The End of the Snowman

Due to overriding commitments, Pasha Law will be going into recess.

Note for other bloggers, feel free to link to, or even extract, any of the fascinating articles from archives into your own sites.

And for our readers who want to stay topical, Pasha Law recommends that you hook on over to Weazl's Revenge

Food Shortages: 'Problem-Reaction-Solution' ?

Times

Expensive food will make economic slowdowns a lot harder to manage.

Over the past half-century, Western consumers have come to expect plentiful food supplies, at costs that have declined both in real terms and as a proportion of their earnings. Had it not been for the price-distorting peculiarities of the Common Agricultural Policy, the benefits for Europe of these years of plenty would have been still more marked, but the cost of food has in general been one thing that governments in industrialised countries have not needed to worry about.

The “Great Grain Robbery” in the 1970s, when massive Soviet purchases of US grain sent world prices through the roof, was an exception that proved the rule; Moscow was denounced so bitterly at the time precisely because stable supplies and prices were thought of in rich nations almost as a birthright. Similarly, what Europeans most resented about the adoption of the euro was the way that their grocery bills jumped overnight.

The grocery bills are jumping again today, not just in Europe but all over the world. The age of cheap food has abruptly come to an end, and food prices are likely to remain high for some considerable time. The reasons are soaring demand in the developing world, high oil prices contributing to the costs of planting, fertiliser, harvesting and transport, poor harvests in major grain and rice-producing regions because of drought in Australia and cold summers in Europe and parts of North America, and, finally, disastrously timed official policies on ethanol and other biofuels. Take all these together, and the result is a jump of 40 per cent in the UN's 2007 global food price index.

For British households, more expensive food means less spare cash at the end of the month. For Afghans faced by flour costing up to 80 per cent more, it means going hungry - and, probably, even greater political instability.

For many governments, from Mexico to Malaysia, it means food riots. For everyone, persistently higher food costs will translate into hefty wage demands, and make it much harder for governments to finesse the nasty combination of weakening economies and gathering inflationary pressures. No one is talking stagflation yet, nor should they - but double-digit inflation of any kind is bad news and commodities such as soya beans, maize and wheat are up by as much as 100 per cent.

Governments are worried not only by costs, but by supply, as traditional sources of imports dry up. US wheat stocks are at their lowest since just after the Second World War, and in Europe proverbial seas and mountains of surplus produce have vanished. Argentina has set ceilings on its beef exports, and China, where inflation is at a ten-year high in large part because the prices of pork and other staple foods have gone through the roof, has, Heinz-like, slapped export taxes on 57 varieties of farm produce.

Export tariffs are the worst possible response to shortages. Farmers need every encouragement to expand production. Trade barriers send the opposite signal. There is scope for increasing productivity per hectare right across Asia and, even more so, in Africa. Genetics has the potential to usher in a second green revolution, if science is not fettered by superstition. But these are long-term solutions. There is one thing that politicians can do in the here and now: free up farm trade while the going (for farmers) is good, and when even the EU is busy cutting tariffs unilaterally and has eliminated, albeit “temporarily”, all barriers to cereal imports. A Doha deal will be done this year, or not at all. The time is now.

Source: Times Online

***

Pasha Law: Points to Note

- Companies such as Monsanto have successfully copyrighted seeds that farmers around the world have used for centuries.

- One of the most active funders of GM research has been the Rockefeller Foundation.

- Henry Kissinger’s words in the 1970s capture the motivation: ’Control the oil and you can control entire continents. Control food and you control people ...’


Further Reading:

Scientists Warn of Wheat Disease

Who is Responsible?

LHC: Curiosity that Killed at CET?

Located in Switzerland, LHC is a bold six billion dollar experiment to enable physicists to look back in time by recreating the conditions of the BIG BANG!

However, safety concerns have been expressed by many in various scientific journals, mainly pertaining to:

1. Micro blackholes, according to the 'standard calculations' these are harmless because they would quickly decay by Hawking radiation, the problem is that Hawking radiation (which is still debated) is not yet an experimentally-tested phenomenon, and so micro black holes might not decay as rapidly as calculated, and accumulate inside the earth and eventually devour it.

2. If the hypothetical Strangelets exist, and produced at LHC, they could initiate a uncontrolable fusion where the nuclei in the planet were converted to strange matter.

Anyway, sync your watches to Central European Time 10th September 2008 when the Large Hadron Collider project becomes operational, however, the first high-energy collisions are planned to take place after the LHC is officially unveiled, on 21st October, 2008.

