DOUBLE STANDARDS – Guest Patrick Henningsen speaks out about Press TV now banned in Europe

Press TV’s top current affairs show ‘Double Standards’, invites 21st Century Wire’s Patrick Henningsen on the program to discuss the hypocrisy and censorship by the European Commission and the UK’s Ofcom regulator for banning Press TV’s global news channel from European satellite and cable broadcasting. When it comes to broadcaster integrity, networks like the BBC and CNN should have their licenses revoked for reporting fake news and covering up internal investigations into criminal activity… facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterest

RISK ASSESSMENT: IRAN – ‘Entree to a One World Order’ – Interview with Patrick Henningsen

What will a war with Iran look like? What will be the results of a unilateral attack on Iran by Israel and the US? Will it trigger multi-regional military conflict? 21st Century Wire geopolitical analyst, Patrick Henningsen, outlines possible outcomes, including the Hegelian outcome of a One World Order aka ‘New World Order’, in an exclusive, previously unreleased interview with domestic Russian television, filmed in London in Sept 2012.  ….facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterest

Henningsen: ‘US and allies are unleash hell in Syria, new violence levels reached’

Iran’s Press TV Channel says its correspondent Maya Nasser has been shot dead by a sniper while reporting on air about today’s twin blasts in Damascus. Patrick Henningsen – a geopolitical analyst for the current affairs website “UK Column” – believes the Iranian journalist’s death is unlikely to be an accident. Henningsen also highlights the role of foreign fighters in Syria, who are logically, materially and financially supported by US and western governments. http://www.ukcolumn.org ….facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterest

Radio Interview with 21st Century Wire Editor Patrick Henningsen Discussing Risks at Ft Calhoun Nuke Plant

21st Century Wire July 7, 2011

Listen to Patrick Henningsen’s interview on Gorilla Radio with host Chris Cook. Henningsen discusses to real dangers and public risk surrounding the Fort Calhoun and Cooper nuclear facilities in Nebraska, USA, both nuclear plants currently under siege by the rising flood waters of the Missouri River this month.

LISTEN TO INTERVIEW STREAM HERE

HOW HIGH'S THE WATER? Fort Calhoun nuclear plant poses similar risks to the Fukushima Plant which suffered a full meltdown this past spring.

Regarding the media blackout on the dangers present in Nebraska this week Patrick explains, “If public safety is not number one on the priority list of every single person in any of these agencies (OPPD, NRC, Army Corps of Engineers) then they really need to reassess what they are doing.” “The United States just OK’d $185 billion on top of their annual $50 billion- to upgrade and modernise their nuclear arsenal… the military industrial complex is very connected to the nuclear industry”. -facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterest

Gorilla Radio with Chris Cook, Patrick Henningsen, Janine Bandcroft July 4, 2011

21st Century Wire July 4, 2011 This week: Patrick Henningsen is a UK-based pundit, commentator, online editor, journalist, and founder of 21st Century Wire, a news service launched during the 2009 Copenhagen Climate Change Summit. The 21st Century Wire is an attempt to, quote; “deliver content that looks squarely at power, its architecture, as well as the seeds of corruption.”

Henningsen is in the United States today, following the burgeoning story of twin nuclear disasters in the making in the heartland that aren’t making the headlines. Tune in to radio show here at 5pm PCT.
-
And; the Annual Pastor’s for Peace Caravan to Cuba embarked on its 22nd trans-continental pilgrimage to bring goods sanctioned by the United States to that embargoed Caribbean island. Our own two-time Caravanista, CFUV broadcaster, and Victoria Street Newz publisher, Janine Bandcroft accompanied the Canadian contingent from our neck of the words here in the Pacific Northwest to the Peace Arch at Blaine, Washington to see this year’s crew safely across the border. Janine Bandcroft reporting from the crossing with the Pastor’s for Peace Caravan in the second half. And; Janine will join us live at the bottom of the hour to bring us other news from Victoria and beyond. But first, Patrick Henningsen from the waters rising around America’s Midwest nuclear facilities.

Gorilla Radio talks with 21st Century Wire Editor Patrick Henningsen on the first half of the show.

Chris Cook hosts Gorilla Radio, airing live every Monday, 5-6pm Pacific Time. In Victoria at 101.9FM, 104.3 cable, and on the internet at: http://cfuv.uvic.ca.  He also serves as a contributing editor to the website, http://www.pacificfreepress.com.
-
Check out the GR blog at: http://GorillaRadioBlog.blogspot.com
facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterest

The 21st Century Matrix: Technocracy and the Rise of the Machines

By Patrick Henningsen
Editor
21st Century Wire
August 2, 2010

Call it the Matrix, the Scientific Dictatorship, Transhumanism- or call it the Technocracy. No matter which name we give it, few can deny that today’s technology is advancing at an ever-increasing rapid clip, with most of us left on the sidelines playing the passive role of consumer and spectator. For ethicists and philosophers, however, it’s become a game of catch-up. So how does one navigate, let alone make sense of our new 21st century matrix?

