2015 milestone: The (mostly) failed surreptitious takeover of USAmerica has unraveled by now

(latest major update of this section on or about 10-9-03)

_________by J.R. Mooneyham_________
(Free JavaScripts provided by The JavaScript Source)

Please help us keep this site online



(Translate this site)

First aid for broken links


| Search this site |
| Site map | Site author | Site store |
>>> | Latest site updates | <<<

| Access Google's cache of this site |


Alternative (mirror site) links
| Translate this site |
| Site search | Site map | Site author |
| Access Google's cache of this site |

Introduction to the Signposts Timeline (and Contents)

| 1990-2000 AD | 2001 AD-2002 AD | 2003-2008 | 2009-2017 | 2018-2025 | 2026-2049 | 2050-2081 | 2082-2183 | 2184-2272 | 2273-2350 | 2351-2600 |

Back to the Table of Contents of the Signposts Timeline

Back to 1990 AD-2050 AD in Perspectives...



2015 milestone: The (mostly) failed surreptitious takeover of USAmerica has unraveled by now

[Caution: Extreme speculation ahead; this section mostly created for "What If?" cautionary value]

The conspirators at important posts in various intelligence and security agencies in USAmerica realize their plans for a behind-the-scenes take over of the US government have been foiled by recent events unfolding on the internet. Only years later does the general public learn of all this. Years during which USAmerica has become more introverted and greatly intensified its surveillance on both its own citizens and the rest of the world, as a result of fears of terrorism and increasing global competition.

The ever greater funds required for this were secretly funneled from the huge USAmerican military and intelligence budgets-- even as many social programs like Social Security and Medicare were drastically scaled back.

"According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions"

-- US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, speaking about Pentagon spending alone

-- The War On Waste (possibly by Vince Gonzales); CBSNews.com; Jan. 29, 2002

-- The Pentagon's Mystery Budget

No nation on Earth spends more on secret 'black' projects than the USA.

-- New technology from 'black world' By Nick Easen; CNN; September 8, 2003

The US government now appears it will be mired in budget deficits at least through 2005, if not longer, according to a National Press Club speech by President Bush's budget director, Mitch Daniels.

Daniels says the deficits should be handled by cutting the budgets of social programs, and forcing annual Congressional votes (and opportunities for more cuts) even for the continuing operation of programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

-- Media War Horses Aim for the Front Lines By Howard Kurtz; Washington Post; November 30, 2001

(Eventually the presidential administrations, Senate, and Congressional Houses of the time will be blamed for gross mismanagement of the economy under their watch)

Little did many citizens suspect prior to 2015 that the festering developments at high levels in USAmerica's most powerful intelligence and security agencies (in combination with certain actions of Congress) will bring about eventual decline and dissolution of USAmerica itself-- proving ultimately to be a far greater danger than any fiscal deficit or external enemy.

Though some aspects of the conspiracy were downright obvious in hindsight (i.e., being wrote about in the mainstream press of the time, albeit usually as segregated, disjointed, and somewhat vague pieces of the whole), the truth of the matter eludes the public until long after the conspirators have discarded their plans as ruined.

Details of the conspiracy, learned only years and decades after its assumed failure and abandonment, included early on efforts to heighten public anticipation of the Millennium Bug, much like the buildup given by Hollywood for a major disaster film of the late 20th century, followed up by a purposely sabotaged or bungled preparation for the Bug in several governmental and military operations, which (the conspirators hoped) would result in an enhanced level of perceived havoc when the event did come about.

From the conspirators' perspective, in the (hopefully) substantial chaos which resulted from the Bug's impact, the American public would eagerly accept new and tougher laws and regulations regarding the internet (among other things), including acquiesing to the long time government desire to make individual privacy and e-commerce security permanently subordinate to the government's ability to examine and control all electronic communications as they saw fit. "Big Brother" of Orwell's "1984", it seems, was merely a bit late for his previously predicted place in history. At least, so far as USAmerican conspirators' hopes were placed.

-- "Keeping Big Brother Offline" by Lori Patel, Wired News, 6-18-98

-- "1/1/00", DaveNet, 6-12-98, by Dave Winer

Unfortunately for the conspirators, the Y2K problem was overestimated in many ways-- while business and individual responses and flexibility regarding same were underestimated.

