The New Master Influence:
Democracy vs. Islam
Excerpt from JULY 2003 EWR
by Richard Maybury
Copyright © 2006 by Henry Madison Research, Inc.
www.richardmaybury.com
1-800-509-5400, Fax 602-943-2363
|
25-Aug-06
Excerpt from JULY 2003 EWR, p. 2-8
The New Master Influence:
Democracy vs. Islam
by Richard J. Maybury
America has a lot of thought-provoking war memorials. My favorite is the Vietnam memorial in Washington. I like it because my name is not on it.
It has a lot of my friends' names.
The rude awakening for us Vietnam-era troops was that political power really does corrupt the morals and the judgement; the government will send soldiers to die for nothing. It will even lie to them and send them to die for purposes that are dishonorable.
Time and mountains of propaganda have nearly buried this lesson. EWR is one of the few publications trying to keep it alive.
US troops have been told they fought in Iraq to make the Iraqis free. Is this true? Or is Iraq the tip of an iceberg - the first appearance of a new master influence on the economy and investment markets?
Freedom in Iraq
I have been keeping a list of what US officials demand of the Iraqis.
First, Iraqis are now free to travel their own path, but they must arrive at democracy.
Iraqis also cannot allow Baathists in power. Their new government is forbidden to have WMDs. It must have a constitution, be pro-American, and give no support to rebels trying to overthrow Persian Gulf oil dictators.
The new Iraqi government must privatize state-owned industry, rewrite the tax code, reorganize the central bank, and reorganize the stock exchange, but not according to Iraqi custom - according to US instructions. 1
Iraqis also cannot form an alliance with Syria or Iran. They cannot change Iraq's borders.
Above all, Iraqis are absolutely forbidden to set up a Shiite Islamic state like that of Iran, which is based on sharia (shah-ree-ah, Islamic law).
Other than that, Iraqis are free to do as they please, which means they are free to do whatever Washington tells them to do.
If you cannot shake the impression this "freedom" policy was invented by a committee of barking lunatics, do not feel a need to apologize. Let me try to explain what is happening.
God's Rule vs. Majority Rule
Iraq is 95% Moslem, 60-65% of them Shiite Moslem. For 1,373 years, the custom in Moslem countries has been to have governments and legal systems based on sharia. Sharia is the law of the Koran believed to be handed down from God.
Sharia is why democracy has never been popular in the Islamic world. No man can serve two masters. A person cannot live under majority rule and God's rule. One body of law must trump the other, and Moslems have typically opted for the laws of their God.
There are exceptions, but generally, across the Islamic world, it has always been God's law first, man's law second.
In my opinion, this has been the crux of all political and economic questions throughout the world for centuries. Who's law do you obey, that of your God or that of your government?
In the western world, governments have taught their populations that scripture says we must obey the government. It's a neat trick, the government's behavior is sanctioned by God, so God's law and the government's law are the same thing. The divine right of kings has been replaced by the divine right of the majority.
Moslems have never bought into it, and this is one reason the Third World War is likely to last decades.
The Grand Plan
Washington's plan for Iraqis is a key part of a larger plan that is getting virtually no publicity, but which Washington intends to be the strongest influence on our way of life, including our investments, for decades.
The plan goes under various names, including The New American Century and The New International Strategy. The plan has been under development since the 1980s. In 1992, Bush advisor Paul Wolfowitz authored the initial blueprint called Defense Planning Guidance.
You can find lots of information about the plan at
http://www.newamericancentury.org and
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/iraq/themes/1992.html
The proponents of the plan have not settled on a single name for it, so I call it the New Rome plan, and the proponents, the New Romans.
I chose this name because the plan is a repeat of what Rome was doing two-thousand years ago.
The way the Romans controlled the whole Mediterranean world was by turning everyone into Romans. Conquered groups were ordered to use Roman ways. After decades of behaving like Romans, these people would begin to think like Romans.
When Rome was satisfied that a conquered group had been sufficiently brainwashed, the group would be inducted into the empire as full-fledged Roman citizens.
Washington today is trying to turn everyone into Americans.
