THE TRUTH ABOUT TRUTH:

All truth passes through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed.
Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.



Wednesday, June 24, 2009

IRAN'S MISTAKE: "LISTENING TO THE AMERICANS"

.
And once again there’s this urgent call for sanctions and threats of force against Iran at the precise time Iran is opening a new oil exchange with all transactions in Euros.
~ Dr. Ron Paul; “The End Of Dollar Hegemony” (2006)

Numerous economists have expressed alarm about Iran’s ambitions, saying that “the impact of the Iran Oil Bourse on the American dollar – and U.S. economy – could be worse than Iran launching a direct nuclear attack.” (Some pundits have even suggested that this could be an additional explanation for why this Islamic republic appears to be the U.S.’s next target.)
~ Dr. Chuck Missler; “Prophecy 20/20: Profiling The Future Through The Lens Of Scripture” (2006)

It was a sad commentary, I reflected, that the United States, and indeed most Western countries, had adopted a double standard for international morality: anything Marxist, no matter how bloody and base, is acceptable.
~ Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (The Shah Of Iran)

If you stick your nose in somebody else’s business and it smells like sh#t, odds are you have your nose in a very private place. Remove it!
~ Stephen T. McCarthy (me)

Originally, the next thing I intended to post on this Blog was links to some excellent articles about the U.S. Constitution, but with the terribly sad upheaval taking place in Iran right now, I’ve decided to shelve the Constitution links. Besides, what the hell does the U.S. Constitution have to do with the United States in 2009 anyway? How relevant is THAT? (I shall return to beat this dead horse later.) A blogger needs to keep up with the times, to roll with the punches, to ride the waves of shifting seas; a blogger needs to remain as flexible as Gumby and his pony pal, Pokey, too. (You can read my mind about that suspicious relationship – I’m not even going to go there.)

It’s a pretty good bet that our government will eventually attempt to use the current crisis in Iran as a pretext for sticking our nose in Iran’s anal orifice. After all, USAP’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, believes one should “never let a serious crisis go to waste.”

A study of the history of American foreign policy will show that more times than not, where there is strife and social unrest around the world, and where America has interjected Herself in the affairs of other nations, the unrest was created or, at best, exacerbated by American meddling. The U.S. State Department has been more responsible for worldwide political problems over the last 80 years than any other party one could point to. Who assisted the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia? The U.S. Government (and some very wealthy so-called “American Capitalists”). Who was most responsible for making the U.S.S.R. a world superpower? The U.S. Government. Who made it possible for Communism to gain control of China? The U.S. Government. Who helped Saddam Hussein get a stranglehold on Iraq? The U.S. Government. Who cloaked Castro in a cover of respectability (just another “agrarian reformer”) so he could turn Cuba over to the Communists? The U.S. Government-controlled mainstream media. (And if you don’t understand why the major media sources – including Fox News – are arms of the U.S. Government, then you need to read “Stop Being A Useful Idiot” for starters.) I could go on and on and on. To get a good idea of how sticking our nose in the “business” of other nations has continually backfired and shot us in our own butt, read Congressman Ron Paul’s book “A Foreign Policy Of Freedom.”

Make no mistake about it, my heart goes out to many Iranians at this time. However, with all hell breaking loose in Iran now, and my suspicion that this corrupt administration (“meet the new boss; same as the old boss”) will try to use it to its advantage (just like the “W” administration used the 9/11 attacks), now is a good time to read James Perloff’s good article which appeared in the 2009, May 25th issue of The New American magazine. Timing is everything, and Perloff’s was impeccable! Yes, it's lengthy, but what doesn't kill ya makes ya smarter and harder to fool the next time.

IRAN AND THE SHAH: WHAT REALLY HAPPENED
By James Perloff
Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Americans have been hearing for several years about potential war with Iran. For instance, on September 17, 2006, Time magazine reported, “The U.S. would have to consider military action long before Iran had an actual bomb.” On October 10, under the heading “A Chilling Preview of War,” Time warned: “As Iran continues to enrich uranium, the U.S. military has issued a ‘Prepare to Deploy’ order.”

In September 2007, US News & World Report stated: “Amid deepening frustration with Iran, calls for shifting Bush administration policy toward military strikes or other stronger actions are intensifying.” And in June 2008, President-to-be Barack Obama declared: “The danger from Iran is grave, it is real, and my goal will be to eliminate this threat.”

However, suppose a progressive, pro-Western regime ruled Iran, representing no threat? War discussions would be unnecessary. Yet many forget that, until 30 years ago, exactly such a regime led Iran, until it was toppled with the help of the same U.S. foreign policy establishment recently beating war drums.

Meet the Shah
From 1941 until 1979, Iran was ruled by a constitutional monarchy under Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Iran’s Shah (king).

Although Iran, also called Persia, was the world’s oldest empire, dating back 2,500 years, by 1900 it was floundering. Bandits dominated the land; literacy was one percent; and women, under archaic Islamic dictates, had no rights.

The Shah changed all this. Primarily by using oil-generated wealth, he modernized the nation. He built rural roads, postal services, libraries, and electrical installations. He constructed dams to irrigate Iran’s arid land, making the country 90-percent self-sufficient in food production. He established colleges and universities, and at his own expense, set up an educational foundation to train students for Iran’s future.

To encourage independent cultivation, the Shah donated 500,000 Crown acres to 25,000 farmers. In 1978, his last full year in power, the average Iranian earned $2,540, compared to $160 25 years earlier. Iran had full employment, requiring foreign workers. The national currency was stable for 15 years, inspiring French economist André Piettre to call Iran a country of “growth without inflation.” Although Iran was the world’s second largest oil exporter, the Shah planned construction of 18 nuclear power plants. He built an Olympic sports complex and applied to host the 1988 Olympics (an honor eventually assigned Seoul), an achievement unthinkable for other Middle East nations.

Long regarded as a U.S. ally, the Shah was pro-Western and anti-communist, and he was aware that he posed the main barrier to Soviet ambitions in the Middle East. As distinguished foreign-affairs analyst Hilaire du Berrier noted: “He determined to make Iran … capable of blocking a Russian advance until the West should realize to what extent her own interests were threatened and come to his aid.... It necessitated an army of 250,000 men.” The Shah’s air force ranked among the world’s five best. A voice for stability within the Middle East itself, he favored peace with Israel and supplied the beleaguered state with oil.

On the home front, the Shah protected minorities and permitted non-Muslims to practice their faiths. “All faith,” he wrote, “imposes respect upon the beholder.” The Shah also brought Iran into the 20th century by granting women equal rights. This was not to accommodate feminism, but to end archaic brutalization.

Yet, at the height of Iran’s prosperity, the Shah suddenly became the target of an ignoble campaign led by U.S. and British foreign policy makers. Bolstered by slander in the Western press, these forces, along with Soviet-inspired communist insurgents, and mullahs opposing the Shah’s progressiveness, combined to face him with overwhelming opposition. In three years he went from vibrant monarch to exile (on January 16, 1979), and ultimately death, while Iran fell to Ayatollah Khomeini’s terror.

Houchang Nahavandi, one of the Shah’s ministers and closest advisers, reveals in his book The Last Shah of Iran: “We now know that the idea of deposing the Shah was broached continually, from the mid-seventies on, in the National Security Council in Washington, by Henry Kissinger, whom the Shah thought of as a firm friend.”

