Your website author pulls ALL the threads together in this Feb 3rd, 2003 email to Australia's National Security Hotline.

Updated on April 22nd, 2006



"If you pass this book on to someone, you have my thanks." co-author, William Rivers Pitt

Click here for the complete 139kb .htm version of "War on Iraq"

Click here for the no-frills 46kb .doc version, which is a fine-print Winzip compression suitable for emailing as an attachment or opening and printing out.


 Click here to go to Amazon and buy this book


Armageddon: (probably Hebrew: “Hill of Megiddo”), in the New Testament, place where the kings of the Earth under demonic leadership will wage war on the forces of God at the end of world history. Armageddon is mentioned in the Bible only once, in Revelations, or The Revelation to John (16:16). The Palestinian city of Megiddo was probably used as a symbol for such a battle because of its strategic importance in Palestinian history. Because it controlled a pass that cut through the Mount Carmel ridge from the coastal Plain of Sharon into Esdraelon, Megiddo commanded the road leading from Egypt and the coastal plain of Palestine into Galilee, Syria, and Mesopotamia. Megiddo was the scene of many battles, and Revelations seems to imply that the “hill” on which the city fortress stood, or the “mountain” heights behind it, had become a symbol of the final battlefield where God's heavenly armies will defeat the demon-led forces of evil. Other biblical references suggest Jerusalem as the site of this battle.

Copyright © 1994-2002 Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.

"Australian troops being sent to the Gulf will be deployed according to a Bush Administration plan for war on Iraq even though the Howard Government says it has made no decision to join a United States-led attack.".

(Don't miss our "Conspiracy" webpage)

PITT: Brent Scowcroft recently described it as Armageddon.

RITTER: It could get that way. There's a real potential for that. We'll be racing two factors: time and casualties. If we go into Iraq, we're going to have to win quickly. We aren't going to have the latitude for a long, drawn-out campaign. If the Iraqis can delay our action for any amount of time - a month, two, if Saddam can hang on - the Arab world will explode in a way we've never seen, a way that will make 9/11 look like a kid's game.

 "That's where Armageddon comes in. No one today can ever envision giving terrorists a nuclear weapon; it would be very difficult for them to acquire one. But if either the United States or Israel were to use a nuke against Iraq, I guarantee within ten years the United States would be struck by a terrorist nuclear bomb. And then all bets will be off. If the U.S. or Israel used nukes against Iraq, Pakistan and Iran would turn over nuclear capability to terrorists. I guarantee this. There's Armageddon. This war with Iraq is the dumbest thing I've ever heard of."

PITT: You think oil doesn't have very much to do with this.

RITTER: No. Oil is everywhere in that part of the world. We can get all the oil we want from Iraq. The Iraqi Oil Minister has made it clear that, once the sanctions are lifted, Iraq will do whatever they can to ensure the strategic energy requirements of the United States are met. It's not that Iraq is denying us access to oil.

"One power with a president who can't think properly, ... wants to plant the world into holocaust"

Former South African President Nelson Mandela, on President George Bush's stance on Iraq, January 30th, 2003.



Please! Read this book! Don't be suicidally ignorant!


In an "instant book" entitled War On Iraq author William Rivers Pitt talks to former Marine and U.N. weapons inspector Scott Ritter (a self-described conservative Republican) and debunks the key arguments for war with Iraq. These are: that Iraq has a viable stockpile of weapons of mass destruction and will soon have nuclear capabilities, that Saddam Hussein is an ally of Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, and that any new Iraqi regime would be friendlier to the West than Hussein's.

War On Iraq argues that, unlike the televised in-and-out Persian Gulf War, the current conflict will cause heavy casualties on both sides, the destabilization of the Middle East, and a terrible backlash of terrorist attacks on the United States. Scott Ritter argues that a war on Iraq will give rise "to exactly the kind of Islam vs. the West al Qaeda sought when it attacked the World Trade Center a year ago."

