The politics of greed is what keeps this world wrapped in corruption. If you want to stick around for a while longer, I suggest you educate yourself and try to do something constructive to help save what little good, honesty, and trust we have left.

A motto for us old vets: Take one with you!

Use your Go Back and Go Forward commands to get to where you were in a previous file.

Go to Home

Highest Go To numbers are the latest Links of all coruption pages.


Go to 12433
http://www.gaiaonline.com/forum/politics/bush-seeks-to-pardom-himself-from-commiting-war-crimes/t.37013551/

::Bush seeks to pardom himself from commiting war crimes!
Quote:
The ''pardon'' is buried in Bush's proposed legislation to create a new kind of military tribunal for cases involving top al-Qaida operatives. The ''pardon'' provision has nothing to do with the tribunals. Instead, it guts the War Crimes Act of 1996, a federal law that makes it a crime, in some cases punishable by death, to mistreat detainees in violation of the Geneva Conventions and makes the new, weaker terms of the War Crimes Act retroactive to 9/11.

Press accounts of the provision have described it as providing immunity for CIA interrogators. But its terms cover the president and other top officials because the act applies to any U.S. national.


It's not a pardon, and the author of this article knew it. It's only a weakening of the War Crimes Act, then made retroactive.

In other words, it means that Interrogators never committed a crime in the first place. No Pardon necessary. Further, this was a piece of legislation, not an executive order... which means that this would be an act of Congress, not the President.

Spin spin spin

Quote:
Thirty-two years ago, President Gerald Ford created a political firestorm by pardoning former President Richard Nixon of all crimes he may have committed in Watergate -- and lost his election as a result. Now, President Bush, to avoid a similar public outcry, is quietly trying to pardon himself of any crimes connected with the torture and mistreatment of U.S. detainees.

The ''pardon'' is buried in Bush's proposed legislation to create a new kind of military tribunal for cases involving top al-Qaida operatives. The ''pardon'' provision has nothing to do with the tribunals. Instead, it guts the War Crimes Act of 1996, a federal law that makes it a crime, in some cases punishable by death, to mistreat detainees in violation of the Geneva Conventions and makes the new, weaker terms of the War Crimes Act retroactive to 9/11.

Press accounts of the provision have described it as providing immunity for CIA interrogators. But its terms cover the president and other top officials because the act applies to any U.S. national.

Avoiding prosecution under the War Crimes Act has been an obsession of this administration since shortly after 9/11. In a January 2002 memorandum to the president, then-White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales pointed out the problem of prosecution for detainee mistreatment under the War Crimes Act. He notes that given the vague language of the statute, no one could predict what future ''prosecutors and independent counsels'' might do if they decided to bring charges under the act. As an author of the 1978 special prosecutor statute, I know that independent counsels (who used to be called ''special prosecutors'' prior to the statute's reauthorization in 1994) aren't for low-level government officials such as CIA interrogators, but for the president and his Cabinet. It is clear that Gonzales was concerned about top administration officials.

Gonzales also understood that the specter of prosecution could hang over top administration officials involved in detainee mistreatment throughout their lives. Because there is no statute of limitations in cases where death resulted from the mistreatment, prosecutors far into the future, not appointed by Bush or beholden to him, would be making the decisions whether to prosecute.

To ''reduce the threat of domestic criminal prosecution under the War Crimes Act,'' Gonzales recommended that Bush not apply the Geneva Conventions to al-Qaida and the Taliban. Since the War Crimes Act carried out the Geneva Conventions, Gonzales reasoned that if the Conventions didn't apply, neither did the War Crimes Act. Bush implemented the recommendation on Feb. 7, 2002.

When the Supreme Court recently decided that the Conventions did apply to al-Qaida and Taliban detainees, the possibility of criminal liability for high-level administration officials reared its ugly head again.

What to do? The administration has apparently decided to secure immunity from prosecution through legislation. Under cover of the controversy involving the military tribunals and whether they could use hearsay or coerced evidence, the administration is trying to pardon itself, hoping that no one will notice. The urgent timetable has to do more than anything with the possibility that the next Congress may be controlled by Democrats, who will not permit such a provision to be adopted.

Creating immunity retroactively for violating the law sets a terrible precedent. The president takes an oath of office to uphold the Constitution; that document requires him to obey the laws, not violate them. A president who knowingly and deliberately violates U.S. criminal laws should not be able to use stealth tactics to immunize himself from liability, and Congress should not go along.

"EvilPappa"
Changing the law because you violated it doesn't suddenly make it legal, neither does dodging it..

There is no such thing as "dodging" a law. Further, Bush didn't change the law: Congress did.

And yes, that does suddenly make it legal.



Go to 12432
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080123/97602999.html
Russia remains 'haven' of stability amid global financial crisis
16:19 | 23/ 01/ 2008

DAVOS, January 23 (RIA Novosti) - Russia's finance minister said on Wednesday that Russia was a safe haven for investors and the country's economy remained stable amid slumping global stock markets.

World stock exchanges have seen heightened volatility in recent weeks following the financial turmoil provoked by the U.S. subprime mortgage crisis and fresh signs of a recession in the world's largest economy.

Speaking on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum that opened in the Swiss resort of Davos earlier in the day, Finance Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Alexei Kudrin said, "In the past few years Russia has managed to achieve economic stability piling up substantial international reserves, which play the role of an airbag. I believe Russia will soon be the focus of attention as a haven of stability."

The official said he had held talks with a number of international investors at the forum, who shared their plans to invest hundreds of millions of dollars in the Russian economy.

Kudrin also said that Russia could offer financial assistance to the international community to help calm plunging global stock markets.

"As a country with substantial reserves, Russia could help soothe the global crisis," the Russian minister said.

The largest U.S. banks said earlier they would seek to raise equity abroad to shore up their liquidity.

Russia's Stabilization Fund, set up to accrue surplus revenue from high world oil prices, stood at 3.85 trillion rubles ($157 billion) on January 1, 2008, compared to 2.35 trillion rubles ($89.1 billion) a year earlier.

The Russian Trading System (RTS) index gained 1.83% during Wednesday morning's trade to 2,003.65 points, regaining most of the losses sustained in the past two days when it plunged 7.38% from Friday's close to below 2,000 on Monday afternoon, and fell another 5.83% to below 1,900 points on Tuesday morning.

However, the index was given a boost by the United States Federal Reserve's decision to slash its interest rate by three quarters of a percentage point on Tuesday, an emergency move to avoid a U.S. economic recession.



Go to 12431
http://www.rense.com/politics6/assass.htm
Assassinations Of The
20th Century - Why?
By Sherman H. Skolnick
12-28-99

The 20th Century came to a close and those who procured political murders have not been heard from. Are there two sides to the story? If so, how far into the 21st Century will it take until we hear THEIR side articulated? And will the common people accept the explanations?

In the past, I have attended sizeable meetings of political assassination researchers. At the beginning, many of those present greeted me friendly-like, even shook hands with me. During the meetings I asked sticky questions. So, my so-called "friends" and "acquaintances" hooted me down, demanded that I be silenced by being thrown out of the covention hall. What was it that so offended them?

I asked questions about the financial explanation of political rub-outs. I wanted discussions of the economic forces FOR and AGAINST bloody deeds done. I dared, from an historical and intellectual stand-point, to ask if those who arranged political assassinations had any justification whatsoever? If so, what was it?

Those in attendance, concerned about their book and lecture contracts, suddenly looked upon me as an ENEMY. "Turn off your tape recorder, Sherman", they shouted. I came with a small audio recorder in which I plugged a "shotgun microphone", that could pick up discussions thirty feet away and more. What scared them so, that they wanted to grab my wheelchair and roll me forcefully out of the place? Was it my long-nose microphone which to tape I obviously pointed at them like a gun? I did ask my questions to the speakers in a polite voice.

