Saturday, October 13, 2007



by Alan Stang
October 13, 2007

Some forty five years ago, when I first became aware of the conspiracy for world domination, took up my sword and shield in the battle for America and sallied forth to arouse others, I discovered two kinds of prospects. Race, sex, ethnicity and education did not seem to matter. The difference between the two kinds cut through them all.

The first kind would tell me that he or she had long suspected something was wrong but couldn’t identify it. Now that I had, everything came into focus and they could. Now they could easily predict what would happen, simply because they knew what had happened before. Even today I can still do that and mystify people, but it is so easy, so obvious, I don’t even think of it as predicting.

Indeed, from time to time I still get messages from people who say that when they first heard me talk, the shock was so great they knew I was crazy, but now that sufficient time has passed they realize that they are crazy too. One lady actually said that. “Guess what? Now I’m crazy too!”

For instance, in the spring of 2001, before Nine Eleven, I addressed the California state convention of the Daughters of the American Revolution and told them who Bush was and what he would do. Many of the Daughters were angered and horrified, but it has all turned out as I said. It was easy to do because I knew what Bush was. I remembered George I saying again and again that we need a “new world order.”

Back there at the beginning was also the period when I was so grateful to be allowed to tell the American side that I would sit patiently like a dumb animal on talk shows while the host dumped on me, hoping he would let me say a few words. Often, they would invite me precisely to serve as an object of ridicule. I’ll do another piece you may find interesting, recounting some of my experiences and what I finally did instead.

The second kind of prospect would listen with half an ear, sometimes less, and remain unconvinced. “Prove it! Prove it!” I can hear one of them shouting. So I would go away and come back with more proof. But I never could persuade them. The proof I presented was never enough, or never enough of the right kind. Or, I had used the wrong language to describe something. I would go away to devise another approach, convinced the fault was mine. If only I could do it right, just right, they would see.

But they never did and I continued to blame myself, wasting precious time. As you can probably imagine, the frustration was intense. Only gradually did the truth dawn that there was nothing wrong with me. There was something wrong with them. Some of them were simply too weak minded or intimidated or covetous to face reality. Others may have been deliberately trying to waste my time.

Whatever the reason, as the truth finally dawned on me, I of course changed my method. Now, maybe once a year, I would stop by for a few minutes to see whether they had made any progress, whether they had recovered from their delusions. Sometimes they had; often they had not. If not, I would cheerfully go my way.

All of this again becomes germane – even more germane – because some readers who are too young to remember it are now writing to complain about my language. They like what I have to say but they can’t pass it along because if their prospects read in my pieces about “el presidente Jorge W. Boosh,” about “Democruds” and “Republicruds,” about “queers” and “faggots,” they will instantly turn off. Indeed, the people who complain are almost turned off themselves. So, why do I use that language?

Literary types may remember (Janet) Taylor Caldwell. At one time, she could have been the biggest selling author in the world, because all her many novels were selling at once. They probably still are. A few have been made into movies. Janet was a staunch believer and a ferocious defender of our Christian civilization.

She was also a prodigious imbiber. Once, at a convention in Boston, the late, great Susan Huck, Ph.D., warned me about a bottle on the mantle in Janet’s hotel room. “It’s white lightning,” whispered Dr. Huck, a world class imbiber herself. Susan was trying to protect me, knowing that although I do enjoy an occasional, adult beverage, I am not at all a competitor.

Sure enough, later, up in her room, Janet poured me a hearty glass from the bottle. It looked perfectly innocuous, like distilled water, but a sip confirmed that it was white lightning indeed. I was able to stash the rest of the glass unimbibed, and Janet did not notice because she launched into a session of truly valuable advice: “Listen to Mamma! Listen to Mamma! Get published!” I did of course, and her memorable review appears on the dust jacket of my first novel, The Highest Virtue. Go to for details.

Janet was once visiting a women’s club. I can’t recall which one it was, but of course the ladies were thrilled to have the world’s best-selling novelist as their guest. Needless to say, she was sipping whisky from a water glass during the visit. One of the distinguished ladies made the fatal mistake of asking Janet what we should do with the Communists after we win the battle for America.

Janet took a long, thoughtful swig from the water glass and replied, “I think we ought to kill the sons of bitches!”

To feel the full effect of this, you need to imagine an elegant, patrician, truly Great Lady, saying it. Yes, it was notoriously unladylike terminology, even an intolerant thought, but it certainly did get the attention of the ladies there assembled. And the point of course is that so does mine. It certainly gets the attention of the people who protest.

Notice that my language is much more genteel than Janet’s. I go out of my way not to use profanity. Of course, I am not a Great Lady. She was and could get away with it. In fact, my language is very carefully honed and directed. It is interesting to note that no one writes to say it is inaccurate, untrue. One of its purposes, admittedly, is to bring its object down by subjecting it to ridicule, by showing it to be utterly contemptible, a literary technique or style that of course has a long history.

So, for instance, the appellation “el presidente Jorge W. Boosh” communicates our awareness that Bush is committing treason by conducting the present invasion of our country across the Mexican border. We know that because if he were to pick up the phone and say, “Stop it at once!” it would stop at once. But he does not pick up the phone and say that. In the latest revelation, Boosh has gone into court to prevent the execution of a Mexican who bragged about raping and murdering two teen age girls. Boosh says the monster is an illegal alien and is protected by treaty.

The appellation also communicates our utter disgust for Boosh’s true allegiance and contempt for the traitor. So, then, if all this is true, what is the problem? The problem is precisely that it is true. It is embarrassing. The people who won’t look at it – won’t face it – can’t. The simple truth is too frightful. That is why the word “faggot” offends them. In my new book, Not Holier Than Thou: How Queer is Bush? I explain that the anxiety such words cause is proof they have been brainwashed. I am not going to explain how for the umpteenth time here. Get the book. Go to

The same considerations would apply to my characterization of the Communist Broadcasting System's revolting Mike Wallace, whose show I once wrote, as “snot dripping from the nose of a skid row drunk,” and “dog vomit filled with maggots the dog is lapping up.” It was Mike who said at a conference on journalistic ethics that he would not warn a Marine Corps commander of an upcoming ambush, because to do so would damage his journalistic “impartiality.” What else could you call this skunk?

There is still another reason for such inflammatory language. Yes, it infuriates. It is calculated to infuriate the reader and arouse. It is meant to convey the fact that we are not engaged in an ideological discussion here; this is not a university debate. We are at war. Aided by domestic traitors, a foreign power is attacking and invading our country. There has been bloodshed. There have been casualties. I am not talking about Iraq. Iraq is a distant front in the war. I am talking about New York. I am talking about Seattle. We are in the middle of the most dangerous national emergency in our history.

Also, friends, again, I have been writing about these monsters for some forty five years. I know they have been committing monstrous atrocities for some two hundred years. I am tired of being polite. How many more ways can one write about them; how many other things can one say? And what you like to read is now irrelevant.

I said above that what I was talking about all those many years ago is even more germane today. Why? Back then, the conspiracy for world government was more concealed, admittedly harder to see. It was not yet strong enough to reveal itself completely. Today, as the late, great Robert Welch once put it, the conspiracy is necessarily “running naked to the finish line.” Because it is so close, it is easier to see.

Which means that the people who today refuse to see, the quibblers, are more culpable than their spiritual progenitors. They have much less excuse. In mind’s eye now I imagine them, like the ladies at that women’s club, elegantly dressed and coiffeured, cute, little napkins on their knees, eating finger sandwiches, quibbling about exactly how to say it, as if what we’re talking about has nothing to do with them, as if they can choose whether or not to become involved. And they are doing that while actual rapists are breaking into their beautifully decorated meeting room, intending to drag them by their beautifully frosted hair into the street.

So I believe I can reassure the heroes who willingly endure the schizophrenic frustration of trying to convince blockhead fellow citizens that something is fatally wrong in our country, let alone convince them it is bad enough to enlist in the war. I have discovered over more than 40 years in the struggle that if my language were as pristine as Shirley Temple's in her prime, and my usages as contemplative as the Dalai Lama's, these brittle folks would find something else to dissuade them.

It will never be quite right. These are the same people who demand that you prove your point, but however much proof you bring them, it is never enough. They don’t investigate on their own; they don’t follow leads; they expect you to bring the proof to them and put it in their laps, and still they demand proof while a criminal alien or a terrorist is already in the house. But you couldn’t convince them because you didn’t say it quite right. Of course we are talking about the spoiled brat mentality of the typical liberaloid. If one of them caught someone raping his wife, he would reason with him.

I write to you in December, 1945. It is snowing. It is cold. And von Rundstedt’s panzers surround the 101st Airborne at Bastogne. Or, if you prefer, it is 1942, before the Battle of Midway. After the disaster at Pearl, nothing much prevents the Japanese fleet from reaching Hawaii, even the entire West Coast. In fact, in June they will occupy the Aleutians, U.S. territory.

Now it is time for Old Blood and Guts. Now it is time for General Patton. You are part of the Third Army and must get to Bastogne. Did you know that “the speech” George C. Scott rendered so expertly in the film was a sissified version of the speech Patton actually made? I am not going to tell you what he really said, because the General would not want me to. A sublime Christian gentleman, he would have turned seven shades of crimson had any ladies been there to hear him. If you are a man, you can find it yourself on the net.

Compared to all this, I must admit my language amounts to nothing more than timid obfuscation that just beats around the boosh. I apologize. From now on, if you like, I’ll talk more like Mamma.


Alan Stang was one of Mike Wallace’s original writers at Channel 13 in New York, where he wrote some of the scripts that sent Mike to CBS. Stang has been a radio talk show host himself. In Los Angeles, he went head to head nightly with Larry King, and, according to Arbitron, had almost twice as many listeners. He has been a foreign correspondent. He has written hundreds of feature magazine articles in national magazines and some fifteen books, for which he has won many awards, including a citation from the Pennsylvania House of Representatives for journalistic excellence. One of Stang’s exposés stopped a criminal attempt to seize control of New Mexico, where a gang seized a court house, held a judge hostage and killed a deputy. The scheme was close to success before Stang intervened. Another Stang exposé inspired major reforms in federal labor legislation.

