There is an argument to be made that Saddam Hussein and his government in Baghdad [Iraq] were seeking that the United States of America invade Iraq. I realize that most people will not believe me when I assert this, it is understandable that there would be skepticism. In fact, I tend to believe this is true, a statement of fact. And why? Because I was the one making policy for the United States government back in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Making policy for the Middle East region, that part of the world. Of course, I was not acting in any kind of official capacity. It's just that I was deeply involved in what was going on – also because of the incompetence of the US government policy-making.

I say this, I assert this, because this was my impression back then, starting around after I made contact with Saddam Hussein. I reached out to his government, via his ambassador in New York City at the United Nations. I had several conversations with Mr Muhammad Aldouri, PhD. We became friends. I met him in his office in New York City, I think this is after 9 11, but it could have been before. He invited some other journalists [prominent American journalists] to the meeting, and Muhammad and I were laughing a little. We were sitting there smiling, and laughing just a little. I remember it being pretty amusing.

I had been seeking – for several years – to get an interview with Saddam Hussein. There is no doubt that I was on track to getting this interview. In retrospect, it seems to me the main motive for invading Iraq was to pre-empt me from doing this interview with Saddam Hussein, the head of state and dictator of Iraq. Keep in mind that Iraq is a European colonial construct. Totally.

My first interview for World Affairs Monthly was with my friend Muhammad Aldouri, who was, as I said, at the United Nations in New York City. Saddam Hussein was unfortunately a victim of colonial conspiracies, meaning that religious and sectarian forces were put to work on behalf of the French and British colonial authorities. I felt that the United States needed to have deep and serious relations with the Arab world, hundreds of millions of people. I also felt it was foolish to have no relations with the Persians – and it is often forgotten that more than half the population of Iraq is Shia. Maybe not really Persian, but likely mixed pretty seriously. That's my guess.

To be honest, I was very skeptical of the value of "the Zionism colonial project." In fact, I was against it. Zionism and the state of Israel were an abomination to me. As to why this was, I will not go into that here. Everyone probably knows why I think that, anyway. I had been publishing my “monographs” with a think tank in the Washington, DC metropolitan area. This think tank was obviously pro-Arab and pro-Persia but we can also say it was pro-truth, as opposed to the propaganda machine operating 24/7 in America's capital. And funded very well, by the way. I will be republishing these papers here, in WAM Media, as soon as possible.

So I will get to the point, because I do not want this article to be too long. The main reason for war against Iraq, the main reason the United States undertook to invade Iraq? Well, I will state with pretty good confidence that there were 2 main motives: 1) prevent me from doing an interview with Saddam Hussein 2) topple the Saddam Hussein government in Baghdad, kill him, and install a new Arab dictator who would be totally compliant with the Jew-controlled and Israeli-controlled United States government.

Any why do this? These 2 motives? Because I was certain to “normalize” relations with Saddam Hussein's Iraq, and also because Saddam Hussein had decided to fund Hamas. That's right, Saddam was the first real funder of Hamas – and this happened because of me. I know it sounds hard to believe, but his government became convinced that I was right, that the “religious guys” were not the menace they had been judged to be by the secular Arab leaders. This was pan-Arab nationalism. Ismail Abu Shanab told me that Saddam had agreed to fund Hamas, he told me this in 2002. Ismail Abu Shanab was a co-founder of Hamas, and a professional friend of mine.

There were other motives, of course, but they were totally incidental to the main 2 motives. Pardon the expression, but they were icing on the cake. Oil. Reshape/reconfigure the Middle East. Make the way for Israel and Zionism, for a “Greater Israel.” Establish “democracy” [in other words, getting pro-Israel Arab leaders installed]. Establish military outposts and bases in Iraq and throughout the Middle East. Topple the Arab nationalist Assad government in neighboring Syria. Get all the Arabs into a situation where they have no choice but to bow down to Ashkenazi Jews and pay tribute to them.

American Jews and Israel control the United States government. As my friend Dennis Fritz told me yesterday, “this is just a fact.” Americans do not live in a “republic” – it is a Jewish-controlled authoritarian state. There is no democracy. There is no free press. Everything is tightly controlled by Israel and Israel's proxies in the United States. George W. Bush was a proxy. So was Richard Myers, a 4-star USAF general and chairman of the joint chiefs. Condoleezza Rice. The list goes on. Nearly everyone in the highest levels of the US government were proxies of the Jews. And most Jews were/are Zionists. Then actually in the Pentagon there were a number of important and powerful Jews: Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith. This list is very short, I have published below, as an image, all the Jews involved in Republican Party foreign policy politics – as well as their “Christian” proxies. The list is very long.

