Subscribe to free
Pharisee Watch

Gifts Accepted Here

Journal of "We Hold These Truths"

February 1997

The Warmaker Series

The Warmakers' Attack On Religious Fundamentalism

The Stock Market: Boom or Bubble?

The Warmaker Series

by Brian Cavallo

This is the third in a series of articles on The Warmakers. In Edition I, September, 1996, WHTT published America's First War of Aggression, a private letter written Christmas day 1990, a plea to church leaders to stay out of the Gulf War. History will have the grim task of recording the human tragedy resulting from the Gulf war, the first high tech war game with human targets.

In November 1996, WHTT published Edition II, Understanding The Internationalists’ Triangle, the United Nations, Foreign Aid and Terrorism, an account of the many UN Peacekeeping operations worldwide. The report details why UN Peacekeeping operations foster wars, provides the general identity and affiliation of the Warmakers, and details evidence that the American taxpayer is bearing the burden of almost the entire world’s warmaking activity.

The Warmakers' Attack on Religious Fundamentalism, printed in this Edition III, provides a history of the ongoing propaganda campaign without which there could have been no United Nations war actions. It will reveal a new dimension in brainwashing techniques aimed at the influential, Christian activists.

The Warmakers' Attack On Religious Fundamentalism

by C. E. Carlson

The movie, Star Trek, First Encounter finds the crew of the Enterprise invaded and occupied by "The Borg," humanoids that have somehow gained access and control.

The Borg are mechanically retrofitted humans empowered with an evolving logic system emanating from a grotesque, but seductive queen bee super robots. The combat is hand to hand and the prospects appear desperate if not hopeless. The Enterprise crew work for "The Federation," presumably the benevolent world government of its day. At one point the captain of the Enterprise explains the economics of life in the 24th Century to a visitor from a former century. Work for profit, he explains, is no longer necessary because technology has provided plenty for all.

The purpose of the Federation is to maintain inter-world peace, and the warmaking machines area necessity to cope with the evolving aliens who would apparently convert all humanoid subjects to an intergalactic life of slavery. God does not rate even a bit part in First Encounter. The collective imaginations of Hollywood cannot hold a candle to the realities of the warmaking schemes that are going around us. While some might choose to imagine themselves in the fanciful and surreal Star Trek drama, we are already playing out an active part in the games of life and death far more fascinating and realistic than any Hollywood plot. Most Americans are unknowing passengers on the real ship Enterprise, hurdling ahead into a chaotic world of wars that no one can seem to understand. Not unlike the Enterprise, the controls seem to have been assumed by an alien power from within. Most passengers are simply so occupied with their own business and domestic problems they are only vaguely aware of the effect of these foreign entanglements.

A visiting Borg might conclude that Earth's history is a series of bridges between endless wars. Why are more pages devoted to war than all the positive events of mankind combined? Is it the nature of ordinary man to transform himself into a killing machine and march off to a foreign theater to accost his distant neighbor?

Our own experiences tell us this is not true; one would be hard pressed to find a single American 18 year old whose life ambition it was to go off to Saudi Arabia and systematically destroy human life and risk being gassed or killed in the process. Yet almost a million American youths were sent to the Gulf by their leaders. Sadly, few Christian leaders at home seriously objected to the totally unnecessary killing of others or the risk to our own military, see America's First War of Aggression by Charles Carlson.

This story is about propaganda that makes war, and your author has chosen to label those political leaders and the power elite bosses who campaign for war, see Colin Powell and the Power Elite by Justin Romando.

Propaganda is the art of making war seem necessary and therefore, a matter of national pride. It is the war technique used by the Warmakers to control your government.

Most Americans, including many Christian and "conservative" leaders, have been subtly influenced to some greater or lesser degree, to accept anew era of war in which our own armed forces become glorified mercenaries at the behest of the UN (read Warmakers). It is this authors thesis that these very Christian and normally conservative leaders, along with their followers, will someday be the ultimate victim of this propaganda campaign, a propaganda war on Religious Fundamentalism.

Much of powerful evidence we will present in this paper is taken from the Warmakers's own words. The much repeated but true axiom, "there is nothing so powerful as the truth, and often nothing so strange" could hardly be more appropriate.

The powerful propaganda machine that wields control over the establishment media, both political parties, and all too much of our government, openly promoted a new enemy for the USA before the Soviet Union was ever put to rest, see Attacking Islam, C. E. Carlson, The New American, March 21, 1996(3)

These Warmakers selected the scattered and mostly impoverished nations of Islam to be their next ideological enemy before the American people had the least idea that communism was to be made pass as a tool of propagandists. The USSR was finished as a world power. Those who created its power image told us in their writings the USSR was to be recycled into the role of international welfare urchin. But as Orwell told us, and as "First Encounter" has confirmed, a world government can not exist without a world enemy. The WARMAKERS would create one.

In the USSR's place the Warmakers began to promote Islam and Islamic peoples as a great ideological enemy of mankind. They promoted the successor international enemy number one with the calculated eye of a heavyweight boxing promoter, building up the next mark to be crushed by his meal ticket. There was nothing personal about the choice of Islam; for the Warmakers, war and the unfortunate death that go with it is strictly business. The diverse Muslim nations did not possess the wealth and power needed to qualify as a worthy opponent for the world's superpower. Islam became the enemy by default because there is no other choice. The image of a vicious, powerful and organized Islamic adversary was to be concocted, like a puffed up superman suit, to hide the frail body beneath. To understand how this enemy is being conditioned for war we must go back a few years and examine the Warmakers' own pronouncements.

