Many people ask why and think about eye by eye

[Roland Kunz]

Hello

Many people ask why and think about eye by eye.

Now they just follow the old tracks and the terrorists also where thinking to have a right to pay something back. The signs had been on the wall since months at least in germany we seem to be more sensitive to some things. It is just a 8 hour drive to Bosnia, Stuttgart was within the attaczone from the Iraq missles and also could have ben hit by Milosevic´s Army.

In July Bin Laden made big words and black clouds where allready to see.

Now following are just two puzzle pieces, i can´t rate the values.

Grüsse

DEBKAfile Exclusive
Peres-Arafat Rendezvous Cliffhanger
10 September 2001

Two key Middle East rendezvous - the one between the Israeli foreign minister Shimon Peres and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat September 11 and Arafat's visit to Damascus on September 12 - are in preparation under the shadow of a large-scale military buildup for a possible twin offensive against key Palestinian targets in Jenin and Tulkarem on the West Bank, as well as the Gaza Strip locations of Gaza City, seat of the Palestinian Authority, and Rafah.

Monday night, Palestinian sources reported Israel tank, infantry and air force helicopters massed in both locations and poised for attack.

Arafat has proved as slippery as an eel in avoiding an encounter with Shimon Peres. Yet the Europeans, spearheaded by the EU foreign affairs chief Javier Solana, believed Monday they had finally bagged him. If they are right, the encounter will take place in the next 24 hours although the venue is still up in the air. The sounds of victory in Brussels were strongly echoed at the special headquarters Peres set up for Arafat's ensnarement. DEBKAfile's political sources name its members as former justice minister and Peres right hand, Dr. Yossi Bailin, a second right hand, Uri Savir, and the foreign ministry's director general Avi Gil. All three are ardent pro-Oslo activists and have never swerved from deeming Arafat Israel's "peace partner", through the thick and thin of the most violent terrorist campaign ever mounted anywhere.

The Israeli prime minister's most constant political antagonists are therefore being allowed to run his government's short-term foreign policy strategy, an anomaly which has much to do with Ariel Sharon's inborn cynicism.

To snare Arafat, the tacticians employed by Solana and Peres took advantage of his longed-for historic interview in Damascus with President Bashar Assad. Though due on September 12, Assad is still keeping the Palestinian leader sitting on the edge of his seat. Assad suspects Arafat will lead him up the garden path, while Arafat is preparing for Assad's traps.

To impress Assad with his uncompromising anti-Israeli bona fides, the Palestinian leader staged Sunday's unprecedented series of rapid-fire terrorist bombings in three separate Israeli locations. According to DEBKAfile's intelligence sources, the confidential reports reaching the Israeli prime minister's office leave no doubt that the series was orchestrated from start to finish by Arafat himself.

Sending an Israeli Arab suicide to bomb the Nahariya railway station had two motives: one to demonstrate to what lengths Arafat was prepared to go in waging war against Israel - sacrificing one of the high cards he was saving for a later stage in the conflict. The other was to raise his clout in the eyes of the Syrian leadership by boasting possession of the key for manipulating the Israeli Arab community. To buy a position of influence with the Israeli Arabs, the Syrians, Arafat was saying, would do better to deal with him rather than the Hizballah or the Jihad Islami. In another gesture towards Damascus, Arafat employed for the first Palestinian strike of Sunday agents of Mussa Arafat's military intelligence service to bomb the Israeli military outpost near the Erez crossing into the Gaza Strip. The bomber himself was said to have acted in the name of the Damascus-based Democratic Front, a mark of respect for the Palestinian group that operates under Syrian military intelligence auspices.

Arafat also stayed away from the Arab foreign ministers session in Cairo Sunday in order to show the Syrian president he is a free agent and not dependent on Egyptian patronage.

The Europeans are willing to buy Arafat's explanation of the importance of his meeting Assad - he claims he must go to Damascus to moderate the Syrian leader's extreme views. Nonetheless, they handed him an ultimatum: Get together with Peres before going to Damascus - or else face the cutoff of aid from European nations including France, Germany and Spain. Since Arafat is not over-endowed with foreign aid at this moment, especially from his Arab brethren, he is expected to think twice before defying the Europeans.

But his consent to see Peres before going to Damascus will be hedged round with at least one condition - a demand that the meeting take place at Taba, Cairo or Sharm El-Sheikh, all places were diplomatic negotiations led nowhere after major Israeli concessions. In this way, he will try and show the world that he can force Peres and Sharon to swallow the continuation of diplomatic negotiations at those break-off points.

Sharon is standing fast against that subterfuge. Otherwise he is not averse to his foreign minister meeting with the Palestinian leader, since according to the intelligence reports on his desk, the meeting will get exactly nowhere and Peres will be left with nothing to show for his Herculean effort to persuade Arafat to meet him. That will be a point up for Sharon.

The meeting will be a waste of time chiefly because Arafat's intentions are unchanged.

Before leaving for Damascus, Sharon has been told by intelligence sources, the Palestinian leader will leave instructions for a fresh wave of terrorist attacks to accompany his talks with Syrian leaders. Unless of course Sharon pre-empts that offensive with one of his own.

DEBKAfile
Political Analysis, Espionage, Terrorism, Security

kokhaviv publications > The Israel Archive


-------------------------------------------------------


International War Crimes Tribunal
United States War Crimes Against Iraq

Initial Complaint
Charging

George Bush, J. Danforth Quayle, James Baker,
Richard Cheney, William Webster, Colin Powell,
Norman Schwarzkopf and Others to be named
With

Crimes Against Peace, War Crimes, Crimes Against
Humanity and Other Criminal Acts and High Crimes in
Violation of the Charter of the United Nations,
International Law, the Constitution of the United States
and Laws made in Pursuance Thereof.

Preliminary Statement
These charges have been prepared prior to the first hearing of the Commission of Inquiry by its staff. They are based on direct and circumstantial evidence from public and private documents; official statements and admissions by the persons charged and others; eyewitness accounts; Commission investigations and witness interviews in Iraq, the Middle East and elsewhere during and after the bombing; photographs and video tape; expert analyses; commentary and interviews; media coverage, published reports and accounts gathered between December 1990 and May l991. Commission of Inquiry hearings will be held in key cities where evidence is available supporting, expanding, adding, contradicting, disproving or explaining these, or similar charges against the accused and others of whatever nationality. When evidence sufficient to sustain convictions of the accused or others is obtained and after demanding the production of documents from the U.S. government, and others, and requesting testimony from the accused, offering them a full opportunity to present any defense personally, or by counsel, the evidence will be presented to an International War Crimes Tribunal. The Tribunal will consider the evidence gathered, seek and examine whatever additional evidence it chooses and render its judgment on the charges, the evidence, and the law.
Background
Since World War I, the United Kingdom, France, and the United States have dominated the Arabian Peninsula and Gulf region and its oil resources. This has been accomplished by military conquest and coercion, economic control and exploitation, and through surrogate governments and their military forces. Thus, from 1953 to 1979 in the post World War II era, control over the region was exercised primarily through U.S. influence and control over the Gulf sheikdoms of Saudi Arabia and through the Shah of Iran. From 1953 to 1979 the Shah of Iran acted as a Pentagon/CIA surrogate to police the region. After the fall of the Shah and the seizure of U.S. Embassy hostages in Teheran, the U.S. provided military aid and assistance to Iraq, as did the USSR, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and most of the Emirates, in its war with Iran. U.S. policy during that tragic eight year war, 1980 - 1988, is probably best summed up by the phrase, "we hope they kill each other."
Throughout the seventy-five year period from Britain's invasion of Iraq early in World War I to the destruction of Iraq in 1991 by U.S. air power, the United States and the United Kingdom demonstrated no concern for democratic values, human rights, social justice, or political and cultural integrity in the region, nor for stopping military aggression there. The U.S. supported the Shah of Iran for 25 years, selling him more than $20 billion of advanced military equipment between 1972 and 1978 alone. Throughout this period the Shah and his brutal secret police called SAVAK had one of the worst human rights records in the world. Then in the 1980s, the U.S. supported Iraq in its wrongful aggression against Iran, ignoring Iraq's own poor human rights record.[l]

When the Iraqi government nationalized the Iraqi Petroleum Company in 1972, the Nixon Administration embarked on a campaign to destabilize the Iraqi government. It was in the 1970s that the U.S. first armed and then abandoned the Kurdish people, costing tens of thousands of Kurdish lives. The U.S. manipulated the Kurds through CIA and other agencies to attack Iraq, intending to harass Iraq while maintaining Iranian supremacy at the cost of Kurdish lives without intending any benefit to the Kurdish people or an autonomous Kurdistan.[2]

The U.S. with close oil and other economic ties to Saudi Arabia and Kuwait has fully supported both governments despite the total absence of democratic institutions, their pervasive human rights violations and the infliction of cruel, inhuman and degrading punishments such as stoning to death for adultery and amputation of a hand for property offenses.

The U.S., sometimes alone among nations, supported Israel when it defied scores of UN resolutions concerning Palestinian rights, when it invaded Lebanon in a war which took tens of thousands of lives, and during its continuing occupation of southern Lebanon, the Golan Heights, the West Bank and Gaza.

The United States itself engaged in recent aggressions in violation of international law by invading Grenada in 1983, bombing Tripoli and Benghazi in Libya in 1986, financing the contra in Nicaragua, UNITA in southern Africa and supporting military dictatorships in Liberia, Chile, E1 Salvador, Guatemala, the Philippines, and many other places.

The U.S. invasion of Panama in December 1989 involved the same and additional violations of international law that apply to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. The U.S. invasion took between 1,000 and 4,000 Panamanian lives. The United States government is still covering up the death toll. U.S. aggression caused massive property destruction throughout Panama.[3] According to U.S. and international human rights organization estimates, Kuwait's casualties from Iraq's invasion and the ensuing months of occupation were in the "hundreds" - between 300 and 600.[4] Reports from Kuwait list 628 Palestinians killed by Kuwaiti death squads since the Sabah royal family regained control over Kuwait.

The United States changed its military plans for protecting its control over oil and other interests in the Arabian Peninsula in the late 1980s when it became clear that economic problems in the USSR were debilitating its military capacity and Soviet forces withdrew from Afghanistan. Thereafter, direct military domination within the region became the U.S. strategy.

With the decline in U.S. oil production through 1989, experts predicted U.S. oil imports from the Gulf would rise from 10% that year to 25% by the year 2000. Japanese and European dependency is much greater.[5]

The Charges
1. The United States engaged in a pattern of conduct beginning in or before 1989 intended to lead Iraq into provocations justifying U.S. military action against Iraq and permanent U.S. military domination of the Gulf.
In 1989, General Colin Powell, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and General Norman Schwarzkopf, Commander in Chief of the Central Command, completely revised U.S. military operations and plans for the Persian Gulf to prepare to intervene in a regional conflict against Iraq. The CIA assisted and directed Kuwait in its actions. At the time, Kuwait was violating OPEC oil production agreements, extracting excessive amounts of oil from pools shared with Iraq and demanding repayment of loans it made to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war. Kuwait broke off negotiations with Iraq over these disputes. The U.S. intended to provoke Iraq into actions against Kuwait that would justify U.S. intervention.
In 1989, CIA Director William Webster testified before the Congress about the alarming increase in U.S. importation of Gulf oil, citing U.S. rise in use from 5% in 1973 to 10% in 1989 and predicting 25% of all U.S. oil consumption would come from the region by 2000.[6] In early 1990, General Schwarzkopf informed the Senate Armed Services Committee of the new military strategy in the Gulf designed to protect U.S. access to and control over Gulf oil in the event of regional conflicts.

In July 1990, General Schwarzkopf and his staff ran elaborate, computerized war games pitting about 100,000 U.S. troops against Iraqi armored divisions.

The U.S. showed no opposition to Iraq's increasing threats against Kuwait. U.S. companies sought major contracts in Iraq. The Congress approved agricultural loan subsidies to Iraq of hundreds of millions of dollars to benefit U.S. farmers. However, loans for food deliveries of rice, corn, wheat and other essentials bought almost exclusively from the U.S. were cut off in the spring of 1990 to cause shortages. Arms were sold to Iraq by U.S. manufacturers. When Saddam Hussein requested U.S. Ambassador April Glaspie to explain State Department testimony in Congress about lraq's threats against Kuwait, she assured him the U.S. considered the dispute a regional concern, and it would not intervene. By these acts, the U.S. intended to lead Iraq into a provocation justifying war.

On August 2, 1990, Iraq occupied Kuwait without significant resistance.

On August 3, 1990, without any evidence of a threat to Saudi Arabia, and King Fahd believed Iraq had no intention of invading his country, President Bush vowed to defend Saudi Arabia. He sent Secretary Cheney, General Powell, and General Schwarzkopf almost immediately to Saudi Arabia where on August 6, General Schwarzkopf told King Fahd the U.S. thought Saddam Hussein could attack Saudi Arabia in as little as 48 hours. The efforts toward an Arab solution of the crisis were destroyed. Iraq never attacked Saudi Arabia and waited over five months while the U.S. slowly built a force of more than 500,000 soldiers and began the systematic destruction by aircraft and missiles of Iraq and its military, both defenseless against U.S. and coalition technology. In October 1990, General Powell referred to the new military plan developed in 1989. After the war, General Schwarzkopf referred to eighteen months of planning for the campaign.

The U.S. retains troops in Iraq as of May 1991 and throughout the region and has announced its intention to maintain a permanent military presence.

This course of conduct constitutes a crime against peace.

2. President Bush from August 2, 1990, intended and acted to prevent any interference with his plan to destroy Iraq economically and militarily.
Without consultation or communication with Congress, President Bush ordered 40,000 U.S. military personnel to advance the U.S. buildup in Saudi Arabia in the first week of August 1990. He exacted a request from Saudi Arabia for U.S. military assistance and on August 8, 1990, assured the world his acts were "wholly defensive." He waited until after the November 1990 elections to announce his earlier order sending more than 200,000 additional military personnel, clearly an assault force, again without advising Congress. As late as January 9, 1991, he insisted he had the constitutional authority to attack Iraq without Congressional approval.
While concealing his intention, President Bush continued the military build up of U.S. forces unabated from August into January 1991, intending to attack and destroy Iraq. He pressed the military to expedite preparation and to commence the assault before military considerations were optimum. When Air Force Chief of Staff General Michael J. Dugan mentioned plans to destroy the Iraqi civilian economy to the press on September 16, 1990, he was removed from office.[7]

President Bush coerced the United Nations Security Council into an unprecedented series of resolutions, finally securing authority for any nation in its absolute discretion by all necessary means to enforce the resolutions. To secure votes the U.S. paid multi-billion dollar bribes, offered arms for regional wars, threatened and carried out economic retaliation, forgave multi-billion dollar loans (including a $7 billion loan to Egypt for arms), offered diplomatic relations despite human rights violations and in other ways corruptly exacted votes, creating the appearance of near universal international approval of U.S. policies toward Iraq. A country which opposed the U.S., as Yemen did, lost millions of dollars in aid, as promised, the costliest vote it ever cast.

President Bush consistently rejected and ridiculed Iraq's efforts to negotiate a peaceful resolution, beginning with Iraq's August 12, 1990, proposal, largely ignored, and ending with its mid-February 1991 peace offer which he called a "cruel hoax." For his part, President Bush consistently insisted there would be no negotiation, no compromise, no face saving, no reward for aggression. Simultaneously, he accused Saddam Hussein of rejecting diplomatic solutions.

President Bush led a sophisticated campaign to demonize Saddam Hussein, calling him a Hitler, repeatedly citing reports - which he knew were false - of the murder of hundreds of incubator babies, accusing Iraq of using chemical weapons on his own people and on the Iranians knowing U.S intelligence believed the reports untrue.

After subverting every effort for peace, President Bush began the destruction of Iraq answering his own question, "Why not wait? . . . The world could wait no longer." The course of conduct constitutes a crime against peace.

3. President Bush ordered the destruction of facilities essential to civilian life and economic productivity throughout Iraq.
Systematic aerial and missile bombardment of Iraq was ordered to begin at 6:30 p.m. EST January 16, 1991, eighteen and one-half hours after the deadline set on the insistence of President Bush, in order to be reported on television evening news in the U.S. The bombing continued for forty-two days. It met no resistance from Iraqi aircraft and no effective anti-aircraft or anti-missile ground fire. Iraq was defenseless.
The United States reports it flew 110,000 air sorties against Iraq, dropping 88,000 tons of bombs, nearly seven times the equivalent of the atomic bomb that destroyed Hiroshima. 93% of the bombs were free falling bombs, most dropped from higher than 30,000 feet. Of the remaining 7% of the bombs with electronically guided systems, more than 25% missed their targets, nearly all caused damage primarily beyond any identifiable target. Most of the targets were civilian facilities.

The intention and effort of the bombing of civilian life and facilities was to systematically destroy Iraq's infrastructure leaving it in a preindustrial condition. Iraq's civilian population was dependent on industrial capacities. The U.S. assault left Iraq in a near apocalyptic condition as reported by the first United Nations observers after the war.[8] Among the facilities targeted and destroyed were:

electric power generation, relay and transmission;
water treatment, pumping and distribution systems and reservoirs;
telephone and radio exchanges, relay stations, towers and transmission facilities;
food processing, storage and distribution facilities and markets, infant milk formula and beverage plants, animal vaccination facilities and irrigation sites;
railroad transportation facilities, bus depots, bridges, highway overpasses, highways, highway repair stations, trains, buses and other public transportation vehicles, commercial and private vehicles;
oil wells and pumps, pipelines, refineries, oil storage tanks, gasoline filling stations and fuel delivery tank cars and trucks, and kerosene storage tanks;
sewage treatment and disposal systems;
factories engaged in civilian production, e.g., textile and automobile assembly; and
historical markers and ancient sites.
As a direct, intentional and foreseeable result of this destruction, tens of thousands of people have died from dehydration, dysentery and diseases caused by impure water, inability to obtain effective medical assistance and debilitation from hunger, shock, cold and stress. More will die until potable water, sanitary living conditions, adequate food supplies and other necessities are provided. There is a high risk of epidemics of cholera, typhoid, hepatitis and other diseases as well as starvation and malnutrition through the summer of 1991 and until food supplies are adequate and essential services are restored.
Only the United States could have carried out this destruction of Iraq, and the war was conducted almost exclusively by the United States. This conduct violated the UN Charter, the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the Nuremberg Charter, and the laws of armed conflict.

4. The United States intentionally bombed and destroyed civilian life, commercial and business districts, schools, hospitals, mosques, churches, shelters, residential areas, historical sites, private vehicles and civilian government offices.
The destruction of civilian facilities left the entire civilian population without heat, cooking fuel, refrigeration, potable water, telephones, power for radio or TV reception, public transportation and fuel for private automobiles. It also limited food supplies, closed schools, created massive unemployment, severely limited economic activity and caused hospitals and medical services to shut down. In addition, residential areas of every major city and most towns and villages were targeted and destroyed. Isolated Bedouin camps were attacked by U.S. aircraft. In addition to deaths and injuries, the aerial assault destroyed 10 - 20,000 homes, apartments and other dwellings. Commercial centers with shops, retail stores, offices, hotels, restaurants and other public accommodations were targeted and thousands were destroyed. Scores of schools, hospitals, mosques and churches were damaged or destroyed. Thousands of civilian vehicles on highways, roads and parked on streets and in garages were targeted and destroyed. These included public buses, private vans and mini-buses, trucks, tractor trailers, lorries, taxi cabs and private cars. The purpose of this bombing was to terrorize the entire country, kill people, destroy property, prevent movement, demoralize the people and force the overthrow of the government.
As a result of the bombing of facilities essential to civilian life, residential and other civilian buildings and areas, at least 125,000 men, women and children were killed. The Red Crescent Society of Jordan estimated 113,000 civilian dead, 60% children, the week before the end of the war.

The conduct violated the UN Charter, the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the Nuremberg Charter, and the laws of armed conflict.

5. The United States intentionally bombed indiscriminately throughout Iraq.
In aerial attacks, including strafing, over cities, towns, the countryside and highways, U.S. aircraft bombed and strafed indiscriminately. In every city and town bombs fell by chance far from any conceivable target, whether a civilian facility, military installation or military target. In the countryside random attacks were made on travelers, villagers, even Bedouins. The purpose of the attacks was to destroy life, property and terrorize the civilian population. On the highways, civilian vehicles including public buses taxicabs and passenger cars were bombed and strafed at random to frighten civilians from flight, from seeking food or medical care, finding relatives or other uses of highways. The effect was summary execution and corporal punishment indiscriminately of men, women and children, young and old, rich and poor, all nationalities including the large immigrant populations even Americans, all ethnic groups, including many Kurds and Assyrians, all religions including Shia and Sunni Moslems, Chaldeans and other Christians, and Jews. U.S. deliberate indifference to civilian and military casualties in Iraq, or their nature, is exemplified by General Colin Powell's response to a press inquiry about the number dead from the air and ground campaigns: "It's really not a number I'm terribly interested in."[9]
The conduct violates Protocol I Additional, Article 51.4 to the Geneva Conventions of 1977.

6. The United States intentionally bombed and destroyed Iraqi military personnel, used excessive force, killed soldiers seeking to surrender and in disorganized individual flight, often unarmed and far from any combat zones and randomly and wantonly killed Iraqi soldiers and destroyed materiel after the cease fire.
In the first hours of the aerial and missile bombardment, the United States destroyed most military communications and began the systematic killing of soldiers who were incapable of defense or escape and the destruction of military equipment. Over a period of forty-two days, U.S bombing killed tens of thousands of defenseless soldiers, cut off most of their food, water and other supplies and left them in desperate and helpless disarray. Without significant risk to its own personnel, the U.S. led in the killing of at least 100,000 Iraqi soldiers at a cost of 148 U.S. combat casualties, according to the U.S. government. When it was determined that the civilian economy and the military were sufficiently destroyed, the U.S. ground forces moved into Kuwait and Iraq attacking disoriented disorganized, fleeing Iraqi forces wherever they could be found, killing thousands more and destroying any equipment found. The slaughter continued after the cease fire. For example, on March 2, 1991, U.S. 24th Division Forces engaged in a four-hour assault against Iraqis just west of Basra. More than 750 vehicles were destroyed, thousands were killed without U.S. casualties. A U.S. commander said, "We really waxed them." It was called a "Turkey Shoot." One Apache helicopter crew member yelled "Say hello to Allah" as he launched a laser-guided Hellfire missile.[10]
The intention was not to remove Iraq's presence from Kuwait. It was to destroy Iraq. In the process there was great destruction of property in Kuwait. The disproportion in death and destruction inflicted on a defenseless enemy exceeded 1,000 to one.

General Thomas Kelly commented on February 23, 1991, that by the time the ground war begins "there won't be many of them left." General Norman Schwarzkopf placed Iraqi military casualties at over 100,000. The intention was to destroy all military facilities and equipment wherever located and to so decimate the military age male population that Iraq could not raise a substantial force for half a generation.

The conduct violated the Charter of the United Nations, the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the Nuremberg Charter, and the laws of armed conflict.

7. The United States used prohibited weapons capable of mass destruction and inflicting indiscriminate death and unnecessary suffering against both military and civilian targets.
Among the known illegal weapons and illegal uses of weapons employed by the United States are the following:
fuel air explosives capable of widespread incineration and death;
napalm;
cluster and anti-personnel fragmentation bombs; and
"superbombs," 2.5 ton devices, intended for assassination of government leaders.
Fuel air explosives were used against troops-in-place, civilian areas, oil fields and fleeing civilians and soldiers on two stretches of highway between Kuwait and Iraq. Included in fuel air weapons used was the BLU-82, a 15,000-pound device capable of incinerating everything within hundreds of yards.
One seven mile stretch called the "Highway of Death" was littered with hundreds of vehicles and thousands of dead. All were fleeing to Iraq for their lives. Thousands were civilians of all ages, including Kuwaitis, Iraqis, Palestinians, Jordanians and other nationalities. Another 60-mile stretch of road to the east was strewn with the remnants of tanks, armored cars, trucks, ambulances and thousands of bodies following an attack on convoys on the night of February 25, 1991. The press reported that no survivors are known or likely. One flatbed truck contained nine bodies, their hair and clothes were burned off, skin incinerated by heat so intense it melted the windshield onto the dashboard.

Napalm was used against civilians, military personnel and to start fires. Oil well fires in both Iraq and Kuwait were intentionally started by U.S. aircraft dropping napalm and other heat intensive devices.

Cluster and anti-personnel fragmentation bombs were used in Basra and other cities, and towns, against the convoys described above and against military units. The CBU-75 carries 1,800 bomblets called Sadeyes. One type of Sadeyes can explode before hitting the ground, on impact, or be timed to explode at different times after impact. Each bomblet contains 600 razor sharp steel fragments lethal up to 40 feet. The 1,800 bomblets from one CBU-75 can cover an area equal to 157 football fields with deadly shrapnel. "Superbombs" were dropped on hardened shelters, at least two in the last days of the assault, with the intention of assassinating President Saddam Hussein. One was misdirected. It was not the first time the Pentagon targeted a head of state. In April 1986, the U.S. attempted to assassinate Col. Muammar Qaddafi by laser directed bombs in its attack on Tripoli, Libya.

Illegal weapons killed thousands of civilians and soldiers.

The conduct violated the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the Nuremberg Charter and the laws of armed conflict.

8. The United States intentionally attacked installations in Iraq containing dangerous substances and forces.
Despite the fact that Iraq used no nuclear or chemical weapons and in the face of UN resolutions limiting the authorized means of removing Iraqi forces from Kuwait, the U.S. intentionally bombed alleged nuclear sites, chemical plants, dams and other dangerous forces. The U.S. knew such attacks could cause the release of dangerous forces from such installations and consequent severe losses among the civilian population. While some civilians were killed in such attacks, there are no reported cases of consequent severe losses presumably because lethal nuclear materials and dangerous chemical and biological warfare substances were not present at the sites bombed.
The conduct violates Protocol I Additional, Article 56, to the Geneva Convention, 1977.

9. President Bush ordered U.S. forces to invade Panama, resulting in the deaths of 1,000 to 4,000 Panamanians and the destruction of thousands of private dwellings, public buildings, and commercial structures.
On December 20, 1989, President Bush ordered a military assault on Panama using aircraft, artillery, helicopter gunships and experimenting with new weapons, including the Stealth bomber. The attack was a surprise assault targeting civilian and non-combatant government structures. In the E1 Chorillo district of Panama City alone, hundreds of civilians were killed and between 15,000 and 30,000 made homeless. U.S. soldiers buried dead Panamanians in mass graves, often without identification. The head of state, Manuel Noriega, who was systematically demonized by the U.S. government and press, ultimately surrendered to U.S. forces and was brought to Miami, Florida, on extra-territorial U.S. criminal charges.
The U.S. invasion of Panama violated all the international laws Iraq violated when it invaded Kuwait and more. Many more Panamanians were killed by U.S. forces than Iraq killed Kuwaitis.

President Bush violated the Charter of the United Nations, the Hague and Geneva Conventions, committed crimes against peace, war crimes and violated the U.S.Constitution and numerous U.S. criminal statutes in ordering and directing the assault on Panama.

10. President Bush obstructed justice and corrupted United Nations functions as a means of securing power to commit crimes against peace and war crimes.
President Bush caused the United Nations to completely bypass Chapter VI provisions of its Charter for the Pacific Settlement of Disputes. This was done in order to obtain Security Council resolutions authorizing the use of all necessary means, in the absolute discretion of any nation, to fulfill UN resolutions directed against Iraq and which were used to destroy Iraq. To obtain Security Council votes, the U.S. corruptly paid member nations billions of dollars, provided them arms to conduct regional wars, forgave billions in debts, withdrew opposition to a World Bank loan, agreed to diplomatic relations despite human rights violations and threatened economic and political reprisals. A nation which voted against the United States, Yemen, was immediately punished by the loss of millions of dollars in aid. The U.S. paid the UN $187 million to reduce the amount of dues it owed to the UN to avoid criticism of its coercive activities. The United Nations, created to end the scourge of war, became an instrument of war and condoned war crimes.
The conduct violates the Charter of the United Nations and the Constitution and laws of the United States.

