Terrible Lies/

Terrible Truths
Essays on the American and Israeli
perpetual war Plutocracies

American Phoenix

Fiat Lux

By John F Scanlon Volume I

2017 Edition 2017 09 21

1
3 AUDIOBOOK COLLECTIONS

6 BOOK COLLECTIONS
Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................4
1 Our Plutocrats’ Plans ................................................................................................................7
1.1 The Oded Yinon Plan 1982.............................................................................................. 10
2 The War on Terror is a Lie ..................................................................................................... 12
Sources and Footnotes ........................................................................................................... 14
(1) Stopping Terror with Justice ........................................................................................ 14
(6) The One Percent Doctrine ............................................................................................ 15
(7) Jawbreaker ................................................................................................................... 16
(8) Kill Bin Laden ............................................................................................................. 18
2.1 Torture Update ................................................................................................................ 22
The Killing of Osama bin Laden ........................................................................................ 25
2.2 Senate Committee’s 11/30/2009 Report on Tora Bora ..................................................... 26
2.3 Serbs in Kandahar 2004 ................................................................................................... 27
2.4 Terrorism: The 03/10/1945 Bombing of Tokyo............................................................... 29
The Atomic Bomb was not needed to end WWII ............................................................... 31
3 Intentional Dysfunction in the Occupation of Iraq .................................................................. 32
3.1 Iraq War’s WMD weapons of mass deception 2003 ......................................................... 42
3.2 ISIS came out of the Iraq War.......................................................................................... 45
4 Religion Serves Politics .......................................................................................................... 47
4.1 Bible Time Lines ............................................................................................................. 53
Time Lines Spreadsheet * .................................................................................................. 58
5 Motivation for the attack on the USS Liberty ......................................................................... 61
6 Great Recessions II ................................................................................................................ 63
The Fed ............................................................................................................................. 68
7 Gun Control – A Bigger Picture ............................................................................................. 73
Stand Your Ground laws ................................................................................................... 78
School Security ................................................................................................................. 79
Addendum: State and Local Corruption ............................................................................ 82
7.1 Kennedy and Vietnam ................................................................................................. 84
8 Machiavelli on Corruption...................................................................................................... 86
9 Solutions ................................................................................................................................ 88
9.1 Solutions – Pivot to Diplomacy ....................................................................................... 88

2
 9.1.1 2008 Georgia Russia War ......................................................................................... 97
9.2 Solutions – IRV Majority Rule Democracy 2003 ............................................................. 99
9.3 Summary of Solutions 2012 ........................................................................................... 102
Supplement – Political Zionism ............................................................................................... 104
Sources and Footnotes with Excerpts ................................................................................... 110
WWI ............................................................................................................................... 110
Interwar Years ................................................................................................................. 112
WWII .............................................................................................................................. 114
The Hungarian Jews 1944 ................................................................................................... 119
The Gruenwald/Kastner Trial .......................................................................................... 119
Eichmann’s “Blood for Cargo” Proposal ......................................................................... 120
Eichmann’s Story Part 2 .................................................................................................. 122
The Horthy Offer 07/18/1944 .......................................................................................... 125
An Open Letter to America’s war plutocrats............................................................................ 127

You can download “The Bible Time Lines” Excel spreadsheet * and review related articles at:
https://goo.gl/KYPFSf OR
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0ByIC4F1Uo9zwQzVGa1dUckpuRTA&usp=sharing
Author: John F Scanlon San Diego CA [email protected]

3
Introduction
Terrible Lies/ Terrible Truths
Essays on the American and Israeli perpetual war Plutocracies

The following are recurring themes in these papers. The American and Israeli
people are free and have influence, but we do not control our countries. Our
dysfunction is not due to incompetence, it’s intentional. Our war plutocrats are
the primary beneficiaries of our militarism, and these war plutocrats are the
existential threat to our democracies, not foreign states and terrorists.

War plutocrats are the flesh and blood persons who own and operate our defense
industries and other large corporations that benefit from war.

The following should be made widely known to the American public. If you read
nothing else, read the few pages covering these referenced topics and check their
sources and footnotes:

• 1982 Oded Yinon Plan called for the balkanization of the Middle East by and for the benefit
of Israel. The American invasion and occupation of Iraq intentionally fractured Iraq
implementing Paragraph 23. See Section 1.1 and Chapter 3.
• The Pentagon in 2001 had plans for military campaigns against 7 Middle East countries
within 5 years (Ch. 1). This plan has been drawn out but is well along and still in process.
• Bush and Cheney in 2001 intentionally allowed al Qaeda to escape Tora Bora, Afghanistan
(Ch. 2). The body of the paper is just one and a half pages. I recommend the second page,
Footnote (1), if you are not familiar with the modern history of America’s involvement in the
Muslim world.
• The Fed has 3 trillion in a “money creation account” hidden in financial institutions’ reserve
deposits (Ch. 6 under “Federal Reserve Accounting”). This section is just one and half
pages. As of 10/29/2014 the account was 2,919,995 M the difference between securities held
and currency outstanding.

An unclassified, underreported but significant point on our economy:

• Total domestic, nonfinancial debt to GDP has stayed above 247% since 2009 in spite of a
growing GDP and a trillion-dollar reduction in household mortgages through over four
million foreclosures. This is the highest or one of the highest debt/GDP ratios in our
recorded history. It has been and will continue to be a drag on the American economy. We
cannot service such indebtedness. Continued debt forgiveness with concomitant losses to
creditors is unavoidable (Ch. 6). 11/15/2014 Note: The Fed recently reduced nonfinancial
debt by 2.4 T. It reclassified these corporate bonds as miscellaneous other liabilities reducing
the ratio of nonfinancial debt to GDP to just 234%. This manipulation was subsequently
reversed.

2016 Total domestic, nonfinancial debt to GDP was 253.5%.

Source: http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/ See the 09/21/2017 release pages 7 and 9.
2009 to 2016, GDP grew 29.2%, but debt grew 31.3%.

4
Now is the time. We may have begun a long war to destroy the Islamic State while offering no
viable alternative. Fed tapering has ended. 09/2017 The Islamic State will soon lose its
geographic holdings, but the war on terror will continue, and we still offer no viable alternative.
09/2017 The Fed has reinvested all its bond portfolio redemptions/ principal payments since
tapering ended in 2014 and now plans to very slowly reduce its trillions in long term bond
holdings beginning in October 2017.

Reading Guide
These essays were written as stand-alone pieces and may be read as such. Given the
independence of each piece there is redundancy which is less than optimal but will allow you to
move more quickly through later reading. I did not originally intend to write a book but
eventually discerned in these pieces a logical progression in a whole work. Your background
may preempt the need to follow this progression.

There are tangential pieces that I hope you will not find distracting but rather of interest. Some
of the Footnotes and Addendums could stand alone as separate essays. You may find some of
them of interest all by themselves. All the articles are dated. Significant new material was
added in red and/or italics after the date of origin.

Titles of the chapters/ articles do not always clearly indicate the body of the work.

Chapter 2 The War on Terror is a Lie. – includes in Footnote (1) the actions America has taken
in the Muslim world that created the hatred and terrorism against us. Footnotes 6, 7, and 8 are
excerpts from three books including one by the CIA station chief in charge at Tora Bora and one
by the head of Delta Force at Tora Bora. An essay/addendum was added later which postulates a
relationship between the first publication of this article on 10/20/2009 and the 11/30/2009 report
on Tora Bora by the majority staff of the Senate foreign relations committee.

Chapter 4 Religion Serves Politics - condemns the religious defense of the war on terror,
concludes the Book of Joshua was uninspired, and includes an addendum that reconciles the
Bible timeline, the Jewish timeline, and the historical timeline. If you’re a Bible student you
should find this essay/addendum of interest even if you thoroughly disagree with the rest of the
paper.

Chapter 6 Great Recessions II - includes a review of basic economics theory, economic history in
the S&L crisis and the great recession, reasons to predict another great recession, and a critique
of the Fed.

Chapter 7 Gun Control: A bigger picture – may be the heart of this eBook. It advances the
theory that we are a sick society made sick by our unwillingness to face terrible truths. It
reviews the history of those truths. We have been an aggressor nation since before our inception.
It advances the case against our war plutocrats. It makes the case for gun control in cutting our
military, intelligence, and security spending in half, back to year 2000 spending. The gun
control we need most is the defunding of possible, future American aggression.

5
It also supports some traditional gun control as long as that control does not eliminate effective
weapons in the hands of citizens. We are capable of self-governance and self-defense. And, we
may need these weapons to make things right.

Chapter 9, Section 1 Pivot to Diplomacy – It recommends foreign policy positions to replace our
current, corrupt dollar diplomacy with a values based diplomacy, attempts to clarify issues, and
recommends actions to be taken regarding the Islamic State, Israel/ Palestine, Eastern Ukraine,
and China.

We have fought against evil, but we have arguably fought for even greater evil in the continuing
war, chaos, and corruption we left behind in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, and Libya…

We will stop losing wars when we stop fighting unjust wars. Stop 2014 11 15

This is a controversial book. A primary advantage of the eBook version is that you may instantly
check the sources available online. If you prefer to read a paper version, read it with the eBook
on your computer so you can quickly check sources. You can order the paperback version at:
https://www.amazon.com/Terrible-Lies-Truths-Perpetual-Plutocracies/dp/1973434563/

6
1 Our Plutocrats’ Plans
2014 09 23

Mere incompetence could not create the current level of dysfunction, and gross error
uncorrected over time is most always intentional. There is almost no aspect of the
current reality that is not manipulated by these Plutocrats’ machinations.

These planners/ sociopaths control America, Israel, and much of the rest of the world.
They are a large portion of our plutocrats including war plutocrats, financial
plutocrats, and additional unknowns. They appear to value short term extraordinary
profits over even their own long term best interests with no concern for others. They
created the Great Recession through fraud, and while their American banks paid 65
B+ in settlements as of 11/2013, they were subject to no direct consequences.
Almost no one went to jail. The world is theirs to rule and/or destroy with impunity.

One Plan - Protocols of the Elders of Zion as reviewed by Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Source: http://www.whale.to/c/alexander.html

The Anonymous author of the Protocols describes a master-plan for vast restructuring of society,
creation of a new oligarchy, and subjugation of millions. Anonym’s way to subjugation leads
through Machiavellian manipulations and mind control a la Orwell’s 1984. (Orwell’s homage to
the Protocols is even more striking as it is rarely noticed).

The master-plan begins with reshaping the human mind:

“People’s minds should be diverted (away from contemplation) towards industry and trade, and
then they will have no time to think. The people will be consumed by the pursuit of gain. It
will be vain pursuit, for we shall put industry on a speculative basis: what is withdrawn from
the land by industry will slip through the hands of workers and industrialists and pass into the
hands of financiers.

The intensified struggle for survival and superiority, accompanied by crises and shocks will
create cold and heartless communities with strong aversion towards religion. Their only guide is
gain that is Mammon, which they will erect into a veritable cult”.

Foresight of Anonym is amazing: in the days of the Protocols’ publication (Russia 1903), Man
was still the measure of things, and a full eighty years would pass, until Milton Friedman and
Chicago School would proclaim Market and Profit as the only guiding light.
- Per Solzhenitsyn End

The Protocols are a forgery, but the Protocols’ anonymous author was amazingly prescient,
and I believe there is a plan. Whose plan? Unknown though it appears our financial plutocrats
are the primary beneficiaries.

War Plans – of America’s Tax-Exempt Foundations uncovered by Norman Dodd and the Reece
Committee 1954

7
The Committee’s investigators reviewed board minutes of Tax Exempt Foundations including
the Carnegie Endowment from its inception in 1910, the Ford Foundation, the Rockefeller
Foundation, and others. These minutes revealed these boards’ conclusions: War is the most
effective means of changing a society. Control of the State Department is the most effective
means to involve the US in wars. Control of education will prevent reversion of the country
back to where we were in 1914. Sources: 1982 interview with Norman Dodd
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUYCBfmIcHM and
A transcript - http://realityzone.stores.yahoo.net/hiddenagenda2.html

The Oded Yinon Plan 1982 31 Paragraphs

This plan calls for the balkanization of the Middle East to be brought about by and for the
benefit of Israel. Whether or not this plan was ever formally adopted as Israeli policy is
irrelevant. What is relevant is that this plan has been followed and is being followed.
Paragraph 23 describes what President George W Bush and Vice President Cheney
accomplished with the intentional destruction of Iraq. See chapter 3. The Plan’s Paragraph 26
describes what Israel has done and is doing to bring about the annexation of the West Bank. See
excerpts from this plan in the next Section 1.1.

War Plans – The Pentagon’s 2001 Middle East Plans

Retired General Wesley Clark states there was an American foreign policy coup in 2001 calling
for military campaigns against seven countries in the Middle East. He thought it may have been
to enhance American control in the area. Around 9/20/2001 he spoke with a general on the Joint
Chiefs’ staff and learned the decision to attack Iraq had already been made. Six weeks later the
same general produced a memo that described how we are going to take out seven countries in
five years starting with Iraq then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and finishing off Iran.
Sources:
http://library.fora.tv/2007/10/03/Wesley_Clark_A_Time_to_Lead/Wesley_Clark_on_America_s
_Foreign_Policy__Coup_ , 10/3/2007 Commonwealth Club/ www.fora.tv , and (1)

Iraq was invaded to destroy Iraq and create a continuing, violent division between Sunni and
Shiite. See Chapter 3. This division spread to Syria and is now resurgent in Iraq. Libya’s
factions continue to fight. The Somali government continues to fight al Shabaab. Sudan is pitted
against South Sudan while South Sudan is in civil war. Egypt is divided between liberals, the
military, and the Muslim Brotherhood. Yemen is fighting both a Shiite Houthi rebellion and a
Sunni al Qaeda backed insurgency. Palestine may or may not hold together in a national unity
government combining Fatah and Hamas.

Who benefits? -
American and Israeli war plutocrats - continue to make their war profits. They are the flesh and
blood persons who own and operate our defense industries and other major corporations that
benefit from our perpetual war economies.
Financial plutocrats - are war plutocrats to the extent they benefit from war.

8
Oil plutocrats – Disorder in oil producing countries such as Libya, Iraq, and Iran increases oil
prices and thereby increases oil company profits.
Greater Israel Zionists - with the Arab world divided there is reduced threat to a greater Israel.
Israel could annex most of the West Bank with near impunity.

Greater Israel Zionists – appear to be a significant subset of our war plutocrats.

Israel exists thru perpetual war though this need not be so. The Balfour Declaration came about
in WW I. The Holocaust in WW II created the impetus for the migration of survivors to Israel.
Israel expanded its borders thru wars in 1948 and 1967. (There was an ongoing civil war before
Israel’s declaration of statehood in 5/1948. Israel attacked Egypt on 10/29/1956 beginning the
Suez War. Israel initiated military actions on June 5 th and again on June 9th in 1967.) The
solution to every problem is alleged to be military action when in fact only political solutions
will bring peace, but peace is not a goal.

Greater Israel Zionists and greater Palestine terrorists are collaborators with unending
occupation rationalizing unending terror, rationalizing unending occupation, rationalizing
unending terror... Greater Zionists actually want a two-state solution but with a greater Israel
incorporating Judea and Samaria and with a decrepit, rump state of Palestine in Gaza.
Greater Zionists are Drang nach Osten (yearning for the East) for Lebensraum (life room) in
Judea and Samaria. Further, perpetual war provides the evolutionary vehicle through which the
strongest survive and thereby strengthen the race. In the same way the Nazis destroyed
Germany, greater Zionists will destroy Israel. These War Plans are not in the long term best
interests of Israel.

Conclusion
No foreign states or terrorists are existential threats to America or Israel. As America and Israel
are plutocracies, though Americans and Israelis are free and have influence, we do not control
our countries. American and Israeli war plutocrats with their cronies control our countries. They
are the existential threat to our democracies. Eliminate their profits/ mammon by ending
American and Israeli aggression. Pivot to diplomacy.

Sources and Footnotes:

(1) Winning Modern Wars by Wesley Clark (New York: Public Affairs, 2003), 130. In this book
Clark describes his conversation with a military officer in the Pentagon shortly after 9/11
regarding a plan to attack seven Middle Eastern countries in five years: "As I went back through
the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes,
we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being
discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries,
beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and finishing off Iran."

Definitions: Greater Zionists - in this writing, the term does not include those who dream of a
greater Israel brought about by just means.

9
1.1 The Oded Yinon Plan 1982
2016 02 06

This plan calls for the balkanization of the Middle East to be brought about by and for the benefit
of Israel. Whether or not this plan was ever formally adopted as Israeli policy is irrelevant.
What is relevant is that this plan has been followed and is being followed. Paragraph 23
describes what President George W Bush and Vice President Cheney accomplished with the
intentional destruction of Iraq. See Chapter 3. The Plan’s Paragraph 26 describes what Israel
has done and is doing to bring about the annexation of the West Bank.

A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties by Oded Yinon February 1982 31 paragraphs
Excerpts:

Paragraph 13 – This national ethnic minority picture extending from Morocco to India and from
Somalia to Turkey points to the absence of stability and a rapid degeneration in the entire region.
When this picture is added to the economic one, we see how the entire region is built like a
house of cards, unable to withstand severe problems.

Paragraph 15 - …A sad and very stormy situation surrounds Israel and creates challenges for it,
problems, risks but also far reaching opportunities for the first time since 1967…

Paragraph 20 - …Egypt, in its present domestic political picture, is already a corpse, all the more
so if we take into account the growing Moslem-Christian rift. Breaking Egypt down
territorially into distinct geographical regions is the political aim of Israel in the Nineteen
Eighties on its Western front.

Paragraph 21 - …If Egypt falls apart, countries like Libya, Sudan or even more distant
states will not continue to exist in their present form and will join the downfall and
dissolution of Egypt…

Paragraph 22 - …Lebanon’s total dissolution into five provinces serves as a precedent for
the entire Arab world including Egypt, Syria, Iraq and the Arabian Peninsula and is
already following that track. The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically and
religiously unique areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front
in the long run, while the dissolution of the military power of those states serves as the primary
short-term target. Syria will fall apart, in accordance with its ethnic and religious structure,
into several states such as in present day Lebanon… This state of affairs will be the
guarantee for peace and security in the area in the long run, and that aim is already within our
reach today.

Paragraph 23 - Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other, is guaranteed
as a candidate for Israel’s targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than that
of Syria. Iraq is stronger than Syria. In the short run it is Iraqi power which constitutes the
greatest threat to Israel. …Every kind of inter-Arab confrontation will assist us in the
short run and will shorten the way to the more important aim of breaking up Iraq into
denominations as in Syria and Lebanon. In Iraq, a division into provinces along

10
ethnic/religious lines as in Syria during Ottoman times is possible. So, three (or more) states will
exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad, and Mosul and Shiite areas in the south will
separate from the Sunni and Kurdish north…

Paragraph 24 – The entire Arabian Peninsula is a natural candidate for dissolution…

Paragraph 25 – Jordan constitutes an immediate strategic target in the short but not in the
long run for it does not constitute a real threat in the long run after its dissolution…

Paragraph 26 - …Israel’s policy, both in war and in peace, ought to be directed at the
liquidation of Jordan under the present regime and the transfer of power to the Palestinian
majority. Changing the regime east of the river will also cause the termination of the problem
of the territories densely populated with Arabs west of the Jordan. Whether in war or under
conditions of peace, emigration from the territories and economic demographic freeze in
them, are the guarantees for the coming change on both banks of the river, and we ought to
be active in order to accelerate this process. …it is not possible to go on living in this country
in the present situation without separating the two nations, the Arabs to Jordan and the Jews
to the areas west of the river. …A nation of their own and security will be theirs only in
Jordan.

Source: A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties by Oded Yinon 31 paragraphs
Published February 1982 in Hebrew in KIVUNIM (Directions) Issue 14, a Journal for Judaism
and Zionism. KIVUNIM was/is published by the Department of Publicity/ The World Zionist
Organization, Jerusalem
An English translation was completed by Israel Shahak 06/13/1982 published by the Association
of Arab American University Graduates, Inc.:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/The%20Zionist%20Plan%20for%20the%20Middl
e%20East.pdf
http://www.globalresearch.ca/greater-israel-the-zionist-plan-for-the-middle-east/5324815

The Management of Savagery - Ali Soufan states this “book sets out a strategy closely aligned
with official al-Qaeda doctrine… The Management of Savagery playbook… proceeds in three
phases. Phase one involves creating and exploiting chaos, or ‘savagery.’ Phase two entails
building popular support for Salafi-jihadi rule. Not until phase three do we reach the
establishment of a permanent Islamic state.” (a, b p.184)

The Oded Yinon Plan and The Management of Savagery share similar paths toward different
ends. Al Qaeda and Israel appear to recognize the commonality of their paths given the few
incidents of al Qaeda and Israel attacking each other. The 2002 Mombasa attacks may be one
such incident. I submit America, Israel, and al Qaeda are allies in Savagery’s phase one.

(a) The Management of Savagery - https://azelin.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/abu-bakr-naji-the-

management-of-savagery-the-most-critical-stage-through-which-the-umma-will-pass.pdf
(b) Anatomy of Terror by Ali Soufan (Former FBI Interrogator)

11
2 The War on Terror is a Lie
2010/12/30

Injustice in American foreign policy is a primary cause of the terror against us. We
will not end terror without justice and a return to American ideals. (1)

Terror must be fought with law enforcement. It is not primarily a military problem
(2). A million men-at-arms are required to fight conventional wars and insurgencies
as in Afghanistan and Iraq. The FBI, CIA, other intelligence services, and the
military’s Special Forces are required to fight terror. The deployment of hundreds of
thousands of our troops indicates we are fighting for some purposes other than
stopping terror – purposes such as empire, cheap natural resources, and war profits
for those who have contrived this war on terror.

We cannot now bring many Guantanamo detainees to trial because we did not build the legal
cases necessary to prosecute them. Only 23 of 770 Guantanamo detainees had been charged
with war crimes as of October 2008 (3).

Torture was used to build the lie. It is unreliable, counter-productive, and not a means to the
truth. Torture was used to get Guantanamo detainees to confess and implicate others whether or
not they and those they implicated were guilty. Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi’s torture in Egypt
produced the lie that Saddam Hussein trained al Qaeda in biological and chemical weapons (4).
Abu Zubaydah while subjected to torture/ waterboarding told his interrogators that al-Qaeda had
links with Saddam Hussein (5). These lies helped rationalize the Iraq war.

The Bush administration refused to fight and win the war on terror (5½). They intentionally
allowed al-Qaeda and bin Laden to escape Afghanistan in December 2001 and subsequently
refused to take the actions necessary to capture or destroy them. The Administration, after being
clearly briefed that “the back door was open,” refused to send 1,200 marines to Tora Bora (6),
refused to authorize 800 Rangers or alternately mines to block the passes at Tora Bora, and then
fired the CIA station chief in the middle of the operation. (7, 8) If al-Qaeda and bin Laden had
been captured or destroyed in December 2001, the war on terror would have come to a premature
end, leaving no quasi-rationalization for perpetual war in Afghanistan and Iraq, and less quasi-
rationalization for a possible future attack on Iran.

Conclusion: The “war on terror” is a lie. It was used as cover for other purposes in a gross
contravention of American ideals. America is existentially threatened by those who have
contrived this war on terror - our domestic enemies, not by foreign terrorists.

See the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s 11/30/2009 Report on Tora Bora at:
http://foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Tora_Bora_Report.pdf
The Committee concluded the escape from Tora Bora was a senior management failure, but the
senior managers they faulted were Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and CentCom General Franks
not President Bush and Vice President Cheney who were fully informed of the situation. See
footnotes 6, 7, and 8 on Tora Bora.

12
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
Zarqawi led Jama’at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad which became al Qaeda in Iraq and then with other
Jihadi groups evolved into ISIS. In the fall of 2002 in northern Iraq, a CIA kill/capture team was
set to go after Zarqawi. The Bush administration stopped the operation (a). They wanted to use
Zarqawi as a link between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein to help rationalize the Iraq war. Colin
Powell mentioned Zarqawi 21 times in his 2/5/2003 address to the UN (a, b p.128). The
administration refused to eliminate Zarqawi just as they had refused to eliminate bin Laden
and al Qaeda at Tora Bora.

Zarqawi was affiliated with but was not yet part of al Qaeda. He had not yet sworn fealty
(Bayat) to bin Laden. He was in or near the camp of Ansar al Islam in northern Kurdish Iraq
outside the control of Saddam Hussein. There was no link.

If Bush had killed or captured Zarqawi in 2002, there may never have been an al Qaeda in
Iraq or an ISIS.

(a) 5/17/2016 Frontline Episode 542, S34: E10, The Secret History of ISIS
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/the-secret-history-of-isis/
See 6:30 minutes into the video, at 8:30 Bush stopped the kill/capture operation.
(b) Anatomy of Terror by Ali Soufan (Former FBI Interrogator)

13
Sources and Footnotes

(1) Stopping Terror with Justice

Author’s Notes

Justice in American foreign policy would eliminate 90% of the terror against us. The Muslim
world dislikes us for many substantive reasons, including the following:
• Our aid to Egypt’s Mubarak and petrodollars to the Arab monarchies enable them to oppress
their people.
• We have done grave harm to the people and state of Iran, while they have done little harm to
us. We overthrew the popular prime minister of Iran, Mohammad Mosaddeq, in 1953 and
replaced him with the Shah who with his Savak secret police oppressed his people for a
generation. We supported Iraq, the clear aggressor, in the 1980s Iraq/ Iran war, and 400,000
Iranians died. In 1979 Iran took Americans hostage. One of their primary demands was that
we not interfere in their internal affairs. Their actions were not unreasonable given our
actions in 1953, and all hostages came home.
• We supported an arms embargo of Bosnia that left Serbs well armed and Muslims less able to
defend themselves against genocide, systematic rape, and ethnic cleansing. In addition, we
allowed Karadzic and Mladic, the President and General of the Bosnian Serb Republic, to
live in NATO controlled areas with impunity for years even though they were two of the
most egregious, genocidal terrorists on the planet.
• We have helped pay for Israel’s aggression in the Occupied Territories for a generation. The
settlement of 500,000 Israelis East of the green line is aggression and/or conquest. These
terms apply.
• We committed unprovoked aggression against Iraq, and John Hopkins University Reports
estimate hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died.

Actions such as these have combined to create the hatred against us. But, we can eliminate this
hatred and its resultant terror with justice. Where America has been in error, we must recognize
those errors and make amends. We don’t need to spend the additional hundreds of billions we
have been spending since 9/11 on defense, security, and intelligence. We don’t need to be
occupiers and torturers. We don’t need an empire to be secure – quite the opposite. We’re
creating more terrorists than we are eliminating. We don’t need to give up our privacy and our
freedom. We don’t need a strong defense more than we need to be strong in the defense of truth
and justice.

(2) Rand Study – “How Terrorist Groups End”

http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG741-1/
The Study’s authors conclude that policing and intelligence, rather than military force, should
form the backbone of U.S. efforts against al Qa'ida. And, U.S. policymakers should end the use
of the phrase “war on terrorism” since there is no battlefield solution to defeating al Qa'ida.

Author’s notes: The destruction of al Qaeda camps and sanctuaries in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and
other countries has and will require military action. For example, the battle of Tora Bora was a
military operation against up to 1,000 primarily al-Qaeda fighters including terrorists and
insurgents.

14
Al-Qaeda is both a terrorist and an insurgent organization. Terrorism by itself cannot be an
existential threat to a government. Terrorism supporting an insurgency can be such a threat.
“The (al-Qaeda) training camps… though they turned out a few thousand terrorists; they turned
out a hundred thousand or more insurgents. The graduates, in turn, trained tens of thousands
more insurgents after returning home.” (Imperial Hubris by Michael Scheuer, Potomac Books -
Paperback edition p. 222)

(3) The Guantanamo Effect by Laurel Fletcher and Eric Stover 2009 See excerpts at:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/01/990357/-Torture-Update-2010-12-15

(4) 5/12/2009 Newsweek web exclusive http://www.newsweek.com/id/196818

“Death in Libya” by Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball
http://www.newsweek.com/did-high-value-detainee-commit-suicide-libya-79805
by Michael Isikoff 5/11/2009

(5) 11/9/2010 Guardian UK -- British deny George Bush's claims that torture helped foil terror
plots. By Richard Norton-Taylor and Ian Black

Update - FBI Agent Ali Soufan was the first to interrogate Zubaydah after his 2002 capture in
Pakistan. Soufan has condemned the CIA for waterboarding a prisoner he considered
cooperative. One official said most all of the critical threat-related information from Zubaydah
was obtained during the period he was questioned by Soufan well before he was interrogated by
the CIA and waterboarded 83 times. (Source: Classified 2014 Senate Report by the Senate
Intelligence Committee per Washington Post article “Report: CIA misled on interrogations” in
the 4/1/2014 SDUT p. A1.)

See Section 2.1 Torture Update.

(5½) On 11/21/2001 Bush ordered Rumsfeld to update plans for an attack on Iraq. Rumsfeld
called Franks while he and an aide were working on plans for air support at Tora Bora and
ordered Franks to update Iraq plans and get back to him in a week. The shift in resources from
Afghanistan to Iraq began even before Tora Bora.
Source: http://foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Tora_Bora_Report.pdf quoting Plan of Attack
by Bob Woodward and American General by Tommy Franks. See page 12/ pdf page 18.

(6) The One Percent Doctrine

by Ron Suskind Hardcover edition Excerpts:

p. 58-59 Hank Crumpton headed up the CIA’s Afghan campaign from Langley. He briefed the
President in late November 2001:

“…Crumpton…showed Bush how the Campaign’s prime goal- to capture bin Laden- was in
jeopardy.”

15
“…Bush asked about the passage to Pakistan. Musharraf had assured the administration…that
his troops would seal the passages into Pakistan, the most logical escape route. Crumpton, using
his map, showed how the border between the countries was misleading, that the area on the
Pakistan side of the line was a lawless, tribal region that Musharraf had little control over. In any
event satellite images showed that Musharraf’s promised troops hadn’t arrived, and seemed
unlikely to appear soon.”

“What’s more, Crumpton added, the Afghan forces were ‘tired and cold and, many of them are
far from home.’ They were battered from fighting in the south against Taliban forces, and
‘they’re just not invested in getting bin Laden.’”

“A few days before, on November 26, a force of about 1,200 marines… had settled around
Kandahar… Crumpton, in constant contact with the Military’s CENTCOM center in Tampa,
Florida, had told General Tommy Franks over the past week of the concerns of the CIA’s
managing operatives in Afghanistan that “the back door was open.” He strongly urged Franks to
move the marines to the cave complex. Franks responded that the momentum of the CIA’s effort
to chase and corner bin Laden could be lost waiting for the troops to arrive; and there was
concern marines would be mired in the snowy mountains.”

“As Crumpton briefed the President- and it became clear that the Pentagon had not voiced the
CIA’s concerns to Bush - he pushed beyond his pay grade. He told Bush that “we’re going to
lose our prey if we’re not careful,” and strongly recommended the marines, or other troops
in the region, get to Tora Bora immediately. Cheney said nothing.

Bush, seeming surprised, pressed him for more information. ‘How bad off are these Afghani
forces really? Are they up to the job?’
‘Definitely not, Mr. President,’ Crumpton said, ‘Definitely not.’”

p. 74 “Classified CIA reports passed to Bush in his morning briefings of early December,
however, warned that ‘the back door is open’ and that a bare few Pakistani army units were
visible gathering near the Pakistani border. None had crossed into Afghanistan, a fierce tribal
area Pakistan had always been reluctant to enter.”

(7) Jawbreaker
Excerpt(s) from JAWBREAKER: THE ATTACK ON BIN LADEN AND AL QAEDA: A
PERSONAL ACCOUNT BY THE CIA'S KEY FIELD COMMANDER by Gary Berntsen and
Ralph Pezzullo, copyright © 2005 by Gary Berntsen and Ralph Pezzullo. Used by permission of
Crown Books, an imprint of the Crown Publishing Group, a division of Penguin Random House
LLC. All rights reserved. Any third party use of this material, outside of this publication, is
prohibited. Interested parties must apply directly to Penguin Random House LLC for permission.
Page numbers are from the original Hardcover edition.

Gary Berntsen was the CIA station chief in East Afghanistan in 2001. He documented the
ineffectiveness of Afghan troops and repeatedly requested 800 Rangers to block the passes

16
between Tora Bora and Pakistan. His requests were denied, and he was relieved in the middle of
the operation. Al-Qaeda was allowed to escape to Pakistan. Excerpts:

p. 211 Colonel Alexander was a SF (Special Forces) Colonel working with CIA Special
Activities Division for the past two years. “He’d also been part of multiple plans to capture bin
Laden during 1999 and 2000, all of which had been canceled at the last minute.”

p. 239 “Two days before the fall of Kabul (on November 12), the London Sunday Times
reported that the al-Qaeda leader was seen entering Jalalabad in a convoy of white Toyota trucks
surrounded by commandos… At mid-afternoon as US bombs fell on the city…”

“…bin Laden…left in a convoy of four wheel drive vehicles.”

“This same convoy of approximately two hundred Toyotas and Land Cruisers was seen two days
later passing through the village of Agam two hours south.”

p. 241 “On the night of November 23rd Northern Alliance sources claimed that two Pakistani
planes landed in Kunduz under the cover of darkness to extract key Pakistani advisors to the
Taliban and several high-ranking Taliban officials. I had no way to confirm this, but wasn’t
surprised. Pakistan’s ISI Directorate had helped create the Taliban and had been a close ally of
their government for years…”

Tora Bora
p. 275 “From the start it was clear that the men leading this new Afghan force did not have the
same desire we did to pursue and destroy al Qaeda. And many of the foot soldiers were
followers of local religious leader Maulawi Mohammad Younus Khalis, who had instructed them
to allow al-Qaeda to escape.”

p. 290 “Day and night, I kept thinking, We needed US soldiers on the ground! We need them to
do the fighting! We need them to block a possible al-Qaeda escape into Pakistan! I’d sent my
request for 800 US Army Rangers and was still waiting for a response. I repeated to anyone at
headquarter who would listen: ‘We need Rangers now! The opportunity to get bin Laden is
slipping away!!’”

“…I’d made it clear in my reports that our Afghan allies were hardly anxious to get at al-Qaeda
in Tora Bora. So why was the US military looking for excuses not to act decisively? Why
would they want to leave something that was so important to an unreliable Afghan army that’d
been cobbled together at the last minute? This was the opportunity we’d hoped for when we
launched this mission. Our advantage was quickly slipping away.”

p. 296 Tora Bora 12/14/2001 Berntsen is relieved.

(12/9/2001) “I heard Hank clear his throat. ‘We’ve selected a permanent chief which will allow
you to return to your post in South America.’… ‘It’s Rich the chief of (Alec Station),’ Hank
answered… ‘He should get to you by the fourteen of December.’ That was five days away.”
(Richard Blee was head of Alec Station, the Bin Laden Issue Station)

17
p. 297 “… Now that we finally had bin Laden and his al-Qaeda cadres trapped in the White
Mountains why was headquarters pulling us out? And why was Washington hesitant about
committing troops to get bin Laden? These were the questions that kept me up at night.”

