Watchman Willie Martin Archive

�Chapter Seven

America's Demise

Dismantling America For World Government

by

David J. Smith

From February 15th to the 22nd, 1987 on the ABC television network, was the most cleverly orchestrated propaganda yet to ever appear openly in the United States, with a message of abject surrender of the American people. Director Wrye appeared February 23, 1987, on ABC's Nightline with host Ted Kopple (CFR). He stated that the picture portrayed the American spirit.

I will call Mr. Wrye down on that and accuse him publicly of being a Socialist (Zionist) New Ager, with inside information for the final conquest of the United States. No one could produce such a mini series with New Age terminology and facts of regionalism without knowing the program for the worldwide conquest of the United States.

For instance, the Heartland Region composed of five states ‑‑ Illinois, Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska and Kansas. We already have 10 federal regions imposed (upon us) during the Nixon Administration, but kept from the American people. The propaganda continued with the upside down American Flag, showing total disdain for America. But when they displayed pictures of Lenin and Abraham Lincoln together, the agony was nearly too much (to bear).

George Washington liberated men to freedom while Lenin caused millions to be slaughtered and enslaved them. ABC tried to give Lenin respectability, He deserves none.

He makes Hitler look like a child at play. America, the Jews plan the same slaughter here. Don't believe their lies of everyone living peacefully into the tenth year of occupation. They will slaughter every Congressman, Minister, and higher educated person they can locate. Then there was the scene where a boy stood up with his Red Hat and Bandana around his neck (The type) that is worn in all socialist countries by young brainwashed kids. He stated twice within the context of his speech that the "Old America" was gone. Anyone who would not enter The New Age Will be crushed. Why did he use the term New Age? Simple! International Socialism is controlled by those of the New Age Movement. Socialism is only being used until they have taken (Control of) the world. Then absolute dictatorship and tyranny will reign supreme.

The final night saw Kris Kristofferson lead an attempt to overthrow the United Nations "peacekeeping" troops‑Russians to regain freedom in America. This drama ended with the "peace‑keeping" troops reaching the radio facilities before a broadcast for freedom could be aired. The general stated, "Momentum was on their (The antichrists) side, and there was no stopping them; so why resist?" �This was the whole purpose of this movie; to program us not to resist the momentum of the new age. Of course the resisters were killed and freedom was forever lost in America. (Don't you see) we have now been told publicly that the forces of evil are so powerful that we cannot stop them, so why not surrender to save much bloodshed?

���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Planned Surrender?

I wonder if there is right now a planned surrender of the United States to the United Nations and merger with the Soviet Union into a one world government. An organization which most of us have never herd of is called members of Congress for peace through law.

This organization has the same goals as the Council On Foreign Relations ‑‑ World Government. It presently boasts of 269 Congressmen as members. A few names are sufficient of past members ‑‑ Hubert Humphries, Henry Kissinger, and Zbigniew Brzezinski. This organization started in 1966.

����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Lenin's Plan

"First we will take Eastern Europe, then the masses of Asia. Then we will encircle the United States, which will be the last bastion of capitalism. We shall not have to attack. It (U.S.) will fall like a ripe grapefruit into our hands." ^[1]

Col. Jack Mohr of Little Rock, Arkansas, and Pastor Earl Jones of Deming, New Mexico, presented the following information to the New Mexico and Arizona legislature in a four hour hearing:

1). Col. Jack Mohr states that he has 176 letters from American tourists to Mexico saying they have seen Communist� Military activities in Mexico.

2). Visual sighting of one combat unit within 25 miles of El Paso, Texas.

3). In 1982, a fishing and hunting guide from Almeto next to Brownsville, Texas, took some Americans dove hunting� about 40 miles northwest of Ciudad Victoria. One morning they heard heavy equipment over a hill. They climbed to� the top and saw tanks, half tracks, and mechanized vehicles all with the Red Soviet Star on them.

4). Four American 4 engine planes flying from San Antonio to Monterrey, Mexico, with (a) cargo of electronic equipment were all shot down by jets with no markings, even though they had clearance for their flight.

5). Reports in the fall of 1984, from Del Rio, Texas, by a Mexican‑American stated that all the old family Mexicans had� moved about 200 miles away from the border. This Mexican‑American hunting guide recruited young Mexicans to take Americans hunting into Old Mexico. After the Americans went to sleep, the young Mexican guides say around the campfires discussing how they had been approached by foreigners offering large sums of money, up to $1,000, for training to go up the Mississippi River and blow up bridges at the appointed time. The designed purpose was to cut food supplies from its distribution center, Omaha, Nebraska, to the East Coast populated centers by blowing the bridges at St. Louis, Missouri, and Cairo, Illinois. A colonel of Federalies came into camp one night and began bragging that the southwest United States would soon be taken.

6). Col. Jack Mohr was in Montreal, Canada, and read a small newspaper article buried in the back section reporting� upon a diplomatic party held for the Mexican Ambassador to Canada. The Mexican Ambassador proposed A toast to the future mutual Canadian-Mexican border.

7). In McAllen, Texas, during 1984, a Baptist Missionary overheard Col. Mohr and a friend talking about the Mexican� situation and reported to him that he had consistently heard since 1976, of Communist in Corna Locka plans to take a strip of land from Corpus Christi to San Antonio to El Paso to Tucson to San Diego. The Communists didn't feel the United States would risk an international incident over this section of land.

8). In 1986, a very reliable American of Mexican descent, and personal friend of Pastor Earl Jones of Deming, New� Mexico, went down the Baja Peninsula to visit relatives. They reported North Korean Communist troops in all the bars up and down Baja.

9). On January 10, 1986, several new major crossing points from Mexico to the U.S. were discovered, Brownsville and� Eagle Pass, Texas; Columbus, New Mexico; Lukeville, Arizona. The Mexican Government has been busing large� numbers of young men to holding areas 25 miles south of the border. Most of these young men are not Mexicans, rather 32 different nationalities have been picked up at border crossings during 1985‑86. Some were Czechs, E. Germans, Yugoslavs, Hungarian, Cuban, and Central Americans, all with social security cards and identification papers. All were from Communist block countries.

10). In November 1985, a frustrated investigative reporter for an El Paso, Texas, newspaper called Col. Jack Mohr to� report the apprehension of seven men crossing the border from El Paso to Los Curses. They had the component� parts of a nuclear device on their persons. The newspaper had a 3 inch high headline ready to print when sources from high up in the State Department in Washington, D.C., sent word that this information was not to reach the American People.

11). On February 26, 1985, a radio station in Tucson, Arizona, made a one time 10 second announcement that 6 North� Korean Soldiers had been captured in a border fight in the Aerovaca area of Arizona. This area is about 15 miles north of the border. The Six North Koreans had Automatic Weapons.

12). On March 13, 1985, a Canadian bush pilot reported tanks, armored vehicles, and personnel carriers with the Red� Russian Star on the side along the Hudson Bay area. He reported his sighting at the air base immediately upon� landing. He was jailed for the weekend until an official from Montreal flew down to receive assurance that he would say nothing. He was released after giving that assurance. Caution: There may be a very slight possibility that these vehicles were U.S. or Canadian on maneuvers. The circumstances, however, are questionable.

13). In 1976, Congressman Larry MacDonald (Now deceased) warned of Mexico going Communist.

14). Steve Symms, Senator from Idaho, receives first hand reports from retired Idaho farmers now living in Mexico�� concerning the relentless march of Communism upon Mexico.

15). In October 1982, 36 House Members warned President Reagan of Mexico being ripe for a Communist takeover.

16). Midland, Texas, County Sheriff Gary Painter took PROOF to the FBI and State Department of twelve terrorist� camps in Mexico. He was treated like a criminal. "Terrorist and Guerrilla Training Camps in Mexico. As most of you know, brother Jack Mohr and I have been reporting the presence of terrorist training camps in Mexico for several years now. As is usually the case in such matters, it has been very difficult for most Americans to accept this information as 'credible,' since nothing has been reported in the media. Well, times are changing! The Midland County, Texas Sheriff Gary Painter had heard and read some of our reports and determined to find out for himself if we were some kind of 'kooks' or if we knew what we were talking about. With the service of his deputies, he acquired the assistance of several Mexican citizens and they went about investigating the presence of the alleged camps. After a four‑month investigation he acquired hard evidence of at least five camps operating in Mexico. He prepared a map showing the camps and, along with this information, went to Washington, D.C., and met with officials from the State Department, Central Intelligence Agency, U.S. Customs and Mr. Boyden Gray, who is the chief council for Vice‑President George Bush. Sheriff Painter's investigation showed that terrorists or guerrillas were also working in Texas and that several Midland residents have visited the training camp located in the State of Chihuahua, which borders Texas from El Paso to the Big Bend area. Sheriff Painter claimed that the camps are funded by drug money out of Columbia and that at the camps that he found, Libyans, Cubans and Columbians are trained for terrorist and guerrilla activities. The essence of this story is in the response that Sheriff Painter received from the group in Washington. The State Department representative told him that his information was 'in the vital interest of our national security' and that his information was 'most accurate and up to date.' But Sheriff Painter says that is the extent of interest the federal agencies have shown! He also stated that 'It's very mind‑boggling that this credible information is being ignored.'" ^[2] Mail can be sent to him at: Sheriff Gary Painter, Midland County Courthouse, Midland, Texas 79701. This address was good in 1986, but it may have changed since that time.

�� 17). In August 1983, Congressman Larry MacDonald stated before committee that he knew of at least five Congressmen who were committing treason by helping the Communist in Mexico and Central America. He stated that he would "blow the whistle" when he got back from Korea. However, he was a dangerous man to the Communist cause, so the Soviet Union shot down Korean Jetliner 007 and killed 247 people. Interesting note: The CIA ordered the plane grounded in Anchorage, Alaska, To take Former President Richard Nixon off of it.

18). John Ashbrook, who also spoke out about Communism in Mexico, also died about the same time under mysterious circumstances.

19). Senator Scoop Jackson of Washington, even though a liberal, had spoke very harshly about Communism in Mexico� and gave a stinging rebuke to the Soviet Union for shooting down Korean Airliner 007. Within three hours, he was dead. Official report, heart attack. His personal physician said: "No Way" did he have a heart attack.

20). In 1976, the Soviet Union was given Mosaic Maps of the Rio Grand River showing all river crossings! Why? These� maps were given to the Soviets by the International Boundary and Water Commission. Approximately the same time, bridges from Mexico into Laredo and El Paso were strengthened to handle up to 90 tons at a time. This amount of tonnage has never crossed these bridges. Are they preparing for future "military" use with heavy vehicles?

21). On December 3, 1976, twenty‑eight Russian ships unloaded heavy military equipment to be transported by rail,� which (had been) reinforced, to an area called the Devil's Backbone because of the terrain. All this equipment has disappeared.

22). Another Russian transport docked and unloaded at Lagona Madre.

23). What happened to the oil bomb in Mexico that was to make it a modern industrial nation with no debt to the��� International Monetary Fund of the United (Communist) Nations? Derricks were built but pumped water from� underground caverns. At Ciudad Victoria, one cavern is 1,068 feet underground reached by huge elevator shafts. Once underground, it take 30 minutes to drive to the end. Four are known to exist held up by natural stone pillars. Is this where the military equipment disappeared?

24). About 60 planes flying about 15,000 feet at high speeds flew over Tucson, Arizona. When police called the David� Monson Air Base (Interceptor Base), they responded that they did not know what it was since they closed at 10 P.M. Question: Why would an interceptor base, whose responsibili�ty it is to identify foreign aircraft flying in U.S. air space close at 10 P.M.?

25). In 1985, two Mig 26, the latest Soviet fighters, were seen over Knoxville, Tennessee. They were trailed by an� American interceptor plane.

26). In late 1985, five Soviet nuclear submarines surfaced off the U.S. East Coast. Our State Department simply said it was routine. What they didn't say was that each submarine carries 20 missiles each with multiple warheads that range up to 1500 miles.

Is Lenin's prophecy coming true? You be the judge. "As long as Capitalism and Socialism exist we cannot live in peace; in the end, one or the other will triumph ‑‑ a funeral dirge will be sung over either the Soviet Republics or over world capitalism." ^[3]

���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Dual System of Government

Below is a very brief history of how the dual system of government was introduced into the United States. As a result our 1789 United States Constitution hangs by a very weak thread. For now it is a simple matter to introduce a military government for the operation of the United States! Dual systems of power have been physically operating the United States since February of 1972. When President Richard Nixon on February 14, 1972 established the second (And illegal) system of power simply by issuing an Executive Order (E.O. #11647). Just by entering the Executive Order in the Federal Register, and no Congressmen challenging it for its illegal nature within thirty days, it becomes law. It was considered "LAW." It set up the United Nation's infra-structure for command and control of the United States. United Nation's general assembly and security council resolutions were then relayed to the U.S. Executive Department to get enacted in any manner it could achieve to continue alterations to U.S. power structure to shape the U.S. for world government command and control.

The U.S. armed forces were to wait until 1988 to be permanently transferred to the communist control of the security council of the United States, which would be done by treaties. That is where we are today. Outlawing of all civilian owned firearms had a first deadline of 1983, but it was unsuccessful, but which will be picked up and enacted by the signing of the disarmament treaties. Every U.S. President has co-operated with these plans since the United Nations Charter was (illegally) ratified as a "TREATY" in 1945.

President D.D. Eisenhower began the disarmament program with the "Open Skies" Project.

President John F. Kennedy signed Public Law 87-297 which calls for the elimination of our U.S. Armed Forces (and your guns) and turning both over to the U.N. President Lyndon Johnson wanted to sign the Executive Order for the master ten regions but worked instead on the U.N.'s economic regions, leaving Richard Nixon as President to bring in the comprehensive master United Nations Control System Ten Regions.

President Gerald Ford enhanced the U.N. control system, while President James Carter (along with President Johnson) signed some of the Human Rights Treaties which replaced our Bill of Rights.

United World Federalist, President Ronald Wilson Reagan, promoted the dual system by establishing direct control between his Office of Management and Budget and the Governors' Offices, to (so-called) "Streamline the system" for faster response mechanisms. President Reagan also signed the Genocide Treaty which puts all U.S. Citizens more closely under control of the already operating United Nations World Government Court System. President Reagan also signed a new Constitution for the U.S. under The Title of Treaty 97-19.

President George Bush will, finished the signing away of our U.S. Army to the U.N. (plus all our civilian owned guns) by yet another disarmament treaty. Because President Bush is not opposed to these treaties. He has proven to be an opponent to civilian ownership of firearms. He is in agreement with the "Peace" program, which is not a "Peace" program at all! Meanwhile many young and innocent people have taken seats in State Legislatures who have no idea of the regional operation connection for United Nations' eventual control of the U.S. The good people in State Legislative offices can reverse the damage done to our country and our people.

President Bill Clinton will advance or nation further and further into moral decline, and put it ever further under Jewish control. But no matter because God has told us that He will utterly destroy them: "The vision of Obadiah. Thus saith the Lord God concerning Edom (The Jews); We have heard a rumour from the Lord, and an ambassador is sent among the heathen, Arise ye, and let us rise up against her in battle. Behold, I have made thee small among the heathen: thou (You Jews) art greatly despised. The pride of thine heart hath deceived thee, thou that dwellest in the clefts of the rock, whose habitation is high; that saith in his heart, Who shall bring me down to the ground? Though thou exalt thyself as the eagle, and though thou set thy nest among the stars, thence will I bring thee down, saith the Lord. If thieves came to thee, if robbers by night, (how art thou cut off!) would they not have stolen till they had enough? if the grapegatherers came to thee, would they not leave some grapes? How are the things of Esau searched out! how are his hidden things sought up! All the men of thy confederacy have brought thee even to the border: the men that were at peace with thee have deceived thee, and prevailed against thee; they that eat thy bread have laid a wound under thee: there is none understanding in him. Shall I not in that day, saith the Lord, even destroy the wise men out of Edom, and understanding out of the mount of Esau? And thy mighty men, O Teman, shall be dismayed, to the end that every one of the mount of Esau may be cut off by slaughter. For thy violence against thy brother Jacob shame shall cover thee, and thou shalt be cut off for ever. In the day that thou stoodest on the other side, in the day that the strangers carried away captive his forces, and foreigners entered into his gates, and cast lots upon Jerusalem, even thou wast as one of them. But thou shouldest not have looked on the day of thy brother in the day that he became a stranger; neither shouldest thou have rejoiced over the children of Judah in the day of their destruction; neither shouldest thou have spoken proudly in the day of distress. Thou shouldest not have entered into the gate of my people in the day of their calamity; yea, thou shouldest not have looked on their affliction in the day of their calamity, nor have laid hands on their substance in the day of their calamity; Neither shouldest thou have stood in the crossway, to cut off those of his that did escape; neither shouldest thou have delivered up those of his that did remain in the day of distress. For the day of the Lord is near upon all the heathen: as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head. For as ye have drunk upon my holy mountain, so shall all the heathen drink continually, yea, they shall drink, and they shall swallow down, and they shall be as though they had not been. But upon mount Zion shall be deliverance, and there shall be holiness; and the house of Jacob shall possess their possessions. And the house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau (The Jews) for stubble, and they shall kindle in them, and devour them (The Jews); and there shall not be any remaining of the house of Esau (The Jews); for the Lord hath spoken it." ^[4]

Obadiah is describing the events of just one of Edom's treachery and revenge against His people Israel, when Judah was undergoing its final siege from Babylon. After the enemy armies had captured Jerusalem in 586 B.C., Edom had treacherously participated in its destruction. Rather than render aid when the enemy was upon God's people, Edom, out of revenge and hatred, invaded Jerusalem and took part in the plunder of the stricken city. This violence of Edom upon Judah was condemned by God and elaborated by Obadiah.

The Edomites took advantage of Judah's captivity so as to wreak their revenge and hatred upon God's people. The prophet Ezekiel also speaks of Edom's treachery, "against the house of Judah by taking vengeance, and has greatly offended, and revenged himself upon them." ^[5]

And again in Ezekiel chapters 35 and 36, Edom is denounced for its actions in helping Israel's enemies in the final overthrow of Jerusalem, where Edom had, "shed the blood of the children of Israel by the force of the sword in the time of their calamity." ^[6]

Edom (The Jews) acted with great vengeance in their treacherous plan to invade Israel's land, to burn and pillage it, and to destroy and kill the remnant of God's people that were left in Jerusalem. Edom's desire for revenge against Jacob was revealed by Edom's desire to see Jerusalem destroyed when Israel possessed it, as revealed by the writer of Psalms: "Remember, O Lord, the children of Edom in the day of Jerusalem; who said, Raze it, raze it, even to the foundation thereof." ^[7]

The word raze means "to tear down completely; level to the ground; demolish." ^[8] When Jacob/Israel was at its zenith in terms of national status and prosperity, Esau/Edom desired to see its capital city destroyed. The Edomites, being fewer in number and subservient to Jacob, had not the ability or might to take out their revenge against Israel and Judah until they were weakened by a civil war between them (734 B.C.). Judah had suffered the loss of 120,000 men in one day.^[9]

Another 200,000 of Judah's inhabitants were taken captive by Israel along with much of its goods as a spoil.^[10] The Edomites took advantage of Judah's weakened condition and in their vengeance "had come and attacked Judah, and carried away captives." ^[11] Thus, when Judah was torn by the ravages of war, it was Edom (The Jews) who had rushed in and ransacked the land and took the inhabitants into captivity.

But, will they? It cannot be overemphasized that our 1789 Constitution is a perpetual document and the Bill of Rights is Irrevocable. All that has been enacted as "Law" to dislodge the system established by our forefathers is illegal. Because illegalities were not challenged and stopped, the perpetrators of the dual system kept piling more illegalities upon prior illegalities, all the while wrapping the illegalities in Constitutional packaging. The boldness of these perpetrators has always depended upon the innocence and the unawareness of the American people. The people saw no cause for alarm in the Constitutional packaging while destructive legislation and treaties, etc., altered the American system unabated.

They can not see the damage being done to their beloved country (and many will simply deny such a thing is happening, hoping against hope that by ignoring it; it will go away) and its constitution, because it did not appear to effect them directly. It only affected someone else, but not them or their family. Never coming to the realization that if a bad law has an effect on someone else, it will eventually affect them also!

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ Socialism via Legislation

Centralization of power in Washington is a prime Communist‑Socialist‑Zionist objective. If the Socialist‑ Communists‑Zionists can destroy the States (States Rights) as effective units of government and centralize ALL power in Washington, they have only One Battle to Win. Let's examine the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. It states: "...the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution ‑‑ are reserved to the states respectively or to the people."

No where in the Constitution does it give the Federal Government any power or control over education, health, welfare, labor, dams and public power projects, agriculture, unemployment or housing. According to the Constitution, the regulation of all these areas are to remain within the jurisdiction of the states or the people. Remember the predictions of both Socialists and Communists that they would pass legislation to Socialize America without us knowing how it happened?

You can now know why it does not matter which party controls the House and Senate or who is elected President of the U.S. When Federal funds are used to support education, health, welfare, labor, dams, public power projects, agriculture, unemployment, housing and etc., the Federal Government uses control over these areas to varying degrees. Notice why the Liberals‑Socialists‑Communists‑ Zionist‑want the Federal Government to subsidize every area of government; the U.S. Supreme Court, in the case of Wickard vs. Filburn, 1942, included the following statement as part of its decision: "It is hardly a lack of due process for Government to Regulate that which it subsidizes."

Each new Federal Law passed by Congress which invades the rights of the individual States further strengthens the control the government exercises over the citizens. An example of the individual States is that the Kennedy Administration proposed the establishment of a new Department of Urban Affairs, whose director served as an additional member of the President's Cabinet. Thus the Federal Government would by‑pass the States, and deal directly with the cities ‑‑ a pattern completely contrary to all the precepts of the United States Constitution.

����������������������������������������������������������������������� The Liberal Socialist-Communist-Zionist Conspiracy

On August 17, 1961, in discussing the similarity between Socialism and Communism, Senator Karl Mundt stated that some of the Liberals; "...cringe when we mention socialism and Communism and imply that they have some relationship."

Senator Mundt then continued: "Of course Socialism and Communism are related! They are ideological blood brothers! If anyone does not believe that ‑‑ ask any Communist. Khrushchev used the words interchangeably."

The Socialists in our nation on stated occasions declared that they are anti‑Communist. Senator Strom Thurmond explains this fraudulent posture by stating: "Since marxist‑socialists share the ultimate goal of the Communists, their opposition to Communists, their opposition to Communism is limited. These Marxist‑Socialists in our country support anti‑Communism only so long as it is aimed exclusively at the Communist armed threat. They want world Socialism controlled by themselves, not the Russians or Chinese. The Socialists look forward to an International Socialists order just as the Communists do, except they, the Socialists are dedicated to the evolutionary, rather than the revolutionary approach."

Sen. Thurmond went on to say Socialism is a philosophy which embraces government ownership of the principal tools of production and transportation, and then Senator Thurmond continued: "It deplores and seeks to end private property rights and the profit motive. Private property rights cannot be destroyed without destroying political rights, and, indeed, all liberty. If you destroy economic freedom, all other liberty must follow, for liberty is indivisible. Thus the precepts of Socialism, if embraced in America, will destroy our liberty and establish a centralized authoritarian government. Will bondage be any less onerous to Americans because their bonds were forged by Socialists, rather than Communists?"

������������������������������������������������������������������������� Traitors Turning U.S. Over To World Government

A world filled with tension. It is called the COLD WAR, but it is real war. This thing called the "cold war" has claimed more lives, brought captive more people, and cost more money than any "hot war" in history. Yet millions upon millions of Americans cannot comprehend that we are still at war with the Soviets (Jewish Communism). This is why the rapid deterioration of America.

�It has not had a real victory since World War II. Within the picture frame called the "cold war," there have been many "hot wars" ‑‑ China, Malaya, Indonesia, Algeria, the Congo, Cuba, Iraq, the Gaza Strip, Hungary, Korea, Angola, Burma, Tibet, Egypt, El Salvadore, Vietnam, and others. The Communists have won all those wars in which they have been involved ‑‑ with the help of the American Government. There has been increased terrorist and guerrilla activity. No "Big" war has taken place because the forces for World Government supporting Communism are winning without it, until they are ready for the final social cataclysm that will force world government or destruction.

After World War II ended in 1945, the communists held 160‑million Russians in slavery. The Czars controlled a larger land mass than the communists. Communism was a third rate power militarily, industrially, and economically. Forty‑two (42) years later the U.S. had spent over $1.5 Trillion to "fight" communism and lost over 100,000 men to stop wars of aggression. Yet, with all the expenditures in terms of dollars and lives, the communists openly control 40% of the earth's land mass. Fidel Castro is just 90 miles off the shores of the U.S. The unseen, hidden tentacles of the communist conspiracy exert enormous influences over the rest of the world.

�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� The United Nations The New Babylon

"The last hope of mankind...the only means to protect the world from the horrors of war." This was the banner under which the Internationalist monstrosity known as the United nations (A real bill of goods) was sold to the American people in 1945.

One thing must be established at the outset: The aims of the United Nations organization are diametrically and irreversibly opposed to the best interests of the American people. The ultimate goal is to do away with the United States constitution and our sovereignty and to merge this great nation into a mongrolized one-world community patterned after Russia and China which have been created and sustained by the International Bankers. In this way, their methods of total subjugation are being refined and perfected ahead of their final all‑out effort to seize total control.

As Dr. Carroll Quigley states in his Tragedy and Hope: "Their aim is nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. The system was to be controlled in a feudalistic fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences." ^[12]

To understand how the UN came into being we need to go back to the conclusion of the first World War. At that time, President Woodrow Wilson went to Paris with an entourage of Insiders ‑‑ Paul Warburg, the sinister "Col" House, Thomas Lamont, etc., ‑‑ with high hopes of establishing a base for their much sought after "New World Order" through the formation of a league of Nations. Congress, at the strong urging the treaty prepared at Paris. As a result, America remained fairly free of alien entanglement.

The Internationalists had lost a battle but were determined not to fail in their ultimate goal. Careful planning and organization were called for if the popular climate of rejection of such unconstitutional ideas were to be sold to the American public. The insiders decided on a multi‑pronged offensive.

In the 1920's, the Internationalists formed a variety of "front" organizations all over the world to promote their plans for One‑World government. In the United States their little publicized tool was the Council on Foreign Relations which was brought into being under the guidance of "Colonel" House and with the aid of such well‑known International Jewish Financiers as Baruch, Schiff, Warburg and Rockefeller. Since the days of the FDR Administration many CFR members have served in high government posts and have been largely responsible for formulating national policy.

Another powerful tool in their hands was the new breed of "educators" masquerading under the name of "Frontier Thinkers." These newcomers on the American education scene were Sponsored by the Carnegie and other Foundations and led by John Dewey. Their specific job was to indoctrinate teachers and prepare teaching material designed to "influence the social attitudes and behavior of coming generations."

Dr. Harold Rugg, a disciple of Dewey, unveiled their motives when he wrote that: "A new public mind is to be created. How? Only by creating tens of millions of new individual minds and welding them into a new social mind. Old stereotypes must be broken up and new climates of opinion formed in the neighborhoods of America." ^[13]

Their plan was simple: Create a "new" breed of American by brain‑washing the youth of the nation, by ridiculing traditional standards of conduct and by pumping alien, socialistic concepts into their minds under the guise of "education." The American schools were being turned into Brain‑Washing Machines to make future generations of Americans willing pawns in the Conspirators' Game.

Members of the Council on Foreign Relations were losing no time in laying plans for the future. State Department publication 2349, Report to the President on the results of the San Francisco Conference, by the U.S. Secretary of State. Edward Stettinius, stated: "With the outbreak of war in Europe, it was clear that the United States would be confronted, after the war with new and exceptional problems...Accordingly, a committee on Post‑War Problems was set up before the end of 1939, at the suggestion of the CFR. The Committee consisted of high officials of the Department of State." All but one were CFR members.

Following Pearl Harbor, the One Worlders wasted no time capitalizing on our entry into the war. A conference was called of all the nations allied against the Axis powers. Meeting in Washington, D.C., early in 1942, The Representatives of 26 Nations issued a declaration of the United Nations. Thus the term "Allied Powers" was subtly superseded by "United Nations." In subsequent wartime propaganda the term served two purposes:

1). It helped developed support among the American people for our allies ‑‑ including Russia; and

2). A more insidious aim: it served to condition the minds of citizens towards acceptance of the coming Jewish Adam� Weishaupt, inspired "Novus Ordo Seclorum" ‑ The New World Order. Even before a foundation meeting of the New United Nations Organization could be held, the Insiders began to sell out America's interests.

At the infamous Yalta Conference, early in 1945, President Roosevelt and his advisors granted Russia three votes in the General Assembly to our one. The veto provision was written into the charter at Yalta.

On April 25, 1945, less than two weeks after Roosevelt's death, the San Francisco Conference opened with representatives of 46 nations in attendance. They adopted the Charter the following day and the UN was on its way. At the conclusion of the... Conference the Charter of the United Nations was bundled off to a waiting plane and gingerly placed in a 75 pound fireproof safe equipped with a small parachute. Attached to the safe was a stern inscription: "Finder, do not open! Notify the Department of State, Washington, D.C., Chief custodian was Conference Secretary: General Alger Hiss..." ^[14]

So the charter was on its way to Washington to be ratified by the Senate. The Communist‑ Establishment coalition spared no effort to get their favorite project past the American lawmakers. Their strategy was clear: "Great popular support and enthusiasm for the United Nations policies should be built up, well organized and fully articulate. But it is also necessary to do more than that. The opposition must be rendered so impotent that it will be unable to gather any significant support in the Senate against the UN Charter and the treaties which will follow..." ^[15]

This theme was taken up by the "liberal" press and the American public was deluged by a flood of misinformation with regard to the aims and purposes of the new organizations. U.S. government officials instrumental in the founding of the U.N. kept from the public (And many of their representatives) the fact that, from its inception, the organization was designed to promote the cause of world socialism, the aim of the U.S.S.R. The site for the U.N. headquarters in New York was donated by the Rockefellers. Ratification of the U.N. Charter was steamrollered through the Senate on a wave of oratorical praise, and so the United States became committed to a "New World Order" which subverted its own Constitution.

To many the above statement may appear to be "idiotic" or "absurd:" It is, nevertheless, a statement of plain fact as was clearly acknowledged by no less an Establishment Insider than Secretary of State John Foster Dulles. In an April 12, 1952 speech, Dulles states: "The treaty‑making power is an extraordinary power, liable to abuse. Treaties make international law and they also make domestic law. Under our constitution, treaties became the Supreme Law of the Land. They are indeed more supreme than ordinary laws, for congressional laws are invalid if they do not conform to the Constitution, whereas treaty laws can override the Constitution Treaties, for example, can take powers away from the Congress and give them to the President. They can take powers from the States and give them to the Federal Government or to some international body and they can cut across the rights given to the people by their constitution�al Bill of Rights."

The lie that treaties could place Americans at the not‑so‑tender mercies of a future World Government was so clearly recognized by the legal profession following the ratification of the U.N. Charter that, in 1952 the American Bar Association, even though under tremendous pressure from Jewish lawyers against it, passed a resolution recommending a Constitutional Amendment which would state: "A provision of a treaty which conflicts with any provision of this Constitution shall not be of any force and effect. A treaty shall become effective as internal law of the United States only through legislation in Congress which it could enact under its delegated powers in the absence of such a treaty."

In 1950, the State Department issued a very illuminating official report entitled Post War Foreign Policy Preparation, 1939‑1945, which named the men in the U.S. Government who did the planning and shaped the policies that led to the creation of the United Nations.

Almost all of which were Jewish, and all of which were Communist: Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White, Viginius Coe, Noel Field, Laurance Duggan, Henry Wadleigh, John Carter Vincent, David Weintraub, Nathan Silvermaster, Harold Glasser, Victor Perlo, Irving Kaplan, Solomon Adler, Abraham Silverman, William Ullman, William Taylor and John Foster Dulles.

All of the above, with the exception of Dulles, were later identified in sworn testimony As Communist Agents. John Foster Dulles? It is well known where his sentiments really lay; he had been hired by Joseph Stalin to act as Russia's legal council in the United States. He was also closely associated with J.P. Morgan. These men were traitors who, in conjunction with communist Russia's official representatives, formulated the Charter of the United Nations at the Dumbarton Oaks and Yalta Conferences.

It is no wonder that some patriotic Americans got the distinct impression that our interests were being "SOLD OUT" at the conclusion of the war. Never, in all of recorded history, has a nation or people been so deliberately deceived by its alleged representatives, as has the United States and its people.

The few Americans who have taken the time to read the Constitutions of both the U.S.S.R. and the United Nations have come to the spine‑chilling realization that the latter is little more than a carbon copy of the former. However, that fact shouldn't come as much of a surprise when one considers the political hue of the characters who drafted the Charter: Nothing else could be expected. In addition, the seals of both the U.N. and the U.S.S.R. are very similar. Again no coincidence: The U.N. seal was designed by the Jewish Communist Carl Aldo Marzani.

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Masters of Deceit

The founders of the United Nations Organization, was well represented by the CFR: In fact, forty‑seven members of the CFR were members of the United States delegation, including Edward Stettinius, the Secretary of State; John Foster Dulles; Nelson Rockefeller; Adlai Stevenson; and the first Chairman of the U.N., Alger Hiss: and their successors have proven to be "Masters of Deceit." They have succeeded in shielding their real goals and objectives from overwhelming majority of mankind behind an ever‑increasing bombardment of propaganda in the name of "peace," "justice," "freedom" and "rights." The so‑called "New" phrases to describe the all‑encompassing changes being made are: "The New Economic Order," or "The New International Economic Order," or "The New World Order." These phrases all mean the same thing and are used interchangeably. The United Nations' World Population Conference at Bucharest called for a; "...new economic order by eradicating the cause of world poverty, by ensuring the equitable distribution of the world's resources..."

This is simple Marxism carried only one step further, "From each (nation) according to its ability, to each (nation) according to its needs." If governments are going to create a "New Economic Order," and they are going to divide the wealth between the wealthy nations and the poor nations, they will need a method by which to accomplish this. One method proposed by the United nations in 1969 and 1970. "The General Assembly adopted without dissension Thursday a declaration calling for: (the use of) the world fiscal system and government spending for a more equitable distribution of income." ^[16]

The United Nations later considered a proposal where: "...everybody in the world would pay a sales tax on certain home appliances and some luxury items to help poor nations." ^[17] (It is readily apparent just which nations have "home appliances and some luxury items:" the wealthier nations, those which protect the right to private property).

Further discussions about this problem of providing for the poor, overpopulated nations of the world continued in 1979 when the representatives of 156 nations met: "...to debate the best way to divide the world's dwindling resources. A bloc of 80 poor nations will call for $25‑Billion in new aid from (the) rich nations."

The caption over the article read: "Haves, have‑nots meet, and pictured then U.N. Secretary‑General Kurt Waldheim and Philippines President Ferdinand E. Marcos." ^[18] A similar caption was on top of another article discussing the Cancun Mexico, meetings held in October, 1981. It read: "Haves, Have‑nots gathering to debate new economic order." ^[19]

If there is going to be a world‑wide tax collected to provide for the poor nations, there will have to be a world-wide tax collector, and this is coming in the near future. For instance, James Warburg told a Senate Sub‑Committee on February 17, 1950: "We shall have world government (a world tax collector) whether or not you like it, by conquest or by consent." ^[20]

Even one of the Popes of the Catholic Church, in this case Pope Paul VI, in his Encyclical entitled, "This is Progress," also went on record of supporting a world government. He wrote, "The need is clear to have in course of time world government by a world authority." ^[21]

��������������������������������������������������������������������������� The World Tax Collector is Very Nearly in Place

Former United Nations Ambassador Adlai Stevenson openly acknowledged this monstrous hypocrisy when he was so bold as to encourage newsmen to project a False image of the U.N. to the World. Speaking to the United nations Correspondents Association of February 14, 1961, Stevenson asked newsmen to: "...help us to create the sense of our overriding human concern. Interpret us to each other not as plotters or as war mongers or as demons and demigods, but as puzzled yet aspiring men and women struggling on the possible brink of Armageddon to achieve a common purpose. We are not like that, I have no doubt. But I believe the majority of our delegates would accept such a description of their own attitudes. The whole press corps working at the United nations has a unique part to play in projecting this (False) picture." ^[22]

What Jewish Illuminists clearly have in mind for your future and mine is graphically portrayed by the Jew George Orwell in his book, "1984." Orwell would appear to have written this book with a considerable amount of inside information of what the Internationalists have in mind for the future. To date, Orwell has proved to be remarkably accurate in his predictions of "things to come." His prognosis of the future almost directly parallels that of Dr. Carroll Quigley. One of their FALSE "pictures" being projected by the U.N. is that it is a "peacekeeping" organization, "... determined to saved succeeding generations from the scourge of war...(and) to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small..." ^[23]

Even a cursory glance at the record of the last 40 some odd years will clearly show that such high‑sounding phraseology is just so much pious rhetoric and is devoid of any real or purposeful meaning. The simple truth is that never in all of recorded history has there been a similar period so filled with war, terrorism and moral corruption. Since 1945 there have been more than 50 major outbreaks of violence: Korea, Vietnam, Hungary, Tibet, Biafrica and Katanga to name just a few. You can be sure that if the American people ever wake up to what is happening here at home and revolt as they are sure to do, United Nations troops will be landed on the New Super Airports, which have been built in the eventuality of such an event!

The reason should be obvious to any objective and intellectually honest person. The United Nations: Is not interested in helping people to either keep their freedom or to regain it if lost. Their sole aim is to promote the aims of the One‑Worlders who are determined to shackle All Mankind with a totalitarian dictatorship. Who pays for this Illuminst One‑World Monstrosity? As you may have guessed, it is the American taxpayers who get ripped off to pay the expenses of maintaining "the last hope of mankind."

When the American people began bankrolling the U.N. in 1946, the U.S. Congress opened a bank account in the name of: United Nations, New York, New York. Although few realize it, the check Congress signed, "...authorized to be appropriated annually to the Department of State, out of the Treasury, such sums as may be necessary for the payment by the United nations as apportioned by the General Assembly..." ^[24]

This U.S. public law clearly states that the U.N. tells us how much we have to pay and we will give it to them. The U.N. budget is assessed against all members at scales broadly based on their ability to pay, which is simply an international application of the basic Marxist principle, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.'

Our share of the financial burden has always headed the list. It was originally suggested that the U.S. kick in 50 percent of the budge, but that amount was negotiated down to 39.89 percent. Since that time our assessment to the regular U.N. budget has been gradually lowered. It now stands at 25 percent. That figure is, however, misleading as it doesn't include our 'voluntary contributions' to various 'special programs' of the U.N. these 'voluntary contributions' amount to more than our regular contributions.'" ^[25]

What does the American taxpayers get for his money? According to official government sources: "...the U.N. provides public forum for clarifying to a wide audience our position on issues of vital concern to us...and for enlisting support for international action on matters of prime concern."

In actual fact, what we have paid for is an expensive soap box from which uncouth and un‑ Godly murderers like Nikita Khruschev, and the murdering maniacs like the leaders from the State of Israel, infidels like Castro, and assorted Zionist‑Communist scum. A place where the Jewish‑Communist‑Zionist can sell their anti‑American, anti‑Christ, anti‑Christian Internationalists ideas in America. No wonder the Communist wanted the U.N. headquarters based in America! Every agency of the United Nations carefully orchestrates all its efforts towards the same goal; The establishment of a totalitarian one-world Government. Some will no doubt take exception to what is being presented. They will point to such operations as UNESCO and UNICEF and ask: "Aren't these fine, outstanding organizations and aren't they doing a tremendous job of helping people in need around the world?"

On the surface, that appears to be the case ‑‑ but only because of the false propaganda put out by the U.N. and its friends. As far as UNICEF is concerned, the record clearly shows that ever since its inception this organization has mightily aided and abetted Communists around the world and Has not helped even one single anti-Communist at any time since its inception.

The McGraw Edison, Committee for Public Affairs pointed out: "The United nations International Children's Emergency Fund...appropriated $59,000,000 between 1947 and 1958 to Communist Countries. In a ratio not unlike that of other U.N. ventures, the United States has furnished $42,000,000 of the money...As with other aid programs, the assistance does not go to the needy but is administered through governments." The food and medical supplies are used by the Communists to keep enslaved the people under its control.

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ Communist Control of the Home Team

In 1952, the Senate Security Sub‑Committee began an investigation of American citizens employed by the U.N. Of the 33 U.S. citizens employed in the U.N. called as witnesses, 26 refused to answer questions concerning Communist Party affiliations by pleading the Fifth Amendment. Twelve employees refused to say whether or not they would be loyal to the United States in the event of a war with Russia.

Senator James O Eastland of Mississippi, sub‑committee chairman, stated during the course of the hearing: "I am appalled at the extensive evidence indicating that there is today in the U.N. among the American employees there, the greatest concentration of communists (Traitors) that this committee has ever encountered. I believe that the evidence shows that the security of officers of our government knew, or at least had reason to know, that these people have been Communists for many years." ^[26]

Even while the Federal Government was holding its hearings, a Federal Grand Jury in New York was also investigating U.S. employees working in the U.N. Here is the language of one of the Grand Jury reports: "...startling evidence has disclosed infiltration into the U.N. of an overwhelmingly large group of disloyal (Traitors) U.S. citizens, many of whom are closely associated with the International Communist Movement." ^[27]

Secretary General Trygve Lie, in an attempt to quiet rising public opinion, discharged 11 of the individuals who had pleaded the Fifth Amendment at the Senate Hearings. All eleven were later reinstated with back pay and "damages" of up to $40,000 per employee were awarded.^[28]

Those two hearings were held in 1952 and 1953. Since then, so much red tape has been injected into the proceedings of congressional committees investigating Communist or Zionist penetration into our government that it is impossible to obtain anymore meaningful testimony. Consequently, there have been few attempts to investigate Communist and Zionist penetration of the U.N. through the United States Government since 1954.� We have examined the record of the U.N. team from the most anti‑Communist country in the world ‑‑ the United States. So you can well imagine the ideological sympathies of the representatives from those countries which refuse to call themselves anti‑Communist.

�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Communist Control...Key Post

In fact Trygve Lie, second secretary‑general of the U.N. when confronted with the task of filling this position stated in his book, "In The Cause Of Peace": "Mr. Vyshinsky (of the USSR) did not delay his approach. He was the first to inform me of an understanding which the Big Five had reached in London on the appointment of a Soviet National as assistant secretary‑general for political and security council affairs.

Mr. Stettinius (U.S. Secretary of State) confirmed to me that he had agreed with the Soviet delegation in the matter ...The preservation of international peace and security was the organization's highest responsibility, and the Americans had agreed to entrust the direction of the Secretariat department most concerned with this to a Soviet national." ^[29]

Secretary General U Thant on August 14, 1965, appointed Alexei Nesterenko, the eighth Russian Communist to hold this post.^[30] And the practice continues to this very day.

���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� More Treason

The "space race" began on October 4, 1957, when the Russians announced that they had orbited the first man‑made satellite in history, called Sputnik. Russia's ability to orbit an earth satellite was given to the Russian government by the American Government at the end of World War II.

General George Patton, as he moved eastward into and through western Europe and Germany, captured the two German towns of Peenemunde and Nordhausen, where the German scientists were developing the V‑1 and V‑2 rockets. Patton was ordered by his commanding officer, the Supreme Allied Commander, General Dwight D. Eisenhower, to turn over these two cities in the their entirety to the Russians.

Included in this turn‑over were thousands of German scientists who were transported to Russia with the factories of the two towns, removed down to the last office desk. Fortunately, one of these scientists saw what was about to befall him and others involved with Germany's space efforts, and he led 129 of them from Germany where he surrendered to the American forces rather than to the Russians. This space scientist, Dr. Werner von Braun, became the head of America's space program, when he and the other scientists reached America.

Dr. von Braun was later unsuccessful in convincing the Eisenhower administration to orbit America's first satellite: "Long before the Soviet Union launched the first satellite...von Braun said his team had the capability to orbit a payload by putting an upper stage on the Redstone (rocket). But President Eisenhower turned him down..." ^[31]

The same gentlemen who arranged for Russia to orbit the first satellite by turning over to the Russians nearly the entire German rocket capacity, now was in a position to insure that the Russians were able to orbit the first satellite before the Americans. The Russians were now able to use the successful orbiting of this satellite to boast that Communism was obviously superior to Capitalism. "The old jesting about socialist inefficiency came to an end when the first Soviet Sputnik circled the earth." ^[32]

President Eisenhower turned this Russian "victory" into two major defeats for the Unites States:

1). It was now apparent, according to the Administration, that America lagged behind the Russians in the field of� education or in the ability to engineer such a scientific feat.

It was imperative that the American government enter the field of education to narrow the gap between the two competing economic systems. So the Eisenhower Administration quickly pushed the federal government into the funding of education on a nationwide basis, completely in violation of the Constitution of the United States, which gave no such authority to the federal government.

2). Since the American Government was now behind in the "space race," it was imperative that the American Government compete with the Russians, first by orbiting a satellite, and then by reaching out into distant space.

In other words, America had been taken out of the space race by President Eisenhower, and then put back in, at great expense to the American taxpayers. And the only way the planners felt that they could get the taxpayer to support the tax increase, was to convince them there was a "space race" with the Communists.

A Russian writer on the subject of space research, Leonid Vladimirov, who defected to the West, has written a book The Russian Space Bluff: "It is possible that, without having the fear of Soviet competition, the Americans would not have been in such a hurry to land on the Moon and would thus have saved themselves thousands of millions of dollars."^[33]

Vladimirov discussed the state of the Russian missile industry after the orbiting of Sputnik. He informed his readers that the Russians, as late as 1959, had: "...proposed making a 'cluster of clusters' ‑‑ combining together five four‑chamber engines to make one giant engine." ^[34]

The combining of a series of individual rockets, each no larger than a captured German V‑2, indicated that the Russian missile industry had not matured much since the days when Eisenhower provided them with the V‑2 rocket. It also meant that these rockets were cumbersome and extremely inaccurate, because of the difficulty in getting so many rockets to fire at the same time. The state of the Russian missile industry was known to the American Government, according to an article in Time Magazine in 1980: "Three years later (1959), the overhead view (from the U‑2 spyplane overflights) of the Tyuratam site (where all Soviet missiles were then tested) gave the U.S. some needed reassurance. Determining that the rocket booster aperture at the base of the launch pad was 15 meters (50 ft.) in diameter, photo interpreters concluded that the Soviets were still using missile boosted by auxiliary rockets strapped around the circumference of the main rocket. Because they were so cumbersome they could not be practically deployed, the U.S. strategic planners concluded that the missile gap did not exist either." ^[35]

This statement of fact is extremely revealing, looking backwards from this 1980 article, because the "missile gap" that became one of the main debating issues on the Kennedy‑Nixon debates during the 1960 Presidential election campaign, was not a "missile gap" at all.

It will be recalled that John Kennedy contended that the Eisenhower Administration, which Richard Nixon had to defend because he was Eisenhower's Vice‑President, had allowed the Russians to far exceed the then meager American rocket efforts, to the point where there was an enormous "missile gap," threatening the very safety of the American people. Nixon, it will be remembered, did not defend the position very well, and Kennedy was elected.

All the time, Nixon knew (or should have known) that the so‑called "missile gap" did not exist. Russia did not have the technology it claimed it had. America knew that the Russians had not perfected the single stage rocket but were, in essence, "gluing" a series of V‑2 rockets to a central cluster.

This clustering together of a series of rockets can be seen in the August 14, 1978 Time Magazine, on page 48, and in the Santa Ana Register of September 17, 1976. These pictures reveal a tall, slender, central rocket, with a series of four clusters along side the main engine, each with four internal rocket engines.

This means that, as recently as 1978, the Russians were not advanced enough to have developed the technology to construct a single‑stage rocket capable of placing large payloads into space. In fact, the Russians had been experimenting with such technology before, without success, according to Vladimirov: "Friends of mine among the rocket engineers used to tell me how copies of all the American rocket engines then known were built in Soviet factories on an experimental basis. The engines...all burnt out while they were being tested." ^[36]

Other rocketry‑related efforts of the Russians have come under question. The "Lunik" moon landing in 1959, for instance, has been called a "hoax" by an American writer, by the name of Lloyd Mallan, who has written: "The Lunik, in short, was a coolly insolent, magnificent, international hoax. I found no hint...of any tracking station in the Free World having heard with scientific certainty the radio signals from Russia's moon‑or‑sun rocket." ^[37]

In another book on the same subject, Mr. Mallan reported that Cosmonaut Alexie Leonov's "walk in space" on March 18, 1965: "...was faked. Four months of solid research interviewing top experts in the fields of photo‑optics, photo‑ chemistry and electro‑optics, all of whom carefully studied the motion picture film and still photographs officially released by the Soviet Government, convinced me..."

Mallan's conclusions were that the film showing Leonov in space...was double-printed...The foreground (Leonov) was superimposed on the background (the Earth below). The Russian film showed reflections from the glass plate under which a double print is made. Leonov was suspended with wire or cables.

In several episodes of the Russian film, light was reflected from a small portion of the wire (or CABLE) attached to Leonov's space suit! One camera angle was impossible of achievement. This showed Leonov crawling out of his hatch into space. It was a head‑on shot, so the camera would have had to have been located out in space "BEYOND" the space ship! One still photo (the clearest one) shows Leonov emerging from his hatch standing straight up, his body still half-way inside the space ship. This contradicts the motion picture film which shows him squirming out of the hatch on his belly.

If one very carefully observes the motions of Leonov as he laboriously wiggles through the extraordinarily long tunnel, it is obvious that he is under one 'g' (the force of normal, earth gravity) and exerts most of his muscular force against only one side of the duct, rather than bumping from side to side and moving forward with the ease one would expect. in the absence of gravity. ^[38]

The question of who tracked Russian space efforts in the early stages of the "space race," is still a mystery. It was thought the U.S. North American Air Defense Command (NORAD) did, but since 1961, they have: "...had a Presidential order never to divulge any information about the tracking of foreign space vehicles."

And a spokesman for the Smithsonian Institute's world‑wide network of tracking cameras commented: "We don't track Russian satellites." ^[39] What that meant, was that the American Government, in the early stages of Russia's space efforts, had to believe whatever the Russians said.

Additional examples of the phoniness of Russia's space efforts are ample to illustrate the charge that the truth is less than what has passed as the evidence. The February, 1962, Scientific American Magazine carried an advertisement on page 91, placed there by the Sperry Gyroscope Company. This ad showed a drawing of a space station in orbit and individuals working on it in space suits. This same drawing, with the addition of certain descriptive phrases attached to identify certain parts of the space station, appeared in the October 13, 1969 New York Times, on page 32, over seven years later. But the New York Times used the drawing to illustrate: "One concept of a future Soviet space station in which the crewmen in a mother ship transfer through a transit chute to help assemble another ship is depicted here."

One would wonder why the New York Times had to resort to the use of a 1962 Sperry advertisement to illustrate a Russian space effort. The only conclusion one can draw from these facts is that the Russians did not have a space effort. It seems logical that, if they did, they would make it known to the world in large, easily identifiable pictures or drawing. But that has not happened. Whatever space successes the Russians have achieved have been made all the easier by American technology. It is commonly known that ball‑bearings are absolutely essential to rocket and missile guidance systems. Dr. Antony Sutton's research into this vital industry has discovered that: "The entire ball-bearing production capability of the Soviet Union is of Western origin...All Soviet missiles and related systems including guidance systems have bearings manufactured on Western equipment or Soviet duplicates of this equipment." ^[40]

Part of this technology came from a Chicago‑based company, which helped the Russians build a complete automotive bearing factory in March of 1975. This factory was capable of producing 60 million engine bearings a year.^[41]� And the ability to produce miniature ball‑bearings, vital to the missile and rocketry industries, came from an order filled by the Bryant Grinder Company of Springfield, Vermont. The machines, capable of producing ball‑bearings accurate to twenty‑five millionths of an inch, were sold to Russia in 1972, and were approved as "non‑strategic trade" by President Richard Nixon. Their immediate use is in guidance systems for missiles, but one Congressman, William L. Dickinson, reported that these machines have another important function: "These machines sold for $20‑million. They were capable of producing high quality precision, miniature ball bearings of the type used in Intercontinental Ballistic Missile multiple warheads. As a consequence, Soviet missile accuracy improved dramatically to the point where 90 percent of our land‑based ICBM (If we had one) could now be destroyed in a first strike. This was a technology the Soviets did not have, which they bought for a cheap price and which endangers the lives of millions of Americans." ^[42]

How the Russians acquired these machines is an illustration of how such sales are made. In 1960, the Soviets ordered 45 of these machines, but the export license needed for their sale to Russia was denied by President John Kennedy. Twelve years later, the Soviets ordered 164 of these same machines, and this time, the export license was approved by President Nixon. The Soviet Minister of Machine Tool Industry was quoted at the time as saying: "We had waited twelve years to get these machines." ^[43]

Whatever the Soviets have achieved in their space program has been with the assistance of men, in government, who are traitors in every sense of the word! Whatever programs they faked or didn't have, the American media has certified as valid. Another area the United States has assisted the Russians is in the field of military hardware. During the Korean war, the Soviets were supplying the North Koreans and the Red Chinese with jet aircraft, including the MIG‑15. This airplane was similar in configuration to the F‑86, being flown by the South Korean and American pilots, and suppled by America.

Both of these planes were designed by the same man, a German who was captured at Nordhausen at the end of World War II. As discussed before, the scientist went to one nation, and his plans went to the other. But there is more to this story than this. The MIG‑15 was powered by reproductions of fifty‑five Rolls‑Royce jet engines sold to Russia by this English company in 1947.

These engines were immediately reproduced and suppled to the manufacturers of the MIG‑15 in Russia. ^[44] Rolls‑Royce later tried to sell larger jet engines to Russia in 1977. These engines, the largest produced at that time, provided 50,000 pounds of thrust to the jumbo jets envisioned by the master planners in the aircraft industry in Russia. � These engines were not sold to the Russians, apparently because of the pressure from the American Government which wanted General Electric to sell its CF6 nearly identical engine to the Soviets. The CF6 engine is currently being used in the American airplane industry in the 747, the DC‑10 and the world's largest cargo plane, the Air Force's C‑5A. Rolls‑Royce was successful, however, in 1977, in selling the Red Chinese the necessary jet engines to power their newly developed F‑12 jet airplane. Perhaps the most extraordinary example of America's military assistance to the Russian Government occurred during the Vietnamese war. Dr. Sutton has concluded that; "...the guns, the ammunition, the weapons, the transportation systems, that killed Americans in Vietnam came from the American subsidized economy of the Soviet Union." ^[45]

America's assistance to the cause of the North Vietnamese Government had an early beginning. In an article entitled "When Ho Chi Minh was an Intelligence Agent for the U.S.," author Lloyd Shearer details how the American Government assisted the early efforts of the founder of the revolution against the South Vietnamese Government. Ho Chi Minh was recruited into the American intelligence apparatus. The article states: "We had a trusted agent whom we regularly supplied with weapons, radio equipment, operators and medicine. All of it served to reinforce his position and status." ^[46]

So even before the Vietnamese war started, traitors in the American Government were supplying the guerilla army of the man who would ultimately lead the Viet Cong in a war against America. The American people, who were beginning to sense that something was wrong with the conduct of America's efforts in the war, started showing that concern at the polls. The aid and trade being sent to Russia during the war became a campaign issue in the 1968 Presidential campaign. The Republicans at their convention that year included the following plank in their party platform: "Nations hostile to this country will receive no assistance from the U.S. We will not provide aid of any kind to countries which aid and abet the war efforts of North Vietnam." ^[47]

Republican Presidential candidate Richard Nixon also addressed himself to this plank when he told the American Legion Convention in September, 1968: "There should be no aid or credits of any kind with any country, including the Soviet Union, that aids the enemy in Viet Nam." ^[48]

Candidate Nixon's campaign literature repeated the Republican Party's concern in this matter. One of his campaign flyers covered this issue: "The United States should not provide anything that could be treated as, or classified as, aid to those (Communist bloc) nations if they persist in trading or aiding the enemy in North Vietnam." ^[49]

Our Planet Earth seems to be spinning faster and faster with each week and month that passes as political, economic and monetary turmoil, not only increases, but the rate of change itself accelerates.

"And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines (A great scarcity of everything), and pestilences (Any widespread, often fatal infectious or contagious disease, as cholera [AIDS] or the bubonic plague) and earthquakes, in divers (Various or different) places." ^[50]

It is not only the events which are taking place that is significant, but the tremendous speeding up or acceleration of these events, which needs to be considered. It is said, man has amassed more knowledge in the past 35 years than throughout all prior history. "But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased." ^[51]

One large super computer can store quantities of information equivalent to thousands of years of prior knowledge and research, and process more data than all former computers combined. Instantaneous global communication today connects all points of the globe via satellite and other high technology, so that all events everywhere can be instantly known and viewed by everyone. A globe that once took months to circle can now be traversed in hours and every square inch of the planet can now be reached by destructive nuclear weapons within fifteen minutes, each with more explosive power than the world had seen in total prior to 1945.

The acceleration or snowball factor can be seen in the deteriorating world debt pyramid where personal and business bankruptcies, S&L and bank failures and Third World defaults are accelerating at a breakneck pace. It can be seen in the incredible upheaval and change in the Soviet Empire and in the accelerating communist revolutions in Central and Latin America, South Africa, the Philippines and the Middle East. It can be seen in the stampede toward political, economic, and monetary union in Western Europe; and in the plunge toward a New World Order and "the merger of the common interests of the US and USSR" (targeted for the mid‑1990's by Bush and his globalist friends).

The acceleration factor can be seen in the rapid spread of the New Age Movement which promises to usher in a global government by the year 2000 and in the explosion of the Occult, Satanism, and New Age philosophy. In short, the world is careening toward incredible change, convulsions, and chaos in the 1990's. While peace, prosperity, brotherhood, and world government are being promised and sold to the masses by American, Western and Soviet leaders, is approaching like a freight train out of control. "The way of peace they know not; and there is no judgment in their goings: they have made them crooked paths: whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace." ^[52]

But the Clergy of Organized Religion helps them by telling our people, "...the prophets (Clergy) of Israel (America and the other White Christian Nations of the Western world) which prophesy concerning Jerusalem (The United States), and which see visions of peace for her, and there is no peace, saith the Lord God." ^[53] However, God has given us a warning: "For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them...and they shall not escape." ^[54]

The 1990's promise to be the most chaotic and convulsive decade in modern, or perhaps all of history. As David Hunt describes in his excellent book on the period which lies ahead, it will be, "...peace, prosperity, and then the coming holocaust." Remember to watch, not just WHAT is happening, but the RATE at which those events are happening. It's called The Acceleration Factor.

����������������������������������������������������������������������� Mesmerized by the Bear: The Great Soviet Deception

"The immediate issue for America surely is not Communism, but Soviet power. The USSR wields the mightiest military establishment ever assembled, in tandem with a vast edifice of disinformation, active measures, and agents of influence, all of which allow the Soviets to manipulate world opinion at will. Today, in the Soviet Union, Communist ideology has been dead for a long time. But the huge Soviet military establishment remains intact and geared for action." ^[55]; "When at your zenith of strength, feign weakness." ^[56]; "The U.S. Communist Party is more influential than ever, because we have created an atmosphere that the USSR is no longer a threat to America." ^[57]

Considering the "acceleration factor," when one looks at current developments in Europe, and between East and West, and America and Russia, one feels like he is in a time warp. The Cold War and Communism have been declared officially dead, Eastern Europe appears to be breaking up, as is the NATO Alliance, and Gorbachev and Bush are talking about our new partnership, merging our common goals, and the New World Order. Has world peace and brotherhood finally arrived? If not, what are we looking at that is emerging in the 1990's?

��������������������������������������������������������������������������� The Soviet Strategy for the Conquest of the West

It should never be forgotten that the Soviets are the chess champions of the world who have learned geostrategically to plan 10 ‑ 20 moves (or years) ahead, to use strategic feints, deception and subterfuge. The people, J. Edgar Hoover called "masters of deceit" have learned the art of war and strategic deception from such masters as Sun Tsu and von Clause‑witz, as well as from modern strategic geniuses such as Hitler, Mao tse‑Tung and Lenin.

The Soviets' Six Glasnosts: The present period of glasnost/perestroika (The sixth since 1921) is designed to get America to disarm, to build up and bailout the Soviet Union economically and industrially, and to neutralize Western Europe and dissolve NATO. That this glasnost is a giant deception is easier to understand if one looks at it in the perspective of the first five Russian (Read that Jew�ish/Communist) glasnosts. Glasnost, a Russian concept which originally meant publicity or notoriety, has been an effective instrument of Soviet policy since the early days of the Bolshevik Revolution. As Edward Jay Epstein wrote in his excellent book Deception, "Glasnost was first used by Lenin, who realized that power proceeded from denying others a veil of privacy for their decision making. Hence glasnost, or 'public airing' became a weapon for the Communist Party...The logic went: Democracies allow public criticism of officials; the Soviet Union allows public criticism of officials; therefore, the Soviet Union is a democracy...Glasnost lent credibility to government‑controlled newspapers that otherwise would be considered mouth‑pieces for the Communist Party. It could be used to establish a set of convenient peepholes for journalists, academics and other Kremlin watchers through which they could see selected pictures of Soviet Society...Lenin, to get his revolution accepted by Western governments and businesses, had to represent it as something it was not."

The First Glasnost: 1921 to 1929: Under Lenin's New Economic Plan, he persuaded Western governments, businessmen, and bankers that the revolution was "restructuring," moving back to the free market, and politically liberalizing. Massive Western financial and industrial aid poured in for nine years. Glasnost #1 ended abruptly in 1929, and tens of millions of Russians were murdered shortly thereafter.

The Second Glasnost: 1936 to 1937: Stalin suggested in the mid‑'30's a restructuring of the Soviet economy along capitalist lines (He called it "PERESTROIKA"). He proclaimed that the Soviet Union was returning to a Western‑style constitutional government, to freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and a return to free elections with secret ballots. Stalin was portrayed in the Soviet and Western press as a pragmatist ‑ not an ideologue (sound familiar?). Roosevelt and other Western leaders and businessmen began to pour billions in aid, credits, and trade. Glasnost #2 came to an end abruptly in 1938, and the brutal purges known as the "Great Terror" followed immediately thereafter.

The Third Glasnost: 1941 to 1945: When Hitler invaded Russia in June 1941, the "partnership" with the United States was quickly revived by Stalin. Stalin again claimed that the militant phase of Communism was at an end; he dissolved the Comintern (a key organ for spreading international communist revolution). He promised that after the war, Russia would be buying a massive amount of goods from the West. This all justified massive economic and military aid through the Lend‑Lease Program (almost $10‑billion). Harry Hopkins, President Roosevelt's advisor, wrote after meeting with Stalin at Yalta in 1945, "We really believed that this was the dawn of the new day we had been praying for...the Russians had proved that they could be reasonable and farseeing, and there wasn't any doubt in the mind of the President, or any of us, that we could live and get along with them peacefully for as far into the future as any of us could imagine."

Glasnost #3 ended in 1945, when the Soviets annexed the three Baltic States ‑ Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, as well as parts of Poland, Romania, Prussia, Finland, Japan, and most of Eastern Europe. Over 100‑million people were enslaved and tens of millions subsequently died.

The Fourth Glasnost: 1956 to 1959: In 1956, Khrushchev launched another glasnost based on economic and political reforms, a return to competition and the free market, de‑Stalinization, and a restoration of democracy and individual freedom in the Soviet Union. The end of Stalin's "cult of personality" was equated by Khrushchev with democracy and so portrayed in the Western Media. The Soviet press began to publish stories about private millionaires, underground businesses, and a thriving black market. Russian church leaders were allowed to travel abroad; Solzhenitsyn was allowed to publish his works; Soviet dissidents were allowed to have contact with the Western press.

Khrushchev complained about inefficiencies in the Soviet economy, and stated almost word for word, Stalin's earlier message to the west: "If we cannot give our people the same standard of living that you give your peoples under the Capitalist system, we know that Communism cannot succeed."

Sound familiar? This is almost "Exactly" what Gorbachev has been saying and doing. Then, via his American intermediary Armand Hammer, Khruschev began to push for increased trade, credits, and aid. Some were forth coming, but not as much as in Glasnost #1 ‑ #3. Glasnost #4 began to end in 1959, with the Soviet‑backed communist takeover in Cuba, the shooting down of an American U‑2, the mass arrest of Soviet dissidents, and the creation of the Berlin Wall.

The Fifth Glasnost: 1970 to 1975: The fifth glasnost detente, initiated by Leonid Brezhnev. It offered to restrict strategic arms, negotiate mutually beneficial accords, and relax internal tensions.

The Soviets began "public airings" of issues to explain to relevant audiences in the West why they had abandoned their prior goal of world revolution. The central theme of this glasnost was that the Soviet government was no longer run by ideologies, but by technocrats, who had no interest in adhering to the Leninist doctrine of class warfare. Instead, like technocrats in the West, they wanted to expand their industrial base. The chief goals of this glasnost were to obtain increased US aid and trade (which they did under Nixon and Kissinger), and, most importantly, to inaugurate the arms control process. During this glasnost, Brezhnev appeared willing to let communist countries in Eastern Europe follow their own independent relations with the West, he announced unilateral troop cuts in Soviet forces in Eastern Europe. The Anti‑Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1973 was one of Brezhnev's trophies from this glasnost.

Glasnost #5 began to lose credibility in 1975 when the Soviet‑backed North Vietnamese overran South Vietnam in violation of Russian promises to Kissinger. Over the next few years, widespread arrests of Soviet dissidents, resumption of covert actions abroad, and finally, the invasion of Afghanistan in late '79 by Russia, totally discredited this glasnost.

The Sixth Glasnost: 1985 to ????: This began under Gorbachev and is a composite of the first five glasnosts, although it is bigger and better and more sophisticated than any of its five predecessors. And its stakes are much higher ‑ Western Europe and perhaps the whole world. (NOTE: It has been reported that Glasnost #6 was supposed to start in 1983 under Yuri Andropov, the brutal 15 year head of the KGB, who was portrayed by Soviet disinformation and the Western media as a "tall, handsome, muscular, English‑speaking Russian, who wore American suits, drank American scotch, a lover of classical music etc." in short, someone Americans would perceive to be just like us.

Providentially, Andropov died of kidney disease in 1983, and glasnost #6 had to wait until Andropov's prot�g�, Mikhail Gorbachev, could be brought to power in 1985. It should be remembered, however, that the present Glasnost #6 scenario was scripted by Andropov and his KGB associates.

That is why General Vladimir Dryuchkov, the most vicious hardliner since Andropov, has been elevated to head the KGB. Glasnost #6 is completely orchestrated by the KGB). Each of these six glasnosts were strategic deceptions, carefully scripted by KGB and other strategic planners to get the West to provide massive economic aid and to disarm.

History shows, that after each of these glasnosts, the Soviet reverted to form ‑ mass murders, purges, global revolution, intrigue, conquest of countries, assassinations, etc. In fact, since 1961 (shortly after Glasnost #4 was terminated) 21 more countries have fallen to Soviet‑backed coups, revolutions, or wars of national liberation.

The West has been deceived five times, but Gorbachev's current deception is the biggest and most dangerous of all. Gorbachev's current strategy Gorbachev and his brilliant KGB script writers and military planners have decided to trade "nominal" control over the Eastern bloc satellites for the neutralization of Western Europe and the destruction of the NATO military alliance; a quantum rearrangement of the European chess board.

Gorbachev and his Kremlin planners have Not lost control (In fact, Gorbachev has more power than any Russian leader since Lenin or Stalin). The well drafted script calls for the Appearance that he has lost control. In fact, the Soviet Military and Secret Police are still intact in All of the Eastern European satellite states (there are 380,000 Soviet troops in East Germany alone), and the Soviet KGB and military, which are firmly in control of the Soviet Union today, are both stronger than they have ever been in the Soviets' 72 year history. However, the script calls for America and Western Europe to be allowed to take over the financial burdens of Eastern Europe. East Germany will become reunified; Western Europe is about to become neutral; NATO will collapse; Eastern and Western Europe will become realigned in an economic and, eventually, political bloc; America and the West will massively disarm in light of the "Diminished" Soviet threat and "end of the Cold War."

America will become progressively more isolated economically and politically from a united and neutral Europe; the Soviets will enter into an economic and possibly one day, a military alliance with Japan; and all of the above will be paid for by America and Western Europe in the biggest economic bailout in world history. After Glasnost #6, which is the greatest and most brilliant strategic deception of all has run its course, the Soviets will have the names of millions of dissidents throughout the Empire, and these will be systematically liquidated in bloody purges a la Stalin, Mao, and Tiananmen Square. Sometime, during or at the end of Glasnost #6, America will be targeted for nuclear blackmail, or outright military attack a la the Red Dawn scenario.

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� The Soviets Are Masters of Deception

"They disarm, we build." ^[58]; "The Soviets intend to conceal vast 'reserves' of missiles and warheads, hiding them in places throughout the expansive Soviet Union where the 'imperialists' could not spot them. Later, they could be launched...in a nuclear war." ^[59]; "In Military affairs, perestroika and modernization of Soviet technology under the new economic thinking and more open East ‑ West trade will help increase the military might of our country...Soviet disarmament proposals act as solvents to 'disarm' the military ‑ industrial complex of NATO." ^[60]; "Perestroika is expressly designed to enhance Soviet military capability and combat readiness." ^[61]

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ The Soviet Arms Buildup

"A prudent maxim for unsettled times: Keep one's eye on who has what guns." ^[62]; "Widely advertised Soviet cut‑backs are not what they are advertised to be, but are actually a part of a major restructuring and modernization of the Soviet forces. US intelligence sources expect the Soviet military to emerge in the early 1990's more powerful than it is today ...Strong and growing evidence indicates that the Soviet offensive strategy hasn't changed. It is still aimed at world domination, and there is nothing defensive about that." ^[63]; "We are not just a little bit behind the Russians, we are devastatingly behind them...I think the time has come when we have to quit fooling around and trying to lie to the American people." ^[64] In spite of the euphoria over the "collapse of Communism," "Communism is dead," "the Cold War is over," etc., and all of Gorbachev's "promises" to disarm, Soviet military strength continues to ominously grow, and the Soviet Military lead over the US continues to widen substantially. According to the current US Defense Report, Janes, and other international strategic think tanks, Moscow is producing ever‑growing numbers of ICBMs, Submarines, Tanks, Aircraft Carriers, Surface to Air Missiles, and other major military components.

�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� The Growing Soviet/US Military Gap

While the Soviets claim to be disarming, under Gorbachev's glasnost/perestroika, they have undergone their most massive arms buildup in the Soviets' years of power. In 1985, the Soviets had a 5 to 1 conventional lead in arms and manpower over the US and at least a 5 to 1 strategic nuclear lead. They are producing 16,000 SAM Missiles per year and have massive superiority in tanks, anti‑tank weapons, manpower, chemical weapons, artillery, combat aircraft, helicopters, as well as in tactical nuclear and ballistic systems.

They are not disarming ‑ They are modernizing! In spite of the Western perception that Russia is an economic/industrial basket case, her weapons production lines are turning out high quality weapons - as high a quality as United States weapons, but in vastly larger numbers.

In the 1970's the Soviets acquired a fleet of missiles designed to destroy American Missiles on the ground, leading the respected defense analyst, Angelo Codevilla, to conclude in 1979 that: "Soviet armament gave it a good chance of destroying most of America's missiles and bombers in a first strike, and of defeating United States forces in Europe, all without inflicting casualties on the order of World War II."

Today, in the wake of America's pulling its missiles out of Western Europe, and a decade of massive new Soviet missile and anti‑missile production and deployment, Codevilla believes America is far more vulnerable to a successful, decisive nuclear first strike than a decade ago.

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� The Shifting Strategic Balance

Codevilla, writing in Gary North's Remnant Review (12/1/89), says of the changing strategic balance: "The United States' 'hard' strategic targets include 50 MX missile silos, 950 Minutemen silos, some 100 locations in two dozen ports where about twenty ballistic missile submarines and perhaps fifty cruise missile‑firing attack submarines may be located on any given day, some 100 locations on about 25 airfields where the United States 98 B‑1 and 300 b‑52 Bombers are located, and about 800 radar, communications, command, control, and intelligence targets. To hit these 2,000 targets, the Soviets have at least 3,080 counter‑force warheads aboard 308 SS‑18 ICBMs, 552 warheads aboard 138 SS‑17s, 1,950 aboard 350 SS‑19s, 100 aboard a like number of truck mobile SS‑25s, and about 1,000 on perhaps 100 rail mobile SS‑24s. That amounts to over 6,500, or a 3.5 to 1 ratio of war‑heads to targets‑up from about 2.5 to 1 a decade ago.

In addition to this, the Soviets have perhaps another 5,000 non‑counter‑force strategic warheads. On our side, the only warheads with a counter‑force potential equal to the Soviets' are the 500 atop our 50 MXs. The overall ration of Soviet to United States warheads is 8 to 1. In practice, this means that a decapitating first strike is a serious option for whomever has power in the Kremlin, but none at all for the United States!

It also means that after such a strike, the United States would be left with very little strategic power for retaliation other than the perhaps 2,400 submarine‑launched ballistic missile (SLBM) warheads at sea at any one time...But these are small, inaccurate, and incapable of penetrating Russia's formidable missile defenses."

Codevilla went on to describe that: "The importance of the proposed Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) is that, as it cuts down the number of missiles on both sides, it would very likely squeeze America's allotted number of warheads and allowable strategic weapons into perhaps 400 strategic targets or less. Most likely these would be 50 fixed, or semi‑fixed MXs, perhaps 100 vulnerable bombers, and perhaps 15 submarines, only 8 of which would be at sea at any given time. The Soviets would have 4,000 counter‑force warheads to hit them with. That would mean a 10 to 1 ration, but against a much smaller target base."

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ Soviet Missile and Civil Defense

Russia has protected its key cities, government control centers, military, and industrial installations with massive anti‑missile and anti‑aircraft defenses to protect against any American missile (probably from US submarines) or bomber retaliation. These air defenses include 10,000 surface‑to‑air missiles. The Soviets spend $7‑billion per year on a massive civil defense system and have $200‑billion worth of shelters in the ground.

America Has No Missile Defense System

Or Civil Defense

The balance of power in Western Europe has shifted dramatically as the United States pulled all of its nuclear missiles, capable of hitting Russia, out of Europe while The Soviets have deployed even more missiles targeted on Europe. As Codevilla points out: "It is a common misconception that the Soviet Union is 'devaluing nuclear weapons,' especially in Europe. While in fact, the Soviets continue to produce about 500 SS‑21s every year. So, each year's production carries as many short range (500 miles maximum) missile warheads as Gorbachev has promised to withdraw from Europe. In addition, the Soviet Union's production of nuclear‑capable artillery outnumbers ours by about 17 to 1. No, the Soviet Union is de‑nuclearizing Western Europe, not Eastern Europe."

���������������������������������������������������������������������������� Upgrading and Modernizing the Soviet Military

Codevilla also states: "The Soviet armed forces are in the process of one of their periodic 'revolutions.' There was one in the mid‑1920s, another in the late 1940s, and a big one between about 1957 and 1964. These revolutions consist of eliminating old weapons and concepts while introducing better ones. They always involve some shrinkage in quantity and a substantial increase in quality. The current 'revolution' seems cut out of the same cloth. As the Soviet military‑industrial complex looks to the future, they are eliminating less‑trained personnel (some of whom, from Central Asia, don't even speak Russian) and are trying hard to raise the quality both of the equipment it produces and of the people who are to operate it. In other words, Soviet conventional forces are not becoming weaker, they are preparing to win the next war."

So, Gorbachev is spending 20% of his GNP on a military buildup and modernization of Russia's already vastly superior arsenal, widening his military lead over America, and encouraging our disarmament. Soviet MIG 29s to Cuba While the Soviets talk peace they have begun delivery of their most advanced fighter attack aircraft, the MIG 29 (two, at this writing) to Cuba. A squadron of 14 of these sophisticated fighters, capable of attacking important US military sea lanes in the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Basin and the US Eastern Seaboard, as far north as South Carolina, and as far west as New Orleans, will be delivered shortly. The MIG 29s are part of the Soviets' annual $5‑billion in aid (mostly military) to Cuba.

��������������������������������������������������������������������� Massive Soviet Weapons Deliveries to Central America

Soviet‑backed Communist guerrillas (FMLN) attacked San Salvador, the capital of El Salvador, on November 10‑11, using Russian arms supplied through Cuba and Nicaragua. The plan was to assassinate El Salvador's President and top leadership (thereby decapitating and toppling the government).

�It was the Communists' version of North Vietnam's Tet Offensive. Cuban, Nicaraguan, East German and Palestinian commanders participated in the attack. On November 25, a plane from Nicaragua crashed in Eastern El Salvador carrying 24 Russian SAM‑7 anti‑aircraft missiles and a host of other Soviet weapons. So far this year (1989), the Soviets have delivered an estimated $350‑million in weapons to the Communist Sandinistas (part of the $5‑billion in weapons delivered over the past 9 years), a total violation of Gorbachev's promise to President Bush, to cut off Soviet arms deliveries to Nicaragua. If El Salvador should fall to this Soviet‑backed guerilla onslaught (which has claimed 70,000 lives since 1981), the combination of Soviet‑backed Cuba, Nicaragua and El Salvador would be too much for Costa Rica, Honduras, Guatemala and Belize. All would fall in short order, and the Soviets would have a clean sweep of Central America from Columbia to Mexico ‑ with those two countries the next two dominoes to be taken out. All of this could happen over the next 2 ‑ 4 years, even as Americans are euphorically congratulating themselves over the "death of Communism," and the "end of the Cold War."

������������������������������������������������������������������� Soviets Orchestrating Guerilla Wars All Over the World

Via the KGB, or GRU (Soviet Military Intelligence) the Soviets are orchestrating guerilla wars against South Africa, Peru, Columbia, Venezuela, the Philippines, and in a dozen other spots around the globe ‑ arming, training, and directing a score of communist national liberation groups. (Since 1961, Moscow has conquered more than 20 countries with such wars of so‑called national liberation, its coups, and subversion). They have quietly airlifted $2.1‑billion in arms to the communist government in Afghanistan in 1989 for use against the Mujahideen; several hundred million in arms to the vicious Communist New Peoples Army in the Philippines, and $5‑billion in arms to Communist Angola for eventual use against the Republic of South Africa.

���������������������������������������������������������������������������� Soviet Espionage Against America is Exploding

Recently CIA Director William Webster stated that the KGB threat against America ‑ despite glasnost-perestroika ‑ has grown dramatically, and more successful intelligence operations have taken place against the US over the past 4 years: "...than at any time in our history...Over the past decade, we have discovered more penetrations of the United States defense and intelligence communities than at any time in our history."

Senator David Boren (D‑OR), head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, says: "The spy war is heating up."

Under General Kryuchkov, the KGB, which is charged with stealing American technology (especially military) is working overtime, while the Bush Administration, basking in the euphoria of "our new partnership," is dropping most of our internal security countermeasures. In fact, Soviet Military and Intelligence personnel are given frequent access to United States military bases and defense plants by the Bush Administration.

This type of treason started under the Reagan Administration. Meanwhile, thousands of spies and spetsnaz have poured out of Eastern Europe with the flood of refugees into the West in the latter part of 1989.

��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� The American Stampede to Disarm

Gorbachev's and the KGB's number one goal of glasnost/perestroika and the "apparent" liberalization in Eastern Europe is to Lower the threat perception of the United States and Western Allies so that there will be major reductions in defense spending. In this Gorbachev has already been incredibly successful. West Germany has announced that it will cut its military forces by 20%.

