I wish he were our USA President!
By G. Edward Griffin.
Within minutes after the terrorist attack against the World Trade Center and
the Pentagon on September 11, my phone began to ring and emails started
pouring in asking what was the meaning of it all. I was flattered that
anyone thought I would know the answer to that question; but, in truth, I
knew little more than what was being shown on television. It was impossible
to have a reasoned response until the shock wore off and the facts could be
assembled. The concepts I would like to share with you today were set to
paper three days after that event. I printed about a dozen copies and gave
them to family and friends. Since then I have added historical data, but the
concepts and the message remain unchanged. Many of the predictions I made
have already come to pass; but any pride I might have in being right is far
offset by the grim substance of those predictions.
After completing The Creature from Jekyll Island, I felt that I still had
one more book to write and that it would be called The Freedom Manifesto. I
also knew that I would need a dramatic issue in the first chapter to capture
attention. Well, the terrorist attack on September 11 was certainly that
- and more. I told those on my email list that I would send them my expanded
report on terrorism, but then I became bogged down in structuring and
gathering material for the book. By that time, the report had become huge
and had to be divided into chapters. All of that took about four weeks. So,
what started out to be a four-page report on terrorism metamorphosed into
Chapter One of The Freedom Manifesto. At first, it was my intent to keep the
material up to date with late-breaking events; but then it occurred to me
that it might have more value in its original form than if it were
continually updated. Writing about news events after they happen is not
difficult, but writing about them before they happen is another matter.
So, I decided to let the overview stand exactly as conceptualized on Friday,
September 14, 2001.
This is that report. ********* KNOW THE ENEMY In the year 500 b.c., a
Chinese general and philosopher by the name of Sun Tzu wrote a treatise
called The Art of War. It has been translated into just about every language
in the world and has become a classic of military and political strategy. In
it, Sun Tzu said: If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear
the result of a hundred battles.
If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will
also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will
succumb in every battle.[1] It is now three days after the attack, and I am
haunted by the words of Sun Tzu. America has declared war, but her leaders
are not even sure who the enemy is. Is it a man called Osama bin Laden? Is
it Afghanistan, the nation that shelters him? Is it the Taliban which rules
Afghanistan? Is it a terrorist group called al-Qaida?
Is it Muslim Extremism? We commit to war but do not know the enemy. The
meaning of this event is far more complicated than the surface facts would
indicate. On the surface, we have a group of people in the Middle East who
hate America and have pledged themselves to inflict severe punishment on
her, even at the sacrifice of their own lives. If that is as far as we care
to look, then the meaning is simple. It is them against us; we are at war;
they are the bad guys; we are the good guys; and we must destroy the enemy.
That is the meaning that was given to the American people by their leaders.
President Bush summarized it well when he told the nation, Tuesday, that the
attack was an act of cowardice and that America was the target because it
was a beacon of freedom. If that is the correct meaning of the event, the
logical consequences are that we must fight back; we must defend freedom;
and we must not stop until the cowards are wiped off the face of the earth.
That is the path of war, retaliation, and, of course, counter-retaliation.
There is, however, a deeper understanding of this event, and it has to do
with the maxim: actions have consequences. To come to that understanding, we
must do the unthinkable in moments of crisis. We must ask questions.
LOYALTY AND PATRIOTISM
Asking questions is not popular with some people. When a
nation is at war, there is a tendency for its citizens to rally behind their
leaders without questioning the wisdom of their actions. For them, the test
of patriotism is conformity. Those who ask questions are called unpatriotic.
Life is simple for the conformists.
All they want to know is "What side are you on, anyway?" [2] When we reach
the end of this report, there will be no doubt in anyone's mind about my
patriotism or which side holds my loyalty; but, along the way, I definitely
will be asking some hard questions about the wisdom of American foreign
policy. Although I may be critical of our politicians and their policies; I
want it clearly understood at the outset that I totally support our men and
women who will be sent into combat as a result of those policies. When we
find ourselves in a shooting war, regardless of how we got into it, at that
point we have no choice.
