“Rebuilding America’s Defenses”—The Project for the New American Century”
A Summary by Helen Corneli

The authors (directed by William Kristol, Robert Kagan, Devon Gaffney Cross, Bruce Jackson and John R. Bolton, with Gary Smith as Executive Director and Thomas Donnelly the principal Author) wish to correct previous Defense Reviews, which they assert “shortchange strategy.” Building upon the strategy produced by Cheney’s defense Department in 1992 they define a goal of maintaining U.S. preeminence in military power—a goal “buried,” they assert by the Clinton administration. They see arms superiority as the only way to “remain in a position to help shape things for the better.” They held seminars with unnamed participants, discussing readiness, the revolution in armaments, planning for theater and ‘small’ wars, as well as ‘constabulary’ actions. Written in a time of budget surplus, with a “ troubled, unready military,” the report was intentionally published in an election year, though it was not widely available to the public.

TWO SUMMARIES of Summaries.

I Establish Four Core Missions for U.S. military forces
Defend the American homeland;
Fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars;
Perform the “constabulary” for more security in critical regions
Transform U.S. forces to exploit the “revolution in military affairs

This will require $ allocations for keeping global nuclear strategic superiority: more personnel-- from 1.4 million to 1.6 million repositioned forces. Reassign ground forces to permanent bases in Southeast Europe and Southeast Asia, and deploy more naval units to East Asia.

II Modernize Forces Selectively: a) Proceed with F-22, but supplement with lift, electronic support and other aircraft; expand submarine fleet, purchase Comanche helicopters and medium-weigh ground vehicles (Army) and V-22 Ospreys for Marines.
b) Cancel various “roadblock” programs: CVX Aircraft carriers for example.
c) Develop a global missile defense system; deploy it.
d) Control space and “cyberspace—anticipating a “Space Force.”
e) Make sure the U.S. maintains global superiority through competitive use of advanced technology

* * *

II. The report is cumulatively repetitive, with chapter I charging that previous American defense planners had failed to match geopolitical reality with military might. A comparison of the one-rival situation, (the Soviet Union) to current potential theater wars, spread across the globe, particularly in East Asia, forces us to deter or compel regional foes to change their ways when they act to challenge American interests and “principles.” This means an ability to fight two wars at the same time. Current deployment, they declare, won’t meet current reality. Worst of all, the Pentagon has not considered new technologies in communication and weapons, while (they assert) China, Iran, Iraq, and North Korea are “rushing” to develop missiles and nuclear weapons. Pentagon responses are “poorly focused and woefully under-funded.”

Chapter II argues that the often restated principle, “American peace depends on military preeminence,” will require four essential missions—a requirement ignored by previous defense

-2-

reviews. The need: to consolidate 20th century victories over Germany and Japan, keep the Middle East “stable,” and set conditions for success in East Asia mean that we must defend the homeland, fight and win multiple large scale wars, be constables to preserve the peace, while transforming our own forces.

• Missile defense must be designed and built.
• Peacekeeping operations must be better understood and supported
• The Defense Department must be transformed with a goal of redesigning and building new ‘conventional’ forces.

Chapter III is devoted to repositioning today’s force. To be militarily superior dictates that the army become “the first line of American defenses…”the cavalry on the new American frontier.” A reorientation of the units that Clinton deployed in the Balkans shows that NATO bases in Italy be improved, an airfield in Hungary established, and Incirlik Air Base (Turkey) expanded. Similar specifics are outlined for the Persian Gulf region and for East Asia. The Navy should station fewer carriers in the Gulf and Mediterranean so that more may be positioned in the Pacific. Naval planning must focus on achieving “increased naval presence at a lower cost.”

Chapter IV makes specific suggestions for rebuilding and using the current (as of late 2000) armed forces. These are: redeploy army and naval units to the Balkans and the Persian Gulf. A commitment to permanent stationing abroad is primary. Thus a larger, better trained army with support and active branches must be financed, modernized, and trained for modern warfare. Soldiers must be provided with a better life. The requests of Army and other services for better equipment, housing, etc. must be honored, and a focus on combat missions regained. The role, training, and use of a reduced National Guard and Army reserve should be focused, not frittered away in “ongoing contingency operations.” Forward based forces must be self-contained, combined arms units that can help with intelligence gathering. They must also be made aware of the political and security realities wherever they are. These units are particularly suited for the role of “change agents” in the military. Forces now stationed in South Korea need preparation for longer range operations,” and with added rocket, aviation an attack helicopter assets, might become a model for the new, independent, combined-arms forces needed elsewhere too.”

