Starting with first principles and the scientific method
America First Books
Featuring ebooks that find a truer path in uncertain times
The Rattler's Revenge Cover Inside Cover Table of Contents Preface
  Photos Summary Report Contacts Ads for AFP
  Requiem Back to Catalog    


[Pages 9-36 of The Rattler's Revenge]


PREFACE

PRELUDE TO PERFIDY
(The beginning of base treachery)


“Who are the War Agitators?”

Richard Perle is a madman, totally out of control, possessed by the forces of darkness. Perle is a world class propagandist and absolute master of the Big Lie. Perle is the Prince of Darkness, the most evil man on the face of the earth...

Thus spake Jude Wanniski. Although occasionally uttering invectives in his articles, they are well laced with objective truth. Besides being a superlative wordsmith, Wanniski is also known as a very savvy supply side investor.
In a scathing article of 21 Feb. 2002, Jude inveighs against the base perfidy of one Richard Perle:

Perle has an uncanny ability to ‘cloud men’s minds,’ like the Shadow of yore, and, over the years, he has not only clouded the mind of Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld, but also of a great many world leaders. Perle loves not only war, but war against small countries that can be easily squashed by America’s military might. He has a long list in his pocket of those he proposes to squash after he takes care of Iraq.

Perle, of course, is not alone in vying for the title of “the most evil man on the face of the earth.” He has a lot of competition in such of his neocon colleagues as Paul Wolfowitz, Zibgniew Brezezinski, Henry Kissinger, Richard Armitage and Eliot Abrams. We know them collectively as neoconservatives and recognize them as ardent backers of the Israel First clique.
We will concentrate more on Perle and his perfidious playmates as we move, serpentine-like, through this latest of “snake books”, entitled The Rattler’s Revenge.
A quick look at Appendix C — which contains our assortment of full-page, 4-color ads carried periodically in The American Free Press -- will add impetus to our choice of descriptive words and phrases, all pointing toward a montage of madmen who now completely control the foreign policy of both State and Defense. By the arcane process of perfidious infiltration they have slowly and methodically taken over all of those cabinet offices at the highest level for the past 40 years.
I have known many of these madmen personally and have worked with them at various levels while serving as one of the chief arms negotiators for both secretaries of defense, Bob McNamara and Mel Laird. Individually, these madmen can be tolerated, but, believe me, a collective clique of ambitious neocons, such as those currently assembled in my old office of International Security Affairs (ISA), can be very dangerous indeed.
As President Harry Truman remarked in one of his diary entries of July 1947: “The Jews, I find, are very, very selfish... Put an underdog on top and it makes no difference whether, his name is Russian, Jewish, Negro, he goes haywire.”
As Patrick J. Buchanan so boldly stated: “A neoconservative clique seeks to ensnare our country in a series of wars that are not in America’s interest.” He added that “[T]he War Party’s Plan ... has been in preparation far in advance of 9-11.” (The American Conservative - 24 March 2003).
Buchanan is at his very best when asking such pithy questions as “Whose War?” and “Which War?” and “Was the official version of 9-11 a gigantic hoax?” Pat was one of the first national columnists who told it exactly like it was: “We are told our enemy is Osama bin Laden, but, the war crimes of {11 September} were carried out by men who live among us. The enemy is already inside the gates.” (LA Times 21 September 2001)
Who are these men who live among us? Ahhh, that is the question!
We hope to provide answers to that question, plus give you a factual reportage of the five W’s: Who - What - When - Where - Why. Hopefully, too, as we move along in annals of time and events, we may also find answers to the How of it... namely, how was the 9-11 tragedy of our time specifically carried out?

QUESTION: WHO DONE IT?

That, too, is a leading question. There are no simple or easy answers. Bear in mind that we are only at the preface or beginning of this remarkable horror story. At present, I will cite three most revealing policy papers emanating from three different sources.
Yet, the three studies are remarkably similar in content and phraseology, in style and methodology, as if an Unseen Hand had guided their sharpened pencils and thought processes.
Coincidence? You decide. As we proceed onward into never-never land, feel free to question my analysis and interpretations. Also, caution me when I stray too far from the subject at hand. I do have a certain tendency to use circumlocution when I consider that the subject is becoming too boring, or, conversely, too exciting. Circumlocution means a roundabout, indirect, or lengthy way of expressing something.
On to the three studies! We will concentrate more fully on them in later chapters.
In June of 1997, a grouping of former GOP officials, now ensconced in a local think tank, introduced “The Project for the New American Century.” They proposed a “revolution” in the methods, techniques and objectives of the U.S. military forces and called for a radical change in “preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, prosperity and principles.”
These prophets of pusillanimity at first merely stated that history (of the 20th century) “should have taught us that it is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge and to meet threats before they become dire.”
The next report in our pecking order was published in 2000 and titled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”. In its 76 pages of purple prose, the authors take on a grandeur and bravado not emphasized in the earlier paper. They set out an “ideal military preparedness level” which would assure global domination and identify a hi-tech form of warfare which would enable the military to use far less “force”; i.e., manpower, than that same military was accustomed to accept.
They also identified those “hostile regimes” referred to in the “Principles” as...you guessed it...Iran, Iraq, Syria and North Korea (no mention at this time of Liberia).
The signers of the “Principles” (in 1997) stated that the process of transforming the military would probably be a long one... “absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor.”
Included among the signers of these “Principles” are some illustrious statesmen, thinkers, academicians...and “madmen” (as Jude Wanniski refers to them): Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, I. Lewis Libby, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and Elliott Abrams.
Third in studies and reports is the “National Energy Policy”, passed from the hands of V.P. Dick Cheney to Pres. George W. Bush on 16 May 2001. Cheney had commissioned an energy report from forrner Secretary of State James Baker III o/a December 2000.
Jim Baker then delivered the energy report to Dick Cheney sometime in April 2001. The report recommends — among other national energy security matters — that the United States conduct an immediate policy review of Iraq, including military, energy, economic and political/diplomatic assessments., The report also states:

