Sender, Berl & Sons Inc.
Analyses on the Oil Complex in view of Geopolitics
December 9, 2002
Other Sundry Interpretations 2002 Regarding
China and Middle East

A Discussion about Iraq and Oil
November 13, 2002 2:30PM

First (and foremost): Our systems support a major bottom and forthcoming major rise in oil prices. These interpretations are across the board for crude, heating and unleaded gasoline. We interpret the down move today in the oils are moving positions from weak to strong hands.

Second: Once Osama bin-Laden appeared out of the woodwork, we concluded early this morning as we expressed that Saddam would accept the inspectors.

Third: By accepting the inspectors, Saddam was saying that he was going to play a good boy and cooperate in every sense of the word.

Fourth: By doing so, when there is an attack on US interests such as a major naval vessel, Saddam is going to say, not me. I am looking to be a good boy and cooperate, get rid of WMD, and Mr. President Bush you prevailed. So, go back to your first assignment and agenda, and get the man who you and everyone else believed died because he is out to get you and I'm not.

Fifth: Saddam was so eager to start playing good guy now, no doubt having been told the Osama scenario, that he "succumbed" on Wednesday, not waiting until the Friday deadline.

Sixth: From our perspective, he and his son who spoke against the Parliament's decision to reject the UN resolution were too happy in playing along with the UN resolution.

Seventh: This puts the ball into Bush's lap. He's got a massive amount of military moving into for an attack on Iraq, and now he knows that Saddam is going to play along, and that Osama is going to plan a major terrorist attack against US military or here at home.

Eighth: President Bush is there not to have Saddam play along but to give him reason to attack because his mission is to capture and gain control of the oil (that's what justifies lower oil prices).

Ninth: He knows that China is out to stop him.

Tenth: He is faced with issue of who will he attack when the US faces the major Osama incident of terrorism. He wants to attack Iraq. He doesn't want to attack Osama because there is nothing to attack.

Eleventh: If the world points to Osama, he is left with a Sharon scenario: what to do after being subject to terrorism?

Twelfth: Thus, he has to blame Saddam. Thus the dynamic for Tonkin II.

Conclusion: If anyone thinks that Bush is going to be stuck like Sharon is, to wit: being contained from capturing the oil, while facing terrorism against his military and domestically here and home, they don't know our President and those at State and Defense who are going to bend over to give him the international excuse to attack.

All this is going to play out in our opinion quickly BECAUSE our systems do support a major bottom taking place right now in the oil complex, and rising oil prices are not consistent with Bush sitting around waiting for an excuse to attack.

President Bush will create one. Otherwise, Saddam may have in fact destroyed nearly all his WMD because he is now to Bush what Arafat was to Sharon when he was pigeon holed in his compound surrounded by Israeli troops: technically safe.

However, again, it is important to understand that Bush is not Sharon, and he will do something to open the doorway for him to do what he wants.

Of course, Jiang Zemin knows this as well and no doubt is equally prepared.

No need to watch a movie. As you can see, day by day, the players give command performances; however, no one wants to see the forest from the trees. Sharon right now has the full opportunity to pursue a religious resolution with the Arab/Islamic nations.

Joseph Ehrlich
Sender, Berl & Sons Inc.
November 13, 2002 2:30PM

A Discussion about Iraq and Oil II
December 9, 2002 2:00PM

1. The chart in January heating oil shows you that the oils did in fact bottom on or about the date we wrote the above.




2. Saddam has had a very large halo around his head.

2a. Saddam has even apologized to Kuwait.

3. China inserted North Korea into the equation.

3a. North Korea has essentially proven to the world community that Bush is only interested in Saddam because it seeks to capture to control Iraqi oil and oil reserves.

3b. Bush in making continued promises for major tax cuts to stimulate the economy, while continuing spendthrift spending, has further convinced the world that he needs the oil to pay for his self-serving programs.

4. We interpreted that Osama bin-Laden will not attack the US until after Bush attacks Iraq.

5. Bush has been trying everything and anything to cajole Saddam to give him any excuse to attack.

6. Saddam has not played along with Bush's wishes. In fact Bush's wishes encourages him to restrain himself, something otherwise difficult for him to do.

6a. Saddam has received sincere praise from Arab/Islamic leaders and we have interpreted that Saudi Arabia has apologized to Saddam for accurately forewarning the Arab/Islamic world of a US agenda that no one could believe until Bush openly admitted to it.

6b. The National Security Strategy was the most serious blunder in US history because we are not sure how the US plans on getting out from under it. Without question, it has undermined our future.

7. Bush finds himself between a rock and a hard place and wants to attack Iraq on the belief it will be over quickly and then he can move against North Korea.

8. North Korea has irritated the situation by giving the world community more reason why Bush should be moving against it not Iraq who everyone now believes as we have that it has no WMD sufficient to platform a US attack.

9. China has opened up a new front with Venezuela.

10. Bush has had to move quickly in Venezuela based on received intelligence to plug the hole in Venezuela opened by China. If he loses there, and is precluded by Saddam's compliance from moving against Iraq, due to world pressure and opinion (and thanks to Bush's obsessive calls for attack, the entire world is monitoring events in Iraq), and North Korea keeps saying you, Bush, want us, not Iraq, and the Saudis can exact some revenge for now knowing that Bush was out to undermine them with the attack on Iraq, Bush will have compromised US global interests more quickly and more seriously than any President in US history.

Conclusion: There are those at the highest level of the NWO not part of the oil cartel that are no doubt in major conflict with the oil cartel segment. Bush 41 and friends are saying that screw everyone, let's roll and get the oil and take it from there. The other side is pointing to consequences that we agree are inevitable in case the oil group really believes that they can deploy the military to steal oil assets.

We thus conclude that since Bush and cohorts have screwed up big time, including opening the gateway for Zemin and friends to continue on in power, Bush will in fact have to retract his agenda and do whatever it takes to neutralize the situation and save as much face as he is able to do.

We believe the above attests, particularly if the CIA and DIA assess that Chavez will now prevail in Venezuela, that Bush has been relying on the video game squad at the Pentagon, competent in taking out Afghanistan, but not much experienced or too lazy or inept to work up a plan that can do what Bush wants when the targets are backed up covertly by the Chinese. Otherwise, if they recognize what we have been saying, they are without the courage to tell Bush to his face that his projects for world domination and control are out of sync with reality and the times.

We believe Bush is on the precipice of losing a major international battle to the Chinese and that the US's future control of oil through our long standing relationship with Middle Eastern states has been irretrievably compromised and lost.

Bush can take the NSS document, tear out the sheets, and wipe away the tears from policies and an agenda which defies historical description.

If you think Bush's economic team, which truly meant to restore some integrity into the system, needed replacement, it is the entire administration which needs it. If Israel doesn't learn a quick lesson, if this proves to be the case, then Israel is far from being off the hook. In fact, for Bush to regain points in the Middle East, he will have to give the Arab/Islamic nations their wishes as far as Israel is concerned (AND QUICKLY). Bush will get cheap oil and a bruised ego. Israel will get the brunt of Bush's misjudgments and miscalculations, for which Israel globally announced their full unequivocal support.

In the meantime, keep your eye on developments in Venezuela. It is hard for us to believe that Bush would trigger the strike without having a full fledged plan to win. If Bush loses, the above scenario and outlook is in play. If he can't win in Venezuela, how in the world can he dare begin he can go forward with his questionable agenda in the Middle East. He can't. He shouldn't. If he stumbles in Venezuela forces and powers that be may compel Bush to throw in the towel.

We need leaders no longer aligned with the NWO. We need them badly.

Joseph Ehrlich
Sender, Berl & Sons Inc.
December 9, 2002 2:30 PM.

Venezuela

SenderBerl: If you think this is coincidence, then you have to pause and rethink it. Read the article below and our highlighted comment and then consider that the strike reared its head on December 3rd, the day after the China meeting, and was formalized on December 4th. The true enemy again is China who is doing to the US what the US wants to do to it. Again, now that Bush issued that idiotic NSS document, he has unified the world against us. Chavez no doubt with have China's strategic assistance so, with the US pulling out all stops, and having prepared for this strike, we and the world leadership will watch very carefully who prevails.

