CONTROL AND NATURE OF THE COMING WORLD ORDER
Published in 2 Parts - Part 2
October, 2004

A Rag-bag Of Self-Destructive International Chaos And Greed

In 2002 we examined the record of increasingly globalised forces and interests that were driving the world towards further conflict in a continuum of conflicts(1). The ultimate earthly Power - we tend to write this term with the "P" in the upper case deliberately - is that of Money Power. The existing finance-capitalist economic system is based on escalating, insatiable debt from which these forces, catalysed by human greed, and the individual and corporate lust for Power, derive their momentum. In Part 1 of this two-part analysis, we considered the relationship of these forces to World Revolution, the integrated human machinery involved, well-expressed in the "Mattoid" syndrome, and the way in which the virus, the spores of Marxist-Leninist revolutionary philosophy, formerly ensrhined in Soviet politico-Military Doctrine, are continuing to weave a path through Western society(2). It is worth taking a look at what Paul Kingsworth wrote in the context of the corporate world in the United States under the title In My Own Words, in Resurgence, No. 227, November-December, 2004.

Corporations gained the rights of "persons" in a series of controversial court decisions in the Nineteenth Century, in which corporate lawyers successfully, if bizarrely, argued that the constitutional rights which guaranteed the freedom of American citizens applied to American companies too. From then on, there was no looking back. Today, American companies regularly claim constitutional rights to increase their power and evade their responsibilities. They use the Fourteenth Amendment, to the United States Constitution - written to protect the "life, liberty or property" of freed slaves - to evade laws aimed at protecting people from corporate abuses. They use the Fourth Amendment - the right to be secure from government interference - to avoid inspections of their property. And they use the First Amendment - the right to free speech - to protect corporate donations to political parties, and the funding of political advertisements.

As we ponder the significance of the diagram under the heading "Food For Thought", to which we shall return in due course, we should by now be able to appreciate what an excellent job Karl Marx performed in applying his own impetus to the Revolution that began in France in 1789. In a self-indulgent Western society of male make-up, poodle parlours and cosmetic surgery for teenagers, the people at all levels have been diverted and disorientated from reality. The global scenario is compounded, inter alia, of a Revolution to destroy the Existing Social Order - us - essentially the Nation State, and the concomitant, conterminous interests of the Global Power Brokers of International Finance-Capitalism who wish to see such barriers broken down to their own advantage. We cannot see this today, even if the majority even bother to try. This is not entirely surprising as we are deliberately neither being told nor educated to this scenario. At the bar of our golf club, at work, around the dinner table, we express, whenever we care to do so, disoriented, discordant, truncated views of the world around us; views and opinions drawn from conditioned distortions - and omissions - orchestrated and massaged for our benefit by the controlled Mass Communications Media and the Entertainment Industry. We stand with our backs to the oncoming "train", so let us continue this analogy. We recently watched the third version of John Buchan's The Thirty Nine Steps. Based on the run-up to the 1914-18 War, the "express" train which bore our hero North to Scotland departed from St Pancras Station when it would logically have departed from Euston or King's Cross; the unrealistically short train was composed of 1930s carriages, one of which bore a post-1947 "first class" logo, and the train was drawn by a small mixed traffic locomotive from the late 1940s. And we think we know!

Perhaps we should heed the words of the late Pastor Niemoller, a survivor of the concentration camps:

First came the Communists, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up, because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me.

The Contortions Of Political Demarcation

Have you ever tried knitting - or unravelling, as you will - spaghetti? We have frequently referred to the proliferation of quasi party political terminology; much of it employed intentionally as a trigger to divert or suppress rational thought. Terms like "Hard Left", "Hard Right", "Far Right", Neo Liberal", "Neo Conservative", "Neo Fascist", and so on are bandied around without the slightest attempt at definition to justify a political position of argument. It is doubtful if any casual observer tempted to invoke the term "Communist" except on the strength of popularly accepted rhetoric would be able to identify a Communist even if he was standing next to one. "Democracy" is another elastic term applied tactically to a scenario according to need. In September, 2004, the Financial Times reported that the French Socialist, Laurent Fabius, had threatened to withdraw support from President Chirac in any vote for a European Constitution. The reason was the need for a "more 'social' approach to France's economic problems, notably the rising number of companies shifting production to other E.U. countries with lower taxes and labour costs". This is where theory comes home to roost, since this is more redolent of Right Wing support for domestic - nationalist - capitalist interests, where as Socialism, essentially International Socialism, is precisely that, committed to the International Working Class. In just this way traditional, national, cultural values have been tactically associated with the political Right and marginalised accordingly - vilified - in current political thought. It is largely why the British Conservative Party has almost completely lost the plot. Here is an extract from what James Gibb Stuart, advocate of monetary and economic reform, author and publisher wrote in The Conservative Ethic, in 1994:

There is a crisis of confusion among the British people who consider themselves to be conservatives. This is because the British Conservative Party, traditional repository of their loyalties, has been swayed in its decision-making by crypto-internationalists who are less concerned about the political and economic integrity of Her Majesty's United Kingdom than with their goal of a federal Europe dominated by a European Central Bank. . . . Since all this has created a sense of total disillusionment with British politicians and political institutions, it is necessary to take a frank look at the external forces which have brought us where we are. For the bulldog breed which fought and sacrificed in two world wars has not really been imbued with a death wish, a desire to commit hara-kiri. It is now threatened with extinction because, lulled by an internationalist media industry that phased out the warning signals, it got itself sucked into another war - a secret and subversive war - without being able to identify the enemy. Therein lies the critical factor, for not even the battling British can fight a successful underground war without knowing the nature and the motives of the enemy. The enemy in this context, the surreptitious eroder of national values and nation-based conservatism, is an international consortium of financiers and multinational corporations whose ultimate goal is world government, which they hope to bring about through the elimination of nation states and political frontiers, the progressive centralisation of power, and the establishment of a global market place. . . . Money is the root of this particular evil. Money and the massive power and patronage which it so readily commands! It is essentially a capitalist power, and since conservatives have instinctively looked to capitalism in all its forms as their natural friend and ally, they have been betrayed from both within and behind by those with whom they thought they shared a set of common values.

In his feature "Over The Rainbow" on Populist Conservatism in the London Review of Books, Slavoj _i_ek tackles the cross currents of political terminology and objectives from the American heartland. He cites the view of one observer that "economic class conflict (poor farmers and blue collar workers versus lawyers, bankers and large companies), has been transposed into an opposition between honest, hard-working, Christian Americans on the one hand, and decadent, latte-drinking liberals who drive foreign cars, mock patriotism and advocate abortion and homosexuality on the other". _i_ek argues that populist conservative opposition to taxation and regulation by the state is counter productive in that it opens the floodgates to big business. It also follows that a "moral war" allows the lower classes to articulate their fury without disturbing dominant economic interests and that the Culture War, in other words, is Class War by other means; one being the displacement of the other. Here is a further extract from the article:

. . . [ I]t takes two to fight a culture war; culture is also the dominant ideological concern of "enlightened" liberals, whose fight is against sexism, racism and fundamentalism, and for multicultural tolerance. What "culture" means today is closely connected with the status of belief. We no longer really believe, but merely observe certain religious rituals and mores as a gesture of respect for the community to which we belong, non-believing Jews obey kosher rules out of respect for tradition, and so on. The statement "I don't really believe in it, it's just part of my culture" captures the disavowed, or displaced, belief characteristic of our times. Although we do not believe in Santa Claus, there is a Christmas tree in every house and public place every December. "Culture" is the name for all those things we practise without really believing in them, without taking them seriously. The second thing to note is that, while they profess solidarity with the poor, liberals' fight for multicultural tolerance and women's rights, opposes them to the "lower classes" with their supposed intolerance, fundamentalism and sexism. The true lines of division are obfuscated by the careful use of terminology. The way "modernisation" has been used in the recent ideological offensive is exemplary. First, an abstract opposition between "modernisers" (those who endorse global capitalism in all its aspects, from the economic to the cultural), and "traditionalists" (those who resist globalisation). Into this category of those-who-resist can then be thrown a mixture of traditional conservatives, the populist right and elements of the "old left" - those who continue to advocate the welfare state, trade unions and so on.. . . . "Modernisation" fails to function as the key to social totality - it is an abstract universal notion - whereas the wager of Marxism is that there is one antagonism (Class Struggle), which determines all others and is therefore a concrete universal. Feminism is similarly abstract; it can be articulated with the struggle for emancipation of the lower classes, or it can (and certainly does), function as an ideological tool of the upper middle classes used to assert their superiority over the supposedly patriarchal and intolerant lower classes. . . . (The same goes for racism; it is the dynamics of Class Struggle itself that explains why racism is strongest among the white working class).

The Myths And Delusions Of "Democracy"

As successive layers of a conceptual "onion" are peeled away there is inevitably a good deal of repetition in the process of exposing the situation from different directions and considering different levels of perception and orientation. According to The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English, "Democracy" may be defined as "a system of government by the whole population, usually through elected representatives", and "an egalitarian and tolerant form of society". The reality is that of a largely cosmetic variable in which the mass of the people have precious little genuine say except, perhaps, in smaller countries like Switzerland. Government must be balanced between an essential hierarchy, collective liberty, individual freedoms and rights, and legitimate national interests. In the United States we witness the actions of a pattern of government based on massively financed vested interests and Power blocs in which some 286,000,000 people have to choose between two parties with precious little obvious fundamental difference between them. As in the recent presidential pantomime outsiders like Ross Perot, Ralph Nader and Patrick Buchanan swiftly fall away like melting snow. In Europe we are seeing remote and severely distended political representation and a multilingual, multicultural "bran tub" of party political positions behind which Power is exercised by massive, oppressive and faceless bureaucratic machinery and powerful, embedded lobbies such as the Monsanto Corporation. In this context democracy for the individual is a sour joke!

The Financial Times recently reported the now deposed American Secretary of State, Colin Powell, as avowing that the "U.S. is intent on completing the task of spreading democracy". This is a travesty of such a term. Whatever the faults of the former British and European colonial systems which only existed to protect perceived national interests in the context of a vanished age, we have seen the corruption, chaos and genocide that the premature imposition of so-called "democratic" systems of government has since brought to Central and Southern Africa. True United States intentions to extend its influence were expressed in a letter dated 9th March, 1960, to the then Secretary of State, Christian Herter, from the President of the International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft & Agricultural Implement Workers of America. In this the American Federation of Labour and Congress of Industrial Organisations (A.F.L.-C.I.O.), pledged to bring pressure to bear on Apartheid South Africa. Add to this the later perambulations of Secretary of State, Bilderberg member Dr Henry Kissinger and Bilderberg Chairman Lord Carrington in this region, and Carrington's role in the installation of Robert Mugabe in Rhodesia-Zimbabwe, and we may see that the strategy was far from humanitarian. It is therefore easy to see the Anti-Apartheid Movement and the World Council of Churches (W.C.C.), as different layers of the same "onion". Backed by Western Powers the African National Congress (A.N.C.), was controlled by largely Communist leaders such as Joe Slovo and Mac Maharaj, and supported in its Armed Struggle by the Soviet Union. Moreover, the A.N.C. and the Irish Republican Army (I.R.A.), openly collaborated and the latter even used the A.N.C. offices at 28 Penton Street in North London. Evidence of A.N.C.-I.R.A. collaboration was held by the Metropolitan Police in 1993, but was deliberately withheld from Andrew Hunter, a Member of Parliament who was investigating these connections(3). We also read that at Zagorsk, in the U.S.S.R. in 1989, the Executive Committee of Communist dominated W.C.C. was on record as making grants to the Programme to Combat Racism, in which South Africa was a primary target.

In Fabian Freeway, Rose Martin wrote in great detail of the trans-Atlantic Fabian International Socialist network(4), of the education of future Third World leaders at the hands of Fabian professors in English universities, and the important influence of the Marxist Professor Harold Laski at the Rockefeller Foundation-funded London School of Economics and Political Science (L.S.E.). The current South African President, Moscow trained Thabo Mbeki, is a Marxist. Under his regime numerous white South African farmers have been attacked, killed and their land seized. Nepotism on the part of the A.N.C. leadership is rife and the crime rate in the country has soared to one of the world's highest. A.N.C. spokesman Smuts Ngonyama, was reported in the Financial Times as on record with a South African newspaper for stating that he did not join the (Armed) Struggle "to stay poor". The Marxist President of Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe, initiated into Marxism whilst at the Fort Hare University, in South Africa, heads an even more corrupt regime and has overtly led a ruthless campaign to dispossess white Zimbabwean farmers of their property; a process little different to Josef Stalin's liquidation of the Kulaks - the landed peasantry in the Soviet Union - in the 1930s. We should understand that Western style one-man-one-vote democracy is thus a very friable commodity. The African experience has shown that the substitution of this form of government for traditional indigenous systems has ultimately lead to destabilisation and dictatorship. In 1989 United Christian Action revealed that for Africa as a whole 21 of 26 countries had fallen under one-party rule, the remaining 5 being military dictatorships; 11 were Marxist and 15 Socialist and overall, government had been seized on 44 occasions by a coup.

That the United States should be intent on imposing "democracy" in the Middle East after the African experience, as it has done in the Balkans for the same reasons, means simply that existing or traditional systems of governance have been less vulnerable to economic exploitation and control than under a Western parliamentary style of government and West-sponsored political leadership. In this scenario the one country whose genocidal rule over the Palestinian territory it controls is never seriously challenged politically or effectively exposed by the Media is Israel, whose supporters and apologists are embedded in the British and United States political and social infrastructure. Supported unequivocally by the United States under dominant American-Jewish and evangelical Christian factions Israel remains immune from United Nations censure and has long been an "illegal" nuclear power. Whilst it is fair that governments in the West take national interests into account, the manner in which this balance is being achieved is untenable. This cannot logically be argued or opposed on grounds of any political alignment, but as a simple question of right and wrong as theoretically enshrined in the United Nations Charter. The illegal invasion of Iraq in March, 2003, by the United States-United Kingdom Coalition was nothing more than part of the strategy to control the Middle East and its natural resources. That the infrastructure of the country should have been deliberately destroyed during the Gulf War of 1991, and contained by sanctions in that condition, that entire Iraqi communities have been deliberately smashed with the use of modern battlefield weapons, and that between 15,000 and 100,000 Iraqi men, women and children should have been slaughtered is a travesty of the Christian ethic and any pretence of "liberation". In reality the West, still largely, if only nominally Christian, has demonstrated just how elastic and conveniently adaptable the Christian faith and its so-called leadership have been. Had there been any trace of genuine Christian or humanitarian concern, the same military force would have been applied in Rwanda, the Occupied Territories of Palestine, the Congo, Indonesia, Zimbabwe and the Sudan.