11. President Bush usurped the Constitutional power of Congress as a means of securing power to commit crimes against peace, war crimes, and other high crimes.
President Bush intentionally usurped Congressional power, ignored its authority, and failed and refused to consult with the Congress. He deliberately misled, deceived, concealed and made false representations to the Congress to prevent its free deliberation and informed exercise of legislature power. President Bush individually ordered a naval blockade against Iraq, itself an act of war. He switched U.S. forces from a wholly defensive position and capability to an offensive capacity for aggression against Iraq without consultation with and contrary to assurances given to the Congress. He secured legislation approving enforcement of UN resolutions vesting absolute discretion in any nation, providing no guidelines and requiring no reporting to the UN, knowing he intended to destroy the ammed forces and civilian economy of Iraq. Those acts were undertaken to enable him to commit crimes against peace and war crimes.
The conduct violates the Constitution and laws of the United States, all committed to engage in the other impeachable offenses set forth in this Complaint.

12. The United States waged war on the environment.
Pollution from the detonation of 88,000 tons of bombs, innumerable missiles, rockets, artillery and small arms with the combustion and fires they caused and by 110,000 air sorties at a rate of nearly two per minute for six weeks has caused enormous injury to life and the ecology. Attacks by U.S. aircraft caused much if not all of the worst oil spills in the Gulf. Aircraft and helicopters dropping napalm and fuel-air explosives on oil wells, storage tanks and refineries caused oil fires throughout Iraq and many, if not most, of the oil well fires in Iraq and Kuwait. The intentional destruction of municipal water systems, waste material treatment and sewage disposal systems constitutes a direct and continuing assault on life and health throughout Iraq.
The conduct violated the UN Charter, the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the laws of ammed conflict and constituted war crimes and crimes against humanity.

13. President Bush encouraged and aided Shiite Muslims and Kurds to rebel against the government of Iraq causing fratricidal violence, emigration, exposure, hunger and sickness and thousands of deaths. After the rebellion failed, the U.S. invaded and occupied parts of Iraq without authority in order to increase division and hostility within Iraq.
Without authority from the Congress or the UN, President Bush continued his imperious military actions after the cease fire. He encouraged and aided rebellion against Iraq, failed to protect the warring parties, encouraged migration of whole populations, placing them in jeopardy from the elements, hunger, and disease. After much suffering and many deaths, President Bush then without authority used U.S. military forces to distribute aid at and near the Turkish border, ignoring the often greater suffering among refugees in Iran. He then arbitrarily set up bantustan-like settlements for Kurds in Iraq and demanded Iraq pay for U.S. costs. When Kurds chose to return to their homes in Iraq, he moved U.S. troops further into northern Iraq against the will of the government and without authority.
The conduct violated the Charter of the United Nations, international law, the Constitution and laws of the United States, and the laws of Iraq.

14. President Bush intentionally deprived the Iraqi people of essential medicines, potable water, food, and other necessities.
A major component of the assault on Iraq was the systematic deprivation of essential human needs and services. To break the will of the people, destroy their economic capability, reduce their numbers and weaken their health, the United States:
imposed and enforced embargoes preventing the shipment of needed medicines, water purifiers, infant milk formula, food and other supplies;
individually, without congressional authority, ordered a U.S. naval blockade of Iraq, an act of war, to deprive the Iraqi people of needed supplies;
froze funds of Iraq and forced other nations to do so, depriving Iraq of the ability to purchase needed medicines, food and other supplies;
controlled information about the urgent need for such supplies to prevent sickness, death and threatened epidemic, endangering the whole society;
prevented international organizations, governments and relief agencies from providing needed supplies and obtaining information concerning needs;
failed to assist or meet urgent needs of huge refugee populations including Egyptians, Indians, Pakistanis, Yemenis, Sudanese, Jordanians, Palestinians, Sri Lankans, Filipinos, and interfered with efforts of others to do so;
consistently diverted attention from health and epidemic threats within Iraq caused by the U.S. even after advertising the plight of Kurdish people on the Turkish border;
deliberately bombed the electrical grids causing the closure of hospitals and laboratories, loss of medicine and essential fluids and blood; and
deliberately bombed food storage, fertilizer, and seed storage facilities.
As a result of these acts, thousands of people died, many more suffered illness and permanent injury. As a single illustration, Iraq consumed infant milk formula at a rate of 2,500 tons per month during the first seven months of 1990. From November 1, 1990, to February 7, 1991, Iraq was able to import only 17 tons. Its own productive capacity was destroyed. Many Iraqis believed that President Bush intended that their infants die because he targeted their food supply. The Red Crescent Society of Iraq estimated 3,000 infant deaths as of February 7, 1991, resulting from infant milk formula and infant medication shortages.
This conduct violates the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other covenants and constitutes a crime against humanity.

15. The United States continued its assault on Iraq after the cease fire, invading and occupying areas at will.
The United States has acted with dictatorial authority over Iraq and its external relations since the end of the military conflict. It has shot and killed Iraqi military personnel, destroyed aircraft and materiel at will, occupied vast areas of Iraq in the north and south and consistently threatened use of force against Iraq.
This conduct violates the sovereignty of a nation, exceeds authority in UN resolutions, is unauthorized by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and constitutes war crimes.

16. The United States has violated and condoned violations of human rights, civil liberties and the U.S. Bill of Rights in the United States, in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere to achieve its purpose of military domination.
Among the many violations committed or condoned by the U.S. government are the following:
illegal surveillance, arrest, interrogation and harassment of Arab-American, Iraqi-American, and U.S. resident Arabs;
illegal detention, interrogation and treatment of Iraqi prisoners of war;
aiding and condoning Kuwaiti summary executions, assaults, torture and illegal detention of Palestinians and other residents in Kuwait after the U.S. occupation; and
unwarranted, discriminatory, and excessive prosecution and punishment of U.S. military personnel who refused to serve in the Gulf, sought conscientious objector status or protested U.S. policies.
Persons were killed, assaulted, tortured, illegally detained and prosecuted, harassed and humiliated as a result of these policies.
The conduct violates the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights , the Hague and Geneva Conventions and the Constitution and laws of the United States.

17. The United States, having destroyed Iraq's economic base, demands reparations which will permanently impoverish Iraq and threaten its people with famine and epidemic.
Having destroyed lives, property and essential civilian facilities in Iraq which the U.S. concedes will require $50 billion to replace (estimated at $200 billion by Iraq, killed at least 125,000 people by bombing and many thousands more by sickness and hunger, the U.S. now seeks to control Iraq economically even as its people face famine and epidemic.[l1] Damages, including casualties in Iraq, systematically inflicted by the U.S. exceed all damages, casualties and costs of all other parties to the conflict combined many times over. Reparations under these conditions are an exaction of tribute for the conqueror from a desperately needy country. The United States seeks to force Iraq to pay for damage to Kuwait largely caused by the U.S. and even to pay U.S. costs for its violations of Iraqi sovereignty in occupying northern Iraq to further manipulate the Kurdish population there. Such reparations are a neocolonial means of expropriating Iraq's oil, natural resources, and human labor.
The conduct violates the Charter of the United Nations and the Constitution and laws of the United States.

18. President Bush systematically manipulated, controlled, directed, misinformed and restricted press and media coverage to obtain constant support in the media for his military and political goals.
The Bush Administration achieved a five-month-long commercial for militarism and individual weapons systems. The American people were seduced into the celebration of a slaughter by controlled propaganda demonizing Iraq, assuring the world no harm would come to Iraqi civilians, deliberately spreading false stories of atrocities including chemical warfare threats, deaths of incubator babies and threats to the entire region by a new Hitler.
The press received virtually all its information from or by permission of the Pentagon. Efforts were made to prevent any adverse information or opposition views from being heard. CNN's limited presence in Baghdad was described as Iraqi propaganda. Independent observers, eyewitnesses' photos, and video tapes with information about the effects of the U.S. bombing were excluded from the media. Television network ownership, advertizers, newspaper ownership, elite columnists and commentators intimidated and instructed reporters and selected interviewees. They formed a near-single voice of praise for U.S. militarism, often exceeding the Pentagon in bellicosity.

The American people and their democratic institutions were deprived of information essential to sound judgment and were regimented, despite profound concem, to support a major neocolonial intervention and war of aggression. The principal purpose of the First Amendment to the United States was to assure the press and the people the right to criticize their government with impunity. This purpose has been effectively destroyed in relation to U.S. military aggression since the press was denied access to assaults on Grenada, Libya, Panama and, now on a much greater scale, against Iraq.

This conduct violates the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and is part of a pattern of conduct intended to create support for conduct constituting crimes against peace and war crimes.

19. The United States has by force secured a permanent military presence in the Gulf, the control of its oil resources and geopolitical domination of the Arabian Peninsula and Gulf region.
The U.S. has committed the acts described in this complaint to create a permanent U.S. military presence in the Persian Gulf, to dominate its oil resources until depleted and to maintain geopolitical domination over the region.
The conduct violates the Charter of the United Nations, international law, and the Constitution and laws of the United States.

Scope of the Inquiry
The Commission of Inquiry will focus on U.S. criminal conduct because of its destruction of Iraq, killing at least 125,000 persons directly by its bombing while proclaiming its own combat losses as 148, because it destroyed the economic base of Iraq and because its acts are still inflicting consequential deaths that may reach hundreds of thousands. The Commission of Inquiry will seek and accept evidence of criminal acts by any person or government, related to the Gulf conflict, because it believes international law must be applied uniformly. It believes that "victors' justice" is not law, but the extension of war by force of the prevailing party. The U.S. Senate, European Community foreign ministers, and the western press, even former Nuremberg prosecutors, have overwhelmingly called for war crimes trials for Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi leadership alone. Even Mrs. Barbara Bush has said she would like to see Saddam Hussein hanged, albeit without mentioning a trial. Comprehensive efforts to gather and evaluate evidence, objectively judge all the conduct that constitutes crimes against peace and war crimes and to present these facts for judgment to the court of world opinion requires that at least one major effort focus on the United States. The Commission of Inquiry believes its focus on U.S. criminal acts is important, proper, and the only way to bring the whole truth, a balanced perspective and impartiality in application of legal process to this great human tragedy.
Ramsey Clark
May 9, 1991

Final Judgement: International War Crimes Tribunal

The Basis in International Law
Testimony and Evidence
International Law
Notes
Covert Operations: The Persian Gulf and the New World Order (Washington, DC: Christic Institute, 1991).
Rhodri Jeffreys-Jones, The CIA and American Democracy (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), p. 206.
Independent Commission of Inquiry on the U.S. Invasion of Panama, The U.S. Invasion of Panama: The Truth Behind Operation Just Cause(Boston: South End Press, 1990).
Amnesty International Reports, 1991, pp. 122-124.
Congressional Record, June 12, 1990, S8605.
"Saddam's Oil Plot." London Observer, October 21, 1990.
Rick Atkinson, "U.S. to Rely on Air Strikes if War Erupts," Washington Post, September 16, 1990: Al + . Eric Schmitt, "Ousted General Gets A Break," New York Times, November 7, 1991: Al9.
Joint WHO / UNICEF Team Report: A Visit to Iraq (New York: United Nations, 1991). A report to the Secretary General, dated March 20, 1991 by representatives of the U.N. Secretariat, UNICEF, UNDP, UNDRO, UNHCR, FAO and WHO.
Patrick E. Tyler, "Powell Says U.S. Will Stay In Iraq," New York Times, March 23, 1991: Al + .
Patrick J. Sloyan, "Massive Battle After Cease Fire," New York Newsday, May 8, 1991: A4+.
"U.S. Prepares UN Draft on Claims Against Iraq," New York Times, November 1, 1990.
Next » Final Judgement: International War Crimes Tribunal

The Basis in International Law
Testimony and Evidence
International Law

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Index
WWW URL: http://deoxy.org/warcrim2.htm
Copyright © 1992 by The Commission of Inquiry for the International War Crimes Tribunal Final Judgment:
International War Crimes Tribunal

The members of the International War Crimes Tribunal, meeting in New York, have carefully considered the Initial Complaint of the Commission of Inquiry dated May 6, 1991 against President George H. W. Bush, Vice President J. Danforth Quayle, Secretary of Defense Richard Cheney, Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf Commander of the Allied Forces in the Persian Gulf, and others named in the Complaint charging them with nineteen separate crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity in violation of the Charter of the United Nations, the 1949 Geneva Conventions, the First Protocol thereto, and other international agreements and customary international law:

having the right and obligation as citizens of the world to sit in judgment regarding violations of international humanitarian law;

having heard the testimony from various Commissions of Inquiry hearings held within their own countries and/or elsewhere during the past year and having received reports from numerous other Commission hearings which recite the evidence there gathered;

having been provided with documentary evidence, eyewitness statements, photos, videotapes, special reports, expert analyses and summaries of evidence available to the Commission; having access to all evidence, knowledge, and expert opinion in the Commission files or available to the Commission;

having been provided by the Commission, or elsewhere obtained, various books, articles, and other written materials on various aspects of events and conditions in the Persian Gulf and military and arms establishments;

having considered newspaper coverage, magazine and periodical reports, special publications, T.V., radio, and other media coverage and public statements by the accused, other public officials and other public materials;

having heard the presentations of the Commission of Inquiry in public hearing on February 29, 1992, the testimony and evidence there presented; and having met, considered and deliberated with each other and with Commission staff and having considered all the evidence that is relevant to the nineteen charges of criminal conduct alleged in the Initial Complaint make the following findings.

Findings
The members of the International War Crimes Tribunal finds each of the named accused Guilty on the basis of the evidence against them and that each of the nineteen crimes alleged in the Initial Complaint, attached hereto, has been established to have been committed beyond a reasonable doubt.

The members believe that it is imperative if there is ever to be peace that power be accountable for its criminal acts and we condemn in the strongest possible terms those found guilty of the charges herein. We urge the Commission of Inquiry and all people to act on recommendations developed by the Commission to hold power accountable and to secure social justice on which lasting peace must be based.


Recommendations
The Members urge the immediate revocation of all embargoes, sanctions and penalties against Iraq because they constitute a continuing crime against humanity.

The Members urge public action to prevent new aggressions by the United States threatened against Iraq, Libya, Cuba, Haiti, North Korea, Pakistan and other countries and the Palestine people; fullest condemnation of any threat or use of military technology against life, both civilian and military, as was used by the United States against the people of Iraq.

The Members urge that the power of the United Nations Security Council, which was blatantly manipulated by the U.S. to authorize illegal military action and sanctions, be vested in the General Assembly; that all permanent members be removed and that the right of veto be eliminated as undemocratic and contrary to the basic principles of the U.N. Charter.

The Members urge the Commission to provide for the permanent preservation of the reports, evidence, and materials gathered to make them available to others, and to seek ways to provide the widest possible distribution of the truth about the U.S. assault on Iraq.

Charges of Other Countries
In accordance with the last paragraph of the Initial Complaint designated Scope of Inquiry, the Commission has gathered substantial evidence of criminal acts by governments and individual officials in addition to those formally presented here. Formal charges have been drafted by some Commissions of Inquiry against other governments in addition to the United States. Those charges have not been acted upon here. The Commission of Inquiry or any of its national components may choose to pursue such other charges at some future time. The Members urge all involved to exert their utmost effort to prevent recurrences of violations by other governments that were not considered here.

Done in New York this 29th day of February, 1992.

(signed)
Olga Mejia, Panama
President of the National Human Rights Commission in Panama, a non-governmental body representing peasants' organizations, urban trade unions, women's groups and others.

Sheik Mohamed Rashid, Pakistan
Former deputy prime minister. Long-term political prisoner during the struggle against British colonialism and activist for workers' and peasants' rights.

Dr. Haluk Gerger, Turkey
Founding member of Turkish Human Rights Association and professor of political science. Dismissed from Ankara University by military government.

Susumu Ozaki, Japan
Former judge and pro-labor attorney imprisoned 1934-1938 for violating Security Law under militarist government for opposing Japan's invasion of China.

Michael Ratner, USA
Attorney, former director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, past president of the National Lawyers Guild.

Lord Tony Gifford, Britain
Human rights lawyer practicing in England and Jamaica. Investigated human rights abuses in British-occupied Ireland.

Rene Dumont, France
Argonomist, ecologist, specialist in agriculture of developing countries, author. His 45th book, This War Dishonors Us, appears in 1992.

Bassam Haddadin, Jordan
Member of Parliament, Second Secretary for the Jordanian Democratic Peoples Party. Member of Parliamentary Committee on Palestine.

Dr. Sherif Hetata, Egypt
Medical Doctor, author, member of the Central Committee of the Arab Progressive Unionist Party. Political prisoner 14 years in 1950s and 1960s.

Deborah Jackson, USA
First vice president of the American Association of Jurists, former director of National Conference of Black Lawyers.

Opato Matarmah, Menominee Nation of North America
Involved in defense of human rights of indigenous peoples since 1981. Represented the International Indian Treaty Council at the Commission of Human Rights at the U.N.

Laura Albizu, Campos Meneses, Puerto Rico
Past President of the Puerto Rican Nationalist Party and current Secretary for Foreign Relations. Honorary president of Peace Council.

Aisha Nyerere, Tanzania
Resident Magistrate of the High Court in Arusha, Tanzania. Researched the impact of the Gulf war on East Africa.

Peter Leibovtich, Canada
President of United Steel Workers of America, USWA, Local 8782 and of the Executive Council of the Ontario Federation of Labor.

John Philpot, Quebec
Attorney, member of Board of Directors of Quebec Movement for Sovereignty. Organizing Secretary for the American Association of Jurist in Canada.

John Jones, USA
Community leader in the state of New Jersey. Vietnam veteran who became leader of movement against U.S. attack on Iraq.

Gloria La Riva, USA
Founding member of the Farmworkers Emergency Relief Committee and Emergency Committee to Stop the U.S. War in the Middle East in San Francisco.

Key Martin, USA
Member of Executive Committee of Local 3 of the Newspaper Guild in New York. Jailed in 1967 for taking message of Bertrand Russell Tribunal on Vietnam to active duty Gls.

Dr. Alfred Mechtersheimer, Germany
Former member of the Bundestag from the Green Party. Former Lieutenant Colonel in the Bundeswher; current peace researcher.

Abderrazak Kilani, Tunisia
Tunisian Bar Association. Former President, Association of Young Lawyers; founding member, National Committee to Lift the Embargo from Iraq.

Tan Sri Ahmad Noordin bin Zakaria, Malaysia
Former Auditor General of Malaysia. Known throughout his country for battling corruption in government.

P. S. Poti, India
Former Chief Justice of the Gujarat High Court. In 1989 elected president of the All-lndia Lawyers Union.

The Basis in International Law
Testimony and Evidence
International Law

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Index
World Wide Web URL: http://deoxy.org/warcrim3.htm
Copyright © 1992 by The Commission of Inquiry for the International War Crimes Tribunal

[Roland Kunz]

"An extraordinary session for the Arab Parliamentary Union shortly
Regional, Politics, 7/5/2001

An extraordinary session will be held by the Arab parliamentary Union on July 11 under the title of the " Intifada" to discuss acceptance of the Saudi Shoura council in the membership of the federation and means of fostering cooperation and cooperation between Arab parliaments.

This session comes following a series of contacts between the Arab parliaments and the general secretariat of the Arab Parliamentary Union which takes Damascus as a headquarters. The session will also discuss a Palestinian work paper on conditions in the Palestinian territories under the continued Israeli aggression against the Palestinian people, its invasion of the Palestinian territories, destroying the Palestinian cities and villages and burning the agricultural crops.

The session will also discuss the possibility of convening an urgent session for the Inter- parliamentary union to be dedicated to discuss the Israeli escalation against the Palestinian people."

SALAAM. THANK YOU FOR REMEMBERING TO ADVISE ME OF ANY NEARFUTURE MEETINGS. INASFAR AS RECOMMENDATION TOWARD OUR SAUDI SHOURA COUNCIL FOR MEMBERSHIP IN THE ARAB PARLIAMENTARY UNION OF THE FEDERATION OF UNITED ARAB AND TRUELY ENLIGHTENED ISLAMIC STATES {AND OUR ALLIES} - I AM ECSTATIC TO HEAR SUCH NEWS. I FOR ONE WILL BE WILLING TO COOPERATE IMMENSELY TOWARD THIS PROGRESSIVE DIALOGUE SHOULD THIS BE UPHELD.


"LONDON: OPEC warned to leave prices to market forces 05/07/2001 14:22:39
A major UK financial daily newspaper has appealed to OPEC not to intervene in the pricing of crude oil.
In its leader column, The Financial Times said market forces alone should dictate price levels and added that lower prices would help kick start a faltering global economy. The paper also called on OPEC superpower to resume its role of 'swing producer to smooth out peaks and troughs in the market.'

It argued that if prices remain high, the chances of a significant second round inflationary effects would be considerably enhanced, whereas whereas a fall would help revive corporate profits and bolster consumer spending.

It maintained that OPEC's problem was that its mechanism to stabilise prices does not work automatically. 'Its efforts to push down the oil price tend to overshoot and its reaction to rising prices is far too slow.'

News Feed provided by Energy24

energy24"

PERMANENT SECRETARIAT ON BEHALF OF THE KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA TOWARD THE ENERGY FORUM IN PROMOTING CONTINUOUS DIALOGUE BETWEEN PRODUCERS AND CONSUMERS

TODAY WE SPEAK AGAIN "TO" BRITAIN

SALAH! I WILL DEAL WITH THIS NEXT. LONDON YOU ARE IN NO POSITION TO DICTATE ANYTHING TO OPEC. WE HAVE THE OIL AND THE GAS. YOU HAD THE COAL. BECAUSE OF YOUR ARROGANCE YOU NOW HAVE LITTLE TO NOTHING TO OFFER YOUR NATIONAL CITIZENS. I WILL ADD TO THIS SHORTLY. ADIEU.

IN DEALING WITH BRITAIN JUST AS AN EXAMPLE AND IN DEALING WITH THE BRITISH THREAT TOWARD OPEC ["BY THE WAY THEY JUST THREATENED NATO WITH EXPULSION OF SEVERAL NATIONS IF THEY DO NAUGHT COMPLY WITH 'TEXT' TOWARD THAT OF NAUGHT EVER FULFILLING THE OSLO ACCORDS" - HOPE SOME OF YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS SCRIBED LITTLE PORTION MEANS] WHICH IS RIDICULOUS LET ME EXPLAIN WHAT BRITAIN IS TRYING TO DO.

BRITAIN NOW EVEN MORE EXPOSED THAN IT WAS BEFORE SEEKS TO GLUT OR DE-STABLIZE THE MARKET.

REMEMBER ON ALL FRONTS THE POLICY OF BRITAIN IS AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN: AS SOON AS THINGS GO WELL FOR OTHERS - DE-STABALIZE AND FRAGMENT AND THEY WILL COLLAPSE WHETHER THEY BE INDIVIDUAL HU-MAN BEINGS OR NATIONS AND THEIR FOOLISH GOVERNMENTS OF 'ULTRA-NATIONAL POLICY BROKERS.' WE WILL WIN THEM ALL IN THE END.

NOW AT ONE TIME THAT WAS TRUE BUT NAUGHT ANY MORE BECAUSE AS YOU CAN SEE BRITAIN - WE ARE STILL ALIVE.

SELAH. SO LET US CONTINUE.

IF THE BRITISH PARLIAMENT WOULD LIKE LOWER FUEL PRICES THEN LOWER YOUR TAX BASE ON PETROLEUM PRODUCTS AND OIL. BETTER YET GET RID OF ALL TAX FRONTS ON FUEL AT THE GAS PUMPS.

SECONDLY DO NAUGHT LOOK TOWARD OIL FUTURES UPON THE MARKET FOR ANY KIND OF STABILITY.

WHILE OPEC HAS NAUGHT SET PRICES FOR QUITE SOME TIME WE NATURALLY DO NAUGHT INTEND UPON BEING A PENDULUM FOR BRITISH WHIMS.

SAUDI ARABIA OPERATES WITHIN THE COHERENT JURISDICTION OF OPEC AND WHATEVER CONCENUS HAS BEEN AGREED UPON THAT IS THE CONCENSUS SAUDI ARABIA ALSO RESPONDS TO. WE DO NAUGHT INTEND AT ANY POINT IN TIME OF WORKING OUTSIDE OF OPEC BASIS.

WHAT IS HAPPENING TO BRITAIN AT THIS TIME IS THE BRITISH PARLIAMENT HAS THE INTERNATIONAL BANKER STERNLY ASKING FOR BRITAIN'S DEPTS TO BE PAID. THE DEVIL AT ALL TIMES WANTS THE PAYBACK. SO WHAT BRITAIN DOES IS CLIMBS ALL OVER OPECS BACK AND THE BRITISH TAX COLLECTOR TO IN TURN GO AFTER THE BRITISH TAXPAYING CITIZENS IN ORDER TO ACQUISITION THE PAYMENTS BACK TO THE BANKERS ORGANIZATION OF WHICH THE ZIONISTS IN COOPERATION WITH THE IMPERIALISTS HAD LONG AGO SET UP AN INSTITUTE IN THE FORMAT OF THE LONDON SCHOOL OF TYRANNICAL ECONOMICS OF THE OLD ONE WORLD ORDER AND GLUT THEREIN MORE TAXES FROM WITHIN THE ALREADY EMPTY POCKETBOOKS OF MOST BRITISH CITIZENS.


"Editorial:
An embarrassing Anglo-American failure

AS EXPECTED, the UK- and US-sponsored draft resolution at the UN for remodelling the 11-year-old sanctions on Iraq has failed. That is at least for now, thanks to the firm and determined position of Russia. Moscow apparently deemed any prolonging of the sanctions in any form, or under any new name, unjustifiable, unethical and harmful not only to Iraq and its people but to the whole region and the integrity of the Security Council itself.
The so-called “smart sanctions” that have been promoted by the new US administration since it took office do not offer any real change in the nature of the sanctions themselves. Rather, they are just another chapter in a stumbling and inconsistent policy to deal with a complex situation on the basis of trial and error, usually ending up repeating more of the error.

The failure of the US-UK project has been met with a sigh of relief at all official and popular levels in Jordan. In fact, Jordan has been shouldering mounting economic, financial and developmental hardships as a result of the continuation of the sanctions regime on Iraq, its main trade partner and supplier of oil at concessionary terms.

The initial idea behind the “smart sanctions” — easing controls on humanitarian supplies and tightening them on military materials — was developed in such a manner by the British that turned it into a counterproductive proposal, compared to the existing embargo. In fact, and by introducing a list of procedures and bureaucratic measures, the new proposals, if ever implemented, will surely prolong the suffering of ordinary Iraqi people rather than ease their plight as was originally envisaged.

It also puts on Iraq's neighbours, including Jordan, the burden of participating in this enormous monitoring and inspection system — a task which is not only a direct violation of our sovereignty and rights, but further harms our basic relations and vital interests, in addition to being extremely unpopular.

The Jordanian leadership and people are united in the firmest belief that sanctions should end and not simply be renamed and repackaged while nothing changes on the ground.

This firm position is not dictated by the fact that Jordan has sustained immense damage as a direct result of the sanctions, and the subjective handling of the Iraq issue, but is the consequence of our strong feelings of national and human solidarity with our brethren in another Arab country.

The people of this country could not, should not and will not tolerate any indifference to the mounting suffering and compounded injustice in Iraq as a matter of principle and before any other consideration.

It is vital that we re-emphasise this position now, being aware of the likelihood that the US and UK will eventually resume their efforts to revive their failed project under a new disguise by December.

[NOTE: THE BRITISH, SCANDINAVIAN AND EU FACTION COUPLED WITH CANADA AND THE UNITED STATES WILL NAUGHT ACHIEVE THE REOPENING OF THEIR FAILED PROJECT IF THE JORDANIAN PEOPLE ALL JOIN THE INTIFADAH WHICH DOES NAUGHT ONLY DEMONSTRATE THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM AGAINST THE INVADERS OF HOLY PALESTINIAN TERRITORY BUT ALSO MEANS TO WAGE THE HOLY WAR INSIDE EACH NATIONAL BORDERS AGAINST THE ZIONIST AND IMPERIALIST ELEMENT.

