Terry Mauro

Though Quigley was an eminent historian Tragedy and Hope was one of his more obscure works which seems to have tried to distance himself from later, AFAICT only conspiracy nuts especially far right John Birch types paid it any heed What's the point of this comment? It's chocked full of false assertions. The influential Macmillan family published the book, so they seemed to think it was important. And how many printings has this book been through since it was first published in 1966(?). <REMOVED BY MODERATOR> And based on an online version never documented the claims he made simply stating that, “ I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960's, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments Quigley tells his readers that he has studied the operations of this network for twenty years! That he was permitted to read their papers and secret records. But even so he never said that Morgan was British only that it worked with “a group of international financiers in London” "A group of international financiers in London"? That's as good a definition of the British Empire as anyone is going to get. This slime mold includes JP Morgan as well as the other Wall Street financial houses. You can look at the records of the Pecora Commission, and you'll find that JP Morgan was shown to be an "instrument" for carrying out financial warfare and credit policy for British interests. JP Morgan has always been a tool of the British Empire. Physical address withstanding. Maybe the problem is we havent agreed upon the definition of an American institution or a British institution? That might be where the problem is.

What an absurdly meaningless comment (offered without any supporting evidence). Just about anything can be justified by saying it is “considered by many” to be true. Many people think eating someone else’s feces is a sexual thrill* they might well outnumber the people who believe Morgan is British especially if you don’t count the Larrouchites who blindly accept whatever their messiah tells them. Still waiting for any evidence that the company is “British” * http://www.iamindepression.com/sexual-disorders/coprophilia.htm ============================================================================== http://www.truthcontrol.com/node/jp-morgan-jr: http://www.c-ville.com/index.php?cat=141404064432695&ShowArticle_ID=11801904103927332 http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1591086.J_P_Morgan_Jr_1867_1943 John Douglas Forbes LEN this 100 year old guy is in the phone book in Virginia. Why not give him a call , You're the one making the claim why don't YOU give him a call? You alreay have his phone number. All that you have from him is a supposed quote from him devoid of any larger context. J.P. Morgan, Jr., became a partner in the London house of J.S. Morgan & Co. on January 1,1898, and a fortnight later, with his wife Jessie and their three children, [...] he left New York and took up residence in England for the next eight years. Morgan was sent to London to do two specific things. The first was to learn at first hand how the British carried on a banking business under a central banking system dominated by the Bank of England. Morgan, Sr., anticipated the establishment of the Federal Reserve System in the United States and wanted someone who would eventually have authority in the Morgan firms to know how such a system worked. The second was quietly to look about the City and select British partners to convert the elder Morgan's privately owned J.S. Morgan & Co. into a British concern. The facts remain that J.P. Morgan Jr. was at least a 3rd generation American. J.S. Morgan his grandfather was born in MA. as was George Peabody J.S.'s partner. J.P. Jr. running the London office for 8 years over a century ago does not in anyway make the firm British. You still haven't shown anyone who isn't Larrouchite beleves it is. Y? Quote: The facts remain that J.P. Morgan Jr. was at least a 3rd generation American. J.S. Morgan his grandfather was born in MA. as was George Peabody J.S.'s partner. J.P. Jr. running the London office for 8 years over a century ago does not in anyway make the firm British. You still haven't shown anyone who isn't Larrouchite beleves it is. Steve never made such a stupid comment. When or where did Steve make this claim? Quote: You still haven't shown anyone who isn't Larrouchite beleves it is. Talk about a meaningless comment. Besides Steve just provided you with a lead to follow up and you're just too damn lazy to do any work that doesnt involve google and/or gossip.

What an absurdly meaningless comment (offered without any supporting evidence). Just about anything can be justified by saying it is “considered by many” to be true. Many people think eating someone else’s feces is a sexual thrill* they might well outnumber the people who believe Morgan is British especially if you don’t count the Larrouchites who blindly accept whatever their messiah tells them. Still waiting for any evidence that the company is “British” * http://www.iamindepression.com/sexual-disorders/coprophilia.htm Many people think eating someone else’s feces is a sexual thrill* Like Len Colby, GG Allin and the Murder Junkies.

For those of you interested in Permindex and Louis Mortimer Bloomfield read EIR's 2005 review "Italy's Black Prince Terror War against the nation state". The Nov. 22, 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy was coordinated by the Rome and New Orleans-headquartered Permindex corporation, which French intelligence, SDECE, discovered had also put up $200,000 for an attempt on de Gaulle. Even a cursory examination of the hard-core fascist outlook and connections of most of the Permindex/CMC personnel, their numerous ties to high-level Anglo-American intelligence, along with their financial connections, leaves no doubt that Permindex and its Rome-based arm, Centro Mondiale Commerciale (CMC), were part of the parallel NATO/Gladio structure. Permindex was registered in Berne, Switzerland, Dulles's old stomping grounds. It was chaired by a high-ranking veteran of the Special Operations Executive (SOE) and the OSS, the Canada-based lawyer and financier, Louis Mortimer Bloomfield, the majority shareholder in Permindex (who also owned 50% of CMC). Its board was a mélange of devout "anti-communists," aristocrats, and fascists of various intelligence pedigrees. These included Count Guitierez di Spadafora, former undersecretary of agriculture to Mussolini, secretary of a British-sponsored Sicilian separatist movement, and in-law of Hjalmar Schacht, the master financier of the postwar Nazi International; Carlo d'Amelio, a Rome attorney who oversaw the financial holdings of the House of Savoy, and, according to some accounts, also of the Pallavicini family, and was the founding president of the CMC; Giuseppe Zigiotti, head of the Fascist National Association for Militia Arms; several other wartime fascists; and former OSS London and SOE veteran Col. Clay Shaw, the operations officer for the assassination. Permindex was chaired by Canada's Bloomfield, while its international arm, CMC, was based in Rome, and Clay Shaw's firm in New Orleans, International Trade Mart, was a subsidiary of Permindex/CMC. According to documents released through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), OSS veteran Shaw worked for the CIA, as well. There was ample evidence of Shaw's involvement in the assassination, for which he was indicted by New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison. Notably, one of the names found in Shaw's personal phone book was that of Princess Marcella Borghese, a member of the Black Prince's family. And one of the lower-level figures in the ambit of the plot, Dallas nightclub owner Jack Ruby (who assassinated patsy Lee Harvey Oswald), charged repeatedly in letters from jail, that "the Nazis and the Fascists were behind the Kennedy murder." According to the highly credible Torbitt manuscript, "Ruby was much more knowledgeable about the conspiracy than most." Huge financial resources flowed through Permindex/CMC for no commercial purpose. Some of these funds, at least, were provided through banks which had earlier financed the Nazis, including one intimately associated with Allen Dulles from the time of his 1930s work with Nazi cartels, through to his 1953-61 stint as CIA chief. Some hints of where the money was going could be found in French and Italian press reports that CMC official Ferenc Nagy, the fiercely anti-communist former Prime Minister of Hungary, was financing Jacques Soustelle and the OAS, along with other European fascist movements; or in New Orleans District Attorney Garrison's observation about "Shaw's secret life as an Agency [CIA] man trying to bring Fascism back to Italy."[6] NATO units were also involved in at least some of the numerous assassination attempts on France's President Charles de Gaulle in 1962-63, which was no doubt a factor in de Gaulle's withdrawing France from NATO's military command in 1966. France, after all, had been a key target of NATO's "Operation Demagnetize" in the 1950s, and the "anti-communist," bitterly anti-de Gaulle OAS operatives like Guerin Serac, were natural partners of NATO. Adm. Pierre Lacoste, director of the France's military secret service DGSE (1982-85), admitted after Andreotti had exposed Gladio's existence in 1990, that some "terrorist actions" against de Gaulle and his plans to liberate Algeria were carried out by groups involving "a limited number of people" from the French Gladio organization! A five-year investigation by France's SDECE intelligence agency of a 1962 assassination plot against de Gaulle found that the assassination had been planned in the Brussels headquarters of NATO by a specific group of British and French generals, who employed former fascists for the planned wetwork. http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2005/3205_italy_black_prince.html Page #54 PDF file http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2005/eirv32/eirv32n05.pdf