Conclusion: China is forcing Bush to spread resources all over the planet. Bush has not been tested in a major conflict scenario. Again, the US is great at defeating countries with mickey mouse militaries; however, its repeated squeamishness in calling China its enemy in here, suggests that it is scared. Listen carefully: if Chavez consolidates his power in Venezuela, Bush will be even more desperate than he already is to move against Iraq. If China is in Venezuela, Bush better know what China has ready for Bush in the Middle East. It can be a very bad picture ahead for the US, especially when we continue to tremble at a call we made in 1999 seeing Global War in 2003 unless the US and Israel pursue a religious resolution in the Middle East.

We hope the administration knows what it doing. From everything we have assessed particularly in releasing that NSS document, it doesn't seem that way at all, and if it doesn't then it better reign in the military before it opens a door that cannot be shut.

What scares us the most is the second article below which speaks for itself (and we include a brief comment on it as well).

Joseph Ehrlich
Sender, Berl & Sons Inc.
December 8, 2002 10:30 PM

Last updated at: (Beijing Time) Tuesday, December 03, 2002

Chinese Premier Meets Venezuelan Foreign Minister

December 3, 2002: China and Venezuela have seen frequent exchanges of high-level visits, enhanced trade and economic cooperation and closer consultations and coordination in international affairs in recent years, Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji said Monday.

Zhu made the remark in a meeting with Venezuelan Foreign Minister Roy Chaderton Matos, giving high evaluation of the development of bilateral relations since China and Venezuela forged diplomatic ties.

He mentioned in particular the visits between Chinese PresidentJiang Zemin and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez in April and May last year, which defined a strategic partnership for common development for the two nations in the new century.

SenderBerl: This is exactly what Zemin did in Iran, Syria and Lebanon (and don't tell anyone, Egypt as well).

China values its relationship with Venezuela, and pledges continued efforts to further friendly ties, Zhu said.

Chaderton praised China's achievements since his last visit 21 years ago, saying the country is building its future in line with its magnificent blueprint.

He said Venezuela attaches importance to developing relations with China, and the two countries' long-term friendship and strategic partnership will benefit both peoples.

Chaderton conveyed President Chavez's greetings to Zhu, who asked to send his regards to the president, and also expressed condolence on the casualties caused by a blaze in Venezuela's capital Caracas last night.



People's Daily Online --- http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/

SenderBerl: Here we see what we first interpreted: the House showing themselves to be a ship of fools. They gave the President what he wanted because he gave them overt and covert assurances that he will do nothing before they are consulted, before he pursues alternative diplomatic courses to seek a solution to Iraq short of military attack and war.

The House took the line of least resistance giving the oil cartel exactly what they wanted: assurances and promises are easily and conveniently forgotten and out of order for discussion once the first American is killed overseas in the military attack (or subject to biochemical attack).

If the Senate succumbs as well the President will 100% attack for without capture and control of Iraqi oil the NWO agenda is a total failure.

However, he no doubt sold it as the solution to the American economy and for the Republican party, a soaring stock market under cheap oil as the mask for the predicate to undertake the world domination and control outlined clearly and emphatically in the National Security Strategy, a document hard to find anyone discussing in this historic time, preceding, to our minds, a dark time and future.

If the U.S. and Israel are all that certain and clear that they will prevail, perhaps they should take a day or two to consult with scholars throughout the spectrum of education of the dynamics in play when those countries under monotheism including the Islamic countries faltered and pursued the wrong course.

There are those out there who hope to see the day that the US takes Iraq, captures the oil fields, rests control of the Middle East from China, and then look to us and say, what do now say?

We say we prefer to be showered with criticism than to see the consequences we see and fear, but our purpose has been to relay what we have seen as clear and certain, subsequently to date proven to be the very case as interpreted.

Thus, from our perspective, our insights and perspective have already defied the odds in being correct, and thus what those who wish to criticize us one day for our position should pause and consider if we prove right once again, at a vortex in history where no one can reverse the course, where the benefits we all enjoy today are simply gone (we note that we have hardly received any criticism, those receiving our E-mails in fact seeing the accuracy of our interpretations to date).

Counterpoint: Didn't the House limit the President to a military attack on Iraq in its resolution? Yes, but what will the situation be when Syria and/or Iran join the fray against Israel. Did the President put Israel just where he wanted it: compelled to rebuff an attack by Syria and wage an attack against it? The NWO group knows that all it needs is the green light for the Iraqi oil fields, all other NWO dynamics come into play one way or the other BUT for China. Again, the Chinese response may not be immediate but our conclusion is that Israel will fare very badly, very badly indeed, and that the US will encounter bioterrorism which will change everything domestically.

We have been trying to capture the video of President Bush standing to the right of Gephardt today. To us it looked as though the President couldn't hide his feelings toward Gephardt for while the man gave the President everything he wanted, the President reacted to his words as though Gephardt was the King of Chumps. Without people like Gephardt the NWO wouldn't have a chance, regrettably there is no shortage of Gephardts.

Now the pressure is on the Senate. We wish our confidence could be higher than it is. We only know that once the Senate gives the green light, there is no force which will stop the NWO from moving for those Iraqi oil fields and in this pursuit a first good look into the abyss will unfold and then we will have little else to say because man has made his choice to pursue the folly of his ways and attest that he has learned nothing at all from history.

Joseph Ehrlich
Sender, Berl & Sons Inc.
October 2, 2002

October 18, 2002

All these interpretations carried great odds against their being correct (remember that even though some are already proven, it doesn't diminish the odds existing at the time they were made):

1. Arafat would turn down Clinton and Barak's offer of Jerusalem and the West Bank.

2. Bush in attacking Afghanistan was trying to encourage coups in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to intervene and intercede to capture and control Islamic nuclear and Islamic oil.

3. Saudi Arabia was on the table as the primary target for overthrow of its current regime and intercession of a new world order approved leadership.

4. When Sharon attacked the West Bank and Arafat's compound, that Arafat was the safest man in the Middle East.

5. Sharon was acting with President Bush's blessings to take out all West Bank terrorist cells, and thereafter would take out all terrorist cells in Gaza as part of the new world order staging using the Israeli public including children as terrorist victims to open the gateway to the new world order hidden agenda.

6. That the hidden agenda included the advance knowledge that the Saudi peace initiative would fail because it was quite simple to undermine it: literally two simultaneous acts of terrorism against public Israeli targets.

7. That the agreement between the US and Israel included the new world order agenda to overthrow the political regimes in those countries now affiliated with China (as a separate matter our first call that China was in control of the Middle East was discounted even by US intelligence): Syria, Iraq and Iran.

8. Our interpretation touched and covered by no one why the US within 30 days of 9-11 offered Syria a seat on the prestigious UN Security Council when Syria was a documented terrorist supporting state.

9. Our interpretation and the deep analysis thereof why we were certain based on certain truths known to the government that President Bush had a mole who knew about the truths behind the government and 9-11. SenderBerl believes that this mole was placed during the open door days of the Clinton presidency (which not only made China into the force it is today but also we learn yesterday North Korea).

10. Our immediate interpretation that Bush post Sharon's incursions into the West Bank and Gaza took the dispute from the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians and made it a conflict between the West and Islam.

11. Our immediate interpretation upon its release that the National Security Strategy was a ratification of the new world order agenda, dictatorial in nature, seeking world control and domination, and thus anti-American and unconstitutional and that it would prove to be the seedbed for escalation in major terrorism.

12. Our interpretation that WNV was an established platform for domestic bioterrorism and that it was linked to China.

13. Our interpretation that the collapse of the World Trade Center towers was due to internal explosives linked to China (and that the US government was also not free from taint).

14. Our interpretation that while the Democrats were calling for a 9-11 investigation that they would capture political capital from the President but that there would never be any real investigation and if possible there would be a superseding act of domestic terrorism which would render 9-11 second in peoples' minds.

15. Our interpretation that Dick Gephardt was bought by Bush as Bush bought Musharraf and that historically Gephardt's willingness to sell himself at the expense of his party and country was to obtain primary and preferred recognition, make him part of NWO team, and thus find the support to have him made the Democratic Presidential candidate in 2004 (our producing a video segment showing the collusion between him and the President).