The Pattern Repeats In The United Kingdom

The late Alan Clark described the nature of the Conservative Party and the Tory "Grandees" behind the Party in The Tories - Conservatives And The Nation State 1922 - 1997(5). Originally it could be said that the Conservative Party was synonymous with capitalist interests, and that the Labour Party represented the Working Classes and the ownership and control by them of the means of production. Internationalisation of banking and business and a debt-usury economic system have seriously scrambled these demarcations. Broadly, increasing prosperity based on Godless Materialism coupled with Globalisation have left the Conservative Party adrift with no viable philosophy, no less than the evaporation of the original raison d'être of Working Class interests. Into this vacuum have come ambitious idealists, many barristers like Tony Blair who have never run a business or organisation of any consequence in their lives, In their ranks are numerous individuals, such as David Blunkett, Jack Straw, Paul Boateng, Dennis Skinner and others who have earlier associations with the extreme political Left. What they now face in practice, given many legitimate domestic social issues, was the truth that the Power once faced by old Labour had reached global dimensions. In Tony Blair's Fabian pamphlet, The Third Way we had what was theoretically a way round this impasse(6). Here we have to compare what has been promised by this "New" Labour philosophy with what has actually been delivered. Blair's writing was redolent of the gizmo-ridden, superficial, simplistic babble of a sixth form debating society. Health Care, Defence, Education and Transport, for example, have found Ministers with little experience floundering out of their depth and clinging to a mish-mash of Socialist platitudes. At the same time we have the dangerous thread of Marxist-Leninist ideology that we know as Political Correctness and Cultural Communism(7)(8)(9). We have already shown how two Government Ministers took the "correct Marxist-Leninist" position in the face of the true facts, and also lied on ideological lines(10). However, when one of these, Foreign Office Minister Denis MacShane, referred to resistance fighters in Iraq as "fascists" when interviewed on Channel 4 television on 29th October, 2004, one could only question his grip on reality. To judge from his other recent performances, it may just be that MacShane, unlike Milibrand, is simply a loose cannon of no great intellect; not a compelling recommendation for a Government Minister.

The Winter, 1998, issue of the Socialist journal Fabian Review contained a two-part feature "Globalisation: Meeting the Challenge". The first article by Jessica Crowe, a freelance consultant on labour and human rights issues, opened with a sub-title that began "Globalisation has been portrayed as unstoppable . . . " Crowe's case, naturally enough, was that the Socialist International was a logical democratic basis for harnessing forces that were increasingly global in scale. From this we quote the following paragraph, with emphasis added:

So we need to concentrate on how to manage and regulate globalisation so that its fruits in terms of rising wealth and income are distributed more evenly and that all people are able to participate in the changing societies it creates. This does not mean governments have no role, or that they have lost all their national responsibilities. Rather the opposite. It means that there is an additional role - that of international governance. Governance means people as well as governments, which raises issues of transparency and participation. But the crucial role of governments is as our representatives in existing international fora, in negotiating the new forms of regulation and governance needed for the new era.

In January, 1999, the Fabian Society organised a one-day conference: "Globalisation - Meeting the Challenge - how the Labour movement should respond". Two of the speakers were then Minister for Overseas development, Clare Short, and the then Economic Secretary to The Treasury, Patricia Hewitt, now Minister for Trade and Industry. The stark truth is that "New" Labour has already lost game, set and match to Corporate interests but, from sheer self-interest, works to maintain the illusion for the electorate. An old favourite, Prawn Cocktail Party, has shown how both the Conservative and Labour Parties fell in succession under the spell of the City of London in the wake of the 1939-45 War(11). In Captive State George Monbiot describes the exercise of Corporate Power over construction planning procedures, university faculties, research and curricula; even, for example, to an H.S.B.C. Bank logo on the saddles of Metropolitan Police horses,. and the Power Brokers who profit. He describes the Power of the American Monsanto Corporation and the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (M.A.I.)(12). One small instance of these tentacles was reported in the satirical magazine Private Eye: Despite Government concern over child obesity, a Nottinghamshire school was forced to retain a "trash food" vending machine under the terms of a Public Finance Initiative (P.F.I.), contract with Alfred MacAlpine Business Services.

The global outreach to the Third World and control over Government was demonstrated by Minister Clare Short, when Minister for Overseas Development, in her policy for the provision of Genetically Modified (G.M.), agricultural supplies as part of "Aid" to African countries. Foreign - inward - investment, and thus ownership and control of private business and the national infrastructure, already takes place on a global scale. The M.A.I. would have given Global Corporations legal powers over sovereign national governments, proposals in which the present Government clearly connived. This was only prevented after widespread protest from abroad. The Royal Institute of International Affairs (R.I.I.A.), was founded in the 1920s along with the American Council on Foreign Relations (C.F.R.), and evolved from Lord Milner's "Kindergarten" of influential individuals and the international system of "Round Table" organisations(13). The R.I.I.A. has therefore existed as a powerful forum for the "good and the great"; those who know what is best for the rest of us - Dr Henry Kissinger is an associate. The story of the Multilateral Agreement on Investment was recorded in detail from the viewpoint of these interests(14). Predictably, however, a claim was disingenuously made that M.A.I. proposals had been fully publicised, whereas considerable effort had been necessary to obtain details of what was afoot. One might also inquire what coverage was given to the situation, what public debate was initiated by the controlled Media, and what information was provided to the electorate by a Labour Government - of the people - committed to democratic rule? Precisely! We need to measure "Democracy" in this light.

THE REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE LIVES ON

The Unbroken Thread Weaves Through A Convoluted Scenario

At last we come to the mystery diagram on our cover page. Any one travelling North of Carlisle on the A74 dual carriageway to Scotland will be familiar with this sign. Instead of drive-in roadside service areas, one is frequently diverted off the main route to a nearby village. We are strongly reminded that this sign also symbolises a dangerous geopolitical illusion. We have been encouraged by the "talking heads" of the Media to believe that the Communist threat ended with the perceived collapse of Communism in the Soviet Union. This implies that the World Revolution postulated by Karl Marx in the Nineteenth Century was a temporary, if violent aberration; a diversion. The truth is that Vladimir Il'ich Lenin developed Marxian theory in a practical form as Marxism-Leninism so to Soviet Communism, whereas the World Revolution was international - a Socialist Brotherhood of Man. Not for the first time we point out that the second "S" in U.S.S.R. stood for "Socialist". Such has been the success of the Ideological Struggle, for the mind, that Marxist Revolution lives on in the "bloodstream" of political activism; instinctively for the most part; as spores; a virus, or a form of political or ideological "H.I.V.". From time to time we can glimpse this virus. We already have the case of Education Minister David Milibrand, who diverted falling education standards as a "Class" issue(15). We also had Foreign Office Minister for Europe openly lying - but taking the correct Marxist-Leninist position - to the Media, and suggesting that there were "Racist" links with opposition to a federal European State(16). Proposals by the Minister for Culture, Media and Sport, Tessa Jowell, for American-style casinos in the United Kingdom met with sharp opposition in October, 2004. A contradiction of her "Culture" portfolio, and a measure probably coupled with a need for additional Treasury revenue, Jowell promptly condemned her critics as "snobs", so instinctively invoking the Class War as well as distorting social questions by alluding to a small, exclusive and wholly unrepresentative element of wealthy gamblers. Legislation against country sports has now been openly declared to be a Class War; legislation used for the purpose that will have the same destructive consequences across the social spectrum in attacking land ownership and the bourgeoisie as the ruthless measures that Josef Stalin was able to employ.