In America, U.S. News and World Report (12/11/89) articulated the disarmament explosion which is sweeping the land with an article entitled "Does America Need An Army?" Secretary of Defense Cheney (a member of the globalist CFR and Trilateral Commission) said in late November that hew was: "...planning to cut Pentagon spending next year because the likelihood of all‑out conflict between the United States and the Soviet Union...is probably lower now than it's been since the end of World War II."

Cheney and the Bush Administration are planning a three year cut in the defense budget of $180‑billion ($60‑billion, or 20%, per year) starting in FY '91; the cutting of 229,000 troops over the next year to meet Gramm‑Rudman budget constraints; the closing of 15 Air Force Bases; eliminate 200,000 Army personnel (a 17% cut, or 3 divisions, out of a total of 18 active divisions); the phase‑out of 2 aircraft carriers, (The Russians now have 4 aircraft carriers under construction), with associated air wings, some battleships and other surface ships (100 naval ships in total to be phased out); the elimination of the building of most Stealth Bombers; canceling of the program to modernize the main battle tank (the M‑1 Abrams); cutting American troops in Western Europe from 310,000 to 100,000 (a two‑thirds cut); and much more.

Retired General E.C. Meyer, former Army Chief of Staff, predicts that The United States Army will be cut in half over the next few years. The Wall Street Journal refers to Secretary Cheney as the Secretary of Disarmament. Liberal politicians and academics are jumping on the bandwagon, calling for the total elimination of the rail‑based MX missile; the scale‑back of the Stealth Bomber from 132 to 13 planes; elimination of SDI; the closing of hundreds of American military bases around the world; the total elimination of America's Advanced Tactical Fighters, and a 50%, or more, cut in the size of the United States military forces.

Liberal Congressman Jim Bates (D‑CA) has introduced legislation to close the Marines' Camp Pendleton and turn it into a national park. Pendleton is one of America's two Marine bases that fronts on a body of water. Other Congressional liberals hope to switch billions from defense to social programs, while many moderates and conservatives see the defense crunch as a way of helping to balance the budget and eliminate the deficit. It seems that Bush and Gorbachev have opened up Pandora's disarmament box in America, and now, the momentum for disarmament will become inexorable (like the growing leftist orchestrated momentum for gun control).

It should be remembered that as America embarks on massive military cuts that the Soviets have 215 combat ready divisions vs. 18 for the United States, which are about to be cut to 15. Tiny Cuba has a larger standing army than America Before these proposed cuts. The 5 to 1 conventional and strategic nuclear lead which the Soviets presently enjoy over America should also be remembered, as should the present 4 to 1 Soviet Naval lead over the United States.

����������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Bush Appeasement at the Malta Summit

The early December Malta Summit between Bush and Gorbachev has established George Bush as the greatest appeaser since Neville Chamberlain groveled before Adolf Hitler at the Munich Summit in 1938 ‑ appeasement which helped set the stage for World War II. Columnist/author William Safire, writing in The New York Times called Bush's performance, "...Doormat Diplomacy...The Bush strategy was to win world approbation by giving Mr. Gorbachev everything before he had to ask." Among these pre‑emptive concessions were:

1). Bush's proposal to give Russia observer status at the IMF and World Bank;

2). Bush promised to give the Soviets ‑ Most Favored Nation trade status (opening up a Pandora's box of trade, financial� aid, and high tech transfers to the Soviets) at the summit in June;

3). Bush promised massive United States taxpayer‑backed loans to the Soviets via our Export‑Import Bank;

4). Bush offered to shift the disarmament focus from strategic forces to conventional forces;

5). Bush offered to halt American production of chemical weapons;

6). Bush agreed to negotiate and sign a START Disarmament Treaty by next June will cut America's and Russia's� Strategic forces (bombers, missiles, missile launching submarines, etc.) by 50%.

Before the Summit, Bush proclaimed his own "new thinking" by proclaiming: "...the end of an era of hard, joyless peace between two armed camps;" by referring to Gorbachev, "...as that dynamic architect of reform" (Russian citizens would disagree); and by making an extraordinary pledge: "There is no greater advocate of perestroika than the President of the United States." At the Summit, according to press reports, "Bush and Gorbachev, with an unprecedented display of camaraderie, buried the Cold War at sea, promising to build new relations based on economic ties, disarmament accords, and support for reforms in Eastern Europe."

The world press euphorically referred to the two "Super Partners" ^[65] While Bush was committing the political and economic power of the United States to helping the Communist Party in the USSR to maintain its power Gorbachev persuaded Bush to de‑link the Soviet Union's support of regional aggression from the disarmament issue and America's financial and technological aid to the Soviets. In other words, Bush agreed to proceed with disarmament and massive American aid to the Russians, in spite of their revolutionary wars in Central America, Africa, the Middle East, the Philippines, etc.

Bush never mentioned the withdrawal of 500,000 Soviet troops from Eastern Europe. As William Safire stated: "In terms of Bush giving away everything and getting nothing, and Gorbachev giving nothing and getting everything, Mr. Bush failed miserably and Mr. Gorbachev succeeded brilliantly...Despite this quid‑pro‑nothing, Secretary of State Baker gushed at the 'potential for real chemistry between the two leaders' brought about by American concessioneering and Soviet stonewalling."

Safire went on to say: "Approaching the Summit with the goal of developing a close personal friendship with Mr. Gorbachev, Mr. Bush was afflicted with an almost childlike desire to surprise the Great Surpriser."

So, once aboard the Maxim Gorky, "Bush whirled about and presented the Soviet leader with the detailed granting of Moscow's economic wish list...The surprised and delighted Soviet leader thanked Mr. Bush for his support of perestroika and said: 'The Cold War is over.'" Gorbachev was delighted! This was like Kissinger going to the negotiating table with the North Vietnamese and giving them everything they wanted ‑ including South Vietnam. Like Gorbachev, they too were delighted!

Another New York Times editorial entitled "Life Support for Moscow" by A.M. Rosenthal commented regarding Bush's support for Gorbachev and his regime against those freedom loving Russians who have been trying to overthrow the yoke of Communism: "The United States has decided to try to halt, or at least delay the great international revolution against Communism in Russia...Until Malta, there was a strong and growing possibility that the monopoly of the Communist Party power in the Soviet Union would end soon...However, Gorbachev got all the economic support he dreamt of to keep his boat from sinking. He received the political and emotional commitment of the American Administration against those Russian liberals who have fought for an end to Party rule. Washington's support is a powerful weapon for Mr. Gorbachev to bring home for use against those who once trusted America to remain the enemy of Communist Party domination...Why did President Bush decide to turn Malta into an instrument for the preservation of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union? Surely Americans never realized the role Mr. Bush would play in providing life support for the Soviet Communist Party, keeping it breathing through more years of pain for the Soviet people."

This is the 7th major round of American financing of the Soviet leaders' oppression of their own people if you include the original American financing of the Bolshevik Revolution. Is this what the establishment means by "the merging of the interests of the US and USSR" and what Bush means by his phrase "the new partnership?"

������������������������������������������������������������� The Neutralization of Western Europe and The Demise of NATO

In addition to disarming the West, Gorbachev and his KGB and military strategists have long had the goal of enticing Western Europe into neutrality, eliminating NATO, and isolating, or at least greatly reducing, American influence in Europe. A corollary to these goals is the linking up of Eastern and Western Europe economically and politically via the European Community.

The beginning of the demise of NATO came when Reagan agreed to pull all of America's intermediate range nuclear missiles (Western Europe's nuclear umbrella) out of Europe under the terms of the INF Treaty. This sent a loud and clear signal to Western Europe that America could no longer be counted upon to defend the continent. It also played directly into the hands of the West German Greens, and other pro‑Soviet leftist anti‑nuclear disarmament groups all over Europe, and undermined the already shaky position of the pro‑defense politicians in Western Europe.

Now, West Germany, dominated by pacifists and anti‑nuclear disarmament activists, has agreed to cut its defenses 20%, and is pushing for reunification with East Germany. (Only 30% of West Germans now approve of American troops on their soil). Although the Russians and East Germans are feigning reluctance for reunification, that reunification, will be the final stake in the heart of an already faltering NATO Alliance. Even though this is true at the present time, Germany will destroy ALL of its enemies: "In that day will I make the governors of Judah like an hearth of fire among the wood, and like a torch of fire in a sheaf; and they shall devour all the people round about, on the right hand and on the left: and Jerusalem shall be inhabited again in her own place, even in Jerusalem. The Lord also shall save the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem do not magnify themselves against Judah. In that day shall the Lord defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the Lord before them. And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem." ^[66]

A reunified, or federated Germany, will quickly become neutral, will drop out of NATO, and since West Germany is the anchor of NATO, the alliance will collapse shortly thereafter. For a time, France and England will try to maintain independent viable nuclear and conventional military deterrents, but the rest of Europe will follow Germany quickly into neutrality (a stipulation Russia will demand and receive). England and France will move to the left, Margaret Thatcher will be ousted, and the momentum of events will move England and France along with the rest of Western Europe, into neutrality.

Already NATO members are canceling billions of dollars in weapons standardization programs because of the simultaneous declines in perceptions of the Soviet threat and in Western defense budgets. With American leaders now openly talking about pulling out 100,000 ‑ 200,000 American troops (no longer needed in the new post ‑ Cold war era) the public and political will (or motivation) to continue to support sizable defense expenditures will collapse all over Western Europe, as it has in America, and it will all happen, quite literally, overnight (within 6 ‑ 18 months). It's called the acceleration factor.

A US News & World Report article (11/27/89) sums it up pretty well: "The Russians Aren't Coming ‑ With Peace Breaking Out, NATO Defense Strategies Are In For A Shake‑up."

In short, over the next one to two years, NATO will cease to be a military deterrent to the Soviet military might. The political left in America and Europe want to convert NATO into an administrative, and perhaps policing body to help implement the political union of Western Europe in '92 and perhaps the union of Eastern and Western Europe over the next 3 ‑ 5 years.

All of this is calculated to reduce American influence. After a decent interval of Western European disarmament and economic buildup of the East by the West (perhaps 3 ‑ 5 years), the Soviets will begin to flex their military muscle by the mid‑1990's. Then a disarmed Western Europe will know who's boss ‑ the guys to the east with all the guns, tanks, and planes. The Soviet strategy will then shift to "operation intimidation" and a neutralized, disarmed Western Europe will find itself in a subservient role to the Soviets. In effect, Gorbachev is currently trading some control over Eastern Europe for eventual de facto control over all of Europe ‑ East and West. How is that for a brilliant chess move?

����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� The Care and Feeding of the Bear

"The capitalists of the world and their governments, in the pursuit of conquest of the Soviet market, will close their eyes to the indicated higher reality, and thus will turn into deaf, mute, blind men. They will extend credits, and giving us the materials and technology we lack, they will restore our military industry, indispensable for our suppliers. In other words, they will labor for the preparation for their own suicide." ^[67]; "It is an odds‑on bet that the Soviets are deliberately exaggerating their current economic difficulties, so as to pressure the gullible West to come to their financial rescue BEFORE the Soviet military‑industrial establishment suffers serious erosion." ^[68]

In addition to disarming the West, and neutralizing Western Europe, while concurrently sabotaging the NATO alliance, the third major goal of the current glasnost/perestroika campaign is to get America and the West to bail out the Soviet Union economically. Lenin and all of his heirs down through Gorbachev predicted that greedy Western businessmen would sell them the rope with which they would hang us, and would sell their souls, their birthright, and even their freedom for profit. Gorbachev intends for America, Western Europe and Japan to take over the financial burden of Eastern Europe, to supply Russia with massive credits, to pour in massive amounts of high technology, and to help rebuild Russia's (reported) basket case agricultural and industrial infrastructure.

Gorbachev knows that the greatest allies he has in achieving his economic and political goals are greedy American businessmen. Already they are pushing for Most Favored Nation trade status, repeal of ALL restrictions on trade, high tech transfers, joint ventures, etc. Pan Am Airways and Sheraton Hotels have teamed up with Aeroflot and the city of Moscow to build two new hotels in Moscow.

Everything from Control Data computers to fiber optics to Pepsi Cola to petrochemical and light bulb factories are now being sold into the Russian market. Combustion Engineering is now erecting a $10‑billion petrochemical plant in the USSR, the largest US venture to date. Joint US/USSR Trade and Economic Council want virtually all US products (defense and otherwise) to be freed up for sale to Russia, and all joint US/Soviet ventures to be tax‑payer insured by the Overseas Private Investment Corporation.

There is no doubt ‑‑ there is an unholy alliance between Bush and his administration and the Clinton administration and these multi-national corporate and banking leaders, who, like sharks smelling blood, are going into a feeding frenzy over the billions of dollars in profits they plan to make in joint ventures and other deals in Russia and the East Bloc, where they see a market of 400-million people just waiting to be exploited.

Just as Bush and his establishment friends will do anything for billions in profits from Soviet/US trade, so the Bush Administration has quietly reopened all aid and trade channels with the Peoples' Republic of China. Thanks to the efforts of Bush, Baker, Kissinger, Nixon, Haig, etc., business is back to normal with the butchers of Tiananmen Square (but that is not a pimple compared to the murder of from 60 ‑ 100 million Chinese the Communists have committed since 1949).� Congress has voted $934‑million in tax‑payers' aid to Poland and Hungary. Secretary of State James Baker has offered massive financial aid to East Germany. The 12 nation European Community has agreed to a large aid package for Eastern Europe (Poland, East Germany, Hungary and Yugoslavia) and has signed a 10‑year trade pact with the USSR to eliminate trade quotas and increase technical aid.

The Export‑Import Bank is considering up to $10‑billion in loans to the Soviets. And The New York Times has in an editorial (1/1/89) called on President Bush to, "Help Mr. Gorbachev Help the West" by making huge loan guarantees. "There also exists another alliance ‑ at first glance a strange one, a surprising one ‑ but if you think about it, in fact, one which is well grounded and easy to understand. This is the alliance between our Communist leaders and your capitalists." ^[69]

���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Toward A New World Order

Newsweek's (12/11/89) cover story "Super Partners ‑ An Ambitious Game Plan For A New Era" says a lot about where we are and where we are headed. For over fifty years, Eastern Establishment insiders have talked about merger with the Soviet Union, about merging the common interests of America and Russia, about world government, and, more recently, about the New World Order.

The agenda of the Liberal Eastern Establishment in America and Europe ever since they helped finance the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, and helped to finance the Soviets in the '20s, '30s and '40s, right up through the present, has been global government. This is obvious in studying the publications of the CFR, Trilateral Commission, and other establishment groups.

They see the Soviet Union as an important vehicle (or tool) to be used to help bring about this world government or so‑called "new world order." Soviet‑backed revolutions and the establishment of their own foreign policy machinations against countries like China in the '40s; Cuba in the '50s; Iran, Nicaragua, Rhodesia and the Panama Canal giveaway in the '80s; and South Africa, South Korea and Central America in the late 1980's and early 1990's is all designed to set the stage for world government in the 1990's.

South Africa will be one of the last major dominoes to fall to Communism (it appears it will take 1 ‑ 3 years), via an ANC (African National Conference) Government; the United States of Western Europe is to emerge in 1992; Eastern and Western Europe are to merge into one large economic and political bloc, and the world government (New World Order) dreamed of by Bush, Kissinger, Shultz, Brzezinski, Rockefeller, and their establishment associates is supposed to emerge in the mid‑to‑late 1990's via a global merger of the East and West.

A few minor wars (perhaps in Central America and/or the Middle East) are envisioned along the way, to preoccupy and divert the attention of the masses, but a government of, by, and for the elite is scheduled to emerge before the year 2000. That is the establishment agenda; that is the New Age Movement Agenda, but we do not think this is the agenda of the Soviet Union. (It should be remembered that the best laid plans of mice and men and elitists sometimes go astray).

The Red Dawn Scenario ‑ The Soviets have another agenda. It is called Red Dawn. If one studies the writings of Lenin, Stalin, Manuiliski, Andropov and Soviet leaders right down through Gorbachev, one will conclude that the Soviet leadership from 1917 to the present has never deviated from the Marxist/Leninist goal of world domination.

Capitalism in general and America in particular are their number one enemy and obstacle to achieving this dream. Western liberals and appeasers from bush to Kennedy, from Kissinger to James Baker, from Rockefeller to Armand Hammer (Lenin's old crony and far more than just a "liberal") can keep telling us that "Communism is dead," that the "Cold War is over," and that "Russia is now our partner." But the Marxist/Leninists who run the Kremlin, who run the KGB, who run the Soviet military have never been stronger, nor more dedicated to the destruction of America.

The retrenchment, retreat, and "humbling" of the Communist Bloc is simply the Communist Dialectic (two steps forward one back, then two forward) in action, the 6th Glasnost since 1921, and the greatest strategic deception in modern (perhaps all of) history. Proud arrogant people are easy to manipulate, and America's Liberal Eastern Establishment leaders are proud, arrogant men ‑ today, more so than ever, because they believe they have their dream of world government almost achieved, almost in hand. As such, they can be manipulated by the Communist leadership for their own ends.

From Lenin to Gorbachev, the Communist leadership has talked of the necessity for using wealthy finance capitalists (like the Armand Hammers, the David Rockefellers, the Dwayne Andreas, and thousands more) to help finance their world revolution.

The communist leadership understands these mens' greed and lust for more and more wealth. It also understands their lust for power, and world domination via their "new world order," or global government, scheduled to emerge in the mid‑'90s. So, the Communist leadership, headed by Gorbachev is willing to go along with their "new world order" schemes, with the reunification of Germany and then Europe (albeit under neutral banners).

That Communist leadership is willing to grovel before their Western benefactors, and smile, and bow, and humbly admit their mistakes ‑ and beg for forgiveness, and ask for financial and industrial help to change their ways. But at some point in time, the Soviets, led and directed by the greatest masters of deception in history, will launch their final drive for World Domination; they will double-cross their liberal Western capitalist benefactors, and will attack the United States of America.

You see, they don't see the elitist "New World Order" crowd dominating the globe ‑ they see themselves dominating through their overwhelming military might, through their stealth and deception! (Both historical and contemporary Soviet writers and strategists have long said they would attack us when we were at peace with them). (That will be the beginning of the Red Dawn Scenario. That will be, what they believe, the beginning of a Jewish controlled World Kingdom). History is replete with examples of such strategic deceptions and double‑crosses.

For Example: The ancient Greeks who sailed their fleet away from Troy, in defeat and humiliation, leaving� behind a gift, a war reparation, a giant wooden horse. A proud and gullible Troy fell that very night.

For Example: An Oriental Ambassador, humbled by America's trade prowess in the Pacific, bowed in humility� before our proud and powerful President, seeking conciliation and improved relations with America. Ten��� minutes later, his Emperor's Navy and air force was attacking our unprepared American fleet in Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941.

For Example: After signing a non‑aggression pact with Stalin in 1939, whereby Russia and Germany would carve� up Poland, Hitler double crossed Stalin and abruptly turned and invaded Russia in 1941.

The Red Dawn Scenario (made into a movie based upon an official US Government strategic scenario) hypothesizes that: When Western Europe goes neutral, NATO will collapse, Communist backed revolution sweeps through the Caribbean Basin, Central America and Mexico.

America, weakened by three decades of disarmament and appeasement, has its major Strategic Air Command bases, missile sites, and naval ports (but not cities, for the most part) ‑ about 400 targets in all (as estimated by Codevilla) nuked. These nuclear missiles are launched from Soviet submarines Currently a few miles off the US east and west coasts, from MIG fighter bombers launched against the southeastern United States from Cuba, and across the polar ice cap.

America, of course, because of 25 years of disarmament treaties, has no nuclear defense whatsoever. A feeble retaliation from a handful of American submarines does minimal damage to a well‑defended Soviet Union.

Within hours of the attack, the Soviets launch an airborne and armored invasion into an undefended and disarmed United States through Alaska and Mexico. This airborne/armored invasion by Russians, Cubans, Nicaraguans, and other Eastern block troops quickly cuts North America in half and the political survival of America becomes problematic.

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Is The Red Dawn scenario Plausible?

In many people's opinion, and that of a number of defense and intelligence analysts he knows, IT IS! The Soviet strategy for the conquest of America has long been, "...internal demoralization, plus disarmament, plus external encirclement, will lead to nuclear blackmail and eventual surrender or conquest..."

Perhaps a George Bush, or his successor, with a nuclear gun to his head, will simply surrender ‑ the present "partnership" will reach a "new level of accommodation." Or perhaps the Soviets will opt for Red Dawn. The point is the elements for the launching of a Red Dawn Scenario are now moving into place. These elements include:

1). Vastly superior Soviet military strength vs. the United States;

2). A neutral Europe and the termination of the NATO military alliance (which secures Russia's western flank);

3). Revolutionary Communist governments in Cuba, Nicaragua, Panama, and eventually, throughout Central America� and Mexico;

4). Larger standing armies in Cuba and Nicaragua than America now possesses;

5). A very porous, undefendable border with Mexico stretching 2,100 miles from Brownsville to Tijuana;

6). Millions of Latin refugees in the southwestern United States, with millions more coming in each year, thousands of which are KGB, DGI or other east bloc agents, spetsnaz, etc.;

7). A total absence of United States air defenses against submarine launched missiles (from Soviet subs on the American east and west coasts, or the Gulf of Mexico), from Cuban or Central American based aircraft, or from Russia across the polar ice cap;

8). Huge stores of prepositioned conventional weapons in Cuba, Nicaragua, and eventually, throughout Central America and Mexico; and

9). A sparsely populated and largely undefended Alaska, virtually adjacent to the Soviet Union, and already (at this� writing), being infiltrated by Soviet agents and spetsnaz.

Very few Americans will be able to comprehend, accept or be willing to believe the above analysis. The "peace propaganda" to the contrary is enormous and overwhelming. We are the "Pollyanna people," we want good news, not bad, and we love people who tell us what we want to hear (like George Bush and Ronald Reagan), and we hate people who tell us what we don't want to hear. Today, we hear our leaders telling us that "there will be peace in our day," but the Bible warns to beware when men cry "peace, peace, and there is no peace."

Kennedy in 1960 was faced with a weakening dollar in Europe and a rising gold price. His logical reaction at that time was to return to the Constitution with regard to monetary and currency policy. No American president has ever dared do this since John F. Kennedy. And what does the Constitution Say? The Constitution simply says that Congress shall coin and regulate money. Kennedy reasoned that by not paying interest to the bankers in control of the Federal Reserve system, who print paper and then loan it to the government at interest, was the wise step to take. Even at that time it was considered that America had a spiraling national debt. And what did Kennedy do?

��������������������������������������������������������������������������������� June 14th 1963 ‑‑ Executive Order 11.110

This little known Executive Order called for the issuance of $4,292,893,815 in a new currency, called "United States Notes." These notes were to be issued through the Treasury, rather than through the traditional method of the Federal Reserve System. That same day, Kennedy also signed a bill changing the backing of one and two dollar bills from silver to gold adding strength to the weakening U.S. currency. It took only between June 4th, 1963, and November 22nd to organize the conspiracy to do away with this independent thinking American.

The Interest Free Currency was the "Straw that broke the Camel's Back!" The comptroller of the currency under JFK was James J. Saxon. Jim Saxon had already been at odds with the powerful Federal Reserve Board for some time and had decided to reduce the power of the Federal Reserve Board [if that were possible, under his president. Saxon had already decided that non‑federal reserve banks could underwrite state and local general obligation bonds, weakening the overall authority of Federal Reserve Banks.

��������������������������������������������������������� Interest Free United States Notes Withdrawn After Kennedy's Death!

Naturally, after Kennedy's assassination, these "Kennedy Bills" were quickly withdrawn from circulation never to be issued again. Furthermore the American public is was not ever to learn of the possibility of issuing currency and bonds at vastly reduced interest rates under the general borrowing authority of the Constitution and by eliminating any interest payments to the Federal Reserve bankers. Following is a reproduction of Executive Order 11.110.

�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Executive Order 10289

Amendment of executive order no. 10289 as amended, relating to the performance of certain functions affecting the dept. of the treasury.� By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 301 of title 3 of the United States Code, it is ordered as follows: Section 1. Executive Order No. 10289 of September 19, 1951 as amended, is hereby further amended:

(a) By adding at the end of paragraph 1 thereof of the following subparagraphs (j): the authority vested in the President by paragraph

(b) of section 43 of the Act of May 12, 1933, as amended (31 U.S.C. 821 (b) to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury not then held for redemption of any outstanding silver certificates, to prescribe the denomination of such silver certificates, and to coin standard silver dollars and subsidiary silver currency for their redemption by;

(b) By revoking subparagraphs (b) and � of paragraph 2 thereof.

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ What About The Future?

When considering the possibility of the "second currency" being issued for domestic purposes only, and the prohibition of the export of this currency outside the control of the Treasury Department, consider the Executive Order 11.110.

And consider that control of our destiny by way of ever‑expanding federal deficits and currency upon which interest must be paid to the banks, the Trilateral/Zionist conspiracy has succeeded in wrecking American prosperity already, and may yet result in an economic crash not seen since the 1930s. People who refuse to consider the possibility of taking precautionary actions to protect their assets are simply guilty of gross neglect.

���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Other Presidents Have Paid

������������������������������������������������������������������������������� With Their Lives For Fighting The Bankers

Of all the conspiracy theories promulgated in an attempt to explain the mysteries surrounding the Kennedy assassination, the following thesis is by far the most comprehensive and compelling: Oliver Stone's movie about the Kennedy assassination could do an incalculable amount of good, if it finally tells the truth from the right historical perspective.

A few paragraphs ago when we said that Kennedy's issuing of interest free currency was the straw that broke the camel's back, it was not just an off‑the‑cuff remark. We can now benefit from a kind of historical hindsight, to see that the following thesis represents the most viable explanation of the mysterious surrounding the Kennedy assassination! Consider:

It is little known that the battle between our American leaders and the Internationalist bankers of the Rothschild/Rockefeller stripe has been going on since the earliest days of our country. Furthermore, it appears that some of our bravest presidents have paid with their lives for trying to free our people from the shackles of the unjust and insane interest charge every time a banking cartel lends our country more money through the banking system.

����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� How Our Economy is Controlled!

Let's be clear on what Kennedy, and Lincoln before him, tried to do. Sheldon Emery's book, "Billions for the Bankers and Debts for the People," explains that, as things are, every time Congress asks for more money to be printed, the Federal Reserve board "graciously" prints it. But there's a Big Catch. This paper money is then LOANED to the people of the United States at Exorbitant interest rates. Thus, for merely printing paper money, the owners of the Federal Reserve Board [a private company, with private stockholders] charges billions of interest and "debt" payments owned by the private sector economy.

���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� The Federal Reserve Board

��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� The Key to the Conspiracy's Power!

So we can understand why Kennedy and Lincoln felt it was necessary to act, let's focus for a moment on the current, private and subversive nature of the Federal Reserve Board. Check your phone book and you will find the Federal Reserve board listed, not under U.S. Government agencies, but with other private companies, such as "Federal Express." For instance, the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, Cincinnati branch, is listed on page 88 of the business section of the white pages in the 1990‑91 phone book.

And how about the fact that this private company, which controls ALL of our money, has never been audited? In other words, we are looking at a private company operating a money printing machine that is, effectively, a black box which neither the Congress nor the people of the United States may look! The scam is of such mind‑boggling proportions that few will focus on it long enough to grasp it! How much money the manipulators of the FED have printed and "loaned out" to anti‑Christian enterprises working to destroy Christian civilization, or to allies, so that they could become a factor in a targeted industry, will probably never be known.

������������������������������������������������������������� Some Presidents Saw Through This Scan and Tried to Break It!

So, like many thousands of grassroots American patriots, Lincoln and Kennedy [despite other shortcomings] seemed to have seen through this hoax. Why should Americans pay interest to ANY private group for issuing OUR OWN money which is brought into circulation in response to the productive capacity of the American people? Why should our country go deeper into debt to these international bankers every time we become wealthier in terms of the actual goods and services available in the country?

Think about it, think how many more material goods are in our nation today as opposed to the 1930s. To take just the electronics industry, TVS, VCRs, automobiles, computers, the space industry, etc. Yet, we are so much more in debt today than in the 1930s. Why? Because each time money came into circulation to produce these and other dynamic inventions, it was Loaned to us by private international bankers running the Federal Reserve Board, and the citizens of the United States have paid and paid and paid the interest on that "loan." Kennedy and Lincoln in order to begin to remedy this absurd situation simply issued money from the U.S. Treasury, which was put into circulation with no interest burden or debt burden on the American people. Simple? Yes! The first duty of a responsible government? Of course. So why has it not been effectively accomplished?

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Ben Franklin Also Understood!

Nor was Rothschild the only one who understood these things. From the autobiography of Ben Franklin, as reported in Money Creators by Gertrude Coogan: "...the inability of the colonists to get the power to issue their own money permanently out of the hands of George III and the international bankers was the Prime reason for the Revolutionary War."

In Senate document number 23 from the Committee on Banking and Currency, page 23, we find Franklin answering a question about why the economy of the young colonies was booming: "That is simple. In the colonies we issue our own money. It is called Colonial Script. We issue it in proper proportion to the demands of trade and industry."

������������������������������������������������������� The Kennedy Assassination In Light of Suppressed American History!

However the international bankers could see that such interest free scrip would keep America free and independent from their influence. So by 1781, banker‑backed Alexander Hamilton [a Jew named Levine] succeeded in starting the Bank of America. After a few years of "bank" money, the prosperity under "colonial script" had vanished, and Ben Franklin again, in his autobiography: "...conditions were so reversed that the era of prosperity had ended and a depression set in to such an extent that the streets of the Colonies were filled with the unemployed!"

By 1790, Hamilton (Levine) and his banker friends had succeeded in creating a privately owned central bank and converted the public debt into interest bearing bonds payable to the bankers. In 1811, Hamilton's bank charter expired and the international bankers precipitated the war of 1812. By 1816 another privately‑owned U.S. bank was started up with $35 million in assets, only $7 million owned by the government. This bank was chartered for 20 years.

������������������������������������������������������������������������� Andrew Jackson One of the Few Great Presidents!

When the 1816 charter expired in 1836, president Andrew Jackson Vetoed it! It was at this time that Jackson made his three famous statements. First, Jackson told Van Buren according to National Geographic Society: "The Bank is trying to kill me, but I will kill it!"

Second he said: "If the American people only understood the rank injustice of our money and banking system, there would be a revolution before morning..."

Jackson's other statement was reported in all the grade school and high school books up until at least the late 1960s, but the context was never given. But many understand the full weight of President Jackson's words directed at the bankers pushing a renewal of their bank charter: "You are a den of vipers. I intend to rout you out and by the eternal God, I will rout you out..."

For his courageous words and action, there was an assassination attempt on President Jackson, but by the grace of God, the gun misfired!

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Abraham Lincoln Balked at Bankers!

President Lincoln needed money to pay for the Civil War, and the international bankers knowing his desperation offered loans at 24‑36% interest. Lincoln balked at their demands, as he did not want to plunge his countrymen into such usurious debt. Lincoln was advised to ask Congress to pass a law authorizing the printing of full legal tender treasury notes. Lincoln said at that time: "We gave the people of this Republic the greatest blessing they ever had, their own paper money to pay their own debts..."

These Treasury notes were printed with green ink on the back so the people called them "greenbacks." Lincoln printed over 400 million of the greenbacks, debt‑free and interest‑free and paid the soldiers, U.S. government employees, and bought supplies for the war. This vexed the international bankers who had wanted Lincoln to borrow the money from them so the American people would owe endless interest on the loan. Lincoln's method made this seem ridiculous. Of course, Lincoln was assassinated after the end of the Civil War by a Jew that history shows to have had ties to the secret societies of Europe, John Wilkes Booth. After Lincoln's assassination, the government was induced to revoke the greenback law which put an end to Lincoln's debt‑free, interest‑free greenbacks.

A new national banking act was enacted, and all money was to become interest‑bearing again. The act also provided that the green backs would be retired as soon as they came back to the Treasury.

����������������������������������������������������������������� Garfield and McKinley Also Targeted by "Lone Assassins!"

James A. Garfield was elected the 20th president of the United States and assumed office in 1881. The Encyclopedia Britannica tells us that, after he served as a school teacher and principal in Ohio: "In 1862 he was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives where he served until 1880. Chairman of the House Committee on Appropriations, he became an expert on fiscal matters, advocated a high protective tariff..."

Shortly before his election to the presidency Garfield is reported to have said: "...whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce."

Encyclopedia Britannica again: "On July 2nd, 1881 after only four months in office, Garfield was shot at the railroad station in Washington, D.C., by [a Jew called] Charles J. Guiteau, a disappointed office seeker."

Garfield lay unconscious for 80 days and then expired. Twenty years later in 1900, William McKinley was elected to a second term by a large majority. The Encyclopedia Britannica tells us that he was well‑known as a champion of protective tariffs for key American industries, but it is silent on another aspect of McKinley's career: his opposition to renewal of the bank charter being pushed at that time by the banking cartel.

Shortly after his re‑election, Britannica tells us that: "...he was fatally shot on September 6, 1901, by [a Jew called] Leon Czolgosz, an anarchist." He was another president who happened to oppose the international bankers, and was Reportedly shot by a "lone nut."

���������������������������������������������������������������������� Federal Reserve the Ultimate Goal Finally Established!

Finally in 1913, the bankers were able to get their long sought Federal Reserve act passed through Congress. They now had achieved an "unlimited term" to run the country by controlling the creation of money. We are now suffering massive financial chaos, exactly because of the conspiracy's desire to depress the American economy, and press firms and our people into the service of foreign nations. [Example: building factories and drilling for oil in the USSR and other Communist countries, instead of in America]. The only modern president to stand up to the FED was President Kennedy through his already alluded to Executive Order 11.110 putting $4 billion of Treasury notes into circulation in June of 1963 and, as stated earlier President Johnson's first act in office was to recall the Kennedy notes.

���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Reagan Threatened Paul Volcker!

On the campaign trail in 1980, Reagan slipped and stated, "...that the Federal Reserve Bank was answerable to no one, not even the president..." At that time of 20% interest rates, he also stated that we would replace FED chairman Paul Volcker. President Reagan was shot shortly after assuming office on the very day, that the Trilateral Commission was meeting in Washington, D.C. Just as convincing evidence has come forth that the U.S. Intelligence agencies played an essential role in the elimination of Kennedy, so it seems was the case with Reagan.

Lt. Col. Bo Gritz presented impressive evidence at the June 1991 Patterson Strategy Seminar in Dallas that the bullet Could not have possibly come from John Hinckley's Gun, but almost surely was fired from a special small weapon available exclusively to the CIA and related intelligence agencies. [After the shooting, Reagan publicly told FED chairman Volcker he was doing a "good job."]

So from all of the above, it appears to be very unhealthy for a president of the United States to buck the international bankers. Earl Warren of Warren Commission infamy announced the establishment line shortly after the Kennedy assassination, that the evidence would be Sealed up for 75 years! This, along with all that is presented here, proves the total relevancy of the Kennedy assassination today to the American people and to any future president who may wish to take on the international bankers and rectify the greatest theft in history.

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ Killing A Prisoner Before Trial

����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Goes Back At Least 2,000 Years!

Before leaving the Kennedy assassination, one of the most astounding things about it was the walking of the "criminal of the century," Lee Harvey Oswald, across Dallas so that someone could walk up and shoot him at point blank range. This happened two days After the assassination and obviously Prevented a Trial, at which time Lee Harvey Oswald's lawyers would have likely brought out all the evidence that Oswald could not possibly have pulled off the Kennedy assassination alone. Oswald in all probability was not even involved in the shooting of Kennedy [although he was involved with the CIA and the operation, and ended up as the patsy]. In fact, this technique of killing a prisoner "before trial" is an old technique of the enemies of Christianity, a 2,000 year old technique.

Some of the Pharisees and Sadducees, the spiritual ancestors of our current day top Zionists, were attempting to use this technique on St. Paul. See Acts of the Apostles, Chapter 23. The book Plot Against the Church written in 1962, one year before the Kennedy assassination, commented on this passage in Chapter 23 of the Acts of the Apostles: "...the foresight of the captain...frustrated their criminal plans. Therefore he sent Paul away under the guard of 200 soldiers and 2 officers...one sees that even in those distant times, they applied the system of murdering a prisoner on the road when the latter was brought from one place to another."

And so, in 1963, the world saw Lee Harvey Oswald himself killed as a "prisoner on the road" being moved from one place to another. Oswald the "lone nut" was killed, in turn, by a "lone nut" assassin, which prevented the trial which would have exposed all the lies and cover‑ups of the Warren Commission.

�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Advice To A Future President

In retrospect, the sad mistake made by President Kennedy was to issue the U.S. Treasury notes, without FIRST going on television and informing the American people what he was going to do...and why! And furthermore, WHO will be most likely to attempt to stop a president who so acts. Instead of taking this logical step, Kennedy gave his remarks to a minutely small audience at Columbia University shortly before the assassination according to many reports.

Finally, it would be advisable for any president who tries to take America's currency back from this ruthless clique of international bankers, to make sure that his message gets out to the American people. Any president who takes such an act in the future should send troops to temporarily occupy the three television networks to ensure that the Zionists who control those networks do not "pull the plug" before this future president can get his message to the American people. For this wrecking of the greatest civilization of the ages, we can thank the Jewish Marxist movement.

The real danger is here at home. Several millions of our people have been so subverted and misguided that it would appear they would side with the Communists in case of a Revolution here. This condition would have been intolerable enough in the days when wars and revolutions were fought man to man. Today it is immeasurably more dangerous, with a Jewish minority much in control of propaganda machines with which to inflame the public mind and, at the timely moment, create hysteria and confusion.

Anti‑Communists have great difficulty in getting out information on the conspiracy systematically destroy this society. Privately‑financed pressure groups, such as the ADL, as well as the radio‑television outlets, movie companies and the press, stand ready to defame and intimidate any opposition to Communism which threatens to become influential.

Will we have the determination and character to overcome the massive handicap our past blindness and ignorance allowed to develop? Which way shall we go, toward a liberation and salvation of our Christian‑ White Nation or toward our total enslavement? Until we start exerting as much time and effort to preserving our nation as the groups such as the Anti‑Defamation League are spending to destroy it, conditions will only worsen.

1990 April 10: The Wall Street Journal publishes excerpts from CFR member Paul Nitze's speech at the March 12 opening of the new CFR office in Washington, DC: "For the Council on Foreign Relations to have its own quarters here in Washington reflects a changed era. In the '20s and '30s, New York was not only the financial, industrial and press capital of the country, but prided itself on being its policy center as well. The State Department and White House might conduct diplomacy in peace and raise and command armies in war, but policy was made by serious people, men with a longer view, i.e., the great men of finance and their advisers. New York was where they were to be found..."

CFR member George Sherry's The United Nations Reborn is published in which concerning the U.S. he states that "After all, the U.N. Charter is the law of the land."

1990 September: In The UNESCO Courier for this month is an interview with Gro Harlem Brundtland, who is former prime minister of Norway and former chair of the United Nation's 1983 World Commission on Environment and Development, which issued Our Common Future in 1987. In the interview Ms. Brundtland declares that "the nation-state has had its day as the decisive body in world affairs...The new factor today is that the nation-state is no longer enough. Some traditional national authority must be surrendered...We need a common authority to decide." She goes on to explain that an international authority will even be able to prevail over a big or strong country.

1991 April 22: Common Responsibility in the 1990s: The Stockholm Initiative and Global Security and Governance is published with Jimmy Carter and Robert McNamara support it. The document declares: "We need a new world order...The time is ripe to implement the international security regime based on the Charter of the United Nations...For a new world order...permanent political offices in key regions, military observer teams, fact-finding missions, and military collective-security forces could constitute a global emergency system...U.N. missions could be used to oversee elections... They could be put to work in cases of internal conflicts which have an impact on other countries...Zones free of specific types of weapons could be established...While history calls us back to old nationalism and unreconstructed sovereignty...given the interdependencies of today, the scope of sovereignty is in reality much more limited than either politicians or the public want to admit...The old order is passing and the new world order must be established...The Secretary-General should have the power to take initiatives and act swiftly when an international crisis calls for it, if need be without prior consent by the Security Council."

The Arkansas Governor's School, founded in 1979 and overseen by appointees of Bill Clinton, has the following activities (according to Peter LaBarbera of Concerned Women for America, in Human Events, September 12, 1992): "A blatant anti-Christian diatribe from a radical feminist 'which,' who likens Jesus Christ's death on the cross to necrophilia and sado-masochism; pro-homosexual readings, discussions, and films like 'The Times of Harvey Milk' a film lionizing homosexual San Francisco supervisor Harvey Milk; a lecture from the attorney who defend 'Jane Roe' in the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court case concerning abortion (with no balancing speaker from the pro-life side); and a lesson in 'Animal Liberation' from a representative of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), a rabid 'animal right's' group whose leader has compared chicken harvesting to the holocaust."

1991 August: Librarian of Congress and former Rhodes scholar James Billington writes from Moscow that: "One of Russia's great art historians had told me in all seriousness a hear before (about August 1990) that all of Russia's troubles had begun when Gorbachev was initiated into a Masonic Lodge by Margaret Thatcher during his first trip to London...Vladimir Turbin described the new Soviet man as an 'epic knight charging forth across the steppe on a horse called Proletarian Strength, bearing in his heart the image of a beautiful Helen called Rosa Luxembourg'...The tragedy at Chernobyl was widely accorded apocalyptical significance, particularly since the word also mean wormwood, and thus suggested to many the apocalyptical Star Wormwood from the Book of Revelation. Beillington will write all of this in his 1992 book, Russia Transformed: Breakthrough to Hope, Moscow, August 1991, and acknowledges 'I owe special thanks for support of the research for this work to Dr. David Hamburg (CFR member) and the Carnegie Corporation of New York...I have a deep and special debt to the head of the Library of Congress's Moscow office, Mikhail Levner.'"

1991 October: The Trilateral Commission issues a report, "Beyond Interdependence: The Meshing of the World's Economy and the Earth's Ecology," with a foreword by David Rockefeller, who speaks of a "central international policy" for the "contemporary international order."

Crystal Globe: The Haves and Have-Nots of the New World Order by Marvin Cetron and Owen Davies is published. Advertised as "A sweeping all-encompassing portrait of the world in 2000, the New World Order in the 21st century," the authors predict increased terrorism, global warming, and one chapter is titled "Ceding Sovereignty for the Global Good."

The Unfinished Agenda: A New Vision for Child Development and Education is published by the Committee for Economic Development (CED). For over fifty years, the CED (composed of some two hundred fifty business leaders and educators) has had influence on the formation of business and public policy, issuing statements on national policy such as "Transnational Corporations and Developing Countries: New Policies for a Changing World Economy" (1981) and "Toward a New International Economic System. A Joint Japanese-American View" (1974). The CED has close relations with counterpart groups in Spain, Australia, West Germany, France, Japan, England and Sweden. Such networking programs have resulted in joint policy statements on energy, East-West trade, assistance to developing countries, and reduction of non-tariff barriers to trade. In the U.S. there are over ninety members of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) or CED's boards, committees, and staffs.

1992: Who Will Tell the People by William Greider is published in which the author writes about "the global economy," saying that many orthodox economists assume that the American wage decline must continue for at least another generation, because worldwide wage patterns are moving toward equilibrium. The standard of living will decline further, and he says that unfettered globalization has a flavor of betrayal, as the upper stratum of citizens and their global enterprises benefit enormously from the very things that injure the other classes of workers, the depression of wages and the dismantling of national sovereignty.

1992 February: The North-South Institute, an Ottawa think-tank, publishes a lecture by Maurice Strong, secretary-general of the Earth Summit to be held in Rio (June 3-14), in which he proclaims: "Frankly, we may get to the point where the only way of saving the world will be for industrial civilization to collapse."

Earth in the Balance by Sen. Al Gore (who became Vice-President in 1993) is published, in which he emphasizes a "pan-religious perspective" and "our global civilization," saying: "The richness and diversity of our religious tradition throughout history is a spiritual resource long ignored by people of faith, who are often afraid to open their minds to teachings first offered outside their own system of belief. But the emergence of...an intense new interest in the different perspectives on life in other cultures...has spurred a renewed investigation of the wisdom distilled by all faiths. This pan-religious perspective may prove especially important where our global civilization's responsibility for the earth is concerned."

He then proceeds to describe Native American, Earth Goddess, and Bahai beliefs relative to the earth and the environment and nature. Gore has opposed barring federal funds for "obscene" art, and he opposed a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit desecration of the America flag. However, neither of these nor many other social issues important to the American people were raised by President Bush in his four and a half hours of debate against Bill Clinton and Ross Perot.

1992 April 23: U.S. Senator Joseph Biden of the Senate Foreign Relations committee writes the op-ed article, "How I Learned to Love the New World Order," in The Wall Street Journal, and states: "Why not breathe life into the U.N. Charter? It envisages a permanent commitment of forces, for use by the Security Council."

1992 May 23: Flora Lewis writes the op-ed article, "The End of Sovereignty," in The New York Times, and commenting upon the European community writes: "Some Europeans, like Margaret Thatcher, oppose letting European union nibble away at sovereign command within national borders because they consider Brussels likely to reintroduce socialistic tendencies."

1992 June: Los Angeles Times syndicate columnist Cal Thomas quotes Chris Whittle as saying, "America can have fifty thousand New Age elementary schools on-line by the year 2000." Whittle originated "Channel One" used by many schools around the nation, and he's a very close friend of U.S. secretary of education Lamar Alexander. Alexander has written that the book which has changed his own thinking the most, and which he's tried to read once a year since it was published, is New Ager Rene Dubos' A God Within, in which Plato is quoted as saying, "In reality the greatest blessings come to us through madness...Madness, which come from god, is superior to sanity, which is of human origin."

Dubos explains that "apparently certain drugs can help in generating this inspired state," and he introduces reincarnation by quoting Mirandola: "Thou shalt have the power to degenerate into lower forms of life, which are brutish. Thou shalt have the power...to be reborn into higher forms, which are divine."

1992 June 3-14: The U.N. Conference on Environment and Development ("Earth summit") is held in Rio de Janeiro and results in, among other things, a program of action known as "Agenda 21" dealing with human health, education and other needs, and each nation is required to develop a plan for implementing the agenda.

Maurice Strong (heading the summit) and Boutros Boutros-Ghali (U.N. secretary-general) hope the Rio Declaration will be transformed into the originally intended Earth Charter in time for the U.N.'s fiftieth anniversary in 1995. Held simultaneously with the "Earth Summit" is "The Sacred Earth Gathering" with New Age networker and former U.N. assistant secretary-general Robert Muller, and "The Parliamentary Earth Summit" which plans to form the International Green Cross first suggested by Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990 (Gorbachev will help prepare the IGC's charter for the Global Forum meeting in Kyoto, Japan in April 1993)

1992 July 9: The New American Schools Development Corporation, which was formed at the request of president Bush, selects eleven projects to fund from six hundred eighty-six applicants. One of the projects selected is called "Odyssey," and includes students "from birth," teaches "world citizenship ideals and values," and two hundred twenty-two hours of service is "expected" from students by the time they graduate. Seven CFR members and five CED members are on the NASDC board of directors.

1992 July 15: Bob Heckman, one of the Bush re-election campaign's designated liaisons to the "Religious Right," sends a memo to his superior, Mimi Dawson, director of coalitions, saying, "The president should avoid using the following phrases...New World Order..." This is according to Michael Isikoff of The Washington Post on October 11, 1992, who says that "the phrase began to disappear from Bush's vocabulary shortly after (Pat) Robertson's book (The New World Order, 1991) was published."

1992 July 20: Time magazine publishes "The Birth of the Global Nation" by Strobe Talbott (CFR director and TC member who was Bill Clinton's roommate at Oxford University when both were Rhodes scholars). In this article, Talbott remarks:� "I�ll bet that within the next hundred years...nationhood as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority...All countries are basically social arrangements, accommodations to changing circumstances. No matter how permanent and even sacred they may seem at any one time, in fact they are all artificial and temporary...Perhaps national sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all...But it has taken the events in our own wondrous and terrible century to clinch the case for world government."

1992 August 9: That the New Age New World Order will include all aspects of life, even athletics, is demonstrated in the closing ceremony of the Olympics, in which "happy devils" dance and figures representing demons writhe on the stadium floor accompanied by eerie music.

It is a message to the people of the world. It also reminds us of the rows of grotesque gargoyles or demons' heads that have recently been painted on the southeast and northeast corridor walls of the Library of Congress' Thomas Jefferson Building Main Vestibule, replacing a group of our nation's founders kneeling in prayer which has been on the walls since 1897, when the building was reconstructed.

A poster describing the future agenda of the Library of Congress said the Thomas Jefferson Building "now undergoing renovation, will reopen in 1993...Following its renovation, the Thomas Jefferson Building will celebrate the humanistic legacy of the world."

1992 August 20: Warren Getler, associate editor of Foreign Affairs (the CFR's journal), writes in The Wall Street Journal the article, "Uncle Sam Should strengthen U.N., Not Boss it," in which he proclaims: "In the future, the U.S. will need to examine whether it can place a significant number of its assets, along with those of other U.N. members, under a unified permanent U.N. command for enforcement purposes...The U.N. Charter's Articles 42 and 43 provide for the legal stepping stones for the creation of a U.N. army, serving at the Security Council's discretion. These articles oblige all U.N. members 'to make available to the Secretary Council on its call in accordance with a special agreement or agreements, armed forces, facilities and assistance'...A U.N. with teeth is an idea that should not be easily dismissed if we are truly in a 'new world order.'"

1992 August 26: U.S. Senator David Boren, CFR member, Rhodes scholar and chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, writes the op-ed article, "The World Needs an Army on Call," in The New York Times stating:� "In the aftermath of World War II, President Truman wanted to empower the United Nations to create a new world order...Richard Gardner proposes that forty to fifty member nations contribute to a rapid-deployment force of one hundred thousand volunteers that could train under common leadership...It is time for us to create such a force...The existence of such a force would go a long way toward making the 'new world order' more than just a slogan."

1992 August 31: In "Washington Dateline," the president of The American Research Foundation, Robert H. Goldsborough, writes that he was told personally by Mark Jones (one-time financial advisor to the late John D. Rockefeller, Jr., and president of the National Economic Council in the 1960s and 1970s), "that just four men, through their interlocking directorates on boards of large corporations and major banks, controlled the movement of capital and the creation of debt in America. According to Jones, Sidney Weinberg, Frank Altshula and General Lucius Clay were three of those men in the 1930s, '40s, '50s, and '60s. The fourth was Eugene Meyer, Jr., whose father was a partner in the immensely powerful international bank, Lazard Freres...Today the Washington Post (and Newsweek) is controlled by Meyer Jr.' daughter Katharine Graham."

CFR member (and former chairman of Citicorp) Walter Wriston's "The Twilight of Sovereignty" is published in which he declares that "The world can no longer be understood as a collection of national economies, (but) a single global economy...A truly global economy will require concessions of national power and compromises of national sovereignty that seemed impossible a few years ago and which even now we can but partly imagine...The global (information) network will be internationalists in their outlook and will approve and encourage the worldwide erosion of traditional sovereignty...The national and international agendas of nations are increasingly being set not by some grand government plan but for the media."

Wriston also speaks of "The new international financial system...a new world monetary standard...the new world money market...the new world communications network...the new international monetary system," and he says "There is no escaping the system."; "And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name." ^[70]

1992 September 17-20: Cable News Network sponsors the first World Economic Development Congress, which is held in Washington, D.C., and dedicated to "Building the Integrated Global Economy." Keynote speakers are former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, GATT director-general Arthur Dunkel, and Henry Kissinger. Discussed at "The Economic Policy and Marketing Summit" of the congress is the topic, "Can the World Bank meet the Demands of the New World Order?"

1992 September 21: President Bush addresses the U.N. General Assembly and says: "We must forge a genuine global community...an international economic order...Meeting these challenges will require us to strengthen our collective engagement...We, too, must change our institutions and our practices if we are to make a new world of the promise of today...The United States is changing its institutions and policies to catalyze this effort...There's need for monitoring and preventive peacekeeping, putting (blue berets) on the ground before the fighting starts...(There's a) need to develop intelligence capabilities for United Nations peacekeeping...We must change our national institutions if we are to do its part to strengthen world peace by strengthening international peacekeeping...We will work with the United Nations to best employ our considerable lift, logistics, communications and intelligence capabilities...The United States is prepared to make available our bases and facilities for multinational training and field exercises...(We'll) redirect the United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency to refocus its technical support for...global defense conversion...We fully intend to have other nations participate in this global protection system...The United States would be strongly engaged with its global partners in building a global economic, financial and trading structure for this new era...I affirmed American support for European integration...Our new emphasis should be on building economic partnerships...None of us can afford insular policies. Each of us must contributed, through greater coordinated action, to build a stronger world economy...We cannot separate our fate from that of others...our prosperity is so interdependent...Let us pledge ourselves to fulfill the promise of a truly United Nations."

1992 September 24: Former assistant secretary-general of the U.N. Robert Muller (who brought China into the U.N.) speaks at Denver University's law school saying he� wrote to leaders of countries on the U.N. Security Council, "giving them my proposals for the New World Order...and I believe some of them will be implemented."

He recommends a world government with executive, legislative, and judicial branches. He also describes other proposals for world government, such as the Stockholm initiative and one upcoming by the Club of Rome. The he indicates he has developed his own ten commandments for the World Parliament of Religions to be held in Chicago in 1993. His recent books are The Birth of a Global Civilization With proposals for a New Political System for Planet Earth (1991) and First Lady of the World (1991) in which he foresees total disarmament by 2010 A.D.

1992 September 27-29: CBS "60 Minutes" on September 27 and ABC "Nightline" on September 29 show how the U.S. Agency for International Development has been using tax dollars to promote the movement of U.S. businesses to Central America, resulting in a loss of certain U.S. jobs. This would facilitate a New World Economic Order. When President Bush was asked in the Carolinas about the loss of textile jobs, he said "C'est la vie" ('That's life')."

1992 September 29: Winston Lord delivers a speech, "Changing Our Ways. America and the New World," at a town hall meeting in Los Angeles, in which he remarks: "To a certain extent, we are going to have to yield some of our sovereignty, which will be controversial at home...(Under) the North American Free Trade Agreement...some Americans are going to be hurt as low-wage jobs are taken away...We encourage the development of international law� so that the international community is able to intervene across national borders in cases of large-scale human rights abuses, by force if necessary."

1992 October 3: Washington Post article headlined "U.N. Seizes Iraqi Oil, Money Abroad" describes "First Confiscation by World Body." The word, "First," implies it will not be the last confiscation by the U.N. of some nations' assets.

1992 October: Harper's magazine publishes Christopher Lasch's article, "Hillary Clinton, Child Saver: What She Values Will Not Help the Family," in which he states that from Ms. Clinton's perspective, "the 'traditional' family is, for the most part, an institution in need of therapy, an institution that stands in the way of children's rights, an obstacle to enlightened progress...She wants to give children and adolescents the same rights as adults...She condemns the State's assumption of parental responsibilities, not because she has any faith in parents themselves but because she is opposed to the principle of parental authority in any form...Her writings leave the unmistakable impression that it is the family that holds children back, the state that sets them free."

1992 November 3: ABC television's Peter Jennings says during coverage of the election results that if Bill Clinton wins, he'll turn "to Senator Sam Nunn for advice on international affairs and the New World Order...in the New World Order, the secretary of defense job (a position Clinton might offer to Senator Nunn) is a much more challenging one than the Senate." Clinton does win the election for the presidency on this day, and on November 6 names Warren Christopher (CFR vice-chairman and former Trilateralist) and Vernon Jordan (CFR member and Trilateralist) as heading his presidential transition team.

1992 November 21: The Brownsville (Texas) Herald publishes the text of "The United Nations World Pledge" recited by students at a Brownsville school. It reads: "I pledge allegiance to the world, to cherish every living thing, to care for the earth and sea and air, with peace and freedom everywhere."

1992 November 24: What would happen to the U.S. if it formally accepted the international law of the New World Order under the U.N. is shown by a fifty-nine-to-three vote in the U.N. General Assembly against the latest U.S. embargo against Cuba. The deputy chief of the U.S. mission to the U.N. Ambassador Alexander Watson, says the American embargo is a bilateral issue between the U.S. and Cuba, and not an issue for an international forum like the U.N. However, even Ambassador Thomas Richardson of Britain, which abstains, says the U.S. law is "a violation of a general principle of international law and the sovereignty of independent nations."

1992 December 12: Human Events publishes an article by Herbert Romerstein, former staff member with the U.S. House Intelligence Committee, in which he describes CFR member Johnetta Cole, whom Clinton has appointed transition coordinator for education, arts, labor, and humanities. Romerstein declares that she "is a woman with a long record of active support for the Castro Communist dictatorship and the Communist dictatorship that ruled Grenada."

Mark Lowery, who formerly served as publicity director for the Arkansas Governor's School, reveals that at the Governor's School: "...They're trying to mold students' minds in this more liberal, humanistic thinking...They're trying to move ultimately into 'political correctness'...Parents need to know their children are being brainwashed...I would call it indoctrination...It's something that's well-orchestrated, well-organized, mind-bending and manipulative...It tears down authority figures...Renowned writer Ellen Gilchrist spoke to the students and was quoted as saying, 'Students, do me a favor and totally ignore your parents'...There's collusion throughout all areas to try and help develop a belief that there are no absolutes...It was an attack upon Christianity, but more so it was an attack upon conservative thought...The students were told that they're an elite who will not be understood by their parents, because the students have been treated to thoughts their parents can't handle." A parent of a student at the Governor's School related that the children weren't allowed to go home except on July 4 weekend, and were discouraged from having any contact (e.g., by telephone) with the outside world, which sounds reminiscent of Maria Trapp's statement in The Story of the Trapp Family Singers: 'This morning we are told (by the Nazis) at the (school) assembly that our parents are nice, old-fashioned people who don't understand the new Party. We should leave them alone and not bother. We are the hope of the nation, the hope of the world. We should never mention at home what we learn at school now."

Also concerning Arkansas education and world government, a group called "Peace Links" has entered a number of schools, and when asked in an Arkansas Gazette article whether she thought the U.S. Constitution might eventually be set aside, Arkansas state coordinator for Peace Links, Olivia Guggenheim, responded, "Yes, it would be a natural progression of events." In the same article, Betty Bumpers, is quoted as saying: "At some time...we all would be in a progression toward a one-world government. It's the logical progression of events. We are all one people."

False Profits: The Inside Story of BCCI, the World's Most Corrupt Financial Empire is published. Authors Peter Truell� (staff reporter for The Wall Street Journal) and Larry Gurwin (winner of an Overseas Press Club award) state; "Both President Bush and his Democratic rival, Governor Bill Clinton of Arkansas, were surrounded by people with ties to BCCI ...Clinton's campaign aides included at least two officials of Hill and Knowlton, the PR and lobbying firm that represented BCCI and First American (Bank). For much of his political career, Clinton received substantial financial backing from Jackson Stephens, the Arkansas investment banker who helped to bring BCCI into the United States. In addition, Stephen's firm has given substantial legal work to the Little Rock law firm in which Hillary Clinton, the governor's wife, is a partner. Mrs. Clinton even� represented one of Stephen's companies in a case related to BCCI."

1992 December 31: "The New Year at a New Age Retreat: The Clintons in Agreeable Company," by Michael Kelly is published in The New York Times. Kelly writes: "If the time has come for New Age politics, what will be done with all the Old Age politicians?...Bill Clinton, eight-year Renaissance Weekend veteran, always fits in perfectly, say his fellow talkers. Indeed, they say, the Renaissance Spirit is the spirit of rationalism will move the masses toward betterment."

1993: In the CFR's Foreign Affairs (Winter 1992/93), U.N. Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali writes "Empowering the United Nations" in which he states: "It is undeniable that the centuries-old doctrine of absolute and exclusive sovereignty no longer stands...Underlaying the rights of the individual and the rights of peoples is a dimension of universal sovereignty that resides in all humanity...It is a sense that increasingly finds expression in the gradual expansion of international law...In this setting the significance of the United Nations should be evident and accepted."

In this same edition, Michael Teitelbaum writes "The Population Threat" in which he asserts: "With Bill Clinton as president, we can expect waning influence for the fringe groups that have been allowed to control population issues for the past decade. Moreover one may hope that the new administration will honor the promise in its campaign book, Putting People First, to 'restore U.S. funding for the United Nations population stabilization efforts,'...The new administration should look again at the Reagan administration's ban on U.S. contributions to the U.N. Fund for Population Activities and International Planned Parenthood Federation, two of the most effective multilateral actors in the population sphere."

1993 January 25: Newsweek publishes "The New Age President," in which Howard Fineman writes: "America gets a New Age president this week...He can speak in the rhythms and rhetoric of pop psychology and self-actualization. He can search for the inner self while seeking connection with the greater whole...For ever Bible quote, there is a truism from the Age of Therapy. Clinton talks from time to time in the lingo of 'centering' the personality and 'channeling' creative personal energy...For Clinton, 'talking it through' is...a method of leadership, as though government were nothing more or less than a giant national counseling session...a group-therapy exercise..." �Among Clinton's "favorite things" are listed "heroes" like Professor Carroll Quigley, and New Age "musicians" like Judy Collins (among the first endorses of Planetary Citizens) and Peter, Paul and Mary (who are noted for the song "Puff, the Magic Dragon"), as well as Fleetwood Mac.

1993 January 28: The New York Times Service's syndicated column by Mikhail Gorbachev is printed in The Cape Cod Times, under the title "New World Order: Consensus." In this article (which is printed in newspapers around the nation), Gorbachev proclaims: "Never before have the programs of the incoming and outgoing presidents been so dramatically linked to one another...Bill Clinton inherits an America...that must move on to a new role in the world...The need is growing for international institutions acting on behalf of all...President Clinton will be a success if he manages to� use American influence to accomplish this transformation of international responsibility and increase significantly the role of the United Nations. Yes, such a choice would narrow the independence many believe the United States now enjoys...accepting the aegis of a higher institution that operates on a consensus, such as the U.N...The United Nations must get the power necessary to carry out the functions of its charter. These include not only preventing conflicts but also the suppression of violations of international law...Bill Clinton will be a great president, if he can make America the creator of a new world order based on consensus."

1993 February 1: "Indoctrinating the Children" by Dr. Thomas Sowell (economist and Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution) is published by Forbes, and Dr. Sowell writes: "The techniques of brainwashing developed in totalitarian countries are routinely used in psychological conditioning programs imposed on American school children. These include emotional shock and desensitization, psychological isolation from sources of support, stripping away defenses, manipulative cross-examination of the individual's underlying moral values, and inducing acceptance of alternative values by psychological rather than rational means. These techniques are not confined to separate courses or programs...(and) are not isolated idiosyncrasies of particular teachers. They are products of numerous books and other 'educational' material in programs packaged by organizations that sell such curricula to administrators and teach the techniques to teachers...Some packages even include instructions on how to deal with parents or others who object...Stripping away psychological defenses can be done through assignments to keep diaries to be discussed in the group and through role-playing assignments, both techniques used in the original brainwashing programs in China under Mao."

1993 April 11: The Washington Post prints nationally syndicated columnist George Will's article "Sovereignty and Sophistry," in which he states: "In May some thousands of U.S. troops will come under United Nations command, exercised by a Turkish general. Never before has there been foreign command of U.S. military units...Article 43 of the U.N. Charter authorizes a standing U.N. military force ...Last year the Senate Foreign Relations Committee endorsed it...Unfortunately, Article 43 is the law of the land, our land."

2000: In the late 1970s, HEW executive assistant Eddie Bernice Johnson advocated the licensing of parents before they are permitted to have children, saying: "We require almost every endeavor or profession to be licensed, why not the most single important responsibility which a parent can ever have?"

Not long thereafter, Professor Gene Stephens of the College of Criminal Justice at the University of South Carolina wrote in "Crime in the Year 2000" ^[71]: "Parental care in the year 2000 may be different from today's, and better, since by then the movement to license or certify parents may be well under way. In most cases, certified couples would be allowed to have their own natural children. In some instances, however, genetic scanning may find that some women and men can produce 'super' babies but are not well suited to rear them... Child breeding and rearing...may be considered too important to be left to chance...Man's ability to control his fellow man will surely grow greater, not less, over the next two decades."

But how could Professor Stephen' projection of the year 2000 A.D. have come about? Remember that in chapter three of Machiavelli's The Prince, he remarks "...the distempers of a State being discovered while yet inchoate (in their early states), which can only be done by a sagacious ruler, may easily be dealt with; but when, from not being observed, they are suffered to grow until they are obvious to everyone, there is no longer any remedy."

And remember regarding the New World Order that sixty years ago, noted author H.G. Wells wrote in The Shape of Things to Come that the plan for the "Modern World-State" would succeed about fifty years after the time of his writing, and that it would come out of something that occurred at Basra, Iraq. He said Russia would be eager to assimilate, and although the world government "had been plainly coming for some years, although it had been endlessly feared and murmured against, it found no opposition prepared anywhere." During those fifty years, the traditional family would have to be undermined.

Economic conditions would cause both parents to work, leaving children's values� to be increasingly molded in pre-school years by day-care workers. Government would come to play an ever more prominent role in citizens' lives through social service programs and education (e.g., comprehensive sex education). The public would become more absorbed in music, sports, TV, and materialistic pursuits. Indeed, in our recent history there seems to have been an increasing sense of chaos and distrust, along with economic difficulties, drugs, and suicides, all of which former communist Kenneth Goff said Soviet politician L.P. Beria urged (in his speech on "Psycholopolitics") American students at Lenin University before 1936 to promote in the U.S. in the future.

But for the U.N. to increase in influence, the Soviet empire would have to collapse. This collapse would allow American armaments to be drastically reduced, in turn causing the U.S. to have to rely on collective efforts via the U.N. for future peacekeeping efforts. A precedent could be set in this regard if there were a tyrant (Saddam Hussein) against whom the nations of the world could agree to act.

But to establish a precedent for intervening in the internal affairs of a nation without its request would require a great humanitarian effort such as feeding the starving children of Somalia. Future events furthering the New World Order will be in all likelihood include alleged environmental "crises," along with economic crises that will facilitate a one-world economy (with regional economic trading blocs as an interim step).

In education, international academic standards, curricula, and tests will be developed based on the assertion that we must be competitive in the global marketplace, and we must therefore be able to compare our educational progress with that of other countries.

Regarding religion, there will be an increasing synchronization of religions based upon what the various world religions have in common, and all in the name of furthering world peace and unity. And euthanasia along with eugenics will become more prevalent, having set the precedent of legally killing innocent human life by abortion. Most of what will occur will be accepted voluntarily by people.

For example, people will not be forced to eat or not eat certain things or to exercise plan in order to obtain affordable health insurance premiums. Remember that in George Orwell's 1984, "Big Brother's" agent O'Brien, said: "We are not content with negative obedience, nor eve with the most object submission. When finally you surrender to us, it must be of your own free will. We do not destroy the heretic because he resists us...We convert him, we capture his inner mind, we reshape him."

Thus, while too many have slept, the long-planned and cleverly orchestrated New World Order is speedily coming into reality. "Therefore let us not sleep, as others do, but let us watch and be sober..." and "pray without ceasing." ^[72] "Now it is time to awake out of sleep" ^[73] and become watchmen blowing the trumpet to warn the people ^[74].

FESSING UP: "It isn't merely that the Jews dominate the media." jokes Robert Rosenblatt in a piece in The New Republic in which he reflects on Nixon's fear of Jewish ubiquity in America. "We are the media." Everybody in the media is Jewish, Mr. Rosenblatt says. "Some are Sabras, who were born into the trade. Some like the Washington Post's William Raspberry or, occasionally, TNR's Fouad Ajami, are in disguise. Others have converted, and outsiders cannot always guess who."

The reason Jews have sought to monopolize the media: "To take over the world. We have done so in deliberate stages. Our interest in monopolizing world banks proved generally successful, with a slight glitch in Europe between the early 1930s and 1945. Our monopoly of Hollywood was swift and complete. It may seem odd that our design there was not to celebrate Jews in American culture but rather to reinforce the image of the dominant Protestant, yet that was merely a diversionary tactic." ^[75]

The foregoing is masterful propaganda. It reveals the naked truth, but with tongue in cheek delivery that disarms uninformed readers. Nearly everything attributed to Roger Rosenblatt is true. Jews do dominate the media, but not everyone in the media is Jewish. His overstatement is calculated to produce the opposite effect. He's correct that some Jews were born into the trade and some are disguised. Others have converted and outsiders cannot guess who they are.

Why have Jews sought to monopolize the media? "To take over the world," he says. This is another statement designed to produce incredulity in non-Jewish circles. The fact is that Jewish leaders would very much like to monopolize the world. Read Strong Delusions. And they have planned it in deliberate stages. Rosenblatt's admission that they have monopolized the world banks and Hollywood is right on target, and his statement about their subterfuge regarding Protestantism is revealing.

What Rosenblatt Didn't Mention: Conspicuously absent from Rosenblatt's revelations is the Russian nightmare. The Bolshevik Jews conquered the Russians and committed such heinous crimes against them that the secrets of that reign of terror have been closely guarded, is only now beginning to surface. But the truth cannot be hidden forever. An estimated 50-65 million souls behind the iron curtain (the Evil Empire) were destroyed, about 12-15 million of whom were Christians. One of the reasons for the tremendous propaganda claiming that 6 million Jews in Europe perished has been to help hide their atrocities against inhabitants under the Soviet boot.

It has been stated that the collapse of socialism/communism in Russia is probably a ploy. Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the new controversial political figure in Russia bolsters our suspicions. He has allegedly said that 2 million Jews control Russia.^[76] However, Zhirinovsky has been accused of being a fascist, a potential Hitler, and an anti-Semite by Vladimir Pozner of the Pozner Donahue Show on CNBC.

Surprisingly, some evangelical Christians have postulated that Zhirinovsky may be another Hitler and the leader of the Gog-Magog forces that attack "Israel" in the Middle East in the battle of Armageddon. Such speculation is built upon dispensationalism and a misunderstanding of Bible prophecy. It also reveals a paucity of comprehension of Zionist strategies and tactics. It plays into the hands of the Talmudists.

On 6/24/94 David Frost interviewed Zhirinovsky on PBS TV (recorded in Russia), concerning 2 million Jews in Russia. Zhirinovsky said that it would be their choice to stay in Russia if he were president. He said they are no problem. He said the Bolsheviks (Communist Jews) are still in power, that they stole more than half of his votes in the December election, and that the U.S. supports them. This all sounds like double talk until one thinks about it carefully. Did someone get to Zhirinovsky between the time he allegedly said that 2 million Jews control Russia, and the time he was interviewed by Frost? A source who has been to Russia recently says that from 1965 most of the Jewish Bolsheviks left the USSR for Israel, the U.S., Canada, Australia, and other places, with enormous sums of money they stole and milked from the Russian people.

This source said, many have gone back (and are continuing to return) to Russia to buy up commercial control of the country, that they are the ones around Yeltsin who call themselves Democrats (the Russian's Choice Party). He further said that Zhirinovsky claims he is not Jewish, that his papers were modified. When asked about the whites in South Africa who are being disenfranchised. Zhirinovsky said that if he were president he would welcome them to Russia. He said he would ban all Western religious organizations. A Related Event in Budapest?

"Budapest: Right-wing Hungarian politician Istvan Csurka has blamed Israel for the Socialist victory in last week's national elections. 'Israel directed the results of the Hungarian elections by remote control,' Mr. Csurka wrote in the newspaper Magyar Forum. Mr. Csurka's Hungarian Justice Party received only 1% of the vote in the first round of voting and he was thus unable to win reelection to his Parliament seat. The Hungarian electorate gave a stunning victory to the Socialists, which was credited by the reform wing of the former communist party, in the May 29 elections. They soundly defeated the ruling Hungarian Democratic Forum, to which Csurka formerly belonged." ^[77]

Since the Jewish Telegraphic Agency used the term "Right-wing" to describe Csurka, we can be reasonably certain that Jews are powerful in the Socialist forces that won the victory. This would be similar to what Vladimir Zhirinovsky is saying in Russia. Remember, the Jewish leftists in the U.S. use the same terminology for those of us who are constitutionalists/conservatives/Christian. If we put two and two together, we can often deduce some truth that we would otherwise miss. We also know that the political machinery of Talmudic-Zionist cliques in America are super effective.

James and Kenneth Collier are brothers who wrote Votescam: The Stealing of America ^[78], in which they claim that a major fraud of voting counting is being committed in this country and that the major news networks are in on it. This sounds too bizarre to be seriously considered, but many have long since learned that the world conspirators are far more sophisticated and diabolical than most people suspect. We also know that the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion revealed that the conspirators have their hands into the conduct of elections ^[79] Well, now, the only thing left is to urge people to become believers, not only in God and Jesus Christ, but in Bible prophecy. These, coupled with history, demonstrate the reality of a world conspiracy, the fundamental purpose of which is to destroy Christianity. It is known as the anti-Christ system. Read the book "Strong Delusion," by Gordon Ginn.

A look at the train of Treason in our American government from the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, to the Waco holocaust of 1993. An analysis of a 101-page report sent to Attorney General Reno, May 23, 1993, on the Waco issue, by Washington, D.C. Attorney Paul D. Wilcher, by Lt. Col. Gordon "Jack" Mohr, AUS Ret. Mr. Wilcher was found dead in his Washington apartment a few days later, a reported suicide.

"A wonderful and horrible thing is committed in the land; The prophets (preachers, ministers, priests, evangelists, etc.) prophesy (preach) falsely, and the priests (politicians) bear rule by their means; and my people (Israel) love to have it so; and what will ye do in the end thereof?" ^[80]

For some time, now after reading Attorney Paul Wilcher's 101-page report to Attorney General Reno, following the Waco holocaust, and his reported death by suicide a few days later, I have been strongly, spiritually led, I believe, to talk about the "treason in high places," which has been destroying Israel America for over seventy years, preparing us for the takeover by the antichrist's of the New World Order. Some have warned me that this report would be dangerous, after seeing what happened to Attorney Wilcher, but what can they do to a 78-year-old man, other than kill him? A few extra days at this time in my life, means very little to me, compared with preparing our people for what lies ahead. My duty is to my God and my people, not to the corrupt government of the United States.

Many years ago, a well-known writer penned these words: "TREASON prospers; what's the reason? For when Treason prospers, none dare call it treason!"

For over eighty years now, treason, as defined in the United States Constitution has prospered in "la cesspool Grande on the Potomac," commonly known as Washington, D.C., as men in positions of highest responsibility in our government, have deliberately ignored the oath of office they took to "Defend and preserve our Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic."

Instead of doing this, for reasons of political profit, and popularity, they have become traitors to our nation and our people. It is high time they be exposed! The main purpose of the Intelligence Report is to shine the spotlight of truth on this Treason, and bring it out into the open, where our people can see what is being done to them by men they have trusted and they can take steps to stop it!

The United States Constitution in Article III, section 3, defines TREASON in terms any Fifth Grader can understand:� "Treason shall consist only, in levying war against them (the U.S.), adhering (supporting or approving) to their enemies; giving them aid and comfort."��

Yet this treason has been carried on in our Nation's capitol for over eighty years, as America has been governed, not by our own people, but by tyrannical foreign "money power." We have not had an American government in Washington since at least 1933, regardless of whether Republicans or Democrats have been in power, for the "power behind the throne," has been "foreign money power." That is why we see very little difference in foreign and domestic policies, when there is a change of Administration. In spite of all the campaign rhetoric, they are governed by the same international force.

For those who have taken the time and effort to study our problems and are honest and brave enough to admit it, we have been under Zionist Control (International Jewish Bankers control) since at least 1913, when Congress turned over control of our money to the Internationalists. So don't laugh with sarcasm, when you see the letters Z.O.G. (Zionist Occupation Government), for whether you and your pastor wants to admit it or not, this is true. The real plot to control Christian America, and her great wealth and power, reached the point of realism in 1913, when the Federal Reserve Act was slipped into place through the treason of President Woodrow Wilson and his Jewish alter-ego Col. Edward Mandel House. This was merely one phase of the Zionist plot for world control.

The satanic plot against mankind and Christianity in particular, was launched in the 1760's under the name of the Illuminati, which has been extensively covered earlier. This subversive organization was brought into being through the manipulations of a Jew named Adam Weishaupt in Bavaria. He had converted to Catholicism, and became a Jesuit priest, then like many Marranos, he changed horses again and became an agent of the International Jewish house of Rothschild.

This Illuminati organization, with heavy Masonic backing, was forced underground by the Bavarian government when secret documents concerning their operations came into Bavarian government hands. It surfaced again later, and was what caused George Washington to warn American Masons against foreign infiltration of the Lodge, through the Scottish Rites. Today, this same subversive organization is operating under the name of Council on Foreign Relations in this country and other names in every major country on earth. It's hierarchy, the master-minds who control it, are in a very real sense the descendants of the original Illuminati conspiracy. To conceal this fact, many of these officials have changed their names from obviously Jewish ones, to those which Appear to be Anglo-Saxon. (A good example is the perennial head of the Communist Party, USA, Gus Hall, whose name was originally Hallberg).

In every Israel nation of Christendom, we find a national organization similar to the CFR, who answers to its International Masters. In Britain it is known as the British Institute of International Affairs. All these organizations, are controlled by immensely wealthy Jewish bankers, all controlled by the House of Rothschild in Europe. For many years, the International Bankers had cast envious eyes at the enormous wealth and potential of America.

They knew that as long as the United States would coin their own money, in obedience to its Constitution, we would remain economically free. So the World Conspirators, the descendants of the Illuminati, were urged in their world conquest by the words of their holy book the Babylonian Talmud, which states: "When our Messiah (world Jewish control) comes, every Jew will have 2,000 goyim (non-Jewish animal) slaves."

In 1859, the Chief Rabbi of France, a man named Reichorn, at the funeral of another prominent rabbi said: "Wars are the Jews harvests; for with them we wipe out the Christians and get control of their gold. We have already killed 100-million of them and the end is not yet."

This was Before the mass killings of the Civil War, World War I and World War II which were all instigated by the Jewish bankers.

When the Rothschilds obtained control of the Bank of England, following Nathan's spectacular financial "killing" in 1815, he and his associates insisted that Gold be made the only base for the issuance of paper money. In 1870 the European bankers experienced a little annoyance in their control system doe to the fact that in America a considerable amount of silver coin was used. The European Bankers decided that silver must be demonetized in the United States. At that time England had much gold and very little silver; America had much silver and very little gold. ^[81] The bankers on both sides of the Atlantic knew that while this difference continued they could not obtain absolute control of the economy of the nation and absolute control is essential for the success of big scale manipulation.

The European International Bankers sent Ernest Seyd over to America and placed at his disposal in American banks $500,000 with which to bribe key members of the American legislature. In 1873, at the instigation of the bankers, their agents introduced a "Bill," innocently named "A Bill to reform Coinage and Mint Laws." It was cleverly drafted. Many pages of writing concealed the real purpose behind the Bill. The Bill was sponsored by none other than Senator John Sherman, whose letter to the House of Rothschild has already been referred to. Sherman was supported by Congressman Samuel Hooper.

After Senator Sherman gave a very plausible, but misleading, report regarding the purpose of the Bill, it was passed without a dissenting vote. Three years passed before the full import of the Bill began to be realized. It was a camouflaged Bill to demonetize silver. President Grant signed the Bill without reading the contents after he had been assured it was just a routine matter necessary to make some desirable reforms in the coinage and monetary laws. According to the Congressional Record none but the members of the Committee which introduced the Bill understood its meaning.

The International Bankers considered the passage of the Bill so essential to their plans, to obtain absolute control of the monetary system of the United States, that Ernest Seyd was instructed to represent himself as an expert on coining of money. After organizing the formation of a committee favorable to his masters' objectives, he sat in with the committee, in a professional advisory capacity, and helped draft the Bill in accordance with the Rothschilds' instructions.

