hear Dr. Blaylock's radio interview on www.dorway.com'

Courageous whistleblowers like these have spoken in three congressional hearings, but industry's lobbying and political action keep the poison in the foods of the world. Our recourse as consumers is personal communication since the media is paid by advertising to push Nutrasweet/Equal/Diet Coke, etc..
1987

Department of Defense admits that, despite a treaty banning research and development of biological agents, it continues to operate research facilities at 127 facilities and universities around the nation.
1989

During which time the number of French children at risk of growth-hormone-related CJD had practically doubled, the first French children fulfilled that tragic legacy. In 1993, those responsible for this travesty were threatened with manslaughter charges. By 1997, France had half of the world's 100-plus cases of pituitary hormone-related CJD.
1990

More than 1500 six-month old black and Hispanic babies in Los Angeles are given an "experimental" measles vaccine that had never been licensed for use in the United States. CDC later admits that parents were never informed that the vaccine being injected to their children was experimental.
1991

Although the general elitism of human-pituitary programs restricted this brand of medical madness to North America, Europe and Australasian, Third World children and women did not altogether escape the insanity of applying Frankenstein medicine to social conditions. A medical report in 1991 linked the CJD death of a young Brazilian man, like those of five youthful New Zealand men and women, with a childhood treatment involving pituitary growth hormone obtained from the US.

Unfortunately, the fate of women in Mexico City whose breasts were injected with US pituitary hormones in an appalling experiment to increase the volume of milk in lactating mothers (some already pregnant again) will probably never be known.
1992

It was discovered the federal violence initiative - the federal government's agency - wide plan to go into America's inner cities to experiment on children in the hope of finding genetic and biological causes for violence. We opposed this program as racist and abusive of children. Our efforts led to the cancellation of this program. It also led the chief sponsor of the program, psychiatrist Frederick Goodwin, to resign from his post as director of NIMH and to leave a career in the government. The fenfluramine studies at Columbia and Queens College are part of the violence initiative. They were created under its umbrella before it was cancelled. They confirm our fears that while the public aspects of the violence initiative were withdrawn, the actual individual projects continue unabated.
1992

Boris Yeltsin confirmed that anthrax was being researched at Sverdlosk and vowed to stop all "Soviet" BW research. Unfortunately, defectors have contradicted Yeltsin and there are rumors that although the 'official government' statement and ideal may be an elimination of biological weapons, the military is still actively pursuing a BW program on its own.
1993

The FDA approved aspartame as an ingredient in numerous food items that would always be heated to above 86°degrees F (30°Degrees C). An act that can only be described as "unconscionable"
1994

One has only to learn what really happened to the Christians in Rwanda between April and July of 1994 to imagine what may lie in store for Christians here in America at some time in the not-too-distant future. After the Christian Tutsis had been disarmed by governmental decree in the early 1990s, Hutu-led military forces began to systematically massacre the defenseless Christians. The massacre began in April 1994 and continued until July 1994. Using machetes rather than bullets, the Hutu forces were able to create a state of abject fear and terror within the helpless Christian population as they systematically butchered hundreds of thousands of them.

The United Nations immediately convened hearings on the genocide taking place in Rwanda, but Madeline Albright, the American Ambassador to the United Nations, argued strenuously that neighboring African nations should not be allowed to intervene until the "civil war had come to an end." In reality, of course, there was no civil war since those being slaughtered had no weapons with which to defend themselves; it was simply a matter of mass murder. In addition to blocking intervention by neighboring nations, Madeline Albright also insisted that the word "genocide" must not be used, and that the United Nations forces stationed in Rwanda were not to be allowed to intervene. In the three months that followed, between one-half and three-quarters of a million Christians were systematically dismembered, hacked to death, and slaughtered in the bloody carnage that ensued.

Tens of thousands of Christians were murdered in their churches; tens of thousands more were murdered in their hospitals and in their schools. On several occasions, United Nations soldiers stationed in Rwanda actually handed over helpless Christians under their protection to members of the Hutu militia. They then stood by as their screaming charges were unceremoniously hacked to pieces. At the end of the carnage, in late July 1994, the American government rewarded the Hutu murderers with millions of dollars in foreign aid.

Strangely, the American press has remained silent Subversion Of The Free Press By The CIA about the fact that almost all of those who were slaughtered were Christians, and it was the policies of our government that were primarily responsible for blocking efforts by neighboring African countries to intervene. The Population Control Agenda
1994

With a technique called "gene tracking," Dr. Garth Nicolson at the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, TX discovers that many returning Desert Storm veterans are infected with an altered strain of Mycoplasma incognitus, a microbe commonly used in the production of biological weapons. Incorporated into its molecular structure is 40 percent of the HIV protein coat, indicating that it had been man-made. See also The Resnick Interview with Peter Kawaja and Ex-NSA Agent Joe Jordan
1995

Dr Phyllis Mullenix, former head of toxicology at Forsyth Dental Center in Boston and now a critic of fluoridation. Animal studies which Mullenix and co-workers conducted at Forsyth in the early 1990s indicated that fluoride was a powerful central nervous system (CNS) toxin and might adversely affect human brain functioning even at low doses. (New epidemiological evidence from China adds support, showing a correlation between low-dose fluoride exposure and diminished IQ in children.) Mullenix's results were published in 1995 in a reputable peer-reviewed scientific journal.
1995

The University of Rochester's classified fluoride studies, code-named "Program F", were started during the war and continued up until the early 1950s. They were conducted at its Atomic Energy Project (AEP), a top-secret facility funded by the AEC and housed at Strong Memorial Hospital. It was there that one of the most notorious human radiation experiments of the Cold War took place, in which unsuspecting hospital patients were injected with toxic doses of radioactive plutonium. Revelation of this experiment - in a Pulitzer Prize winning account by Eileen Welsome - led to a 1995 US presidential investigation and a multimillion-dollar cash settlement for victims.
1995

U.S. Government admits that it had offered Japanese war criminals and scientists who had performed human medical experiments salaries and immunity from prosecution in exchange for data on biological warfare research.
1995

Dr. Garth Nicolson, uncovers evidence that the biological agents used during the Gulf War had been manufactured in Houston, TX and Boca Raton, Fl and tested on prisoners in the Texas Department of Corrections.
1996, 27 June

without public notice, the FDA removed all restrictions from aspartame allowing it to be used in everything, including all heated and baked goods. The truth about aspartame's toxicity is far different than what the NutraSweet Company would have you readers believe.
1996

A new scientific paper dealing with a meta-analysis of 23 different scientific studies on the relationship between first-trimester abortions and breast cancer was published in a British medical journal. That study clearly demonstrated a higher incidence of breast cancer in women who had had first-trimester abortions. In response to that publication, the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Cancer Society (ACS), and pro-abortion/population-control advocates joined together in an unholy alliance to attack the conclusions of the authors, and to block all efforts to disseminate that information to American physicians. The Population Control Agenda
1997 October

Speaking from Washington, DC, Nobel Prize winner for discovering the role of molecules known as "prions" in the invariably fatal brain illnesses such as "mad cow disease" or bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in cattle, and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) in humans, Dr Stanley Prusiner from the University of California predicted that the first drug therapy, which would not necessarily be a cure for BSE or CJD, was at least five years away.

At the same time, on the opposite side of the Atlantic, the post-mortem of Chris Warne, a 36-year-old fitness fanatic from Derbyshire, England, revealed that he was the 21st victim of the new variant of CJD which had spread from BSE-infected cattle to humans via the food chain. Only 18 months earlier, a British House of Commons admission that BSE-infected meat had probably caused the CJD deaths of 10 youthful Britons left the British meat industry in tatters.

Since then, the history of BSE has gradually unfolded to reveal a brain-dead imperialism, one which, while blinded by its own arrogant greed to inflate market profits, has treated public and, indeed, world health with gay abandon. Formerly a rare disease which affected less than one per million in most countries, one worst-case scenario predicts that BSE-infected meat will push the incidence of CJD in humans to claim 10,000 British lives by the year 2000, and a further 10 million by the year 2010.

Another predicts that half the British people, some 30 million, will be left brain-dead by CJD. As Chris Warne's mother commented, her son was a health-conscious sportsman, but "after winning medals in March, by July he couldn't stand on his feet, and by October he was gone".

Researchers at the US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (or USAMRIID) at Fort Detrick in Frederick MD have reconstructed and modified the H1N1 Spanish Flu virus, making it far more deadly than it ever was back when it was responsible for the 1918-1919 flu pandemic that killed over 20 million worldwide and over 500,000 here in the US.

FRANCE is facing a new health scandal following allegations that the prestigious Pasteur Institute willfully ignored warnings that up to 600 children were being injected with cancerous hormones.

The disclosures that children may have been put at risk emerged during a new investigation into the link between the growth hormones and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD), which caused a major scandal when acknowledged in the Nineties . So far, 74 children have died of CJD after being treated with growth hormones extracted from the bodies of victims of neurological illnesses in the Eighties.

