May 16, 2002

The Big Brother Files #39: Exposing The Beast

Hello everyone

Lots of juicy globalist stuff in this one.

Jean Hudon
Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator

P.S. See also my latest Media compilation #72: Why Is The Media Protecting The NWO Mob? --- Posted at

... with much of the same stuff as below and which I introduced this way: "This is the GREAT taboo, the one question no journalist dare try answering. The failure of most Western media to investigate the most glaring global plot to impose a dictatorial, brutish New World Order as exposed below is sure going to be the most unforgivable blemish staining the reputation of our so-called free press for centuries to come... That is, unless something is done about it!"

NOTE: For those on this list who are from Quebec, the conference "The Hidden History of Humanity" will be offered in Quebec City (Motel Universel) on May 22 by Francois Pierre <> who specializes in talking about the same issues as David Icke. For more details or go at or contact him.


1. Why is the Media Keeping a Lid on These Most Important Meetings? The Utter Falsity of Free Press!
2. A U.S. Cabal Pulling America to War
3. Unanswered Questions About 9-11
4. WTC - NO CLUES...
5. DREAM TAMPERING - Is Someone Transmitting Dream Images To Us As We Sleep?

See also:


Character Assassination of Rep. Cynthia McKinney

Newsweek: Unheeded Warnings; Doubting FBI Denials

Robert Fisk: Why does John Malkovich want to kill me? (14 May 2002)

More evidence of warnings to Washington of September 11 attacks (8 May 2002)
(...) It is all the more inexplicable that a month later, when FBI agents in Minneapolis reported the detention of Zaccarias Moussaoui, the French-Moroccan student who wanted to learn how to fly a Boeing 747 without learning how to take off or land, FBI headquarters showed little interest.



Date: Fri, 10 May 2002
From: BILL D <>
Subject: Globalist Agenda

NOTE: From May 30-June 2, 2002, the ultra-secret, ultra-elitist Bilderberg cabal will meet at the Westfields Marriott Hotel in Chantilly, Va., seven miles south of Washington, D.C. The big question is: will the local and national media cover this extremely crucial event?

Why is the Media Keeping a Lid on These Most Important Meetings? The Utter Falsity of Free Press!

Last mid-April, 2002, the Trilateral Commission met for four days at the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Washington, D.C. As they do every year, this highly influential group of world leaders from North America, Japan and Europe plotted ways to promote their globalist agenda. Some of the items on their nefarious list this year were:

- America's upcoming invasion of Iraq, and how to lure Europe and other Asian nations into supporting our War Machine.

- Further create a multinational financial octopus, with the United Nations as the head of a one-world government.

- Keep pumping money, technology, and computers into China, bolstering them as the next premier global superpower.

- Funnel more American aid to "under-exploited" foreign countries, leading the way for the implementation of a World Tax.

- Finally, prevent the Israeli/Palestinian war from turning into a complete powder keg, thus endangering our Middle Eastern oil supplies.

To me, each of these issues seems vitally important, even crucial, to the world. Others thought so too, for some of the attendees included:

- David Rockefeller - Overlord, Chase-Manhattan Bank
- Paul Volcker - Former Chairman, Federal Reserve
- Charles Robb - Former Senator
- Robert McNamara - Former Secretary of Defense
- Kenneth Lay - Former CEO, Enron
- Henry Kissinger - Former Secretary of State
- Winston Lord - Former China Ambassador
- David Gergen - Editor, U.S. News and World Report
- Zbigniew Brzezinski - Former Head of National Security, Trilateral co-founder
- Madeline Albright - Former Secretary of State
- John Deutch - Former Head, CIA
- Richard Holbrook - Former U.S. Ambassador to U.N.
- Harold Brown - Former Secretary of Defense
- Strobe Talbott - Former Under Secretary of State
- Tom Foley - Former Speaker of the House

Some fairly important names, huh? Well, in addition to them, there was also the head of
Goldman-Sachs International, which is one of the ten firms that hold the most stock in our nation's
Federal Reserve System. Plus, there were other representatives from:

