Neo-Conservatism

Amerikan Beauty III: Washington Prostitution and Gannon-Gate Values

“We’re here on behalf of our people and that means that we conduct ourselves with the utmost dignity and probity. And obviously what’s been reported doesn’t match up with those standards,”

– President Barack Obama commenting on secret service Prostitution scandal


The above quote should have those who have been paying attention to the nature of US government antics over the past decade rolling around the floor with tragi-comedy laughter.  It is not the fact that “dignity” and “probity” is patently absent from 99.9% of Congress and not something Obama himself is famous for, as any cursory look over his tenure will reveal, but the sordid reality of systematic prostitution at the White House, something the President expects us to conveniently forget.

In 2012, Obama had to calm the waters of media excitement when his Secret Service were found to have been sleeping on the job – or rather sleeping with those on the job – ahead of a visit to Colombia.  Obama was apparently “angry” and keen for an internal inquiry to get underway, a “probe” he expected “to be “thorough” and “rigorous”.

We can only imagine he or his press secretary was having a little titter at what he presumably thought was a storm in a jacuzzi …

barack-obama-arrogance© unknown

Smell that? There’s something in the air … and its not “Hope”.

After several agents lost their jobs over the scandal, obviously due to damage limitation rather than any reaction to what was business as usual, it is even more pathetic that our feckless media pretended to be wide-eyed with shock when they reported eighteen months later that the Obama administration was less than candid about they did or didn’t know.

Some things never change – like the ponerisation of successive US administrations. To find out where democracy was really decomposing we have to go back a little ways to the building blocks of our current malaise dutifully laid by the Bush-Cheney brand of psychopathy.

The Neo-Conservative Bush Administration appeared to willingly choose the spoils of decadence and degradation as a natural pathway. High level paedophilia and prostitution are the mainstays of government, as the Jeff Gannon scandal briefly revealed. While this was another sex scandal which gradually died away it was not peculiar to the Bush Reich, rather it indicated business as usual, though certainly religious authoritarians seemed to be particularly drawn to such activities. The only difference between the cartel capitalism of the Neo-Conservatives and other political expressions of the State is that they employed a more “Leninist” claim to the throne where authority manifests as brutish thuggery; a celebration of power and contempt for the public. Let’s not kid ourselves that more “Fabian” or gradualist claims favoured by other factions of the Establishment are not  prone to the same psychopathology, though they may be far more circumspect in their predatory behaviour.

I.Lewis “Scooter” Libby Jr., former Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, was indicted on criminal felony charges by a grand jury over the leaking of information regarding CIA agent Valerie Plame in October 2005. He published a novel called The Apprentice some years before his unceremonious departure, which contained graphic scenes of bestiality, paedophilia, rape and incest. [1] While this was distasteful coming from a high-level member of the Neo-Con government, perhaps the inspiration for these themes may have come directly from the White House?

(Top) Jeff Gannon (James D. Guckert) as gay prostitution website proprietor (bottom) at a White House press briefing

The dark history of the Bush family and its administration was shunted under the spotlight in 2004 care of Jeff Gannon aka: James Guckert / Gosch, a man at the centre of a scandal and a homosexual prostitution ring operating deep in the heart of the government, involving top military brass and senior White House officials – even Daddy Bush. The right-wing journalist was found to have gained access to the White House press pool with few credentials and a fake name. This led to further investigations as to how exactly Mr. Gannon was able to obtain such freedoms and favours which included numerous “sleep-overs” even when press conferences or briefings were not scheduled. Using the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Rep. Louise Slaughter and Rep. John Conyers were able to view the Secret Service logs of Jeff Gannon’s White House entries and exits. In fact, over a two year period, Gannon visited the White House 196 times – twice weekly.

The gay rights activism website AMERICAblog and other bloggers began to do some research on Gannon’s background and discovered that “Gannon” was actually “James .D. Guckert,” a man who owned a variety of gay-sex sites all with a military theme, including such notables as HotMilitaryStud.com, MilitaryEscorts.com and M4M.com. Here you could find Guckert offering his sexual services in no uncertain terms.

One wonders how long officials at the White House had been taking up these offers?

Quite a while, it seems. Which means Gannon was likely a periphery element in the everyday corruption of the US government and likely milked the attention for all its worth. Despite extensive research, he link to any deeper significance became tenuous at best.

While writing under the pseudonym “Jeff Gannon,” James Guckert was Washington bureau chief for Talon News, a conservative online news outlet associated with another Web site, GOPUSA. During press conferences much of the White House press corps was already mystified by Gucket’s questioning which was overly friendly (as well as factually inaccurate) they were equally puzzled as to why Guckert would turn up when there was the likelihood of aggressive questioning on “sensitive” matters. Moreover, much of his subsequent questioning would show an extreme right-wing and often anti-gay agenda. Talon News is effectively a tool for Neo-Conservatism supported by Gucket’s qualifications credentials which consisted of little more than a $50 training course at the Leadership Broadcast School of Journalism. Suddenly, an online, gay prostitute listing himself on the Internet as a homosexual escort and personal trainer, charging $200 per hour for his “discreet” services, was plugging questions to Bush at more than four press conferences. As AmericaBlog mentioned:

“… It’s looking increasingly like they made a decision to allow a hooker to ask the President of the United States questions. They made a decision to give a man with an alias and no journalistic experience access to the West Wing of the White House on a “daily basis.” […] What kind of leadership would let prostitutes roam the halls of the West Wing? What kind of war-time leadership can’t find the same information that took bloggers only days to find? None of this is by accident.”

The blog goes on to highlight the breath-taking hypocrisy that was so much a part of the Bush-Cheney government, not least a standard theme in the continuity of emerging pathocracies:

“This is the same White House that ran for office on a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. While they are surrounded by gay hookers? While they use a gay hooker to write articles for their gay hating political base? While they use a gay hooker to destroy a political enemy? Not to mention the hypocrisy of a ‘reporter’ who chooses to publish article after article defending the ant-gay religious-right point of view on gay civil rights issue.” [2]

As part and parcel Establishment occult preoccupations, the Bush dynasty had been rumoured to indulge in homosexual sex parties and sado-masochistic paedophilia for generations, though evidence of these accusations remains circumstantial in the public realm. The exclamations of apparent shock and horror from Democrats and Republicans alike have merely shown either how much it is a part of their lives or how painfully naive Congressmen really are. Guckert has since been tied to George W. Bush, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, Texas GOP entrepreneur Bobby Eberle and political Svengali Karl Rove. We see the association highlighted in pink when we realise that Eberle owns Talon News and GOPUSA, the latter of which Rove uncharacteristically bestowed an interview. A student of Machiavelli and “dirty tricks,” Rove’s dominance of Neo-Con politics (though recently clipped by the Valerie Plame affair) cannot be underestimated.

Statement

President George W. Bush, Laura Bush and Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove on the South Lawn August 13, 2007, shortly after announcing his resignation.Photo: Joyce N. Boghosian | wikipedia

On June 30th 1989, The Washington Post ran a report detailing the existence of a homosexual prostitution ring which was under investigation by federal and district authorities. Among its clients were: “…key officials of the Reagan and Bush administrations, military officers, congressional aides and US and foreign businessmen with close social ties to Washington’s political Elite…One of the ring’s high-profile clients was so well-connected, in fact, that he could arrange a middle-of-the-night tour of the White House for his friends on Sunday, July 3, of last year. Among the six persons on the extraordinary 1 a.m. tour were two male prostitutes.” [3]  True to form, the “investigation” never got off the ground.

