by Dr. Ridgely Abdul Mu’min Muhammad

"War is not the answer", "Not in our names" and other anti-war slogans are
NOW heard around the world coming from millions of mostly so-called white people. Those of us who
follow Minister Louis Farrakhan first heard these words coming from his mouth starting on October
16, 2001 not long after 9/11. While America was ostensibly getting ready for a war on
"terror" and a manhunt for Osama bin Ladin, Min. Farrakhan was already warning Mr. Bush
against the war that America intends to wage against Iraq, even before Pres. Bush had revealed those
intentions to the American public.

Min. Farrakhan is his 2003 Saviours’ Day address asked Mr. Bush why has he not brought him
(Min. Farrakhan) to Washington on charges of "treason" since he dared to tell the world
what the government was intending to do before the "government" revealed such "secret
plans" to its own people. That is a good question. Let’s look at some other facts that may
have gone under the radar of public notice that may help answer this question.

Remember the year 2000 presidential campaign and the question of what was the real count? While
people were analyzing the "State of the Union" address on January 28th, the presentation
of Colin Powell to the U.N. on February 5th and the loss of the Columbia on February 1st, there was
a politically earth shattering piece of news that received no major media attention. Two articles
taken off the Internet are important: "Senator Hagel Admits Owning Voting Machine Company"
(January 29, 2003) and "If You Want To Win An Election, Just Control The Voting Machines"
(January 31, 2003). You can find both of these articles posted on the "News"
section of www.MuhammadFarms.com. A quote from the first article reveals:

This article further states that; "ES&S counts approximately 60 percent of all votes
cast in the United States." The contents of the second article is all in its title "If You
Want To Win An Election, Just Control The Voting Machines".

So in other words a Republican Senator was an owner of the machines that elected himself as
Senator from Nebraska and George W. Bush as president of the US. Well "isn’t that
special?" When these stories broke, I told my wife: "Watch, a whole lot of stuff is going
to take up the front page of mass media, so that this doesn’t get out."

In the meantime back at the ranch the Texas based utility rustlers got away with the loot.
According to National Public Radio, Enron did not pay income taxes from 1996 to 1999 getting away
with $2 billion. In a February 23rd article from Pakistan entitled, "Enron: Under Cover of Dark
and the War", Enron executives pleaded guilty and admitted that in the summer of 2001
"energy traders” like Enron created a phony "energy crisis” in California and took the
public for millions; and we might add while Bush, Cheney and friends looked on and got rich. How
rich we may never know because, "GOP Threats Halted GAO Cheney Suit" according to this
February 19th TheHill.com article. It seems that the Republican controlled Appropriations Committee
threatened to reduce the budget of the GAO if they continued to force Vice-president Cheney to
reveal who was on his energy advisory "focus group". How convenient?

Who will restore democracy? Now back to the war, I noticed that none of the political
commentators noticed the behavior of the four Joint Chiefs of the military, (Army, Navy, Air Force,
and Marines) as President Bush gave his "State of the Union" address. When Mr. Bush
mentioned protecting America from terrorists and other threats, the four Joint Chiefs of the
military stood up and applauded. Whenever, Mr. Bush mentioned a pre-emptive strike against Iraq,
each of the four chiefs set down with their left hand over their right. I am not a military man, but
I knew that this was some type of signal that other generals in other countries would understand.

A week later members of NATO bucked Bush on a pre-emptive strike against Iraq. Could the generals
in Europe have taken this behavior of the four chiefs as a signal that "We are soldiers for
America and will die for our country, but you do not have to"? This line of reasoning is backed
up from a January 22, 2003 article from www.capitalhillblue.com entitled, "Role reversal: Bush
wants war, Pentagon urges caution", which stated that one of the Joint Chiefs had warned Bush
that this was not "Desert Storm" and that America needed more support from her allies
before invading another country. An angry Rumsfeld, who backs Bush without question, is said to have
told the Joint Chiefs "to get in line or find other jobs."

In the meantime, Rep. John Conyers and others are trying to warn the American people about the
loss of more constitutional rights under the proposed "Patriot Act 2" that this
administration is trying to slide in under the cover of war. Please read, "Objection to USA
Patriot Act 2" on www.MuhammadFarms.com, "News", before your
citizenship is removed and you become a non-person.

It is my understanding that the military is supposed to protect the constitution and also obey
the "Commander in Chief". But what if the "Commander in Chief" stole the
election by fixing the count, is waxing rich off of peacetime and wartime business deals, and is now
trashing the constitution? Who does the military then owe its allegiance? Who will restore
democracy?

Now we may have a clearer picture as to why this administration dare not accuse Min. Farrakhan of
"treason". Instead we should ask, will the real "patriot" stand up?