Israel had bought billions in oil futures, bets based on secret knowledge of upcoming events that would make oil go up in price, way up, despite all indications otherwise. They knew something nobody else knew. Have we heard this accusation before, perhaps on 9/11, airline stock futures?
Sources in Iran, not only confirmed Israel’s investment strategy but admitted as well that factions in Iran were set to share in Israel’s potential massive profits if, for some mysterious reason, an attack on Iran, one doomed to be at best a joke attack, were to go forward.
Sources in Iran, in actuality, confirmed that also, that they had knowledge of an Israeli attack and that some in Iran were fully complicit, willing to “stand aside” and allow Israel to fly 1400 miles to Iran under continual radar observation, total “sitting ducks,” for an attack that, considering the size of Iran, that would be like killing an elephant with a grain of sand. Any attack attempt would be reported by Russian satellites, advanced Russian systems in Syria and, of course, by the thousands of Russian radar and satellite technicians working in Iran. The “in air” refueling planes themselves would be seen from as far away as Germany.
Iranian sources went further, naming those in Iran who had been offered payment by Israel, part of the oil future proceeds, proceeds that could become a massive debt, hundreds of billions, unless an attack is carried out soon and oil quickly goes above $120 a barrel, way above that, the price set by this round out “futures.”
Iran has its own interests. As a nation with little but an oil economy, it is dependent on direct sale of oil for its survival. When this was last discussed but not leaked by everyone, back in 2008, there was a bit of a different world.
via a reader
Since you post so interesting (in my opinion) articles about COINTELPRO and "Ways to Supress the Truth", perhaps you would find also interesting the text below. It is an essay I wrote: "CONSPIRACY OF THE COLD WAR". Please read at your convenience. If you find it indeed interesting and informational enough - feel free to post it.
Conspiracy of the Cold War
Writing about the Conspiracy of the Cold War is damn near impossible if we don’t change our way of evaluating historical events. We need to learn to read our history books with an analytical eye and draw our own, independent conclusions. To illustrate how important this is (or rather how easily we are getting mislead even with the not-so-important issues), let me use the following example: Please tell me, from your knowledge of history, who was taller and by how much: Napoleon Bonaparte or Josef Stalin? The answer can be found below in the Notes #1 and #2.
As you see the knowledge of two readily available facts (how many centimeters for Napoleon and how many for Stalin) allowed you to draw your own independent conclusion and freed you from a lie you believed in for so long. Now just imagine what the guilty of misleading you on the aforementioned subject did when the misleading could bring some kind of profit......
People who write about sensitive and politically incorrect subjects become victims of “labeling”. Calling them “conspiracy nuts” or at least “conspiracy theorists” usually comes first. Somebody made a compilation of all the tricks used against people like me. Here is the link to it: http://www.proparanoid.net/truth.htm#25r
To make accusing me of being a “nut” more difficult, my research was based only on reputable sources (generally accepted as a part of the main media channels). The quotes I used come from the same sources. In the majority of the cases I just used Wikipedia.com due to its popularity and accessibility for all. We can only speculate to how many “juicy” details have been removed by the people who control the flow of information. It is somehow depressing that I was able to build my case using only sanitized, official sources. This fact alone proves how monstrous a crime was (and is) committed on us all and how stupid and oblivious we are for not noticing it. Perhaps we just deserve it......
People who control the flow of information to our brains became, over the years, so arrogant that it is now mandatory to give us “digested” news – with commentaries tutoring us as to what to think about a particular piece of information. I feel insulted when they try doing this to me. What about you? Most people don't even notice! Since we all live under total information control it is extremely difficult to sift through and to find important pieces of the puzzle still hidden inside the “information fodder” (A.K.A. official news and official history). My objective here is not to educate people but to make them able to educate themselves. I am trying to do this using the Cold War example. I believe this subject of the Conspiracy of the Cold War is crucial to understand as soon as possible....if we want to survive.
If your position is that all events in history took place exactly as it is written in books, then … you are one happy guy! You will waste your time reading anything below. You will find the stuff below to be confusing and strange. Better go back to your TV or the Xbox game you just left ...and don't forget your snack!
The Cold War affected the lives of all. If not personally yours (let's say, you are 20 years old now) then your parents and grandparents. What was it, really? The Whole world was divided into two groups: the Communist Bloc countries (plus their allies) versus Western Bloc countries (NATO) with their allies. There was no neutral country – if your relations with one group were cooling down then automatically you moved closer to the other group. Fascinating! Both groups hated each other causing constant tension, military conflicts and the arms race. There was no solution and no end in sights. The Communist Bloc played the role of “bad guy”, while the Western Bloc “defended democracy and freedom”. Sounds like a screenplay, doesn't it? The tragedy is it took tens of millions of lives and destroyed the lives of hundreds of millions more. It still influences (in a negative way) your existence today but you just don't realize it.
The Cold War was a direct result of the creation of the Soviet Union, which started with THE REVOLUTION. There were actually 3 revolutions. Learning the details about them will explain how the whole conspiracy began.
The “information controllers” created in our minds, an image of revolution – an organized uprising of uneducated masses suddenly able to overthrow (by military means) an existing government and to create a working alternative system of governance. Actually when we people riot, we do it as a protest against something (new taxes, bad president etc.). We want to stop and reverse bad changes but we do not want to change the system we are used to. Sometimes riots trigger (not directly cause) structural changes and these changes are made by one of the leading groups of the society, not by the rioters. This was the case with the February 1917 Revolution in Russia.
Well, let's start from the beginning. In 1905 the popular dissatisfaction with economic situation grew to the conflict proportions. The feudal system of the Russian government could not deal with 20th Century reality. Riots and military mutiny forced the Czar to create some form of democracy (Note # 10 below). The changes were only cosmetic and not very long lasting. The hardship of WWI caused the return of riots (Note #11). A quote from Wikipedia.com explains very well what happened: “This revolution appeared to break out spontaneously, without any real leadership or formal planning. Russia had been suffering from a number of economic and social problems, which were compounded by the impact of the First World War. Bread rioters and industrial strikers were joined on the streets by disaffected elements of the city's garrison. As more and more troops deserted, and with loyal troops trapped at the front, the city moved into a state of anarchy, prompting a revolution the Tsarist regime did not survive.” This perfectly illustrates how we people behave. The riots triggered the pressure applied on the Czar by the country's elite. They wanted to introduce a typical western form of democracy that would solve the existing problems. The Czar understood and abdicated. The new era began. If there was no conspiracy, the crisis in Russia would end at this moment.
Our “information controllers” want us to believe that the October Revolution was a natural continuation of the February Revolution. No. The results of the February Revolution solved all the problems and the riots stopped. Now the conspirators went to work. A young government, popularly known as the Kerensky's government (after its last Prime Minister), was an easy prey for penetrating and/or overthrowing. Who were those conspirators? The people involved in any form of conspiracy must have something in common BEFORE they start to conspire. Sometimes they are members of the same family (the Italian Mafia for example), neighbors, friends, or colleagues from work or from the army or even some social clubs. Sometimes social clubs are created for the sole purpose of secret meetings! Please read the Note #7 now. Did you notice something? Now, please read Notes #8, #9, and #34. In the Note #12 you will find the following quote: “In modern times, the case for seeing the October Revolution as "a classic modern coup d'état without mass support" has been proposed by historian Richard Pipes". So, after all, the October Revolution wasn't a military struggle by desperate masses to wrestle power away but a sneaky transfer. Mr. Kerensky fulfilled his role, moved out of the country and “lived happily ever-after”. He did not join any anticommunist movement; he did not fight for his country. He settled in the U.S.A. and became a celebrated “specialist on Russian affairs” at Stanford University. The real Russian patriots did not forget nor forgive him for his treason. When he died in 1970 the Russian Orthodox Church in America refused him a burial; the Serbian subdivision of the same church also said “no”. Out of desperation the family moved his body to England where he was also rejected. Eventually he was buried at the non-denominational cemetery. Of course our “information controllers” swept all these events under the rug. Wikipedia tries to explain that the reason for the burial refusal was Kerensky's membership of Freemasonry. Just a nice, quick explanation hiding historical significance of the whole event. By the way – isn't Freemasonry a “social club”?
Now, let's think about WHY Russia was chosen for this “social experiment”. What feudalism and communism have in common is the fact they both require a very obedient population in order to exist. Russia, as well as China and India of that time, was a country of peasants (83% of population) still living in a feudal system. They were treated like slaves (if not like half-animals) and they (what is typical for human psychology) considered this normal. They did not know better! Russia just approached the first stage of becoming a modern, industrialized, democratic nation. Already built modern factories, railroads and it was a matter of time for the majority of people to emancipate. Our conspirators understood that if they want to succeed, it must be done now. They wanted to jump in before the capitalistic/democratic stage of Russia's development took place, and to seize control over this so well-trained to obey society. The Orthodox Church, the enforcer of faith in the Czarist system, would be replaced by the communist doctrine. The cult of the Czar (as the omnipotent ruler) would be replaced by the cult of Lenin/Stalin etc. So, frankly speaking, the poor Russian majority did not gain anything. Slaves remained slaves, only the ownership changed.
The Conspirators were so enthusiastic about their initial success that they attempted to bring “freedom to proletariat” of Poland, Germany and Hungary! In all cases they were quickly defeated. The proletariat of all these countries was already emancipated and educated enough to understand the danger. People actually took an active role in defeating the Soviets. Coming back to Note #9. When you do your own research, you will understand that Jacob Schiff was only one of many bankers giving money to stage the “revolution”. What does a real revolution need money for? There is no record of any weapons purchase transaction - Kerensky just gave them enough weapons from the government arsenal! Then....what else did they need so much money for? People? Mercenaries and bribery? Either way – just more proof of criminal dealings and not a real revolution.
One of the best examples still existing in official history (thank God!), showing how the money was “greasing the wheels”, is the life and career of Alexander Parvus. This is phenomenal! He was a high rank intelligence agent, considered a genius by many. To this day we don't know for whom he worked. If there were really two sides in any of the conflicts in which he was involved, he would inevitably be killed for betraying one of the participants. But no, he lived “happily ever after” exactly like Kerensky did! Till his death he maintained a comfortable lifestyle, occupying a well-appointed 32-room mansion on Berlin's Peacock Island (Note #13). All of this without a legitimate source of income. Wikipedia suggests that the mansion was just a “gift” from the German government. During this period, while he lived at the expense of German government (a capitalistic government, therefore a mortal enemy of the Soviets) his sons were well-known Soviet diplomats. What a coincident!
So what exactly did he do in his career? He was a “money-bag man” (or should I rather say “Santa-Claus”) and an advisor to the Russian communists, German Communists and Turkish revolutionaries. Nobody knows where the money was coming from. Pointing fingers at the Germans (as Wikipedia does), without any supporting evidence or even a logical explanation is wrong. It makes absolutely no sense why the Germans would actively support a communist coup in Russia having no warranty that the future Soviet government would stop the war. They also had no warranty that the Soviet Union, when created, would not try to cause a revolution in Germany – actually they did! Considering the German intelligence to be total imbeciles would be silly. The only logical explanation is that Mr. Parvus' money and power came from a different source. Another good example is his involvement in Turkey. A quote from Wikipedia: “Soon afterwards Parvus moved to Istanbul in Turkey, where he lived for five years. There he set up an arms trading company which profited handsomely during the Balkan War. He became the financial and political advisor of the Young Turks. In 1912 he was made editor of Turk Yurdu, their daily newspaper. He worked closely with the triumvirs known as the Three Pashas - Enver, Talat and Cemal - and Finance Minister Djavid Bey. The triumvirs of Three Pashas planned and executed the Armenian Genocide in 1915. His firm dealt with the deliveries of foodstuffs for the Turkish army and he was a business partner of the Krupp concern, of Vickers Limited, and of the famous arms dealer Basil Zaharov. Arms dealings with Vickers Limited at war time gave basis to the theory that Alexander Parvus was also a British intelligence asset.” Wow! So a British spy as well! Let's make it simpler: he was an agent for people making money of our misery – the conspirators. For him there were not two sides of any conflict and this is reality!
Back to Russia. Keeping the majority close to the feudal serf’s state of mind was essential for the existence of communism but it had its own consequences. Feudal serfs were not able to participate in industrial progress – this is exactly what caused the collapse of the Czar's government! The use of more whipping and less bread did not produce any results except millions of dead people (Note # 28). The creators of the whole scheme needed to arrange for clandestine economic support of this giant concentration camp. Why clandestine?. Communists preached the violent elimination of existing western forms of government; therefore they became natural mortal enemies isolated from the rest of the world. For example the U.S.A. officially recognized Soviet Union only in 1930. Our conspirators supported and DEVELOPED the Soviet Union by the way of private investments. All of it was semi-secret and gigantic in scale. In case somebody discovered the truth – the excuse was: “well, this is a private enterprise”. The way I understand private enterprises, the investments go to places where there is a probability of return plus the probability of future profits. The Soviets were mortal enemies of private enterprise (capitalism) and they kept proving it with their actions. Why did the biggest and most profitable firms of the world invest huge amounts of money when it was obvious there would not be any return or profit? Was this an intentional bad investment or.......they expected future profits of different kind? Well, for sure the first “perpetual enemy” in history was created and only needed to grow in strength.
One of the “poster children” of the clandestine support for the Soviets was Armand Hammer (Note #21). He spent his lifetime working as a back-door channel of “life support” for the Soviet Union. Like in the case of Alexander Parvus – nobody knows for whom this guy worked. He was on the FBI “black list” (as suspected Soviet spy) from the very beginning. Later in life he publicly admitted to be a communist sympathizer. In the same moment he was one of the most conservative, right wing republicans – even charged with illegal support for President Nixon! Doesn't this look like a paradox? Well, only when you use the knowledge you obtained from the “information fodder”. Exactly like Mr. Parvus – this guy was above the Cold War “conflict”. He was on the conspirator’s team.
It was known to everyone (also a source of many jokes) that everything (except some military equipment) made in Soviet Union was an exact copy of a western product. It would be waste of time to list all examples – everything means EVERYTHING. Now we have to use our analytical thinking and ask the following questions:
Was this happening because all products were made in the facilities provided to Soviets (in secret) by the original western manufacturers?
Were Soviets stealing technologies and designs of everything they produced? If this is the case, WHY there was no legal action against it? Just a cover-up to keep this giant concentration camp alive?
My belief is it was a mixture of both. Please read the works of Professor Anthony C. Sutton (Note #14) to learn more details.
