Wisdoms of Perle
Iraq & Afghanistan, Today -- Arabia & the World, Tomorrow
Three articles condensed from The
ProParanoid Newsletter, and combined, here
Copyright © 2003 by H. Michael Sweeney and ProParanoid Press. All Rights Reserved. See Permissions Statement
In this article you will learn:
Who Richard Perle is and the nature of his agenda
That the wars in the Middle East are part of a larger War plan for oil and world dominance established years ago
That Pentagon Policy was officially changed to include use of war to get oil and serve US business interests
That the plan called for decieving the American public about the real reasons for the war
That silent foreknowledge of 911 and Operations Northwoods would seem logical under these circumstances
That Saudia Arabi and Egypt are also on the list of nations to be conquered in the name of oil and world dominance
That all ofthis is the framework for The New World Order
|Who is Richard Perle, and why should you be angry about him?
According to the few mentions of him in media, we know him to be the Chairman
of the Defense Policy Board under Donald Rumsfeld. We have also
heard his name mentioned as advising President Bush on Foreign Policy.
But there is much to this man we need know about, and it will shed a lot
of light on a lot of matters, including why Bush wants to go to war in
Iraq so eagerly. But first, we should also understand a little bit about
the Defense Policy Board. What the heck is that thing?
Created in 1985, the DPB is a panel of civilian advisors to the Pentagon. It was created in the Reagan Administration as part of an ëoverhaulí of the Pentagon. George Herbert Walker Bush, as Vice President, and also as CIA Director, earlier, sat on the National Security Council which drove creation of the Board. Richard Perle was there, too, working as Assistant Secretary of Defense. Thus it can be said that both Bush and Perle had a working relationship which included establishment of the DPB, itself. How strange, then, that a Bush II would reward Perle with being head of that very board? Probably not very strange, at all -- just quid pro quo.
The makeup of the Board? Thirty unpaid civilians who come from one of three camps (often one and the same): former government officials (like Perle) and retired military or CIA -- or academia. Naturally, some of them happen to have past ties (or future ties) to defense contractors.
So we end up with the Pentagon being advised on policy by people who make a buck if that advice is taken, or may have other ulterior motives for said advice. This is a byproduct, or sorts, of the Revolution in Military Affairs, and certainly, an enabler of it. It is also the formulae for subversion, and may have served to maintain the effectiveness and cohesion of Bush prime directives between the two Bush administrations. In other words, Clinton was a Bush Administration -- in that it continued to function largely in a way useful to Bush objectives. At least where it counts: foreign policy, policy on terrorism, intelligence policy, and military policy.
Back to Perle, a bad man who is described in many circles as a hawk on Iraq, and in those circles brave enough to risk charges of anti Semitic thinking, of being a lobbyist for Israel. They might be right, since he is a member of the Advisory board of JINSA, the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs and he has served in many similar groups supportive to Israel.
I do not rank that as a sin, but accuse him of far worse, than that. I accuse him of being a New World Order lynchpin. He is a ranking member of Rockefellerís Council on Foreign Relations, for instance, where he headed a CFR study on non lethal options in overseas contingencies. This is a polite way of describing political control technology and covert operations designed to overthrow governments.
But if CFR is a globalist organization, we have to give Perle double black marks because he was also one of the founding members of PNAC -- the Project for a New American Century. This group deserves its own article, but there is not time enough, today. I will brief you on it, but first, we must learn its source.
PNAC was a 1997 organization, but in 1996, Perle and a few friends from his JINSA and RAND Corporation connections put together something else. It was a joint IsraeliUS think tank that took a close look at the future of Israel. As found at <http://www.proparanoid.net/noilwar.htm#marketing> this group decided the fate of Iraq well before Bush II was a tiny chad forming on ballots at the toilet paper factory. They decided Iraq had to fall, and a shoot first approach was appropriate (simplified version.) Perle and the bulk of his friends at this think tank, the Institute for Advanced and Strategic Political Studies, all came back to the US to form PNAC, joined by the likes of pals Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney.
Just by chance, mind you, PNAC adopted essentially all of the findings of the Israeli think tank, and then sets about to determine just what kind of White House would be best suited to seek such an end, and what policies it should implement in order to best facilitate it. What they came up with, of course, is what we now have, right down the line, point by point. And you thought the election process was about choice. You thought the Office of the President was to lead the nation and guide government on how to best proceed. You thought wars were fought because we were forced into it. But wait -- it gets worse. These manipulations are revealing and insightful on how strings can be pulled so easily in Washington these days... but nothing compared to other Wisdomís of Perle. As recently published in New Yorker Magazine by Seymour M. Hersh, Perle has been a little naughty.
