BREAKING: Discover How A Slacker Makes $100,000 A Year!
WEBMASTERS! Get Your Website To The Top Of Google
Protesters train at camps before Japan G8 summit
Monday, July 7th, 2008
By Danielle Demetriou | Dreadlocks flailing in the wind, the man emitted a fierce cry as he ran down the quiet country lane towards me, brandishing a bamboo stick in each hand.
Normally, I would turn and flee. But we were both playing roles in a training exercise for demonstrators preparing for Monday’s G8 summit in Hokkaido in northern Japan, and my own face was covered by a menacing revolutionary scarf.
Thousands of protesters have marched, danced and drummed their way through the streets near a highly secured hotel on the remote Lake Toya where the leaders will meet.
For many people, the focus has already shifted from Gordon Brown’s stance on climate change and the contents of Carla Bruni’s wardrobe to the students, farmers, trade unionists and anarchists trying to disrupt proceedings.
Japan, where such protest training camps have never been set up before, is taking the threat very seriously: it has deployed 40,000 armed police across the country and is spending £142 million on security.
The police have arrested three demonstrators after angry scuffles, including the disc-jockey on a mobile protest float.
The protesters have been carefully planning their response in a rural camp in nearby Tobetsu.
The programme covers direct action workshops, protest tactic discussions, legal advisory training, puppet making, football tournaments and drumming sessions.
In the guise of a Western protester, The Telegraph infiltrated the camp, which adheres to a strict “no media” policy.
It was a 20-minute walk through green fields backed by mist-shrouded mountains and drizzly skies. But as the string of colourful tents came into view, a car could also be seen in the distance, manned by plain clothes police keeping a watchful eye on proceedings.
The camp was set in the grounds of a former school, where flourescent anti-G8 banners fluttered in the breeze and a large sign read: “Alternative village.”
Inside a reception tent, two Japanese activists slouched on a sofa, handed out a list of rules and politely asked for a daily Y1,500 (£7) donation to help run the camp.
About three quarters of the protesters are Japanese from a variety of backgrounds, including trade unionists, farmers, activists, and the Japanese Communist party.
Many of them are students, but there were plenty of older Japanese citizens as well, including Hiroshi Tsuchira, 71, a retired airport worker.
“Life is difficult for people in Japan and I have never been to march this big before but it is important for people to hear our voice,” he said. “Our future will not be good if it lies in the hands of the G8 leaders.”
Other activists came from San Francisco, London and Nantes.
They included people from charities like Oxfam and more riotous protesters from a French anarcho-syndicalist commune.
“We are protesting against a structure of capitalism that has been created by the G8 summit,” said Nakata-san, a political science student from Tokyo. “We want to create our own ideal system in this campsite community.”
Despite its anarchic credentials, the campsite offers a perfect template of Japan’s renowned organisational skills. Neat piles of placards, T-shirts and recycling bins line the entrance, while leaflets offer advice on protest etiquette.
Japanese bamboo flute music is as prominent as punk rock on the internal sound system, which also broadcasts sudden and surreal messages: “Will volunteers please help peel vegetables for dinner!” or “Rave party in the gym at 5pm!”
The gym is a vast space filled with piles of anti-G8 banners and brightly coloured protest “puppets” – including eight wooden creations on sticks emblazoned with skulls on one side and the faces of G8 leaders on the other.
And there are many meetings. After a long discussion about colour-coded washing-up bowls and whether sheets should be used with futons, the cultural differences suddenly came to light.
“Is there nothing else to talk about?” muttered Sarah, a straight-talking activist who spent two months travelling overland to Japan from London. “I’m stunned.”
Beneath the veneer of domesticity, serious training sessions are under way for the 1,000 protesters at three camps near Lake Toya.
One teaches how to avoid arrest. “It was hands on, direct and practical,” said James, a 19-year-old Cambridge undergraduate. “It’s useful for people who want to go to these protests and make an impact without getting arrested.”
From intricate diagrams of where to stand in a crowd to stunts like dressing up as clowns, the discussions are painstakingly detailed.
For protesters who need to sleep, there are tents or, for an additional fee, three neatly organised rooms, equipped with futons and blankets.
And for those too hungry to continue training on behalf of the world’s poor, there are delicious vegan meals of curry, risotto, seaweed salad and fresh fruit prepared by a “food collective” that also works around the clock to make fresh hemp bread from cannabis seeds.
Late arrivals were disappointed to learn that they had missed the last of the direct action workshops laid on over previous days. They were masterminded by Lisa Fithian, an American activist - and so fearful are the Japanese authorities over the risk of disruption to the summit that she was reportedly only allowed into the country on condition that she left before the summit had even begun.
Have Your Say: Protesters train at camps before Japan G8 summit
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
Those who control oil and water will control the world
Tuesday, April 1st, 2008
New superpowers are competing for diminishing resources as Britain becomes a bit-player. The outcome could be deadly.
History may not repeat itself, but, as Mark Twain observed, it can sometimes rhyme. The crises and conflicts of the past recur, recognisably similar even when altered by new conditions. At present, a race for the world’s resources is underway that resembles the Great Game that was played in the decades leading up to the First World War. Now, as then, the most coveted prize is oil and the risk is that as the contest heats up it will not always be peaceful. But this is no simple rerun of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Today, there are powerful new players and it is not only oil that is at stake.
It was Rudyard Kipling who brought the idea of the Great Game into the public mind in Kim, his cloak-and-dagger novel of espionage and imperial geopolitics in the time of the Raj. Then, the main players were Britain and Russia and the object of the game was control of central Asia’s oil. Now, Britain hardly matters and India and China, which were subjugated countries during the last round of the game, have emerged as key players. The struggle is no longer focused mainly on central Asian oil. It stretches from the Persian Gulf to Africa, Latin America, even the polar caps, and it is also a struggle for water and depleting supplies of vital minerals. Above all, global warming is increasing the scarcity of natural resources. The Great Game that is afoot today is more intractable and more dangerous than the last.
The biggest new player in the game is China and it is there that the emerging pattern is clearest. China’s rulers have staked everything on economic growth. Without improving living standards, there would be large-scale unrest, which could pose a threat to their power. Moreover, China is in the middle of the largest and fastest move from the countryside to the city in history, a process that cannot be stopped.
There is no alternative to continuing growth, but it comes with deadly side-effects. Overused in industry and agriculture, and under threat from the retreat of the Himalayan glaciers, water is becoming a non-renewable resource. Two-thirds of China’s cities face shortages, while deserts are eating up arable land. Breakneck industrialisation is worsening this environmental breakdown, as many more power plants are being built and run on high-polluting coal that accelerates global warming. There is a vicious circle at work here and not only in China. Because ongoing growth requires massive inputs of energy and minerals, Chinese companies are scouring the world for supplies. The result is unstoppable rising demand for resources that are unalterably finite.
Although oil reserves may not have peaked in any literal sense, the days when conventional oil was cheap have gone forever. Countries are reacting by trying to secure the remaining reserves, not least those that are being opened up by climate change. Canada is building bases to counter Russian claims on the melting Arctic icecap, parts of which are also claimed by Norway, Denmark and the US. Britain is staking out claims on areas around the South Pole.
The scramble for energy is shaping many of the conflicts we can expect in the present century. The danger is not just another oil shock that impacts on industrial production, but a threat of famine. Without a drip feed of petroleum to highly mechanised farms, many of the food shelves in the supermarkets would be empty. Far from the world weaning itself off oil, it is more addicted to the stuff than ever. It is hardly surprising that powerful states are gearing up to seize their share.
This new round of the Great Game did not start yesterday. It began with the last big conflict of the 20th century, which was an oil war and nothing else. No one pretended the first Gulf War was fought to combat terrorism or spread democracy. As George Bush Snr and John Major admitted at the time, it was aimed at securing global oil supplies, pure and simple. Despite the denials of a less honest generation of politicians, there can be no doubt that controlling the country’s oil was one of the objectives of the later invasion of Iraq.
Oil remains at the heart of the game and, if anything, it is even more important than before. With their complex logistics and heavy reliance on air power, high-tech armies are extremely energy-intensive. According to a Pentagon report, the amount of petroleum needed for each soldier each day increased four times between the Second World War and the Gulf War and quadrupled again when the US invaded Iraq. Recent estimates suggest the amount used per soldier has jumped again in the five years since the invasion.
Whereas Western countries dominated the last round of the Great Game, this time they rely on increasingly self-assertive producer countries. Mr Putin’s well-honed contempt for world opinion might grate on European ears, but Europe is heavily dependent on his energy. Hugo Chávez might be an object of hate for George W Bush, but Venezuela still supplies around 10 per cent of America’s imported oil. President Ahmadinejad is seen by some as the devil incarnate, but with oil at more than a $100 a barrel, any Western attempt to topple him would be horrendously risky.
While Western power declines, the rising powers are at odds with each other. China and India are rivals for oil and natural gas in central Asia. Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia and Indonesia have clashed over underwater oil reserves in the South China Sea. Saudi Arabia and Iran are rivals in the Gulf, while Iran and Turkey are eyeing Iraq. Greater international co-operation seems the obvious solution, but the reality is that as the resources crunch bites more deeply, the world is becoming steadily more fragmented and divided.
We are a long way from the fantasy world of only a decade ago, when fashionable gurus were talking sagely of the knowledge economy. Then, we were told material resources did not matter any more - it was ideas that drove economic development. The business cycle had been left behind and an era of endless growth had arrived. Actually, the knowledge economy was an illusion created by cheap oil and cheap money and everlasting booms always end in tears. This is not the end of the world or of global capitalism, just history as usual.
What is different this time is climate change. Rising sea levels reduce food and fresh-water supplies, which may trigger large-scale movements of refugees from Africa and Asia into Europe. Global warming threatens energy supplies. As the fossil fuels of the past become more expensive, others, such as tar sands, are becoming more economically viable, but these alternative fuels are also dirtier than conventional oil.
In this round of the Great Game, energy shortage and global warming are reinforcing each another. The result can only be a growing risk of conflict. There were around 1.65 billion people in the world when the last round was played out. At the start of the 21st century, there are four times as many, struggling to secure their future in a world being changed out of recognition by climate change. It would be wise to plan for some more of history’s rhymes.
· John Gray is author of Black Mass: Apocalyptic Religion and the Death of Utopia, published by Allen Lane in paperback on 24 April
Have Your Say: Those who control oil and water will control the world
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
Is this the end of traditional governments?
Wednesday, March 19th, 2008
In the first chapter of David Rothkopf’s “Superclass: The Global Power Elite and the World They Are Making,” the author quotes Mark Malloch Brown, a British minister of state and former deputy secretary-general of the United Nations, recalling what it was like to walk with his wife through a reception in New York for the World Economic Forum. The WEF puts on the famous annual meeting of business leaders, political figures, NGO heads, scientists and other movers and shakers, nicknamed after the small Swiss alpine town where it takes place, Davos. After crossing the room and shaking countless manicured hands in the process, the couple turned to each other and marveled that “we walk though the Davos party and know more people than when we’re walking across the village green in the town we live in.”Brown is far from the only one who could tell such a tale. “Davos man” is an epithet coined by the conservative scholar Samuel Huntington to describe the very specific type that attends the conference. These are people who, as Huntington wrote, “have little need for national loyalty, view national boundaries as obstacles that thankfully are vanishing, and see national governments as residues from the past whose only useful function is to facilitate the elite’s global operations.”
Not everyone Rothkopf writes about in “Superclass”
Rothkopf’s credible, if not especially original argument in “Superclass” is that over the past several decades a “global elite” has emerged whose connections to each other have become more significant than their ties to their home nations and governments. They schmooze regularly at conferences like Davos, go to the same schools, serve together on corporate and nonprofit boards, and above all do business with each other constantly — to the point that they have become a kind of culture in themselves, a “class without a country,” as Rothkopf puts it. Furthermore, these people are “the new leadership class for our era.”
A former undersecretary of commerce in the Clinton administration and an officer in an assortment of “advisory” firms (including Kissinger Associates, run by former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, and the consulting company Rothkopf himself founded, Garten Rothkopf), Rothkopf is an insider of sorts, well enough connected to sit in on meetings of power brokers without quite being one himself. He also writes Op-Eds on international affairs for major newspapers and is a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, positions that require the display of some critical distance. “Superclass” isn’t as condemnatory as Naomi Klein’s anti-globalization manifesto “No Logo,” let alone the conspiracy theorizing of “The Iron Triangle,” Dan Briody’s exposé of the Carlyle Group, but it doesn’t merely fawn over its subjects, either.
Rothkopf announces that he and his researchers have identified “just over 6,000″ people who match his definition of the superclass — that is, who have met complicated (and vaguely explained) metrics designed to determine “the ability to regularly influence the lives of millions of people in multiple countries worldwide.” These include heads of state and religious and military leaders — even the occasional pop star, like Bono — but the core membership is businessmen: hedge fund managers, technology entrepreneurs and private equity investors.
Money alone doesn’t cut the mustard. A fabulously wealthy widow living out the end of a quiet life isn’t in the superclass; you must not only possess power, but also freely exercise it. Stephen Schwarzman, CEO of the Blackstone Group, is the paradigm: In addition to running a huge private equity firm, he sits on the boards of a half-dozen cultural foundations and belongs to a laundry list of forums and councils, including the WEF. (He also granted Rothkopf a lunch interview at the Four Seasons Grill Room, as the author takes pains to inform his readers.)
The pope is a member of the superclass, as is Osama bin Laden, who can undoubtedly claim influence over current international affairs, even if he sometimes lives in a cave. The Russian illegal arms dealer Viktor “Merchant of Death” Bout is a member, as are Rupert Murdoch and Bill Clinton, who, while no longer commander in chief of the world’s remaining superpower, nevertheless heads the Clinton Global Intiative, a brand new dynamo in the area of international philanthropy.
Rothkopf’s outlook on these players is roughly Clintonian. He believes in capitalism as an engine for prosperity, but he’s leery of the free-market gospel that dictates that “market reforms” ought to be imposed on faltering economies whatever the social and political costs. “It is true,” he writes, “that governments have been unable to do much of what they should do to improve the welfare of their people, and in a vast number of cases markets have done much more.” But the “free-market” moniker is misleading, since such a thing doesn’t really exist. All markets are tweaked by governments to some extent, and what the preachers of the free-market religion never acknowledge is that their own favorite case studies are surreptitiously finagled to benefit the already rich.
Taking a dinner party at the home of Chile’s finance minister, Andres Velasco, as an example, Rothkopf describes his uneasy response to the oligarchs around him. He realizes that they embrace the market-oriented philosophy of the “Chicago Boys,” Milton Friedman’s University of Chicago disciples, but only so long as the attendant suffering is limited to Chile’s lower classes. They quietly resist reforms that might nibble away at their iron control of the nation’s industries. “While many of the most powerful people in the country embrace ‘progress,’” Rothkopf observes of Chile, “they use their energy and political capital primarily on behalf of the changes that benefit them most directly. Elites in Chile have implicitly or explicitly resisted the changes that might create more competition, more entrepreneurship, more access to capital for the poor and middle classes.” As a result, though Chile is touted as Latin America’s great economic success story, profound inequities in its society have gone comparatively unchanged.
“Superclass” makes a case that today’s elites are an improvement on those of the past: Instead of inherited aristocracy or sheer military might, power is more likely to go to the smart, ambitious and hardworking. Membership is fluid to an unprecedented extent, with new people muscling their way into the inner circle and slackers dropping out of the bottom all the time. Still, as Rothkopf points out, the ranks of this elite are overwhelmingly older males of European descent who graduated from prestigious Western colleges. Critics have been complaining for years that Davos is too Eurocentric, one reason why the Boao Forum for Asia was started for Eastern financial honchos in 1998.
Above all, like anybody else — in fact, more than anybody else, given the obsessive, often narcissistic energy required of moguls, politicians and would-be messiahs — these people are self-interested. However gifted, they should not be allowed to operate in a vacuum. The difficulty is that most of them exercise their power transnationally, while laws and regulations are confined within the borders of nation-states (which Rothkopf, in classic Davos-man style, regards as doomed). “We must resist the temptation to reflexively attack elites,” he writes, since human societies need leaders and this is an able bunch, but elites ought to be more accountable to the millions of people whose lives they affect. Otherwise, as history (and the current upsurge in religious extremism) shows, they may provoke a violent and chaotic backlash.
Nevertheless, the likelihood of a world government forming to handle the situation is remote — not while nation-states have any life left in them to defend their sovereignty. International institutions — the U.N., especially, but also the IMF and the World Bank — are weak, or weakening, and are hemorrhaging credibility. The answer, according to Rothkopf, is not global government, but “governance,” fewer formal agreements and mechanisms among international entities. The registration and management of Internet domain names (via a collection of organizations) is one example of this sort of governance, orderly and helpful in a way you wouldn’t automatically associate with Rothkopf’s ominous-sounding definition of the term: “Fulfilling government roles with mechanisms” that “lack the full traditional power, authority or mandates of governments.”
Yikes! Rational as it may sound to set up such systems, they just aren’t directly answerable to the populace at large — they’re undemocratic. Of course, as several of the superclass muckety-mucks Rothkopf talks to complain, most of the officials who are democratically selected by the masses don’t really understand — and perhaps aren’t even capable of understanding — the complex global issues that need to be negotiated. American congressmen, senators and even presidents know how to get elected by capitalizing on delusional fears of gay marriage and illegal aliens, but their constituents don’t demand that they master high-level economic or scientific concepts. Chances are, the voters haven’t even heard of those concepts, let alone formulated opinions on them. How can even the superclass be accountable to a public that can’t (or won’t) comprehend what they do?
Still, Rothkopf insists that elites ought to look out for the disadvantaged. “If the global decisions that take place out there only serve the powerful,” he writes, “and many of the people making the decision are not elected or chosen by the people, the average person is going to recognize they have less influence. So it won’t just be unfair, it will produce a backlash.” One such “backlash” is the administration of Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, a leader characterized by Rothkopf as part of “the global network of antiglobalists.” Chavez has made political theater out of taunting and thwarting the global elite. No wonder one of the book’s chapter sections is titled “Is a Crisis Inevitable?”
