On Jan. 18, I received an e-mail from Larry (all family names are intentionally omitted) which concludes: “I agree with the making of a movie that will show what can happen when [the dictatorship of] China decides it’s time.”
The day earlier I had received the following e-mail from Ralph in California:
Having a Chinese wife, tutoring a Chinese scholar, and having visited China last year, I agree with you that America is in mortal danger.Maybe we cannot elect a president who sees this, but we can try to awaken more people to speak up to the politicians.
Your proposed film is a wonderful idea. I would offer to help in writing, but you are already skilled in that field. I’d be glad to help with publicizing all of this, or be generally helpful. I am a retired teacher of world history, a military veteran of Army Air Force, and in reasonable health. THANK YOU FOR WRITING.
A Jan. 18 e-mail from Gordon, a U.S. lawyer:
Sir: You confirm everything I concluded (based upon my research) about China and her current aims while attending the U.S. Army War College a couple of years ago before my deployment to Iraq with the 116 Calvary Brigade, headquartered in Boise, Idaho. Nevertheless, you are akin to a “prophet in the wilderness.” Realistically, what can we do?
John Stuart Mill (the author of “On Liberty,” published in 1859) treated newspapers and magazines with scornful horror. He was never connected with any university either. He wrote books — and is still world-known as a sage. Now, we live in a society in which the president is elected by a majority, and the prophets for a majority are television “hosts” and their “guests” for whom China does not exist as a threat as it does not for President Bush.
But the enlightenment of the electorate is not hopeless: We can make a film that will be seen by as many voters as PBS has viewers and Random House has readers.
On Jan. 7, I received an e-mail from Donald, containing four lines of approval of my China columns — and 15 pages of his text showing “the China threat.” What is wrong?
It is a 15-page message of a “prophet in the wilderness” to another such prophet (myself). Yet we do not live in England in 1859, but in the West in 2008, and in particular in the United States, where the destiny of the civilization is determined by the majority of the electorate, not by prophets.
Donald has demonstrated an outstanding knowledge in the field and fierce intellectual courage. So? His 15 pages must be translated into a cinematographic language to become known to the electorate.
In his Jan. 17 e-mail, Gregory writes that he has been reading my columns and is “really disturbed by the whole China threat.” But the Subject line of his e-mail is: “Question.”
What is the question? “I am curious as to how you have come across this information and how serious it actually is.” Well, when a civilian object or process is studied, it is possible to check how accurate the data are. But Sun Tzu, the ancient Chinese author of “The Art of War,” said that basic to the art of war are (1) concealment and (2) deception.
The war with the United States, which Japan began by attacking Pearl Harbor, ended brilliantly for the United States: Japan surrendered unconditionally. Why? Because the United States had managed to keep secret its giant Manhattan Project — development of nuclear weapons.
Does Gregory expect the dictatorship of China to divulge to me (or someone else anxious to protect the West) all the secret data on their war preparations? Does Gregory believe in the efficacy of the CIA or the British Intelligence Service in China though they failed in Saddam Hussein’s tiny (compared with China) Third-World Iraq, where a coalition of Western countries, led by the U.S., got stuck for five years!
Roy’s e-mail on Jan. 15 begins as follows: “Lev: You are a genius. I was taught that China would be a threat to the world when I was 14 yrs old — I’m now 47.”
Again, Americans who are 47 years old, if not those who are14, should understand that China is a threat to the West, which no presidential candidate, except Duncan Hunter, has stated whether young or old.
For months, I was explaining to those working for Hunter that if a majority of the electorate saw our film showing that China is a mortal threat to the United States, he would be the U.S. president. My message bogged down among those who worked for him. As of Jan. 18, CNN reported that he had received so few votes that he decided to drop out of the presidential race.
In an e-mail dated Jan. 10, Russel writes: “What positively amazes me is that few people are scared and I find that even my closest friends seem to be in denial and are poorly informed. I remember a Holocaust survivor commenting on how quickly his comfortable German middle class life evaporated. He commented that “Americans are living in a fool’s paradise.”
Timothy ends his Jan. 11 e-mail with the question, “What do you think can be done at this point?” My answer is the same: “A film that can deliver the U.S. electorate from a fool’s paradise.”
In his e-mail on Jan. 17, Keith notes that one-sixth of the population of China were Internet users by the end of 2007.
But what about Hu Jintao’s call last year to “purify” the Internet?
On the other hand, it is the Western (“subversive”) information that the dictatorship of China cannot completely stop, which makes it imperative for the dictatorship of China to establish world domination, not to be overthrown by another Tiananmen movement with a replica of the Statue of Liberty on the Tiananmen Square.
Roy’s e-mail on Jan. 10 is almost two pages long, and I hope it will be used in the film. Here I will quote his last paragraph.
Do we need a film as you suggest? Yes we do. But we need a few good men and women to put together a solid group and not be afraid to warn our nation as to what is coming if significant changes are not made immediately regarding our morals, our return to constitutional law instead of the farce our justice system has become, and unite as a nation to return to the principles our Founding Fathers fought and died to author. Such a group will be ridiculed and called wackos, but who in history did not experience that for standing on truth and principle. I for one am willing to face that.
Says Scott in his e-mail on Jan. 9: “I read your articles almost every week. You think that the U.S. is not doing Nanotechnology research. Then what of this website [the e-mail address follows]? There seems to be such research going on.”
Eric Drexler coined the word “nanotechnology” as he published his book about it in 1986. Since then “nanotechnology” has grown into a huge field, none of which may have anything to do with “molecular nano weapons.”
Indeed, though only one chapter of his book was devoted to nano weapons, Drexler could not receive a cent from the Congress for his Foresight Institute, because the commercial producers of consumer nano goods and services managed to assure the Congress that Drexler’s nano weapons (just one of the chapters of his book) are sheer fantasies.
Charles begins his e-mail of Jan. 3: “I cannot help but read every article you write. It’s scary and intriguing.”
Then Charles plunges into a hopeless gloom. “May God help us in these ominous times!”
By contrast, in his mail of Jan. 10, Carl proposes two actors for our film: “Kiefer Sutherland of ‘24’ and Dennis Haysbert of ‘The Unit.’”
Isn’t it too early to choose the actors for our film? Fortunately, created 30 years ago was our not-for-profit Center for the Survival of Western Democracies, Inc., of which I am the president, and the Advisory Board of which has contained a dozen or so world-known figures (such as the Nobel Prize winning novelist Saul Bellow). We need those who would collect (tax-deductible) donations for the production of our films, whose mission is to save the United States (and Western Europe).
Michael’s Jan. 20 e-mail contains two pages in fine print. No doubt they will be useful for the film, but here I have no space to quote them.
* * *
You can e-mail me at navlev@cloud9.net.
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.