'DEMONSTRATE' FOR EXAMPLE IN THE MEDIA PRESS AND INTERNETED WAVES THAT WE THE ARAB WORLD WILL NO LONGER STAND FOR OUR NATIONS BEING SUBTLY UNDERMINED BY THE BRITISH, AMERICANS AND THE EUROPEANS WHO REALLY DO NAUGHT CARE IN THE LEAST CONCERNING PALESTINE AND DEFINATELY NAUGHT IN CONCERN TOWARD IRAQ.]

Any new resolution should provide for the total lifting of sanctions, but whatever the Security Council decides in the end, it must clearly exempt Jordan from any sanctions-related obligations. This is the least that Jordan is entitled to expect under Article 50 of the UN Charter, as much as the requirements of justice and common sense."

US - BRITISH - ISRAELI DECEPTION

IS A FACT

- "Date :7/5/01 7:15:56 PM
No.: 33

SPA -33- GENERAL/ JAPANESE MINISTER LEAVES RIYADH

RIYADH, JULY 5, SPA -- JAPAN'S MINSTER OF ECONOMY, TRADE AND INDUSTRY TAKEO HIRANUMA AND HIS ACCOMPANYING DELEGATION LEFT RIYADH TODAY FOLLOWING AN OFFICIAL VISIT TO THE KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA.

HE WAS SEEN OFF AT KING KHALID INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BY MINISTER OF PLANNING KHALID BIN MOHAMMED ALGOSAIBI, WHO IS ALSO CHAIRMAN OF THE SAUDI SIDE IN THE SAUDI JAPANESE JOINT COMMITTEE, JAPAN'S AMBASSADOR TO THE KINGDOM S. OSHIMA AND A NUMBER OF OFFICIALS.--SPA



- JAPAN ARABIAN OIL CO LTD


- "JEDDA: Japan wants new talks on Saudi drilling 05/07/2001 01:49:27
Japan may request reopening talks on renewing Arabian Oil Co's drilling rights in the Khafji oil field that expired last year, Japan's trade minister has told a top Saudi official.
In his meeting with Saudi Arabia's second deputy prime minister, Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry Takeo Hiranuma said Japan may propose another round of negotiations in the event the Japanese oil developer reaches an agreement with Kuwait, the Nihon Keizai Shimbun business daily reported.

Last year, the company failed to renew its drilling rights on the Saudi side of the Khafji oil field, which straddles Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

Prince Sultan bin Adb-al-Aziz responded that he would convey Hiranuma's proposal to the relevant government officials. He also asked for Japanese assistance in establishing a training centre for domestic workers in manufacturing industries. Hiranuma said he would consider the request.


Source - Dow Jones"
SALAAM PRINCE SULTAN. I AM JUST REVIEWING CERTAIN CRITERIA CONCERNING THE OVERALL IMPLICATION TOWARD JAPANESE INDUSTRY AND "COAL" OUTPUT SO TO SPEAK IN REGARD TO WARD THAT OFF SAUDI ARABIA, KUWAIT AND OMAN. I WILL TAKE UP CHAIR ALSO IN THE SECONDARY MEETING WITH THE JAPANESE ECONOMY, TRADE AND INDUSTRY MINISTER TAKEO HIRANUMA IN THE SHORTEST POSSIBLE MOMENTS OF MY TIME. PLEASE PASS ON ALL RELEVANT INFORMATION TO OUR HOLY ANNOINTED SAUDI KING YES.

TELAVIV, 5 July — Hopes for a peaceful resolution in the Middle East disappeared in a hail of bullets yesterday as Israeli forces seriously wounded a Palestinian in an assassination attempt in the West Bank. The shooting came after Israel’s Security Cabinet gave the army the green light to “toughen its methods” in dealing with the Palestinians, who warned the Jewish state’s return to direct attacks would plunge the region into chaos.

Members of the Security Cabinet, which met under Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, demanded the immediate elimination of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, holding him responsible for the killings of Israelis. Some ministers also proposed that Israel reoccupy Palestinian self-rule areas.

Hezam Natcheh was shot three times in the stomach in the flashpoint West Bank town of Hebron, in what Israeli Army radio said was a bid to “eliminate” an important member of Arafat’s Fatah movement.

[NOTE: FOR EVERY PALESTINIAN AND OTHER ARAB AND ISLAMIC HOLY {AND FREE ONES=TO DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES} - WHO ARE HURT OR SERIOUSLY WOUNDED BY ISRAELI FORCES OF TERRORISM AND HEINOUS CORRUPTION, THE BLOOD OF THESE PEOPLE WILL RIDE HIGH UPON THE HANDS, HEARTS AND CRIMINAL ACTIVITES OF THOSE ONES SUPPORTING ISRAEL BY EITHER DOING LITTLE, DOING NOTHING OR NAUGHT DEMANDING NATOS PRESENCE IN THE REGION.

NOW I KNOW NATO IS A CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION WHO WORKS FOR THE SO-CALLED FREE POWERS OF THE WEST, BRITISH AND EUROPEAN FRONT IN THE ENLISTMENT TOWARD SECURING AND PROTECTING ZIONIST-IMPERIALIST FOREIGN INTERESTS IN NATIONS SUCH AS YUGOSLAVIA FOR INSTANCE AS NATO SITS SECURELY UPON THE SIDELINES PROTECTING THE NEWLY CORRUPTED CIA-MI5 AND 6 ISRAELI MOSSAD YUGOSLAVIAN GOVERNMENT AND AMERICAN FOREIGN INTERESTS IN THAT REGION - HOWEVER NATO "IS SUPPOSED TO" BELONG TO ALL OF THE NATIONS AND THEREFORE BECAUSE THIS "IS SUPPOSED TO" BE THE STANDARD OF WORLD PROTECTION "I DEMAND THAT THE EU MITCHELL ACCORD BE THROWN OUT THE WINDOW ON THE BASIS THAT NAUGHT ONLY IS ISRAEL REFUSING TO ACKNOWLEDGE SUCH TREATISE BUT THE GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL ARE WAR CRIMINALS WITH A GHASTLY RECORD OF GENOCIDE TO THEIR CREDIT, SO TO SPEAK. FOR THAT IS EXACTLY HOW THE GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL HAS LOOKED AT THE SITUATION OF BOTH PALESTINE AND LEBANON FROM THE BEGINNING OF TIME. ZIONIST ISRAELI ARE NAUGHT PEACEMAKERS AND BOTHE THE WEST AS WELL AS THE EUROPEAN UNION UNDERSTAND AND REALIZE THIS FACT ALL TOO WELL.

SO IN THE FACE OF THE WEST AND EUROPE STILL REFUSING TO PUT NATO IN WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO BELONG TO THE WORLD NATIONS THIS TELLS THE WORLD NATIONS THAT THERE IS CONSPIRACY AMONG ALL OF THESE INTEREST GROUPS AND SO-CALLED ALLIES OF OUR ARAB AND ISLAMIC WORLD.]

It said Natcheh was wanted for involvement in ambush attacks on Israeli soldiers and civilians in Hebron, where around 400 Jewish settlers live under heavy Israeli guard amid 120,000 Palestinians.

He was in serious condition after the shooting, which came shortly after Prime Minister Ariel Sharon led a reportedly contentious four-hour meeting of the Security Cabinet on how to deal with the ongoing Palestinian uprising.

Arafat accused Israel of violating a US-brokered cease-fire by deciding to target Palestinian activists. “By taking such serious decisions, and sending helicopter fighters, the Israeli government created a serious security situation despite the efforts to restore calm and strengthen the cease-fire,” the Palestinian news agency WAFA quoted Arafat as saying.

Meanwhile, Syria and its ally in Lebanon, the Hezbollah, threatened action against Israel yesterday, three days after fierce fighting between the two sides on the Lebanese border. Hezbollah chief Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah vowed that his organization would multiply its attacks on Israel in the disputed Shebaa Farms border territory.

“Each time we get, we will seize the occasion to hit the Israeli occupation forces,” Nasrallah said in an interview with the Lebanese daily As-Safir. “We have ordered an increase in anti-Israeli operations.

“The fact that Syrian positions are taken as targets by the Israeli Army will not affect our determination to pursue the resistance until the liberation of the Shebaa Farms sector,” Nasrallah said."

- IT LOOKS LIKE OUR MAIN SPA GOVERNMENT SITE HAS ALSO BEEN HACKED INTO. IT IS COMPLETELY DOWN.

- I SEE SOMEONE AGAIN BROKE THROUGH THE SHIELD AND CHANGED A FEW WORDS INTO SEVERE SPELLING MISTAKES WHICH I HAVE YET TO FIX OF MINEOWN SELF. AND OF THE PORTION CONCERNING THE ISRAELI TERRORIST PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL ARIEL SHARON THE MAJORITY WAS ERRASED RIGHT OFF THE PAGE. JUST CANNOT STAND UP TO MY PEN CAN CERTAIN ONES OF YE? I AM NOW GOING TO SEE OF MINEOWN LITTLE SELF IF IT CAN BE MADE TRANSPARANT TO PLACE OF THE HATED MATERIAL JUST BELOW THIS. IT WAS ALSO KNOTICED THAT THE ARTICLE WITH BRITAIN, THE U.S. AND ISRAEL IN TEAL WITH THE POOR LITTLE IRAQI DEPLETED URANIUM BOY IN EACH OF THE LINKS - WAS MOVED UP TO SIGNIFY I SUPPOSE WHO EXACTLY DID THIS HACKING INTO MY SITE. ahh SO NOW YE ONES TAKE EVEN MORE NEWSITEMS OFF THIS SITE AND ONES DEALING WITH THE GREAT COMPASSION WHICH SAUDI ARABIA SHOWS TO OTHER NATION STATES INCLUDING INSTRUCTIONS TO IRAQ, PAKISTAN ETC. THEN WENT MISSING THE CARTOON OF PRESIDENT BUSH JR. AND HIS BALLOON AND THE INFORMATION UPON BELGIUM AND THE EU WHO SUPPOSEDLY WANT TO HELP OUR ARAB AND ISLAMIC NATIONS BUT CANNOT QUITE GET THEMESELVES TO DECIDE WHETHER TO ARREST THE ISRAELI ZIONISTS OR COOPERATE WITH THE U.S. AND BRITAIN IN TRYING TO GET THEM BACK TO THE TABLE ON THE MITCHELL ACCORD.

AND INCLUDING TAKING OFF THE ARTICLES WHICH I WROTE EXPOSING WHAT IS BEING DONE IN JORDAN MUCH TO THE DISLIKE OF OTHERS TO READ. IN FACT IT LOOKS AS THOUGH APPROX. TEN PAGES OR MORE HAVE DISAPPEARED AND THOUGH I HAVE THEM IN THE ORIGINAL I CANNOT GET THEM FOR SOME REASON TO SHOW UP ON THE INTERNET WHEN THE PAGE DOES FULLY TRANSFER AND NEITHER CAN THE COMPUTER EXPERT HERE WHO ALSO AVAILS OF HIMSELF TO TELL ON THE ZIONISTS AND IMPERIALISTS UNDER THE TITLE OF HIS 'NEW ERA' PAGE GET THEM TO APPEAR.

WHY ARE YOU ZIONISTS AND IMPERIALISTS SO FRIGHTENED TO MATCH YOUR PENS WITH OURS AND IN PARTICULAR HERE - WITH MINE? I THOUGHT YOU WERE TOP RULERS OF THE WESTERN AND SUPPOSEDLY CULTURED EUROPEAN WORLD?

BUT THE NEWARTICLE WHICH WAS PRESENTED THE OTHER DAY BY MINEOWNSELF IN REGARD TO THE ATROSITY OF ISRAEL AND WHAT EXACTLY HAPPENED TO THE EGYPTIAN SOLDIER - IT IS KNOTICED THAT IT HAS PERHAPS BEEN MOVED UP IN ORDER THAT I REREAD THE TITLE. THIS SOUNDS MUCH LIKE MAJESTIC SHOWING A BRITISH SPY FILM OF HOW THE BRITISH SUBTLY DO THINGS.

BECAUSE YOU HAVE ALSO STOLEN MY SCRIBINGS BRITAIN AND WE WANTED TO ASK IF IT WAS YOUR PEOPLE WHO TOOK THE SCRIBINGS OF BLINKENSOP BECAUSE THEY HAVE ALL DISAPPEARED ALONG WITH SUNDRY OTHER LITTLE ITEMS OF CLOTHING, JEWELERY [WHICH WAS ONLY IMITATION JEWELERY IN THE FIRST PLACE] PICTURES ETC. AND THE FUNNY THING IS THAT WHILE BOTH OF US HAVE LOST MANY MANY MANY ITEMS SOME HAVE BEEN REPLACED BY ITEMS WHICH NEITHER OF US HAVE EVER SEEN AFOREHAND. NOW HOW DO YOU SUPPOSE ALL THIS IS HAPPENING?

IN ANY CASE AS I WAS GOING TO SAY YOU MUST HAVE ALSO READ THESE TENDER LITTLE WORDS FROM THE STOLEN SCRIBINGS:

"IF YOU TOUCH ONE HAIR ON THE HEAD OF MY DAUGHTER I WILL SEE YOU IN HOLY HELL."

?REMEMBER]

http://www.datanet.ab.ca/~sentana/spaeg~4.htm

[Roland Kunz]

Third World Trade Organisation (TWTO)
By Lt Col (Retd) Muhammad Zaman Malik

The problem of economic development is really several problems in one. All these problems are inter-related. It is difficult for the North and the South to agree on the causes of world poverty, let alone its cures. The crux of the problems in 21st century remains the same. It is to feed, clothe, shelter, and employ between 6 billion and 15 billion peoples, on the planet earth, which seems to have reached near exhaustion point in terms of its resources. Everything has its limits. Besides, instead of cooperation, America, on the plea of national interest, has bowed itself out of the Kyoto-commitment population control, health care, education, social welfare, agricultural management, land distribution, energy research, transportation, labour productivity, capital formation, and above all, the technology transfer are the key issues that divided the world in which mostly, the South suffered the maximum. Pakistan’s main focus is to be on food, clothing, housing, transfer of technology and streamlining of the services. Poorly fed people fall an easy prey to diseases rendering them incapable of doing productive work, which results in low productivity, poverty and all the rest, being all in one.

Inflation, as of today, has broken the back of peoples and by all probability, with more population, year after year, while Strum und Drang grows, the fear of dismember/collapse of institutions everywhere also increases in direct proportions. The world leadership has to grow out of its instrumental way of thinking and evolve/adopt an idealistic geo-political way of thinking, soon enough. Swashbuckling of the North must end, atleast now, because the humanity as a whole, in cooperation rather than the confrontation followed hitherto, has to do so, for mutual survival. Self-interest (instrumental way of thinking), is going to be suicidal for all, and, therefore, it must be discarded with all sincerity that comes with idealistic way of thinking. This demands a proper response to the challenge from the highest world forum, the greatest world institution and the most effective trend setter — the UNO itself. The UNO ought to be reorganised in order to ensure equitable availability of resources to all, found in an excellent/ideal democracy — of all the peoples, by all the peoples, and for all the peoples.

The NWO with its kind of WTO stands maligned by its own deeds. It has lost faith and trust of nearly four and a half billion of the world population. South foresees ever mounting problems for itself, if and as long as it continues. Here in the Indo-Pak subcontinent, we had also our share of traitors which were created by the Imperialist powers throughout the history. The locals nowhere fought against them to get rid of their rule, and it was not due to their own efforts. The Imperial rule ended because of the prolonged Second World War. This has been happening in the rise and fall of civilisations.

As the colonial powers withdrew from their colonies, the policy of ‘divide and rule’ became obsolete and was replaced by that of ‘unite and rule’, to achieve the same objectives, according to the changed conditions. As the position of the exploiters changed so also it became necessary that of the exploited. They had to join together to facilitate exploitation of their former colonies, for common advantages. The new situation obviously called for corresponding adjustments both in the former colonies and in the former colonizing countries to make market conditions more suitable for exploitation. Larger markets generated more exports and imports on terms favourable to them. They encouraged increased consumption of goods and a more systematic exploitation of resources. World Bank, IMF, G-8, NWO and its WTO, have recently appeared after a host of their predecessors, created for the purpose. Their aim is not being served by subjugating the world in the conventional sense, but by controlling the minds of the peoples, through amazing technological advances, devices and numerous agencies. Cyber Warfare has come to be the order of the day, as of today! Old colonies are being controlled, therefore, through remote control with the help of old Mir Sadiqs/Jaffars. Here the people, regrettably do not realise that in England the so-called mother of democracies, was evolved after ruthless civil war that continued for two hundred years and yet the Ireland-headache is causing debilitating bloodshed; but UK remains UK. So is the case in most countries, in the east and in the west. Nobody seems more fed up than the Pakistanis! Even in India, they are more involved in infighting in each and every state and against the central government. The countries of Asia, (all the four regions of it), Africa, West, Canada itself and Americans, have the same culture, more than India and Pakistan have in common, yet they, despite fighting numerous deadly wars, never got fed up with the existence of their countries as some of the Pakistanis appear to have become! Yes, we have surely been dismayed hugely by our corrupt/declared and condemned as such, political leadership, comparatively more than that of India’s. But there are some horrifying snags in the Indian states and India’s leadership, as a whole. We, here, in the ‘perpetration’ days were keeping separate and far apart, ‘Muslim Paani’ and ‘Hindu Paani’; and there are some horrendous differences in our cultures except of course we liked their songs and dances as much as we used to do in the ‘prepartition’ India. That’s far less of an identity of cultures compared to what prevails in the countries of the continents and regions. They are all separate countries. This reminds me of my talk to East Pakistanis Students (Muslims), and they used to say, if for nothing else, we would like to have independent country for enabling ourselves go to India unhindered to see films and come back as easily, daily. They are seeing those lovely films; or they not, accordingly? The fault lies in the failure of our TV potential vis-a-vis, that of huge success of the India’s. Massive artificiality in the drama, following in the footsteps of extra-open society of India, has taken out the soul from out of our drama that used to portray the real face of life.

US efforts to subdue China

Vigorous efforts were made by US and UK, to drag Pakistan away from the posture of confrontation to co-operation, with India, on India’s terms. So much so, at the long last, they were to encourage India along with USSR, to dismember Pakistan physically through military invasion, that was launched, after years long insurgency operations by India, through Mukti Bahni that used to draw itself from the strength and guidance of the Hindu teachers and bureaucracy, that was around 80 percent, each, in that part of the country. No Western (our allies), ever raised a little finger whenever reminded of it, by Pakistan. They connived at it if not openly supported it during those years, from 1967 to 1970. So much so, even Kissenger said, we are grateful to Pakistan for making bridges with Beijing but then there exists no content for real relationship between both the countries. And Pakistan had to pay for it; for, soon after that ‘Bridges’ ceremony, India and Soviets concluded a mutual security agreement in August 1971, and then India came to attack East Pakistan while riding over the shoulders of a super power — USSR! India — a bigger country, must restore confidence that was shaken when she occupied Siachin Glacier as late as 1984!

US relations with Pakistan changed dramatically from those of the most ‘allied ally’ to the point at which it was alleged, that there was a collusion, between Pakistan and USA, because of the PRC; prior to 1970-71. Sino-Indian border conflict was engineered by US INT who fed Nehru on very wrong and misleading information, about Chinese strength in NEFA and Ladak. Lt Gen Kaul of 15 Corps tells the harrowing story what happened to his corps, when they attacked Chinese there in Oct 1962! One might read his ‘Untold Story’. Same has been prepared to be done by the present Indian leadership against PRC, by the US. US had also fed wrong information to the Zionist Brezhnev to attack Afghanistan, in Dec. 1969. They always hunted with the hounds and ran with the hare. That’s the Pax Americana!

Latest efforts to involve India in armed conflict with China

Now the point is why and how the three host countries visited by the PRC’s PM in the most recent past, have been made to suffer the most sudden/and stunning blows/setbacks? Sri Lankan’s coalition government is likely to collapse, because 13 Muslim members are not happy; Nepalese royal family suddenly got massacred, leaving the future government in deep turmoil. Here in Pakistan, figure-head President Tarar too, had to go unexpectedly; sudden killings of civilians in IHK have re-erupted. After CIA had finished with Soviets in Afghanistan, they, while maintaining effective command over the various factions which still fight as desired by them, sent their experts into IHK to exercise the same over Indian Security Forces there. Since 1988, the pot is boiling, now of course by the Muslim freedom fighters, who too were trained like Osama bin Laden and Co; in the IHK. In Chhatti Singh 34 Sikhs were killed by them (ISF) just before Clinton were to land at New Delhi. Hundreds of Hindu Yatree’s gone on pilgrimage across to Northern Kashmir were killed by the same Security Forces. FIB office was established in New Delhi soon after Clinton’s visit in March 2000. For what ‘Preservation’ has India allowed US to establish itself in Siachin Glacier? This will amount threatening Pakistan with drowning it into Arabian Sea or rendering it dry like desert, at will; apart from keeping India equally threatened. China would obviously react violently. It might trigger a nuclear holocaust; and US is well-known for it and other destructions, in South East Asia/ Far East! Let us hope the rumour was baseless as it should in fact be!

Third World Trade Organisation (TWTO)

China is sure to enter the WTO, in the near future. Japan is trembling, US is nervous, and EU stands askance thinking of the spectacle that would emerge after that. China would even sell grains to the entire world at the rock-bottom prices and all other goods and commodities that would be cheaper far more than those of the G-8 countries. Therefore, while retaining the membership of ASEAN and WTO, TWTO; to draw the entire Third World/South from out of the back-breaking inflation, China, India and Pakistan, unitedly fight the Trade War by rallying around the entire South behind them. Instead of dissipating their resources and energies at the behest of the Old Imperialists/Colonials, they must forge a, United Trade Front, to draw the golden era of peace and tranquillity that was once envisioned by these countries when they were fighting for their freedom from the colonial powers. India being bigger state than the others in SAARC must rehabilitate the confidence of smaller states. Even Siachin’s capture by India in 1984, ruptured the last ray of confidence of Pakistan, as late as mid-eighties. Colossus (Nehru) obeyed the Jewess Adwina Mountbatten for the same purpose, that existed since Partition. A.B. Vajpayee and Pervez Musharraf must change the fate of the people of all the Southern states. Unitedly they can defeat the West in the Trade War, with the guidance of China who will of course be the founding member like them. At least the peoples are fed up with the crafty bossing of their old colonial masters, from across the seven seas! They undoubtedly expect the same from their leaderships, and ‘now or never’, they urge for! Can’t they follow EU, despite its deadly wars in the recent past? Peoples do not expect the leaderships to be the slaves of the old masters!
http://www.defencejournal.com/globe/index.shtml

[Roland Kunz]

Third World Trade Organisation (TWTO)
By Lt Col (Retd) Muhammad Zaman Malik

The problem of economic development is really several problems in one. All these problems are inter-related. It is difficult for the North and the South to agree on the causes of world poverty, let alone its cures. The crux of the problems in 21st century remains the same. It is to feed, clothe, shelter, and employ between 6 billion and 15 billion peoples, on the planet earth, which seems to have reached near exhaustion point in terms of its resources. Everything has its limits. Besides, instead of cooperation, America, on the plea of national interest, has bowed itself out of the Kyoto-commitment population control, health care, education, social welfare, agricultural management, land distribution, energy research, transportation, labour productivity, capital formation, and above all, the technology transfer are the key issues that divided the world in which mostly, the South suffered the maximum. Pakistan’s main focus is to be on food, clothing, housing, transfer of technology and streamlining of the services. Poorly fed people fall an easy prey to diseases rendering them incapable of doing productive work, which results in low productivity, poverty and all the rest, being all in one.

Inflation, as of today, has broken the back of peoples and by all probability, with more population, year after year, while Strum und Drang grows, the fear of dismember/collapse of institutions everywhere also increases in direct proportions. The world leadership has to grow out of its instrumental way of thinking and evolve/adopt an idealistic geo-political way of thinking, soon enough. Swashbuckling of the North must end, atleast now, because the humanity as a whole, in cooperation rather than the confrontation followed hitherto, has to do so, for mutual survival. Self-interest (instrumental way of thinking), is going to be suicidal for all, and, therefore, it must be discarded with all sincerity that comes with idealistic way of thinking. This demands a proper response to the challenge from the highest world forum, the greatest world institution and the most effective trend setter — the UNO itself. The UNO ought to be reorganised in order to ensure equitable availability of resources to all, found in an excellent/ideal democracy — of all the peoples, by all the peoples, and for all the peoples.

The NWO with its kind of WTO stands maligned by its own deeds. It has lost faith and trust of nearly four and a half billion of the world population. South foresees ever mounting problems for itself, if and as long as it continues. Here in the Indo-Pak subcontinent, we had also our share of traitors which were created by the Imperialist powers throughout the history. The locals nowhere fought against them to get rid of their rule, and it was not due to their own efforts. The Imperial rule ended because of the prolonged Second World War. This has been happening in the rise and fall of civilisations.

As the colonial powers withdrew from their colonies, the policy of ‘divide and rule’ became obsolete and was replaced by that of ‘unite and rule’, to achieve the same objectives, according to the changed conditions. As the position of the exploiters changed so also it became necessary that of the exploited. They had to join together to facilitate exploitation of their former colonies, for common advantages. The new situation obviously called for corresponding adjustments both in the former colonies and in the former colonizing countries to make market conditions more suitable for exploitation. Larger markets generated more exports and imports on terms favourable to them. They encouraged increased consumption of goods and a more systematic exploitation of resources. World Bank, IMF, G-8, NWO and its WTO, have recently appeared after a host of their predecessors, created for the purpose. Their aim is not being served by subjugating the world in the conventional sense, but by controlling the minds of the peoples, through amazing technological advances, devices and numerous agencies. Cyber Warfare has come to be the order of the day, as of today! Old colonies are being controlled, therefore, through remote control with the help of old Mir Sadiqs/Jaffars. Here the people, regrettably do not realise that in England the so-called mother of democracies, was evolved after ruthless civil war that continued for two hundred years and yet the Ireland-headache is causing debilitating bloodshed; but UK remains UK. So is the case in most countries, in the east and in the west. Nobody seems more fed up than the Pakistanis! Even in India, they are more involved in infighting in each and every state and against the central government. The countries of Asia, (all the four regions of it), Africa, West, Canada itself and Americans, have the same culture, more than India and Pakistan have in common, yet they, despite fighting numerous deadly wars, never got fed up with the existence of their countries as some of the Pakistanis appear to have become! Yes, we have surely been dismayed hugely by our corrupt/declared and condemned as such, political leadership, comparatively more than that of India’s. But there are some horrifying snags in the Indian states and India’s leadership, as a whole. We, here, in the ‘perpetration’ days were keeping separate and far apart, ‘Muslim Paani’ and ‘Hindu Paani’; and there are some horrendous differences in our cultures except of course we liked their songs and dances as much as we used to do in the ‘prepartition’ India. That’s far less of an identity of cultures compared to what prevails in the countries of the continents and regions. They are all separate countries. This reminds me of my talk to East Pakistanis Students (Muslims), and they used to say, if for nothing else, we would like to have independent country for enabling ourselves go to India unhindered to see films and come back as easily, daily. They are seeing those lovely films; or they not, accordingly? The fault lies in the failure of our TV potential vis-a-vis, that of huge success of the India’s. Massive artificiality in the drama, following in the footsteps of extra-open society of India, has taken out the soul from out of our drama that used to portray the real face of life.