Rothkopf’s idea is that the superclass ought to be smart enough to foresee any such crisis and head it off by doing more to make the currently disenfranchised feel like “stakeholders” in the new global order. The superclass should recognize that “order and legitimacy are the allies of both business and those who seek social stability.” Furthermore, I suppose, they should put pressure on fellow members who step out of line with this program. The upside to the “closely knit” connections between the globe’s top players is that, like any community, they can use exclusion and ostracism to punish those who misbehave.
This is a tall order indeed. Of course, the power elite are not entirely indifferent to the world’s problems. The Davos conference often spotlights issues like poverty in Africa and global warming, and high-profile charities such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Clinton Global Initiative suggest that at least some of the superclass feel obliged to step in where national governments have failed to do anything substantive. Deciding on how best to gentle the masses, how to settle on standards of global economic conduct and how to enforce those standards won’t be easy, though. Fortunately for the superclass and anyone seeking to work with them, there are consulting companies like Garten Rothkopf (”an international advisory firm specializing in emerging markets investing and risk management related services”) to turn to!
In the concluding pages of “Superclass” it becomes increasingly difficult to dispel the impression that you have just read what amounts to a 380-page business card. Many recent nonfiction books on “current affairs” are little more than that. Organized around a catchy concept and extensively researched by underlings, they win their authors jobs in think tanks and speaking engagements at corporate workshops and conferences — all of which pay much, much more than anyone can expect to make on a book. There are a handful of important ideas in “Superclass,” it’s true, but many of them have been gleaned from other, more original thinkers. There are also a lot of facts and statistics, presumably gathered by Rothkopf’s assistants.
The other thing that you’ll find in “Superclass” is names, lots and lots of names. At times, Rothkopf’s breathless citing of notables, accompanied by the banal details of their C.V.s and hobbies, made me waspish enough to mutter an old saying of indeterminate origins: Great minds talk about ideas, average minds talk about things and small minds talk about people. Yet, to be fair, people are among the things that Rothkopf has to offer his clients, specifically his knowledge of and acquaintances among the very superclass he celebrates and scolds. One thing “Superclass” assiduously demonstrates is that whatever the mistakes of the global elite, Rothkopf has been around to witness a few of them firsthand.
This explains why “Superclass” lacks the one thing that would probably guarantee it a spot on the bestseller list: the actual names of the 6,000 members of the superclass, as defined by Rothkopf’s criteria. The list exists, Rothkopf assures his readers, but publishing it would be “an exercise in futility.” CEOs lose jobs and retire, tycoons suffer financial setbacks and even get thrown in jail. Therefore, “the day after it was published,” the list “would be obsolete.”
Besides, Rothkopf sniffs, “publishing such a list immediately generates debate about who’s in and who’s out, and obscures the bigger issues involved.” This shows a surprising degree of high-mindedness in a book that is significantly occupied with mini-profiles of the rich and powerful, whom they know, how they operate and where they eat lunch. If printing the list coarsens the conversation, then why compile it to begin with? If, as Rothkopf intimates, the list was a necessary part of the book’s research yet publishing it would nevertheless be a detriment to the project, then why mention it at all? Why let drop the tantalizingly specific number of 6,000 names?
Despite his demurrals, I’m sure there are at least a few conversations that Rothkopf would not regard as fatally cheapened by the sharing of his list of the rich and powerful. To the contrary, those conversations would no doubt be very expensive indeed, taking place between Garten Rothkopf and the clients who pay for its consulting services (which surely cost more than the $26 cover price of “Superclass”). In the end, this might be the most important message contained between the covers of “Superclass”: David Rothkopf’s got the list, and you know where to find him.
Have Your Say: Is this the end of traditional governments?
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
An overview of the NSA’s domestic spying program
Monday, March 17th, 2008
In Wednesday’s Wall Street Journal, Siobhan Gorman pulled together the disparate threads of reporting on what’s known of the NSA’s secret domestic spy program, and combined them with some of her own reporting to confirm, once again, that the NSA’s program is another incarnation of the Pentagon’s erstwhile Total Information Awareness program. Gorman also describes how Carnivore, the SWIFT database snooping program, and basically every other “Big Brother” database and data snooping program that the executive branch has developed over the past two administrations* feed information into the NSA’s TIA-like system, which then looks for suspicious patterns in the data.
Gorman’s article provides a great overview of how these programs fit together in the architecture of the modern, post-9/11 surveillance state, and it’s required reading because it comes at a critical time in our national debate about privacy and the limits of executive power. However, if you’ve been following this topic closely then you know that most of the information in the article has been public since 2006.
In this post, I’m going to walk back through some of the previous reporting on the topic, both my own work and that of others, and offer corrections and adjustments where necessary based on the WSJ piece. My hope is that readers and reporters who are so inclined can dig through the details and links and follow up on any leads that others may have missed.
(*Note: Infamous codenames like “Carnivore” and ECHELON first cropped up in Bill Clinton’s second term, and I covered them when Ars launched in mid-1998. In terms of the presidential orders he signed and the programs that were inaugurated on his watch, Clinton laid some of the groundwork for the Bush administration’s pre- and post-9/11 surveillance-related lawbreaking. Or, perhaps a more accurate metaphor is that he blazed a trail that the Bush gang then paved over and turned into a six-lane highway.)
A look back at the role of the TIA in the NSA’s surveillance activities
Back in December of 2005, when the NSA warrantless wiretapping story story broke in the New York Times, I took a close look at what was then known about the program and suggested that the NSA’s program probably shared some technological DNA with the short-lived (2002-2003) Total Information Awareness program. In the years since TIA first appeared under the Pentagon’s roof, the program has moved from agency to agency in the Executive branch, as Congress catches wind of each new incarnation of it and shuts it down only to see it reemerge again with a different acronym on a different department’s budget.
In April of 2006, the MIT Technology Review published a piece by Mark Williams that moved the story forward by fleshing out the relationship between TIA and the NSA’s domestic spying program. Williams reported that elements of TIA had indeed been moved from the Department of Defense to the NSA, and he suggested that this technology was almost certainly in use as part of the domestic spying program that the New York Times had uncovered.
One month later, a very important article on the role of “transactional information”—a term that originally referred to the phone company’s call logs but has since been stretched to fit a widening array of communication types—appeared in USA Today. The article made clear that this “communication metadata” was the real target of the NSA’s vast data collection efforts. Also that May, Wired’s Ryan Singel released critical technical documents that had been sealed under court order, showing some of the nuts and bolts of how the NSA snoops Internet traffic on AT&T’s backbone.
In terms of my own understanding of the NSA’s program, the USA Today article made clear that my initial assessment of the NYT’s piece had missed the mark on an important and central point: the new surveillance technology at the heart of the TSA’s warrantless wiretapping program was not, as I had conjectured, an automated voice recognition system that sampled calls looking for “hits,” and then escalated of-interest calls to higher levels of scrutiny and, ultimately, to a human monitor. This call monitoring is almost surely going on somewhere in the intelligence pipeline, but the core of the NSA’s program really is the aggregation and analysis of communications metadata.
Based on the USA Today piece and on a number of other sources, I suggested in “TIA (aka Topsail) unveiled: the real scope of the NSA’s domestic spying program” that “the original revelations about the NSA’s SIGINT vacuum were just the tip of the iceberg,” and that “it appears there’s probably more that we’ve yet to see. Much more.”
I then put the pieces together and asked the following rhetorical question: “Now, does anyone seriously think that the NSA is not collecting transactional data (at a minimum) for Web, email, FTP and other IP-based communications, and/or that they’re not tying all of this data to individual users?”
Gorman’s WSJ piece provides sourced confirmation that the NSA is doing exactly what I and others suspected they were doing, i.e., they’re collecting e-mail headers, Web surfing histories, cell phone call logs, and every other trace of the digital and analog connections that we make to the world, and they’re synthesizing this into complete informational portraits of individuals.
Network effects
In my “TIA unveiled” piece, I appear to have overstated the scope of the NSA’s profiling by suggesting that the agency is building such informational pictures of everyone in the US. But Gorman’s article provides an important correction by suggesting that the TIA driftnet works in a much more focused fashion.
According to Gorman, counter-terrorism officials must seed the system with leads—like the name or phone number of an individual with suspected terrorist ties. The system then begins monitoring the aforementioned types of transactional data in order to build an informational profile. The system also works outward through the individual’s social network by turning its information vacuum on everyone that that person contacts, and then on their contacts in turn, in an ever-expanding web of surveillance. This way, the system can build of profiles of individuals and groups, and monitor their interactions for suspicious activity.
The fact that the driftnet is seeded by first giving it a single target—a target that is ostensibly drawn from some type of human-generated intelligence—makes it less of a lost cause than a massive, nationwide driftnet would be, but only marginally less so, depending on how far out in the suspect’s social network the surveillance extends. As I explained in this article on why the NSA’s program is a bad idea from a national security perspective, the main problem with these driftnet or “dragnet” systems is that the rate of false positives is typically so high that they produce an overwhelming flood of bogus leads that tie up law enforcement resources.
Even if the more targeted driftnet approach described by Gorman does result in fewer false positives, the constitutional, privacy, and oversight questions still remain. Let’s hope that we, the people, eventually get a shot at answering those questions for ourselves.
Have Your Say: An overview of the NSA’s domestic spying program
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
Laying The Groundwork For One-World Religion?
Saturday, February 23rd, 2008
A diocese of the Church of England is giving an unprecedented £250,000 towards a multifaith building in which the largest amount of worship space will be reserved for Muslims.
The Guildford diocese is one of the wealthiest in the UK. The Bishop of Guildford, the Right Rev Christopher Hill, gave the £250,000 cheque yesterday to the University of Surrey for the first multifaith building of its kind in Britain.
The £6.5 million building will contain separate worship spaces for the Jewish, Christian, Muslim and Sikh communities, along with a further shared space for Buddhists and Hindus. All faiths will share the café in the basement, with a shared staircase down from the upper floors.
Converting each other will be forbidden, an insider said, but it is hoped that the different faith members will form friendships, learn to respect each other and enhance each other’s understanding.
Abdul Mateen Sansom, a Muslim chaplain, said: “As well as being a sorely needed practical solution to student needs, I believe the design and underpinning ethos of this project have potential for notable impact nationally and internationally.”
Lesley Scordellis, lead fundraiser for the centre and development manager at the University of Surrey, defended the Muslim advantage in the space allocation. “It isn’t about giving greater provision for Muslims, it is about likely numbers using it. We certainly have a strong demand for worship space from the Muslim community,” she said.
“We sit right beside Guildford Cathedral so the relative provision in the locality is very different.”
She continued: “We think it is the first of its kind. It breaks with the tradition of having a shared space for each faith. It is all in the same building but each has a completely separate space. The Jewish space has an exclusive kosher kitchen and the Muslim space has an ablutions facility. The design of the building is to facilitate the feeling that they are in one building about faith.”
The donation from the Guildford diocese has not been funded by parishioners but from an old will, the Onslow bequest, one of a number of similar “restricted” funds within the diocese that are used to finance mission projects.
Mark Rudall, a diocesan spokesman, said: “This building has been identified as a potentially highly significant mission resource in what is seen as an unusually diverse setting.”
Christopher Snowden, the university’s Vice-Chancellor, said he was “delighted” by the support from the diocese. “Local support of this nature is crucial to our fundraising.”
Bishop Hill said: “We are proud to participate in this significant venture toward world understanding here in Surrey.”
The multifaith centre is due for completion in 2010. A fundraising campaign has begun to raise the rest of the money.
Have Your Say: Laying The Groundwork For One-World Religion?
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
Out of the ashes: A New World Order
Sunday, January 27th, 2008
Global elite signal declining superpower status of the United States, rise of new order
Comment: French TV was kind enough to inform us about the true decision makers behind Davos - the Bilderberg group. A video clip of this report and an English translation can be found here. The discussion which took place in Davos, Switzerland among several individuals who were themselves members of Bilderberg (such as Henry Kissinger and Gordon Brown) gives a window into the inner workings of the elite game plan.
As the United States faces an economic crisis that is being compared by experts to the 1929 Great Depression, the global elite are proclaiming the fall of the U.S and the rise of a new global order.
The IOL reports that the recent meeting in Davos, Switzerland, which focused in part on the global economic meltdown, pointed to “global” solutions and the need for a strengthened United Nations in the face of world crises.
Sovereignty, according to many who attended, must be weakened. The IOL reports,
| For Gareth Evans, former Australian foreign minister and now president of the International Crisis Group, even those countries with a deep resistance to intervention were starting to recognise that egregious crimes against humanity could not go unchallenged.
“There is now the beginning of a global consensus that sovereignty doesn’t mean a license to kill, doesn’t mean a license to stand back and allow killing of that order to take place,” Evans said. “This is a very real phenomenon, that sovereignty is not what it was and can’t be what it was,” he added. |
Writing in the evening standard, Anthony Hilton states regarding the Davos meeting,
| “World leaders have a similar problem in Davos as they try to think through the turmoil in world markets to focus on what is really happening to the global economy.
Henry Kissinger picked up on the political implications. The challenge to the world, he said, was handling the structural changes taking place - the transfer of economic power from America to the Pacific, the shortages of water and energy and the threat of climate change, which require global not national solutions.” |
A strengthened United Nations, also discussed at Davos, was promoted by Prime Minister Gordon Brown earlier this week after secret talks with world leaders. Brown called for a “new world order” and a “global society”. As the New Zealand Hearld reported,
| “British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has begun secret talks with other world leaders on far-reaching reform of the United Nations Security Council as part of a drive to create a “new world order” and “global society”.” |
The economic crises that the world is plunging into is being and will be used as the pretext to forge the new global order long sought after by the global elite. More centralized control will emerge. “New” solutions will be presented in slick packages to a despairing population begging for order.
Have Your Say: Out of the ashes: A New World Order
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
Brown’s secret talks on ‘new world order’
Friday, January 25th, 2008
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has begun secret talks with other world leaders on far-reaching reform of the United Nations Security Council as part of a drive to create a “new world order” and “global society”.
Brown is drawing up plans to expand the number of permanent members in a move that will provoke fears in his country that the veto enjoyed by Britain could be diluted eventually.
The United States, France, Russia and China also have a veto but the number of members could be doubled to include India, Germany, Japan, Brazil and one or two African nations.
Brown has discussed a shake-up of a structure created in 1945 to reflect the world’s new challenges and power bases during his four-day trip to China and India. British sources revealed “intense discussions” on UN reform were under way and Brown raised it whenever he met another world leader.
The Prime Minister believes the UN is punching below its weight. In 2003, it failed to agree on a fresh resolution giving explicit approval for military action in Iraq. US President George W. Bush then acted unilaterally, winning the support of then British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
His aides are adamant that the British veto will not be negotiated away. One option is for the nations who join not to have a veto, at least initially. In a speech in New Delhi, the Prime Minister was to say: “I support India’s bid for a permanent place - with others - on an expanded UN Security Council.” However, he is not backing Pakistan’s demand for a seat if India wins one.
Brown will unveil a proposal for the UN to spend £100 million ($257 million) a year on setting up a “rapid reaction force” to stop “failed states” sliding back into chaos after a peace deal has been reached.
“There is limited value in military action to end fighting if law and order does not follow,” he will say. “So we must do more to ensure rapid reconstruction on the ground once conflicts are over and combine traditional humanitarian aid and peace-keeping with stabilisation, recovery and development.”
THE UNITED NATIONS: EYE ON THE WORLD
* The UN Security Council’s membership has remained virtually unchanged since it first met in 1946.
* Great Britain, the United States, the then Soviet Union, China and France were designated permanent members of the powerful body.
* Initially, six other countries were elected to serve two-year spells on the council in 1946. They were Australia, Brazil, Egypt, Mexico, the Netherlands and Poland.
* The number of elected members, who are chosen to cover all parts of the globe, was increased to 10 in 1965. They are currently Belgium, Burkina Faso, Costa Rica, Croatia, Indonesia, Italy, Libya, Panama, South Africa and Vietnam.
* Decisions made by the council require nine “yes” votes out of 15. Each permanent member has a veto over resolutions.
* The issue of UN reform has long been on the agenda. One suggestion is that permanent membership could be expanded to 10 with India, Japan, Germany, Brazil and South Africa taking places. Any reform requires 128 nations, two-thirds, to back it in the assembly.
- INDEPENDENT
Have Your Say: Brown’s secret talks on ‘new world order’
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
UN transformation proposed to create ‘new world order’
Monday, January 21st, 2008
Statements coming from Gordon Brown seem to openly admit what has long been denied. The super imperial world is being constructed behind the curtain W/O our consent. Will you continue to allow it?
Andrew Grice in Delhi
Gordon Brown has begun secret talks with other world leaders on far-reaching reform of the United Nations Security Council as part of a drive to create a “new world order” and “global society”.
The Prime Minister is drawing up plans to expand the number of permanent members in a move that will provoke fears that the veto enjoyed by Britain could be diluted eventually. The United States, France, Russia and China also have a veto but the number of members could be doubled to include India, Germany, Japan, Brazil and one or two African nations.
Mr Brown has discussed a shake-up of a structure created in 1945 to reflect the world’s new challenges and power bases during his four-day trip to China and India. Last night, British sources revealed “intense discussions” on UN reform were under way and Mr Brown raised it whenever he met another world leader.
The Prime Minister believes the UN is punching below its weight. In 2003, it failed to agree on a fresh resolution giving explicit approval for military action in Iraq. George Bush then acted unilaterally, winning the support of Tony Blair.
UN reform is highly sensitive and Britain will not yet publish formal proposals for fear of uniting opponents against them. Mr Brown is trying to build a consensus for change first.
His aides are adamant that the British veto will not be negotiated away. One option is for the nations who join not to have a veto, at least initially. In a speech in Delhi today, the Prime Minister will say: “I support India’s bid for a permanent place – with others – on an expanded UN Security Council.” However, he is not backing Pakistan’s demand for a seat if India wins one.
Mr Brown will unveil a proposal for the UN to spend £100m a year on setting up a “rapid reaction force” to stop “failed states” sliding back into chaos after a peace deal has been reached. Civilians such as police, administrators, judges and lawyers would work alongside military peace-keepers. “There is limited value in military action to end fighting if law and order does not follow,” he will say. “So we must do more to ensure rapid reconstruction on the ground once conflicts are over – and combine traditional humanitarian aid and peace-keeping with stabilisation, recovery and development.”