At one meeting I asked Oliver Stone's chief researcher for his movie "JFK", whether the Rothschilds, friends of the Kennedy family, financed the 42 million dollar production. It ran in the Rothschild movie chain, Loew's. She glared at me. Later, when Oliver Stone himself showed up, she grabbed him by the arm, saying, "Don't talk to HIM!" Perhaps indulging me, because of my physical disability, Stone allowed me to point my mike at him as I asked a few questions and then she pulled him away.

HERE ARE SOME ITEMS NEEDED TO BE DISCUSSED:


If there were a well-educated populace to talk to, well-grounded in finance and history, and IF they would listen carefully, could those that were FOR political murder make a thoughtful, persuasive case?

Through their monopoly press, the Establishment brain-washes us daily to their point of view. On all kinds of subjects. Why could they not run documentaries setting forth THEIR JUSTIFICATION for preserving themselves through political murders? Because WE are too stupid to understand? Because it would endanger the "powers-that-be"? What? Why? And they have to keep telling us each time, a "lone nut", a "lone assassin" did it?


THE MURDER OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY, 1963: He was interfering with the Oil Cartel. He wanted to take away the IRS trick favoring them, the oil depletion allowance. He wanted REAL MONEY, not toilet paper from the Federal Reserve, a PRIVATE money ship masquerading as the U.S. Government central bank. A handful of ruling families own the Fed and profit from their issuance of Federal Reserve note "money" disguised as the "U.S. Dollar". Contrary to the U.S.Constitution, the Federal Reserve charges interest on their paper money issuance, benefitting certain ruling families.


Kennedy was the first Catholic President of the U.S. Although labeling himself as only nominally a Catholic, he was perceived as being under the thumb of the Vatican. He violated Church Canon Law, however, by going along with the attack upon ANOTHER Catholic country, namely, Cuba. Some later explained JFK was tricked into the aborted invasion at the Bay of Pigs. Did his sin justify murder BY THE CHURCH?

The Military Brass perceived him as soft on the Soviets, as a communist-sympathizer. Those who commit treason, so the logic goes, like JFK, are to be shot, right? Others now claim Kennedy was interfering with the future of the State of Israel, justifying them in snuffing him out. The book "Final Judgment" by Michael Collins Piper lays out a purported circumstantial case Israel was implicated in the murder of JFK. The book rejects, out of hand, what others claim, however, that Nazi war criminals were involved.[As documented by the late assassination researcher, Mae Brussell.] And the book does not explain how the U.S. Secret Service, the FBI, and the CIA, being the Protestant/Catholic Establishment,---how and why these espionage entities could have covered up all this FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE JEWS.

JFK wanted to stop the war in South-East Asia, thus permitting, supposedly, the Soviet expansion to the Philippines and even to Australia, a former British prison colony. Kennedy was letting Dr. King rile up the country on racial issues. BUT OVERLOOKED: that JFK set loose in the U.S. that the era of the common man had arrived. A dangerous psychology, directly confronting the ruling families. And the ruling elite have a right, do they not, to assert their position by wiping out JFK? Fair is fair, right?

How to deal with JFK? Make an example of him. In front of numerous witnesses, blow out his brains in an open car. The media, on orders, will trumpet, a "lone assassin did it!". And then, the lone assassin is himself murdered. Thereafter, America will continue to "prosper" with the aid of the oil monopoly. Don't oil developers have a right to get rich? Old man Rockefeller, founder of the infamous Standard Oil Trust, was allowed to murder competitors, right?


Would we listen carefully to spokespersons of these interests? Why and how it was necessary, for the "public good", to blow away JFK? So that the U.S. could continue as a stable society.[Some details about the JFK murder are in the book "Farewell America" by James Hepburn. A best-seller in Europe, until recently it was not allowed to be sold by bookstores in the U.S. Censorship. I and one other person were the only ones in the 1970s to get the book into the U.S. I gave them away for small donations, at College lectures. Alas, no copies are available anymore through us.]

MURDER OF MALCOLM X, 1965: The makers and shakers of America began to perceive him an an objectional Black Messiah, steering 11-1/2 per cent of America against the rest. He had a way of pointing with his finger which seemed to scare some folks. While under total surveillance of the American CIA, he traveled to Africa and the Moslem world, urging unity among the people of color there and in the U.S. Malcolm had a blunt way of confronting the American Establishment with the ways they enriched themselves by exploiting people of color. A growing number of Afro-Americans were listening.

Preparing to start a speech in New York, Malcolm was gunned down at the meeting. The black man who bent down to examine him was actually part of a special New York secret police unit. Lone nuts were framed into prison.


America's secret political police have their ways of stopping loud-mouths. FBI, IRS, CIA-trained local police. If a host of near-violent dirty tricks does not work, well, then violence is justified. To preserve the stability of society and finance, to continue the necessary fairy tale of Constitutional rights for everyone. The White Anglo-Saxon Protestants are the majority, are they not? And from THEIR standpoint, are they not entitled to prevail against all dangerous challengers? The apparent motto against smart mouths, "Buy them or bleed them". [See my story about the reported role of Rev. Jesse Jackson in the murder of Dr. King.]

THE MURDER OF DR.MARTIN LUTHER KING, Jr.: The heads of America's secret political police, the FBI and the CIA, perceived Dr. King as a Black Messiah. Dangerous to stable society and set to make impossible demands upon the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant majority.

In their view, Dr. King was interfering with U.S. Foreign Policy. In 1967, a year before they snuffed him out, Dr. King gave a speech. He announced he intended to go to Viet Nam to tell Black GIs they should not be there murdering yellow-skinned people in someone else's civil war. In other words, inciting a black soldiers mutiny.


At that time, although only 11-1/2 per cent of the U.S. population, the blacks constituted 26 per cent of the American military in S.E. Asia and a similarly large per centage of the casualties. The view of the "powers-that-be" was to deal with the rising expectations of American blacks, "Send the blacks to the Asian jungles to die, so they don't come back". Thus eliminating the need of "equal rights", "college enrollments for blacks" and such. Besides, the head of America's Gestapo, the FBI, J. Edgar Hoover, repeatedly falsely claimed Dr. King was a Communist, thus justifying he be murdered as a subversive.

Rev. Jesse Jackson, a reputed FBI stool pigeon all his adult life, was reportedly chosen BY THE FBI to replace Dr. King BEFORE THE FBI MURDERED KING. This choice made, according to reportedly suppressed records of the House Subcommittee on Assassinations, 1975-76. [See my story about The Murder of Dr. King, Unspoken details, and the reported role of Rev.Jesse Jackson.]

As to the secret military team as well as civilian assassins who targeted Dr. King on that fatal day in April, 1968---see the book, "Orders to Kill" by Stephen F. Pepper. The book became the basis for the Memphis jury verdict in 1999, that there WAS a conspiracy to assassinate Dr. King.

But the question remains: could those in favor of the murder, make out a persuasive case that it was necessary for the stablity of the U.S.and to preserve U.S. foreign policy and prevent a possible mutiny by black soldiers?


MURDER OF ROBERT F. KENNEDY, 1968: He had a way of charming the underdogs of America, endangering the ruling elite. In 1967, he set off a scandal by identifying ruling families aiding dirty tricks of the American CIA through Foundation fronts. [See New York Times Index for 1967, summarizing the CIA Foundation mess. We followed up on that showing such foundations financed provocateurs to try to discredit the Viet Nam Peace Movement. Hillary Rodham Clinton became the board chairman of such a Foundation in 1990, the New World Foundation.]