His first book, It’s Very Simple: The True Story of Civil Rights, was an instant best-seller. His first novel, The Highest Virtue, set in the Russian Revolution, won smashing reviews and five stars, top rating, from the West Coast Review of Books, which gave five stars in only one per cent of its reviews.

Stang has lectured in every American state and around the world and has guested on many top shows, including CNN’s Cross Fire. Because he and his wife had the most kids in Santo Domingo, the Dominican Republic, where they lived at the time, the entire family was chosen to be actors in “Havana,” directed by Sydney Pollack and starring Robert Redford, the most expensive movie ever made (at the time). Alan Stang is the man in the ridiculous Harry Truman shirt with the pasted-down hair. He says they made him do it.



By Cliff Kincaid

October 12, 2007

The U.S. Supreme Court’s hearing of the case, Medellin v. Texas, has reminded the American people of President Bush’s terrible tendency to put the foreign interests of Mexico above those of the United States. But the case, being heard on October 10, is significant for another reason. It demonstrates the dangers of passing global treaties and getting involved with international courts and tribunals. The Senate should remember this lesson as it ponders ratification of the U.N.’s Law of the Sea Treaty, which creates an International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and various “dispute resolution panels” that will inevitably rule and act against the U.S. The Senate could vote on this treaty shortly and the odds are that it will pass unless the American people voice their objections immediately and vociferously.

In the Medellin v. Texas case, which we addressed in a June 12 special report, the Bush Administration acted so committed to the primacy of international law and global courts that it took the President’s home state of Texas to court on behalf of a group of convicted Mexican killers. The Mexicans had been sentenced to death for murdering U.S. citizens, including teenagers and young children. It is another low point in the presidency of George W. Bush but it helps explain the twisted mentality behind the administration’s push for ratification of the dangerous United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

Medellin v. Texas figured in Mexico v. United States, the case brought before the U.N.’s International Court of Justice (ICJ). The ICJ ruled 14-1 on behalf of Mexico against the U.S., insisting that the killers were somehow denied their rights to seek outside counsel and advice from Mexican authorities. The ICJ was headed at the time by a judge from communist China, who also ruled against the U.S.

John B. Bellinger III, Legal Adviser to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, cited Mexico v. United States of America in a June 6 speech trying to convince international lawyers that the administration is doing what it can to enforce international law in U.S. courts. He noted with pride that Bush had come down on the same side as the U.N.’s International Court of Justice. In the ICJ decision, Bellinger said, “the ICJ ordered the United States to review the cases of 51 Mexican nationals convicted of capital crimes.” And the President, he said, “acting on the advice of the Secretary of State,” decided to “require each State involved to give the 51 convicts a new hearing.” That’s a total of 51 convicted killers that the President sided with. Assuming the role of a dictator, Bush ordered Texas and the others states to comply with this U.N. court. Texas and many other states resisted. Hence, the case now before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Bellinger’s audience for his June 6 speech was gathered at The Hague, a city in the Netherlands which is home to over 100 international organizations, including the U.N.’s International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court.

Bellinger may have mollified the globalists but the reaction that the case is getting here in the U.S. is very different. The reaction is one of anger and outrage. Fox News and the Laura Ingraham radio show are among the media which have featured emotional interviews with the father of one of the murder victims, Jennifer Ertman. He flatly accused Bush of being a liar when he said he wanted to see justice done in the case and the killers punished for their crimes. He noted that Jose Ernesto Medellin has been on death row longer than his daughter lived. Medellin and other gang members raped and murdered Jennifer Ertman and Elizabeth Peña as the girls were going home.

James Oliphant of the Chicago Tribune provides some of the graphic details about the case: “Medellin stopped Peña. When she tried to run, he threw her to the ground. Ertman ran to help her but also was shoved to the ground. They were gang-raped and beaten. Even as the girls begged for their lives, they were dragged to nearby woods and strangled, one with her own shoelace, the other with a belt and then by a shoe pressed on her windpipe. Their bodies were found four days later.” Medellin had no regrets and bragged about the crime.

Bellinger acknowledged to the international lawyers that “The first defendant to try to take advantage of the President’s decision was in the state of Texas, which objected to the President’s decision. In response, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that the President had no power to intervene in its affairs, even to obtain compliance with an order of the ICJ. This Administration has gone to the Supreme Court of the United States to reverse this decision. We expect a ruling from that Court this time next year.”

This is the case before the Supreme Court on October 10. A decision, as Bellinger indicated, is expected next year.

We don’t know how the Supreme Court will rule on this case. But the people don’t have to wait before sending the President a strong message of protest. They can send that message by having the Senate defeat Bush’s U.N. Law of the Sea Treaty and by drawing the line at further interference by U.N. courts in our sovereign affairs.

The American people have shown, through derailing the Senate’s illegal alien amnesty bill, that they won’t play dumb or go to sleep when the issue is American sovereignty. That is why the Mexican killers case is striking such a chord, leading many to wonder if President Bush has lost his mind by intervening on behalf of the corrupt U.N. and its foreign judges against his home state of Texas.

The problem, of course, goes far beyond the Medellin case or UNCLOS. Trying to appease his foreign audience at The Hague, Bellinger declared that Bush was now trying to get 35 treaties, including UNCLOS, ratified. Bellinger declared that “international law binds us in our domestic system” and that the Bush Administration had entered into 429 international agreements and treaties last year alone. He bragged that, “…I have a staff of 171 lawyers, who work every day to furnish advice on legal matters, domestic and international, and to promote the development of international law as a fundamental element of our foreign policy.”

After hopefully defeating UNCLOS?and the battle is now underway?we should show Mr. Bellinger and his fancy legal team the door.

As for the President, it looks like he’s trying to bring into being the New World Order his father only talked about. It’s not a legacy to be proud of. But it’s one that a President Hillary Clinton would like to inherit.


Cliff Kincaid, a veteran journalist and media critic, Cliff concentrated in journalism and communications at the University of Toledo, where he graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree.

Cliff has written or co-authored nine books on media and cultural affairs and foreign policy issues.

Cliff has appeared on Hannity & Colmes, The O’Reilly Factor, Crossfire and has been published in the Washington Post, Washington Times, Chronicles, Human Events and Insight.



By Rev. Phillip "Flip" Benham

June 10, 2007

In 1994, a number of babies were born near Brownsville, Texas, with strange maladies. Numerous reporters were investigating to see if the culprit was a hidden environmental factor needing to be uncovered. Two little babies were born without brain stems.

With that in mind, now I give you a Faustian wager:

If President G.W. Bush were to say to you, “I’ll sign an Executive order today that will end abortion in America, as far as it is up to me, if you will simply allow the two little babies born down in Brownsville, TX without brain stems to be euthanized. They are only going to live a short time anyway.” Would you make the deal?

Keep in mind that you will be saving the lives of millions of babies at the expense of just two. Pragmatism and utilitarianism would surely recommend that you accept the deal. The entire pro-life movement would demand that you accept the deal. Compassion for children would cry, “YES! I’ll accept the deal!” Your own heart would cry out from deep within your bosom that this is a gift from God. “YES! YES! I’ll accept the deal!” Incrementalism would say, “Amen!” You would also be called every name in the book if you didn’t accept the deal.

So what would you do? Millions of lives depend on your choice.

The devil loves to get us into predicaments like this. He confronts us with the oldest lie on the face of the earth. It is a lie birthed in the pit of hell and it seeks our ultimate destruction. Here it is: “Did God really say….?”

Yes, the devil is always calling God’s Word into question. It is his way. But that is only the bait to get you and me to outright deny God’s Word. The devil is indeed the ultimate incrementalist.

He used it on Eve in the Garden, and Eve bought the lie – disaster followed. He used it on Jesus during His temptation, but he was crushed by the Word of God. He used it on the disciples and saints upon whom the Lord built His Church, and he was crushed again by the Word of God. Today, he is using it (the lie of incrementalism) upon you and me. Will you stand upon God’s Word, or will you bargain with the devil?

The only thing we need remember here is that God never gave us the bargaining chip to negotiate this deal. All human life is sacred to Him. We do not have the moral authority to determine who lives and who dies. This is God’s domain.

One life is as precious in His sight as hundreds of millions of lives. Our responsibility is to say what God says in His Word. Those two babies born down in Brownsville, Texas, are as precious in His sight as all of the 7 billion people on this planet. “What you have done to the least of these my brethren, you have also done it to me…”

The battle is not ours but the Lord’s! Our duty is not to try to outsmart the devil in all of his wiles, but to stand upon the Word of God! Nothing less will do.

Incrementalism is a lie from the pit of hell for it will never allow us to stand alone upon God’s Word!

Operation Rescue was birthed in repentance. We knew we were to stand absolutely on the Word of God. We did not see compromising God’s Word as a tactic to end abortion. We laid our lives down that others might live. We were arrested, lost pastorates, lost jobs, were fined, sued, and were pursued by our own government as “enemies of the state.” Yet, “little by little,” God was leading us to victory. That’s right! When we stand steadfastly on God’s Word, God Himself incrementally brings us into victory.

Say What?

Read the Bible and see (Exodus 23: 27-33; Deuteronomy 7: 21-22; Matthew 13:31-33). God is going to give the Promised Land to His people “little by little” – that is incrementally. But only as they stand resolutely upon His Word. The lie of incrementalism is that we become “as God” trying to negotiate the terms of peace. God wants us to represent Him alone – no negotiation with the enemy. God Himself has already determined the terms of peace. We need to simply deliver God’s mail and He will, incrementally, bring us to victory!