Technologyit is all around us. Some contend that we are literally bathing in it. Most of us spend our entire waking day inside a WiFi zone. But beyond the iPods, iPads, iPhones and the Bluetooths, further below the surface of this seemingly innocuous chapter in human evolution, there lurks a number of unseen forces and currents of change. One of these is a desire by a newly crowned technological elite or new Technocracy to impose or ‘implement’ (depending on your vantage point) an increasing amount of new and far-reaching technologies on to the population at large. What is the Technocracy? Originally, it was an early 20th century movement which fell out of public favor, but its ideas haven’t died, they’ve merely migrated into other areas of the governing class and society.

The technocrat promises a version of socialism that will deliver the people a sort of high-tech utopia, or “Brave New World“. Far from extinct, those ideas are still hanging around and this new system, or matrix is now coming into view. But this time it’s not technocrats who will be leading the revolution per say… it’s the machines themselves.

Step One: Adoption

We have entered into a new epoch where speed and efficiency and what we expect of our machines increases with every new upgrade. If you are under the age of 30, then you probably will not remember a time when there were absolutely no cell phones, no internet, no virtual social networking and no CCTV cameras. If you are under the age of 20, then you were in effect, born into this early version of the 21st century matrix, or as Morpheus might say, ‘born into bondage’.

If this transformation were truly an organic process, then most critical minds would be able to rationalize the rise of the machines. But the evolution of technology and how we interact with it, is not so easy to keep track of.

It is more attuned to Chaos Theory than it is to Darwinian Theory. The media and its modern marketing arms tell us that it’s progress- their role is defined as the initial express vehicle on which all new ideas and advancements are delivered into the mainstream, and in many cases you could say that the public are preconditioned to accept new technology on arrival. Certainly the media is an awesome technological beast worthy of its own in-depth analysis, but we can leave it aside for now, as it has its own virtual limits and only serves as a platform from which real technological applications are successfully launched on the ground. The  key juncture in this equation is when we can touch technology, when it’s adopted in real world interactions, when it becomes our companion or even an extension of our physical self. In the end, much of our day-to-day life depends on technology, so society has had to develop a kind of  unwavering  faith in ‘it’. Some enthusiasts take things a step further, as if it’s a white buffalo, they hunt their prey, waiting from 3am for the Apple Store to open, and finally fall at the feet of their gadgets, paying homage- in effect, worshiping their machine.

Most people might even admit they talk to their cars and give them affectionate names. It’s quite a relationship we are developing with our machines.

Once the stuff of Victorian science fiction, machines embody the ultimate in man’s pursuit of technology.


The term “matrix” is one that many have become familiar over the last decade. And there is a good reason for this. The advancement of new technologies is making that allegory into a reality. The allegory of the ‘matrix’ was first introduced into the mainstream conversation with the Wachowski Brothers film, The Matrix.

The film describes a future in which reality is a computer generated construct perceived by a human population held in captivity and whose harvested  bodies’ heat and electrical activity are used as an energy source to power the machine world. Their reality is actually a simulated reality created by sentient machines in order to pacify and subdue the human race. To date, The Matrix series is one of the most powerful and poignant stories which offers an accessible, theoretical and philosophical explanation of what fundamental characteristics a technocracy or scientific dictatorship might actually have. Few will disagree that it’s a valuable metaphor for our times. So how can society begin to navigate through the 21st century matrix if it finds itself entangled in the ever sophisticated web of modern technology?

How can one determine which technology is good for us and which should be discarded?

Can we at least check its growth? First we need to understand where we came from in the hope to better know where we are heading.


Short film montage, The Robot’s Rebellion, featuring Morpheus, Neo… and David Icke.

How did we get this far?

If one is to obtain even a basic grasp of the mercurial juggernaut known as the Technocracy and its impending Scientific Dictatorship, it is crucially important to know how we got to where we are today. Just like the invention of the printing press transformed society and the advent of the automobile transformed communities, the introduction of each new technology brings forward a new set of dilemmas. The introduction of cellular phones has arguably transformed our nature and the way we operate and communicate minute to minute.

GMO’s (Genetically Modified Food and Organisms) were introduced only a few decades ago and have already devastated many of the world’s natural crops and fish stocks. Likewise, Genetic Cloning and Nanotechnology have some frightening applications which would put most imaginative horror-science fiction stories to shame.

Contemporary philosopher, filmmaker, and brilliant modern thinker Godrey Reggio was quoted as saying, “All tools have intrinsic politics and technology is the tool of now.” Reggio goes on to explain, “I think it’s the tragedy of our time that we’re not aware of the affect of the manner in which we’ve adopted tools. Those tools have become who we are… It’s not that we use technology, we live technology… it (technology) is unknowable”.

In so far as corporations are concerned, economics certainly has played its part in the rise of the machines. In a bid to save money, reduce labor costs and increase efficiency, for the past 200 years corporations have sought to streamline their operations, gaining speed in the late 19th century with industrial revolution practices like the division of labor, separation of parts, as well the incredible growth of both the military and biochemical industrial complex in the early 20th century.

Since the latter half of the 20th century, these same corporations have moved on to robotics, smart tracking and smart advertising in order to secure any possible advantage in an ever-increasing competitive global marketplace. This is for the most part motivated by achieving more competitively priced goods, returning bottom line profits which in turn increase the quarterly value of a corporation’s share prices. It’s business 101- corporations are motivated by money and controlling their markets, so we can easily track the rise of the corporation and also understand their consumer base. Throughout history, when corporations overstep the mark, consumers have boycotted the corporation’s products. That’s your Ace in the pocket. But what happens when the State is involved in the mix?

