SPY EYES

By Dr. Muzaffar Iqbal

On Friday, October 7, 2001, the greatest military power on earth launched a misnamed operation, Enduring Freedom. Ten years later, the country known as the graveyard of empires is indeed full of corpses. In addition, there are hundreds of parched orchards and hundreds of thousands of broken families. And, ironically, in this decade of killing, Kabul has become the hub of crisp business of all kinds—ranging from companies providing on-the-fly security to the old drug trade and everything in between. The interminable war goes on.

For some, the graveyard of foreign occupiers is still not full enough. The proverbial appetite of a certain class of Afghans rages on for more and more American dollars. Yet, no matter how much it spends, there is no victory in sight for the greatest power on earth. It cannot, however, see basic facts which everyone else can see; such is the blindness that comes with power. Instead of admitting the simple truth that 136,000 soldiers on ground, unprecedented bombing power, and billions of green bucks have achieved nothing, it keeps on blaming others for its terrible and miserable defeat: it is the lack of Afghan capacity to shoulder security; no, it is due to lack of enough training; no, no, actually, it is the terrorists hiding in Pakistan; rather, it is ISI.

The one not to be blamed are those who, along with the morally bankrupt leadership of the United Kingdom, embarked upon this shock and awe filled adventure in the wake of September 2001 attacks on the United States of America. At the start of their invasion, they had to buy ground forces (aka Afghan United Front), such was the state of their bravery! Their massive bombardment ousted the Taliban regime from power in Kabul and most of Afghanistan in a matter of weeks, but most of the senior Taliban leadership escaped and when they installed a puppet who was already on their payroll, they called it a victory; democracy had arrived in Afghanistan on the wings of B-52 bombers. Then they had their other puppet—the United Nations—create a so-called “International” Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and finally, NATO assumed control of ISAF in 2003, so that the United States of American could devote all itsmilitary power to another terrible crime: invasion of Iraq.

By the time mission was accomplished in their books, the Afghan resistance led by Taliban was just beginning to gather momentum which would soon become a nightmare for the self-proclaimed victors. By 2006, ISAF was a defeated force in southern Afghanistan. The Taliban-led counter offensive had made deep inroads into the new security system installed by the occupiers and by 2009, even Kabul was not secure anymore. This called for a new strategy; thus on December 1, 2009, Barack Obama announced that he would deploy an additional 30,000 soldiers over a period of six months. This surge was supposed to produce the final result in order for US to start a withdrawal in year 2014. As expected, it did nothing; the equation remained as it was.

Since the invasion, Afghanistan has been technically under the rule of a man from nowhere. On January 26, 2010, this man, who is still welcomed in the Western capitals with red carpets, announced at the International Conference on Afghanistan in London that he intends to reach out to the top echelons of the Taliban (including Mullah Omar, Siraj Haqqani and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar) with a peace initiative. Last week, he gave up that attempt. This closes any possibility of an exit route for the United States in a war that became the United States’ longest war on June 2010 (that is, if the US involvement in the Vietnam War is taken to start on August 7, 1964).

Ten years after launching operation Enduring Freedom, the United States is fully trapped in the rugged land where invaders have always come on their own, but from where no one has ever returned without humiliation and defeat. Yet, this axiomatic truth is hard to swallow for the custodians of the greatest military power on earth; the extremists in Washington DC cannot admit that the United States of America can ever be defeated. Yet, even for them, the cost of the war is becoming a prohibitive factor. A March 2011 Congressional Research Service report said that following the Obama surge announced in 2009, Defense Department spending on Afghanistan has increased 50%, from $4.4 billion to $6.7 billion a month. During that time, troop strength has gone from 44,000 to 84,000, and it is expected to be at 102,000 for fiscal year 2011; the total operational cost for Afghanistan from the beginning of the conflict in 2001 through 2006 only slightly exceeds the amount spent in 2010 alone—$93.8 billion. The projected total cost relating to Afghanistan in fiscal year 2011 is expected to be $118.6 billion.