US efforts to subdue China

Vigorous efforts were made by US and UK, to drag Pakistan away from the posture of confrontation to co-operation, with India, on India’s terms. So much so, at the long last, they were to encourage India along with USSR, to dismember Pakistan physically through military invasion, that was launched, after years long insurgency operations by India, through Mukti Bahni that used to draw itself from the strength and guidance of the Hindu teachers and bureaucracy, that was around 80 percent, each, in that part of the country. No Western (our allies), ever raised a little finger whenever reminded of it, by Pakistan. They connived at it if not openly supported it during those years, from 1967 to 1970. So much so, even Kissenger said, we are grateful to Pakistan for making bridges with Beijing but then there exists no content for real relationship between both the countries. And Pakistan had to pay for it; for, soon after that ‘Bridges’ ceremony, India and Soviets concluded a mutual security agreement in August 1971, and then India came to attack East Pakistan while riding over the shoulders of a super power — USSR! India — a bigger country, must restore confidence that was shaken when she occupied Siachin Glacier as late as 1984!

US relations with Pakistan changed dramatically from those of the most ‘allied ally’ to the point at which it was alleged, that there was a collusion, between Pakistan and USA, because of the PRC; prior to 1970-71. Sino-Indian border conflict was engineered by US INT who fed Nehru on very wrong and misleading information, about Chinese strength in NEFA and Ladak. Lt Gen Kaul of 15 Corps tells the harrowing story what happened to his corps, when they attacked Chinese there in Oct 1962! One might read his ‘Untold Story’. Same has been prepared to be done by the present Indian leadership against PRC, by the US. US had also fed wrong information to the Zionist Brezhnev to attack Afghanistan, in Dec. 1969. They always hunted with the hounds and ran with the hare. That’s the Pax Americana!

Latest efforts to involve India in armed conflict with China

Now the point is why and how the three host countries visited by the PRC’s PM in the most recent past, have been made to suffer the most sudden/and stunning blows/setbacks? Sri Lankan’s coalition government is likely to collapse, because 13 Muslim members are not happy; Nepalese royal family suddenly got massacred, leaving the future government in deep turmoil. Here in Pakistan, figure-head President Tarar too, had to go unexpectedly; sudden killings of civilians in IHK have re-erupted. After CIA had finished with Soviets in Afghanistan, they, while maintaining effective command over the various factions which still fight as desired by them, sent their experts into IHK to exercise the same over Indian Security Forces there. Since 1988, the pot is boiling, now of course by the Muslim freedom fighters, who too were trained like Osama bin Laden and Co; in the IHK. In Chhatti Singh 34 Sikhs were killed by them (ISF) just before Clinton were to land at New Delhi. Hundreds of Hindu Yatree’s gone on pilgrimage across to Northern Kashmir were killed by the same Security Forces. FIB office was established in New Delhi soon after Clinton’s visit in March 2000. For what ‘Preservation’ has India allowed US to establish itself in Siachin Glacier? This will amount threatening Pakistan with drowning it into Arabian Sea or rendering it dry like desert, at will; apart from keeping India equally threatened. China would obviously react violently. It might trigger a nuclear holocaust; and US is well-known for it and other destructions, in South East Asia/ Far East! Let us hope the rumour was baseless as it should in fact be!

Third World Trade Organisation (TWTO)

China is sure to enter the WTO, in the near future. Japan is trembling, US is nervous, and EU stands askance thinking of the spectacle that would emerge after that. China would even sell grains to the entire world at the rock-bottom prices and all other goods and commodities that would be cheaper far more than those of the G-8 countries. Therefore, while retaining the membership of ASEAN and WTO, TWTO; to draw the entire Third World/South from out of the back-breaking inflation, China, India and Pakistan, unitedly fight the Trade War by rallying around the entire South behind them. Instead of dissipating their resources and energies at the behest of the Old Imperialists/Colonials, they must forge a, United Trade Front, to draw the golden era of peace and tranquillity that was once envisioned by these countries when they were fighting for their freedom from the colonial powers. India being bigger state than the others in SAARC must rehabilitate the confidence of smaller states. Even Siachin’s capture by India in 1984, ruptured the last ray of confidence of Pakistan, as late as mid-eighties. Colossus (Nehru) obeyed the Jewess Adwina Mountbatten for the same purpose, that existed since Partition. A.B. Vajpayee and Pervez Musharraf must change the fate of the people of all the Southern states. Unitedly they can defeat the West in the Trade War, with the guidance of China who will of course be the founding member like them. At least the peoples are fed up with the crafty bossing of their old colonial masters, from across the seven seas! They undoubtedly expect the same from their leaderships, and ‘now or never’, they urge for! Can’t they follow EU, despite its deadly wars in the recent past? Peoples do not expect the leaderships to be the slaves of the old masters!
http://www.defencejournal.com/globe/index.shtml

[Roland Kunz]

Urs Kinzelbach - 11:46am Sep 12, 2001 CEST (#456 of 663)
Gabriel Hoefle #451

Auch wenn dieser Angriff tatsächlich "die Welt verändern" sollte, dann doch nicht in dem Sinne, daß keine offene Diskussion über politische Hintergründe mehr möglich ist. Das Gegenteil tut not.

Man darf auf keinem Auge blind sein, denn es geht tatsächlich ein Stück weit auch um unsere Zukunft, Sicherheit und Wohlstand. Die Folgen der Tat betreffen uns schon heute nicht nur auf der emotionalen Ebene, sondern auch auf der wirtschaftlichen - und damit existenziellen Ebene. Eindeutig ist: Wer auch immer die Hintermänner sein mögen, sie waren 100% skrupellos. Weit skrupelloser als die Kennedy - Attentäter und andere. Skrupellosigkeit ist keine arabische Eigenart, sondern generell diejenige Kraft, die Kriege möglich machte und macht, Skrupellosigkeit ist auch ein Stück Voraussetzung zur Machtausübung.

Alles, was sich seit dem Angriff bisher ereignete, war absehbar:

- die Urheberschaft wird radikalen Arabern um dieses Phantom "Bin Laden" zugeschrieben

- Kondolenzen aller Regierungen aus der Welt

- Der "Ruck" des Entsetzens. Der allgegenwärtige Kommentar, daß "die Welt sich verändert habe"

- die vorauseilende Zustimmung verbündeter Regierungen und aller möglichen Kommentatoren zu noch garnicht irgendwie näher definierten künftigen "Strafaktionen"

- die Ankündigung der US-Regierung, künftig nicht nur die mutmaßlichen Täter, sondern auch die Staaten, die ihnen Deckung geben, uneingeschränkt zur Verantwortung zu ziehen

Diese Reaktionen kamen unmittelbar, unreflektiert und unwiedersprochen. Sie waren selbstverständlich absehbar, die Frankfurter Rundschau faßt es zusammen:

"Die USA werden militärisch reagieren. Ein Straffeldzug, und wenn er um den halben Globus geführt werden muss, erscheint wahrscheinlich."

Wer den Anschlag durchführte, rechnete mit diesen Reaktionen. All dies ist höchst zwiespältig.

Angenommen, es waren wirklich arabische USA-Gegner:

Auch wenn das Motiv der "Rache" und "Strafe" an den USA vielleicht für die Täter selber im Vordergrund stand, so wußten doch auf jeden Fall die Hintermänner, daß die Folgen für die Palestinenser und die arabische Stellung in der Welt zunächst sehr ungünstig sein würde.

Politisch gesehen hat der Anschlag auf jeden Fall direkt mit der Lage in Palestina zu tun, allein schon deshalb, weil alle dies sofort vermuten. Ob die Urheberschaft deswegen bei arabischen Palestinensern liegt, ist eine andere Frage.

Wie war die Situation im palestinensisch - israelischen Dauerkonflikt vor dem Angriff?

Das letzte "große" politische Ergeignis war die UNO - Konferenz in Durban, wo viele große arabische und andere Staaten Israel des Rassismus gegenüber Palestinensern bezichtigten - und die Delegationen aus USA und Israel abzogen.

Palestinensische Selbstmordattentäter rissen seit Monaten regelmäßig israelische Menschen in den Tod, Israels internationale politische Position war geschwächt, es gab zahlreiche Versuche, auf Israel mäßigend einzuwirken. Versuche der israelischen Regierung, weiter zu eskalieren, wurden sowohl von Europa als auch aus dem US-Außenministerium eindeutig kritisiert. In Israel herrschte teilweise Verständnislosigkeit gegenüber der so empfundenen Gleichgültigkeit, mit der die Welt auf die Anschläge gegen israelische Menschen reagierte.

Weiterhin war die EU - inklusive J.Fischer - neu ins Spiel gekommen und versuchte, den Konflikt wieder auf die politische Verhandlungsebene zurückzuführen. Insbesondere wurde Syrien in diese Gespräche stärker einbezogen, insbesondere die Regierungsgespräche zwischen der deutschen Regierung und Assad waren eine echte Neuerung. Frankreichs Annäherungsversuche gegenüber Irak sind sowieso bekannt, insbesondere geht es hierbei nicht zuletzt um die Einführung des Euro als Zahlungsmittel auf dem Ölmarkt.

Der Angriff auf die USA hat diese Folgen:

- die USA müssen auf eine ganz neue, dramatische Weise Initiative beweisen

- es erscheint möglich, daß es politisch unreflektiert zu überstürzten Militäraktionen kommt, frei nach dem Motto, daß ungewöhnliche Ereignisse ungewöhnliche Maßnahmen erfordern

Zweifellos ist es erforderlich, die wahren Urheber dieses Anschlages tatsächlich zu identifizieren. Wer solche Skrupellosisgkeit beweist, stellt tatsächlich eine Gefahr für den Weltfrieden dar und ist zu noch ungeheuerlichen Taten sowohl fähig als auch bereit. Die Angelegenheit betrifft nicht nur die USA, sondern alle Völker dieser Erde. Ich bezweifle, daß die USA die wahren Hintermänner selber finden, identifizieren und der Öffentlichkeit bekanntgeben können und werden.

Wenn es zu den von so vielen erwarteten "Strafaktionen" kommt, werden zunächst Menschen sterben, die heute genauso arglos sind wie es jene in den angegriffenen Gebäuden gestern waren.

Steins - 12:28pm Sep 12, 2001 CEST (#460 of 663)
@ Marietta Bachmann #457

Sehr geehrte Frau Bachmann,

das von Ihnen Unterstellte findet sich in meinen Aussagen nicht, entschuldigt habe ich niemanden, sondern lediglich auf gesellschaftliche Zusammenhaenge hingewiesen. Sie hingegen heucheln menschliche Anteilnahme und rufen im naechsten Atemzug zum Krieg auf. Eine historische Analyse benoetigen Sie fuer Ihre Wertungen nicht. Warum auch, wenn Sie schreiben: " die Welt anzuenden werden nicht die, die - wie auch immer- auf diesen terroristischen Krieg reagieren. Die Welt angezuendet haben gestern Diejenigen, die diesen terroristischen Krieg begonnen haben, indem sie zehntausende toeteten. "

Hier meine Stellungnahme im Zusammenhang:


Krieg & Terror - Willkommen im 21. Jahrhundert
Am 11.09.2001 haben die Unterdrueckten dieser Welt dem Zentrum des (Nato-) Imperiums laut und deutlich gesagt: NEIN

So verabscheuungswuerdig auch diese Gewalt ist, verwundern tut an den Ereignissen nur, dass deren Eintreten so lange hat auf sich warten lassen. Um es klar zu sagen; Fuer die Eskalation der Gewalt in diesem Ausmass traegt das US Regime allein die Verantwortung. Die Generationen der durch den barbarischen US Imperialismus in den vergangenen Jahrzehnten unterdrueckten, gemordeten Menschen, Zivilisten, Frauen und Kinder, die nichts mehr zu verlieren haben als ihre Wuerde, haben am 11.September ein Zeichen gesetzt. Dies ist eine Reaktion auf die neuen, agressiven wie groessenwahnsinnigen Globalisierungsstrategien des NATO Imperiums.

Eines muss man sich klarmachen und den Herrschenden vermitteln, wer es noch nicht begriffen hat: Du bist nur stark, solange du den Menschen nicht alles nimmst. Ein Mensch, welchem du alles genommen hast, ist nicht mehr in deiner Gewalt. Er ist wieder frei! Alexander Solschenizyn, russischer Schriftsteller, 1970 Nobelpreis für Literatur

Zu befuerchten bleibt, dass die Spirale der Gewalt nun weiter angeheizt wird, Psychopaten und Massenmoerder wie Goerg Bush Jr. haben sich ja bereits in diese Richtung geaussert. Wenn diese Leute auch nur noch einen Funken Anstand besaessen, dann wuerde das US Regime abdanken und den Weg frei machen fuer demokratische Verhaeltnisse. Wenn ein demokratisches Amerika nicht laenger die Welt als seine Geisel betrachtet, aufhoert die Voelker militaerisch und wirtschaftlich zu unterdruecken, den blutigen US Terror gegen Laender und deren Menschen stoppt, dann ist dies die beste, womoeglich einzige Option, um derartige Gegenschlaege nicht mehr erleben zu muessen.

Unsere Anteilnahme sollte allen Menschen gelten, ungeachtet deren Rasse und Nationalitaet. Menschenrechte, das Recht auf Freiheit und Selbstbestimmung, sind unteilbar. Die Opfer des Angriffs auf die USA sind genauso Opfer der aggressiven Politik des US Imperiums, wie die Opfer in Nagasaki, Korea, Vietnam, Chile, El Salvador, Angola, Suedafrika, Beirut, Bagdad, Kurdistan, um nur einige zu nennen, sowie den Opfern und politischen Gefangenen in den Death Rows in den US Lagern selbst.

Die Bilder dieses Tages sind nur ein schwacher Vorgeschmack, auf das was uns in diesem Jahrhundert moeglicherweise noch bevorstehen wird. Dabei sind diese Bilder nur fuer uns in den NATO Kernstaaten neu, in Beirut, Bagdad, Kurdistan, Palaestina, auf dem Balkan und anderen Laendern und Kontinenten sind die Menschen es bereits gewohnt solche und aehnliche Bilder nicht nur sehen, sondern tagtaeglich auch erleben zu muessen. Deren Trauer um deren Angehoerige wiegt nicht weniger schwer.

Die Frage, was eigentlich sind die Gruende fuer eine solche Entwicklung, muss jenseits aller Propaganda gestellt werden. Alles andere ist einfach nur Heuchelei.

Am 11.09.2001 wurde Geschichte gemacht. Der Mythos des unbezwingbaren Imperiums moderner Praegung ist an diesem Tage gestuerzt worden. Der Krieg findet vorerst nicht im Weltraum statt. Willkommen im 21. Jahrhundert.

Stephan Steins Publizist Berlin


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gabriel Hoefle - 12:36pm Sep 12, 2001 CEST (#462 of 663)
Urs Kinzelbach #456 Es ist schön zusehen, das es hier jemanden gibt der Versuch über den zeitlichen Verlauf der letzten Monate die Ereignisse zu interpretieren ohne irgendwelche Verdächtige anzuklagen. Das einzig was jeder für sich durchdenken kann, ist der Versuch einzelnen Verdachtsgruppen (welche auch immer) als Ausgangsbasis dieser Ereignisse gedanklich festzuhalten. Über solche rein theoretische Grundsteine können dann für die jeweiligen Tatverdächtigen Szenarien entwickelt werden, die beschreiben wie sich die momentane Situation weiter entwickeln wird.

- Auszuschliessen scheint, und dass ist nicht nur meine subjektive Meinung, sondern die vieler befragter und wesentlich fundiertere Wissenschaftler, dass der Anschlag auf Auftrag "Palästinas" beruht. Deren finanziellen und logistischen Mittel reichen höchst wahrscheinlich hierfür nicht aus.

- Auszuschliessen möchte ich auch die "Theorie" der "Star - Wars - Projekt" - Förderung. Es gebe wesendlich einfachere und nicht so WAHNSINNIGE Mittel um eine weltweite Zustimmung für dieses Projekt zu erreichen.

- Für vorstellbar halte ich vorerst:

- Radikale innenpolitisch organisierte Gruppen

- linksradikale kapitalismusfeindliche Gruppierungen (vgl. rote Armeefraktion)

- radikale Globalisierungsgegner

- fundamentalistische staatenlose Gruppierungen

- Radikale anti-israelische Staaten im Nahen Osten

Urs Kinzelbach - 01:01pm Sep 12, 2001 CEST (#464 of 663)
Gabriel Hoefle #462

Der Angriff würde den Feinden Israels nützen, wenn die USA sich resigniert und verschreckt aus der Nahostpolitik zurückzögen. Dies jedoch war überhaupt nicht zu erwarten, vielmehr war das zu erwarten, was nun eintritt:

Die Benennung der Schuldigen (radikale Araber allgemein) sowie der Ruf nach Rache (auch hier wurden ja schon indirekt die potentiellen Ziele genannt {Staaten, die Deckung geben - also ggf. Syrien, Sudan, Lybien, Jemen, Irak, Afghanistan (Sonderrolle Taliban [wurden von USA gestützt - völlig undurchsichtige informelle Kanäle sind vorhanden - alles in der Tagespresse der letzten Jahre nachzulesen]}).

Fest steht, daß es nun eine Situation gibt, in der das Militär der USA quasi "freie Hand" zu haben scheint. Jetzt ist nicht die Zeit der "Zweifler" und "Bedenkenträger" - und schon garnicht die Zeit der "Weicheier", sondern die Zeit der Tat. So ist die Stimmung in den USA. Bis hierhin war die Entwicklung absehbar. Das weitere schon weniger.

Die jetzt zu befürchtende Entwicklung ist nicht im Sinne der arabischen Gegner Israels, da sie ein stärkeres machtpolitisches Engagement der USA im Nahen Osten herausfordert. Die Gegner der israelischen Position müssen ein Interesse daran haben -und hatten es immer-, das Verhältnis zwischen USA und Israel zu schwächen.

Allerdings gibt es eine noch perfidere Möglichkeit: Der Angriff diente tatsächlich als Provokation der USA. Nun wartet der Angreifer die Reaktion ab. Er hat jedoch heute schon vorgebaut - womit keiner rechnet - und in diversen US-Metropolen ticken bereits heute - irgendwo unauffindbar vergraben - die schlimmen Bomben?

Das Ergebnis: Die USA würden diesen Machtkampf wahrscheinlich nicht durchstehen, ohne tatsächlich Kompromisse eingehen und Zugeständnisse machen zu müssen.

Moscow online - 06:34pm Sep 12, 2001 CEST (#497 of 663)
George Bush: wir müssen bereit sein, so viel Geld auszugeben, wieviel unsere nationale Sicherheit dies erfordert (Rückübersetzung aus dem Englischen). Somit ist erst einmal die Frage, wem dieser fürchterliche Terrorakt nützte, zumindest teilweise beantwortet. Grotesk: keiner aus dem Geheimdienst, der so etwas eigentlich hat verhindern sollen, ist seines Amtes enthoben. Diese Menschen haben nur gewonnen. Keiner Fluggesellschaft, die Terroristen an Bord ließ, ist die Lizenz entzogen worden. Der durchschnittliche Amerikaner, der ja ohnehin unter der Last dieser Terrorwelle leidet, wird zur Kasse gebeten. Ich bezweifle, daß diese Greueltat die Araber gemacht haben: zu schwer selbst für einen Ben Laden. Aber der wird den Sündenbock spielen müssen, wie sonst. Auch Israel geht aus dieser Situation gestärkt hervor, mit einer nun sicheren Rückendeckung durch die USA. Wird die Welt einmal etwas über die eigentlichen Drahtziehr etwas erfahren? Kaum. Auch Ben Laden und seine schützende Hand Taliban sind mit US-Hilfe großgezogen worden, es ist kein Geheimnis.

Steins - 09:41pm Sep 12, 2001 CEST (#504 of 663)
@ Michael Korn #484

Sehr geehrter Herr Korn,

begreifen Sie den nicht, dass genau diese Logik die Quelle der Gewalteskalation bildet. Sie teilen die Welt ein in gute Tote und schlechte Tote. Die durch USA und NATO ermordeten Menschen sind nach Ihrer Interpretation also gerechtfertigte Tote, Sie machen sich die NATO Propaganda zu eigen, so einfach ist das.

Und fuer viele Staaten und Voelker dieser Welt ist der Widerstand gegen USA und NATO Imperium genauso legitim und ueberlebenswichtig, wie der antifaschistische Widerstand gegen Nazi Deutschland bis 1945. In diesen Gesellschaften wird im uebrigen mit genau der selben chauvinistischen Logik argumentiert, mit welcher Sie hier Partei ergreifen, die Positionen sind lediglich genau umgekehrt.

Fakt ist, und das laesst sich auch nicht durch platte Propaganda wegdiskutieren, dass USA und NATO sowie deren SatelittenStaaten es sind, welche weite Teile der Welt okkuppieren und unterdruecken. Nicht die USA und kein NATO Staat ist von fremden Truppen Besetzt oder Teile seines Territoriums annektiert.

Ferner brauchen wir wohl nicht darueber zu streiten, dass die USA an fast jeder militaerischen Schweinerei der letzten Jahrzehnte beteilligt waren.

Die heute Krokodilstraenen ueber die Opfer vergiessen, aber bei anderen militaerischen Morden durch USA und NATO schweigen, sind schlichtweg nur Heuchler.

-







21. August 2001




SPIEGEL ONLINE Forum Politik


Amerika wehrt ab – Raketen-Verteidigungssystem als Auslöser zu neuem Wettrüsten?
NMD – mit dem seit langem diskutierten Raketen-Abwehrsystem scheren die USA aus dem Verteidigungskonsens mit den Nato-Verbündeten aus. Russen und Chinesen fühlen sich provoziert, sehen sich zu Reaktionen gedrängt. US-Verteidigungsminister Rumsfeld sagte, seine Regierung würde das Projekt notfalls auch gegen die Bedenken Europas weiterverfolgen. Beginnt ein neues Wettrüsten, ein neuer „Kalter Krieg“? Oder ist diese Demonstration von Stärke auf lange Sicht sinnvoll?


B E I T R Ä G E


(426 vorhergehende Beiträge)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HuK - 05:50pm Sep 11, 2001 CEST (#427 of 663)
der "Zitäter"
Dieses abscheuliche Verbrechen führt das ganze NMD auf grausamste Weise ad absurdum!

Was, wenn in den Flugzeugen A- B- und/oder C-Bomben gewesen wären???

Bush und seine Rüstunsglobbyisten geben sich gefährlichten Illusionen hin!

Bleibt zu hoffen, dass sie diese jetzt angesichts der fürchterlichen Tragödie verloren haben.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Korn - 06:42pm Sep 11, 2001 CEST (#428 of 663)
was sind das für Lebensformen die diesen Anschlag feiern. Ist die Welt den vollkommen wahnsinnig geworden

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthias Poehl - 07:00pm Sep 11, 2001 CEST (#429 of 663)
Egal wie man die amerikanische Politik beurteilt: meine aufrichtige Anteilnahme für das amerikanische Volk, die Regierung, das ganze Land!!!! Zu mehr bin ich jetzt nicht fähig...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Reusch - 10:17pm Sep 11, 2001 CEST (#430 of 663)
Kein steinern Bollwerk kann der Liebe wehren
Ich bin fassungslos!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Um-Leitung - 11:19pm Sep 11, 2001 CEST (#431 of 663)
Kommunisten (China?) & Terroristen unter einer Hut? Wie Sie wissen, stehen sich China und Pakistan sehr nahe. Oder haben Sie heute in den Nachrichten eine Anteilnahme von China etwas gehört? Wahrscheinlich hat China diese Terroristen ermutigt und Geld gespendet. Die freuen sich innerlich und geben es nicht öffentlich zu! Wenn Europe die Zusammenhänge jetzt nicht sieht, wann dann? Diesen Anschlag muss wohl unter dem Rubrik "Der feigste Terror-Anschlag an zivile Bevölkerung" in die Geschichte eingehen.

@ Huk

Gerade durch diese Anti-Amerika Gerede mit NMD durch einige Staaten (auch Europa), kamen diese Terroristen wohl auf die Idee mit typischen terroristischem Mittel die USA ins Herz zu treffen. Leider war die USA auf einen solchen feigen Anschlag nicht vorbereitet. Wie krank, bösartig muss ein Kulter sein, um soviele zivile Bevölkerung zu ermorden? Und dann glauben diese Idioten er komme in den Himmel! Die schmorren jetzt wahrscheinlich in der Hölle.

Gerade jetzt die NMD in Frage zustellen, käme für die Terroristen gelegen. Diese Behauptung ist mit Zynismus nicht zu übertreffen. Solche Gedanken kommen meiner Meinung nach nur Anti-Amerikanern in den Sinn. Dann hätten die Spinner auch noch andere Möglichkeiten ihren "Feind" zu besiegen, weil keine NMD noch weniger Schutz! Logisch?

Für diesen Tat müssen alle Leute, die dafür verantwortlich sind die gerechte Strafe bekommen.

Und für die Verstorbenen und die Angehörigen wünsche ich von meinem ganzen Herzen, dass Sie diese Trauer verdauen können. Ich werde auch einige Gebete für diese Menschen aussprechen. Mögen Sie in Frieden ruhen.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HuK - 12:59am Sep 12, 2001 CEST (#432 of 663)
der "Zitäter"
Um-Leitung, #431


Gerade durch diese Anti-Amerika Gerede mit NMD durch einige Staaten (auch Europa), kamen diese Terroristen wohl auf die Idee mit typischen terroristischem Mittel die USA ins Herz zu treffen.
Meine Kritik richtet sich vehement gegen die m. E. unverantworliche, katastrophale Politik der US-Administration, also gegen Bush und seine militärischen Berater.

Seit wann ist das "Anti-Amerika Gerede"?

Die Bush-Administration ist nicht "Amerika".

Wieviel Prozent der US-Gesamtbevölkerung haben ihn denn gewählt? Haben Sie schon vergessen, auf welche zweifelhafte Art und Weise er die Mehrheit der Wahlmänner erhalten hat? Die Mehrheit der Menschen, die überhaupt zur Wahl gegangen sind, hat er nicht. Und wissen Sie noch, wie die Wahlbeteiligung war?


Leider war die USA auf einen solchen feigen Anschlag nicht vorbereitet.
Leider? Warum denn wohl???

Das will ich Ihnen sagen: Weil Bush Star Wars spielt und deswegen keinen Blick für die Realität in seinem Lande und in der Welt hat! Anstatt mehr für die innere Sicherheit und die Beseitigung sozialer Missstände zu tun, verpulvert er Milliarden Dollars im Weltraum.

Er sorgt sich m. E. nicht um die Sicherheit seiner Landsleute, sondern um die shareholder values der Waffenindustrie, die seinen Wahlkampf mit finanziert hat.

Bevor Sie mir hier Anti-Amerikanismus vorwerfen, sollten Sie mal einen Blick auf den Zustand der US-amerikanischen Gesellschaft werfen und prüfen, wie die Bush-Administration damit umgeht.

Für mich stand von Anfang an fest: NMD ist so gut wie nutzlos.

Die verbrecherischen Anschläge haben heute auf fürchterliche Weise gezeigt, dass es jederzeit unterlaufen werden kann.

Ich wünschte, meine Befürchtung wäre nie wahr geworden!

Aber gegen die Irren dieser Welt gibt es eben keinen absoluten Schutz. Man muss die Ursachen des Terrorismus bekämpfen.

Nach dem tiefen Mitgefühl für die unzähligen unschuldigen Opfer empfinde ich eine ohnmächtige Wut auf die Täter, vor allem aber auf die feigen, hinterhältigen Drahtzieher dieses abscheulichen Verbrechens.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Korn - 01:14am Sep 12, 2001 CEST (#433 of 663)
mach doch mal die Augen auf, die Zeiten sind vorbei in den wir uns drüber streiten konnten, ob wir Bush gut oder schlecht finden. Hier geht es um Terror, der unsere Freiheit bedroht. Wir müssen alles gegen diese lebensformen tun, was in unserer Macht steht.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Urs Kinzelbach - 01:28am Sep 12, 2001 CEST (#434 of 663)
Wer profitiert von diesem Anschlag? Wer hat etwas davon? Wer davon wäre dazu in der Lage? Mal sehen.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steins - 01:55am Sep 12, 2001 CEST (#435 of 663)
Thema Angriff auf USA 11.09.01

Heute haben die Unterdrueckten dieser Welt dem Zentrum des (Nato-) Imperiums laut und deutlich gesagt: NEIN

So verabscheuungswuerdig Gewalt auch ist, verwundern tut an diesen Ereignissen nur, dass deren Eintreten so lange haben auf sich warten lassen. Um es klar zu sagen; An der Eskalation der Gewalt in diesem Ausmass traegt der US Imperialismus allein die Verantwortung. Die Generationen der durch den barbarischen US Imperialismus in den vergangenen Jahrzenhten unterdrueckten, gemorderten Menschen, Zivilisten, Frauen und Kinder, die nichts mehr zu verlieren haben als ihre Wuerde, haben heute ein Zeichen gesetzt. Dies ist eine Reaktion auf die neuen, agressiven wie groessenwahnsinigen Globalisierungsstrategien des NATO Imperiums.