New Way to Kill Viruses: Shake Them to Death

Live Science

Scientists may one day be able to destroy viruses in the same way that opera singers presumably shatter wine glasses. New research mathematically determined the frequencies at which simple viruses could be shaken to death.

"The capsid of a virus is something like the shell of a turtle," said physicist Otto Sankey of Arizona State University. "If the shell can be compromised [by mechanical vibrations], the virus can be inactivated."



Recent experimental evidence has shown that laser pulses tuned to the right frequency can kill certain viruses. However, locating these so-called resonant frequencies is a bit of trial and error.

"Experiments must just try a wide variety of conditions and hope that conditions are found that can lead to success," Sankey told LiveScience.

To expedite this search, Sankey and his student Eric Dykeman have developed a way to calculate the vibrational motion of every atom in a virus shell. From this, they can determine the lowest resonant frequencies.

As an example of their technique, the team modeled the satellite tobacco necrosis virus and found this small virus resonates strongly around 60 Gigahertz (where one Gigahertz is a billion cycles per second), as reported in the Jan. 14 issue of Physical Review Letters.

A virus' death knell

All objects have resonant frequencies at which they naturally oscillate. Pluck a guitar string and it will vibrate at a resonant frequency.

But resonating can get out of control. A famous example is the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, which warped and finally collapsed in 1940 due to a wind that rocked the bridge back and forth at one of its resonant frequencies.



Viruses are susceptible to the same kind of mechanical excitation. An experimental group led by K. T. Tsen from Arizona State University have recently shown that pulses of laser light can induce destructive vibrations in virus shells.

"The idea is that the time that the pulse is on is about a quarter of a period of a vibration," Sankey said. "Like pushing a child on a swing from rest, one impulsive push gets the virus shaking."

It is difficult to calculate what sort of push will kill a virus, since there can be millions of atoms in its shell structure. A direct computation of each atom's movements would take several hundred thousand Gigabytes of computer memory, Sankey explained.

He and Dykeman have found a method to calculate the resonant frequencies with much less memory.

In practice

The team plans to use their technique to study other, more complicated viruses. However, it is still a long way from using this to neutralize the viruses in infected people.

One challenge is that laser light cannot penetrate the skin very deeply. But Sankey imagines that a patient might be hooked up to a dialysis-like machine that cycles blood through a tube where it can be hit with a laser. Or perhaps, ultrasound can be used instead of lasers.

These treatments would presumably be safer for patients than many antiviral drugs that can have terrible side-effects. Normal cells should not be affected by the virus-killing lasers or sound waves because they have resonant frequencies much lower than those of viruses, Sankey said.

Moreover, it is unlikely that viruses will develop resistance to mechanical shaking, as they do to drugs.

"This is such a new field, and there are so few experiments, that the science has not yet had sufficient time to prove itself," Sankey said. "We remain hopeful but remain sceptical at the same time."

Source: Live Science

Travel to Parallel Universes

New Scientist

Wormholes, time travel, white holes, extra spacial dimensions, parallel universes - all arose as solutions to Einstein's equations of general relativity, meaning theoretical physics predicts they should all be likely to exist in the fabric of space-time. ere

But will we ever be able to open a wormhole into space-time to travel towards a parallel universe, and how would we even know if we did? Russian physicist Alexander Shatskiy from the Lebedev Physical Institute argues we have already seen the evidence that indeed parallel universes exist in the gravitational lensing effects that are able to bend light in a unnatural way.

The first prediction of the possibility of traveling to parallel universes was made shortly after Albert Einstein published his Theory of General Relativity. Austrian physicists Ludwig Flamm found that the field equations of general relativity pointed towards the existence of a structure commonly known today as a wormhole, a connection between two regions of space which would permit faster-than-light travel between them. Matter entering one end of the wormhole would immediately exit the other end, at least as long as the wormhole is stable and remains open during the process.

Shatskiy says the only reason why we haven't been able to directly observe wormholes yet is because they are indistinguishable from the black holes. The only problem is that we seem to know more about wormholes than the actual singularity of the black hole. Furthermore, wormholes are though to be extremely unstable, collapsing out of existence as soon as they form. A way to keep a wormhole open for an indefinite amount of time would involve the use of exotic matter, presenting negative energy and mass.

Ordinary matter has positive energy and mass, meaning that massive objects such as black holes bend light through gravitational lensing much in the same way a optical lens would do here on Earth. However, the unique characteristics of the exotic matter would have the exact opposite effect, deflecting light as it passes through a wormhole from a universe to another. Thus, if a star would shine light into a wormhole, at the other end it would emerge in a divergent pattern to form a bright ring of light.