Congressman Samuel Hooper introduced the Bill in the House on April 9, 1872. He is recorded as saying: "Mr. Ernest Seyd, of London, a distinguished writer, has given great attention to the subject of mints and coinage. After examining the first draft of the Bill, he furnished many valuable suggestions which have been incorporated in the Bill."

Mr. John R. Elsom in his book "Lightning over the Treasury Building" on page 49 declares: "According to his (Seyd's) own statement, made to his friend Mr. Frederick A. Lukenback, of Denver, Colorado, who� has, under oath, given us the story, he (Seyd) said 'I saw the Committee of the House and Senate and paid the money, and stayed in America until I knew the measure was safe.'"

In 1878 a further withdrawal of currency, and restricting of credits, caused 10,478 business and banking failures in the United States. In 1879 the issuance of more coin at the insistence of Congress halted the artificially created recession and reduced business failures to 6,658. But in 1882 the "Secret Power" behind International affairs issued orders that there was to be no more pussy-footing. They reminded their banking associates in the States that sentiment has no place in business. These admonishments produced results as spectacular as they were drastic.

It would appear that the International Bankers were deliberately creating conditions of poverty, and despair, in the United States in order to produce conditions which would enable their instrument "The World Revolutionary Party" to recruit revolutionary forces. This accusation is supported by a letter issued to all American Bankers, by the American Bankers Association. It has been proved that this association was intimately affiliated with Rothschild's European Monopoly, of not actually controlled by the House of Rothschild, at that time. The letter read: "Dear Sir: The interest of the National Banks require immediate financial legislation by Congress. Silver certificates, and Treasury notes, must be retired, and national bank notes, upon a gold basis, made the only money. This will require the authorization of new bonds in the amount of $500,000,000 to $1,000,000,000 as the basis of circulation. You will at once retire one-third of your circulation and will call one-half of your loans. Be careful to create a money stringency among your patrons, especially among influential business men. The life of the National Banks, as fixed and safe investments, depends upon immediate action as there is an increasing sentiment in favor of government legal tender and silver coinage." ^[82]

This command was obeyed immediately and the panic of 1893 was created. William Jennings Bryan tried to counteract the bankers' conspiracy, but once again the public believed the false accusations circulated in the Press by the bankers' propagandists. The man in the street blamed the government. The average citizen never even suspected the part the bankers had played in creating chaos in order to feather their own nests. William Jennings Bryan was unable to do anything constructive. His voice, like the voices of many other honest and loyal citizens, was a voice crying in the wilderness.

In 1899 J.P. Morgan, and Anthony Drexel, went to England to attend the International Bankers' Convention. When they returned, J.P. Morgan had been appointed head representative for the Rothschild's interests in the United States. He was probably chosen as Top-man because of the ingenuity he had shown when he made a fortune selling his government Union Army rifles which had already been condemned. ^[83]

As the result of the London Conference J.P. Morgan & Co., of New York, Drexel & Co., of Philadelphia, Grenfell & Co., of London, Morgan Harjes & Co., of Paris, M.M. Warburgs of Germany & Amsterdam and the House of Rothschild were all affiliated.

The Morgan-Drexel combination organized the Northern Securities Corporation in 1901 for the purpose of putting the Heinze-Morse group out of business. The Heinze-Maoris controlled considerable banking, shipping, steel and other industries. They had to be put out of business so the Morgan-Drexel combination could control the forthcoming Federal election. The Morgan-Drexel combination succeeded in putting in Theodore Roosevelt in 1901. This delayed the prosecution which had been started against them by the Justice Department because of the alleged illegal methods used to rid themselves of competition. Morgan-Drexel then affiliated with Kuhn-Loeb and Co. To test their combined strength it was decided to stage another financial "killing." They created "The Wall Street Panic of 1907." The public reaction to such methods of legalized gangsterism was sufficient to make the Government take action, but the evidence which follows clearly proves how the public was betrayed.

The Government appointed A National Monetary Commission. Senator Nelson Aldrich was appointed head of the commission. He was charged with the duty of making a thorough study of financial practices, and then formulating banking and currency reforms by submitting the necessary legislation to Congress. Aldrich, it was discovered afterwards, was financially interested with the powerful Rubber and Tobacco Trusts. He was just about the last man in the Senate who should have been entrusted with such a task. Immediately after his appointment Aldrich picked a small group of trusted lieutenants and they all departed for Europe. While in Europe they were given every facility to study the way the International Bankers controlled the economy of European countries. After Aldrich had spent two years in Europe, he returned to the United States. All the public received for their money was to be told by Aldrich that he hadn't been able to arrive at any definite plan which would prevent recurring financial panics which had upset business, created unemployment, and destroyed many small fortunes in America since the Civil War. Aldrich was so close to the Rockefellers that J.D. Jr. married his daughter Abby.

Prior to the tour of Europe Aldrich had been advised to consult Paul Mortiz Warburg who was a rather unique character. He had arrived in the United States as a German immigrant about 1902. It turned out afterwards that he was a member of the European Financial House of M.M. Warburg and Co., of Hamburg and Amsterdam. This company was, as we have seen, with the House of Rothschild. Paul Warburg had studied International finance in Germany, France, Great Britain, Holland and other countries before entering America as an immigrant. The United States proved to be his land of golden opportunity because, in no time at all, he purchased a partnership in Kuhn-Loeb and Co., of New York. One of his new partners was Jacob Schiff who had previously purchased into the firm with Rothschild gold. This Jacob Schiff is the man evidence will prove financed the Terrorist Movement in Russia from 1883, onwards to 1917. Schiff had managed to achieve undisputed control over the transportation, the communication systems, and the supply lines in the United States. As has been proven, control of these is absolutely essential for successful revolutionary effort in any country. ^[84]

On the night of November 22nd, 1910 a private railway coach was waiting at the Hoboken, New Jersey, Railway Station. Senator Aldrich arrived with A. Piatt Andrews, a professional economist and treasury official, who had been wined and dined in Europe. Shelton, Aldrich's private secretary, also turned up. He was followed by Frank Vanderlip, president of the National City Bank of New York; this Bank represented the Rockefeller Oil Interests and the Kuhn-Loeb railway interests. The directors of the National City Bank had been publicly charged with helping to foment a war between the United States and Spain in 1898. Regardless of the truth or otherwise, of the charges, the fact remains that the National City Bank owned and controlled Cuba's sugar industry when the war ended.

Others who joined Aldrich were H.P. Davison, senior partner of J.P. Morgan & Co., Charles D. Norton, president of Morgan's First National Bank of New York. These last three had been accused in the American legislature of controlling the entire money and credit of the United States. Last to arrive were Paul Warburg and Benjamin Strong. Warburg was so wealthy and powerful by this time that he is said to have inspired the famous comic strip "Orphan Annie" in which Warbucks is featured as the most wealthy and influential man in the world; a man who can, when he so wishes, use superhuman or super-natural powers to protect himself and his interests. Benjamin Strong came into prominence during the preliminary manipulations of high finance which led to the Wall Street Panic of 1907. As one of J.P. Morgan's lieutenants he had earned a reputation for carrying out orders without question and with ruthless efficiency.

Aldrich's private coach was attached to the train. Newspaper reporters learned of this gathering of the men who controlled America's oil, finances, communications, transportation and heavy industries. They began to swarm down upon the private car like locusts. But they couldn't get anyone to speak. Mr. Vanderlip finally brushed off the reporters' demands for information with the explanation "We are going away fro a quiet weekend."

it took years to discover what happened that quiet weekend. A secret meeting was held on Jekyll Island, Georgia. this hide-away was owned by J.P. Morgan, and a small group of his financial affiliates. The business discussed at the meeting referred to was "Ways and means to ensure that proposed legislation to curb financial racketeering and monetary manipulation in the United States be sabotaged and legislation favorable to those attending the secret meeting be substituted." To achieve these two important objectives was no easy task, Mr. Paul Warburg was asked to suggest solutions and his advice was accepted.

Subsequent meetings were held by the same group to iron out details in New York. The conspirators named their group "The First Name Club" because, when meeting together, they always addressed each other by their first names to guard against strangers becoming interested should they hear the surnames of National and International Financiers being spoken. To make a long story short, Aldrich, Warburg and Company, drew up the monetary legislation which Aldrich ultimately presented as the work of his special committee. He had it passed by Congress in 1913 under the title "The Federal Reserve Act of 1913." The vast majority of American citizens honestly believed that this act protected their interests, and placed the Federal Government in control of the nation's economy.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The Federal Reserve System placed the affiliated bankers in America and Europe in position to bring about and control World War One; which was fought to enable the International Conspirators to bring about the Russian Revolution in 1917.

In his book You Gentiles, page 155, Jewish author Maurice Samuels wrote: "We Jews, we are the destroyers and will remain the destroyers. Nothing you can do will ever meet our needs. We will forever destroy, because we want a world of our own (or under our control)."

The ground work for this takeover was laid during the Civil War and shortly after the war ended, when a young Jewish immigrant from Germany, Jacob Schiff, arrived in America. he was an agent of the Rothschild clan, sent to America with the expressed purpose of taking over our economy. He had four primary assignments:

1). To acquire control of the American economy;

2). To find important men in our government and businesses who would be willing to "sell out" and serve as "front men"� in this conspiracy

3). To create minority strife, especially between Blacks and Whites; and,

4). To create a movement within America which would eventually destroy White Christian civilization, looked on by� World Jewry as their worst enemy.

He began his efforts by buying a banking house, using Rothschild money of course. After careful scouting, he purchased a New York firm called Kuhn Loeb. Like Schiff, these men were German Jews who had come to America during the 1840's. They had begun their careers as itinerant peddlers in the mid-west, then graduated to selling supplies to the wagon trains headed west, finally getting into the banking business.

When Jacob Schiff arrived, they had become well-known New York bankers. Shortly after Schiff bought this firm, he married Loeb's daughter Theresa, and took over controlling interest in the firm, calling it Kuhn Loeb and Company. While he posed on the surface as a great philanthropist and Jewish holy man, he was in reality the Satanic agent who carried on the plans for Jewish world conquest with masterful brilliance.

Schiff overcame the contempt of the great American Banking firms of J.P. Morgan and Biddle and Drexel, with a few choice bones, bought with Rothschild funds. Playing his cards well, he became the "patron saint" of such well known "goyim" financiers as Andrew Carnegie, Edward Harriman and the Jewish Rockefeller clan. By 1900, Schiff controlled the banking fraternity of America, through such International banking giants as Lehman Brothers, Goldman-Sachs, and the "big three" of Morgan, Drexel and Biddle.

After gaining control of America's banks, he set out to find traitors within our government who would be willing to "sell out" to Jewish interests. He found them in the Democratic Party, who were hungry to put a man in the Presidency.

Beginning about 1890, a series of contrived "pogroms" in Russia against the Jews, sent thousands of them fleeing out of that country. The vast majority came to the United States, where they settled in such large cities as New York, Los Angeles and Miami. These Jews were joined by millions of Blacks who had been influenced by Schiff's Civil Rights efforts, until in 1910, they were able to put men like Nelson Aldrich into the Senate, and Woodrow Wilson into the White House. Francois Coty in "Figaro" February 20, 1932 stated: "The subsidies granted to the Nihilists in Russia and elsewhere at this period by Jacob Schiff were no longer acts of isolated generosity. A veritable Russian Terrorist organization had been set up in the United States at his expense, charged to assassinate ministers, governors, heads of police, etc."

It might be well to digress here for a moment, and look at another of Schiff's major objectives. This was to destroy the unity of the American people by creating minority groups and engendering racial strife. As early as 1902, a Jewish writer named Israel Cohen, openly admitted that the Jews planned to use Blacks as "cannon fodder" in a racial war that would bring International Jewry into power. The Jews who sought refuge from the Czar, were a ready made group who would do Schiff's bidding. But the Jewish people alone, (with many of them refusing to go along with Schiff's plans) could not be counted on to turn the tide against the White majority. It was here that Schiff turned to that great "sleeping minority" in America, who were much more numerous than the Jews. He began a series of operations to turn Blacks against Whites (this effort is still under way today, at the time of this writing, July 1994).

Using men such as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and other Black radicals who carried out their treason under the guise of Civil Rights, and always under the guiding hand of the Rothschild agents in America, he began to bring about the rioting, looting, rape, and murder which has become so prevalent among our minority people, and which has changed our big cities into living hells of degeneration, perversion and crime.

Working hand in hand with the Ashkenazi Jews (those of the Turco-Mongolian background which make up 90% of the Jews of the world today), problems developed between the races designed to tear this country apart and weaken us for the One World takeover.

Along with his racial disturbances, Schiff did not forget his duty to destroy White Christian civilization, and this was carried out with a vengeance, as Jewish professors began to infiltrate not only our public school system, but our nation's seminaries and thus subvert the church from within. The potential for racial violence has grown in recent years, with the vast illegal immigration of Hispanics and Asiatics, all who are being guided by Rothschild agents who followed in his footsteps.

Today, Jewish pressure in our national Congress, virtually controls our government. Knowledgeable men in Washington, D.C., say that at least 70 of our 100 Senators vote the "straight Zionist ticket," and what the Israelis want, the Israelis get, whether it is good for America or not! The Zionists Lobby in Washington is the strongest in the country, and keeps constant pressure on Congress to keep them in line. This has reached the point where an Israeli official recently boastingly stated: "We have the best Congress that Jewish money can buy." These are the men we am concerned with. We can expect such treachery from the Zionists (Because the Jews are the great traitor people of the world. They have never been true to any government or people they have ever lived with in all of history). But we should not, under any circumstances, allow it in our elected officials, who have taken an oath of office to protect the best interests of America. To do otherwise is Treason of the highest order and suicide!

We know something of the Jewish control exerted in our schools from those who, during the Vietnam War years, were lecturing on the American Opinion Speaker's Bureau of the John Birch Society, and often hit the college circuit.

In over 25 "face to face" confrontations with the radicals who were tearing our colleges apart, we found that 100% of the time, the leadership of these groups came from young Jews from wealthy families. It was their experience with these radicals, plus an in-depth study of God's Word, that convinced them that these antichrists could not possibly be the Chosen People of the Book. Any Christian who is honest enough to do some in-depth research, will have to admit that every effort in America to destroy Christianity, is coming from Jewish sources. But we are warned in the New Testament that these times would come, and it is our White People who concern us, when they turn to TREASON. In 2 Timothy 3:1-5 the Apostle Paul forewarns us of the Treason: "This know also, that the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemous, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those who are good, Traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God, having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof; from such turn away."

So let's go back to 1913, and speak briefly about the American Traitor, who sold America out to foreign economic control, and then got us involved in World War I. This treason alone, cost our people over 300,000 casualties, including 53,513 battle deaths. Yet the Traitors went unpunished! World War I was NOT fought to "end all wars" as we have been told, but was further means of insuring Zionist control over the Free World, while reaping tremendous profits for the International Jewish Bankers who financed both sides of the war. Wilson (a Jew) was followed by another Democrat who took office in 1933, and who was very possibly The Greatest American Traitor of all times. For it was under the Presidency of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, that this nation was turned from a Republic, into a Socialist Welfare State.

It was the connivance of FDR and others of his henchmen, which allowed America, against the will of the majority of its people, to become involved in World War II. Enough has been written about the Treason at Pearl Harbor, that we need not waste time on that.

That war cost us 292,131 dead, plus billions of dollars of our national wealth, which went into the Zionist pockets. It was Roosevelt, who at Potsdam, and later at Yalta, with the traitor Alger Hess by his side, who sold Eastern Europe into the hands of his friend "Uncle Joe Stalin."

Roosevelt was followed by another Jewish Democrat, Harry Truman, who had been the associate of gangster in Kansas City before his election. During his term of office, he allowed us to become involved in the Korean War, which was our first war fought under total United Nations control.

I have first hand information on the Treason committed in this war, as I personally saw efforts of the State Department officials in Seoul, Ambassador William C. Muccio in particular, who deliberately withheld vital information from General MacArthur, regarding the North Korean buildup in early 1950. Yet with this evidence against Muccio, and at least eight of the top ranking State Department officials in Seoul which should have earned them the death penalty, they were all promoted; Muccio being sent as Ambassador to Iceland.

In the meantime, General MacArthur pulled off his brilliant landing at In'chon, our only successful operation in that war. The reason was that he did not notify the Joint Chiefs of Staff of his plans, and the enemy in the U.N. did not know about it. Truman allowed the U.N. to fire this great leader for his patriotism and bravery! Following Truman, came our congenial, golf playing President and the Swedish Jew, Dwight David Eisenhower, the national hero of World War II, when if people had known the truth, they would have run him out of office and held him criminally liable for the deaths of millions of Americans and Germans alike.

Few Americans have ever been told that it was Eisenhower, in conjunction with FDR and Winston Churchill, who discarded the invasion plans of Gen. Patton and Field Marshal Montgomery, for an invasion of Europe through the "soft underbelly of Europe," in 1943. This would have ended the war two years earlier with the saving of millions of lives and countless billions of dollars. But Eisenhower, FDR and Churchill were "dancing to the tune" of their friend Joe Stalin, the Communist murderer, and held off until all of Eastern Europe was in the hands of the Soviets. This was the plan of the Shadow Government. It is also known as Treason!

Eisenhower's part in this can be clearly seen, when he deliberately held up Gen. Pattons attack against Berlin, by refusing to supply his tanks with fuel. All this to give the Soviets the chance to reach Berlin. It was this little congenial, golf playing president who at the end of World War II, who was responsible for an order that went out to American troops in Europe, that resulted in the starvation of 2-million German prisoners in U.S. Army POW camps in Germany.

At this time, America's Foreign Policy was in the hands of a small group of very powerful Zionists. This terrible, reprehensible Shadow Government was headed by Senator Herbert Lehman; Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter, and Secretary of State Henry Morgenthau. These men drew up the plans, approved by President Eisenhower, which brought this monstrous plan into being, as a perpetual blot against American history. The records which prove this are in the National Archives in Washington, D.C. While many� WW II veterans who read this may become angry at the awful truth, I'm afraid I can't change it to make you feel better, for Truth always remains truth, even when it ruffles feathers and hurts people's feelings!

When George Patton, the magnificent, but rather "loud mouthed" patriot that he was, saw the direction Eisenhower was taking in 1945, he made loud sounds about alerting the American people to this Treason and mysteriously died as a result (He did not die as a result of an automobile accident� as we have been told. Like John Kennedy after him, he was murdered to keep his mouth shut, and to protect members of the Shadow Government).

Eisenhower was followed by the Democratic profligate John Kennedy, who in spite of his socialist tendencies, was probably the best of a sorry lot in Washington. He, at least, recognized the International Power struggle going on in Washington, and in a speech at Harvard, he threatened to "blow the whistle" (On very powerful interests in our government who were subverting our Constitution), when he returned from Dallas. As you well know, he didn't make it and much evidence points to CIA involvement and cover-up in his murder. To this day we are not sure what really happened, as every official means has been used to keep the truth from the American People.

The man who benefitted most from this of course, was Lyndon Johnson, the Democrat from Texas who became President on Kennedy's death. He was the man who led this country into the Vietnam War, another war fought under United Nations control and for dark and sinister purposes. It was not a defense against Communism. It is not necessary to say much about Nixon, Ford, Carter, and Reagan, as they have been in the news enough in recent years, that most of you have a good idea of their stand, although many of the "shady issues" of their Administrations and the control exerted by the Shadow Government have cleverly been kept from the American people.

In 1989, we saw the rise to power of a man named George Bush, who had a solid background in CIA operations and who was to play a prominent role in further selling America into the slavery of the New World Order. In fact, during the closing days of his Administration, it became his favorite theme.

His Administration was riddled with scandal, as he often put the welfare of his family oil and drug interests, before that of the country he� served. A good example was our unwarranted military attack against Panama, which was illegal under U.N. law, and contrary to all American principles.

This was followed by our illegal Desert Storm invasion of Iraq, which was not to protect the deplorable government of Kuwait, or our oil interests, but was for the� benefit of Bush's friends, the Israelis. It was carried out from beginning to end under the extreme pressure from the International Zionists who now control the Shadow Government in Washington.

So far, this has been only a "thumb nail" sketch of Treason in High Places in America in the last eighty years. It would appear that by now, decent Americans, especially Christians, would be so "fed up" with our rotten political system, that they would demand a change. Instead we find the fundamental and evangelical pulpits of America, as they thunder the falsehood that it is God's will, ala Romans 13, that Christians obey our government no matter how rotten and antichrist it may be. This is of course a Satanic teaching which cannot be supported by Scripture. For as the Apostle Peter told the Jewish Sanhedrin, which had forbidden Christians to witness for Christ: "We should obey God, rather than man!"

Today, America is saddled with the "Ahab-Jezebel" combination of William and Hillary Rodham Clinton. According to all evidence available, with more coming in every day, a more unsavory duo has never before occupied our White House. Enough has been written and proven of their immoral lifestyle, that little needs to be added other than a warning to Christians who sit complacently in their "spiritual foxholes" folding their hands in prayers, as they ask Jesus to come back and RAPTURE, them from the mess which has been caused by Their apathy. Scripture proves that this Rapture will never take place! About now some of my readers may be saying:� "We thought this Intelligence Report was going to concentrate on Waco, and you have scarcely mentioned it."

Don't give up now, Virginia, we are going to get into Waco with a vengeance. Possibly the most shocking warning of what is ahead for Christians in America, if the Shadow Government is successful, can be seen in the unwarranted, un-Constitutional, illegal and immoral government attack against the Branch Davidians at Waco, which resulted in the deaths of some 90 men, women and children.

More and more, it appears that Waco was a "test case" to see how far the New World advocates could go, before the American people stood up and said: "It's enough!" Unfortunately and tragically, the majority of Christian people in America, urged on by their pastors, ministers, priests, evangelists and etc., supported the antichrist government. Very few took the time to look at the truth surrounding Waco and warn their people that they will suffer similar fates in the future, if we do not do something to stop this outrage now! The fate of Christianity in America hangs in the balance, and the majority of our "brainwashed" pastors remain silent! President Clinton indicated that there will be more such government actions against those who are "politically and religiously incorrect in their thinking." Once again may we ask: Is your church BATF (government) Approved?

Be aware of this, you complacent Christians in our Judeo-Christian churches, The Time Will Come when you will either have to decide for Christ, or antichrist. For we have observed over the past 50 years that a majority of those who call themselves Christian, we are going to predict a rush on the part of those there will be a rush to get in on the side of that antichrist, rather than face government persecution. This is sad indeed, for it means rejection of God ^[85]. If you refuse to take a stand against antichrist tyranny now, when you can still have at least some protection from our justice system, don't expect to stand firm when this persecution comes with men and women being slaughtered in the streets, as it won't happen!

The following vital information, which I am only going to cover in part, due� to lack of space and time, was uncovered by attorney Paul D. Wilcher, from Washington, D.C. The entire 101-page report is available from Citizens For A constitutional Washington, 11910-C Meridian East, #142, Puyallup, WA 98373, for a donation of $20.00.

It was in the form of a letter to U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, and a few days after it as mailed, as we mentioned before. Walcher was found dead in his home, a victim of, you guessed it: Suicide! The original letter was mailed to Ms. Reno on May 21, 1993. This is not a "word for word" report, as we have taken editorial prerogative with it without changing its meaning in the slightest.

Here are some of the things that Paul Wilcher revealed which are generally unknown:

1). Cult leader David Koresh had an extensive CIA background.

2). He was known in CIA circles as a "sleeper" (someone who has been subjected to extensive CIA "mind control�� techniques and programming").

3). Waco is a major center for CIA "mind control" experimentation and programming at the CIA Leadership� Management Institute in Waco. Similar CIA "cults" are located in Salt Lake City, Provo, and Logan, Utah; Boise, Idaho and San Francisco, California.

On April 30th, 1993, the day following the Waco tragedy. The loss of life was not due to "mass suicide," but to "government murder." In an intensive study made by the "whistle blowers," who have had the courage to stand against the Shadow Government, there is much evidence of official harassment in transfers, demotions, firing, black-baling, personal harassment and intimidation of those who reveal these wrongs. It should be quite apparent, that "whistle blowing" on government wrong doing is not an easy thing to do, and often must be undertaken only after prayerful consideration on the part of the Christian Citizen.

The consequences are often quite painful to the "whistle blower" and at times has been fatal not only to him/her, but alto to their entire family. But I have found that one can either become part of the corruption that is destroying this former Christian Republic, or part of the righteous forces which are attempting to combat it. There can be no neutral ground, you are "either for God, or against Him!" Edmund Burke's statement is more true today than ever before: "The only thing necessary for evil to succeed, is for good men to do nothing!" We could rightfully, use the term "Christian." here.

In dealing with the Truth, you Must deal with your own conscience, it is not a committee decision. It is a matter of whether you believe things are "right" or "wrong," and your determination to do something about it, since God will hold you accountable for your actions. That the government actions at Waco were Mass Murder, instead of "suicide," is proved by the evidence:

1). The gunshots that killed Koresh and other members of the Branch Davidians were, according to an article on page� A-18 of the New York Times (March 5, 1993), "of a kind according to medical examiners, that were afflicted after the raid, and were not fired by cult members, but by outsiders." (Which means the government attack force).

2). The multiple fires which consumed the compound and its members, were not set by either Koresh or any of the cult members, but were caused by government action.

1). The killing of Koresh and other Branch Davidians who died by gun fire, constitute:

a). Multiple counts of murder in violation of the relevant provisions of Texas Criminal Law; and,

b). Multiple additional counts of murder in violation of provisions of Texas Criminal Law.

c). Multiple additional predicate crimes of murder, and arson under state law; and,

d). The crime of obstruction of justice 18 USC Sec. 1593 in violation of 18 USC Sec. 198 (1)(B) of the Rico Statute.

An example of this kind of murder and arson can be found on page A-3 of The Washington Post, May 4, 1993: "Six people, including three children were hacked to death in a Harlem apartment today by an unknown assailant, and two fires were set in an attempt to cover up this crime."

e). The destruction of property to prevent seizure in violation of USC 18 Sec. 2232. One of the obvious purposes of� the fire was to destroy all possible forensic evidence;

������ f). That the lies of the Justice Department, FBI, CIA, BATF and other government agents who were on the scene at Waco, as well as other government officials in Washington, D.C., who knew the truth, but who knowingly and deliberately concealed this truth, and grossly misrepresented the true facts, and misled the American people on TV, and through the media, constitutes:

(1) Multiple counts of wire fraud (and/or) conspiracy to do so, in violation of USC 19, Sec. 1343;

(2) Obstruction of justice under USC 18 Sec. 1503;

(3) Obstruction of federal criminal investigation in violation of USC 18 Sec. 1511; and

(4) Multiple predicate crimes of wire fraud, obstruction of justice, obstruction of federal criminal investigation and� obstruction of state and local criminal investigation, in violation of 18 USC Sec. 1961 (1)(B) of the Rico statute.

The conclusion is that the events which led to the destruction of the Camp Davidian Compound and the loss of some 85 lives, was carried out by government agencies in a manner reminiscent of mobsters and gangsters, in utter violation of relevant federal and state criminal codes as well as that of the Rico statute. It was these grossly criminal acts, committed by the United States government, not mass suicide, as we were told by the media, that led to the hellish deaths of 85 men, women and children, while the world watched on TV, as their compound went up in flames on April 19, 1993.

The following information comes from sixteen men, all with intensive intelligence and "back" operation training, over a period of some thirty years, who have first-hand knowledge of what actually happened at Waco. These men are willing to testify in court, under oath, and at length, and in specific detail about this and other covert (under cover) operations, if they are given full immunity and federal protection for themselves and their families. (As of this date, July 30, 1994, no such government protection has been given).

1). Vernon Wayne Howell, known as David Koresh had connections with the CIA, in fact was a trained "sleeper" agent� for this organization;

2). He, and six of his "inner circle" were known as "sleepers," persons who had been subjected to intensive mind control by Agency "mind control experimentation" and had been prepared to carry out specific CIA "wet" operations (a "wet operation" is one that results in the "termination" of the person targeted), at some time in the future, on a cue given by their CIA "handler."

3). Koresh was much like Jim Jones of the Jonestown Guyana disaster, in that he was a "gangster who used the Bible� instead of a gun."

It should be noted here, that Jonestown was NOT a mass suicide, as the media tried to paint it, any more than Waco. It was like Waco, mass murder by a United States government agency. In order to guarantee there were no survivors to tell about the CIA "mind control experiments," which had been performed on 914 mostly Black victims, all were eliminated. In Waco, to even further this deceit, they were cremated in the fire.

4). Koresh was pictured to the American public as a thoroughly disgusting, mentally disturbed megalomaniac. But�� remember, he was a government CIA agent, who willingly allowed himself to be used.

a). Similar to Koresh and his fellow "sleepers," Sirhan Sirhan, the man who was used as the CIA "patsy" to assassinate� Robert Kennedy, and David Hinkley, another CIA agent who attempted to murder President Reagan on March� 31, 1981, were both government "undercover" agents.

5). As one studies this subject, it becomes apparent that the CIA has been able to produce "Manchurian Candidate" type human robots since the late 1940's using methods reminiscent of the "brainwashing" techniques used by the Chinese �Reds" on our POW's in Korea. I have been considered as an expert in that field since the Korean War.

The Communist plan to use "Psycopolitics," "brainwashing," or as the Chinese Reds more accurately called it "mind control," on the people of America, took for in 1935, when a Russian textbook titled "Psycopolitics." (The art of controlling the thinking of an entire nation) was first taught at the Lenin School of Psychological Warfare, University of Moscow, to 47 hand-picked American University students. (45 of these were Jews).

These were to be nucleus, the "cadre" if you will, of the Communist attempted takeover of the United States through our education system. This book was brought to America in 1937, where it was taught at the Eugene Debs Labor School, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, to Communist cadre. A little study of this astounding book, will reveal that the Shadow Government is using it as a "blueprint" in their attempt to subvert and control our people.

On page 52 of this revealing little book are these words: "We have battled in America since the turn of the century to bring to nothing any and all Christian influences and we are succeeding. While we today seem to be kind to the Christian world remember we have yet to influence them to our ends. When that is done, we will have an end to them everywhere.

You must work until 'Christianity' is synonymous with 'insanity.' You must work until the officials of city, county and state governments will not think twice before they pounce upon Christian groups as public enemies. We must be like the vine upon the tree. We use the tree to climb, then strangling it, grow into power on the nourishment of its flesh.

We must strike from our path any opposition. We must use for our tools any authority that comes to hand. And then, at last, the decades sped, we can dispense with all authority save our own and triumph in the greater glory of the party."

This, my Christian brothers and sisters, is the agenda of the Secret Government, the New World Order. One of the most important features of the CIA "mind control" is "programming," or "brainwashing" the subjects memory, including most or all of the programming experience, to where it is erased, or so deeply suppressed it cannot be remembered. Once this CIA program is complete, memory blocks are installed in the subjects subconscious mind to make it almost impossible for him to recover from these "mind-altering; behavior-changing" experiences. He is unable to remember what was done to him, how it happened, and is at the complete mercy of his programmers, who have no mercy!

Sometime in the future, on a secret signal, known only to his CIA "handlers," and which the untrained mind would overlook as normal behavior, he will carry out the� most violent and criminal acts imaginable, against any person or group targeted by the Agency, and will have no qualms of conscience over it. He would not even be aware that he had done their "dirty work." (It has been reported by those who have access to the information, that no one actually retires from the Agency (CIA), unless they die, or are terminated). David Koresh's psychological profile indicated that he was a person not likely to commit suicide.

A possible example of the "self-destruct" aspect of this CIA "mind control," was the strange death of George De Mohrenschildt, who prior to the Kennedy assassination was reportedly one of the CIA handlers of Lee Harvey Oswald. On the day when investigators from the HSCA (House Select Committee on Assassination) came to his home to question him, he was found dead of a gun shot wound and was declared a suicide, naturally!

He was one of several key witnesses in the Kennedy assassination who were found dead on the day of the investigation, all suicides. Another was Regis Kennedy, an FBI agent at Dealy Plaza in Dallas, who immediately following the murder, searched for persons other than Abraham Zepruder, who might have taken movies at the scene.

These films were confiscated immediately by the FBI, before they could be developed and viewed by their owners and seen by the public. It might be well to ask, why? There is no doubt that Regis Kennedy's death was to silence any further questioning on his part, of those who might prove embarrassing to the Secret Government.

De Mohrenshildt's widow, was a friend of the Oswald's and Jacqueline Kennedy, as well as wealthy Texas oilman H.L. Hunt and Bob Kerr. The top CIA man in Dallas, J. Walter Monroe, insisted that her husband had not committed suicide. She also believed that Oswald was not the assassin and that both Oswald and her husband were killed by the CIA to insure their silence.

Have you ever wondered how an individual could commit a horrible murder in cold blood and live with that memory? Very few can. So this is where a special category of covert operations is employed by the CIA, where the real professional killers, the ))7 variety, who are used for high level, top-secret assignments, are being used. These men are usually handpicked, extraordinarily intelligent men, with superior talent, training, and experience. These are the one's who do the really "dirty work" assigned to the Agency. These are the "top-level assassination experts."

For example, the Agency will use a "low-level" operator such as Sirhan Sirhan or Hinckley, and set them up to be a "patsy" for a top-level assassination like the murder of John Kennedy, and the attempt on President Reagan's life. But rarely are those "low-profile" people allowed to "pull the trigger." The real work is carried out by the Agencies "professional killers," who are normally eliminated so they cannot "spill the beans."

This "dirty work" is referred to as a "black operation." When more than one person is to be killed, and where human blood is to be spilled, it is known as a "wet operation." The normal procedure after each "wet" operation is to have all the agents connected with the operation "debriefed" by a special agency "debriefing team." This includes psychologists and psychiatrists who are skilled in various mind control and mind blowing techniques.

During this debriefing, the operatives are required to give the debriefing team a step by step, detailed account of what happened, including both the planning and the actual operation itself. This recitation is repeated several times over; once normally, once under hypnosis, once with a polygraph, and once with the operative under the influence of the drug Scopolamine. Only then is the Agency satisfied that they have all the details. Part of this debriefing is to provide detailed records and feedback to the Agency, concerning the "wet operation."

The importance of success in such an operation cannot be overestimated. For this means that deep within the bowels of the CIA, if one knew where to look, could be found the detailed records of all the "wet" operations and other crimes committed by the Secret Government. This is why they take so many pains to conceal their operations. These records are extremely hard to get, even by the United States Attorney Generals office, as they are under the tightest security imaginable. Far too many necks in government and big business would be put into jeopardy, if these secrets were made known to the public.

After a subject has been debriefed, he is put under deep hypnosis by the debriefing team, where it makes it almost impossible for him to remember what the team members did during the "wet" operation. It also blocks out many of the gory details and makes the "wet agent" less susceptible to nightmares from the atrocities he committed. "Low-level" operations such as James Earl Ray, Sirhan Sirhan and David Hinckley are highly expendable, particularly when eliminating them would preserve the plausibility of the Agency.

There may be some Americans who favor these "hard-nosed" operations to eliminate agents of foreign governments, who are sworn enemies of this nation. But when the people eliminated, are American citizens in good standing, who have gotten in the way of Agency operations, or who have become "politically or religiously incorrect" in their thinking, then these murders take on a horrible significance of what lies ahead for America.

The real threat posed by Koresh and the men and women of the Davidian Compound was that if they were given a legitimate trial before an honest judge and jury, they might expose the CIA's dirty business and their "mind control" used for murder. The "wet operations" at Waco that resulted in the termination of 86 men, women and children was merely for the purpose of covering up and burying the truth, both in the CIA, and in the government which allows them to operate. But let's return to Koresh and his six "fellow sleepers," who were low-level Manchurian-candidate-types, programmed as robot-assassins. They were scheduled to be used by the CIA somewhere in the future.

The term "sleeper" means:

1). That mind control techniques had been used against these men prior to the Waco debacle, possibly years earlier;

2). The secret instructions implanted in their sub-conscious minds had laid dormant for a long time;

3). The task of the CIA was to arouse these men from their induced hypnosis and reactivate their conditioned responses in their subconscious memories, so that they would once again obey the instructions of their "handlers," on cue;

4). That it was possible for the CIA to re-activate these secret, conditioned responses, and once they had performed their service to the agency, they would be eliminated for the protection of the Agency.

It is important for us to understand that the huge cache of military weapons and military-equipment stored in the compound had been acquired and customized for their special purposes and had been acquired and stored with the full knowledge and consent of the CIA over a number of years. Koresh had acquired this large arsenal for a specific purpose, which was not just "self-defense" against government attack. We may never know what that purpose was.

Even though the CIA had trained and pre-programmed these seven "robots," they had to keep a careful watch over them, and if "push came to shove," eliminate them before they could spill anything which might become an embarrassment to the Agency, or as later occurred, that they might pose a danger in a court of law and reveal CIA secrets to the public. As far as is known, the secret mission of Koresh and his "sleepers" has not been revealed. But one of the factors that strongly influenced the February 28th raid, was that Koresh and his "sleepers" were resisting attempts by their "handler's" who were attempting to prepare them for their secret mission. One of the principle reasons for this raid was to punish Koresh and his followers, and frighten them, and or whip them into line to where they would obey their "handlers."

Koresh could have been apprehended anytime when he made his daily jogging runs, outside the compound and was totally unguarded. This would have tipped off the victims to the Agencies intentions. The purpose of the raid was as "heavy handed" and "unsubtle" as possible so they would not miss the Agency's message. "Either shape up and get back into line, or we will take you out." (Kill you).

The gun battle on February 28th, in which four BATF officers were killed was not a tragedy from the CIA point of view. It was a message to CIA "sleepers" across the country, and there are many, "Be prepared to carry out our orders, exactly as we have programmed you, or you and your loved ones will be eliminated for your disobedience."

This kind of thinking is hard to accept in the "land of the free," isn't it? But this condition has developed in America, due mostly to Christian apathy and disobedience to God. The bottom line here is that the CIA was programming the American public, especially those in the Christian church, to accept martial law, whenever "cultists" get out of hand. So we listened as the pulpits of America thundered a perverted translation of Romans 13:1: "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers; For there is no power but to God; and the powers that be are ordained of God." So back the government, or die! Our narrow-minded, bigoted, poll-parrot preachers forgot the message the Apostle Paul gave to the Jewish Sanhedrin in Acts 4:19-20, when they ordered he and his companions to remain silent about Jesus Christ. Peter said:� "Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. For we cannot but speak the things we have seen and heard."

In other words, Peter's message was "We MUST obey God, rather than men!" Throughout the siege, we were incessantly told on television and through the media, how the government was shining high powered lights on the compound and bombarding them with hideous sounds in an attempt to get them to surrender peaceably. After all, they repeatedly said, the FBI does not want a loss of life in this affair.

The truth was far different than we were told! These incessant loud and obnoxious noises, the acid rock music, the Tibetan chants, were merely a cover up for what was really bombarding the compound and its occupants. 20 gigahertz microwave transmissions, designed to be as stressful and destructive to the human psychology, inner ear, psyche, and mental stability, bombarded the compound, as the CIA used these high-intensity microwave transmissions on human subjects, just as they did in Panama, when General Noriega fled to the Vatican Embassy for sanctuary. The press told us about the loud music that bombarded the Embassy, but never told us it was used to cover up transmissions which most human ears cannot endure.

Remember that in the Davidian compound, these high-intensity microwave transmissions continued day and night for 51 days, and there were more than 20 children in the compound at the time. These children were mistreated all right, but not by Koresh and his followers. The subliminal messages designed to reach the sub-conscious minds of Koresh and his people, must have been "pure hell" for the children in particular.

Koresh must have been very strong mentally, for he was able to withstand this bombardment and hold his group together for 51 days. Having talked with people who have been through CIA "mind control" techniques, and having seen what the communists were able to do with American POW's in Korea, using these same tactics, they can assure you that preserving one's sanity and stability in the face of this incessant sound bombardment, was no small accomplishment. In fact, it showed enormous stamina, courage and leadership on the part of Koresh.

It is quite apparent that Koresh's ability to withstand the CIA's efforts to disrupt him angered them more than anything else. They had earlier subjected him to their intensive mind control programming, now he was resisting everything they threw at him. According to information received, Attorney General Reno turned down a plan which had been proposed, for an attack on the compound, two or three weeks earlier. This plan would have involved the Delta Force, an elite, commando type military unit composed of specially trained members of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines, who operate under the command of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the CIA. It would have involved a night raid on the compound and would have depended for its success on the elements of surprise and lighting quick, precise execution. This plan would have probably resulted in the majority of the 95 men, women, and children in the compound being brought out alive.

There was one crucial element of this plan which was highly controversial and upon which the Delta Force and the CIA were most insistent. This was that every effort must be made to protect the occupants of the compound, but that Koresh and his "sleeper agents" MUST all be killed, no questions asked! Under no circumstances were these seven men would ever be able to testify in a court of law, since they possibly could reveal some of the inner secrets of the CIA's assassination program. In other words, this Delta operation would have been a "wet operation," carried out by highly trained CIA professional killers, in order to eliminate all danger to the CIA.

Attorney General Reno reported to the nation on television that she had met with President Clinton on Sunday, April 18, and outlined the plan to attack the Davidian compound in detail. (Which attack was carried out the next day). According to her own words, the President said: "If you think this is right, go ahead!" Attorney General Reno also reported that she and the President were responsible for the holocaust on April 19th. On early Sunday afternoon of the 18th, telephone calls from the CIA headquarters at Waco, to the Parkland Hospital in Dallas, indicated that they should be prepared to receive a large number of burn victims on the following day (Monday):

1). On April 19th (Monday) the Delta Force commando team was on the ground in Waco, ready to carry out their "wet operation";

2). The mass murder of some 82 human beings was to be covered up and made to look "just like Jonestown";

3). This Delta Force of 15 men were headed by a Lt. Col. who was a CIA liaison officer. The group flew into Texas on� their own C-130 transport, which was parked at a local airport, and then departed when the "dirty work" was done.� This plane belonged to "Triangle."

4). In this 15 man team, were two smaller 4 men teams, who actually made the insertion into the compound;

5). These Delta men were dressed in black, with gas masks, black gloves and face masks and were dressed to look like the other FBI men who were on the grounds;

6). That morning, February 19, 1993, America watched as the FBI used military M1A1 major battle tanks to punch holes in the exterior walls of the compound living quarters. At the same time, they lobbed in massive quantities of a very virulent form of tear gas, which has incendiary qualities as well and which has been banned from international use.

7). This gas was designed for use in crowd control and is extremely virulent and irritating when used in fresh air, as is very dangerous when used in an enclosed place.

The logical explanation was that the people in the compound would flee out-of-doors immediately, since gas masks are of little protection against this substance. Strangely enough, not a single person came out of the compound. The question is why? Why did not any of the women and children in particular flee outside seeking fresh air? The media told us that the Branch Davidians were equipped with gas masks. They did not tell us that this gas, as virulently irritating as it may be, was a cover up for the real ingredient used and that the reason no one fled, was that they were incapacitated by the real element being poured into the compound.

Evidence is mounting that the gas being used was tear gas, mixed with a neuro-toxic nerve gas, a poisonous substance which instantly paralyzes those who come into contact with it. There were only nine who escaped the compound, and these were on the 2nd and 3rd floors, with open windows on both sides. These apparently were spared from the deadly nerve gas being used. The others were rendered helpless, as they could no longer coordinate their muscles in an effort to get up, much less flee the fire which consumed all forensic evidence.

This is a very serious matter, which every American, especially Christians should be deeply concerned over. For it means that our government, our military, the FBI, the Justice Department, all take their orders from the CIA, which used poison gas against innocents and subjected them to a painful, ghastly death. This puts this crime on the same level as the war crimes for which the Nazi leaders were prosecuted and executed at the end of World War II, it is an unspeakable violation of human rights. Yet the International Commission on Human Rights has had very little to say about it. After the deadly gas had time to do its paralyzing work, the four men Delta teams entered the compound, there had been no fires up to this time, they were dropped on the roof of the compound by one of several helicopters which had hovered overhead during the entire operation.

While the television camera focused on the tanks battering down the compound walls, the Delta team did their dirty work. (According to reliable reports, all team members had received shots of "atrophine," which is the only antidote for this nerve gas). According to testimony given before the House Judiciary Committee the fires in the compound were not visible until about 11:45 a.m. This gave the Delta team one hour and 45 minutes to make sure that this "wet operation" was a success and that no witnesses were left alive to testify against them.

One of the first things they obviously did was to go to the Communications Center, where they found and murdered Koresh and his close associates. Koresh was killed by a single bullet fired from a frontal position, about 10" away. The gun shot wound that killed his assistant, Steve Schneider, was to the back of the neck, gangster style. Neither� of these shots are typical of suicide attempts. These were not suicide! They were planned, cold-blooded murders, carefully planned to cover up the murder of 82 other human beings. The FBI psychological profile of Koresh showed that he was not susceptible to suicide!

According to an article in "The New York Times," May 15, 1993, p. A-18, two-thirds of the bodies which were given autopsies had bullet wounds of some type which were administered after death. This same Times article stated that it appeared that at least 17 of the children were killed by poisonous injections. But since the majority in the compound had been paralyzed by the nerve gas. This seems highly unlikely unless it was administered by the Delta team. This is the most likely explanation!

The remaining task of the Delta teams was to place canisters of "Willie Peter" (White Phosphorus) in strategic positions in the compound and set them off. These canisters were equipped with delay timing devices which were set off simultaneously at about 11:45 a.m., when the fires first became visible to outside observers. Those who have served in the combat forces of our Armed Forces, can testify to the fearsome device called WP. It ignites immediately and burns with a white-hot intensity, that consumes and burns everything in its path beyond recognition. It thereby is useful in destroying all forensic evidence and covers up the operations of the assassins.

CIA "wet teams" have been known to corner their victims in close quarters, and then throw in WP, so that their victims are immolated before their eyes. The fire produced by WP is so intense, and the combustion so complete, that victims in the Waco holocaust could only be identified by dental works. The media explanation of how the fire started, shows television cameras at ground level with several helicopters hovering overhead. Three or four fires were observed simultaneously at different places in the compound.

These spread rapidly in the all wood building, aided by a strong wind and within minutes the entire building was on fire. There is little or no evidence that these fires were started by those who were inside. There is reason to believe that the gas poured into the compound through the holes battered by the tanks, was in addition to being toxic, also highly flammable. The official story that the fires were a "tragic accident" does not hold up under the known facts, since the compound� would not have literally exploded into a massive fireball all at once. There is evidence that the Delta teams left many people alive, but paralyzed, to face a horrible, fiery fate, without being able to do anything to help themselves. This is a crime against humanity that must not go unpunished! From top level officials, even if it is the President of the United States and the Attorney General, down to the team members who did the actual killing, all Must be brought to justice!

Who ordered the vicious murders of 86 human beings? We sincerely doubt that it was either President Clinton or Attorney General Reno, although it appears that neither of them did anything to stop it; which makes them guilty also? It is even possible that they did not know this was to be a "wet operation." The decision was not made through a normal, publicly acknowledged "chain of command."

The answer to this question brings up the question of the "Shadow Government," which has controlled America since at least 1913, when they took over control of our economics through the Federal Reserve System. This system is not Federal, but is made up of eight privately owned banks, all owned and controlled by international Jewish banking families. These consist of:

�� 1). Rothschild Bank of England.

�� 2). Rockefeller Bank of New York.

�� 3). Lehman Brothers, New York.

�� 4). Goldman-Sachs, New York.

�� 5). Rothschild Bank of Germany.

�� 6). Warburg Bank of Germany.

�� 7). Massenschiff Bank of Italy; and,

�� 8). Lazar Bank of France.

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Americans Core Cancer

���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� This is why we are so deeply in debt

Established in 1913; On December 23 three Senators met and passed this in the U.S. Senate! (The liberal Democrat House had already passed it, but it was dead in the Senate). Congress was adjourned for Christmas and the measure was quickly taken to President Woodrow Wilson who hurriedly signed it. Since then the United States has:

�� 1). Accumulated needless debt;

�� 2). Fought in planned wars;

�� 3). Had engineered depressions;

�� 4). Been forced to fund the United Nations;

�� 5). Given our sovereignty to the United Nations;

�� 6). Now began empowering U.N.

Key function of the Federal Reserve branches is to select candidates to place in: House, Senate, all high courts, White House, State Department, Ambassadors, and etc. Key requirement is absolute loyalty and commitment to make the United Nations the World's Supreme Government. Since the Great war the International Bankers set up more than twenty-six central banks. They were modeled after the Federal Reserve Banks in the United States, which had been established in 1913 according to the theories of Mr. Paul Warburg.

Mr. Paul Warburg's creation of 1913 had been steadily attempting to set up a "Central Banking Organization" which would acknowledge no authority on this planet as above it. Hitler knew that if Warburg and associates had their way, the Bank of International Settlements would become as autocratic in regard to international affairs, as the bank of England is in regard to British National Affairs and Foreign Policy. Politicians and statesmen were being asked to believe this banker's dream would stabilize the banking system of the world. In this contention they were absolutely correct. The nigger-in-the-gold-pile is the fact, that with the realization of this dream, all hope of freedom and plenty for the individual and private industry would automatically disappear. The citizens of the world would have the same financial security as the criminal who enjoys social security behind bars. Against this process of reducing the people of the world to financial slavery Hitler decided to take a definite stand, and he refused to allow Germany to be merged into the league of Monopolist States, secretly controlled by agents of the Illuminati.

After Paul Warburg's Federal Reserve System had been in operation three years, 1913-1916, President Woodrow Wilson summed up the economic situation in the United Sates of America as follows: "A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credits. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men...We have come to be one of the worst ruled; one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments, in the civilized world...no longer a government by conviction and the free vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of small groups of dominant men."

That is actually what modern so-called democracy really means. These men have used a "shadow government" to control and kill American citizens who stand in their way of a New World Order, controlled by them. The answer as to who gave the orders at Waco, lie with this nefarious, antichrist crew and the "top-secret chain of command" it controls through CIA operations. These men are "totally above the law." In practice, they have been successful for decades in being totally unaccountable for their evil actions, for robbing the American people of vast sums of their money and property and for murdering thousands of them to cover up their operations. They operate "world wide."

Note that the "wet teams" are the lowest level in this "chain of command," and operate in Third World countries as roving "death squads," controlled by the "powers that be." They have been responsible for the deaths of millions of people in the last 100 years. The next level of command is the "intelligence community," which orders these "top-secret covert wet operations." These include secret units operating under the Justice Department, the Pentagon, and the U.S. State Department. Above this group, and above the military Joint Chiefs of Staff, the President and Congress, is a top secret council made up of nine men. (Their names are not known and we would not know them if we stumbled across them, although we strongly suspect who a few are). These men have the power, supported by the enormous wealth of the International Bankers, to order "termination with extreme prejudice" of anyone who stands in their way of International power. (This includes the President of the United States, as was the case with John Kennedy).

J. Fletcher Prouty, a retired Colonel in the U.S.A.F., who served as Chief of Special Operations for the Join Chiefs of Staff, and was CIA liaison officer during the Kennedy Administration, states in his book JFK - the CIA, Vietnam and the Plot to Assassinate JFK: "Lest there still be some people among us who still believe that the President runs this country, that the Congress participates effectively in determining the course of its destiny, and that the Supreme Court assures compliance with the Constitution, and all federal laws, let them witness (the handiwork of the Shadow Government and the CIA) and the results of the blatant disregard for all elements of government as we find in on record."^[86]

The real power structures are always the invisible one's behind the visible sovereign powers. He goes on to say: "The CIA today is a far cry from the agency that was created in 1949 by the National Security Act. As President Truman confided to close friends, 'The greatest mistake of my administration took place when I signed the National Security Act of 1947 into law.' It was that act...among other things, which created the CIA."

President Kennedy recognized the danger posed by the CIA and planned to "splinter it into a thousand pieces, and scattering it to the winds." He made his plans known and shortly afterwards was killed in Dallas. Over half of the Secret Service Officers who guard the President are reported to be enforcers of the CIA, which means that their loyalty is to the Shadow Government, FIRST! Twice in my lifetime we have seen a President murdered, and an attempt on another's life!

One thing our people need to realize, is that the purpose of the CIA is not to gather intelligence for the protection of this country, but to carry out the orders of the Shadow Government against anyone who has the audacity to stand against it in any way. Across the rotunda of CIA Headquarters in Washington, D.C., are emblazoned the words of Jesus: "Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free." ^[87] What a travesty of hypocrisy this is, when they are the number one organization in the country she suppresses the truth and keeps it from our people. The actions of the CIA prove beyond the shadow of a doubt, that they have no intentions of allowing the people of the United States to know the truth, and that anyone who attempt to expose the nefarious activities of the Shadow Government, will be "terminated with prejudice." (executed).

Jesus said that we will know men by the "fruits they bear." The same is true of organizations, whether they be a church, a club, a lodge, or a government organization. Discerning people will be able to judge the CIA by the work they do, the way they live, their accomplishments and the legacy they leave behind.^[88]

Following is only a partial list of the "grotesque fruits" of the Shadow Government over the past thirty years. Judge for yourself whether these operations have benefitted a so-called Christian Nation or have become a disgrace to us:

1). The assassination of President John Kennedy and the attempt against the life of President Ronald Reagan;

(a) President Kennedy, as you know was killed on November 22, 1963. Along with this assassination that shocked the nation, was the elimination of 175 key witnesses who could have testified as to what actually took place at Dallas. Surely you are not naive enough to believe that all these deaths were accidental or from natural causes.

(b) The assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., in Memphis, Tennessee on April 4, 1968;

(c) The murder of Senator Robert Kennedy, June 5, 1967, plus numerous witnesses to this crime.

(d) The murder of Malcolm X, Black leader in the early 1960s;

(e) The attempted killing of Alabama Governor George Wallace in April 1972, which left him a permanent cripple;

(f) The murder of the head of the FBI, J. Edgar Hoover, and his close associate, Mr. Tolson, in the early 1970s;

(g) The murder of Martha Mitchell, wife of Attorney General John Mitchell in the early 1970s when she threatened to "blow the whistle" on underhanded government tactics she knew about;

(h) The attempted assassination of President Ronald Reagan, March 31, 1981;

(I) The murder of Senator John Heintz, (R-Pa.) when his private plane was destroyed by a missile fired from a�� helicopter.

(j) The murder of Senator John Tower, (R-Texas), when his private plane was destroyed by a bomb.

(k) The murder of Congressman Ted Weiss (D-NY) in 1992, when he refused to� remain silent on the role played by� President Bush in the October Surprise and the Iran-Contra scandal.

2). The actual or attempted assassination of numerous leaders in foreign countries;

3). The numerous Black Panther leaders such as Fred Hampton and Mark Clark, who were killed in Chicago in the�� 1960s;

4). The murder of 914 men, women, and children in Jonestown, Guyana, by the CIA, in the mid-70s which was foisted off on the� American public as a gigantic suicide by a demented religious leader;

5). The murder of members of the Black MOVE community in Philadelphia in the mid-eighties;

6). The murder of 248 American soldiers, plus the air crew, when their plane was blown up on December 12, 1985, and it was, of course blamed on the Arabs.

7). The murder of more than 250 men, women and children on December 21, 1988, when PAN-AM flight 103 was blown out of the sky over Gander, New Foundland, again blamed on terrorists;

8). The murder of 269 persons on August 31, 1983, when Korean flight 007 was blown out of the sky over the sea of� Japan, and it was said it was shot down by the Russians. Who did they want to eliminate on that flight? It was� outspoken Congressman Lawrence McDonald.

9). October Surprise, in November 1980, whereby George Bush, Ronald Reagan and select CIA agents rigged and stole �the Presidential election from President Jimmy Carter. Over 50 witnesses over the years, who could have testified� against these men, have been terminated. Come now, you don't believe that all these were suicides?

10). The inslaw bankruptcy scandal and the "fixing" of the case in the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, and the� wholesale theft of PROMIS software by the U.S. Justice and Intelligence community, followed by the elimination of numerous witnesses, including Danny Casaloro;

11). The wholesale theft of billions of dollars from the Savings and Loans Associations and banks of America by the� intelligence community, with the proceeds going to fund "wet operations" around the world;

12). Illegal gun running, illegal drug smuggling, and illegal money laundering, which is being carried out today on a� massive scale by the "intelligence community," to fund illegal criminal activities which will not be funded by Congress;

13). The recent murders outside CIA headquarters in Langley, VA and the bombing of the World Trade Center in New� York, all blamed on foreign terrorists, but never proven;

14). The wholesale corruption of our government courts, usually to cover up "crooked government" practices;

15). The rigging in Congress and the Justice Department of all attempts to investigate these assassinations, murders, and major scandals. We all know about this!

16). The discouragement in Congress and the Justice Department of all attempts to investigate these murders,��� assassinations and other major scandals;

17). The rigid control exercised over the years, which allows the media and television to pass on to the American people, only that part of the news which the Shadow Government approves;

18). And finally, the continuous fomenting of rebellions and civil wars, in countries around the world, with the specific� purpose of eventually bringing about the intervention of American forces. This pours billions into the coffers of the International Bankers who control all this, and hastens their agenda for the New World Order. Under this we could list:

(a) The Korean Police Action 1950-1953, with 54,246 American deaths and 157,630 casualties;

(b) The Viet Nam War 1954-73 with 58,151 American deaths and a total of 211,324 casualties.

(c) To this we could add Granada, Panama, Desert Storm, Somalia, and now Bosnia. None of these military actions� have been for the protection or benefit of the United States, but have poured billions into the pockets of the Shadow Government, while tightening their control over our people and preparing them for the New World Order.

Those of you who call yourselves Christian, especially those who are pastors, how can you look at the present sordid mess in America, and then preach on the wickedness of Sodom and Gomorrah? Our present Shadow Government exceeds the wickedness of anything this world has ever seen. But then, maybe it is you who are at least partially to blame.

For in Jeremiah 23:22, we are clearly told, that if the preachers of the land would preach the "whole counsel" of God's Word, the people would "turn from their wicked ways." This has not happened, which indicates to us that something is terribly wrong with the messages which are being preached in most American churches.

We believe the time has come for us to realize that "the time has come that judgment (Gk. 'KRIMA' meaning 'condemnation') MUST begin at the house of God..." How many of you preachers out there are preaching "condemnation against sin and the wickedness found in our government?" Or are you satisfied to ride the "tax free gravy train," as long as the Shadow Government allows you to operate as a church. Remember their words in the Russian textbook in Psycopolitics: "While we today seem to be kind to Christians, remember that we have yet to influence them to our ends. When that is done, we will have an end to them everywhere."

Are you willing to have a BATF approved church now, and have to answer before God later, when He asks why you did not tell your people the whole truth? I would not want to stand in your shoes!

Col. Proudy on page 30 of his book says: "This is one of the secret methods of the secret war. These special (CIA) armed forces are used as agitators. It is as though the fire department was used to start fires, the police department to steal and kill, and doctors ordered to make people sick and destroy their brains, to poison them. Such clandestine operations are designed to make war...even when we have to play both sides at the same time."

The murder of 86 men, women and children in Waco, was a RICO conspiracy. It was carried out by the Shadow Government and interlocking groups, which are the "mother of all corruption" in American society. This Shadow Government conducts the business of our government, not in an open, honest, legitimate manner, according to the laws, Constitution and democratic principles we expect in our American government, but secretly, clandestinely and often illegally, as if they were running a criminal racketeering enterprise, rather than a legitimate government.

It is the duty of all honorable, responsible Americans, more so if you are Christian, to expose this evil system at all costs, so that we can and will, under God, end this rank corruption which has become a "stench in the nostrils of Almighty God." To do less, is to turn our backs on our duty as Christians and Americans, and invite destruction! Ours is a nation of laws and no individual, be they man or woman, is above that law. This has been our national heritage and history from the beginning.

1). The Declaration of Independence of the United States affirms that in the eyes of God "All men and women are� created equal," when it comes to their rights to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." We know from observation, that all are not "created equal" when it comes to intelligence, physical ability, or moral and spiritual rectitude.

2). We salute our flag with allegiance to a Republic, not a Democracy, as the media constantly harps, which stands for "one nation under God, with liberty and justice for all."

3). Over the entrance way to our Supreme Court are found these words "Equal Justice Under The Law!" This has been� our proud heritage. The question is, are we willing to make the effort to keep this a "Republic under God," or will we take the easy way out and allow the Shadow Government to illegally govern and destroy us? The Supreme Court has reaffirmed this principle on many occasions and many examples are given in the original 101 page letter of Attorney Wilcher.

In her first speech given before the Justice Department on April 6, 1993, U.S. Attorney Janet Reno stated: "We represent the American people, and we must be accountable to the people. We must never forget the awesome power of the federal government and must harness that power to make sure that innocent people are not charged, or even tainted, by our actions, and that the guilty are convicted...according to the principles of strict due process and fair play, and with adherence to the Constitution.

We must make government user-friendly, that will open our courts to ALL people, and give every American a reason to believe that the Constitution is a living document which means something." (UNQ)

These are fair words indeed, and it should make our hearts swell with pride, to know that heading our Justice Department is a person of high moral persuasion. But we MUST go by the old saying: "What you do shouts so loud I can't hear what you say!" For Attorney General Reno, and her Justice Department, in face our entire government has gone in the opposite direction of justice for all, and is now openly dedicated to the harassment of good, patriotic, especially Christian citizens. "By their fruits shall ye know them!"

The Constitutional rule is that ALL persons are to be held accountable before the law. Our position is that the higher the ranking they are in the government and the church, the more their responsibility should be. There can be no special set of rules for the people, and another for the leaders. But we know there is, for we can see it in operation almost every day.

As long as one is obedient to the Shadow Government, they can "get away with murder!" While rebellion is often followed by "termination." These high sounding pronouncements do not exist in "le cessepoole Grande on the Potomac," as anyone with intelligence can surely see, for the Shadow Government operates outside, and above the law. They have reached the point where they openly subvert the Justice system to their own ends, turning our government from being a "servant of the people, into a Frankenstenian monster which seeks absolute power over them and the Constitution be damned!"

For well over thirty years, Americans have been told that it is stupid to believe that a conspiracy exists to destroy American principles and Christian civilization. Yet the enemy openly boasts of their plans. They have been encouraged by a media which announces that all bombing are the result of terrorist activities, and many times are not "bombings at all, but merely accidents." They excuse wholesale thievery from our banks by stating that it is "bad management," rather than rascally, planned deception, and that certainly their failure, had nothing to do with the duplicity of the Shadow Government.

They tell us that the war on drugs did not fail because our government, including the Bush family, were the biggest drug dealers and smugglers in the country. They have not told us that our Federal courts are corrupt, even when we see them turn known criminals loose to prey again on a "long suffering public."

They do not tell us that Christian patriots are persecuted because their thoughts are "politically and religiously incorrect," and that they stand against the corruption in government. Instead they are called "anti-Semitic, neo-Nazi, KKK, hate mongers, and other derogatory terms."

They spend millions of dollars putting out films on the Jewish "holocaust," flooding the airwaves, with bogus, so-called historical documentary films, which come from the fertile minds of some Jewish author, (Schindler's List) while totally ignoring the countless millions of Christians who have been slaughtered under Jewish controlled Communism, (or at least that is what Jewish leaders brag about), and while "brainwashed" pastors of Judeo-Christianity, still preach the falsehood that Christianity comes from the antichrist basis of Talmudic filth, of Judaism. Folks, it just isn't so! No matter what men like Billy Graham, Pat Robertson, Jack Van Impe and Peter Lalonde say to the contrary.

The media refuses to tell us that our CIA is responsible for fomenting wars around the globe, on orders from the Shadow Government, which reaps billions of their profits from selling arms to both sides, while preparing America for eventual One World takeover. Americans have been brainwashed into accepting everything they read in the controlled media, or hear on television. In listening to a hot argument which one man indignantly announced that he had documentary evidence to uphold his end of the argument. When asked to produce it, he indignantly said: "Well, I read it in the New York Times."

There will come a time however, and make no mistake about it, and many believe that we are close to it now, when both individuals and the nation as a whole, will no longer accept the controlled fantasies of the media, and will begin to look at reality. Then, they will hold our government responsible for what they do and do not do. Then is when Congress and the President will be held morally responsible for their actions in office, with no excuses allowed. It is going to be very uncomfortable time for many in Washington, and is one of the things the Shadow Government is striving to prevent, even if they MUST murder thousands to do so.

Running away from the truth has never made it disappear! It is only as we listen to the admonition of Jesus Christ in John 8:32, that we will be truly free. Remember He said: "And ye shall KNOW the TRUTH, and the TRUTH shall make you FREE." Until we come to understand the treasonous process which has been used to change America from a Christian Republic, into a Satanic Democratic Welfare State, which is very close to becoming a dictatorship, we will make little headway in our defense against it.

Section 2384 says: "If two or more persons (this consists of a conspiracy)...conspire to overthrow...by force, the government of the United States (and here it is speaking of the Constitutional government, not the Shadow Government)...or by force prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States, contrary to the authority thereof, shall be fined..."

Section 2385: "Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates...the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing...the government of the United States...by force, or violence or assassination of any officer of such government, shall be fined or imprisoned..." (Again it is essential to remind you that this refers to our legally, authorized Constitutional government, and does not refer to the Shadow Government which now controls us). We cannot commit Treason against the Shadow Government, since it is an illegal entity.

It means that members of the CIA and of the Shadow Government, all of whom have taken an oath to uphold and defend the United States and it's Constitution from all enemies, domestic and foreign, have by their actions, placed themselves in the category of Traitors. Attorney Wilcher seems to believe, when you read this entire 101 page expose - that the Shadow Government works more closely with the Right-Wing Republicans, than the Liberal Democrat elements in government. We do not believe this, for the simple reason that there are many Democratic Congressmen who have shown by their actions that they back this Shadow Government. Although President Eisenhower made a feeble stab at warning the nation of the frightful power which was at that time labeled as the "Military and Industrial Complex," he had himself, during World War II and following as President, been a willing servant of the same.

While the CIA at this time in the Cold War did not want detente with the Soviets, Eisenhower held out the hand of friendship to the criminals in the Kremlin, who had murdered over 60-million of their own people in the name of Jewish controlled Communism. It was the Eisenhower Administration that "zapped" the CIA plan for the invasion of Cuba and the assassination of Fidel Castro.

Our Founding Fathers were well aware that "power corrupts, and absolute power, corrupts absolutely!" So they valiantly tried to protect us from this power grab, by demanding that the Bill of Rights, (the first ten Amendments to the Constitution) be the basis for our government. The Bill of Rights, as you should know, are ten basic rights, enjoyed by American citizens, which come from God, and cannot be infringed on (tamper with in any way) by any form of government.

The Second Amendment, the "right of the people to keep and bear arms," is probably the foundation of all these other freedoms, for without it we would have no means of defense against a government which has/is running amok. This is the major reason why this Amendment is under constant attack by the Shadow Government. They know that as long as the American people are able to own firearms, there is little chance for their success. Under the present Clinton Administration, the government has infringed on the rights of the American people, more than at any time in our history, and it openly appears as though they will use any means possible, to disarm us before the year 2000.

The game of Treason is a "high stakes" game. If you win, you are in complete, dictatorial control. But if you lose, your life can well be forfeited, as the Traitors in Washington will discover very shortly! Therefore, one of the choicest spoils of victory is Absolute power over the power to prosecute! In this way you guarantee that as long as you remain in power, you will never be held accountable for your Treason! Because of this, the ultimate prize of the CIA and the Shadow Government, is to control the Justice Department. This is the only way they can insure that those in control, can remain above the law.

Our Founding Fathers, understanding this, and gave First Amendment protection to the media, sometimes referred to as the Fourth Estate. They wished for this group to be the "watchmen" of the country, serving as a deterrent to all three branches of government, making certain that they adhere to the highest level, ethical and moral principles, consistent with freedom, and our Republican form of government. (America was never to be a Democracy!) Apparently our Founding Fathers never suspected that the Fourth Estate would be taken over by the power arm of the Shadow Government and become subservient to them. But this is what has happened in America.

Today, for all intents and purposes, we have a "totally controlled press" in America, operated and owned by International Zionist interests, who are also at the heart of the Shadow Government. When you see the words Zionist Occupation Government (ZOG), you better sit up and take notice, for that is what we have, whether you or your pastor want to admit it or not. It is a government which is completely anti-Christian, and is dedicated to your destruction.

Today, these international and domestic TRAITORS have absolute control over our Justice Department, to the point where if the defense uses the Constitution as the basis for his case in a Federal Court, he is very apt to have the judge say to him: "If you ever bring up the Constitution in this court attain, I'll hold you in contempt of court!"

He can do that legally, for our courts are no longer Constitutional, as we are under United Nations Maritime Law. That's what the gold fringe on our flag represents. If we have an honest Administration in Washington, and this applies to any Administration no matter what their Party affiliation, they would be compelled by their oath of office to expose to the American people the TREASON they KNOW has been endemic in Washington, D.C. for over seventy years.

Unless and until these disclosures are made, America will never be truly free. Attorney General Reno and President Clinton know this truth, which multiples their guilt by not revealing it! If the majority of our American people ever realize what has been happening in our nation's capitol "heads will roll." When Attorney Paul Wilcher sent his 101-page report to Attorney General Reno, he knew he was "putting his life on the line." He wrote to her: "I have now discharged my duty in specific and voluminous detail...I am now laying my own life and the lives of other key witnesses on the line, to bring this information to you."

A few days later, on May 21, 1993, Attorney Wilcher was found dead, sitting naked on a toilet in his apartment. You guessed it - the official verdict was - Suicide! His death was followed shortly by the SUICIDE (?) of Vincent Foster, another attorney who was a close friend of the Clinton's and who had information which might have embarrassed the Administration. You can receive the entire 101-page Wilcher document (at the time of this writing (July - 1995), "Expose On Waco," plus an overview letter and exhibits, by two day priority mail, for a donation of $20.00 to Center for Action/Washington, 11910 C. Meridian East, #142, Puyallup, WA 98373.

The conduct of our government and its forces which allows them to conduct an illegal and immoral action against American citizens, on their own property, with tear and nerve gas and which ends in the deaths of over 80 men, women and children, in "cold blooded murder," and then fire bombing the premises to cover up all forensic evidence, is reprehensible and cannot be defended by any decent person, for any reason. Therefore, be it known that any government official at any level of government, including the President and the Attorney General, and those operating clandestinely under the Shadow Government, must be brought to immediate justice! To do anything less, is to bring dishonor to the name of our Savior, Jesus Christ, and to the honor of America. This shall include all those who:

1). Gave orders for this holocaust;

2). Acted to carry out these illegal orders;

3). Or who knowing the facts, remained silent in the face of their duty to speak up and do everything in their power to prevent it; and,

4). Who acted in any manner to cover up the TRUTH. This includes the media!

These deserve the harshest penalties allowed under our law. There can be no extenuating circumstances. These penalties should include up to:

1). Removal from office, conviction of multiple federal and state felonies (murder, arson and obstruction of justice, etc.);

2). Conviction under the RICO conspiracy statutes; and

3). Imprisonment in a federal penitentiary without any possibility of parole, and/or, the ultimate punishment of death!

It is absolutely impossible for us to overstate the heinousness and criminal brutality, and the utter gross misconduct of government power, which took place at Waco, Texas on April 19, 1993. There is no excuse for not "throwing the book" at these government criminals and American Christians should be in the forefront of demanding that justice be done. To do less, is to abrogate their responsibility before God as Christians.

Although it appears that Attorney Wilcher attempted to cover up any idea that the President and Attorney General Reno held any responsibility in this "crime against humanity," they were morally responsible, at the very least, since they gave the final orders which made this crime possible.

A Federal Court Judge was quoted as saying: "If the government becomes a law breaker, it breeds contempt for the law. It invites every man to become a law unto himself, it invites anarchy."

The Bible tells us that there was a time on earth, when "every man did that which was right in his own eyes." The anarchy which followed is exposed in Genesis 6:11: "the earth also was corrupt before God and the earth was filled with violence." This caused God to say in verse 6: "And it repented the Lord that He had made man on the earth, and it grieved Him at His heart." So the Almighty destroyed man through a great flood, saving only righteous Noah and his family.

As we look at the wickedness of America in 1994, someone has rightly said: "If God allows America to get by with this filth, He will have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah." But He will not allow us to get by with it, for His Law of Harvest is still in effect: "Be not deceived, God is not mocked; for whatsoever a man (or woman) sows, that shall they also reap." �The question we MUST ask ourselves in 1994 is: "How long will God withhold His wrath from America, when His people (Christian Israel, whether they accept it or not), allow by their actions, or lack of actions, this wickedness to continue in the land?" You can be sure, from the testimony of God's Word, that He will hold His people accountable for this wickedness, if we do nothing to stop it.

That Attorney General Reno knew what was right, can be seen in the first speech she made to the Justice Department, she said: "What is the right thing to do?...Sometimes doing the right thing is very politically unpopular. Sometimes it will be painful...But with strength and courage, let us face that question unafraid, as we seek justice for all."

Attorney General Reno KNEW the truth at Waco. That she knows her duty can be seen from her own words. Yet in the days since the Waco holocaust, neither she, the President, or Congress have made any effort to bring the government criminals to justice. Can it be that those in positions of authority are afraid for their own "skins?"

If our government continues to pursue this course of action, then it will be our duty, as Americans, to see that their criminal action is brought to justice! You may be one of those naive Christians who say: "It was a government mistake! It will not happen again!" Are you so dense that you cannot see that they are already preparing for other Waco's? Is your mind so set in "Judeo-Christian religious cement," that it will take the "dynamite" of God to blow it loose to where you can and will see the truth? Will it be necessary for you and your loved one's to be driven to your knees, and have your noses rubbed in the dirt, before you will "listen to God, Obey, Repent, and be saved, both spiritually and physically?"

We already have a Formula for Survival which will work, if we are willing to give it more than mere "lip service." It is found in 2 Chronicles 7:14. Many of you know it by heart: "If my people, which are called by my name (Christian), will humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I Hear from heaven, and will Forgive their sins, and will Heal their land."

But we have seen very little Humbling, or little turning from wicked ways! We have seen many Christians, as they hide in their spiritual foxholes, folding their holy hands in prayer, as they ask Jesus to Rapture them from the mess which was caused by their Christian apathy! Folks it won't work that way, no matter what your pastor says. Even as I have been writing this, a letter arrived in my office from a man who is in my Prison Ministry, in an Illinois penitentiary. He wrote: �"Remember Waco! Well, I'm sitting here in this prison yard watching a SWAT team train alongside the National Guard. They are training in an area just outside the prison perimeter. They carry bodies (prison guards dressed up as terrorists), wearing T-shirts that have Waco Terrorist written on them. I am on the crew that polices this area where they train. They have built houses, which they attack and there are dummies inside wearing the Waco Terrorist T-shirts! Looks tome like they are planning more of the same!"

Apparently this man has more common sense than the majority of those folks who call themselves Christian, who see nothing to get worked about. So they just shout: "Praise the Lord!" and believe everything will be all right. No way folks! This book is a chronology covering events and characters having dramatic consequences in history. In their own words the gradual unfoldment of the New Age New World Order is presented here. It is indeed a chronology of the Conspiracy to Rule the World Through a One World Government Ruled by Satan!

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� History Repeating Itself

We show you that the War on Money and for the supreme control of the world continues, as Mystery Babylon grows ever stronger. We naturally ask the question, "Have we gone through this before somewhere and sometime?" Jesus told us, "And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places." ^[89] The Christian people of the West, the people of the Bible, have been taught of the Four Horses of the Apocalypse, the White Horse of conquerors, the Red Horse of Civil war, the Black Horse of famine and the Pale Horse of death.

Carroll Quigley, in his book "Tragedy and Hope," shows that the White man has a different concept of time and his relationship to it, than other peoples. The White man's concept of time encompasses the past, present and future. Quigley shows that the Black man of Africa, for example, does not include in his thoughts of civilization the history, nor the future, of his people He thinks more in terms of only the present.

The White man, in his natural setting, is taught to think not only of the present but of the history of his people and their future. There is such a thing as DNA race memory. The Bible is a history book of Western man and the lessons to be learned are for our understanding. "Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come." ^[90]

Why, then, do we persist in thinking of the Apocalypse as being only in the future? to do so the White man is not using all of his senses that Carroll Quigley defined. Have the tribulations that are upon us today ever happened before? If Paul's teaching found in 1 Corinthians 10:11 is to be meaningful to us, we must ten look back into history. When we study the history of our people, we can see the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse over and over.

The principles taught in the Bible are never ending. They are just as valuable for us today as the day they were written. "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever." ^[91] It follows, than, that if we learn about what happened in history to bring about the Four Horsemen and then the results of those epochs, we should have a better understanding of where we are heading today. Perhaps one of the best examples of the Apocalypse started in the 14th century. It was the Pale Horse of pestilence (death) in that example. In the book "Travels of Ibn Battuta (London: Cambridge, 1962), we find that the Black Plague (Bubonic) reached the West from Asia in the 1300's. Ibn-Batutta reported, "It devastated nations and caused populations to vanish...laid cities waste...obliterated roads, changed the entire inhabited world."

Civil order broke down because no one was left to enforce it. The terror of infection was so great that, "brother was forsaken by brother and oftentimes husband by wife...fathers and mothers abandoned their children, untended, unvisited...The dead were thrown into pits piled up like merchandise in the hold of a ship. Peasants shut themselves into their houses and feasted on all the food and drink they had, convinced they would be dead before harvest."

In Boccacio's "Decameron" he tells of young people at the time of the plague isolating themselves in a country villa, making love and telling each other stories. Certainly for different reasons in today's society but the story in Boccaccio's "Decameron" should remind us of the situation of modern times. So many of our young people are totally disassociated with reality and it is partly because of one or more of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse of today. Today the thought is, "Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die."

The Pale Horse devastated Europe in the early 1300's and from one-third to one-half of the entire population died before it ended. All classes suffered but the peasants in the rural areas the worst because of the basic living conditions. The result was an extreme shortage of labor. Because of that shortage, the peasants deserted the unpopular landlords and went in search of better conditions and pay. The Peasants' Revolt of 1381 was inspired by a priest named John Ball who preached that all things should be held in common and that all men were equal (Communism). The Black Death didn't bring about any great change for the better in government. There was only the temporary reign of demagogues who were no better than those they replaced. Europe was the same mass of quarreling political units after the Pale Horse as it was before.

However, because of that shortage of labor throughout Europe, there was one major change that took place. It was probably the greatest underlying cause that brought about the Industrial Revolution. Labor organized into crafts and unions. Then the Hanseatic League of merchants was created to make use (and money) from those crafts.

Florence, Italy, had become one of the leading banking cities of Europe. Because of the plague, those banks became destitute. But following the plague, the Florentines rebuilt using the wool industry as their base. Out of that came the super wealthy Medici family. It was from that connection, that Thomas Cromwell came into power with Henry VIII in England. So "what goes around, comes around," deja vu!

The Red Horse of the Apocalypse, war, came about during the 30 years War of Germany from 1618 to 1648. That war destroyed the majority of the people of Germany at the time. This was the time in the Jews' minds when it was stated during World War II: "Germany must be turned into a waste land, as happened there during the 30‑year War." ^[92] Because of it, many of the old families of the United States, came to this country from 1630 to 1650 to escape its wrath. That war didn't create any better government either but it made huge sums of money for a few. Throughout history, the already wealthy took advantage of the tribulations with new ideas to make more money. Great epochs fell to be replaced with new eras, some for the better and some for the worse. The lesson to be learned is that the international money barons have always used tragedies to catapult themselves into more money and more power.

So where are we today? An epoch is ending. Carroll Quigley called it the era of Monopoly Capitalism. The entire world is writhing in agony as the old epoch dies. A new system of capitalism is now forming, just as in the past, the money cartels will try to take advantage of it for their own benefit. "For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now." ^[93]

It has been said that the Twentieth Century ended on November 8th, 1994. What is meant by that statement? That election is said to have reversed a century-long trend towards big government. Federalism, the term of an all powerful, centralized government, was reborn at the beginning of this century, mainly here in the United States. The alliance between big government and big corporations in the United States became the undisputed boss of the world. When the United States sneezed, the rest of the world caught pneumonia. When the United States demanded something of another sovereign nation, they reluctantly but obediently obliged.