That scandal and the contaminated blood affair in which 4,000 people were infected with HIV through unscreened blood transfusions - despite the availability of an American test for the virus - have contributed to France's acute sensitivity on health issues. When the contaminated blood affair came to trial in 1998 , it was alleged that authorization for the American test was withheld to give the institute time to develop a rival French test.

The latest claims suggest that in 1985 the institute sold a batch of growth hormone to French hospitals without waiting for safety checks which showed the batch to have cancer marker cells at five times the permitted limit for use. The institute is further alleged to have made no efforts to withdraw the batch once it was aware of the risk.

HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS NEO-CONNED SPEECH, JULY 10, 2003

HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

July 10, 2003

Neo – CONNED !

The modern-day limited-government movement has been co-opted. The conservatives have failed in their effort to shrink the size of government. There has not been, nor will there soon be, a conservative revolution in Washington. Party control of the federal government has changed, but the inexorable growth in the size and scope of government has continued unabated. The liberal arguments for limited government in personal affairs and foreign military adventurism were never seriously considered as part of this revolution.

Since the change of the political party in charge has not made a difference, who’s really in charge? If the particular party in power makes little difference, whose policy is it that permits expanded government programs, increased spending, huge deficits, nation building and the pervasive invasion of our privacy, with fewer Fourth Amendment protections than ever before?

Someone is responsible, and it’s important that those of us who love liberty, and resent big-brother government, identify the philosophic supporters who have the most to say about the direction our country is going. If they’re wrong—and I believe they are—we need to show it, alert the American people, and offer a more positive approach to government. However, this depends on whether the American people desire to live in a free society and reject the dangerous notion that we need a strong central government to take care of us from the cradle to the grave. Do the American people really believe it’s the government’s responsibility to make us morally better and economically equal? Do we have a responsibility to police the world, while imposing our vision of good government on everyone else in the world with some form of utopian nation building? If not, and the contemporary enemies of liberty are exposed and rejected, then it behooves us to present an alternative philosophy that is morally superior and economically sound and provides a guide to world affairs to enhance peace and commerce.

One thing is certain: conservatives who worked and voted for less government in the Reagan years and welcomed the takeover of the U.S. Congress and the presidency in the 1990s and early 2000s were deceived. Soon they will realize that the goal of limited government has been dashed and that their views no longer matter.

The so-called conservative revolution of the past two decades has given us massive growth in government size, spending and regulations. Deficits are exploding and the national debt is now rising at greater than a half-trillion dollars per year. Taxes do not go down—even if we vote to lower them. They can’t, as long as spending is increased, since all spending must be paid for one way or another. Both Presidents Reagan and the elder George Bush raised taxes directly. With this administration, so far, direct taxes have been reduced—and they certainly should have been—but it means little if spending increases and deficits rise.

When taxes are not raised to accommodate higher spending, the bills must be paid by either borrowing or “printing” new money. This is one reason why we conveniently have a generous Federal Reserve chairman who is willing to accommodate the Congress. With borrowing and inflating, the “tax” is delayed and distributed in a way that makes it difficult for those paying the tax to identify it. Like future generations and those on fixed incomes who suffer from rising prices, and those who lose jobs they certainly feel the consequences of economic dislocation that this process causes. Government spending is always a “tax” burden on the American people and is never equally or fairly distributed. The poor and low-middle income workers always suffer the most from the deceitful tax of inflation and borrowing.

Many present-day conservatives, who generally argue for less government and supported the Reagan/Gingrich/Bush takeover of the federal government, are now justifiably disillusioned. Although not a monolithic group, they wanted to shrink the size of government.

Early in our history, the advocates of limited, constitutional government recognized two important principles: the rule of law was crucial, and a constitutional government must derive “just powers from the consent of the governed.” It was understood that an explicit transfer of power to government could only occur with power rightfully and naturally endowed to each individual as a God-given right. Therefore, the powers that could be transferred would be limited to the purpose of protecting liberty. Unfortunately, in the last 100 years, the defense of liberty has been fragmented and shared by various groups, with some protecting civil liberties, others economic freedom, and a small diverse group arguing for a foreign policy of nonintervention.

The philosophy of freedom has had a tough go of it, and it was hoped that the renewed interest in limited government of the past two decades would revive an interest in reconstituting the freedom philosophy into something more consistent. Those who worked for the goal of limited government power believed the rhetoric of politicians who promised smaller government. Sometimes it was just plain sloppy thinking on their part, but at other times, they fell victim to a deliberate distortion of a concise limited-government philosophy by politicians who misled many into believing that we would see a rollback on government intrusiveness.

Yes, there was always a remnant who longed for truly limited government and maintained a belief in the rule of law, combined with a deep conviction that free people and a government bound by a Constitution were the most advantageous form of government. They recognized it as the only practical way for prosperity to be spread to the maximum number of people while promoting peace and security.

That remnant—imperfect as it may have been—was heard from in the elections of 1980 and 1994 and then achieved major victories in 2000 and 2002 when professed limited-government proponents took over the White House, the Senate and the House. However, the true believers in limited government are now shunned and laughed at. At the very least, they are ignored—except when they are used by the new leaders of the right, the new conservatives now in charge of the U.S. government.

The remnant’s instincts were correct, and the politicians placated them with talk of free markets, limited government, and a humble, non-nation-building foreign policy. However, little concern for civil liberties was expressed in this recent quest for less government. Yet, for an ultimate victory of achieving freedom, this must change. Interest in personal privacy and choices has generally remained outside the concern of many conservatives—especially with the great harm done by their support of the drug war. Even though some confusion has emerged over our foreign policy since the breakdown of the Soviet empire, it’s been a net benefit in getting some conservatives back on track with a less militaristic, interventionist foreign policy. Unfortunately, after 9-ll, the cause of liberty suffered a setback. As a result, millions of Americans voted for the less-than-perfect conservative revolution because they believed in the promises of the politicians.

Now there’s mounting evidence to indicate exactly what happened to the revolution. Government is bigger than ever, and future commitments are overwhelming. Millions will soon become disenchanted with the new status quo delivered to the American people by the advocates of limited government and will find it to be just more of the old status quo. Victories for limited government have turned out to be hollow indeed.

Since the national debt is increasing at a rate greater than a half-trillion dollars per year, the debt limit was recently increased by an astounding $984 billion dollars. Total U.S. government obligations are $43 trillion, while the total net worth of U.S. households is about $40.6 trillion. The country is broke, but no one in Washington seems to notice or care. The philosophic and political commitment for both guns and butter—and especially the expanding American empire—must be challenged. This is crucial for our survival.

In spite of the floundering economy, Congress and the Administration continue to take on new commitments in foreign aid, education, farming, medicine, multiple efforts at nation building, and preemptive wars around the world. Already we’re entrenched in Iraq and Afghanistan, with plans to soon add new trophies to our conquest. War talk abounds as to when Syria, Iran and North Korea will be attacked.

How did all this transpire? Why did the government do it? Why haven’t the people objected? How long will it go on before something is done? Does anyone care?

Will the euphoria of grand military victories—against non-enemies—ever be mellowed? Someday, we as a legislative body must face the reality of the dire situation in which we have allowed ourselves to become enmeshed. Hopefully, it will be soon!

We got here because ideas do have consequences. Bad ideas have bad consequences, and even the best of intentions have unintended consequences. We need to know exactly what the philosophic ideas were that drove us to this point; then, hopefully, reject them and decide on another set of intellectual parameters.

There is abundant evidence exposing those who drive our foreign policy justifying preemptive war. Those who scheme are proud of the achievements in usurping control over foreign policy. These are the neoconservatives of recent fame. Granted, they are talented and achieved a political victory that all policymakers must admire. But can freedom and the republic survive this takeover? That question should concern us.

Neoconservatives are obviously in positions of influence and are well-placed throughout our government and the media. An apathetic Congress put up little resistance and abdicated its responsibilities over foreign affairs. The electorate was easily influenced to join in the patriotic fervor supporting the military adventurism advocated by the neoconservatives.

The numbers of those who still hope for truly limited government diminished and had their concerns ignored these past 22 months, during the aftermath of 9-11. Members of Congress were easily influenced to publicly support any domestic policy or foreign military adventure that was supposed to help reduce the threat of a terrorist attack. Believers in limited government were harder to find. Political money, as usual, played a role in pressing Congress into supporting almost any proposal suggested by the neocons. This process—where campaign dollars and lobbying efforts affect policy—is hardly the domain of any single political party, and unfortunately, is the way of life in Washington.

There are many reasons why government continues to grow. It would be naïve for anyone to expect otherwise. Since 9-11, protection of privacy, whether medical, personal or financial, has vanished. Free speech and the Fourth Amendment have been under constant attack. Higher welfare expenditures are endorsed by the leadership of both parties. Policing the world and nation-building issues are popular campaign targets, yet they are now standard operating procedures. There’s no sign that these programs will be slowed or reversed until either we are stopped by force overseas (which won’t be soon) or we go broke and can no longer afford these grandiose plans for a world empire (which will probably come sooner than later.)