By detecting such signatures, one might point towards the existence of wormhole. The problem is that black holes and large mass accumulations also have the capability of forming rings of light through the gravitational lensing effect, the well known Einstein rings. While Lawrence Krauss from the Case Western Reserve University seems to appreciate Shatskiy's theoretical study, by pointing out the immense effort made by the Russian physicist to find the signature of real wormholes, critics add that Shatskiy avoided to specify the characteristics of the required exotic matter, and even the basic interactions with light.

Furthermore, it is not known yet if exotic matter even exists, but, even if it does, the signature proposed by Shatskiy is indistinguishable from a series of other signatures routinely detected throughout the universe. They do not dispute the fact that wormholes might exist, but they argue that such a possibility is extremely remote.

Source: New Scientist

Recap - Andreas von Buelow: 911 Brainwashing

Served as state-secretary in the German Federal Ministry of Defence and Minister for Research and Technology.

Tagesspiegel

In a full-page interview with the Sunday edition the Berlin Tagesspiegel daily, Andreas von Buelow, said he does not buy any of the official theories that have been presented to date, on the events of September 11.

The apparent failure of the U.S. Administration including its 26 secret agencies with an annual budget of $30 billion, to come up with any convincing assessment, was one big problem that von Buelow addressed, in quite some detail.

He then addressed the role of the official "brainwashing of the Western mass democracies" on the Sept. 11 issue, in promoting the new enemy image of "Islamic terrorism," along lines developed earlier, by senior advisors of the U.S. Administration:

"I am not the origin of the idea of the enemy image. It originates with Zbigniew Brzezinski and Samuel Huntington, two pioneers of American secret intelligence and foreign policies.

"Already in the mid-1990s, Huntington opined that people in Europe and the USA needed someone they could hate -- that would strengthen the identification with their own society. And Brzezinski, that mad dog, already at his time as advisor to President Jimmy Carter, campaigned for the sole right of the USA to all the world's raw materials, especially crude oil and natural gas."

Von Buelow also addressed the role of Brzezinski, personally, in setting up the afghani operation of armed "Islamic" guerilla warfare against the USSR Afghanistan invasion in and after 1979 -- the Taliban being generated by the same operation, after all.

As for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks as such, von Buelow remarked: "Planning the attacks was a master deed, in technical and organizational terms. To hijack four big airliners within a few minutes and fly them into targets within a single hour and doing so on complicated flight routes! That is unthinkable, without backing from the secret apparatuses of state and industry."

He added that laying false tracks of investigation has been an accompanying feature of covert operations ever since they have been launched by influential agencies, so that he is convinced that the full truth behind Sept. 11 still has to be sought.

A partial translation follows.

Question: You seem so angry, really upset.

Andreas Von Buelow: I can explain what's bothering me: I see that after the horrifying attacks of Sept. 11, all political public opinion is being forced into a direction that I consider wrong.

Q: What do you mean by that?

Von Buelow: I wonder why many questions are not asked. Normally, with such a terrible thing, various leads and tracks appear that are then commented on, by the investigators, the media, the government: Is there something here or not? Are the explanations plausible? This time, this is not the case at all. It already began just hours after the attacks in New York and Washington and --

Q: In those hours, there was horror, and grief.

Von Buelow: Right, but actually it was astounding: There are 26 intelligence services in the U.S.A. with a budget of $30 billion--

Q: More than the German defense budget.

Von Buelow: --which were not able to prevent the attacks. In fact, they didn't even have an inkling they would happen. For 60 decisive minutes, the military and intelligence agencies let the fighter planes stay on the ground, 48 hours later, however, the FBI presented a list of suicide attackers. Within ten days, it emerged that seven of them were still alive.

Q: What, please?

Von Buelow: Yes, yes. And why did the FBI chief take no position regarding contradictions? Where the list came from, why it was false? If I were the chief investigator (state attorney) in such a case, I would regularly go to the public, and give information on which leads are valid and which not.

Q: The U.S. government talked about an emergency situation after the attacks: They said they were in a war. Is it not understandable that one does not tell the enemy everything one knows about him?

Von Buelow: Naturally. But a government which goes to war, must first establish who the attacker, the enemy, is. It has a duty to provide evidence. According to its own admission, it has not been able to present any evidence that would hold up in court.

