Lis­ten Side 1 | Side 2

Sup­ple­ment­ing the dis­cus­sion and analy­sis from ear­lier pro­grams on the sub­ject of the ter­ror­ist blitzkrieg of 9/11, this pro­gram derives its title from the Nazi tract Serpent’s Walk.

1. It is con­jec­tured cred­i­bly that, like The Turner Diaries (also pub­lished by National Van­guard Books), the book is actu­ally a blue­print for what is going to take place. It is a novel about a Nazi takeover of the United States in the mid­dle of the 21st cen­tury. The book describes the Third Reich going under­ground, buy­ing into the Amer­i­can media, and tak­ing over the coun­try. “It assumes that Hitler’s war­rior elite — the SS — didn’t give up their strug­gle for a White world when they lost the Sec­ond World War. Instead their sur­vivors went under­ground and adopted some of their tac­tics of their ene­mies: they began build­ing their eco­nomic mus­cle and buy­ing into the opinion-forming media. A cen­tury after the war they are ready to chal­lenge the democ­rats and Jews for the hearts and minds of White Amer­i­cans, who have begun to have their fill of government-enforced multi-culturalism and ‘equal­ity.’” (From the back cover of Serpent’s Walk by “Ran­dolph D. Calver­hall;” Copy­right 1991 [SC]; National Van­guard Books; 0–937944-05-X.)

2. The pro­gram begins with dis­cus­sion of the Saudi role in the events of 9/11. Ten days before the attacks, the Saudis warned George W. Bush that his pol­icy on the Israeli-Palestinian ques­tion was “unac­cept­able.” (“Saudis Warned Bush Over Pol­icy on Israel” by Roula Kha­laf; Finan­cial Times; 10/10/2001; p. 1.)

3. A Saudi-based char­ity that has been alleged by the U.S. to be a sup­port orga­ni­za­tion for the Bin Laden orga­ni­za­tion (the Muwafaq Foun­da­tion) is run by, among oth­ers, two mem­bers of the Bin Mah­fouz fam­ily. (“Phil­an­thropist, or Fount of Funds for Ter­ror­ists?”; by Jeff Gerth and Judith Miller; New York Times; 10/13/2001; p. B3.)

4. The Bin Mah­fouz fam­ily were deeply involved with the BCCI, and were rep­re­sented in the U.S. by James R. Bath. Bath helped cap­i­tal­ize Dubya’s first oil com­pany and was the North Amer­i­can busi­ness rep­re­sen­ta­tive for the Bin Laden family.

5. Sig­nif­i­cantly, the Saudi gov­ern­ment has not frozen funds con­nected to the financ­ing of the Bin Laden orga­ni­za­tion and has been less than vig­or­ous in pro­vid­ing back­ground infor­ma­tion on the Saudi nation­als involved in the attacks. (“Saudi Coop­er­a­tion on Bin Laden Lags, U.S. Aides Say” by Jane Per­lez; New York Times; 10/11/2001; p. B5.)

6. Next, the pro­gram takes up the sub­ject of an alle­ga­tion by Ger­man intel­li­gence that the Ech­e­lon sys­tem pro­vided the U.S. and the United King­dom with advanced warn­ing of the 9/11 attacks. (“News­pa­per: Ech­e­lon Gave Author­i­ties Warn­ing of Attacks” by Ned Stafford [News­bytes]; 9/13/2001; accessed at www.infowar.com.) With the epi­cen­ter of the con­spir­acy hav­ing taken place in Ger­many, this alle­ga­tion by the Ger­mans would appear to be an attempt at deflect­ing par­tial respon­si­bil­ity for the attack away from them­selves. As noted in past pro­grams, Ger­many has been attack­ing the Ech­e­lon net­work and the related Men­with Hill lis­ten­ing sta­tion for years. In the past, Mr. Emory has voiced the opin­ion that ECHELON and Men­with Hill are essen­tial to both U.S. and British national secu­rity and has ana­lyzed the EU/German pres­sure to cur­tail these oper­a­tions against the back­ground of esca­lat­ing intel­li­gence fric­tion between the U.S. and Germany.

7. Sig­nif­i­cantly, a long-awaited Euro­pean Par­lia­ment report on Ech­e­lon con­cluded that “many Euro­pean coun­tries had sim­i­lar abilities”—that would undoubt­edly include Ger­many. (“Report on U.S. Spy Sys­tem” by Suzanne Daley; New York Times; 9/6/2001; p. A6.)

8. In light of that fact, why didn’t Ger­man intel­li­gence know about the attacks? A Libyan arrested in Munich in con­nec­tion with the attacks had been under inves­ti­ga­tion since April. (“Egypt­ian Ter­ror Cell ‘Linked to Bin Laden’” by Heba Saleh; Finan­cial Times; 10/12/2001; p. 5.)

9. The Ger­man pros­e­cu­tor in charge of the inves­ti­ga­tion has been charged with ignor­ing evi­dence that might have led to the inter­dic­tion of the attacks. (“Berlin Demands Boost in Ter­ror Probe” by Hugh Williamson; Finan­cial Times; 10/9/2001; p. 2.)