He will call for the World Bank to lead the fight against climate change as well as poverty in the developing world, and argue that the International Monetary Fund should prevent crises like the credit crunch rather than just resolve them.
Arriving in Delhi yesterday, Mr Brown said he wanted a “partnership of equals” between Britain and India as he called for closer trade links and co-operation against terrorism. He announced £825m of aid over the next three years – £500m of which will be spent on health and education.
Mr Brown is to bring back honorary knighthoods and other awards for cricketers from Commonwealth countries. He said: “Cricket is one of the great things that bind the Commonwealth together. It used to be that great cricketers from the Commonwealth would be recognised by the British nation I would like to see some of the great players in the modern era honoured.”
Read Andrew Grice atindependent.co.uk/todayinpolitics
Security Council membership
The UN Security Council’s membership has remained virtually unchanged since it first met in 1946.
Great Britain, the United States, the then Soviet Union, China and France were designated permanent members of the UN’s most powerful body.
Initially, six other countries were elected to serve two-year spells on the council – in 1946 they were Australia, Brazil, Egypt, Mexico, the Netherlands and Poland.
The number of elected members, who are chosen to cover all parts of the globe, was increased to 10 in 1965. They are currently Belgium, Burkina Faso, Costa Rica, Croatia, Indonesia, Italy, Libya, Panama, South Africa and Vietnam.
Decisions made by the council require nine “yes” votes out of 15. Each permanent member has a veto over resolutions.
The issue of UN reform has long been on the agenda. One suggestion is that permanent membership could be expanded to 10 with India, Japan, Germany, Brazil and South Africa taking places. Any reform requires 128 nations, two-thirds, to support it in the assembly.
—–
Please spread very widely before it is too late. General Joe
Have Your Say: UN transformation proposed to create ‘new world order’
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
War and the ‘New World Order’
Saturday, September 1st, 2007
“We are now at the year 1908, which was the year that the Carnegie Foundation began operations. And, in that year, the trustees meeting, for the first time, raised a specific question, which they discussed throughout the balance of the year, in a very learned fashion. And the question is this: Is there any means known more effective than war, assuming you wish to alter the life of an entire people? And they conclude that, no more effective means to that end is known to humanity, than war. So then, in 1909, they raise the second question, and discuss it, namely, how do we involve the United States in a war?”
-Norman Dobbs, U.S. Congressional Special Committee for the Investigate of Tax-Exempt Foundations (1982)
War is the ultimate means of attempting to change societies and reshape nations. It is through war that national economies and political structures can be forcibly restructured. War is, potentially, the ultimate economic shock therapy. The wars in the Middle East are stepping stones towards establishing a vision of global order that has been in the hearts and minds of the Anglo-American establishment for years. That vision is global ascendancy.
Towards the “New International Order” through the “Global War on Terror”
“There is a chance for the President of the United States [George W. Bush Jr.] to use this disaster [meaning the attacks of September 11, 2001] to carry out what his father…a phrase his father [George H. Bush Sr.] used I think only once, and it hasn’t been used since … and that is a new world order. Think about this. We already have the support of NATO in a remarkable historic departure.”
-Gary Hart, National Security in the 21st Century: Findings of the Hart-Rudman Commission (September 14, 2007)
On January 18, 2005 Henry Kissinger appeared on Charlie Rose, a television program on PBS, and talked about a “New International Order” being created by George W. Bush Jr. and his administration. [1] Henry Kissinger stated that within the next few years that humanity will see the emergence of the beginning of a “New International Order.” Kissinger also stated that the Bush Jr. Administration could bring about this state; “and it could well be this president, [meaning President Bush Jr.] that is so reviled by intellectuals, will emerge as one of the seminal presidents of…of this…of this period…of American modern history.” [2]
When asked what George W. Bush Jr. has to do to bring about this “New International Order” by his interviewer Kissinger paused and gave a vague answer that avoided mentioning the criminality of war. “He has to do some certain things and he has to have some luck,” Kissinger answered followed by “Luck is the residue of design.” [3] It should be noted that if luck is a residue of design then it is no longer chance, but a calculation of intent.
Briefly the role of the American public was talked about by Charlie Rose with Kissinger who paused to pick his words carefully. Kissinger told his interviewer, Rose, that the United States is a nation whose public has no clue about American foreign policy. [4] In regards to the American public, the war agenda cannot move forward if the U.S. maintains its multi-cultural characteristics. It was this multi-cultural characteristic that initially presented the U.S. a problem in declaring war on Germany in both World Wars until the sinking of the RMS Lusitania and the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour. [5]
Thus, an end to a liberal North American immigration regime that ensures a multi-cultural environment in North America is a prerequisite to expanded American war(s). Zbigniew Brzezinski has written that “as America becomes an increasingly multi-cultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues [amongst the American people], except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat.” [6] The E.U. is also beginning to follow suit. This premise by Brzezinski, an individual from within the ruling establishment of America, can be used to explain the demonization of Muslims and several national and ethno-cultural groups such as Arabs, Turks, and Iranians.
It is also worth noting that Gary Hart, a former U.S. senator from Colorado, implied on September 14 of 2001 that the “Global War on Terror” sponsored by the Bush Jr. Administration was a pretext for establishing the so-called “New World Order.” [7] Gary Hart also implicated NATO’s role in shaping this “New World Order.” [8] The project is to be implemented by military might.
A Unipolar World: Pax Americana?
“However, what is a unipolar world? However one might embellish this term, at the end of the day it refers to one type of situation, namely one centre of authority, one centre of force, one centre of decision-making.”
-Vladimir Putin at the Munich Conference on Security Policy in Germany (February 11, 2007)
During his interview, with Charlie Rose, Henry Kissinger had referred to what George H. Bush Sr. identified as the “New World Order.” This was a term frequently used by the former American president that became famous during the Gulf War. With the end of the Cold War and the defeat of Iraq in the Gulf War, Georgia H. Bush Sr. said that humanity in 1991 was witness to the emergence of a “New World Order” that would be led by America. [9] The Gulf War was merely the beginning of this “New World Order.” The seeds had been planted in the Middle East for future wars and Eurasian expansion.
The Trilateral Commission, an organization founded in 1973 and consisting of the wealthiest and most powerful elites from the U.S., the E.U., and Japan, originally created the term that George H. Bush Sr. drew on. Their word was “New International Economic Order.” The Trilateral Commission’s terminology lays bare the economic fabric of this program. Military might is merely the enforcer of foreign policy, and foreign policy is based on economic interests.
An agenda of perpetual warfare and violence has been fueling the march towards global domination through economic means. In essence this war agenda has been an unbroken process watched over by the different presidential administrations of the United States.
Stepping forth from behind the Curtains: NATO’s Role in the Eurasian Roadmap
“The policies of the U.S., since the end of the Cold War are complicated and vast. They involve an intent to dominate and the use of international organizations to advance U.S. economic and geopolitical interests. They also include the conversion of NATO into a surrogate military police force for globalization and U.S. world economic domination.”
-Ramsey Clark, 66th United States Attorney-General (October 6, 2000)
NATO has started replicating long-term American war tactics and strategy. NATO is creating a rapid response force, which involves a significant German role. The force is modeled on the U.S. Rapid Response Force, the forerunner of CENTCOM, and has a global reach. The transformation of the U.S. Rapid Deployment Force into CENTCOM was part of long-term Anglo-American war plans. The NATO force is projected to be able to deploy to any region in the world within five days and planned to be capable of self-sufficient, detached operations for approximately one month. The force will also have land, sea, and air components, including an aircraft carrier. [10]
It is apparent that control over Iraq was planned during the culmination of the Cold War by Anglo-American policy makers. The series of wars that have occurred since the Iraq-Iran War are debatably the products of a historical Anglo-American project in the Middle East— a project that was once a solely British project that predated the Cold War. The project to reshape and control the Middle East is part of the greater project to control Eurasia. Just as how this grand project was embraced by the U.S., as the inheritor of British strategy, the project has been embraced by the Franco-German entente and NATO. Zbigniew Brzezinski argued in 1997 that “Europe is America’s essential geopolitical bridgehead in Eurasia,” or an entry point towards dominating Eurasia. [11]
From the statements and goals of U.S. officials going back to the 1990s NATO was projected to expand across the Eurasian landmass and set to embrace Japan, South Korea, and Australia in what Zbigniew Brzezinski identifies as the “trans-Eurasian security system.” [12] The characteristics of prospective conflicts seem to be slated to become dominated by NATO as France and Germany expand their roles in the “long war.” NATO’s role in the Eastern Mediterranean, the Red Sea, the Indian Ocean, Lebanon, and Afghanistan, along with NATO’s thrust into the post-Soviet niche and inner Eurasia, are all precarious indications of this.
Making Europe the Partner of America in the “Long War:” Enter the Franco-German Entente
“The victory over Iraq [in the Gulf War] was not waged as ‘a war to end all wars.’ Even the ‘New World Order’ cannot guarantee an era of perpetual peace.”
-George H. Bush Sr., 41st President of the United States (March 6, 1991)
Brzezinski explained that although Japan was important to American geo-strategy, Europe as a geopolitical entity (via the E.U. and NATO) constitutes America’s bridgehead into Eurasia. [13] “Unlike America’s links with Japan, NATO entrenches American political influence and military power on the Eurasian mainland,” and that “the allied European nations [were] still highly dependent on U.S. protection, any expansion of Europe’s political scope is automatically an expansion of U.S. influence,” Brzezinski explained in regards to Europe and Japan. [14] Brzezinski was paying more than just lip service to America’s allies in continental Europe; he was stressing that they were crucial, albeit as subordinates, to American global interests.
The strength of NATO would rest on the vitality of the European Union, an Anglo-American and Franco-German device. To emphasis this Brzezinski wrote that “the United States’ ability to project influence and power in Eurasia relies on close transatlantic ties.” [15] Brzezinski also added that France and Germany, the Franco-German entente, would be America’s vital partners in NATO expansion and securing Eurasia, but a united Europe was an essential prerequisite. In regards to the Franco-German entente, Brzezinski wrote in 1998 that “In the western periphery of Eurasia, the key players will continue to be France and Germany, and America’s central goal should be to continue to expand the democratic European bridgehead.” [16] This was essentially the forecast of the “E.U. expansion” that has gone hand-in-hand with earlier NATO expansion since the end of the Cold War. According to Brzezinski it would be up to the Franco-German entente to led Europe: “America cannot create a more united Europe on its own — that is a task for the Europeans, especially the French and the Germans.” [17]
None of the Pentagon’s geo-strategic plans can go forward without the E.U. and NATO. For this to happen it is essential that a strategic consensus between the Anglo-American alliance and the Franco-German entente be forged. The Anglo-American alliance has pursued this track and deeper integration with the Franco-German side, while also taking an adversarial stance against the Franco-German entente. Iraq is a symbolic testimony to this rivalry while Lebanon and NATO expansion in the Eastern Mediterranean is a parallel testimony to the strategic cooperation between the Anglo-American alliance and the Franco-German entente. A contradictory and confusing message is sent from these tracks, but there is always more to the picture. However, it is clear that Franco-German and Anglo-American interests must be synchronized for America to expand its global control.
The Endgame: A “Single Market” under One World Administration?
“I spent thirty-three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country’s most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer…”
-Major-General Smedley D. Butler, U.S. Marine Corp Commander (War Is a Racket, 1935)
After the Second World War, it was believed that from the nucleolus of Britain and American that a “New World Order” would be formed. Britain and America even had a combined military staff and combined chiefs of military staff. Visions for a singular global polity have vividly been tied to the Anglo-American establishment. In 1966, Professor Carroll Quigley, a noted American economist, wrote in his book Hope and Tragedy: A History of the World in Our Time that economics and finance vis-à-vis banking conglomerates were the engine in this drive and the real forces controlling national policies. Carroll Quigley wrote in regards to the Anglo-American alliance that “I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies (notably to its belief that England was an Atlantic rather than a European Power and must be allied, or even federated, with the United States and must remain isolated from Europe), but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known.” [18]
“For America, the chief geopolitical prize is Eurasia,” insists Zbigniew Brzezinski. He also contends, “Now a non-Eurasian power [i.e., the U.S.] is preeminent in Eurasia— and America’s global primacy is directly dependent on how long and how effectively its preponderance on the Eurasian continent is sustained.” [19] The former U.S. national security advisor has also stated, in 1997, that in order to co-opt the Franco-German entente a “Transatlantic Free Trade Agreement, already advocated by a number of prominent Atlantic leaders, could also mitigate the risk of growing economic rivalry between a more united E.U. and the United States.” [20]
There is opposition in North America to what is believed to be the emergence of a projected “North American Union.” This North American entity would further amalgamate Canada, the United States, and Mexico, but the mechanisms for a grander global confederacy have already been drawn. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the creation of the E.U. were stepping stones towards this aspiration. Economics is the key that fuses these polities.
A summit between the E.U. and U.S. has shed light on plans for economic amalgamation. [21] The term used at the summit was “single market” by “renewing the Trans-Atlantic partnership.” [22] This is the same term used to describe the “common market” as it intensified Western European integration, which eventually gave birth to the European Union. At the summit President Bush Jr. met with Jose Manuel Barroso, the President of the European Commission, and Federal Chancellor Merkel. Frau Merkel, while officially there on behalf of the E.U., represented the interests of the Franco-German entente while President Bush Jr. represented Anglo-American interests. Jose Manuel Barroso as the President of the European Commission represented both Anglo-American and Franco-German interests because the E.U. is a joint Anglo-American and Franco-German body. America is a de facto E.U. power due to its alliance with Britain, one of the three major E.U. powers along with France and Germany.
An agreement was reached between the E.U. and U.S. to integrate the markets and regulations of America and Europe even further. This agreement was another layer to add to the strategic consensus that was reached at NATO’s Riga Summit. Both sides also stated that economics is the driving spirit in their relationship and that politics mattered very little. The liberal and conservative leaders of America and Europe are merely two sides of the same coin.
Decades after the end of the Cold War the globe is wrapped within a state of almost perpetual war dominated by the military might of America. The last lines in The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and the Geostrategic Imperatives reveal the ultimate objective of Anglo-American policy: “These efforts will have the added historical advantage of benefiting from the new web of global linkages that is growing exponentially outside the more traditional nation-state system. That web— woven by multinational corporations, NGOs (…) already creates an informal global system that is inherently congenial to more institutionalized and inclusive global cooperation [a reference to global government].” [23]
Brzezinski goes on to predict that “In the course of the next several decades, a functioning structure of global cooperation, based on geopolitical realities, could thus emerge and gradually assume the mantle of the world’s current ‘regent’ [a reference to the U.S.],” and “Geostrategic success in that cause would represent a fitting legacy of America’s role as the first, only, and last truly global superpower.” [24] All around the globe nation-states are being absorbed into larger and larger political and socio-economic entities. This is part of the story of globalization, but it has its dark side. This is the globalization of the few and not of the many.
The Fight for Civilization and the Gathering Storm
“When all is said and done the conflict in Afghanistan will be to the war on terrorism what the North African campaign was to World War II: an essential beginning on the path to victory. But compared to what looms over the horizon— a wide-ranging war in locales from Central Asia to the Middle East and, unfortunately, back again to the United States— Afghanistan will prove but an opening battle.”
-Robert Kagan and William Kristol, The Gathering Storm (The Weekly Standard, October 29, 2001)
One cannot help but remember what was elucidated in 2001 during the start of the “Global War on Terror” by two members of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), stating that Afghanistan was only part of a “wide-ranging war.” [25] Both Robert Kagan and William Kristol are deeply linked to U.S. foreign and military policy extending from writing presidential speeches to having a former spouse as the U.S. ambassador to NATO. It is not coincidental that a portion of their editorial from October of 2001 in The Weekly Standard has actually materialized. These men should be taken for their words when they say that Afghanistan is merely the “opening battle” compared to what is waiting in the horizon.
Referring back to Robert Kagan and William Kristol: “this war will not end in Afghanistan. It is going to spread and engulf a number of countries in conflicts of varying intensity. It could well require the use of American military power in multiple places simultaneously. It is going to resemble the clash of civilizations that everyone has hoped to avoid. And it is going to put enormous and perhaps unbearable strain on parts of an international coalition that basks in contented consensus.” [26] The “international coalition” being referred to is NATO and the international military network based around the U.S. and the “unbearable strain” is war, but of an unknown scale. On August 10, 2007 Lieutenant-General Douglas Lute, the “War Czar” overseeing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and any expanded theatre, publicly talked about restoring a mandatory military draft. [27] The march to war is not waning, but driving the world towards the abyss.
Afghanistan was the first volley in an advance phase of the global conflict that was in its preparatory stages decades ago during the Iraq-Iran War, the Gulf War, and the Kosovo War. Where this global conflict, this “long war” will lead us is unknown, but all humanity is in this together. The American people will sooner or later feel the pain of war as their freedom is effected. Autocracy is a prerequisite to grand empires. Brzezinski has pointed out that “America is too democratic at home to be autocratic abroad,” and “never before has a populist democracy attained international supremacy.” [28] Deviancy is being normalized all over the globe because of this global project. Those that are behind such projects must be reduced to social leprids, as outcasts, denounced by all societies.
Resistance in the Middle East: The Power of the People
“The Iraqi Resistance is by definition democratic as it is the spontaneous expression of a people who took its destiny into its hands, and is by definition progressive as it defends the interests of the people.”
-Hana Al-Bayaty (March 18, 2007)
Anglo-American planners have underestimated the capacity of the power of ordinary people and the human spirit. In the Middle East it has been the resistance of ordinary people that has brought militant globalization to a standstill. Popular resistance movements have bogged down the military might of the remaining global superpower.
A nation is only as legitimate as the people(s) who live in it define it. America is not at war with individual nations, but with the people(s) of these nations. Nor are the American people at war with these nations, it is the American ruling establishment and elites that are at war with these people(s).
The forces of resistance are the forces of the will of the people, without the support of the people none of them could last or stand up to some of the most powerful war machines in human history.
The wars in the Middle East are as much about choice as they are about the right to live. What is at stake is self-determination and liberty. These wars represent the drive to impose an overall monopoly of controls over other nations by a few who have hijacked the foreign policies of America and Britain to serve their own goals.