(8) Kill Bin Laden

by Dalton Fury St. Martin’s Press/New York Hardcover edition Excerpts:

Dalton Fury is the nom de plume of the Major in charge of Delta Force on the ground at Tora
Bora.

p. XXIV “At the end of the day, the men and women farther up the ladder normally take the
word and recommendations of us - the guys on the ground. At some critical times, that did not
happen with the complex fight in Tora Bora. Instead, at times, we were micromanaged by
higher-ups unknown, even to the point of being ordered to send the exact coordinates of our
teams back to various folks in Washington.”

“The muhj (Mujahideen) allies turned their guns on our boys to stop an advance.”

“When we arrived in Afghanistan in December 2001, the US was pulling troops out of the area
in a weird ploy to trick Usama bin Laden while stripping us of a quick reaction force.”

“The muhj… routinely left the battlefield when it got dark, at times abandoning our small teams
in the mountains.”

p. 72 “Then we were slammed by a silly deception plan that had been dreamed up by parties
unknown. The majority of the Rangers and our Delta teammates were being sent home!
Somebody had decided to try and fool Usama bin Laden, al Qaeda, and the Taliban into thinking
that the Joint Special Operations Task Force had left the theater of operations, so that bad buys
would let down their guard. The naïveté’ of that idea still boggles my mind today.

‘Aren’t we at war?’ we asked. Why were we not pouring all available assets in Afghanistan,
rather than withdrawing our strength?”

p. 75 “Where were the satellite photos? Where were those maps of the cave entrances?”

p. 76-77 “There was another intriguing option, and we liked it enough to plan it out. What about
going in the back door, across the 14,000 foot mountains on the Afghan-Pakistan border? What
if several teams could insert safely by helicopter into Pakistan, on the far side of the highest Tora
Bora peaks. They would have bottled oxygen and acclimate themselves as they ascended even
higher, and once they crested the peaks and found any sign of al Qaeda, they would be in
business.

The commandos would own the high ground and could accurately target bunkers and cave
openings with lasers for US warplanes to strike them with relative impunity.

18
A tactical plan drawn up by the Delta experts is rarely denied, and in fact I cannot remember
anyone ever saying no once Delta determined what it needed to do to accomplish its
assigned mission. This one worked its way up through our various commanders, but somewhere
way, way above us, it was denied. We would not be allowed to infiltrate through Pakistan.

Any plan has negatives, including this one. Just re-supplying such recon teams with water,
ammunition, and radio batteries would have been a tall order. That did not mean, however, that
we should not do it. We were Delta and we could overcome such things. Having Delta guarding
the far side of the mountain passes, closing the ring, would have made a huge difference. But
our plan was shot down.”

p. 78 “…the air fleet was being downsized in a strange attempt to fool the terrorists.”

“Ashley (Delta Force Squadron Commander of Fury’s team) wanted to make those possible exit
routes even more dangerous by dropping some CBU-89 Gator mines into the passes. The Gators
would spread a minefield that would both deny enemy foot soldiers their escape routes and also
knock out vehicles, leaving the enemy trapped and shaping the battlefield more to our liking.

Even this logical request was disapproved at some higher level, most likely even above the
four-stars at CENTCOM.”

p. 210-215 December 12, 2001 An alleged al Qaeda surrender

Haji Zaman Ghamshareek – Pashtun warlord who controlled Jalalabad and was one of the senior
Afghan commanders at Tora Bora. He later fled the country and was on the run when this book
was written.

MSS Grinch – Mission Support Site MSS under the command of Sergeant Major Jim code
named Grinch. The mission consisted of 25 American and British commandos.

“The (local) commander said that al Qaeda had thrown in the towel! A full surrender of all al
Qaeda forces was about to take place!

As Jim’s fury grew, the local commander raised Zaman on his radio, and the warlord himself
issued an order that the foreign commandos were not to proceed any farther into the mountains.

‘Whatever it takes,’ Zaman said in Pashto. ‘Under no circumstances are the Americans allowed
to attack al Qaeda. We must see the negotiations through.’

…Jim knew the surrender gambit was nonsense, and said so. He responded that he had his own
orders and intended to see them through…Within twenty minutes after hearing Zaman insist that
Americans would not be allowed to take another step, Jim and MSS Grinch began humping up
the ridgeline.

They had covered only about fifty meters when Zaman’s men appeared on the high ground
and leveled their weapons- eighty AK-47s- at the commandos… the odds in a fire fight were

19
probably about even… but getting into a shootout with your supposed allies was not the most
diplomatic of moves. So MSS Grinch had little choice but to hold in place and let the cease fire
situation play out a little more. An hour passed uneventfully except for the commandos stewing
about being held back.

A few minutes after 6:00 AM, Zaman arrived with another dozen of his fighters… he took full
credit for arranging the surrender…

Jim couldn’t figure out just yet who was doing the stalling. Was al Qaeda using Zaman to buy
time? Or could Zaman perhaps be in cahoots with al Qaeda and delaying the fight to allow the
enemy to consolidate its forces, reposition, or even escape?

…Jim intuitively decided that Zaman was dirty.”

…While Jim was dealing with Zaman, I dialed up Ashley on the satellite phone and filled him in.
He agreed that we had to let the alleged surrender run its course until 5:00 PM, since we really
had no choice.”

p. 243 “With the two original observations posts forced to shut down because of the advancing…
forces… an opportunity presented itself to increase the relentless pursuit of bin Laden.

We now had twelve Green Berets out of a job (They had manned the posts which were now too
far in the rear to be effective.), and several of General Ali’s subordinate commanders … were
begging for commandos to direct bombs along their particular axis of advance. We wanted to
oblige, as this would give us better visibility and at the same time provide firm locations on each
group of muhj. With the Green Berets from Cobra 25 (one of the posts) now available, problem
solved. Or so I thought. (General Hazret Ali was Zaman’s senior warlord.)

The decision to not allow them to enter the mountains dumbfounded me and frustrated the
quiet professionals from Cobra 25. The Green Berets were now out of the fight completely…”

p. 246-247 “The dreadful weather also was playing havoc with some of the aircraft flying
missions to blast the mountainous position, and visibility would change by the hour. We had to
replace the fire support of those planes during the bad weather with some organic all-weather
assets as soon as possible. The Rangers back at Bagram owned just such weapons, and we put in
several requests from some Ranger mortars. Request denied. The reasons elude me still,
particularly, since some of their officers told me that they were anxious to comply and get into
the fight.”

p. 248 “When MSS Grinch had moved into the mountains days earlier, we had been unable to
locate or bargain for donkeys (to move supplies). MSS Monkey had some, but even a donkey
had its limits in this place. Once Grinch entered the radically steep terrain where they were now
fighting, donkeys wouldn’t have helped at all.

We had another idea, and we once again went back to the Rangers… Two platoons of Rangers
were sitting around back at Bagram, and we asked for one platoon to help. They could serve as a
human logistics train from the last vehicle drop-off point in the foothills all the way up to MSS
20
Grinch, which was located several klicks away and at an elevation several thousand meters
higher. Rangers could do what helicopters and mules could not. Request denied. Again, I
never learned the reasons for that refusal.”

p. 294 “Leaving the back door open gave the rat a chance to run.”

21
2.1 Torture Update
2014 12 15 Re-edited Updates to Chapter 2 - paragraph 4, footnotes 4 and 5.

2010 12 15
Alleged terrorist Abu Zubaydah while subjected to torture/ waterboarding told his interrogators
that al-Qaeda had links with Saddam Hussein and that there was a plot to attack Washington with
a dirty bomb. Both claims are now recognized by the CIA to have been false. (a)
(2014 There was a Dirty Bomb plot, but even Zubaydah did not believe it was a viable plan. The
CIA came to the same conclusion. Most important, it was disclosed by Zubaydah before he was
subjected to CIA torture. See “Lie One” below.)

The CIA inspector general in 2004 found that there was no conclusive proof that waterboarding
or other harsh interrogation techniques helped the Bush administration thwart any "specific
imminent attacks." (b)

In 5/2009 Ali Soufan, a veteran FBI investigator, who interrogated senior al-Qaeda captives told
the Senate Judiciary Committee that harsh interrogation techniques are "ineffective, slow and
unreliable." He also disputed claims by former VP Cheney and others that these methods helped
uncover major terrorist plots. Cheney had called for the release of two classified CIA memos that
he says detail successes. Sen. Russ Feingold said he's seen the two documents, and they don't
prove Cheney's case. (c)

In 11/2010 British officials said there was no evidence to support claims by Bush that
information extracted by waterboarding KSM Khalid Sheikh Mohammed saved British lives by
foiling attacks on Heathrow Airport and Canary Wharf. In fact, KSM was arrested a month after
the Heathrow alert. British counter terrorism officials did say KSM provided "extremely
valuable" information but that it mainly related to al-Qaida's structure. (a)

Sources: SDUT – San Diego Union Tribune

(a) 11/9/2010 Guardian UK -- British deny George Bush's claims that torture helped foil terror
plots. By Richard Norton-Taylor and Ian Black
(b) 4/25/2009 SDUT p. A1 Military agency had doubts about "torture' effect.
(c) 5/14/2009 SDUT p. A5 Harsh interrogation techniques ineffective" by MCT News Service

2014 12 15
Torture was effective in creating false Intel to rationalize perpetual war. It was ineffective,
however, in discerning the truth. Our war plutocrats’ cronies continue to lie claiming
otherwise. One measure of its continuing, residual effectiveness can be seen in the budget just
passed by Congress with nearly 600 billion in defense spending against a nonexistent threat.

The same budget also increased campaign spending limits so our war plutocrats could ensure
future war funding. Tax revenues, which are needed elsewhere, fund war profits which in turn
fund campaigns to keep tax revenues funding more war profits. Tax revenues which should be
used to rebuild America’s crippled infrastructure are instead used to cripple other countries’
infrastructure. Stop The lies continued - three more lies:

22
Lie One - The 12/10/2014 Wall Street Journal WSJ Editorial by former CIA directors and
deputy directors (3, First problem) states, “We are convinced that both (Abu Zubaydah and
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed KSM) would not have talked absent the interrogation program.”

In April 2002, FBI Special Agent Ali Soufan interrogated Abu Zubaydah. Ali Soufan described
one meeting as follows (1, page 230, footnote 1315), "So we went back. And we start talking to
him. We took some Coke, tea, and we start talking about different things. We flipped him about
different things, I and [REDACTED]. And then he came back to his senses, and he started
cooperating again. And this is when he gave us Padilla."

Zubaydah did not provide the name “Jose Padilla” but did provide Padilla’s kunya and
information on Padilla’s Dirty Bomb plot. Jose Padilla’s name had already been provided to the
CIA. Zubaydah was not subjected to enhanced interrogation until August 2002. See (1) pages
225-239 1. The Thwarting of the Dirty Bomb/Tall Buildings Plot and the Capture of Jose Padilla.

Lie Two - The WSJ editorial states (3, First problem), “The CIA never would have focused on
the individual who turned out to be bin Laden’s personal courier without the detention and
interrogation program.”
The CIA’s 6/27/2013 Response to the Senate Report states (2, pdf pages 121-123), “The other
intelligence that the Study (Senate Report) characterizes as “critical” did not distinguish Abu
Ahmad (al-Kuwaiti) from others who had some level of access to Bin Ladin, especially before
9/11.”

Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti was the personal courier to bin Laden who eventually, after over seven
more years, lead to bin Laden’s elimination.

“The Department of Justice finalized its approval of the CIA’s enhanced interrogation
techniques… on August 1, 2002.” ((1) Senate Report, p. 231)
“The CIA did not receive any information from CIA detainees on Abu Ahmed al Kuwaiti until
2003.” ((1) Senate Report, p. 380)

I refer you to the Senate Report Executive Summary’s pages 378 to 400 for a complete refutation
of the CIA’s assertions. Prior to the use of CIA enhanced interrogations, the CIA had al-
Kuwaiti’s phone numbers and email addresses. One phone number linked him to the bin Laden
family. The CIA knew he was one of three close, al Qaeda associates with access to bin Laden,
and that he traveled frequently to meet with bin Laden. The CIA knew in 2002 al-Kuwaiti was
special. (1a)

The Senate Report Executive Summary concluded on page 379, “the most accurate information
on Abu Ahmad al-Kuwaiti obtained from a CIA detainee was provided by a CIA detainee
(Hassan Ghul) who had not yet been subjected to the CIA's enhanced interrogation.” See further
references to Hassan Ghul and Abu Ahmad al-Kuwaiti on Senate Report Executive Summary
pages 133, 370, and 384.

23
Lie Three – The CIA’s Response (2, pdf p. 121) states, “Ammar (al-Bulachi), after undergoing
enhanced interrogation techniques (in June 2003), was the first detainee to reveal what
apparently was a carefully guarded al-Qa’ida secret – that Abu Ahmad (al-Kuwaiti) served as a
courier for messages to and from Bin Ladin…”

The Senate Report Executive Summary states (1, p. 382), “On June 25, 2002, the CIA received
reporting from another detainee in the custody of a foreign government – Riyadh the Facilitator –
suggesting al-Kuwaiti may have served as a courier for UBL (Bin Laden).” See additional Intel
on 1, p. 386. This Intel was derived a year before Ammar al Bulachi was interrogated/tortured.

These lies were not merely political posturing; they were treason.

Sources and Footnotes:

(1) Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Report –
Committee Study of the CIA’s Detention and Interrogation Program Executive Summary
w declassification revisions 12/03/2014
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/CRPT-113srpt288.pdf
The Executive Summary begins on pdf p. 30.

(1a) Senate Report Executive Summary pages 378-400

Section 12. Information on the Facilitator (al-Kuwaiti) that Led to the UBL Operation

Prior to receiving Intel on al-Kuwaiti from enhanced interrogations the CIA knew the following
about al-Kuwaiti in 2002:
phone numbers including a phone number linking al-Kuwaiti and the bin Laden family
email addresses including one shared by al-Kuwaiti and al-Bulachi
Intel indicating he was one of three close associates of bin Laden and traveled frequently to meet
with bin Laden -
Ridha al Najjar – On 6/5/2002 the CIA received Intel from this detainee in foreign
custody stating Abu Ahmad (al-Kuwaiti) was one of three al Qaeda associates including
KSM and Saad bin Laden who visited bin Laden. p. 382
Abu Zubair in 8/2002 reported al-Kuwaiti was one of a few close associates of bin Laden.
p. 383
Intel suggesting he was a courier by - Riyadh the Facilitator p. 382,386
physical description, family info … from Abu Zubair p. 391

(2) 6/27/2013 CIA Response to the Senate Report

https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/CIAs_June2013_Response_to_the_SSCI_Study_on_the_For
mer_Detention_and_Interrogation_Program.pdf

(3) Wall Street Journal 12/10/2014 Editorial – Ex-CIA Directors: Interrogations Saved Lives by
former CIA directors George Tenet, Porter Goss and Michael Hayden and former deputy
directors John McLaughlin, Albert Calland, and Stephen Kappes.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/cia-interrogations-saved-lives-1418142644

24
The Killing of Osama bin Laden
2015 05 21 Operation Neptune Spear
I strongly recommend Seymour Hersh’s original, full report on the killing of bin Laden at the
following link. The fiction in the reporting of his death was entertaining, but not as entertaining
as this nonfiction.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v37/n10/seymour-m-hersh/the-killing-of-osama-bin-laden
21 May 2015 London Review of Books published online Sunday 05/10/2015

Bin Laden was in Abbottabad under the control of Pakistan’s ISI, and they cooperated in the
5/2/2011 raid. Bin Laden had no couriers and no strategic or operational control of al Qaeda
except perhaps those allowed by the ISI. There was no treasure trove of Intel.

Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti was the personal courier to bin Laden who was alleged to have led us to
bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad. Last December former CIA directors and deputy
directors claimed we only knew about al-Kuwaiti through enhanced interrogation techniques.
We have already proven al-Kuwaiti was identified without CIA torture (see above). We can now
also prove al-Kuwaiti did not lead us to bin Laden’s compound. A former, senior intelligence
officer with Pakistani ISI tipped off the CIA. In August 2010 he walked into the US Embassy in
Islamabad.

Intelligence work requires some lies such as a cover story to protect the identity of the tipster and
to give cover to cooperative Pakistani Army and ISI leadership. Al-Kuwaiti’s role could be
deemed necessary but it was unnecessary and flat out hubris to then claim torture was
necessary to identify al Kuwaiti. These war plutocrats’ cronies continue to lie with impunity,
and there is no reason to believe they will stop lying.

Along with other reasons, I submit we executed an unprotected, unarmed, and crippled bin
Laden to keep him quiet about Saudi financing of and ties with al Qaeda, about al Qaeda’s
plans for 9/11 not including the demolitions of the twin towers and WTC 7, about the war
on terror, etc.

Kuwaiti/ Abu Ahmed al Kuwaiti aka Ibrahim Saeed Ahmed

25
2.2 Senate Committee’s 11/30/2009 Report on Tora Bora
and my original 10/20/2009 Article

There is an extraordinary similarity between my 10/20/2009 article at opednews.com and the

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Report of 11/30/2009. All interviews noted in the
Report’s footnotes were conducted in October and November. No specific dates were given
for these interviews. General Franks through a 10/27/2009 email from an aide declined to
address discrepancies about bin Laden’s location or conclusions by Special Operations
Command historians. My article was also published on 10/24/2009 at dailykos.com. Note –
although dailykos.com allows indefinite editing, the policy of opednews.com does not allow
editing of an article by non-Premium members after 24 hours. I do not believe I edited either of
these blogs and certainly wouldn’t have done so after reading the Committee’s Report. See the
original opednews.com article at:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Proposed-Resolution--The-by-John-Scanlon-091016-
236.html

The Committee’s Report was a Committee majority (Democratic) staff Report not the results of a
full Committee hearing. See their report at:
http://foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Tora_Bora_Report.pdf
“The decision not to deploy American forces to go after bin Laden or block his escape was made
by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his top commander, Gen. Tommy Franks…”
(p. 2)

As a bank examiner when I finished an unwanted, controversial analysis another examiner would
be detailed to write a rebuttal. The rebuttal provided cover for my management. I suspect a
similar tactic has been employed here to provide cover for President Bush and Vice President
Cheney. I suspect Senator Kerry requested a report on Tora Bora after 10/20/2009, and that my
article was a rough draft for the Committee’s Report.

Full disclosure – the Committee’s Report was issued just before President Obama’s 12/1/2009
West Point announcement to add an additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan. No doubt earlier
failures to add troops when necessary helped Obama sell the additional surge of troops.

This doesn’t change the fact this report attributed no blame to Bush and Cheney who were
Rumsfeld’s and Franks’ fully informed superiors.

26
2.3 Serbs in Kandahar 2004
2004 02 01

An alliance with Serbia would be an abomination. Islam will despise us more than they already
do. I will despise us for such an alliance. This issue is personal. It bothers me more than the
war in Iraq. I have spent the last year fighting against war in Iraq and working to stop the next
unjust war by pointing out the Administration’s lies, but ten years ago Bosnia made me despise
peace without justice. I was a warmonger supporting unilateral, partisan intervention to stop the
genocide. The idea that we would ally ourselves with these genocidal terrorists is despicable.

Administration sponsored Armageddon 2003 10 21

The Administration shows its incompetence, moral bankruptcy, and perhaps psychosis in plans
to send 1,000 Serb combat forces to fight the Taliban in Kandahar (10/4/2003 San Diego Union
Tribune). In grotesque contradiction to Serb actions in Bosnia and Kosovo, these forces are
touted to have anti-terrorist capabilities.

If they actually have such capabilities, those skills should be used in Serbia to bring to justice the
two most egregious terrorists on the planet, former Bosnian Serb President Karadzic and General
Mladic. I suspect there is not the will to do so. Serbia may be democratized and reformed, but it
recently issued a report claiming the mass graves around Srebrenica were primarily for
combatants (10/12/2003 San Diego Union Tribune). Serbia remains unredeemed.

An alliance with Serbia will not bring down the Taliban; it will make them ascendant.
Such an alliance will bring down the Karzai government, accomplishing the exact opposite of its
stated purpose. We should not ally ourselves with genocidal terrorists simply because they are
Christian terrorists.

Al-Qaeda has killed thousands, but ultra-nationalist Serbs have killed hundreds of thousands.

In 1992 and 1993, the West refused to stop Bosnian-Serbs from killing more than 200,000
Bosnian Muslims. Why? We enforced an arms embargo that kept Muslims nearly defenseless
against well-armed Serbs. Why? Subsequent to our unconscionably delayed intervention in late
1995, we allowed Karadzic and Mladic, the two men who lead the genocide, to live for years
with impunity in NATO-controlled areas of Bosnia. Why?

Given this planned alliance with Serbia, I see the possibility Western planners in the early
Nineties foresaw the coming of world Jihad and acquiesced in Bosnia’s slaughter. It would
deprive our perceived, future enemy of significant population resources in Europe. America’s
funding of the oppression of Palestine, unprovoked aggression in Iraq, and now an alliance with
Serbia, combine with other injustices against Islam to make world Jihad a reality. If this theory
is correct, our planners didn’t just foresee it, they have created it.

If Armageddon comes in my lifetime, I will stand where I stand today, with the God of Abraham.
He cannot be pleased that we divide ourselves in his name. I am a mere Irish-American and a
Roman Catholic, but I stand with most all of my Muslim brothers against al-Qaeda terrorists and

27
Palestinian terrorists, but also against aggressor Serbs, aggressor Israelis, and aggressor
Americans, in defense of American ideals. Bring it on, George!

Sources and Footnotes:

Serb ethnic cleansing brigade in training for Afghan mission in the 2004 01 09
Scottish Herald by Ian Brice, Defence Correspondent

Serb paramilitary troops who last saw action in the ethnic cleansing of Kosovo in 1999 are being
trained for anti-terrorist duties in Afghanistan beside some of the US forces who helped expel
them from the Yugoslav province. The 1000-strong force comprises some former members of
the "red berets", a feared military police unit which helped lead the campaign to drive the
Albanian majority out of Kosovo and wipe out Kosovo Liberation Army resistance fighters.

The US has provisionally accepted the offer of the battalion to help relieve the strain on its
overstretched garrison in Kandahar and to help hunt al Qaeda and Taliban fugitives in the
mountains east of the city.

General Goran Radosavljevic, its proposed commander, led anti-guerrilla teams during the
conflict alleged by Human Rights Watch to have committed atrocities against civilians, including
the massacre of 41 villagers at Cuska in May, 1999. A New York court is also considering
charging the Serb officer, alleging that he and other officials were responsible for the execution
of three Albanian-Americans.

The Serbs forced more than 800,000 Muslim Kosovars from their homes before NATO
intervened in a 73-day bombing campaign and ground invasion. About 10,000 Kosovars, mainly
civilians, are estimated to have been killed.

NATO approval is not needed for the planned Afghan deployment since the Serb contingent
would be under US command. NATO's peacekeeping remit is only for Kabul, the capital.

28
2.4 Terrorism: The 03/10/1945 Bombing of Tokyo
12:00AM – 3:45AM
1995/03/01

The most lethal conventional bombing raid in history was an American atrocity - Terrorism.

Recently, the media has debated the justification for the nuclear bombing of Japan. A more
necessary debate should consider the justification for the conventional area bombing of Japan.
The nuclear age has clouded our judgment.

There are significant differences between nuclear bombing and conventional bombing, and
morality is still relevant in modern warfare. If we define terrorism as the targeting of civilians,
then we must define the bombing of both Hiroshima (08/06/1945) and Tokyo (03/10/1945) as
terrorist acts. Both raids targeted civilians. There were, however, differences. An atomic bomb,
by its very nature, is a terror weapon. It can only be deployed in area bombing with significant
civilian casualties. Conventional bombing, on the other hand, can and should use precision
targeting and need not target civilians.

The nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki resulted in 220,000 deaths (2). A roughly
equal number of Japanese, Okinawan, and American deaths resulted from the invasion of
Okinawa (3). It is ludicrous to assume fewer deaths would have resulted from the invasion of the
main islands of Japan. More people survived the war than would have if we hadn’t used the
atomic bomb. In addition, if we had not witnessed the destruction of an atomic bomb in World
War II, we would not have worked to had to avoid its future use. The nuclear bombing of
Hiroshima appears to have been justified. See a more current and contrary conclusion in the
next essay – The Atomic Bomb was not needed to end WWII.

Conventional bombing was not so clearly justifiable, if at all, but there were reasons for the use
of this strategy. Weather conditions over Japan made precision bombing difficult. The Office of
Strategic Services (OSS) did a series of studies based on pre-war data. While the OSS believed
that about half of Japanese manufacturing employees worked in shops of five people or less – the
kind of shops scattered throughout flammable districts – it considered these enterprises relatively
unproductive. It also stated that the proportion of workers in small establishments varied greatly
from city to city, ranging from about 50% in Hiroshima to about 10% in Tokyo. But, the OSS
believed the small workshops made parts for other war items, served as feeder plants for larger
factories, and that destroying them would yield economic results out of proportion to what they
produced directly (1a).

Cottage industry was our nominal target, but Japanese morale was our actual target. In 2/1945
urban area attacks were given priority over all strategic targets except aircraft engine plants. By
the end of the war, 600,000 Japanese civilians had been killed in conventional area bombing (2).

The primary target in the 3/10th raid on Tokyo was a working class, residential neighborhood.
The raid was conducted by 279 Superfortresses (B-29s) from the 21st Bomber Command under
General Curtis LeMay. 60+ tons of napalm per square mile had been calculated to develop into
an uncontrollable conflagration. Fragmentation bombs were interspersed with napalm to keep

29
firefighters away long enough to allow flames to become uncontrollable. 1,665 tons of bombs
were dropped.

This was precision area bombing. Lead Superfortresses dropped marking bombs using precision
bombsights. Planes following behind them dropped bomb clusters which created giant rings of
fire. The remaining planes filled these giant rings. Temperatures reached 2000 degrees
Fahrenheit. 15.8 square miles were incinerated. One million lost their homes. 140,000 lost their
lives (2, 3a). Even if one could justify the area bombing of Japan because of a high
concentration of cottage industry, such logic could not apply to Tokyo with only 10% of its
manufacturing work force in small shops. This raid was an atrocity of epic proportion. A
conclusion not based on 20/20 hindsight, but rather, on facts known at the time of the raid.

America’s actions in World War II overwhelmingly deserve praise, but there were those actions
which should be condemned. Let us not fear the truth. If we do not learn from our mistakes, we
will be doomed to repeat them. Perhaps, if we are willing to admit our mistakes, in time, the
Japanese will be willing to admit their mistakes. March 9th between 9:00AM and 12:45AM PST
will mark the fiftieth anniversary of this raid. On that morning give a moment of your thoughts
to Tokyo.

Sources:
(1) Wings of Judgment by Ronald Schaffer was my primary source for this article.
Published in 1985 by the Oxford University Press.

(1a) Original Sources:

OSS R&A 2262, “Japanese Small-scale Factories in Relation to Air Bombardment,” June 30,
1944, in COA History, frames 726-33;
OSS R&A 2220.1, “Concentration of Employment and Value of Production in Selected Japanese
Cities by Industry,” June 30 1944, frames 734-37, ibid.
OSS - Office of Strategic Services was the precursor to today’s CIA.
COA - Committee of Operations Analysis

(2) 1994 Guinness Book of Records

The Hiroshima bombing resulted in 155,200 deaths including radiation deaths within a year.

(3) 1995 Information Please Almanac

In the invasion of Okinawa 110,000 Japanese troops died, 100,000 (perhaps 150,000) civilians
were killed, and there were 50,000 American casualties. (American casualties normally included
4 or 5 wounded for every man killed.)

(3a) The Almanac stated 170,000 were killed in the 03/10/1945 Tokyo raid. “It was the most
devastating single bombing of a city in history, and it killed more people in one day than either
atomic bomb…”

30
The Atomic Bomb was not needed to end WWII
2015 10 22

Yalta Conference 2/4-11/1945 – Stalin had committed to joining the war with Japan two or three
months after victory in Europe (5/8/1945). Stalin joined the war at midnight the morning of
August 9th before the bombing of Nagasaki. He could not have prepared for his invasion of
Manchuria and the Kuril Islands in just three days.

After the success of Trinity on 7/16, Truman attempted to stall Russia’s entrance into the war
with Japan.

Truman and Secretary of State Byrnes cut the guarantees for the Emperor out of paragraph 12 of
the Potsdam Declaration 7/26/1945. The Potsdam Conference was held from 7/17 to 8/2.
Truman’s journal opined the Japanese would not accept the declaration without these guarantees.

A few days after the A-bombings, we informed the Japanese that Unconditional Surrender would
not require the overthrow of the Emperor.

My conclusions – Japan was already near defeat, Russia’s entrance into the war with Japan, and
guarantees for the Emperor in an otherwise unconditional surrender - would all have combined to
bring about Japan’s surrender. Truman refused to allow these factors to end the war. We
bombed Hiroshima before Russia declared war on Japan 8/8, and before we acquiesced in the
retention of the Emperor.

Delaying the atomic bombings one month would have cost us almost nothing and could have
saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians. I submit Truman knew the war
was ending and was more concerned with influencing Stalin. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the
beginning of the Truman Doctrine.

Source: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1149003

Hiroshima: Historians Reassess

By Gar Alperovitz
Foreign Policy No. 99 (Summer 1995), pp. 15-34
Published by: Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC http://www.jstor.org/publisher/wpni
DOI: 10/2307/1149003

I submit, long before Hiroshima, Japanese leadership had become inured to the terror bombing
of Japanese cities. The 3/10/1945 bombing of 1/5th of Tokyo took three hours and forty five
minutes; the bombing of Hiroshima took an instant, but the results were similar.

The Soviet’s successful invasion of Manchuria was a far more significant factor in Japan’s
decision to surrender. The Japanese did not surrender until 8/15 while the Soviets were
penetrating deep into Manchuria rolling over the Japanese Kwantung Army of 713,000.

31
3 Intentional Dysfunction in the Occupation of Iraq
2006 01 15

Gross errors that continue uncorrected indicate those errors were not honest mistakes but were,
in fact, intentional. I suspect Mr. Bush does not want to win this war; he wants and has
created continuing instability to rationalize an unending occupation. Mr. Sharon did the
same in the West Bank. One difference between these two leaders is that Bush insists on
“staying the course” while Sharon was changing his course, though I’m sure he still preferred a
greater Israel. If I am wrong about Bush’s intentions, he is just incompetent. Intentionally
and/or incompetently, Bush has created a decrepit, dependent Iraq and facilitated the creation of
an insurgency that could be as unending as this occupation.

I believe the following combine to indicate intention rather than mere incompetence:

• The Bush campaign and his early Administration denounced America’s involvement in
peacekeeping and nation-building, suggesting the Administration is philosophically opposed
to rebuilding Iraq.

• In 2002, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld closed the Army War College’s
“Peacekeeping Institute” which trained officers in post-conflict issues (5/12/2003 Newsweek
p.32), in spite of grave need in Afghanistan and the then probable, future need in Iraq.

• Planning – The Pentagon did not adequately plan for post-war operations even though it was
placed in charge of both invading Iraq and rebuilding Iraq after the war (10/6/2003
Newsweek). A 7/21/2002 memo to Mr. Blair and his top advisors in anticipation of the
7/23/2002 “Downing Street Memo” meeting stated, “A post-war occupation of Iraq could
lead to a protracted and costly nation-building exercise… As already made clear, the US
military plans are virtually silent on this point.” (6/12/2005 SDUT p. A2 by Walter Pincus
Washington Post) One month before the US invasion, three State Department bureau chiefs
warned of “serious planning gaps for post-conflict public security and humanitarian
assistance.” (8/9/2005 SDUT p. A2) A Rand Corp study of US military operations in Iraq
prepared for Mr. Rumsfeld concluded “no planning was undertaken to ensure the security of
the Iraqi people.” (4/1/2005 SDUT p. A2 from the Washington Post) (a)

• Planning - The Pentagon ignored extensive State Department studies on how to achieve
stability after an invasion, administer a postwar government, and rebuild the economy
(6/12/2005 SDUT p. A2). The State Department had completed a yearlong $5 million Iraq
reconstruction plan called “The Future of Iraq.” Retired Lt. General Jay Garner was the first
head of Iraq’s postwar administration, but he didn’t find out about this plan until just a few
weeks before the war began in March. After which he brought in Tom Warrick, the primary
author of the plan. (11/26/2003 11:44 AM EST by Michael McDonough AP) As directed
by VP Dick Cheney, Rumsfeld ordered Garner to cut 16 of 20 State Department officials
from his roster. They were deemed soft on the UN and Arabs. One of them was Thomas
Warrick. (10/6/2003 Newsweek)

32
• After the end of formal hostilities, there weren’t enough American forces in Iraq to provide
security for themselves let alone security for Iraqi civilians. Most of our military leaders
wanted 400,000 troops; Rumsfeld insisted on about half that number (2/9/04 Newsweek
p.35). 17 of 24 government ministries were allowed to be looted. The oil ministry, of
course, was well protected. Samarra has had to be taken four times (9/26/2005 Time). I
suspect Samarra is much more damaged now than it was after the first time it was taken.
Other Iraqi cities have suffered the same fate. We could clear, but we could not hold and
rebuild. Retaking cities also costs us more American and Iraqi lives. We have never had
enough troops. (b)

It would be ludicrous to wait for senior military commanders to tell us when we can leave Iraq.
These are the same senior commanders in place and silent while Bush continually said he would
send more troops if senior commanders requested them. They never requested the necessary
number of troops. If they had, they would have lost their jobs.

• Ammunition dumps all over Iraq were left unsecured, giving insurgents access to unlimited
supplies of arms and weapons. As of 10/2004 400,000 tons of munitions had been destroyed
or were to be destroyed. The military estimated an additional minimum of 250,000 tons
remained unaccounted for (10/30/2004 SDUT p. A2 Reuters and AP). Also in 10/2004 103
major weapons dumps had been identified, yet due to troop shortages only a handful were
under regular watch (10/27/04 Salon by David Morris/10/27/04 Slate by Fred Kaplan). In
the early days of the war, International Atomic Energy Agency IAEA Director Mohamed El
Baradei urged the US military to secure Tuwaitha, Iraq’s dormant but largest nuclear facility.
It remained unsecured and was looted (5/17/2003 SDUT p. A2 by Dafna Linzer AP). The
Administration not only failed to secure these sites but also refused to let full international
inspections resume after the March 2003 invasion - inspections which might have helped
secure these sites and their weapons. (c)

• After less than a month, 4/21 to 5/12/2003, General Garner was fired. He believes he was
fired for wanting early elections and opposing privatization (3/18/2004 Guardian by David
Leigh). Garner had also allowed some low-level Baath party bureaucrats to keep their jobs
and planned to call up half of the former Iraqi Army to provide security and help with
reconstruction (11/13/2003 Military.com by David T Pyne).

• In 5/2003 Mr. L. Paul Bremer, who replaced General Garner, issued his de-Baathification
decree eliminating roughly the top six layers of Iraq’s bureaucracy. Senior Baathist leaders,
senior military leaders, and criminals should not be allowed in the new government, but
keeping a large portion of Baathists out of government would be ludicrous given a quarter of
Iraq’s working age population were Baathists (4/24/2004 SDUT p. A18 AP). This decree has
kept Iraq’s most capable and experienced leadership out of the governance and
reconstruction of Iraq.

