Monday, December 31, 2007


whatever we want to happen will happen.

If we want peace, we will have peace.

If we want a fairer world, we will have a fairer world.

If we want to expose paedophile rings, we will expose paedophile rings.

It is up to us. Not them. Shit happens because we let it.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing" (or words to that effect) - Edmund Burke.


British military personnel were left unprotected in disputed waters in the Persian Gulf, and captured by Iran. But instead of resolving the dispute diplomatically, both Britain and the USA were willing to push it all the way to war.

Madeleine McCann was abducted just as awkward questions were being asked in British media about who knew what and when about 7/7. This troublesome line of questions ceased immediately and for several months a global campaign to Find Madeleine was followed in the mainstream media. There were the predictable and shameless suggestions that kids should be microchipped. However, no mention was ever made of the many thousands of kids who disappear, or hundreds of thousands of kids who die of malnutrition and/or preventable diseases due to genocidal policies such as those suggested by Henry "Ranting Scrooge" Kissinger in NSSM200.

The British war against Russia increased, with Russia exercising more control over Russia's natural resources, as well as Shell and BP. There were allegations that Berezovsky was to be assassinated, but the British intercepted the alleged assassin, but very strangely let the assassin go without any charge!? Berezovsky got over an hour on BBC to spew his vitriol against Putin. Russia subsequently sentenced Berezovsky in abenstia (for he would not go back to defend himself) to six years for embezzlement.

Following a visit to Russia, Saudi Arabia decided it would attend the Annapolis meeting, which encouraged Syria to also attend. There now appears to be some consensus on forming and following a regional peace mission. But then the turd in the punch bowl, ObL, released another statement (from the grave?) calling for war on Israel. Again, the timing is highly suspicious.


Here are two blogs of note;

The first suggests why there is an attempt to destablilise Pakistan. I have to say that when I heard Musharraf make several claims against British Intelligence a year or so ago I thought he wasn't long for this world. I never thought that Bhutto would be sent in and assassinated to destabilise him.

The second suggests that the Portuguese investigation is being guided/corrupted by the global Freemason/paedophile ring. Readers should know already of my suspicion about the timing and media manipulation of Madeleine's abduction, as it occured just as our press was asking awkward questions about 7/7 and Operation Crevice and who knew what and when.

Saturday, December 29, 2007


In The Daily Telegraph today there is an arse-licking article entitled "Bankers and Kids", and it goes like this...


A friend in need on the City's doorstep

Last Updated: 3:20am GMT 29/12/2007

Supposedly hard-nosed bankers are changing the lives of deprived children, and at the same time gaining a new perspective on their own priorities. Josephine Moulds reports

John Bennett, consultant to hedge fund group Man Investments, has seen a lot in his 30-year career in the City. He watched the 1987 market crash and subsequent Names scandal at Lloyd's of London while entrenched in the insurance industry, then he ran the financial advisory business of a top 20 accountancy firm, taking him to his current job at Man.

Volunteers at Kids Company; A friend in need on the City's doorstep
Volunteers can help brighten up the environment, lead drama sessions or simply give the children what they need most - time, attention and something to aspire to

However, despite living in interesting times, one of his most memorable moments recently has not come from the troubled credit markets but from Mark, a young man he mentors.

Despite his crippling shyness, Mark had agreed to make a speech to a crowd of 200 people about Kids Company, the charity that supported him when he was kicked out of home.

Bennett helped him write the speech, and all the way along reassured his charge that he would happily step in at the last minute if Mark lost his nerve, or take over halfway through if necessary.

On the day, a large audience of luminaries gathered, among them Bob Geldof and BBC grandee Alan Yentob. Mark stood up and started to read the speech. But then he stopped, put down his notes and spoke from the heart about this fantastic charity and what it had done for him.

It was a tearful moment, a happy tale of triumph over adversity. "You can't buy that sort of stuff," says Bennett, who has volunteered as a mentor with Kids Company for the past two years. Set up in 1996, the London-based charity has flourished under founder Camila Batmanghelidjh to become a reference point for children's organisations across the country. Batmanghelidjh herself is so well known and commands such respect among politicians that she is helping shape government policy towards children.


The overall aim of the article is to portray "supposedly hard-nosed bankers" in a very charitable light, and asks the question; How can the bankers be such genocidal bastards if they can fork out thousands to help poor kids just a mile away from their luxurious offices?

Kids Company sounds very much like the Rothschild scheme to help kids. I posted about that scheme after finding a report about corporate social responsibility on the Rothschild website. In their scheme Rothschild employees (though not the Rothschilds themselves) act as mentors to local under-priviliged kids, helping with their maths etc.

If only the teachers involved knew the real power the bankers have, and how that power has been abused for selfish megalomaniac purposes, sending man to fight man in needless world wars in order to gain total control of the world.

One has to ask why such an article has been compiled and published?


Imagine there’s no bankers
It’s easy if you try
No more wars or hunger
Just peace beneath a pale blue sky

Imagine all the people living life in peace, yoo hoo

Imagine there’s no bankers
Preying on the poor
With their vulture hedge funds
And always wanting more

Imagine all the people living for themselves, yay hay

You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
Wanting control over our money
So the world will live as one

Imagine there’s no bankers
Issuing all our money
Which is created out of nothing
So we live in virtual slavery

Imagine all the people living happily, yoo hoo

Imagine there’s no bankers
Financing all the genocide
Creating Hitlers and Stalins
To force us into taking sides

Imagine all the people living life in peace, yay hay

You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
Wanting control over our money
So the world will live as one

Imagine there’s no bankers
Wanting to rule us all
Through their blood-soaked UN
From behind a large concrete wall

Imagine there's no bankers
Controlling all of the world
Through their selected leaders
Selected at Bilderberg

Imagine all the people living in freedom, yoo hoo

You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
Wanting control over our money
So the world will live as one

Wednesday, December 26, 2007


I had never really looked at Morris before. I had known he was behind the Bank of North America, but didn't know that much about him. Since Anton Chaitkin recently published an article on President Andrew Jackson I have been revising my limited knowledge of the American Revolution.

Robert Morris became the financier of the American Revolution. Morris had built a fortune from his partnership with Thomas Willing in Willing Morris and Company, which dealt in import, export and banking. This occurred due to his election as Superintendent of Finance from 1781 to 1784. As Superintendent of Finance he requested that he also be able to do business, even though he may profit from some of his decisions. If he did make personal profit then he later ploughed it into personally financing the revolution from his own pocket, risking everything he had. In this position Morris proposed the creation of a national bank, called The Bank of North America. The revolutionaries were broke and credit was extremely hard to get. Morris was one of the wealthiest,if not the wealthiest, men supporting the revolution and supplied some of the capital for the bank, but it was insufficient. Benjamin Franklin persuaded the French to loan the revolutionaries some gold to finance the revolution. Morris then had this deposited in the newly created Bank of North America, and used fractional reserve banking to create many millions in paper money which was then used to buy the bank stock, and to pay the revolutionaries and for supplies. Morris also risked his own credit and finances to pay for certain Continental Army operations, including the defeat of Cornwallis. So for this Morris was known as The Financier.

After the war of independence, Morris went back into the import and export business, and was a well respected man for his endeavours to finance the revolution. He quickly built up another fortune, and bought several million acres of land anticipating building farms and great towns for the expected great influx of immigrants, but the mass immigration never occurred and he began to owe his latest fortune and more. Morris proposed Washington as President. On becoming President, Washington asked Morris to become Secretary of the Treasury. Morris refused and instead proposed Alexander Hamilton. Morris had earlier written “On Public Credit” in which he proposed a national bank. One of Hamilton’s first duties was to solve the monetary crisis of the new republic which was seriously in debt. Hamilton proposed the First Bank of the United States, which was controlled by Morris’ partner Thomas Willing and was based on Morris’ ideas of public credit.

Morris later spent four years in debtors’ prison due to the failed land purchases. New laws were enacted to get Morris out debtor's prison. A few years after release he died in poverty in 1806.

Morris' story has persuaded me that money is a very, very complex concept, and the study of money is perhaps one of the greatest challenges to man. I still believe very strongly that the power to create money should never ever be in private hands as it is today, for it gives way too much power to certain people who, as they have shown, cannot be trusted with it and abuse that power for their own selfish megalomaniac purposes. During the US Civil War Abraham Lincoln saved the USA from the international bankers with Greenbacks, which were paper money backed by virtually nothing, but the country had faith in them and so they were accepted which kept the Union. Similarly, it would seem that Morris proposed nearly the same thing as Lincoln, but there was an element of privateering, but I believe any profit that Morris did make he used to pay for the revolution.

Tuesday, December 25, 2007


A group of very concerned British citizens have written a letter to the Committee on Standards in Public Life calling for an investigation into the Israeli influence on British politics. They ask that everyone who supports this call write to the committee urging such an investigation.

Mr Peter Ramsden
Secretary to the Committee
Committee on Standards in Public Life
35 Great Smith Street
London SW1P 3BQ

I believe there is alot more going on than just Israeli brutality. I believe that such brutality is designed to provoke outrage and encourage terrorism, on both sides, to provoke world war. Others believe that Israel is, or was, part of a British Imperialist strategy in the Middle East focused on oil. Others simply believe it is "the Jews". Either way, such brutality must be stopped.




2007-12-23 | Group urges Standards Committee to stamp out Israeli influence that paralyses heart of British government

As the twenty-one month long siege of Gaza becomes a death sentence for yet more civilians, a group in the UK with experience of the Occupied Territories is urging the Committee on Standards in Public Life to examine whether there is undue Israeli influence at the heart of British government.