Of course, this demands an understanding of Scripture and the true nature of the abortion battle. Abortion is a Gospel issue. God will honor those who stand upon His Word and unsheathe the sharp double edged Sword of the Spirit. You want to end abortion? Nothing less than national repentance over the sin of child sacrifice will do. This requires that the Word of God be proclaimed. The Emancipation Proclamation for the Unborn Child must be signed by the President of the United States of America.

For this to happen, repentance in the Church of Jesus Christ must take place first. Yes, abortion will come to an end in America when the Church of Jesus Christ makes up her mind it will come to an end – not one second sooner! We, God’s Church in America, are the ones in sin because we know that abortion is murder, yet do nothing about it! We just blame the Republicans for being cowards, and the Democrats for being murderers.

In Operation Rescue we did not compromise God’s Word. We stood upon the absolute principle that abortion was, is, and forever will be – murder! No incremental steps or attempts to find common ground with the enemy of God’s children. We just took God at His Word.

If you have to compromise His Word in order to get some legislation to pass, like killing babies if they have parental consent, or waiting 24 hours before killing, or anesthetizing the baby before you kill him, then you have bought, hook, line, and sinker, the lie from the devil. The devil never wants anyone to stand upon God’s Word alone, for it spells his absolute defeat. He can’t win when you and I do this. He gets you and me to compromise God’s Word in order to save the lives of some babies, while he keeps his grip on the heart of our nation by keeping abortion legal.

This is the lie of incrementalism.

As we stood upon God’s Word in Operation Rescue and allowed the theology of the Church house to become biography in the streets, we were colored by the devil, and his crowd, as wild-eyed lunatics bent on blowing-up abortion mills and shooting abortionists. Note the design here was to keep us from doing what we were doing.

The devil even used our brothers and sisters in Christ to say we were hurting the cause because of our foolish behavior. The Church said we were disgracing the Name of Christ because we were not submitted to those in authority over us. So we retreated back inside the church house to lick our wounds. We tried to convince ourselves that the only hope to end abortion was to incrementally work for it through legislation spawned in Washington, D.C. Just exactly what the devil wanted – when God’s Church retreats, all hell breaks loose.

We will save some babies, to be sure, by our compromising of God’s Word through incremental legislation - the devil is more than happy to give us a few if we will leave God out of the equation. But we will never end abortion! This is the confusion the devil has been throwing the pro-life movement into for quite a long time now. We keep compromising God’s Word – we do it so that at least we will get something passed in the House and Senate. If it is going to pass muster it has to be watered down. But at least we feel something is going in the right direction.

Church – don’t we want to see abortion criminalized once again in America? Don’t we want to be like Joshua and Caleb who knew that victory comes only as we stand on God’s Word and trust in Him? Instead of all hell breaking loose in our nation, don’t we want to see all heaven being released? If we truly desire to see “Thy kingdom come, Thy will be, done on earth as it is in Heaven” then we must not remove ourselves from under the authority of God’s Word. It is His Word that God watches over to perform. It is His Word that vanquishes his foes. It is his Word that will restore this nation once again, only we must be strong and courageous, taking our stand using the one weapon we have been given – the Sword of the Spirit, the very Word of God.

Rev. Bingham is the National Director of Operation Rescue and Operation Save America. Graduated Florida State University in 1970 with BA Political Science, BA International Relations and Asbury Theological Seminary, 1980 Master of Divinity.

Appearing on numerous local and national television and radio programs (Good Morning America, 48 Hours, Sonja Live, David Praegger Live, ABC World News Tonight, CBS News, NBC News, Hannity & Colmes, and CNN), Rev. Benham is a bold witness for the Lord Jesus Christ in the public arena. He has been interviewed by the Washington Post, Washington Times, New York Times, Time, Newsweek, U.S. News and World Report, World Magazine, and virtually every major newspaper in the country.

Married to his wife, Faye, for thirty-four years, Flip is the father of five wonderful children. Flip and Faye are also the proud grandparents of eight beautiful grandchildren.



By Joel Turtel

October 6, 2007

Many public schools have become pagan religion indoctrination centers. These schools now teach children anti-Judeo-Christian beliefs and pagan religions, and try to mold children's minds through the latest techniques in behavioral psychology. Here are two examples of how schools now use spirit religions as brainwashing techniques in classrooms across America, from Berit Kjos’s book, “Brave New Schools”: “Come to the medicine wheel!” the teacher's cheery voice beckoned the Iowa fourth graders to a fun Native American ritual. “And wear your medicine bags.”

Jonathan grabbed his little brown pouch and hurried to his place. His favorite teacher made school so exciting! She brought Indian beliefs about nature into all the subjects: science, history, art, reading. She even helped the class start The Medicine Wheel Publishing Company to make writing more fun.

She taught Jonathan to make his own medicine bag, a deer-skin pouch filled with special things, such as a red stone that symbolized his place on the medicine wheel astrology chart. This magic pouch would empower him in times of need, such as when taking tests. Jonathan wanted to show it to his parents, but his teacher said no. He didn't know why.

Sitting cross-legged in the circle, the class sang a song to honor the earth: “The Earth is our Mother. We're taking care of her. . . . Hey younga, ho.” Then the teacher read an Indian myth from the popular classroom book, Keepers of the Earth. It told about a beautiful spirit woman who came to save a starving tribe of Sioux Indians. This mystical savior brought sage to purify the people, and she showed them how to use the sacred pipe, a symbol of “the unity of all things” for guidance and prayer to the Great Spirit.

When Rachel Holm, a Minnesota mother, visited Mounds Park All-Nations School, she found magic dream-catchers in every classroom, mystical drawings of a spiritualized earth, and a ring of stones in the schoolyard for medicine wheel ceremonies. She heard politically correct assumptions about the evils of Western culture and the goodness of pagan spirituality. How can public schools promote Native American rituals but censure Christianity? she wondered.”

What's wrong with these seemingly innocuous classes, aside from the issue of separation of religion and schools? The kids were having fun as they learned, so what could be wrong? Plenty. By teaching religious mysticism, public schools throughout the country are filling impressionable young minds with group think, multiculturalism, paganism, Earth worship, astrology, polytheism (belief in many gods), and pantheism (belief in spirit gods that exist in trees, rocks, and water). The God of Moses is out in our public schools, and Earth worship is in.

Many teachers in public schools across the country now stress feelings and mystical experiences, not facts and reason, much less critical reading and thinking. Their behavior modification techniques indoctrinate children with emotion-driven group think and anti-Western, anti-Judeo-Christian values.

In classrooms throughout the country, Judeo-Christian beliefs are cast aside or ridiculed. Multicultural studies, environmental propaganda, and arts-education classes now indoctrinate children with New Age religious beliefs, often without parents’ knowledge. Public schools sometimes try to sneak offensive spirit or new age religions into their curriculum without parents’ knowledge.

In January, 2003, a group of parents sued a Sacramento Unified School District because certain teachers at their local elementary school were aggressively, and secretly, teaching anthroposophy, a religion that combines traditional Western religion with astrology and New Age religion. Pacific Justice Institute lawyers representing the parents indicated that many other public schools in California are now adding New Age and Eastern religions, including Islam, to their curricula. What follows is only a small sample of the flood of “spiritual” sessions taking place in classrooms throughout the country (from Berit Kjos’s brilliant book, “Brave New Schools”) :

1. “Altered states of consciousness: Teaching students to alter their consciousness through centering exercises, guided imagery, and visualizations has become standard practice in self-esteem, multicultural, and arts programs. They often encourage contact with spirit guides.”

2. “Dreams and visions: After studying a pagan myth, students are often asked to imagine or visualize a dream or vision, then describe it in a journal or lesson assignment”

3. “Astrology: Countless teachers across the country require students to document their daily horoscopes. Others help students discover their powers and personalities through Aztec calendars and Chinese.”

4. “Other forms of divination: Through palmistry, I Ching, tarot cards and horoscopes, students learn to experience other cultures and tap into secret sources of wisdom. Students in Texas were told to create a vision in their minds and “describe in your best soothsayer tones the details of your vision.”

5. “Spiritism: While pagan myths and crafts show students how to contact ancestral, nature, and other spirits, classroom rituals actually invoke their presence. California third-graders had to alter their consciousness through guided imagery, invoke or “see” their personal animal spirits, write about their experience . . . and create their own magical medicine shields to represent their spirit helper.”

6. “Magic, spells, and sorcery: Many parents consider magic and spell-casting too bizarre and alien to pose a threat, yet gullible students from coast to coast are learning the ancient formulas and occult techniques.”

7. “Occult charms and symbols: Dreamcatchers, Zuni fetishes, crystals, and power signs like the quartered circle and Hindu mandala are only a few of the empowering charms and symbols fascinating students today.”

8. “Solstice rites: After seating themselves “according to their astrological signs,” Oregon students who traded Christmas for a Winter Solstice celebration watched the “sun god” and “moon goddess” enter the auditorium to the beating of drums and chanting. “Animal spirits” . . . . followed.”

9. “Human sacrifice: Students are given lessons on death education with assignments like the “Fallout Shelter.” Other lessons advocate the cultural endorsement of abortion and euthanasia as a way to prepare the new generation to accept many new forms of human sacrifice, such as the notion of sacrificing oneself for the “common good.”

10. “Sacred sex: Students get lessons about pagan societies’ appreciation for the “unifying power of promiscuity.” By studying these pagan notions on sexuality, children get the idea that promiscuity is normal and acceptable.”

11. “Serpent worship: Many ancient or primitive cultures throughout history have worshipped snakes, which have symbolized occult power, wisdom, and rebirth. Public school multicultural history classes that celebrate these primitive societies can idealize cultures that worshipped serpents.”

Dreams, visions, magic, spells, sorcery, astrology, spirit worship, divination, solstice rites, human sacrifice, sacred sex, and altered states of consciousness? Is this what our children should be learning? Should schools turn children into Earth-and spirit-worshipers? Should parents pay property taxes for public schools that promote pagan religions that can affect their children's ability to tell facts from spirit dreams?

