Level Orange: High Risk of Terrorist Attack (print version)

For those readers living outside of the United States who may be unfamiliar with the goings-on in "The States," in the wake of the 9-11 terror attacks on New York City and Washington D.C., the federal government has set up a bureaucracy known as Homeland Security. In order to keep the public better informed of the current terror-threat assessment, the Homeland Security agency has devised a color-coded system; sort of like a traffic light, only with five colors.

Green is the lowest threat level—indicating "low risk." Blue is the next color, which means "guarded." (Whatever that means) Yellow is the middle color of the terror spectrum. It stands for "significant risk of terrorist attack." Then comes orange—"high risk of terrorist attack." That's the color presently lit in the terror-alert prism—having just been elevated from yellow. And finally, the color red—meaning, "severe risk of terrorist attack."

In reality, most folks pay little attention to the blinking terror rainbow. And why should we? Americans have been whipsawed back and forth with raised and lowered terror alerts ever since 9-11. And then there is the question of 'what are we supposed to do anyway?'

After all, in the immediate aftermath of September 11th the nation was told that the terrorists would "win" if Americans altered their lifestyles in any significant way. As mind-boggling as it may seem to thinking persons, directly after 9-11 the citizenry was told specifically by the President to go out and spend money at the local shopping mall; get on a plane and go to Disneyland, or wherever.

So, it is little wonder that there is now considerable confusion and apathy over the threat of terrorism. In reality, the terror-alert system appears to have conditioned the public to accept the ever-constant threat of imminent terror attacks, so that now most people simply ignore it go on about their business.

Why, then, should the most recent "terrorists threats" be taken any more seriously than the other terror-alerts that never materialized?

Here are a few things to consider:

The recently-elevated orange-level alert comes at a crucial stage in the American political arena. This being a presidential election year, the government has previously stated that terrorists are intent on 'disrupting the democratic process.' However, some observers are more concerned that the Bush administration might use any terror strike to its own political advantage; perhaps as a pretext to postpone or even cancel the election altogether—particularly if the polls indicate the incumbent appears to be in danger of losing. Administration lawyers are actively exploring the legality of postponing the elections. What does all of this mean? Well, for a nation that prides itself on being the bastion of democracy and freedom, talk of canceling the elections is, shall we say—interesting?

More than that, though, with the most recent warning the government claims to have "specific and credible evidence" that terrorists are not only aiming to "disrupt the democratic process," they are now targeting certain financial institutions in New York, New Jersey and in Washington D.C.

Reportedly, intelligence was gathered from a captured al-Qaeda operative. Supposedly, al-Qaeda has done pre-attack surveillance on numerous specific financial institutions; namely, the Wall Street Stock Exchange, Prudential Insurance building, Citigroup, and the IMF and World Bank in Washington D.C. Authorities added other facilities to the list later, including NASDAQ and Morgan Stanley brokerage. However, after the information was initially made public a few days ago, it came to light that the al-Qaeda plans were formulated several years ago—before 9-11. The question arises as to why the government is raising the terror-alert now?

At any rate, except for the few thousand people that work in those buildings, most people are probably inclined to shrug and say: 'So what? That won't affect me personally.'

However, you may want to think again. In the event of a successful attack, even if you live far-away in another hemisphere, the ripple-effect could be far-reaching.

That's because the predicament that is immediately facing the world's sole super-power (and by extension, the world at large) is that the U.S., and the global monetary system it dominates, which has become nothing more than a giant Ponzi scheme in recent years, is now nearing the terminal phase.

In the last few years, corporate scandals have been front page news. Companies like Enron and WorldCom, Global Crossing and the Italian company, Parmalat, have all taken their turn in the hot seat for deceiving investors about the true state of their balance sheets. (More aptly: "imbalance sheets")

But, behind the scenes of these corruption scandals lurk the same banking entities. For example, Parmalat recently announced it was suing Citigroup for their role in the fraudulent affair. Enron is suing Citigroup as well as J.P. Morgan.

Not coincidently, Citigroup and J.P. Morgan (now Morgan/Chase) are also two of the largest players in the world in the unregulated derivatives markets—holding multi-trillion dollar positions that dwarf their asset and capital base—a position technically defined as insolvency.

Since 1973, when the original Bretton Woods agreement was abolished and the so-called floating exchange system came into vogue—evolving into what has become the modern global financial system—trillions upon trillions of dollars of unpayable debt have been amassed; not only by Third World nations, but also by industrialized nations, corporations and individuals. This debt is then "securitized," packaged, sold and resold and the buyers often buy insurance policies known as derivatives to protect themselves from incurring losses.

