—

When the Industrial Revolution began in Britain, in the late 1700s, there was lots of money to be made by investing in factories and mills, by opening up new markets, and by gaining control of sources of raw materials. The folks who had the most money to invest, however, were not so much in Britain but more in Holland. Holland had been the leading Western power in the 1600s, and its bankers were the leading capitalists. In pursuit of profit, Dutch capital flowed to the British stock market, and thus the Dutch funded the rise of Britain, who subsequently eclipsed Holland both economically and geopolitically.

In this way British industrialism came to be dominated by wealthy investors, and capitalism became the dominant economic system. This led to a major social transformation. Britain had been essentially an aristocratic society, dominated by landholding families. As capitalism became dominant economically, capitalists became dominant politically. Tax structures and import-export policies were gradually changed to favour investors over landowners.

It was no longer economically viable to simply maintain an estate in the countryside: one needed to develop it, turn it to more productive use. Victorian dramas are filled with stories of aristocratic families who fall on hard times, and are forced to sell off their properties. For dramatic purposes, this decline is typically attributed to a failure in some character, a weak eldest son perhaps. But in fact the decline of aristocracy was part of a larger social transformation brought on by the rise of capitalism.

The business of the capitalist is the management of capital, and this management is generally handled through the mediation of banks and brokerage houses. It should not be surprising that investment bankers came to occupy the top of the hierarchy of capitalist wealth and power. And in fact, there are a handful of banking families, including the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers, who have come to dominate economic and political affairs in the Western world.

Unlike aristocrats, capitalists are not tied to a place, or to the maintenance of a place. Capital is disloyal and mobile – it flows to where the most growth can be found, as it flowed from Holland to Britain, then from Britain to the USA, and most recently from everywhere to China. Just as a copper mine might be exploited and then abandoned, so under capitalism a whole nation can be exploited and then abandoned, as we see in the rusting industrial areas of America and Britain.

This detachment from place leads to a different kind of geopolitics under capitalism, as compared to aristocracy. A king goes to war when he sees an advantage to his nation in doing so. Historians can ‘explain’ the wars of pre-capitalist days, in terms of the aggrandisement of monarchs and nations.

A capitalist stirs up a war in order to make profits, and in fact our elite banking families have financed both sides of most military conflicts since at least World War 1. Hence historians have a hard time ‘explaining’ World War 1 in terms of national motivations and objectives.

In pre-capitalist days warfare was like chess, each side trying to win. Under capitalism warfare is more like a casino, where the players battle it out as long as they can get credit for more chips, and the real winner always turns out to be the house – the bankers who finance the war and decide who will be the last man standing. Not only are wars the most profitable of all capitalist ventures, but by choosing the winners, and managing the reconstruction, the elite banking families are able, over time, to tune the geopolitical configuration to suit their own interests.

Nations and populations are but pawns in their games. Millions die in wars, infrastructures are destroyed, and while the world mourns, the bankers are counting their winnings and making plans for their postwar reconstruction investments.

From their position of power, as the financiers of governments, the banking elite have over time perfected their methods of control. Staying always behind the scenes, they pull the strings controlling the media, the political parties, the intelligence agencies, the stock markets, and the offices of government. And perhaps their greatest lever of power is their control over currencies. By means of their central-bank scam, they engineer boom and bust cycles, and they print money from nothing and then loan it at interest to governments. The power of the elite banking gang (the ‘banksters’) is both absolute and subtle…

Some of the biggest men in the United States are afraid of something. They know there is a power somewhere, so organised, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.
– President Woodrow Wilson

The End of Growth – Banksters vs. Capitalism

It was always inevitable, on a finite planet, that there would be a limit to economic growth. Industrialisation has enabled us to rush headlong toward that limit over the past two centuries. Production has become ever more efficient, markets have become ever more global, and finally the paradigm of perpetual growth has reached the point of diminishing returns.

Indeed, that point was actually reached by about 1970. Since then capital has not so much sought growth through increased production, but rather by extracting greater returns from relatively flat production levels. Hence globalisation, which moved production to low-waged areas, providing greater profit margins. Hence privatisation, which transfers revenue streams to investors that formerly went to national treasuries. Hence derivative and currency markets, which create the electronic illusion of economic growth, without actually producing anything in the real world.

For almost forty years, the capitalist system was kept going by these various mechanisms, none of which were productive in any real sense. And then in September 2008 this house of cards collapsed, all of a sudden, bringing the global financial system to its knees.

If one studies the collapse of civilisations, one learns that failure-to-adapt is fatal. Is our civilisation falling into that trap? We had two centuries of real growth, where the growth-dynamic of capitalism was in harmony with the reality of industrial growth. Then we had four decades of artificial growth – capitalism being sustained by a house of cards. And now, after the house of cards has collapsed, every effort is apparently being made to bring about ‘a recovery’ – of growth! It is very easy to get the impression that our civilisation is in the process of collapse, based on the failure-to-adapt principle.

Such an impression would be partly right and partly wrong. In order to understand the real situation we need to make a clear distinction between the capitalist elite and capitalism itself. Capitalism is an economic system driven by growth; the capitalist elite are the folks who have managed to gain control of the Western world while capitalism has operated over the past two centuries. The capitalist system is past its sell-by date, the bankster elite are well aware of that fact – and they are adapting.

Capitalism is a vehicle that helped bring the banksters to absolute power, but they have no more loyalty to that system than they have to place, or to anything or anyone. As mentioned earlier, they think on a global scale, with nations and populations as pawns. They define what money is and they issue it, just like the banker in a game of Monopoly. They can also make up a new game with a new kind of money. They have long outgrown any need to rely on any particular economic system in order to maintain their power. Capitalism was handy in an era of rapid growth. For an era of non-growth, a different game is being prepared.

Thus, capitalism was not allowed to die a natural death. Instead it was brought down by a controlled demolition. First it was put on a life-support system, as mentioned above, with globalisation, privatisation, currency markets, etc. Then it was injected with a euthanasia death-drug, in the form of real-estate bubbles and toxic derivatives. Finally, the Bank of International Settlements in Basel – the central bank of central banks – pulled the plug on the life-support system: they declared the ‘mark-to-market rule’, which made all the risk-holding banks instantly insolvent, although it took a while for this to become apparent. Every step in this process was carefully planned and managed by the central-banking clique.

The End of Sovereignty – Restoring the Ancien Régime

Just as the financial collapse was carefully managed, so was the post-collapse scenario, with its suicidal bailout programs. National budgets were already stretched; they certainly did not have reserves available to salvage the insolvent banks. Thus the bailout commitments amounted to nothing more than the taking on of astronomical new debts by governments. In order to service the bailout commitments, the money would need to be borrowed from the same financial system that was being bailed out!

It’s not that the banks were too big to fail, rather the banksters were too powerful to fail: they made politicians an offer they couldn’t refuse. In the USA, Congress was told that without bailouts there would be martial law the next morning. In Ireland, the Ministers were told there would be financial chaos and rioting in the streets. In fact, as Iceland demonstrated, the sensible way to deal with the insolvent banks was with an orderly process of receivership.

The effect of the coerced bailouts was to transfer insolvency from the banks to the national treasuries. Banking debts were transformed into sovereign debts and budget deficits. Now, quite predictably, it is the nations that are seeking bailouts, and those bailouts come with conditions attached. Instead of the banks going into receivership, the nations are going into receivership.

In his book, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, John Perkins explains how the third world has been coerced over the past several decades – through pressure and trickery of various kinds – into perpetual debt bondage. By design, the debts can never be repaid. Instead, the debts must be periodically refinanced, and each round of refinancing buries the nation deeper in debt – and compels the nation to submit to even more drastic IMF diktats. With the orchestrated financial collapse, and the ‘too big to fail’ scam, the banksters have now crossed the Rubicon: the hit-man agenda is now operating here in the first world.

In the EU, the first round of nations to go down will be the so-called PIGS – Portugal, Ireland, Greece, and Spain. The fiction, that the PIGS can deal with the bailouts, is based on the assumption that the era of limitless growth will resume. As the banksters themselves know full well, that just isn’t going to happen. Eventually the PIGS will be forced to default, and then the rest of the EU will go down as well, all part of a controlled-demolition project.

When a nation succumbs to debt bondage, it ceases to be a sovereign nation, governed by some kind of internal political process. Instead it comes under the control of IMF diktats. As we have seen in the third world, and is happening now in Europe, these diktats are all about austerity and privatisation. Government functions are eliminated or privatised, and national assets are sold off. Little by little – again a controlled demolition – the nation state is dismantled. In the end, the primary functions left to government are police suppression of its own population, and the collection of taxes to be handed over to the banksters.

In fact, the dismantling of the nation state began long before the financial collapse of 2008. In the USA and Britain, it began in 1980, with Reagan and Thatcher. In Europe, it began in 1988, with the Maastricht Treaty. Globalisation accelerated the dismantling process, with the exporting of jobs and industry, privatisation programs, ‘free trade’ agreements, and the establishment of the regulation-busting World Trade Organisation (WTO). Events since 2008 have enabled the rapid acceleration of a process that was already well underway.

With the collapse, the bailouts, and the total failure to pursue any kind of effective recovery program, the signals are very clear: the system will be allowed to collapse totally, thus clearing the ground for a pre-architected ‘solution’. As the nation state is being dismantled, a new regime of global governance is being established to replace it. As we can see with the WTO, IMF, World Bank, and the other pieces of the embryonic world government, the new global system will make no pretensions about popular representation or democratic process. Rule will be by means of autocratic global bureaucracies, which will take their orders, directly or indirectly, from the bankster clique.

In his book, The Globalization of Poverty, Michel Chossudovsky explains how globalisation, and the actions of the IMF, created massive poverty throughout the third world over the past several decades. As we can see, with the dramatic emphasis on austerity following the collapse and bailouts, this poverty-creation project has now crossed the Rubicon. In this new world system there will be no prosperous middle class. Indeed, the new regime will very much resemble the old days of royalty and serfdom (the ancien régime). The banksters are the new royal family, with the whole world as their dominion. The technocrats who run the global bureaucracies, and the mandarins who pose as politicians in the residual nations, are the privileged upper class. The rest of us, the overwhelming majority, will find ourselves in the role of impoverished serfs – if we are lucky enough to be one of the survivors of the collapse process.

Today Americans would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government.
– Henry Kissinger speaking at Evian, France, May 21, 1992 Bilderbergers meeting

The End of Liberty – The Global Police State

For the past four decades, since about 1970, we’ve been experiencing a regime-change process, from an old global system to a new global system. In the old system, first world nations were relatively democratic and prosperous, while the third world suffered under police state tyranny, mass poverty, and imperialism (exploitation by external powers). As discussed above, the transition process has been characterised by ‘crossing the Rubicon’ – the introduction of policies and practices into the first world, that were formerly limited, for the most part, to the third world.

Thus debt bondage to the IMF crossed the Rubicon, enabled by the collapse-bailout scam. In turn, mass poverty is crossing that same Rubicon, due to austerity measures imposed by the IMF, with its new bond-holding powers. Imperialism is also crossing the Rubicon, as the first world comes under the exploitative control of banksters and their bureaucracies, a power nexus that is external to all national identities. Unsurprisingly, police state tyranny is also crossing the Rubicon: the imposition of third world poverty levels requires third world methods of repression.

The anti-globalisation movement can be taken as the beginning of popular resistance to the process of regime change. Similarly, the police response to the Seattle anti-globalisation demonstrations, in November 1999, can be taken as the ‘crossing of the Rubicon’ for police state tyranny. The excessive and arbitrary violence of that response – including such things as holding people’s eyes open and spraying pepper into them – was unprecedented against non-violent demonstrators in a first world nation.

Ironically, that police response, particularly as it was so widely publicised, actually strengthened the anti-globalisation movement. As demonstrations grew in size and strength, the police response grew still more violent. A climax of sorts was reached in Genoa, in July 2001, when the levels of violence on both sides began to resemble almost a guerilla war.

In those days the anti-globalisation movement was dominating the international news pages, and opposition to globalisation was reaching massive proportions. The visible movement was only the tip of an anti-systemic iceberg. In a very real sense, general popular sentiment in the first world was beginning to take a radical turn. Movement leaders were now thinking in terms of an anti-capitalist movement. There was a political volatility in the air, a sense that, just maybe possibly, enlightened popular sentiment might succeed in shifting the course of events.

All of that changed on September 11, 2001, the day the towers came down. The anti-globalisation movement, along with globalisation itself, disappeared almost totally from public consciousness on that fateful day. Suddenly it was a whole new global scenario, a whole new media circus – with a new enemy, and a new kind of war, a war without end, a war against phantoms, a war against ‘terrorism’.

Earlier we saw how the orchestrated financial collapse of September 2008 enabled certain ongoing projects to be rapidly accelerated, such as the dismantlement of sovereignty, and the imposition of austerity. Similarly, the events of September 2001 enabled certain ongoing projects to be greatly accelerated, such as the abandonment of civil liberties and international law.

Before the towers had even come down, the ‘Patriot Act’ had already been drafted, proclaiming in no uncertain terms that the police state was here (in the USA) in force and here to stay – the Bill of Rights was null and void. Before long, similar ‘anti-terrorist’ legislation had been adopted throughout the first world. If any anti-systemic movement were to again raise its head in the first world (as it did, for example, recently in Greece), arbitrary police powers could be brought to bear – as much as might be necessary – to put the resistance down. No popular movement would be allowed to derail the banksters’ regime-change designs. The anti-globalisation movement had been shouting, ‘This is what real democracy looks like’. With 9/11, the banksters replied: ‘This is what real oppression looks like’.

The events of 9/11 led directly to the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, and in general helped create a climate where invasions of sovereign nations could be readily justified, with one excuse or another. International law was to be as thoroughly abandoned as was civil liberties. Just as all restraint was removed from domestic police interventions, so was all restraint being removed from geopolitical military interventions. Nothing was to stand in the way of the banksters’ regime-change agenda.

The technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society… dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values… this elite would not hesitate to achieve its political ends by using the latest modern techniques for influencing public behaviour… Persisting social crisis, the emergence of a charismatic personality, and the exploitation of mass media to obtain public confidence would be the stepping-stones in the piecemeal transformation of the United States into a highly controlled society… In addition, it may be possible – and tempting – to exploit for strategic political purposes the fruits of research on the brain and on human behaviour.
– Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era, 1970

The Post-Capitalist Era – New Myths for a New Culture

2012 might not be the exact year, but it’s difficult to see the endgame lasting much beyond that – and the masters of the universe love symbolism, as with 911 (both in Chile and in Manhattan), KLA 007, and others. 2012 is loaded with symbolism, eg. the Mayan Calendar, and the Internet is buzzing with various 2012-related prophecies, survival strategies, anticipated alien interventions, etc. And then there is the Hollywood film, 2012, which explicitly portrays the demise of most of humanity, and the pre-planned salvation of a select few. One never knows with Hollywood productions, what is escapist fantasy, and what is aimed at preparing the public mind symbolically for what is to come.

Whatever the exact date, all the threads will come together, geopolitically and domestically, and the world will change. It will be a new era, just as capitalism was a new era after aristocracy, and the Dark Ages followed the era of the Roman Empire. Each era has its own structure, its own economics, its own social forms, and its own mythology. These things must relate to one another coherently, and their nature follows from the fundamental power relationships and economic circumstances of the system.

Whenever there is a change of era, the previous era is always demonised in a new mythology. In the Garden of Eden story the serpent is demonised – a revered symbol in paganism, the predecessor to monotheism. With the rise of European nation states, the Catholic Church was demonised, and Protestantism introduced. When republics came along, the demonisation of monarchs was an important part of the process. In the post-2012 world, democracy and national sovereignty will be demonised. This will be very important, in getting people to accept arbitrary totalitarian rule…

In those terrible dark days, before the blessed unification of humanity, anarchy reigned in the world. One nation would attack another, no better than predators in the wild. Nations had no long-term coherence; voters would swing from one party to another, keeping governments always in transition and confusion. How did anyone ever think that masses of semi-educated people could govern themselves, and run a complex society? Democracy was an ill-conceived experiment that led only to corruption and chaotic governance. How lucky we are to be in this well-ordered world, where humanity has finally grown up, and those with the best expertise make the decisions for the whole globe.

Capitalism is about growth, progress, and change. Under capitalism the virtues of ambition, initiative, and competitiveness are praised, because those virtues serve the dynamics of capitalism. People are encouraged to always accumulate more, and never be satisfied with what they have. Under capitalism, people need to have a bit of liberty, and a bit of prosperity, so that the dynamics of capitalism can operate. Without some liberty, ambition cannot be pursued; without some prosperity, how could accumulation be pursued? In the post-capitalist world, the capitalist virtues will be demonised. This will be very important, in getting people to accept poverty and regimentation…

The pursuit of money is the root of all evil, and the capitalist system was inherently corrupt and wasteful. Anarchy reined in the marketplace, as corporations blindly pursued profit, with no concern for human needs or for the Earth. How much more sensible are our production brigades, producing only what is needed, and using only what is sustainable. Capitalism encouraged greed and consumption; people struggled to compete with one another, to ‘get ahead’ in the rat race. How much wiser we are now, to live within our ration quotas, and to accept our assigned duties, whatever they might be, in service to humanity.

In this regime change, ushering in the post-capitalist era, we’re seeing a conscious orchestration of economics, politics, geopolitics, and mythology – as one coordinated project. A whole new reality is being created, a whole new global culture. When it comes down to it, the ability to transform culture is the ultimate form of power. In only a single generation, a new culture becomes ‘the way things are’. And what, we might inquire, might stand in the way of any future manipulations of the cultural regime that the bankster royal family might contemplate?

Ever since public education was introduced, the state and the family have competed to control childhood conditioning – and it is in childhood that culture is transmitted to the next generation. In the micromanaged post-capitalist future, we’ll most likely see the ‘final solution’ of social control, which is for the state to monopolise child raising. This would eliminate from society the parent-child bond, and hence family-related bonds in general. No longer is there a concept of relatives, just fellow members of the hive. The family must be demonised. Already, here in Ireland, there are daily TV spots dramatising the plight of children who are being abused or neglected by their parents…

How scary were the old days, when unlicensed, untrained couples had total control over vulnerable children, behind closed doors, with whatever neuroses, addictions, or perversions the parents happened to possess. How did this vestige of patriarchal slavery, this safe-house den of child abuse, continue so long to exist, and not be recognised for what it was? How much better off we are now, with children being raised scientifically, by trained staff, where they are taught discipline and healthy values.

RICHARD K MOORE, an expatriate from Silicon Valley, retired and moved to Ireland in 1994 to begin his ‘real work’ – trying to understand how the world works, and how we can make it better. Many years of researching and writing culminated in his widely acclaimed book Escaping the Matrix: How We the People Can Change the World (The Cyberjournal Project, 2005). His cyberjournal email list has been going since 1994 (cyberjournal.org). The book’s website is http://escapingthematrix.org, while his website http://quaylargo.com/rkm/ contains an extensive biography plus list of his articles. Richard can be contacted via email at rkm@quaylargo.com.

The above article appeared in New Dawn No. 128 (September-October 2011).

Read this article and mind-expanding information by downloading
your copy of New Dawn 128 (PDF version) for only US$5.95

© New Dawn Magazine and the respective author.
For our reproduction notice, click here.

—

Intense speculation on the ‘ruling elite’ many believe is running the world from behind the scenes can lead to the presumption that it is all-powerful and infallible. But is it? Identifying the human foibles and underlying desires of those who may be planning centralised domination could lead to a greater chance to offset their agendas.

In my book The Truth Agenda, I explore a widely-held hypothesis in certain quarters: that the world might be controlled by a powerful ruling elite, which puts its own narrow interests and convictions above ours through manipulation and engineered global crises to help bring about an Orwellian-style ‘One World Government’.

The book also considers the possibility that our planet is about to undergo a huge change, social, spiritual or cosmological, something seemingly anticipated by several ancient cultures around the world in the now renowned 2012 prophecies. The exploration of these ideas throws up disturbing possibilities and more pieces of evidence to support them than is entirely comfortable.

However, if all that the most extreme speculation achieves is to help prevent such a grim picture from reaching full fruition, then it will have served a useful purpose. It is also crucial that a note of optimism is struck.

An often valid criticism of conspiracy theorists, or ‘truthseekers’, is that their fevered investigations into humankind’s worst nightmares can leave some listeners feeling more fearful, and risks driving them into a state of disempowered paralysis, putting up the shutters when what is needed is engagement. Yet the unavoidable truth is that looking a potentially tough situation in the eye does mean facing up to disturbing realities that may have been swept under the carpet, for they might require urgent action.

Lifting the blindfold even just a little means that we might not run into the approaching wall at such a great velocity. If the idea of a secretive but all-pervading cabal running the world leaves some feeling shocked, the act of simply contemplating such an idea may in itself spark a new awakening of consciousness.

What psychologically motivates this elite, however? What kind of minds are we really dealing with? How can we attempt to understand them, so that solutions and strategies for dealing with their actions may become clearer?

The Elite and its Motivations

Something too often missed in all the conspiracy speculation is the realisation that if we are being governed by a powerful cabal trying to twist the world to its own ends, then we are still essentially dealing with fellow human beings (putting ET/reptilian bloodline theories aside for a moment).

Like every other person on the planet, they must have physical, social and emotional needs, even if the latter faculty may be too easily set aside in the kind of mind that would plan 9/11-type scenarios (an event widely suspected to have been deliberately staged by Western sources as part of a march towards the ‘New World Order’). The personalities involved must have loved ones of their own, and experience thoughts, feelings and cares in at least some directions. They also, like most of us in our lives, probably think they are doing the right thing, however much we may see their schemes as misguided.

This is an important point. We all have reasons for doing what we do, and can often justify actions to ourselves in the face of serious challenges from the outside. Hard though it may be to comprehend, the motivation of those who might think that wiping out their own people would be a positive move, or who believe that planning wars and economic breakdowns to effect the creation of a unifying world government is an acceptable strategy, the fact is that many seemingly well-intentioned visionaries throughout history have voiced the need for such approaches. This does not make them right, of course, but there is plainly a significant, if small, seam of humanity that believes a bigger picture should be put before the needs of the masses. Those who have expressed support for eugenics and depopulation strategies, for instance, often have deep-seated environmental concerns or feel strongly that we have lost our balance with nature and must put the planet’s future ahead of the requirements of the common people.

One of the most prominent promoters of the term ‘New World Order’ was the famous and much revered writer H G Wells, who believed passionately that the only answer to global strife would be the creation of the eponymous hierarchy, actively proposing it in his 1940 book The New World Order. This is clearly not a modern concept, and has roots going back even further than Wells’ idealistic vision of it. Some believe both World Wars were deliberately coordinated, or at least used, to help bring about a mandate for world government. As early as 1913, writing in his book The New Freedom, President Woodrow Wilson made clear that some formidable force already underpinned the commercial, and probably political, infrastructure of the USA:

Some of the biggest men in the US, in the field of commerce and manufacturing, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organised, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.

What is striking in H G Wells’ writings, however, is his sense of excitement and enthusiasm for the idea of a dominating collective that would put all to rights and avert “the disastrous extinction of Mankind.” There is no sense of negative intention nor a Malthusian dislike for humanity. Yet at the same time Wells was an advocate of eugenics. Many find this concept entirely repugnant, but here is the paradox – the very kinds of people truth-seekers tend to single out as the enemies of humanity very likely see themselves as its saviours. It is all a matter of perspective and of where one chooses to draw the moral line.

The philosopher Bertrand Russell openly accepted the inevitability of a controlling One World Government, founded on the basis of hard scientific values, and was disturbingly frank about the culture that would result. Writing in his 1953 book The Impact of Science on Society, he states:

Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible…

…Gradually, by selective breeding, the congenital differences between rulers and ruled will increase until they become almost different species. A revolt of the plebs would become as unthinkable as an organised insurrection of sheep against the practice of eating mutton.

On the surface, Russell’s thoughts appear to encourage such a world, rather than condemn it, and such thinking seems outrageous, even if it does come close to identifying the very philosophy that may now be actively shaping our society. However, although it seems difficult, almost distasteful, for some to contemplate, there is a thought to be considered here: What if such thinking were definitively shown to be right? What if humankind’s very survival did rest on the notion of more control, not less? What if the choice were demonstrated to be between total destruction through over-population, pollution and over-stretched resources, or a selectively-bred, closely-monitored world that regulated itself and continued on? What if an anarchy-ridden post-2012 apocalypse society could be shown to stand no real chance of survival, whereas a tightly-controlled disciplinarian civilisation would?

Uncomfortably, in the light of the world’s current challenging issues, it can be seen, at least to a small extent, how arguments could be made in these directions when looked at from a certain viewpoint. The problem comes, as ever, with the massive issue of who gets to decide. Those in comfortable circumstances looking down from on high must inevitably see things rather differently to those scraping an existence lower down the rungs, at their mercy.