Sanctions that are not effective should be phased out and replaced with highly focused and enforced sanctions that target the regime's ability to maintain and acquire weapons of mass destruction. (Author's emphasis)

WEXNER ANALYSIS:

ISRAELI COMMUNICATION PRIORITIES

We have used the same scientific methodology to isolate specific words, phrases, themes and messages that will resonate with at least 70% of the American audience.... All the language we have written in past memos will not work when it comes to U.S. tax dollars. Remember this vital message — Israel can only benefit with U.S. tax dollars

This is a vital new Israeli propaganda strategy document for the period following the war in Iraq and represents why the news and communications we get about the Middle East is so overwhelmingly Pro-Israel.
Every Israeli and most American Jews are programmed by these sophisticated think tank/PR firms that counsel Jews on exactly what to say and how to say it concerning the Middle East situation and that occurring in Iraq. American Patriots and other lovers of Freedom around the world are flooded with this kind of pre-prepared propaganda and the Jews use it when they are brought in front of our television cameras, which they are allowed to use far more than their opponents, the Palestinians, Iraqis or patriotic, and Constitutional-oriented Americans.
The document, entitled “Wexner Analysis: Israeli Communications Priorities 2003”, was prepared for the Wexner Foundation, which operates leadership training programs such as the “Birthright Israel” project which offers free trips for young Jewish Americans to Israel, by the public relations firm, the Luntz Research Companies, and the Israel Project. However, please note that the report’s suggested language is written in a distinctly Israeli — as opposed to a Jewish-American, voice.
These are direct quotes from Israelis who make use of “scientific methodology”. Be aware of the intentional “spin” or play on words that “isolates specific words, phrases, themes and messages that will resonate...”
We used to call it lying, but Elie Weisel and like-minded spinmeisters have turned it into an art.

The world has changed. The words, themes and messages on behalf of Israel must include and embrace the new reality of a post-Saddam world.
In the past, we have urged a lower profile for Israel out of a fear that the American people would blame Israel for what was happening in the rest of the Middle East. Now is the time to link American success in dealing with terrorism and dictators from a position of strength to Israel's ongoing efforts to eradicate terrorism on and within its borders. In the current political environment, you have little to lose and a lot to gain by aligning with America. With all the anti-Americanism across the globe and all the protests and demonstrations, we are looking for allies that share our commitment to security and an end to terrorism and are prepared to say so. Israel is just such an ally.
The fact that Israel has remained relatively silent for the three months preceding the war and for the three weeks of the war was absolutely the correct strategy — and according to all the polling done, it worked. But as the military conflict comes to a close, it is now time for Israel to lay out its own ‘road map” for the future which includes unqualified support for America and unqualified commitment to an ongoing war against terrorism.

ESSENTIAL CONCLUSIONS

This document is rather long because it is impossible to communicate all that is needed in simple one-sentence sound-bites. Yes, we have provided those on the pages that follow, but we have taken the space to explain why the language is so important and the context in which it needs to be used.
If you only read two pages, these are the key conclusions:
1) Iraq colors all. Saddam is your best defense, even if he is dead. The world view of Americans is entirely dominated by developments in Iraq. This is a unique opportunity for Israelis to deliver a message of support and unity at a time of great international anxiety and opposition from some of our European “allies.”
2) Stick to your message, but don’t say it the same way twice.
3) It DOES NOT HELP when you compliment President Bush. When you want to identify with and align yourself with America, just say it. Don’t use George Bush as a synonym for the United States.
4) Conveying sensitivity and a sense of values is a must. Most of the best-performing sound bites mention children, families, and democratic values. Don’t just say that Israel is morally aligned with the U.S. Show it in your language.
5) “SECURITY” sells. Security has become the key fundamental principle for all Americans. Security is the context by which you should explain Israeli need for loan guarantees and military aid, as well as why Israel can’t just give up land.
6) The language in this document will work, but it will work best when it is accompanied with passion and compassion.
7) Find yourself a good female spokesperson.
8) Link Iraqi liberation with the plight of the Palestinian people.
9) A little humility goes a long way.
10) Of course rhetorical questions work, don’t they? Ask a question to which there is only one answer. It is essential that your communication be laced with rhetorical questions, which is how Jews talk anyway.
11) Mahmoud Abbas is still a question mark. Leave him that way. You stand much more to lose by attacking him now. But similarly, he is not worthy of praise.