Teaching pagan beliefs and religions can harm children. Author Aldus Huxley wrote about ‘new-think’ indoctrination in Brave New World, his frightening novel about a future totalitarian society. In his book, school authorities molded children’s minds so that as adults, they lost their ability to think critically or judge the policies of their leaders.

Indoctrinating children with pagan beliefs in our public schools could have a similar effect. If a child believes he or she can turn into a bird or pass a math test by rubbing a voodoo necklace, then facts, reason, hard work, and dedication go out the window.

Pagan mysticism can warp a child's ability to think critically and to grasp and deal with reality. Are state-controlled public schools deliberately trying to cripple children’s ability to reason and deal with facts? School authorities would say that they are simply trying to get children to appreciate other cultures and religions. What they are really doing is to indoctrinate children with the notion that all cultures and religions are “equal” and “harmless,” when they are not.

Parents, I can think of no better way to corrupt your children’s mind’s than by keeping them in government-controlled, public-school indoctrination centers. When was the last time you visited your children’s classrooms and heard what they are really teaching your children?


Joel Turtel, author of Public Schools, Public Menace: How Public Schools Lie To Parents and Betray Our Children, holds a degree in Psychology. For the last ten years he has served as an Education Policy Analyst, studying the climate of today's public schools and its effect on children and parents.

Mr. Turtel has written two books, published over fifty articles, and has been interviewed in both print and broadcast media on the subject. His latest book, Public Schools, Public Menace has garnered national media attention – recently, for example, Dr. Laura Schlessinger featured the book on her nationally syndicated radio show.

Joel Turtel is available to discuss his book Public Schools, Public Menace in the media, at conferences, or with individual groups. Be warned though, you may be shocked by the revelations he has uncovered in America's public-school system.



By Larry Pratt
September 22, 2007

Hundreds of thousands of veterans -- from Vietnam through Operation Iraqi Freedom -- are at risk of being banned from buying firearms if legislation that is pending in Congress gets enacted.

How? The Veterans Disarmament Act -- which has already passed the House -- would place any veteran who has ever been diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) on the federal gun ban list.

This is exactly what President Bill Clinton did over seven years ago when his administration illegitimately added some 83,000 veterans into the National Criminal Information System (NICS system) -- prohibiting them from purchasing firearms, simply because of afflictions like PTSD.

The proposed ban is actually broader. Anyone who is diagnosed as being a tiny danger to himself or others would have his gun rights taken away ... forever. It is section 102(b)(1)(C)(iv) in HR 2640 that provides for dumping raw medical records into the system. Those names -- like the 83,000 records mentioned above -- will then, by law, serve as the basis for gun banning.

No wonder the Military Order of the Purple Heart is opposed to this legislation.

The House bill, HR 2640, is being sponsored by one of the most flaming anti-Second Amendment Representatives in Congress: Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY). Another liberal anti-gunner, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), is sponsoring the bill in the Senate.

Proponents of the bill say that helpful amendments have been made so that any veteran who gets his name on the NICS list can seek an expungement.

But whenever you talk about expunging names from the Brady NICS system, you’re talking about a procedure that has always been a long shot. Right now, there are NO EXPUNGEMENTS of law-abiding Americans’ names that are taking place under federal level. Why? Because the expungement process which already exists has been blocked for over a decade by a "funds cut-off" engineered by another anti-gunner, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY).

So how will this bill make things even worse? Well, two legal terms are radically redefined in the Veterans Disarmament Act to carry out this vicious attack on veterans’ gun rights.

One term relates to who is classified a "mental defective." Forty years ago that term meant one was adjudicated "not guilty" in a court of law by reason of insanity. But under the Veterans Disarmament Act, "mental defective" has been stretched to include anyone whom a psychiatrist determines might be a tiny danger to self or others.

The second term is "adjudicate." In the past, one could only lose one's gun rights through an adjudication by a judge, magistrate or court -- meaning conviction after a trial. Adjudication could only occur in a court with all the protections of due process, including the right to face one's accuser. Now, adjudication in HR 2640 would include a finding by "a court, commission, committee or other authorized person" (namely, a psychiatrist).

Forget the fact that people with PTSD have the same violent crime rate as the rest of us. Vietnam vets with PTSD have had careers and obtained permits to carry firearms concealed. It will now be enough for a psychiatric diagnosis (a "determination" in the language of the bill) to get a veteran barred ­for life ­ from owning guns.

Think of what this bill would do to veterans. If a robber grabs your wallet and takes everything in it, but gives you back $5 to take the bus home, would you call that a financial enhancement? If not, then we should not let HR 2640 supporters call the permission to seek an expungement an enhancement, when prior to this bill, veterans could not legitimately be denied their gun rights after being diagnosed with PTSD.

Veterans with PTSD should not be put in a position to seek an expungement. They have not been convicted (after a trial with due process) of doing anything wrong. If a veteran is thought to be a threat to self or others, there should be a real trial, not an opinion (called a diagnosis) by a psychiatrist.

If members of Congress do not hear from soldiers (active duty and retired) in large numbers, along with the rest of the public, the Veterans Disarmament Act -- misleadingly titled by Rep. McCarthy as the NICS Improvement Amendments Act -- will send this message to veterans: "No good deed goes unpunished."

© 2007 Larry Pratt - All Rights Reserved

Larry Pratt has been Executive Director of Gun Owners of America for 27 years. GOA is a national membership organization of 300,000 Americans dedicated to promoting their second amendment freedom to keep and bear arms.

He published a book, Armed People Victorious, in 1990 and was editor of a book, Safeguarding Liberty: The Constitution & Militias, 1995. His latest book, On the Firing Line: Essays in the Defense of Liberty was published in 2001.

The GOA web site is: Pratt's weekly talk show Live Fire is archived there at:



Jim Kouri, CPP
September 21, 2007

Note: This article is based on a report received by the National Association of Chiefs of Police.

While the battle over providing illegal aliens with driver's licenses rages in state capitals and Washington, DC, North Carolina created the first "North American Union" driver's license, complete with a hologram of the North American continent on the licenses.

The hologram is a facsimile of the map of North America that is used as the background for the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America logo on the SPP website.

Marge Howell, spokeswoman for the North Carolina DMV, told the press that the state was embedding a hologram of North America on the back of their new driver's licenses. "It's a security element that eventually will be on the back of every driver's license in North America," Howell said.

Howell explained the hologram of the North American continent was the creation of the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, a tax-exempt, nonprofit organization that, according to the group's website, "develops model programs in motor vehicle administration, law enforcement and highway safety."

Founded in 1933, AAMVA represents state and provincial officials in the United States and Canada who administer and enforce motor vehicle laws. The government of Mexico is also a member, though the individual Mexican states have yet to join.

According to the group's website, AAMVA's programs are designed "to encourage uniformity and reciprocity among the states and provinces."

"The goal is of the North American hologram," Howell explained, "is to get one common element that law enforcement throughout the continent can look at on all driver's licenses and tell that the driver's license is an official document."

Jason King, spokesman for AAMVA, affirmed the North American hologram was created by AAMVA's Uniform Identification Subcommittee, a working group of AAMVA members.

He explained the goal is to create a continental security device that could be used by state and provincial motor vehicles agencies throughout North America, including the United States, Canada, and Mexico.

King referenced a document on the AAMVA website that describes guidelines for using the North America continent hologram as an Optical Variable Device (OVD) that AAMVA has now licensed with private manufacturers to produce.

AAMVA supplies member motor vehicle agencies with a quantity of North American continent hologram OVD foils to use on their driver's licenses and ID cards as needed.

As the guidelines document on the AAMVA explains, each North American continental hologram OVD foil is embedded with a unique set of control numbers that permit law enforcement electronic scanners to identify the exact jurisdiction and precise individual authorized to hold a driver's license or ID card with that particular OVD foil embedded.

"AAMVA understands its unique positioning and the continuing role identification security will play in helping the general public realize a safer North America," King said. "The association believes ID security will help increase national security, increase highway safety, reduce fraud and system abuse, increase efficiency and effectiveness, and achieve uniformity of processes and practices."

Missouri State Rep. Jim Guest has held a seminar in North Carolina to protest the Real ID law. The surprise came at a meeting on the Real ID held in Raleigh, North Carolina, on Saturday, July 28,"

When Rep. Guest asked participants to take out their driver's license and see what was on it one gentleman was a state employee and on his license there was this hologram with the North American continent on the back. They were all surprised to see that on a North Carolina driver's license.

Guest has formed a coalition called Legislators Against Real ID Act, or LARI.

"I was astonished when I saw that North American hologram on the North Carolina driver's license," Guest said. "I thought to myself that the state DMV has already included this North American symbol on the back of the driver's license without telling the people of North Carolina they were going to do this."

"I thought right then that this was going to be the prototype for the driver's license of the North American Union. When we called the North Carolina DMV, they hedged at first," Guest said, "but finally they admitted that, yes, there was a North American continent hologram on the back of the license."

"This is part of a plan by bureaucrats and trade groups that act like bureaucrats to little by little transform us into a North American Union without any vote being taken and without explaining to the U.S. public what they are doing," Guest argued.

In 2005, North Carolina was the state where illegal immigrants go to get a driver's license, with busloads of aliens travel south on I-95 to get an easy ID.

The Tar Heel State's requirements to obtain a license are weaker than those of many surrounding states.

In 2006, Pastor Rios Sanchez, 55, an illegal alien, was accused of killing three people, including two North Carolina State University students and a 26-year-old, while driving drunk.


Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police. He's former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed "Crack City" by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. He's also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country.

He writes for many police and crime magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer, Campus Law Enforcement Journal, and others. He's appeared as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc. His book Assume The Position is available at Amazon.Com,, and can be ordered at local bookstores



By Rosalind Peterson
September 23, 2007

On August 1, 2007, Republican Senators McConnell and Bond introduced U.S. Senate Bill S1927, “To amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 to provide additional procedures for authorizing certain acquisitions of foreign intelligence information and for other purposes,” on the floor of the U.S. Senate. It is alleged that there was not one U.S. Senator that objected to this bill being introduced under Senate rules.