Now it is not a question of whether or not they would depart, but that of when. The foreign soldiers have done what they could to destroy the country. Hardly a day has passed during the last decade without heinous crimes being committed against civilians in remote village of Afghanistan, but there is no one who is interested in gathering evidence and bringing to justice those who have perpetuating these crimes against humanity. It is true that Britain’s militarypolice have investigated almost 100 incidents in which UK forces have been accused of killing or wounding civilians in Afghanistan, as recent press reports from UK indicate, but none of these investigations has ever produced horror in British public; no one has camped in front of 10 Downing street and the establishment has always treated these cases as exception to the good work being done in the nether land. The British dossier contains a series of incidents in which soldiers shot or bombed civilians; in once incident, British soldiers killed a man who was praying in a field, in another, a man was shot collecting grass and rocks. Likewise, when the news about the American “Kill Team” surfaced in September 2009, and it became known that groups of American soldiers were killing civilians for fun and dismembering their bodies to keep bones and skulls as trophies, it did not bother anyone in America; the killing goes on.

Wall Street and London hedge fund tycoon George Soros sent a signal to his minions and infiltrators when he stated that he sympathized with the Occupy Wall Street movement. Soros's statement dovetailed with David Plouffe, President Obama's Senior Adviser, making contact with certain newly-minted "leaders" of the "Occupy" movement across the United States to ensure that they are as politically-manipulated by the White House as a vast majority of "Tea Party" members have been manipulated by senior Republican Party officials and the billionaire Koch Brothers.

Essentially, Soros and the Koch Brothers have ensured that the anti-corporate state movement in the United States, represented by the Democratic and Republican parties, remains split between artificially-created "left" and "right" camps and fractures into even smaller competing blocs within the two major camps.

The "divide and conquer" strategy is frustrating real attempts to mobilize the American people against Wall Street and lobbyist-occupied Washington.

Plouffe and his operatives want to ensure that the "Occupy" street protests generically call for "jobs," "public education," "Social Security," "health care," and the "environment," as long as they do not take on an anti-Obama tone. Essentially, protesters can call for "jobs," and the Soros-funded manipulators will claim on the slight-expanding main stream media coverage of the "Occupy" protests that the protesters want the Congress to approve Obama's jobs bill. When the protesters call for "health care for all," the Soros opinion manipulators will tell the main stream media that the protesters are against any repeal of "Obamacare."

This campaign to infiltrate the "Occupy" movement has all the fingerprints of Cass Sunstein, the head of the White House Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs. Sunstein has pioneered in the use of social networking and media technologies to engage in "cognitive infiltration" of anti-government movements. Now that the White House and Soros are engaged in joint damage control, Sunstein's policies are being applied throughout the main stream and social media. One meme that has been spread is that the protesters lack "goals" and a "single voice."

Gawker.com is reporting that now entering the scene is the top-shelf Manhattan public relations firm Workhouse Publicity, whose clients include Saks Fifth Avenue and Mercedes-Benz, hardly firms that would sympathize with unemployed protesters, which has pro bono started to send out press releases to the corporate media on behalf of the "Occupy" movement.

At the progressive Democratic "Take Back the American Dream" conference in Washington, the "Occupy" movement was being hailed by many of the same groups that are funded, some to almost 100 percent, by Soros and his affiliated tax-free contrivances, including the Open Society Institute/Foundation and Tides Foundation. WMR learned that Plouffe was in contact with many of the organizations involved in the progressive conference to ensure that anti-Obama rhetoric was tamped down. The move succeeded with anti-Obama feelings only being discussed by union and other activist rank-and-file attendees and not by any of the speakers who represented such Soros-supported conference sponsors as Center for American Progress, Media Matters, MoveOn.org, and Netroots Nation.

Soros, working with the Obama White House, has called into service veterans of popular movement catalytic and infiltration movements, including "themed revolution" and social media uprisings, in Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, Libya, Iran, Ukraine, Serbia, Kyrgyzstan, Georgia, Lebanon and other countries. The "Arab Spring" backfired on Soros and his allies because the infiltrators could not guarantee the majority of the protesters would be pro-West, pro-capitalist, and ambivalent on Israel.

The major marching orders for these infiltrators is to take over the "leadership vacuum" of the "Occupy" movement and steer it into voicing support for Obama's pro-Wall Street policies without the protesters, themselves, unaware that they are supporting the status quo. The strategy is to ensure that no new and unrecognized leaders appear from within the movement, whether from union or political rank-and-file ranks. Leaders who are not already known quantities and who might resist control by political and financial interests will be eclipsed by those who have been on the Soros payroll for years.

The only way for the Occupy movement to ensure its independence is to begin fashioning protest signs that read: "SOROS IS WALL STREET!" and "OBAMA – OWNED AND OPERATED BY WALL STREET!"

