CONTROL AND NATURE OF THE COMING WORLD ORDER
Published in 2 Parts - Part 2
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
Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up, because I was
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
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
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
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
DIVERSION, THE "ATTACK" ON THE
WEST AND 9/11
Paving The Way - From A National To An International
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.
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.
(17) Chiang Kai-shek, Madame. Conversations With Mikhail Borodin. Privately
(18) On Target, Vol. 33, Nos. 18 &19, 6th & 20th March, 2004.
(19) Pepper, John. American Negro Problems. Workers Library Publishers,
(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.,
(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.