Accomplishing all this will require enlarging service budgets substantially as well as cutting some inappropriate weapons such as Crusader artillery. The Air Force--the most flexible and responsive arm of the service, faced with the need for global reach--needs a modern, not ‘big-war “air campaign” model with 19-20 active and 8 reserve wing equivalents. It must be widely deployed from Italy to Southeast Asia, feature electronic warfare, airborne command and control, large stocks of precision-guided missiles, fleets of AWACS, JSTARS and other support planes, a rebuilt pilot corps and trained police, maintenance, and intelligence personnel. Widely scattered bases are essential. Ditch the Joint Strike Fighter—a sink-hole for needed funds. Problems—such as lack of practice and training, an aging fleet with high maintenance costs—prove the need for increased budgets. The Air Force should begin building new space capability.

Navy and Marine Corps receive equally detailed and specific recommendations, all involving larger budgets. Although the Nay already has unchallenged supremacy, it is not modernized, and it does not meet current realities. It owns up to an “aging force structure” and does not have enough ships. The Rx is, realignment and reconfiguration. East Asian realities mean that 2/3 of battle groups must be assigned to the Pacific, where a permanent base must be established. We need 9, instead of 12, aircraft carriers, and new building must focus on “unmanned aerial vehicles. At the same time, increasing spending on “surface combatants and submarines,” and counter-mine warfare is needed. The current reliance on postponed maintenance and the practice of training while deployed is limiting the service’s ability to meet the “two-war standard.” Obsolescence of the existing fleet looms as the number of combatant ships is reduced. The status of submarines is bad: 23-27 boats needed rather than the 10 new attack submarines planned. As with ships and submarines, naval aircraft purchases are too small. The Navy, too must impose new deployment patterns to meet situations such as recent Taiwan/China tensions, and other possible requirements.

The Marines. This uniquely versatile corps needs to grow (to 200,000) and change focus to its core naval infantry mission. Keeping coming needs in East Asia in mind, this focus should include more cooperation with other service, modernizing by creating lighter units and more aircraft. The Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle will improve its mobility and range. Like other services, it needs more resources, training, and money. In sum, budgets for the Navy and Marines should increase from 98 billion to up to 220 billion.

Chapter V: Creating Tomorrow’s Dominant Force

Recommendations include stopping the misguided slide of R&D funds from the Reagan era figure of 20% of spending to a 2000 figure of 8%. While averring that their suggestions must not decouple us from our allies, and admitting that the process will be long (absent a catastrophic, SEE BELOW-catalyzing event), the suggestions are to develop a layered missile defense system of land, sea and space-based sections. In turn, this requires control of space and cyberspace. A transition time will be needed to truly transform our defense.

After vigorous criticism of staying with the ABM treaty and ending the “Brilliant Pebbles” project, the need for a galaxy of surveillance satellites to find and track incoming ballistic missiles is posited. A global net of command and control plus interceptor bases is needed—but will not be enough. No, THAAD (Theater High Altitude Area Defense) and a similar Navy

-4-

system, based on lasers, must be funded. The Air Force has a Space-Based Infrared System that locates and ‘captures’ missiles almost upon launch; hence budget cuts for these programs must be restored. There is further discussion of GPALS, Global Protection Against Limited Strikes.