16. SenderBerl expecting no terrorist attacks and explaining why none were seen for all this time but now first explaining on October 3, 2002, why they were imminent.

17. Interpreting from the very first that the Montgomery County sniper was a low level subtle form of terrorism representing the very same terrorism put upon Israel explicitly to send President Bush a message that America is highly vulnerable to immediate attack on its shores, creating a state of national chaos and panic, economic and political collapse, at will, should President Bush pursue military action to gain presence in Iraq and the Middle East.
***
Moreover, Sender, Berl & Sons Inc. told the US government before Bush made his two trips to confirm the same that China would not participate in the new world order agenda and that you could understand China's thinking regarding it in the Beijing movie, The Emperor and the Assassin.
***
China's position is that it must discourage Bush and the US from attacking Iraq. It also knows that Bush will be difficult to stop. Thus, it must itself initiate extreme measures. We are so close to the point of no return, we are consumed with making whatever effort we can to persuade you to stop the President from the oil cartel segment of the NWO game plan. As we proffered and as some in the NWO know, without China there is no one world government. This is supposed to encourage looking for new answers and a new path. However, the oil cartel segment is not going to think, it is going to act, and by doing so, it is taking us to the feared irreversible point of the abyss.

Joseph Ehrlich
Sender, Berl & Sons Inc.
October 18, 2002 1:30PM EST

SenderBerl: US is making a serious mistake

Our interpretation that President Bush has no choice but to attack Iraq is being confirmed by the same type of media which preceded President Bush Sr.'s attack a decade back. However, as we said, China and Iraq, Iran, and Syria are all well aware of the agenda and thus it is somewhat arrogant for the US to believe that they can circumvent a defense whether affirmative or otherwise to the US plan.

President Bush not coincidentally will be in Crawford all throughout August. Moreover, Musharraf is meeting with Zemin August 2nd. August is the Bush month for attacking Iraq. President Bush has lost the Middle East and critical oil for the future and needs to intervene, and the US admits openly that it wants to seize control of the Iraqi oil fields and put in a caretaker government.

If President Bush and his administration do not think that this will invoke an affirmative defense not only by Iraq but also by Syria, Iran and China, then they are dreaming. President Bush thus is looking for Iraq to use weapons of mass destruction and odds are high they will be deployed against Israel. Iraq has all this time to implement their use and Saddam Hussein in view of President Bush's admission that he is going to install a caretaker government and run the Iraqi oil fields as he wishes, is going to find a lot of sympathetic ears and hands to implement their use against Israel.

Moreover, WMD will be used no doubt against American and British interests overseas. This will commence a regional war, where the US strategists are hoping that Israel carries most of the ball and the blame. However, it is crystal clear that President Bush is pushing this agenda having convinced Sharon or Sharon convincing him that regime changes are essential to any hope of peace. The only hope that will be served is that of those who are willing to allow the use of weapons of mass destruction and will result in so many deaths that it is something we need not discuss but to say that it could result in a minimum of 100,000 deaths and as much as a million or more (probably the latter) In Israel alone. While this may be hard to fathom, when Israel was lost the first time, the losses suffered were proportionally far greater.

The only secular argument we can accept is that those advising President Bush are saying that it is better to confront China now rather than ten years down the line. However, the dire mistake the US is making is that when it has proven itself to be a country unable to understand the foreign mindset, it completely discounts the preparations in effect throughout the world for this preemptive strike against three countries, not to primarily serve peace but to secure back control of the Middle East, captured by China. The US knows China has prevailed and it is essentially going out and saying we taking it back like it or not and if don't like it we are ready to see what you are going to do about it. This represents nothing higher than adolescent logic and thinking.

Now, in the hope that we can put a little fear into those who are pushing this agenda, let us tell you what we interpret can take place.

China will advise Iraq to probably lace all highly probable areas of US troop movement with devastating explosive weapons, the degree of which we don't want to guess. This is why President Bush will keep the media from reporting casualties: US troops will be killed on a large scale basis in trying to capture key infrastructure locations, which will be rigged on probably three dimensions with explosives of varying designs.

Whether the Iraqi government will give the people adjacent to those critical areas the prerogative of leaving the area before it deploys them is speculation. The US thinking that it has considered this affirmative defense will use new weapons to neutralize in their minds the use of any triggering devices and the like. However, there is nothing more devastating than sending troops into an area where the enemy knows for certain they will be sent. This again may be the same mindset that connected to 911 (it is ironical that the S&P today closed at 911).

The US will first send troops into the oil fields to secure them from being destroyed by Saddam Hussein. The US strategists knowing that the Hussein NWO opposition people -- tomorrow's caretaker government -- needs the oil to prosper from the ordeal, will do everything to get the people of Iraq to understand the need of Americans to protect the fields, simply underestimate the Islamic mindset. The Islamic people will now, based on the perceived arrogance of the US in proclaiming that they will install caretaker governments and take control of the oil, carry the same deep hatred invoked during the accident and death of Princess Diana, another event in history tying into today's date.

What we believe the US has not appropriately assessed is that not only Iraq but Iran and Syria with China's strategists have set up an affirmative defense in random areas where they can cause havoc for Americans whether domestic or international when they are convinced that the US is ready to launch the attack against Iraq.

Such an affirmative defense may require that the US reallocate troop and weapon resources to some other area and shift focus away from Iraq and any commitment to spending time and resources there. This is important to understand. The US has always taken the step of saying we are going to get you, we are going to send in troops and we have allocated three months, six months, to get the job done. Nothing has ever happened to uproot the US Middle East plan in the past. The planners having no experience with a counter offense have not properly prepared we believe for such contingency.

Sender, Berl & Sons Inc. believes that the US in going out and saying we are going to take over the oil fields and put in a caretaker government, everyone knowing that it holds the same plans for Iran and Syria, is undertaking a course of insanity consistent with biblical warnings for this period of time.

The new world order agenda is ultimately anti-American and anti-G-d. The soot and ash surrounding the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings foreshadowed what the world might wind up looking as once the threshold is crossed of the use of nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction. SenderBerl believes that they will be used; that those seeking world dominance under an agenda never disclosed to the American people -- as Israel under the Oslo process never told their citizens a word of the full truth of what it represented -- will take us to a dark future which may officially start with the President's ill advised invasion of Iraq (mandating a concurrent attack by Israel against Syria under the pretext or reality of an attack against Israel from Syria/Lebanon).

The leadership is acting as though it is desperate. This is usually the nexus to a major mistake. They affirmatively refuse to consider the only genuine solution, the religious solution. As we feared, if we are proven right, there will be no satisfaction at all in having been correct all along. The thing to do is to stop and think long and hard before undertaking the course.

Let us further say, that if reality proves that the US has successfully implemented an overthrow in Iraq, it will not be what it appears to be. When General Bar-Kohabbah sent out troops against the Romans, initial victories went to him. Thereafter, death and devastation prevailed against him. Again, those seeking to move the region away from G-d will never prevail. It would be an affront to G-d. With that dynamic in play, SenderBerl is highly confident that its analysis in such regard will prove as accurate as those we have been detailing for nearly a decade in terms of the Middle East. In  early 1983 we advised the Reagan administration that Japan was our enemy and not our friend and was out to undermine the US dollar and economy. It took President Reagan and then VP Bush, Sr. 3-4 years to perceive the truth of it. SenderBerl on 9-11 pointed to China behind the  total collapse of the World Trade Center buildings.

One of our clients, told us what happened in China post 9-11. A student in a major university felt compelled to stand up with her entire class and applaud with her teachers and the administration over the successful attack on America. The student thereafter carried serious guilt in feeling that she had to applaud when she in her heart disagreed with her fellow Chinese students.

We are only saddened to see that man just as he did in the past, pays idle lip service to the correct course,  and in doing so fails to recognize and/or admit to the Chinese biblical role, and thus willingly if not knowingly undertakes the path assuring death and destruction of increasing historic proportion.