- Fuji Xerox
- The Ambassador of Germany
- a Georgetown Professor
- a Washington Post columnist
- Chairman, Archer-Daniels Midland
- President, Club of Rome
- International Monetary Fund managing director
- Former Canadian High Commissioner to the U.K.
- a member of the British Parliament
- President Emeritus, AFL-CIO (NITE branch)
- President, Federal Reserve
- Chairman, Levi-Strauss
- Director of Rothschild & Sons
- Vice Chairman, Citicorp (which owns 22% of NYFR stock)
- CEO, Institution of Global Economics, Seoul
- Former Minister of Trade, Mexico
- Former Irish Senator
- Former CEO, Xerox
- Former President of Mexico

Finally, some of the speakers and panelists were:

- Dick Cheney, Vice President of the United States
- Alan Greenspan, Chairman, Federal Reserve
- Colin Powell, Secretary of State
- Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense

In all, 251 of the most influential businessmen, statesmen, politicians, financiers, and academics met right in Washington, D.C., and how much did you hear about it in your local or national media? I'll bet nothing! I mean, Kenneth Lay, fallen head of Enron, was there. Every time he sneezed or clipped a hangnail, the press reported on it. But not this time at the Trilateral Commission meeting.

Think of it this way (as veteran reporter Jim Tucker of the American Free Press so eloquently puts it). Every year when the world's greatest actors get together at the Academy Awards, is the media present? Yes. How about when America's two best football teams meet at the Super Bowl. Is the media there? Of course. TV's Emmy awards - the media is there. Grammy's - the media is there en force. Hell, the media even reports on hog-calling contests at the State Fair in Arkansas.

But when some of the most powerful men and women congregate to determine the course of future history, did any of the following cover their meeting:

New York Times - NO
Newsweek - NO
Time Magazine - NO

Hell, the Washington Post and U.S. News and World Report even had journalists present! They should be running full-color blowout cover story articles on the Trilateral Commission's meeting. Regrettably, they're not. Instead, we get the same old sanitized, censored pablum that keeps the masses socially controlled and uninformed.

Why? It's appalling. In Russia, there used to be an old joke about their two primary newspapers - Pravda, which means "truth," and Isvestia, which translates to "News." The punch line was: "There's no truth in Pravda, and no news in Isvestia!" All of us in America laugh at that joke because we enjoy freedom of the press and openness in the media, right? Wrong. Where is the "truth" and "news" in our media if we're being spoon-fed crap that is supposed to condition and brainwash us instead of to inform us? What differentiates us from the old hard-core Soviets if we're not being told the truth? Sure, there are alternate sources of insight, like the Internet and underground press, but the mainstream media in this country should be ashamed of themselves.

Again I'll ask - why do they refuse to give us the whole story? Well, the answer lies in an all-pervasive concept: Control. Y'see, being that five multinational corporations now own the entirety of the mainstream media in this country, they essentially determine what you see and cannot see (or read or hear). With this stranglehold over the media, here's how they control their output. Let's pretend there's a hotshot journalist that graduates from college, and he lands his first job at a small-town newspaper. Young and idealistic, he writes articles about township council meetings and profiles on little old ladies growing petunias in their backyard. Everything is running smoothly, and life is good.

Within a year the kid moves on to a small city paper, keeps shining, and soon finds himself writing at a nationally known publication. He soon gets married, has two children, and buys a big house in a nice neighborhood. He even wins a few awards along the way. His future is bright.

Then, when all seems settled and cool, this reporter gets tipped-off to an incredibly horrendous program that is secretly being implemented on and against the American people without their knowledge. The reporter, outraged, does some research and discovers that, yes; this shit really is going down. So, with facts in hand and a belly full of bravado to back him up, he storms into his editor's office and lays it all out, saying that he wants to expose this obvious injustice.

Now here's where things get sticky. The editor obviously knows what's going on, so he sits the reporter down and tells him quite frankly that these types of stories "CANNOT" be covered because of the potential damage it could cause to the Controllers. The reporter freaks out and says that if his newspaper won't blow the lid off this story, he'll take his notes and sources to another outlet. The editor, who'd been through this same routine twenty years earlier, explains to the man that he's a great reporter with tons of potential, but if he pursues this story, he'll be blackballed within the Industry. Sure, he might get an underground publication to run his story, but in the mainstream, he's all washed-up. That means no more cushy assignments, hobnobbing with influential personalities, no more killer salary, and no more promotions or vacations in Hawaii. Hell, in all likelihood, he'll probably be shit-canned in the near future if he causes any more trouble. The reporter protests, but his editor tells him to consider the impact on his career. Without the big money rolling in, how can he pay his mortgage, keep his trophy wife in pretties, send their two children to private school, and dine at the finest restaurants? He'll go from prince to pauper, get divorced, and live a shit life.