The office of US Attorney General Jay B. Stephens, former deputy White House counsel to President Reagan who was coordinating federal aspects of the inquiry, refused to discuss the investigation or grand jury actions. He then promptly decided not to cooperate with The Times newspaper request to cover the story. The fact that there was a conflict of interest regarding his position on the case was due to several of his former White House colleagues listed as clients of the homosexual prostitution ring, according to their credit card records. Stephens said the investigation into the alleged prostitution ring was “concluded” and that the indictment focused on those who had allegedly set up the ring rather than on clients who reportedly patronized it – which is revealing in itself.

WTpage1The Washington Times Exclusive 1989

When he was asked about earlier reports that some of those clients included high-level officials in the Reagan and Bush administrations, Stephens said the investigation had not revealed “additional conduct which suggests criminal conduct on behalf of other people.” Or, reading between the lines – “We didn’t go there.” [4] In the same year, a Henry W. Vinson, 29, of Williamson, W.Va., a coal miner’s son, accused of setting up the gay escort service, was arraigned in U.S. District Court “after – (allegedly and conveniently) – turning himself in to Secret Service agents.”

Among several low-level government employees at the centre of the scandal was Craig Spence, wealthy Republican lobbyist known for his lavish cocktail power-parties. According to one author, Spence’s entire mansion was covered with two way mirrors, hidden microphones and cameras. Spence “ ‘… hinted the tours were arranged by ‘top level’ persons, including Donald Gregg, National Security Advisor to Vice President Bush…’ Spence, according to friends, was also carrying out homosexual blackmail operations for the CIA.” [5]

This particular power broker reportedly introduced Ted Koppel the “Nightline” anchor and a 42-year veteran of ABC News, to a 15-year-old boy, whom the newsman later claimed Spence had introduced as his son. As author David McGowan mentioned, “Koppel…had been a close friend for over 20 years and surely knew that Spence did not have a teenage son.” [6] As with all glimpses into the honeycomb networks of child rape, it was not long before the media obediently lost all interest:

The Spence story never really registered on the national media’s radar screen. Despite being a largely Republican scandal, it was completely ignored by such pillars of the purportedly liberal press as the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times. The story soon disappeared entirely and Washington and the media proceeded to pretend as though nothing had ever happened. According to a Washington Times reporter, the paper trail was quickly covered up. Some 20,000 documents pertaining to the case were sealed by court order and the U.S. Attorney’s office issued a gag order on the release of information. [7]

And what do you know? Spence was found dead in his barricaded room at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel, in the autumn of 89.’ Wearing a tuxedo, with a telephone cradled to his ear and a Walkman headset around his neck and no signs of injury were found. Police: “… refused to comment on the cause of death.” But after a swift investigation his death was ruled a suicide. This is especially unconvincing when he had earlier confided in a friend that: “I may be disappearing soon. It will be sudden. It may appear to be a suicide, but it won’t be.” The friend also remarked: “that the CIA might ‘double-cross him,’ and kill him… ‘ and then to make it look like a suicide.’

serveimageAs so many other witness connected to the case, Spence had been subpoenaed by a grand jury but had not yet been called to appear. As one article mentions: “Spence had also reportedly agreed to provide Penthouse magazine with ‘lurid details of Washington’s bisexual wonderland.’ His story, needless to say, was never told.” [8] Similarly, reports were sunk that linked a paedophile-prostitution club right into the heart of Congress and a nearby public elementary school. [9] By now, we can see a formula that is in operation throughout such investigations. Loose ends are taken care of through the tried and tested method of “suiciding” which appears in all of the high profile cases in this series. It seems Spence may have had one too many parties and one too many names in his little black book. After all, it was rumoured that over 200 of Washington’s Elite had used the call boy service. Needless to say, the White House, including President Bush, did not bother to comment, refused to answer questions or discuss the incident.

It is easy to see how the extensive practice of global satellite surveillance and bugging systems come into play to support the activity. A Washington Post report from 1997 reads: “…The FBI is believed to have bugged more than 300 locations, with electronic audio and video surveillance devices used to monitor 10,000 to 15,000 conversations — much of it real-time data that was bounced from satellites to the NSA. The monitoring stations usually were placed near a Secret Service perimeter or Naval Intelligence facilities.” [10] (Now we know the sheer scope of the surveillance society in the 21st Century is almost beyond our wildest imaginations.  Snowden hasn’t even touched the surface).

Regarding the procurement of boys to engage in sexual activities with diplomats, a former Bush economic adviser observed: “‘the sex? That’s done all the time. If a foreign diplomat wants a companion, the State Department provides it. It doesn’t matter if it’s a man or woman. They have a special fund set up for that.” He goes on to say: “Another former NSC official who requested anonymity says other countries also do it. ‘I was offered every sexual favor you can imagine. I turned it down all the time. After a while they left me alone and stopped offering me.’” [11]

With a MSM thoroughly controlled and largely ineffective with regard to investigative reporting, the best course of action for those who know they have been spotted is to remain silent. Since Reagan’s cardboard cut-out presidency, faith in the duplicity of the media from agents and the ignorant alike, they have been able to indulge their perversions and assassinations secure in their perceived omnipotence. It seems that Gannon was representative of a history of soliciting in which the administrations of Bush Sr., Reagan, and Clinton also had regular visits from male prostitutes. Yet, rather than the storm-in-a-tea-cup that is “Gannon-gate” it is the indifference and silence on historical issues of child abuse and corruption that is disheartening. Around the same time that a gay sex ring was in operation within the White House another story surfaced which supported the premise that Bush Sr. was an active paedophile and many other top officials for whom the sexual services of young boys formed an habitual and institutionalised tradition of abuse.

Was it true, that James Guckert is none other than Johnny Gosch, 12-year-old paperboy kidnapped from West Des Moines, 23 years ago? Was a mother’s grief for a lost son merely projected onto Guckert, yet accurate as a metaphor for  the many believed to have been sexually abused, tortured, brainwashed and sold into a very modern form of US slavery?

Which brings us to the Franklin Sex Abuse Scandal.

 


Notes

[1] The New Yorker, November 7 2005: “Libby does not shy from the scatological. The narrative makes generous mention of lice, snot, drunkenness, bad breath, torture, urine, “turds,” armpits, arm hair, neck hair, pubic hair, pus, boils, and blood (regular and menstrual). One passage goes, ‘At length he walked around to the deer’s head and, reaching into his pants, struggled for a moment and then pulled out his penis. He began to piss in the snow just in front of the deer’s nostrils.’ […] “Where his Republican predecessors can seem embarrassingly awkward—the written equivalent of trying to cop a feel while pinning on a corsage—Libby is unabashed: ‘At age ten the madam put the child in a cage with a bear trained to couple with young girls so the girls would be frigid and not fall in love with their patrons. They fed her through the bars and aroused the bear with a stick when it seemed to lose interest.’”
[2] ‘A man called Jeff,’ Americablog.com, Monday, February 14, 2005.
[3] ‘Power Broker Served Drugs, Sex at Parties bugged for Blackmail.’ By Michael Hedges and Jerry Seper, The Washington Times, June 30, 1989.
[4] ‘Sex and the Captial’ By Karlyn Barker, Washington Post, July 24, 1990.
[5] ‘Spence Arrested in N.Y., Released Bizarre Interview is no Night on the Town’ by Jerry Seper and Michael Hedges, Washington Times; August 9, 1989.
[6] p.32; Programmed to Kill: The Politics of Serial Murder By David McGowan, Published by Universe Inc. 2004.
[8] ‘Stirring the White House honey pot’ TBR News.org, February 10, 2005.
9] ‘A little outrage for the children?’ by Wesley Pruden The Washington Times August 25, 1989.
[10] ‘Snooping on Allies Embarrasses U.S.’ By Timothy Maier, Insight Magazine, October 20, 1997.
[11] Ibid.

