CHAPTER TWELVE

TERRORISM-THE DILEMMA OF THE MIDDLE EAST

September 11, 2006 - the fifth anniversary of the second attack on the World Trade Center in New York. Three-thousand victims are being memorialized in ceremonies at "ground zero" and in communities throughout the U.S. President George W. Bush proclaimed that U.S. citizens "are safer today, but not yet safe." This is deceptive and understates true conditions. Despite the billions of dollars spent by the huge bureaucratic Homeland Security force, the president admits the end is not yet in sight.
There are so many holes in the security system that it is a miracle al Qaeda terrorists have not attacked again. According to various media sources, seaports do not have a system that can inspect all shipments into U.S. power plants, water and public facilities are vulnerable to sneak attacks, and illegal entry into the U.S. is rampant due to ineffective immigration control. Terrorist cells have been found in Germany and Britain, and there is no doubt that there are hundreds more in the U.S. and throughout the world. The second in command of al Qaeda yesterday gave more devastating warnings of future attacks on the U.S. and Israel.
Terrorist attacks over the last two decades appear to have been planned at intervals when nations fail to react. One Hezbollah suicide bomber killed 240 American servicemen in barracks in Lebanon in 1983. The first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 and the federal building bombing by American terrorists in Oklahoma were mourned. In response to 1998 embassy bombings in Kenya, Tasmania and Nairobi, and on the vessel, U.S.S. Cole in 2000, President Clinton ordered the "Infinite Reach" bombing operation in the Sudan and Afghanistan, targeting areas associated with al Qaeda.
The attacks by terrorists are growing in frequency, emboldened by the failure of the United Nations and cautious governments to act. Total casualties due to terrorist acts since the late 20th century, are 75,201-103,664 in the Philippines, Africa and Iraq.
In response to the treachery of 9/11, Americans supported the "war on terrorism" and on October 7, 2001, U.S. and NATO troops mobilized in Afghanistan to find Osama bin Laden. They bombarded caves and Taliban territory where he might be hidden. Some subordinates have been killed. Those captured are locked away in various prisons, yet to be brought to justice.
It was thought the Taliban had been vanquished and on December 22, 2001, following United Nations' sponsored negotiations conducted in West Germany, the U.S. installed a multi-ethnic interim government in Afghanistan as a peace-keeping force, with elections of a permanent government to take place in 2003.
Afghanistan was promised $1.05 billion in economic aid, and no interference with its local politics which reflects the lust for power by tribal factions. Warlords compete for control of the lucrative opium trade which supports world-wide drug addiction and funds al Qaeda. Pashtans, in the south formerly connected to royalty, dominate. Tajiks, Uzebeks and Hazras control the northwest, and Hazarjats central Afghanistan.
The Taliban in Afghanistan is re-emerging in greater strength. Just a few days ago, September 7, 2006, two bombings occurred in the capital city of Kabul, another was announced today.
With increased financial support from radical Muslims, the Taliban intends to depose the new democratic government which had been making progress in restructuring Afghanistan. NATO commanders are asking for helicopters, transport planes and additional 2,500 troops to meet the new strength.* President of Pakistan, Pervez Musharraf agreed to a truce with tribal leaders of the north and will not allow American or other foreign troops to pursue the Taliban into Pakistan. He apparently fears an Iraqi-like occupation by American troops. It is thought that Osama bin Laden now survives somewhere in Pakistan.
Since the beginning of 2006, terrorist bombings resulted in deaths in a train derailment in Spain, in a British subway, an Egyptian resort, hotels in Indonesia, suicide bombing and rocket attacks on Israel, and in Iraq's cities by insurgents against their own people, on American and coalition troops.
Five years later, what is so chilling is that there are no confirmed reports as to the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden while his video tapes surfaced from time to time. Despite the most advanced satellite technology which has the capability of spotting individuals from space, surveillance has been unable to pinpoint activity as simple as trucks bringing water, food and weapons, that would uncover al Qaeda's hideouts. The poppy fields seen by satellites remain in production.
Abu Mussaud Zarqawi the terrorist leader in Iraq, was killed in a bombing raid of his secret meeting place, uncovered by an intelligence source.