So, the reporter goes home and discusses his options with his wife, then returns to work the next day to tell his editor that, yes, he'll can the expose and bury it. Pleased, the editor lets his "higher-ups" know that this guy is a "team player," and soon he gets another promotion. Then, a couple of years down the line he gets assigned to be the Executive Editor at a mid-sized newspaper. That's when some hotshot citizens come to him with a story that'll blow the lid off a government scam. They have tons of information, sources, and data - and want the new editor to run their story.

By this time, though, the editor knows how the game is played. He wasn't assigned to this job to report on news that benefits the community. He was put there to "keep a lid" on everything - to not blow any covers. So the editor tells his "higher-ups" what's going on, and asks how he should handle it. They tell him, and the editor puts a dagger through the story and kills it. It's dead, done, and over, and no one's the wiser. The "higher-ups" are again pleased with him for being a "team player," and soon he's promoted to editor at a big-city paper. And welluh, the game goes on and the System stays intact.

That's the way it works, but not only in the newspaper business. It's the same in:

Television - The same concept applies. Ask Dan Rather - he made his entire career by scamming the JFK Assassination in Dallas where he was the "chosen" reporter. He soon replaced Walter Cronkite as the anchor at the CBS Evening News. What's the frequency, Dan?

Politics - If a candidate doesn't toe the line, and instead tries to reveal the boatload of crap that's flowing through the bowels of our political system, all of a sudden the big Party Machine money from the Republicans and Democrats that had gone to their re-election campaigns suddenly dries up and is funneled to another candidate that is better "trained" in following the rules. If this candidate insists on trying to expose the inner workings of the Machine, the media conveniently uncovers a "scandal," and the politician is publicly humiliated, insuring that they'll never be re-elected again. Almost all "falls from grace" are not because a certain politician is any dirtier than the rest; it's because they're bucking the System and trying to bring to light all the shit and graft and underhanded schemes.

Academia - If an instructor or professor adheres to the accepted "curriculum" and doesn't stray or tell the truth (especially in history, political science, economics, archaeology, and the science fields), they're in the running for all the benefits of academic life. But if they venture into forbidden territory, the promotions, cushy conference trips to Florida in January, the research money, and tenure fade away into oblivion. In other words, teach what is included within the narrow confines established by the Controllers, or else you'll be passed over time and again for someone who is more of a team player.

The same rationale applies to the business world, medical profession, and the dog-eat-dog trenches of the legal profession. Either conform, or get bounced and/or rejected.

So, with the above information in mind, it's time to test the above theory. I'm sure you remember how I opened this article by writing about the recent Trilateral Commission meeting in Washington, D.C. that went completely unreported in the mainstream American media. But alas, I'm going to give them a chance to redeem themselves. How? Well, during the weekend of May 30-June 2, the Bilderbergs, the most powerful "secret" group of international bankers and high-rollers in the world, will congregate in Chantilly, Virginia at the Westfields Marriott Hotel, less than ten miles south of Washington, D.C. at Dulles International Airport.

There! As first reported in the American Free Press, the location and date have been established. The most influential men and women in the world will be there from May 30-June 2. The big question is, will the American media cover this meeting like they do the Super Bowl or Academy Awards?

They should, for some of the people expected there are David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger, Christopher Dodd (who will be a candidate for the Presidency in 2004), the President of the World Bank, plus queens, military advisors, and business tycoons. In addition, some of the topics to be discussed are:

- How to manipulate the "terrorism" War Machine to the Controllers benefit

- A United Nations World Tax

- A worldwide ban on firearms

- How to make the dollar similar to the Euro currency, then filter it throughout North, Central, and South America

- Further spread NAFTA to completely destroy whatever industry we have left in America

- Oust Saddam Hussein and declare war on Iraq

I'm not sure about you, but these issues seem crucial to not only the USA, but the entire planet. More importantly, what these 120 individuals decide at the Bilderberg meeting will then be filtered down to the world leaders who have been "selected" to hold office. That includes America! Think about how atrocious this situation is. It should fill you with rage. A cabal of mega-rich elitists meet 'secretly' once a year to decide world events, then bestow them on OUR 'selected' political leaders in Washington, D.C. to implement. Then, to add insult to injury, the media - our FREE and OPEN media - refuses to cover these meetings. Why? Because they're controlled by the same devils that attend these nefarious conferences.