The ultimate need, analogous to Britain’s former mastery of the seas, is unrestricted use of space, involving space stations. Instead of ‘dilatory drift’ and reliance on NASA, we should create a US Space Force. Coupled with establishing security for our nation’s Internet structure, this move would not only protect our own Internet, but also give us an valued tool for disabling adversaries.
Thus, the needed transformation will require us to be more aware of the world situation; to share that information, and adjust our military’s range of responses with global platforms and weapons. Precise, 'miniatured’ tools, allowing speed, stealth, automation, and simulation, can apply to the communication and other new systems--from electronic to biological--that may develop elsewhere, requiring us to respond with better systems. The Department of Defense is to be rebuilt, with highly talented people to direct competition and experimentation. A “Buck Rogers” set of possibilities is detailed under which a squad of seven soldiers could dominate the equivalent of Gettysburg, where 165,000 men fought. The Air Force should stay ready for large sophisticated theater-strikes, but also move into space based systems. The Navy can specialize in ‘power projection’ ashore to lead in joint operations conducted from the sea. Both near term (stealth, long range guns, improved missiles) and longer term (use of UAVs and more forceful submarine use) are important concerns—all under an umbrella of experimentation. The Marines can forsake the Harrier planes, and develop a “gunship” V-22 aircraft.
Chapter VI Defense Spending
A mere six pages is devoted to this subject. A defense deficit has been created because a peace dividend has been paid out: Clinton spent 162 billion LESS than his predecessor. Other, varying estimates are cited, none lower than 27 billion yearly. And, because of Social Security costs, the downward trend is predicted to continue. If this happens, it is goodbye preeminence. US forces will become “too old and too small.” Such a trend would make enormous allocations to the military from 2006 through 2020 necessary. Allowing the military to become unfit and obsolete--especially because peace itself is the product of American preeminence-- will allow those dangerous to our values to threaten, if not overcome us.

DIRECTLY FROM HE REPORT PAGE -52-!

4/8/17
2+2=5: Is Hillary Clinton President? Trump ordered the Navy to bombard a Syria air base in the middle of the night with 59 Tomahawk missiles. The justification was the Syrian Government on Tuesday had a chemical weapons strike killing more than 100 people comprised of civilians, children and of course let us not forget little babies. It's always the Children that is the most effective argument when the deep state wants to justify an unjustified event. Trump looked emotionally distressed but obviously reading from two teleprompter that Obama made famous. So why the Hillary question?

Just a few short hours before Trump ordered the strike Hillary was being interview by CNN and made this statement: “I really believe we should have and still should take out his airfields and prevent him from being able to use them to bomb innocent people and drop Sarin gas on them.” You will later be told it wasn’t Sarin but something else. Looking at the pictures from the gas attack, people are walking around unprotected from one of the most dangerous deadly chemical weapon in the inventor of bad weapons. This is not possible if it was Sarin. I noticed no blood. I thought it was a bombing?

Turning to Trump’s strike, this would have turned that base and area into a no-go zone and contaminated the whole area if there was Sarin gas at that location. Syria was going to meet this coming month to discuss a settlement of the so-called civil war, why would he take such a nonsensical action? I recall last week Tump and Tillerson said Assad could stay. What happen, do we have a defective Intel Agency or is it just the deep State?

Did they make Trump a war criminal like the rest of them? Bush's, Chaney, Clinton's, Obama..etc. Go back in history and look at most of the NAZI war criminals defense. "we were only taking orders." We have bomber a sovereign nations airbase, an act of war killing their citizens, interfering with a sovereign government political issues all by force and not invitation. Russia on the other hand was invited. What would happen if the Israel government sent missiles into a location in the United States where a suspected enemy was running their anti Israel campaign. What happen when the Russian’s tried to move into Cuba?

Trump may know business but I am afraid he is out of his league in this business. They now have him right where the want him. Next will be a wholesale change in his closes aid. He will not make the changes, they will. Remember, winners and losers. Who won with this attack and who lost? His foreign policy is the exact opposite what he ran on and now he is mirroring Hillary.

They are now taking Trump deeper down the “Rabbit Hole”. NBC news has reported that top-ranking intelligence and military officials have provided options for President Trump on North Korea. Namely put Nukes in South Korea or the assassination of Kim Jong-un. Reagan Executive Order 12333…”No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination.” The Neocon’s are in charge, what else do you need to know.


 

FOOD FOR THOUGHT  4/6/17

Two plus two = five. This was the simple answer that Winston Smith finally agreed to be correct. Winston Smith, the main character in Eric Blair’s dystopia novel better known as George Orwell’s novel titled 1984 is being played out over the last couple days with big brother trying to convince the public as well as President Donald Trump that 2+2=5.