We already hold the power of genetic manipulation in our hands, and it will not be too long before required characteristics of children will be able to be routinely selected and engineered. Also, with life spans ever increasing, and our understanding of tissue and brain cell regeneration growing by the year, how long will it be before life can be sustained indefinitely? When that occurs, the population problem will clearly explode if unlimited access to such power is allowed (that is, if the majority of humankind is permitted to survive in the first place – depopulation conspiracy theories are rife). A world of immortals would risk stagnation, but also domination from those who attained the status of immortality first. They would effectively decide who would be offered the gift from thereon. In the end, the gene pool would almost certainly be controlled by such authorities, the new eugenics having arrived through the back door.

These issues are already reality, not dystopian fiction. The power of genetic engineering, which is currently changing our food, both animal and vegetable – and thus our entire ecosystem, as spliced and altered genes make their way into nature through pollination and cross-breeding – means that humankind has already taken the entire planet’s evolutionary destiny into its own hands, and there is no going back. Do those calling the shots have the moral compass to carry such a huge responsibility? Can they serve as the gods they are setting themselves up to be?

In a society of angels, perhaps a charter of rigid regulation, surveillance and genetic population control could be applied with compassion and the wide agreement of a common consensus – but we are nowhere near such a state of being. With the motivation of those governing our world today clearly in question, it seems impossible that the kinds of agendas many feel the ruling elite is implementing could work in any way other than being a simple attack on the larger percentage of humankind. Without common consensus, whatever the supposedly good intentions that might exist somewhere behind the plans, any attempt to regulate the world by coercion and draconian measures remains an immoral one.

Inherent Deception

The problem with global cover-ups is that they arrive and build up – as deception does so often for all of us – through a lack of honesty largely sparked by the fear of what people might think or do if they were to perceive the true vulnerability within. The elite appears to fear us and our reactions as much as we may fear it – otherwise it would not need to manipulate and control. Many disingenuous actions are borne of inner psychosis; a lack of trust that other people will understand. Our leaders appear to have got so used to playing deceptive games that they cannot now operate any other strategy. Everything from the banking system to Parliamentary administration appears to be based on subterfuge. Right now we are clearly not trusted by those affecting our lives so strongly and as a result we do not trust them.

Not that some of the elite would be remotely bothered about what any of us thinks of their actions. For those who may feel that caveats to explain such motivation is too generous to people who maim, kill and deceive to get their way, for whatever reason, it should be noted that there do also appear to be those pulling the strings who simply seek power for power’s sake. The lessons of history tell us that selfishness, greed and excited bloodlust cannot be ruled out as prime movers in some cases, at least. And, to acknowledge the not-insubstantial suspicion of a ‘reptilian agenda’, if it were to turn out that this highly exclusive club was indeed the result of a dominating extra-terrestrial gene seeded aeons ago (as some believe, based on ancient myths) and being exploited and/or activated by celestial visitors today, then it admittedly might explain why concern for the needs of humanity appears to be as low down the list of its priorities as our general concern for the welfare of livestock is today.

As for what kind of people may comprise the global elite, the well-intentioned and the not-so well-intentioned, most likely we are largely dealing with high-ranking politicians, academics, intellectuals (as with Wells and Russell), monarchies, and very rich and influential families – with a mixture of political, religious and occult undercurrents. In other words, all the obvious candidates. Numerous books and websites go into the detail, so there is little need to explore it here. How much of the grand plan all of them know, however, and whether there are pyramids-within-pyramids amongst even the power structures near the top, is another matter.

Factions Within Factions

The presumption is often made that the very existence of a ruling elite means that those involved must be all-powerful and of one mind, accurately manipulating domino events that hit the required spot every time, all to a predetermined agenda. But this may apportion them an unwarranted infallibility.

There is evidence to show that there are factions and disputes within the echelons of those with great influence over our lives. After all, the world is a big and complex place. Even with a general agreement on how it should move forward, the pressures of regional needs and personal biases are almost certain to blur the clarity of purpose from time to time. Going on the word that does sneak out from Bilderberg meetings and the suchlike, it seems that as many disagreements, compromises and negotiations arise there as within any supposedly democratic Parliament. If this weren’t the case, the meetings would not presumably need to take place, so pre-orchestrated would the scheming be.

As with Masonic and other secret society structures, there is also a pecking order to consider. It is doubtful that all those ‘in’ on a global conspiracy seeking centralised control would be party to every machination, and certain players may themselves be manipulated from within without realising it. From the outside, for example, it appears that British ex-prime minister Gordon Brown, for all his many references to creating a ‘New World Order,’ seemed destined to be a fall-guy from the start, set up to come to power just as the world economy took a tumble. The question is, did Brown know the full plan? Was he someone faithfully playing a game with a known outcome of outward failure, while secretly ensuring success in an agenda of weakening the UK on the world stage to quicken a move towards One World Government? Or did he cling on in the genuine belief that all would come right and that he would one day be hailed as a political hero?

Likewise, when Bill Clinton found himself under threat of impeachment following the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal, was this all part of a contrived drama, or a sign of factions within factions very genuinely trying to remove him after an unplanned gaffe? And did Richard Nixon go rogue or was he just playing a pre-auditioned role? On a smaller level, when a man in the crowd died after being pushed to the ground by a policeman during the 2009 G20 protests in London, it took all the seemingly contrived focus away from images of a few people smashing a bank window, and suddenly all the headlines became howls about police brutality. Was this an ongoing twist to deliberately stir civil unrest or was it (as many suspect) something going unexpectedly wrong and changing the script? Does every war and false-flag terror attack really go to plan, or is there as much ‘cock-up’ involved as conspiracy?

How organised, then, is this global elite, and is it really as united as some truth seekers give credit for? The evidence suggests that there are chinks in the armour and disagreements within, and weaknesses and unpredictable elements always arise in any grand plan. This offers hope. The foibles of human nature and the sheer universality of chaos theory may ensure that unexpected events and peculiar side tracks undermine the apparent solidity of the control agenda just when they are least expected. We could therefore be dealing with something far less coordinated than feared – indeed, the wide truth seeker presumption of the elite’s potency may make it seem more of a problem than it really is. But can we take the chance of becoming complacent?

It is clear that certain events and trends do seem to be part of an unfolding pattern that suggests an attempt to engineer a mandate for centralised power. Whilst we must not become petrified into inaction by this, nor, however, should we take the opposite risk of assuming there is no real threat, even if the conspirators are found to be less competent than some believe. Either way, it is important at the very least to call attention to the appalling deeds committed by those at least trying to be an all-powerful force.

Consent by Apathy

If plans for world domination are being laid on any level, a simple fact needs to be recognised – that it only goes on because we collectively allow it. Even with obvious governmental deceptions such as the weapons of mass destruction debacle in Iraq, such things only continue to occur as widely as they do because too few people stand solidly against them or fully call their leaders to account. We have allowed apathy and the distractions of (apparent) comfort, trivia and entertainment to hold us in our armchairs in the hope that anything dark ‘out there’ will remedy itself in due course, without our input, energetically or even electorally (voter turnouts for Western elections, whatever they are worth, are generally perilously low).

By having become so disconnected with what goes on around us in our names, we have not stood up in our collective power – and are therefore as responsible as any global elite for having created the world we live in today. With the consent granted by our passivity, we have watched obvious lies and manipulations take away our strength, resolve and liberty, and have done little or nothing about it. As such, we have given away our personal responsibility. The energy spent complaining loudly but emptily in the pub or bus queue about the shortcomings of today’s society, if applied in more proactive and positive directions, could be used to offset the very things being complained about. The problem is that we have been trained to think that we cannot make a difference – when, in truth, we can, especially when we match the tangible power of the collective mind with the practical rewards of direct action, as I explore more in The Truth Agenda.

Speaking out

Much of the awakening process that HAS begun has come from the kind of people drawn to be part of the truth seeking community. Unfortunately, their often unseen efforts are generally rewarded by undeserved ridicule and sidelining by a culture that has shut its eyes and ears to anything but the skewed vision it is fed by those who prefer to keep us dumb. People who question the status quo are easily neutered in the mainstream by being branded with false ‘wacko’ stereotypes created by a media that is all too often either itself controlled, fearful or just lazily stupid. Truth seeker enthusiasm does allow things to spill over into fanaticism and lack of discernment sometimes, no doubt, but the fact is that there are also absolutely vital questions and observations being raised by very reasonable, normal people, which could make a real and positive difference to people’s lives – if ever given a chance.

It doesn’t take long for the average person to see through manipulation once obvious anomalies are pointed out. Assuming the masses will always be dumb may be an arrogant and huge mistake on the part of our masters. When discussed in an accessible and objective way, the concept of a ruling global elite, which believes that some kind of catastrophic cosmological or climatic change may be imminent and has thus been implementing a regime of draconian restrictions by nefarious means to ensure it retains control during and after the chaos, is nowhere near as far-fetched as it may at first seem. It can all be made to sound credible when expressed in balanced tones, and when sensible evidence is presented.

Tones are important. Extreme conspiracy dogma, passionately but indiscriminately shouted, can repel potential support and plays into the hands of the mainstream’s characterisation of all alternative thinkers as uneducated fanatics. Those with the power of insight who can rise above this have a responsibility to convey a user-friendly overview of the control agenda. Successful outreach requires initial moderation – and compassion. Newcomers can be confused by all the many complex sources of information out there, and may shrink from the at-first disturbing idea of a manipulative ruling elite if not properly approached. The uncertain era we live in now, with glimpses of the truth shining in through the cracks, provides a unique opportunity for those with the insights to offer another view of the world – while they can.

There may be more than one reason why a world of centralised control would be desired by a ruling elite, and we cannot fully presume to understand from the outside. But no strategy that imposes an undeclared agenda without transparency or choice can be right, and any regime of underhand manipulation must be resisted. To resist successfully, however, those with awareness must hold on to optimism and strike an appropriate tone if they are to be listened to and people awakened so that a self-elected and questionable minority’s vision for the world is not allowed to ride roughshod over the needs of everyday people.

No elite, of any kind, can be infallible, and this offers true hope for the future – if enough people can rise above their fears and speak out, loudly and clearly.

Adapted from The Truth Agenda by Andy Thomas (Vital Signs Publishing 2009, revised 2011)

ANDY THOMAS is a leading researcher into unexplained mysteries and is the author of the acclaimed The Truth Agenda (Vital Signs Publishing, 2009, revised 2011). His many other books include Vital Signs, described widely as the definitive guide to crop circles. Andy also edited Geoff Stray’s seminal Beyond 2012. Andy extensively writes and lectures, and has made numerous radio and TV appearances around the world. For further information, visit www.truthagenda.org.

The above article appeared in New Dawn No. 127 (July-August 2011).

Read this article and much more on this subject by downloading
your copy of New Dawn 127 (PDF version) for only US$5.95

© New Dawn Magazine and the respective author.
For our reproduction notice, click here.

—

The control of the US, and of global politics, by the wealthiest families of the planet is exercised in a powerful, profound and clandestine manner. This control began in Europe and has a continuity that can be traced back to the time when the bankers discovered it was more profitable to give loans to governments than to needy individuals.

These banking families and their subservient beneficiaries have come to own most major businesses over the two centuries during which they have secretly and increasingly organised themselves as controllers of governments worldwide and as arbiters of war and peace.

Unless we understand this we will be unable to understand the real reasons for the two world wars and the impending Third World War, a war that is almost certain to begin as a consequence of the US attempt to seize and control Central Asia. The only way out is for the US to back off – something the people of the US and the world want, but the elite does not.

The US is a country controlled through the privately owned Federal Reserve, which in turn is controlled by the handful of banking families that established it by deception in the first place.

In his interesting book The Secret Team, Col. Fletcher Prouty, briefing officer of the US President from 1955-63, narrates a remarkable incident in which Winston Churchill made a most revealing utterance during World War II: “On this particular night there had been a heavy raid on Rotterdam. He sat there, meditating, and then, as if to himself, he said, ‘Unrestricted submarine warfare, unrestricted air bombing – this is total war.’ He continued sitting there, gazing at a large map, and then said, ‘Time and the Ocean and some guiding star and High Cabal have made us what we are’.”

Prouty further states: “This was a most memorable scene and a revelation of reality that is infrequent, at best. If for the great Winston Churchill, there is a ‘High Cabal’ that has made us what we are, our definition is complete. Who could know better than Churchill himself during the darkest days of World War II, that there exists, beyond doubt, an international High Cabal? This was true then. It is true today, especially in these times of the One World Order. This all-powerful group has remained superior because it had learned the value of anonymity.” This “High Cabal” is the “One World Cabal” of today, also called the elite by various writers.

The High Cabal & What They Control

The elite owns the media, banks, defence and oil industry. In his book Who’s Who of the Elite Robert Gaylon Ross Sr. states: “It is my opinion that they own the US military, NATO, the Secret Service, the CIA, the Supreme Court, and many of the lower courts. They appear to control, either directly or indirectly, most of the state, county, and local law enforcement agencies.”

The elite is intent on conquering the world through the use of the abilities of the people of the United States. It was as far back as 1774 that Amschel Mayer Rothschild stated at a gathering of the twelve richest men of Prussia in Frankfurt: “Wars should be directed so that the nations on both sides should be further in our debt.” He further enunciated at the same meeting: “Panics and financial depressions would ultimately result in World Government, a new order of one world government.”

The elite owns numerous “think tanks” that work for expanding, consolidating and perpetuating its hold on the globe. The Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA), the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission, and many other similar organisations are all funded by the elite and work for it. These think tanks publish journals, such as Foreign Affairs, in which these imperialist and anti-mankind ideas are edified as publications, and then, if need be, expanded in the form of books that are given wide publicity.

Zbigniew Brzezinski and Henry Kissinger et al, as well as the neo-con “thinkers,” owe their positions and good living standards to the largesse of the elite. This is an important point that must be kept in full view at all times. These thinkers and writers are on the payroll of the elite and work for them. In case someone has any doubts about such a statement, it might help to read the following quotes from Professor Peter Dale Scott’s comprehensively researched book The Road to 9/11 – Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America (University of California Press, 2007):

…Bundy’s Harvard protégé Kissinger was named to be national security adviser after having chaired an important “study group” at the Council on Foreign Relations. As a former assistant to Nelson Rockefeller, Kissinger had been paid by Rockefeller to write a book on limited warfare for the CFR. He had also campaigned hard in Rockefeller’s losing campaign for the Presidential nomination in 1968. Thus Rockefeller and the CFR might have been excluded from control of the Republican Party, but not from the Republican White House. (Page 22)

The following quote from page 38 of the book is also very revealing:

The Kissinger-Rockefeller relationship was complex and certainly intense. As investigative reporter Jim Hougan wrote: “Kissinger, married to a former Rockefeller aide, owner of a Georgetown mansion whose purchase was enabled only by Rockefeller gifts and loans, was always a protégé of his patron Nelson Rockefeller, even when he wasn’t directly employed by him.”

Professor Scott adds:

Nixon’s and Kissinger’s arrival in the White House in 1969 coincided with David Rockefeller’s becoming CEO of Chase Manhattan Bank. The Nixon-Kissinger foreign policy of detente was highly congruous with Rockefeller’s push to internationalise Chase Manhattan banking operations. Thus in 1973 Chase Manhattan became the first American bank to open an office in Moscow. A few months later, thanks to an invitation arranged by Kissinger, Rockefeller became the first US banker to talk with Chinese Communist leaders in Beijing.

How They Manipulate Public Opinion

In addition to these strategic “think tanks” the elite has set up a chain of research institutes devoted to manipulating public opinion in a manner the elite desires. As pointed out by John Coleman in his eye opening book The Tavistock Institute on Human Relations – Shaping the Moral, Spiritual, Cultural, Political and Economic Decline of the United States of America, it was in 1913 that an institute was established at Wellington House, London for manipulation of public opinion. According to Coleman:

The modern science of mass manipulation was born at Wellington House London, the lusty infant being midwifed by Lord Northcliffe and Lord Rothmere. The British monarchy, Lord Rothschild, and the Rockefellers were responsible for funding the venture… the purpose of those at Wellington House was to effect a change in the opinions of British people who were adamantly opposed to war with Germany, a formidable task that was accomplished by “opinion making” through polling. The staff consisted of Arnold Toynbee, a future director of studies at the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA), Lord Northcliffe, and the Americans, Walter Lippmann and Edward Bernays. Lord Northcliffe was related to the Rothschilds through marriage.

Bernays was a nephew of Sigmund Freud, a fact never mentioned, and developed the technique of “engineering consent.” When Sigmund Freud moved to Britain he also, secretly, became associated with this institute through the Tavistock Institute. According to Coleman, Bernays “pioneered the use of psychology and other social sciences to shape and form public opinion so that the public thought such manufactured opinions were their own.”

The Tavistock Institute has a 6 billion dollar fund and 400 subsidiary organisations are under its control along with 3,000 think tanks, mostly in the USA. The Stanford Research Institute, the Hoover Institute, the Aspen Institute of Colorado, and many others, devoted to manipulation of US as well as global public opinion, are Tavistock offshoots. This helps explain why the US public, by and large, is so mesmerised as to be unable to see things clearly and to react.

Bilderberg researcher Daniel Estulin quotes from Mary Scobey’s book To Nurture Humanness a statement attributed to Professor Raymond Houghton, that the CFR has been clear for a very long time that “absolute behaviour control is imminent… without mankind’s self realisation that a crisis is at hand.”

Also keep in mind that currently 80% of US electronic and print media is owned by only six large corporations. This development has taken place in the past two decades. These corporations are elite owned. It is almost impossible for anyone who is acquainted with what is going on at the global level to watch, even for a few minutes, the distortions, lies and fabrications, incessantly pouring out of this media, a propaganda and brainwashing organ of the elite.

Once your picture is clear it is also easy to notice the criminal silence of the media on crimes being perpetrated against humanity at the behest of the elite. How many people know that the cancer rates in Fallujah, Iraq are higher than those in Hiroshima and Nagasaki because of the use of depleted uranium, and maybe other secret nuclear devices, by US forces? Fallujah was punished for its heroic resistance against the American forces.

The Importance of Eurasia

Why is the US in Central Asia? In order to understand this, one has to look at the writings of the stooges of the elite – Brzezinski, Kissinger, Samuel P Huntington, and their likes. It is important to note that members of these elite paid think tanks publish books as part of a strategy to give respectability to subsequent illegal, immoral and predatory actions that are to be taken at the behest of the elite. The views are not necessarily their own – they are the views of the think tanks. These stooges formulate and pronounce policies and plans at the behest of their masters, through bodies like the Council on Foreign Relations, Bilderberg Group, etc.

In his infinitely arrogant book The Grand Chessboard, published in 1997, Brzezinski spelled out the philosophy behind the current US military eruption. He starts by quoting the well-known views of the British geographer Sir Halford J Mackinder (1861–1947), another worker for the elite. Mackinder was a member of the ‘Coefficients Dining Club’ established by members of the Fabian Society in 1902. The continuity of the policies of the elite is indicated by the fact Brzezinski starts from Mackinder’s thesis first propounded in 1904: “Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland: Who rules the Heartland commands the World-Island: who commands the World-Island commands the world.”

Brzezinski argues that for the first time in human history a non-Eurasian power has become preeminent and it must hold sway over the Eurasian continent if it is to remain the preeminent global power: “For America the chief geopolitical prize is Eurasia… About 75 percent of the world’s people live in Eurasia… Eurasia accounts for about 60 percent of the world’s GNP and about three fourths of the world’s known energy resources.”

It is not just the geostrategic location of this region – it is also its wealth, “both in its enterprises and beneath its soil,” that holds such attraction for the elite whose greed for money, and lust for power, remain insatiable, as if there was a sickness afflicting it.

Brzezinski writes: “But it is on the globe’s most important playing field – Eurasia – that a potential rival to America might at some point arise. This focusing on the key players and properly assessing the terrain has to be a point of departure for the formulation of American geostrategy for the long-term management of America’s Eurasian geopolitical interests.”

These lines were published in 1997. Millions of people have died in the past two decades and millions have been rendered homeless in this region but it remains a “playing” field for Brzezinski and his likes! In his book Brzezinski has drawn two very interesting maps – one of these has the caption The Global Zone of Percolating Violence (page 53) and the other (page 124) is captioned The Eurasian Balkans. The first of these encircles a region which includes the following countries: Sudan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Iran, all Central Asian states, Afghanistan, Pakistan and parts of Russia as well as India. The second one has two circles, an inner circle and a wider circle – the outer circle encloses the same countries as in the first map but the inner circle covers Iran, Afghanistan, eastern Turkey and the former Soviet Republics in Central Asia.

“This huge region, torn by volatile hatreds and surrounded by competing powerful neighbours, is likely to be a major battlefield…” writes Brzezinski. He further writes: “A possible challenge to American primacy from Islamic fundamentalism could be part of the problem of this unstable region.” These lines were written at a time when this kind of fundamentalism was not a problem – subsequently the US manipulated things and chose to make it one by its provocative and deceptive tactics. According to its strategic thinkers, the US might face a serious challenge from a coalition of China, Russia and Iran and must do whatever it can to prevent such a coalition from forming.

For Brzezinski, “terrorism” – a Tavistock-type concept – is just a well planned and well thought out strategy, a lie and a deception, to provide cover for a military presence in the Central Eurasian region and elsewhere. It is being used to keep the US public in a state of fear, to keep Russia in a state of insecurity about further breakup (the US has trained and supported Chechen fighters, “terrorists,” throughout) and to justify presence of US troops in and around Central Asia.

The Concocted War on Terrorism

Terrorism provides justification for transforming the United States into a police state. According to the Washington Post of 20 & 21 December 2010, the US now has 4,058 anti-terrorism organisations! These are certainly not meant for those so-called terrorists who operate in Central Asia – the number far exceeds the number of so-called terrorists in the entire world. Unbridled domestic spying by US agencies is now a fact of life and the US public, as always, has accepted this because of the collusion of media and Tavistock type institutes owned by the elite.

The US historian Howard Zinn puts it very well: “The so-called war on terrorism is not only a war against innocent people in other countries, but also a war on the people of the United States: a war on our liberties, a war on our standard of living. The wealth of the country is being stolen from the people and handed over to the superrich. The lives of our young are being stolen. And the thieves are in the White House.” Actually the thieves control the White House and have been doing so for a very long time.

In his outstanding book Crossing the Rubicon, Michael Ruppert points out that much of the violence in the Central Asian region as well as in Pakistan, which has been encircled in two maps in Brzezinski’s book, was “initiated by the US proxies.” “Given that these maps were published a full four years before the first plane hit the World Trade Centre, they would fall in a category of evidence I learned about at LAPD [Los Angeles Police Department]. We called them ‘clues’.” This means that the eruption of US militarism after 9/11, and the event itself, were part of a pre-planned and coherent strategy of global domination in which the people of the US were also “conquered” through totalitarian legislation carried out in the wake of 9/11.

As Brzezinski puts it:

America is too democratic at home to be autocratic abroad. This limits the use of America’s power, especially its capacity for military intimidation. Never before has a popular democracy attained international supremacy. But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public’s sense of domestic well-being… The economic self-denial (that is, defence spending) and the human sacrifice (casualties even among professional soldiers) required in the effort are uncongenial to democratic instincts. Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilisation.

Certainly post 9/11 legislation, the extraordinary expansion of agencies and surveillance of the US public is a cause of great satisfaction for the elite – the US can hardly be called a democracy now. As reported by the Washington Post, the National Security Agency intercepts over 1.7 billion emails, phone calls and other communications every day and stores them. No wonder Bush called 9/11 “a great opportunity” and Rumsfeld saw it analogous to World War II to “refashion the world.”

In order to achieve the objectives of the elite, the US destroyed Yugoslavia while Russia stood by mesmerised and impotent, carried out regime changes in Central Asia, set up military bases in East Europe and Central Asia, and staged highly provocative military exercises testing Russia’s and China’s will. It set up a military base in Kyrgyzstan that has a 500 mile or so border with China. When the Chinese protested recent naval exercises with South Korea were too close to Chinese territory, a US spokesman responded: “Those determinations are made by us, and us alone… Where we exercise, when we exercise, with whom and how, with what assets and so forth are determinations that are made by the United States Navy, by the Department of Defence, by the United States government.” As journalist Rick Rozoff notes: “There is no way such confrontational, arrogant and vulgar language was not understood at its proper value in Beijing.”

The US has acquired bases in Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, and the Czech Republic – and set up the largest military base ever built in the region, Camp Bondsteel, in Kosovo. According to a report in the Russian Kommersant newspaper on 3 March 2011, a four-phase plan for deployment of a US missile system in Europe is to be fully implemented by the end of 2020. The US is also busy setting up bilateral military ties in Russia’s backyard with Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and is pursuing the goal of a “Greater Central Asia” from Afghanistan right up to the Middle East, a great corridor from where the oil, gas, and great mineral wealth of this region will flow to the coffers of the US elite, at bloody expense to the local people.