The Iraqi Resistance and the other resistance movements of the Middle East are movements of the peoples and by nature egalitarian. Would anyone in the so-called West dare label the French, Czechoslovakian, Greek, Libyan, Chinese, Malaysian, and Soviet resistance movements against Germany, Italy, and Japan during the Second World War as terrorist movements? However, the occupying Axis governments labeled these movements as terrorists. Did not France and the other areas occupied by Germany and the Axis Powers not have governments that said the Axis Powers were welcomed forces bringing stability as do the governments of Iraq and Afghanistan? For example in France there was the Vichy Government. When Germany was defeated the leaders of the Vichy Government in France were executed as traitors.
The U.S. government misleadingly claims that it is bringing democracy to these lands, but since when was democracy forced from the top down to the bottom? Is this not the opposite of democracy; things being forced down from the top to the bottom? Democracy is an expression of the masses that manifests itself upwards and not from the opposite direction.
No force on earth can defeat the popular will of the people; this is why domestic populations are manipulated into supporting wars. It is only division that allows small groups to take temporary reign over the people(s). However, for every scheme and plan to create division and anarchy amongst the people(s) of the world there is a plan to unite them and strengthen them. This is one of the greatest fears of many in positions of power. This is the fear of any awakening of large societal groups and populations.
There is no greater ally to the movements of resistance in the Middle East and beyond than unadulterated public opinion in the rest of the world. The people(s) of Britain, Israel, and the U.S. are also victims of their own governments who manipulate their fears and create animosity between them and other nations. This in itself is a great crime. What differences exist between nations are only a means to test the best of them.
Fear and hate are the weapons of the real terrorists, the masters of deception, and those who belittle others for profit and personal gain. These are the terrorists who give orders in positions of political leadership in the White House and elsewhere at the expense of their own people and the rest of humanity. The world is now embarking into the abyss of perpetual war and a period in which the contemplation of the use of nuclear weapons is being made. A stand must be made by individuals of good conscience and will. It seems possible that it will be a matter of time before the citizens of Europe, North America, and other lands will be compelled or necessitated to join the peoples of occupied lands in resistance.
War must be averted on two fronts; in the shorter-term (as differentiated from “short-term”) or near future, war must be averted from emerging in the Middle East, and in the longer-term in Eurasia. Only the resistance of the people and public opinion can stop war from enveloping the globe. Public opinion must translate into public action if humanity it to be spared from a massive war—a war that could prove to become a nuclear armageddon.
Countdown to 1984?
“In brief, the U.S policy goal must be unapologetically twofold: to perpetuate America’s own dominant position for at least a generation and preferably longer still; and to create a geopolitical framework that can absorb the inevitable shocks and strains of social-political change…”
-Zbigniew Brzezinski (The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives, 1997)
In a twist of Orwellian fate, the earth seems closer to appearing like a rendition of the world in George Orwell’s novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. [29] However, the road ahead is not scripted. The future is only anticipated and planned, but never certain in a universe of infinite probabilities. Time will tell where the road ahead will guide us. Those that see themselves as masters of destiny have had their ideas proven wrong in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Somalia, and Lebanon. It may look as if opposition to a war agenda is like tiny raindrops beating against an unrelenting mountain, but mountains can be eventually eroded by those tiny raindrops. There exists a “sensitive dependence on initial conditions,” commonly called the “butterfly effect,” whereas the flaps of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil may set off a tornado in Texas. Individual actions can offset the march to war that is unfolding on this planet.
NOTES
[1] Henry Kissinger, A conversation with Henry Kissinger, interview with Charles P. Rose Jr., Charlie Rose (show), January 18, 2005.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid.
[5] The U.S. government was secretly arming Britain during the First World War and profiting off the war. In regards to the sinking of the RMS Lusitania, a British passenger ship, unknown to the public at the time the ship was also carrying military supplies from the U.S. to Britain.
In the case of Pearl Harbour, the U.S. government was aware of a Japanese plan to attack the U.S. Pacific Fleet in Hawaii. American officials allowed the attack to take place to arouse public support for the entry of the U.S. in the Second World War. It should be noted that prior to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour the U.S. government had led a complete embargo of oil and materials to Japan and frozen all Japanese assets by July 25, 1941. Oil is needed to run economies and war and all strategists and military planners know this very well. Japan was baited into an inevitable war with the U.S. and decided to take the first shot. This benefited the U.S. government in mobilizing the American public to support the war effort in the Second World War just as the tragic events of September 11th, 2001 allowed the Bush Jr. Administration to launch the “Global War on Terror.” U.S. involvement in the Second World War was for economic purposes and had nothing to do with morality.
In the case of the RMS Lusitania the German embassy in Washington D.C. was trying to make clear to the Americans before it started sinking merchant ships helping Britain that it would engage in such activities. It should be noted that Britain was doing the same in both World Wars. U.S. officials are actually believed to have obstructed these attempts by the Germans in an attempt to involve the U.S. in the First World War.
[6] Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and the Geostrategic Imperatives (NYC, New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1997), p.211.
[7] Gary Hart, Transcript. National Security in the 21st Century: Findings of the Hart-Rudman Commission, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), September 14, 2001. http://www.cfr.org/publication/4049/national_security_in_the_21st_century.html
[8] Ibid.
[9] George Herbert Walker Bush Sr., Gulf War Victory Speech, (Address, Capitol Hill, Washington, District of Columbia, January 6, 1991) March 6, 1991.
[10] Bettina Berg, High readiness and global deployability, Federal Ministry of Defence Germany), November 30, 2006.
[11] Zbigniew Brzezinski, A geostrategy for Eurasia, Foreign Affairs, vol. 76, no. 5 (September- October, 1997): p.50-64.
Note: The writings from Brzezinski’s paper for Foreign Affairs and the Council for Foreign Relations (CFR) were also used for his book The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and the Geostrategic Imperatives that had its first edition published in 1997. Brzezinski’s 1997 Foreign Affairs journal entry is a condensed synopsis of his 1997 book. Points and quotes cited from it are identical or almost identical to the writing from his 1997 book.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time (NYC, New York: The Macmillan Company, 1966), p.950.
[14] Brzezinski, A geostrategy for Eurasia, Op. cit.
[15] Ibid.
[16] Ibid.
[17] Ibid.
[18] Ibid.
[19] Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard, Op. cit., p.30.
[20] Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard, Op. cit., p.200.
[21] Desmond Butler, E.U., U.S. Agree on Iran, Russia Disputes, Associated Press, April 30, 2007. http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6597779,00.html
[22] US and EU agree ‘single market,’ British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), April 30, 2007. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6607757.stm
[23] Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard, Op. cit., p.215.
[24] Ibid.
[25] Robert Kagan and William Kristol, The Gathering Storm, The Weekly Standard, October 29, 2002, p.13. http://www.newamericancentury.org/Editorial-102901.pdf
[26] Ibid.
[27] Toby Harnden, ‘Return to conscription should be considered,’ The Telegraph U.K.), August 11, 2007. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/08/11/wdraft111.xml
[28] Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard, Op. cit., p.35-36.
[29] Refer to the polity and geographic boundaries of Winston Smith’s fictional world, in Orwell’s novel. In the fictional state of Oceania (which includes America, the British Isles, and Australia) there is absolute control exercised over all aspects of the lives of all citizens by one single entity, the Party, which has three political mottos: WAR IS PEACE. FREEDOM IS SLAVERY. IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.
Have Your Say: War and the ‘New World Order’
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
Of Marx, Christ, and the Persecution of Radicals
Friday, July 27th, 2007
By Jason Miller
RINF Alternative News
A few days ago, one of my closest friends hit me with a heavily loaded question.
“Are you a Communist?” she queried.
To which I replied:
I do not belong nor militate in any formal communist party in the U.S. Nor do I belong to any other political entity or party. Furthermore, I do not subscribe to a specific doctrine, ideology, or dogma. My allegiance is to my core principles and values, which are premised on honesty, justice, humanity, responsibility, critical thinking, open-mindedness, egalitarianism, compassion, a belief in a Higher Power of my understanding, and many of the teachings of Christ.
My personal beliefs aside, communism is an incredibly loaded word. Our infinitely mendacious educational, social, and media infrastructures begin inculcating reflexive rejection of “all things communist or socialist” into US Americans from the moment they draw their initial breath.
Why is the establishment so desperate to vaccinate us against the “disease” of communism?
Because at its hopelessly rotten core, capitalism, which is manifested most strongly in the United States, is about exploitation, hyper-competitiveness, “rugged individualism”, survival of the fittest, concentration of wealth in the hands of the few, profits above all, property over people, greed, and selfishness. Perhaps worst of all, this pyramid scheme masquerading as a “moral” economic system inevitably leads to wars fueled by its insatiable demands for new markets, more resources, and cheaper labor. Why else would 350 million out of 6.5 billion people spend a trillion dollars a year on a military that has the capacity to destroy our planet thousands of times over, dwarfs the combined firepower of the rest of the world, and plagues over 130 countries with its “benign” occupations? We in the United States maintain a carefully crafted façade as the “benevolent champions of democracy”, but will quickly install ruthless tyrants and commit mass murder (euphemistically labeling our victims as “collateral damage”) if sovereign nations dare to resist our economic rape and plunder.
And for those who have swallowed the specious argument that “true capitalism” doesn’t exist, you’re dreaming. Pinch yourself hard enough and you may awaken before it is too late. Capitalism is a cancer upon the sentient beings of the Earth and we are suffering through its advanced stages. Finance capital reigns supreme, massive oligopolies abound, wealth is increasingly accumulating in the hands of the few, imperial wars to expand markets and attain resources are increasing in frequency, and the insatiable greed driving this appalling perversion is raping and destroying the Earth.
Some opine that if we could just dismantle the “socialist” aspects of our socioeconomic system in the United States, restoring an unbridled free market, the world would be a much better place. Certainly our cynical plutocracy would welcome such a transition. However, it is hard to envision too many working people truly welcoming a return to ten year olds working twelve hour days, company towns, death and dismemberment on the job with no recourse against employers maintaining perilous work environments, miserly wages that would make today’s working poor look relatively affluent, blatantly monopolistic business practices, and wanton disregard for the environment.
History has clearly demonstrated that “free markets” are “free passes” for acquisitive sociopaths who thrive on bullying and exploiting a large percentage of the Earth’s sentient beings. And despite the ridiculously few and relatively minor restraints that social unrest has forced the opulent class to implement in the US, adept players in the deadly game of capitalism have refused to surrender their “inalienable right” to fuck the rest of the human race in their relentless charge to attain the power and wealth they so desperately crave to distract them from the existential agony of their spiritual emptiness.
[Note: If you don’t find a historical perspective convincing enough, consider the deadly machinations of the “free market” in China as it hurtles headlong into the very bowels of capitalist Hell:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/07/26/madeinchina.overview/index.html]
Karl Marx predicted the inevitable implosion of capitalism and theorized that a much more humane, egalitarian, and democratic system would rise in its place. It is little wonder that the bourgeoisie in the United States have striven so tenaciously to inculcate the unwashed masses to despise, fear, and ridicule socialism, communism, and nearly all aspects of Marxist thought. Sound bites, emotionally evocative images, ahistorical presentations, fear mongering, jingoism, advertising, and numerous temptations of instant gratification comprise a vast array of highly refined and insidious propaganda that perpetually hammers our minds to create a potent and effective false consciousness, and an irrational fear of anything but capitalism.
Socialism and communism, the political manifestations of Marxist ideas, have been grossly distorted within the framework of this false consciousness. While it is true that the implementations of Marx’s philosophies have yielded mixed results (many of those outcomes are primarily due to the unwavering hostility of the older, well established capitalist powers in the second half of the 20th century, led of course by the U.S.), the chasm between reality and the mind fuck we have received since birth is wide enough to engulf Donald Trump’s ego, or most of it anyway. For evidence, one need look no further than our Cold War nemesis.
Consider the pernicious myth that the United States “defeated” fascism in Europe in WWII. This lie persists despite the fact that a number of our very own uber-Capitalists did business with the Nazi regime until the 1942 Trading with the Enemy Act finally forbade it. Ironically, Prescott Bush, GW’s grandfather, was amongst those profiting from Hitler’s rise to power. Further, our ruling elite refused to intervene on behalf of a democratically elected government in Spain against Franco, who ultimately rose to power as a fascist dictator. Perhaps most importantly, the US lost about 500,000 people (almost all of whom were military personnel) in “defeating” Germany. Russia, one of history’s most heavily vilified “communist” nations, sacrificed 20 million people to ensure Hitler’s defeat. Had it not been for those evil “communists”, we might be speaking German right now.
Shortages of consumer goods is another “communist failure” apologists for capitalism love to trot out as “proof” that their beloved license to plunder and conquer is inherently superior to a more just economic system. Yet time and again they suppress the real reasons these shortages occurred. Recognizing the existential threat that Marxist ideals posed to their Anglo, imperial, and patriarchal plutocracy, the United States ruling class and its allies circled the wagons and imposed crippling economic sanctions on nations attempting to implement communism (i.e. Russia and Cuba).
Domestically, communists and socialists endured harassment, financial ruin, and prison. Witness the Palmer Raids and the witch hunts of the McCarthy era. Thank God our opulent overlords nipped potential revolutionary action in the bud. It is a tremendous relief that such a small number of “richly deserving” individuals acted to ensure the perpetuation of their virtual monopoly on the wealth of our nation, particularly in light of the existence of over a million homeless US Americans. Heartwarming indeed.
Yet our intrepid profit-seekers weren’t content to stop there. Realizing that the Soviet Union had an economy that was roughly 1/8th the size of the United States and was still largely agrarian all the way up to the Russian Revolution, they decided to initiate a ruinous military escalation that eventually culminated in the criminal nuclear arms race. Enabling obscene profits for the military industrial complex (by way of raping the US American taxpayer) and smothering communism in its infancy, the vampiric bourgeoisie ensured the perpetuation of its abominable existence. Meanwhile, the Ruskies faced the staggering tasks of industrializing a technologically backward nation, rebuilding their devastated infrastructure, and meeting consumer demands. So of course they didn’t have a McDonalds on each corner or a new car dealer within a three mile radius of every home. They were too busy bringing their economy into the 20th Century, recovering from Hitler’s invasion, and matching the US warhead for warhead.
Now, do I think that any manifestation of a communist government to date is a utopia? No. I see their flaws. But remember, those who have tried to implement socialism or communism have faced a formidable adversary in the form of the rotten bastards who comprise both our “elected” and our de facto governments. Crushing those who dare to attempt alternatives to the sacred cow of capitalism and trumpeting our “monopoly” on virtue, we US Americans would benefit tremendously from some serious soul-searching about our participation in a morally bankrupt mode of being. What spiritual growth or substance could possibly flourish in a system premised on greed, selfishness, and self-absorption?
Are we, the beneficiaries of a relative degree of physical security and comfort (in exchange for our complicity in crony capitalism, Neoliberal exploitation, and imperial invasions), truly superior to the communists and socialists we have been taught to fear and revile? How many invasions have Fidel or Chavez EVER launched?
We the People are mere pawns of our multimillionaires in Congress, the 10% who own 90% of our nation’s wealth, massive corporations, and a group which includes in its ranks both GW and other abject criminals like Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Abrams, Negroponte, and many others who have acted with impunity dating back to the Nixon era. There is a revolving door between our government (including both “elected” and appointed officials) and major corporations. Cheney and Halliburton represent exhibit A. Lobbyists and special interest groups pull our legislators’ strings and, in some instances, even write our laws, as was the case in the behind-closed-doors deal that Cheney cooked for the energy corporations. And look at our most likely Democratic Presidential nominee to be, Hillary Clinton, whose conservatism is one of the best kept secrets inside the Beltway. As a First Lady, she ostensibly fought aggressively for universal health care. She has now sold us out by accepting nearly a million dollars from the health care industry. Corruption, duplicity, mendacity, and egregious criminal conduct are not the exception. They are the rule in our vaunted capitalist system.
Our domestic politics, guided and determined by the demands of our predatory socioeconomic structure, are not alone in reeking of the fetid stench of profound moral decay. Consider our malevolent foreign policy, including myriad CIA covert operations, economic extortion, and outright imperial slaughter frequently employed to crush efforts by sovereign nations to defy the capitalist paradigm and implement socialism. For convincing evidence that we are NOT wearing white hats and making the world safe for democracy, do a little research on Chile and Salvador Allende, Cuba and Castro, Iran and Mossadeq, Franco and Spain, Ho Chi Minh and Vietnam (we “only” killed 3 million people there), Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador, and Nicaragua.
Here is a good starting point (the entire website is excellent, but the page linked below gives a condensed version of parts of our history the plutocracy doesn’t want the masses to know– the mainstream media and textbook writers have done a masterful job of shielding us from the truths displayed on this site):
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/US_ThirdWorld/dictators.html
While it wasn’t his intention at the time, David Starr Jordan (from Imperial Democracy, 1899, pp. 50-51 –cited in Monthly Review, September 2006, p. 53.) penned an apt characterization of the despicable foreign policy of the American Empire:
“First you push into territories where you have no business to be, and where you had promised not to go; secondly, your intrusion provokes resentment and, in these wild countries, resentment means resistance; thirdly, you instantly cry out that the people are rebellious and that their act is rebellion (this in spite of your own assurance that you have no intention of setting up a permanent sovereignty over them); fourthly, you send a force to stamp out the rebellion; and fifthly, having spread bloodshed, confusion and anarchy, you declare, with hands uplifted to the heavens, that moral reasons force you to stay, for if you were to leave, this territory would be left in a condition which no civilized power could contemplate with equanimity or with composure. These are the five stages in the Forward Rake’s progress.”
Having analyzed our vile and reprehensible economic paradigm from many angles, I find it virtually impossible to believe that a critical thinking, decent human being could support our institutionalized rapacity, at least not once they pierced the simulacrum so fastidiously maintained by the corporate media.
Fortunately, challenging life experiences spurred me to undertake a spiritual and intellectual journey that enabled me to break free of the prison of false consciousness. While I tend to look at the world through a very eclectic lens, I derive most of my principles, beliefs, and sociopolitical views from Marxism, the Friends of Bill W, Christ’s teachings, and Buddha.