TWO MOST IMPORTANT
WORDS: SADDAM HUSSEIN

This document is about language, so let me be blunt. “Saddam Hussein” are the two words that tie Israel to America and are most likely to deliver support in Congress. They also just happen to be two of the most hated words in the English language right now.
References to the successful outcome of the war with Iraq benefit Israel. While Americans don’t want to increase foreign aid in a time of significant budgetary deficits and painful spending cuts, there is one and only one argument that will work for continuing Israeli aid (in four easy steps):
(1) As a democracy, Israel has the right and the responsibility to defend its borders and protect its people.
(2) Prevention works. Even with the collapse of Saddam’s regime, terrorist threats remain throughout our region.
(3) Israel is America’s one and only true ally in the region. In these particularly unstable and dangerous times, Israel should not be forced to go it alone.
(4) With America’s financial assistance, Israel can defend its borders, protect its people, and provide invaluable assistance to the American effort in the war against terrorism.

“DEMOCRACY” CONNECTS
IRAQ AND PALESTINE

"My earnest hope is that with regime change in Iraq, democracy may finally take firm root in the Middle East.”
Americans want democracy to flourish in the Middle East.
Democracy loves company. So far, one of Israel’s most effective messages has been that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. It’s time for true democracy for the Palestinian people. They deserve no less.
This may seem simplistic but the message works when delivered this way and in this order. Americans sincerely hope that Iraq — a former adversary — can become a partner in peace once a representative government is installed. Insofar as they yearn for freedom and deserve representative leadership, the Palestinian people are no different. This is exactly what Israel has asked of the Palestinian Authority for so long: to establish a legitimate government that will become a partner in peace.
Using the word “democracy” without giving examples of what makes this system of government so essential is like saying you want “peace"’ without giving evidence that you’ve made honest strides toward achieving it. Americans want proof that you know what these nice-sounding words mean.
When linking our common bond of democracy, use specific examples of why we hope that more nations establish the freedoms democracy guarantees:

— Women are treated as equals
— The press operates freely
— All religions are respected
— The people choose who represents them in free elections
— Democracies do not make war on each other

Finally, make the argument that if these freedoms are so dear to Israelis and Americans, they are just as dearly missed by the Palestinian people. All people yearn to live free, and their current leadership denies them that right.

ISRAELI NUCLEAR OPTION = WMD

Time to read again The Samson Option by Seymour Hersh, wherein the Jews, overrun by the “Islamic Fundamentalist” hordes, pull down the temple (using the atomic weapons stockpiled in the Negev Desert), thus wiping out not only the Arabs practicing their “right of return”, but those Jews who choose to remain behind (or forced to remain behind, especially the African and Asiatic Jews) after George “Dubya” Bush grants refugee status to the citizens of Israel, many of whom have “dual citizenship”, i.e., of Israel and the United States.
Time, too, to interject a statement made by Dr. Abdul Alim Muhammad in an interview with the Executive Intelligence Review of 22 March 1996. Dr. Muhammad, a medical doctor of repute, had accompanied Minister Farrakhan on his visit to such Muslim countries as Libya, Iraq and Iran. He refers to his tour of hospitals in Iraq:

{W}e saw infants who were just a bag of bones...depressed immune systems... suffering from leukemia, caused by the use of nuclear weapons — low yield nuclear weapons — which were used during the Gulf war, which I don’t think was reported... Now, five years after the war, there are thousands upon thousands of children, and some adults, suffering the effect of exposure to radiation.

