| The Real Reason We Are At War
Time Magazine
November 13, 2000
Saddam Turns His Back on Greenbacks
Europe's dream of promoting the euro as a competitor
to the U.S. dollar may get a boost from SADDAM HUSSEIN.
Iraq says that from now on, it wants payments for its
oil in euros, despite the fact that the battered
European currency unit, which use to be worth quite
a bit more than $1, has dropped to about 82 cents.
Iraq says it will no longer accept dollars for oil
because it does not want to deal "in currency of the
enemy."
The switch to euros would cost the U.N. a small
fortune in accounting paperwork changes. It would also
reduce the interest earnings and reparations payments
that Iraq is making for damage it caused during the Gulf War,
a shortfall the Iraqis would have to make up.
The move hurts Iraq, the U.N. and the countries receiving
reparations. So why is Saddam doing it? Diplomatic
sources say switching to the euro will favor European
suppliers over U.S. ones in competing for Iraqi contracts,
and the p.r. boost that Baghdad would probably get in
Europe would be another plus.
-By William Dowell/ New York City
=======================================
Saddam Turns His Back on Greenbacks
By WILLIAM DOWELL/NEW YORK CITY
http://www.time.com/time/archive/preview/0,10987,998512,00.html
=======================================
The Euro And The War On Iraq
By Amir Butler
ATrueWord.com
info@atrueword.com
3-29-3
http://atrueword.com/index.php/article/articleview/49/1/1/
As Mark Twain once noted, prophecy is always difficult, particularly
with regards to the future. However, it is a safe bet that as soon as
Saddam is toppled one of the first tasks of the America-backed regime
will be to restore the US dollar as the nation's oil currency.
In November 2000, Iraq began selling its oil for euros, moving away from
the post-World War II standard of the US dollar as the currency of
international trade. Whilst seen by many at the time as a bizarre act of
political defiance, it has proved beneficial for Iraq, with the euro
gaining almost 25% against the dollar during 2001. It now costs around
USD$1.05 to buy one Euro.
Iraq's move towards the euro is indicative of a growing trend. Iran has
already converted the majority of its central bank reserve funds to the
euro, and has hinted at adopting the euro for all oil sales. On December
7th, 2002, the third member of the axis of evil, North Korea, officially
dropped the dollar and began using euros for trade. Venezuela, not a
member of the axis of evil yet, but a large oil producer nonetheless, is
also considering a switch to the euro. More importantly, at its April
14th, 2002 meeting in Spain, OPEC expressed an interest in leaving the
dollar in favour of the euro.
If OPEC were to switch to the euro as the standard for oil transactions,
it would have serious ramifications for the US economy. Oil-consuming
economies would have to flush the dollars out of their central bank
holdings and convert them to euros. Some economists estimate that with
the market flooded, the US dollar could drop up to 40% in value. As the
currency falls, there would be a monetary evacuation by foreign
investors abandoning the US stock markets and dollar-denominated assets.
Imported products would cost Americans a lot more, and the trade deficit
would be magnified.
It is foreign demand for the US dollar that funds the US federal budget
deficits. Foreign investors flush with dollars typically look to US
treasury securities as a means of secure investment. With a large
reduction in such investment, the country could potentially go into
default. Things could turn very bad, very quickly.
In May 2004 an additional 10 member nations will join the European
Union. At that point, the EU will represent an oil consumer 33% larger
than the United States. In order to mitigate currency risks, the
Europeans will increasingly pressure OPEC to trade in euros, and with
the EU at that stage buying over half of OPEC oil production, such a
change seems likely.
This is a scenario that America cannot afford to see eventuate. The US
will go to any length to fend off an attempt by OPEC to dump greenbacks
as its reserve currency. Attacking Iraq and installing a client regime
in Baghdad may have a preventative effect. It will certainly ensure that
Iraq returns to using dollars and provide a violent example to any other
nation in the region contemplating a migration to the euro.
An American-backed junta in Iraq would also enable the US to smash
OPEC's hold over oil prices. The US or its client regime could increase
Iraqi oil production to levels well beyond OPEC quotas, driving prices
down worldwide and weakening the economies of the oil producing nations,
thus lessening their likelihood of abandoning the dollar. It would have
the short term effect of reducing the profits of domestic oil companies,
but the long term effect of securing America's economic hegemony.
The frequently offered canard of the Left that this war is being fought
to secure oil revenues for American oil companies may have some truth to
it. However, a more plausible explanation may be that the Bush
administration is waging war to protect the dollar and smash the OPEC
hold over international oil prices. It's a war whose purpose is bigger
than Halliburton or Exxon: it's a war being fought to maintain America's
position in the world.
Attending the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, George Bush Senior told the
world that, "the American way of life is not negotiable". As cruise
missiles rain on Iraq, we are learning just how 'non-negotiable' that
way of life really is.
Amir Butler is executive director of the Australian Muslim Public
Affairs Committee (AMPAC), and writes for ATrueWord.com. He can be
contacted at abutler@atrueword.com.
=========================================
Alexander's Gas & Oil Connections - UN agrees to Iraq euro account
... sponsored by: UN agrees to Iraq euro account 30-10-00 A United Nations
committee gave Iraq the green light to open a euro-denominated bank account
to ... it the go-ahead to create a euro-based account for Iraq, the
officials and diplomats ...
http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/news/ntm04607.htm
UN agrees to Iraq euro account
30-10-00 A United Nations committee gave Iraq the green light to open a
euro-denominated bank account to handle deposits from oil sales -- a victory
in Baghdad's campaign to stop using the hated American currency. The
decision eased fears that Iraq would follow through on a threat to disrupt
oil exports if its request to start collecting payment in the common
European currency was denied.
The UN's sanctions committee on Iraq, made up of the 15 Security Council
members, agreed it could not object to the request because it had no legal
basis to block it. Nevertheless, the United Nations has warned that the
switch could cost millions of dollars in lost interest and other revenue,
diplomats and UN officials said.