LOSING THE BEST ENEMY MONEY COULD BUY

A revealing preview of this war plan was provided in a quasi-governmental study which became the subject of a controversial book published in 1967 entitled, A Report From Iron Mountain on the Possibilities and Desirability of Peace.4 The text of the report was accompanied by interviews between the author and certain anonymous participants in the three yearlong, highly confidential study. Its conclusion, "When asked how best to prepare for the advent of peace, we must first reply, as strongly as we can, that the war system cannot responsibly be allowed to disappear ---." These academicians concluded, at taxpayer expense, that war was needed in order to control the American people.

The identity of participants in the Iron Mountain Report were never officially verified, and the book was denounced by Henry Kissinger as "bad satire". However, verification of the participants is no longer so important, for the war-making recommendations provided in the Report From Iron Mountain now speak for themselves in light of subsequent events. For if the Warmakers' think tank did not meet at Iron Mountain to plan for future wars, they must have read the book, for every step has been carried out.

Warmaker elitist Henry Kissinger was to publicly lament the loss of the Soviet Union as an opponent 25 years later. And on August 2, 1996 the Wall Street Journal carried an editorial by aging Council on Foreign Relations philosopher Irving Kristol who made the amazing statement, "with the end of the Cold War, what we really need is an obvious ideological and threatening enemy, one worthy of our mettle, one that can unite us in opposition."

The Warmakers' propagandists began to openly promote a new enemy for a worldwide shooting war in the mid 1980s. Few Americans realized the might of the Soviet Union had been intentionally exaggerated by the Warmaker propaganda machine. Only after travel was opened to western businessmen did Americans begin to realize that the USSR had been an economic disaster for decades. The military might of the Confederation of Independent States (CIS), formerly the USSR, was finally debunked when it was unable to defeat impoverished Afghanistan.

Today bankruptcy and general strife are a reality as CIS workers are demanding $8 billion in back wages that the government simply cannot pay. According to a Wall Street Journal account on December 9, 1996, 230,000 Russian mine workers ended an eight-day hunger strike only when the government consented to give each one a conciliatory $200 payment on back wages. Such is the mighty USSR.

ENEMY BY DEFAULT

The Warmakers' press agents gradually began to signal that there was to be a new ideological enemy. Pronouncements from the leading power elite press, led by Foreign Affairs magazine, began to cue that the Warmakers had chosen a victim to replace the USSR in the early 1980s, or before. The diverse and largely impoverished but heavily populated Islamic controlled or influenced nations of the world were, indeed, a strange choice to battle the most powerful war machine in the history of the world. It was to be a mindless conflict funded by the American taxpayer, whose unsuspecting Muslim participants would supply the bodies.

In order to condition the American public to the genocide that would follow, the Warmakers undertook a massive propaganda program that has unfolded in stages.

First, the Warmakers created a perceived Islamic ideological enemy in the minds of the American people where none existed, a program that was accelerated in the mid 1980s. Second, the Warmakers deliberately provoked incidents that caused hatred on both sides that could be branded as, an act of a mad man, terrorist, extremists, and other fighting words. These were expanded into excuses to start little wars. Third, the Warmakers provided a vehicle to keep the wars going regardless of public opinion.

It was a fighting machine entirely under their control, a private army outside the control of Congress and the voters. This private army is the US military forces loaned to the Warmakers, much as the Hessian soldiers were loaned to King George in 1777, with a smattering of allied detachments, all under the aegis of the United Nations.

The role of the establishment press was to manufacture an attitude of distrust between Americans and Mid-Eastern Islamics, between Christians and Muslims. The distrust between Muslim and Jew is already frothing over as a result of the 50 year old Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which began in 1948 when the United Nations "partitioned" the Palestine nation to make way for a new Israeli state. Quite naturally, Americans were drawn into side taking by the propaganda machine. The Warmakers annually provide enormous military aid to the Israeli government. In the early 1970s the same Warmakers fanned the flames by recognizing (as did the Arab League) The Palestine Liberation Organizations and began providing clandestine financial support to the PLO. Arafat became the plump and rosy Warmaker propagandists' Arab leader of the world, providing the radical image of the world terrorist.

The Arafat connection was best demonstrated when by the well publicized US Marine rescue of the entire 5000-man PLO army from the tight spot it had gotten into in southern Lebanon, under direct order form George Bush . Many observers who were not aware that the power elite was financing both sides, nevertheless wondered why the President would order the rescue of a terrorist organization.

Bill Jasper, provided details in his "The Mid-East Peace Charade," article in the October 8,1993 issue of The New American Magazine.(5) As a result of the much publicized PLO terrorist acts many Americans became conditioned to ignore genocide against Muslims, that is, to shrug it off as the just punishment for acts of terrorism by the PLO. Having created an image equating Muslim fundamentalists to terrorists, the Warmakers could perpetuate unlimited war around the globe without serious public objection so long as most of the victims were believed to be Islamic. The incidents needed to start a shooting war could be and were easily manufactured by blowing naturally occurring minor conflicts out of proportion. One such example was Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait in the fall of 1990, which was sanctioned in advance by the US State Department, then condemned after it was too late for Saddam Hussein to back out of Kuwait without losing face. (1)

PROPAGANDA IN OVERDRIVE

The Council on Foreign Relations' Foreign Affairs Magazine began to equate Muslims with terrorists in 1986 or before. The international press, or global fourth estate, quickly took the cue and began a campaign to paint Islam as a potential world enemy. The Warmakers' press taunted and conditioned its new enemy as a picador taunts a fighting bull; no abuse or insult was too strong. The enemy, like the bull, was selected for courage in the face of certain destruction. Dozens of Islamic countries represented a big target, with a combined population of 1.2 billion people. The Warmakers had reason to be confident Muslim countries would fight back when invaded or threatened. This was amply borne out in the Soviet Army's experience in Afghanistan and in the southern states of the CIS.