We must put all that we have into the fight. But, the other side of that
coin is that we must fight to win. Our goal must be victory, not stalemate -
and we should achieve it as quickly as possible to minimize casualties on
both sides. That does not mean fighting a protracted conflict in which
something other than victory is the goal. That is what our politicians
forced us to do in Korea and Vietnam and Desert Storm and the Balkan War.
After the fighting was over, the tyrannical regimes were still there. We
left them in place. Some of them are now supporting the terrorists who have
attacked us. In the days ahead, we must be clear on the difference between
loyalty and patriotism. The spirit of loyalty compels us to support and
defend our country even when she is wrong.
That is necessary in time of war, but patriotism is a higher ideal. It
compels us, not only to defend our country when she is wrong, but also to do
everything within our power to bring her back to the side of right. When it
comes to patriotism, there is no one who has a greater love for country than
I do. That is easy to say; but when you hear someone make that statement,
you have a right to know where is the evidence? My evidence is my life. I
did not purchase our family's flag on Tuesday. It is very old and weathered.
We have proudly displayed it on every holiday for more than forty years.
Often, it was the only flag in the neighborhood. I did not need a terrorist
attack to remind me to honor my country and my heritage.
Displaying the flag is important, but patriotism requires much more than
that. I have devoted almost the entirety of my adult life trying to mobilize
my fellow countrymen to the defense of America from her enemies outside her
borders and within. Since 1960, I have left behind me a long paper trail and
a mountain of audio and videotapes extolling the virtues of the American
system, her culture, her Constitution, and her people. I love America and
all that she has stood for in days gone by, but I am saddened beyond words
at what has been done to her within my lifetime - and what I fear is yet to
be done in the days ahead. There are those who may say that I am
anti-government, but that is not true. I am not anti-government; I am
anti-corrupt government. I will do everything possible to defend my
government from those who would violate their oaths of office, tear apart
the Constitution, or use their positions of trust to oppress our people.
To oppose corruption in government is the highest obligation of patriotism.
WHY DO THEY HATE AMERICA?
The first question we need to ask is why? Why do
the terrorists hate America?[3] I am reminded of the story of a young man in
medieval times who wanted to become a knight. He obtained an audience with
the king and offered his services, explaining that he was an excellent
swordsman. The king told him that the realm was at peace, and there was no
need for a knight. Nevertheless, the young man insisted that he be allowed
to serve. To put and end to the discussion, the king finally agreed and
knighted him on the spot.
Several months later, the young knight returned to the castle and requested
another audience. When he entered the throne room, he bowed in respect and
then reported that he had been very busy. He explained that he had killed
thirty of the king's enemies in the North and forty-five of them in the
South. The king looked puzzled for a moment and said, "But I don't have any
enemies." To which the knight replied, "You do now, Sire." Do Muslim
terrorists hate America because of their religion or their culture? Is it
because they are envious of America's wealth or that American women wear
short skirts? Or is it because they really do hate freedom? No one with
knowledge of Islam believes any of those answers.
Some commentators have quoted the more militant passages of the Koran as
proof that religion is, indeed, the basis of this animosity, but a careful
reading reveals that violence is approved only in retaliation. Of course,
there are groups within Islam that have a very liberal interpretation of
retaliation, but the fact remains that the terrorists are attacking only
those countries that have previously conducted military campaigns against
their people. Their hatred comes, not from the Koran or the ancient
traditions or from envy. It comes from a desire for revenge.
AMERICA BECOMES WORLD POLICEMAN
Ever since the end of World War II, America's politicians
have viewed themselves as global leaders with a responsibility to manage the
affairs of the world that outweighs or at least equals any obligation to
their own country. For over five decades, the nation's universities and
media have extolled the virtues of internationalism.
The old tradition of avoiding foreign entanglements was sneeringly called
isolationism. We were conditioned to think that the old way was stupid. The
wave of the future was shown to us, and it was a New World Order. Over the
years, we watched with approval as our leaders increasingly entangled our
once sovereign nation into a world community called the United Nations.