None of this happened by accident or coincidence. Precise philosophic ideas prompted certain individuals to gain influence to implement these plans. The neoconservatives—a name they gave themselves—diligently worked their way into positions of power and influence. They documented their goals, strategy and moral justification for all they hoped to accomplish. Above all else, they were not and are not conservatives dedicated to limited, constitutional government.

Neo-conservatism has been around for decades and, strangely, has connections to past generations as far back as Machiavelli. Modern-day neo-conservatism was introduced to us in the 1960s. It entails both a detailed strategy as well as a philosophy of government. The ideas of Teddy Roosevelt, and certainly Woodrow Wilson, were quite similar to many of the views of present-day neocons. Neocon spokesman Max Boot brags that what he advocates is “hard Wilsonianism.” In many ways, there’s nothing “neo” about their views, and certainly nothing conservative. Yet they have been able to co-opt the conservative movement by advertising themselves as a new or modern form of conservatism.

More recently, the modern-day neocons have come from the far left, a group historically identified as former Trotskyites. Liberal, Christopher Hitchens, has recently officially joined the neocons, and it has been reported that he has already been to the White House as an ad hoc consultant. Many neocons now in positions of influence in Washington can trace their status back to Professor Leo Strauss of the University of Chicago. One of Strauss’ books was Thoughts on Machiavelli. This book was not a condemnation of Machiavelli’s philosophy. Paul Wolfowitz actually got his PhD under Strauss. Others closely associated with these views are Richard Perle, Eliot Abrams, Robert Kagan, and William Kristol. All are key players in designing our new strategy of preemptive war. Others include: Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute; former CIA Director James Woolsey; Bill Bennett of Book of Virtues fame; Frank Gaffney; Dick Cheney; and Donald Rumsfeld. There are just too many to mention who are philosophically or politically connected to the neocon philosophy in some varying degree.

The godfather of modern-day neo-conservatism is considered to be Irving Kristol, father of Bill Kristol, who set the stage in 1983 with his publication Reflections of a Neoconservative. In this book, Kristol also defends the traditional liberal position on welfare.

More important than the names of people affiliated with neo-conservatism are the views they adhere to. Here is a brief summary of the general understanding of what neocons believe:

They agree with Trotsky on permanent revolution, violent as well as intellectual.

They are for redrawing the map of the Middle East and are willing to use force to do so.

They believe in preemptive war to achieve desired ends.

They accept the notion that the ends justify the means—that hardball politics is a moral necessity.

They express no opposition to the welfare state.

They are not bashful about an American empire; instead they strongly endorse it.

They believe lying is necessary for the state to survive.

They believe a powerful federal government is a benefit.

They believe pertinent facts about how a society should be run should be held by the elite and withheld from those who do not have the courage to deal with it.

10.

They believe neutrality in foreign affairs is ill advised.

11.

They hold Leo Strauss in high esteem.

12.

They believe imperialism, if progressive in nature, is appropriate.

13.

Using American might to force American ideals on others is acceptable. Force should not be limited to the defense of our country.

14.

9-11 resulted from the lack of foreign entanglements, not from too many.

15.

They dislike and despise libertarians (therefore, the same applies to all strict constitutionalists.)

16.

They endorse attacks on civil liberties, such as those found in the Patriot Act, as being necessary.

17.

They unconditionally support Israel and have a close alliance with the Likud Party.

Various organizations and publications over the last 30 years have played a significant role in the rise to power of the neoconservatives. It took plenty of money and commitment to produce the intellectual arguments needed to convince the many participants in the movement of its respectability.

It is no secret—especially after the rash of research and articles written about the neocons since our invasion of Iraq—how they gained influence and what organizations were used to promote their cause. Although for decades, they agitated for their beliefs through publications like The National Review, The Weekly Standard, The Public Interest, The Wall Street Journal, Commentary, and the New York Post, their views only gained momentum in the 1990s following the first Persian Gulf War—which still has not ended even with removal of Saddam Hussein. They became convinced that a much more militant approach to resolving all the conflicts in the Middle East was an absolute necessity, and they were determined to implement that policy.

In addition to publications, multiple think tanks and projects were created to promote their agenda. A product of the Bradley Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) led the neocon charge, but the real push for war came from the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) another organization helped by the Bradley Foundation. This occurred in 1998 and was chaired by Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol. They urged early on for war against Iraq, but were disappointed with the Clinton administration, which never followed through with its periodic bombings. Obviously, these bombings were motivated more by Clinton’s personal and political problems than a belief in the neocon agenda.

The election of 2000 changed all that. The Defense Policy Board, chaired by Richard Perle, played no small role in coordinating the various projects and think tanks, all determined to take us into war against Iraq. It wasn’t too long before the dream of empire was brought closer to reality by the election of 2000 with Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld playing key roles in this accomplishment. The plan to promote an “American greatness” imperialistic foreign policy was now a distinct possibility. Iraq offered a great opportunity to prove their long-held theories. This opportunity was a consequence of the 9-11 disaster.

The money and views of Rupert Murdoch also played a key role in promoting the neocon views, as well as rallying support by the general population, through his News Corporation, which owns Fox News Network, the New York Post, and Weekly Standard. This powerful and influential media empire did more to galvanize public support for the Iraqi invasion than one might imagine. This facilitated the Rumsfeld/Cheney policy as their plans to attack Iraq came to fruition. It would have been difficult for the neocons to usurp foreign policy from the restraints of Colin Powell’s State Department without the successful agitation of the Rupert Murdoch empire. Max Boot was satisfied, as he explained: “Neoconservatives believe in using American might to promote American ideals abroad.” This attitude is a far cry from the advice of the Founders, who advocated no entangling alliances and neutrality as the proper goal of American foreign policy.

Let there be no doubt, those in the neocon camp had been anxious to go to war against Iraq for a decade. They justified the use of force to accomplish their goals, even if it required preemptive war. If anyone doubts this assertion, they need only to read of their strategy in “A Clean Break: a New Strategy for Securing the Realm.” Although they felt morally justified in changing the government in Iraq, they knew that public support was important, and justification had to be given to pursue the war. Of course, a threat to us had to exist before the people and the Congress would go along with war. The majority of Americans became convinced of this threat, which, in actuality, never really existed. Now we have the ongoing debate over the location of weapons of mass destruction. Where was the danger? Was all this killing and spending necessary? How long will this nation building and dying go on? When will we become more concerned about the needs of our own citizens than the problems we sought in Iraq and Afghanistan? Who knows where we’ll go next—Iran, Syria or North Korea?

At the end of the Cold War, the neoconservatives realized a rearrangement of the world was occurring and that our superior economic and military power offered them a perfect opportunity to control the process of remaking the Middle East.

It was recognized that a new era was upon us, and the neocons welcomed Frances Fukuyama’s “end of history” declaration. To them, the debate was over. The West won; the Soviets lost. Old-fashioned communism was dead. Long live the new era of neoconservatism. The struggle may not be over, but the West won the intellectual fight, they reasoned. The only problem is that the neocons decided to define the philosophy of the victors. They have been amazingly successful in their efforts to control the debate over what Western values are and by what methods they will be spread throughout the world.

Communism surely lost a lot with the breakup of the Soviet Empire, but this can hardly be declared a victory for American liberty, as the Founders understood it. Neoconservatism is not the philosophy of free markets and a wise foreign policy. Instead, it represents big-government welfare at home and a program of using our military might to spread their version of American values throughout the world. Since neoconservatives dominate the way the U.S. government now operates, it behooves us all to understand their beliefs and goals. The breakup of the Soviet system may well have been an epic event but to say that the views of the neocons are the unchallenged victors and that all we need do is wait for their implementation is a capitulation to controlling the forces of history that many Americans are not yet ready to concede. There is surely no need to do so.

There is now a recognized philosophic connection between modern-day neoconservatives and Irving Kristol, Leo Strauss, and Machiavelli. This is important in understanding that today’s policies and the subsequent problems will be with us for years to come if these policies are not reversed.

Not only did Leo Strauss write favorably of Machiavelli, Michael Ledeen, a current leader of the neoconservative movement, did the same in 1999 in his book with the title, Machiavelli on Modern Leadership, and subtitled: Why Machiavelli’s iron rules are as timely and important today as five centuries ago. Ledeen is indeed an influential neocon theorist whose views get lots of attention today in Washington. His book on Machiavelli, interestingly enough, was passed out to Members of Congress attending a political strategy meeting shortly after its publication and at just about the time A Clean Break was issued.

In Ledeen’s most recent publication, The War Against the Terror Masters, he reiterates his beliefs outlined in this 1999 Machaivelli book. He specifically praises: “Creative destruction…both within our own society and abroad…(foreigners) seeing America undo traditional societies may fear us, for they do not wish to be undone.” Amazingly, Ledeen concludes: “They must attack us in order to survive, just as we must destroy them to advance our historic mission.”

