Lis­ten:
MP3 Side 1 | Side 2
RealAu­dio

This pro­gram presents analy­sis of the domes­tic polit­i­cal and eco­nom­ic impli­ca­tions of the 9/11/2001 ter­ror attacks. It is impor­tant to note that the dis­tinc­tion between the domes­tic and for­eign pol­i­cy impli­ca­tions of the inci­dents is, to a con­sid­er­able extent, aca­d­e­m­ic. Mr. Emory notes that the attacks (con­cep­tu­al­ized from a military/foreign pol­i­cy stand­point) are inex­tri­ca­bly linked with their domes­tic impact. As the title of the broad­cast indi­cates, the attacks can be accu­rate­ly con­sid­ered as a sneak attack by a for­eign power—the Under­ground Reich—and its Fifth Col­umn in the Unit­ed States nation­al secu­ri­ty estab­lish­ment. The 9/11/2001 attack can also be viewed as pro­mot­ing the domes­tic polit­i­cal and police pow­ers of the seat­ed polit­i­cal inter­ests. The fact that the 9/11 attacks have been fol­lowed by the pas­sage of sweep­ing law enforce­ment and intel­li­gence pro­vi­sions which may be used to abridge the con­sti­tu­tion­al free­doms of Amer­i­can cit­i­zens and to sti­fle legit­i­mate polit­i­cal dis­sent is not to be over­looked. The fun­da­men­tal the­sis here is that, in addi­tion to being an attack on the Unit­ed States by the Under­ground Reich, the Sep­tem­ber 11 assaults con­sti­tute “nation build­ing” in this coun­try by the Bor­mann group and its for­eign and domes­tic polit­i­cal and eco­nom­ic allies.

1. One of the pri­ma­ry hypothe­ses of the For The Record series on the Sep­tem­ber 11 attacks is the con­tention that the sce­nario advanced in the “nov­el” Ser­pen­t’s Walk is, in fact, being real­ized. The Nazi takeover of the Unit­ed States described in the book takes place after the Under­ground Reich and the SS infil­trate the U.S. Army and intel­li­gence com­mu­ni­ty. After a bio­log­i­cal war­fare attack result­ing in the dec­la­ra­tion of mar­tial law in the U.S., the Under­ground Reich takes over the coun­try. (This “fic­tion­al” sce­nario takes place in the mid­dle of the twen­ty-first cen­tu­ry.)

2. The dis­cus­sion begins with a look at recent devel­op­ments in the inves­ti­ga­tion of the anthrax attacks direct­ed at media out­lets and Demo­c­ra­t­ic sen­a­tors fol­low­ing the attacks on the World Trade Cen­ter and the Pen­ta­gon. (“Anthrax and Ebo­la Sam­ples ‘Miss­ing from U.S. Army Lab’ ” by Gwen Robin­son; Finan­cial Times; 1/22/2002; p. 8.) In addi­tion to not­ing that anthrax and Ebo­la sam­ples were miss­ing from the U.S. Army instal­la­tion at Fort Det­rick (for­mer­ly the cen­ter of U.S. bio­log­i­cal war­fare research), the arti­cle notes that unau­tho­rized per­son­nel appar­ent­ly had access to the lab­o­ra­to­ry. (Idem.) It is cred­i­ble that the domes­tic anthrax attacks were per­pe­trat­ed by domes­tic fas­cists, oper­at­ing as part of a ter­ror­ist “pin­cers move­ment” with the Al Qae­da agents involved in the 9/11 attacks.

3. Next, the pro­gram dis­cuss­es the Bush polit­i­cal agen­da after the attacks. (“Let’s Roll” by Thomas Fried­man; New York Times; 1/2/2002, p. A25.) The col­umn notes that Bush has used the Sep­tem­ber 11 attacks to push for a nar­row, right wing agen­da. (Idem.) It is con­tend­ed that the Bush admin­is­tra­tion is con­trolled by the Bor­mann orga­ni­za­tion and Under­ground Reich, and that just such an agen­da was a major domes­tic goal of the attacks.

4. Bush aide Karl Rove has explic­it­ly stat­ed that the Repub­li­cans should use the 9/11 attacks as a par­ti­san polit­i­cal issue in the 2002 elec­tions. (“Democ­rats Blast GOP’s Par­ti­san Spin on War” by Ali­son Mitchell [New York Times]; San Fran­cis­co Chron­i­cle; 1/20/2002; p. A12.)

5. Much of the first side of the pro­gram con­sists of the pre­sen­ta­tion of an op-ed piece that dis­cuss­es the lack of bipar­ti­san pol­i­tics used by the Repub­li­cans dur­ing the Clin­ton admin­is­tra­tion. (“The Gore Night­mare” by Albert R. Hunt; Wall Street Jour­nal; 11/29/2001; p. A19.) It is high­ly prob­a­ble that they would have behaved in a sim­i­lar fash­ion with regard to the 9/11 attacks had Gore been allowed to assume the pres­i­den­cy. In effect, the attacks may very well turn out to be “Amer­i­ca’s Reich­stag Fire.” Whether this turns out to be true will depend on the will and com­mit­ment of the Amer­i­can peo­ple, but the out­look does not inspire opti­mism. The broad­cast turns to analy­sis of the Sau­di invest­ment in the Unit­ed States and its effect on domes­tic U.S. pol­i­tics.