So, ask yourselves, is this the type of situation that benefits us, or does it only perpetuate the Controllers' power? If you're able to see through the ruse that's being perpetrated on us, the next thing you should ask is, how much longer are we going to tolerate being treated like morons?


Sent by "Boudewijn Wegerif" <> on 10 May 2002

Excerpted from


A U.S. Cabal Pulling America to War

by Conn Hallinan

"Sometime this fall, probably before the mid-term elections, the U.S. will probably be at war with Iraq. But why are we headed to war in the Mideast? Not because Iraq is engaged in terrorism. According to the CIA, it isn't. Not because Iraqi arms threaten our security. According to most arms inspectors, Iraq is essentially disarmed. No, it will happen because more than a decade ago a small cabal of political heavyweights in the administration of George Bush the First, who now also run the foreign and defense policy of George Bush II, sat down and drew up a blueprint to rule the world. X-Files fantasies?

"Their names should be familiar: Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Secretary of State Colin Powell, and Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Cheney's chief of staff. Their goal is to "shape" the world to "preclude the rise of another global rival for the indefinite future"," in the words of one of the group's leading thinkers, Zalmay Khalizad (now special envoy to Afghanistan).

"The tone of these people is chilling. Our allies are cast as a bunch of spineless whiners, international agreements are dismissed as straitjackets, and the "enemy" portrayed as a mob of wogs, easily scattered by a show of cold steel. In his briefing of senior White House staff on the Mideast, Bernard Lewis of Princeton (another "team" member) argued that "in that part of the world, nothing matters more than resolute force and will".

"Homework was undoubtedly the collected works of Cecil Rhodes and Rudyard Kipling."

When Bush addressed the nation Sept. 20, he called on the American people and our allies to join a "war on terrorism." But in the intervening six months, the goals of that war have changed drastically. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice told Lemann that the policy was not just to go after terrorists, but to prevent the accumulation of weapons of mass destruction in "the hands of irresponsible states."

This is a handy little distinction, because on Feb. 5 the CIA said there was no evidence that Iraq has engaged in any terrorism directed at the United States or its allies. And while the administration has trumpeted that Iraq blocked all arms inspections three years ago, few people outside of Washington (except British Prime Minister Tony Blair) actually think that Iraq has such weapons.

As Scott Ritter, former head of the UN Special Commission on Concealment says, "It was possible as early as 1997 to determine that, strictly from a qualitative standpoint, Iraq had been disarmed."

Would it make a difference if Iraq agreed to inspections? Nope. When asked that question by CNN, Powell replied that "even then the United States believes the Iraqi people would be better served with a new kind of leadership."

The latest rationale for invasion is that Iraq has ties with al Qaeda, a charge based more on tortured logic than intelligence. CIA Director George Tenet recently told Congress that, while there was no evidence that such ties exist, the "mutual antipathy" that the two had for the United States "suggests that tactical cooperation between the two is possible." If one can find two flimsier words than "suggests" and "possible" to launch a war, it would be great to hear them.

The lack of evidence linking Iraq to terrorism is deeply disturbing to our allies. Even America's strongest ally, Britain, is split on an invasion. More than 122 Labor members of Parliament have signed a petition opposing any attack. By shifting the target from terrorism to weapons that might fall into the hands of terrorists, virtually any country becomes a target. The administration has already lined up Syria, Iran, Somalia, and Sudan once Iraq is toppled. That invading any of these countries would violate international law and the UN charter doesn't faze these people.

U.S. foreign policy has been hijacked by a group of unelected unilateralists who seem determined to drag America into an endless morass of brushfire wars to achieve the goal of unrestrained power. They are doing this without consulting with Congress or the American people, and unless citizens act now to hold them accountable, our world is going to get a lot more dangerous than it already is.