This is the first report, outside of military intelligence circles, acknowledging the distinct probability of the use of CBR low yield weaponry against the Iraqis. A small circle of friends and colleagues, most of them retired from the military, raised this possibility shortly after the Scud exercise and the valiant efforts to shoot them down with the ineffective Patriot anti-missile missile.
One 3-star opined that the Israelis could have fired a few missiles with low yield tactical nuke warheads, or C-B warheads, from the Negev Desert located about 100 miles south of Beershaba and about 600 miles west of Baghdad. Iraqi casualties from these low-yield CBR weapons — mostly civilians — number in the hundreds of thousands.
The U.S. military also has the capability of using such weapons, either fired from ships in the Gulf, carried aboard attack aircraft, or fired from ground-launched vehicles supporting US Army ground forces as they penetrated into Iraq.
Unfortunately, some of our troops, especially those in the 101st Airmobile Division, which made deep penetrations, were contaminated by these very toxic agents of chemical-biological-neurological-radiological weaponry and which we now call the Gulf War Syndrome or the Gulf War Illness.
Believe me, such horrific and intentional destruction could not be caused by depleted uranium (DU) rounds fired from anti-tank weapons.
On the night of 21 February 1991, certain satellite images were captured of apparent rocket or missile launches flaring across the Negev Desert. Question: Could this have been the beginning of what we now call Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD); i.e., the use of low yield nuclear weapons against the Iraqi populace by the Israelis?
This is a smoldering political issue purposely kept under wraps by the Pentagon, but which could explode in our faces. Knowing the import of manipulating public opinion and by use of disinformation and propaganda, the present administration in Washington can give this horrific act of terror and mass murder the proper spin so that the public will be convinced that it was Saddam Hussein who caused the slaughter of his own people. We will then slaver — as did Papa Bush, and now, Bush junior — to go in and “get” that “madman”.
This is Jingoism, pure and simple.

MASSIVE FRAUD BEING PERPETRATED

As we enter the Ides of August (13th day of the month), we face a dire dilemma. A massive fraud is being perpetrated against the American people — a fraud of heretofore unprecedented dimensions, which, if carried to its ultimate dimensions, will literally destroy the country we once proudly knew as the United States of America — a Republic for which it stood…
The fraud itself is divided into two major events, both contrived. One event started in July 2000 and continued unabated until 11 September 2001. The first event was triggered by electricity prices spiking to their highest levels. The people of the state of California, under the stewardship of one Gray Davis (who is going down for the count), became victims of this massive fraud, which generated more than $8.2 billion in manipulated profits-to a chosen few.
The other massive and unprecedented fraud perpetrated on the entire American populace is now known as 9/11.
The two events were joined at the hip. It is a lengthy story of unrequited greed and unbelievable chicanery astride its serpentine tail. Its many wiggles and squiggles leave an indelible trail across the wasteland of history.
By the adroit use of books — namely the Barbarians series — we have now joined these momentous events at the spine, so to speak.
We have now joined Book I — The Serpent’s Sting, and Book III — The Rattler's Revenge, at the spine and combined these two books. Book I has undergone a process of re-writing, revising and updating, leaving the real meat of those chapters intact, but eliminating some of the outdated or irrelevant material.
Book III constitutes the newest and latest material of some astounding and chilling fact, combined with an autobiographical sketch of the author going back to 1943 when the actual fun and games began. I was 17 at the time, full of vim and vigor, as many of my contemporaries were, and hot to get into the action. “Patriotism” was the “in” thing and there followed a series of actions and activities — many of them classed as “high adventure”, and not a few of them best forgotten as “unmentionable”.
I concentrated on Book III to be a much easier read and often penned it in the first person, sans foot notes and chapter references and indices, which, although necessary for the scholarly researcher, leaves something to be desired for the ordinary avid reader.
I met a bevy of people along the way — some innately good, others, inherently bad from the get go. Many were of high ranking personages —cabinet rank and ministers without portfolio — others, kings and presidents and dictators too, neither good nor bad, but certainly not indifferent.
I introduce you to them along the way; not just name dropping, for I did drop a few, but substantiated with a collection of personal letters and personal autographs, for I was there, often front and center to the action.
And I enjoyed it immensely. I was there, but hardly ever alone, for I had an incomparable wife, Ursella, whom I saw occasionally (we had five incomparable “natural” children and two adopted). In all my travels about the world, she generally kept me on the straight and narrow, busy constantly with actually running a household and raising kids, with time out occasionally for her two favorite sports, tennis and skiing.
Insofar as Book II is concerned — The Viper’s Venom— continues on its own with a full head of steam. It has been selling briskly and continuously for 10 months. Book I —The Serpent’s Sting — has been selling briskly for nearly three years. In July 2003, we were completely out of stock and had to decide whether to re-stock, or to revise and update. We chose the latter approach and combined Book I with Book III.
Together, the three books, constituting the “Snakes Series”, form a mosaic of man’s base treachery through the years and centuries. We have also met a lot of snakes in the ensuing years.
Apart from those studies and reports listed above, I now flag three other studies well worth an honorable mention. I list them, along with their principal authors. As a professor of prose and geopolitics, I hereby assign these studies to my students (our readers) as future homework. I call specific attention to one written by the inimitable Morton Halperin, and flag some pieces of correspondence relating directly to that creepy crawly individual. (See attached letters)

Document #5 - “Using Power and Diplomacy to Deal with Rogue States” by Thomas H. Henrikson of the Hoover Institute

Document #6 - “National Security Initiative, The Transformation of National Security” by Newt Gingrich.

Document #7 - “A Report of Policy Options Towards Iraq” by Geoffrey Kemp, Morton H. Halperin, Council on Foreign Relations. (The attached correspondence relates directly to that particular author — M.H. Halperin, an avowed Marxist/Leninist.)