The book offers a non-partisan analysis of the current situation, including a brief history, and conducts a pointed interview with former U.N. weapons inspector Scott Ritter to dismantle the myths about Iraq’s present weapons program and to uncover the neo-conservative forces behind the White House’s fixation on Iraq.

War on Iraq argues that the threatened conflict will be playing into the hand of Osama bin Laden (who would like to see Saddam Hussein deposed as much as the Bush administration) and that any attack at this moment in history would be both unprovoked and illegal. It then lays down the framework for a reasonable, informed debate. The book closes with a stark forecast for American troops if a ground war ensues and urges the nation’s leaders to seek a diplomatic solution before it is too late.

• Weapons of mass destruction unlikely

• No tie between Al Qaeda and Hussein

• The problems with regime change

• Possible devastating consequences of going to war

War on Iraq consists of a small introduction detailing the recent history of Iraq and Western intervention in the country and then a 50-page interview with ex-weapons inspector Scott Ritter (carried out by William Rivers Pitt). It is a testament to such a small (79 pages) book that after reading it one, in some sense, feels that one has read a full and detailed account of the issues and, perhaps more importantly, a considered refutation of the excuses, exaggerations, misunderstandings and lies that make up far to much of the media froth helping to push us all into a war that Ritter, for one, thinks could be hugely dangerous. Ritter knows more about the recent history of Iraq than most anyone else having for seven years been part of the UN weapons inspectorate team that was charged with finding and destroying weapons of mass destruction inside Saddam's Iraq. This team was kicked out of Iraq when it became clear the US were indeed using the UN teams to gather intelligence.

Ritter makes it perfectly clear that his position concerning Iraq is not ideological--he is a card-carrying Republican after all and an ex-marine which immediately suggests he can not really be described as a liberal pacifist! He simply suggests that the excuses being given for the drive to war have not and can not be corroborated. This is an explosive little book and those who oppose any and all wars or those who support them would do well to see if they can respond to Ritter's challenges. --Mark Thwaite

With so many politicians and elected officials in blind lockstep with the USA's apparent desire to attack Iraq, it's time to think outside of the box.

How resourceful would we be if we had the ability to see the future and it didn't look like we thought it would?

If you wish to contemplate something and share it with others, in order to initiate more resourceful thinking, you may ask:

If you knew that attacking Iraq would somehow ultimately lead to the destruction of the USA, what would you do?

What would you do instead of attacking?

Spread the question!

(Very special thanks to Michael Horn, a very special Human Being, with very special insight.)

"If you pass this book on to someone, you have my thanks." William Rivers Pitt, co-author of "War on Iraq".

I can recognise heroic patriotism when I see it.

I am taking Mr Pitt at his word and I hope that he will allow survival instinct and common sense to triumph over our anachronistic copyright legislation, because I sincerely believe that this small book can save the world. Having said that, I do not take the technically unlawful copying and publication here of this ebook lightly and neither should you, the reader. If I thought that scanning this book would in any way jeopardise the legitimate earnings of the authors or publishers, I never would have done it. Now, you, the reader, have a moral obligation to buy this small book and I trust that you will at your earliest opportunity, and I trust that you WILL indeed "pass this book on to someone". I also note that Major Ritter, at the time of this writing, is $56,000 out of pocket for his effort at spreading this vital truth - which can save YOUR life, and those of your loved-ones - and his investor is also still owed $30,000. If, unlike us, you have some money, why don't you invest it in paying off these debts?

Yes, I can recognise heroic patriotism when I see it, and all the more for it's rarity these terrible days, because so many of these noble mothers' sons made the supreme sacrifice for ineffably sacred abstractions like freedom, liberty, justice and peace. Our best and brightest were butchered in the trenches, the jungles and the deserts, in the terrible bloodbaths which characterised the 20th Century and all but the first 9 months of this one. This most calculated and egregious disgenics has left what passes for our western civilization morally emasculated.