American soldiers are dying in Afghanistan, fighting an enemy that thrives on the opium trade, that the President refuses to target," LaRouche declared. "That kind of policy is tantamount to treason, and warrants the President's immediate impeachment. It cannot be tolerated." LaRouche also called for the immediate dismissal of Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, who has been pivotal in the disastrous Obama policy. http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2010/3714lar_demands_impeach.html

Prince Phillip- Equal rights for Apes. EIR 1996 http://wlym.com/~oakland/brutish/EIRDarwinApes.pdf

Terry, I think Maurice is arguing that Bloomfield himself, knowing of such accusations, ordered his papers released and open to the public so that it can be shown that he was not the Mastermind of the Dealey Plaza Operation. I think it is a great approach though for some reason I think the beauracrats are too pigheaded to understand that. While the eventual release of the Bloomfield papers may exonerate him, it wouldn't do the same for the British Oligarchy, as they've done more dastardly deeds in the past. BK Bill, Let's see if I understand. Major Louis Mortimer Bloomfield knowing that he has been "linked" with the JFK assassination waits for his death some 21 years after the murder of Kennedy to donate his papers McGill University (??) where they sit for another 22-23 years waiting for some "researcher" to prove that he had nothing to do with the Kennedy murder? You might want to lay off the conspiracy books Terry, Please,before being sarcastic, re-read everything I've posted on the Bloomfield Archives, because the fact that you mentionned McGill University show that you don't possess the basic facts on this subject. As for FBI Division Five, except for the Torbitt manuscript, do you have any documentary evidence 1- that Division Five exists, 2- That Bloomfield is part of it. I've read everything on Bloomfield, from Flammonde to Torbitt and Dope Inc and every issue of Executive Intelligence Review, and even Michael Piper (by the way, if you want to read everything about Bloomfield, you should also look at Bomb in the Basement by Michael Karpin, there is something there that Piper would surely put in a next edition of Final Judgment). After I have published my book (De Dallas à Montréal), I have once met Jeffrey Steinberg, author of Dope Inc and EIR editor, in Montreal, and looked at everything EIR had on Bloomfield. All of that is quite interesting, but the part about Bloomfield as the "assassination engineer" is a false conclusion based on incomplete facts. For my part, I'm just trying to complete the facts. But please, Terry, make the intellectual effort to discriminate between facts and conclusions. Terry, look again at the Bloomfield documents that I have published and try seriously to say that Bloomfield is in full control of Permindex. Obviously, he is not. Maurice, Here are a few of your statements. Please make the intellectual effort to discriminate between facts and conclusions". You should take your own advice. Please tell me what documents you've produced to date that do not support the evidence presented in Dope, Inc. Please tell me. And you've read every issue of Executive Intelligence Review? Hmmmm..... I find this statement highly suspect. You met Jeff Steinberg. How in the world does your meeting Jeff Steinberg prove your assertion that Major Louis Mortimer Bloomfield is innocent? I would like to know that. PS- Maurice you may note that I placed question marks next to McGill University. I was not certain when I responded to Bill Kelly exactly where Bloomfield had placed his personal papers.

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=it&u=http://www.permindex.org/&ei=2uceTNfPG8LTnAfAlvzmAw&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CDYQ7gEwCA&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dpermindex%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4GGLF_enUS265US265

Hi Terry, Garrison and French Intelligence may be 100% right about Clay Shaw and Permindex, but the case against Louis Bloomfield seems to be an extrapolation on the basis that he was Permindex major shareholder. According to the archives, he was holding the shares, but Georges Mantello was directing all shots. So, instead of seeing Bloomfield as the mythological engineer of the crime of the century, I think searchers and historians should investigate Permindex as an organisation and look at all its ramifications. And this will point to others, such as Mantello, that may have play a more significant part than Bloomfield. Maurice, Major Bloomfield was detailed into the FBI as the contracting (recruitment) agent for it's counterespionage Division Five. As late as 1963 he was still a top official in Division Five. In 1963 Bloomfield was also a top official of British Special Operations Executive (SOE). He was also President and Chairman of the Board of Permindex. And Permindex was the apparatus used to assassinate John Kennedy as well as their repeated assasination attempts against Charles De Gaulle. You cannot be serious with your claim that Bloomfield is innocent of running an off shore assassination bureau for the British.

Terry, I think Maurice is arguing that Bloomfield himself, knowing of such accusations, ordered his papers released and open to the public so that it can be shown that he was not the Mastermind of the Dealey Plaza Operation. I think it is a great approach though for some reason I think the beauracrats are too pigheaded to understand that. While the eventual release of the Bloomfield papers may exonerate him, it wouldn't do the same for the British Oligarchy, as they've done more dastardly deeds in the past. BK Bill, Let's see if I understand. Major Louis Mortimer Bloomfield knowing that he has been "linked" with the JFK assassination waits for his death some 21 years after the murder of Kennedy to donate his papers McGill University (??) where they sit for another 22-23 years waiting for some "researcher" to prove that he had nothing to do with the Kennedy murder? You might want to lay off the conspiracy books

Thank you for all documents related to Louis Mortimer Bloomfield and Permindex. What I don't understand is why you think these documents prove that Bloomfield was not the architect of the Kennedy assassination? French Intelligence identified Permindex as the entity conduiting money for the attempted assassination of Charles De Gaulle. They were also linked to the murder of Italian industrialist Enrico Mattei. Jim Garrison had it right when he arrested Permindex director Clay Shaw for conspiracy. Permindex carried out the assassination of John F. Kennedy on orders from the British Oligarchy.