There were instances that somebody unaware of the real situation tried to escape the Soviet Bloc hoping to join and work for the other side.....but there weren’t two sides! These people (especially KGB members and military personnel) were quickly eliminated by the swift cooperation of “both sides”. There is very little written about this and the people who survived are afraid to talk. The only readily available story comes from Canada and dates back to 1945. Mr. Igor Gouzenko walked into the office of Canadian Police with a briefcase full of documents, Soviet code books, and deciphering materials. How valuable was his information? Let me quote from Wikipedia:
“The evidence provided by Gouzenko led to the arrest of 39 suspects; a total of 18 were eventually convicted of a variety of offenses. Among those convicted were Fred Rose, the only Communist Member of Parliament in the Canadian House of Commons; Sam Carr, the Communist Party's national organizer; and scientist Raymond Boyer. A Royal Commission of Inquiry to investigate espionage, headed by Justice Robert Taschereau and Justice Roy Kellock, was conducted into the Gouzenko Affair and his evidence of a Soviet spy ring in Canada. It also alerted other countries around the world, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, that Soviet agents had almost certainly infiltrated their nations as well. Gouzenko provided many vital leads which assisted greatly with ongoing espionage investigations in Britain and North America. His testimony is believed [by whom?] to have been vital in the successful prosecution of Klaus Fuchs, the German communist physicist who emigrated to Britain and who later stole atomic secrets for the Soviets. Fuchs spent some time at the Chalk River Laboratories, northwest of Ottawa, where atomic research had been underway since the early 1940s His information also likely helped in the investigation of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg in the U.S. Gouzenko, being a cipher clerk by profession, likely also assisted with the Venona investigation, which probed Soviet codes and which eventually led to the discovery of vital Soviet spies such as Donald Maclean, Guy Burgess, Kim Philby, Anthony Blunt, and John Cairncross (the so-called Cambridge Five), as well as Alan Nunn May.”
Gouzenko was lucky. His fate was quickly decided by honest members of the Canadian government before the conspirators could do anything. In English we say: “you can’t un-ring a bell”. This saved his life. Let me again illustrate with a quote from Wikipedia:
“Robertson told the Prime Minister that Gouzenko was threatening suicide, but King was adamant that his government not get involved, even if Gouzenko was apprehended by Soviet authorities. Robertson ignored the Prime Minister's wishes and authorized granting asylum to Gouzenko and his family, on the basis that their lives were in danger. “ (Note #41)
Evidently, with time, Gouzenko understood the whole game and his position in it. Unlike the scores of Soviet defectors that followed, he completely disappeared from the scene. He knew he could not give our conspirators any excuses to blame him for a potential assassination by the Soviets. If the Soviets found him, this would be only possible with Canadian cooperation. The extent of secrecy he maintained can be clearly seen in history of his grave. He died in 1982, his wife in 2001. The grave remained unmarked till 2002 – over 10 years after the “collapse” of communism! The aforementioned scores of Soviet defectors should be considered “theater”. On average they provided very little information but they always maintained a celebrity image with TV appearances, interviews, conferences etc. By their behavior, these professionally trained intelligence officers, proved that they had no fear of dying because......hmm…let’s think........there was really nobody after them.....?
Some escapees of lower importance were handled sloppily enough to find their chance of survival. These cases illustrate how the system worked.
In 1970 seaman Simonas Kudirka jumped from the Soviet ship by the coast of Massachusetts and asked for political asylum (Note #3). Since he was a real escapee he was not accepted. The State Department (the office responsible for handling asylum seeking cases) did not respond to his request leaving the decision in hands of the military (in this case, the Coast Guard). This was done against U.S. Laws and regulations. Then, military superiors ordered the Capitan of the Coast Guard vessel to allow the Soviets to come and take Kudirka back by force. In Stalinist times this was equal with a death sentence – it happened to many Soviet seamen in the 1940s in and around San Francisco. Kudirka was “lucky” - he was only sent to Siberia! Also, he had some family (from his mother’s side) living in the U.S.A. When they learned what happened to him, they started a campaign. Our conspirators needed to do some damage control before people start suspecting how the truth looks. They found scapegoats in the form of the Coast Guard officers and.....brought Kudirka from Siberia directly to the U.S.A.! Now use your logical thinking: if the Soviet Union was a genuine enemy of the U.S.A., would they bow under American pressure (clearly an act of weakness), or rather would they do the opposite to show their strength and discourage future escape attempts?
The next case is of a Polish artist, Andrzej Suda. He came to the U.S.A. in 1985 hoping for the “American dream”. Soon after arriving, the Soviet Block intelligence network set him up with a girl. She was a spy. He was her cover and in the future was to be eliminated (Note #27). When he realized what was happening he informed the FBI and a half a dozen of other American agencies. To make a long story short, he became the enemy! His former girlfriend became a darling of the U.S. Establishment. When the State Department wanted to deport her (because they discovered her real profession), Congressman Duncan Hunter, one of the most influential republicans (and a presidential candidate) stopped the deportation procedure and gave her a Green Card (U.S. Residency) with a new “A” number - a criminal act by itself! Her original files at the State Department and the F.B.I. simply disappeared. Andrzej Suda's career (and life) was then systematically destroyed by “unknown forces”. Now he resides in Switzerland trying to put his life back together.
He is included in the worldwide list of whistleblowers: http://wikicompany.org/wiki/911:Whistleblowers (look for American citizens).
What I found interesting - one person involved in Suda's case (Stanislaw Marianski, the brother of the spy girl Suda was involved with) did exactly what Kudirka did. He was a Polish marchant marine and in 1969 jumped from the ship asking for political asylum. Since he was from the "special” group of people he was accepted and treated like a celebrity. What a contrast! If you want to learn more about him – search for Stanislaw Marianski. It is here: http://www.aisjca-mft.org/suda.fotodoc/FOTODO~B.JPG
People like Kudirka and Suda were occasionally able to break through creating a potential great danger of exposure to the whole system. Our conspirators invented something better, more foolproof – a VIRTUAL ENEMY! Of course it sounds ridiculous and impossible at the first glance but....with appropriate preparations can be achieved (Notes #15, 39, 40 and 47):
Generation after generation we the people were conditioned to accept only “digested news” coming to us. This made us incapable of independent analytical thinking. We just “swallow the information fodder”.
Conspirators needed actors to play a role of the virtual enemy. About 90% of those actors did not even know they were actors in some kind of script. They were set up in a specific situation and killed. The following day their families heard in shock from the “digested news” that their loved ones were foot soldiers (for example suicide bombers) for the hated virtual enemy. Next, perhaps 9%, are the victims of some form of mind control (Note #43, 44 and 45). These poor souls perform some violent acts, get killed in action or just arrested, tried and executed for their crimes. They are very important. They provide realism - the real face to the “virtual enemy” image. In the end we have some REAL ACTORS! These are some of the conspirators. They appear from time to time to be acting as leaders or at least speakers for the virtual enemy. Since they are conspirators they never get caught. Their speeches, full of venom, should keep us hating this virtual enemy (Notes # 16, #20 and #46). George Orwell in his book “1984” called this “an hour of hate”.
How our conspirators made a “nice” transition from one scheme to the next? First they needed the “collapse” of communism. Preferably communism should die of “natural causes”, from the illnesses we all knew existed from the very beginning – a simple inability to survive economically on its own. As we all know from the news it was the Polish workers movement of SOLIDARITY that started the whole process. To explain better what it really was I must tell you a story of two brothers.
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves."
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
The older brother Stefan Michnik joined the Stalinist forces immediately after the communism arrival in Poland. He wanted to become a judge, so he became a judge....without any law school diploma! Under Stalin it was absolutely insignificant to have legal knowledge when you sentence people to death and that is exactly what Stefan Michnik did best. He even liked participating in executions! If he was doing this a few years earlier, in a German uniform, his name would be synonymous with that of a monster. He would be chased, found, tried and executed for his crimes. If he was caught before the Nuremberg trials, he surely would end up sitting together with Göring and others. But he was working for the “right side”....
So what happened to him? From 1968 he lives happily in Sweden. You remember the stories of Alexander Kerensky and Alexander Parvus? Stefan Michnik is of that kind. The public outrage forced the Polish court to issue an arrest warrant (August 2007) and to request his extradition from Sweden. On November 18th, 2010 Swedish court rejected Polish request on bases of time limitation (Note #5). So, now my children – listen carefully: if you want to murder people for pleasure, to become a monster of global proportions, and never worry to pay for what you have done – you must join the right group of people. The conspirators I am trying to point out to you are the right group. Enjoy yourselves!
The younger brother Adam Michnik was a driving force of the SOLIDARITY movement. Even today he is considered the “gray eminence” of Polish establishment. In case you wonder who is taking care of the “information control” for Poland: Adam Michnik is the founder and the editor-in-chief of the largest newspaper in Poland: Gazeta Wyborcza (Notes #6 and #25). Sorry, I almost forgot to mention his father Ozjasz Szechter! Mr. Szechter was a very active communist before WWII in Poland. In 1934 he was tried and imprisoned for a conspiracy to overthrow the Polish government. It was a communist movement, clearly an extension of the Soviet NKVD, trying to take control of the country and to join the Soviet Union (Note #22). The Institute of National Remembrance (I.P.N.) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instytut_Pami%C4%99ci_Narodowej) made this fact public. Adam Michnik sued this governmental agency for slander arguing that his father was not a Soviet spy as it was stated. In fact he was tried on even higher charges of treason; therefore the court ruled for I.P.N. and dismissed the case. Adam Michnik did not stop there. He took the case to higher court and won. The governmental agency had to apologize and to remove the word “spy” from their findings. So, not only is Stefan Michnik “so special” but the whole family.....
Now we are coming back to the SOLIDARITY “revolution” in Poland. The first food riots took place in 1970. It was a genuine movement so it was crushed by the army. Many people died, especially in Gdansk. The conspirators perhaps realized in that moment that such an anticommunist “uprising”, when not violent and properly controlled, could be the perfect cover for the transition into new system. Having this in mind the “reforms” made after 1970 were aimed to create even greater problems in about 10 years. Poland took huge amount of western loans and spent them quickly. For the show they purchased some licenses in order to start quality production. Most of the loans....nobody knows what happened. Of course the whole plan was to fail, and it did. In the meantime the conspirators had 10 years of time to create a base for their Solidarity “movement”. At first there was K.O.R. (Defense Committee for Workers) established on 23 September 1976. Founding members were of course only intellectuals (most connected to conspirators, like Adam Michnik), not a single worker. Some real patriots were naïve enough to join but were rather discouraged to stay. Mr. Antoni Pajdak would be a good example. His active political life started in 1910 when he was 16. Spent 10 years of his life between Soviet prisons and Siberia. Lost his wife when she was “suicided” by Stalinist bandits. His daughter, arrested 3 days after his wife, spent 6 years in prison. He became one of the founding members of K.O.R. In 1981 “somebody” beat this 87 year old man on the street and left him to die. He survived. Nothing bad ever happened to the right members of K.O.R. (Note #23)
Later the labor union called SOLIDARITY (SOLIDARNOSC in Polish) was created. Conspirators found one of their informants fitting the profile of the popular leader. He was genetically Polish, looked Polish and was primitive enough to play the role of “one of the folks” (Note #4).
The truth is only a small percentage of us humans have the characteristics of a fighter and stand up to defend themselves. The majority are just “sheeple”. The conspirators know this and use it to their advantage. They cultivate in our minds the illusion of opposites. Since “nobody questions good news” - we remain happy, docile, and stupid. Why am I bringing this subject? Well, it is necessary in order to continue my Solidarity story. Just before the transition conspirators needed to clean their puppet movement from undesirables. The perfect member of SOLIDARITY should be “sheeple” - perhaps vocal but surely unable to act independently (without any directive from above). Conspirators were especially concerned (understandably) with the members willing (and able) to take matters in their own hands. How to find them in order to eliminate? Communist government of General Piotr Jaruzelski announced Martial Law. The Army flooded Polish streets with troops and tanks. For the normal average Pole this moment appeared as the “end of dreams” (the sheeple majority) or “call to arms” (the active type). Jaruzelski arrested all the Solidarity leaders and put them in detention facilities (read: hotels). This made them excused from any action on the street and kept them SAFE. Many places in Poland exploded with strikes and fighting. Army attacked with brutal force killing most of the active types (Note #35). The objective was reached – the grass-roots level of Solidarity was finally “clean” and 100% controllable. Now the conspirators only needed to continue elimination of some unwanted individuals from the higher parts of Polish society. Materials regarding these atrocities are not available in English (I wonder WHY?...). Please read my translation and interpretation posted below (Notes #24, 26, 36, 37 and 38).
The transition went in accordance with plans – lots of “Blah, blah, blah” and no violence. Nobody from the communist side was hurt, arrested or in any way suffered. Actually, many became rich. If you look deeply into the past of the Eastern European financial elite you will find only high rank party members, agents of secret services, and military officers. Earlier, writing about the October Revolution, my comment was: “Slaves remained slaves, only the ownership changed”. This time the owners remained the same. Let me use one quite anecdotal illustration of what happened. In 1991 Poles were joking about it. Under communism, on every level of administration, one could see the evidence of dual power. The building of let's say, county offices was usually overshadowed by bigger building called HOUSE OF THE PARTY. There, local Party apparatchicks had their offices. During the transition the Communist Party practically disappeared and all Party buildings became.....banks! Poles were joking that buildings did not change and people working inside did not change. What do you think happened with the majestic building of the Central Committee of the Polish Communist Party (K.C. PZPR) in Warsaw? You guessed it – became Polish Stock Exchange! (Note #42)
When the transition was successfully finished the time came to make the “sheeple” forget and forgive the previous regime. All cases regarding communist atrocities were re-opened (supposedly to “serve justice” this time) but nothing came out of it. The horrible case of Stefan Michnik brought some progress only...to be blocked by the Swedish branch of conspirators. Adam Michnik with his propaganda arm Gazeta Wyborcza started a campaign to clean the image (Note #25) of General Jaruzelski and everybody else guilty of murdering Polish patriots. Polish secret services, so experienced with torturing and murdering own citizens, did not lose employment. Now the same criminals in the same facilities torture innocent people in the name of the “War on Terror”(Notes #17, #18 and #19). I would risk to say, Adam Michnik is not too upset about it.....
How should I finish this essay? It would be easy if the historical subject I was writing about came to its end one day but the conspiracy of Cold War didn't really die, just went through metamorphosis........
As they say in America: “same cake, different day”.
Who is guilty of this situation? I am and you are – we, normal people, are responsible for this and we all pay one way or another. There is so much wisdom in the following quote:
“The world is a dangerous place to live - not because of the people who are evil but because of the people who don't do anything about it.”
1. Josef Stalin
From Wikipedia: While photographs and portraits portray Stalin as physically massive and majestic (he had several painters shot who did not depict him "right"), he was only five feet four inches tall(160 cm). President Harry S. Truman, who stood only five feet nine inches himself, described Stalin as "a little squirt".
From Wikipedia: The British Tory press sometimes depicted Napoleon as much smaller than average height, and this image persists. Confusion about his height also results from the difference between the French pouce and British inch—2.71 and 2.54 cm respectively; he was about 1.7 meters (5 ft 7 in) tall, average height for the period.