In the event it turned out only the most developed nations had any significant potential for y2k failures to 'spike' above the general noise of technological problems typical of the late 20th century. And of those, increasing business competition and the widespread awareness of the bug led to most business concerns successfully taking pre-emptive action against the problem. What subsequently remained of the problem tended to be successfully dealt with via fairly simple means-- such as rebooting systems, or changing a couple parameters in software.

The y2k event thus seemed very anti-climatic for many-- partly because less than 50% of related problems occured around 1-1-2000, and partly because most of those encountering problems did not make them public; perhaps less than 10% of y2k-related glitches ever became known to the public-at-large. Why the under-reporting? Few businesses wanted their customers or competitors to learn of such internal failures. Few individuals could discern the difference between y2k problems and the routine daily havoc experienced with their Windows PCs at the time. Restarts and reloads of the OS were not unusual practices for them.

Of course, government agencies worldwide would continue to encounter glitches of one kind or another for years afterwards-- but many would never be reported, and few of those which did become public amounted to more than minor and temporary nuisances. Again, the under-reporting was due primarily to the entities not wanting their peers and/or enemies/competitors (other nations) learning of any weakness on their part, among other things.

So the long term conspirators were disappointed by the Y2K event. But they had other cards to play.

Other important elements of public persuasion towards goals of increased national surveillance powers apparently included purposely putting the entire planet at risk via the USA and Russian nuclear arsenals. In the USA case, by dangling computer access to the store in front of hackers worldwide online, while also maintaining a sufficiently high level of armed alert (wholly unnecessary overkill for much of the period) on the devices themselves so that officials could accurately claim in public statements and Congressional hearings that the arsenal was at risk of accidental firing or other calamities due to cyber-assaults. Amazingly, merely standing the USA arsenal down to a lower level of alert status would have placed many more layers of safety and security between the arsenal and any possible cyber-assault, but the public for some reason never grasped this fact, despite heroic efforts on the part of a few lonely voices to make them understand.

-- FBI "Cries Wolf" Over Hackers by Sarah Johnstone and Steve Ranger, Network Week, 4-14-98

-- "Do Computers Pose a Nuclear Threat?" by GARY CHAPMAN, Los Angeles Times, 5-4-98

In regards to the Russian nuclear arsenal, covert USA policy was to help keep the post-USSR Russian government as weak as possible, in order to encourage a further splintering in the state, to even smaller and weaker players economically and militarily over time. This was seen as one way to insure nothing like the USSR ever rose again from the ashes to threaten or compete with the USA on a scale like that of the Cold War.

And the reduced security for the Russian nuclear arsenal that this engendered? Icing on the cake, so far as certain USAmerican conspirators were concerned. If terrorists managed to buy or steal a Russian nuclear or biochemical weapon or technology, or Russia felt compelled in its weakened state to use nukes in a civil war or against external enemies, then so much the better for the overall plan. If Russia used nukes too early, the world would see them as sufficiently dangerous that an international coalition might be authorised to conquer the state and control it much in the fashion of Germany after WWII. Also, one or more weapons of mass destruction used on American targets or others would simply scare the American public into giving up still more of their freedoms and civil liberties that much faster...and once USA citizens were suitably restrained, the rest of the world would easily follow. After all, history showed USAmerica had been the pinnacle of personal freedoms and hopes of recent centuries. Dash that, and you're halfway to owning the entire globe for cents on the dollar.

But just in case such items as the above didn't pan out, subtle support and encouragement of other possible elements of chaos, like CIA-trained terrorists of past USAmerican covert ventures in places like Afghanistan and others, might take up the slack, to provide the manipulation desired of American public opinion...

And indeed, this particular element of the plan worked spectacularly for a number of years, beginning in late 2001, with a high profile terrorist attack on the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York. Even the terrorist masterminds and conspiratorial circle themselves were shocked at the size of their success.

USAmerica's short-lived war on terrorism

The presidential administration of the time over-reacted to the attack, playing into the hands of both the obvious terrorists and the more subtle conspirators which indirectly encouraged such actions.

-- Bin Laden's wish granted

-- Last American Combat Troops Quit Saudi Arabia

-- Gadhafi: U.S. made bin Laden a saint - Aug. 3, 2003

-- Official Says Qaeda Recruited Saudi Hijackers to Strain Ties

-- Saudis consider nuclear bomb

The term "war" was invoked quite freely at the time in public speeches and press conferences, which along with executive orders which shut down much of the US economy for days, and kept it barely running for weeks afterward, nearly pushed USAmerica full-bore into the recession it had been narrowly avoiding up to that point. Consumer and investor confidence both took alarming hits at the time, with the government's obvious over-reaction to the event perhaps doing worse damage than the terrorist strike itself.