Q: Some information on the perpetrators has been proven with documents. The suspected leader, Mohammad Atta, left Portland for Boston on the morning of Sept. 11, in order to board the plane that later hit the World Trade Center

Von Buelow: If this Atta was the decisive man in the operation, it's really strange that he took such a risk of taking a plane that would reach Boston such a short time before the connecting flight. Had his flight been a few minutes late, he would not have been in the plane that was hijacked. Why should a sophisticated terrorist do this? One can, by the way, read on CNN (Internet) that none of these names were on the official passenger lists. None of them had gone through the check-in procedures. And why did none of the threatened pilots give the agreed-upon code 7700 over the [Steuerknueppel: STEERING NOB?] to the ground station? In addition: The black boxes which are fire and shock proof, as well as the voice recordings, contain no valuable data--

Q: That sounds like--

Von Buelow: --like assailants who, in their preparations, leave tracks behind them like a herd of stampeding elephants? They made payments with credit cards with their own names; they reported to their flight instructors with their own names. They left behind rented cars with flight manuals in Arabic for jumbo jets. They took with them, on their suicide trip, wills and farewell letters, which fall into the hands of the FBI, because they were stored in the wrong place and wrongly addressed. Clues were left like behind like in a child's game of hide-and-seek, which were to be followed!

There is also the theory of one British flight engineer:

According to this, the steering of the planes was perhaps taken out of the pilots' hands, from outside.

The Americans had developed a method in the 1970s, whereby they could rescue hijacked planes by intervening into the computer piloting [automatic pilot system]. This theory says, this technique was abused in this case. That's a theory....

Q: Which sounds really adventurous, and was never considered.

Von Buelow: You see! I do not accept this theory, but I find it worth considering. And what about the obscure stock transactions? In the week prior to the attacks, the amount of transactions in stocks in American Airlines, United Airlines, and insurance companies, increased 1,200%. It was for a value of $15 billion. Some people must have known something. Who?

Q: Why don't you speculate on who it might have been.

Von Buelow: With the help of the horrifying attacks, the Western mass democracies were subjected to brainwashing. The enemy image of anti-communism doesn't work any more; it is to be replaced by peoples of Islamic belief. They are accused of having given birth to suicidal terrorism.

Q: Brainwashing? That's a tough term.

Von Buelow: Yes? But the idea of the enemy image doesn't come from me. It comes from Zbigniew Brzezinski and Samuel Huntington, two policy-makers of American intelligence and foreign policy. Already in the middle of he 1990s, Huntingon believed, people in Europe and the U.S. needed someone they could hate-- this would strengthen their identification with their own society. And Brzezinski, the mad dog, as adviser to President Jimmy Carter, campaigned for the exclusive right of the U.S. to seize all the raw materials of the world, especially oil and gas.

Q: You mean, the events of Sept. 11--

Von Buelow: --fit perfectly in the concept of the armaments industry, the intelligence agencies, the whole military-industrial-academic complex. This is in fact conspicuous. The huge raw materials reserves of the former Soviet Union are now at their disposal, also the pipeline routes and--

Q: Erich Follach described that at length in Spiegel: ``It's a matter of military bases, drugs, oil and gas reserves.''

Von Buelow: I can state: the planning of the attacks was technically and organizationally a master achievement. To hijack four huge airplanes within a few minutes and within one hour, to drive them into their targets, with complicated flight maneuvers! This is unthinkable, without years-long support from secret apparatuses of the state and industry.

Q: You are a conspiracy theorist!

Von Buelow: Yeah, yeah. That's the ridicule heaped [on those raising these questions] by those who would prefer to follow the official, politically correct line. Even investigative journalists are fed propaganda and disinformation. Anyone who doubts that, doesn't have all his marbles! That is your accusation.

Q: Your career actually speaks against the idea that you are not in your right mind. You were already in the 1970s, state secretary in the Defense Ministry; in 1993 you were the SPD [Social Democratic Party] speaker in the Schalk-Golodkowski investigation committee--

Von Buelow: And it all began there! Until that time, I did not have any great knowledge of the work of intelligence agencies. And now we had to take note of a great discrepancy: We shed light on the dealings of the Stasi and other East bloc intelligence agencies in the field of economic criminality, but as soon as we wanted to know something about the activities of the BND [German intelligence] or the CIA, it was mercilessly blocked. No information, no cooperation, nothing! That's when I was first taken aback.