Thank you for the link. The important sections include the following: The below table shows ownership statistics as of 31st December 2009, as taken from the BP official website. As you can see it shows that UK ownership of BP is only marginally larger than US ownership. One large US investor could complete the swing. The simple fact is that BP Plc is NOT a British company, at least no more than it is an American company. It has effectively been Anglo-American since a 1998 merger with Amoco. Apparently BP employees some 96,000 permanent members of staff for the day-to-day operation of the business, of which 10,000 are British and 24,000 of them are American. Benefical Owners Of BP Percentage Shares United Kingdom (40%) United States (39%) Rest of Europe (10%) Rest of World (7%) Miscellaneous (4%) Another important section: Only 8 of the 126 people working on the Deepwater Horizon were BP employees. BP only held a 65% share in the well, Anadarko held 25%. Anadarko are a Texas based oil production company with 4000 employees. The rig itself was owned and operated by an American firm, Transocean. They have been questioned with regards to possible understaffing. On the night of the disaster there were just 18 employees on the rig, lower than any other retained record. None of these were engineers, electricians, subsea supervisors or mechanics. The failed 'blow out preventer' was made by another American firm - Cameron. The cement work carried out which was supposed to 'seal' the well was carried out by yet another American firm, Halliburton - once run by Dick Cherney. Before the Gulf of Mexico disaster, ExxonMobil was the worst oil-spiller in US history. So, Americans, before being so quick to judge this not-very-British Company, consider where the liability should perhaps lay? If BP is brought down by the unwise Obama and a subservient witch hunt, consider the impact on your own pensions, your own unemployment rates, your own insurance premiums, and perhaps the accountability of your own fully American owned corporations in this unfortunate fiasco. ++++++++++++++++++++++ British elites use USA and Canadian companies as "fronts" for their real power. Unless there is something odd going on (like a takeover/abortion funding issue) 5.5 to 6% of total voting stocks vote. You need only 3.1% of voting stock (not non-voting common stock) to control in most cases. Morgan is considered a British company by many. POINT TWO On the internet there are claims that are emails from BP to Transocean and Halliburton ordering them to do unsafe things at the rig. POINT THREE see http://www.prisonplanet.com/bp-aware-of-cracks-in-oil-well-two-months-before-explosion.html sg &&&&&&&&&&&&&& BTW IMHO people connected with Empire Trust/DeGloyer and McNaughton/clients of Doyle Smith and Doyle/Locke & Purnell/Murchisons(many of their lawyers) and Permindex are all British elite connected and part of 11/22/63 POTUS kill. &&&&&&& Go break out your unpublished PD Scott Dallas Conspiracy and read section VII pg 17. Knowing Empire Trust is "B" you can look at the National American Bank in New Orleans and Tujague/Shert in a new way. Matter of fact re-read the whole book and think of US Life(ULTRA DEEP NARCOTICS) and Empire Trust are under "B" influence. sg (the Murchisons had dealing with the Old Suez Canal Company (when it had "B" connections) and Empire Trust and the "B" Kirby family)((your Dallas work speaks of Tommy Corcoran he is connected to BINNS and US Life) US LIFE had deep OSS connection)) Thanks Steve. JP Morgan is the most British of the Wall Street banks. In 1984 JP Morgan issued an internal memo "Rethinking Glass Steagall" to eliminate banking regulations enacted by our anti British Free Trade President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Alana Greenspan who fathered the multi trillion dollar derivatives market(now collapsing) during his tenure as Fed Chairman was an officer with JP Morgan at the time Morgan started the drum beat to eliminate Glass Steagall. We all know that Greenspan was knighted by the Queen for ripping up the Constitution. QUOTE: Charles Geisst, Professor of Finance at Manhattan College, has recounted how Greenspan undermined the Glass-Steagall Act first as a JP Morgan director and then as Chair of the Federal Reserve: When he [Greenspan] was a director of J.P. Morgan & Company in the 1980s, Morgan produced a pamphlet called "Rethinking Glass-Steagall," in 1984, which he was obviously privy to and had contributed to…The pamphlet was advocating getting rid of the Glass-Steagall Act and the separation between commercial and investment banking, so that commercial bankers particularly could begin to underwrite corporate securities again, as they hadn't done since before 1933. [19] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=JPMorgan_Chase Watch Jeff Steinberg in this 18 minute interview titled "The Repeal of Glass Steagall. http://www.larouchepac.com/lpactv?nid=14878

For Immediate Release The Nuclear Option against British Sabotage in Our Gulf June 16—A new article by 21st Century Science & Technology editor-in-chief Laurence Hecht warns that use of a peaceful nuclear explosive may become the only available option to seal the damaged BP well in the Gulf of Mexico. Hecht describes how this would work and where it has been used before, and discusses the underlying cause of the Gulf oil crisis: the failure of the United States to go nuclear. You can read the full article here: http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles_2010/BP_nuclear-option.pdf'>http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles_2010/BP_nuclear-option.pdf 21st Century Science & Technology P.O. Box 16285 Washington D.Cl 20041 Tel 703-777-6943 Fax 703-771-9214 http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com

http://www.moneynews.com/StreetTalk/San-Diego-Consider-Bankruptcy/2010/06/17/id/362289?s=a l&promo_code=A17C-1 “It seems the grand jury report is looking to bust open the discussion about the irrevocable nature of pension obligations.” Ironically enough, while cities teeter on the verge of bankruptcy, municipal bond prices continue to rise. "The day of reckoning is here," Jeffrey Schoenfeld, chief investment officer of Brown Brothers Harriman, told the Wall Street Journal. "But municipal investors continue to act as if there's no default risk in municipal bonds." © Moneynews. All rights reserved.

Sure the House of Morgan is an American institution. In fact all of Wall Street is uniquely American in their outlook. Junius Spencer Morgan was born on April 14, 1813, in West Springfield, Mass. He grew up in Hartford, Conn., where his father was a prosperous merchant with diverse business interests. Morgan entered the business world as an apprentice merchant at the age of 16 before going to New York to learn banking. He then became a partner in various mercantile firms. A trip to Europe in 1853 decisively altered Morgan's business career and life. He met George Peabody, an American in London, and was invited to become a partner in his merchant-banking firm, founded in 1852, which facilitated the flow of British capital to America. Morgan moved to London in 1854 to take up his duties as junior partner. Peabody retired a decade later, and Morgan became director of the firm, whose name was changed to J. S. Morgan and Company. He also inherited the high standing of Peabody in England, an asset of incalculable value. That and his abilities enabled him to build the firm into the most important American banking company in Europe. Morgan himself became the most influential American banker in that part of the world. Morgan met Andrew Carnegie in 1869 and in business dealings with him in 1873 was able to be helpful. He also headed a syndicate which lent France money in 1870 to aid in the continuation of the Franco-Prussian War after a decisive French defeat. One writer has speculated that this was "possibly the greatest single coup organized by Junius Morgan … and the whole operation was a sensation in the financial world." Morgan, with his son as the manager, in 1879 sold in London a sizable block of the New York Central Railroad stock owned by William H. Vanderbilt. He financed Cecil Rhodes in the 1880s in his contest for control of the diamond market against Barney Barnato, who was supported by the banking family, the Rothschilds. Morgan died in Monte Carlo, where he usually wintered, on April 8, 1890. He can justifiably be regarded as the initiator of the house of Morgan, which was made so powerful and famous by his son, John Pierpont Morgan.

John, I think our late President Franklin Roosevelt would dispute your characterization of JP Morgan as an American institution. FDR described the likes of JP Morgan as the "American Tory" faction. Historically, the term Tory has been applied in various ways to supporters of the British monarchy The term was applied particularly to the isolated bands of guerrillas resisting Oliver Cromwell's nine-month 16491650 campaign in Ireland, who were allied with Royalists through treaty with the Parliament of Confederate Ireland, signed at Kilkenny in January 1649.[4] English Tories from the time of the Glorious Revolution up until the Reform Bill of 1832 were characterized by strong monarchist tendencies, support of the Church of England, and hostility to reform, while the Tory Party was an actual organization which held power intermittently throughout the same period. The term remains in occasional use to refer to the modern Conservatives that evolved from this party. And don't forget the genocide committed in Indian by the British East India company.