From Wikipedia: On November 23, 1970, Simonas "Simas" Kudirka, a Soviet seaman of Lithuanian origin, leapt from the 400-foot (120 m) mother ship Sovetskaya Litva, anchored in U.S waters near Aquinnah, Massachusetts on Martha's Vineyard Island, aboard the Coast Guard ship Vigilant, sailing from New Bedford. The Soviets accused Kudirka of theft of 3,000 rubles from the ship's safe. Ten hours passed. After attempts to get the U.S. State Department to provide guidance failed, Rear Admiral William B. Ellis, commander of the First Coast Guard District, ordered Commander Ralph E. Eustis to permit a detachment of Soviet seamen to board the Vigilant to return Kudirka to the Soviet ship. This led to a change in asylum policy by the U.S. Coast Guard. Admiral Ellis and his chief of staff were given administrative punishment under Article 15 of the UCMJ. Commander Eustis was given a non-punitive letter of reprimand and assigned to shore duty. Kudirka was tried for treason by the Soviet Union and given a ten-year sentence in the Gulag. Subsequent investigations revealed that Kudirka could claim American citizenship through his mother and was allowed to come to the United States in 1974. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kudirka_incident#The_Kudirka_incident
In a new book, two Polish historians publish what they say is proof that Solidarity hero Lech Walesa collaborated with the Communist-era secret police -- and tried to cover it up decades later. The accusations have set off a new storm over Poland's past.
Yet the authors of "The Secret Police and Lech Walesa," both of whom work as historians at the government-affiliated Institute for National Remembrance, or IPN, say they have uncovered compelling new evidence that Walesa collaborated with Communist officials under the code name "Bolek."
http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Michnik (only available in Polish)
6. Adam Michnik - ”Gray Eminence” of the Solidarity movement, brother of Stefan
From Wikipedia: Adam Michnik is the editor-in-chief of Gazeta Wyborcza, where he sometimes writes under the pen-names of Andrzej Zagozda or Andrzej Jagodziński. In 1966-1989 he was one of the leading organizers of the illegal, democratic opposition in Poland. A historian, essayist, and political commentator, he is the recipient of laureate of many awards, including a Knight of the Legion of Honour and European of the Year. He was born to Ozjasz (Uzziah) Szechter, the first secretary of the Communist Party of Western Ukraine and his wife Helena (née Michnik), a historian, children's book writer and Communist. Michnik's parents were Jews. Michnik describes himself as a Pole of Jewish origins. His half-brother, Stefan Michnik, was a judge in the 1950s, during the period of Stalinism and currently resides in Sweden. He publicly admitted passing death sentences on Polish anti-communist resistance fighters, such as major Zefiryn Machalla. He is a member of Association of Polish Writers and Council on Foreign Relations. On the anniversary of the introduction of martial law, on 13 December 2005, Michnik delivered exposition at the University of Warsaw (article published in "Gazeta Wyborcza") in which he appealed to president Lech Kaczyński for statutory abolition for those who were responsible for the martial law. The article was a response to information about instituting an inquiry by Institute of National Remembrance (IPN) against General Jaruzelski. Michnik appealed about abolition even earlier- in 1991 (during the exposition on Faculty of Law at University of Maria Curie- Skłodowska in Lublin (UMCS), "Gazeta w Lublinie" 11-12-1991) and also in 2001 in the article "Stan wojenny 20 lat później" ("Gazeta Wyborcza" 12 December 2001).
From Wikipedia: Kerensky's father was the headmaster of Vladimir Ulyanov (Lenin) at a secondary school for boys in Simbirsk, and members of the Kerensky and Ulyanov families were friends.…....., Kerensky adopted a policy that isolated the right-wing conservatives, both democratic and monarchist-oriented. His philosophy of "no enemies to the left" greatly empowered the Bolsheviks and gave them a free hand, allowing them to take over the military arm or "voyenka" of the Petrograd and Moscow Soviets. His arrest of Kornilov and other officers left him without strong allies against the Bolsheviks, who ended up being Kerensky's strongest and most determined adversaries, as opposed to the right wing, which evolved into the White movement. During the Kornilov Affair, Kerensky had distributed arms to the Petrograd workers, and by November most of these armed workers had gone over to the Bolsheviks. On 6–7 November [O.S. 25–26 October] 1917 the Bolsheviks launched the second Russian revolution of the year. Kerensky's government in Petrograd had almost no support in the city. Only one small force, the First Petrograd Women's Battalion, also known as The Women's Death Battalion, was willing to fight for the government against the Bolsheviks, but this force too crossed over to the revolution without firing a single shot. It took less than 20 hours before the Bolsheviks had taken over the government. Kerensky eventually settled in New York City, but spent much of his time at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University in California, where he both used and contributed to the Institution's huge archive on Russian history, and where he taught graduate courses. He wrote and broadcast extensively on Russian politics and history. His last public speech was delivered at Kalamazoo College, in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Kerensky died at his home in New York City in 1970, one of the last surviving major participants in the turbulent events of 1917. The local Russian Orthodox Churches in New York refused to grant Kerensky burial, seeing him as being a freemason and being largely responsible for Russia falling to the Bolsheviks. A Serbian Orthodox Church also refused so Kerensky's body was flown to London where he was buried at Putney Vale's non-denominational cemetery.
8. Just a quote: “Communism is not [and never was] a creation of the masses to overthrow the Banking establishment, but rather a creation of the Banking establishment to overthrow and enslave the people.” Anthony J. Hilder
9. Just a quote: In 1949, Jacob Schiff’s grandson, John Schiff, was quoted as stating that Jacob Schiff invested “about $20,000,000” in the Russian Revolution. (Cholly Knickerbocker column, New York Journal American, February 3, 1949.) That $20,000,000 would easily equal $400,000,000 in today’s dollars. Please read also Notes #29, 30, 31, 32, and 33
10. Revolution of 1905
From Wikipedia: The 1905 Russian Revolution was a wave of mass political and social unrest that spread through vast areas of the Russian Empire. Some of it was directed against the government, while some was undirected. It included terrorism, worker strikes, peasant unrest, and military mutinies. It led to the establishment of limited constitutional monarchy, the State Duma of the Russian Empire, the multi-party system, and the Russian Constitution of 1906. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1905_Russian_Revolution
From Wikipedia: The February Revolution (Russian: Февральская революция) of 1917 was the first of two revolutions in Russia in 1917. Centered around the then capital Petrograd (modern day St. Petersburg) in March (late February in the Julian calendar). Its immediate result was the abdication of Tsar Nicholas II, the collapse of Imperial Russia and the end of the Romanov dynasty. Tsarism was replaced by a Russian Provisional Government under Prince Georgy Lvov, an alliance between liberals and socialists who wanted to instigate political reform, creating a democratically-elected executive and constituent assembly. Socialists also formed the Petrograd Soviet, and the two ruled together in a system known as Dual Power.
This revolution appeared to break out spontaneously, without any real leadership or formal planning. Russia had been suffering from a number of economic and social problems, which were compounded by the impact of the First World War. Bread rioters and industrial strikers were joined on the streets by disaffected elements of the city's garrison. As more and more troops deserted, and with loyal troops trapped at the Front, the city moved into a state of anarchy, prompting a revolution the Tsarist regime did not survive.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/February_Revolution
From Wikipedia: It followed and capitalized on the February Revolution of the same year. The October Revolution in Petrograd overthrew the Russian Provisional Government and gave the power to the local soviets dominated by Bolsheviks. As the revolution was not universally recognized outside of Petrograd there followed the struggles of the Russian Civil War (1917–1922) and the creation of the Soviet Union in 1922. Bolsheviks led their forces in the uprising in Petrograd (modern day Saint Petersburg), the capital of Russia, against the Kerensky Provisional Government. For the most part, the revolt in Petrograd was bloodless, with the Red Guards led by Bolsheviks taking over major government facilities with little opposition before finally launching an assault on the poorly defended Winter Palace. The official Soviet version of events follows: An assault led by Vladmir Lenin was launched at 9:45 p.m. signaled by a blank shot from the cruiser Aurora. (The Aurora was placed in Petrograd and still stands there now.) The Winter Palace was guarded by Cossacks, cadets (military students), and a Women's Battalion. It was taken at about 2 a.m. The earlier date was made the official date of the Revolution, when all offices except the Winter Palace had been taken. More contemporary research with access to government archives significantly corrects accepted Soviet edited and embellished history. The archival version shows that parties of Bolshevik operatives sent out from the Smolny by Lenin took over all critical centers of power in Petrograd in the early hours of the night without a shot being fired. In actual fact the effectively unoccupied Winter Palace also was taken bloodlessly by a small group which broke in, got lost in the cavernous interior, and accidentally happened upon the remnants of Kerensky's provisional government in the imperial family's breakfast room. The illiterate revolutionaries then compelled those arrested to write up their own arrest papers. The stories of the "defense of the Winter Palace" and the heroic "Storming of the Winter Palace" came later as the creative propaganda product of Bolshevik publicists. Grandiose paintings depicting the "Women's Battalion" and photo stills taken from Sergei Eisenstein's staged film depicting the "politically correct" version of the October events in Petrograd came to be taken as truth.
Later official accounts of the revolution from the Soviet Union would depict the events in October as being far more dramatic than they actually had been. (See firsthand account by British General Knox.) This was helped by the historical reenactment, entitled The Storming of the Winter Palace, which was staged in 1920. This reenactment, watched by 100,000 spectators, provided the model for official films made much later, which showed a huge storming of the Winter Palace and fierce fighting (See Sergei Eisenstein's October: Ten Days That Shook the World). In reality the Bolshevik insurgents faced little or no opposition. The insurrection was timed and organized to hand state power to the Second All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies, which began on 25 October. After a single day of revolution eighteen people had been arrested and two had been killed. In modern times, the case for seeing the October Revolution as "a classic modern coup d'état without mass support" has been proposed by historian Richard Pipes.
In 1911 General Knox was appointed the British Military Attaché in Russia. As a fluent speaker of Russian, he became a liaison officer to the Russian Army during First World War. During October Revolution in Russia Alfred Knox observed the Bolsheviks taking the Winter Palace on 25 October (7 November) 1917:
"The garrison of the Winter Palace originally consisted of about 2,000 all told, including detachments from yunker and ensign schools, three squadrons of Cossacks, a company of volunteers and a company from the Women's Battalion.
The garrison had dwindled owing to desertions, for there were no provisions and it had been practically starved for two days. There was no strong man to take command and to enforce discipline. No one had any stomach for fighting; and some of the ensigns even borrowed great coats of soldier pattern from the women to enable them to escape unobserved.
The greater part of the yunkers of the Mikhail Artillery School returned to their school, taking with them four out of their six guns. Then the Cossacks left, declaring themselves opposed to bloodshed! At 10 p.m. a large part of the ensigns left, leaving few defenders except the ensigns of the Engineering School and the company of women."
In 1921 Knox published his memoirs, With the Russian Army: 1914-1917. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_Revolution
From Wikipedia: Israel Lazarevich Gelfand (Russian: Изра́иль Ла́заревич Ге́льфанд) best remembered by his pseudonym, Alexander Parvus, was born of ethnic Jewish parents on September 8 [O.S. August 27] 1867 in the shtetl of Berazino, now part of Belarus. He was raised in Odessa (in today's Ukraine), where he began associating with the Jewish revolutionary (The Bund) circles. At age nineteen he left for Basel, where he continued his studies, becoming a doctor of economy in 1891 (his dissertation dealing with "work recovery"). By this time he openly became a Marxist. He moved to Germany, joined the Social Democratic Party and befriended German revolutionary Rosa Luxemburg. In 1900, he met Vladimir Lenin for the first time, in Munich, each admiring the other's theoretical works. Parvus encouraged Lenin to begin publishing his revolutionary paper Iskra. During this time he developed the concept of using a foreign war to provoke an internal revolt within a country. It was at this time that Parvus revived, from Marx, the concept-strategy of "permanent revolution". He communicated this philosophy to Trotsky who then further expanded and developed it. Some accuse Parvus of having funded Lenin while in Switzerland. A biography of Parvus by the authors Scharlau and Zeman have concluded that there was absolute cooperation between the two. In March 1917, in a plan strategized together with Parvus, German intelligence sent Vladimir Lenin and a group of 30 of his revolutionary associates from Switzerland through Germany in a train car under supervision of Swiss socialist Fritz Platten. As his political activity waned, the war ground to a halt, and he refused to help the new German authorities smash the Spartacist uprising, he retreated to a German island near Berlin. Despite his failure to help the new Weimar Republic regime he was well provided for, living in a well-appointed 32-room mansion in Berlin's Peacock Island. He later published his memoirs from this residence. Parvus died in Berlin on December 12, 1924. His body was cremated and interred in a Berlin cemetery. After his death Konrad Haenisch wrote in his memoir "This man possessed the ablest brains of the Second International"
During his lifetime Alexander Parvus' reputation among his revolutionary peers suffered as a result of the Maxim Gorky affair and the fact that he was in effect a German government agent. At the same time both his business skills and revolutionary ideas were appreciated and relied upon by Russian and German revolutionaries and Ottoman's Young Turks. After the October Revolution in Russia for obvious political reasons his role was denied and he himself vilified. This continued during Stalin's era and sometimes had anti-Semitic overtones to it. In Germany however he was considered favorably. His name is often used in modern political debates in Russia.
Surprisingly, Parvus has left no documents after his death and all of his savings disappeared. Both of his surviving sons became great Soviet diplomats, although one died in the gulag and the other disappeared.
From Wikipedia: Sutton studied at the universities of London, Goettingen and California and received his D.Sc. degree from University of Southampton, England. He was an economics professor at California State University Los Angeles and a research fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution from 1968 to 1973. During his time at the Hoover Institute he wrote the major study Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development (in three volumes), arguing that the West played a major role in developing the Soviet Union from its very beginnings up until the present time (1970). Sutton argued that the Soviet Union's technological and manufacturing base—which was then engaged in supplying the Viet Cong -- was built by United States corporations and largely funded by US taxpayers. Steel and iron plants, the GAZ automobile factory - a Ford subsidiary, located in eastern Russia - and many other Soviet industrial enterprises were, according to Sutton, built with the help or technical assistance of the United States or U.S. corporations. He argued further that the Soviet Union's acquisition of MIRV technology was made possible by receiving (from U.S. sources) machining equipment for the manufacture of precision ball bearings, necessary to mass-produce MIRV-enabled missiles. In 1973 Sutton published a popularized, condensed version of the three volumes called National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union, and was thereby forced out of the Hoover Institution.
In his book, Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era (New York: Viking Press;1970), Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote: For impressive evidence of Western participation in the early phase of Soviet economic growth, see Antony C. Sutton's “Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development: 1917-1930”, which argues that Soviet economic development for 1917-1930 was essentially dependent on Western technological aid (p.283), and that at least 95 per cent of the industrial structure received this assistance. (p. 348).
Professor Richard Pipes, of Harvard, said in his book, Survival Is Not Enough: Soviet Realities and America's Future (Simon & Schuster; 1984): “In his three-volume detailed account of Soviet Purchases of Western Equipment and Technology ...Sutton comes to conclusions that are uncomfortable for many businessmen and economists. For this reason his work tends to be either dismissed out of hand as 'extreme' or, more often, simply ignored.”
From Wikipedia: He served as state-secretary in the German Federal Ministry of Defence (1976-1980) and Minister for Research and Technology (1980-1982), both during the Chancellor Helmut Schmidt administration, and was regarded as a "rising star" of German politics at the time. He served for 25 years as an SPD member of the German parliament (1969-1994). In the late eighties and early nineties, he served on the parliamentary committee on intelligence services ("Parlamentarischer Kontrollausschuss"). This committee supervises German intelligence agencies and has access to classified information. In the early nineties, von Bülow also served as SPD ranking member of the Schalck-Golodkowski investigation committee, a task that first led him to inquire into white collar crime in connection with Eastern intelligence services, and later also into what he labels "criminal activities" of Western intelligence services. His first major publication dealing with this realm, In the Name of the State (German: Im Namen des Staates) is a heavily referenced and extensive study focusing mostly on the CIA. Since leaving the Bundestag, he has largely left the SPD's political loop.