Kissinger virtually epitomized the American establishment: before acting as Secretary of State under Republicans Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, he had been chief foreign-affairs adviser to Nelson Rockefeller, whom he called “the single most influential person in my life.” Jimmy Carter defeated Ford in the 1976 presidential election, but the switch to a Democratic administration did not change the new foreign policy tilt against the Shah. Every presidential administration since Franklin D. Roosevelt’s has been dominated by members of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the most visible manifestation of the establishment that dictates U.S. foreign policy along internationalist lines. The Carter administration was no exception.

Nahavandi writes:

"The alternation of parties does not change the diplomatic orientation of the United States that much. The process of toppling the Shah had been envisaged and initiated in 1974, under a certain Republican administration.... Numerous, published documents and studies bear witness to the fact, even if it was not until the beginning of the Carter administration that the decision was made to take concerted action by evoking problems related to human rights."

The Shah’s destruction required assembling a team of diplomatic “hit men.” Du Berrier commented:

"When the situation was deemed ripe, U.S. Ambassador William Sullivan — the man reputed to have toppled the pro-American government of General Phoumi Nosavan in Laos — was sent to urge the Shah to get out. In December Mr. George Ball, an instant “authority on Iran,” was sent as a follow-up with the same message."

Sullivan (CFR), a career diplomat with no Middle East experience, became our ambassador to Iran in 1977. The Shah recalled:

"Whenever I met Sullivan and asked him to confirm these official statements [of American support], he promised he would. But a day or two later he would return, gravely shake his head, and say that he had received “no instructions” and therefore could not comment.... His answer was always the same: I have received no instructions.... This rote answer had been given me since early September [1978] and I would continue to hear it until the day I left the country."

The other key player du Berrier named, George Ball, was a quintessential establishment man: CFR member, Bilderberger, and banker with Lehman Brothers Kuhn Loeb. The Shah commented: “What was I to make, for example, of the Administration’s sudden decision to call former Under Secretary of State George Ball to the White House as an advisor on Iran? I knew that Ball was no friend.”

Writes Nahavandi:

"George Ball — that guru of American diplomacy and prominento of certain think-tanks and pressure groups — once paid a long visit to Teheran, where, interestingly, the National Broadcasting Authority placed an office at his disposal. Once installed there, he played host to all the best-known dissidents and gave them encouragement. After he returned to Washington, he made public statements, hostile and insulting to the Sovereign."

Joining the smear was U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy, whose role Nahavandi recalled in a 1981 interview:

"But we must not forget the venom with which Teddy Kennedy ranted against the Shah, nor that on December 7, 1977, the Kennedy family financed a so-called committee for the defense of liberties and rights of man in Teheran, which was nothing but a headquarters for revolution."

Suddenly, the Shah noted, the U.S. media found him “a despot, an oppressor, a tyrant.” Kennedy denounced him for running “one of the most violent regimes in the history of mankind.”

At the center of the “human rights” complaints was the Shah’s security force, SAVAK. Comparable in its mission to America’s FBI, SAVAK was engaged in a deadly struggle against terrorism, most of which was fueled by the bordering USSR, which linked to Iran’s internal communist party, the Tudeh. SAVAK, which had only 4,000 employees in 1978, saved many lives by averting several bombing attempts. Its prisons were open for Red Cross inspections, and though unsuccessful attempts were made on the Shah’s life, he always pardoned the would-be assassins. Nevertheless, a massive campaign was deployed against him. Within Iran, Islamic fundamentalists, who resented the Shah’s progressive pro-Western views, combined with Soviet-sponsored communists to overthrow the Shah. This tandem was “odd” because communism is committed to destroying all religion, which Marx called “the opiate of the masses.” The Shah understood that “Islamic Marxism” was an oxymoron, commenting: “Of course the two concepts are irreconcilable — unless those who profess Islam do not understand their own religion or pervert it for their own political ends.”

For Western TV cameras, protestors in Teheran carried empty coffins, or coffins seized from genuine funerals, proclaiming these were “victims of SAVAK.” This deception — later admitted by the revolutionaries — was necessary because they had no actual martyrs to parade. Another tactic: demonstrators splashed themselves with mercurochrome, claiming SAVAK had bloodied them.

The Western media cooperated. When Carter visited Iran at the end of 1977, the press reported that his departure to Teheran International Airport had been through empty streets, because the city was “all locked up and emptied of people, by order of the SAVAK.” What the media didn’t mention: Carter chose to depart at 6 a.m., when the streets were naturally empty.

An equally vicious campaign occurred when the Shah and his wife, Empress Farah, came for a state visit to America in November 1977. While touring Williamsburg, Virginia, about 500 Iranian students showed up, enthusiastically applauding. However, about 50 protestors waved hammer-and-sickle red flags. These unlikely Iranians were masked, unable to speak Persian, and some were blonde. The U.S. media focused exclusively on the protesters. Wrote the Shah: “Imagine my amazement the next day when I saw the press had reversed the numbers and wrote that the fifty Shah supporters were lost in a hostile crowd.”

On November 16, the Shah and Empress were due to visit Carter. Several thousand Iranian patriots surrounded the White House bearing a huge banner saying “Welcome Shah.” However, as Nahavandi reports:

"The police kept them as far away as possible, but allowed a small number of opponents [again, masked] to approach the railings … close to where the Sovereign’s helicopter was going to land for the official welcome. At the exact moment, when courtesies were being exchanged on the White House lawn, these people produced sticks and bicycle chains and set upon the others.... Thus, the whole world was allowed to see riotous scenes, on television, as an accompaniment to the arrival of the Imperial Couple."

Terror at Home
Two major events propelled the revolution in Iran. On the afternoon of August 19, 1978, a deliberate fire gutted the Rex Cinema in Abadan, killing 477 people, including many children with their mothers. Blocked exits prevented escape. The police learned that the fire was caused by Ruhollah Khomeini supporters, who fled to Iraq, where the ayatollah was in exile. But the international press blamed the fire on the Shah and his “dreaded SAVAK.” Furthermore, the mass murder had been timed to coincide with the Shah’s planned celebration of his mother’s birthday; it could thus be reported that the royal family danced while Iran wept. Communist-inspired rioting swept Iran.

Foreigners, including Palestinians, appeared in the crowds. Although the media depicted demonstrations as “spontaneous uprisings,” professional revolutionaries organized them. Some Iranian students were caught up in it. Here the Shah’s generosity backfired. As du Berrier pointed out:

"In his desperate need of men capable of handling the sophisticated equipment he was bringing in, the Shah had sent over a hundred thousand students abroad.... Those educated in France and America return indoctrinated by leftist professors and eager to serve as links between comrades abroad and the Communist Party at home."

When the demonstrations turned violent, the government reluctantly invoked martial law. The second dark day was September 8. Thousands of demonstrators gathered in Teheran were ordered to disperse by an army unit. Gunmen — many on rooftops — fired on the soldiers. The Shah’s army fired back. The rooftop snipers then sprayed the crowd. When the tragedy was over, 121 demonstrators and 70 soldiers and police lay dead. Autopsies revealed that most in the crowd had been killed by ammo non-regulation for the army. Nevertheless, the Western press claimed the Shah had massacred his own people.

The Shah, extremely grieved by this incident, and wanting no further bloodshed, gave orders tightly restricting the military. This proved a mistake. Until now, the sight of his elite troops had quieted mobs. The new restraints emboldened revolutionaries, who brazenly insulted soldiers, knowing they could fire only as a last resort.

Khomeini and the Media Cabal
Meanwhile, internationalist forces rallied around a new figure they had chosen to lead Iran: Ruhollah Khomeini. A minor cleric of Indian extraction, Khomeini had denounced the Shah’s reforms during the 1960s — especially women’s rights and land reform for Muslim clerics, many of whom were large landholders. Because his incendiary remarks had contributed to violence and rioting then, he was exiled, living mostly in Iraq, where Iranians largely forgot him until 1978.