The State has become one of the biggest consumers of the products that corporations are peddling, and as you will see later, understanding its motivations can be a different matter altogether.

Rise and rise of the State

There is now a new kid on the block. One of the biggest new growth areas for big corporations is providing applications for their biggest bread and butter client- the State. In an era of fiat currencies and government deficits, unlike Joe Public, the State has an almost unlimited cheque book. For the most part, the State maintains a captive audience and has a mandate to take whatever money it needs from that audience, and giving back whatever or what little it sees fit.  One of the biggest, and surely the most expensive things the State claims to provide is “security”. And that brings us to the real rub. There is an elegant and disturbingly tango which has taken place between the State’s governing bureaucracy and a Public who has become obsessed with the need to feel hyper-secure. Using fear as an instrument of control, each party feeds off the other, and this dark dance increases in its intensity as each new technological innovation is applied to the science of people management- administered by a governing class that appears to have become high on its elaborate new toy chest.

Most of these toys are tools used for applications in the field of social engineering.

The goals of the State and its social engineers are not so much economic or bottom line driven(as in the case of corporations), they are to do with maintaining power in what has become an almost neofeudal manner. Why else would municipalities in the US and UK spend many billions on CCTV cameras and elaborate computer systems for spying on their own citizens? At such an expense to the public purse, surely there is no real money in that enterprise. So why do it then? We can begin looking for answers to this question by entering the brave new world of Biometric security.

Right down to the local level, both bureaucrats and law enforcement administrators have simply fallen in love with Biometrics, because it sounds great on paper and is a dream for civil servants obsessed with “risk assessment”. And it’s a multi-billion dollar industry in its own right. Once confined to fingerprints, blood stains and photo identification, Biometrics has now expanded to iris scanning software, RFID chips, DNA screening, X-ray body scanning and facial recognition scan software, some of which is readily available to buy online. In a bid to move further towards a cashless society, the biometric thumb scans has even made its way into today’s vending machines (more fun for the kids).

Say Hello To My Little Friend

Meet your new little buddy, the RFID chip. He’s everywhere- in your subway pass, your passport, your luggage, even burried in the neck of your house pet. RFID-ID tracking chips and human implants are no longer theoretical, they are fast becoming commonplace. Driving this whole revolution is, of course, the rise in popularity and universal adoption of the microchip. It’s applications are virtually limitless.

As UK based lecturer and best-selling author David Icke explained recently on tour, “It’s not just about electronic tagging…  microchips are ready to be introduced.” Icke added, “The technology is designed to have the emotional, mental and physical level of people manipulated and dictated to from the computer to the chip.  They can isolate an individual or they can do it en mass. They (the administrators) can make you docile, aggressive (etc)”.

  
Philosopher and Filmmaker Godrey Reggio explains the relationship between technology, art and language in today’s modern world.

The role of art in understanding the technocracy

Art can play a significant role in either unmasking a technocracy or conditioning people to passively accept and be literally amazed by it. In the case of the film The Matrix, it has most likely awakened more young minds to the architecture of control-based systems designed by the governing corporate elite.

A look at the popular Terminator film series, particularly its latest episode Terminator Salvation, shows what can happen at the end of our current trajectory of unmanned, computer controlled drone attack aircraft and automated robotic military weaponry. An awakened mind may look at this film and see the perverse nature in these kinds of military applications, while a military bureaucrat or military contractor engineer may see something completely different- a beautiful new world of automated machinery which takes the human element completely out of one side of the equation. You can almost hear them now, “Wow. That would be sooo cool.” Whereas the US military used to mean ‘soldier vs. soldier’, and lately ‘soldier vs. man’, it is increasing becoming a disturbing story of ‘machines vs. man’.

Other important pieces of cinema in recent years include the film, The Minority Report, based on the novel by Philip K. Dick, which shows a future law enforcement based on the rather disturbing concept of ‘Precrime’- a trend based on computer generated ‘profiling’ which is already coming into play with law enforcement today, and the twin TV series productions, Battlestar Galactica and Caprica, both of which trace the genesis and social adoption of robotics in their off-planet fictional human civilization. Also worth mentioning are the films A.I. (Artificial Intelligence) and the 70′s cult classic Zero Population Growth staring Oliver Reed, a distopic tale which chronicles a future where child birth is banned by the State.

Pop Tech: A controversial scene from the Björk music video “All is full of love”.

The future is at our doorstep

So many of the scenarios mapped out in popular science fiction are coming to fruition much faster than expected. Scenes that we thought were never going to happen for the next 100 years are appearing in our news every day, just visit WIRED magazine’s website for daily evidence of this.

Scientists, ‘futurist’ pundits, policy makers and the most crucial group in this mix- the public, have probably enjoyed many films and viewed scenes like the Voight-Kampf Test in Blade Runner (a film also based on a Philip K. Dick novel), the invention of CYLONS in Caprica or the smart iris scans in The Minority Report, considering any serious moral or ethical questions to be generations away- not a priority for discussion today, and yet suddenly we have the future right at our doorstep.