No one makes any secret of the fact that Washington sees Iraq as a test case for the New Rome plan. George Bush boasted about it in his February 26th speech. He intends to spread the American Way throughout Arab lands, to "transform that vital region." 2
Defense secretary Rumsfeld writes, "If Iraq - with its size, capabilities, and resources - is able to move to the path of representative democracy, the impact in the region and the world could be dramatic. Iraq could conceivably become a model." He adds a world-class understatement: "The transition to democracy will take time and may not always be a smooth road."3
In other words, Iraqis will do things the American Way, or else. The New International Strategy says Washington will build "the infrastructure of democracy" all over the world.
|
Some Moslems and Christians believe God's law and majority rule can exist side by side as equals. Turks have been trying to make this work since 1923, producing severe political tensions, economic chaos, assassinations, and a parade of military coups.
| |
|
Only by making the whole world democratic, they claim, can they eliminate terrorism. Writing in the Jan/Feb 2003 FOREIGN AFFAIRS, political analyst Thomas Carothers explains, "U.S. officials and policy experts have increasingly come to believe that it is precisely the lack of democracy in many of these countries that helps breed Islamic extremism."
This desire to force the whole world into a US-led democratic matrix is expressed in a new phrase used by US policy gurus: "disconnectedness defines danger."4 If you are not part of the US-led global community, then you are a threat. This is a restatement of a line Bush uses often, "you are either with us or with the terrorists."5
Both these lines are, in effect, declarations of war on anyone who does not join the US Empire.
The New U.S. Imperialism, and Proud of it
Last month I mentioned the government's film series WHY WE FIGHT made during World War II. The purpose of WHY WE FIGHT was to inculcate Americans with the belief the US government was as pure as the driven snow and had no motive but to save mankind from the satanic Japanese and Germans.
The film series worked so well that its message became the premise of scores of war movies.
|
Excerpts
We are determined that before the sun sets on this terrible struggle, our flag will be recognized throughout the world as a symbol of freedom on the one hand, and of overwhelming power on the other."
No compromise is possible. The victory of the democracies can only be complete with the utter defeat," of the non-democratic enemy.
"This is a fight between a free world and a slave world."
"There is a spirit among all nations which is best expressed in our own Declaration of Independence."
"Americans are lighthouses lighting up a dark and foggy world."
"That's what's at stake, it's us or them, the chips are down."
"Two worlds stand against each other. One must die, and one must live."
"He who comes to us with the sword shall perish by the sword."
"Oh Lord, give us faith in the inevitable power of light over darkness, of justice over evil."
No, these are not lines from post-9-11 speeches of President Bush. They are from the film series WHY WE FIGHT made in the 1940s. WHY WE FIGHT sired hundreds of war movies viewed incessantly by baby boomers as they were growing up. Bush, Clinton and many of their advisors are boomers.
|
|
Key point: WHY WE FIGHT and its spawn were made for adults, to be viewed a single time in movie theaters. But then along came TV, and these films were watched incessantly by baby boomers as the boomers were growing up.
Children have little knowledge of the real world and few skills at critical thinking. Young boomers absorbed this propaganda as if it were 100% true.
Part of the propaganda was the message, the American Way is the right way, superior to any other.
The Clintons, Bush and most others running the government today are boomers.
One of the most amazing whoppers in the WHY WE FIGHT series was that President Roosevelt's support for Stalin was necessary to keep the Soviet Union free. Yes, the Soviet Union. Free. This foolishness was inserted into WHY WE FIGHT at a time when Stalin had already murdered more than ten million, and US officials knew it.6
I strongly recommend every reader of EWR watch WHY WE FIGHT, and some of the popular war movies that reinforced its message, for instance, WAKE ISLAND and SANDS OF IWO JIMA.
Hundreds of times, you have probably seen clips from the brilliantly compelling WHY WE FIGHT in other movies, and not recognized the origin.
THEY WERE EXPENDABLE starring John Wayne was so persuasively written that a teenage male who watches it without realizing how he is being manipulated will forever carry its message with him. Even at my age, and with all I know about this subject, the movie's ending gives me a powerful urge to run down to the nearest army recruiter and sign up to save Donna Reed.
You can get these movies at http://www.amazon.com.
My point is that the people running the US government today grew up watching these films and they now make foreign policy decisions based on the model unconsciously formed when they were children.
This warped thinking has led to a bold new attempt not only to justify American imperialism as a necessary evil, but to whitewash it as something to be proud of. A sterling example was the article in the May 6th USA TODAY, "American Imperialism? No Need to Run Away from the Label," by Max Boot.
The argument made in Boot's editorial, in WHY WE FIGHT, and by the Clinton and Bush administrations is that democracy is the one and only correct way to do things, and America has the right and duty to impose it on the rest of the world to thwart "evildoers."