The blockade stops vital medical supplies going in and prevents chronically sick patients (including children) transferring to proper hospital treatment outside Gaza. Israel’s deep penetration of our political system, says the group, is preventing Britain from taking a principled stand on Middle East matters, including the long catalogue of grotesque violations of Palestinian human rights, of which the Gaza siege is only the latest example. Conservative Friends of Israel, for example, claim the support of 80 percent of Tory MPs.

Signatories to the letter include Mona Baker, Karl Sabbagh, Derek Summerfield and Felicity Arbuthnot.

Spokesman for the group is David Halpin, a trauma surgeon, who has spent all of the last five years of his retirement standing with the Palestinians for Justice. He has seen the destruction of lives, limbs, livings and hope at first hand. He advised the Hamas government how they should investigate the use of illegal weapons by Israel. In March, he lead a team of seven UK doctors into Gaza. The Dove and Dolphin Medical Centre was opened then. This is named after the symbolic voyage he led five years ago from which the charity was named...

He says: "It is insufficient that humans should weep beneath the crucifixion of the Palestine people in 2007 AD. They must halt it forthwith."


Even though I know today is actually a load of bollocks, and is based on an ancient babylonian sun religion, I wish everyone a merry christmas (in that I believe in the sentiment and intention, but not the religion itself).

Everyone, that is, except the international-warmongering-bankster-traitors-to-the-human-race, and their minions, gofers and puppets, and the satanists they front for. They are the most detested beings on this planet. But what do they care? They've got billions, can easily create more billions for themselves and war, and think they own the world.

2008 WILL be the year.

But for now, relax and enjoy the fake holidays given to us by our jailers.

Saturday, December 22, 2007


An allegation was made in Die Welt on 12th November that Vladimir Putin was sitting on a fortune, which he had accrued during his tenure in the Kremlin after appointing comrades to powerful positions. The allegation was made by Stanislav Belkovsky. In 2002 Belkovsky co-founded The Council for National Strategy, resigned from that, and then co-founded the National Strategy Institute in 2004.

So who financed Belkovsky’s The Council for National Strategy and National Strategy Institute?

Belkovsky is credited with either predicting, preparing the Russian public for, or warning the Russian public of, the assault on Yukos and Khodorkovsky in a series of articles in 2003 and blaming it on a group of oligarchs.

However, several commentators have linked Belkovsky with Boris Berezovsky, but, as far as I know, no evidence has been put forth to support this. One such article entitled “Oligarchs, True and False”, by Vladimir Pribylovsky was published by The Jamestown Foundation, which has Zbigniew Brzezinski on its board.

The allegations made by Belkovsky about Putin’s fortune were made at an opportune time for certain people. The substance of those allegations also adds to the opportunism. Belkovsky also alleged that the Russian economy is about to fail, that Putin has been lucky with high oil prices, and that Putin would retire from politics and take up a high profile position, for example as head of the International Olympic Committee, just to protect himself from internal and external enemies.

The allegations were published on 12th November in Die Welt. The Russian elections were held a few weeks later on the 2nd December. Die Welt is published by Axel Springer AG, which openly supports Israel, was one of several European newspapers to publish the cartoons of Mohammed in early 2006 that sparked Muslim riots across the world, and is managed by Bilderberger (2005) Matthias Dopfner.

Following Time magazine awarding Putin the title Man of the Year 2007, the Belkovsky allegations resurfaced in UK newspapers.

Today, one of the allegations made by Belkovsky has been debunked. The oil company Gunvor was alleged by Belkovsky to be at least 75% controlled by Putin. Gunvor’s CEO Torbjorn Tornqvist has today written a letter to The Guardian in reply to The Guardian’s article on Belkovsky’s claims published on 21st December. Gunvor states;

“Your story (Putin, the Kremlin power struggle and the $40bn fortune, December 21) contained serious inaccuracies about Gunvor, the oil-trading firm of which I am the chief executive officer. In fairness to the Guardian, which I know to be a reputable and serious newspaper, you are not the first to print information about supposed links to President Putin.
First, it is plain wrong to state that President Putin owns any part of Gunvor, or is a beneficiary of its activities. This company is majority owned by its founders, Guennadi Timtchenko and myself, with a minority of the shares held by a third investor. None of the shares in this organisation are held by President Putin or by anyone allied with him.
The media seem to believe that this company makes multibillion-dollar profits each year, and that it mysteriously enjoys profit margins way out of kilter with others in the oil-trading sector. I wish this were the case, but the truth is that our profits are in the hundreds of millions, not the billions; this is the norm for a business of our scale operating in our sector. We are a well-run organisation and I am proud of our activities and our record - but it is simply wrong to suggest that we benefit from favours granted over trading contracts in Russia and leading to multibillion-dollar profits.
Some of the inaccurate stories about Gunvor seem to have gained currency because my co-founder, Mr Timtchenko, did indeed know President Putin in the days before the latter became famous. However, suggestions that they share a KGB heritage or have been in business together are wide of the mark.
Torbjorn Tornqvist
CEO, Gunvor Group, Geneva..”

I think there is trick, trick, trickery afoot from certain camps based in London, trying to capitalise on, or engineer, destabilization brought about since Putin named his preferred successor. The website is reportedly run by the The National Strategy Institute [1], and is believed to be financed by Berezovsky.[2]

Examine the timing and accuracy of the allegations;

1.a few weeks before the Russian parliamentary elections, Belkovsky claims Putin is sitting on a multi-billion dollar fortune.

2.The allegations are printed in a pro-Israel, Muslim-hating German newspaper run by a Bilderberger.

3.a few days after Putin is named Man of the Year, and he has named his preferred successor, the same allegations are recycled in The Guardian., one of those allegations has been denied in a letter to The Guardian.



Sunday, December 16, 2007


Yesterday in The Daily Telegraph Peter Spencer of Ernst & Young suggested that the capital requirement for banks be decreased from 8% to 6%. He suggested this would spark a rise in the number of interbank loans and thus ease the current "credit crisis".

What will he suggest if this doesn't work? A 0% capital requirement? Is this the ultimate goal of the engineered "credit crisis"?

I do not believe that this crisis appeared out of nowhere undetected. Something like the saga surrounding Nick Leeson I can believe occuring undetected. But in this crisis major banks are losing billions.

The system is a lot closer to 0% capital requirement anyway. Any bank notes declared as capital are worthless in themselves, and can only be exchanged for yet more paper with different coloured ink on them.



Banks Are Insolvent, So Ease the Rules, Auditor Says
Increase Decrease

December 15, 2007 (LPAC)--Auditors are in a tough spot these post-Enron days, with the demise of Arthur Andersen on everyone's mind. If the auditors refuse to rubber-stamp the banks' fictitious valuations, the banks collapse,-- but if the auditors allow the fiction, they run the risk of being severely punished for malfeasance down the road. Hence the suggestion by Ernst & Young Item Club's Peter Spencer in today's London Telegraph, that the British "government must suspend a set of key banking regulations at the heart of the current financial crisis, or risk seeing the economy spiral towards a future that could `make 1929 look like a walk in the park'."

Spencer tries to blunt the clear meaning of his statement, by claiming that the banks are refusing to lend to each other, not because they are insolvent, but rather that they are being prevented from lending to each other by overly restrictive government regulations! The regulations he blames are the capital requirements set by the international Basel agreements, which require the banks to have an 8 percent capital reserve, which Spencer said should be cut to about 6 percent.

In reality, the idea that a mere 2 percent reduction in capital requirements would head off a crisis that would make 1929 look like a "walk in the park," is absurd, as both Spencer and the Telegraph know. What the auditors are really saying, is that the banks are already insolvent, and that the capital requirements must be lowered so that the auditors can continue to certify their books. Which is only an indirect way of admitting the banks are indeed insolvent, despite his denial.

Friday, December 14, 2007


Here is treachery with a smile.

This is Gordon Brown signing a document that increases the power of the organisation that we were told in the 1970's would just be a common market. That organisation is now assuming the role of a large nation; President, Army, foreign policy, currency, etc. Similar organisations are appearing in Africa, Asia, Americas.

Thursday, December 13, 2007


Ace ranter Henry Kissinger, like John Bolton last week, has been allowed to publish yet another rant in the WP. And like Bolton, everyone's favourite ranter Kissinger attacks the US intelligence community for coming up with the wrong estimate on Iran (wrong for the warmongers anyway).

It is highly significant that both Bolton and Kissinger have been able to write such articles rants in the WP. Both are vehement warmongering Israel-firsters.

It is also highly significant that neither have mentioned Israel's nukes, which we are 100% confident exist thanks to the Rothschilds, and neither have mentioned the US Army War College finding in 2006 that should Israel "de-nuke" then the nuclear arms race in the Middle East would not exist, and we wouldn't be having all these rants and threats of war.

So c'mon W! Let's all get pissed on peace. If reports are to be believed, you are intent on leaving a lasting peace in the Middle East. Kissinger, Bolton, Cheney etc are all traitors. Traitors not just to America, but to the whole human race.

NB note the title of Kissy's article. "Why Spying and Policymaking Don't Mix". Did he write a similar article about Feith and the Office of Special Plans before Iraq? I don't recall reading one.



Misreading the Iran Report
Why Spying and Policymaking Don't Mix

By Henry A. Kissinger
Thursday, December 13, 2007; Page A35

The extraordinary spectacle of the president's national security adviser obliged to defend the president's Iran policy against a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) raises two core issues: How are we now to judge the nuclear threat posed by Iran? How are we to judge the intelligence community's relationship with the White House and the rest of the government?

