WITHOUT A COMPASS ON THE GLOBAL FREEWAY

Vol. 34
Nos. 20 & 21
2nd & 16th April, 2005

DRIVING AND NAVIGATING IN THE DARK

Do We Know Where We Are Going?

The Universe - our Universe - is not even a dot on the graph of infinite time and space. Try to work that one out if you will! We must therefore confine ourselves to the Universe in which we exist; the world we live in. Towards the end of the Twentieth Century the consolidation of financial and corporate, multinational Power proceeded at an alarming pace. In 1986 the "Big Bang" of computerised London Stock Exchange dealings and the sheer scale of corporate investment effectively elbowed out the small investor(3). Our own local stockbroking firm, like printed share certificates, appeared to vanish down a black hole almost overnight; not unlike the fate of the electorate and the Nation State in the contemporary party political scenario. The dawn of the Third Millennium and the destruction of the Twin Towers of the World Trade Centre in New York, on 11th September, 2001, opened the floodgates for raw United States Power. Our so-called "Christian" leaders in the United States and the United Kingdom, abetted by their sycophantic, self-interested and craven political following, set about smashing to pieces an entire people, their vital infrastructure and their ancient culture in Iraq. Whatever the attempts to paper over the cracks, our leaders were liars and the evidence and pretext were false, as the perpetrators had known from the start. To this day the fairy tale persists that to expose this imposition of raw economic and military Power in the Middle East, or in the Third and Developing Worlds generally, is somehow politically of the Left Wing. All we can say is that those who think this way and profess Christianity should go to Church, get on their knees, and ponder hard this one.

Mark well the extracts in "Food For Thought". It is windy as we write. No, not the curry we ate the previous day. Outside a gale is gathering pace. In many ways it is symbolic of the gathering storm - or is it the gathering "momentum? - of the geopolitical, global scenario. China, India and the Nations of the Far East generally, are fast coming on stream. China, with a population of one billion plus, and India with a population roughly three quarters of this, dwarf those of the Western Powers; notably that of the United States. In past months we have written of the implications. Even as we tap away at the keyboard it resembles a gathering storm as reports, especially on China, continue to escalate in the business pages: "Setting limits on weapons for China" & "Treat China with respect", International Herald Tribune, 26th February, 2005; "China looms in the rear view mirror" Financial Times, 1st March, 2005; "Oil leaps as O.P.E.C. hints $80 barrel is on the way - Cold snap and growing demand from China and India add to pressure", The Daily Telegraph, 4th March, 2005; "India and China banks cut dollar exposure ", Financial Times, 8th March, 2005; "Asian groups lean towards local bankers" Financial Times, 9th March, 2005; "N.Y.S.E. [New York Stock Exchange], N.A.S.D.A.Q. [National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotations system (U.S.)] to open outposts in China" Financial Times, 10th March, 2005. All but one of these reports occurred in March this year. The following letter was published in The Daily Telegraph of 1st March, 2005, in response to an earlier letter, under the heading "Vacuuming our jobs". It might just as well have been titled "Heads in the sand":

Clearly, one cannot ignore the ability of the Far East to produce goods of quality at low cost (Comment, 28th February). In Neil Collin's view, we in Britain will prosper by designing, developing and marketing the products. How long does he think that this state of affairs will last? Does he seriously believe that, having the dynamism and the acquired ability to produce these things, the overseas manufacturers will continue to let us have the cream, and not develop their own products and brands? Furthermore, much of the design skill and engineering and scientific expertise will blossom within the manufacturing companies themselves, and from within their local suppliers who will make the components and machinery for those factories. With the loss of manufacturing in Britain, the exposure of would-be designers and technicians to the complex requirements and challenges of making things is lost, and the pool of expertise is progressively diminished.

Driving Blind - Who Gets What And Who Goes Where?

The writer of this letter, John Ditchfield, goes on to regret the loss of much of British manufacturing industry, whereas our continental neighbours have "cherished" theirs. Here we would not agree. Ownership and operation of manufacturing is now comprehensively scrambled across national borders. The Motor Manufacturing Industry in Italy has a constant struggle to survive. Germany, ostensibly a motor manufacturing power-house, is in recession. A decision by American-owned General Motors to locate certain new manufacture in Germany has meant a serious loss of capacity for its Swedish subsidiary, Saab. The United Kingdom survives in this and other fields as an assembler of foreign owned products. So where lies economic sovereignty? In only twenty years the share columns of the Financial Times have undergone a massive change. It represents a massive shake-down behind which now lurks the emergence of China, India and the Far East; a pattern already set by post-war Japan. These columns reveal the progress of corporate "cannibalism"; in other words the progressive centralisation of Power. Another feature is an almost obscene explosion of investment funds and financial services - money making money out of money - control of the lifeblood of investment without producing or manufacturing a thing itself. It was surely significant that a Financial Times survey of 26th February, 2005, "Embarrassment of riches gives U.K. plc something to think about", listed 15 companies of which only one, British Aerospace Industries, was identifiable as a manufacturer. Two were "support services", another "utilities", one "mining", one "construction", one the grossly over-inflated and parasitic "advertising industry", three "hotels-drink-leisure", one "chemicals" and four "banks and financial services". We then come to the question of corporate ownership and just who owns what if we are to know where the profits are going from automobile manufacturing or any other business. We can only see Mr Ditchfield's concerns in the light of this and the endlessly complicated convolutions of off-shore investment, tax havens, government taxation, borrowing and benefits and proliferating service industries and bureaucracies that appear to fill the vacuum. So who gets the money and who - the mass of the population - gets what is left over.

The vast international money market that is the lifeblood of investment and our prosperity - or otherwise - is controlled by the Global Power brokers, the Ruling Elite whose tentacles extend to Elite Establishments and the reaches of elected governments. Except in a negative sense it has little relevance to the needs and often the meagre subsistence of millions of ordinary people across the world. Agriculture and food production are classic examples. Just how little this relevance was conveyed by the Financial Times on 14th March, 2005, with this comment on the high-yield debt market:

It's like a game of musical chairs. You just hope it is somebody else that gets hurt when the music stops.

The one-way ratchet of consolidation and centralisation as old as the history of man. When United States economic and commercial muscle came on stream in the Twentieth Century it was simply another phase in this process. The same instinctive drive resulted in a continuum of tactical power blocs to maintain a balance. In 2001 we gave an history of the plot to dismember the United Kingdom, and the domestic political betrayal of moves to incorporate its component parts - the "regions" - into a federal European "state" as opposed to the original and conveniently cosmetic concept of political and economic co-operation(4). United States influences; the Foundations and names such as Rockefeller, lay behind the early post-war machinations to this end. The destruction of the Twin Towers in New York on 11th September, 2001, triggered a massive expansion of United States Power in which the Government of New Labour was a willing accomplice with mutual interests, namely oil, at stake. As Internationalist Fabian Socialists New labour was already philosophically committed to the elimination of national boundaries. This gave impetus to optional groupings in an expansion of the European Union from the Baltic across Eastern Europe as far as Russia. It also brought into play questions for a future role of Nato, under continued American dominance as a useful enforcement arm in the global Power play. In turn this has brought into play the concept of an European military force beyond the reach of the United States. The vast mass of ordinary people are the innocent ping-pong balls, for the most part to be deliberately diverted and kept in ignorance of the subtle, arcane forces and interests at play in the corridors of Power.

We see our potential fate as a nation sign-posted in a report that Germany, apparently unilaterally, proposed to undertake overseas military commitments as part of Nato in return for United States support for a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council. Whilst seemingly few British Members of Parliament are conversant with the proposed European Union Constitution, the Spanish Foreign Minister, Miguel Angel Moratinos, has reportedly gone ahead of the game:

Mr Moratinos declared "We are witnessing the last remnants of national politics". And asked if the treaty would strip, parliaments like Westminster of the right to set their own laws he replied "Absolutely". He said they had already signed away power to run their own economy, legal system and human rights rules. The next step will be to form a Europe-wide foreign policy and merge the armed forces into a single E.U. army. Mr Moratinos said the Constitution would lead to a "surrender of member states sovereignty". He told an E.U. think-tank that patriotism will be swept away as we all become Europeans. The member states have already relinquished control of justice, liberty and security".

Telegraph Newspapers have long had close and identifiable ties to American, Political Zionist and Israeli interests(5). It was not therefore surprising that Charles Moore wrote on 19th February, 2005, under the title "Why the E.U. Constitution is bad for Britain and bad for the U.S.". Whichever way, the tug-of-war exposes the dangers for the loss of sovereignty for the British people. Moore, however, did expose the traps and anomalies of any such Constitution.

It is natural for Americans to like the sound of the word "constitution". They have the best one ever written in a single document. It consists, in the copy I have before me, of 12 pages, 11 if you exclude the list of the men who signed it. There are also amendments added over the past two centuries: they amount to another nine pages. If President Bush tucked himself up with it at his famously early bedtime of 9.30, he could finish it well before 10. I should be surprised if the State Department, the Washington faction keenest on turning Mr Bush into a Euro enthusiast, has encouraged him to go to bed with a copy of the European Constitution. My copy, published by T.S.O. (note that the former name Her Majesty's Stationery Office has quietly been relegated), is 511 pages long. I do not claim it would keep Mr Bush up all night in fact, I guarantee that, if he tried to read it, he would still be asleep by 10 but it would wake him and the First Lady up with a start as it slipped from his nerveless hands and crashed, all 2lb 8oz of it, on the floor. If he did spend 20 minutes with the document, however, the President would see that it was not what is normally meant by a constitution. Rather than confining itself to the division of powers by which a country should be governed head of state, parliament, judiciary, what's local and what's national it lays out scores of pages telling people how to run their lives. It supports positive discrimination, outlaws the death penalty in all circumstances, commits itself to high public spending, compulsory consultation with trade unions about changes at work, "the exchange of youth workers", "fat free breakfasts", "distance education" and "the physical and moral integrity of sportsmen and sportswomen" (I made one of these up). And it imposes all these on nations that have their own governments and electorates. It also contains a great bundle of miscellaneous provisions about such things as abortion in Malta, "Hot Rolling Mills Nos 1 and 2" for a steel company in the Czech Republic, some rather frightening looking stuff about the nuclear power plant in Slovakia and "the right to provide services by natural persons who do not enjoy hembygdsrcittlkotiseutuoikeus (regional citizenship) in Åland". This is not a constitution, certainly not a constitution intended to be understood by those it affects. It is a vast agglomeration of decisions made by governments to take power over citizens of vastly differing countries.

The hidden agenda tucked neatly away in this caustic critique was, of course, that of tying the United Kingdom, not to an European "state". Far from arguing for British sovereignty, Moore was postulating the alternative case; that for a vassal state of the United States:

If one had to point out only two aspects of the treaty to Mr Bush, I would first draw his attention to Article 1 16, which commits all member states to a "common foreign and security policy". "Member states," it goes on, "shall actively and unreservedly support the union's common foreign and security policy in a spirit of loyalty and mutual solidarity and shall comply with the union's actions in this area." That would seem, at a stroke, to prevent Britain (or any other member country) from acting unilaterally in military or political alliance with the United States ever again. In his interview with Alec Russell in today's paper, the President expresses his objections to the E.U. as a means of projecting global power and supplanting Nato: that is exactly what the European Constitution is trying to bring about (Emphasis added).

A Fry-Up On The Freeway

Let us now veer sharply away from talk of the Twin Towers of 9-11, of Global Power Brokerage and politicians, to a roadside cafe in a lay-by on a busy road in Wales. It is a truck stop, a "truckkie", colloquially known as a "greasy spoon". It is housed like many such cafes in a large portakabin and overlooks the peaceful green countryside. Five years ago we made an impromptu stop on a regular journey. When these ceased we continued to call, simply to get away from the world outside, from an artificial existence of telephones, computers, faxes and political make-believe for a world of real people. The socially sensitive might dismiss this as "slumming". Wishful thinking liberals would probably condemn it resentfully as patronising; an environment with which they themselves, faced with the reality of their social illusions, could not cope. Either way such inferences would be spurious. One is accepted on merit. Whatever one may make of the proliferation of heavy goods vehicles on our roads, or the vested interests of the road transport and oil lobbies, these men are not the creations of Politically Correct social engineering smothered by inhibitions of racial equality or equal opportunities; they have to be tough, intelligent and hard-working. Others drop by for tea and a chat; local delivery van drivers, dustmen, maintenance men and the occasional police patrolman. They are the kind of people who would be first on the spot in an emergency. It is a glimpse of a "Yeoman Nation" beautifully depicted by the magazine This England(6); not that this is unduly sentimental or regressive, as much as that sustained efforts have long been made and continue to be made to destabilise and destroy it. Conversation is illuminating. The newspapers are invariably the Mirror, The Sun, the Mail and sometimes a local newspaper; the pages evidence of just how little such people are told of important issues that dominate and determine the world in which they live.