Fears of a new Vietnam-type quagmire, plus the emergence of a virtual police state on American shores, affected the American economy in various unexpected ways for the remainder of the presidential administration of the time.

-- Bush's Vietnam By John Pilger; New Statesman; found on or about 6-20-03; http://www.johnpilger.com is a second URL (that of the writer themselves)

-- Mistakes of Vietnam repeated with Iraq

-- The Vietnam II Preflight Check†By Jack McMillan

-- Vietnam War Terms Make a Comeback

-- 30-Year Anniversary Tonkin Gulf Lie Launched Vietnam War

-- Soldiers fear 'Afghan Vietnam'

-- Ottawa and Washington are parting company in the most serious global-security dispute since Canada sat out the Vietnam War

-- Veterans tell Bush 'Gulf war will be worse than Vietnam'

-- I know our hawks avoided serving in Vietnam, but didnít they, like, read about it?

-- Quagmire? What Quagmire?

-- Quagmire Or Expensive Mud?

-- U.S. sinking in Iraq quagmire

-- Rumsfeld dismisses talk of Iraq operation turning into a quagmire

-- Growing resistance shows the markings of a guerrilla war

-- Post-war Iraq: Quagmire or Master Plan?

-- 'Iraq will become a quagmire for the Americans'

-- Envoy dubs US a police state

-- US uses terrorism law in other crime probes

-- Critics Say Security Laws Sacrifice Civil Liberties

-- 'red alert may bring martial law'

-- U.S. becoming Big Brother society Report

-- Fighting terror by terrifying U.S. citizens

"the fact that the Bush Administration would try and use the courts to stiffle dissent is nothing short of astounding, and must be broadcast to as wide an audience as possible"

-- Ashcroft tried to prevent NYC protests; February 16, 2003; daily KOS

-- The New McCarthyism: Secret Arrest and Detention instead of Blacklisting.

Due to a variety of factors, the overseas 'war' against terrorism proclaimed by the USAmerican president of 2001 sputtered out during his time in office-- though its legacy of greatly intensified surveillance and tracking of American citizens, and significant curtailment of their civil liberties, will continue on for decades to come.

Excessive military spending along with growing social program demands led to chronic deficits once again for USAmerica. These in turn pushed up inflation and interest rates, reducing the growth potential of both the US and world economies, as well as their flexibility to innovate and adapt to changing circumstances.

While corporate interests eagerly accepted the government's money for a great many new projects and services during the period, they (and most foreign governments) did not long allow the USAmerican government to continue its aggressive campaign to disassemble the money flows of the global underground economy and black market. For organized crime and terrorism were not the only entities which used the medium. Big business and governments often did the same themselves. Including USAmerican business and government.

Allowing the US to delve too deeply there simply wasn't in the interests of many leaders and organizations, worldwide. And so the practice ended not long after it began-- although to save political face this was largely kept from the public-at-large.

Casualties of both USAmerican servicemen and innocent civilians also soon brought a halt to large, overt military actions related to the conflict.

However, the powers controlling events at the time did allow the USAmerican administration some apparent victories-- and faster than most expected, too-- to help bring unwelcome financial intrusions to a more rapid end. Soon after that, most all the military adventures and financial investigations relating to the matter were effectively terminated-- or subtlely re-purposed to fulfill other aims.

The apparent early successes, coupled with the customary historical lull between major terrorist incidents (and the typical incompetence and high risk of failure which usually marked such terrorist efforts), allowed USAmerica to return to something approaching life as it was prior to 9-11-01. That is, except for the wider surveillance, censorship, and reduced freedoms of its citizens. And until chronic and growing budget deficits began to adversely affect the economy-- and the next major terrorist incident took place on US soil.

For USAmerica's 'war on terrorism' accomplished little for anyone but the terrorists, the owners of the American military-industrial complex, and the takeover conspirators spoken of here. In the wake of the next major incident the American government tightens the screws still further on its citizens, as well as goes through the motions of mobilizing military strikes against the supposed source of the attacks.

And the cycle begins again. As might be expected, all this progressively weakens USAmerica more and more, as it also makes it a less inviting place to live (or visit).