U.S. Senate Bill S1927, was railroaded into passage by the President of the United States who declared that it should be passed, that it was a matter of national security, and that “new undisclosed threats” may surely cause us to be attacked while Congress was on a month-long vacation, if this bill were not passed by Congress. Democratic Majority Leader of the U. S. Senate, Harry Reid and U.S. Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi allowed this bill to be brought to the floor for a vote knowing that they did not have the votes to defeat this bill.

The passage of this bill and the loss of our civil liberties under the U.S.

Constitution is forever lost to the American people.

When these so-called “Congressional Leaders” now say that they will fix this bill by bringing to vote another bill they are not telling you the truth. The President will only sign bills that further undermine our Civil Liberties and will veto any bills that don’t meet his demands. And when Senator Reid and Speak Pelosi state that there is a sunset provision in this bill this is not completely true either. They allowed this bill to pass knowing that the bill contained the following “exception” language:

(c) Sunset- Except as provided in subsection (d), sections 2, 3, 4, and 5 of this Act, and the amendments made by this Act, shall cease to have effect 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(d) Authorizations in Effect- Authorizations for the acquisition of foreign intelligence information pursuant to the amendments made by this Act, and directives issued pursuant to such authorizations, shall remain in effect until their expiration. Such acquisitions shall be governed by the applicable provisions of such amendments and shall not be deemed to constitute electronic surveillance as that term is defined in section 101(f) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801(f)).
If you take a look at the exceptions listed above you will note that the provisions in the bill that are the most harmful the to rights of American citizens will continue forever. And when Subsection (d) states “…shall remain in effect until their expiration…” one should understand that directives can be issued that will last in perpetuity.

The bill is a short one and easy to read. Everyone that looks at this bill will know that those who voted for this bill had read it and understood completely the provisions in this bill. And remember that Senator Feinstein from California voted for this bill and Senator Barbara Boxer allegedly couldn’t be found to cast her vote. (Congressman Mike Thompson from California understood the true nature of this bill and voted against it.) How did your elected representatives vote? Elections are on the horizon and it is time we held our elected representatives accountable for their actions in not upholding our civil liberties and undermining the U.S. Constitution. Furthermore under Section 105B (a):

“…Sec. 105B. (a) Notwithstanding any other law, the Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General, may for periods of up to one year authorize the acquisition of foreign intelligence information concerning persons reasonably believed to be outside the United States if the Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General determine…”
This bill allows only two people to make decisions regarding the acquisition of foreign intelligence information and communications between U.S. Citizens and those outside the United States. And one of them is Attorney General Gonzales who has failed to “remember” his actions or allegedly lied to Congress on several occasions. It is alleged that no Court, even the FISA Court, will be reviewing these decisions in advance to determine “probable cause” in advance of these acquisitions and will merely “rubber stamp” these actions once brought before them. And it does not limit the number of outside agents (and “others”) that are now empowered to provide information or spy on American citizens both inside and outside of the United States.

This bill also makes freedom of the press, guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution null and void. Why? Reporters, for example, have a wide variety of sources inside and outside of the United States and they provide news reports while living outside the United States. There is nothing to prevent the Bush Administration, or any future administration from spying on reporters and their sources. This bill has a “chilling affect” on the news we will be receiving from reporters and foreign sources. And it will further isolate U.S. Citizens from the knowledge of what is happening outside the United States. It will make news coverage more difficult and promote a news media only able to report on what any current “administration” deems acceptable as news. And it will cut down on a reporter’s ability to research and report on issues that may not be acceptable to any current administration.

In addition, it places a “chill” on communications between families living inside and outside the United States…and on any correspondence by U.S. citizens to and from U.S. citizens living or traveling outside the United States. The “chill” will be the fear that communication will immediately place both sides of a communication under surveillance by the Bush Administration without probable cause of any type of illegal or terrorist activity. And American citizens will have no possible way to find out about any type of communications surveillance or redress their grievances about such surveillance. Since American citizens who are spied upon will not know about the spying due to the “information being classified” they cannot take legal action.

It is clear that the Bush/Cheney Administration characterizes those that oppose the positions taken by their administration or who ask uncomfortable questions, as unpatriotic. Vice-President Cheney and members of the Bush Administration have made that extremely clear with their rhetoric since the so-called election of Bush in 2001. If our generals disagree with the President or anyone inside his administration disagrees in public, their resignations or firings are almost immediate.

And it is clear, that Congress is working toward passing another version of this bill this fall and are holding hearings this week on a new version. The next version to be passed will erode our Constitution and our Bill of Rights even more unless we, the American people, rise up and say no. It is quite possible that the majority of people feel that they have nothing to hide and therefore why object to this invasion of privacy. Since when did Americans become the enemy to be spied upon? And does spying on American citizens and undermining our rights protect us? No! It only promotes more fear to speak out and object against government policies which the American people feel are not right.

An acquiescent media and many reporters, who were Bush Administration “mouthpieces,” have pushed a one-sided version of events to the detriment of all American citizens. These mouthpieces led us down the path to attacking Iraq and they continue to drive discussions about the United States taking action against other countries, like Iran, without a bit of proof being provided to the American people. (CNN’s Michael Ware constantly reports as fact many stories from Iraq and gives opinions about other countries…however, he provides no independent proof of his statements and he is never pressed as to the accuracy and who are his sources.) Many reporters like to push Bush Administration propaganda about the Iraq war without any proof. When asked about their proof they can only quote “high government officials.” They have no other research or documents to back up their claims. The signing of U.S. Senate Bill S1927 will make more reporters Bush/Cheney “mouthpieces” and make it much harder for American citizens to know the truth or protest the actions of our government.

The media continues, as one example, to hide most information or show pictures that would give American citizens a clear view of what is happening in many countries around the world. They rarely mention the real story of what is happening to our jobs…and don’t let any candidates for office tell you that their re-education plans for us are going to help you find a good paying job ever again. Re-educate us for what…jobs that don’t exist? (American workers are good workers and are educated…American companies just don’t want to pay us a living wage and a pension.

There is no corporate loyalty to the American workers who made these corporations rich…now it is only the greed of higher profits that drives corporate interests along with cheap illegal labor designed to keep wages low for all American citizens. If corporations won’t have access to cheap illegal workers then outsourcing to find the lower wage workers in other countries will increase. And as we import more from countries like China – food and product safety become very real issues that Congress is not addressing.) Luckily we still have a few patriotic and courageous people who will speak out on these issues, Like Lou Dobbs on CNN, and Keith Obermann on MSNBC.

As your elected representatives show up in your neighborhoods asking for your vote and your money remember that lobbying and ethics reform has not been high on their agendas since the last election. And when candidates tell you, like Senator Clinton, that corporations like Chevron, Exxon, or the pharmaceutical companies represent the people…that is not exactly true. Corporations do not represent the interests of their employees; they represent their corporate profit and unregulated business interests in their lobbying efforts. Corporations are becoming rich on government welfare programs…the oil companies are just one example.

When you go to vote also remember that most members of the U.S. Congress failed to stop U.S. Senate Bill S1927, which amended the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, which provides additional procedures for authorizing certain acquisitions of foreign intelligence information and for other purposes.” This past week CNN and MSNBC (August 15, 2007), announced that our military spy satellites would now be allowed to secretly spy on the citizens of the United States and the information gathered would be used by many agencies within the U.S. When did U.S. Citizens become the enemy? And when voting remember how they voted on not protecting American jobs in favor of amnesty for illegal immigrants.

Also remember that most of your candidates for President did not step outside of their offices with regard to U.S. Senate Bill S1927 and ask all American citizens to take immediate action against this bill. They didn’t hold press conferences and in most cases their offices were only open to the public during regular hours and were not open after hours and on weekends so that their constituents could contact them about this bill that was passed during weekend hours. Only one Congressman, that I know of, Mike Thompson, of California, kept his office open for calls…he should be commended. What about your elected officials?

A few members of Congress were given classified briefings and classified information between August 1, and August 4, 2007, with regard to alleged terrorist threats. However, they couldn’t object in public to what they were spoon-fed by Bush/Cheney. Receiving classified information effectively neutered them from representing your interests. What a neat trick…give a certain few, most Bush Administration supporters, a little classified information so that they could convince others to vote for this bill.

The few who “know the secrets” are unable to speak out. And what about the majority that are not briefed and given this classified information? They can’t represent your interests as they are deliberately kept in the dark regarding these issues unless they read the information in a newspaper. Many politicians stand on the floor of Congress reading newspaper information about what our government is doing behind closed doors. It is odd that our elected officials have to rely on the press to find out what they should know already as our representatives.

And when they state that they can’t debate most classified information on the floor of the House or Senate…that isn’t quite true either. A U.S. Supreme Court decision upheld the right, in 1972, of Senator Gravel to release classified information on the floor of the U.S. Senate under the “Speech and Debate Clause” of the U.S. Constitution. The public has a right to hear these debates. Therefore, when your elected officials say that they can’t object to certain programs or policies because the information is classified, quote this Supreme Court Decision. The U.S. Constitution allows them to speak truth to power and debate these issues under the “Speech & Debate Clause” of the U.S. Constitution; and this right was upheld in 1972, by the U.S. Supreme Court.

It is time to step forward and demand that our elected officials stop undermining our U.S. Constitution and our Civil Liberties. And if they don’t, we the people, can show up and vote “no” at election time. The American people have a powerful voice and can apply pressure today on all of our elected officials… and we can let them know we outnumber the corporate lobbyists at the ballot box.