The war on terrorism was succeeding in Afghanistan with Americans in full support of the mission. Afghanistan had a democratic government with a promising prosperity, until George W. Bush changed priorities. History will show his foreign policy decision produced the planetary crisis of the 21st century, if not the beginning of the end of the planet.

THE INVASION OF IRAQ
There should be no question that had the strength of American and U.N. and NATO forces remained focused on Afghanistan, Osama bin Laden would have been captured and the terrorist threat ended. Instead, Bush’s manic invasion of Iraq in 2003 its true purpose still unknown, the world is far less safe than before 9/11. What is known is that his true motives have been veiled by lies.
It would be far more difficult today for a new approach with new leaders and renewed cooperation of threatened nations due to the change in sympathy for the 9/11 disaster. What could have been an international cooperative effort of intelligence agencies and police departments, as well as special forces, is no longer viable under this Bush administration.
. More Americans have been killed in Iraq than died in the attack of 9/11. Iraqi civilian deaths have not been counted. Yet, the rubber-stamping Congress, a cowed press and dumbed-down citizens have not demanded the resignation or impeachment of George W. Bush, who violated the Constitution in waging a war to "bring democracy to the world" which Bush proclaims to be his mission.
The result of the war on Iraq is that Saddam Hussein has been deposed. His trial and execution took more than three years. Other than some $6 million found at the beginning of the invasion in one of his palaces, many millions more than likely reside in numbered accounts in international banks. Does the Bush administration know the whereabouts of these funds that could be used to repair the infrastructure U.S. bombs destroyed?
Why did Bush ignore the United Nations' affirmation that Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction? Only recently, in a press conference, a reporter shouted out, "What did Iraq have to do with the terrorists?" and the president quickly responded "nothing." There is some element very wrong here, either in the president's recollection or in his mental ability, or in his moral character to be unable to tell the truth. In any case, he too, is a danger to the planet.
Even worse is the inflexible policy to "stay the course." No one has questioned what that policy means. An ineffective press fails to seek information as to what that course is, what are the end goals and how and when they must be met. Is this administration talking about endless occupation, or until Iraq and the middle-east are entirely restructured? Is there any idea as to how many years will be considered to complete the "course."
Encouraged by Republican senators, such as McCain of Arizona who says mistakes have been made, but does not explain who made them and what they are, they shamelessly accuse Democrats and anyone who want the troops home of being unpatriotic. He plans to be the next president in 2008 and voters should beware of his loyalty to party rather than to the country.
With profound arrogance both President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair, on May 29, 2006, admitted they were wrong about the weapons of mass destruction, and that they didn’t know enough about the strength of the Iraqi insurgency. As to the apathetic or ignorant American public, and its spineless representatives who fear to appear as though they don't support the president, they won't be re-elected, no apology, no resignations are forthcoming. It is surprising that the British have not called for a new election to remove Mr. Blair.
An investigation is needed of Iraqi’s opposition politician Ahmad Chalabi, who allegedly misled the U.S. about Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction. We need to know to what extent reports were mishandled by intelligence agencies and how they were used to make a case for war. Bush has refused to meet with the moderate former President of Iran, Mohammud Khatomi, who might have shed some light on Iraq’s weapons, as well as how the anti American current Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad came into power and defies the world regarding nuclear proliferation.
All incumbent members of Congress who voted for the war on Iraq should not be reelected, or if their terms are not completed should be impeached for failure in their duty to balance the power of the executive branch. Along with the president they should be tried in the World Court for the deaths of more than three-thousand American troops and "coalition" forces, as well as Iraqi casualties. The Bush administration is putting out feelers for retroactive legislation that would protect them from prosecution for war crimes.
At last American voters on November 7, 2006 expressed their disapproval of the president’s “stay the course” strategy in Iraq. Many Republicans for the first time in their lives voted Democratic. The Democratic Party now controls both houses, albeit by a very narrow margin. The first five months have not brought the wars to a conceivable end. The president and his cronies stubbornly adhere to "winning" without explaining what do they want to win. Are they saying that the sacrifice of more than 3,000 American lives is in vain because deposing Saddam Hussein is not a "win" or they did not "win" when millions of Iraqis elected a new government?
Neighboring nations in the middle-east, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Yemen, and other Arab nations sent no troops despite the danger that Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction were in their neighborhoods. Israel was told to stay out of the conflict.