Treaty by treaty, we watched and approved as we became increasingly subject
to international edicts and played the role of world policeman. It is in
that role that our military began to wage wars against populations far
removed from our shores and even further from our national interests.
To justify those wars, we were told that we were defending victim groups
against their despotic neighbors or ridding the world of drug lords; but,
after the smoke of battle cleared, we discovered that there were hidden
agendas that were much less noble. More often than not, the real purpose of
the war was to control oil fields, ports, mineral resources, or military
supply lines - or even to distract voters from thinking about scandals in
the White House. If you roam around the globe shooting and bombing people,
and aligning yourself politically with others who do the same, you cannot
expect your victims to like you very much. Some may even be willing to die
for revenge.
A MOMENT OF TRUTH IN MEDIA
On Wednesday evening (September 12), Henry Sigman, reported on Nightline:
"The U.S. is seen as a sort of an insensitive hegemony with arrogance that
seeks to impose it's own values on the rest of the world. It is seen as an
uncritical supporter of the State of Israel in its conflict with the Palestinians,
and the combination of the two does not make for U.S. popularity in that part
of the world." Adding to this theme was Magnas Raisdorff, who also appeared
on Nightline while Ted Koppel, the show's host, was speaking from London.
Raisdorff, a reporter in the London branch of CBS,
and an expert on terrorism, agreed with Sigman. He said: Many in the Arab
world regard the U.S., not as an honest broker, but as protecting and
shielding Israel over very important political as well as religious issues.
Among these issues are: Israel's control over holy Islamic sites, like the
Dome of the Rock;[4] the presence of U.S. troops near Islamic religious
places such as Mecca and Medina; the sanctions the U.S. has placed on Iraq
are mostly depriving children of drugs and food they desperately need; and,
most importantly, Israel's attacks on prominent Palestinian militants are
using equipment, like helicopter gun ships, provided by the U.S. Then Jim
Ruden, also in London, came on the program to summarize Raisdorff's report
saying: "And that is why what happened yesterday, happened, not because
'America is the world's brightest beacon [of freedom].'"
Since the end of World War II, the United States has launched military
strikes against Panama, Kosovo, Albania, Bosnia, Croatia, Serbia, Iraq,
Kuwait, Sudan, Haiti, Granada, Afghanistan, and Somalia - all in the pursuit
of stopping drugs, defending freedom, or resisting Communism. In the great
majority of cases, these objectives were not achieved. The only measurable
result has been the creation of hostility toward America. That is what I
call the OOPS Factor that has been a dominant feature of U.S. foreign policy
for over five decades. Politicians never admit that they have made a mistake
- especially a big one.
To do so would imply that they are not qualified to lead. No matter what
errors they make, they find something or someone to blame. Their standard
excuse is that they didn't have enough money or large enough staff or enough
authority. If only we will increase their budget and give them more power,
everything will be corrected. Typically, they already have spent too much
money, hired too many people, and exercised too much authority, so their
proposed solution is more of exactly what created the problem in the first
place. In the case of terrorism, the politicians who create U.S. foreign
policy cannot be expected to tell the world they made a mistake. It will be
a chilly day in Hades when they announce that they, themselves, have any
responsibility for these acts.
They will not want the American people contemplating the possibility that
Tuesday's attack might have been related to an interventionist foreign
policy. They will try to single out a person and then demonize him so he
will become the central focus of anger and retaliation. That person probably
will be Osama bin Laden, so, let us see what he has to say about this.
(Please remember that these words were written just three days after the
attack of September 11; and, at that time, bin Laden had not yet been firmly
declared as the responsible party.)
FROM THE MIND OF BIN LADEN
In May of 1998, ABC reporter John Miller interviewed bin Laden at his camp on
a mountaintop in Southern Afghanistan. This is what he said: The Americans
impose themselves on everyone. . They accuse our children in Palestine of
being terrorists.
Those children who have no weapons and have not even reached maturity. At
the same time, they defend . with their airplanes and tanks, the state of
the Jews that has a policy to destroy the future of these children. . In the
Sabra and Shatilla massacre, . houses were demolished over the heads of
children. Also, by testimony of relief workers in Iraq, the American-led
sanctions resulted in the death of more than one million Iraqi children. .