These people are trying to save Donna Reed.
Sections of the New American Century, the New International Strategy, and Bush's speeches are almost word-for-word from WHY WE FIGHT (see "Excerpts" box) and I am sure Bush and his advisors do not even realize it; they absorbed these messages as children.
I do not think I exaggerate when I say that if a person has not recently viewed WHY WE FIGHT and a few of the war movies spun off from it, he cannot fully understand what is happening in Washington.
Mixing images of churches, crosses and other religious symbols, with patriotic symbols such as flags and the Liberty Bell, WHY WE FIGHT paints the Second World War as a holy war. One film ends with a choir singing the rousing, "Onward Christian Soldiers." It's a perfect, though accidental, brainwash that a half-century ago set up the boomers for the present crusade in the Mideast.
An interesting item from ABC News:
" Thousands of marines have been given a pamphlet called 'A Christian's Duty,' a mini prayer book which includes a tear-out section to be mailed to the White House pledging the soldier who sends it in has been praying for Bush."7
The New Marxism
In a CNBC interview aired June 2nd, national security advisor Condoleezza Rice praised "American values" as the "organizing principle for the world."
The New Rome plan is really just a rewrite of Marxism with a stars-and-stripes cover. Marxists believe socialism is the natural condition of humans, and all humans should have it imposed upon them, by force if necessary. You might remember Marx' famous remark, "history is on our side, socialism is inevitable."
"According to a poll released by the Pew Global Attitudes project on June 3rd, foreign approval of America has plummeted since the war in Iraq, particularly in the Muslim world. There, the survey suggests, 'The bottom has fallen out of support for America.' ... In Indonesia, for instance, only 15% of respondents had a favorable opinion of America: a dramatic reversal from a year ago, when more than 60% viewed America positively. ... Many Muslim publics feel threatened by the United States."
- THE ECONOMIST, 7 Jun 03, p.26
|
|
The New Rome plan says Americanism is the natural condition of humans, and all should have it imposed upon them. Washington's new National Security Strategy says, "The United States must defend liberty and justice because these principles are right and true for all people everywhere. ... no nation is exempt from them. ... We will make freedom and the development of democratic institutions key themes."
I urge you to read the whole plan at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.html
Let me point out, I am completely convinced Patrick Henry, James Madison and the other American founders were on the right track; I admire them greatly, my company is named after them. But no one has a monopoly on truth. If others wish to try different paths, they have the right to do so. As judge Learned Hand observed, "The spirit of liberty is the spirit that is not too sure it is right."
Are Moslems Intelligent Enough?
What about sharia?
Forget it. US officials have decided everyone will have democracy.8 This is what the movies taught and this is what all must have.
As explained in the 5/03 and 6/03 EWRs, democracy is not liberty. Liberty is obedience to the two laws taught by all religions - the laws that make civilization possible: do all you have agreed to do and, do not encroach on other persons or their property.
Democracy is majority rule.
It is hard to think of anything farther from sharia than democracy.
US officials demand that Iraqis write a constitution that creates democracy. But millions of Moslems already have a constitution - sharia. This is why the New Rome plan causes them to see democracy as an attack on their religion.
Notice the extreme bigotry in the New Rome plan. Apparently believing they are being magnanimous, US officials argue that Iraqis and other Moslems are intelligent and ethical enough to embrace democracy. In his February 26th speech, Bush said, "Iraq, with its proud heritage, abundant resources and skilled and educated people, is fully capable of moving toward democracy."
To feel the need to make this argument is to assume democracy is superior to sharia and requires more intelligence and ethics than sharia.
Moslems are not stupid. They know they are being talked down to and they will be seen in the West as inferior until they adopt democracy.
Let me emphasize, under the New Rome plan, Moslems do not have the right to opt against democracy. Islamic ways must be subordinate to the American Way. Iraqi civil servants must declare in writing that they will obey the orders of the US even if these orders contradict their cultural or religious beliefs.9
Who Are The Instigators?
The New American Century project was formally launched in 1997. The URL for its web site was mentioned on page 3. Notice, some of the names associated with the project are those closely associated with the White House today - vice president Cheney and defense secretary Rumsfeld, among others. These are the same people who participated in creation of the New International Strategy released by George Bush on September 20, 2002. (Posted at the White House web site, see URL under my heading "The New Marxism.")