ISRAELI PATRIOT BLASTS SHARON’S PERFIDY

An important and disturbing new book entitled Politicide: Ariel Sharon’s War against the Palestinians has hit the marketplace and is well worth a read. The author, Dr. Baruch Kimmerling, is a sociologist and Israeli academician with impressive credentials. He has written books on the broad subject of Israeli history and a more narrow focused work on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Dr. Kimmerling hones in on Ariel Sharon and his perfidious (treacherous) activities, not only as the Israeli prime minister, but long before that as a perpetual warrior against the Palestinian people.
He is “an agent of destruction”, which is oriented toward one major goal: the politicide of the Palestinian people.

By politicide, I mean a process that has, as its ultimate goal, the dissolution of the Palestinian people’s existence as a legitimate social, political, and economic entity. This process may also include their partial or complete ethnic cleansing from the territory known as the Land of Israel. This policy will inevitably rot the internal fabric of Israeli society and undermine the moral foundation of the Jewish state in the Middle East. From this perspective, the result will be a double politicide — that of the Palestinian entity, and, in the long run, that of the Jewish entity as well. Therefore, the current Israeli government poses a considerable danger to the stability and the very survival of all the peoples of the entire region.

Dr. Kimmerling winds up this exceptionally interesting tome with a word of warning:

Neither the Jews nor the Palestinians will be moved from that piece of land without great harm befalling the other side also. If the hostilities persist, the situation may lead to long-term mutual attrition, resulting in the destruction and disappearance of both societies as the conflict escalates into a regional war, whether non- conventional weapons are used or not... If both sides will make or remake the painful compromises they find unthinkable at present, but which are needed to effect a mutual reconciliation, they may not only cease being enemies, but may find that their common interests lead them to become close allies as well.


PRELUDE TO PANIC

In Book II of the Barbarians series — The Viper’s Venom — which was published in October 2002 — I warned of a gigantic stock market bubble about to burst. Well, it busted, and took with it the life’s savings of a lot of folks.
Now, another bubble looms on the horizon, the long bond market. Warning — warning! It is but another massive fraud being perpetrated on the American people.
To further lower interest rates, the Feds are buying up long bonds like there’s no tomorrow. The 30-year bonds were averaging about 4% a couple months ago, and now, the interest rate is 5.3% and climbing.
It is also crashing. The intricate process of driving up the long interest rates will have a marked delitierious effect on the price of a home over a 30-year period, among other factors. By raising the interest rates on 30-year bonds, we will see an added 15% at least as the ultimate cost to buying a home.

Here’s what I said in August 2002:

The 9-11 activity and horrific destruction of U.S. property and lives was intentionally meant to trigger a psychological and patriotic reaction on the part of the U.S. citizens, which is paving the way for “combined U.N. activity” (using the fig leaf of NATO) for striking key targets in both the Middle East/ South Asia and the Balkans. The goal continues to be ultimate destruction of all national sovereignty and establishment of, a global government.
The trigger for the 9-11 activity was the imminent and unstoppable world-wide financial collapse, which can only be prevented (temporarily) by a major war, perhaps to become known as WW III. To bring it off (one more time), martial law will probably be imposed in the United States.
In each of the major wars of the 20th century, the financial manipulators (located in the City of London and New York City) had placed the U.S. (and much of the Western world) in a monetary expansion mode, followed by an ever-tightening vice of a gigantic credit squeeze. We now have two ongoing and tightly controlled simultaneous events (emanating from the two symbolic targets of 9-11:
1) Alan Greenspan, Fed chairman, promising to flood the market with up to $200 billion and to further lower interest rates, thus assuredly bringing about hyper-inflation and dollar devaluation. Much of these multi billions in largesse will be dumped into the coffers, of Wall Street, Defense, bankrupt airlines, insurance companies and into the willing arms of debt-ridden third world countries in the form of debt repudiation (forgiveness). Call it bribery, in order to get these often reluctant nations to join our coalition of “freedom fighters” in “the war against terrorism”
2) Paul Wolfowitz deputy Defense secretary, promised that the U.S. will launch “sustained military strikes against those behind the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington”.
He said that the “military retaliation would continue until the roots of terrorism are destroyed.”
This bit of saber rattling was seconded by select NATO allies (especially Britain), and by our chief ally in the Middle East, the Butcher of Beruit, Ariel Sharon, while Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, with the blessings of Pres. George W. Bush, is activating thousands of national guard and reservists, not only to guard the vulnerable airports, but to do fly-overs of our Nation’s capital in Fl6s from the North Dakota Air Guard (the Happy Hooligans). Other National Guard units are being jockeyed into potential combat “hot spots” throughout the Middle East/South Asia and the Balkans.

Stay tuned, friends; remember, it ain’t over ‘til it’s over.


DID THE MADMEN STAGE A COLD COUP ON 9-11?