Deficits continue to rise, interest rates follow, and taxes on the majority of the population are forced up even as social services for same are cut.

The Great Recession of the early 21st Century

In an amazing (if sad) repeat of history, the USAmerican Republican party once again plunges America into a deep economic recession, dragging much of the rest of the world with it in the early 21st century, much the same way as they did it in the early 20th.

The details of this second disaster included USAmerica sanctioning anti-competitive behavior and monopolist status on the part of Microsoft Corporation and others, which affected industry and commerce worldwide, reducing innovation and competition. Other excesses included unjustifiable expansions of copyright, trademark, and patent powers, which only amplified effective monopolies in business, as well as put huge restraints on the potential of the internet in areas like distance learning and collaborative innovation. At the same time there were new limits placed on free speech and civil liberties, which muted most protests and activist movements that in previous times had helped moderate the impact of such excesses.

Some economists who've studied economic depressions believe the clearest causes of depressions are too little business competition, especially when government itself contributes to such reductions. Also, when governments prop up inefficient businesses rather than letting them fail, that too can help bring on depression.

The USA itself may still be vulnerable to experiencing economic depressions in the present or future. There's no clear way to guarantee they won't occur. All we have available are clues from past experience about how we might minimize the frequency and severity of economic downturns.

-- Could We Face Another Depression? By Christopher Farrell; BusinessWeek; The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. ; OCTOBER 19, 2001

The Republican political party of USAmerica controlled both houses of Congress for the whole decade preceding the Great Depression of the 20th century. They also held the Presidency during these years. They pushed tariffs to an all time high, often looked the other way as big business commited violations of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act and market competition within the USA waned, and made tax cuts which benefited the wealthy.

It was after all this that the Great Depression took place, lasting for many years. Republicans lost their popular support with this event.

-- Encyclopedia Americana: Republican Party possibly by George H. Mayer, University of South Florida, Grolier Incorporated

The trend rate of productivity before 1995 was 1-1.5%. In 1995 and after, 2-2.5%. This increase allowed for faster economic growth without fear of substantial increases in inflation.

New security concerns post 9-11-01 will increase economic costs for many players, shift many resources from private to public hands, and maybe lead to foreign investors taking their money elsewhere. All this could reduce the trend rate to lower levels once again, and thus the allowable economic growth rate, too.

If US anti-terrorism efforts appear to succeed, and rapidly come to an end, the US economy may return to the favorable trend rate once again. But if the opposite occurs-- that is, the terrorism effort looks bogged down, adrift, or leading to a wider war-- economic performance will likely suffer.

Productivity could be permanently diminished if defense spending consumes too many dollars. Government deficits and taxes could rise, taking interest rates up too, thereby shrinking the private sector and sending foreign investment to better havens.

-- A Deck Stacked with Wild Cards By Margaret Popper; Edited by Beth Belton; BusinessWeek Online; SEPTEMBER 21, 2001; The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc.

The increasing general weakness of the country soon affects its military too, helping lead to a wide curtailment of the 'world policing', 'force projection', and 'war on terror' activities around the world which the nation had undertaken over previous years and decades. USAmerica becomes increasingly isolated from the rest of the world in many ways.

Sure, America's rich and powerful tend to retain their fortunes and influence. But the swelling middle-class of previous history stops growing, then begins shrinking, as the ranks of the lower classes and poor expand.

The dynamic social activism which served America so well in earlier times failed to change matters now. Why? The heavy-handed surveillance and civil liberty restrictions earlier put into place to battle so-called terrorism ends up being used instead to locate and quash efforts to organize protests or resistance against the status quo. Related laws (or media or government 'policies') effectively censor newscasts and web sites, while primarily only government and corporate approved views are dispensed to the masses.

With opposition to current government policies muted, government incumbents and/or hand-picked establishment nominees for all positions almost always win re-election, and what was once arguably the greatest nation on Earth continues its long slide into historical oblivion.

Only future political and economic dynamics taking place elsewhere in the world will eventually free the Americans from their self-made trap. But even that will not occur until long after the American conspirators of this time are foiled in their plans to take complete control of the country-- even as they succeed at virtually everything else related to this goal.

While it may be true that infiltrating some terrorist organizations with human agents may be impossible, thereby putting the burden on technologies instead, it's also true that much terrorist actions may be perpetrated via very low tech means, thereby blinding even the best technological tools one might possess.