• On 5/23/2003 Mr. Bremer issued Order No. 2 which formally disbanded the Iraqi Army
(2/7/2005 Newsweek). It was an “insane” decision, said retired Marine General Joe Hoar
who commanded US forces in the Middle East from 1991-1994 (12/30/2005 SDUT by

33
 Rogers and Liewer). Without more American troops, this army provided the only other way
to provide peace and security for the people of Iraq.

On 5/16/2003, five days after arriving in Baghdad, Bremer assembled the top American officials
in Baghdad. Upon hearing of Bremer’s de-Baathification plans, the CIA’s Baghdad station chief
responded, “Well, that’s 30,000 to 50,000 pissed-off Baathists you’re driving underground.” In
response to disbanding the Iraqi Army, the station chief said, “That’s another 350,000 Iraqis
you’re pissing off, and they’ve got guns. (10/6/2003 Newsweek) According to one official who
attended the meeting, Bremer replied: “I don’t have any choice… Those are my
instructions…The president told me that de-Baathification is more important.” (11/24/2003
Newsweek)

De-Baathification and disbanding the Iraqi army are widely held to be the gravest errors made in
postwar Iraq. The Administration has done too little too late to correct these errors. US officials
encouraged former Baathists to run in December’s election, saying it was one way to bring
marginalized Sunnis into the new government (12/12/2005 SDUT p. A2), but de-Baathification
is already codified in Iraq’s constitution and laws. Iraq’s courts and electoral commission
required affected Sunni parties to take 90 former Baathists from their candidate lists before the
12/15/2005 elections would be certified (1/1/2006 SDUT by Straziuso AP). A generation of
Baathist oppression has taught Shiites and Kurds - it is better to oppress than be oppressed.
Israelis appear to have learned the same lesson. The lesson learned should have been - all
oppression is wrong. (d)

• Inadequate Intel – On 6/13/2003 hundreds of American intelligence officers were transferred

from Iraq to Florida, leaving only 30 Intel officers in Iraq for counter insurgency work
(9/26/2005 Time p.47). In addition, the Administration’s fixation on finding WMD’s
diverted precious Intel resources that could have helped thwart the fledgling insurgency. The
problem continues. A recently retired four star general with Middle East experience stated,
“We don’t have enough intelligence analysts working on this problem. The Defense
Intelligence Agency DIA puts most of its emphasis and assets on Iran, North Korea, and
China. The Iraqi insurgency is simply not top priority, and that’s a damn shame.”
(9/26/2005 Time)

• Minimal Reconstruction - Only 13 billion of 30 billion that Congress allocated for rebuilding
Iraq and training its security forces had been spent through 8/2005, according to the
Government Accounting Office GAO (12/30/2005 SDUT by Dreazen Wall Street Journal).
Billions of dollars have been lost to corruption or wasted, according to US government
reports (12/9/2005 Christian Science Monitor by La Franchi). More than one quarter of
Iraq’s work force is unemployed (12/28/2005 by Palmer Newhouse News). 25% of
reconstruction funds have been spent on security according to federal auditors (12/24/2005
SDUT p. A19 by Castaneda AP). Because the security situation is so dire, efforts to train
local ministries are hamstrung by a shortage of experts from Energy, Treasury, and other US
agencies. Lt. Gen. John Vines, who commands US forces in Iraq under General Casey,
recently asked a congressional delegation: “Where the hell is the rest of the US
government?” (12/26/2006 Newsweek p. 42)

34
• The Administration has refused international help rather than lose sole control of Iraq. Just
weeks after the end of formal hostilities, France and Germany offered to help rebuild Iraq
under UN auspices (4/19/2004 Newsweek), but the UN wasn’t given any significant role
until 3/2004, when it was needed to broker a compromise on establishing an interim
government and to help with future elections. In handling postwar Iraq, senior American
officials in Washington avoided any real conversations with UN officials who had been
involved in Bosnia, Kosovo, East Timor, etc. (12/19/2005 Newsweek by Fareed Zakaria)

• Iraqification - The US commanding General in Iraq George Casey opined in October that
only one Iraqi battalion was capable of fighting without US help (SDUT 12/11/2005 AP). It
has taken more than two and a half years to make one battalion of 500 men battle ready. 500
from the combination of new troops, Peshmergas from Iraqi Kurdistan, Shia militiamen from
South Iraq, and troops from the former Iraqi army. If 400,000 troops are necessary to
maintain security, at this rate, we will be able to leave Iraq in 2000 years.

The European based International Crisis Group has defined what it calls Iraq’s “vicious circle.”
“Lack of security leads to lack of reconstruction, which leads to lack of jobs, which leads back to
lack of security.” (10/17/2004 SDUT p. A2 by Charles Hanley AP) This circle is also unending
occupation causing insurgency causing occupation. We can and must break this circle.

“More than a dozen current and former intelligence officers knowledgeable about Iraq spoke
with Time in recent weeks (prior to 9/26) to share details about the conflict. They voiced their
growing frustration with a war that they feel was not properly anticipated by the Bush
Administration, a war fought with insufficient resources, a war that almost all of them now
believe is not winnable militarily.” (9/26/05 Time p. 46) (e) We can’t win with just military
action, but we could co-opt the Sunni nationalist insurgency (f) with political action. We could
even politically co-opt al-Qaeda in Iraq, but that would require actions beyond Iraq. We would
have to address most of the injustice in American foreign policy.

Conclusion
Mr. Bush could demonstrate he did not intentionally create this instability by meeting the
legitimate political demands of the Sunni nationalist insurgency. I believe elections will not
significantly appease this insurgency as discrimination against Baathists will continue, and the
American occupation will continue with fewer troops but with no exit strategy and no timetable
for a full withdrawal (g). If we can set a short timetable for establishing democratic institutions,
we can certainly set a longer timetable for re-establishing an army. Unlike Mr. Bush, who will
give nothing more than spin on these issues, these insurgents will adopt a genuine two track
strategy combining military and political action.

An exit strategy - Vote for Congressmen who will impeach this President. Impeach. Re-
baathify. Set a timetable for a full withdrawal. Send enough troops. When the time’s up,
declare victory and come home. Lastly, value American ideals and never again commit
unprovoked aggression. Alternately, make the next war civil war. God damn an American
Empire.

35
Sources and Footnotes:
Primary Sources: SDUT – San Diego Union Tribune newspaper
10/6/2003 Newsweek
9/26/2005 Time magazine

(a) Planning:
A postwar self-evaluation by the 3rd Infantry division found, “Despite the virtual certainty that
the military would accomplish the regime change, there was no plan for oversight and
reconstruction, even after the division arrived in Baghdad.” Further, “Because of the refusal to
acknowledge occupier status, commanders did not initially take measures available to occupying
powers, such as imposing curfews, directing civilians to return to work, and controlling the local
governments and populace.” (11/28/2003 SDUT p. A2 by John Lumpkin and Dafna Linzer AP)

(b) We have never had enough troops:

…Paul Bremer, the senior US official in Iraq till 6/2004, told Defense Secretary Donald
Rumsfeld in a May 2004 memo that a far larger number of US troops were needed to effectively
fight the insurgency but his advice was rejected…
Bremer said in an NBC News interview Sunday that his memo to Rumsfeld suggested a half a
million troops were needed – more than three times the number at the time…
Many critics, including some leading members of Congress, continued to urge President Bush to
increase the number of troops in Iraq as the insurgency persisted.
(1/10/2006 by Robert Burns AP)

When Senator John McCain made his first trip to Iraq after the capture of Baghdad, he
encountered a dozen junior officers of the American and British forces who told him in vivid
terms how they were hampered by the shortage of troops. (11/20/2005 SDUT by David S
Broder Washington Post)

Senator McCain said the Bush administration must make broad changes in its strategy to
confront the insurgency in Iraq and commit more troops and resources to the effort… “Our
forces cannot hold the ground indefinitely, and when they move on to fight other battles, the
insurgent ranks replenish and strongholds fill again…Our troops must then re-enter the same
area and re-fight the same battle.” (11/10/05 19:56 ET Reuters by Vicki Allen)

“…it’s grimly apparent that US troop levels in Iraq are inadequate to defeat the insurgency or,
apparently, to significantly diminish terrorist violence. Field commanders complain privately
that they have far too few soldiers and marines to defend cleared areas.” (8/28/2005 SDUT
Editorial by Robert J. Caldwell)

Thomas Hammes, a retired Marine colonel who has written a book on anti-insurgency tactics,
said ground commanders have been saying that they don’t have enough troops to cover the
country, despite the Pentagon’s insistence that they do. (8/8/2005 07:06 USA TODAY by
Kimberly Johnson)

36
In Anbar province, Col H R McMaster author of “Dereliction of Duty” gave his officers
permission to speak with brutal frankness. One of them told a reporter from the Knight Ridder
newspaper chain, “There’s simply not enough forces here.” (7/4/2005 Newsweek p.26)

“It’s not too late for the United States to turn its fortunes around in Iraq, but it will take a long-
term commitment, more honesty about wartime setbacks and many more boots on the ground,
say local Marines and global military experts.” (6/29/2005 SDUT by Rick Rogers)

Iraq’s ambassador to the United Nations, Samir Sumaiada’ie, predicted to The Scotsman that
unless the US and Britain added “a considerable amount” of troops to Iraq, the insurgency would
grow. (9/20/2004 Newsweek)

During the planning, General Franks and his team expected that 150,000 international troops
would join US forces in the post war phase. They never materialized. (8/1/2004 SDUT Parade).

“Had the proper number of forces been in place early on, the looting that did so much damage to
Iraq’s infrastructure might have been stopped, munitions dumps could have been secured,
economic reconstruction would have moved ahead more easily, and more men and resources
could have been devoted to the training of Iraqi forces.” (5/5/2004 SDUT by Robert Kagan and
William Kristol Weekly Standard)

“We do need and welcome more foreign troops into Iraq and there will be more foreign
troops into Iraq,” Bush told reporters in Seattle on Friday (8/26/2003 SDUT p. A8)

(c) Ammunition dumps were unsecured:

A 5/27/2005 report by the UN’s Monitoring, Verification, and Inspection Agency UNMOVIC
cited evidence of looting at 109 of 378 sealed sites examined via satellite photos (6/9/2005
SDUT p. A2). UNMOVIC could only study satellite surveillance as the Administration will not
allow them in Iraq.

Al Qaqaa - “…an Iraqi informant reported to the CIA that he saw people looting buildings at Al
Qaqaa State Establishment, a huge fortress where hundreds of tons of deadly explosive were
stored. The CIA distributed alerts throughout the intelligence community and to military units in
Iraq. However, according to a source who was briefed on the incident, the US military never
sent in any troops to frighten off the looters and secure the facility.” (11/8/2004 Newsweek p.8)
In October 2004 the UN nuclear agency warned that insurgents may have obtained 377 tons of
extremely potent conventional explosives it confirmed were looted from the Al Qaqaa facility.
Iraqi officials had reported to the agency that explosives had vanished as a result of, “theft and
looting… due to lack of security.” (SDUT 10/26/2004 by William J Kole and Tini Tran AP).
“…Al Qaqaa, was supposed to be under US military control but is now a no-man’s land, still
picked over by looters as recently as yesterday…The IAEA publicly warned about the danger of
these explosives before the war, and after the invasion it specifically told US officials about the
need to keep the explosives secured, European diplomats said in interviews last week.”
(10/25/2004 SDUT p. A1 by Glanz, Broad, and Sanger NY Times News Service)

37
(d) Re-Baathification and Re-hiring former Army Officers
In a reversal of policy, US officials in Iraq are encouraging some former members of Saddam
Hussein’s Baath Party to run in Thursday’s (12/15/05) elections, saying it was one way to bring
marginalized Sunni Muslims into the new government… Until now, the US has led calls for
purging Baathists from the government… It is widely acknowledged that thrusting a large
segment of the population into unemployment fueled the mostly Sunni insurgency. (12/12/2005
SDUT p. A2)

The Iraqi government called yesterday for the return of junior officers from the disbanded army
of Saddam Hussein… Under yesterday’s announcement, any former officers up to the rank of
major are eligible for reinstatement by applying this month at recruitment centers in six cities
across Iraq. (11/3/2005 SDUT by Edward Wongf NY Times)

Gen. Babaker Zebari, the Iraqi Army chief of staff, announced that former soldiers below the
rank of lieutenant colonel would be welcomed back into the ranks – so long as they are not high
ranking Baath Party members. (2/21/2005 Newsweek p. 28)
Iraq’s Defense Ministry said yesterday that as part of its anti-insurgent efforts, it has asked
thousands of former military officers who served under former president Saddam Hussein –
including members of the Republican Guard and officers with a rank of lieutenant colonel or
lower who were not top Baath Party members - to return to service. (2/13/2005 SDUT by Struck
Washington Post)

Bremer announced a shift in policy. Bremer stated Americans would begin reinstating many of
the “honorable men” who served as senior officers in Hussein’s army and he also pledged to hire
thousands of teachers and university professors who were low level Baath party members and
who had gone through a vetting process. (4/24/2004 SDUT p. A18 AP)

Bremer quickly changed course and began cash handouts to former soldiers while trying to
reconstitute the Iraqi Army and police. (10 6 2003 Newsweek p. 37)
This reconstitution apparently didn’t include any of the officer corps, see above, although
Bremer claimed only 9,000 generals were precluded from reinstatement (2/13/2005 SDUT p.
G5). Whatever efforts were undertaken, they were ineffective.

(e) We cannot win militarily:

“War is the extension of politics by other means.” - Clausewitz
Politics is the extension of war by other means.

…US diplomats, convinced that the insurgency can’t be defeated by military means alone, see
the elections as a vital chance to find a political solution … (12/19/2005 Newsweek p. 46)

“We’ve been pounding this with a military hammer, but we all agree that the solution will be
political,” says one infantry colonel on the front lines. (10/3/2005 SDUT by David Ignatius
Washington Post)

In the middle of 2004 Ambassador Negroponte replaced Bremer. “Negroponte set up a joint
military-diplomatic team to review the situation in the country. The consensus was that

38
things were a mess, that little had been accomplished on either the civilian or the military
side and that there was no effective plan for dealing with the insurgency. The new team
concluded the insurgency could not be defeated militarily - but that it might be divided.”
(9 26 2005 Time p. 52)

“…history teaches that insurgencies are defeated by a combination of political and military
means.” (8/28/2005 SDUT Editorial by Robert J Caldwell)

“…military commanders interviewed by Newsweek all concede that eliminating the Iraqi
insurgency by military means is probably impossible. The goal is to train enough Iraqis to
replace US troops, while the insurgency is pacified by political means.” (7/4/2005 Newsweek p.
26)

A US military official in Baghdad and others said in interviews that insurgents have enough
popular support among nationalist Iraqis angered by the presence of US force that they cannot be
militarily defeated. (7/9/2004 SDUT p. A1 by Jim Krane AP)

(f) Insurgents:
85% of attacks in the country are in four provinces including Baghdad (11 20 2005 SDUT p. A2)
There are 18 provinces in Iraq, 4 with insurgents primarily in 7 major cities.

Classified CIA and State Dep assessments completed in May – Foreign fighters make up only a
fraction of the Iraqi insurgency, perhaps as little as 5 percent.
(7/5/2005 SDUT p. A2 by Warren Strobel Knight Ridder)

Air Force Col. Dewey G Ford, a spokesman said in an e-mail, The US military in Iraq believes it
faces at most 20,000 active insurgents, the vast majority of them Sunni.
(7/2/2005 SDUT p. A2 by Mariam Fam AP)

Since 2003, fewer than 10 percent of more than 500 suicide attacks have been carried out by
Iraqis, according to one defense official…
“I still think 80 percent of the insurgency, the day to day activity, is Iraqi – the roadside
bombings, mortars, direct weapons fire, rifle fire, automatic weapons fire,” said Kenneth
Katzman, a Middle East expert with the Congressional Research service, which advises US
lawmakers.
(7/1/2005 SDUT p. A2 by Quinn and Shrader AP)

US military analysts say Sunni Muslim Imams can call upon part time fighters to boost forces as
high as 20,000.
At the orders of Gen John Abizaid, the US commander of Mideast operations, Army analysts
looked closely for evidence that Iraq’s insurgency was adopting extreme Islamist goals, the
official said. Analysts learned that ridding Iraq of US troops was the motivator for most
insurgents, not the formation of an Islamic state.
(7/9/2004 SDUT by Krane AP)

39
(g) Timetable:
A reconciliation council in Cairo backed by the Arab League in a consensus that included about
100 Sunni, Shiite, and Kurdish leaders, many of whom will run in the election on Dec 15th,
signed a closing memorandum yesterday that “demands a withdrawal of foreign troops on a
specified timetable, dependent on an immediate national program for rebuilding the security
forces.”
(11/22/2005 SDUT p. A1 by Fattah NY Times News Service)

“Our position is unchanged,” Sheik Mohammed Bashar al-Faydhi, spokesman for the hard line
clerical Association of Muslim Scholars, told reporters yesterday, “We will not participate in the
political process as long as the occupation exists,” although he suggested that might change if
Washington offered a timetable for withdrawal.
(11/14/2005 SDUT p. A2 by Mroue AP)

In June one-third of the 275 assembly members signed a petition asking the US to set a timetable
for withdrawal. (9/14/2005 SDUT by Youssef Knight Ridder)

Baathists have several demands, chief among them the restoration of the Baath Party. “Again,
here we have shifted,” the diplomat says. “They would be willing to rename the party, but they
believe that they should be allowed to contest for votes in Iraq and be a political play in the
country.” They also want a clear statement from the United States that its forces will leave Iraq
– not right away, but within some reasonable time frame…
(8/8/2005 Newsweek by Fareed Zakaria)

…those who approach the (US) embassy are usually academics, businessmen, or midlevel
officials of the former ruling Baath party. Their demands center on paying pensions for former
military officers, rehiring former officers in the new Iraqi army, or providing a timetable for the
withdrawal of US led troops. Such overtures have increased since the Jan 30 elections…
(7/2/2005 SDUT p. A2 by Mariam Fam AP)

Insurgents represented by the new National Council for Unity and Construction of Iraq want U.S.
troops to leave in one to three years according to spokesman Ayham al-Samarie (6/30/05 SDUT
p. A2 by Patrick Quinn AP).

…some Sunni leaders have said they will fully join the political process only after the United
States announces when it will pull out its troops.
(4/2/2005 SDUT by Knickmeyer Washington Post)

40
3 Addendums:

The Al Sadr Rebellion

We provoked and then aggravated the first al-Sadr rebellion. In 2003, Cleric Abdel-Majid al-
Khoei was killed and an arrest warrant was issued for Muqtada al-Sadr, the leader of the Mahdi
army. American forces planned to arrest al-Sadr in the fall, but the plan was postponed. On
3/25/04 Mr. Bremer announced Iraq’s interim government would not control Iraq’s newly
formed Army (1). Shortly thereafter, Bremer ordered al-Sadr’s newspaper, Al Hawza, closed for
two months for inciting violence. On Saturday 4/3 rd, al-Sadr’s top lieutenant Mustafa al-Yacoubi
was arrested for charges connected with al-Khoei’s murder. He has since been released. (2) On
Sunday 4/4th, the rebellion began. On 4/14, in the middle of the insurrection, President Bush said
Israel should not have to return to its pre-1967 borders, and that Palestinian refugees should be
resettled only in a Palestinian state, not in Israel proper (3).

It was claimed the Coalition Provisional Authority CPA didn’t just arrest al-Sadr as it wanted to
coopt him even during his insurgency. But, why would we want the political participation of a
murderer? Didn’t we just overthrow another Iraqi murderer? These actions may have been the
result of mere incompetence, but we could not have done a better job, provoking and aggravating
this rebellion, if we had done so intentionally.

1) 3/26/2004 SDUT p. A2 by John F Burns and Thom Shanker NY Times

2) 4/19/2004 Newsweek
3) 4/26/2004 Newsweek p. 37 and the 4/15/2004 SDUT p. A1 by Elisabeth Bumiller NY Times

Ahmed Chalabi
Chalabi is the “piece of corruption” that helped Bush spin us into this war as head of the exiled
Iraqi National Congress. The INC provided flawed Intel. Chalabi was also the neo cons pick to
lead Iraq after the war. He allegedly fell out with the Administration in mid-2004 when he
clashed with Bremer over how much sovereignty Iraqis would get on 6/30/2004 and was
suspected of sharing Intel with Iran. In the first “Governing Council,” Chalabi was head of the
economic and finance committee. He also chaired the De-Baathification Commission. In spite
of this alleged falling out, he continued to hold high office. He was a deputy prime minister in
the Constitutional Assembly.

I suspect Chalabi is still Bush’s man in Iraq, and the alleged falling out was nothing more than
spin to make Chalabi more palatable to Iraqis. If true, this plan has failed. Iraqi election
officials said, with 95 percent of a preliminary tally from the vote completed, Chalabi remained
almost 8,000 votes short of the 40,000 minimum needed for him or his bloc to win a single seat
in the National Assembly (12/27/2005 SDUT p. A8). Chalabi should now be done. If he ends
up holding office in the new government, it will be a testament to the new government’s
corruption.

41
3.1 Iraq War’s WMD weapons of mass deception 2003
The real WMD were the Bush Administration’s lies used to rationalize the Iraq war.
These pieces were added as an afterthought. The issues have been thoroughly dealt with, but I
thought a book about our lies should include these past, egregious lies. We are still suffering the
consequences of these lies. I offer them as a partial review and as examples of the process
necessary to uncover the truth. They were written before Scooter Libby was convicted of outing
Valerie Plame, Ambassador Joseph Wilson’s wife, and before David Kay concluded there were
no WMDs in Iraq.

The Uranium Lie 7/23/2003

As of 7/14/2003, the Administration claimed there is additional British intelligence supporting
the uranium allegation, claimed London hasn’t made this intelligence available, claimed it did
not know the source of this intelligence, and admitted it was not trying to determine the source
(7/15/2003 UT). This week’s Newsweek (7/28/2003) noted the existence of a British report that
the Iraqis were trying to buy uranium from several East African countries. I believe if this
intelligence were significant, the U.S. would already have it.

The Administration’s claims are incredible given what we now know about the uranium
allegation. The Italians informed the U.S. of the Niger documents two years ago. Ambassador
Joseph Wilson reviewed the uranium allegation for the CIA in February 2002 and found it to be
baseless. His review was independent of the Niger documents. The CIA station chief in Rome
was given the Niger documents in October 2002 and apparently tossed them out. The
International Atomic Energy Agency was given the Niger documents in February 2003 and
within two hours determined them to be forgeries. (Primary source: 7/28/2003 Newsweek)

Given all the intelligence and analysis showing the allegation to be baseless and the current
controversy over the allegation, it is unbelievable the Administration has not gone after any and
all intelligence supporting the allegation. I suspect in fact they have known all along - the
allegation is baseless.

Even if we eventually find WMD, the intelligence was manipulated.

Request your local newspaper, your Senators, and your Representative demand the
Administration either admit there is no significant, additional, British intelligence or make public
that intelligence.

Sources: 7/15/2003 San Diego Union Tribune UT and 7/28/2003 Newsweek

"National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice is holding to the Niger story, noting that the
British government now says other, unspecified intelligence supports the uranium allegation.”
(7/15 UT)

“…London hasn't supplied Washington with any such information, Rice acknowledged.
Likewise, Baute's office has received nothing from the British three weeks after asking for the
purported independent evidence, said sources at the UN agency's headquarters in Vienna..."
(7/15 UT) (Jacques Baute is with the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency.)

42
"Amid the finger-pointing, the episode forced the administration to concede it did not know the
source of the British intelligence - and, in fact, was not trying to determine the source." (7/15
UT)

Iraq al-Qaeda Connection 7/19/2003

Lie: [State of the union address 1/28/2003] “Evidence from intelligence sources, secret
communications and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and
protects terrorists, including members of al-Qaeda.” (7/13/2003 UT - San Diego Union Tribune)

Truth: “There was no significant pattern of cooperation between Iraq and the al-Qaeda terrorist
operation,” former State Department intelligence official Greg Thielmann said. Intelligence
agencies agreed on the “lack of a meaningful connection to al-Qaeda” and said so to the White
House and Congress, Thielmann said. “That (Hussein) was promoting al-Qaeda is absurd,”
Cannistraro said. (Vince Cannistraro is a former CIA counterterrorism chief) (7/13 UT)

Truth: “Abu Zubaydah, a Qaeda planner and recruiter until his capture in March 2002, told his
questioners last year that the idea of working with Mr. Hussein’s government had been discussed
among Qaeda leaders, but that Osama bin Laden had rejected such proposals, according to an
official who has read the Central Intelligence Agency’s classified report on the interrogation. In
his debriefing, Mr. Zubaydah said Mr. Bin Laden had vetoed the idea because he did not want to
be beholden to Mr. Hussein, the official said.” (James Risen 6/8 New York Times)

Truth: “The Bush administration pressed the CIA in the run-up to the war on Iraq to look for
evidence of close cooperation between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, but the agency found no
proof, according to an internal CIA intelligence review.” (7/4 UT)

Truth: “The UN terrorism committee has found no evidence linking Iraq and al-Qaeda.” (7/2
UT) (This is a post war finding backing these other prewar findings.)
See Chapter 2 paragraph 4.

WMD 7/19/2003
Lie: [President Bush 3/17/2003] “Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no
doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons
ever devised.” (John W Dean 6/6 FindLaw’s Writ, William Rivers Pitt 6/3/2003 Truthout)

Lie: [Secretary Rumsfeld 3/30/2003] “We know where (Iraq’s WMD) are. They’re in the area
around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat.” (Christopher Scheer
6/27 AlterNet.org, dod.gov/news/Mar2003)

Truth: “Jacoby (Director) said his agency (DIA) concurred in an intelligence community
consensus last fall that Iraq had a program for weapons of mass destruction. But the DIA was
unable to pinpoint any locations.” (6/7 UT) (Vice Admiral Lowell Jacoby is the director of the
Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).)

Truth: “As the military began to gear up for an invasion, top planners at Central Command tried
to get a fix from the CIA on WMD sites they could take out with bombs and missiles. After

43
much badgering, says an informed military source, the CIA allowed the CENTCOM planners to
see what the agency had on WMD sites. ‘It was crap,’ said a CENTCOM planner… When the
military visited these sites after the war, they found nothing but rubble. No traces of WMD.”
(Newsweek 6/9)

Lie: [President Bush 10/7/2002 in Cincinnati] “The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting
its nuclear weapons program…” (John W Dean 6/6 FindLaw’s Writ, Christopher Scheer 6/27
AlterNet.org)

Truth: “In two reports to Powell, INR concluded there was no reliable evidence that Iraq had
restarted a nuclear program at all.” (Newsweek 6/9) (INR is the State Department’s bureau of
intelligence and research.)

Lie: [President Bush 10/7] “Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and
other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear
weapons.” (John W Dean 6/6 FindLaw’s Writ, Christopher Scheer 6/27 AlterNet.org) “Powell
did keep a hedged endorsement of the aluminum tubes (in his 2/5 address to the UN).”
(Newsweek 6/9)

Truth: “The Department of Energy concluded that the tubes were the wrong specification to be
used in a centrifuge, the equipment used to enrich uranium. The State Department’s INR
concluded that the tubes were meant to be used for a multiple-rocket-launching system.”
(Newsweek 6/9)

Lie: [The President’s sixteen words in his state of the union address 1/28/2003] “The British
government has learned that Saddam recently sought significant quantities of uranium from
Africa.”

Truth: “‘They knew the Niger story was a flat out lie,’ states the former ambassador who
investigated the charges.” (James Goldsborough 7/7 UT, New Republic as reported by
Christopher Scheer 6/27 AlterNet.org) (The former ambassador James Wilson went to Niger in
February 2002 at the request of the CIA to assess the intelligence report (7/6 UT).)

George W. Bush’s CIA Briefer:

Bush and Cheney Falsely Presented WMD Intelligence to Public 2015 05 19
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/05/michael-morell-bush-cheney-iraq-war
Michael Morell was a longtime CIA official who eventually became the agency’s deputy director
and acting director. During the pre-invasion period, he served as Bush’s intelligence briefer.
Appearing on MSNBC’s Hardball on Tuesday night, Morrell made it clear: The Bush-Cheney
administration publicly misrepresented the intelligence related to Iraq’s supposed WMD
program and Saddam’s alleged links to Al Qaeda.

44
3.2 ISIS came out of the Iraq War
2015 06 04

The current lies:

• Middle Easterners have been in sectarian conflict for millennia.
• President Obama is responsible for the rise of ISIS because he failed to keep our troops in
Iraq, and he failed to adequately support Syrian rebels.

Sectarianism - There was little historic, sectarian conflict in the Middle East before the breakup
of the Ottoman Empire. “The ‘problem of sectarianism’ is something that has arisen in modern
times…” (1)

Religion in politics - The Mosque was one of the few places in European colonies and
oppressive Middle Eastern regimes where political action was tolerated. Islamists were the only
politicians outside the power structures.

Iraq - Shiite Iraqis fought for Iraq in the Iraq Iran War in spite of appeals by their coreligionists
in Iran. Their greater loyalty was to Iraq over Shiism. (1b)

I submit George W Bush’s ultimate purpose in the Iraq War was to create sectarianism, chaos,
and perpetual war. He didn’t just stop with conquering Iraq. Within months he had thrown out
the Baathists, the only people then capable of administering Iraq, and disbanded the Iraqi Army,
the only institution then capable of maintaining order.

Haji Bakr was a primary strategist behind ISIS (2). Bakr had been an Iraqi Colonel working for
Saddam Hussein in the Intelligence Service of the Iraqi Air Defense Forces. He may have been
one of the people we should have thrown out, but we didn’t have to throw out all his
subordinates freeing them to follow men like Bakr.

Sunday’s neo con, talking heads now claim the rise of ISIS was the fault of Obama because he
took the troops out of Iraq in 2011. It is true he got us out of Iraq, and if we had kept a never
ending occupation force in Anbar province, we might have kept disenfranchised Sunnis from
effectively rebelling against al Maliki. Apparently, in order to maintain the new world order and,
of course, to create profits for our war plutocrats and their cronies, we should aggress against and
occupy the world.

Syria – Our war mongers maintain another reason ISIS is ascendant was Obama’s failure to
support moderate Syrian rebels in mid-2012 early in their civil war. They fail to acknowledge
Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia came together in Istanbul in 2012 to coordinate the training and
arming of Syrian rebels (3). Most of those resources and rebels eventually went to ISIS.
Further, Americans trained and armed the Iraqi army yet an IS force of 1,000 was able to
overwhelm an Iraqi army force of 30,000 and take Mosul, Iraq (4). If there is no political
solution, there will be no lasting military solution in Iraq or Syria.

Condemn the lies and speak the truth:

• George W Bush was the US President responsible for the rise of ISIS.

45
• Bush didn’t go to war because of false Intel, he and Cheney created the false Intel to go to
war. (5)
• Bush and Cheney used torture to falsely connect Saddam Hussein with al Qaeda. (See
Chapter 2, paragraph 4.)

What are we fighting for?

Two million Vietnamese died to delay our defeat in Vietnam. How many more millions would
have died for our victory? Hundreds of thousands died as a result of the Iraq war. How many
more hundreds of thousands would have to die for a complete victory?
We fought against great evil but for nothing.

ARVN wouldn’t fight because we fought for a corrupt, military government in South Vietnam.
ARVN knew it wasn’t worth fighting for. We eliminated Saddam Hussein only to replace him
with al Maliki who refused to enfranchise the Sunnis and was then replaced by ISIS in Anbar
Province. What do we offer to replace ISIS? We overthrew Gaddafi in Libya and Islamic
Courts Union in Somalia only to replace them with chaos. We have offered no reasonable
alternative, from Vietnam to Iraq, and continue to offer nothing but the sweet release of death.

Our neo cons too often claim international problems have military solutions. I submit they are
once again partially correct. Given the corruption in our Congress, given these neo cons past
abuses of power, and in order to save tens of thousands of Iranians, we should support a
military option against these war mongers.

We will stop losing wars when we stop fighting unjust wars. Stop

Sources:
(1) Great Decisions 2015 by the Foreign Policy Association
(1b) p.32
(2) http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-files-show-structure-of-islamist-
terror-group-a-1029274.html
(3) 10/04/2014 San Diego Union p.B8, “Syria’s Proxy War” by David Ignatius from the
Washington Post
(4) 06/21/2014 The Economist p.47 “Why Iraq’s army crumbled”
(5) http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/05/michael-morell-bush-cheney-iraq-war

2017 I submit, we can now conclude, we fought in the Middle East for our plutocrats’ war
profits, for cheap resources/oil, and for the West Bank - we’ve balkanized the region eliminating
most Arab threats to Israel’s future annexation of more of Judea and Samaria.
We serve BB, Big Brother, Bibi Netanyahu. See Section 1.1.

46
4 Religion Serves Politics
The false religion of “Greater Israel” Zionism 2011 05 06+

I will make the case in this paper that not only have America’s religions failed to
preempt her corruption, they have facilitated her corruption.

Outline:
Introduction
The War on Terror
The Bible and Greater Israel
Sources and Footnotes
4.1 Bible Time Lines

Machiavelli wrote in his Discourses - religion is the most necessary support of any civil society.
He opined an attentive review of Roman history shows the great degree to which religion served
in the command of the armies, in uniting the people and keeping them well conducted, and in
covering the wicked with shame. He concludes religion was one of the chief causes of the
prosperity of Rome. (1a) “And certainly, if the Christian religion had from the beginning been
maintained according to the principles of its founder, the Christian states and republics would
have been much more united and happy than what they are.” (1b)

Machiavelli wrote of religion as it should work and as it has often worked to the betterment of
government.

I submit America is now a corrupt principality with the mere veneer of a Republic ruled by
warlord princes. We mere plebes are allowed our freedom but only very limited freedom to rule.
Machiavelli, contrary to his reputation, supported good government and preferred Republics over
Principalities. He would not be pleased with the current state of America. Read his thoughts on
corruption in Chapter 8 of this eBook. Five hundred years ago he wrote in these words an apt
description of America today.

I believe God’s laws are written in the hearts and minds of men. I believe we are more naturally
of good character than bad. But, in a corrupt world it is only with suffering that we can maintain
our good character. I don’t believe we need religion, but that it can assist us. Many of us
including myself would like such assistance. I submit, however, that now we must assist our
religions.

The most significant corruption in America is our willfully ignorant cowardice. We are
unwilling to face some awful truths.

The War on Terror

After the 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Franklin Graham said Islam "is a very evil
and wicked religion." (2) The Reverend Jerry Vines, former president of the Southern Baptist
Convention, called the Prophet Muhammad “a demon-possessed pedophile.” (3) Pope
Benedict joined this chorus in his 9/12/2006 speech at the University of Regensburg. In an
excerpt from this speech, the Pontiff speaks of the conversation between Byzantine emperor

47
Manuel II Palaiologos and an educated Persian on the subjects of Christianity, Islam, and the
truth of both:

“In the seventh conversation ("diálesis" -- controversy) edited by professor Khoury, the emperor
touches on the theme of the jihad (holy war). The emperor must have known that sura 2:256
reads: "There is no compulsion in religion." It is one of the suras of the early period, when
Mohammed was still powerless and under [threat]. But naturally the emperor also knew the
instructions, developed later and recorded in the Koran, concerning holy war.

Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the
"Book" and the "infidels," he turns to his interlocutor somewhat brusquely with the central
question on the relationship between religion and violence in general, in these words: "Show
me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil
and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."” (4)

The Pope used the words of Manual II to express himself, but he also stated in his own words
that there were surahs written after 2:256 which called for forced conversion. In fact, there are
no such surahs. There are surahs which, when taken out of context, could be construed to come
close, but no surah as clearly calls for forced conversion as surah 2:256 prohibits such action. (5)

I submit these pseudo Christian leaders serve the lie that is the war on terror. See chapter 2.

The Bible and Greater Israel

Genesis 15:18 Then and there the Lord made a covenant with Abram. He said, “I promise to
give your descendants all this land from the border of Egypt to the Euphrates River…”

17:7 “…The whole land of Canaan will belong to your descendants forever, and I will be their
God.”
17:18 …He asked God, “Why not let Ishmael be my heir?” 17:19 But God said, “No. Your wife
Sarah will bear you a son and you will name him Isaac. I will keep my covenant with him and
with his descendants forever. It is an everlasting covenant…”

I think a reasonable interpretation of these Genesis verses is that Canaan/Israel was promised to
the descendants of Isaac and Jacob, the Jews, in perpetuity. I do not deny this promise. I deny,
however, that God would sanction the current, unjust means now used to bring about a greater
Israel.

I once called greater Zionists - Fundamentalists. They are not. They do not follow the
fundamentals of their religions. As the Pharisees in the time of Jesus, they are overly concerned
with the literal letter of the word and insufficiently concerned with the spirit of the word. They
refuse to obey the following:
• The 10th Commandment – Do not covet another man’s house... They covet Palestinians’
lands.
• The 8th Commandment – Do not steal. They support the theft of Palestinians’ lands.
• The word of God in Ezekiel 47:21-23 “Divide this land among your tribes; it is to be your
permanent possession. The foreigners who are living among you and who have had

48
 children born here are also to receive their share of the land when you divide it. They
are to be treated like full Israelite citizens and are to draw lots for shares of the land along
with the tribes of Israel. All foreign residents will receive their share with the people of
the tribe among whom they are living. I, the Sovereign Lord, have spoken.” (6)

Most important, they refuse to have faith in a powerful and just God who will keep his
promises by just means.

There are parts of the Bible I have come to believe are not inspired:

The Hamitic/ Canaanite Curse – Genesis 9:18-29

Ham found his father naked and drunk and then told his brothers of their father’s state. In return
for this slight, Noah cursed all the descendants of Ham’s youngest son Canaan. Not only was the
punishment grotesque in relation to the minor crime, but also, the punishment was directed not at
the offending person but toward another and all that persons’ descendants.

I’ve read the theory that “exposing one’s nakedness” meant to cuckold someone by having
relations with their wives or concubines. There is no mention of Noah having concubines, and I
find it difficult to believe Ham had relations with his mother. Jacob’s eldest son Reuben had
relations with one of Jacob’s concubines. In his last words Jacob said because Reuben
dishonored Jacob’s bed he would not be the most important son, but Jacob also called him the
strongest of all his sons and “my strength.” (Gen 49:3-4) Reuben certainly “exposed Jacob’s
nakedness” yet suffered much less than Canaan’s descendants for Ham’s slight.

Additional theories include the possibility that Ham castrated Noah, Ham attempted to assert his
dominance over Noah by fathering Canaan with Ham’s own Mother, Canaan was guilty of some
abuse or perversion against his grandfather Noah, and Ham witnessed this abuse, did not
interfere, and spread the story. I think a more plausible explanation for these passages is simply
that they were written to rationalize the subjugation of Canaan. I conclude these verses are a
self-serving tribal story.

Genocide
Deuteronomy 7:1-2 “The Lord your God will bring you into the land that you are going to
occupy, and he will drive many nations out of it. As you advance, he will drive out seven
nations larger and more powerful than you: the Hittites, the Girgashites, the Amorites, the
Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites. When the Lord your God places these
people in your power and you defeat them, you must put them all to death. Do not make an
alliance with them or show them any mercy…”

Deuteronomy 20:16-18 Rules concerning war - “But when you capture cities in the land that the
Lord your God is giving you, kill everyone. Completely destroy all the people: the Hittites, the
Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites, as the Lord ordered you to
do. Kill them, so that they will not make you sin against the Lord…” God allows Satan in the
world but not the Canaanites.

49
The Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Hivites, and Jebusites among others were listed as
descendants of Canaan in Genesis 10:15-20.

The Book of Joshua tells of how Joshua obeyed the Lord. Joshua 10:40 “…He spared no one;
everyone was put to death. This was what the Lord God of Israel had commanded.” Joshua
11:12 “Joshua captured all these cities and their kings, putting everyone to death, just as Moses,
the Lord’s servant, had commanded.”

Genocide is one of the worst of all possible sins. Yet, God is alleged to have commanded it. I
didn’t have a problem with God flooding the world or killing the first born of Egypt, but in this
case, he commanded mortal men to do this awful work. I know we cannot fully know the mind
of God, and it is not our place to judge God. I also know that ours and Canaanites’ mortal lives
are nothing in relation to ours and their spiritual lives. Still, God commanding such actions is
utterly inconsistent with basic tenets of all Abrahamic faiths.

I see the enhancement of political control as one possible reason for the inclusion of these myths
in the Bible. The Israelites did not get these commands directly from God. They received them
through intermediaries such as Moses and Joshua. Machiavelli in his “Discourses” claimed
religion was an essential element of state control. What more control could one want than the
ability to get good people to commit great sin? There aren’t many sins greater than genocide. If
God can command genocide, he could command almost anything, but of course, only through his
intermediaries.

These myths may have been deemed necessary for the protection of the Israelites. The Bible
timeline and Jewish calendar appear to have been manipulated possibly to perpetuate these
myths. See Section 4.1 Bible Time Lines.

Bible Archaeology - The consensus in Bible archaeology, with the exception of fundamentalist
maximalists, is that there was no mass Israelite captivity in Egypt, no mass exodus from Egypt,
and most important to this paper, no genocidal invasion of Canaan. Canaan suffered decline and
internal rebellion. Further, the Israelites are believed to have come substantially from the ranks
of the Canaanites. Source: The Bible’s Buried Secrets 2008 PBS Nova at:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/bible/program.html.

The idea that Israelites came substantially from Canaanites is backed up by the fact that Hebrew
is in the Southern sub group of the Canaanite languages. Further, an evolutionary genetics
analysis of the Y chromosomes of Jewish men in seven communities found them related to each
other and to present-day Palestinian and Syrian populations (7). Today’s Jewish men and
Palestinian men share common ancestral fathers.

It is poetic justice that a large portion of Jewish greater Zionists are, in fact, self-hating anti-
Canaanites.

We may still find kernels of truth to support the Captivity, the Exodus, and even the Conquest.
We have found Pi Ramesses, and 1252 BC is the optimal time estimate for the Exodus (See
Section 4.1). The Captivity and Exodus likely did not involve hundreds of thousands, but these

50
may still have been historical events. There are kernels to support the Conquest. Hazor has a
destruction layer at c 1200 BC. Lachish has a destruction layer at c 1150 BC. Mere kernels,
however, even without the contrary evidence, would not support a full invasion and genocide of
Canaan.

There was no Conquest of Canaan, Torah verses calling for genocide are fiction, and the
Book of Joshua is fiction.

I submit these fictions have caused great harm. If God can command genocide, he could
command anything. These fictions paved the way for innumerable atrocities. The First
Crusaders massacred Jewish and Muslim civilians on their way to and in the city of Jerusalem.
Hitler could order the Holocaust. Americans in the good war could target and fire bomb the
civilian populations of German and Japanese cities. Today’s terrorists can claim they use Godly
means when they target unarmed, innocent civilians.

Conclusion
I call on all Abrahamic religions, not to change their canon, but to instruct their followings that
biblical passages claiming God commanded genocide are uninspired, tribal stories. God did not
order Israelites to kill all men, women, and children of Canaan. He did not order Israelites to kill
all men, women, children, and babies of the Amalekites (1 Samuel 15:3). These passages were
the work of men not of Yahweh, God, or Allah. God would not have ordered men to commit
genocide - to claim otherwise is blasphemy.

Our more conservative religions should at least conclude these passages “may not be inspired”
and certainly should not be looked to for guidance in our lives.

51
Sources and Footnotes:
Primary sources:
“Good News Bible” For Catholics - Today’s English Version 1992 second edition published by
the Catholic Bible Press a division of Thomas Nelson Publishers.

The Holy Quran translated by Maulana Muhammad Ali 2002 Edition

Published by Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha’at Islam Lahore Inc. USA

(1) The Prince and the Discourses by Niccolo Machiavelli

(1a) First Book, Chapter 11 - Of the Religion of the Romans

(1b) First Book, Chapter 12 – The importance of giving religion a prominent influence in a state,
and how Italy was ruined because she failed in this respect through the conduct of the Church of
Rome.

(1c) Corruption
First Book, Chapter 18 - How in a corrupt state a free government may be maintained,
assuming that one exists there already; and how it could be introduced if none had previously
existed.
First Book, Chapter 33 – When an evil has sprung up within a state, or come upon from
without, it is safer to temporize with it rather than to attack it violently
See excerpts from these referenced chapters in Chapter 8 of this eBook.

(2) Washington Post Article – “Franklin Graham cut from Pentagon prayer event for anti-Islam”
remarks By David Waters | April 22, 2010; 12:37 PM ET | Category: Under God

(3) 05/08/2003 San Diego Union Tribune p. A21 “Evangelicals rip remarks against Islam” by
Rachel Zoll AP

(4) Pope Benedict’s 09/12/2006 speech at the University of Regensburg from an early
translation provided through Zenit.org. The translation provided through the following link is
insignificantly different. https://zenit.org/articles/papal-address-at-university-of-regensburg/

(5) Surah 2: Section 24: Fighting in Defence Verses 189-196: Verse 190 “And fight in the way
of Allah against those who fight against you but be not aggressive. Surely Allah loves not the
aggressors.”

(6) Contrary to the long-standing assertion that Israeli settlements are built on unclaimed
territory, in 2006, a Peace Now report asserted that 40% of West Bank settlements are built on
private lands seized from Palestinians. The land was seized by the Army long after Israel’s
Supreme Court outlawed the practice in 1979. (Source: 11/22/2006 San Diego Union Tribune
p. A12 “Israeli settlement land disputed” from the AP)

(7) 5/14/2002 New York Times - In DNA… by Nicholas Wade

52
4.1 Bible Time Lines
2011 05 06 Rewritten 2017

The Bible timeline, the Jewish calendar, and the historical timeline should all reconcile with each
other. This Bible timeline by definition reconciles with the historical timeline from 925 BC
forward. This/The Bible timeline, as calculated in the Table/spreadsheet below, has 4,175 BC as
its Beginning. The Jewish calendar has 3,760 BC as its Beginning, for a difference with the
Bible timeline of 415 years. We will reconcile this difference and differences with the historical
timeline.

I submit gross errors left unidentified over a long period are most always intentional. Gross
errors by their very grossness should be easy to identify.

Major differences between the Bible timeline (BT), the Jewish calendar (JC), and the historical
timeline:
• As you will see below, The BT shows Terah was 130 when Abram was born, while the JC
shows Terah was 70 at Abram’s birth.
• The BT shows 430 years in captivity while the JC shows just 210 years.
• Both the BT and JC show 480 years between the Exodus and the beginning of Temple
construction - in the 4th year of Solomon’s reign. This BT using 925 BC for Shishak’s
campaign in Judah gives 967 BC as Solomon’s 4th year while the JC shows 832 BC as
Solomon’s 4th year.
• The JC shows the Temple destruction in 422 BC while the historical timeline shows 587 BC.

I submit the Bible’s Pharaoh Shishak was Egypt’s Shoshenq I, and these time lines should all
meet in 925 BC, the fifth year of Rehoboam’s reign in Judah. Further, all time lines should show
the Temple destruction in 587 BC. We can accomplish these by eliminating all the differences
as follows:

The 415 years difference will be eliminated from the Bible timeline. The differences between
the Jewish calendar and the historical timeline will fully offset each other. Review these
adjustments with the Table/spreadsheet below.

1) We adjusted the Jewish calendar by adding 60 years to the calendar before Abram’s birth
under the assumption that Terah was 130 years old not 70 when Abram was born. These 60
years were offset by subtracting 30 years from the period between the Exodus and the Temple
construction and subtracting 30 years from the period between the Temple construction and
destruction. These three offsetting adjustments were made only to the JC.

Genesis verse 11:26 states, “After Terah was 70 years old, he became the father of Abram,
Nahor, and Haran.” Unlike the prior verses which stated the ages of the Patriarchs at the births
of their apparent first sons, this verse only says all Terah’s sons were born after he was 70 – not
when he was 70, and it doesn’t specify when after 70. The chronology in verses 11:32 to 12:4
indicates Terah died at 205 before Abram left Haran at age 75 (205-75=130). Verse 12:1 states
God asked Abram to leave his father’s home - not to leave his father. Stephen in New Testament

53
Acts 7:4 states, “After Abraham’s father died, God made him move to this land (Canaan/
Palestine)…” Terah was 130 when Abram was born.

2) The Jewish calendar shows the Egyptian captivity as lasting only 210 years versus 430 years
in Ex 12:40-41 for a difference of 220 years. I submit 430 years refers to much more than the
time from Jacob entering Egypt to the Exodus. We will assume the Jewish calendar and 210
years is correct. We reduced this period in the Bible timeline by 220 years to match the Jewish
calendar. (See Footnote 1) This adjustment (2) combined with adjustment (3) will place the
Exodus at 1,252 BC on both time lines.

Ex 12:40 states, “The Israelites had lived in Egypt 430 years.” Both time lines now show 425
years from Abram’s departure from Haran/ arrival in Canaan/ arrival in Egypt to the Exodus
with the Israelites leaving Egypt, and 400 years from the birth of Isaac to the Exodus. There is
close New Testament authority for this interpretation in the words of Paul in Galatians 3:17 and
Acts 13:17-20.

An Exodus date of 1252 BC was after Akhenaten, allowing for the possible influence of the Aten
monotheism/ monolatry on proto Israelites, and after the conflicts in Canaan noted in the Amarna
letters. It was shortly after the 1254 BC death of Amun-her-khepeshef the first son and heir of
Ramesses II. Most important, the date allows time before 1252 BC for proto Israelites to have
helped build Pi Ramesses. After 1252 BC, there was time for 40 years of Wandering and a few
years in Canaan before the Merneptah Stele in 1209/1208 BC. The Israelites would arrive in
Canaan near the beginning of the Bronze Age Collapse.

3) The remaining difference of the 415 years is 195 years (415-220). Both the Bible timeline and
the Jewish calendar claim there were 480 years from the Exodus to the beginning of Temple
construction (1 Kings 6:1). 480 was a symbolic length of time representing 12 Biblical
generations. If we reduce this to 285 years for both calendars, they will both match the historical
timeline at the beginning of Temple construction in 967 BC. We reduced this period on both
time lines by 195 years.

Jewish calendar - This 195 years adjustment was offset by the 165 “missing years” on the Jewish
calendar (587 BC - 422 BC = 165) and 30 of the 60 years we added to the Jewish calendar before
Abram’s birth. The missing years are missing from the Jewish calendar after the Temple
destruction primarily if not wholly in a truncated timeline for the Persian/ Achaemenid Empire.
The historical timeline for this Empire was 550 BC to 330 BC. We replaced those missing years
with 165 of the extra years from before the Temple construction.

These 195 years were removed from the Bible timeline not the Jewish calendar where they were
simply moved elsewhere. The differences of 220 in years of captivity and these 195 years total
415. We have eliminated the 415 years difference between the Bible timeline and the Jewish
calendar.

4) The Jewish calendar timeline is reduced another 30 years between construction and
destruction of the Temple offset by the remaining 30 of the 60 years we added to the calendar
before Abram’s birth. The result is 587 BC as the date of the Temple’s destruction.

54
5) Add 165 of the extra years from before the Temple construction to the Jewish calendar after
the Temple destruction to replace the 165 missing years.

We added 225 years to and subtracted 225 years from different places in the JC. We have
eliminated the differences between the Jewish calendar and the historical timeline.

Resulting Bible timeline/ Jewish calendar/ Historical timeline

The Beginning 3,760 BCE Mythology
The Flood 2,104
Birth of Abram 1,752
Exodus 1,252
4 Year of Solomon’s Reign
th
967
5th Year of Rehoboam’s Reign 925
Destruction of the Temple 587 History

Questions:
Why does the Jewish calendar show Terah’s age at Abram’s birth to be 70 while the Bibwriters
show 130? And/or Why didn’t the Bible writers clearly note the age of Terah when Abram was
born as they had noted such ages for all the other Patriarchs?

Why did Bible writers state the Egyptian captivity was 430 years while the Jewish calendar
shows 210 years? (1)

Much of the current Hebrew Bible was written and/or codified in Babylon and Persia ruled Judah
following the destruction of the Temple and has been preserved ever since. The destruction of
the Temple at the beginning of the Babylonian exile was a significant event for the Israelites.
Would not the date of this destruction also have been preserved? If the Hebrew Bible could be
preserved, why not this one date?
Why does the Jewish calendar show the destruction at 422 BC rather than 587 BC?
Who, what, when, where, how, and why were the 165 “missing years” identified?

We can easily adjust the Jewish calendar to bring it in line with the historical timeline. A quick
reiteration: Add 60 years to the calendar before Abram’s birth, subtract 30 years between the
Exodus and the Temple construction, and subtract 30 years between the Temple construction and
destruction. Eliminate the 165 “missing years” by subtracting them from between the Exodus
and the Temple Construction and adding them back to the calendar after the Temple destruction.

The Jewish calendar only required five adjustments to bring it in line with the historical timeline
- possibly as early as the Exodus. These adjustments offset each other. Why were these such
simple adjustments? If they were intentional manipulations, why were they left in plain sight?

Again, I submit gross errors left unidentified over a long period are most always intentional.
Gross errors by their very grossness should be easy to identify.

55
Deuteronomy 29:29 states, “There are some things that the Lord our God has kept secret…”
Why would God keep secrets from us? I suspect it would be better for us not to know our
individual futures. Such knowledge might affect our free will. Daniel 12:9 states there are
secrets sealed till the end times. What other secrets might best be kept from us? Do God’s
intercessors keep his secrets from us? The idea that these time lines should come together as
a result of these few adjustments cannot be a new idea.

If these time lines were manipulated, why?

One Possible Answer:

A problematic timeline has made it difficult to determine the dates of the Conquest and thereby
prove or disprove its authenticity. The dates of the destruction layers in Canaanite cities cover a
wide range of possibilities – Ai c 2400 BC, Jericho c 1550 BC, Lachish c 1150 BC, etc. As long
as the timeline was undefined, the possibility of a Conquest remained open. Bible writers may
have wanted the Israelites, for their own protection, to be seen as potentially genocidal and
serving a powerful, genocidal god.

Footnote (1): Exodus 12:37 states 600,000 men not counting women and children set out from
Ramses, Egypt. Numbers states a census was taken one year and one month after leaving Egypt.
Numbers 1:46 states all men over twenty and fit for military service were counted except the
Levites. The total was 603,550. 603,550 – 600,000 = 3,550. 3,760 – 3,550 = 210. This result/
code was imbedded in appropriate text. It was imbedded in sacred text. 3,760 BC, however, was
calculated from the Anno Domini AD numbering system developed by the Monk Exiguus in 525
AD – more than a thousand years after these scriptures were written. Interestingly, the AD
system made this coding possible, but apparently erred on the date of Jesus’ birth. Jesus would
have to have been born in 4 BC or earlier to be born before Herod the Great died in 4 BC.
Is this derived 210 just a coincidence?

Numbers 26:51 gives the result of a second census at 601,730. 3,760 – 1,730 = 2,030. Is there
any significance in these numbers?

Is there any similar evidence in the Bible supporting 285 years between the Captivity and
Temple construction? 1 Kings 5:16 states Temple workers had 3,300 supervisors. 2 Chronicles
2:2 claims 3,600 supervisors. 3,600 – 3,300 = 300. This is close to 285.

Fun Stuff:
2030 - 23 is a significant number. There are 23 books in the Tanakh/ Hebrew Bible sans Daniel,
which was written much later than the original books. Daniel in the Tanakh is not placed with
the Nevi’im/ Prophets but rather with the Ketuvim/ Writings. There are 22 letters sans variants
in the Hebrew alphabet. Hebrew alphabet, acrostic poems often included a 23rd line beginning
with the letter Peh. The first letter of the 1st 12th and 23rd verse/line, aleph lamedh and peh
spelled Aleph indicating the completeness of the work (Source: The Unity of the Hebrew Bible
by David Noel Freedman pgs.81-2). Moses’ brother Aaron died on Mount Hor at the age of one
hundred “twenty three” (Numbers 33:38). In Numbers’ second census there were 23 thousand
Levites. The second census was taken just before the Israelites entered into the Promised Land.

56
Perhaps Armageddon will be in 2030 AD just before we enter into the 1,000 year reign of the
Messiah/ Christ/ Mahdi. The seven year influence/ reign of the Beast would begin in 2023.

Luke 3:1 states John the Baptist began his ministry in the 15th year of the rule of Emperor
Tiberius, 29 AD. John ministered to and baptized many eventually baptizing Jesus. Jesus went
thru his temptation. He then returned to Galilee and began his ministry when he was about 30
years old. If we reasonably assume Jesus began his 1st ministry in 30 AD and if Armageddon is
in 2030 AD, it will have been exactly 2,000 years from the beginning of his 1 st earthly ministry
to the beginning of his 2nd earthly ministry.

There are 23 pairs of chromosomes in human cells.

The earth’s axial tilt varies around 23 degrees (22.1 degrees to 24.5 degrees, currently
approaching 23.4 degrees). The Arctic Circle will be at 66.6 degrees North latitude.

Note: Jesus said of his second coming in Matthew 24:36, “No one knows, however, when that
day and hour will come - …the Father alone knows.”

Rothschild – the Beast, Rev 13:18 – “This calls for wisdom. Whoever is intelligent can figure
out the meaning of the number of the beast, because the number stands for the name of someone.
Its number is 666.” Rothschild, in English, is red shield. I submit the Rothschild’s red shield
showed a Star of David with a six sided hexagram, six small triangles, and six points, 666, and
has equilateral triangles large and small with 3 60 degree angles, 60 60 60/ 666. What exactly
were the red shields over the “red shield houses,” the house of Anselm Moses Bauer in
Frankfurt? And the earlier house of Isaak Elchanan?

Pope Benedict – False Prophet, 2nd beast Rev 13:11 – “It had two horns like a lamb’s horns and
it spoke like a dragon.” The Pope is the representative of Christ/the lamb on earth, but Pope
Benedict spoke like a dragon in his 2006 Regensburg speech.

57
Time Lines Spreadsheet *
Bible Timeline
Ten Age at birth of
Patriarchs - X BCE
Adam 130 Seth 1656
Seth 105 Enosh 352
Enosh 90 Kenan 720
Kenan 70 Mahalalel 480
Mahalalel 65 Jared 967
Jared 162 Enoch 4175 Beginning
Enoch 65 Methuselah
Methuselah 187 Lamech
Lamech 182 Noah
Noah 600 when Flood came.
1656 years before the Flood -1656
2519 Flood
Ten More -98 Age of Shem when Flood came.
Shem 100 Arpachshad
Arpachshad 35 Shelah
Shelah 30 Eber
Eber 34 Peleg
Peleg 30 Reu
Reu 32 Serug
Serug 30 Nahor
Nahor 29 Terah
Terah (a) 130 Abram
Abram 352 From the Flood to the Birth of Abram -352
2167 Birth of Abram
Abram 100 Isaac
Isaac 60 Jacob
Jacob 147 Died
-17 Years Jacob lived in Egypt before he died.
(b) 430 Years of Egyptian captivity, to the day
720 From Birth of Abraham to the Exodus -720
1447 Exodus

From Captivity to Solomon beginning the

(c) 480 Temple -480
967 was the 4th year of Solomon's reign 967 Temple construction begins
2793 AM

380 From Temple construction to destruction -380

587 Temple destruction
3173 AM

58
 Jewish Masoretic ADJUSTED
Calendar Calendar JC JC
BCE AM BCE AM
130
105
90 5768 5768
70 -2008 -2008
65
162 3760 Beginning 3760 0
65
187
182
600
1656 -1656 -1656
Flood 2104 1656 2104 1656
-98
100
35
30
34
30
32
30
29
70 -60
292 -292 -292 292
Birth of Abram 1812 1948 1752 2008
100
60
147
-17
210
500 -500 -500 500
Exodus 1312 2448 1252 2508
30 -30
165 -165

480 -480 -480 480

Temple constru 832 2927 967 2793

30 -30
410 -410 -410 410
Temple destruc 422 3338 587 3173
-165 165

59
You can download an Excel workbook and adjust this spreadsheet with your own
assumptions. Go to the workbook titled “4.1 Bible Time Lines.xls” at:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0ByIC4F1Uo9zwQzVGa1dUckpuRTA&usp=sharing
OR https://goo.gl/KYPFSf

The “Time Lines” spreadsheet within this workbook includes Bible sources and a History/
Archaeology timeline.

60
5 Motivation for the attack on the USS Liberty
2008 06 08

Today is the anniversary of the Israeli attack. Along with others (1), I submit it was undertaken
to keep the US from interfering with Israel’s attack on Syria the following day.

On June 8th 1967 at 2:00 PM local time, in the middle of the 1967 Six Day War, the intelligence
ship USS Liberty was attacked by Israeli air and naval forces. By June 8 th the fighting had ended
on all fronts (2a). The Six Day War could have been the four day war. Instead, on the
morning of June 9th Israeli forces initiated new actions against Syria. This attack lead to
significant international intrigue. Both the US and USSR considered military intervention. If the
US had had prior knowledge of Israeli plans, they may have stopped them. Israel took action to
preempt this possibility.

Israel was apparently unsatisfied with the terms of its 7/20/1949 armistice with Syria. Prior to
the 1967 War, in order to enhance its influence in the de militarized zones, it instigated border
clashes with Syria. Moshe Dayan admitted in interviews that Israel was responsible for at least
eighty percent of the border clashes with Syria between 1949 and 1967 (2b). On the morning of
June 9th 1967, Israel instigated another border clash with no initial interference from the US.

One could argue that the closing of the Gulf of Aqaba was an act of war, but it was Israel that
began preemptive military action in the four day war. Further, it was Israel that began military
action in the two day war, and this action was in no way preemptive. Two thirds of Syria’s air
force had already been destroyed; Syria could offer no serious threat. It was precisely this
weakness that, allegedly, lead to Dayan’s final decision to attack (2c). I submit this decision was
actually made well in advance of June 9th.

Both America and Israel are aggressor nations. Both have acted contrary to American ideals, but
their interests are not always synonymous. We should not let Israel dictate American foreign
policy.

Sources and Footnotes:

(1) Several books and the BBC documentary USS Liberty: Dead in the Water argued that
Liberty was attacked in order to prevent the U.S. from knowing about the forthcoming attack in
the Golan Heights, which apparently would violate a cease-fire to which Israel's government had
agreed. (Source: Wikipedia – “USS Liberty incident”)

(2) Primary Source: The Fifty Years’ War – Israel and the Arabs by Ahron Bregman and Jihan
El-Tahri. This was the companion text to the 1998 PBS documentary of the same name.
Excerpts are in page number order:

p. 109 (2a)
“On June 8 at 7 PM, Prime Minister Eshkol summoned his ministers. Just four days after the
war had begun; the fighting had ended on all fronts: the Egyptian army was defeated,
Jordan was crushed, and the West Bank and Jerusalem were in Israeli hands.

61
The only Arab state, it seemed, that would survive the war intact was Syria.”

p. 111 (2c)
“On June 9, at 3:30 AM, Mossad intercepted a cable sent from President Nasser to Syrian
President Nur el Din Attasi. ‘I think,’ wrote Nasser, ‘that Israel is interested in concentrating its
forces against Syria, in order to crush the Syrian Army… I would like to advise you to end the
hostilities and let U Thant, the Secretary General, know in order to keep the Syrian Army intact.
We have lost this battle. God will be with us in the future.’
When Dayan saw the cable, he came to the conclusion that the Syrians would not put up serious
resistance and phoned David Elazar, who was in charge of forces in the north. Dayan asked,
‘Are you ready for an attack?’ Elazar replied, ‘Yes, I am.” Dayan said, ‘So, go ahead and
attack.’”

“…At the Dan Hotel, Eshkol was in for a shock when his wife called him to the phone. It was 8
AM, and Dayan was on the line. ‘We have gone up to the Golan Heights,’ Dayan said.”

p. 315
In the 7/20/1949 Israeli-Syrian armistice agreement, Syria withdrew from the areas it had
occupied allowing these to become demilitarized zones without either country having
sovereignty. “…Although Israel signed on the dotted line, the Israelis were unhappy with this
agreement and, during the nineteen years leading up to the 1967 war, took actions to expand their
control over the demilitarized zones. These tactics were intended to provoke the Syrians, so that
the resulting border clashes could be exploited to increase Israel’s influence in the areas. Moshe
Dayan, a former chief of staff and defense minister, admitted in a newspaper interview, ‘It used
to go like this: we would send a tractor into the demilitarized zone knowing, in advance, that the
Syrians would start shooting. If they refrained we would instruct the tractor to keep on
advancing until the Syrians lost their temper and started shooting. Then we would use our
cannons and, later, also our air force.’”

p. 315 (2b)
“While Syria was responsible for some border clashes, Dayan also admitted in the
interview quoted above that Israel was responsible for at least eighty percent of the clashes
between 1949 and 1967.”

p. 316
“In 1967, Israel went on the offensive, consolidated its hold on the demilitarized zones, and took
the Golan Heights… Israel took action to turn the Golan Heights into de facto Israeli land by
starting to build settlements on the Heights, and, from autumn of 1967 up to mid-1968,
systematically destroying Arab houses and villages.”

62
6 Great Recessions II
- coming soon to an economy near you. 12/29/2013

We are again in a bubble economy created by our plutocrats for their extraordinary
profits. The Fed in its primary function of facilitating and managing instability has
helped create this bubble with a 2.5 trillion money creation account hidden in
depository institutions’ excess reserves. Our total nonfinancial debt has increased
beyond our capacity to repay. And, bubbles burst.

December 23rd was the 100th birthday of the Fed. Congress as its supervising
authority should once again review and amend the Fed’s systems and delegated
authority.

Outline: Intro
Current Stats
Economics Theory 1A/1B
History - S&L crisis, Great Recessions GRs I, and Great Recessions GRs II
The Fed - protecting us from deflation and affordable housing
- Fed accounting
Predictions
Miscellaneous additional recommendations
Sources and Footnotes

Intro
The American economy is once again a bubble intentionally created by our plutocrats and their
cronies. Our plutocrats are the flesh and blood people who own and operate our large
corporations including banks. Corporate welfare is plutocrat welfare; corporatism is plutocracy.
Our plutocrats want the instability that comes with bubbles to create opportunities for
extraordinary profits. Normal profits from a job creating, sustainable, stable economy are simply
insufficient. The Fed was created by our plutocrats not to provide stability but to facilitate and
manage instability. The Fed now has 2.5 trillion in a money creation account hidden in excess
reserve deposits. This magic money was/is used to purchase long term LT securities to keep LT
interest rates artificially low and thereby facilitate the creation of another bubble economy.

Lower LT interest rates increase the value of bonds, increase the price earnings PE ratios in the
stock market, and increase the price of housing by lowering mortgage interest. All these markets
are now volatile bubbles. Their volatility was evident in the quick 100 basis point rise in LT
rates resulting from Fed Chairman Bernanke’s May announcement on future tapering - in
quantitative easing QE 3/4, the Fed’s current LT bonds purchasing programs.

Unnaturally low interest rates over extended periods negatively affect other areas not normally
considered. Lower returns have contributed to growing deficits in our pension funds. Lower
returns on insurance company investments have likely increased our insurance premiums. Low
interest rates have encouraged our excessive borrowing…

63
Current Stats
Total domestic, nonfinancial debt is 248% of GDP - 41,431.9 B in debt to 16,695.7 B in GDP
(a). This is the highest or one of the highest debt/GDP ratios in our recorded history. We cannot
service such indebtedness. Continued debt forgiveness with concomitant losses to creditors is
unavoidable. This annual ratio has stayed above 247% since 2009 in spite of a growing GDP
and a trillion dollar reduction in household mortgages with over four million foreclosures (b).
Federal debt has seen the most growth, growing from 5.1 trillion in 2007 to 12 trillion at the end
of September. Yet, all areas but household mortgages have increased debt. Note - this
discussion is of nonfinancial debt and excludes financial debt such as debt the federal
government owes itself in the Social Security trust funds.
Source: http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/ See the 12/09/2013 release pages 5 and 12.

Corporate debt increased 1,910.1 B from the end of 2009 to 9/2013. During the same period
American corporations purchased 1,880 B in treasury stock per Birinyi and Bloomberg data (c).
From a macro perspective, our corporations replaced 1.9 trillion in MV equity with 1.9 trillion in
debt. It is true this increased current earnings per share and selling shareholders did well given
rising, high stock values, but remaining shareholders received overvalued treasury stock and are
stuck with excessive debt which will reduce future earnings when interest rates rise – more proof
their treasury stock was overvalued.

Our debt will continue to be a drag on our economic growth. In the past we have inflated GDP
to reduce our debt/GDP ratio and paid back our debt with inflated dollars. This may not be as
acceptable to creditors as it was in the past.

Inflation – has been 1.2% over the last year well below the Fed’s latest general goal of 2.0%.
The Fed is normally concerned with keeping inflation low but is currently, allegedly more
concerned with the possibility of deflation.
Source: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cpi.pdf 12/2013 Report

We’re not going to get cost push inflation from higher costs in our resource/factor markets until
interest rates rise and, of more importance, labor costs rise. Though labor costs are shrinking as
a percentage of national income, labor costs at 64% remain a much higher percent of national
income than the cost of financial capital (d).

GDP gap – is the gap between a full employment GDP and the current GDP with current
unemployment. Full employment is defined as an unavoidable 4% unemployment. November
unemployment was reported at 7.0% and is in line with the Fed’s QE target, but this measure
only counts people still looking for work and does not measure underemployment. We have
been in an extended downturn. Labor market participation is near a 35 year low at 63.0%. I
submit the current GDP gap is much more than the difference between 4% and 7%
unemployment, and we need a full employment GDP to maximize our ability to pay our debts.
Source: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm 12/06/2013 report
The 09/01/2017 Employment Situation Summary for August 2017 reports unemployment was just
4.4% but the labor participation rate was still 62.9%.

64
Economics Theory 1A/1B
Free market – is a lie. We are a corrupt monopoly/ oligopoly capitalist system not a free
competition capitalist system which would allow competitive effects to self-regulate markets.
The government regulation we most need is antitrust regulation to reestablish free competition
by breaking up our monopolies/ oligopolies and the too big to fail. Competition is the only way
markets can self-regulate. Such self-regulation would preempt the need for other more
onerous, micro managing regulations.

Liquidity trap – In classical theory savings and investments always moved toward equilibrium.
Given the correct interest rate, savings would equal investments. Keynes made the case that
there was no such natural equilibrium. Savers and investors were different people with differing
motivators. During down times savings would increase to cover future uncertainties. The trap
was that increased savings/ liquidity was funded by decreased consumption spending which led
to reduced economic activity with concomitant uncertainties leading to increased savings in a
continuing, viscous circle.