Although silent about the murder of his brother John(1963), and the attempted murder by a sabotage plane crash of brother Teddy (1964), Bobby in his heart of hearts obviously vowed revenge. A natural feeling. If elected President, Bobby would get to the bottom of those who bloodied his family. A few moments after he won the crucial California Presidential Primary, June, 1968, Bobby was gunned down. The press whores, on signal proclaimed a "lone nut did it, Sirhan Sirhan". Yet the local coroner later testified the fatal bullets were shot a few inches away from Bobby's head. Sirhan was never closer than 8 feet. The documentary movie "The Second Gun" by Theodore Charach, an eyewitness, was suppressed and bottled up for many years.

[Among the corrupt, CIA-trained Los Angeles police that covered up the RFK murder, were some of the same ones that framed O.J. Simpson for a double murder.]

The arrangers of an assassination researcher convention, in Chicago, 1993, did two things that greatly puzzled me:

[1] They said they are inviting the mass media to a press conference. I said I would right there at the convention confront the press fakers to their face with their lies about "lone assassin". "If you do that, Sherman, I intend to call the police and have you arrested", so threatened the marketing expert who came up with big bucks to arrange that convention and supervise it. I wanted to attend the rest of the meeting, so I relented. I asked myself repeatedly, "Who ARE these people with the deep pockets arranging these assassination research conventions? Are they performing a test, to see if the public is really interested in all this?"

And [2] They told me to inform my friend, Theodore Charach (His movie "The Second Gun"), that if he shows up for the meetings, he will be arrested. I was told, "Charach talks too loud". I protested in vain, "He has an interesting documentary to show". The blunt reply from the convention boss, "I repeat, Sherman, if you arrange to have Charach come here, you and he will both be arrested."

I got into big trouble when I joined with another convention participant and began investigating who set up the assassination research convention in Chicago.

So, somewhere in the 21st Century, are those who procured these political murders, going to make a persuasive case that the bloody deeds were essential to the survival of the United States as a stable society? And would the common people somehow be brainwashed into accepting these justifications?

As to the sabotaged plane crash used to murder John F. Kennedy, Jr., see my four part series: "What Happened to America's Golden Boy" and study the establishment rationale for it.



Go to 12430
http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=110
PUTIN’S PLAN TO FOIL THE JEWS
By Brother Nathanael Kapner - Copyright © 2008
All Articles May Be Reproduced Only With Authorship of Br Nathanael Kapner
& Link To Real Jew News
(Plagiarists Like “Roy Roger” Take Notice!)

THE JEWS OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER have met their match in Russia’s President Vladimir Putin.

Richard Holbrooke, a Jew who changed his name from “Richard Moos,” demanded in his 11-25-07 Washington Post article that “the Kosovo Muslims should declare independence from Serbia and ignore a Russian threat.”
(Back To The Brink, Richard Holbrooke)

But the Jew Holbrooke got the heebie-jeebies one week later when he saw that Putin could care less about his demands. For in the Jew-run Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) Holbrooke gave an interview with Bernard Gwertzman, saying: “There is a chance that Serbia could send troops into Kosovo sparking a crises.”
See: “Kosovo Independence Could Spark Crisis” Here





HOW PUTIN IS FOILING THE JEWS

The New World Order Jews like Richard “Moos” Holbrooke want to establish a One World Government. These Jews don’t like upstarts such as Serbia who get in their way. For Serbia (and Russia!) have made it clear that they will not accept a Muslim takeover of Kosovo. For an independent Kosovo will give the European Union and their Jewish bank, the House of Rothschild, control of the Balkans.

So what does the mastermind Vladimir Putin do? He decides to partner with Greek Prime Minister, Costas Karamanlis, to build a Gazprom pipeline through Serbia, into Kosovo, and ending up in Greece - to supply the EU with much-need oil! Ha ha ha!

Here is an excerpt from “Moscow Exploiting Kosovo:”

— “The European Union looks like a bystander to Russia’s capture of energy markets and infrastructure in EU territory. Moscow is using an opening through Serbia, a country that Russia has tempted into isolation from the West by encouraging Serbian nationalism over Kosovo. Putin will meet with Serbia’s president, Boris Tadic, on January 18, 2008 for the signing of an agreement on a gas pipeline project that also involves Greece.” —
See Article: Here





VLADIMIR PUTIN & THE REVIVAL OF CHRISTIANITY

ON JANUARY 14 2008 Russian President Vladimir Putin made a statement at an Orthodox Christian prayer ceremony that will make the Jews shake in their shpilkies (guts): “The Russian government is indebted to the Russian Orthodox Church and will facilitate the revival of religion in Russia.”
See: “State Will Repay Debt To Russian Orthodox Church” Here

While George W Bush is lighting Hanukkah candles in the White House and allowing Jew Cabinet Members like Michael Mukasey to put up mammoth Hanukkah Menorahs on the White House Lawn, Russian President Vladimir Putin is lighting Christian candles in Orthodox Christian churches! Bravo!

Jews fear strong Christian political leaders like Vladimir Putin who take a stand for Christianity. Methinks that the year 2008 is going to be the beginning of not only pie in the face of the New World Order Jews, but also a backlash against the Jewification of the Western World. And the backlash has begun with Vladimir Putin!


CLICK: Real Jew News @
Go to 12429
http://www.realjewnews.com/



Go to 12428
http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=106
JEW CHERTOFF’S SUBVERSIVE
NORTH AMERICAN UNION PLAN
By Brother Nathanael Kapner - Copyright © 2008
All Articles May Be Reproduced Only With Authorship & Link To Real Jew News
(Plagiarists Like “Roy Roger” Take Notice!)

NOT ONLY DO WE HAVE THE JEW MICHAEL CHERTOFF POLICING our nation as Secretary and chief of US Homeland Security, he wants to destroy our nation’s sovereignty as well. Why? Because Jews wish to destroy America’s Christian memory.

America’s memory is a Christian heritage which Jews despise. A North American Union, (by which the US, Mexico, and Canada, will unite as a sovereign unit), will eradicate America’s Christian memory. This will make the Jews very happy. And the Jew Michael Chertoff is the leading instigator of the Anti-Christian North American Union.


ABOUT THE JEW MICHAEL CHERTOFF

November 28 1953: Michael Chertoff is born in NJ of Rabbi Gershon Chertoff and Israeli-citizen mother, Livia Eisen, who worked for Israel’s El Al airlines. Michael Chertoff’s birth certificate registers him as a dual-citizen of Israel and USA.
See: “Dual Citizenship — Loyal to Whom?” Click Here

1953-1970: Under his father’s tutelage, Chertoff is drilled in Zionist ideology and the Talmud. The Talmud teaches hatred towards Christians. The Talmud blasphemes Jesus Christ. The Talmud teaches that Christianity is idolatry.
See: “Judaism’s Strange Gods” Here

June 12 1988: Chertoff marries Jew Meryl Justin, co-chair of the Anti-Defamation League’s (ADL) civil rights committee. His two children attend Jewish private schools.

June 1978: After graduating Harvard Law School, Chertoff begins his career in Jewish law firms and later in public service.

June 1978: Chertoff is instrumental figure in drafting the USA Patriot Act.

May 24 2001: Chertoff appointed by President Bush as head of Criminal Division of the Justice Department’s US Attorney-General Office.

~ In this position Chertoff is chief-architect of Bush’s War on Terrorism. Chertoff concocts an Al Quaida connection with fugitive Osama Bin Laden directing 9-11 activities from a cave in Afghanistan. Chertoff does this to divert focus on Israel’s complicity in the World Trade Center bombing.

February 15 2005: Sworn in as Secretary of US Homeland Security, no one is aware that Chertoff has dual citizenship in Israel and USA. Chertoff immediately goes to work on implementing the Anti-Christian North American Union.