The committee authorized its chairman, Dutch Ambassador Peter van Walsum, to
draft a letter to the UN Secretariat giving it the go-ahead to create a
euro-based account for Iraq, the officials and diplomats said. An account
could be created soon.
Iraq informed the committee that it was extending its Nov. 1 deadline to
create the euro account until Nov. 6. The United Nations already has a
dollar-based escrow account at the French bank BNP Paribas in New York to
receive payment for oil exported by Iraq through the UN oil-for-food
program.
The program allows Iraq, under sanctions for its 1990 invasion of Kuwait, to
sell its oil provided the proceeds are used to buy humanitarian goods for
its 22 mm people. Currently, Iraq exports about 2.3 mm bpd.
Earlier this month, Iraq requested the United Nations create a
euro-denominated account so it didn't have to receive payment for its oil in
American dollars, which it considers the currency of an "enemy state." The
UN Treasury Department said the change would be cumbersome and costly since
oil is bought and sold internationally in dollars and recommended the
proposal be studied further since the financial implications were so great.
The UN sanctions committee requested a report in three months on the
implications of the change, including its costs and benefits. French
Ambassador Jean-David Levitte complained that the Treasury report omitted
any mention of potential gains of using the euro, which France and 10 other
countries use. He noted that a significant portion of the humanitarian
supplies Baghdad purchases through the oil-for-food program comes from
countries that use the euro.
"Transactions in this currency would reduce costs for exporters which
currently have to factor in variations in the euro-dollar exchange rate," he
wrote Undersecretary General for Management Joseph Connor. Levitte also
complained that the Treasury report concluded it was up to the sanctions
committee, which is deeply divided over Iraq, to approve the switch to the
euro account. He said there was no reference in any UN resolution that
requires the committee to be involved in such dealings.
Source: AP
===========================
Western Press Review: Kosovo, Iraq, Euro, Lazarenko
... Press Review: Kosovo, Iraq, Euro, Lazarenko By Don ... They turn also to
Iraq's Saddam Hussein ... flirtation with the euro, and the flight of ...
commentator Heiko Flottau in Iraq analyzes the effects ... the direction of
the euro until it is too late ...
more hits from:
http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/1999/.../F.RU.990224140416.html - 8 KB
eLibrary - EU/IRAQ: COMMISSION UNVEILS EURO 13 MILLION AID PLAN
... announced on July 4 a Euro 13 million aid plan ... humanitarian crisis
in Iraq. The funds, channelled ... ECHO has provided Euro 50 million since
1998 ... vulnerable populations in Iraq. ..JJ LC Author not available, EU
IRAQ COMMISSION UNVEILS EURO 13 MILLION AID PLAN ...
Description: The European Commission announced on July 4 a Euro 13 million
aid plan to ...(more) Available from eLibrary, the digital archive. Free
trial membership required.
more hits from: http://ask.elibrary.com/getdoc.asp? ... - 2 KB
The Euro Effect Iraq Oil and threat to the dollar | Metafilter
... dollar standard to a euro standard. Iraq actually made this ... the
creation of the Euro - create an international ... they please. Look at
Iraq, not exactly a player ... already switching to euro and they have some
reserves. 3.) Iraq actually made this ...
more hits from: http://www.metafilter.com/comments.mefi/23463 - 47 KB
spiked-politics | Column | Euro-occupation plan for Iraq
Iraq: inspecting the situation ... War on Iraq ... 2003 Printer-friendly
version Euro-occupation plan for Iraq So now we know the Franco-German
alternative ...
http://www.spiked-online.com/Articles/00000006DC48.htm - 24 KB
Euro Independent: War with Iraq could spark recession
War with Iraq could spark recession 9/9/2002 1:13:41 ... nightmare scenario.
Enormous casualties in Iraq lead to major demonstrations in Arab capitals
... analysts do a lot. Although most see war with Iraq as an
almost-certainty, the various, possible ...
http://www.euro-ind.com/article.asp?article=2578 - 6 KB
The Euro Effect Iraq Oil and threat to the dollar | Metafilter
... dollar standard to a euro standard. Iraq actually made this ... the
creation of the Euro - create an international ... they please. Look at
Iraq, not exactly a player ... already switching to euro and they have some
reserves. 3.) Iraq actually made this ...
http://a-list.metafilter.com/comments.mefi/23463 - 47 KB
ProFinanceservice, Inc - Forex - Dollar extends losses against euro as
Iraq/North...
... ground against the euro and other major currencies ... concerns about an
Iraq war and North Korea ... extends losses against euro as Iraq/North Korea
worries ... ground against the euro and other major currencies ... concerns
about an Iraq war and North Korea ...
http://www.profinanceservice.com/news.asp?news=750 - 16 KB
trinicenter.com - Iraq's Euro - American Weapons Collusion
Iraq's Euro - American Weapons Collusion Posted ... bilateral or otherwise
bombing of Iraq' one salient variable in this military ... Persian Gulf." It
is as a result of this Euro-American conspiracy with Iraq that at least
5,000 Gulf War veterans ...
http://www.trinicenter.com/kwame/2002/Nov/ - 12 KB
US-Euro Tension Over Iraq Flares At Davos
RENSE.COM US-Euro Tension Over Iraq Flares At Davos By Paul Taylor ...
Switzerland (Reuters) - Tensions over Iraq flared at a meeting of global
business ... to do their job of checking on Iraq's suspected weapons of mass
destruction ...
http://www.rense.com/general34/oroe.htm - 14 KB
===========================================
THE REAL REASON WE ARE AT WAR!
Wed Apr 2 13:13:03 2003
208.152.73.199
THE REAL REASON WE ARE AT WAR!
http://praesentia.us/archives/000227.html
Dollar vs. Euro - Hegemoney.
The Federal Reserve's greatest nightmare is that OPEC will switch its
international transactions from a dollar standard to a euro standard. Iraq
actually made this switch in Nov. 2000 (when the euro was worth around 80
cents), and has actually made off like a bandit considering the dollar's
steady depreciation against the euro.