If those words don’t scare you, nothing will. If they are not a clear warning, I don’t know what could be. It sounds like both sides of each disagreement in the world will be following the principle of preemptive war. The world is certainly a less safe place for it.

In Machiavelli on Modern Leadership, Ledeen praises a business leader for correctly understanding Machiavelli: “There are no absolute solutions. It all depends. What is right and what is wrong depends on what needs to be done and how.” This is a clear endorsement of situational ethics and is not coming from the traditional left. It reminds me of: “It depends on what the definition of the word ‘is’ is.”

Ledeen quotes Machiavelli approvingly on what makes a great leader. “A prince must have no other objectives or other thoughts or take anything for his craft, except war.” To Ledeen, this meant: “…the virtue of the warrior are those of great leaders of any successful organization.” Yet it’s obvious that war is not coincidental to neocon philosophy, but an integral part. The intellectuals justify it, and the politicians carry it out. There’s a precise reason to argue for war over peace according to Ledeen, for “…peace increases our peril by making discipline less urgent, encouraging some of our worst instincts, in depriving us of some of our best leaders.” Peace, he claims, is a dream and not even a pleasant one, for it would cause indolence and would undermine the power of the state. Although I concede the history of the world is a history of frequent war, to capitulate and give up even striving for peace—believing peace is not a benefit to mankind—is a frightening thought that condemns the world to perpetual war and justifies it as a benefit and necessity. These are dangerous ideas, from which no good can come.

The conflict of the ages has been between the state and the individual: central power versus liberty. The more restrained the state and the more emphasis on individual liberty, the greater has been the advancement of civilization and general prosperity. Just as man’s condition was not locked in place by the times and wars of old and improved with liberty and free markets, there’s no reason to believe a new stage for man might not be achieved by believing and working for conditions of peace. The inevitability and so-called need for preemptive war should never be intellectually justified as being a benefit. Such an attitude guarantees the backsliding of civilization. Neocons, unfortunately, claim that war is in man’s nature and that we can’t do much about it, so let’s use it to our advantage by promoting our goodness around the world through force of arms. That view is anathema to the cause of liberty and the preservation of the Constitution. If it is not loudly refuted, our future will be dire indeed.

Ledeen believes man is basically evil and cannot be left to his own desires. Therefore, he must have proper and strong leadership, just as Machiavelli argued. Only then can man achieve good, as Ledeen explains: “In order to achieve the most noble accomplishments, the leader may have to ‘enter into evil.’ This is the chilling insight that has made Machiavelli so feared, admired and challenging…we are rotten,” argues Ledeen. “It’s true that we can achieve greatness if, and only if, we are properly led.” In other words, man is so depraved that individuals are incapable of moral, ethical and spiritual greatness, and achieving excellence and virtue can only come from a powerful authoritarian leader. What depraved ideas are these to now be influencing our leaders in Washington? The question Ledeen doesn’t answer is: “Why do the political leaders not suffer from the same shortcomings and where do they obtain their monopoly on wisdom?”

Once this trust is placed in the hands of a powerful leader, this neocon argues that certain tools are permissible to use. For instance: “Lying is central to the survival of nations and to the success of great enterprises, because if our enemies can count on the reliability of everything you say, your vulnerability is enormously increased.” What about the effects of lying on one’s own people? Who cares if a leader can fool the enemy? Does calling it “strategic deception” make lying morally justifiable? Ledeen and Machiavelli argue that it does, as long as the survivability of the state is at stake. Preserving the state is their goal, even if the personal liberty of all individuals has to be suspended or canceled.

Ledeen makes it clear that war is necessary to establish national boundaries—because that’s the way it’s always been done. Who needs progress of the human race! He explains:

"Look at the map of the world: national boundaries have not been drawn by peaceful men leading lives of spiritual contemplation. National boundaries have been established by war, and national character has been shaped by struggle, most often bloody struggle."

Yes, but who is to lead the charge and decide which borders we are to fight for? What about borders 6,000 miles away unrelated to our own contiguous borders and our own national security? Stating a relative truism regarding the frequency of war throughout history should hardly be the moral justification for expanding the concept of war to settle man’s disputes. How can one call this progress?

Machiavelli, Ledeen and the neocons recognized a need to generate a religious zeal for promoting the state. This, he claims, is especially necessary when force is used to promote an agenda. It’s been true throughout history and remains true today, each side of major conflicts invokes God’s approval. Our side refers to a “crusade;” theirs to a “holy Jihad.” Too often wars boil down to their god against our God. It seems this principle is more a cynical effort to gain approval from the masses, especially those most likely to be killed for the sake of the war promoters on both sides who have power, prestige and wealth at stake.

Ledeen explains why God must always be on the side of advocates of war: “Without fear of God, no state can last long, for the dread of eternal damnation keeps men in line, causes them to honor their promises, and inspires them to risk their lives for the common good.” It seems dying for the common good has gained a higher moral status than eternal salvation of one’s soul. Ledeen adds:

"Without fear of punishment, men will not obey laws that force them to act contrary to their passions. Without fear of arms, the state cannot enforce the laws…to this end, Machiavelli wants leaders to make the state spectacular."

It’s of interest to note that some large Christian denominations have joined the neoconservatives in promoting preemptive war, while completely ignoring the Christian doctrine of a Just War. The neocons sought and openly welcomed their support.

I’d like someone to glean anything from what the Founders said or placed in the Constitution that agrees with this now-professed doctrine of a “spectacular” state promoted by those who now have so much influence on our policies here at home and abroad. Ledeen argues that this religious element, this fear of God, is needed for discipline of those who may be hesitant to sacrifice their lives for the good of the “spectacular state.”

He explains in eerie terms: “Dying for one’s country doesn’t come naturally. Modern armies, raised from the populace, must be inspired, motivated, indoctrinated. Religion is central to the military enterprise, for men are more likely to risk their lives if they believe they will be rewarded forever after for serving their country.” This is an admonition that might just as well have been given by Osama bin Laden, in rallying his troops to sacrifice their lives to kill the invading infidels, as by our intellectuals at the AEI, who greatly influence our foreign policy.

Neocons—anxious for the U.S. to use force to realign the boundaries and change regimes in the Middle East—clearly understand the benefit of a galvanizing and emotional event to rally the people to their cause. Without a special event, they realized the difficulty in selling their policy of preemptive war where our own military personnel would be killed. Whether it was the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, the Gulf of Tonkin, or the Maine, all served their purpose in promoting a war that was sought by our leaders.

Ledeen writes of a fortuitous event (1999):

…of course, we can always get lucky. Stunning events from outside can providentially awaken the enterprise from its growing torpor, and demonstrate the need for reversal, as the devastating Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 so effectively aroused the U.S. from its soothing dreams of permanent neutrality.

Amazingly, Ledeen calls Pearl Harbor a “lucky” event. The Project for a New American Century, as recently as September 2000, likewise, foresaw the need for “a Pearl Harbor event” that would galvanize the American people to support their ambitious plans to ensure political and economic domination of the world, while strangling any potential “rival.”

Recognizing a “need” for a Pearl Harbor event, and referring to Pearl Harbor as being “lucky” are not identical to support and knowledge of such an event, but this sympathy for a galvanizing event, as 9-11 turned out to be, was used to promote an agenda that strict constitutionalists and devotees of the Founders of this nation find appalling is indeed disturbing. After 9-11, Rumsfeld and others argued for an immediate attack on Iraq, even though it was not implicated in the attacks.

The fact that neo-conservatives ridicule those who firmly believe that U.S. interests and world peace would best be served by a policy of neutrality and avoiding foreign entanglements should not go unchallenged. Not to do so is to condone their grandiose plans for American world hegemony.

The current attention given neocons is usually done in the context of foreign policy. But there’s more to what’s going on today than just the tremendous influence the neocons have on our new policy of preemptive war with a goal of empire. Our government is now being moved by several ideas that come together in what I call “neoconism.” The foreign policy is being openly debated, even if its implications are not fully understood by many who support it. Washington is now driven by old views brought together in a new package.

We know those who lead us—both in the administration and in Congress—show no appetite to challenge the tax or monetary systems that do so much damage to our economy. The IRS and the Federal Reserve are off limits for criticism or reform. There’s no resistance to spending, either domestic or foreign. Debt is not seen as a problem. The supply-siders won on this issue, and now many conservatives readily endorse deficit spending.

There’s no serious opposition to the expanding welfare state, with rapid growth of the education, agriculture and medical-care bureaucracy. Support for labor unions and protectionism are not uncommon. Civil liberties are easily sacrificed in the post 9-11 atmosphere prevailing in Washington. Privacy issues are of little concern, except for a few members of Congress. Foreign aid and internationalism—in spite of some healthy criticism of the UN and growing concerns for our national sovereignty—are championed on both sides of the aisle. Lip service is given to the free market and free trade, yet the entire economy is run by special-interest legislation favoring big business, big labor and, especially, big money.