A general election now looms in the United Kingdom. Politicians are suddenly discovering that such people and their daily problems exist. Pledges and initiatives flow like water; promises previously broken or conveniently forgotten, glibly undertaken during earlier campaigns to rectify bureaucratic strangulation, oppressive contortions of law and order legislation and practice, constraints imposed on effective policing by red tape and Political Correctness, the continuing mismanagement and manipulation of health care and so on. These are people trapped in a farce of "democracy" on both sides of the Atlantic; victims of monopolistic two-party political systems with precious little difference between them, systems sustained by massive financial contributions from vested interests; systems over which they have precious little control. They, their friends and relatives are the same people governments send to fight and die in what are fundamentally bankers' wars; increasingly today resource wars; all for the profit of the Ruling Elite. But what are such people being told, for example, about the proposed European Constitution that could change their lives for ever? They are entitled to expect those individual politicians whom they have elected to represent them to read and understand that Constitution page by page. They have a right to demand that they vote on such questions in accordance with their interests; not those of the collective party-political whip. They have a right to regular and comprehensive coverage by prime-time television as the ready medium of mass communication, not a monopoly of endless mind-numbing diversionary diet of televised soap and sport. The political conspiracy, for it is no less than that, is precisely the opposite.

THE INSTITUTIONAL TERRORISM OF THE TWIN TOWERS

The Mutation Of Lenin's Deaf Mute Blindmen

Vladimir Il'ich Lenin dismissed corporate Western businessmen, whose vision extended only to the next contract, as "Deaf Mute Blind-men", in that they played into the hands of the Soviet Union by sacrificing the security of their own people by trading in Western material resources and technology. Since this time, without the restraining geopolitical counterbalance of the Soviet Bloc, the Power Brokers have come a long way with a readiness to sacrifice any one who gets in their way on a global scale, latterly with the shadow of the Far East looming. Another Vladimir, K.G.B.-trained Vladimir Putin, must be smiling as the President of Russia; a Power and a Politico-Military culture that has by no means gone away. Since the perceived collapse of the Soviet Union that began in 1989, it has been possible to watch the present Global Power Structure evolve. Two factors are pivotal and seem likely to remain so until the full challenge from the Far Eat materialises. One, a long-term constant is the control over United States policies in the Middle East exercised by the Organised Jewish faction, and the central role of the State of Israel, including surrogate operations of Mossad elsewhere in the world. The second has been the destruction of the Twin Towers of the World Trade Centre, in New York, on 11th September, 2001. This was covered at the time in successive editions of On Target to which the reader may wish to refer(7)(8).

Popular concepts of American invincibility dissolved with the magnitude of the historic catastrophe on 11th September. The public shock wave was followed swiftly by searching questions about an attack that had been forecast and the failure of established counter-measures. That these questions persist was evident in a New York Times report as recently as 10th February, 2005 that "U.S. received 52 warnings before 9-11". Other unanswered questions remain despite an official investigation: fragmentation of - or deliberate intervention in - the operational and intelligence chain, including the United States Air Force, the Federal Aviation Authority (F.A.A.), the Pentagon, the White House, the C.I.A. and the F.B.I.; the unusual configuration of the collapse of the Twin Towers with a vertical implosion consistent with planned demolition, rather than a lateral collapse; a ground level explosion immediately prior to the aircraft strike, disappearance of the "black box" flight recorders and swift removal of vital evidence from the debris. Black Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney went further in claiming that the Administration of President George W, Bush had had prior knowledge of the attack. Here the plot thickens. Rapid expansion of the Internet has meant that circulation of reports and assessments by reputable analysts are not easily suppressed. Perceptions depend on the extent to which one is able to peel away the layers of a conceptual "onion". Opinion is hardening that not only did certain elements of the Bush Administration know of the impending attack, but that they were involved in its orchestration; something probably only the monolithic domestic Power behind Bush has been able so far to suppress. William Engdahl, author of the definitive Anglo-American Oil Power and the New World Order(9) has written:

A new "war on tyranny" is being groomed to replace the out-moded "war on terror". Far from being a semantic nuance, the shift is highly revealing of the next phase of Washington's global agenda. In his 20th January, 2005, inaugural speech, Bush declared, "It is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world". . . . The use of tyranny as justification for United States military intervention marks a dramatic new step in Washington's quest for global domination. "Washingion", of course, today is shorthand for the policy domination by a private group of military and energy conglomerates, from Halliburton to McDonnell Douglas, from Bechtel to ExxonMobil and ChevronTexaco, not unlike that foreseen in president Dwight Eisenhower's 1961 speech warning of excessive control of government by a military industrial complex. . . . Tyranny has to do with the internal affairs of a nation; it has to do with how a leader and a people interact, not with its foreign policy. It has nothing to do with aggression against the United States or others.

Michael Kane wrote of the complex relations with, and involvement of, the Saudi Arabian Monarchy. He wrote of an advanced computer system that had been capable of overriding, and inserting false data in, other computer networks such as that operated by the F.A.A. Moreover, that this had been employed on 11th September, 2001, by an elite group under Vice-President Dick Cheney(10). Here are some brief edited extracts:

At the heart of our story is a programme (we'll call it Ptech, after the company that produced it) that combines artificial intelligence, datamining, and "interoperability", the capacity for one programme to read, operate, and modify the source codes of other programmes. The computational power of the Ptech evolution of PROMIS represents a daunting new surveillance and intervention capability in the hands of the same elites who planned 9-11, prosecute the subsequent resource wars, and are presiding over what may become a full economic and military disaster for the resource consuming citizens of America and the world. [Although not expanded in our text, PROMIS appears to be a mnemonic derived from programme to read, operate, and modify the source codes of other programmes - Ed.] Since the "War On Terror" and the coming dollar-fossil fuel collapse will necessitate new levels of domestic repression, this is just the capability those elites require. Ptech is the functional equivalent of Total Information Awareness. The human side of Ptech is where the thievery and murder come in; among the financiers and programmers of Ptech are apparent members of an international network of organized criminals involved in decades of narcotraffic, gunrunning, money laundering, and terrorism. Their personal and professional connections reach up into the highest levels of the American government, and their activities are still underway.

The issue of Saudi complicity in the attacks of 9-11 has played out into two different views. The first is the idea that the Saudis were solely responsible. This has been pumped up by Fox News and largely accepted as gospel in certain parts of the mainstream media. The second view is that the Saudis were set up to take the fall for having pulled off 9-11, covering up United States complicity. Neither view is correct, and both depend on a mistaken view of that country as a monolithic, homogeneous actor on the world stage. The opposite is true. . . . Like virtually all Islamic states, Saudi Arabia has been the target of ongoing efforts by American Intelligence aimed at suppressing any stirrings of incipient secular leftism. This is opposed, we believe, to what may be convenient and clandestine support for "al Qa'eda" terrorists (that is, fundamentalists), acting as United States proxies, who might destabilize the Kingdom in advance of the United States carving off only those regions with oil reserves. Socially polarized oil wealth, the ever changing Arab Israeli conflict, and American geopolitical maneuvering configure a daunting matrix of hidden forces that can't be fully understood or managed not least because the intelligence elements are often double or triple agents with inscrutable loyalties.

The Ptech story is of intense interest for its implications about United States Government guilt in 9-11. As Ralph Schoenman, Michel Chossudovsky, Paul Thompson and others have argued, "al Qa'eda" is not only traceable to C.I.A. activity in Pakistan and Afghanistan during the Soviet period, it is also a current tool of American imperial ambitions. That directly contradicts the official story, in which al Qa'eda is the foreign devil incarnate, a militant hate group formed straight from the soil of Saudi ideology with no economic grievances, no interests in common with anyone in the non Muslim world, and above all, no connections to the United States through funding, personnel, armaments, drug trafficking, visa assistance, or communications. It certainly is a militant hate group, but the rank and file may be totally unaware of real connections between their own leaders and the people they oppose with their very lives. Beneficiaries of the Ptech connected MAK charities, the young men in Hezbollah and Hamas are fighting in land disputes, not heady ideological quests. They are also bitter, bereaved, murderous bigots with all the psychic rigidity and hysteria found in fundamentalists from Oklahoma to Hebron to Jeddah. Their hatred of the American national security state is surely absolute, but they are also beneficiaries of the Pentagon's need for an Enemy. That means that they can expect the United States to provide covert help of some kind at crucial points in the game. And the most despicable element in the American side of that process is the Bush Cheney junta itself, which used its own assets inside the terrorist network associated with Osama bin Laden to murder three thousand civilians in New York, Washington, and Pennsylvania as a pretext for unending warfare. This was done for reasons of state. But it was also done for personal gratifications including vast sums of money, permanent blackmail over those involved, and a heroin like rush of criminally insane individual power. . . . And the apparatus that permitted this remains in place as do most of the personnel.

Wreathing Smoke And Smoky Mirrors

Reference should be made to the December, 2004, edition of On Target, in which we recorded professional and public concerns about the manner of the collapse of the Twin Towers under the heading "Smoky Mirrors Of Obfuscation And Cover-Up"(11). We also reproduced the first 24 serials from a chronicle of 103 key events surrounding 11th September, 2001. This was the work of Michael C. Ruppert, a former Los Angeles Police Department narcotics investigator, and a well-known author and speaker on the subject. Here we publish the remaining serials:

25. Summer 2001 The online newswire online.ie reports on 14th September that an Iranian man phones United States law enforcement to warn of an imminent attack on the World Trade Centre (W.T.C.) in the week of 9th September. German police confirm the calls but state that the United States Secret Service would not reveal any further information.
(https://www.online.ie/news/viewer.adp?article=1512332
https://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/online_ ie_story.html)

26. Summer, 2001 Jordanian Intelligence, the G.I.D., makes a communications intercept deemed so important that King Abdullah's men relay it to Washington, probably through the C.I.A. station in Amman. To make doubly sure the message got through it was passed through an Arab intermediary to a German intelligence agent. The message: A major attack was planned inside the United States, and aircraft would be used. The code name of the operation was "The Big Wedding." "When it became clear that the information was embarrassing to Bush Administration officials and Congressmen who at first denied that there had been any such warnings before 11th September, senior Jordanian officials backed away from their earlier confirmations". This case was authenticated by A.B.C. reporter John K. Cooley. (International Herald Tribune (I.H.T.), 21st May, 2002).

27. Summer 2001 (est.) The National Security Agency intercepts telephone conversations between bin Laden aide Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and Mohammed Atta and does not share the information with any other agencies. (Jonathan Landay, Knight Ridder Newspapers, 6th June, 2002).

28. 26th June, 2001 The magazine indiareacts.com states that "India and Iran will 'facilitate' United States and Russian plans for 'limited military action' against the Taliban". The story indicates that the fighting will be done by United States and Russian troops with the help of Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. (indiareacts.com, 26th June, 2001).

29. Summer 2001 Russian intelligence notifies the C.I.A. that 25 terrorist pilots have been specifically training for missions involving hijacked airliners. This is reported in the Russian press and news stories are translated for F.T.W. (fromthewilderness website), by a retired C.I.A. officer. (Note: The story currently on the lzvestia web site has been edited to delete a key paragraph.) [Source: lzvestia, 12th September, 2001;
https://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/izvestia_story_ pic.html)

30. 4th - 14th July, 2001 Osama bin Laden receives treatment for kidney disease at the American hospital in Dubai and meets with a C.I.A. official, who returns to C.I.A. Headquarters on 15th July. (Le Figaro, 31st October, 2001
https://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/LeFigaro_ osama_dubai.html).

31. 15th July, 2001 Members of the G8 (group of leading economic nations), meeting in Genoa, Italy, discuss the Taliban, pipelines, and the handing over of Osama bin Laden. According to Pakistani representative Ambassador Naiz Naik, the United States delegation, led by former Clinton Ambassador to Pakistan Tom Simmons warned of a "military option" if the Taliban did not change position. (Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie, Bin Laden: La Verite Interdite, pp 76 7. Thanks to Prof. Peter Dale Scott).

32. July, 2001 Immediately after the G8 Summit three American officials Tom Simmons (former United States Ambassador to Pakistan), Kari Inderfurth (former Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian affairs) and Lee Coldren (former State Department expert on South Asia) meet with Pakistani and Russian Intelligence Officers in Berlin and tell them that the United States is planning military strikes against Afghanistan in October. A French book released in November, Bin Laden La Verite Interdite, discloses that Taliban representatives often sat in on the meetings. British papers confirm that the Pakistani I.S.I. relayed the threats to the Taliban. (The Guardian, 22nd September, 2001; the B.B.C., 18th September, 2001; The Inter Press Service, 16th November, 2001; Alexander's Gas and Oil Connections, 21st February, 2002).