He has written a book called The CIA and September 11 (German: Die CIA und der 11. September), in which he implies US government complicity in the September 11, 2001 attacks.
"Planning the attacks was a master deed, in technical and organizational terms. To hijack four big airliners within a few minutes and fly them into targets within a single hour and doing so on complicated flight routes! That is unthinkable, without backing from the secret apparatuses of state and industry." Tagesspiegel,13. Jan. 2002
He told The Daily Telegraph at his home in Bonn.
"If what I say is right, the whole US government should end up behind bars" and "They have hidden behind a veil of secrecy and destroyed the evidence - that they invented the story of 19 Muslims working within Osama bin Laden's al-Qa'eda - in order to hide the truth of their own covert operation"
16. Adam Pearlman A.K.A. Adam Yahiye Gadahn
From Wikipedia: born Adam Pearlman, September 1, 1978) is an American senior operative, cultural interpreter, spokesman and media advisor for the terrorist group Al-Qaeda. Since 2004, he appeared in a number of videos produced by Al-Qaeda as "Azzam the American" ('Azzām al-Amrīki, عزام الأمريكي, sometimes transcribed as Ezzam Al-Amerikee). Gadahn converted to Sunni Islam in 1995, at the age of 17, at a California mosque and is described as a "homegrown", meaning that he has converted to an ideology so firmly that he is now willing to harm his country of origin. He is believed to have inspired the 2007 Osama bin Laden video.. Gadahn's Jewish paternal grandfather, Carl Pearlman, was a prominent urologist; and on the Board of Directors of the Anti-Defamation League. According to Gadahn, he was a "zealous supporter" of Israel. Gadahn's paternal grandmother, Agnes Branch, a Christian, was an editor for The Chronicle Christian Newspaper. Gadahn's father, originally Phil Pearlman, grew up in Orange County, California. He was involved in the counterculture movement at the University of California at Irvine, and before Adam's birth became a Christian. Gadahn described his father as having been "raised agnostic or atheist, but he became a believer in One God when he picked up a Bible left on the beach.” His father's religious perspective was flexible and based upon his own spiritual needs and as a new convert to Islam, Gadahn portrayed his father in manner sympathetic to his religion of conversion. Phil and his wife Jennifer changed their name to Gadahn, after the Biblical warrior Gideon. In a short period of time, Gadahn became a senior commander to Bin Laden and is assumed to be playing the role of "translator, video producer, and cultural interpreter." Gadahn declared his animosity towards the US by declaring it "enemy soil" and praising the individuals responsible for the September 11 attacks. The first production of al-Qaeda's media division, As-Sahab, was believed to have been in 2001 with the involvement of Adam Yahiye Gadahn. US and British intelligence officials believe it to be run by Gadahn.
In “good tradition” of Stefan Michnik!
18. Polish probe urged of CIA 'black site,' 'torture'
From Wikipedia In military terminology, a black site is a location at which an unacknowledged black project is conducted. Recently, the term has gained notoriety in describing secret prisons operated by the United States (U.S.) Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), generally outside of U.S. territory and legal jurisdiction. It can refer to the facilities that are controlled by the CIA used by the U.S. government in its War on Terror to detain alleged unlawful enemy combatants.
U.S. President George W. Bush acknowledged the existence of secret prisons operated by the CIA during a speech on September 6, 2006. A claim that the black sites existed was made by The Washington Post in November 2005 and before this by human rights NGOs (non-governmental organizations).
Many European countries [who?] have officially denied they are hosting black sites to imprison terrorists or cooperating in the U.S. extraordinary rendition program. Not one country has confirmed that it is hosting black sites. However, a European Union (EU) report adopted on February 14, 2007, by a majority of the European Parliament (382 MEPs voting in favour, 256 against and 74 abstaining) stated the CIA operated 1,245 flights and that it was not possible to contradict evidence or suggestions that secret detention centres were operated in Poland and Romania.
20. Where on Earth is Osama bin Laden?
From Wikipedia: Armand Hammer (May 21, 1898 – December 10, 1990) was an American business tycoon most closely associated with Occidental Petroleum, a company he ran for decades, though he was known as well as for his art collection, his philanthropy, and for his close ties to the Soviet Union.
Hammer was born in Manhattan, New York to Russian-born Jewish immigrants Julius and Rose (Lipshitz) Hammer. His father came to the United States from Odessa in 1875, and settled in The Bronx, where he ran a general medical practice and five drugstores.
In fact, according to multiple biographers, Hammer was named after the "Arm and Hammer" symbol of the Socialist Labor Party of America (SLP), in which his father, a committed socialist, had a leadership role at one time. (After the Russian Revolution, a part of the SLP under Julius' leadership split off to become a founding element of the Communist Party USA.) Later in his life, Hammer would admit the communist tie himself.
According to Hammer, he scored his first business triumph in 1919, manufacturing and selling a ginger extract which legally contained high levels of alcohol. This was extremely popular during prohibition, and the company had $1 million in sales that year. In 1921, while waiting for his internship to begin at Bellevue Hospital, Hammer went to the Soviet Union for a trip that ended up lasting until late 1930.
Hammer's intentions in the 1921 trip have been debated since. He has claimed that he originally intended to recoup $150,000 in debts for drugs shipped during the Allied intervention, but was soon moved by a capitalistic and philanthropic interest in selling wheat to the then-starving Russians. In his passport application, Hammer stated that he intended to visit only western Europe. J. Edgar Hoover in the Justice Department knew this was false, but Hammer was allowed to travel anyway.
Politically, Hammer was a staunch supporter of the Republican Party. He boosted Richard Nixon's presidential campaign with $54,000 in campaign contributions. He was convicted on charges that one of these donations had been made illegally, but was later pardoned by Republican U.S. President George H. W. Bush.
Late in life, he would brag that he had been the only man in history friendly with both Vladimir Lenin and Ronald Reagan. Throughout his life he continued personal and business dealings with the Soviet Union, despite the Cold War.
In his 1983 book RED CARPET, author Joseph Finder was the first to reveal that Armand Hammer worked for Soviet intelligence (the NKVD and its successive incarnations) and laundered money for the Soviet Union and the Comintern.
Edward Jay Epstein published a book critical of Hammer after his death titled
“Dossier: The Secret History of Armand Hammer”. Among his claims:
*James Jesus Angleton, head of counterintelligence for the Central Intelligence Agency, said that the CIA has received evidence from the British secret service that Hammer laundered money for the Soviets.
*Lenin issued orders to “make note of Armand Hammer and in every way help him on my behalf if he applies”.
*J. Edgar Hoover wrote "a rotten bunch" on the front of FBI file "61-280 — Armand Hammer, Internal Security — Russia."
*Hammer may have initiated human rights abuses in Occidental Petroleum's operations in South America.
22. Ozjasz Szechter, father of Adam Michnik
From Wikipedia: Communist agent charged with treason in 1934
http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozjasz_Szechter (only in Polish)
23. Antoni Pajdak
http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoni_Pajdak (only in Polish)
24. Jerzy Popiełuszko, a priest murdered by secret police
A car accident was set up to kill Jerzy Popiełuszko on October 13, 1984, but he escaped it. The alternative plan was to kidnap him, and it was carried out on October 19, 1984. The priest was beaten and murdered by three Security Police officers. Then, his body was dumped into the Vistula Water Reservoir near Włocławek from where it was recovered on October 30, 1984. News of the political murder caused an uproar throughout Poland, and the murderers and one of their superiors were convicted of the crime. More than 250,000 people, including Lech Wałęsa, attended his funeral on November 3, 1984. Despite the murder and its repercussions, the Communist regime remained in power until 1989. Popiełuszko's murderers - Captain Grzegorz Piotrowski, Leszek Pękala, Waldemar Chmielewski and Colonel Adam Pietruszka (responsible for giving them the order to kill) - were jailed but released later as part of an amnesty.
From Wikipedia: is Poland's second-largest daily newspaper (after the tabloid Fakt). It is considered to be one of the most influential and opinion-forming newspapers in Poland. Gazeta Wyborcza has been criticized for distorted coverage of controversial issues such as post-communist vetting, Polish-Jewish relations and the Polish minority in Lithuania. It has also received criticism for using its influence to whitewash former communists, particularly General Jaruzelski. After the fall of communism, the paper was criticized for taking part in an "intensive propaganda campaign" and particularly for rigorously trying to revamp Jaruzelski's image.
25. Piotr Bartoszcze, founder and first leader of the SOLIDARITY OF PEASANTS, murdered by communist secret police in February 1984.
During Martial Law arrested together with all Solidarity leaders; after release continued his activities; found beaten and strangled to death. The 1984 “investigation” produced no suspects. Case was re-opened in 1995 – with the same results.
From Wikipedia: http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piotr_Bartoszcze (only in Polish)
27. Andrzej Suda
From Wikicompany.org: The most dramatic was my experience with the FBI. The FBI wasn't interested to investigate my case at all – instead they informed the Polish intelligence network about my actions. You can understand why I feel lucky to be alive today! I asked the highest law enforcement agency in America to help me in this situation – to investigate the FBI betrayal and to bring guilty to justice. This highest law enforcement agency is not widely known. It is called the Office of the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Justice (shortly O.I.G.). O.I.G. was created to investigate crimes committed by agents of FBI, CIA, DEA and other federal agencies. With the help of the O.I.G. I was able to collect hard evidence of the FBI treason. What do you think happened next? Well, the O.I.G. investigator was transferred from San Diego to San Francisco and stopped his investigation! In 1999 he was interviewed by a journalist Jeff Nyquist and admitted (I quote): "There is a problem at the Justice Department in Washington. Things were being short-circuited at the top. For some strange reasons, spies connected to Eastern European Mafia organizations were being allowed to operate freely on American soil"
28. Russian famine of 1921
From Wikipedia: The Russian famine of 1921, also known as Povolzhye famine, which began in the early spring of that year, and lasted through 1922, was a severe famine that occurred in Bolshevik Russia. The famine, which killed an estimated 5 million, affected mostly the Volga-Ural region. Hunger was so severe that it was doubtful that seed-grain would be sown rather than eaten. At one point, relief agencies had to give grain to the railroad staff to get their supplies moved. Peasants often had to resort to eating weeds, food surrogates and even cannibalism trying to save seeds for planting in the fall.
The Bolsheviks believed that peasants were actively trying to undermine the war effort. The Black Book of Communism states that Lenin ordered the seizure of the food peasants had grown for their own subsistence and their seed grain in retaliation for this "sabotage," leading to widespread peasant revolts. In 1920, Lenin had ordered increased emphasis on food requisitioning from the peasantry. Aid from outside Russia was rejected. The American Relief Administration, which Herbert Hoover had formed to help the starvation of World War I, had offered assistance to Lenin in 1919, on condition that they have full say over the Russian railway network and hand out food impartially to all. Lenin refused this as interference in Russian internal affairs.
From Wikipedia: Jacob Henry Schiff, born Jakob Heinrich Schiff (January 10, 1847 – September 25, 1920) was a Jewish German-born New York City banker and philanthropist, who helped finance, among many other things, the Japanese military efforts against Tsarist Russia in the Russo-Japanese War. From his base on Wall Street, he was the foremost Jewish leader from 1880 to 1920 in what later became known as the "Schiff era", grappling with all major Jewish issues and problems of the day, including the plight of Russian Jews under the tsar, American and international antisemitism, care of needy Jewish immigrants, and the rise of Zionism. He also became the director of many important corporations, including the National City Bank of New York, Equitable Life Assurance Society, Wells Fargo & Company, and the Union Pacific Railroad. In many of his interests he was associated with E.H. Harriman.
30. Warburg family
From Wikipedia: Felix and Paul Warburg emigrated to the United States. Felix Warburg married Frieda Schiff, daughter of Jacob H. Schiff, a a banker and philanthropist. His house in New York City is now the Jewish Museum. His brother Paul married Nina Loeb, daughter of Solomon Loeb. He is seen as the "father" of the U.S. Federal Reserve System.
From Wikipedia: Although a major factor in German finance, after frequent business trips to New York, Warburg settled there in 1902 as a partner in Kuhn, Loeb & Company where the influential Jacob Schiff, his wife's brother-in-law, was senior partner. Warburg remained a partner in the family firm in Hamburg, but he became a naturalized American citizen in 1911. He was a member of Temple Emanu-El in New York City. Paul Warburg became known as a persuasive advocate of central banking in America, in 1907 publishing the pamphlets "Defects and Needs of Our Banking System" and "A Plan for A Modified Central Bank". His efforts were successful in 1913 with the founding of the Federal Reserve System. He was appointed a member of the first Federal Reserve Board by President Woodrow Wilson, serving until 1918. He became a director of the Council on Foreign Relations at its founding in 1921, remaining on the board until his death. From 1921 to 1926 Warburg was a member of the advisory council of Federal Reserve Board, serving as president of the advisory council in 1924-26. He was also a trustee of the Institute of Economics, founded in 1922; when it was merged into the Brookings Institution in 1927, he became a trustee of the latter, serving until his death.
From Wikipedia: He was a grandson of Moses Marcus Warburg, one of the founders of the bank, M. M. Warburg (in 1798). Felix Warburg was a partner in Kuhn, Loeb & Co.. He is known as a leading advocate of a Federal Reserve System for the United States. He married Frieda Schiff, daughter of Jacob H. Schiff and Therese Loeb Schiff, in 1895.
33. Max Warburg
From Wikipedia: was a German-born American banker and from 1910 until 1938, director of M.M.Warburg & CO in Hamburg, Germany. As head of that firm, he advised Kaiser Wilhelm IIprior to World War I. His brother Paul Warburg was the chief architect of Federal Reserve Board in the United States.
In the Bolshevik Revolution we have some of the world’s richest and most powerful men financing a movement which claims its very existence is based on the concept of stripping of their wealth men like the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Schiffs, Warburgs, Morgans, Harrimans, and Milners. But obviously these men have no fear of international Communism. It is only logical to assume that if they financed it and do not fear it, it must be because they control it. Can there be any other explanation that makes sense? Remember that for over 150 years it has been standard operating procedure of the Rothschild’s and their allies to control both sides of every conflict. You must have an “enemy” if you are going to collect from the King.