The Warmakers incited and initiated the first hot war in Iraq on January 19, 1991 where Americans and Arabs actually killed each other in the purposeless, one-sided Gulf war. The United Nations was used by the WARMAKERS as a front to bully Congress into an undeclared war. The Gulf War marked the first time America initiated an unprovoked attack on a foreign power in another hemisphere.

The Gulf war tested the effectiveness of the Warmakers' propaganda campaign. Would the American public revolt to the televised horror of selective annihilation. The resultant death and devastation was electronically blurred from the American public, as ultrasound blurs but does not hide the beating heart of the unborn child. The Washington Warmakers' political generals, Schwarzkopf and Colin Powell carefully avoided talking about dead Iraqis, instead referring to completed missions, "killing tanks" and destroyed "targets". But in spite of media sterilization, the horror of the war was visible to anyone who really cared to look or think about the lethal effect of 110,000 air sorties with 88,000 tons of explosives and chemical weapons, the TNT equivalent of 5 or more Hiroshimas.

The American public was never reminded that Iraq is smaller and with less economic base than the state of Arizona, that Iraq supports 20 million people, 75 percent of whom are women and children. America's moral leaders in the churches failed miserably their moral duty to defend human life. Few said or did anything in protest. Most actually supported the Gulf War because they believed it was time for a victory.

Thus encouraged in the Gulf, the Warmaker juggernaut went into high gear. The United Nations, carrying the American proxy, simply invaded Somalia and Bosnia and Haiti. In Bosnia the UN troops were conveniently present before the war began and before Bosnia even seriously considered independence from the former Yugoslavia. It was the United Nations high command that first promised protection to the Bosnians, then when Bosnia committed to independence the UN switched sides encouraging the Serbs to war, then initiated an embargo, virtually a blockade of Bosnia. The embargo encouraged rape and methodical genocide at the hands of the Bosnian Serbs. At the start of the war the Bosnian were 45% Muslim and 55% other ethnic or religious groups. News photos show the UN Peace keepers observing the carnage. No less than five high State Department officials assigned to Bosnia resigned in protest of the callous State Department policy. George Kenny and Marshall Freeman Harris were both ambassador-level career diplomats. Both cited the arms embargo on Bosnia as constituting duplicity in genocide against the Muslim people, see "Understanding the Internationalist's Triangle, The United Nations, Foreign Aid and Terrorism," by C. E. Carlson, WHTT Newsletter, Edition II, November 1996. (6)

In Somalia, the UN humanitarian mission turned into an invasion whose stated purpose was to remove General Adid, the Muslim leader. General Adid is apparently popular with the Somali people because the UN was unable to apprehend him, even with the help of large bribes and reward offers. The UN troops repeatedly gunned down Somali civilians who challenged their authority. Little doubt remained that the US was responsible because American helicopter gun ships were used almost exclusively.

Americans were also stirred to hatred. Who can forget seeing on network TV the body of a soldier dragged by a crowd of blacks? We were told again and again the body was a dead American Serviceman in Somalia. Almost everyone saw the body, but how many knew that in a March 21, 1994, Newsday reported the US Army's belated official statement admitting no such American serviceman was identified. If you were you fooled by this propaganda hoax, you should wonder, for what purpose! Islamic publications, such as Crescent International and The Link, make it clear they are well aware the US taxpayer funds the UN war efforts. Americans, especially Christians are considered responsible for their government's action in the eyes of the Muslims world because most Islamics in other countries regard America as a Christian nation. It should be noted that the concept of separation of church and state is foreign to Islamic fundamentalists.

Hard feeling are growing. Some Iranians now celebrate the day the American Embassy was captured, and frequently refer to the US as "the great Satan". This should surprise no one since the US supported Iraq in its eight year war with Iran. According to the United Nation's own figures (UNICEF) the diabolical and unthinkably cruel embargo against Iraq has thus far resulted in the deaths of 500,000 children in Iraq, including 170,000 Kurd children, dying from malnutrition and disease since 1991. There is much sympathy for Iraqis, even in Iran.

In Bosnia numbers are smaller. The infamous Dayton (Ohio) Accord has left millions homeless, probably more than half of the victims Muslims. Again, no doubt is left in the minds of the survivors that Americans are responsible. President William Jefferson Clinton's US 1993 peace plan called for virtual internment for the Muslim survivors in camps, as were the Palestinians 30 years before. Bad feelings toward Americans are inevitable.

ATTACKING RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISTS

How is it that the citizens of the richest and most benevolent country in the world, the foundation of mission activity world wide, can be so callous to the suffering of millions? Again, the answer is a propaganda campaign the cost of which has no limits. The power elite controlled national media commenced a campaign to discredit anyone with strong and active religious oriented activities in the early 1980s or before. The primary focus was and is Muslim Fundamentalism; however, many Christian activists, such as pro-life activists, have been painted with the same brush.