President Trump ran on a peace ticket and said he liked Putin and he could work with him. Now, today I read that Russia and Putin are the enemies and they better stay out of our way when the United States launches regime change in Syria. We and President Trump are told that the Syria government used chemical weapons on their citizens while it’s common knowledge that ISIS is on the run and we sent troops there a couple weeks ago to supposedly help defeat ISIS. There is absolutely nothing for Bashar al-Assad to gain in a chemical weapons attack on its citizens. It is only a losing proposition to us poison gas on his people. Remember, Hillary Clinton said we created ISIS and I quote; ““Let’s remember here… the people we are fighting today we funded them twenty years ago… let’s go recruit these mujahideen... And great, let them come from Saudi Arabia and other countries, importing their Wahabi brand of Islam so that we can go beat the Soviet Union.” 

Ask yourself over the past 16+ year war in the middle east who are the winners and who are the losers?  As most of you know I am somewhat of an expert on 911 as compared to the general knowledge of the public so I will start my analysis with an abbreviated  911 summary.

The twin towers, building seven, the pentagon and Flight 93. 
Losers; for starters were the people that died in the buildings, the people that tried to rescue them, their families and loved ones and untold continuing deaths and health problems directly related to 911. 
Winners on 911. Larry Silverstein a big winner purchase the leasing rights six weeks before the attack and just happen to have $3.4 billion dollars of insurance on the property and insured against terrorist attack.  The North Tower had a terrorist attack in 1993 that was designed to take the building down but due to its strength and placement of the charges it did not fall. Big winner, Larry Silverstein got a new building 7 that he owned and was not hit by an airplane. Larry got $4.9 billion dollars for his losses, a new building 7 and a refund on what he paid the port authority for the lease that lasted six weeks.Additional winners: Contractors who redeveloped the property and all that goes with it. 
The Pentagon and the Military Industrial Complex were big winners as Rumsfeld announced on September 10, 2001, that the “real terrorist is the Pentagon can’t account for $2.3 Trillion Dollars. Whatever hit the Pentagon corkscrewed down at 500mph and crashed into the newly fortified section of the Pentagon that happens to be the military accounting department that was looking for the $2.3 Trillion Dollars. I would say that made many people winners including contractors that charged $300 for a toilet seat. And now contractors who got to rebuild the damaged section. Losers; the people that died there along with their families and friends. Winners and losers, just like when a loved one dies you lose and the undertaker wins. Biggest winner, the DOD who ended up with an open checkbook with no accounting and everyone promoted. As a matter of fact, the Commission was not charged with finding guilt in any department. They were actually prohibited from doing so. The Commission's mission statement: “Our aim has not been to assign individual blame. Our aim has been to provide the fullest possible account of the events surrounding 9/11 and to identify lessons learned.”

General Westley Clark told us in September and October of 2001 what was going to happen. I leave that up to your analysis as to determine the winners and losers.

Now to the point of the writing, we now know that our government participated in “false flags” to gin-up the public support that normally would not be there. Woodrow Wilson’s campaign slogan was “he kept us out of the war” and shortly after becoming President we were in WWI with the sinking of the Lusitania carrying munitions.   American’s were warned in the newspapers by the German government not to board the ship as the Germany knew the Lusitania was acting as a munition ship in addition to a passenger ship and thereby taking an active part in the British war effort.  The U.S.claiming to be neutral and the killing of American’s on the ship dragged us into WWI. Fast forward to WWII and Pearl Harbor and the spin of a surprise attack that was only a surprise to those at Pearl Harbor. This is a documented fact, the government knew. The three aircraft carriers assigned to Pearl Harbor were not in port. If they were in port at the time we would have lost the Pacific. 

The Korea war was a proxy war between the United States and Russia. At the end of WWII, Korea, part of the Japanese Empire prior to the end of the war was divided at the 38 parallel between the old Soviet Empire and the United States. Another banker war supported by the Truman doctrine of the “dominion theory” and preserving democracy in that part of the world. Think about it. We have the State of Hawaii thousands of miles from our country, I think that is stretching Manifest Destiney a little too far. We have not been a county since the early 1800’s, we are an empire that I think our founders never envisioned but the BANKERS did and do.