Friday, December 07, 2007


Imagine there’s no bankers
It’s easy if you try
No more wars or hunger
Just peace beneath a pale blue sky

Imagine all the people living life in peace, yoo hoo

Imagine there’s no bankers
Preying on the poor
With their vulture hedge funds
And always wanting more

Imagine all the people living for themselves, yay hay

You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
Wanting control over our money
So the world will live as one

Imagine there’s no bankers
Issuing all our money
Which is created out of nothing
So we live in virtual slavery

Imagine all the people living happily, yoo hoo

Imagine there’s no bankers
Financing all the genocide
Creating Hitlers and Stalins
To force us into taking sides

Imagine all the people living life in peace, yay hay

You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
Wanting control over our money
So the world will live as one

Imagine there’s no bankers
Wanting to rule us all
Through their blood-soaked UN
From behind a large concrete wall

Imagine there's no bankers
Controlling all of the world
Through their selected leaders
Selected at Bilderberg

Imagine all the people living in freedom, yoo hoo

You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
Wanting control over our money
So the world will live as one

Thursday, December 06, 2007


There is an interesting report in The Daily Mail today about lawyers.

The headline that caught my eye was "Female partner at leading solicitors had threesome with two young trainees".

This caught my eye because kids read the internet, right?

I can see a number of conversations along the lines of

"Mummy? Daddy? What's a threesome?".
"Well, it's where three..."

But the last couple of paragraphs is where the real story is.

The report is actually based on a survey of lawyers in the annual Christmas quiz set by lawyers' magazine Legal Business.

The last paragraph of the report is
"Our quiz seems to suggest that morality levels in the legal profession are directly linked to earnings, with one decreasing as the other increases."

There are very highly paid men and women lawyers in The City of London and Wall Street prepared to stand up for and protect the world war mongers and creaters of genocidal economic programs.

Paul Weller while in The Style Council wrote the following lyrics for "The Whole Point of No Return", which contains the following line

The laws made for and by the rich

Why is the law made for and by the rich?
Why are they rich in the first place?

Because the banking system gives them power to create virtually unlimited quantities of money, to pay greedy and traitors-to-the-human-race lawyers to write up and defend the law.

That threesome is nowhere near the immorality of the top lawyers.

"The Whole Point of No Return" by The Style Council

The lords and ladies pass a ruling
That sons and girls go hand in land
From good stock and the best breeding
Paid for by the servile class
Who have been told all lie in state
To bow down forth and face their fate
Its so easy.
So, so easy

All righteousness did build thy arrow
To shoot it straight into their lies
Who would expect the mighty sparrow
Could rid our world of all their kind?

Rising up and taking back
The property of every man
Oh its easy.
So, so easy

Rising up to break this thing
From family trees the dukes do swing
Just one blow to scratch the itch
The laws made for and by the rich
It would be easy.
So, so easy.


The Washington Post has today published an attack by John Bolton on the NIE report on Iran. Bolton produces no evidence whatsoever that Iran has been attempting to produce a nuclear weapon. This correlates with what Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov said yesterday, in that Russia has no evidence that Iran ever followed a nuclear weapons program.

In his WP piece Bolton reminds us that he was Undersecretary of State for Arms Control in 2003. This was when the "coalition of the killing" went into Iraq telling us that Iraq had WMD and that they knew exactly where they were. To date, no such WMD has been found. However, despite telling us that Iraqi oil would be used for the Iraqis, the Iraq Oil Privatisation Law, which will hand control over Iraq's oil to Anglo-Americans, is being passed.

So can we ever believe John Bolton and his moustache again? I seriously doubt it.

I think that a compromise was reached between Cheney and the intelligence community. The year 2003 automatically makes one think that perhaps the invasion of Iraq did make Iran think twice about its nuclear weapon programme.

And there lies the trick, for you then assume that Iran did have a nuclear weapon programme. And if it did, then it could start it up again. So we had better invade etc etc.

But as Lavrov said; what evidence is at all that Iran ever did or does have a nuclear weapon programme?



The Flaws In the Iran Report

By John R. Bolton
Thursday, December 6, 2007; Page A29

Rarely has a document from the supposedly hidden world of intelligence had such an impact as the National Intelligence Estimate released this week. Rarely has an administration been so unprepared for such an event. And rarely have vehement critics of the "intelligence community" on issues such as Iraq's weapons of mass destruction reversed themselves so quickly.

All this shows that we not only have a problem interpreting what the mullahs in Tehran are up to, but also a more fundamental problem: Too much of the intelligence community is engaging in policy formulation rather than "intelligence" analysis, and too many in Congress and the media are happy about it. President Bush may not be able to repair his Iran policy (which was not rigorous enough to begin with) in his last year, but he would leave a lasting legacy by returning the intelligence world to its proper function.

Wednesday, December 05, 2007


That's what that b&"*^%rd Blair said when he moved into No. 10 10 years ago.

But apparently our youth, those who will vote in the next series of governments in the decades to come, have slipped down the world education league tables.

However, do not fear for the sort of people we are bringing up, for they can buy booze which is cheaper than water, then batter a guy to death when he asks them to stop their drunken rowdiness, and then go and play a video game called "kill and torture as many virtual people as you can v. 3.0", and then watch some soft porn on MTV.

Just what sort of psyche will our kids have when they grow up?



Billions spent on education, but British schools slump in the world league
By LAURA CLARK - More by this author »

Last updated at 23:58pm on 4th December 2007

Britain has nosedived down the world education league despite billions of pounds of extra spending on schools, an international study revealed yesterday.

The findings are the third in a week to highlight falling education standards in a country with a schools budget that has risen to more than £50billion a year.

Our schools now stand at 24th in a table of teenagers' achievement in maths, level with Poland and down from eighth in six years.

Monday, December 03, 2007


I have posted about Kasparov’s The Other Russia before.

Here are the members of The Other Russia from The National Endowment for Democracy;
Frank Conatser
Nadia Diuk
Carl Gershman
Marc Schliefer
John Squier

Other persons of interest;
Anthony Russell Brenton, Ambassador of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Russian Federation
Richard C Holbrooke, Council on Foreign Relations
Michael McFaul, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Dick Morris, Political Adviser
Bruce Jackson, President, Project on Transitional Democracies, and PNAC

The aim of The Project on Transitional Democracies is
"The Project on Transitional Democracies has been organized to exploit the opportunities to accelerate democratic reform and integration which we believe will exist in the broader Euro-Atlantic region over the next decade. The Project is a multi-year endeavor aimed at accelerating the pace of reform in Europe's post-1989 democracies and advancing the date for the integration of these democracies into the institutions of the Euro-Atlantic.”

i.e. the aim of The Project on Transitional Democracies is to assimilate as much as the former Soviet Empire into the NATO/EU sphere as fast as possible. Hence its name.

So when Putin accuses us of interfering in Russian politics is he correct? Christ, Ambassador “Big Mouth” Brenton is a member of The Other Russia!! “Big Mouth” says nothing of the NED/PNAC/CFR influence on The Other Russia.

As long as we have the NWO in Washington and London, we can never play fair. We can never play by the rules, because they don’t. They have proven themselves beyond doubt to be very mentally sick and evil. They engineered, financed and profited sickeningly from WW1 and WW2. They invaded Iraq in 2003 and killed a half million, and at least double that during the 1990’s, just in Iraq alone! This shows they are prepared to do anything to get what they want, and that is total global domination of all of the world’s people and its natural resources.

So when United Russia gets 62% of the vote, implying Putin’s rule for several more years at least, you can bet these NED/PNAC/CFR guys are pissed off. I don’t know whether to believe all or some of the allegations made against the voting procedures in Russia, but I am willing to bet a significant portion are false, and the others are true, if only to protect the Russian people from the NWO!

Who is trying to stop war on Iran?

Who is correctly accusing NATO of mission creep?

Who is correctly accusing BushCheney & Co of preparing another 9/11 or Pearl

Who is correctly accusing BushCheney & Co of installing missiles in Poland that can be easily turned from defence against Iran to offence against Russia?

Who is hated by the people we hate?

Nobody is perfect. Nobody is all things to all men and women. But at the moment, I believe we should consider the following very closely; my enemy’s enemy is my friend.

Of course, I may be wrong. Putin may be one of them, requiring the threat of NATO etc to remain in power to build a bigger police state. But the only concentration camps I hear about are those in the USA built by Wackenhut to be filled with Americans after the very Pearl Harbour event Putin is warning us of.

But if Putin is one of them, why is he accusing BushCheney & Co. of preparing another Pearl Harbour for yet more American-instigated war? And how can he assimilate Russia into NATO after all he has said?

Thursday, November 29, 2007


I wonder if he'll now get another half hour on BBC HardTalk or BBC Question Time.



Berezovsky sentenced to 6 years for stealing 215 mln rbls

29.11.2007, 14.08

MOSCOW, November 29 (Itar-Tass) - Moscow's Savyolovsky court on Thursday found businessman Boris Berezovsky guilty of stealing 215 million roubles belonging to the Aeroflot company, and sentenced him to six years in jail.

The court dropped the money laundering charge as it concluded that Berezovsky himself had been the recipient of the stolen money, together with Aeroflot's former deputy director general Nikolai Glushkov.


If you went around to your neighbours house to ask to borrow his lawn mower for a couple of hours, but he instead gave you a piece of paper with "1 lawn mower" written on it, you'd think he was cheeky, and possibly a little insane, particularly if he wrote the loan down in a little book on the table next to his front door.

But if a few hours later he came around to your house asking for the return of the lawn mower he loaned you, and that if you didn't return it he would take you to court and bring in the bailiffs, you'd think what?

That your neighbour was insane, a fraud and a thug?

Well, that is what is going on today in your local high street, and in The City of London.

Fraud and thuggery, down at the Bank of Thuggery and Fraud.


From reading World Socialist Website, it would appear that the outcomes of Annapolis were
1. the USA i.e. Israel was given all the power as to who decides what is fair and who has been trying
2. Abbas was pressured into starting a Palestinian civil war.