33. July, 2001 The G8 summit at Genoa, Italy is surrounded by antiaircraft guns, and local airspace is closed off after Italian and Egyptian officials (including President Hosni Mubarak) warn American Intelligence that airliners stuffed with explosives might be used to attack President Bush. United States officials state that the warnings were "unsubstantiated". (But I wonder if they would have taken away the anti aircraft artillery?) (Los Angeles Times, 27th September, 2001).

34. 26th July, 2001 C.B.S. News reports that John Ashcroft has stopped flying commercial airlines due a threat assessment. Ashcroft told the press that he didn't know anything about what had caused it.

35. 2nd August, 2001 United States Ambassador to Pakistan, Christine Rocca (a former C.I.A. officer), meets in Islamabad with a Taliban Ambassador and demands the extradition of [Osama] bin Laden. This was the last known meeting on the subject. (Brisard and Dasquie, p 79. Thanks to Professor Peter Dale Scott).

36. August, 2001 The F.B.I. arrests an Islamic militant linked to [Osama] bin Laden in Boston. French intelligence sources confirm that the man is a key member of bin Laden's network and the F.B.I. learns that he has been taking flying lessons. At the time of his arrest the man is in possession of technical information on Boeing aircraft, and flight manuals. (Reuters, 13th September, 2001).

37. 11th or 12th August, 2001 - United States Navy Lieutenant Delmart "Mike" Vreeland, jailed in Toronto on United States fraud charges and claiming to be an officer with United States Naval Intelligence, writes details of the pending W.T.C. attacks and seals them in an envelope, which he gives to Canadian authorities. (The Toronto Star, 23rd October, 2001; Toronto Superior Court Records).

38. August, 2001 As reported in the International Herald Tribune both a French magazine (name not given) and a Moroccan newspaper simultaneously report that a Moroccan agent named Hassan Dabou had penetrated al Qa'eda to the point of getting close to bin Laden, who was "very disappointed" that the 1993 bombing had not toppled the W.T.C. Dabou was called to the United States after reporting this, which curtailed his ability to stay in touch with the organization and gather additional intelligence that might have prevented the attacks. Though not proved beyond a doubt, these stories have been met with a wall of silence. (International Herald Tribune, 21st May, 2002).

39. August 2001 Russian President Vladimir Putin orders Russian Intelligence to warn the United States Government "in the strongest possible terms" of imminent attacks on airports and government buildings. (M.S.N.B.C. interview with Putin, 15th September, 2001).

40. August 2001 President Bush receives classified intelligence briefings at his Crawford, Texas ranch indicating that Osama bin Laden might be planning to hijack commercial airliners. (C.B.S. News; C.N.N., 15th May, 2002)

41. late August 2001 Prince Turki, the pro United States head of Saudi Intelligence (also known to be close to Osama bin Laden), is replaced by his more neutral half-brother, Prince Nawwaf who is an ally of Crown Prince Abdullah. (Saudi Arabian Information Resource, 31st August, 2001; http:llwww.saudinf.com Thanks to Prof. Peter Dale Scott).

42. August-September, 2001 The Dow ]ones Industrial Average drops nearly 900 points in the three weeks prior to the attack. A major stock market crash is imminent.

43. August-September 2001 According to a detailed 13 page memo written by Minneapolis F.B.I. Legal Officer Colleen Rowley, F.B.I. Headquarters ignores urgent, direct warnings from French Intelligence Services about pending attacks. In addition, a single Supervisory Special Agent (S.S.A.) in Washington expends extra effort to thwart the field office's investigation of Zacarias Moussaoui, in one case re-writing Rowley's affidavit for a search warrant to search Moussaoui's laptop. Rowley's memo uses terms like "deliberately sabotage", "block", "integrity", "omitted", "downplayed", "glossed over", "mis characterise", "improper political reasons", "deliberately thwarting", "deliberately further undercut", "suppressed" and "not completely honest". These are not terms describing negligent acts but rather, deliberate acts. F.B.I. field agents desperately attempt to get action, but to no avail. One agent speculates that bin Laden might be planning to crash airliners into the W.T.C., while Rowley ironically noted that the S.S.A. who had committed these deliberate actions had actually been promoted after 11th September. (Associated Press, 21st May, 2002).

44. 3rd - 10th September, 2001 M.S.N.B.C. reports on 16th September that a caller to a Cayman Islands radio talk show gave several warnings of an imminent attack on the United States by bin Laden in the week prior to 9 11.

45. Early September 2001 An F.B.I. internal document, based upon field notes from Minnesota field agents, discloses that the agents had been investigating and had questioned the "20th hijacker", Zacarias Moussaoui. The field notes speculate that Moussaoui, who had been taking flight lessons, might crash an airliner into the W.T.C. Interestingly, the field agents' requests to obtain a search warrant for his personal computer were denied. French Intelligence confirms to the F.B.I. that Moussaoui has ties to terrorist groups and may have travelled to Afghanistan. The agents also had no knowledge of the Phoenix memo (See Item 21). One news story states that agents were in "a frenzy", absolutely convinced that he was "going to do something with a plane". (Newsweek, 20th May, 2002 issue, story by Michael Isikoff)..

46. 1st - 10th September, 2001 In an exercise, called Operation "Swift Sword" and planned for four years, 23,000 British troops are steaming toward Oman. Although the 9 11 attacks caused a hiccup in the deployment, the massive operation was implemented as planned. At the same time two United States carrier battle groups arrive on station in the Gulf of Arabia just off the Pakistani coast. Also at the same time, some 17,000 United States troops join more than 23,000 NATO troops in Egypt for Operation "Bright Star". All of these forces are in place before the first plane hits the W.T.C.. (The Guardian; C.N.N.; Fox; The Observer; International Law Professor Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois).

47. 4th - 5th September, 2001 A freshman at Brooklyn's New Utrecht High School who had recently emigrated from Pakistan reportedly predicts the destruction of the World Trade Centre a week prior to the 9 11 attacks, according to the JournalNews newspaper in White Plains, New York. Citing "three police sources and a city official familiar with the investigation" as well as confirmation from the F.B.I. that the Bureau had received this information, the paper reported that in the midst of a heated class discussion the student pointed to the World Trade Centre from a third story window and said, "Do you see those two buildings? They won't be standing there next week". New York City Board of Education spokeswoman Catie Marshall confirmed for the JournalNews "that school officials reported the matter to police within minutes of the 11th September attack" and students told the paper that "F.B.I. agents and New York Police Department detectives descended on the school on 13th September to interrogate the student [who made the prediction] and others in his class", which was "an English class for Arab American students". (The JournalNews, 11th October, 2001; https://www.thejournalnews.com/newsroom/101101/llwarumors.html).

48. 5th September, 2001 "Five hundred websites many of them with an Arab or Muslim connection crash when an anti terrorism taskforce raids InfoCom Corp. in Texas", reported Britain's The Guardian on 10th September, 2001. A taskforce of approximately 80 federal agents and officials from the F.B.I., Secret Service, I.N.S., Customs, Bureau of Diplomatic Security, I.R.S., and Commerce Department occupied InfoCom's office building in the Dallas suburb of Richardson, Texas for four days, "copying every hard disc they could find". InfoCom hosts many websites for Middle Eastern clients and is located across the street from the Holy Land Foundation, a charitable organization which has been alleged to have connections with terrorist groups. InfoCom's vice President of marketing, Ghassan Elashi, is also the Chairman of the Holy Land Foundation. (The Guardian, 10th September 10, 2001;
https://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,549590,00.html)

49. 7th September, 2001 Florida Governor Jeb Bush signs a two year emergency executive order (01 261) making new provisions for the Florida National Guard to assist law enforcement and emergency management personnel in the event of large civil disturbances, disaster or acts of terrorism. (State of Florida website listing of Governor's executive orders).

50. 6th -7th September, 2001 Put options (a speculation that the stock will go down) totalling 4,744 are purchased on United Air Lines stock, as opposed to only 396 call options (speculation that the stock will go up). This is a dramatic and abnormal increase in sales of put options. Many of the United "puts" are purchased through Deutschebank-A.B. Brown, a firm managed until 1998 by the current executive director of the C.I.A., A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard. (The Herzliyya International Policy Institute for Counterterrorism (I.C.T.), https://www.ict.org.il/, 21st September, 2001 (Note: The I.C.T. article on possible terrorist insider trading appeared eight days *after* the 9-11 attacks.); The New York Times; The Wall Street Journal; The San Francisco Chronicle, 19th September, 2001).

51. 10th September, 2001 "Put" options totaling 4,516 are purchased on American Airlines as compared to 748 call options. (Herzliyya Institute above).

52. 6th - 11th September, 2001 No other airlines show any similar trading patterns to those experienced by United and American. The put option purchases on both airlines were 600 per cent above normal. This at a time when Reuters (10th September) issues a business report stating, "Airline stocks may be poised to take off".

53. 6th - 10th September, 2001 Highly abnormal levels of put options are purchased in Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, AXA Re(insurance) which owns 25 per cent of American Airlines, and Munich Re. All of these companies are directly impacted by the 11th September attacks. (I.C.T., above; FTW, 18th October, 2001; https://www.fromthewilderness.com/freelww3/octl5200l.htm).

54. 2001 2002 It has been documented that the C.I.A., the Israeli Mossad, and many other intelligence agencies monitor stock trading in real time using highly advanced programmes reported to be descended from Promis software. This is to alert national intelligence services of just such kinds of attacks. Promis was reported as recently as June, 2001, to be in Osama bin Laden's possession and, as a result of recent stories by Fox, both the F.B.I. and the Justice Department have confirmed its use for United States Intelligence gathering through at least summer 2002. This would confirm that C.I.A. had additional advance warning of imminent attacks. (The Washington Times, 15th June, 2001; Fox, 16th October, 2001;
FTW, 26th October, 2001,
https://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/11_ 19_ 01 magic_ carpet.htm
FTW, Vol. IV, No. 6, 18th September, 2001
https://www.fromthewilderness.com/freelww3/septl80l.html
FTW, Vol. Ill, No. 7, 20th September, 2000
https://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/pandora/052401 _promis.html)

55. 9th September, 2001 President George W. Bush is presented with detailed war plans to overthrow al Qa'eda, according to United States and foreign sources speaking to N.B.C. News. (M.S.N.B.C., 16th May, 2002. Thanks to Prof. Peter Dale Scott).

56. 10th September, 2001 This item has been removed solely at the request of the party previously named in this entry. Recent court proceedings which occurred after the news story we had cited have indicated that there was no connection between the story listed here, the person named therein and the attacks of 9-11 01. At the request of the previously named party, FTW has replaced the $1,000 reward with a $1,000 donation to The Childrens Defence Fund on behalf of the named party and the issue is now amicably resolved without any hard feelings between that party and FTW

57. 10th September, 2001 According to Newsweek, a group of top Pentagon officials suddenly cancelled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns. (Newsweek, 24th September, 2001).

58. 10th September, 2001 The Houston Chronicle reports the F.B.I. was notified of a fifth grader from a Dallas suburb who told his teacher, "Tomorrow, World War 111 will begin. It will begin in the United States, and the United States will lose". The Chronicle was unclear on specifically when Garland, Texas school district officials told the F.B.I. about the incident, but it was some time between 13th September, 2001 and the story's publication date of 19th September, 2001. (Houston Chronicle, 19th September, 2001.

https://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/metropolitan/105522).

59. 10th September, 2001 San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown receives a call from what he described as "his security people at the airport" eight hours before the terrorist attacks "advising him that Americans should be cautious about their air travel", as reported by the San Francisco Chronicle. Brown was scheduled to fly to New York from San Francisco International Airport. He told the Chronicle the call "didn't come in any alarming fashion, which is why I'm hesitant to make any alarming statement". (San Francisco Chronicle, 12th September, 2001; https://www.sfgate.com/today/0912_chron_mnreport.shtm).

60. 11th September, 2001 The National Reconnaissance Office (N.R.O.), the federal agency that runs many of the nation's spy satellites, schedules an exercise involving a plane crashing into one of the agency's buildings. "On the morning of 11th September, 2001", according to a website advertising a homeland security conference in Chicago run by the National Law Enforcement and Security Institute, C.I.A. official John Fulton and his team "were running a preplanned simulation to explore the emergency response issues that would be created if a plane were to strike a building. Little did they know that the scenario would come true in a dramatic way". Fulton is the head of the N.R.O.'s strategic gaming division. (National Law Enforcement and Security Institute;
https://www.nisi.net
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?
tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020821/ap_wo_ en_ ge/us_ sept_ 11_plane_exercise_ 1).

61. 11th September, 2001 After the attacks on the World Trade Centrer and Pentagon occur, National Public Radio's congressional correspondent David Welna reports, "I spoke with congressman Ike Skelton, a Democrat from Missouri and a member of the Armed Services Committee, who said that just recently the director of the C.I.A. warned that there could be an attack an imminent attack on the United States of this nature. So this is not entirely unexpected". ( https://www.thememoryhole.org/updates.htm).