Joseph Ehrlich
Sender, Berl & Sons Inc.
July 31, 2002

Some excerpts from our recent E-mail:

The new world order agenda wants to resolve the Islamic issue (oil and nuclear) and China (the only real threat today to the one world government agenda). China is dead set against the one world government and has captured the Middle East and consequently in time control of oil. The United States cannot allow this to take place....
July 21, 2002 Major Analysis

,,,,Until the US recognized that without taking out the regimes, which it in any event wanted to do, in Iraq, Syria and Iran, that any move back to 1967 borders by Israel was a suicidal gesture by Israel because after forfeiting strategic lands the Arab nations in the hands of the current leaderships ultimately would again militarily attack.
July 21, 2002 Major Analysis

Moreover, when President Bush on June 24th made the irrevocable error of openly admitting that he wanted to install hand selected leaderships in the Middle East to fashion the countries into the image of the new world order, he made a costly error, no doubt by G-d’s design. The United States has now irretrievably lost the Middle East, leaving it no alternative now but to move militarily against those in the declared axis of evil. Now, realizing that the Islamic nations are in cooperation with each other in not giving President Bush any reason to launch a military attack in the region, the United States is desperate and the EU notes the same and rejects President Bush’s announced agenda of a pre-emptive strike against Iraq (which would also mandate an attack of Syria by Israel) all opening a possible portal to Armageddon.
July 21, 2002 Major Analysis

...Now that the US realizes that China has captured the Middle East and that China is against the new world order agenda, it has to decide how to deal with China, and the government is releasing first official word platforming a future declaration against China.
July 21, 2002 Major Analysis

President Bush is approaching obsessive in moving against Saddam Hussein, not to follow up for his father but in terms of the unraveling reality that the U.S. has lost the Middle East. Once he moves against Iraq, whether right or wrong from the EU point of view, Israel WILL move against Syria and two of the three threats are eliminated.
E-mail 7-28-02

All we can further add is that for some reason August is a favorite month of the Bush people to strike Saddam Hussein. Thus, odds are that President Bush will move against Iraq in August for otherwise he will not only lose the Middle East but the Congress as well in the November elections.
E-mail 7-28-02

SenderBerl: The problem with the Bush administration is that it is deploying the rest of the Bush the first strategy where the entire power platform in the Middle East and Asia has it all figured out. You can't deploy a design ten years old. Perhaps it is time that those behind the new world order face the reality that the entire agenda was not to serve the world but themselves.
E-mail 7-28-02

SenderBerl: The New York Times reports:

The "inside-out" approach, as some call this Baghdad-first option, would capitalize on the American military's ability to strike over long distances, maneuvering forces to envelop a large target. Those advocating that plan say it reflects a strong desire to find a strategy that would not require a full quarter-million American troops, yet hits hard enough to succeed. One important aim would be to disrupt Iraq's ability to order the use of weapons of mass destruction.

SenderBerl: The US intends to use weapons unknown to the American public. These weapons can literally neutralize all electronic systems within a large radius and moreover disorient everyone within its boundaries as well. A smaller version of the weapon in fact was part of the missile which was used to take down TWA Flight 800 taking out its electronic systems thus SenderBerl knowing that the missile was NOT part of a terrorist delivery system.

While of course the strategy is bold it is also risky and in our respectful opinion will open a gateway which President Bush does not want to really open. Wihtout question those suggesting it are saying that its effective use will scare the daylights out of the Islamic world and thereafter everyone will fall into place.

This may be the case short term, but we doubt it. Moreover, we continue to watch if President Bush will in fact deploy it and more importantly what China intends to do to now that

a. it has disrupted the peace process in the Middle East
b. offset Musharraf politically
c. gained the upper hand in Nepal.

Of course, China is waiting for the US to make its move. It is also smiling at how many points it has gained in the Arab/Islamic world, everyone seeing Israel in a quagmire which it cannot find a solution out of (Israel waiting for the US to pursue its covert promise to proceed against Iraq to start the chain in the change of regimes).

August is around the corner. If President Bush strikes it will be within two weeks in our best estimation. He certainly has to do something because the US and Israel wither domestically and internationally.

Joseph Ehrlich
Sender, Berl & Sons Inc.
Early morning July 29, 2002

SenderBerl: The article below supports SenderBerl's contention that China has backed a PLO strategy which causes Israel to collapse from its own weight. First, tourism has been destroyed. Second, requiring Israel to call up reserves taking men out of the economy to reoccupy the West Bank. Israel recently has become aware of this Trojan Horse strategy but despite knowing about it, seems on the slipper slope and does not know how to escape.
Email 7-29-02

SenderBerl: The articles below evidence that the war against terrorism all along has been a war against CHINA. Now that Jiang Zemin intends to stay in power, the US is escalating matters by telling the world the last thing China wants to hear: that the US intends to maintain a long term presence in China's domain. Let us be the first to tell you that this is interpreted as HIGHLY NEGATIVE. Will China now put its troops into the Middle East? Will China now proceed against Taiwan? Things are unravelling as we feared they would and we can only confirm again that we are in the most dangerous times in world history.
E-mail 7-29-02

End excerpts

Today's News Stories which say a great deal!

Iran tells its forces to prepare for U.S. attack


TEHRAN, Iran (Reuters) - Iran's army chief said on Wednesday his forces had been told to make preparations for a possible attack by the United States on the Islamic Republic, which Washington has accused of supporting terrorism.


U.S. says raising oil reserves not linked to Iraq

By Tom Doggett

WASHINGTON, July 31 (Reuters) - The U.S. Energy Department said on Wednesday it will seek to boost the U.S. emergency crude stockpile, but a spokesman said the move should not be interpreted as a precursor to a possible attack on Iraq.

The department said it will accept bids next Tuesday from energy companies to supply 40,000 barrels per day (bpd) of oil to the stockpile in exchange for crude drilled in the Gulf of Mexico.

A department spokesman said the additional oil is part of the administration's plan announced last year to fill the emergency reserve to its 700 million-barrel capacity by 2005, and should not be interpreted as being part of a plan to attack Iraq.


Bush drumbeat leaves key questions on Iraq

By Charles Aldinger

WASHINGTON, July 31 (Reuters) - Despite increasing threats from the White House to get rid of Iraq's President Saddam Hussein's regime, analysts and lawmakers do not expect any U.S. military attack against Iraq this year.

There are no outward signs of a U.S. military buildup in the Gulf. But a drumbeat of warnings from U.S. President George W. Bush that Saddam must be deposed has triggered deep concern in the Middle East, Europe and world markets over any new war with Baghdad.

Insight on the News - World
Issue: 08/19/02

New Reports Detail The China Threat
By J. Michael Waller

The Bush administration's ambiguous China policy got a kick in the pants recently when the Pentagon and the bipartisan, congressionally chartered U.S.-China Security Review Commission issued separate reports describing Beijing's looming military threat to U.S. national interests. Both reports — mandated by Congress at the end of the Clinton era to evaluate China's growing military power — ratified the long-stated views of U.S. national-security analysts that Beijing has been using cash from American consumers and investors to bankroll an ambitious military buildup that ultimately may be used to attack the United States. Both reports begin by warning that the United States has a poor understanding of the Chinese military and Beijing's intentions because intelligence and analysis on China is sketchy. And that alone is sending shock waves through the foreign-policy, defense and intelligence establishments. "The Pentagon report specifically, but the China Commission report as well, question a key tenet upon which America's peaceful relations with China have been based since the early 1970s," says Richard D. Fisher, a China military expert with the Jamestown Foundation. "The fundamental tenet being that America expects China to peacefully settle its differences with Taiwan. This expectation is included in two of the major communiqués between the United States and China, and is enshrined as policy in the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act. The Pentagon has very likely started a major debate within the U.S. government by questioning for the first time China's willingness peacefully to resolve its differences with Taiwan." That's a big development. Neither report says it explicitly, but both issue observations and conclusions that bury the argument of the George H.W. Bush and Clinton administrations that the "People's Republic [of China] is our partner."

SenderBerl: Just as Peres proclaimed Arafat his partner.