Instead of the “end of history,” we are now experiencing the end of a vocal limited-government movement in our nation’s capital. While most conservatives no longer defend balanced budgets and reduced spending, most liberals have grown lazy in defending civil liberties and now are approving wars that we initiate. The so-called “third way” has arrived and, sadly, it has taken the worst of what the conservatives and liberals have to offer. The people are less well off for it, while liberty languishes as a result.

Neocons enthusiastically embrace the Department of Education and national testing. Both parties overwhelmingly support the huge commitment to a new prescription drug program. Their devotion to the new approach called “compassionate conservatism” has lured many conservatives into supporting programs for expanding the federal role in welfare and in church charities. The faith-based initiative is a neocon project, yet it only repackages and expands the liberal notion of welfare. The intellectuals who promoted these initiatives were neocons, but there’s nothing conservative about expanding the federal government’s role in welfare.

The supply-siders’ policy of low-marginal tax rates has been incorporated into neoconism, as well as their support for easy money and generous monetary inflation. Neoconservatives are disinterested in the gold standard and even ignore the supply-siders’ argument for a phony gold standard.

Is it any wonder that federal government spending is growing at a rate faster than in any time in the past 35 years?

Power, politics and privilege prevail over the rule of law, liberty, justice and peace. But it does not need to be that way. Neoconism has brought together many old ideas about how government should rule the people. It may have modernized its appeal and packaging, but authoritarian rule is authoritarian rule, regardless of the humanitarian overtones. A solution can only come after the current ideology driving our government policies is replaced with a more positive one. In a historical context, liberty is a modern idea and must once again regain the high moral ground for civilization to advance. Restating the old justifications for war, people control and a benevolent state will not suffice. It cannot eliminate the shortcomings that always occur when the state assumes authority over others and when the will of one nation is forced on another—whether or not it is done with good intentions.

I realize that all conservatives are not neoconservatives, and all neocons don’t necessarily agree on all points—which means that in spite of their tremendous influence, most Members of Congress and those in the administration do not necessarily take their marching orders from the AEI or Richard Perle. But to use this as a reason to ignore what neoconservative leaders believe, write about it and agitate for—with amazing success I might point out—would be at our own peril. This country still allows open discourse—though less everyday—and we who disagree should push the discussion and expose those who drive our policies. It is getting more difficult to get fair and balanced discussion on the issues, because it has become routine for the hegemons to label those who object to preemptive war and domestic surveillance as traitors, unpatriotic and un-American. The uniformity of support for our current foreign policy by major and cable-news networks should concern every American. We should all be thankful for CSPAN and the internet.

Michael Ledeen and other neoconservatives are already lobbying for war against Iran. Ledeen is pretty nasty to those who call for a calmer, reasoned approach by calling those who are not ready for war “cowards and appeasers of tyrants.” Because some urge a less militaristic approach to dealing with Iran, he claims they are betraying America’s best “traditions.” I wonder where he learned early American history! It’s obvious that Ledeen doesn’t consider the Founders and the Constitution part of our best traditions. We were hardly encouraged by the American revolutionaries to pursue an American empire. We were, however, urged to keep the Republic they so painstakingly designed.

If the neoconservatives retain control of the conservative, limited-government movement in Washington, the ideas, once championed by conservatives, of limiting the size and scope of government will be a long-forgotten dream.

The believers in liberty ought not deceive themselves. Who should be satisfied? Certainly not conservatives, for there is no conservative movement left. How could liberals be satisfied? They are pleased with the centralization of education and medical programs in Washington and support many of the administration’s proposals. But none should be pleased with the steady attack on the civil liberties of all American citizens and the now-accepted consensus that preemptive war—for almost any reason—is an acceptable policy for dealing with all the conflicts and problems of the world.

In spite of the deteriorating conditions in Washington—with loss of personal liberty, a weak economy, exploding deficits, and perpetual war, followed by nation building—there are still quite a number of us who would relish the opportunity to improve things, in one way or another. Certainly, a growing number of frustrated Americans, from both the right and the left, are getting anxious to see this Congress do a better job. But first, Congress must stop doing a bad job.

We’re at the point where we need a call to arms, both here in Washington and across the country. I’m not talking about firearms. Those of us who care need to raise both arms and face our palms out and begin waving and shouting: Stop! Enough is enough! It should include liberals, conservatives and independents. We’re all getting a bum rap from politicians who are pushed by polls and controlled by special-interest money.

One thing is certain, no matter how morally justified the programs and policies seem, the ability to finance all the guns and butter being promised is limited, and those limits are becoming more apparent every day.

Spending, borrowing and printing money cannot be the road to prosperity. It hasn’t worked in Japan, and it isn’t working here either. As a matter of fact, it’s never worked anytime throughout history. A point is always reached where government planning, spending and inflation run out of steam. Instead of these old tools reviving an economy, as they do in the early stages of economic interventionism, they eventually become the problem. Both sides of the political spectrum must one day realize that limitless government intrusion in the economy, in our personal lives and in the affairs of other nations cannot serve the best interests of America. This is not a conservative problem, nor is it a liberal problem—it’s a government intrusion problem that comes from both groups, albeit for different reasons. The problems emanate from both camps that champion different programs for different reasons. The solution will come when both groups realize that it’s not merely a single-party problem, or just a liberal or just a conservative problem.

Once enough of us decide we’ve had enough of all these so-called good things that the government is always promising—or more likely, when the country is broke and the government is unable to fulfill its promises to the people—we can start a serious discussion on the proper role for government in a free society. Unfortunately, it will be some time before Congress gets the message that the people are demanding true reform. This requires that those responsible for today’s problems are exposed and their philosophy of pervasive government intrusion is rejected.

Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it’s realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy. A few have, and others will continue to do so, but too many—both in and out of government—close their eyes to the issue of personal liberty and ignore the fact that endless borrowing to finance endless demands cannot be sustained. True prosperity can only come from a healthy economy and sound money. That can only be achieved in a free society.

Fortress North America: A Vast Gated Community

America has always been known as the great melting pot where people from various nations can come here with hard work and a bit of luck enrich their lives and the lives of our families. Immigrants have come to America and brought skills that we as Americans valued. We gained from their skills and labor and they came to a country where you can be free to live in peace and comfort.

Today Mexicans are leaving their country in droves and come to America to improve their lives. If I lived In Mexico where the there is such a divide between those have and those who have not I would take the risks and come to America myself. The problem is that there are at least 30 million illegal aliens in America who have not been tested for diseases like TB[1] and they are being exploited by America businesses who don't want to pay the minimum wage or higher.

These men and women break their back in this country only to be paid slave wages. In many states such as Florida, Georgia, Texas and Arizona they have taken over many towns and locals have had to move out. Now many of us have begged the government for a border fence, well we are going to get one but is it took keep the illegals out or to keep us in?

Fortress North America[2] is a term used during World War II which was devised to protect America and Canada from the Nazi blitzkrieg in case all the other nations failed to stop them. Since 9/11 it has been used to further integrate North America and secure the continent. If we are to integrate with Canada and Mexico why is it that we can no longer cross both borders without a long-range RFID enabled passport, thumb print and a cavity search[3]?

Forget about travelling out of the country on an airplane, you must have 'clearance' before hand. If you are on a no-fly list then you can't even leave the country. Now when you travel abroad you are put in a Homeland Security database which creates a risk assessment profile to determine whether you are a terrorist, subversive or peaceful protestor. This is called the Automated Targeting System[4]. Bruce Schneier said it best, "It's the sort of thing you'd expect from the former Soviet Union or East Germany or China."

RFID, radio frequency identification is being using in U.S. passports, Wal-Mart groceries and the jeans you buy in The Gap. It is being used by the government because it is easy to track and trace travelers who come and go. A recent story showed that the National Guard[5] during times of disasters and emergencies will be using RFID to track people, pets and equipment. So if you are put on a bus going to a wonderful local FEMA center you are being tracked and corralled like cattle.

On the northern and southern border the U.S. VISIT[6] initiative has created biometric checkpoints for everyone but illegal aliens. The U.S. government may be willing to put unregulated mercenary forces such as Blackwater USA or Dyncorp[7] on both borders to 'keep us safe'. All of this safety is beginning to look a lot like East Germany. We have lost so many liberties that Americans have taken for granted. Our government has taken our liberties and replaced them with permissions attached with fees.

We live in a gated North American community ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the police state. When the next attack happens on American soil will you quietly go to your local FEMA center? Halliburton[8] is building detention camps, and preachers[9] are being bought off by Homeland Security to quell dissent when martial law is declared. This police state apparatus is being built right under our noses. It is late in the game but we still have time. Plan for your family before your government unveils their plans for you.

Clever tyrants are never punished. --Voltaire

1. Business World. Illegal aliens bringing drug-resistant TB and other diseases with them. 2005 [cited; Available from: http://www.businessword.com/index.php/weblog/comments/1598/.

2. Global Research. "Securing the North American Security Perimeter". 2005 [cited; Available from: http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=175.