A contemporary philosopher might ask: Are the advancements in intelligent computers, virtual realities, robotics and pharmaceutical drugs serving to further detach humanity from its core sense of human experience? What makes a human unique? Is it breeding, or individuality? Is it imagination, or is it the soul? One thing is for sure, in order to address some of these deeper points we will need more philosophers than ever before.

One the stated goals of the Technocracy is to engineer and perfect a mechanized society, where each person is groomed to perform a specific role in the socio-economic scheme of things. Transhumanism, formerly known as the once popular Eugenics Movement, takes this a step further by looking to technology to enhance and augment the current human form. From a technocrat’s perspective, humans themselves are seen as biological androids who can be medicated, trained and steered through the application of pharmaceutical products coupled with psychological conditioning. When introduced into the human body, powerfully genetically engineered pharmaceutical products can yield results similar to that of programming a computer to generate a desired outcome. The Technocrat would consider the recent spike in use of antidepressants and serotonin re-uptake inhibitors like Prozac, Paxil, and ‘mood stabilisers’ like Zanex and Lithium as some kind of positive and necessary trend, while the Transhumanists will offer that this trend has inched humanity into position for what they believe is our destiny in their next phase of evolution- bringing us even closer to our machine companions.

Learning to Love Your Robot

For years, the holy grail of technology has definitely been the robot. Once the stuff of Victorian science fiction, machines made in man’s likeness embody the ultimate in man’s pursuit of technology. 

Advances in robotics, particularly work done in countries like Japan, have already eclipsed the fictional horizon and are with us as we speak. We can look to the Far East for more evidence here.  The HRP-4C, a walking, talking humanoid fashion model ‘fembot’ developed by Japan’s National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST) made her first official runway debut in a special fashion show in Tokyo last year. Not least of all, the HRP-4C fembot seems to have mastered that all important vacant, expression-less stare we see on most top runway models. She may have a future after all…

  
Humanoid fashion model ‘fembot’ developed by Japan’s National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology.

A scene like that of Kissing robots may be a disturbing and perverse watershed moment for many people, but it constitutes a breakthrough moment for certain technology enthusiasts and science fiction fans (or sci-fi freaks, depending on your particular bent). As odd as it might seem, an idea that was once reserved for MTV and comic books has, at a great expense, now manifested itself in real life (see video below).

  
Kissing robots developed by the National Taiwan University of Science and Technology The Digital Economy

There are plenty of innovations we can point to that may give an indication as to where technology is going.

So called ‘intelligent’ computers and their many applications have already replaced a significant proportion of the world’s workforce and slowly but surely man is losing his grip on the fundamental idea of “the fruits of one’s labor”. This means that the single biggest  growth area for jobs is not for men and women- it’s jobs for computers because they are cheaper, faster and in some cases ‘smarter’ than their human counterparts.

One of the biggest growth areas in terms of human jobs has been in software and digital media, a culture that for the most part was(and still is to some degree) built on dreams of a 20 hour work week and million dollar employee stock options, and it’s an industry where the trusted microchip is now doing all the work. A corporation like Microsoft built its global empire on a product which cost nothing to reproduce, yet is sold for hundreds of dollar per unit. The social ramifications of the digital products these same companies are rolling out are even more compelling- replacing the human experience with a software interface and virtual communities and portals- boasting numbers in the hundreds of millions. 

The video gaming and vice industries also comprise a large portion of this digital economy. One of the biggest sectors of the digital world is the infamous global digital sex industry, which now dwarfs its own print and vice predecessors. Again, this reaffirms the move from the human experience to the virtual, or machine generated experience.

Waking up to the matrix

Technology might be the tool of choice for the social engineer and a power obsessed technocratic elite, but it is a long way from being infallible or, in some cases- even practical. Huge amounts of money are wasted by the State annually on technology which has no practical application on the ground. After they have wasted millions on purchasing it, the State will often waste millions more in an attempt to force it down the throat of a generation. This was certainly the case with regards to the now obsolete Anthropogentic, or ‘Man-made’ Global Warming movement. In ten years it grew into one of the world’s most expensive state-sponsored global industries, an industry based entirely on computer modeled projections of what might happen in 50 years time- an example of some people’s unquestioning faith in a piece of computer software (and not the science of real world observation) that purported to predict the future- and thus, the fate of the entire human race.

Understanding the nature of certain technological failures can also help us to better realise that not all seemingly new and exciting innovations are effective in achieving the stated objectives of their designers, and are hardly safe from theft or gross manipulation.

Bottom line: Software is written by humans, so it can be rigged, cracked, and made redundant – and robots can (and will) malfunction or run out of battery power, DNA can be switched, forged or data details attached to it altered, and computers… can certainly be hacked.

RFID chips can also be hacked and disabled using basic, inexpensive electronic equipment available from your local electronic shop. In addition to this, it’s important to point out that legions of ‘white hat’ hackers (many of whom could easily be confused with authentic libertarians) have done incredible work in recent years to expose the futility of State-sponsored big brother technologies, helping in some way to keep the governing and corporate elite in check.

  
One of the most powerful demonstrations of a white hat hacker, easily hacking RFID-chipped passports in his neighbourhood.

In a world that some might say constitutes many more consumers than it does deep thinkers, technology is steaming ahead in an unrestrained fashion. If mankind was ever presented with an opportunity to start asking the hard questions and identifying the real dilemmas, it is right here and right now.