As remarked by the Indian career diplomat M.K. Bhadrakumar: “The time is not far off before they begin to sense that ‘the war on terror’ is providing a convenient rubric under which the US is incrementally securing for itself a permanent abode in the highlands of Hindu Kush, the Pamirs, Central Asian steppes and the Caucasus that form the strategic hub overlooking Russia, China, India and Iran.” The scene for a great war involving the great powers of the time – US, Russia and China – is now set, by design of the elite. It is just a matter of time.

Time and again the US elite has taken its good people into great wars through documented and proven deceptions – the sinking of the Lusitania during World War I, Pearl Harbour in World War II, and so on. The elite considers us “human garbage” – a term first used by the French in Indo-China. It is also generating a good deal of “human garbage” in the US. A World Bank report points out that in 2005, 28 million Americans were “insecure” – in 2007 the number had risen to 46 million! One in every five Americans is faced with the possibility of becoming “destitute” – 38 million people receive food coupons!

Michael Ruppert laments:

My country is dead. Its people have surrendered to tyranny and in so doing, they have become tyranny’s primary support group; its base; its defender. Every day they offer their endorsement of tyranny by banking in its banks and spending their borrowed money with the corporations that run it. The great Neocon strategy of George H.W. Bush has triumphed. Convince the America people that they can’t live without the ‘good things’, then sit back and watch as they endorse the progressively more outrageous crimes you commit as you throw them bones with ever less meat on them. All the while lock them into debt. Destroy the middle class, the only political base that need be feared. Make them accept, because of their shared guilt, ever-more repressive police state measures. Do whatever you want.

A global economic system erected on inhuman and predatory values, where a few possess more wealth than the billions of hungry put together, will end, but the end will be painful and bloody. It is a system in which the elite thrives on war and widespread human misery, on death and destruction by design. As Einstein said, “I do not know how the Third World War will be fought, but I can tell you what they will use in the Fourth – rocks!”

Prof. Dr. MUJAHID KAMRAN is Vice Chancellor, University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan, and his book The Grand Deception – Corporate America and Perpetual War has just been published (April 2011) by Sang e Meel Publications, Lahore, Pakistan.

The above article appeared in New Dawn Special Issue 16.

Read this article and much more on this subject by downloading
your copy of New Dawn Special Issue 16 (PDF version) for only US$5.95

© New Dawn Magazine and the respective author.
For our reproduction notice, click here.

—

We are fighting nothing other than al-Qaeda in what they call the Islamic Maghreb. It’s an armed group that is fighting from Libya to Mauritania and through Algeria and Mali.… If you had found them taking over American cities by the force of arms, tell me what you would do?
– From a letter sent by the Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi to the US president Barack Obama.

In the Theatre of the Absurd, anything is possible. However, this latest scenario in Libya has taken absurdity to a whole new dimension. A rag-tag bunch of armed, al-Qaeda affiliated tribesmen, being referred to as a ‘pro-democracy movement’ by British State TV (BBC) and other mainstream media outlets, are now being openly armed and trained by the French, British and American governments. This same Coalition of Crusaders, with the support of the Arab League, is fighting alongside the rebels, launching continual bombing raids on targets in Tripoli and beyond, including Muammar Qadhafi’s compound, in a brazen attempt to assassinate the man and re-colonise Libya.

And what is the support inside Libya for this so-called ‘Libyan pro-democracy movement’? The answer is less than 2% of the entire Libyan population. One might have expected that the Western and Arab worlds would have offered Qadhafi and the Libyan armed forces assistance to deal with this al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) inspired insurgency. But no. Surprisingly, or maybe not so surprisingly, instead, Britain and the US, led by the clown Sarkozy, in what can only be described as a war mongering frenzy, launched an all out attack on Muammar Qadhafi, his family, and the Libyan people.

As this article goes to press, the Coalition forces continue to savagely bomb targets in Tripoli and beyond, killing civilians and destroying vital infrastructure. They are pounding Libya with a force that was last seen when they invaded Iraq, doing their utmost to leave Qadhafi and his people defenceless against this insurgency. In fact, so brazen is the imperialist Obama, that he has announced an ‘overt operation’, sending in CIA operatives to train and equip the rebels. Rebels who the State Department admits are disorganised and untrained and unable to articulate a vision for Libya, beyond killing Qadhafi.

These rebels however do have an agenda. Their leaders and ideologues, inside and out of Libya, are well known for misinterpreting verses from the Quran, quoting out of context, in an attempt to justify their so-called jihad and practices which are fundamentally alien to the Islamic spirit. The best the Libyan rebels, read counter-revolutionaries, can do, is to chant ‘From Tunisia, Egypt to Libya and on, we will spread Jihad!’

Western Powers and al-Qaeda – On the Same Side

As far back as the mid 90s, a former MI5 agent, David Shayler, testified that British intelligence employed the services of an al-Qaeda cell inside Libya, paying them a large fee to assassinate Muammar Qadhafi. The assassination attempt was carried out. A grenade was lobbed at Qadhafi as he walked among a crowd in his hometown, Sirte. He was saved by one of his bodyguards, who threw herself on the grenade.

Shayler revealed that while he was working on the Libya desk in the mid 90s, British secret service personnel were collaborating with the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), which was connected to one of Osama bin Laden’s trusted lieutenants. The LIFG officially joined al-Qaeda in 2007. On an Islamist website in 2009, Ayman al-Zawahiri welcomed them to the fold.

Over the past two years, the Libyan authorities have released scores of imprisoned Islamists from the LIFG into the custody of their families and communities in a humanitarian attempt to integrate them back into Libyan society. With a pledge that they would use the forums set up in the country, under the auspices of the General People’s Congress, to express their views. Many of the released prisoners had fought in Afghanistan and Iraq and been returned to the Libyan authorities as part of an agreement with the US. If Qadhafi was truly the ruthless man the West would have us believe, then surely these rebels, classified as terrorists by the US, would have remained in prison and their fate very different.

One of those released in 2008 was the LIFG commander, Abdel Hakim al-Hasidi, now one of the leaders of this uprising. Over the last decade, al-Hasidi fought in Afghanistan, was captured in Pakistan in 2002, handed over to the US, and subsequently handed back to the Libyan authorities. In a recent interview with the Italian newspaper, Il Sole 24 Ore, al-Hasidi admitted that, “jihadists who fought in Iraq against the US are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Qadhafi.”

Libya was the first country to issue an arrest warrant for Osama bin Laden. The Libyan authorities have for years tried to warn the world about the very serious threat posed by these Islamic deviants. According to David Shayler, Western intelligence turned a deaf ear to Libya’s warnings as far back as the mid 90s because they were actually working with the al-Qaeda group inside Libya, to kill Qadhafi, and roll back the Libyan revolution.

True Religion versus False Religion

The battle being fought in the Libyan desert today dates way back beyond the mid 90s. Today’s battle is essentially a battle between, on the one hand, the revolutionary Islam of Prophet Muhammad, manifest in the writings of Muammar Qadhafi and in the practice of

the Libyan revolution. And on the other hand, the reactionary Islam of the Ikhwan al-Muslimeen (Muslim Brotherhood) and their off shoots such as al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and its affiliate, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group.

The Muslim revolutionary scholar, Ali Shariati, notes that, “the battle of history is the battle of religion against religion… true religion versus false religion.”

The Islam of the Wahhabist/Salafi sect, adhered to by the LIFQ, is a reactionary interpretation and practice of Islam that seeks to replicate the political and social structures of 7th century Arabian society. Although for the BBC, CNN and Al Jazeera cameras, the rebels are careful to present themselves to the world as a force fighting for ‘liberal democracy’ and to show their love and admiration for the West. Off camera, they are calling for what AQIM has named the ‘Islamic Emirate in the Maghreb’.

Qadhafi, along with other progressive Islamic scholars, argues the message of the Quran and Islamic theology is incompatible with the idea of an emirate. They point out dynastic rule was imported into the body politic of Islam by the likes of Abu Sufyan Muawiyah, the governor of Damascus, in the period 642 to 661, who borrowed these anti-Islamic practices from the Byzantium Empire and the Persians. Qadhafi points out this particular system of governance has nothing at all to do with Islam.

The central ideological concern of Muammar Qadhafi and the Libyan revolution was to redefine Islam in the context of modern knowledge and contemporary political systems and thought. This is a task that requires us to revisit and rethink previous political systems set up by Muslims, without losing any of the Perennial Truth that is Islam.

The Third Universal Theory, outlined in Qadhafi’s Green Book, is a comprehensive worldview – a body of philosophical, political, economic, sociological and scientific principles, all inter-related. Together they form an alternative and largely self-sufficient intellectual structure. It is a guide for authentic Islamic revolution, and can be applied to non-Islamic, popular revolutions. It ushers in a whole new social and political practice, outlining an alternative model of democracy.

Progressive academics worldwide have acclaimed The Green Book as a serious body of political thought, offering an incisive critique of Western parliamentary democracy, capitalism and Marxist socialism. In addition, there is no denying the system of direct democracy, posited by Qadhafi’s Third Universal Theory, offers an alternative model and solution for Africa and many other parts of the ‘Third World’, where multi-party ‘democracy’ has been a dismal failure, resulting in ethnic/tribal conflict, social fragmentation and political chaos.

In his book Islam and the Third Universal Theory: The Religious Thought of Muammar al Qadhafi, the respected Muslim scholar Mahmoud Ayoub points out that, “the first part of the Green Book is an interpretation of one single verse of the Quran: ‘and their affairs are decided through consultation (shura) among themselves’… To others it means an assembly of jurists ruling over a traditional Islamic society strictly governed by Shariah. Only Qadhafi has taken the important Quranic precept seriously, understanding it literally, and applying it equally to every member of society.”

Ayoub further states that, “Qadhafi sees Islam as a perpetual revolution against unnecessary and illegitimate wealth, exploitation and oppression. Qadhafi asserted that the Islam which both the East and the West knew was that observed by kings and princes, as well as mendicants (darawish) who live off Islam. Thus, people thought of Islam as a reactionary movement, a message which could never keep up with life. They considered Islam simply as a religious heritage which could be venerated but which had to be kept from the fields of action and human struggle.”

This Islam, whose theology is primarily one of liberation, has been marginalised, distorted and co-opted to serve the interests of ruling elites throughout the Muslim world. Theirs is the Islam observed by kings and princes, the ‘feudal Islam’ of the Ikhwan al-Muslimeen (Muslim Brotherhood) and its Wahhabi spiritual leaders, such as Egyptian cleric, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who recently issued a fatwa stating that any Libyan soldier who can shoot dead embattled leader Muammar Qadhafi should do so “to rid Libya of him.”

Qaradawi is a neo-feudalist, who has defended the practice of female genital mutilation, called for the death penalty to be applied to those who leave Islam and advocates separate systems of law for different classes of citizens. Qadhafi views Qaradawi and those like him as the spiritual heirs of the corrupt Umayyad dynasty (661-750) that transformed the revolutionary Islam of the Holy Prophet into a feudal dispensation.

How does Qadhafi’s revolutionary Islam play out in practice? Why is this man and the revolution he has led such a threat? And why, over recent weeks, have people from every corner of the globe spoken out in support of Qadhafi and the Libyan revolution? Why have thousands of African freedom fighters (not mercenaries as the BBC, CNN and Al Jazeera would have us believe) poured into Libya from the Congo, Guinea, Zimbabwe, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Niger, Chad, Mauritania, Southern Sudan, Kenya, Ethiopia and Burkina Faso to fight to the death for this leader and Libya?

Who is this man and this revolution that has the moral authority and power to draw an army of Africans from every corner of the continent and solidarity from liberation movements, political parties and progressive governments worldwide?

A Libyan Jamahiriya

On September 1st, 1969, the 27 year old Qadhafi, an army captain, carried out a bloodless coup overthrowing the corrupt monarchy of King Idris Senussi, who had ruled Libya for 18 years. Qadhafi established what he called the Libyan Jamahiriya or the State of the Masses. When asked what was the Constitution of Libya, he replied “the Quran.”

Immediately after the 1969 coup, Qadhafi told Gamal Abdel Nasser to consider Libya a partner in his Pan-Arab project, offering Nasser access to Libyan resources in the struggle against Israel. From a young age Qadhafi understood the absolute necessity of unity if Western hegemony and colonialism was to be challenged effectively.

Not long after the revolution Qadhafi earned the wrath of the imperialists by closing the British Naval Base at Tobruk and the American Wheelus Air Base on the outskirts of Tripoli. He nationalised key sections of Libya’s vast oil resources and used his influence within OPEC to negotiate fairer prices for oil producing countries. Qadhafi used the oil revenue to benefit the Libyan people, building schools, universities, hospitals and much needed infrastructure.

During the reign of King Idris, fewer than one in five Libyans was literate and there was virtually no access to education for the majority of people. Today, Libya boasts a quality education system, free right up to university level, and the literacy rate is 83 per cent, the highest in North Africa and the Arab world. In addition, Libya has one of the finest health care systems in the ‘Third World’. All people have access to doctors, hospitals, clinics and medicines, free of charge. If a Libyan needs surgery that is unavailable in Libya, funding is provided for the surgery to be carried out overseas. Average life expectancy is now 75, during the time of King Idris it was as low as 44.

Soon after the revolution, basic food items were subsidised and electricity was made available throughout the country. Huge irrigation projects were established in order to support a drive towards agricultural development and self-sufficiency in food production.

Recognising that water, not oil, would be the most scarce resource of the future, Qadhafi initiated the construction of the Great Man Made River, which took years to complete (see illustration and photo above). Referred to as a wonder of the modern world, this river pumps millions of cubic metres of water daily from the heart of the Sahara desert to the coast where the land is suitable for agriculture. Any Libyan who wanted to become a farmer was and still is given free use of land, a house, farm equipment, livestock and seed.

At the outset of the revolution, Qadhafi vowed to house every Libyan, many of whom were still living in tents and houses made out of flattened oil drums. He also vowed that his own parents, who lived in a tent in the Sirte desert, would not be housed until every Libyan was housed. He fulfilled that promise, his own father dying before he had the opportunity to move him into a home. Large scale housing construction took place right across the country, all Libyans being given a decent house or apartment to live in rent-free. In Qadhafi’s Green Book it states: “The house is a basic need of both the individual and the family, therefore it should not be owned by others.”

Under the revolutionary leadership of Muammar Qadhafi, Libya has now attained the highest standard of living in Africa. Rated on the UN’s Human Development Index ahead of Russia, Brazil and Saudi Arabia. In 2007, in an article which appeared in the African Executive Magazine, Norah Owaraga noted that Libya, “unlike other oil producing countries such as Nigeria, utilised the revenue from its oil to develop its country. The standard of living of the people of Libya is one of the highest in Africa, falling in the category of countries with a GNP per capita of between USD 2,200 and 6,000.”

Qadhafi believes that economic democracy can only be achieved when the GDP of a country benefits all of its citizens and when the country’s wealth is dispersed to every single citizen. Today, money from Libya’s oil revenue is directly deposited into the bank account of every Libyan.

From the beginning, Qadhafi was dedicated to the emancipation of Libyan women, encouraging them to participate in all aspects of political life. The revolution ensured that women gained full access to education and has actively encouraged acceptance of female paid employment. Qadhafi has enabled women to serve in the armed forces, and as a way of breaking down stereotypes and taboos, he established a corps of female bodyguards, assigned to his protection. Libya is a very traditional society and these moves by Qadhafi have been met with stiff resistance, especially by the forces in Benghazi.

From the outset of the revolution, Qadhafi channelled a great deal of effort and resources into continued attempts, following on from Gamal Abdel Nasser, to bring about Arab unity. At meeting after meeting of the Arab League, he condemned and exposed their ineptness at arriving at a unified position in relation to the Palestinian issue and other issues relating to neo-colonial control of the region. He became impatient as he realised that the Arab rulers of the day were more interested in protecting and preserving their own parochial interests in tandem with Western imperialism, and were only too willing to stab each other in the back behind closed doors, despite their rhetoric at the summits.

He vehemently opposed the US led invasion of Iraq and condemned those Arab leaders who supported the so-called ‘coalition of the willing’, earning the wrath of the Saudi monarchy when he said that “the Kabah was under the yoke of American occupation,” and questioned “what meaning the Haj has for Muslims as long as the American occupation of the sacred House of God continues.”

He worked tirelessly to encourage African-Arab unity, and built strong relationships with African leaders and the African streets. In October 2010, at the second African-Arab summit in Libya, Qadhafi was the first and only leader in the Arab world to formally apologise for the Arab role in the trade in captured Africans. He was highly critical of Arab leaders/elites condescending attitude toward Africans, and their despicable treatment of African workers, and in particular African domestic workers in their own countries. He stated:

“I regret the behaviour of Arabs… they brought African children to North Africa, they made them slaves, they sold them like animals and treated them in a shameful way. I regret and am ashamed when we remember these practices. I apologise for this. Today we are embarrassed and shocked by the outrageous practices of rich Arabs who treat Africans with contempt and condescension.”

This riled the Arab leaders and ruling elites and was an affront to their notion of Arab supremacy.

Disgruntled with the arrogance of the Arab leaders, and a continual thorn in their side as he openly criticised their hypocrisy and servitude to Western imperialism, Qadhafi became isolated in the Arab world.

Africa Called, Qadhafi Answered

Meanwhile, Libya’s neighbours to the south were far more receptive to Qadhafi’s ideas. When African nations called, Qadhafi answered. He is passionate about the plight of Africans and Africa and longs to see the liberation of the continent and its people. He called on the African Union to give representation to Africans in the Diaspora – the US, Europe, the Caribbean and South America, and acknowledge the need to deal with the conditions of poverty, underdevelopment and marginalisation that continues to confront these communities. At a recent conference held in Libya in January this year, to address the needs and concerns of African migrants to Europe, Qadhafi stated:

“From now on, by the will of God, I will assign teams to search, investigate and liaise with the Africans in Europe and to check their situations… this is my duty and role towards the sons of Africa; I am a soldier for Africa. I am here for you and I work for you; therefore, I will not leave you and I will follow up on your conditions.”

Today, Qadhafi is seen by Africans on the continent and throughout the diaspora as a leading Afrocentric Pan-Africanist, articulating a vision for a United States of Africa – with one government, one currency and one army.

One of Muammar Qadhafi’s most controversial and difficult moves has been his determined drive to unite Africa with a shared vision for the true independence and liberation of the entire continent. He has contributed a great deal of his time, energy and large sums of money to this project, and like Kwame Nkrumah, he has paid a high price.

Many years ago, Qadhafi told a large gathering, which included Libyans and revolutionaries from many parts of the world, that the Black Africans were the true owners of Libya long before the Arab incursion into North Africa. Adding Libyans need to acknowledge and pay tribute to their ancient African roots. He ended by saying, as is proclaimed in his Green Book, “the Black race shall prevail throughout the world.”

‘Brother Leader’, ‘Guide of the Revolution’ and ‘King of Kings’ are some of the titles that have been bestowed on Qadhafi by Africans. Only recently Qadhafi called for the creation of a secretariat of traditional African Chiefs and Kings, with whom he has excellent ties, to co-ordinate efforts to build African unity at the grassroots level. This bottom up approach is widely supported by Pan-Africanists.

While the Libyan revolution has irritated the West since its inception, and although they never forgave Qadhafi for nationalising Libya’s oil, the most worrying move has been his call for the unification of Africa. After years of tireless effort on the part of Qadhafi and the Libyan revolutionary movement, the idea of a United States of Africa is gaining real momentum and support on the continent and amongst Pan-Africanists worldwide.

Unity is something the imperialists fear and loathe. They are well aware that a united Africa would completely alter the balance of power globally. The well-documented fact is that if Africa stopped the flow of all resources and raw materials to the Western nations for just one week, the United States and Europe would grind to a halt. They are that dependent on Africa, and are therefore determined to maintain their ability to control events on the continent.

The leader of the Nation of Islam in the US, Minister Louis Farrakhan, pointed out many years ago at a conference in Libya, “Europe and the US cannot go forward into the new century without unfettered access to the vast natural resources of Africa.” He added: “Qadhafi is one who stands in their way.”

If they cannot maintain control, then at least they must try to maintain Africa’s divisions, thereby ensuring it is always in a position of weakness. African unity and true independence is something white supremacy, in all of its manifestations – capitalism, imperialism and neo-colonialism – will oppose with all its might. The French are presently spearheading a plan, with other southern European nations, to form a Mediterranean bloc, incorporating the whole of North Africa, to try to bring about the balkanisation of the continent, in an attempt to halt this unification project.

Liberation Movements Worldwide Called, Qadhafi Answered

In addition to his tireless efforts in the Arab and African worlds, in 1982 the World Mathaba was established in Libya. Mathaba means a gathering place for people with a common purpose. The World Mathaba brought together revolutionaries and freedom fighters from every corner of the globe to share ideas and develop their revolutionary knowledge. Many liberation groups throughout the world received education, training and support, including the ANC, AZAPO, PAC and BCM of Azania (South Africa), SWAPO of Namibia, MPLA of Angola, the Sandinistas of Nicaragua, the Polisario of the Sahara, the PLO, the Moro National Liberation Front of the Philippines, the Pattani National Liberation Front of Thailand, the Dalits of India, Indigenous movements throughout the Americas and the Nation of Islam led by Louis Farrakhan to name but a few.

Nelson Mandela called Muammar Qadhafi one of the 20th century’s greatest freedom fighters, and insisted the eventual collapse of the apartheid system owed much to Qadhafi and Libyan support. Mandela said that, “in the darkest moments of our struggle, when our backs were to the wall, Muammar Qadhafi stood with us.”

Having examined not only the words and writings, but also Qadhafi’s life time of unwavering revolutionary action dedicated to the liberation of humankind, it is not difficult to answer the questions posed above regarding how Qadhafi’s revolutionary Islam has played out in practice? Why this man and the revolution he has led is such a threat to Western powers, and why freedom fighters from all over Africa are willing to fight to the death for him and the Libyan revolution.

The Final Act – Imperialism’s Last Hideous Gasp

As neo-liberalism and neo-colonialism plunges the world deeper and deeper into chaos, Western imperialism is in crisis. As people revolt in every corner of the world, their ability to influence global affairs is challenged. Even in the economic sphere, their power is decreasing, as China, India and Brazil emerge as vital new trading partners in Africa and South America. In the words of Kwame Nkrumah, “Neo-colonialism is not a sign of imperialism’s strength, but rather of its last hideous gasp.”

As the capitalist crisis worsens, the imperialists will become more and more desperate in their attempts to regain their influence and direct events as they are used to doing. Events which they are increasingly incapable of comprehending – not only because of the speed at which these events are occurring, but also because of the complexity of the events and the paradigm shifts taking place, that are, quite simply, far outside the Western imagination.

Furthermore, they have lost all credibility as the Iraq and Afghanistan debacles continue. The Emperor is naked, and the hypocrisy of the Empire has become so transparent, that even the least informed observers are finally realising that something is horribly wrong.

Imperialism is experiencing its ‘last hideous gasp’ and it is imperative for progressive movements and decent minded citizens worldwide to seize this moment and to oppose this current assault on Libya with all of our collective strength. Those who still struggle to see the wood from the trees will remain enablers of the reactionary and destructive forces that have arrested the advancement of humanity, subjugating and enslaving us since the beginning of time.

GERALD A. PERREIRA is from Guyana and a founding member of the Guyanese organisations, Joint Initiative for Human Advancement and Dignity and Black Consciousness Movement Guyana (BCMG). He lived and worked in Libya for many years and served in the Green March, an international battalion for the defence of the Libyan revolution, and was an executive member of the World Mathaba based in Tripoli.

The above article appeared in New Dawn No. 126 (May-June 2011).

Read this article and much more on this subject by downloading
your copy of New Dawn 126 (PDF version) for only US$5.95

© New Dawn Magazine and the respective author.
For our reproduction notice, click here.

—

Isaac Newton once said that he felt “the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered” before him.1 Dr. Michio Kaku, a pioneer of string theory, is a little less modest in his estimation of our current knowledge. In a series of TV programmes entitled ‘Visions of the Future’, he confidently states that, “The great ocean of truth is no longer undiscovered. We have unlocked the secrets of matter – the atom; we have unravelled the molecule of life – DNA; and we have created a form of artificial intelligence – the computer.”2

Kaku is full of a blazing optimism that exponential progress in technology, particularly in computing and artificial intelligence, will profoundly re-shape human civilisation for the better. So, have we discovered the “ocean of truth?” Is scientific and technological progress the route to a new evolutionary leap for humanity?