It is necessary that your writer offer an opinion that will not be substantiated in this text. The evidence that Muslim Fundamentalist have been targeted is overwhelming. It has also become increasingly clear that some of the individual propagandists who are being used to carry out the Warmer’s agenda are probably fired by intense ethnic preferences, which show up frequently in their own words. Others are simply getting on a popular, and sometimes profitable, bandwagon. However, I find little evidence the Warmakers have any particular hatred for any religion. The power elite seems to repress all faiths that act like religions and tolerate all cults that do not. Muslims have probably been targeted because they have a history of fighting back when oppressed, but not on account of any religious preferences or tenets possessed by the Warmakers. It has become apparent that the propagandists are much too cold-blooded and pragmatic to harbor any ingrained prejudice or preference toward any particular religious view. Further, it is the writer's view that the Warmakers acts prove they ignore God and all beliefs that are not pragmatic. Conversely, they seem tolerant of any compromised religion or cult that they can use to promote their propaganda aims, as we shall see. The power elite fear "fundamentalists" of all religions, which is why they work so hard to divide them one from another. (2)

So successful has been this propaganda program that to be called a "fundamentalist" of any hue has become a slur. The term is liberally applied by the organized media to any group, Christian or otherwise, which acts upon any set of principles other than expediency. The public, and EspecIally many Christian leaders, have been gradually programmed to associate those who are branded fundamentalist as violent and irrational. Randy Weaver, the late David Koresh, and Sheik Omar Abduel Rahman (who is now serving a very Questionable life prison sentence) share the label with the dignified Dr. James Dobson, ex-football coach Bill McCartney and pro-life activist Randall Terry.

What do these men have in common? Each appears to stand on some set of religious principles or standards that are in conflict with the politically correct standard of religious conduct acceptable to the Warmakers. A Muslim or a Christian leader can remain perfectly acceptable to the power elite so long as he is not an activist. The establishment media constantly connects fundamentalism with the violent or the unsavory, as we shall see.

But what is wrong with being a fundamentalist? Is it not a strict adherence to a code that makes winning football teams, straight "A" students or a quality business?

Is it not what Jesus called his disciples to do? The effect of this obvious word bending has been the creation of a dirty word from a good one. Certainly some activist Christian groups, including several of the pro-active, right to life groups have been labeled "fundamentalist" and have been vilified, selectively prosecuted and selectively legislated against. But it is the Muslims who are the overwhelming target of the international media smear.

So blatant and persistent has been this attack on the character of Muslims that the public, including fundamentalist Christians, are expected to accept without question the establishment media created image of Muslims as organized, unified, homogeneous and terrorist by nature.

Unfortunately many Christians have accepted this unthinking characterization. All logic and reasonable experience tells us this is categorically untrue.

However, the press constantly implies, and on occasion states outright, that Muslims are the inexplicable, incurable enemies of the non-Muslim world. The manufactured myth is that Muslim Fundamentalism is a great threat to Christianity. The anti-Islamic brainwashing has been effectively accomplished over a period of years, and has been so subtle most of us did not know it was happening.

In truth, it may well be the organized persecution and genocide of Muslims that is the greatest threat to Christianity. Why, because it will almost surely lead to the persecution of activist "fundamentalist" Christians tomorrow. For a historic example, the defense of persecuted groups in Nazi Germany eventually led to the execution of Reverend Detrich Bonhoffer by hanging and the student members of the Order of the White Rose by decapitation. What little was left of the compromised Christian churches in Germany was silenced.

THE POWER ELITE'S SIZZLING PRESS

One of many factually absurd examples of fundamentalist bashing is found in "Fundamentalism, the Zeal to Heal, or to Kill," an Associated Press story by Sharon Cohen on May 15, 1993. This bizarre story was only one of hundreds inundating the public in a hurricane of vitriolic attacks on religious activists of all kinds.

Muslims were the author's primary target, but Ms. Cohen conveniently clumped all the "fundamentalists" into a sort of super cult. She denounced "Fundamentalism, one of the fastest growing religious movements," in which she includes radical Zionists, certain Egyptian Islamics, Operation Rescue, and Muslims of all nationalities into one imaginary, homogeneous, terrorist inclined, super cult.

The power elite have used their own in-house publications to precision engineer the press campaign to discredit Muslims. The Spring, 1993 Foreign Affairs devotes the keynote debate to; Is Islam a Threat?, by CFR member Judith Miller, a NY Times writer.7 In The Arabs and Islam, Ms. Miller generalizes about all of Islam and does not differentiate the law abiding from the several cases of documented outlaw activity, nor does she make a serious attempt to prove there is a united Islam. She simply assumes we have already been conditioned to accept the idea that Islam equals fundamentalism which equates to terrorism. Miller states, "Islam has its own version of a New World Order and a strategy to obtain it." She goes on to picture a warlike united Islam, which she claims (without offering a shred of evidence), has executed a secret manifesto committing Islam to war against the West.

Ms. Miller does her best to make us fighting mad at the Islamic people everywhere. She stirs the reader by vague references to atrocities against Christians in Sudan and the lashing of women in unnamed Arab states. Ms. Miller makes no serious attempt to prove her assertions, and her reference to Christians being victimized by the Sudanese tribesmen has become a propaganda hallmark, playing up any tribal or political conflict as a Muslim vs. Christian war. Ms. Miller concedes that Islam may not be militarily strong enough "to attack the US openly or directly," but she suggests that Islam is organizing to do so, and that all Islamics are fanatically anti-American.