Q: Schalck-Golodkowski mediated, among other things, various business deals abroad. When you looked at his case more closely--

Von Buelow: We found, for example, a clue in Rostock, where Schalck organized his weapons depot. Well, then we happened upon an affiliation of Schalck in Panama, and then we happened upon Manuel Noriega, who was for many years President, drug dealer, and money launderer, all in one, right? And this Noriega was also on the payroll of the CIA, for $200,000 a year. These were things that really made me curious.

Q: You wrote a book on the dealings of the CIA and Co. In the meantime, you have become an expert regarding the strange things related to intelligence services' work.

Von Buelow: ``Strange things'' is the wrong term. What has gone on, and goes on, in the name of intelligence services, are true crimes.

Q: What would you say determines the work of intelligence services?

Von Buelow: So that we don't have any misunderstandings: I find that it makes sense to have intelligence services....

Q: You don't think much of the earlier proposals by the Greens, who wanted to dismantle these agencies?

Von Buelow: No. It is right to take a look behind the scenes. Getting intelligence about the intentions of an enemy, makes sense. It is important when one tries to put oneself into the mind of the enemy. Whoever wants to understand the CIA's methods, has to deal with its main tasks, covert operations: below the level of war, and outside international law, foreign states are to be influenced, by organizing insurrections, terrorist attacks, usually combined with drugs and weapons trade, and money laundering. This is essentially very simple: One arms violent people with weapons. Since, however, it must not under any circumstances come out, that there is an intelligence agency behind it, all traces are erased, with tremendous deployment of resources.

I have the impression that this kind of intelligence agency spends 90% of its time this way: creating false leads. So that, if anyone suspects the collaboration of the agencies, he is accused of the sickness of conspiracy madness. The truth often comes out only years later. CIA chief Allen Dulles once said: In case of doubt, I would even lie to the Congress!

Q: The American journalist Seymour M. Hersh, wrote in the New Yorker, that even some people in the CIA and government assumed, that certain leads had been laid in order to confuse the investigators. Who, Herr von Buelow, would have done this?

Von Buelow: I don't know that either. How should I? I simply use my common sense, and-- See: The terrorists behaved in such a way to attract attention. And as practicing Muslims, they were in a strip-tease bar, and, drunken, stuck dollar bills into the panty of the dancer.

Q: Things like that also happen.

Von Buelow: It may be. As a lone fighter, I cannot prove anything, that's beyond my capabilities. I have real difficulties, however, to imagine that all this all sprung out of the mind of an evil man in his cave.

Q: Mr. von Buelow, you yourself say that you are alone in your criticism. Formerly, you were part of the political establishment, now you are an outsider.

Von Buelow: That is a problem sometimes, but one gets used to it. By the way, I know a lot of people, including very influential ones, who agree with me, but only in whispers, never publicly.

Q: Do you still have contact with old SPD companions, such as Egon Bahr and former Chancellor Helmut Schmidt?

Von Buelow: There are no close contacts any more. I wanted to go to the last SPD party congress, but I was sick.

Q: Can it be, Mr. von Buelow, that you are a mouthpiece for typical anti-Americanism?

Von Buelow: Nonsense, this has absolutely nothing to do with anti-Americanism. I am a great admirer of this great, open, free society, and always have been. I studied in the U.S.

Q: How did you get the idea that there could be a link between the attacks and the American intelligence agencies?

Von Buelow: Do you remember the first attack on the WorldTrade Center in 1993?

Q: Six people were killed and over a thousand wounded, by a bomb explosion.

Von Buelow: In the middle was the bombmaker, a former Egyptian officer. He had pulled together some Muslims for the attack. They were snuck into the country by the CIA, despite a State Department ban on their entry. At the same time, the leader of the band was an FBI informant.

And he made a deal with the authorities: At the last minute, the dangerous explosive material would be replaced by a harmless powder.

The FBI did not stick to the deal. The bomb exploded, so to speak, with the knowledge of the FBI. The official story of the crime was quickly found: The criminals were evil Muslims.

Q: At the time Soviet soldiers marched into Afghanistan, you were in the cabinet of Helmut Schmidt. What was it like?

Von Buelow: The Americans pushed for trade sanctions, they demanded the boycott of the Olympic games in Moscow....

Q: .... which the German government followed...

Von Buelow: And today we know: It was the strategy of the American security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, to destabilize the Soviet Union from neighboring Muslim countries They lured the Russians into Afghanistan, and then prepared for them a hell on earth, their Vietnam. With decisive support of the U.S. intelligence agencies, at least 30,000 Muslim fighters were trained in Afghanistan and Pakistan, a bunch of good-for-nothings and fanatics who were, and still are today, ready for anything.