Iran did not attend and is holding its own summit with Hamas.

So are we any closer to a lasting peace?

I would say as long as they are talking then there is always a chance, small deals can lead to slightly larger deals can lead to big deals etc. And you never know, Iran might start talking! However, if points 1 and 2 above are true then I am deeply disappointed and think we've been stitched up good and proper.

Wednesday, November 28, 2007


This is a question asked by FT columnist Martin Wolf today, and the industry being referred to is banking.

Wolf's answer is, "banking takes high risks."

What is the real reason as to why banking is so profitable? The banks make their profits for themselves out of nothing!

Let's assume that the plain black ink bic biro is our national currency, called the "pen".

A bank has one pen. A customer asks for a loan of 9 pens. You would think the bank can't satisfy the request, but in bizzaro banking world the bank can issue a note with "9 pens" written on it and then claim the customer owes it 9 pens. If the customer repays the "loan" of 9 pens, in real pens or with more pieces of paper with values totalling 9 pens, then the bank can say it has 10 pens + interest, when in fact it has only one real physical pen. The bank can then issue pieces of paper with even greater numbers on them. Eventually the bank can have pieces of paper with values totalling 1 million pens all derived from creating the pens out of nothing and "loaning" them out and the "loans" being repaid, so the owner of the bank is now a millonaire in pens, closes the bank down and lives the life of luxury for the rest of his life, spending the paper notes he issued as hard currency to buy a house, a boat, a ferrari, etc. All he did was issue some pieces of paper with numbers on them.

That is why banking is so profitable. They can simply create money out of nothing, while the rest of us mugs work our arses off just to survive.

Sunday, November 25, 2007


This is a very interesting blog, indicating
1. the Portuguese have been impersonating Inspector Clouseau en masse
2. there is a vast and well protected sickening paedophile ring in Portugal
3. a possible Freemasonic link

I still find the timing of Madeleine's abduction very significant, just as stories about who knew what about 7/7 were appearing thick and fast in the mainstream media following the prosecution of suspects of Operation Crevice and all the evidence that came out those prosecutions. Following Madeleine's abduction those stories stopped, and the whole world was driven into a frenzy looking for just one girl, while hundreds of children have gone missing, and thousands of children have died of drought and famine, since without any mention.

Saturday, November 24, 2007


But only after meeting with Putin in Moscow yesterday.


And even after Israel attacked Syria who then pulled out, Syria will now attend, because the Saudis are attending.

It looks like we have another chance for talks to begin to solve the diabolical problem that those pesky Illuminati critters posed the human race.

Wednesday, November 07, 2007


Last night's Spooks had a good dig at Iran.

MI5 were the good guys (as always), and saved an Iranian diplomat's life during an assassination attempt, but later found out he had lied and had agreed to purchase some triggers for a nuclear bomb from an underground source. A Russian spy was somewhat embarrassed when certain documents were given to her to prove the purchase.

It is stuff like this that subtley develops beliefs in the mass psyche, all preparing us for the attack on Iran. The propaganda will not stop.

I find the timing of the current "credit crunch", which is slowly snowballing into something global and has a lot further to go, and the build up to war on Iran more than "coincidental".

Sunday, November 04, 2007


I stayed up late last night, flicked through the channels and ended up watching one of the MTV channels on cable, to see what our youth are being programmed with.

I saw two videos that indicate, along with the supermice news, where the NWO are taking the human race.

The first video was by an entity called "Narcotic Thrust", which consisted of a group of young women cheerleaders in short skirts and tight tops making a series of "dance" moves, which were basically to roll and jump around with their legs wide open. They were dressed in black, red and silver, the colours of Bohemian Grove.

The second, I can't remember who it was by, consisted of a compilation of young men and women masturbating, but you only saw their faces as they went through the process.

There was not one song about the shit state of the world, but there were plenty of videos of lots of shiny, happy people, and Kylie Minogue "Spinning Around" in extremely tight hot pants.

While you were sleeping, this is what your children are watching.

I would not have been surprised to see a mock or even real sacrifice, or young men and women rolling around in blood during an orgy.

Do you want your child to grow up as human, or beast?

Saturday, November 03, 2007


Genetically engineered supermice can run faster for longer. They are also much more aggressive.

There is no way that this genie is getting back into the bottle!

This is where the human race is heading; a genetically engineered global elite protected by genetically engineered global supercops policing a genetically engineered global slave population, all financed by a bankrupt and fraudulent banking system.

You can bet that some more kids will be kidnapped for scientists to experiment upon in those underground bases to get this technique adapted for humans.

Who is funding this research anyway? And how were the mice genetically engineered?



Case Western Reserve University researchers have bred a line of "mighty mice" (PEPCK-Cmus mice) that have the capability of running five to six kilometers at a speed of 20 meters per minute on a treadmill for up to six hours before stopping.


They knew who Jean Charles was within 15 minutes of his head getting shot to bits.

They also knew he was not carrying a bomb.

Did Blair know? If not, why was he not told?



...Minutes later, Commander Dick told the jury, she began to fear that an innocent man may have been killed. Barely 15 minutes after De Menezes had been shot, an explosives expert confirmed he was not carrying a bomb, and documents on him revealed his name and identity.

Friday, November 02, 2007


We are always told, "get legal advice"?

But who really knows how our banking system actually works, in order to "advise"?

And who gives them permission to "advise"?

And how did they acquire the knowledge in order to "advise"?

And how much would they charge to offer that "advice"?

And would that "advice" really be that impartial?

It's time to find these things out.


Where did all that come from?

How many hospitals and nurses, and/or schools and teachers is that?

£23 billion for one financial institution in big trouble. The BBC said last it represented every family in the UK each lending NR £760! (but without their permission)

The difference is that when we, i.e. the human race, say "lend" we mean temporarily transfer control of but not ownership, but when the banks say "lend" they mean magically create something out of thin air and trick us into believeing it exists, lend out a piece of paper expecting us to equate the piece of paper with the physical object, but they expect repayment in real physical objects i.e. the banks create something out of thin air!

"lend" v "lend".

Hmm. Are there two definitions of "lend"? Particularly in contract terms?

How much more money is being and will be created out of nothing to save a fraudulent, bankrupt system benefitting only a few, while the human race stagnates or degenerates?

Monday, October 29, 2007


I could not agree more.



Berserker Cheney Escalates Push for World War III

by Jeffrey Steinberg

October 27, 2007 (LPAC) -- The Bush Administration, led by Vice President Dick Cheney, has again escalated its drive for senseless military action against Iran, through a combination of new unilateral sanctions against the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, and a new hyperventilating propaganda push, led personally by the Vice President and President, aimed at provoking Tehran into providing a pretext for war. At the same time, anti-war forces around the globe--including Russian President Vladimir Putin, and some factions within the Bush Administration itself--have taken some extraordinary actions, aimed at averting an attack on Iran, that would almost certainly escalate out of control to general global war.

One of the most stunning denunciations of the Cheney war schemes was delivered in Washington on October 17 by Wesley Clark, a retired five-star general and former candidate for the Democratic Presidential nomination.

Speaking before several hundred American and Arab policy-makers at the 16th annual conference of the National Council on U.S.-Arab Relations (NCUSAR), Clark urged a vigorous public debate on the Iran situation, leading to a new diplomatic dialogue with Tehran, and pointedly denounced the Bush Administration's war policies as part of a continuing “political coup d'etat” that was carried out, from the White House, after the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Clark charged that, following 9-11, a small group inside the Bush Administration imposed a new strategy, without debate, without Congressional authorization, and without consultation with America's allies. Clark recounted a May 1991 private conversation he had with then-Pentagon official Paul Wolfowitz and his deputy Lewis “Scooter” Libby. Clark recounted Wolfowitz's berating of then-President George H.W. Bush, for failing to conclude Operation Desert Storm with the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. Wolfowitz told Clark that, within “the next 5-10 years,” the United States must overthrow a string of “former Soviet client-states,” including Syria, Iraq, and Iran. Wolfowitz told the flabbergasted general that the United States would have that window of opportunity to “use military force with impunity” before a new, as-yet unknown “superpower” emerged to challenge American global military hegemony.

General Clark recounted that when then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney, along with Wolfowitz and Libby, took their “Roman Empire” scheme to National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft and President Bush, they were forcefully rebuked. After 9-11, Clark charged, Cheney and Wolfowitz resurrected the scheme, but never informed the American people or the Congress, because “they would have been laughed off the stage,” and denounced for “flights of fantasy.” Nevertheless, Clark reported, a written plan was circulated in the Rumsfeld Pentagon right after 9-11, listing seven regimes to be overthrown in the next five years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Libya, Sudan, and Somalia. Now, Clark concluded, “we are living with the consequences,” including the $800 billion spent to date on Iraq and Afghanistan. “The U.S. is weaker, our adversaries are stronger.”

In response to a question from EIR, Clark urged diplomacy with both Iran and Syria. “Find common interests, avert war, and help our friends in the region,” he demanded, asking “Aren't we big enough to do this?” The alternative, he warned, is a two-three-week bombing campaign, that will render Iran “a failed state,” but with the most dire consequences for the United States and the world.

Putin Leads War-Avoidance

The message delivered by General Clark resonated throughout the two-day policy-makers conference, and also reflected in an escalation of war-avoidance initiatives by leading international players, including President Putin.

The Russian leader has engaged in a whirlwind of diplomacy, beginning with his two-day summit in Moscow earlier this month with French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

Sarkozy came into the Moscow meeting, having joined the Cheney chorus, threatening that Iran's alleged pursuit of a nuclear weapon could lead to World War III. But in the meeting with Putin, Sarkozy, according to informed U.S. intelligence sources, tilted into the war-avoidance camp, under the weight of simultaneous pressure from the Russians and from circles within his own French military/intelligence institutions.