The Politics of Entrapment V: Terror-Porn Fusion

“… rates of child sexual abuse have declined substantially since the mid-1990s, a time period that corresponds to the spread of CP online. . . . The fact that this trend is revealed in multiple sources tends to undermine arguments that it is because of reduced reporting or changes in investigatory or statistical procedures. . . . [T]o date, there has not been a spike in the rate of child sexual abuse that corresponds with the apparent expansion of online CP.”

Janis Wolak, David Finkelhor and Kimberly Mitchell (2011). “Child Pornography Possessors: Trends in Offender and Case Characteristics”. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment 23 (22). doi:10.1177/1079063210372143.


In the UK, new rules exist that oblige doctors and social workers to give the police any information they have about teenagers’ sex lives. The London Child Protection Committee (LCPC) protocol allows child welfare staff an unjustifiable level of interference in the sex lives of teenagers, which could risk breaching the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the right to privacy enshrined in article eight of the convention. Senior lawyer Stephen Groz commented on the new protocol believing that: “It is particularly hard to see what justification there can be for routine assessment – if that is what is intended – in the case of those in the 16-18 year age group, where the prevention of crime will normally afford no justification at all.” [1] Mandatory sentencing where no clear definition of the crime is known is already steaming ahead. According to one expert, 12 and 13 year-old defendants “are being convicted of relatively minor sexual indiscretions in the crown court, and, if the law operates as it is supposed to, being sentenced to custody when it should be a supervision order.” [2]

With over 2,225 child offenders serving life without parole (LWOP) sentences in U.S prisons for crimes committed before they were age 18, [3] it seems Europe is being set to emulate the this direction. It is no surprise that America’s emerging “soft” fascism cloaked under the pretence of liberty is being welcomed by some governments of Europe.

Labour MP David Blunkett (who resigned in 2006 after yet another financial scandal) would likely have called such concerns “airy-fairy” and those seeking a fair and just system as the “enemy.” Blunkett proceeded to remove the presumption of innocence from the Sexual Offences act of 2003, giving a clear and straight road for court cases to be prosecuted successfully without any evidence. This laid greater emphasis on the prosecution state where, as in the US, you are presumed guilty before being proven innocent. This US version of the law paved the way for their fabrications in Operation Ore where an allegation alone was all it took to convict. That is not to say that all of the reforms have been dangerous. On the contrary, many are to be welcomed, yet those that are suspect are so grave that they tend to create difficulties that eclipse glimmers of progress.

Another stalwart defender of Blair’s Britain was Charles Clarke MP the UK government’s Interior minister who was at pains to tell the European Union that in his view: “The judges both in my country and in the European Court need to understand that the people of Europe … will not for a long time accept that action cannot be taken against people who are offering a real threat to our way of life because of human rights considerations …” [4] This kind of paramoralism is reminiscent of the same use of the Neo-Con theme of “they hate us for our freedoms” so often repeated as a blanket rebuttal for genuine concerns for civil liberties. Nonetheless, the die was cast.

The National Criminal Intelligence Service said in its annual report in 2003 that “more than half of the child porn sites are hosted in the United States” and that “the number of sites coming from Russia has doubled in the past year.” Evangelistic crusades are being encouraged and often waged whipping up a great deal of emotion with little factual data. Child pornography figures in some quarters have been massively overblown or in some cases plucked out of thin air. According to reports from within the US last year a 300 percent rise in internet paedophilia may indicate both a new phenomenon whereby a new technology is utilised but which also reinforces the mythology and lies designed to keep such dynamics firmly in place. If a new crisis is needed then child porn can be used as a “double-bind.” As one journalist recently remarked: “What an irony if the only readily available child porn on the Internet is being maintained by the police and the self-appointed monitors!” [5]

On the evening of January 17 2005, the UK’s Sky News reported on the false evidence used by the UK police in Operation Ore and the overwhelming incidences of corruption.  It remains to be seen if any action will be taken against the police perceived as protector and confidante, is about as far away from reality as it is possible to be. Some men and women in law enforcement know this very well, yet few speak out.

It is likely that much of the child pornography within societies today are produced and distributed underground through an informal but loose-knit networks of paedophiles operating in most European countries with sporadic burgeoning of paedophilia rings arising out of, or adjacent to sexual abuse within neighbourhoods and families. However, with the rise in child trafficking and clear indications of institutionalised child rape networks, child pornography as a multi-billion dollar industry may be, purposely exaggerated. Yet, as a strand in the overall industry of exploitation where billions are indeed accrued, it remains a connected reality, the dividends logically set to increase.

Michael Heimbach, head of the FBI’s Crimes Against Children Unit believes sexual deviants: “… have a real innate need to communicate with others … and sharing experiences. It’s a psychological support base; it makes them say, ‘I’m not so weird’. There are a lot of other people out there that like the same thing I do’’” The current case Heimbach was describing involved “An underground ring of adults who created and trafficked in pornographic videos of naked children being beaten with paddles, hairbrushes and canes.” The “loose-knit” group called the “Spanking Club” were said to have brutally beaten children as young as 4 years old. The club was seen as being influenced and encouraged by the availability of porn and internet chat-rooms where an exchange of fantasies and photos took place.[6]

The more disturbing links to pornography, trafficking and child abuse lead to the front door of the Establishment and naturally remain secured with cast iron protection. We see the guilty and often the innocent placed in prison and taking their own lives while high level paedophiles and child rapists remain above the law. It is also likely that most of the hardcore child porn that does exist is so far underground that it is alongside the impassable domain of the snuff movie where information is almost impossible to come by. For example, the discovery of crimes that may have been continuing undetected for decades are now frequently being seen via the relative “safety” of a closed system known as Internet Relay Chat – IRC – which requires participants to log in using passwords. And many of the paedophiles in question are no amateurs. They can be extremely competent with encryption usage and various other technical ways to avoid entrapment.

The vast majority of stings are carried out by the enormous stores of innocent child nudity and “artistic” erotica that under the laws of the US and increasingly Europe are deemed obscene. As we have seen, this material may also serve as a means to entrap people for private extortion. And what of the recent ruling from the US that effectively all porn is child porn? [7]

We then have the the Child Protection and Obscenity Enforcement Act also known as “2257” which now requires adult porn or erotica companies to keep detailed records proving that all the models they use are over the age of 18. These records contain the real names of performers and their addresses which have to be published somewhere online. It does not take a huge leap of logic to realize that this could leave some persons – such as women operating webcam shows from their homes – open to stalking and harassment. Moreover, all sites coming under the new law are required to have their address clearly accessible to all in order to indicate their “place of business.”  To avoid fines and jail terms persons must keep “proper records” and under the new version of 2257, all files that contain every single pornographic or erotic image and film published, must be cross-indexed with age-verification papers for every single performer that features in the stills or movies. This is a huge undertaking meaning massive overhauls for businesses hard drives, the records of which must be kept for seven years. The porn business is up in arms over the law claiming that it curtails significant freedoms. As the same report states: “…they have vast numbers of addresses to punch into their super computer for listing undesirables…. the Patriot Act [8] was used to prosecute people for offences that were not terrorist offences shortly after it became law.” [9]

We can easily forget how insidious these new acts and waiting executive laws really are and how they primed and ready to dispense with all constitutional rights. Clamping down on the business of porn is a red herring. As former director of UK civil rights organization and now a much needed voice as Deputy Chair of the new Independent Police Complaints Commission, John Wadham mentioned recently: “I recall an occasion attempting to argue that even alleged sex offenders have human rights, when confronted by the devastated mother of a child murdered by a sex offender.” [10]  Not an easy prospect, which is why child porn and public pornography in general could be one of the many channels by which we might endure a gradual but comprehensive lock-down on internet freedoms.