In a transparent attempt to exaggerate the vitality of the fundamentalist movement, Miller blames radical Islam for the toppling of the Shah of Iran, ignoring the role of CFR members, such as former Secretary of State, Cyrus Vance, and current Secretary of State, Warren Christopher, who worked together to push Iran into chaos in 1978. As an aside, it is these same two Warmakers, with the aid of Tri-Lateral Commission member Lord David Owens, who later presided over the callous annihilation of Bosnia. (6)

Ms. Miller authored several books in 1996 including, God Has Ninety Nine Names, which has infuriated American Muslims by making personal, moral insinuations against their prophet. In writing her lavishly financed 574 page invective on Islam, Miller reserved particular attack on the impoverished Central African country of Sudan.

Not surprisingly, this coincides with the UN's demand for stepped up peacekeeping in Sudan, a certain precursor to a demand for American troops.

Looking back further in Warmaker publications, we find that a tone-setting story appeared in the 1986 Summer Foreign Affairs issue, Fundamentalist Muslims Between America and Russia.(8) The author was CFR member Daniel Pipes, Director of The Foreign Policy Research Institute in Philadelphia. Pipes' story sets the background for the attempt to establish the fundamentalist label as a dangerous and militant one, and a potential world war enemy. Unlike Miller, Pipes was more cautious in discriminating between violent and law abiding Muslims; however, he applies the fundamentalist label liberally. Pipes, a smooth talking trend setter, explained to the establishment audience of Foreign Affairs why Islam should be the next US enemy, to replace the Soviet Union in that role.

Pipes correctly predicted the USSR would fail; he then rationalized why Islam is likely to become an organized enemy of the US Pipes contended that Fundamentalist Islam will become an adversary because "America presents the greater (than the USSR) obstacle to Islamic Law."

Pipes showed considerable concern about the potential hostile actions of the 50 million Muslims within the USSR toward centralized communist government, and he clearly stated he was on the Soviet side. He warned that "in the case of fundamentalist Muslims opposing governments allied with the Soviet Union, the US is naturally tempted to provide aid to the fundamentalists." Pipes cautioned this would be a mistake, as it would" make them (Islam) an alternative to communism". He calls for "strict limitations to any aid to be given to Fundamentalist Muslims," even when they are trying to escape the old USSR system.

Pipes, a leading CFR spokesman, presented this thesis in 1986, five years before the USSR collapsed and independence minded Muslim countries began to seek their freedom. Pipes announces that more help could be given to Afghanistan's Mujahaddin if fundamentalists were not involved. Pipes, writing for the CFR, makes it clear that the CFR deliberately campaigned to delay aid for Afghanistan in its bloody war to reject the Russian invasion.

Pipes also wrote a feature article in the October 30, 1992, Wall Street Journal, with the racist title, Fundamental Questions About Muslims. Imagine the outcry that would result if a racist article entitled, "Fundamental Questions About Catholics, American Indians, Jews, or Blacks --" was published by the Wall Street Journal! Yet, this kind of inflammatory journalism has become an everyday event in the lives of American Muslims, several million of whom are citizens of the USA. The effect of this propaganda on American Muslims will be treated at a later date.

The current guru of Muslim-baiters is Steven Emerson, author of Jihad in America, a program produced by PBS with taxpayer money. Jihad may be the most vehemently racial film ever produced in the USA; nevertheless, it has been aired on Frontline and other network specials.

Emerson's statements are persuasive in their passion, but are equally striking in the lack of any substantial, verifiable evidence. Nevertheless, Emerson is promoted constantly in the establishment media. Typical of Emerson's disregard for the truth, on April 19, 1995 he appeared as a "terrorism expert" on CBS News, repeatedly blaming Middle Easterners for the Oklahoma City bombing. Emerson revealed shallowness of his logic with the statement, "This (the bombing) was done with the intent to cause as many casualties as possible. That is a Middle Eastern trait." Later, Emerson testified before the Senate and helped President Clinton force through the infamous terrorism bill, which he testified was needed to control "Islamic Terrorists, Muslim Fundamentalists and Islamic Militants." The Nation stated on May 15, 1995 that Emerson, "for the first 48 hours (after the bombing) was a fixture on radio and TV; waging Jihad on Islam."

Emerson is considered by Islamic journalists to be a spokesman for the Israeli lobby in America. There seems to be some merit to this conclusion. Writing for The Institute of World Jewish Congress, Emerson states, "Fundamentalist Islamic terrorism represents one of the most lethal threats to the stability of Western society.

Unfortunately, neither Western policy makers nor their constituents have fully grasped the implications of the fact that militant Muslim fundamentalists have organized extensive infrastructures particularly in the United States, taking advantage of American democracy and exploiting its freedoms." Emerson also joins the attacks on Sudan and calls for military action by the West.

In his editorial for The Virtual Jerusalem Homepage, an Israeli information front on the Internet, Emerson states, "Militant fundamentalism is on the rise throughout the Muslim world, as well as in Islamic communities in the west. Sudan is already firmly in its grip and Algeria and Egypt are directly threatened. Unless the West takes action to rein in this menace it could find itself the victim of extremist violence on a level hitherto unimaginable."

Emerson clearly wants the "West" to attack someone, preferably Sudan. Again, a recurring Warmaker target is an impoverished, third world Islamic state.