35. Pacification of the coal mine "Wujek" on 16 December 1981
When Martial Law was announced brave workers of this coal mine started lock-in strike. Army responded with extreme violence. They attacked defenseless people with tanks and machine guns. In accordance with "official" news "only" 9 workers were killed and 21 wounded.
http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacyfikacja_kopalni_Wujek (only in Polish)
Here is the “sanitized” English version: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacification_of_Wujek
36. Jan Samsonowicz, one of the Solidarity leaders in Gdansk shipyard
Was (together with Piotr Dyk) an initiator and a member of a secret counterintelligence group within Solidarity movement. His investigation produced evidence of a communist mole at the top of Solidarity hierarchy and his group found out that the western financial aid for the Solidarity was handled by.....Polish secret police! Alexander Parvus comes to mind! Samsonowicz was found hanged from the gate of Gdansk shipyard. The "investigation" ruled this a "suicide"
From Wikipedia: http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Samsonowicz_%28dzi%C5%82acz_Solidarn%C5%9B%29 (only in Polish)
37. Grzegorz Przemyk, son of the Solidarity activist, beaten to death by police
Barbara Sadowska was a popular artist and poet. She was also an active dissident.
On 3rd of May 1983 she was beaten by police. Apparently beating “didn't do the trick”, therefore on 12th of May 1983 police arrested her teenage son, took to the station and beat to death. Actually he was taken by ambulance and after emergency surgery died in hospital of internal trauma. The uproar in Poland was so big that communists needed to open an “investigation” .To cover up they needed even help of the Interior Ministry. The medic from ambulance and the doctor were found “guilty of negligence”. They spent some time in prison. Medic admitted later being forced to “confess”. After 1989 case was re-opened. It was a lot of “theater” going on but final result is exactly like in other cases – not a single criminal was punished! Barbara Sadowska died 3 years after her son (at age 46).
Stanislaw Pyjas and his friend Leslaw Maleszka were active members of student opposition against the communist regime. Pyjas was beaten to death. The "official" investigation found the cause of death to be a "fall from the staircase". There were rumors that local boxer (and a thug) Marian Weclewicz bragged about beating Pyjas on request of a secret police officer. The suspected officer died of a "heart attack" and Weclewicz was murdered. Stanislaw Pietraszka, the last person to see Pyjas alive and claiming to remember the face of attacker – soon died, too. In 1991 the case was re-opened. The only person punished was prof. Zdzislaw Marek who performed the autopsy on Pyjas and falsified its findings. No, no – he wasn't charged by the court – he was fired from the Medical Academy for causing embarrassment! The key to the whole story lies in hands of Leslaw Maleszka. Now we know he was a paid police informant from the very beginning, therefore the "handler" for Pyjas. What is he doing now? He is a successful journalist of ..........(surprise, surprise!) Gazeta Wyborcza.
From Wikipedia: http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanis%C5%82aw_Pyjas (only in Polish)
In late June 2008, private television TVN presented a documentary Trzech kumpli (Three mates), which presented the story of Wildstein, Pyjas and Lesław Maleszka (aka Ketman and Return). All three of them were friends in college, studied together and were active in anticommunist opposition. However, Maleszka, who afterwards worked for Gazeta Wyborcza, was a secret informer of Służba Bezpieczeństwa. Maleszka was a highly praised agent, whose reports on students in Kraków, in which he did not hesitate to describe the intimate lives of his closest friends, were calledexcellent by his secret service bosses. According to Roman Graczyk, a journalist and Maleszka’s friend from university, Pyjas had to die, because he might have suspected Maleszka of collaboration. The secret services did not want to lose such a valuable agent and an unknown officer ordered the assassination.
39. Just a quote:
"The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al Qaida. And any informed intelligence officer knows this. But there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an identified entity representing the 'devil' only in order to drive the TV watcher to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the US . . ." Former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook
40. Just a quote: "Today's international terrorism is a phenomenon that combines the use of terror by state and non-state political structures as a means to attain their political objectives through people's intimidation, psychological and social destabilization, the elimination of resistance from power organizations and the creation of appropriate conditions for the manipulation of the countries' policies and the behavior of people".
41. Igor Gouzenko
From Wikipedia: was a cipher clerk for the Soviet Embassy to Canada in Ottawa, Ontario. He defected on September 5, 1945, with 109 documents on Soviet espionage activities in the West. This forced Prime Minister Mackenzie King to call a Royal Commission to investigate espionage in Canada.
Gouzenko exposed Joseph Stalin's efforts to steal nuclear secrets, and the then-unknown technique of planting sleeper agents. The "Gouzenko Affair" is often credited as a triggering event of the Cold War. In 1945, hearing that he and his family were to be sent home to the Soviet Union and dissatisfied with the quality of life and the politics of his homeland, he decided to defect. Gouzenko walked out of the embassy door carrying with him a briefcase with Soviet code books and deciphering materials. He initially went to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, but the RCMP officers on duty refused to believe his story. He then went to the Ottawa Journal newspaper, but the paper's night editor was not interested, and suggested he go to the Department of Justice – however nobody was on duty at night when he arrived. Terrified that the Soviets had discovered his duplicity, he went back to his apartment and hid his family in the apartment across the hall for the night. Gouzenko, hidden by a neighbor, watched through the keyhole as a group of Soviet agents broke into his apartment. They began searching through his belongings, and only left when confronted by Ottawa police.
The next day Gouzenko was able to find contacts in the RCMP who were willing to examine the evidence he had removed from the Soviet embassy. Gouzenko was transported by the RCMP to the secret "Camp X", now abandoned, but located in present-day Oshawa and comfortably distant from Ottawa. Camp X had been used during World War II as a training station for Allied undercover personnel. It has been alleged that, though the RCMP expressed interest in Gouzenko, Prime Minister of Canada William Lyon Mackenzie King initially wanted nothing to do with him. Even with Gouzenko in hiding and under RCMP protection, King reportedly pushed for a diplomatic solution to avoid upsetting the Soviet Union, still a wartime ally and ostensible friend. Documents reveal that King, then 70 and weary from six years of war leadership, was aghast when Norman Robertson, his Undersecretary for External Affairs, and his assistant, H. H. Wrong, informed him on the morning of September 6, 1945, that a "terrible thing" had happened. Gouzenko and his wife Svetlana, they told him, had appeared at the office of Justice Minister Louis St. Laurent with documents unmasking Soviet perfidy on Canadian soil. "It was like a bomb on top of everything else", King wrote. Robertson told the Prime Minister that Gouzenko was threatening suicide, but King was adamant that his government not get involved, even if Gouzenko was apprehended by Soviet authorities. Robertson ignored the Prime Minister's wishes and authorized granting asylum to Gouzenko and his family, on the basis that their lives were in danger. Gouzenko's defection "ushered in the modern era of Canadian security intelligence". The evidence provided by Gouzenko led to the arrest of 39 suspects; a total of 18 were eventually convicted of a variety of offenses. Among those convicted were Fred Rose, the only Communist Member of Parliament in the Canadian House of Commons; Sam Carr, the Communist Party's national organizer; and scientist Raymond Boyer. A Royal Commission of Inquiry to investigate espionage, headed by Justice Robert Taschereau and Justice Roy Kellock, was conducted into the Gouzenko Affair and his evidence of a Soviet spy ring in Canada. It also alerted other countries around the world, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, that Soviet agents had almost certainly infiltrated their nations as well.
Gouzenko provided many vital leads which assisted greatly with ongoing espionage investigations in Britain and North America. His testimony is believed to have been vital in the successful prosecution of Klaus Fuchs, the German communist physicist who emigrated to Britain and who later stole atomic secrets for the Soviets. Fuchs spent some time at the Chalk River Laboratories, northwest of Ottawa, where atomic research had been underway since the early 1940s. His information also likely helped in the investigation of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg in the U.S. Gouzenko, being a cipher clerk by profession, likely also assisted with the Venona investigation, which probed Soviet codes and which eventually led to the discovery of vital Soviet spies such as Donald Maclean, Guy Burgess, Kim Philby, Anthony Blunt, and John Cairncross (the so-called Cambridge Five), as well as Alan Nunn May. Gouzenko and his family were given another identity by the Canadian government out of fear of Soviet reprisals. Gouzenko, as assigned by the Canadian government, lived the rest of his life under the assumed name of George Brown. Little is known about his life afterwards, but it is understood that he and his wife settled down to a middle class existence under an assumed name in the Toronto suburb of Clarkson. They raised eight children together. Gouzenko died of a heart attack in 1982 at Mississauga, Canada; his grave was not initially marked. Svetlana died in September 2001 and was buried next to him. It was only in 2002 that the family put up a headstone.
42. Warsaw Stock Exchange
From Wikipedia: In the years 1991–2000, the stock exchange was located in the building which during the previous, and then recent, communist years had been the seat of the Central Committee of the ruling Polish Communist Party. This can be considered an interesting reflection on the rapid transition of Poland from a communist to a market economy.
43. The Greenbaum Speech
Herein is the lecture by D.C.Hammond, originally entitled "Hypnosis in MPD: Ritual Abuse," but now usually known as the "Greenbaum Speech," delivered at the Fourth Annual Eastern Regional Conference on Abuse and Multiple Personality, Thursday June 25, 1992, at the Radisson Plaza Hotel, Mark Center, Alexandria, Virginia.
Sponsored by the Center for Abuse Recovery & Empowerment, The Psychiatric Institute of Washington, D.C. Both a tape and a transcript were at one time available from Audio Transcripts of Alexandria, Virginia (800-338-2111). Tapes and transcripts of other sessions from the conference are still being sold but -- understandably -- not this one. The transcript below was made from a privately made tape of the original lecture.
44. Project MKULTRA
From Wikipedia: Project MKULTRA, or MK-ULTRA, was the code name for a covert, illegal CIA human research program, run by the Office of Scientific Intelligence. This official U.S. government program began in the early 1950s, continuing at least through the late 1960s, and it used U.S. and Canadian citizens as its test subjects.
The published evidence indicates that Project MKULTRA involved the use of many methodologies to manipulate individual mental states and alter brain functions, including the surreptitious administration of drugs and other chemicals, sensory deprivation, isolation, and verbal and sexual abuse.
Project MKULTRA was first brought to wide public attention in 1975 by the U.S. Congress, through investigations by the Church Committee, and by a presidential commission known as the Rockefeller Commission. Investigative efforts were hampered by the fact that CIA Director Richard Helms ordered all MKULTRA files destroyed in 1973; the Church Committee and Rockefeller Commission investigations relied on the sworn testimony of direct participants and on the relatively small number of documents that survived Helms' destruction order. Although the CIA insists that MKULTRA-type experiments have been abandoned, 14-year CIA veteran Victor Marchetti has stated in various interviews that the CIA routinely conducts disinformation campaigns and that CIA mind control research continued. In a 1977 interview, Marchetti specifically called the CIA claim that MKULTRA was abandoned a "cover story."
A considerable amount of credible circumstantial evidence suggests that Theodore Kaczynski, also known as the Unabomber, participated in CIA-sponsored MKULTRA experiments conducted at Harvard University from the fall of 1959 through the spring of 1962. During World War II, Henry Murray, the lead researcher in the Harvard experiments, served with the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), which was a forerunner of the CIA. Murray applied for a grant funded by the United States Navy, and his Harvard stress experiments strongly resembled those run by the OSS. Beginning at the age of sixteen, Kaczynski participated along with twenty-one other undergraduate students in the Harvard experiments, which have been described as "disturbing" and "ethically indefensible."
Lawrence Teeter, attorney for convicted assassin Sirhan Sirhan, believed Sirhan was under the influence of hypnosis when he fired his weapon at Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. Teeter linked the CIA's MKULTRA program to mind control techniques that he claimed were used to control Sirhan.
(Just look at his face!)
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, 27 September 2001
“Bin Laden Family Could Profit From a Jump
In Defense Spending Due to Ties to U.S. Bank”
by Daniel Golden, James Bandler and Marcus Walker, Staff Reporters
47. Terrorist with a bomb escorted through the airport checkpoint by U.S. Intelligence agents.
From Fox News TV: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_k6lhuC2ms
Address by President Dwight D. Eisenhower "The Chance for Peace" delivered before the American Society of Newspaper Editors, April 16,1953.
In this spring of 1953 the free world weighs one question above all others: the chance for a just peace for all peoples.
To weigh this chance is to summon instantly to mind another recent moment of great decision. It came with that yet more hopeful spring of 1945, bright with the promise of victory and of freedom. The hope of all just men in that moment too was a just and lasting peace.
The 8 years that have passed have seen that hope waver, grow dim, and almost die. And the shadow of fear again has darkly lengthened across the world.
Today the hope of free men remains stubborn and brave, but it is sternly disciplined by experience. It shuns not only all crude counsel of despair but also the self-deceit of easy illusion. It weighs the chance for peace with sure, clear knowledge of what happened to the vain hope of 1945.
In that spring of victory the soldiers of the Western Allies met the soldiers of Russia in the center of Europe. They were triumphant comrades in arms. Their peoples shared the joyous prospect of building, in honor of their dead, the only fitting monument-an age of just peace. All these war-weary peoples shared too this concrete, decent purpose: to guard vigilantly against the domination ever again of any part of the world by a single, unbridled aggressive power.
This common purpose lasted an instant and perished. The nations of the world divided to follow two distinct roads.
The United States and our valued friends, the other free nations, chose one road.
The leaders of the Soviet Union chose another.
The way chosen by the United States was plainly marked by a few clear precepts, which govern its conduct in world affairs.
First: No people on earth can be held, as a people, to be enemy, for all humanity shares the common hunger for peace and fellowship and justice.
Second: No nation's security and well-being can be lastingly achieved in isolation but only ineffective cooperation with fellow-nations.
Third: Any nation's right to form of government and an economic system of its own choosing is inalienable.
Fourth: Any nation's attempt to dictate to other nations their form of government is indefensible.
And fifth: A nation's hope of lasting peace cannot be firmly based upon any race in armaments but rather upon just relations and honest understanding with all other nations.
In the light of these principles the citizens of the United States defined the way they proposed to follow, through the aftermath of war, toward true peace.
This way was faithful to the spirit that inspired the United Nations: to prohibit strife, to relieve tensions, to banish fears. This way was to control and to reduce armaments. This way was to allow all nations to devote their energies and resources to the great and good tasks of healing the war's wounds, of clothing and feeding and housing the needy, of perfecting a just political life, of enjoying the fruits of their own free toil.
The Soviet government held a vastly different vision of the future.
In the world of its design, security was to be found, not in mutual trust and mutual aid but in force: huge armies, subversion, rule of neighbor nations. The goal was power superiority at all costs. Security was to be sought by denying it to all others.
The result has been tragic for the world and, for the Soviet Union, it has also been ironic.
The amassing of the Soviet power alerted free nations to a new danger of aggression. It compelled them in self-defense to spend unprecedented money and energy for armaments. It forced them to develop weapons of war now capable of inflicting instant and terrible punishment upon any aggressor.
It instilled in the free nations-and let none doubt this-the unshakable conviction that, as long as there persists a threat to freedom, they must, at any cost, remain armed, strong, and ready for the risk of war.
It inspired them-and let none doubt this-to attain a unity of purpose and will beyond the power of propaganda or pressure to break, now or ever.
There remained, however, one thing essentially unchanged and unaffected by Soviet conduct: the readiness of the free nations to welcome sincerely any genuine evidence of peaceful purpose enabling all peoples again to resume their common quest of just peace.
The free nations, most solemnly and repeatedly, have assured the Soviet Union that their firm association has never had any aggressive purpose whatsoever. Soviet leaders, however, have seemed to persuade themselves, or tried to persuade their people, otherwise.