One example of such blindsiding is communications. It takes little more than a pre-set group of codewords to hide messages in plain sight of even the most robust electronic surveillance systems, such as USAmerica's Echelon and/or Carnivore software. Using people rather than technology to carry messages can also render intelligence technology impotent.

Encryption, like any other technology, may be used for good or evil. But so far terrorists seem to wisely avoid its use for the most sensitive of matters, since its vulnerability to breakage is uncertain.

-- Intelligence technology may not stop terrorists by Will Knight, 13 September, 01; Special: Terrorist attack on America, New Scientist

For more about America's mostly self-inflicted wounds and related matters during and after this time, please refer to this page.

But, back to the conspirators' plans prior to 2015...

China was the main fly in the ointment, so far as the conspirators were concerned. They considered China their only real potential competitor/spoiler in the game, around 2000-2010. The planners couldn't be absolutely sure what China might do if it realized what was happening internally in the USA-- or even if it didn't. So the conspirators made sure to box China in from every angle they could muster. Make China think that the USA truly cared about the fate of Vietnam or the Spratly Islands or Taiwan. That way, even if China made a military move during the crucial transition of power in the USA, it would likely only be in regards to one of those insignificant pieces on the board. Of course, if China learned the truth, it would possibly expand out into Asia and the Pacific like Japan had decades before, forcing an American response, and possibly unraveling the carefully planned takeover of the USA before it could be fully cemented into place.

Once the coup was successfully completed, the conspirators believed they would enjoy a much stronger bargaining position in regards to China, due to America's technological edge, their new carte blanche relating to military and intelligence spending, and less worry of public reaction to American casualties, due in no small part to having effectively muzzled the USA's once mighty free press, and greatly weakening America's middle-class both politically and economically (thus minimizing both the numbers and resources available for rebellion/protest from the masses; lessons from history show support from a critical mass of middle-class citizens is often the crucial element required for a successful revolt against the government).

Plus, after a long campaign of R&D, a vast array of "non-lethal weaponry" was at the disposal of the US military and police forces, which allowed the government to simply 'erase' peaceful demonstrations from the streets in minutes, with a minimum casualty rate to garner outrage from witnesses and others-- and also helped the government justify the use of strong counter-force where and when frustrated protesters added weapons to their signs. The first line use of non-lethal weaponry, accompanied with a suitable propaganda spin, essentially paved the way for the government to deal with resistance howsoever it pleased (or so thought the conspirators in the early days).

-- Non-lethal weapons kept secret

And where both non-lethal weaponry and conventional weapons failed to quell a rebellion? Well, the USA still had a significant supply of tactical neutron bombs available, which would kill all life within a certain short range (such as a field of combat), while destroying or damaging almost nothing else in the vicinity. So real estate and automobiles, etc., were preserved. Wherever remote observation means of neutron use could be thwarted or confiscated, the government could also recast the event as it pleased, with no one the wiser. Remember, neutron bombs leave no living witnesses. And survivors at the periphery of the blast (if any) can be dealt with by other measures. So in some cases, family and friends might be aware that Johnny left to participate in a protest, and never returned, with the evening news reporting that apparently some protestors tried to use nerve gas on government troops, but the wind blew it backwards instead...and due to lingering dangers the bodies had to be incinerated...or any other lie a spokesman might care to tell.

So anyway, after USAmerica was subdued, the conspirators expected to secretly negotitiate with China to essentially divvy up the world between them-- in something like a 60/40 split, since the USA enjoyed substantial military advantages over the Chinese. China would be allowed to dominate a great deal of Asia, including India, Vietnam, Indonesia, and various backward satellites of the once-monolithic USSR.

The USA would get to command Europe, Australia, Africa, and the cream of the crop of the old USSR satellites, like Ukraine.

The Mideast, Russia/Siberia, and Japan would be major issues of negotiation between the US and China, likely divided up and swallowed piecemeal by the two superpowers.

Of course, to minimize problems in assimilation of all these parties, the US and China would stage a carefully orchestrated 'world war', while secretly sharing much intelligence and manipulating one another's allies to the agreed upon ends. When the war was over, many world citizens would be relieved that little had been destroyed and few killed, compared to what 'could have been'. And support for each nation's new place among the two major world alliances would be kept high by fear of a future 'Doomsday' war ravaging the planet and driving humanity to extinction.