A shadowy past followed Khomeini. The 1960s rioting linked to him was financed, in part, by Eastern Bloc intelligence services. He was in the circle of the cleric Kachani Sayed Abolghassem, who had ties to East German intelligence. Furthermore, in 1960, Colonel Michael Goliniewski, second-in-command of Soviet counter-intelligence in Poland, defected to the West. His debriefings exposed so many communist agents that he was honored by a resolution of the U.S. House of Representatives. One report, declassified in 2000, revealed, “Ayatollah Khomeini was one of Moscow’s five sources of intelligence at the heart of the Shiite hierarchy.”

Nevertheless, as French journalist Dominique Lorenz reported, the Americans, “having picked Khomeini to overthrow the Shah, had to get him out of Iraq, clothe him with respectability and set him up in Paris, a succession of events, which could not have occurred, if the leadership in France had been against it.”

In 1978, Khomeini, in Iraq since 1965, was permitted to reside at Neauphle-le-Château in France. Two French police squads, along with Algerians and Palestinians, protected him. Nahavandi notes:

"Around the small villa occupied by Khomeini, the agents of many of the world’s secret services were gathered as thickly as the autumn leaves. The CIA, the MI6, the KGB and the SDECE were all there. The CIA had even rented the house next door. According to most of the published witness-statements, the East Germans were in charge of most of the radio-transmissions; and, on at least one occasion, eight thousand cassettes of the Ayatollah’s speeches were sent, directly to Teheran, by diplomatic bag."

Foreign-affairs analyst du Berrier reported:

"French services quickly verified that Libya, Iraq and Russia were providing money. Young Iranians, members of the Tudeh (communist) Party, made up Khomeini’s secretariat in France. Working in cooperation with the French Communist Party they provided couriers to pass his orders and tapes into Iran. Their sympathizers in Britain turned the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) into a propaganda organ."

Journalists descended in droves on Neauphle-le-Château; Khomeini gave 132 interviews in 112 days, receiving easy questions as their media organs became his sounding board. Nahavandi affirms that, within Iran “the Voice of America, the Voice of Israel and, especially, the BBC virtually became the voice of the revolution, moving from criticism, to overt incitement of revolt, and from biased reporting, to outright disinformation.”

Khomeini’s inflammatory speeches were broadcast; revolutionary songs aired on Iranian radio. One journalist, however, stunned Khomeini by bucking the trend: intelligence expert Pierre de Villemarest, hero of the French Resistance in World War II, anti-communist, and critic of the CFR. Interviewing Khomeini, de Villemarest asked:

"How are you going to solve the economic crisis into which you have plunged the country through your agitation of these past few weeks?... And aren’t you afraid that when the present regime is destroyed you will be outpaced by a party as tightly-knit and well organized as the [communist] Tudeh?"

Khomeini didn’t reply. The interpreter stood, saying, “The Ayatollah is tired.” De Villemarest registered his concern with the French Ministry of the Interior, but reported, “They told me to occupy myself with something else.”

Ending the Shah’s Rule
Iran’s situation deteriorated. As Western media spurred revolutionaries, riots and strikes paralyzed Iran. The Shah wrote:

"At about this time, a new CIA chief was stationed in Teheran. He had been transferred to Iran from a post in Tokyo with no previous experience in Iranian affairs. Why did the U.S. install a man totally ignorant of my country in the midst of such a crisis? I was astonished by the insignificance of the reports he gave me. At one point we spoke of liberalization and I saw a smile spread across his face."

The Carter administration’s continuous demand upon the Shah: liberalize. On October 26, 1978, he freed 1,500 prisoners, but increased rioting followed. The Shah commented that “the more I liberalized, the worse the situation in Iran became. Every initiative I took was seen as proof of my own weakness and that of my government.” Revolutionaries equated liberalization with appeasement. “My greatest mistake,” the Shah recalled, “was in listening to the Americans on matters concerning the internal affairs of my kingdom.”

Iran’s last hope: its well-trained military could still restore order. The Carter administration realized this. Du Berrier noted: “Air Force General Robert Huyser, deputy commander of U.S. forces in Europe, was sent to pressure Iran’s generals into giving in without a fight.” “Huyser directly threatened the military with a break in diplomatic relations and a cutoff of arms if they moved to support their monarch.”

“It was therefore necessary,” the Shah wrote, “to neutralize the Iranian army. It was clearly for this reason that General Huyser had come to Teheran.”

Huyser only paid the Shah a cursory visit, but had three meetings with Iran’s revolutionary leaders — one lasting 10 hours. Huyser, of course, had no authority to interfere with a foreign nation’s sovereign affairs.

Prior to execution later by Khomeini, General Amir Hossein Rabbi, commander-in-chief of the Iranian Air Force, stated: “General Huyser threw the Shah out of the country like a dead mouse.”

U.S. officials pressed the Shah to leave Iran. He reflected:

"You cannot imagine the pressure the Americans were putting on me, and in the end it became an order.... How could I stay when the Americans had sent a general, Huyser, to force me out? How could I stand alone against Henry Precht [the State Department Director for Iran] and the entire State Department?"

He finally accepted exile, clinging to the belief that America was still Iran’s ally, and that leaving would avert greater bloodshed. These hopes proved illusions.

A factor in the Shah’s decision to depart was that — unknown to most people — he had cancer. U.S. Ambassador William Sullivan (CFR) assured the Shah that, if he exited Iran, America would welcome him. Despite the pleadings of myriad Iranians to stay, he reluctantly left. However, shortly after reaching Cairo, the U.S. ambassador to Egypt effectively informed him that “the government of the United States regrets that it cannot welcome the Shah to American territory.”

The betrayed ruler now became “a man without a country.”

Iran’s Chaotic Descent
On February 1, 1979, with U.S. officials joining the welcoming committee, Ayatollah Khomeini arrived in Iran amid media fanfare. Although counter-demonstrations, some numbering up to 300,000 people, erupted in Iran, the Western press barely mentioned them.

Khomeini had taken power, not by a constitutional process, but violent revolution that ultimately claimed hundreds of thousands of lives. Numerous of his opponents were executed, usually without due process, and often after brutal torture. Teheran’s police officers — loyal to the Shah — were slaughtered. At least 1,200 Imperial Army officers, who had been instructed by General Huyser not to resist the revolution, were put to death. Before dying, many exclaimed, “God save the King!” “On February 17,” reported du Berrier, “General Huyser faced the first photos of the murdered leaders whose hands he had tied and read the descriptions of their mutilations.” At the year’s end, the military emasculated and no longer a threat, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. More Iranians were killed during Khomeini’s first month in power than in the Shah’s 37-year reign. Yet Carter, Ted Kennedy, and the Western media, who had brayed so long about the Shah’s alleged “human rights” violations, said nothing. Mass executions and torture elicited no protests. Seeing his country thus destroyed, the exiled Shah raged to an adviser: “Where are the defenders of human rights and democracy now?” Later, the Shah wrote that there was...

"not a word of protest from American human rights advocates who had been so vocal in denouncing my “tyrannical” regime! It was a sad commentary, I reflected, that the United States, and indeed most Western countries, had adopted a double standard for international morality: anything Marxist, no matter how bloody and base, is acceptable."

Exile
The Shah’s personal tragedy wasn’t over. He stayed briefly in Egypt and Morocco, but did not wish to impose risks on his hosts from Muslim extremists. Eventually he welcomed Mexican President Lopes Portillo’s hospitality.