Together with many dedicated and exceptional human beings, I am waging an intellectual/political struggle for social justice, a reasonable degree of peace in the world, a significant reduction in exploitation, a more equitable distribution of resources, an end to the rising epidemic of unnecessary suffering, the formation of a social structure based on our interdependence with nature and each other, the obliteration of the moronic, sociopathic American myth that individuality and personal rights supersede the well-being of the collective, true justice for criminals and their victims, the evisceration of corporate power, awakening people from their trance of self-absorption and apathy, and an end to the hedonistic narcissism manifested in obscene levels of consumerism. A number of factors indicate that we are in a pre-revolutionary stage in the United States. Premature revolutionary activity at this point would be suicidal folly, but meanwhile, we have plenty of opportunity to implement radical solutions at the personal level and to employ political education to win hearts and minds.
If you still tremble at the notion of “Godless communists, socialists or Marxists,” remember that though I am not a Christian, I am deeply spiritual and derive tremendous inspiration from Christ and members of the Liberation Theology Movement. Marxist thought is not antithetical to spirituality, morality, or Christianity. In fact, I examined its synthesis with these elements in some detail when I wrote “Jesus Wouldn’t Bomb Anyone: Why are we waging war on the poor and oppressed?” at:
http://freepress.org/departments/display/9/2007/2526
No, I’m not the “communist bogeyman” that Ronald Reagan (who was a far better actor in the White House than he was in Hollywood) warned you about. How could I be? Communists, socialists, and Marxists are only potentially threatening to those amongst us who will waste eternity desperately attempting to squeeze camels through the eyes of needles.
Forget worrying about the “communist threat.” We need to turn the moneyed establishment’s idiocy on its head and focus our energies on answering a question that affects the 90% of us who aren’t obscenely affluent:
How will humanity survive the capitalist threat?
Jason Miller is a wage slave of the American Empire who has freed himself intellectually and spiritually. He is Cyrano’s Journal Online’s associate editor (http://www.bestcyrano.org/) and publishes Thomas Paine’s Corner within Cyrano’s at http://www.bestcyrano.org/THOMASPAINE/. You can reach him at JMiller@bestcyrano.org
Have Your Say: Of Marx, Christ, and the Persecution of Radicals
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
Globalisation backlash in rich nations
Monday, July 23rd, 2007
By Chris Giles
A popular backlash against globalisation and the leaders of the world’s largest companies is sweeping all rich countries, an FT/Harris poll shows.
Large majorities of people in the US and in Europe want higher taxation for the rich and even pay caps for corporate executives to counter what they believe are unjustified rewards and the negative effects of globalisation.
Viewing globalisation as an overwhelmingly negative force, citizens of rich countries are looking to governments to cushion the blows they perceive have come from the liberalisation of their economies to trade with emerging countries.
Those polled in Britain, France, the US and Spain were about three times more likely to say globalisation was having a negative rather than a positive effect on their countries. The majority was smaller in Germany, with its large export base.
Corporate leaders fared little better, with 5 per cent or fewer of those polled in the US and all large European economies (except Italy) saying they had a great deal of admiration for those who run large companies. In these countries, between a third and a half said they had no admiration at all for corporate bosses.
In response to fears of globalisation and rising inequality, the public in all the rich countries surveyed – the US, Germany, UK, France, Italy and Spain – want their governments to increase taxation on those with the highest incomes. In European countries, a large majority want governments to go further and to impose pay caps on the heads of companies.
Europeans still overwhelmingly support the principle of free competition within the European Union, contrary to Nicolas Sarkozy’s wishes at the recent European summit, but in France, Germany and Spain, the populations want their political leaders to play a larger role in managing their economies.
The depth of anti-globalisation feeling in the FT/Harris poll, which surveyed more than 1,000 people online in each of the six countries, will dismay policy-makers and corporate executives. Their view that opening economies to freer trade is beneficial to poor and rich countries alike is not shared by the citizens of rich countries, regardless of how liberal their economic traditions.
The issue of rising inequality is now high on the political agenda of every country and will feature prominently in the 2008 US presidential election.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Have Your Say: Globalisation backlash in rich nations
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
Sneak Attack On America - New World Order Style
Friday, July 13th, 2007
Hidden History
When Geraldo Rivera was at ABC News, 20/20 back in the 70’s he interviewed some people that went to a land development in northwest Arkansas, called Holiday Island Suburban Improvement District (appears to have been connected with, McCulloch Properties, Pratt Properties, Pratt Holding Company, MCO Properties, MCO Resorts, MCO Holdings, and others, at one time or another, see section below titiled MCO Properties and Charles Hurwitz). The people Geraldo interviewed on 20/20 claimed they signed some papers at Holiday Island that they had not read, lost everything they had including homes if they owned homes, cars, businesses, they even lost their identity, as they had no records in government, such as drivers licenses, birth certificates, marriage licenses, etc., after having signed papers at Holiday Island, and never got their day in court, and all they were left with was their Bibles. They also claimed they could work but didn’t get to keep their pay if they were paid by check, and those people from Holiday Island kept doing things to them that made them paranoid. Bagabonds without a home is what I think Geraldo called them. Geraldo tried to confront someone that was connected with Holiday Island, about all this, their comment was, no comment.
How The Scam Worked
At one time Holiday Island had a fair amount of people touring their property, from all over the country. One would naturally assume that the people Geraldo was interviewing on 20/20, that claimed the people from Holiday Island “kept doing things to them that made them paranoid”, came from various parts of the country, which means that whoever it was, doing things to these people, as they claimed, had a large network of people working with them and/or for them.
In 1981, they were still presenting papers at Holiday Island for those people that they singled out, that appeared to have been written in a secret code or foreign language, (note the people Geraldo interviewed claimed they signed papers at Holiday Island that they had not read) and they told people, something along the lines that implied it was to verify who you are. No one said, if you sign this your giving up your rights, freedoms, liberties, access to the courts, property or volunteering into a black-op experiment to monitor your thoughts, etc., etc.
People would naturally be very suspicious and think it very odd to say the least, if they were signing papers written in english, to buy property, and then someone came up with a paper for them to sign that was written in some sort of secret code or foreign language, that they could not make out, by reading it. There would be very few people that would ever sign such a paper, under those circumstances, of their own free will and accord and no reasonable person would expect, under normal conditions, that anyone presented with such a paper or document, would sign it.
At one time Holiday Island would give you $50.00 and a nights lodging in a motel if you agreed to take a tour of their property. What happened, appears to have gone something like this, for those that were singled out, that is. The paid for motel, office was not opened for the most part, as if they didn’t want any other guests or business. The motel didn’t appear to have anyone else staying there or very few people, if any, even during the middle of tourist season, in a tourist town such as Eureka Springs, Arkansas.
So it appears, they isolated their patsy, that they singled out, for a reason. More than likely, so they could implant them, then continued their fraud and conspiracy to cover that up, in case they were ever exposed, by hypnotizing, tricking their patsy, so they would sign a paper the next day at Holiday Island, that was written in a foreign language or some sort of secret code that I referred to above, and was documented somewhat on 20/20, on the show in question, when the people they interviewed stated that “they had signed papers at Holiday Island that they had not read”.
You might find it interesting to know that shortly after having visited Holiday Island in 1981, I noticed a mark, that looks like a scar, that was caused by a fairly deep cut, on my right hand, below my little finger, but I never cut myself there.
A Black Budget Project.
My experience and adventure in dealing with Holiday Island and those connected with it, are somewhat different, than the people that were interviewed by ABC News 20/20, regarding that land development in Arkansas, in part for the following reasons. When I went to Holiday Island in 1981 I had forgotten that I saw the ABC News show about Holiday Island. Driving back to Kansas from Holiday Island, Arkansas I remembered that Holiday Island was documented by ABC News 20/20. Once they realized that I knew that, they more than likely were somewhat spooked.
Shortly after having visited Holiday Island I had found a note in my apartment saying something along the line that the objective was to create paranoia and it was signed CEPO. Rather that was the actual name of the of the program or operation or they were using CEPO as a cover in case they were ever exposed, I don’t know. Nor do I know what CEPO stands for.
It was several years later while looking things up on the internet I came across someone with a private business, that claimed in his qualifications that he had at one time worked as a contractor in a CIA program called CEPO and that program had to do with detecting rather or not a person was telling the truth. Regardless of that, I thought they were monitoring my thoughts, from almost from the very beginning, from the way they were acting and what they were doing, It wasn’t that hard to figure out they were trying to screw with my mind by what they were doing and the means they had to do it with.
If you think about what I just said, it fits in with what the people Geraldo interviewed said, when the people he interviewed claimed that the people from Holiday Island kept doing things to them that made them paranoid. That’s makes sense, because if someone had the technology to monitor your thoughts and decided to use psychology on you it would naturally make you paranoid as they played with your mind, played on your fears, anxieties, etc, as they tried to control and manipulate you.
From my first hand knowledge of the subject and through reason and logic, I think it would be reasonable, and logical to assume that the number one suspect behind this secret operation or network that I write about and that was documented through ABC news 20/20 and the people they interviewed, when they stumbled onto them, would be the CIA.
From known facts, the most reasonable, logical explanation for what was going on was, the CIA was using was using American citizens to test their technology on.
No Fear Of Being Exposed
Whatever Holiday Island was at the time, or the companies that owned or controlled it, they were not afraid of the Arkansas government or the Federal government coming after them, even after having been investigated by the Federal government and after having been exposed on national television by ABC News 20/20 when they stumbled on to them and documented Holiday Island back in the 70’s. That should tell you something.
It should be obvious by now, that the CIA and their network was not afraid at the time of being exposed or of the oversight committees (a dog and pony show for the American people) that was set up in the early 70’s to watch over the intelligence community around the same time this CEPO program appears to have first come online.
Media Black-Out
What Holiday Island is today, the companies that owned it or were connected with it, or who owns it today, etc., etc., I don’t know, but when that story first broke on ABC News 20/20, in the 70’s, it must of been the buzz, in the political circles in Arkansas, as you can imagine.
Several years back I called what I was led to believe was the producers office for ABC News 20/20 and told them about the show in question and what I was looking for and had them check their files to find out when it was aired, after a few minutes the person came back on the phone and said, she could not find information on it because she didn’t know what that show was categorized under.
In the mean time you have Mrs. Clinton running for president and the controlled media spiking this story, in their attempt to fool the American public into thinking they are going to get something different, rather than the conservatives, neocons if they vote for Mrs. Clinton.
In reality, if Mrs. Clinton becomes President the American people are going to get another person with very strong CIA ties, that’s of the same ilk as Bush - Cheney, if not worse.
In Typical Clinton Fashion Hillary Denies Denies Denies
On July,20, 2006, I posted a article on the internet titled “Warrantless Spy Program Monitoring Peoples Thoughts”. The next day on July 21, New York Daily News published a article titled “Hil frets chips will be put in kids’ brains”. The article quotes Mrs. Clinton “At the rate that technology is advancing, people will be implanting chips in our children to advertise directly into their brains and tell them what kind of products to buy,” The New York Democrat said the country was performing a “massive experiment”….. Mrs. Clinton was speaking at the Kaiser Family Foundation.
I can’t help but wonder, what would the odds be of Hillary Clinton talking about such a obscure subject as implanting chips in people, just hours after this original post appeared?
Why Am I Now The Only One Talking About This?
Did the people interviewed on 20/20 in regards to the program in question, die mysteriously, and under questionable circumstances, like so many other people that the Clinton’s were associated with? Arkancided is what some people call it, or CIAcided like others say, because there is not really any difference between the two. Perhaps the reason other people are not talking about this matter any more is, they were driven insane, by the unregulated mind manipulators and their candy store of hidden technology. Perhaps some of their early victims may have been recruited into their network, that I talk about and that is why they are not talking any more?
The only people that would truly consider me a threat of any kind, would be the network or maybe a better term would be secret society that I write about here,
Bush Administration Warrantless Spy Program - A Trojan Horse Sneak Attack
Regardless of what The Bush Administration says on alleged changes to their Warrantless Wiretapping, the facts remain that the Eschalon Spy Program has been around long before the War On Terrorism began, intercepting, phone calls, faxes, email, without a warrant, and the Israeli back door into the phone system, that was documented on Fox News when they did a 4 part series on the largest spy ring ever uncovered in America can be used to spy on Americans. So you might ask yourself, being Bush and his comrades already have the capability to monitor phone calls, and are, what were they really up to?
I would say, based on my experience and based on what other people have said about this, along with other factors, that the Bush administration through their warrantless wiretapping program are more than likely trying to legitimize what they have been doing all along. That is monitoring peoples thoughts without a warrant.
The excuse being used at this time and currently being promoted by the administration and their cronies in the press, is that warrantless searches and spying is necessary in order to keep us safe. They also try to imply that no mater what political party happens to be in power, now or in the future, that this newly granted authority will not be misused.
I am trying to point out, through this article, that these people, no mater who they are, have already misused this technology against American citizens and this has gone on in administration after administration and the dangers that can cause to a free society,
If they could sneak up on those Holiday Island victims that were documented by ABC News 20/20, and others, through stealth, and monitor their thoughts. the question begs to be asked, will they be able to some day sneak up on the rest of the American people?
Perhaps with advancements in this 30+ year old technology they will be able to turn American population into virtual human slaves? That may not be as far out as you think considering that the Washington Post has published a article titled “Mind Games” that claims the military is working on such types of technology. If their telling us about that, through the press and also through official documents such as Air Force 2025, admitting they want a micro chipped society, what else aren’t they telling us about and hiding behind a cloak of national security?
If the whole truth be known, the security they talk about is really security for themselves, their friends, their political cronies and network, for they can use this technology and other power grabs, to enrich themselves, in the hopes of enslaving America and then ultimately the world, through their contrived wars, emergencies, dangers and fear mongering, before more people wake up to their scams, crimes, conspiracies and treason.
Why I Write About This
Basically I am just corroborating what has already been documented to some extent, through ABC News 20/20 and the people they interviewed, and expanding on what they didn’t tell and/or didn’t know at the time, when the stumbled on to what has all the hallmarks of a secret black budget, illegal, covert, unethical, operation.
Hopefully by me writing about this, and telling what I know, it will encourage others that have knowledge about this matter to also step forward. I also hope that other truth seekers also research this matter for themselves and hopefully help expose what’s really going on and/or expand on this research, because this is one of the most vital issues of are time and has enormous implications. Perhaps by exposing their evil plot it will help make the world a safer, better place, not only for us here, but future generations yet to come.
I am just a average Joe, that loves life, it’s wonders, beauty, freedom, liberty, privacy and our beloved Republic, and expect good, honest government, and do not like or appreciate other peoples sorry attempt to get me caught up in their ongoing frauds and conspiracies against myself and/or others, by keeping quite about this.
What qualifies me to tell you what I think about all this and give you my opinion about this, is the fact that I saw the ABC News 20/20 show documenting what I consider to be a slam dunk, government, black budget operation dealing with the subject at hand - That I was at Holiday Island in 1981 - And that I have off and on over the last 26 or so years had to deal with these people, their network, secret society, or whatever you want to call them.
Have Your Say: Sneak Attack On America - New World Order Style
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
An alternative look at the New World Order
Wednesday, July 4th, 2007
By Adrian Salbuchi
RINF Alternative News
THE RULES OR WORLD POWER:
Rule No. 1 -
Today’s world is ruled not by Justice, nor by the pursuit of the Common Good, nor by International Treaties, nor - much less - by Morals and Ethics.
Today’s world is ruled by POWER.
I. The Flux and Flow of Power
When we speak of Power, we do so with a Capital “P”, so as to differentiate it from mere force or blind strength that have no common goals and objectives. Power, in our view, is the true and concrete ability to plan, promote, organize, and carry out actions, the result of which invariably lead to specific and desired Objectives and Goals in the short, medium and long terms.
This definition thus spans political, economic, industrial, financial, business, commercial, technological, cultural, psychological and (usually, in the last instance) military factors. The exercise of Power requires coordinated and intelligent use of all resources at hand - whether they be plentiful or lean, physical or abstract, concrete or potential - with the view of achieving those concrete Objectives and Goals.
It may very well happen that an individual, or an organization, or a Nation may have great Power at its disposal, and yet, if they do not know how to organize and wield it properly with a Vision for the future, they may spend it rashly and even end up quickly loosing it altogether. Symmetriacally, it may also occur that an individual, organization or Nation may have little Power at hand, and yet know how to best organize and make efficient and creative use of it in a successful and forward-looking way, thus growing and concentrating such Power in a relatively short time.
In fact, Power is never permanently owned by any individual, organization or Nation. At most, an individual, organization or Nation may have Power flow through their hands for a while until such time as some other individual, organization or Nation proves more capable and creative, or is stronger-willed to use, develop, and consolidate such Power in their hands. Then, like water, it will automatically flow to such new Powerholders having the talent and audacity to conquer Power. Because Power is never given as a gift; it is always won by conquest. Often, such “conquest” merely consists in seeing a new circumstance or unexpected opportunity before others do, and understanding how to best take advantage of it and thus acting accordingly. In such cases, conquering Power means being in the right place, at the right time, and doing the right thing: with calm, alert and ready to act. It goes without saying that the conquest of Power is remarkably similar to the strategic mindset necessary to win a game of chess.
Power is elusive. It fluxes and flows pretty much like sea waves or, better still, like ocean waves and tides. Every Nation, organization or community can take advantage of these “waves” if they properly assess the opportunities they represent at different times and places and in varying circumstances. If they mistakenly allow such opportunities to pass by, or if they do not understand the intrinsic dynamics and logic of Power, they may end up getting themselves drowned by a sudden wave not properly foreseen or, on the contrary, they may end up stranded high and dry during ebb tide. It’s like the difference between being at the railway station and boarding the train as it is about to leave, or arriving a mere 15 seconds too late when the train just left… A mere 15 second time difference, but what a difference in the outcome!
Harnessing the flux of Power as its waves flow through the ocean of historical space and time, requires that we understand that even physical oceanic waves are, in actual fact, virtual: although with each wave it is ocean water that rises, falls and breaks on the beach, the actual waves travelling upon the surface of the water are themselves, however, abstract and intangible - you cannot isolate a wave or hold one in your hand as you can with water. This is something that all good surfers know… Come to think of it, the conquest and use of Power has a lot in common with surfing: a dangerous staying balanced, a perilous not falling off the board, a flexible controlling of speed, direction and pitch. I.e., we need to literally “ride the wave” or, as Italian philosopher Julius Evola once said, “ride the tiger…”. Power also seems to have a feline, hunting style and gait to it.