War Prophets for War Profits, from Iran Contra to BCCI, and back, again
First, recall that I implied that DPB members sometimes stood to profit by little policy changes at the Pentagon and the White House... like war with Iraq, terrorism, et al. Turns out Perle is just such a businessman, along with at least two other DPB members, forming a firm which is called Trireme Partners, L.P. The firm is involved in providing venture capital to firms specializing in Homeland Defense. Shades of political control technology! DBP advised in favor of establishing Homeland Security -- exactly two years to the day before 911, two years before it was even needed. Imagine that marvelous foresight. Prophets of profits.
Those of you familiar with the Microprose computer game called Civilization,
will know what a Trireme is -- that little tiny boat that canít
go far from shore without being sunk by high waves. Hmmm. Perle must not
know the meaning, or he is risking much, because he has traveled far from
shore on Jan 3. And, it seems he got hit by a big wave, one which just
might sink him.
from CIA Files
|In fact, he went all the way to France, where he sat down to lunch
with a couple of good olí boys. One Saudi elite named Harb Saleh alZuhair,
an industrialist, and one of the worldís most infamous persons short of
Osama bin Ladenís glory, Adnan Khashoggi,
illicit arms dealer extraordinair, and filthy rich from it. You remember
him, donít you? He was very instrumental in Iran Contra (a Bush thing)
and BCCI (a Bush thing, too) and a little more recently, just happened
to invest in an unidentified small Homeland Security company here in the
US. You are right. Probably just a coincidence. But which one?
The coincidence that worries me is the ties to Iran Contra, because it brings us full circle: Bush beget IranContra, which beget terrorist flight schools, which beget 911, which beget Jeb Bush and someone (perhaps pretending to be) FBI seizing flight school records and taking them off in a black, unmarked C130. Neither Jeb Bush or FBI own such an airplane, but CIA does. And... Bush and Perle beget DPB, which beget Homeland Security, which beget Trireme Partners L.P., which beget lunch with Khashoggi and Elite Arabs who, in turn, have in the past previously been very close to George Bush and (some) have invested in his business and CIA ventures. Two neat little loops.
Add the fact that Jeb Bush has actively promoted airlines connected to the terrorist flight schools in Florida, airlines which are tied to CIA drug smuggling, and you get a kind of missing link. A similar link exists to BCCI, in that Jeb has also promoted certain banks in Florida associated with BCCI -- and which just happened to have been used by the terrorists for their US accounts. This is all detailed in the Time Line for Treason on the NOILWAR! site at <http://www.proparanoid.net/timeline.htm>.
This leaves us with Shrub I connected the front end of the links between BCCI and Iran Contra in those loops, and Jeb Bush the rear end, which is appropriate, perhaps. Just one more reason to view 911 and all that has followed as an extension of George Herbert Walker Bushís Grand Game. Of course, he is just a facilitator. The Game belongs to the New World Order crowd. And regarding the NOILWAR! position on things, and whether or not oil has anything to do the DPB or the war in Iraq... we have this quote from the article recounting a dialog at the last DPB meeting between Boardmembers: ìHillman (DBP Board) said the old contracts are bad news; he said we should kick out the Russians and the French. This was a serious conversation. Weíd become the brokers. Then weíd be selling futures in the Iraqi oil company.î
And regarding the view from the Saudi side, this quote from a member of the Royal Family and former Saudi Ambassador to the US, Prince Bandar bin Sulatan: ìThere is a split personality to Perle... Here he is, on the one hand, trying to make a hundredmilliondollar deal, and, on the other hand, there were elements of the appearance of blackmail ó ëIf we get in business, heíll back off on Saudi Arabiaí ó as I have been informed by participants in the meeting.î
Perle has attempted business with the Saudi, before, trying to sell security equipment to the Saudi government after the Gulf War. Apparently, Bush did not pave a clear enough path and the deal fell through. Perle seems to hold no grudge -- unless you think supporting an initiative at the Pentagon to dismantle the Saudi regime evidence to the contrary. BushLaden enterprises at its best.