However, in Mexico the Shah received an invitation from CFR Chairman David Rockefeller, who used influence to secure permission for the Shah to come to America for medical treatment. Rockefeller sent a trendy Park Avenue MD to examine the Shah, who agreed — against his better judgment — to abandon his personal physicians and fly to New York for treatment. In October 1979, he was received at the Rockefeller-founded Sloan-Kettering Memorial Hospital for cancer treatment. Here the Shah experienced a fateful delay in spleen surgery that some believe accelerated his death.

The Shah’s admission to the United States had another outcome. Partly in retribution, on November 4, 1979, Iranians took 52 hostages from the U.S. embassy in Teheran. (According to Nahavandi, Soviet special services assisted them.) This embarrassed Jimmy Carter, who had done so much to destroy the Shah and support Khomeini. The seizure made the Shah a pawn.

While in New York, Mexico inexplicably reversed its welcome, informing the Shah that his return would contravene Mexico’s “vital interests.” One can only guess at the hidden hands possibly influencing this decision.

Carter faced a dilemma. Iran wanted the Shah’s return — for a degrading execution — in exchange for the American hostages. However, a direct trade might humiliate the United States.

Therefore, Panama was selected as intermediary. Following treatment in New York, the Shah was informed he could no longer remain in America, but Panama would welcome him. In Panama, however, the Shah and Empress were under virtual house arrest; it was apparent that it would only be a matter of time before the Shah would be sent to Iran in exchange for the hostages. A special cage was erected in Teheran. Khomeini’s followers envisioned parading him in the streets before final torture and bloody execution.

However, Anwar Sadat, the Egyptian president and the Shah’s friend, discerned the scheme, and sent a jet to Panama, which escorted the Shah and Empress safely to Egypt.

Mohammad Reza Pahlavi died on July 27, 1980. His last words: “I wait upon Fate, never ceasing to pray for Iran, and for my people. I think only of their suffering.” In Cairo, a grand funeral honored him. Three million Egyptians followed the procession.

Anwar Sadat who, like the Shah, advocated a peaceful Middle East, and defied the American establishment by saving the Shah from infamous death, did not survive much longer himself. The following year, Muslim extremists assassinated him under circumstances remaining controversial.

The Issues
Why did the American establishment, defying logic and morality, betray our ally the Shah? Only the perpetrators can answer the question, but a few possibilities should be considered.

Iran ranks second in the world in oil and natural-gas reserves. Energy is critical to world domination, and major oil companies, such as Exxon and British Petroleum, have long exerted behind-the-scenes influence on national policies.

The major oil companies had for years dictated Iranian oil commerce, but the Shah explained:

.
"In 1973 we succeeded in putting a stop, irrevocably, to sixty years of foreign exploitation of Iranian oil-resources.... In 1974, Iran at last took over the management of the entire oil-industry, including the refineries at Abadan and so on.... I am quite convinced that it was from this moment that some very powerful, international interests identified, within Iran, the collusive elements, which they could use to encompass my downfall."

Does this explain the sudden attitude change toward Iran expressed by Henry Kissinger, beginning in the mid-seventies? Kissinger’s links to the Rockefellers, whose fortune derived primarily from oil, bolsters the Shah’s view on the situation. However, other factors should be considered.

Although the Shah maintained a neutral stance toward Israel, during the 1973 Yom Kippur War, he allowed critical supplies to reach Egypt, enabling it to achieve a balance of success, and earning Sadat’s undying gratitude, but wrath from influential Zionists. Did this impact the West’s attitude change in the mid-seventies?

We should not overlook that the Shah opposed the powerful opium trade, now flourishing in the Middle East.

Finally, the Shah was a nationalist who brought his country to the brink of greatness and encouraged Middle East peace. These qualities are anathema to those seeking global governance, for strong nations resist membership in world bodies, and war has long been a destabilizing catalyst essential to what globalists call “the new world order.”

What is the solution to modern Iran? Before listening to war drums, let us remember:

It was the CFR clique — the same establishment entrenched in the Bush and Obama administrations — that ousted the Shah, resulting in today’s Iran. That establishment also chanted for the six-year-old Iraq War over alleged weapons of mass destruction never found. Therefore, instead of contemplating war with Iran, a nation four times Iraq’s size, let us demand that America shed its CFR hierarchy and their interventionist policy that has wrought decades of misery, and adopt a policy of avoiding foreign entanglements, and of minding our own business in international affairs.

To the man or woman who believes (like I do) that The Bible is the Word Of God and who also wishes to see peace in Iran, I ask you: what does Scripture say about the future prospects of peace in the Middle East? Do you think that American intervention can lead to long-lasting peace in that region of the world? Or, for that matter, can we expect permanent peace ANYWHERE at all on this planet prior to the return of Christ? If you believe so, know that your God disagrees with you. (Read your Bible.)

To the secular man or woman who wishes to see peace in Iran, I ask you to consider that Albert Einstein said insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Even if American meddling wasn’t really about power-mad empire-building but was truly about seeking peace on Earth in good faith, is it not insane to believe that our foreign policies in the Middle East will succeed now when they have always failed in the past?

I argue that the wisest and most efficacious thing we as Americans can do for Iranians is to pray for them. The Bible warns us against getting militarily involved:

He who passes by and meddles in a quarrel not his own
Is like one who takes a dog by the ears.

~ Proverbs 26:17

Let’s not listen to the deceitful voices of those in power who will surely promise falsely:

“Carry on my [wayward] American sons;
There’ll be peace when you are done.”


Yeah, right!
I think we can expect similar results from pursuing further American foreign policy to what we have experienced in the past. How ‘bout we stay home and tend to our own business for once? You know, let’s try something DIFFERENT!

~ Stephen T. McCarthy

Addendum:

Xtremely, Xtremely Important Link:
The End Of Dollar Hegemony

If you appreciated James Perloff’s article posted above, then consider reading his books. I have read both “THE SHADOWS OF POWER: The Council On Foreign Relations And The American Decline” and “TORNADO IN A JUNKYARD: The Relentless Myth Of Darwinism” and I strongly recommend them to you. The Council On Foreign Relations is to peace what Mao was to love, and Darwin was to science what Marx was to economics.
.

Friday, June 12, 2009

SEX, TATTOOS & VIOLENCE R US - #1

.
This is the debut installment of a new feature I’m adding to this Blog. We here at Xtremely Un-P.C. And Unrepentant (that is, me, myself, and my inflatable girlfriend Ariel) were initially tempted to call this segment “Miscellaneous Minutiae”, but then our gin-soaked and air-filled heads started thinking and we realized that no one was going to read something titled “Miscellaneous Minutiae.” If a blogger in the U.S. wants to gain the attention of American readers, he or she had better write about things that most interest the American People. And since nowadays it seems that nothing interests the American People more than sex, tattoos and violence, we decided to grab your attention by calling this feature just that. And it worked, too, didn’t it? (See how smart my inflatable girlfriend is?)

The majority of my posts on this Blog are rather lengthy… and long. The idea behind SEX, TATTOOS & VIOLENCE R US is to give me a forum where I can just post brief (and short) comments on a variety of related (and unrelated) topics. Like a kind of grab bag of crap. Sort of like what I did in “7 Remastered RANDOM THOUGHTS + 1 Previously Unreleased BONUS TRACK And 1 ALTERNATE TAKE", only in a continuing format.