3. PC World. Plan to Use RFID in U.S. Border Control Draws Fire. 2007 [cited; Available from: http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,136981-pg,1/article.html.

4. Bruce Schneier. Automated Targeting System. 2006 [cited; Available from: http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/12/automated_targe.html.

5. Mobile Radio Technology. National Guard uses RFID to track people, property. 2007 [cited; Available from: http://mrtmag.com/briefs/national_guard_rfid_091007/.

6. SECURE ID News. Biometric data to be required upon exiting the United States [cited; Available from: http://www.secureidnews.com/news/2007/06/29/biometric-data-to-be-required-upon-exiting-the-united-states/.

7. El Paso Times. Private security force isn't desirable. 2007 [cited; Available from: http://www.elpasotimes.com/opinion/ci_6847673.

8. Alternet. American Prison Camps Are on the Way. 2006 [cited; Available from: http://www.alternet.org/rights/42458/.

9. KSLA. Homeland Security Enlists Clergy to Quell Public Unrest if Martial Law Ever Declared. 2007 [cited; Available from: http://www.ksla.com/Global/story.asp?S=6937987.

Doublespeak

Doublespeak

The words listed here are ones that are often used by politicians and the media to put spin on an idea. The following words mean almost the same thing, but convey completely different images to the listener.

Affirmative Action / Racial Discrimination - Both mean "preferential treatment for a particular race". However, the first is mandated by law and the second in illegal.

Alternative lifestyles / sexual perversions - First, let's examine the definition of perversion from Webster's dictionary:

per-ver-sion (per-vur'-zhan) n. a turning from the true purpose, use, or meaning; corruption; unnatural manifestation of sexual desire.

If you follow this definition, any sexual act performed for any "unnatural" reasons (i.e. for any reason other than the "natural", instinctual purpose of reproduction) can be considered a perversion. There are many activities that either completely prohibit or are unnecessary for the purpose of propagation of the species, such as Bestiality (sex with animals), Homosexuality (attraction to same sex), Pedophilia (attraction to children), Necrophilia (Sexual gratification by having sex with the dead), Monogamy (attraction to only one mate), Chastity (abstaining from sex), and Bondage. It is difficult to claim that any of these practices are instinctual, since they are not routinely practiced by other mammals. This is not to say that these desires are necessarily wrong, but it should be recognized that they are all perversions of a human's natural desire to mate.

Unfortunately, this fact is hard for some people to take. They don't like being told that what they are doing is in fact, very weird. So, in order to remove the stigma of being a pervert, it was necessary to come up with the term alternative lifestyle to describe these strange mating habits.

Here is an interesting example I found in the St. Louis Riverfront Times

...a fall 1999 British-made documentary, "Hidden Love: Animal Passions", reported on practitioners in Missouri's "zoophile" community (i.e., Human beings romantically involved with animals), including an interview with an uncloseted zoophile gushing over his "wife", Pixel, a horse; said one activists, "We are not sick at all. Zoosexuality is (merely) an alternative lifestyle". - Riverfront Times, Feb 9-15, 2000 p.8

Attack / Retaliation - When our allies suffer a loss of life/property at the hands of an enemy, it is called a cold-blooded attack. When our enemies suffer a loss of life/property at the hands of an ally, it is called retaliation.

And when that enemy retaliates for the attack it just suffered, it is again referred to as a cold-blooded attack -- never as retaliation. No matter how often this cycle continues, our side is always said to be retaliating to the other side's attack.

This effect is most apparent in the Israeli / Palestinian war. The Palestinians will launch a surprise attack, and Israel will retaliate. The Palestinians will launch another surprise attack, and Israel will retaliate again. The Palestinians launch yet another surprise attack, and Israel... well, you get the idea.

When the events are explained in explained in this manner, one might get the impression that Israel is the victim of Palestinian aggression -- That Israelis desire nothing but peace and Palestinians desire nothing but war. Of course, it is impossible to say for sure 'who started it'. After all, this land had been changing hands continuously for the last 2500 years. However -- As far as I can tell, this latest conflict began back in the 1940's when Anglo-American and Jewish terrorist forces (Irgon and Stern) forced the Palestinians off their land in order to pave the way for the creation of a Jewish state.

Of course Israel wants peace now -- They are the ones with the land! Demanding peace after forcibly taking another person's land is like winning a large sum of money on the first hand of poker and then refusing to play another game. The Palestinians want their land back -- and Israel is trying to claim the moral high ground by denying them a chance to win it back.

Bust / Massive arrest by the state - When US police go on rampage and incarcerate large numbers of people during the "War on Drugs" it is considered a great victory ... When China arrest large numbers of people for trying to bring down the government, it is considered to be a barbaric act against basic human rights.

Campaign contribution / bribe - Is there any difference at all? In theory, a bribe is a guarantee that a political payoff will result on a specified action being taken by a politician. But a campaign contribution is not supposed to contain such a quid pro quo But why else would an organization give $500,000 to a political candidate, if the didn't expect something in return?

Civilian Casualties / Collateral damage - Other countries kill their own citizens... America only damages them.

Charity / Redistribution of wealth - When you offer food to people that are hungry, you are giving charity. When a government takes money from you in order to give it to people that aren't a whole hell of a lot poorer than you, it is called redistribution of wealth.

Dedicated / Fanatical - The US is "Dedicated" to keeping drugs out of America, while the citizens of Salem were "Fanatical" for their desire to keep witches out of Salem.

Educated / Brainwashed - US children are "Educated" about the evils of drugs, pollution, and race relations ... Soviet children were "Brainwashed" in Soviet doctrine.

Ethnic Cleansing / Population Transfer - The US forced thousands of Germans out of their homes after WWII. (The land was given to Poland for "war reparations") At the time, we called this "Population Transfer".

Freedom fighters / Terrorists - Freedom Fighters attack other governments to obtain "freedom". Terrorists attack the U.S. and our allies, in order to gain their freedom.

Invasion / Military Police Action / Peacekeeping - All of these words can be used to describe when one country puts troops in another land. The choice of which word to use depends entirely on which country is performing this action. When the USSR entered Afghanistan to support the existing government, it was called an invasion. When the US put troops in Vietnam, it was considered a "police action". The presence of U.N. troops in Bosnia is called "Peacekeeping".

Law and Order / Oppression - Every law has at its core a desire to force a person to behave a certain way, and is a form a oppression. The only factor that determines whether a law is "oppressive' is whether or not you agree with it -- and whether or not you believe that the law will effect you!

Prohibition / War on Drugs - You can find a detailed comparison here.

Realistic / Stereotypical - If a person believes that it is a bad idea to walk though the ghetto at night, they are simply being realistic. However, if they take the next step and say that the reason it's such a bad idea is because of the people that live in that neighborhood, they are accused of stereotyping.

Revolution / Civil War - When the colonies revolted against oppression from Britain, it was called a "revolution". When the south revolted against the oppression of Washington DC, it was called a civil war. I guess it all depends on who wins the war. If the government wins, it is a civil war. If the citizens win, it is a revolution.

Shell Shock / Combat Fatigue / Operational Exhaustion / Post-traumatic stress disorder - The comedian George Carlin once pointed out how the way we describe this condition has changed over the years. He pointed out how the wording has changed to completely remove any connection with the horrors of war from the name of the condition, even though it is the horrors of war which is the direct cause of the condition.

Self-confident / Arrogant - Liberals are self-confident... because they are dedicated to their beliefs. But, conservatives are arrogant because they are dedicated to their beliefs.

Slave/Serf/indentured servant/debtor

A slave labors for his owner, and in return is given food, shelter, and the occasional lashing. He is the property of his master, and may be sold at any time.

In the by-gone days of Europe, a surf was required to give 20% of his produce to his lord - in exchange he had enough food to eat, and was allowed to live on the land. Actually, a serf is considered part of land - If the property is sold, he is sold with it. This is an improvement over slavery in that families cannot be broken up at the whim of the master - plus the peasant is allowed to accumulate some possessions.

An Indentured servant was required to work for his "master" for a term of years. This servitude was generally "repayment" for some sort of loan or grant. Many colonists became indentured servants to pay for their passage to the new world.

Today's society is far more advanced. People are no longer considered to be anybody else's property. They my own their own property. None-the-less, a worker must still pay 38% of what they earn to the state. To make matters worse, most are heavily in debt to banks and other lending institutions. In a sense, they have allowed themselves to become "indentured servants" by agreeing to loans with 15%-20% usury charges. They are forced to hand over a large percentage of their income to their new masters. (Did you really think the bank was doing you a favor by giving you a credit card?)

Spend / Invest - Politicians aren't spending taxpayer money - they're investing it. Normally, when one says that he is investing money, we assume that that person is intending to profit monetarily from that investment. The definition according to the American Heritage® Dictionary is:

in•vest - To commit (money or capital) in order to gain a financial return: (invested their savings in stocks and bonds.)