The genuine Russian-led examples of burgeoning child trafficking networks are a reality, as are some of the isolated European instances of exploitation. Typical examples include the arrest of five suspects in the Spanish cities of Madrid, Murcia, Lerida and Valencia in 2005. One man was charged with abducting, raping and abusing babies as young as 11 months while the others were charged with filming and distributing images of the abuse on the Internet.[11] Or the British man and father jailed for raping a baby with a sentence that was ridiculously lenient. [12] Both cases were proven instances that child molestation is a growing reality in our societies. This is the nature of the perfect double bind. There are further “politically correct” rulings that funnel more chaos into an already charged domain.

Take the 2004 ruling in the Italian high court that paedophiles can take pornographic photos of children as long as they are not sold for profit. Which means one can share and perpetrate acts of child porn as long as you do not charge for viewing the material, otherwise, it is legal. The report continues: “…that the Court of Cassation in Rome upheld the acquittal by a court in Turin of Antonio B., 45, over photographs that he took when he forced a youth of 13 to carry out sexual acts.”[13]

There are small clues in the above that included “forced” “sexual acts” and “profit.” One wonders what thoughts processes are running through those whose directives one would hope, are first and foremost to protect the interests of children. Similarly, Canada’s BC provincial court also came to the conclusion that possession of child porn represented a clear self-imposed boundary that would not be transgressed by those who chose to view such pornography. A court in Oregon believed a law that prohibited adults from giving minors sexually explicit materials violated the Oregon Constitution’s free speech protections.

There is, as we shall see, a huge difference between an individual who has exploited and even murdered a child for his own gratification and an individual who has been surfing for adult porn. This is the background to much of the prosecutions focused around child pornography. In such an emotive arena all manner of forces are vying for control and have little to do with liberty, least of all for the rights of the child. In effect, child pornography – while certainly encompassing very real predatory beings intent on using the internet to search for prey – is now a term that is used by law enforcement agencies to cover a multitude of sins extending to arts and basic pornography – regardless of its morality.

Let us keep in mind that in 2004 and 2005, three young children were killed by sex offenders. Congress immediately reacted and passed the most unconstitutional child abuse laws in the history of the USA. Yet, while the figures for the prevalence of sexual abuse remains contentious and unresolved, you can bet that the horrendous figures for physical abuse, drug abuse, gang related crime and drunk-driving deaths of children on the roads barely gets a mention. This is not sensational enough; this doesn’t get the voyeuristic and self-righteous juices flowing. Meanwhile, the financial, business and political “Elite” can play the “knight in shining armour” while indulging in the very practices they apparently eschew.

Inflating or even taking advantage of a rise in child pornography online could lead to a comprehensive ban on extreme examples of porn and finally pornography itself. For the masses that is. The tool of child porn will serve as a prelude to more extreme forms of “crimes against the state.” We may look for a gradual fusion between dissidents, Al-Qaeda and the “War on Terror” so that internet surveillance can be comprehensively tightened. The dawn raids of Landslide/Ore and other trawling and entrapment operations that ruined so many lives may well be the first stage in quelling any kind of dissidence of the near future. Criticism of the US government and Homeland Security is perceived as Bush’s line: “if you’re not with us you’re with the terrorists.”  In many American minds the sex offender and terrorist is more or less one and the same as in this Georgian State legislator’s opinion: “Sex offenders are the most reviled people in society… They’re one step above terrorists; there’s no political downside to cracking down on these folks.” It is then that we realise the true extent of ponerisation that is now occurring.

In Britain, the “surveillance society” is well and truly here. One of the ideas floated by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre with children bombarded by images and info-tainment, was to turn them into “spy kids” for the Establishment in Europe and the US. This is the crux of the matter: to make people so dependent and reliant on the State from largely phantom fears that children especially feel compelled to turn their own parent’s in. “There are 9.5 million school-kids in the UK. Imagine if we could get them all to save the CEOP’s website to their favourites box so that whenever they are online they can fill in a form telling us who they are talking to, what (those people) are saying and why they think it is a threat.” [14]

The UK is the most spied-on country in the world according to a recent official report. We are being scrutinized, logged and photographed as never before with a typical Briton caught on camera over 300 times a day. The report highlighted concern over records kept of every internet site we visit and the long-term retention of logs detailing those visits to the growing use of automatic number plate recognition to track people’s journeys.  Integrate this with child porn and paedophile concerns – it’s a pretext for Orwellian controls ready and waiting for the State. But hyping the fear is essential. For instance, one study showed how easily the climate of paedophilia panic was eroding normal life. A schoolgirl’s playground banter: “… resulted in her father being refused work because he had been classed as a suspected paedophile. ‘The little girl was overheard saying, ‘My dad bonked me last night’. A dinner lady heard this and reported it to the school authorities,’… Social services discovered that the girl was referring to her father tapping her playfully on the head with an inflatable hammer. The file was closed, but five years later the father discovered he was still a suspected sex offender.” [15]

We are now faced with the possibility that factions within the US government itself, after seeking to stem a largely imaginary tsunami of child porn became its greatest purveyors and sellers. This was  due to factional objectives, the most important perhaps being the protection of an Elite who do indeed prey on children and young adults as a way of life, systemised and institutionalised by political expediency and blackmail.

Shout loud enough and hard enough with inflated figures and dubious data and the core subject matter, where it counts, becomes discredited.

As we can see from other prominent factors such as the War on Terror, the purpose may be to contribute to the initiation of draconian controls where misguided moralism lumps art into child pornography and along with child rape just as dissidents are cast under the same shadow of the terrorist. It is the ultimate justification for the death of internet free speech. The threat of child pornography and those affiliated with “terrorist groups” become the package by which internet freedom is lost for the “greater good.”

Taking this hypothesis further, we might conjecture that if that factions within governments are in control not only of narcotics, arms, human trafficking, but also the pornography industry we can see blackmail would play an increasingly decisive role in forcing certain people into taking top positions in NBC, NASA, Harvard, the military, the FBI, and FEMA. Perhaps there are many such virtual, commercial porn sites directly serving this purpose as recruiters for a new generation of politically compromised men. The Pathocracy needs key positions to be filled to facilitate a greater ease of psychologically compromised individuals whose influence is spread into the everyday lives of the populace enhancing their suggestibility towards specific pre-designed objectives. Those that “fit” in the core network of psychopathic groupings can then be relied upon to carry out their naturally allotted tasks. Disinformation artists in radio, television and the internet may have been given immunity from prosecution by federal authorities in return for defending the government.

Why not use the presence of child porn as the perfect pretext?