Putin next hosted U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice for several days of talks with their Russian counterparts. Putin invited the Pentagon chief to address a Russian military academy, and privately signaled that the American proposal for settling the dispute over the planned deployment of U.S. anti-ballistic missile systems in Poland and the Czech Republic, was a positive, albeit insufficient step. According to Washington sources, Gates proposed that Russian military observers could be stationed at the Eastern European missile defense sites, as well as at U.S. command installations.

Gates, in turn, told reporters during a stop over in Europe for a NATO-Russian conference, that the United States could possibly delay activation of the ABM sites, pending firm evidence that Iran possessed missiles capable of striking Europe. As Gates was delivering these hopeful remarks, Bush was issued the message that the U.S. was hell-bent on deploying the ABM system on Russia's border.

During Putin's historic trip to Tehran, to attend a Caspian Sea heads of state meeting, he clearly signaled that Russia would strongly oppose any U.S. military action against Iran, while, at the same time, pressing the Iranian government to avoid any provocation that could give Cheney the pretext to attack. Reportedly, in his private meeting with Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Putin minced no words, in warning that the Bush-Cheney Administration would launch a devastating bombing campaign against Iran, if given the pretext. Russia clearly does not want another American war on its border.

According to U.S. intelligence sources, a huge political brawl is taking place behind the scenes in Tehran, over how to respond to the U.S. provocations and the Putin intervention. The latest Cheney provocation was announced on Oct. 25 by Rice and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson: Economic sanctions against the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.

World War III Rhetoric

In response to the wildly provocative speech by Vice President Cheney at the annual conference of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) on October 21, pushing for military strikes against Iran, Putin delivered an equally hard-line retort, drawing a parallel to the U.S. planned deployment of ABM systems in Eastern Europe, to the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.

In his WINEP speech, Cheney had warned Iran of “serious consequences” if it did not abandon its nuclear enrichment program, and its intervention into Iraq.

Practically daring Iran to respond, Cheney ranted, “Given the nature of Iran's rulers, the declarations of the Iranian President, and the trouble the regime is causing throughout the region--including the direct involvement in the killing of Americans--our country and the entire international community cannot stand by as a terror-supporting state fulfills its most aggressive ambitions. The Iranian regime needs to know,” Cheney concluded, “that if it stays on its present course, the international community is prepared to impose serious consequences.”

In a clear warning to the Bush-Cheney Administration, Putin told reporters in Lisbon, Portugal, during a European-Russian annual summit, that the U.S. ABM deployment was “technologically similar” to the Cuban Missile Crisis of the 1960s. “Let me recall how relations shaped up in a similar situation in the mid-1960s,” Putin told reporters. “Similar actions by the Soviet Union, when it deployed missiles in Cuba, provoked the Caribbean crisis. For us, technologically, the situation is very similar.” However, Putin concluded that there was no danger of the situation escalating out of control, because Russia and the United States are “not enemies anymore,” and President Bush is his “personal friend.”

Just days earlier, Bush had babbled to reporters that Iran's pursuit of the “knowledge” of how to build a nuclear bomb could trigger World War III. “I've told people that if you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing Iran from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon,” the President threatened.

Putin's Israel Play

Days after his Tehran excursion, Putin hosted Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in Moscow, for talks also aimed at cooling down the hyper-rhetoric for World War III.

Immediately after their talks, Putin dispatched a high-level Russian delegation for a week of talks in Israel. The delegation, led by Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Saltanov and special Middle East peace envoy Sergei Yakovlev, assured the Israelis that Russia is equally adamant about preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear bomb, but cautioned, according to Ha'aretz, “The difference between us and you, is that you're basing yourselves on estimates, whereas we're basing ourselves on precise information. When we see that the situation is sufficiently dangerous, we'll know how to stop the Iranians, and if we want to, we can do this without difficulty.”

At no point in recent history, has there been so much high-level diplomacy aimed at averting world war. But by the same token, the 911 “political coup d'etat” at the White House, led by Cheney's team of berserkers has not been defeated, and then, the danger of global conflagration cannot be underestimated for a moment.

Saturday, October 27, 2007


Shortly after 7/7 I wrote to the ISC and warned them that Israel was preparing for a full-scale invasion of Gaza.



There is an enormous gap between the reasons Israel is giving for the decision to impose significant sanctions against Hamas rule in the Gaza Strip, and the real intentions behind them. Defense Minister Ehud Barak authorized Thursday a plan for
disrupting electricity supply to the Gaza Strip, as well as significantly shrinking fuel shipments. This is supposed to reduce the number of Qassam rocket attacks against Sderot and the other border communities. In practice, defense officials believe that the Palestinian militants will intensify their attacks in response to the sanctions.

As such, the real aim of this effort is twofold: to attempt a new form of "escalation" as a response to aggression from Gaza, before Israel embarks on a major military operation there; and to prepare the ground for a more clear-cut isolation of the Gaza Strip - limiting to an absolute minimum Israel's obligation toward the Palestinians there.

Several weeks ago, Barak said Israel "is getting closer" to a major operation in the strip. Like Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi, Barak is not excited about this possibility. He knows that it will not be easy, and there are no guarantees for positive results. Many soldiers will be killed and so will many innocent Palestinians, because the IDF will employ a massive artillery bombardment before it sends infantry into the crowded built-up areas. This will be a "dirty war," very aggressive, that will have scenes of destruction similar to southern Lebanon in 2006. The sole exception: unlike in Lebanon, the population there has nowhere to run.

Moreover, Ashkenazi has told the cabinet that he will only support an offensive operation if it is long-lasting. If after several weeks of fighting, the IDF is allowed time to carry out arrests and gather intelligence, then the chief of staff sees a point for the operation.

Defense sources say the sanctions will lead the militants to intensify their attacks to show that they do not succumb to Israeli pressure. And because the sanctions will not be severe - so as not to create a humanitarian crisis - they will not be effective. It is actually expected that the gasoline shortage will have a greater effect than the disruptions in the electricity supply - which normally happens because of equipment breakdowns.

The decision on sanctions is also an attempt to give expression to the inclination to completely disengage from Gaza. In this way Israel is sending a message to the Palestinian leadership in the strip that it must seek alternatives, however minor, to goods and services coming from Israel. This touches on the day after the Annapolis summit. Failure at the summit may lead Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas into the arms of Hamas. In such a case, Israel is raising a big stop sign at the exit from Ramallah: Passage to Gaza is closed.


I am not surprised at this. I believe one of his jobs was disinformation.

But who confirmed it? And why now? What effect does the claim have?

I think it confirms Lugovoy's claims more.

But if Litvinenko was MI6 does this increase the possibility that Berezovsky is also MI6?



The former Russian spy poisoned in a London hotel was an MI6 agent, the Daily Mail can reveal.

Alexander Litvinenko was receiving a retainer of around £2,000 a month from the British security services at the time he was murdered.

The disclosure, by diplomatic and intelligence sources, is the latest twist in the Litvinenko affair, which has plunged relations between London and Moscow to their lowest point since the Cold War.

Wednesday, October 24, 2007


The Times is reporting that Russia's investigation into the photogenic death of Alexander Litvinenko is being blocked by Great Britain.

Surely Great Britain wants to get at the truth of this death, to show the world how right it is in making its accusations, and to show that Russia is a ruthless tyranny prepared to commit radioactive murder on British streets.

Well, that's what any normal person would think.

Why would our honourable, truthful government be blocking such an investigation?

Our government is constantly saying to us, regarding the increasing police state and surveillance, ID Cards and the ubiquitous CCTV (which is not working), "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear".

Well, let's see what's being hidden. Let Russia investigate.

I want to know what happened. Millions, if not billions, do too.

ps It is obvious that Putin is trying very hard to stop the Albert Pike WW3. The longer this smear over Litvinenko hangs over Russia, as well as all the others e.g. Politkovskaya, the harder it will be for him to find consensus and peaceful compromise. I suggest this is why there is this reluctance to allow Russia to investigate.

The City of London and Wall Street are where the real criminals are.



The Kremlin sought to turn the tables on Britain yesterday over the killing of Alexander Litvinenko, the dissident former security officer.

The Prosecutor-General’s Office accused the Crown Prosecution Service of blocking a Russian inquiry into the death by repeatedly ignoring urgent requests for information.

It complained to Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, that her officials had done nothing to resolve the dispute despite Russian pleas to intervene with the CPS. Details of the complaint were released as Russia said that it had received a fresh request from the CPS for help with the case.

The CPS has accused Andrei Lugovoy, a former KGB officer, of murdering Litvinenko with radioactive polonium210 in London. President Putin has dismissed the British case as “stupid” and refused to extradite Mr Lugovoy, citing a constitutional ban. The controversy has plunged relations between London and Moscow to their worst level since the Cold War. Britain expelled four Russian diplomats in July, prompting Moscow to order four British envoys to leave.

The Prosecutor-General’s Office said in a statement that it had written to the Home Secretary acknowledging Britain’s latest request for assistance. It added that Russia had been waiting ten months for Britain to answer its requests for information concerning Litvinenko.

“Russia notified that the requests are urgent. The Russian Prosecutor-General’s Office has many times asked the Home Office to accelerate the execution of the requests,” it said. “Nevertheless, the Russian Prosecutor-General’s Office has received no information from relevant British agencies on these requests.”

Russia complained that its investigators had been unable to interview doctors who had treated Litvinenko at Barnet Hospital and University College Hospital, where he died on November 23. It had not received copies of autopsy reports or the results of any forensic examination. “These conditions deprive Russia of a bulk of information, which could be helpful in solving the crime, and of an opportunity to fully verify existing theories,” it said.