The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse have been busy throughout this century just as they have in years past. In fact, there have been more people to die (in terms of numbers but not percentages), mostly with the Red Horse of war, in this century than at any other period of time in recorded history. People of all ethnic groups and religious persuasions have been the target of the war-making machines of this century. Whatever the number really was in the so-called holocaust, the vast majority of those who succumbed were Christians. It has been conservatively estimated that well over 100 million Christians have been exterminated by those who create war since, but not including, World War II alone!

This century has experienced a significant increase in the number of earthquakes. From the tenth through the eighteenth centuries great quakes struck from one to three times each century. Great earthquakes are classified as being magnitude 8 or greater on the Richter scale. Great earthquakes are now occurring on an average of one or more each year. That is a significant increase by anyone's estimation. Records show a rise in the number of devastating storms and floods which have destroyed innumerable numbers of people along with their property all over the world. Famines have taken huge numbers of people, particularity in the third world nations. Only in the Western, and more industrialized nations, has food production exceeded the demands. Just as happened following the days of the Black Plague and the Thirty Years War, the "peasants have become restless, as the saying goes! Different peoples in nations all over the world are once again clamoring for their right to exist and survive. Additionally, they want their survival to be within their own ethnic group."

Because of the world-wide influence of the Big Government-Big Corporation (Mystery Babylon) alliances of the United States, the dreams of ethnic separation remained in jeopardy. As recently as the affairs in Somalia and Iraq, the aver citizen in the United States has been willing for our country to be the policeman of the world. it is going to be a very hard pill indeed for Big Government to swallow but the vote in November, 1994 forced a change in their thinking.

The Government of the United States, and those who from behind the scenes control it, are now unsure of their actions. From interviews with American citizens and results of opinion polls, the American people are no longer so flamboyantly eager to meddle in other people's affairs. This is not going unnoticed by those who make and break nations with their money. Just as their forefathers did before them such as the period following the Black Plague of Europe, advantage is being taken by the money cartels of the current unrest. Indeed, they are once again using the dialectical materialism (controlled Hegellian dialectics) to take advantage of the ethnic unrest of the world's population. The situation in the old Yugoslavia is a case in point. That so-called war is as phoney as Clinton's three dollar bill! But all this additional wealth will not benefit Mystery Babylon in the end, for: "And he (Almighty God) shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people...The lofty looks of man shall be humbled, and the haughtiness of men shall be bowed down, and the Lord alone shall be exalted in that day. For the day of the Lord of hosts shall be upon every one that is proud and lofty, and upon every one that is lifted up; and he shall be brought low...the idols he shall utterly abolish. And they (the rich and powerful) shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into the caves of the earth, for fear of the Lord, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth. In that day a man shall cast him idols of silver, and his idols of gold, which they made each one for himself to worship, to the moles and to the bats; To go into the clefts of the rocks, and into the tops of the ragged rocks, for fear of the Lord, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth." ^[94]

What is another reason the rich and powerful will cast their gold and silver to the moles and bats? It is because they: "Go to now, Ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you. Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are motheaten. Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. Ye have heaped treasure together for the last days. Behold, the hire of the labourers who have reaped down your fields, which is of you kept back by fraud, crieth: and the cries of them which have reaped are entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth. Ye have lived in pleasure on the earth, and been wanton; ye have nourished your hearts, as in a day of slaughter. Ye have condemned and killed the just; and he doth not resist you." ^[95]

United Nations forces are placed in jeopardy in Bosnia among hostile forces in an ethnic conflict as "observers." The U.N. is told repeatedly to stay out of their private affairs. The U.N. continues and increases their presence with increasing threats. The Serbs take U.N. troops as hostages and consider them prisoners of war. The United States sends aircraft into the area and one is shot down. Congress, realizing the will of the American people following the November, 1994 elections so far (at the time of this writing) is refusing to allow the President to send troops into the area. The stage drama of this situation has not yet finished but if history is a teacher, attempts will be made to foment another significant war, perhaps even larger than either World War I or World War II. There is a reason for this. As was discussed earlier, money in huge quantities is to be made whenever the Four Horsemen ride!

"Wars are the Jews harvest, For with them we wipe out the Christians and get control of their gold. We have already killed 100‑million of them, and the end is not yet." ^[96]

Epochs do not end and new ones start overnight; it takes years usually for this phenomenon to be realized. It would appear that the end of World War II was the start of the downfall of the epoch now ending. The money cartels were well aware of it even at that time because, as we now know, they have had so much to do with making it happen. Sometimes it is so difficult for us to understand but God is in command of whatever happens. His purpose is to teach us the simple axiom that we cannot have a peaceful, tranquil, happy, fruitful life as a people unless we do it His way, and only His way.

"Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren: and the spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward. So Samuel rose up, and went to Ramah. But the spirit of the Lord departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the Lord troubled him." ^[97]; "Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the Lord hath not done it?"

As soon as we, as a Christian Nation, decide that we will do it God's way and then firmly tell our government to stop doing what they are doing, it will stop. In a small way that is what happened on November 8, 1994 because there are still enough Christians in America who have a Christian ethic. "Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you." ^[98]

Now if only the majority of our Christian brethren will understand that the "devil" there means any adversary and that they most often wear three piece pin-striped suits, we can get on with bringing America back to a Christian Republic! We will be well on our way to doing God's will and destroying Mystery Babylon.

The book "Tragedy and Hope" by Carroll Quigley was either purposefully or inadvertently published to inform us what was about to happen to us. Inasmuch as we are a firm believer in the Hegellian Dialectics and its misuse in Marx's Dialectical Materialism, it is almost certain that Quigley wrote the book to be used to accomplish the desires of the money cartels. Clinton, for example, was a devout student of Quigley at Georgetown University. A particular passage from that instruction book says this: "The economic disasters of two wars, a world depression, and the post-war fluctuations showed clearly by 1960 that a new economic organization of society was both needed and available. The lasses-faire competitive system had destroyed itself, and almost destroyed civilization as well, by its inability to distribute the goods it could produce. The system of monopoly capitalism had helped in this disaster, and clearly showed that its efforts, in Fascist countries, to protect its profits and privileges by authoritarian government and ultimately by war were unsuccessful because it could not combine conservatism in economic and social life with the necessary innovation and freedom in military and intellectual life to win the wars it could start. Moreover, Communism, on the winning side of the war, nonetheless showed that it, like any authoritarian system, failed to produce innovations, flexibility, and freedom; it could make extensive industrial advances only by copying freer peoples, and could not raise its standards of living substantially because it could not combine lack of freedom and force in political life and in the utilization of economic resources with the increased production of food and spiritual or intellectual freedom which were the chief desires of its own peoples.

This almost simultaneous failure of laissez faire, of economic Fascism, and of Communism to satisfy the growing popular demand both for rising standards of living and for spiritual liberty has forced the mid-twentieth century to seek some new economic organization. This demand has been intensified by the arrival on the scene of new peoples, new nations, and new tribes who by their demands for these same goods have shown their growing awareness of the problems, and their determination to do something about them. As this new group of underdeveloped peoples look about, they have been struck by the conflicting claims of the two great superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union. The former offered the goods the new peoples wanted (rising standards of living and freedom), while the latter seemed to offer methods of getting these goods (by state accumulation of capital, government direction of the utilization of economic resources, and centralized methods of over-all social planning) which might tend to smother these goals. The net result of all this has been a convergence of all three systems toward a common, if remote, system of the future."

There are several important points that Quigley made here that tells us what they are planning. He says that the "laissez-faire competitive system destroyed itself, and almost destroyed civilization as well, by its inability to distribute the goods it could produce." It is important to note that it was not laissez-faire that caused the trouble. It was the control of governments through embargoes, etc., that caused the problems of distribution. It is because of more government, not less government.

He wrote that monopoly capitalism helped in this disaster and, in Fascist countries, authoritarian government and war were unsuccessful because they could not combine conservatism in economic and social life with the necessary innovation and freedom in military and intellectual life to win the wars it could start. Knowledgeable observes of World War II will, without question, admit that Germany didn't have any trouble producing adequate weaponry.

He states that Communism was on the winning side of the war; then he says that Communism failed to satisfy the growing popular demand both for rising standards of living and for spiritual liberty. This has forced the mid-twentieth century to seek some new economic organization.

His statement in this regard at first appears to be an oxymoron. In reality he is right in that Communism is now the accepted way of life including here in the United States. It was bought and paid for by the unlimited sums of money we will be discussing shortly. A short 30 years ago those of us who were staunch anti-Communists were considered to be the true Americans and the Communists among us were the enemy.

Today it is the reverse; those who are the true Americans of 30 years ago and now criticize the government for acting as Communists are considered the enemy (racist, anti-Semitic, neo-Nazi, extremist, separatist, etc.). Another point must be made in this regard, Isn't it strange that the world is being forced into some new uncharted waters of economics by the money barons based on their claims that the system of laissez-faire has failed. They claim that laissez-faire has failed to satisfy demands for a rising standard of living and for spiritual liberty.

We have already seen that this new economic system that we have been forced into has resulted in our standard of living going down rapidly as well as our spiritual liberty. Our Constitutional freedoms are being destroyed in the process. We don't have a decreased authoritarian government because of this new system. We have a government now that many throughout the world have termed "Fascist." Anyone who is an old-fashioned basic Christian is now classified as a terrorist. So much for the accuracy of Carroll Quigley's statements. However, it is most important that he is telling us that the money cartels are creating a change in the economic system so that even more profits can be realized by their families. "Such a deal, I'm telling you. I guarantee it."

It, perhaps, is in order to quickly review the systems of finance and capitalism prevalent in the 1800's; it was a system of family ownership and capital which started a business that grew because of inventiveness, hard work, productivity and persistence. Such enterprises may have been personally and privately owned or they may have been incorporated as a private, family corporation. Oftentimes, because outside capital was needed, they became public corporations and sold stock in public stock are obvious but the system by and large was sustained. It is true, many of those who were in finance capitalism first obtained their operating capital through ill-gotten methods such as the Chinese Opium trade. That notwithstanding, there were many, if not most, who gathered their wealth honestly. Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, and others like them, are examples.

At the latter part of the last century, Monopoly Capitalism started its takeover; the perils of public stock became obvious. This was the system where competition was driven out by one family in the industry and great monopolies were formed. John D. Rockefeller and the oil empire he created is an example. Old John ruthlessly drove out all of his competitors through various means and most of them were dishonest, if not Constitutionally unlawful. There were literally thousands of assassinations throughout the oil industry during this period of time.

Then, things happened that caused the monopolies to fail. It wasn't because of anti-monopoly laws in themselves that did it. Those laws were part of the tools used to cause the change to the new system of Pluralist Economy. This is the system where outside money is used to purchase huge quantities of corporate stock in hostile takeovers of one corporation by another. Loopholes in the system were used to accomplish this. Leverage buyouts, derivative stock manipulations and buying on margins were systems used. But it took huge quantities of money to accomplish this. Where did these huge quantities of money come from?

At the outset this may sound simplistic but bear with us! It all started with the Rothschilds and that statement in itself is simplistic. Mayer Amschel Rothschild I (his real name was Amschel Mayer Bauer) was born in Germany in 1743 and died in 1812. Rothschild was an Ashkenazi an Eastern Jew from Khazaria. He married Gutter Schnaper in 1770 and they had a large family of five sons and five daughters. He was educated as a Rabbi but became the money lending agent for William IX, Landgrave of Hesse-Cassel.

He had five sons; all of them were specially-trained to become Captains of High Finance, Nathan, one of the sons showed exceptional ability and, at the age of twenty-one went to England with the definite purpose of securing control of the Bank of England. The purpose was to use this control to work in conjunction with his father and other brothers to set up, and consolidate, an International Banking Monopoly in Europe. The combined wealth of the International Banking Pool could then be used to further the secret ambitions his father had made known to all his sons.

In studying the World Revolutionary Movement it is important to remember that The Red Flag was the symbol of the French Revolution and every revolution since that time. More significant still is the fact that when Lenin, financed by the International Bankers, overthrew the Russian Government and established the first Totalitarian Dictatorship in 1917, the design of the flag was a Red Flag, with a Hammer and Sickle, with the Star of the Jews imposed. In 1773, when Mayer Rothschild was thirty years of age, he invited twelve other wealthy and influential men to meet him in Frankfort. His purpose was to convince them that if they agreed to pool their resources they could then finance and control the World Revolutionary Movement and use it as the Manual of Action to win ultimate control of the wealth, natural resources, and man-power of the entire world.

Rothschild revealed how the English Revolution had been organized. He pointed out the mistakes and errors that had been made. The revolutionary period had been too long. The elimination of reactionaries had not been accomplished speedily, had not been put into effective operation. Even after all these mistakes had been made the initial purpose of the revolution had been achieved. The bankers who instigated the revolution had established control of the national economy and consolidated the national debt. By means of intrigue carried out on an international scale they had increased the national debt steadily and by loaning the money to fight the wars and rebellions they had fomented since 1694.

Basing his arguments on logic and sound reasoning, Mayer Rothschild pointed out that the financial results obtained as the result of the English Revolution would be as nothing when compared to the financial rewards to be obtained by a French Revolution provided those present agreed to unity of purpose, and put into effect his carefully thought out and revised revolutionary plan. The project would be backed by all the power that could be purchased with their pooled resources. This agreement reached, Mayer Rothschild unfolded his revolutionary plan. By clever manipulation of their combined wealth it would be possible to create such adverse economic conditions that the masses would be reduced to a state bordering on starvation by unemployment.

By use of cleverly conceived propaganda it would be easy to place the blame for the adverse economic conditions on the King, his Court, the Nobles, the Church, Industrialists, and the employers of labor. Their paid propagandists would arouse feelings of hatred and revenge against the ruling classes by exposing all real and alleged cases of extravagance, licentious conduct, injustice, oppression, and persecution. They would also invent infamies to bring into disrepute others who might, if left alone, interfere with their over-all plans.^[99] After the general introduction to build up an enthusiastic reception for the plot he was about to unfold, Rothschild turned to a manuscript and proceeded to read a carefully prepared plan of action. The following is a condensed version of the plot by which the conspirators hope to obtain ultimate undisputed control of the wealth, natural resources, and man-power of the entire world. Compare these with the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion and you can see the similarities; proving that they were concocted by the same group of people.

1). The speaker started to unfold the plot by saying that because the majority of men were inclined to evil rather than to good the best results in governing them could be obtained by using violence and terrorism and not by academic discussions. The speaker reasoned that in the beginning human society had been subject to brutal and blind force which was afterwards changed to Law. He argued that Law was Force only in disguise. He reasoned it was logical to conclude that "by the laws of nature right lies in force."

2). He next asserted that political freedom is an idea and not a fact. He stated that in order to usurp political power all that was necessary was to preach 'Liberalism' so that the electorate, for the sake of an idea, would yield some of their power and prerogatives which the plotters could then gather together into their own hands.

3). The speaker asserted that the Power of Gold had usurped the power of liberal rulers even then, 1773. He reminded his audience that there had been a time when Faith had ruled but stated that once Freedom had been substituted for Faith the people did not know how to use it in moderation. He argued that because of this fact it was logical to assume that they could use the idea of Freedom to bring about 'Class Wars.' He pointed out that it was immaterial to the success of His plan whether the established government were destroyed by internal or external foes because the victor had of necessity to seek the aid of 'Capital' which 'Is entirely in our hands.' ^[100]

4). He argued that the use of any and all means to reach their final goal was justified on the grounds that the ruler who governed by a moral code was not a skilled politician because he left himself vulnerable and in an unstable position on his throne. He said 'those who wish to rule must have recourse to cunning and to make-believe because great national qualities, like frankness and honesty, are vices in politics.'

5). He asserted 'Our right lies in force. The word Right is an abstract thought and proves nothing. I find a new Right...to attack by the Right of the strong, and to scatter to the winds all existing forces of order and regulation, to reconstruct all existing institutions, and to become the sovereign Lord of all those who left to us the Rights to their powers by lying them down voluntarily in their 'Liberalism.'

6). He then admonished his listeners with these words 'The power of our resources must remain invisible until the very moment when it has gained such strength that no cunning or force can undermine it.' He warned them that any deviation from the Line of the strategical plan he was making known to them would risk bringing to naught 'The Labors of Centuries.'

7). He next advocated the use of 'Mob Psychology' to obtain control of the masses. He reasoned that the might of the Mob is blind, senseless, and unreasoning and ever at the mercy of suggestion from any side. He stated 'Only a despotic ruler can rule the Mob efficiently because without absolute despotism there can be no existence for civilization which was carried out Not by the masses, but by their guide, who-so-ever that person might be.' He warned 'The moment the Mob seizes Freedom in its hands it quickly turns to anarchy.'

8). He next advocated that the use of alcoholic liquors, drugs, moral corruption, and all forms of vice, be used systematically by their 'Agenturs' ^[101] to corrupt the morals of the youth of the nations. He recommended that the special 'agenturs' should be trained as tutors, lackeys, governesses, clerks and by our women in the places of dissipation frequented by the Goyim.^[102] He added, 'In the number of these last I count also the so-called society ladies who become voluntary followers of the others in corruption and luxury. We must not stop at bribery, deceit, and treachery when they should serve towards the attainment of our end.'

9). Turning to politics he claimed they had the Right to seize property by any means, and without hesitation, if by doing so they secured submission, and sovereignty. He pronounced 'Our State marching along the path of peaceful conquest has the Right to replace the horrors of wars by less noticeable and more satisfactory sentences of death necessary to maintain the 'terror' which tends to produce blind submission.'

10). Dealing with the use of slogans he said 'In ancient times we were the first to put the words 'Liberty,' 'Equality' and 'Fraternity' into the mouths of the masses...words repeated to this day by stupid poll-parrots; words which the would be wise men of the Goyim could make nothing of in their abstractness, and did not note the contradiction of their meaning and inter relation.' He claimed the words brought under their directions and control 'legions' 'Who bore our banners with enthusiasm.' He reasoned that there is no place in nature for 'Equality,' 'Liberty,' or 'Fraternity.' He said 'On the ruins of the natural and genealogical aristocracy of the Goyim we have set up the aristocracy of Money. The qualification for this aristocracy is Wealth which is dependent upon us.'

11). He next expounded his theories regarding war. In 1773 he set down a principle which the governments of Britain and the United States publicly announced as their joint policy in 1939. He said it should be the policy of those present to foment wars but to direct the peace conferences so that neither of the combatants obtained territorial gains. He said the wars should be directed so that the nations engaged on both sides would be placed further in their debt, and in the power of 'Our' Agenturs.

12). He next dealt with administration. He told those present that they must use their wealth to have candidates chosen for public office who would be 'servile and obedient to our commands, so they may readily be used as Pawns in our game by the learned and ingenious men we will appoint to operate behind the scenes of government as official advisers.' He added 'the men we appoint as 'Advisers' will have been bred, reared, and trained from childhood in accordance with our ideas to rule the affairs of the whole world.'

13). He dealt with propaganda, and explained how their combined wealth could control all outlets of public information while they remained in the shade and clear of blame regardless of what the repercussions might be due to the publication of libels, slanders, or untruths. The speaker said: 'Thanks to the Press we have got gold in our hands notwithstanding the fact that we had to gather it out of the oceans of blood and tears...But it has paid us even though we have sacrificed many of our own people. Each victim on our side is worth a thousand Goyim.'

14). He next explained the necessity of having their 'Agentur' always come out into the open, and appear on the scene, when conditions had reached their lowest ebb, and the masses had been subjugated by means of want and terror. He pointed out that when it was time to restore order they should do it in such a way that the victims would believe they had been the prey of criminals and irresponsible. He said, 'By executing the criminals and lunatics after they have carried out our preconceived 'reign of terror,' we can make ourselves appear as the saviors of the oppressed, and the champions of the workers.' The speaker then added 'We are interested in just the opposite...in the diminution, the killing out of the Goyim.'

15). He next explained how industrial depressions and financial panics could be brought about and used to serve their purpose saying 'Enforced unemployment and hunger, imposed on the masses because of the power we have to create shortages of food, will create the right of Capital to rule more surely than it was given to the real aristocracy, and by the legal authority of Kings.' He claimed that by having their agentur control the 'Mob,' the 'Mob' could then be used to wipe out all who dared to stand in their way.

16). The infiltration into continental Freemasonry was next discussed extensively. The speaker stated that their purpose would be to take advantage of the facilities and secrecy Freemasonry had to offer. He pointed out that they could organize their own Grand Orient Lodges within blue Freemasonry in order to carry on their subversive activities and hide the true nature of their work under the cloak of philanthropy. He stated that all members initiated into their Grand Orient Lodges should be used for proselytizing purposes and for spreading their atheistic-materialistic ideology among the Goyim. He ended this phrase of the discussion with the words, 'When the hour strikes for our sovereign Lord of all the World to be crowned these same hands will sweep away everything that might stand in his way.'

17). He next expounded the value of systematic deceptions, pointing out that their agentur should be trained in the sue of high sounding phrases, and the use of popular slogans. They should make the masses the most lavish of promises. He observed 'The opposite of what has been promised can always be done afterwards...that is of no consequence.' He reasoned that by using such words as Freedom and Liberty, the Goyim could be stirred up to such a pitch of patriotic fervor that they could be made to fight even against the Laws of God, and Nature. He added 'And for this reason after we obtain control the very Name of God will be erased form the 'Lexicon of life.' ^[103]

18). He then detailed the plans for revolutionary war; the art of street fighting; and outlined the pattern for the 'Reign of Terror' which he insisted must accompany every revolutionary effort 'Because it is the most economical way to bring the population to speedy subjection.'

19). Diplomacy was next discussed. After all wars secret diplomacy must be insisted upon 'in order that our agentur, masquerading as 'political,' 'Financial,' and 'Economic' advisers, can carry out our mandates without fear of exposing who are 'The Secret Power' behind national and international affairs.' The speaker then told those present that by secret diplomacy they must obtain such control 'that the nations cannot come to even an inconsiderable private agreement without our secret agents having a hand in it.'

20). Ultimate World Government the goal. To reach this goal the speaker told them 'It will be necessary to establish huge monopolies, reservoirs of such colossal riches, that even the largest fortunes of the Goyim will depend on us to such an extent that they will go to the bottom together with the credit of their governments on the day after the great political smash.' The speaker then added 'You gentlemen here present who are economists just strike on estimate the significance of this combination.'

�� 21). Economic war. Plans to rob the Goyim of their landed properties and industries were then discussed. A combination of high taxes and unfair competition was advocated to bring about the economic ruin of the Goyim as far as their national financial interests and investments were concerned. In the international field he felt they could be achieved by the careful control of raw materials, organized agitation among the workers for shorter hors and higher pay, and by subsidizing competitors. The speaker warned his co-conspirators that they must arrange matters, and contort conditions, so that 'the increased wages obtained by the workers will not benefit them in any way.'

22). Armaments. It was suggested that the building up of armaments for the purpose of making the goyim destroy each other should be launched on such a colossal scale that in the final analysis 'there will only be the masses of the proletariat left in the world, with a few millionaires devoted to our cause...and police, and soldiers sufficient to protect our interests.'

23). The New Order. The members of the One World Government would be appointed by the Dictator. He would pick men from among the scientists, the economists, the financiers, the industrialists, and from the millionaires because 'in substance everything will be settled by the question of figures.'

24). Importance of youth. The importance of capturing the interest of youth was emphasized with the admonition that 'Our agenturs should infiltrate into all classes, and levels of society and government, for the purpose of fooling, bemusing, and corrupting the younger members of society by teaching them theories and principles we know to be false.'

25). National and International Laws should not be changed but should be used as they are, to destroy the civilization of the Goyim 'merely by twisting them into a contradiction of the interpretation which first masks the law and afterwards hides it altogether. Our ultimate aim is to substitute Arbitration for Law.' The speaker then told his listeners "You may think the Goyim will rise upon us with arms, but in the West we have against this possibility an organization of such appalling terror that the very stoutest hearts quail...the 'Underground'...the Metroplitans...The subterranean corridors...these will be established in the capitals and cities of all countries before that danger threatens."� The use of the word "WEST" has great significance. It makes it plain that Rothschild was addressing men who had joined the World Revolutionary Movement which was started in the Pale of Settlement in the "EAST." It must be remembered that before Amschel Moses Bauer (Rothschild) settled down in Frankfort, Germany, he had followed his trade as a gold and silversmith, traveling extensively in the "East" of Europe, where he had undoubtedly met the men his son Amschel Mayer addressed AFTER he developed from a money-lender into a banker and established "The House of Rothschild" in the Judenstrasse where the above meeting is said to have taken place in 1773.

* Regarding Mayer Amschel and his relations with William IX, the "Jewish Encyclopedia" states: "He became an agent of William IX, Landgrave of Hesse-Cassel, who on his father's death in 1785 had inherited the largest private fortune in Europe (estimated at $40,000,000 - which would equate out to about $200,000,000,000 today) derived mainly from the hire of troops to the British government for the putting down of the revolution in the United States...After the battle of June 1806 the Landgrave fled to Denmark, leaving $3,000,000 with Mayer Rothschild for safe keeping.

According to legend this money was hidden away in wine casks and escaping the search of Napoleon's soldiers when they entered Frankfort, was restored intact in the same casks in 1814 when the elector returned to the electorate. The facts are somewhat less romantic and more business like."

Those are simply nice terms for saying Rothschild absconded with the money. Amshel gave the money to his son Nathan and directed him to take it to London and, again from the "Jewish Encyclopedia," this is what happened: "Nathan Rothschild invested it in 800,000,000 pounds of gold from the East India company, knowing that it would be needed for Wellington's peninsula campaign. He made no less than four profits: (1) on the sale of Wellington's paper (which he bought at 50 cents on the dollar and collected at par); (2) on the sale of gold to Wellington; (3) on its re-purchase; and (4) on forwarding it to Portugal. This was the beginning of the great fortune."

Nathan was said to be very shrewd, unscrupulous and uncouth. Because of those "attributes" he parlayed the original $3,000,000 to $7,500,000,000 by the time of his death. This was just from the English branch of the family. Amshel Rothschild initiated a very strict code of conduct and purpose within his family. That code was developed around four points: (1) The eldest son of the eldest son was to be the head and ruler of the fortune; (2) The inter-marriage of cousins was demanded. This was accomplished to keep the fortune within the dynasty. According to the "Jewish Encyclopedia," out of 48 marriages, 29 had been between cousins. The other marriages were to influential and wealthy Jews to further garnish the fortunes into a consolidated total wealth; (3) The unity of the family fortune and its concealment was accomplished; and (4) A perpetual family partnership was assured. Obviously, if the Christian family had more unity and less self-righteousness, we as a people would make their dynasty look like school children.

Lionel, Nathan's eldest son, succeeded him as head of Nathan's firm. Lionel loaned money to the British government which included $40 million for the Irish famine, $80 million for the Crimean War, $40 million to Egypt. He provided funds for the purchase of Suez Canal shares, the payment of the French indemnity to Germany and he directed the finances of the Austrian Empire. These "magnanimous" gestures earned him a seat in the British Parliament. That didn't come easy, though. He was elected the first time but he would not take the oath with a Bible with the New Testament in it! He was elected the second time with the same results. After his third election, they changed the rules and allowed him to take his oath without the New Testament included!

The English branch of the dynasty extends to the United States. Here in America, as of the time of World War II, the Rothschild dynasty owned the New York banks (with the possible exception of two) and included the control of the New York Federal Reserve Bank. They owned the insurance companies, the railroads, 70% of the steel industry, 80% of the press, news, advertising agencies, and 80% of the movie industry.

At the time of World War II, it can be conservatively estimated that they owned one-half of the total wealth of the United States. Obviously, that wealth will not be much greater. It is estimated that the Rothschild dynasty owns over fifty percent of the wealth of the world. That seems preposterous until one realizes the complexity of their organization with the multitude of front organizations that act in their behalf. They still own and control those organizations and thus realize the profits generated by them.

That control of the American economy was gradual and thus the American people never realized, and still do not, what was happening, particularity since the news media was owned by these people. The book "Our Crowd" by Stephen Birmingham, Harper and Roe, New York, reveals this early relationship between the Sephardic Jews from Western Europe and the Ashkenazi Jews form Eastern Europe. "The German Jews (Ashkenazi from Khazaria), by the 1870's, were called 'Forty-Eighters,'" after the pivotal year of their migration from Germany. A careful distinction was drown between Jews of the "Nathan type," and those of the "Seligman type," between the "better class of Jews," and "vulgar Jews," between "Sephardic" and "German (Ashkenazi)," and, finally between "refined Hebrew ladies and gentlemen" and "Jews." The more the Germans insisted that they were "Hebrews," not "Jews," the more the Sephardim tried to disassociate themselves from the accented newcomers by stressing their ancient Spanish heritage...it began to be clear that, no matter how much they might wish to be, immigrant Germans (Ashkenazi Jews) were not really quite "American."

Then an Ashkenazi man named August Belmont arrived among the Sephardics. Birmingham writes this about him, "The first thing New York society noticed about August Belmont was that he had lots of money. It was Rothschild money, to be sure, but he used it lavishly. As a financier with the funds of the world's largest private bank at his fingertips, he was immediately important not only to American companies but to the United States Government, which was always running out of cash and whose credit needed constant infusions from bankers. August Belmont became a figure, both as a host and as a guest, at New York parties. He spoke some Italian, a little Spanish, a little French, and all three languages with an atrocious accent, but nobody in New York knew the difference. It was exciting to hear him drop phrases in foreign tongues, and he was admired for his hand kissing 'Continental manner.'"

This was the start of the Ashkenazi invasion of the American economy and the change in the United States, and the world's economic system. In very short order other names were added to the list; the Warburgs, the Schiffs, etc.

According to Judith Ehrlich, the author of the book "The New Crowd" (ISBN 0060973528), the Ashkenazi Jews (mainly the Rothschilds) now own most of the Wall Street firms. Through this ownership the change in shifting to the Pluralist Economy as reported by Carroll Quigley is secured. We should not be confused between the book "Our Crowd" by Birmingham which portrays the wealth and power of the Sephardic crowd and the book "The New Crowd" by Judith Ehrlich. The title "The New Crowd" in itself tells us that there was a monumental change in the monied families in the United States. The European branches of the Rothschild dynasty fared just as well. One of the Rothschild clan married into the Sassoon family. Through this connection they own and control the banks of India and China. As previously stated the Sassoons were heavily involved in the Chinese Opium trade. Obviously that trade is continuing today with the United States and Europe being the target for their sales.

Cecil Rhodes (Rhodes Scholarship benefactor) as an agent for the English branch of the Rothschilds. In that capacity Rhodes, along with the Oppenheimers, were able to defraud the Boers out of the rights to the diamonds under their land in South Africa. There have been billions upon billions of dollars realized out of the sales of those diamonds by the Rothschild dynasty.

We hear so much about the English branch of the Rothschild family being so beneficial to the British Empire since they were and are ostensibly a part of their economic community. If that be the case, why is it then that England is practically destitute today with their Empire destroyed? The British Empire was destroyed because the Rothschilds absconded with the money! The Rothschild clan are citizens of no country. Their allegiance is, and always has been, to political Zionism.

To this day England, and the United States Eastern Establishment, are living under the delusion that the English branch of the Rothschild dynasty operates their financial affairs to the best interests of both countries. Nothing could be further from the truth. The stock markets, banks, insurance companies and the industrial infrastructure of both countries all work for the worldwide Rothschild Zionist Empire (Mystery Babylon). That is a hard pill to swallow but neither of our countries control their own destinies.

Reviewing the lineage with respect to the financial operations (the nobility or kingship line is somewhat different), Amshel was succeeded upon his death by Nathan. Nathan married the sister-in-law of Moses Montefiore, a Sephardic Jew who at the time ruled the financial affairs of the British Empire, which really meant the entire world at that time. By that marriage the Sephardic and the Ashkenazi branches were united.

We have previously discussed the dialectics being used in the contest between the Sephardic and the Ashkenazi Jews. It would appear that dialectical materialism is being used to create a synthesis to the liking of both sides of the house. It would then likewise indicate that the ongoing fight between the Grand Orient and English Freemasonry is dialectical materialism in action.

Back to the Rothschild clan. Nathan was succeeded by Lionel, the eldest son, who was the managing partner of the English branch at the time. Lionel was elected to the Parliament after some skullduggery over the oath of office and the Bible as previously mentioned. Lionel was succeeded by Lionel's eldest son, also named Nathan Mayer. This Nathan became Lord Rothschild I over the objection of Queen Victoria. She already realized the ill consequences that were looming on the horizon.

Nathan Mayer Rothschild (Lord Rothschild I) was succeeded by Lionel Walter Rothschild who became Lord Rothschild II. It was this man, Lionel Walter who was a very intimate friend of Theodore Hertzl, the founder of political Zionism and the dream for a Jewish homeland which was to be built with the plans of world domination, financial and political. It was reasoned by the Rothschilds that the financial aspects of world domination control the political affairs. The Golden Rule to them, is, "He who has the gold makes the rules!"

Amshel Myer Rothschild, the originator of the dynasty, started his fortune using the money he absconded from the estate of William IX, Landgrave of Hesse-Cassel. It is poignant that the money originally came from King George III to pay for the Hessian troops acting as mercenaries fighting the Americans in our Revolutionary War. Was it more than coincidence that Amshel Rothschild also ordered Adam Wieshaupt to prepare the Illuminati documents undoubtedly using some of that money? Both England and the United States are now paying for that terrible mistake that King George made. In the book, "The Rothschilds," J. Reeves wrote: "To the Rothschilds nothing could have occurred more propitiously than the outbreak of the American revolt and that of the French Revolution, as the two enabled them to lay the foundation of the immense wealth they have since acquired."

As we have previously stated, Adam Wieshaupt was born in 1748. Wieshaupt was Jewish according to the Frenchman Pouget de Saint-Andre. He became a professor and a Jesuit and in that capacity, he taught religious law at the University of Inglostadt in Southern Germany. He founded the Illuminati on May 1, 1776 with only five members. There were only about 60 members by 1780. It was what they taught and their influence that is important. They taught revolutionary ideas to Masonic lodges and in 1777 he joined the Masons. By 1779, he was in control of the Grand Orient lodge named "Theodore of Good Counsel." This attests to his prowess as a teacher.

In 1782 Amschel Rothschild ordered Weishaupt to his Frankfort address and hired him to organize the Grand Orient to do Rothschilds bidding in the World Revolutionary Movement. He did his work very well because he was able to cover Germany with enclaves of revolutionaries and he was able to send thousands of assassin into Paris. Just as in Russia in 1917, these assassins were mainly Jews, undoubtedly supplied by Rothschild. Money was no object because the entire conduct of the French Revolution was funded by the Rothschild clan. Amshel simply ordered his brother Jewish bankers to submit money for the cause.

According to the book "The Illuminoids" by Neal Wilgus, Sun Publishing Co. Albuquerque, the subject of the Illuminati was discussed at all levels of society here in America. After the Bavarian suppression of the Illuminati caused by the arrest of an Illuminati courier traveling from Frankfort to Paris with detailed instructions for the French Revolution, there was considerable debate on their influence here in this country. A preacher named Jedediah Morse, the father of Samuel F.B. Morse the inventor of the Morse Telegraph, gave a sermon on the evils of the Illuminatis. Jedediah charged that the Illuminati had infiltrated into the Masonic lodges here in this country.

President John Adams replied to the charges by implying that the Masons were capable of corruption and that they must possess the power of compelling all members to keep a secret. Thomas Jefferson replied by praising quotations from Weishaupt. George Washington replied that he, "did not believe that the lodges of Freemasons in this country had, as societies, endeavored to propagate the diabolical tenets of the Illuminati or the Jacobisn." Of the three president, only John Adams understood the potential problems. John Adams was the only one of the three who was not a Mason.

Neal Wilgus reports that Michael P. Merlie of the University of Wisconsin conducted a genealogical study on the past president of the United States. He shows that, up through Jimmy Carter, out of the 37 preceding presidents, 21 were close relatives. Merlie reports that does not include the relationships through marriages.

Those relationships would include the marriage, for example, of Nixon's daughter to the Cox and Livingston clans of Presidents James Monroe, Zachary Taylor and Taylor's third cousin, James Madison. That would also include Jefferson Davis of the confederacy since he was the son-in-law of Zachary Taylor.

According to Merile, Thomas Jefferson and William Henry Harrison were near cousins and both of them were related to Andrew Jackson and John Tyler, all of whom descended from William Armistead. From the same family came Calvin Coolidge, Harry Truman, and Lyndon Johnson.

According to the "Masonic Temple Topics" of June, 1976, the following presidents were Masons: Washington, Jefferson, Madisonm, Monroe, Jackson, Polk, Buchanan, A. Johnson, Garfield, McKinley, T. Roosevelt, Taft, Hardin, F. Roosevelt, Truman and Ford. Why is this knowledge important? It reflects the mental conditioning and thoughts of a significant number of our presidents with respect to the Freemasonry movement, both the English and the Grand Orient.� It shows the relationship between the Rothschild dynasty and Freemasonry and particularity the Illuminati. George Washington's quote doesn't appear to be too critical of the relationship. We will probably never know if he, along with the rest of them, were knowledgeable of the Rothschild connection and the conspiratorial relationship to World Zionism.

"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." ^[104]

From "Iron Curtain Over America," by Col. John Beaty we read: "In a small but extremely valuable book, 'The American As He is,' President Nicholas Murray Butler of Columbia University in 1908 called attention to the fact that Christianity in some one of its many forms is a dominant part of the American nature. Butler, then at the zenith of his intellectual power, expressed fear that our capacity to subdue and assimilate the alien elements brought by immigration may soon be exhausted. He concluded accordingly that the dangers which confront America will come, if at all, from within."

Was our Christian country being preserved to the best ability of our presidents? Again from "Iron Curtain Over America": "...after 1880 and particularly in the first two decades of the Twentieth Century, immigration to the United States from Eastern Europe increased rapidly. The Eastern European immigrant Jews brought with them the worn our concept of a Jewish people. Soon these newcomers of nationalist persuasion actually exerted influence over the old and once anti-nationalist organization of American Reform Judaism. In the winter of 1941-'42 the Central Conference of American Rabbis had endorsed the campaign to organize a Jewish Army. The event indicated the capitulation of the leadership of Reform Judaism to Jewish Nationalism. Many American-minded Jews protested, but the voices were disorganized and therefore could be safely ignored. American Jewry had succumbed to the relentless pressure of the Zionists.

Since the predominant new Jews consider themselves superior people and a separate nationality ^[105], the assimilation appears not to be out of the question. America now has virtually a nation within the nation, and an aggressive culture-conscious nation at that."

From Col. Beaty's book we learn that the earlier Sephardic Jews in America were demonized by the Ashkenazis in much the same way as Christian conservatives are today, and even more so since the Oklahoma bombing disaster. Also note that these Ashkenazis were able to organize a Jewish army. Take note also that these same Ashkenazis are at the forefront of demonizing those Christians who are fulfilling their Second Amendment rights for the citizen's militia.

Since our presidents have come from Western European stock and particularity from Britain, their affinity for Freemasonry would most probably be of the English Freemasonry movement. Thus, the dialectical fight between English Freemasonry and the Grand Orient as portrayed in the book "Scarlet and the Beast" appears to be just that, smoke and mirrors. Albert Pike's "Morals and Dogma" is still the "bible" of both branches. Albert Pike is adamant about the destruction of Christianity. Is that not the same goal of this "nation within a nation" that Col. Beaty discussed?

It has been estimated that only about one in five thousand Masons realize what is happening. Most are ordinary people and they have no idea that they, too, are being manipulated for a sinister purpose. How much better would everything be if the Masons were taught The Body of Christ instead of The Brotherhood of man!

"It is said that history does not repeat itself. That's very foolish. The history of our planet is made up of successive voids and of the ruins that others have strewn about as they each had their turn, and that some have at times regenerated.

For the West is empty, even if it has not yet become really aware of it. An extraordinarily inventive civilization, surely the only one capable of meeting the challenges of the third millennium, the West has no soul left. At every level - nations, races, cultures, as well as individuals - it is always the soul that wins the decisive battles. It is only the soul that forms the weave of gold and brass from which the shields that save the strong are fashioned. I can hardly discern any soul in us." ^[106]

That quote from Jean Raspail is so poignant and so true. There is only one reason why our beloved nation has lost its soul. It is because we have given up our close relationship with Jesus Christ. It was Christianity that forged the European nations out of wilderness. It was Christianity that created the United States. When we collectively allow any belief or system to remove or otherwise deny the Christian principles form our system of government, we will have lost our soul as a nation. That has already been accomplished.

Mainline Christianity in American has become a toothless tiger. It has become masochistic in that the churches seem to be deriving great pleasure in assuming guilt for something for which they are not responsible. This malady has so completely consumed the once Christian America that the entire fabric of our society has been corrupted. The word malady has two meanings: (1) A sickness of the body and, (2) A moral defect or corruption. Mainline Christianity, and thus America, possesses both definitions.

What is that guilt and how did it develop? Christianity has assumed the responsibility for all of the oppressions against the Jews, Blacks and the Hispanics of the world from whatever source, real or imaginary. This has created a situation where a minority portion of society is allowed to do anything it wants with near total impunity while the majority of society suffers in silence and the Christian Churches love to have it so. This enigma has penetrated every facet of our lives, from the government at the highest level to the discussions in the local coffee shops. The paradox can even be seen in the affairs of the Oklahoma City bombing.

The Apostle Paul said: "For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not self-willed, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre; But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy, temperate; Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers. For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake. One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are always liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth." ^[107]

April 19, 1995: The Oklahoma City Bombing: This is separated from the first one because of its significance to what is happening in America today. Revelation 13 describes the rise of an end time social system that will bear rule over all the earth. It reveals that this end time system is really a battle for world dominance, the minds of the people. The rise of this government will parallel the military rise of other nations; it will become a police state. No nation or individual will eventually be able to resist it by force because it will control all the major types of arms in the world. This is coming in the United States, and we believe that these two parts will prove it to your satisfaction, if you will only take time to study them and other facts that you personally know of, that is not in these.

This end of the age World Government or New World Order will be anti-God, anti-Christ, and will strive to exterminate the Christians of the world. The Persecution of Christians will become a reality in the United States and the other Christian Nations of the World. How will it finally gain military control? Let's explore some thoughts of others who have written about the Oklahoma City bombing and gain some of their insights.

Fascist Terror Stalking America, by Texe Marrs: "Ye have lived in pleasure on the earth, and been wanton; ye have nourished your hearts, as in a day of slaughter. Ye have condemned and killed the just; and he doth not resist you." ^[108]

It is fair to say that Bill Clinton is, in fact, a fascist. A fascist is a strange, hybrid creature who combines the most effective, and most virulent, strains of both Nazism and Communism. The fascist believes in a totalitarian government, but one ruled behind the scenes by a wealthy elite, such as the CFR and Trilateral Commission (Skull and Bones, Bildeburgers, Illuminati, etc.). The fascist despises God, for he believes himself to be divine. The fascist deceitfully uses and manipulates the masses. From the rich he privately obtains his awesome power. From the deluded people he obtains his authority, which he wields with cruel and terrible effectiveness. Yes, Bill Clinton is a fascist. And today it is the fascists who stalk America. The modern-day fascist tyrants, however, have not changed much from those of the past. Bill Clinton, like Hitler and Mussolini before him, tells outrageous lies.

He lies about what really happened in Waco, and he cynically uses the Oklahoma City tragedy to arouse public fear and incite public anger toward perceived "enemies." Mr. Clinton manipulates this fear and anger to achieve the hidden agenda of the Illuminati (Zionist/One World elitists who control him from behind the scenes) elite; the granting of dictatorial police powers and the setting aside of our nation's Bill of Rights.

In London's Daily Telegraph Newspaper, historian John Keegan recently penned an article under the title, "Who Says A Hitler Could Never Happen Again?" Keegan observed, "People...cannot tolerate chronic insecurity. They crave civil peace almost as much as they need food. If denied it, they will give their loyalty to anyone who can assure it; they will also sanction any measures this Leviathan - as Hobbes called this bringer of security - deems necessary to restore order." "Hitler's genius," Keegan continues, "was for playing on the fears and anxieties of ordinary men and women" who, frightened and desperate for order, agreed "to the whole apparatus of social control that Hitler installed, when he achieved power - With Their Votes."

Keegan points out that the people, feeling themselves under pressure from a "collection of terrorists, fanatics, and criminals, assented to police state tactics, deprivation of civil rights, imprisonment without trial, judicial murder, and eventually, mass extermination of the enemies of the people."

To those who say that it couldn't happen today, not with an enlightened media, Keegan responds by reminding us that, in fact, the Media were the greatest promoters of Nazi fascism and were among the warmest advocates of Adolf Hitler's totalitarian program. "Hitler's real genius," says Keegan, "was in public relations...The German press, radio, and cinema applauded the Nazi assault on 'anti-social and criminal elements' every step of the way."

And so we return again to 1995, to Bill Clinton, and to an anxious and fearful America. Clinton's unconstitutional agenda, as was Hitler's, is applauded by the media. Even the gassing and burning to death of the 17 children inside the Branch Davidian compound in Waco is described as a righteous act by an honest and virtuous President and Attorney-General. The German people had their Reichstag. The Americans now have their Oklahoma City. Apparently the devil never changes his ways, and neither do his fascist agents here on planet earth.

Who Profits?: No one but an insane sadist, or a scheming totalitarian, would have participated in or applauded the Oklahoma City Bombing. Who, then, did profit from this otherwise senseless act of sheer terror? You know, and I know, the answer. In a manner frighteningly reminiscent of Josef Stalin's purges in Soviet Russia and Hitler's propagandistic Nazi era, Bill Clinton, Janet Reno, and their totalitarian comrades are cynically using this tragedy to demand special, dictatorial police powers. How disgustingly convenient, how cruelly perfect, how devilishly advantageous to the long-cherished agenda of Bill Clinton and his New World Order superiors was this monstrous firebombing and massacre in Oklahoma City! Truly, God's Word is astute, for we read in Proverbs 8:36: "All they that hate me love death."

I know that we are repeating ourselves but please bear with us, for we believe that the following must be read again, so that it will sink in more clearly.

Enemies of the State: Both the government and the media agree: certain, designated "enemies" must be stopped. Federal law enforcement agencies, we are told, must be given the maximum authority to shut the mouths of dissidents. Republicans and Democrats alike in Congress seem determined to give to federal authorities dictatorial tools to end what the media describes as "the threat to public security posed by dangerous, anti-government factions."

America is being told that so-called "extremist, right-wing" groups must be thoroughly investigated, even if they are not suspected of actual crimes. For the good of the nation, they MUST be confronted with far-reaching, police state tactics. Among the extremist groups identified by the media and the government as threats to national security are the following; look and see if you or someone you know could be on Big Brother's enemy hit list. Check to see if you are a designated "enemy of the state:"

* Pro-lifers, who oppose abortion, all of whom, the government and media claim, are guilty of a national conspiracy to firebomb abortion clinics and murder abortion doctors.

* Christian Fundamentalists, especially those who believe in a coming apocalypse, a literal Armageddon, the last days' rise of Mystery Babylon, and the imminent return of Jesus Christ.

* Conspiracy Theorists, especially those who warn of a "New World Order" or who criticize the United Nations.

* Farmers and Ranchers, because they oppose the "wisdom" of new environmental regulations and the government's management of their lands and homesteads. Of course, only the little farmers and ranchers are threats, the big, "agribusiness" titans are government-approved!!!

* Internet and Fax users, because they are supposedly guilty of spreading so-called "hate" messages by computer and over the fax lines.

* Gun Owners, vilified because they allege that the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees to the citizenry "the right to keep and bear arms." This, we are told, is a dangerous and inflammatory idea.

* Militia Members, targeted because they expose the heinous and murderous acts perpetrated by the FBI and BATF in Waco, and Ruby Creek, things that the national media and the government prefer the American people not find out.

* Conservative Talk Show Hosts, because they provide forums where the enslaved working classes, American patriots, Biblical Christians, and other anti-New World Order voices stir up discontent and distrust of Big Brother Government - which, of course, is a decided no-no as far as the elitists are concerned.

* Tax Protesters, because they simply don't understand that it is a "good thing" for our friends at the IRS to exercise such massive and unconstitutional police powers over the suffering and ever more paying citizenry. How else can we pay for the police state, for all those much-needed government welfare programs, and for all that foreign aid?

* Constitutionalists, because of their unacceptable belief that the wording of the Bill of Rights is to be taken literally. Constitutionalists are also said to be extreme because they oppose the New World Order and warn of a coming, one world government system which would make obsolete the need for our "old and antiquated" national constitutional.

* Tenth Amendment Advocates, especially to be watched and beaten down are those who believe in the Tenth Amendment, which states that those powers not specifically delegated to the federal government, "are reserved to the states or to the people." This, say the media and the politicians in Washington, D.C. (District of Corruption) is a disturbing and revolutionary notion!

* Patriots, because they cherish the "Old America" the land that once belonged to the brave and the free, before today's socialist rot set in.

* Armed Forces Personnel, because they despise their "heroic," draft-dodging, U.S. military-loathing, Commander-in-chief. These men and women oppose PDD-25, the government's directive to turn over command of the U.S. military forces to United Nations' controllers. Many uniformed personnel are also "America Firsters," and this presents a roadblock to the glorious, soon coming New Age of one-worldism.

* Right-Wing Extremists, all of the people in the above categories, plus many more "anti-government" agitators, for example, home schoolers, objectors to homosexual conduct, etc., are lumped together and labeled as "right-wing extremists." The nation is being encouraged to distrust, investigate, watch, despise, and quarantine these terrible people.

Chipping Away At Freedom, by William Norman Grigg: In an address denouncing the French Revolutionary terror two centuries ago, Noah Webster observed that governments always justify the criminal aggrandizement of their powers by deploying "the old state plea of necessity." As Congress finishes work on the "Comprehensive Terrorism Prevention Act," a measure which will continue the unconstitutional enrichment of federal police powers, the air is thick with invocations of the "necessity" defense. "Necessity" has no stronger champion than Representative Charles Schumer (D-HY), a veteran anti-gun zealot. Schumer explains that restraints on federal power must be lifted, because "in wartime, it's different than peacetime. In terrorism time, it's different from peacetime."

Remarkably, at least one supporter of the Senate version of the Terrorism Prevention Act has candidly admitted that the measure will lead to abuses of individual liberty. During Senate debate over the bill, Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) declared, "It is disturbing to me when the Congress is faced with a decision to increase protection for the people by chipping away at the edges of freedom. But in this case, the imperative is clear."

Although Murray admonished her colleagues that "we as elected officials have an...obligation to keep from unnerving the people we are trying to protect," her remarks could not fail to unnerve the attentive: "We have no idea what kind of mistakes will be made, or whose rights will be infringed, when this bill is implemented...While we can take comfort knowing this bill strengthens the hand of law enforcement to aggressively pursue terrorists, none of us should take comfort in what it might mean for 'innocents' caught in the middle as the anti-terrorism effort 'intensifies.'

It will be critically important," emphasized Murray, "for law enforcement officials of all types...to protect the citizens that go along with the kind of broad new powers we are bestowing upon them."

Centralization of Power: The rationale for this enrichment of federal power, of course, was the April 19th bombing in Oklahoma City. However, there was public ambivalence regarding the proposed anti-terrorism legislation even in the immediate aftermath of the bombing. A Time/CNN poll conducted on April 27th found that 61 percent of the surveyed public believed that "the federal government...already has enough power" to investigate U.S. citizens; 60 percent of those polled responded that they were worried about abuses of power "if the federal government were given more powers in order to combat terrorism."

In spite of the public's unease, President Clinton has insisted that an anti-terrorism measure must be passed as quickly as possible, before political support for new federal powers dissipates altogether. As of this writing, the Senate has passed its version of the bill (S. 735), and the House version (H.R. 1710) has been voted out of committee for consideration by the entire House.

Both the Senate and House versions of the measure would create new federal powers to conduct wiretap surveillance and to collect information from private transactions. The Senate bill provides $1.8 billion to hire new federal law enforcement officers and creates a new FBI counter-terrorism center. In addition, S. 735 expands the predicate offenses under the Racketeer-Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, a measure which may be used to criminalize political associations (It is already being used against pro-life activists, and "some" Christian churches, whose pastor does not preach government approved sermons).

Both the Senate and House measures would relax the posse comitatus guidelines which prevent the direct involvement of the military in domestic law enforcement. Furthermore, the House version of the measure would permit the federal government to define nearly any crime involving a gun as a act of "terrorism" that would therefore fall under the scope of the bill. The Senate's bill does contain some useful provisions dealing with the threat posed by "international terrorism." The measure provides for more rapid deportation of suspected aliens and bans organizational and fund-raising efforts on behalf of foreign terrorist groups. It also contains a welcome limit on death row appeals. Significantly, these provisions, which target real terrorists and convicted criminals, were loudly denounced by many liberal senators who eventually voted for the measure.

Hastily Crafted Bills: The Clinton administration's original bill, H.R. 896 (sponsored by Representative Charles Schumer), contained all the troublesome provisions which are found in the present Senate and House bills. Further, as David Kopel of the Independence Institute observes, the administration's original bill "abolished...all jurisdictional restraints on federal agencies." Additionally, the President would have been given the power to designate any group, foreign or domestic, as a "terrorist" organization. Given Mr. Clinton's dyspeptic fulminations about "right-wing extremists," talk radio hosts, and gun rights advocates, it is not difficult to imagine how such powers would have been used.

In modified form, the original Clinton administration bill was adopted by the Republican Senate leadership. Mike Hammond, a legislative analyst for Gun Owners of America, told The New America, "The Senate leadership simply took the Schumer bill, added some things, and removed some of its more objectionable features, and claimed it as its own. There were no hearings or witnesses."

The result met with the Clinton Administration's unqualified approval. As the New York Times pointed out, "Although drafted by the Republican majority, the legislation would give President Clinton most of the provisions he requested in a counter-terrorism measure."

As Senator Murray's remarks suggest, the Senate measure is intended to cast a wide and indiscriminate net. A crime may be designated a "terrorist offense" if it involves "the mail, or any facility utilized in interstate commerce," or "obstructs, delays, or affects interstate or foreign commerce in any way or degree..." This promiscuous use of the Constitution's commerce clause runs contrary to the Supreme Court's recent Lopez decision, in which the power delegated to the federal government are "few and defined," and that they do not amount to a general grant of police power over the nation. The substance of S. 735 illustrates that preserving the unconstitutional police power of the federal government is a priority for both the Clinton administration and the Republican Senate leadership.

Another provision of the Senate measure states that federal jurisdiction "shall exist over all principals, co-conspirators, and accessories after the fact" in any terrorism prosecution. Furthermore, one "accessory" if he "transfers an explosive material, knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such explosive material will be used to commit a crime of violence."

This remarkable subjective standard could be used to prosecute law-abiding firearms and explosives dealers, or, for that matter, fertilizer and fuel oil salesmen, who innocently make a sale to the wrong person; all the feds would be required to prove in such a case would be a "reasonable cause" to know how the products would be used. This offense carries a mandatory ten year prison sentence.

The Senate bill also contains a statement of "findings" which encourages the President to "undertake immediate efforts to develop multilateral efforts" to prevent international terrorism, and to use "all necessary means," including "military force." While American Presidents can properly use military force to prevent and punish acts of international terrorism, the Senate's findings use the threat of terrorism as a pretext for continued entanglement in NATO and other multilateral relationships which have no relationship to America's national interests.

Furthermore, S. 735 actually expands presidential authority to provide military assistance to terrorists states. Although the Senate measure decrees that "no assistance...shall be provided to the government of any country that provides lethal military equipment" to recognized terrorist states, it contains a self-nullifying codicil stating that such assistance may be provided if the President "determines that furnishing such assistance is important to the national interests of the United States..." (President Clinton is already using this provision in sending troops to Bosnia against Congressional or public opinion). This provision will be welcomed by the Clinton Administration, which has dispensed aid and other favors upon North Korea, China, and Russia...all of which sponsor terrorists...and upon such practitioners of terrorism as Hafez al Assad, Yasir Arafat and the Israelis.

Discretion and Rectitude: The House Judiciary Committee approved H.R. 1710 by a 23-12 vote on June 14th. Among the opponents of the measure were found several conservative Republicans who objected to its excessively broad firearms-related language: Terrorism, as defined in the measure, includes "the use of any explosive or firearm (other than for mere personal monetary gain) with intent to endanger, directly or indirectly, the safety of one or more individuals." The New York Times observed, "The committee members received [this] language just moments before it was to vote on it." The committee members therefore voted up-or-down on statutory language the implications of which were not entirely understood by the legislators.

Seeking to placate concerned members of his House Judiciary Committee, chairman Henry Hyde (R-IL) declared, "The use of a gun in a crime is a serious act. That doesn't offend my sense of rectitude to have that defined as terrorism." Representative Martin Hoke (R-OH) rejoined, "We don't want crimes of passion to be suddenly federalized." Hyde parried this complaint by asserting that "prosecutorial discretion" on the part of federal authorities would prevent such a result. Besides, Hyde insisted, an act of domestic violence "sounds pretty terroristic to me." Observing that his motivation was "to move the bill," Hyde assured his colleagues that a "better, more accurate definition" of terrorism could be substituted in the final version of the measure. "But meanwhile, we have a workable [definition]. It's not the worst in the world."

If constitutional limitations on federal police powers are to be limited only by the "prosecutorial discretion" of federal officials and Henry Hyde's storied "sense of rectitude," the Republic is in serious trouble. Associate Deputy Attorney 'General Andrew Fois, who was assigned by the Justice Department to monitor the legislation, approved of the committee's definition, explaining that "we proposed a definition that is broad enough to enforce our needs. The efforts are to narrow it." In short, the Clinton Administration's motley band of regulatory zealots (fellow fascists), gun-grabbers, and property-seizers will be satisfied with nearly any definition which enlarges federal authority. So much for "prosecutorial discretion."

As for Hyde's "rectitude," this dubious attribute led the congressman to support last year's ban on "assault" weapons; it has also inspired him to denounce as obsolete the Constitution's allocation of war-declaring power to the Congress. Other Republicans in Hyde's committee did not share their chairman's cavalier attitude regarding constitutional limitations on federal power. Following the vote, Representative Bob Barr (R-GA) remarked, "Under this definition, any crime that involves the use of firearms becomes a terrorist act, and then the provisions of this bill - making it easy for the federal government to wiretap or obtain financial records - apply...In addition, these all become federal offenses, and that cuts squarely against the grain [of] what I and the people in my district want me to be doing up here, which is to be narrowing the scope of federal activity, not vastly expanding it."

Similar views were expressed by Representative James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), who was also among the Republicans who opposed the bill in committee. Kathy Benz, Sensenbrenner's press secretary, told The New American that Sensenbrenner was firmly opposed to the measure on federalist grounds. Furthermore, recounted Benz, "The bill will give Janet Reno's Justice Department vastly expanded powers to intrude into the lives of private, law-abiding citizens on the basis of political beliefs."

Militarizing Law Enforcement: It has been frequently recalled that every dictatorship makes use of centralized and militarized law enforcement to suppress its subjects. Both of these tendencies were manifest in last year's Omnibus Crime Bill, and they are powerfully reinforced by this year's Terrorism Prevention Act. Liberal Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI), who voted against last year's crime bill on federalist grounds, was also among the eight salons who voted against the Senate's version of the anti-terrorism bill. He regards the terrorism bill as "a vehicle to undo some of the traditional barriers which separate the federal government from state and local law enforcement."

Feingold particularly takes issue with the revision of posse comitatus guidelines, which would allow the Attorney General to use the military to investigate incidents of biological and chemical terrorism: "This really goes over the line, because what it does is give the military, in cases of biological and chemical terrorism, new powers it has never had before, including the power of arrest in what are called exigent circumstances. I think this is a dangerous precedent."

Extending the principle contained in S. 735, Feingold explained, "It is possible to argue that the military should be involved in some sort of gun-related items [because] that involves the whole country. So this is a dangerous precedent, as well as one of the most dangerous departures from the protection of civilian law enforcement in the history of our country."

The Independence Institute's David Kopel shares Feingold's misgivings about weakening the posse comitatus guidelines. Kopel told The New American, "This is really a solution in search of a problem - or maybe a solution which can evolve into a real problem."

While acknowledging that chemical or biological terrorism is not an impossibility, Kopel indicated that there are preemptive measures which are compatible with the earlier posse comitatus guidelines: "There are perfectly permissible ways for the military to share its expertise regarding chemical and biological warfare with civilian law enforcement personnel. For example, it could train the FBI to deal with such threats, and the FBI could pass this along to local police, or perhaps military experts could train local police directly, as long as the military is not actually enforcing civilian law. This is a more elaborate solution, but it would help maintain one of the most important characteristics of a free society - a clear separation of roles between the military and civilian law enforcement."

Kopel is also critical of what he calls a "massive expansion of federal jurisdiction" created by the anti-terrorism legislation. Although Kopel is not sanguine about the threat of terrorism, he concludes that "there is nothing in this legislation that would have prevented the tragedy of Oklahoma City. There is, however, a lot which could be used to increase the vulnerability of American citizens to abuses of government power - State Terrorism."

An American Enabling Act?: Professor Angelo Codevilla of Boston University has written that the Terrorism Prevention Act "portends trouble" for American liberty, as "...the President's rhetoric has made it perfectly clear who, in his view, the country's potential terrorists are, and hence who the targets of the government's attentions will be. The standard developed after Oklahoma City - namely that possession of literature and frequent expression of opinions similar to those of people involved in violence - will enable the Clinton Justice Department to treat a wide variety of conservatives as threats to internal security. �These are not 'paranoid fantasies,'" Codevilla maintains. "This is the legacy of almost thirty years of the federalization and militarization of American law enforcement. What will happen if this panoply of weapons is put to the service of political passions and bureaucratic self-interest?"

One of the most prominent profiles in bureaucratic self-interest is that offered by ATF Director Stephen Higgins, the official who supervised the raid on the Branch Davidian congregation. In a July 2nd Washington Post op-ed column, Higgins petulantly attacked critics of the Waco raid and reiterated a string of weary falsehoods and misrepresentation in an effort to forestall a congressional inquiry into the tragedy. Higgins justified the lethal raid as part of a necessary campaign against religious "extremists" and concluded, "The day has long passed when we can afford to ignore the threat posed by individuals who believe they are subject only to the laws of their god and not those of our government."

In predictably self-serving fashion, Higgins ignores an even greater danger: a government which presents itself as God. One example of such a government was that of National Socialist Germany, which used "anti-terrorism" laws to obtain total power. Following the arson attack on the German Reichstag on February 27, 1933, German President Hindenburg signed an executive decree "for the protection of the people and the state." Interpreting the attack as the opening salvo in a terrorist campaign against the new National Socialist government, the decree enlarged the powers of the central government to permit "restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including the press...on the rights of assembly and association, and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications," and specified that "warrants for house searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed."

Less than a month later, the Reichstag enacted a "Law for Removing the Distress of People and Reich," also known as the "Enabling Act," in which it essentially renounced its residual powers by assigning all legislative authority to the Reich cabinet for a period of four years. Hitler, who at that time was Chancellor, promised, "The government will make use of these powers only insofar as they are essential for carrying out vitally necessary measures...The number of cases in which an internal necessity exits for having recourse to such a law is a limited one."

However, the unlimited powers granted to Hitler's government through the Enabling Act allowed him the luxury of defining "essential" powers and "vitally necessary measures" according to his ideological needs. Although he promised that "the separate existence of the federal states will not be done away," the National Socialist central government consolidated all powers to itself. Although he promised that "the rights of the churches will not be diminished," his government aggressively persecuted religious "extremists" who insisted that the state was accountable to God's authority.

The Enabling Act, which had been created as a "counter-terrorism" measure, provided a legal, democratic rationale for national socialist dictatorship. Although the federal powers created by the Comprehensive Terrorism Prevention Act fall far short of those granted to Hitler's government by the Enabling Act, they not only manifest the same tendency toward radically centralized police authority, but (if enacted) will set the stage for even more oppressive legislation. Once again, a nation is being told to entrust its government with vastly increased powers, which will supposedly be used in a "limited" way. In such fashion is the "old stale plea of necessity" renewed, to the detriment of individual liberty.

FBI Stonewalls Evidence Discovered by TV Station: by Spotlight Newspaper, 300 Independence Ave. SE, Washington, D.C. 20003: Strange new revelations about what really happened before, during and after the terrorist bombing in Oklahoma City were discussed on the June 6 broadcast of The Spotlight's nightly call-in talk forum, Radio Free America (RFA) with host Tom Valentine.

The guest was David Hall, owner of KPOC Television in Ponca City, Oklahoma, which is roughly 90 miles from Oklahoma City. Hall and his news team have been investigating the Oklahoma City bombing and have uncovered facts which do not agree with the official government version of what supposedly happened.

Hall has prepared two videos, one on the Randy Weaver affair and one on the Branch Davidian holocaust at Waco. They may be ordered, at $19.95 each by calling toll-free 1-800-474-2861. An edited transcript of Valentine's interview with Hall follows. Valentine's questions are preceded by a (V); and Hall's responses are preceded by (D).

(V) Your station is located just about an hour and a half's drive from Oklahoma City and you were covering "the bomb" from the beginning.

(D) That's right. We had people on the scene by about 10:45 the morning of the bombing. We were covering it like any story that we would cover. However, after about a week certain things started developing, so we started looking into it in a serious manner. Consequently we've hired three special investigators (two of them are former FBI agents) who are working for us for the last 30 days.

(V) Have you also been in touch with Ted Gunderson, the former special agent in charge of the FBI office in Los Angeles, whose inquiries into the nature of the bomb have been reported extensively by The Spotlight?

(D) I have Gunderson's full report and expect to meet with him eventually. However, we haven't gotten to that part of the story (i.e., the nature of the bomb itself) as of yet. We're still working on the McVeigh and John Doe No. 2 angles, trying to bring some inconsistencies into line and make some sense out of what we've been told.

(V) What have been some of these inconsistencies and other questions that have led you into investigating the bombing story further?

(D) I think the thing that really bothered us is that we were told on the afternoon of April 19, the day of the bombing, that they had videotape of a brown Ford pickup with McVeigh getting in it, leaving the truck that was supposed to be carrying the bomb, and that there was another suspect in that brown Ford pickup with McVeigh. They also stated that a female witness had been driving away from the scene as the bomb exploded. She had her front car window blown out. She also saw these two individuals.

Then we find that McVeigh was arrested at 10:45 that morning by the Oklahoma highway patrolman, Charlie Hanger. McVeigh was in a 1978 cream colored Mercury. That caught our attention, since this car was nothing like the vehicle that the authorities were supposed to be on the lookout for and for which they had put out an all-points bulletin.

About two weeks ago, we and another television station confronted them on this and asked shy they were not continuing to look for the brown Ford Pickup and John Doe No. 2. That seemed to have fallen by the wayside. The authorities told us, though, that they had not put out an all-points bulletin for the brown Ford pickup and that we were totally in error. We video-taped that interview, by the way, and so did the other television station.

However, we then went to the police broadcast tapes that went out on April 19th. We brought up the tape which indicated that there had been an all-points bulletin for a brown Ford pickup that had two occupants and that this bulletin was put out with the authority of the FBI. We played that tape for them and they said that they had "no comment" on it.

Now after Waco we had begun to wake up, and realized that these people (the authorities) didn't tell us the truth all the time, so we started looking at the Oklahoma City bombing case a little harder.

At another point they indicated that McVeigh was arrested at 10:45 on the morning of Wednesday, April 19, and that the vehicle he was driving was the 1978 Mercury. I happened to be sitting by my radio scanner on Friday, April 21, about one o'clock in the afternoon, and I heard a broadcast coming over from the Oklahoma Highway Patrol that they had a car on I-35 and that the car, most likely, had been involved in the bombing.

I dispatched a crew over from the station and they got there and a lady there told us that she witnessed the arrest of a man about 1:30 pm. She said he was taken out of the vehicle, put in a military helicopter and [it] went south with him. We broadcast that story as did Channel 4 in Oklahoma City, as well as the Oklahoma News Network for radio.

If that wasn't enough, then, the following Monday we had our insurance agent for the station who came in that day to visit. He lives at Perry, Oklahoma. I mentioned this report to him and he said, "I was coming down I-35 on Friday and a highway patrolman passed me with his red lights and siren on at a high rate of speed." He said that when he got up to where the patrolman had gone there were all sorts of vehicles and all sorts of police (including plain-closes men). There was a helicopter flying away. So that substantiates the story that the lady had told. Our insurance man is a former Oklahoma City police officer. So we are trying to determine who was arrested on Friday. Was McVeigh arrested on Wednesday (as they say) or on Friday? It may be that there is a reasonable explanation for this. It may be that the car McVeigh was driving was left on the spot for two days, but that's not likely.

The Oklahoma Highway Patrol has a policy in the types of arrest that McVeigh was involved in. The car would be impounded and searched and taken off the highway. At any rate, they don't let a car sit for a 48-hour period on I-35.

(V) Are you suggesting that McVeigh's real arrest by a very lucky highway patrolman didn't really happen on the morning of April 19 (shortly after the bombing), but that it really happened on April 21?

(D) Well, we've been told by two witnesses that there was an arrest on that date. We're trying to clear this up with the FBI, but we can't get statements form them. They are not commenting on that. So it's a very real problem.

However, there's another problem with this arrest. If McVeigh left Oklahoma City at 9:00 in the morning (and he was arrested at Perry, Oklahoma at 10:20 that morning according to the official reports), he would have known from early reports that there were at least six people dead from the bombing (since he had a radio in that car). He was running 85 miles an hour down I-35, which has highway patrolmen all along the highway. He had no license plate on the car. He had a fully loaded gun strapped in a shoulder holster.

Now according to Patrolman Charlie Hanger, when he stopped McVeigh, the suspect got out of the car and said, "I've got a gun under my jacket," and gave himself up. That doesn't make sense to me. At that point McVeigh would have had nothing to lose if he had shot the officer right there and gone on down the road.

It Doesn't Make Sense to a Lot of People: There are some real problems here. I'm not buying the story, nor does my television crew, nor do the former FBI agents who we have on board. What we have are several problems with the stories put out by the FBI, and even they are acknowledging that they have problems.

They don't know if they have enough evidence to prosecute James Nichols and are asking for an extension on the grand jury. I think, perhaps, there might be similar problems with McVeigh, but I feel that we have enough information at this time to say that he certainly was involved in the bombing in some way.

However, we looked at McVeigh's work record over the 30-day period prior to the bombing, and we found that he worked 24 or 25 hours, drawing $4.35 an hour. To build the bomb, rent the truck and stay in the motels that were used would have exceeded $10,000. How a man such as McVeigh, whom we might call a drifter, and just working to eat each day, could come up with $10,000 raises questions.

We think we have the answer at this time, but I'd rather not go into it over the program at this time. We've interviewed many, many people who have actually been with McVeigh and actually known some of the things involved around this bombing, and when all of it comes out, people are going to be astounded with what we've uncovered.

(V) Have you interviewed Charlie Hanger, the officer who was supposed to have arrested McVeigh?

(D) We have talked with Hanger, Charlie is not talking at this time. He's been told by the FBI not to talk. We did talk with him early on and he told us that he made that arrest at 10:20 am on April 19. Charlie is under the spell of the FBI. That doesn't have any effect on the information that we've uncovered up to this point.

We actually know where McVeigh stopped along the way and talked with people and we've talked with some of those people. The FBI knows the same thing that we know. They know that McVeigh was supposed to be in Oklahoma city at 3:00 in the morning and was delayed because he got lost, and we've talked to the people who talked to him while he was lost and got him back on the road. Then there are the stories that there were no ATF people in the bureau office the day of the bombing. A lot of people have heard those stories. The ATF has sent out a disclaimer, saying that they had five agents who were dead.

However, there's a bad problem with that because two days prior to that, one agent told us that there were no ATF agents in the office that day. He even told us where they were. He told us that he was in Oklahoma City in court with a fellow named Fuzzy Warren. Then he said, there were three agents in Newkirk, Oklahoma on an arson case, and a couple others were involved in cases around the country. He said that five agents were up all night because they were involved in surveillance until about 6:30 in the morning, at which time they went home and went to bed. What he told us was that no agents were killed, but that there was a secretary in the office and she did not get hurt.

According to him they were all out doing their jobs. I will tell you this much; we're going to have a real problem with those five agents who were up all night and went home and went to bed.

(V) Whatever happened to the brown Ford pickup that McVeigh and the other suspect were supposedly spotted in just prior to the bombing?

(D) We don't believe there ever was such a vehicle. They've never produced a videotape of the scene that was supposed to be Southwestern Bell's video surveillance camera in a building across the street from the federal building. No one has seen those videos. They've not been released to anybody, although several people have made inquiries.

(V) What about the seismographic evidence in circulation that suggests that there were two explosions at the federal building?

(D) There certainly were two explosions. At the onset we were told that those two seismic readings were the explosion going off and then the concrete from the building falling and hitting the ground. Then they retracted that and said that there was the explosion and then something following it like a sonic boom.

We have a former ATF agent who has looked at the charts and his conclusions, while not firm yet, are somewhat in concurrence with those of (former FBI official) Ted Gunderson (who believes that the bomb had to be more powerful than what's officially been reported). We're not ready to draw a conclusion, but we are still working on this particular question.

Another thing that the authorities will have to address is that the demolition of the building by explosives did not register on the seismograph that suggested there had been two explosion on April 19th. We had 60 million tons of concrete fall on April 19 at the time of the blast. Then when the building was brought down, there were some 200 million tons fall, but that shock wave didn't register.

Now here's something else that we broadcast (as did other local Oklahoma stations) and this didn't get outside the state in the national media reports. The assistant Oklahoma City fire chief, John Hanson, told us that they had found two undetonated bombs in the building as well as one rocket launcher in the building.

We have confirmed that they were there, but we have not been able to get any comments from the FBI or the ATF. So there are some problems there.

(V) You've uncovered some other interesting things?

(D) We think that we've found John Doe No. 2 and we have had him under surveillance for about six days. We know that John Doe No. 2 was in Tulsa, along with McVeigh, at a gun show on April 1st. McVeigh was attempting to buy some pistols over there and he said he was not going to register with the ATF. So we knew about that. We talked at length with a man who was selling guns at a gun show and he reported this to the FTI and no action was taken on that.

(V) The FBI were certainly miracle people after the bombing. It was the day after the bombing that they were in Michigan ransacking houses, in Mexico and Arizona. Did they know ahead about all of these people?

(D) I think - as do a lot of other people - that McVeigh was under surveillance for a long time. I think you could put that theory in the bank and draw money on it. We have evidence that would support that. I think there was prior knowledge of the bombing.

(V) A lady named Deborah von Trapp has been claiming that the American Government was responsible for the gassings in Tokyo and that the Japanese retaliated by the Oklahoma City bombing. I don't find it credible at all, although I actually provided Miss von Trapp a forum on this program several years ago in another matter involving her personal conflict with Xerox Corporation. Any comments on her allegations?

(D) We have totally investigated this claim and we can't substantiate anything she says. CBS News, incidentally, actually looked into her claim and they can't find anything reliable in what she says either.

(V) Personally, I believe Miss von Trapp was deliberately handed mis-information so that some of us who believe there's a lot more to the Oklahoma City bombing story might get entrapped (and therefore discredited).

(D) I believe you're right. I don't know that she knowingly did this, but we did a lot of investigation into this. Now some friends of mine at CBS who know what we are doing, and who are friendly to us, also looked into this. There are people in the major media who share information with us a lot of the time and their hands are tied.

I want to say that I have a great deal of faith in Radio Free America. I know that the information that you put out is accurate and I want people to know that.

So Where Was The ATF That Day?: From The Jubilee Newspaper - Exploding the Oklahoma Myths...May/June 1995, by Paul Hall. The old saying "truth is stranger than fiction" is definitely ringing true when it comes to the tragic story of mass destruction in Oklahoma City. Amid the dozens of allegations and speculative reports now in circulation around the country, one question rang forth from someone who many would have thought to be a very unlikely source, but whose question, if truly answered, may blow the lid off the tightly sealed pot of myths and obvious lies. The big question is now on everyone's mind.

On May 23, the day of the hasty implosion, Edye Smith, the mother of Chase, 3 and Colton, 2, who were murdered along with 167 others on that frightful day...came forward to publicly ask what others may have been afraid to mention: Where was the ATF the morning of April 19th?

There were actually several different interviews wherein Edye asked basically the same question. Here are her words taken directly from two television broadcast transcripts.

6:00 pm Newscast, KFOR-TV, Oklahoma City: Edye to Reporter: "Did they (ATF) have a warning or didn't they? We can't get them to answer our questions. They had an option to not be in the office that day. Why didn't everyone else have that option too? We don't know, we're asking simple questions and we can't get any answers and so it makes us that much more curious. Where the hell were they?"

Gary Tuckman's live CNN interview with Edye Smith: Tuckman: "but in the next couple of months when things start to get quiet here in Oklahoma City, do you think it will begin getting tougher for you?"

Edye: "Yeah, but I don't think things are going to start getting very quiet, you know? There's a...there are a lot of questions that have been left unanswered, a lot of questions we don't have answers for, we're being told to keep our mouth shut, not talk about it, don't ask those questions, but I think things are going to get a lot noisier."

Tuckman: "What kind of questions have people been telling you to keep your mouth shut about?"

Edye: "Well, we've just from the very beginning, we, along with hundreds and thousands of other people, want to know just, and we just innocently ask questions, you know, where was ATF? All 15 or 17 of their employees survived and they live, they're on the ninth floor. They were the target of the explosion, and where were they? Did they have a warning sign? I mean, did they think it might be a bad day to go in the office? They had an option not to go to work that day, and my kids didn't get that option, nobody else in the building got that option. And we're just asking questions, we're not making accusations. We just want to know, and they're telling us, 'Keep you mouth shut, don't talk about it.'"

Tuckman: "Well, Edye Smith and the Wilburns, thanks for joining us..." At that point the cover-up went into high gear. Television transcripts show how the local media, Governor Keating (former FBI) and the ATF began a frantic effort to defuse this loose cannon, Edye Smith. She must be quieted. In an exclusive phone interview, Edye told The Jubilee that on the day of the implosion (the day she asked the question) her answering machine was full of messages form ATF agents who said, "we need to get this cleared up." But in Edye's opinion she felt as though the ATF was saying, "let us tell our story and you just believe it, don't ask any more questions."

Several government officials came to her home the next day to answer her question. Present at the meeting were ATF agents Luke Frainey (OK City) and Steve Kyler (from Dallas). U.S. Attorney Pat Ryan, a woman from the U.S. Department of Justice, and an IRS investigator. The government officials told her there were five ATF agents in the building that morning, out of 15 who work in the office.

1). Valerie Rodin, a secretary.

2). Vernon Buster, a compliance officer.

3). Jim Scaggs, a compliance officer.

4). Luke Frainey, an undercover agent.

5). Alex McCully, office manger.

Scaggs and Buster reportedly were in the west end of the building (DEA or Social Security office), and sustained only minor injuries - their injuries are unconfirmed however, since no hospital records can be located. Further, according to some, these two may not have been ATF agents at all. McCully was in the elevator on his way out of the building. Frainey came to work that morning after being on assignment for two days. Rodin was in the ATF office. After the meeting, local media quoted Edye as saying, "she got the answers she was looking for."

Edye told The Jubilee, "Yeah, they gave me answers, I think they were sincere, but I don't think they knew what the heck was going on that day." She said the answers she got were, "No that's not true, that's not true, that's not true." This, she says, is how they answered her questions. Adding, "I still feel like there is more to it than that."