If we bear in mind that the Marxist Revolution is fundamentally International, we will be able to interpret a report on the Nationalist, anti-European Union, United Kingdom Independence Party (U.K.I.P.), on 22nd October, 2004, in the Morning Star, successor to the Communist Daily Worker. This was headed predictably "The growing threat of Europe's 'fascist elite" with reference to "[T]he European trend of 'respectable' far-right parties sneaking past the electorate's defences". But the dominant Internationalist European Ideology took another twist with the proposal to appoint the Italian politician Rocco Buttiglione, who is a devout Roman Catholic with strong views on Homosexuality, Feminism and the Family, European Justice Minister. Predictably, the appointment was rejected by the European Civil Liberties Committee and the European Parliament. This was reported in the Morning Star as "Italian bigot drops commission bid". Stephen Glover, writing in the conservative Daily Mail on 29th October made the mistake of many "talking heads" with the title "The fascists are back in Europe!" (Emphasis added). The episode was in no way a fascist one; it was exactly along doctrinaire Marxist-Leninist lines that go back to the Communist Manifesto and the Political Correctness of Cultural Communism.

Illusions, Myths, Misinformation And Moving Goalposts

We live in confused and confusing times when the majority prefers to continue looking the other way - with its back to the oncoming train! John Brett, in "Becoming What We Oppose", for The New Times Survey of July, 2004, has a point:
The old saying, "We become what we oppose", has rattled around in my mind since I first heard it, which would be over 40 years or more ago. Now as I see many of my lifetime associates adrift in the authoritarian quagmire, I feel like joining them, for it appears to be a comfortable place to be. It seems to be a place where you can sit back and tell your grandchildren, "well I did my part", like a returned soldier. This seems not to have happened to C.H. Douglas, Solzhenitsyn and many others, but it has happened to the two original churches. After 2,000 years of being immobile, they have not only been neutralised, but are now discounting the Gospels, and in some cases supporting the anti-Christ. This has not happened suddenly, but gradually over the last century. Put simply, the "Church" has abandoned the Truth, particularly the truth about its own demise. The odd cleric, who stands up and exposes the truth by pointing to the lies, has his audience turning their faces the other way, while they scratch their heads, or try to change the subject. This does not happen so much out of embarrassment, but out of sheer confusion. But why are they confused? It was after an editor changed my letter where I wrote about "nuclear weapons", that I got a clue. It appears there are no such things as nuclear weapons any more, only "weapons of mass destruction". [Exactly as "chair" or "chairperson" have taken the place of "chairman" - Ed.]. Then I remembered that there is no such thing as "anti-Jewish" any more, only "anti-Semitism". All of these words took me directly to the Middle East, where the Semitic Arabs are being attacked by two nuclear powers, the U.S.A. and Israel.

Through the various convolutions and metamorphoses, we must identify the International Socialist thread, not least its convenient and conterminous relationship to what is now Capitalism of global dimensions. Liberal author Antony Sampson exposed the influence of the Class System in early editions of his Anatomy of Britain series. However, man, like the animal world, is essentially and naturally hierarchical. Inevitably, we must have those who lead and those who follow or must be led. We may argue that quality rather than (social) class should be the justification or entitlement for such a responsibility. Equally enshrined in nature is that, like sporting prowess, there must also be a natural element of inheritance, just as there will be privilege which must be accompanied by a fair degree of reward. Socialist ideologues and Liberal wishful thinkers have long been determined on imposing a one-size-fits-all non-judgmental, anti-elitist, egalitarian concept on society through sociology and education. As long ago as 1920 the Communist adviser to the Nationalist Government in China, Mikhail Borodin, told Madame Chiang Kai-shek that Liberal academics would help do the work of the Marxist revolutionaries for them(17). Today we see the consequences; in the elimination of talent, competitive sport and other activities, and individual responsibility, coupled with the crippling ideological constraints of Political Correctness. We see this, for example, in the pathetic standards of many senior police officers who, after all, are ultimately commanders and leaders of men. The damage is now well rooted in the public psyche and is fast being consolidated through legislation such as that to increase state involvement in the family at the expense of parental authority, or to eliminate independence of thought and judgement. What these revolutionary thinkers are careful not to point out is that there is no such thing as a truly egalitarian society. In other words, one ruling caste or group can only be removed, replaced or superceded to be replaced by another.

Perhaps with a guilty whiff of déjà vu, Sampson, writing in The Independent on 11th September, 2004, questioned the progressive liquidation of an elite ruling class, under the heading "We've abandoned the tradition of a ruling elite. But is it to Britain's benefit?" With astonishing inaccuracy Sampson wrote that Sir Winston Churchill was a son of the Duke of Marlborough, whereas he was the son of Lord Randolph Churchill. Sampson nevertheless identified the rise of the Bush, Gore and Kerry dynasties in the United States. This he contrasted with the decline in the United Kingdom of an hereditary, historical ruling class with its depth, coherence and long tradition of public service, and its replacement by a discordant, disjointed species of semi-competent and inexperienced political opportunists [Has Sampson been reading On Target? - Ed.]. What we do have under the overtly corrupt regime of Fabian International Socialists headed by Prime Minister Tony Blair is a close comparison with the Nomenklatura of the Soviet Union. Of personal aggrandisement, and privilege in a way denied the Proletariat - the electorate - save for the wealthiest. No months on hospital waiting lists for treatment. No trudging from dentist to dentist in the hope of being registered for National Health Service treatment, for the leading politicians of "New" Labour. And, as the costs of house purchase soar to crisis levels and the provision of housing for the lowest paid falls behind the demand; an accumulation of expensive properties, just as the Soviet Nomenklatura had their dachas.

How we interpret or choose to see the continuity of Marxist Revolution - the "H.I.V. virus" in the political bloodstream, party-political cynicism and expediency, the solidarity of the International Socialist Brotherhood or the paramountcy of financial and commercial interests, these interrelationships and convolutions may be seen through the window of English cricket tours to Southern Africa. In 1968 the M.C.C. cricket tour to Apartheid South Africa was called off because the coloured player Basil d'Olivera could not be included in the party. This was shortly before the period of sanctions in which Western banks and other businesses were to be forced to pull out of South Africa. In 1984 the Communist-controlled African National Congress (A.N.C.), formalised its resistance in the Armed Struggle. Unspeakable atrocities were committed mainly against Black South Africans who opposed the campaign - remember the "burning neck-lace"?. Zulu leader Dr Buthelezi, opted for peaceful opposition to Apartheid rule, as a consequence of which some 14,000 of his own people were slaughtered. In 1987 Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was able to condemn the A.N.C. as terrorists (The Guardian, 19th October, 1987). At about this time Consolidated Gold Fields donated £75,000 to the Conservative Party. By 1990, condemnation of the A.N.C. had ceased and evidence of A.N.C.-I.R.A. co-operation was being officially denied despite documentary evidence. In Rhodesia in the 1970s, Marxist Robert Mugabe became leader of the Zimbabwe African National Union party (Z.A.N.U.), the military wing of which, the Zimbabwe National Liberation Army (Z.A.N.L.A.), along with the infamous 5th Brigade, carried out a genocidal guerrilla campaign, inflicting atrocities on Black and White Rhodesians alike. As President of Zimbabwe, Mugabe has initiated a violent campaign against his political opponents, and sent his "home guard" to dispossess White Zimbabwean farmers of their land, murdering a number of farmers, their families and Black Zimbabwean farm workers in the process. In true Marxist fashion, sequestrated property has been handed on to Mugabe's family and political allies. The Marxist President of South Africa, Thabo Mbeki, has consistently refused to criticise his fellow Marxist, Mugabe, and has frequently supported him. Zimbabwe is reported to be an important trading partner of the United Kingdom. Currently the M.C.C. touring team has been increasingly isolated not only by its own representatives, but by the International Socialist Government of Prime Minister Blair, over doubts about the justification to play in Zimbabwe. No trade sanctions, no official cancellation, and certainly no threat of invasion by an Anglo-American Military Coalition, whether or not under a contrived under a United Nations banner. .We must draw our own conclusions on the extent to which International Socialist "solidarity" - our "virus" - has played a part, instinctively or otherwise. Let us hope that we get it right!