To delay any serious discussion about the nature of new technology and its place alongside the human race is to deny any of the inherent responsibilities that we are entrusted with as a race on this planet. There is a very real quickening taking place before our eyes, and there is a risk that certain technological applications could supplant a valuable set of commonly understood, fundamental languages and human values.  

We have to ask ourselves which aspects of the real human experience are we willing to sacrifice for a few abstract constructs like ‘convenience’ and ‘security’. Rutger Hauer’s character in the film, Blade Runner, offers a replicant’s perspective on this, one of the great philosophical questions of our time…

    
Rutger Hauer’s famous passage,  “Tears in the Rain”.

As we witness the rise of a 21st century scientific matrix, we must all ask ourselves that basic question: how far- and to what end should mankind go in order to achieve his life, liberty and happiness?

Here, Godfrey Reggio offers up a fitting conclusion, “Mystery is gone to the certainty of technological principles. So the real terror, the real aggression against life comes in the form of the pursuit of our technological happiness”.

———

About the author: Patrick Henningsen is a writer, filmmaker, communications consultant and managing editor of 21st Century Wire.  Contact: pj.henningsen@gmail.com facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterest

Botched CIA Kidnapping and the PR War- is the Agency is Losing Its Touch?

By Patrick Henningsen Editor 21st Century Wire July 17, 2010 The public relations war waged by the US-Euro-Israel axis block was dealt an unfortunate blow this week when it was revealed that an Iranian nuclear scientist was kidnapped by CIA and Israeli assets during a Hajj pilgrimage in Saudi Arabia, drugged and spirited away to the US, then offered millions for information regarding Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons ambitions, only to return back to Iran to tell all. In his most recent article, The Independent’s award-winning journalist Patrick Cockburn outlines this story which you can read here. It’s a bizarre one to say the least. Such an event will no doubt  be scored as a major setback in the effort for hearts and minds, and men and women pacing the halls of Langley, Pennsylvania Avenue and the Pentagon are most certainly scrambling to limit the PR damage from this incident. In today’s world of extraordinary rendition and extrajudicial state-sponsored assassinations, a routine CIA abduction would normally raise few if any eyebrows outside of the morally inclined who send their yearly cheque to Amnesty International. “Nothing interesting here, move along” says the mainstream media and White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, except when there is big money involved. US officials have admitted on record that Mr Shahram Amiri was paid a cool $5m by the CIA, apparently for information about Iran’s suspected nuclear weapons programme. And the fact that he is Iranian- and not Iraqi or Arab further moves this spook novel tale into uncharted territory. As if the embarrassment of this revelation was not enough, the CIA dropped the ball by losing their prized catch after a year in custody, only to see him turn up at the Pakistani Embassy in Washington. Upon his triumphant repatriation to Tehran this week, the scientist  stated that he was offered $50m to stay in the US- where he would most likely be refashioned into a ladder day Ahmed Chalabi-type US marionette puppet to be paraded in front of Senate committee Hearings on Iran and churning out regular pro-democracy proclamations, human rights rhetoric and shadow reports about weapons of mass destruction hidden somewhere inside his home country… all from a heavily guarded witness protection compound in Beverly Hills. In his own words, Amiri denied he had ever had information about an Iranian nuclear programme explaining, “I am an ordinary researcher… I have never made nuclear-related researches. I’m not involved in any confidential jobs. I had no classified information.” It’s entirely possible that like most of the taxi drivers, farmers and delivery boys locked up in Guantanamo and Bagram prisons, Mr Amiri was the wrong guy in the right place and by the time he was Gulf-Streamed back to Washington the politics of modern desktop intelligence had overtaken old fashion common sense.

Shahram Amiri reappears after a year in CIA custody (Photo: BBC)

After a 6 year public relations bout between the powers of the West and Iran, with Iran out-manned and out muscled by the West’s immense PR machine,  Mr Amiri’s return to Iran appears to have awarded Iran, in PR terms anyway, a tenth round decision by knockout. In an arena where the  Pentagon spends at least $4.7 billion a year on PR trying to win the hearts and minds at home and abroad, the CIA’s botched operation here resembles the demise of someone like Mike Tyson, the heavy weight fighter who following a series of high profile blunders, embarked on a long and painful career downward trajectory. There was a time when he had it all. We all remember ‘Iron Mike’ in his heyday dropping his opponents in 90 seconds, the toughest guy on the block, a consummate underdog, untouchable, a man of the people and with all the money and a celebrity wife to boot. And then it began to go all a bit wrong for Iron Mike- first came the allegations of wife-beating, a rape conviction, jail time, chewing off the ear of an opponent, the bankruptcies, followed by circus-like appearances alongside Jake the Snake on the WWF circuit, B movie cameos… and finally all those the tattoos, lots of them. It’s safe to say that the glory days are long gone. What, with all the abductions, assassinations, torture and fabricated intelligence, one could say that like the Champ, the CIA- or “The Agency” as it’s romantically referred to in modern folklore, has not only lost its touch, it’s lost its way and has become a parody of itself.