Keynes reasoned that savings would lead to lower interest rates but not necessarily increased
investment. Business investors must consider all costs and benefits in a business investment, not
just interest rates, and during down times potential profits are low. Regardless of how much or
how long the Fed lowers interest rates, low rates will not necessarily increase job-creating,
business investment.

Keynes theorized a solution in which government could replace private business investment with
public investment. Deficit spending could lead to increased economic activity in a beneficial
circle which would eventually create increased taxes to pay off the deficit debt. It worked.
Deficit spending helped make the bad times better. It also made the good times better leading to
unending deficits and high debt. This outcome is not what Keynes intended. Keynes is not
responsible for our fiscal irresponsibility.

Public investment, in spite of high debt, could still be used to stimulate our economy and meet
long neglected public needs like our crumbling infrastructure. America needs value adding jobs
more than we need transfer payments and plutocrat/ corporate welfare.

Wealth effect – is the increase in consumption spending attributable to the perception that one is
wealthier. It is a double edged sword in that consumption spending will decrease from the
perception one is poorer. There was a positive wealth effect from the increase in home prices
before their peak in July 2006. There was a negative wealth effect from the drop in home prices
after their peak. We now appear to have regained the net worth we lost in the great recession.
(Source: 12/09 Z-1 release pages 113-115.) I submit this is bubble wealth. Our wealth was
bubblicious before the Great Recessions GRs I, and it is bubblicious now before the Great
Recessions GRs II. Just like our plutocrats, in order to recognize this bubble wealth, you will
have to sell your bubble assets well before the GRs II.

65
History
Deregulation and regulatory forbearance have repeatedly lead to booms and busts in our real
estate RE markets, but the only thing we learn from history is that we don’t learn from history.

Savings and Loan S&L Crisis

Deregulation in the early eighties gave new powers to S&Ls such as making commercial RE
loans, making construction RE loans, selling mortgages, etc. S&L bankers and examiners had
little experience in these areas and were ill equipped to manage them. This was followed by
regulatory forbearance in that the Reagan administration refused to fund adequate numbers of
FSLIC examiners to meet the needs of this fast growing industry and refused to fund their
reeducation to deal with the industry’s expanded powers.

RE values went up then down creating selling and buying opportunities for those who were
aware of what was happening. I did not assume this was a manipulation until it happened again.

Great Recessions GRs I

Deregulation and regulatory forbearance lead to another RE boom and bust.

The Glass-Steagall Acts of 1932/1933 separated commercial banks, investment banks, and stock
brokers thus eliminating conflicts of interest and the potential for abusive self-dealing. In 1999
Glass-Steagall was repealed. I was still working as a bank examiner at the time, and I remember
thinking there must be people much smarter than me to calculate we would be better off without
this legislation which had served us well for over 65 years.

Brooksley Born in 1998/1999, as chairperson of the Commodities Futures Trading Commission

CFTC, lobbied to give the CFTC oversight authority over off-exchange, over-the-counter OTC
markets for derivatives in addition to its authority over exchange-traded markets for derivatives.
These OTC derivatives were known only to their counterparties and those counterparties’
regulators if any. There was no way to assess systemic risk. This systemic risk was made
apparent in the 1998 collapse of Long Term Capital Management LTCM which had leveraged
itself into an extreme risk position with the extensive use of unregulated OTC derivatives. Even
their investors could not assess LTCM’s risk exposure.

Born’s position was opposed by other regulators and plutocrat cronies including Treasury
Secretaries Rubin and Summers, Fed chairman Greenspan, SEC chairman Levitt, and Congress.

Congress in December 2000 passed the Commodities Futures Modernization Act CFMA within
a FY 2001 appropriations bill. The CFMA legislation excluded financial derivatives including
credit default swaps CDSs from supervision under the Commodities Enforcement Act. It
reasserted and strengthened their exemption from state laws which could construe them to be
gambling.

CDSs were used as insurance against defaulting securities, but while Insurers are precluded from
underwriting policies for persons with no insurable interest in the subject property, naked CDS
allow parties to have no interest in the contract referenced security. It’s a very sophisticated
hedge or, more likely more often, plain and simple gambling. Naked CDSs made up as much as

66
80% of the CDSs market (e). Insured commercial banks and other “too big to fail” institutions
should not have been allowed to use them to speculate/ gamble.

Deregulation combined with regulatory forbearance to facilitate a massive worldwide securities

fraud. Terrorism played a role in this forbearance. On 9/11 all SEC records in New York were
eliminated with the destruction of WTC 7. More important, law enforcement resources were
transferred from addressing corruption to addressing terrorism. Regulators allowed banks to
securitize subprime, liar loans into fraudulently AAA rated securities and their derivatives.

You could make the case bankers and others were not gambling in their use of CDSs because in
fact they had rigged their games. It wasn’t gambling; it was stealing. SNL Financial reports
America’s six largest banks have agreed to pay 65 billion in settlements related to their
mortgages and the financial crisis. Further claims were projected to increase that figure to 85
billion. (11/02/2013 Economist p. 81) Bloomberg reported our six largest banks, between
1/2008 and 6/2013, paid 56 B in legal fees and 47 B to mortgage investors (12/8/2013 SDUT
p.C3).

Just one indicative example was Abacus 2007-AC1. Investment bank Goldman Sachs colluded
with John Paulson to create, sell, and bet against a synthetic collateralized debt obligation CDO
Abacus-2007 AC1. The contract referenced securities in this transaction were intentionally
picked to default. Goldman Sachs paid 550 million in settlements on this transaction but
admitted no wrongdoing, and no one went to jail. Paulson made 1 billion from this transaction
(f) and apparently suffered no legal consequences.

We are the most incarcerated country on earth. Though we are only 5% of the world’s
population, we have 25% of the world’s prison population. There is room for victimless
criminals like marijuana smokers, but no room for our plutocrats and their cronies who cheated
the world of hundreds of billions.

Great Recessions GRs II

The lack of correct, adequate reregulation and, I believe, improper regulator interference has
created another RE boom soon to be bust.

The repeal of Glass-Steagall allowed conflicts of interest and self-dealing. During the run up to
the GRs I, our bankers abused those conflicts of interest. Since the GRs I, the abuse continued.
Our large banks are too large, have too much power in too many areas, are willing to abuse those
powers, and are willing to collude in abusing those powers.

The following are a few indicative examples:

Banks which are supposed to compete with each other colluded to fix the Japanese benchmark
rate, Euribor, and Libor. Bloomberg News reported global fines had totaled 6 billion by 12/4 (g).

JP Morgan, the country’s largest commercial bank, paid a settlement of 410 M to FERC for
Enron style manipulation of energy prices. In 2003 an exemption was passed which allows Wall
Street banks to enter into transactions in physical commodities that are complementary to their
financial activities (8/17/2013 Economist p.59).

67
I submit we don’t need feel good PR in an unnecessary, new consumer protection agency or a
thousand pages of regulations and interpretations on the Volcker rule prohibiting banks from
proprietary trading. We need to reestablish and enforce Glass-Steagall and anti-trust regulations.
We are micro managing when we should be macro managing.

The Fed
- protecting us from deflation and affordable housing

Fed management states it has kept interest rates low to stimulate the economy and stop deflation.
As noted above, this will not necessarily increase business investment. It has been temporarily
successful in fighting deflation given the rise in our bond, stock, and homes markets. But, if as I
believe we are in a bubble, then the coming GRs II will eliminate this temporary success. I
believe Fed management is aware of these points and is pursuing other purposes.

The S&P Case-Shiller US national home price index was 100 in 3/2000, 189.93 in 6/2006 peak,
124.20 in 3/2012 low, and 150.92 in 9/2013. The homes market peaked nationally in July 2006.
It then dropped dramatically reaching a market low in early 2012 but that low was still much
higher than the homes market in 2000. The homes market in 2000 was not deflationary, and the
homes market at the 2012 low was also not deflationary. Source: 12/2013 Report
http://us.spindices.com/indices/real-estate/sp-case-shiller-us-national-home-price-index

The unnatural state of our homes market is apparent in the fact that 42% of all residential sales in
November were to buyers who paid cash – investors/ speculators (h). They’re bidding up the
prices of our homes; they’re blowing bubbles.

There has been a campaign to get people to refinance their homes at lower rates to help keep
them in their homes. All the reporting about refinancing never mentions that once you refinance
you cannot use your state’s anti-deficiency laws. Most states prohibit creditors from pursuing
borrowers personally for deficiency balances in foreclosures on purchase money mortgages.
Creditors can only move against the collateral. Once you refinance, you become personally
liable for your loan beyond the value of your collateral. When this bubble bursts, refinanced
borrowers will not be able to walk away from their mortgages on underwater homes and escape
personal liability.

California changed its laws in January 2013 to allow anti-deficiency laws to apply to the portion
of a refinancing used to pay off a prior, purchase money mortgage, but this law is not retroactive.

Whether the price of your home is 1 million or 200,000, you still need a home to live in. You
must sell your home to recognize an increase in value. I submit higher home prices do not
increase our standard of living if we simply stay in our homes, and certainly reduces the standard
of living of new buyers and indirectly increases rents, reducing living standards of renters.

68
Federal Reserve Accounting
12/31/2012 Federal Reserve Combined Financial Statement
Depository Institutions 1,491,045 M
Footnote m. Deposits, Depository Institutions
“Depository institutions’ deposits represent the reserve and service-related balances, such as
required clearing balances, in the accounts that depository institutions hold at the Reserve Banks.
The interest rates paid on required reserve balances and excess balances are determined by the
Board of Governors, based on an FOMC-established target range for the federal funds rate.
Interest payable is reported as a component of ‘Interest payable to depository institutions’ in the
Combined Statements of Condition.”
Source: http://federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/BSTcombinedfinstmt2012.pdf
See pages 5 and 16.

Never before in accounting history, has so much money been explained by so few words. And, I
believe it’s a lie. Most of this account balance is not reserve balances.

We are supposed to believe, as of 12/11/2013, institutions have left 2.5 trillion in excess reserves
at the Fed to be paid 25 basis points interest. And, excess reserves increase by 85 billion every
month paid the same 25 basis points interest. Further, would not short-term rates rise if 2.5
trillion in funds were taken out of circulation in excess reserve deposits?
Source: http://federalreserve.gov/releases/h41/

I offer the following estimate as an alternative accounting. It is oversimplified and not accurate,
but it is certainly more accurate than the Fed’s disclosed accounting:
12/31/2012 Institutions’ Deposits (M) Debit Credit
Required Reserves 60,000
Excess Reserves 447,541

Money Creation Account 1,712,327

Money Elimination Account -728,823
Total 1,491,045

Required reserves were estimated to be 60 billion. Gross required reserves for the two weeks
ended 1/9/2013 were 114 billion from which we can subtract eligible vault cash of 54 billion.
See 1/10/2013 Fed Report H.3 (502). Note – Total institutions’ deposits were 21 billion in
1951 and 19 billion in 2006.
Excess reserves were 447,451 M equal to 507,541 M in total reserves less 60,000 M in estimated
required reserves.
Right or wrong the source for the 507,541 M:
http://federalreserve.gov/econresdata/releases/combanksal/combanksal120130331.htm
Money creation account balance was 1,712,327 M equal to total securities of 2,838,988 M less
Federal Reserve notes in circulation of 1,126,661 M.
Money elimination account balance was -728,823 M equal to the combination of 447,451 M
offsetting excess reserves plus 281,282 offsetting funds primarily from sources outside of
institutions’ deposits.

69
I do not believe the Fed would subject itself to the interest rate risk involved with funding
trillions in long term assets with trillions in short term funds. If as I believe LT assets are not
funded by reserve deposits, whatever happens to the future level of reserves is irrelevant. The
Fed is still subject to interest rate risk in that LT securities will depreciate as LT interest rates
rise. The Fed has stated it will not sell its mortgage backed securities, if so, their depreciation
will be irrelevant. The Fed will still have more than enough interest earnings to fund its
operations and continue to refund unspent interest earnings to the Treasury.

One way or another, these accounts are manipulated. If the public and Congress understood the
magic used to create money the Fed uses to purchase LT securities, they would lose whatever
faith they may still have in the Fed.

Predictions: Our next, wholly avoidable crises will arrive in late spring/early summer. Look for
significant events on or around 5/22/2014.

Fed QE 3/4 tapering is set to begin in January 2014 with a mere 10 B reduction in securities
purchases. The longer they extend tapering, the larger will be the financial collapse. New
purchases continued through 2014. All redemptions/principal payments have been reinvested
since then. 09/20/2017 Fed Chairman Yellen announced plans to reduce principal reinvestments
in both Treasuries and Mortgage Backed Securities MBS by 10 B per month beginning in
October 2017. This 10 B cap will rise to a meaningless 50 B cap over the next year – 30 B in
Treasuries and 20 B in MBS. Most months redemptions will not come close to these limits (The
Economist 09/16/2017). Note – the Fed holds over 2.6 trillion in bonds not backing Federal
Reserve notes.

• Fed Taper Day, December 18th 2013, was the beginning of the end. The bond, stock, and
then home market bubbles will begin to collapse into the Great Recessions II.
2017 It’s coming.

The troop level in Afghanistan is projected to be down to 34,000 by the end of February 2014 as
promised by Obama in his 2013 State of the Union Address. Long term plans call for force
levels to drop to between 20,000 and 10,000 in 2014. April 5, 2014 is the next presidential
election in Afghanistan.
• Karzai or the new President will sign a status of forces agreement with the US.
• Force levels will stay around 30,000 as they were during the Bush years for possible use in
Iran and to protect illegal drug profits. The UN Office on Drugs and Crime 2008 report
showed the potential metric tonnage of Afghan opium production rose from 185 metric tons
during its ban in 2001 to 8,200 metric tons in 2007. UNODC 2013 report showed potential
metric tonnage at 5,500. 80% of drug profits are made in the country of consumption i.e.
America. The loss of these profits would hurt our plutocrats and deepen our recession. (i)

The end of April will be the end of nine months of peace negotiations between Israel and
Palestine.

70
• Negotiations will end without a final agreement. The collaboration will continue between
greater Palestine terrorists and greater Israel Zionists. Terror and occupation will continue to
rationalize each other.
• Israel/Palestine will explode in violence. The UN will recognize Palestine without borders as
a full member state by the end of 2015.
• Terror threats against the US will skyrocket with a concomitant negative effect on markets.

The end of May will be the end of the initial six months delineated in the interim, nuclear
agreement with Iran. Iran will have had another six months to comply with International
demands and will be deemed just months away from the capability of producing a nuclear
device. The Interim Agreement was signed 11/24/2013, but the referenced, initial six months
began on 1/20/2014 and ended 7/20/2014. The Final Agreement/ Joint Comprehensive Plan of
Action JCPOA was signed 07/14/2015 with Implementation Day on 01/16/2016.
• Congress will push for war. This was, obviously, a self-unfulfilling prophecy. Our war
plutocrats and their cronies will attempt to sell the war as an economic necessity. WWII
brought us out of the depression, but given our current high debt, this war would deepen the
coming recession.

Full disclosure – Given the extraordinary rise in home prices in the early 2000s, I predicted a
negative wealth effect from a bursting bubble home market would result in a recession in the
spring 2004 then the spring 2005. I was several years premature. 2017 Oops, I did it again.

Additional miscellaneous recommendations

Refinance our short-term ST nonfinancial federal debt into 20/30 year maturity bonds before LT
rates skyrocket.

End our war economy by all just means necessary.

Stop aggressor Americans from unnecessarily killing tens of thousands of Iranians as they/we
killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.
Support a military option against those who support an Iran military option.
Next war, civil war – Prepare for a war to end all America’s unjust wars.

Corruption - Reestablish honesty, integrity, and trust in American business and financial
markets. As recently made evident, markets cannot function in their absence. I suspect during
the Lehman Bros 2008 Panic, banks would not lend to each other for fear that other banks were
as dishonest as they were. Don’t bail ‘em, jail ‘em.
We must all stand up to the corruption in our individual lives and workplaces. Risk your job or
risk your country.

Employment - If you are receiving transfer payments such as welfare, unemployment, or social
security, and you are either able bodied or able minded, recognize an obligation to work at least
part time as a volunteer. We all need to help reestablish a sustainable, stable economy.
If your job is not adding value, get a new job.
Do Good.

71
Raise the federal minimum wage to $10/ hour 50% of average hourly wage of nonsupervisory
personnel at $20.31/ hour. This is also in a reasonable 40-45% of national average hourly wage
at $24.15/ hour. Such a raise would reduce these workers need for aid, increase consumption
spending given these workers high propensity to consume, and would moderately help fight
deflation. Source: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm 12/06/2013 report
8/2017 average hourly wage of nonsupervisory personnel was 22.12, 50% of which would give a
national minimum wage of 11.06.

Keep a six months supply, no more no less, of gin and tonic for the coming hard times. If you
keep less, you may be overcome by depression. If you keep more, you may think you have
enough to drink yourself to death - and then attempt to do so.

Sources and Footnotes:

Primary sources: The Economist magazine, San Diego Union Tribune SDUT,
www.wikipedia.com, www.federalreserve.gov, www.bls.gov,
http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/ See the 12/09/2013 Z-1 statistical release.

(a) The GDP figure used was the average annualized figures for the first three quarters of 2013
from the 12/09/2013 Z-1 release. Gross domestic product GDP indicates our capacity to
service our debt. It is the market value of the products and services produced in one year in
our product markets. The flip side of this figure is what our producers pay for labor and
financial capital in our resource/factor markets. GDP in the product markets roughly equals
national income and fixed capital consumption in the resource/ factor markets.
(b) 9/16/2012 SDUT p.C1 from Nation’s Housing article by Kenneth Harney – “1.2 million
families across the country are now at some stage of foreclosure, 3.8 million homeowners
have been foreclosed upon since September 2008…” This was in September 2012.
(c) Bloomberg News in the 12/17/2013 SDUT p. C4 and the 12/09 Z-1.
(d) Source: 11/2/2013 Economist p.12. Note: The 12/9 Z-1 release p.13 shows 3rd quarter
annualized compensation of employees/ national income was 60.9% (8,889.1B/ 14,596.7B).
A portion of proprietors’ income is compensation for proprietors’ labor which would
significantly increase this percentage. See also footnote (a).
(e) Bloomberg News 7/24/2009 article “Banning Naked Default Swaps…” As much as 80
percent of the credit-default swap market is traded by firms that don’t own the underlying
debt, Eric Dinallo, the former superintendent of the New York State Insurance Department,
estimated in a January (2009) interview. The following broken link is for reference only:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a0W1VTiv9q2A
(f) http://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2010/comp21489.pdf p.3
(g) 12/05/2013 SDUT p.C4 from Washington Post article by Danielle Douglas
(h) 12/29/2013 SDUT p.C1 from Nation’s Housing article by Kenneth Harney
(i) Sources: American War Machine by Peter Dale Scott p.227 and p. 235 and
http://www.unodc.org/wdr/index.html

72
7 Gun Control – A Bigger Picture
2014 03 04

Outline/ Summary

Hypothesis - We are a sick society. Gun violence is a mere symptom of this

sickness. George Orwell’s doublethink creates cognitive dissonance leading to
mental illness and too often irrational, criminal behavior. A primary doublethink
is claiming American ideals while in reality we aggress against and occupy the
world. A society with immoral leadership cannot expect its lesser, weaker
members to act morally, and nihilism makes perfect sense in the vast gulf
between our ideals and our immoral reality.

Terrible Truths
Plutocrat corruption/ welfare
Gun control we need – Cut by half defense, security, and intelligence spending.
Cut this funding of our aggression. Eliminate this primary doublethink and make
our ideals our reality in American foreign policy.
Gun control we must avoid – eliminating citizens access to effective weaponry
for the defense of ourselves, others, the country, and the world. We the people
are capable of self-governance and self-defense.
An American phoenix program
Sources and Footnotes Addendums

Hypothesis
Americans are people of the lie – willfully ignorant cowards unwilling to face terrible truths.
The truth is we have an immoral government, run by an immoral plutocracy, with the
acquiescence of an immoral populace. Contrary to our ideals we have aggressed against native
America, Canada, Mexico, Spain, Vietnam, and Iraq. We needlessly killed millions in Vietnam
and hundreds of thousands in Iraq. We support financially, diplomatically, and militarily Israel’s
aggression in the West Bank. We are the bad guys.

There are many areas of contradictions and hypocrisy in our society which contribute to our
sickness. We claim to be a land of equality, but we have not had such inequality in wealth and
income since the 1920s. We claim to have a free market economy, but we are not a free
competition capitalist system. We are a corrupt, monopoly/ oligopoly capitalist system. We
claim to be free, but with only 5% of the world’s population we have 25% of the world’s
prisoners. We claim to be a Christian nation, but we more often extend the back of the hand
rather than the helping hand. I will concentrate in this paper on our most egregious hypocrisy –
our claiming American ideals while perpetuating unnecessary killing in unjust wars.

Doublethink is Orwell’s term for holding two contradictory beliefs at the same time. This
contradiction creates cognitive dissonance (CD), too often resulting in irrational and/or
destructive behavior. CD theory postulates deviant behavior results from our natural bias to seek
consonance between our expectations and our reality. Given this bias, we attempt to reduce the

73
dissonance by lowering the import of one of the discordant factors, adding consonant factors,
changing one of the discordant factors, etc.

I suspect we also compartmentalize in an attempt to separate different realities. We separate our

religion from our science. We require individual morality but allow our government to act
immorally. I submit integrity is the integration of all our values into all our realities. What is
true in science is true in religion. What is true for an individual is true for a country. Truth is not
relative. Time and space are relative. Our individual perceptions of truth will vary, but the truth
does not vary. Truth is absolute.

Whatever games we may play, pieces of the truth leak into our consciousness.

Terrible Truths
America has often gone to war through gross manipulations. General Zachary Taylor was
attacked after being ordered into disputed territory between the Nueces and Rio Grande rivers,
Spain could not have benefited from blowing up the Maine, the Lusitania had munitions in her
hold, it may not have been mere coincidence that there were no aircraft carriers at Pearl Harbor
on 12/07/1941, the first Tonkin Gulf incident was provoked, the second incident didn’t happen, I
don’t believe jet fuel fires in the upper floors could have thoroughly demolished the entire
superstructures of both the Twin Towers on 9/11, Bin Laden was intentionally allowed to escape
Tora Bora in December 2001, and there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Further, a
nuclear capable and/or armed Iran will never be a significant threat to the United States.

We have overthrown democratically elected heads of state because they were socialist and/or
threatened American business interests. We overthrew Mosaddegh in Iran 1953 for Iranian oil,
overthrew Arbenz in Guatemala 1954 for the United Fruit Company, and helped overthrow
Allende in Chile 9/11/1973 for ITT, Anaconda, and Kennecott. If we were immorally capable of
coup de tats elsewhere, why not in America?

I believe our war plutocrats assassinated John F Kennedy in 1963 because he planned to get us
out of Vietnam. Kennedy wasn’t a socialist, but he threatened future war profits. Kennedy had
refused to introduce US troops into Cuba, Laos, and the Congo. He allowed military advisors
into Vietnam but refused to introduce US combat troops. Through the 10/11/1963 NSAM 263,
he approved plans to remove 1,000 advisors from Vietnam by the end of 1963 and most of the
16,000+ advisors by the end of 1965. Sources: http://www.jfklancer.com/NSAM263.html and
“JFK and the Unspeakable” by James Douglass. Just over eight months after his assassination,
we created the Tonkin Gulf incidents. There would have been no such incidents under JFK. See
Section 7.1

Plutocrat corruption/ welfare

America is a plutocracy. Corporate welfare is plutocrat welfare, and corporatism is plutocracy.
Blaming our problems on Corporatism allows our plutocrats to escape their personal
responsibility as the owners and operators of our large corporations. Every level of American
government, government bureaucracy, media, and academia are corrupt. We the people are free
and have influence, but we do not control our country. Millions in the streets before the attack
on Iraq did not keep America from attacking. On 10/10/2002, 68% of the House and 77% of the

74
Senate authorized unilateral war with Iraq while only 37% of their constituents supported
unilateral war (1). Congress refused to abide by the wishes of their constituents and followed the
wishes of their contributors.

The finance and real estate industries are the largest contributors to American politics and
thereby among the worst corrupters. Their plutocrats have destroyed the world’s economy for
their extraordinary profits, but while their corporations are fined, and even though we are the
most incarcerated nation on earth, none of these plutocrats went to jail. Even after the
devastation of the Great Recessions I, we have not reregulated. We have not restored free
competition capitalism, not eliminated abusive conflicts of interest by reestablishing Glass-
Steagall, and not reestablished honesty in our markets. See the case for these ideas in Chapter 6
Great Recessions II. Chapter 6 deals with corruption on a national level, but it is at all levels of
government. See the addendum at the end of this chapter on redevelopment in San Diego, CA.

If Americans are willing to acquiesce in this corruption, I can accept their acquiescence until this
corruption leads to unnecessary killing in unjust wars.

I submit foreign states and terrorists are not existential threats to America, while Our war
plutocrats are our domestic enemies and an existential threat to America. War plutocrats
are the flesh and blood people who own and operate our major defense contractors and other
large corporations with major benefits from our war economy. I submit the goals of our
perpetual war are cheap resources and war profits for these plutocrats.

The Carlyle Group – combined privileged information and deep connections for high profits. In
2001 - its total investments in the arms industry made it the 11th largest US defense contractor.
George H W Bush and James A Baker were advisors. Former British prime minister John Major
was the Chairman of Carlyle Europe. The Group combined the House of Bush and the House of
Saud including the bin Laden family until after 9/11 (2). George W Bush provided the American
military while Saudi Arabia provided 15 of the 9/11 hijackers. No doubt Carlyle’s pre 9/11
defense investments became extraordinarily lucrative after 9/11.

Two 9/11 hijackers were known to the CIA before they entered and while they were in the US, al
Mihdhar and al Hazmi on Flight 77. These men were helped by Saudi nationals in LA and San
Diego. Their landlord for a time in San Diego/ La Mesa was an FBI informant who was
allegedly unaware they were with al Qaeda. The CIA refused to inform the FBI of their
presence in the US (3) Source: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/military/spy-factory.html.
Former counterterrorism czar Richard A Clarke believes the CIA planned to turn these men into
double agents (4). The CIA and its sixty employees who knew these men were in the US have
never been forced to openly explain their actions. I suspect they took no actions to turn these
terrorists, and they weren’t incompetent. They were simply following CIA traditions in the
service of our war plutocrats.

There are other examples of nominal enemies colluding:

Pakistan and the Afghan Taliban – (The Afghan Taliban and Pakistani Taliban are two different,
separate organizations.) American Military and Intelligence in Afghanistan have continually
complained of Pakistan’s duplicity. Pakistan, our nominal ally, helped create the Afghan

75
Taliban, allowed its leadership, the Quetta Shura, to stay in Quetta, Pakistan at least through
February 2010, and I believe allowed bin Laden to stay in Abbottabad, Pakistan. Pakistan played
and likely continues to play its part in this perpetual war.

Greater Palestine terrorists are collaborators with greater Israel Zionists. Unending terror
rationalizes unending occupation which rationalizes unending terror. It makes perfect sense for
Israel to release terrorist prisoners and then refuse to give up the West Bank. I doubt there is
direct collusion, but I believe there is indirect collusion.

The control we need -

Cut defense, security, and intelligence spending back to year 2000 levels - 50%. We now have
600 bases and/or deployments spread over 156 countries and consume just under half the world’s
military spending (5). The 2014 defense budget is 625 B (6). This defense budget does not
include 73.3 B for military construction and the VA, 39.3 B for the Department of Homeland
Security, and 49.0 B for the State Department and foreign operations (7). If we cut the defense
budget by half, we would still greatly outspend Europe with a total defense budget of just 275 B
(8).

Our military strength has been derived from our economic strength. No doubt we have some
economic advantages derived from our aggression, but our economic strength more influences
our military strength than vice versa. Unfortunately, we are now economically decrepit partly
due to overspending in defense/ offense.

Total domestic, nonfinancial debt is 248% of GDP - 41,431.9 B in debt to 16,695.7 B in GDP
(9). This is the highest or one of the highest debt/GDP ratios in our recorded history. This
annual ratio has stayed above 247% since 2009 in spite of a growing GDP and a trillion dollar
reduction in household mortgages with over four million foreclosures. Federal nonfinancial debt
has seen the most growth, growing from 5.1 trillion in 2007 to 12 trillion at the end of
September.

Republicans always want to blame our federal deficits on high social spending. They refuse to
recognize the effects of low taxes and high defense spending.

The F-35 Lightning II fighter program is the poster child for needlessly high defense spending.
The Foreign Policy Association states it is literally the “most expensive weapon ever
developed.” (5) The program has a current projected price tag of 391.2 B for 2,443 aircraft (10).
Future costs including maintenance over the life of the aircraft are projected to be a trillion on
this program (5). That’s a trillion with a T plus the hundreds of billions already spent for this
one fighter program. The F-35C carrier version has a current flyaway cost of 200 million for just
one fighter. There have been 163 B in cost overruns so far, and there will be more (11).

The F-35 program was moved into production while still under development ensuring the
likelihood of continuing the program. There was no dual contracting to allow competitive
effects in fighter production. We’re developing a thoroughbred racehorse to work on the farm.
This delivery system and its munitions will cost far more than most all of their targets. And, we
already have a fifth generation fighter in the F-22 Raptor.

76
Iran - We have caused great harm to Iran. We overthrew Iran’s democracy and their Prime
Minister Mosaddegh in 1953. We supported the aggressor Saddam Hussein in the Iraq Iran War
from 1980 to 1988. Iran is flawed given its support for the targeting of civilians by Hamas,
Hezbollah, and the Syrian regime, but neither America nor an American armed Israel has a
morally superior position from which to attack Iran.

We cannot afford a protracted engagement with Iran. It is true that WWII got us out of the
depression, but all the deficit spending for the depression and the war resulted in a 1946 total
nonfinancial debt to GDP of only 164%. Further, in 1946, given the world had just been
decimated by depression and war, there was nothing but growth ahead of us. Today we have no
similar growth to look forward to. Unless we pillage defeated countries as did Nazi Germany,
war today makes no economic sense from a macro perspective. War plutocrats may see their
cheap resources and war profits as advantageous from their micro perspective, but they will
prosper while America dies.

If we used our military strength to support just causes like stopping genocide in Bosnia, Rwanda,
or Darfur, I could justify continued though necessarily diminished support for defense spending,
and the world would love us. Instead we continue to aggress for the benefit of our war
plutocrats, and the world hates us. I am not recommending we isolate ourselves in fortress
America. Step back from the world militarily but step forward diplomatically. Instead of going
into the world to kill people, go into the world to help people. Do good.

Full disclosure – In the summer of 2001 just before 9/11, I condemned the mainland Chinese
government as the most belligerent in the world and made the case we should increase military
spending to meet the threat she posed to Taiwan. I even voted for Bush in 2000 for fear Gore
would not defend Taiwan. After 9/11 the Chinese government was replaced by the Bush
Administration as the most belligerent on earth.

China on 11/23/2013 declared an air defense identification zone ADIZ over the East China Sea
including the disputed Senkaku/ Diaoyu islands. On 1/1/2014 China announced new fishing
regulations in the waters of Hainan Province which claims 2 M square kilometers of the total 3.5
M in the South China Sea (12). I am still concerned with possible Chinese aggression; I’m just
more concerned with continued American aggression.

The control we must avoid -

The second amendment delineates an inalienable, preexisting individual right, but also provides
for a well-regulated militia. Reasonable regulation is acceptable, but the removal of effective
weaponry is not acceptable. America may be corrupt beyond nonviolent redemption. Rough
justice may be the only justice possible. We don’t need effective weaponry to shoot Bambi; we
need such weapons to shoot the lowest form of life on the planet, Homo sapien predators. If you
think we’ve progressed beyond our Wild West culture, how do you explain our unnecessary
killing of millions of Vietnamese and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis?

77
There is no better deterrent to our enemies, both foreign and domestic, than a well-armed
citizenry. Further, our heavy military weapons do not provide deterrence against our domestic
enemies, the only enemies that now existentially threaten us.

Just over 50 years ago the M14 rifle was adopted by the American military. Irvine C Porter as a
member of the NRA Executive Council wrote the following about the M14 in March 1963, “All
that remains to be done, in my opinion, is to provide means for every physically fit male in the
age bracket of 18-65 years to qualify annually at least as a Marksman with this fine weapon.
Such an achievement will materially strengthen the physical as well as the mental and moral
fiber of our nation, contributing greatly to its defense.” (13)

California has among the most restrictive gun laws in the nation but still allows some effective
weapons including the M1A rifle, the civilian version of the M14. I believe the laws are overly
restrictive in prohibiting the AR-15 rifle, the civilian version of the M16, but the laws do allow a
version the M1A rifle that has been somewhat modified such as eliminating its flash suppressor.
Relative to the M16, it has a more effective, higher caliber 7.62 mm cartridge and with scopes a
longer effective range of up to 875 yards. The Taliban can muster 440 yards from M16s with
near impunity. The M1A is an effective weapon.

California’s Democratic governor recently had to veto a law which would have prohibited this
weapon. The CA legislature passed this law SB 374 indicating we must continually defend the
legality of these weapons. We have an inalienable right with or without the Constitution, and
hopefully, we can keep these weapons legal.

Open carry laws - should reestablish the practice in California. Prior to 2012, Californians could
openly carry an unloaded pistol with separated ammunition. On 2/13/2014, the Federal 9 th
Circuit Court of Appeals found California’s concealed carry weapons CCW laws to be
unconstitutional reasoning the second amendment requires states to permit some form of carry
for self-defense outside the home. Given CA CCW laws only allow carry permits for applicants
who can show “good cause” for a permit, most ordinary citizens don’t qualify. Ordinary citizens
were prevented from both open carry and concealed carry. The court therefore nullified the
“good cause” qualification in the CCW law. I submit open carry would satisfy the court, be a
safer alternative to CCW, and provide greater crime deterrence than CCW.

California could and should clean up its Armed Prohibited Person System. The State Auditor in
an October 2013 report found the program failed to take guns from 21,000 Californians who had
lost their gun rights. The report also found the current mental health, criminal, and gun
databases were riddled with errors, and that 3 of 8 confiscation decisions were incorrect. Gun
Owners of California, a pro-gun organization, estimated the system was 40 to 60 percent
incorrect. Others put the percentage lower, but it was still high. (14) This is not reasonable
regulation.

Stand Your Ground laws

- should be repealed. It is not okay for civilians or police to shoot unarmed attackers. If one is
faced with shooting an unarmed assailant or retreating, the correct choice in most all cases is to
retreat. One can then continue to pursue an attacker when sufficient help is available.

78
School Security
- We don’t have to live in a police state or make our schools armed camps.
As part of a general initiative to extend personal responsibility for our own security, I
recommend all schools have secured gun safes at a few locations on campuses. The safes
would hold weapons and ballistic vests to be used by capable staff for the protection of students
and staff. Vests should be clearly labeled “School Security.” We have former soldiers
everywhere fully capable of using such weapons, and non-veterans can be trained to use such
weapons. Obviously, all staff would not be capable, but certainly several capable staff can be
found in most all schools. The primary effect of such a program would likely be deterrence, but
it would also save lives when deterrence doesn’t work.