The Conditioning Process Continues - How To Destroy A Nation

"Race", ritually defined by the colour of the skin, is one major factor that we can consider here. If we accept the Marxist, Cultural Communist origins of Political Correctness, the process of employing legislation and bodies such as the Race Relations and Equal Opportunities Commissions progressively to constrain freedom of expression and discussion, and traditional values, this must be taken extremely seriously. We must understand that "Race", regardless of any claimed past colonial oppression or injustice, is employed as a political, ideological instrument. The "correct position" in the manner of Marxism-Leninism is that no racial differences are permitted; a deterrent from which politicians and academics of all shades have been conditioned to run scared. Valid scientific evidence or opinion to the contrary is suppressed and those responsible are denounced(18) In the case of the Race factor as a path to multiculturalism, it is unfortunate that colour per se is the customary demarcation. It is unlikely that a disproportionate percentage of Germanic, Gallic or Latin immigrants would be acceptable or settle comfortably into an Anglo-Saxon-Celtic environment any more than we would in theirs. In the United States the Negro "question" devolves from the unique history of the slave trade and was made a specific target for Communist exploitation(19). The United States, the great "melting pot", and a far larger land mass than Europe as a whole, evolved constitutionally as it absorbed waves of immigrants, with only two currently dominant languages. Europe already exists as a myriad of historic languages, traditions and cultures. Except to satisfy Internationalist Socialist objectives, and given a history of British and European imperial conquest and varying degrees of economic exploitation, there has arguably been no cause to accept mass immigration from Third World countries or elsewhere in Europe. Economically this is an effect; the logical and humanitarian approach to which is to remove the cause - economic exploitation which continues today under the "new" colonisation of the global economic model, but this runs counter to the interests of the Global Power Brokers of International Finance-Capitalism abetted by the political subservience and acquiescence of governments.

It is just and proper that immigrant people legitimately present in this country should be totally assimilated into the parent British society without discrimination or prejudice, to enrich the British culture but not to dominate it or fundamentally change it. The same may be argued conversely in the case of indigenous people in former colonies, but the complex permutations are such that recognition is far easier than implementation. The same general principle applies in Western societies to the rights of Homosexuals and Feminists, both of which, like Race, have been, and continue to be, employed specifically as mechanisms of the Revolution to destabilise and destroy the Existing Order. Tentative attempts to ensure assimilation of greater numbers of immigrants seem to have been dismissed or foundered on a long record of official ineptitude, impotence and a lack of resolve in a situation that has already become almost imbedded. It is utterly unacceptable that numbers at any time should be such that immigrants have been left to create their own de facto ghettos and take control of large areas of urban Britain. It is also known despite persistent ministerial prevarication that resources are insufficient to exercise proper controls over immigration and asylum at the point of entry, as for instance is the case for the inspection of imported foreign meat. On 23rd June, 2004, The Daily Telegraph reported: "Asylum staff 'not up to the job' after ethnic quota drive":

The Home Office has been forced to reinstate minimum academic standards for asylum case workers after they were dropped to attract more ethnic minority applicants. (Emphasis added).

This is another angle and excellent example of the consequences for the public - and the private - sectors when attempts are made to impose any form of "quota system", practised as "Affirmative Action" in South Africa and the United States. It also confirms the total absence of inspirational, strategic political leadership or initiative in this field over many years, as opposed to short-term tactical and politically motivated expedients. No better instance of this is the manner in which the present Conservative Party "leadership" continues to grub around hopefully for the "ethnic vote". The Morning Star has reported that the Campaign for Racial Equality is investigating a claim that a MacDonalds' restaurant in Manchester has infringed workers' "Rights" and European employment law by requiring employees to communicate in English. This is another manifestation of Politically Correct Socialist bureaucracy. Any one who has entered a shop in Wales, for example, to find conversation changing immediately to Welsh, will appreciate this tactic and the implications for any management. Resentment, especially with British manufacturing industry in decline and jobs being outsourced to Third World countries, will inevitably find an outlet in large bodies where it is harder to suppress, such as sports crowds and within the ranks of the Police and the Armed Forces. On 31st October, 2004, The Independent on Sunday reported a complaint from MG-Rover that the Police are using foreign cars with the byline that "Political Correctness is stopping one authority from buying British" and this extract:

One police authority, when asked why it did not buy Rover cars, explained that buying "anything British, including British cars, was an overtly nationalist statement and could be considered offensive by vulnerable, deprived and ethnic minority groups in our society"(Emphasis added).

This scandalous expression of betrayal by a body that purports to take an oath of loyalty to Queen and Country is hard to imagine in the context of any other Western country. Writing in The Sun on 16th October, 2004, the motoring journalist Jeremy Clarkson, took the problem further: We may read into this extract the consequences for the rank and file of the craven capitulation of senior police officers to the mores of Political Correctness and the relentless questioning by Rights and Race groups of Police handling of any contact with so-called ethnic minorities. That there may be a problem in this sensitive area of Law and Order is one example of the Police being faced with the effects of economic and social problems without any obvious, effective or equitable Government initiative to tackle the root causes in either the host or the immigrant society.

Thanks to all our politicians and everybody on Channel Four News, it's now generally accepted that multi-racialism is a good thing for Britain. Really? Multi-racialism has brought us the current spate of drive-by shootings. It's multi-racialism that this week alone has seen a 14-year-old girl killed and a toddler hospitalised with gunshot wounds because her dad supposedly "dissed" someone in a bar. Telling Jamaican yardies that we welcome their culture, in all its forms, is as daft as telling the French they can come here and drive on the right.

In The Macpherson Report: 'Anti-racist' Hysteria and the Sovietisation of the United Kingdom Dr Frank Ellis, Lecturer in Russian at the University of Leeds, analyses the Report of the Inquiry by Sir William Macpherson of Cluny, a retired judge, into the tragic death of Black teenager Stephen Lawrence in Eltham, South East London, in 1993(20). That Dr Ellis and Professor Antony Flew, who wrote the preface to Dr Ellis' booklet, should, like the analysis itself, be regarded as associated with a "Right" Wing position, even to the Publisher, is characteristic of any distortion - diversion from what the analysis is all about. A second observation is that Macpherson, a man of impeccable background; Scots Guards officer, Commanding Officer of 21st Regiment Special Air Service Regiment (T.A.), and Member of the Queen's Bodyguard for Scotland, should have compiled such a document, defies belief. (Dr Ellis himself was a regular army officer who served in the Parachute Regiment and 22nd Special Air Service Regiment). Macpherson's Report reveals that the forces of Law and Order are a major focus of the Ideological Struggle of the Revolution. Dr Ellis shows that Macpherson based his investigation on the assumption that the death was, ipso facto, racially motivated and that, ipso facto, regardless of the overall competence of the investigation all actions by the investigating officers and their statements at the Inquiry were racially prejudiced. Moreover that, without any supporting evidence, this extended, ipso facto, into the body of the Metropolitan Police Service (M.P.S.). To understand Marxist-Leninist Doctrine is to understand how manipulation of the "Race" factor in this case accorded precisely with the "correct position".