IRON MIKE: the former heavyweight champ lost his touch

The Importance of the PR War Time will tell the full scope and severity of the PR damage sustained by the CIA with the botched kidnapping of this Iranian scientist. How well or how widely this CIA kidnapping story was covered in the domestic US media is difficult to measure without running real focus groups and getting Joe the Plumber’s take on the incident.  European or World headlines don’t always penetrate US minds. One example being the infamous ‘Downing Street Memo’ which was a major scandal in the British press, but was somehow barely mentioned on American network television for two months when it ran in Europe. First published by The Sunday Times on May 1, 2005 this document detailed, amongst other things, President Bush’s plan to provoke Saddam or even by shooting down its own US aircraft(a False Flag Attack), thus providing a pretext for the initial invasion. During those two months in the US, ABC ran a virtual fire blanket of approximately 121 stories on Michael Jackson and 42 stories on Natalee Holloway, a high-school student who disappeared from a bar while on holiday in Aruba. CBS news had 235 stories featuring Michael Jackson and 70 on Natalee Holloway- with the Downing Street Memo practically nonexistent in the news cycle. Ect, ect. So much for the fabled watchdog. We should be aware that there is a massive gulf between the quantity and the quality of the news we are fed by the majors. Public Perception vs Opinion The reality of the dominant mainstream media influence on public perception- which in turn, influences foreign and military policy decisions, is something which often eludes the passive viewer. As we are witnessing today with Iran, the run-up to the big event is everything. When it comes to a pre-war campaign, your government with do as much as it can get away with, unless… there is a sizeable public backlash in the run-up to a particular event. In the case of Iraq, the public’s resistance to the imminent US-British invasion in March 2003 was significant but not large enough to tip the scales of overall public perception of the supposed Iraqi threat. We say perception here, not opinion, because perception deals with perceived fact, whilst opinion is something else altogether. It’s important to note the difference between the two and that perception comes before opinion. We are forever being told how important public opinion is to the formation of policy, but it’s the perceived reality of a situation that supplies the spark needed to get political wheels in motion. For example, the public cannot actually have an ‘opinion’ on whether or not Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction hidden in his palace because the answer to this question relies on actual fact and the existence physical evidence. But after a sustained public relations media campaign, over time, enough of the public(and Congress) can- and did, perceive that these weapons were there in Iraq , thus providing Washington and London for a pretext to prepare the attack or invasion later. Afterwards, the public would then be asked their opinion on where or not we should go to war. Ditto for our elected representatives. Once the occupation was underway and the ‘Coalition of the Willing’ had already sunk $500 billion into their colonial venture, it was obvious to even the most ardent anti-war activist that no matter how hard they tried, they could not stop the juggernaut, and so elites and opportunists were not denied the spoils of the Iraq War. Yet, there was a point in late 2002 and early 2003 where the public perception of the nature of the threat from Iraq was not clear enough to endorse an invasion. Few would disagree that the US could not have had a ‘coalition’ without Tony Blair standing shoulder to shoulder with Washington, because in American eyes, his endorsement of Washington’s fabricated intelligence and cooked-up dossiers gave a sort of credence to America’s bumbling Dubya Jr and Daddy Bush Sr’s somewhat questionable designs on the Middle East. The Pentagon’s PR victory was achieved before the invasion in 2003 during a very long(and expensive) public relations war to mislead the public about WMDs and won enough hearts and minds in the West to get a green light. Open the bomb doors. The same is happening now with regards to Iran, as spin doctors and spooks in the West work to construct a public perception of Iran’s nuclear capability, afterward they will return to ask us our opinion on whether or not we should attack or invade the alleged rogue state. CIA: Losing its touch? Has the CIA lost its touch? When events spill into the public arena, even the Agency knows that perception and opinion are much harder to control than their operations in the field. Some might argue that they lost it a long time ago. After the forged document for Yellow Cake uranium from Niger and Tony Blair and Alastair Campbell’s now legendary “Dodgy Dossier”, a generation of educated readers will almost certainly be sceptical of any serious intelligence claims which originate from Langley, Virginia, much less informants or foriegn nationals who were drugged and kidnapped. Former CIA analyst Ray McGovern has stated this week in his editorial that ‘Amiri wasn’t going to play curveball’ and that despite what Hilary Clinton and the White House claim, Iran has no nuclear weapons capabilities now- and certainly won’t have any time in the near future. This conclusion, of course, is based on the CIA’s own Intelligence Estimate published in 2007, so it seems the Agency is offering $50 million to strangers in order to undo their intelligence findings. Interesting. He has described repeatedly on record an agency marginalized by an ever-growing bureaucracy and sycophantic culture that fears the opinions of experienced analysts will clash with political and military industrial ambitions. In the end, we can only watch in amazement and place our bets on what will be the next move in the public relations war against Iran. No matter which way the Iranian project goes, intelligent politcal circles are already debating the relevancy and long term fate of the Agency. From a cost-benefit point of view an argument certainly can be made today that the effectiveness of this monster of a department has already peaked. To understand better the full size and scope of this intelligence monster we can look to The Washington Post who recently published a brave volume of information on the subject entitled, “Top Secret America”, a project nearly two years in the making that describes the huge national security buildup in the United States after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. See their full report online here. Max Keiser talks live on the Alex Jones Show about the size of the “Secret Government” in the US. Nonetheless, all eyes are currently on Iran. For anyone who is still on the fence as whether or not Iran actually presents some kind nuclear threat to the West, just remember that you too may have to endure the aftermath of an attack which could trigger WWIII proper. Think long and hard about that one, because you can be guaranteed that Dr Strangelove and the War Hawks have not. Hardly a “surgical” operation, and all the more reason to keep an eye on what’s going on in Washington, London and Tel Aviv. The truth about Iran’s nuclear weapons programme or even its alleged intent to “wipe Israel off the map” (this was never actually said by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad) will not be coming out of the mouths off politicians or their frontmen. Ask yourself what lessons we have learned from the Iraq invasion. After the attack, comes the war. Remember during the early days of Iraq, the words of White House press secretary Scott McClellan, assuring us all that “I think we have a clear strategy for success, and there is great progress being made on the ground. We are succeeding and we will succeed.” This followed by President Bush saying, “We have a clear path forward.” It sounded good at the time- to them anyway. Whether it’s McClellan-Bush or Gibbs-Obama, the message and the game are one in the same. Don’t be fooled, don’t be distracted by Brad, Angelina, Michael Jackson, Paris or LeBron, just know that you are in the middle of the PR War- and make no mistake… it’s a war for your mind. —————
Mr Amiri denied that he had ever had any information about the Iranian nuclear programme. “I am an ordinary researcher… I have never made nuclear-related researches. I’m not involved in any confidential jobs. I had no classified information.”
facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterest

Copenhagen’s Climate Change Titanic Heading for An Iceberg

By Patrick Henningsen 10th December 2009 Correspondent in Copenhagen In the wake of COP15’s infamous Danish Text Leak this week, politicians are now showing their true dictatorial colours and designs on implementing the initial plans of a world government through the Copenhagen Treaty. The leak detailed a backroom deal between political elites, including officials from the US, UK and Denmark, which has sought to reverse the original Kyoto agreement where the first world nations had to pick up the bill for alleged climate reparations, and instead raising their own emissions restrictions and make the developing countries cap theirs. A classic ‘bait-and-switch’ at the eleventh hour, evidently at the expense of the developing nations. Yet, many international delegates here appear to be under no illusions that any meaningful long-term agreement draft next week will be of little consequence if the US cannot sell it back to their constituents at home. US Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) administrator Lisa Jackson appeared yesterday at the UN Climate Change Summit to assure the international community that the EPA will not let democracy get in the way of regulating the deadly toxic gas known as carbon dioxide at home. Her “endangerment” declaration means that CO2 will still be subject to intense regulation under the Clean Air Act, giving the White House executive power to limit CO2 emissions- even if Congress does not pass a definitive climate bill in 2010. EPA’s Jackson received applause from the audience, but critics and opponents of carbon emissions trading schemes, see it as just the latest episode in what has become a systematic failure of the World’s Developed economies to convince the Third World that a Copenhagen agreement will be in their long term interests. Barun Mitra, Director of The Liberty Institute in New Delhi, India explains, “Developing countries are naturally sceptical about how much will really come out of this conference. Many people characterise this political divide as one of ‘rich countries vs poor countries’, but in reality what we have is a section of the elite in rich countries colluding with a section of the elite in poor countries making policy decisions that have a negative effect on the average person.” Mitra adds, “There is a classic divide about what gets talked about at these type of international conferences and what can actually be implemented once leaders of go back to their respective countries. In actuality, Climate Change is not really a key domestic issue for China and India, but economic growth is. Economic growth is still the top priority for developing countries.” Green Protests Planned Supporters of Copenhagen’s global government agenda to save the world from a global warming doomsday are also heavy reliant on green activists and have even drafted in the help of anarchists and anti-capitalist protestors who are gathering in their hundreds near the City’s Klima Forum site. Protestors will spend the weekend in meetings to organise and prepare for a series of mass demonstrations and incursions on the official UN Summit venue at Bella Centre. Most “Climate Action” activist groups present here in Copenhagen, however untrustworthy of their Western leaders’ ability to cut a fair deal with poor Third World nations, seem to trust the UN implicitly when it comes to the science laid out by the IPCC. At the same time, elite representitives in attendance from the Third World are at loggerheads with Western elites about what their carbon emissions caps will be. Ironically, all sides in this showdown appear to be at their respective polar ends of the green power spectrum, in the end all three sides have fallen for the same discredited, global warming scientific alarmism that underpins each and every policy which will come out of the UN conference. Piers Corbyn, Director of Weather Action illustrates this irony saying, “Real green activist and real environmentalists need to think about getting off of this climate change Titanic- before it ends up hitting the iceberg of truth and bringing them down with it.” What will follow next week is sure to be another surreal and ridiculous chapter in the folly we have come to know as COP15. New Film from Copenhagen: A challenging discussion about the science and politics of Climate Change… - Part 1 – Climate Sceptics or Climate Realists - Part 2- Climate Sceptics or Climate Realists - Part 3- Climate Sceptics or Climate Realists facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterest

“Hopenhagen” Hopes to Set its Global Agenda

Hopenhagen

(photo: Patrick Henningsen) Supporters of a Climate Change Treaty say Obama is determined to sign something despite recent set-backs in the run up to COP 15.