Correspondingly, a key success factor seems to lie on know well we use whatever Power we have. In an intelligent, proper, efficient and creative manner rather than just throwing its weight around in “bulk”. At times,. it may even happen that having too much Power can even become a handicap for a Nation, an organization or an individual, as this leads to complacency, sluggishness, inefficiency, mistakes and bad habits. Too much Power made the Roman Emperors grow fat, greedy and soft-bellied; too much Power made the Nomenklatura become too cowardly to rise up and defend the Soviet State; and too much Power may end up making a half-witted US President irresponsibly misuse it to burn others to a crisp, and in the process, also burn his own house down. An old adagio says, “Those whom the Gods wish to destroy, they first turn mad…”
French philosopher Michel Foucault once observed that “Power is and must be assessed as something that flows and operates, to somehow say it, as a chain. It is never localized here or there, it is never in the hands of someone, it cannot be hoarded up as riches or as a personal asset. Power functions and is exercised through networks and grids, the passageways of which not only force individuals to circulate but also lead them into situations where they must suffer Power and exercise Power; they are never Power’s inert target or accomplice; rather, they are its element of re-composition. In other words, Power does not apply to individuals; rather it flows through individuals.”[2]
Rule No. 2 -
The quantity of Power in the hands of individuals, organizations and Nations is an important factor. However:
The quality of Power - reflecting creativity, ability and knowledge on the part of those wielding it - is an even more important factor.
II.Carpe Diem! - Seize the Day!
Today, the Argentine people and other peoples in our Region suffer serious and dangerous national circumstances which, in our case at least, force us to ask ourselves whether Argentina will survive as a sovereign Nation in the decades to come. Irrespective of the fact that our Ruling Class - in Government, in the opposition, in the media and in our universities and corporate world - does not seem to properly acknowledge the seriousness of this situation - perhaps they all prefer to turn a blind eye to this - the truth is that today Argentina faces its “to be or not to be”; i.e., we run the risk of loosing our historical Destiny as a Nation. In fact, whether we realize it or not, Argentina is deploying the pieces in what no doubt is the decisive - perhaps the last - “game of chess” that we have yet to play on the global geopolitical chessboard. And this is happening right now! Not tomorrow, nor the day after. As with all end games, it is absolutely essential for us that we win, because this time around we will not have a second chance.
Today, Argentina is a defeated Nation. Whether we like it or not; and admit and accept it. This is the raw truth: in the decades after World War II, we were defeated on the geopolitical battleground to become a powerful Regional Power; then in the seventies we were defeated on the political battleground by communist terrorist organizations; and, finally in 1982, we were defeated on the military battleground in the Malvinas-Falklands War by the combined forces of the capitalist plutocracy entrenched in the United Kingdom and the US. Three lost battles, no doubt. However, we have not yet lost the war…
Argentina’s national crisis has much in common with the grave crises that other great nations of the world have had to face in modern times, irrespective of ideological considerations: Power has no ideology. Two examples: Germany after the First World War in 1918 / 1919, and France when it was invaded and sliced-up by Germany in 1940. Both countries had lost key battles, however neither had yet lost their wars. It is enlightening to see how these two great nations recovered from temporary defeat and, like the mythical Phoenix, were re-born from their own ashes.
Argentina has much in common with the German Social Democratic “Weimar” Republic[3] of 1919: a nation defeated, prostrated and raped by its enemies; a decadent, soft-bellied and battered country in the hands of a weak ruling class, trapped in the invisible chains of Usury. Argentina also has a lot in common with France in 1940: invaded by the armed forces of its implacable German enemy. Nevertheless, Germany and France, each in their own time and in their own ways, overcame circumstantial defeat. Each did so with the very lean resources then at their disposal, and inspired by a clear Vision of what had to be done, how, when and why it had to be done, and who could do it - under very different circumstances, each finally got up on their own feet and had the courage to reconquer their lost National Power. What they later did with it is another story; the fundamental point is how they conquered lost Power.
In order for that same invigorating effect to arise in Argentina, we first need to become fully aware of, cultivate and nurture a key factor that comes before a people can even begin to dream about National reconstruction and sovereignty. That key factor is fundamentally emotional and even irrational and is having a clear collective will to Power. This means the population needs to be shaken from its slumber. In the words of Argentine political science professor Alberto Tandurella, “the will to Power is an essential and vital factor that projects… as a solid link spanning time and space over our thinking and cultural fibre. When necessary - i.e., in times of grave emergency or danger challenging national survival - it is also the task of philosophers, thinkers, scientists, politicians, government officers and citizens as a whole. This phenomenon generates, as a sort of existential seal, a specific world view when confronted with contingencies arising from the complex myriad of circumstances and factors affecting the life of a nation, and its interaction with other world players”.[4]
Thus, Argentina still has a chance to recover that slice of Power that may be rightfully ours. In actual fact, looking at our country’s decadence over the past one hundred and fifty years, we can certainly say that this process entails a veritable re-conquest - i.e., more than just building national Power from scratch - because Argentina once did climb to loftier heights, from which we then collapsed to the depths where we lie today.
The first inevitable step that we need to take consists in understanding how and why we fell so badly. It is all about once again becoming inspired by fundamental Values that so many Argentinians now seem to have forgotten and even lost. It is all about recovering the sense of National Dignity that surges from deep love for one’s Country, its People and Land. As Argentine researcher and political science expert Dénes Martos eloquently states in his essay, Los Espartanos (The Spartans): “Nothing in life is given in any lasting manner if we do not fight to defend it. And in order to be able to fight with some degree of success, one must be organized for combat. Otherwise, the enemy’s first strike will generate a stampede amongst our own forces. And there will always be an enemy. Especially in politics. This is just the way things are, and this is how things have always been, even though many people will try to deny it. Today, there seems to be a veritable plague of people who think that in order not to have any enemies, all you need do is declare your sincere intention of not wanting to have any enemies. That, however, is ridiculous. More than ten thousand years of history contradict such fantasies. It is like trying to stop urban crime by declaring your honest intention of not putting up a fight if you are mugged on the streets.”[5]
If we succeed in making this quantum leap of almost magical effects and awaken our Will to National strength, then we will not only be treading the road towards a promising future, but we will also be building a Recovery Model that might help other countries and peoples in our Region who are in a similar predicament. This will undoubtedly entail strenuous efforts, generous sacrifice, and much “blood, sweat and tears” on our part as this all entails founding a new sovereign Republic to replace the quasi-colonial administration we presently suffer. Once again, we have the example of France which in the mid-fifties overcame its grave national crisis when Charles De Gaulle cast the decadent post-war Fourth French Republic into History’s garbage bin, and founded in its place today’s very successful Fifth French Republic. For us the time draws near when we too will have to break the bonds of domination and found a Second Argentine Republic, having true Sovereignty, Justice and Dignity.
Such a Second Argentine Republic would not be an end in itself. Rather, it would represent an initial milestone on the road towards true continental integration and independence for the Central and South American countries. Even beyond our Region, we would set a good example for other suffering nations, in a world that is quickly slipping into an abyss of increasing violence, despair and injustice. Inevitably, the half billion people living in Central and South America will need to come together as one Nation under a unified Sovereign State, if we are to defend our collective interest with sufficient Power to neutralize the New World Order’s Global Leviathan set on world conquest.
Rule No. 3 -
The Rule of Power is a rule of iron, hard and cold:
Those having Power use it to promote their Objectives and Interests.
Those not having Power have no choice but to suffer the consequences of the actions taken by those having the Power to promote their Objectives and Interests.
To conclude: the roots of Argentina’s dramatic situation lie not in the fact that we are not right or that what out People want is not correct. Rather, our predicament stems from the fact that, as a Nation, we lack the necessary Power, in its widest definition, to achieve what we need. In other words, we need to build the Power necessary to achieve our collective Destiny.
III. Key Factors that Define World Power
Let us begin by identifying and defining Power in order to better understand its true nature, internal dynamics and logic:
1) Whence does Power come from?
Power shows itself in a myriad of ways, but there are four basic roots or foundations on which it rests:
· Physical Force - I.e., the concrete ability to physically force and overcome another party’s will or desire (i.e., “fists and guns”).
Based on: Military and armed force, irrespective of whether legal/legitimate or not. This type of Power enables direct control over entire populations and their social structures. Physical violence or the threat thereof, is used to achieve results and objectives and thus becomes a primary instrument of control and domination.
· Money - I.e., the control and command of a Nation’s economic, monetary and financial systems (i.e., “money makes the world go around…”)
Based on: Money, finance, banking, currency, usury and the legislation that turns the grossest financial and economic excesses into “legal procedure”, even though morally wrong and ethically illegitimate. This requires seizing a high degree of control over a Nation-State, its government and, most important, buying out its Ruling Class. Money Power allows indirect control of all social life through the arbitrary management and distortion of republican institutions and organizations, which are commandeered to serve their interests. The social fabric is eroded by promoting disproportionate greed for profit, and lack of social solidarity, through gross corruption and buying of key people’s wills. Money Power finances politicians, political parties, election campaigns, the media, lobbies and PAC’s, and ends up controlling and literally acquiring a whole army of local players.
· Knowledge - I.e., the control of ideas, paradigms and human motivation (i.e., “having brains”).
Based on: Intellectual and cultural Power exercised through models of thought, language, history, philosophy, science and technology, culture and religion. As a planning process, this means the ability to identify coming risks and threats, and taking advantage of opportunities. It implies exercising psychological operations - Psyops - in order to align its own “friendly” forces (i.e., “public opinion”), and weaken adversarial “enemy” forces. Often, if no proper enemy is at hand, then one is suitably invented.
· Charisma - I.e., the control of collective feeling based on emotional and intuitive factors emanating from “special” and irreplaceable individuals and leaders. In the recent past, we have seen political, social and religious leaders exercise the Power of personal Charisma, irrespective of ideological considerations. For example, Mahatma Gandhi, Charles De Gaulle, Benito Mussolini, Vladimir Lenin, Martin Luther King, Adolf Hitler, Ayattolah Khomeini, Winston Churchill, Mao Zedong, J. Nehru, Gamal Nasser, Fidel Castro, José Antonio Primo de Rivera, Juan Perón, and many others.
Based on: The personalities of key individuals that seem to tap into collective unconscious forces, generating a Vision of a desirable and inspiring future, turning it into something not only possible, but necessary as well. Strongly based on the inspiration of Hope and Faith.[6]
2) Power Management
Power has two key coordinates that must be properly understood, controlled and managed: Power has a Space coordinate and Power has a Time coordinate, reflected as territorial/physical control, and control of continuity in time.
Space reflects the “here and now” of Power at any given moment. For example, right now the United States is a powerful nation, Exxon is a powerful corporation and the Rockefellers are a powerful family. However, this can all quickly change, for better or for worse, in the Time coordinate as other challenging players appear on the scene which may result in other countries, corporations or families becoming powerful and even displacing the US, Exxon or the Rockefellers.
The Time coordinate, in turn, is fundamental as it addresses the need to preserve, consolidate and increase Power, to which end not only do the direct interests of those in power need to be (pre)served (i.e., consolidate and grow corporate, family or national Power), but also medium and long term plans need to be implemented in order to guarantee a consistent, coherent and sequential continuity, irrespective of all imaginable contingencies, spanning decades, even centuries into the future.
3) The Different Dynamics of Power
Another key factor in Power Management lies in the ability to implement effective, far-reaching and lasting self-correcting processes in such areas as finance, economics, social sciences, geopolitics, geoeconomics, science & technology, and many other disciplines. To a great extent, this can be achieved by introducing “embedded paradigms” [7] into the collective mind, in such a way that that when these processes interact, they automatically orient themselves towards the desired ends in a highly “spontaneous”, automatic and self-correcting way. Nowadays, the New World Order confronts us with a veritable System of Thought, as international law professor at Cambridge University Phillip Allott recently explained when he said that “democracy and capitalism are systems that contain their own values, which means that in order to participate in them, man must accept those values; even transcendental values on such matters as Justice, happiness and the like. Citizens must therefore give up their minds to the system, which is not political or economic, but rather a system of consciousness. Democracy and capitalism are systems of consciousness. People do not realize this but their minds are determined by these systems… This is why democracy and capitalism represent a totalitarian regime. Totalitarianism means total control of Society… and there has never been a totalitarianism as strong as today’s. The totalitarianism of the democratic and capitalist systems is so sophisticated, that even our desires are determined by the System. We desire that which Society wishes that we desire.” (Interview in the Buenos Aires daily “La Nación” 20-Jun-07).
Within this scope, we need to further understand that financial, economic and social processes all have very different dynamics and development speeds. This is one of the major causes of the violence, friction and conflict in today’s world:
1. Finance - Thanks to modern IT and Communications technologies, finance can move instantly, as financial operators and players the world over speculate, invest, divest, migrate from one type of financial instrument to another, jump from one market to another one on the far side of the world, from one currency to another, using extremely powerful computers, softwares and telecom networks that span the entire planet. This Financial Overworld today handles almost 3 trillion dollars (u$s 3.000.000.000.000!!) a day (yes, every day!). 97% of these funds serve that which Peter Drucker calls “the symbolic economy” [8], i.e., speculation and Usury, and not the True Economy of Work and Production. If we annualize this financial turnover, we reach unimaginable figures of the order of 600 to 900 trillion dollars! And yet, annual global Gross Domestic Product (i.e., the economies of all countries and players added up), give us a figure of only around 40 to 50 trillion dollars, i.e., ten to fifteen times less. Therefore, Finance is ten to fifteen times greater than the real Economy which means it is far larger than what the economy actually needs.
Dynamics: The Virtual economy of Finance operates in terms of seconds or fractions of a second, and has become highly automated. In today’s financial markets, stocks, commodities and foreign exchange traders have computers that automatically buy and sell, based on minimum and maximum variation limits and levels programmed into their computers. This instantaneous power of action and reaction, has allowed Finance to usurp a higher place than what it should legitimately have, enabling it to control the better part of all human activities in all corners of the world. Today, Finance is king and reigns supreme. However, it is a bastard and illegitimate king that reigns over us all…
2. The Economy - Economic processes run at a much slower pace than finance, because building cars, airplanes, and TV sets; manufacturing cookies and clothing; rendering services, erecting plants and factories; training and recruiting people (and later firing them!); purchasing raw materials, distributing products and services, and everything else generated by the Real Economy through Work and Production, takes time. Much more time.
Dynamics: Depending on what you are manufacturing or building, economic processes can take hours, days, weeks or even years to complete. The Economy thus operates at a much slower speed than Finance.
3. Society - Collective processes governing changes in mental paradigms, ethical values, social usage, customs, habits and styles, etc., are much slower still. Today, we are experiencing unprecedented social and cultural “re-engineering” on an planetary scale geared on altering social and cultural behaviour patterns that affect fundamental Values, on which Family, Community, Religion, Nation and Culture have been based for untold thousands of years. The two main instruments used to promote this dramatic Social Change are:
Schools - Elementary and high schools, and the University - where the educational content on social, cultural and political matters has been distorted, contaminated, dismembered, eroded, replaced, emptied out and even turned upside down, in all manners necessary to accommodate the Educational System to meet the goals, objectives, values and needs of the type of mental profile New World Order planners seek.
The Media - Television, radio, op-ed editorials, mainstream press, the show business industry - which for the most part promotes a demoralizing, destructive, perverse and unnatural message - seem inspired by Age-old methods reminiscent of the latter days of the Roman Empire, with the “added value” of today’s technologies: i.e., panem et circenses - bread and circus. All of this is sustained by the proliferation of blood games. brutality, sexual orgies, drugs, gambling and an all-pervasive sense of collective emptiness, vulgarity and stupidity. The media also serve to consume the population’s free and unstructured time between work and sleep, so as to ensure that there is little truly creative social activity amongst the bulk of the people.
Dynamics: Social and cultural change is very slow indeed, and needs to be measured in terms of decades, generations and even centuries.
4) Who wields Power?
Firstly, a clear distinction must be made between Real Power and Formal Power:
· Real Power - Centered on proactive structures and organizations driving concrete and effective political, economic and social decisions inside a Nation, a region, social class, or public or private institution, or a combination of these. Its effectiveness is not so much given by the actual location of the Power base, but rather by its continuity in time, that allows it to perpetuate and increase its capacity for Domination.
Structures wielding Real Power are political, economic, financial, technological, cultural and psychological in nature, or a combination thereof. They can maintain a high or low public profile, depending on strategic convenience; i.e., they may involve a highly wealthy but elusive individual, such as a Rockefeller, or a highly powerful public figure like the president of the United States.
Real Power structures of the New World Order drive causes which, although not normally visible, nevertheless generate highly visible results
· Formal Power - Centered on formal structures that through the years have become merely reactive executors of the strategies and decisions emanating from the Real Power structures. These include highly visible structures, such as major multinational corporations, transnational banks. multimedia monopolies, key universities and certain posts in the governments of all countries in the world (i.e., presidents, cabinet members, legislators, judges, governors and advisors). Regarding the latter, this process reflects the gross erosion of the sovereignty of the modern Nation-State.
Formal Power structures of the New World Order implement high-profile visible effects that have their roots in the usually non-visible causes emanating from Real Power structures
Rule No. 4 -
Real Power structures of the New World Order drive causes which, although not normally visible, nevertheless generate highly visible results when implemented by Formal Power structures. Symmetrically:
Formal Power structures of the New World Order implement high-profile visible effects that have their roots in the usually non-visible causes emanating from Real Power structures.