10. Exam­in­ing the geopo­lit­i­cal ben­e­fits that have accrued to Ger­many from the 9/11 attacks, the broad­cast notes that Ger­man chan­cel­lor Ger­hard Schroder stated that Ger­many will no longer play ‘a sec­ondary role’ in inter­na­tional affairs. (“Ger­many Ready for More Senior Role in World Affairs” by Haig Simon­ian; Finan­cial Times; 10/12/2001; p. 7.)

11. Alarm­ingly, Ger­man Luft­waffe pilots are now man­ning AWACS air­craft that are patrolling Amer­i­can air­space. (“Berlin Flexes its Mus­cles” by Haig Simon­ian; Finan­cial Times; 10/13–14/2001; p. 9.)

12. Much of the rest of the broad­cast exam­ines infor­ma­tion sup­ple­ment­ing the long-running dis­cus­sion of Ger­man con­trol over the Amer­i­can media. In Serpent’s Walk, the descen­dants of the SS go under­ground after the Sec­ond World War, put together an enor­mous eco­nomic orga­ni­za­tion, gain con­trol over the Amer­i­can media, infil­trate the U.S. mil­i­tary and, after a bio­log­i­cal war­fare attack that destroys much of the U.S. and mar­tial law is declared, this “under­ground Reich” takes over the United States. It is cer­tainly cred­i­ble that the book is, in fact, a blue­print for what the Bor­mann orga­ni­za­tion and its asso­ciates are plan­ning to do.

The pro­gram then high­lights U.S. Trade Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Robert Zoellick’s use of the 9/11 attacks to pro­mote “fast track” trade leg­is­la­tion that would per­mit George Bush to bypass Con­gress. (“Boost for Bush on ‘Fast Track’ Trade Deal” by Edward Alden; Finan­cial Times; 9/27/2001; p. 1.) Zoel­lick’s back­ground strongly sug­gests involve­ment with the Bor­mann orga­ni­za­tion. The fast track leg­is­la­tion being pur­sued by Zoel­lick would fur­ther facil­i­tate takeovers of Amer­i­can media out­lets by Ger­man corporations.

13. In addi­tion, the non-stop cov­er­age of the 9/11 attacks has badly depressed Amer­i­can media stocks, due to the loss of adver­tis­ing rev­enues. (“Media Feel­ing the Pain” by Mark Schwan­hausser; San Jose Mer­cury News; 9/23/2001; p. 1F.)

14. This will, of course, make eas­ier a poten­tial takeover of one of the suf­fer­ing com­pa­nies. Stocks of other com­pa­nies, includ­ing the British Pear­son firm, have also declined as a result of the attacks. (“Global Media Trou­bles Deepen” by Christo­pher Grimes and Patrick Jenk­ins; Finan­cial Times; 10/3/2001; p. 17.)

15. The Ber­tels­mann firm, on the other hand, is in excel­lent finan­cial shape for prospec­tive takeovers, and is plan­ning such trans­ac­tions. (“Ber­tels­mann Look­ing Around for Acqui­si­tions” by Jeff Leeds; Los Ange­les Times; 9/28/2001; p. C5.)

16. (Ber­tels­mann is a cen­tral focus of the series on Ger­man cor­po­rate con­trol over the Amer­i­can media and appears to be a Bor­mann firm.) One of the trans­ac­tions that placed Ber­tels­mann in a capital-rich posi­tion was its sale of AOL Europe, which may give the firm 6.75 bil­lion dol­lars (includ­ing 2.5 bil­lion in cash.) (“It Looks Like Ber­tels­mann Out­foxed AOL in Europe” by Scott Her­hold; San Jose Mer­cury News; 10/11/2001; p. 1F.)

17. Next, the pro­gram high­lights the “hypo­thet­i­cal” bio­log­i­cal war­fare attack that paves the way for the SS takeover of the United States. (Serpent’s Walk; p. 139.) The broad­cast under­scores the fact that Amer­i­can media out­lets were among the first tar­gets of the Anthrax bioter­ror that fol­lowed the 9/11 attacks. (“Mail Room Anxiety—Delivery Curbed” by Bill Wal­lace, Robert Sal­la­day and Henry K. Lee; San Fran­cisco Chron­i­cle; 10/13/2001; p. 1.)

18. The broad­cast con­cludes with dis­cus­sion of unusual stock mar­ket activ­ity in the weeks pre­ced­ing 9/11. The activ­ity in S&P 500 index options was very unusual in con­nec­tion with the 9/11 attacks, poten­tially yield­ing extra­or­di­nary cap­i­tal to who­ever appears to have engi­neered the manip­u­la­tion. (“Fol­low the Money” by Erin E. Arved­lund; Barron’s; 10/8/2001; p. 22.)

19. Cor­rec­tion: $120,000 is the sum needed to yield a net of $780,000, not $1,200, as was incor­rectly noted in the broadcast.