It was Edward Luttwak who authored “Coup D’état: A Practical Handbook”. He said, “A coup consists of the infiltration of a small but critical segment of the state apparatus, which is then used to displace the government from its control of the remainder.”
Did this singular event actually take place during the early morning hours of 11 September 2001 when “a small but critical segment of the state apparatus” displaced the government by what we call a cold coup?
Read very carefully all the small print contained in Appendix A -- “Summary Report to the Joint Chiefs of Staff -- 9-11-01 Disaster”, then, you decide.
An associate editor of the Wall Street Journal reports

Douglas Feith’s sin is being Don Rumsfeld’s ideas man and one of the brains behind some of the most significant foreign policy and national security advances of the Bush administration. As Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, Mr. Feith has transformed a once relatively obscure corner of the Pentagon into the world’s most effective think tank. The fact that the President has adopted many of the ideas brewed there infuriates those who see Defense usurping a role that rightly belongs to the State Department. (WSJ 08-05-03)

Feith is #3 in the pecking order of Defense, right after #2 -Paul Wolfowitz. Of course, at this writing Numero Uno is Donald Rumsfeld, the Sec. Def. I have known Don Rumsfeld personally since 1975 when he assumed the position of Sec. Def. for the first time. Other infiltrators into the Defense Department, most of whom I knew personally, included Jim Schlessinger, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Frank Carlucci, Jim Woolsey, Stephen Hadley and Richard Armitage. Several of them occupied the top slot in the Pentagon, as well as the CIA.
At that time, I was the principal arms negotiator for the Middle East and was slated to assume the position of Director, Defense Security Assistance Agency, as well as promotion to a brigadier general (reserve) slot coming open in First Army. (See Appendix B - “Letters of Encouragement”).
Those singular events didn't happen.
As I explained in Book 1, The Serpent’s Sting, this was the time I exited Washington, D.C. and the Pentagon for my farm in central Virginia “where I began an intensive program of research which slowly unmasked a deadly Bolshevik peril to our Republic...”
I witnessed the serpentine maneuvering up close and within the hallowed halls of the Puzzle Palace by a den of vipers who had surreptitiously infiltrated the highest echelons of Defense and State to where they could now make national policy with impunity.
For example, during the beginnings of the Reagan Revolution, the Office of Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy was created for one Richard Perle, who was handed “significant roles and missions” in the policy formulation mode. Until that time (1981) Defense did not make US foreign policy — State did — but Defense implemented that policy.
Under Perle, he and his fellow neocons now did both. He was followed in that illustrious position by such neocons as Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Stepehen Hadley and Abram Shulsky.


“A MORAL CESSPOOL”

Francis A. Boyle, Professor of law, U. of Illinois Law School, told it like it was on 2 Aug 2003, when he likened his Alma Mater — the University of Chicago — to “a moral cesspool”.
He referred to, among others, Prof. Leo Strauss, who headed the Dept. of Political Science there and where Boyle graduated with an AB degree in 1971. According to Boyle, it is a matter of record that immediately after the 9-11-01 event, it was Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his pro-Israeli Neocon, Paul Wolfowitz who began to plot, plan, scheme and conspire to wage a war of savage aggression against Iraq. We will cover more of this scheming on the part of those former students of Leo Strauss and his Machiavellian/Nietzschean theories in Chapter 13, “Manipulating Public Opinion”.
Suffice it to say at this time that Attorney General John Ashcroft received his law degree from the University of Chicago in 1967. Others of the Straussian cabal included Wolfowitz, who graduated with a PhD ‘72, Ahmad Chalabi, PhD ‘69, Abram Shulsky, PhD ‘72, Zalmay Khalilzad, Ph.D. ‘79, to name but a chosen few.
Boyle tells us that “According to his own public estimate and boast before the American Enterprises Institute, Pres. Bush the Younger hired about 20 Straussians to occupy key positions in his administration, many holding offices where they could push American policy in favor of Israel and against its chosen enemies, such as Iraq, Iran, Syria and the Palestinians.”

It was the Chicago Straussian cabal of pro-Israel neocons who set up a separate “intelligence” unit within the Pentagon that was responsible for many of the bald-faced lies, deceptions, half-truths, and outright propaganda that Bushie Junior then disseminated to the lap-dog U.S. news media in order to generate public support for a war of aggression against Iraq or the benefit of Israel and in order to steal Iraq’s oil. (Boyle)

As Machiavelli once advised his Prince in Chapter XVIII of that book: “Those who want to deceive will always find those willing to be deceived.”