Who can forget the Kennedy family's involvement in the FBI sting of Hillary Clinton. Edward Kennedy's Brother in law Raymond Reggie was helping the FBI to entrap Hillary Clinton. The Kennedy family is not some squeaky clean group of liberal democrats. Look further at their involvement with the private security firm INTERTEL. Or their decades long association with NSA/ INTERTEL operative Walter Sheridan, of NBC White Paper fame. http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/04/24/hillary_clinton_aide_reportedly_taped/ Hillary Clinton aide reportedly taped Kennedy in-law said to aid the FBI By Michael Kranish, Globe Staff | April 24, 2005 WASHINGTON -- Senator Edward M. Kennedy's brother-in-law secretly taped at least one telephone conversation as part of an FBI investigation into a former aide to Senator Hillary Clinton, according to published reports. Raymond Reggie, a brother of Kennedy's wife, Victoria Reggie Kennedy, pleaded guilty Thursday on federal bank fraud charges in New Orleans. Further: A New Orleans political consultant who is Senator Kennedy's brother-in-law, Raymond Reggie, has been operating in Democratic circles for the last three years as an undercover informant for the FBI, sources close to the matter said yesterday. At a federal court hearing yesterday morning, Reggie, 43, who organized fund-raisers for President and Mrs. Clinton, pleaded guilty to two felony charges, bank fraud and conspiracy. Prosecutors described check-kiting and loan fraud schemes he operated involving three Louisiana banks, but they did not publicly detail his cooperation with the government. http://www.nysun.com/national/kennedy-relative-acted-as-informant-in-democrat/12645/ Reggie's role in taping the former Clinton aide for the FBI surfaced as a result of that plea, the reports said. The reports quoted unnamed sources as saying Reggie worked with the FBI in its investigation of former Clinton aide David Rosen. Reggie cooperated with the FBI in an effort to reduce his sentence, according to reports Friday in The Times-Picayune of New Orleans, the New York Post, and The New York Sun. Rosen has been under investigation on accusations of filing false campaign finance reports, stemming from a 2000 fund-raiser for Clinton in Hollywood. He was indicted last January on charges that he falsely reported that the fund-raiser cost $400,000, instead of the actual cost of the event, $1.2 million, according to an Associated Press report. Clinton herself is not a target of the investigation, according to The Times-Picayune. Reggie has been friendly with a number of prominent Democrats, including President Clinton. He has also contributed to the campaigns of former vice president Al Gore and Senator Mary Landrieu, a Louisiana Democrat, as well as Hillary Clinton's Senate campaign. Reggie's family has long been close to the Kennedy family. Edmund Reggie, the father of Ray and Victoria, was a key political supporter of President Kennedy. It was through that connection that Senator Edward M. Kennedy got to know Victoria, whom he married in 1992. Last year, Edmund Reggie, a retired Louisiana judge, came to Boston to help broker a deal related to the Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway, an effort lauded by Kennedy. The bank fraud case against Ray Reggie alleges that he defrauded one bank of $3.5 million, according to The Times-Picayune. The account of the unnamed sources quoted in the published reports could not be verified yesterday by the Globe. Spokesmen for Senators Kennedy and Clinton, and the lawyer representing Reggie, could not be reached for comment. © Copyright 2006 Globe Newspaper Company.

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY THE NUCLEAR OPTION AGAINST BRITISH SABOTAGE IN OUR GULF by Laurence Hecht June 13--It appears increasingly likely that recourse to use of a peaceful nuclear explosive (PNE), may become the only available option to seal the damaged BP well in the Gulf of Mexico, 41 miles off our coast. Such a measure can be carried out with virtually zero danger of radioactive release, according to experts, including Milo Nordyke, a former chief scientist on the U.S. Operation Plowshare program for peaceful use of nuclear explosives. A 10- to 15-kiloton nuclear device would be placed within 20 to 30 feet of the well bore, at a depth below 6,000 feet, where no danger of wave formation from deformation of the sea floor could occur. The explosion would produce a shock wave that would push rock horizontally against the well bore, sealing it shut. That would close the hole, well below the probable cracks that may exist in the upper 1,200-foot layer of mud and soft rock. In a worst-case scenario in which the well failed to seal, the minimal amount of radioactive material that might escape up the well would be so diluted upon mixing with seawater as to render it harmless. Smaller nuclear devices, carried by projectiles of a classified nature which could be injected directly down the well bore, are also possible. Whether or not it becomes necessary to use such a device, it is urgent that preparations be made now for such an eventuality. There is growing evidence that the well is releasing oil at a rate of 90,000 barrels per day or greater, while the likelihood of success of the relief wells has been called into question. Stratigraphic studies, design and building of the device, and preparations for deployment all take time, time which has been lost by the Administration policy of denial. Expertise in these matters resides among specialists at the Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos national laboratories. Such a program can be carried out only under U.S. government authority. The urgent need for preparing the nuclear option thus provides one more reason why BP must be expropriated under national security emergency measures, its records seized, and its top executives jailed and held for trial on crimes including the criminally negligent homicide in the death of 11 oil rig workers. That will require the removal of the British tool presently occupying the master bedroom at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. A greater challenge might arise, if BP actually drilled to 30,000 feet, or below, and is tapping into a deep formation at very high pressures (see below)--another reason why we must take over, and gain control of the situation. - The Other Nuclear - Apart from such immediately required measures, the unfolding crisis in the Gulf brings to the fore a more far-reaching, yet most urgent necessity. The underlying cause of the Gulf Oil Crisis has been our failure to go nuclear. Supporting the present world population of 6.8 billion persons at a decently human living standard cannot be accomplished with the present mix of energy and raw-material-extraction technologies. The widespread introduction of high {energy-flux-density} power sources, starting now with nuclear power, and moving on to controlled thermonuclear fusion, and later, to matter-antimatter reactions, is essential to ensuring our future survival. For now, nuclear power is the key to replacing our present dependence upon fossil-based fuels. The energy contained in 1.86 grams (0.07 ounces) of processed uranium is equal to 1,260 gallons of petroleum and 6.15 tons of coal. Comparing these ratios of energy output, per weight of fuel, provides an approximate sort of measure for the concept of energy flux-density. By such measure, the advantage of nuclear comes to 2.16 million to 1, as compared to oil, and 2.98 million to 1, as compared to coal. Mastery of the thermonuclear fusion reaction will allow us to raise those ratios by several orders of magnitude, and make manned interplanetary space flight a reality for coming generations. The temperature and energy flux-density of the nuclear fission reaction permits the production of cheap electrical power, and of industrial process heat needed for processing ore and the desalination of seawater. Nuclear power can also replace fossil fuels in transportation, eliminating completely the dependence upon imported oil and deep offshore drilling. The temperature and high energy-flux of a nuclear reaction permits us to economically separate water into its constituent atoms. The hydrogen so produced can be burned as a fuel, either directly, or by recombination in fuel cells. Synthetic hydrocarbon fuels and various types of hydrogen carriers, such as ammonia, may also be produced to supply specialized needs for liquid fuels. The abundant electricity produced by nuclear power will supply battery-powered vehicles, and more importantly, provide the power to a nationwide grid of magnetically levitated high-speed rail. To bring the present world population up to acceptable standards of living will require the production of at least 6,000 new nuclear power plants within the next generation. Wind and solar energy installations not only cannot meet that need, but cost more, in actual physical economic measure, than they contribute to an economy. A more precise definition of {energy flux-density} is transformative power. Beyond the already cited advantages, a nuclear reaction produces a change in the structure of the atomic nucleus such as will never occur in a windmill, solar cell, or oil-, gas-, or coal-fired power plant. The next phase of our economic development, the isotope economy, will involve the production of new materials, including those of varied isotopic composition, for use in industry, agriculture, medicine, and space colonization. We will get a start on this through our gear-up for mass serial production of nuclear plants, including new design types, such as the high-temperature gas-cooled reactors, integral fast-flux reactors which breed more new fuel than they consume, and similar proven designs. With the development of thermonuclear fusion reactors, other capabilities become possible. Mastery of the low-energy nuclear reactions (``cold fusion'') will also contribute to the isotope economy, adding new dimensions to our understanding of nuclear transmutations. The intentional suppression of that just-described economic future has been the central feature of British imperial policy over at least the past half century. The specifically stated intention of leading British figures, including Prince Philip, the late Lord Bertrand Russell, and former H.G. Wells collaborator Julian Huxley, has been to carry out a drastic reduction in human population, to fewer than 2 billion persons. - What Caused the Blowout? - Lacking nuclear power, the push to ever deeper drilling for oil and gas resources was inevitable. Whether the blowout of the Macondo well was due to the greed and utter incompetence of BP officials, or, as also appears possible, it was a willful act of sabotage, such an event was, in any case, inevitable, sooner or later. It may be that the blown-out BP well is not at the 18,000-foot depth cited in the company's public relations efforts, but at 30,000 feet, or that other deep wells in the vicinity have tapped into formations, known as oil migration channels, at this depth. There is evidence that the theory of Russian geologist Vladimir Kutcherov, according to which oil is continuously formed deep within the Earth's crust, at depths of 30,000 feet or greater, may have been secretly adopted by the oil cartel, at the same time that the theory was publicly discredited and dismissed. Under this theory, drilling on the cracks between continental plates, or in such formations as are found in much of the Gulf of Mexico, would tap into these rich reserves. Soviet oil and gas production may have already exploited such deep faults, possibly below 30,000 feet. Kutcherov, in collaboration with scientists from the Russian of Academy of Sciences, experimentally demonstrated the production of methane, and heavier hydrocarbons of the alkane series, from a mixture of calcium carbonate, iron oxide, and water, maintained at extremely high pressures and temperatures, such as are found deep within the Earth. The origin of deep oil would thus be abiogenic, confirming the earlier hypotheses of Alexander von Humboldt, Dmitri Mendeleyev, and Marcelin Berthelot. The biological signature found in oil is a result of dissolved organic matter in the abiogenic petroleum, according to the Russian-Ukrainian theory. The action of deep-dwelling life forms upon the already produced hydrocarbons may also play a part. The Soviet use of peaceful nuclear explosives for oil and gas exploration may have been operating on this view. This was the same program which pioneered the technique for sealing runaway gas-well fires, using small nuclear charges placed in slant wells which intersected the runaway well several thousand feet down. That program was successful in all its attempts, closing five wells and reducing pressure in a sixth, according to a report, published in 2000, by Milo Nordyke of Lawrence Livermore Laboratory. There is some indication that advanced thermal imaging techniques, using satellites, may have been carried out by U.S. government agencies, beginning in the 1980s, in an attempt to map these formations in the Gulf. It is possible that BP obtained access to that classified data for use in its Gulf exploration campaign. There is also indication that BP is presenting the public a Hollywood-like scenario of its operations on the sea floor. Engineering experts point out that the Cameron Blowout Preventer, the five-story tower which sits, or once sat, on the sea floor at the well outlet, was designed for a maximum pressure of 15,000 pounsd per square inch (psi), while the explosion appears to trained observers to have produced pressures in excess of 30,000 psi. In that case, the blowout preventer would have been damaged beyond functionality. The device we see in the live video streams may be a second blowout preventer, which is getting its oil by piping from the main well, or a nearby production facility. The main well may be completely open, according to some industry insiders. Thus the Macondo blowout may be the result of having struck into extremely high-pressure migration channels of deep oil. Or, there may be an element of willful sabotage in creating the disaster, directed by British interests against the United States. In either case, the time for expropriation, and preparation of the nuclear option, is now. <pa{The author is the Editor of }21st Century Science & Technology{. He can be reached at hecht3@verizon.net. ..