And one of them is Osama bin Laden. I wrote years ago: ` `It was out of this brood, that the Taliban grew up in Afghanistan, who had been brought up in the Koran schools financed by American and Saudi funds, the Taliban who are now terrorizing the country and destroying it

Q: Even though you say, for the U.S. it was a matter of raw materials in the region, the starting point for the U.S. aggression, was the terrorist attack which cost thousands of human lives.

Von Buelow: Completely true. One must always keep this gruesome act in mind. Nonetheless, in the analysis of political processes, I am allowed to look and see who has advantages and disadvantages, and what is coincidental. When in doubt, it is always worthwhile to take a look at a map, where are raw materials resources, and the routes to them? Then lay a map of civil wars and conflicts on top of that --they coincide. The same is the case with the third map: nodal points of the drug trade.

Where this all comes together, the American intelligence services are not far away. By the way, the Bush family is linked to oil, gas, and weapons trade, through the bin Laden family.

Q: What do you think of the Bin Laden films?

Von Buelow: When one is dealing with intelligence services, one can imagine manipulations of the highest quality. Hollywood could provide these techniques. I consider the videos inappropriate as evidence.

Q: You believe the CIA is capable of anything, [wouldn't stop at anything].

Von Buelow: The CIA, in the state interests of the U.S., does not have to abide by any law in interventions abroad, is not bound by international law; only the President gives orders.

And when funds are cut, peace is on the horizon, then a bomb explodes somewhere. Thus it is proven, that you can't do without the intelligence services; and that the critics are nuts, as Father Bush called them, Bush who was once CIA head and President.

You have to see that the U.S. spends $30 billion on intelligence services, and $13 billion on anti-drug work. And what comes out of it?

The chief of a special unit of the strategic anti-drug work declared, in despair, after 30 years of service, that in every big, important drug case, the CIA came in and took it out of my hands. (Rosalinda: Michael Levin)

Q: Do you criticize the German government for its reaction after Sept. 11?

Von Buelow: No. To assume that the government were independent in these questions, would be naive.

Q: Herr von Buelow, what will you do now?

Von Buelow: Nothing. My task is concluded by saying, it could not have been that way [according to the official story]. Search for the truth!

Source: Tagesspiegel, 13 Jan 2002

*****

Related Material...

This War on Terrorism is Bogus
A 'Pearl Harbour Event'?
International Terrorism Does Not Exist
Former Italian President Speaks Out

International Terrorism Does Not Exist

General Leonid Ivashov

Vice-president of the Academy on geopolitical affairs.
He was the chief of the department for General affairs in the Soviet Union’s ministry of Defense, secretary of the Council of defense ministers of the Community of independant states (CIS), chief of the Military cooperation department at the Russian federation’s Ministry of defense and Joint chief of staff of the Russian armies

General Leonid Ivashov was the Chief of Staff of the Russian armed forces when the September 11, 2001, attacks took place. This military man, who lived the events from the inside, offers an analysis which is very different to that of his American colleagues. As he did during the Axis for Peace 2005 conference, he now explains that international terrorism does not exist and that the September 11 attacks were the result of a set-up.

What we are seeing is a manipulation by the big powers; this terrorism would not exist without them. He affirms that, instead of faking a “world war on terror”, the best way to reduce that kind of attacks is through respect for international law and peaceful cooperation among countries and their citizens.

As the current international situation shows, terrorism emerges where contradiction aggravate, where there is a change of social relations or a change of regime, where there is political, economic or social instability, where there is moral decadence, where cynicism and nihilism triumph, where vice is legalized and where crime spreads.

It is globalization what creates the conditions for the emergence of these extremely dangerous phenomena. It is in this context that the new world geo-strategic map is being designed, that the resources of the planet are being re-distributed, that borders are disappearing, that international law is being torn into pieces, that cultural identities are being erased, that spiritual life becomes impoverished...

The analysis of the essence of the globalization process, the military and political doctrines of the United States and other countries, shows that terrorism contributes to a world dominance and the submissiveness of states to a global oligarchy. This means that terrorism is not something independent of world politics but simply an instrument, a means to install a unipolar world with a sole world headquarters, a pretext to erase national borders and to establish the rule of a new world elite. It is precisely this elite that constitutes the key element of world terrorism, its ideologist and its “godfather”. The main target of the world elite is the historical, cultural, traditional and natural reality; the existing system of relations among states; the world national and state order of human civilization and national identity.