PUTSCH AT THE PENTAGON

As we go to press (15 August 2003), here are some late-breaking stories of critical import, and all aimed at the complete takeover of the federal government. I must first clarify the meanings of key words and phrases for you;
Putsch (pooch) is an uprising or rebellion, especially an unsuccessful or minor one;
Coup D’état - a stroke of state; sudden forcible overthrow of a government. Luttwak tells us that “{A} coup consists of the infiltration of a small but critical segment of the state apparatus, which is then used to displace the government from its control of the remainder.”
Here is a key sentence: “Our first objective will be achieved by conveying the reality and strength of the coup instead of trying to justify it.”
Did this singular event actually take place during the early morning hours of 11 September 2001 when “a small but critical segment of the state apparatus” displaced the government by what we call a cold coup?
In an AP story (4 August 2003), appropriately flagged, Putsch at the Pentagon: “In an unusual sweep, several high-ranking Army Generals are told to retire early. The move appears to be part of a ‘housecleaning’ effort that will allow Gen. Peter Schoomaker — who became the new Army chief of staff August 1 — to fill key positions with fresh faces...
“Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld plucked Shoomaker from retirement to assume the top post after three active-duty Army generals — including Keane (Gen. John Keane, vice chief of staff) — declined the offer to become chief...”
Question: Could this be an indicator that all is not well on the Home Front? Could it be the beginnings of what we call “a counter coup?” Recall that I warned you explicitly in both books I & II that we are facing a coming coup d’état.
In Book One, I said this:

Has there already been a defacto coup d’état?

Consider carefully an excerpt from Book I, Barbarians Inside the Gates. This book was published a year before the critical date of 11 September 2001. One of its most revealing chapters is “The Coming Coup”. I warned you then that a coup d’état was about to happen!

(begin quote - Prologue - page XXI of Book I)
Edward Luttwak, formerly a student at the London School of Economics, published Coup d’état - A Practical Handbook in 1978. It is a masterpiece.
We must now ask the question: Have the Barbarians already pulled off a de facto coup?
Here is a most pertinent passage from Edward Luttwak’s Coup d’état:
If we were revolutionaries, wanting to change the structure of society, our aim would be to destroy the power of some of the political forces, and the long and often bloody process of revolutionary attrition can achieve this.
Our purpose, however, is quite different: we want to seize power within the present system, and we shall only stay in power if we embody some new status quo supported by those very forces which a revolution may seek to destroy. (emphasis added)
Should we want to achieve fundamental social change we can do so after we have become the government. This perhaps is a more efficient method (and certainly a less painful one) than that of the classic revolution.
Though we will try to avoid all conflict with the political forces, some of them will almost certainly oppose a coup.
But this opposition will largely subside when we have substituted our new status quo for the old one, and can enforce it by our control of the state bureaucracy and security forces. (emphasis added)
This period of transition, which comes after we have emerged into the open and before we are vested with the authority of the state, is the most critical phase of the coup. We shall then be carrying out the dual task of imposing our control on the machinery of state, while at the same time using it to impose our control on the country at large. Any resistance to the coup in the one will stimulate further resistance in the other; if a chain reaction develops the coup could be defeated.

Our major point to ponder as we go through Barbarians Inside the Gates is that if a de facto coup has already taken place, then, in order to avoid a bloody revolution for change, a counter-coup may be necessary in order to restore the machinery of state and gain control once more of the critical levers of power.

Think about it seriously, for time is fast running out.

{end quote -- Page XXI of Book I, Barbarians Inside the Gates}

In Book Two, The Viper’s Venom, I said this:

If a coup d’état actually took place early that morning of 11 September, then, who were the actual king makers? Who was “in charge”? Certain individuals appear to be in control... appear to be actually running the government (called a shadow government). Please see Book Two for the names of those culpable criminals. Will they now be tried for high treason.

Now, to muddy these turbulent waters even further, here is a late-breaking story out of Newsday (08/09/03):

WASHINGTON -- Pentagon hard-liners pressing for regime change in Iran have held secret and unauthorized meetings in Paris with a controversial weapons dealer who was a major figure in the Iran-contra scandal. The sources said that at least two Pentagon officials working for Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith have met several times with Manucher Ghorbanifar, the Iranian Jewish middleman in U.S. arms-for- hostage trades to Iran in the mid-1980s.
The senior official said that the policy objective of Feith and a group of neo-conservative civilians inside the Pentagon is regime change in Iran. He said that the immediate objective of the Pentagon hard-liners appears to be to “antagonize Iran so that they get frustrated and then by their reactions harden U.S. policy against them.”

Note that these neo-conservative hard-liners include such other neocons as Harold Rhode, a Middle East specialist working for Doug Feith (remember the name); and Michael Ledeen, a former NSC consultant.
“Ledeen, now a ‘scholar’ at the American Enterprises Institute (AEI), and an ardent advocate for regime change in Iran, would neither confirm nor deny that he arranged the meetings (in Paris), saying ‘it’s nobody’s business.’”
Friends, before these cunning, brilliant and totally unscrupulous “madmen” succeed in pulling the temple down a la Samson (where is Delilah ... aka Hillary?), let’s seriously contemplate going for broke, pulling off a counter coup d’état, staging military tribunals, with consequent punishments — including executions — and then go about our legitimate business of restoring the constitution and the Republic for which it stands.