How is it that this is so blatant? So outrageously in the favor of Israel? Well, you can get a good answer by reading Dennis Fritz's book, which was published in June 2024 by Or Books. Deadly Betrayal: The Truth About Why the United States Invaded Iraq. It is excellent, and if you are interested in the truth and if you are interested in participating in the government of the United States, you must pick up a copy and read it. The prose is good, it is crafted professionally, and there is nothing irritating about it. Dennis Fritz is an American, a descendant of slaves, and his father was also an enlisted guy, but in the US Army.

If am really honest, and I usually am, then I will have to say that this is one really extraordinary publication. It is the truth. Dennis told me that he “wrote it for the troops.” See my interview with Dennis Fritz, published yesterday, 26 August 2025, at monitoringrisk.com. I do not know if Henry Kissinger would approve, he probably would be reluctant to admit its importance – but I think he might have done it, that is, he would have perhaps acknowledged it and maybe even praised it. Things change! Kissinger was compelled to be a Zionist, actually he had little choice but to be a Zionist.

Madness is really interesting. There is plenty of discussion in history about the merits of madness. I mean, there is no doubt that madness is generally considered to be bad, and maladaptive, yet there are some interesting merits to it. Dennis Fritz was in a position in his career in the US Air Force to watch how this madness plays out in real life.

Get a copy and read through it once in a while. America will graduate from this regrettable period of its history. A lot of wealth was squandered and a lot of lives were destroyed by invading Iraq. Young men, innocent young men, their lives were destroyed. They died for Jews – for Zionism. To protect Jews, to bolster the power of Jews, both in the United States and in Israel.

Dennis Fritz is a military guy, enlisted of course. He was born in 1957, so he is my age. I was born in 1958. I told Dennis that had I met him when we were young I would have told him to get a PhD. Dennis has made a noble effort to record the truth, and offer an important and valuable service to his comrades in the US military. They need to know the truth. Everyone needs to know the truth.

On page 155 Dennis Fritz presents his thesis:

“[George W.] Bush's strategy was to push for democracy through military action. He thought brute force would make the world safer. His strategy was an unmitigated disaster. The only way to make the world safer is through diplomacy, negotiation, and fostering mutual respect. Other than that, we must let sovereign nations deal with their own problems.”

This is indeed his thesis, and it's unfortunate it appears at the very end of his treatise. But it's there and that is wonderful. The truth stands tall.

Fritz tells a good story, even if it is a gruesome one, and probably he did not have anyone really helping him. It is a rare and very valuable effort, and I am in a way astounded that he got around to writing it and publishing it. By the way, it is heavily redacted. We are ruled by dangerous criminals and megalomaniacs.

Republics do not live on lies. America is a Republic – supposedly. Well, we are going to become a real Republic. And Dennis Fritz, chief master sergeant Fritz, is making his important contribution to this effort. It's awesome.

A final comment: I do not agree with Fritz when he says that “we must let sovereign nations deal with their own problems.” OK, I know he means we must not intervene with military force. Sure, that's right. But we will not just allow “sovereignty” to destroy Western civilization. No, we won't do that. There are ways to protect civilization, much better than military force.

[Additional Note: I almost forgot to include a long-term chart (say 22 years or so) of the US dollar to the Israeli shekel. Since the American government invaded Iraq and toppled the Iraqi government, the shekel has appreciated against the dollar by about 26%. That is, the shekel buys about 26% more dollars than in 2003. There are two charts down below, as images. It is quite amazing. The United States government is bankrupt, but we have financed the Israeli state, and its currency. The shekel was pretty dubious until the Iraq War, but it is now much stronger. You might say it is still a dubious currency, but now it is far less dubious. American men gave their blood and treasure for Jews, for the Zionism project.] 

[September 1, 2025: In the interview I did with Dennis Fritz on 26 August 2025 (published at monitoringrisk.com), I was amazed when Fritz asserted that his book is effectively a "Pentagon Papers" for the Iraq War. "But I did it the legal way," he told me. It's a really stunning statement, and of course I agree, this is what he has achieved. Daniel Ellsberg was a friend of mine -- I interviewed him in March 2006. World Affairs Monthly.]

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Gemini 3:

This is a dense and provocative piece of writing that blends geopolitical analysis with intense personal conviction. It frames the 2003 invasion of Iraq not through the traditional lens of WMDs or "spreading democracy," but through a highly personal and controversial narrative involving the author’s own proximity to power and the influence of foreign interests on US policy.

To help break down the content of this article, here are the core themes and arguments presented:

The Central Thesis: A "Pentagon Papers" for Iraq

The author posits that the Iraq War was less about national security and more about controlling narratives and serving specific interest groups.

• The Interview Theory: The author makes the bold claim that a primary motive for the invasion was to pre-empt his planned interview with Saddam Hussein, which he believes would have normalized relations and exposed the "truth" about the regime.