The whitewash after the meeting was relentless and probably reached the pinnacle of nonsense when Ted Burton, a reporter for KJRH-TV reported, "Kathy Wilburn (Edye's mother) and Edye Smith now believe their (the ATF's) survival was the will of God, not a hunch that something was going to happen." A statement Edye adamantly denies and was quite upset about it when The Jubilee read it to her. While the official explanation of who was in the building remains firm, the whereabouts of the other 10 agents has not been as consistent. For example, KWTV's May 23rd 5:00 pm report quoted ATF agent Harry Eberhardt (who was across the street at the time of the explosion) as having this account:

* Two agents were late to work.

* Two planned to come to work late after "working late the night before."

* Two were in the courthouse across the street. (One was Harry Eberhardt).

* Three agents were in Ponca City testifying in an arson trial.

So, we have 5 in the building and 9 elsewhere equaling 14 agents.

Meanwhile, KFOR-TV's May 23rd, 6:00 pm report says, also quoting Eberhardt:

* One was on his way to work.

* One had worked late and was at home.

* One was testifying in federal court across the street.

* Three were testifying in Ponca City (arson trial).

That's 5 in the building and 6 elsewhere = 11.

Dave Hall, owner of KPOC-TV in Ponca City told The Jubilee he was told:

* One was testifying in federal court across the street.

* Three agents were in Newkirk (near Ponca City) for the arson trial. (Confirmed, he had a reporter in the courtroom).

* Two agents attending a trial in Garfield County.

* Five agents were off that day because they were "on surveillance" the morning of the 19th. (It's Halls theory that the agents were surveilling the Murrah Building).

That's 5 in the building and 11 elsewhere = 16.

Edye, and others interviewed. said they arrived at the bombing site only minutes after the blast(s) went off and discovered that at least 10 ATF agents (uninjured, and wearing their ATF jackets) were wandering around, kicking debris, looking for evidence. But an ATF spokesman says the agents she saw "probably" came from the federal courthouse across the street - an explanation that may be true.

What makes the Smith family so sure the ATF was tipped off? Reportedly, a gentleman who worked across the street from the Murrah Building ran to see if his wife (who worked in the Murrah Building) was among the survivors. There he discovered an ATF agent assisting his wife, who was hurt. The gentleman asked the unhurt agent, "How did you get out of there?" And to his surprise the agent replied, "I don't know what's going on, I got a page yesterday and was told not to come to work today." (A page on his beeper).

The Jubilee's source is a man who is close friends with a friend of the couple. In other words, there is one person between the couple and our source. The source says the gentleman wants to go forward, but his wife is "scared to death" and she doesn't want anyone to know who he is. We are told they're an older couple in their 50s.

Edye tells another interesting story about a lady investigator, Malisa Moore, who called her on April 24th after her explosive question. Moore told Edye, "you're right about the advance warning for ATF." She relayed to Edye that her best friend goes to collage with ATF agent Konop's son, Mike Konop. Mike reportedly told the whole college class that his dad was "conveniently" late to work that morning. He drove by and picked up one or two other ATF agents and they were all late to work that morning. Edye said she thought the woman was just another kook until the ATF told Edye that in fact, Konop was one of the agents late to work that morning, and that he does have a son named Mike. ^[109]

Knowing that the ATF had a warning doesn't explain who tipped them off. Perhaps they weren't tipped off at all. Some theorists say many of the ATF agents knew the attack was coming because they were involved and were deliberately avoiding the building. The answer will come when, or if, the agents go public or when the trail of circumstantial evidence and bogus alibis lead to their guilt.

Knowing what we now know about the strong likelihood of more than one bomb having been placed in the Murrah Building, it raises an interesting question: Why were the two (or one) ATF agents working late the night before? (Or were there five agents "working late" as IPOC-TV suggests?"

Given the possibility that explosives were strategically placed inside the building, could these men have worked on that project in the early morning hours? So who told Mrs. Smith to keep her mouth shut? According to Edye, several families who had hired attorneys for a civil suit (not against the ATF) had hired an investigator to call on the ATF to start asking some questions. The ATF told him to "back off" and not ask any more questions and to "tell the family in Oklahoma to stop because they don't know what they're dealing with." The investigator quit.

Of course, no Oklahoma bombing story is complete without the government and media working the militia into it somehow. KWTV reported, "Militia groups and conspiracy theorists have spread reports the ATF office workers were warned to stay home on April 19th. Edye Smith, whose children were killed in the bombing, wants to know if the reports are true."

Edye told The Jubilee, the militia had nothing to do with her question, adding that she got her information elsewhere.

Another good question being asked is: Where were the top officials from other agencies that day? KWTV reported that Chiefs of the DEA, Secret Service, and Marshall's Service were on annual leave playing in a Special Olympics benefit golf tournament that morning. The report said, "all had offices in the Murrah Building. FBI Chief Bob Ricks was also in the tournament."

The Smith family and others are calling for a congressional investigation into the ATF where-abouts, and say they will continue to investigate the entire tragedy along with thousands of other concerned but skeptical Americans. "As far as I'm concerned I don't have anything else to live for, I'm not scared to do anything."

For Whom The Bell Tolls: An historical analysis of the Oklahoma City Bombing, and who's responsible: If in November of 1963 someone had told the American people that the CIA had played a role in the murder of President John F. Kennedy, few would have believed it at that time.

Slightly over thirty years after the assassination it is hard to find an informed citizen who does not know of the involvement by CIA agents in JFK's death. Indeed, the very records that would show conclusively that a branch of government participated in killing a President of the United States have of necessity been sealed from public view for the rest of this century. A requisite sealing and hiding of truth if malevolent forces in government were to remain in power [Many believe the reason the records were sealed was to keep the American people from knowing that the Israelis were involved, and probably did the actual murder. See the November 20, 1995 issue of The Spotlight Newspaper].

In analyzing the bombing of the Oklahoma federal building, or any other crime for that matter, one must follow certain guidelines. In the financial world the dictum always is "follow the money" if one wants to discover the culprits. In the political world one must ask "who benefits?" as well as "why?" to determine those likely to be behind an act. A further tool in tracking down those responsible for present crime is to allow history to serve as a willing witness. A witness which often provides an unobstructed window into the future.

The paramount threat to the Constitution of this nation is not the United Nations nor some socialist pipe dream of a "New World Order." The rope that is strangling the life and breath out of liberty is held tightly in Washington by governmental hands intent upon conducting a police-state lynching of liberty. This hanging was designed from the very beginning to snuff out freedom. A fierce choke-hold on America that has become tighter and tighter every day.

Who Really Did the Bombing: Two possible Answers: First, as a condition of reasonable inquiry and for the sake of fair analysis, let us assume that the government had no hand in the actual bombing that benefits them so much. Second, let it be further assumed that McVeigh and Nichols are not being set up by the government or by actual agents of government, but are rather men who took it upon themselves to commit the act that has brought so much immediate harm to the people in Oklahoma and soon will bring harm to the rest of the nation by increasing the power of the police state. What then would produce the amount of frustration necessary to motivate decorated Gulf War veterans to carry out such an act independent of any government collusion?

Two things come to mind: Failure of government to punish those who killed Mrs. Weaver and her son at Ruby Ridge, and failure of government to punish those in law enforcement who murdered innocent men, women and children at Waco. Had FBI agent Larry Potts and those under him been tried and punished for issuing shoot-to-kill orders at Weaver's cabin instead of receiving governmental immunity, perhaps McVeigh and his cohort would not have felt the need personally to punish the government for its crimes.

Janet Reno, in a statement announcing the promotion of Potts to the number two position in the FBI, stated that the butcher of Ruby Creek and Waco is "the very best FBI has." The best for what? Shooting women at their front doors? Gassing children to death, then burning their bodies to prevent public exposure of the crime? Murder, cover-up, political assassination? The best for what?

Had a grand jury in Waco indicted those who ordered the tanks in and those who drove them, along with ATF agents who stormed the church without a valid warrant, then perhaps McVeigh would have felt the American system of government was working and there was no need for him to become judge, jury and executioner. But because those in government have placed themselves above the law by which the rest of America must live, McVeigh brought the law of the lynch mob to the government.

When law breaks down, the vigilante is called forth. Janet Reno, Attorney General, protected the murderous agents of the ATF and FBI. Bill Clinton, criminal extra ordinaire himself, attempted to excuse federal conduct to the nation. Millions did not buy it, McVeigh may have been one of them.

Clinton and Reno are, then, most responsible for the bombing in Oklahoma City, not because of a conspiracy, not because of a sinister plot, but simply because they failed to punish those in government who did wrong and thereby fostered McVeigh's belief that the federal government was willing, at great expense of life, to police everyone but itself.

Would The Government Do It?: The second possible scenario and one many see as much more likely, is that the bombing was conducted by elements within the government itself. Before the bombing, anti-government public opinion and militias were sweeping the country. Growing daily was a tidal wave of resentment against the corrupt little men in high places. A literal flood of resistance to Washington racketeering and abuse of human rights was rushing toward the throne of corruption on the banks of the Potomac River.

In this view, the Oklahoma bombing is a federal dam against such public opinion - a dam of dead bodies designed to hold back the flood of opposition, to redirect public opinion away from Washington and against those who oppose the government and the evil its doing today. Is this possible? Is it really likely that the government would do such a thing? Let history answer these questions, for only by knowing what has been done by such men in the past can we judge present events.

A veritable Litany of Governmental Deception: What explosion in the dead of night led to a declaration of war against Spain? The sinking of the battleship Maine in Havana harbor with the loss of 260 men was blamed on a Spanish torpedo.

The news media used this incident to manipulate public opinion in favor of war. Years later the ship was uncovered from the mud of the harbor revealing that the explosion had gone off inside the ship in the forward ammo magazine.

The U.S. entered WW I after the Lusitania was sunk by a German U-Boat on the high seas. Americans were told by the media that the vessel was an "innocent passenger ship" merely carrying tourists to Europe. In fact, some 55 years later, the manifest revealed that it was a registered warship commissioned in His Majesty's Royal Navy. Under international law the ship was fair game on the high seas.

The German embassy ran ads in New York papers urging Americans not to book passage on the ship. The federal government lied to the American people and said it was only an ocean liner. The news media used this incident to ship up public sentiment for America's entry into the war in Europe. One hundred and sixteen thousand, five hundred and seventeen American soldiers died in WW I - senseless waste of lives of a hundred thousand young men by sinister forces within the government who favored war, made possible in no small part because of this deception.

What bombing produced an instant declaration of war on Japan and Germany in 1941? December 7th is truly a day of infamy. But no more for the Japanese than for President Roosevelt and others in his administration who knew the "Japs" were on their way to bomb Pearl Harbor.

Their murderous failure to warn the young men on the ships was treason. Two thousand, four hundred and three sailors and army soldiers died in a hail storm of bombs dropped from Japanese planes. Yet the government, in vain attempts to hide its complicity in the bombing at Pearl Harbor, has classified as top secret the document dealing with the months preceding the bombing and immediately after.

Classified documents dealing with a war that ended fifty years ago. A huge cache of top-secret records at the U.S. Navy storage depot at Crane, Indiana, many of them dealing with the Japanese attack upon Pearl Harbor, remain hidden from public view. An estimated 28.6 million pages and 4,631 rolls of microfilm remain classified materials from World War II. Why the fear of releasing the documents? Because many of the World War II generation are yet alive and would instantly become foes of Washington were they to see the documents.

Those documents dealing with the Roosevelt conspiracy to withhold information obtained through the breaking of secret Japanese codes, are records that expose murderously criminal behavior and are not to be released until the next century.^[110] Other� classified documents currently lying on shelves in the National Archives are growing older by the day, fading, but not fading as fast as the generation who fought the war. Admiral Kimmel, the commander at Pearl Harbor that fateful day, later called Roosevelt "a damned traitor," and so he most certainly was.

What torpedo attack upon a U.S. ship in "international waters" led to war in Vietnam? The Tonkin Gulf resolution was passed immediately after Lyndon Johnson and others in the federal government deceived the American people into believing that a U.S. destroyer was attacked without provocation by the North Vietnamese Navy. It was revealed ten years later that no such attack had occurred. This deception by the President of the united States led to the deaths of 57,800 men in Viet Nam. The government to this day has engaged in a criminal cover-up of the fact that they left another 2,500 in bamboo cages as prisoners or war. Would the government lie to the American people? Ask a POW.

Finally, newspaper accounts of the arrests of Egyptians accused of blowing up the World Trade Center reveal that not only did the FBI have advance notice of the bombing but, worse, their informant, a former Egyptian army officer, built the bomb. Emad Ali Salem infiltrated the anti-Israel group for the FBI, who asked him if the Egyptians could build a bomb. Salem told them they could not. The FBI instructed Salem to build a bomb for the Egyptians, using phony powder. Then the FBI told Salem to use real explosives. Salem did as he was told but began secretly to tape his FBI handlers in their meetings.

Transcripts of these recordings were published in The New York Times in October, 1993. Properly placed, the bomb would have killed a hundred thousand rather than the six people it did kill. According to court documents filed in New York, the FBI had advance knowledge of the bombing. But the decision was made on orders from the highest levels within the government to allow it to occur. Why?

Why did the government need a bombing with great loss of life? Is the Comprehensive Terrorism Prevention Act of 1995 so important to their police state plans that they had to try a second time? Was Oklahoma City a successful try for the government?

Would anyone but a fool not suspect government complicity in the Oklahoma tragedy? Is there any compelling reason to give government the benefit of the doubt now? Those who know and study history can reasonably assume the government was behind the Oklahoma bombing. Clearly the disaster there served the interests and purposes of sinister forces within government who want to pull the rope tighter around the neck of all of us, left, right and center. The government cares not one whit about the politics of those it seeks to control, only that they are controlled. Today they wish to spy on and violate the rights of those on the right, tomorrow it will be the left. The all-seeing eye of the state will look evenly upon us all.

Finally, the explosion that went off in John Fitzgerald Kennedy's head led to the passage of the 1968 gun control act, even though elements in government had performed the assassination. Those who wish to foist on the American people a new world order plainly care nothing for the lives of Americans, whether they are presidents, women with babies, small boys with dogs, or children at Waco or Oklahoma City.

Indeed, it seems clear that one can safely state that public policy by bombing is a long-standing tradition of the federal government. Is the Oklahoma City bombing a break with tradition, or merely old methods in new places?

Let history judge and reason rule. Blaming the bombing in Oklahoma City on the militia, or unnamed "patriots" is an obscenity. For it was, after all, the taking of lives by government at Ruby Ridge and Waco that provided the innocent blood that gave birth to the militia and the associated anti-government feeling currently sweeping the nation. It was the absolute terror and shock of watching black boots from the government kill then kill again that motivated Americans to awake from their long peaceful slumber only to find that a nightmare government had metastasize while they slept.

Ruling America is a deadly viral-like plague of murderers, swindlers, petty tyrants, liars, and would be police-state functionaries who had infected government institutions and the establishment news media to the point that both have become deadly to the health of the people.

A government by deceit and deception has spawned from the cesspools of mental degradation known only to the lowest sorts of humankind. This political Ebola virus spread rapidly until American citizens began to eradicate it through grass roots action. The Center for Disease Control in the Political realm has been American patriots who seek to end the nightmare, not perpetuate it.

The black boots, masks, and black ninja uniforms of the police state do not operate in a vacuum, they are directed by political leaders who are elected. One must keep in mind that there will always be thousands of low intelligence, high testosterone brutes who will willingly attack their fellow citizens for money, perks and a federal pension plan for retirement.

Directing one's anger at these unthinking, state-supported terrorists is not efficient nor conductive to correcting the problem. Rather, we must "fire" the political leaders who send them. Two-thirds of the senate, along with about 250 or so house members, and this black plague is not only contained, but reversed. This can all be done legally by casting ballots at the polls rather than waiting for the federals to come to your front door. Americans must beware of those who seek to focus their attention on the far more numerous but vastly less important church-door smashers of the ATF and black-booted back shooters of the FBI, who are, after all, nothing more than "cannon fodder as good as any."

To control this disease of the American spirit we must go straight for the command and control center in Washington. We still have the power to take America back so long as free elections are held. Between now and the next national election we must all arm ourselves with a voter registration slip and use it to "fire" the infectious bought whores of the new world government who are now proposing to rule us all with an Orwellian iron fist, forever beating us into submission, while claiming to protect us.

Let it be made clear that those in opposition to the police state must not become like those they oppose. It is the government's style to kill innocent women and children. If we who love freedom, become like the FBI hostage rescue agents, wantonly murdering, killing, maiming, and destroying the lives of innocent citizens, then what difference does it make who wins this conflict between Federal Evil and American Good?

Explosive Evidence of a Cover-up: by William F. Jasper, of The New American, August 7, 1995; Mysteries in Oklahoma City Bombing Begin to Unravel: Since his critical analysis of the Oklahoma City bombing appeared in the June 26th issue of The New American (OKC Bombing: Expert Analysis), Brigadier General Benton K. Partin (USAF, Ret.) has been a busy man.

Besides being interviewed on dozens of radio and television programs, he has traveled to Oklahoma City to examine forensic evidence not previously available to him. What he found there is nothing less than highly explosive. Photographic evidence, together with architectural assessments of the structural integrity of the remainder of the building after the blast, offer strong support for the general's conclusion in his initial analysis that demolition charges had been used in addition to the truck bomb.

From the outset of the April 19th blast, General Partin was convinced there was something fishy about the official story attributing the devastation at the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building solely to a truck bomb. The laws of physics and a lifetime of experience with explosives and munitions told him that both the magnitude and the pattern of damage were totally inconsistent with a single bomb, especially one detonated outside of the building on the street. "When I first saw the pictures of the truck bomb's asymmetrical damage to the federal building," Partin said, "my immediate reaction was that the pattern of damage would have been technically impossible without supplementing demolition charges at some of the reinforced concrete column bases, a standard demolition technique."

Appeal For Action: In a letter which he personally delivered to the Capitol offices of 56 members of Congress on May 18th, the general, one of our nation's premiere munitions and explosives experts, detailed some of the many problems with the official version of the bombing and appealed for action to delay the demolition of the building so that vital evidence would not be destroyed.� "A careful examination of the collapsed column bases would readily reveal a failure mode produced by a demolition charge," he wrote. "This evidence would be so critical, a separate and independent assessment should be made before a building demolition team destroys the evidence forever."

Unfortunately, that appeal could not stop the rush to judgement; the building was demolished five days later, on May 23rd. By the time General Partin arrived in Oklahoma City, all that remained at the Murrah Building site was a mound of dirt and the stumps of the building's four corner columns. The thousands of tons of the building's rubble - the primary forensic evidence in this "deadliest terrorist attack ever on American soil" - had been buried in a landfill outside of town.

That, however, did not prevent Partin from examining hundreds of photographs, he told The New American, provide more than sufficient evidence to sustain this earlier misgivings about the case. They provide, says the general, undeniable proof that demolition charges had been used on four of the building's columns and that these, not the truck bomb, caused the massive structural damage on April 19th.

General Partin released this new evidence on July 13th in a 23-page report entitled "Bomb Damage Analysis of Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma." The report includes five 8� X 11 color photographs and a detailed diagram illustrating the potential blast impact of the truck bomb on the damaged building.

Notwithstanding the fact that it has been completely ignored by the Establishment media, the general's report presents a very compelling case. The nature of the evidence and the cogency of his analysis, combined with his professional stature and distinguished career, make the general's charges difficult to dismiss.

General Partin's 31 years of active service in the Air Force include intensive research, design, testing, and management of weapons development at all levels and testing of all types of explosives. He commanded the Air Force Armament Technology Laboratory and was chairman of the joint services committee responsible for harmonization of air munitions requirements for the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps. General Partin was a Command Pilot and Command Missileman. He is a recipient of the Distinguished Service Medal and was thrice awarded the Legion of Merit.

In a diagram he made of the Murrah Building to accompany his May 18th letter to Congress General Partin had shown the damage due to the collapse of the reinforced concrete columns. The diagram showed that in the first row of columns facing the street where the truck bomb was parked, seven columns collapsed, while in Row B only one column failed.

Unlike rows B and C, where all eleven columns ran from the ground floor to the top of the building, in row A the bases of the even numbered columns stood on a heavy reinforced concrete header - or horizontal transfer beam - which was supported at the third floor by the much larger odd-numbered columns.

Reflecting the information publicly available at the time, and the official story that the truck bomb had been responsible for the building collapse, General Partin's original diagram placed the truck bomb in front of column A3, which allowed for the maximum penetration of the blast toward the failed B3 column and gave the greatest possible benefit of the doubt to the official scenario. Even so, the official scenario faced daunting inconsistencies and contradictions. "The total incompatibility with a single truck bomb," he wrote, "lies in the fact that either some of the columns collapsed that should not have collapsed or some of the columns are still standing that should have collapsed and did not."

Indeed, it defies not only physics but common sense to suggest that a bomb blast would cause larger, stronger columns to collapse while not affecting smaller columns, or that it would leave standing columns that are closer and take out identical columns that are farther away.

Do You Believe In Magic?: Additional information now makes the general's already compelling case against the official explosion scenario even more convincing. "The truck bomb was not in front of column A3 as I had originally shown in my diagram," Partin has told The New American, "but instead, as the crater shows, about 15 feet out from columns A4 and A5. This means that the damage was even more asymmetrical, more at odds with the truck bomb explanation than I had originally stated. It means that column B4, which did not come down, would have received about 40% more impulse from the truck bomb's blast than B3, which did come down. If any columns were going to come down in the B row it would have been B4 and B5. You don't have to go any farther than that to know that you had a demolition charge on column B3 - unless you believe in magic."

But "magic" aplenty there was - if the reigning scenarists are to be believed. "If you look at those B row columns," says Partin, "you can see that they still have furring strips and sheetrock on them. Down on the first and second floors some of the sheetrock and furring strips have been knocked off by the blast, but you see absolutely no spalling to those columns. You can see they were not even chipped or scratched. Now, you can't have the blast reaching clear in to column B3 and bring down that heavy reinforced column and at the same time not even blowing off the light sheetrock covering from the adjacent B4 column. To suggest otherwise is ludicrous."

Moreover, he observes, if the blast from the truck bomb were responsible for collapsing the support columns, one would expect the columns and header to be blown inward. But that is not the case. "The header and the A row columns went straight down; they were not blown into the building," says Partin. "Column B3 also went straight down. This is consistent with demolition charges." Indeed, we saw the same kind of straight-down collapse when the building was imploded on May 23rd.

According to General Partin, very little of the structural damage sustained on April 19th was actually caused by the truck bomb. He re-emphasizes a crucial point that he has stressed many times before and that he believes most people fail to grasp.

Blast through air is a terribly inefficient coupling mechanism against heavy reinforced concrete beams and columns; blast impulse - and its potential for damage - drops dramatically when traveling through air, initially falling off more rapidly than an inverse function of the distance cubed. Even though the Oklahoma City truck bomb mad an enormous impulse wave, it is wrong, he says, to be overly impressed and to attribute a force to that explosion which it clearly did not have. "Using the official estimate usually cited for the amount of explosive in the truck bomb - 4,800 pounds - would yield a sphere of ammonium nitrate bout 4� feet in diameter with a pressure of explosion of about � million pounds per square inch at detonation - that's a bit generous," says the general. "But by the time the blast wave travels through the air to the nearest of the columns in the A row (A5) it dropped off to about 375 pounds of pressure per square inch, and by the time it reaches the nearest B row columns it's down in the range of 27 to 38 [pounds per square inch]. And out at column A7 it's down around 25 to 35 pounds per square inch. The yield strength of concrete is around 3,500 pounds per square inch, and yet we're supposed to believe that this large, reinforced concrete column is going to be brought down by 25 to 35 pounds of pressure? It's absurd."

Added Evidence: However, as persuasive as this evidence may be, there is still much more. General Partin points out that in most photos of the Murrah Building one can plainly see column A9 still standing with the header beam broken off before A8, leaving a cantilever of almost 20 feet. The collapse of column A7 left a cantilever of 40 feet (20 feet from A7 to A8, plus 20 feet from A8 to A9); when the floors above came down they snapped off the cantilever near A8 between A8 and A9. The end of the cantilevered concrete header is rough and jagged, consonant with breakage due to the downward force of the tons of falling debris. The photographic evidence, however, shows that at the juncture of the fallen beams near column A7 there is a failure that is smooth and rounded, what Partin says is unmistakably the work of "a high-energy explosive in contact with that structural member."

c1��� c2��� c3�� c4��� c5��� c6�� c7��� c8��� c9�� c10��� c11

������������ X

b1��� b2��� b3�� b4��� b5��� b6�� b7��� b8��� b9�� b10��� b11

�� ����������X���������� X

a1��� a2��� a3�� a4��� a5��� a6�� a7��� a8��� a9�� a10��� a11

������������������ 0 Truck

X Collapsed at 3rd floor

The photos show that the thick concrete header beam (about 3 feet by 5 feet) came down in three 40-foot sections, with the same kind of failures at its junction with A3, A5, A7, and, as previously mentioned, a fourth section of some 20 feet that broke off near A8. Anyone familiar with explosive effects on concrete, says Partin, "would see immediately that these were failures caused by contact explosive charges" and not structural fractures due to the shock wave from the truck bomb. If the shock wave from the truck blast had been strong enough to collapse the columns - and, as we have seen, it was not - the fractures would be jagged, like the end of the cantilevered header. But they are not. General Partin explains: "When a high-energy explosive charge is detonated in contact with a reinforced concrete structure, the wave of deformation travels through the concrete, pulverizing it and turning it to sand, stripping it away from the steel reinforcement bars. That's what we see here in each of these cases, at the junctures of the header and columns A3, A5, and A7, and at B3. The failures are relatively clean and smooth, obviously produced by explosives in contact with the junctures."

At each of the junctures the concrete has been turned to sand - extending along the header about two feet on either side of the juncture, and a foot to a foot-and-a-half below the juncture on the columns. The steel reinforced rods stick out exposed for about three feet.

Inside Access: In his May 18th letter to Congress and in his earlier interview with The New American, General Partin pointed out that it would not have been difficult to place explosive charges at the bases of the columns in row A since that row is accessible from the street. However, as we have seen, the charges were not placed at the column bases, but at the juncture of the odd-numbered A columns and the header. This means they were not placed at the street level - which could have been done from the outside - but on the third floor. Which means the bomber(s) had to have access to the inside of the building.

This, of course, casts a whole new light on the bombing. And a very disturbing and sinister light at that, since it implies an "inside job," and makes it very difficult to pin the blame solely on the individual, or individuals, who positioned the truck bomb. It virtually necessitates the involvement of individuals who had normal access to the building. "You just don't walk in off the street through security with explosives like this," Partin says.

This doesn't mean, ipso facto, as some overzealous critics have charged, that the FBI, ATF, DEA, Janet Reno, Bill Clinton, Louis Freeh, or any other similarly high officials planned and perpetrated this atrocity. Such conclusions reach beyond the scope of the evidence available at this time. However, it is no more of a reach than we have witnessed in the pathetic attempts by portside politicos, editorialists, and reporters to connect a gigantic "right-wing" conspiracy to blame for the nefarious act.

The tendency by some on the right to lean on the trigger before clearing leather is more than matched by the penchant of those on the left reflexively to reject out of hand any and all evidence - no matter how solid - which conflicts with the official line that a single truck bomb planted by vicious right-wing extremists was responsible for the devastating explosion.

Unfortunately, Clintonistas are not the only ones afflicted with this bias; "respectable" Republicans and "acceptable" conservatives also have been preconditioned to spout the line and to dismiss as dangerous and wacky any evidence pointing toward explosives inside the building or the possible involvement of government agents in the deadly blast. However, Partin cannot be written off as a militia misfit or a UFO nut case, and the evidence he marshals stands on its own strength. Furthermore, other credible authorities endorse his thesis.

Corroborating Opinions: Among the explosives experts interviewed by The New American who subscribe to General Partin's analysis are professional civilian demolitionist, scientists, and bomb specialists who currently serve, or previously served, in military and police units. Sam Gronning, a licensed, professional blaster in Casper, Wyoming, with 30 years experience in explosives, told us the Partin letter "states in very precise technical terms what everyone in this business knows: No truck bomb of ANFO [ammonium nitrate fuel oil] out in the open is going to cause the kind of damage we had there" in Oklahoma City. "In 30 years of blasting, using everything from 100 percent nitrogel to ANFO, I've not seen anything to support that story."

Gronning notes that he recently detonated an ANFO charge more than three times the size of the one reportedly responsible for the Oklahoma destruction. "I set off 16,000 pounds of ANFO and was standing upright just 1,000 feet away from the blast," and even a bomb that size would not have caused the destruction experienced in the April 19th explosion, he said.

Dr. Rodger Raubach, who took his PhD in physical chemistry and served on the research faculty at Stanford University, says, "General Partin's assessment is absolutely correct. I don't care if they pulled up a semi-trailer truck with 20 tons of ammonium nitrate; it wouldn't do the damage we saw there."

Raubach, who is the technical director of a chemical company, explained to The New America that "the detonation velocity of the shock wave from an ANFO explosion is on the order of 3,500 meters per second. In comparison, military explosives generally have detonation velocities that hit 7,000 to 8,000-plus meters per second. Things like TNT have a detonation velocity of about 7,100 meters per second. The most energetic single-component explosive of this type, C-4 or RDX, is about 8,000 meters per second and above. You don't start doing big-time damage to heavy structures until you get into those ranges, which is why the military uses those explosives."

Dramatic Drop-Off: Several qualified experts we interviewed, however, took issue with the general's assessment. Jim Redyke, a demolition expert form Tulsa, Oklahoma, has imploded hundreds of buildings and was a constant at the Oklahoma City bomb site. Redyke told The New American that "this was consistent with the kind of damage [one would expect] from this size of bomb."

An Army Special Forces officer with explosives experience seconded this opinion, mentioning that nearly identical damage was done in the two 1983 Lebanon incidents, in which truck bombs were used to collapse the U.S. Marine barracks and the U.S. embassy.

Responding to these critics, General Partin observed that it is not surprising that even many people with a professional knowledge of explosives might be unduly impressed with the size and explosive wallop of the bomb and fail to reckon with the fundamental laws of physics. "Yes, this was a big bomb with a big blast," agreed General Partin.� "But most people fail to appreciate how inefficient a blast is in air and how dramatically its destructive potential drops off just a few feet from the explosion. In the Lebanon barracks bombing. The truck was driven directly under the building so that the explosion had maximum effectiveness against a much lower building with much smaller columns."

Demolitionist, Partin pointed out, rarely deal with the size of explosive charge used in the Oklahoma City truck bomb. "They use a couple hundred pounds of explosive that may be distributed among dozens - or hundreds - of small charges detonating microseconds or milliseconds apart."

Those charges placed directly on, or in, a structure, "propagate a wave of deformation of nearly a million pounds per square inch that pulverizes concrete, which has a yield strength of only about 3,500 pounds per square inch."

But if you put just a few feet of air between the explosive and the target, the blast wave quickly drops from nearly a million pounds per square inch to hundreds of pounds per square inch. It still makes an impressive boom, but has very little effect on heavy reinforced concrete.

It was this fact of physics which occupied much of Partin's attention in weapons development for the U.S. Armed Forces and made him an untiring crusader for the development and deployment of precision-guided munitions. General Partin cites accounts of the many laboratory and field tests he ran using large-yield bombs on numerous structures and targets. That experience, he says, together with all the known history of modern warfare shows that bombs can detonate close to a hard structure without causing severe destruction.

One argument offered by a nationally prominent demolition expert we interviewed who disagreed with the multiple explosion thesis turned out to provide not only an interesting insight into human psychology, but a strong (though unintended) affirmation, of sorts, for the general's position. "But if there were [explosive] charges planted inside the building, that would indicate complicity by [agents of] the government," he commented, "and I just can't believe that."

The New American received a similar remark from another explosives specialist, indicating that when it comes to confronting unpleasant realities, even some who are accustomed to dealing with "just the facts" may allow emotions to lead.

Compounding Evidence: An inside bombing is consistent not only with the aforementioned evidence and explosives experience, but with other facts in the case as well. "You probably recall seeing the broadcast [on April 19th] in which a reporter from Channel 4 television in Oklahoma City is interviewing an official after the blast who is explaining that a bomb squad has just defused one undetonated bomb and is in the process of disarming another," says General Partin.

Yes, we do recall, as do millions of others, no doubt. And we have it on videotape. Subsequent "official" statements explained that what had actually been discovered turned out to be ATF "training aids."

To General Partin, such explanations are cut from the same deceptive cloth as the official scenarios which are being used to obfuscate and contradict the plain facts of this horrendous crime. The "dummy bomb" reports, he says, "impute either the highest stupidity to the bomb technicians - since training aids are always clearly labeled as such - or gross, gross incompetence on the part of the ATF for not marking the devices as 'training aids' in the first place."

Yet another significant piece of evidence against the "single truck bomb" theory is the structural integrity of the remainder of the building after the explosion. A single bomb blast large enough to cause the destruction we saw there would also cause considerable structural damage to the rest of the building. That, however, was not the case. Architects and structural engineers involved with the building told The New American that emotional and political factors, not technical and safety factors, guided the decision to demolish the building.

Architect Ed Kirkpatrick arrived at the Murrah Building shortly after the April 19th explosion and was one of the main structural safety consultants in the early phases of the rescue effort.

Most of the building was, in his opinion, structurally sound and worth restoring. "I thought they were much too hasty in bringing it down," he told The New American. Jim Lofts, the architect who designed the award-winning building, also agreed that the structure was sound and could be restored. "I think technologically we could have removed the damaged part of the building and rebuilt it, and I was for that," he said in an interview with The new America. "But I've come to see that emotionally it might not have worked; it might be too difficult for the employees to work again at the same building."

The structural integrity of the Murrah Building after the blast buttresses the evidence that explosives other than the truck bomb were involved in this crime. It is consistent with the use of demolition charges which produce very precise, localized damage. It also points to the conclusion that the decision to destroy the building was based on political considerations, not on professional, technical expertise. Demolition of the building was not essential to "public safety," as the politicians alleged. Demolition, especially a very hurried demolition, was essential though to bury the evidence. General Partin visited the FBI Waste Systems landfill outside Oklahoma City recently where the Murrah Building rubble was taken.

He had originally thought that the materials would have been laid out for investigation, as one would expect in a case of this importance, involving such great loss of life and such serious national security implications. Far from it. Although much of the debris was initially deposited on the parking lot and the grounds of the Oklahoma County Sheriff's Department Training Center for examination, it is now buried. The landfill is surrounded by a chain link fence and, when the general visited the site, was guarded by security personnel. "This," says General Partin, "is a classic cover-up of immense proportions."

Considering the enormity of the crime committed, the rancorous political debate and furious legislative activity it has produced, and the extensive media coverage that has been lavished on some of the most trivial minutiae of this case, the near total blackout of General Partin's highly credible analysis is nothing short of amazing. The same media jackals who, in the wake of Oklahoma City, have swarmed all over rural American communities in desperate search of right-wing bogey men to fit their preferred preconceptions, cannot be bothered by common sense, facts, and solid evidence.

It may be that the general's assessment will be proven to be way off; perhaps other equally qualified experts will be found to adequately answer the critical objections he raises. If that is the case, so be it. So far, however, the prostitute press and pusillanimous politicians have sought to stifle his persuasive arguments with stonewalled silence. And, ignoring his compelling evidence, they continue cynically to exploit the fears they have fanned since the Oklahoma bombing to push so-called "anti-terrorist" legislation that seriously threatens the liberty of all Americans.

Yes, "cover-up" and "burying the evidence" have taken on new meaning since Oklahoma City. And for all the righteous blather about "bringing to justice" those responsible for this heinous act, so far there appears to be no one in Congress, the government, or the major media with the courage, integrity, and resolve to take the risks involved in assuring that true justice is not trampled and that the real criminals do not get away - literally - with murder.

Purveyors of Hate and Division: Since the Oklahoma City bombing, President Clinton has launched a broadside attack on his arch political enemies, the entire political right in America urging all Americans to "speak out against inflammatory rhetoric and against those who spread hate." ^[111]

On Monday, April 24, 1995, 5 days after the bombing, Clinton denounced the "loud and angry voices that inflame the public debate" and encouraged the American people to turn against "the purveyors of hatred and division." Attacking talk radio (which is by-and-large unfriendly to the President), Clinton said the nation's airwaves are being used to "keep some people as paranoid as possible and the rest of us all torn up and upset with each other. They spread hate, they leave the impression that violence is acceptable...Those of us who do not agree with the purveyors of hatred and division, with the promoters of paranoia...it is time we all stood up and spoke against that kind of reckless speech and behavior. When they talk of hatred, we must stand against them. When they talk of violence, we must stand against them. When they say things that are irresponsible, we must call them on it." ^[112]

After the President's remarks (in Minneapolis) suggesting, according to the Albuquerque Journal "that there is a link between the Oklahoma City bombing and harsh conservative attacks on government," Rush Limbaugh responded that� "the liberals, led by Clinton, were trying to foment a national hysteria against the conservative movement...Make no mistake about it; liberals intend to use this tragedy for their own political gain."

Limbaugh blamed "many in mainstream media for irresponsible attempts to categorize and demonize those who had nothing to do with this...there is absolutely no connection between these nuts and mainstream conservatism in America today."

On May 1, President Clinton denounced "armed fanatics who challenge federal authority while professing to love America. People who say 'I love my country but I hate my government - who do these people think they are, saying their government has stamped out human freedom." ^[113]

On May 6, 1995, the Albuquerque Journal wrote: "In his most vehement and direct attack on volunteer militia groups since the Oklahoma City bombing, President Clinton on Friday (speaking at Michigan State University) denounced them as false patriots, declaring 'there is nothing patriotic about hating your government or pretending you can hate your government but love your country...'How dare you suggest we in the freest nation on earth live in tyranny? How dare you call yourself patriots and heroes? If you appropriate our sacred symbols for paranoid purposes and compare yourselves to colonial militias who fought for democracy you now rail against, you are wrong.' Clinton aides said the President's remarks were not just directed at militias, but at a larger group that is being drawn into a growing culture of anti-government violence, reinforced by vituperative radio programs." ^[114]

Clinton Creates A Backlash: Commenting on Clinton's post-bombing rhetoric, New York Times columnist William Safire wrote (April 28, 1995): "Unable to restrain himself from treating the tragedy as a political opportunity, the president launched into a diatribe against the radio talk show hosts who have deviled him...The impression Clinton left, by his very words, was that the Oklahoma bombing had been incited by words 'regularly said over the airwaves' by his political critics."

Clinton's attacks, Safire wrote: "were calculated to associate the bombing and the national revulsion that followed it, with what has been said 'over the airwaves.'"� That means talk radio. "The President was not criticizing Hollywood movie makers who punctuate each chase with spectacular explosions, or who perpetrate theories that the government conspired to kill Kennedy and cover it up. Instead, the President was clearly aiming suppressing fire at right wing radio talk show hosts. In the presence of tragedy, to impute a portion of responsibility to angry airwaves as 'promoters of paranoia' is a form of extremism that a president should avoid."

Denver talk show host and columnist Mike Rosen recently wrote in The Denver Post: "Clinton perceived an opportunity to stigmatize his main-stream conservative critics by linking them to the Oklahoma City bombers. Clinton's denouncement was shallow and self-serving. Criticism - even intense criticism - is not synonymous with hate. Criticism is the lifeblood of a free society. It is why we have a First Amendment

To liberals like Clinton, it's 'valid criticism' when a liberal attacks a conservative, but 'hate' when a conservative criticizes a liberal...To hear Bill Clinton tell it, people could be trusted to think for themselves when liberals had a monopoly on the media. Now that conservatives have a beachhead on talk radio, those who agree with them are portrayed as mindless automatons."

Columnist Tony Snow, writing in The Denver Post (April 27, 1995) about Clinton's politicizing of the tragedy at the funeral service for blast victims, said: "The Elmer Gantry of the Me Generation spoiled everything by turning dead children into political props. He committed the gaffe in a funeral service, of all places, when he used an eulogy to ask Americans to 'purge the dark forces surrounding us.'

He later explained that he was talking about the 'loud and angry voices of paranoia that spread hate and violence' - an obvious allusion to the American right wing. Think about it! The President did not blame McVeigh. Instead, he treated the madman as a leading social indicator and implied that the real culprits in the Oklahoma City tragedy were an undefined mass of 'them' - gun owners, talk radio hosts, conservatives and other dissenter-devils of various sorts.

He then proposed a 'cure' for the imagined trend: Have Congress redefine terrorism in terms broad enough to include everything from fighting words to the ownership of things that in combination might be used for evil ends.

The Oklahoma blast enabled the President to combine his two favorite replies to last year's elections - that his opponents are evil and he alone can save the children. ^[115] But timing is everything, and the President's latest attack gave even opportunism a bad name. The White House's consistent references to the children, coupled with reporters' ghoulish insistence on trying to top each other's eloquent description of playroom carnage amounts to political kinder porn.

The President also proved that his word means nothing. On Thursday he cautioned against stereo-typing. On Monday, he lumped his opponents in with McVeigh - and encouraged wide-ranging recriminations. Grief does things like that to a man. So it now falls to the gentle American people to console Bill Clinton and teach him the proper way to mourn - not with vengeance or spite, but with tears and prayers for the living and the dead."

Indicating All Conservatives: It is not just those conservative white men who dress up in military fatigues who fear the federal government. In a USA Today/CNN/Gallop poll released April 27, 1995, the question was asked: "Is the federal government so large and powerful that it poses an immediate threat to the rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens?" 40% of the public, representing 106 million people, said yes. As Gary Bauer, president of the Family Research Council said: "I doubt if there has been any time in our 220-year history when four out of ten Americans would see our government as a threat."

The Rocky Mountain News (April 27, 1995) wrote: "In the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing, the Gallup Poll found that Americans worried that the federal government poses an immediate threat to their liberties don't fit the stereotype of those in the militia movement. In fact, the Gallup survey found just the opposite. Gallup found more women than men, more blacks than whites, and more Democrats than Republicans who say they are worried the federal government might threaten their liberties."

Gallup found 39% of Americans surveyed believed the federal government was a threat to the rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens. Gallup found agreement about a government threat: By 41% of women and 35% of men; by 37% of whites and 54% of non-whites; by 39% of self-described conservatives and 42% of independents. Those not trusting the government in various regions of the country were 41% in the South; 38% in the Midwest, 37% in the East, and 36% in the West (i.e., pretty evenly distributed across the country). The survey also found that 19% think "That ordinary citizens should be allowed to buy firearms and organize to resist the powers of the federal government." That is incredible - unprecedented in U.S. history. Over 50 million Americans say, according to Gallup, that they would use armies "to resist the powers of the federal government."

The Establishment media went into apoplexy over these polls, so CNN retook the poll, asking the same question but leaving out the word "immediate." The second time around, in the CNN poll published on May 16, 1995, 52% of respondents said they do not trust the government. In light of these polls, it would seem that the Clintonites and the liberal media are pursuing a very unwise (and perhaps even dangerous) course to attack (in the media at the moment) the conservative movement. Constitutionalists, pro-lifers, the Christian right, and anyone who opposes, disagrees with or criticizes the government.

These polls would seem to indicate that opposition to the government is far larger than the 50 to 100,000 militia members which the Clintonites and media are presently targeting, and is not just restricted to the political right or frustrated white males. Are the Clintonites trying to provoke a confrontation, as they did at Ruby Ridge and Waco, only this time much larger?

Attacking Talk Radio: Bill Clinton and the Establishment media have picked a fight with the talk radio industry (which has become the equivalent to the "American Town Meetings" of the 1990s), and so far it appears to have backfired, with talk radio having won the first round. Thousands of irate listeners have been calling in to hundreds of talk shows across the country^[116] to decry Clinton's attacks on freedom of speech, on talk radio, and his "guilt by association" linkage of talk radio to the Oklahoma City bombing. Clinton attacked "people who use the airways to spread hate and violence."

Rush Limbaugh told listeners: "Liberals intend to use this tragedy for their own gain. The Clinton attacks will have a chilling effect on the debate of ideas. We have been talking about the role of government since the founding of this country 200 years ago. I'm here to tell you it is irresponsible and vacuous to suggest this 200-year-old debate caused this tragedy."

Commenting on the present frenzy of the main-line media, Limbaugh said: "You want a real recipe for hate? You take an elite group losing its monopoly as your opinion leader: columnists at the major newspapers, anchors at the major networks, reporters on magazines and so forth. Add to that a new medium (including me) that's cutting into their influence. You blend that with a national shift in the country from left to center. Then you wait for a monstrous tragedy to inflame it, and you keep it cooking as long as you can." ^[117]

Attacking the Conspiracy Theorists: High on the Clintonites' and the Establishment media's hit list (or is it hate list?) are people who talk about the coming world government under the U.N. called The New World Order. MIA has written frequently about this world government and this writer has in fact published a book entitled: The New World Order: The countdown To Armageddon.

Pat Robertson's book on the New World Order (for which he is presently taking massive flack from the Establishment media) sold over a half-million copies. Virtually everything the conservatives know about the New World Order they were told by Establishment types who are behind it, such as George Bush (who mentioned it several hundred times in public); Henry Kissinger who, among other things, says that "NAFTA is a giant stepping-stone to the New World Order;" David Rockefeller and other leaders of the Trilateral Commission and Council on Foreign Relations. Gorbachev talked about the New World Order hundreds of times while in power, and since. So did Willy Brandt, Helmut Schmidt and other European leaders. The Establishment has been open about their plans to install a world government by the year 2000, having written profusely about same in their own publications for years, and having talked openly about such plans in their meetings. But now, once again, the genie is out of the bottle. Our side was listening and now tens of millions of Americans (conservative and liberal) understand their plans for world government - which the Establishment media now vehemently deny ever existed. And they are trying to label anyone who mentions the subject of their New World Order global government as a dangerous right-wing hate-purveying fanatic - perhaps even a mental case. Oops! Please send back your New World Order book and we shall burn or shred them before Bill Clinton's book burners arrive.

Dr. Dennis Cuddy, author of Secret Records Revealed: Bill Clinton and the New World Order, recently wrote the following letter to The Wall Street Journal regarding the conspiracy for world government, which the Establishment (including The Wall Street Journal) now denies ever existed: Dear Mr. Henninger: On Your editorial page, you printed a rather extreme article, "A Millennium of Paranoia" by Daniel Pipes. The article concluded by saying the battle should take place "in the realm of ideas." Therefore, I hope as a matter of fairness, you will allow me to write an article giving an opposite view of the theory. If you are unwilling to do that however, I hope at the very least you will print the letter-to-the-editor below. Thank you. Paranoia and Pathology?: "Concerning Daniel Pipes' 'A Millennium of Paranoia' (April 26), of course there aren't conspiracies around every corner, but it's a bit much for Mr. Pipes to use words like 'paranoia' and 'pathology' when President Wilson in 'The New Freedom' said: 'There is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that (people) had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.' A few years later, New York City Mayor John Hylan elaborated on Wilson's statement, naming names.

A few years later, William Paley began CBS and hired as chief advisor Edward Bernays, who wrote 'Propaganda' the same year (1938), stating: 'Those who manipulate the organized habits and opinions of the masses constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power in this country.' And a few years later, President Roosevelt wrote to Col. Edward M. House (President Wilson's chief advisor): 'The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.'

More recently, Richard Gardner in the Council on Foreign Relations' Journal, 'Foreign Affairs,' wrote that 'an end run around national sovereignty, destroying it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.' He went on to explain how GATT would be part of it, and later (1992) he became an adviser to Bill Clinton on U.N. matters, with President Clinton afterward appointing him an Ambassador. Also in 1992, Strobe Talbott (number 2 at the State Department) wrote in 'Time:' 'Perhaps national sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all,' and that 'the case for world government' was 'clinched.' For this article, he was given an award by the World Federalist Association, to which President Clinton, on June 22, 1993 wrote a congratulatory letter saying the WFA's past president, Norman Cousins, 'worked for world government,' and the President concluded the letter by wishing them 'future success.'

Bill Clinton's Georgetown University mentor, Professor Carroll Quigley, in 'Tragedy and Hope' said he had looked at the 'secret records' of the power elite and approved of what they were doing. He went on to describe the Council on Foreign Relations as a 'front' for J.P. Morgan, and later Arthur Schlessinger, Jr. in 'A Thousand Days,' would also use the term 'front organizations' of the power elite to describe the CFR, Rockefeller, Carnegie and Ford Foundations. In 1992, CFR member and former Citicorp chairman Walter Wriston wrote 'The Twilight of Sovereignty,' saying that 'a truly global economy will require ...compromise of national sovereignty...There is no escaping the system.'

There are hundreds of other quotes by preeminent people that could be given, but Mr. Pipes spends a great deal of time on McCarthyism. What he doesn't say is that in Carl Berstein's 'Loyalties: A Son's Memoirs,' Carl's father (a member of the American Communist Party) chided his son, saying: 'you're going to prove McCarthy right, because all he was saying was that the system was loaded with communists. And he was right.'" ^[118]

Attacking Gun Owners: The Establishment and the political left desperately want and need gun control. They cannot slam dunk their New World Order global government on America while 75 million Americans still own 200 million firearms. And over the past months the gun control juggernaut has been badly stalled out. Support for, or opposition to gun control was a major issue in many congressional races last fall and a number of leading liberal congressmen such as Tom Foley, Jack Brooks, and Mike Synar lost their seats because of their support for gun control.

Prior to the Oklahoma City bombing, the repeal of the ban on semi-automatic weapons (almost 200 different guns) which was part of Clinton's 1994 Crime Control Bill, looked like it was in the bag. There was strong support among Republicans for repeal of the so-called "assault weapons ban" i.e., up to 225 House members were committed to support the repeal). In the wake of the Oklahoma City, all of that has changed. The Republicans have shelved all efforts to real the ban for 6 to 12 months (or perhaps indefinitely).

In spite of the fact that no firearms were used in the commission of the Oklahoma City bombing, the political left, the media, and the Clintonites have used the tragedy to stir up anti-gun emotions across America and to reinvigorate the gun control juggernaut which stalled out last year. Bill Clinton and the media leftists have masterfully tried to connect the bombing to militias (although there appears to be no direct link between the bombers and the various state militias) and then to connect the militias to guns, and hence gun control.

The Democrat/Clinton/media spin on gun control is that advertisements by pro-gun organizations such as NRA may have helped create the climate of paranoia that encourages militia groups and others to hate the federal government. [Note: Is that a stretch, or is that a stretch?] The leftist Handgun Control, Inc., has criticized the NRA-sponsored ad showing a heavily armed BATF squad about to launch an assault on a home.

But isn't that exactly what the BATF has been doing to law-abiding gun owners for years - kicking in doors (usually at dawn) and shooting innocent victims if they make a move? Isn't that what happened to the Weavers, to Donald Scott, to the Branch Davidians, and to dozens more Americans in recent years? This is the same BATF which Representative John Dingell (D-MI) referred to when he said: "If I were to select a jackbooted group of fascists who are perhaps as large a danger to American society as I could pick today, I would pick the ATF."

Question: Why does the BATF always wear black - and especially black ski masks? The only people who wear black ski masks in the 1990s are Arab terrorists, criminals robbing 7-11s, and the BATF (and FBI). Is it for intimidation purposes? Even the Gestapo and the KGB, as bad as they were, didn't wear black ski masks when they kicked in doors of citizens.

So great have been the abuses of the BATF, that this "rogue agency" (as it has been called by a number of U.S. Congressmen) was about to be investigated for abuses of gun owners by a congressional committee. In the wake of Oklahoma City, those hearings have been postponed, and BATF power and influence may even be increased.

Handgun Control, Inc., has accused the pro-gun group (called by the press "pro-gun ideologies") of "incendiary rhetoric that is being parroted by militia groups." And on and on it goes, as the Clintonites, the mainline media, and the political left try to tie together (in the minds of the American public) the Oklahoma bombing, pro-gun militias, and gun ownership in general, and imbues the pro-gun groups with "the rhetoric of hate, paranoia, division, and extremism" in order to justify even more Draconian gun control measures, which are a part of proposed anti-terrorism, anti-paramilitary group legislation. This is exactly the way Hitler and the Nazis emotionally stampeded the gullible German people into gun control in the wake of the Richstag fire in Berlin in 1933 (which also had nothing to do with firearms). So, in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing, with fertilizer the alleged weapon, the left is attacking gun owners, gun-owning militias, the Second Amendment, the NRA, and Gun Owners of America. My, how they have changed the subject and most Americans haven't even caught on.

New Proposed Legislation That Needs To Be Opposed:

1). H.R. 1488: Initially this bill was designed to repeal the 1994 semi-auto ban. But the bill has been changed so that it will actually increase the scope and power of the federal government over firearms - by increasing the BATF's jurisdiction over firearms. Section 3 of the bill would effectively federalize certain state crimes committed while in the possession of a firearm by creating mandatory prison terms for a broad range of conduct consisting of the actual or threatened use of force against person or property. Conduct as innocuous as threatening a barking dog or defending yourself against a violent felon who just turned his back on you could land you 10-20 years in a federal prison.

Section 3 of H.R. 1488 will massively increase the role of the federal government (especially the BATF). Under this provision, Bernie Goetz, who defended himself against, and shot four subway thugs in New York in the 1980s, would have received a mandatory minimum prison sentence of 20 years with no parole. Section 3 opens the door to getting the federal government involved in all gun possession charges - both state and federal. Under H.R. 1488, the BATF will start enforcing gun laws that up until now have been enforced by the states. (This is yet another attempt to take what little is left of State's rights away). The BATF would then become the gun cops, enforcing every local gun ordinance.

2). The Domestic Insurgency Act of 1995 - H.R. 1544: Introduced May 2, 1995 to prohibit the formation of paramilitary organizations (i.e., to outlaw all militias). This, of course, is un-Constitutional, since militias are set out and made legal in the U.S. Constitution - but Constitutionality is of no major concern to most members of Congress or the Clintonites. This bill will effectively outlaw any two (or more) people getting together with firearms. (You will have to forget about hunting with your buddies).

It will give the government carte blanche to go after gun owners. If you and two friends, or two of your children are at the shooting range with firearms, you can be defined under this bill as a "paramilitary group" and sentenced to up to 10 years in prison and fined as well. Training with firearms (i.e., as at firearms training schools) will be severely restricted or eliminated under this legislation (except for government agents). Does this sound like legislation that might have come out of the Third Reich? Folks, they're serious about taking your Second Amendment gun rights away from you. Believe it!

3). The Counter-Terrorism Legislation - There are actually two versions of this legislation - the first being pushed by President Clinton and Senators Biden and Specter, and Representatives Schumer and Dicks. The second is a Republican version (S. 735) introduced by Senators Hatch, Dole, Nickels, Thurmond, Simpson, Brown, Kyl, and Gramm. The Republican version would give broad new powers to the government and the Clinton version would give near total police state powers to the government. Both pieces of legislation will greatly restrict our freedoms and gun ownership rights, but the Clinton version is far and away the worst.

Gun Control in Canada : Canadian gun controllers are using the Oklahoma City bombing as an excuse to register all firearms in Canada (i.e., handguns, rifles, and shotguns) and shut down almost all ammunition sales. Justice Minister Allan Rock says a, "tough, universal gun control law is necessary to stem crime in Canada, and could head off formation of private American-style militias." ^[119]

Attacking the Militias: The government, the Clintonites, and the mainline media have become totally paranoid about the militias which have begun to spring up in several dozen or more states. Probably comprising between 50,000 and 100,000 members, these groups appear to be made up predominately of patriotic, conservative individuals (many of them ex-military) who strongly support the Constitution, traditional (Christian) values, and the Second Amendment right to own and bear firearms - a right which they believe the government is trying to take from them.

Most militia types (along with millions of other Americas) have come to understand and hate the New World Order, and many militia people apparently see themselves as a sort of "French Resistance" if the Establishment tries to slam dunk the New World Order on America. Let us hope and pray that it never comes to that. The media have stereo-typed militia members as White Males, 18-46 years old, with past service in the military; Christian, unemployed, and gun owners.

Typical of the media rhetoric directed against the militia movement since the Oklahoma City bombing was an article in the Dallas Morning News (April 27, 1995) by Clarence Page, entitled: "Hate Groups Declare War on America." Page wrote: "An American Jewish Congress report called the militias a new style of hate group operating in 20 states that target not only racial and religious minorities, as do old-style haters ^[120], but also government and government workers. The first person murdered by a militia member may well be a county clerk, a postal worker, a deputy sheriff, a tax collector, a fire fighter...Those who declare war on a country's government declare war on all Americans."

Question: Is this the very rhetoric of hate and paranoia of which the left accuses conservatives? Is this inflammatory language?

The U.S. Government inadvertently helped to create the militias when its agents shot Vicki Weaver (a nursing mother with baby in arms) and her 14-year-old son, Sam, and when the BATF and FBI attacked and killed 86 men, women, Children, and babies at the Branch Davidian compound in Waco a little over two years ago. The present militia movement was born out of fear, anger, and revulsion arising from these two well-publicized government abuses of power. Prior to the Oklahoma City bombing, Congressional hearings on these two government attacks on peaceful citizens were scheduled and hopefully will still take place. ^[121]

The present militias, while predominately made up of patriotic God-fearing individuals exercising their rights to bear arms and form a militia, probably do have a few kooks, radicals, and hotheads in their midst. The militia movement has been under withering attack from the media since the Oklahoma City bombing and may soon come under physical attack from the government.

If the militias wish to survive and play a positive, peaceful, constructive role (as envisioned by the Founding Fathers), they should set up a screening mechanism for new members or recruits to identify and expel undisciplined hotheads and moles who will discredit them in the eyes of the general public and give the government the excuse to move against them and eliminate them. They should also cooperate closely with local law enforcement officials and get (and abide by) competent legal counsel at all times, meticulously striving to break no local, state or federal laws.

While this writer has no contact with militias, nor has he ever attended one of their meetings, it does appear that they are getting a bum rap from the Clintonites and the liberal media - who are trying to brand them as terrorists and link them to the Oklahoma City bombing. This writer has seen no evidence in the media to day that indicates that there is any such linkage.

If the government backs away from its people-control measures, gun-related raids of homes, property seizures, etc., the militia movement will probably fade away as quickly as it came into being. It should be remembered, however, that 52% of the public (over 130 million people), according to the polls, apparently do not trust the government, and 19% (or 50 million) would purchase firearms to defend themselves against the government, according to the same polls.

If Clinton, Reno, and their associates in the BATF, FBI, or the military should stage any more Ruby Ridge/Waco-style assaults - against, for example, militia groups or other groups of conservatives exercising their Constitutional right to dissent or criticism of the government, the ranks of these militia groups could swell from under 100,000 to hundreds of thousands or even millions, and these groups could be driven underground.

It has been widely rumored since March that the Clintonites have been planning such raids (perhaps using racketeering or conspiracy laws to charge a network of militias with inciting violence and carnage). This writer hopes and prays that neither the militia groups nor the government precipitates such a confrontation. It could spread like a prairie fire and further galvanize right-wing opposition to the government.

Questions Regarding Oklahoma City That Demand Honest Answers: Every American wants to see truth and justice emerge from the Oklahoma City holocaust - not another cover-up like we saw after the Kennedy assassination or the Waco massacre. The culprits of the Oklahoma City bombing need to be brought to justice, tried, and convicted in an open court of law (like the O.J. Simpson trial), and executed in order to satisfy the blood of the innocents, which was so cruelly spilled. But the incredible politicalization of the tragedy by the Clintonites and the Establishment media since April 19 notwithstanding, Americans will demand, and have the right to know, what really happened in Oklahoma City. A Waco/Kennedy assassination-type cover-up of the truth will simply spread more distrust of the government and exacerbate the growing polarization between the left and right in America.

The American people have a right to know what really happened at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, what really happened in Waco, and what really happened in Oklahoma City. An independent Congressional investigation of the Oklahoma City bombing should be conducted (like the independent Watergate and Whitewater investigations) and not just an investigation by the Clinton Administration and Reno Justice Department, who have been less than forthright in the past (as in the Waco massacre) and who could have a conflict of interest in the outcome of the investigation (i.e., a total indictment of the American right wing represents Clinton's only re-election chance in '96).

Review of the Kennedy Assassination and Cover-up: Because the government and liberal media give us instant, simple, pat, "obvious" answers to assassinations such as the JFK, Martin Luther King, or Bobby Kennedy shootings, or assassination attempts such as those on Ronald Reagan or Pope John Paul II, doesn't necessarily mean those answers are what really happened. Governments do perpetrate cover-ups, for whatever reason(s), and most thinking people know that.

When the Pope was shot in 1981, the global press and Italian government authorities immediately told the world that Ali Aga (the would-be assassin) was a right-wing Turkish terrorist - member of the right-wing Gray Wolves. This was dis-information.

It was soon learned from French intelligence that Ali Aga was in fact working for the KGB and was operating on orders from the Soviet Politburo to assassinate the Pope. Claire Sterling wrote about the KGB connection in Reader's Digest a year later, and the right-wing extremist story was quietly dropped. Today it is common knowledge (though never discussed) that the KGB tried to kill the Pope.

When John Hinkley shot President Reagan in 1981, the world was told that he was a "lone madman" and he was locked out of sight in a mental hospital for life. But no one ever explained where he was for the year prior to the shooting. Was he programmed or trained for the attack? It is rumored that he smuggled one note out of the hospital a few ears after the shooting, which said: "It was a conspiracy." We will probably never know.

When John F. Kennedy was shot in Dallas on November 22, 1963, we were told that Lee Harvey Oswald was a "lone madman." Immediately after the shooting, the liberal media reported all over the country that it was a plot by right-wing extremists, and conservative leaders in Dallas and elsewhere were beginning to be arrested. A few hours later WDSU Radio in New Orleans called to say that Oswald was a member of the pro-Castro Fair Play for Cuba Committee, had recently spent time in Russia where he was married to a Russian woman with close family ties to the KGB, and that Oswald had admitted on the radio that he was a Marxist.

The news was broadcast all over the country before it could be stopped, and the anti-right-wing witch hunt which had already begun stopped abruptly. Shortly thereafter, Oswald was shot to death by Jack ruby (who also had connections to Cuba) as he was being transferred from the Dallas County jail. All told, over the next year or so, about 50 people who "knew too much" about the assassination died abruptly.

The Warren Commission announced the "official version" that Oswald was a "lone madman" and the case was closed. A few months later journalist Dorthy Kilgallen was allowed to interview Jack Ruby in jail, and he allegedly told her "the whole story." Within 24 hours, before Kilgallen could release her story, she was dead of an overdose of sleeping pills. Ruby died shortly thereafter of an overnight case of cancer.

The point is, whoever shot JFK (and there are a number of possibilities), there was a massive cover-up with a long string of dead bodies and incredible dis-information released to the public by the government. Oswald probably did not shoot the president - a number of top military snipers have said the shot from the Texas Book Depository building was impossible. Oswald was probably simply an expendable pawn in a much larger conspiracy. Today, very few thinking people believe a "lone madman" named Oswald really shot President Kennedy. Even Hollywood has made a number of movies challenging the "lone madman" version.

Always mistrust the obvious and look behind the obvious, official version: Could Timothy McVeigh be the Lee Harvey Oswald of the 1990s? We may never know!

Questions Being Asked By the Public Which Demand Answers: A number of questions are being asked on talk radio by the "paranoid, doubting Thomases" of the right:

1). How did the government get the composite drawing of John Does 1 and 2 so quickly?

2). Why was McVeigh, who was allegedly clever enough to build an elaborate bomb and set it off in a manner that would seem to require great expertise and intelligence, dumb enough to try to escape in a car with no license tag?

3). why, if McVeigh had just murdered over 150 people, did he make no attempt to shoot the policeman who stopped him for speeding with the gun he had at his side?

4). Why has the government and the media covered up the data that shows that there were very likely two explosions 10 seconds apart as recorded by the seismology department of the University of Oklahoma? Was there a second, larger bomb inside the building? If so, who rigged it? How did they gain access to a federal facility?

5). How could an ammonium nitrate car bomb smaller than (or at most, equal to) the bomb detonated in the World Trade Center (and placed farther from its target) do so much more damage to the Federal Building in Oklahoma City?

6). Why were most of the 15 BATF agents out of the building at the time of the explosion?

7). Why has the fact that at least one additional undetonated bomb was found inside the building, indicating more bombers with access to the inside of the building, not been revealed by the media or the government?

8). Why did the FBI curtail the rescue operation on the night of the bombing (10 hours after the explosion) for 12 hours, reducing rescue workers to just 12, while they rushed 40-50 agents to floors 7-9 to retrieve papers and files? There were dying victims in the rubble, with the last live victim pulled out 36 hours after the blast. Why was FBI paperwork/file retrieval more important than rescuing dying victims? How many more victims died because of that delay? What was in those files?

9). Is it true, as rumored, that the BATF stored all the records on the Waco/Branch Davidian operations in the Murrah Federal Building, records which would have been subpoenaed by the Congress in the hearings on the BATF and its involvement at Waco and Ruby Ridge?

10). Does what happened in Waco on April 19, 1993, when about 80 men, women, children and babies were killed by the government, have any relevance to what happened in Oklahoma city on April 19, 1995? Would the same group of people (i.e., Clinton and Reno) who perpetrated the deaths of 86 peaceful citizens at the Branch Davidian compound (by shooting, CS gas, and flames) and covered up the deed, even to the extent of bulldozing the site a few weeks later, would such a group of people perpetrate Oklahoma City to advance their own political agenda? ^[122]

11). Were Whitewater-related indictments against Hillary Clinton and possibly Bill Clinton about to be handed down shortly after the Oklahoma City bombing - as has been reported?

12). it is alleged that, regarding the farm in Decker, Michigan where the brother of suspect Terry Nichols resided, a search warrant had already been obtained seven days prior to the bombing - before there was even a suspect. If so, and this allegation can be proven or disproved, why?

13). Two witnesses are reported to have seen a black helicopter hovering over the top of the Federal Building prior to the explosions, only to fly away minutes before the explosions, and not to return. This needs to be confirmed, denied, or explained.

The Omnibus Counter-Terrorism Bill: On February 10, 1995, Senators Joe Biden (D-DE), Arlen Specter (R-PA), Representatives Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Norman Dicks (D-WA) proposed legislation (which was authored and pushed by Bill Clinton and his Justice Department) S. 390 and H.R. 896, which would severely undermine the U.S. Bill of Rights and give many police state powers to the government.

Since Oklahoma City, Clinton and his liberal sponsors have moved to make the legislation even more Draconian. Elements of the legislation include:

1). The President can determine what persons or groups are "terrorists" at his discretion and that determination is unappealable. In the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing it is clear that any "politically incorrect" conservative group from pro-lifers to militias; from Christian Right activists to pro-gun groups; from Constitutionalists to traditionalists; can be lumped together and called terrorists.

2). The definition of "terrorist" will become open-ended. The bill essentially defines "terrorism" as "anything that is intended to coerce, intimidate or retaliate against a government or urban population." This is such a broad definition that it could include labor strikers, anti-abortion protesters, political action groups, Focus on the Family, or any criticism of the government.

3). Accused "terrorists" can be held without bail for long periods without trial. It reverses the presumption of innocence. They can be sentenced to 10 years minimum mandatory sentences with no possible parole or probation - even for minor offenses.

4). It un-Constitutionally suspends Posse Comitatus - which prevents the U.S. military from being used against the civilian population. This is especially troubling since 25% of the Marines questioned in the Twenty-nine Palms questionnaire said they would fire on American citizens if directed to do so by their superiors. Under this bill, the Army, Navy or Air Force can be used against the civilian population.

5). The FBI, the military, and other government agencies will be given carte blanche (indeed encouraged) to investigate and infiltrate any "suspect" groups (as Newt Gingrich advocates) at will. That means any "politically incorrect" conservative groups (pro-life, Christian Right, militia, pro-gun, etc., collectively to be called "hate groups") can expect to have the FBI and other government agencies opening their mail, tapping their phones, infiltrating their groups, spying on them and trying to entrap them into breaking some law so they can arrest and jail them under terrorism laws. The truth is, the feds are already doing these things!

6). It authorizes secret trials for aliens who are not charged with a crime with no chance to see evidence compiled against them or to question their accusers, and deportation with no appeal - all based on evidence heretofore deemed to be illegal.

7). It outlaws the caching (or hoarding) of "anything that could support terrorism" (again, remember the broad definition of the word). This includes money, weapons, communications equipment, food and shelter! (Reread that sentence!)

8). It provides the federal government with extended powers to tap phone conversations, faxes, and computer communications; monitor calling patterns and your log of phone calls; monitor credit card transactions, bank records, hotel and travel records, etc. (Isn't this what the KGB did in Russia and the Gestapo in Germany?) This will be the end of privacy and freedom in America as we have known it!

9). It forbids fund raising by organizations the President deems to be terrorist (i.e., that could be the NRA, Gun Owners of America, Focus on the Family, Operation Rescue, etc.).

The Republican Version: The Republicans, led by Orrin Hatch, Newt Gingrich and Bob Dole, have proposed an anti-terrorist bill (S. 735) which includes most of the provisions of the Clinton Bill, and which creates an across-the-board "conspiracy" crime for violation of virtually any firearms provision of federal law, including simple paperwork and technical violations.

It would remove the "overt act" requirement, currently a prerequisite for conspiracy under federal law, and would punish "conspiracy" at the same level as if the crime had actually been consummated (i.e., if you think about it, or talk about it, but don't do it, it's still "conspiracy." The RICO laws, now being applied against pro-lifers, will be expanded to many more "crimes," probably including so-called "hate crimes").

Penalties for the general crime of "conspiracy," to violate any federal felon, which, like "terrorism can mean almost anything, will be increased from 5 years to 20 years." Many state laws will be federalized and simply threatening to engage in an illegal act, or "appearing to have intended to coerce, intimidate or retaliate against a government or civilian population" is punishable by up to 10 years in jail.

In Summary: Both the Republican and Democratic versions of the anti-terrorism bill will go a long way toward destroying our Bill of Rights, our free speech, our right to dissent, our gun ownership rights, and our freedom of association with people or groups who are "politically incorrect," such as Christians, Lodges and etc., or hold "strange," non-mainstream religious views. Very few of our Congressional leaders seem to have any knowledge or understanding of our Constitution or how they are shredding it. The Republican version gives less direct power to the president, but both versions are a quantum leap toward an American Police State.

Other Troubling Legislation, Executive Orders and Initiatives:

1). The Communications Decency Amendment to the Telecommunications Reform Bill: The computer Internet is an electronic microcosm of mankind. It lets individuals anonymously debate any issue with a huge audience. Internet contains immeasurable data - valid and invalid, useful and useless, tranquil and inflammatory, decent and indecent - on just about any subject known or imaginable

Now Congress is proposing legislation that would impose a $100,000 fine and/or a two-year jail sentence on anyone using computers "to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass." In other words, Big Brother wants to censor the Internet of information deemed "politically incorrect," that spreads "hate, fear, division, distrust of government, and anything else - Government doesn't like."

The excuse for censoring the Internet is that some material has sexual content. Really! Then why not censor television, the movies, the newsstands, Playboy, Penthouse, etc.? Another excuse for censoring the Internet is that it contains "dangerous right-wing material" on guns, how to make bombs, etc. Yes, but that information is also in books. The federal Government is about to start censoring and burning books ala Nazi Germany as well?

As a May 6, 1995 editorial in The Albuquerque Journal pointed out: "Government control of offensive material on the Internet will lead to government control (or censorship) of intense debate of politically unpopular positions, religion, or government itself." In short, politically incorrect material on the Internet is about to be censored. Shades of Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, and etc.

2). H.R. 1488: Was originally introduced to repeal the semi-automatic weapons ban (part of the 1994 Clinton Crime Bill). But Section 3 was slipped in, which would "federalize" any crime involving possession of a firearm. This could lead to BATF enforcing even local ordinances that prohibit the discharge of weapons within city limits. It would probably ultimately require a BATF officer in every state, county, city and town in the nation.

3). H.R. 97: Would establish a rapid-deployment federal paramilitary strike force of 2,500 federal law enforcement officers who could be loaned out to the states that might need them.

4). Executive Order 12938: Authorizes a national state of emergency in the event of a nuclear, biological, or chemical terrorist attack (i.e., if there should be an attack like the gas attack which occurred recently on the Japanese subway train, Bill Clinton has the authority to place the entire country under martial law - ala Los Angeles during the riots in 1992).

5). Executive Order 12919: Authorizes martial law and the confiscation of resources, including transportation, food, water, medical supplies and other items necessary to respond to all "threats against national security." But what constitutes a "threat to national security?" Right-wing hate rhetoric? Militias? Gun owners? Pro-life demonstrators? Another Oklahoma-style bombing? Riots in a major city? Hitler called the communists a "threat to national security" and seized total power. Would Bill Clinton do such a thing, but use the conservative movement or some part thereof as the excuse?

6). H.R. 666: The "Beast Bill" Has already passed the House and is headed for the Senate. sold to the public as fighting crime, it effectively guts the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution by allowing illegally seized evidence to be used in court proceedings if officers or agents making the seizure think they were within Fourth Amendment guidelines. What does that mean? No one knows, so obviously from now on all illegal seizures will be in "good faith" and there Will Be No Fourth Amendment Protection.

7). Hate Crime To Be Targeted: The Orange County Register reported (April 20, 1995) that: "The Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith of San Diego County has started a computerized registry to better analyze and combat the problem of hate crimes and incidents of bias. Every law enforcement agency in the country has agreed to turn over its police records to the League for the posting of the registry."

Such computer tracking of "hate crime" (at least what the Zionists and government agents think is a hate crime) and "hate criminals" is about to be launched nationwide. But what is a "hate crime?" Essentially anything that is "politically incorrect" (i.e., conservatives, those critical of government, pro-life, pro-gun, pro-militias, Christians, etc.). Is Nazi and Communist-style censorship of free speech and political dissent right around the corner? What do you think? ^[123]

Conclusion: In the wake of the Oklahoma City tragedy, the political left in America (i.e., the Clintonites, the Establishment, the liberal mainline media, Congressional socialists of both parties, the gun control and abortion groups, etc.) are on a roll. Their declining fortunes since the November '94 election have been reversed and, in the wake of the April 19, bombing, they have put the entire conservative movement in America on the defensive by laying a collective guilt trip on it - like they tried to do after the Kennedy assassination.

Bill Clinton and the Liberal Establishment are using the Oklahoma City tragedy to turn the public against their political enemies (i.e., the conservatives) just as Adolf Hitler used the Reichstag fire to gain power over his political opposition. The Clintontites and the liberal media are using the bombing to try to stampeded America (i.e., the Congress and the public) into handing massive police state powers to the government to fight the "crisis of terrorism." And if they don't get it you can surely bet that other terrorist acts will occur. We have already seen a train wreck in Arizona which was said, by the government, to be a terrorist attack. And if that does not do the trick watch out for other bombings which will in all likelihood make the Oklahoma City Bombing small in comparison.

The Arizona Train Derailment: By David Hoffman, On October 9, 1995, the nation witnessed its first attack on a passenger train, when Amtrak�s �Sunset Limited� was derailed while en route from Phoenix to San Diego. The derailment, caused by sabotage, resulted in over 100 injuries, including one death.

The terrorists left behind a cryptic note, calling themselves the �Sons of the Gestapo.� The main-stream press quickly jumped on this latest �terrorist� attack, coming as id did only six months after the Oklahoma City bombing. While no one, including law-enforcement officials, had ever heard of the �Sons of the Gestapo,� the purveyors of deception immediately played it up as the obvious work of a �Right-wing� militia group.

It may not have mattered, however. In the aftermath of the Oklahoma City bombing, any such attack on American citizens would be excuse enough to push the Anti-Terrorism Bill through Congress. And the press and anti-militia activists such as the ADL and the SPLC were eager to jump on the militia connection. �Sons of the Gestapo,� they asserted, could only be the pseudonym for a Right-wing hate-group.

Yet law-enforcement officials had only an enigmatic message to guide them. The note left behind by the saboteurs railed against the BATF and FBI for their actions at Waco and Ruby Ridge, and stated, �This is not Nazi Germany.�

Why anyone would attack a passenger train to exact revenge on government officials for killing innocent civilians is beyond credulity. Yet, as in the Oklahoma City case, this was the message that the saboteurs and the government controlled press wanted us to believe. America was filled with hateful Right-wing extremists who would do anything; kill anyone, women, children, babies, to pursue their violent anti-government course. As Attorney General Janet Reno announced in the Oklahoma City case, so the local U.S. Attorney, Janet Napolitano would declared: �We are going to pursue every bit of evidence and every lead very thoroughly until we find the person or persons who committed this crime.�

While the FBI swarmed through Maricopa County, interrogating and harassing local residents and harassing the few isolated �desert rats� who inhabited the surrounding countryside, a real investigation was being conducted by a lone Maricopa County Sheriff. With the assistance of Craig Roberts, a retired Tulsa police officer with military intelligence experience who worked on the Oklahoma City investigation, the Sheriff was able to uncover some amazing information. What they found was that other than rescue vehicles, there were no vehicle tracks entering or exiting the crash site. Moreover, the site itself was extremely remote, being near the summit of the rugged Gila Bend Mountains, which surrounded the site to the east, north, and west. It was there, along a sharp S-curve, that the perpetrators had pulled 29 spikes from the tracks, causing the fatal crash.

Why had the perpetrators chosen such a remote location, Roberts wondered? Had they picked a more accessible spot, he reasoned, it would have surely lessened their chances of being caught, as all they would have had to do was drive to the nearest highway. In this case, the nearest road was Highway 8, 38 miles away, necessitating a difficult drive over rugged terrain, at the same time as law-enforcement officers would surely be on a heightened state of alert.

Shat Roberts and his sheriff partner also discovered was that 90 minutes away by air, in Pinal County, was a mysterious air base known as Marana. The locked-down facility was owned by Evergreen, Inc., a government contractor reportedly involved in drug smuggling during the Iran-Countra period. The base, located off of Highway 10 between Phoenix and Tucson, was the site of strange night-time training maneuvers involving black and unmarked military-type helicopters. Passersby had also witnessed black-clad troops dropping into the desert en masse, using steerable black �Paracommander� parachutes.

This began to raise some interesting possibilities. Had the perpetrators been dropped into the site by air, then picked up by chopper? Both Roberts and his colleague at the Sheriff�s Department were experienced military pilots. They observed that it would have been easy for a helicopter to fly low through the mountain passes, avoiding radar, and insert and extract a team. As Roberts noted, �A full moon, wind out of the south at 8 knots, and a clear sky would be an ideal night for air operation.�

The possibilities of a covert paramilitary commando team being responsible for the attack raised more than a few eyebrows at the Maricopa County Sheriff�s Department, until they began investigating a lead provided by a sympathetic FBI agent that several hikers had seen a small group of parachutists drop into the desert that night. They also discovered the following information: �A VFR target squawking 1200 that left Tri-City airfield in Albuquerque on a southwest course, climbed to 10,500 feet, then, when it was exactly due east of the Amtrak site, turned due west and flew a course line that took it one mile south of the site, it dropped to 8,500 feet. Albuquerque contacted the Los Angeles Center which tracked the aircraft to a landing at Montgomery Field in San Diego. It crossed the valley sough of the bridge at 1940 hours (7:40 p.m.) Since the winds that night were at 8 knots out of the south, a drop one mile from the target site would compensate for wind drift. Moreover, such a flight is not required to file a flight plan listing its passengers, and an aircraft flying out of Albuquerque, squawking on transponder 1200, wouldn�t look particularly suspicious.�

When they checked with the refueller at Montgomery Field, the records indicated that the �N� number checked to a Beach craft, registered to Raytheon. Raytheon owns E-systems. Like Evergreen, E-Systems, based in Greenville, Texas, is a covert government contractor, reportedly involved in drug-running, and reputed to have �wet-teams� (assassination teams). The director of E-Systems was former NSA Director and CIA Deputy Director Bobby Ray Inman. While it is possible a jump was made from the Beech craft, a plane commonly used for such purposes, it still left the problem of the team�s extraction. With the radar track information, the Maricopa Sheriff then went to the Air Force at Yuma, who monitor the Aerostat radar drug balloons. The DEA balloons have �look-down� capability for detecting low-flying aircraft. The Master Sergeant at Yuma agreed to help out. A short time later he called back. �Sorry,� he said. �We can�t help you out.� �What? Why? Asked Jack. �The plug�s been pulled.� �What does that mean?�

The sergeant sounded very uncomfortable when he replied. �We really wanted to check this out, but all I can say is the balloons were down that night.� �Why?� asked Jack. �Maintenance.� �All of them?� asked Jack, incredulously. �Yes, sir.� The sergeant sounded very nervous. �Why?� �All I can tell you is that they were ordered down for maintenance. It came from above my pay grade.�

One has to wonder what �above my pay grade� means. Why would all the balloons be ordered down for maintenance? Obviously, a cover-up was in progress. It was beginning to sound suspiciously like the hurried demolition of the Oklahoma Federal Building, to prevent any independent forensic analysis of the bomb site. Or the Secret Service removing President Kennedy�s protective bubble form his limousine; failing to secure the windows and rooftops along the parade route; and changing the route at the last minute.