Political shenanigans on the China Commission, and fears in some quarters of the present presidential administration that the Pentagon report would offend Beijing, made supporters of the missions of these reports fear that neither would be objectively written or, if they were, that they ever would see the light of day. The Communist Chinese government has complained loudly. In his first Washington news conference, Chinese Embassy spokesman Xie Feng actually accused the Pentagon and the congressional commission of lying, warning that the reports could endanger bilateral relations and world peace. Claimed Xie, "The threat to Sino-U.S. relations, the threat to world peace, doesn't lie in China but rather in these people who have fabricated this China threat." The Pentagon report meanwhile is the product of intense wrangling between two strains within the Department of Defense (DoD). These are the go-along-to-get-along attitude of some of the "Clintonized" flag officers and research institutes (see "Clinton Undead Still Haunt Pentagon," June 17), and the more real-world policy shop led by Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith. Administration sources say the National Security Council held up its publication for half a year. The DoD report smashed the conventional wisdom that China would be far from able to conquer Taiwan. "Previously, the whole debate over the threat to Taiwan had been cast through the lens of whether the PLA [People's Liberation Army] could invade or not invade," Fisher says. "This was always a straw-man argument because nobody would ever take seriously the prospect of an all-out, D-Day-style invasion, so the liberal side of the argument would always discount the threat to Taiwan. The Pentagon report does a great service by introducing the notion of the PLA's development of a range of coercive strategies and military options to use against Taiwan. There are operations, short of an all-out invasion, that are designed to produce a political outcome, such as a surrender by Taiwan's leaders after a rapid, two- to three-day blitzkrieg assault." For the first time, an official U.S. government policy document states that Beijing's military buildup against Taiwan presents a threat to U.S. allies in the region. The Pentagon report says, "The PRC's ability to exercise coercive military options presents challenges not only to Taiwan but also to other potential adversaries, such as the Philippines and Japan." Fisher notes, "This is the first time any U.S. government statement has cast China's military as a threat to the region, much less as a threat to U.S. allies in particular." The report also crystallizes a growing concern about Russia's massive weapons proliferation to China (see "PRC Arms Itself to Wage War on U.S.," Aug. 12). "The Pentagon's emphasis on the degree to which Chinese-military modernization stems from Russian assistance is indicative of the administration's emerging focus on the Russia-China strategic relationship," says Ilan Berman, vice president for policy at the American Foreign Policy Council. "This is definitely a positive development." "I thought it exceeded expectations," Fisher says. "Knowing about the degree of dissension among the members of the China Commission, it was a pleasant surprise. It produced useful and solid observations and recommendations." Congress created the commission at the instigation of national-security conservatives a year after requiring the Pentagon's annual reports on Chinese military power, at the end of Clinton's term in 2000. The idea was to get the White House and the public to confront "the national-security impacts of the bilateral trade and economic relationship between" the United States and China. Congress, according to a commission document, "wanted the commission to evaluate whether our economic policies with China harm or help United States national security and, based on that assessment, to make recommendations in those areas that will improve our nation's interests" in regular annual reports. It seemed the commission would remain in security-oriented hands until liberal Republican Sen. James Jeffords of Vermont defected and kicked the Senate to Democratic control. That put Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.) in control of much of the commission's staffing. Famous for channeling taxpayer money to his home state and to his friends, Byrd promptly installed old cronies at top levels of the commission staff. These included longtime staffer C. Richard D'Amato, who had no public record of expertise on China but who had just wrapped up work with another congressional commission, that one on the trade deficit. D'Amato became commission chairman, with Republican Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute as vice chairman. Congressional sources tell Insight that the Democratic majority pushed many conservative commissioners aside — even the only recognized academic sinologists among them — and allied with Chamber-of-Commerce-type Republicans who tended to place commercial interests ahead of national security. They doled out research and writing grants to few specialists considered tough on China. Commission leaders even shortened the organization's name to "U.S.-China Commission," taking out the words "Security Review" — an illegal act, some insiders cautioned, since the name was spelled out by federal law. Commission letterhead, staff business cards, the Website banner and even the site address (www.uscc.gov) all reflected the soft-soap name change. Yet somewhere along the way, as experts wrote studies and provided testimony, the facts fell into place. Human-rights and labor concerns of liberals found fertile ground among the national-security-minded conservatives and vice versa. Remarkably, the widely bipartisan group of 12 commissioners, with just a single exception, found what many more-assertive analysts had argued all along. Their final product became a primer for a broad-based rethinking of how the United States should deal with China's regime. The commissioners wrote that U.S. intelligence collection and analysis on China continues to be poor; that U.S. leaders have a "limited understanding" of Chinese official goals because "the U.S. government has dedicated insufficient resources to collect, translate and analyze Chinese writings and statements"; that "attempts to build crisis-management and confidence-building measures between the United States and China have failed"; that Beijing "sees the United States as a hegemonic power" and a "superpower in decline"; that the PRC "is dedicating considerable resources toward preparing for potential conflict with the United States, especially over Taiwan"; and Chinese leaders believe that, "despite overwhelming U.S. military and technological superiority, China can still defeat the United States by transforming its weakness into strength and exploiting U.S. vulnerabilities through asymmetric warfare, assassin's-mace weapons, deception, surprise and pre-emptive strikes." The sole dissenting commissioner was William A. Reinsch — a former Clinton undersecretary of commerce and now a business lobbyist who has pushed for relaxing or lifting sanctions against rogue nations such as Iraq, the Sudan and Cuba that have been identified by the State Department as terrorist regimes. Reinsch complained, "The commission majority has bent over backward to avoid describing the Chinese as a 'threat'; yet the belief that they are permeates every chapter" of the report. Reinsch's dissent thus underlined the commission's accomplishment. Commissioner Waldron's Grave Warning Commissioner Arthur Waldron, a professor of international relations at the University of Pennsylvania and a key figure in shaping the U.S.-China Security Review Commission report, wrote an addendum offering his own concerns to expand on the document's final draft: "The wide-ranging purpose of China's military buildup must be recognized. It is not a response, as is sometimes suggested, to U.S. support for Taiwan and other Asian friends. Rather, the buildup should be understood as aimed at excluding the U.S. from Asia, and establishing the ability to threaten and coerce neighboring states ranging from Mongolia to Japan to India. This conclusion is supported not only by evidence of China's capabilities, but also widely available statements of Chinese intent. If Taiwan did not exist, today's China would still pose serious security issues to all Asian states. "Money gained through trade with the U.S. must not be permitted to strengthen China's military and security apparatus. Current measures are entirely inadequate. A massive strengthening of counterintelligence is required; scrutiny must be imposed on Chinese access to U.S. capital markets, with real sanctions. U.S. companies should be forbidden to do business with army and security-related Chinese entities. Foreign companies helping China's military and security apparatus … should be denied any participation in U.S. government procurement or development programs. "With respect to China's proliferation behavior, we have all the evidence we need: China is a major source of advanced weapons to terrorist-sponsoring and other dangerous states. What is required is firm action. "Far more work is required, both from the commission and from government, on China's role (or lack of role) in international terrorism. Beijing's close connections to terrorist-sponsoring states provide ample reason for concern. … "U.S. intelligence operations with respect to China are inadequate and often misguided. Thorough reform is required, along the lines suggested by the Congressionally-mandated Tilelli report, which the CIA did not implement." J. Michael Waller is a senior writer for Insight magazine.


SenderBerl: Too little too late?

End

May 5, 2002

Due to the significance of world events, we wanted to further comment as follows.

A.    We accurately perceived post 9-11 that President Bush attempted to incite overthrows of Islamic nuclear (Pakistan) and Islamic oil (Saudi Arabia).

B.    By thrashing his weight around, President Bush truly generated fear among the Saudis that the US was intent to overthrow their regime.

C.    By doing so, he elevated a façade of a military resolution to a political resolution when on or about March 20th the Saudis for the first time presented a peace initiative.

D.    By this time, President Bush, in seeing that he was not about to cause a coup within Pakistan, allowing him to intercede, at least to the degree of securing Pakistani nuclear weapons, went out and simply “bought” Musharraf.

E.    Now having bought him, Musharraf at US urging went forth with a referendum to afford him five years of additional power by popular mandate.

F.    President Bush in fully knowing that there is a covert cold war going on between the US and China, openly supported the referendum knowing about the major infirmities of fraud and coercion as part of the alleged election process.

G.    The entire political power world knows and saw this as a major interventionary victory for the US, which we tell you was deliberate in causing China overt global political embarrassment.

H.    President Bush is in effect saying that while China has been calling the US a paper tiger, that the US now says to China’s new friends, who are willing to forego their long-term history and relationship with the US, that it is China who is the paper tiger.