The real reason the Bush administration wants a puppet government in Iraq -
or more importantly, the reason why the corporate-military-industrial
network conglomerate wants a puppet government in Iraq - is so that it will
revert back to a dollar standard and stay that way." (While also hoping to
veto any wider OPEC momentum for the switch from Iran - which is seriously
considering switching to euros as their oil transaction currency as of Sept
2002 - and other OPEC members including Saudi Arabia whose regime appears
increasingly weak/threatened from an internal coup).
This administration is acutely aware of this and in preparation for invading
Iraq we will create a huge and permanent military presence in the Persian
Gulf region, just in case we need to grab Saudi's oil fields as well as
Iraq’s…
Saddam sealed his fate when he decided to switch to the euro in late 2000
(and later converted his $10 billion reserve fund at the U.N. to euros) - at
that point, another manufactured Gulf War become inevitable under Bush II.
Only the most extreme circumstances could possibly stop that now and I
strongly doubt anything can - short of Saddam getting replaced with a pliant
regime.
Big Picture Perspective: Everything else aside from the reserve currency and
the Saudi/Iran oil issues (i.e. domestic political issues and international
criticism) is peripheral and of marginal consequence to this administration.
Further, the dollar-euro threat is powerful enough that they'll rather risk
much of the economic backlash in the short-term to stave off the long-term
dollar crash of an OPEC transaction standard change from dollars to euros.
All of this fits into the broader Great Game that encompasses Russia, India,
China.
The effect of an OPEC switch to the euro would be that oil-consuming nations
would have to flush dollars out of their reserve funds and replace these
with euros. The dollar would crash anywhere from 20-40% in value and the
consequences would be those one could expect from any currency collapse and
massive inflation (think Argentina currency crisis, for example). You'd have
foreign funds stream out of the U.S. stock markets and dollar denominated
assets, there'd surely be a run on the banks much like the 1930s, the
current account deficit would become unserviceable, the budget deficit would
go into default, and so on. Your basic 3rd world economic crisis scenario.
The United States economy is intimately tied to the dollar's role as reserve
currency. This doesn't mean that the U.S. couldn't function otherwise, but
that the transition would have to be gradual to avoid such dislocations (and
the ultimate result of this would probably be the U.S. and the E.U.
switching roles in the global economy).
The following two recent articles discuss Iran’s vacillating position about
switching to the euro as their standard currency for oil exports, and this
may help explain Bush’s sudden urgency to topple Saddam. In the aftermath of
toppling Saddam it is clear the U.S. will keep a large and permanent U.S.
military force in the Persian Gulf. Indeed, the Bush administration has no
“exit strategy” in a post-Saddam Iraq, as a permanent U.S. military force
will be needed to "maintain order" (ie. to protect the newly installed
puppet regime).
Paradoxically, if the war in Iraq goes poorly or becomes prolonged, it is
possible that Iran and other OPEC members may do exactly what Saddam did,
thus creating the very situation this administration is trying to prevent,
an OPEC switch to the euros as their oil transaction currency standard.
'Economics Drive Iran Euro Oil Plan, Politics Also Key' (August 2002)
'Iran may switch to the euro for crude sale payments' (Sept 2002)
USA intelligence agencies revealed in plot to oust Venezuela's President’
(Dec 2002)
Venezuela is the fourth largest producer of oil, and the corporate elites
appear interested in privatizing Venezuela’s oil industry as that outcome
would become lucrative to the U.S. based oil conglomerates.
Additionally, the Bush junta may be concerned that Chavez’s “barter deals”
with 12 Latin American countries as well as Cuba are effectively cutting the
U.S. dollar out of the vital oil transaction currency cycle. Commodities are
being traded among these countries in exchange for Venezuela’s oil, and thus
dollars are not being used in these barter agreements. If these unique oil
transactions proliferate, they will create more devaluation pressure on the
dollar. Continuing attempts to remove Chavez appear likely.
Why is the dollar still strong? Well, the elites understand that the
strength of the dollar does not rest on our economic output per se, as our
historically high trade account deficit (almost 5% of GDP) and $6.3 trillion
dollar deficit (55% of GDP) are factors that would devalue the currency of
any nation under the “old rules.”
The truth is that the strength of the dollar rests on being the reserve fiat
currency for global oil/energy transactions (ie. “petro-dollar”). The U.S.
prints fiat reserve dollars, hundreds of billions of these petro-dollars are
used by all nation states to purchase oil/energy from OPEC producers (except
Iraq and Venezuela, and perhaps Iran in the near future). These billions of
petro-dollars are consumed by oil-consuming nations, and re-cycled from OPEC
back into the U.S. via Treasury Bills or other dollar-denominated assets
such as U.S. stocks, real estate, etc. (this is item #3 on the above list on
how to end U.S. hegemony)
The “old rules” for valuation of our currency were based on our flexible
market, per worker productivity, trade exports and manufacturing output,
free flow of trade goods, established and transparent accounting
methodologies, proper government oversight (ie. SEC), and of course
profitability, total cash flow, etc. While many of these factors remain
present, over the last twenty years our economic structure has broken some
of these principles. Despite the numerous technical weakness in the U.S.
economy from an export/trade account deficit perspective, and related issues
of debt, the dollar as the fiat oil currency has remained strong, creating
“new rules”.
The following article discusses the virtues of our fiat oil currency (or
vices from the perspective of developing nations, whose debt is denominated
in dollars, and must acquire dollars for oil, and dollars to prop-up their
domestic currencies).
'US Dollar hegemony has got to go" (Asia Times, June 2002)
Ever since 1971, when US president Richard Nixon took the dollar off the
gold standard (at $35 per ounce) that had been agreed to at the Bretton
Woods Conference at the end of World War II, the dollar has been a global
monetary instrument that the United States, and only the United States, can
produce by fiat. The dollar, now a fiat currency, is at a 16-year
trade-weighted high despite record US current-account deficits and the
status of the US as the leading debtor nation. The US national debt as of
April 4 was $6.021 trillion against a gross domestic product (GDP) of $9
trillion.