August 27 2007: Chertoff speaks before the International Association of the Chiefs of Police. He tells them: “We now have a capability of potential terrorists to radicalize themselves over the Internet. They never have to go to a terrorist training camp. These are the kind of terrorists that we may not be able to detect with spies and satellites.”
See> “Chertoff: ‘Radical Ideologies’ Threaten Internet” Here





JEW CHERTOFF’S ROLE IN 9-11 WORLD TRADE CENTER BOMBINGS

As head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, Chertoff allowed suspected Israeli terrorists to return to Israel:

# September 11 2001: Israeli suspects working for the phony moving company, Urban Moving Systems from Weehawken, N.J., are caught driving moving vans near the World Trade Center in NY City which tested positive for explosives.

# September 11 2001: One group of 5 Israelis of Urban Moving Systems are seen on the roof of a nearby building videotaping and celebrating the destruction of the World Trade Center.

# September 11 2001: A “Dominic Suter” (fake name) the owner of Urban Moving Systems, which was found to be a Mossad front company, flees to Israel with Michael Chertoff’s aid. This was right after FBI agents requested a second interview.

# September 21 2001: Michael Chertoff arranges for the group of 5 Israeli workers, (Mossad agents), of Urban Moving Systems, to be returned to Israel on “visa violations.”





JEW CHERTOFF’S NORTH AMERICAN UNION PLAN

March 23 2005: Heads of government Vincente Fox (Mexico), George W. Bush (USA), and Paul Martin (Canada), launch the North American Partnership at a meeting in Waco, Texas. Their stated goal is for “a safer, more prosperous North America.” Chertoff, as Secretary of US Homeland Security, was given full access to the meeting’s proceedings and minutes.

September 22 2005: Chertoff implements the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP). The SPP is designed “to promote security and business partnerships between the North American nations.” Critics maintained that the SPP partnership was merely a cover to advance a North American Union which would compromise U.S. sovereignty.
See: “North American Union: Chertoff Implementation” Here

December 2005: A Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) document, called “Building a North American Community,” calls for North American integration with “open borders between Mexico, US, and Canada, for the movement of goods and people.” The SPP Web Site which Chertoff oversees, is almost verbatim the CFR outline for the North American Union.

February 16, 2007: Chertoff and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, (two of three Cabinet heads overseeing the SPP), attend a North American Union meeting in Ottawa Canada to discuss business partnerships vis-à-vis the NAFTA Super Highway that stretches from southern Mexico through the US up to Montreal Canada.

~ Chertoff, the chief architect of George W. Bush’s War On Terrorism unfolds his plan to use the pretext of the War on Terrorism to merge large corporations, government power, military interests, and police law enforcement, into a “secure” yet “prosperous” North American Union. In such a scenario, powerful elites, namely, Jews, like Michael Chertoff, will rule.


JEWS LIKE MICHAEL CHERTOFF MUST BE STOPPED BEFORE THEY DESTROY AMERICA

A North American Union will bring us one step closer to a One World Government setting the stage for the appearance of the Jewish Anti-Christ. But we can stop Jews like Michael Chertoff from bringing on a One World Government which will destroy America’s sovereignty and Christian heritage. We can do this by keeping Jews out of politics.

We must be aware of Jewish appointments to high places and Jewish hopefuls for Congress and Senate positions. Then we simply use our voting power and protests to deny Jews their desire to rule over us.

It is time for us all to raise our voices crying, “A Christian America! Not A Jewish America!” For in a pluralistic, multi-cultural society, such as which a North American Union envisions, the Jews will rule. And the Jewish Anti-Christ will come!

Brother Nathanael Kapner
CLICK: Real Jew News @
Go to 12427
http://www.realjewnews.com/



Go to 12426
http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=77
JEWS PLOTTED THE ARMENIAN HOLOCAUST!
By Brother Nathanael Kapner - Copyright © 2007
*All Articles May Be Reproduced Only With Authorship & Link*
(Plagiarists Like “Roy Roger” Take Notice!)

BUSINESS AS USUAL is a powerful motivating force especially when Jews like the Rothschilds are running an oil business. Banking is the forté of the Jewish House of Rothschild. But raw materials–especially oil–are money in the bank.

The Young Turk movement, AKA Committee of Union and Progress, arose out of the Rothschilds’ oil interests in the Black Sea area of the Ottoman Empire in the late 1800s. ‘Creating stability’ in an incendiary realm was necessary for the Rothschilds’ new oil enterprise Baku Oil. The ‘instability’ of the Armenian Christians’ financial and intellectual prominence in the area was not ‘good for business.’

Thus hand-picked Jews of Salonika, (Jews made up the majority of the city’s population), and foreign agitators such as the Russian Zionist, Vladimir Jabotinksy, the editor of The Young Turk newspaper, were just what the Rothschilds needed for ridding the source of that instability, the Armenian Christians.

Now, the Zionist Young Turks who sought for the break up of the Ottoman Empire in order to obtain Palestine–and the House of Rothschild, who needed a Jewish-controlled Turkey and hegemony over the entire Middle East, could work together. This meant funding for the Jewish Young Turks and revolutionary subversives for the Rothschilds.





HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE JEWISH YOUNG TURKS

1680: Sabbatai Zvi, a Turkish Jew, proclaims himself to be the Jewish Messiah in Salonica. After amassing a following of thousands of Jews - he led them on a Zionist exodus to Palestine. On the way he decided to become a Muslim. Many of his followers saw this as God’s plan and also became Muslims.

1716: A group called the “Donmeh” forms in Salonica of Sabbatai Zvi’s followers headed by Sabbatai Zvi’s successor, Baruchya Russo. By the early 1900’s, the Donmeh numbers in the hundreds of thousands. They were known as “Crypto Jews” because though outwardly appearing to be Muslims, they were still Jews following the customs of the Jewish occult Kabbala which Sabbatai Zvi taught. They continue in their fervent, (yet secret), Zionist vision.

1860: Jewish Hungarian Zionist named Arminius Vambery becomes an advisor to the Sultan Abdül Mecit while secretly working as an agent for Lord Palmerston of the British Foreign Office. Vambery tries to broker a deal between the Zionist leader Theodore Herzl and Sultan Abdül Mecit over the creation of Israel but fails.

1891: Out of the Donmeh a Zionist political group forms called The Committee of Union and Progress, later called The Young Turks. The group is headed by a Freemason Jew by the name of Emmanuel Carraso who organizes the secret Committee of Union and Progress in Geneva with the help of the Rothschilds.

1895-1896: Sephardic Jews of Salonika together with the Turks massacre Armenian Christians in Istanbul.

1902 & 1907: Two Congresses of The Young Turks meet in Paris to plan, prepare, and effect the penetration the Sultan’s army leading to the military coup of 1908.

1908: The Jewish Young Turks revolt and force the Sultan Abdül Hamid II into submission.

1909: The Jewish Young Turks rape, torture, and slaughter over 100,000 Armenians in the city of Adana, also known as Cilicia.

1914: The Jews of The Young Turks create unrest, turmoil, and bolster the paid Serbian assassin, Gavrilo Princip, which leads to World War I.

1915: The Armenian Holocaust engineered by the ruling Jews of The Young Turks, leaves 1.5 million Armenian Christians starved, tortured, and murdered.

1918: Jew Mustafa Kemal ‘Attaturk’ ascends into leadership.

1920: Russian Jewish Bolsheviks supply Attaturk iwth 10 million gold roubles, 45,000 rifles, and 300 machine guns with ammunition.

1921: Attaturk occupies the Port of Batu in conjunction with the Russian Jewish Bolsheviks ceding it to the Bolsheviks five days later. The Rothschilds are delighted.

1922: Jewish Khemalists orchestrate the burning of Smyrna resulting in the ‘ethnic cleansing’ of over 100,000 Armenian and Greek Christians left tortured, starved, raped, and dead.