And so it has come to pass that the Soviet Union itself has shared and suffered the very fears it has fostered in the rest of the world.
This has been the way of life forged by 8 years of fear and force.
What can the world, or any nation in it, hope for if no turning is found on this dread road?
The worst to be feared and the best to be expected can be simply stated.
The worst is atomic war.
The best would be this: a life of perpetual fear and tension; a burden of arms draining the wealthand the labor of all peoples; a wasting of strength that defies the American system or the Soviet system or any system to achieve true abundance and happiness for the peoples of this earth.
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
This world in arms in not spending money alone.
It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.
The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities.
It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population.
It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals.
It is some 50 miles of concrete highway.
We pay for a single fighter with a half million bushels of wheat.
We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people.
This, I repeat, is the best way of life to be found on the road the world has been taking.
This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.
These plain and cruel truths define the peril and point the hope that come with this spring of 1953.
This is one of those times in the affairs of nations when the gravest choices must be made, if there is to be a turning toward a just and lasting peace.
It is a moment that calls upon the governments of the world to speak their intentions with simplicity and with honest.
It calls upon them to answer the questions that stirs the hearts of all sane men: is there no other way the world may live?
The world knows that an era ended with the death of Joseph Stalin. The extraordinary 30-year span of his rule saw the Soviet Empire expand to reach from the Baltic Sea to the Sea of Japan, finally to dominate 800 million souls.
The Soviet system shaped by Stalin and his predecessors was born of one World War. It survived the stubborn and often amazing courage of second World War. It has lived to threaten a third.
Now, a new leadership has assumed power in the Soviet Union. It links to the past, however strong, cannot bind it completely. Its future is, in great part, its own to make.
This new leadership confronts a free world aroused, as rarely in its history, by the will to stay free.
This free world knows, out of bitter wisdom of experience, that vigilance and sacrifice are the price of liberty.
It knows that the defense of Western Europe imperatively demands the unity of purpose and action made possible by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, embracing a European Defense Community.
It knows that Western Germany deserves to be a free and equal partner in this community and that this, for Germany, is the only safe way to full, final unity.
It knows that aggression in Korea and in southeast Asia are threats to the whole free community to be met by united action.
This is the kind of free world which the new Soviet leadership confront. It is a world that demands and expects the fullest respect of its rights and interests. It is a world that will always accord the same respect to all others.
So the new Soviet leadership now has a precious opportunity to awaken, with the rest of the world, to the point of peril reached and to help turn the tide of history.
Will it do this?
We do not yet know. Recent statements and gestures of Soviet leaders give some evidence that they may recognize this critical moment.
We welcome every honest act of peace.
We care nothing for mere rhetoric.
We are only for sincerity of peaceful purpose attested by deeds. The opportunities for such deeds are many. The performance of a great number of them waits upon no complex protocol but upon the simple will to do them. Even a few such clear and specific acts, such as the Soviet Union's signature upon the Austrian treaty or its release of thousands of prisoners still held from World War II, would be impressive signs of sincere intent. They would carry a power of persuasion not to be matched by any amount of oratory.
This we do know: a world that begins to witness the rebirth of trust among nations can find its way to a peace that is neither partial nor punitive.
With all who will work in good faith toward such a peace, we are ready, with renewed resolve, to strive to redeem the near-lost hopes of our day.
The first great step along this way must be the conclusion of an honorable armistice in Korea.
This means the immediate cessation of hostilities and the prompt initiation of political discussions leading to the holding of free elections in a united Korea.
It should mean, no less importantly, an end to the direct and indirect attacks upon the security of Indochina and Malaya. For any armistice in Korea that merely released aggressive armies to attack elsewhere would be fraud.
We seek, throughout Asia as throughout the world, a peace that is true and total.
Out of this can grow a still wider task-the achieving of just political settlements for the otherserious and specific issues between the free world and the Soviet Union.
None of these issues, great or small, is insoluble-given only the will to respect the rights of all nations.
Again we say: the United States is ready to assume its just part.
We have already done all within our power to speed conclusion of the treaty with Austria, which will free that country from economic exploitation and from occupation by foreign troops.
We are ready not only to press forward with the present plans for closer unity of the nations of Western Europe by also, upon that foundation, to strive to foster a broader European community, conducive to the free movement of persons, of trade, and of ideas.
This community would include a free and united Germany, with a government based upon free and secret elections.
This free community and the full independence of the East European nations could mean the end of present unnatural division of Europe.
As progress in all these areas strengthens world trust, we could proceed concurrently with the next great work-the reduction of the burden of armaments now weighing upon the world. To this end we would welcome and enter into the most solemn agreements. These could properly include:
The limitation, by absolute numbers or by an agreed international ratio, of the sizes of the military and security forces of all nations.
A commitment by all nations to set an agreed limit upon that proportion of total production of certain strategic materials to be devoted to military purposes.
International control of atomic energy to promote its use for peaceful purposes only and to insure the prohibition of atomic weapons.
A limitation or prohibition of other categories of weapons of great destructiveness.
The enforcement of all these agreed limitations and prohibitions by adequate safe-guards, including a practical system of inspection under the United Nations.
The details of such disarmament programs are manifestly critical and complex. Neither the United States nor any other nation can properly claim to possess a perfect, immutable formula. But the formula matters less than the faith-the good faith without which no formula can work justly and effectively.
The fruit of success in all these tasks would present the world with the greatest task, and the greatest opportunity, of all. It is this: the dedication of the energies, the resources, and the imaginations of all peaceful nations to a new kind of war. This would be a declared total war, not upon any human enemy but upon the brute forces of poverty and need.
The peace we seek, founded upon decent trust and cooperative effort among nations, can be fortified, not by weapons of war but by wheat and by cotton, by milk and by wool, by meat and by timber and by rice. These are words that translate into every language on earth. These are needs that challenge this world in arms.
This idea of a just and peaceful world is not new or strange to us. It inspired the people of the United States to initiate the European Recovery Program in 1947. That program was prepared to treat, with like and equal concern, the needs of Eastern and Western Europe.
We are prepared to reaffirm, with the most concrete evidence, our readiness to help build a world in which all peoples can be productive and prosperous.
This Government is ready to ask its people to join with all nations in devoting a substantial percentage of the savings achieved by disarmament to a fund for world aid and reconstruction. The purposes of this great work would be to help other peoples to develop the underdeveloped areas of the world, to stimulate profitability and fair world trade, to assist all peoples to know the blessings of productive freedom.
The monuments to this new kind of war would be these: roads and schools, hospitals and homes, food and health.
We are ready, in short, to dedicate our strength to serving the needs, rather than the fears, of the world.
We are ready, by these and all such actions, to make of the United Nations an institution that can effectively guard the peace and security of all peoples.
I know of nothing I can add to make plainer the sincere purpose of the United States.
I know of no course, other than that marked by these and similar actions, that can be called the highway of peace.
I know of only one question upon which progress waits. It is this:
What is the Soviet Union ready to do?
Whatever the answer be, let it be plainly spoken.
Again we say: the hunger for peace is too great, the hour in history too late, for any government to mock men's hopes with mere words and promises and gestures.
The test of truth is simple. There can be no persuasion but by deeds.
Is the new leadership of Soviet Union prepared to use its decisive influence in the Communist world, including control of the flow of arms, to bring not merely an expedient truce in Korea but genuine peace in Asia?
Is it prepared to allow other nations, including those of Eastern Europe, the free choice of their own forms of government?
Is it prepared to act in concert with others upon serious disarmament proposals to be made firmly effective by stringent U.N. control and inspection?
If not, where then is the concrete evidence of the Soviet Union's concern for peace?
The test is clear.
There is, before all peoples, a precious chance to turn the black tide of events. If we failed to strive to seize this chance, the judgment of future ages would be harsh and just.
If we strive but fail and the world remains armed against itself, it at least need be divided no longer in its clear knowledge of who has condemned humankind to this fate.
The purpose of the United States, in stating these proposals, is simple and clear.
These proposals spring, without ulterior purpose or political passion, from our calm conviction that the hunger for peace is in the hearts of all peoples--those of Russia and of China no less than of our own country.
They conform to our firm faith that God created men to enjoy, not destroy, the fruits of the earth and of their own toil.
They aspire to this: the lifting, from the backs and from the hearts of men, of their burden of arms and of fears, so that they may find before them a golden age of freedom and of peace.
Note: The President's address was broadcast over television and radio from the Statler Hotel in Washington.
Address by President Dwight D. Eisenhower "The Chance for Peace" delivered before the American Society of Newspaper Editors, April 16,1953.
And by "great" he doesn't mean good. How can you stop this? According to Celente, 54 cents of every tax dollar goes to support the military in some manner. Stop paying taxes and there is no money for war, tyranny or oppression.
It is time for all people of conscience to call upon America to come back home. Come home, America. Omar Khayyam is right: "The moving finger writes, and having writ moves on." I call on Washington today. I call on every man and woman of good will all over America today. I call on the young men of America who must make a choice today to take a stand on this issue. Tomorrow may be too late. The book may close. And don't let anybody make you think that God chose America as his divine, messianic force to be a sort of policeman of the whole world. God has a way of standing before the nations with judgment, and it seems that I can hear God saying to America, "You're too arrogant! And if you don't change your ways, I will rise up and break the backbone of your power, and I'll place it in the hands of a nation that doesn't even know my name. Be still and know that I'm God."
The sermon which I am preaching this morning in a sense is not the usual kind of sermon, but it is a sermon and an important subject, nevertheless, because the issue that I will be discussing today is one of the most controversial issues confronting our nation. I'm using as a subject from which to preach, "Why I Am Opposed to the War in Vietnam."
Now, let me make it clear in the beginning, that I see this war as an unjust, evil, and futile war. I preach to you today on the war in Vietnam because my conscience leaves me with no other choice. The time has come for America to hear the truth about this tragic war. In international conflicts, the truth is hard to come by because most nations are deceived about themselves. Rationalizations and the incessant search for scapegoats are the psychological cataracts that blind us to our sins. But the day has passed for superficial patriotism. He who lives with untruth lives in spiritual slavery. Freedom is still the bonus we receive for knowing the truth. "Ye shall know the truth," says Jesus, "and the truth shall set you free." Now, I've chosen to preach about the war in Vietnam because I agree with Dante, that the hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in a period of moral crisis maintain their neutrality. There comes a time when silence becomes betrayal.
The truth of these words is beyond doubt, but the mission to which they call us is a most difficult one. Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government's policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one's own bosom and in the surrounding world. Moreover, when the issues at hand seem as perplexing, as they often do in the case of this dreadful conflict, we're always on the verge of being mesmerized by uncertainty. But we must move on. Some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony. But we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak. And we must rejoice as well, for in all our history there has never been such a monumental dissent during a war, by the American people.
Polls reveal that almost fifteen million Americans explicitly oppose the war in Vietnam. Additional millions cannot bring themselves around to support it. And even those millions who do support the war [are] half-hearted, confused, and doubt-ridden. This reveals that millions have chosen to move beyond the prophesying of smooth patriotism, to the high grounds of firm dissent, based upon the mandates of conscience and the reading of history. Now, of course, one of the difficulties in speaking out today grows the fact that there are those who are seeking to equate dissent with disloyalty. It's a dark day in our nation when high-level authorities will seek to use every method to silence dissent. But something is happening, and people are not going to be silenced. The truth must be told, and I say that those who are seeking to make it appear that anyone who opposes the war in Vietnam is a fool or a traitor or an enemy of our soldiers is a person that has taken a stand against the best in our tradition.
Yes, we must stand, and we must speak. [tape skip]...have moved to break the betrayal of my own silences and to speak from the burnings of my own heart, as I have called for radical departures from the destruction of Vietnam. Many persons have questioned me about the wisdom of my path. At the heart of their concerns, this query has often loomed large and loud: "Why are you speaking about the war, Dr. King? Why are you joining the voices of dissent?" Peace and civil rights don't mix, they say. And so this morning, I speak to you on this issue, because I am determined to take the Gospel seriously. And I come this morning to my pulpit to make a passionate plea to my beloved nation.
This sermon is not addressed to Hanoi, or to the National Liberation Front. It is not addressed to China or to Russia. Nor is it an attempt to overlook the ambiguity of the total situation and the need for a collective solution to the tragedy of Vietnam. Nor is it an attempt to make North Vietnam or the National Liberation Front paragons of virtue, nor to overlook the role they must play in a successful resolution of the problem. This morning, however, I wish not to speak with Hanoi and the National Liberation Front, but rather to my fellow Americans, who bear the greatest responsibility, and entered a conflict that has exacted a heavy price on both continents.
Now, since I am a preacher by calling, I suppose it is not surprising that I have seven major reasons for bringing Vietnam into the field of my moral vision. There is...a very obvious and almost facile connection between the war in Vietnam and the struggle I and others have been waging in America. A few years ago there was a shining moment in that struggle. It seemed that there was a real promise of hope for the poor, both black and white, through the Poverty Program. There were experiments, hopes, and new beginnings. Then came the build-up in Vietnam. And I watched the program broken as if it was some idle political plaything of a society gone mad on war. And I knew that America would never invest the necessary funds or energies in rehabilitation of its poor so long as adventures like Vietnam continued to draw men and skills and money, like some demonic, destructive suction tube. And you may not know it, my friends, but it is estimated that we spend $500,000 to kill each enemy soldier, while we spend only fifty-three dollars for each person classified as poor, and much of that fifty-three dollars goes for salaries to people that are not poor. So I was increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor, and attack it as such.
Perhaps the more tragic recognition of reality took place when it became clear to me that the war was doing far more than devastating the hope of the poor at home. It was sending their sons, and their brothers, and their husbands to fight and die in extraordinarily high proportion relative to the rest of the population. We were taking the black young men who had been crippled by society and sending them eight thousand miles away to guarantee liberties in Southeast Asia which they had not found in Southwest Georgia and East Harlem. So we have been repeatedly faced with a cruel irony of watching Negro and white boys on TV screens as they kill and die together for a nation that has been unable to seat them together in the same school room. So we watch them in brutal solidarity, burning the huts of a poor village. But we realize that they would hardly live on the same block in Chicago or Atlanta. Now, I could not be silent in the face of such cruel manipulation of the poor.
My third reason moves to an even deeper level of awareness, for it grows out of my experience in the ghettos of the North over the last three years--especially the last three summers. As I have walked among the desperate, rejected, and angry young men, I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through non-violent action; for they ask and write me, "So what about Vietnam?" They ask if our nation wasn't using massive doses of violence to solve its problems to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without first having spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today: my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of the hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence I cannot be silent. Been a lot of applauding over the last few years. They applauded our total movement; they've applauded me. America and most of its newspapers applauded me in Montgomery. And I stood before thousands of Negroes getting ready to riot when my home was bombed and said, we can't do it this way. They applauded us in the sit-in movement--we non-violently decided to sit in at lunch counters. The applauded us on the Freedom Rides when we accepted blows without retaliation. They praised us in Albany and Birmingham and Selma, Alabama. Oh, the press was so noble in its applause, and so noble in its praise when I was saying, Be non-violent toward Bull Connor;when I was saying, Be non-violent toward [Selma, Alabama segregationist sheriff] Jim Clark. There's something strangely inconsistent about a nation and a press that will praise you when you say, Be non-violent toward Jim Clark, but will curse and damn you when you say, "Be non-violent toward little brown Vietnamese children. There's something wrong with that press!