World trade is now a game in which the US produces dollars and the rest of
the world produces things that dollars can buy. The world's interlinked
economies no longer trade to capture a comparative advantage; they compete
in exports to capture needed dollars to service dollar-denominated foreign
debts and to accumulate dollar reserves to sustain the exchange value of
their domestic currencies.
To prevent speculative and manipulative attacks on their currencies, the
world's central banks must acquire and hold dollar reserves in corresponding
amounts to their currencies in circulation. The higher the market pressure
to devalue a particular currency, the more dollar reserves its central bank
must hold. This creates a built-in support for a strong dollar that in turn
forces the world's central banks to acquire and hold more dollar reserves,
making it stronger.
This phenomenon is known as dollar hegemony, which is created by the
geopolitically constructed peculiarity that critical commodities, most
notably oil, are denominated in dollars. Everyone accepts dollars because
dollars can buy oil. The recycling of petro-dollars is the price the US has
extracted from oil-producing countries for US tolerance of the oil-exporting
cartel since 1973."
By definition, dollar reserves must be invested in US assets, creating a
capital-accounts surplus for the US economy. Even after a year of sharp
correction, US stock valuation is still at a 25-year high and trading at a
56 percent premium compared with emerging markets.
The US capital-account surplus in turn finances the US trade deficit.
Moreover, any asset, regardless of location, that is denominated in dollars
is a US asset in essence. When oil is denominated in dollars through US
state action and the dollar is a fiat currency, the US essentially owns the
world's oil for free. And the more the US prints greenbacks, the higher the
price of US assets will rise. Thus a strong-dollar policy gives the US a
double win.
This unique geo-political agreement with Saudi Arabia dating from 1971 has
worked to our favor for the past 30 years, as this arrangement has raised
the entire asset value of all dollar denominated assets/properties. This is
sustainable as long as
1) nations continue to demand and purchase oil for their energy/survival
needs, and...
2) that the fiat reserve currency for global oil purchases remain the U.S.
dollar. (and dollar only)
The introduction of the euro is a significant new factor, and appears to be
the primary threat to U.S. economic hegemony.
Growing evidence suggests the post WWII dynamic regarding currency is
changing with the advent of the euro, and the belligerent actions of the
Bush administration appear to be accelerating some countries to switch to
the euro as an alternative to the dollar. In December 2002 ten additional
countries were approved for full membership into the E.U. This will result
in a combined GDP of $9.6 trillion, and 450 million people, directly
competing with the U.S.
However, the question remains - will events in Iraq, Venezuela or perhaps
Japan provide the impetus for OPEC act on their “internal discussions” and
switch to the euro as the new fiat currency for oil?
Japan’s fragile economy could implode from a spike in oil prices during the
Iraq war, but the switch could also be triggered if the OPEC cartel felt
threatened the Bush junta’s long-term intention of breaking–up the decision
making process of OPEC. Such a decision by OPEC to switch to the euros could
create the dreaded domino effect described in the opening paragraphs, and
the date of such a decision would mark the end of U.S. dollar hegemony, and
thus the end of our precarious economic superpower status.
How would this administration break the OPEC cartel in a post Saddam Iraq?
First, after converting Iraq back to the dollar standard, they hope to
quickly increase the production of Iraq oil, quadrupling or quintupling
Iraq’s oil output to drive down prices. Ultimately this would result in the
dissolution of the OPEC cartel. Dr. Nayyer Ali offers an excellent and
succinct analysis of what the neocons want to do with OPEC....
originally posted by W. Clark.
Posted by ldabney at January 1, 2003 09:43 PM | TrackBack
Email this page to a friend
Comments
http://www.praesentia.us/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi?__mode=view&entry_id=227
============================================
Topic: Dollar vs. Euro
... Dollar vs. Euro 1/1/02: On New Year ... The dollar will fall against the
euro from 8/23 to 8/30 Invest ... Links ECB's fixing of Euro vs US Dollar
ECB - Apr 13, 2002 ...
http://money.usatoday.newsfutures.com/.../group.html?... - 17 KB
Moped Army - Dollar vs. Euro
... Message | Next Message Dollar vs. Euro Author: Wayne ... CASEY 06-20-02
19:40 Dollar vs. Euro new Wayne 06-20-02 20:23 ... 06-21-02 09:36 the euro,
the dollar, thoughts of suicide new GK ...
http://www.mopedarmy.com/forums/discuss/1/40992/40977/ - 60 KB
Collar Aktien Clearing-Stelle Aktien euro vs dollar
Clearing-Stelle Aktien euro vs dollar ... Handel Aktien Clearing-Stelle
Aktien euro vs dollar ... Clearing-Stelle Aktien euro vs dollar euro
currency exchange ...
Description: Ab nun - - Collar Aktien dow jones utility monthly chart
investment newsletters ! - Collar Aktien Clearing-Mitglied Aktien Conversion
Aktien Cost of carry Aktien Covered Option Aktien
more hits from:
http://www.aktienhandel-1.com/depots/aydepots_portfolio_r_depot.html - 4 KB
TheStreet.com: Yen Rises Vs. Dollar, Euro
... Yen Rises Vs. Dollar, Euro By TSC Staff ... climbed to 131.67 against
the dollar from 132.13 Wednesday. The euro slipped to 118.62 yen from 119.37
in the prior session. The euro fell to 90.09 cents from 90 ...
more hits from: http://aol.thestreet.com/markets/currency/10006120.html - 17
KB
The Dollar vs The Euro
... Europe introduced the euro ... The dollar is the de facto world ...
countries switching to euro reserves from dollar reserves would bring ...
businesses converted their dollar assets into euro assets, the ...
Description: The Dollar vs The Euro,Iraq Weapons
Program,america,africa,middle east,asia,europe, rock and roll, soul, jazz,
new age, instrumentals,music,bands,concerts,live shows,brodcasters
http://www.rockhawk.com/the_dollar_vs_the_euro.htm - 24 KB
US$ Dollar "Weakness" -vs- Euro "Strength" -- EagleRanch InterActive PLATA y
ORO...