We know what happens to American Presidents when the British become angry with them Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley and JFK. QUOTE LAROUCHE: Yeah, well, the thing is, at this point, we have to assume that either the entire British establishment is hopelessly stupid, and incapable of finding its way to the toilet! SPANNAUS: Could be! LAROUCHE: Or else, there are elements of this sabotage, by BP against the United States, which is willful. Now, BP is, historically, from its first incarnation in one form or another, was the oil -- what happened, is the British Empire, in preparing for what it planned to be World War I -- and they pretty much got what they wanted -- at that point, they took a part of Turkey, because Turkey was in a weakened conditioned at that time. They took an area of Turkey, which is now called Kuwait, and adjoining areas. And they set up the British monarchy's private oil patch. This thing went through a number of evolutions, including the Arab Iranian Oil Company and so forth, but it was always the British monarchy itself which controlled it. And the purpose was to convert the capital combat ships of the British Navy from coal burning, to {oil burning}. That was the original purpose. And that succeeded in that respect: The British {did} develop capital ships, which were oil-burning rather than coal-burning. They oriented themselves to that more advanced technology, and then built what became the oil industry in the north, the Anglo-Dutch oil industry became a product of that process. So what we we're dealing with, we're dealing with, actually, the British royal family's, in the sense of the title of what the royal family does, the British royal family's personal control, which is BP. There are other things, because it's also the British-Dutch connection, which is part of the same thing. So, these two monarchies, typified in the recent past by the Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, and then also Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands: These two guys actually organized much of this stuff. And we're now going through, again, this same group is again organizing new kinds of horror shows for the world in general. So we have to recognize, on that kind of basis, and on the basis of what the Inter-Alpha Group is also, which is another part of the British Empire, we have to recognize that this force, that controls BP, as its own instrument, that this thing is attacking the United States people, and so forth. Therefore, are we not subjected to something tantamount to warfare against our nation and people? And what's the role of our President, who, apart from appearing like a reincarnation of the Emperor Nero on health-care and other policies, is also kowtowing, essentially to the British. He may attack Hayward and other people about BP! But the fact is, he's done everything to prevent the United States from launching the effective measures which this crisis would demand. So he's sitting there, and while he's talking, and talking about this and that, he is actually {blocking} what should be the United States defense {against} the implications of this oil crisis, this out-of-control oil crisis. And I think therefore, we have to say, something tantamount to a state of war exists between the British Empire, and most of the citizens of the United States, apart from a few people who kissing the bottom of some British this or that. So, I treat it {very} seriously. This is typical of the fact -- I don't think the United States is going to survive, unless we, very soon, boot this guy out of the Presidency! HOEFLE: Well, you have to wonder, given the fact that the British monarchy lost the fight at Copenhagen, and Obama was very much in support of the British monarchy at that point, if this might not be in some way a response to that defeat, to create a global crisis, environmental crisis. LAROUCHE: No. I don't think so. I don't think so. Because, I don't believe in event-driven history. I believe in policy-driven events. And therefore, the British determination to destroy the United States has been planned, it's been on the launching pad for a very long time. It's been the intention -- Look, go back a bit. Look how this works. And the problem with many of our people, citizens and even some in my own organization, is they think in short-term, hit-and-run operations. But when you're dealing with an empire, and the empire thinks in the long term -- the British Empire is not the people of the United Kingdom; it's an international financial power, it's an imperial financial power, which is the hands of a small group, held together around a rallying point of the British monarchy. Now this organization, ever since its foundation, back in the Seven Years' War, this organization has always proceeded with calculation, and they've proceeded with long-term calculation, and they've succeeded because their victims were always thinking in short terms. The victims were always thinking in terms of reacting to events! The British respond, as an empire does, to long-term planning. For example, how were we destroyed? The actual destruction of the United States, occurred when the British were confronted by the Presidency of John F. Kennedy. What did they do? Well, they first went after the steel industry, and John F. Kennedy beat them! Then, they wanted to get him into a war Southeast Asia, in Vietnam. What did they do? They pressed for it. Kennedy resisted; he had the backing of MacArthur, he was stubborn. And as long as he remained President, the United States was not going to the Indo-China War. So what did they do? The obvious thing, they killed the President, and later killed his brother, just to make sure they had safety in this thing. They intimidated and terrified Johnson, the Vice President who became President, and got him into that war. That war, in that form, went on in Indo-China for ten years. And between the time Kennedy was killed and the war was started, and ten years later, the United States was no longer the same. We had the developments, for example, the youth eruptions, the wild eruptions going into '68, all the things that happened were planned, consistent policy. And that's what they're doing now. These guys are out to destroy us. Many of our people who are foolish, are waiting for an event, a {casus belli}; well, the British laugh at that, because they function on a status situation, not a casus belli. What are they doing, for example, in Afghanistan? What the hell are we dong in Afghanistan? SPANNAUS: Getting killed!