If we adhere to this definition, the act of squandering taxpayer money on pet projects cannot be considered investing -- That is, unless the politician is expecting to profit from it personally. But of course, this is sometimes the case. Like when politicians spend money in order to please their campaign contributors, who in turn give the politicians even more money come election time.

Tax Cut / Tax Scheme - When the Republicans propose a tax cut, the Democrats call it a tax scheme. In the English language, the word scheme is normally used to describe a plot to rip people off. It is not used to describe a plan to let people keep what is theirs.

Take a look at these examples, and see if you can figure out which sentences are not correct:

A dangerous computer hacker came up with a scheme to steal thousands of credit card numbers without getting caught.

The bank robber came up with a scheme to become a law abiding citizen.

The unscrupulous tele-marketing company schemed to rip-off the elderly.

The doctors in the emergency room schemed to save their patient's life.

If you answered #2 & #4, CONGRATULATIONS - You are a normal human being!

I can appreciate the fact that it is hard for a politician to fight a tax cut, but blatant misuse of the English language is not the answer. Shame on you, Democrats.

Trickle-Down Economics / Supply side economics - The belief that companies create jobs. It is the belief that if America produces more, we will have more stuff... go figure.

Visionary / unrealistic - All Visionaries have been called unrealistic at one time or another.

Suspected 9-11 Criminal Coconspirators

	George W. Bush — eldest son of Bush crime family; guilty of election fraud in 2000, 2004; guilty of war crimes, war profiteering, treason, crimes against humanity; likely signed-off on 9-11 plot
	Dick Cheney — former PNAC member; guilty of war profiteering, treason; was in bunker on 9-11 directing several “war games”; lied to 9-11 Omission Commission about timing of 9-11 activities
	Donald Rumsfeld — former Secretary of War and PNAC member; close friend of Cheney; was at Pentagon on 9-11; once slipped and said “when that missile hit the Pentagon”
	Paul Wolfowitz — Deputy Secretary of War on 9-11; “dual citizen” of US and Israel; Zionist; investigated for spying for Israel; former PNAC member; chief architect of Iraq war; forced to resign in World Bank scandal
	Richard Perle — former assistant Secretary of War, chairman War Policy Board, and PNAC member; “dual citizen” of US and Israel; Zionist; allegedly gave $100,000 to head of Pakistan’s ISI, Mahmoud Ahmad; nicknamed “Prince of Darkness”