 


Notes
[1] Teen sex monitoring ‘may breach human rights’ David Batty, The Guardian, Wednesday December 14, 2005.
[2] Dr David Thomas Retired Cambridge University don, sentencing expert and author of leading textbook on sentencing. Quoted in ‘Judges speak out against erosion of independence by government’ The Guardian, Tuesday April 26, 2005.
[3] ‘United States: Thousands of Children Sentenced to Life without Parole’ National Study by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch Finds Majority Face Life for First Offense, New York, October 12, 2005 Human Rights Watch, hrw.org/
[4] ‘EU must accept some erosion of civil rights-Britain,’ By Aine Gallagher, Reuters, September 7, 2005.
[5] Ibid.
[6] ‘Child Pornography Case Highlights Use of Internet in Crime’ By Michelle Mittelstadt, The Dallas Morning News, March 11, 2002.
[7] ‘On File’ By Annalee Newitz, AlterNet, http://www.alternet.org, June 22, 2005.
[8] The Patriot Act: HR 3162 RDS 107th Congress, 1st Session H. R. 3162 October 24, 2001, revised and updated to PATRIOT Act II in 2003. “Diminishes personal privacy by removing checks on government power, diminishes public accountability by increasing government secrecy; diminishes corporate accountability under the pretext of fighting terrorism; Undermines fundamental constitutional rights of Americans under overbroad definitions of ‘terrorism’ and ‘terrorist organization’ or under a terrorism pretext; Unfairly targets immigrants under the pretext of fighting terrorism. – b y Timothy H. Edgar, Legislative Counsel February 14, 2003 Section-by-Section Analysis of Justice Department draft ‘Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003,’ also known as “Patriot Act II” American Civil Liberties Union.
[9] Ibid.
[10] ‘I am ashamed to be leaving Liberty whilst people are interned without trial’ John Wadham LIBERTY editorial 2005 liberty.com.
[11] ‘Spanish police break up pedophile ring suspected of abusing babies’ Reuters, May 26 2005
[12] Baby rape sentence ‘unduly lenient’ BBC News, Wednesday, 3 September, 2003.
[13] ‘Italy and Oregon Courts Rule for Paedophilia’ June 2 2004 lifesite.net
[14] The Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, July 25 Press Release, http://www.ceop.gov.uk/
[15] ‘Britain the most spied on People in the Western World’ The Sunday Times, October 29, 2006.

Lights, Camera, Reaction!

By M.K. Styllinski

“All these people that run studios – they go to Washington, they hang around with senators, they hang around with CIA directors, and everybody’s on board.”

Former CIA agent Robert Baer


A rather infamous military unit with a less than all-American, apple pie history has been assigned to implement the directives of the US Army’s Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Command (Airborne), or USACAPOC (A). The umbrella unit for Psychological Operations (PSYOPS) the unit is known to have been deployed in Central America, Afghanistan and the Balkans and is currently authorized to use computer network attacks, psychological activities and deception, as well as facilities and staff of the military global public affairs apparatus that are now “officially” mandated. Control of the Internet, the development of electronic warfare against disobedient media, and the control of commercial satellites are also part of its remit.

In March 2000 the independent web journal Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting published the story from the French Intelligence newsletter and the Dutch newspaper Trouw that several officers from the PSYOPS unit at Fort Bragg were allowed to work at CNN with more than 1,500 unconfirmed instances. The story received little coverage.

In the 1980s, officers from the 4th Army PSYOPS group staffed the National Security Council’s Office of Public Diplomacy (OPD), where stories were planted in the US media in order to strengthen and support Reagan’s controversial Central American policies. An investigation by the congressional General Accounting Office found that OPD had engaged in “prohibited, covert propaganda activities,” and as the Iran-Contra scandal broke and the subsequent investigations that followed, the office was eventually shut down. However, the 4th PSYOPS unit is still very much in operation and with, it seems, a new lease of life. Yet another example of splitting apart essentially one military into smaller and smaller divisions, the very concept of PSYOPS has now been outsourced to various companies networked with think-tanks, mercenaries, private armies and the burgeoning securities business.

On May 1st 2002, in a premature display of bravado, President George W. Bush honoured the gung-ho premise of the movie Top Gun by swaggering across the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln and posed for photographers. Photos of Bush with a “thumbs up” sign appeared in magazines and internet sites. One could almost hear the cheesy rendition of the movie’s soundtrack: “highway to the danger-zone.” Better still, we could buy a George Bush doll in authentic “Elite Force Aviator” attire for the bargain basement price of $39.99! What price the life of Iraqi civilians? A plastic “George Bush” for American kids and cluster bombs for Iraqi children six thousand miles away.

The Top Gun type mentality along with all the other gun-slinger clichés are on show here. Osama and Saddam were the designated villains and the Middle East as the town that was only big enough for Bush and his magnificent seven. It remained to be seen whether Bush Jr. would ride off into a desert sunset with his less than stable spoils or ransack the next town as self-appointed sheriff. In any event, the Neo-Conservative administration availed itself of one of the most potent moulders of our perceptions: Movies.

p27437_p_v7_aaThe entertainment industry has long since been the tool of successive shadow administrations and affiliated “think-tanks.” The CIA secretly subsidizes many authors, media critics and journalists via private foundations and front organizations which are indirectly or directly linked to the Hollywood industry. The present propaganda machine has advanced this medium into a potent weapon of subliminal yet often ham-fisted mass programming to a greater degree than ever before. For instance, did you ever wonder why there was a steady flurry of war movies spear-headed by Spielberg’s Saving Private Ryan in 1998? From 2000 to 2002 there was a tangible increase in war film production both in the cinema and on T.V. reaching a peak prior to 9/11 including: Windtalkers, Black hawk Down, U-571, Band of Brothers (T.V.) The Patriot, We Were Soldiers, K-19, Hart’s War, Behind Enemy Lines, to name but only a few. The pièce de résistance of the most blatant movie propaganda came in the form of Jerry Bruckheimer’s epic Pearl Harbour (2001) where the US rewrote history in true “Forest Gump” style. This latter movie was designed to elicit the response of “America under attack” and the accompanying mass expression of righteous indignation that was required just prior to the modern day version of Pearl Harbour: the September 11 attacks.

Since 9/11, more than one third of Hollywood productions have been war movies designed to whip up patriotic fervour and associated fear mongering. The Sum of All Fears directed by Phil Alden Robinson, and released in 2002 is a case in point. A group of terrorists get their hands on a nuclear device which they explode in a US city, hoping to start a war with Russia. It received the endorsement and support of both the Pentagon and the CIA since Russia is set to become the bogey man for a new cold war in the sights of Anglo-American strategists. [1]

Spawned from the Fox News network and syndicated worldwide, the hugely successful 2001 – 2010 US TV series “24” was an example of Neo-Conservative propaganda at its most obvious. Jack Bauer, Played by Keifer Sutherland is an agent of the Counter Terrorist Unit (CTU) foiling dastardly plots by Al-Qaeda during a 24hr day. The series’ depiction and celebration of torture, terror plots falling from the sky on a daily basis and the negative portrayal of all Muslims did create its fair share of criticism but its success all but drowned out dissenting voices. The heavy emphasis on torture as an ideal solution was criticised by human rights activists, academics and even military officials who were apparently concerned that US soldiers were imitating the torture techniques depicted in the show. [2] (Somehow I think that was already going on before Kiefer came along).