We now move on to the Vietnam War. How did we manage to persuade the public to support this war when there was no “declaration of war.” Simple, false flag. It was Johnson’s Tonkin Gulf Resolution. The USS Maddox, a spy ship was cruising the Tonkin Gulf and claimed they were fired on by North Vietnam ship in international waters. It turned out to be a ruse providing  Johnson with a blank check to start another war to fuel the Military Industrial Complex (MIC) and pad the bankers fiat money scheme. Just think, we call them the Vietnam War, the Korea War, and the Middle East War without the declaration of war. How can this be? It couldn’t if we were a nation of laws and not of me. The Constitution is very specific on Congress having the only power to declare war. 

With the ongoing issue in Syria who wins and who loses. Loser: Syria Christians, Al-Assad, and the Middle East. Winner; ISIS, MIC, maybe the five dancing Israel’s (google it if you don’t know what I am talking about). After all, Israel had a knock down dragged out war in 1976 with Syria as one of the warring parties of the six-day war. Would be nice to have them out of the way, but it may backfire. Isn’t Trump's son-in-law Jewish? Nothing to do with religion, only connecting dots. Millions of  people were/are killed in holy wars than other conflicts, get your history book out.  A little background on Kushner..is he the man for the job Trump handed to him? http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/a8293534/who-is-jared-kushner-trump-administration/

In summary, the point being they don’t need to remake the wheel, that’s why history is important, we must learn from it.  Syria, winners, and losers.  Who would be the winners if we went into Syria and took out Bashar al-Assad? Would you and I be the winner? Would our government be the winner? Would Russia be the winner? Would Al-Assad be the winner? Would the citizens of Syria be the winners? Would the U.S. Treasury be the winner? I think you get the picture.  It will be the same winners as above and it will not be me, you, or our nation. It will be the Bankers and the MIC. However, there is one caveat. The situation is much more critical than in the past. We and they can now blow up the planet. Like I have said in my early postings. Trump must purge the NEOCON’S and meet with knowledgeable people that have not served government and are not looking for a ticket to ride.  He has very little time to do this.

4/7/17
I now wake up this morning and find that Trump ordered 60 Cruise Tomahawk missile strikes while entertaining the President of China at his club.  Trump was not there to greet the China’s President, more than likely payback the snub to Obama at the G20 meeting in China.  Again, winners and losers. As I said above Bashar al-Assad has nothing to gain from such an attack. Who wins? Sixty-missiles at $1.5million a copy and going up in price. Gearing up for more conflict, who wins and who loses. I guess you can figure that out by now. No need to remake the wheel, it's history.

Special note: Trump is now the hero of the networks. I have watched Trump in the last couple days and he talks and looks like he is on some kind of drug. This attack is exactly what Hillary wanted to do and Trump said we should get out of there. I have been watch Syria Girl say the poison was not weapon’s grade as she saw film of inspectors and doctors treating people without protective clothing. If it’s weapons grade and you touch it your dead. Additionally, after Gulf War One the UN removed all of Saddam’s chemical weapons that US companies sold to him opening the door for another attack under Bush Jr. We will not invade a country with chemical weapons, that is why they must be removed, then we attack. Now the MIC will need to replace those missiles and add more at a greater cost, a general will get promoted and Trump may start a golf tour unless he can right his own ship and only he can do that. Sad day for our country. To be continued….

More Food for THOUGHT...