Zu befuerchten bleibt, dass die Spirale der Gewalt nun weiter angeheizt wird, Psychopaten und Massenmoerder wie Goerg Bush Jr. haben sich ja bereits in diese Richtung geaussert.

Willkommen im 21. Jahrhundert.

-

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J.S. - 02:19am Sep 12, 2001 CEST (#436 of 663)
Steins

dir scheint nicht klar zu sein was heute passiert ist. Feige Mistkerle haben den Freien Zugang zu Flugreisen dazu genutzt viele Zivilisten zu Töten. Wer wird hier unterdrückt? Diese Terroristen die man in ein Flugzeug gelassen hat ohne eine Leibesvisitation oder irgent ein anderes Hindernis? Hat man den Terroristen etwa gesagt "Du siehst Arabisch aus also geh zu Fuss!"? Nein! man hat ihnen wie jedem anderen auch ein Ticket verkauft und die Stewardess hat ihm freundlich erklärt wie er am schnellsten zu seinem Sitz kommt. Was soll das Gerede von Unterdrückten? Diese Terroristen sind die UNTERDRÜCKER!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marietta Bachmann - 02:29am Sep 12, 2001 CEST (#437 of 663)
Steins

"...Zivilisten, Frauen und Kinder haben ein Zeichen gesetzt" ??? Zivilisten, Frauen und Kinder setzen ein Zeichen gegen den amerikanischen Imperialismus, indem sie andere Zivilisten, Frauen und Kinder zu Tausenden töten ???

Wer diesen TERRORISTISCHEN Akt befürwortet, stellt sich auf eine Stufe mit denen, die ihn ausführten.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steins - 03:04am Sep 12, 2001 CEST (#438 of 663)
Nur mal eine Frage, wuerde mich persoenlich interressieren:

Dein Vater kommt von der Folter nicht zurueck, Dein Sohn ist im Widerstand gefallen, das Haus Deiner Mutter und Schwester wurde abgerissen, Dein Land ist nicht Souveraen, Teile davon durch Besetzung annektiert, Dein Volk leided Hunger waehrend ein von aussen am Leben erhaltenes MarionettenRegime in Saus und Braus lebt.

Nun gut, wir sind Buddhisten und lehnen Gewalt, auch antiimperialen und antifaschistischen Widerstand ab. Aber verwundert es ernsthaft, wenn Menschen beginnen sich zu wehren?

-

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J.S. - 03:13am Sep 12, 2001 CEST (#439 of 663)
Steins

Glaubst du im ernst das die Terroristen Hunger litten? Quatsch die bekamen gerade von der Stewardess ein Essen serviert! Darauf haben sie die Stewardess und viele andere Umgebracht.

Kapierst du nicht was passiert ist?


Aber verwundert es ernsthaft, wenn Menschen beginnen sich zu wehren?
Nein, jetzt werden sich die Menschen wehren.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J.S. - 03:26am Sep 12, 2001 CEST (#440 of 663)
Steins

Es wäre nett, wenn du deine Ideen für dich behälst. Heute sind vermutlich ein paar tausend Menschen gestorben und deine Ideen sind nicht angebracht. Falls du irgenteine Sympathie für das Palästinensische Volk haben solltest (warum auch immer) sollte dir klar sein das du heute das Ende jeder Aussicht für dieses Volk gesehen hast.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steins - 03:45am Sep 12, 2001 CEST (#441 of 663)
@ J.S.

Meine Sympathien gelten allen Menschen, ungeachtet deren Rasse und Nationalitaet. Menschenrechte, das Recht auf Freiheit und Selbstbestimmung, sind unteilbar. Die heutigen Opfer in USA sind genauso Opfer des US Imperiums, wie die Opfer in Nagasaki, Korea, Vietnam, Chile, El Salvador, Afrika, Beirut, Bagdad, um nur einige zu nennen, sowie den Opfern und politischen Gefangenen in den Death Rows in den US Lagern selbst.

Tue Dir selbst einen Gefallen und plappere nicht einfach die NATO Propaganda nach. Auch ist das Thema zu ernst, um auf dem Niveau von Fussball Chauvinismus zu argumentieren.

-

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J.S. - 03:54am Sep 12, 2001 CEST (#442 of 663)
Steins

Wir haben es hier mit Menschenverachtenden Terrorismus zu tun und du redest von "US Imperialismus". Was geht blos in dir vor? Heute sind ein paar tausend Menschen in den USA gestorben und das völlig sinnlos.

Man könnte über die Aussenpolitik der USA diskutieren aber nicht vor diesem Hintergrund.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steins

[Roland Kunz]

UNIVERSITY OF TASMANIA, AUSTRALIA


DE PROVERBIO
An Electronic Journal of International Proverb Studies

VOLUME 1 - Number 1 - 1995
ISSN 1323-4633
URL: http://info.utas.edu.au/docs/flonta/
E-mail: deproverbio.editor@modlang.utas.edu.au


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


WOLFGANG MIEDER
"... as if I were the master of the situation"
Proverbial Manipulation in Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf
For Alan Dundes on His Sixtieth Birthday
While there is no dearth of scholarly studies on the language use in Nazi Germany,[1] recent investigators have pointed out that such analyses should not only look at the language of National Socialism, but also at the German language as it was used throughout the country during the years of the Nazi regime.[2] Two early documents from that time clearly illustrate the latter desideratum. In his satirical work Die dritte Walpurgisnacht (1933), the Austrian cultural critic Karl Kraus exposes and attacks the rising National Socialism by way of its slogans, phrases, and proverbial expressions. He points out that this "politische Phrasenvernebelung" (political smoke-screen of phrases) had a marked influence on the general German population right from the start which, however, for the most part did not become aware of "what reality lies hidden behind such expressions".[3] Varying the German proverb "Die Sonne bringt es an den Tag" (The sun will bring it to light), Kraus writes that "Die Sprache [i.e., language] bringt es an den Tag".[4] This altered proverb is also cited several times in the autobiographical yet scholarly book entitled L[ingua] T[ertii] I[mperii]: Notizbuch eines Philologen (1947) by the Holocaust survivor Victor Klemperer[5] in order to point to the thoughtless and immoral language used during the Third Reich. And there is also the courageous essay with the Biblical-proverbial title of "An ihrer Sprache sollt Ihr sie erkennen: Die Gleichschaltung [i.e.; political coordination] der deutschen Sprache" (1938), in which Hans Jacob talks about the spreading "Vergewaltigung des Sprachgeistes" (rape of the spirit of the language) in Nazi Germany.[6] The title is a parody of the Bible proverb "An ihren Früchten sollt ihr sie erkennen" (Matth. 7:16; Ye shall know them by their fruits), and the article itself explains that German citizens should pay attention to the language of Hitler and his followers in order to comprehend their evil designs. Hitler actually used this very proverb on March 23, 1933, in a sarcastic speech against the Social Democrats. There he adds that "the fruits testify against them"[7] to the prophetic proverb, but little did Hitler know that it would be the fruits of his words and deeds that would in due time incriminate himself and his loyal Nazis.

Obviously the National Socialists had their special vocabulary which underpinned their political program with a pronounced rhetorical and propagandistic style. Detailed studies by Cornelia Berning, Werner Betz, Siegfried Bork, Rolf Glunk, Heinz Paechter, Wolfgang Sauer, Eugen Seidel and Ingeborg Seidel-Slotty, etc. have shown this in much detail,[8] but it must not be forgotten that the Nazis also made considerable use of all aspects of folk speech. At a party convention in 1934 Joseph Goebbels called directly for the use of such language: "We must speak the language which the folk understands. Whoever wants to speak to the folk must, as Luther says, pay heed to folk speech".[9]

Hitler actually had already said something quite similar in 1925/26 in Mein Kampf: "I must not measure the speech of a statesman to his people by the impression which it leaves in a university professor, but by the effect it exerts on the people" (477).[10] What Hitler claims to be of specific importance to a speaker addressing the common folk is of equal significance for the language of propaganda which he analyzes in various sections of his book: "All propaganda must be popular and its intellectual level must be adjusted to the most limited intelligence among those it is addressed to. Consequently, the greater the mass it is intended to reach, the lower its purely intellectual level will have to be" (180).[11]

Little wonder then that elements of folk speech appear with considerable frequency in Hitler's "Kampfbuch" (book of struggle), in the official party newspaper Völkischer Beobachter, and in all the Nazis' other publications, leaflets, and posters. In this regard Hitler's Mein Kampf is not so much an autobiographical account but in large parts rather "the typical life experience and the current ideological clichés [...] of the collective social experience".[12] These language clichés reach from stereotypes to vulgar expressions in the form of slogans and curses,[13] which attain their grotesque and aggressive climax in the anti-Marxist and anti-Semitic tirades. The cultural historian George Steiner made the following remarks regarding the "guilt" of the German language on the atrocities of the Nazis: "Hitler sensed in German another music than that of Goethe, Heine, and Mann; a rasping cadence, half nebulous jargon, half obscenity. And instead of turning away in nauseated disbelief, the German people gave massive echo to the man's bellowing".[14]

This linguistic crudity is apparent particularly in the generous employment of metaphors and formulaic structures.[15] The inclination of the Nazis towards the slogan, the headline, the quotation, the Bible verse - in short the almost mechanical use of formulaic phrases in oral speech and written texts - has been shown repeatedly by a number of scholars.[16] Detlev Grieswelle even speaks of a "Hammerschlagtaktik"[17] (hammer-blow tactic) to describe the way in which these formulaic structures are again and again integrated into speeches and written texts. Hitler was quite conscious of the effectiveness of this approach, as can be seen from the following quotation concerning "The Importance of the Spoken Word" (107; running header) in Mein Kampf: "But the power which has always started the greatest religious and political avalanches in history rolling has from time immemorial been the magic power of the spoken word [...] Only a storm of hot passion can turn the destinies of peoples, and he alone can arouse passion who bears it within himself. It alone gives its chosen one the words which like hammer blows can open the gates to the hearts of a people" (106-107).

The problem with the use of these ready-made formulas was, of course, that they were not intended to enlighten people but that they were cited to legitimize National Socialist ideology. This went so far that new slogans were created by the Nazi propaganda machine which in 1937 (!) were already included in the quickly Nazified standard collection of quotations, i.e., Georg Büchmann's Geflügelte Worte, the German equivalent to the Oxford Dictionary of Quotations or John Bartlett's Literary Quotations. Gunther Haupt and Werner Rust as editors have incorporated ten whole pages of quotations and slogans of National Socialism in their "Nazi-Büchmann", among them "Blutzeuge" (blood witness), "Mit den Juden gibt es kein Paktieren, sondern nur das harte Entweder-Oder" (out of Mein Kampf [206]: "There is no making pacts with Jews; there can only be the hard: either-or"), "der Trommler" (the drummer), "Wahrer Sozialismus heißt nicht: allen das Gleiche, sondern: jedem das Seine" (True socialism does not mean: to everybody the same, but rather: each to his own), "Nur wer gehorchen kann, kann später auch befehlen!" (Only he who can obey, can later also command), "Gemeinnutz [geht] vor Eigennutz" (The common good takes precedence over self-interest), "Gleichschaltung" (political coordination), "Ein Führer, ein Volk, ein Staat" (One leader, one folk, one state), "Kraft durch Freude" (strength through joy), and at the end even the first stanza of Horst Wessel's Nazi anthem "Die Fahne hoch!" (Raise high the banner!).[18]

This short list also includes two proverbs, but they too were misused and manipulated by the National Socialists in due time, as Theodor Heuß, Bertolt Brecht, and Ernst Bloch have clearly shown in the case of "Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz".[19] The proverbial concept of solidarity was quickly reinterpreted in order to justify the military and racist plans of the Nazis. And also the seemingly harmless proverb "Jedem das Seine" took on an inhuman quality as a grotesque slogan at the main gate of the Buchenwald concentration camp.[20] The same is true, of course, of the revolting use of the proverb "Arbeit macht frei" (Work makes free) at the main gate at Auschwitz. Ruth Klüger includes an unnerving paragraph about this proverb in her autobiography weiter leben (1992) wherein she describes her life and survival at Auschwitz as a young Jewish girl:


Everybody knows the proverb "Arbeit macht frei" (Work makes free) as the slogan with a murderous irony. There were other such proverbs at the crossbeams of our barracks [at Auschwitz]. REDEN IST SILBER, SCHWEIGEN IST GOLD (Speech is silver, silence is gold) was one of them. Even better was LEBEN UND LEBEN LASSEN (Live and let live). An earlier transport which did not exist any longer had had to affix these proverbs. I stared at them every day, disgusted by their absolute claim of truth, which this reality exposed as a total lie. German proverbs are an abomination for me since then, I can't hear a single one without imagining the crossbeams of a concentration camp barrack, and immediately weakening it by a devaluing remark. I have irritated many a pious soul who did not get acquainted with such life-supporting wisdom in the extermination camp with such apparent cynicism.[21]

This sobering statement is also reminiscent of the motto which Friedrich Wolf placed at the beginning of his poem "Der Sprichwort-Song" (1932) in which the three German proverbs "Armut schändet nicht" (Poverty is no disgrace), "Trocken Brot macht Wangen rot" (Dry bread makes red cheeks), and "Hunger ist der beste Koch" (Hunger is the best cook) are critically analyzed from a social point of view: "Selbst die Sprichwörter entlarven die Ideologie der jeweils herrschenden Klasse" (Even proverbs unmask the ideology of the ruling class at any given time).[22]
In an article on "Proverbs in Nazi Germany" (1982)[23] Wolfgang Mieder has shown in great detail what an important but dangerous role proverbs played in the Third Reich. But this study discusses primarily anti-Semitic proverb collections and the use of anti-Semitic proverbs and proverbial expressions during that time, showing in particular what kinds of inhuman functions this proverbial wisdom took on during the persecution and extermination of the Jews. Proverbial stereotypes turned into life-threatening weapons for these innocent victims of the Nazi regime. What originally were hateful verbal slurs was turned into murderous action against millions of people. How correct was Karl Kraus's statement at the time when Hitler came to power in 1933 that this meant an "Aufbruch der Phrase zur Tat"[24] (a change from the cliché to action)! What once was a metaphorical proverb or proverbial expression turned into aggressive action. This phenomenon is well explained by Hitler himself in his speech of January 30, 1942, in which the Biblical proverb "Auge um Auge, Zahn um Zahn" (Ex. 21:24; Matth. 5:38; An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth) is perverted into a folkloric justification of the actual extermination of the European Jews:


We recognize clearly that the war can end only with the extermination of the Aryan peoples or with the disappearance of the Jews from Europe. I have stated it already on September 1, 1939 (actually already on January 30, 1939) in the German Reichstag - and I am careful when it comes to premature prophecies - that this war will not end in the way that the Jews imagine it, namely that the European-Aryan peoples will be exterminated, but rather that the result of this war will be the destruction of Jewry. For the first time the authentic old Jewish law will be employed: "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth!"
And the further these fights are extended, the more anti-Semitism will spread - this the world Jewry better understand. [...] And the hour will come when this most evil world enemy of all times will have ceased playing its role for at least a thousand years.[25]

The question arises whether Hitler only made such "devilish" statements in the middle of the Second World War, or whether this change from cliché (among them proverbs and proverbial expressions) to dreadful deeds can be noticed already much earlier. Hitler's autobiographical book Mein Kampf is particularly suitable for an answer to this question. After all, it is only partially a report of Hitler's early life to about 1925 and much more a propagandistic declaration of the ideology of and the "Kampf" (struggle) for National Socialism in Germany. A few scholars have mentioned Hitler's use of proverbial phrases in Mein Kampf in a paragraph or two, but there has never been a systematic and complete identification of all proverbial texts as well as a detailed interpretation of their rhetorical function. Sigrid Frind quotes sixteen examples in order to show that Hitler "integrated colloquial speech rather liberally into the text".[26] Seven examples are noted by Siegfried Bork, who refers to Hitler's "linguistic carelessness" who, however, "consciously integrated primitive jargon" because "he wanted to rule the masses, and since the masses were not 'educated', they had to be spoken to in such a fashion that they could identify with that what was being said".[27] He comes a bit closer to the crux of the matter in another section of his book about Mißbrauch der Sprache (1970), i.e., the misuse of language by the Nazis, when he refers to Hitler's and their use of "'hammering' phraseology". Such slogans as "Deutschland erwache!" (Germany awaken!), "Kraft durch Freude" (Strength through joy), or "Wo der Führer ist, ist der Sieg" (Where the "Führer" is, there is victory) were used as ideological leitmotifs to manipulate people's opinions and to feign apparent legitimation of all aspects of National Socialism, especially its racial doctrines.[28] In a third study by Kirsten Gomard on linguistic usage during the Third Reich, it is argued that Hitler used metaphorical expressions merely in order "to make his text more understandable, partially through illustrations and partially through simplifications".[29] These scholarly observations are not incorrect, but in their brevity and superficiality they do not do justice to Hitler's consciously crafted rhetorical style and his programmatic intentions.
It is generally known, after all, that Mein Kampf was intended to be a kind of "Bible of National Socialism" in which Hitler intentionally used the style of the "charlatan agitator" as well as the propagandistic "language of mass fanaticism".[30] The American critic of culture and language Kenneth Burke noticed already in his significant early essay on "The Rhetoric of Hitler's 'Battle'" (1939) that this book suffers on account of its constant repetitions. But this endless reiteration of arguments and phrases was to Hitler's way of thinking absolutely effective, for "by means of it Hitler provided a 'world-view' for people who had previously seen the world but piecemeal".[31] It must be stressed, however, that Mein Kampf was only available in two rather large volumes until 1930 when it was printed in a more appealing one-volume "Volksausgabe" (folk edition). Until January 30, 1933, the total sales of the book in Germany amounted to just 287,000 copies, which to a certain degree justifies the claim that there was a "Nichtbeachtung" (ignoring) or "Nichtvertrautheit" (unfamiliarity) with the book before Hitler's actual rise to power in 1933.[32] After that, the sale numbers rose dramatically, reaching 5,450,000 copies by 1939 and 9,840,000 by 1943, i.e., almost ten million books sold.[33] The reasons for this "success" are known - Hitler's book belonged on the bookshelf, civil servants received it as a present for special accomplishments, justices of the peace gave it to newlyweds as a state gift, etc. But the book was not necessarily read. This is unfortunate indeed, for it contains in black and white what Hitler was planning for Germany and Europe, and in what brutal manner he intended to construct his Thousand Year Reich. But while people might not have read this book, thousands of them certainly listened voluntarily, or were obliged to listen, to his many inflammatory and hateful speeches. They often contained verbatim sections out of Mein Kampf so that people were confronted with its absurd goals whether they liked it or not. Hitler's book was also quoted plenty of times by teachers in schools which quickly became Nazified. Hitler's slogans from this book appeared on posters, in headlines, and on the radio, and they even wound up as sententious remarks in the "Büchmann" book of German quotations. There is no way to deny the effectiveness of this ill-conceived book. It found its readers one way or the other, just as Hitler lured people in droves to listen to his speeches. The printed book together with his oral rhetoric helped Hitler to gain ultimate power,[34] and his manipulative and shrewd (mis)use of folk speech with its proverbs and proverbial expressions played a considerable role in this process.

Hitler's rhetorical "art" as author and speaker consisted from the start at least in part in the way he employed pithy metaphorical expressions from colloquial speech in order to clarify or augment more abstract arguments or ideas. Quite often he uses so-called twin-formulas whose alliteration, rhyme, formulaic structure, and metaphors add expressive color and emotion to his otherwise tedious and lengthy sentences or paragraphs. The following contextualized examples show clearly how effectively such twin formulas as "mit Ach und Krach" (with fits and starts), "Zeter und Mordio jammern" (to raise a hue and cry), "außer Rand und Band geraten" (to go hog wild and pig crazy), "in Fleisch und Blut übergehen" (to enter one's flesh and blood), "hinter Schloß und Riegel" (under lock and key), "auf Biegen und Brechen" (through thick and thin), "sang- und klanglos" (unheralded and unsung), and "Mord und Totschlag" (mayhem and murder) were integrated into the prose text, adding much expressive power through the formulaic nature of folk speech:


Morally poisoned, physically undernourished, his poor little head full of lice, the young 'citizen' goes off to public school. After many fits and starts he may learn to read and write, but that is about all (32).
In this case, to be sure, the party [the Social Democrats] will raise a hue and cry; though it has long despised all state authority, it will set up a howling cry for that same authority and in most cases will actually attain its goal amid the general confusion (44).
I [Hitler] was even more indignant that the same Viennese press which made the most obsequious bows to every rickety horse in the Court, and went hog wild and pig crazy if he accidentally swished his tail, should, with supposed concern, yet, as it seemed to me, ill-concealed malice, express its criticisms of the German Kaiser (54).
When these principles enter the flesh and blood of our supporters, the movement will become unshakable and invincible (352).[35]
And so if National Socialists wanted to hold meetings in certain places and the unions declared that this would lead to resistance on the part of their members, the police, you may rest assured, did not put these blackmailing scoundrels under lock and key, but forbade our meeting (487).
I made it clear to the lads [the SA] that today probably for the first time they would have to show themselves loyal to the movement through thick and thin, and that not a man of us must leave the hall unless we were carried out dead (504).
Everywhere these organizations sprang up out of the ground, only to vanish unheralded and unsung (218).
Unfortunately, it was raining in the morning, and the fear seemed founded that under such circumstances many people would prefer to stay home, instead of hurrying through the rain and snow to a meeting at which there might possibly be mayhem and murder (499).

These examples illustrate Hitler's aggressive style based on folk speech, and it becomes clear that he uses the twin formulas in particular to characterize or embarrass his political enemies. He does the same with such expressions which declare enemies of the movement to be "Neunmalkluge" (smart alecks), "Angsthasen" (chicken-hearted), "Faulpelze" (lazybones), "Einfaltspinsel" (blockheads), and "Strohköpfe" (thick-heads). In Mein Kampf Hitler already knows everything better than anybody else. Whoever attempts to argue against him is quickly brushed aside as being incapable, stupid or timid:

The art of propaganda lies in understanding the emotional ideas of the great masses [...]. The fact that our smart alecks do not understand this merely shows how mentally lazy and conceited they are (180).
For the cursing and 'beefing' you could hear at the front [during World War I] were never an incitement to shirk duty or a glorification of the chicken-hearted. No! The coward still passed as a coward and as nothing else (192).
To them also belongs the type of lazybones who could perfectly well think, but from sheer mental laziness seizes gratefully on everything that someone else has thought, with the modest assumption that the someone else has exerted himself considerably (241).
Only a bourgeois blockhead is capable of imagining that Bolshevism has been exorcised (661).
We were treated to the spectacle (as we still are today!) of the greatest parliamentary thick-heads [straw heads] [...] suddenly setting themselves on the pedestal of statesmen, from which they could lecture down at plain ordinary mortals (671).

Hitler was a real virtuoso in declaring other people to be stupid. This is also evident from his repetitive employment of the proverbial expression "keine blasse Ahnung haben" (not to have the faintest [foggiest] idea) which appears five times as a leitmotif in this book. The frequent use of this phrase indicates Hitler's arrogance and presumptuousness and shows how he already considered himself at this early stage of his career as the all-knowing prophet:

We no longer had the faintest idea concerning the essence of the force which can lead men to their death of their own free will and decision (153).
People didn't have the foggiest idea that enthusiasm once scotched cannot be reawakened at need (167).
Independent thinking sometimes seems to these circles a true sin against holy advancement, so that we may not be surprised if even today a Bavarian state ministry, for example, still has not the faintest idea that the Jews are members of a people[36] and not of a 'religion' (306).
Anyone who believes today that a folkish National Socialist state must distinguish itself from other states only in a purely mechanical sense, by a superior construction of its economic life, [...], has not gone beyond the most superficial aspect of the matter and has not the faintest idea of what we call a philosophy (443).
Millions of German blockheads babbled this nonsense [about an apolitical existence] after him [the Jew in general], without having even the faintest idea that in this way they were for practical purposes disarming themselves and exposing themselves defenseless to the Jew (533).

It is interesting to note in these examples how a rather "faint" expression without much of a metaphor can become a powerful rhetorical weapon used quite pointedly against the Germans themselves, the Jewish population, etc. Of importance to Hitler is always just the immediate effectiveness of his momentary statement which is strengthened linguistically and emotionally by phrases from folk speech.
Hitler also delights in citing the proverbial expression "jdm. das Handwerk legen" (to put an end to someone's wheeling and dealing) in order to state belligerently how he will stop the activities of people whom he dislikes. The phrase is not necessarily threatening in normal language usage, but in the case of Hitler it expresses his obsession for power, his anti-Semitism, and his hate of Marxism at this early stage of his political development in the 1920s:


By it [absolute authority of leadership] alone can an end be put to the wheeling and dealing of such ruinous elements [Hitler means the Jews] (362).
On the whole, the bourgeois press, as usual, was partly pitiful and partly contemptible, and only a few honest newspapers greeted the fact that in one place at least someone has dared to put a halt to the wheeling and dealing of the Marxist highwayman (551).[37]
We would have to pay most catastrophically if in the spring of 1923 we did not avail ourselves of the opportunity to halt the wheeling and dealing of the Marxist traitors and murderers of the nation for good (678-679).

But there is also the proverbial expression "mit einem Schlage" (with one blow [stroke]) which appears seven times in Mein Kampf. With this phrase Hitler wants to express his spontaneity and forceful engagement when it comes to "hammer" out the program of his National Socialist movement. This forceful cliché reappears like the blows of a "Schlaghammer" (sledge-hammer) throughout this book, signalling perhaps also Hitler's growing explosiveness and temper fits in later years:

I was captivated with one blow [by Wagner's opera "Lohengrin"] (17).[38]
In the last hour [...] a means was chosen which seemed suited to stifle the German spring attack in the germ with one blow, to make victory impossible (195).
At one stroke the means was found to restore the sinking confidence of the Allied soldiers, [...] (197).
No more than Nature desires the mating of weaker with stronger individuals, even less does she desire the blending of a higher with a lower race, since, if she did, her whole work of higher breeding, over perhaps hundreds of thousands of years, might be ruined with one blow (286).
The banner-bearers of the Red International would then, [...], emit a fiery call to the proletarian masses, and their struggle at one stroke would be removed from the stuffy air of our parliamentary meeting halls to the factories and the streets (377).
The further result would be that at one stroke Germany would be freed from her unfavorable strategic position (665).