	Douglas Feith — effectively in command, with Wolfowitz, of War Department on 9-11; Undersecretary of War for Policy; “dual citizen” of US and Israel; Zionist; investigated for spying for Israel; former PNAC member
	Dov Zakheim — Pentagon comptroller when trillion dollars reported missing on 9-10-01; “dual citizen” of US and Israel; Zionist; Shul Rabbi; former CFR member; former CEO of fly-by-remote manufacturer; reputed 9-11 mastermind
	George Tenet — director of the CIA on 9-11; was awarded the “Medal of Freedom” by Bush for his fine work on 9-11; reported to be “dual citizen” of US and Israel
	Robert Mueller — FBI director on 9-11; under his “leadership” FBI field agents’ warnings of an imminent attack were stifled
	Thomas Pickard — took over the job of FBI director from Louis Freeh in August 2001; held this position only for a few weeks before Robert Mueller became director; former Terror Task Force chief John O’Neill complained about sabotage by Pickard
	Dale Watson — former Deputy Chief of the CIA at the Counter-Terrorist Center; appointed Inspector Deputy Assistant Director of the National Security Division (NSD), FBI Headquarters, Washington, DC in July 1998; appointed FBI Headquarters Assistant on December 6, 1999 by the Attorney General; ignored at least four different FBI agents’ warnings including an “urgent cable” from the CIA on August 23rd about Almihdhar and Alhazmi
	Dave Frasca — FBI Radical Fundamentalists Unit Chief; personally scuttled the work of Kenneth Williams in July 2001 and Coleen Rowley in August 2001, the Arizona and Minnesota FBI agents who were actively investigating “terrorist” patsies in CIA-operated flight schools
	Marion “Spike” Bowman — FBI agent who thwarted FBI investigations into both Zacarias Moussaoui and the anthrax attacks on Congress
	John Ashcroft — Attorney General on 9-11; protected “terrorist” patsy Abdussattar Shaikh from subpoena after 9-11; stopped flying commercial aircraft in 2001
	Michael Chertoff — Assistant Attorney General on 9-11; freed over 100 Israeli spies in the US after 9-11; promoted to head Homeland Security; “dual citizen” of US and Israel; Zionist; likely Mossad agent
	Colin Powell — Secretary of State on 9-11; met with General Mahmoud Ahmad two days after 9-11; former chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff; helped cover up Vietnam My Lai massacre
	Condi Rice — National Security Adviser on 9-11; promoted to Secretary of State; lied to 9-11 Omission Commission while under oath
	Tommy Thompson — Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary; hired Jerome Hauer, former Office of Emergency Center, on 9-10-01
	Jerome Hauer — managing director of Kroll and senior adviser to US Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) for National Security and Emergency Management on 9-11; put John O’Neill at the WTC on 9-11; lied to Dan Rather on CBS News on 9-11 about the controlled demolition of WTC buildings; director of Giuliani’s Office of Emergency Management from 1996 to 2000
	Porter Goss — former House Intelligence Chair; was meeting with General Mahmoud Ahmad, head of Pakistan’s ISI and 9-11 financier, on 9-11; promoted to Director of CIA, resigned after “hookergate”
	Bob Graham — former Florida Senator; was meeting with General Mahmoud Ahmad, head of Pakistan’s ISI and 9-11 financier, on 9-11; ran for President in 2004
	Marc Grossman — Under Secretary for Political Affairs on 9-11; met with General Mahmoud Ahmad, head of Pakistan’s ISI and 9-11 financier, on or shortly after 9-11; “dual citizen” of US and Israel
	Richard Armitage — former member of PNAC, Deputy Secretary of State; met with General Mahmoud Ahmad, head of Pakistan’s ISI and 9-11 financier, shortly after 9-11
	Philip Zelikow — led the 9-11 Cover-Up Commission; personally wrote the 9-11 Omission Commission Report, a best-selling work of fiction; appointed Counselor of US Department of State; “dual citizen” of US and Israel
	Ari Fleischer — White House spokesman for Bush on 9-11; “dual citizen” of US and Israel; connected to the extremist group called the Chabad Lubavitch Hasidics
	Richard Meyers — in charge of USA air defenses on 9-11; lied to 9-11 Omission Commission about reasons for air defense failure on 9-11; promoted to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
	Ralph Eberhardt — NORAD Commander on 9-11; fanatical supporter of missile defense scheme, militarization of space; enthusiastic supporter of merging law enforcement and the military
	Larry Arnold — NORAD Commander Major General on 9-11; has used 9-11 to push militarization of USA
	Eric Findley — Canadian Air Force Major General; acting commander of NORAD on 9-11
	Montague Winfield — Major General in charge of Pentagon war room on 9-10-01, the evening of September 10th he requested a rookie to stand in for him on 9-11
	Richard Mies — former Admiral; ran Global Guardian “war game” on 9-11 out of US Strategic Command (Stratcom) at Offutt Air Force Base; now CEO of Hicks & Associates, a “strategic consultant” to the USG dealing in “military transformation”
	Henry Shelton — chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff on 9-11; supported formation of Able Danger
	Peter Schoomaker — US Army Chief of Staff; former SOCOM (Special Operations Command) chief; ran Able Danger
	Geoffrey Lambert — Major General; SOCOM (Special Operations Command) Intel Chief; made Able Danger, the program that tracked patsy “terrorists”, off limits to FBI
	Tony Gentry — Army Intelligence and Security Command General Counsel; ordered 2.5 terrabytes of Able Danger data destroyed
	Philip Odeen — as director of Program Analysis for the National Security Council, provided staff support to Henry Kissinger from 1971 to 1973; served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of War in Systems Analysis; named to chair the National War Panel in 1997; former president of Reynolds and Reynolds; former CEO and president of BDM International; executive vice president of Washington operations of TRW
	Elliot Abrams — former member of PNAC, National Security Council; pleaded guilty in 1991 to lying to Congress about Iran-Contra affair; “dual citizen” of US and Israel; Zionist
	Lewis “Scooter” Libby — former PNAC member; studied political science at Yale under Paul Wolfowitz; aid to Cheney; convicted for lying about outing of Valerie Plame; “dual citizen” of US and Israel; Zionist
	Jack Abramoff — entertained USG “terrorist” patsy Mohammed Atta on his yacht just before 9-11; convicted criminal lobbyist; ardent Zionist
	Jeb Bush — Florida governor on 9-11; declared martial law in Florida four days before 9-11; brother of George Bush; PNAC member; guilty of election fraud in 2000
	Rudolph Giuliani — mayor of New York on 9-11; hailed as “hero” for his “gutsy” leadership on 9-11; allegedly involved with FEMA and former NYC Police Chief Kerik in Operation Code Angel
	Bernard Kerik — NYC Police Chief on 9-11; “sidekick” of Giuliani; allegedly involved with FEMA in WTC demolition “war games” called Operation Code Angel
	Eliot Spitzer — New York Attorney General on 9-11; barred his top aide, Deputy Attorney General Dietrich Snell, from testifying to Congress on Able Danger; threw out Karl Schwarz’s 9-11 synopsis
	Richard Holbrooke — former US ambassador to UN; CFR member; co-chaired “Independent Task Force on America’s Response to Terrorism” in which the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT) was promoted
	John Deutch — former Undersecretary of War, director of CIA; co-authored paper, “Catastrophic Terrorism: A National Policy” with Zelikow, Ashton Carter; senior partner at Global Technology Partners, an affiliate of Rothschild North America; MIT professor; grandson of Yonah Fischer, Antwerp diamond merchant who ran Zionist Federation of Belgium
	Ashton Carter — co-authored paper, “Catastrophic Terrorism: A National Policy” with Zelikow and Deutch; senior partner at Global Technology Partners, an affiliate of Rothschild North America
	Abdussattar Shaikh — FBI informant to the San Diego office; helped bring “terrorist” patsies to USA; protected by Attorney General Ashcroft
	Abdullah Noman — worked for the US Consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; filed 10-15 visas for the patsy 9-11 “hijackers” in the Visa Express Program
	Daniel Lewin — officer in elite, secret unit of Israeli military called “Sayeret Matkal”; orchestrated activities of Mossad agents in USA before 9-11; was allegedly stabbed or “shot” by highjacker Satam al-Suqami before AA flight 11 crashed into the WTC
	Dominic Suter — Mossad agent; his front company, Urban Moving Systems, employed the five Mossad agents caught celebrating in New York on 9-11
	Sivan Kurzberg — driver of van belonging to the celebrating Israelis; when stopped by police on 9-11, he said “We are Israelis. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are your problem”
	John Gross — one of the lead engineers for the flawed NIST report on why the WTC buildings collapsed; denies existence of molten steel at the WTC
	Theresa McAllister — edited the flawed NIST report on why the WTC buildings collapsed
	Ronald Hamburger — structural engineer and Senior Principal at Simpson Gumpertz and Heger consulting engineers in San Francisco; was a principal author of FEMA’s initial report on the collapse of the twin towers; later a key participant in the flawed NIST report on why the WTC buildings collapsed
	William Baker — member of FEMA Probe Team; partner with Skidmore, Owings, Merrill; contributed to the flawed NIST report on why the WTC buildings collapsed
	Harold Nelson — contributed to the flawed NIST report on why the WTC buildings collapsed
	Ramon Gilsanz — contributed to the flawed NIST report on why the WTC buildings collapsed
	Shankar Nair — contributed to the flawed NIST report on why the WTC buildings collapsed; quoted in Chicago Tribune, September 19, 2001 that “Already there is near-consensus as to the sequence of events that led to the collapse of the World Trade Center”
	Gene Corley — led FEMA/ASCE WTC collapse “investigation”; was the principal investigator for ASCE and FEMA of the 1995 bombing of the Murrah Federal Office Building in Oklahoma City
	Paul Mlakar — part of ASCE team that investigated both WTC and Murrah Federal building attacks
	Mete Sozen — part of ASCE team that investigated both WTC and Murrah Federal building attacks
	Charles Thornton — partner of Richard Tomasetti; told Karl Koch, whose company erected the WTC steel, “Karl, we all know what caused the collapse”; part of ASCE team that investigated both WTC and Murrah Federal building attacks
	Richard Tomasetti — partner of Charles Thornton; reportedly behind the unprecedented and widely criticized decision to destroy most of the WTC steel evidence
	Benjamin Chertoff — 25-year-old cousin of Michael Chertoff; senior “researcher” for Popular Mechanics’ hit piece on 9-11 Truth Movement
	unnamed — FAA manager at the New York Air Route Traffic Control Center who destroyed controllers’ tapes of 9-11
	Marvin Bush — brother of George Bush; on board of Securacom, US-Kuwaiti company paid $9.2 to manage WTC security October 1996 to 1998; on board of HCC Insurance, big WTC insurer
	Wirt Walker — cousin of George Bush; principal at Securacom, US-Kuwaiti joint-venture that managed security for WTC, United Airlines, and Dulles Airport, all of which figured into 9-11
	Larry Silverstein — he and partner Frank Lowy obtained 99-year lease on WTC shortly before 9-11; made several billion dollars on 9-11 insurance fraud; admitted to “pulling” WTC 7
	David Rockefeller — vice director of the Council on Foreign Relations (1949-1985), vice president (1950-1970), and chairman (1970-1985); as chairman of the Downtown-Lower Manhattan Association (1958 to 1975) was primary builder of WTC complex; founder and honorary chairman of the Trilateral Commission; president or CEO of Chase Manhattan Bank, 1961 to 1981; 9-11 was the anniversary of 1973 CIA-sponsored coup plotted by David Rockefeller’s cabal and overseen by Nelson’s protégé Henry Kissinger that toppled Chile’s President Salvadore Allende
	Nicholas Rockefeller — told film-maker Aaron Russo of coming catastrophic event eleven months before 9-11
	Warren Buffett — was hosting golf charity event at the US Strategic Command headquarters at Offutt Air Force Base in Omaha on 9-11 (Bush flew to Offutt afternoon of 9-11); world’s second richest person
	Maurice Greenberg — CEO of American International Group (AIG) on 9-11 which became co-owner of the “private spy agency”, Kroll Associates, in 1993 and was a major share-holder in Marsh & McClennan whose CEO on 9-11 was Maurice’s son Jeffrey; director of the New York Federal Reserve bank (1988-1995); deputy chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in 1996; major investor in the Blackstone Group
	Jules Kroll — founder of Kroll Corporation, a “security services” company which was in charge of “security” at WTC on 9-11; has close links to CIA and is active private military contractor in Iraq; Zionist
	Paul Bremer — Marsh & McClennan executive on 9-11; Chairman of the Congressional National Commission on Terrorism, 1999 to 2000; US Ambassador-at-Large for Counterterrorism, 1986 to 1989; Presidential Envoy to Irag and Adminstrator of the Coaltion Provisional Authority, May 2003 to December 2004
	Peter Peterson — CEO of the Blackstone Group, parent corporation of one of three lease-holders for WTC 7 on 9-11; also chairman of the CFR and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on 9-11; CEO of the Institute for International Economics in October 2000
	A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard — now number three Executive Director at the CIA; until 1998, managed firm used to place “put options” on United Airlines which has left $2.5 million in “profits” unclaimed
	Mark Loizeaux — as CEO of CDI was instrumental in “recycling” steel from WTC crime scene; CDI also buried the rubble from the crime scene of the Murrah Federal Building
	Loring Knoblauch — CEO of Underwriters Labs; said that jet fuel fires were not “reasonably foreseeable”; resigned suddenly in August 2004 after UL performed tests of WTC floor models where floors did not collapse and were barely affected
	Michael Cherkasky — CEO of Kroll on 9-11; former investigator in the Manhattan DA’s Office from 1978 to 1994; now CEO of insurance-firm Marsh & McClennan
	Frank Carlucci — former Secretary of War; affiliated with PNAC; served as chairman of the Carlyle Group (1992-2003); on BoD of BDM International
	William Kristol — PNAC co-founder; adherent of Leo Strauss; editor of The Weekly Standard; strong advocate of the Iraq war; “dual citizen” of US and Israel; Zionist
	William Perry — former Secretary of War; associated with the Rothschild's banking empire through Global Technology, a Rothschild affiliate
	James Woolsey — former CIA director; PNAC member; claims “incompetence” was reason for 9-11
	Newt Gingrich — former Speaker of the House; PNAC member; reputed to be a member of the CFR; served on the Pentagon’s War Policy Board
	Henry Kissinger — long criminal history; wanted for war crimes in several countries; sat on War Policy Board under Perle; chosen to lead 9-11 Cover-Up Omission Commission; “dual citizen” of US and Israel
	George H.W. Bush — Bush crime family Don; Skull and Bones; CIA operative involved in JFK assassination; former head of CIA; son of friend shot Reagan when he was VP; war profiteer
	Tony Blair — British Prime Minister on 9-11; ally and partner in crime of George Bush; London 7-7 bombings were also “false flag” operation
	Pauline Neville-Jones — International Governor of BBC on 9-11; Chairman of UK Joint Intelligence Committee (1991-1994); Chairman of QinetiQ Group, a war technology company with government customers in UK and USA; Chairman of Information Assurance Advisory Council (IAAC)
	Mahmoud Ahmad — head of Pakistan’s ISI; had Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh wire $100,000 to lead 9-11 “terrorist” patsy Mohammad Atta
	Benjamin Netanyahu — former Israeli Prime Minister; said 9-11 was “good” for US-Israeli relationship