THE BRITISH AMBASSADOR TO THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE SIR GERALD LOWTHER’S LETTER TO SIR CHARLES HARDING, May 29, 1910

— “Shortly after the revolution in July 1908, it soon became known that many of the Young Turks’ leading members were Freemasons. It was noticed that Jews of all colours, native and foreign, were enthusiastic supporters of the new dispensation, till, as many Turks expressed it, every Hebrew became a potential spy of the Young Turks. Turks began to remark that the movement was rather a Jewish than a Turkish Revolution.” —





THE JEWISH MURDERERS KNOWN AS THE YOUNG TURKS

1. Emmanuel Carraso: B’nai B’rith Official of Italian origin. Grand Master of the Macedonia Ressurected Masonic Lodge in Salonika; Established the ’secret’ Committee of Union & Progress in Salonika in 1890.

2. Tallaat Pasha (1874-1921): Thought to be a Turk but in reality a “Donmeh Jew.” Interior Minister of Turkey during World War I; Member of Carasso’s Masonic lodge and Grand Master of the Scottish Rite Masons in Turkey; Chief architect of the Armenian Holocaust and Director of Deportations. He wrote, “By continuing the deportation of the Armenians to their destinations during the intense cold we are ensuring their eternal rest.”

3. Djavid Bey: “Donmeh Jew.” Talaat’s Finance Minister; Arranged the finances of revolution in Turkey with the Rothschilds; Later assasinated by Attaturk as a perceived rival.

4. Messim Russo: Assistant to Djavid Bey.

5. Refik Bey, AKA Refik Saydam Bey: Editor of Young Turk newpaper Revolutionary Press; Became Prime Minister of Turkey in 1939.

6. Emanuel Qrasow: Jewish propagandist for The Young Turks. Headed the delegation to inform Sultan Abdül Hamid II that “”The nation has removed you from your office.”

7. Vladimir Jabotinsky: Russian Zionist who moved to Turkey in 1908. Supported by B’nai Brith of London and Dutch Zionist millionaire, Jacob Kann; Editor of Young Turk newpaper. Later started the terrorist Irgun political party in Israel.

8. Alexander Helphand, AKA Parvus: Financier/liaison of the Rothschilds of the Young Turk revolution; Editor of The Turkish Homeland.

9. Mustafa Kemal ‘Attaturk’ (1881-1938): A Jew of Sephardic (Spanish) origin. Attaturk attended the Jewish elementary school known as Semsi Effendi School run by the Jew Simon Zvi. Over 12,000 Jews welcomed to Turkey by Attaturk in 1933 when Hitler came to power.





JEW ABE FOXMAN OF THE ADL DENIES THE ARMENIAN HOLOCAUST

For many years, the Anti Defamation League and now its director, Abraham Foxman, refuse to acknowledge that the massacres of 1.5 million Armenians between 1915 and 1923 constituted genocide. Jews simply can’t stand to share their so-called “martyred-race” status with anyone else. And besides, Jews don’t like to have their crimes pointed out to them. If one does, he is instantly labelled an “Anti Semite!”

Foxman has reiterated the ADL’s opposition to formal U.S. recognition of the Armenian Holocaust calling a proposed Congressional resolution “a counterproductive diversion.” This position is inconsistent with the ADL’s mission statement “to secure justice and fair treatment to all citizens alike.”

But the Jew Abe Foxman and his racist ADL organization do not care about any other ethnic group but their own. And they will lie and suppress the historical facts (and all historical facts that incriminate the Jews) of the Armenian Holocaust and the role that the Jews played in it. Foxman and all Jews do this in order to perpetuate their image as “innocent victims.”




WE CANNOT ALLOW THE JEWS to get away with their suppression of historical facts that incriminate the Jews any longer. Abe Foxman and his racist Jewish friends love to see Revisionist Historians thrown in jail for questioning particulars of the Jewish Holocaust in Germany. But it is Foxman and the rest of the Jewish censors who should be thrown in jail for denying the Armenian Holocaust! Why do Jews abide by a double standard constantly? Aren’t we all sick of it and all these Jews for that matter by now?

I, for one, Brother Nathanael Kapner, a former Jew and now an Orthodox Christian, will do all in my power to expose the Jews. For the Jews are *not* innocent victims of persecution against them but have *prompted* backlashes against them throughout their “wandering-among-the-nations” history. The Jews in fact are the most fierce perpetrators of racist crimes the world has ever known. And the Armenian Holocaust of which the Jews are responsible is a clear example of their Jewish racist crimes.



Go to 12425
http://judicial-inc.biz/9y_60,000_a_yr_immigrant.htm
SUBJECT: Verification of Refugee Status with the Department of State Refugee Data Center

The Social Security Administration (SSA) has entered into an agreement with the Department of State (DOS) for verification of a refugee's status with the DOS Refugee Data Center (RDC). The DOS/RDC is to be used by SSA for refugees applying for a social security number when SSA cannot verify refugee status by an online Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlement (SAVE) query.

Refugees often apply for Social Security numbers within days of arriving in the United States and before data is available through SAVE. On January 29, 2002, SSA released instructions to its field office employees on how to verify refugee status using the DOS Refugee Data Center. The verification instructions are provided in the attached SSA File Number EM-02009. The new instructions state that if the online SAVE query does not confirm refugee status, SSA now requires verification with the RDC of the status of any individual presenting an I-94 Arrival/Departure Card indicating the person was admitted as a refugee.

For more information on the new SSA instructions using the DOS/RDC to verify refugee status for refugees applying for a social security number, please read the attachment from SSA.



Go to 12424
http://rense.com/general79/seniors.htm
IIlegal Aliens Cause Massive
Cuts For US Seniors
ALL Illegals Must Be Rounded Up And Deported - NOW
12-4-7

I hope the following 14 reasons are forwarded over and over again until they are read so many times that the reader gets sick of reading them. I have included the URL's for verification of the following facts:

1. $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year. http://tinyurl.com/zob77

2. $2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens. http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html

3. $2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens. http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html

4. $12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English! http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.0.html

5. $17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

6. $3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

7. 30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

8. $90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on illegal aliens for Welfare and Social Services by the American taxpayers. http://premium.cnn.com/TRANSCIPTS/0610/29/ldt.01.html

9. $200 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that's two-and-a-half times that of white non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/12/ldt.01.html

11. During the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern Border also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from Terrorist Countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroin and marijuana, crossed into the U. S from the Southern border. Homeland Security Report. http://tinyurl.com/t9sht

12. The National Policy Institute, "estimated that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period." http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/pdf/deportation.pdf

13. In 2006 illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin. http://www.rense.com/general75/niht.htm

14. "The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One Million Sex Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants In The United States". http://www.drdsk.com/articleshtml

Total cost is a whooping... $338.3 BILLION A YEAR!!!

If this doesn't bother you then just delete the message, but on the other hand, if it does raise the hair on the back of your neck, then forward it.