I.    This puts enormous pressure on China to save face and should China fail to respond to Bush’s “I dare you to” challenge, China will lose great face.

J.    Unfortunately, we believe China will respond (especially because it is so easy for them to covertly undermine the US agenda).

K.    On March 30th the literal first day of the Israeli incursion into the West Bank we said that Arafat was the safest man in the Middle East.

L.    When, many days later, Bush gave Sharon a mandate to withdraw and Sharon twice refuted Bush’s public mandate, it became obvious to the world what we knew: that Bush authorized the incursion.

M.    Our position proved accurate that Sharon went out to eliminate all the threats to Arafat. Yasser Arafat admitted to the US, from our perspective, that he has to support terrorism because if he supports the Saudi peace initiative those militant groups totally against any accord will proceed to undermine him if not kill him.

N.    Thus, Sharon was given the green light to eliminate all those local groups, giving Arafat no excuse not to speak for the Saudi peace initiative (except conveniently to supreme pragmatist and strategist Arafat there are several groups remaining in Gaza who have already warned Arafat about some of his recent behavior).

O.    We interpreted the strategic phase after the elimination of the local terrorists as an expedited move toward the Saudi peace, especially in that the staged terrorism which platformed Sharon’s incursion also served as a platform of creating the ideal environment for the Israeli people to accept any legitimate peace (no doubt further aided by the emergence of anti-Semitism globally).

P.    While Sharon took out the local terrorists, the claimed problem for Arafat, Israel claimed that it could not accept the Saudi peace because with Syria, Iraq and Iran, any peace will only be a ruse to obtain strategic land to launch a military attack at what remains of Israel.

Q.    The US consequently has had to accept responsibility to neutralize Iraq, Iran and Syria, which responsibility it does not assume with great reluctance.

R.    When Syria was given a prestigious rare seat on the UN Security Council nearly immediately post 9/11, no one could explain it. Mainstream media didn’t touch it. Of course, our assessment that China was all over Syria, explained it. Bush went out and offered Assad of Syria everything and anything it wanted and no doubt the Saudis would have not announced the peace initiative UNLESS it knew Syria and everyone else would support it. Thus in Beirut (the Arab League meeting which took place only days later), everyone did support it in principle.

S.    Of course, Israel said to the US with just cause that Syria was going to get back with a ribbon the Golan and control of the water resources, and Israel getting from Syria a “promise,” even with a US guarantee, just wouldn’t cut it for Israel.

T.    The very fact that both Egypt and Jordan, the two countries with written peace agreements, stood openly ready to abandon them to join a war against Israel, after its “criminal incursion” into the West Bank, only proved the case to the US.

U.    Thus, we came out with an assessment that there was an 80% probability of a regional war. We looked to the scenario of Israel attacking Syria due to Hizbollah rocket attacks and when Iraq came in to aid Syria, the US would move against Iraq while Israel undermined Assad in Syria.

V.    We thought China would sense this scenario as well and thus Syria has been awfully quiet recently to reduce giving Israel any excuse to initiate such a regional conflict.

W.    Moreover, just days ago, the premier of China went to Lebanon, publicly saying de facto that China would intercede for Lebanon. At the same time, President Zemin went to Iran to publicly lock in their support and backing for Iran. Further, the US seeing this intercession sent Powell to see Mubarack the very day when there was a Chinese delegation in Egypt to discuss mutual cooperation for the 21st century.
Mubarack had the nerve to tell Powell that he had a headache and sent a lesser official to visit with Powell.

X.    China knows that the US is intent to ram through a peace. By doing so, by giving the region renewed stability, it undermines China’s successes in the Middle East, accomplished covertly through the Clinton presidency. Thus, in our opinion, China’s best option is to blow apart the possibility of peace no later than on or at about the time that Arafat publicly supports it. In our opinion, it will do so by acting through a third party, staging it to blame Israel by compromising a religious Islamic site. Alternatively, a major Jewish site could be compromised foreclosing the possibility of any peace.

Y.    Moreover, we have interpreted that since the major players recognize the US’s aggressive stance for Musharraf, they have concluded that the US is desperate enough and needs to undermine current regimes in Syria and Iraq (at minimum).

Z.    Our concern is that since this is a (covert) dynamic recognizable by China, China is countering by telling its friends that if the regimes in Jordan and Egypt are undermined, the US will be totally locked out of the Middle East and with control over oil the US agenda in the “unipolar” new world order agenda will be severely compromised.
***
Joseph Ehrlich
Sender, Berl & Sons Inc.
Early AM, May 5, 2002

PS. Note that when Sharon made the “criminal incursion” into the West Bank within 24 hours of when the Beirut Arab League conference disbanded, the Arab League of nations did not utter a word threatening to undermine the ratification given in Beirut to the Saudi peace initiative. This was a red flag that the staging we suspected from the very time of the announcement of the peace initiative was in play. Further, as we suspected, events have moved quickly in line with the US need to reach a peace as quickly as possible (the US wanted Sharon to move more quickly in his assigned task, but Israel sensitive to world response carried out its assigned mission with minimal loss of human life as a priority over speed). As a result of the US need to move things forward quickly, China, while it is reluctant to move quickly, must make, because of President Bush’s dare, resulting in loss of face for China, a major counter move sooner than later. If China proves itself to be the paper tiger, stock markets throughout the world will soar (and President Bush will lose some of those major worry lines).

Our First Internet Posting in 2002

SenderBerl believes there is something that touched a raw nerve in our May 23, 2002 radio interview. We believe it is one of the following possible comments made:

1. SenderBerl pointing out that President Bush qualified his remark regarding "that fateful morning."

2. SenderBerl's position that VP Cheney's remarks regarding an imminent further domestic terrorist attack was irresponsible and traumatized children.

3. SenderBerl's position that Cheney's remarks operated as a self-fulfilling prophecy and worked to encouraged fringe terrorists cells to undertake an attack.

4. SenderBerl pointing out that there were no further attacks for 8 1/2 months since 9-11; further explaining why there were none and why none were expected.

5. SenderBerl finding fault with using national security as a facade to keep facts out of the hands of those charged with oversight of those making decisions.

6. SenderBerl pointing out before the release of the Newsweek poll confirming same that Americans want an investigation; Americans want to be assured that someone is looking over how decisions are being made.

7. SenderBerl declaring Arafat the safest man in the Middle East after Israel first made its incursion into the West Bank.

8. SenderBerl taking the position that terrorist attacks served Arafat in eliminating all those who posed political and physical threats to his tenure and safety and also served to soften Israelis to accepting the Saudi peace initiative.

9 SenderBerl pointing out that after Israel eliminated all terrorist networks in the West Bank and Gaza that the US would pursue its end in eliminating the threat posed by Syria, Iraq and Iran.

10. SenderBerl emphasizing its position since October 2001 that Syria was offered a position on the UN Security Council with US approval, albeit a terrorist state, to offset Chinese influence over Syria.

11. SenderBerl pointing out that the real reason Mubarack of Egypt turned down Powell's visit to Cairo and request to meet with him was due to the fact that the Chinese delegation was in town. Mubarack told Powell he had a "headache."

This interview can be heard by clicking below:

http://www.senderberl.com/052302.rm

The report upon which the interview was grounded is reproduced below with a recent SenderBerl report indicating that NOW Americans and American interests ARE targets of Islamic terrorist cells.

MAY 19, 2002 REPORT

Why Dick Cheney is correct in warning of a more serious threat!

This is one of the most serious interpretations we have ever issued. Dick Cheney is out there warning of a more serious terror attack on the US than 9-11. He is correct, but below is our interpretation of why.

Regrettably, and we emphasize regrettably, we issued to some colleagues immediately post 9-11 evidence that we were able to ascertain that the government did know about the attack on the World Trade Center and Washington targets. When President Bush came out and said this weekend that no one should doubt that if he knew there would be attacks “ON THAT FATEFUL MORNING,” he would have done everything to stop them, we recognized this statement was not a lie. It is however disinformation. While President Bush didn’t know the day and time, he, in our respectful opinion, knew that what we now know as 9-11 was coming within a narrow time window. In other words, if you take out that phrase “on that fateful morning,” the statement then becomes putatively untruthful.

"Had I known that the enemy was going to use airplanes to kill on that fateful morning, I would have done everything in my power to protect the American people," Bush said.

We do not intend to get into this sad possibility now opened by the behavior of the political parties in Washington. Suffice it to say that even without the evidence we have secured that it sufficient to recognize that the major lies now undermine President Bush’s chances of re-election in 2004.

Now, here is why we believe this to be the case.

First, the major error committed was the statements made by C. Rice, his national security advisor, that the White House had no thought or idea that a plane would be used as a missile to wit: this was a new perspective, to which the White House was otherwise unaware. This is easily proven untrue by a series of reports throughout a four or five year period where the CIA and other agencies uncovered the strategic intent to use a plane as a missile to take out government related facilities/buildings.  Thus, we can conclude that Ms. Rice has cost herself her job because her remaining in this position will be a political liability in 2004. Thus, when no one is looking, she ultimately will be replaced.

Second, is Dick Cheney coming on so strong against an investigation of 9-11. The American public doesn’t care if it is an open or closed investigation, but they surely want to know that the check and balance system in Washington is in operation against the threat that its government serves as its greatest opponent, if not enemy. It surely wants to know that no one really knew this was forthcoming and allowed it to happen - especially with someone like Dick Cheney rattling their instincts.

Thus, when Dick Cheney comes out in the name of the administration and declares that there is a war going on and that the Democrats and no one else should have the audacity to look into the truth, then the damage is more severe that President Bush Sr.’s tax gaffe.

Third, while TWA Flight 800 proves that there is no real intent of the Democrats to unmask the sordid truth behind 9-11, it is political fodder that can be used to black mail the Republicans. When Gephardt implores the press to act accountably in their role as the fourth estate, it makes us ill, when both parties and the fourth estate stood intentionally blind to TWA Flight 800 and other major stories. The fourth estate doesn’t need to know what we know. Just look again at what we wrote immediately with 9-11: we said that when four planes went off transponders, why didn’t bells ring everywhere (honestly, in the environment known to the White House as just admitted since Friday, one plane off transponder should have rung bells everywhere)? Now, we also know that when the threat was known that U.S. military fighters were told to sit on the runway for some 30 minutes or more before taking to the air! So the fourth estate and the political opposition need little else to inquire as to what happened. Gordon Thomas in his book Seeds of Fire proffers that the Mossad told the U.S. about an imminent attack by bin-Laden trained terrorists, and the Mossad itself said as much to the CIA, and the CIA denied the Mossad saying any such thing. Israeli military experts pointed out, contrary to C. Rice’s position that the FAA was on full alert for a plane hijacking, that air and sea monitoring by the US was direly lacking on 9-11. The truth of it is that everyone was asleep and when the serious threat was known someone kept our military fighters on the ground.

Conclusion: Thus, Dick Cheney who we ascertained scares a lot of people for a reputation that connects not only with cold heartedness but sheer cruelty, proffers that the U.S. faces the threat of a worse attack. What Sender, Berl & Sons understands and interprets therefrom, from our experience in geopolitical analysis and events, is that a worse attack will make 9-11 and the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings, and the myriad of serious questions never asked or answered, a thing of the past, forgotten in the death and destruction of the forecasted more horrific attack. The American people cannot absorb anything beyond the scope and issues connected to a worse attack. Thus, we are sick and disheartened to conclude that if the investigation into 9-11 gets into the nerve to the administration’s tooth, that what Cheney and Rumsfeld both immediately announced contemporaneous with the new hotbed discussion of 9-11, might in fact prove true, and then from our perspective we have a shadow government out of control (one which should have been lassoed in under Clinton).

Let us conclude with a very important point in this critical and sad time in history. Jimmy Carter went to Cuba and spoke forcibly for the important of democratic elections. Many years ago Sender, Berl & Sons Inc. detected the major strategic design of the new world order group. While they permitted free and open elections, they controlled the candidates running for office. Thus, while the Israeli people elected Sharon, they really got Peres. Similarly today, Netanyahu stands against Sharon, as Sharon recently stood against Barak. So if Sharon gets into political trouble, Netanyahu will carry the day and the Israeli people will have elected Netanyahu and still get Peres (meaning a government willing to give up the West Bank on new world order direction). In Recapturing America, we proffered that when John Smith died at 52 of a heart attack (despite his poor health history), that the timing was impeccable to bring in Clinton clone Tony Blair who has served as Clinton (after he proved himself a failed President his first year in office) the new world order agenda. Thus, we never doubted from the very first day of political office, Tony Blair’s commitment to sandbag the British Pound.

Why is Sender, Berl & Sons Inc. against the new world order? It is anti-religion, anti-democratic, anti-U.S., and portends a leadership equating with one historical reference: Rome. Many of the people serving the current administration believe they are serving the country, but the failure of the fourth estate buries appropriate discussion of events and issues and thus why control of the mainstream media and press were critical to the new world order agenda. Now, there is the Internet and new world order forces are able to control new news figures by a familiar route: money, greed and power.

Let us say this, when you saw the American people give the huge amount of money they did, and saw the entire government sit on their hands with tape over their mouths as the elitist American Way and Red Cross took the position that they would do with it as they pleased, this was a microcosmic example of why we have to take the time we do to shake up anyone we can as to sordid state of affairs in America and the world today.

We support the Constitution of the United States of America, the religious tenets upon which it was founded, including but not limited to an operational fourth estate. Without it, the future will be as dire and dark as we are telling you, evidenced by the worldwide movement to attack G-d. Without a religious resolution in the Middle East, brace yourselves for a future completely opposite to the one the rosy media has instilled into your minds.

Joseph Ehrlich
Sender, Berl & Sons Inc.
Sunday, May 19, 2002

JUNE 25, 2002 REPORT

SenderBerl: President Bush doesn't get it. The battle today is not between the Palestinians and Israel but between Islam and the West. This battle is forged by current US policy and was evidenced by President Bush's posture in his comments yesterday. We thereby excerpt some of them and provide our succinct commentary thereon.

President Bush:
And when the Palestinian people have new leaders, new institutions and new security arrangements with their neighbors, the United States of America will support the creation of a Palestinian State, whose borders and certain aspects of its sovereignty will be provisional until resolved as part of a final settlement in the Middle East.

SenderBerl: The Islamic world has witnessed with China the US instilling caretaker governments throughout the world. They are deleting the word "new" above and substituting the word "controlled" as reflecting the truth of President Bush's intent in his remarks. The Islamic world we think wants to rid itself of US bullying even more than any thought of ridding itself of Israel. The US is the real enemy of the Islamic world because religious leaders have interpreted that US policy wants to dilute the relationship between the Islamic people and G-d. When Afghanistan was freed of Taliban influence, the first pictures shown by CNN reflected merchants posting pictures of pin up girls in the marketplace.

President Bush:
In the work ahead, we all have responsibilities. The Palestinian people are gifted and capable and I'm confident they can achieve a new birth for their nation.

A Palestinian State will never be created by terror. It will be built through reform. And reform must be more than cosmetic change or a veiled attempt to preserve the status quo. True reform will require entirely new political and economic institutions based on democracy, market economics and action against terrorism.    

SenderBerl: Again when President Bush uses the word reform, it is perceived by the Islamic world as one where everything changes where things are in accord with US desires and wishes, as though the Arab people were its dog and had to respond to the wishes and desires of its master. This rather than encourage "reform" encourages resistance.

President Bush:
Today the elected Palestinian legislature has no authority and power is concentrated in the hands of an unaccountable few. A Palestinian State can only serve its citizens with a new constitution which separates the powers of government.    

SenderBerl: The Chinese laugh when they hear President Bush say the above. The aftermath of 9-11 showed many American people that US citizens face the same expressed woes: critical decisions in the hands of a few without adequate oversight by provided branches of government who have been rendered lame and ineffective due to Executive Orders.

***

President Bush:
The United States, along with the European Union and Arab states, will work with Palestinian leaders to create a new constitutional framework and a working democracy for the Palestinian people. And the United States, along with others in the international community, will help the Palestinians organize and monitor fair, multiparty local elections by the end of the year with national elections to follow.