Subsequent actions exposed the craven standard at the command level of the M.P.S. in particular and the Police Service as a whole. Rejection of the military pattern of any officer "class" in favour of an egalitarian "canteen mentality" policy, has apparently taken its toll as we see in subservience to Race-oriented legislation by the Police hierarchy; to Equal Opportunities policies, adoption of Politically Correct terminology, and homosexuality. We read the cringing confession of Institutional Racism - a term contrived by the Macpherson Report - personally and on behalf of the M.P.S. by Deputy Assistant Commissioner J.G.D. Grieve in a full-page feature in The Daily Telegraph with acute embarrassment bordering on disbelief. The consequences of this widespread professional cowardice have been dire. We have already had the Chief Constable of Cheshire, Peter Fahy, publicly remonstrating with the Bishop of Chester for a perfectly valid observation on homosexuality, following a threat of Police action. In September, 2004, the Daily Mail reported that the Chief Constable for North Wales, Richard Brunstrom, has reduced police coverage in vandal-ridden Penmaenmawr from 4 officers to one, and handed the newly renovated police station over to the North Wales Race Equality Network. On 23rd September, 2004, the Daily Mail reported the case of Police Constable Tariq Mahmood who, while uninsured, drove off after injuring two women and a child in a collision, resprayed his car to change the colour and persuaded members of his family to cover for him. On sick leave following a previous accident and claiming family problems at a disciplinary investigation, Mahmood was reported to have threatened to sue the Police for racial discrimination if he was dismissed the Force. He was fined £425 and posted, still in the Police Service, to another job. On 27th October, 2004, the Shropshire Star revealed that 140 police recruits had been dismissed as unsuitable after failing a "new role-playing test" geared to race, gender and sexual orientation, according to the Minister for Crime Reduction, Policing and Community Safety, Hazel Blears, a 48-year-old former career solicitor. The axiom that springs to mind is that there are no bad men, only bad officers. When one contemplates what Dr Ellis sees as the process of Sovietization through coercive social engineering, one may readily understand why International Socialist ideologues have long been keen to get their hands in the same way on that other uni-formed institution, the Armed Forces.

DIVERSION, THE "ATTACK" ON THE WEST AND 9/11

Paving The Way - From A National To An International Scenario

We have considered only one, key, point of attack in what we believe remains a World Revolution. Popular perceptions, if they occur at all, are deceived by the contagious, concealed "virus" of Marxism-Leninism and gradualism; the slow but relentless pace of the Fabian International Socialist "tortoise" on both sides of the Atlantic(21). The attack on the Existing Order, socially, morally and culturally, may be identified, given the commercialised, promotional and selective nature of Media coverage, by systematic monitoring; European bureaucracy now dictates that "girl" only in flat-sharing advertisements must be replaced by "person" in the interests of gender equality (Daily Mail, 22nd September, 2004); legislation is to be passed to remove the rights of hoteliers to refuse homosexual couples (Daily Mail, 17th July, 2004); the new Miss Marple detective series is to incorporate a lesbian theme (Daily Mail, 8th November, 2004); the National Director of Christian Voice, a respected organisation based on Christian moral values, whose Patron is The Lord Ashbourne, is expected to be interviewed by the Police for denouncing homosexual legislation and promotion, and challenging Chief Constables collectively on their acceptance of homosexual policies; St Mary Magdalene Church of England School, in London, has been instructed to delete "Saint" from its title "in case this offends other religious groups" (The Daily Telegraph, 5th November, 2004); under Equal Opportunities legislation, satanic worship is to be permitted in the Royal Navy (Daily Mail, 26th October, 2004); as a consequence of media pornography, active promotion of liberal values, permissive sex education in schools and the introduction of legislation to undermine the family, we have the highest rates of teenage pregnancy and Sexually Transmitted Disease (S.T.D.), in Europe; we have headlines such as "Welcome to Sex-on-Sea" (The Sunday Telegraph, 1st August, 2004), and "Racecourse on Web list for outdoor sex sessions" ("dogging", the practice of intercourse in public, Shropshire Star, 21st September, 2004). If we think the situation is much different in the United States, we have numerous reports of a general ban on Christian symbolism; in Philadelphia eleven evangelical Christians were gaoled and charged with "hate crimes" for peacefully observing a "gay pride" parade (National Prayer Network, 10th October, 2004), and clothing manufacturer Abercrombie & Fitch is to pay $40,000,000 to Black, Hispanic and Asian employees for alleged racial discrimination and cultivating "a virtually all-white image in its catalogues" (Associated Press, 16th November, 2004).

If we allow for a serious challenge from the Liberal-Democratic Party, the Conservative Party still remains a potential electoral counter to the Fabian International Socialism of "New" Labour and the Marxist-Leninist "virus" running through the Establishment Elite. So far the Conservative leadership, itself infiltrated by liberal philosophies, appears completely to have lost the plot and recognition of the deepening concerns of a vast swathe of "Middle England". We are reminded of the old French film comedy "Jour de Fête". In this an old man is depicted bending with a mallet as he tries to drive in a tent peg. Each time he swings, the mallet comes down on either side of his target. When he looks up, he is cross-eyed. This analogy takes us to the much wider, global stage, and lamentable failure, even at the highest levels, to understand and recognise the threat. There will be those who regard our position on Marx, Marxism-Leninism and the continuity of the World Revolution - the virus - with reservations and even cynicism amounting to dismissal. The records of United States Congressional investigations in the 1950s and 1960s, and original research in the United Kingdom available to us, suggest that not only has the subject been well understood in the past, but also that genuine knowledge of Marxist-Leninist philosophy and its interpretation and application have been deliberately withheld from the academic, the military, the intelligence services and certainly the public domain. Professor Paul Wilkinson of St Andrew's University is regarded as an expert on Terrorism. Let us therefore consider an extract from his work, The Fight Against Terrorism(22):

The Soviet Government should be urged to use its considerable influence on its clients: Syria, a very important client in the Middle east, and Libya, less important but still dependent on the Soviet Union for supplies of weapons and military expertise. That certainly would be some evidence that the Soviets meant what they said in their frequent statements, preceding the recent summit for example, that they wanted to do something to help in the battle against international terrorism. The litmus test of Soviet sincerity in this regard is whether it will use its very real leverage over these regimes to force them to abandon the strategy of state sponsored terrorism. But, sadly, the West is hardly in a position to condemn the Soviet Union's latest cynical courtship of the Iranian regime when Western arms dealers and other commercial interests are busy integrating themselves with Teheran (Emphasis added).

For the student of Marxism-Leninism, and from a knowledge of Soviet Politico-Military Doctrine, there are serious misconceptions here. To begin with, Communists always mean what they say. The real problem is reluctance in the West to accept this, and the total failure to interpret it in Marxist-Leninist terms . In the same way there is no question of "wanting to do something to help", or of "leverage over these regimes . . . " in the way inferred. A Marxist-Leninist will act solely in accordance with the correct Marxist-Leninist position, and in no other way.. We may be certain that the mind of Russian President Vladimir Putin, a trained Marxist and former K.G.B. Colonel, works in this way. As the global scenario continues to evolve, it is a fair bet that he will run rings round not only Western intelligence services, but around their political leaders, too.