Monday, October 22, 2007


I am reading Norman Baker's hypothesis in The Daily Mail on the death of Dr David Kelly, and find it much more credible than the findings of the Freemasonic Hutton Inquiry.

However, Baker's conclusion is interesting; that British Intelligence knew of a plot by angry opponents of Saddam to kill Kelly, but were just too late, and decided to cover it up but at risk of implicating themselves.

As on 9/11, the USAF arrived at the WTC just too late, and the fighters based at Andrews AFB were scrambled just too late.

The unexplained Operation Mason is very damning evedience that someone knew something was about to happen.

Baker has received this information regarding the opponents of Saddam from a well-placed source, apparently. But Baker goes on to speculate that Kelly was killed with great expertise and professionalism, even proposing that blood was sucked out of his body to kill him. If a gang of angry opponents of Saddam did kill Kelly then where did they get that expertise? Did they use methods developed by the CIA?

There is a possibility that this "murderous gang of opponents of Saddam" is bogus and a red herring to deflect criticism and investigation into Kelly's murder. If such a gang did execute the murder then they did so with the aid of factions within British and American Intelligence, through either logistics or finance or even method of execution, maybe all three.

One thing is for sure. I will support Norman Baker in his quest. His one man investigation is making much more sense.

Thursday, October 18, 2007


The inquest into the murder of Diana was today shown the receipt indicating that Dodi had bought Diana an engagement ring.

Yesterday it was revealed that several newspapers had been told to expect an announcement from Diana and Dodi.

Hmm. I wonder what that could have been?

But instead, we heard the screech of tyres, and saw the blinding bright flash in the tunnel, resulting in the death of love.

What a different world it would be today if Diana had not been murdered because she was about to marry a Muslim. In the eyes of some she had to go.

(NB the questioning with the use of quotation marks, as in "engagement ring")


The Princess Diana inquest jury has been shown a copy of a receipt for a £11,600 "engagement ring" bought by Dodi Al Fayed hours before they died.

Dated 30 August 1997, the receipt from the Paris branch of jewellery store Alberto Repossi contained the words "bague fiancaille" or engagement ring.

The High Court heard the ring was from the "Dis-moi oui" range, which means "Tell me yes".


Tuesday, October 16, 2007


They now say they KNEW he was not a terrorist suspect, and all they wanted to do was ask him a few questions.

But they still used dum-dum bullets on an innocent man pinned to the floor.

I know mediums and psychics are occasionally used in investgations, but to kill an innocent man who is alive before using a medium to contact him "from beyond the grave" to ask him a few questions is a ridiculous waste of precious resources.

Blair has to go.


A high speed chase down a stretch of Parisian road with no functional CCTV.

The hunted chased into a thin tunnel by two adjacent cars, bumped from behind to destabilise the car and its driver.

At the same time, a motorcycle overtakes the hunted car, and directs a blinding bright flash towards the driver of the hunted car, out of sight from the public view.

The driver loses control, and in the tunnel crashes into a pillar, killing several occupants instantly.

The motorcycle passenger checks the result, and signals the job is done. The motorcycle speeds off into the Parisian night, never to be found.

A slow ambulance drive towards a distant hospital finishes off the remaining surviving occupants.

The driver of the hunted Mercedes is subsequently blamed, through doctored blood samples indicating he should have been legless when there is no video evidence to question never mind prove his drunkenness.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is the world we live in.

Monday, October 15, 2007


Francois Levistre told the inquest into the death of Diana that he saw a "major white flash" directed at the Mercedes she was in moments before the crash. And that before this the Mercedes had been overtaken by a high speed motorcycle. The "major white flash" was directed at the Mercedes. The Mercedes then veered from side to side and then crashed. The motorcycle stopped, and the passenger on the motorcycle then got off, moved towards the crashed Mercedes and then climbed back onto the motorcycle which then sped off.

Richard Tomlinson has maintained that this is straight out of a plan of MI6 to murder a Balkan politician; a high speed chase and a bright flash to blind the driver.

1. Henri Paul does not appear drunk, yet alcohol levels in his blood samples are ridiculously high
2. Diana was aware of plots to kill her
3. an engagement ring had been bought
4. high speed chase with motorcycle overtaking Diana's car, a major bright flash in the tunnel, with motorcycle passenger checking the aftermath and driving off.

Now imagine why the CCTV watching that stretch of road was off that night.

It's gotta be at least "Open Verdict", with great cause for concern in some Establishment circles.

I believe there is more to come.

Question: are paparazzi told by police not to use high power flash photography in tunnels? How powerful are the flash that paparazzi use?



Diana crash witness tells of 'white flash'

James Orr and agencies
Monday October 15, 2007
Guardian Unlimited

A motorist who witnessed the crash that killed Diana, Princess of Wales, today told how he had seen a "major white flash" moments before the tragedy.

Francois Levistre was driving in front of the Mercedes carrying the princess when the fatal collision happened in the Alma underpass in Paris.

Speaking by video link at the inquest into the deaths of Diana and her lover, Dodi Fayed, Mr Levistre described how a motorbike had overtaken the princess's car in the tunnel.

...He saw the motorcycle passenger get off the motorbike, approach the car, and then gesture to the bike's driver before climbing back on and driving off. Mr Levistre told the jury, sitting at the high court in London, that the bike's occupants looked at him before passing his car and leaving the underpass.


Israel attacked Syria last month, alleging a joint nuclear missile operation between Syria and North Korea. Justin Raimondo at AntiWar comments on that attack.



The Dair El Zor Hoax
Why are the Israelis lying about striking a "nuclear facility" in Syria?
by Justin Raimondo

The great "mystery" arising out of the recent Israeli strike at Syria – purportedly targeting a nuclear-related site near the town of Dair El Zor in the northern part of the country – has been the subject of much speculation, but its real purposes have been hidden behind the veil of obfuscation deliberately thrown over the affair by the Israelis and their media amen corner. The gale winds of another Israeli propaganda campaign are blowing at full force across the American media landscape, perpetrating a hoax of outrageous proportions: namely, that the Israelis knocked out a nascent nuclear facility. In a replay of the disastrous Judith Miller fabrications, the Times makes it look like the Syrians, with North Korean assistance, had constructed a nuke plant that was just about to go online:

"The attack on the reactor project has echoes of an Israeli raid more than a quarter century ago, in 1981, when Israel destroyed the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq shortly before it was to have begun operating. That attack was officially condemned by the Reagan administration, though Israelis consider it among their military's finest moments. In the weeks before the Iraq war, Bush administration officials said they believed that the attack set back Iraq's nuclear ambitions by many years."

What a lot of nonsense. The Iraqis had completed a nuclear facility that was fully operational and could have produced weapons-grade materials. The Syrian project has been going nowhere for 40 years, as Joseph Cirincione, author of Bomb Scare: The History and Future of Nuclear Weapons and a senior fellow and director for nuclear policy at the Center for American Progress, informs us:

"It is a basic research program built around a tiny 30 kilowatt reactor that produced a few isotopes and neutrons. It is nowhere near a program for nuclear weapons or nuclear fuel."

Who cares about facts when you've got a perfectly good excuse to run a sensational headline? In any case, "many details remain unclear," as the Times piece puts it, which gives the editors an out. However, I'd trust Laura Rozen before I'd trust the Times, and she relays the following far more plausible account from Intelligence Online:

"In attacking Dair El Zor in Syria on Sept. 6, the Israeli air force wasn't targeting a nuclear site but rather one of the main arms depots in the country.

"Dair El Zor houses a huge underground base where the Syrian army stores the long and medium-range missiles it mostly buys from Iran and North Korea. The attack by the Israeli air force coincided with the arrival of a stock of parts for Syria's 200 Scud B and 60 Scud C weapons."

The moment this story hit the headlines, the alarm on my bullsh*t meter started clanging pretty loudly. But what, one wondered, was the purpose of this elaborate deception?

First, it was meant as a warning to Iran, a clear demonstration that the Israelis can and will act if Tehran fails to curb its ambition to join Israel as a full-fledged member of the nuclear club. Furthermore, it was meant to show Washington's solidarity with Tel Aviv in this matter: in spite of doubts arising from the Rice-Gates faction within the administration, the Americans gave the Israelis the green light. It also, I believe, prefigures, on a much smaller scale, the sequence of events likely to trigger war with Iran: an Israeli strike, Iranian retaliation via Hezbollah, followed by American intervention, which would be practically inevitable.

Second, the Syrian hoax aims at derailing the recent U.S. agreement with North Korea to dismantle its nuclear apparatus. If North Korea is "proliferating," it's already in violation of the accord, and the neoconservatives in the administration and its periphery are already howling that the deal is off.

Third, and, in my view, most important in the long run, this whole propaganda campaign is designed to make an ideological point. As Joshua Muravchik put it in the Los Angeles Times Sunday morning:

"Law is largely a matter of practice and custom, and it is gradually changing to accommodate new realms of self-defense. Had American forces found nuclear weapons in Iraq, or a nuclear program nearly ready to produce weapons, the international assessment of our decision to invade would be very different today. That we made an appalling mistake about Iraqi WMD shows the risks of the new doctrine that Bush proposes – but it does not diminish the issue that gave rise to that doctrine.

"The evolution of our thinking about these issues will be at the forefront of the debate as Washington moves closer to a preemptive (or 'preventive') strike against Iran's nuclear program."