A transition planetary panel must take charge of the departure of all coalition forces from Iraq, and establish authority to seek out and isolate insurgents. The coalition should leave behind conventional weapons and supplies in control of the panel, to provide security, and to end the Sunni-Shia conflict.
A huge majority of Iraqis want American troops they call"occupiers" out of the their country. More active than the elected officials, Shiite cleric Moqtade al Sadr leads the protesters. The dilemna is that he and his Islamic militias demand that all the people strictly adhere to his fundamentalist view of the Koran. If Iraqis are grateful to be a democracy, they will immediately put in place their own seurity forces so that coalition forces can withdraw. Otherwise, the Taliban, and militants will continue to threaten, if not dominate the world.
By coincidence (which has been occurring all through the writing of this book) as I write this portion, surprising news report on CNN, September 12, 2006, shows Iraqi prime-minister, Nouri al-Maliki and Iran's president,Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, greeting each other in Iran. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice says al-Maliki will express his satisfaction with their new democracy, while Ahmadinejad, points out that they will be in the region much longer than the U.S. and that they should form an alliance.
He is offering to come to Iraq to help eradicate the insurgency. However, since Iran and Iraq are predominantly Shia, the Sunnis formerly under Hussein will more than likely see this as a threat. It can be expected that hostile activity in Iraq will increase as a result of this meeting. Immediate cooperation for global self-government is mandatory, if their alliance is an indication of the alliances that could destroy those who do not convert to Islam.
Those who say change is too slow, that the idea for global self government is not an option, must be reminded of the history of Iraq and Iran. Their conflict goes back many centuries, but recent history is their war from September 22, 1980 to August 20, 1988 over the dominance of the Persian Gulf. It resulted in one million casualties approximately one half million each, costing over $1.19 trillion (US equivalent).
Iraq invaded Iran in response to Ayatollah Khomeni’s demand to overthrow Saddam Hussein. Iraq had early successes, helped by $200 million worth of helicopters purchased from the U.S. This war ended in a stalemate.
When Hussein came into power, al-Maliki, now prime minister, fled to Syria, then to Iran and there became involved in politics. He returned when Hussein was deposed and became the leader of the Dawa party. He was appointed to succeed the transitional government replacing Ibrahim al-Jaafari of the same party. Maliki’s 37-member cabinet was approved by the National Assembly until 2010.
At this moment, CNN is reporting that the new Iraqi government has been going after al Qaeda in the Anbar Ramadi province, and needs more troops and weapons. Is this what Iran is offering? Will this cause the onset of a full civil war with nations coming to the aid of the Sunnis? Islamic believers have forgotten the Medina Charter created by Mohammed, prohibiting Muslims from killing Muslims.
Just reported (September 13, 2006) 8:45 a.m. central time): Casualty tolls are 16 members of the Taliban near Kandahar, more suicide bombing in Baghdad. Iraqi health ministry reports they received 1,800 Iraqi civilian bodies in July, 2006 and 1,500 in August.

NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION
The imminent danger is Iran's current determination to develop nuclear power supposedly for commercial use. Another threat of nuclear proliferation comes from North Korea. In July 2006, it launched a test missile which almost reached Japan. Both countries said they won't be stopped by the United Nations or the United States. In the meantime, China and Russia are supposed to be discouraging North Korea from further tests, but little news has been forthcoming as to their progress.
The Bush administration refuses to talk to the presidents of Iran and North Korea. Vice President Cheney, says, "we don't negotiate with evil; we defeat it," and prevents any diplomatic talks from taking place, even after six-party talks arrived at a rare agreement on broad principles.* In other words, Cheney is telling the world, that everyone must do as the Bush administration says and then there will be dialogue. While they are in power, can the U.S. be trusted to lead the world?
On May 31, 2006, Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice in an interview with PBS, repeated Vice-President's Cheney’s policy in answer to Iranians wanting to know if they would be secure against a U.S. attack.
Iran’s reprehensible threat should be controlled by the United Nations, not the U.S. alone. Surely the “war president” Bush will not make the same mistake as he has in Iraq by failing to meet with the Iranian president. If he continues on this path, there is certainly going to be an even more devastating war with Iran and its allies which no country in the middle-east and possibly the United States or the planet will survive.