The expression "mit einem Schlage" certainly adds an element of a forceful struggle to these passages, and it should not be surprising that Hitler also makes frequent use of other formulaic phrases which date from the warfare of the Middle Ages or the military in general. After all, there is a reason for this book's being called Mein Kampf or "My Battle", and such proverbial phrases as "gegen jdn. Sturm laufen" (to be up in arms against), "Spiegelfechterei" (shadow-boxing), "auf Leben und Tod" (for life and death), "bei der Stange halten" (to stick to one's guns), "jdn. aus dem Felde schlagen" (to drive someone from the field [of battle]), "eine Bresche schlagen" (to make a breach), and "die Lunte ans Pulverfaß legen" (to place the fuse under the powder-barrel) all fit splendidly into Hitler's description of the battle for power of the National Socialists:

Since the Social Democrats best know the value of force from their own experience, they are most up in arms against those in whose nature they detect any of this substance which is so rare (43).
No! This is shadow-boxing and must be regarded as an attempt to divert attention (47).
For me [Hitler], to be sure, these incidents had the virtue that the squad of my loyal followers came to feel really attached to me, and was soon sworn for life and death by my side (558).
The enormous propaganda which had made the British people persevere and stick to their guns in this war, which recklessly incited them and stirred up all their deepest instincts and passions, now inevitably weighed like lead on the decisions of British statesmen (616).
And so he [the Jew] inevitably drives every competitor in this sphere from the field in a short time (322).
This, above all, is the fighting factor which makes a breach and opens the way for the recognition of basic religious views (380).
They [the meetings of the National Socialists] were like a powder barrel that could blow up at any moment, with a burning fuse placed already under it (484).

It is also of interest to mention Hitler's militaristic interpretation of the rather philosophical Hamlet-quotation "Sein oder Nichtsein (to be or not to be). This sententious remark turned proverb appears six times in Mein Kampf, and Hitler also used it repeatedly in his speeches, especially in his proclamations of the "Endkampf" (final battle) during 1944 and 1945. At the end of the Thousand Year Reich, Hitler was indeed concerned only with the struggle over life or death of the German people:

It is our duty to inform all weaklings that this [the struggle against Social Democracy] is a question of to be or not to be (44).
A fight for freedom had begun, [...] and this time not the fate of Serbia or Austria was involved, but whether the German nation was to be or not to be (161)
For me it was not that Austria was fighting for some Serbian satisfaction, but that Germany was fighting for her existence, the German nation for to be or not to be, for freedom and future (162).
Just as the Republic today can dissolve parties, this method should have been used at that time, with more reason. For to be or not to be of a whole nation was at stake! (169-170).
When the nations of this planet fight for existence - when the question of destiny, 'to be or not to be,' cries out for a solution - then all considerations of humanitarianism or aesthetics crumble into nothingness (177).
[...], the whole attention of a people must be focused and concentrated on this one question [the sin against blood and race], as though to be or not to be depended on its solution (249).

In a speech on March 5, 1932, at Bad Blankenburg in Thuringia Hitler had declared rather sarcastically and provokingly that "They are quite right, our enemies, when they say: It is a matter of to be or not to be. Very true! 'To be or not to be, that is the motto for Germany'."[39] In his speech of November 12, 1944, the still-prophetic "Führer" spoke of the determination that "in the vast battle of our people for to be or not to be the final victory will belong to it, the fighting front and the not less heroically fighting homeland".[40] The proverbial quotation is repeated twice in this speech with Hitler referring to the "common battle of all for to be or not to be" and to the "times of the battle of fate of all for to be or not to be".[41] Finally, on January 1, 1945, Hitler began his New Year's message to the German soldiers with the following statement, in which the Hamlet-proverb in view of the hopeless war efforts, was expanded by the additional twin formula "um Leben oder Tod" (for life or death):

Soldiers!
The world decisive meaning of the war in which we are engaged is today very clear to the German people: a merciless battle for to be or not to be, i.e., for life or death! Because the goal of our opposing Jewish-international world conspiracy is the extermination of our people.[42]

What incredible twisting of the actual situation! After all, Hitler knew only too well who was being "exterminated" in Germany at that time. This proverbial statement by Hitler is once again a clear indication of how he used his powerful rhetoric to the very end in order to convince the Germans to engage themselves in the senseless final battle.
It is a known fact that Hitler's speeches usually included some sections of wild roaring and incomprehensible screaming. It is not surprising then that Hitler himself characterized his grotesque rhetorical style in his early political speeches by such proverbial statements as "in my little circle I talked my tongue sore and my throat hoarse" (62) and "at that time I often talked my throat hoarse" (680). Generally Hitler prefers proverbial expressions which refer to the body. Such folk metaphors underscore his aggressive tirades and they mirror the violence of his thoughts. There are literally dozens of proverbial expressions which refer to such body parts as the eyes, feet, hair, head, backbone, finger, mouth, hands, body, ears, and shoulders. The following examples are a representative sample of this effective somatic rhetoric based on folk speech:


When I [Hitler] recognized the Jew as the leader of the Social Democracy, the scales dropped from my eyes (60).
I, too, was determined to leap into this new world, with both feet, and fight my way through (25).
The corrosive insolence of his behavior [i.e., a young despiser of authority], combined with an immorality, even at this age, which would make your hair stand on end (33).
Only the board fences around the brains of all so-called 'experts' were preserved for posterity (214).
You felt like dashing your head against the wall in despair over such people! (464)
With the occupation of the Ruhr, the French hoped not only to break the moral backbone of Germany once and for all, but to put us into an embarrassing economic situation (675).
It [the state] must keep a sharp eye on the fingers of the press (242).
At that time [...] I saw no enlightenment in this direction [about the peace treaties] from the parties which today have their mouths so full of words and act as if they had brought about the change in public opinion (468).
It is as plain as one's hand that combating Jewry on such a [religious] basis could provide the Jews with small cause for concern (120).[43]
For to come to grips with the body of that plague [syphilis], tremendous sacrifices and equally great labors are necessary (251)
Only when a nation is healthy in all its members, in body and soul, can every man's joy in belonging to it rightfully be magnified to that high sentiment which we designate as national pride (427).
Again and again, I begged them [certain politicians] to give free rein to fate, and to give our movement an opportunity for a reckoning with Marxism; but I preached to deaf ears (681).
They [the petty bourgeois] will laugh at it [at racial purity] or shrug their crooked shoulders and moan forth their eternal excuse: 'That would be very nice in itself, but it can't be done!' (405-406).
Let anyone who is inclined to shrug his shoulders at this ["prostitution of the people's soul"] just study the basic statistical facts on the dissemination of this plague (257).

In two of these examples the somatic expressions are used in statements dealing with Hitler's scorn for prostitution and syphilis. They both appear in the chapter on "Causes of the Collapse [in the First World War]" in which Hitler in a special section (pp. 246-266) also describes the "terrible poisoning of the health of the national body" (246) in drastic metaphors. He takes on the tone of a preacher confronting his flock with its sins and scorns especially those people who do not confront the syphilitic plague energetically enough. By simultaneously employing two twin formulas referring to the Bible, Hitler succeeds in drawing a picture of Germany as a hellhole on the verge of destruction:

They [certain people] wrap themselves in a saint's cloak of prudishness as absurd as it is hypocritical; they speak of this whole field [i.e., syphilis] as if it were a great sin, and above all express their profound indignation against every sinner caught in the act, then close their eyes in pious horror to this godless plague and pray God to let sulphur and brimstone - preferably after their own death - rain down on this whole Sodom and Gomorrah, thus once again making an instructive example of this shameless humanity (248).

On this point one might even argue that Hitler has a kind of language power which is reminiscent of that of Martin Luther, who integrated many proverbs and proverbial expressions into his folk sermons.[44] But after reading the following paragraph by Hitler, it becomes only too obvious what he has in mind with his health obsession. Syphilis is nothing else for him but a symbol for the sinful impurity of the German-Aryan race through the Jews. This absurd claim is underscored by Hitler with a shrewdly misused Biblical proverb (Exodus 20:5) whose claim to authority strengthens the psychological and propagandistic manipulation of the German citizenry:

But then more than ever the question becomes: Which people will be the first and only one to master this plague by its own strength, and which nations will perish from it? And this is the crux of the whole matter. Here again we have a touchstone of a race's value - the race which cannot stand the test will simply die out, making place for healthier or tougher and more resistant races. For since this question primarily regards the offspring, it is one of those about which it is said with such terrible justice that the sins of the fathers are visited down to the tenth generation. But this truth applies only to profanation of the blood and the race. Blood sin and desecration of the race are the original sin in this world and the end of humanity which surrenders to it (248-249).

At the end of this section Hitler adds the threatening exclamation "Woe to the peoples who can no longer be the master of this disease!" (259). The simple expression "Herr der Lage sein" (to be the master of the situation) refers without doubt to Hitler's ideal of the Aryan "superman", and who will be surprised to learn that Hitler used this phrase a total of seven times as a guiding leitmotif throughout Mein Kampf.[45] Its first occurrence indicates the "master" Hitler in his anti-Semitic confrontation with the Jews which reappears in many places throughout the book: "Who, in view of the diabolical craftiness of these seducers [the Jews], could damn the luckless victims [the Germans]? How hard it was, even for me, to

[Roland Kunz]

Introduction
excerpted from the book
Rogue State
by William Blum
Common Courage Press, 2000


For 70 years, the United States convinced much of the world that 1 there was an international conspiracy out there. An International Communist Conspiracy, seeking no less than control over the entire planet, for purposes which had no socially redeeming values. And the world was made to believe that it somehow needed the United States to save it from communist darkness. "Just buy our weapons," said Washington, "let our military and our corporations roam freely across your land, and give us veto power over whom your leaders will be, and we'll protect you."
It was the cleverest protection racket since men convinced women that they needed men to protect them-if all the men vanished overnight, how many women would be afraid to walk the streets?
And if the people of any foreign land were benighted enough to not realize that they needed to be saved, if they failed to appreciate the underlying nobility of American motives, they were warned that they would burn in Communist Hell. Or a CIA facsimile thereof. And they would be saved nonetheless.
A decade after the fall of the Berlin Wall, America is still saving countries and peoples from one danger or another. The scorecard reads as follows: From 1945 to the end of the century, the United States attempted to overthrow more than 40 foreign govemments, and to crush more than 30 populist-nationalist movements struggling against intolerable regimes. In the process, the US caused the end of life for several million people, and condemned many millions more to a life ~f agony and despair.
As I write this in Washington, DC, in April 1999, the United States is busy saving Yugoslavia. Bombing a modem, sophisticated society back to a pre-industrial age. And The Great American Public, in its infinite wisdom, is convinced that its govemment is motivated by "humanitarian" impulses.
Washington is awash with foreign dignitaries here to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, three days of unprecedented pomp and circumstance. The prime ministers, presidents and foreign ministers, despite their rank, are delighted to be included amongst the schoolyard bully's close friends. Private corporations are funding the opulent weekend; a dozen of them paying $250,000 apiece to have one of their executives serve as a director on the NATO Summit's host committee. Many of the same firms lobbied hard to expand NATO by adding the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland, each of which will be purchasing plentiful quantities of military hardware from these companies.
This marriage of NATO and the transnationals is the foundation of the New World Order, the name George Bush gave to the American Empire. The credibility of the New World Order depends upon the world believing that the new world will be a better one for the multitude of humanity, not just for those for whom too much is not enough, and believing that the leader of the New World Order, the United States, means well.
Let's have a short look at some modem American history, which may be instructive. A congressional report of 1994 informed us that:
Approximately 60,000 military personnel were used as human subjects in the 1940s to test two chemical agents, mustard gas and lewisite [blister gas]. Most of these subjects were not informed of the nature of the experiments and never received medical followup after their participation in the research. Additionally, some of these human subjects were threatened with imprisonment at Fort Leavenworth if they discussed these experiments with anyone, including their wives, parents and family doctors. For decades, the Pentagon denied that the research had taken place, resulting in decades of suffering for many veterans who became ill after the secret testing.
Now let's skip ahead to the 1990s. Many thousands of American soldiers came home from the Gulf War with unusual, debilitating ailments. Exposure to harmful chemical or biological agents was suspected, but the Pentagon denied that this had occurred. Years went by while the Gls suffered terribly: neurological problems, chronic fatigue, skin problems, scarred lungs, rnemory loss, muscle and joint pain, severe headaches, personality changes, passing out and much more. Eventually, the Pentagon, inch by inch, was forced to move away from its denials and admit that, yes, chemical weapon depots had been bombed; then, yes, there probably were releases of the deadly poisons; then, yes, American servicemen were indeed in the vicinity of these poisonous releases, 400 soldiers; then, it might have been 5,000; then, "a very large number", probably more than 15,000i then, finally, a precise number-20,867; then, "The Pentagon announced that a longawaited computer model estimates that nearly 100,000 U.S. soldiers could have been exposed to trace amounts of sarin gas..."
Soldiers were also forced to take vaccines against anthrax and nerve gas not approved by the FDA as safe and effective, and punished, sometimes treated like criminals, if they refused. (During World War II, US soldiers were forced to take a yellow fever vaccine, with the result that some 330,000 of them were infected with the hepatitis B virus.3) Finally, in late 1999, almost nine years after the Gulf War's end, the Defense Department announced that a drug given to soldiers to protect them against a particular nerve gas, "cannot be ruled out" as a cause of lingering illnesses in some veterans.4
The Pentagon brass, moreover, did not wam American soldiers of the grave danger of being in close proximity to expended depleted uranium weapons on the battlefield.
If the Pentagon had been much more forthcoming from the outset about what it knew all along about these various substances and weapons, the soldiers might have had a proper diagnosis early on and received appropriate care sooner. The cost in terms of human suffering was incalculable. One gauge of that cost may lie in the estimate that one-third of the homeless in America are military veterans.
And in the decades between the 1940s and 1990s, what do we find? A remarkable variety of govemment programs, either formally, or in effect, using soldiers as guinea pigs-marched to nuclear explosion sites, with pilots then sent through the mushroom clouds; subjected to chemical and biological weapons experiments; radiation experiments; behavior modification experiments that washed their brains with LSDi exposure tO the dioxin of Agent Orange in Korea and Vietnam...the list goes on...literally millions of experimental subjects, seldom given a choice or adequate information, often with disastrous effects to their physical and/or mental health, rarely with proper medical care or even monitoring.
The moral of this little slice of history is simple: If the United States govemment does not care about the health and welfare of its own soldiers, if our leaders are not moved by the prolonged pain and suffering of the wretched warriors enlisted to fight the empire's wars, how can it be argued, how can it be believed, that they care about foreign peoples? At all.
When the Dalai Lama was asked by a CIA officer in 1995: "Did we do a good or bad thing in providing this support [to the Tibetans]?'', the Tibetan spiritual leader replied that though it helped the morale of those resisting the Chinese, "thousands of lives were lost in the resistance" and that "the U.S. Govemment had involved itself in his country's affairs not to help Tibet but only as a Cold War tactic to challenge the Chinese."
"Let me tell you about the very rich," wrote F. Scott Fitzgerald. "They are different from you and me."
So are our leaders.
Consider Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security adviser to Jimmy Carter. In a 1998 interview he admitted that the official story that the US gave military aid to the Afghanistan opposition only after the Soviet invasion in 1979 was a lie. The truth was, he said, that the US began aiding the Islamic fundamentalist Moujahedeen six months before the Russians made their move, even though he believed-and told this to Carter-that "this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention".
Brzezinski was asked whether he regretted this decision.
Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it' The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter: We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam War. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.7
Besides the fact that there is no demonstrable connection between the Afghanistan war and the breakup of the Soviet empire, we are faced with the consequences of that war: the defeat of a govemment committed to bringing the extraordinarily backward nation into the 20th century; the breathtaking camage; Moujahedeen torture that even US govemment officials called "indescribable horror"; half the population either dead, disabled or refugeesi the spawning of thousands of Islamic fundamentalist terrorists who have unleashed atrocities in numerous countries; and the unbelievable repression of women in Afghanistan, instituted by America's wartime allies.
And for playing a key role in causing all this, Zbigniew Brzezinski has no regrets. Regrets? The man is downright proud of it! The kindest thing one can say about such a person-as about a sociopath-is that he's arnoral. At least in his public incamation, which is all we're concemed with here. In medieval times he would have been called Zbigniew the Terrible.
And what does this tell us about Jimmy Carter, whom many people think of as perhaps the only halfway decent person to occupy the White House since Roosevelt? Or is it Lincoln?
In 1977, when pressed by joumalists about whether the US had a moral obligation to help rebuild Vietnam, President Carter responded: "Well, the destruction was mutual."9 (Perhaps when he observed the devastation of the South Bronx later that year, he was under the impression that it had been caused by Vietnamese bombing.)
In the now-famous exchange on TV between Madeleine Albright and reporter Lesley Stahl, the latter was speaking of US sanctions against Iraq, and asked the then-US ambassador to the UN: "We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And-and you know, is the price worth it."
Replied Albright: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price-we think the price is worth it."
One can give Albright the absolute full benefit of any doubt and say that she had no choice but to defend administration policy. But what kind of person is it who takes a job appointment knowing full well that she will be an integral part of such ongoing policies and will be expected to defend them without apology? Not long afterwards, Albright was appointed Secretary of State.
Lawrence Summers is another case in point. In December 1991, while chief economist for the World Bank, he wrote an intemal memo saying that the Bank should encourage migration of "the dirty industries" to the less-developed countries because, amongst other reasons, health-impairing and death-causing pollution costs would be lower. Inasmuch as these costs are based on the lost eamings of the affected workers, in a country of very low wages the computed costs would be (much lower. "I think," he wrote, "the economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest-wage country is impeccable and we should face up to that." Despite this memo receiving wide distribution and condemnation, Summers, in 1999, was appointed Secretary of the Treasury by President Clinton. This was a promotion from being Undersecretary of the Treasury-for intemational affairs.
We also have Clinton himself, who on day 33 of the aerial devastation of Yugoslavia-33 days and nights of destroying villages, schools, hospitals, apartment buildings, the ecology, separating people from their limbs, from their eyesight, spilling their intestines, traumatizing children for the rest of their days...destroying a life the Serbians will never know again-on day 33 William Jefferson Clinton, cau. tioning against judging the bombing policy prematurely, saw fit to declare: "This may seem like a long time. [But] I don't think that this air campaign has been going on a particularly long time." And then the man continued it another 45 days.
Clinton's vice president, Albert Gore, appears eminently suitable to succeed him to the throne. In 1998, he put great pressure on South Africa, threatening trade sanctions if the govemment didn't cancel plans to use much cheaper generic AIDS drugs, which would cut into US companies' sales. South Africa, it should be noted, has about three million HlV-positive persons among its largely impoverished population. When Gore, who at the time had significant ties to the drug industry, was heckled for what he had done during a speech in New York, he declined to respond in substance, but instead called out: "I love this country. I love the First Amendment."
It's interesting to note that when Madeleine Albright was heckled in Columbus, Ohio in February 1998, while defending the administration's Iraq policy, she yelled: "We are the greatest country in the world!"
Patriotism is indeed the last refuge of a scoundrel, though Gore's and Albright's words don't quite have the ring of "Deutschland uber alles" or "Rule Britannia".
In 1985, Ronald Reagan, demonstrating the preeminent intellect for which he was esteemed, tried to show how totalitarian the Soviet Union was by declaring: "I'm no linguist, but I've been told that in the Russian language there isn't even a word for 'freedom'." In light of the above cast of characters and their declarations, can we ask if there's a word in American English for "embarrassment"?
No, it is not simply that power corrupts and dehumanizes.
Neither is it that US foreign policy is cruel because American leaders are cruel.
It's that our leaders are cruel because only those willing to be inordinately cruel and remorseless can hold positions of leadership in the foreign policy establishment; it might as well be written into the job description. People capable of expressing a full human measure of compassion and empathy toward faraway powerless strangers - (let alone American soldiers - do not become president of the United States, or vice president, or secretary of state, or national security adviser or secretary of the treasury. Nor do they want to.
There's a sort of Peter Principle at work here. Laurence Peter wrote that in a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence. Perhaps we can postulate that in a foreign policy establishment committed to imperialist domination by any means necessary, employees tend to rise to the level of cruelty they can live with.
A few days after the bombing of Yugoslavia had ended, the New York Tmes published as its lead article in the Sunday Week in Review, a piece by Michael Wines, which declared that "Human rights had been
elevated to a military priority and a preeminent Westem value...The war only underscored the deep ideological divide between an idealistic New World bent on ending inhumanity and an Old World equalIy fatalistic about unending conflict...there is also a yawning gap between the West and much of the world on the value of a single life."
And so on. A paean to the innate goodness of the West, an ethos unfortunately not shared by much of the rest of the world, who, Wines lamented, "just don't buy into Westem notions of rights and responsibilities." The Tmes fed us this morality tale after "the West" had just completed the most ferocious sustained bombing of a nation in the history of the planet, a small portion of whose dreadful consequences are referred to above.
During the American bombing of Iraq in 1991, the previous record for sustained ferociousness, a civilian air raid shelter was destroyed by a depleted-uranium projectile, incinerating to charred blackness many hundreds of people, a great number of them women and children. White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater, reiterating US military statements that the shelter had been a command-and-control center, said: "We don't know why civilians were at that location, but we do know that Saddam Hussein does not share our value for the sanctity of human life."~8
Similarly, during the Viemam War, President Johnson and other govemment officials assured us that Asians don't have the same high regard for human life as Americans do. We were told this, of course, as American bombs, napalm, Agent Orange and helicopter gunships were disintegrating the Viemamese and their highly regarded lives.
And at the same time, on a day in February 1966, David Lawrence, the editor of US News & World Report was moved to put the following words to paper: "What the United States is doing in Vietnam is the most significant example of philanthropy extended by one people to another that we have wimessed in our times."
I sent Mr. Lawrence a copy of a well-done pamphlet entitled American Atrocities in Vietnam, which gave graphic detail of its subject. To this I attached a note which first repeated Lawrence's quotation with his name below it, then added: "One of us is crazy", followed by my name.
Lawrence responded with a full page letter, at the heart of which was: "I think a careful reading of it [the pamphlet] will prove the point I was trying to make-namely that primitive peoples with savagery in their hearts have to be helped to understand the true basis of a civilized existence."
The American mind-as exemplffled by that of Michael Wines and David Lawrence-is, politically, so deeply formed that to liberate it would involve uncommon, and as yet perhaps undiscovered, philosophical and surgical skill. The great majority of Americans, even the most cynical, who need no convincing that the words that come out (of a politician's mouth are a blend of mis-, dis- and non-information, and should always carry a veracity health waming - appear to lose their critical faculties when confronted by "our boys who are risking their lives". If love is blind, patriotism has lost all five senses.
To the extent that the cynicism of these Americans is directed toward their government's habitual foreign adventures, it's to question whether the administration's stated interpretation of a situation is valid, whether the stated goals are worthwhile, and whether the stated goals can be achieved-but not to question the govemment's motivation. It is assumed a priori that our leaders mean well by the foreign people involved-no matter how much death, destruction and suffering their policies objectively result in.

[Jack Olsen]

Roland, speaking as a complete stranger who lives half way around the world in Los Angeles, let me say that I am extremely happy that you are such an active presence on this bulletin board. Thank you for your very thought-provoking contributions.

------------------
Jack Olsen
My Rennlist page • My Pelican Gallery page • My Porsche Owners Gallery page

[Planter91C2]

roland, although i appreciate your technical assistance, i do not appreciate some of this anti-american rhetoric.





the truth is on their faces.

[Roland Kunz]

[b)Roland, speaking as a complete stranger who lives half way around the world in Los Angeles, let me say that I am extremely happy that you are such an active presence on this bulletin board. Thank you for your very thought-provoking contributions.[/b]

Hello Jack

I just used it to collect interessting things and maybe someone able to read german ( Or translates it via babelfish a.o. ) will understand those parts too.

This is may way to work things out.
The whole story was suspect to me as I always followed the Nationalists movments since the last years and how they get international. Germany has many very right orientatet people and some are very right or better say brown as the **** in there brains.
Now the funny thing is they got supportet and hostet from natinalsits in the US, Japan, Russia,, all over the world and they still think that ol AH was greatest all time leader. And they still have that "Iron Dream" from a elite rule the world and make underpeople to slaves and use others resources for there fortune.

OK I´m a german and I´m maybe to oversensitive ( or say I learnd MY leason from the world history )

In fact I´m happy to see you as I had fears redding Olson on the victim list.
However each one on a punisment or death list is one to much.

But I know the problems from democracy since Arsitotiles idears where reviewed by Socrates.

So I would say I try to be a socratic follower.
( now 99% from the fellow readers have to use google to follow up so they will get educatet or more sophisticatet hopefully and learn to reflect the dirt )

Grüsse

[Roland Kunz]

undefined
More...


undefined
[Close]


undefined
[Close]


undefined


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PEARL HARBOR
MOTHER OF ALL CONSPIRACIES


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"...everything that the Japanese were planning to do was known to the United States..." ARMY BOARD, 1944
President Roosevelt (FDR) provoked the attack, knew about it in advance and covered up his failure to warn the Hawaiian commanders. FDR needed the attack to sucker Hitler to declare war, since the public and Congress were overwhelmingly against entering the war in Europe. It was his backdoor to war.

FDR blinded the commanders at Pearl Harbor and set them up by -

denying intelligence to Hawaii (HI)
on Nov 27, misleading the commanders into thinking negotiations with Japan were continuing to prevent them from realizing the war was on
having false information sent to HI about the location of the Japanese carrier fleet.
BACKGROUND
1904 - The Japanese destroyed the Russian navy in a surprise attack in undeclared war.
1932 - In The Grand Joint Army Navy Exercises the attacker, Admiral Yarnell, attacked with 152 planes a half-hour before dawn 40 miles NE of Kahuku Point and caught the defenders of Pearl Harbor completely by surprise. It was a Sunday.
1938 - Admiral Ernst King led a carrier-born airstrike from the USS Saratoga successfully against Pearl Harbor in another exercise.
1940 - FDR ordered the fleet transferred from the West Coast to its exposed position in Hawaii and ordered the fleet remain stationed at Pearl Harbor over complaints by its commander Admiral Richardson that there was inadequate protection from air attack and no protection from torpedo attack. Richardson felt so strongly that he twice disobeyed orders to berth his fleet there and he raised the issue personally with FDR in October and he was soon after replaced. His successor, Admiral Kimmel, also brought up the same issues with FDR in June 1941.
7 Oct 1940 - Navy IQ analyst McCollum wrote an 8 point memo on how to force Japan into war with US. Beginning the next day FDR began to put them into effect and all 8 were eventually accomplished.
11 November 1940 - 21 aged British planes destroyed the Italian fleet, including 3 battleships, at their homeport in the harbor of Taranto in Southern Italy by using technically innovative shallow-draft torpedoes.
11 February 1941 - FDR proposed sacrificing 6 cruisers and 2 carriers at Manila to get into war. Navy Chief Stark objected: "I have previously opposed this and you have concurred as to its unwisdom. Particularly do I recall your remark in a previous conference when Mr. Hull suggested (more forces to Manila) and the question arose as to getting them out and your 100% reply, from my standpoint, was that you might not mind losing one or two cruisers, but that you did not want to take a chance on losing 5 or 6." (Charles Beard PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT AND THE COMING OF WAR 1941, p 424)
March 1941 - FDR sold munitions and convoyed them to belligerents in Europe -- both acts of war and both violations of international law -- the Lend-Lease Act.
23 Jun 1941 - Advisor Harold Ickes wrote FDR a memo the day after Germany invaded the Soviet Union, "There might develop from the embargoing of oil to Japan such a situation as would make it not only possible but easy to get into this war in an effective way. And if we should thus indirectly be brought in, we would avoid the criticism that we had gone in as an ally of communistic Russia." FDR was pleased with Admiral Richmond Turner's report read July 22: "It is generally believed that shutting off the American supply of petroleum will lead promptly to the invasion of Netherland East Indies...it seems certain she would also include military action against the Philippine Islands, which would immediately involve us in a Pacific war." On July 24 FDR told the Volunteer Participation Committee, "If we had cut off the oil off, they probably would have gone down to the Dutch East Indies a year ago, and you would have had war." The next day FDR froze all Japanese assets in US cutting off their main supply of oil and forcing them into war with the US. Intelligence information was withheld from Hawaii from this point forward.
14 August - At the Atlantic Conference, Churchill noted the "astonishing depth of Roosevelt's intense desire for war." Churchill cabled his cabinet "(FDR) obviously was very determined that they should come in.".
18 October - diary entry by Secretary of Interior Harold Ickes: "For a long time I have believed that our best entrance into the war would be by way of Japan."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CODES
Purple Code - the top Japanese diplomatic machine cipher which used automatic telephone switches to separately and differently encipher each character sent. It was cracked by the Army Signal Intelligence Service (331 men).
J-19 was the main Japanese diplomatic code book. This columnar code was cracked.
Coral Machine Cipher or JNA-20 was a simplified version of Purple used by Naval attaches. Only one message deciphered prior to Pearl Harbor has been declassified.
JN-25 - The Japanese Fleet's Cryptographic System, a.k.a. 5 number code (Sample). JN stands for Japanese Navy, introduced 1 June 1939. This was a very simple old-type code book system used by the American Army and Navy in 1898 and abandoned in 1917 because it was insecure. Version A has a dictionary of 5,600 numbers, words and phrases, each given as a five figure number. These were super-enciphered by addition to random numbers contained in a second code book. The dictionary was only changed once before PH on Dec 1, 1940, to a slightly larger version B but the random book was changed every 3 to 6 months- last on Aug 1. The Japanese blundered away the code when they introduced JN25-B by continuing to use, for 2 months, random books that had been previously solved by the Allies. That was the equivalent of handing over the JN-25B codebook. It was child's play for the Navy group OP-20-G (738 men whose primary responsibility was Japanese naval codes) to reconstruct the exposed dictionary. We recovered the whole thing immediately - in 1994 the NSA published that JN-25BB was completely cracked in December 1940. In January 1941 the US gave Britain two JN-25B code books with keys and techniques for deciphering. The entire Pearl Harbor scheme was laid out in this code. The official US Navy statement on JN-25B is the NAVAL SECURITY GROUP HISTORY TO WORLD WAR II prepared by Captain J. Holtwick in June 1971 who quotes Captain Safford, the chief of OP-20-G, on page 398: "By 1 December 1941 we had the code solved to a readable extent." Churchill wrote "From the end of 1940 the Americans had pierced the vital Japanese ciphers, and were decoding large numbers of their military and diplomatic telegrams."(GRAND ALLIANCE p 598) Safford reported that during 1941 "The Navy COMINT team did a thorough job on the Japanese Navy with no help from the Army."(SRH-149) " ... many pattern messages could be read practically entire with as few as 1500 meanings." (NSA).
In 1979 the NSA released 2,413 JN-25 orders of the 26,581 intercepted by US between Sept 1 and Dec 4, 1941. The NSA says "We know now that they contained important details concerning the existence, organization, objective, and even the whereabouts of the Pearl Harbor Strike Force." (Parker p 21) Of the over thousand radio messages sent by Tokyo to the attack fleet, only 20 are in the National Archives. All messages to the attack fleet were sent several times, at least one message was sent every odd hour of the day and each had a special serial number. Starting in early November 1941 when the attack fleet assembled and started receiving radio messages, OP-20-G stayed open 24 hours a day and the "First Team" of codebreakers worked on JN-25. In November and early December 1941, OP-20-G spent 85 percent of its effort reading Japanese Navy traffic, 12 percent on Japanese diplomatic traffic and 3 percent on German naval codes. FDR was personally briefed twice a day on JN-25 traffic by his aide, Captain John Beardell, and demanded to see the original raw messages in English. The US Government refuses to identify or declassify any pre-Dec 7, 1941 decrypts of JN-25 on the basis of national security, a half-century after the war.