By Patrick Henningsen Correspondent in Copenhagen The UN’s International Summit on Climate Change, COP 15, opened its doors yesterday in Copenhagen. Attendees include over 10,000 delegates and observers from 192 countries as well as thousands of press. UN slogans line Copenhagen’s billboards and public spaces, including its main strap-line urging world leaders to “Seal the Deal” next week. But since the pre-summit meetings in New York, Barcelona and Bangkok, insiders are said to have known for weeks that any meaningful deal is beyond reach this year. Serious negotiations have stalled, as 192 nations may be left with the prospect of producing a vestigial, nonbinding political agreement calling for reductions in green house gases or “global warming emissions” in the future, as well as the promise of financial aid for developing nations to “adapt to climate change”, with a binding pledge to come later in 2010. Only after all this would signatories eventually see a binding treaty signed in 2012, complete with target mechanisms, enforcement measures and dollar amounts for poor third world countries. Craig Rucker, Executive Director of CFACT and co-chair of the ‘Climate Sense’ meeting in Copenhagen says, “Even if there is something signed here in Copenhagen, it does not mean that it will become real policy worldwide- it could become another meaningless agreement. The Kyoto Agreement was signed by President Bill Clinton, yet it was never ratified by the United States.” In ironic carbon neutral fashion, Copenhagen’s International Airport has catered for some 140 private jets and the UN has laid out for a fleet of over 1200 limousines for VIP delegates. Many critics has seized on this as an example of the governing, globalist oligarchy class present here in Copenhagen, a class who expects its citizens to hold up one end of a bargain that it cannot manage to do itself. Climate Gate Revelations Curiously, the Danish hosts of COP 15 have nicknamed the summit “Hopenhagen”.  In itself this slogan spells out the inherent problems implementing any real binding contract for CO2 globally and in light of recent developments on the scientific front, this is certain to become an increasingly uphill battle for proponents of man-made global warming theory. The single biggest revelation being discussed in low voices here in Copenhagen is the Climate Gate scandal out of the UN’s CRU facility at East Anglia University. Across town from the massive UN’s Summit compound, however, at a meeting organised by CFACT and the multinational group Climate Sense, the Climate Gate scandal is being hailed as the first official crack in the man-made global warming hypothesis which is underpinning each and every policy surrounding global carbon emissions. Climate Sense has assembled an impressive panel of speakers which include Lord Chris Monckton(UK), Professor Fred Singer(US) and Professor Ian Pilmer(Australia). Climate Sense co-organiser Graham Capper explains, “We’ve organised this meeting and brought this great line-up of speakers because what is being proposed here at COP 15 is based on questionable science and impractical economic sense. Climate Gate has only highlighted problems that have been around the so-called scientific consensus for a long time.” Waning U.S. Influence The US House of Representatives passed its first incarnation of a climate bill this past June but it is unlikely that this will make it to the Senate for a serious debate anytime soon. One U.S. Official who asked not to be named so as to speak more freely, said that the focus on Copenhagen has been set back by the current domestic debate dominating Capitol Hill- Healthcare Reform. With the lowest approval rating at home of any US President at this juncture in his young tenure and with his recent defeat in getting the 2016 Summer Olympics to his hometown Chicago, Obama will likely want to return to Washington with some version of a victory. Supporters of a Climate Change Treaty say Obama is determined to sign something despite multiple set-backs in the run up to COP 15. Mainstream media pundits still contend that the US is the world’s economic superpower and that an American signature to the Copenhagen Treaty will position the country to lead the world by example in Climate Change policy. Some might say that this overlooks the reality of the world’s economic league tables, where the USA’s economic clout is not what it used to be. With the current continual slide of the once mighty US dollar, the galactic debt on its balance sheet, and the prolonged recession being forecast across the board, China and the Eurozone are each set to surpass the US in total GDP output and productivity. Still, news agencies like AFP claim in their opening news release from Copenhagen, “US President Barack Obama is hoping to push through a new deal after the United States — the world’s biggest economy — rejected Kyoto under his predecessor, George W. Bush.” Before it takes any action and makes a firm commitment, the US Congress will likely expect to see other major players like China, India and Brazil make real commitments, but the reality is that those emerging economies are likely to deliver little beyond promises. More ‘Climate Theatre’ Apocalyptic scientific projections countered by lofty emissions targets and their treaties, most of which are not even remotely anchored in reality, are fast coming to be known as “Climate Theatre”.  The stage is set for even more drama, as delegates and observers anticipate the arrival on Friday of President Barrack Obama, who plans to announce an 85% emissions cut by 2050… pushing US emissions back to levels not seen since the year 1900. Even the ultimate salesman will have trouble selling that one. In short, it will not happen unless the US can manage turn back the population clock back to 100 million people which would require it to wipe out 4/5 of its population. Eugenicists can argue amongst themselves over the logistics of that particular scenario. Globally, 56 newspapers published an identical editorial telling their leaders to agree on action to limit temperature rises to 2.0 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit)  or watch as climate change “ravages our planet”. How the political delegates from 192 countries here are planning to control the Earth’s temperature is yet one of many outrageous scenarios which have become part and parcel of global climate conferences. With the science behind global warming now under the gun, end game policies like Cap and Trade may soon be dissected in similar fashion, bringing the whole conversation of climate change alarmism out of its current theatre and into a new phase of rigorous public debate.facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterest