 One of the best definitions of a true patriot today, I believe, is a person who defends his country against its own government. I love my country. It's the government that worries me. One of the best ways to defend our country against our government is through the search for historical truth, especially as it relates to war. This is a theme of my book, A Century of War, where in our state, quote, we must learn to avoid war and develop a general will to peace. I believe the key to this development is to learn the truth about the real causes and effects of wars so that we can see through the false propaganda, which is used by political leaders to convince us to go to war. It has been the wars of the 20th century, which have been the primary destroyers of individual freedom, even for the winners of those wars. As Ludwig von Mises stated in his book, Socialism, war is harmful not only to the conquered, but to the conqueror. Society has arisen out of the works of peace. The essence of society is peacemaking. Peace and not war is the father of all things. Only economic action has created wealth around us. Labor, not the profession of arms, brings happiness. Peace builds, war destroys, end quote. In a recent book by Andrew Basswick entitled Washington Rules, he states, Proud of World War Two, Americans by and large viewed military power and institutions with skepticism, if not outright hostility. In the wake of World War Two, that changed. An affinity for military might emerged as central to the American identity. In quote, his book is a history of the huge shift in public opinion, which tried to avoid wars into acceptance of permanent war with the war on terror. The event of 9-11 was the perfect storm for the destruction of American freedom because we are now at war permanently with terrorism. And there is no way to tell when the war is over or who could sign a peace treaty for the terrorist. One of the benefits of the government and war is that it gives complete control over the people and their property and dissent is stifled. There's a great book out now entitled It's Dangerous to Be Right When Your Government Is Wrong. Maybe some of you have seen that book. It takes a courageous person, a courageous patriot to stand up to his own government and say that war is wrong, but it needs to be done to protect freedom. You can be accused of being disloyal, even if you question wars that have been over for some time like World War One or World War Two. One of the best books of this year is entitled Marius Mosaic by Peter Janney. It's not only as a courageous book, but it's a personal challenge to Janney because he exposes his own father, who was a high level CIA executive, at least of being in the know about the murder by the CIA of an American citizen here in America, who happened to be a family friend. I'll talk more about the book later, but I want to give you his quotation in the book about patriotism, quote, patriotism, real patriotism has a most important venue. And it is not always about putting on a uniform to fight some senseless, insane war. There is a higher loyalty than real patriotism demands and encompasses, and that is loyalty to the pursuit of truth, no matter how painful or uncomfortable the journey, end quote. Revisionism about war is a search for historical truth to bring history into accord with the facts, with the purpose of trying to promote peace and to prevent war. This is very large subjects. I want to confine my remarks to only two specific aspects of revisionism on war. First, we need a new paradigm for political labels, which needs to include the fact that the political philosophy of fascism is a political philosophy of the left and not the right. Collectivism includes communism, socialism and fascism. Confucius is reported to have said that you can lose your liberty by corruption of language and the meaning of words. I think this needs to be a revision of the political labels left and right and conservative and liberal because they've become rather meaningless in the description of the political ideas that are current today. As you know, the terms left and right as political labels arose out of the French Revolution and was certain but where certain parties were seated in the assembly based upon the ideas that were pertinent to the French Revolution. I would suggest a new designation of something like at the top of the end of the spectrum, the words individual freedom or simply individualism. And at the bottom end of the spectrum, the word collectivism, then you can place the ideas on a value system as they relate more to one and to the other. One specific reason I think this is important is because of the word fascism has been designated as a political system on the extreme right and also on the right of place conservatism and libertarianism. Communism and socialism are placed on the left. I believe this is particularly important because I think that the so-called progressive movement in America, which began with the Spanish American War and met the peak of its influence through the reforms of 1913 and the World War One is in reality fascism. I think that fascism should be lumped together with communism and socialism and described by the phrase collectivism. There are many writers who agree that Franklin Roosevelt's new deal was fascism. And I think that the 20th century America has evolved into a political fascist system of war and welfare. Benito Mussolini was the founder of European fascism in Milan in 1919. He came to power in 1922 in Italy. He remained in total control for 21 years. I quote him in my book, A Century of War, for a statement that he made in 1927 as follows, quote, fascism believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace. War alone brings up to its highest tension, all human energy and puts a stamp of nobility upon the people who have the courage to meet it. It may be expected that this will be the century of authority, a century of the left, a century of fascism. For the 19th century was a century of individualism. Liberalism always signifies individualism. It may be expected that this will be the century of collectivism and hence the century of the state for fascism, the growth of empire. That is for grass, for fascism, the growth of empire. That is to say, the expansion of the nation is the essential manifestation of vitality and its opposite is a sign of decay and death, end quote, very prophetic. Respect respectively, both Germany and Italy became unified nations in the latter part of the 19th century. The ideas of Marx and communism constituted an international movement advocating violence and force to eliminate private property and capitalism. Another international movement was socialism, which also attacked property and individualism, yet many socialists were stated that socialism could be established through democracy rather than by force, by simply enlarging the number of eligible voters. After World War One, communism became a severe threat to take over in Italy. Mussolini was a dedicated socialist and a journalist, and he supported fascism as a national movement rather than an international movement to fight international communism. He advocated force and war as a method to combat the violence of communism. There was no racism connected to fascism in Italy. In Germany, however, after World War One, where violence of communism was also about to take over as part of the international movement, it was Hitler and the national socialist German Workers' Party, which advocated force and violence to overcome communism. Hitler saw communism as a Jewish political movement and almost always referred to it as Judaism. It was Hitler who introduced racism to the fascist movement. Today, if someone wants to smear another person, a political person, they will say they're part of the extreme right. Or they are fascists and everyone naturally assumes he's talking about Nazis. People on the left often characterize as moderates and people on the right is extremists. Another excellent book published in 2007, which supports my argument that fascism is part of the left, is entitled Liberal Fascism by John Goldberg. He states the main idea of this book as follows. Quote, in this book, I have argued that modern liberalism is the offspring of 20th century progressivism, which in turn shares intellectual roots with European fascism. Jonah Goldberg points out in this book that Teddy Roosevelt, Herbert Crowley and his colleagues glorified war because it, quote, was the midwife of progress. Indeed, Crowley believed that the Spanish American War's greatest significance lay in the fact that it gave birth to progressivism. In quote, Goldberg points out that the progressive believed in the militarization of society and politics was considered the best available means towards centralization of power. You could use patriotism on the people to cause them to give up their liberty in the name of security. Goldberg states, quote, Wilson fully abandoned his faith in congressional government when he witnessed Teddy Roosevelt's success in turning the Oval Office into the bully pulpit. In quote, Goldberg further pointed out that the progressives were openly and proudly hostile to individualism and viewed the traditional system of constitutional checks and balances as an outdated impediment to progress because such horse and buggy institutions were a barrier to their own ambition. In quote, Goldberg thinks that Wilson may have been the 20th century's first fascist political leader instead of Mussolini. One of the 20th century's most astute intellectuals in political theory was Eric von Konell Leiden, who agrees completely with me on Goldberg on placing fascism on the left. He covers this in his book entitled Leftism Revisited. In chapter four that is entitled Right and Left, he points out that in Germany after World War One, the national socialists or Nazis were seated on the far right of the right stag or assembly because on the left was the side of the assembly with the internationalists, which were the communists and the socialists. The conservatives and the monarchists were national movements and were seated on the right. Since Nazism was a national movement in Germany, rather than international, they were seated on the right. He states, this is how fascism became placed on the right in political dialogue. I think it's an important part of revisionism to get language correct and to reveal to Americans, especially, that the philosophy of progressivism, modern liberalism and neo-conservatism are really part of the fascist movement and they all collectivists, along with socialism and communism. Today, the dominant intellectual movement known as neo-conservatism fits the definition of fascism. They gain control over the George W. Bush administration. And it continued to dominate American foreign policy with the tragic war in Iraq and other wars spreading throughout the Middle East, which was their original intent. Springs me to my second point on revisionism in war. And that is the problem of the CIA and its secret activities, which often lead to war. If you want to see where America first became known in the Middle East as the Great Satan, you can start with a book by Stephen Kinzer entitled All the Shaw's Men, An American Coup and the Roots of the Middle East Terror. The book explains how the British colonial policy caused them to rape Iran by taking its oil and placing the British oil company and a refinery in Iran. Without any real benefit to Iran at all, Iran's greatest statesman who was democratically elected, genuinely popular and well educated in Europe was Mossaday, who came to power and terminated the British imperialism by nationalizing the oil company. Churchill and the British appealed to President Truman to use the American CIA to overthrow Mossaday. But Truman refused on the grounds that the CIA was simply an information gathering agency and not an agency used to overthrow governments. This all changed with the election of Eisenhower in 1952, who brought to power the aggressive Dulles Brothers with John Foster's Secretary of State and Allen as head of CIA. The Dulles Brothers convinced Eisenhower