The optical character recognition and laborious typographic correction of this 78 page book was a small labor of love for me. The writing and publication of the book, War on Iraq, was obviously a much bigger labor of love for Major Ritter and Mr. Pitt, who clearly love their country and have done something noble to try to preserve it and the sacred ideas it was founded on.

The war on Iraq is not about oil. This is a deliberate distraction from the bizarre truth. The war on Iraq is about Armageddon - the "Final Battle", the "End of Time" ...the end of the world and the "Rapture" - an insanely delusional murder/suicide fantasy by a religious fringe who - due to their ancient, powerful and now recently banished ties to primordial god/overlords beyond the intellectual grasp of all but the most open-minded and well informed generalists - have slowly acquired a covert power unrivalled in the long and bloody history of planet Earth.

Only the cold hard facts will dispel the lies which have been shouted for millennia.

This small book can start to do that if we let it.

Click here for the complete 139kb .htm version of "War on Iraq"

Click here for the no-frills 46kb .doc version, which is a fine-print Winzip compression suitable for emailing as an attachment or opening and printing out.

Remember, If you read this book here, you have a moral obligation to recompense the publishers, and if we don't start exercising our moral obligations on this poor planet, most of us are going to die - probably very horribly and very soon. It's that simple.

"If you pass this book on to someone, you have my thanks." William Rivers Pitt, co-author of "War on Iraq".


December 12th, 2002 SYDNEY MORNING HERALD

We'll use nuclear arms, US warns

"...the strategy...breaks with 50 years of American counter-proliferation efforts by authorising pre-emptive strikes..."
January 9th, 2003

Sydney Morning Herald

UN report predicts Iraq catastrophe

"UN planners paint a dire picture of Iraq after extensive bombing and ground fighting. The large casualty estimate is predicated on this scenario, which would involve far greater loss of life than the narrow bombing campaign of the 1991 Gulf War." 

February 10th (&12th)

At stake in Iraq: the world as we know it

" If it goes badly, American power and influence will wane and the unipolar moment will have passed."

Sydney Morning Herald

White House knew there were no WMD: CIA

April 22nd, 2006

The CIA had evidence Iraq possessed no weapons of mass destruction six months before the 2003 US-led invasion but was ignored by a White House intent on ousting Saddam Hussein, a former senior CIA official said, according to CBS.

Tyler Drumheller, who headed CIA covert operations in Europe during the run-up to the Iraq war, said intelligence opposing administration claims of a WMD threat came from a top Iraqi official who provided the US spy agency with other credible information.

The source "told us that there were no active weapons of mass destruction programs," Drumheller said in a CBS interview to be aired on Sunday on the US network's 60 Minutes.

"The (White House) group that was dealing with preparation for the Iraq war came back and said they were no longer interested," he was quoted as saying in interview excerpts released by CBS on Friday.

"We said: 'Well, what about the intel?' And they said: 'Well, this isn't about intel anymore. This is about regime change'," added Drumheller, whose CIA operation was assigned the task of debriefing the Iraqi official.

He was the latest former US official to accuse the White House of setting an early course toward war in Iraq and ignoring intelligence that conflicted with its aim.

CBS said the CIA's intelligence source was former Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri and that former CIA Director George Tenet delivered the information personally to US President George W Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and other top White House officials in September 2002. They rebuffed the CIA three days later.

"The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy," the former CIA agent told CBS.

US allegations that Saddam had WMD and posed a threat to international security was a main justification for the March 2003 invasion.

A 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, to which the CIA was a major contributor, concluded that prewar Iraq had an active nuclear program and a huge stockpile of unconventional weapons.

No such weapons have been found, however, and US assertions that they existed are now regarded as a hugely damaging intelligence failure.

But Drumheller, co-author of a forthcoming book entitled On the Brink: How the White House Has Compromised American Intelligence, rejects the notion of an intelligence failure.

© 2006 Reuters



Back to Homepage