Snopes is provided for doubters:
Go to 12423
http://www.snopes.com/politics/immigration/bankofamerica.asp


Social Security Change For 2008

The United States Senate voted to extend Social Security Benefits to Illegal Aliens beginning in 2008.
Now, the following are the senators who voted to give illegal aliens Social Security benefits. They are grouped by home state. If a state is not listed, there was no voting representative.
Alaska: Stevens (R)
Arizona : McCain (R)
Arkansas : Lincoln (D) Pryor (D)
California : Boxer (D) Feinstein (D)
Colorado : Salazar (D)
Connecticut : Dodd (D) Lieberman (D)
Delaware : Biden (D) Carper (D)
Florida : Martinez (R)
Hawaii : Akaka (D) Inouye (D)
Illinois : Durbin (D) Obama (D)
Indiana : Bayh (D) Lugar (R)
Iowa : Harkin (D)
Kansas : Brownback (R)
Louisiana : Landrieu (D)
Maryland : Mikulski (D) Sarbanes (D)
Massachusetts : Kennedy (D) Kerry (D)
Montana : Baucus (D)
Nebraska : Hagel (R)
Nevada : Reid (D)
New Jersey : Lautenberg (D) Menendez (D)
New Mexico : Bingaman (D)
New York : Clinton (D) Schumer (D)
North Dakota : Dorgan (D)
Ohio : DeWine (R) Voinovich(R)
Oregon : Wyden (D)
Pennsylvania : Specter (R)
Rhode Island : Chafee (R) Reed (D)
South Carolina : Graham (R)
South Dakota : Johnson (D)
Vermont : Jeffords (I) Leahy (D)
Washington : Cantwell (D) Murray (D)
West Virginia : Rockefeller (D), by Not Voting
Wisconsin : Feingold (D) Kohl (D)

SEND THIS TO ALL YOU KNOW. THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES NEEDS TO KNOW THIS INFORMATION, UNLESS THEY DON'T MIND SHARING THEIR SOCIAL SECURITY WITH FOREIGN WORKERS who didn't pay in a dime.

LET US SHOW OUR LEADERS IN WASHINGTON "PEOPLE POWER" AND THE POWER OF THE INTERNET. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU ARE REPUBLICAN, DEMOCRAT OR INDEPENDENT! KEEP IT GOING!!!!

SOCIAL SECURITY:
(This is worth reading. It is short and to the point.)
Perhaps we are asking the wrong questions during election years. Our Senators and Congresswomen do not pay into Social Security and, of course, they do not collect from it.
You see, Social Security benefits were not suitable for persons of their rare elevation in society. They felt they should have a special plan for themselves So, many years ago they voted in their own benefit plan.
In more recent years, no congressperson has felt the need to change it. After all, it is a great plan.
For all practical purposes their plan works like this:
When they retire, they continue to draw the same pay until they die.
Except it may increase from time to time for cost of living adjustments.. For example, Senator Byrd and Congressman White and their wives may expect to draw $7,800,000.00 (that's Seven Million, Eight-Hundred Thousand Dollars), with their wives drawing $275,000.00 during the last years of their lives.
This is calculated on an average life span for each of those two Dignitaries.
Younger Dignitaries who retire at an early age, will receive much more during the rest of their lives.
Their cost for this excellent plan is $0.00. NADA... ZILCH... ZERO!!!

This little perk they voted for themselves is free to them. You and I pick up the tab for this plan. The funds for this fine retirement plan come directly from the General Funds; "OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK "!
From our own Social Security Plan, which you and I pay (or have paid) into, every payday until we retire (which amount is matched by our employer). We can expect to get an average of $1,000 per month after retirement. Or, in other words, we would have to collect our average of $1,000 monthly benefits for 68 years and one (1) month to equal Senator Bill Bradley's benefits!
Social Security could be very good if only one small change were made.
That change would be to: Jerk the Golden Fleece Retirement Plan from under the Senators and Congressmen. Put them into the Social Security plan with the rest of us Then sit back... And see how fast they would fix it.
If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of awareness will be planted and maybe good changes will evolve.
How many people CAN you send this to?

Better yet How many people WILL you send this to?



Go to 12422
http://www.rense.com/general80/sink.htm
How To Sink America
By Chalmers Johnson and Tom Engelhardt
TomDispatch
1-23-8

Within the next month, the Pentagon will submit its 2009 budget to Congress and it's a fair bet that it will be even larger than the staggering 2008 one. Like the Army and the Marines, the Pentagon itself is overstretched and under strain ­ and like the two services, which are expected to add 92,000 new troops over the next five years (at an estimated cost of $1.2 billion per 10,000), the Pentagon's response is never to cut back, but always to expand, always to demand more.

After all, there are those disastrous Afghan and Iraqi wars still eating taxpayer dollars as if there were no tomorrow. Then there's what enthusiasts like to call "the next war" to think about, which means all those big-ticket weapons, all those jets, ships, and armored vehicles for the future. And don't forget the still-popular, Rumsfeld-style "netcentric warfare" systems (robots, drones, communications satellites, and the like), not to speak of the killer space toys being developed; and then there's all that ruined equipment out of Iraq and Afghanistan to be massively replaced ­ and all those ruined human beings to take care of.

You'll get the gist of this from a recent editorial in the trade magazine Aviation Week & Space Technology:

"The fact Washington must face is that nearly five years of war have left U.S. forces worse off than they have been in a generation, yes, since Vietnam, and restoring them will take budget-building unlike any in the past."

Even on the rare occasion when ­ as in the case of Boeing's C-17 cargo plane ­ the Pentagon decides to cancel a project, there's Congress to remember. Contracts and subcontracts for weapons systems, carefully doled out to as many states as possible, mean jobs, and so Congress often balks at such cuts. (Fifty-five House members recently warned the Pentagon of a "strong negative response" if funding for the C-17 is excised from the 2009 budget.) All in all, it adds up to a defense menu for a glutton.

Already, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has said that 2009 funding is "largely locked into place." The giant military-industrial combines ­ Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, Raytheon ­ have been watching their stocks rise in otherwise treacherous times. They are hopeful. As Ronald Sugar, Northrop CEO, put it: "A great global power like the United States needs a great navy and a great navy needs an adequate number of ships, and they have to be modern and capable" ­ and guess which company is the Navy's largest shipbuilder?

There should be nothing surprising in all this, especially for those of us who have read Chalmers Johnson's Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic, the final volume of his Blowback Trilogy. Published in 2007, it is already a classic on what imperial overstretch means for the rest of us. The paperback of Nemesis is officially out today, just as global stock markets tumble. It is simply a must-read (and if you've already read it, then get a copy for a friend). In the meantime, hunker in for Johnson's latest magisterial account of how the mightiest guns the Pentagon can muster threaten to sink our own country. (For those interested, click here to view a clip from a new film, "Chalmers Johnson on American Hegemony," in Cinema Libre Studios' Speaking Freely series in which he discusses military Keynesianism and imperial bankruptcy.) Tom

Going Bankrupt

Why the debt crisis is now the greatest threat to the American republic
by Chalmers Johnson

The military adventurers of the Bush administration have much in common with the corporate leaders of the defunct energy company Enron. Both groups of men thought that they were the "smartest guys in the room," the title of Alex Gibney's prize-winning film on what went wrong at Enron. The neoconservatives in the White House and the Pentagon outsmarted themselves. They failed even to address the problem of how to finance their schemes of imperialist wars and global domination.

As a result, going into 2008, the United States finds itself in the anomalous position of being unable to pay for its own elevated living standards or its wasteful, overly large military establishment. Its government no longer even attempts to reduce the ruinous expenses of maintaining huge standing armies, replacing the equipment that seven years of wars have destroyed or worn out, or preparing for a war in outer space against unknown adversaries. Instead, the Bush administration puts off these costs for future generations to pay ­ or repudiate. This utter fiscal irresponsibility has been disguised through many manipulative financial schemes (such as causing poorer countries to lend us unprecedented sums of money), but the time of reckoning is fast approaching.

There are three broad aspects to our debt crisis. First, in the current fiscal year (2008) we are spending insane amounts of money on "defense" projects that bear no relationship to the national security of the United States. Simultaneously, we are keeping the income tax burdens on the richest segments of the American population at strikingly low levels.

Second, we continue to believe that we can compensate for the accelerating erosion of our manufacturing base and our loss of jobs to foreign countries through massive military expenditures ­ so-called "military Keynesianism," which I discuss in detail in my book Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic. By military Keynesianism, I mean the mistaken belief that public policies focused on frequent wars, huge expenditures on weapons and munitions, and large standing armies can indefinitely sustain a wealthy capitalist economy. The opposite is actually true.