To end World War II, the U.S. dropped atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima in Japan. Hundreds of thousands of lives were saved at the cost of thousands in Japan. World leaders apparently have learned nothing from history.
Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said he would wipe Israel off the map and has threatened the U.S. If he achieves his nuclear goal, is there any doubt that he would release this terror on Israel? How much fall-out would kill everyone in neighboring nations in the middle-east and when would the land be free of radiation to re-populate?
Global chaos and uncertainty continues with North Korea in a stand-off regarding nuclear proliferation; tribes and insurgents, are active in African genocide; nations form alliances then change again depending upon whether or not they are seeking “favorable” status from the super powers. THINKing people must realize that current conditions are worse since the start of the 21st century, only seven years ago. We should no longer trust the "decider" as President Bush describes himself.

ISRAEL/ARAB/BRITISH MANDATE/RUSSIAN INFLUENCE
The following brief history of the British empire's mandate in Palestine, their departure after World War II, and between the United Nations’ creation of Israel as a nation in 1948, will provide some insight into the latest middle-east crisis of July 12, 2006. Their role was as insidious as any government in history and clearly exacerbated the terrible enmity between Arabs and Jews in Israel.
The British were in control and could have prevented the deadly conflict between Arabs and Jews, when the Arabs tried to drive Jews into the sea, blocked roads and ambushed Jews bringing food in convoys to their starving people in the old quarter of Jerusalem. Burned-out trucks remain as memorials along those roads to Jerusalem.
Not only did the British refuse to intercede on the side of non violence, they exacerbated the situation by looking the other way when the Jews were in extreme danger, driven from kibbutzim by the Arabs, and as Jewish terrorists responded by raids on Arab villages.
In the book, O Jerusalem by Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre, actual events are reported in this bitter struggle in 1948. Nokrashy Pasha, Prime Minister during the reign of Egyptian King Farouk, was assured by their army general Mohammed Haidar Pasha that they were ready for a war against the Jews when the British departed and "would parade in Tel Aviv in two weeks."
Sir Ronald Campbell, the British ambassador to Egypt, told the Prime Minister that his government did not approve of the coming clash of arms in Palestine as they were resigned to accepting partition as decided by the United Nations. However, he said, "should it be Egypt's decision to enter a war against the Jews, Great Britain would not oppose her efforts, nor hinder the movement of Egyptian forces." Then added, "should Egypt decide to go to war and find herself in need of additional munitions and armaments, His Majesty's government was prepared to allow the Egyptian Army access to the Suez Canal supply depots on two conditions. The first was discretion, the second was that the two nations continue satisfactory progress toward a solution to the problem which most concerned them, the Sudan."
This devious agreement was of itself senseless in view of British warnings that the Jews were organized and courageous. Egyptians said they first needed to find their way to Tel Aviv as they had no road maps of Palestine. One man was assigned to steal fifty maps from the Land Settlement Department so they could start to plot a route.
Intervention by the British was to check the Jewish advance in the port of Jaffa adjacent to Tel Aviv. Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin gave Sir Gordon MacMillan a direct, unequivocal order "to bloody well put troops in there and get Jaffa back for the Arabs."
British government officials had agreed to give Transjordanians enough ammunition for a thirty-day war. Unofficially, the Arab Legion had been able to get a good deal more. For six weeks the British had been dumping their spare ammunition into the Dead Sea, much of it instead landed into the waiting trucks of Arab legionnaires.
The fighting started immediately upon British withdrawal. Positions were taken and retaken in Jerusalem and at various villages and kibbituzim. Since May 14, 1948, the United States had been seeking a cease-fire call but was persistently thwarted by the British. They knew the Arabs were on the brink of substantial gains and were in no hurry to see the end of the fighting. A senior diplomat told an American colleague, "the situation should be allowed to seek its own level for a while." Egyptian forces did not favor the cease-fire appeal, confident of its ability to "parade in Tel Aviv."
Finally on May 22, 1948 the U.S. and Soviet Union pushed a cease-fire appeal through the Security Council threatening severe sanctions if it was not followed, despite British attempts to prevail.