Flight 93 – Todd Beamer and other passengers took actions against hijackers after learning three
other planes were flown into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. These passengers weren’t able
to save themselves, but they saved the Capitol building or the White House. This assumes 93
wasn’t simply shot down. Even if the plane was shot down, passengers took action. I submit
passengers of the other planes would have taken action if our intelligence community had
condescended to inform the public that suicide hijackings were possible, and citizens should
not necessarily be passive.

We the people are capable of self-governance and self-defense.

An American phoenix program

The Vietnam Phoenix Program between 1965 and 1972 neutralized over 81,000 Viet Cong VC
operatives, supporters, and informants. Those targeted were not soldiers but civilians who were
part of the VC infrastructure. Neutralized meant captured, converted, or killed. Over 26,000
were killed.

I propose a similar program in America targeting the worst of our war plutocrats and the worst of
their political, bureaucrat, media, and think tank cronies. Support the threat to neutralize these
aggressors if Congress authorizes military action and/or concurrent with any future military
action against Iran - next war, civil war. The immediate and primary purpose of such a program
would be to save the lives of tens of thousands of Iranians.

George W Bush and Dick Cheney committed high treason in December 2001 when they
repeatedly refused requests for the resources and actions necessary to prevent Osama bin Laden
and al Qaeda from escaping Tora Bora. If we had captured or destroyed bin Laden and al Qaeda
at Tora Bora, the rationalization for continued war would have ended, but Bush and Cheney
wanted war for cheap natural resources and war profits. I submit, if we had neutralized Bush and
Cheney for high treason in 2002, we may have been able to save the lives of hundreds of
thousands of Iraqis. See the case for their treason in Chapter 2 The War on Terror is a Lie.

We should overthrow our war plutocrats’ control of the government, not the government. Our
government and police are not our enemies. These institutions certainly include the corrupt in
their ranks, but their ranks also include those who stand against the corruption and support

79
American ideals. We may also be able to reestablish America’s sanity and humanity. Again, our
primary purpose would be to save Iranian lives, but saving Iran could save America.

Sources and Footnotes:

Primary sources: The Economist magazine, San Diego Union Tribune SDUT,
www.wikipedia.com

(1) 9/20-22/2002 Gallup poll

58% opposed a US invasion of Iraq without UN support,
37% supported such action. Our politicians claimed they supported the Iraq war for political
reasons. Their political reasons were dollars not votes.

10/3-6/2002 Gallup poll found - If the President decided to invade, 47% thought the U.S. should
invade and would support his decision, and 27% thought the U.S. shouldn’t invade but would
still support his decision, for a total of 74% who would support his decision.

A poll by Princeton Survey Research Associates on 1/23-24/2003, published 1/25/2003 in a

Newsweek web exclusive, found the following:
53% of Americans opposed a unilateral war with only one or two major allies and without UN
approval,
7% were undecided, and
40% supported such a war. These were the results after Congress voted.

(2) The Shadow World by Andrew Feinstein pgs.282-6 and The Carlyle Group by Tom
Shorrock with thenation.com 3/26/2002 http://www.rense.com/general21/gf.htm

(3) 2/3/2009 Nova episode - The Spy Factory http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/military/spy-

factory.html Mark Rossini and Doug Miller were liaison FBI agents at Alec Station in the CIA.
They were ordered not to inform the FBI of these terrorists’ presence in the US.

(4) 10/2009 Interview of former counterterrorism czar Richard A Clarke

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1d-RGkYpXCg Clarke stated on record he had intelligence
that three former top CIA officials -- George Tenet, Cofer Black, and Richard Blee --
knowingly withheld key information on alleged hijackers al Mihdhar and al Hazmi in Kuala
Lumpur and San Diego from the White House, the FBI, Immigration INS, the State Department,
and the Defense Department.

Clarke stated the CIA wanted to get inside al Qaeda, and he suspects they hoped to turn al
Mihdhar and al Hazmi. The CIA finally placed these two on their terrorist watch list on
8/21/2001 and 8/23/2001. Clarke postulates that if this information had been shared with senior
levels of counter terrorism offices in the White House, FBI, INS, etc., even as late as the
Principles Meeting of 9/4/2001, we could have apprehended these suspects before 9/11. They
were using hotel rooms and credit cards in their own names.

(5) Great Decisions 2014 by the Foreign Policy Association p.6

80
(6) http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ain-defense-perspective/2014-01-03/congress-
passes-2014-defense-authorization-bill
526.8 B in base expenditures, 80.7 B in overseas contingency operations (including
Afghanistan), and 17.6 B in Dep of Energy nuclear weapons programs for a total of 625.1 B.

(7) http://appropriations.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=366721

(8) 12/21/2013 The Economist p.82

(9) The GDP figure used was the average annualized figures for the first three quarters of 2013
from the Federal Reserve’s 12/09/2013 Z-1 release at http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/

(10) 12/08/2013 SDUT p. A32 New US Bombers by Tony Capaccio with Bloomberg. One
hundred of the Air Force’s new long-range strike bombers are projected, by three defense
analysts, to cost 81 B or 810 M per plane.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-06/u-s-bombers-seen-costing-81-billion-47-more-
than-plan.html

(11) http://www.cbsnews.com/news/f-35-joint-strike-fighter-60-minutes/

(12) 1/18/2014 The Economist p.40

(13) 3/2013 American Rifleman p.33

(14) 12/29/2013 SDUT article on new gun laws by Steven Greenhut p. A11

81
Addendum: State and Local Corruption
2014 03 04

The essays above deal primarily with corruption at a national level, but it is at every level. I will
address San Diego and California as indicative examples. Until 2011 California law allowed
the formation of redevelopment agencies financed by increases in future property taxes. I submit
these agencies were used overwhelmingly for plutocrat welfare. All new property taxes in a
designated area like downtown San Diego went to its redevelopment agency. In the years before
repeal of this welfare law, San Diego’s downtown agency had hundreds of millions to invest in
redevelopment.

We had redevelopment and other public funds to invest in a baseball park we didn’t need and a
high end, central library we didn’t need, but the city’s general fund couldn’t afford to pay our
pension costs, maintain our infrastructure in roads buildings and water system, or hire 500
needed firefighters. We could not meet minimum public needs.

Our investment in new structures reduced our capacity to maintain current structures leading to a
need for new structures. Developer plutocrats flourished while San Diego declined into one of
America’s worst cities.

The above described redevelopment agency could lie with impunity. It claimed in 7/2009 that
original plans for a new city hall would cost only 432 M. The cost was 520 M. There was no
law enforcement or regulator response to this agency’s misrepresentation, though the new city
hall was never built. This public agency continues to exist as Civic San Diego.

San Diego has been criminally negligent in not providing adequate fire protection. The City lost
hundreds of homes in October wildfires, 321 destroyed and 70 damaged in 2003, 365 destroyed
and 79 damaged in 2007 (Sources: City of SD After Action Reports). Interestingly, developers
and the building industry made profits rebuilding those homes. So, while we can’t afford
adequate fire protection because we’re funding unnecessary redevelopment for developer profits,
the resulting reduction in fire protection also results in developer profits. It’s like Orwell’s 1984
but with wildfires replacing wars to create the destruction reconstruction destruction cycle in Big
Brother’s utopian economy.

The City now plans to spend 520 M to expand our convention center while we can’t afford to
maintain the current facility. The facility has over 25 million in deferred maintenance costs.
(Source: http://www.sandiego.gov/iba/pdf/reports/2013/13_31attachment1_130725.pdf)

Community planning is a vicious circle of exceptions. A developer identifies a community need

and promises to fill that need in exchange for a variance such as higher density in a planned
development which creates another need, a need which is then filled by the next developer.

Poway Unified school district, which services my portion of San Diego, borrowed 124.6 M in
7/2011 on construction bonds for which it will pay back 981 M. The bond exceeded its legal
lending limit of 105 M and pays 5.9% effective interest well over the then market rate of less
than 3.75%. These are capital appreciation bonds so we will be paying excessively high interest

82
for an excessively long period. This may not directly involve developers but at least a small
portion 124.6 M will benefit developers’ allies in the building industry. The biggest ill-gotten
benefit will go to the special bond holders who hold these special bonds. It is certainly another
example of corruption to which, again, there has been no law enforcement or regulator response.

The fact that California’s redevelopment law was repealed gives me hope, but our developer
plutocrats continue to push for new redevelopment legislation such as CA Senate Bill 1 –
Sustainable Communities Investment Authority. This bill allows a local government to establish
an Authority and direct tax increment revenues to that Authority in order to address blight by
supporting development in transit priority project areas, small walk able communities, and
clean energy manufacturing sites.
9/12/13 placed on inactive status
9/9/13 Senate concurred with Assembly amendments
9/9/13 passed Assembly version 48 to 28
5/28/13 passed Senate version 27 to 11, 1 abstention

The 2014 California Jobs and Education Development Initiative Act (Jedi Act) was another
threat of future corruption.

7 Addendum – Proper Gun Control

Know your weapon. Dry fire (snapping in) Practice Visualize every possible situation.
Practice to develop the muscle memory needed to take you through any situation.
Use the meaty part of the tip of your finger on the trigger.
Use a sling on a rifle.
When shooting a rifle, support your weapon with your bones not your muscles.

Attain a natural point of aim. Do not force yourself into a position. If you are in a natural
point of aim, you will return to the same position after firing a round. (You will then be able to
instantly continue firing at your target. This assumes you are using a semi auto weapon.)

Site picture – concentrate/ focus on the front sight blade. The front sight should be crystal
clear. Place the tip of your front sight on the center of your target. The target should be out of
focus. If you concentrate on the front sight, your rear sight will fall into place.

Do not anticipate your shots. You should not know when your weapon fires.

Remember your BRASS:

Breathe – Do not hold your breath. Exhale.
Relax
Aim – focus on the front site.
Slack – take up the slack in the trigger.
Squeeze – Don’t jerk. Don’t anticipate your shots.

83
7.1 Kennedy and Vietnam
2014 03 04 Re-edited

Kennedy was working to get us out of Vietnam. Through the 10/11/1963 NSAM 263, he
(Kennedy) approved plans to remove 1,000 advisors from Vietnam by the end of 1963 and
most of the 16,000+ advisors by the end of 1965.
Source:
http://www.jfklancer.com/NSAM263.html and “JFK and the Unspeakable” by James Douglass.
NSAM – National Security Action Memo

3,500 advisors were projected to still be in Vietnam through 1966 with lesser numbers in
following years.

Kennedy had begun his withdrawal. Most of the 1,000 advisors were withdrawn. The high of
about 16,742 advisors in October was reduced to about 15,894 by the end of December.
CINCPAC even completed a somewhat more accelerated withdrawal plan on 12/05/1963.
Source:
https://nara-media-001.s3.amazonaws.com/arcmedia/research/pentagon-papers/Pentagon-Papers-
Part-IV-B-4.pdf See pdf pages 47 and 50 of 65, pages 27 and 30 of the original document.

It’s been claimed Kennedy only threatened advisor withdrawals to pressure the Diem regime and
its successor regime. Immediately after the Diem coup, America restored its Vietnamese aid
programs – economic aid, the Commercial Import Program, and various capital work projects,
yet advisor withdrawals continued. After Kennedy’s assassination in NSAM 273 dated
11/26/1963, President Johnson reaffirmed, “The objective of the US with respect to the
withdrawal of US Personnel remains as stated in the White House statement of 10/02/1963.”

The 10/02/63 White House WH statement stated, “3. Major U. S. assistance in support of this
military effort is needed only until the insurgency has been suppressed or until the national
security forces of the Government of South Viet-Nam are capable of suppressing it. Secretary
McNamara and General Taylor reported their judgment that the major part of the U.S. military
task can be completed by the end of 1965, although there may be a continuing requirement for a
limited number of U.S. training personnel. They reported that by the end of this year, the US
program for training Vietnamese should have progressed to the point where 1,000 US military
personnel assigned to South Vietnam can be withdrawn.”
Sources:
NSAM 273 - http://www.lbjlib.utexas.edu/johnson/archives.hom/NSAMs/nsam273.asp

10/02/1963 WH Memo –
https://nara-media-001.s3.amazonaws.com/arcmedia/research/pentagon-papers/Pentagon-Papers-
Part-IV-B-4.pdf See pdf pages 42-43
Pages 22-23 of the original document in which the WH memo was copied.

Withdrawals were real and Kennedy Policy. They were not simply threats to pressure the
governments of Vietnam. Kennedy had planned, delayed, re-planned, and finally began a
withdrawal which I believe was a primary reason for his assassination.

84
Primary Source:
https://www.archives.gov/research/pentagon-papers/
All 47/48 volumes 7,000 pages of the Pentagon Papers were declassified and published by the
National Archives on 6/13/2011. 34% was new material. Note - nothing cited above was new
material, but it was presented in a more organized, complete, and clear form.

85
8 Machiavelli on Corruption
2011 05 06

I submit America is now a corrupt principality with the mere veneer of a Republic ruled by
warlord princes. We mere plebes are allowed our freedom and have influence, but we do not
control our country. Machiavelli, contrary to his reputation, supported good government and
preferred Republics over Principalities. He would not be pleased with the current state of
America. Read his thoughts on corruption below. Five hundred years ago he wrote in these
words an apt description of America today.

The most significant corruption in America is our willfully ignorant cowardice. We are
unwilling to face some awful truths.

The Discourses by Niccolo Machiavelli

First Book, Chapter 18 – How in a corrupt state a free government may be maintained,
assuming that one exists there already; and how it could be introduced if none had previously
existed.

Upon this subject I must say that either one of them would be exceedingly difficult.

…good habits of the people require good laws to support them, so laws, to be observed, need
good habits on the part of the people. Besides, the constitution and laws established in a republic
at its very origin, when men were still pure, no longer suit when men have become corrupt and
bad.

…And the truth that the original institutions (constitution) were no longer suitable to a corrupt
state is clearly seen in these two main points, - the creation of the magistrates, and the forms used
in making laws.

As regards the first… (Roman) security and the weakness of conquered nations caused the
Roman people no longer to bestow the consulate/(magistrate) according to the merits of the
candidates, but according to favor…After that they descended from those who were most
favored to such as had (the) most wealth and power, so that the really meritorious became wholly
excluded from that dignity.

…Now as to the mode of making laws. At first …any citizen had the right to propose any law,
and every citizen could speak in favor or against it before its final adoption. This system was
good as long as the citizens were uncorrupted. … (then) people having heard both sides may
decide in favor of the best. But when the citizens had become corrupt, this system became the
worst possible, for then only the powerful proposed laws, not for the common good and the
liberty of all, but for the increase of their own power, and fear restrained all the others from
speaking against such laws; and thus, the people were by force and fraud made to resolve upon
their own ruin.

86
It was necessary, therefore, if Rome wished to preserve her liberty in the midst of this corruption
that she should have modified her constitution… as the constitution of a state, when once it has
been discovered to be no longer suitable, should be amended, either all at once or by degrees as
each defect becomes known, I say that both these courses are equally impossible…

For a gradual modification requires to be the work of some wise man… but it is very likely that
such a man may never rise up in the state, and even if he did he will hardly be able to persuade
the others to what he proposes for men accustomed to live after one fashion do not like to
change, and the less so as they do not see the evil staring them in the face, but presented to them
as a mere conjecture.

As to reforming these institutions all at once, when their defects have become manifest to
everybody, that also is difficult; for to do this ordinary means will not suffice; they may even be
injurious under such circumstances, and therefore it becomes necessary to resort to extraordinary
measures, such as violence and arms, and above all things to make one’s self absolute master of
the state, so as to be able to dispose of it at will. And as the reformation of the political condition
of a state presupposes a good man … the making of himself prince of a republic by violence
naturally presupposes a bad one…

From these combined causes arises the difficulty or impossibility of maintaining liberty in a
republic that has become corrupt…

First Book, Chapter 33 – When an evil has sprung up within a state,

or come upon from without, it is safer to temporize with it rather than to attack it violently

…And such evils arise more frequently in a republic from intrinsic than extrinsic causes, as it
often occurs that a citizen is allowed to acquire more authority than is proper; or that changes are
permitted in a law which is the very nerve and life of liberty, and then they let this evil go so far
that it becomes more hazardous to correct it than to allow it to run on.

Source: The Prince and the Discourses published by Modern Library College Editions

87
9 Solutions
9.1 Solutions – Pivot to Diplomacy
2014 11 15
Most all of the world’s problems do not have military solutions.

Establish American ideals as the foundation of American foreign policy in the following order of
importance: Truth, justice, self-determination, majority rule with minority rights, and peace.

• Recognize we have been a primary cause of the current chaos in the Middle East. See
references to the Pentagon’s 2001 Middle East war plans at:
http://library.fora.tv/2007/10/03/Wesley_Clark_A_Time_to_Lead/Wesley_Clark_on_Americ
a_s_Foreign_Policy__Coup_ (1)
• Support Plebiscites to determine who should rule where. Demand UN supervised plebiscites
in Eastern Ukraine and Kashmir. Recognize past plebiscites in South Ossetia and the
Crimea.
• Talk with everybody about everything. We must negotiate with terrorists, though we should
not allow a terrorist act to force us to take or not to take an action.
• Subordinate ourselves to the rule of law in general and specifically the International Criminal
Court ICC and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea UNCLOS. We have not ratified
either statute. If we had been subject to the ICC, President Bush and Vice President Cheney
may have been deterred from attacking Iraq, and how can we ask China to follow UNCLOS
while we refuse to recognize this Convention?
• All foreign military aid should be reduced over the next five years to nearly nothing.

Islamic State IS Support IS containment then Stop / No rollbacks / No long war

The goal should be to contain not to destroy IS. Stop their expansion out of Sunni Arab areas
then Stop. Do not make war on the IS. We can offer no viable alternative. We took out
oppressive leaders in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, and Libya and then allowed them to be
replaced by continuing war, chaos, and corruption. Stop

Just over one year ago we were going to fight with ISIL against Syria’s Assad. I believe we
balked at allying ourselves with such extremists, and they are extremists. Even al Qaeda has
labeled them overly brutal. But, while they have executed thousands, Assad has targeted and
killed tens of thousands of civilians (2). As extreme as they are, they are not as extreme as
Assad. We should not be taking on the IS, freeing Assad to concentrate on more moderate
groups (3).

Most of Syria’s oil fields are in Eastern Syria. I submit one primary reason we are attacking the
IS and not Assad is that the IS now controls those fields.

There is no moderate Syrian force capable of pushing both the IS and Assad out of Syria. The
Free Syrian Army FSA is not a viable force. The Syrian National Coalition, the political arm of
the FSA, has almost no support in Syria. In October 2013 dozens of rebel groups broke with this
coalition (4). The addition of 5,000 well trained fighters to the FSA will not likely be the seed of
a future, effective force.
88
If we limited ourselves to the containment of the IS in Sunni Arab areas, only engaged them to
check their expansion into areas unfriendly to them, and left them in peace otherwise, they might
be willing to accept these limits and minimize acts of terror against us. We could then allow the
IS and Assad to expend themselves on each other.

Sunni Arabs in Iraq and Syria must bear the primary responsibility for determining how they are
to be governed in Sunni Arab areas. The IS in their areas is their responsibility.

Iraq
Iraq’s Sunni Arabs have not been allowed an effective voice in Baghdad for over a decade.
According to former Marine Josh Rushing with Al Jazeera most of the IS fighters in Iraq
are local Sunni Arabs (5). Iraqi Sunnis must determine if they want to be a part of a reformed
Iraq, the IS, or something else. The fate of Western Iraq belongs to these Sunnis not to Iraqi
Shiites, not to Iraqi Kurds, and certainly not to Americans.

As President Johnson said/inferred in his 1964 campaign, we should not send American boys to
fight a war Asian boys should fight. Replace Asian with Vietnamese, Kuwaiti, Afghani, or Iraqi
and the statement is still true. Stop
America should not deploy any major, ground combat units.

Syria
Syria’s Sunni Arabs must determine if they want to be a part of Syria, the IS, or something else.

President Obama has been criticized for not bombing Syria after the Assad government breached
his red line on the use of chemical weapons and for not earlier arming moderate Syrian rebels.
Obama established his red line in August 2012. In fact, most all of Syria’s chemical weapons
were eliminated without American bombing. And, Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia began
training and arming Syrian rebels in Istanbul in 2012. Unfortunately, much of that effort
eventually aided the IS. Obama was correct in refusing to do “stupid stuff” though the US, Saudi
Arabia, and Jordan began a different program to train and arm moderate rebels in 2013. (6)

Note - We trained and armed the Iraqi army yet an IS force of 1,000 was able to overwhelm an
Iraqi army force of 30,000 and take Mosul, Iraq (7). If there is no political solution, there will be
no lasting military solution in Iraq or Syria. Further, our defense industries were paid to arm Iraq
with weapons that now arm IS and will likely be paid to rearm Iraq. The world may be in chaos,
but there is one constant - war profits.

Al Qaeda Talk
They were our allies in 1980s Afghanistan and recently against the IS. The al Nusra Front is al
Qaeda’s primary affiliate in Syria. Al Qaeda and al Nusra broke with the IS in June 2013. On
02/23/2014 the IS assassinated Abu Khaled al-Suri, al Qaeda’s primary representative in Syria.
Recognize al Qaeda is more a multi-national militia than a terrorist organization with most of its
members militiamen not terrorists. They do not have to be our enemy on this front.

89
The Khorasan Group – I believe this fiction was created as an excuse to attack the al Nusra
Front. Our war plutocrats don’t want to be allied with al Qaeda against the IS and hope to bomb
them all into reconciliation.
“Within the (al Qaeda) organization members refer to the central command as Khorasan…”
(Source: Anatomy of Terror by Ali Soufan (Former FBI Interrogator) p.182)

Ahrar al Sham
We bombed its Bab al Hawa, Syria headquarters on 11/06/2014. It is part of the “Islamic Front”
coalition, supports theocracy over democracy in Syria, but does not fight for global Jihad. It is
not affiliated with al Qaeda though some of its leadership have had ties to al Qaeda. It has
cooperated with the al Nusra Front as have more moderate Syrian groups.

On 9/9/2014 its then leader Hassan Abboud and 27 others in the group’s leadership were killed
in a suicide bombing by the IS. In an interview with the BBC last June, Abboud condemned the
Islamic State: "Isis does not reflect Islam in any way. Islam is a religion of peace. It is not a
religion of slaughter. Isis represents the worst image ever of Islam." Abboud said his group
wanted a Syria in which women were able to drive and Christians, and even Assad's Alawite
sect, would be safe from harm. Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-27687018

Ahrar al Sham is not on the US list of terrorist organizations (8). It appears the current plan is to
kill everybody and let God sort them out. Except Assad (9)

Turkey
Turkey must recognize it is a pluralist state with a Turkish majority and an18% Kurdish
minority. These Kurds are not ethnic Turks, but they are Turkish nationals. Turkey has good
relations with Kurdish Iraqis, and there is no reason it could not also have good relations with
Kurdish Syrians and, most important, Kurdish Turks. Turkey needs to support Kurdish Turks’
language, culture, values, and loyalty to the Kurds of other nations - value and help all the people
of Kurdistan. Whether or not there is ever a state of Kurdistan, all Kurdish people should come
to value their ethnic Turk neighbors. The Ottomans, with exceptions, respected multiple cultures
within their domain. Their descendants need to do the same.

Kurdish Syria’s democratic workers party PYD is closely tied to Kurdish Turkey’s PKK, and the
PYD’s armed wing is now defending Kobani. These ties to the PKK are one reason Turkey has
been slow to aid Kobani, but if Kobani is allowed to fall to the IS, current peace talks between
Turkey and the PKK could end.

Gulf Monarchies
Demand they end their governments’ and citizens’ support for the military wings of terrorist
organizations including the Islamic State, al Qaeda, Hamas, Taliban, etc. They must end all
contributions to terrorists. Establish, if necessary, sanctions on the flow of Gulf oil until they
end the flow of funds to terrorists.

Israel/ Palestine
• End our support for greater Israel Zionists, for the blockade of Gaza, and for the occupation
of the West Bank.

90
• Condemn Israel’s collective punishment of Gaza civilians. Demand Israel produce the Intel
on all 17,000+ civilian homes which they believe made those homes legitimate military
targets. They were not.
• Cease all military aid gradually over five years or abruptly if Israel refuses to leave the West
Bank by 11/01/2016.
• Recognize Israel as the Jewish homeland and a pluralist state with a majority Jewish
population and a 20% minority Palestinian, primarily Muslim population.
• Recognize the State of Palestine. Support Palestine’s full membership in the UN.
• Talk with Hamas. Condemn Hamas as collaborators with unending terror rationalizing
unending occupation and blockade, rationalizing unending terror, rationalizing unending
occupation and blockade... Demand Hamas commit to and forever stop indiscriminate
shelling/ bombing.

Iran
• Establish relations with a new embassy in Iran. Formally apologize for our actions in 1953
and our support for Saddam Hussein in the Iraq Iran war.
• Unilaterally eliminate an American military option in pursuit of a nuclear free Iran.
• Support her right to unlimited centrifuges under intrusive supervision by the IAEA.

India
Demand a plebiscite in Kashmir. India cannot claim to be a democracy if she will not allow self-
determination in Kashmir.

Pakistan
• Demand it end its military support for the Afghan Taliban and Kashmiri terrorists.
• Cease all military aid gradually over five years or abruptly if Pakistan continues to support
these groups.

Afghanistan
We would stop losing wars if we only fought just wars.

Russia
Our leadership vilifies Putin with extreme hypocrisy. They still condemn Russia’s invasion of
Georgia but always fail to mention that Georgia first invaded South Ossetia (See Addendum).
Georgia was the aggressor just as America was the aggressor in the Iraq war. Last March
Russia’s Foreign Minister Lavrov claimed the Ukraine could not function as a unified state and
should federalize. Secretary of State Kerry responded about federalization, “It is up to the
Ukrainians” (unless of course they’re Crimean). We refused to recognize Crimea’s referendum.

Diplomacy requires us to see the other’s point of view. I submit the following combined to
threaten the future of Russia and its Black Sea fleet:
• NATO had moved ever eastward. Pro West Ukrainians had pursued ties and a future
membership with NATO.
• The West trained and armed Georgia before Georgia invaded South Ossetia in August 2008.
• In September 2008 Ukraine’s pro West, then Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko ruled out
Russia`s Black Sea fleet staying in the Ukraine after its lease ends in 2017 (10a).

91
• In April 2010 under pro Russia President Yanukovych, Russia’s naval base leases were
extended after encountering stiff opposition in Ukraine’s parliament and passing by only
52%. (10b)
• Ukraine’s pro Russia government was replaced by a pro West government without a popular
vote. On 2/22/2014 328 members of Ukraine’s Parliament voted to remove President
Yanukovych. (11)

It was not unreasonable for Putin to be concerned and to take actions to reduce future threats. I
concur a Crimean referendum should have preceded any Russian military action. But, I also
believe Putin would not have annexed the Crimea if its plebiscite had not supported Russian
annexation. He will not annex Donetsk and Luhansk unless most of their citizens support
Russian annexation.

NATO Expansion - The inclusion of former Warsaw Pact countries and Soviet Republics in
NATO will not make Europe safer. I submit a primary reason for their inclusion is to create
profits for Western defense industries from retooling Eastern Europe’s militaries. It’s about
money not security.

Eastern Ukraine Plebiscites

Russian and Ukrainian forces could work together in Eastern Ukraine to maintain order during a
UN plebiscite. All sides could make it clear they will comply with the results of this plebiscite.
I suspect Donetsk and Luhansk would vote to be autonomous republics but within Ukraine, not
in the Russian Federation given most of their people, though Russian speaking, identify as
Ukrainian (12). The plebiscites should be UN supervised to ensure all citizens’ freedom to
choose, ensure fairness, and to be acceptable to both the Ukraine and Russia.

I believe the Crimean plebiscite was legitimate given most of its people are Russian speaking
and identify as Russians. If there are legitimate questions as to its legitimacy, another UN
supervised plebiscite could be held. The same could be done in South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

I submit if 1938 Sudetenland had been allowed a plebiscite, it would have voted to join
Germany. After the annexation, Sudetenland had one of the highest concentrations of Nazi party
members in Germany (13). No democratic state could have legitimately condemned such a
union though some equitable adjustments may have been necessary to compensate
Czechoslovakia for its prior investments in Sudetenland. I submit the Munich Agreement with
equitable adjustments would have been acceptable, and diplomacy is most always preferable to
war. What was not acceptable was Hitler’s invasion of the rest of the Czech Republic six
months later. WWII in Europe began with this invasion on March 16th 1939 not on September
1st 1939.

Putin is not Hitler, and we need Russia as an ally to check China’s aggression.

China
Communist China has shown its belligerence from the invasion of Tibet in 1950 to its current
claim over 90% of the South China Sea. It is absurd that China has territorial disputes and/or

92
exclusive economic zone EEZ conflicts with Brunei, Malaysia, and Indonesia. Shouldn’t China
first conquer Vietnam and the Philippines?
• Talk, support the rule of law, and play a major diplomatic role.
• Support a military option to help Asian countries check China’s military expansion though
the primary responsibility remains with these countries. I submit any military actions should
be multilateral with the US in a minor supporting role. Don’t send American boys to fight a
war, Asian boys should fight.

Our war plutocrats

• Demand our Congressmen end their collaboration with these plutocrats.
• We may be corrupt beyond nonviolent redemption. Support a military option against these
plutocrats.

It is not ok to kill hundreds of thousands of foreigners to protect a few thousand Americans from
terrorists created by our killing hundreds of thousands of foreigners. Stop

93
Sources and Footnotes:
(1) The Pentagon’s 2001 Middle East war plans
Retired General Wesley Clark states there was an American foreign policy coup in 2001 calling
for military campaigns against seven countries in the Middle East. He thought it may have been
to enhance American control in the area. Sources:
http://library.fora.tv/2007/10/03/Wesley_Clark_A_Time_to_Lead/Wesley_Clark_on_America_s
_Foreign_Policy__Coup_ 10/3/2007 Commonwealth Club/ www.fora.tv

Winning Modern Wars by Wesley Clark (New York: Public Affairs, 2003), 130. In this book
Clark describes his conversation with a military officer in the Pentagon shortly after 9/11
regarding a plan to attack seven Middle Eastern countries in five years: "As I went back through
the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes,
we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being
discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven
countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and finishing off
Iran."

(2) I define “targeting” to include area bombing/ shelling where most of the casualties were
civilians. Sources:
09/27/2014 The Economist p.25 stated there had been 200,000 total deaths and 9.5M refugees in
the Syrian civil war. “One Syrian NGO reckons IS has killed 830 Syrian civilians, compared
with the regime’s 125,000.” (I suspect the NGO here is the Syrian Observatory for Human
Rights SOHR and the 125,000 includes the deaths of Syrian rebel forces. The Observatory’s
4/2014 report included those forces in their civilian death count. See below for corrected figures.
I still join with the Observatory to conclude Assad remains the greater evil with his use of area
bombing/ shelling, chemical weapons, barrel bombs, and torture to create a much higher civilian
body count than the IS.)

http://antiwar.com/blog/2014/04/16/most-reported-deaths-in-syria-have-not-been-committed-by-
assad-regime/
150,344 total casualties including 24,274 Syrian rebel forces’ deaths and 51,212 civilian deaths
34.1% reported by the SOHR.

06/27/2013 San Diego Union p. A8 “Congress balks at lethal aid to Rebels” from the AP. The
SOHR reported most of the 100,191 killed in Syria were combatants. 36,661 were civilians.

(3) http://www.voanews.com/content/syrian-regime-increases-airstrikes-in-rebel-
territory/2503654.html 10/31/2014 Voice of America VOA
U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Thursday that Assad seems to be taking advantage of
the American-led airstrikes against the Islamic State group, using the coalition’s air offensive as
an opportunity to increase his own air assaults on opponents.

Abu Muhammad, a moderate Islamist insurgent commander, told VOA the Syrian president
realigned his forces once the coalition airstrikes began — shifting some troops from eastern
Syria to reinforce his offensive against moderate and Islamist rebels in the key city of Aleppo,
and to strengthen his defense of the town of Idlib, to the west.

94
In an assessment last week for a Washington-based think tank, the Center for Strategic and
International Studies, security analyst Anthony Cordesman warned: “The Assad forces are
using the U.S. and allied campaign against the Islamic State to make a massive step-up in
air attacks on other rebels.”

(4) 10/17/2013 San Diego Union p. A9 “Rebels break from Syrian Opposition” from the AP

(5) http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2014/09/19/reporter-trip-rushing

(6) 10/04/2014 San Diego Union p. B8, “Syria’s Proxy War” by David Ignatius from the
Washington Post

(7) 06/21/2014 The Economist p.47 “Why Iraq’s army crumbled”

(8) 11/7/2014 San Diego Union p. A4 “US Airstrikes target al-Qaeda affiliate (al Nusra) in
Syria” from The Washington Post.

(9) 11/15/2014 The Economist p.50 The war in Syria - “America’s decision to hit jihadist
groups other than IS has further splintered the fractious rebels. Some have defected to extremist
groups… convinced that America’s coalition is in effect an ally of Mr. Assad’s. Revelations that
President Barack Obama promised not to attack the Assad regime in a secret letter to
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei… have deepened such Sunni fears.”

I could not confirm this promise from another source, but promise or not, the Coalition has not
attacked Assad’s forces.

(10) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kharkiv_Pact
(10a) with original source http://www.unian.net/eng/news/news-274818.html

(10b) with additional source - Parliamentary chaos as Ukraine ratifies fleet deal, World (UK:
BBC), 27 April 2010

(11) Pro Russia President Viktor Yanukovych was overthrown because he is alleged to have
ordered the 2/20/2014 Black Thursday shooting of sixty protesters at Maidan Square yet he has
not been pursued by the international community for crimes against humanity.

Gennady Moskal, head of a Ukrainian parliamentary commission investigating the shootings,

said the bullets found did not match firearms issued to the special anti-riot police unit Berkut
which unlike most police units are allowed to carry lethal weapons. Mr. Moskal said there was
no forensic evidence linking the mass killings in Kiev on 2/20/2014 to the Berkut.

Estonia’s Foreign Minister Urmas Paet told the EU’s Catherine Ashton, “There is a stronger and
stronger understanding that behind the snipers – it was not Yanukovych, it was somebody from
the new coalition… they were the same snipers killing people from both sides.” Police and

95
protestors were killed “by the same kind of bullets.” Mr. Paet confirmed the accuracy of the
recorded statements.
Source/broken link for reference:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sponsored/rbth/politics/10857920/ukraine-murder-
maidan.html
See additional and some conflicting information at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euromaidan#Investigation_into_shooters.2Fsnipers

Nine Berkut unit officers were arrested, and the unit disbanded though additional special police
and/or military units were alleged to be involved - units such as the SBU’s Alpha Unit and the
Russian FSB. Why would pro government forces shoot their own police? If it was to provoke a
crackdown, why lose sympathy by killing so many protesters? Why hasn’t Yanukovych been
indicted?

(12) Polls suggest 2/3rds of people in the south and east want to stay part of Ukraine and not be
annexed by Russia per 04/26/2014 The Economist p.50. See the Public opinion section of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donbass_status_referendums,_2014#Question

Referendums were held in rebel areas of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts on 05/11/2014 where
voters are alleged to have overwhelmingly approved declarations of independence for the two
republics.