62. 11th September, 2001 United Air Lines flight 23, scheduled to fly from New York City to Los Angeles was delayed after four Muslim passengers began demanding that the plane take off immediately. This happened apparently after the first plane had hit the W.T.C. The passengers were thrown off the flight. (The Globe and Mail, 13th June, 2002).

63. 11th September, 2001 General Mahmud of the I.S.I. (see serial 18), friend of Mohammed Atta, is visiting Washington on behalf of the Taliban. He is meeting with the Chairmen of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, Representative Porter Goss, Republican, Florida., and Senator Bob Graham, Democrat, Florida., (M.S.N.B.C., 7th October 2001; The New York Times, 17th February, 2002).

64. 11th September, 2001 Employees of Odigo, Inc. in Israel, one of the world's largest instant messaging companies with offices in New York, receive threat warnings of an imminent attack on the W.T.C. less than two hours before the first plane hits. Law enforcement authorities have gone silent about any investigation of this. The Odigo research and development offices in Israel are located in the city of Herzliyya, a ritzy suburb of Tel Aviv that is the same location as the Institute for Counter Terrorism which eight days later reports details of insider trading on 9-11. (C.N.N.'s Daniel Sieberg, 28th September, 2001; M.S.N.B.C. Newsbytes, Brian McWilliams, 27th September, 2001; Ha'aretz, 26th September, 2001).

65. 11th September, 2001 For 50 minutes, from 8:15 am until 9:05 am, with it widely known within the F.A.A. and the military that four planes have been simultaneously hijacked and taken off course, no one notifies the President of the United States. It is not until 9:30 that any Air Force planes are scrambled to intercept, but by then it is too late. This means that the National Command Authority waited for 75 minutes before scrambling aircraft, even though it was known that four simultaneous hijackings had occurred. (Source: C.N.N.; A.B.C.; M.S.N.B.C.; Los Angeles Times; The New York Times; www.tenc.net).

66. 11th - 12th September, 2001 Nearly a month before the first reported outbreak, White House officials start taking the powerful antibiotic Cipro to treat anthrax. By the end of the year it will be known that the Ames strain of anthrax used in the attacks against Senators Leahy and Daschle was produced by C.I.A. programmes coordinated through Fort Detrick, the Batelle Memorial Institute and the Dugway Proving Ground. (N.B.C.; C.N.N.; www.tetrahedron.org and www.judicialwatch.orq).

67. 13th September, 2001 China is admitted to the World Trade Organisation quickly, after years of unsuccessful attempts. (The New York Times, 30th September 30, 2001).

68. 14th September, 2001 Canadian jailers open the sealed envelope from Mike Vreeland in Toronto and see that it describes attacks against the W.T.C. and Pentagon. The United States Navy subsequently states that Vreeland was discharged as a seaman in 1986 for unsatisfactory performance and has never worked in intelligence. (The Toronto Star, 23rd October, 2001; Toronto Superior Court records).

69. 15th September, 2001 The New York Times reports that Mayo Shattuck III has resigned, effective immediately, as head of the Alex Brown (A.B.) unit of Deutschebank.

70. 29th September, 20011 The San Francisco Chronicle reports that $2,500,000 million in "put" options on American and United airlines are unclaimed. This is likely the result of the suspension in trading on the New York Stock Exchange after the attacks, which gave the Securities and Exchange Commission time to be waiting when the owners showed up to redeem their put options.

71. 10th October, 2001 The Pakistani newspaper The Frontier Post reports that United States Ambassador Wendy Chamberlain has paid a call on the Pakistani oil minister. A previously abandoned Unocal gas pipeline project from Turkmenistan, across Afghanistan, to Pakistan is now back on the table "in view of recent geopolitical developments".

72. 11th October, 2001 The Ashcroft Justice Department takes over all terrorist prosecutions from the United States Attorney's office in New York, which has had a highly successful track record in prosecuting terrorist cases connected to Osama bin Laden. (The New York Times, 11th October, 2001).

73. Mid October 2001 The Dow Jones Industrial Average, after having suffered a precipitous drop has recovered most of its pre attack losses. Although still weak and vulnerable to negative earnings reports, a crash has been averted by a infusion of government spending on defence programmes, subsidies for "affected" industries and planned tax cuts for corporations.

74. 29th October, 2001 The Bush Administration drafts "an executive order that would usher in a new era of secrecy for presidential records and allow an incumbent president to withhold a former president's papers even if the former president wanted to make them public", wrote the Washington Post. The order also required members of the public to prove "at least a demonstrated, specific need" for a president's papers to be released. Critics contend this would overturn the 1978 Presidential Records Act, which releases documents after 12 years. The White House maintained that a Supreme Court decision in 1977 allows presidents various privileges for their records. (Washington Post, 1st November, 2001;
http://washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A20731 2001Oct31?1anguage=printer).

75. 21st November, 2001 The British paper The Independent runs a story headlined, "Opium Farmers Rejoice at the Defeat of the Taliban". The story reports that massive opium planting is underway all over the country.

76. 25th November, 2001 The Observer runs a story headlined "Victorious Warlords Set To Open the Opium Floodgates". It states that farmers are being encouraged by warlords allied with the victorious Americans are "being encouraged to plant as much opium as possible".

77. 4th December, 2001 Convicted drug lord and opium kingpin Ayub Afridi is recruited by the United States Government to help establish control in Afghanistan by unifying various Pashtun warlords. The former opium smuggler who was one of the C.I.A.'s leading assets in the war against the Russians is released from prison in order to do this. (The Asia Times Online. 4th December, 2001).

78. 25th December, 2001 Newly appointed Afghani President Hamid Karzai is revealed as being a former paid consultant for Unocal. (Le Monde).

79. 3rd Jananuary, 2002 President Bush appoints Zalmy Khalilzad as a special envoy to Afghanistan. Khalilzad, a former employee of Unocal, also wrote op-eds in the Washington Post in 1997 supporting the Taliban regime. (Pravda, 9th January, 2002).

80. 4th January, 2002 Florida drug trafficking explodes after 9 11. In a surge of trafficking reminiscent of the 1980s the diversion of resources away from drug enforcement has opened the floodgates for a new surge of cocaine and heroin from South America. (The Christian Science Monitor, 4th January, 2002).

81. 10th January, 2002 In a call from a speaker phone in open court, attorneys for Mike Vreeland call the Pentagon's switchboard operator, who confirms that Vreeland is indeed a naval lieutenant on active duty. She provides an office number and a direct dial phone extension to his office in the Pentagon. (Attorney Rocco Galati; Toronto Superior Court records).

82. 10th January, 2002 Attorney General John Ashcroft recuses himself from the Enron investigation because Enron had been a major campaign donor in his 2000 Senate race. He fails to recuse himself from involvement in two sitting federal grand juries investigating bribery and corruption charges against ExxonMobil and BP Amoco, which have massive oil interests in Central Asia. Both were major Ashcroft donors in 2000. (C.N.N., 10th January, 2002; FTW "The Elephant in the Living Room, Part 1", 4th April, 2002; https://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/04_ 04_ 02_ elephant.html).

83. 23rd January, 2002 Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl is kidnapped in Pakistan. Pearl is reported dead on 21st February. Lead suspect Ahmad Umar Sheik, former colleague of General Ahmad, is arrested on 12th February and named as the lead suspect in the kidnapping and murder. Legal sources close to the Pakistani government tell FTW that Pearl was investigating the I.S.I.. (CNN.com).

84. 9th February, 2002 Pakistani leader General Musharraf and Afghan leader Hamid Karzai announce their agreement to "cooperate in all spheres of activity", including the proposed Central Asian pipeline. Pakistan will give $10,000,000 to Afghanistan to help pay Afghan government workers. (The Irish Times, 9th February 2002).

85. 18th February, 2002 The Financial Times reports that the estimated opium harvest in Afghanistan in the late spring 2002 will reach a world record 4,500 metric tons.

86. Mid April, 2002 World Bank chief James Wolfensohn, at the opening of the World Bank's offices in Kabul, states he has held talks about financing the Trans Afghanistan gas pipeline. He confirms $100,000,000 in new grants for the interim Afghani government. Wolfensohn also states that a number of companies have already expressed interest in the project. (Alexander's Gas and Oil Connections, citing an Agence France Presse story]

87. 13th May, 2002 The B.B.C. reports that Afghanistan is about to close a deal for construction of the $2,000,000,000 gas pipeline to run from Turkmenistan to Pakistan and India. The story states, "work on the project will start after an agreement is expected to be struck" at a summit scheduled for the end of the month. Unocal will build the pipeline. (B.B.C., 13th May, 2002).

88. May, 2002 A number of sources report progress on both oil and gas pipelines. Regional sources state that Unocal will re emerge as a pipeline contender after withdrawing from the CentGas pipeline project in 1998. Unocal denies plans to revive the gas pipeline but curiously neglects to mention whether or not it has any interest in the oil pipeline, which local sources say is moving ahead. (The Dawn Group of Newspapers, 7th, 17th & 22nd May, 2002).

89. 30th May, 2002 Afghanistan's interim leader, Hamid Karzai, Turkmenistan's President Niyazov, and Pakistani President Musharraf meet in Islamabad to sign a memorandum of understanding on the trans Afghanistan gas pipeline project. The three leaders will meet for more talks on the project in October. The Turkmen Afghan Pakistani gas pipeline accord has been published and can be viewed at the following website:
https://www.gasandoil.com/goc/news/nts22622.htrn (NewsBase, 5th June, 2002).

90. 16th May, 2002 White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer states unequivocally that while President Bush had been warned of possible hijackings, "The president did not not receive information about the use of airplanes as missiles by suicide bombers". (C.B.S. News, 15th May, 2002).

91. 19th May, 2002 Former F.B.I. Agent Tyrone Powers, now a professor at Anne Arundel Community College, states on radio station KISS 98.7 that he has credible evidence suggesting that the Bush Administration did in fact allow the 11th Sepember attacks to further a hidden agenda.
(https://www.indymedia.org 20th May, 2002).

92. 31st May, 2002 F.B.I. Agent Robert Wright delivers a tearful press conference at the National Press Club describing his lawsuit against the F.B.I. for deliberately curtailing investigations that might have prevented the 9-11 attacks. He uses words like "prevented", "thwarted", "obstructed", "threatened", "intimidated", and "retaliation" to describe the actions of his superiors in blocking his attempts to shut off money flows to al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. These are not words of negligence. They are words describing deliberate and malicious actions. (C SPAN website).

93. 4th June, 2002 Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Steve Butler, who had called President Bush a joke and accused him of allowing the 11th September attacks to happen, is suspended from his post at the Defense Language School in Monterey, California and could face a court martial. (Press, 4th June, 2002).

94. 14th June, 2002 Common Dreams website publishes an account from a former member of the 1-118th Infantry Battalion of the South Carolina National Guard: "My unit reported for drill in July, 2001, and we were suddenly and unexpectedly informed that all activities planned for the next two months would be suspended in order to prepare for a mobilisation exercise to be held on 14th September, 2001. We worked diligently for two weekends and even came in on an unscheduled day in August to prepare for the exercise. By the end of August all we needed was a phone call, which we were to expect, and we could hop into a fully prepared convoy with our bags and equipment packed".
(Common Dreams, https://www.commondreams.org/views02/06l4 02.htm).

95. 17th June, 2002 Reuters reports that Butler's case has been resolved without the necessity of a court martial. (I guess so. There's enough material here to prove him right. M.C.R.). (Reuters, 17th June, 2002).

96. 2nd July, 2002 Motions from Zacarias Moussaoui are unsealed in federal court, indicating that Moussaoui wants to testify before both a Grand Jury and Congress about the 11th Sepember attacks. Moussaoui claims to have information showing that the United States Government wanted the attacks to happen. (The Washington Post, 3rd July, 2002).

97. 3rd July, 2002 The first ever shipment of Russian oil, 200,000 metric tons, arrives in Houston. (The Moscow Times, 6th July, 2002).

98. 6th July, 2002 Afghan Vice President Hajji Abdul Qadir is assassinated by Afghan warlords. The New York Times reports that Qadir may have been assassinated by opium warlords upset by Qadir's efforts to reduce the rampant opium farming and processing that has taken place since the United States occupation. Qadir had been overseeing a Western backed eradication programme, according to the Times. However, the opium warlords of the region are same ones sponsored, protected, and in some cases released from prison by the C.I.A. and who have been protected by President Bush's special envoy, Zalmay Khalilzad. It is reported that the raw opium is being refined near United States bases at Kandahar. (The New York Times, 8th July, 2002; Far Eastern Economic Review, 18th April, 2002).

99. 26th July, 2002 White House security prevented the legal watchgroup Judicial Watch from serving Vice President Cheney with a lawsuit filed on behalf of Halliburton shareholders. Before becoming vice president Cheney was C.E.O. of Halliburton, which has filed for bankruptcy. (Cybercast News Service, cnsnews.com).