Though sprinkled with plotlines that depict evil CIA turncoats or nasty oil men financing terrorist acts, the overwhelming narrative of the series was supporting the idea of a War on Terror and the gallant protection of the Homeland under siege. After all, the fear required for the terror hoax to work means that the mass mind must believe that there are terrorists crawling out of the cracks in one’s loft and settling in for the night under your children’s beds and loitering with intent on every street corner. The overall answer to all this terrorism is that you must fight fire with fire and violate the U.S. Constitution, suspend Habeas Corpus and follow the dictates of your beloved government. Most of all, be afraid of Al-Qaeda and Osama as the greatest threat to the American way of life. Gallant Mr. Bauer, the lead character, killed 112 people in the first five seasons of the show confirming a distinctly American idea of act first and think about the consequences much later – if at all. (Or better still, outsource someone else to do it for you.) [3]

images

Keifer Sutherland as “Jack Bauer” from the hugely popular US TV series “24.” which aired from 2001-2014.

How perceptions filtered through entertainment sanctions otherwise brutal and inhuman assaults on human beings can best be summarised by ex-president Bill Clinton who stated in an interview that while he did not feel there was a place for torture in US policy he nonetheless gave the practice a blessing to carried out covertly because: “If you’re the Jack Bauer person, you’ll do whatever you do and you should be prepared to take the consequences.” [4] This is exactly how the mass population justifies state-mandated behaviour. The latter is largely based on ignorance whereas the former is sourced from an Establishment perception that “the end justifies the means.” Presumably, this would include a scene from season 1 where Jack Bauer patriotically decapitates a villain’s head with a hacksaw. Drawn from the CIA handbook perhaps?

In June 2006, 24 cast and crew members met with U.S. government officials to run PR for the War on Terror. Half the Bush administration rolled up to the televised event so that they could heap praise and adoration on the show for displaying dedication to the cause of protecting the Homeland. Arch-Zionist Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, right-wing talk show host Rush Limbaugh and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas were some of the Neo-Conservative luminaries to rub shoulders with their fantasy counterparts. Even Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld were grinning like cheshire cats probably not understanding what it was they were meant to be praising other than it was good PR. It is unlikely that will we see a clearer display of self-congratulatory blend of entertainment and government policy than at this Heritage foundation sponsored event. [5]

En masse, some of these films may have played a minor role in moulding the psyche of this troubled nation, just as they did during the intense paranoia of the cold war era. They may serve to engender a sense of patriotism, and an erroneous star spangled heroism that inflates the national pride, whilst creating the need for an emotional outlet. If the democrats are afraid to speak out against the present erosion of civil liberties for fear of not supporting the troops (most of whom are demoralised and utterly desperate to return home) then the same can be said of the public at large where the herd mentality can be at its strongest involving God, the military, and the beloved home soil. In this sense, Hollywood is US culture.

By the same token, the deification of the movie market ensures that it is not simply a way to relax and enjoy our leisure time – they have become the incessant analgesic and anaesthetic to our own imagination and creativity; numbing our cognitive abilities with bland, iconic formulas for living; programming trite solutions for love and relating; substituting voyeurism, violence and titillation for high quality entertainment which has the potential to cultivate true understanding and greater awareness. Once we rely more and more on the buffering arena of entertainment we become progressively open to the subtle tinkering of our already pliable emotions. It seems this objective fact has not been lost on politicians and it’s military. 

BBC News picked up on this stratagem in a report from October 2001. We discover that US intelligence specialists sought in secret, “advice on handling terrorist attacks from Hollywood film-makers.” According to the trade paper Variety “a discussion group between movie and military representatives was held at the University of Southern California…” And further: “The group is said to have been set up by the US Army to discuss future terrorist activity in the wake of the attacks of 11 September.” Regardless of the wisdom of consulting Hollywood for advice on anything let alone military tactics, is this not rather strange for such a plan of action to take place barely a month after the 9/11 attacks? Unless, that is, it represented a single stage within a long-term strategy. The piece continues: “Among those reported to have been involved were Die Hard screenwriter Steven E.De Souza and Joseph Zito, director of Delta Force One and Missing in Action. Other, more conventional, feature makers were also said to have been present, including Randal Kleiser, who made Grease.” [6]

Perhaps the military will dance and sing their way into Syria? If only.

The fact that military intelligence are considering the advice of B-movie writers and directors is disturbing enough, it becomes especially worrisome when we consider the bizarre reversal of those that are in the business of killing, looking for advice from those who present killing as sure-fire entertainment. It surely becomes apparent that such an exercise would prove a potential asset if they were considering how to capitalize on future terrorist attacks along with the associated emotional manipulation that could be carried out within such scenarios. As a Variety spokesman mentions: “the entertainment industry can offer expertise in understanding plot and character, as well as advice on scenario training.” Sound familiar? Evidence strongly suggests, not only did members of Bush-Cheney administration know about the imminent attack on the Twin towers, there was also substantial circumstantial and solid empirical evidence that this may have been carefully crafted within certain factions of the Anglo-American Establishment. In other words, 9/11 was largely manufactured to achieve ideological and political goals most of which we are now witnessing.

Finally, the end piece of the report allows us to read between the lines:

The US Army is also behind the university’s [of Southern California] Institute for Creative Technologies (ICT). The ICT calls upon the resources and talents of the entertainment industry and computer scientists to help with virtual reality scenario simulation. Variety reported that the ICT’s creative director James Korris confirmed that the meetings between the film-makers and the US Army were taking place. However, the paper added that Mr Korris had refused to give details as to what specific recommendations had been made to the US government. [7]

Obviously more than his job’s worth.

The above piece is only the tip of the iceberg. Rather than the Army seeking advice it is far more likely a case of the US military offering their services (military hardware, locations etc.) in return for entraining the public with propaganda. When we tie this in with the NSA classified surveillance and PSYOPS technology that is far in advanced of anything we see in the market place then such pooling of entertainment utilities to bolster this same insider technology is not at all far-fetched. But more importantly, it becomes another tool by which the unconscious of the mass mind can be manipulated with relative ease.

the_dark_knight_poster

“Welcome to a World Without Rules.” The Dark Knight (2008) A vehicle for Establishment programming?

The power of Hollywood imagery is seldom debated. To the conscious mind movie symbols do not register but to the subconscious they are clear commands drawn from decades of psychology and mind control studies. When the mind is in a fearful or excited state it is wide open for re-programming. Thousands of films and video games are currently bombarding human consciousness with the idea that an outside threat comes from an evil terrorist that openly announces themselves. The hero archetype is wheeled in to defeat the enemy because the public – ordinary men and women – are always powerless and have to place their hopes, dreams and wishes onto an authority figure. And authority is in state government which will sometimes have to discard the rule of law in order to save society from the evil doers. This theme was seen most clearly in the 2008 film Dark Knight, the second installment in the Batman trilogy and one of the most successful films in history. It was also replete with propaganda messages.
We have Bruce Wayne, secretive banker industrialist by day, who is the Batman by night desperately trying to save Gotham City from the evil Joker seeking to destabilise society and reduce the city to chaos. The Joker is anarchist, non-conformist, anti-corporate protagonist and so of course, he has to be a psychopathic terrorist who hates freedom. Batman is “forced” to fight fire with fire when the law becomes corrupted and no longer a viable tool for civic emancipation. By developing a system to hack into cell phones and hijacking audio microphone systems they are used as a vast sonar system that would produce a 3D surveillance view of the city. The virtual Christ figure of the Dark Knight is able to save the city but not before violating everyone’s rights through warrantless spying to tackle the ubiquitous presence of the so-called terrorists, exactly what the Bush and Obama administrations continue to do. In other words, dear old Bat man is the Established order and the unjustly vilified government:

We, the US government have sacrificed so much and been attacked for eroding civil liberties and creating a police state…But it was only ever for your protection…Look at Batman. Can’t you understand his predicament? Can you therefore not understand what we must do?