Like the two foregoing examples, only the government; or shadow element within the government, had the capability of pulling that off. No �lone nut� or criminal syndicate could orchestrate such a massive and well-executed cover-up. Moreover, no militia group could order all the radar balloons down on the night of the attack. As a Maricopa County resident stated to the Arizona Republic regarding the FBI�s so-called militia theory, �Buddy, you can�t get three people out here to get together on what kind of pickup to drive, and you think we�re going to form a militia?�

Obviously, no militia would benefit from such an attack. And what about the �Sons of the Gestapo?� As Roberts wrote: �As an old Southeast Asia hand (a marine sniper during Vietnam). I remember that one of the teams used by Phoenix Program assassins working under MACV-SOG (Military Advisory Command, Studies and Observations Group) was a twisted bar-room version of the last acronym.� �Yeah,� a drunk trooper would mention. �I�m SOG a son of the Gestapo.��

The Phoenix assassination program, as previously discussed, was organized by the CIA�s William Colby, Ted Shackley, and fielded by General John Singlaub. Singlaub commanded Second Lieutenant Oliver North. Shackley, Singlaub, and North would go on to orchestrate the secret and illegal Iran-Contra operation, smuggling drugs into this county at such places as Mena, Arkansas and Marana. Interestingly whenever Iran-Contra drug shipments came in for the California run, the drug balloons under �Operation Watchtower� were shut down.

Could this be the same mechanism that shut them down the night of the attack? Apparently, the �Sons of the Gestapo� note left behind was a �false flat,� a distraction designed to serve a political purpose. In this case, that purpose; likes the Oklahoma bombing which preceded it, was to connect the Amtrak attack with the Patriot/Militia movement. Considering the reaction of the mainstream press, it appears they have largely succeeded.

All of these freedoms have been under steady and accelerating attack over the past few years, with the Republicans and many conservatives just as guilty of eroding these protections as the Democrats and liberals. Very few of our leaders in the Congress, in the media, in business, in the bureaucracy, in law enforcement, understand the Constitution or the real dangers to our freedoms if it is dismantled.

As a people, we Christians of Western European descent, are extremely susceptible to the simplest forms of psychological conditioning. In a message presented several years ago by Earl Jones titled "Changing Evil to Good" in which the classical system of psychological conditioning was explained and who developed it. We will very briefly review that system here because a form of it was used to create this unbelievable guilt with which the Christian West is burdened.

���������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Racism, Anti-Semitism: What Are They?

There is surely no nation in the world that holds "racism" and "Anti-Semitism" in greater horror than does the people in the United States. Compared to other kinds of offenses, it is thought to be somehow more reprehensible, than rape or murder - certainly more so than the murder of "innocent" unborn babies. The national media and public have become so used to tales of murder, rape, robbery, and arson, that any but the most spectacular crimes are shrugged off as part of the inevitable texture of American life.

However, "Racism" and "Anti-Semitism" are never shrugged off; for example, when a White Georgetown Law School Student reported in early 1995 that black students were not as qualified as White students, it set off a booming, national controversy about "racism." If the student had related some statement that the Jews would have considered "Anti-Semitic," and anything or anyone that disagrees with them is labeled as such, the White student would have been crucified and discharged from the school. Or if the student had merely murdered someone he would have attracted far less attention and criticism.

Racism is, indeed, the national obsession. Universities are on full alert for it; newspapers and politicians denounce it; churches preach against it; yet America is said to be racked with it, but just what is racism? Dictionaries are not much help in understanding what is meant by the word. They usually define it as the belief that one's own ethnic stock is superior to others, or as the belief that culture and behavior are rooted in race. When Americans speak of racism they mean a great deal more than this.

Nevertheless, the dictionary definition of racism is a clue to understanding what Americans do mean. A peculiarly American meaning derives from the current dogma that all ethnic stocks are equal; despite clear evidence to the contrary. All races have been declared to be equally talented and hard-working, and anyone who questions the dogma is thought to be not merely wrong but evil.

The dogma has logical consequences that are profoundly important; if blacks, for example, are equal to Whites in every way - what accounts for their poverty, criminality, moral degeneracy and dissipation? Since any theory of racial differences has been outlawed, the only possible explanation for black failure is White Racism. And since blacks are markedly poor, crime-prone, and dissipated, America must be raced with pervasive racism. Nothing else could be keeping them in such an abject state.

All public discourse on race today is locked into this rigid logic and any explanation for black failure that does not depend on White Wickedness threatens to veer off into the forbidden territory of racial differences. Thus, even if today's Whites can find in their hearts no desire to oppress blacks, yesterday's Whites must have oppressed them. If Whites do not consciously oppress blacks, they must oppress them unconsciously, if no obviously racist individuals can be identified, then social institutions must be racist. Or, since blacks are failing so terribly in America there simply must be millions of White People we do not know about, who are working day and night to keep blacks in misery. The dogma of racial equality leaves no room for an explanation of black failure that is not, in some fashion, an indictment of White People.

The logical consequences of this are clear; since we are "required" to believe that the only explanation for non-White failure is White racism, every time a non-White is poor, commits a crime, goes on welfare, or takes drugs, White Society stands accused of yet another act of racism. All failure or misbehavior by non-Whites is standing proof that White society is riddled with hatred and bigotry. For precisely so long as non-Whites fail to succeed in life at exactly the same level as Whites, Whites will be, by definition, thwarting and oppressing them. This obligatory pattern of thinking leads to strange conclusions.

Racism is a sin that is thought to be committed, almost, exclusively by White People. Indeed, a black congressman from Chicago, Gus Savage, and Coleman Young, the black mayor of Detroit, have argued that only White People can be racist. Like wise in 1987, the affirmative action officer of the State Insurance Fund of New York issued a company pamphlet in which she explained that ALL Whites are racist and that ONLY Whites can be racist. How else could the plight of blacks be explained without flirting with the possibility of racial inequality?

Although some blacks and liberal Whites concede that non-Whites can, perhaps, be racist they invariably add that non-Whites have been forced into it as self-defense because of centuries of White oppression. What appears to be non-White racism is so understandable and forgivable that it hardly deserves the name. Thus, whether or not an act is called racism depends on the race of the racist. What would surely be called racism when done by Whites is thought to be normal when done by anyone else. The reverse is also true.

Examples of this sort of double standard are so common, it is almost tedious to list them: When a White man kills a black man and uses the word "nigger" while doing so, there is an enormous media uproar and the nation beats its collective breast; but when members of the Black Yahweh cult carry out ritual murders of random Whites, the media are silent. College campuses forbid pejorative statements about non-Whites as "racist," but ignore scurrilous attacks on Whites. At election time, if 60 percent of the White voters vote for a White candidate, and 95 percent of the black voters vote for a black opponent, it is Whites who are accused of racial bias. There are 107 "historically black" colleges, whose fundamental blackness must be preserved in the name of diversity, but all historically White colleges must be forcibly integrated in the name of...the same thing. To resist would be racist.

"Black Pride" is said to be a wonderful and worthy thing, but anything that could be construed as an expression of White Pride is a form of hatred. It is perfectly natural for third-world immigrants to expect school instruction and driver's tests in their own languages, whereas for native Americans to ask them to learn English is racist. Blatant anti-White prejudice, in the form of affirmative action, is now the law of the land; and anything remotely like affirmative action, if practiced in favor of Whites, would be attacked as despicable favoritism. All across the country, black, Hispanic and Asian clubs and caucuses are thought to be fine expressions of ethnic solidarity, but any club or association expressly for Whites is by definition racist.

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) campaigns openly for black advantage but is a respected "civil rights" organization. The National Association for the Advancement of White People (NAAWP) campaigns merely for equal treatment of all races, but is said to be viciously racist and Anti-Semitic.

At a few college campuses, students opposed to affirmative action laws have set up student unions for White, analogous to those for blacks, Hispanics, Jews, and etc., and have been roundly condemned as racists. Recently, when the White students at Lowell High School in San Francisco found themselves to be a minority, they asked for a racially exclusive club like the ones that non-Whites have. They were turned down in horror. Indeed, in America today, any club not specifically formed to be a White enclave but whose members simply happen all to be white is branded as racist or Anti-Semitic.

Today, one of the favorite slogans that define the asymmetric quality of American racism is "celebration of diversity." It has begun to dawn on a few people that "diversity" is always achieved at the expense of White (and most of the time White men), and never the other way around. No one proposes that Howard University be made more diverse by admitting Whites, Hispanics, or Asians.

No one ever suggests that National Hispanic University in San Jose, California would benefit from the diversity of having non-Hispanics on campus. No one suggests that the Black Congressional Caucus or the executive ranks of the NAACP or the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund suffer from a lack of diversity. Somehow, it is perfectly legitimate for them to celebrate "homogeneity." And yet any all-White group, a company, a town, a school, a club, a neighborhood, is thought to suffer from a crippling lack of diversity that must be remedied as quickly as possibly. Only when Whites have been reduced to a minority has "diversity" been achieved.

Let us put it bluntly. To "celebrate" or "embrace" diversity, as we are so often asked to so, is no different from "deploring an excess of Whites." In fact, the entire nation is thought to suffer from an excess of Whites. Our current immigration policies are structured so that approximately 90 percent of our annual 800,000 legal immigrants are non-White. The several million illegal immigrants that enter the country every year are virtually all non-White. It would be racist not to be grateful for this laudable contribution to "diversity." It is, of course, only White nations that are called upon to practice this kind of "diversity." It is almost criminal to imagine a nation of any other race countenancing blatant dispossession of this kind.

What if the people in the United States were pouring its poorest, least educated and most criminal elements across the border into Mexico? Could anyone be fooled into thinking that Mexico was being "culturally enriched?" What if the state of Chihuahua were losing its majority population to poor Whites who demanded that schools be taught in English, who insisted on celebrating the Fourth of July, who demanded the right to vote even if they weren't citizens, who clamored for "affirmative action" in jobs and schooling?

Would Mexico, or any other non-White nation tolerate this kind of cultural and demographic depredation? Of course not. Yet White Americans are supposed to look upon the flood of Hispanics and Asians entering their country as a priceless cultural gift. They are supposed to "celebrate" their own loss of influence, their own dwindling numbers, their own dispossession, for to do otherwise would be hopelessly racist.

There is another curious asymmetry about American racism. When non-Whites advance their own racial purposes, no one ever accuses them of "hating" another group. Blacks and Jews can join "civil rights" groups and Hispanics can be activists without fear of being branded as bigots and hate mongers. They can agitate openly for racial preferences that can come only at the expense of Whites. They can demand preferential treatment of all kinds without anyone ever suggesting that they are "anti-White."

Whites, on the other hand, need only express their opposition to affirmative action to be called haters. They need only subject racial policies that are clearly prejudicial to themselves to be called racists. Should they actually go so far as to say that they prefer the company of their own kind, that they wish to be left alone to enjoy the fruits of their European heritage, they are irredeemably wicked and hateful.

Here, then is the final, baffling inconsistency about American race relations: All non-Whites are allowed to prefer the company of their own kind, to think of themselves as groups with interests distinct from those of the whole, and to work openly or group advantage. None of this is thought to be racist. At the same time, "Whites" must "also" champion the racial interests of non-Whites.

They must sacrifice their own future on the altar of "diversity" and cooperate in their own dispossession. They are to encourage, even to subsidize, the displacement of a European people and culture by alien peoples and cultures. To put it in the simplest possible terms, White people are cheerfully to slaughter their own society, to commit racial and cultural suicide. To refuse to do so would be racism.

Of course, the entire non-White enterprise in the United States is perfectly natural and healthy. Nothing could be more natural than to love one's people and to hope that it should flourish. Filipinos and El Salvadoran are doubtless astonished to discover that simply by setting foot in the United States they are entitled to affirmative action preferences over native-born Whites, but can they be blamed for accepting them?

Is it surprising that they should want their languages, their cultures, their brothers and sisters to take possession and put their mark indelibly on the land? If the once-great people of a once-great nation is bent upon self-destruction and is prepared to hand over land and power to whomever shows up and asks for it, why should Mexican, Blacks, Jews and etc., complain?

No, it is the White enterprise in the united States that is unnatural, unhealthy, and without historical precedent. Whites have let themselves be convinced that it is racist merely to object to dispossession, they have allowed themselves to be convinced that it is natural for their sons and daughters to marry a black, Jew or any other race, other than their own, that it is racist to work for their own interests. Never in the history of the world has a dominant people thrown open the gates to strangers, and poured out its wealth to aliens.

Never before has a people been fooled into thinking that there was virtue or nobility in surrendering its heritage, and giving away to others its place in history. Of all the races in America, only Whites have been tricked into thinking that a preference for one's own kind is racism. Only Whites are ever told that a love for their own people is somehow "hatred" of others. All healthy people prefer the company of their own kind, and it has nothing to do with hatred. All men love their families more than their neighbors, but this does not mean that they hate their neighbors. Whites who love their racial family need bear no ill will towards non-Whites. They only wish to be left alone to participate in the unfolding of their racial and cultural destinies.

What Whites in America are being asked to do is, therefore, is utterly unnatural; they are being asked to devote themselves to the interests of other races and to ignore the interests of their own kind. This is like asking a man to forsake his own children and love the children of his neighbors, since to do otherwise would be "racist."

What then, is "racism?" It is considerably more than any dictionary is likely to say. It is any opposition of Whites to official policies of racial preference for non-Whites. It is any preference by Whites for their own people and culture. It is resistance by Whites to the idea of becoming a minority people. It is any unwillingness to be pushed aside. It is, in short, any of the normal aspirations of people-hood that have defined nations since the beginning of history; but only so long as the aspirations are those of Whites.

In 1928, Walter Bernays, published a book titled "Propaganda." Walter Bernays was the nephew of Sigmund Freud, the father of modern psychology. In his book, "Propaganda," Walter Bernays discussed how the public mind is manipulated. He wrote this: "The structure of the mechanism which controls the public mind, and how it is manipulated by the special pleader who seeks to create public acceptance for a particular idea or commodity." He used the words special pleader to refer to any person or organization, public or private, who intends to control the public's mind.

Walter Bernays wrote further, "Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. Our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. If you can influence the group of leaders, either with or without their conscious cooperation, you automatically influence the group which they sway."

The system is so simple that it is hard to believe that it is so effective but, as was pointed out, we of Western European descent are extremely susceptible to brainwashing. Bernays explains how the system works. His example is specifically directed to developing the public desire for a produce but it can be and is used over and over to mold and direct our lives, individually and nationally. Continuing with his writing, "Supposing the public relations man for the Beech-Nut Bacon Company wanted to dramatically increase the sales of bacon to the public. He would suggest to the physicians in the country that they state publicly that it is wholesome to eat bacon. He would show 'proof' to the physicians that this is true. We know as a mathematical certainty that large numbers of persons will follow the advice of their doctors because the public relations man understands the psychological relationship of dependence of men on their physicians."

He continues by explaining the importance of stating to the physicians who the people and organizations are that OPPOSE the idea that bacon is wholesome. That, according to Bernays, is the key to the psychology. He explained that one should always show that individuals or organizations who are demonized or ridiculed to those opposing the idea that is being planted in the public mind.

Kooky scientists, convicted felons, the John Birch Society, the Ku Klux Klan, or Identity Christians were the types he suggested. It is obvious, he shows, that if people or organizations thought by the public to be evil, or crazy, were those opposing their cause, then the cause itself had to be righteous and true.

The system of controlled psychology as developed by Walter Bernays is the method that is being used to cause mainline Christianity, the government at all levels, the schools and the public at large to apologize and grovel at the feet of a perceived victim where there is no justification.

Applying the lessons learned from Walter Bernay's book "Propaganda" to the system of a double standard now

being seen in all of the Western Christian nations, we can understand why the government acts and reacts as they do. First, the "beauty and tranquility" of racial togetherness, the brotherhood of man, we must be an example of "democracy" in action, etc., is taught through the schools, churches, service organizations and government.

Then, they must find a person or organization that has beliefs that do not conform to those of the "established" victims of society. Examples of such beliefs are ethnic separation including dating and intermarriage, government at the lowest level in a true republican form, total freedom of religion (not only those with an approved 501-C3 tax exemption) and allodial ownership of land instead of ownership in fief. These are only a few examples from a list of many. These beliefs are generally lawful (as compared to legal) and they are nearly always Biblically moral.

Then, efforts are made to demonize one or more of such groups by using the full weight and power of the fourth estate, the establishment controlled media (TV, radio, newspapers, magazines and movies). These media outlets are somewhat under the gun, too.

If they don't cooperate they lose their license to operate. Thus, we see why organizations that are determined not to be politically correct are barred from broadcasting. We can see why interviews with such groups are pre-recorded and then edited to "print or broadcast the news that fits." The Waco siege is a good example of this phenomena. The mainline media was invited to the Waco siege by the government for the purpose of propaganda, to show the American people how omnipotent the federal government was. The moment the affair went awry, the media was totally excluded.

After the individual or organization has been thoroughly demonized, an incident is arranged to destroy that individual or organization with the goal of destroying the belief and molding the public at large into compliance. If we follow Walter Bernay's lessons in his book "Propaganda," we can readily realize that they have been used on our people for nearly 75 years. Only by the strength given to us by God if we ask Him for it, can we resist this terrible onslaught.

The real coup that has brought about this modern double standard has very little, if anything, to do with the Biblical history of the life and death of Jesus nor the tribulations and martyrdom of the early Christians, all of which was brought about by the high priests of the Phariseeical Jewry of that day.

The stories of attacks by the Jews and counterattacks by Christians throughout the past two millennia are well documented. Continuing to this day most Christians possess a latent mistrust of Jewry and in return the average Jew is wary and as a result has become circumspect, cautious and politic. By the very nature of the American society of ethical values being shared, the two diametrically opposed faiths have obtained a sort of truce.

But that is not the problem causing the current double standard which has all but destroyed our Christian Republic and the Christian Church along with it. The problem of the double standard has been caused by political Zionism. It is a political term and its politics is to control the world. It is accurately estimated that nearly 95 percent of political Zionists who claim to be Jews are actually atheistic and humanistic. They come mainly from the Ashkenazi clan of Khazaria and it is they who instigated and brought about Communism and the U.S.S.R.

But as Paul Gottfried reports in his well written editorial titled, "Why must Christians routinely grovel and apologize for crimes against Jews which they never committed?" ^[124]: "It has respected 'Christian' theologians such as Paul Van Buren, Mary Daley, and Malcom Hay, who took the lead in 'linking' the Holocaust and the New Testament. This practice was common among liberal Christians before it became widespread among Jewish authors. Through Elie Weisel did stress Christian guilt for the Holocaust as early as 1945, that idea played little role in the dominant Jewish interpretations before the seventies...Jewish victimology in the U.S. has coincided with the upsurge of other designated victim movements, black, Hispanic, gay, and feminist, and all have enjoyed the support or at least tolerance of the white majority Christian culture."

Mr. Gottfried reports on the speech delivered before the Anti-Defamation League of the B'nai B'rith by Ralph Reed of the Christian Coalition. This speech was reported by the "New York Times" which stated that Reed extended the olive branch to the Christian Coalition's Jewish critics by saying that the Coalition would try harder to overcome "insensitivity to Christian anti-Semitism."

The article reported that Reed disavowed any description to America as a Christian Nation. Reed said that describing America as a Christian Nation was blatant wrong and it conjured up for Jews historical memories of the Inquisition and other persecutions.

The "New York Times" article revealed that Ralph Reed criticized Pat Robertson for his statement in his book "The New World Order" wherein he complained of the conspiracy of European bankers against American interests. The ADL considered Robertson's reference to the European bankers as a veiled attack on Jewish interests. Reed stated, "if one is insensitive to other Jewish concerns, it does not answer these concerns to say 'I'm pro-Israel." Such a statement by the ADL is an admission that European bankers are primarily Jewish. Paul Gottfried very correctly states, "If Christians want to be punching-bags, other will take advantage of the masochism."

Another very pertinent point that Mr. Gottfried made was relative to the double standard, "Why are all Christians to blame for the Inquisition and Holocaust (whatever that really means), but Jews as such are not to be held responsible for the even larger massacres unleased by Communists in the present century? The Jewish record of excusing and even supporting murderous regimes of the Left is far grimmer than the Christian record of collaboration with Hitler...Why are Foxman and the ADL not required to apologize to the Christian kinsmen of those killed by Communist regimes in which Jews played prominent roles, but American Christians must now atone for every Christian act of intolerance, no matter when it occurred? Why are American Jewish leftists not to be held accountable, as Jews, for the acts of Russian Jewish Communists, even if they defended the Soviet system, but Southern Evangelicals in 1995 must bear responsibility for the unkindness of Spanish Catholics in 1492?"

Another example of this double standard might be cited to make my point more clear. �"For a long time the liberal establishment, Christian and Jewish, pretended that all slave traders were White Christians, which is historically inaccurate. The purveyors of this factoid only grew indignant when blacks implicated Jews specifically in the slave trade. While the first statement is false, the second is at least partially true: Sephardic Jews, such as those who settled in Rhode Island and in the Carolinas, sometimes did make money by trading in slaves. The same was true for Christians and for many African animists."

We have all seen TV articles showing the activities of the militias. They have shown such activities as target practice with their weapons and close-combat training as well as Special Forces type squad training. In fact, they have disclosed repeatedly that ex-Special Forces personnel are being used as the primary training teams.

In each of these TV articles the emphasis is on the supposed illegality of such activities. As we know, even the Congress is now holding hearings on these activities. The militia members interviewed at these hearings have conducted themselves in an exemplary manner.

But what about activities of this type by Jewish organizations? Have there been TV articles and documentaries covering the Camp Jedel operations in the Catskill Mountains in upstate New York? According to articles found in "The Times Herald Record," August 19, 1981; the "Albuquerque Journal," August 29, 1981; the "World News Examiner," August 20, 1982; "Time," August 30, 1971; "New York Sunday Record," August 23, 1981, the Jewish Defense League's activities at this camp are well documented. Notice that these articles are nearly 15 years old. Notice, also, that there has been no government intervention in any way and in fact, the camp is totally ignored.

As found in "The Zionist Terror Network: Background and Operations of the Jewish Defense League" ISBN 0-939484- 22-6, "Institute For Historical Review," P.O. Box 1306, Torrance, CA 90505, we find this description of their activities: �"Publically, both the JDL and Kahane (now deceased) are disavowed by mainstream Jewish organizations in the U.S. However, while Jewish leaders do not generally support the JDL in public many Jews are contributing to the organization. The Jewish Defense League has substantial real estate holdings including a school for terrorists in the Catskills, Camp Jedel, where Allen Goodman, a JDL member who massacred Arab civilians at the Temple Mount in Jerusalem in 1982, received paramilitary instruction.

The camp, a former Catskills resort, and another 62-acre site nearby, is surrounded by a metal fence and features a 30-foot watchtower. It is guarded by men armed with semi-automatic AR-15 rifles. Photos of Arab leaders are used for target practice at the training site. Participants are indoctrinated by rabbis who deliver 'highly emotional' speeches, often using a rifle as a prop. Members of both the Israeli armed forces and U.S. Army Special Forces have instructed JDL recruits in military tactics at the camp. The JDL used another paramilitary camp in the hills of California's Texas Canyon, which was under the control of West Coast JDL leader Irving Rubin. League members, including Mordachai Levy, received weapons training here in 1980."

An even more blatant act of the dual standard again deals with militias, paramilitary training and membership in foreign conflicts as mercenaries while holding citizenship in the United States. The book "The Secret Army" by David J. Bercusson (ISBN 0-99619-035-5, T.H. Best Printing Co. 78 Sullivan St. Toronto, Ontario, describes the manner in which the world Zionist organizations developed the army that fought the Arab-Israeli war of 1948.

The writer relates openly and unabashedly the Zionists efforts within the United States to obtain equipment, weapons, ammunition and all of the rest of the material with which to equip and train an army. He shows the cooperation, even in the face of laws prohibiting it, obtained from active military officers within our Department of Defense, the State Department, Justice Department and Executive Branch.

Ben Gurion, who later became Israel's Prime Minister, started the process by directing Moshe Shertok, then head of the Jewish Agency's Political Department and their unofficial foreign minister to the united States, to contact General John Hilldring. Hilldring was Assistant Secretary of State at the time. Hilldring was asked for "two or three competent American officers who would be prepared to proceed to Palestine and advise on defense arrangements." Hilldring told Shertok that he would have to go to the "very top," which he did.

Ex-military officers of the United States were allowed to participate in this private army venture. The country we now know as Israel did not exist at that time. This venture was that of a private army; that army was made up of men to include volunteers form Britain, Canada, South Africa and the United States. To obtain recruits for this private army venture, they used volunteers within the Jewish population to search out and contact Jewish veterans who would be willing to go to Palestine. Synagogues or Jewish community halls were used by speakers to gather support for this operation. Certainly this did not go unnoticed by the United States Department of Justice but nothing was done to stop it.

The Jewish community knew that what they were doing was unlawful in the United States. They used cryptic forms of communication to keep the average American citizen in ignorance in the event someone decided to contest their actions. Section 10 of the United States Criminal Code prohibited, "Enlisting or entering into the service of any foreign prince, state, colony, district, or people as a soldier, or as a marine, or seaman on board of any shop of war, letter or marque, or privateer."

Within the FBI there were some men who could not be bought. They knew of the operation and tried to stop it, with some success, but only for a while. There were individuals within the Passport Section of the State Department who also tried to block this activity but they, too, met with only partial success.

What this meant was that our government at the top was not demanding that the recruitment for a private army within the United States cease. Contrast this with the current hysteria over militias, anti-terrorism, gun regulation and confiscation and with emphasis made on those who teach the American people our need to return to a Christian Republic.

The great conflict between East and West, Left-Wing and Right-Wing, "Judeo-Christian" Zionism and genuine Christian Republicanism continues to rage. With some fear of oversimplification, the struggles of today can be reduced to that great conflict. Samuel Francis wrote an article titled: "The Real Extremists Are Still On The Left." That article can be found in the May 18, 1995 issue of the newspaper "The Wanderer":� "If FBI Director Louis Freeh is looking for some extremist group to investigate, he need look no further than the hat-and-violence-drenched movement in the Southwestern United States that pushes for open immigration and demands return of the southwest to Mexico. Long before right-wing militias began mobilizing in reaction against gun control, far-left Hispanic activists were soaking themselves in violent rhetoric that makes the militias sound like the Little League.

Last year, not long after the passage of California's Proposition 187, a radical Hispanic group calling itself the 'Mexican Movement for National Liberation' put out a statement that let us know what it thinks about the effort to remove illegal immigrants from the welfare rolls. Proposition 187 'is a declaration of war against the Mexican people in the militarily occupied northern half of our Mexican nation,' it proclaimed.

The statement went on to accuse the 'Europeans' (note the lower-case spelling) of 'genocide against our people' for the last 400 years, but White Americans and American institutions are the special targets of their hatred. 'The local police departments are nothing more than glorified armies of occupation in our barrios, colonials, and homeland. Their attempts at selective assassinations have failed to intimidate us. In a version of low intensity warfare, they have attempted to destroy our political movements.'

Proposition 187, the statement screams, 'is a wake-up call to resist by any and all means,' and it calls for creating 'the revolutionary clandestine formations that will defend our people and lead to our ultimate national liberation struggle and socialist reunification of Mexico.' It ends with a call to 'create the conditions for Mexican Intifada.'

Lest you imagine that this and similar statements represent merely a loony fringe, understand that this one was published in a tabloid newspaper put out by another group, 'People Against Racist Terror' (PART), that helped organize mass demonstrations against 187 in Los Angeles only days before the real citizens of the state overwhelmingly passed the resolution. PART's rhetoric duplicates that of the Mexican 'liberation' group, comparing the U.S. Government to Nazi Germany.

Curiously also, the newspaper anticipates the fevered witch-hunt rhetoric of the mainstream media in the last few weeks in trying to link the populist right with the Oklahoma City Bombing. Thus, it attacks anti-abortion activists, the religious right, Second Amendment supporters, and the militia movement, among others. Fringe such groups may be, but point is that they're the ones active among Hispanics in the southwest.

But don't bet your camouflage the FBI is looking at this movement, with its not-too-subtle incitement of violence and guerrilla warfare. What the bureau actually did during the 187 controversy was harass law-abiding supports of the resolution.

Thus, three days before the vote on 187, one of its coauthors, Barbara Coe, received a little visit rom the FBI. Assistant Attorney General Deval Patrick defends the agents by claiming they were just interested in whether leaflets Mrs. Coe had recently distributed about illegal voting by aliens had violated voters' civil rights. But Mrs. Coe says the agents repeatedly asked if the leaflets had been designed or distributed by the Republican Party. Just a little visit to let her know Big Brother was watching.

Another little visit was paid to yet another citizen, Horacio Grana, who legally immigrated from Mexico and who supported 187. After the federal judge blocked the successful ballot measure in a court ruling, Grana wrote to the judge objecting to the ruling and giving his name and address. A few days later, U.S. Marshals showed up to quiz him about it. 'I told them I have the right to freedom of speech,' Grana says. 'They had a very bad attitude with me. It was like Gestapo tactics.'

President Clinton leapt at the chance to blame his political critics on the right for the Oklahoma City atrocity, and the federal leviathan wasted no time investigating law abiding supporters of immigration reform, but no one cares that left-wing extremist Hispanic activists have long openly called for violence and insurrection and pushed for the disintegration of the country. If this is an example of what the President means by 'counter-terrorism,' it makes you wonder if maybe the militias don't have a point."

That is an excellent example of the double standard with reference to the Hispanics being the victim and the White-Anglo-Saxon-Protestant-Male (WASPM) being the evil ones. Another example of this phenomena of a dual standard between the government decreed victims at the hands of the WASPM's comes from an article written by Clark Corey, title "America Must Move."

It was published in the August 1995 issue of Media Bypass Magazine: "Americans need to compare the evil of the Rodney-King devastation in which media and government manipulated a minor arrest into a holocaust far worse than Oklahoma. A wife-beating felon violating parole, drunk and high on PCP, ran from police, endangering untold lives and property. King assaulted a Highway Patrol officer into pulling a gun on him and his life perhaps was saved by the arrival of L.A. police. He favored them with obscene gestures, threw off their 'swarm' like puppies, and rose from two Taserings with a savage attack on the police. It was shoot or use batons to bring him to submission.

Neutral lawyers (actually partial to the media) reported that the unmanipulated video did show police pausing frequently to observe whether King would submit to cuffing, and they admitted 'reasonable force.' King's medical report read: 'PCP, minor lacerations;' he had fallen on his face twice when Tasered.

King was a powerful, prison-phsiqued, drug-mad felon, no 'innocent motorist.' More lies; it wasn't a lily-white Simi jury but a Ventura County jury that had four blacks, until dumped for NAACP fingering. It was evil, smear-America, renegadism that brought a trial against the police instead of King, after they had brought in a drug-empowered monster, who repeatedly attacked police with only minor lacerations. But that racist renegade injustice is minor compared with what was coming. From the time of the arrest until the non-guilty verdict was announced, the media and the government kept, as by a conspiracy, nearly all information from the public, except the tail-end of a manipulated video, some 20 seconds which they ran over and over. The public was led to believe that the officers were tried for 'excessive force,' (the indictment was for a preposterous charge next to murder) a falsehood reinforced by rerunning the false video.

Thus, when the not-guilty verdict came, it was like a bomb, Pearl Harbor all over; an air-head feminist was shown demanding to know, 'You mean what I saw didn't happen?' The Black Mayor rushed on TV, 'express our outrage!' And they were prepared, as if forewarned. Burn, baby burn! From TV copters, 'Over this way!' Most fun since Watergate, because it all could be charged to racist America. 'Beaten into insensitivity!' from Sam Donaldson.

�Miscarriage of justice!' Nothing but lies and hatred. There were many more bloody and battered bodies, though fewer actual deaths, than in Oklahoma. But instead of showing them over and over in all their gore, we were shown 'happy looters,' criminal thugs telling America, 'victims of society.' Police who had endangered their lives to bring in unhurt an attacking monster were 'animals;' while brutes who took the head of an innocent passerby into their hands and beat it to mush were victims of America and of a disease, 'riot mentality.' The evil of the media and of the government was the as-if-planned conversion of a common arrest into a block-buster of hate America and trial-by-jury outmoded and denigrated. To top it off, renegades in Washington stepped in, ordering a 'civil rights' trial in L.A. where there would be no neutral observers. Then again into the press stepped Janet Reno, ordering tougher sentences like Stalin overcalling Vyshinsky.

Stalinist Angela Davis, who supplied the guns for the bloody assault on the Marin Courthouse in 1970, has now been honored with a Presidential Chair at the University of California, with a six-figure salary, plus a $30,000 annual stipend, plus coveted assistants and space, to teach nihilism and hate America...And it was just back in the 70s when Court and Congress gave orders and passed laws blocking all monitoring, record keeping, or surveillance of communist or their renegade groups, even those teaching and preparing violent assaults on our society. The jury in Waco rejected all serious charges against the surviving and destitute Davidians, declaring stoutly that it was the government that should have been on trial, but their decision was simply reversed, by a Federal Judge!

Only understanding can bring a powerful motivation. This evil did not start in 1990; it has deep roots. By the early 1900s, John Dewey and helpers began socializing education-transforming it from that needed by a self-governing people to that required by clients to the State. A little later Morris Cohen of Harvard, and son of Felix were teaching 'socialized law,' 'judicial legislation' would empower judges to overturn all laws and Constitution, in the name of the Constitution and the success of Hitler is presented as proof. Franklin Roosevelt knew by 9 a.m. December 7, 1941, that bombs would start falling on Pearl Harbor by 1 p.m. so he got out his stamp collection. Arthur Schlesinger has admitted as much and he has recognized that the only real question is why did he do it. The answer is, to save socialism (communism), it was certainly not to save anything else. In 1963, John Kennedy was led for months by a 'Get Diem,' to move the war along. Ho Chi Minh had been in tentative settlement with Diem's brother since July. This was used as an excuse to hurry the Vietnam general's coup along, eventually forced by cutting support for their armies. With Diem gone, the whole structure of the South collapsed, as had been warned, and then the renegades declared the war unwinable, then criminal, then America was criminal. The war became madness."

The dual standard is seen in so many aspects of modern American society. The dual standard which has been shown in the efforts of the Office of Special Investigations (OSI), an official branch of the Department of Justice is clearly evident. Repeatedly their so-called Nazi hunters have dug up innocent people and hounded them literally to death or to the shame and hardship of expulsion from this country.

Karl Linnas and his family lived under extreme pressures form the OSI and finally were expelled to Russia where he was ruthlessly killed in Leningrad. Feodor Fedorenko was deported and executed on behalf of the OSI in Russia and it was all based on manipulated and erroneous information, to keep the holocaust lie alive and well; so the Zionists could fleece Americans of more billions of dollars.

Mykola Kowalchuk of Philadelphia was harassed, intimidated, coerced, threatened, fired from his jobs, consistent demonstrations in front of his home, windows broken, etc. He and his family suffered for 17 years. Then the U.S. District Court dismissed the case for lack of evidence. Derge Kowalchuk, Mykolas' brother suffered the same fate. This man underwent a civil proceeding and was denaturalized. He, too, was innocent of OSI charges. Arthur Rudolph was the top Rocket engine scientist working for the U.S. space effort.

It was he who was responsible for the Saturn V engine design. After his work was finished OSI harassed an intimidated him until he had to leave for Germany. He was cleared of all charges after a two year investigation in that country. Andrija Artukovic was a man dying from Alzheimers disease and sclerosis of the brain. He was extradited to Yugoslavia based on false accusations. He died there in that country.

It is reported that Alan Dershowitz, one of the lawyers for O.J. Simpson, publically stated that "John Demajanjuk should die whether he is innocent or guilty, because he is Ukrainian." We should all recall the mass slaughter of the Ukrainian people by the Jewish Bolsheviks. By deliberate starvation somewhere between 3 and 7 million Ukrainian people died by deliberately confiscating the vast harvest of grain that these people produced. This tragedy is accurately revealed in a documentary titled "The Ukrainian Famine. Harvest of Despair." That film should be shown in every Christian Church in America but it is not because of the dual standard.

The reasons for this are easy to understand if we, as Christian Americans, will only think rationally instead of emotionally. Perhaps this can be best shown by extracting from an editorial found in "Ameirch Focus, Commentaries on America."

"America: Submerged in a Sea of Zionism. Will history remember America merely as a major captive nation of Zionist world conquest, ignoring the lustrous ascendance and near triumph of the glorious potential of free man? Will Zionist scorched-earth shots to the heart of all that is wholesome buy them their long-sought victory for Babylonian humanism with its showy irreverence and the glorification of all that is sordid? Will all of the goodness, wholesomeness and productivity of our unique Christian Republic, which millions forfeited their lives to give us, be purged from the world, leaving man to enter the 21st century enslaved to the least of God's creations? Must Americans forever witness Zionist self-promotion and self-portrayal as our best and brightest, as our most deserving and selfless citizens suffering a society of lesser humans with intellectually inferior pursuits? Will God allow animal cunning, arrogance, greed and self-aggrandizement a final victory over humanity?

With 'political correctness' based upon Zionist fascism in the ascendance, with the American media system largely a Zionist tool, with Foundations and Zionist Political Action Committees spreading legislative dollars and providing selected candidates massive financial support, with two parties and political commentary dominated by the Zionist International, can traditional Americans hope to reverse the current course of history? Can we develop a formula to reclaim our Republic and the tools of a productive society, recapturing or rebuilding the essence of a nation one deservedly the noble and gracious leader of the world's nations?

Can we collectively observe that our governmental processes are captive to Zionist appointees at every level, that our State, Treasury and Commerce Departments as well as the Presidency are operated by Zionists who take their order from Zionism? Can we perceive that almost all of the national information-flow reaches us only through a Zionist filter and pro-Israel/Zionist propaganda machine?

Have we not discovered the demise of education, the growth and development of crime, the decay of our cities and our rapid decline as a united people have happened concurrent with the intrusion of Zionists and Zionism into the American system? Have we not noticed that today it is increasingly difficult for ordinary people, Jew or Christian, White, Black, Yellow or Brown, to live together in 'live and let live' affection and respect, as the ADL the ACLU and the AIPAC attack society's pillars, move to destroy the Christian history of America and indoctrinate our children with ideas and philosophies that most of the world holds to be reprehensible, society-destructive, and beyond civility? Have we not noticed the fear in our church bodies, the manipulation of them to amend and mutate the teaching of Jesus' word to men?

Here we have history's master victimizers, representing themselves as the victims, as betrayed and sinned against, demeaned and tormented because of society's jealousy; a colony of Culicidae (insects such as mosquitoes and gnats) decrying the occasional angry slap by those that have been stung.

We observe the creators of much of man's sordid and duplicitous record artfully and deceitfully altering, amending, abridging and censoring the record to point the finger of responsibility to others, begging society's pity and solace for pain suggested to have been shared by no other people and never publicly recognizing, though surely perceiving, that it has been their centuries-long manipulation of their fellow man and their self-ordination as gods that has cause the animosity they correctly sense.

Consider an alien system with such a firm hold on American policy mechanisms that they are capable of having American citizenship granted overnight to one of Zionism's most energetic employees and then have him named as American ambassador to his former employer nation and confirmed without a word from our 'illustrious Senate,' including that great defender of American interests, Mr. Jesse Helms? And consider a President's cabinet with 80% Jewish Zionist members and a President, himself a Rhodes Scholar (but unable to finish at Oxford) and a member of the Zionist International; a Trilateralist, Bilderberg secret communist.

Consider an alien philosophy carefully scheming to own and control America's newspaper and broadcasting systems, then combining its now massive propaganda and reinstructional capabilities with the movie, entertainment and documentary producers of Hollywood, in short order reducing life to drugs and sexual fantasies and living to a succession of mindless escapades and romps in the hay; surely and continuously changing Americans then America...finally creating such irresponsible and chaotic conditions in our lives that we then welcome massive regulation, police restraints and New World Order socialist oppression just to get order again; forget morality or social ethics, productivity or national focus.

Consider the raw source of energy and money for the pro-abortion and homosexual lifestyle movements, the illegal immigration madness, loss of personal heritage identity, multicultural disarray and the move to make our precious English subordinate to the first choice of everyone's original homeland language.

These are funded, not by the grassroots but by single source money...given in every case to reduce our influential Christian nation to helplessness; Babylonians filled with hate for the Christian people who bade them welcome, spending enormous effort and endless dollars to destroy our once wholesome influence on an ugly world. Witness the altered state of church in America; intimidated, compromised, fearful and spiritless. Are they winning? Look and listen to the new mores of our changed society. Consider which nation is our number one recipient of 'loans' and aid. Note that they take what they want from our military arsenal and then without apology copy and sell it around the world, wherever money is to be made or counties subverted.

Note their demand for U.N. (American) troops to clear away the enemy which surrounds their homeland and as stalking horses for their political influence thought the world. From the Pentagon, State, Presidency or the United Nations, their influence and numbers overwhelm any possible opposition and America increasingly does what they demand of us. And then, dear friends, we have just witnessed once again their absolute mastery over our financial affairs. They own Banking, Investment Banking, the control of every major corporation, of course the 'Fed' and control of the Treasury of the United States. As we have just seen in Mexico, they do as they please, manipulating conditions, loaning then withdrawing support capital and grasping control of the resources of nations one by one, sometimes for profit but always for control. And then there is the depreciating dollar and Americans and the humble Mexicans are about to be enslaved by its demise.

When we add thought-control (political correctness) emanating from our college campuses and the continuous flow of Marxist ideas from Zionist professors to the 'hate crimes' laws and the massive effort to close down unwelcome publishers and Republican ideas, we can see that our Zionist fascist New World Order elitists have left no scheme destructive of Christian freedom left unutilized.

Consider then the 'we-are-in-charge' arrogance of the 'Justice' department's 92 Waco murders, followed by official lies and media cover-up, to be followed by massive raids on the citizens' militias that resulted...and national martial law, orchestrated and controlled by our Zionist fascist President in collaboration with the ADL.

Finally, we can watch with dismay as black-shirted, hooded world police power is deployed in America, computer programs are prepared for our personal control and prisons are readied for any who would underscore their First Amendment rights by using them. And huge funds of propaganda and money are expended to take from us our last hope of freedom; the Second Amendment and our guns. And 90% of Americans haven't a hint, a clue. So brainwashed are they that when push comes to shove, most of them will unknowingly side with this enemy. So we who perceive must do the work of thousands."

Our citizens need only to start thinking rationally instead of emotionally. Our Christian brothers and sisters must start demanding that Biblical Christian principles be taught from behind the pulpit. The greatness of our Christian heritage and its heroes must be emphasized instead of the groveling at the feet of thee "Culicidae." As history has repeatedly proven the teaching of Jesus: "But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves." ^[125]

It will not be long until the Zionist Jews have reduced all the Mexican people to slave status, and they will be working day and night for peanuts; and if they resist they will be slaughtered. Such is the destiny of the Mexican people. The Blacks have been introduced to AIDS thanks to Jewish Scientists in government.

November 4, 1995: Jewish Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was gunned down by Yigal Amir, by member of a Jewish Militia Cult; who immediately confessed to the assassination. He is a 25 year old member of a radical ultra extremist Zionist cult associated with Kahane Chai (which is Hebrew for Kahane lives). The group was formed and named after the radical Rabbi Meir Kahane who was himself assassinated in 1990, in the Zionist State of Israel. Not widely reported is who the backers of Mr. Amir were. They were the deeply religious ultra Orthodox Rabbis and the extremist cult known as Kahane Chai. Rabbis actually provided the official and religious sanction (approval) for Rabin's murder. This has been openly discussed in the Time Magazine of Israel the Jerusalem Report Magazine of November 16, 1995.

Just prior to Rabin's assassination, a Jewish Rabbi is said to have placed a death curse on the Israeli Prime Minister. An article called Invoking The Spirits, in the November 16, 1995 issue of the Jerusalem Report, reported one week before Rabin was assassinated, that an unnamed Rabbi, who is head of an ancient Kabbalah sect, performed the mystical rite just across the street from Rabin's residence in early October. "And on him, Yitzhak son of Rosa, known as Rabin, we have permission...to demand from the angels of destruction that they take a sword to this wicked man...to kill him...for handing over the land of Israel to our enemies the sons of Ishmael."

This is the Kabbalistic curse called the pulsa denura - Aramaic for "lashes of fire" was decreed against the premier for his "heretical" policies. Quoting an unnamed Rabbi clad in his tefillin (the leather box attached to a long strap which is wound around the arm and wrist)...He's (Rabin) inciting against Judaism." The read out loud the most terrifying curses in the tradition of Kabbalistic mysticism in front of the Rabin residence on the eve of Yom Kippur.

The Rabbi, who will not allow his name to be published, but identifies himself as a member of the far-right Kach political movement in Israel, which was founded as the Israeli chapter of Kahane Chai, says the curse generally works within 30 days. That put the expiration date for Rabin's murder in early November. Rabin was assassinated on Saturday November 4th, within the time limits set by the Kabbalistic Rabbis who are steeped in the Babylonian Talmud - the "Bible" of the modern day Jewish religion. "Not only the ultra religious extremists" so says the article, "but many traditional leaning Israelis regard these curses with the utmost seriousness. Invoking the 'pulsa denura is a perilous undertaking, for if the ceremony is not performed in a strictly prescribed fashion, it can strike the conjurers themselves."

Killer Brainwashed by Violent Zionist Cult! "We don't believe in the Kabalistic curses" said one observer. What is clear is the "extremists" of the Kahane Chai movement were backed up in their activities by the most religious rabbis of the highest authority. Yigal Amir immediately stated that the Talmud requires that those who give away the land of the Jews to the enemy, the Arabs and others, must be put to death. He quoted the citation numbers of the Talmud books in his defense, and this was published in the Jewish press. Amir was a member of the religious Zionist cult. Question: How did the Cult Awareness Network (CAN) miss their American operations??

One U.S. Rabbi, Abraham Hecht, according to the Jewish Week of November 3, has apologized for HIS cursing, even BEFORE Rabin was assassinated. His apology came several weeks after he said on Israeli television, "that according to Jewish Torah (The Talmud, not the Christian Bible as most Christians believe) law, Rabin can be killed as a traitor to the Jewish people, because of the land give backs called for in the Israeli-Palestinian peace agreements."

The non radical Jewish community in the United States wants to know exactly how these extremists groups in Israel are funded. According to the New York Times of November 13, they are funded by their followers here in the United States. Not only that, but also there is an open admission of the existence of military training camps in the Catskill mountains run by the Kahane Chai. Kahane Chai offers the same kind of training as do the various gentile militia groups which have drawn the ire of the Anti-Defamation League and that are routinely blamed for everything from the Oklahoma Federal Building explosion to the train derailment near Prescott, Arizona.

It is interesting to note that while the Jewish Militia, which trains in the Catskills, maintains heavy armaments, there is no interest in this group by the Clinton Administration! The BATF has conduced no investigations, no raids, has not burned down any buildings or has not pumped life threatening CS gas into their compounds. Nor have they conducted the kind of FBI/BATF operations which resulted in the death of Sammy and Vicki Weaver in Ruby Ridge, Idaho. Why Not?

As a matter of fact, the Jewish militia has been offered protection here in the U.S. by the Clinton Administration at the behest of the backers of Bill Clinton. Apparently they push their envelop a bit too far and managed to set up their own conspirator for an assassination. The Middle East peace process is clearly the work of the World Zionist Government. Their plan is to trade land for peace and suck tens of billions of dollars into Israel and create the most prosperous and profitable business operation anywhere in the world.

As an example, just recently, INTEL, the world's largest chip maker, agreed to invest $1.5 Billion in a new plant in Israel. Now the Zionist conspiracy's plans have gone awry, as their instructions to the Clinton Administration were to allow the Jewish militia to function freely and without impediment or press attention. Meanwhile, the Christian militias are scathingly treated in the press, investigated and labeled as "extremists" or the "wacko patriots of the Christian right."

Brooklyn is the home of Kahane Chai, the Jewish Defense League and the Chasidic sect, which was recently honored in a White House ceremony posthumously honoring their late leader the Rabbi Menacham Schneerson with a Congressional Medal of Honor.

The Brooklyn Chasitic Rabbis and their members are the most extreme ultra right wing Zionists who believe that the land of Israel is sacred, and that no land must ever be given back, according to Biblical law, as it is the land of their forefathers in the Bible. They also believe that they are "God's chosen people" and that Jesus was a Jew (as in a modern day Jew). All of this is patently false, for 95% of all the Jews in the world today are the descendants of Japath, not Shem. And the rest have mixed themselves that they no longer qualify as descendants of Abraham at all.

Just weeks ago, a highly respected Israeli General, who is the mayor of Haifa Israel, was routed from a Brooklyn auditorium by hecklers denouncing him as a "traitor." Last week, a cable television in Manhattan, two people sat in front of a photograph of the late Rabbi Meir Kahane, and Applauded Yigar Amir, the man who has confessed to killing Yitzhak Rabin. The New York Times admits that the cult has transplanted their mix of religion and violence to Israel over 20 years ago, when the Brooklyn born militant Meir Kahane founded his group.

Kahane Chai has cult chapters in Miami, Los Angeles, Chicago, Baltimore and Philadelphia. Opposing Kahane Chai are any number of Jewish groups that do support the peace process and who now bitterly mourn the death of their leader, the first native born Israeli Premier Yitzhak Rabin. The word "extremist" is routinely applied to Christians of various beliefs, including Randy Weaver and his wife and family, the Branch Davidians and innumerable other groups and Christian publications. According to the New York Times of November 13 authorities in Israel have developed evidence that the killing of Rabin was the result of a conspiracy among "right wing extremists" of Jewish background here in the United States.

Jewish, Transvestitate Attorney General Janet Reno has suddenly shown a "tremendous" interest in these Jewish extremists, and offered to have the Justice Department look into whether any of those arrested in Israel were linked to people or groups in this country. The New York Times stated that evidence has already been accumulated in Israel of a connection with the U.S. extremists. Let's see if the cult is treated like the Weavers??

The IRS Treats Jewish Cults With Respect! While cursing and persecuting Christians. Tax deductible donations raised in the U.S. for political and charitable purposes could be financing the kind of militancy that many feel threatens the move toward peace, and finances the 400 cult member in Hebron, a town with 120,000 Arabs, which is to be turned over to Arab administration in due course.

The Treasury Department acknowledged that a January 1995 order was issued, freezing the assets of two of the better known Jewish cults here, including the Kahane Chai and Kach, of which Yigai Amir was a member. None the less, state department officials conceded that money illegally raised here for superficially legitimate causes can seep through the freezing of asset ruling to reach Israel. In other words, there are no teeth put into the Treasury Department action in January. Possible they were too busy defending themselves against their actions against Christians in various parts of the country, including Ruby Ridge.

The FBI and Cult Awareness Network (CAN - A Jewish hate group) Focused on Christian Groups! The New York Times admits that even modest sums raised in the U.S. could be important to the terrorists in Israel. Many Jewish settlers said that they intend to fight the agreement to turn over the lands in the West Bank as they are part of (sic) their Biblical Heritage. The New York Times quoted Ian Lustick, an expert on right-wing Jewish groups and a professor at the University of Pennsylvania as saying: "My sense is that the FBI has focused on people making bombs and blowing up buildings here instead of on the trans-Atlantic flow of people and money into the settlements." Mr. Lustick is quite right!

The New York Times quotes the Treasury Department as saying; "charitable money and front organizations exist in the United States, raising money ostensibly for charity, but then directing it to militants." If this is the case, they why are the BATF and FBI not concentrating on closing down the militia and paramilitary training sites here in the United States, and cutting off all fund raising sources for the Israeli settlements, which are to be turned over to the Arabs under the Peace Accords? Is it because the backers of Bill Clinton have not given their approval and their permission?

Mr. Nakhleh, a Palestinian Christian born in Palestine, is the author of The Encyclopedia of the Palestine Problem. He was a graduate of London University and a barrister at law in London and a member of the Palestine Bar. He represented the Arab Higher Committee for Palestine in New York in 1947-48, and was representative of the League of Arab States with the rank of Minister Plena Potentiary for Latin America with an office in Buenos Aires. For the last 32 years he has been representing the Arab Higher Committee for Palestine in New York.

Mr. Nakhleh's encyclopedic work describes the terrorist Yitzhak Rabin. He became a terrorist member of the Haganah and its smaller elite corps the Palmach, in the 1940s. Rabin fought in the military in the War of Independence of 1948, and by 1964, his career placed him in the position of Army Chief of Staff at the pinnacle of the military. In that position, he led the armed forces of Israel in the Six Day War in June of 1967. For the next five years, he was sent to Washington as Israel's Ambassador. While Ambassador to the U.S. he worked to transfer as much U.S. technology and expensive weaponry as possible tot he control of Israel.

Rabin Follows A Long Line of Terrorist Prime Minister! Rabin returned to Israel in 1973, and ran for Parliament, winning a Labor Seat in the Israeli Parliament. A few months later, Rabin seized a chance to run as the Labor candidate for Prime Minister, and competed against the man who has now replaced him, Shimon Perez. Rabin defeated Perez for Prime Minister and served until he was forced to resign in April of 1977, after a scandal over the revelation that he and his wife had held foreign bank accounts in Washington, D.C. - a violation of Israel's strict foreign exchange change control laws.

For the next seven years, Rabin retreated to the Labor's back bench, until a National Unity Government turned to him as Defiance Minister in 1984. In this role, he became the primary enemy of the Palestinians during the Intifadeh, the uprising against Israeli rule that developed in the occupied territories in 1987. He was always known as being ruthless, but he is particularly known for his vicious atrocities committed during the Intifadeh period. Then after meetings in New York with the Kissingers, Rockefellers and the Bronfmans, they decided on a negotiated peace theme for his 1992 campaign for Prime Minister against the Likud Party terrorist Yitzhak Shamir.

It was with the constant attention and backing of the Bush and subsequent Clinton Administrations that negotiated peace settlements were completed with Jordan and the Oslo Agreements were reached, providing for the protection of Palestinians living in Israel AND offering them some tiny land in exchange for peace. The Clinton Administration has vigorously backed him in his peace settlement with Yassir Arafat, the Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization.

Sometimes the involvement of the Clinton Administration was so extreme, that Clinton spent more time attending Jewish political and religious meetings (always in secret of course) than he did running the United States government. This, of course, has been pointed out innumerable time by many patriotic magazines, and also revealed White House photographs that are only provided to the Jewish Press, while being denied the Wire Services or anyone who might ask.

The Attack on the USS Liberty! According to CIA intelligence reports, General Moshe Dayan ordered the June 8, 1967 attack on the USS Liberty, and the resulting massacre of the defenseless crew of American sailors. During the unprovoked attack, 34 U.S. Navy men were killed, and 171 wounded. At the time General Dayan reported to the Chief of Staff of the Israeli Armed Forces: Yitzhak Rabin.

Rabin had legal responsibility to ensure that Israeli aircraft did not fire upon neutral vessels in neutral waters. Neither Dayan nor Yitzhak Rabin were ever mentioned in the U.S. media after the brutal attack on their ally and its naval ship. The U.S. government under Lyndon Johnson enforced a massive media cover up of the crime.

The USS Liberty was an unarmed intelligence monitoring vessel. It was clear from the record at the time, that the head of the Mossad (Israeli intelligence) in 1967, had to give clearance for the attack, and knew well that the boat was unarmed and was a friendly vessel. Because of the domination of the U.S. government by Zionists interests, the memory of the 34 Navy men killed and 171 wounded has NEVER been properly honored by the U.S. government, and Israel has never been called to account. Neither Yitzhak Rabin, the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces, nor General Moshe Dayan was ever held accountable for the war crimes committed against the nation that literally gave birth to the modern nation of Israel. The minute by minute developments concerning the Israeli attack on the ship are outlined in detail on page 282 in the Encyclopedia of the Palestinian Problem. It's a riveting and sickening story.

The Massacres of Sabra and Shatila Camps! The carnage and atrocities committed against Palestinians at these two refugee camps occurred during the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982. It was a mass murder of more than 2,750 men, women and children (according to a body count taken in the camps by the International Committee of the Red Cross on September 23, 1982). The Israelis ordered the Phalangist Military forces to conduct the genocide.

The principal war criminal bearing legal responsibility for the massacres was the Israeli Minister of Defense, Arial Sharone. While Rabin did not play a direct role in the Sabra and Shatila massacre, he was no less a member of the leadership at the time, and thus cannot escape sharing responsibility.

Breaking with tradition in not reporting anything in opposition to the Israeli's the U.S. television networks provided day in and day out coverage on the evening news of the brutality and ruthless atrocities carried out against the Palestinians who were attempting to regain their country. The resistance known as the Intifadeh, broke out in 1987, Yitzhak Rabin was the Defense Minister.

As such, he ordered the deportation of large numbers of Palestinians never to be able to return to their families, confiscated assets and ran tens of thousands of Palestinians off of their homeland, in some cases inherited from four or five generations who had owned them previously. It was visible on U.S. television, that middle age women were routinely beaten and the men involved in the Intifadeh were to suffer broken legs and arms for their resistance. This is all directly attributable to the utterly ruthless instincts of Yitzhak Rabin.

Jews Killing Jews For Political Gain! Joshua Schein, in a letter to the editor of the New York Times November 14, 1995, pointed out that in June 1948, Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion ordered the bombing and striking of the Irgun ship Altalena off the cost of Tel-Aviv. At least 17 Jews were killed, some of them shot in the water as they tried to swim to shore. The commander of the firing troops was a young officer named Yitzhak Rabin. And why was this carried out? Because the incident was misdescribed as the British Troops attempting to keep the Jews from landing in their new home land. In fact, it was not the British who committed the atrocity, but the Jews themselves. They committed the act of genocide against their own people to gain publicity for their new nation!

The death of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin no doubt came as a shock to many and who have since been pondering the ramifications of his death, and what possible effect his absence will have on the future of Jewish-occupied Palestine. Well, we do not believe that the Jews have any natural, legitimate, or even Biblical right to the land of Palestine.

The original Biblical Deed was accompanied by a solemn Covenant and ratified by God Almighty (the Donor), ensuring that the descendants of Abraham would occupy Palestine and other portions of the surrounding territories to which it is inseparably bound. God Almighty kept His oath with the descendants of Abraham; however, when we are talking about such descendants, we must bear in mind that the descendants of Abraham include more than just those of the offspring of Isaac.

We must not forget the children Abraham begat through Hagar (Sarah's handmaid) and Keturah (Abraham's second wife), the descendants of whom are the Arabs, Lebanese, Palestinians, Afghans, and related people. Finding pure-blooded Arabs is about as difficult as trying to find a pure-blooded Benjaminite, or a pure-blooded Judean who has not intermarried with other Israelites from different tribes. So, just as the different tribes of Israel intermarried, so did Abraham's offspring through Hagar and Keturah.

The lands of these people include Pakistan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Egypt, Iran (formerly known as Persia), Iraq, and Palestine. The land belonging to Isaac, Abraham and Sarah's son of promise, is a different issue, but we must understand that the land of Palestine did remain with the children of Abraham. The Scriptures say in Genesis 25:7-10: "And these are the days of the years of Abraham's life which he lived, an hundred threescore and fifteen years. Then Abraham gave up the ghost, and died in a good old age, an old man, and full of years; and was gathered to his people. And his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah, in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite, which is before Mamre; The field which Abraham purchased of the sons of Heth: there was Abraham buried, and Sarah his wife."

As you can see from the above verses, both Isaac and Ishmael buried their father, Abraham. This shows the love Ishmael held for Abraham, and this love was carried on to his descendants. Even today, there is a great Islamic mosque over the graves which is called "Al Khalili Mosque," in reference to Abraham who is called Abraham Al Khalili, which means friend of God.

Certainly we can see that the descendants of Ishmael and Keturah, as the seed of Abraham, were blessed. However, we are asked by certain modern-day theologians to believe that the Arabs and kindred people (children of the bondwoman) somehow ended up with the greater portion of land, and that the small territory occupied by a people called Jews (who are thought to be the true descendants of Isaac and Jacob, and are NOT), is the fulfillment of the blessings Abraham passed on to his son of promise, Isaac.

Few Zionist-loving Judeo-Christians have ever stopped to seriously examine the obvious conclusion of their belief: if those who call themselves Jews are really God's chosen people, then how is it that the Arabs have ended up with a far greater portion of landmass, and the Jews have ended up with only a small piece of real estate?

Which was given to them by the United Nations and protected by the United States since its inception, otherwise it would have been destroyed years ago. After all, the true sons of Israel were to receive a far greater blessing and inheritance, yet in viewing the picture we are painted today by Zionist advocates, it's obvious that something is amiss.

In Genesis 35:10-11, it's interesting to note that right after Jacob's name is changed to Israel, the land blessing is given: "And God said unto him, Thy name is Jacob: thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name: and he called his name Israel. And God said unto him, I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins."

Please note that this Divinely appointed land blessing given to Jacob/Israel was never fulfilled for the sons of Isaac while they were in the land of Palestine. It is also completely ridiculous to look at the Jews' allotted land in Palestine and claim that this is the fulfillment of Genesis 35:11, because they are certainly not a company of nations. Besides the fact that their landmass is so sparse, Zionist-occupied Palestine has not even come close to possessing a resource like the vast underground lakes of oil which the Arab nations now possess. No doubt the Zionists would give their eyeteeth, left ear, and all the foreign-aid perks they receive, just to have such a black-gold cash crop as the Arab nations have!

Furthermore, the Jews have never ruled Palestine. They did occupy what, in the time of the Roman Empire, was called the Province of Judea, which in the time of the divided kingdoms of Israel and Judah was called the Southern Kingdom of Judah. But only a small portion of Palestine was occupied before their Babylonian captivity.

It is our contention that the Middle East peace process is a natural evolution which was bound to happen, as the Zionists really have no other recourse. There is really no viable alternative available for them to expand their land, other than to continue to steal land from the Palestinians, however, that would only result in more war along with more bombings and assassinations.

After all, the Zionists know full well that the land they acquired through the terms of the Balfour Declaration and the League of Nations mandate to Great Britain, was obtained through fraudulent means. While the United Nations resolution authorized the creation of both an Arab and a Jewish State in Palestine, it did not authorize the expulsion of the Arabs; rather, it stipulated the protection of their political rights and of their property.

In 1976, Dr. Frank C. Sakran wrote the book, Palestine Still A Dilemma, and on page 160 the author makes this important observation: "...Israel occupied large Arab territories in 1967. She is still in occupation of these territories, except for a small sliver on the eastern bank of the Suez Canal and a smaller one in Syria. This continued occupation not only violates Article 2 of the U.N. Charter and the 1949 armistance agreements but also defies Security Council Resolution 242, adopted back in 1967 and affirmed in October 1973. It will be recalled that Resolution 242 says that 'the acquisition of territory by force of arms is inadmissible.' But Israel has not withdrawn and insists on keeping at least several important areas in Egypt, in the West Bank of Jordan, and in Syria and has been establishing new Jewish settlements in various parts of these territories. And where Jewish settlements are established, Israelis say, the Israeli flag must remain."

Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who was in actuality a terrorist and murderer who climbed to political power over the bodies of Arabs and Jews! In 1940 Rabin was a member of "Palmach," a violent underground force, who blew up the Jewish refugee ship "Patria" in Haifa Harbor, where more that 250 Jewish emigrants died in the explosion. In the ensuing months, three other ships loaded with Jewish refugees were dynamited by "Palmach" squads, which cost the lives of more than 1,000 Jews. David Ben-Gurion a former Israeli Prime Minister stated: "the terrorist bombings stirred more worldwide sympathy and support for us than we anticipated." ^[126]

Rabin was also in command of the troops that massacred more than 250 defenseless men, women and children at Lidda and Ramble. (The Spotlight Newspaper). He was also one of those in command when the Israeli's tried to sink the U.S.S. Liberty in 1967. The ship was clearly marked with U.S. Flags. Dr. Lilienthal described the REAL reason for the attack: "Had the Israelis been successful in 'sinking' the Liberty, the atrocity would have been blamed on the Egyptians and produced a Pearl Harbor-type reaction in the United States." (Alfred M. Lilienthal, The Zionist Connection). He was also in charge of the spy network which controlled Jonathan Jay Pollard. The Israeli's do not deny that Pollard, a former Navy intelligence analyst who stole secret documents for Israeli espionage by the suitcase full, and was controlled, ultimately by Rabin.^[127]

According to The Spotlight Newspaper, November 20, 1995; Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, died at the hands of an assassin as a direct result of his connection with the crisis that began when, following JFK's assassination, Lyndon Johnson reversed JFK's Middle East policy, and that the CIA collaborated with the Israeli Mossad in the Assassination of then President John F. Kennedy.^[128]

Yitzhak Rabin played a major role in the bloody history of Zionism. He left an evidence trail which tied him into almost every act of terrorism perpetuated by the Israeli government, he led Jewish forces in the 1967 Six-Day War, which was in direct violation of their U.N. charter of peace. In 1968, Rabin was promoted for his loyalty to the Zionist cause and was appointed ambassador to the United States. It is interesting to note that since the 1967 war, the United States.

It is interesting to note that since the 1967 war, the United States openly took over supplying arms to Israel and enough zeal to keep the Zionists militarily stronger than ALL the Arab states around them combined. Involved in this conspiracy was the clear-and-still-present danger Henry (RED) Kissinger, then Secretary of State, who during the Lebanon/Israeli conflict of 1973, airlifted to Israel over two billions dollars worth of war jets, tanks, missiles, and so forth. Congress quickly voted the money as a gift to pay for these highly sophisticated and highly restricted/top secret weapons. This "GIFT" was given while the United States was in a difficult economic situation, But The American Government had so much faith in the American Taxpayers, that they just passed the bill on to us!

Because of Yitzhak Rabin, the American people have been swindled out of billions of dollars in all manner of foreign aid. Yes, Rabin followed the money trail which led him to become Israel's fifth prime minister at age 52, in 1974. Now that Rabin is dead, it is almost laughable that the media calls him a minister of peace, as his history has been anything but. The November 20, 1995 issue of The Spotlight, on its opening cover, stated: "It appears as if everyone who is anyone thinks that Yitzhak Rabin was a great peacemaker. The flag flew at half-mast on all U.S. government buildings and the Congress shut down because the entire leadership donned yarmulkes and flew to Israel for the funeral. Two former Presidents went, as did most of the leaders of other nations! Who was this saint to bring out rivers of tears? Well, he was one of the most ruthless killers and terrorists in history. He was a long-time, high-level functionary of the Mossad, Israel's secret service. Nice guys do not get that job. Rabin was there at the time an American President was killed by the Mossad. he was also the Israeli military chief of staff who personally ordered the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty, even though he knew it was an American vessel!

Another thing; you can thank God that Rabin's killer was not an Arab. If he had been, by now the Israelis would have lobbed nuclear bombs at their neighbors and Mossad-controlled Congressmen would have introduced more anti-terrorist bills by the dozen. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) would have flood the newspapers with diatribes against 'hate' groups and the Holocaust Museum would be able to double its admission fee."

With regard to Yitzhak Rabin, many could not help but ponder the often quoted Scripture verse found in 1 Thessalonians 5:3, "For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them...and they shall not escape."

In the book The Life of an American Jew in Racist Marxist Israel, by the late Jack Bernstein, he said on page 11: "Since the Israeli government knows, and the favored Zionists know, that the Zionist pressure in America will ensure that America will keep sending them massive amounts of money, the Israeli government and its favored citizens spend money like drunken sailors. This practice leads to inflation and eventually to an economic collapse."

Well, Jack Bernstein was not a fool, he knew that Yitzhak Rabin was one of those elitist spendthrifts "drunken sailors," who if the truth were known, was no true friend of the Jews nor of the Untied States of America. so don't get caught up in all the media-hype about Yitzhak Rabin. There was nothing remotely merciful about him or his ways.

����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� America Can Still Be Free

In the closing speech of his play King John, Shakespeare makes a character say: "This England never did, nor never shall Lie at the proud foot of a conqueror But when it first did help to wound itself." In June, 1951, before the members of the Texas Legislature in Austin, General of the Army Douglas MacArthur made a speech of which the above quotation might have been the text. He said in part: "I am concerned for the security of our great nation, not so much because of any potential threat from without, but because of the insidious forces working from within which, opposed to all of our great traditions, have gravely weakened the structure and tone of our American way of life."

The "insidious forces working from within" and "opposed to all our great traditions" are the first and most serious challenge that faces America. There are those who seek to corrupt our youth that they may rule them. There are those who seek to destroy our unity by stirring up antagonism among the various Christian denominations. There are those who, in one way or another, intrude their stooges into many of our high military and executive offices. Effective in any evil purpose is the current menace of censorship, analyzed in Chapter V, and the even greater threatened menace of a far more drastic censorship imposed not by those of alien origin and sympathy within our country, but by those of alien origin and sympathy within our country, but by alien‑dominated agencies of the United Nations.

Moreover, and even more significant, it must not be forgotten that an undigested mass in the "body politic," an ideologically hostile "nation within the nation," has through history proved the spearhead of conquerors. Throughout history members of an unassimilated minority have repeatedly been used as individual spies ‑‑ as when the Parthians used Jews in Rome as spies while the Romans used Jews in Parthia for the same purpose. Recent instances of espionage involved the theft of atomic secrets from both Canada and the United States.

In addition to working individually for the enemies of his country, the unassimilated alien has often worked collectively. According to A History of Palestine from 135 A.D. to Modern Times, by James Parkes (Oxford University Press, New York, 1909), Persians in 614 A.D. invaded Palestine, a part of the Christian Roman Empire of the East, and took Jerusalem. Here is Mr. Parkes's account: "There is no doubt that the...Jews aided the Persians with all the men they could muster, and that the help they gave was considerable. Once Jerusalem was in Persian hands a terrible massacre of Christians took place, and the Jews are accused of having taken the lead in this massacre." ^[129] Mr. Parkes concludes that it "would not be surprising if the accusation were true."

Another famous betrayal of a country by its Jewish minority took place in Spain. In his History of the Jews, already referred to, Professor Graetz gives an account (Vol.III, p. 109) of the coming of alien conquerors into Spain, a country which had been organized by the Visigothes, a race closely akin in blood to the English, Swedes, Germans, and other peoples of the North Sea area: "The Jews of Africa, who at various times had emigrated thither from Spain, and their unlucky co‑religionists of the Peninsula, made common cause with the Mahometan conqueror, Tarik, who brought over from Africa into Andalusia an army eager for the fray.

After the battle of xeres (July, 711), and the death of Roderic, the last of the visigothic kings, the victorious Arabs pushed onward, and were everywhere supported by the Jews. In every city that they conquered, the Moslem generals were able to leave but a small garrison of their own troops, as they had need of every man for the subjection of the country; they therefore confided them to the safekeeping of the Jews. In this manner the Jews who but lately had been serfs, now became the masters of the towns of Cordova, Granada, Malaga, and many others.

When Tarik appeared before the capital, Toledo, he found it occupied by a small garrison only, the nobles and clergy having found safety in flight. While the Christians were in church, praying for the safety of their country and religion, the Jews flung open the gates to the victorious Arabs (Palm Sunday, 712), receiving them with acclamations, and thus avenged themselves for the many miseries which had befallen them in the course of a century since the time of Reccared and Sisebut. The capital also was intrusted by Tarik to the cowardly Visigoths, who had sought safety in flight, for the purpose of recovering from them the treasure which they had carried off."

Finally when Musa Ibn‑Nosair. the Governor of Africa, brought a second army into Spain and conquered other cities, he also delivered them into the custody of the Jews. The "miseries" which prompted the Jews of Spain to treason are explained by Professor Graetz. King Sisebut was annoyingly determined to convert them to Christianity, and among the "miseries" inflicted by King Reccared "the most oppressive of all was the restraint touching the possession of slaves. Henceforward the Jews were neither to purchase Christian slaves nor to accept them as presents." ^[130]

The newly Christianized East German Goths of Spain were noted for their chastity, piety, and tolerance,^[131] but the latter quality apparently was not inclusive enough to allow the wealthy alien minority to own the coveted bodies of fair‑haired girls and young men.

There is a lesson for America in the solicitude of the Visigoths for their young. Americans of native stock should rouse themselves from their half‑century of lethargic indifference and should study the set‑up which permits the enslavement of young people's minds by forces hostile to Western Christian civilization. Our boys and girls are propagandized constantly by books, periodicals, motion pictures, radio, television, and advertisements; and from some of the things that they read and see and hear they are influenced toward a degraded standard of personal conduct, an indifference to the traditional doctrines of Christianity, and a sympathy for Marxism or Communism.

American parents must evolve and make successful a positive; not a negative, counter‑movement in favor of the mores of Western civilization, or that civilization will fall. It is well known that the Communists expend their greatest effort at capturing the young; but in this most vital of all fields those Americans who are presumably anti‑Communistic have; at least up to the summer of 1952, made so little effort that it may well be described as none at all.

Since President Franklin Roosevelt's recognition of the Soviet masters of Russia (November 16, 1933), the United States has consistently helped to "wound itself" by catering to the "insidious forces working from within," who are "opposed to all our great traditions" of Christian civilization. These powerful "forces" have been welcomed to our shores, have become rich and influential, and nothing has been expected of them beyond a pro‑American patriotism rather than a hostile nationalist separatism.

In spite of all kindliness, they have, however stubbornly adhered to their purposes and have indeed "gravely weakened the structure and tone of our American way of life." But the wealth of our land and the vitality of our people are both so great that the trap has not yet been finally sprung; the noose has not yet been fatally drawn. Despite the hostile aliens who exert power in Washington; despite the aid and succor given them by uninformed, hired, or subverted persons of native stock; despite the work of the "romantics, bums, and enemy agents"^[132] who have directed our foreign policy in recent years, there is a chance for the survival of America. A great country can be conquered only if it is inwardly rotten. We can still be free, if we wish.

Basic moves, as indicated in preceding chapters, are three: We must (i) lift the iron‑curtain of censorship which, not satisfied with falsifying the news of the hour, has gone back into past centuries to mutilate the classics of our literature and to exclude from our school histories such vital and significant facts as those presented.

A start toward this goal can be made by exercising some of the Constitution‑guaranteed rights, and by subscribing to periodicals with a firm record of opposing Communism. The reading of periodicals and books friendly to the American tradition not only encourages and strengthens the publisher of such works but makes the reader of them a better informed and therefore a more effective instrument in the great cause of saving Western Christian civilization.

������� We must (ii) begin in the spirit of humane Christian civilization to evolve some method of preventing our unassimilable mass of aliens and alien‑minded people from exercising in this country a power over our culture and our lives out of all proportion to the number of the minority, and to prevent this minority from shaping, against the general national interest, our policies on such vital matters as war and immigration. The American Legion seems to be working toward leadership in this vital matter. The movement should be supported by other veterans' organizations, women's clubs, luncheon clubs, and other groups favorable to the survival of America. In the great effort, no individual should fail; for there is no such thing as activity by a group, a club, or even a legion, except as a product of the devoted zeal of one or more individuals.

Our danger from internal sources hostile to our civilization was the subject of a warning by General MacArthur in his speech before the Massachusetts Legislature on July 25, 1951: "This evil force, with neither spiritual base nor moral standard, rallies the abnormal and sub‑normal elements among our citizenry and applies internal pressure against all things we hold decent and all things that we hold right; the type of pressure which has caused many Christian nations abroad to fall and their own cherished freedoms to languish in the shackles of complete suppression.

As it has happened there it can happen here. Our need for patriotic fervor and religious devotion was never more impelling. There can be no compromise with atheistic communism; no half way in the preservation of freedom and religion. It must be all or nothing. We must unite in the high purpose that the liberties etched upon the design of our life by our forefathers be unimpaired and that we maintain the moral courage and spiritual leadership to preserve inviolate that bulwark of all freedom, our Christian faith." We must (iii) effect a genuine clean‑up of our government removing not only all those who can be proved to be traitors, but also all those whose policies have for stupidity or bad judgment been inimical to the interests of our country.

After reading this, there is no way, that any patriotic American can not see that every single Jew who has ever been elected into office has been a traitor. As you can see by the following they have used deceit, treachery and out right lies to further their own ends. And for the most part most of the non-Jews elected as Senators or Representatives have not opposed them, in fact, they have cow towed to them and are therefore guilty of treason also.

Jewish involvement in shaping American immigration policy, 1881-1965: A Historical Review, by Kevin MacDonald Department of Psychology California State University-Long Beach Long Beach, CA 90840-0901 Population and Environment, in press.

ABSTRACT: THIS PAPER DISCUSSES JEWISH INVOLVEMENT IN SHAPING UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION POLICY. IN ADDITION TO A PERIODIC INTEREST IN FOSTERING THE IMMIGRATION OF CO-RELIGIONISTS...JEWS HAVE AN INTEREST IN OPPOSING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF ETHNICALLY AND CULTURALLY HOMOGENEOUS SOCIETIES IN WHICH THEY RESIDE AS MINORITIES. JEWS HAVE BEEN AT THE FOREFRONT IN SUPPORTING MOVEMENTS AIMED AT ALTERING THE ETHNIC STATUS QUO IN THE UNITED STATES IN FAVOR OF IMMIGRATION OF NON-EUROPEAN PEOPLES. These activities have involved leadership in Congress, organizing and funding anti-restrictionist groups composed of Jews and gentiles, and originating intellectual movements opposed to evolutionary and biological perspectives in the social sciences.

INTRODUCTION: Ethnic conflict is of obvious importance for understanding critical aspects of American history, and not only for understanding Black/White ethnic conflict or the fate of Native Americans. Immigration policy is a paradigmatic example of conflict of interest between ethnic groups because IMMIGRATION POLICY INFLUENCES THE FUTURE DEMOGRAPHIC COMPOSITION OF THE NATION. Ethnic groups unable to influence immigration policy in their own interests will eventually be displaced or reduced in relative numbers by groups able to accomplish this goal.

This paper discusses ethnic conflict between Jews and gentiles in the area of immigration policy. Immigration policy is, however, only one aspect of conflicts of interest between Jews and gentiles in America. The skirmishes between Jews and the gentile power structure beginning in the late nineteenth century always had strong overtones of anti-Semitism. These battles involved issues of Jewish upward mobility, quotas on Jewish representation in elite schools beginning in the nineteenth century and peaking in the 1920s and 1930s, the anti-Communist crusades in the post-World War II era, as well as the very powerful concern with the cultural influences of the major media extending from Henry Ford�s writings in the 1920s to the Hollywood inquisitions of the McCarthy era and into the contemporary era.

That anti-Semitism was involved in these issues can be seen from the fact that historians of Judaism (e.g., Sachar 1992, p. 620ff) feel compelled to include accounts of these events as important to the history of Jews in America, by the anti-Semitic pronouncements of many of the gentile participants, and by the self-conscious understanding of Jewish participants and observers. The Jewish involvement in influencing immigration policy in the United States is especially noteworthy as an aspect of ethnic conflict. Jewish involvement has had certain unique qualities that have distinguished Jewish interests from the interests of other groups favoring liberal immigration policies.