Overcoming Dangerous Misconceptions Of Soviet Policy And Strategy

Extract From A Discussion Paper, October, 1989

We now come to an extract taken from a Paper originally tabled for a conference in 1989. The British Conservative Party was still in office, and the Soviet Communist system was entering its death throes. The paper states that economic, military and financial support had been provided by the West; as it points out, in effect conniving in our own destruction. In fact support had been provided almost without a break since the 1920s, even to the supply of complete factories. A series of British Government Command Papers between the early 1950s and the mid-1970s recorded in detail agreements on collaboration in the industrial, technological, scientific, industrial, cultural, communication and education fields. The following paragraphs should be read with care, especially the words and sentences highlighted. This extract remains valid to this day. It enables us to understand the situation we have been postulating and the arcane convolutions of East-West relationships. With the evolving Power of Capitalism on a global scale and the inherent Marxist-Leninist pedigree of the Russian Government, we appear to be involved in a cat-and-mouse game of ultimate control based on natural resources and the global economy.

The inherent weakness of Marxism lies in its economic structure and the reason for this is historic. Marx himself was not an economist but a philosopher. . . . A perfect understanding of this potentially fatal economic weakness prompted Lenin and all subsequent Communist leaders down to the present times of Glasnost and Perestroika to recognise the vital need to maintain the closest of relations with capitalist circles of the bourgeois West if Communism is eventually to triumph. . . . The role of the Capitalist West is therefore to provide the host body on which the parasitic growth of Communism can thrive before the inevitable and final destruction of the host [capitalist] body itself . But in this dependence of Communism on Capitalism lies its mortal danger and the seed of the final destruction of Communism itself. For it follows logically that from an understanding of the workings of Communism the key can be found to the weapons that will ultimately destroy it [Communism]. And with this a methodology then can be evolved to identify, counter and finally overthrow this worldwide politico-military conspiracy mounted by Marxist dictatorships and movements, aimed at the liquidation of an entire international class and particularly directed at the European heartlands. This approach is in stark contrast to the reported views of some Conservative ministers that exposure of the public to the realities of Soviet aims, however potentially traumatic, is politically unacceptable as the Conservative Party and hence the British Government is without any practical solution. It is this attitude which has resulted in the provision of actual economic, military and financial support to Marxist regimes dedicated to the destruction of governments such as our own. . . .

Basically Marxism has taken the Clausewitzian position that War is the extension of politics by other, violent means. General Carl von Clausewitz, the great 19th Century military thinker(23)) However, the concept has been refined to relate particularly to the politics of the Class War. In this context, strange as it may appear to non-Marxist minds, the aim has always been and must always be, the liquidation of an international class - the capitalist and imperialist bourgeoisie. Because of the class-social nature of this aim Marxism mounts a total offensive, comprising every field of human activity, whether religious, philosophic, social, political, economic, scientific or military. It follows that the means of counter must also be total. However, Communist dictatorships and Western type democracies have fundamentally different perceptions of international and inter-class conflict, and Western governments in failing to grasp this continue to rely on the false assumption that the policy and strategy of the C.P.S.U. (Communist Party of the Soviet Union), is an approximate mirror image of their own. As a consequence they not only find it extremely difficult to assess and respond to conflict orientated on a class basis, but even more difficult to actually recognise it.

The Theory And Practice Of Diversion

We have frequently referred to Diversion - "Diversiya" - in On Target. A brief study of Diversion follows logically from the extract from the Discussion Paper. It merits the same careful reading and should draw us even closer to the central theme of these pages. Generally, diversionary tactics may be employed at will in many contexts other than in battle, for example on the sports field. However, Diversion was brought to a high standard of development as an important component of Soviet Military Doctrine, with considerable resources devoted to it(24). We should also note the distinction drawn between Terrorism, defined here as a major weapon of Diversion, and the terms "Terrorist" and "Terrorism"as subsumed by the Western Powers to mean the character and methods associated with those who resist or oppose them, when the real translation is that of "Freedom Fighter", "Resistance Fighter" or "Guerrilla" as in Iraq today or behind enemy lines during the 1939-45 War.

The Theory and practice of Diversion are as old as organised conflict itself, but the massive social and economic changes of the 19th and 20th centuries making war a matter of mass armies involving entire populations, widespread world industrialisation, the inception and development of Communist ideology and power and other factors, have increased the scope of diversionary operations enormously. The basic aim of Diversion is the disorientation of the enemy - the deflection of his attention away from the main threat. To this purpose Diversion is generally directed against the physical and psychological "rear" of enemy armies and their supporting peoples. Diversion is not an end in itself, but an auxiliary operation, usually mounted away from the main point of conflict, as a means to an end which is the final overthrow of the enemy. In this context tendencies to represent Terrorism, which is a major weapon of Diversion, as the primary international threat to be overcome are a dangerous misconception. Whether adopted for reasons of political expediency or otherwise, when taken as a basis for action the effect is diversionary, drawing attention away from the main threat. They also expose the victim to another aspect of Diversion - that of Provocation in which he is provoked to act against his own interests. . . . Modern conditions provide the widest spectrum of activity for the conduct of diversionary operations in the politico-military, industrial, social and related fields. To accomplish such operations Diversion makes use, inter alia, of Propaganda, Agitation, Provocation, the Sabotage, Neutralisation and Destruction of military, industrial infrastructure and similar establishments and plant, Arson and creation of Explosions, the disruption and complete severance of State and Armed Forces Command and Control, . . . Liquidation of Government and Military leaders, biological attack and poisoning, the application of Influence and Pressure on the moral-psychological state of the enemy and the destruction of the ethos of the people.

The Path To The Aerial Suicide Attack On The United States

The Twin Towers Of The World Trade Centre in New York were destroyed in a suicide attack using hi-jacked civilian passenger aircraft, on 11th September, 2001, and a third aircraft was said to have been crashed into the Pentagon on the same date. These events and the background to them were covered in On Target(25). The 19 hi-jackers were all Moslems, mostly originating from Saudi Arabia, who were known to have connections in Germany and to have trained openly to fly in the United States. Rescue activity surrounding such an unprecedented disaster was predictable enough. It was assumed, perhaps understandably to a degree, that there was an automatic link with Islam, in particular to Osama bin Laden, and his al Qa'eda organisation that had originally been sponsored by the C.I.A. in Afghanistan. We were struck at the time by a leading article the following day in The Daily Telegraph by Daniel Johnson; "War to the death between America and Islamic terrorists". This would have been filed only a few hours after the disaster, when no definitive evidence could have been available. The newspaper at that time was owned by Conrad Black whose directors included leading neoconservative hawk, Israeli-linked Richard Perle and Major General Shlomo Gazit, a former Director General of Israeli Military Intelligence. The United States, and the United Kingdom, on the pretext that theTaliban were refusing to hand over Osama bin Laden, duly invaded Afghanistan on 7th October, 2001. The Media began to talk up war against Iraq, already on the cards in the White House for some two years, with spurious claims about the possession of biological weapons such as Anthrax. In an interview in The Sunday Telegraph, another Israel-linked neoconservative Paul Wolfowitz, United States Deputy Secretary of Defense, talked up the threat of terrorist attacks against the United Kingdom. Claims were made in the press that huge dealings in shares had taken place on the Stock Market immediately prior to the disaster with pressing allegations that these were linked to Islamic terrorists.