http://www.larouchepac.com/node/14806 LaRouche: BP Actions In Gulf Are An Act of War Against the United States June 10, 2010 (LPAC)—"There is no question that the continuation of this problem in the Gulf, is expressly the warfare-like intention of the British Empire against the United States," charged Lyndon LaRouche on June 8. LaRouche was referring to the utter failure of British Petroleum to deal seriously with the consequences of its own murderous negligence in the case of the Deepwater Horizon drilling station—including its ongoing lies about the size of the leakage, as well as its failure to mobilize anywhere near the resources required to mitigate the damage. The British are effectively carrying out warfare against the United States, LaRouche said. In addition, "the President is a complicit traitor to the United States in this war." Obama's traitorous behavior is demonstrated, first and foremost, by the fact that he has left the handling of the crisis in the hands of the British imperial company, refusing to exercise the sovereign powers of the United States government to expropriate them, and to take over the operations to save the United States population from further devastation of their livelihood. Thus, by his failure to act, Obama has left the British criminal in charge of the crime scene, and subjected the American people to more destruction. Like the British agent he is, the President refuses to defend the United States against British depradations. "Remember, BP is the personal asset of the British monarchy," LaRouche added. "It's an imperial, Anglo-Dutch imperial entity." It is carrying out "a sabotage operation against the economy and people of the United States." The conclusion is clear: "This President must go, and must go now! He's unfit to be President, and those in elected office who support him, are not fit to be members of our government. They should git 'n scat, right now!" Printer-friendly version Send to friend Contribute Subscribe Membership Volunteer

Governance BP head office in St. James's, City of WestminsterThe Board Members are:[42] Carl-Henric Svanberg – Chairman Sir Ian Prosser – Non-executive director Byron Grote – Chief Financial Officer Andy Inglis – Chief executive, Exploration and Production Antony Burgmans – Non-executive director, board of Mauritshuis, AEGON, Unilever Cynthia Carroll – Non-executive director, CEO of Anglo American, also board of De Beers Sir William Castell – Non-executive director chairman of The Prince’s Trust George David – Non-executive director Tony Hayward – CEO/MD BP Worldwide Iain Conn George David vice-chairman of the Peterson Institute for International Economics Erroll Davis, board of General Motors and Union Pacific. Douglas J Flint, CBE director HSBC Dr DeAnne Julius, director of Chatham House

"Expropriate BP! Take over BP then use our nuclear option to solve the enviromental disaster in the Gulf. Crisis in the Gulf Part II. The nuclear option, then and now. http://www.larouchepac.com/lpactv?nid=14783

Walt, that is partly correct and partly incorrect. The "Palestinians" did have their chance at sovereignty and failed to sieze it for LACK OF EFFORT. It was their's for the "declaring" --which they declined to do. However, it is the Arab States (not necessarily the "Palestinians") who resent the existence of a Jewish State. This is one of the most important distinctions to be understood about this conflict. It really isn't "Israelis vs Palestinians" at all--and never has been! That is the "front operation" to conceal the real agenda, which is: Anti-Jews vs Jews. I know it sounds too simplistic, but--it is what it is. Anti-Jews are not the same as anti-semitic. Anti-semitic is a mis-nomer for anti-Jew. Well, that's not what I meant. I don't claim that the "Palestinians" are to blame. I think that, as "a people" they have no power because they have no cohesiveness. There are no "Palestinians" because there is no "Palestine" no matter that such a label has been assigned to non-Jewish settlers in that region. So, I don't think that they're to blame for their plight. However, their plight is not improved by any of the Arab States in the region. It is exacerbated without any mercy extended to them because they are being exploited for only one reason: the DESTRUCTION of the State of Israel. It has more than passing relevance. The first shot has been followed by the second, third, fourth, and fifth (plus) shots, so far. Israel has nothing in its CHARTER calling for the destruction of Arab States. However, several Arab States have such an order/goal contained in their CHARTER. That's right, calling for "the Jews to be driven into the sea..." Such things change the playing field considerably--as they should. I have seen no evidence of that, Walt. None. While I don't agree with every action they have taken, still none rise to that level--not by a long shot! Gas chambers? Ovens? Mass graves? -- not close... I have yet to see Israel attack a neighbor unprovoked! Never. The closest example--was when they blew up a Nuclear facility that would be capable of producing weapons in Syria. Yet, keep in mind, Syria has a sworn CHARTER to DESTROY Israel--so I can hardly call it "unprovoked" at all! Me too. ___________________________________________________________________________ I found a map which shows where Palestine had been prior to 1948. Here's the link. Map of Israel Israel was created in 1948, after UN Resolution 181 partitioned the territory of the British Mandate for Palestine into two states for Jews and Palestinian ... www.mideastweb.org/misrael.htm - Cached - Similar Show more results from www.mideastweb.org The land variously called Israel and Palestine at different times in history, is a small, (10,000 square miles at present) land at the eastern end of the Mediterranean Sea. During its long history, its area, population and ownership varied greatly. The present state of Israel formally occupies all the land from the Jordan river to the Mediterranean ocean, bounded by Egypt in the south, Lebanon in the north, and Jordan in the East. The recognized borders of Israel constitute about 78% of the land. The remainder is divided between land occupied by Israel since the 1967 6-day war and the autonomous regions under the control of the Palestinian autonomy. The Gaza strip occupies an additional 141 square miles south of Israel along the sea coast, and is mostly under the control of the Palestinian authority with small areas occupied by Israeli settlements. Prior to 1917, the territory that is now called Palestine and Israel was ruled by the Ottoman Turkish Empire, and included three sanjaks (districts). The name "Palestine," that was used by Roman and briefly by Arab rulers, was revived by the British, who received a mandate from the League of Nations to administer Palestine as a national home for the Jewish people. Israel was created in 1948, after UN Resolution 181 partitioned the territory of the British Mandate for Palestine into two states for Jews and Palestinian Arabs. The Arabs objected to the creation of the Jewish state and fought a war against it. The Arab side lost the war, and the Palestinian state never really came into being. The territory allotted to the Palestinian state by the UN partition resolution was taken over by Israel and Jordan. About 780,000 Palestinians became refugees. Beginning in 1993, the Oslo agreements promised gradual withdrawal of Israel from the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Palestinians were hopeful that this process would end in a state for them. However, the peace process was marred by terrorist attacks, Israeli proliferation of settlements and negotiations that seemed to lead nowhere. Following breakdown of the final status negotiations in the summer of 2000, riots erupted in September 2000 when Israeli right wing political leader Ariel Sharon paid a controversial visit to the temple mount, in the Al-Aqsa mosque compound, holy to Muslims.. Palestinians refused to accept the agreement offered by US President Clinton in December 2000, and violence continued at least until the beginning of 2005. Israel has reoccupied large parts of the territory it had ceded to the Palestinians in the West Bank during the Oslo peace process, and continues to build settlements on Palestinian land (click for map). Election of relatively moderate Mahmoud Abbas as Palestinian Authority President and the Israeli disengagement plan (withdrawal from Gaza and four West Bank settlements) offered new hope of peace. See Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Since Oslo Israel has a population of over 6.5 million, of whom about 14.5% are Muslims and about 3% are Druze or Christian. Most of the remainder are Jews. Per capita GDP is about $23,000 and literacy rates are over 95%. Life expectancy is over 75 years, and infant mortality about 7 per thousand, comparing favorably with Europe and North America. The Palestinian areas account for about 2,800 square miles of the total territory. They have a population estimated at about 3 million, per capita GDP of under $2,000, literacy rate of about 86% and infant mortality of 33 per thousand. More History Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Since Oslo See also -Palestine Ami Isseroff In a nutshell: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict News Views More Country Facts Population of Palestine before 1948 President Harry S. Truman and US Support for Creation of Israel The Palestinian Refugees Zionism Bibliography - Zionism Mandate Palestine Palestine & Palestinians Israel and Palestine Since 1918 Discussion Forum Copyright 2001 -2005, by MidEastWeb for Coexistence The above article is copyright by MidEastWeb and the author. Please tell your friends about MidEastWeb. Please forward these materials in e-mails to friends and link to this URL - http://www.mideastweb.org. You can print out materials for your own use or classroom use, giving the URL of MidEastWeb, without asking our explicit permission. Printed material should bear this notice: "Copyright by MidEastWeb for Coexistence R.A. - http://www.mideastweb.org All rights Reserved. " Reproduction in any other form - by permission only. Please do not copy materials from this Web site to your Web site. Map of Israel