Details of Pacepa’s allegations that the Soviets have been behind terrorist activity are described as follows:
After 1967: International terrorism conceived at Soviet’s Lubyanka KGB headquarters.
1968-1978: Romania sent two cargo planes every week to Palestinian terrorists in Lebanon.
1969 - KGB transformed airplane hijacking as an instrument of terror. 82 hijackings carried out by KGB. General Aleksandr Sakharovsky, who created Romania’s intelligence structure boasts “airplane hijacking is my own invention.”
November 1969 - Armed attack on El Al office in Athens, 1 dead - 14 wounded. This office was adjacent to Olympic Airlines owned by Aristotle Onassis. This “success” prompted a plan to kill Jews in airports, train stations and other public places. By end of ‘60s the KGB was deeply involved in mass terrorism against Jews, carried out by various Palestinian client organizations.
The history of Britain's treatment of Jews apparently had not changed since they expelled them in 1290 A.D. British colonizers' historic boast until modern times was "the sun never sets on the British Empire." The queen of England, Elizabeth II continues to reign in Canada, Australia, Northern Ireland, Bermuda, albeit with little power.
As if this intolerance and treachery were not enough, a former Communist General, Ion Mihai Pacepa, reveals how the Soviets masterminded Arab terrorism supplying outmoded weapons to Arab terrorists, and now to the rest of the world. Russian Footprints,World Jewish Digest, October, 2006. Merely twenty years after the Soviets joined with the U.S. for a cease-fire between Arab and Jews in 1948, their terrorist activity affirms their this anti-Israel policy. The following attacks against Israel and the US prevail to this day.
1971 - KGB operation called Tayfun (typhoon) to destabilize Western Europe. The Baader-Meinhof, the Red Army Faction and other KGB sponsored Marxist organizations unleashed a wave of anti-American terrorism.
1972 - May 30. Ben Gurion Airport, 22 dead - 76 wounded.
1974 - December. Tel Aviv movie theater, 2 dead - 66 wounded.
1975 - March. Tel Aviv Hotel - 25 dead, 6 wounded.
May. Jerusalem bomb. 1 dead - 3 wounded.
July 4. Zion Square, Jerusalem. 15 dead, 62 wounded.
December 23. Richard Welsh, CIA Station Chief killed in Athens.
1978. - April. Brussels Airport. 12 wounded
May. El Al plane in Paris. 12 wounded
1979 - June. American General Alexander Haig, Commander of NATO, injured in bomb attack in his vehicle in Brussels.
1989 - September. General Frederick K. Kroesen - commander of U.S. forces in Europe barely survived a rocket attack.
November - Alfred Herrhausen, pro-American Chairman of Deutsche Bank killed during grenade attack.
1990 - July, Hans Neusel, a pro-American state secretary in West German interior ministry wounded during an assassination attempt.
1992 - Kremlin decides to turn Islam World against U.S. and Israel. It was a vicious plan to “instill a Nazi-style hatred of Jews and turn the emotions into a terrorist bloodbath.” Code name was SIG (Sionistskiye Gosudarstva) or Zionist government. The plan was within the Communist Romanian sphere of influence in Libya, Lebanon and Syria.
General Pacepa’s mission was to find Islamic ethnic groups and train them in disinformation and terrorist operation, infiltrate countries in the Romanian sphere. Before he left Romania in 1978 he had sent 500 undercover agents to Islamic institutes. Over 4,000 agents spread throughout the Islamic world were masters of propaganda and lies, to lay the foundation for the anti Israel/Jewish/American terrorism present today.
2000 - Former officers of KGB and Soviet Red Amy took over the Kremlin and Russia’s government.
2001 - September 11. Russian President Vladimir Putin, former head of the KGB was the first leader of a foreign country to express sympathy to President Bush for “terrible tragedies of terrorist attacks.”
2002 - March. Putin moved back into terrorist business, re-instituting sales of weapons to Iran’s dictator, Ayatollah Khamenei; constructed a 1,000 megawatt nuclear reactor at Bushehr, with a uranium conversion facility to produce material for nuclear weapons. Russian technicians helped Iran develop the Shahab-4 missile of 1,250 mile range which can carry a nuclear or germ warhead anywhere in the Middle East or Europe.