One can safely say that current ruling Pakistani elite including political, civil, business and military have sold Pakistan as much as for roughly $8 billion worth of assets abroad. This rough estimate is based on the available figures of two leading figures in Pakistani politics Nawaz Sharif & Brothers Limited and Zardari & Co Limited who have properties and assets abroad mainly in the USA, UK, Europe and else where.

The others are Chaudhry brothers of PML-Q, ANP leader Asfandyar Wali, Rehman Malik and others also have assets abroad. British national and self exiled MQM-A leader Altaf Hussain is also part of political sharks in terms of assets abroad.

The foreign assets of other politicians like Imran Khan and religious parties are not yet reported. But one can not rule anything out. One thing is common among almost all Pakistani politicians and Generals is that all of them have their children or grand children living, studying abroad with foreign nationalities or married to foreign nationals. Hypercritically those who shout the loudest against the US have send their sons and daughters their too.

There is another class who has assets abroad and that is members of civil, military establishments and corrupt business elite. They are the protectors of the assets of these politicians. They teach them the tricks of ‘sophisticated bank robberies’, wiping out their bank loans, taking commissions from international firms and safely depositing them abroad. There is a tiny minority in Karachi, who is ready to serve any one and every one in terms of money laundering, playing with the currency exchange rates and provides help in the flight of capital out of Pakistan. They place their members on high positions in the disguise of ‘great community workers’ but in actual fact these people are responsible for funding terrorism and gang warfare in Karachi to all sides. They act as a bank for enemies of Pakistan. Their media channels follow the lines of the enemies of Pakistan in media and psychological warfare. They are the champions of flourishing of ‘black economy’ in Pakistan. That is why we find them in almost each and every financial scandal in the known memory of Pakistani corruption.

Most of the above got these properties and assets by robbing Pakistan and selling its sovereignty. The so called business community of Karachi is at the fore front in facilitating the flight of capital abroad and later investments in their projects. They are in the ‘gold circle’ of the current regime and so called elite.

They are the real gangsters and worst than target killers. After reading most of JIT (Joint Investigation Team) reports of target killers from Karachi one can safely say these are the poor people living in deprived areas killing around innocent people on the orders of shady elite living in posh areas with guards in big mansions. One can find this so called business community in all shady deals and working as bank for any one and every one especially the nasty neighbours.

In London they have readymade business plans for Pakistani crooks and cons with money. Some of them regularly attend religious gatherings and give large sums in charity to get credibility among the clerics. Without knowing the source of the money some clerics do special prayers for them. Some of them are notorious for frequently doing ‘bankruptcies’, insolvencies as well as running special religious TV channels. Well money can buy you anything? That is how they get their people placed on the influential positions with access to sensitive information.

This is the small minority of people has held Pakistan hostage to the foreigners just to protect their assets, properties, foreign nationalities and green cards. The freezing of assets of Arab leaders after the Arab spring in the past few months should be a wake up call and lesson for others? The lesson is your money is safer in your own country than a foreign plastic platinum card in your back pockets.   

Bashing of Pakistan’s military both as an institution and its generals for both right and wrong reasons is quite fashionable. Pakistan’s military and nuclear assets are the main target of the enemies and so called friends. Pakistan’s army is a voluntary force; everybody can join the army and may be after the 30 years of service an officer become a general, others retires as they go along their careers.

“The personal wealth of Pakistani generals is estimated at £3.5m a head’, according to The Guardian’s report, “The plot to bring back Benazir” published on 21st July 2007. 

The musical chair of politicians and military is harming the existence of Pakistan. The elite of Pakistan are institutionally corrupt and now become an organised ‘mafia’. Scandals of ‘steel mills’, sugar mills, cement; stock exchange has broken the records of previous corruptions. The culprits are from both opposition and ruling party.

Few years ago Zardari – Benazir Bhutto assets worth more than $ 2 billion according to Saifurahman and according to NAB figure are around $1.2bn [£ 830m]. Raja Bashir of The Pakistani National Accountability Bureau told The Guardian that, “Ms Bhutto has 26 bank accounts, 14 properties and total assets of one billion sterling pounds abroad. We are very glad that other countries are cooperating with us.”

On March 2, 2006, The Dawn newspaper reported that Benazir’s assets in Spain ‘unearthed’, The National Accountability Bureau claimed to have unearthed two more offshore companies and a villa in Spain owned by former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. A spokesman of the bureau said that judicial authorities of Spain had frozen assets of two Sharjah-based companies, Petroline and Tempo Global Gains, as well as their six bank accounts.