However, no one seems to have questioned the fact that only a relative few derivatives underwriters exist. So, instead of spreading financial risk, (as advertised) it has actually concentrated risk into the hands of a few institutions, with massive exposure. In the event of significant interest rate swings or fluctuations of currency exchange rates, (which is the sort of losses derivatives insure against) the counterparties on the wrong end of the trade could easily be wiped out—with systemic consequences. (A systemic crisis develops when one or more large debtors default, causing their creditors to default on their creditors, and on and on in domino fashion.)

Interestingly, like the large derivatives parties on the hit list, terrorist-targeted institutions like the World Bank and the IMF have also been instrumental in propping up the bankrupt IMF dollar system. In all likelihood, the real reason these institutions have now been targeted for attack is that the global financial system has nearly reached the breaking point and the London-centered financial oligarchy know that their system is soon to disintegrate.

Blowing up such institutions would seem to be a convenient way to disguise the rampant fraud that has been perpetrated on the world by the IMF/ Wall Street system. The blame could then be laid at the doorstep of Islamic radicals instead of the financial oligarchy. True, there are supposed to be fail-safe computer back-up systems in place at all the institutions that are on the hit list, but realistically, it is hard to believe that things would go on in business-as-usual fashion should a concerted blow be directed at the heart and soul of the dollar system.

In any event, should the banks not be blown up, physically, as the latest orange-color coded alert calls for, it appears to be only a matter of time until they blow-up financially. According to a recent statement by the physical economist, Lyndon LaRouche, metaphoric "dynamite is everywhere" in the global financial system, and is primed and over-ripe to explode.

Jehovah's Witnesses are well aware of the fact that Satan and his demon cohorts are the unseen overlords of this world. The Devil even once boasted to Christ that all authority had been given him and to whomever he wants to, he gives it. That being the case, shall we suppose that Satan will bestow his authority on just anyone? That is not likely. The Devil only empowers those who think and act like he does. The human rulers of this world must share the Devil's lust for power and have the inclination to ruthlessly use the power given them whenever it is deemed necessary.

The way the world works, it is unacceptable to the mafia-like banking and oil cartel that rule the present system, to simply allow their financial empire to be put into receivership in an orderly and structured way by the nation-states. They are intent on breaking, once and for all time, the governmental institutions that pose a threat to their continued dominance in the post-crash world. The long-time goal of the ruling oligarchy is to permanently destroy the United States constitutional government. (See essay: Doom of the Anglo-American Dyad)

(As an example of the conflict between private interests and national interests, consider the present situation in Russia playing out between the state and Yukos Oil Company.)

By violently collapsing the financial and monetary system, the ruling oligarchy hope to create a big enough crash to terrorize the nations of the industrialized world, particularly the United States, into a situation whereby martial law and dictatorship are considered the only acceptable alternatives to chaos. It is the intent of the elite to be in control of all the necessities of life once the dust settles from the collapse. This appears to be the End Game for the establishment of the new world order.

U.S. officials have said all along that it is not a question of 'if' there will be another terror attack; the only question is "when?" The same holds true for the financial system. Its collapse may not be postponed indefinitely. (Ultimately, the arrival of Jehovah's Day is only a matter of "when?")

So, that's what we are facing, friends. Perilous times indeed!

But what are we supposed to do about it? The average person has been conditioned to dismiss such talk as alarmists' conspiracy theories. However, the Bible proverb says: "Shrewd is the one that has seen the calamity and proceeds to conceal himself, but the inexperienced have passed along and must suffer the penalty."

The question now posed is what practical steps can we take now in order to cushion the blow to ourselves and our families?

Predictably, in the event that financial institutions are destroyed, the financial media has strongly advised small-time investors not to panic and whatever you do—do not sell your stock shares! (You may be sure that the professional fund managers will not follow that advice)

On the other extreme, one company that sells survival gear is reportedly doing a brisk business selling gas masks, chemical hoods and even parachutes for people that work in high-rise buildings! (Don't laugh. No doubt the poor souls who plunged to their deaths from atop the blazing Twin Towers would have gladly strapped one on before they leapt.)

The National Terror Alert Resource Center offers more practical advice, which some readers might find helpful.

Paradoxically, of all people, Jehovah's Witnesses are inclined to frown upon any sort of non-spiritual survival preparations for the kind of calamity we are facing. We have been led to believe that we will somehow be passive bystanders when the system comes crashing down around us. The Watchtower feels that we should just trust God and leave everything in his hands. To prepare in any practical way is viewed as having a lack of faith in Jehovah's saving power. But is that reasonable and balanced thinking? In other areas of life don't we take measured precautions—just in case?

For instance, if you are a motorist, don't you usually carry a spare tire? Hopefully you may never need it, but if you do ever have a flat tire, isn't it nice to know that you are prepared? And isn't it a good idea to have a fire extinguisher in your home—just in case? Even something as simple as having a flashlight handy in the home is prudent in case of a sudden electrical blackout at night. In such circumstances we do not expect Jehovah to make up for our negligence, do we?