Yes, "the evolution of our thinking" will be helped along by the Israelis, who, as we know, are always in the vanguard when it comes to pushing the boundaries of prudence, not to mention morality and basic human decency. From "Israel has the right to defend itself," a phrase we've heard with metronomic regularity over the years, the progression to "Israel has the right to preemptively attack whomever and whatever it pleases" – based on "secret" intelligence – is a cognitive leap made easier by Israeli boldness. What it's all leading up to is an assault on Iran that may well be sparked by an Israeli provocation.

It's fitting that the whole propaganda campaign is based on a gigantic lie, one that surpasses their previous record in its brazenness and sheer scope. This is the War Party's signature style. In spite of reports that Israeli commandos landed on Syrian soil and made off with "nuclear materials" – a highly unlikely made-for-TV-movie scenario – one imagines that if this were true, they would have displayed the evidence by now. And what about the IAEA? Surely their scientists would have detected the nuclear emissions from such a bombing raid: yet we have seen no evidence, no announcement, no nothing. What's up with that? It's all verrrrrry suspicious.

As Joe Cirincione put it to the BBC:

"This appears to be the work of a small group of officials leaking cherry-picked, unvetted 'intelligence' to key reporters in order to promote a preexisting political agenda. If this sounds like the run-up to the war with Iraq, then it should."

It's the same gang, with the same agenda, only this time their lies are on a bigger scale – and the stakes are much higher. What's amazing, to me, is that, even with this kind of record, these guys appear to be getting away with it. Once again, the major news media outlets are acting as conduits for war propaganda – and instead of displaying the least bit of skepticism, they're more gullible than ever.


Yesterday morning I posted the following comment to an article from Simon Jenkins,
"The biggest threat to the West lies within itself, not with Islam" at


"In both Washington and London are leaders who have so little confidence in democracy as to regard it as vulnerable to a few madmen, and who have so little respect for democracy’s freedoms as to suspend them at the bang of a bomb."

Who do you think is planting the bombs then?

Operation Gladio was a NATO-run state-sanctioned terrorist operation to blame Communists.
Pearl Harbour was provoked and allowed.
The lies of 9/11 are crumbling faster than the WTC towers in a controlled demolition.
And still there has been no inquiry into London 7/7 despite MI5 lying that the alleged bombers were 'clean skins' when they were under surveillance.

Terror is a political tool. No doubt there are genuine attacks by people disillusioned by corrupt political processes. But this also creates opportunities for the state to give these people bombs and capitalise on the shock and horror of the aftermath.

The current global turmoil stems from 9/11.

9/11 was an inside job!

9/11 was an inside job!


As of 0651 this morning the comment has not been posted, despite 28 others being posted.

Again, who is censoring?

This is not a post in defence of Russia's sovereignty, but a post about state-sponsored terrorism.

Saturday, October 13, 2007


At last, an investigation into wireless broadband is to be undertaken.

But what exactly will the investigation look at?

Will it look at wireless broadband exclusively, or will it also look at the effect of the whole sea of digital communication that we can't see but is undoubtedly affecting us because we know it can cause cancer. There is no way that something like wireless broadband, digital TV etc would be introduced into mainstream society if TPTB didn't know the general effect it has; that is to interfere with, and perhaps control, our natural vibrations.

It affects me, certainly. After a few hours of sitting in an environment with strong wireless broadband I begin to feel not right, and need to leave the area for a while.



The government has ordered a wide-ranging investigation into wireless computer networks amid concerns over the potential health risks they pose for millions of schoolchildren and office workers.

The Health Protection Agency (HPA) will spend two years conducting lab tests and monitoring exposure levels to the wireless signals in classrooms, homes and offices, before compiling a health risk report on the technology.

Fears over the potential risks of wireless networks have led some school governors to order their withdrawal from classrooms.

Friday, October 12, 2007


The Times is more anti-Russian than most British newspapers, and repeatedly prints articles that mock Russian democracy and attack the freedom, or lack thereof, of the press in Russia. Unsurprisingly, no mention is made by The Times of Bilderberg and its sponsors and controllers who select our leaders at their clandestine meetings. And they repeatedly do not print my comments on articles they publish on their website.

The Times is not the only one to enforce such censorship of my comments.

Why? What am I saying that deserves such censorship? But perhaps more importantly, who is deciding which comments are posted?

For example, yesterday morning I submitted the following comment to their article about the chief of the FSB alleging British intent in destabilising and dismantling the Russian empire, at


Kasparov's "The Other Russia" is seriously financed and controlled by Anglo-Americans, including the corrupt and greedy National Endowment for Democracy, and lists the British Ambassador to Russia as a member!

The Eurasia Foundation, recipient of alleged MI6 cash via Marc Doe, is even more controlled by the Anglo-American Establishment that thinks all the world’s natural resources and people belong to it and are at their disposal.

To think that MI6 would not attempt to recruit Berezovsky and thus his contacts network in Russia is naive. Why is he here? His recruitment was probably part of the deal.

There is no doubt the UK and USA are interfering in internal Russian politics. The question is, should we?


As of 0725 this morning that comment has not been published.

This censorship of my comments in British online media is occuring more and more frequently, the same British press that attacks freedom of the press in Russia.

Can anyone smell the putrid stench of corrupt hypocrisy?

Thursday, October 11, 2007



It was the USA v Communism in Vietnam.

It was Israel v Arabs in the six-day war. Israel also tried to drag the USA into its wars by attacking the USS Liberty, intending to sink it and blame Egypt.

I struggle to find a reason for the Vietnam war. It was such a long war. It dragged the USA through the mud, made some hate America, turned some to Communism, and made a few people substantially financially wealthier.

But I look back now and I see a war between Israel and its neighbours, and a war between the USA and Communism, and an attempt to drag the USA into a Middle East war, all concurrently. It sounds more similar to the description of WW3 as proposed by Pike than today, in which Russia and China are no longer Communist and are embracing capitalism in their own unique ways.

These military events of 1967, plus the '67, hint to me that 1967 was the first attempt to create the Pike WW3.

That failed, so the Zionists had to take overt control of the USA and execute a highly risky false-flag terror attack on US soil in order to send US troops into the Middle East en masse, fulfilling the "A Clean Break" document calling for Israeli aggression against its neighbours. It happened on 9/11 because that's what it was; an emergency, that the plan is seriously in danger of failing.

Well, it certainly is failing.


Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" is full of untruths, the High Court has ruled, and must be attached with a warning that other theories on climate change exist.

Yeah, like the Sun is getting stronger and the whole Solar System is showing signs of warming up.



Al Gore’s inconvenient judgment

Lewis Smith, Environment Reporter

Al Gore’s award-winning climate change documentary was littered with nine inconvenient untruths, a judge ruled yesterday.

An Inconvenient Truth won plaudits from the environmental lobby and an Oscar from the film industry but was found wanting when it was scrutinised in the High Court in London.

Mr Justice Burton identified nine significant errors within the former presidential candidate’s documentary as he assessed whether it should be shown to school children. He agreed that Mr Gore’s film was “broadly accurate” in its presentation of the causes and likely effects of climate change but said that some of the claims were wrong and had arisen in “the context of alarmism and exaggeration”.


FDR was a four term President who had won the war (although he played a highly significant part in dragging the USA into the war in the first place). This gave him licence from the public to do anything he wanted.

So what did he want?

1. he was against the establishment of Israel, a Jewish homeland in Palestine.
2. he was against dropping the bomb on Japan.
3. he planned for dismantling British control over its empire and creating sovereign nation states.

If "the plan" was to continue, it was crucial that Israel be created to cause the anger and friction in the Middle East we see today (6m jews had been murdered for that purpose during WW2), the bomb had to be dropped on Japan to terrify the world into ceding sovereignty to the UN, and the British Empire had to remain intact.

If FDR had lived long enough then the plan could have been stalled significantly, or even stopped.

So what evidence is there that FDR was murdered?

From "The Strange Death of Franklin D Roosevelt" by Emmanuel Josephson

"Admiral McIntyre, FDR's physician is reported to have said that Roosevelt's
body was not embalmed; that in less than four hours after death, it had
turned black, a reaction that occurs among other cases, in event of arsenic

On his return from Yalta, Roosevelt was obviously acutely ill. He was weak
and haggard and had lost a lot of weight. His face was so drawn that it
looked like a death mask. It reminded one of the case of cholera or acute
poisoning. For a time he was thought to be approaching the end and frantic
consultations were held. He responded to treatment and made a measure of
recovery. But pathetically he carried on and fronted for his masters. In
connection with Roosevelt's entertainment at Yalta, Paul Mallon reports that
once again there was extended to him the extraordinary courtesy of service by
a skilled physician as a waiter. Mallon's report ascribes to the physician
the task of sizing up Roosevelt's health for Stalin. "Pa" Watson, Roosevelt's
military aid, suddenly became ill, and died on the return trip."

FDR's corpse was quickly placed in a sealed casket and buried without an autopsy. Despite numerous requests the casket has not been dug up and opened for an autopsy to occur.

Hmm. It sounds awfully suspicious to me.

Truman succeeded FDR and agreed to create Israel, agreed to drop the bomb on Japan, and did not dismantle the British Empire. Truman became a 33rd Degree Freemason shortly after dropping the bomb.

Not that I am championing FDR. I recently read "Franklin Delano Roosevelt ; My exploited Father-in-Law" by Curtis Dall, which was a very interesting read. The chapters on interviews with Admiral Husband Kimmel and Commander George Earle show that FDR was quite a ruthless warmonger who provoked and allowed Pearl Harbour and declined a negotiated peace with anti-Hitler German forces allied with Admiral Canaris, decisions that Dall could not believe or conceive FDR making.

But then again if he had not, would we all be wearing Swastikas?

My conclusion on FDR? He had grown too powerful from winning the war and had ideas that did not agree with "the plan". Hence, murder by arsenic at Yalta (and after?)