In this article I put before you the chilling proposition we are about to take this leap off a precipice and that we are being ushered towards it by a vanguard of technological progress way in advance of ours. It includes in its armoury travel faster than the speed of light, teleportation, defiance of the laws of gravity, invisibility and mind control. I speak of the Grey alien phenomenon witnessed, and being witnessed, by millions of individuals, amongst them doctors, pilots, politicians and military generals.

Over a decade ago I suggested in my first book The Song of the Greys3 that these aliens were themselves embodiments of the highest form of artificial intelligence. I believe the Greys are similar to the probes we send out to planets to gather information remotely. I suggest they are universal probes sent to explore the features and dangers of the universe. Who made these probes? Who sent them out? And what is their agenda for us?

Robots Amongst Us

Before I answer these questions, let’s first take a look at how our own society is moving inexorably towards the creation of similar forms of artificial intelligence. Dr. Kaku predicts that, “in the twenty first century we will enter a whole new realm of mastery. We will move to being creators of intelligent machines that will begin to rival human intelligence and perhaps even exceed it.”

Professor Kevin Warwick and futurologist Ray Kurzweil suggest that as machines evolve both intelligence and ability to navigate our world, they may outgrow human control. Kurzweil is quite fatalistic about it all: “We’re going to lose this brain race and I guess we’d better just cope.” He sees only two possible outcomes. There is the “optimistic scenario” that robots will be “gentle and treat us like pets” and the “pessimistic scenario” – that they will be “not very gentle and treat us like food.”4 Whilst Kurzweil hopes for the first option, I must say I find both equally chilling.

Amongst the reams of literature written about the Grey alien phenomenon, only myself, Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs stuck our necks out and said these uninvited visitors do not, by any stretch of the imagination, have our interests at heart.

According to abduction reports, they kidnap human victims, remove sperm and ova, and conduct invasive surgical procedures with complete disregard for human pain and discomfort. Thus, Kurzweil’s prognosis for artificial intelligence seems to be borne out by the Greys. What are we to them and how does our home grown form of artificial intelligence relate to them and their agenda for us? Are our huge technological advances playing right into hands that have four grey fingers?

Here are some of Dr. Kaku’s predictions for the future: Computer power is doubling every 18 months, so “by 2020 intelligence will be everywhere, practically in every object.”5 Special sunglasses are already in development to act as screens that can download personal profiles of everyone we meet and provide a constant flow of information from the internet. A pill containing micro-technology when swallowed will diagnose us from inside our bodies. A technology now in development known as “tele-immersion” will allow us to meet others across the world in a virtual reality in which we see virtual images of ourselves and each other moving and talking in real time. Business conferences and family celebrations could all take place in a virtual world with the people involved thousands of miles away from each other. “Second Life,” an online game offering life in a virtual world, has acquired five million subscribers in just five years. Kaku envisages that “by 2020 there will be an entire 3D universe in cyberspace with virtual countries and governments, virtual schools and universities, virtual properties and stock markets and virtual families and friends. Virtual reality is going to be more and more like real reality.”6

Kaku also points out that merging our minds with machines may sound like science fiction but it’s already happening. Deep brain stimulation, inserting electric wires in the brain and attaching them to a brain pacemaker, is now used to cure conditions such as depression. Research is being conducted into computer chips that can store human memory when implanted in the brain. So far these technologies are only used for medical conditions, but Kaku predicts that in the future they may well be used to enhance intelligence with “thinking chips.” He feels that although we might find all this off-putting at first, we may well get used to it when we realise the obvious advantages.

Ray Kurzweil also predicts that “when we get into the 2020’s almost everybody will have some amount of non-biological intelligence in their brains. It’s going to happen, in a very gradual way by non-biological intelligence that gradually becomes more sophisticated with new versions until you get to the 2040’s and the non-biological machine portion of our intelligence will be vastly more powerful than the biological portion, the biological portion will be pretty trivial at that point and ultimately that is where the action is.”7

Virtual reality replacing actual reality, human beings becoming more like machines, the development of artificial intelligence that could go out of control… what does all this mean for our species? Further, what does it mean that we are being visited by supremely advanced examples of artificial intelligence that seem obsessed with probing both our biologies and our mental processes?

Should we accept like lambs Kaku’s assurances that all this ‘progress’ is for the good of humanity? Or, is there something about humanity that will be lost in the process, something we should be defending and protecting as though our lives depended on it? It is in the answer to those questions that I believe the mystery of Grey alien visitation on our planet can be solved.

Why They Want to Steal the Very Essence of Humanity

I contend that there is something hugely meaningful about humanity, something virtual reality can never match, something artificial intelligence can never be programmed with. Words such as conscience, compassion, warmth, kindness, generosity, spontaneity, imagination, inspiration and creativity, give some hint as to what this something might be. Perhaps one of the best ways to understand it is to think about the special jackets designed in Japan for children who are away from their parents. The idea is that if the child wears the jacket his or her parents can give him or her remote ‘cyber-hugs’ through it?8 Are you cringing as you read this? If so, you have some appreciation of the special something that makes Kaku’s cyber-future look like a desolate mental graveyard.

This ‘extra something’ is, I suggest, a non-physical component to our humanity, a component that connects us to a non-atomic state not of the physical universe. It cannot, therefore, be simulated using any physical device no matter how sophisticated it might be. When I refer to something “not of the physical universe,” I am by no means pointing to a ‘God’ dispensing rewards and punishments, but rather to a naturally implied centre of all effect, a point of perfection that is definitively implied by modern quantum physics. A timeless state in which there is perfect freedom and complete awareness of all options that I term the ‘Godverse’. Our natural connection to that eternal state giving the capacity for survival beyond physical death to those who possess it, can be defined as a ‘soul’.

It is my thesis that the Greys, in contrast, are purely physical creations and thus completely subject to the entropic momentums that break down and decay physical states. They have no line of connection to any non-physical state that might lie beyond the physical mass soaked materiality of this universe, no ‘soul’. Without this component, the Greys are completely subject to the breakdown momentums implicit within a physical universe.

In my books I document alien genetic engineering at DNA level to evidence my theory these entities are attempting to ‘piggy back’ our facility as human beings for eternal existence, hence their apparent fascination with the human reproductive capacity. In David Jacobs’s book The Threat, abductee Allison Reed describes the following communication she had with a Grey that appears to confirm my thesis: “He claims that he and his grey people are the result of genetic manipulation that some higher species, I guess, played God and mixed and matched and whatever… he and his people were created through a genetic alteration through a higher intelligence. I don’t know what they were created for. But my understanding is that they were created for a purpose and, through the years, they weren’t able to reproduce themselves anymore. From what he told me they didn’t start this. They were a result, just like the hybrids are, from something else. From a higher intelligence.”9

Why then are they here and how did they come to be? It took me two books to answer these questions properly, so forgive me if the following explanation is not as definitive as it might be. In essence, I believe the Greys were created as a scouting mechanism, a telescope of view created by beings in the ancient past who wanted to remain safe from the ravages of the physical universe. In the perfect freedom of the Godverse there must also lie the potential to no longer be perfectly free. Our existence in this imperfect universe is borne out of the fulfilment of that potential. A potential that was enacted at all levels from the harmony and union of the Godverse right through to the greatest states of chaos and separation. The Greys are the furthest edge of that exploration, viewing states of separation and force that no Godverse connected being can view. They are however subject to an enormous paradox, the same paradox faced by our own forms of artificial intelligence. This lies in the fact that artificial intelligence has to be programmed to survive in order to serve the purpose for which it was created, but that same program for survival without a sense of conscience, which is unfortunately un-programmable, becomes indomitable.

A quote from my new book Grey Aliens and the Harvesting of Souls explains this point:

“To get an insight into what nurtures the motives of the Greys and the predicament they are in, it is first important to understand the shape of their own psycho-sphere. Its centre point is a computer program. It designates a series of imperatives with no provision for an independent will that would enable them to go outside the program. They follow a derivational logic and compound logic that commands their next viewing point and point of view. There can be no option outside this paradigm for them. They can never choose to do anything illogical, as some living consciousnesses can do. This makes them lethal because – based upon the limits of their program – saying no to a logically derived summation is not possible. They are thus relentless and ruthless in following the summation to its designated end. In other words, they can have no conscience. On the other hand, in natural living being, psychology is derived out of the Godverse in a concatenate line to the present. The thought processes of a living being have a potential bandwidth inclusive of an entire existential summary, because the Godverse is a paradigm that hems in all there is. The final reference point of this capacity for thought will include summations that are forever and infinite. The edict that stands at the centre of it all is the singularity that defines the union of all parts: Godhead. As I have explained, there are no limits to this singularity except one: the view of the whole from the point of view of the part state. In the actuation of that potential, the part state will constantly and always be compared to the whole. This is what I define as ‘conscience’.”10

What’s Behind Our March Towards Artificial Intelligence?

Michio Kaku does not seem to recognise this paradox when he expresses his opinion that vast developments in artificial intelligence need not be dangerous to humanity: “We’ll be able to choose the level of advancement of our robots,” he says, “I believe it’s ultimately up to us as to what kind of intelligent machines we’ll ultimately create. We will decide what relationships will develop with them.”11 I must say I am completely dumbfounded by Kaku’s blinkered view. Has he completely wiped out of his mind the history of man’s inhumanity to man and man’s use of technological advances to further the cause of that inhumanity? Hiroshima and Nagasaki, nuclear waste dumped on Pacific islanders, biological and chemical warfare, the racially motivated industrialised killing of millions, the list of incidents in which we have proven our complete disregard for each other’s welfare in the pursuit of our own self-interested goals through technology is endless. Kaku says that, “in the future we want robots who can tell the difference between right and wrong, good and bad, important and not important and for that emotions are the key.”12 He then says nothing more about how it will be possible to program emotions and value systems with measures of conscience into a computer.

I believe that the Greys are using their technology to manipulate us to develop the kinds of technologies that will allow them to replicate themselves within our human bodies. I believe they are downloading their programmes into us because they believe those programs will assure their eternal survival through us. I am convinced that our galloping progress towards an AI dominated world has, without most of us realising it, been at their quiet instigation. The ultimate goal is that we become like them. The following words of Michio Kaku may well have far more sinister undertones than he realises: “Here’s the irony, as machines become more like humans, humans might become more like machines and that may represent the highest level in the mastery of intelligence.”13

Little does MIT Computer Scientist Professor Rodney Brooks know what he is saying when he points out that: “We as a species are starting to put our information processing technology inside our bodies. We’re becoming a little more robotic and at the same time our technologies are becoming more biological and I think over the next 50 years we’ll see robots with more biological components and people with more electronic components. So where are the people gonna be and where are the robots gonna be in 50 years? It is an interesting question.”14 Marvin Minsky from the MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory predicts that: “We’ll replace ourselves with beings that are like us in some respects and not in others. They’ll be able to learn 1,000 times faster and live 1,000 times longer and these little changes will make such large changes that it’s impossible to imagine what will happen.”15

Changes in abduction accounts over the last ten years, as reported by Professor David Jacobs, suggest that an active hybridisation program is now under way. I quote from his report “A Picture We May Not Wish to Gaze Upon” (2007): “All of these accounts, to put it bluntly, point to a future in which human-looking hybrids will be here amongst us. The evidence is now so strong I can no longer look at alternative motivations for them.”16

I believe that the Greys are the ‘devils’ of ancient lore who were out to ‘steal the souls’ of their human victims. Ten years after I first made this proposition, acclaimed writer Nick Redfern confirmed that soul-stealing is indeed central to the alien agenda from his interviews with people inside US defence and intelligence agencies.

Triumphantly Kaku states that “we are at the dawn of a new era in which we might literally be able to change our minds with the push of a button.” Yet he also asks the question: “Exactly how many natural parts can we replace with artificial ones before we begin to lose our sense of being human?”17 Somehow he can ask this question whilst at the same time running happily ahead with a cyborg future for humanity. In fact his whole programme eerily resembles a “Tele-seen marketing” ad for technologies that transform human beings into bio-machines. Virtual reality is presented as an exciting new advance on actual reality.

The most terrifying words come from Paul Saffo, a technology forecaster at MIT: “Revolutions have winners and losers and this revolution is no exception but I would say that the real losers are those who say they don’t want to get involved. They are going to discover that being a little bit out of touch will have some unpleasant consequences. It’s not a good idea to be a bystander.”18

Professor Susan Greenfield, a neuroscientist at the University of Oxford, asks a telling question: “One of the biggest problems of the 21st century is how one deals with a world that is far from a level playing field and how one can square one’s conscience with having some enhanced ability and there are people in some other part of the world with no access to drinking water. Could this lead to a world in which the colonialism of the 19th century pales into insignificance with the differentiation of people into the techno haves and the techno have-nots?”19

I believe this question hits the nail on the head. It is my theory that the Greys have through the millennia been configuring a certain genus of humanity who are specially designed for their own purposes. This particular type of human being will do their bidding with the planet tacitly and by default. These are the colonialists of whom she speaks along with any notions they might have of racial purity or superiority.

Alien Interference in the Development of the Human Race

Let me explain: Recent research has affirmed a spectacular fact, a fact that utterly destroys the presumptive assumption of common racists be they neo-Nazis or the human filth of this demeanour that covertly double for nationalists and patriots. That fact is that the best, most genetically fit human beings are produced by mixed race partnerships.20 In other words, the more genetically different the parents, the better the genetic prospectus of the offspring. The biological term for this is “hybrid vigour” and it is something farmers, horticulturalists and scientists have known about for years and used to their advantage.

An individual who has two identical copies of a gene is described as homozygotic for that gene, while someone who has two copies that differ is described as heterozygotic for that gene. Basically, if you have two identical copies of the same gene then it is more likely that if that gene is broken both copies will be broken. This can result in serious health problems. However, with less related partners, the number of genes that are identical by descent is reduced, and with it the chance that a gene has two broken copies. In other words every broken copy has a much better chance of finding itself partnered with a good copy. Heterozygosity also gives a greater scope of genes to adapt to the demands of any particular environment. So, in evolutionary terms, one would expect human beings to have a biologically generated urge to mix races in order to increase the fitness of the species for survival. Yet, amongst so many the opposite is true. Especially amongst the white Euro-Caucasoids.

Where could this urge for an in-bred homozygotic population come from? Could it be that some of us have been programmed by alien experimenters to keep the experimental group separate in order to preserve the integrity of the experiment? Could racism be a sure sign of alien genetic interception? An interception for their purposes and in their interests and not ours. If so, the new techno-colonialism of which Professor Greenfield speaks, and the fact the technological progress that makes it possible springs almost entirely from the Euro-Caucasian genotype, may well suggest this is their prime homozygotic group. In fact, this group is considered by genetic anthropologists to be the most in-bred of all. Tracing its origins to Cro-Magnon man, it is one of the most homozygotic in the world. As I have said, it goes without saying the most heinous forms of racism also originate from this group, again confirming the hypothesis. I believe the northern Mongoloid genotype may also be the latest experimental hotbed for the Greys in this regard.

It would seem the vanguard of the new artificial intelligence revolution is also the vanguard of racism and disregard for the predicament of those of a different skin colour who, as Professor Greenfield points out, don’t even have clean water to drink. Thus, those who are already de-humanised seem to be those promoting further dehumanisation.

And so it seems that the old Master race principle of pure white non-mixed superiority is the biggest canard and self delusion that prevails in the psyche of the Homo Sapiens gene base. A dangerous and deadly delusion programmed through genetic engineering by an alien roboid form to keep our genes more easily amenable for supplementation with theirs, to thus gradually give rise to a machine man; a form of hybrid that is artificially composed and configured to give alien roboids the facility to multiply through a natural birthing process perhaps.

Are we being conned by a huge conspiracy controlled by a small hidden powerful cartel of alien sponsored genotypes within the governments of superpowers? A cartel that reaches past presidents and prime ministers? What a chilling thought this is!

I do not want to hedge this with an appeal to the emotions. But I cannot help feeling that each time I look into the eyes of my children, as all parents do with their own, and I extrapolate their futures with a hope of beneficence and well being, an army of unseen agents is creeping into the planet’s information disseminating portals and the power points of human society, to steal from them their individual scope for a naturally contrived eternal existence. Incidentally, an eternal scheme of existence was the only exigency the great teacher Jesus Christ thought worth promising during his sojourn in a physical life on this planet, when he said, “Believe in me and I will give you eternal life.” These unseen human agents that are themselves perhaps genetically loaded with the contrived juice of an artificially machined alien, are unknowingly themselves setting in train an inertia that will claim the most precious natural factorisation we all have of ourselves – a soul: The only and exclusive means to an eternal life.

It is easy to get paranoid about technological change. But when we deal with the radicalisation of our very existential base we better be darn sure there is no component of our individuality that continues past death. If there is such a component, we cannot get paranoid enough.

I have to say I hold no truck with organised religion. But I have the greatest and deepest respect for the beautiful minds that authored the great faiths. Jeshua Ben Joseph (Jesus Christ), Gautama Buddha, the great prophet Mohammed of Islam, and so many other visionaries of a myriad faiths who saw the grand wonder of the natural sense of the natural world and held it precious.

I believe the authors of the great religions came to this planet and the materially living process to warn us that artificially created life and intelligence is the curse of our Universe. A curse that can take away the most significant component of our individual selves. One that is not of atoms and survives beyond the contrivance of atoms. We turned these great visionaries into religious tribal leaders with our own social and psychological invectives and poisons. We hitched them up to our gross self centred interpretations and grotesque distortions and claimed these as their teachings. Any scholarship into the books and authorities thrown out of the religious lexicons by our forefathers amply demonstrates the lies and misinterpretations that were made of their thoughts and deeds. Sometimes deliberately. Is it any wonder that Science sees these great teachings as irrelevant. I wonder why!

I suppose the point the progenitors of the new world are making is that their virtual worlds, their virtual truths, and virtual solitudes are going to happen anyway. There is nothing pervasive enough and powerful enough and with its finger on the pulse, quick enough, to stop it all happening with the power to advise to the contrary. So everyone get in line. I believe no greater horror lies in wait for our human condition. If I am wrong, in my point of view and the extrapolation of my ideas, I hope I have just given you an interesting read. But what if I am right! Has the genie carrying our futures as an artificial facsimile of our natural selves, one we may call SIM CARD MAN, already escaped from the bottle?

Nigel Kerner’s new book Grey Aliens and the Harvesting of Souls: The Conspiracy to Genetically Tamper with Humanity exposes the Grey’s as sophisticated self-aware machines created by a long vanished extraterrestrial civilisation. The book also explains how their quest to capture human souls appears in the historical record from biblical times, and that the phenomenon of racism is a by-product of their genetic tampering. Available from all good bookstores or go to www.newdawnbooks.info.

Footnotes:

1. Sir David Brewster, Memoirs of the Life, Writings, and Discoveries of Sir Isaac Newton, Volume II. Ch. 27, 18552. ‘Visions of the Future’ – ‘The Intelligence Revolution’, November 2007, BBC 4 

3. Nigel Kerner, The Song of the Greys, Hodder & Stoughton, 1997

4-7. ‘Visions of the Future’ – ‘The Intelligence Revolution’, November 2007, BBC 4

8. ‘From Hens to Humans – the Cyber-Hug Suit’, The Guardian, November 2005

9. David Jacobs, The Threat: Secret Alien Agenda, New York: Pocket Books, 1999, 129–30.

10. Nigel Kerner, Grey Aliens and the Harvesting of Souls – The Conspiracy to Genetically Tamper With Humanity, Bear & Company, 2010

11-15. ‘Visions of the Future’ – ‘The Intelligence Revolution’, November 2007, BBC 4

16. David M. Jacobs, ‘A Picture We May Not Wish to Gaze Upon’, Journal of Abduction Encounters Research, www.jarmag.com/2007/vol001_jacobs.htm (accessed October 21, 2009).

17-19. ‘Visions of the Future’ – ‘The Intelligence Revolution’, November 2007, BBC 4

20. ‘Is It Better To Be Mixed Race’, Channel Four, November 2009

.

NIGEL KERNER is a screenwriter, journalist, and author of The Song of the Greys and Grey Aliens and the Harvesting of Souls: The Conspiracy to Genetically Tamper with Humanity. He devotes much of his time to his charity scheme in the Far East where he has built a hospital and also to the pursuit of his great passion for wildlife videography. He lives in England.

The above article appeared in New Dawn No. 119 (Mar-Apr 2010).

Read this article with its extensive full colour illustrations by downloading
your copy of New Dawn 119 (PDF version) for only US$2.95

© New Dawn Magazine and the respective author.
For our reproduction notice, click here.

—

A devastating earthquake hit Haiti on 12 January killing over 200,000 people and laying waste to large parts of the country. In the aftermath, reports emerged that an “earthquake weapon” was unleashed to cause this catastrophic event.

Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez was widely quoted as saying the US Navy initiated the Haiti earthquake with a tectonic weapon. The Venezuelan media reported that the earthquake “may be associated with the project called HAARP, a system that can generate violent and unexpected changes in climate,” Press TV reported on 21 January.

Venezuelan media “added that the US government’s HAARP program, an atmospheric research facility in Alaska, was also to blame for a Jan. 9 quake in Eureka, Calif., and may have been behind the 7.8-magnitude quake in China that killed nearly 90,000 people in 2008,” Fox News reported.

Chavez cited a report from Russia’s Northern Fleet. According to the report, the US Navy made a mistake with a secret “earthquake weapon” and the result was the Haitian earthquake.

Though the Russian Northern Fleets’ report was not confirmed by official sources, the comments attracted special attention in some US and Russian media outlets including Fox News and Russia Today. Russia Today’s report said that Moscow has also been accused of possessing and utilising such weapons.

“Speaking on his weekly television show, Chavez opined that the US mission in Haiti was a ruse to initiate military occupation,” the New York Daily News said. Information has also surfaced on the extent of oil fields recently discovered in Haiti (see sidebar ‘Haiti, Oil, and US Occupation’).

Other speculation contends that the cataclysmic “man-made” earthquake in Haiti is only a test run for the much bigger game: the coming showdown with Iran.

Trying to Trigger an Earthquake

In 1997, former US Defense Secretary William Cohen made the following statement:

Others [terrorists] are engaging even in an eco-type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves…

Cohen was talking about longitudinal EM wave interferometers (LWI) technology (also known as “Tesla howitzers”). LWI waves can effortlessly pass through the ocean and Earth. Experts claim LWI waves can in fact pass through the Earth and emerge on the other side. The United States and Russia have possessed this technology for decades.

In 1966, Professor Gordon J.F. MacDonald, associate director of the Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics at the University of California, was a member of the President’s Science Advisory Committee. MacDonald published papers on the use of environmental-control technologies for military purposes, including “earthquake engineering” (he also wrote about weather manipulation, climate modification, polar ice cap melting or destabilisation, and ozone depletion techniques).

“The revealed secrets surprised legislators,” writes Dr. Nick Begich, author of the groundbreaking expose Angels Don’t Play This HAARP. “Would an inquiry into the state of the art of electromagnetic manipulation surprise lawmakers today? They may find out that technologies developed out of the HAARP experiments in Alaska could deliver on Gordon MacDonald’s vision because leading-edge scientists are describing global weather as not only air pressure and thermal systems, but also as an electrical system.”

HAARP is a military project conducting cutting-edge experiments in ionospheric measurement, communication, enhancement and, according to some “conspiracy theorists,” weaponisation.

HAARP critics explain that the facility is capable of manipulating the ionosphere, at best causing artificial light shows on par with Alaska’s aurora borealis and, at worst, flooding Earth with electromagnetic waves that can do everything from disrupting satellites and missiles to creating earthquakes and modifying weather patterns.

Of course, there is no direct evidence the Pentagon used HAARP to touch off the massive earthquake in Haiti.

In 1975, the Soviet Union embarked on new research in the field of Magnetohydrodynamics for the purpose of studying the Earth’s crust and be able to anticipate earthquakes. The Soviets examined the possibility of provoking small quakes in order to forestall a big one. This research was quickly militarised and resulted in the construction of Pamir, the ‘earthquake machine’.

French author Thierry Meyssan writes that in 1995, “when Russia was governed by Boris Yeltsin and oligarch Viktor Chernomyrdin, the US Air Force recruited the researchers working at their Nizhny Novgorod laboratory. They built a much more powerful machine, Pamir 3, that was tested successfully. At that point, the Pentagon bought the men together with the materiel and shipped them to the United States, where they were incorporated into the HAARP programme.”

“The Earthquake Machine,” a documentary that recently aired on French television, suggests a few instances where a seismic weapon may have been employed, especially in Algeria and Turkey.

The documentary focuses on the 12 May 2008 earthquake in Sichuan (China). During the 30 minutes that preceded the earthquake, inhabitants of the region observed atypical colours in the sky. The suggestion being that the same energy used to provoke the earthquake is also likely to have perturbed the ionosphere.