We believe that the biggest thieves in the world and the terrorists are the
Americans. The only way for us to fend off these assaults is to use similar
means. . So, we tell the Americans as a people, and we tell the mothers of
soldiers, and American mothers in general, if they value their lives and
those of their children, find a nationalistic government that will look
after their interests and . does not attack others, their lands, or their
honor.[5]
I am not quoting bin Laden because I think he is a nice guy or that I want
to exonerate him in any way. In my view, there is never any excuse for
terrorism. I include his words only to emphasize what I stated earlier. He
and his followers are not motivated by hatred of freedom or by religious
zeal but by a desire for revenge. In the days ahead, as we contemplate how
to put an end to terrorism, we had better be clear on that. As long as we
follow a foreign policy of interventionism, we will create new enemies
faster than we can track down the old ones and we will never be able to
erect anti-terrorist measures capable of stopping them all. If we retaliate
against populations or geographical areas, we will certainly unite all of
Islam in a holy war against us, and we will light the fire of hatred in the
hearts of a billion Muslims who will have but one purpose in life: to seek
revenge against us.
SAGE ADVICE FROM THE PAST
For the past few days, I have found myself
thinking about George Washington. At first, I didn't know why. Then it
dawned on me. Hadn't Washington warned about all this just before leaving
office as first President of the United States? So I dug out a copy of his
Farewell Address and, sure enough, there it was. This is what he said:
Observe good faith and justice toward all nations; cultivate peace and
harmony with all.
Antipathy in one nation against another, disposes each more readily to offer
insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be
haughty and intractable when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute
occur. Hence frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests.
So, likewise, the passionate attachment of one nation for another produces
a variety of evils.
Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary
common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, . betrays the
former into participation in the quarrels and the wars of the latter. .
Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none or very remote
relation.
Hence, she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the cause of which are
essentially foreign to our concerns. ... Why quit our own to stand upon
foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of
Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition,
rivalship, interest, humor, or caprice? It is our true policy to steer clear
of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world. One cannot
read those words of wisdom without sadly realizing how far we have drifted
from our nation's moorings. In retrospect, the so-called isolationism of our
forefathers is now looking very good.
NO PLACE TO HIDE
In 1982 I produced a video documentary entitled No Place to
Hide; The Strategy and Tactics of Terrorism. Immediately after Tuesday's
attack, I began to get inquiries about the program. Friends who possessed
copies ran them on public-access cable. Suddenly, the video, which had
remained almost forgotten in the back pages of our catalogue, became a best
seller. There is good reason for that. When I did the research for this
topic, I discovered that terrorism involves a lot more than just blowing
things up and killing people. There is a well-defined strategy behind it
that has to do with the anticipated reaction of the target government and
its citizens. Terrorists themselves phrase it this way: The action is in the
reaction. They know that, after repeated attacks, people will become angry
with their leaders for not preventing terrorism. This sets citizens against
their own government. They also know that terrorist attacks will cause
people to curtail travel, business ventures, and the purchase of luxuries,
all of which will depress the economy.
In our modern age, many people have come to think that the health of the
economy is government's responsibility. So, any decline in the market, loss
of jobs or purchasing power will also be blamed on the government, making it
even more unpopular. The most important reaction, however, is that terrorism
causes the target government to respond with police state measures against
its own citizens. Carlos Marighella, was a former leader of the Communist
Party of Brazil. His book, The Mini-Manual for Urban Guerrillas, has been
studied by revolutionaries and terrorists worldwide. It explains that the
target government must be deliberately goaded into violating the rights of
its citizens.
Marighella said: The government has no alternative but to intensify repression.
The police roundups, house searches, arrests of innocent people make life
unbearable. The general sentiment is that the government is unjust,
incapable of solving problems, and resorts purely and simply to the physical
liquidation of its opponents. The urban guerilla must become more
aggressive and violent, resorting without letup to sabotage, terrorism,
expropriations, assaults, kidnappings, and executions, heightening the
disastrous situation in which the government must act.[6] The same strategy
was expressed in 1968 by Italian Communist Giangiacomo Feltrinelli, in a
booklet entitled Political Guerilla Warfare. Feltrinelli said that the task
of the terrorist was to "violate the law openly . challenging and outraging
institutions and public order in every way.