100. 2nd August 2002 The F.B.I. asked members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees to take lie detector tests as investigators try to determine who leaked information to C.N.N. about communications in Arabic that made vague references to an impending attack on the United States. The communications were intercepted by the National Security Agency on 10th September, but weren't translated until 12th September. (Associated Press story published in the Boston Globe, 2nd August, 2002; https://www.truthout.org/docs 02108.03A.fbi.lie.det.p.htm).

101. 5th August, 2002 The Associated Press reported Russia's major role over the last five years in the trafficking of Afghan heroin into Europe. (Santa Fe New Mexican, 5th August, 2002
www.sfnewmexican.com).

102. 16th August, 2002 A Knight Ridder story discloses that members of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's staff have created a special planning unit for an invasion of Iraq. The unit is composed primarily of civilians and was spearheaded by conservative members of Rumsfeld's staff, such as Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. The story was headlined, "White House Methodically Preparing for Iraq Campaign". (Knight Ridder Newspapers, www.truthout.org/docs02/08.17B.wh.prep.irq.p.htm).

103. 28th August, 2002 The Globe and Mail of Canada reports Afghanistan will become the world's top producer of opium this year, surpassing Southeast Asia. (The Globe and Mail, 28th Auguat, 2002).

Now, let's go back to the 31st October, 2001, story by Le Figaro the one that has Osama bin Laden meeting with a C.I.A. officer in Dubai in July, 2001. The story says:

Throughout his stay in the hospital, Osama Bin Laden received visits from many family members [There goes the story that he's a black sheep! MCR] and Saudi Arabian Emirate personalities of status. During this time the local representative of the C.I.A. was seen by many people taking the elevator and going to bin Laden's room. Several days later the C.I.A. officer bragged to his friends about having visited the Saudi millionaire. From authoritative sources, this C.I.A. agent visited C.I.A. Headquarters on 15th July, the day after bin Laden's departure for Quetta. According to various Arab diplomatic sources and French Intelligence itself, precise information was communicated to the C.I.A. concerning terrorist attacks aimed at American interests in the world, including its own territory. Extremely bothered, they (American intelligence officers in a meeting with French intelligence officers) requested from their French peers exact details about the Algerian activists (connected to bin Laden through Dubai banking institutions), without explaining the exact nature of their inquiry. When asked the question "What do you fear in the coming days?" the Americans responded with incomprehensible silence. On further investigation, the F.B.I. discovered certain plans that had been put together between the C.I.A. and its "Islamic friends" over the years. The meeting in Dubai is, so it would seem, consistent with "a certain American policy".

Even though Le Figaro reported that it had confirmed with hospital staff that bin Laden had been there as reported, stories printed on 1st November contained quotes from hospital staff that these reports were untrue. On 1st November, 2001, as reported by the Ananova press agency, the C.I.A. flatly denied that any meeting between any C.I.A. personnel and Osama bin Laden [had taken place] at any time.

Whom do you believe?

BOOK REVIEW
by "Kitz"

House of Bush, House of Saud - The Secret Relationship between the World's Two Most Powerful Dynasties, by Craig Unger, Scribner, 2004.

This book is a disturbing account of the secret relationship between the House of Bush and the House of Saud. It is, of course, also about oil and, as such, Unger, I feel, has missed am opportunity to put the relationship into a broader perspective.

First, it is an unfortunate, yet inescapable fact that more than half of the world's known reserves of oil lie within Islamic countries, stretching from the Mediterranean, through Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Iran, the Caucasian states to the boundaries of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Second, America has a satellite state, Israel, which it will protect in whatever circumstances, and third, that this is underpinned by the powerful Jewish lobby which seeks to influence American Middle Eastern policy. President Truman recognised the power of this lobby as far back as 1945. Closely related to this has been President George W. Bush's adoption of neoconservative policies of an oil-rich administration which sees them as the only way to safeguard the national interest in the 21st century

Unger defines the House of Bush in his appendices to his book. Two presidents, father George Bush and his son President George W. Bush, James A. Baker III, Frank Carlucci, a former Secretary of Defence, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and the awesomely funded Carlyle Group come within this definition.

The House of Saud is defined as including the de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia, Prince Abdullah, Prince Ahmed, a nephew of the ailing King Fahd and perhaps the most important of them all Prince Bandar, the long-term Saudi Ambassador to the United States and a very close friend of George Bush Snr., the ex-President. Also, within this House are the bin Ladens, renowned for their vast construction industry, whose founder, Mohammed bin Laden is the father of Osama bin Laden, the head of al Qa'eda. Significantly, Mohammed constructed the holy sites of Mecca and Medina.

Unger points out a stark contrast. The House of Bush is part of a democratic nation painfully constructed by the Founding Fathers and protected by its Constitution. The House of Saud is a theocratic monarchy, in close alliance with the powerful Wahabi religious grouping character-ised by its deviations from some aspects of Mohammedanism and by its brutality. To the Wahabis there is only one Jihad - repression at home and the gunning down of the Infidel abroad.

Unger systematically explains how the House of Bush came to be enmeshed politically, financially and socially with the House of Saud. The extent to which the relationship develops cannot solely be explained by the need to ensure American access to reasonably priced Saudi oil but also to the rich pickings that accompanied it. Dick Cheney was the Chief Execu-tive of Halliburton, a powerful company paid to develop Saudi oilfields, who received $34,000,000 during his last year with the company but without relinquishing more than 400,000 stock options when he became Vice-President. George Bush Snr., in marrying oil to politics was a one-time member of the Carlyle Group and acted as its senior adviser until October, 2003. Even so, he still addresses the Group, receiving up to $100,000 per speech. George W. Bush was at one time a failed director of Harken Energy, whose involvement in outsider trading was steered away from investigation by his father who was President at the time. James Baker III was and still is a senior partner in the legal firm of Baker Botts, renowned for its protection of oil interests. Even Condoleezza Rice was involved with Chevron Oil at one time. The Cabinet is "oil-rich" and has been described as the richest ever.

The House of Saud needs no such close examination for it can be described as being Wahabi-based at home and hedonistically-based abroad. Prince Ahmed bin Sultan sought out the best bloodstock available and owned the 2000 Kentucky Derby winner. He might have had foreknowledge of the 9-11 attack but was to die later in mysterious circumstances, presumably of a heart attack. Most however were oil billionaires buying up real estate with their seemingly endless petro-dollars. Salem bin Laden, Osama's half-brother, was a friend of the Saudi banker Khalid bin Mahfouz. The most influential Saudi prince, however, was Prince Bandar, who successfully cultivated a close relationship with the House of Bush. 9-11 threatened to undermine this relationship.

When it was revealed that nine out of the fifteen terrorists engaged in the destruction of the Twin Towers were Saudis, Bandar went into overdrive. Within hours as entire airlines became grounded and the lives of Saudi citizens in America imperilled, Bandar, with the obvious complicity of the White House, saw to it that privileged Saudis, ranging from students to bankers, were put on flights out of America. Significant though this was in displaying how deep the relationship between the House of Bush and the House of Saud, it supplied the neo-conservatives with an opportunity to resurrect a plan which if implemented would give America the right to authorise strikes against any country which stood in its way. Furthermore, this provided President George W. Bush with the opportunity to proclaim, cowboy-style, that those who stood against us were our enemies in the global fight against terrorism. This seemingly fitted in well with the avowed objectives of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (A.I.P.A.C.).

But perhaps the most significant part of this book lies within the questions raised by Craig Unger, which have yet to be answered. Who authorised the use of Visa Express whereby Saudis, notably Saudis of the House of Saud were able to enter America with virtually no questions asked? Unger comments that nine of the fifteen terrorists involved with 9-11 were Saudis. Who authorised the swift, secretive getaway of so many influential Saudis after 9-11? How was it that Prince Bandar was allowed so much influence over the House of Bush as Saudi Ambassador to America? How does the Carlyle Group get away with its assertion that it does not deal in the awarding of defence contracts to Saudi Arabia when one of its companies, Vinnell, certainly does? How was Richard Clarke's advice to the National Security Council ignored, when, if taken up could have led to the destruction of al Qa'eda rather than the invasion of Iraq?* Indeed, one may question the circumstances of 9-11 itself as Unger hints and this may yet edge its way into the public domain when the relatives of those killed in 9-11 press for answers about the collapse of the Twin Towers and whether the present Bush administration sticks to its refusal to declassify important passages of Congress's report on the disaster.

* Richard Clarke was appointed by President Clinton as Chairman of the Co-ordinating Sub-Group (C.S.G.), to centralise control of intelligence, in short, the nation's first counter-terrorism czar.

REFERENCES

(1) Taken from a feature "Neo-conservatism Versus Liberal Internationalism: (A New Struggle For The Soul Of The Jewish People . . . And Of Many Non-Jews". The Canadian Intelligence Service, January/February/March, 2005.
(2) Clark, William. "The Real Reasons Why Iran is the Next Target: The Emerging Euro-denominated International Oil Marker", 27th October, 2004.
(3) Dictionary Of Finance And Banking. Oxford University Press, 1997

(4) On Target, Vol. 31, Nos. 3 & 4, 11th & 25th August, 2001. The Planned Break-Up Of The United Kingdom.
(5) On Target, Vol. 31, Nos. 22 & 23, 4th & 18th May, 2002. Iraq In The Global Scenario. Part 2 Section B.
(6) This England, P.O. Box 52, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, GL50 1YQ. Tel orders: 01242 515156; Enquiries: 01242 537900; Fax: 01242 537901; E-mail: <sales@thisengland.co.uk>
(7) On Target, Vol. 31, Nos 5 & 6, 8th & 22nd September, 2001. See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Oil.
(8) On Target, Vol. 31, Nos. 7 - 13, 6th & 20th October, 3rd & 17th November and 1st, 15th & 29th December, 2001. September The Eleventh, 2001.
(9) Engdahl. F. William. A Century of War - Anglo-American Oil Politics And The New World Order. Dr. Böttiger Verlags-GmbH, 1992. £12.95.
(10) Kane, Michael. "Ptech, 9-11 and U.S.A.-Saudi Terror Part II - Promis Connections to Cheney Control of 9-11 Attacks Confirmed". The Wilderness Publications, 2005.
(11) On Target, Vol. 34, Nos. 12 & 13, 11th & 25th December, 2004. Terrorists, "Terrorists" And Terrorism.

I feel that instead of any inability to communicate, there is a deliberate evasion of communication. Communication itself between people is so frightening that rather than do that there is a continual cross-talk, a continual talking about other things, rather than what is at the root of their relationship
Harold Pinter, quoted in The Theatre of the Absurd by Martin Esslin

IRAQ - THE NEW HOLOCAUST

The palpable lie to justify the invasion of Iraq in March, 2003, is a matter of record. It is only sustained by British and American leaders, abetted by craven political followers who condone their actions, who trample over the truth, the United Nations and Governments of other major powers that dare to question their actions. An old wartime adage was that when the British bombed, the Germans ran; when the Germans bombed, the British ran but, when the Americans bombed, they both ran. It is far, far worse than that in the Middle East as we have recorded regularly in On Target(1). To cite the brutality of British imperialism in the Middle East in the 1920s is to forget that we have passed through the age of the League of Nations, Italian atrocities in Ethopia in the 1930s and the Nazi German era. Today we have a United Nations that supposedly embodies all the enlightened humanitarian experience and principles evolved from those earlier years. In practice it is constrained to function as a cat's-paw of the United States and a convenient cover for largely Anglo-American military excursions. From the outset ill-prepared, inept and badly-led United States forces ruthlessly killed and maimed vast numbers of Iraqi men, women and children with the deliberate use of a massive arsenal of modern battlefield weaponry. The historically turbulent township of Fallujah had already suffered indiscriminate British and American bombing during the Gulf war of 1991(2). The killing of innocent civilians resumed on the ground after March, 2003, largely as a conseqeunce of misunderstanding and incompetence on the part of trigger-happy United States troops.

Frustration at their inablity to suppress resistance in Fallujah and the deaths of American mercenaries whose bodies were dragged through the streets, mutilated and hung from a bridge, boiled up in a vengeful bloodlust of their own making; a military force already smitten by its own ineptitude and the illegality of its presence in Iraq in the first place. An assault on Fallujah was launched in Novermber, 2004, with British military assistance sanctioned by Prime Minister Blair. The destruction of Fallujah was undertaken as ruthlessly as any Nazi German annihilation of towns, villages and their populations during the 1939-45 War. It was a deliberate Holocaust. The savagery was unworthy of any so-called developed Nation and signatory to the United Nations Charter. We record this in edited reports and extracts that follow. Another manifestation of this unprincipled United States Power is that they have been prepared to murder journalists who might threaten to expose these atrocities. When Kate Adie spoke, immediately prior to the invasion, or when Naomi Klein of The Guardian is involved, we must take serious notice. Even in the United Kingdom, Foreign Office and Police dirty tricks were deployed against journalist Felicity Arbuthnot when she persisted in publicising the case of the Irish Hostage, Margaret Hassan(3). With the connivance of Israel and powerful elements of the American-Jewish lobby, fronted by the neo-conservatives in the United States, all well-documented(4)(5), Iran is currently being talked up as the next target. Now read on.