As if the weight of such a commitment to the life and health of America were not enough, another burden of responsibility was placed upon me in 1964. And I cannot forget that the Nobel Peace Prize was not just something taking place, but it was a commission--a commission to work harder than I had ever worked before for the brotherhood of Man. This is a calling that takes me beyond national allegiances. But even if it were not present, I would yet have to live with the meaning of my commitment to the ministry of Jesus Christ. To me, the relationship of this ministry to the making of peace is so obvious that I sometimes marvel at those who ask me why I am speaking against the war. Could it be that they do not know that the Good News was meant for all men, for communists and capitalists, for their children and ours, for black and white, for revolutionary and conservative. Have they forgotten that my ministry is in obedience to the One who loved His enemies so fully that he died for them? What, then, can I say to the Vietcong, or to Castro, or to Mao, as a faithful minister to Jesus Christ? Can I threaten them with death, or must I not share with them my life? Finally, I must be true to my conviction that I share with all men the calling to be the son of the Living God. Beyond the calling of race or nation or creed is this vocation of sonship and brotherhood. And because I believe that the Father is deeply concerned, especially for His suffering and helpless and outcast children, I come today to speak for them. And as I ponder the madness of Vietnam and search within myself for ways to understand and respond in compassion, my mind goes constantly to the people of that peninsula. I speak not now of the soldiers of each side, not of the military government of Saigon, but simply of the people who have been under the curse of war for almost three continuous decades now. I think of them, too, because it is clear to me that there will be no meaningful solution until some attempt is made to know these people and hear their broken cries.
Now, let me tell you the truth about it. They must see Americans as strange liberators. Do you realize that the Vietnamese people proclaimed their own independence in 1945 after a combined French and Japanese occupation. And incidentally, this was before the Communist revolution in China. They were led by Ho Chi Minh. And this is a little-known fact, and these people declared themselves independent in 1945. They quoted our Declaration of Independence in their document of freedom, and yet our government refused to recognize them. President Truman said they were not ready for independence. So we fell victim as a nation at that time of the same deadly arrogance that has poisoned the international situation for all of these years. France then set out to reconquer its former colony. And they fought eight long, hard, brutal years trying to re-conquer Vietnam. You know who helped France? It was the United States of America. It came to the point that we were meeting more than eighty percent of the war costs. And even when France started despairing of its reckless action, we did not. And in 1954, a conference was called at Geneva, and an agreement was reached, because France had been defeated at Dien Bien Phu. But even after that, and after the Geneva Accord, we did not stop. We must face the sad fact that our government sought, in a real sense, to sabotage the Geneva Accord. Well, after the French were defeated, it looked as if independence and land reform would come through the Geneva agreement. But instead the United States came and started supporting a man named Diem who turned out to be one of the most ruthless dictators in the history of the world. He set out to silence all opposition. People were brutally murdered because they raised their voices against the brutal policies of Diem. And the peasants watched and cringed as Diem ruthlessly rooted out all opposition. The peasants watched as all this was presided over by United States influence and by increasing numbers of United States troops who came to help quell the insurgency that Diem's methods had aroused. When Diem was overthrown, they may have been happy, but the long line of military dictatorships seemed to offer no real change, especially in terms of their need for land and peace. And who are we supporting in Vietnam today? It's a man by the name of general Ky [Air Vice Marshal Nguyen Cao Ky] who fought with the French against his own people, and who said on one occasion that the greatest hero of his life is Hitler. This is who we are supporting in Vietnam today. Oh, our government and the press generally won't tell us these things, but God told me to tell you this morning. The truth must be told.
The only change came from America as we increased our troop commitments in support of governments which were singularly corrupt, inept, and without popular support and all the while the people read our leaflets and received regular promises of peace and democracy and land reform. Now they languish under our bombs and consider us, not their fellow Vietnamese, the real enemy. They move sadly and apathetically as we herd them off the land of their fathers into concentration camps, where minimal social needs are rarely met. They know they must move or be destroyed by our bombs. So they go, primarily women, and children and the aged. They watch as we poison their water, as we kill a million acres of their crops. They must weep as the bulldozers roar through their areas preparing to destroy the precious trees. They wander into the towns and see thousands of thousands of the children, homeless, without clothes, running in packs on the streets like animals. They see the children degraded by our soldiers as they beg for food. They see the children selling their sisters to our soldiers, soliciting for their mothers. We have destroyed their two most cherished institutions: the family and the village. We have destroyed their land and their crops. We have cooperated in the crushing of the nation's only noncommunist revolutionary political force, the United Buddhist Church. This is a role our nation has taken, the role of those who make peaceful revolutions impossible but refusing to give up the privileges and the pleasures that comes from the immense profits of overseas investments. I'm convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, militarism and economic exploitation are incapable of being conquered.
A true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our present policies. On the one hand, we are called to play the Good Samaritan on life's roadside, but that will be only an initial act. One day we must come to see that the whole Jericho Road must be changed so that men and women will not be constantly beaten and robbed as they make their journey on life's highway. True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar. A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth with righteous indignation. It will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa, and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say, "This is not just." It will look at our alliance with the landed gentry of Latin America and say, "This is not just." The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just. A true revolution of values will lay hands on the world order and say of war, "This way of settling differences is not just." This business of burning human beings with napalm, of filling our nation's homes with orphans and widows, of injecting poisonous drugs of hate into the veins of peoples normally humane, of sending men home from dark and bloody battlefields physically handicapped and psychologically deranged, cannot be reconciled with wisdom, justice, and love. A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.
Oh, my friends, if there is any one thing that we must see today is that these are revolutionary times. All over the globe men are revolting against old systems of exploitation and oppression, and out of the wounds of a frail world, new systems of justice and equality are being born. The shirtless and barefoot people of the land are rising up as never before. The people who sat in darkness have seen a great light. They are saying, unconsciously, as we say in one of our freedom songs, "Ain't gonna let nobody turn me around!" It is a sad fact that because of comfort, complacency, a morbid fear of communism, our proneness to adjust to injustice, the Western nations that initiated so much of the revolutionary spirit of the modern world have now become the arch anti-revolutionaries. This has driven many to feel that only Marxism has a revolutionary spirit. Therefore, communism is a judgment against our failure to make democracy real and follow through on the revolutions that we initiated. Our only hope today lies in our ability to recapture the revolutionary spirit and go out into a sometimes hostile world declaring eternal hostility to poverty, racism, and militarism. With this powerful commitment we shall boldly challenge the status quo, we shall boldly challenge unjust mores, and thereby speed up the day when "every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low, and the rough places shall be made plain, and the crooked places straight. And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together."
A genuine revolution of values means in the final analysis that our loyalties must become ecumenical rather than sectional. Every nation must now develop an overriding loyalty to mankind as a whole in order to preserve the best in their individual societies. This call for a worldwide fellowship that lifts neighborly concern beyond one's tribe, race, class, and nation is in reality a call for an all-embracing, unconditional love for all men. This oft misunderstood and misinterpreted concept, so readily dismissed by the Nietzsches of the world as a weak and cowardly force, has now become an absolute necessity for the survival of mankind. And when I speak of love I'm not speaking of some sentimental and weak response. I am speaking of that force which all of the great religions have seen as the supreme unifying principle of life. Love is somehow the key that unlocks the door which leads to ultimate reality. This Hindu-Muslim-Christian-Jewish-Buddhist belief about ultimate reality is beautifully summed up in the first epistle of John: "Let us love one another, for God is love. And every one that loveth is born of God and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God, for God is love. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us and his love is perfected in us."
Let me say finally that I oppose the war in Vietnam because I love America. I speak out against this war, not in anger, but with anxiety and sorrow in my heart, and, above all, with a passionate desire to see our beloved country stand as the moral example of the world. I speak out against this war because I am disappointed with America. And there can be no great disappointment where there is not great love. I am disappointed with our failure to deal positively and forthrightly with the triple evils of racism, economic exploitation, and militarism. We are presently moving down a dead-end road that can lead to national disaster. America has strayed to the far country of racism and militarism. The home that all too many Americans left was solidly structured idealistically; its pillars were solidly grounded in the insights of our Judeo-Christian heritage. All men are made in the image of God. All men are bothers. All men are created equal. Every man is an heir to a legacy of dignity and worth. Every man has rights that are neither conferred by, nor derived from the State--they are God-given. Out of one blood, God made all men to dwell upon the face of the earth. What a marvelous foundation for any home! What a glorious and healthy place to inhabit. But America's strayed away, and this unnatural excursion has brought only confusion and bewilderment. It has left hearts aching with guilt and minds distorted with irrationality.
It is time for all people of conscience to call upon America to come back home. Come home, America. Omar Khayyam is right: "The moving finger writes, and having writ moves on." I call on Washington today. I call on every man and woman of good will all over America today. I call on the young men of America who must make a choice today to take a stand on this issue. Tomorrow may be too late. The book may close. And don't let anybody make you think that God chose America as his divine, messianic force to be a sort of policeman of the whole world. God has a way of standing before the nations with judgment, and it seems that I can hear God saying to America, "You're too arrogant! And if you don't change your ways, I will rise up and break the backbone of your power, and I'll place it in the hands of a nation that doesn't even know my name. Be still and know that I'm God."
Now it isn't easy to stand up for truth and for justice. Sometimes it means being frustrated. When you tell the truth and take a stand, sometimes it means that you will walk the streets with a burdened heart. Sometimes it means losing a job...means being abused and scorned. It may mean having a seven, eight year old child asking a daddy, "Why do you have to go to jail so much?" And I've long since learned that to be a follower to the Jesus Christ means taking up the cross. And my bible tells me that Good Friday comes before Easter. Before the crown we wear, there is the cross that we must bear. Let us bear it--bear it for truth, bear it for justice, and bear it for peace. Let us go out this morning with that determination. And I have not lost faith. I'm not in despair, because I know that there is a moral order. I haven't lost faith, because the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice. I can still sing "We Shall Overcome" because Carlyle was right: "No lie can live forever." We shall overcome because William Cullen Bryant was right: "Truth pressed to earth will rise again." We shall overcome because James Russell Lowell was right: "Truth forever on the scaffold, wrong forever on the throne." Yet, that scaffold sways the future. We shall overcome because the bible is right: "You shall reap what you sow." With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our world into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to speed up the day when justice will roll down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream. With this faith we will be able to speed up the day when the lion and the lamb will lie down together, and every man will sit under his own vine and fig tree, and none shall be afraid because the words of the Lord have spoken it. With this faith we will be able to speed up the day when all over the world we will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we're free at last!" With this faith, we'll sing it as we're getting ready to sing it now. Men will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. And nations will not rise up against nations, neither shall they study war anymore. And I don't know about you, I ain't gonna study war no more.
Text courtesy of Information Clearinghouse.
Check out the The CIA Sabotage Manual as well.
Guerrilla warfare is essentially a political war. Therefore, its area of
operations exceeds the territorial limits of conventional warfare, to penetrate
the political entity itself: the "political animal" that Aristotle defined.
In effect, the human being should be considered the priority objective in a
political war. And conceived as the military target of guerrilla war, the human
being has his most critical point in his mind. Once his mind has been reached,
the "political animal" has been defeated, without necessarily receiving
Guerrilla warfare is born and grows in the political environment; in the
constant combat to dominate that area of political mentality that is inherent
to all human beings and which collectively constitutes the "environment" in
which guerrilla warfare moves, and which is where precisely its victory or
failure is defined.
This conception of guerrilla warfare as political war turns Psychological
Operations into the decisive factor of the results. The target, then, is the
minds of the population, all the population: our troops, the enemy troops and
the civilian population.
This book is a manual for the training of guerrillas in psychological
operations, and its application to the concrete case of the Christian and
democratic crusade being waged in Nicaragua by the Freedom Commandos.
The purpose of this book is to introduce the guerrilla student to the
psychological operations techniques that will be of immediate and practical
value to him in guerrilla warfare. This section is introductory and general;
subsequent sections will cover each point set forth here in more detail.
The nature of the environment of guerrilla warfare does not permit
sophisticated psychological operations, and it becomes necessary for the chiefs
of groups, chiefs of detachments and squadron leaders to have the ability to
carry out, with minimal instructions from the higher levels, psychological
action operations with the contacts that are thoroughly aware of the situation,
i.e. the foundations.
2. Combatant-Propagandist Guerrillas
In order to obtain the maximum results from the psychological operations in
guerrilla warfare, every combatant should be as highly motivated to carry out
propaganda face to face as he is a combatant. This means that the individual
political awareness of the guerrilla of the reason for his struggle will be
as acute as his ability to fight.
Such a political awareness and motivation is obtained through the dynamic of
groups and self-criticism, as a standard method of instruction for the
guerrilla training and operations. Group discussions raise the spirit and
improve the unity of thought of the guerrilla training and operations. Group
discussions raise the spirit and improve the unity of thought of the guerrilla
squads and exercise social pressure on the weak members to carry out a better
role in future training or in combative action. Self-criticism is in terms of
one's contribution or defects in his contribution to the cause, to the
movement, the struggle, etc.; and gives a positive individual commitment to the
mission of the group.
The desired result is a guerrilla who can persuasively justify his actions when
he comes into contact with any member of the People of Nicaragua, and
especially with himself and his fellow guerrillas in dealing with the
vicissitudes of guerrilla warfare. This means that every guerrilla will be
persuasive in his face-to-face communication - propagandist-combatant - ins his
contact with the people; he should be able to give 5 or 10 logical reasons why,
for example, a peasant should give him cloth, needle and thread to mend his
clothes. When the guerrilla behaves in this manner, enemy propaganda will never
succeed in making him an enemy in the eyes of the people. It also means that
hunger, cold, fatigue and insecurity will have a meaning, psychologically, in
the cause of the struggle due to his constant orientation.
3. Armed Propaganda
Armed propaganda includes every act carried out, and the good impression that
this armed force causes will result in positive attitudes in the population
toward that force; ad it does not include forced indoctrination. Armed
propaganda improves the behavior of the population toward them, and it is not
achieved by force.
This means that a guerrilla armed unit in a rural town will not give the
impression that arms are their strength over the peasants, but rather that they
are the strength of the peasants against the Sandinista government of
repression. This is achieved through a close identification with the people,
as follows: hanging up weapons and working together with them on their crops,
in construction, in the harvesting of grains, in fishing, etc.; explanations to
young men about basic weapons, e.g. giving them an unloaded weapon and
letting them touch it, see it, etc.; describing in a rudimentary manner its
operation; describing with simple slogans how weapons will serve the people to
win their freedom; demanding the requests by the people for hospitals and
education, reducing taxes, etc.
All these acts have as their goal the creation of an identification of the
people with the weapons and the guerrillas who carry them, so that the
population feels that the weapons are, indirectly, their weapon to protect them
and help them in the struggle against a regime of oppression. Implicit terror
always accompanies weapons, since the people are internally "aware" that they
can be used against them, but as long as explicit coercion is avoided, positive
attitudes can be achieved with respect to the presence of armed guerrillas
within the population.