Then, when the state intervenes as a result, with the police and the courts,
it will be easy to denounce its harshness and repressive dictatorial
tendencies."[7] In Germany, Ulrike Meinhof, a member of a terrorist group
called the Red Army Fraction, explained it this way. She said: "It is
necessary to provoke the latent fascism in society, . and then the people
will turn to us for leadership."[8] Initially, most citizens will not
complain about a repressive government if they are convinced it is necessary
for their own safety, but eventually it adds to a growing dissatisfaction
with the status quo and sets the stage for a revolution - either a violent
one or a political one - in which the target system is stripped of its
freedoms with the timid consent of the governed. That is the real goal of
international terrorism. Let me to repeat that. The goal of international
terrorism is a revolution - either a violent one or a political one -in
which the target system is stripped of its freedoms with the timid consent
of the governed. Who would want to do that? Certainly, that is not the goal
of those who sacrifice their lives in acts of suicidal revenge.
They care nothing about changing the structure of the target society. But
those who encourage them, who finance them, who train them, and who
psychologically program them by enflaming their passions, are quite
different. Who are they?
There are two powerful groups today that would like to see what is left of
the free world brought under totalitarian control. For many decades they
have alternated between competing and cooperating with each other in their
quest for world dominance. Together, they constitute the greatest threat to
freedom that the human race has ever faced. Yet, less than 5% of the
population even knows that they exist.
They have worked very hard to avoid using names for themselves that are
commonly recognized. Humans think with words, and if we have no words to
identify these groups, then we cannot even think about them - which is very
much to their liking. If we are to follow Sun Tzu's advice, if we are to
know the enemy, it is obvious that the first thing we must do is identify
him. In the following three chapters, I will identify the names of these
groups. From their own records, I will show their ideologies, their goals,
and their tactics. By the end of Chapter Four, you will know the enemy.
PERPETUAL WAR
In the meantime, we are told that we are fighting terrorism.
But terrorism is not the enemy. It is a strategy of the enemy.
That is like saying the enemy is hand-to-hand combat or air raids or missile
attacks or espionage. Since terrorism is not the enemy, a war on terrorism
cannot be won. It is doomed to drag on forever - just like the war on drugs
and the war against crime. It might as well be a war against sin. Shortly
after World War II, George Orwell wrote his classic novel entitled, 1984. It
was a satirical prediction of what the world might be like far in the
future.
Orwell envisioned that, if governments continued to expand their
power as they were then doing, eventually, they would evolve into a global
police state. He described the methods that would be used to keep the masses
from rebelling. Thought control was the primary method, but one of the ways
they accomplished that was to be constantly at war. In time of war, the
populace will accept any hardship and make any sacrifice to defend the
homeland.
However, to have war, it was necessary to have an enemy, and that enemy had
to be despicable in the eyes of the homeland defenders. Atrocities had to be
committed and many lives had to be lost. But it was equally important to
avoid winning the war - otherwise, the hardships imposed by the state would
no longer seem reasonable to its subjects. The world was divided into three
geographical areas called Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia, and the rulers of
these regions agreed to war against each other but never to seek outright
victory. The object was perpetual war. Orwell described it this way: In one
combination or another, these three superstates are permanently at war and
have been so for the past twenty-five years.
War, however, is no longer the desperate, annihilating struggle that it was
in the early decades of the twentieth century. . This is not to say that
either the conduct of the war, or the prevailing attitude toward it, has
become less bloodthirsty or more chivalrous. On the contrary, war hysteria
is continuous and universal in all countries. . But in a physical sense war
involves very small numbers of people, mostly highly trained specialists,
and causes comparatively few casualties. The fighting, when there is any,
takes place on the vague frontiers whose whereabouts the average man can
only guess at. . In the centers of civilization war means no more than a
continuous shortage of consumption goods, and the occasional crash of a
rocket bomb which may cause a few scores of deaths.