1, U.S. Senate Bill S1927 Signed into Law on August 5, 2007
2, Full Text of U.S. Senate Bill S1927
3, U.S. Supreme Court GRAVEL v. UNITED STATES, 408 U.S. 606 (1972) 408 U.S. 606 GRAVEL v. UNITED STATES CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT No. 71-1017. Argued April 19-20, 1972 Decided June 29, 1972 *
4, You can always have a paper trail when you vote…vote absentee.
5, U.S. Spy Satellites will be used to Spy on U.S. Citizens – August 15, 2007


In 1995, Rosalind, now retired, became a certified California United State Department of Agriculture (USDA) Farm Service Agency Agriculture Crop Loss Adjustor working in more than ten counties throughout California. Rosalind has a BA degree from Sonoma State University in Environmental Studies & Planning (ENSP), with emphasis on using solar power, photosynthesis, agriculture, and crop production.

Between 1989 and 1993 Rosalind worked as an Agricultural Technologist for the Mendocino County Department of Agriculture. After leaving Mendocino County she took a position with the USDA Farm Service Agency as a Program Assistant in Mendocino, Sonoma, and the Salinas County Offices, where she worked until becoming certified as a crop loss adjustor for the State.




Deanna Spingola
September 9, 2007

Ever since Lincoln's "Civil War," America has been "transformed from a limited, constitutional government to a highly centralized welfare-warfare state."[1] War is allegedly initiated for "national security" reasons - "newspeak" for resource seizure and/or control by multinational corporations/banks through their financial grip on governments. What! You think the United States would not participate in or condone plunder? The government plunders your pocket for interest payments (AKA income tax) on their loans from the Federal Reserve to finance all war-like activities, whether subversive or public!

False pretenses for war include: civilize the uncivilized, spread democracy, save foreign citizens from their selectively despicable leaders (those resistant to U.S. interests), eradicate slavery, attack them before they attack us (media-induced fear), or fight Nazism, Communism, Fascism, terrorism, ___________ (fill in the blank). If those justifications fail, "false flag" operations are used - frequently against U.S. citizens (The Maine, The Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, Northwoods Tonkin, 9/11). Corroborating "news," stipulated via the daily memo, is combined with patriotic pro-war exuberance, contrived fear and subtle but unmistakable ethnic denunciation is disseminated by numerous so-called "conservative" talking heads - nothing but Murdoch mouthpieces - indistinguishable except for personal characteristics.

Unless deliberately distracted individuals ignore the pro-war monopoly media's regurgitation of disinformation and misinformation and investigate the circumstances regarding U.S. invasions into other countries, they are enslaved by apathetic ignorance and at the mercy of the corporate-owned, government-sanctioned Ministry of Truth and their fabricated federal fairy tales designed to manipulate us into endless unconstitutional foreign "entanglements."

In this subjective environment, anti-war sentiments are equivalent to treason. Alternative media voices are silenced by dismissals or show cancellations. A thorough review of historical specifics would either expose government officials who, ignorant of the Constitution, specialize in serial stupidity or verify their treacherous adherence to the banker's globalist agenda. Power-driven members in the three branches of government either willingly acquiesce or act to prevent a media-blitzing exposure of some abominable character flaw or behavior by their well-informed, all knowing managers. Alternatives for elimination of the noble-acting, uncooperative include: assassinations, plane crashes, Watergating, or suicide by multiple gun shot wounds.

The arrogant interventionist attitude necessitates the demonization of entire ethnic and philosophical groups - why else would otherwise good people maim, rape or slaughter complete strangers - other humans? After World War II, many non Nazis were unaware of their government's atrocities in neighboring countries. Americans, calculatingly shocked by graphic newsreel images, readily hated all Germans for the Nazi's ethnic brutality. To incite our contemporary indignation, our monopoly media promptly revealed unearthed bodies accredited to Hussein's regime. In contrast, that same monopoly media conceals the graphic images of returning body bags, slaughtered children, white phosphorous-toasted cadavers, and the murdered family of the fourteen year old girl who was gang raped, murdered and then burned and who knows what else.[2] Exposing these horrific images would detract from the globalist agenda of sustained warfare in the oil-rich Middle East.

Governments are artificial entities, financed by international bank loans; they target "enemies," and whip up the populace, assisted by Stallone-style Hollywood flicks that glorify "good wars." Well-placed patriotic posters and ads focusing on the "war on terror" target specific audiences. Some of those ads are financed by Freedom's Watch, with communications expert, Ari Fleischer, a dual U.S.-Israel citizen and former Bush press secretary, as their spokesman. Currently his group is mounting a multimillion-dollar advertising campaign to urge congress and constituents to support the war and not "cut and run," psychologically well-chosen words for a people who wish to radiate strength.[3] Who else sponsors ads - the banker-backed Carlyle Group, Blackwater, or Halliburton - groups that apparently value money over life? What motivates affluent groups like this who wield sufficient influence that citizens abandon all sensitivity to human life in favor of some well-marketed yet indefinite agenda?

Despite consenting signatures, the Geneva Conventions need to be reestablished after the lastest horrors have been publically exposed; they do little to curb future atrocities. The conference in 1949 prohibits reprisal killings, terrorizing entire populations, permanently displacing residents, plundering and pillaging, physical abuse or torture, murder, corporal punishments, mutilation and medical or scientific experiments, injuries against people due to race, nationality, religion or political opinion. Those prohibitions should have covered Korea, Vietnam and our other post-war interventions. They didn't! It took another post-Vietnam Geneva Convention!

Who benefits? In order to engage in contemporary no-win wars, the government borrows money from the Federal Reserve resulting in increased profits for the bankers. Lengthy no-win wars sustain profits for the power elite. Winning terminates the money siphoning machine. Militaristic minions, reinforced by CIA-style bureaucratic agencies, prevent or inhibit competition for available resources, depopulate countries, destabilize economies, seize prime lands and resources, perpetuate government contracts to certain big business buddies, alter social structure and culture, perpetuate hostility, provoke civil war (divide and conquer - the people kill each other) with both sides financed and logistically supported, build permanent military bases in order to execute additional assaults in the area, relocate populations for covert political purposes, transfer power and emotionally decimate and destroy families, the most essential social unit. Violence is widespread - triggering forced migration. Iraqi families, who have been expelled from their homes, use refuse to erect makeshift shelters for protection against the intense heat of the Middle East. War-weary innocent children play amongst heaps of garbage and drink and eat whatever they can scavenge.[4] War is indiscriminate - everyone suffers.

Another function of foreign wars is chaotic national division and distraction. Citizens are currently contending on prospective presidential candidates by who will prolong or end the war(s). The best candidate is the one who will protect us from our own government! While thus distracted we fail to recognize that our government is, in fact, seizing our most fundamental liberties (Patriot Act) and combining our country with Mexico and Canada, a finalizing step to the one world government. Continuous wars, since the Civil War, catapult us towards the same goal.

Neither Vietnam nor Iraq was a threat to our "national security." The ongoing assault against the citizens of Iraq started long before March 2003 or even 1991. This last invasion was premeditated and planned long before 9/11. Likewise - "the invasion of Vietnam was deliberate and calculated, as were policies and strategies that bordered on genocide and were designed to force millions of people to abandon their homes. Experimental weapons were used against civilians. Chemicals banned in the United States -- Agent Orange -- were used to change the genetic and environmental order in Vietnam."[5]

The French, led by Louis-Napoleon, motivated by greedy economic and military interests, first invaded the vulnerable Vietnamese in July 1857. They professed to have a "moral obligation," as a "superior culture," to civilize the "uncivilized," a common Western justification for many hostile invasions. Without sufficient weapons and national unity to resist the French, Emperor Tu Duc signed the Treaty of Saigon, a "peace treaty," in June 1862 giving into the French demands which included payment of a large indemnity to France for its losses in attacking Vietnam."[6] "Peace treaties" are habitually disingenuous, but standard procedure - the antagonistic, armed invaders conquer and subjugate the indigenous unarmed populace and belatedly proffer "peace," while stripping them of their dignity and natural resources.

A few citizens, friendly and helpful to the invading French, were rewarded with the forcefully-vacated residences of fleeing families, a common practice. Valuables, personal or national, do not disappear - they merely change hands. Lands were also allotted to incoming French settlers, creating a "French-Vietnamese landholding class."[7]

Other encroachments and more treaties established a French protectorate over Vietnam by 1883, partitioned into three sectors, which formally ended Vietnam's independence.[8] France pilfered the natural resources, silenced popular leaders and left a dispirited, impoverished Vietnamese population.[9] Under the French the Vietnamese required identity papers to travel out of their districts, freedom of speech and organization were restricted, land was confiscated by large landowners, citizens were imprisoned for minor offenses, poverty increased and education was neglected causing the literacy rate to fall.

Ho Chi Minh (1890-1969), born Nguyen Sinh Cung in Kim Lien in Annam in central Vietnam, was the son of an official who resigned in protest against the French "domination of his country." In 1911, Ho left Vietnam and worked as a cook on a French steamship traveling from Saigon to Marseilles. He went to London in 1914 for two years where he worked as a kitchen-hand at the Carlton Hotel. From 1919 until 1923, he lived in France, where he associated with French socialists.[10] During the Paris Peace Conference (victor's formally carving up the spoils) he attempted to meet with President Woodrow Wilson to petition for Vietnam's freedom but, predictably, he was turned away. Despite Wilson's deceptive rhetoric about "A free, open-minded, and absolutely impartial adjustment of all colonial claims," Vietnam was still under French rule.[11]

Ho Chi Minh was part of the group which founded the French Communist party, later banned after the signing of the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression pact in August 1939. "He was summoned to Moscow for training and, in late 1924 he was sent to Guangzhou, Canton, China, where he organized a revolutionary movement among Vietnamese exiles called the Viet Nam Thanh Nien Cach Menh Dong Chi Hoi (Revolutionary Youth League). He was forced to leave by local authorities who cracked down on Communist activities. He represented Communist International when he went to Hong Kong and founded the Indochinese Communist Party (ICP) on February 3, 1930 at a conference of the Thanh Nein. Party objectives include: overthrow the French, establish an independent Vietnam, nationalization of the economy, cancellation of public debts, land reform, education for everyone, and the creation of an eight-hour work day.[12]

Hong Kong's British police arrested him in June 1931 and incarcerated him until 1933. He then went to the Soviet Union and taught at the Lenin Institute until 1938 when he returned to China as an advisor to the "Chinese Communist armed forces."[13]

Another organization, the revolutionary Vietnam Quoc Dan Dang Party was secretly established on Christmas 1927 in Ha Noi. The party's first assault against French brutality and injustice occurred on February 10, 1930. They lost - the 13 brave leaders were guillotined in the early morning of June 17, 1930.