The villa worth half million Euros, allegedly owned by Ms Bhutto and her three children, Bilawal Zardari, Bakhtawar Zardari and Aseefa Zardari in Playas Del Arenal, Marbella, had also been seized by the High Court of the Valencia province, the NAB claimed. The NAB official said the Petroline Company was owned by Ms Bhutto, former FIA director-general Rehman Malik and Hassan Ali Jafferi and was established in 2000.

Nawaz Sharif had no connection with the feudal elite. His family moved from Jati Umra near Amirtasr and by 1960 they owned a few modest size factories – iron foundry, ice making, andwater pump factory.

Some how Mian Sharif managed to reach General Jill, as General Ghulam Jilani Governor of Punjab in General Zia’s regime He literally begged to give a break in politics to Nawaz Sharif. That is how he got into the military’s chicken farm and his factories started laying golden eggs.  Nawaz Sharif was appointed as finance minister of Punjab in 1983.  

In 1981 the family business group Ittefaq’s turnover was Rs. 337 million, but by 1987 it had soared to at least Rs. 2,500 million, that is according to the group’s own accounts. Within four years Ittefaq had become one of the wealthiest private industrial groups in Pakistan. ‘Hard work and grace of Allah’ explained Shabaz Sharif. One can imagine the miraculous growth in the assets of billions now. Investing in politics is not bad business at all in Pakistan.

According to Asia Week, Rehman Malik current Interior minister and key holder of Zardari’s safe produced 200-page report of MNS’s corruption. The secret document was leaked to the London-based Observer newspaper published details of alleged corruption involving the MNS and his family. According to the report, the Sharif family obtained loans from Pakistani state banks for business purposes and illegally converted the money into foreign exchange worth at least $66 million.

According to the report, the Sharif family acquired properties in London through two companies, Nescoll and Nielson Enterprises, registered in the British Virgin Islands and linked to a bank account in Lahore in the name of a fictitious person: Sulman Zia. The four flats in Avendale House in Park Lane are said to be worth at least £ 750,000, which worth millions of pounds keeping in view the current housing market in London. Not a bad deal!

What clinched the appointment for Nawaz Sharif as PM was a word to the presidency by the then ISI chief Lt. Gen Hamid Gull, that the army believed he was a better choice. General Hamid Gull now regrets his misjudgement. Subsequently the President also dismissed him. Nawaz Sharif’s problem was power: a pathological crass compounded by crass incompetence. Nawaz Sharif also seemed to be an ungrateful person. He did not feel any obligation towards president Ghulam Ishaq Khan, nor did he ever say ‘thank you’ to General Hamid Gull’.

The smart business minded ‘Abbaji’ late father of Nawaz Sharif invited General Asif Nawaz to his Lahore residence. After a fatherly ‘tête-à-tête’, Abbaji told the new army chief that he was like his son and requested him to take his two sons Nawaz and Shabaz under his wings: and also told the ‘children’ that they must follow and never disregard the General Sahib’s advice. And one last thing Abbaji said to the General Sahib, as he came to see him out off at the porch of his house, ‘my both children have a Mercedes each, and here is the key to yours; you are like a son to me.’

It didn’t work with General Asif Nawaz, he felt offended and therefore, instead of being able to buy the General, Nawaz Sharif had instead lost his respect too.

“I sent Ghaus Ali Shah to gave a lift home to General Musharaf and inform him that he has been deposed in absence said Nawaz Sharif while addressing a meeting in Manchester in July 2007. How intelligent was to promote engineering corp’s, Kashmiri, General Zia and decorate him with the badges purchased from Sadar Bazar Rawalpindi, MNS must be thinking in his spare time? 

Majeed Nizami editor of the Nawa-e-waqat a closest ally of Nawaz Sharif had to remark that they used to regard Benazir Bhutto as a ‘security risk’, it seemed Nawaz Sharif was a greater security risk. He was indeed the worst thing that had happened to Pakistan since independence. Whether it was money, morals or security, the nation found it difficult to trust him. His recent speech at SAFMA attracted lot of controversies. MNS don’t believe in reading and learning?

It is interesting that when Pakistani soldiers and Kashmiri freedom fighters were battling against the Indian army on the freezing heights of Kargil, Nawaz Sharif’s business proxies were selling sugar to India . India did not need to import any sugar and yet if Vajpayee had accepted to buy Pakistani sugar it was only to sweeten his relationship with Nawaz Sharif.