Weizman at the Paris Peace Conference, 1919 Weizman was a leader of the Jewish delegation that presented the case for a Jewish homeland to the Allied leaders as they deliberated how to divide up former German and Ottoman possessions, although Britain and France had already staked their own claims in their private Agreement. At Paris, Weizman co-presented a Statement, together with a map of the proposed homeland. This clashed with the expectation of Faisal's Arab delegation that his state would include Palestine. The Jewish statement supported the creation of a mandate entrusted to Britain, pointing out that: The preference on the part of the Jews for a British Trusteeship is unquestionably the result of the peculiar relationship of England to he Jewish Palestinian problem. The return of the Jews to Zion has not only been a remarkable feature in English literature, but in the domain of statecraft it has played its part, beginning with the readmission of the Jews under Cromwell II manifested itself particularly in the 19th century in the instructions given to British Consular representatives in the Orient after the Damascus Incident; in the various Jewish Palestinian projects suggested by English non-Jews prior to 1881; in the letters of endorsement and support given by members of the Royal Family and Officers of the Government to Lawrence Oliphant; and finally, in the three consecutive acts which definitely associated Great Britain with Zionism in the minds of the Jews, viz - The El Arish offer in 1901; the East African offer in 1903, and lastly the British Declaration in favor of a Jewish National Home in Palestine in 1917. Moreover, the Jews who have gained political experience in many lands under a great variety of governmental systems, whole-heartedly appreciate the advanced and liberal policies adopted by Great Britain in her modern colonial administration.[1] The newly formed League of Nations ratified the British Mandate for Palestine on July 24, 1922. The mandate required Britain to "secure the establishment of the Jewish national home" while at the same time "safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion."[2] Palestinian Arabs, Christian as well as Muslim, had started to protest against the Mandate since the Peace Conference had ended. The Hashemite family of Emir Hussein had expected Syria and Palestine, as well as continuing to rule the Hejaz, and briefly controlled the former and the latter. However, France had laid its stake on Syria and Hussein was forced into exile by Prince Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud who founded Saudi Arabia. In 1921, the British made Emir Faisal King of Iraq, and his brother, as-Sayyid Abdullah king of Trans-Jordan. Both territories were carved from out of their mandated portion of the former Ottoman Empire. Sykes-Picot Agreement http://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/Sykes-Picot_Agreement It is accordingly understood between the French and British Governments--- 1. That France and Great Britain are prepared to recognize and protect an independent Arab State or a Confederation of Arab States in the areas (A) and ( marked on the annexed map, under the suzerainty of an Arab chief. That in area (A) France, and in area ( Great Britain, shall have priority of right of enterprise and local loans. That in area (A) France, and in area ( Great Britain, shall alone supply advisers or foreign functionaries at the request of the Arab State or Confederation of Arab States. 2. That in the blue area France, and in the red area Great Britain, shall be allowed to establish such direct or indirect administration or control as they desire and as they may think fit to arrange with the Arab State or Confederation of Arab States. 3. That in the brown area there shall be established an international administration, the form of which is to be decided upon after consultation with Russia, and subsequently in consultation with the other Allies, and the representatives of the Shereef of Mecca. 4. That Great Britain be accorded (1) the ports of Haifa and Acre, (2) guarantee of a given supply of water from the Tigris and Euphrates in area (A) for area (. His Majesty's Government, on their part, undertake that they will at no time enter into negotiations for the cession of Cyprus to any third Power without the previous consent of the French Government. 5. That Alexandretta shall be a free port as regards the trade of the British Empire, and that there shall be no discrimination in port charges or facilities as regards British shipping and British goods; that there shall be freedom of transit for British goods through Alexandretta and by railway through the blue area, whether those goods are intended for or originate in the red area, or ( area, or area (A); and there shall be no discrimination, direct or indirect against British goods on any railway or against British goods or ships at any port serving the areas mentioned. That Haifa shall be a free port as regards the trade of France, her dominions and protectorates, and there shall be no discrimination in port charges or facilities as regards French shipping and French goods. There shall be freedom of transit for French goods through Haifa and by the British railway through the brown area, whether those goods are intended for or originate in the blue area, area (A), or area (, and there shall be no discrimination, direct or indirect, against French goods on any railway, or against French goods or ships at any port serving the areas mentioned. 6. That in area (A) the Baghdad Railway shall not be extended southwards beyond Mosul, and in area ( northwards beyond Samarra, until a railway connecting Baghdad with Aleppo via the Euphrates Valley has been completed, and then only with the concurrence of the two Governments. 7. That Great Britain has the right to build, administer, and be sole owner of a railway connecting Haifa with area (, and shall have a perpetual right to transport troops along such a line at all times. It is to be understood by both Governments that this railway is to facilitate the connexion of Baghdad with Haifa by rail, and it is further understood that, if the engineering difficulties and expense entailed by keeping this connecting line in the brown area only make the project unfeasible, that the French Government shall be prepared to consider that the line in question may also traverse the polygon Banias-Keis Marib-Salkhab Tell Otsda-Mesmie before reaching area (. 8. For a period of twenty years the existing Turkish customs tariff shall remain in force throughout the whole of the blue and red areas, as well as in areas (A) and (, and no increase in the rates of duty or conversion from ad valorem to specific rates shall be made except by agreement between the two Powers. There shall be no interior customs barriers between any of the above-mentioned areas. The customs duties leviable on goods destined for the interior shall be collected at the port of entry and handed over to the administration of the area of destination. 9. It shall be agreed that the French Government will at no time enter into any negotiations for the cession of their rights and will not cede such rights in the blue area to any third Power, except the Arab State or Confederation of Arab States without the previous agreement of His Majesty's Government, who, on their part, will give a similar undertaking to the French Government regarding the red area. 10. The British and French Governments, as the protectors of the Arab State, shall agree that they will not themselves acquire and will not consent to a third Power acquiring territorial possessions in the Arabian peninsula, nor consent to a third Power installing a naval base either on the east coast, or on the islands, of the Red Sea. This, however, shall not prevent such adjustment of the Aden frontier as may be necessary in consequence of recent Turkish aggression. 11. The negotiations with the Arabs as to the boundaries of the Arab State or Confederation of Arab States shall be continued through the same channel as heretofore on behalf of the two Powers. 12. It is agreed that measures to control the importation of arms into the Arab territories will be considered by the two Governments. I have further the honour to state that, in order to make the agreement complete, His Majesty's Government are proposing to the Russian Government to exchange notes analogous to those exchanged by the latter and your Excellency's Government on the 26th April last. Copies of these notes will be communicated to your Excellency as soon as exchanged. I would also venture to remind your Excellency that the conclusion of the present agreement raises, for practical consideration, the question of the claims of Italy to a share in any partition or rearrangement of Turkey in Asia, as formulated in article 9 of the agreement of the 26th April, 1915, between Italy and the Allies. His Majesty's Government further consider that the Japanese Government should be informed of the arrangement now concluded