SenderBerl: We ourselves are disturbed when we read the above because we have been commenting for many years about the modus operandi of the new world order which by the way applies to the United States (itself a victim thereof): provide free and open elections subject to making sure that new world order forces control those who are running for high office. Thereby, it doesn't matter who runs, the result is the same: officials loyal to new world order forces. See Recapturing America.    

***

President Bush:
Today, the Palestinian people live in economic stagnation, made worse by official corruption. A Palestinian State will require a vibrant economy, where honest enterprise is encouraged by honest government. The United States, the international donor community and the World Bank stand ready to work with Palestinians on a major project of economic reform and development. The United States, the EU, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund are willing to oversee reforms in Palestinian finances, encouraging transparency and independent auditing. And the United States, along with our partners in the developed world, will increase our humanitarian assistance to relieve Palestinian suffering.    

SenderBerl: When the US these days expresses the willingness to oversee reforms in Palestinian finances, the rest of the world today understands this to mean obtaining full economic control over the subject country. In this manner, the subject country becomes a perpetual debtor nation to its lender country(countries), and must comply or else face dire consequences. Some countries would rather remain backward than become a lifetime debtor nation. President Bush's remarks in essence say that there is no choice in the matter: you must do it our way. This is what will platform the imminent new level of resistance. While the US wants to put out Saudi Arabia in the forefront of supporting this path, SenderBerl interprets that the Islamic world will continue to act in every way possible to resist it.

***
President Bush:
I have a hope for the people of Muslim countries. Your commitments to morality and learning and tolerance lead to great historical achievements, and those values are alive in the Islamic world today. You have a rich culture, and you share the aspirations of men and women in every culture. Prosperity and freedom and dignity are not just American hopes or Western hopes, they are universal human hopes. And even in the violence and turmoil of the Middle East, America believes those hopes have the power to transform lives and nations.    

SenderBerl: These patronizing comments ill serve US interests. In fact, we interpret that when Prime Minister Sharon now enters Gaza, as we interpreted heretofore, to kill off any remnant of terrorists, that this will escalate the type of terrorism which Israel will face. We thereby see terrorism in Israel which causes a higher plateau of death and suffering and due to President Bush's position in his comments and remarks we believe that the Islamic world will now take the battle to Americans and American interests world wide, signifying that the conflict far exceeds the boundaries of the conflict in Israel.

What about China? China sees that the US effort in the Middle East has been lost. When President Bush speaks about 18 to 36 months to redo Oslo, it is translated as defeat for the US and the need now for China to further solidify its interests in the Middle East as US forges ahead to further antagonize everyone in the Middle East with remarks which are only seen as super power bullying.

What about Israel? Initial reactions are joy that President Sharon can now deal forcibly with terrorism and that Oslo has been shelved for the time being until the US can put in a hand picked government with the Palestinian people. However, the truth of it is that Israel has been given another window to take the correct course and the window will be shortened when Israel, Jews, and Americans face heightened terrorism globally.

Conclusion: The controlling dynamic is biblical. We said long ago that Israel despite its military could not prevail in the conflict, and it has not, as the nation faces economic collapse and other major problems.  What President Bush has done we fear is escalate the level of the attack. Since the Islamic world will interpret a new affirmative major effort to dilute Islam, the deeds stemming from global terrorism will now escalate. Short of blowing up all the Islamic people and nations, the US and Israel will now face a future of heightened terrorism. The only solution as we have long proffered is a religious resolution. If the new world order is committed to taking those under monotheism away from G-d, then the future is dark and dire. What needs review and reconsideration is whether the US and the world is subject to a policy created by limited hands which not only seek to undermine G-d but also have undermined the very precepts upon which our nation was founded (and under which it truly prospered).

China will now further emerge as a world power. Since the US for commercial reasons or otherwise fails to declare China its true enemy, the US operates out of weakness not strength. Just as its initiative failed from two sequential acts of local Israeli terrorism, President Bush's entire South East Asia stratagem rests on Musharraf. Our position regarding Musharraf is clear. Jiang Zemin detests the man and thus this does not forbode well for him and thus the US stratagem.

Bottom line: The US moved out on 9-11 with a modus operandi not well enough thought out and planned reflecting fat from too many years of artifical prosperity from the Clinton term and tenure. When some of this fat now evaporates perhaps someone will bow to those who truly founded this nation and undertake consideration of a religious resolution to an escalated conflict which can truly undermine the future for everyone.

Joseph Ehrlich
Sender, Berl & Sons Inc.
Early Morning, June 25, 2002    

March 1, 2002 Interim Analysis

President Bush recently returned from his second trip in four months to China. The mainstream news media gave more attention to his going than to covering what happened when he was there. Due to the absence of mainstream media coverage and the significance of current events, SenderBerl made a rare public appearance to speak regarding the issues connective to President Bush’s China trip. 

 To link to the interview click here:
http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?id=1018919&location=dallas

President Bush seemingly has charged himself with responsibility of abating if not resolving the two major nuclear threats: Kashmir and the Middle East. Casting aside the noise, you will see that President Bush has been brilliantly successful to date: 

1. President Bush opened up dialogue, if not far more, with Pakistan through its military leader General Musaraff. Therefore, the open threat in this region has been seriously abated and the President has obtained a platform, previously non-existent, to work from, in neutralizing the threat and longer-term danger represented by this Islamic nuclear power.
   
2. As to the Middle East, which was lost post 9-11, the President played a long game, and it now appears that he has a 60% and better chance of getting it back. Here, for the first time in history, the U.S. does not have to chase the Arab nations for a peace; but, on the other hand, they are approaching the U.S. for a longer-term peace. This is all because President Bush was willing to sacrifice himself, compromise himself, to provide the environment for the Middle East to move toward a peace.

President Bush is goal-oriented, and at this point of time we applaud him and in appearing on Internet radio we did so to explain what is truly going on, in our respectful opinion, and to set forth what the U.S. must incorporate into its design, in furthering a peace agenda under the Saudi peace plan.

President Bush and Vice-President Cheney are not idly highlighting the threat of steep U.S. domestic casualties. The specter of WW III is much closer than anyone wishes to emphasize. However, the road to peace is not much further away either, and listening to the interview might give you the understanding you cannot otherwise achieve from public mainstream media outlets.

 Joseph Ehrlich
Sender, Berl & Sons Inc.
March 1, 2002

November 8, 2001 Interim Analysis

China wants the United States out of South Asia. The U.S. either has to confront China or save face and negotiate a pass from domestic terrorism and if receiving it, leave the area. It is likely ultimately to do the latter, recently changing its tune from a multi year residency to one which may terminate this winter. In terms of the Mid-East, the tail that wags the dog is Syria and it is currently with China. Thus, the United States cannot effectively pursue its new revised (due to China) Mid-East peace agenda, where it now would be willing to abandon Israel, passing it off to the EU for support, to garner a new firm alliance with the Arab block of countries. Thus, this experience has been costly to the U.S. Syria openly sides with China. Saudi Arabia is likely to bolt too, with untold consequences to the U.S. economy, perhaps allowing preferential shipments now to new WTO member China. In short, the Mid-East has been lost. The two main countries which remain in the Arab/Islamic block are Turkey and Jordan. Because of a serious error, where King Abdullah yesterday, November 7, 2001, sat side by side in a carriage with Queen Elizabeth II (analysis at www.senderberl.com/china/abdullah.htm), we regrettably believe that he may be subject to Islamic political assassination. Have no question that China is intent on fomenting conflict in the Mid-East, where it will side with the Arab block against Israel. The U.S. may be stuck with Israel because it is problematic whether it can pursue its agenda because of Syria's continued siding with China. Pakistan, albeit the coerced cooperation of its government, seems likely to remain with China. As to Afghanistan, we cannot see its future at this time. The above reflects the opinion and interpretation of SenderBerl based on current data.

Joseph Ehrlich
Sender, Berl & Sons Inc.
November 8, 2001

Updated with News Stories

Saudis tell US forces to get out

Foreign soldiers seen as political liability

Ewen MacAskill, diplomatic editor
Saturday January 19, 2002
The Guardian

Saudi Arabia's rulers are poised to throw US strategy in the Middle East into disarray by asking Washington to pull its forces out of the kingdom because they have become a "political liability".