6. There was a recent con­fer­ence in Jed­dah (head­quar­ters of the Bin Laden con­struc­tion out­fit) at which Sau­di busi­ness lumi­nar­ies dis­cussed the gloomy out­look for their Amer­i­can invest­ment prospects. (“Jed­dah Busi­ness­men Frus­trat­ed by Tense Rela­tions with U.S.” by Roula Khalf; Finan­cial Times; 1/21/2002; p. 5.) (For­mer Pres­i­dent Bush has twice vis­it­ed the Bin Laden busi­ness com­pound as part of his work for the Car­lyle Group, one of the Bush family/Bin Laden fam­i­ly busi­ness prospects.) Among the spon­sors of the recent Jed­dah con­fer­ence was Prince Alwaleed, a busi­ness asso­ciate of Youss­eff Nada and Ital­ian Prime Min­is­ter Sil­vio Berlus­coni. (Idem.)

7. Much of the sec­ond side of the pro­gram focus­es on the “petrodol­lar con­nec­tion.” In addi­tion to Amer­i­can depen­dence on Sau­di oil, the Unit­ed States has become sub­servient to the Saud­is because, in addi­tion to hold­ing much of the for­eign debt incurred by the Reagan/Bush admin­is­tra­tions, the Sau­di “petrodol­lars” have become an impor­tant source of cap­i­tal for Amer­i­can insti­tu­tions. The pro­found Sau­di polit­i­cal influ­ence stem­ming from that invest­ment has had a desta­bi­liz­ing influ­ence on the Unit­ed States. (The Amer­i­can House of Saud; by Steven Emer­son; Copy­right 1985 [HC]; Franklin & Watts; ISBN 0–531-09778–1; pp. 17–19.)

8. Iron­i­cal­ly, Amer­i­can-based multi­na­tion­al cor­po­ra­tions that have been involved in desta­bi­liz­ing for­eign gov­ern­ments are (as a result of petrodol­lar invest­ment) involved in desta­bi­liz­ing the Unit­ed States. (Ibid.; p. 18.)

9. It should be not­ed that the Sau­di monar­chy has retained all of its Nazi-linked anti-Semit­ic dog­ma, includ­ing a well-doc­u­ment­ed belief in The Pro­to­cols of the Elders of Zion. (Ibid.; p. 27.)

10. Next, the pro­gram high­lights the actu­al­iza­tion of this dog­mat­ic anti-Semi­tism through the use of Amer­i­can pub­lic rela­tions firms. One of the indi­vid­u­als retained by the Saud­is to help reshape Amer­i­can pub­lic opin­ion is the pow­er­ful Robert Kei­th Gray, one of the pri­ma­ry movers in the Repub­li­can Par­ty and an inti­mate of many Regan/Bush staffers. (Ibid.; p. 338)

11. Gray’s pow­er­ful PR firm authored a mem­o­ran­dum detail­ing a pro­pa­gan­da strat­e­gy against the Jews that was bla­tant­ly big­ot­ed, and which may very well have been put into effect, despite dis­claimers to the con­trary. (Ibid.; pp. 345–347.) It is cer­tain that the memo is char­ac­ter­is­tic of the sort of anti-Semit­ic con­spir­a­cy the­o­ries that have become increas­ing­ly preva­lent on both the right and the left.

12. The broad­cast high­lights analy­sis by Richard Lebeviere that ana­lyzes Amer­i­can for­eign pol­i­cy as being poly-cen­trist and, con­se­quent­ly “inco­her­ent.” (Dol­lars for Ter­ror: The Unit­ed States and Islam; by Richard Labeviere; Copy­right 2000 [SC]; Algo­ra Pub­lish­ing; ISBN 1–892941-06–6;p. 161.) “With the deci­sion-mak­ing pow­er split into so many stra­ta, each super­im­pos­ing its own com­pet­ing motives onto the issues, U.S. inter­na­tion­al pol­i­cy takes on the form of a mul­ti-lay­ered bakla­va pas­try. In this con­fig­u­ra­tion, the intel­li­gence ser­vices (includ­ing the CIA) play a cen­tral role. . . .One of the most dis­con­cert­ing episodes in this his­to­ry erupt­ed with the ‘Iran­gate’ affair, and the trau­ma it caused would influ­ence the U.S. gov­ern­ment for a long time. Its con­se­quences are still shap­ing recent evo­lu­tions in inter­na­tion­al pol­i­cy. The scan­dal is emblem­at­ic of the his­to­ry of U.S. gov­ern­ment, because it illus­trates a col­lapse of the ‘bakla­va’ struc­ture due to an instance of the CIA’s uni­lat­er­al action vis-à-vis the exec­u­tive pow­er. Iran­gate marked a pro­found rup­ture. Now we have two eras, pre-and post-Iran­gate.” (Ibid.; p. 163.) (It should be not­ed that the elder George Bush was the prin­ci­pal fig­ure involved in the Iran­gate scan­dal.)