AD or Administrative Code wrongly called Admiralty Code was an old four character transposition code used for personnel matters. No important messages were sent in this weak code. Introduced Nov 1938, it was seldom used after Dec 1940.
Magic - the security designation given to all decoded Japanese diplomatic messages. It's hard not to conclude with historians like Charles Bateson that "Magic standing alone points so irresistibly to the Pearl Harbor attack that it is inconceivable anybody could have failed to forecast the Japanese move." The NSA reached the same conclusion in 1955.
Ultra - the security designation for military codes. No Pearl Harbor investigation discussed Ultra even though on June 7, 1942 the Chicago Tribune and six other newspapers betrayed the fact we were reading JN-25.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WARNINGS
Warnings do no harm and might do inexpressible good
27 January 1941, Dr. Ricardo Shreiber, the Peruvian envoy in Tokyo told Max Bishop, third secretary of the US embassy that he had just learned from his intelligence sources that there was a war plan involving a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor. This information was sent to the State Department and Naval Intelligence and to Admiral Kimmel at Hawaii.
31 March 1941 - A Navy report by Bellinger and Martin predicted that if Japan made war on the US, they would strike Pearl Harbor without warning at dawn with aircraft from a maximum of 6 carriers. For years Navy planners had assumed that Japan, on the outbreak of war, would strike the American fleet wherever it was. The fleet was the only threat to Japan's plans. Logically, Japan couldn't engage in any major operation with the American fleet on its flank. The strategic options for the Japanese were not unlimited.
10 July - US Military Attache Smith-Hutton at Tokyo reported Japanese Navy secretly practicing aircraft torpedo attacks against capital ships in Ariake Bay. The bay closely resembles Pearl Harbor.
July - The US Military Attache in Mexico forwarded a report that the Japanese were constructing special small submarines for attacking the American fleet in Pearl Harbor, and that a training program then under way included towing them from Japan to positions off the Hawaiian Islands, where they practiced surfacing and submerging.
10 August 1941, the top British agent, code named "Tricycle", Dusko Popov, told the FBI of the planned attack on Pearl Harbor and that it would be soon. The FBI told him that his information was "too precise, too complete to be believed. The questionnaire plus the other information you brought spell out in detail exactly where, when, how, and by whom we are to be attacked. If anything, it sounds like a trap." He also reported that a senior Japanese naval person had gone to Taranto to collect all secret data on the attack there and that it was of utmost importance to them. The info was given to Naval IQ.
Early in the Fall, Kilsoo Haan, an agent for the Sino-Korean People's League, told Eric Severeid of CBS that the Korean underground in Korea and Japan had positive proof that the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor before Christmas. Among other things, one Korean had actually seen the plans. In late October, Haan finally convinced US Senator Guy Gillette that the Japanese were planning to attack in December or January. Gillette alerted the State Department, Army and Navy Intelligence and FDR personally.
24 September 1941, the " bomb plot" message in J-19 code from Japan Naval Intelligence to Japan' s consul general in Honolulu requesting grid of exact locations of ships pinpointed for the benefit of bombardiers and torpedo pilots was deciphered. There was no reason to know the EXACT location of ships in harbor, unless to attack them - it was a dead giveaway. Chief of War Plans Turner and Chief of Naval Operations Stark repeatedly kept it and warnings based on it prepared by Safford and others from being passed to Hawaii. The chief of Naval Intelligence Captain Kirk was replaced because he insisted on warning HI. It was lack of information like this that lead to the exoneration of the Hawaii commanders and the blaming of Washington for unpreparedness for the attack by the Army Board and Navy Court. At no time did the Japanese ever ask for a similar bomb plot for any other American military installation. Why the Roosevelt administration allowed flagrant Japanese spying on PH has never been explained, but they blocked 2 Congressional investigations in the fall of 1941 to allow it to continue. The bomb plots were addressed to "Chief of 3rd Bureau, Naval General Staff", marked Secret Intelligence message, and given special serial numbers, so their significance couldn't be missed. There were about 95 ships in port. The text was:

"Strictly secret.

"Henceforth, we would like to have you make reports concerning vessels
along the following lines insofar as possible:

"1. The waters (of Pearl Harbor) are to be divided roughly into five
subareas (We have no objections to your abbreviating as much as you
like.)

"Area A. Waters between Ford Island and the Arsenal.
"Area B. Waters adjacent to the Island south and west of Ford Island.
(This area is on the opposite side of the Island from Area A.)
"Area C. East Loch.
"Area D. Middle Loch.
"Area E. West Loch and the communication water routes.

"2. With regard to warships and aircraft carriers, we would like to have
you report on those at anchor (these are not so important) tied up at
wharves, buoys and in docks. (Designate types and classes briefly. If
possible we would like to have you make mention of the fact when
there are two or more vessels along side the same wharf.)"

Simple traffic analysis of the accelerated frequency of messages from various Japanese consuls gave a another identification of war preparations, from Aug-Dec there were 6 messages from Seattle, 18 from Panama, 55 from Manila and 68 from Hawaii.
Oct. - Soviet top spy Richard Sorge, the greatest spy in history, informed Kremlin that Pearl Harbor would be attacked within 60 days. Moscow informed him that this was passed to the US. Interestingly, all references to Pearl Harbor in the War Department's copy of Sorge's 32,000 word confession to the Japanese were deleted. NY Daily News, 17 May 1951.
16 Oct. - FDR grossly humiliated Japan's Ambassador and refused to meet with Premier Konoye to engineer the war party, lead by General Tojo, into power in Japan.
1 Nov. - JN-25 Order to continue drills against anchored capital ships to prepare to "ambush and completely destroy the US enemy." The message included references to armor-piercing bombs and 'near surface torpedoes.'
13 Nov. - The German Ambassador to US, Dr. Thomsen an anti-Nazi, told OSS that Pearl Harbor would be attacked.
14 Nov. - Japanese Merchant Marine was alerted that wartime recognition signals would be in effect Dec 1.
22 Nov. - Tokyo said to Ambassador Nomura in Washington about extending the deadline for negotiations to November 29: "...this time we mean it, that the deadline absolutely cannot be changed. After that things are automatically going to happen."
CIA Director Allen Dulles told people that US was warned in mid-November that the Japanese Fleet had sailed east past Tokyo Bay and was going to attack Pearl Harbor. FOIA #F-1998-00977.
23 Nov. - JN25 order - "The first air attack has been set for 0330 hours on X-day." (Tokyo time or 8 A.M. Honolulu time)
25 Nov. - British decrypted the Winds setup message sent Nov. 19. The US decoded it Nov. 28. It was a J-19 Code message that there would be an attack and that the signal would come over Radio Tokyo as a weather report - rain meaning war, east (Higashi) meaning US.
25 Nov. - Secretary of War Stimson noted in his diary "FDR stated that we were likely to be attacked perhaps as soon as next Monday." FDR asked: "the question was how we should maneuver them into the position of firing the first shot without too much danger to ourselves. In spite of the risk involved, however, in letting the Japanese fire the first shot, we realized that in order to have the full support of the American people it was desirable to make sure that the Japanese be the ones to do this so that there should remain no doubt in anyone's mind as to who were the aggressors."
25 Nov. - Navy Department ordered all US trans-Pacific shipping to take the southern route. PHH 12:317 ADM Turner testified "We sent the traffic down to the Torres Straight, so that the track of the Japanese task force would be clear of any traffic." PHH 4:1942
25 Nov. - Yamamoto radioed this order in JN-25: " (a) The task force, keeping its movements strictly secret and maintaining close guard against submarines and aircraft, shall advance into Hawaiian waters and upon the very opening of hostilities, shall attack the main force of the United States Fleet in Hawaii and deal it a mortal blow. The raid is planned for dawn on X-day -- exact date to be given by later order. (b) Should the negotiations with the US prove successful, the task force shall hold itself in readiness forthwith to return and reassemble. (c) The task force will move out of Hitokappu Wan on the morning of 26 November and advance to the standing-by position on the afternoon of 4 December and speedily complete refueling." ( Order to sail - scan from the PHA Congressional Hearings Report, vol 1 p 180, transcript p 437-8) This was decoded by the British on November 25 and the Dutch on November 27. When it was decoded by the US is a national secret, however, on November 26 Naval Intelligence reported the concentration of units of the Japanese fleet at an unknown port ready for offensive action.
26 Nov. 3 A.M. - Churchill sent an urgent secret message to FDR, probably containing above message. This message caused the greatest agitation in DC. Of Churchill's voluminous correspondence with FDR, this is the only message that has not been released (on the grounds that it would damage national security). Stark testified that "On November 26 there was received specific evidence of the Japanese intention to wage offensive war against Great Britain and the United States." C.I.A. Director William Casey, who was in the OSS in 1941, in his book THE SECRET WAR AGAINST HITLER, p 7, wrote "The British had sent word that a Japanese fleet was steaming east toward Hawaii." Washington, in an order of Nov 26, ordered both US aircraft carriers, the Enterprise and the Lexington out of Pearl Harbor "as soon as possible". This order included stripping Pearl of 50 planes or 40 percent of its already inadequate fighter protection. In response to Churchill's message, FDR secretly cabled him that afternoon - "Negotiations off. Services expect action within two weeks." Note that the only way FDR could have linked negotiations with service action, let alone have known the timing of the action, was if he had the message to sail. In other words, the only service action contingent on negotiations was Pearl Harbor.
26 Nov. - the "most fateful document " was Hull's ultimatum that Japan must withdraw from Indochina and all China. FDR's Ambassador to Japan called this "The document that touched the button that started the war."
27 Nov. - Secretary of War Stimson sent a confused and confusing hostile action possible or DO-DON'T warning. The Navy Court found this message directed attention away from Pearl Harbor, rather than toward it. One purpose of the message was to mislead HI into believing negotiations were continuing. The Army which could not do reconnaisance was ordered to and the Navy which could was ordered not to. The Army was ordered on sabotage alert, which specifically precluded attention to outside threat. Navy attention was misdirected 5000 miles from HI. DC repeated, no less than three times as a direct instruction of the President, "The US desires that Japan commit the first overt act Period." It was unusual that FDR directed this warning, a routine matter, to Hawaii which is proof that he knew other warnings were not sent. A simple question--what Japanese "overt act" was FDR expecting at Pearl Harbor? He ordered sabotage prevented and subs couldn't enter, that leaves air attack. The words "overt act" disclose FDR's intent - not just that Japan be allowed to attack but that they inflict damage on the fleet. This FDR order to allow a Japanese attack was aid to the enemy - explicit treason.
29 Nov.- Hull sat in Layfayette Park across from the White House with ace United Press reporter Joe Leib and showed him a message stating that Pearl Harbor would be attacked on December 7. This could well have been the Nov. 26 message from Churchill. The New York Times in its 12/8/41 PH report on page 13 under the headline "Attack Was Expected" stated the US had known that Pearl Harbor was going to be attacked the week before. Perhaps Leib wasn't the only reporter Hull told.
29 Nov. - The FBI embassy tap made an intercept of an uncoded plain-text Japanese telephone conversation in which

an Embassy functionary (Kurusu) asked 'Tell me, what zero hour is. Otherwise, I won't be able to carry on diplomacy.' The voice from Tokyo (K. Yamamoto) said softly, 'Well then, I will tell you. Zero hour is December 8 (Tokyo time, ie, December 7 US time) at Pearl Harbor.' (US Navy translation)
30 Nov. US Time (or 1 Dec. Tokyo time) - The Japanese fleet was radioed this Imperial Naval Order (JN-25): "JAPAN, UNDER THE NECESSITY OF HER SELF-PRESERVATION AND SELF-DEFENSE, HAS REACHED A POSITION TO DECLARE WAR ON THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA." ( Congress Appendix D, p 415). US ally China also recovered it in plain text from a shot-down Japanese Army plane near Canton that evening. This caused an emergency Imperial Conference because they knew the Chinese would give the information to GB and US. In a related J-19 message the next day, the US translated elaborate instructions from Japan dealing in precise detail with the method of internment of American and British nationals in Asia "on the outbreak of war with England and the United States"
1 Dec. - Office of Naval Intelligence, ONI, Twelfth Naval District in San Francisco found the missing Japanese fleet by correlating reports from the four wireless news services and several shipping companies that they were getting strange signals west of Hawaii. The Soviet Union also knew the exact location of the Japanese fleet because they asked the Japanese in advance to let one of their ships pass (Layton p 261). This info was most likely given to them by US because Sorge's spy ring was rolled up November 14. All long-range PBY patrols from the Aleutians were ordered stopped on Dec 6 to prevent contact.
1 Dec. - Foreign Minister Togo cabled Washington Ambassador Nomura to continue negotiations "to prevent the U.S. from becoming unduly suspicious."
1 Dec. - The tanker Shiriya, which had been added to the Striking Force in an order intercepted Nov 14, radioed "proceeding to a position 30.00 N, 154.20 E. Expect to arrive at that point on 3 December." (near HI) The fact that this message is in the National Archives destroys the myth that the attack fleet maintained radio silence. They were not ordered to (Order 820). Serial numbers prove that the Striking Force sent over 663 radio messages between Nov 16 and Dec 7 or about 1 per hour. The NSA has not released any raw intercepts because the headers would prove that the Striking Force did not maintain radio silence. On Nov 29 the Hiyei sent one message to the Commander of the 3rd fleet; on Nov 30 the Akagi sent several messages to its tankers - see page 474 of the Hewitt Report. Stinnett in DAY OF DECEIT (p 209) found over 100 messages from the Striking Force in the National Archives. All Direction Finding reports from HI have been crudely cut out. Reports from Dec 5 show messages sent from the Striking Force picked up by Station Cast, P.I.
From traffic analysis, HI reported that the carrier force was at sea and in the North. THE MOST AMAZING FACT is that in reply to that report, MacArthur's command sent a series of three messages, Nov 26, 29, Dec 2, to HI lying about the location of the carrier fleet - saying it was in the South China Sea. This false information, which the NSA calls inexplicable, was the true reason that HI was caught unawares. Duane Whitlock, who is still alive in Iowa, sent those messages.
There were a large number of other messages that gave the location of the Striking Force by alluding to the Aleutians, the North Pacific and various weather systems near HI.
1 Dec. - FDR cut short his scheduled ten day vacation after 1 day to meet with Hull and Stark. The result of this meeting was reported on 2 Dec. by the Washington Post: "President Roosevelt yesterday assumed direct command of diplomatic and military moves relating to Japan." This politically damaging move was necessary to prevent the mutiny of conspirators.
1 Dec. 3:30 P.M. FDR read Foreign Minister Togo's message to his ambassador to Germany: "Say very secretly to them that there is extreme danger between Japan & Anglo-Saxon nations through some clash of arms, add that the time of this war may come quicker than anyone dreams." This was in response to extreme German pressure on November 29 for Japan to strike the US and promises to join with Japan in war against the US. The second of its three parts has never been released. The message says it contains the plan of campaign. This is 1 of only 3 known DIPLOMATIC intercepts that specified PH as target. It was so interesting, FDR kept a copy.
2 Dec. 2200 Tokyo time- Here is a typical JN-25 ships-in-harbor report sent to attack fleet, words in parenthesis were in the original: "Striking Force telegram No. 994. Two battleships (Oklahoma, Nevada), 1 aircraft carrier (Enterprise) 2 heavy cruisers, 12 destroyers sailed. The force that sailed on 22 November returned to port. Ships at anchor Pearl Harbor p.m. 28 November were 6 battleships (2 Maryland class, 2 California class, 2 Pennsylvania class), 1 aircraft carrier (Lexington), 9 heavy cruisers (5 San Fransisco class, 3 Chicago class, 1 Salt Lake class), 5 light cruisers (4 Honolulu class, 1 Omaha class)"
2 Dec. - Commander of the Combined Imperial Fleet Yamamoto radioed the attack fleet in plain (uncoded) Japanese Climb Niitakayama 1208 (Dec 8 Japanese time, Dec 7 our time). Thus the US knew EXACTLY when the war would start. Even HI knew. Mount Niitaka was the highest mountain in the Japanese Empire - 13,113 feet.
2 Dec. - General Hein Ter Poorten, the commander of the Netherlands East Indies Army gave the Winds setup message to the US War Department. The Dutch intercept station was Kamer 14 on Java. The Dutch, British and Americans all had liaison officers at each others' Far Eastern code centers and secret radio contact with each other (British FECB at Singapore; and US at Station Cast, Philippines) throughout 1941. These centers helped each other. The Australians had a center in Melbourne and the Chinese also broke JN-25. A Dutch sub had visually tracked the attack fleet to the Kurile Islands in early November and this info was passed to DC, but DC did not give it to HI. The intercepts the Dutch gave the US are still classified in RG 38, Box 792.
2 Dec - Japanese order No. 902 specified that old JN-25 additive tables version 7 would continue to be used alongside version 8 when the latter was introduced on December 4. This means the US read all messages to the Striking Force through the attack.
4 Dec. - In the early hours, Ralph Briggs at the Navy's East Coast Intercept station, received the "East Winds, Rain" message, the Winds Execute, which meant war. He put it on the TWX circuit immediately and called his commander. This message was deleted from the files. One of the main coverups of Pearl Harbor was to make this message disappear. Japanese Dispatch # 7001. In response to the Winds Execute, the Office of US Naval IQ had all Far Eastern stations (Hawaii not informed) destroy their codes and classified documents including the Tokyo Embassy.
4 Dec. - Kilsoo Haan called Maxwell Hamilton at the State Department and told him that the Korean underground had information that the Japanese would attack Pearl Harbor the coming weekend.
4 Dec. - The Dutch invoked the ADB joint defense agreement when the Japanese crossed the magic line of 100 East and 10 North. The U.S. was at war with Japan 3 days before they were at war with us.
4 Dec. - General Ter Poorten sent all the details of the Winds Execute command to Colonel Weijerman, the Dutch military attache' in Washington to pass on to the highest military circles. Weijerman personally gave it to Marshall, Chief of Staff of the War Department.
4 Dec - US General Thorpe at Java sent four messages warning of the PH attack. DC ordered him to stop sending warnings.
5 Dec. - All Japanese international shipping had returned to home port.
5 December - In the morning FDR dictated a letter to Wendell Wilkie for the Australian Prime Minister, "There is always the Japanese to consider. The situation is definitely serious and there might be an armed clash at any moment...Perhaps the next four or five days will decide the matters."
5 Dec. - At a Cabinet meeting, Secretary of the Navy Knox said, "Well, you know Mr. President, we know where the Japanese fleet is?" "Yes, I know" said FDR. " I think we ought to tell everybody just how ticklish the situation is. We have information as Knox just mentioned...Well, you tell them what it is, Frank." Knox became very excited and said, "Well, we have very secret information that the Japanese fleet is out at sea. Our information is..." and then a scowling FDR cut him off. (Infamy, Toland, 1982, ch 14 sec 5)
5 Dec. - Washington Star reporter Constantine Brown quotes a friend in his book The Coming of the Whirlwind p 291, "This is it! The Japs are ready to attack. We've broken their code, and we've read their ORDERS."
5 Dec. - Lt. Howard Brown of Station Cast in the Philippines received urgent request from Washington to listen for a short message from Tokyo which ended with the English word "stop". He heard the message at 11:30 PM Hawaiian time Dec 6. This is the Hidden Word Code set up in a message of November 27 (e.g. in code, Roosevelt=Miss Kimiko). The message was: "Relations between Japan and the following countries are on the brink of catastrophe: Britain and the United States."
6 December - This 18 November J19 message was translated by the Army:
"1. The warships at anchor in the Harbor on the 15th were as I told you in my No.219 on that day. Area A -- A battleship of the Oklahoma class entered and one tanker left port. Area C -- 3 warships of the heavy cruiser class were at anchor.
2. On the 17th the Saratoga was not in harbor. The carrier Enterprise, or some other vessel was in Area C. Two heavy cruisers of the Chicago class, one of the Pensacola class were tied up at docks 'KS'. 4 merchant vessels were at anchor in area D.
3. At 10:00 A.M. on the morning of the 17th, 8 destroyers were observed entering the Harbor..." Of course this information was not passed to HI.
6 Dec. - A Dec 2 request from Tokyo to HI for information about the absence of barrage balloons, anti-torpedo nets and air recon was translated by the Army.
6 Dec. - at 9:30 P.M FDR read the first 13 parts of the decoded Japanese diplomatic declaration of war and said "This means war." What kind of President would do nothing? When he returned to his 34 dinner guests he said, "The war starts tomorrow."
6 Dec. - the war cabinet: FDR, top advisor Hopkins, Stimson, Marshall, Secretary of the Navy Knox, with aides John McCrea and Frank Beatty "deliberately sat through the night of 6 December 1941 waiting for the Japs to strike." (Infamy ch 16 sec 2)
7 December - A message from the Japanese Consul in Budapest to Tokyo:
"On the 6th, the American Minister presented to the Government of this country a British Government communique to the effect that a state of war would break out on the 7th." The communique was the Dec 5th War Alert from the British Admiralty. It has disappeared. This triple priority alert was delivered to FDR personally. The Mid-East British Air Marshall told Col. Bonner Fellers on Saturday that he had received a secret signal that America was coming into the war in 24 hours. Churchill summarized the message in GRAND ALLIANCE page 601 as listing the two fleets attacking British targets and "Other Japanese fleets...also at sea on other tasks." There only were three other fleets- for Guam, the Philippines and HI. 2 paragraphs of the alert, British targets only, are printed in AT DAWN WE SLEPT, Prange, p 464. There is no innocent purpose for our government to hide this document.
7 December 1941 very early Washington time, there were two Marines, an emergency special detail, stationed outside the Japanese Naval Attache's door. 9:30 AM Aides begged Stark to send a warning to Hawaii. He did not. 10 AM FDR read the 14th part, 11 A.M. FDR read the 15th part setting the time for the declaration of war to be delivered to the State Department at 1 PM, about dawn Pearl Harbor time, and did nothing. Navy Secretary Knox was given the 15th part at 11:15 A.M. with this note from the Office of Naval IQ: "This means a sunrise attack on Pearl Harbor today." Naval IQ also transmitted this prediction to Hull and about 8 others, including the White House (PHH 36:532). At 10:30 AM Bratton informed Marshall that he had a most important message (the 15th part) and would bring it to Marshall's quarters but Marshall said he would take it at his office. At 11:25 Marshall reached his office according to Bratton. Marshall testified that he had been riding horses that morning but he was contradicted by Harrison, McCollum, and Deane. Marshall who had read the first 13 parts by 10 PM the prior night, perjured himself by denying that he had even received them. Marshall, in the face of his aides' urgent supplications that he warn Hawaii, made strange delays including reading and re-reading all of the 10 minute long 14 Part Message (and some parts several times) which took an hour and refused to use the scrambler phone on his desk, refused to send a warning by the fast, more secure Navy system but sent Bratton three times to inquire how long it would take to send his watered down warning - when informed it would take 30 or 40 minutes by Army radio, he was satisfied (that meant he had delayed enough so the warning wouldn't reach Pearl Harbor until after the 1 PM Washington time deadline). The warning was in fact sent commercial without priority identification and arrived 6 hours late. This message reached all other addressees, like the Philippines and Canal Zone, in a timely manner.
7 December - 7:55 A.M. Hawaii time AIR RAID PEARL HARBOR. THIS IS NOT DRILL.
7 December - 1:50 P.M. Washington time. Harry Hopkins, who was the only person with FDR when he received the news of the attack by telephone from Knox, wrote that FDR was unsurprised and expressed "great relief." Eleanor Roosevelt wrote about December 7th in This I Remember p 233, that FDR became "in a way more serene." In the NY Times Magazine of October 8, 1944 she wrote: "December 7 was...far from the shock it proved to the country in general. We had expected something of the sort for a long time."
7 December - 3:00 PM "The (war cabinet) conference met in not too tense an atmosphere because I think that all of us believed that in the last analysis the enemy was Hitler...and that Japan had given us an opportunity." Harry Hopkins, Dec. 7 Memo (Roosevelt and Hopkins R Sherwood, p. 431)
7 December - 9 hours later, MacArthur's entire air force was caught by surprise and wiped out in the Philippines. His reaction to the news of Pearl Harbor was quite unusual - he locked himself in his room all morning and refused to meet with his air commander General Brereton, and refused to attack Japanese forces on Formosa even under orders from the War Department. MacArthur gave three conflicting orders that ensured the planes were on the ground most of the morning. MacArthur used radar tracking of the Japanese planes at 140, 100, 80, 60, down to 20 miles to time his final order and ensure his planes were on the ground. Strategically, the destruction of half of all US heavy bombers in the world was more important than naval damage in Pearl Harbor. Either MacArthur had committed the greatest blunder in military history or he was under orders to allow his forces to be destroyed. If it were the greatest blunder in history, it is remarkable how he escaped any reprimand, kept his command and got his fourth star and Congressional Medal of Honor shortly later. Prange argued, "How could the President ensure a successful Japanese attack unless he confided in the commanders and persuaded them to allow the enemy to proceed unhindered?"
7 December - 8:30 PM, FDR said to his cabinet, "We have reason to believe that the Germans have told the Japanese that if Japan declares war, they will too. In other words, a declaration of war by Japan automatically brings..." at which point he was interrupted, but his expectation and focus is clear. Mrs. Frances Perkins, Secretary of Labor, observed later about FDR: "I had a deep emotional feeling that something was wrong, that this situation was not all it appeared to be." Mrs. Perkins was obsessed by Roosevelt's strange reactions that night and remarked particularly on the expression he had:" In other words, there have been times when I associated that expression with a kind of evasiveness."
FDR met with CBS newsman Edward R. Murrow at midnight. Murrow, who had seen many statesmen in crises, was surprised at FDR's calm reaction. After chatting about London, they reviewed the latest news from PH and then FDR tested Murrow's news instincts with these 2 bizarre giveaway questions: "Did this surprise you?" Murrow said yes. FDR: "Maybe you think it didn't surprise us?" FDR gave the impression that the attack itself was not unwelcome. This is the same high-strung FDR that got polio when convicted of perjury; the same FDR that was bedridden for a month when he learned Russia was to be attacked; the same FDR who couldn't eat or drink when he got the Japanese order to sail.
8 December - In a conversation with his speechwriter Rosenman, FDR "emphasized that Hitler was still the first target, but he feared that a great many Americans would insist that we make the war in the Pacific at least equally important with the war against Hitler."
Later, Jonathan Daniels, administrative assistant and press secretary to FDR said, "The blow was heavier than he had hoped it would necessarily be...But the risks paid off; even the loss was worth the price..."
FDR reminisced with Stalin at Tehran on November 30, 1943, saying "if the Japanese had not attacked the US he doubted very much if it would have been possible to send any American forces to Europe." Compare this statement with what FDR said at the Atlantic Conference 4 months before Pearl: "Everything was to be done to force an 'incident' to justify hostitlities." Given that a Japanese attack was the only possible incident, then FDR had said he would do it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Information Known in Washington and Hawaii

October 9-December 7, 1941

Date Item Washington Kimmel Short

Oct. 9 "Bombplot" message X
Nov. 26-28 "Winds" setup message X X [1]
Nov. 26 Location of carriers X
Dec. 1 Japanese declaration of war X
Dec. 2-6 Code destruction X [2] X X
Dec. 4 "Winds execute" message X X[3]
Dec. 4 US at war with Japan via ADB X
Dec. 5 British Admiralty Alert X
Dec. 6-7 "14 Part" message X
Dec. 7 "One o'clock" message X

[1] Admiral Kimmel learned of the "winds" code in a Nov. 28th
dispatch to him from the US Asiatic Fleet. JCC, p. 470.
[2] DC informed HI that codes were being burned world-wide so when they
learned the local consulate burned codes they would not go on alert.
[3] General Short was given the Winds Execute by British IQ.