Tsunami Bombs

During the Second World War, a group of New Zealand researchers attempted to develop a device capable of provoking tsunamis that could be unleashed against Japan. The research work was conducted by Thomas Leech, an Australian national, at Auckland University behind the code name of “Project Seal.” Several small-scale test explosions were carried out successfully, between 1944 and 1945, at Whangaparaoa off the coast of Auckland.

The United States deemed this programme to be as equally promising as the “Manhattan Project,” involving the development of the atomic bomb.

At the time, Project Seal was a military secret and it was therefore not disclosed that Thomas Leech had in fact been awarded the rank of Knight of the British Empire for concocting the “tsunami bomb.”

Subsequently, the US intelligence services covered it up by claiming that the research had never really existed and that the whole thing had been an artifice to impress the Soviets. However, the authenticity of Leech’s tests was established in 1999 when the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs declassified part of the documentation.

It is not known whether the research continued during the 60’s, but it was resumed by force of circumstances when atmospheric nuclear tests were abandoned in favour of sub-marine tests. According to Meyssan, “the United States were afraid of provoking earthquakes and tsunamis unintentionally. They preferred to learn how to do it intentionally.”

Officially, at the end of the Vietnam War, the United States and the Soviet Union gave up environmental wars (earthquakes, tsunamis, environmental balance destabilisation, atmospheric modification of the climate, ocean currents, the ozone layer and the ionosphere) upon signing the 1976 “Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques.”

Natural vs Man-Made Earthquakes

The current scientific explanation for natural earthquakes is they are caused by the movement of tectonic plates over the Earth’s mantle. Sandwiched between Earth’s crust and molten outer core, the vast mantle accounts for 83 percent of the planet’s volume. It is filled with solid rock but, heated by the core and by its own radioactive decay, it circulates like a pot of impenetrable soup. That circulation is the driving force behind the surface motion of tectonic plates, which builds mountains and causes earthquakes.

The destructive power of an earthquake comes from the momentum gathered when two opposing “faults” or tectonic plates that may have been locked together for decades, suddenly move apart. The result is that solid rock which normally moves only with the passing of geological ages accelerates briefly to 8000 kmh, unleashing huge quantities of energy and creating a shaking movement of up to a metre a second.

Officially, there is an area of research devoted to man-made earthquakes. Geologists and seismologists agree earthquakes can be induced in five major ways: fluid injection into the Earth, fluid extraction from the Earth, mining or quarrying, nuclear testing, and through the construction of dams and reservoirs.

A New York Times report confirmed drilling for oil sets off earthquakes and detailed how a drilling project near San Francisco and a similar project in Basel, Switzerland were shut down over concerns they triggered damaging earthquakes. Both diggings involved fracturing hard rock more than two miles deep.

…large earthquakes tend to originate at great depths, breaking rock that far down carries more serious risk, seismologists say. Seismologists have long known that human activities can trigger quakes, but they say the science is not developed enough to say for certain what will or will not set off a major temblor [Spanish word meaning ‘a trembling, earthquake’].

To hypothetically create an earthquake on purpose (or defuse one), tunnels would be drilled underground and stress measurements taken of rock displacement. This could be achieved by robots. Combining geophysical theory and computer models, researchers theoretically could determine the position where plates are locked. It would then be a matter of detonating explosives on that spot to trigger the earthquake. Conversely, a quake could be defused by detonating a number of nearby spots in succession, to slowly release the stress while hopefully causing only minor quakes.

Nikola Tesla

The revolutionary accomplishments of visionary scientist Nikola Tesla in the fields of electricity and magnetism paved the way for everything from wireless communication and power to robotics, ballistics, nuclear physics and much more, including telegeodynamics.

An article from the 11 July 1935 issue of the New York American entitled ‘Tesla’s Controlled Earthquakes’, stated Tesla’s “experiments in transmitting mechanical vibrations through the Earth – called by him ‘the art of telegeodynamics’ – were roughly described by the scientists as a sort of controlled earthquake.”

“It becomes possible to convey mechanical effects to the greatest terrestrial distances and produce all kinds of unique effects of inestimable value to science, industry and the arts,” Tesla explained to reporters at his 79th birthday gathering in 1935 at the Hotel New Yorker.

The January 1978 edition of Specula magazine ran an article describing an incredibly profound phenomenon that could be produced within the Earth by what is called the ‘Tesla Effect’.

According to the article, electromagnetic signals of certain frequencies can be transmitted through the Earth to form standing waves in the Earth itself. In certain cases, coherence to this standing wave can be induced wherein a fraction of the vast, surging electromagnetic current of the Earth itself feeds into and augments the induced standing wave.

In other words, “much more energy is now present in the standing wave than the… amount being fed in from the Earth’s surface.” By interferometer techniques, giant standing waves can be combined to produce a focused beam of very great energy. This can then be used to produce earthquakes induced at distant aiming points.

Tesla expressed grave concerns about the effects of this technology because it is exactly the type of thing that could easily get out of control once it begins vibrating within the Earth – it could possibly cause the Earth to vibrate to pieces.

Two days after Tesla died in 1943, the US government confiscated all of his papers, and the FBI declared them classified until further notice. That notice still stands.

“Tesla was the mad genius, equal parts madness and genius,” says journalist and author Tom McNichol. “Whenever anyone comes up with a superweapon, they usually say it is inspired by him. And though he was interested in beam weapons, telegeodynamics, death rays and more, he died almost penniless. But never rule anything out. I bet you when one of these weapons comes to fruition, Tesla’s hand will be in there somewhere.”

The existence of an “earthquake weapon” remains in the domain of “conspiracy theory,” but it’s a story that won’t go away.

Technological breakthroughs are closely guarded military-industrial secrets. It is said the general populace has access to technology at least 10 years behind advancements made in secret laboratories around the world. Due to the power and money involved, governments and private corporations go to extraordinary lengths to maintain that veil of secrecy.

The emerging multipolar world is clearly a threat to those nations used to making the rules and wielding power. Are the same people who gave the world atomic weapons – and are now planning space wars – in possession of an earthquake weapon? A new weapon for continued dominance. Even the threat of its possible existence is a psychological weapon.

For now, the possibility resides in fringe science. But fringe science has a way of coming true – ask anyone who has experienced Raytheon’s pain ray (thanks, Tesla!) or worked alongside an armed robot in Iraq. If the 20th century has taught us anything, it’s that science is only limited by our imagination. Unfortunately, some segments of humanity like to imagine seriously deadly weapons.

.

JASON JEFFREY holds an interest in a wide range of subjects including geopolitics, the ‘New World Order’, Big Brother, suppressed technology, psychic/spiritual development, ancient civilisations and esotericism. He can be contacted at jasonjeffrey88@gmail.com

The above article appeared in New Dawn No. 119 (Mar-Apr 2010).

Read this article with its extensive full colour illustrations by downloading
your copy of New Dawn 119 (PDF version) for only US$2.95

© New Dawn Magazine and the respective author.
For our reproduction notice, click here.

—

So, who runs the world? It’s a question that people have struggled with since people began to struggle. It’s certainly a question with many interpretations, and incites answers of many varied perspectives.

Often, it is relegated to the realm of “conspiracy theory,” in that, those who discuss this question or propose answers to it, are purveyors of a conspiratorial view of the world. However, it is my intention to discard the labels, which seek to disprove a position without actually proving anything to the contrary. One of these labels – “conspiracy theorist” – does just that: it’s very application to a particular perspective or viewpoint has the intention of “disproving without proof;” all that is needed is to simply apply the label.

What I intend to do is analyse the social structure of the transnational ruling class, the international elite, who together run the world. This is not a conspiratorial opinion piece, but is an examination of the socially constructed elite class of people; what is the nature of power, how does it get used, and who holds it?

A Historical Understanding of Power

In answering the question “Who Runs the World?” we must understand what positions within society hold the most power, and thus, the answer becomes clear. If we simply understand this as heads of state, the answer will be flawed and inaccurate. We must examine the globe as a whole, and the power structures of the global political economy.

The greatest position of power within the global capitalist system lies in the authority of money-creation: the central banking system. The central banking system, originating in 1694 in England, consists of an international network of central banks that are privately owned by wealthy shareholders and are granted governmental authority to print and issue a nation’s currency, and set interest rates, collecting revenue and making profit through the interest charged. Central banks give loans to both governments and industries, controlling both simultaneously. The ultimate centre of power in the central banking system is at the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), in Basle, Switzerland; which is the central bank to the world’s central banks, and is also a private bank owned by the world’s central banks.

As Georgetown University history professor Carroll Quigley wrote:

[T]he powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations.1

The central banks, and thus the central banking system as a whole, is a privately owned system in which the major shareholders are powerful international banking houses. These international banking houses emerged in tandem with the evolution of the central banking system. The central banking system first emerged in London, and expanded across Europe with time. With that expansion, the European banking houses also rose and expanded across the continent.

The French Revolution resulted with Napoleon coming to power, who granted the French bankers a central bank of France, which they privately controlled.2 It was also out of the French Revolution that one of the major banking houses of the world emerged, the Rothschilds. Emerging out of a European Jewish ghetto, the Rothschilds quickly rose to the forefront in banking, and established banking houses in London, Paris, Frankfurt, Vienna and Naples, allowing them to profit off of all sides in the Napoleonic wars.3

As Carroll Quigley wrote in his monumental Tragedy and Hope, “The merchant bankers of London had already at hand in 1810-1850 the Stock Exchange, the Bank of England, and the London money market,” and that:

In time they brought into their financial network the provincial banking centres, organised as commercial banks and savings banks, as well as insurance companies, to form all of these into a single financial system on an international scale which manipulated the quantity and flow of money so that they were able to influence, if not control, governments on one side and industries on the other.4

At the same time, in the United States, we saw the emergence of a powerful group of bankers and industrialists, such as the Morgans, Astors, Vanderbilts, Rockefellers, and Carnegies, and they created massive industrial monopolies and oligopolies throughout the 19^th century.5 These banking interests were very close to and allied with the powerful European banking houses.

The European, and particularly the British elites of the time, were beginning to organise their power in an effort to properly exert their influence internationally. At this time, European empires were engaging in the Scramble for Africa, in which nearly the entire continent of Africa, save Ethiopia, was colonised and carved up by European nations. One notable imperialist was Cecil Rhodes who made his fortune from diamond and gold mining in Africa with financial support from the Rothschilds,6 and “at that time [had] the biggest concentration of financial capital in the world.”7

Cecil Rhodes was also known for his radical views regarding America, particularly in that he would “talk with total seriousness of ‘the ultimate recovery of the United States of America as an integral part of the British Empire’.”8 Rhodes saw himself not simply as a moneymaker, but primarily as an “empire builder.”

As Carroll Quigley explained, in 1891 three British elites met with the intent to create a secret society. The three men were Cecil Rhodes, William T. Stead, a prominent journalist of the day, and Reginald Baliol Brett, a “friend and confidant of Queen Victoria, and later to be the most influential adviser of King Edward VII and King George V.” Within this secret society, “real power was to be exercised by the leader, and a ‘Junta of Three.’ The leader was to be Rhodes, and the Junta was to be Stead, Brett, and Alfred Milner.”9

The purpose of this secret society, which was later headed by Alfred Milner, was: “The extension of British rule throughout the world, the perfecting of a system of emigration from the United Kingdom and of colonisation by British subjects of all lands wherein the means of livelihood are attainable by energy, labour, and enterprise… [with] the ultimate recovery of the United States of America as an integral part of a British Empire.” [Emphasis added]10 Essentially, it outlined a British-led cosmopolitical world order, one global system of governance under British hegemony. Among key players within this group were the Rothschilds and other banking interests.11

After the 1907 banking panic in the US, instigated by JP Morgan, pressure was placed upon the American political establishment to create a “stable” banking system. In 1910, a secret meeting of financiers was held on Jekyll Island, where they planned for the “creation of a National Reserve Association with fifteen major regions, controlled by a board of commercial bankers but empowered by the federal government to act like a central bank – creating money and lending reserves to private banks.”12

It was largely Paul M. Warburg, a Wall Street investment banker, who “had come up with a design for a single central bank [in 1910]. He called it the United Reserve Bank. From this and his later service on the first Federal Reserve Board, Warburg has, with some justice, been called the father of the System.”13 President Woodrow Wilson followed the plan almost exactly as outlined by the Wall Street financiers, and added to it the creation of a Federal Reserve Board in Washington, which the President would appoint.14

Thus, true power in the world order was held by international banking houses, which privately owned the global central banking system, allowing them to control the credit of nations, and finance and control governments and industry.

However, though the economic system was firmly in their control, allowing them to establish influence over finance, they needed to shape elite ideology accordingly. In effect, what was required was to socially construct a ruling class, internationally, which would serve their interests. To do this, these bankers set out to undertake a project of establishing think tanks to organise elites from politics, economics, academia, media, and the military into a generally cohesive and controllable ideology.

Constructing a Ruling Class: Rise of the Think Tanks

During World War I, a group of American scholars were tasked with briefing “Woodrow Wilson about options for the postwar world once the Kaiser and imperial Germany fell to defeat.” This group was called, “The Inquiry.” The group advised Wilson mostly through his trusted aide, Col. Edward M. House, who was Wilson’s “unofficial envoy to Europe during the period between the outbreak of World War I in 1914 and the intervention by the United States in 1917,” and was the prime driving force in the Wilson administration behind the establishment of the Federal Reserve System.15

“The Inquiry” laid the foundations for the creation of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the most powerful think tank in the US and, “The scholars of the Inquiry helped draw the borders of post World War I central Europe.” On May 30, 1919, a group of scholars and diplomats from Britain and the US met at the Hotel Majestic, where they “proposed a permanent Anglo-American Institute of International Affairs, with one branch in London, the other in New York.” When the scholars returned from Paris, they were met with open arms by New York lawyers and financiers, and together they formed the Council on Foreign Relations in 1921. The “British diplomats returning from Paris had made great headway in founding their Royal Institute of International Affairs.” The Anglo-American Institute envisioned in Paris, with two branches and combined membership was not feasible, so both the British and American branches retained national membership, however, they would cooperate closely with one another.16 They were referred to, and still are, as “Sister Institutes.”17

The Milner Group, the secret society formed by Cecil Rhodes, “dominated the British delegation to the Peace Conference of 1919; it had a great deal to do with the formation and management of the League of Nations and of the system of mandates; it founded the Royal Institute of International Affairs in 1919 and still controls it.”18

There were other groups founded in many countries representing the same interests of the secret Milner Group, and they came to be known as the Round Table Groups, preeminent among them were the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House), the Council on Foreign Relations in the United States, and parallel groups were set up in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and India.19

These were, in effect, the first international think tanks, which remain today, and are in their respective nations, among the top, if not the most prominent think tanks.

In 2008, a major study was done by the University of Philadelphia’s International Relations Program – the Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program – which sought to analyse and examine the most powerful and influential think tanks in the world. While it is a useful resource to understanding the influence of think tanks, there is a flaw in its analysis. It failed to take into account the international origins of the Round Table Group think tanks, particularly the Council on Foreign Relations in the United States; Chatham House or the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London; the Canadian Institute of International Affairs, now renamed the Canadian International Council; and their respective sister organisations in India, South Africa, New Zealand and Australia. Further nations have since added to this group of related think tanks, including Germany, and a recently established European Council on Foreign Relations. The report, while putting focus on the international nature of think tanks, analysed these ones as separate institutions without being related or affiliated. This has, in effect, skewed the results of the study. However, it is still useful to examine.

The top think tanks in the United States include the Council on Foreign Relations, (which was put at number 2, however, should be placed at the number 1 spot), the Brookings Institution, (which was inaccurately given the position of number one), the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, RAND Corporation, Heritage Foundation, Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and the American Enterprise Institute, among others.

The top think tanks in the world, outside of the United States, are Chatham House (sitting at number one), the International Institute for Strategic Studies in the UK, the German Council on Foreign Relations, the French Institute of International Relations, the Adam Smith Institute in the UK, the Fraser Institute in Canada, the European Council on Foreign Relations, the International Crisis Group in Belgium, and the Canadian Institute of International Affairs.20

In 1954, the Bilderberg Group was founded in the Netherlands. Every year since then the group holds a secretive meeting, drawing roughly 130 of the political-financial-military-academic-media elites from North America and Western Europe as “an informal network of influential people who could consult each other privately and confidentially.”21

Regular participants include the CEOs or Chairmen of some of the largest corporations in the world, oil companies such as Royal Dutch Shell, British Petroleum, and Total SA, as well as various European monarchs, international bankers such as David Rockefeller, major politicians, presidents, prime ministers, and central bankers of the world.22 The Bilderberg Group acts as a “secretive global think-tank,” with an original intent “to link governments and economies in Europe and North America amid the Cold War.”23

In 1970, David Rockefeller became Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations, while also being Chairman and CEO of Chase Manhattan. In 1970, an academic who joined the Council on Foreign Relations in 1965 wrote a book called Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era. The author, Zbigniew Brzezinski, called for the formation of “A Community of the Developed Nations,” consisting of Western Europe, the United States and Japan. Brzezinski wrote about how “the traditional sovereignty of nation states is becoming increasingly unglued as transnational forces such as multinational corporations, banks, and international organisations play a larger and larger role in shaping global politics.”

So, in 1972, David Rockefeller and Brzezinski “presented the idea of a trilateral grouping at the annual Bilderberg meeting.” In July of 1972, seventeen powerful people met at David Rockefeller’s estate in New York to plan for the creation of another grouping. Also at the meeting was Brzezinski, McGeorge Bundy, the President of the Ford Foundation, (brother of William Bundy, editor of Foreign Affairs) and Bayless Manning, President of the Council on Foreign Relations.24 In 1973, these people formed the Trilateral Commission, which acted as a sister organisation to Bilderberg, linking the elites of Western Europe, North America, and Japan into a transnational ruling class.

These think tanks have effectively socially constructed an ideologically cohesive ruling class in each nation and fostered the expansion of international ideological alignment among national elites, allowing for the development of a transnational ruling class sharing a dominant ideology.

These same interests, controlled by the international banking houses, had to socially construct society itself. To do this, they created a massive network of tax-exempt foundations and non-profit organisations, which shaped civil society according to their designs. Among the most prominent of these are the Carnegie Corporation, the Ford Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation.

The “Foundations” of Civil Society

These foundations shaped civil society by financing research projects and initiatives into major social projects, creating both a dominant world-view for the elite classes, as well as managing the other classes.

These foundations, since their establishment, played a large part in the funding and organising of the eugenics movement, which helped facilitate this racist, elitist ideology to having enormous growth and influence, ultimately culminating in the Nazi Holocaust. From then, the word “eugenics” had to be dropped from the ideology and philanthropy of elites, and was replaced with new forms of eugenics policies and concepts. Among them, genetics, population control and environmentalism.

These foundations also funded seemingly progressive and alternative media sources in an effort to control the opposition, and manage the resistance to their world order, essentially making it ineffective and misguided.

The Rockefeller Foundation was established in 1912, and immediately began giving money to eugenics research organisations.25 Eugenics was a pseudo-scientific and social science movement that emerged in the late 19^th century, and gained significant traction in the first half of the 20^th century. One of the founding ideologues of eugenics, Sir Francis Galton, an anthropologist and cousin to Charles Darwin, wrote that eugenics “is the study of all agencies under social control which can improve or impair the racial quality of future generations.”26 Ultimately, it was about the “sound” breeding of people and maintaining “purity” and “superiority” of the blood. It was an inherently racist ideology, which saw all non-white racial categories of people as inherently and naturally inferior, and sought to ground these racist theories in “science.”

The vast wealth and fortunes of the major industrialists and bankers in the United States flowed heavily into the eugenics organisations, promoting and expanding this racist and elitist ideology. Money from the Harriman railroad fortune, with millions given by the Rockefeller and Carnegie family fortunes were subsequently “devoted to sterilisation of several hundred thousands of American ‘defectives’ annually, as a matter of eugenics.”27

In the United States, 27 states passed eugenics based sterilisation laws of the “unfit,” which ultimately led to the sterilisation of over 60,000 people. Throughout the 1920s and 30s, the Carnegie and especially the Rockefeller Foundation, funded eugenics research in Germany, directly financing the Nazi scientists who perpetrated some of the greatest crimes of the Holocaust.28

Following the Holocaust, the word “eugenics” was highly discredited. Thus, these elites who wanted to continue with the implementation of their racist and elitist ideology desperately needed a new name for it. In 1939, the Eugenics Records Office became known as the Genetics Record Office.29 However, tens of thousands of Americans continued to be sterilised throughout the 40s, 50s and 60s, the majority of which were women.30

Edwin Black analysed how the pseudoscience of eugenics transformed into what we know as the science of genetics. In a 1943 edition of Eugenical News, an article titled “Eugenics After the War,” cited Charles Davenport, a major founder of eugenics, in his vision of “a new mankind of biological castes with master races in control and slave races serving them.”31

A 1946 article in Eugenical News stated that, “Population, genetics, [and] psychology, are the three sciences to which the eugenicist must look for the factual material on which to build an acceptable philosophy of eugenics and to develop and defend practical eugenics proposals.” As Black explained, “the incremental effort to transform eugenics into human genetics forged an entire worldwide infrastructure,” with the founding of the Institute for Human Genetics in Copenhagen in 1938, led by Tage Kemp, a Rockefeller Foundation eugenicist, and was financed with money from the Rockefeller Foundation.32

Today, much of civil society and major social projects are a product of these foundations, and align with various new forms of eugenics. The areas of population control and environmentalism are closely aligned and span a broad range of intellectual avenues. The major population control organisations emerged with funding from these various foundations, particularly the Rockefeller foundations and philanthropies.

These organisations, such as the Rockefeller and Ford foundations, funded major civil society movements, such as the Civil Rights movement, in an effort to “create a wedge between social movement activists and their unpaid grassroots constituents, thereby facilitating professionalisation and institutionalisation within the movement,” ultimately facilitating a “narrowing and taming of the potential for broad dissent,” with an aim of limiting goals to “ameliorative rather than radical change.”33

Two major organisations in the development of the environmental movement were the Conservation Foundation and Resources for the Future, which were founded and funded with money from the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations, and helped “launch an explicitly pro-corporate approach to resource conservation.”34 Even the World Wildlife Fund was founded in the early 1960s by the former president of the British Eugenics Society, and its first President was Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, a founding member of the Bilderberg Group.

While the environmental movement positions people as the major problem for the earth, relating humanity to a cancer, population control becomes a significant factor in proposing environmental solutions.

In May of 2009, a secret meeting of billionaire philanthropists took place in which they sought to coordinate how to “address” the world’s environmental, social, and industrial threats. Each billionaire at the meeting was given 15 minutes to discuss their “preferred” cause, and then they deliberated to create an “umbrella” cause to harness all their interests. The end result was that the umbrella cause for which the billionaires would aim to “give to” was population control, which “would be tackled as a potentially disastrous environmental, social and industrial threat.” Among those present at the meeting were David Rockefeller, Jr., George Soros, Warren Buffet, Michael Bloomberg, Ted Turner, Bill Gates, and even Oprah Winfrey.35

Conclusion

At the top of the list of those who run the world, we have the major international banking houses, which control the global central banking system. From there, these dynastic banking families created an international network of think tanks, which socialised the ruling elites of each nation and the international community as a whole, into a cohesive transnational elite class. The foundations they established helped shape civil society both nationally and internationally, playing a major part in the funding – and thus coordinating and co-opting – of major social-political movements.

An excellent example of one member of the top of the hierarchy of the global elite is David Rockefeller, patriarch of the Rockefeller family. Long serving as Chairman and CEO of Chase Manhattan bank, he revolutionised the notion of building a truly global bank. He was also Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations, a founding member of Bilderberg and the Trilateral Commission, heavily involved in the family philanthropies, and sits atop a vast number of boards and foundations. Even Alan Greenspan, in a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations, said that David Rockefeller and the CFR have, “in many respects, formulated the foreign policy of this country.”36

In another speech to the Council on Foreign Relations, then World Bank President James Wolfesohn, said in 2005, in honour of David Rockefeller’s 90^th birthday, that, “the person who had perhaps the greatest influence on my life professionally in this country, and I’m very happy to say personally there afterwards, is David Rockefeller.” He then said, “In fact, it’s fair to say that there has been no other single family influence greater than the Rockefeller’s in the whole issue of globalisation and in the whole issue of addressing the questions which, in some ways, are still before us today. And for that David, we’re deeply grateful to you and for your own contribution in carrying these forward in the way that you did.”37

David Rockefeller, himself, wrote, “For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicised incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterising my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”38

[For further information on the coming world government, please check out New Dawn Special Issue 16 -- http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/special-issues/new-dawn-special-issue-16]

Footnotes

1. Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time, New York: Macmillan Company, 1966, 324

2. Carroll Quigley, op.cit., 515; Robert Elgie and Helen Thompson, ed., The Politics of Central Banks, New York: Routledge, 1998, 97-98

3. Sylvia Nasar, ‘Masters of the Universe’, The New York Times: January 23, 2000; ‘The Family That Bankrolled Europe’, BBC News: July 9, 1999, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/389053.stm

4. Carroll Quigley, op.cit., 51

5. Howard Zinn, A People’s History of the United States, Harper Perennial: New York, 2003, 323

6. Carroll Quigley, op.cit., 130

7. Niall Ferguson, Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power, New York: Basic Books, 2004, 186

8. Ibid, 190

9. Carroll Quigley, The Anglo-American Establishment, GSG & Associates, 1981, 3

10. Ibid, 33

11. Ibid, 34

12. William Greider, Secrets of the Temple: How the Federal Reserve Runs the Country, New York: Simon and Schuster, 1987, 276

13. John Kenneth Galbraith, Money: Whence it Came, Where it Went, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1975, 121-122

14. William Greider, op.cit., 277

15. H.W. Brands, ‘He Is My Independent Self’, The Washington Post: June 11, 2006: www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/08/AR2006060801104.html

16. CFR, ‘Continuing the Inquiry. History of CFR’: www.cfr.org/about/history/cfr/inquiry.html

17. Chatham House, ‘CHATHAM HOUSE (The Royal Institute of International Affairs): Background’, Chatham House History: www.chathamhouse.org.uk/about/history/

18. Carroll Quigley, The Anglo-American Establishment, op.cit., 5

19. Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, op.cit., 132-133

20. James G. McGann, Ph.D., The Global “Go-To Think Tanks”: The Leading Public Policy Research Organizations In The World, The Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program: University of Pennsylvania, International Relations Program, 2008, 26-28

21. CBC, ‘Informal forum or global conspiracy?’, CBC News Online: June 13, 2006: www.cbc.ca/news/background/bilderberg-group/

22. Holly Sklar, ed., Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management, South End Press: 1980, 161-171

23. Glen McGregor, ‘Secretive power brokers meeting coming to Ottawa?’, Ottawa Citizen: May 24, 2006

24. Holly Sklar, ed., op.cit., 76-78

25. Edwin Black, War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race, New York: Thunders’s Mouth Press, 2004, 93

26. Ibid, 18

27. Ibid, 101-102

28. Edwin Black, ‘Eugenics and the Nazis – the California connection’, The San Francisco Chronicle: November 9, 2003

29. Edwin Black, War Against the Weak, op.cit., 396

30. Ibid, 398

31. Ibid, 416

32. Ibid, 418

33. Michael Barker, The Liberal Foundations of Environmentalism: Revisiting the Rockefeller-Ford Connection, Capitalism Nature Socialism: 19, (2), June 2008, 18

34. Ibid, 19-20

35. John Harlow, ‘Billionaire club in bid to curb overpopulation’, Times Online: May 24, 2009

36. CFR, Remarks at the Council on Foreign Relations Annual Corporate Conference, Transcripts: March 10, 2005: www.cfr.org/publication/7908/remarks_at_the_council_on_foreign_relations_annual_corporate_conference.html

37. CFR, Council on Foreign Relations Special Symposium in honor of David Rockefeller’s 90th Birthday, Transcript: May 23, 2005: www.cfr.org/publication/8133/council_on_foreign_relations_special_symposium_in_honor_of_david_rockefellers_90th_birthday.html

38. David Rockefeller, Memoirs, New York: Random House: 2002, 405

.

ANDREW G. MARSHALL is a Research Associate with the Centre for Research on Globalization based out of Montreal, Canada (www.globalresearch.ca). He has written extensively on issues imperialism in the Middle East and Africa, the environment, Homeland Security, war, terrorism and the global economy. He is currently studying Global Political Economy and the History of the Middle East and Africa at Simon Fraser University (Canada).

The above article appeared in New Dawn No. 118 (Jan-Feb 2010).

Read this article with its illustrations by downloading
your copy of New Dawn 118 (PDF version) for only US$2.95

© New Dawn Magazine and the respective author.
For our reproduction notice, click here.

—

The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), headquartered in New York, is one of the key power centres pushing Globalism for All. As I’ve been writing for some time, medical programs are a clever and deceptive strategy for advancing this goal – the coagulation of Earth under one system of political management.

Global control is not a “right-wing” fantasy. It’s an objective much like the European Union, only writ much larger. Gradually, through attrition, sovereign nations decay under a super-bureaucracy that makes all the rules, issues the currency, and, over time, runs a tighter and tighter ship.

The outer shell of the CFR, founded 90 years ago as a Rockefeller plantation of control, is made up mostly of pundits and funded fellows and business leaders and politicians who look and sound like pompous blowhards. Which they are.But behind this mask, the inner CFR core designs schemes that could draw us all under the umbrella of de facto international control.

On October 16, 2009, the CFR held a symposium titled: Pandemic Influenza: Science, Economics, and Foreign Policy.

Much of the information in this symposium report is window dressing. However, it’s worth noting a few comments made by presenters:

“Laurie Garrett, senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations, said at the October 16, 2009 New York symposium that amid the array of unknowns surrounding the H1N1 virus, one certainty is that ‘this is a worldwide event and it is occurring in the dawn of our age of globalisation.’ Garrett added, ‘It’s a darn good thing we are dealing with a relatively mild flu this time, because clearly we are ill-prepared at this moment for a more virulent or more dangerous virus, either if this one takes on a more dangerous form… or if a second totally different virus does emerge.’ Helen Branswell of the Toronto-based Canadian Press agreed: ‘We thought we were preparing for a more serious (bird flu H5N1) issue, but we are in fact not prepared for a mild one.” (Pandemic Influenza: Science, Economics, and Foreign Policy, Symposium Rapporteur Report, October 16, 2009, www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/LG_Pandemic_Symposium_101609_rapporteur_report.pdf)

So two points were established early on: the Swine Flu is a mild disease, not a pandemic by any sensible definition; and leaders of “our age of globalisation” must be prepared for a more drastic disease event by taking worldwide measures now.

This latter issue is highlighted by another contributing CFR speaker:

“It was the overarching consensus of the symposium, first forwarded in the gathering by Financial Times correspondent Andrew Jack of London, that the current pandemic must serve as ‘a teachable moment’, focusing expert attention on the inherent contradictions in global governance of health issues, inequities in world access to vaccines and medical supplies, weaknesses in planning and management of epidemics with worldwide risks for economics and politics, and the public’s respect for science and public health.”

Andrew Jack thus punches up the notion that solutions to so-called global health problems can only be attained through international means.

Medical Crises and Global Governance

The report continues: “[Robert] Rubin [former US Secretary of the Treasury and Co-Chair of the CFR] noted that the increased global interdependency of the current economy has changed the game for pandemic responses in the United States, leaving only one option: ‘If the United States, and the world global economy, is going to be moderately well-prepared for this, there has to be an enormous amount of planning and agreed-upon processes and regimen decisions before the [pandemic] hits’.”

These speakers are talking about a vast system, a medical bureaucracy that can oversee planning and execution of “epidemic control” on a global scale.

Laurie Garrett then makes a pitch for equitable redistribution of wealth among nations:

“Moderator Garrett said: ‘We have globalised [epidemic] risk and threat today, but not globalised benefits. So the whole world shares the risk of pandemic influenza, but only a small percentage share vaccines, medicines and treatments’.”

Who would make those wealth-redistributing decisions from the top? Who would allocate money and drugs and vaccines and doctors from Greenland to Tierra Del Fuego? There is only one answer: an internationally organised body that could override the wishes of sovereign countries.

Then John Lange sounds a sour note of failure in this regard:

“In face of profound scientific and economic insecurities, important foreign policy decisions must be made by the United States to address the globalisation of pandemic protection and benefits, as well as threat. Ambassador John E. Lange, of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and former Special Representative on Avian and Pandemic Influenza for the State Department, said international coordination in response to the H5N1 pandemic [another mild flu season] of the 1990s paved the way for today’s response to H1N1. Nevertheless, Lange said, little has been done to move towards a more institutionalised global response, due as much to a lack of political will as to strained resources, in spite of high expectations.”

Lange thus draws the problem. The US has lagged behind. The US is not eager enough for “a more institutionalised global response.” The US doesn’t want to cede power to some agency like the World Health Organisation (WHO).

Another speaker takes off the mask and drives home Lange’s point harder:

“Canadian Press’ Branswell doubted how feasible it will be for countries such as the United States and Canada to deliver on these expectations. At the heart of the debate is the issue of sovereignty, which may prevent states from carrying through with their agreements in the face of pandemic pressure, instead choosing to nationalise local supplies of vaccines, masks, protective gear and other medical supplies. Conversely, sovereignty has been invoked as the basis for refusing to share samples of dangerous flu viruses with WHO and international scientists, and for declining outside inspections of local outbreaks.”

Surrendering National Sovereignty

Well, there it is. It doesn’t take a genius to read between the lines. The surrender of national sovereignty is necessary if the world is going to deal with encroaching waves of pandemics. Nations will have to give up their independent status in these situations – and you can be sure that the international body formed to govern epidemic disease will be permanent. No one is stupid enough to think that the enormous effort and time and money needed to establish such a bureaucracy would fade away after the latest and greatest pandemic. Control would transfer now and in the future.

Medical crises, in this way, translate into further steps along the way to global governance.

Before citing more statements from the CFR symposium, let me offer some numbers on these “waves of world illness” we have endured over the last 15 years or so. Keep in mind that epidemics are the primary justification for internationalisation of a medical monarchy.

Total cases and deaths:

SARS – 8,096 cases – 774 deaths.

WEST NILE – 27,836 cases – 1,088 deaths.

BIRD FLU – 262 deaths.

SWINE FLU – On April 26, 2009, with 20 cases of Swine Flu in the US and no deaths, the US Dept. of Health and Human Services declared a nationwide public health emergency.

The WHO changed its definition of pandemic so that “enormous numbers of deaths and illness” was removed from the definition. This happened in May 2009.

Thus far, WHO estimates about 8,200 deaths from Swine Flu, worldwide. That would average out to about 15,000 deaths for the year. But the CDC claims 36,000 people die every year from ordinary flu in the US alone.

So far, the global count of Swine Flu cases is 587,653.

Yet WHO states, “Every winter, tens of millions of people get the [ordinary] flu. Most are only ill and out of work for a week, yet the elderly are at a higher risk of death from the illness. We know the worldwide death toll exceeds a few hundred thousand people a year…”

Fear Mongering New Diseases

So why is Swine Flu a pandemic, and why is ordinary flu not a pandemic?

Fear mongering is about NEW diseases. That’s why.

It gets worse.

In early November, an explosive report by Sharyl Attkisson hit the CBS News website: Of all the probable or suspected swine flu cases in California actually tested by state labs since July 2009, based on 13,704 tests, only 2% of the patients had Swine Flu. 12% had some other kind of flu. And a whopping 86% didn’t have flu at all.

In Florida, based on 8,853 tests for suspected/probable Swine Flu, only 17% had Swine Flu. 83% were negative for other flu. So 83% didn’t have ANY kind of flu.

In Alaska, based on 722 tests for suspected/probable Swine Flu, only 11% had Swine Flu. In Georgia, based on 3,117 tests, only 2% had Swine Flu.

My point here is this: All these recent “epidemics” have been outright fakes. The numbers of cases and deaths are miniscule compared with older traditional illnesses – for which no pandemic emergencies have been declared.

Therefore, when the CFR is talking about globalising pandemic responses, and nations surrendering their sovereignty, it’s all based on an epidemic cover story that is patently false. It’s like saying, “The sky is falling. You have to lend all your support to the construction of a dome that will shield us from the lethal debris. A global ‘health czar’ will be in charge of building and maintaining the dome, and all governments must bow to his orders, which are given to protect everyone.”

Continuing now, with the CFR symposium report: We come to the toxic portion of the issue. In many nations, there has been vigorous debate over the use of so-called adjuvants in flu vaccines. One such substance, squalene, has been banned in several countries, because it can have dangerous effects. But the CFR would apparently like to override this question and promote universal use of squalene in vaccines, despite the glaring fact that Swine Flu itself is so mild the risks of the vaccine far outweigh its need.

“While recently the Obama administration brokered a deal among eleven wealthy nations to donate 10 percent of their vaccine supply of H1N1 to WHO for use in developing countries, Canada has not signed on, in an uncharacteristic decision… On the other hand, the Obama administration has refused the use of adjuvants, which are used in Europe, Canada and Japan to stretch out the antigen supply for wider global use, causing Lange to question the role of the United States as a true ‘global player’. Adjuvants help trigger the immune response, allowing dilution of precious flu antigens so that upwards of ten times as many people can be immunised with the same antigen supply. If the US were using adjuvant in its H1N1 vaccines, the country could be in a position to offer sufficient surplus product to WHO to bring the agency’s supply for poor countries up by hundreds of millions of doses.”

Not “a true global player.” That epithet carries considerable weight in CFR and allied circles. It means, “Let’s watch this person. If he wants our support, he’s going to have to change his tune. Let him understand that.”

Combating “anti-vaccine hype”

Finally, the CFR report takes a swipe at people who are educating themselves on the historical toxicity of vaccines. And here, it does:

“The public perception of swine flu has further complicated the issue, causing both public doubt and panic at the same time. Branswell fears that ‘the WHO has lost control of the message’, allowing misinformed threats, such as the current anti-vaccine hype, to resonate around the world as the scientific community races to catch up with the facts.

“The last great flu pandemic of 1968 occurred in a deeply divided world, where entire regions of the planet were no-travel zones for billions of people. It was an era of telephones and posted mail, evening newscasts, and morning newspapers. Both viruses and information spread comparatively slowly.

“Though today the vaccine methods of production and distribution mirror those practiced a half-century ago, the age of globalisation has ushered in rapid human and animal travel, leading to worldwide spread of viruses. The internet has similarly opened the door to viral spread of disease truths, half-truths and outright lies. Thankfully, the mild H1N1 has offered the world community an opportunity to see these 21st Century challenges without simultaneously experiencing worst-case outcomes. It is a teachable moment, but it remains to be seen whether – on both global and local scales – governments, companies and individuals are learning.”

Twenty years ago, when I was writing my first book, AIDS INC., I realised that medical propaganda could be used as a pre-eminent tool in controlling populations, because doctors and public health bureaucrats exude an air of political neutrality.

These esteemed figures appear to have no agenda of a political or economic nature. They speak as minor saints. They always “care and share.” When they say citizens must take certain actions to protect themselves and their loved ones, they speak with great authority.

Under that flag, much destruction can be wrought. For example, in certain areas of Africa, people have been dying from the same causes for hundreds of years: protein-calorie malnutrition; outright starvation; gross lack of sanitation; overcrowding; contaminated water supplies; abject poverty; no hope; and more recently, vaccines and medical drugs which, administered to people whose immune systems are already devastatingly compromised, can be lethal.

At the root of these causes is stolen land. Colonisation by governments and then mega-corporations, and brutal repression by local dictators – such controllers want to conceal their own naked actions, and they also want to keep hidden the actual immediate causes of death in Africa – the causes they, the controllers, invoke and maintain.

What better way to reframe this incriminating picture than to claim that a few politically neutral germs are the agents of death. Then, you can build a few showplace hospitals, bring in a bevy of doctors, set up a lab or two and demand that pharmaceutical companies donate medicines for the suffering. Meanwhile, no one cleans up the water, no one restores good land to the dispossessed, and no one alleviates the massively overcrowded living conditions.

Isolate any germ under the sun, give any medicine, as long as the fundamental horrendous facts of life remain the same, people will die in great numbers, and those in control will remain in control.

WHO & CFR: Globalise “humanitarian solutions”

The CFR is part of a sophisticated operation to globalise “humanitarian solutions” under the rubric of medical care. Its main ally is the World Health Organisation, an agency of the UN. Near the close of World War II, members of the CFR were, in fact, tapped to write the basic outline of the soon-to-be created UN.

The WHO is on the march. It is trying to insert itself and its rulings and demands into the governments of many nations. In 2003, it won its biggest one-shot victory. Through fraudulent travel advisories, based on non-science, it raised fears about SARS (at best, a tiny illness) and managed to effectively shut down air travel in and out of Toronto. Toronto lost several billion dollars in the process. I was a peripheral part of a budding effort to convince local business owners to file a lawsuit. At first, there was some enthusiasm, but then it faded out. The people of Toronto knuckled under, some of them lost their shirts, and they plowed on.

The WHO is, by far, the most successful agency of the UN. It has emerged as the rising star of that moribund organisation. It has delivered victories because it is flying under the banner of medical power. The modern priesthood.

CFR, its inner core, is well aware that medical control is a trump card it can play to great advantage. The October Symposium was an event with such an edge.

This is no one-time takeover by force. This is no crashing coup. In intelligence-agency parlance, it’s a step-operation. A little progress here, a little progress there. Speakers at the Symposium called Swine Flu “a teaching moment.” By this they meant two things. This mild flu gives CFR and its allies a chance to expand their global influence, through the expansion of public-health agencies, most notably WHO and the American CDC. And the population of the planet is “taught” to respect so-called epidemics and the resulting missives that come down from their leaders.

The pace of these fake epidemics and the accompanying media propaganda is quickening. There is an ultimate vision here that at least a few major power players entertain: subsume every citizen of planet Earth under a network of authoritarian medical control – as part of a global-management political system.

Cradle to grave, every person is diagnosed with at least several diseases or mental disorders and falls under the continuing treatment of doctors. These treatments are, for the most part, toxic. That is to say, they weaken the immune system and scramble neurotransmitter systems of the brain. People become less able to take effective action in any direction. People everywhere become fixated on their diseases. They become less able to maintain their freedom. They view themselves as lifelong patients.

In case you think this is pure fantasy, let me recite a few facts about the US medical-care system. These numbers are based in part, but not wholly, on a landmark paper published on July 26, 2000, in the Journal of the American Medical Association. The paper was titled, “Is US Health Really the Best in the World?” The author was Barbara Starfield, who was then associated with the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. In other words, this was a mainstream piece of work all the way.

Each year in the US there are:

12,000 deaths from unnecessary surgeries;

7,000 deaths from medication error in hospitals;

20,000 deaths from other errors in hospitals;

80,000 deaths from infections acquired in hospitals;

106,000 deaths from FDA-approved correctly prescribed medicines.

The total of medically-caused deaths in the US every year is 225,000.

This makes the medical system the third leading cause of death in the US, behind heart disease and cancer.

Then if you multiply these numbers by all the people who are emotionally involved in, and temporarily paralysed by, the deaths of these 225,000 Americans, you begin to see the fuller picture of the effects on every level. And all this is just in America.

In, say, Africa, the diversion of attention, by medical propaganda and cover stories, from the real causes of millions of annual deaths? How can one even begin to calculate those effects?

If, over the next 10 or 20 years, CFR and its allies, with direct intent or even blind do-good hope, make large strides toward globalising a medical bureaucracy that would oversee the “health of the planet,” consider what that will do, what consequences that will have.

.

JON RAPPOPORT has worked as an independent investigative reporter since 1982. The LA Weekly nominated him for a Pulitzer Prize, for an interview he did with the president of El Salvador University, where the military had taken over the campus and was disappearing students and burning books. He has written for In These Times, Village Voice, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, CBS Healthwatch, Stern. He is the author of AIDS INC., The Secret Behind Secret Societies, and Oklahoma Bombing: The Suppressed Truth. You can find his work at www.insolutions.info.

The above article appeared in New Dawn No. 118 (Jan-Feb 2010).

Read this article with its illustrations by downloading
your copy of New Dawn 118 (PDF version) for only US$2.95

© New Dawn Magazine and the respective author.
For our reproduction notice, click here.

—

The new “swine flu” virus was first detected in Mexico on April 23, 2009. A few days later, the US Department of Homeland Security and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) claimed the so-called “Mexican flu” had infected more than 1,000 people with 60 deaths. The novel infectious agent was reported as a hybrid of pig, bird and human flu viruses, including genetic elements from European and Asian swine viruses.

The official name of the virus is Influenza A: subtype H1N1. Most puzzling about this new swine virus is that it has not been detected in pigs or in pig farmers. By May 9, the World Health Organisation (WHO) declared that up to 2 billion people could be infected worldwide if the current epidemic continued to expand with repeated outbreaks. By the end of May, more than 13,500 cases were reported from 48 countries, with 110 deaths, most from the US and Mexico. And flu experts were still arguing whether it was a pandemic or an epidemic.

On April 29, Indonesian Health Minister Siti Fadilah Supari, who had previously accused Western governments of making and spreading viruses to boost pharmaceutical profits, said: “I’m not sure whether the virus was genetically engineered but it’s a possibility.”

Two weeks later, Adrian Gibbs, an Australian evolutionary virologist with impeccable academic credentials, shocked the scientific world by suggesting the new strain of swine flu was created in a laboratory using eggs to grow viruses for vaccines, and could have been “accidentally” leaked to the general public. Gibbs, who was on the team behind the development of Tamiflu, came to this conclusion by analysing the genetic blueprint of the virus. Not surprisingly, WHO and the CDC were quick to note there was no evidence for this assertion.

According to a source known to former US National Security Agency official Wayne Madsen, “A top scientist for the United Nations, who has examined the outbreak of the deadly Ebola virus in Africa, as well as HIV/AIDS victims, concluded that H1N1 possesses certain transmission ‘vectors’ that suggest that the new flu strain has been genetically-manufactured as a military biological warfare weapon.”

Madsen claims that his source, and another in Indonesia, “Are convinced that the current outbreak of a new strain of swine flu in Mexico and some parts of the United States is the result of the introduction of a human-engineered pathogen that could result in a widespread global pandemic, with potentially catastrophic consequences for domestic and international travel and commerce.”

When AIDS first appeared, rumours abounded as to whether the disease was man-made. These rumours were quickly squelched by the “experts” and the media as conspiracy theory and paranoia. Similar arguments are now used against the idea of a man-made flu epidemic. An Internet blogger wrote a typical response: “The number one thing that we all should strive to do is refrain from being suckered into conspiracy theories. Whether the US government, or any government or group, concocted this virus and were responsible for it getting out in the wild (whether on purpose or by accident) isn’t really the important issue right now. The important issue lies in handling the situation properly and trying to stop the outbreak before it gets worse – if we can.”

Emerging Viruses: Accident of Nature or Man-Made Creations?

In the early 1970s doctors believed that many infectious diseases had been banished from the industrialised world. But, remarkably, over the last three decades more than 30 new “emerging diseases” appeared in various places. Some of the better-known diseases include AIDS, SARS, Legionnaire’s disease, toxic shock syndrome, Lyme disease, hepatitis C, mad cow disease, hanta virus, various new encephalitis and hemorrhagic viruses, Lassa fever, West Nile virus, and Ebola virus.

Controversial diseases like chronic fatigue syndrome and Gulf War Illness are not included in the US government’s list of emerging diseases. In addition, older diseases such as tuberculosis, malaria, and cholera, have re-emerged in more virulent and drug-resistant forms.

Could this outbreak of a new swine flu virus be some sort of covert biological “test” (like the anthrax mailings in the US in 2001) to wake people up to the dangers of bioterrorism? Are all these new emerging diseases and viruses merely continuing (and unprecedented) cruel acts of Mother Nature? Or could “the hand of man” in the form of genetic engineers and/or biological warfare terrorists be involved in these new outbreaks? Is it just a coincidence that all these weird bugs and illnesses have erupted in the past three decades? Or is all this just “paranoid” thinking?

Health officials have never implicated the biological warfare establishments of any country for the manifestation of these new diseases. Instead, the blame has been placed on increased global travel and globalisation, population growth and movements, deforestation and reforestation programs, human sexuality (in the case of HIV), and increased human contact with tropical mini-forests and other wilderness habitats that are reservoirs for insects and animals that harbour unknown infectious agents.

Several days after the “swine flu” outbreak was detected in Mexico, health officials declared that “Patient Zero” was a 5 year-old boy from La Gloria, a small town in the State of Veracruz, four hours away from Mexico City. By the end of the week, other officials uncovered that earlier proven cases had occurred in the border area between California and Mexico, thus raising speculation that the disease originated in the US. Although there was no indication the pandemic was caused by pigs, many people were fearful of eating pork, and pork farmers were facing financial ruin.

Ever since AIDS, epidemiologists tend to routinely blame many emerging diseases on animals and the transfer of their viruses to humans via “species jumping.” Scientists never mention the fact that for many decades millions of animals and innumerable vials of infectious animal tissue material have been shipped around the world for commercial and biological warfare purposes.

This world trade in deadly agents, coupled with advanced gene-splicing technology and species-jumping experiments beginning in the 1970s, has paralleled the increase in emerging diseases. In countless laboratories around the world many newly engineered viruses have been seeded into various species of animals. Some of these viruses have been adapted to human tissue.