The traditionally spook-ridden Wall St. Journal unsurprisingly picked up on this theme and reinforced the line: The Dark Knight is “a paean of praise to the fortitude and moral courage that has been shown by George W. Bush in this time of terror and war,” where he: “sometimes has to push the boundaries of civil rights to deal with an emergency, certain that he will re-establish those boundaries when the emergency is past.” [8]  It’s all the most abject nonsense of course. The government is misunderstood all right but not for the reasons it would like you to believe. And the movies play their back up role in shaping mass consciousness, suitably wide open over tubs of pop-corn.

The US has been in a state of emergency since September 2001 and there is no sign that there will be any return to pre-911 legislation – quite the opposite. Writer David S. Goyer stated that the primary theme of The Dark Knight is “escalation.” This fits very well with the idea of “order meeting chaos” and the creation of suitable bogeymen to ensure such “order” remains in the hands of traditional authority figures be it the saviour of comic heros or your friendly put upon cop and government official. Revolution is also required in order to deliver the punishment from the Big Daddy state which is then able to impose further draconian laws on its populace as a response to such instability. But to do that you need to create mythical enemies that keep the public in a state of fear so that the order can be strengthened in times of engineered chaos. We must be encouraged to love our servitude and understand that the curtailment to liberty and freedom are only for our long-term benefit. The super-heroes are in fact the authority of the state protecting the powerless and enfeebled children under its care. Government should at all times be supported.

Since the Second World War we are now observing a “bleed-through” of such experimentation across all intelligence and military endeavours which must necessarily include the moulding of the population through all means at their disposal. Or in the words of one President Abraham Lincoln: “Public sentiment is everything. With public sentiment nothing can fail. Without it nothing can succeed. He who moulds opinion is greater than he who enacts the laws.” And when you have control of both the laws and all possible outlets for propaganda then public opinion is effectively the clay that is permanently on the potter’s wheel. The waters of our sedentary lifestyles on the one hand and the ever-increasing storms of hardship on the other act to keep the clay manageable and open to “problem-reaction-solution” scenarios such as the rightly dramatic but Hollywood laden overtones of the twin towers attack.

 


 

See also: 9/11: An Occult Ritual? and Technocracy XVIII: Occult Transhumanism (2)

 


Notes

[1] The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives by Zbigniew Brzezinski Published by Basic books, 1997: “For America, the chief geopolitical prize is Eurasia… Now a non-Eurasian power is preeminent in Eurasia – and America’s global primacy is directly dependent on how long and how effectively its preponderance on the Eurasian continent is sustained.” (p.30)

“America’s withdrawal from the world or because of the sudden emergence of a successful rival – would produce massive international instability. It would prompt global anarchy.” (p.30)

“Two basic steps are thus required: first, to identify the geostrategically dynamic Eurasian states that have the power to cause a potentially important shift in the international distribution of power and to decipher the central external goals of their respective political elites and the likely consequences of their seeking to attain them;… second, to formulate specific U.S. policies to offset, co-opt, and/or control the above…” (p.40)

“To put it in a terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together.” (p.40)

“Henceforth, the United States may have to determine how to cope with regional coalitions that seek to push America out of Eurasia, thereby threatening America’s status as a global power.” (p.55)

[Referring to an area he calls the “Eurasian Balkans” and a 1997 map in which he has circled the exact location of the current conflict – describing it as the central region of pending conflict for world dominance] “Moreover, they [the Central Asian Republics] are of importance from the standpoint of security and historical ambitions to at least three of their most immediate and more powerful neighbors, namely Russia, Turkey and Iran, with China also signaling an increasing political interest in the region. But the Eurasian Balkans are infinitely more important as a potential economic prize: an enormous concentration of natural gas and oil reserves is located in the region, in addition to important minerals, including gold.” (p.124)
[2] ‘Normalizing Torture on “24”’. by Adam Green The New York Times, May 22, 2005. | “’24’ is fictional. So is the idea that torture works’. By Ben Macintyre, The Times, April 23 2009.
[3] ‘What a difference a day makes’ By Stephanie Merritt, The Observer, July 2, 2006.
[4] ‘Torture like Jack Bauer’s would be OK, Bill Clinton says’. By Michael McAuliff, New York Daily October 1, 2007.
[5] ‘Calling On Hollywood’s Terrorism ‘Experts’’ By Paul Farhi, Washington Post, June 24, 2006.
[6] ‘Army turns to Hollywood for advice’ BBC News, October 8, 2001.
[7] Ibid.
[8] ‘What Bush and Batman Have in Common’ by Andrew Klavan, The Wall Street Journal. July 25, 2008

The “Structural Adjustment Team” II

“The WTO has rapidly accumulated a sordid record. Binding decisions from its enforcement tribunals have undermined consumer and environmental protections around the world. TNCs have used the threat of WTO action to roll back or block countless rules designed to benefit workers, consumers and the environment, and to promote human rights and development in the world’s poorest countries. But all this has been predicted long before the WTO came into formal effect. From the outset GATT was seen as a “rich man’s club” dominated by Western industrial countries.”

Znet / Z mag.org, 12/28/04


wtoThe World Trade Organisation slithered into view much later in 1995 replacing the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). The WTO’s mandate is to make sure that the free market has unfettered access to all and everything under the banner of free trade. International trade restrictions are to be reduced or done way with completely. This means a free ride for corporations once they claim their country.

The World Bank does exactly what its name implies: an international institution that gives loans to developing countries in order to improve their socio-economic standing and eradicate poverty. At least, that’s the official line if you believe the BBC and other MSM outlets. At the most basic level of interpretation, the interests which dominate the bank are drawn from Neo-liberal economic perception rooted in the Establishment classes which means that their interests dominate over all else. Though the World Bank represents 186 countries it is governed and funded by a powerful few, namely the United States and the G8 nations. It is thus tied to the formation of an economic order that conforms to their reality and no one else’s, the evidence of which is obvious for all to see. It is an immediate contradiction in terms that the reduction of poverty is formulated from an economic order which can only increase it.

One only has to look at the past and traditionally American presidents of the World Bank to understand the biased economic and corporate beliefs behind the dispensing of loans. These have included from 1991-1995: JP Morgan bank executive Lewis T. Preston; from 1995-2005: corporate lawyer and banker Sir James Wolfensohn; 2005-2007: Neo-Conservative and Iraq war strategist, US Deputy Secretary of Defence Paul Wolfowitz and from 2007: the present incumbent Robert Zoellick former Bank executive with Goldman Sachs, Deputy Secretary of State and US Trade Representative. The eight international development goals that 193 United Nations member states and over 23 international organizations have agreed to achieve by the year 2015. The World Bank has also agreed to commit itself to these goals which are to:

  • Eradicate Extreme Poverty and Hunger
  • Reduce Child Mortality
  • Improve Maternal Health
  • Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria, and Other Diseases
  • Ensure Environmental Sustainability
  • Develop a Global Partnership for Development [1]

Tragically, (though certain members of the World Bank are entirely cognizant of this fact) eradicating poverty long-term is unlikely to be achieved because the World Bank actively creates it. That is not to say that great gains have not been made before the Global Economic Crisis. (GEC) According to the UN fact sheet “…the world is on track to meet the MDG target of halving the proportion of people living on less than $1 a day between 1990 and 2015.” While this is great news, to make sure this is a lasting change leading to the eradication of poverty and hunger and not just a peak in the overall trough of global economic fortunes, the very nature of economics has to change so that the crises such as we have witnessed in 2008 and onwards do not send the achievements plummeting back to former figures.