Conn Hallinan <> writes for Foreign Policy In Focus -


Unanswered Questions About 9-11

"Boudewijn Wegerif" <> continued with this...

Was it this small cabal of nasties behind the attack on the integrity of the world on September 11, 2001, one wonders.

I was interested to receive an E-mail from list member Dick Eastman with a long list of unanswered questions designed to uncover what really happened on 9.11. The questionnaire is posted at the American Patriot Friends Network Discussion Board. There is also a list of URL links that will be useful for those of you who remain determined to keep the questions alive.

Here are a few of the questions, somewhat edited by me:


Richard Mueller, the FBI, is asked:

- Can you explain why some media reports said that two of the hijackers had bought tickets for flights scheduled after the Sept. 11 attacks?

- Can you explain why Ahmed Alghamdi, who was on the United Airlines plane that hit the World Trade Center, had also purchased tickets for a flight the next day from Dulles Airport in Washington D.C. to Saudi Arabia?

- Can you explain why none of the eight indestructible Black Boxes have been found at the three crash centers?

- Who was that gentleman on the street on September 11th at about 8:48 a.m. with a cam-corder in his hands taking the video, which captured and recorded the incident of the first plane hitting the tower?

- Why did he never appear in the media again?

- Can you explain the odd coincidence that Microsoft got a hoax anthrax letter from Malaysia on the same day that President Bush said that Malaysia might be one of the next targets of the United States?

- Why did the FBI never investigate the case of Don C Wiley, a BioScientist who disappeared on November 13th, 2001? Why did the FBI only start to investigate after his dead body was found on December 22nd 2001, 300 miles away? Did the FBI investigate at the military hydro plant next to his body, after Workers of that plant found him? Can you explain why the media wrote different versions about how, when and where he was found? Why was the police report then changed, after 2 months, from suicide to an accident?

Dr. Manfred Schneider of the Bayer pharmaceutical company is asked:

- When exactly did the US Government ask you for help by sending anti-anthrax vaccines to the United States? When did you start sending the vaccines? When did you double your production of vaccines?

And here are some of the questions asked of George Tenet, of the CIA:

- Is it correct that some US Airbases were on high alert on September 10th and for what purpose?

- Where did you get the photos of all 19 hijackers? How did you get all 19 names so fast two days after the attack? Why did all 19 names still not appear on the passenger list two days after the hijacker list was released? How did you get the first five names of the hijackers on the same day, September 11th? Can you explain, why none of the names appeared on the passenger lists UA and AA gave out to CNN?

- How were the hijackers able to disable the defense systems?

- Have you investigated the death of Vladimir Pasechnik, former director of the Institute of Ultra Pure Biochemical Preparations, a component of the Soviet biowarfare establishment, Biopreparat, in November 2001? What about the other deaths of Scientists Robert M. Schwartz, Dr. Benito Que and Set Van Nguyen in the same month?


Date: Wed, 8 May 2002
From: Richard Giles <>
Subject: WTC - NO CLUES...

Hi Jean,

This story is very interesting in the light of all the other material circulating in the last few months on Sept 11. It concludes that the "terrorists" must have too good and too efficient to be spotted, but there is another conclusion that many will be gravitating too, there was no "terrorist" network, and that the reason there is no paper trail is that there was no paper to leave a trail as the whole event was an inside job - another explanation altogether must be found for why no records were left. It will involve finding out just who was really involved in the Sept 11 attacks. This answer will very simply explain the reason there are no credit cards, and phone call records and whatever else is missing. Think on that. It is very hard to believe that the world's largest intelligence services (CIA, FBI, NSA) missed it all for five years. And this story appeared in the US media too.




Posted on Tues, April 30, 2002


U.S. Finds No Paper Trail in Terror Plot
Los Angeles Times Service

WASHINGTON - For more than seven months, U.S. authorities probing the Sept. 11 attacks have scoured everything from caves to credit cards in the expectation that they would ultimately discover how the 19 hijackers plotted their brazen scheme. But the global search has produced virtually nothing in the way of hard evidence about the terrorists' planning, and authorities said Monday that they now face the growing realization that they may never know many key details.




FBI Chief says alleged 9.11 hijackers 'left no paper trail' whatsoever (May 3)

Speaking on April 19 to a meeting of the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco, FBI Chief Robert Mueller said: "In our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper -- either here in the United States or in the treasure trove of information that has turned up in Afghanistan and elsewhere -- that mentioned any aspect of the Sept. 11 plot."