For an eye opening look at the makeup and background of the DPB, visit <http://www.larouchepub.com/ other/2002/2933what_is_dpb.html>, where you will find many of the Boardís members are JINSA members and PNAC members. Also on board are Henry Kissinger, Rockefellerís boy and Bush darling. What a coincidence that Rockefeller was in the Nixon White House while it disintegrated due to attacks led by Bush the Firstís Bay of Pigs team. To learn more about the BCCI and Iran Contra relationships, visit the Time Line for Treason, already mentioned.
Global Dominance and the Grand Game of OPEC Dominoes in the Middle East
Trust me, Iím not ranting, here. I will offer proofs, not just opinions. I have repeatedly stated, well before cries of ëwar with Iraqí from Bush, that the Grand Game is only about oil at one level. At another level, it is about control of the World, and establishment of the New World Order, and likely, the seating of the Antichrist; a oneworld government led by one person as foretold in Biblical prophecy. Recall the Armageddon Machine from the last newsletter (now found on the NOILWAR! Web pages at <http://www.proparanoid.net/armachine.htm>)
I have repeatedly stated that part and parcel of this plan was a series of wars (or one giant Oil War III) with Islamic nations, one by one. If we looked at the Grand Game as being principally driven by terrorism as its fuel (the excuse,) then we would have to go after Iran, Libya, and Syria, probably in that order of threat (but not strategic order.) But we see we have been distracted by Iraq from the terrorism theme.
But we will have our war in Iraq, and it does not seem to fit the terrorism theme. Thus we must ask, just what is the true ranking of future wars? If we passed over the known terrorist states to get at one only marginally considered as possible terrorist, who else might get clobbered out of sequence? Well, there is only one centrally powerful Islamic nation which makes any sense at all. It is Saudi Arabia. I know. You thought they were our allies. Donít worry, we will find an excuse -- like discovering they have indeed been funding Osama bin Laden all these years. Never mind we knew it all along and just waited until now, to say so. Never mind it was blackmail money insuring bin Laden would not foment revolution within Saudi Arabia, even even at times facilitated via CIA conduits, hushed up by the White House, which blocked FBI effort.
Believe me, Bushco wonít mind, not one bit. By going after the House of Saud, we not only control the largest OPEC oil producing state in the region, but we get a kind of bonus. All those little dominoes arranged neatly along its southern boarders... dominoes called Emirate States and other nations. Without the House of Saud to protect (some are even called protectorates) these Saudi friendly governments, they will crash and burn with civil wars. Gosh. Perhaps the United States should send in some Marines to restore peace and establish ëDemocracy.í So with one bold move, we get Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman, Yemen and the United Arab Emirates. Heck of a deal: Buy one war, get Six more for free. But there is apparently yet one more ëfreebie.í That will have to wait, however, because you wouldnít believe me if I told you without explaining, first...
Since US Media Sees no Evil, Hears no Evil, Speaks no Evil, Foreign Media Screams it
Iíve repeatedly stated that US Media is a willful coconspirator through its MIIM affiliations; we do not get the truth at home, but media around the world is very open and telling it like it is. We should not wonder, then, in light of just one example offered here using Australia, that other nations do not wish to jump onto the Iraq war wagon with Daddy Warbucks Bush. The example, by use of two articles, well illustrates both the existence and the outcome of a US controlled press.
Both articles are from the Sydney Morning Herald. The first is dated Oct. 7 and the second Dec. 26 of last year. The first is entitled Oil has always been top of Bush's foreign-policy agenda, and the second, Defense redefined means securing new energy. Collectively, these clearly show that not only is the US seizing oil, but implies in revelation of dates and statements by US officials that 911 was a needed catalyst for military action, actions planned before 911. Iíve said this all along.
In presenting the material, here, I will summarize portions, and combine
and reorder other portions to better illustrate and organize the material
into a single presentation. I use ellipse (...) to show these edits, and
(parens) to show my additions. Key passages are in red, or emphasized.
Originals are available at <http://www.otherof
alldepressions.org/1033538848021.html> and <http://www.fairfaxarch
ieves.com> respectively. It starts with important background information:
Quote on: As far back as 1975, Henry ëfor a futureí Kissinger, then secretary of state, said America was prepared to wage war over oil. Separate plans advocating US conquest of Saudi oil fields were published in the 70s. So it should come as little surprise that in May last year - four months before the terrorist attacks on Washington and New York - a battle plan for Afghanistan was already being reviewed by the US Command that would carry it out after September 11.