... ThaiGold Subject: US$ Dollar "Weakness" -vs- Euro "Strength" Any fiat
... value. Neither the Euro, nor the US$ Dollar is redeemable in physical
... Silver and $50 Gold. Dollars of a New Reality. A ... A Sound Era. If the
Euro still exists by then ...
http://209.55.84.52/76552/190.html - 15 KB
singlecurrency.co.uk - The Euro vs. The Dollar
... The Big Fight: The Euro vs. The Dollar Tuesday 17 th ... would become
the Euro, there was much talk ... challenge to the dollar as the world's
leading ... idea is sound. The Euro has reserves of ... times that of the
dollar. 'Euroland' has a ...
http://singlecurrency.co.uk/latest_features_eurodollar.html - 7 KB
Euro Vs Dollar
Euro Vs Dollar TrafficScour Results for Euro Vs Dollar Look for euro vs
dollar at eBay - The World's Online Marketplace ...
more hits from: http://investing.multimediahouse.us/dir/.../index.shtml - 27
KB
Yen Falls Vs. Dollar, Euro
... Yen Falls Vs. Dollar, Euro By TSC Staff 12/06/2001 ... EST The dollar
rose to 124.62 yen Thursday ... fell to 110.91 against the euro from 110.22.
The British ... The euro traded at 89.22 cents ...
more hits from: http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/markets/.../10004997.html -
27 KB
===========================================
War Is A Racket - Smedley Butler on Interventionism
Wed Apr 2 13:04:16 2003
208.152.73.199
War Is A Racket
Excerpt from a speech delivered in 1933
by: Major General Smedley Butler, former Commandant USMC
War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something
that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside
group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very
few at the expense of the masses. I believe in adequate defense at the
coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll
fight. The trouble with
America is that when the dollar only earns 6% over here, then it gets
restless and goes overseas to get 100%. Then the flag follows the dollar and
the soldiers follow the flag.
I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment
of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the
defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other
reason is simply a racket.
There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind
to. It has its "finger men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to
destroy enemies, its "brain men" to plan war preparations, and a "Big Boss"
Super-Nationalistic-Capitalism. It may seem odd for me, a military man to
adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty-three
years and four months in active military service as a member of this
country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all
commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that
period, I spent most of my time being a high-class muscleman for Big
Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer,
a gangster for capitalism.
I suspected I was part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like
all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own
until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended
animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with
everyone in the military service. I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico,
safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a
decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I
helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the
benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify
Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909 -
1912 (where have I heard that name before?).
I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interest in
1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way
unmolested. During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would
say, a swell racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al
Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three
districts.
I operated on three continents.
==================================
MORE:
War Is A Racket by Major General Smedley Butler
==================================
Smedley Butler on Interventionism
-- Excerpt from a speech delivered in 1933, by Major General Smedley Butler,
USMC.
http://www.fas.org/man/smedley.htm
War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something
that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside
group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very
few at the expense of the masses.
I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation
comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that
when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless and
goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the
soldiers follow the flag.
I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment
of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the
defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other
reason is simply a racket.
There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind
to. It has its "finger men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to
destroy enemies, its "brain men" to plan war preparations, and a "Big Boss"
Super-Nationalistic-Capitalism.
It may seem odd for me, a military man to adopt such a comparison.
Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty- three years and four months in
active military service as a member of this country's most agile military
force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second
Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time
being a high class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the
Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.
I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it.
Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my
own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended
animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with
everyone in the military service.
I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in
1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank
boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central
American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of
racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international
banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 (where have I heard that name
before?). I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar
interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its
way unmolested.
During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell
racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few
hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I
operated on three continents.
===================================
Testify! : Dollar vs. Euro - Hegemoney.
... January 01, 2003 Dollar vs. Euro - Hegemoney. The Federal Reserve ...
international transactions from a dollar standard to a euro standard. Iraq
actually made ... administration. Further, the dollar-euro threat is
powerful enough that ...
more hits from: http://praesentia.us/archives/000227.html
Dollar vs. Euro - Hegemoney.
The Federal Reserve's greatest nightmare is that OPEC will switch its
international transactions from a dollar standard to a euro standard. Iraq
actually made this switch in Nov. 2000 (when the euro was worth around 80
cents), and has actually made off like a bandit considering the dollar's
steady depreciation against the euro.
The real reason the Bush administration wants a puppet government in Iraq -
or more importantly, the reason why the corporate-military-industrial
network conglomerate wants a puppet government in Iraq - is so that it will
revert back to a dollar standard and stay that way." (While also hoping to
veto any wider OPEC momentum for the switch from Iran - which is seriously
considering switching to euros as their oil transaction currency as of Sept
2002 - and other OPEC members including Saudi Arabia whose regime appears
increasingly weak/threatened from an internal coup).
This administration is acutely aware of this and in preparation for invading
Iraq we will create a huge and permanent military presence in the Persian
Gulf region, just in case we need to grab Saudi's oil fields as well as
Iraq’s…
Saddam sealed his fate when he decided to switch to the euro in late 2000
(and later converted his $10 billion reserve fund at the U.N. to euros) - at
that point, another manufactured Gulf War become inevitable under Bush II.
Only the most extreme circumstances could possibly stop that now and I
strongly doubt anything can - short of Saddam getting replaced with a pliant
regime.
Big Picture Perspective: Everything else aside from the reserve currency and
the Saudi/Iran oil issues (i.e. domestic political issues and international
criticism) is peripheral and of marginal consequence to this administration.
Further, the dollar-euro threat is powerful enough that they'll rather risk
much of the economic backlash in the short-term to stave off the long-term
dollar crash of an OPEC transaction standard change from dollars to euros.
All of this fits into the broader Great Game that encompasses Russia, India,
China.
The effect of an OPEC switch to the euro would be that oil-consuming nations
would have to flush dollars out of their reserve funds and replace these
with euros. The dollar would crash anywhere from 20-40% in value and the
consequences would be those one could expect from any currency collapse and
massive inflation (think Argentina currency crisis, for example). You'd have
foreign funds stream out of the U.S. stock markets and dollar denominated
assets, there'd surely be a run on the banks much like the 1930s, the
current account deficit would become unserviceable, the budget deficit would
go into default, and so on. Your basic 3rd world economic crisis scenario.