In the ensuing months a series of events and questions began to occur, none of which when subjected to formal "investigation" appear to have been satisfactorily answered. Aircraft crews at Andrews Air Base, on 24-hour call for just such an emergency, had been inexplicably stood down immediately prior to the disaster. Little was heard subsequently of the threatened and potentially sensational investigation into the pre-emptive Stock Market dealings or the foreknowledge that seemed to have been available to certain investors. An Anthrax attack in the United States that had promptly been attributed to Terrorists, turned out to be domestic in origin. Reports consistently indicated a massive underground explosion which would have explained the uncanny collapse of the Twin Towers, but this has never been officially tabled or investigated despite concerns expressed by the New York firefighters themselves, and fire engineers. The stricken site was cleared with remarkable speed, such that expert metallurgists have voiced concern that steel from the structures would normally have been retained for analysis. "Abandoned" computer records, documents and military material that implicated al Qa'eda were conveniently discovered during the campaign in Afghanistan, and also in Pakistan. Right up to the election campaign of President George W. Bush, Osama bin Laden has popped up at convenient intervals on the air or in videos to massage the terrorist threat.

Two books, published 23 years apart in America, show how perceptions, and the goalposts influencing those perceptions, have changed. In 1971 Phillip Abbott Luce wrote of his time as a Communist, then as a New Labour activist, in the days of student protest against the Vietnam War and conservative American society with its strategic anti-Communist interests. He referred to the role of Herbert Marcuse, one of the four leading Marxist founders of Cultural Communism at the Institute for Social Research in Frankfurt in the 1920s(26). In 1994 Dr James W. Wardner reflected the changing balance of Power in the United States which was pittng American society against increasingly powerful political and corporate interests that were attaining global dimensions. He cited the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderberg Group, the Federal Reserve and the controlled Media(27). In the Morning Star of 22nd September, 2004, Karl Dallas took the situation a stage further in a review of a new book by Slavoj _i_ek; Iraq: The Borrowed Kettle(28). In this _i_ek suggests that the George W. Bush's invasion of Iraq included the pretext for an attack on the American people themselves. Dallas quotes:

What if the true target of the war on terror is not only a global rearrangement in the Middle East and beyond, but also U.S. society itself, namely, the repression of whatever remains of its emancipatory potential?

An expert on Soviet Communism was of the opinion that the attack had classic signs of a massive diversionary exercise. But it had been taken for granted that it was an Islamic reprisal for United States imperialism in the Middle East. Could the hi-jackers have been duped into carrying out the operation by a third party? In 1941 President Rooseveldt withheld intelligence of an impending Japanese attack that cost the lives of some 2,500 American servicemen at Pearl Harbour. In 1967 the United States condoned an Israeli attack on the U.S.S. Liberty with the loss of 34 lives and another 67 wounded. Subsequent investigations into both cases have been officially suppressed. Maintenance of a terrorist threat has enabled the United States Government to impose repressive security measures. This has facilitated excursions into Afghanistan and the Middle East and brought the United States closer to the key oil producing states. It has revitalised a dollar economy that had been in dire straits, and boosted the Military-Industrial complex. From a Russian or Islamic viewpoint the United States could be drawn on to its own sword by campaigns it cannot sustain in the long term. China, with a population some four times that of the United States is coming rapidly on stream economically and politically and, in Clausewitzian terms, militarily. We should think on these things.

REFERENCES

Note: Prices are shown where available from Bloomfield Books, and represent only a selection relevant to the theme of this edition of On Target. A wide range of reading may be found in the Stock Price List (S.P.L.), which may be obtained post free on request from the address on the last page. Out of print, or older works, may be obtained through the Book Search Service, or the Second-Hand Book Service, both of which are operated by Mr. T.G. Turner, for which details are available as for the S.P.L.

(1) On Target, Vol. 32, Nos 7 - 11, 5th & 19th October and 2nd, 16th & 30th Novem-ber, 2002. Why A Major War Is Needed - The Global Economy And Those Who Control It.
(2) On Target, Vol. 34, Nos. 5 & 6, 4th & 18th September, 2004.
(3) Letter from Andrew Hunter, M.P., to the late Commander Michael Blake, R.N., dated 13th July, 1993.
(4) Martin, Rose L. Fabian Freeway - High Road To Socialism In The U.S.A. 1884-1966. Western Islands, 1966.
(5) Clark, Alan. The Tories - Conservatives And The Nation State 1922 - 1997. Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1998.
(6) Blair, Tony. The Third Way - New Politics for the New Century. Fabian Pamphlet 588. The Fabian Society, 1998.
(7) On Target, Vol. 29, Nos. 6 & 7, 11th & 25th September and Nos. 8 & 9, 9th & 23rd October, 1999. Conspiracy, Revolution And Moral Decay.
(8) On Target, Vol. 33, Nos. 3 & 4, 9th & 23rd August, 2003. Political Correctness (P.C.) Weapon Of Mass Mental And Social Destruction.
(9) Political Correctness and the Ideological Struggle: From Lenin and Mao to Marcuse and Foucault. Dr Frank Ellis. The Journal of Social, Political and Economic Studies, Vol. 27, No. 4, Winter 2002.
(10) On Target, Vol. 34, Nos. 5 & 6. Op. cit.
(11) Ramsay, Robin. Prawn Cocktail Party - The Hidden Power Behind New Labour. VISION Paperbacks, 1998. £11.95.
(12) Monbiot, George. Captive State - The Corporate Takeover Of Britain. Mac-millan, 2000. H/B £15.95.
(13) Quigley, Carroll. The Anglo-American Establishment - From Rhodes to Cliveden. Books in Focus Inc., 1981. P/B reprint, £22.95.
(14) Henderson, David. The M.A.I. Affair - A Story and its Lessons. The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1999.

(15) On Target, Vol. 34, Nos. 5 & 6. Op. cit.
(16) Ibid.
(17) Chiang Kai-shek, Madame. Conversations With Mikhail Borodin. Privately published, c1978.
(18) On Target, Vol. 33, Nos. 18 &19, 6th & 20th March, 2004.
(19) Pepper, John. American Negro Problems. Workers Library Publishers, Inc., 1928.
(20) Ellis, Dr Frank. The Macpherson Report: 'Anti-racist' Hysteria and the Sovietisation of the United Kingdom. Right Now Press Ltd., 2001.
(21) Martin, Rose L. Op. cit.
(22) Wilkinson, Paul. The Fight Against Terrorism: The Mackenzie Institute for the Study of Terrorism, 1989.
(23) Clausewitz, General Carl von. On War, translated by Colonel J.J. Graham. In three volumes. Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., Ltd., 1908.
(24) The Diversionary Service, c1941. Believed to have been translated from the original Russian or Latvian in the United States.
(25) On Target, Vol.31, Nos. 7 - 13, 6th & 20th October, 3rd & 17th November and 1st, 15th & 29th December, 2001.
(26) Luce, Phillip Abbott. The New Left Today: America's Trojan Horse. The Capitol Hill Press, 1971.
(27) Wardner, Dr James W. The Planned Destruction Of America. Longwood Communications, 1994. £14.95.
(28) _i_ek, Slavoj. Iraq: The Borrowed Kettle. Verso, 2004.