"There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution." — John Adams, The Works of John Adams
Political parties exist to give the illusion of choice. But the "choices" they give you are choices they decide upon. You have very little say in it.
Plainly stated, an elite group rules no matter which political party appears to be in power.
The people in political power, under any party name, keep themselves and their buddies in power to keep mass corruption covered up. The same bureaucrats are always in charge so as to keep a tight lid on in order to prevent exposure.
The reality is that there are two names of political parties, but the philosophy and morality of all politicians is the same. Things that are equal to the same thing are equal to each other.
The axiom above brings forth the conclusion that politicians cannot be different and cannot have a different morality than the system and survive as politicians. Therefore, they have to all be the same.
The power structure quickly dispenses with a politician who has an honestly opposing morality and philosophy. If as few as one million Americans knew this truth, the corrupt political system in America would collapse.
Politicians are crude, monotonous and uncommitted to anything that does not grow their power and the power of the state. It seems that the politicians have a language and word system that baffles and stupefies the public mind. There is no doubt about it, consummate political power lies in the power to deceive.
Politicians — with few exceptions — worship the state and consider the state as the only cure for all ills imagined and real. They are beholden to the system. They seek to divide the people and place them into one group or another and then to pit them against each other — Republican vs. Democrat, liberal vs. conservative, white vs. black, male vs. female, straight vs. sodomite, Christian vs. Muslim, Christian vs. Jew, Christian vs. nonbeliever — in order to achieve more political power.
The American people have become so dependent on political authority that they do not know the difference in realism and illusion. Tens of millions of people can be psyched up to kill each other in foreign wars when in fact the only difference in the two systems is the name.
The political process is a facade of government that satisfies the quest for political choices. It is an illusion unrelated to reality and political participation by the people. It is, however, the perfect system for keeping the people focused on empty nonsense year after year. People totally misunderstand the nature of government. Otherwise they would know that there is no such thing as political choices or political freedom.
We are oppressed by government and most people are unaware of it because they themselves have assumed government morality from childhood as outlined above. It is impossible to change what you believe in your heart. If you are taught that democracy means freedom of political choices, you never question it, and the facade of politics serves for reality. Any challenge to this paradigm is written off as nuttery or conspiracy.
The political process is a merry-go-round of phony politicians and platforms that can guarantee only one thing to the person; that is, eternal diversion, deception and exhaustion.
The American people are taught from birth that Americanism and patriotism demands and requires participation in politics. In this, guilt overrides common sense and reality. This unconscious stigma has enslaved many a soul for all his lifetime.
To power seekers, the most attractive government is some form of collectivism. It can be any name, but it must be collectivism. Collectivism is ideal for government expansion at the expense of the people. Collectivism attracts hard-wired psychopaths who use the system for cronyism and their aggrandizement. They care not one whit about constitutional government and the rule of law. They only care about a political facade to hide their chicanery.
The result is the collectivist American system that has gradually adopted the 10 planks of communism without Americans even being aware of it.
Following are the 10 planks of communism at work in America. America is nearer a communistic than a republican in form of government.

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. (Private property rights are almost nonexistent today. You don't own your property if it can be confiscated for non-payment of tribute to the king, or if a government agency like the Environmental Protection Agency can arbitrarily tell you what you can and can't do with it.)
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. (Accomplished via the American tax system. Enforced via the Gestapo-like Internal Revenue Service.)
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance. (Accomplished via the estate tax.)
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. (Accomplished via rendition, asset forfeiture and drug laws allowing law enforcement to confiscate property if it is suspected of being used in the trade or manufacture of drugs — often without evidence.)
5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly. (Accomplished via the Federal Reserve, which is not Federal and doesn't hold "reserves.")
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state. (Accomplished via the Federal Communications Commission and the regulated airline industry, Amtrak, public transportation and the regulated auto industry. Further attempts being made to seize more power through control of the Internet.)
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of wastelands and the improvement of the soil, generally in accordance with a common plan. (Accomplished through price controls on the utilities via their government-supported monopolies and subsidies for favored industries.)
8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. (Industrial armies accomplished through regulations favoring/subsidizing unions.)
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country. (In progress via the UN Agenda 21 and 2030 Sustainable Development agenda, planned communities, etc.)
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production. (Accomplished via the public indoctrination system called public education under the control of the federal government.)

• HOME
• DAILY NEWS
• WEB SITES
• 2+2=5
• RABBIT HOLE
• CONTACT PAGE
• 911 Trump Knows
• 911For Dummies
• 911 Just Asking Part 1
• 911 Just Asking Part 2
• 911 Just Asking Part 3
• 911 Just Asking Part 4of4
• FEDERAL RESERVE