It does not matter whether the war is actually happening, and since no
decisive victory is possible, it does not matter whether the war is going
well or badly. All that is needed is that a state of war should exist. .War,
it will be seen, is now a purely internal affair . waged by each ruling
group against its own subjects, and the object of the war is not to make or
prevent conquests of territory, but to keep the structure of society
intact.[9] When we look at the facts surrounding the war on terrorism -
particularly the impossibility of victory - we cannot miss the striking
parallels to Orwell's satire. His only error, it seems, was choosing the
wrong year for the title of his book.
THIRTEEN PREDICTIONS
It is always dangerous to make predictions -
especially if they are put into print. If they prove to be wrong, they can
haunt you for the rest of your life. Nevertheless, here are thirteen
predictions that I fervently hope will be wrong. Unfortunately, I have no doubt
that most if not all of them will come to pass.
1. The first prediction is that we will not be given genuine options
regarding the war on terrorism. We will have only two choices, both of which
are disastrous. It will be similar to the Vietnam War in which Americans
were expected to be either hawks or doves. Either they supported the no-win
war or they opposed it. They were not given the option of victory. Their
choice was between pulling out of the war and turning the country over to
the Vietcong quickly or doggedly staying in the war and turning the country
over to the Vietcong slowly - which is the way it turned out.
Likewise, in the war on terrorism, we will be asked simply to choose sides.
Either we are for freedom or for terrorism. The wisdom of U.S.
interventionism will not be allowed as a topic for public debate. 2. Most
American political leaders are now committed to world government, so the
second prediction is that they will crow about how America will not tolerate
terrorism, but they will not act as Americans. Instead, they will act as
internationalists. They will turn to the UN to lead a global war against
terrorism. They will seek to expand the capacity of NATO. and UN military
forces. Although American troops will provide the backbone of military
action, they will operate under UN authority. 3. The third prediction is
that the drive for national disarmament will be intensified. This will not
lead to the elimination of weapons of mass destruction, but merely to the
transfer of those weapons to UN control.
It will be popularized as a means of getting nuclear and bio-chemical
weapons out of the hands of terrorists. The internationalists promoting this
move will not seem to care that many of the world's most notorious
terrorists now hold seats of power at the UN and that the worst of them will
actually control these weapons. This will be documented in Chapters Five and
Six. To be continued in part The Grand Deception (part 2) > 10507.1 > 4. The
fourth prediction is that, if any terrorists are captured, they will be
brought before the UN World Court and tried as international criminals.
This will create popular support for the Court and will go a long way toward
legitimizing it as the ultimate high tribunal. The public will not realize
the fateful precedent that is being established - a precedent that will
eventually be used to justify bringing citizens of any country to trial
based on charges made by their adversaries in other countries. Anyone who
seriously opposes the New World Order could then be transported to The Hague
in the Netherlands and face charges of polluting the planet or committing
hate crimes or participating in social genocide or supporting terrorism. 5.
The fifth prediction is that the FBI will be heavily criticized for failing
to detect an attack as extensive and well coordinated as this.
In reply, we will be told that the FBI was hampered by lack of funding, low
manpower, and too little authority. Naturally, that will be followed by an
increase in funding, additional manpower, and greatly expanded authority. 6.
The sixth prediction is that, eventually, it will be discovered that the FBI
and other intelligence agencies had prior warning and, possibly, specific
knowledge of Tuesday's attack; yet they did nothing to prevent it or to warn
the victims. This will be a repeat of what happened at the bombing of the
Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City six years previously. Why they
failed to do so is the topic of Chapter Four. 7. The seventh prediction is
that much of the war on terrorism will be waged against Americans inside
their own country.