The United States economy is intimately tied to the dollar's role as reserve
currency. This doesn't mean that the U.S. couldn't function otherwise, but
that the transition would have to be gradual to avoid such dislocations (and
the ultimate result of this would probably be the U.S. and the E.U.
switching roles in the global economy).
The following two recent articles discuss Iran’s vacillating position about
switching to the euro as their standard currency for oil exports, and this
may help explain Bush’s sudden urgency to topple Saddam. In the aftermath of
toppling Saddam it is clear the U.S. will keep a large and permanent U.S.
military force in the Persian Gulf. Indeed, the Bush administration has no
“exit strategy” in a post-Saddam Iraq, as a permanent U.S. military force
will be needed to "maintain order" (ie. to protect the newly installed
puppet regime).
Paradoxically, if the war in Iraq goes poorly or becomes prolonged, it is
possible that Iran and other OPEC members may do exactly what Saddam did,
thus creating the very situation this administration is trying to prevent,
an OPEC switch to the euros as their oil transaction currency standard.
'Economics Drive Iran Euro Oil Plan, Politics Also Key' (August 2002)
'Iran may switch to the euro for crude sale payments' (Sept 2002)
USA intelligence agencies revealed in plot to oust Venezuela's President’
(Dec 2002)
Venezuela is the fourth largest producer of oil, and the corporate elites
appear interested in privatizing Venezuela’s oil industry as that outcome
would become lucrative to the U.S. based oil conglomerates.
Additionally, the Bush junta may be concerned that Chavez’s “barter deals”
with 12 Latin American countries as well as Cuba are effectively cutting the
U.S. dollar out of the vital oil transaction currency cycle. Commodities are
being traded among these countries in exchange for Venezuela’s oil, and thus
dollars are not being used in these barter agreements. If these unique oil
transactions proliferate, they will create more devaluation pressure on the
dollar. Continuing attempts to remove Chavez appear likely.
Why is the dollar still strong? Well, the elites understand that the
strength of the dollar does not rest on our economic output per se, as our
historically high trade account deficit (almost 5% of GDP) and $6.3 trillion
dollar deficit (55% of GDP) are factors that would devalue the currency of
any nation under the “old rules.”
The truth is that the strength of the dollar rests on being the reserve fiat
currency for global oil/energy transactions (ie. “petro-dollar”). The U.S.
prints fiat reserve dollars, hundreds of billions of these petro-dollars are
used by all nation states to purchase oil/energy from OPEC producers (except
Iraq and Venezuela, and perhaps Iran in the near future). These billions of
petro-dollars are consumed by oil-consuming nations, and re-cycled from OPEC
back into the U.S. via Treasury Bills or other dollar-denominated assets
such as U.S. stocks, real estate, etc. (this is item #3 on the above list on
how to end U.S. hegemony)
The “old rules” for valuation of our currency were based on our flexible
market, per worker productivity, trade exports and manufacturing output,
free flow of trade goods, established and transparent accounting
methodologies, proper government oversight (ie. SEC), and of course
profitability, total cash flow, etc. While many of these factors remain
present, over the last twenty years our economic structure has broken some
of these principles. Despite the numerous technical weakness in the U.S.
economy from an export/trade account deficit perspective, and related issues
of debt, the dollar as the fiat oil currency has remained strong, creating
“new rules”.
The following article discusses the virtues of our fiat oil currency (or
vices from the perspective of developing nations, whose debt is denominated
in dollars, and must acquire dollars for oil, and dollars to prop-up their
domestic currencies).
'US Dollar hegemony has got to go" (Asia Times, June 2002)
Ever since 1971, when US president Richard Nixon took the dollar off the
gold standard (at $35 per ounce) that had been agreed to at the Bretton
Woods Conference at the end of World War II, the dollar has been a global
monetary instrument that the United States, and only the United States, can
produce by fiat. The dollar, now a fiat currency, is at a 16-year
trade-weighted high despite record US current-account deficits and the
status of the US as the leading debtor nation. The US national debt as of
April 4 was $6.021 trillion against a gross domestic product (GDP) of $9
trillion.
World trade is now a game in which the US produces dollars and the rest of
the world produces things that dollars can buy. The world's interlinked
economies no longer trade to capture a comparative advantage; they compete
in exports to capture needed dollars to service dollar-denominated foreign
debts and to accumulate dollar reserves to sustain the exchange value of
their domestic currencies.
To prevent speculative and manipulative attacks on their currencies, the
world's central banks must acquire and hold dollar reserves in corresponding
amounts to their currencies in circulation. The higher the market pressure
to devalue a particular currency, the more dollar reserves its central bank
must hold. This creates a built-in support for a strong dollar that in turn
forces the world's central banks to acquire and hold more dollar reserves,
making it stronger.
This phenomenon is known as dollar hegemony, which is created by the
geopolitically constructed peculiarity that critical commodities, most
notably oil, are denominated in dollars. Everyone accepts dollars because
dollars can buy oil. The recycling of petro-dollars is the price the US has
extracted from oil-producing countries for US tolerance of the oil-exporting
cartel since 1973."
By definition, dollar reserves must be invested in US assets, creating a
capital-accounts surplus for the US economy. Even after a year of sharp
correction, US stock valuation is still at a 25-year high and trading at a
56 percent premium compared with emerging markets.
The US capital-account surplus in turn finances the US trade deficit.
Moreover, any asset, regardless of location, that is denominated in dollars
is a US asset in essence. When oil is denominated in dollars through US
state action and the dollar is a fiat currency, the US essentially owns the
world's oil for free. And the more the US prints greenbacks, the higher the
price of US assets will rise. Thus a strong-dollar policy gives the US a
double win.