It is highly significant that when the Kargil crisis broke out both George Fernandez and K S Sudarshan, the former a socialist and India’s defence minister and the later leader of BJP militant wing RSS themselves exculpate Nawaz Sharif of any blame. If the Indians were trying to protect Nawaz Sharif, they must have had very good reasons to do so. It is this selfish and opportunist behaviour that made these leaders make decisions against the interests of Pakistani state? Take the example of US aid to Pakistan and kind of work these people agree to do in return.  

More recently angry and sarcastic attitude of Nawaz Sharif against the military is deplorable, when thousands of soldiers have lost their lives while his sons and nephews are doing multi million dollar businesses abroad. Pakistani politicians including Nawaz Sharif can only have moral high ground on others once they prove themselves. That they look after Pakistan’s national interests more than their personal wealth hidden abroad. They don’t take decisions which harm the interests of Pakistan just because their assets could be frozen abroad.

The US aid to Pakistan has actually proven to be a ‘rip off and fraud’ by financial terrorists of Wall Steers.  There is no doubt that US has caused more than $70 billion losses to Pakistan since 2001. On the other hand only aided/lend or both $22.87 billion from 1950 to 2010. Most part of that aid actually never arrived in Pakistan as it was paid to your defence and military complexes back in the USA.  This rip off could only be possible if people mentioned above have prostituted themselves for personal interests.  

Total US Aid: $22.87 billion in 60 years & losses to Pakistan: $60 billion
1950-1964     2.5bn economic and 500 m military aid
1965-1979     2.55 billion economic and 26 million military
1980-1990     5 billion military and economic aid
1991-2000     429 million economic and $5.2 million military
2001-2009     3.6 billion economic and 9 billion military
2009-2015     7.5 billion approved under Kerry Lugar Bill aid mostly non military ($1.5 billion per year)

Almost all the regimes of Pakistan have been prostituting with the enemies by deliberately harming the state of Pakistan and following IMF agenda e.g. gas and electric shortages to destroy the industrial infrastructure, Railways and Pakistan Steel. They have ignored the risks and challenges concerning the US lead military occupation of Afghanistan and drone attacks on Pakistan. Pakistan has suffered approximately $70 billion economic, human losses, structural damages to roads and bridges deployed more than 147,800 troops conducting combat operations in the tribal areas along the Afghan border. The Pakistan armed forces has lost more than 3,200 soldiers, with another 6,400 injured. They sustain an average of 10 casualties each day, and approximately 35,000 Pakistani civilians killed by suicide bombers and terrorism.  

US policies around the world and especially in Pakistan created refugees and approximately 2 million internally displaced people (IDPs) in SWAT and FATA to further destabilize the country. Millions of people in Pakistan are waiting to be fully rehabilitated; 2.5 million Afghan refugees are a burden on the economy of Pakistan as well as causing social problems. They can’t go back to Afghanistan as US and NATO have occupied Afghanistan and fighting an unwinnable war.

One can assume that Pakistani nation suffered both human and financial losses only because this small minority of people have their few billion dollars worth assets in USA, UK, Dubai, Malaysia and Europe. If current regime and political stake holders in government really sincere with Pakistan, they should bring their money back to Pakistan. They can enjoy their wealth and it will be safe and unfrozen.

Russia and China’s veto of the UN Security Council resolution which condemned Syria over its brutal crackdown on anti-government protesters and contained a weak reference to the possibility of sanctions against Damascus proved (again) one thing – that despite torrents of soaring rhetoric to the contrary from our leaders, international politicsis not about doing what is right and in the best interests of all nations and peoples, it’s only about the short-term, short-sighted, political self-interest of leaders and their governments. And the statement by U.S. ambassador Susan Rice, described by the New York Times as “one of her most bellicose speeches in the Council chamber”, was pure, unadultered hypocrisy at its most naked.

But let us first of all be clear about the meaning of hypocrisy (hypocrite is from hypokrite, the ancient Greek for actor). The definitions of hypocrisy are “a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not… the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion.” The synonyms for hypocrisy are “can’t… dissembling… insincerity… piousness.” The antonyms are “genuineness… sincerity.”

If I was contributing to the updating of dictionaries, I would add another definition of hypocrisy – American foreign policy.