Why is this nefarious New American Century plan openly available on government web sites? Because the New Romans are proud of it. They see nothing wrong with it. They believe Americans are a superior form of human who have the right and duty to impose the American Way onto the whole world. This is what WHY WE FIGHT and its offspring taught, and this is what they believe.
Jonathan Mayhew was a minister who gave the sermon in 1750 telling Americans they had to choose between their government's law and their God's law. John Adams reported that this sermon led to the American Revolution.10
|
|
Suppose the Russian, Chinese or Iranian government was planning a New Russian Century, a New Chinese Century or a New Iranian Century for you and your family? How would you feel about that?
This is how the rest of the world feels about us.
Why are US officials so in love with democracy?
Because They Believe It Works
In the 1990s, several think tanks conjured up the idea that democracies do not cause wars. In the words of Bush on February 26th, "The world has a clear interest in the spread of democratic values, because stable and free nations do not breed the ideologies of murder. They encourage the peaceful pursuit of a better life."
This claim became especially popular during the Clinton administration, which launched the effort to forcibly democratize the world, starting with the Balkans.
Remember the assertion by Clinton's secretary of state Madeline Albright in 1998: "If we have to use force, it is because we are America. We are the indispensable nation. We stand tall. We see farther into the future."11
After 9-11, the Bush administration grabbed this Clinton ball and ran with it as their personal holy crusade.
Despite the present republican leadership, the Clintons still support the crusade. Hillary is a member of the Senate Armed Services committee. A week after the start of the invasion of Iraq, when US supply lines were cut and it had become apparent defense secretary Rumsfeld had launched a high-risk blitzkrieg using too few troops, Hillary told him the committee was 100% behind him and would provide anything he needed. Source: "Hillary Goes to War," Wall Street Journal, 6 May 03, p.A26.
Another key point is that US officials did not launch the war in Iraq because of 9-11. 9-11 created the opportunity for them to do what they already wanted to do - to continue the Clinton effort to democratize the globe.
Afghanistan turned out to be a failure, so now they are trying to make Iraq the model for imposing the American Way onto everyone.
Do These Systems Work?
Is sharia a workable system?
I doubt it, but I also doubt democracy is, and if a Moslem wants sharia, we have no right to force democracy onto him.
The idea that democracy is the route to peace makes sense only if we overlook, for instance, eight centuries of the history of England.
In 1215, the English signed the Magna Carta, giving birth to the most influential democracy since ancient Greece.
Then these English democrats set about conquering the Irish, Scots and eventually a fourth of the world.
No one knows how many millions were murdered by this bastion of democracy, but the British conquests were envied by Stalin and Hitler, and rivaled only by Genghis Khan.
This democratic cancer spread for more than 500 years, until a ragtag group of minutemen started rolling it back at Lexington and Concord.
I have been reading the literature of the American Revolution for more than 35 years, and have never seen the word democracy. It was liberty, always liberty, they were fighting for.
They were fighting to get rid of one of the most democratic of all governments.
Apart from the British example, if we believe democracy is the route to peace, how do we explain the French subjugation of Algeria, the Russian massacre of the Chechens, or the US conquest of the American Indians and Filipinos?
To see how well majority rule works, I invite you to visit Kosovo, Bosnia or Albania. But return quickly, they are perpetually on the brink of war.
There is also that small matter of voters, in the newly democratic Russia, electing as their first president a former top communist, and their second president, a former KGB agent.
Majority rule is mob rule. A recent study by the World Bank found that in multi-ethnic societies where one ethnic group forms a majority, the risk of war is 50% higher than in societies where there is no clear majority.12
If we look more carefully at the research behind the glowing endorsements for democracy, we find the endorsements are true to this extent: light-skinned Christian democracies do not attack light-skinned Christian democracies.
This is not an indictment of light skin or Christianity, I happen to be intimately acquainted with both. I mention it only because the belief that democratic governments do not practice war and genocide is, well, ask a Sioux or Cheyenne.
India was conquered by Britain. When Mahatma Gandhi visited England in 1930, he was asked his opinion of western civilization. Gandhi replied that he thought it would be a good idea for the West to be civilized.
Those who believe Iraqis or anyone else will be less violent under majority rule are candidates for the committee mentioned earlier - the barking lunatics. Yet, advocates of The New American Century take their "victory" in Iraq as confirmation they should now move forward, imposing the American Way onto all countries, starting with the Mideast.
Is This A Crusade Against Islam?