So without further ado (and no more introduction), here’s three or four (or 10) things my girlfriend and I have been thinking about in recent days. If you don’t like what’s written below, don’t blame me - I just write what Ariel tells me to. If either of us wore pants in this relationship, it would be her:

YER TOO DAMN DUMB TO DRINK!
My brother Nappy and I were watching some Andy Griffith Show DVDs last Sunday evening and periodically checking in on the score of the Lakers vs. Magic NBA Championship game. At one point, I caught a TV commercial for Coors beer. They were proudly bragging about how the mountains illustrated on the beer can now turn the color blue when the brew is cold enough to drink. I pity the fool who needs a damn can to tell him when the beer inside is cold enough to drink. Men have been guzzling beer ever since God created it at the close of the 6th Day and we never needed anything but our fingers (or the back of buddy’s neck) to tell us when it was an adequate temperature to quaff. Son-Of-A-Bitch! Has it REALLY come to this in America?! Are we now so dumbed-down that we need a picture on a beer can to clue us in to when it’s OK to “Tilt”? Oh, stick a fork in us, we’re done. (Uh… well, hold on -maybe we’re not done. Has the fork turned blue yet? Wait ‘til the fork turns blue, THEN stick it in us.)

A DUMB IN THE OVEN?
A couple of days ago, I was at the .99 Cent Store buying toilet paper. (Why pay more? That would be just like flushing money down the toilet.) In one aisle I noticed a rack of pregnancy tests for sale. Uh… would anyone REALLY trust a pregnancy test they got for .99 cents? There are a few things that are worth paying a bit more for. Who needs a .99 cent heart attack?

WALKING BILLBOARDS AND MOTHER TRUCKERS
Dear Abby Normal ~
Everywhere I look anymore is an inked-up broad and a woman driving a truck. Do you suppose American women will EVER stop tattooing their bodies and hauling nothing around town in pickup trucks? In other words, will American women eventually stop trying to prove their manhood and be at peace with themselves? Will they ever get over their “menvy” and rejoice in the privilege of being women? Yeah, I thought not.
Signed,
Repulsed In Airheadzona

WHATABURGER WENT THAT-A-WAY
For those of you who think we are beginning to pull out of our economic woes, think again. Just last week a Whataburger near me went belly up. That is to say, doors and windows boarded up! Dang. I had only recently discovered the place, too. Being a vegetarian, I had always assumed that they didn’t have much on their menu that I could order. Then one day I wandered in and surprisingly found a couple of items that appealed to me – particularly a breakfast egg sandwich. It was cheap and it was good enough to start my morning with. Whataburger was there one day and gone the next. Poop! Anyway, keep your head down – the crap is still splattering off the economic fan.

WHATAWAYTOGO
For a couple of years in my boyhood, my favorite TV show was Kung Fu. I eagerly anticipated the fights (there was almost always one quick fight and one extended fight), but honestly, even as young as I was (12), I also eagerly anticipated the philosophical teachings. I still have a copy of “The Kung Fu Book Of Caine” published in 1993 by Herbie Pilato. In the Foreward, the show’s star, David Carradine, wrote: Our basic concerns to make this show what it was were absolute authenticity, historical accuracy, the chronicling of the troubles the Chinese immigrants experienced in America, a hint of the need for social revolution, lots of Chinese philosopy, caring for all life, a lot of heart, and superior technical quality in the films, in the writing and in our execution of all this. Somewhere right in the center was this character “Kwai Chang Caine” or “Little Grasshopper” who bound it all together.
- - -
“Bound”, eh? [*Cough!-Cough!*]
- - -
According to David Carradine, the fourth flute he used in the show was made for him personally by Jose Feliciano and Cannonball Adderley. Mercy, Mercy, Mercy! Now that’s pretty cool!
- - -
I’m certainly not in the habit of speaking ill about the newly dead, however, not everything about Carradine was “cool.” For one thing, in the book he also writes:
- - -
After all, kung-fu is not about being a warrior but about training the mind and body.
- - -
Well, pardon my Buddhism but… “BULLSHIT!” I don’t believe that anyone has ever entered into martial arts training without first having a violent mind. If a nonviolent person wanted to train their mind, they would study and attempt to live The Holy Bible, wherein one finds the sayings of Jesus. These are the deepest and most challenging concepts ever articulated in “this world.” And if a nonviolent person wanted to train their body, they would take up golf. Or ice-skating, if they want an aerobic workout, too.
- - -
I was never really a David Carradine fan to begin with, but he got eternally etched onto my Bad Boys list when he chose to play a part in helping Quentin Tarantino put his mental illness on the silver screen for the entertainment of The American People. Americans may have applauded that “Kill Bill” sh#t, but then, as we’ve already established, Americans love sex, tattoos and violence.
- - -
Carradine and actress Barbara Hershey had a son they named Free. Yeah, Free. How “Summer-Of-Lovely.” Unfortunately, what Free will never be free of is the image of his dad dying in a closet with one end of a cord tied around his neck and the other end tied around his… kung-fu. A person ought to be more careful with his legacy… and his kung-fu. Now and forever, “David Carradine”, “Kwai Chang Caine”, and “Kill Bill” will conjure that sad, well-hung image in every person’s mind. What a REAL shame!
- - -
I guess it was time for you to leave, Grasshopper, but did it have to be THAT way? Sheesh! Well, as Master Kan once said to you: “Be neither brave nor afraid, but at Peace.”

WELL, AIN’T HE TWEET?!
I keep hearing about this Twitter.com thing, but I know very little about it. What I DO know, however, is that I will NEVER participate in it. I won't have my name associated with something that calls itself TWITTER and where the messages one writes are called TWEETS. Sorry, that's just a little too faggy sounding for me. “Real Men don’t Tweet!” Now there’s a slogan the country should rally around. After they’ve changed the name to Mutter.com they can get back to me. Maybe I’ll play then. Maybe.

BLAME IT ON MY “BRAIN DAMAGE”
On Tuesday, my buddy The Great L.C. gave me his old copy of Pink Floyd’s “Dark Side Of The Moon.” He just bought the freshly remastered version and didn’t know what to do with his first copy of the compact disc. He offered it to me, thinking I probably already owned it and he was surprised to learn that I didn’t have ANY Pink Floyd in my music collection. Of course, his surprise was understandable considering my recent Blog Bit titled “NO DRUGS (EXCEPT FOR PINK FLOYD).” But, fact is, I never reacquired my Floyd stuffs when I made the transition from LP to CD in 1988. I’m generally more of a Jazz and Blues man now.
- - -
I thanked The Great L.C. and told him I was glad to have “Dark Side Of The Moon” (DSOTM), while carelessly referring to it as “a true American classic.” L.C. rightfully corrected my error and I was a bit embarrassed at making such a silly and obvious mistake like that.
- - -
Later that night, I got to contemplating how I could have said something so foolish when I know much better. I came to the conclusion that DSOTM has been with us so long now and is such a ubiquitous recording that everyone is familiar with and so many people own, that it’s almost become a part of the American culture. It spent an astounding 741 weeks on America’s Top 200 albums chart, and according to a Wikipedia article, “It is estimated that one in every fourteen people in the USA under the age of fifty owns or has owned a copy.” When I was a teenager, virtually every friend I knew had the LP. And to my dear departed friend Party Marty, track four, “The Great Gig In The Sky”, was one of the seven songs that most reminded him of me. (Neither Marty nor I could have ever imagined that he would be going to The Great Gig In The Sky before I would!) Yup, I guess it seems to this boy that Floyd’s masterpiece is now an “ADOPTED American Classic.”