We can thus conclude that on a worldwide basis Power has been, for the most part, “privatized”, i.e., the reins of Control have migrated towards eminently economic and financial structures. This is what Alvin Toffler back in 1990 described as a veritable Powershift. Consequently, its structure and dynamics have great analogy with the structure and internal logic of private economic organizations, i.e., traditional private capitalist corporations - more specifically, British and US corporate structures[9] - where Power is distributed into three vertical and hierarchical levels:
· Shareholders - They are the true owners and controllers of the Corporation, even if they seldom or ever become involved in its economic and administrative processes. They may even be totally ignorant of fundamental aspects of the Corporation’s inner workings because they seldom contribute anything of real value or work to the Corporation. Rather, they focus on speculation and use of expected returns and evolution of their shareholdings in the stock markets. I.e., they focus on and prioritize Finance, not Economic Production;
· Directors - They are the people representing shareholders and supervising/overseeing the correct, efficient and proper operation of the Corporation in accordance with their interests and local legislation. They are accountable for corporate strategic planning to ensure maximum growth of present and future stock yields, with minimum expenses. This makes the capitalist corporation a basically antisocial structure. Lastly,
· Managers - They are accountable for the day-to-day running of the Corporation. Normally, they are trained and hard working specialists, who add value to the Corporation through their talent and organizational skills and discipline affecting all employees, suppliers and business partners.
We can summarize these three hierarchical segments as follows:
Table 1 - Structure of the Private Capitalist Corporation
Hierarchichal Level
Chosen By
Functions
Power Base
Shareholders
Self-Appointed (they are the owners…)
As shareholders, they own the Corporation and have the last word on all key strategic decisions.
They are sovereign in the widest sense of the word.
They focus on and prioritize Finance, not Economic Production;
Loyalty: to themselves and their peers
As legal owners of Company stock, their power is guaranteed by on-going legislation.
Power emanates from the ownership of money (economic strength), bringing with it social prestige, often associated with certain segments and family dynasties.
In the US and Europe, Rockefeller, Hearst, Rothschild, Morgan, Ford, Harriman, Warburg, Buffet, Soros, Carnegie, Rhodes, Agnelli, Ford; in Argentina: Fortabat, Bemberg, Perez-Companc, Mitre, Bulgheroni, Rocca, Macri, Noble.
Directors
Shareholders
They look after the interests of the Corporation with the objective of maximizing profits;
They approve Operational Plans (i.e., 1 year ahead) and Strategic Plans (i.e., 3 to 5 or more years ahead) sub-mitted to them by Manage-ment.
They focus on both Finance and Economic Production, as they distribute profits; approve investments; supervise operations.
Loyalty: to Shareholders and their peers
Their power is delegated to them by shareholders.
They are intimately linked to shareholders’ economic and social interests.
Normally, majority shareholders are also members of the Board of Directors and hold top corporate offices. .
All change in shareholder structure may immediately bring about a change in how the Board of Directors is made up
Managers
Directors
They prepare and execute Strategic and Operational Plans once approved by the Board of Directors.
They manage and run the Corporation on a day-to-day basis
They focus on Economic Production.
Loyalty: to the Market (i.e., whoever offers them the best Remuneration Package)
Their Power is delegated to them by the Board of Directors.
Management skills, talent and know-how (i.e., markets, technologies, resources, business contacts, etc) give them power to successfully carry out Action Plans approved by the Board of Directors based on the Objectives of Shareholders.
Managers and their key staff may thus enjoy economic and social benefits (compensation, employee benefitrs, social prestige, job security, retirement plans, health plans and fringe benefits such as company cars, plush offices, secretaries, travel and entertainment expenses, etc).
Their results-linked income also gives them the opportunity of rising within the company hierarchy, through stock options, thus enabling them to become, themselves, directors and shareholders.
Rule No. 5 -
The greatest privatization of our time, is the Privatization of Power on planetary and national scales.
A good illustration of the Privatization of Power can be found in the way that the basic trappings of Private Power can be seen as structurally implicit in Government Power structures (i.e., in the public sector referring to the Nation-State).
As indicated, we already live under a World Government which we do not, for the most part, recognize as such, simply because the characteristics we normally tend to associate with the concept of “government” are not immediately visible. Rather, today’s World Government has more in common with traditional Private Power structures. As Power has become essentially privatized, then it logically follows that the World Government we live under today is also of a private nature. This is the basic ideology that forms the very foundations of Globalization, i.e., that Power is Private.
Rule No. 6 -
Today, we have World Government. However, since World Power has been privatized, the corollary is that the World Government running our planet is also, basically, a private entity or system.
If we observe the public Power structure in Argentina, for example, and compare and extrapolate it with the three-fold division of Power that governs modern private corporations and its hierarchical structure, then we can more easily understand where the true causes of Argentina’s (and many another country’s too!) decadence lie. Table 2, below, describes the way Private Power has distorted public institutional structures so much out of shape, that it reflects and becomes functional to Private Power structures.
In other words, Real Power (i.e., private Power) more or less conditions and controls Formal Power structures (i.e., public Power), from where emanate today’s dysfunctions referring to the “division of powers” on which “democracy” is allegedly based:
Table 2: Comparison of how National Public Power is based on Private Power Structures.
Private Power Structure Levels
Public Power Structure Levels
Scope and Characteristics
Shareholders
Upper Level Decisions
(the “Owners”):
· The “Imperium” (Global)
· Private New World Order Power Structures.
Geostrategic;
· Long-term planning;
· Private (in its upper levels);
· Anti-democratic.
Directors
Medium Level Decisions
(the “Deciders”):
· ”Potestas”, i.e., traditionally, the “Senate” (also Global)
· Power centers making the “wheel of World Power” turn
Strategic-Operational;
· Medium Term;
· Private (mid-levels);
· Non-democratic (i.e., neutral).
Managers
Lower Level Decisions
(day-to-day “Operators”):
· “Auctoritas” -
· Government and Branches of the Nation-state: Executive, Legislative, Judiciary.
· “The President” as general manager
Tactical-Operational;
· Short Term;
· Public;
· Formally, “democratic”.
As we can see, National Power in a country such as Argentina only lies in Lower Level decisions (i.e., the President, Congress, etc). Medium and Upper Level Decision levels lie outside of our country, and today we exert no control over them, even though they permanently affect us profoundly. A similar structure can be found in the majority of countries throughout the world.
Let us further describe these concepts:
Upper Level Decisions (i.e., the “Owners” of the world)
In the private corporate world, these are in the hands of Shareholders. In the public world under the New World Order, this is what is traditionally called Imperium (in the imperial Roman sense of the word). Except in industrialized nations like the US, UK, Russia, China and France, national governments have little or no access to this upper decision level where we find the true “owners of the world” wielding Real Power. They are coordinated by and grouped around the following major axis:
· Think Tanks - A small and highly sophisticated worldwide network of geostrategic planning centers or think tanks - the “Worlds Mastermind” as we have elsewhere described this - most notably, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg Group, Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA), Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, World Economic Forum, American Enterprise Institute (AEI), Group of Thirty, Brookings Institution, The Heritage Foundation, Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS), Hudson Institution, Cato Institute, Tavistock Institute, Hoover Institute, amongst other think tank organizations [10]. In our Latin American Region in general, and in Argentina in particular, we can also mention the Americas Society / Council of the Americas, Consejo Argentino para las Relaciones Internacionales (CARI, Argentina), and the Inter-American Dialogue, amongst others. They plan out the long-terms development of complex political, economic, financial, monetary, technological and cultural processes, integrating them within solid structures and complex models for domination on national, regional and global levels.
· Dynastic Families, wielding immense economic, financial, social and industrial power for many generations and even centuries: (i.e., Rothschild, Rockefeller, Morgan, Schiff, Warburg, Weill, Lazard, Harriman, Mellon, Agnelli, Montefiore, Carnegie, Ben-Laden, Bush, and others). In Argentina, Fortabat, Bemberg, Bunge, Noble, Alemann, Mitre, and Macri families.
· Royal Dynasties and Noble bloodlines - the so-called “Black Nobility” who have wielded social, economic, religious and military Power for many centuries (the Crowns of Britain, Holland, Spain, Belgium, Monaco and the “uncrowned nobilities” in republics like France, Germany, Austria, Italy and Portugal). They closely tie in with their noble counterparts amongst Arabian sheikdoms and “uncrowned” nobilities in the United States and the Far East.
· Religious Organizations - Political structures of certain religious organizations (i.e., the Church of England, the Lutheran and Calvinist Churches; in the US Evangelical and Pentecostal religious organizations, many of which are staunchly pro-Zionist for mostly religious reasons, the Jewish Sanhedrin, and certain key political structures within the Vatican State);
· Supranational political structures: Freemasonry, International Zionism, International Social Democracy, International Christian Democracy.
· Organized Crime - Although illegitimate and illegal, these are organizations with which legitimate Real Power Structures need to interact and reach “working agreements” with. This encompasses various Maffias, arms dealers, drug cartels, money launderers, opium, cocaine and heroine producers (in such places as Bolivia, Colombia, Afghanistan and Thailand), and their respective financial dealers (located in major financial markets). I.e., the New World Order power structure encompasses agreements and pacts made with major Organized Crime structures, which are willing to abide by and respect a set of “unwritten rules and guidelines”. When any such criminal organization runs amuck, then we see highly violent actions taken against them: e.g., Manuel Noriega taken out in Panama; the Medellin Cartel destroyed in Colombia; Slobodan Milosevich formally tried for “war crimes” although he was head of a major opium financial clearing house in Belgrade; or even Saddam Hussein who was until 1991 a functional New World Order organized crime player. Maffia-like “codes of behaviour” must be agreed and respected. We very emphatically point out that the natural interface between legitimate “legal” interests and “illegal” Organized Crime is to be found in the powerful “State within a State” intelligence services of the United States (i.e., the CIA, Central Intelligence Agency), Britain (i.e., MI6 - Military Intelligence 6, Foreign) and Israel (i.e., Mossad), amongst others, which by their very nature as secret organizations, have the necessary ambivalence, legal coverage and discretion to be able to deal covertly with organized crime, outside the media and press limelight and, more importantly, beyond the reach of on-going legislation.
Not surprisingly, there are three very similar types of organizations under the New World Order in which, once you have become a member and insider, you are never allowed to leave (except inside a coffin): the Intelligence Agencies, Freemasonry and “Maffia” organizations.
Time frame: Long term (i.e., 25, 50, even 100 years).
Scope: Geostrategic / Global.
Profile: Discrete and deeply un-democratic, even anti-democratic.
Power Base: The New World Order Real Power Overworld. They are above any and all law, legitimacy or justice; solely bound by the “unwritten rules, guidelines and codes of behaviour”. They are also above all nations, even the most powerful, whose Nation-States - notably the United States of America and the United Kingdom - have been literally commandeered by this extremely powerful supra-national overworld structure.
Medium Level Decisions (the “Deciders”)
In the private corporate world, these are in the hands of Directors. In the public world under the New World Order, this is what is we could call the Traditional “Senate”. or the Roman” Potestas”, made up of major players: i.e., multinational corporations, trans-national financial institutions, multilateral financial entities, monopoly multimedia operators, major universities and specific sectors of all national governments (notably in the areas of foreign relations, the economy and defense), in the United States and in other countries. In fact, except in industrialized nations like the US, UK, Russia, China and France, national governments have little or no access to this upper decision level where the “Deciders of the world” wield Real Power.
They direct and channel specific resources towards financing political election campaigns for the benefit of those political parties and candidates who have been screened, pre-selected and approved, maintaining a credible balance and image in order to ensure that the electorate always have the (albeit, false) impression that “the people elect those who govern them”. Major local and foreign corporations and trans-national financial institutions are the primary source of such electoral financing. Monopolized multimedia organizations, in turn, execute intensive psychological action campaigns - Psyops and even Psyops Warfare - in the short term (e.g., right before an election), whilst the educational system executes medium and long term psychological action, in order to ensure that the population at large believe, accept and embrace the so-called “democratic system”, and that they question little or nothing regarding its flagrant internal contradictions, imbalances and outright lies.
Time Frame: Medium Term (i.e., 5, 10, 15 years).
Scope: Strategic.
Profile: Discrete, non-democratic or neutral regarding the democratic concept (they may hypocritically promote democracy in the public political stage, whilst they will staunchly resist all ideas of “democratic contagion” spilling over into the private world (e.g., democratization of Finance and the Economy).
Power Base: The globalized financial structure; they promote and operate within the legislative systems that best suit their needs and enable them to promote their interests, irrespective of whether or not such interests are legitimate. I.e., legality without legitimacy.
Lower Level Decisions (Day-to-day “Operators”)
In the private Corporate world, these are in the hands of Managers. In the public world under the New World Order, this can be described as “Autorictas” - i.e., “the authorities”: governments, republican institutions, law enforcement, armed forces, security forces, controlling and supervisory entities and the like. In our example, this would include The President as chief of the Executive Branch, and also applies to the Legislative and Judicial branches of public government.
A nation’s president - whether it be George W Bush in the US or Nestor Kirchner in Argentina - is thus limited in his scope of action to short-term management decisions limited by their terms in office (usually, just four years with one possible re-election term, clearly too short a timespan for implementing solid continuity of Power). His or her term in office arises from public election processes which, although formally “democratic”, usually end up being “fought” amongst a small group - usually just two - pre-selected candidates who have been extensively canvassed, screened, investigated, and questioned until finally approved and accepted by the “Directors” and “Shareholders” of the New World Order. For it is the latter who actually control the entire election process, by financing extremely costly election campaigns and managing media-based psychological operation campaigns. This involves very well paid and duly “aligned” talk-show hosts, op-ed editors, journalists, authors, anchor newspeople and a whole army of polling offices, analysts, academics, and commentators, not to mention the major newspapers, radio and TV networks themselves. The US-based Council on Foreign Relations once very candidly described this process referring to the two major political parties in the US - Republicans and Democrats - by stating that “irrespective of whoever wins the elections, it is we who govern”
Time Frame: Short Term (i.e., 1 to 4 years).
Scope: Operational-Tactical.
Profile: High Public Profile; election-orientated (i.e., formally, “democratic”).
Power Base: “Popular Support” and “public opinion”, which are manifested through carefully staged and directed - at times, even rigged - elections, controlled from more discrete Power levels controlled by the “Directors” and “Shareholders” of the New World Order.
Structure: Executive, Legislative and Judiciary branches of Government. National (Federal), Provincial (State) and Municipal (Local) levels of public government, all duly supplemented by an array of NGO’s, trade unions, political lobbies (local and foreign), PAC’s, think tanks and intermediate organizations of all sorts, shapes and kinds, in a veritable Power network that reaches out into almost every corner of social life. Again, this encompasses criminal organizations, gangs and pressure groups. A good historical example of the latter were the joint efforts between the US Government and the domestic Italian Maffia organizations during the World War II, when they both worked together during the invasion of Italy. The Maffia in the US opposed Benito Mussolini because he had banned them in Italy.
5) Where is Power located?
The Dialectic of Power
Three further dimensions of Power to be kept in mind:
· The relationship that exists between Command and Obedience, which manifests as Order -
This relationship specifically governs all military and militarized organizations where obedience is imposed based on hierarchical rank stemming from universaly accepted Codes of Law and Conduct. The link between Command and Obedience may become more indirect when obedience implicitly arises from pure coersion (i.e., fear and punishment).
An example of this is observed in the modern corporate world where employees necessarily accept and obey orders, rules and measures, irrespective of they fairness, because they know only too well that not doing so, will undoubtedly lead to no career growth, flat salaries and even termination of employment, with the ensuing serious consequences for the well-being of themselves and their families. These “rules” govern not only individual companies but the “labour market” as a whole so anybody leaving one company knows that his next employer will be pretty much the same.
This is explains why a permanent level of unemployment is structurally maintained, because fear of job loss is a powerful instrument of coersion to maintain social order and discipline amongst the work force. In Society, there exist a series of Command and Obedience relationships in the family, in school, at work and in all public and private social behaviour.
· The relationship that exists between Public and Private which manifests as Public Opinion -
We have described this when referring to the privatization of Power. Whilst access to Public Power is achieved through various electoral mechanisms we described, that are based on “arithmetic” or quantitative results (i.e., the winner is whoever gets the highest number of votes), Private Power exerts domination through the generation of currents of public opinion and paradigms of a more qualitative nature, the propagation of which is based on the availability of economic and financial resources.
Additionally, the moment that certain social players have the ability and power to generate public opinion - which is in turn intimately linked with such factors as prestige, credibility and soundness of information sources - they can, if they so wish, tap into a surprising new and powerful Power level that is directly linked with lying. I.e., within specific limits and guidelines (in space and time), these Power factors have the ability to promote their objectives and interests through astute and decided use of lies in matters referring to politics, finance, society, culture and the economy. This is what is traditionally referred to as “propaganda”. If the objective sought happens to be sufficiently important, then Real Power may even risk being caught “red-handed” which is, in itself, a calculated risk as long as this happens after the objective sought has been achieved. Real Power structures may even go so far as to try and “judge” those whom public opinion perceives as “liars” in any particular scandal or affaire, thus rendering the entire process more credible and respectable, leaving few trails behind and thus maintaining the whole process intact and ready…. for the next bout of lies.
This is the time-honoured axiom of the powerful which they themselves describe as the consistent and intelligent use of “Force and Hypocrisy”. Notable recent examples are the invasions of Iraq in 2003 by the United States and the United Kingdom that was based on flagrant and outright lies and misinformation referring to inexistent “Weapons of Mass Destruction” which allegedly allowed Saddam Hussein to “attack London or Washington in 45 minutes”, or the “smoking gun” that could become a “mushroom cloud”, and other similar nonsense and childish lies.
A similar situation can be observed regarding the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, done to allegedly “capture Osama Bin-Laden and defeat Al-Qaeda” in some God forsaken cave in the mountains, when today it has become increasingly clear that the US is not really interested in capturing Osama (a member of the Bin-Laden family, close business partners of the Bush family in the Carlyle Group).
· The relationship that exists between Ally and Adversary, which is manifested in Struggle -
As Politics refer to man’s activities and those of his community regarding Power, its natural scope requires distinguishing between Friends or allies, on the one hand, and Enemies or adversaries on the other[11]. Such allies or adversaries may be of the most varied sort: individual persons, institutions, organizations, Nations and even symbols, ideologies and collective values. One can thus understand the reason why Real Power structures so highly value having the ability of, amongst other things, writing - and even re-writing - history because, as George Orwell so clearly stated in his magnificent 1948 novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four, “whoever controls the past, controls the present; whoever controls the present, controls the future”.