Today’s international terrorism is a phenomenon that combines the use of terror by state and non-state political structures as a means to attain their political objectives through people’s intimidation, psychological and social destabilization, the elimination of resistance inside power organizations and the creation of appropriate conditions for the manipulation of the countries’ policies and the behavior of people.

Terrorism is the weapon used in a new type of war. At the same time, international terrorism, in complicity with the media, becomes the manager of global processes. It is precisely the symbiosis between media and terror, which allows modifying international politics and the exiting reality.

In this context, if we analyze what happened on September 11, 2001, in the United States, we can arrive at the following conclusions:

1. The organizers of those attacks were the political and business circles interested in destabilizing the world order and who had the means necessary to finance the operation. The political conception of this action matured there where tensions emerged in the administration of financial and other types of resources. We have to look for the reasons of the attacks in the coincidence of interests of the big capital at global and transnational levels, in the circles that were not satisfied with the rhythm of the globalization process or its direction.

Unlike traditional wars, whose conception is determined by generals and politicians, the oligarchs and politicians submitted to the former were the ones who did it this time.

2. Only secret services and their current chiefs – or those retired but still having influence inside the state organizations – have the ability to plan, organize and conduct an operation of such magnitude. Generally, secret services create, finance and control extremist organizations. Without the support of secret services, these organizations cannot exist – let alone carry out operations of such magnitude inside countries so well protected. Planning and carrying out an operation on this scale is extremely complex.

3. Osama bin Laden and “Al Qaeda” cannot be the organizers nor the performers of the September 11 attacks. They do not have the necessary organization, resources or leaders. Thus, a team of professionals had to be created and the Arab kamikazes are just extras to mask the operation.

The September 11 operation modified the course of events in the world in the direction chosen by transnational mafias and international oligarchs; that is, those who hope to control the planet’s natural resources, the world information network and the financial flows. This operation also favored the US economic and political elite that also seeks world dominance

The use of the term “international terrorism” has the following goals:

- Hiding the real objectives of the forces deployed all over the world in the struggle for dominance and control;

- Turning the people’s demands to a struggle of undefined goals against an invisible enemy;

- Destroying basic international norms and changing concepts such as: aggression, state terror, dictatorship or movement of national liberation;
- Depriving peoples of their legitimate right to fight against aggressions and to reject the work of foreign intelligence services;

- Establishing the principle of renunciation to national interests, transforming objectives in the military field by giving priority to the war on terror, violating the logic of military alliances to the detriment of a joint defense and to favor the anti-terrorist coalition;

- Solving economic problems through a tough military rule using the war on terror as a pretext. In order to fight in an efficient way against international terrorism it is necessary to take the following steps:

- To confirm before the UN General Assembly the principles of the UN Charter and international law as principles that all states are obliged to respect;

- To create a geo-strategic organization (perhaps inspired in the Cooperation Organization of Shanghai comprised of Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan) with a set of values different to that of the Atlantists; to design a strategy of development of states, a system of international security, another financial and economic model (which would mean that the world would again rest on two pillars);

- To associate (under the United Nations) the scientific elites in the design and promotion of the philosophical concepts of the Human Being of the 21st Century.

- To organize the interaction of all religious denominations in the world, on behalf of the stability of humanity’s development, security and mutual support.

Source: Voltaire

*****

Related Material...

This War on Terrorism is Bogus
A 'Pearl Harbour Event'?

Proxy Leader vs Proxy Terrorists

Independent, UK

The Afghan government claims they prove British agents were talking to the Taliban without permission from the Afghan President, Hamid Karzai, despite Gordon Brown's pledge that Britain will not negotiate.

The Prime Minister told Parliament on 12 December: "Our objective is to defeat the insurgency by isolating and eliminating their leaders. We will not enter into any negotiations with these people."

The British insist President Karzai's office knew what was going on. But Mr Karzai has expelled two top diplomats amid accusations they were part of a plot to buy-off the insurgents.

The row was the first in a series of spectacular diplomatic spats which has seen Anglo-Afghan relations sink to a new low. Since December, President Karzai has blocked the appointment of Paddy Ashdown to the top UN job in Kabul and he has blamed British troops for losing control of Helmand.

It has also soured relations between Kabul and Washington, where State Department officials were instrumental in pushing Lord Ashdown for the UN role.

President Karzai's political mentor, Sibghatullah Mojaddedi, endorsed a death sentence for blasphemy on the student journalist Sayed Pervez Kambaksh last week, and two British contractors have been arrested in Kabul on, it is claimed, trumped up weapons charges. The developments are seen as a deliberate defiance of the British.