I CHECKED THE BLACK BOX FIRST!
Undoubtedly, there are millions of White Dumb-O-Crats (and even some White Repugnantcans) running around these days proud of themselves for having voted for USAP, believing their vote reflects their bleeding-heart open-mindedness and their sense of racial equality, yada-yada-blah-blah. I would like them all to know that I voted a Black man for president nearly a decade before they did. In 2000, I cast my presidential vote for Alan Keyes. So, not only did my vote come well before theirs, but my vote went to a Black American patriot born in America, not to an undocumented Black Marxist born in a foreign country. Yeah, uh-huh, that’s right: “I Was Voting Black Man When Voting Black Man Wasn’t Cool.”

WHAT’S WRONG WITH THIS (Big) PICTURE?
From time to time, I have puzzled over the question why (after a full year) this Blog has failed to generate any following outside of my very small circle of personal friends. I wondered if it might be the subjects I address. But, no. Politics, humor, important book reviews? What’s not to be interested in? Could it be the writing? Perhaps. But then again, I have often enough received compliments from my friends: Aardvark, Ol’ WP, Mr. Paul, Br’er Marc – these are all individuals operating at a level of intelligence that I definitely respect, and all have had nice things to say about my writing at different times. A professional writer, Phillip Jennings, once even used the B-word to describe my writing. (No! Not “bastardly” or “bitchy.”) I question whether or not he was being sincere, but at the same time, I doubt he would have said something positive at all if he really thought my writing was stinko. [By the way, check out Phillip Jennings’ newest book being published by Regnery in January, 2010, titled “The Politically Incorrect Guide To The Vietnam War.”]
- - -
I’m inclined to think that even a raving madman wouldn’t mistake me for a raving madman, and that most readers see my conclusions have some extensive research backing them. I’ll even venture to guess that the majority of people who have read my entries on the New World Order conspiracy recognize, even if only subconsciously, that I speak the truth. So, what’s wrong with this Blog then?
- - -
I think the answer may have finally occurred to me late last week. I fairly regularly read the political Blogs of other writers here at Blogspot and beyond. It strikes me that they almost all have a certain something in common: Political blogs begin with a very pronounced “Us Versus Them” attitude. It’s either a Republican’s blog bashing the Democrats, or a Democrat’s blog bashing the Republicans. And they all primarily deal with the day-to-day political issues. They seem to share a micro-political viewpoint. Their concerns are on what dumbass thing USAP said yesterday, or what new piece of legislation Congress passed today, or who might or might not get a Supreme Court nomination tomorrow, etc.
- - -
Xtremely Un-P.C. And Unrepentant, on the other hand, generally adopts a macro-political viewpoint. I am far more concerned with “The Big Picture.” I think most Americans are afraid to face up to the fact that the little goings-on really do not alter the broad path we traverse on the way to our eventual demise. They would rather hide their faces from the great truth and continue with their delusions; choosing to believe (falsely) that if they could just get the right man into the White House, or just gain party control of both the House and the Senate, or just get the right configuration of lawyers in the U.S. Supreme Court, everything will get better. I believe it is easier for most people to just choose sides (the side that SAYS – not necessarily does, but SAYS – the things they want to hear) and to pretend that things will eventually improve in America. If the people were to acknowledge that even their own chosen political party is in actuality their enemy, it would leave the people feeling alone and powerless in their struggle for truth, justice, and The American Way.
- - -
It is the rare person indeed who can confront the truth and admit: I feel like a ten-year-old who has rooted for the "good guys" in professional wrestling with great fervor, and is just learning that the whole thing is fake--not on the level! "..no...it couldn't be...they don't mean it...you mean, you mean...everything I thought was....WRONG??!!" But that woman and I concur with Patrick Henry who said: “It is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth ... For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and to provide for it.”
- - -
It’s a hard thing for the average American to admit the fact that they really WILL NOT and CANNOT change the course of the country. Americans are afraid, and therefore they refuse to see the evil that is all around them and in plain view 24/7. The Big Picture is a darkness living brazenly in the light of day and which conspires against America, against humanity at large, against national sovereignty and personal liberty.
- - -
So, the political Blogs that entertain an “Us Versus Them” micro-view acquire a following of readers because most Blog visitors share this mind-set. It is the prevailing political assumption in America. “Not that there’s anything wrong with that” but it simply doesn’t represent the greater political reality. It’s like concerning oneself with the red or blue colors of the spokes but never realizing they are all - regardless of color - part of an outer wheel. Or, to use a different analogy: If a person hasn’t first seen the big picture on the lid of the box, examining the separate jigsaw puzzle pieces and attempting to put them together is a waste of time and an exercise in frustration.
- - -
In short, I think the reason Xtremely Un-P.C. And Unrepentant has only a few regular readers is because it scares people; it makes people uncomfortable. Well, so be it then! Henry David Thoreau wrote: “There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root.” I like to think that this Blog makes me a “striker”, not a “hacker.” And I would not refocus on the political minutiae in order to gain a larger readership. This Blog will continue to emphasize the BIG, BAD PICTURE, and if that means only a few good friends will continue to check in here, that’s fine with me. I’m mostly writing to (hopefully) “Amuse Friends And Piss Off Enemies” anyway. And nothing I or any other blogger says can change the future anyhow because largely… “It is written.”

AN INVITATION TO FRIENDSHIP
Hi. I am a very friendly person but I am also shy. I want to meet new people but this is not easy for me.
- - -
I would like to share my pictures with you, only this website will not allow me to. However, I do have my nude photo collection - which is very tasteful and artistic - posted on a different site where it is permitted.
- - -
If you would like to see my nude photos, please click here.

~ Stephen T. McCarthy
"As a dog returns to his own vomit, so a fool repeats his folly."
~ Proverbs 26:11
.

Wednesday, June 3, 2009

THE CONGRESSMAN'S CONFESSION ABOUT THE "NEW WORLD ORDER"

.
[Updated from the STMcC archive: 2004, October]

Until a person has a working knowledge of 'The Federal Reserve System' and 'The Council On Foreign Relations', he or she has no real understanding of the contemporary American/geopolitical landscape. Anytime you find a Democrat and a Republican arguing politics, you can be sure that neither one of them actually knows the truth . . . unless they're professional politicians.
~ Stephen T. McCarthy

(Yup, I'm quotin' muhself.)

WAKE UP AND SMELL THE ARSENIC

Yes, there is a Conspiracy. It dates back at least as far as May 1, 1776, when Adam Weishaupt founded his order of THE ILLUMINATI in Bavaria and then infiltrated and corrupted Freemasonry with the intention of subverting all societal institutions and replacing them with a global, totalitarian order which the Illuminati would control.

Indeed, the Illuminati still exists. Contrary to the belief of some historians and researchers, a fairly convincing line can be drawn from Weishaupt to a couple of the behind-the-scenes leaders of our times. For this reason, I sometimes still employ the name "Illuminati" even though it is highly doubtful that the Conspirators still utilize this ancient sobriquet in referring to themselves. (Some Conspiracy researchers prefer the titles, "The Insiders" or "The Establishment" or “The Elite”, but "Illuminati" works just as well and correctly implies an ongoing agenda.)

Regardless of which name one uses to refer to the conspirators, their goal, known by the code phrase "THE NEW WORLD ORDER", remains the same: to slowly and imperceptibly counter the restraints of and usurp the authority of the U.S. Constitution and thereby dissolve our Constitutional Republic, replacing it with a global, totalitarian system based generally upon Marxist dogma and to be governed by the Secret Society that brought it into existence.

The Council On Foreign Relations, The Trilateral Commission, The Bilderbergers, The United Nations, and The Communist Party are all extensions and/or tools of "The Illuminati", but who are the actual members of this Secret Society? This is difficult to ascertain for it remains a super-secret cabal, but the Rothschild, Rockefeller, and J. P. Morgan Families are most certainly involved. While the Illuminati may include members from a variety of influential social arenas, the significant core of the Conspiracy is composed of International Bankers.