New laws, international treaties, and executive orders will severely
restrict travel, speech, privacy, and the possession of firearms. Americans
have consistently rejected these measures in the past, but there will be
much less opposition when they are presented in the name of fighting
terrorism. Government agencies will demand to know everything about us, from
our school records, our psychological profiles, our buying habits, our
political views, our medical histories, our religious beliefs, the balances
in our savings accounts, our social patterns, a list of our friends
-everything. This will not be unique to America. The same program will be
carried out in every nation in what is left of the free world. 8. The eighth
prediction is that those who speak out against these measures will be
branded as right-wing extremists, anti-government kooks, or paranoid
militiamen. The object will be to isolate all dissidents from the mainstream
and frighten everyone else into remaining silent.
It is always possible to find a few genuine crackpots; and, even though they
will constitute less than one percent of the movement, they will be the ones
selected by the media to represent the dissident view point. A little bit of
garbage can stink up the whole basket. In spite of that, responsible
dissenters will still be heard. If they begin to attract a following, they
will be arrested on charges of hindering the war effort, committing hate
crimes, terrorism, tax evasion, investment fraud, credit-card fraud, child
molestation, illegal possession of firearms, drug trafficking, money
laundering, or anything else that will demonize them in the public mind.
The mass media will uncritically report these charges, and the public will
assume they are true. There is nothing quite so dramatic as watching someone
on the evening news being thrown against the wall by a SWAT team and hauled
off in handcuffs. TV viewers will assume that, surely, he must be guilty of
something. His neighbors will shake their heads and say ".
and he seemed like such a nice person." 9. One of the few remaining
obstacles to the New World Order is the Internet, because it allows the
public to bypass the mass media and have access to unfiltered information
and opinion.
Therefore, the ninth prediction is that laws will be enacted to
restrict the use of the Internet. Child pornography has long been the
rallying cry to justify government control. Now, the specter of terrorism
and money laundering will be added to the list. The real object will be to
eliminate the voices of dissent. 10. The tenth prediction is that the war on
terrorism will be dragged out over many years or decades. Like the war on
drugs after which it is patterned, there will be no victory. That is because
both of these wars are designed, not to be won, but to be waged. Their
function is to sensitize the population with fear and indignation, to
provide credible justification for the gradual expansion of government power
and the consolidation of that power into the UN. 11. The eleventh prediction
is that it will take a long time to locate Osama bin Laden.
A TV reporter can casually interview him at his mountain stronghold, but the
U.S. military and CIA - with legions of spies and Delta forces and high-tech
orbiting satellites - they cannot find him. Why not? Because they do not
want to find him. His image as a mastermind terrorist is necessary as a
focus for American anger and patriotic fervor. If we are to wage war, there
must be someone to personify the enemy. Bin Laden is useful in that role.
Of course, if his continued evasion becomes too embarrassing, he will be
killed in military action or captured - if he doesn't take his own life first.
Either way, that will not put the matter to rest, because bin Laden is not
the cause of terrorism, he is the icon of terrorism. If he were to be
eliminated, someone else would only have to be found to take his place. So
it is best to give each of them as much longevity as possible.
That is why terrorists like Arrafat, Hussein, Qadhafi and Khomeini, not
only are allowed to remain in power, but receive funding and military aid
from the U.S. government. They are the best enemies money can buy. This
issue will be covered in Chapter Four. 12. The twelfth prediction is that,
when the Taliban is toppled in Afghanistan, a new government will be
established by the UN. Like Kosovo before it, the UN military will remain
behind, and the country will not be independent. There will be talk about
how it will represent the Afghan people, but it will serve the agendas of
the internationalists who will create it. The sad country will become just
another pin on the map showing the location of yet one more UN province.
13. The thirteenth prediction is that, while all this is going on,
politicians will continue waving the American flag and giving lip service to
traditional American sentiments in order to placate their constituency who
must never be allowed to know that they are being delivered into slavery.
Yes, actions have consequences, and the long-range consequences of this act
of terrorism are even more devastating than the loss of life and property
that has been the focus of the media so far. Behold the Grand Deception: The
action is in the reaction. The war on terrorism is a war on freedom.
********* That is the end of Chapter One, as it will appear in The Freedom
Manifesto. I cannot predict how long it will take to complete the remaining
chapters, but I can tell you that I have made this a high priority project.