13. The pro­gram then turns to a dis­cus­sion of the pro­mo­tion of fun­da­men­tal­ist reli­gion as a means of under­min­ing the demo­c­ra­t­ic nation-state, and sub­vert­ing human rights by pro­mot­ing theoc­ra­cy. The growth of fun­da­men­tal­ist Chris­tian­i­ty in the Unit­ed States is one of the focal points. (Ibid.; p. 375.)

14. It should be not­ed that the Repub­li­can Par­ty inter­sects heav­i­ly with the Chris­t­ian right. Next the pro­gram notes that the sec­u­lar state has been a fun­da­men­tal his­tor­i­cal guar­an­tor of human rights, by ensur­ing the sep­a­ra­tion of church and state. (Ibid.; p. 380.)

15. The focus then shifts to multi­na­tion­al cor­po­rate pro­mo­tion if “Islamism” as a means of sub­vert­ing human rights to theo­crat­ic fas­cism. (Ibid.; pp. 391–392.)

16. The pro­gram con­cludes with review of the role in this “theoc­ra­ti­za­tion” process that the Bormann/Underground Reich “Cor­poro­c­ra­cy” appears to be real­iz­ing. Like The Turn­er Diaries (also pub­lished by Nation­al Van­guard Books), the book Ser­pen­t’s Walk appears to be 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.)

17. This process is described in more detail in a pas­sage of text, con­sist­ing of a dis­cus­sion between Wrench (a mem­ber of this Under­ground Reich) and a mer­ce­nary named Less­ing. “The SS . . . what was left of it . . .had busi­ness objec­tives before and dur­ing World War II. When the war was lost they just kept on, but from oth­er places: Bogo­ta, Asun­cion, Buenos Aires, Rio de Janeiro, Mex­i­co City, Colom­bo, Dam­as­cus, Dac­ca . . . you name it. They real­ized that the world is head­ing towards a ‘cor­po­racra­cy;’ five or ten inter­na­tion­al super-com­pa­nies that will run every­thing worth run­ning by the year 2100. Those super-cor­po­ra­tions exist now, and they’re already divid­ing up the pro­duc­tion and mar­ket­ing of food, trans­port, steel and heavy indus­try, oil, the media, and oth­er com­modi­ties. They’re already divid­ing up the pro­duc­tion and mar­ket­ing of food, trans­port, steel and heavy indus­try, oil, the media, and oth­er com­modi­ties. They’re most­ly con­glom­er­ates, with fin­gers in more than one pie . . . . We, the SS, have the say in four or five. We’ve been com­pet­ing for the past six­ty years or so, and we’re slow­ly gain­ing . . . . About ten years ago, we swung a merge, a takeover, and got vot­ing con­trol of a super­corp that runs a small but sig­nif­i­cant chunk of the Amer­i­can media. Not open­ly, not with bands and trum­pets or swastikas fly­ing, but qui­et­ly: one huge cor­po­ra­tion cud­dling up to anoth­er one and gen­tly munch­ing it up, like a great, gub­bing amoe­ba. Since then we’ve been replac­ing exec­u­tives, push­ing some­body out here, bring­ing some­body else in there. We’ve swing pro­gram con­tent around, too. Not much, but a lit­tle, so it won’t show. We’ve cut down on ‘nasty-Nazi’ movies . . . good guys in white hats and bad guys in black SS hats . . . lov­able Jews ver­sus fiendish Ger­mans . . . and we have media psy­chol­o­gists, ad agen­cies, and behav­ior mod­i­fi­ca­tion spe­cial­ists work­ing on image changes . . . . But all we ever hear about are the poor, inno­cent Jews and the awful ‘Holo­caust,’ when, in fact, there nev­er was an ‘exter­mi­na­tion pol­i­cy,’ a ‘Final Solu­tion,’ or any­thing like it!” (Ibid.; pp. 42–43.) It is Mr. Emory’s view that the descrip­tion in Ser­pen­t’s Walk refers to the Bor­mann orga­ni­za­tion. The eco­nom­ic and polit­i­cal com­po­nent of a Third Reich gone under­ground, the Bor­mann orga­ni­za­tion con­trols cor­po­rate Ger­many and much of the rest of the world. Cre­at­ed and run by Mar­tin Bor­mann, the orga­ni­za­tion­al genius who was the “the pow­er behind the throne” in Nazi Ger­many, the Bor­mann group is a pri­ma­ry ele­ment of the analy­sis pre­sent­ed in the For the Record pro­grams.