THE CONGRESSMAN'S CONFESSION

In early 1994, I decided to move from Prescott, Arizona, to a State that I will call, OPHIR. As a "going away" gift, a friend and co-worker gave me a copy of the Pat Robertson book “The New World Order.” Shortly after arriving in OPHIR, I began reading “The New World Order”, which addresses the treasonous plan of a collection of Conspirators bent on having the United States Of America surrender its national sovereignty in favor of a global, Socialistic order. I had encountered this premise before, but had dismissed most of it as outlandish paranoia. I had to admit, however, that Robertson’s “The New World Order” seemed to be very well researched and presented. Its apparent credibility now had me intrigued and genuinely concerned.

While in OPHIR, I began spending a lot of time with a good friend of mine, whom I will call "ALPHA" because I have not sought permission to use actual names in this presentation. I had met ALPHA in the late 1970s, and it just so happened that his Dad had been a CONGRESSMAN representing a district in OPHIR for a considerable length of time. Being a close friend of his son, I got to know CONGRESSMAN "OMEGA" a little bit over the years.

One evening at a hilltop barbecue attended by a group of friends, I related to ALPHA some of the many startling and disconcerting political machinations I had learned about in Pat Robertson's “The New World Order.” My friend and I engaged in a pretty heavy conversation that night, both of us being able to clearly recall President George H. W. Bush repeatedly using the phrase, "new world order" in several speeches that he delivered at the time of the first Gulf War. [Definitely in February 1990; and on September 11, 1990; October 30, 1990; November 17, 1990; January 29, 1991; February 1, 1991 (he used the phrase three times that day); March 6, 1991 - and he possibly also used the phrase in a speech delivered in December 1990; and possibly on 1/9/'91; 1/16/'91 and in August '91.]

Although he didn't seem to have any prior knowledge of the agenda that I was revealing to him, ALPHA expressed a natural curiosity about it. It occurred to me that if anybody could reliably confirm or deny the existence of this treasonous plan of the Illuminati, surely his Dad, the experienced CONGRESSMAN OMEGA was in a position to do so. I made up my mind then and there that someday, when the proper opportunity presented itself, I would get the CONGRESSMAN'S opinion on this subject.

The moment that I was waiting for arrived about a month later. I was relaxing at ALPHA's apartment with a few other guys when CONGRESSMAN OMEGA and his wife stopped by. They had just flown in from Washington D.C. and still had their luggage in hand. After a little time had elapsed in their visit, I pulled my friend aside and asked him to question his Dad about the New World Order. A few minutes later, ALPHA broached the subject and THE CONGRESSMAN responded: "Well, I don't know anything about that, but I will tell you one thing: I don't know why, but every time I heard George Bush use that phrase, 'the new world order', in his speeches, something about it just made my skin crawl."

That was all that CONGRESSMAN OMEGA had to say on the subject, and yet I intuitively knew that there was more information that he was privy to but was withholding.

Shortly afterwards, I loaned my copy of Pat Robertson's book “The New World Order” to ALPHA and asked him to read it so that we could discuss it further and more extensively at a later date.

Several weeks passed and then one day ALPHA came to me with a surprising story. He explained that he had read Robertson's “The New World Order” in its entirety, and then later, armed with names, dates and historical facts that he had gleaned from the book, he approached his Dad and questioned him a second time about the New World Order. He sought to know whether Pat Robertson's book was factual in charging that a secret group of Conspirators at the most influential levels within our government and economic institutions was determined to overturn the U.S. Constitution, surrender our national sovereignty and institute a form of global, totalitarian Socialism in its place.

This time, in private conversation with his son, CONGRESSMAN OMEGA came clean and confessed:

YES, IT'S TRUE. A PERSON CANNOT CLIMB AS HIGH ON THE POLITICAL LADDER AS I HAVE WITHOUT BECOMING AWARE OF IT. THERE REALLY ISN'T ANYTHING THAT WE CAN DO ABOUT IT, OTHER THAN TO SIMPLY DO THE BEST JOB THAT WE CAN FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FROM WITHIN THE GIVEN PARAMETERS.

I can't say why it is that CONGRESSMAN OMEGA was reluctant to divulge this information when the subject was initially raised at his son's apartment weeks earlier. I imagine he wanted to avoid discussing this menace in the presence of several of ALPHA's friends, myself included. And yet, he did not swear his son to secrecy when he did admit the truth later, and so ALPHA felt comfortable in relating it to me.

It should be noted that CONGRESSMAN OMEGA had a high profile in Washington D.C. as a very feisty, outspoken, front-line man in his political party. He had made his reputation by being a hard-nosed battler, a "never say die," blood and thunder politician. And it is this that most impressed me about his confession. It occurred to me that if this semi-secret, invisible power was capable of instilling in CONGRESSMAN OMEGA a "go along to get along" attitude; if it could intimidate a man like this into maintaining public silence about this Conspiracy, then truly this was an exceedingly dangerous force - one not to be trifled with.

I referred to the Conspiracy as "semi-secret" in the previous sentence only because there has been so much information published and revealed about it in the last couple of decades that it is hardly a secret anymore. If this is all news to you, it is not because it has been hidden from you. Evidence of The Conspiracy is ubiquitous. Perhaps you've been spending too much time reading romance or mystery novels and supermarket tabloids, and not enough time with intellectually-challenging literature lately. Or perhaps you have assumed that everything that is important for you to know is transmitted through the Boob Tube.

Obviously, there is no way for me to prove conclusively to you the veracity of my account of THE CONGRESSMAN'S CONFESSION. All that I have to offer as evidence in defense of my story is the following testimony:

Although I am not exactly a "Christian" in the contemporary sense, I devotedly avow that Yeshua (Jesus Christ) is my Savior and my Holy King. Yeshua said that we are His friends if we perform His commandments (John 15:14), and so, wishing to be a friend of The Holy King, I take His commandments very seriously. One of the principles that He commanded was, "Let your 'Yes' be 'Yes', and your 'No', 'No.' For whatever is more than these is from the evil one." (Matthew 5:37) I am therefore constrained against lying, and I tell you, YES, this story of THE CONGRESSMAN'S CONFESSION is entirely true to the full extent of my knowledge. Furthermore, my good friend ALPHA reconfirmed his Dad's statement for me years later. ALPHA was unquestionably being truthful with me!

DEPROGRAMMING YOURSELF (RECOMMENDED READING)

"THE NEW WORLD ORDER" is a trans-party agenda to create a global, totalitarian, Socialistic system. With the Republican and the Democrat parties both having been commandeered by The Council On Foreign Relations, there is actually little difference in the platforms of our two principal political parties. The two-party system is an illusion which permits the disgusted American voters to throw the bastards out of office every four years without actually changing the decision-makers behind the scenes. The Illuminati is playing the American People for fools because the American People ARE fools!

Under both political parties, the inexorable pursuit of global collectivism continues. Only the rate of speed with which Socialism encroaches upon our Constitutional Republic differs - the Republicans often feeling obligated to push Socialism at a slightly slower pace in order to maintain the ILLUSION that they oppose what the Democrats are doing. We merely get to choose whether we prefer to gulp our arsenic or sip it. [*Or as my buddy Br’er Marc once said: We can choose to smoke our cancer-causing cigarettes filtered (Republicans) or unfiltered (Democrats).]