The crash of the New York Stock Exchange on October 29, 1929 had caused a 50% decrease in Vietnamese salaries, unemployment increases to 33% and strikes break out. Poverty-stricken demonstrators took over in some districts and made demands. The French sent in Foreign Legion troops and arrested 1,000 individuals. Four hundred people received lengthy prison terms and eighty individuals were executed, including some Communist Party members. By 1832, there are 10,000 political prisoners in Vietnam. When America's cash catastrophe occurs you may expect a military presence and martial law. Due to decades of Federal Reserve economic gymnastics and despite the official deceitful "all is well" canned rhetoric; a deliberate cash crash is inevitable. It will create a similar scenario: riots, arrests, incarcerations and executions for the very vocal.

Prior to the crash of 1929, U.S. bankers and officials claimed that the economy was good: On July 27, 1928, Herbert Hoover said in San Francisco: "Unemployment in the sense of distress is widely disappearing.... We in America today are nearer to the final triumph over poverty than ever before in the history of any land."[14] Do you recognize the familiar jargon?

In early 1941, Ho Chi Minh finally returned to Vietnam after being absent for nearly thirty years. "On behalf of the Communist International" he presided over the Eighth Conference of the ICP. Following Comintern instructions, the party created the Viet Minh Front and put forward an essentially nationalist program.[15]

After Hitler invaded Russia in June 1941, Japan moved into southern Indochina. Japan occupied Vietnam in 1941 despite the efforts of Ho Chi Minh and his Communist Viet Minh (Vietnam Independence League). During World War II, Ho Chi Minh's Viet Minh received military equipment and financial assistance from the United States in return for intelligence information on Japanese operations in Indochina.[16] The U.S. military intelligence agency Office of Strategic Services (OSS) teamed up "with Ho Chi Minh and his Viet Minh guerrillas to harass Japanese troops in the jungles."[17]

The Japanese surrendered on August 14 (formally on September 2, 1945). After the American "shock and awe" demonstration of military muscle, don't-ever-mess-with-us defeat of Japan that ended World War Two, Ho Chi Minh managed, with a guerrilla network, to gain control of much of the countryside in northern Vietnam. France still dominated the cities in northern Vietnam as well as the whole of southern Vietnam. Together, the Nationalist and Communist Parties fought against France. They created a Declaration of Independence for the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, dated September 2, 1945. Half a million people gathered in Hanoi to hear Ho Chi Minh read the Vietnamese Declaration of Independence which was allegedly based on the American Declaration of Independence and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen.


1, The Great Centralizer, Abraham Lincoln and the War between the States by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
2, "Redacted" Stuns Venice, August 31, 2007
3, Group to Urge War Support, New York Times, Published: August 22, 2007.
4, Mosaic: World News From The Middle East - August 8. 2007, US Bombings Kill 30 in Sader City, Al Jazeera TV, Qatar
5, John Pilger addresses Columbia University in New York, April 14, 2006
6, Vietnam, Ronald J. Cima, ed. Vietnam: A Country Study. Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress, 1987.Under French Rule
7, Vietnam, Ronald J. Cima, ed. Vietnam: A Country Study. Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress, 1987. Colonial Administration
8, Ibid
9, Asian Nation, Asian American History, Demographics and Issues
10, Rule by Secrecy by Jim Marrs, pg. 125
11, The Samil (March First) Independence Movement by Lee Wha Rang
12, Ho Chi Minh
13, Ho Chi Minh, Selected Works (Hanoi, 1960-1962), Vol. 2, Biography of Ho Chi Minh
14, Forecast Center
15, Myths of the Vietnam War by Robert F Turner, The Pentagon Papers Reconsidered, September 1972
16, Ibid
17, The Vietnam War, Seeds of Conflict, 1945 - 1960

Deanna Spingola has been a quilt designer and is the author of two books. She has traveled extensively teaching and lecturing on her unique methods. She has always been an avid reader of non-fiction works designed to educate rather than entertain. She is active in family history research and lectures on that topic. Currently she is the director of the local Family History Center. She has a great interest in politics and the direction of current government policies, particularly as they relate to the Constitution.



Deanna Spingola
October 6, 2007

From October 1944 to May 1945, Hanoi and the surrounding area suffered a horrific famine that resulted in the starvation deaths of nearly two million people, out of a population of about ten million. There were many reasons for the famine, the first and foremost was war! Remember, the Japanese invaded and occupied Viet Nam beginning in 1941. The Americans were bombing Japanese occupiers as well as crucial infrastructure, like roads. This "collateral" damage affected the transportation of rice from the south of Viet Nam where the majority of rice, a daily staple, was grown. Another famine factor was the ongoing exploitation of natural resources. Fertile food-producing land used for generations was seized by the French for more exportable, non eatable, high profit-producing crops. Understandably, the deadly deficiencies further provoked peasant revolts against both the Japanese and the French colonial society. Hungry people are desperate people! Hunger rules the world!

In 1945, there were two groups who were involved in clandestine activities with the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) in Indochina. One represented Western Oil interests - the GBT or the Gordon Group. The other group was the Viet Minh (a popular movement of Catholics, Buddhists, small businessmen, communists and farmers).[1] "By 1945, the American OSS, dedicated to supporting guerrilla warfare and resistance organization, and the Office of War Information (OWI), which disseminated US propaganda, were developing independent contacts inside northern Indochina. As a result, the OSS increasingly endorsed the one truly effective resistance movement: Ho Chi Minh's Viet Minh coalition."[2]

On August 17, 1945, Ho Chi Minh appealed to the people to rise up in revolution for their independence. It had been under French control and was one undivided country which had been exploited by the French for decades. The Viet Minh took control of Hanoi that same day.

Ho Chi Minh feared that China and France would cut a deal to remove him, destroy the Viet Minh and return Viet Nam to the French. However, the OSS had a statement from Chiang Kai-shek, dated August 24, 1945 indicating that China had no interest in getting "mired" in Indochina. Chiang had expressed this attitude to Roosevelt in Cairo in November 1943. It was his contention that the Vietnamese were not Chinese, could not be assimilated into Chinese society and that China had no territorial interest in Indochina. Perhaps China merely intended to deal with France regarding their interests without even considering the viability of the Vietnamese independence movement.[3]

Saigon fell on August 25, 1945. Then on August 28, 1945 the Viet Minh announced the formation of the provisional government of the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam.

Independence Day for Viet Nam was scheduled for September 2, 1945. The atmosphere in Hanoi, after decades of foreign subjection, was festive. Residents were cleaning storefronts and hanging red garlands of flowers. Streamers proclaimed "Liberty for Viet Nam" and "Independence." The allies, especially Americans, were welcome. British troops arrived about the ninth of September. The Vietnamese anticipated a new government headed by the person who had struggled for their independence for so long - Ho Chi Minh of the Viet Minh. The people wanted change and independence from all foreign domination. Ninety percent of the inhabitants of Viet Nam lived off the land and they had been subjected to an evil system of feudalism which reduced them to mere slaves.[4]

The French, resistant to losing their foreign treasure trove, created an environment of fear among the French civilian community in Hanoi by telling them they were in "mortal danger" from the "Vietnamese Communists." They labeled the Viet Minh "Communist" to discredit them. Ho's provisional government had assured the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) hierarchy that violence against the French "would be avoided at all costs." The Viet Minh, despite "French provocations" had given no indication for alarm. The French appeared to be attempting to turn the tables and condemn the Vietnamese for the poor "oppressed French."[5] In addition, the French parachuted agents into strategic locations in an effort to occupy all public offices and buildings in an attempt to reestablish control.

America, once an ally, would shortly withdraw support from Ho Chi Minh due to his Communist affiliation. However, American analysts could not determine any correlation between Ho Chi Minh and Moscow. Ho Chi Minh did not appear to be following any instructions or policies from Moscow. There was communist influence in the Viet Minh - such as the right arm salute. They had borrowed posters and banners from Western leftist art. The Viet Minh also embraced American influence by incorporating policies and techniques of a democratic government. According to Arthur Hale of the U.S. Information Agency in 1945, the Viet Minh leadership used communist methods to appeal and arouse the masses to support the establishment of an independent democracy (declassified in 1972).[6]

The French stereotyped the revolutionaries as "ungrateful." Quite justifiably, the Vietnamese failed to recognize reasons why they should be grateful for decades of French-inflicted misery. The French did contribute some things: more jails than schools, more prison camps than hospitals, more army barracks than houses, fine schools for a few privileged Vietnamese - to serve the French colonial needs. Ho Chi Minh wanted to look to the future, not replay the injustices of the past. His aim was to rid Viet Nam of all foreign control: "French, Japanese, Chinese, or whatever." He felt that the Vietnamese had a right to govern themselves. "Ho wanted American technical experts to help establish those few industries that Viet Nam was capable of supporting." He was also concerned about the residual affects of the malnutrition suffered by the "calamitous famine of 1944."[7]

Despite the fact that Ho Chi Minh looked to the future he defined some of the French abuses inflicted on the Vietnamese in his speech on September 2, 1945. He was introduced to the huge crowd as the "liberator and savior of the nation." He said that for more than eighty years the French colonialists had violated and oppressed the citizens. He accused them of the following: imposing inhuman laws, dividing the country into three distinct political regimes to destroy national unity,[8] killed our patriots, drowned their uprisings in "rivers of blood," silenced public opinion, "fostered political obscurantism," weakened the race by encouraging the use of opium and alcohol, devastated and exploited the land, robbed the people of their rice fields, mines, forests and raw materials, "monopolized the issuance of banknotes and export trade," invented hundreds of unjustifiable taxes to reduce the peasantry and small businessman to a state of extreme poverty and mercilessly exploited the workers.[9] Worldwide, tyrants use the same tactics.