Journalist Jane Hunter, writing in Extra, October/November 1992, keenly observed the careful crafting of Emerson's media power image, "There are thousands of ex-grinders in journalism, pushing tantalizing stories with few verifiable facts. Most collect rejection slips, but Steven Emerson finds one respectable media outlet after another for his work, which is sometimes nimble in its treatment of facts, often credulous of intelligence sources, and almost invariably supportive of the Israeli government."

The power elite media attack on Islam is not without its effect on American Muslims. The Council on American Islamic Relations has released a report entitled, The Price of Ignorance, detailing some 300 incidents of anti-Muslim harassment, discrimination and actual violence that have occurred in the past year. One such incident details a Muslim family in Oklahoma City attacked by a neighborhood mob after the erroneous reports of Islamic involvement in the Oklahoma City bombing with one reported death of an unborn child. One mosque in the city was also damaged, but no apologies were ever made to innocent "Middle Easterners" when the Oklahoma City bombers turned out to be the work of Midwesterners.

MAKING WAR

The United Nations "Peacekeeping forces" are occupying 10 or more countries in which Muslims are either believed to control the government or have massive population numbers, as in Tajikistan and Kashmir. The UN has a stated plan to occupy 21 additional "trouble spots", according to the CIA's The World Peacekeeping Operations Report, 1994.9 Several trouble spot countries have already suffered UN invasion since the 1994 report, including Somalia, Haiti, and not surprisingly, Sudan.

Again, a majority of these target shave Muslim majorities or a strong or active Muslim political contingent. A list of UN Peacekeeping Operations, with Muslim dominated countries in italics, are: Cyprus, Croatia, El Salvador, Angola, Somalia, Sudan, Liberia, Eritrea (near Ethiopia), South Odessa (Georgia), Nagonro-Karabakh, Abkahazia, Sinai, Rwanda, Cambodia, Jerusalem, Western Sahara, Mozambique, Lebanon, Republic of South Africa (proposed mandate), Bosnia-Herzegovina, Haiti, Moldovia, Tajikistan, Golan Heights, Kashmir, Kuwait, Sri Lanka, Solomon Islands, and Liberia.

The death toll in UN Peacekeeping are as already runs into the millions. The first UN Peacekeeping force landed in Palestine in 1948, it has never departed from Palestine, and few have ever ended. Counted in the sacrifice of human lives a UN Peacekeeping site is probably the most dangerous place to live on the face of the globe. As an example, 118 Lebanese civilians were killed on April 19, 1996, inside a United Nations compound where they had taken shelter. An Israeli drone aircraft directed the pinpoint shelling of the compound by the Israeli Army.

Other peacekeeping operations are proposed where Muslim led independence movements are challenging former USSR leaders. These include Georgia and Tajikistan, but for some reason Chechnya was not included.

As CFR Member Pipes pronounced, several former USSR states are now seeking freedom. In effect the Warmakers are using the UN to maintain status quo in these freedom seeking countries. Americans are supposed to be unconcerned because those dead are "radical Muslim fundamentalists". What has become of the American principle of supporting freedom movements world wide? A detailed account of UN Peacekeeping can be found in the WHTT, 1996 Edition II, Nov., 96.

THE POISON PEN

The Warmakers' writings tell us they expect retribution from the Muslims. Yossef Bodansky authored Iran's Springboard to Europe, September 3, 1992, Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, part of House Republican Research Committee, chaired by Congressman Bill McCollum and Dana Rohrabacher.10 This official report broad brushed Muslims everywhere as terrorists.

Curt Lohbeck, author of Holy War Unholy Victory, identified Bodansky as a weapons salesman for the State of Israel in the mid 1980s.11 Bodansky was introduced to the Afghani resistance leaders by Richard Perle. Judging from Lohbeck's account of the matter Bodansky probably was not an American citizen at that time. He was supposedly a consultant to the State Department, where his mentor was CFR member and Assistant Secretary of State Richard Perle. Whether or not Bodansky later obtained his influential job on the House Republican Research Committee through the Perle's connection is speculative.

But Bodansky clearly used his position on the House Committee to generate inflammatory research reports on official stationery. He also authored a book called, Target America, Terrorism in the US. This is a frightening, but totally unverifiable attack on American Muslims.

Conservative Congressman Rohrabacher abruptly resigned as Co-Chairman of the committee after the first Bodansky committee report, Iran's Springboard to Europe, was issued in September 1992. Rohrabacher's name was thereafter withdrawn from the letterhead, which contained the names of some 12 other Republican Congressmen. Rohrabacher has failed to answer written inquires, a veteran aid at his office (who asked to remain anonymous) confirmed that the congressman was outraged by Bodansky's untruths on letter head stationery. Not one of the other twelve congressmen acknowledged written inquiries.

Among the more outrageous statements made in the Committee report authored by Bodansky was the following generality: "The Muslims consider democracy as the worst scourge the west has inflicted on Muslim society in order to destroy it from the inside and annihilate its ancestral values, and are therefore determined to strike at the core--the Muslim communities demand to retain all aspects of Islamic Law, including blood vengeance and killing of females." An Executive Summary of the report, from which the above quote is taken, is available from WHTT.

Unfortunately, the full report is unavailable. What American Muslim would not be rightly outraged by such a report on Congressional stationery. It is no surprise that Congressman McCollum of Florida, who wrote a preface for Bodansky's book, has now suppressed and made the reports of his own committee confidential. (11)

Bodansky's most inflammatory committee report may be Islam and the Church, January 16, 1994. Bodansky conveniently lumps all "Christian" denominations together into what he calls "The Church "which he claims Islam is attempting to annihilate.12 He, like other establishment propagandists, does not fail to attack Sudan (also without hard evidence) as a slave state that crucifies "Christians".