4. Armed Propaganda Teams
Armed Propaganda Teams (EPA) are formed through a careful selection of
persuasive and highly motivated guerrillas who move about within the
population, encouraging the people to support the guerrillas and put up
resistance against the enemy. It combines a high degree of political
awareness and the "armed" propaganda ability of the guerrillas toward a
planned, programmed, and controlled effort.
The careful selection of the staff, based on their persuasiveness in informal
discussions and their ability in combat, is more important than their degree
of education or the training program. The tactics of the Armed Propaganda Teams
are carried out covertly, and should be parallel to the tactical effort in
guerrilla warfare. The knowledge of the psychology of the population is primary
for the Armed Propaganda Teams, but much more intelligence data will be
obtained from an EPA program in the area of operations.
5. Development and Control of the "Front" Organizations
The development and control of "front" (or facade) organizations is carried out
through subjective internal control at group meetings of "inside cadres,"
and the calculations of the time for the fusion of these combined efforts to be
applied to the masses.
Established citizens-doctors, lawyers, businessmen, teachers, etc.-will be
recruited initially as "Social Crusaders" in typically "innocuous" movements in
the area of operations. When their "involvement" with the clandestine
organization is revealed to them, this supplies the psychological pressure to
use them as "inside cadres" in groups to which they already belong or of which
they can be members.
Then they will receive instruction in techniques of persuasion over control
of target groups to support our democratic revolution, through a gradual and
skillful process. A cell control system isolates individuals from one another,
and at the appropriate moment, their influence is used for the fusion of
groups in a united national front.
6. Control of Meetings and Mass Assemblies
The control of mass meetings in support of guerrilla warfare is carried out
internally through a covert commando element, bodyguards, messengers, shock
forces (initiators of incidents), placard carriers (also used for making
signals), shouters of slogans, everything under the control of the outside
When the cadres are placed or recruited in organizations such as labor
unions, youth groups agrarian organizations or professional associations, they
will begin to manipulate the objectives of the groups. The psychological
apparatus of our movement through inside cadres prepares a mental attitude
which at the crucial moment can be turned into a fury of justified violence.
Through a small group of guerrillas infiltrated within the masses this can be
carried out; they will have the mission of agitating by giving the impression
that there are many of them and that they have a large popular backing. Using
the tactics of a force of 200-300 agitators, a demonstration can be created
in which 10,000-20,000 persons take part.
7. Support of Contacts with Their Roots in Reality
The support of local contacts who are familiar with the deep reality is
achieved through the exploitation of the social and political weaknesses of the
target society, with propagandist-combatant guerrillas, armed propaganda, armed
propaganda teams, cover organizations and mass meetings.
The combatant-propagandist guerrilla is the result of a continuous program of
indoctrination and motivation. They will have the mission of showing the
people how great and fair our movement is in the eyes of all Nicaraguans and the
world. Identifying themselves with our people, they will increase the
sympathy towards our movement, which will result in greater support of the
population for the freedom commandos, taking away support for the regime in
Armed propaganda will extend this identification process of the people with the
Christian guerrillas, providing converging points against the Sandinista
The Armed Propaganda Teams provide a several-stage program of persuasive
planning in guerrilla warfare in all areas of the country. Also, these teams
are the "eyes and ears" of our movement.
The development and control of the cover organizations in guerrilla warfare
will give our movement the ability to create a "whiplash" effect within the
population when the order for fusion is given. When the infiltration and
internal subjective control have been developed in a manner parallel to other
guerrilla activities, a comandante of ours will literally be able to shake up
the Sandinista structure, and replace it.
The mass assemblies and meetings are the culmination of a wide base support
among the population, and it comes about in the later phases of the operation.
This is the moment in which the overthrow can be achieved and our revolution
can become an open one, requiring the close collaboration of the entire
population of the country, and of contacts with their roots in reality.
The tactical effort in guerrilla warfare is directed at the weaknesses of the
enemy and at destroying their military resistance capacity, and should be
parallel to a psychological effort to weaken and destroy their sociopolitical
capacity at the same time. In guerrilla warfare, more than in any other type
of military effort, the psychological activities should be simultaneous with
the military ones, in order to achieve the objectives desired.
From Let's Try Democracy:
By David Swanson
This coming week, the House of Representatives is expected to vote on $33 billion for war. A majority of Americans opposes this, but a sizable minority of Americans supports it. No one who supports it can be aware of any of the following six facts.
1. For many months, probably years, at least the second largest and probably the largest source of revenue for the Taliban has been U.S. taxpayers. We are giving the Taliban our money instead of investing it in useful things at home or abroad. "WARLORD, INC.: Extortion and Corruption Along the U.S. Supply Chain in Afghanistan," is a report from the Majority Staff of the Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs in the U.S. House of Representatives. The reportdocuments payoffs to the Taliban for safe passage of U.S. goods, payoffs very likely greater than the Taliban's profits from opium, its other big money maker. And this isneither new nor unknown to top U.S. officials. But it must be unknown to Americans supporting the war. You can't support a war where you're funding both sides unless you want both sides to lose. We lock people away for giving a pair of socks to the enemy, while our own government serves as chief financial sponsor.
2. Our top consumer of oil is the U.S. military. We don't just fight wars in areas of the globe that are coincidentally rich in oil, but fighting those wars is the single biggest way in which we burn oil. We pollute the air in the process of poisoning the earth with all variety of weaponry. According to the 2007 CIA World Fact Book, when oil consumption is broken down per capita, the U.S. military ranks fourth in the world, behind just three actual nations. There's no way to care about the environment while allowing the money that could create renewable energy to be spent instead on an operation whose destructiveness is rivaled only by BP. We could have 20 green energy jobs at $50 K each for what it costs to send one soldier to Afghanistan. We're fighting wars for the fuel to fight wars, even though the process is eating up the funds we could use to try to survive its side-effects.
3. Over half of every U.S. tax dollar is spent on wars, the military, and payments on debt for past wars and military spending. Here's a pie chart that breaks it down for you. If you're concerned about government spending, you can't just be concerned with the minority of it that is carefully funded with taxes and off-setting cuts elsewhere. You have to also consider the single biggest item, the one that takes up a majority of the budget, large chunks of which are routinely funded off the books, borrowed from China, and passed with so-called "emergency supplemental" bills of the sort now before the House of Representatives, the sole purpose of which is to keep the money outside the budget. Numerous economic studies have shown that investing in the military, even at home, does less for the economy than tax cuts, which do less for the economy than investing in education, energy, infrastructure, and other areas. Its wars or jobs, we can't have both. The labor movement has mostly (with some good exceptions) been silent on war spending, in part because jobs spending has been packaged into the same bill. Now it's not. Now the House is confronted with a bill that spends on war the money that is needed for jobs, for housing, for schools, for green energy, for retirement. Will advocates of these raise their voices this week?
4. A leading, and probably the leading, cause of death in the U.S. military is suicide. U.S. troops are killing themselves in record numbers. One central reason for this is likely that these troops have no idea what it is they are risking their lives, and taking others' lives, for. Can we expect them to know, when top officials in Washington don't? When the President's special representative to Afghanistan testified in the Senate recently, senators from both parties asked him repeatedly what the goal was, what success would look like, for what purpose the war went on. Richard Holbrooke had no answers. Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) told the Los Angeles Times: "A lot of folks on both sides of the aisle think this effort is adrift. A lot of folks you'd consider the strongest hawks in the country are scratching their heads in concern." Corker complained that after listening for 90 minutes to Holbrooke he had "no earthly idea what our objectives are on the civilian front. So far, this has been an incredible waste of time."
5. The $33 billion about to be voted on cannot possibly be needed to continue the war in Afghanistan, because it is exclusively to be used for escalating that war. The President was publicly pressured by his generals several months ago to begin an escalation, but Congress has yet to fund it. To the extent that it has been begun unfunded, it can be undone. CNN reports: "Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned senators in June that military operations will need to be reduced for the rest of the year unless Congress approves additional funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan." This is nonsense. If this escalation funding were blocked, the war would remain at the level it was at before. And that's if the Pentagon respects the authority of the Congress. The other alternative, openly indicated by Gates, is that the Pentagon will fund the escalation out of its standard budget. Congressman Alan Grayson has a bill called "The War Is Making You Poor Act" which would require that wars be funded out of the military budget, which would eliminate federal taxes on the first $35,000 anyone earned and reduce the national debt. How horrible would that be?
6. War would be the greatest evil on earth even if it were free. Watch this new video of a man whose father was shot and killed while sleeping in bed. More of our tax dollars at work. How many of these stories of what our military does can we write off? Our drones kill both civilians and "insurgents," as do our night raids and check points. Or, maybe not the check points. General Stanley McChrystal said that of the amazing number of people we've killed at check points, none of them have been any threat. And the damage lasts in the places we destroy. Look at this new report on the damage done to the children of Fallujah. This is not because U.S. soldiers aren't brave or their parents didn't raise them well. It's because these wars don't involve pairs of armies on battlefields. We're occupying countries where the enemies look like everyone except us.
Well, maybe our representatives know all of this and still fund wars because people who fund them tell them to. But what can we do about it? We vote whenever there's an election, or at least some of us do. Isn't that our role? What does this have to do with elections? It should have everything to do with them. When we call our congress members this week we should not just ask them to vote No on war money, we should demand it, and we should let them know that we will work to unelect them, even replacing them with someone worse (since you can't get much worse), if they vote for this money. And we should spend August rewarding and punishing accordingly. Here are 88 candidates for Congress this year who have committed to not voting a dime for these wars. They are from every party and political inclination. They should be supported.
If this war funding can be blocked for another week it will be blocked until mid-September and perhaps for good. If we can get closer to doing that than we have before, we will have something to build on. Just holding a straightforward vote in which war opponents vote No and war supporters vote Yes, no matter how close or far we are from winning, will identify who needs to keep their job and who doesn't. If most of the Yes votes are Republican, we will be able to confront the President with the opposition of his own party. We're moving toward peace.
Get resources from http://defundwar.org
FCNL has a toll-free number to call your representative: 1-888-493-5443. Use it.
The Taliban had all but eradicated the opium growers before the US invasion. So why is cheap Afghani heroin flooding into the United States?
Obama is asking Congress for more money to fund his surge in what is now America's Longest War. Look where that money is going.
In Afghan fields the poppies grow.
Between the crosses.
Row on row.
By Eva Bartlett via Aletho News:
A dry winter with very late rains –at the end of January, the last possible time for planting, the farmers said –followed by a dry spring evolved into the beginnings of a dry summer.
Called yesterday to accompany farmers in the Faraheen and Khoza’a regions, each east of Khan Younis, we were suddenly busy again. So it goes with the farmers who’ve been forced to give up high-maintenance agriculture and try for the lowest-maintenance crops possible: wheat, rye, lentils. No more trees, they’ve all been bulldozed too many times. Not so many potatoes, nor much parsley–they require more water than the sparse rains provided or the destroyed water cisterns, wells and piping allowed for.
Whereas before the heightened Israeli army aggressions against these visibly unarmed farmers they would live on their land, at the very least daily visit and work on it, they are now resigned to rushed attempts at sowing and harvesting some of Gaza’s richest soils, under the thud and whiz of Israeli army bullets.
We were to join Leila Abu Dagga’s sister to harvest 5 dunams of lentils. But when we arrived were told, “it’s gone, the Israelis bulldozed it all”. [The land in question is near where the young, deaf farmer was shot by an Israeli soldier last year. Over 500 metres from the border, I remember it well (and remember the shock of the Israeli soldiers having shot around us to reach this unarmed farmer just trying to earn 20 shekels a day. The horror: shit, is he dead? The disbelief: but they saw us farming for over 2 hours... why shoot now? The disgust: this kid is just trying to add to his large family's small income)]
So we moved to Abu Tabbash land, roughly 12 dunams of wheat which we had accompanied the elderly farmer on four months ago. Then, the Israeli army jeeps had lorded atop earth mounds just across the Green Line border fence as Abu Khader walked the length of his accessible land, back and forth, hand-spraying wheat seeds.
As we arrive, shortly after 7 am, he tells us “we started at 5 am. The jeeps were there, but no shooting yet”. He is neither surprised nor grateful, just matter of fact. Matter of fact is the Israeli soldiers can appear at any moment and shoot at any moment, any whim. There is no pattern, no predictability, and the only seeming reason, quite obviously, is pure harrassment with the intent of driving Palestinians off their land and destroying the agricultural sector.
So farmers like Abu Khader risk working on their land, abadoning the tens, hundreds for some families, of dunams lost to within and near the Israeli-imposed “buffer zone”. But they do so at frantic paces, determined to work even the smallest section of their land.
“It’s quite remarkable,” says Adie, one of us accompanying the farmers. “It’s unbelievable that the Israeli army would fire on a scene like this. It’s one of the most tranquil things you could be doing, this hand-harvesting.”
Abu Khader has the bearing, humility, and cracked heels of someone who has toiled the land all his life. His dignity shines, as does his sense of urgency to harvest the crop, and he wastes no time with small-talk or breaks.
Working with three other family members, he hand-plucks the wheat from its earth, noting “it’s so meagre this year. It should be up to here,” gesturing near head level.
They rip, pile and bundle wheat and the dry hay-grass which will serve as animal feed. The bundles are stuffed into large sacs or piled on too-small donkey carts and hauled off.
Day one they’ve harvested from 5 am to 10 am and call it a day. Day two –”there was shooting this morning,” we are told, and an hour and a half another round of shots at visibly unarmed farmers –they work roughly the same, with same intensity, saying “tomorrow we’ll finish, just need an hour and a half”.
We leave, some of the plucked wheat still in small piles to be collected the next morning.
We learn hours later that after farmers and accompaniers left the land, Israeli bulldozers crushed in and lit afire by incendiary devices the land in and along the “buffer zone” including Abu Khader Abu Tabbash’s remaining wheat.
Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010 (Introduced in Senate)
S 3081 IS
To provide for the interrogation and detention of enemy belligerents who commit hostile acts against the United States, to establish certain limitations on the prosecution of such belligerents for such acts, and for other purposes.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
March 4, 2010
Mr. MCCAIN (for himself, Mr. LIEBERMAN, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. BROWN of Massachusetts, Mr. WICKER, Mr. CHAMBLISS, Mr. LEMIEUX, Mr. SESSIONS, and Mr. VITTER) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
To provide for the interrogation and detention of enemy belligerents who commit hostile acts against the United States, to establish certain limitations on the prosecution of such belligerents for such acts, and for other purposes.
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
SEC. 2. PLACEMENT OF SUSPECTED UNPRIVILEGED ENEMY BELLIGERENTS IN MILITARY CUSTODY.
SEC. 3. INTERROGATION AND DETERMINATION OF STATUS OF SUSPECTED UNPRIVILEGED ENEMY BELLIGERENTS.
SEC. 4. LIMITATION ON PROSECUTION OF ALIEN UNPRIVILEGED ENEMY BELLIGERENTS.
SEC. 5. DETENTION WITHOUT TRIAL OF UNPRIVILEGED ENEMY BELLIGERENTS.
SEC. 6. DEFINITIONS.
SEC. 7. EFFECTIVE DATE.