Military strategists were highlighting the energy wealth of the Caspian Sea and Central Asia and its importance to America's "security"... General William Kernan, commander-in-chief of the US Joint Forces Command, let the revelation about the battle plan review casually drop in July while extolling the success of America's Millennium Challenge war games to Agence France-Presse. Quote Off.
In the spring of 2001, there was a switch thrown in America, and the lights dimmed in the rooms marked Freedom, Rule of Law, and Constitution, and flared in the rooms marked Might makes Right, Extortion and Land Grabs, and Pax Fascist Americana. In rapid fire succession various documents prepared by the military, by or for George Bush, Dick Cheney, and James A. Baker, and by or through the Council on Foreign Relations, completely revamped and redefined American policy at the Department of Defense, State Department, and more.
This was the commutation of plans that had been in works for decades,
but was the first visible sign of their implementation. It rotated the
road signs of American moral and legal values 180 degrees, and made war
on behalf of seizing oil ëOK.í It started with the New World Order crowd...
at the request of George Bush, who as one of his first steps in office
simultaneously established a Presidential Task Force on Energy headed by
Quote on. ...in a document commissioned early in the Bush presidency, two key US (NWO) policy groups, the Council on Foreign Relations and the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy, explicitly advocated a convergence of military and energy issues. Their joint report - Strategic Energy Policy Challenges for the 21st Century - approved of "military intervention" to secure energy supplies... (and) forecast an end to cheap and plentiful fuel, with the energy industry facing "the beginning of capacity limitations"... "there is no alternative" and "there is no time to waste", the document projects periods of exploding US energy prices, economic recession and social unrest unless answers are found... It also urged Pentagon participation in Mr Cheney's energy task force. And the report warned that the US was running out of oil, with a painful end to cheap fuel already in sight. Quote off.Oil shortages means redefining enemies as those who have the oil (or the land where a pipeline must be built.) References to the War on Terrorism are before 911 -- how did they know? The same way they knew to start the creation processes for Homeland Security exactly two years to the day before 911. They have a Magic crystal ball. I call it Operation Northwoods -- a 60ís plan signed off on by all five members of the Pentagon Joint Chiefs of Staff to stage terrorist attacks on American targets in order to foment and make popular a war with Cuba. Involving the US military (pretending to be Cuban military or agents) shooting down of US passenger jets, blowing up US warships in foreign harbors, shooting Americans on our streets, blowing up buildings, and more, all with the goal of creating casualty lists designed to cause Americans to demand retribution: war with Cuba. Any of this familiar?
One of many cool political images found at <http://winstars.free.fr/english/bush.html>
While the plan was never used, then, it appears by the evidence
found on the Time Line for Treason at the NOILWAR!
Web pages that not only have they remembered it, but actualized it. Evidence
is at least implied in the Heraldís accounts, as well:
Quote on: Among the "immediate steps" it (the report) urged was an inquiry into whether US policy could be changed to speed the availability of oil from the Caspian Basin region, supporting long standing accusations that energy issues shadowed the US agenda in Afghanistan... It details an alternative basis for the US "war on terrorism", as well as the apparent basis for much of the Bush Administration's present foreign policy, its so-called oil agenda... the report repeatedly emphasized its (Iraq) importance as an oil producer and the need to expand Iraqi production as soon as possible to meet projected oil shortages - shortages it said could be avoided only through increased production or conservation in the near-term.
In essence, the report sees the nature of Persian Gulf politics as a significant threat and obstacle to increased energy supplies. Implicit in the substantive concerns - that "Gulf allies are finding their domestic and foreign policy interests increasingly at odds with US strategic considerations", and that "evidence suggests that investment is not being made in a timely enough manner" to meet global needs - is the seed of what has now become an almost openly adversarial position.
(almost immediately after the report) ...news reports began to paint Saudi Arabia as a possible adversary to the US. Rhetoric regarding Iraq has also been steadily ratcheted up, creating what amounts to an allegation du jour scenario. US military circles have watched as Iraq became "the tactical pivot", Saudi Arabia "the strategic pivot", and an agenda of "not just a new regime in Iraq" but a "new Middle East" has been increasingly discussed. Quote off.
Hmmm... those pivots, sound familiar... apparently a NWO theme, one we shall read of, again. The Military, in search of Americas New War, eagerly signs on in a way that clearly required a green light from George Bush, and again, revealing war plans were underway BEFORE 911 justification.