Even though the FBI and other U.S. intelligence agencies have not turned up any concrete evidence of how the 9.11 attacks were planned and carried out, they insist that they have no doubt of who was responsible. After seven months, FBI assertions aside, no one else has provided anything like proof for the U.S. Government's official story either. Meanwhile, a significant amount of evidence is being uncovered that contradicts the official story.

There are no Arab names on the publically released flight lists, no bodies, and the perpetrators reportedly used fake ID's. What is the proof that the FBI even knows who the perpetrators were? Quotes in the Washington Post from the flight instructors who trained the alleged pilots indicate that they were not capable of flying the hijacked planes.

The official story has been created by a corporate media machine with defense industry ties and a presidential administration that stole an election. Why are these entities considered reliable sources? Isn't it time for a serious investigation that does not presuppose that the government/media's explanation, if it can be called that, is the only "real" one?

More details at:

See also:

"Why Does The Indymedia Network Refuse To Look Into The Events Of 911?"

Senator Bob Grahm : On 911 DOJ, CIA Uncooperative


Date: Tuesday, May 07, 2002
List-subscribe: <>


Is Someone Transmitting Dream Images To Us As We Sleep?

by Mark Andrews

Late night talk show host Art Bell received an email from a female listener in which she spoke of a recent dream wherein she saw Chinese paratroopers descending from the sky in an invasion of the United States.

The young lady shared the contents of her dream with a friend who, to her surprise, related having exactly the same dream on the same night. Further inquiries found five other people who had had precisely the same dream on the very same night.

Precognitive dreams are quite common, however they tend to be much more randomly received. (Highly improbable that seven people would have the same prophetic dream at the same time.)

Simple coincidence or psychic synchronicity might explain the situation, but (again) it's the number of individuals - having exactly the same dream on the same night - and the specification of the para-troopers - that seem to suggest that what the seven experienced that night was a planned and directed dream "transmission".

It has always been known by those who practice psychic manipulations that a person is much more susceptible to your telepathic suggestions when they are in the Alpha level of sleep. (The dream state.)

If this was indeed a dream "invasion", then who would have the capacity to broadcast psychic images on "The Alpha Channel"?

It would be highly unlikely that the Chinese would go to such great lengths to announce to us their plans for an up-coming invasion. It would certainly not be strategically advantageous to any such war effort on their part.

But then, who WOULD benefit from a subconsciously implanted scenario that produces high levels of paranoia and patriotic vigilance on the part of those who received the dream images?

It is a well known fact that the American Central Intelligence Agency spent many years (and many millions of dollars) on a mind control project known as "M-K Ultra". It can be safely assumed that the CIA was able to achieve and perfect numerous techniques for the manipulation of human thought.

It is also a well known fact that the US military has invested just as much time and money (if not much more of both) on programs that train operatives in the art of "remote viewing"; focused clairvoyance.

It would be a very short leap from these two techniques to a program of dream manipulation beamed at the general public while they are in the Alpha levels of sleep.

Could the shared dream that the seven people had on that night be part of a much larger program to coerce the American public into a state of unwittingly accepting ever-increasing funding for the military? Could it have been a psychic "infomercial" for the Administration's "war on terrorism"? Could it be part of an agenda that seeks to control our thoughts through the use of implanted telepathic and clairvoyant intrusions? Thirty years ago, such questions would have been met with ridicule. In the year 2002 (following the events of 9-11) such questions seem to frightfully legitimate.

Shield Before You Sleep To Resist Psychic Intrusion

If we are indeed being subjected to dream-state mind control, then it would be in all of our best interests to take measures that are designed to block such incursions.


It is also prudent to shield your family and loved ones from psychic manipulations as they sleep by willing it and including them in your daily and nightly prayers.

It could very well be that I am completely off-base with my theories that the CIA (or other governmental agencies) are employing the use of psychotronic technologies to manipulate the people of the US (and all of the people of the world) into unknowingly accepting their plans for total domination. Yes, I could be wrong about that. But - whatever the case - White Light shielding is always a very, very, good idea; no matter the reason.

Just to be sure.

Mark Andrews