Much of the Islamic world is convinced Washington is waging a crusade against Islam. US officials hotly deny it.
Let's try to do what Washington never does, look at things from the other side's point of view.
If Moslems are forced to accept majority rule instead of sharia as their highest law, then if this is not a crusade against Islam, what is it?
In fairness I should point out that I do not believe George Bush is consciously complicit in the New Rome plan or the war on Islam. I do not believe he has the background to understand these things. I think he is being steered by stronger personalities, especially Rumsfeld. I also think Bush is being lied to about what is really happening, his subordinates and foreign allies have been deliberately feeding him false intelligence.
Do Bush's People Really Lie to Him?
"The first casualty when war comes is truth."
--Senator Hiram Johnson, 1917
I often repeat Johnson's remark because it is so important. This new world war has grabbed the economy and the investment markets by the collar, slammed them up against a wall, and begun dictating terms to them. An investor who believes Washington's rosy propaganda will configure his investment portfolio for a world that does not exist.
One of the most significant lies to be uncovered so far is the one about Iraq's nuclear weapons. On September 24th, as Congress prepared to vote for the attack on Iraq, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was told there was ironclad proof Iraqis were working on atomic bombs. On January 28th, president Bush cited this in his State of the Union message, to convince the American public to back the war.
Bush was hoodwinked, the "evidence" had been fabricated by the British government.13
It gets worse. The Iraqi darling of the Bush administration is Ahmad Chalabi. The Bush team hopes Chalabi will be the new president of Iraq, and Chalabi knows it.
Often when foreign demonstrators shout "We want freedom!," US translators report this on the news as "We want democracy!"
|
|
The CIA has now admitted that - surprise! - Chalabi's group has been feeding false intelligence to Bush.14
Just before the attack on Iraq, American special forces troops were slipped into Iraq to scout the alleged WMD sites that would be captured. The special forces found the sites empty,15 but apparently Bush was not told. A former intelligence official says information was used by top officials "only when it fit their agenda."16
So, it seems clear that Bush is being steered by people who know more than he does, and who keep him in the dark.
What a shock, the New Romans behave like Romans.
Why Is It So Important?
Let me emphasize, the New Rome plan is not a partisan issue. It was launched during the Clinton administration. New Romans include republicans and democrats, liberals and conservatives.
9-11 was their big opportunity, their chance to pour all the resources of the federal government into the plan. Bush gave his axis-of-evil speech, signaling his intention to attack Iraq, in January 2002, because, I believe, by then it had become apparent most of the Taliban and al-Qaeda had escaped; Afghanistan could not be used as the model, another country was needed.
The April 23rd WASHINGTON POST reports, "The administration hopes the US-led war in Iraq will lead to a crescent of democracies in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, the Israeli occupied territories and Saudi Arabia. ... 'This is a 25-year project,' one three-star general officer said." "US Planners Surprised...," Wash. Post, 23 Apr 03.
What is monumentally important about all this, and completely ignored by the mainstream press, (some of whom, such as Max Boot, are apparently New Romans) is that the invasion of Iraq was the test case, a precedent. By attacking a country that had not attacked us, the New Romans violated international agreements going all the way back to the 1555 Peace of Augsburg and the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia. They got away with it, so they now intend to reconstruct the whole Mideast, and eventually the entire world, in their own image and likeness, and not one American in a thousand understands enough about it to object.
Singing praises to the new US Empire, historian Niall Ferguson writes in the WALL STREET JOURNAL, "The greatest empire of modern times has come into existence without the American people even noticing."17
Summarizing in 14 words what we have covered so far: Washington, DC in 2003 has become the thing George Washington was fighting in 1776.
And, the troops were lied to. It is clear to everyone now that the war in Iraq is not about WMDs; US officials have found none, at least none that have not been planted.
Nor can it be about bringing freedom to Iraqis, unless freedom means dancing to Washington's tune.
It is about setting a precedent for forcing the American Way - majority rule - onto a billion Moslems, and onto anyone else who resists.
This is a script written sixty years ago for WHY WE FIGHT, and unconsciously absorbed by millions of boomers including, apparently, those running the government today. (Many children are still raised on these movies. I get hate mail from them.) To these people, the plan to democratize the world is holy writ, their destiny, and they are proud of it. This is why it is included on the official White House web site.