Note: Texts have been edited to suit the layout and practices of On Target, especially where anomalies existed in English used as a second language. Textual references have been incorporated in general references at the end of this On Target.

SHOOTING THE MESSENGER

The Pentagon has threatened to fire on the satellite uplink positions of independent journalists in Iraq, according to veteran B.B.C. war correspondent, Kate Adie. In an interview on Irish radio in March, 2003, Kate Adie said that questioned about the consequences of such potentially fatal actions, a senior Pentagon officer had said: "Who cares . . . They've been warned". According to Kate Adie, who twelve years ago covered the last Gulf War, the Pentagon attitude is "entirely hostile to the free spread of information. . . . I am enormously pessimistic of the chance of decent on the spot reporting, as the war occurs", she told Irish national broadcaster, Tom McGurk on the R.T.E.I. Radio "Sunday Show". Kate Adie made the startling revelations during a discussion of media freedom issues in the likely upcoming war in Iraq. She also warned that the Pentagon is vetting journalists according to their stance on the war and intends to take control of American journalists' satellite equipment in order to control access to the airwaves. Another guest on the show, war author Phillip Knightley, reported that the Pentagon has also threatened they "may find it necessary to bomb areas in which war correspondents are attempting to report from the Iraqi side". Kate Adie spoke further during her interview, from which this is an extract:

And what actually appals me is the difference between twelve years ago and now. I've seen a complete erosion of any kind of acknowledgment that reporters should be able to report as they witness. . . . This is threatening freedom of information, before you even get to a war. The second thing is there was a massive news blackout imposed. In the last Gulf war, where I was one of the pool correspondents with the British Army we effectively had very, very light touch when it came to any kind of censorship. We were told that anything which was going to endanger troops lives which we understood we shouldn't broadcast. But other than that, we were relatively free. . . . And this time the Americans are asking journalists who go with them, whether they are . . . have feelings against the war. And therefore if you have views that are sceptical, then you are not to be acceptable. . . . And then on top of everything else, there is now a blackout (which was imposed, during the last war, at the beginning of the war) . . . ordered by one Mr. Dick Cheney, who is in charge of this. I am enormously pessimistic of the chance of decent on the spot reporting, as the war occurs. You will get it later.

Independent Media: Enemy Target
by Ghali Hassan, Information Clearing House, 18th March, 2005

Since the start of the 2003 War on Iraq, there have been 13 incidents involving the killing of journalists by United States soldiers. All the journalists who have been killed were "un-embedded" journalists. No journalists employed by mainstream media such as the B.B.C. or C.N.N. have been killed or abducted in Iraq. Independent media worldwide are finding it difficult to exist in a world controlled by few large corporations and government-controlled public broadcasters. Information provided by independent media and honest journalists, is the most powerful weapon in the War on Iraq since 1990. The lack of this journalistic credibility and impartiality has contributed to the unnecessary killing of more than 2,000,000 Iraqis, a third of them children under the age of 5 years old, as a result of 13 years of criminal sanctions and wars perpetuated by the United States and Britain. To conduct their war with minimum opposition, the United States and British administrations and military have introduced new phenomenon in journalism. It is called "embedded" journalism, which means journalists do what they are told, and report what they have not witnessed. "Embedded" journalism is a form of fake news operations broadcast as if it was genuine news in the homes of Western television viewers. The best description of this new phenomenon is propaganda's journalism, an important tool of America's "War on Terror". The first casualty of this phenomenon has been the quality of the news and information to the public. Giant corporations have now moved to own large parts of the media. The United States is leading the way in the concentration of media in the hands of few large corporations. America's Online (A.O.L.) owns Netscape, Time magazine, Hollywood's Warner Brothers and C.N.N. Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation controls the best selling newspapers in Britain and the United States. In Australia, the Murdoch media have negligible competition. The Murdoch deceptive media coverage, led by Fox News, played an important role in selling the war to the public and continues to provide a very deceptive and untruthful picture of Iraq under United States Occupation.

Outside the parameters of these giant media corporations and their "embedded" journalists are the few journalists of independent media. Their independent reporting during the War on Iraq has annoyed the United States Administration, including Donald Rumsfeld and Collin Powell. The Guardian of London reported on 2nd April, 2003 that "An hotel in Basra being used as a base by al-Jazeera's team of correspondents in the City was shelled this morning, the Arabic television news channel has claimed. The Basra Sheraton, whose only guests are al-Jazeera journalists, received four direct hits this morning during a heavy artillery bombardment, according to the Qatar based broadcaster". The Guardian added that "al-Jazeera had officially advised the Pentagon of all relevant details pertaining to its reporters covering the war on Iraq, as stipulated by relevant international practice and conventions governing reporting of wars. The details included official headquarters of all its reporters in Basra, Mosul and Baghdad". On 8th April, 2003, al-Jazeera Television reporter Tariq Ayoub was killed by a rocket fired from an American plane at the roof of the Palestine Hotel, the most marked media centre in Baghdad. Since the beginning of the war, at least 74 journalists have died in Iraq. To date, there has been no satisfactory and impartial investigation of these mysterious killings of journalists. Although, there is no "evidence" of a systematic policy to kill journalists, it seems that a policy of preventing independent media reporting from the war is a top priority of the United States Administration. The United States role in preventing independent news from reaching the public has been widely reported since the invasion of Iraq. Independent journalists were nowhere to be seen in Iraq, and most of them have been forced to leave the country.

The killing of the Italian intelligence agent Nicola Calipari and injuring of Giuliana Sgrena, the award winning war reporter with the progressive Italian daily newspaper Il Manifesto, by United States forces is a case in point. As Jerry Fresia, a former American Air Force Intelligence Officer, writes, "It is reasonable to assume that the United States intercepted all phone communication between Italian agents in Iraq and Rome. Are we to believe that in an area near the airport, an area that is intensely hostile according to the United States, that they would not be monitoring cell phone signals?" He added; "The vehicle in which Nicola and Giuliana were riding wasn't simply a vehicle carrying a hostage to freedom, [the vehicle] was considered a military target". Before her release, Sgrena admitted that her captors, who have yet to prove any link to the Iraqi Resistance, warned her that "The Americans don't want you to go back" to Italy. "It was an ambush", Sgrena's partner, Pierre Scolari said. Giuliana Sgrena is one of the very few endangered species that still exist in a world where militarised nations are addicted to violence and public deception. She has eyewitnesses and detailed information regarding the United States use of illegal napalm and chemical weapons in the attacks on Fallujah, where thousands of innocent Iraqi men, women and children were massacred and a vibrant city of 300,000 people was completely destroyed. Fallujah was a no-go for independent journalists during the American assault on the city. It is suggested that the United States and Britain are in the process of using the Fallujah style destruction in other cities. In addition, Sgrena has documented evidence of ongoing sadistic, blatant and wanton criminal abuses, torture and rape of Iraqi women by American forces in Iraq. Crimes without witnesses are no crimes in the new United States war.

Given the illegality and immorality of the War on Iraq, independent journalists like Giutiana Sgrena and Tariq Ayoub are considered enemy targets. By contrast "embedded" journalists have enjoyed protection and were never in danger at any time. They broadcast from their hotels or from the safety of American tanks. Their jobs are to provide a distorted picture that fit the imperialist propaganda. The victims of this criminal complicity are not only the Iraqi people, but also the citizens of the imperial power. They have to be misled and poorly informed about their government's wars and policy abroad. Public silence is the support needed for legitimacy. It is worth remembering that public broadcasters are accountable to the public only. They are funded as independent media, not government's propaganda agents, and are as such obliged to provide the public with impartial news and information. Independent media coverage has awakened peoples' moral consciousness against the war. In the United States, the Army's failure to recruit new soldiers has been attributed to honest reporting by few independent journalists. Recently, The New York Times reported on 4th March, 2005, that "Top Pentagon officials acknowledge that the graphic images of casualties [dead and wounded soldiers] from Iraq and the obvious danger of serving there had caused many parents to advice their children to avoid joining the military now". It is in the interest of the United States and its allies to prevent honest reporting from Iraq reaching their citizens at home.

Note: Ghali Hassan lives in Perth, Western Australia. Giuliana Sgrena's articles can be viewed here: <www.ilmanifesto.it/pag/sgrena/en/>

THE LIQUIDATION OF A COMMUNITY

No End To Destruction In Fallujah
al-Jazeera, Sunday 2nd January, 2005

Iraqis returning to Fallujah have found their properties either vandalised or demolished and now live in more of a ghetto than a city, according to a national television station. Iraq's al Sharqiya Television said on Friday 31st December, 2004, that locals bussed back into the destroyed city saw the United States army knocking over even more homes. The report added: "Search operations began in the City's East, where each house was either marked with an X or an X inside a circle. X meant the house was safe, whereas the circle symbolised the house was a source of danger and was to be demolished." Speaking to al-Jazeera on Saturday, Iraqi journalist Fadil al Badrani added that a few who returned last week and had been happy to find their houses mostly intact watched in disbelief as American forces pushed their homes over in the past four days. And al Badrani said disbelief and shock was turning to anger. On Saturday, thousands of furious locals marched to the City's gates to remonstrate with troops. But it was not just the scale of destruction that angered citizens. They were also unhappy about rules imposed before being allowed to enter their city and the almost total media black out on their situation, journalists said. Most complained of United States soldiers pointing their weapons at them even in the simplest of situations, while others asked why they had been prevented from putting front doors back on to their homes. "And everyone was demanding that United States forces withdraw immediately, allow media teams into the city to document the destruction, compensate citizens for the loss of their homes, and help in reconstruction of the city", the programme reported. Others expressed health concerns, he added, particularly over decaying corpses and polluted water.

One returnee, Yasir Abbas Atiya, told an Australian reporter he had always thought that he would rather sleep on the streets of his beloved hometown rather than in his current squalid Baghdad shelter. Thirty minutes after he returned home this week, however, Atiya had to change his mind. He left in disgust and has no plans to go back. "I couldn't stand it", the grocer said. "I was born in that town. I know every inch of it. But when I got there, I did not recognise it." Lakes of sewage foul the streets. The smell of corpses inside charred buildings pervades the atmosphere. No water or electricity are available and there are constant warnings to watch out for landmines and booby traps. "I thought 'this is not my town'", Atiya said on Tuesday after going back to the abandoned Baghdad clinic his family shares with nearly 100 other displaced Fallujans. "How can I take my family to live there?" One of the causes of major complaint were stringent and intrusive security measures. United States forces stationed around the City have to issue identity cards to those they allow back in, a document that has to be carried at all times. Citizens must leave their cars outside Fallujah; no vehicles are allowed in except approved buses that herd people back and forth. At the beginning of December, one prime time United States news channel had a military official telling Americans that Fallujans would "be finger printed, given a retina scan and then an identity card, which will only allow them to travel around their homes or to nearby aid centres . . . The Marines will be authorised to use deadly force against those breaking the rules."

Historical precedent? But the destruction of Fallujah and the treatent of its residents comes as little surprise to Professor Rashid Khalidi at Columbia University in the United States. He points out that the British also chose to "make an example" out of Falluja when, in 1920, they launched a massive air campaign and flattened the City. The British army lost more than 1,000 soldiers in Iraq at the time and resorted to indiscriminate killing to regain a semblance of control a history, he says, that is surprisingly familiar. "The Bush Administration is not creating the world anew in the Middle East. It is waging a war in a place where history really matters," he said. He points out that American troops, deployed in the Middle East for more than 62 years, have to recognise that their Nation that was once celebrated as a non colonial power has joined the imperial club, as Iraq's invasion and Fallujahs destruction demonstrates. "Things have changed fundamentally for the worse with the invasion and occupation of Iraq, particularly with the revelation that the core pretexts offered by the administration for the invasion were false. And particularly with growing Iraqi dissatisfaction with the occupation and with the images of the hellish chaos broadcast regularly everywhere in the world except in the United States thanks to the excellent job done by the media in keeping the real human costs of Iraq off our television screens." The Columbia Professor concludes that the White House has proclaimed good intentions while refusing to acknowledge that Iraqis can only judge by what they see in places such as Fallujah "It does not matter what you say you are doing in Fallujah what matters is what you are doing in Fallujah and what people see that you are doing."