=======================================
Dr. Hooman Peimani content@atimes.com
PIPELINE FROM IRAQ TO ISRAEL
Sat Apr 5 23:30:12 2003
208.152.73.120
In the pipeline: More regime change
By Hooman Peimani
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/ED04Ak01.html
An Israeli daily, Ha'aretz, has reported that Israel is seriously
considering restarting a strategically important oil pipeline that once
transferred oil from the Iraqi city of Mosul to Israel's northern port of
Haifa. Given the Israeli claim of a positive US approach to the plan, the
Israeli project provides grounds for a theory that the ongoing war against
Iraq is in part a joint US, British and Israeli design for reshaping the
Middle East to serve their particular interests, including their oil
requirements.
According to the daily, Israeli National Infrastructure Minister Yosef
Paritzky considers the pipeline project as economically justifiable as it
would reduce the country's cost of oil imports. This is currently very high,
as Israel imports oil from Russia. There would also be a strategic
justification for the project, as importing oil from an oil supplier in
Israel's close proximity would increase its fuel security and would address
its major handicap, that is, its total dependence on imported fuel from
far-away suppliers. While living in the oil-rich Middle East, the Israelis
cannot count on regional oil exporters because of the existing Arab-Israeli
conflict. Prior to the 1979 Iranian revolution, Iran, which was on friendly
terms with Israel, provided its oil requirements. That arrangement ended in
1979 when the new Iranian revolutionary regime cut ties with Israel.
Paritzky has requested an assessment of the Mosul-Haifa pipeline's current
state, which ceased to operate in 1948. Presumably, the pipeline will
require major repair and/or upgrading, if not an overhaul, as it has not
been in use for more than half a century. However, its full operation,
including the required repair work, needs the consent of Iraq, the would-be
oil supplier, and Syria, a country neighboring both Iraq and Israel, through
which the pipeline passes.
Iraqi consent will be out of the question as long as the current regime of
Saddam Hussein is in power. As acknowledged by the Israeli minister, a
prerequisite for the project is, therefore, a new regime in Baghdad with
friendly ties with Israel. However, such a regime, if ever it comes to
power, will still require Syria's consent to operationalize the pipeline.
Given the overall political environment in the Middle East and Israel's
continued occupation of Syria's Golan Heights, the existing Syrian regime
will never grant its consent as long as the status quo prevails. As stated
by the Iranian government, during the Iran-Iraq war (1980-88) when Iraq
enjoyed cordial and close relations with Israel's mentor, the United States,
Israel tried, but failed, to resume the oil flow through the pipeline.
Syria, a friend of Iran and an enemy of Iraq, blocked the flow of Iraqi oil.
Hence, unless the pipeline were redirected through Jordan, another country
bordering Israel and Iraq with normalized relations with Israel, the
pipeline project will require a different regime in Syria. In other words,
regime change in both Iraq and Syria is the prerequisite for the project. As
Paritzky did not mention a redirecting option, it is safe to suggest that
the Israelis are also optimistic about a regime change in Syria in the near
future.
Oil pipelines are a highly vulnerable means of exporting oil, requiring a
predictable long-term reliability of the countries through which they pass.
Knowing this, the Israelis can only begin their technical assessment of the
pipeline once they are convinced that the existing political barriers can be
overcome. This requires new regimes in Baghdad and Damascus.
According to the Israeli minister, the United States will back his project
since the pipeline would bring Iraqi oil directly from Iraq to the
Mediterranean. In such a case, the Americans could bypass the Persian Gulf
for their imported Iraqi oil, while having secured access to the world's
second-largest oil reserves. Especially since the early 1990s, they have
repeatedly expressed their concern about over-reliance on the Persian Gulf
for their oil imports, which contains more than 60 percent of the world's
proven oil reserves. Given the concentration of the major oil exporters in
that region, its instability could interrupt or completely stop the flow of
oil by oil tankers, with a consequent major impact on the US economy, as it
is so dependent on oil.
To decrease their vulnerability to such a worst-case scenario, the Americans
have sought to diversify their oil suppliers. Apart from the Caspian
oil-exporters, they have resorted to non-OPEC (Organization of Petroleum
Exporting Countries) African countries (Chad and Angola), whose resources
are also closer to the United States than those of the Persian Gulf and the
Caspian Sea. However, these alternative suppliers could only allay the US
fear for a while, given the small size of their oil deposits. Thus, in the
long run, the US will have to import heavily from the Persian Gulf region,
where existing oil reserves will outlast those of other regions, and while
some of its oil-rich countries, such as Iran, keep finding new oilfields.
Given this situation, finding reliable alternative export routes and means
to sea routes and oil tankers for Persian Gulf oil exports is the long-term
solution for the Americans requiring an increasing amount of imported oil.
In this regard, land-based pipelines to carry oil to easily accessible
warm-water open seas such as the Mediterranean would be a suitable option. A
fully operational Mosul-Haifa pipeline could address that US problem, while
satisfying Israel's oil requirements at same time.
The Israeli oil pipeline plan, though, runs contrary to the stated US war
objectives in Iraq. The two key members of the "coalition of the willing" -
the United States and the United Kingdom - have rejected oil as a motivation
for the war, a point not taken seriously by many all over the world.
Nevertheless, the Israeli plan, the US-stated goal of securing Iraqi
oilfields, including those of Mosul, and the declared US objective of a
regime change in Iraq offer some evidence to the contrary.
Against this background, the US government's growing anti-Syrian rhetoric,
including accusing Syria of supplying military equipment to Iraq, may well
be the initial stage toward the expansion of the war to Syria. If this
happens, it could lead to a regime change there to serve various purposes,
including the cooperation of Syria in future oil exports via the Mosul-Haifa
pipeline.
Dr Hooman Peimani works as an independent consultant with international
organizations in Geneva and does research in international relations.
(©2003 Asia Times Online Co, Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact
content@atimes.com for information on our sales and syndication policies.)
=======================================
Yes, Oil Plays Big Role As Motive for Iraq War
By Youssef M. Ibrahim
Youssef M. Ibrahim, a former Mideast and energy editor for The New York
Times and The Wall Street Journal, is a group editor with Energy
Intelligence publications.