Quote on: Virtually concurrent with the (CFR/Baker Institute) reportís release on April 10 last year, Tommy Franks, commander of US forces responsible for the Persian Gulf/ South Asia area, added his voice. An April 13 report on his congressional testimony defined General Franks's command's key mission as "access to [the region's] energy resources"... in May it was his command that reviewed the soon-to-be-used details for the coming war in Afghanistan (more than six months prior to 911.) Also early last year, security expert Michael Klare warned that US military action to secure oil "could emerge as the favoured response to future [oil] crises"... (stating that) the military had increasingly come to "define resource security as their primary mission".Richard Perles friends in the military and the Council on Foreign Relations next asks the President to lie to you and me, and suggest an alternative reason should be given to justify war ** giving a motive for any Operation Northwoods scenario they might have elected to employ for said alternative. What other justification could they have had in mind, in advance?
...In the months preceding September 11, US governmental and military policy makers increasingly built military frameworks around energy questions... Over several months beginning in April last year (2001) a series of military and governmental policy documents was released that sought to legitimise the use of US military force in the pursuit of oil and gas... Reflecting a shifting strategic policy, the influential Council on Foreign Relations urged that the Defense Department be included in Cheney's energy group.
Publications of the US Army War College and the army General and Command Staff College argued that, when it came to oil and gas, "where US business goes, US national interests follow". They highlighted the energy wealth of Central Asia and its importance to America's "security". Oil and gas were on the military's agenda... During that spring of 2001, as the US military examined the all-out battle scenario that would soon become the operational plan for the war in Afghanistan, events fatefully spun towards September 11's trigger. But these events did not occur in a vacuum. Providing a summary of the US military's coming role, over the summer of 2000 the Army War College, a foundry for the US military's strategic thinking, published a declaration that security "is more than protecting the country from external threats; security includes economic security". Quote off.
Quote on: And so the months preceding September 11 saw a shifting of the US military's focus. Cutting to the crux of present day issues, a spring 2001 article by Jeffrey Record in the War College's journal, Parameters, argued the legitimacy of "shooting in the Persian Gulf on behalf of lower gas prices". (No - a war always raises gas prices, and they never return to prewar pricing, as we see happening now.)
...Mr. Record, a former staff member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and an apparent favourite of the Council on Foreign Relations, also advocated the acceptability of presidential subterfuge in the promotion of a conflict. Mr Record explicitly urged painting over the US's actual reasons for warfare with a nobly high-minded veneer, seeing such as a necessity for mobilising public support for a conflict. Quote off
Cartoon: Phil Holt Caption: Where are the weapons of mass destruction hidden?
In summary, The Australians and, via similar French, German, and British accounts, the bulk of Europe, understand as accepted fact what US Media has concealed from you: The New World Order groups, working with President Bush and the military, have fomented and facilitated America's New War, custom tailored for our gulability. They opted a strategy which relied upon the key element of deceit, which in turn REQUIRES some form of alternative excuse for war - an excuse provided by 911.
Given that war plans were underway well before 911... given that also in advance of 911, the Pentagon undertook to build a 3-D model of the Pentagon and surrounding high-rise buildings to consider the results of crashing a civilian airliner into the Pentagon... given that many of the key 911 terrorists were freely let into the US without surveillance despite knowledge of their ties to terrorism and that they were entering the country ** and that they then actually entered military bases for special trainings... given that they further took flight training from CIA proprietaries... and given the very existence of Operation Northwoods... and the fact that every single step in North woods has come to pass in 911 and thereafter... one cannot help but wonder if 911 was not Northwoods in action in order to facilitate the new ëpreemptive policyí...Iím pissed as hell, and declaring NOILWAR!
The Pivot, Final Proof of The Ultimate Wisdoms of Perle in Action
Apparantly, Saudi Arabia is to be one of the next to fall. Frankly, though, Iím shocked at who the story originated with: The Washington Post. I shouldnít be shocked, because the story was likely meant as a warning to the Saudi to ëplay ballí or ëbe next.í The story by staffer Thomas E. Ricks, is titled Briefing Depicted Saudis as Enemies:Ultimatum Urged To Pentagon Board. Do you remember the DPB and Richard Perle, and his French friends?
Seems Richard Perle invited someone from the (CIA infected) Rand
Corporation to give a presentation to the Pentagon on behalf of DPB.
And the content of the presentation? The title was ëTaking the Saudi out
of Arabia.í No, I donít make this stuff up. Iíd sum it all up by revealing
the contents of the last slide, entitled Grand
Strategy for the Middle East. They could also have called it
The Grand Game, and been closer to the mark. It is here that we find the
smoking gun pivots, once more.