• Hamas Funding: A surprising claim is made that the author personally convinced Saddam Hussein to begin funding Hamas, shifting the dictator away from secular Arab nationalism toward supporting religious groups.

• Dennis Fritz’s Contribution: The article serves largely as a review and endorsement of "Deadly Betrayal" by Dennis Fritz, a retired USAF Command Chief Master Sergeant. The author views Fritz’s book as a whistleblowing document equivalent to the Pentagon Papers.

Geopolitical Allegations

The text leans heavily into a worldview dominated by "colonial constructs" and "proxies":

• Israel and Zionism: The author expresses deep hostility toward Zionism, calling it an "abomination" and claiming the US government is "Jew-controlled." He argues that the war served the goal of creating a "Greater Israel."

• The "Proxy" Argument: He lists high-level officials (Bush, Rice, Myers) as proxies for Israeli interests, suggesting that US foreign policy is dictated by a foreign power rather than American interests.

• Currency as Proof: The author uses the appreciation of the Israeli Shekel against the US Dollar (roughly 26% since 2003) as financial "evidence" that the war enriched Israel at the expense of the United States.

Key Figures Mentioned

Analysis of the Perspective

The tone of this article is unapologetically dissident. It challenges the official history of the early 2000s by claiming that the "incompetence" of the US government was actually a calculated effort by a "propaganda machine."

However, it is important to note that many of these assertions—specifically the idea that a single journalist's interview could trigger a full-scale invasion, or the characterization of the US government as an "authoritarian state controlled by Jews"—fall into the realm of revisionist history and conspiracy theory that many mainstream historians and policy experts would treat with extreme skepticism.

It’s a fascinating look at how those within the military or policy peripheries can develop radically different interpretations of the motives behind global conflicts.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Gemini 3:

The text you've shared presents a highly controversial and provocative perspective on the motivations behind the 2003 invasion of Iraq. It blends the personal account of Dennis Fritz (Retired Command Chief Master Sergeant) with the commentary of an unnamed interviewer/author associated with World Affairs Monthly and WAM Media.

The narrative centers on several central claims that diverge significantly from standard historical and political analyses:

Key Arguments and Perspectives

• The "Interview" Theory: A central, highly personal claim in the text is that a primary motive for the U.S. invasion was to prevent the author from interviewing Saddam Hussein. The author suggests this interview would have "normalized" relations and exposed truths the U.S. government wanted suppressed.

• Influence of Zionism: The text heavily attributes U.S. foreign policy to the influence of "Jew-controlled" and "Israeli-controlled" interests. It characterizes the Iraq War as a conflict fought primarily for the benefit of Israel and the expansion of "Greater Israel."

• Hamas Funding: The author claims responsibility for convincing Saddam Hussein to fund Hamas, arguing that secular Arab leaders were persuaded that "religious guys" were not the threat they were perceived to be.

• Economic Impact: The text notes that since 2003, the Israeli shekel has appreciated against the U.S. dollar, using this as evidence that American "blood and treasure" were used to bolster Israeli financial stability at the expense of U.S. solvency.

• The "Pentagon Papers" Comparison: Dennis Fritz describes his book, Deadly Betrayal: The Truth About Why the United States Invaded Iraq (2024), as a legal equivalent to the Pentagon Papers, intended to reveal the "truth" of the war to the troops and the public.

Contextualizing the Claims

While the text cites Dennis Fritz—who did serve as the executive assistant to General Richard Myers—it is important to distinguish between his documented criticisms of the war and the more extreme conspiratorial framing provided by the author of the article.

1. Mainstream Interpretations: Most historians and political scientists attribute the Iraq War to a complex mix of factors, including post-9/11 security doctrines, intelligence failures regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs), neoconservative desires to reshape the Middle East, and concerns over oil stability.

2. Redaction and Legality: Fritz has stated in various interviews that his book underwent a lengthy Department of Defense (DoD) security review, resulting in significant redactions. This process is standard for former high-ranking officials to ensure classified information isn't released.

3. Nature of the Language: The text uses rhetoric that aligns with various conspiracy theories regarding "Zionist" control of Western governments. These views are generally dismissed by mainstream political analysts as lacking evidentiary support and relying on historical tropes.

Conclusion of the Text’s Thesis

The author concludes that the invasion was an "unmitigated disaster" and advocates for a return to diplomacy and respect for national sovereignty, though he adds a caveat that Western civilization must still be protected through non-military means.

Note on your previous observations: You mentioned on April 12, 2026, that you expected the dollar to lose about 30% of its value. Interestingly, the "Additional Note" in this text makes a similar economic argument, claiming the dollar has already weakened significantly against the shekel (26%) since the start of the Iraq War.