Third, in our devotion to militarism (despite our limited resources), we are failing to invest in our social infrastructure and other requirements for the long-term health of our country. These are what economists call "opportunity costs," things not done because we spent our money on something else. Our public education system has deteriorated alarmingly. We have failed to provide health care to all our citizens and neglected our responsibilities as the world's number-one polluter. Most important, we have lost our competitiveness as a manufacturer for civilian needs ­ an infinitely more efficient use of scarce resources than arms manufacturing. Let me discuss each of these.

The Current Fiscal Disaster

It is virtually impossible to overstate the profligacy of what our government spends on the military. The Department of Defense's planned expenditures for fiscal year 2008 are larger than all other nations' military budgets combined. The supplementary budget to pay for the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, not part of the official defense budget, is itself larger than the combined military budgets of Russia and China. Defense-related spending for fiscal 2008 will exceed $1 trillion for the first time in history. The United States has become the largest single salesman of arms and munitions to other nations on Earth. Leaving out of account President Bush's two ongoing wars, defense spending has doubled since the mid-1990s. The defense budget for fiscal 2008 is the largest since World War II.

Before we try to break down and analyze this gargantuan sum, there is one important caveat. Figures on defense spending are notoriously unreliable. The numbers released by the Congressional Reference Service and the Congressional Budget Office do not agree with each other. Robert Higgs, senior fellow for political economy at the Independent Institute, says, "A well-founded rule of thumb is to take the Pentagon's (always well publicized) basic budget total and double it." Even a cursory reading of newspaper articles about the Department of Defense will turn up major differences in statistics about its expenses. Some 30-40 percent of the defense budget is "black," meaning that these sections contain hidden expenditures for classified projects. There is no possible way to know what they include or whether their total amounts are accurate.

There are many reasons for this budgetary sleight-of-hand ­ including a desire for secrecy on the part of the president, the secretary of defense, and the military-industrial complex ­ but the chief one is that members of Congress, who profit enormously from defense jobs and pork-barrel projects in their districts, have a political interest in supporting the Department of Defense. In 1996, in an attempt to bring accounting standards within the executive branch somewhat closer to those of the civilian economy, Congress passed the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act. It required all federal agencies to hire outside auditors to review their books and release the results to the public. Neither the Department of Defense nor the Department of Homeland Security has ever complied. Congress has complained, but not penalized either department for ignoring the law. The result is that all numbers released by the Pentagon should be regarded as suspect.

In discussing the fiscal 2008 defense budget, as released to the press on Feb. 7, 2007, I have been guided by two experienced and reliable analysts: William D. Hartung of the New America Foundation's Arms and Security Initiative and Fred Kaplan, defense correspondent for Slate.com. They agree that the Department of Defense requested $481.4 billion for salaries, operations (except in Iraq and Afghanistan), and equipment. They also agree on a figure of $141.7 billion for the "supplemental" budget to fight the "global war on terrorism" ­ that is, the two ongoing wars that the general public may think are actually covered by the basic Pentagon budget. The Department of Defense also asked for an extra $93.4 billion to pay for hitherto unmentioned war costs in the remainder of 2007 and, most creatively, an additional "allowance" (a new term in defense budget documents) of $50 billion to be charged to fiscal year 2009. This comes to a total spending request by the Department of Defense of $766.5 billion.

But there is much more. In an attempt to disguise the true size of the American military empire, the government has long hidden major military-related expenditures in departments other than Defense. For example, $23.4 billion for the Department of Energy goes toward developing and maintaining nuclear warheads; and $25.3 billion in the Department of State budget is spent on foreign military assistance (primarily for Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, the United Arab Republic, Egypt, and Pakistan). Another $1.03 billion outside the official Department of Defense budget is now needed for recruitment and reenlistment incentives for the overstretched U.S. military itself, up from a mere $174 million in 2003, the year the war in Iraq began. The Department of Veterans Affairs currently gets at least $75.7 billion, 50 percent of which goes for the long-term care of the grievously injured among the at least 28,870 soldiers so far wounded in Iraq and another 1,708 in Afghanistan. The amount is universally derided as inadequate. Another $46.4 billion goes to the Department of Homeland Security.

Missing as well from this compilation is $1.9 billion to the Department of Justice for the paramilitary activities of the FBI; $38.5 billion to the Department of the Treasury for the Military Retirement Fund; $7.6 billion for the military-related activities of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration; and well over $200 billion in interest for past debt-financed defense outlays. This brings U.S. spending for its military establishment during the current fiscal year (2008), conservatively calculated, to at least $1.1 trillion.

Military Keynesianism

Such expenditures are not only morally obscene, they are fiscally unsustainable. Many neoconservatives and poorly informed patriotic Americans believe that, even though our defense budget is huge, we can afford it because we are the richest country on Earth. Unfortunately, that statement is no longer true. The world's richest political entity, according to the CIA's World Factbook, is the European Union. The EU's 2006 GDP (gross domestic product ­ all goods and services produced domestically) was estimated to be slightly larger than that of the U.S. However, China's 2006 GDP was only slightly smaller than that of the U.S., and Japan was the world's fourth richest nation.

A more telling comparison that reveals just how much worse we're doing can be found among the "current accounts" of various nations. The current account measures the net trade surplus or deficit of a country plus cross-border payments of interest, royalties, dividends, capital gains, foreign aid, and other income. For example, in order for Japan to manufacture anything, it must import all required raw materials. Even after this incredible expense is met, it still has an $88 billion per year trade surplus with the United States and enjoys the world's second highest current account balance. (China is number one.) The United States, by contrast, is number 163 ­ dead last on the list, worse than countries like Australia and the United Kingdom that also have large trade deficits. Its 2006 current account deficit was $811.5 billion; second worst was Spain at $106.4 billion. This is what is unsustainable.

It's not just that our tastes for foreign goods, including imported oil, vastly exceed our ability to pay for them. We are financing them through massive borrowing. On Nov. 7, 2007, the U.S. Treasury announced that the national debt had breached $9 trillion for the first time ever. This was just five weeks after Congress raised the so-called debt ceiling to $9.815 trillion. If you begin in 1789, at the moment the Constitution became the supreme law of the land, the debt accumulated by the federal government did not top $1 trillion until 1981. When George Bush became president in January 2001, it stood at approximately $5.7 trillion. Since then, it has increased by 45 percent. This huge debt can be largely explained by our defense expenditures in comparison with the rest of the world.

The world's top 10 military spenders and the approximate amounts each country currently budgets for its military establishment are:

1. United States (FY08 budget), $623 billion
2. China (2004), $65 billion
3. Russia, $50 billion
4. France (2005), $45 billion
5. Japan (2007), $41.75 billion
6. Germany (2003), $35.1 billion
7. Italy (2003), $28.2 billion
8. South Korea (2003), $21.1 billion
9. India (2005 est.), $19 billion
10. Saudi Arabia (2005 est.), $18 billion

World total military expenditures (2004 est.), $1,100 billion
World total (minus the United States), $500 billion

Our excessive military expenditures did not occur over just a few short years or simply because of the Bush administration's policies. They have been going on for a very long time in accordance with a superficially plausible ideology and have now become entrenched in our democratic political system where they are starting to wreak havoc. This ideology I call "military Keynesianism" ­ the determination to maintain a permanent war economy and to treat military output as an ordinary economic product, even though it makes no contribution to either production or consumption.