In her statement after Russia and China had vetoed and before she walked out of the Council chamber, Susan Rice said: “The United States is outraged that this council has utterly failed to address an urgent moral challenge and a growing threat to regional peace and security.”

This is, of course, the same Susan Rice who will cast the U.S. veto to kill the Palestinians’ bid for Security Council recognition of their statehood (if the bid gets to the Security Council). It is apparently of no concern to her and her master that the Security Council has utterly failed, time and time again, to address the criminal policies of the Zionist (not Jewish) state of Israel,policies which present a far more urgent moral challenge and growing threat to regional peace and security than what Bashar al-Assad’s monster regime is doing in Syria.

Rice also said: “Today the courageous people of Syria can now see who on this Council supports their yearning for liberty and universal human rights and who does not.”

Quite so, madam ambassador, but is it of no concern to you that almost the whole world (of peoples not governments) is aware of who on the Security Council supports the Palestinian yearning for liberty and universal human rights and who does not?

If there was a Nobel prize for hypocrisy, Susan Rice would have to be added to the list of nominees for it along with President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. (Question: What do those two gentlemen have in common? Answer: In the context of targetedassassinations by drones or whatever, it can be said that both are cold-blooded killers).

On another matter… The jury in my mind is still out on the question of whether or not professor Shlomo Avineri, the Polish-born Israeli political scientist, is a hypocrite. His most recent article is in Ha’aretz with the headline No realistic chance of permanent Middle East peace. The following is its opening paragraph.

“In his speech to the UN General Assembly, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas once again made a common Palestinian mistake: a Palestinian leader does not have to persuade the nations of the world, but rather the Israelis. A Palestinian state will arise only if the Palestinians convince the Israelis that they are indeed ready to live in peace and mutual recognition.”

In theory that makes a lot of sense, but it ignores the fact that most Israeli Jews have been brainwashed by Zionist propaganda and, as a consequence, need to feel threatened, need to believe they are the victims and not the oppressors. Put another way, most Israeli Jews do not want to believe that the Palestinians (the vast majority of them) have long been ready for peace on terms which any rational government and people in Israel would have accepted with relief.

That being so, there isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell of peace unless and until an American president has the freedom and the courage to use his leverage to compel Israel to end its occupation of all Arab land grabbed in 1967.

By Wayne Madsen

A limited-distribution document circulating around relevant oversight committees of the Congress has raised some eyebrows on Capitol Hill. The document, said to have originated with the Department of Homeland Security, describes seven mass detention centers that have been set up at military bases, mostly in the western states. With "Occupy Wall Street" and similar "occupy" city movements gaining in numbers and power around the nation, some in Congress suspect the Homeland Security document is a way to assure right-wing members of Congress, Republicans and Democrats, that the Obama administration has implemented plans to detain key leaders and participants in the mass protests sweeping the United States.

WMR has learned of the document from a House Judiciary Committee source.

The U.S. government, particularly the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), has been developing plans for the mass detention of American citizens since the Nixon administration. Plans for such action re-surfaced in the 1980s, with Iran-contra felon Oliver North being questioned, albeit unsuccessfully, about one such mass arrest and detention program, REX-84, by Representative Jack Brooks (D-TX), during the Iran-contra joint Congressional hearings.

The arrest of over 700 protesters at the Brooklyn Bridge by the New York police may have been a dry-run for a much larger round-up, one that could be mirrored across the United States. Although most of the protesters in New York received a citation for disorderly conduct and other lesser infractions, in the event of a national emergency and suspension of habeas corpus, federal authorities would not be so sanguine, with felony charges likely, and then only, if those arrested are ever brought before a judge.

On April 3, 2008, WMR reported on a similar limited distribution document that was circulating among select circles in the Congress: "WMR has learned from knowledgeable sources within the US financial community that an alarming confidential and limited distribution document is circulating among senior members of Congress and their senior staff members that is warning of a bleak future for the United States if it does not quickly get its financial house in order. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is among those who have reportedly read the document. The document is being called the 'C & R' document because it reportedly states that if the United States defaults on loans and debt underwriting from China, Japan, and Russia, all of which are propping up the United States government financially, and the United States unilaterally cancels the debts, America can expect a war that will have disastrous results for the United States and the world. "Conflict" is the "C word" in the document. The other scenario is that the federal government will be forced to drastically raise taxes in order to pay off debts to foreign countries to the point that the American people will react with a popular revolution against the government. "Revolution" is the document's 'R word.'" The title of the document was "Conflict or Revolution."