Since these achievements, by the UN’s own admission is largely due to the “extraordinary success in Asia, mostly East Asia” based on exactly the same banking and economic model of the West then it can only offer the same eventual boom and bust scenarios which have long been part of Western capitalist “growth” and the environmental and social problems attached to them. Thanks to the GEC global unemployment has rocketed as it does with any crisis. Consequently, while extreme poverty has been reduced, halving the levels of hunger is proving much more difficult, with only intermittent change.

Similarly, reducing child mortality, combating HIV/AIDS, Malaria and other disease cannot hope to have lasting results because the World Bank cannot recognise that all related problems largely stem from the economics has largely been absorbed into the underworld of systemic crime which has effectively become the “overworld.”

To ensure environmental sustainability the World Bank must redesign its economic framework to such an extent that there would be little reason for it to exist. The millennium goals are a world class oxymoron for most if not all institutions and organisations shackled by the very same myopic mind-set seen from those who inhabit the leather chairs of World Bank offices. A “Global Partnership for Development” under World Bank terms can only mean a continuing strategy for corporatism. If their basic economic directives do not change then neither do the consequences for most of the global population, despite G8 countries being willing to cut billions of owed debt from their books. [2]

All this may sound desperately cynical on my part. But you see, if you the UN is still encased in the same economic box, then any long-term alleviation of poverty, hunger and mortality rate will logically be dependent on the those highly unstable fluctuations which characterise the financial architecture of the globe. Nothing less than a radical overhaul of the very concept of banking and commerce is needed. Micro-credit and micro-banking is one example and a great step forward in this direction. [3]

The World Bank is the largest source of development finance in the world and has an impressive (or iniquitous depending on your view) record of large-scale engineering, reconstruction and infrastructure projects in developing countries. More regional and local projects have also been financed including roads, bridges, dams and pipelines which often go hand in hand with the extraction of natural resources and the presence of corporations lingering in the background.

The World Bank, The IMF, the WTO and the United Nations have helped to create, augment and sustain the current global financial architecture and its various social iniquities while offering occasional bursts of short-term relief in the guise of numerous social programs and initiatives. Seldom do they address the root causes of national and international socio-economic problems. Counter to the prevailing view that these post war institutions offer at least a partial amelioration of global problems, we can see that they are in fact, representatives of a Global Official Culture dressed up in humanitarian goals.

The above is the standard interpretation of the organisation which is enough in itself to petition for change. However, it goes deeper than that.

Former insider and one-time Senior Counsel Karen Hudes knows how the World Bank lies to run things. A graduate of the Yale Law School with over 20 years of experience in the legal Department at the World Bank and founder of the Non-Governmental Organization Committee of the International Law Section of the American Bar Association and the Committee on Multilateralism and the Accountability of International Organizations of the American Branch of the International Law Association, Hudes knows about her subject extremely well.  During a May 2013 interview with journalist Alex Newman of New American magazine she was explicit as to how the mechanism of corruption is allowed to keep functioning and who is responsible. The article, entitled: ‘World Bank Insider Blows Whistle on Corruption, Federal Reserve’ reports that the domination of the global financial system, according to Hudes is sourced from: “…a small group of corrupt, power-hungry figures centered around the privately owned U.S. Federal Reserve. The network has seized control of the media to cover up its crimes, too, she explained.” The New American continues:  “Hudes said that when she tried to blow the whistle on multiple problems at the World Bank, she was fired for her efforts. Now, along with a network of fellow whistleblowers, Hudes is determined to expose and end the corruption. And she is confident of success.”

The article goes on to describe the basis of this control system:

“Citing an explosive 2011 Swiss study published in the PLOS ONE journal on the ‘network of global corporate control,’ Hudes pointed out that a small group of entities — mostly financial institutions and especially central banks — exert a massive amount of influence over the international economy from behind the scenes. ‘What is really going on is that the world’s resources are being dominated by this group, she explained, adding that the ‘corrupt power grabbers’ have managed to dominate the media as well. “They’re being allowed to do it.’

According to the peer-reviewed paper, which presented the first global investigation of ownership architecture in the international economy, transnational corporations form a ‘giant bow-tie structure.’ A large portion of control, meanwhile, ‘flows to a small tightly-knit core of financial institutions.’ The researchers described the core as an ‘economic ‘super-entity’ that raises important issues for policymakers and researchers. Of course, the implications are enormous for citizens as well.

[…] ‘I realized we were now dealing with something known as state capture, which is where the institutions of government are co-opted by the group that’s corrupt,’ she told The New American in a phone interview. “The pillars of the U.S. government — some of them — are dysfunctional because of state capture; this is a big story, this is a big cover up.’

At the heart of the network, Hudes said, are 147 financial institutions and central banks — especially the Federal Reserve, which was created by Congress but is owned by essentially a cartel of private banks. ‘This is a story about how the international financial system was secretly gamed, mostly by central banks — they’re the ones we are talking about,” she explained. ‘The central bankers have been gaming the system. I would say that this is a power grab.’ ” [Emphasis mine]

Rather than seeing this as a case of conspiratorial fever or a left-right political agenda being played out, it is far better to simply accept that Hudes – as have so many other whistleblowers in recent times – simply stated the objective reality of what she experienced, confirming what so many outsiders suspected after witnessing first-hand the trail of devastation it has produced.

If we know, then we may change it.

Perhaps we can see why the psychopath in society has played a large part in creating and maintaining the economic architecture which is still ruining lives. Psychologist and leading authority on the psychopath Dr. Robert Hare stated that if he could not study psychopaths in prison, his next best choice would be a Stock Exchange. If people are no more than units of labour consumption and values have no meaning at all when set against the personal power and corporate greed then it goes some way to explaining why such consistently toxic systems continue to ravage humanity and its home. As normal human beings try to compete in a system that is favoured towards the human predator it is inevitable that they are pushed to the periphery to become the minority rather than the majority. If there are four times more psychopaths at the head of large corporations than in the general population it means they immediately have a huge advantage in obtaining whatever it is they want, which is usually everything.

 


Notes

[1] http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/pdf/MDG_FS_1_EN.pdf
[2] “G8 Finance Ministers agreed in June 2005 to provide enough funds to the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the African Development Bank (ADB) to cancel an additional $40–55 billion debt owed by members of the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) to allow impoverished countries to re-channel the resources saved from the forgiven debt to social programs for improving health and education and for alleviating poverty.” United Nations Millennium Development Goals website, 16 June 2009. This is an example. One can cancel 100billion of debt but if the same directives remain in place then so too will the next generation of victims. They will re-channel their resources so that they can be ready to take the next set of measures to keep them dancing to the WB, IMF and WTO tune.
[3] Microcredit or Microfinance: United Nations declared 2005 to be the International Year of Microcredit and the founders of the microcredit movement were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2006. For more articles see: New York Times: ‘Tiny Loans Make a Big Difference in Lives of Poor’ | http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/29/technology/29venture.html | USA Today/Associated Press: Microcredit pioneers win Nobel Peace Prize – http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-10-13-norway-nobel_x.htm | Wall Street Journal: A new way to do well by doing good – http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06005/633114.stm | BusinessWeek: ‘Microfinance funds lift poor entrepreneurs—and benefit investors’| http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_19/b3932134_mz070.htm | The Economist: ‘Microcredit in India, High finance benefits the poor’ – http://www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?story_id=2413549