And didn't the Lord Jesus himself say that if the householder knew exactly when the thief was going to come he would stay up all night in order to prevent his house from being plundered? Well, what's the difference whether we are robbed at gunpoint or by some other means if the end result is our loss? We should realize that the collapse of the financial system will be a much more effective thief than ten-thousand masked bandits. (See Joel 2:9)

It is true that Christ also warned us to "Remember the wife of Lot," and that we must be ready to leave everything behind—"Let the man on the housetop not come down to take the goods out of his house." But shouldn't that be our decision to make when the time comes? Our leaving everything behind should not be because we were caught off guard because of having a false sense of security in this system's permanence, should it?

When it comes time for this system to go into its death throes, we will inevitably face tests of faith that we cannot specifically prepare for now. And if we must go into the Lion's den—then so be it. Let Jehovah's Will be done—not our own. However, when in the lion's lair, is it really necessary to disrobe and pepper ourselves with meat-tenderizer to prove our faith before the snarling predator?

Particularly if we have dependent babies or children, having several weeks' supply of baby formula and other baby needs would not necessarily be indicative of a lack of faith, would it? And having extra canned food on hand for older children doesn't seem like an unreasonable thing either, does it? Why should our children be made to suffer needlessly? Isn't it the obligation of parents to ensure the welfare of their children to the best of their ability? Besides, there are many other uncertainties in this world beside war and financial collapse. Storms, earthquakes, floods, and other natural disasters can also have us wishing we had been better prepared to face calamity.

And what is wrong with people who depend on certain prescription drugs for diabetes or asthma, (to name a few conditions) having at least a 60-90 day supply on hand? Who wants to be facing a medical emergency while trying to compete for critical life's necessities with panic-stricken, stampeding mobs?

And what about elderly ones in our congregations who may not be able to fend for themselves during the critical times ahead? Do we wait for disaster to strike before we think of their future needs? More than likely a time of catastrophe is when they are more apt to be over-looked in the confusion. Paul advised the Corinthian congregation to set aside material provisions every week for the relief of the holy ones back then, saying: "Every first day of the week let each of you at his own house set something aside in store as he may be prospering."

Wouldn't it be a loving thing to do now; to set aside a few things in the pantry for a future time of need—not just for ourselves, but for the brothers and sisters—just in case there is an unexpected calamity? According to the apostolic counsel above, it is the Christian thing to do.

As the Bible indicates, money does offer limited protection from life's hard realities. Ecclesiastes 7:12 says: "For wisdom is for a protection the same as money is for a protection; but the advantage of knowledge is that wisdom itself preserves alive its owners."

But what good is money if you can't get to it? In the event of a systemic crash, whether brought on by a deliberate act of terrorism or a debt default or some other event, more than likely the global banking system would freeze up and have to be shut down until things could be sorted out. In that event, cash-on-hand would be king— at least in the short term. Rather than blindly trusting the inherently fragile banking network with all of our money, however little or much that may be, wouldn't it be more prudent to have a reasonable amount of emergency cash on hand in a safe place—just in case? Whatever happened to the practical wisdom of having a little cash stashed in grandma's cookie jar?

Really, it is not that we do not trust Jehovah in such matters. It is just that we should not be so trusting of the Devil! And let's face it: unless you are self-sufficient, most of us are overly dependent upon the Devil's system of things.

Ironically, as the terror alert was raised to the orange level this week, the Watchtower's feature article on their website was entitled: "What We Learned From the Pygmies." The article relates how the Pygmy people hunt and use medicinal plants and eke out a living off the land. No doubt primitive peoples and others who live off the land will be much less affected by the coming crash of the financial system. They can, indeed, teach us a lot about self-sufficiency and resourcefulness. (Perhaps the New York Bethelites will learn to forage for their keep in Central Park when the time comes?)

Yet, the irony is that the Watchtower apparently feels that millions of Jehovah's Witnesses and the reading public are better served by articles on the African Pygmies rather than any timely presentation of the stark realities facing the modern world. While the Watchtower continues to insist that the end is near, they do not at all seem to be awake to the real and present dangers facing us. It seems irresponsible of them to leave Jehovah's Witnesses so uninformed and ill-prepared in practical matters to face the harsh realities of a looming tribulation like no other.

How true Jesus' words at Luke 16:8, where he said: "For the sons of this system of things are wiser in a practical way toward their own generation than the sons of the light are."

Whether anything comes of the latest orange alert or not remains to be seen, at the very least we should be mindful of the uncertain and critical times we are entering. Ultimately it should serve to help us "keep close in mind the presence of the day of Jehovah."