The findings of the report have been widely leaked and are quoted in certain "Christian" fund raising organizations in the US and Europe. One of many is London based Christian Solidarity International, Rev. Steven L. Snyder, President, which bases repetitive fund raising appeals in the US on such abuses as the alleged crucifixion of Christians in the Sudan. CSI targets American churchgoers. The authority often quoted is none other than Bodansky's committee. The impoverished nation of Sudan is a favoritetarget, as Bodansky plays Warmaker propaganda in perfect harmony with his cohorts. Copies of this rare report, also repressed by the Committee, is available from WHTT.

Bodansky apparently parted company with the Congressional Study Group in 1996. He has since linked up with The Freeman Center, in Houston Texas, where Bodansky is listed as "International Terrorism Expert".

Bernard J. Shapiro, President of Freeman states, "I founded the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies in order to create a powerful voice to arouse the Jewish community to the action necessary to frustrate the evil designs of the enemies of Israel. I need your help to accomplish this mission (Internet Freeman Home Page)." Bodansky's resume with Freeman lists him as a former State Department consultant, but curiously no mention is made of working for the Congressional Republican Study Group.

With all this hate baiting some acts of terrorist backlash should not surprise anyone, but the number of actual incidents against Americans has been minute compared to drive by shootings on the LA or Phoenix streets. When Muslim terrorism fails to materialize, the Warmakers have shown every willingness to manufacture, encourage, or even stage events. Examples are the Oklahoma city blast, where the press blamed Islam, knowing non-Islamics had done it; the World Trade Center Blast, where the FBI maintained a one million dollar informant, entrapped and encouraged the Islamic bombers to carry out the act and may well have provided the money to buy the explosives. Much of this was thoroughly documented in the trial records of Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, who was himself tried of conspiracy to blow up the UN Building and for planning the overthrow of the President of Egypt-- in an American court no less.

Finally, there was the alleged plot to kill former President George Bush in Kuwait in 1993, which was completely forgotten after President Clinton used the story as an excuse to fire 23 Cruise missiles on civilian neighborhoods in Baghdad, killing eight civilians and unknown numbers of military personnel two years after the Gulf War had ended. The only lasting result of this raid was more unnecessary hatred toward Americans.

TIME TO LOGGER THE WAGONS

The guerrilla war on board the Star Ship Enterprise is pale and benign compared to the drama being played out on board the good ship USA. If The Warmakers are allowed to have their way, the unholy UN wars will ultimately be spread to the US.

The reason Christians must take responsibility to stop the Warmakers' attack on Muslim fundamentalism is that most Christians are fundamentalists, too. The taking of innocent life is an abomination under God's law, whether that be the life of unborn children or innocent life anywhere on the globe. American Christians can not shirk from the fact that responsibility falls upon the US citizen for the acts of our leaders. This is the essence of a republican form of government. That a child is born of Muslim parents is the vilest of excuses for taking his life.

God's abomination of the shedding of innocent blood does not stop with children. Thus far it would be hard to find one person killed in any of the UN wars who represented a direct threat to Americans.

Imagine, if you can, a UN Force sent here to disarm American Muslims. According to the American Muslim Council The American Muslim population is estimated at five million. Of that number 42% are listed as African Americans, 12.4% Arab and 24.4% South Asian. Your author is firmly convinced most traditional or fundamentalist American Muslims are productive and hardworking, and that drugs, gang activity and street crime are almost unknown, as confirmed by the notable lack of Islamic names on the published police blotters.

But there is a practical and selfish reason to oppose the Warmakers. The ultimate aim of the coordinated Muslim hate baiting can only be an excuse for some future peacekeeping action that will directly affect Americans. If the blood persecution continues in distant third world countries like Iraq and Sudan, surely we will witness the UN on American soil on pretext of the pursuit of international terrorists on our shores.

The certain result would be the abrogation of our individual sovereignty. Suspension of constitutional rights, including gun confiscation, could easily be carried out by UN peacekeepers, ostensibly to control the non-existent threat of "Muslim Fundamentalists." Who would resist an international treaty enforced by the United Nations? Has anyone resisted the World Court trials of Serbian and Bosnian "war criminals"? One Serb has already been sentenced in The Hague to 10 years in an unnamed prison.

If and when fundamentalist Christians finally decide to stand up for the rights of their Muslim neighbors, they too may also become a persecuted class, as German Christians were persecuted for acting out their faith in defense of other persecuted classes. A tissue here is our individual sovereignty as American citizens. That means our lives are at stake. If Warmakers would condemn a half million Iraqis, Kurds, Bosnians, Palestinians, or Iranians to slow death, why would they think twice of doing the same to Americans.

Exposure of the Warmakers' acts is the only way of averting continued human tragedy. Men of fundamental Godly principles of all faiths must put aside establishment-fostered differences and logger the wagons against evil. Then, unlike the pioneers of old, they must line up on the outside of the circle and face inward; for the threat is from anti-religious Warmakers in our very midst.

We face a marauding and totally vile force from within which has already penetrated our defenses. Not only should these internationalist Warmaker killers be exposed, but they should not be allowed to escape. It is Scriptural, legal, logical and necessary that they be prosecuted and tried for their crimes.

An understanding of the Warmaker propaganda campaign that engulfs us is a necessary starting point for any such reversal. We encourage the circulation of this report as widely as possible.