And beyond that? Well, eventually, after their majority of the world was fully consolidated and integrated into a well oiled machine, the conspirators expected the time would be ripe for taking over the rest of the planet...

Yes, the conspirators thought they had all the angles covered.

-- "1/1/00", DaveNet, 6-12-98, by Dave Winer

But in the very beginning, the overriding strategic vision for all the initial measures planned by the conspirators was... first and foremost, create a political environment which nourished the popular perception that significant changes in the USAmerican Constitution were required, in order to prevent "...excessive influence..." from "...both domesic subversives and foreign agencies on the internet..." to be exerted on USAmerican elections, institutions, laws, media, "...and the public consciousness...", as well as "...close the doors...[to]...those who would undermine the best parts of the American political system..." [read: harrass and persecute those American citizens who publically or actively opposed the status quo in Washington DC]. The powers of the geopolitical status quo were rightfully worried that newly emerging social forces (primarily on the internet) might strip them of power, and turn it over to the 'unwashed masses' instead. And long before their master plan for conquering the world could be implemented.

Thus, the earliest stages of the secret plan hatched both by invisible mid-level to high level bureaucrats and high profile officials of the USAmerican government (as well as select corporate CEOs and others) were driven as much by fear of the internet as anything else.

You see, to the conspirators, it appeared there would soon be no middle-ground: either someone made a grab for the whole ball of wax (and did it relatively soon), or else those currently on top would likely find their wealth and power fast dissolving due to new forces arising on the internet and elsewhere.

The republic of USAmerica, which performed so magnificently for so long in the face of daunting social and technological change, leading the entire world through dark days to better times, is at last feeling its age-- and so begins its long but slow decline.

[Another Y2K related site is Y2K: The Only Year 2000 Novel, and was also found on Scripting News]

Predictions by Frances Cairncross, senior editor of the Economist magazine:

* a paradoxical simultaneous decline and rise in government powers over the individual. On the one hand, global commercial sales of books and other products and service reduce the censorship power and economic and legal control of individual governments over citizens. Yet at the same time it will become easier for governments to spy on citizens and locate them as it wishes. The ultimate socio-economic consequences of this paradox are unclear...

Cairncross has published a book on these subjects: "The Death of Distance".

-- "An economist ponders the impact of technology" by JENNIFER FILES, The Dallas Morning News/Mercury Center, 7-8-98

Mainstream USAmerican media (such as ABC's Nightline) circa 1998 and 1999 were doing disturbing presentations to the American public regarding possible biowar and bioterrorism attacks. One striking element in the presentation was an apparent assumption that USAmerica could not depend even upon its ally nations to help during such a crisis, with extra supplies of vaccines or antibiotics.

Such seeming distrust of other nations also appeared around the same time in the US Senate, as that body struck down a treaty for banning nuclear weapons tests because they felt foreigners would cheat. The US is pushing for building its own anti-missile defense shield despite opposition from virtually all its allies, as well as the strong likelihood that proceeding with such a shield would cause a collapse in past arms agreements negotiated with Russia, and alarm China, perhaps leading to an all new arms race. The US government also seems to be standing in the way of real verification procedures for a treaty outlawing bioweapons.

Events seem to be pointing to a growing isolationism in the US.

-- Prophets of doom By Debora Mackenzie, From New Scientist, 20 November 1999


Back to 1990 AD-2050 AD in Perspectives...



Introduction to the Signposts Timeline (and Contents)

| 1990-2000 AD | 2001 AD-2002 AD | 2003-2008 | 2009-2017 | 2018-2025 | 2026-2049 | 2050-2081 | 2082-2183 | 2184-2272 | 2273-2350 | 2351-2600 |

The above article(s) come from and make references to a collection copyright © 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 by J.R. Mooneyham (except where otherwise noted in the text). Text here explicitly authored by J.R. Mooneyham may be freely copied and distributed for non-commercial purposes in paper and electronic form without charge if this copyright paragraph and link to jmooneyham.com or jrmooneyham.com are included.

So who is J.R. Mooneyham, and just what are his qualifications for speculating about the future of government, business, technology, and society?

You can find out by clicking here...(and also send FEEDBACK)



Back to J.R.'s WebFLUX Page

Back to J.R.'s WebWork Page (A hefty catalog of links to almost everything)

Site Map for the WebFLUX and WebWork pages