(13) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudetenland#Sudetenland_as_part_of_Nazi_Germany with

original source Zimmermann, Volker: Die Sudetendeutschen im NS-Staat. Politik und Stimmung
der Bevölkerung im Reichsgau Sudetenland (1938-1945). Essen 1999. (ISBN 3-88474-770-3)

96
9.1.1 2008 Georgia Russia War
/ Plebiscites / Secession

Sack the Sacks: Saakashvili and Bush 2008 08 23

We need to terminate the presidencies of aggressors such as Georgian President Saakashvili and
President Bush.

On August 7th Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili (aka Sackash*ti) said he planned to offer
South Ossetia “unlimited autonomy” within the Georgian state, with Russia to be a guarantor of
the arrangement. Both sides said they were in discussions. Later in the day, however, the Saak
ordered a massive artillery attack on Tskhinvali followed the next day by a ground assault. (1)

Zbigniew Brzezinski postulates that “Moscow was waiting for such an act to provide a pretext
for the use of force.” (2) Even if this were true, the Saak didn’t have to provide the pretext. I
suspect there has been manipulation on all sides. Given the close relationship between America
and Georgia, I see the possibility the Administration was fully aware of and fully supported
Saak’s plans. The Administration claims to have been blindsided but instead of criticizing
Saak’s brash actions, they were instantly gushing with support.

Mr. Bush (our sack) continually emphasizes that Saak was democratically elected and paints
Georgia as the offended party. Saak was the aggressor and should be condemned as such. Bush
doesn’t recognize this aggression just as he doesn’t recognize his own aggression in Iraq.

Why do Bush and Saak recognize Georgian democracy and not South Ossetia’s democracy?
South Ossetia has been a de-facto independent, autonomous region for sixteen years. In a 2006
referendum South Ossetians voted overwhelmingly for independence (3). Russia, of course,
suffers similar hypocrisy in recognizing the right of secession in Abkhazia and South Ossetia but
not in Kosovo and Chechnya.

How are South Ossetia and Russia to deter future aggression if not by punitive strikes? I would
prefer they struck only military targets, but they are within their rights to punish Georgia.

Georgia, as an aggressor nation, should not be allowed to join NATO. If our sack unilaterally
attacks Iran, America should be thrown out of NATO. Democracy is not always synonymous
with truth and justice; there are just too many sacks in the world.

Sources:
(1) 8/15/2008 San Diego Union Tribune p. B7, “Leaders Err on Ossetia and Georgia” by
Thomas de Waal with the Institute of War and Peace.
(2) 8/14/2008 Time.com “Staring Down the Russians” by Zbigniew Brzezinski.
(3) 8/12/2008 Christian Science Monitor “Roots of Georgia-Russia clash run deep” by Fred
Weird, Paul Rimple, and John Wendle.

97
10/14/2009 Update –
An independent inquiry ordered by the EU concluded Georgia violated international law and
triggered last year’s war with Russia by attacking South Ossetia. The report also found that
Russia’s invasion of Georgia after the attack was illegal and unjustified, and that Ossetian
militias conducted ethnic cleansing of Georgian villages. (1)

I supported Russia’s punitive military actions against Georgia proper as I saw them deterring
future aggression. It appears, contrary to the EU inquiry, Russia didn’t go far enough. Until the
recent intervention by the Russian coast guard, US supplied, Georgian gun boats had been
blockading Abkhazian ports (2).

My opponents refused to call Georgia’s actions aggression because they interpreted the
breakaway republics as the sovereign territory of Georgia disregarding the years of their
independence and the wishes of their people. My opponents cannot claim to support self-
determination and democracy and still stand in support of forced union and stand against
the right of secession.

After 144 years, Americans still haven’t learned the lessons of our civil war. 300,000
Confederate soldiers apparently died for nothing. It is true, they died in defense of slavery their
unjust cause, but they also died in defense of the right of secession their just cause. I support the
Confederate battle flag as our strongest American symbol of this right. I will only display it,
however, in the presence of the black liberation flag or in the colors of the black liberation flag.
Those two flags represent the just causes of the civil war, the causes that made the civil war the
tragedy it was. A greater tragedy, however, is that half of today’s Americans are mired in
cowardice and willful ignorance, unwilling to discern the truth.

Sources:
(1) 10/1/2009 San Diego Union Tribune p. A8 “Georgia, Russia faulted in war report”
(2) 10/5/2009 Newsweek p.10 “Russia is spoiling for another fight” by Owen Matthews and
Anna Nemtsova

98
9.2 Solutions – IRV Majority Rule Democracy 2003
2003 08 04
Free America with IRV instant runoff voting.

America is not a democracy in that we do not have majority rule. Americans who vote for third
parties, or even third candidates, are disenfranchised. Our national leaders may be elected by
mere pluralities (1) in both primary and general elections, resulting in compounded injustice.
Plurality rule is the basis for the two-party system where third parties and third candidates have
almost no chance. Our choices are fundamentally limited. We cannot vote for our best choice
without throwing away our vote unless our candidate is one of the two frontrunners in one of the
two main parties.

The two-party system facilitates corruption. Special interests need only contribute to the
campaigns of the two frontrunners to cover their bets. Further, I suspect money alone can create
a frontrunner. Although campaign financing reform is necessary, it is not as fundamental as
majority rule, and majority rule may preclude the need for those reforms that could overreach
and threaten free speech.

I submit if we opened up the electoral process, more Americans would register and vote as they
would know their votes count. Americans may be apathetic, but that is not the basic problem.
The basic problem is the limitations of plurality rule.

Only 51.3% of the voting age population voted in the last presidential election. Gore won the
popular vote with a plurality of 48.4% against Bush with 47.9% and Nader with 2.7%. Bush
won the electoral vote by only 5 votes, receiving 271 against Gore’s 266. If we had runoff
elections, most all of Nader’s supporters would have voted for Gore giving him a clear majority
and almost certainly the presidency even with the electoral college. (2)

Americans need real political power to effect change. Even mass movements are marginalized
in a corrupt system. Majority rule isn’t a cure-all, but it is a major step in the right direction. By
simply providing run-off elections we can create majority rule, create a multi-party system,
enfranchise third party voters, and enfranchise third candidate voters.

It appears we can implement majority rule with changes in state and/or federal law. We do not
need to amend the Constitution. Under the U.S. Constitution, state legislatures have the primary
responsibility to set the manner of holding both presidential and congressional elections.
Alternately, Congress may alter the manner of holding congressional elections. (3)

Fight for true democracy here in America. Add majority rule to your list of political causes.
Changing our voting process may be the only way to bring about many other political changes.
Instant runoff voting is already a plank in the Green party platform. Insist your party and your
candidates support majority rule. In California, if our legislators won’t support majority rule, we
may be able to use an initiative. Register and vote for majority rule.

2017 We need majority rule/ four round voting or ranked choice/ two round voting.

99
Ranked choice voting is instant runoff voting and should be used in both primary and general
elections. Parties should be able to vet their candidates in primaries before running them in
general elections.
Majority rule/ four round voting would require runoffs in the primary and general elections.
Majority rule/ two round voting is even more restricted than plurality rule.

Majority rule/ four round voting would reduce extremism. Majority rule in primaries would
require candidates to appeal to the majority of their party reducing extremism within a party.
Majority rule in generals would also reduce extremism as candidates must appeal to a majority
of all voters.

If we required open primaries, all independent voters would be able to participate in the
primaries. Voters should only be able to vote in one party primary for all offices which would
minimize dishonest manipulation as they would lose the ability to vote for candidates in other
parties.

Sources and Footnotes:

(1) Plurality (from Webster’s 9th new collegiate dictionary definition 3c) - a number of votes
cast for a candidate in a contest of more than two candidates that is greater than the number cast
for any other candidate but not more than half the total votes cast.

(2) Source - http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0876793.html

(3) U.S. Constitution Article I Section 4 (1) [Control of congressional elections] - The times,
places, and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in
each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter
such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators.

U.S. Constitution Article II Section 1 (2) [Appointment and qualifications of presidential

electors] – Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a
number of electors…

(4) See a tutorial on instant runoff voting (IRV) at http://www.chrisgates.net/irv/

See the following website for information on proportional representation:

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/polit/damy/prlib.htm

Strategies
Any change in the two-party system will be impossible without the acquiescence of one or both
of the main parties. We must make changes from within these parties, recognizing these parties’
power structures have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. They will have to give lip
service to this cause but will likely take little action, or worse, sabotage our efforts.

100
The Democratic party could enhance its membership and power by enlisting third party members
with promises to introduce legislation for instant runoff voting (IRV). The same can be said of
individual democratic candidates. The party and Democratic candidates should support IRV as it
will allow liberal, third party members to vote in runoff elections for Democrats.

Third party members (TPM’s) could register as Democrats and vote in primaries for Democratic
peace candidates that, at a minimum, support instant runoffs. In California, TPM’s need only
register as independents to vote in the democratic primary. TPM’s could help make the
Democratic party the peace party, or at least the Just-war party. Should a peace candidate not
win the Democratic primary, TPM’s could still cast a protest vote for a third party candidate.

A protest vote similar to the last presidential election would make it clear to the Democratic
leadership; the party must change, support IRV, or it will continue to lose elections.

In the Democratic presidential primary, a candidate who receives less than 15% of the vote will
be denied delegates. The number of delegates he would have received will be distributed
proportionally among the remaining candidates including unjust war Democrats. Should your
preferred candidate have less than 15% of the polls before the election, consider voting for your
alternate. This system is archaic and undemocratic but until we change it, we must optimize the
effectiveness of our votes with a full understanding of the system.

In state level voting, vote for Democrats who commit to introducing majority rule legislation,
and don’t vote for those who won’t so commit.

A close partnership between Democrats and third parties would be mutually beneficial, and in
fact, beneficial to the nation.

Recommendations for the Kucinich Campaign:

I recommend Kucinich commit to introducing federal legislation requiring all states use instant
runoff voting (IRV) in congressional elections. Such support should win him the votes of third
party members and possibly third party endorsements.

I think it’s healthy for third parties to run candidates for President and to use those candidacies to
sell their platforms, but ask those candidates to endorse Kucinich in the general elections in
return for the commitment to IRV.

Questions and Issues:

We need constitutional lawyers to tell us exactly what state and federal laws have to be changed.
We should work to change CA law with regard to both state and federal elections
State legislatures are empowered under the U.S. Constitution to set the manner of federal
elections. Would a CA IRV initiative be legal under the U.S. Constitution? Even if an initiative
is not effective for federal elections, it can bring IRV to state elections. Why not begin a CA
initiative process immediately?
The Green party already has an IRV plank. Would they be willing to lead the way with the help
of different party members and the peace movement?

101
9.3 Summary of Solutions 2012
2012 02 10+

We often criticize without offering solutions. The following is a summary of our significant
problems, with an emphasis on our unjust wars, and a summary of actions which could help us
solve these problems and reestablish American democracy.

The Problems:
• Force recognition that our America is corrupt. Speak up.
• Recognize the primary problem – Most Americans are willingly ignorant cowards unwilling
to face awful truths. Leaven the truth with compassion for their pain but speak the truth
• Force recognition of the Lies – the Tonkin Gulf incidents, 9/11, the war on terror, Iraq’s
WMD, Iran’s nuclear threat, etc. Speak up.
• Force recognition that America’s existential enemies are a segment of our plutocrats. They
are the flesh and blood persons who own and control the artificial persons of corporate
America. They are primarily domestic not foreign. Foreign terrorists pose no existential
threat to America. Speak.

The Solutions:
• Majority Rule democracy such as IRV instant runoff voting with multiple candidates and
parties – End the too easily corrupted, two-party duopoly which results from our plurality
rule system. In addition: Competitive political districts would motivate our representatives
to listen to us. End gerrymandering. Voters’ political affiliation should not be considered.
As much as possible, all residents of a small city or a large neighborhood in a large city
should share the same political districts in most levels of government. See Section 9.2.
• Stop playing monopoly. Free competition capitalism should replace the current system of
corrupt, monopoly capitalism. Competition will enable markets to self-regulate and thereby
minimize the need for other, more intrusive regulation.
• Re Regulation to reestablish honesty in our financial markets. This can only happen with
reasonable government intervention. Reestablish Glass Steagall to end conflicts of interest.
• Stand up to the corruption in our individual lives and workplaces.
• Raise the minimum wage to between 40% and 45% of the national average hourly wage and
thereby reduce the need for the social welfare safety net.
• Raise taxes at all levels of government to, at least, meet minimal public needs including debt
reduction. There is a place in our individual self-interests for the public good.
• Join a militia. Rough justice may be the only justice available to us mere plebes and to
citizens of other countries aggressor Americans may wish to attack. Next war, civil war.

If Americans are willing to allow our corruption to continue, so be it, unless that corruption leads
to another unjust war. War in the nuclear age is potentially suicidal. Unjust war in any age is an
abomination. Can we not now at least end America’s unjust wars?

This plan is not a mere fight for American ideals like truth, justice, freedom, and democracy.
This is a fight for the preservation of the species, the planet, and our humanity.

102
Cali-fornication

The Problems – California and other states have created systems that make them ungovernable.
California’s initiative process has hamstrung our legislators. Most of our budget is now beyond
legislative control. Term limits give us new blood but throw away experienced legislators.
Proposition 13 requires all state tax increases be passed by a 2/3 rd vote of the legislature and
most local tax increases be passed by a 2/3rd vote of the public. An amendment to the California
constitution only requires a majority vote of the public. Redevelopment funds replaced much of
normal capital budgets partly because they didn’t require public votes.

California’s chaos is so extreme as to make me think it is more due to intelligent design than to
natural evolution. Things don’t get this messed up by mere accident. All voters, including
myself, must bear responsibility, but I submit our plutocrats with the abuse of their power bear
extraordinary responsibility. This dysfunction has been to their benefit. Redevelopment funds
became a source for their corporate welfare. Our plutocrats get their man in with a mere
plurality of the vote in a gerrymandered district and then it takes a super majority of the
legislature to increase their taxes, while the state goes straight to hell.

The Solutions – Californians should adopt the solutions noted above. Further: End term limits
the loss of which can be offset by the enhanced power of voters in competitive districts with
majority rule. Eliminate most all budget restrictions to allow the legislature to effectively govern
us. Allow taxes to be increased by a simple majority of our legislators.

Conclusion
I believe it’s hopeless, but we’re not dead yet. Let’s work together to create an
alternate ending.

The End of Volume I

103
Supplement – Political Zionism
A Century of Racist, Zealot Dogma 2017 02 27

09/30/2016 Cover Letter

Ladies and Gentlemen:

The following is a rebuke of political Zionism - the movement to establish a Jewish nation/state
of Israel. I submit Zionist leaders pushed America to war in WWI and in Iraq. I submit if we
wish to end our perpetual war, we must end Israel’s undue influence on American politics
beginning with a complete cessation of military aid.

I believe most Jews are political Zionists, and I understand their affinity for the state of Israel and
the retention of Jerusalem as its capital. I am a mere Irish American and support a greater
Ireland – the Unity of the island under the Republic of Ireland. There are, however, other
positions I value more than Unity such as truth and justice, self-determination and democracy,
majority rule with minority rights, and peace. I value all of these more than Unity and in the
order they are listed. I ask Jews with a similar dream of a greater Israel to subordinate their
dream to these other values. Support a future, greater Israel brought about by just means or not
at all.

This is a Work in Progress. See the latest version of this article at:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByIC4F1Uo9zwSGJ4cXNVb2IyTmM/view?usp=sharing
Excerpts of books and articles in the footnotes are an intricate part of this paper. Send me your
thoughts and/or corrections to [email protected] Subject: Zionism.

Note: I strongly recommend Mulhall’s book “America and the Founding of Israel.” Regardless
of where you stand on this issue, this book will inform you.

Sincerely, John F Scanlon San Diego CA

104
Political Zionism: A Century of Racist, Zealot Dogma
with aggression, conquest, ethnic cleansing, collective punishment, and perpetual war.

Opinions/ Thoughts

I submit most Zionist leaders, from those who created modern Israel to their descendant Zionists
who now control Israel, were/are ungodly men as evidenced by the means they have used to
accomplish their ends. The Zionism of the last hundred years was/is not sanctioned by God.
The current government of Israel is not sanctioned by God. Greater Zionism, as it has been and
is being implemented, is contrary to Jewish ethics, Christian ethics, and American ideals.

Zionism and Jewish immigration to Palestine began in the 19 th century, but according to Ottoman
statistics studied by Justin McCarthy, by WWI (1914) the population of Palestine was 800,000
including just 60,000 Jews.

Balfour Declaration 11/2/1917 And the Palestine Mandate 9/29/1923

The British, in the McMahon-Hussein Correspondence, had promised Ottoman Arabia to the
Arabs in return for their military alliance in WWI. Yet in contravention of this commitment,
they promised the French modern Syria and Lebanon, and promised the Zionists “a national
home for the Jewish people” in Palestine. The commitment to Zionists was not an empty
promise as was the commitment to the Arabs. The Balfour Declaration was backed up by the
creation of the British administered Mandatory Palestine sans Transjordan. Further, the
administration of the Mandate was biased for Jews and against Arabs as shown in the “Palestine
Papers” by Doreen Ingrams, and “Balfour and Palestine” by Anthony Nutting. (See footnotes
below for WWI and the Interwar Years.)

The British would not have taken such significant actions for the benefit of Zionists without
equally significant actions on the part of Zionists. I submit Zionist leaders promised to bring
America into WWI, and their efforts were significant in making that happen. I submit the
British believed this extreme statement, or they would not have taken the actions they took.

WWI - By the end of 1916, Britain and France had conquered all of Germany’s colonies except
German East Africa, but the Western Front in Europe was at a stalemate after the catastrophic
battles of Verdun and the Somme. On 12/12/1916, the Germans offered peace negotiations. On
12/18/1916, US President Wilson asked the belligerents to state their concrete war aims and the
conditions they would require to make peace. Britain, through Prime Minister Lloyd George,
demanded the full fruits of victory with “complete restitution, full reparation, and effectual
guarantee (against repetition).” The British were not ready for peace as they had additional war
aims.

The entry of the US into the war freed Britain to divert more resources to conquering the
Ottoman Empire. Britain began her conquest of Palestine with the 3/26/1917 attack on Gaza just
eleven days before the US declared war on Germany on 4/6/1917. I submit America entered the
war not to fight for Wilson’s 14 Points and self-determination but to fight for the further
expansions of the British and French empires.

105
If Zionist leaders worked to bring America into the war, they helped extend the war with all its
horrors by a year and half to advance their dogma.

The Palestine Mandate sans Transjordan closely fit the borders for a Palestine protectorate
defined by the Zionist contingent at Versailles and Ezekiel chapter 47. The East bank of the
Jordan, however, went to Transjordan. The remaining Mandate combined the Ottomans’
southern portion of the Beirut Vilayet, the southwestern portion of the Syria Vilayet, and the
Jerusalem Governorate. I submit Zionists defined the borders of modern Palestine and created
the modern, Palestinian Arab identity.

Interwar Years - I submit Germans joined the British in believing Zionists brought America into
the war as evidenced by virulent anti-Semitism following the war. This perceived treachery
would sow the seeds of destruction for 40% of the world’s Jews.

WWII – By December 1942 the Allies knew of the Nazi extermination plans, the death camps,
and that two million Jews had already been killed. Yet they refused to undertake large scale
rescue actions claiming such would hamper the war effort. Numerous reasons were given:
There was nowhere to take them. There were not enough ships. They could be infiltrated and/or
manipulated by Nazi spies. Hitler might actually comply with requests to free Jews burdening
the allies with millions of refugees (as though this would be a bad thing). Note: America wasn’t
willing to rescue Jews but was willing and had the resources to provide transport, feed, clothe,
and shelter nearly 425,000 German POWs inside the United States (Wyman p.338, NY Times).

No large scale rescue action took place. This position was ludicrous given Hitler’s willingness
to continue the Final Solution even while he was losing the war.

It appears the Jewish Agency for Palestine colluded with the allies to do nothing. Nothing
was done to take advantage of the 12/1942 Romanian proposal to free 72,000 Jews, or the 5/1944
Eichmann proposal to free one million Jews. (See footnotes below for WWII.)

Early in 1943 mainstream American Jewish organizations issued statements and held mass
demonstrations in support of rescue action. They then effectively acquiesced to the Allies’
position. Though they continued to issue statements, they refused to aggressively lobby
President Roosevelt and Congress for large scale rescue actions and the bombing of Holocaust
infrastructure.

In 10/1943 the American Zionist Emergency Council AZEC successfully lobbied against the
British 1939 White Paper (WP). On 11/10/1943 the British announced they would disregard the
WP’s scheduled 3/31/1944 end of Jewish immigration to Palestine until the remaining 31,000
quota places had been filled. In the summer of 1944, Zionist leaders persuaded Republicans and
Democrats alike to adopt platform planks calling for unrestricted Jewish immigration to Palestine
and the establishment of a Jewish commonwealth there. In the presidential campaign of 1944
both Roosevelt and Republican candidate Dewey pledged support for a Jewish commonwealth in
Palestine. In 12/1945 both houses of Congress overwhelmingly passed the Palestine resolution
calling for the establishment of a Jewish commonwealth. During the war American Jewish

106
organizations successfully lobbied for a Jewish commonwealth, but they made no such effort
for large scale rescue. (Wyman, pages 172-174)

They did lobby against such efforts by the Bergson Group.

I submit Zionists wanted to use the Holocaust to create world opinion in favor of a Jewish state.
The Holocaust was the ultimate proof that Jews could not be assimilated and required a state of
their own. I submit Zionist leaders were willing to sacrifice Europe’s unimportant Jews in
pursuit of their dogma.

Exceptions - Revisionist Zionists Peter Bergson et al. lobbied the Roosevelt administration to
rescue Europe’s Jews. The Bergson Group was marginally successful in spite of opposition by
mainstream American Jewish organizations. The U.S. Labor Zionist movement, in August 1944,
published an editorial calling for “Allied bombings of the death camps and the roads leading to
them…” According to a report by the David S Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, this was
the only time “an official organ of an American Jewish organization publicly calling for bombing
the camps.”

A related tangent - I submit the Allies did not bomb the death camps as the camps took attention
away from our terror bombing of German and Japanese cities. Zyklon B took attention away
from our preferred gas - gasoline based napalm. The Nazis mercifully killed their victims before
burning their bodies in the ovens; we simply burned them alive.

See footnotes below for WWII.

American Zionists injured their own cause by not diligently pursuing the destruction of
Holocaust infrastructure, the large scale rescue of European Jews, and the immigration of
European Jews everywhere, including but not limited to Palestine. Zionists would lose six
million Jews and all their descendants as possible immigrants to Palestine.

1948 1967 - I submit, aside from lebensraum, another purpose for not allowing the return of
Palestinians in 1948 and 1967 was to spur Arab countries to push their Jews out of their
countries and thereby increase the Jewish population of Israel.

The 1982 Oded Yinon Plan called for Israel to pursue the balkanization of the Middle East. The
plan may never have received official sanction, but it was/is being executed. Neo con Zionists
implemented Paragraph 23 with the 2003 American invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Gaza War, Summer 2014 - 17,000 Palestinian homes were destroyed with 7,000 razed and
10,000 severely affected by bombing. An additional 79,000 homes were less damaged. (UN
estimates) The IDF dropped leaflets, knocked on the roofs, and took other extraordinary efforts
to get civilians out of these homes before they were attacked. Those actions were commendable;
however, the idea that most of the 17,000 homes were legitimate military targets is nonsense.
Perhaps thousands were legitimate targets. I can’t prove this statement, but I submit the IDF will
never share the Intel proving these homes were legitimate targets because no such evidence
exists. By their own estimates the IDF killed 761 civilians, while Hamas terrorists only killed six

107
civilians. I submit this was another example of Israel’s collective punishment and
disproportionate, extreme measures.

9/30/2016 I do support a Jewish home in Palestine, but I will no longer say I am a Zionist. I
have not and do not recognize the right of the State of Israel to exist. Israelis have abrogated
their right to self-determination by denying Palestinians their right to self-determination.

Zionist leaders sacrificed the world, including its Jews, in pursuit of their zealot dogma.
Next year, Justice in Jerusalem. Eadala/ Justice

Recommendations:
Greater Zionism v. Lesser Zionism
Lesser Zionism - Redefine Zionism/ Post-Zionism as a movement to maintain a Jewish
cultural/spiritual home in a bi national, democratic state governed by majority rule with minority
rights regardless of whether it has a Jewish or Arab majority.

• Recognize Palestinians’ right to self-determination.

• Recognize the State of Palestine.
• Recognize Palestinian refugees of 1948 and 1967 and their descendants have a right of return
and/or compensation.
• Recognize the right of Palestine to defend itself.
Demand Hamas and Hezbollah cease their collaboration with greater Zionists in their
terrorist targeting of civilians - target the IDF and armed settlers in the occupied territories,
the IDF blockading the Gaza, greater Zionist political leaders, and Israel’s war plutocrats.
Give perpetual war to those most responsible for this perpetual war.
• Cease all military aid to Israel. This aid supports far more than Israel’s defense; it supports
her conquest of Palestine.
• Recognize Israel as a Jewish cultural/spiritual home and a bi national state. Palestinians
make up 25% of Israel proper and an overwhelming majority in the Occupied and Besieged
Territories.
Demand all Arabs in Israeli controlled areas be given the right to vote in all levels of Israeli
elections. Israeli controlled areas include the Besieged Territories. Citizens of the State of
Palestine living in Israeli controlled areas would have dual citizenship as they would have
voting rights in Israel for as long as they live in Israeli controlled areas.

108
Primary Bibliography

Ernst, Morris L So Far So Good

Published by Harper New York 1948

Hecht, Ben Perfidy

Published by Julian Messner Inc. New York 1961
(Mr. Hecht bases much of this work on the Hebrew court records of the Kastner Trial.
Page numbers cited for this book are from an online version with rebuttals at:
http://www.vho.org/aaargh/fran/livres6/perfidy.pdf )

Landman, Samuel M.A. Great Britain, The Jews, and Palestine

Published in the New Zionist Press (London) March 1936.
See a transcript of this article at: http://desip.igc.org/1939sLandman.htm

Lilienthal, Alfred M. What Price Israel

Published by Henry Regnery Company Chicago 1953

Medoff, Rafael The Deafening Silence

Published by Shapolsky Publishers New York 1987

Mulhall, John W CSP America and the Founding of Israel

Deshon Press, Los Angeles 1995 Paperback

Wyman, David S Abandonment of the Jews: America and the Holocaust 1941-1945
Published by Pantheon Books New York 1984

Yale, William The Near East: A Modern History

University of Michigan Press 1968 pages 266-270 This book was a part of the series:
The University of Michigan History of the Modern World.
(Yale recognized a British Zionist agreement at the end of 1916, asserted James A
Malcolm’s part in this endeavor, and cited Samuel Landman’s 1936 recognition of this
agreement. This Academic’s recognition of these facts and sources gave them the
credibility necessary for me to use them in this white paper.)

109
Sources and Footnotes with Excerpts
In Chronological Order - WWI, Interwar Years, and WWII including an Addendum –
The Hungarian Jews 1944

WWI
Great Britain, The Jews, and Palestine by Samuel Landman, M.A.
Published in the New Zionist Press (London) March 1936
See a transcript of this article at: http://desip.igc.org/1939sLandman.htm
Landman was the Secretary of the Joint Zionist Council of the UK in 1912, Joint Editor of the
Zionist in 1913-1914. From 1917-1922 he was Solicitor and Secretary to the Zionist
organization. He was Legal Adviser to the New Zionist Organization at this writing in 1936.

(Anti-Semitism in Germany and Poland created a great influx of Jews to Palestine with 134,000
emigrating from 1933-35. This influx created great difficulties for the British administration in
Palestine. The purpose of Landman’s paper was to remind the British of their obligations under
the 1916 “Gentleman’s” Agreement and the 1917 Balfour Declaration.)

Paragraph 5 - “Mr. James A. Malcolm… knew that Mr. Woodrow Wilson, for good and
sufficient reasons, always attached the greatest possible importance to the advice of a very
prominent Zionist (Mr. Justice Brandeis, of the U.S. Supreme Court); and was in close touch
with Mr. Greenberg, Editor of the Jewish Chronicle (London);… and realized the depth and
strength of Jewish national aspirations;…
spontaneously took the initiative, to convince first of all Sir Mark Sykes, Under Secretary of the
War Cabinet, and afterwards Monsieur Georges Picot, of the French Embassy in London… that
the best and perhaps only way (which proved to be true) to induce the American President
to come into (the) war was to secure the co-operation of Zionist Jews by promising them
Palestine, and thus enlist and mobilize the hitherto unsuspectedly powerful forces of Zionist
Jews in America and elsewhere in favour of the Allies on a Quid pro quo contract basis. Thus,
as will be seen, the Zionists, having carried out their part, and greatly helped to bring America in,
the Balfour Declaration of 1917 was but the public confirmation of the necessarily secret
“gentleman’s” agreement of 1916…”

Paragraph 7 – “An interesting account of the negotiations carried on in London and Paris, and
subsequent developments, has already appeared in the Jewish press and need not be repeated
here in detail, except to recall that immediately after the “gentleman’s” agreement between Mark
Sykes, authorized by the War Cabinet, and the Zionist leaders, …cable facilities were given to
the latter to communicate the glad tidings to their friends and organizations in America and
elsewhere, and the change in official and public opinion as reflected in the American press
in favor of joining the Allies in the War, was as gratifying as it was rapid.”

Paragraph 9 – “…The fact that it was Jewish help that brought (the) U.S.A. into the War on the
side of the Allies has rankled ever since in German – especially Nazi – minds, and has
contributed in no small measure to the prominence which anti-Semitism occupies in the Nazi
programme.” End

110
In 1937 Lloyd George told the Palestine Royal (Peel) Commission:
“Zionist leaders gave us a definite promise that, if the Allies committed themselves to giving
facilities for the establishment of a national home for the Jews in Palestine, they would do their
best to rally Jewish sentiment and support throughout the world to the Allied cause. They kept
their word.”
Source: 1937 Palestine Royal (Peel) Commission Report page 17 as quoted in Mulhall p.62.

In July 1937 Churchill speaking of the Balfour Declaration in the House of Commons, said:
“It is a delusion to suppose this was a mere act of crusading enthusiasm or quixotic philanthropy.
On the contrary, it was a measure taken… in due need of the war with the object of promoting
the general victory of the Allies, for which we expected and received valuable and important
assistance.”
Source: Parliamentary Debates, House of Commons, Vol. 326, col. 2330 as quoted in Lilienthal
p.22.

Medoff p.82
…in the 1930s, the American Jewish Committee had refused to help sponsor a US speaking tour
for Winston Churchill because, Morris Waldman wrote in his memoirs, “we feared that his
appearance in the United States on such a mission” might be interpreted as part of some Jewish-
British plot to involve the United States in the European mess.” (5)

These fears were still apparent in the 1940s. During his 1940 tour of the United States,
Jabotinsky (leader of the Revisionist Zionists) reported to friends that “the Jews are still shy of
saying any decisive word lest they be charged with warmongering…. I have never seen
American Jewry so scared of local anti-Semites as they are now.” (6) Jabotinsky was not alone
in this assessment. Labor Zionist leader David Ben-Gurion, who visited the United States in
October of that year, recalled a conversation he had with one Jewish leader:
He agreed with all I said, but argued that he could do nothing in public, since he might injure the
Jews of America. I asked him “Which are you first, a Jew or an American? He replied, “…We
are a minority here. If I stand up and demand American aid for Britain, people will say
after the war the dirty Jews got us into it, that it was a Jewish war, that it was for their sakes
that our sons died in battle.” This fear I found in almost all Zionist circles. (7)

(5) Morris Waldman, Nor by Power (New York: International Universities Press, 1953), pages
67-68.
(6) Robert Silverberg, If I forget Thee O Jerusalem: American Jews and the State of Israel (New
York: William Morrow, 1970), p.183
(7) Ibid, pages 184-185 End

(Thoughts: I submit these American Jews had good reason to be concerned given they knew of
the Zionists’ part in getting America into WWI.)

111
Interwar Years
Balfour and Palestine: A legacy of deceit By Sir Anthony Nutting
http://www.balfourproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Nutting-Balfour-and-Palestine.pdf

(Anthony Nutting resigned from Anthony Eden’s cabinet when he found Eden was going into
Suez (1956). Writing around 1975, he reflects on Doreen Ingram's book “The Palestine Papers:
1917-1922: Seeds of Conflict”. The papers in this book made clear that during and after the First
World War British Government ministers and officials had intentionally rather than accidentally
laid the groundwork for a Jewish state in Palestine, while deliberately keeping this from the
Arabs. With a brief glance at the history since, Nutting acknowledges the impossibility of
undoing the harm done at the time, but emphasises Britain’s responsibility to help resolve the
modern situation.) Excerpts with footnote numbers for reference:

One of the most shattering and shaming indictments of British Foreign policy ever framed has
recently come to light in a collection of state documents compiled by Doreen Ingrams and
entitled "Palestine Papers 1917-1922, Seeds of Conflict" (John Murray, 1972). As the
Foreword very properly reminds us, 'the (Palestine) conflict began not in 1948 but in 1917' with
the publication of the Balfour Declaration…

(10)… It is scarcely surprising, therefore, that Lord Curzon made no impression on Balfour
when he warned him that Weizmann 'contemplates a Jewish state, a Jewish nation, a subordinate
population of Arabs, etc. ruled by Jews; the Jews in possession of the fat of the land and
directing the Administration', and that he was 'trying to effect this behind the screen and under
the shelter of British trusteeship'.(11) Curzon's warning was ignored, as was also his protest that,
on historical grounds, the British had 'a stronger claim to parts of France' than the Jews had to
Palestine, considering that their connection with the land had 'terminated 1,200 years ago'.(12)

Likewise Edwin Montagu, Secretary of State for India and himself a Jew, was brushed aside
when he argued that the system of Government under the British mandate discriminated against
the Arabs in favour of the tiny Jewish minority.(13)

For, as is all too evident from the Cabinet documents of this period, the British Government
never intended to allow the Arab majority any voice in shaping the future of their own country.
'The weak point of our position', Balfour wrote to Lloyd George in February 1919, 'is of
course that in the case of Palestine we deliberately and rightly decline to accept the
principle of self-determination'.(14) If the existing population were consulted, he added,
they would 'unquestionably' return an anti-Zionist verdict. And in reply to Curzon, Balfour
stated quite categorically that 'in Palestine we do not propose even to go through the form of
consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants of the country .... The Four Great Powers are
committed to Zionism. And Zionism, be it right or wrong, good or bad, is rooted in age-long
traditions, in present needs, in future hopes, of far profounder import than the desires and
prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land'.(15)

(17) …The solemn promise of independence which was given by Sir Henry McMahon in 1915
when High Commissioner in Cairo and which secured the support of the Arab armies of Emir
Feisal against the Turks in World War I was to be cynically ignored. So too was the Anglo-

112
French declaration of November 1918, pledging that the Arabs in the territories to be liberated
from Turkish rule would be free to choose their own form of government, which had been issued
as a reassurance to those who feared that the Balfour Declaration would cancel out McMahon's
undertaking…

(25) …No less determined than the Zionists' leader to deceive the Arab majority in Palestine, the
Foreign Office said, in a telegram sent early in 1918 to Sir Reginald Wingate, the High
Commissioner in Cairo, 'it is most important that everything should be done to allay Arab
suspicions regarding the true aims of Zionism'.(26)

And when an Arab delegation visited London in August 1921 to seek assurances regarding their
future, a senior Colonial Office official, Sir Hubert Young, still further spelled out to Ministers
the deceptions which they were practising on the inhabitants of Palestine. In a memorandum for
the Foreign Secretary he wrote that, although the general strategic idea was 'the gradual
immigration of Jews into Palestine until that country becomes a predominantly Jewish
State', it was 'questionable whether we are in a position to tell the Arabs what our policy really
means'.(27)

And to the same Arab delegation Sir Herbert Samuel, as the High Commissioner in Palestine,
was no less ready to dissemble than Weizmann had been in his encounters with Feisal. Having
earlier proclaimed in a public speech that the British Government ‘has never consented and will
never consent’ to the establishment of a Jewish Government…(28)

(32)… And the only result which (Foreign Secretary) Carson’s remonstrances obtained was the
transfer of responsibility for Palestine affairs from the Foreign Office, over which he presided, to
the Colonial Office, then under direction of Mr. Winston Churchill, an avowed supporter of
the Zionist cause.