1 C E Carlson, America's First War of Aggression, WHTT Newsletter Edition I, October 1996

2 Justin Raimondo, Colin Powell and the Power Elite. Autobiography, inventory of Council on Foreign Relations and the Tri-Lateral Commission members, including appointees,

3 C E Carlson, Attacking Islam, The New American, March 21, 1996

4 Leonard C. Lewan, Report from Iron Mountain on the Possibility and Desirability of Peace, The Dial Press Inc., 1967 67-27553

5 William Jasper, "The Mid-East Peace Charade," The New American, October 18, 1993

6 C E Carlson, Understanding the Internationalist's Triangle, The United Nations, Foreign Aid and Terrorism, WHTT Newsletter, Edition II, November 1996.

7 Judith Miller, "Is Islam A Threat?", Foreign Affairs, Spring 1993, Council On Foreign Relations.

8 Daniel Pipes, "Fundamentalist Muslims Between America and Russia," Foreign Affairs, Summer 1986, Council on Foreign Relations.

9 Frederick H. Fleitz, World Peacekeeping Operations, 1993, Directorate of Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency, EUR 92-10027, by , available from National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161 703- 487-4650 reports were discontinued in 1995. List of countries present or proposed.

10 Yossef Bodansky, Iran, Executive Summary, Springboard to Europe, September 3, 1993, report by the Task Force on Terrorism on Unconventional Warfare, Chief of Staff chaired by Congressman Bill McCollum and Dana Rohrabacher. Mr. Bodansky is author of Target America: Terrorism In the US.

11 Kurt Lohbeck, Holy War Unholy Victory, Regnery 1993, page 125 Bodansky/Perle

12 Bodansky, Committee report January 19, 1994, Islam against The Church

The Stock Market: Boom or Bubble?

Neil Nobel, economic writer and Vice President of Investments with Paine Webber Securities, addressed the Arizona Business Briefing on November 18, Speaking on The Stock Market, Boom or Bubble. Neil started with a disclaimer indicating that these were his own views, not necessarily those of Paine Webber or most Wall Streeters, where the security analysts are uniformly optimistic about the outlook for the stock market.

Mr. Nobel started by looking at historic valuation of the market using the tools perfected by Professors Graham and Dodd. On the basis of price to dividend, and price to book value, this is the most expensive market in the 20^th century.

On a price to earnings basis (P/E ratio), the market is expensive. Neil then noted that earnings have been inflated by down sizing, and short term factors such as depreciation, lower corporate taxes, and especially, lower interest rates. He quoted Dr. Martin Barnes of the Bank Credit Analyst, a well known market service that evaluated the credit worthiness of commercial banks, indicating that earnings have been much weaker than they appear to be. If true, it means the P/E ratio is much higher than it shows and the market much more expensive.

Showing several charts, Mr. Nobel keyed on one which reflected how far the market, based on the Dow Jones Industrial Average, could decline just to get back to normal,' not bear market, pricing. The risk appeared to be between 1500 and 4000 points, depending on which indicator is used.

The bull market people, Mr. Nobel noted, say the old indicators are no longer valid. As such, many Wall Street analysts do not feel at all worried about the market and feel it is destined to go higher. This would require taking the position that conditions are now so different, that all the old indicators of value should be discarded. Bulls say it is a new era of rapid technological change, free trade, and end of Communism, and Baby Boomers saving for retirement. He was skeptical of all the above so-called arguments.

He pointed out that many non-market measures of value also showed gross over-valuation. Specifically, the price of stocks relative to housing, to real wages, to gold, to oil; all said the same things as the Graham and Dodd ratios, i.e. the market is indeed over valued.

He further suggested that the market became detached from underlying growth and productivity some time ago and is taking on the characteristics of the classic "bubble." He quoted Charles Kindleberger of MIT, an eminent historian of economic circles, who also believes the current market is a bubble. If true, then investors have to proceed with great caution because a break could develop at any time.

Mr. Nobel feels the cause of this bubble is mainly government manipulation of interest rates, driving them down well below the natural rate (the rate dictated by real demand for credit and real available savings). He pointed out the bubble was inflated in two phases. First, the 24 consecutive cuts in rates between 1989 and 1992, as the Federal Reserve System (FED) moved to shore up the crumbling banking system. Second, the huge foreign buying of our bonds, with those levels practically doubling in just the past 20 months. The governments monazite a great deal of their own debt and force FED money into the financial markets (stocks and bonds) and little got into the real economy. This has inflated stock prices, but has done little to spur real economic growth. The result is a market based on easy credit and government manipulation that is detached from underlying reality. Mr. Nobel said he had no idea how long such a levitation can continue and admitted it has lasted several years longer than he himself had thought possible.

One of the questions posed by Mr. Nobel was: "Why have so many conservatives been wrong about this market? He said they underestimated the power of the FED and other central banks to cooperate in blowing up the market.

He also said that cultural and moral decline that has so upset conservatives made them cranky and unable mentally to see why the market should do so well when the country seems to be in decline. He did add that culture does matter to the markets, but not in the short term. It will take a while for the moral decay to rot the underpinnings of the market.

Finally, according to Mr. Nobel, the biggest short term threat is deflation and an economic slow down. The poor action of gold and other commodities, and the recent breakout in bonds, appears to suggest the economy is starting to contract and that this poses a threat to stocks because of disappointing earnings. We will be watching with interest, Neil.