Throughout much of this period, one Jewish interest in liberal immigration policies stemmed from a desire to provide a sanctuary for Jews fleeing from anti-Semitic persecutions in Europe and elsewhere. Anti-Semitic persecutions have been a recurrent phenomenon in the modern world beginning with the Czarist persecutions in 1881, and continuing into the post-World War II era in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. As a result, liberal immigration has been a Jewish interest because survival often dictated that Jews seek refuge in other lands (Cohen 1972, p. 341). For a similar reason, Jews have consistently advocated an internationalist foreign policy for the United States because antuazl internationally-minded America was likely to be more sensitive to the problems of foreign Jewries (Cohen 1972, p. 342).

However, in addition to a persistent concern that America be a safe haven for Jews fleeing outbreaks of anti-Semitism in foreign countries, there is evidence that Jews, much more than any other European-derived ethnic group in America, have viewed liberal immigration policies as a mechanism of ensuring that America would be a pluralistic rather than a unitary, homogeneous society (e.g., Cohen 1972). PLURALISM SERVES BOTH INTERNAL (within-group) AND EXTERNAL (between-group) JEWISH INTERESTS. PLURALISM SERVES INTERNAL JEWISH INTERESTS BECAUSE IT LEGITIMATES THE INTERNAL JEWISH INTEREST IN RATIONALIZING AND OPENLY ADVOCATING AN INTEREST IN JEWISH GROUP COMMITMENT AND NON-ASSIMILATION, what Howard Sachar (1992, p. 427) terms its function in legitimizing the preservation of a minority culture in the midst of a majority�s host society. The development of an ethnic, political, or religious monoculture implies that Judaism can survive only by engaging in a sort of semi-crypsis.

As Irving Louis Horowitz (1993, 86) notes regarding the long-term consequences of Jewish life under Communism, Jews suffer, their numbers decline, and emigration becomes a survival solution when the state demands integration into a national mainstream, a religious universal defined by a state religion or a near-state religion. Both Neusner (1987) and Ellman (1987) suggest that the increased sense of ethnic consciousness seen in Jewish circles recently has been influenced by this general movement within American society toward the legitimization of minority group ethnocentrism. More importantly, ethnic and religious pluralism serves external Jewish interests because Jews become just one of many ethnic groups.

This results in the diffusion of political and cultural influence among the various ethnic and religious groups, and it becomes difficult or impossible to develop unified, cohesive groups of gentiles united in their opposition to Judaism. Historically, major anti-Semitic movements have tended to erupt in societies that have been, apart from the Jews, religiously and/or ethnically homogeneous (MacDonald, 1994; 1998).

Conversely, one reason for the relative lack of anti-Semitism in America compared to Europe was that Jews did not stand out as a solitary group of [religious] non-conformists (Higham 1984, p. 156). It follows also that ethnically and religiously pluralistic societies are more likely to satisfy Jewish interests than are societies characterized by ethnic and religious homogeneity among gentiles. Beginning with Horace Kallen, Jewish intellectuals have been at the forefront in developing models of the United States as a culturally and ethnically pluralistic society. Reflecting the utility of cultural pluralism in serving internal Jewish group interests in maintaining cultural separatism, Kallen personally combined his ideology of cultural pluralism with a deep immersion in Jewish history and internationally-minded America was likely to be more sensitive to the problems of foreign Jewries (Cohen 1972, p. 342).

More importantly, ethnic and religious pluralism serves external Jewish interests because Jews become just one of many ethnic groups. This results in the diffusion of political and cultural influence among the various ethnic and religious groups, and it becomes difficult or impossible to develop unified, cohesive groups of gentiles united in their opposition to Judaism. Historically, major anti-Semitic movements have tended to erupt in societies that have been, apart from the Jews, religiously and/or ethnically homogeneous (MacDonald, 1994; 1998). Conversely, one reason for the relative lack of anti-Semitism in America compared to Europe was that jews did not stand out as a solitary group of [religious] non-conformists (Higham 1984, p. 156). It follows also that ethnically and religiously pluralistic societies are more likely to satisfy Jewish interests than are societies characterized by ethnic and religious homogeneity among gentiles.

Beginning with Horace Kallen, Jewish intellectuals have been at the forefront in developing models of the United States as a culturally and ethnically pluralistic society. Reflecting the utility of cultural pluralism in serving internal Jewish group interests in maintaining cultural separatism, Kallen personally combined his ideology of cultural pluralism with a deep immersion in Jewish history and literature, a commitment to Zionism, and political activity on behalf of Jews in Eastern Europe (Sachar 1992, p. 425ff; Frommer 1978). Kallen (1915; 1924) developed a polycentric ideal for American ethnic relationships. Kallen defined ethnicity as deriving from one�s biological endowment, implying that Jews should be able to remain a genetically and culturally cohesive group while nevertheless participating in American democratic institutions.

This conception that the United States should be organized as a set of separate ethnic/cultural groups was accompanied by an ideology that relationships between groups would be cooperative and benign: Kallen lifted his eyes above the strife that swirled around him to an ideal realm where diversity and harmony coexist (Higham 1984, p. 209). Similarly in Germany, the Jewish leader Moritz Lazarus argued in opposition to the views of the German intellectual Heinrich Treitschke that the continued separateness of diverse ethnic groups contributed to the richness of German culture (Schorsch 1972, p. 63).

LAZARUS ALSO DEVELOPED THE DOCTRINE OF DUAL LOYALTY WHICH BECAME A CORNERSTONE OF THE ZIONIST MOVEMENT. Kallen wrote his 1915 essay partly in reaction to the ideas of Edward A. Ross (1914). Ross was a Darwinian sociologist who believed that the existence of clearly demarcated groups would tend to result in between-group competition for resources. Higham�s comment is interesting because it shows that Kallen�s romantic views of group co-existence were contradicted by the reality of between-group competition in his own day. Indeed, it is noteworthy that Kallen was a prominent leader of the American Jewish Congress (AJ Congress). During the 1920s and 1930s the AJ Congress championed group economic and political rights for Jews in Eastern Europe at a time when there was widespread ethnic tensions and persecution of Jews, and despite the fears of many that such rights would merely exacerbate current tensions.

The AJ Congress demanded that Jews be allowed proportional political representation as well as the ability to organize their own communities and preserve an autonomous Jewish national culture. The treaties with Eastern European countries and Turkey included provisions that the state provide instruction in minority languages and that Jews have the right to refuse to attend courts or other public functions on the Sabbath (Frommer 1978, p. 162).

Kallen�s idea of cultural pluralism as a model for America was popularized among gentile intellectuals by John Dewey (Higham 1984, p. 209), who in turn was promoted by Jewish intellectuals: If lapsed Congregationalists like Dewey did not need immigrants to inspire them to press against the boundaries of even the most liberal of Protestant sensibilities, Dewey�s kind were resoundingly encouraged in that direction by the Jewish intellectuals they encountered in urban academic and literary communities (Hollinger, 1996, p. 24).

Literature, a commitment to Zionism, and political activity on behalf of Jews in Eastern Europe (Sachar 1992, p. 425ff; Frommer 1978). Kallen (1915; 1924) developed a polycentric ideal for American ethnic relationships. Kallen defined ethnicity as deriving from one�s biological endowment, implying that Jews should be able to remain a genetically and culturally cohesive group while nevertheless participating in American democratic institutions.

This conception that the United States should be organized as a set of separate ethnic/cultural groups was accompanied by an ideology that relationships between groups would be cooperative and benign: Kallen lifted his eyes above the strife that swirled around him to an ideal realm where diversity and harmony coexist (Higham 1984, p. 209).

Similarly in Germany, the Jewish leader Moritz Lazarus argued in opposition to the views of the German intellectual Heinrich Treitschke that the continued separateness of diverse ethnic groups contributed to the richness of German culture (Schorsch 1972, p. 63). Lazarus also developed the doctrine of dual loyalty which became a cornerstone of the Zionist movement. Kallen wrote his 1915 essay partly in reaction to the ideas of Edward A. Ross (1914).

Ross was a Darwinian sociologist who believed that the existence of clearly demarcated groups would tend to result in between-group competition for resources. Higham�s comment is interesting because it shows that Kallen�s romantic views of group co-existence were contradicted by the reality of between-group competition in his own day. Indeed, it is noteworthy that Kallen was a prominent leader of the American Jewish Congress (AJ Congress). During the 1920s and 1930s the AJ Congress championed group economic and political rights for Jews in Eastern Europe at a time when there was widespread ethnic tensions and persecution of Jews, and despite the fears of many that such rights would merely exacerbate current tensions.

The AJ Congress demanded that Jews be allowed proportional political representation as well as the ability to organize their own communities and preserve an autonomous Jewish national culture. The treaties with Eastern European countries and Turkey included provisions that the state provide instruction in minority languages and that Jews have the right to refuse to attend courts or other public functions on the Sabbath (Frommer 1978, p. 162). Kallen�s idea of cultural pluralism as a model for America was popularized among gentile intellectuals by John Dewey (Higham 1984, p. 209), who in turn was promoted by Jewish intellectuals: If lapsed Congregationalists like Dewey did not need immigrants to inspire them to press against the boundaries of even the most liberal of Protestant sensibilities, Dewey�s kind were resoundingly encouraged in that direction by the Jewish intellectuals they encountered in urban academic and literary communities (Hollinger, 1996, p. 24).

Kallen�s ideas have been very influential in producing Jewish self-conceptualizations of their status in America. This influence was apparent as early as 1915 among American Zionists, such as Louis D. Brandeis. Brandeis viewed America as composed of different nationalities whose free development would spiritually enrich the United States and would make it a democracy par excellence (Gal 1989, p. 70). These views became a hallmark of mainstream American Zionism, secular and religious alike (Gal 1989, p. 70).

But Kallen�s influence extended really to all educated Jews: Legitimizing the preservation of a minority culture in the midst of a majority�s host society, pluralism functioned as intellectual anchorage for an educated Jewish second generation, sustained its cohesiveness and its most tenacious communal endeavors through the rigors of the Depression and revived anti-Semitism, through the shock of Nazism and the Holocaust, until the emergence of Zionism in the post-World War II years swept through American Jewry with a climactic redemptionist fervor of its own. (Sachar 1992, p. 427)

Explicit statements linking immigration policy to a Jewish interest in cultural pluralism can be found among prominent Jewish social scientists and political activists. In his review of Kallen�s (1956) Cultural Pluralism and the American Idea appearing in Congress Weekly (published by the AJ Congress), Joseph L. Blau (1958, p. 15) noted that Kallen�s view is needed to serve the cause of minority groups and minority cultures in this nation without a permanent majority the implication being that Kallen�s ideology of multi-culturalism opposes the interests of any ethnic group in dominating America.

The well-known author and prominent Zionist Maurice Samuel (1924, p. 215) writing partly as a negative reaction to the immigration law of 1924, wrote that If, then, the struggle between us [i.e., Jews and gentiles] is ever to be lifted beyond the physical, your democracies will have to alter their demands for racial, spiritual and cultural homogeneity with the State. But it would be foolish to regard this as a possibility, for the tendency of this civilization is in the opposite direction. There is a steady approach toward the identification of government with race, instead of with the political State.

Samuel deplored the 1924 legislation and in the following quote he develops the view that the American state as having no ethnic implications. We have just witnessed, in America, the repetition, in the peculiar form adapted to this country, of the evil farce to which the experience of many centuries has not yet accustomed us. If America had any meaning at all, it lay in the peculiar attempt to rise above the trend of our present civilization the identification of race with State...America was therefore the New World in this vital respect that the State was purely an ideal, and nationality was identical only with acceptance of the ideal. But it seems now that the entire point of view was a mistaken one, that America was incapable of rising above her origins, and the semblance of an ideal-nationalism was only a stage in the proper development of the universal gentile spirit...To-day, with race triumphant over ideal, anti-Semitism uncovers its fangs, and to the heartless refusal of the most elementary human right, the right of asylum, is added cowardly insult. We are not only excluded, but we are told, in the unmistakable language of the immigration laws, that we are an inferior people. Without the moral courage to stand up squarely to its evil instincts, the country prepared itself, through its journalists, by a long draught of vilification of the Jew, and, when sufficiently inspired by the popular and scientific potions, committed the act. (pp. 218-220)

A congruent opinion is expressed by prominent Jewish social scientist and political activist Earl Raab (Raab is associated with the Anti-Defamation League of B�nai B�rith (ADL), and is executive director emeritus of the Perlmutter Institute for Jewish Advocacy at Brandeis University. He is also a columnist for the San Francisco Jewish Bulletin. Among other works, he is co-author, with Seymour Lipset of The Politics of Unreason: Right Wing-Extremism in America, 1790-1970 (Lipset & Raab 1970), a volume in a series of books on anti-Semitism in the United States sponsored by the ADL) who remarks very positively on the success of American immigration policy in altering the ethnic composition of the United States since 1965.

Raab notes that the Jewish community has taken a leadership role in changing the Northwestern European bias of American immigration policy (1993a, p. 17), and he has also maintained that one factor inhibiting anti-Semitism in the contemporary United States is that (a)n increasing ethnic heterogeneity, as a result of immigration, has made it even more difficult for a political party or mass movement of bigotry to develop (1995, p. 91).

Or more colorfully: The Census Bureau has just reported that about half of the American population will soon be non-white or non-European. And they will all be American citizens. We have tipped beyond the point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able to prevail in this country. We [i.e., Jews] have been nourishing the American climate of opposition to bigotry for about half a century. That climate has not yet been perfected, but the heterogeneous nature of our population tends to make it irreversible and makes our constitutional constraints against bigotry more practical than ever. (Raab 1993b, p. 23). (In Australia, Miriam Faine, an editorial committee member of the Australian Jewish Democrat stated that the strengthening of multi-cultural or diverse Australia is also our most effective insurance policy against anti-Semitism. The day Australia has a Chinese Australian Governor General I would feel more confident of my freedom to live as a Jewish Australian (in McCormack 1994, p. 11)).

Indeed, the primary objective of Jewish political activity after 1945 was...to prevent the emergence of an anti-Semitic reactionary mass movement in the United States (Svonkin 1997, 8). Charles Silberman (1985, 350) notes that American Jews are committed to cultural tolerance because of their belief one firmly rooted in history that Jews are safe only in a society acceptant of a wide range of attitudes and behaviors, as well as a diversity of religious and ethnic groups. It is this belief, for example, not approval of homosexuality, that leads an overwhelming majority of American Jews to endorse gay rights and to take a liberal stance on most other so-called social issues. (Moreover, A DEEP CONCERN THAT AN ETHNICALLY AND CULTURALLY HOMOGENEOUS AMERICA WOULD COMPROMISE JEWISH INTERESTS can be seen in Silberman�s comments on the attraction of Jews to the Democratic party...with its traditional hospitality to non-WASP ethnic groups...A distinguished economist who strongly disagreed with Mondale�s economic policies voted for him nonetheless. I watched the conventions on television, he explained, and the Republicans did not look like my kind of people. That same reaction led many Jews to vote for Carter in 1980 despite their dislike of him; I rather live in a country governed by the faces I saw at the Democratic convention than by those I saw at the Republican contention a well-known author told me (pp. 347-348)).

Silberman�s comment that Jewish attitudes are firmly rooted in history is quite reasonable: There has indeed been a only with acceptance of the ideal. But it seems now that the entire point of view was a mistaken one, that America was incapable of rising above her origins, and the semblance of an ideal-nationalism was only a stage in the proper development of the universal gentile spirit...To-day, with race triumphant over ideal, anti-Semitism uncovers its fangs, and to the heartless refusal of the most elementary human right, the right of asylum, is added cowardly insult. We are not only excluded, but we are told, in the unmistakable language of the immigration laws, that we are an inferior people. Without the moral courage to stand up squarely to its evil instincts, the country prepared itself, through its journalists, by a long draught of vilification of the Jew, and, when sufficiently inspired by the popular and scientific potions, committed the act. (pp. 218-220)

A congruent opinion is expressed by prominent Jewish social scientist and political activist Earl Raab who remarks very positively on the success of American immigration policy in altering the ethnic composition of the United States since 1965. Raab notes that the Jewish community has taken a leadership role in changing the Northwestern European bias of American immigration policy (1993a, p. 17), and he has also maintained that one factor inhibiting anti-Semitism in the contemporary United States is that (a)n� increasing ethnic heterogeneity, as a result of immigration, has made it even more difficult for a political party or mass movement of bigotry to develop (1995, p. 91). Or more colorfully: The Census Bureau has just reported that about half of the American population will soon be non-white or non-European. And they will all be American citizens. We have tipped beyond the point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able to prevail in this country.

We [i.e., Jews] have been nourishing the American climate of opposition to bigotry for about half a century. That climate has not yet been perfected, but the heterogeneous nature of our population tends to make it irreversible and makes our constitutional constraints against bigotry more practical than ever. (Raab 1993b, p. 23). Indeed, the primary objective of Jewish political activity after 1945 was...to prevent the emergence of an anti-Semitic reactionary mass movement in the United States (Svonkin 1997, 8).

Charles Silberman (1985, 350) notes that American Jews are committed to cultural tolerance because of their belief one firmly rooted in history that Jews are safe only in a society acceptant of a wide range of attitudes and behaviors, as well as a diversity of religious and ethnic groups. It is this belief, for example, not approval of homosexuality, that leads an overwhelming majority of American Jews to endorse gay rights� and to take a liberal stance on most other so-called social issues. Silberman�s comment that Jewish attitudes are firmly rooted in history is quite reasonable: There has indeed been a tendency for Jews to be persecuted by a culturally and/or ethnically homogeneous majority that come to view Jews as a negatively evaluated outcrop.

Similarly, in listing the positive benefits of immigration, Diana Aviv, director of the Washington Action Office of the Council of Jewish Federations states that immigration is about diversity, cultural enrichment and economic opportunity for the immigrants (quoted in Forward, March 8, 1996, p. 5). And in summarizing Jewish involvement in the 1996 legislative battles a newspaper account stated that Jewish groups failed to kill a number of provisions that reflect the kind of political expediency that they regard as a direct attack on American pluralism (Detroit Jewish News; May 10, 1996).

It is noteworthy also that there has been a conflict between predominantly Jewish

neo-Conservatives and predominantly gentile paleo-conservatives over the issue of Third World immigration into the United States. Many of these neo-conservative intellectuals had previously been radical leftists, (Goldberg (1996, 160) notes that the future neo-conservatives were disciples of Trotskyist theoretician Max Schachtman. A good example is Irving Kristol�s (1983) Memoirs of a Trotskyist)) and the split between the neo-conservatives and their previous allies resulted in an intense internecine feud (Gottfried 1993; Rothman & Lichter 1982, p. 105). Neo-conservatives Norman Podhoretz and Richard John Neuhaus reacted very negatively to an article by a paleo-conservative concerned that such immigration would eventually lead to the United States being dominated by such immigrants (see Judis 1990, p. 33). Other examples are neo-Conservatives Julian Simon (1990) and Ben Wattenberg (1991), both of whom advocate very high levels of immigration from all parts of the world, so that the United States will become what Wattenberg describes as the world�s first Universal Nation. Based on recent data, Fetzer (1996) reports that Jews remain far more favorable to immigration to the United States than any other ethnic group or religion.

It should be noted as a general point that the effectiveness of Jewish organizations in influencing American immigration policy has been facilitated by certain characteristics of American Jewry. As Neuringer (1971, p. 87) notes, Jewish influence on immigration policy was facilitated by Jewish wealth, education, and social status. Reflecting its general disproportionate representation in markers of economic success and political influence, Jewish organizations have been able to have a vastly disproportionate effect on United States immigration policy because Jews as a group are highly organized, highly intelligent, and politically astute, and they were able to command a high level of financial, political, and intellectual resources in pursuing their political aims.

Similarly, Hollinger (1996, p. 19) notes that Jews were more influential in the decline of a homogeneous Protestant Christian culture in the United States than Catholics because of their greater wealth, social standing, and technical skill in the intellectual arena. In the area of immigration policy, the main Jewish activist organization influencing immigration policy, the American Jewish Committee (AJ Committee), was characterized by strong leadership [particularly Louis Marshall], internal cohesion, well-funded programs, sophisticated lobbying techniques, well-chosen non-Jewish allies, and good timing (Goldstein 1990, p. 333).

In this regard, the Jewish success in influencing immigration policy is entirely analogous to their success in influencing the secularization of American culture. As in the case of immigration policy, the secularization of American culture is a Jewish interest because Jews have a perceived interest that America not be a homogeneous Christian culture. Jewish civil rights organizations have had an historic role in the postwar development of American church-state law and policy (Ivers 1995, p. 2). Unlike the effort to influence immigration, the opposition to a homogeneous Christian culture was mainly carried out in the courts.

The Jewish effort in this case was well funded and was the focus of well-organized, highly dedicated Jewish civil service organizations, including the AJ COMMITTEE, the AJ Congress, and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). It involved keen legal expertise both in the actual litigation but also in influencing legal opinion via articles in law journals and other forums of intellectual debate, including the popular media. It also involved a highly charismatic and effective leadership, particularly Leo Pfeffer of the AJ Congress:

No other lawyer exercised such complete intellectual dominance over a chosen area of law for so extensive a period as an author, scholar, public citizen, and above all, legal advocate who harnessed his multiple and formidable talents into a single force capable of satisfying all that an institution needs for a successful constitutional reform movement...

That Pfeffer, through an enviable combination of skill, determination, and persistence, was able in such a short period of time to make church-state reform the foremost cause with which rival organizations associated the AJ Congress illustrates well the impact that individual lawyers endowed with exceptional skills can have on the character and life of the organizations for which they work...As if to confirm the extent to which Pfeffer is associated with post-Everson [i.e., post-1946] constitutional development, even the major critics of the Courts church-state jurisprudence during this period and the modern doctrine of separationism rarely fail to make reference to Pfeffer as the central force responsible for what they lament as the lost meaning of the establishment clause. (Ivers 1995, pp. 222-224)

Similarly, Hollinger (1996, p. 4) notes the transformation of the ethnoreligious demography of American academic life by Jews in the period from the 1930s to the 1960s, as well as the Jewish influence on trends toward the secularization of American society and in advancing an ideal of cosmopolitanism (p. 11). The pace of this influence was very likely influenced by immigration battles of the 1920s. Hollinger notes that the old Protestant establishment influence persisted until the 1960s in large measure because of the Immigration Act of 1924: HAD THE MASSIVE IMMIGRATION OF CATHOLICS AND JEWS CONTINUED AT PRE-1924 LEVELS, THE COURSE OF AMERICAN HISTORY WOULD HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT IN MANY WAYS, including, one may reasonably speculate, a more rapid diminution of Protestant cultural hegemony. Immigration restriction gave that hegemony a new lease of life (p. 22).

It is reasonable to suppose, therefore, that the immigration battles from 1881 to 1965 have been of momentous historical importance in shaping the contours of American culture in the late twentieth century. The ultimate success of Jewish attitudes on immigration was also influenced by intellectual movements that collectively resulted in a decline of evolutionary and biological thinking in the academic world.

Although playing virtually no role in the restrictionist position in the Congressional debates on the immigration (which focused mainly on the fairness of maintaining the ethnic status quo; see below), a component of the intellectual zeitgeist of the 1920s was the prevalence of evolutionary theories of race and ethnicity (Singerman 1986), particularly the theories of Madison Grant. In The Passing of the Great Race, Grant (1921) argued that the American colonial stock was derived from superior Nordic racial elements and that IMMIGRATION OF OTHER RACES WOULD LOWER THE COMPETENCE LEVEL OF THE SOCIETY AS A WHOLE AS WELL AS THREATEN DEMOCRATIC AND REPUBLICAN INSTITUTIONS.

Grant�s ideas were popularized in the media at the time of the immigration debates (see Divine 1957, pp. 12ff) and often provoked negative comments in Jewish publications such as The American Hebrew (e.g., March 21, 1924, pp. 554, 625).(Grant�s letter to the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization emphasized the principle argument of the restrictionists, i.e., that the use of the 1890 census of the foreign born as the basis of the immigration law was fair to all ethnic groups currently in the country, and that the use of the 1910 census discriminated against the native Americans whose ancestors were in this country before its independence. He also argued in favor of quotas from Western Hemisphere nations because these countries in some cases furnish very undesirable immigrants. The Mexicans who come into the United States are overwhelmingly of Indian blood, and the recent intelligence tests have shown their very low intellectual status. We have already got too many of them in our Southwestern States, and a check should be put on their increase (p. 571).

Grant was also concerned about the unassimilability of recent immigrants. He included with his letter a Chicago Tribune editorial commenting on a situation in Hamtramck, Michigan in which recent immigrants were described as demanding Polish rule, the expulsion of non-Poles, and that only the Polish language be spoken even by federal officials. Grant also argued that differences in reproductive rate would result in displacement of groups that delayed marriage and had fewer children clearly a concern that as a result of immigration his ethnic group would be displaced by ethnic groups with a higher rate of natural increase. (Restriction of Immigration; Hearings Before the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization House of Representatives, sixty-eighth Congress, First Session, Jan. 5, 1924; p. 570.))

The debate over group differences in IQ was also tied to the immigration issue. C. C. Brigham�s study of intelligence among United States army personnel concluded that Nordics were superior to Alpine and Mediterranean Europeans, and Brigham (1923, p. 210) concluded that (i)mmigration should not only be restrictive but highly selective. In the Foreword to Brigham�s book, Harvard psychologist Robert M. Yerkes stated that The author presents not theories but facts. It behooves us to consider their reliability and meaning, for no one of us as a citizen can afford to ignore the menace of race deterioration or the evident relation of immigration to national progress and welfare (in Brigham 1923, pp. vii-viii).

Nevertheless, as Samelson (1975) points out, the drive to restrict immigration originated long before IQ testing came into existence and restriction was favored by a variety of groups, including organized labor, for reasons other than those related to race and IQ, including especially the fairness of maintaining the ethnic status quo in the United States. Moreover, although Brigham�s IQ testing results did indeed appear in the statement submitted by the Allied Patriotic Societies to the House hearings, (Restriction of Immigration; Hearings Before the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization House of Representatives, sixty-eighth Congress, First Session, Jan. 5, 1924; p. 580-581.) the role of IQ testing in the immigration debates has been greatly exaggerated (Snyderman & Herrnstein, 1983).

Indeed, IQ testing was never even mentioned in either the House Majority Report or the Minority Report, and there is no mention of intelligence testing in the Act; test results on immigrants appear only briefly in the committee hearings and are then largely ignored or criticized, and they are brought up only once in over 600 pages of congressional floor debate, where they are subjected to further criticism without rejoinder. None of the major contemporary figures in testing...were called to testify, nor were their writings inserted into the legislative record (Snyderman & Herrnstein 1983, 994).

It is also very easy to over-emphasize the importance of theories of Nordic superiority as an ingredient of popular and Congressional restrictionist sentiment. As Singerman (1986, 118-119) points out, racial anti-Semitism was employed by only a handful of writers; and the Jewish problem...was a minor preoccupation even among such widely-published authors as Madison Grant or T. Lothrop Stoddard and none of the individuals examined [in Singerman�s review] could be regarded as professional Jew-baiters or full-time propagandists against Jews, domestic or foreign.

As indicated below, arguments related to Nordic superiority, including supposed Nordic intellectual superiority, played remarkably little role in Congressional debates over immigration in the 1920s, the common argument of the restrictionists being that immigration policy should reflect equally the interests of all ethnic groups currently in the country. Nevertheless, it is probable that the decline in evolutionary/biological theories of race and ethnicity facilitated the sea change in immigration policy brought about by the 1965 law.

As Higham (1984) notes, by the time of the final victory in 1965 which removed national origins and racial ancestry from immigration policy and opened up immigration to all human groups, the Boasian perspective of cultural determinism and anti-biologism had become standard academic wisdom. The result was that it became intellectually fashionable to discount the very existence of persistent ethnic differences. The whole reaction deprived popular race feelings of a powerful ideological weapon (Higham 1984, pp. 58-59).

JEWISH INTELLECTUALS WERE PROMINENTLY INVOLVED IN THE MOVEMENT TO ERADICATE THE RACIALIST IDEAS OF GRANT AND OTHERS (Degler 1991, p. 200). Indeed, even during the earlier debates leading up to the immigration bills of 1921 and 1924, restrictionists perceived themselves to be under attack from Jewish intellectuals. In 1918, Prescott F. Hall, secretary of the Immigration Restriction League, wrote to Grant that; What I wanted...was the names of a few anthropologists of note who have declared in favor of the inequality of the races...I AM UP AGAINST THE JEWS ALL THE TIME IN THE EQUALITY ARGUMENT and thought perhaps you might be able offhand to name a few besides Osborn) whom I could quote in support (in Samelson 1975, p. 467).

Grant also believed that Jews were engaged in a campaign to discredit racial research. In the Introduction to the 1921 edition of Passing of the Great Race, Grant complained that (i)t is well-nigh impossible to publish in the American newspapers any reflection upon certain religions or races which are hysterically sensitive even when not mentioned by name. The underlying idea seems to be that if publication can be suppressed the facts themselves will ultimately disappear. Abroad, conditions are fully as bad, and we have the authority of one of the most eminent anthropologists in France that THE COLLECTION OF ANTHROPOLOGICAL MEASUREMENTS AND DATA AMONG FRENCH RECRUITS AT THE OUTBREAK OF THE GREAT WAR WAS PREVENTED BY JEWISH INFLUENCE, WHICH AIMED TO SUPPRESS ANY SUGGESTION OF RACIAL DIFFERENTIATION IN FRANCE.

Particularly important was the work of Columbia University anthropologist Franz Boas and his followers. Boas� influence upon American social scientists in matters of race can hardly be exaggerated (Degler 1991, p. 61). He engaged in a life-long assault on the idea that race was a primary source of the differences to be found in the mental or social capabilities of human groups. He accomplished his mission largely through his ceaseless, almost relentless articulation of the concept of culture (p. 61).

Boas, almost single-handedly, developed in America the concept of culture, which, like a powerful solvent, would in time expunge race from the literature of social science (p. 71). Throughout this explication of Boas�s conception of culture and his opposition to a racial

interpretation of human behavior, the central point has been that Boas did not arrive at the position from a disinterested, scientific inquiry into a vexed if controversial question.

Instead, his idea derived from an ideological commitment that began in his early life and academic experiences in Europe and continued in America to shape his professional outlook...there is no doubt that he had a deep interest in collecting evidence and designing arguments that would rebut or refute an ideological outlook racism which he considered restrictive upon individuals and undesirable for society...there is a persistent interest in pressing his social values upon the profession and the public. (Degler 1991, pp. 82-83)

There is evidence that Boas strongly identified as a Jew and viewed his research as having important implications in the political arena and particularly in the area of immigration policy. Boas was born in Prussia to a Jewish-liberal family in which the revolutionary ideals of 1848 remained influential (Stocking 1968, p. 149). Boas developed a left-liberal posture which...is at once scientific and political (Stocking 1968, p. 149) and was intensely concerned with anti-Semitism from an early period in his life (White 1966, p. 16). Moreover, Boas was deeply alienated from and hostile toward gentile culture, particularly the cultural ideal of the Prussian aristocracy (Degler 1991, p. 200; Stocking 1968, p. 150). For example, when Margaret Mead was looking for a way to persuade Boas to let her pursue her research in the South Sea islands, she hit upon a sure way of getting him to change his mind.

I knew there was one thing that mattered more to Boas than the direction taken by anthropological research. This was that he should behave like a liberal, democratic, modern man, not like a Prussian autocrat. The ploy worked because she had indeed uncovered the heart of his personal values (Degler 1991, p. 73).

Boas was greatly motivated by the immigration issue as it occurred early in the century. Carl Degler (1991, p. 74) notes that Boas� professional correspondence reveals that an important motive behind his famous head-measuring project in 1910 was his strong personal interest in keeping America diverse in population. The study, whose conclusions were placed into the Congressional Record by Representative Emanuel Celler during the debate on immigration restriction (Cong. Rec., April 8, 1924, pp. 5915-5916), concluded that the environmental differences consequent to immigration caused differences in head shape. (At the time, head shape as determined by the cephalic index was the main measurement used by scientists involved in racial differences research).

Boas argued that his research showed that all foreign groups living in favorable social circumstances had become assimilated to America in the sense that their physical measurements converged on the American type. Although he was considerably more circumspect regarding his conclusions in the body of his report (see also Stocking 1968, p. 178), Boas (1911, p. 5) stated in his Introduction that all fear of an unfavorable influence of South European immigration upon the body of our people should be dismissed. As a further indication of Boas� ideological commitment to the immigration issue, Degler makes the following comment regarding one of Boas� environmentalist explanations for mental differences between immigrant and native children: Why Boas chose to advance such an ad hoc interpretation is hard to understand until one recognizes his desire to explain in a favorable way the apparent mental backwardness of the immigrant children (p. 75).

BOAS and HIS STUDENTS WERE INTENSELY CONCERNED WITH PUSHING AN IDEOLOGICAL AGENDA WITHIN THE AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL PROFESSION (Degler 1991; Freeman 1991; Torrey 1992). In this regard it is interesting that Boas and his associates had a much more highly developed sense of group identity, a commitment to a common viewpoint, and an agenda to dominate the institutional structure of anthropology than did their opponents (Stocking 1968, pp. 279-280).

The defeat of the Darwinians had not happened without considerable exhortation of every mother�s son� standing for the Right. Nor had it been accomplished without some rather strong pressure applied both to staunch friends and to the weaker brethren often by the sheer force of Boas� personality (Stocking 1968, 286). By 1915 the Boasians controlled the American Anthropological Association and held a two-thirds majority on the Executive Board (Stocking 1968, 285). BY 1926 EVERY MAJOR DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY IN THE UNITED STATES WAS HEADED BY A STUDENT OF BOAS, THE MAJORITY OF WHOM WERE JEWISH.

According to White (1966, p. 26), Boas� most influential students were Ruth Benedict, Alexander Goldenweiser, Melville Herskovits, Alfred Kroeber, Robert Lowie, Margaret Mead, Paul Radin, Edward Sapir, and Leslie Spier. ALL OF THIS SMALL, COMPACT GROUP OF SCHOLARS...GATHERED ABOUT THEIR LEADER (White 1966, p. 26) WERE JEWS with the exception of Kroeber, Benedict and Mead.

Indeed, Herskovits (1953, p. 91), whose hagiography of Boas qualifies as one of the most worshipful in intellectual history, noted that (t)he four decades of the tenure of [Boas�] professorship at Columbia gave a continuity to his teaching that permitted him to develop students who eventually made up the greater part of the significant professional core of American anthropologists, and who came to man and direct most of the major departments of anthropology in the United States. In their turn, they trained the students who...have continued the tradition in which their teachers were trained.

By the mid-1930s the Boasian view of the cultural determination of human behavior had a strong influence on social scientists generally (Stocking 1968, p. 300). The ideology of racial equality was an important weapon on behalf of opening immigration up to all human groups. For example, in a 1951 statement to Congress, the AJ Congress stated that The findings of science must force even the most prejudiced among us to accept, as unqualifiedly as we do the law of gravity, that intelligence, morality and character, bear no relationship whatever to geography or place of birth. (Statement of the AJ Congress, Joint Hearings Before the Subcommittees of the Committees on the Judiciary, 82^nd Congress, first session, on S. 716, H. R. 2379, and H. R. 2816. March 6-April 9, 1951, p. 391)

The statement went on to cite some of Boas� popular writings on the subject as well as the writings of Boas� prot�g�e Ashley Montagu, perhaps the most visible opponent of the concept of race during this period. Montagu, whose original name was Israel Ehrenberg, theorized that humans are innately cooperative (but not innately aggressive) and there is a universal brotherhood among humans (see Shipman 1994, p. 159ff).

And in 1952 another Boas� prot�g�, Margaret Mead, testified before the President�s Commission on Immigration and Naturalization (PCIN) (1953, p. 92) that all human beings from all groups of people have the same potentialities...Our best anthropological evidence today suggests that the people of every group have about the same distribution of potentialities. Another witness stated that the executive board of the American Anthropological Association had unanimously endorsed the proposition that (a)ll scientific evidence indicates that all peoples are inherently capable of acquiring or adapting to our civilization (PCIN 1953, p. 93).

By 1965 Senator Jacob Javits (Cong. Rec., 111, 1965, p. 24469) confidently announced to the Senate during the debate on the immigration bill that (b)oth the dictates of our consciences as well as the precepts of sociologists tell us that immigration, as it exists in the national origins quota system, is wrong, and without any basis in reason or fact for we know better than to say that one man is better than another because of the color of his skin. The intellectual revolution and its translation into public policy had been completed.

JEWISH ANTI-RESTRICTIONIST POLITICAL ACTIVITY: Jewish Anti-Restrictionist Activity up to 1924. WHILE JEWISH INVOLVEMENT IN ALTERING THE INTELLECTUAL DISCUSSION OF RACE AND ETHNICITY APPEARS TO HAVE HAD LONG TERM REPERCUSSIONS ON UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION POLICY, JEWISH POLITICAL INVOLVEMENT WAS ULTIMATELY OF MUCH GREATER SIGNIFICANCE. JEWISH OPINION IS NOT MONOLITHIC.

Nevertheless, although there have been dissenters, Jews have been the single most persistent pressure group favoring a liberal immigration policy in the United States in the entire immigration debate beginning in 1881 (Neuringer 1971, p. ii): In undertaking to sway immigration policy in a liberal direction, Jewish spokesmen and organizations demonstrated a degree of energy unsurpassed by any other interested pressure group. Immigration had constituted a prime object of concern for practically every major Jewish defense and community relations organization.

Over the years, their spokesmen had assiduously attended congressional hearings, and THE JEWISH EFFORT WAS OF THE UTMOST IMPORTANCE IN ESTABLISHING AND FINANCING SUCH NON-SECTARIAN GROUPS AS THE NATIONAL LIBERAL IMMIGRATION LEAGUE AND THE CITIZENS COMMITTEE FOR DISPLACED PERSONS. As recounted by Nathan C. Belth (1979, p. 173) in his history of the Anti-Defamation League of B�nai B�rith (ADL),

In Congress, through all the years when THE IMMIGRATION BATTLES WERE BEING FOUGHT, THE NAMES OF JEWISH LEGISLATORS WERE IN THE FOREFRONT OF THE LIBERAL FORCES: from Adolph Sabath to Samuel Dickstein and Emanuel Celler in the House and from Herbert H. Lehman to Jacob Javits in the Senate. EACH IN HIS TIME WAS A LEADER OF THE ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE and of major organizations concerned with democratic development. The Jewish congressmen who are most closely identified with anti-restrictionist efforts in Congress have therefore also been leaders of the group most closely identified with Jewish ethnic political activism and self-defense.

Throughout the entire period of almost 100 years prior to achieving success with the

immigration law of 1965, Jewish groups opportunistically made alliances with other groups whose interests temporarily converged with Jewish interests (e.g., a constantly changing set of ethnic groups, religious groups, pro-Communists, anti-Communists, the foreign policy interests of various presidents, the political need for president�s to curry favor with groups influential in populous states in order to win national elections, etc.).

Particularly noteworthy was the support of a liberal immigration policy from industrial interests wanting cheap labor, at least in the period prior to the 1924 temporary triumph of restrictionism. Within this constantly shifting set of alliances, JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS PERSISTENTLY PURSUED THEIR GOALS OF MAXIMIZING THE NUMBER OF JEWISH IMMIGRANTS AND OPENING UP THE UNITED STATES TO IMMIGRATION FROM ALL OF THE PEOPLES OF THE WORLD. As indicated in the following, THE HISTORICAL RECORD SUPPORTS THE PROPOSITION THAT MAKING THE UNITED STATES INTO A MULTI-CULTURAL SOCIETY HAS BEEN A MAJOR GOAL OF ORGANIZED JEWRY BEGINNING IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY.

The ultimate Jewish victory on immigration is remarkable because it was waged in different arenas against a potentially very powerful set of opponents. Beginning in the late nineteenth century, leadership of the restrictionists was provided by Eastern patricians such as Senator Henry Cabot Lodge. However, the main political basis of restrictionism from 1910 to 1952 (in addition to the relatively ineffectual labor union interests) derived from the common people of the South and West (Higham 1984, p. 49) and their representatives in Congress. Fundamentally, the clashes between Jews and gentiles in the period between 1900 and 1965 were a conflict between Jews and this geographically centered group. JEWS, AS A RESULT OF THEIR INTELLECTUAL ENERGY AND ECONOMIC RESOURCES, CONSTITUTED AN ADVANCE GUARD OF THE NEW PEOPLES WHO HAD NO FEELING FOR THE TRADITIONS OF RURAL AMERICA (Higham 1984, pp. 168-169).

Although often concerned that Jewish immigration would fan the flames of anti- Semitism in America, Jewish leaders fought a long and largely successful delaying action against restrictions on immigration during the period from 1891-1924, particularly as they affected the ability of Jews to immigrate. These efforts continued despite the fact that by 1905, there was a polarity between Jewish and general American opinion on immigration (Neuringer 1971, p. 83).

In particular, while other religious groups such as Catholics and ethnic groups such as the Irish remained divided and ambivalent on their attitudes toward immigration and were poorly organized and ineffective in influencing immigration policy, and while labor unions opposed immigration in their attempt to diminish the supply of cheap labor, JEWISH GROUPS ENGAGED IN AN INTENSIVE AND SUSTAINED EFFORT AGAINST ATTEMPTS TO RESTRICT IMMIGRATION.

As recounted by Cohen (1972, p. 40ff), the AJ COMMITTEE�S EFFORTS IN OPPOSITION TO IMMIGRATION RESTRICTION IN THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY CONSTITUTE A REMARKABLE EXAMPLE OF THE ABILITY OF JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS TO INFLUENCE PUBLIC POLICY. Of all the groups affected by the immigration legislation of 1907, Jews had the least to gain in terms of numbers of possible immigrants, but they played by far the largest role in shaping the legislation (Cohen 1972, p. 41).

In the subsequent period leading up to the relatively ineffective restrictionist legislation of 1917, when restrictionists again mounted an effort in Congress, only the Jewish segment was aroused (Cohen 1972, p. 49). Nevertheless, because of the fear of anti-Semitism, efforts were made to prevent the perception of Jewish involvement in anti-restrictionist campaigns. In 1906, Jewish anti-restrictionist political operatives were instructed to lobby Congress without mentioning their affiliation with the AJ COMMITTEE because of the danger that the Jews may be accused of being organized for a political purpose (comments of Herbert Friedenwald, AJ COMMITTEE secretary; in Goldstein 1990, p. 125).

Beginning in the late nineteenth century, anti-restrictionist arguments developed by Jews were typically couched in terms of universalist humanitarian ideals, and as part of this universalizing effort, gentiles from old line Protestant families were recruited to act as window dressing for their efforts and Jewish groups such as the AJ Committee funded pro-immigration groups composed of non-Jews (Neuringer 1971, p. 92).

As was the case in later pro-immigration efforts, much of the activity was behind-the-scenes personal interventions with politicians in order to minimize public perception of the Jewish role and provoke activities of the opposition. Opposing politicians, such as Henry Cabot Lodge, and organizations like the Immigration Restriction League were kept under close scrutiny and pressured by lobbyists. Lobbyists in Washington also kept a daily scorecard of voting tendencies as immigration bills wended their way through Congress and engaged in intense and successful efforts to convince Presidents Taft and Wilson to veto restrictive immigration legislation. Catholic prelates were recruited to protest the effects of restrictionist legislation on immigration from Italy and Hungary. When restrictionist arguments appeared in the media, the AJ COMMITTEE made sophisticated replies, based on scholarly data and typically couched in universalist terms as benefitting the whole society (e.g., Neuringer 1971, p. 44).

Articles favorable to immigration were published in national magazines and letters to the editor were published in newspapers. And efforts were made to minimize the negative perceptions of immigration by attempting to distribute Jewish immigrants around the country and by getting Jewish aliens off public support. Legal proceedings were filed to prevent the deportation of Jewish aliens. And eventually the Committee organized mass protest meetings.

Indeed, writing in 1914, the sociologist Edward A. Ross had a clear sense that liberal

immigration policy was exclusively a Jewish issue. Ross provides the following quote from PROMINENT AUTHOR AND ZIONIST PIONEER ISRAEL ZANGWILL AS CLEARLY ARTICULATING THE IDEA THAT AMERICA IS AN IDEAL PLACE TO ACHIEVE JEWISH INTERESTS. AMERICA HAS AMPLE ROOM FOR ALL THE SIX MILLIONS OF THE PALE [i.e., the Pale of Settlement, home to most of Russia�s Jews]; any one of her fifty states could absorb them. And next to being in a country of their own, there could be no better fate for them than to be together in a land of civil and religious liberty, of whose Constitution Christianity forms no part and where their collective votes would practically guarantee them against future persecution (Israel Zangwill, in Ross 1914, p. 144).

JEWS THEREFORE HAVE A POWERFUL INTEREST IN IMMIGRATION POLICY; HENCE THE ENDEAVOR OF THE JEWS TO CONTROL THE IMMIGRATION POLICY OF THE UNITED STATES. Although theirs is but a seventh of our net immigration, they led the fight on the Immigration Commission�s bill. The power of the million Jews in the Metropolis lined up the Congressional delegation from New York in solid opposition to the literacy test. The systematic campaign in newspapers and magazines to break down all arguments for restriction and to calm nativist fears is waged by and for one race. Hebrew money is behind the National Liberal Immigration League and its numerous publications. From the paper before the commercial body or the scientific association to the heavy treatise produced with the aid of the Baron de Hirsch Fund, the literature that proves the blessings of immigration to all classes in America emanates from subtle Hebrew brains (Ross 1914, pp. 144-145).

Ross (1914, p. 150) also reported that immigration officials had become very sore over THE INCESSANT FIRE OF FALSE ACCUSATIONS TO WHICH THEY ARE SUBJECTED BY THE JEWISH PRESS AND SOCIETIES. UNITED STATES SENATORS COMPLAIN THAT DURING THE CLOSE OF THE STRUGGLE OVER THE IMMIGRATION BILL THEY WERE OVERWHELMED WITH A TORRENT OF CROOKED STATISTICS AND MISREPRESENTATIONS OF JEWS FIGHTING THE LITERACY TEST.

It is also noteworthy that Zangwill�s views on immigration were highly salient to restrictionists in the debates over the 1924 immigration law (see below). In an address reprinted in The American Hebrew (Oct. 19, 1923, p. 582), Zangwill noted that There is only one way to World Peace, and that is the absolute abolition of passports, visas, frontiers, custom houses, and all other devices that make of the population of our planet not a co-operating civilization but a mutual irritation society.

It is noteworthy that, despite elaborate and deceptive attempts to present the pro-immigration movement as broad-based, Jewish activists were well aware of the lack of enthusiasm of other groups. During the fight over restrictionist legislation at the end of the Taft administration, Herbert Friedenwald, AJ Committee secretary, wrote that it was very� difficult to get any people except the Jews stirred up in this fight (in Goldstein 1990, p. 203). The AJ COMMITTEE also contributed heavily to staging anti-restrictionist rallies in major American cities, but allowed other ethnic groups to take credit for the events, and it organized groups of non-Jews from the West to influence President Taft to veto restrictionist legislation (Goldstein 1990, pp. 216, 227). Later, during the Wilson Administration, Louis Marshall stated that We are practically the only ones who are fighting [the literacy test] while a great proportion [of the people] is indifferent to what is done (in Goldstein 1990, p. 249). The forces of immigration restriction were temporarily successful with the immigration laws of 1921 and 1924 which passed despite the intense opposition of Jewish groups. Divine (1957, p. 8) notes that Arrayed against [the restrictionist forces] in 1921 were only the spokesmen for the southeastern European immigrants, mainly Jewish leaders, whose protests were drowned out by the general cry for restriction.

Similarly during the 1924 congressional hearings on immigration, the most prominent group of witnesses against the bill were representatives of southeastern European immigrants, particularly JEWISH LEADERS (Divine 1957, 16). Neuringer (1971, p. 164) NOTES THAT JEWISH OPPOSITION TO THE 1921 AND 1924 LEGISLATION WAS MOTIVATED LESS BY A DESIRE FOR HIGHER LEVELS OF JEWISH IMMIGRATION THAN BY OPPOSITION TO THE IMPLICIT THEORY THAT AMERICA SHOULD BE DOMINATED BY INDIVIDUALS WITH NORTHERN AND WESTERN EUROPEAN ANCESTRY. THE JEWISH INTEREST WAS THUS TO OPPOSE THE ETHNIC INTERESTS OF THE PEOPLES OF NORTHWESTERN EUROPE IN MAINTAINING AN ETHNIC STATUS QUO OR INCREASING THEIR PERCENTAGE OF THE POPULATION.

However, even prior to this period Jewish organizations were adamantly opposed to any restrictions on immigration based on race or ethnicity, indicating that they had a very different view of the ideal racial/ethnic composition of the United States than did the non-Jewish European-derived peoples. Thus in 1882 the Jewish press was unanimous in its condemnation of the Chinese Exclusion Act (Neuringer 1971, p. 23) even though this act had no direct bearing on Jewish immigration. In the early twentieth century the AJ COMMITTEE AT TIMES ACTIVELY FOUGHT AGAINST ANY BILL THAT RESTRICTED IMMIGRATION TO WHITE PERSONS OR NON-ASIANS, and only refrained from active opposition if it judged that AJ COMMITTEE support would threaten the immigration of Jews (Cohen 1972, p. 47; Goldstein 1990, p. 250).

In 1920 the Central Conference of American Rabbis passed a resolution urging that the Nation...keep the gates of our beloved Republic open...to the oppressed and distressed of all mankind in conformity with its historic role as a haven of refuge for all men and women who pledge allegiance to its laws (in The American Hebrew, Oct. 1, 1920, p. 594). The American Hebrew (Feb. 17, 1922; p. 373), a publication founded in 1867, that represented the German-Jewish establishment of the period, reiterated its long-standing policy that it has always stood for the admission of worthy immigrants of all classes, irrespective of nationality.

And in his testimony in the 1924 hearings before the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, the AJ COMMITTEE�s Louis Marshall stated that the bill echoed the sentiments of the Ku Klux Klan and characterized it as being inspired by the racialist theories of Houston Stewart Chamberlain. At a time when the population of the United States was over 100,000,000, Marshall stated that we have room in this country for ten times the population we have (p. 309), and advocated admission of all of the peoples of the world without quota limit, excluding only those who were mentally, morally and physically unfit, who are enemies of organized government, and who are apt to become public charges; (Restriction of Immigration; Hearings Before the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization House of Representatives, sixty-eighth Congress, First Session, Jan. 3, 1924; p. 303) similarly Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, representing the AJ Congress and a variety of other Jewish organizations, asserted the right of every man outside of America to be considered fairly and equitably and without discrimination. (Restriction of Immigration; Hearings Before the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization House of Representatives, sixty-eighth Congress, First Session, Jan. 3, 1924; p. 341)

By prescribing that immigration be restricted to 3% of the foreign born as of the 1890 census, the 1924 law prescribed an ethnic status quo approximating the 1920 census. The House Majority Report emphasized the idea that prior to the legislation, immigration was highly biased in favor of Eastern and Southern Europeans and that this imbalance had been continued by the 1921 legislation in which quotas were based on the numbers of foreign born as of the 1910 census. The expressed intention was that the interests of other groups to pursue their ethnic interests by expanding their percentage of the population should be balanced against the ethnic interests of the majority in retaining their ethnic representation in the population.

The 1921 law gave 46% of quota immigration to Southern and Eastern Europe even though these areas constituted only 11.7% of the United States population as of the 1920 census. The 1924 law prescribed that these areas would get 15.3% of the quota slots a figure that was actually higher than their present representation in the population. The use of the 1890 census is not discriminatory. It is used in an effort to preserve as nearly as possible, the racial status quo of the United States. It is hoped to guarantee as best we can at this late date, racial homogeneity in the United States The use of a later census would discriminate against those who founded the Nation and perpetuated its institutions. (House Rep. 350, 1924, p. 16). After 3 years, quotas were derived from a national origins formula based on 1920 census data for the entire population, not only the foreign born.

While there is no doubt that this legislation represented a victory for the northwestern European peoples of the United States, there was no attempt to reverse the trends in the ethnic composition of the country but rather to preserve the ethnic status quo. While motivated by a desire to preserve an ethnic status quo, these laws may also have been motivated partly by anti-Semitism, since during this period opposition to immigration was perceived as mainly a Jewish issue (see above).

This certainly appears to have been the perception of Jewish observers: for example, prominent Jewish writer Maurice Samuel (1924), writing in the immediate aftermath of the 1924 legislation, wrote that it is chiefly against the Jew that anti-immigration laws are passed here in America as in England and Germany (p. 217), and such perceptions continue among historians of the period (e.g., Hertzberg 1989, 239).

This perception was not restricted to Jews. In remarks before the Senate, the anti- restrictionist Senator Reed of Missouri noted that Attacks have likewise been made upon the Jewish people who have crowded to our shores. The spirit of intolerance has been especially active as to them (Cong. Rec. Feb. 19, 1921; p. 3463), and during World War II Secretary of War Robert Stimson stated that it was opposition to unrestricted immigration of Jews that resulted in the restrictive legislation of 1924 (Breitman & Kraut, 1987, p. 87). Moreover, the House Immigration Committee Majority Report (House Report #109, Dec. 6, 1920) stated that by far the largest percentage of immigrants (are) peoples of Jewish extraction, (p. 4), and it implied that the majority of the expected new immigrants would be Polish Jews. The report confirmed the published statement of a commissioner of the Hebrew Sheltering and Aid Society of America made after his personal investigation in Poland, to the effect that If there were in existence a ship that could hold 3,000,000 human beings, the 3,000,000 Jews of Poland would board it to escape to America (p. 6).

The Majority Report also included a report by Wilbur S. Carr, head of the United States Consular Service, that stated that the Polish Jews were abnormally twisted because of (a) reaction from war strain; (b) the shock of revolutionary disorders; (c) the dullness and stultification resulting from past years of oppression and abuse...; Eighty-five to ninety percent lack any conception of patriotic or national spirit. And the majority of this percentage are unable to acquire it (p. 9; see also Breitman and Kraut [1987, 12] for a discussion of Carr�s anti-Semitism).

Consular reports warned that many Bolshevik sympathizers are in Poland (p. 11). Similarly in the Senate, Senator McKellar cited the report that if there were a ship large enough, 3,000,000 Poles would immigrate. He also stated that the Joint Distribution Committee, an American committee doing relief work among the Hebrews in Poland, distributes more than $1,000,000 per month of American money in that country alone. It is also shown that $100,000,000 a year is a conservative estimate of money sent to Poland from America through the mails, through the banks, and through the relief societies. This golden stream pouring into Poland from America makes practically every Pole wildly desirous of going to the country from which such marvelous wealth comes (Cong. Rec., Feb. 19, 1921, p. 3456).

As a further indication of the salience of Polish-Jewish immigration issues, the letter on alien visas submitted by the State Department in 1921 to Albert Johnson, Chairman of the Committee on Migration and Naturalization, devoted over four times as much space to the situation in Poland as it did to any other country. The report emphasized the activities of the Polish-Jewish newspaper Der Emigrant in promoting emigration to the United States of Polish Jews, the activities of the Hebrew Sheltering and Immigrant Society and wealthy private citizens from the United States in facilitating immigration by providing money and performing the paperwork. (THERE WAS INDEED A LARGE NETWORK OF AGENTS IN EASTERN EUROPE WHO, IN VIOLATION OF UNITED STATES LAW, DID THEIR BEST TO DRUM UP BUSINESS BY ENTICING AS MANY EMIGRANTS AS POSSIBLE [Nadell 1984, 56].) The report also noted the poor condition of the prospective immigrants: At the present time it is only too obvious that they must be subnormal, and their normal state is of very low standard. Six years of war and confusion and famine and pestilence have racked their bodies and twisted their mentality. The elders have deteriorated to a marked degree. Minors have grown into adult years with the entire period lost in their rightful development and too frequently with the acquisition of perverted ideas which have flooded Europe since 1914 [presumably a reference to radical political ideas that were common in this group; see below] (Cong. Rec., April 20, 1921, p. 498).

The report also stated that articles in the Warsaw press had reported that propaganda favoring

unrestricted immigration is being planned, including celebrations in New York aimed at showing the contributions of immigrants to the development of the United States. The reports for Belgium (whose emigrants originated in Poland and Czechoslovakia) and Romania also highlighted the importance of Jews as prospective immigrants. In response, Representative Isaac Siegel stated that the report was edited and doctored by certain officials and commented that the report did not mention countries with larger numbers of immigrants than Poland. (For example, there was no .mention of Italy in the report)

Without explicitly saying so (I leave it to every man in the House to make his own deductions and his own inferences there from (Cong. Rec., April 20, 1921, p. 504), the implication was that the focus on Poland was prompted by anti-Semitism. The House Majority report (signed by 15 of its 17 members with only Reps. Dickstein and Sabath not signing) also emphasized the Jewish role in defining the intellectual battle in terms of Nordic superiority and American ideals rather than in the terms of an ethnic status quo actually favored by the committee: The cry of discrimination is, the committee believes, manufactured and built up by special representatives of racial groups, aided by aliens actually living abroad. Members of the committee have taken notice of a report in the Jewish Tribune (New York) February 8, 1924, of a farewell dinner to Mr. Israel Zangwill which says: Mr. Zangwill spoke chiefly on the immigration question, declaring that if Jews persisted in a strenuous opposition to the restricted immigration there would be no restriction. If you create enough fuss against this Nordic nonsense, he said, you will defeat this legislation. You must make a fight against this bill; tell them they are destroying American ideals. Most fortifications are of cardboard, and if you press against them, they give way.

The Committee does not feel that the restriction aimed to be accomplished in this bill is

directed at the Jews, for they can come within the quotas from any country in which they were born. The Committee has not dwelt on the desirability of a Nordic or any other particular type of immigrant, but has held steadfastly to the purpose of securing a heavy restriction, with the quota so divided that the countries from which the most came in the two decades ahead of the World War might be slowed down in order that the United States might restore its population balance. The continued charge that the Committee has built up a Nordic race and devoted its hearing to that end is part of a deliberately manufactured assault for as a matter of fact the committee has done nothing of the kind (House Rep. 350, 1924, p. 16).

Indeed, one is struck in reading the 1924 Congressional debate by the rarity with which the issue of Nordic racial superiority is raised by those in favor of the legislation, while virtually all of the anti-restrictionists raised this issue. (For example, in the Senate debates of April 15-19, 1924, Nordic superiority was not mentioned by any of the proponents of the legislation but was mentioned by the following opponents of the legislation: Senators Colt (p. 6542), Reed (p. 6468), Walsh (p. 6355). In the House debates of April 5, 8, and 15, virtually all of the opponents of the legislation raised the racial inferiority issue, including Reps. Celler (p. 5914-5915), Clancy (p. 5930), Connery (p. 5683), Dickstein (p. 5655-5656, 5686), Gallivan (p. 5849), Jacobstein (p. 5864), James (p. 5670), Kunz (p. 5896), LaGuardia (p. 5657), Mooney (p. 5909-5910), O�Connell (p. 5836), O�Connor (p. 5648), Oliver (p. 5870), O�Sullivan (p. 5899), Perlman (p. 5651); Sabath (p. 5651, 5662), and Tague (p. 5873). Several representatives (e.g., Reps. Dickinson [p. 6267), Garber [pp. 5689-5693] and Smith [p. 5705]) contrasted the positive characteristics of the Nordic immigrants with the negative characteristics of more recent immigrants without distinguishing genetic from environmental reasons as possible influences. They, along with several others, noted especially the lack of assimilation of the recent immigrants and their tendencies to cluster in urban areas. Rep. Allen argued that there is a necessity for purifying and keeping pure the blood of America (p. 5693). Rep. McSwain, who argued for the need to preserve Nordic hegemony, did not do so on the basis of Nordic superiority but on the basis of legitimate ethnic self-interest (pp. 5683-5; see also comments of Reps. Lea and Miller). Rep. Gasque introduced a newspaper article that referred to the laws of heredity and to the swamping of the race that had built America (p. 6270))

After a particularly colorful comment in opposition to the theory of Nordic racial superiority, restrictionist leader Albert Johnson remarked that I would like very much to say on behalf of the committee that through the strenuous times of the hearings this committee under took not to discuss the Nordic proposition or racial matters (Cong. Rec., April 8, 1924; p. 5911).

Earlier, during the hearings on the bill, Johnson remarked in response to the comments of Rabbi Stephen S. Wise representing the AJ Congress that I dislike to be placed continually in the attitude of assuming that there is a race prejudice, when the one thing I have tried to do for 11 years is to free myself from race prejudice, if I had it at all. (Restriction of Immigration. Hearings Before the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization House of Representatives, sixty-eighth Congress, First Session, Jan. 3, 1924; p. 351) Several restrictionists explicitly denounced the theory of Nordic superiority, including Senators Bruce (p. 5955) and Jones (p. 6614) and Representatives Bacon (p. 5902), Byrnes (p. 5653), Johnson (p. 5648), McLoed (p. 5675-6), McReynolds (p. 5855), Michener (p. 5909), Miller (p. 5883), Newton (p. 6240); Rosenbloom (p. 5851), Vaile (p. 5922), Vincent (p. 6266), White, (p. 5898), and Wilson (p. 5671; all references to Cong. Rec., April 1924). Indeed, it is noteworthy that there are indications in the Congressional debate that representatives from the far West were concerned about the competence and competitive threat presented by Japanese immigrants, and their rhetoric suggested they viewed the Japanese as racially equal or superior, not inferior. For example, Senator Jones stated that we admit that [the Japanese] are as able as we are, that they are as progressive as we are, that they are as honest as we are, that they are as brainy as we are, and that they are equal in all that goes to make a great people and nation (Cong. Rec., April 18, 1924, p. 6614); Representative MacLafferty emphasized Japanese domination of certain agricultural markets (Cong. Rec. April 5, 1924, p. 5681), and Representative Lea noted their ability to supplant their American competitor (Cong. Rec. April 5, 1924, p. 5697).

Representative Miller described the Japanese as a relentless and unconquerable competitor of our people wherever he places himself (Cong. Rec. April 8, 1924, p. 5884); See also comments of Representatives Gilbert (Cong. Rec. April 12, 1924, p. 6261) Raker (Cong. Rec. April 8, 1924, p. 5892} and Free (Cong. Rec. April 8, 1924, p. 5924ff). Moreover, while the issue of Jewish/gentile resource competition was not raised during the Congressional debates, quotas on Jewish admissions to Ivy League universities were a highly salient issue among Jews during this period.

The quota issue was highly publicized in the Jewish media and the focus of activities of Jewish self-defense organizations such as the ADL (see, e.g., the ADL statement published in The American Hebrew, Sept. 29, 1922, p. 536). Jewish/gentile resource competition may therefore have been on the minds of some legislators. Indeed, President A. Lawrence Lowell of Harvard was the national vice-president of the Immigration Restriction League as well as a proponent of quotas on Jewish admission to Harvard (Symott 1986, 238), suggesting that resource competition with an intellectually superior Jewish group was an issue for at least some prominent restrictionists. It is probable that anti-Jewish animosity related to resource competition issues were widespread. Higham (1984, 141) writes of the urgent pressure which the Jews, as an exceptionally ambitious immigrant people, put upon some of the more crowded rungs of the social ladder (Higham 1984, 141).

Beginning in the nineteenth century there were fairly high levels of covert and overt anti- Semitism in patrician circles resulting from the very rapid upward mobility of Jews and their competitive drive. In the period prior to World War I, the reaction of the gentile power structure was to construct social registers and emphasize genealogy as mechanisms of exclusion criteria that could not be met my money alone (Higham 1984, 104ff, 127). During this period Edward A. Ross (1914, 164) described gentile resentment for being obliged to engage in a humiliating and undignified scramble in order to keep his trade or his clients against the Jewish invader suggesting a rather broad-based concern with Jewish economic competition. Attempts at exclusion in a wide range of areas were increased in the 1920s and reached their peak during the difficult economic situation of the Great Depression (Higham 1984, 131ff).

However, in the 1924 debates the only Congressional comments suggesting a concern with Jewish/gentile resource competition (as well as a concern that the interests of Jewish intellectuals are not the same as their gentile counterparts) that I have been able to find are the following from Representative Wefald: I for one am not afraid of the radical ideas that some might bring with them. Ideas you cannot keep out anyway, but the leadership of our intellectual life in many of its phases has come into the hands of these clever newcomers who have no sympathy with our old- time American ideals nor with those of northern Europe, who detect our weaknesses and pander to them and get wealthy through the disservices they render us.

Our whole system of amusements has been taken over by men who came here on the crest of the south and east European immigration. They produce our horrible film stories, they compose and dish out to us our jazz music, they write many of the books we read, and edit our magazines and newspapers (Cong. Rec., April 12, 1924, p. 6272).

The immigration debate also occurred amid discussion in the Jewish media of Thorsten Veblen�s famous essay.� The Intellectual Pre-eminence of Jews in Modern Europe (serialized in The American Hebrew beginning September 10, 1920). In an editorial of July 13, 1923 (p. 177), The American Hebrew noted that Jews were disproportionately represented among the gifted in Louis Terman�s study of gifted children and commented that this fact must give rise to bitter, though futile, reflection among the so-called Nordics. The editorial also noted that Jews were over represented among scholarship winners in competitions sponsored by the state of New York. The editorial pointedly noted that perhaps the Nordics are too proud to try for these honors. In any event the list of names just announced by the State Department of Education at Albany as winners of these coveted scholarships is not in the least Nordic; it reads like a confirmation roster at a Temple.

There is indeed evidence that Jews, like East Asians, have higher IQ�s than Caucasians (Lynn, 1987; MacDonald, 1994; Rushton, 1995). The most common argument made by those favoring the legislation, and the one reflected in the majority report, is the argument that in the interests of fairness to all ethnic groups, the quotas should reflect the relative ethnic composition of the entire country. Restrictionists noted that the census of 1890 was chosen because the percentages of the foreign born of different ethnic groups in that year approximated the general ethnic composition of the entire country in 1920. Senator Reed of Pennsylvania and Representative Rogers of Massachusetts proposed to achieve the same result by directly basing the quotas on the national origins of all people in the country as of the 1920 census, and this was eventually incorporated into the law.

Representative Rogers argued that gentlemen, you can not dissent from this principle because it is fair. It does not discriminate for anybody and it does not discriminate against anybody (Cong. Rec. April 8, 1924; p. 5847). Senator Reed noted, The purpose, I think, of most of us in changing the quota basis is to cease from discriminating against the native born here and against the group of our citizens who come from northern and western Europe. I think the present system discriminates in favor of southeastern Europe (Cong. Rec., April. 16, 1924; p. 6457) (i.e., because 46% of the quotas under the 1921 went to Eastern and Southern Europe when they constituted less than 12% of the population).

As an example illustrating the fundamental argument asserting a legitimate ethnic interest in

maintaining an ethnic status quo without claiming racial superiority, consider the following statement from Representative William N. Vaile of Colorado, one of the most prominent restrictionists: Let me emphasize here that the restrictionists of Congress do not claim that the Nordic race, or even the Anglo-Saxon race, is the best race in the world. Let us concede, in all fairness that the Czech is a more sturdy laborer, with a very low percentage of crime and insanity, that the Jew is the best businessman in the world, and that the Italian has a spiritual grasp and an artistic sense which have greatly enriched the world and which have, indeed, enriched us, a spiritual exaltation and an artistic creative sense which the Nordic rarely attains. Nordics need not be vain about their own qualifications. It well behooves them to be humble. What we do claim is that the northern European, and particularly Anglo-Saxons made this country. Oh, yes; the others helped. But that is the full statement of the case. They came to this country because it was already made as an Anglo-Saxon commonwealth. They added to it, they often enriched, but they did not make it, and they have not yet greatly changed it. We are determined that they shall not. It is a good country. It suits us. And what we assert is that we are not going to surrender it to somebody else or allow other people, no matter what their merits, to make it something different. If there is any changing to be done, we will do it ourselves (Cong. Rec. April 8, 1924; p. 5922).

The debate in the House also illustrated the highly salient role of Jewish legislators in combating restrictionism. Representative Robison singled out Representative Sabath as the leader of anti-restrictionist efforts, and, without mentioning any other opponent of restriction, he also focused on Reps. Jacobstein, Celler, and Perlman as being opposed to any restrictions on immigration (Cong. Rec. April 5, 1924, p. 5666). Representative Blanton, complaining of the difficulty of getting restrictionist legislation through Congress, noted When at least 65 per cent of the sentiment of this House, in my judgment, is in favor of the exclusion of all foreigners for five years, why do we not put that into law? Has Brother Sabath such a tremendous influence over us that he holds us down on this proposition? (Cong. Rec. April 5, 1924, p. 5685). Representative Sabath responded that There may be something to that. In addition, the following comments of Representative Leavitt clearly indicate the salience of Jewish congressmen to their opponents during the debate: The instinct for national and race preservation is not one to be condemned, as has been intimated here. No one should be better able to understand the desire of Americans to keep America American than the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Sabath], who is leading the attack on this measure, or the gentlemen from New York, Mr. Dickstein, Mr. Jacobstein, Mr. Celler, and Mr. Perlman.

They are of the one great historic people who have maintained the identity of their race throughout the centuries because they believe sincerely that they are a chosen people, with certain ideals to maintain, and knowing that the loss of racial identity means a change of ideals. That fact should make it easy for them and the majority of the most active opponents of this measure in the spoken debate to recognize and sympathize with our viewpoint, which is not so extreme as that of their own race, but only demands that the admixture of other peoples shall be only of such kind and proportions and in such quantities as will not alter racial characteristics more rapidly than there can be assimilation as to ideas of government as well as of blood. (Cong. Rec., April 12, 1924; pp. 6265- 6266)

The view that Jews had a strong tendency to oppose genetic assimilation with surrounding groups occurred among other observers as well and was a component of contemporary anti- Semitism (see Singerman 1986, pp. 110-111). Jewish avoidance of exogamy certainly had a basis in reality (MacDonald 1994, Ch. 2-4).

Indeed, it is noteworthy that there was powerful opposition to intermarriage even among the more liberal segments of early twentieth-century American Judaism and certainly among the less liberal segments represented by the great majority of Orthodox immigrants from Eastern Europe who had come to constitute the great majority of American Jewry. For example, the prominent nineteenth-century Reform leader David Einhorn was a lifelong opponent of mixed marriages and refused to officiate at such ceremonies, even when pressed to do so (Meyer 1988, 247). Einhorn was also a staunch opponent of conversion of gentiles to Judaism because of the effects on the racial purity of Judaism (Levenson 1989, 331). Similarly, the influential Reform intellectual Kaufman Kohler was also an ardent opponent of mixed marriage. In a view that is highly compatible with Horace Kallen�s multi-culturalism, Kohler concluded that Israel must remain separate and avoid intermarriage until it leads mankind to an era of universal peace and brotherhood among the races (Kohler 1918, 445-446).

The negative attitude toward intermarriage was confirmed by survey results. A 1912 survey indicated that only seven of 100 Reform rabbis had officiated at a mixed marriage, and a 1909 resolution of the Central Council of American Rabbis declared that "mixed marriages are contrary to the tradition of the Jewish religion and should be discouraged by the American Rabbinate" (Meyer 1988, 290). Gentile perceptions of Jewish attitudes on intermarriage therefore had a strong basis in reality. The Involvement of Jewish Immigrants in Radical Politics. The Congressional debates of 1924 reflected a highly charged context in which Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe were widely perceived to not only avoid intermarriage but also to retain a separatist culture and to be disproportionately involved in radical political movements. The perception of radicalism among Jewish immigrants was common in Jewish as well as gentile publications. The American Hebrew editorialized that we must not forget the immigrants from Russia and Austria will be coming from countries infested with Bolshevism, and it will require more than a superficial effort to make good citizens out of them (in Neuringer 1971, p. 165). The fact that Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe were viewed as infected with Bolshevism...unpatriotic, alien, unassimilable resulted in a wave of anti-Semitism in the 1920s and contributed to the restrictive immigration legislation of the period (Neuringer 1971, p. 165). In Sorin�s (1985, 46) study of immigrant Jewish radical activists, over half had been involved in radical politics in Europe before emigrating, and for those immigrating after 1900, the percentage rose to 69%.

Jewish publications warned of the possibilities of anti-Semitism resulting from the leftism of Jewish immigrants, and the official Jewish community engaged in a near-desperation...effort to portray the Jew as one hundred per cent American by, e.g., organizing patriotic pageants on national holidays and by attempting to get the immigrants to learn English (Neuringer, 1971, p. 167).

Similarly, in England, THE IMMIGRATION OF EASTERN EUROPEAN JEWS INTO ENGLAND AFTER 1880 HAD A TRANSFORMATIVE EFFECT ON THE POLITICAL ATTITUDES OF BRITISH JEWRY IN THE DIRECTION OF SOCIALISM, TRADE-UNIONISM, AND ZIONISM, often combined with religious orthodoxy and devotion to a highly separatist traditional lifestyle (Alderman, 1983; p. 7ff). The more established Jewish organizations fought hard to combat the well-founded image of Jewish immigrants as Zionist, religiously orthodox political radicals who refused to be conscripted into the armed forces during World War I in order to fight the enemies of the officially anti-Semitic Czarist government (Alderman, 1992, p. 237ff). The Jewish Old Left, including the unions, the leftist press, and the leftist fraternal orders (which were often associated with a synagogue), was a part of the wider Jewish community, and Jewish members typically retained a strong Jewish ethnic identity (Howe 1976; Liebman 1979; Buhle 1980).

This phenomenon occurred within the entire spectrum of leftist organizations, including organizations such as the Communist Party and the Socialist Party whose membership also included gentiles (Liebman, 1979, p. 267ff; Buhle 1980). Werner Cohn (1958, p. 621) describes the general milieu of the immigrant Jewish community in the period from 1886-1920 as one big radical debating society: By 1886 the Jewish community in New York had become conspicuous for its support of the third-party (United Labor) candidacy of Henry George, the theoretician of the Single Tax. From then Jewish districts in New York and elsewhere were famous for their radical voting habits. The Lower East Side repeatedly picked as its congressman Meyer London, the only New York Socialist ever to be elected to Congress. And many Socialists went to the State Assembly

in Albany from Jewish districts. In the 1917 mayoralty campaign in New York City, the Socialist and anti-war candidacy of Morris Hillquit was supported by the most authoritative voices of the Jewish Lower East Side: The United Hebrew Trades, the International Ladies� Garment Workers� Union, and most importantly, the very popular Yiddish Daily Forward. This was the period in which extreme radicals like Alexander Berkman and Emma Goldman were giants in the Jewish community, and when almost all the Jewish giants among them Abraham Cahan, Morris Hillquit, and the young Morris R. Cohen were radicals. Even Samuel Gompers, when speaking before Jewish audiences, felt it necessary to use radical phrases. In addition, The Freiheit, which was an unofficial organ of the Communist Party from the 1920s to the 1950s stood at the center of Yiddish proletarian institutions and subculture...[which offered] identity, meaning, friendship, and understanding (Liebman, 1979, pp. 349-350). The newspaper lost considerable support in the Jewish community in 1929 when it took the Communist party position in opposition to Zionism, and by the 1950s it essentially had to choose between satisfying its Jewish soul or its status as a Communist organ. It chose the former, and by the late 1960s it was justifying not returning the Israeli occupied territories in opposition to the line of the American Communist Party. The relationship of Jews and the American Communist Party (CPUSA) is particularly interesting because a concern with Communist subversion under the direction of the Soviet Union was a feature of the immigration debates of the 1920s and because a substantial proportion of the CPUSA were foreign born. (See, e.g., Restriction of Immigration; Hearings Before the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization House of Representatives, sixty-eighth Congress, First Session, Jan. 5, 1924; p. 733ff.) Beginning in the 1920s JEWS WHOSE BACKGROUNDS DERIVED FROM EASTERN EUROPE PLAYED A VERY PROMINENT AND DISPROPORTIONATE ROLE IN THE CPUSA (Klehr, 1978, p. 37ff). MERELY CITING PERCENTAGES OF JEWISH LEADERS PROBABLY DOES NOT ADEQUATELY INDICATE THE EXTEND OF JEWISH INFLUENCE IN THE CPUSA, SINCE ACTIVE EFFORTS WERE MADE TO RECRUIT GENTILES AS A SORT OF WINDOW DRESSING TO CONCEAL THE EXTENT OF JEWISH INFLUENCE IN THE MOVEMENT (Klehr, 1978, p. 40; Rothman & Lichter, 1982, p. 99).

Klehr (1978, p. 40) estimates that FROM 1921 to 1961, JEWS CONSTITUTED 33.5% OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND THE REPRESENTATION OF JEWS WAS OFTEN ABOVE 40% (Klehr, 1978, p. 46). In the 1920s A MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERS OF THE SOCIALIST PARTY WERE IMMIGRANTS AND THAT AN OVERWHELMING (Glazer 1961, 38, 40) PERCENTAGE OF THE CPUSA CONSISTED OF RECENT IMMIGRANTS, A SUBSTANTIAL PERCENTAGE OF WHOM WERE JEWS. In Philadelphia in the 1930'S, fully 72.2% of the CP members were the children of Jewish immigrants who came to the United States in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century (Lyons 1982, 71).

As late as 1929, 90% of the members of� the Communist Party in Philadelphia were foreign born and in June of 1933 the national organization of the CPUSA was still 70% foreign born (Lyons 1982, 72-73). JEWS WERE THE ONLY NATIVE-BORN ETHNIC GROUP FROM WHICH THE PARTY WAS ABLE TO RECRUIT. GLAZER (1969; p. 129) STATES that at least HALF OF THE CPUSA MEMBERSHIP OF AROUND 50,000 WERE JEWS INTO THE 1950s AND THAT THERE WAS A VERY HIGH RATE OF TURNOVER, SO THAT PERHAPS 10 TIMES THAT NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS WERE INVOLVED IN THE PARTY AND THERE WERE AN EQUAL OR LARGER NUMBER WHO WERE SOCIALISTS OF ONE KIND OR ANOTHER.� Writing of the 1920's, Buhle (1980, p. 89) notes that most of those favorable to the party and the Freiheit simply did not join no more than a few thousand out of a following of a hundred times that large.

There was also great concern within the Jewish community that the over representation of Jews

within the CPUSA would lead to anti-Semitism from the 1920s through the Cold War period: The fight against the stereotype of Communist-Jew became a virtual obsession with Jewish leaders and opinion makers throughout America (Liebman 1979, p. 515), and indeed, the association of Jews with the CPUSA was a focus of anti-Semitic literature (e.g., Henry Ford�s [1920] International Jew; John Beaty�s [1951] The Iron Curtain Over America). As a result, the AJ Committee engaged in intensive efforts to change opinion within the Jewish community by showing that Jewish interests were more compatible with advocating American democracy than Soviet Communism (e.g., emphasizing Soviet anti-Semitism and Soviet support of nations opposed to Israel in the period after

World War II) (Cohen, 1972, p. 347ff). Jewish Anti-Restrictionist Activity, 1924-1945.

The saliency of Jewish involvement in United States immigration policy continued after the 1924 legislation. Particularly objectionable to Jewish groups was the national origins quota system. For example, a writer for the Jewish Tribune stated in 1927, we...regard all measures for regulating immigration according to nationality as illogical, unjust, and un-American (in Neuringer, 1971, p. 205).