April 4, 2003
This war may not be about oil in the first place, but to argue that the
United States is committing more than 300,000 armed men and women to the
single area of the world sitting atop two-thirds of the global oil reserves
without having oil on its mind is a bit of a stretch.
Of course oil is crucial. We consume 40 percent of its world production and
import half of the oil we need. Furthermore, we have always preserved in one
way or another a hegemony over the Persian Gulf region that in the past few
years has become threatened by the rise of rogue regimes like Iraq and
Islamic fundamentalism in Iran and Saudi Arabia. Checking this threat is
unquestionably part of the scenario.
If proof were needed, even as the war is under way the press reports that
the Defense Department has already contracted the same companies that
extinguished many of the fires in Kuwait's oil wells in the past Gulf War,
12 years ago, to stand by. More important, the department has signed up a
subsidiary of Vice President Dick Cheney's old firm, Halliburton Co., to
subcontract that work. A spokesman for Halliburton confirmed that the value
of these contracts is estimated at $900 million. While the Halliburton
spokesman claims the company got the job because of its 84-year-long
experience, the smell of oil, business and politics wafts in the air.
The vice president, it is well known, controls the nation's energy policies
under authority ceded to him by the president. Equally significant, he has
been one of the prime hawks behind the war on Iraq. It is legitimate for
taxpayers to ask where one ends and the other begins.
Indeed, of the $74.7 billion the White House requested from Congress for the
cost of war, $500 million are targeted to repair Iraqi oil fields in poor
condition for lack of spare parts over the past 12 years of United
Nations-imposed sanctions. Nearly 100 American companies are lining up for
contracts. While we claim the oil of Iraq is for the people of Iraq, it
seems that, for now at least, it is for the companies of America.
We are "doing" Iraq because it has oil and it is "do-able."
The oil argument becomes stronger when we consider that other great powers
are fighting for Iraqi oil - France, Russia and China.
Over the past 12 years, since Iraq was placed under sanctions, it has
followed a clever strategy of encouraging French, Russian and Chinese oil
companies to come into the country, look at the oil data and undertake
preliminary surveys of areas they might want to bid for to obtain
oil-production concessions once the sanctions are lifted.
If those countries are successful in making deals for Iraqi oil, given that
naton's huge reserves, the entire American hegemony over Mideast oil would
come apart. Is it a surprise the French, Russian and Chinese governments
were among the biggest opponents of this war in the UN Security Council? Is
it a surprise we were for it as we were losing our oil foothold?
Now what remains to be asked is whether the French, Russians and Chinese are
more moral or less moral than the United States. Do they have more rights to
Mideast oil, equal rights or any rights? Do we?
What matters most is that this war, as far as we, the French, the Russians
and the Chinese are concerned, is indeed about oil, not about any democracy.
President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney should come clean
with the American people. We are not really interested in democracy in the
Mideast.
Furthermore our pursuit of Iraq in an attempt to turn it into some private
American gasoline-pumping station could lead us into a quagmire. No people,
be they Iraqis, Iranians or Saudis, will accept American dictates over their
single national resource - oil.
Move cursor over the map for details or scroll down for war brief
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EC22Ak02.html
===========================================
HALLIBURTON'S $7B 'NO-COMPETITION' CONTRACT
Fri Apr 11 21:02:16 2003
208.152.73.170
DOCUMENTS RELATED TO HALLIBURTON'S $7B 'NO-COMPETITION' CONTRACT
TO FIGHT IRAQI OIL WELL FIRES
U.S Army Corps Of Engineers' Explanation That Inviting Other
Contractors To Bid For A Highly Classified Requirement That A
Halliburton Subsidiary Was Already Under Contract To Perform "Would
Have Been A Wasteful Duplication Of Effort." (April 8, 2003) [PDF]
http://www.apfn.org/pdf/halliburton408034.pdf
Additional Inquiry By Rep. Henry Waxman (D. Ca.) Of The Committee
On Government Reform On The Lack Of Competitive Bids For The $7B
Contract To Put Out Iraqi Oil Fires (April 10, 2003) [PDF]
http://www.apfn.org/pdf/halliburton41003.pdf
========================================
Halliburton Iraq ties more than Cheney said
... items all the time Halliburton Iraq ties more than Cheney said NewsMax
Wires Monday, June 25, 2001 UNITED NATIONS, June 23 (UPI) -- Halliburton Co
...
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/6/.../80648.shtml - 31 KB
ShelbyCountyLiberalPress.org ® - Cheney
... Halliburton Iraq ties more than Cheney said NewsMax Wires ...
Description: Welcome Home Liberal! You've found the ONLY source of Liberal
information in Central Indiana! We haven't forgotten that Liberal is NOT a
dirty word!®
http://www.shelbycountyliberalpress.org/cheney.htm - 44 KB
Phillips Petroleum
Phillips Petroleum News - News articles about Phillips Petroleum from
thousands of online newspapers, magazines, periodicals, journals, and other
news sources. All categorized and with search engine capabilities.
http://phillipspetroleum.newstrove.com/ - 87 KB
EyeOnTech
... take amounted to approximately thirty pieces of silver (adjusted for
inflation from 33 A.D.) Need proof? Type "Halliburton" + "Iraq" into your
search engine. Admiral John Poindexter, recently put in charge of going over
your e-mails and credit ...
more hits from: http://radio.weblogs.com/0100001/ - 79 KB
Utility Fog Blog - Look Out Honey Cuz We're Using Technology
I didn't blog like mad on Sept. 1st. When I updated to Mandrake 8.2 all the
file dates changed. I have since mastered the intricacies of "cp -p
http://www.blarg.net/~wayule/blog_cgi/blosxom.cgi - 135 KB
The Enemy Withi, by Gore Vidal, 10/27/02
Gore Vidal is America's most controversial writer and a ferocious, often
isolated, critic of the Bush administration. Here, against a backdrop of
spreading unease about America's response to the events of 11 September 2001
and their aftermath, we...
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/EnemyWithin.html - 73 KB
|