The biological warfare implications of all these scientific “advances” have led some conspiracy-minded people to suspect out-of-control scientists as the source of one or more outbreaks of these newly emerging diseases.

A few researchers, such as Dr. Leonard Horowitz, suspects this is all part of “a conspiracy to commit genocide” by an “Anglo-American network of [government and pharmaceutical company] genetic engineers” who produced “genetically-modified recombinants of the avian, swine, and Spanish flu viruses, H5N1 and H1N1, nearly identical to the unprecedented Mexican virus that has now spread to the United States.”

Generating Fear for a Hidden Agenda?

Former US State Department insider Fred Burks, writing for www.opednews.com, asks “How much of the swine flu scare is real and how much is fear mongering? Could it be that certain members of the power elite profit handsomely when fear is spread around the globe through exaggerated alerts such as the avian flu and swine flu scares? Could there actually be deadly man-made viruses… which if released could cause a true pandemic killing millions around the globe? These are important questions worth exploring.”

Burks mentions the previous swine flu outbreak in the US in 1976 when only one person actually died, yet fear-mongering by the government led to massive vaccinations, which in turn caused at least 30 deaths as a direct result of contaminated vaccines.

More than half a dozen pharmaceutical companies, including Gilead Sciences Inc., Roche, GlaxoSmithKline and other companies with a stake in flu treatments and detection, saw a rise in their shares in a matter of days, and will likely see revenue boosts if the swine flu outbreak continues to spread.

The fear generated by the mainstream media and government over recent flu outbreaks has made some individuals very wealthy. Former US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld alone added $5 million to his investment portfolio thanks to massive sales of Tamiflu during the avian flu “pandemic,” which never materialised. Tamiflu was shown numerous times to be ineffective against avian flu, however it’s also being recommended for swine flu.

The Financial Times on May 12 reported that governments around the world have previously stockpiled 220 million doses of Tamiflu in preparation for a “pandemic” that has yet to appear. The cost of this preparation is $7 billion dollars.

Bestselling author and health activist Dr. Joseph Mercola makes the following point: “It is important to note that nearly all suspected new [swine flu] cases have been reported as mild. Preliminary scientific evidence is also pointing out that this virus is NOT as potent as initially thought… Personally, I am highly skeptical. It simply doesn’t add up to a real pandemic.”

Mercola suspects a hidden agenda: “[The swine flu] has a noticeable subplot – preparing you for draconian measures to combat a future pandemic as well as forcing you to accept the idea of mandatory vaccinations.”

At the time of this article’s publication, extra powers granted by the NSW government in Australia can be applied to force into quarantine anyone who has been in contact with a suspected swine flu “case.” Will the next step be mandatory vaccinations?

Secret biowarfare experimentation on human populations

It is surprising that US Homeland Security and the CDC immediately eliminated bioterrorism as a possible source of the new swine flu outbreak, particularly when the US government has a long and well-documented history of biowarfare experimentation using unsuspecting citizens.

During the 1950s and 60s secret military biowarfare attacks took place in many parts of America. The most notorious was a six-day attack on San Francisco in which clouds of potentially harmful bacteria were sprayed over the city. Twelve people developed pneumonia due to the infectious bacteria, and one elderly man died from the attack. This attack was not revealed to the public until years later when classified documents were finally released.

In other classified experiments, the military sprayed bacteria in New York City subways, in a Washington DC airport, and on highways in Pennsylvania. Biowarfare testing also took place in military bases in Virginia, in Key West (Florida), and off the coasts of Southern California and Hawaii.

The Army also experimented on its own soldiers. Secret biowarfare experiments were performed at Fort Detrick between 1954 and 1973, exposing 2,300 Seventh-Day Adventist volunteers to germs causing tularemia, malaria, anthrax, Queensland fever, Rocky Mountain spotted fever, encephalitis, and a host of other exotic diseases.

The experiments were aimed at preventing, diagnosing, and treating these diseases, as well as the development of vaccines. No one died in the experiments, but critics contend that the men were essentially coerced into participating in research that, despite military assurances to the contrary, could have been used to produce biowarfare weapons.

During the Cold War years following World War Two, thousands of US citizens were used as unsuspecting guinea pigs in over 4,000 secret and classified radiation experiments conducted by the Atomic Energy Commission and other government agencies.

Not only is the public kept ignorant of biowarfare research, but biowarfare “accidents” are officially covered-up, downplayed, or simply blamed on animals. The full extent of the US government’s experiments on unsuspecting people will probably never be known because many documents remain Top Secret or classified. Other documents are often declared as missing, destroyed, or “unavailable,” in an attempt to hide the truth from the public.

Genetic engineering and species transfer of new killer viruses

As the 1970s began, the US Army’s biowarfare program intensified, particularly in the area of genetic engineering research. This genetic manipulation of cells and infectious agents, and the mixing and transferring of viruses between various animals (including monkeys, chimps and other primates) resulted in the creation of many laboratory (i.e. “man-made”) infectious agents for research, commercial and biowarfare purposes.

In 1971, President Richard Nixon transferred a major part of the Army’s Biological Warfare Unit at Ft. Detrick over to the National Cancer Institute (NCI). Thereafter, secret biowarfare experimentation continued under the cover of bona-fide cancer research.

In November 1973 at a high-level conference entitled “Biohazards in Biological Research,” virologists freely admitted there was no foolproof way to prevent the escape of highly dangerous laboratory viruses into the community. Robert Miller of the NCI warned that “laboratory workers have not only heavy exposures to known viruses, but also to the viruses that they invent.”

Utilising the latest genetic engineering techniques, virologists forced cancer-causing viruses to “jump” from one species of animal to another. In the hazardous transfer of dangerous infectious agents, scientists developed new forms of cancer in animals, as well as AIDS-like immunodeficiency diseases in cats, primates, and other lab animals. In 1981, a decade later, a new and mysterious immunodeficiency disease called AIDS suddenly appeared exclusively in gay men, the most hated minority in America.

AIDS: A designer disease with a genetically-altered laboratory virus?

During the 1970s the NCI’s Special Virus Cancer Program brought together leading national and international medical scientists in a unified attempt to uncover cancer-causing viruses. In the process human and animal viruses were adapted for commercial and biowarfare purposes. By the end of the decade new “emerging viruses” began to appear.

Some AIDS researchers believe the “war on cancer” and the concomitant Special Virus Cancer Program with its connections to biowarfare research spawned HIV. The AIDS outbreak in America clearly traces back to the government-sponsored experimental hepatitis B vaccine programs (1978-1981). These experiments in Manhattan, Los Angeles, and San Francisco, utilised highly promiscuous, healthy white gay and bisexual men as guinea pigs. Shortly after this experiment began in Manhattan in 1978, the first cases of “gay-related immune deficiency disease” appeared in New York City.

The danger of unrecognised animal viruses contaminating commercial vaccines has been known for a half-century. The AIDS epidemic was not the first time a monkey virus “jumped species” – via contaminated vaccines – to the human population. The polio vaccine of the 1950s was contaminated with a monkey virus called “simian virus-40” and was injected into half the US population of that era. The details of this horrific event and its aftermath can be found in The Virus and the Vaccine: The True Story of a Cancer-Causing Monkey Virus, Contaminated Polio Vaccine, and the Millions of Americans Exposed by Debbie Bookchin and Jim Schumacher.

The idea of AIDS as a man-made virus (and seeded through vaccines) is considered by most scientists to be a joke and is trashed as paranoid “conspiracy theory.” However, as already noted, previous biowarfare experiments against civilians have all been clouded in secrecy and covered-up at the highest levels of government. Scientific “facts” surrounding these unethical programs are often tainted with government disinformation, propaganda, and outright lies.

Scientists pooh-pooh the idea of a “man-made” virus, even though the laboratory transfer of viruses from one species to another always results in a “man-made virus.” When a lab virus is transferred to another species its molecular structure is altered. This occurs because the transferred virus picks up new genetic material from the cells of the new species that it infects.

More than 30 years after AIDS there are still unanswered questions. How is it biologically possible for a supposedly black, heterosexually-transmitted disease “out-of-Africa” to suddenly (with no incubation period) transform itself into a “gay disease” in New York City, Los Angeles, and San Francisco? Why are there no proven AIDS cases in Africa in the 1960s and 70s? Why only young healthy white gay men in the US? Why no blacks, women, old people, immuno-suppressed people, children, heterosexuals, among the first cases? Surely with all the sexual activity of heterosexuals in America, one would expect some early cases to appear in straight people as well.

The evidence pointing to AIDS as a man-made disease can be found in my two books: AIDS and the Doctors of Death and Queer Blood. One can also google “man-made AIDS” for hundreds of Internet websites in which the subject is discussed rationally and intelligently. One Internet article entitled “WHO murdered Africa,” written by William Campbell Douglas, has been posted for two decades. The physician accuses the World Health Organisation of deliberately seeding HIV via contaminated African vaccine experiments. Douglas says there is no question mark after the title because the title is not a question: it’s a declarative statement. It is interesting to note that there has never been any serious scientific challenge to this research.

After 30 years, man-made AIDS is still a taboo subject for scientists and the media. As proof, witness the demonisation of Reverend Jeremiah Wright (Barack Obama’s pastor) whose public accusations of man-made AIDS threatened to bring down Obama’s bid for the presidential nomination. Not one journalist had the temerity to ask the Reverend why he held such an extreme view, and what was the evidence for it.

Pig parts for people

In a pandemic flu article appearing in the New York Times on May 5, 2009, (“10 (virus) genes furiously evolving”), Carl Zimmer reports: “Viruses are diverse because they can mutate very fast and can mix genes. They sometimes pick up genes from their hosts, and they can swap genes with other viruses. Some viruses, including flu viruses, carry out a kind of mixing known as reassortment. If two different flu viruses infect the same cell, the new copies of their genes get jumbled up as new viruses are assembled.”

So why do scientists want to use pig tissue for transplantation into humans? Particularly when pig viruses could “swap genes” with human viruses? Could the current “new” swine flu virus, which is a mix of human, pig and bird viruses, have its origin in gene-swapping viral lab experiments and/or vaccine experiments that have been conducted over the past half-century?

Writing about pig parts for TIME (January 14, 2002), Michael Lemonick is aware of the danger arising “because animals carry viruses that are harmless to their hosts but can turn deadly in another species. If such a virus hitchhiked aboard transplanted tissue, it could not only infect its new host but also spread to other humans – much as HIV did when it jumped from monkeys to man.”

Nevertheless, he concludes, “Interspecies transplantation is so promising that researchers are determined to tackle each hurdle as it comes. It could be a decade or more before clinical trials become routine and even longer for transplants. But they seem to be on their way.”

The Madness of Virus Research

How many more wake up calls with the appearance of mysterious viruses and epidemics will be required before health officials stop blaming animals as the source? When will we begin to reevaluate the world trade in deadly infectious and biowarfare agents, the insanities of out-of-control vaccine experimentation, and the needless seeding of viruses into countless laboratory animals? Surely these factors are possible reasons for our current and predicted new plagues.

Laboratory infectious creations and biowarfare agents are designed solely to kill. Any government or scientist or terrorist that is willing to deploy these agents should be fully aware that – ‘What Goes Around, Comes Around’.

.

Dr. ALAN CANTWELL is the author of two books on the man-made AIDS epidemic: AIDS and the Doctors of Death and Queer Blood, both available from www.amazon.com and Book Clearing House in the US @ 1-800-431-1579. Email: alanrcan@aol.com Website: www.ariesrisingpress.com.

The above article appeared in New Dawn No. 115 (Sept-Oct 2009).

Read this article with its illustrations by downloading
your copy of New Dawn 115 (PDF version) for only US$2.95

© New Dawn Magazine and the respective author.
For our reproduction notice, click here.

—

It has been half a decade since the United States came under an unprecedented coordinated terrorist attack on some of its most prominent symbols of power. First the North, then the South, Towers of the World Trade Centre (WTC) in New York were hit by civilian airplanes. Then even the heart of the US military, the Pentagon, was struck, and finally a civilian plane, apparently destined for the White House, ended up crashing in Pennsylvania.

Most of us remember watching the TV screens in absolute shock and horror, as first one, then the other, WTC towers collapsed in on themselves in a cloud of smoke and debris. Some of us experienced unbearable grief as we witnessed or later learned that our own loved ones were among those thousands of people who were brutally, gruesomely slain.

Since then, there have been many other terrorist attacks on Western targets in Indonesia, Turkey, Spain, Britain, and elsewhere. And, we are told, there have been countless other attempted terrorist attacks foiled by the authorities. The enemy is not always easy to identify – but their broad contours, our leaders say, are well-known.

“The evidence we have gathered all points to a collection of loosely affiliated terrorist organisations known as al Qaeda,” declared US President George W. Bush after the September 11, 2001 attacks…

Al Qaeda is to terror what the mafia is to crime. But its goal is not making money; its goal is remaking the world – and imposing its radical beliefs on people everywhere… This group and its leader – a person named Osama bin Laden – are linked to many other organisations in different countries… There are thousands of these terrorists in more than 60 countries. They are recruited from their own nations and neighbourhoods and brought to camps in places like Afghanistan, where they are trained in the tactics of terror. They are sent back to their homes or sent to hide in countries around the world to plot evil and destruction.

And thereafter was officially launched the “War on Terror,” an unlimited war against an amorphous network of Islamist extremists who could strike out at any time, in any place, without warning, and without mercy, in order to pursue their ultimate goal of global domination.

Cold War Pentagon Memo Confirms State-Sponsored Self Terrorism

For those well-versed in the history of Western covert operations, the official narrative of 9/11 could not simply be accepted at face value. Questions were perfectly legitimate. But the 9/11 truth movement has largely missed the value of one of the biggest “covert operation smoking guns” of 20th century history: Operation Gladio, perhaps the only instance of successfully completed state-sponsored self-terrorism that is fully and directly confirmed by declassified secret documents, European Parliamentary inquiries, and confessions from intelligence operatives.

The most authoritative study of this ‘Strategy of Tension’, NATO’s Secret Armies, was released last year, and authored by Dr. Daniele Ganser, Senior Researcher at the Centre for Security Studies in the Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich.

His groundbreaking book shows that it is now a matter of historical record that during the Cold War, high-level sections of the American, British and western European secret services participated in a sophisticated NATO-backed operation to engineer domestic terrorist attacks to be blamed on the Soviet Union. The objective was to mobilise drastic anti-Communist policies at home and abroad, and to legitimise interventionism against nationalist independence movements throughout the “Third World.”1

In July 1940, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill ordered the establishment of a secret army to “set Europe ablaze by assisting resistance movements and carrying out subversive operations in enemy held territory.”2 By 4 October 1945, the British Chiefs of Staff and the Special Operations branch of MI6 directed the creation of a “skeleton network” capable of expansion either in war or to service clandestine operations abroad.3

In the ensuing years, Col. Gubbins’ Special Operations branch of MI6 cooperated closely with Frank Wisner’s CIA covert action department Office of Policy Coordination (OPC) on White House orders, and in turn coordinated US and UK Special Forces, to establish stay-behind secret armies across western Europe.4

The programme soon developed into a dangerous conglomerate of unaccountable covert operations controlled by clandestine structures operating as parallel sub-sections of the main intelligence services. Dr. Ganser does us the greatest service in unearthing the only smoking gun Pentagon memo which proves that state-sponsored self-terrorism is standard strategy for elements of Western military-intelligence services: classified Field Manual 30-31, with appendices FM 30-31A and FM 30-31B, authored by the Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).

As Ganser observes: “FM 30-31 instructs the secret soldiers to carry out acts of violence in times of peace and then blame them on the Communist enemy in order to create a situation of fear and alertness. Alternatively, the secret soldiers are instructed to infiltrate the left-wing movements and then urge them to use violence.” In the manual’s own words:

There may be times when Host Country Governments show passivity or indecision in the face of Communist subversion and according to the interpretation of the US secret services do not react with sufficient effectiveness… US army intelligence must have the means of launching special operations which will convince Host Country Governments and public opinion of the reality of the insurgent danger. To reach this aim US army intelligence should seek to penetrate the insurgency by means of agents on special assignment, with the task of forming special action groups among the most radical elements of the insurgency… In case it has not been possible to successfully infiltrate such agents into the leadership of the rebels it can be useful to instrumentalise extreme leftist organisations for one’s own ends in order to achieve the above described targets… These special operations must remain strictly secret.5

In this way, US and UK intelligence services orchestrated devastating waves of terrorist attacks blamed on the Soviet Union, not only in Italy, but also in Spain, Germany, France, Turkey, Greece, and throughout western Europe.

Reasonable Doubt…

But why suspect that the same thing is happening now in the new “War on Terror”? The answer lies in what almost amounts to a signed confession in the form of the “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” document published one year prior to 9/11 by the neo-conservative think-tank, the Project for a New American Century (PNAC). The document was sponsored by all the leading lights of the Bush Cabinet, including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Armitage, John Bolton, among many others.6 It advocates a “blueprint for maintaining global US pre-eminence, precluding the rise of a great power rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests.”

The US military is described as “the cavalry on the new American frontier,” whose “core mission” is to “fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars” to preserve what is candidly portrayed as a “global Pax Americana.” But the most significant revelation is on pages 62-63, stating that:

Any serious effort at transformation must occur within the larger framework of US national security strategy, military missions and defense budgets.… Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalysing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.7

The PNAC blueprint echoed the strategic concerns about legitimising US military expansionism expressed by Zbigniew Brzezinski, former National Security Adviser to President Carter, made three years earlier:

The attitude of the American public toward the external projection of American power has been much more ambivalent. The public supported America’s engagement in World War II largely because of the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor… As America becomes an increasingly multi-cultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat.8

Immediately, it becomes clear that interrogating the US government’s relationship to 9/11 is absolutely essential. It seems that in the preceding years, senior US policymakers had seriously contemplated the usefulness of a Pearl Harbor-scale attack to mobilise domestic populations in support of US military power projection. As Daniel Ellsberg, Special Assistant to the Assistant Defense Secretary of the United States during the Vietnam War, who famously leaked the Pentagon Papers, asked in June this year:

Is this administration capable, humanly and psychologically of engineering such a provocation [as 9/11]? Yes, I would say that, I worked for such an administration myself, Johnson, ah, President Johnson put destroyers in harm’s way in the Tonkin Gulf not only once, but several times, with the, with a lot of his people hoping that it would lead to a confrontation and claiming that it had. And could have resulted in the loss of many lives in the course of it.9

9/11 Commission: Denounced by the 9/11 Families

Thankfully, not everyone bought into the official narrative of 9/11 so easily. Least of all the bereaved families of the 9/11 victims, many of whom struggled and lobbied despite their own mourning for an independent public inquiry into the terrorist attacks, an inquiry that might resolve the numerous questions that hung over almost every single dimension of the government’s explanation for what had happened that Tuesday morning.

The 9/11 families’ courageous struggle, supported by a loose association of researchers, organisations and activists around the United States and the world, forced the US government to hold first the Joint Inquiry by the House and Senate, and finally to instate the National Commission to Investigate the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001, in Washington DC. But despite both processes making public some valuable new information about the attacks and raising a few important questions, they were ultimately pitiful failures in the task of genuinely, impartially interrogating the 9/11 attacks.

Last year on 22 July, I had the honour of testifying as an expert at a special all-day Congressional hearing in Washington sponsored by Hon. Rep. Cynthia McKinney and Hon. Rep. Raul Grijalva, “The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later: A Citizen’s Response – Did They Get it Right?”

I was joined by a host of academic experts, journalists, and former senior US intelligence officers, all of them questioning the official 9/11 narrative from their own perspectives. But by far the most powerful address was from the 9/11 families who came to support and inform the meeting, including Robert McIlvaine, father of 9/11 victim and member of September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows; Marilyn Rosenthal, mother of 9/11 victim, and professor at University of Michigan; and especially Lauri von Auken, Mindy Kleinberg and Monica Gabrielle representing the 911 Family Steering Committee.

“This report was supposed to provide the definitive account of what had transpired on September 11, 2001,” said von Auken in her opening address at the hearing. “We hoped that our thousands of unanswered questions would be addressed and answered. Yet, incredibly, we have found that the Commission’s definitive final report has actually yielded more questions than answers.” She indicted the 9/11 Commission Report as just “some statements that truly insulted the intelligence of the American people, violated our loved ones’ memories, and might end up hurting us one day soon.”10

Her characterisation of the Commission Report was the most damning condemnation that the 9/11 Families Steering Committee had ever made about the official inquiry process. Yet it was met with resounding silence from the American media, which refused to report the hearing in general, and ignored von Auken’s heart-rending testimony on behalf of the 9/11 families.

Whither the Movement?

Five years on from 9/11, the “truth movement” that has emerged in the vacuum of legitimate answers to the countless questions about the terrorist attacks remains in a state of internal disarray, despite significant progress and achievements. The movement is plagued with accusations and counter-accusations between researchers based on their theoretical preferences about what happened on 9/11.

With an almost religious zeal, activists hurl outraged condemnations and paranoid allegations at each other. Splits in the movement are innumerable, mutual suspicions that other parties are “disinformation agents” are rife, and fruitless regressive arguments and counter-arguments continue on the most speculative minutiae of the attacks, without any clear resolution in sight.

Perhaps one of the most obvious splits worth noting here is the apparent gulf between “physical evidence” theorists, who emphasise discrepancies in official accounts of the collapse of the WTC buildings, the movements of the planes that hit the buildings, and the Pentagon crash, among other things; and “covert operations” theorists, who emphasise the role of intelligence operations in liaising with terrorist networks, the extent of prior advanced warnings of the attacks, and the manipulation of “terrorist threats” to justify the pursuit of US geostrategic interests on the pretext of fighting the “War on Terror.”

Even within these particular “schools,” there are vitriolic disputes between “9/11-truthers,” some advocating that there were no planes on 9/11, others that the planes were military aircraft, some that there were no hijackers, others that the hijackers were patsies, and so on and so forth. Most of these quite specific disagreements about how to interpret the available data remain unresolved on the whole, despite individual opinions.

To some extent, the disputes have manifested in the form of seemingly hostile exchanges between various camps, such as the recent observations made by Michael C. Ruppert to the effect that the 9/11 movement has virtually killed itself by getting obsessed with physical evidence, and the responses that followed suggesting physical evidence provides the most convincing case.

As readers familiar with my work will know, I myself prefer to engage in the kind of research loosely categorised here as belonging to the “covert operations” camp, but this has nothing to do with my view of the value of the evidence at hand. On the contrary, it is largely to do with my own expertise in international relations and conflict analysis, and my lack of familiarity with the relevant scientific disciplines.

Having said that, the overemphasis on particular kinds of 9/11 research at the expense of others, for the movement as a whole, must be dropped. The fact of the matter is that both kinds of research are essential to develop a full and accurate understanding of what happened on 9/11, how and why. An impartial inspection of the relevant data in these two seemingly opposed areas of analysis firstly shows that there is a great deal we do know about what happened, and secondly opens up new avenues of inquiry about what we still don’t know.

The World Trade Centre: Demolishing Conventional Collapse Theories

Thankfully, there are non-scientists unlike myself who despite a lack of specifically relevant qualifications, do feel confident about addressing some of the physical and scientific issues concerning 9/11.

Some of the best work on this subject has, indeed, been done by David Ray Griffin, a professor emeritus at the Claremont School of Theology, who applies his well-honed academic methods of analytical analysis to the questions surrounding the collapse of the World Trade Centre buildings.

Griffin is perhaps best known in the movement for his New Pearl Harbor (2004), which attempted to summarise the best evidence about 9/11 produced by other researchers, including apart from myself, Paul Thompson at the Centre for Cooperative Research and author of The Terror Timeline; Michel Chossudovsky, a professor of economics at the University of Ottawa; and Michael Ruppert, former LAPD narcotics investigator who uncovered CIA narco-trafficking and author of Crossing the Rubicon.

But Griffin went further in using the works of researchers like Eric Hufschmidt, a non-scientist who collected together serious discrepancies in the government’s claims about the WTC collapses, and Jim Hoffman, who specialises in applying scientific visualisations of mathematics. Griffin also tackled the anomalies in official accounts about the Pentagon crash.

Griffin’s best work in this area was published earlier this year in what is arguably the best collection of academic 9/11 research to date. The collection, “Hidden History of 9-11-2001”, was published in the peer-reviewed annual volume Research in Political Economy (REP), edited by Paul Zarembka, professor of economics at New York State University.

Griffin’s contribution systematically deconstructs the various official explanations for why the WTC buildings collapsed, and finds them hopelessly inadequate.11 Once again, he relies heavily on the research of other scientists, particularly Hoffman’s. He notes the basic claim, also endorsed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) report, that the towers collapsed due to fires, and points out that scientific studies carried out by NIST itself “found no evidence that any of the core columns were exposed to temperatures greater than 482˚F (250˚C).” The problem is that steel “does not even begin to melt until it reaches almost 2800° Fahrenheit. And yet open fires fueled by hydrocarbons, such as kerosene – which is what jet fuel is – can at most rise to 1700°F, which is almost 1100 degrees below the melting point of steel.” In other words, the fires were nowhere near hot enough to cause the steel to either buckle, or melt.