Journalists Tell Of United States Fallujah Killings
al-Jazeera, Thursday 17th March, 2005

All is quiet in Fallujah, or at least that is how it seems, given that the mainstream media has largely forgotten about the Iraqi city. But independent journalists are risking life and limb to bring out a very different story. The picture they are painting is of United States soldiers killing whole families, including children, attacks on hospitals and doctors, the use of napalm like weapons and sections of the city destroyed. One of the few reporters who has reached Fallujah is American Dahr Jamail of the Inter Press Service. He interviewed a doctor who had filmed the testimony of a 16 year old girl. "She stayed for three days with the bodies of her family who were killed in their home. When the soldiers entered she was in her home with her father, mother, 12 year old brother and two sisters. She watched the soldiers enter and shoot her mother and father directly, without saying anything. They beat her two sisters, then shot them in the head. After this her brother was enraged and ran at the soldiers while shouting at them, so they shot him dead", Jamail relates. Another report comes from an aid convoy headed up by Doctor Salem Ismael. He was in Fallujah last month. As well as delivering aid he photographed the dead, including children, and interviewed remaining residents. Again his story does not tally with the indifference shown by the main media networks. "The accounts I heard . . . will live with me forever. You may think you know what happened in Fallujah, but the truth is worse than you could possibly have imagined", he says. He relates the story of Hudda Fawzi Salam Issawi from the Julan district of Fallujah: "Five of us, including a 55 year old neighbour, were trapped together in our house in Fallujah when the siege began. On 9th November American Marines came to our house. My father and the neighbour went to the door to meet them. We were not fighters. We thought we had nothing to fear. I ran into the kitchen to put on my veil, since men were going to enter our house and it would be wrong for them to see me with my hair uncovered. "This saved my life. As my father and neighbour approached the door, the Americans opened fire on them. They died instantly. "Me and my 13 year old brother hid in the kitchen behind the fridge. The soldiers came into the house and caught my older sister. They beat her. Then they shot her. But they did not see me. Soon they left, but not before they had destroyed our furniture and stolen the money from my father's pocket."

Journalist and writer Naomi Klein has also come under attack for insisting that United States forces are eliminating those who dare to count casualties. No less than the United States Ambassador to the United Kingdom, David Johnson, wrote a letter to British newspaper The Guardian that published Klein's work, demanding evidence, which she then provided. The first piece of evidence Klein sent to Johnson was that the hospital in Fallujah was raided to stop any reporting of casualties, a tactic that was later repeated in Mosul.

The first major operation by United States Marines and Iraqi soldiers was to storm Fallujah general hospital, arresting doctors and placing the facility under military control. The New York Times reported that the hospital was selected as an early target because the American military believed that it was the source of rumours about heavy casualties, noting that "this time around, the American military intends to fight its own information war, countering or squelching what has been one of the insurgents' most potent weapons". The Los Angeles Times quoted a doctor as saying that the soldiers "stole the mobile phones' at the hospital preventing doctors from communicating with the outside world".

As Dahr Jamail reports from his online diary "doctors are now technically forbidden to talk to the media or allow them to take photos in Iraqi hospitals unless granted permission from the Ministry of Health and its United States adviser". Allied to this are various reports of the United States using napalm and napalm like weaponry in Fallujah. Jamail recounts:
"Last November, another Fallujah refugee from the Julan area, Abu Sabah, told me: 'They (United States Military) used these weird bombs that put up smoke like a mushroom cloud. Then small pieces fall from the air with long tails of smoke behind them.' He explained that pieces of these bombs exploded into large fires that burned peoples' skin even when water was dumped on their bodies, which is the effect of phosphorous weapons, as well as napalm."

The reports of the use of napalm in civilian areas are widespread, as are many other frightening allegations. The attacks on the hospitals and medical facilities in Fallujah are also in direct contravention of the Geneva Conventions. But as Richard Perle, a senior adviser to United States President George Bush said at the start of the Iraq war: "The greatest triumph of the Iraq war is the destruction of the evil of international law."

THE REAL REASONS WHY IRAN IS THE NEXT TARGET
The Emerging Euro denominated International Oil Marker
by William Clark
Centre for Research on Globalisation, 27th October 2004

The Iranians are about to commit an "offence" far greater than Saddam Hussein's conversion to the euro of Iraq's oil exports in the Autumn of 2000. Numerous articles have revealed Pentagon planning for operations against Iran as early as 2005. While the publicly stated reasons will be over Iran's nuclear ambitions, there are unspoken macroeconomic drivers explaining the Real Reasons regarding the second stage of petro-dollar warfare Iran's upcoming euro based oil Bourse. In 2005 2006, The Tehran government has developed a plan to begin competing with New York's N.Y.M.EX.(New York Mercantile Exchange) and London's I.P.E. (International Petroleum Exchange), with respect to international oil trades using a euro denominated international oil trading mechanism. This means that without some form of United States intervention, the euro is going to establish a firm foothold in the international oil trade. Given United States debt levels and the stated neoconservative project for United States global domination, Tehran's objective constitutes an obvious encroachment on American dollar supremacy in the international oil market

Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes . . . known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. . . . No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare. (James Madison, Political Observations, 1795)

Madison's words of wisdom should be carefully considered by the American people and world community. The rapidly deteriorating situation on the ground in Iraq portends an even direr situation for American soldiers and the people of the world community should the Bush Administration pursue their strategy regarding Iran. Current geopolitical tensions between the United States and Iran extend beyond the publicly stated concerns regarding Iran's nuclear intentions, and likely include a proposed Iranian "petro-euro system" for oil trade. Similar to the Iraq war, upcoming operations against Iran relate to the macroeconomics of the "petrodollar recycling" and the unpublicised but real challenge to United States dollar supremacy from the euro as an alternative oil transaction currency. It is now obvious the invasion of Iraq had less to do with any threat from Saddam's long gone W.M.D. (Weapons of Mass Destruction) programme and certainly less to do to do with fighting International terrorism than it has to do with gaining control over Iraq's hydrocarbon reserves and in doing so maintaining the American dollar as the monopoly currency for the critical international oil market. Throughout 2004 statements by former administration insiders revealed that the Bush-Cheney Administration entered into office with the intention of toppling Saddam Hussein. Indeed, the neoconservative strategy of installing a pro United States government in Baghdad along with multiple United States military bases was partly designed to thwart further momentum within O.P.E.C. (Organisation of Oil Exporting Countries) towards a "petro-euro". However, subsequent events show this strategy to be fundamentally flawed, with Iran moving forward towards a petro-euro system for international oil trades, while Russia discusses this option.

Candidly stated, "Operation Iraqi Freedom" was a war designed to install a pro United States puppet in Iraq, establish multiple United States military bases before the onset of Peak Oil, and to reconvert Iraq back to petrodollars while hoping to thwart further O.P.E.C. momentum towards the euro as an alternative oil transaction currency(6). In 2003 the global community witnessed a combination of petrodollar warfare and oil depletion warfare. The majority of the world's governments especially the European Union, Russia and China were not amused and neither are the American soldiers who are currently stationed in Iraq. Indeed, the author's original pre war hypothesis was validated shortly after the war in a Financial Times article dated 5th June, 2003, which confirmed Iraqi oil sales returning to the international markets were once again denominated in United States dollars, not euros. Not surprisingly, this detail was never mentioned in the five United States major media conglomerates who appear to censor this type of information, but confirmation of this vital fact provides insight into one of the crucial yet overlooked rationales for 2003 the Iraq war.

The tender, for which bids are due by 10th June, switches the transaction back to dollars the international currency of oil sales despite the greenback's recent fall in value. Saddam Hussein in 2000 insisted Iraq's oil be sold for euros, a political move, but one that improved Iraq's recent earnings thanks to the rise in the value of the euro against the dollar(7).

Unfortunately, it has become clear that yet another manufactured war, or some type of ill advised covert operation is inevitable under President George W. Bush, should he win the 2004 Presidential Election [Now, of course duly won - Ed.]. Numerous news reports over the past several months have revealed that the neoconservatives are quietly but actively planning for the second petrodollar war, this time against Iran.

Deep in the Pentagon, admirals and generals are updating plans for possible United States military action in Syria and Iran. The Defence Department unit responsible for military planning for the two troublesome countries is "busier than ever", an administration official says. Some Bush advisers characterize the work as merely an effort to revise routine plans the Pentagon maintains for all contingencies in light of the Iraq war. More skittish bureaucrats say the updates are accompanied by a revived campaign by administration conservatives and neocons for more hard line United States policies toward the countries . . . . Even hard liners acknowledge that given the United States military commitment in Iraq, a United States attack on either country would be an unlikely last resort; covert action of some kind is the favoured route for Washington hard liners who want regime change in Damascus and Tehran. . . . Administration hawks are pinning their hopes on regime change in Tehran by covert means, preferably, but by force of arms if necessary. Papers on the idea have circulated inside the administration, mostly labeled "draft" or "working draft" to evade congressional subpoena powers and the Freedom of Information Act. Informed sources say the memos echo the Administration's abortive Iraq strategy: oust the existing regime, swiftly install a pro United States government in its place (extracting the new regime's promise to renounce any nuclear ambitions) and get out. This daredevil scheme horrifies American military leaders, and there's no evidence that it has won any backers at the cabinet level(8).

To date, one of the more difficult technical obstacles concerning a euro based oil transaction trading system is the lack of a euro denominated oil pricing standard, or oil "marker" as it is referred to in the industry. The three current oil markers are United States dollar denominated, which include the West Texas Intermediate crude (W.T.I.), Norway Brent crude, and the U.A.E. (United Arab Emirates) Dubai crude. However, since the spring of 2003, Iran has required payments in the euro currency for its European and Asian-A.C.U. (Asian Clearing Union) exports although the oil pricing for trades are still denominated in the dollar(9). Therefore, a potentially significant news development was reported in June, 2004, announcing Iran's intentions to create an Iranian oil Bourse. (The word "bourse" refers to a stock exchange for securities trading, and is derived from the French stock exchange in Paris, the Federation Internationale des Bourses de Valeurs.) This announcement portended competition would arise between the Iranian oil bourse and London's International Petroleum Exchange (I.P.E.), as well as the New York Mercantile Exchange (N.Y.M.EX). It should be noted that both the I.P.E. and N.Y.M.EX are owned by American corporations.

The macroeconomic implications of a successful Iranian Bourse are noteworthy. Considering that Iran has switched to the euro for its oil payments from European Union and A.C.U. customers, it would be logical to assume the proposed Iranian Bourse will usher in a fourth crude oil marker denominated in the euro currency. Such a development would remove the main technical obstacle for a broad based petro-euro system for international oil trades. From a purely economic and monetary perspective, a petro-euro system is a logical development given that the European Union imports more oil from O.P.E.C. producers than does the United States, and the European Union accounts for 45 per cent of imports into the Middle East (2002 data). Acknowledging that many of the oil contracts for Iran and Saudi Arabi are linked to the United Kingdom's Brent crude marker, the Iranian bourse could create a significant shift in the flow of international commerce into the Middle East. If Iran's bourse becomes a successful alternative for oil trades, it would challenge the hegemony currently enjoyed by the financial centres in both London (I.P.E.) and New York (N.Y.M.EX), a factor not overlooked in the following article:

Iran is to launch an oil trading market for Middle East and O.P.E.C. producers that could threaten the supremacy of London's International Petroleum Exchange. . . . He [Mr. Asemipour] played down the dangers that the new exchange could eventually pose for the I.P.E. or N.Y.M.EX, saying he hoped they might be able to cooperate in some way. . . . Some industry experts have warned the Iranians and other O.P.E.C. producers that Western exchanges are controlled by big financial and oil corporations, which have a vested interest in market volatility. The I.P.E., bought in 2001 by a consortium that includes B.P., Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, was unwilling to discuss the Iranian move yesterday. "We would not have any comment to make on it at this stage," said an I.P.E. spokeswoman(10).

It is unclear at the time of writing, if this project will be successful, or could it prompt overt or covert United States interventions thereby signaling the second phase of petrodollar warfare in the Middle East. News articles in June, 2004, revealed the discredited neoconservative sycophant Ahmed Chalabi may have revealed his knowledge to Iran regarding United States military planning for operations against that Nation.

The reason for the United States breakup with Ahmed Chalabi, the Shiite Iraqi politician, could be his leak of Pentagon plans to invade Iran before Christmas 2005, but the American Government has not changed its objective, and the attack could happen earlier if President George W. Bush is re elected [now confirmed], or later if John Kerry is sworn in. . . . Diplomats said Chalabi was alerted to the Pentagon plans and in the process of trying to learn more to tell the Iranians, he invited suspicions of United States officials, who subsequently got the Iraqi Police to raid the compound of his Iraqi National Congress on 20th May, 2004, leading to a final break up of relations. While the United States is uncertain how much of the attack plans were leaked to Iran, it could change some of the invasion tactics, but the broad parameters would be kept intact(11).