If you would like to be notified when it is published, I suggest that you
visit our web site and request to be added to the mailing list.
If you are on line as you read this, click here to register. If you are not
on line, then log on to our web site registration page at
http://www.realityzone.com/ourcrusade.html.
WHAT CAN BE DONE?
In the meantime, the crucial question is what can be done now, especially
considering the lateness of the hour. This is where it can really get
depressing. At the present time, there is nothing that men and women of good
conscience can do to alter the forces of destruction that have been
unleashed against them. As long as the nations of the world are controlled
by politicians with a globalist and collectivist mindset; as long as they
use every problem and crisis as an excuse to expand the power of government;
as long as the great majority of our fellow passengers on this spaceship
called Earth are unaware of these ploys, then absolutely nothing can be
done. But notice I said "as long as." The "as-long-as" part of the equation
contains two elements that underlie all of our problems: (1) We have put the
wrong people into government and (2) the public has been denied vital
information - which is why we put the wrong people into government.
Therefore, any realistic plan for eliminating terrorism and recapturing
freedom must have two objectives: (1) We must put the right people into
government and (2) we must see that the public gets the information it has
been denied. The political objective is important, but it cannot be reached
without first achieving the educational objective, so that is where we must
begin.
A WAY TO BYPASS THE MASS MEDIA
The first step is to mass distribute
copies of this report. For that purpose, they now are available free from
the Reality Zone web site. You can either print them from your computer to
be used as handouts and envelope enclosures or you can send emails to your
friends inviting them to visit the Reality Zone and read the report on line.
That is so simple it can be done with a click of the mouse. At the bottom of
the report is a form that reads: Tell A Friend. While you are on line you
can enter the names of those you would like to read this report. The Reality
Zone will do the rest. I urge you to send this report to everyone you know.
Everyone. Don't worry about how they will react. Some have been so sheltered
from reality that they will not be able to accept the validity of this
information, no matter how much documentation is provided. After all, they
are not getting any of this through the mass media.
Besides, people don't want to hear bad news But, as events unfold and as the
predictions become historical facts, our friends eventually will come on
board. It is my intent to make the Reality Zone a cyberspace information hub
where people from all over the world can come for reliable information on
the global crusade for freedom. In addition to this report, you will be able
to get a printed transcript of the video documentary, No Place to Hide; The
Strategy and Tactics of Terrorism. Many other items will be added as we
expand.
Anyone who wants to translate these materials into a language other
than English is encouraged to do so and send it to us for posting. It is our
goal to have the documents available in every major language of the world.
With the capacity to send electronic documents over the Internet, we finally
have a way to bypass the mass media. Just imagine what would happen if
everyone of the 5000 people on my email list would forward a copy of this
Report to everyone on their email list. And then imagine that ten or fifteen
percent of those would do the same. It would be theoretically possible to
reach every person with an email address on the entire planet within a few
months.
A GLOBAL FORCE FOR FREEDOM This is
no longer an issue just for Americans. It is now a global battle that cuts
across all lines of nationality, race, religion, language, culture, economic
status, and level of education. This is a battle in which we are all united
by common cause. That includes Christians, Jews, Muslims, Americans,
Afghans, Iraqis, Russians, Chinese, Mexicans, Somalians, Croatians, Serbs,
Australians, Canadians -literally everyone in the world who seeks freedom.
I am not talking about governments.
I am talking about people. We must not be tricked into pitting Christians
against Muslims or Muslims against Jews, or Jews against Christians, or any
other combination of religion against religion. No matter how we may differ
over theology, the one thing on which we agree is that it is God's plan for
all men to be free. That is our common cause, and that is the rallying cry
that will bring millions into our ranks. We will not be able to defeat the
global force of despotism without building a global counter-force for freedom.
We are now engaged in world War III, a war involving every nation and every
human being on the planet. You and I are involved whether we like it or not.
We cannot escape. There is no place to hide. The only question is when will
we commit to battle. If we wait until there is no longer any controversy and
all of our friends clearly see that the war on terrorism is a grand deception,
then we will have waited too long. The time to step forward is now.
G. Edward Griffin
|