An Afghan government source said the training camp was part of a British plan to use bands of reconciled Taliban, called Community Defence Volunteers, to fight the remaining insurgents. "The camp would provide military training for 1,800 ordinary Taliban fighters and 200 low-level commanders," he said.

The computer memory stick at the centre of the row was impounded by officers from Afghanistan's KGB-trained National Directorate of Security after they moved against a party of international diplomats who were visiting Helmand.

A ministry insider said: "When they were arrested, the British said the Ministry of the Interior and the National Security Council knew about it, but no one knew anything. That's why the President was so angry."

Details of how much President Karzai was told remain murky. Some analysts believe Afghan officials were briefed about the plan, but that it later evolved.

The camp was due to be built outside Musa Qala, in Helmand. It was part of a package of reconstruction and development incentives designed to win trust and support in the aftermath of the British-led battle to retake the stronghold last year.

But the Afghans feared the British were training a militia with no loyalty to the central government. Intercepted Taliban communications suggested they thought the British were trying to help them, the Afghan official said.

The Western delegates, Michael Semple and Mervyn Patterson, were given 48 hours to leave the country. Their Afghan colleagues, including a former army general, were jailed. The expulsions coincided with a row within the Taliban's ranks which saw a senior commander, Mansoor Dadullah, sacked for talking to British spies. One official claimed the camp was planned for Mansoor and his men.

The computer stick contained a three-stage plan, called the European Union Peace Building Programme. The third stage covered military training.

Curiously, the European Union says the programme did not exist and there were no EU funds to run it.

Afghan government officials insist it was bankrolled by the British. UK diplomats, the UN, Western officials and senior Afghan officials have all confirmed the outline of the plan, which they agree is entirely British-led, but all refused to talk about it on the record. President Karzai's office claimed it was "a matter of national security".

The memory stick revealed that $125,000 (£64,000) had been spent on preparing the camp and a further $200,000 was earmarked to run it in 2008, an Afghan official said. The figures sparked allegations that British agents were paying the Taliban.

President Karzai's spokesman, Humayun Hamidzada, accused Mr Semple and Mr Patterson of being "involved in some activities that were not their jobs."

The camp would also have provided vocational training, including farming and irrigation techniques, to offer people a viable alternative to growing opium. But the Afghan government took issue with plans to provide military training, to turn the insurgents into a defence force.

Afghan government staff also claimed the "EU peace-builders" had handed over mobile phones, laptops and airtime credit to insurgents. They said the memory stick revealed plans to train the Taliban to use secure satellite phones, so they could communicate directly with UK officials.

Mr Patterson, a Briton, was the third-ranking UN diplomat when he was held. Mr Semple, an Irishman, was the acting head of the EU mission. Officially, the British embassy remains tight-lipped, fuelling speculation that the plan may have been part of a wider clandestine operation.

A spokesman repeated the line used since Christmas: "The EU and UN have responded to inquiries on this. We have nothing further to add."

But privately, the UN maintains it had no role in setting up the camp. Meanwhile, Mr Semple's EU boss, Francesc Vendrell, admitted he had very little idea what was going on.

Yet the British ambassador, Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles, cut short his Christmas holiday to meet President Karzai and "spell out the Foreign Office paper-trail" which diplomats claim proves his government had agreed. They met twice, but it was not enough to stop Mr Semple and Mr Patterson being forced to leave.

Gordon Brown has also said Britain would increase its support for "community defence initiatives, where local volunteers are recruited to defend homes and families modelled on traditional Afghan arbakai".

Background to the proposal

* December 11

British and Afghan troops take Musa Qala, a Taliban stronghold in Helmand, after President Hamid Karzai reveals that a senior Taliban commander swapped sides.

* December 23-24

The acting head of the EU mission, Michael Semple, and the third-ranking UN diplomat in Afghanistan, Mervyn Patterson, hold talks with local dignitaries and Taliban sympathisers in Helmand. Afghan secret police arrest their colleague, General Stanikzai, and seize a memory stick containing plans for training camps.

* December 25

Semple and Patterson are given 48 hours in which to leave Kabul.

* December 27

The two diplomats fly out of the Afghan capital, despite international appeals to let them stay.

Source: Independant

*****

Related Material...

This War on Terrorism is Bogus
Who is Hamid Karzai?
Former Italian President Speaks Out

Also:

Special Forces Caught Carrying Out Staged Terror?