Regardless of the potential United States response to an Iranian petroeuro system, the emergence of an oil exchange market in the Middle East is not entirely surprising given the domestic peaking and decline of oil exports in America and the United Kingdom in comparison to the remaining oil reserves in Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia. According to Mohammad Javad Asemipour, an advisor to Iran's oil ministry and the individual responsible for this project, this new oil exchange is scheduled to begin oil trading in March, 2005

Asemipour said the platform should be trading crude, natural gas and petrochemicals by the start of the new Iranian year, which falls on 21st March, 2005. He said other members of the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries Iran is the producer group's second largest producer behind Saudi Arabia as well as oil producers from the Caspian Region would eventually participate in the exchange(12).

(Note: the most recent Iranian news report from 5th October, 2004, stated: "Iran's oil bourse will start trading by early 2006", which suggests a delay from the original 21st March, 2005, target date)(13). Additionally, according to the following report, Saudi investors may be interested in participating in the Iranian oil exchange market, further illustrating why petrodollar hegemony is becoming unsustainable:

Chris Cook, who previously worked for the I.P.E. and now offers consultancy services to markets through Partnerships Consulting L.L.P. in London, commented: "Post 9-11, there has also been an interest in the project from the Saudis, who weren't interested in participating before. Others familiar with Iran's economy said [that] since 9-11, Saudi Arabian investors are opting to invest in Iran rather than traditional Western markets as the Kingdom's relations with the United States have weakened. Iran's Oil Ministry has made no secret of its eagerness to attract much needed foreign investment in its energy sector and broaden its choice of oil buyers. . . . Along with several other members of O.P.E.C., Iranian oil officials believe crude trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange and the I.P.E. is controlled by the oil majors and big financial companies, who benefit from market volatility(14).

One of the Federal Reserve's nightmares may begin to unfold in 2005 or 2006, when it appears international buyers will have a choice of buying a barrel of oil for $50 dollars on the N.Y.M.EX and I.P.E. or purchase a barrel of oil for 37-40 euros via the Iranian Bourse. This assumes the euro maintains its current 20 25 per cent appreciated value relative to the dollar and assumes that some sort of "intervention" is not undertaken against Iran. The upcoming bourse will introduce petrodollar versus petro-euro currency hedging, and fundamentally new dynamics to the biggest market in the world global oil and gas trades. During an important speech in April, 2002, Mr. Javad Yarjani, an O.P.E.C. executive, described three pivotal events that would facilitate an O.P.E.C. transition to euros(15). He stated this would be based on (a), if and when Norway's Brent crude is re dominated in euros; (b), if and when the U.K. adopts the euro, and (c), whether or not the euro gains parity valuation relative to the dollar, and the European Union's proposed expansion plans were successful. (Note: Both of the later two criteria have transpired; the euro's valuation has been above the dollar since late 2002, and the euro based European Union enlarged in May, 2004, from 12 to 22 countries). In the mean-time, the United Kingdom remains uncomfortably juxtaposed between the financial interests of the United States banking nexus (New York-Washington) and the European Union financial centres (Paris-Frankfurt).

The implementation of the proposed Iranian oil Bourse (exchange) in 2005-2006 if successful in utilising the euro as its oil transaction currency standard essentially negates the necessity of the previous two criteria as described by Mr Yarjani regarding the solidification of a "petro-euro" system for international oil trades(16). It should also be noted that during 2003 2004 Russia and China have both increased their central bank holdings of the euro currency, which appears to be a coordinated move to facilitate the anticipated ascendance of the euro as a second World Reserve currency(17)(18). In the meantime, the United Kingdom is uncomfortably juxtaposed between the financial interests of the United States (New York-Washington) banking nexus and that of the European Union financial centre (Paris-Frankfurt). The immediate question for Americans? Will the neoconservatives attempt to intervene covertly and-or overtly in Iran during 2005 in an effort to prevent the formation of a euro denominated crude oil pricing mechanism? Commentators in India are quite correct in their assessment that a United States intervention in Iran is likely to prove disastrous for the United States, making matters much worse regarding international terrorism, not to mention potential effects on the American economy:

The giving up on the terror war while Iran invasion plans are drawn up makes no sense, especially since the previous invasion and current occupation of Iraq has further fuelled al Qa'eda terrorism after 9-1l. . . . It is obvious that sucked into Iraq, the United States has limited military manpower left to combat the aI Qa'eda elsewhere in the Middle East and South Central Asia, . . .and NATO is so seriously cross with America that it hesitates to provides troops in Iraq, and no other country is willing to bail out America outside its immediate allies like Britain, Italy, Australia and Japan. . . . If it [United States] intervenes again, it is absolutely certain it will not be able to improve the situation Iraq shows America has not the depth or patience to create a new civil society and will only make matters worse. There is a better way, as the constructive engagement of Libya's Colonel Muammar Gaddafi has shown. . . . lran is obviously a more complex case than Libya, because power resides in the clergy, and Iran has not been entirely transparent about its nuclear programme, but the sensible way is to take it gently, and nudge it to moderation. Regime change will only worsen global Islamist terror, and in any case, Saudi Arabia is a fitter case for democratic intervention, if at all(19).

It is abundantly clear that a second Bush term will bring a confrontation and possible war with Iran during 2005. Colin Powell as the [now replaced by Condoleezza Rice] Secretary of State, has moderated neoconservative military designs regarding Iran, but Powell has stated that he will be leaving at the end of Bush's first term. [Of course if John Kerry wins in November, he might pursue a similar military strategy. However, it is my opinion that Kerry is more likely to pursue multilateral negotiations regarding the Iranian issues]. Clearly, there are numerous risks regarding neoconservative strategy towards Iran. First, unlike Iraq, Iran has a robust military capability. Secondly, a repeat of any "Shock and Awe" tactics is not advisable given that Iran has installed sophisticated anti ship missiles on the Island of Abu Musa, and therefore controls the critical Strait of Hormuz(20). In the case of a United States attack, a shut down of the Strait of Hormuz where all of the Persian Gulf-bound oil tankers must pass could easily trigger a market panic with oil prices skyrocketing to $100 per barrel or more. World oil production is now flat out, and a major interruption would escalate oil prices to a level that would set off a global Depression. Why are the neoconservatives willing to takes such risks? Simply stated their goal is United States global domination.

A successful Iranian bourse would solidify the petro-euro as an alternative oil transaction currency, and thereby end the petrodollar's hegemonic status as the monopoly oil currency. Therefore, a graduated approach is needed to avoid precipitous United States economic dislocations. Multilateral compromise with the European Union and O.P.E.C. regarding oil currency is certainly preferable to an "Operation Iranian Freedom",' or perhaps an attempted C.I.A. sponsored repeat of the 1953 Iranian coup Operation "Ajax" part 11(21). Indeed, there are very good reasons for American military leaders to be "horrified" at the thought of a second Bush term in which Cheney and the neoconservatives would be unrestrained in their tragic pursuit of United States global domination.

Newsweek has learned that the C.I.A. and D.I.A. (Defence Intelligence Agency), have war gamed the likely consequences of a United States pre emptive strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. No one liked the out-come. As an Air Force source tells it, "The war games were unsuccessful at preventing the conflict from escalating(22).

Despite the impressive power of the United States Military and the ability of our intelligence agencies to facilitate "interventions", it would be perilous and possibly ruinous for the United States to intervene in Iran given the dire situation in Iraq. The Monterey Institute of International Studies provided an extensive analysis of the possible consequences of a preemptive attack on Iran's nuclear facilities and warned of the following:

Considering the extensive financial and national policy investment Iran has committed to its nuclear projects, it is almost certain that an attack by Israel or the United States would result in immediate retaliation. A likely scenario includes an immediate Iranian missile counterattack on Israel and American bases in the Gulf, followed by a very serious effort to destabilize Iraq and foment all out confrontation between the United States and Iraq's Shi'ite majority. Iran could also opt to destabilize Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states with a significant Shi'ite population, and induce Lebanese Hizbollah to launch a series of rocket attacks on Northern Israel. . . . An attack on Iranian nuclear facilities . . . could have various adverse effects on United States interests in the Middle East and the world. Most important, in the absence of evidence of an Iranian illegal nuclear program, an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities by the United States or Israel would be likely to strengthen Iran's international stature and reduce the threat of international sanctions against Iran. Such an event is more likely to embolden and expand Iran's nuclear aspirations and capabilities in the long term . . . one thing is for certain, it would not be just another Osirak. (23).

I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts. (Abraham Lincoln)

REFERENCES

(1) On Target, passim.
(2) Clark, Ramsey. The Fire This Time - U.S. War Crimes in the Gulf. Thunder's Mouth Press, 1994.
(3) On Target, Vol. 34, Nos. 14 & 15, 8th & 22nd January, 2005. pp. 7(167)-8(168).
(4) Goldberg, J.J. Jewish Power - Inside the American Jewish Establishment. Perseus Books, 1997. Goldberg, himself Jewish, provides a graphic, detailed account of Jewish influence - in itself much divided - in the United States.
(5) On Target, Vol. 33, Nos. 22, 23 & 24, 1st, 15th & 29th May, 2004. pp. 7(327)-13(333).
(6) "Revisited The Real Reasons for the Upcoming War with Iraq: A Macro-economic and Geostrategic Analysis of the Unspoken Truth", January 2003 (updated January 2004).
<http:llwww.ratical.org/ratville/CAHIRRiraqWar.htmi>
(7) Hoyos, Carol & Morrison, Kevin, "Iraq returns to the international oil market," Financial Times, 5th June, 2003
<http:llwww.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/FINANCIAL%20TIMES _Iraq%20returns%20to%20internationai%20oii%20market.htm>
(8) "War Gaming the Mullahs: The U.S. weighs the price of a pre emptive strike", Newsweek, 27th September issue, 2004.
< http:llwww.msnbc.msn.comlid/6039135/sitelnewsweek/>
(9) Shivkumar, C. "Iran offers oil to Asian union on easier terms", The Hindu Business Line. 16th June 16, 2003.
< http:llwww.thehindubusinessline.corn/bline/2003106117/stories/2003061
702 >
(10) Macalister, Terry. "Iran takes on west's control of oil trading", The Guardian, 16th June 2004.
<http:llwww.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,3604,1239644,00.htmi>
(11) "U.S. to invade Iran before 2005 Christmas", News Insight: Public Affairs Mag-azine, 9th June, 2004. <http:llwww.newsinsight.net/nati2.asp? recno=2789>
(12) "Iran Eyes Deal on Oil Bourse; I.P.E. Chairman Visits Tehran", Rigzone.com 8th July, 2004. <httpllwww.riqzone.com/newslarticle.asp?>
(13) "Iran's oil bourse expects to start by early 2006", Reuters, 5th October, 2004 <http:llwww.iranoilgas.com>
(14) "Iran Eyes Deal on Oil Bourse; I.P.E. Chairman Visits Tehran". Op cit.
(15) "The Choice of Currency for the Denomination of the Oil Bill". Speech given by Javad Yarjani, Head of O.P.E.C.'s Petroleum Market Analysis Department, on The International Role of the Euro (Invited by the Spanish Minister of Economic Affairs during Spain's Presidency of the European Union). (4th April, 2002, Oviedo, Spain). <http.llwww.opec.org/Newslnfo/Speeches/sp20021spAraqueSpainAprl4.htm>
(16) Ibid.
(17) "Russia shifts to euro as foreign currency reserves soar", A.F.P.,9th June, 2003. <http:llwww.cdi.org/russialjohnsonl7214 3.cfm>
(18) "China to diversify foreign exchange reserves", China Business Weekly, 8th May, 2004. <http:llwww.chinadaily.com.cnlenglish/doc/2004 05108/content 328744.htm >
(19) "Terror & regime change: Any U.S. invasion of Iran will have terrible conse-quences," News Insight: Public Affairs Magazine, 11th June, 2004. < http:llwww.indiareacts.comlarchivedebates/nat2.asp? recno=908&ctq=World >
(20) Analysis of Abu Musa Island. www.globalsecurity.org. < http:llwww.globalsecurity.orglwmd/-woridliranlabu musa.htm>
(21) Smith, W. "Destabilising a Newly Free Iran", The Institute for Economic Democracy, 2003. <http:llwww.ied.infolbooks/whylcontrol.htmi>
(22) "War Gaming the Mullahs: The U.S. weighs the price of a pre emptive strike" Op. cit..
(23) Salama, Sammy and Karen Ruster. "A Preemptive Attack on Iran's Nuclear Facilities: Possible Consequences," Monterry Institute of International Studies., 12th August, 2004. (updated September 9, 2004). <http:llcns.miis.edu/pubs/week/040812.htm>
- Philips, Peter. "Censored 2004," Project Censored. Seven Stories Press, 2003. <http:llwww.projectcensored.org/>
­ Clark, William. Petrodollar Warfare. To be published Spring, 2005.