Note that none of the 3 diplomatic messages or the many naval messages
identifying Pearl as the target were forwarded (not to mention HUMINT).
Only 5 of the 74 Navy IQ packets delivered to FDR in the 2 weeks before
Dec 7 can be found.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMISSIONS AND COVERUP
Two and only two courts of law have decided the issue of whether FDR and Washington or the commanders in Hawaii were responsible for the Pearl Harbor disaster. Both the Navy Court and the Army Board found Washington guilty (in 1944).
NAVY Court of Inquiry
!!!Top Secret ARMY Board Report!!! (30K), Oct, 1944, "Now let us turn to the fateful period between November 27 and December 6, 1941. In this period numerous pieces of information came to our State, War, and Navy Departments in all of their Top ranks indicating precisely the intentions of the Japanese including the probable exact hour and date of the attack. " In response to this report, Marshall offered his resignation - the sign of a guilty conscience. Marshall testified at the MacArthur hearings that he considered loyalty to his chief superior to loyalty to his country.
JOINT CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE on the Investigation of the Pearl Harbor Attack, Nov 15, 1945 to May 31, 1946, proved that there had been so much reversion of testimony, coverup and outright lies that the truth would have to wait until all Pearl Harbor records were declassified.
Most of the conspirators were military men, all men of FDR's own choice, men who only followed orders and FDR never delegated authority. Stark, in answer to charges that he denied IQ to Hawaii, publicly offerred a Nuremberg defense in August 1945 that everything he did pre-Dec 7, 1941 was on FDR's orders. The handfull of military men in DC responsible for the disaster at Pearl Harbor were directly under the control of FDR and were later promoted and protected from investigation; promoted with FDR's full knowledge that they were responsible for not warning Hawaii. On the record, Intelligence tried to warn HI scores of times but were prevented by FDR's men.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

STATISTICS - ROOSEVELT WAS DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FOLLOWING:
American
Deaths: 2403; Wounded 1,178.
Eighteen ships were sunk or seriously damaged including 5 battleships (USS Arizona photo).

188 planes were destroyed and 162 were damaged.


Japanese
Out of an attack force of 31 ships and 353 raiding planes the Japanese lost:
64 deaths,
29 planes,
5 midget submarines.

CONCLUSION - ROOSEVELT WAS A TRAITOR
The US was warned by, at least, the governments of Britain, Netherlands, Australia, Peru, Korea and the Soviet Union that a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor was coming. All important Japanese codes were broken. FDR and Marshall and others knew the attack was coming, allowed it and covered up their knowledge. It's significant that both the the chief of OP-20-G Safford and Friedman of Army SIS, the two people in the world that knew what we decoded, said that FDR knew Pearl Harbor was going to be attacked.


Pearl Harbor was not about war with Japan -
It was about war with GERMANY
Most important was the promise FDR had made to the American people - solemnly given and repeated--not to send their sons into foreign war unless attacked. He did not mind violating that pledge. He merely feared the political effect of the violation. Alsop and Kintner, White House columnist pets, had written a short time before that "He (Roosevelt) does not feel he can openly violate them (his pledges). But he can get around them the smart way." They explained this meant getting the Germans to shoot first. Then he could shoot back. But it was clear to him by November that the Germans were not going to shoot first. But FDR knew that he could force the Japanese to do so.
HITLER WOULD NOT DECLARE WAR IF U.S. UNBEATABLE
OBJECTIVE: War with Germany. How do you bait Hitler to declare war on you? You don't get it by looking unbeatable!
Direct provocation in Atlantic had failed - Hitler didn't bite.
FDR knew from magic that if Japan attacked, Germany would declare war.
Therefore: the problem was how to maneuver Japan into firing the first shot or make the first overt act.
Japan must succeed or Hitler would renege.
War with Japan was a given because they had to attack the Philippines. If Japan's fleet were destroyed, it would defeat the purpose. It would have been obvious suicide for Hitler to declare war if Japan were crippled - it would allow the US to attack him without even the possibility of a two-front war. That was what he had just been avoiding for months. The plan could only work if Japan's attack succeeded. The lure of a weakened US in a two-front war focused on Japan seemed to make a German war declaration cost-free. But it was all a trap - FDR was always going to ignore Japan and go after Hitler, for his ultimate goal was to save his beloved Soviet Communism.

In November FDR ordered the Red Cross Disaster Relief director to secretly prepare for massive casualties at Pearl Harbor because he was going to let it be attacked. When he protested to the President, President Roosevelt told him that "the American people would never agree to enter the war in Europe unless they were attack [sic] within their own borders." See U.S. Naval Institute - Naval History - Advance Warning? The Red Cross Connection by Daryl S. Borgquist
CHURCHILL--FDR KNEW. Did FDR know that Pearl Harbor was a Japanese target? Answer: FDR planned Pearl Harbor to be their target. He ordered the ships in and the carriers out. Churchill wrote about Pearl Harbor that FDR and his top advisors "knew the full and immediate purpose of their enemy." (GRAND ALLIANCE p 603) Churchill's entire discussion of Pearl Harbor was a justification of treason, e.g.: "A Japanese attack upon the U.S. was a vast simplification of (FDR's and advisors') problems and their duty. How can we wonder that they regarded the actual form of the attack, or even its scale, as incomparably less important than the fact that the whole American nation would be united...?"


J. Edgar Hoover told his friends in early 1942 that FDR had known about the Pearl Harbor plan since the early fall. It was totally in character for FDR to concoct such a plan. Not only had the US Senate already censured FDR for utterly lacking moral perspective, but as Walter Lippmann wrote: "his purposes are not simple and his methods are not direct." To get into the war, FDR used the Atlantic Fleet as bait to be shot up; Pearl Harbor was the same thing in the Pacific. US Admiral Bloch testified "The Japanese only destroyed a lot of old hardware. In a sense they did us a favor." This was obviously FDR's view as well, because on 7 December at 2:15 PM, minutes after hearing of the attack and before any damage reports were in, FDR called Lord Halifax at the British Embassy and told him "Most of the fleet was at sea...none of their newer ships were in harbour."

COVERUP BY SECRECY. Why does the government refuse to release all the messages to the attack fleet, or any JN-25 messages decoded before Dec 7? There is absolutely nothing about national security to hide in JN-25. It is a trivial and worthless 19th century code. The techniques for cracking it had been published world-wide in 1931. The US government has proudly showed how they used JN-25 decrypts after December 8 to win the Battle of Midway which occurred 7 months after Pearl Harbor. Therefore, there is nothing intrinsic about the code itself, the means of cracking it, or the fact that we cracked it, that has any national security implications of any nature. What is the difference between decrypts from the Purple machine and decrypts from JN-25? The answer is simply that the JN-25 messages contained the final operational details of the Pearl Harbor attack, whereas the Purple did not.

WHAT ARE THEY HIDING? Why won't they let the truth out? Such secrecy breeds mistrust in government. The only thing that is left to hide are JN-25 decrypts and worksheets showing that the US and Britain monitored the Japanese attack fleet all the way to Pearl Harbor. That is the scandal. That is the big secret. It raises the issue of whether the NSA is accessory after the fact to treason. However, the secrecy and misdirection by the NSA about our capabilities with JN-25B and pre-war messages proves there is something very wrong. The NSA has systematically lied about the size of the JN25 books by a factor of 4 and about how many codebreakers worked on the code in 1941 by a factor of 22. The NSA is an evil Gestapo that is committed neither to truth nor open government nor the rule of law. We live an Orwellian history in which treason is honored, in which FDR's murder of thousands of young innocent men is good. In a word, we are no different from the tyranny we decry. A self-governing people must have truth to make proper decisions. By subverting the truth, the National Security Agency is subverting our Democracy.

He who controls the past, controls the future. He who controls the present, controls the past. - Orwell
Tokyo had to send the daily bomb-plots, cabled from its Honolulu consulate, to the attack fleet by JN-25 radio messages. The pilots had to get their target information. "The news of the position of enemy ships in Pearl Harbor comes again and again." - Lt. Cmdr. Chigusa, executive officer of the attack fleet's Akigumo in his diary, December 4, 1941 (At Dawn We Slept, G. Prange, page 453). FDR got it, too. FDR knew the Japanese pilots' targets as well as they did, because he got their bomb-plots when they did. He had their specific targets, ship by ship, in his hands at the White House. These messages would prove absolutely that FDR knew that the attack fleet's target was Pearl Harbor and therefore are not released. The unnecessary and illogical secrecy about pre-December 7, 1941, JN-25 decoding is conclusive evidence that there was wrongdoing at the highest levels.

FDR was a traitor for maneuvering Japan into war with US - and that is known and admitted - FDR was a traitor for sacrificing American lives, for putting America in danger, for usurping the Constitutional power of Congress to make war. Day of infamy, indeed; he chose his words precisely with a hidden double-meaning. Four days before the attack, FDR could have sent telegrams of condolence to the families of the sailors he was going to allow to be killed. Even today there is a coverup, based on a transparently bogus excuse of national security, that shows that our government cannot face the truth about what happened a half-century ago. Truth we owe the men of Pearl Harbor. Until we tell the full truth, we dishonor them and every soldier and sailor who gave their life for their country. Should their lives have been sacrificed for treason and no one know, they had died in vain. If their honor cover treason - we are not a nation of law. The Air Corps in the Philippines and the Navy at Pearl were FDR's bait, the oil embargo was his stick, the end of negotiations was the tripwire in FDR's game of shame - a game of death for so many. Roosevelt aided and abetted the murder of thousands of Americans.


LINKS
Pearl Harbor, Mother of All Conspiracies, the book <--click here to buy paperback (424 explosive pages) or ebook. You have read the webpage - now get the whole story! This webpage is about 10 percent of the first chapter with many of the most startling revelations only in the book.
"Mother of All Conspiracies is a sensational book that will change the face of America!"
Professor Robert Kelso


"Very late on a cold, dark night in December, a British emissary was driven through the dreary streets of Washington. Inside his diplomatic pouch he carried a secret message marked Most Urgent Personal and Secret to the President. It was a triple priority message from the British Admiralty in London that the United States of America was going to be attacked at Pearl Harbor on December 7th. Lord Halifax was swiftly shown in to the White House and conferred with Franklin Roosevelt. Roosevelt's hopes soared; his long-laid plans were about to be fulfilled. It was December 5th, 1941."
From the Introduction
This definitive Revisionist Bible presents incontrovertible proof that the United States read the main Japanese fleet code JN-25 prior to Pearl Harbor. It shows exactly how it was broken. This book by far has more recent documents, more secret documents, and more important secret documents than any book on Pearl Harbor ever written. It is the best book on the event that changed history, the most important public crime of modern times, our entry into World War II. This resulted in the immediate loss of over thirty million lives, an ultimate cost of more than fifteen trillion dollars, incredible suffering, and a military-scientific-technological-industrial aftermath which may wipe out the human race.


Revelations from Pearl Harbor Mother of All Conspiracies:
The publication for the first time of the November 26, 1941, Navy intelligence analysis proving Washington knew the Japanese carrier fleet was going to attack Pearl Harbor.

Explosive disclosures from the most secret codebook never meant to be released.
For the first time, the publication of the previously blacked out portions of SRH-149 Communications Intelligence in the United States, A Brief History by Laurence F. Safford, the fundamental document of Pearl Harbor.


The scheme Washington used for confusing radar at Hawaii on December 7th.
The publication for the first time of more than a hundred JN-25B messages in their original 1941 pre-Pearl Harbor decryption.


The treason at the Battle Midway.
The details of how, when, and why Roosevelt sold out his country to be President for life.

If you are interested in the truth you must add this book to your library.


Books may be ordered:

online: http://www.xlibris.com/PearlHarbor.html
email: orders@xlibris.com
by fax: (215) 923-4685
by telephone: 1-888-795-4274 x.276
by mail: Xlibris Corp.
436 Walnut St.
11th Fl.
Philadelphia, PA 19106

And available through your local Borders bookstore. Check the in-store "Title Search" computer.


For Mother of Conspiracies documents and references, as well as much more information, please refer to my book.
Yahoo! 's Pearl Harbor Page

The FDR Scandal Page.

Take Action: Send a Freedom of Information Act request to the NSA for release of all pre-Pearl Harbor secrets.

E-mail Mark Willey: pha1941@hotmail.com.

URL: http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6315/pearl.html


...shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered--
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he that today sheds his blood for me
Shall be my brother.
---USS ARIZONA MEMORIAL DEDICATION
http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6315/pearl.html

[Roland Kunz]

Politik und Medien interpretieren Terrorschlag falsch

Die amerikanische Autorin Susan Sontag hat Politik und Medien nach den verheerenden Terroranschlägen in den USA Täuschung und Desinformation vorgeworfen. Die Attentäter hält sie für mutig.


AP

Autorin Sontag: Unheilige Alllianz zwischen Medien und Politik


Hamburg - Regierung und Medien versuchten, die Öffentlichkeit wie Unmündige zu behandeln, kritisierte die Autorin in einem Beitrag für die "Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung". Die Regierung suggeriere den Menschen mit Hilfe der Medien, alles sei unter Kontrolle. Die Einstimmigkeit der realitätsverzerrenden Rhetorik sei "einer Demokratie unwürdig".
Noch nie sei Amerika so weit von der Wirklichkeit entfernt gewesen, wie am vergangenen Dienstag. "Das Missverhältnis zwischen den Ereignissen und der Art und Weise, wie sie aufgenommen und verarbeitet wurden, auf der einen Seite und dem selbstgerechten Blödsinn und den dreisten Täuschungen praktisch aller Politiker (...) und Fernsehkommentatoren (...) auf der anderen Seite, ist alarmierend und deprimierend", schreibt Sontag weiter.

Nach Ansicht von Sontag, die zahlreiche Bücher zur Medienkritik verfasst hat, hätten sich die Stimmen zu einer Kampagne verdichtet, mit der die Öffentlichkeit "verdummt" werden solle. Wo sei die Einsicht, fragt Sontag, dass es sich bei der Terror-Attacke nicht um einen Angriff auf "Zivilisation", "Freiheit" oder die "freie Welt" handele; sondern "um einen Angriff auf die Vereinigten Staaten, die einzig selbsternannte Supermacht der Welt; um einen Angriff, der als Konsequenz der Politik, Interessen und Handlungen der Vereinigten Staaten unternommen wurde"?

Vielen Amerikanern sei überhaupt nicht mehr bewusst, dass das US-Militär noch immer Bomben auf den Irak werfe. Vergeltungsschläge aus dem Himmel seien "feige", nicht allerdings die Attentäter, die bereit gewesen wären, selbst zu sterben, um andere zu töten. Sontag: "Wenn wir von Mut sprechen, der einzigen moralisch neutralen Tugend, dann kann man den Attentätern - was immer sonst auch über sie zu sagen wäre - eines nicht vorwerfen: dass sie Feiglinge seien."

Alle Amerikaner müssten jetzt gründlich Nachdenken: Über das "kolossale Versagen der amerikanischen Geheimdienste, die Zukunft der amerikanischen Politik besonders im Nahen Osten und über vernünftige Verteidigungsprogramme für dieses Land".

"Wir haben einen Präsidenten, der uns wie ein Roboter immer wieder versichert, dass Amerika nach wie vor aufrecht steht." Die Regierung versichere, alles werde in Ordnung kommen. "Nichts ist in Ordnung", meint Susan Sontag, 68, die mit Büchern wie "In America", "Der Liebhaber des Vulkans" oder "Aids und seine Metaphern" bekannt geworden ist.

http://www.spiegel.de/kultur/gesellschaft/0,1518,157544,00.html


----------------------------------------


Überraschung durch hausgemachte Schurken

Matthias Bröckers 15.09.2001
The WTC Conspiracy III

Am 25. November 1941 notierte der US-Verteidigungsminister Henry Stimson nach einer Unterhaltung mit Präsident Roosevelt über die Japaner in sein Tagebuch: "Die Frage war, wie man sie in eine Position manövrieren könnte, in der sie den ersten Schuss abgeben würden, ohne dass uns allzuviel passiert... es war wünschenswert, sicherzustellen, dass die Japaner dies wären, (die den ersten Schus abgeben), so dass niemand auch nur den geringsten Zweifel haben könnte, wer der Aggressor war."




Keine zwei Wochen später war es dann soweit. Schon 1932 und 1938 war der Stützpunkt zweimal bei Marineübungen "überfallen" worden - einmal von 152 Flugzeugen - und jedes Mal war die Verteidigung völlig überfordert. Deshalb galt Pearl Harbour als besonders verwundbarer Marinehafen. Als Roosevelt befahl, die Flotte von der Westküste dorthin zu verlegen, protestierte der amtierende Admiral Richardson dagegen und weigerte sich schließlich sogar, den Befehl auszuführen.

Er wurde durch Admiral Kimmel ersetzt - den man nach dem japanischen Angriff wegen Nachlässigkeit vor einen Untersuchungsausschuss brachte. Er wurde freigesprochen, als bekannt wurde, dass man ihm 188 entschlüsselte japanische Nachrichte vorenthalten hatte, aus denen der bevorstehenden Angriff samt Datum und Uhrzeit hervorging. Auch holländische, britische und russische Nachrichtendienste hatten vor einem bevorstehenden Angriff gewarnt - doch auch diese Meldung waren von den Geheimdiensten in Washington zurückgehalten worden. Als zwei der zwischen 1920 und 1940 angesehensten Historiker der USA - die Professoren Charles Beard und Harry Elmer Barnes - die offizielle Regierungsversion daraufhin ablehnten, wurden sie als Spinner und Verrückte denunziert und aus dem Lehrbetrieb entfernt. Der "Überraschungsangriff" steht seitdem in jedem Lexikon (siehe dazu auch Harry Elmer Barnes : Pearl Harbor After a Quarter of a Century).

Am 25.Juli 1990 überbrachte die US-Botschafterin in Irak, April Glaspie, eine Botschaft des Weißen Hauses an Saddam Hussein: Präsident Bush wünsche, die Beziehungen zu Irak "auszubauen und zu vertiefen". Weiter hieß es: "Wir haben zu innerarabischen Differenzen wie auch zu Ihren Auseinandersetzungen mit Kuweit nicht viel zu sagen. Wir alle sind davon überzeugt, dass sie das Problem bald lösen werden."

Natürlich war Saddams Truppenaufmarsch in den Wochen zuvor genau registriert worden. Dass eine Invasion Kuwaits unmittelbar bevorstand, war offensichtlich... jedoch war auch hier beabsichtigt, ihn zum "ersten Schuss" einzuladen. Sonst hätte man bei der anschließenden Bombardierung Iraks (100.000 Tote) am Ende ja als Aggressor dagestanden - und statt als treuer Schäferhund der "Zivilisation" als bissiger Pittbull eigener Macht- und Öl-Interessen. So wie ohne Pearl Harbour schon Hiroshima und Nagasaki nicht als Verteidigung der Zivilisation durchgegangen wären, sondern als mörderischer Waffentest und Terroranschlag.

Wenn wundert es da noch, dass bei "Überraschungsangriffen" allerhöchstes Misstrauen angesagt ist. Nach den Japanern und Saddam ist jetzt Usama Ibn Laden aus dem Überraschungsei geschlüpft - ein neuer, hausgemachter Schurke.



http://www.heise.de/tp/deutsch/inhalt/co/9545/1.html

------------------------------------------


Don't trust authorities! Think for yourself!

Mathias Bröckers 16.09.2001
The WTC Conspiracy IV

Die Journalistin und Anwältin Barbara Olsen, konservative Kommentatorin bei CNN, zählt zu den Opfern der auf das Pentagon gestürzten Maschine. Sie konnte vor dem Absturz zwei Mal mit ihrem Mann Ted telefonieren, einem hohen Justizbeamten der Bush-Regierung. Sie teilte ihm unter anderem mit, dass das Flugzeug auf das Pentagon zusteuere. Sie äußerte sich aber nicht über die Nationalität oder Hautfarbe der Entführer. Merkwürdig?




Was wäre die normale Reaktion einer weißen, blonden Frau, einer geschulten Beobachterin und Journalistin aus konservativem Umfeld, wenn Farbige, Araber oder fremdsprachige Menschen ihr Flugzeug gekidnappt haben und sie hektisch ein Notfall-Telefonat führt? Würde sie diese wichtige Nachricht nicht mit einem Wort erwähnen ? Oder andersherum: Kann man aus der Nichterwähnung von "browns" nicht den Schluss ziehen, dass es sich um "normale", akzentfrei sprechende Weiße gehandelt haben muss?

Die faschistischen Milizen in den USA jedenfalls haben mit dem Oklahoma-Anschlag bewiesen, dass sie im Kampf gegen das verhasste ZOG (Zionist Occupied Government) auch vor Massenmord nicht zurückschrecken. Ihren radikalen Antisemitismus teilen sie mit den Terrorkommandos eines Ibn Ladin. Doch scheint es von den ersten Minuten des Anschlags völlig ausgemachte Sache zu sein, dass die Täter im muslimischen Umfeld zu suchen sind - so wie es vor 20 Jahren automatisch die "Russen" gewesen wären. Jetzt entdecken die bis dato tiefschlafenden NSA, CIA und FBI einen verdächtigen Araber nach dem anderen, darunter den angeblichen "Terrorpiloten". Das "typische" Bild, das von ihm veröffentlicht wird, verstärkt den Verdacht, dass es Frau Olsen eine Erwähnung wert gewesen wäre ...

Fragen nach einem Motiv sollten immer ganz niedrig ansetzen. Wer profitiert eigentlich von dem andauernden Konflikt von Muslims, Juden und Christen im Nahen Osten? Wer hat die "radikal-islamischen" Bösewichter wie Ibn Ladin oder Saddam Hussein mit vielen Milliarden, Waffen und Terror-Know-How aufgebaut? Wer hat, durch die Stützung von menschenrechtsverachtenden Feudalregimen wie in Saudi-Arabien einerseits und gesetzeswidrigen israelischen Landnahmen andererseits, den militanten Widerstand der islamischen Welt permanent befördert? Wer muss sich als "Schutzmacht" unverzichtbar machen und deshalb Juden und Moslems gegeneinander hetzen? Wer weigert sich, die Kontrolle über die größten Ölvorkommen der Welt aufzugeben ?

In 50 Jahren, wenn Öl machtpolitisch unbedeutend geworden ist, wird der Nahe Osten ein Paradies des Friedens, garantiert! Aber jetzt haben Banditen dem Sheriff den Stern weggeschossen & sein Pistolenhalfter in Brand gesetzt & die "Zivilisation" ist aufgerufen, einen Weltkrieg zu führen. Eigentlich aber sollte man den Sheriff wegen unverantwortlicher Außenpolitik absetzen, ihn samt seiner Truppen auf seine Ranch zurückbeordern und unter Aufsicht der UN in Jerusalem einen runden Tisch der jüdisch-christlich-islamischen Völker einberufen. Nur so hätte der Terror ein Ende.


http://www.heise.de/tp/deutsch/inhalt/co/9561/1.html


Defense costs ?

http://projects.sipri.se/milex/mex_major_spenders.html

[Roland Kunz]

Hello

roland, although i appreciate your technical assistance, i do not appreciate some of this anti-american rhetoric.

Untill now all those posts where from other sites from the internet some from them are not existing anymore so I used my back up.

If you would know the sources you might better think twice.

Search for DEBEKA and tell on witch side those puplishers are for sure.

Now about the "happy" pictures I would say you look a the fans from a soccerteam.

I´m not sure if anybody here realize that for those people Now York doesn´t mean the same as for us. They also didn´t get the "full story".

Those people live a complete other way and you will surly not trade the lifestyles and they do also make partys for other reasons and as they don´t have very much to make a party or feel on the winner side..........

I give it up some people are just victims to the propaganda.

But I´m sure if Bin Laden gets riped in parts by 20 machinguns some will be on the US streets and maybe some CNN guys just pay some people to dance for the news.

Pictures are easy to manipulate but people allways think seeing is beleiving

BTW check that issue on the 928 rennlist forum.

And before you get me wrong i do not have any problems with the World ending terrorismen but I strongly would like to have all terrorists and there supporters treatet equal as if we still divide in friendly and unfriendly terror ( Both are "usefull" anyhow ) we will never come to a end only speed up the process.

Now just lock who financed bin Laden and teached him also suporting his whole organisation and get those people in your country and don´t let them come true with phrases like; I´can not remeber or I´wasn´t in charge. OK Reagan seems to have alzheimer and so he is pardoned ( or god had his fingers in there ).

How about just reading the Kerr ( sp ?) report ?

Don´t ask what the others can do to stop terrorismen start with your own area.
And I tell you if you cleaned that out most terrorismen will be vanished or dryed out from money, shelter and support.

Grüsse

[DennisR_944]

Uhhhhh.....don't look now, but you're talking to yourself....it's just as well. You're the only one that believes your senseless drivel anyway.

You have a good day now, hear?

------------------
Dennis Russell
Indianapolis, IN USA
1987 944 n/a

[drew1]

Roland,

I think your point is that the US has & is trying underhandedly to dominate the world.

You have found others with this opinion & present their opinions as evidence. Ask yourself, which division of conquered Germany after WW II was allowed the oportunity for self government & development, East or West?

drew1

[poorsche]

That was quit eye opening!

Thanks Roland