This ideology goes back to the first years of the Cold War. During the late 1940s, the U.S. was haunted by economic anxieties. The Great Depression of the 1930s had been overcome only by the war production boom of World War II. With peace and demobilization, there was a pervasive fear that the Depression would return. During 1949, alarmed by the Soviet Union's detonation of an atomic bomb, the looming communist victory in the Chinese civil war, a domestic recession, and the lowering of the Iron Curtain around the USSR's European satellites, the U.S. sought to draft basic strategy for the emerging cold war. The result was the militaristic National Security Council Report 68 (NSC-68) drafted under the supervision of Paul Nitze, then head of the Policy Planning Staff in the State Department. Dated April 14, 1950, and signed by President Harry S. Truman on Sept. 30, 1950, it laid out the basic public economic policies that the United States pursues to the present day.

In its conclusions, NSC-68 asserted, "One of the most significant lessons of our World War II experience was that the American economy, when it operates at a level approaching full efficiency, can provide enormous resources for purposes other than civilian consumption while simultaneously providing a high standard of living."

With this understanding, American strategists began to build up a massive munitions industry, both to counter the military might of the Soviet Union (which they consistently overstated) and also to maintain full employment as well as ward off a possible return of the Depression. The result was that, under Pentagon leadership, entire new industries were created to manufacture large aircraft, nuclear-powered submarines, nuclear warheads, intercontinental ballistic missiles, and surveillance and communications satellites. This led to what President Eisenhower warned against in his farewell address of Feb. 6, 1961: "The conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience" ­ that is, the military-industrial complex.

By 1990, the value of the weapons, equipment, and factories devoted to the Department of Defense was 83 percent of the value of all plants and equipment in American manufacturing. From 1947 to 1990, the combined U.S. military budgets amounted to $8.7 trillion. Even though the Soviet Union no longer exists, U.S. reliance on military Keynesianism has, if anything, ratcheted up, thanks to the massive vested interests that have become entrenched around the military establishment. Over time, a commitment to both guns and butter has proven an unstable configuration. Military industries crowd out the civilian economy and lead to severe economic weaknesses. Devotion to military Keynesianism is, in fact, a form of slow economic suicide.

On May 1, 2007, the Center for Economic and Policy Research of Washington, D.C., released a study prepared by the global forecasting company Global Insight on the long-term economic impact of increased military spending. Guided by economist Dean Baker, this research showed that, after an initial demand stimulus, by about the sixth year the effect of increased military spending turns negative. Needless to say, the U.S. economy has had to cope with growing defense spending for more than 60 years. He found that, after 10 years of higher defense spending, there would be 464,000 fewer jobs than in a baseline scenario that involved lower defense spending.

Baker concluded:

"It is often believed that wars and military spending increases are good for the economy. In fact, most economic models show that military spending diverts resources from productive uses, such as consumption and investment, and ultimately slows economic growth and reduces employment."

These are only some of the many deleterious effects of military Keynesianism.

Hollowing Out the American Economy

It was believed that the U.S. could afford both a massive military establishment and a high standard of living, and that it needed both to maintain full employment. But it did not work out that way. By the 1960s, it was becoming apparent that turning over the nation's largest manufacturing enterprises to the Department of Defense and producing goods without any investment or consumption value was starting to crowd out civilian economic activities. The historian Thomas E. Woods Jr. observes that, during the 1950s and 1960s, between one-third and two-thirds of all American research talent was siphoned off into the military sector. It is, of course, impossible to know what innovations never appeared as a result of this diversion of resources and brainpower into the service of the military, but it was during the 1960s that we first began to notice Japan was outpacing us in the design and quality of a range of consumer goods, including household electronics and automobiles.

Nuclear weapons furnish a striking illustration of these anomalies. Between the 1940s and 1996, the United States spent at least $5.8 trillion on the development, testing, and construction of nuclear bombs. By 1967, the peak year of its nuclear stockpile, the United States possessed some 32,500 deliverable atomic and hydrogen bombs, none of which, thankfully, was ever used. They perfectly illustrate the Keynesian principle that the government can provide make-work jobs to keep people employed. Nuclear weapons were not just America's secret weapon, but also its secret economic weapon. As of 2006, we still had 9,960 of them. There is today no sane use for them, while the trillions spent on them could have been used to solve the problems of social security and health care, quality education and access to higher education for all, not to speak of the retention of highly skilled jobs within the American economy.

The pioneer in analyzing what has been lost as a result of military Keynesianism was the late Seymour Melman (1917-2004), a professor of industrial engineering and operations research at Columbia University. His 1970 book, Pentagon Capitalism: The Political Economy of War, was a prescient analysis of the unintended consequences of the American preoccupation with its armed forces and their weaponry since the onset of the Cold War. Melman wrote (pp. 2-3):

"From 1946 to 1969, the United States government spent over $1,000 billion on the military, more than half of this under the Kennedy and Johnson administrations ­ the period during which the [Pentagon-dominated] state management was established as a formal institution. This sum of staggering size (try to visualize a billion of something) does not express the cost of the military establishment to the nation as a whole. The true cost is measured by what has been forgone, by the accumulated deterioration in many facets of life by the inability to alleviate human wretchedness of long duration."

In an important exegesis on Melman's relevance to the current American economic situation, Thomas Woods writes:

"According to the U.S. Department of Defense, during the four decades from 1947 through 1987 it used (in 1982 dollars) $7.62 trillion in capital resources. In 1985, the Department of Commerce estimated the value of the nation's plant and equipment, and infrastructure, at just over $7.29 trillion. In other words, the amount spent over that period could have doubled the American capital stock or modernized and replaced its existing stock."

The fact that we did not modernize or replace our capital assets is one of the main reasons why, by the turn of the 21st century, our manufacturing base had all but evaporated. Machine tools ­ an industry on which Melman was an authority ­ are a particularly important symptom. In November 1968, a five-year inventory disclosed (p. 186) "that 64 percent of the metalworking machine tools used in U.S. industry were ten years old or older. The age of this industrial equipment (drills, lathes, etc.) marks the United States' machine tool stock as the oldest among all major industrial nations, and it marks the continuation of a deterioration process that began with the end the Second World War. This deterioration at the base of the industrial system certifies to the continuous debilitating and depleting effect that the military use of capital and research and development talent has had on American industry."

Nothing has been done in the period since 1968 to reverse these trends and it shows today in our massive imports of equipment ­ from medical machines like proton accelerators for radiological therapy (made primarily in Belgium, Germany, and Japan) to cars and trucks.

Our short tenure as the world's "lone superpower" has come to an end. As Harvard economics professor Benjamin Friedman has written:

"Again and again it has always been the world's leading lending country that has been the premier country in terms of political influence, diplomatic influence, and cultural influence. It's no accident that we took over the role from the British at the same time that we took over the job of being the world's leading lending country. Today we are no longer the world's leading lending country. In fact we are now the world's biggest debtor country, and we are continuing to wield influence on the basis of military prowess alone."

Some of the damage done can never be rectified. There are, however, some steps that this country urgently needs to take. These include reversing Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for the wealthy, beginning to liquidate our global empire of over 800 military bases, cutting from the defense budget all projects that bear no relationship to the national security of the United States, and ceasing to use the defense budget as a Keynesian jobs program. If we do these things we have a chance of squeaking by. If we don't, we face probable national insolvency and a long depression.

Chalmers Johnson is the author of Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic, just published in paperback. It is the final volume of his Blowback Trilogy, which also includes Blowback (2000) and The Sorrows of Empire (2004).

[Note: For those interested, click here to view a clip from a new film, "Chalmers Johnson on American Hegemony," in Cinema Libre Studios' Speaking Freely series in which he discusses "military Keynesianism" and imperial bankruptcy. For sources on global military spending, please see: (1) Global Security Organization, "World Wide Military Expenditures" as well as Glenn Greenwald, "The bipartisan consensus on U.S. military spending"; (2) Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, "Report: China biggest Asian military spender."]



Use your Go Back and Go Forward commands to get to where you were in a previous file.