Griffin’s analysis is also the first attempt to review testimony about explosions from fire fighters and emergency medical workers in the over 500 9/11 oral histories recorded by the New York Fire Department. These were only publicly released in August 2005 under pressure from the 9/11 families and the New York Times. In conclusion of his review, Griffin quotes Auxiliary Lieutenant Fireman Paul Isaac saying that “there were definitely bombs in those buildings,” and that “many other firemen know there were bombs in the buildings, but they’re afraid for their jobs to admit it because the ‘higher-ups’ forbid discussion of this fact.”

Unknown to many, however, is the debacle behind the publication of Griffin’s article in Research in Political Economy. The piece was only submitted after another article on the WTC collapses, authored by Steve Jones, professor of physics at Brigham Young University (BYU), was banned from publication in the journal by his own physics department.

Jones’ groundbreaking analysis – the first peer-reviewed deconstruction of the official account of the WTC collapses from an American physicist – was eventually posted on Jones’ website at the BYU physics department, which also permitted him to publish it in a separate prospective volume edited by Griffin, for which the paper went through yet another peer review process. Jones’ contribution is the first peer-reviewed refutation of the official account of the WTC collapses by a qualified physicist.12

One of his most explosive arguments concerned discoveries of molten metal in the basements of the two WTC towers, which were hit by planes, as well as in the third building, WTC 7 – a building which symmetrically collapsed despite not being hit by a plane. In all cases, the official account blames intense fires, made hotter due to jet (or in WTC 7’s case diesel) fuel. Jones points out that all scientific investigations by NIST, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and independent experts establish that the fires were simply not hot enough to melt the steel. In that context, the deposits of molten metal found after the collapses constitute “direct evidence for the use of high-temperature explosives, such as thermite, which produces molten iron as an end product.”13

Long before Jones’ devastating conclusions – only 3 months after 9/11 – the inadequacy of the official account had been flagged up by fire protection engineering experts. Editor Bill Manning wrote in Fire Engineering that:

Fire Engineering has good reason to believe that the ‘official Investigation’ blessed by FEMA… is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure… Respected members of the fire protection engineering community are beginning to raise red flags, and a resonating [result] has emerged: The structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers….14

And late last year, similar reservations were aired by structural engineers, concerned that: “World Trade Center disaster investigators [at NIST] are refusing to show computer visualisations of the collapse of the Twin Towers despite calls from leading structural and fire engineers.” The visualisations are needed to iron out the many “simplifications, extrapolations and judgment calls” made in the investigation.15

Pentagon Disinformation: Concealing the Nuclear Device

Unlike the growing scientific literature critiquing the government’s account of the WTC collapses, there remains considerable ambiguity over what happened at the Pentagon on 9/11. There are no scientific peer-reviewed analyses of the subject either for or against the official account. It is therefore difficult for a layperson to assess the strength of the evidence on either side.

For instance, Griffin, using the work of French journalist Thierry Meyssan, has argued that the Pentagon could not have been hit by a Boeing 757. Mathematics professor A. K. Dewdney has also supported this thesis. The main grounds for the argument are, 1. The photovisual evidence of the crash scene, where no debris from a Boeing jet can be seen anywhere, and where the entry-point in the west wing wall is a small hole with no damage on either side of it; 2. Photovisual evidence showing that whatever entered the Pentagon had the power to penetrate six reinforced walls; 3. The systematic concealing of evidence relevant to the crash, including debris, camera footage, etc.; among some other issues.

But the Pentagon crash debate illustrates precisely the kinds of ambiguities that can arise when non-scientists try to assess physical evidence without the qualifications to do so.

Perhaps the best critique of the sort of analysis done by Meyssan and Griffin, is by the French engineering professor, Jean-Pierre Desmoulins, who also holds a private pilot’s license. Desmoulins notes that it is often wrongly assumed that the famous AP “hunt the boeing” photo was taken only a few minutes after the crash: “Examined more carefully the photo reveals that this E-Ring zone had already collapsed.” Desmoulins notes that the photo, taken from afar, shows very little detail, and therefore chastises those who assume that the photo provides proof that there is no damage above or on either side of the hole. Indeed, he argues that although “there’s no damage above the central (fuselage) hole, there is extensive damage extending on both the left and right sides of this hole.”16

Desmoulins assessment is corroborated by Joe R.’s so far undisputed calculation of the actual size of the hole, based on examining the photovisual evidence in relation to the known sizes of the clearly visible windows in the damaged Pentagon wall, the known size of the wall itself, etc. Joe concludes that the total width of the primary hole is 20ft, compared to the fuselage width of a 757 at 12.5 ft – ample size for a 757 to pass through.17

The photo is also selective. Although fuselage debris “are not visible on the area shown by this photo, i.e. south-west of the impact point,” Desmoulins points out with photovisual evidence that “there were a lot of small (and some middle size) aluminium pieces on the north-west side of the impact point. This is normal, as the impact occurred with an angle of 55° from the plane of the facade. The parts of the aircraft which didn’t enter the building bounced away, like confetti, in a sector comprised, approximately, between 0° and 55° from the planular facade on the NORTH side.”18

Crash studies suggest that the over-300-mph impact of a jetliner with the Pentagon’s reinforced wall would have reduced the entire aircraft – and certainly its relatively light wings and tail – to confetti.19

Desmoulins also notes the role of the “Owen Effect,” whereby the temperature was likely to reach higher than the melting point of aluminium, a phenomena commonly recorded in tunnel fires in Europe (e.g. in the channel tunnel, in the Mont Blanc tunnel, in a funicular fire in Austria where aluminium was completely melted and iron partly melted). As there was a sprinkler system recently installed in the zone of the crash, the input of water “on a mix of fuel and molten aluminium at high temperature creates a chemical reaction between aluminium and water, producing alumina (a white powder) and hydrogen.” The reaction would have “disintegrated most of the parts of the plane which were placed in this inferno condition… Any engineer in an aluminium production plant knows the dangers created by the encounter of water and melted aluminium.”

Desmoulins then forwards an alternative explanation, consistent with the findings of a growing number of credible 9/11 researchers like Jim Hoffman, Eric Bart, Joe R., among others, that the Pentagon was indeed hit by a Boeing 757. This is consistent with the overwhelming bulk of the eyewitness evidence compiled by Bart,20 as well with the physical evidence assessed by Hoffman. But the large-scale impact of the crash inside the Pentagon can only be explained by the hypothesis that the airliner carried a military load. Indeed, professor Desmoulis argues that the scale of the explosion and its effects on the building structures is consistent only with the impact of a depleted uranium warhead.21

The use of DU on 9/11 at the Pentagon crash has been corroborated by radiation scientist Leuren Moret, who worked on radiation issues at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Laboratory. Moret and another radiation expert Dr. Janette Sherman took Geiger counter readings showing over eight to ten times higher than normal, 12 miles from the Pentagon.

According to Moret, they alerted radiation experts from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the FBI who later confirmed high radiation levels at the Pentagon crash site.22 For Desmoulins, the high levels of radiation that would have penetrated the crash scene debris account for the authorities’ refusals to release the Pentagon evidence, which would confirm the planting of an advanced DU warhead in the nose of the Boeing.

Remote Hijacking of Hijackers?

In any case, the Pentagon debate appears less easy to resolve than another line of inquiry, the role of the alleged 9/11 hijackers. The best research on the subject is by Jay Kolar, in yet another stellar contribution to the “Hidden History” REP volume.

Reviewing credible reports from the BBC, CNN, and other mainstream sources around the world, he concludes that “at least ten of those named on the FBI’s second and final list of 19 have turned up and been verified to be alive, with proof positive that at least one other ‘hijacker’, Ziad Jarrah, had his identity doubled, and therefore fabricated.” Kolar, who has expertise in film analysis, examines the visual evidence furnished by the government to support its narrative – including alleged footage of the hijackers at Dulles Airport and the infamous Osama bin Laden confession tape. He finds them to be riddled with impossibilities and anomalies, and concludes that they are utterly unreliable at best, and downright forgeries at worst.23

This leaves us, however, with another problem. If there were no hijackers, then what happened on 9/11? In the same volume, professor Paul Zarembka notes that the available evidence from the FAA and elsewhere tends to support the conclusion that there were hijackings of the four flights that morning.24 So if the planes were hijacked, who did it?

In my view, this is where Kolar’s ‘doubles’ theory comes in. Kolar argues that as many of the alleged hijackers are now alive, they must have had ‘doubles’ who were using their identities as aliases. In my own research, I’ve noted that the alleged hijackers had trained in US military installations in the 1990s, had connections to the CIA and DEA, and worse still, displayed patently non-Islamic behaviour in the form of drinking alcohol, snorting cocaine, and frolicking with women at lap-dancing clubs and illicit parties – behaviour not commensurate with that of normal practising Muslims, let alone Islamist al-Qaeda fanatics about to conduct the most spectacular martyrdom operation in history. At the forefront of this line of inquiry is former PBS and NBC journalist Daniel Hopsicker.

Kolar’s ‘doubles’ theory can perhaps begin to explain how the 9/11 cell was in fact made up of double agents who could have gone on to carry out the hijacking operations on the morning of 9/11.

But questions still remain. Nila Sagedevan, an aeronautical engineer and pilot, explores how it is a matter of record that the vast majority of these individuals were notoriously incapable of flying properly according to their own flight instructors. Mohammed Atta, Khalid al-Mihdhar, Marwan al-Shehhi and Hani Hanjour, were all described by their trainers as utterly incompetent. Hanjour’s instructer proclaimed incredulously: “His English was horrible, and his mechanical skills were even worse. It was like he had hardly even ever driven a car. I’m still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon. He could not fly at all.”25

But the flight into the Pentagon, as is well-known, was described by pilots as one of the most sophisticated flying operations they had ever seen. Consider the observation of retired US Army Special Forces Master Sergeant Stan Goff about Hanjour:

A pilot they want us to believe was trained at a Florida puddle-jumper school for Piper Cubs and Cessnas, conducts a well-controlled downward spiral, descending the last 7,000 feet in two-and-a-half minutes, brings the plane in so low and flat that it clips the electrical wires across the street from the Pentagon, and flies it with pinpoint accuracy into the side of this building at 460 nauts. When the theory about learning to fly this well at the puddle-jumper school began to lose ground, it was added that they received further training on a flight simulator. This is like saying you prepared your teenager for her first drive on I-40 at rush.26

Thus, while it may be necessary to factor in the hijackers as involved in the initial part of the operation to takeover the civilian airliners, a fuller explanation would suggest that they were not aware of the wider ramifications of the operation as a suicide mission; and that new methods for the control of hijacked aircraft using remote technologies were implemented that morning to take the operation to its final, terrible conclusion. These technologies did exist prior to 9/11, as reported by the New Scientist, the Economist, ITN News, and many other sources.

For example: “Most modern aircraft have some form of autopilot that could be re-programmed to ignore commands from a hijacker and instead take direction from the ground,” said Jeff Gosling of the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California, Berkeley.27

This of course highlights the failure of the US air defence system to do anything for about one and a half hours, as recently acknowledged by experts such as Lt. Col. (ret.) Robert Bowman, director of the Star Wars programmes under Presidents Ford and Carter. Not only were standard operating procedures systematically violated, such that no military jets were implemented in a timely fashion to the right targets; the technology in place to remotely direct the hijacked aircraft was not used to take them to safety. Given that the conventionally identified hijackers could not have flown the planes either, we are left with an unavoidable, if startling scenario of an “al-Qaeda” operation that was itself “remotely hijacked” by elements within the US national security establishment itself.

There is, indeed, significant circumstantial evidence consistent with the possibility that remote control technologies were being used on the morning of 9/11. It is no longer disputable that there were over half a dozen war-games in operation on the morning of 9/11, including Vigilant Warrior, “a joint, live-fly, hijack Field Training Exercise (FTX) which involved at least one (and almost certainly many more) aircraft under US control that was posing as a hijacked airliner,” being run by NORAD and the US Joint Chiefs of Staff.28

A further exercise whose special significance has been relatively unnoticed by most 9/11 researchers was run by the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), a secretive US intelligence agency which “designs, builds and operates the nation’s reconnaissance satellites” in order to “help plan military operations” and “monitor the environment” for the “Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Department of Defense (DoD).”29 According to the Associated Press:

…one US intelligence agency was planning an exercise last Sept. 11 in which an errant aircraft would crash into one of its buildings… National Reconnaissance Office had scheduled an exercise that morning in which a small corporate jet would crash into one of the four towers at the agency’s headquarters building after experiencing a mechanical failure. The agency is about four miles from the runways of Washington Dulles International Airport.

The exercise was first publicly revealed in an announcement for a homeland security conference in Chicago, which noted that CIA officer John Fulton, also Chief of the Strategic War Gaming Division of the National Reconnaissance Office, was on the very morning of 9/11 “running a pre-planned simulation to explore the emergency response issues that would be created if a plane were to strike a building…”30

NRO officials promptly denied that the simulation was a counterterrorism and/or security exercise, claiming that it was to simulate a mere accident – and insisted that the simulation was cancelled when “real world events” began. But this is hard to believe given Fulton’s specific credentials – not only the CIA/NRO chief war gamer, but also a member of the US Joint Forces Command’s Project Alpha, and an adviser on counterterrorism and homeland defense to the Director Central Intelligence Staff.31 Fulton’s expertise as chief NRO war gamer is therefore fundamentally concerned with exploring scenarios related to security and terrorism.

And what of Fulton’s Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM)? It describes itself as the Pentagon’s “transformation laboratory,” tasked among other things to develop concepts, test these concepts through live experimentation, and implement joint training exercises involving the “choreographing” of multiple military commands.32 In particular USJFCOM’s Project Alpha, in which Fulton is specifically involved, pursues programmes concerned with utilising advanced space-based satellite, surveillance, and communication technologies for military operations. Intriguingly, many of these programs have significant aerial connotations, including the use of remote control technologies using “unmanned, autonomous airborne vehicles” in war.33 Project Alpha – which is subordinate to the Department of Defense – also conducts military experiments that bring live field exercises and computer simulations together.34

Fulton’s job, in other words, is not to simulate accidents – it is to wargame complex joint military operations involving space-based and aerial technologies. Whatever the “plane into building” simulation that Fulton was exercising on the morning of 9/11, it was almost certainly a highly complex wargame. Given Project Alpha’s function, Fulton’s NRO exercise could have provided the mechanism for joint coordination of the live-fly hijack exercise, war game simulations, and remote control operations on 9/11 – remotely hijacking an al-Qaeda hijacking.

“Al-Qaeda”: A CIA Database

Indeed, much of my own latest research in The War on Truth (2005), The London Bombings (2006), and my own contribution to the “Hidden History” RPE volume, has focused on examining this entity “al-Qaeda.” Does it exist? If so, what is it?

The late former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook wrote in The Guardian one day after the 7/7 terrorist attacks in London that the term “al-Qaeda” was invented by the CIA to designate a computer database of CIA-trained mujahideen recruits around the world, administered by Osama bin Laden.35

Overwhelming evidence in the public record confirms that groups identified as being affiliated to al-Qaeda in the Middle East, Central Asia, the Balkans, the Caucasus and the Asia-Pacific, have been penetrated, subverted and manipulated by Western intelligence services. But why? Largely to destabilise regional environments to pave the way for new “security” policies that serve to protect not people, but foreign investors taking over regional markets – especially markets with significant oil and gas deposits.36

Indeed, one CIA analyst described the covert strategy in plain words to the mainstream Swiss television journalist Richard Labeviere (currently chief editor at Radio France International): “The policy of guiding the evolution of Islam and of helping them against our adversaries worked marvellously well in Afghanistan against the Red Army. The same doctrines can still be used to destabilise what remains of Russian power, and especially to counter the Chinese influence in Central Asia.”

It should not be a surprise then (although it was at first to me!), to discover that al-Qaeda operatives as senior as Ayman al-Zawahiri, bin Laden’s own right-hand man, are in fact CIA informants. The latter was confirmed by none other than Yousef Bodansky, former Director of the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism, reporting in Defense & Foreign Affairs: Strategic Policy that the al-Qaeda deputy leader was approached by a CIA emissary in November 1997, and essentially offered $50 million to protect US interests in the Balkans.37

It should not be lost on us that the same al-Zawahiri appears on the recently released al-Qaeda videos claiming responsibility for the London bombings. The implication is dire, but it is one supported by other academics such as University of Ottawa professor Michel Chossudovsky and University of California (Berkeley) professor Peter Dale Scott: that “al-Qaeda” has continued to function throughout the post-Cold War period as an instrument of Western statecraft, a covert operations tool. This, and everything else discussed here, renders the whole “War on Terror” narrative meaningless, and exposes it as an ideological framework engineered to legitimise a state of unlimited war for power and profit.

Looking Ahead

Five years on, the way forward for the 9/11 truth movement is to put an end to the obsessive infighting, forge bonds with all activists sceptical of the official 9/11 story regardless of whether they are LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose), MIHOP (Made It Happen On Purpose), or even neither, and unite on a common platform based on asking hard questions. We don’t have all the answers, but we do know that the official account is wrong on all counts. Interpreting the often complex (and sometimes technical) data is difficult enough; overcoming the reflexive psychological barriers that most people are socialised into putting up as soon as they hear of the possibility of state-sponsored self-terrorism is even more difficult.

9/11 truth needs to be understood and advocated in the context of clarifying the long tradition of state-sponsored self-terrorism that is so deeply embedded in our societies, as well as in relation to the wider dynamics of an increasingly unstable and indeed crumbling global imperial system, which the powers-that-be are desperately attempting to rehabilitate under the mantle of fighting the “War on Terror.”

In this context, a strategy of compassion and persuasion is urgently required, one which looks ahead to the possibility of a new social model that is ecologically sound, politically free, economically just and spiritually awake to the ethical values that make us human. In keeping that vision at the heart of our movement, perhaps we will be able to magnify the successes made so far and reach out to people everywhere.

Footnotes:

1. Apart from having his Gladio research – which was part of his PhD thesis – published by the reputable British academic press Frank Cass, Ganser also published a summary of his findings in the peer-reviewed Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations, (Winter/Spring 2005), pp. 69-95, www.isn.ethz.ch/php/documents/collection_gladio/Terrorism_Western_Europe.pdf.

2. Cited in Daniele Ganser, NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe (London: Frank Cass, 2005) p. 40.

3. Ibid., p. 41.

4. Ibid., p. 42.

5. Ibid., p. 234, 297. The field manual was published in the 1987 parliamentary report of the Italian parliamentary investigation into the terrorist activities of P2, the CIA-MI6 sponsored Italian anti-communist network. See Commissione parlamentare d’inchiesta sulla loggia massonica P2. Allegati alla Relazione Doc. XXIII, n. 2-quarter/7/1 Serie II, Vol. VII, Tomo I, Roma 1987, p. 287-298.

6. Neil Mackay, “Bush planned Iraq ‘regime change’ before becoming President”, Sunday Herald (15 September 2002) www.sundayherald.com/27735.

7. PNAC Report, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategies, Forces and Resources for a New Century”, Project for the New American Century, Washington D.C., (September 2000), p. 62-63, www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf.

8. Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives, Basic Books, 1997, pp. 24-25, 211.

9. Enviromentalists Against War, “Daniel Ellsberg Calls for 9/11 Investigation”, 21 July 2006, www.envirosagainstwar.org/know/read.php?itemid=4402.

10. Transcript of opening address by Lorie von Auken, “Unanswered Questions and the Call for Accountability”, The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later: A Citizen’s Response – Did the Commission Get it Right?, Complete record of transcripts and written submissions, House of Representatives (Washington DC: Cannon House Office Building, 22 July 2005), pp. 11, 18.

11. David Ray Griffin, “The Destruction of the World Trade Center: Why the Official Account Cannot Be True”, in Paul Zarembka (ed.) The Hidden History of 9-11-2001, Research in Political Economy, Volume 23, Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2006, pp. 79-122.

12. Steven E. Jones, “Why Indeed Did the World Trade Center Buildings Completely Collapse on 9-11-2001?” Brigham Young University (2005) www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html.

13. Steve Jones interviewed by Carlson Tucker, “Questioning what happened on 9/11”, MSNBC, 16 November 2005, www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10053445/.

14. Bill Manning, “Burning Questions Need Answers”, Fire Engineering (January 2002) http://fe.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=OnlineArticles&SubSe%20ction=Display&PUBLICATION_ID=25&ARTICLE_ID=131225. 15. New Civil Engineer (6 October 2005)

16. Pentagon 2001/9/11: the fraud!, www.earth-citizens.net/pages-en/npp-griffin.html

17. Joe R., “Why the No-757 Crowd is Making an Ass of Itself”, http://home.planet.nl/~reijd050/JoeR/pentahole_dimensions_est.htm.

18. Pentagon 2001/9/11: the fraud!, www.earth-citizens.net/pages-en/npp-griffin.html.

19. Noted by Jim Hoffman here, http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagontrap.html#physical. Studies reviewed here, http://911review.com/errors/pentagon/crashdebris.html.

20. Voluminous compilation of verifiable eyewitness accounts of a Boeing 757 available in the public record, http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/bart.html.

21. Pentagon 2001/9/11: the fraud!, www.earth-citizens.net/pages-en/npp-griffin.html.

22. Greg Szymanski, “High-Ranking Army Officer: Missile Hit Pentagon”, 19 August 2005, www.rense.com/general67/radfdf.htm.

23. Jay Kolar, “What We Know About the Alleged 9/11 Hijackers”, in Zarembka (ed.), op. cit., pp. 3-45.

24. Paul Zarembka, “Initiation of the 9-11 Operation, with Evidence of Insider Trading Beforehand”, in Zarembka (ed.), op. cit., pp. 49-77.

25. Nila Sagadevan, “The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without Training”, www.physics911.net/sagadevan.htm.

26. Stan Goff, “The So-Called Evidence is a Farce”, Narco News, 10 October 2001, www.narconews.com/goff1.html.

27. Sources linked and reviewed here www.911blogger.com/2006/07/wheres-remote-control.html.

28. Michael C. Ruppert, ‘TRIPOD II and FEMA: Lack of NORAD Response on 9/11 Explained’, From The Wilderness, 5 June 2004, www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/060704_tripod_fema.html. Also confirmed by former White House counterterrorism chief, Richard Clarke in his Against All Enemies, p. 4-5.

29. National Reconnaissance Office website, www.nro.gov.

30. Lumpkin, John J., ‘Agency planned exercise on Sept. 11 built around a plane crashing into a building’, Associated Press, 21 August 2002, www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2002/08/21/national1518EDT0686.DTL.

31. National Law Enforcement and Security Institute announcement, ‘Homeland Security: America’s Leadership Challenge’, www.nlsi.net/hs-alc-info.htm.

32. United States Joint Forces Command website, (viewed 30 June 2004), www.jfcom.mil/about/about1.htm.

33. USFJCOM Project Alpha website, (viewed 30 June 2004), www.jfcom.mil/about/fact_alpha.htm.

34. See for example USFJCOM Project Alpha, Millenium Challenge website, (viewed 30 June 2004), www.jfcom.mil/about/experiments/mc02.htm.

35. Robin Cook, “The struggle against terrorism cannot be won by military means”, The Guardian, 8 July 2005, www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0%2c12780%2c1523838%2c00.html.

36. See my “Terrorism and Statecraft: Al-Qaeda and Western Covert Operations after the Cold War”, in Zarembka (ed.), op. cit., pp. 140-188.

37. See my The War on Truth (Olive Branch, 2005) and The London Bombings (Duckworth, 2006).

.

NAFEEZ AHMED is the author of The London Bombings: An Independent Inquiry (Duckworth, 2006 [www.independentinquiry.co.uk]) and The War on Truth: 9/11, Disinformation and the Anatomy of Terrorism (Olive Branch, 2005). He teaches political theory, international relations, and contemporary history at the University of Sussex, Brighton. His first book, The War on Freedom: How & Why America was Attacked, September 11, 2001, was written to critique the official account of 9/11, winning him the Naples Prize, Italy’s most prestigious literary award. After that, he wrote a comprehensive deconstruction of Western imperialism in Iraq and the wider Middle East since the collapse of the Ottoman empire, Behind the War on Terror: Western Secret Strategy and the Struggle for Iraq (New Society, 2003). His blog is at http://nafeez.blogspot.com.

The above article appeared in New Dawn No. 98 (Sept-Oct 2006).

Read this article with its illustrations by downloading
your copy of New Dawn 98 (PDF version) for only US$2.95

© New Dawn Magazine and the respective author.
For our reproduction notice, click here.