(35) …While the Arabs were denied any democratic system of representation; the Zionists were
allowed to establish a Commission and later an Agency of their own in Palestine…

(37) …at the end of 1920 an Advisory Council (was established) of ten official and ten non-
official members… the non-official members, with four Moslems, three Jews and three
Christians making up the total of ten, put the Arab Moslems in a minority although they then
numbered some 80 per cent of the total population…

(38)… Apart from this travesty of democracy, the Arabs, whether Moslem or Christian, were not
allowed any representative institutions, although the Jewish minority had been permitted early in
1920 to hold elections for a Jewish Assembly to deal with matters affecting their community…

(39)… Any elected body of Arabs would, it was felt, 'undoubtedly prohibit further immigration
of Jews' (40) and so 'bar the way to the execution of the Zionist programme'.(41) And as
Churchill claimed in his statement to the House of Commons on Palestine policy on June 14,
1921, to stop future immigration would be to accept the proposition that 'the word of
Britain no longer counts throughout the East and the Middle East'.

113
(44)… So the discriminations continued. Tens of thousands of Jews from Europe were allowed
to migrate to Palestine and by the middle thirties the Jewish proportion of the population had
risen from 8 to 30 per cent. More threatening still, large tracts of land were bought up by the
Jewish Agency from Lebanese and Syrian landlords now living under French rule, who found it
difficult and sometimes impossible to obtain the necessary passports and permits to visit their
tenant farms. And as the land was parceled out among the new Jewish settlers, the former Arab
tenants were evicted, sometimes with only a few pounds compensation, often with none.

Deprived of any constitutional means of appeal or protest, the Arabs in 1936 resorted to violence
in an attempt to force their British rulers to honour their guarantees and to 'deal with them with
equality'. But to no avail…

…The famous proposal in the White Paper of 1939 for the establishment, after a ten-year
transition period, of an independent binational state in Palestine was still-born... End

WWII

Fall/1941 Hitler’s headquarters orders the “physical annihilation” of the Jews.

01/20/1942 Wannsee Conference plans the “Final Solution.”

06/13/1942 New York Times p. 7 Nazis Blame Jews For Big Bombings
Propaganda Minister Goebbels said tonight that Germany would carry out a mass
“extermination” of Jews in reprisal for the Allied air bombings of German cities… (originally
from a 6/12 German Broadcast recorded by the United Press in New York)
Dr. Goebbels said… Germany would repay “blow by blow” the air attacks on her cities. “This is
a very expensive method but England wanted it and she will get it,” he continued. “Terror can
be crushed only by terror…” The Propaganda Minister said that the “Jewish press” of London
and New York had, with “bloodthirsty malice,” brought on the bombing of German cities. “The
Jews are playing a frivolous game and they will pay for it with the extermination of their race in
all Europe and perhaps beyond Europe.” (originally from an article in the publication “The
Reich”)

114
WWII continued -
Rescuing European Jews –

Wyman, pages 82-83 The Romanian Proposal

…According to a representative of the Jewish Agency (for Palestine), a Dutch businessman,
resident in Rumania, had called on him in Istanbul in early December (1942) carrying a proposal
from Rumanian officials. They were ready to permit the departure of 72,000 Jews still alive in
Transnistria and offered to provide ships to move them to Palestine or another Allied port. The
Dutchman also stated the Catholic bishop of Bucharest was prepared to permit the use of the
Vatican flag on the ships. End

(The NY Times reported this proposal on 2/13/1943. The Romanians had asked to be paid
expenses of 20,000 Rumanian Lei ($130) per refugee along with additional funds should
Romanian ships be utilized. The Jewish Agency had informed the British government of the
proposal. More than two months passed before this proposal was made public. Why didn’t the
Jewish Agency inform American Jewish organizations of this proposal? American Jewish
organizations, with or without help from others, could have funded this venture.

I submit the Jewish Agency colluded with the British to do nothing. The Agency was more
concerned with its relations with Britain and the future state of Israel than 72,000 Jews in
Transnistria. The Agency showed the same skewed values in its handling of the 5/1944
Eichmann proposal. See the Addendum below.)

What Price Israel by Alfred M. Lilienthal pages 32-34 Immigration of War Refugees
There were other lands, besides Palestine, to which the displaced persons (DPs) could have gone.
President Roosevelt was deeply concerned with the plight of the European refugees and thought
that all the free nations of the world ought to accept a certain number of immigrants, irrespective
of race, creed, color or political belief. The President hoped the rescue of 500,000 DPs could be
achieved by such a generous grant of a worldwide political asylum. In line with this
humanitarian idea, Morris Ernst, New York attorney and close friend of the President, went to
London in the middle of the war to see if the British would take in 100,000 to 200,000 uprooted
people. The President had reasons to assume that Canada, Australia, and the South American
countries would gladly open their doors. And if such good examples were set by other nations,
Mr. Roosevelt felt that the American Congress could be “educated to go back to our traditional
position of asylum.” The key was in London. Would Morris Ernst succeed there? Mr. Ernst
came home to report and this is what took place in the White House (as related to a Cincinnati
audience in 1950):

Ernst: “We are at home plate. That little island [and it was during the second Blitz that he
visited England] on a properly representative program of a World Immigration Budget, will
match the United States up to 150,000”
Roosevelt: “150,000 to England – 150,000 to match that in the United Stated – pick up 200,000
or 300,000 elsewhere, and we can start with a half a million of these oppressed people.”

A week later, or so, Mr. Ernst and his wife again visited the President.

115
Roosevelt: …to Ernst: “Nothing doing on the program. We can’t put it over because the
dominant vocal Jewish leadership of America won’t stand for it.”
Ernst: “It’s impossible! Why?”
Roosevelt: “They are right from their point of view. The Zionist movement knows that
Palestine is, and will be for some time, a remittance society. They know that they can raise vast
sums for Palestine by saying to donors, ‘There is no other place this poor Jew can go.’ But if
there is a world political asylum for all people irrespective of race, creed or color, they cannot
raise their money. Then the people who do not want to give the money will have an excuse to
say ‘What do you mean, there is no place they can go but Palestine? They are the preferred
wards of the world.’”

Morris Ernst, shocked, first refused to believe his leader and friend. He began to lobby among
his influential Jewish friends for this world program of rescue, without mentioning the
President’s or the British reaction. As he himself has put it: “I was thrown out of parlors of
friends of mine who very frankly said ‘Morris, this is treason. You are undermining the Zionist
movement.’ He ran into the same reaction amongst all Jewish groups and leaders. Everywhere
he found “a deep, genuine, often fanatically emotional vested interest in putting over the
Palestinian movement” in men “who are little concerned about human blood if it is not their
own.”

This response of Zionism ended the remarkable Roosevelt effort to rescue Europe’s Displaced
Persons. End
(Roosevelt did establish the War Refugee Board in 1/1944.)
(Lilienthal referenced So Far So Good by Morris L Ernst, pages 170-177, for additional
discussion on Europe’s war refugees.)

Hecht, p. 33
These crimes involve, also, a hardness of heart difficult to imagine as a basic Jewish quality. But
it is there in the leaders of Israel.
Itzchak Greenbaum, Chief of the Rescue Committee of the Jewish Agency, announced in Tel
Aviv in 1943, "When they asked me, couldn't you give money out of United Jewish Appeal
funds for the rescue of Jews in Europe, I said, 'No!' And I say again, 'No!' In my opinion one
should resist this wave which pushes the Zionist activities to secondary importance."27
(27) "On the Holocaust and on the Reaction," statement by Itzhak Greenbaum addressed to the
Zionist Executive Council on February 18, 1943 and published in his book, Beeyemei Khurban
Veshoah (In days of Holocaust and Destruction), 1946. End

(The War Refugee Board WRB acted mainly as a facilitator and coordinator of projects carried
out by private organizations. Further, projects sponsored by the WRB were almost entirely
funded by Jewish organizations. The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee JDC was
the largest Jewish organization conducting overseas relief and contributed $15 million to WRB
projects. The American United Jewish Appeal UJA was the major American Jewish fund-raising
agency and the main source of the JDC’s income. (Wyman, pages 213-214))

116
Lilienthal, p. 36
…this is what the Jewish Forward, (the) largest Yiddish newspaper in the world, had to say on
December 11, 1943: “The Jewish Conference is alive only when there is something in the air
which has to do with a Commonwealth in Palestine, and it is asleep when it concerns rescue
work for the Jews in the Diaspora.”

The "Bergson Boys"

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/holocaust/timeline/index.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/holocaust/peopleevents/pandeAMEX88.html
On the morning of November 25, 1942, a small but shocking article in "The Washington Post"
grabbed the attention of Peter Bergson, a young Jewish Palestinian who was staying in
Washington, D.C. The headline read "Two Million Jews Slain." The story went on to explain
that World Jewish Congress Chairman Rabbi Stephen Wise had confirmation from the State
Department that the Nazis were planning to annihilate the entire Jewish population of Europe.
The 32-year-old reader was not only dismayed at the content of the article, he was also extremely
distressed that it had been buried on page six of the paper. It made such an impact on him that it
would drastically change his mission in the United States, making him take a course of action
that would ultimately play a decisive role in President Roosevelt's decision to create a
government agency devoted to saving Jews.

Bergson and a handful of other young Palestinian Jews associated with the Zionist, right-wing
Irgun organization had arrived in the United States in 1940 hoping to create a Jewish Army. This
separate Jewish fighting force, made up of Palestinian Jews, stateless Jewish refugees, and Jews
from non-belligerent nations, would fight alongside other Allied armies under supreme Allied
command. "JEWS FIGHT FOR THE RIGHT TO FIGHT" ran one of their "New York Times"
advertisements at the beginning of 1942. But reading about the horrifying news from Europe,
Bergson changed his focus: now the rescue of Europe's Jews became his top priority.

…FOR SALE TO HUMANITY 70,000 JEWS, GUARANTEED HUMAN BEINGS AT $50 A

PIECE, the group demanded that the Allied countries "immediately appoint an inter-
governmental committee" to devise plans to end the Holocaust. The established American
Jewish leadership, Zionists included, was horrified: they accused the "Bergson Boys", as the
young men were known, of sensationalism and recklessness; and they argued the foreigners
had no mandate to speak for American Jews.

In January 1944, before Congress could vote on (a) resolution, President Roosevelt made it
irrelevant by establishing the War Refugee Board, an agency charged with rescuing the victims
of Nazi oppression. He did so in part because the Treasury Department had just presented him
with a searing indictment of the State Department's continuous obstruction of all rescue efforts.
But the mounting pressure the Bergsonites had helped create on Capitol Hill for an independent
rescue agency produced a political climate that also encouraged him to act.

Although the War Refugee Board suffered from inadequate funding and lack of cooperation
from other government agencies, it probably saved about 200,000 lives. End

117
In Dramatic Dissent: The Bergson Boys by Monty Noam Penkower
American Jewish History Vol. 70, No. 3 (March 1981), pages 281-309
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press http://www.jstor.org/publisher/jhup
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23881816

Penkower p. 282 - A divided Jewish leadership also failed to grasp or convey the significance of
the disaster (the Holocaust).

End of 1943, Penkower p. 294 - Rabbi Stephen Wise’s appearance before the Bloom House
Foreign Affairs Committee on the War Refugee Board WRB resolution:
“Speaking as a co-chairman of the recently established American Jewish Conference AJC, Wise
lost no time in throwing a damper on the resolution…
…The Zionist official then deemed the resolution at hand “inadequate” for its lack of a specific
program, especially for not mentioning open entry into Palestine…
…For Wise and other leading Zionists, however, rescue and Palestine were inseparable…”

Penkower p. 306 - The Emergency Committee to Save the Jewish People of Europe (a
committee of the Bergson Group), (was) the first broadly based organization calling for rescue
action. End

WWII continued -
Bombing the Death Camps –

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/bombau.html Paragraph 11
…the Jewish Frontier, the monthly magazine of the U.S. Labor Zionist movement, published
(in its August 1944 edition) an unsigned editorial calling for “Allied bombings of the death
camps and the roads leading to them…” According to a report by the David S Wyman
Institute for Holocaust Studies, this was the only time “an official organ of an American
Jewish organization publicly calling for bombing the camps” (other requests were made
privately by other Jewish groups). (6a)
(6a) Rafael Medoff, “Golda Meir and the Campaigne for an Allied Bombing of Auschwitz.” The
David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, (September 2011). End

118
The Hungarian Jews 1944
• The Gruenwald/Kastner Trial 1954 and The Kastner Train
• Eichmann’s “Blood for Cargo” Proposal and Joel Brand
• Eichmann’s Story Part 2
• The Horthy Offer 07/18/1944

The Gruenwald/Kastner Trial

Dr. Rudolph Kastner was the de facto head of the Jewish Agency’s Rescue Committee in
Hungary. He failed to warn Hungary’s Jews after learning of Nazi plans to exterminate them.

The Kastner trial was in fact a libel case brought by the Israeli government for the benefit of
Kastner against Malchiel Gruenwald who had accused Kastner of collaborating with the Nazis.
The Nazis had allowed Kastner to save 1,684 Hungarian Jews including 388 important Jews
from his hometown of Kluj, Hungary. These rescued Jews were transported by train first to
Bergen-Belsen then to Switzerland. Kastner failed to warn and may have led others to lie to the
unsaved, remaining Jews of Kluj. The unsaved, near 20,000, were told the Nazis were truthful
when claiming Jews were going to Kenyermeze and/or work camps. Nearly all were killed at
Auschwitz.

Hecht, pages 75-76

Judge Halevi: (slowly and distinctly) Did you tell anybody in Kluj what you knew about the
extermination that was going on in Auschwitz?...
Judge Halevi: (sternly) That was not my question. Did you tell anyone that the Germans were
preparing the deportation of Hungary's Jews to Auschwitz?...
Judge Halevi: Why didn't you inform the Jews of Kluj of what you knew? I want to hear your
answer, Dr. Kastner.

Kastner: (faintly) I told them everything I knew — when I was in contact with them — later I
was in contact only with my father-in-law. And I dared give only one clear hint. He had to know
that there was deportation and that extermination would follow.
Judge Halevi: Then why didn't the Jews of Kluj know about all that?
Kastner: Your Honor asks me —
Kastner: Your Honor, I think that my colleagues in Kluj, including my father-in-law, did not do
all in their power — did not do all that could have been done — all that they had to do.
Kastner: On the other hand, Your Honor, I am sorry to say that the witnesses from Kluj who
testified here — in my opinion, I don't think they represent the true Jewry of Kluj. For it is not a
coincidence that there was not a single important figure among them.78
(78) Cross-examination of Kastner in C.C. 124/53 in the D.C. Jerusalem.

Hecht, pages 113-116 Excerpts from Judge Benjamin Halevi’s verdict:

The masses of Jews from Hungary’s ghettos obediently boarded the deportation trains without
knowing their fate. They were full of confidence in the false information that they were being
transferred to Kenyermeze… They (the Nazis) were able to deport the Jews to their
extermination by the help of Jewish leaders. The false information was spread by Jewish
leaders…

119
The Nazi succeeded in bringing the Jewish leaders into collaboration with the Nazis at the time
of the catastrophe…
Eichmann did not want a second Warsaw. For this reason, the Nazis exerted themselves to
mislead and bribe the Jewish leaders…
Collaboration between the Jewish Agency’s Rescue Committee and the Exterminators of the
Jews was solidified in Budapest and Vienna. Kastner’s duties were part and parcel of the general
duties of the S.S. End

Gruenwald’s trial took place in 1954. Judge Halevi in June 1955 issued his verdicts in favor of
Gruenwald except that he was fined $1 for falsely accusing Kastner of taking a Nazi bribe.
Kastner was assassinated in March 1957. The Israeli Supreme Court in January 1958 reversed
Halevi’s verdicts of innocence except in Gruenwald’s accusation that Kastner helped Nazi Kurt
Becher escape punishment after the war.

Hecht, pages 123-124

Here are a few final samples of (Israeli Attorney General Chaim) Cohen's political philosophy,
as offered to the (Israeli) Supreme Court judges (in 1957/58):
"If in Kastner's opinion, rightly or wrongly, he believed that one million Jews were hopelessly
doomed, he was allowed not to inform them of their fate; and to concentrate on the saving of the
few.
"He was entitled to make a deal with the Nazis for the saving of a few hundred and entitled not
to warn the millions. In fact, if that's how he saw it, rightly or wrongly, that was his duty."
Said Cohen:
"If you don't like it, if it doesn't coincide with your own philosophy, you may criticize Kastner
and say his policy was a mistaken one. But what does all this have to do with collaboration? 161
. . . It has always been our Zionist tradition to select the few out of many in arranging the
immigration to Palestine [the Weizmann Blueprint]. Are we therefore to be called traitors?" End

Note: See Wyman, pages 245-249. It appears negotiations by Saly Mayer and others were
significant in getting the Kastner train’s 1,686 Hungarian Jews out of Bergen-Belsen and
transported to Switzerland, 318 in August and 1,368 in early December 1944.

Eichmann’s “Blood for Cargo” Proposal

One of the witnesses called in the Kastner trial was Joel Brand. Brand like Kastner was from
Kluj and worked for the Agency’s Recue Committee in Hungary. Brand testified Adolph
Eichmann told him he would spare a million Jews and send them out of Hungary alive and
unhurt in exchange for ten thousand trucks and one thousand tons of tea and coffee. The
proposal exchanges would be made in increments of 100,000 Hungarian Jews for 1,000 trucks
and supplies. All the winterized trucks with their trailers would go to the Eastern Front.
Theories were that the Germans were hoping to divide the allies, make peace with the West,
and/or ally with the West against Stalin’s Russia.

Hecht, p. 139 The Proposal

Brand: …Then I became full of hope and went on – ‘The local Jews and our friends abroad may
perhaps muster sums of money, if lives are to be saved.’

120
“Eichmann answered, ‘Go on then. Go ahead to Switzerland, to Turkey, to Spain, wherever you
please; so long as you can produce cargo!’
“’What sort of cargo do you want?’ I asked.
“‘Anything at all,’ Eichmann said. ‘For example – trucks. Ten thousand trucks are worth
a million Jews to me.’ He paused a moment and added: ‘Tea and coffee, too, and soap. One
thousand tons of tea and coffee. All these I am in need of.’
“To this I replied, I haven’t the vaguest idea where all these cargoes are to be obtained. Who on
earth will treat this offer seriously? Which official body will believe that delivery of the trucks
will in fact induce you to spare a million Jews?’
“Eichmann answered that he was willing to offer one hundred thousand Jews in advance,
and on receiving the proportionate payment, he would release another ten percent. ‘Pick
them anywhere you want,” he said, ‘Hungary, Auschwitz, Slovakia – anywhere you want and
anyone you want…’

“Eichmann received me on the 15th, for the last time, and told me, ‘You are to set out now.
Today we begin to deport twelve thousand per day, but these shall not be exterminated during
negotiations. But you, Brand, have to return in a week or two. I can’t put your Jews on ice
and preserve them forever. If it turns out that the negotiations demand some more time, we’ll be
considerate. You, however, have to return. Quickly. Your return, coupled with the verbal
acceptance of my offer, will inspire me to cease the gassing, and lay down the advance
payment of one hundred thousand immediately.’ End

The Nazis had arrested an envoy from Nathan Schwalb and Saly Mayer in Switzerland to the
Budapest Rescue Committee and confiscated the money and letters he was carrying, over 50,000
dollars and 270,000 Swiss francs. These were all given to Brand in apparent hopes of furthering
negotiations on Eichmann’s proposal.

The Nazis sent Joel Brand to make this offer to the Jewish Agency in neutral Istanbul. He
reached Istanbul on 5/19th aboard a German diplomatic plane. The Agency’s Rescue Committee
in Istanbul immediately informed the British of Brand’s arrival and eventually sent Brand to
British Syria to meet Agency official Moshe Sharett. The British arrested Brand on June 7 th in
Aleppo, Syria after which on June 11th he met with Sharett in the company of British officers.
Sharett already knew everything. Brand remained in British custody for four and half months.
The Jewish Agency in alliance with the British did nothing. The arrest of Brand was the end of
this proposal.

Hecht, pages 108-109 Defense attorney Shmuel Tamir speaking in his closing arguments:
“And why did they (Israeli government institutions) knowingly cover up the collaboration of
Kastner with the Nazis? There is only one answer. They had no choice. They had to protect
Kastner for fear he would reveal all the facts known to him about another collaboration – the
Jewish Agency collaboration with the British – which sabotaged the rescue of Europe’s Jews and
contributed to their annihilation…”

Hecht, p. 144
The last lines of Brand’s testimony, as they appear on page 676 of the Protocol (court transcript),
read: “Rightly or wrongly, for better or for worse, I have cursed Jewry’s official leaders ever

121
since. All these things shall haunt me until my dying day. It is much more than a man can bear.”
199 (199) Protocol, C.Ç. 124/53 in the D.C. Jerusalem.

Eichmann’s Story Part 2

by Adolph Eichmann
Life, Vol. 49, No. 23, December 5, 1960, pages 146-148, as transcribed at:
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/german/einsatzgruppen/esg/trials/profiles/confession.html
Original source: Former SS Dutchman Willem Sassen tape-recorded interviews with Eichmann
in Argentina between 1951 and 1959.

Nazi who had millions of Jews killed…-

Only Heinrich Himmler could turn off the liquidation machine. It was in 1944, the year of the
assassination attempt on Hitler, then Reichsführer Himmler took over as commander of the
Reserve Army, that he authorized me to propose an exchange: one million Jews for 10,000
winterized trucks with trailers. The world Jewish organization could decide for itself what Jews
it wanted to choose. We asked only that they get us 10,000 trucks. Thanks to Himmler's
directive, I could assure them, on my word of honor, that these trucks would be used only on the
Eastern front. As I said at the time, "When the 10,000 winterized trucks with trailers are here,
then the liquidation machine in Auschwitz will be stopped."

In obedience to Himmler's directive I now concentrated on negotiations with the Jewish political
officials in Budapest. One man stood out among them, Dr. Rudolf Kastner, authorized
representative of the Zionist movement. This Dr. Kastner was a young man about my age, an ice-
cold lawyer and a fanatical Zionist. He agreed to help keep the Jews from resisting
deportation and even keep order in the collection camps if I would close my eyes and let a
few hundred or a few thousand young Jews emigrate illegally to Palestine. It was a good
bargain. For keeping order in the camps, the price of 15,000 to 20,000 Jews - in the end there
may have been more - was not too high for me.

Except perhaps for the first few sessions, Kastner never came to me fearful of the Gestapo strong
man. We negotiated entirely as equals. People forget that. We were political opponents trying to
arrive at a settlement, and we trusted each other perfectly. When he was with me, Kastner
smoked cigarets as though he were in a coffeehouse. While we talked he would smoke one
aromatic cigaret after another, taking them from a silver case and lighting them with a little silver
lighter. With his great polish and reserve he would have made an ideal Gestapo officer himself.

Dr. Kastner's main concern was to make it possible for a select group of Hungarian Jews to
emigrate to Israel. But the Arrow Cross, the Hungarian fascist party, had grown strong and
stubborn. Its inspectors permitted no exceptions to the mass deportations. So the Jewish officials
turned to the German occupation authorities. They realized that we were specialists who had
learned about Jewish affairs through years of practice.

Immensely idealistic Zionists - …As a matter of fact, there was a very strong similarity between
our attitudes in the SS and the viewpoint of these immensely idealistic Zionist leaders who were

122
fighting what might be their last battle. As I told Kastner: "We, too, are idealists and we, too, had
to sacrifice our own blood before we came to power."

I believe that Kastner would have sacrificed a thousand or a hundred thousand of his blood to
achieve his political goal. He was not interested in old Jews or those who had become
assimilated into Hungarian society. But he was incredibly persistent in trying to save biologically
valuable Jewish blood, that is, human material that was capable of reproduction and hard work.
"You can have the others," he would say, "but let me have this group here." And because
Kastner rendered us a great service by helping keep the deportation camps peaceful, I
would let his groups escape. After all, I was not concerned with small groups of a thousand or
so Jews.

At the same time Kastner was bargaining with another SS official, a Colonel Kurt Becker.
Becher was bartering Jews for foreign exchange and goods on direct orders from Himmler…

Men under Becher's command guarded a special group of 700 Jews whom Kastner had requested
from a list. They were mostly young people, although the group also included Kastner's entire
family. I did not care if Kastner took his relatives along. He could take them wherever he wanted
to.

The gentleman’s agreement - …This is how most of the illegal emigrations were arranged: a
group of special Jews was taken into custody and brought together in a place designated by
Kastner and his men, where they were put under SS guard to keep them from harm. After the
Jewish political organizations arranged transportation out of the country, I instructed the border
police to let these transports pass unhindered. They travelled generally by night. That was the
"gentleman's agreement" I had with Kastner.

After leaving Hungary, the Jews could then travel through neutral foreign countries or stay
hidden, usually in Romania, until the necessary steamships arrived to take them on board. When
they reached Israel, the ships waited off shore until a few courageous Jews helped the passengers
land against the orders of the British mandate authorities. Since the refugees had no valid papers,
the Jewish organization must have spent enormous sums of money to bribe Romanian officials,
who did not do these favors for nothing. All this went on with Himmler's permission. I would
never have dared to dance to my own waltz. If I demanded rigid obedience from my own
subordinates, I had to be just as rigid in carrying out my own superior's orders. Otherwise I
would have been a bad SS commander, and I think I was a good SS commander.

By the same token, my relationship with Dr. Kastner was strictly correct...

All my own agreements with the Jewish officials were more or less side-transactions to the
exchange of the million Jews for 10,000 winterized trucks with trailers. Becher and I were twice
ordered to Himmler in Berlin to discuss it. Whether Himmler settled the actual terms of the
exchange or whether he left it to me, I do not remember. When I think back though, it seems to
me that Himmler may have authorized the offer for an "appropriate number," and I set the
figure at 10,000 to one million because I was an idealist and wanted to accomplish as much as
possible for the Reich.

123
It was clear to me that for lack of numbers I could never have squeezed a million Jews out of
Hungary. But it was obvious that Jews were piled on Jews in Auschwitz and the various
concentration camps. So I assumed that we could easily produce a million Jews. Jews from
Hungary supplemented with Jews from Germany, from Austria, from wherever they wanted to
take them. It would be a tragedy if the international Jewish community was not able or
willing to accept them.

Motorize the divisions - … I do remember Himmler specifically saying to me, "Eichmann,

motorize the 8th and 22nd Cavalry Divisions". This indicated the personal concern of Himmler,
who was soon to take over the Reserve Army, in receiving those trucks. They were far more
important than the lives of individual Jews. What did he care about a million Jews? His concern
was his divisions. He apparently did not want to motorize these two divisions, but rather to equip
them for use as a sort of fast-moving task force. It was for this that he gave instructions to Lieut.
General Oswald Pohl, who was in charge of the concentration camp system, to kill no more
Jews, to save them up, more or less.

After I received Himmler's authorization I told my assistant Krumey to bring me Joel Brand, a
Hungarian Jew whom we had chosen to send to Palestine to take a proposal to the Jewish
leaders. Brand left on his trip some time before the grain was high, as an old country boy I
remember the time well. Krumey brought him to Vienna, had him furnished with the proper
papers and shipped him by plane to Istanbul, because Turkey was still neutral. When he got as
far as Syria, he was arrested by the British, interrogated, and imprisoned in Cairo. The Jewish
leaders never accepted our proposal.

I knew at the time that Brand was being held by the British because Kastner was giving me
constant reports. But when I let Brand leave the country, I had made sure his family stayed in
Budapest so that I could have a guarantee of his return. Then as the weeks went by I said to
Kastner, "Kastner, you know what we agreed. Brand's family stays here because he must return.
Why doesn't he come back?"…

Meanwhile the deportations had to continue in spite of our pending deal. But the Jews were to a
certain extent "put on ice, held in a camp ready to be moved at any time. Suppose Brand had
come back and told me, "Obersturmbannführer, the matter is settled. Five or ten thousand trucks
are on their way. Give me a half million or a million Jews. You promised me that if I brought
you a positive report, you'd send 100,000 Jews to a neutral country as a deposit." Then it would
have been easy for us to ship the Jews off.

If the deal had succeeded, I believe I could have arranged to ship the first 20,000 Jews in two
days via Romania to Palestine or even via France to Spain. If there had been any delay it would
have come from the side of the receivers. The plain fact was that there was no place on earth that
would have been ready to accept the Jews, not even this one million… End

According to German records between 5/15 thru 6/7/1944, the day Brand was arrested by the
British, 289,357 Hungarian Jews were transported to Auschwitz at 12,000 per day. (Source:

124
http://konfliktuskutato.hu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=288:hungarian-
jews-in-auschwitz-birkenau&catid=36:english See section 8.)

Thoughts: Any cargo given to Germany would aid her war effort but weigh the military value of
the requested commodities against the value of one million Jews. I submit exchanges could have
begun as proposed with later modifications replacing thousands of trucks with thousands of tons
of humanitarian aid. Alternately, Brand could have been allowed to immediately return to
Budapest with an agreement never meant to be honored, but 100,000 Jews may have been saved.
Such actions may have proven the proposal was a ruse, but no action was taken.

No attempt was made to take advantage of this proposal. I submit the Israeli government had
reasons for defending Kastner. Humane considerations were not in the calculations of the Jewish
Agency. The Agency’s relationship with Britain and the future state of Israel were more valued
than one million unimportant Jews.

The Horthy Offer 07/18/1944

On 07/7/1944 Hungary’s Regent Miklos Horthy, under pressure from neutral countries and
Allied promises of punishment for all who participated in atrocities, halted deportations to
Auschwitz. By 7/9th, 437,402 had already been deported to Auschwitz. The Germans
acquiesced likely due to their deteriorating military position. Subsequently on 7/18th, Horthy
offered to permit emigration of all Jewish children under ten who possessed visas to other
countries and all Jews of any age who had Palestine certificates (Wyman, p. 238). The
Germans did not acquiesce to this offer closing Hungary’s borders, but not before mainstream
American Zionists showed their true values.

Wyman, p. 253
…With the announcement of the Horthy offer, which appeared to release all Jews who had
Palestine certificates, the Bergonsites accelerated their drive (to open Palestine to Jewish
refugees) … And they went to Congress with resolutions calling on the President to urge Britain
to open emergency camps in Palestine, where tens of thousands of Hungarian Jews could be
sheltered in safety until the war ended. They could then, if necessary, be returned to Hungary or
sent elsewhere.

The Bergsonites saw the “shelters plan” as a way to open Palestine for the immediate emergency
without getting the matter entangled in the politically difficult issues of the (British 1939) White
Paper and Jewish statehood. Those questions they concluded could wait until after the war. This
position paralleled that of the WRB (War Refugees Board). It had earlier decided to stay away
from the controversy over the Zionists’ Palestine resolution, but wanted pressure put on Britain
to open Palestine at least as a temporary haven.

The Palestine shelters resolution quickly picked up important bipartisan backing in Congress…
But the proposal soon collapsed, largely because of opposition from the State Department and
Zionist organizations. (80)

125
The State Department asserted that passage of the legislation would anger Arabs and set off
unrest in the Middle East. The Zionists persuaded key members of Congress including Tom
Connally and Sol Bloom (chairmen of the relevant Senate and House committees), not to act on
it. They told legislators that the plan was unnecessary because the few Jews who might get to
Palestine from Hungary could enter under the remaining White Paper quota. Moreover,
the Zionists strenuously opposed any plan to send Jews to Palestine with the understanding that
they might have to leave after the war. Such a concession, legitimized by the approval of
Congress, might establish a precedent that could impair the Jewish claim to Palestine. (81)
End

Note: The 1939 White Paper quota was for just 50,000 Jews at 10,000 per year.
Thoughts: I submit American Zionists valued the future state of Israel over the lives of the then
remaining hundreds of thousands of Hungarian Jews.

Hecht, p. 15
In August, 1937 Dr. (Chaim) Weizmann, as leader of World Zionism, addressed a Zionist
convention in London... (He) had this to say:
"I told the (1937 Peel/ Palestine) British Royal Commission that the hopes of Europe's six
million Jews were centered on emigration. I was asked, 'Can you bring six million Jews to
Palestine?' I replied, 'No.' - - The old ones will pass. They will bear their fate or they will not.
They were dust, economic and moral dust in a cruel world. - - Only a branch shall survive. - -
They had to accept it…”4
(4) The New Judea (official organ of the Zionist Organization of England) XIII (April, 1937).

126
An Open Letter to America’s war plutocrats
and their war mongers in Congress

2015 10 01

Salutations:

I will publicly advocate your assassinations if Congress ever again successfully votes for
unprovoked, American aggression in another unjust war.

Americans have killed two million Vietnamese and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis while from
North Vietnam to the Islamic State we offered no viable alternative.

We got into our wars with lies. The first Tonkin Gulf incident was provoked. The second
incident didn’t happen. There were no WMDs in Iraq and no connections between Saddam
Hussein and al Qaeda or 9/11.

I wish for you redemption, but I will not wait for your redemption if you needlessly kill again.
The next unjust, American war will be civil war, and you will be the legitimate targets of all
good people who value truth, justice, and freedom.

Sincerely,
John F Scanlon San Diego CA [email protected]

Please share this with your Congressmen.

127
 This book was distributed courtesy of:

For your own Unlimited Reading and FREE eBooks today, visit:
http://www.Free-eBooks.net

Share this eBook with anyone and everyone automatically by selecting any of the
options below:

To show your appreciation to the author and help others have

wonderful reading experiences and find helpful information too,
we'd be very grateful if you'd kindly
post your comments for this book here.

COPYRIGHT INFORMATION

Free-eBooks.net respects the intellectual property of others. When a book's copyright owner submits their work to Free-eBooks.net, they are granting us permission to distribute such material. Unless
otherwise stated in this book, this permission is not passed onto others. As such, redistributing this book without the copyright owner's permission can constitute copyright infringement. If you
believe that your work has been used in a manner that constitutes copyright infringement, please follow our Notice and Procedure for Making Claims of Copyright Infringement as seen in our Terms
of Service here:

http://www.free-ebooks.net/tos.html
3 AUDIOBOOK COLLECTIONS

6 BOOK COLLECTIONS