Our two-party political system is simply a classic example of warfare's oldest military tactic: Divide and Conquer. You won't be enlightened about The Conspiracy by the major news media. Hardly the societal watchdogs the public thinks they are, our print and broadcast news organizations are largely editorially-controlled. To learn the truth you will be required to read books. ("Oh, no! Not books! ANYTHING but that!") Awww, our post-literate generation. Yes, books! And to that end, I recommend the titles on the following list as an excellent place to begin. This is but a miniscule offering but it will provide a first-rate education on "THE NEW WORLD ORDER" and then you can branch out on your own from here.

“The Creature From Jekyll Island: A Second Look At The Federal Reserve”
by G. Edward Griffin
This book will teach you about both The Federal Reserve System and the Council On Foreign Relations, not in a dry, textbook style, but rather in a very fascinating and entertaining manner. Congressman Ron Paul has called this book, "A superb analysis deserving serious attention by all Americans. Be prepared for one heck of a journey through time and mind." I call it perhaps the single most important book on politics that you will ever read! If you're going to peruse only ONE book on this list, this should probably be the ONE!

“None Dare Call It Treason: 25 Years Later”
by John Stormer
The heartbreaking and nauseating story of the U.S. Government's love affair with Communism. This book will come as a real shocker to most people, and will be especially disturbing for those who lost loved ones in the Korean and Vietnam "police actions." This book remains vital to our times and is absolutely essential reading. This one (along with “The Creature…”) is part of The Dynamic Political Duo.

“The Naked Capitalist”
by W. Cleon Skousen
This is Skousen's excellent extensive review of Dr. Carroll Quigley's important but massive tome, 'Tragedy And Hope.' The Naked Capitalist may be the perfect overview of this conspiracy to kill America's Constitutional Republic and replace it with a global, totalitarian system based generally upon the Marxist model. There are some used out-of-print editions of this book that can be purchased very inexpensively. If you're on a tight budget, shop around the web.

“The Unseen Hand”
by A. Ralph Epperson
Mr. Epperson is a better researcher than a writer. This, however, is well written and a solid research source - easily his best book. I highly recommend it as a starting point. In addition, Mr. Epperson is a very approachable man: he actually includes his phone number in the book and encourages serious students to contact him. I have spoken with him several times over the years and found him to be sincere and extremely accommodating. A very nice man!

“The Shadows Of Power: The Council On Foreign Relations And The American Decline”
by James Perloff
A first-rate examination of The Council On Foreign Relations: who they are and what they believe. Another great starting point for the genuine American Patriot.

“Treason: The New World Order”
by Gurudas
This compilation of assorted published facts concerning the New World Order is absolutely loaded with information. It employs a kind of shotgun approach to the subject which will compel the earnest student to follow-up with further research into some of its various subjects. Economic Machinations, Bureaucratic Tyranny and Corporate Fascism are the primary themes explored. This was published in 1996, but any person who read it any time prior to September 11, 2001, probably just nodded when those planes hit the buildings, knowing that a surprise [Cough!-Cough!] attack like that was to be expected. Unfortunately, this important book is out-of-print and it’s nearly impossible to find a used copy at a reasonable price. A borrowed copy can be easily obtained, however, through an Interlibrary Loan. It’s well worth the trouble and the wait.

OTHER RELATED TITLES

There was a time when I was spiritually-minded but not religious. I was also totally apolitical. It was no coincidence that when Yeshua (Jesus Christ) Baptized me with The Holy Spirit, He concurrently brought a political awareness to me. I had an epiphany years later in which it was revealed that these matters are intertwined. I am convinced that, despite appearances, there is actually nothing truly secular in our experience; with our every thought, word, and action, we align ourselves with either Divine Light or demonic darkness. This world is engaged in cosmic, spiritual warfare, and we, as individuals, represent the weapons, the prizes, and the victorious or the defeated in each battle. This is not the place to elaborate on this theory, but with this general theme in mind, I believe that the following books are also very relevant to any discussion of the New World Order, because to gain the greatest comprehension of it, one needs to undertake an integrated study of both history and prophecy.

“The Holy Bible: From The Ancient Eastern Text”
translated into English from the Aramaic language by George M. Lamsa
Fifteen years of deep study has convinced me that this is the most accurate translation of the world's most important book - the Word Of God. The creation of "The New World Order" and its eventual destruction at the Hand Of God was foretold thousands of years ago. My studies indicate that between now and the next 8 years we can anticipate a number of earth-shaking events of Biblical proportions. [*Was the Boston Red Sox winning the World Series just the first of these?! Hmmm...] Seriously . . . I strongly suggest that you buckle your seatbelt and promptly get yourself right with God.

“Learn The Bible In 24 Hours”
by Chuck Missler
Have you ever wondered whether there was really any evidence to support the idea that The Bible is a Divinely-inspired work? Wonder no more. "The Bible is the only book that hangs its entire credibility on its ability to write history in advance, without error." (Page 14) This is a great concept and it will be an invaluable source of inspiration and information for the person who wishes to gain a greater grasp of The Bible's scope and authenticity.

[An even better book of this type is the out-of-print “Evidence For Faith: Deciding The God Question” edited by John Warwick Montgomery. Used copies are available from internet booksellers.]

“Original Intent: The Courts, The Constitution And Religion”
by David Barton
An integral aspect of the Marxist system (and thus a plank of pure Socialistic thought) is the eradication of the belief in a supernatural God, with the State acting as a substitution. Therefore, it is in keeping with The New World Order agenda that God should be publicly put away in favor of a humanistic world-view. It is no accident that our Social Engineers have commenced with a full-blown attack on God in the public arena in recent decades. Did you know that The Declaration Of Independence specifically mentions God four times and that neither the phrase, "separation of church and state" nor its meaning appears in any of this Country's founding documents? Who banished God from America, and how did they do it? This masterpiece of research will surprise you with the answers!

“Armageddon: Earth’s Last Days”
by Grant Jeffrey
I am most emphatically NOT a Grant Jeffrey fan, but this one book is well-presented and will be a real eye-opener for a lot of people who dismiss the idea that the world "as we know it" is about to reach its conclusion. Many books of this type have been published, but I thought this was one of the better ones I’ve read.

“One World”
by Tal Brooke
I consider this one of the most important books about the New World Order because between its covers it exposes both facets of the scheme: the quest to gain total control of “this world’s” materialistic riches with the power to dictate life to the masses, as well as the unseen spiritual forces that influence (some might say “possess”) the Elite members of this conspiracy to think and behave the way they do. Most books about the New World Order examine only the economic/corporate aspects of the plot, ignoring the dark spiritual forces behind it all. Although I am not in agreement with all of Mr. Brooke’s orthodox Christian views, there is no denying that he is highly intelligent, a very good writer, and responsible for perhaps the best and most balanced overview of the New World Order.

That having been said, I would recommend that the New World Order newbie not start with Brooke’s “One World.” It is difficult enough for the average person to comprehend and accept the idea that an evil conspiracy this immense could possibly exist, without also having to simultaneously attempt to understand the spiritual wickedness that undergirds the conspiracy. First study the seemingly “secular” parts of this treasonous agenda, and once the evidence has convinced you of the reality of a conspiracy (this may take years) only then will you be ready to consider the possibility that the whole thing is not really of "this world", that it is founded upon demonic darkness - that we are not really dealing with an attempt to conquer the world, but dealing with spiritual warfare, an attempt to conquer God's children. It’s not about a scorched Earth, it’s about scorched souls.

“You can discern the face of the sky and of the earth,
but how is it you do not discern this time?”
~ Jesus Christ (Luke 12:56)

Bless And Be Blessed.
~ Stephen T. McCarthy

Related Links:
See The New World Order In Black And White
Marx Vs. Keynes: Comparative Socialism In Miniature
Stop Being A "Useful Idiot"
.