Incidentally, there is a tried and true solution to the God's-law-vs.-man's-law problem. It is explained in my book WHATEVER HAPPENED TO JUSTICE? But, few national leaders will touch it, so we should expect the God's-law-vs.-man's-law impasse, and the new world war stoked by it, to last decades.
What will be the effect of New Rome plan on the economy and our investments?
Costs Unparalleled
In my opinion, Washington's attempt to impose democracy onto the whole world will be the most powerful influence on the economy and our investments for decades. I believe it will be the most expensive thing Washington has ever done, more expensive even than World War II. On April 28th, Rumsfeld said the "historic success" in Iraq would influence defense spending for decades.18
One reason millions of French and other west Europeans strongly oppose the US war in Iraq is that they know more about this than Americans do. These countries have been fighting Moslems for a thousand years - they are the ones who started the Crusades. They can see where Washington's New Rome plan is leading, and they want no part of it.
This is why Bush is now turning to Poland and other east European countries as allies. One problem with these allies, however, is that they are not rich like the west Europeans. Carla Anne Robbins and Jeanne Cummings of the WALL STREET JOURNAL report, "American officials are resigned to paying the lion's share of the costs."19
A project this size - remaking the whole world - has never been tackled before. In comparison, the task of beating Germany and Japan in World War II looks like child's play.
The closest thing to it was the British attempt to force the British Way onto the whole world, and the British did succeed in doing this to a fourth of the world. By 1950, the cost of the British project had nearly bankrupted London and severely undermined the value of the pound. By 1980, Great Britain had been reduced to just Britain.
So, combine the New Rome plan with the new soft-dollar policy, and what picture do we get for the investment markets?
Massive Shifts in the Flows of Money
This enormous new war between democracy and Islam must include, among other things, building the giant offshore floating bases described in the previous two EWRs. The government's spending already exceeds its income by $29 billion per month - three times the pace of last year - and they are cutting taxes; how will they pay for all this?
We can be sure they will continue borrowing much of the money, which will eventually drive up long-term interest rates. They will print the rest, undermining the value of the dollar and driving up prices.
Which prices?
Prices of things that profit from war: real estate, raw materials including oil, precious metals, high quality foreign currencies, namely the Swiss franc and New Zealand dollar, and weapons stocks.
One thing we can be sure about: the New Rome and soft dollar policies will be the most important influences on the economy and investment markets, probably for the rest of our lives. Those who understand will have many opportunities for profit. Those who do not will be ambushed by one disaster after another. I hope you will spread the word, warn everyone you care about.
1 "Bush Officials Draft Broad Plan...," Wall Street Journal, 1 May 03, p.1.
2 You can read his speech at http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/ releases/2003/02/20030226-11.html
3 "Core Principles...," by Donald H. Rumsfeld, Wall Street Journal, 27 May 03, p.A14.
4 "Pentagon Prepares...," Wall Street Journal, 27 May 03, p.1.
5 First stated in his speech of 6 Nov 01.
6 THE PENGUIN BOOK OF LIES, edited by Philip Kerr, Viking Penguin, NY, 1990, p.334-338.
7 "US Soldiers in Iraq...," ABC News Online, 30 Mar 03.
8 "Shadow Men," The Economist, 24 Apr 03, and "If Iraq War Opens...," Wall Street Journal, 1 May 03, p.1.
9 "Iraqis Voice Fear of Signing...," LA Times, 18 Jun 03.
10 THE REVOLUTIONARY YEARS, by Mortimer J. Adler, Encyclopedia Britannica press, 1976, pages 21 and 310.
11 BLOWBACK, by Chalmers Johnson, Henry Holt & Co., NY, 2000, p.217.
12 "The Global Menace...," Economist, 24 May 03, p.24.
13 The Economist, 7 Jun 03, p.49.
14 "Selective Intelligence," by Seymour M. Hersh, New Yorker, 5 May 03.
15 Ibid., Hersh.
16 Ibid., Hersh.
17 "The 'E' Word," Wall Street Journal, 6 Jun 03.
18 "Rumsfeld, Franks Thank Troops," AP, 28 April 03.
19 "In President's Postwar Vision...," WSJ, 30 May 03, p.1.
|
U.S. & World Early Warning Report®. Published ten times per year.
© 1991-2007 Henry Madison Research, Inc., PO Box 84908, Phoenix, AZ 85071.
Phone toll-free 1-800-509-5400. Outside US: 602-252-4477. Fax: 602-943-2363.
Visa, MasterCard accepted. www.chaostan.com
|