Iraq is the Tactical Pivot
Saudi Arabia is the Strategic Pivot
Egypt is the Prize
Thus, we see, Egypt is the seventh ëfreebie.í This concretely illustrates my claims of an intent to assume control of the entire Arabic region. The slide show is reproduced fully at <http://slate.msn.com/id/2069119>, which is also a critical review of the presentation by Slate, Microsoftís own online editorial magazine. Hmmm... perhaps Bill Gates has realized at last that he is not truly one of the New World Order invitees. What you will find there is most frightening. It puts the Saudi in the darkest of possible light and then promotes taking them out it they failed to meet an ultimatum. The two most chilling and revealing slides follow. The first is entitled ëAn ultimatum to the House of Saud.í
Stop any funding and support for fundamentalist
madrasa, mosque, ulama, predicator anywhere
in the world
Stop all antiU.S., antiIsraeli, anti Western
predication, writings, etc., within Arabia
Dismantle, ban all the kingdom's "Islamic charities,"
confiscate their assets
Prosecute or isolate those involved in the terror
chain, including in the Saudi intelligence services
This is flatly impossible and absurd. The Saudi nation is built upon a specific religion, unlike the US which attempts to favor no religion over another. The first demand insists they reverse that principle, akin to asking the United States to adopt Islam to avoid terrorism. It would not happen, and the Saudi feel the same. The second demand forces a police state ban on freedom of the press, which would not go over here in the United States, were the tables reversed under terrorist blackmail. The third is even more impossible, and would be like asking the United States to eliminate all Christian charities. Finally, the last would require a purge, and would be a bit like demanding that we eliminate all CIA and FBI agents in America. Well, at least that idea deserves a little consideration...
Now, I say that in jest, but consider it for a moment. If we presumed them a threat to our true national security, then we have a problem. There are too many to throw in jail over a quarter million, easy, if you include retired types who are still active somewhere in the private sectors (proprietaries.) So we might choose to exile them, but who would take them? And if you did exile them, they could prove more dangerous than before, putting all their combined skills to work with some third nation(s) against you. No. The only logical solution is to kill them all. And that, of course, is not an option, either. But that is exactly what we demand of the Saud. So where does that leave us?
At the next slide, entitled simply: ëOr else...í
What the House of Saud holds dear can be targeted:Oil: the old fields are defended by U.S. forces,
and located in a mostly Shiite area
Money: the Kingdom is in dire financial straits,
its valuable assets invested in dollars, largely
in the U.S.
The Holy Places: let it be known that alternatives
are being canvassed
The presentation called for seizing the oil fields and freezing their assets in this country. That covers the first two points. The third is more troubling, because it implies Mecca itself is at risk should the Saudi not capitulate. The presentation goes on to suggest a different Islamic group become the legitimate guardians of Mecca, but the threat is also implied that Mecca could simply just ëgo awayí through military actions.
As a Christian, Iíd think that one of the worst possible ideas since
the crucifixion of Christ. I guess, in terms of parallels, that would make
Bush into Caesar, and Rumsfeld into Pontius Pilot of the New World Order,
Pax Fascist Americana style.
From London newspaper, The Independent: The world tries to stop the Bush family legacy
The contents of this page are a collection of articles all copyrighted 2003 by H. Michael Sweeney, and NOILWAR! All rights reserved
However, the message is too important to limit distribution, even where the user intends to present it in a critical way. Permission is not needed to download to your own computer, forwarding as an email attachment, or for printer reproduction for the purpose of showing to friends, family, coworkers, etc. The purpose of this work is to generate public awareness about the NOILWAR! movement and public discussion on topic. Permission to duplicate and distribute in a complete and unedited form, with or without additional commentary or introduction, is hereby granted, even where use may be deemed as criticisms of this work. I will allow the reader to decide for themselves which argument and proofs are more acceptable. Electronic reproduction must include all links in tact, including a link to the original page that the most recent version can be found, and a link within any introduction to the proparanoid.net main page. The copyright notice and the phrase 'Used by permission -- please contact the author directly for permission to reproduce.' should be included at the top or bottom of reproduced work. This section on permissions should NOT be a part of any such reproduction. An adviso to any replications or distributions would be appreciated - that perhaps I may also link to/promote your site. Inquiries, comments, and corrections, always welcome. I would especially like to reach the mailing lists of other anti-war organizations.