“WHY ARE WE LOSING?”

In a gut-grabbing commentary (Washington Times 30 May 1999), B. K. Eakman asks that question, then pointedly answers it:

We lost because we failed to apply the strategic lessons of warfare to the attack on our culture. We lost because we gave away the psychological environment. We spent 30 years playing by our opponents’ rules of engagement instead of forcing them to play by ours.

In her exceptionally revealing book, Cloning of the American Mind, Eakman also asks the question: How did we lose?

We lost by basing our strategy on wishful thinking instead of the realities of war, by allowing turf battles to split our alliances, by treating our allies like competition instead of welcoming them as friends.
If we are to save our way of life in the coming century, individuals of principle will have to don the mentality of the resistance fighter. We no longer have the luxury of time for righteous indignation.

In sum, we have two choices: we can surrender unconditionally to the Enemy Within; or we can fight. There are no other choices, and time is fast running out. If we choose the latter, we had best unsheathe our swords and join Horatius at the bridge.


[page 33, The Rattler' Revenge]

(copy)

11 Nov 93

Bruce Thiesen
National Commander American Legion
1608 K Street NW Washington DC 20006

Dear Commander Thiesen:
Congratulations! Anybody who commands three million troops deserves five stars.
You and I joined the US Army at the same age (18), you a year ahead of me. I ended up in Burma following a mule’s ass across the mountains and through the jungles ... high adventure!. I would later pull a tour with the the 27th Wolfhound Regiment in Korea.
Still later, I would work for Jim Gavin, Dwight Beach, Bill Ryder and Bob York in the Pentagon and would retain a deep and abiding friendship with these guys and their wives until all of them have now answered the last airborne muster. I still keep in touch with Hal Moore, whose book, We Were Soldiers Once — and Young came out last year. I also hear regularly from Gen. Frank Sampson (Father Sam) and hope to get a card from him at Christmas.
By the superb examples set by such great soldiers as Father Sam, my cousin, Colonel Ed Grand Pre, such commanders as Generals “Lightnin’ Joe” Collins, Harold K Johnson and “Jumpin’ Jim” Gavin — all of them Catholics — I became a convert to Catholicism.
All these guys helped to make a soldier out of me. I am especially aware of the oath you and I and others took over 50 years ago ... to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enernies, foreign and domestic.
It is the latter I am now especially concerned about, for the enemy is not in Somaliland, nor in Bosnia, nor Haiti, nor Iraq, but here in the United States.
The Enemy is within.
Four years ago, I set out to define that enemy. I became somewhat of a recluse here on my farm, severing most all of my connections and devoting my time to the chores of the farm and a vast reading and research program of factual books and articles, plus having access to critical military intelligence reports.
I want to stress that we are today in the major crisis of our short time as a sovereign nation. What we choose to do (or not to do) between now and 1996 will either restore our Country and our Faith or utterly destroy both and bring us under absolute despotism.
I have detailed this major crisis in 38 chapters of a political/cultural bombshell called BARBARIANS INSIDE THE GATES. Such friends as Pat Buchanan, Alf Regnery, John McManus, Msgr. Sampson, Dr. George Roche and Ed Grand Pre have gone over it chapter-by-chapter and have provided advice, guidance and encouragement. My brother, Jim, a DuPont executive, and former paratrooper of the 82d Airborne, also has commented on selected chapters.
Bruce, we are at war, and yet, too many of us are thinking only of a business-as-usual election in 1996; you know, if only we can win a few more seats in Congress and come up with a “winnable” presidential candidate, while the powers that be in the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) are already programming us for a Perot-Dole win, or some other combination satisfactory to their New World Order plans. After the Clinton-Rodham-Gore combo, they may look good, but inside the Beltway and along Madison Avenue and Wall Street, it will be business as usual which spells slavery and disaster for most of us.
By that time our Constitution and our national sovereignty will have been subordinated to the United Nations Charter and our military will be under the jurisdiction of Boutrous Boutrous-Gali and his Soviet henchman, the UN Undersecretary for Political & Security Affairs. Clinton intends to slam-dunk our military into the role of United Nations “peacekeeping”, perhaps under NATO.
This is why Clinton and his totally incompetent Secretary of Defense, Les Aspin. chose Morton Halperin, a known security risk and avowed Marxist, to be Asst Sec Def for Democracy and Peacekeeping (neither is a role for the military which is designed as an instrument of force to destroy an enemy).
God help us! For the enemy is within the gates.
In September, I extracted information from BARBARIANS and prepared a backgrounder on Halperin (attached). I sent copies of it to Senators John Warner, John McCain, Sam Nunn and Strom Thurmond. I have received letters of acknowledgment from them and apparently they have individually requested Clinton to withdraw his name.








 

The Rattler's Revenge Cover Inside Cover Table of Contents Preface
  Photos Summary Report Contacts Ads for AFP
  Requiem Back to Catalog