May. NATO foreign ministers approve partnership with Russia, who wants to be admitted to the World Trade Organization. The hope is that first it must get out of the terrorism business and convince Iran to renounce nuclear weapons. Russia is as much at risk as all countries within the 1,250 Iranian missile range. When exactly did the Cold War end?
2006 - July 12. Hezbollah in southern Lebanon attacks Israel with Soviet Kalishnikovs and Katyushas, Russian Fajr-1 and Fajr-3 rockets, Russian AT-5 Spandrel antitank missiles and Kornet antitank rockets. They had been hidden underneath schools, hospitals, residences, and public places. The weapons abandoned by Hezbollah were marked: “Customer: Ministry of Defense of Syria. Supplier: KBP, Tula, Russia.”
Israel had removed soldiers from Lebanon in 1984, in an agreement that Lebanon would protect the border. Instead of eradicating the Hezbollah terrorists who were occupying their land, the Lebanese government said they intended to support their attack on Israel. The Lebanese government has not recognized the ultimate grave danger to their own country if it were controlled by these terrorists openly supported by Syria and Iran. Did they not in recent history expel Syria from Lebanon?
Is there any wonder that Israel's fury has escalated to a firm commitment to end the terror of suicide bombers who regularly crept into Israel and killed civilians since 1948? A month before the current attack, Hamas terrorists killed two Israeli soldiers and captured a third. Israel retaliated with attacks on Gaza. The familiar tactic of torment and reprisal is no surprise since the creation of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
Israel dropped leaflets to tell Lebanese civilians and tourists when they would be bombing, and to leave the area. Hezbollah and Hamas did not warn the Israelis when they would attack.
We have watched the violence in the mid-east since 1948. No matter what efforts are made by the U.S. to bring peace to the region, suicide bombers frequently enter Israel find their way to crowded areas of people going about their daily lives, kill themselves and everyone in proximity. Israel retaliates, kills their Hamas leaders and more suicide bombers are recruited to carry on the cycle.
A cease-fire is currently in effect, but Israelis feel there is little hope that it will hold. The best that can be said for American and British support of Israel in the recent conflict is that they did nothing. At least they acknowledged that Israel had a right to defend itself. They did not interfere with Israel's action to destroy as much of the Hezbollah as possible in Lebanon. U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan deplored “Israel’s excessive force.”
Israelis are seeking the resignations of prime minister, Ehud Olmert, Defense Minister Amir Peretz and General; Dan Halutz, for not waging a decisive war against Hezbollah. Cautious of world opinion, Israel purportedly used only five percent of its military capability. The criticism emanates from being "perceived as helpless in the face of a sub-state terrorist organization" and "created the impression that it has become a country that is not defendable," as reported in World Jewish Digest, September, 2006. In fact, "Israel is a strong country, but the very creation of an image of weakness means defeat".
Do Americans equate the action of Hezbollah's attack on Israel with the terrorist attack of September 11? Suppose an anti-American group in Canada or Mexico launched continuous rocket attacks across the border into the United States. If Syria and Iran supplied these rockets would that not be a legitimate reason for the US to defend itself against them?

ISLAM
The major threat to the planet is the fanatic followers of Islam who want to conduct jihad against nations and all religions, including their fellow Muslims, who do not agree with their religious extremes. In a recent tape an al Qaeda's subordinate stated that if all the people in the world would convert to Islam, terrorist acts would end.
The number of Muslims in the world (see Religion chapter), some 1,179,326,000 is twenty-five percent of the world's believers. Of this number, it is estimated that ten percent, 179,326,000 are militants. Can 75 percent of the people prevail over Islamic terrorists? The answer is probably negative in that seventy percent of Americans who detest Bush's policies, have not been able to deter him from "staying the course" in Iraq.
The recent publication of former CIA director George Tenet’s book, At the Center of the Storm, is beyond astonishing and as described on the book jacket, is a “whirlwind of actions, accusations and recriminations that emerged in the wake of 9/11 and the Iraq war.” It is an accounting of what might be the truth, then lies, then white-washing, then all of the actors protecting their turf, contradictions about what was done and a strangely obsessive practice to protect and support the actions of George W. Bush -43. The numerous revelations demand an immediate thorough investigation, not by politicians, but by the judicial system or the U.S. will no longer be viable as a democracy.