Hi Greg, I just wanted to copy and paste something from Col. Prouty, a letter exchange between you and him from Len's site, that I've kept in my files for years. It deals with some of the heavy hitters, and explains how and why Korea, and Vietnam were in the planning stages as far back as The Teheran Conference in October 1943. I've taken the liberty of "bolding" the names, and color highlighting the parts that seemed relevant to me at the time. Thanks go out to Len Osanic, and to you, Greg. Ter Here it is: An interesting reply from Col. Prouty Reply to Greg Burnham This is the response to the good paper we have received from Greg Burnham on the subject of Marine Colonel Jack Hawkins, and other special operations matters TO: Gregory Burnham: You ask about Col. Jack Hawkins. I certainly do remember him mostly from the Bay of Pigs days. I have looked in a 1963 Pentagon telephone book and find him listed for that year. He was the tactical man we got from the Marines to plan the landing of the Anti-Castro unit and train them. I knew that he was against the project, as many of us were for purely tactical reasons. These Cubans in the USA were not military trained and the restrictions placed upon the project were too severe. Actually Bissell's comment to Hawkins about "air support ready to strike, if needed" was accurate. We had provided the rebels with 16 B-26's that I had put through a transition project in Arizona. They had 8 50 Cal. machine guns in each nose. (With this is mind,) Castro had only 10 capable combat aircraft Kennedy ordered them all to be destroyed before the landing. On Sat., a.m., May 15th they were attacked and all of 7 were destroyed. We scoured Cuba with U-2 reconnaissance and found that three jets that Castro had left were all that he had; but these armed jets could easily shoot down the B-26's. Therefore Kennedy made it very clear on May 16th that the landing could not take place until the Rebel's B-26's had totally destroyed the last three Castro jets...ON THE GROUND. (If this had been done, as ordered by the President then the 16 bombers could have supported the invasion and the Cuban rebels would have had a more than even chance to beat Castro's ground troops and their equipment by bombardment. Bissell had not lied to JFK; but McGeorge Bundy called Gen. Cabell, then Deputy Director of the CIA and told him that the bombing must not take place until the invaders had landed at the Bay of Pigs. It was about 3:30 am then and Cabell was having trouble locating Rusk to get his opinion. Of all things, Allen Dulles was out of the country. That is the basic mistake. I won't carry it further here. All of the details are in my book "The Secret Team" and in my new CD-ROM. They will tell you the rest of the story. I can send you the CD if you want ($34.95) You have printed an interesting line: "there was a high motivation for the Agency to compromise JFK politically." The story is more than that. In late Dec. 1959, when Castro and his rebels were marching into Havana, a group of us in the Special Ops business were ordered into an office. There we were told that if Castro did take over Havana we were going to be ordered to form a rebel force. Recall this was under Eisenhower and Nixon. Well no call came and after midnight when we had the office TV on and were watching the "New Years" celebrations we were told we could go home. Castro was the new ruler of Cuba. Later in the spring of 1960, Castro came to New York City to speak at the United Nations. Following that speech, he went to Washington and had a meeting with Nixon. After that meeting, Nixon commented with reporters saying, more or less, that if Castro was not a Communist he was close to it. That set the tone for the Eisenhower people to order the CIA to prepare to over-throw his Government. A little later a team from the CIA came to my office in the Pentagon (At that time I was the Special Operations officer there for the Air Force). They asked me if we had an airfield that could be used for a base to train aircrews and to get aircraft for them for a Cuban anti-Castro rebel group. This started it all. During this period summer of 1960, we were coming up on a presidential election time and JFK nominated by the Democrats. The Republicans were certain that they would win; so they began to put all the new, and huge appropriations into the next year for "President" Nixon; but in a surprise he was not elected and I never saw such emotional feelings as then. I was then working in the office of the Secretary of Defense, in the Office of Special Operations. In the halls of the Pentagon you could hear the dislike of the new President; and the realization of the fact that JFK had inherited billions of dollars of procurement money for high cost items such and the $6 or $7 billion dollar TFX aircraft buy. In one tactical move the Republicans changed the Anti-Castro plans from small over-the-beach and air drop tactics to a major invasion. In no time they had built up a 3,000 man force that had to be trained and equipped, and dumped it all in JFK's lap. They did not realize that JFK already knew the Anti-Castro leaders who had been guests of the Kennedy's at their big Florida resort home. One day I was sent to the Senate Office building to a certain room number to pick up four men and have them driven to the Pentagon and to the Secretary of Defense, Gates. The office turned out to be Senator Kennedy's office and the four men were the leaders of the Cuban Exile group: Artime, Varona, Mendonca and one more. Here it was only early summer of 1959, and JFK had yet be nominated for the Presidency by the Democrats, and he was entertaining them in his family's winter home in West Palm Beach and in his Senate office building. People did know how well JFK knew them. The most influential debate he had before the election with Nixon was the third, when they debated the Cuban Problem. Kennedy just made Nixon look ridiculous; and that debate alone perhaps won for JFK his narrow managing in the election. Shortly after the election a team of top level CIA officials came to my office and requested that I get base facilities for at least 3,000 Cuban exiles, and enough aircraft for them. They built the Cuban force immediately by those numbers and then with Kennedy's inauguration they dumped it all in his lap. By April 1961 the invasion plan had been worked out under the leadership of Jack Hawkins. It was all predicated on the fact that the Invasion Force would destroy all of Castro's aircraft BEFORE the invasion took place. This was the plan that was briefed to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, approved by them and taken to Kennedy. Kennedy said little about it except on Sunday, April 17th he finally approved the invasion with the strict proviso that all of Castro's jets would be destroyed; or the invasion force would not be landed on the beach. We all understood that. For some reason, at 9:30PM McGeorge Bundy called Gen. Cabell, Deputy Director of the CIA and told him that the invasion was off until the men were on the beach. B-26 invasion planes that had been put on stand-by in Nicaragua were not to be released until dawn. This of course was against Kennedy's orders, because the three jets that Castro had could easily destroy them. Gen. Cabell left the office in an attempt to locate Sec. of State Rusk. He knew that order had to be changed. While he was doing that the hours passed, and I got a telephone call from the air commander in Nicaragua who was all upset. He knew if the B-26's were not there by dawn the jets would take off and down them. I could hear the B-26 engines running in the background. I made many calls around Washington to get help with this essential problem. As the clock kept running it became too late for the B-26's to arrive before dawn while the T-33 jets were on the ground. Meanwhile the troops were landing at the Bay of Pigs. The whole thing was a disaster...and it was not Kennedy's fault. The last order he had given that day was "The B-26's must destroy the jets before they take off or the invasion must be cancelled," This was the military approved plan and Kennedy's orders. You are correct also about the Power's U-2. That flight was made to fail by a shortage of the proper fuel. The engine stopped when Powers was about one half way to his goal in Norway. He did not use his parachute, because he could fly the plane to the ground. That also caused the important Paris Conference on May 1, 1960 that had been planned between Eisenhower and Khrushchev to be cancelled As you may know, the Korean War and the Vietnam War were both planned at the Teheran Conference in Oct 1943. When the Japanese surrendered on Sept 2, 1945 the enormous supply of equipment and arms-stockpiled for 500,000 men, were divided in half and one half was sent to Korea and the other half to Vietnam. In later years both were used in wars in which the U.S. was heavily involved and both Presidents were blamed for them. This created especially opposition against Kennedy in the year 1963, and led to his death. Kennedy had already issued Presidential Directives during Oct 1963 to the effect that 1000 American personnel would be out of Vietnam by Christmas 1963, and that all American personnel would be out of Vietnam by the end of 1965. This was the final action that caused his assassination by the powers that wanted to continue the costly, and profitable... to them... warfare in Vietnam. You are correct about the Bay of Pigs landing disaster, except for the details that the Cuban rebels were equipped with armed B-26 's; and if used while Castro's jets were still on the ground on the morning o April 18th that would easily been destroyed. Then the landing force would have had, little or no real opposition and they would have defeated Castro. The JCS [Joint Chiefs of Staff. My emphasis. TM] and Kennedy had both ordered that if the jets were not destroyed there would be no invasion. Kennedy had ordered that no "active duty USA aircraft would be used in that invasion". This was a firm order that we all understood. You are correct that Kennedy's NSAM #263 would have had us out of Vietnam for sure. I was one of its writers. I know how determined he was, but that was Oct 11,1963. Kennedy was dead on Nov 22, 1963. We all can see the connection. L. Fletcher Prouty