that the CIA should be used to overthrow Mossaday because using that they used the argument that they did not do that communism would take over Iran. Teddy Roosevelt's grandson, Kermit Roosevelt, led the CIA secret and successful plan to overthrow Mossaday and then install the Shah to head the government. The CIA trained the Shah's secret police who continued to terrorize the people of Iran until the Shah was overthrown later by his own people. America, which had had a good reputation in the Middle East before that, then became known as the Great Satan because it became well known that it was a CIA that had removed Mossaday. Stephen Kenzel, who wrote all the Shah's men, continued his story of the disastrous activity of the CIA in his excellent book entitled Overthrow, America's Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq. When Eisenhower left office in 1960, he described the CIA as, quote, a legacy of ashes, which became the title of an excellent and critical history of the CIA by Tim Wynum published in 2007. The CIA is now recognized worldwide as the great threat to many countries and the cause of much war and chaos. Back in 1971, the British historian, Arnold Toynbee, wrote in the New York Times, May 7, 1971, as follows, quote, to most Europeans, I guess, America now looks like the most dangerous country in the world since America is unquestionably the most powerful country. The transformation of America. The transformation of America's image within the last 30 years is very frightening to Europeans. It is probably still more frightening for the great majority of the human race who are neither Europeans nor North Americans. They, I imagine, feel even more insecure than we feel. They feel at any moment America may intervene in their internal affairs with the same appalling consequences as it followed from the American intervention into Southeast Asia. In today's climate, wherever there's trouble, violence, suffering, tragedy, the rest of us are now quick to suspect the CIA. In fact, the roles of the United States and Russia have been reversed in the eyes of much of the world. Today, America has become the nightmare, end quote. Of course, this was written long before the mid-east wars and all the involvement of the CIA there in the Iraq war. I do not think that timing is really a coincidence that one month after the assassination of President John Kennedy, former President Harry Truman, who had created the CIA in 1947, wrote an editorial in the Washington Post dated December 22, 1963, entitled, U.S. should hold CIA to intelligence. It states this. There's something about the way the CIA has been functioning that is casting a shadow over our historic position. I feel we need to correct it. For some time, I've been disturbed by the way that CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the government. Listen to this next sentence and see what event you think he's referring to. This has led to trouble and may have compounded our difficulties in several explosive areas four months after Kennedy's assassination. Therefore, I would like to see the CIA be restored to its original assignment as an intelligence arm of the president and whatever else it can properly do in that capacity and that its operational duties be terminated or properly used elsewhere. Excuse me, this brings me back to the fantastic book Mary's Mosaic by Peter Genie who condemns the CIA for what he believes was the murder of Mary Myer, 11 months after John Kennedy's murder because the CIA felt that she knew too much about the assassination of John Kennedy and the involvement of the CIA. Mary Myer was a beautiful, independently wealthy, well-educated and influential person. The CIA apparently feared that her diary contained much incriminating evidence against the CIA. There are several accounts of the search for Mary Myer's diary. One is that on the day after Mary's murder, her sister, who was married to Ben Bradley with the Washington Post, both went to Mary's house to search for the diary. When they entered her house, they found James Angleton, chief of counterintelligence of the CIA, already there without permission or authority, also searching for the diary. Mary had known John Kennedy for many years since college days and was suspected of being his mistress after her divorce from Cord Myer. She was strongly opposed to the American intervention in the Vietnam and it was suspected that she had much influence on President Kennedy about Vietnam and war in general. As I stated, Peter Janney's father was a high-ranking CIA executive and Mary Myer's former husband, Cord Myer was also a high-ranking CIA executive. And for some time at CIA gatherings, while she was still married to Cord Myer, she was openly critical of the CIA activities. At the time of her murder, she was divorced from Cord Myer. In his book, Mary's Mosaic, Peter Janney's State, excuse me, the CIA's inception and entrance into American landscape fundamentally altered not only the functioning of our government, but the entire character of American life. The CIA reign during the Cold War has contaminated the pursuit of historical truth. While the dismantling of America's Republic didn't begin in Dallas in 1963, that they certainly marked an unprecedented acceleration of the erosion of constitutional democracy. America has never recovered. Today in 2012, the ongoing disintegration of our country is ultimately about the corruption of our government. A government that has consistently misrepresented and lied about what really took place in Dallas in 1963 as it did about the escalation of the Vietnam War that followed and which it presently continues to do in so many things. One solution to the CIA issue was stated by President Kennedy after the failed invasion of Cuba and which was organized by the CIA. And he stated, quote, I'm going to splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds. In conclusion, I believe that true patriot is the individual who will speak truth to power and try to bring history into accord with the facts, especially as to war. Thank you. Thank you.