During the 1930s the most outspoken critic of further restrictions on immigration (motivated now mainly by the Great Depression) was Representative Samuel Dickstein, and Dickstein�s assumption of the chairmanship of the House Immigration Committee in 1931 marked the end of the ability of restrictionists to enact further reductions in quotas (Divine, 1957, pp. 79-88). Jewish groups were the primary opponents of restriction and the primary supporters of liberalized regulations during the 1930s while their opponents emphasized the economic consequences of immigration during a period of high unemployment (Divine, 1957, pp. 85-88). Between 1933 and 1938, Representative Dickstein introduced a number of bills aimed at increasing the number of refugees from Nazi Germany and supported mainly by Jewish organizations, but the restrictionists prevailed (Divine, 1957, p. 93).

During the 1930s, concerns about the radicalism and unassimilability of Jewish immigrants as well as the possibility of Nazi subversion were the main factors influencing the opposition to changing the immigration laws (Breitman & Kraut, 1987). Moreover, (c)harges that the Jews in America were more loyal to their tribe than to their country abounded in the United States in the 1930s (Breitman & Kraut, 1987, p. 87). There was a clear perception among all parties that the public opposed any changes in immigration policy and that the public was particularly opposed to Jewish immigration. The 1939 hearings on the proposed legislation to admit 20,000 German refugee children therefore minimized the Jewish interest in the legislation. The bill referred to people of every race and creed suffering from conditions which compel them to seek refuge in other lands. (Hearings before the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, House of Representatives, May 24-June 1, 1939: Joint Resolutions to Authorize the Admission to the United States of a Limited Number of German Refugee Children, p. 1)

THE BILL DID NOT MENTION THAT JEWS WOULD BE THE MAIN BENEFICIARIES OF THE LEGISLATION, and witnesses in favor of the bill emphasized that only approximately 60% of the children would be Jewish. The only person identifying himself as a member of the Jewish race who testified in favor of the bill was one-fourth Catholic and three-quarters Jewish with Protestant and Catholic nieces and nephews, and from the South which was a bastion of anti-immigration sentiment. (Hearings before the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, House of Representatives, May 24-June 1, 1939: Joint Resolutions to Authorize the Admission to the United States of a Limited Number of German Refugee Children, p. 78)

On the other hand, opponents of the bill threatened to publicize the very large percentage of Jews already being admitted under the quota system presumably an indication of the powerful force of a virulent and pervasive anti-Semitism among the American public (Breitman & Kraut, 1987, p. 80). Opponents noted that the immigration permitted by the bill would be for the most part of the Jewish race, and a witness testified that the Jewish people will profit most by this legislation goes without saying (in Divine, 1957, p. 100).

The restrictionists argued in economic terms, e.g., by frequently citing President Roosevelt�s statement in his second inaugural speech one-third of a nation ill-housed, ill-clad, ill-nourished and citing large numbers of needy children already in the United States. However, the main restrictionist concern was that the bill was yet another in a long history of attempts by anti- restrictionists to develop precedents that would eventually undermine the 1924 law. For example, Francis Kinnecutt, President of the Allied Patriotic Societies, emphasized that the 1924 law had been based on the idea of proportional representation based on the ethnic composition of the country. The legislation would be a precedent for similar unscientific and favored-nation legislation in response to the pressure of foreign nationalistic or racial groups, rather than in accordance with the needs and desires of the American people. (Hearings before the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, House of Representatives, May 24-June 1, 1939: Joint Resolutions to Authorize the Admission to the United States of a Limited Number of German Refugee Children, p. 140)

Wilbur S. Carr and other State Department officials were important in minimizing the entry of

Jewish refugees from Germany during the 1930s. Undersecretary of State William Phillips was an

ardent anti-Semite with considerable influence on immigration policy between 1933-1936 (Breitman & Kraut, 1987, p. 36). Throughout the period until the end of World War II attempts to foster Jewish immigration, even in the context of knowledge that the Nazis were persecuting Jews, were largely unsuccessful because of an unyielding Congress and the activities of bureaucrats, especially those in the State Department. Public discussion in periodicals such as The Nation (Nov. 19, 1938), and The New Republic (Nov. 23, 1938) charged that the restrictionism was motivated by anti-Semitism, while opponents of admitting large numbers of Jews argued that admission would result in an increase in anti-Semitism.

Henry Pratt Fairchild (1939, p. 344), who was a restrictionist and was highly critical of the Jews (see Fairchild, 1947), emphasized the powerful current of anti-foreignism and anti-Semitism that is running close to the surface of the American public mind, ready to burst out into violent eruption on relatively slight provocation. Public opinion remained steadfast against increasing the quotas for European refugees: a 1939 poll in Fortune (April, 1939) magazine showed that 83% answered no to the following question: if you were a member of Congress would you vote yes or no on a bill to open the doors of the United States to a larger number of European refugees than now admitted under our immigration quotas? Less than 9% replied yes and the remainder had no opinion. Jewish Anti-Restrictionist Activity, 1946-1952.

Although Jewish interests were defeated by the 1924 legislation, the discriminatory character of the Reed-Johnson Act continued to rankle all sectors of American Jewish opinion (Neuringer, 1971, 196). During this period, an article by Will Maslow (1950) in Congress Weekly reiterated the belief that the restrictive immigration laws intentionally targeted Jews: Only one type of law, immigration legislation which relates to aliens outside the country, is not subject to constitutional guarantees, and even here hostility toward Jewish immigration has had to be disguised in an elaborate quota scheme in which eligibility was based on place of birth rather than religion.

THE JEWISH CONCERN TO ALTER THE ETHNIC BALANCE OF THE UNITED STATES IS APPARENT IN THE DEBATES OVER IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION during the post World War II era. In 1948 the AJ COMMITTEE submitted a statement to the Senate subcommittee which simultaneously denied the importance of the material interests of the United States as well as affirmed its commitment to immigration of all races: Americanism is not to be measured by conformity to law, or zeal for education, or literacy, or any of these qualities in which immigrants may excel the native-born. Americanism is the spirit behind the welcome that America has traditionally extended to people of all races, all religions, all nationalities (in Cohen 1972, p. 369).

In 1945 Representative Emanuel Celler introduced a bill ending Chinese exclusion by establishing token quotas for Chinese, and in 1948 the AJ COMMITTEE condemned racial quotas on Asians (Divine, 1957, p. 155). On the other hand, JEWISH GROUPS HAD AN ATTITUDE OF INDIFFERENCE OR EVEN HOSTILITY TOWARD IMMIGRATION OF NON-JEWS FROM EUROPE (including Southern Europe) in the post-World War II era (Neuringer, 1971, pp. 356, 367-369, 383). Thus Jewish spokesmen did not testify at all during the first set of hearings on emergency legislation which allowed immigration of a limited number of German, Italian, Greek, and Dutch immigrants, escapees from Communism, and a small number of Poles, Orientals, and Arabs.

When Jewish spokesmen eventually testified (partly because a small number of the escapees from Communism were Jews), they took the opportunity to once again focus on their condemnation of the national origins provisions of the 1924 law. Jewish involvement in opposing restrictions during this period was motivated partly by attempts to establish precedents in which the quota system was bypassed and partly by attempts to increase immigration of Jews from Eastern Europe.

The Citizen�s Committee on Displaced Persons, which advocated legislation to admit 400,000 refugees as non-quota immigrants over a period of 4 years, was funded mainly by the AJ COMMITTEE and other Jewish contributors (See Cong. Rec., October 15, 1949, pp. 14647-14654; Neuringer 1971, p. ii) and maintained a staff of 65 people. Witnesses opposing the legislation complained that the bill was an attempt to subvert the ethnic balance of the United States established by the 1924 legislation (Divine 1957, p. 117).

In the event, the bill that was reported out of the subcommittee did not satisfy Jewish interests because it established a cut-off date that excluded Jews who had migrated from Eastern Europe after World War II, including Jews fleeing Polish anti-Semitism. The Senate subcommittee regarded the movement of Jews and other refugees from eastern Europe after 1945 as falling outside the scope of the main problem and implied that this exodus was a planned migration organized by Jewish agencies in the United States and in Europe (Senate Report No. 950 [1948], pp. 15-16).

Jewish representatives led the assault on the bill (Divine 1957, p. 127), Representative Emanuel Celler terming it as worse than no bill at all. All it does is exclude...Jews (in Neuringer, 1971, p. 298; see also Divine, 1957, p. 127). In reluctantly signing the bill, President Truman noted that the 1945 cutoff date discriminates in callous fashion against displaced persons of the Jewish faith (Interpreter Releases, 25 [July 21, 1948], pp. 252-254). On the other hand, Senator Chapman Revercomb stated that there is no distinction, certainly no discrimination, intended between any persons because of their religion or their race, but there are differences drawn among those persons who are in fact displaced persons and have been in camp longest and have a preference (Cong. Rec. May 26, 1948, p. 6793).

In his analysis, Divine (1957, p. 143) concludes that the expressed motive of the restrictionists, to limit the program to those people displaced during the course of the war, appears to be a valid explanation for these provisions. The tendency of Jewish groups to attribute the exclusion of many of their coreligionists to anti-Semitic bias is understandable; however, the extreme charges of discrimination made during the 1948 presidential campaign lead one to suspect that the northern wing of the Democratic party was using this issue to attract votes from members of minority groups. Certainly Truman�s assertion that the 1948 law was anti-Catholic, made in the face of Catholic denials, indicates that political expediency had a great deal to do with the emphasis on the discrimination issue.

In the aftermath of this bill, the Citizens Committee on Displaced Persons released a report labeling the bill as characterized by hate and racism and Jewish organizations were unanimous in denouncing the law (Divine, 1957, p. 131). After the 1948 elections resulted in a Democratic Congress and a sympathetic President Truman, Representative Celler introduced a bill without the 1945 cutoff date, but the bill, after passing the House, failed in the Senate because of the opposition of Senator Pat McCarran. During the hearings, McCarran noted that the Citizens Committee had spent over $800,000 lobbying for a liberalized bill, with the result that there has been disseminated over the length and breadth of this nation a campaign of misrepresentation and falsehood which has misled many public-spirited and well-meaning citizens and organizations (Cong. Rec., April 26, 1949, pp. 5042- 5043).

After defeat, the Citizen�s Committee increased expenditures to over $1,000,000 and succeeded in passing a bill, introduced by Representative Celler, with a 1949 cutoff date that did not discriminate against Jews but largely excluded ethnic Germans who had been expelled from Eastern Europe. In an odd twist in the debate, restrictionists now accused the anti-restrictionists of ethnic bias (e.g., Senator Eastland, Cong. Rec. April 5, 1950, p. 2737; Senator McCarran, Cong. Rec. April 5, 1950, p. 4743).

At a time when there were no outbreaks of anti-Semitism in other parts of the world creating an urgent need for Jewish immigration and with the presence of Israel as a safe haven for Jews, Jewish organizations still vigorously objected to the continuation of the national origins provisions of the 1924 law in the McCarran-Walter law of 1952 (Neuringer 1971, p. 337ff). Indeed, when District Court of Appeals Judge Simon H. Rifkind testified on behalf of a wide range of Jewish organizations against the Releases, 25 [July 21, 1948], pp. 252-254).

On the other hand, Senator Chapman Revercomb stated that there is no distinction, certainly no discrimination, intended between any persons because of their religion or their race, but there are differences drawn among those persons who are in fact displaced persons and have been in camp longest and have a preference (Cong. Rec. May 26, 1948, p. 6793).

In his analysis, Divine (1957, p. 143) concludes that the expressed motive of the restrictionists, to limit the program to those people displaced during the course of the war, appears to be a valid explanation for these provisions. The tendency of Jewish groups to attribute the exclusion of many of their coreligionists to anti-Semitic bias is understandable; however, the extreme charges of discrimination made during the 1948 presidential campaign lead one to suspect that the northern wing of the Democratic party was using this issue to attract votes from members of minority groups.

Certainly Truman�s assertion that the 1948 law was anti-Catholic, made in the face of Catholic denials, indicates that political expediency had a great deal to do with the emphasis on the discrimination issue. In the aftermath of this bill, the Citizens Committee on Displaced Persons released a report labeling the bill as characterized by hate and racism and Jewish organizations were unanimous in denouncing the law (Divine, 1957, p. 131). After the 1948 elections resulted in a Democratic Congress and a sympathetic President Truman, Representative Celler introduced a bill without the 1945 cutoff date, but the bill, after passing the House, failed in the Senate because of the opposition of Senator Pat McCarran.

During the hearings, McCarran noted that the Citizens Committee had spent over $800,000 lobbying for a liberalized bill, with the result that there has been disseminated over the length and breadth of this nation a campaign of misrepresentation and falsehood which has misled many public-spirited and well-meaning citizens and organizations (Cong. Rec., April 26, 1949, pp. 5042- 5043).

After defeat, the Citizen�s Committee increased expenditures to over $1,000,000 and succeeded in passing a bill, introduced by Representative Celler, with a 1949 cutoff date that did not discriminate against Jews but largely excluded ethnic Germans who had been expelled from Eastern Europe. In an odd twist in the debate, restrictionists now accused the anti-restrictionists of ethnic bias (e.g., Senator Eastland, Cong. Rec. April 5, 1950, p. 2737; Senator McCarran, Cong. Rec. April 5, 1950, p. 4743).

At a time when there were no outbreaks of anti-Semitism in other parts of the world creating an

urgent need for Jewish immigration and with the presence of Israel as a safe haven for Jews, Jewish organizations still vigorously objected to the continuation of the national origins provisions of the 1924 law in the McCarran-Walter law of 1952 (Neuringer 1971, p. 337ff). Indeed, when District Court of Appeals Judge Simon H. Rifkind testified on behalf of a wide range of Jewish organizations against the McCarran-Walter bill he noted emphatically that because of the international situation and particularly the existence of Israel as a safe haven for Jews, Jewish views on immigration legislation were not predicated on the plight of our co-religionists but rather the impact which immigration and naturalization laws have upon the temper and quality of American life here in the United States. (Statement of the AJ Congress, Joint Hearings Before the Subcommittees of the Committees on the Judiciary, 82^nd Congress, first session, on S. 716, H. R. 2379, and H. R. 2816. March 6-April 9, 1951, p. 565) The argument was now typically couched in terms of democratic principles and the cause of international amity (Cohen 1972, p. 368) the implicit theory being that the principles of democracy required ethnic diversity and the theory that the good will of other countries depended on American willingness to accept their citizens as immigrants. Rifkind noted that (T)he enactment of [the McCarran-Walter bill] will gravely impair the national effort we are putting forth.

FOR WE ARE ENGAGED IN A WAR FOR THE HEARTS AND MINDS OF MEN. The free nations of the world look to us for moral and spiritual reinforcement at a time when the faith which moves men is as important as the force they wield. The McCarran-Walter law explicitly included racial ancestry as a criterion in its provision that Orientals would be included in the token Oriental quotas no matter where they were born. Herbert Lehman, a senator from New York and the most prominent senatorial opponent of immigration restriction during the 1950s (Neuringer 1971, p. 351), argued during the debates over the McCarran-Walter bill that immigrants from Jamaica of African descent should be included in the quota for England and stated that the bill would cause resentment among Asians (Neuringer 1971, pp. 346, 356).

Representative Emanuel Celler and Representative Jacob Javits, the leaders of the anti-restrictionists in the House, made similar arguments (Cong. Rec., April 23, 1952, pp. 4306, 4219). As was also apparent in the battles dating back to the nineteenth century (see above), the opposition to the national origins legislation went beyond its effects on Jewish immigration to include advocacy of immigration into the United States of all of the racial/ethnic groups of the world.

Reflecting a concern for maintaining the ethnic status quo as well as the salience of Jewish issues during the period, the hearings of the subcommittee considering the McCarran immigration law noted that The population of the United States has increased three-fold since 1877, while the Jewish population has increased twenty-one fold during the same period (Senate Report No.� 1515 [1950], pp. 2-4). The bill also included a provision that naturalized citizens automatically lost citizenship if they resided abroad continuously for 5 years. This provision was viewed by Jewish organizations as motivated by anti-Zionist attitudes: Testimony by Government officials at the hearings...made it clear that the provision stemmed from a desire to dissuade naturalized American Jews from subscribing to a deeply held ideal which some officials in contravention of American policy regarded as undesirable...(Statement of Will Maslow representing the AJ Congress, Joint Hearings Before the Subcommittees of the Committees on the Judiciary, 82^nd Congress, first session, on S. 716, H. R. 2379, and H. R. 2816. March 6-April 9, 1951, p. 394)

Reaffirming the logic of the 1920s restrictionists, the subcommittee report emphasized that a purpose of the 1924 law was the restriction of immigration from southern and eastern Europe in order to preserve a predominance of persons of northwestern European origin in the composition of our total population but noted that this purpose did not imply any theory of Nordic supremacy (Senate Report, No. 1515, [1950], pp. 442, 445-446). The argument was sometimes phrased in terms of an emphasis on the similarity of cultural background of prospective immigrants, but� again the underlying logic was that ethnic groups already in the country had legitimate interests in maintaining the ethnic status quo.

It is important to note that Jewish spokesmen differed from other liberal groups in their motives for opposing restrictions on immigration during this period. In the following I emphasize the Congressional testimony of Judge Simon H. Rifkind who represented a very broad range of Jewish agencies in the hearings on the McCarran-Walter bill in 1951. (Joint Hearings Before the Subcommittees of the Committees on the Judiciary, 82nd Congress, first session, on S. 716, H. R. 2379, and H. R. 2816. March 6-April 9, 1951, pp. 562-595)

1). Immigration should come from all racial/ethnic groups: We conceive of Americanism as the spirit behind the welcome that America has traditionally extended to people of different races, all religions, all nationalities. Americanism is a tolerant way of life that was devised by men who differed from one another vastly in religion, race background, education, and lineage, and who agreed to forget all these things and ask of a new neighbor not where he comes from but only what he can do and what is his spirit toward his fellow men (p. 566).

2). The total number of immigrants should be maximized within very broad economic and

political constraints: (T)he regulation [of immigration] is the regulation of an asset, not of a liability

(p. 567). Rifkind emphasized several times that unused quotas had the effect of restricting total numbers of immigrants, and he viewed this very negatively (e.g., p. 569).

3). Immigrants should not be viewed as economic assets and imported only to serve the present

needs of the United States: Looking at [selective immigration] from the point of view of the United States, never from the point of view of the immigrant, I say that we should, to some extent, allow for our temporary needs, but not to make our immigration problem an employment instrumentality. I do not think that we are buying economic commodities when we allow immigrants to come in. We are admitting human beings who will found families and raise children, whose children may reach the heights at least so we hope and pray. For a small segment of the immigrant stream I think we are entitled to say, if we happen to be short of a particular talent, let us go out and look for them, if necessary, but let us not make that the all-pervading thought. (p. 570)

The opposition to needed skills as the basis of immigration was consistent with the prolonged Jewish attempt to delay the passage of a literacy test as a criterion for immigration beginning in the late nineteenth century until a literacy test was finally passed in 1917. While Rifkind�s testimony was free of the accusation that present immigration policy was based on the theory of Nordic superiority, Nordic superiority continued to be a prominent theme of other Jewish groups advocating immigration from all ethnic groups, particularly the AJ Congress.

The statement of the AJ Congress at these hearings focused a great deal of attention on the importance of the theory of Nordic supremacy as motivating the 1924 legislation, but also noted the previous history of ethnic discrimination that existed long before these theories were developed, including the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, the gentlemen�s agreement with Japan of 1907 which limited immigration of Japanese workers, and the exclusion of other Asians in 1917. The statement noted that the 1924 legislation had succeeded in its aim of preserving the ethnic balance of the U.S. as of the 1920 census.

However, it noted that the objective is valueless. There is nothing sacrosanct about the composition of the population in 1920. It would be foolish to believe that we reached the peak of ethnic perfection in that year. (Joint Hearings Before the Subcommittees of the Committees on the Judiciary, 82^nd� Congress, first session, on S. 716, H. R. 2379, and H. R. 2816. March 6-April 9, 1951, p. 410)

Moreover, in an explicit statement of Horace Kallen�s multi-cultural ideal, the AJ Congress statement advocated the thesis of cultural democracy which would guarantee to all groups majority and minority alike...the right to be different and the responsibility to make sure that their differences do not conflict with the welfare of the American people as a whole. (Joint Hearings Before the Subcommittees of the Committees on the Judiciary, 82nd Congress, first session, on S. 716, H. R. 2379, and H. R. 2816. March 6-April 9, 1951, p. 404)

During this period, the Congress Weekly, the journal of the AJ Congress, regularly denounced the national origins provisions as based on the myth of the existence of superior and inferior racial stocks (Oct. 17, 1955; p. 3) and advocated immigration on the basis of need and other criteria unrelated to race or national origin (May 4, 1953, p. 3). Particularly objectionable from the perspective of the AJ Congress was the implication that there should be no change in the ethnic status quo prescribed by the 1924 legislation (e.g., Goldstein, 1952a, p. 6). The national origins formula is outrageous now...when our national experience has confirmed beyond a doubt that our very strength lies in the diversity of our peoples (Goldstein, 1952b, p. 5).

As indicated above, there is some evidence that the 1924 legislation and the restrictionism of the 1930s was motivated partly by anti-Semitic attitudes. Anti-Semitism and its linkage with anti-Communism was also apparent in the immigration arguments during the 1950s preceding and following the passage of the McCarran-Walter act. Restrictionists often pointed to evidence that over 90% of American Communists had backgrounds linking them to Eastern Europe and a major thrust of their efforts was to prevent immigration from this area and to ease deportation procedures to prevent Communist subversion.

Since Eastern Europe was also the origin of most Jewish immigration and because Jews were disproportionately represented among American Communists, these issues became linked and the situation lent itself to broad anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about the role of Jews in American politics (e.g., Beaty, 1951). In Congress, the notorious anti-Semite Representative John Rankin, without making explicit reference to Jews, stated that They whine about discrimination. Do you know who is being discriminated against? The white Christian people of America, the ones who created this nation...I am talking about the White Christian people of the North as well as the South...Communism is racial. A racial minority seized control in Russia and in all her satellite countries, such as Poland, Czechoslovakia, and many other countries I could name. They have been run out of practically every country in Europe in the years gone by, and if they keep stirring race trouble in this country and trying to force their communistic program on the Christian people of America, there is no telling what will happen to them here (Cong. Rec., April 23, 1952, p. 4320).

Reinforcing these links, the position of mainstream Jewish organizations such as the

AJ COMMITTEE, which opposed communism, often coincided with the position of the CPUSA on issues of immigration. For example, both the AJ COMMITTEE and the CPUSA condemned the McCarran-Walter act while, on the other hand, the AJ COMMITTEE had a major role in influencing the recommendations of President Truman�s Commission on Immigration and Naturalization (PCIN) for relaxing the security provisions of the McCarran-Walter act, and these recommendations were warmly greeted by the CPUSA at a time when a prime goal of the security provisions was to exclude communists (Bennett, 1963, p. 166).

JEWS WERE DISPROPORTIONATELY REPRESENTED IN THE PCIN AS WELL AS IN THE ORGANIZATIONS VIEWED BY CONGRESS AS COMMUNIST FRONT ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED IN IMMIGRATION ISSUES, AND THIS WAS UNDOUBTEDLY HIGHLY SALIENT TO ANTI-SEMITES. The Chairman of the PCIN was Philip B. Perlman and THE STAFF OF THE COMMISSION CONTAINED A HIGH PERCENTAGE OF JEWS, headed by Harry N. Rosenfield (Executive Director) and Elliot Shirk (Assistant to the Executive Director), and its report was wholeheartedly endorsed by the AJ Congress (see Congress Weekly, Jan. 12, 1952, p. 3). The proceedings were printed as the report Whom We Shall Welcome with the cooperation of Representative Emanuel Celler.

In Congress, Senator McCarran accused the PCIN of containing communist sympathizers, and the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) released a report stating that some two dozen Communists and many times that number with records of repeated affiliation with known Communist enterprises testified before the Commission or submitted statements for inclusion in the record of the earrings...Nowhere in either the record of the hearings or in the report is there a single reference to the true background of these persons (House Report No. 1182, 85^th� Congress, 1^st Session, p. 47). The report referred particularly to Communists associated with the American Committee for the Protection of Foreign Born (ACPFB) headed by Abner Green. Green, who was Jewish, figured very prominently in these hearings, and Jews were generally disproportionately represented among those singled out as officers and sponsors of the ACPFB (pp. 13-21).

HUAC provided evidence that ACPFB had close ties with the CPUSA and noted that 24 of the individuals associated with the ACPFB had signed statements incorporated into the printed record of the PCIN. The AJ COMMITTEE was also heavily involved in the deliberations of the PCIN, including providing testimony and distributing data and other material to individuals and organizations testifying before the PCIN (Cohen, 1972, p. 371). All of its recommendations were incorporated into the final report (Cohen, 1972, p. 371) (including a de-emphasis on economic skills as criteria for immigration, scrapping the national origins legislation, and opening immigration to all the peoples of the world on a first come, first served basis), the only exception being that the report recommended a lower total number of immigrants than recommended by the AJ COMMITTEE and other Jewish groups. The AJ COMMITTEE thus went beyond merely advocating the principle of immigration from all racial/ethnic groups (token quotas for Asians and Africans had already been included in the McCarran-Walter act) to attempt to maximize the total number of immigrants from all parts of the world within the current political climate.

Indeed, the Commission (PCIN, 1953, p. 106) pointedly noted that the 1924 legislation had succeeded in maintaining the racial status quo and that the main barrier to changing the racial status quo was not the national origins system (because there were already high levels of non-quota immigrants and because the countries of Northern and Western Europe did not fill their quotas) but the total number of immigrants allowed into the United States. The Commission thus viewed changing the racial status quo of the United States as a desirable goal, and to that end made a major point of the desirability of increasing the total amount of immigration (PCIN, 1953, p. 42). As Bennett (1963, p. 164) notes, in the eyes of the PCIN, the 1924 legislation reducing the total number of immigrants was a very bad thing because of its finding that one race is just as good as another for American citizenship or any other purpose.

Correspondingly, the defenders of the 1952 legislation conceptualized the issue as fundamentally one of ethnic warfare. Senator McCarran stated that subverting the national origins system would, in the course of a generation or so, tend to change the ethnic and cultural composition of this nation (in Bennett, 1963, p. 185), and Richard Arens, a Congressional staff ember who had a prominent role in the hearings on the McCarran-Walter bill as well as in the activities of the HUAC, stated that these are the critics who do not like America as it is and has been.

They think our people exist in unfair ethnic proportions. They prefer that we bear a greater resemblance or ethnic relationship to the foreign peoples whom they favor and for whom they are seeking disproportionately greater immigration privileges (in Bennett, 1963, 186). As Divine (1957, p. 188) notes, ethnic interests predominated on both sides; the charges of racism made against the restrictionists who were advocating the ethnic status quo were balanced against the attempts by anti-restrictionists to alter the ethnic status quo in a manner that conformed to their own perceived ethnic interests.

The salience of Jewish involvement in immigration during this period is also apparent in several other incidents. In 1950 the representative of the AJ Congress testified that the retention of national origins in any form would be a political and moral catastrophe (revision of Immigration Laws Joint Hearings, 1950, pp. 336-337). The national origins formula implies that persons in quest of the opportunity to live in this land are to be judged according to breed like cattle at a country fair and not on the basis of their character fitness or capacity (Congress Weekly 21, 1952, pp. 3-4).

Divine (1957, p. 173) characterizes the AJ Congress as representing the more militant wing of the opposition because of its principled opposition to any form of the national origins formula, whereas other opponents merely wanted to be able to distribute unused quotas to Southern and Eastern Europe. Representative Francis Walter noted the propaganda drive that is being engaged in now by certain members of the American Jewish Congress opposed to the Immigration and Nationality Code (Cong. Rec. Mar, 13, 1952, p. 2283), noting particularly the activities of Dr. Israel Goldstein, president of the AJ Congress, who had been reported in the New York Times as having� stated that the Immigration and Nationality law would place a legislative seal of inferiority on all persons of other than Anglo-Saxon origin. Representative Walter then noted the special role that Jewish organizations had played in attempting to foster family reunion rather than special skills as the basis of United States immigration policy.

After Representative Jacob Javits stated that opposition to the law was not confined to the one group the gentleman mentioned (Congressional Record, March 13, 1952, p. 2284), Walter responded as follows: I might call your attention to the fact that Mr. Harry N. Rosenfield, Commissioner of the Displaced Persons Commission and incidentally a brother-in-law of a lawyer who is stirring up all this agitation, in a speech recently said: The proposed legislation is America�s Nuremberg trial. It is racist and archaic,� based on a theory that people with different styles of noses should be treated differently.

Representative Walter then went on to note that during the hearings on the bill, the only two organizations that were hostile to the entire bill were the AJ Congress and the Association of Immigration and Nationality Lawyers, the latter represented by an attorney who is also advising and counseling the American Jewish Congress. (Indeed, Goldstein [1952b] himself noted that at the time of the Joint House-Senate hearings on the McCarran bill, the American Jewish Congress was the only civic group which dared flatly to oppose the national origins quota formula).

Representative Emanuel Celler then stated that Walter should not have overemphasized as he did the people of one particular faith who are opposing the bill (p. 2285). Representative Walter agreed with Celler�s comments, noting that there are other very fine Jewish groups who endorse the bill. Nevertheless, the principle Jewish organizations, including the AJ Congress, the AJ COMMITTEE, the ADL, the National Council of Jewish Women, and the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, did indeed oppose the bill (Cong. Rec., April 23, 1952, p. 4247), and when Judge Simon Rifkind testified against the bill in the Joint Hearings, he emphasized that he represented a very wide range of Jewish groups, the entire body of religious opinion and lay opinion within the Jewish group, religiously speaking, from the extreme right and extreme left (p. 563). (Joint Hearings Before the Subcommittees of the Committees on the Judiciary, 82nd Congress, first session, on S. 716, H. R. 2379, and H. R. 2816. March 6-April 9, 1951, p. 563) Rifkind represented a long list of national and local Jewish groups, including in addition to the above, the Synagogue Council of America, the Jewish Labor Committee, the Jewish War Veterans of the United States, and 27 local Jewish councils throughout the United States. Moreover, the fight against the bill was led by Jewish members of Congress, including especially Celler,

Javits, and Lehman, all of whom, as indicated above, were prominent members of the ADL. Albeit by indirection, Representative Walter was clearly calling attention to the special Jewish role in the immigration conflict of 1952. The special role of the AJ Congress in opposing the McCarran-Walter act was a source of pride within the group: on the verge of victory in 1965, the Congress bi-Weekly editorialized that it was a cause of pride that Rabbi Israel Goldstein had been singled out by Rep. Walter for attack on the floor of the House of Representatives as the prime organizer of the campaign against the measures he co-sponsored (Feb. 1, 1965; p. 3).

The perception that Jewish concerns were an important feature of the opposition to the McCarran-Walter act can also be seen in the following exchange between Representative Celler and Representative Walter. Celler noted that The national origin theory upon which our immigration law is based...[mocks] our protestations based on a question of equality of opportunity for all peoples, regardless of race, color, or creed. Representative Walter replied that a great menace to America lies in the fact that so many professionals, including professional Jews, are shedding crocodile tears for no reason whatsoever (Cong. Rec. Jan. 13, 1953, p. 372).

And in a comment referring to the peculiarities of Jewish interests in immigration legislation, Richard Arens, Staff Director of the Senate subcommittee that produced the McCarran-Walter act, pointedly noted that one of the curious things about those who most loudly claim that the 1952 act is discriminatory and that it does not make allowance for a sufficient number of alleged refugees, is that they oppose admission of any of the approximately one million Arab refugees in camps where they are living in pitiful circumstances after having been driven out of Israel (in Bennett, 1963, p. 181).

The McCarran-Walter Act was passed over President Truman�s veto, and Truman�s alleged partisanship to Jews was a favorite target of anti-Semites (Cohen, 1972, p. 377). Prior to the veto, Truman was intensively lobbied, particularly [by] Jewish societies opposed to the bill, while government agencies, including the State Department urged Truman to sign the bill (Divine, 1957, p. 184). Moreover, individuals with openly anti-Semitic attitudes, such as John Beaty (1951), often focused on Jewish involvement in the immigration battles during this period.

JEWISH ANTI-RESTRICTIONIST ACTIVITY, 1953-1965: During this period, the Congress Weekly regularly noted the role of Jewish organizations as the vanguard of liberalized immigration laws: For example, in its editorial of Feb. 20, 1956 (p. 3), it congratulated President Eisenhower for his unequivocal opposition to the quota system which, more than any other feature of our immigration policy, has excited the most widespread and most intense aversion among Americans. In advancing this proposal for new guidelines and standards in determining admissions, President Eisenhower has courageously taken a stand in advance of even many advocates of a liberal immigration policy and embraced a position which had at first been urged by the American Jewish Congress and other Jewish agencies.

The AJ COMMITTEE made a major effort to keep the immigration issue alive during a period of widespread apathy among the American public between the passage of the McCarran-Walter act and the early 1960s. JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS INTENSIFIED THEIR EFFORT DURING THIS PERIOD (Cohen, 1972, pp. 370-373; Neuringer, 1971, p. 358), with the AJ COMMITTEE helping to establish the Joint Conference on Alien Legislation and the American Immigration Conference (organizations representing pro-immigration forces) as well as providing most of the funding and performing most of the work of these groups. In 1955 the AJ COMMITTEE organized a group of influential citizens as the National Commission on Immigration and Citizenship in order to give prestige to the campaign (Cohen, 1972, p. 373).

All these groups studied immigration laws, disseminated information to the public, presented testimony to Congress, and planned other appropriate activities...There were no immediate or dramatic results; but AJC�s dogged campaign in conjunction with like-minded organizations ultimately prodded the Kennedy and Johnson administrations to action (Cohen, 1972, p. 373).

An article by Oscar Handlin (1952), the prominent Harvard historian of immigration, is a fascinating microcosm of the Jewish approach to immigration during this period. Writing in Commentary (a publication of the AJ COMMITTEE) almost 30 years after the 1924 defeat and in the immediate aftermath of the McCarran-Walter act, Handlin entitled his article The immigration fight has only begun: Lessons of the McCarran-Walter setback. The title is a remarkable indication of the tenacity and persistence of Jewish commitment to this issue. The message is to not be discouraged by the recent defeat which occurred despite all the effort toward securing the revision of our immigration laws (p. 2).

Handlin attempts to cast the argument in universalist terms as benefitting all Americans and as conforming to American ideals that all men, being brothers, are equally capable of being Americans (p.7). Current immigration law reflects racist xenophobia (p. 2) by its token quotas for Asians and its deprivation of the right of West Indian Blacks to take advantage of British quotas. Handlin ascribes the restrictionist sentiments of Pat McCarran to the hatred of foreigners that was all about him in his youth and by the dim, recalled fear that he himself might be counted among them (p.� 3) a sort of psychoanalytic identification-with-the-aggressor argument (McCarran was Catholic).

In his article Handlin repeatedly uses the term we (as in (i)f we cannot beat McCarran and his cohorts with their own weapons, we can do much to destroy the efficacy of those weapons (p. 4), suggesting Handlin�s belief in a unified Jewish interest in liberal immigration policy and presaging a prolonged chipping away of the 1952 legislation in the ensuing years. Handlin�s anti-restrictionist strategy included altering the views of social scientists to the effect that it was possible and necessary to distinguish among the races of immigrants that clamored for admission to the United States (p. 4).

Handlin�s proposal to recruit social scientists in the immigration battles is congruent with the political agenda of the Boasian school of anthropology discussed above. And as Higham (1984) notes, the ascendancy of such views was as an important component of the ultimate victory over restrictionism. In an arguably tendentious rendering of the logic of preserving the ethnic status quo that underlay the arguments for restriction in the period from 1921-1952, Handlin stated: The laws are bad because they rest on the racist assumption that mankind is divided into fixed breeds, biologically and culturally separated from each other, and because, within that framework, they assume that Americans are Anglo-Saxons by origin and ought to remain so.

To all other peoples, the laws say that the United States ranks them in terms of their racial proximity to our own superior stock; and upon the many, many millions of Americans not descended from the Anglo-Saxons, the laws cast a distinct imputation of inferiority (p. 5). Handlin then deplored the apathy of other hyphenated Americans to share the enthusiasm of the Jewish effort: Many groups failed to see the relevance of the McCarran-Walter Bill to their own position; the suggested that they ought to act as groups to assert their rightful interests: The Italian American has the right to be heard on these issues precisely as an Italian American (p. 7; italics in text).

The implicit assumption is that America ought to be composed of cohesive subgroups with a clear sense of their group interests in opposition to the peoples deriving from Northern and Western Europe or of the United States as a whole. And there is the implication that Italian-Americans have an interest in furthering immigration of Africans and Asians and in creating such a multi-racial and multi-cultural society.

Shortly after Handlin�s article, William Petersen (1955), also writing in Commentary, argued that pro-immigration forces should be explicit in their advocacy of a multi-cultural society, and that the importance of this goal transcended the importance of achieving any self-interested goal of the United States, such as obtaining needed skills or improving foreign relations. In making his case he cited a group of predominantly Jewish social scientists whose works, beginning with Horace Kallen�s plea for a multi-cultural, pluralistic society, constitute the beginning of a scholarly legitimization of the different immigration policy that will perhaps one day become law (p. 86),

Including, besides Kallen, Melville Herskovits, Geoffrey Gorer, Samuel Lubell, David Riesman, Thorsten Sellin, and Milton Konvitz. These social scientists did indeed contribute to the immigration battles. For example, the following quotation from a scholarly book on immigration policy by Milton Konvitz of Cornell University reflects the rejection of national interest as an element of United States immigration policy a hallmark of the Jewish approach to immigration: To place so much emphasis on technological and vocational qualifications is to remove every vestige of humanitarianism from our immigration policy. We deserve small thanks from those who come here if they are admitted because we find that they are urgently needed, by reason of their training and experience, to advance our national interests. This is hardly immigration; it is the importation of special skills or know-how, not greatly different from the importation of coffee or rubber. It is hardly in the spirit of American ideals to disregard a man�s character and promise and to look only at his education and the vocational opportunities he had the good fortune to enjoy (Konvitz, 1953, p. 26).

Handlin wrote that the McCarran-Walter law was only a temporary setback and he was right. Thirty years after the triumph of restrictionism, only Jewish groups remained as persistent and tenacious advocates of a multi-cultural America. Forty-one years after the 1924 triumph of restrictionism and the national origins provision and only 13 years after its reaffirmation with the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952, Jewish organizations successfully supported ending the geographically based national origins basis of immigration intended to result in an ethnic status quo in what was now a radically altered intellectual and political climate.

Particularly important is the provision in the Immigration Act of 1965 that expanded the number of non-quota immigrants. Beginning in their testimony on the 1924 law, Jewish spokesmen had been in the forefront in attempts to admit family members on a non-quota basis (Neuringer, 1971, p. 191).

During the House debates on immigration surrounding the McCarran-Walter Act, Representative Walter (Cong. Rec., p. 2284, March 13, 1952) noted the special focus that Jewish organizations had on family reunion rather than on special skills. Responding to Representative Javits who had complained that under the bill 50% of the quota for Negroes from the British West Indies colonies would be reserved for people with special skills, Walter noted that I would like to call the gentleman�s attention to the fact that this is the principle of using 50 percent of the quota for people needed in the United States. But, if that entire 50 percent is not used in that category, then the unused numbers go down to the next category which replies to the objections that these Jewish organizations make much of, that families are being separated.

Prior to the 1965 law, Bennett (1963, p. 244), commenting on the family unification aspects of the 1961 immigration legislation, noted that the relationship by blood or marriage and the principle of uniting families have become the open Sesame to the immigration gates. Moreover, despite repeated denials by the anti-restrictionists that their proposals would affect the ethnic balance of the country, Bennett (1963, p. 256) commented that the repeated, persistent extension of non-quota� status to immigrants from countries with oversubscribed quotas and flatly discriminated against by [the McCarran-Walter act] together with administrative waivers of inadmissibility, adjustment of status and private bills, is helping to speed and make apparently inevitable a change in the ethnic face of the nation (p. 257) a reference to the chipping away of the 1952 law recommended as a strategy in Handlin�s article. Indeed, a major argument apparent in the debate over the 1965 legislation was that the 1952 law had been so weakened that it had largely become irrelevant and there was a need to overhaul immigration legislation to legitimize a de facto situation.

Bennett also noted that (t)he stress on the immigration issue arises from insistence of those who regard quotas as ceilings, not floors [opponents of restriction often referred to unused quotas as wasted], who want to remake America in the image of small-quota countries and who do not like our basic ideology, cultural attitudes and heritage. They insist that it is the duty of the United States to accept immigrants irrespective of their assimilability or our own population problems. They insist on remaining hyphenated Americans (1963, p. 295).

The family-based emphasis of the quota regulations of the 1965 law (e.g., the provision that at least 24% of the quota for each area be set aside for brothers and sisters of citizens) has resulted in a multiplier effect which ultimately subverted the quota system entirely by allowing for a chaining phenomenon in which endless chains of the close relatives of close relatives are admitted outside the quota system: Imagine one immigrant, say an engineering student, who was studying in the U. S. during the 1960's. If he found a job after graduation, he could then bring over his wife [as the souse of a resident alien], and six years later, after being naturalized, his bothers and sisters [as siblings of a citizen]. They, in turn, could bring their wives, husbands, and children. Within a dozen years, one immigrant entering as a skilled worker could easily generate 25 visas for in-laws, nieces, and nephews (McConnell 1988, p. 98).

The 1965 law also de-emphasized the criterion that immigrants should have needed skills. (In

1986, less than 4% of immigrants were admitted on the basis of needed skills, while 74% were admitted on the basis of kinship [see Brimelow, 1995].) As indicated above, THE REJECTION OF A SKILL REQUIREMENT OR OTHER TESTS OF COMPETENCE IN FAVOR OF HUMANITARIAN GOALS AND FAMILY UNIFICATION HAD BEEN AN ELEMENT OF JEWISH IMMIGRATION POLICY at least since debate on the McCarran-Walter act of the early 1950s and extending really to the long opposition to literacy tests dating from the end of the nineteenth century.

Senator Jacob Javits played a prominent role in the Senate hearings on the 1965 bill, and Emanuel Celler, who fought for unrestricted immigration for over 40 years in the House of Representatives, introduced similar legislation in that body. Jewish organizations (American Council for Judaism Philanthropic Fund; Council of Jewish Federations & Welfare Funds; B�nai B�rith Women) filed briefs in support of the measure before the Senate Subcommittee, as did organizations such as the ACLU and the Americans for Democratic Action with a large Jewish membership.

Indeed, it is noteworthy that well before the ultimate triumph of the Jewish policy on immigration, Javits (1951) authored an article entitled Let�s open the gates that proposed immigration level of 500,000 per year for 20 years with no restrictions on national origin. In 1961 Javits proposed a bill that sought to destroy the [national origins quota system] by a flank attack and to increase quota and non-quota immigration (Bennett, 1963, p. 250).

In addition to provisions aimed at removing barriers due to race, ethnic and national origins, included in this bill was a provision that brothers, sisters, and married sons or daughters of United States citizens and their spouses and children who had become eligible under the quota system in legislation of 1957 be included as non-quota immigrants an even more radical version of the provision whose incorporation in the 1965 law facilitated non-European immigration into the United States. Although this provision of Javit�s bill was not approved at the time, the bill�s proposals for softening previous restrictions on Asian and Black immigration as well as removing racial classification from visa documents (thus allowing unlimited non-quota immigration of Asians born in the Western Hemisphere) were approved.

It is also interesting that the main victory of the restrictionists in 1965 was that Western Hemisphere nations were included in the new quota system thus ending the possibility of unrestricted immigration from those regions. In speeches before the Senate, Senator Javits (Cong. Rec. 111, 1965, p. 24469) bitterly opposed this extension of the quota system, arguing that placing any limits on immigration of all of the people of the Western Hemisphere would have severely negative implications on United States foreign policy. In a highly revealing discussion of the bill before the Senate, Senator Sam Ervin (Cong. Rec. 89^th Congress, 1st session, pp. 24446-51, 1965) noted that those who disagree with me express no shock that Britain, in the future, can send us 10,000 fewer immigrants than she has sent on an annual average in the past. They are only shocked that British Guyana cannot send us every single citizen of that country who wishes to come. Clearly the forces of liberal immigration really wanted unlimited immigration into the United States.

The pro-immigrationists also failed to prevent a requirement that the Secretary of Labor determine that there are insufficient Americans able and willing to perform the labor which the aliens intend to perform, and that the employment of such aliens will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of American workers. Writing in the American Jewish Year Book, Liskofsky (1966, 174) notes that pro-immigration groups opposed these regulations but agreed to them in order to get a bill that ended the national origins provisions. After passage they became intensely concerned. They voiced publicly the fear that the new, administratively cumbersome procedure might easily result in paralyzing most immigration of skilled and unskilled workers as well as of non-preference immigrants.

REFLECTING THE LONG JEWISH OPPOSITION TO THE IDEA THAT IMMIGRATION POLICY SHOULD BE IN THE NATIONAL INTEREST, THE ECONOMIC WELFARE OF AMERICAN CITIZENS WAS IRRELEVANT; securing high levels of immigration had become an end in itself. The 1965 law is having the effect that it seems reasonable to suppose had been intended by its Jewish advocates all along: the Census Bureau projects that by the year 2050, European-derived peoples will no longer be a majority of the population of America. Moreover, multi-culturalism has already become a powerful ideological and political reality (Brimelow, 1995). Although the proponents of the 1965 legislation continued to insist that the bill would not affect the ethnic balance of the United States or even impact its culture, it is difficult to believe that at least some of the proponents were unaware of the eventual implications.

OPPONENTS, CERTAINLY, WERE QUITE CLEAR THAT IT WOULD INDEED AFFECT THE ETHNIC BALANCE OF THE UNITED STATES. Given the intense involvement of organizations such as the AJ COMMITTEE in the details of immigration legislation and their very negative attitudes toward the North-Western European bias of pre-1965 United States immigration policy and very negative attitudes toward the idea of an ethnic status quo embodied, e.g., in the PCIN document Whom We Shall Welcome, it appears unlikely to suppose that these organizations were unaware of the inaccuracy of the projections of the effects of this legislation that were made by its supporters.

Given the clearly articulated interests in ending the ethnic status quo evident in the arguments of anti-restrictionists throughout the period from 1924-1965, the 1965 law would not have been perceived by its proponents as a victory unless they viewed it as ultimately changing the ethnic status quo. Revealingly, the 1965 law was viewed as a victory by the anti-restrictionists, and it is noteworthy that after regularly condemning United States immigration law and championing the eradication of the national origins formula precisely because it had produced an ethnic status quo, The Congress bi-Weekly completely ceased publishing articles on this topic.

Moreover, Lawrence Auster (1990, p. 31ff) shows that the supporters of the legislation repeatedly glossed over the distinction between quota and non-quota immigration and failed to mention the effect that the legislation would have on non-quota immigration. Projections of the number of new immigrants failed to take account of the well-known and often commented-upon fact that the old quotas favoring Western European countries were not being filled. Moreover, continuing a tradition of over 40 years, the rhetoric of those in favor of the bill presented the legislation of 1924 and 1952 as based on theories of racial superiority and as involving racial discrimination rather than in terms of an attempt to create an ethnic status quo.

Even in 1952, Senator McCarran was well aware of the high stakes at risk in immigration policy: I believe that this nation is the last hope of Western civilization and if this oasis of the world shall be overrun, perverted, contaminated or destroyed, then the last flickering light of humanity will be extinguished. I take no issue with those who would praise the contributions which have been made to our society by people of many races, of varied creeds and colors. America is indeed a joining together of many streams which go to form a mighty river which we call the American way.

However, we have in the United States today hard-core, indigestible blocs which have not become integrated into the American way of life, but which, on the contrary are its deadly enemies. Today, as never before, untold millions are storming our gates for admission and those gates are cracking under the strain. The solution of the problems of Europe and Asia will not come through a transplanting of those problems en masse to the United States...I do not intend to become prophetic, but if the enemies of this legislation succeed in riddling it to pieces, or in amending it beyond recognition, they will have contributed more to promote this nations downfall than any other group since we achieved our independence as a nation (Senator Pat McCarran, Cong. Rec., March 2, 1953, p. 1518).

CONCLUSION: The defeats of 1924 and 1952 did not prevent the ultimate victory of the Jewish interest in combating the cultural, political, and demographic dominance of the European-derived peoples of the United States. What is truly remarkable is the tenacity with which Jewish ethnic interests were pursued for a period of close to 100 years. Also remarkable was the ability to frame the argument of immigration-restrictionists in terms of racial superiority in the period from 1924- 1965 rather than in such positive terms as the ethnic interests of the peoples of northern and western Europe in maintaining a status quo as of 1924.

During the period between 1924 and 1965 Jewish interests were largely thwarted, but this did not prevent the ultimate triumph of the Jewish perspective on immigration. In a very real sense the result of the immigration changes fostered by Jewish intellectual and political activity have constituted a long term victory over the political, demographic, and cultural representation of the common people of the South and West (Higham 1984, 49) whose congressional delegates were in the forefront of the restrictionist forces. Former Secretary of the Navy James Webb (1995) notes that it is the descendants of those WASPS who settled the West and South who by and large did the most to lay out the infrastructure of this country, quite often suffering educational and professional regression as they tamed the wilderness, built the towns, roads and schools, and initiated a democratic way of life that later white cultures were able to take advantage of without paying the price of pioneering.

Today they have the least, socioeconomically, to show for these contributions. And if one would care to check a map, they are from the areas now evincing the greatest resistance to government practices. Webb�s ideas are not new but reflect the sentiments a great many congressmen voiced during the immigration debates of the 1920's. It is instructive to consider the possible long term effects of this sea change in American immigration policy combined with the current emphasis on multi-culturalism. The shift to multi-culturalism has coincided with an enormous growth of immigration from non-European-derived peoples beginning with the Immigration Act of 1965 which favored immigrants from non-European countries.

Many of these immigrants come from non- Western countries where cultural, gender, and genetic segregation are the norm. Within the context of multi-cultural America, they are encouraged to retain their own languages and religions and encouraged to marry within the group. The movement toward ethnic separatism is highly problematic. Historically, ethnic separatism has been an extremely divisive force within societies. At the present time there are ethnically based conflicts on every continent, and formerly multi-ethnic societies are breaking away and establishing ethno-states based on ethnic homogeneity (Tullberg & Tullberg, 1997). These results confirm the expectation that indeed ethnicity is important in human affairs. People appear to be extremely aware of group membership, and ethnicity remains a common source of group identity. Individuals are also keenly aware of the relative standing of their own group in terms of resource control and social status.

And they are willing to take extraordinary steps in order to achieve and retain economic and political power in defense of these group imperatives. It is instructive to think of the circumstances which could minimize group conflict given the assumption of ethnic separatism. Theorists of cultural pluralism, such as Horace Kallen, envision the possibility that different ethnic groups would retain their distinctive identity in the context of complete political equality and economic opportunity. The difficulty with this scenario is that no provision is made for the results of competition for resources within the society.

In the best of circumstances one might suppose that the separated ethnic groups would engage in absolute reciprocity with each other, so that there would be no differences in terms of any measure of success in the society, including social class membership, economic role (e.g., producer versus consumer; creditor versus debtor; manager versus worker), or fertility between the separated ethnic groups. All groups would have approximately equal numbers and equal political power, or if there were different numbers there would be provisions ensuring that minorities could retain equitable representation in terms of the markers of success. Such conditions would minimize hostility between the groups because it would be difficult to attribute one�s status to the actions of the other group.

However, given the existence of ethnic separatism, it would still be in the interests of each group to advance its own interests at the expense of the other groups. All things being equal, a given ethnic group would be better off if it ensured that the other group had fewer resources, a lower social status, lower fertility, and proportionately less political power than itself. (Indeed, lowering the political and demographic power of the European-derived peoples of the United States has clearly been the aim of the Jewish political and intellectual activities discussed here). The hypothesized steady state of equality therefore implies a set of balance of power relationships each side constantly checking to make sure that the other is not cheating; each side constantly looking for ways to obtain dominance and exploitation by any possible means; each side willing to compromise only because of the threat of retaliation by the other side; each side willing to cooperate in a manner which involves a cost only if forced to do so by, e.g., the presence of external threat.

Clearly any type of cooperation which would involve true altruism toward the other group would not be expected. Thus the ideal situation of absolute equality would certainly require a great deal of monitoring and undoubtedly be characterized by a great deal of mutual suspicion. However, in the real world even this rather grim ideal is highly unlikely. In the real world, ethnic groups differ in their talents and abilities; they differ in their numbers, fertility, and the extent to which they encourage parenting practices conducive to resource acquisition; and they differ in the resources held at any point in time and in their political power. Equality or proportionate equity would be extremely difficult to attain, or to maintain after it has been achieved, without extraordinary levels of monitoring and without extremely intense social controls which would enforce ethnic quotas on the accumulation of wealth, admission to universities, obtaining high status jobs, etc.

Because of differing talents and abilities and differing parenting styles between ethnic groups, there would be a need to have different criteria for qualifying and retaining jobs depending on ethnic group membership. (Moreover, achieving parity between Jews and other ethnic groups would entail a very high level of discrimination against individual Jews for admission to universities or employment opportunities, and would even entail a large taxation on Jews in order to prevent the present Jewish advantage in the possession of wealth, since at present Jews are vastly over- represented among the wealthy and the successful in the United States (e.g., Ginsberg, 1994; Lipsett & Raab, 1995). Beginning in the 1920s, studies have repeatedly shown that Ashkenazi Jews have a full-scale IQ of approximately 117 and a verbal IQ in the range of 125 (see MacDonald, 1994 for a review). By 1988, Jews constituted about 40% of admissions to Ivy League colleges and Jewish income was at least double that of gentiles (Shapiro (1992, p. 116). SHAPIRO also SHOWS THAT JEWS ARE OVER REPRESENTED BY AT LEAST A FACTOR OF NINE ON INDEXES OF WEALTH, BUT THAT THIS IS A CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE BECAUSE MUCH JEWISH WEALTH IS IN REAL ESTATE WHICH IS DIFFICULT TO DETERMINE AND EASY TO HIDE.

While constituting approximately 2.4% of the population of the United States, Jews represented one half of the top 100 Wall Street executives. Lipset and Raab (1995) note that Jews contribute between one-quarter and one-third of all political contributions in the United States, including one- half of Democratic Party contributions and one-fourth of Republican contributions. Indeed, many Jewish intellectuals (including neo-conservatives such as Daniel Bell, Sidney Hook, Irving Howe, Irving Kristol, Nathan Glazer, Norman Podhoretz, and Earl Raab) as well as Jewish organizations (including the ADL, the AJ COMMITTEE, and the AJ Congress) have been eloquent opponents of affirmative action and quota mechanisms for distributing resources (see Sachar 1992, p. 818ff))

In the real world, therefore, there would have to be extraordinary efforts made to attain this steady state of ethnic balance of power and resources. It is of great interest that the ideology of Jewish-gentile co-existence has sometimes included the idea that the different ethnic groups develop a similar occupational profile and (implicitly) control resources in proportion to their numbers. The dream of the German assimilationists during the nineteenth-century was that the occupational profile of the Jews after emancipation would be highly similar to that of the gentiles a utopian expectation...shared by many, Jews and non-Jews alike (Katz, 1986, p. 67).

Efforts were made to decrease the percentage of Jews involved in trade and increase the percentages involved in agriculture and artisanry. In the event, however, the result of emancipation was that Jews were vastly over represented among the economic and cultural elite of the society, and this over representation was a critical feature of German anti-Semitism from 1870-1933.

Similarly, during the 1920s plans were proposed in which each ethnic group received a percentage of placements at Harvard and other universities reflecting the percentage of racial and national groups in the United States. These plans certainly reflect the importance of ethnicity in human affairs, but surely a society based on this type of ethnic special interest is not one which a social engineer in the manner of Lycurgus, Moses, Plato, or the American Founding Fathers would design as a blueprint for an entire society. The levels of social tension are bound to be chronically high.

Moreover, there is a considerable chance that ethnic warfare would occur even if precise parity had been achieved via intensive social controls: as indicated above, it would always be in the interests of any ethnic group to obtain hegemony over the others. If one adopts a cultural pluralism model in which there is free competition for resources and reproductive success, differences between ethnic groups are inevitable, and history suggests that such differences would result in animosity from the groups that are losing out.

The Tutsi/Hutu struggle in Rwanda and its neighbors is only the latest of many tragic examples. Assuming that there are ethnic differences in talents and abilities, the supposition that ethnic separatism could be a stable situation without ethnic animosity requires either a balance of power situation maintained with powerful social controls, as described above, or it requires that at least some ethnic groups be unconcerned that they are losing in the competition.

I regard this last possibility as remote at best. The proposition that an ethnic group should or would be unconcerned with its own eclipse and domination is certainly not expected by any theoretical or ideological perspective of which I am aware. The present immigration policy essentially places America in play as an arena of ethnic competition in a sense which does not apply in the non-Western nations of the world where the implicit assumption is that territory is held by its historically-dominant people. Under present policies, each racial/ethnic group in the world is encouraged to press its interest in expanding its demographic and political presence in America and can be expected to do so if given the opportunity.

Contrary to policies they advocate for the United States, American Jews have had no interest at all in proposing that immigration to Israel should be similarly multi-ethnic or that Israel should have an immigration policy that would threaten the hegemony of Jews in Israel. Indeed, THE VERY DEEP ETHNIC CONFLICT WITHIN ISRAEL IS AN EXCELLENT EXAMPLE OF THE FAILURE OF MULTI-CULTURALISM. Similarly, while Jews have been on the forefront of movements to separate church and state in the United States and often protested lack of religious freedom in the Soviet Union, the control of religious affairs by the Orthodox in Israel has received only belated and half- hearted opposition by American Jewish organizations (Cohen, 1972, 317) and has not prevented the all-out support of Israel by American Jews, despite the fact that Israel�s policy regarding immigration is quite the opposite of that of Western democracies.

At present the interests of non-European-derived peoples to expand demographically and politically in the United States are widely perceived as a moral imperative, while the attempts of the European-derived peoples to retain demographic, political, and cultural control are represented as racist and patently immoral. From the perspective of these European-derived peoples, the prescribed morality entails altruism and self-sacrifice, and it is unlikely to be viable in the long run.

And, as we have seen, the viability of such a morality of self-sacrifice is especially problematic in the context of a multi-cultural society in which everyone is highly conscious of group membership and there is between-group competition for resources. Although the success of the anti-restrictionist effort is an indication that people can be induced to be altruistic toward other groups, I rather doubt such altruism will continue to occur if there are obvious signs that the status and political power of the European-derived group is decreasing while the power of other groups increases as a result of immigration and other social policies.

The prediction, both on common sense grounds and on the basis of psychological research on social identity process (e.g., Hogg & Abrams, 1987), is that as other groups become increasingly powerful and salient in a multi-cultural society, the European-derived peoples of the United States will become increasingly unified and that contemporary divisive influences among the European-derived peoples of the United States (e.g., issues related to gender and sexual orientation; social class differences; religious differences) will be increasingly perceived as unimportant.

Eventually these groups will develop greater cohesion and a sense of common interest in their interactions with the other ethnic groups with profound consequences on the future history of America and the West.

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ The Forgotten Presidents

�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� By George Grant ([email protected])

��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� Excerpted from The Patriot's Handbook

Who was the first president of the United� States? Ask any school child and they will� readily tell you "George Washington." And of course, they would be wrong; at least technically. Washington was not inaugurated until April 30, 1789. And yet, the United States continually had functioning governments from as early as September 5, 1774 and operated as a confederated nation from as early as July 4, 1776.

During that nearly fifteen year interval, Congress; first the Continental Congress and then later the Confederation Congress, was always moderated by a duly elected president. As the chief executive officer of the government of the United States, the president was recognized as the head of state.

Washington was thus the fifteenth in a long line of distinguished presidents; and he led the seventeenth administration, he just happened to be the first under the current constitution. So who were the luminaries who preceded him? The following brief biographies profile these "forgotten presidents."

Peyton Randolph of Virginia (1723‑1775) When delegates gathered in Philadelphia for the first Continental Congress, they promptly� elected the former King's Attorney of Virginia as the moderator and president of their convocation. He was a propitious choice. He was a legal prodigy; having studied at the Inner Temple in London, served as his native colony's Attorney General, and tutored many of the� most able men of the South at William and Mary College, including the young Patrick Henry. His home in Williamsburg was the gathering place for Virginia's legal and political gentry, and it remains a popular attraction in the restored colonial capital. He had served as a delegate in the Virginia House of Burgesses, and had been a commander under William Byrd in the colonial militia. He was a scholar of some renown, having begun a self‑guided reading of the classics when he was thirteen. Despite suffering poor health served the Continental Congress as president twice, in 1774 from September 5 to October 21, and then again for a few days in 1775 from May 10 to May 23. He never lived to see independence, yet was numbered among the nation's most revered founders.

Henry Middleton (1717‑1784) America's second elected president was one of the wealthiest planters in the South, the patriarch of the most powerful families anywhere in the nation. His public spirit was evident from an early age. He was a member of his state's Common House from 1744‑1747.

During the last two years he served as the Speaker. During 1755 he was the King's Commissioner of Indian Affairs. He was a member of the South Carolina Council from 1755‑1770. His valor in the War with the Cherokees during 1760‑1761 earned him wide recognition throughout the colonies; and demonstrated his cool leadership abilities while under pressure. He was elected as a delegate to the first session of the Continental Congress and when Peyton Randolph was forced to resign the presidency, his peers immediately turned to Middleton to complete the term. He served as the fledgling coalition's president from October 22, 1774 until Randolph was able to resume his duties briefly beginning on May 10, 1775. Afterward, he was a member of the Congressional Council of Safety and helped to establish the young nation's policy toward the encouragement and support of education.

In February 1776 he resigned his political involvements in order to prepare his family and lands for what he believed was inevitable war; but he was replaced by his son Arthur who eventually became a signer of both the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation, served time as an English prisoner of war, and was twice elected Governor of his state.

John Hancock (1737‑1793) The third president was a patriot, rebel leader, merchant who signed his name into immortality in giant strokes on the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776. The boldness of his signature has made it live in American minds as a perfect expression of the strength and freedom; and defiance, of the individual in the face of British tyranny. As President of the Continental Congress during two widely spaced terms; the first from May 24 1775 to October 30 1777 and the second from November 23, 1885 to June 5, 1786; Hancock was the presiding officer when the members approved the Declaration of Independence. Because of his position, it was his official duty to sign the document first, but not necessarily as dramatically as he did.

Hancock figured prominently in another historic event; the battle at Lexington: British troops who fought there April 10, 1775, had known Hancock and Samuel Adams were in Lexington and had come there to capture these rebel leaders. And the two would have been captured, if they had not been warned by Paul Revere. As early as 1768, Hancock defied the British by refusing to pay customs charges on the cargo of one of his ships.One of Boston's wealthiest merchants, he was recognized by the citizens, as well as by the British, as a rebel leader; and was elected President of the first Massachusetts Provincial Congress. After he was chosen President of the Continental Congress in 1775, Hancock became known beyond the borders of Massachusetts, and, having served as colonel of the Massachusetts Governor's Guards he hoped to be named commander of the American forces�until John Adams nominated George Washington. In 1778 Hancock was commissioned Major General and took part in an unsuccessful campaign in Rhode Island. But it was as a political leader that his real distinction was earned; as the first Governor of Massachusetts, as President of Congress, and as President of the Massachusetts constitutional ratification convention.

He helped win ratification in Massachusetts,� gaining enough popular recognition to make him a contender for the newly created Presidency of the United States, but again he saw Washington gain the prize. Like his rival, George Washington, Hancock was a wealthy man who risked much for the cause of independence. He was the wealthiest New Englander supporting the patriotic cause, and, although he lacked the brilliance of John Adams or the capacity to inspire of Samuel Adams, he became one of the foremost leaders of the new nation; perhaps, in part, because he was willing to commit so much at such risk to the cause of� freedom.

Henry Laurens (1724‑1792) The only American president ever to be held as a prisoner of war by a foreign power, Laurens was heralded after he was released as "the father of our country," by no less a personage than George Washington. He was of Huguenot extraction, his ancestors having come to America from France after the revocation of the Edict of Nantes made the Reformed faith illegal.Raised and educated for a life of mercantilism at his home in Charleston, he also had the opportunity to spend more than a year in continental travel. It was while in Europe that he began to write revolutionary pamphlets; gaining him renown as a patriot.

He served as vice‑president of South Carolina in 1776. He was then elected to the Continental Congress. He succeeded John Hancock as President of the newly independent but war beleaguered United States on November 1, 1777. He served until December 9, 1778 at which time he was appointed Ambassador to the Netherlands.

Unfortunately for the cause of the young nation, he was captured by an English warship during his cross‑Atlantic voyage and was confined to the Tower of London until the end of the war. After the Battle of Yorktown, the American government regained his freedom in a dramatic prisoner exchange; President Laurens for Lord Cornwallis. Ever the patriot, Laurens continued to serve his nation as one of the three representatives selected to negotiate terms at the Paris Peace Conference in 1782.

John Jay (1745‑1829) America's first Secretary of State, first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, one of its first ambassadors, and author of some of� the celebrated Federalist Papers, Jay was a Founding Father who, by a quirk of fate, missed signing the Declaration of Independence�at the time of the vote for independence and the signing, he had temporarily left the Continental Congress to serve in New York's revolutionary legislature.

Nevertheless, he was chosen by his peers to succeed Henry Laurens as President of the United States; serving a term from December 10, 1778 to September 27, 1779. A conservative New York lawyer who was at first against the idea of independence for the colonies, the aristocratic Jay in 1776 turned into a patriot who was willing to give the next twenty‑five years of his life to help establish the new nation.

During those years, he won the regard of his peers as a dedicated and accomplished statesman and a man of unwavering principle. In the Continental Congress Jay prepared addresses to the people of Canada and Great Britain.

In New York he drafted the State constitution and served as Chief Justice during the war. He was President of the Continental Congress before he undertook the difficult assignment, as ambassador, of trying to gain support and funds from Spain. After helping Franklin, Jefferson, Adams, and Laurens complete peace negotiations in Paris in 1783, Jay returned to become the first Secretary of State, called "Secretary of Foreign Affairs" under the Articles of Confederation. He negotiated valuable commercial treaties with Russia and� Morocco, and dealt with the continuing controversy with Britain and Spain over the southern and western boundaries of the United States.

He proposed that America and Britain establish a joint commission to arbitrate disputes that remained after the war; a proposal which, though not adopted, influenced the government's use of arbitration and diplomacy in settling later international problems. In this post Jay felt keenly the weakness of the Articles of Confederation and was one of the first to advocate a new governmental compact. He wrote five Federalist Papers supporting the Constitution, and he was a leader in the New York ratification convention. As first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Jay made the historic decision that a State could be sued by a citizen from another State, which led to� the Eleventh Amendment to the Constitution. On a special mission to London he concluded the "Jay Treaty," which helped avert a renewal of hostilities with Britain but won little popular favor at home; and it is probably for this treaty that this Founding Father is best remembered.

Samuel Huntington (1732‑1796) An industrious youth who mastered his studies of the law without the advantage of a school, a tutor, or a master; borrowing books and snatching opportunities to read and research between odd jobs, he was one of the greatest self‑made men among the Founders. He was also one of the greatest legal minds of the age, all the more remarkable for his lack of advantage as a youth. In 1764, in recognition of his obvious abilities and initiative, he was elected to the General Assembly of Connecticut.

The next year he was chosen to serve on the� Executive Council. In 1774 he was appointed Associate Judge of the Superior Court and, as a delegate to the Continental Congress, was acknowledged to be a legal scholar of some respect. He served in Congress for five consecutive terms, during the last of which he was elected President. He served in that off ice from September 28, 1779 until ill health forced him to resign on July 9, 1781.

He returned to his home in Connecticut; and as he recuperated, he accepted more Counciliar and Bench duties. He again took his seat in Congress in 1783, but left it to become Chief Justice of his state's Superior Court. He was elected Lieutenant Governor in 1785 and Governor in 1786. According to John Jay, he was "the most precisely trained Christian jurists ever to serve his country."

Thomas McKean (1734‑1817) During his astonishingly varied fifty‑year career in public life he held almost every possible position; from deputy county attorney to President of the United States under the Confederation. Besides signing the Declaration of Independence, he contributed significantly to the development and establishment of constitutional government in both his home state of Delaware and the nation. At the Stamp Act Congress he proposed the voting procedure that Congress adopted: that each colony, regardless of size or population, have one vote, the practice adopted by the Continental Congress and the Congress of the Confederation, and the principle of state equality manifest in the composition of the Senate. And as county judge in 1765, he defied the British by ordering his court to work only with documents that did not bear the hated stamps.

In June 1776, at the Continental Congress, McKean joined with Caesar Rodney to register Delaware's approval of the Declaration of Independence, over the negative vote of the third Delaware delegate, George Read; permitting it to be "The unanimous declaration of the thirteen United States." And at a special Delaware convention, he drafted the constitution for that State. McKean also helped draft; and signed, the Articles of Confederation. It was during his tenure of service as President, from July 10, 1781 to November 4, 1782, when news arrived from General Washington in October 1781 that the British had surrendered following the Battle of Yorktown.

As Chief Justice of the supreme court of Pennsylvania, he contributed to the establishment of the legal system in that State, and, in 1787, he strongly supported the Constitution at the Pennsylvania Ratification Convention, declaring it "the best the world has yet seen." At sixty‑five, after over forty years of public service, McKean resigned from his post as Chief Justice.

A candidate on the Democratic‑Republican ticket in 1799, McKean was elected Governor of Pennsylvania. As Governor, he followed such a strict policy of appointing only fellow Republicans to office that he became the father of the spoils system in America. He served three tempestuous terms as Governor, completing one of the longest continuous careers of public service of any of the Founding Fathers.

John Hanson (1715‑1783) He was the heir of one of the greatest family traditions in the colonies and became the patriarch of a long line of American patriots; his great grandfather died at Lutzen beside the great King Gustavus Aldophus of Sweden; his grandfather was one of the founders of New Sweden along the Delaware River in Maryland; one of his nephews was the military secretary to George Washington; another was a signer of the Declaration; still another was a signer of the Constitution; yet another was Governor of Maryland during the Revolution; and still another was a member of the first Congress; two sons were killed in action with the Continental Army; a grandson served as a member of Congress under the new Constitution; and another grandson was a Maryland Senator.

Thus, even if Hanson had not served as President himself, he would have greatly contributed to the life of the nation through his ancestry and progeny. As a youngster he began a self‑guided reading of classics and rather quickly became an acknowledged expert in the juridicalism of Anselm and the practical philosophy of Seneca, both of which were influential in the development of the political philosophy of the great leaders of the Reformation. It was based upon these legal and theological studies that the young planter; his farm, Mulberry Grove was just across the Potomac from Mount Vernon, began to espouse the cause of the patriots. In 1775 he was elected to the Provincial Legislature of Maryland.

Then in 1777, he became a member of Congress where he distinguished himself as a brilliant administrator. Thus, he was elected President in 1781. He served in that office from November 5, 1781 until November 3, 1782. He was the first President to serve a full term after the full ratification of the Articles of Confederation; and like so many of the Southern and New England Founders, he was strongly opposed to the Constitution when it was first discussed. He remained a confirmed anti‑federalist until his untimely death.

Elias Boudinot (1741‑1802) He did not sign the Declaration, the Articles, or the Constitution. He did not serve in the Continental Army with distinction. He was not renowned for his legal mind or his political skills. He was instead a man who spent his entire career in foreign diplomacy. He earned the respect of his fellow patriots during the dangerous days following the traitorous action of Benedict Arnold.

His deft handling of relations with Canada also earned him great praise. After being elected to the Congress from his home state of New Jersey, he served as the new nation's Secretary for Foreign Affairs; managing the influx of aid from France, Spain, and Holland. The in 1783 he was elected to the Presidency. He served in that office from November 4, 1782 until November 2, 1783. Like so many of the other early presidents, he was a classically trained scholar, of the Reformed faith, and an anti‑federalist in political matters. He was the father and grandfather of frontiersmen, and one of his grandchildren and namesakes eventually became a leader of the Cherokee nation in its bid for independence from the sprawling expansion of the United States.

Thomas Mifflin (1744‑1800) By an ironic sort of providence, Thomas Mifflin served as George Washington's first aide‑de‑camp at the beginning of the Revolutionary War, and, when the war was over, he was the man, as President of the United States, who accepted Washington's resignation of his commission. In the years between, Mifflin greatly served the cause of freedom�and, apparently, his own cause; while serving as the first Quartermaster General of the Continental Army. He obtained desperately needed supplies for the new army, and was suspected of making excessive profit himself. Although experienced in business and successful in obtaining supplies for the war, Mifflin preferred the front lines, and he distinguished himself in military actions on Long Island and near Philadelphia. Born and reared a Quaker, he was excluded from their meetings for his military activities. A controversial figure, Mifflin lost favor with Washington and was part of the Conway Cabal, a rather notorious plan to replace Washington with General Horatio Gates. And Mifflin narrowly missed court‑martial action over his handling of funds by resigning his commission in 1778.

In spite of these problems, and of repeated charges that he was a drunkard, Mifflin continued to be elected to positions of responsibility; as President and Governor of Pennsylvania, delegate to the Constitutional Convention, as well as the highest office in the land; where he served from November 3, 1783 to November 29, 1784. Most of Mifflin's significant contributions occurred in his earlier years, in the First and Second Continental Congresses he was firm in his stand for independence and for fighting for it, and he helped obtain both men and supplies for Washington's army in the early critical period. In 1784, as President, he signed the treaty with Great Britain which ended the war. Although a delegate to the Constitutional Convention, he did not make a significant contribution, beyond signing the document.

As Governor of Pennsylvania, although he was accused of negligence, he supported improvements of roads, and reformed the State penal and judicial systems. He had gradually become sympathetic to Jefferson's principles regarding State's rights, even so, he directed the Pennsylvania militia to support the Federal tax collectors in the Whiskey Rebellion. In spite of charges of corruption, the affable Mifflin remained a popular figure. A magnetic personality and an effective speaker, he managed to hold a variety of elective offices for almost thirty years of the critical Revolutionary period.

Richard Henry Lee (1732‑1794) His resolution "that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States," approved by the Continental Congress July 2, 1776, was the first official act of the United Colonies that set them irrevocably on the road to independence. It was not surprising that it came from Lee's pen; as early as 1768 he proposed the idea of committees of correspondence among the colonies, and in 1774 he proposed that the colonies meet in what became the Continental Congress.

From the first, his eye was on independence. A wealthy Virginia planter whose ancestors had been granted extensive lands by King Charles II, Lee disdained the traditional aristocratic role and the aristocratic view.In the House of Burgesses he flatly denounced the practice of slavery. He saw independent America as "an asylum where the unhappy may find solace, and the persecuted repose."

In 1764, when news of the proposed Stamp Act reached Virginia, Lee was a member of the committee of the House of Burgesses that drew up an address to the King, an official protest against such a tax. After the tax was established, Lee organized the citizens of his county into the Westmoreland Association, a group pledged to buy no British goods until the Stamp Act was repealed. At the First Continental Congress, Lee persuaded representatives from all the colonies to adopt this non‑importation idea, leading to the formation of the Continental Association, which was one of the first steps toward union of the colonies. Lee also proposed to the First Continental Congress that a militia be organized and armed; the year before the first shots were fired at Lexington; but this and other proposals of his were considered too radical, at the time. Three days after Lee introduced his resolution, in June of 1776, he was appointed by Congress� to the committee responsible for drafting a declaration of independence, but he was called home when his wife fell ill, and his place was taken by his young prot�g�, Thomas Jefferson.

Thus Lee missed the chance to draft the document, though his influence greatly shaped it and he was able� to return in time to sign it. He was elected President, serving from November 30, 1784 to November 22, 1785 when he was succeeded by the second administration of John Hancock. Elected to the Constitutional Convention, Lee refused to attend, but as a member of the Congress of the Confederation, he contributed to another great document, the Northwest Ordinance, which provided for the formation of new States from the Northwest Territory. When the completed Constitution was sent to the States for ratification, Lee opposed it as anti‑democratic and anti‑Christian.

However, as one of Virginia's first Senators, he helped assure passage of the amendments that, he felt, corrected many of the document's gravest faults, the Bill of Rights. He was the great uncle of Robert E. Lee and the scion of a great family tradition.

Nathaniel Gorham (1738‑1796) Another self‑made man, Gorham was one of the many successful Boston merchants� who risked all he had for the cause of freedom. He was first elected to the Massachusetts General Court in 1771. His honesty and integrity won his acclaim and was thus among the first delegates chose to serve in the Continental Congress. He remained in public service throughout the war and into the Constitutional period, though his greatest contribution was his call for a stronger central government. But even though he was an avid federalist, he did not believe that the union could; or even should, be maintained peaceably for more than a hundred years.

He was convinced that eventually, in order to avoid civil or cultural war, smaller regional interests should pursue an independent course. His support of a new constitution was rooted more in pragmatism than ideology. When John Hancock was unable to complete his second term as President, Gorham was elected to succeed him, serving from June 6, 1786 to February 1, 1787.

It was during this time that the Congress actually entertained the idea of asking Prince Henry, the brother of Frederick II of Prussia, and Bonnie Prince Charlie; the leader of the ill‑fated Scottish Jacobite Rising and heir of the Stuart royal line, to consider the possibility of establishing a constitutional monarch in America. It was a plan that had much to recommend it but eventually the advocates of republicanism held the day. During the final years of his life, Gorham was concerned with several speculative land deals which nearly cost him his entire fortune.

Arthur St. Clair (1734‑1818) Born and educated in Edinburgh, Scotland during the tumultuous days of the final Jacobite Rising and the Tartan Suppression, St. Clair was the only president of the United States born and bred on foreign soil.

Though most of his family and friends abandoned their devastated homeland in the years following the Battle of Culloden; after which nearly a third of the land was depopulated through emigration to America, he stayed behind to learn the ways of the hated Hanoverian English in the Royal Navy. His plan was to learn of the enemy's military might in order to fight another day.

During the global conflict of the Seven Years War, generally known as the French and Indian War, he� was stationed in the American theater. Afterward, he decided to settle in Pennsylvania where many of his kin had established themselves. His civic‑mindedness quickly became apparent: he helped to organize both the New� Jersey and the Pennsylvania militias, led the Continental Army's Canadian expedition, and was elected Congress. His long years of training in the enemy camp was finally paying off.

He was elected President in 1787; and he served from February 2 of that year until January 21 of the next. Following his term of duty in the highest office in the land, he became the first Governor of the Northwest Territory and the founder of Cincinnati. Though he briefly supported the idea of creating a constitutional monarchy under the Stuart's Bonnie Prince Charlie, he was a strident Anti‑Federalist, believing that the proposed federal constitution would eventually allow for the intrusion of government into virtually every sphere and aspect of life.

He even predicted that under the vastly expanded centralized power of the state the taxing powers of bureaucrats and other unelected officials would eventually confiscate as much as a quarter of the income of the citizens�a notion that seemed laughable at the time but that has proven to be ominously modest in light of our current governmental leviathan.

St. Clair lived to see the hated English tyrants who destroyed his homeland defeated. But he despaired that his adopted home might actually create similar tyrannies and impose them upon themselves.

Cyrus Griffin (1736‑1796) Like Peyton Randolph, he was trained in London's Inner Temple to be a lawyer, and thus was counted among his nation's legal elite. Like so many other� Virginians, he was an anti‑federalist, though he eventually accepted the new Constitution with the promise of the Bill of Rights as a hedge against the establishment of an American monarchy, which still had a good deal of currency.

The Articles of Confederation afforded such freedoms that he had become convinced that even with the incumbent loss of liberty, some new form of government would be required. A prot�g� of George Washington� having worked with him on several speculative land deals in the West; he was a reluctant supporter of the Constitutional ratifying process. It was during his term in the office of the Presidency, the last before the new national compact went into effect, that ratification was formalized and finalized. He served as the nation's chief executive from January 22, 1788 until George Washington's inauguration on April 30, 1789.

 

---