Tuesday, October 09, 2007


If mobile phone use, which uses microwaves, causes a risk, what about all the wireless broadband and digital TV transmission?

How can anyone say this microwave telecommunication is safe? The fact is it is not safe. If it is causing cancer then in some people it is affecting DNA strongly enough to mutate it, and if that is the case then in most of us it is affecting DNA vibration in some way, generally clouding thought and emotions.



Mobile phone cancer risk 'higher for children'

By Harry Wallop, Consumer Affairs Correspondent
Last Updated: 2:31am BST 09/10/2007

Children should not be given mobile phones because using them for more than 10 years increases the risk of brain cancer, a leading scientist has said.


I agree with this analysis from Jeffrey Steinberg.

Withdrawing British troops from Basra betrays the "it's all about the oil" argument, and leaves the USA virtually stranded pissing in the Iraqi wind, caught between the Sunni and Shi'ites.

But to then send some British troops to the Iraq-Iran border is criminal and asking for trouble, particularly as the "Iranian nuke" argument for war on Iran has been demolished and certain people are looking for another argument for war on Iran e.g. a few dead British soldiers allegedly murdered in cold blood by Iranian Revolutionary Guards smuggling IEDs into Iraq.

ps on FDR, I am now coming around to the theory that he did plan for a post-WW2 dismantling of the British Empire, and for this I think he was arguably murdered with arsenic after Yalta, but after wittingly or unwittingly fulfilling certain parts of "the plan", i.e. he was exploited, as we all are in numerous ways.

And it is for similar reasons that Putin is demonised with allegations of murdering Politkovskaya, Litvinenko, etc and for sending Russian bombers to fly directly to London, etc. to stop any American-Russian partnership. I find it interesting that there were no reports of the USA intercepting Russian bombers during recent Russian exercises near the USA.



This article appears in the October 12, 2007 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.

Britain's 'Managed Chaos' Drives the World Toward War

by Jeffrey Steinberg

By all accounts, U.S. military commanders in Iraq, along with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, are furious at the British government not only for pulling the vast majority of its troops out of Iraq, but for turning over the keys to the vital oil region of the south to competing Shi'ite militias. Great Britain's military departure from Iraq is not the consequence of anti-war ferment inside the United Kingdom. It is a key feature of a British oligarchical "Great Game" strategy of fomenting "managed chaos" throughout the vital Persian Gulf and Eastern Mediterranean areas—and sticking the United States with the legacy of crushing failure and the hatred of much of the Arab and Islamic world.

Senior U.S. intelligence sources have shared with EIR this assessment of Britain's strategic manuevers against a United States, already saddled with a Dick Cheney-led Executive branch, hell-bent on bringing down the United States before the Bush Administration leaves office. In effect, Vice President Cheney is the greatest British asset in official Washington since an earlier Vice President, Aaron Burr, fled to London, following the murder of Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton, and schemed for the rest of his life, against the continued existence of the American Republic.

The problem, on which these senior U.S. intelligence officials agree with EIR, is not limited to the British geopolitical machinations against the United States—at a moment of perhaps the greatest U.S. official leadership crisis ever. That very real problem is vastly compounded by the fact that many well-meaning and patriotic Americans, including many within the top echelons of the military, the intelligence community, and the diplomatic corps, lack the depth of historical insight to fathom the British agenda. The British have positioned themselves to exploit this American vulnerability. For some within the British oligarchy, the remaining months of the Bush-Cheney Administration represent the greatest opportunity in over 200 years, to avenge the American Revolution, and crush the republican ideals that spread around the globe as the result of the events of 1775-87.

The following ongoing British manuevers are exemplary of the larger problem.
The Iraq Gambit

While the assumption of most Americans, including the majority of members of the 110th Congress, is that the Bush Administration manipulated and cajoled Tony Blair's Britain into joining the United States in the Iraq disaster, nothing could be further from the truth. From the outset, the British were 100% in on the Iraq War scam, fabricating much of the original disinformation that sold the war to an all-too-gullible U.S. Congress and American public; and housing the Ahmed Chalabi-led Iraqi National Congress which fed the dezinformatsiya stovepipe into the White House.

When the "hot phase" of the Iraq invasion ended in April 2003, the British, with more than a century of experience as would-be imperial overlords of the world's petroleum patch, took control of the oil-rich southern region, around the port of Basra, whence all of Iraq's oil is shipped to the world market. Despite the overall chaos and lack of infrastructure reconstruction, Iraq manages to pump 1.2-1.5 million barrels of oil a day for export, a fraction of its earlier capacity, but a factor in world oil flows, nonetheless. When the Brits announced plans for further troop withdrawals, oil prices on the spot market shot up, as speculators bet that oil flows from Basra were in jeopardy. They are almost certainly right.

While U.S. forces concentrated on the no-man's land of Anbar Province and the increasingly ethnically cleansed capital city of Baghdad, British forces manned the southern Iraqi energy choke-point, and are now leaving it, over the next six months or so, in the hands of local battling Shi'ite militias—not the central government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. U.S. military and intelligence sources estimate that it would take upwards of 70,000 U.S. troops to bring some stability to southern Iraq once the Brits leave—troops that do not exist.
Al-Yamamah Revisited

While setting up a situation of semi-permanent instability in southern Iraq, the British are also playing a Sunni fundamentalist card, through their Saudi Arabian partners, particularly the Saudi monarch's national security advisor and former Ambassador in Washington, D.C., Prince Bandar bin-Sultan.

In late September, the Saudi government announced the signing of yet-another major arms deal with Great Britain's leading arms manufacturer, BAE Systems. The deal, worth an estimated $8 billion, involves the sale of 72 Euro-jet fighter planes, along with a range of support services, air defense infrastructure, etc. The deal is an extension of the long-standing "Al-Yamamah" contract, involving the Saudi purchase of billions of dollars in British arms, in return for crude oil—which the British sold on the spot market for massive profits—estimated at well over $100 billion.

While the Al-Yamamah project created perhaps the largest unregulated slush fund for covert operations ever assembled, it also exposed the pivotal role of Prince Bandar, as a key British agent, operating not only within the inner circle of power in the Kingdom, but also inside the Bush family/right-wing-Republican orbit.

The U.S. Department of Justice is probing Prince Bandar's role in the Al-Yamamah program, because of a reported $2 billion in kickbacks he received, via the Bank of England and Washington, D.C. Saudi Embassy accounts at the now-defunct Riggs Bank. U.S. intelligence sources have emphasized that, if the DOJ probe goes beyond the issue of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, to the charge of money laundering, it could unearth massive Saudi government funding of Muslim Brotherhood penetration operations all over the United States—at a time when U.S. law enforcement and intelligence services are alarmed about the dangers of another major terrorist attack.

The Saudi government is pouring millions of dollars into Sunni tribes in Iraq, to buy their temporary loyalty to the U.S. occupation forces. On a deeper level, and in sync with the British "managed chaos" schemes, the "neo-con" faction of the Saudi monarchy, led by Bandar, is building up a fundamentalist Sunni "buffer state" in Anbar Province and other Iraqi border areas, in anticipation of a long Sunni versus Shi'ite war.

Every American expert on the Persian Gulf interviewed by EIR confirmed the assessment that the United States has bought a degree of near-term stability in Anbar and other Sunni areas of Iraq, but in the long term, Saudi factions and their British partners—committed to the spreading of Salafi Sunni fundamentalism—are going to have their way.
Watch Out for Tony Blair

The historically challenged U.S. President George W. Bush is the perfect fool, to be exploited by London's Great Gamesters. Bush angered Russia and the European Union, when he unilaterally anointed former British Prime Minister Blair as chief "peace emissary" for the Quartet (the U.S., Russia, UN, and EU), assigned to get an Israeli-Palestinian accord.

Some U.S. intelligence sources have alerted EIR that Blair's appointment further advanced Britain's "controlled chaos" schemes. It was Blair, in his final hours in office, who secured the latest Saudi-British arms deal. Late in 2006, he quashed Britain's Serious Fraud Office (SFO) probe of the Al-Yamamah scheme, claiming that British national security would be jeopardized by any further inquest.

Now, these sources warn, Blair is intent on eking out some small progress in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, while avoiding any kind of final settlement that might bring genuine stability to the conflict zone. At all costs, Blair will ally with Cheney and others in the war party in Washington, who oppose any kind of peace deal between Israel and Syria—despite the fact that final agreements over the Golan Heights, the division of the waters of Lake Tiberius, and all other stumbling block issues, have already been settled, and Israeli President Shimon Peres, with the full endorsement of Lyndon LaRouche, has signalled that now is the moment for Israel and Syria to make peace.

Genuine peace is not the British aim; however, a small step forward on the Israel-Palestine track, some senior U.S. souces warn, could warm London to the idea of a U.S.-Iran confrontation before Bush and Cheney leave office. Right now, these sources report, with the Palestinian issue still a burning passion for a vast majority on the Arab and Muslim street, any direct U.S.-Iranian confrontation would likely trigger uncontrolled chaos—which is more than London cares to bargain for—at least for the moment.

What drives the Gordon Brown government is the City of London's knowledge that the post-Bretton Woods, London-run global financial system is about to blow. At moments like this, the greatest fear, from the Anglo-Dutch oligarchical standpoint, is a U.S.A. returning to the American System outlook and policies last expressed, within government, in the Presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt. Any glimmer of the FDR impulse, now so actively being promoted by LaRouche; and any suggestion of a U.S.-Russian strategic partnership—already placed on the table by Russian President Vladimir Putin—to put this fragile world back together again, would spell doom for the Anglo-Dutch system.

For now, London's major weapon against such developments, is "managed chaos." To understand the unfolding events in Southwest Asia, this concept must be grasped. Ignore it at a very high price.