In addition, Ho accused the "Japanese fascists" of violating Indochina's territory by "establishing new bases for their fight against the Allies." The complicit French basically handed the country over to the Japanese which added to the suffering of the citizens. Viet Nam ceased to be a French colony in the autumn of 1940 and became occupied by the Japanese. Ho declared: "the French have fled, the Japanese have capitulated, Emperor Bao Dai has abdicated. Our people have broken the chains which for nearly a century have fettered them and have won independence for our nation. For these reasons, we, members of the Provisional Government, representing the whole of the Vietnamese people, declare that from now on we break off all relations of a colonial character with France; we repeal all international obligations that France has so far subscribed to on our behalf; and we abolish all the special rights the French have unlawfully acquired in our territory. We are convinced that the Allied nations which at Tehran and San Francisco acknowledged the principles of self determination and equality of nations, will not refuse to acknowledge the independence of Viet Nam. For these reasons, we, members of the Provisional Government of the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam, solemnly declare to the world that Viet Nam has the right to be a free and independent country - and in fact it is so already. The entire Vietnamese people are determined to mobilize all their spiritual and material forces, to sacrifice their lives and property, in order to safeguard their right to liberty and independence."[10]

When Ho Chi Minh proclaimed that Viet Nam was finally free there was a small assembly of agents from the OSS in the crowd of four hundred thousand Vietnamese who had gathered to hear Ho's address. The OSS hierarchy had urged him to create an independent Viet Nam. These agents had worked closely with him and other Vietnamese insurgents prior to the end of World War II. Ho and his group had rescued downed American pilots and gathered intelligence on the Japanese for the American OSS.

Ho Chi Minh idealistically thought that his country was free. He was not aware that Harry S. Truman, Winston Churchill and Joseph Stalin had already decided the post-war fate of Southeast Asia, "with or without their consent," at the nefarious Potsdam Conference, held at Potsdam, Germany, from July 17 to August 2, 1945. Never mind that the indigenous peoples had lived there for hundreds of years and assumed that their land belonged to them.[11] The country was to be divided into two sections with the northern half under the control of China, not Chiang Kai-shek, and the southern half under the British. China was Viet Nam's ancient enemy. Ho Chi Minh, in 1945, understood how difficult it would be for his nation to escape domination by China or for that matter, the Soviet Union if used as a counterforce. He had hoped that the U.S. would play a peaceful, stabilizing role in his country's development.[12] Ho Chi Minh had written numerous letters to U.S. officials years before World War II requesting help - they went unanswered.

On September 23, the Saigon population rebelled against the foreigners and surrounded them in the center of the city without access to supplies. In October, the fighting French managed to re-establish control. This was followed by months of negotiations and international political maneuvers which gave Indochina back to France. The Viet Minh negotiation strategy of independence failed despite Ho Chi Minh's trip to France. In March, 1946, Ho stood before a crowd in Hanoi, and sadly proclaimed, "I swear, I have not sold you out!"[13]

During the pandemic turbulence in Saigon, the first American, Office of Strategic Services (OSS) officer Lt. Col. A. Peter Dewey, was killed on September 26, 1945 by Viet Minh gorillas who mistook him for a French officer. Prior to his death, Dewey "had filed a report on the deepening crisis in Viet Nam, stating his opinion that the U.S. 'ought to clear out of Southeast Asia.'"[14] Apparently, no one took his report seriously. The poor man was out of the Power Elite loop!

Truman disbanded the OSS on October 1, 1945. On January 22, 1946, Truman issued a directive creating a new Central Intelligence Group (CIG) to be jointly staffed and funded by the Departments of State, War and Navy.

"Actually the U.S. involvement in what later became known as the Viet Nam War began on the very day of the Japanese surrender, September 2, 1945."[15] On that day, the representative of the Emperor of Japan signed the surrender papers laid before him by General Douglas MacArthur on the deck of the battleship Missouri in Tokyo.

Before their disbandment in 1945, OSS units organized huge shipments of arms to Syngman Rhee in Korea and Ho Chi Minh in Viet Nam. Both of these countries had been devastated by the Japanese during the war. Those arms shipments went to the two countries where two devastating "Cold War" conflicts were imminent. Those wars were deliberately "Cold War style" - no military objective and no victorious conclusion. Other foreign interventions ensued using the same no-win, civilian-consuming blueprint.[16]

President Roosevelt, whose early family finances were greatly enhanced by China trade, thought that Indochina (Laos, Cambodia, and Viet Nam) should be turned over to a trusteeship rather than returned to France. Roosevelt had discussed this proposal with the Allies at the Cairo, Teheran, and Yalta Conferences and received the endorsement of Chiang Kai-shek and Joseph Stalin; Prime Minister Churchill demurred. However, Chiang Kai-shek did not want control over Indochina or responsibility for a trusteeship. This may have led to his waning support from the U.S. or whoever makes those "national security" decisions on behalf of American taxpayers. Apparently, Roosevelt, who thought that Britain "would take land anywhere in the world even if it were only a rock or a sandbar," offended Churchill's super imperialistic tendencies for which he never forgot or forgave Roosevelt. The British Empire, freely changing boundaries and merging peoples in conquered or controlled nations, had benefited greatly from the Far East (since 1600) with their monarchy-established British East India Company.[17]

Roosevelt unexpectedly died at age 63 on April 12, 1945, less than two months after the Yalta conference. There are claims that he was poisoned. Truman, his vice president, assumed the otherwise prestigious role of taking orders from the Power Elite.

Plans had been made for an American land invasion into Japan in the late fall of 1945 using the island of Okinawa as a launching site when it became available. Air raids against Okinawa started in October 1944. The invasion preparations included sufficient equipment to supply 500,000 men. Japanese resistance on Okinawa ended on June 22, 1945. Supplies and equipment began to be stacked up, fifteen to twenty feet high, all over the island. Japan surrendered earlier than expected which curtailed the massive invasion. Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty was at Naha Harbor, Okinawa when U.S. Navy Transport vessels began to show up. He relates that the war materials were loaded onto those ships. He asked the Harbormaster "if all of that new material was being returned to the States." According to Prouty, the Harbormaster responded: "Hell No! They ain't never goin' to see it again. One half of this stuff, enough to equip and support at least 150,000 men, is going to Korea and the other half is going to Indochina.'"[18]

"In 1945, none of us had any idea that the first battles of the Cold War were going to be fought by U.S. Military units in those two regions beginning in 1950 and 1965, yet that is precisely what had been planned and it is precisely what happened. Who made that decision back in 1943-1945?"[19]

That military material was loaded during September 1945 and shipped to Haiphong the port of Hanoi, the capital of Viet Nam. There were sufficient arms to supply any army for battle. "Once in Haiphong Harbor this enormous shipment of arms was transferred under the direction of U.S. Army Major General Gallagher, who was supporting the OSS and his associate Ho Chi Minh. Gallagher had come from China to mop up the remnants of the defeated Japanese army. Ho's military commander Colonel Giap quickly moved this equipment into hiding until the day when it would be needed. By 1954, that time had come."[20] Fot part one click below.

Click here for part -----> 1,


1, Why Viet Nam? Prelude to America's Albatross by Archimedes L. A. Patti, pg. 43
2, SOE's French Indo-China Section, 1943-1945 by Martin Thomas, Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 34, No. 4 (Oct., 2000), pp. 943-976
3, Why Viet Nam? Prelude to America's Albatross by Archimedes L. A. Patti, pg. 235-36
4, Ibid, pg. 240-42
5, Ibid, pg. 239
6, The American involvement in Vietnam Accessed September 18, 2007
7, Ibid, pg. 246
8, In the 1930s, the area today known as Vietnam was made up of three distinct areas: Annam, Tonkin and Cochinchina, all under French administration. Indochina refers to Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia.
9, Ibid, pg. 250-52
10, Ibid, pg. 250-52
11, JFK, the CIA, Vietnam and the Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy by L. Fletcher Prouty, pgs. 14-15
12, Why Vietnam? Prelude to America's Albatross by Archimedes L. A. Patti, pg. xviii
13, The Anti-Colonial Movement in Vietnam by Loren Goldner, New Politics, vol. 6, no. 3, Summer 1997
14, The Vietnam War, Seeds of Conflict, 1945 - 1960, Accessed August 25, 2007
15, In August 1945, the Japanese situation was desperate. The major cities were devastated by atomic or conventional attack, and the casualties numbered in the millions. Millions more were refugees, and the average consumption was below 1200 calories a day. The fleet was lost, and the merchant shipping could not leave home waters or sail from the few possessions still held without braving submarine or mine attack. Oil stocks were gone, rubber and steel were in short supply, and the Soviets were moving against the only sizable forces the Japanese had left, the Kwantung Army in Manchuria. They were a starving and undersupplied force. Many divisions had transferred to the Pacific, where they died in the island battles.
16, JFK, The CIA, Vietnam and the Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy by L. Fletcher Prouty, pg 18
17, Ibid, pgs. 14-15
18, Ibid, pgs. 17-18
19, Ibid, pg. 18
20, Ibid, pg. 39

Deanna Spingola has been a quilt designer and is the author of two books. She has traveled extensively teaching and lecturing on her unique methods. She has always been an avid reader of non-fiction works designed to educate rather than entertain. She is active in family history research and lectures on that topic. Currently she is the director of the local Family History Center. She has a great interest in politics and the direction of current government policies, particularly as they relate to the Constitution.