Clearly, “Official History” is also a formidable instrument of Power and Domination which orients, teaches and intimidates public opinion by imposing an intellectual corset which often - especially in matters pertaining to contemporary universal history - take the shape of intellectual terrorism whereby certain historical investigations are banned by law. Making such historical investigations in what the New World Order Establishment considers a “revisionist” frame of mind, could very well end up landing you in jail (at least such is the case in Canada, France, Germany and Austria where academics like British historian David Irving, German researcher Ernst Zuendel and French historian Robert Faurisson have been persecuted and even jailed). We have also experienced this in our own local history in Argentina where president Kirchner himself willingly propagates outright lies referring to Argentina’s attack by extreme left-wing guerrillas in the sixties and seventies, and the violent repression and backlash of the liberal right-wing military in the seventies and eighties.
No doubt other alternative models of thought could be designed to describe and better understand the inner workings of World Power, where it lies, who wields it and how it is used. We describe below a simplified schematic “Wheel of World Power” that merely serves to show where that wheel is taking us all today, and why it inexorably spins in the direction of the present model of “Globalization” or New world Order - with its gross injustices, genocide, frustration, suffering and hunger for untold millions of people throughout the world - and not in other directions leading to more viable and just global systems. For instance, systems geared on achieving the Common Good of Mankind, based on moral values promoted by all the great Religions of the world. I.e., a truly “kindler, gentler world”, so hypocritically expressed by today’s New World Order Establishment.
To better describe this, we will split World Power into six major axes, although that in no way means that that is rigorously correct. The “Wheel of World Power” could just as well be described as consisting of many other numbers of axes, depending on the level of detail and prioritization of sectors one may wish to use.
The “Wheel” of World Power
The greater part of World Power in the New World Order’s present global geopolitical architecture is centered on the following:
· Major Multinational Industrial Corporations - The Fortune 500 in industry, services, distribution, energy, mining, research & development, “defence”, electronics, aerospace, manufacturing, foodstuff, textile, chemical , oil & gas, construction, shipping, engineering, consulting, etc.
· Private Financial Institutions - Commercial and investment inter-and transnational banks, financial consultants, risk-rating societies, stock exchanges, fund managers, insurance and reinsurance companies, pensions and investment funds, hedge funds, etc.
· Multilateral national and supranational entities - The International Monetary Fund(IMF), World Bank (WB), Inter-American Development Bank (IADB), Bank of International Settlements, national central banks, i.e., the Federal Reserve Bank of the US, administrative, economic and monetary entities in the European Union,; the United Nations, and others,
· Universities and Academic Infrastructure - Notably, in the disciplines of political science, international and government relations, and social sciences (i.e., in the US: Harvard, MIT, Columbia, NYU, Princeton, Yale, Johns Hopkins, Chicago, Stanford, Georgetown, amongst others - In the UK: Oxford, Cambridge, London School of Economics).
· Multimedia Monopolies - Newspapers such as The New York Times, Washington Post-Newsweek, International Herald Tribune, CNN-Time Warner, radio and TV networks like ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox News, PBS, weekly magazines as The Economist, Der Spiegel, Le Monde, monthlies and quarterlies like Foreign Affairs, Commentary, The National Interest, Foreign Policy, news agencies like Reuters, Associated Press, Deutsche Presse Agentur, France Press, EFE and others
· Government - Key posts in domestic and foreign policy and in economic, financial and monetary matters. In the US, this would include: the President, Vice-President, secretaries of State, Defence, Treasury, Homeland Security, key embassies, the National Security Council, CIA, FBI, Director of National Intelligence, FEMA, key Congressional commissions, the Military commanders, and others
Central Axis: Private World Government
In order to serve New World Order goals and interests, this “wheel of power” must spin in a certain, specific direction and not go just anywhere. Thus, its true power emanates from the forces steering it from the hub, and that hub is occupied by a discrete - though not secret - tight network of think-tanks and geopolitical planning centers, acting very flexibly and giving each of the major axes of power their specific “libretto”, so to speak, so that each in its own space and time does what it needs to do within a much wider plan spanning the entire globe for decades to come:
As explained above, the most powerful of these think-tanks having a worldwide scope are the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg Group, and a handful of others
Other similar but subordinated entities with regional or more a specific scopes, include the Americas Society-Council of the Americas, Asia Society, Inter-American Dialogue, Consejo Chileno, Consejo Mexicano, Consejo de Estudios Brasileiros, Canadian Institute of International Affairs, and dozens of others. This power structure is highly hierarchical and pyramid-structured. As its operators and players go further down the pyramid they also get further away from the “real picture” and from seeing and understanding what “the other side of the pyramid” is doing, and how that relates to their own actions within the greater scheme of things. As in the intelligence community, the whole model ensures that each member operates on a “need to know” basis. Only those at the pinnacle or very near the top of the pyramid, can have a full bird’s eye view of what is happening, and how everything ties in neatly to a Master Plan. For those having a taste for the symbolic, that’s the Eye Symbol on your One-Dollar bill…
Amongst the subordinated secondary organizations in this network, in Argentina we find the Consejo Argentino para las Relaciones Internacionales (CARI), CEMA, FIEL, Fundación Mediterránea, Centro de Estabilización Financiera (CEF),[12] and the economics and political science faculties in almost all major public and private universities throughout the country, whose job it is to ensure that students become docile gears in this Global Model, and that they never identify the true purpose and inner workings of the New World Order machinery.
Not surprisingly, in these Power centers the same names, institutions and organizations appear time and again. Thus, in spite of the great dispersion and multiplicity of organizations, we fnd certain key individuals in all of them, notably, the Rockefellers, Kissingers, Rothschilds, Soros, Rhodes, Brzezinskis, Greenbergs, and their associates. All of them involve men and women allied by common paradigms, objectives and interests. This guarantees that in spire of this conveniently engineered dispersion, the network itself will always operate in a solid, flexible, coherent and consistent manner, generating powerful results whilst maintaining an elusive and discrete profile.
6) Where is Power going?
We conclude this essay by saying that the New World Order Power Structure we describe, and its effects upon countries in the so-called “Third World” - i.e., throughout Africa, Asia, Central and South America, including Argentina - should be understood as a Global Model maintaining a permanent state of Total War against these regions and countries. This Total War is waged from the Global Power Centers on political, economic, financial, natural resources, technological, military, intellectual and cultural fronts. Above all, it is waged as Psychological Warfare, which is truly the “mother of all wars”, because it represents the ability that the powerful have, of acting upon the collective psyche, both of the groups favourable to their interests, as well as of adversarial or potentially adversarial groups.
Clearly, the Total War we describe has been waged for decades with special intensity against Argentina, due to our country’s recurrent “insubordination” to the needs and wishes of global imperial power in our Region. As far as Argentina is concerned, we thus have two basic options:
· Either we surrender unconditionally, which means that the growing violence against Argentina through swarm-like attacks by the New World Order Power Structure on all fronts will subside, but at the cost of the disappearance of Argentina as a sovereign nation in the medium term (not more than 10 to 15 years from now). Unconditional surrender always carries with it a “ceasefire”, however the ensuing “peace” may turn out to be far worse than the turmoil we presently live in 13], or
· We can organize a true and all-encompassing Defence & Resistance Movement against this Total War being waged against us. This implies bringing together all our creativity, will-power, resources, instruments, intelligence and arms to neutralize and mitigate its adverse effects..
Rule No. 7 -
For there to be Peace, all nations and global players must be sincerely willing to resolve problems and conflicts through non-violent means. However:
For there to be War, you only need one Nation or global player deciding to impose its will on others through violent means.
Argentina is a peace-loving country. For decades, we have been systematically attacked by the forces driving the New World Order using a strategy of Total War, because those forces require free access to the immense natural resources inside our territory.
Argentina thus has only two options: Defence or Surrender. The same holds true for most countries in the world.
What we have described regarding Argentina in this brief essay is, no doubt, also applicable to most other countries in our Region and beyond. Each with its own specific set of circumstances, problems, strengths and weaknesses.
The goal of this essay is to describe how the New World Order Power System works, showing that it is based on War, Usury and Lies, and that countries under fire like Argentina may yet find legitimate ways to defend themselves.
——————————————————————————–
[1] “Historia de la Guerra del Peloponeso”, Edit. Alianza, Madrid 1989, Libro V., párrafo 89, pág. 447. Quoted by Alberto Tandurella in “Globalizacion: su impacto en la evolucion socioeconomica de las naciones” - (Boletín de Lecturas Sociales y Economicas, Universidad Católica Argentina, Año 7, No. 33, oct. 2000).
[2] Seer “Genealogía del racismo” - Editorial Altamira, La Plata, 1936 - quoted by Tandurella in op. Cit.
[3] Weimar Republc is the name the German Republic often used after the First World War when the Social Democratic government declared a new republic in the German city of Weimar.
[4] Op cit.
[5] “Los Espartanos: la Historia de un Pueblo que supo vivir, combatir y morir”, Dénes Martos, La Editorial Virtual, Buenos Aires, 2003. See www.laeditorialvirtual.com.ar.
[6] This ties in with the doctrine of the Archetypes of the Collective Unconcious developed by Swiss psychologist Carl G. Jung, who describes the “incarnation” of certain collective archetypes in exceptional individuals who thus become vehicles for a certain Common Wisdom of incredible power: the Vox Populi; or voice of the people, which the Hindus described as the Avatara…. German philosopher Georg Friedrich Hegel in turn spoke of “World Historical personalities”, who have an “intuition regarding the next step in the collective development of a People” and, like Alexander, Caesar or Napoleon, lead their peoples towards their inexorable Destiny (See “The Philosophy of History”).
[7] We define “Paradigm” as a system of thought and/or values which can trigger specific, subjective and often automatic visions or models regarding a discipline or specialization. Paradigms also form a specific World View - Weltanschauung - and even conform religious dogmas. Often, Paradigms behave more like religious dogmas than rational doctrines.
[8] Peter Drucker, “Postindustrial society”, Editorial Sudamericana, Buenos Aires, 1994.
[9] The origins of which date back to the British East India Company in its imperial headquarters in seventeenth century London.
[10] Extensively described by the author of this essay in his book, “El Cerebro del Mundo: la cara oculta de la globalización”, Ediciones del Copista, 4th. Ed., Córdoba, Argentina 2003.
[11] Seer Carl Schmitt, “El concepto de la política”.
[12] Founded by local economists and political players Miguel Kiegel andDaniel Marx. Marx, in turn, is a founding member together with former US Treasury Secretary (under the Bush Senior Administration) Nicholas Brady, mentor of the so-called “Brady Bonds” mega-swap of the nineties. In addition, then Treasury Under-Secretary David Mulford, is a partner and protector of former economy minister Domingo Cavallo. Cavallo and Marx were two key players in Argentina’s financial meltdown in 2001.
[13] Argentina was militarily defeated by the combined forces of the United Kingdom and the United States in the 1982 Malvinas-Falklands War. Two treaties were signed by former president Carlos Menem and his then Foreign Secretary Domingo Cavallo in Madrid and London in 1990, which can be interpreted as a veritable “Treaty of Versailles” by which Argentina formally surrendered to the US and the UK. These treaties bear great similarity to the obnoxious Treaty of Versailles imposed by the US, Britain and France on a vanquished Germany in 1919. See “Los tratados de paz por la guerra de Malvinas. Hambre y desocupación para los Argentinos”, Julio C. González, Ediciones del Copista, Córdoba, Argentina, 2004.
_______________________________
(*) Adrian Salbuchi is researcher, author and speaker; host of the Buenos Aires talk-show “El Traductor Radial” and founder of the Argentine Second Republic Movement (Movimiento por la Segunda República Argentina) www.eltraductorradial.com.ar. Also www.m2ra.com. He is author of various books in Spanish on international politics, notably, “El Cerebro del Mundo: la cara oculta de la Globalización” (Córdoba, Argentina, 4th Edition, 2003, 472 pages - which translates as “The World’s Mastermind: the Hidden Face of Globalization” - synopsis available at www.globalresearch.ca) and “Bienvenidos a la Jungla: Dominio y Supervivencia en el Nuevo Orden Mundial” (Ediciones Anábasis, Córdoba, Argentina, 2005, 252 pags - translates as “Welcome to the Jungle: Domination and Survival in the New World Order)”. He lives and works in Buenos Aires. Please direct all inquiries to asalbuchi@infovia.com.ar.
This essay is a translation of Chapter One of his book “Bienvenidos a la Jungla: Dominio y Supervivencia en el Nuevo Orden Mundial” (Ediciones Anábasis, Córdoba, Argentina, 2005, 252 pags);
Through the Looking Glass. - COPYLEFT - Copying allowed if the source is indicated. July 2007
Have Your Say: An alternative look at the New World Order
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
Coca Cola Illuminati Symbolism
Sunday, July 1st, 2007
Enlarge picture >>
Enlarge picture >>
Have Your Say: Coca Cola Illuminati Symbolism
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
New World Order Evolving
Friday, June 29th, 2007
By Ivan Simic
RINF Alternative News
The term “*New World Order*” (*Novus Ordo Mundi*) has been used to refer to a new period of history evidencing a dramatic change in world political thought and the balance of power.
When we talk about New World Order we can say that everything is about hegemony and dominance of stronger countries over others. If we look back through history we can recount various attempts of several countries to create a New World Order or some sort of dominance among countries. Some of these attempts was led by great warriors such as, Alexander the Great (Macedonian Empire), Julius Caesar (Roman Empire), Genghis Khan (Mongol Empire), Napoleon Bonaparte (French Empire), Adolf Hitler, among others. From this we can see that every attempt to rule the world was needles and devastating.
We heard many theories and conspiracy theories about the New World Order, some of which include the USA and the UK wanting to form the Federal World Government, or the Illuminati (The People of The Light) believing that they are masterminds behind events that will lead to a New World Order, or that the Freemasons are involved in the conspiracy to create a New World Order, or that international organizations such as the World Bank, IMF, European Union, the United Nations, and NATO are often listed as core NWO organizations, Black helicopters, etc. In my opinion, these theories will never take place because of strong disagreement from Russia, China and Islamic countries.
In regard to the above, in present times, we can see that even more countries are trying to dominate and create some sort of order among themselves by creating Unions and Alliances between them; like European Union, African union, Alliance of the USA, the UK, Australia and Canada, etc.
In the very near future, in order to survive, keep national identity and to maintain economy, costume and culture it is more likely that more Unions and Alliances would be formed to create a New World Order; bigger European Union with new member states such as: Macedonia, Croatia and Turkey. Union of Asian and Eurasian countries Russia, Mongolia, China and India, Union of Islamic countries from Middle East and Central Asia, Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia, stronger unity of African Union, Union of Central and South America; Panama, Colombia, Cuba and Venezuela, and eventually North American Union; USA, Canada and Mexico. After these Unions, we can expect even bigger ones.
My vision is that they are going to look like this.
European Union (EU) led by supreme members Germany and Austria will expand to five more countries Switzerland, Norway, Serbia, Montenegro and Moldova.. It is most likely that the EU will have problems with France and Turkeybecause of the pressure from Muslim countries from the south.
In order to maintain stability in the world, Union of Asia and Eurasia countries (UA) led by Russia, China and India will expand to Ukraine, Georgia, Armenia, Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka and North Korea. South Korea and Japan will try to stay neutral while on the other side Pakistan, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan will try to form some sort of Union among themselves because of historic experience and influence from Russia and India. This Union will create struggle between Middle East and North Africa (MENA) and the UA but eventually will get them back to Russian and Indian embrace.
Because of enormous power of other Unions, Union of Islamic countries will transform it self in Union of Middle East and North Africa (MENA) and led by Iran and Saudi Arabia will enlarge to whole Middle East (except Cyprus and Israel), North Africa, Sudan and Afghanistan. In these circumstances,
Israelwill lose support from the USA and the UK. This Union will be one of strongest unions since it would be directed strictly by religion and desire to preserve their customs; also, it will become economically one of the strongest and one of the most influential Union since there is great number of Muslims in the EU and the USA. Turkey, France and Morocco will be the bridges of MENA to set influence on the EU.
The African Union will get weakened when it loses members from the North but eventually she will form new Sub-Saharan Union (SSU) which will become stronger, and finally place Africa on the right way. Because of the events in North Africa and new MENA Union, SSU will prosper with great economic support from the EU, the UA and Great American Union (GAU).
Union of Central and South America will enlarge to the whole continent and they will join North America to create Great American Union (GAU). The USA will have great influence on other members through Mexico. This Union will be led by the USA in the North and Brazil in the South. This Union will make the USA to concentrate on the American continent and eventually stop supporting the UK and Israel, which will lead to the UKdrawing closer to the EU and Europe; this would push the State of Israel to find a new way out and for the USA to become independent from the two of them.
Countries from Southeast Asia like Singapore, Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines, etc. will become oasis for peace and world’s largest tourist destinations. It is most likely that Japan and South Korea will join them.
The Formation of these Unions will bring many difficulties and misunderstandings; however, Unions will be formed with an objective; desire to compete, to dominate, to parry, to be biggest and some even to survive, regardless of differences in religion, nationality, color of skin, history, culture, among others.
Bigger Unions means bigger desires, desire to be first, to be biggest, to be strongest no matter what. These desires will create disorder among countries, and eventually will create war of the Nations, war that will destroy mankind and mark the beginning of a true world order.
Have Your Say: New World Order Evolving
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .
Related News
- Visitors to Japan to be fingerprinted
- Climate change protest starts tonight
- Anti-G8 activist detained and beaten
- “Bums for Bush” protesters won’t turn the other cheek
- Climate activists vow to stay at camp
Loading ...
Email This Page To A Friend
- Susan Klebold The Columbine Essay - O Magazine
- ID card officials back away from scandal-hit database
- Refugees Increasingly Being Refused Asylum
- Police in Wales have taken DNA samples from more than 55,000 innocent people
- BBC Pays Google For Internet Marketing
- Freedom of Information Act Cost BBC £3m
- U.S. Extends Blackwater Task In Iraq
- District 9 Hits UK
- Internet Marketing - 7 Future Proofing SEO Tips
- Stop the War Coalition: Conspiracy Groups Distraction At Best, Antisemitic At Worst
- News To Your Inbox
- Join The RINF Forum
- Twitter - RINF Forum
- Twitter - Main Newswire
- Add To My Yahoo
- Add To Google
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
Hotels Morecambe
Web Hosting Reviews
Log Splitter
Home based business opportunities
Find Office Chairs
WoW guide reviews
Get Ghillie Suits
Best weight loss pills
Online Dating