....for Power

Money as Power

America prints and exports Dollars. That is what it does. It is a law unto itself. It exists in an alternate reality outside the Economic system within which other Countries have to struggle for existence. The US is the greatest user of Keynesian Economics in the World but it punishes any other Nation if they came even close to operating the same model. America wrote the rules so it can, and does, abuse its power and privileged position. Oil is priced in Dollars. Every country needs Oil so every Country needs Dollars.

It didn't cost America anything to make these Dollars. So poor countries have to export whatever they can to the US for Dollars. Third World Debt is in Dollars. It is the 'hard currency' that debtor nations must earn just to pay the interest on their loans. The loans were largely used to buy American goods and services. Hence the Third World Debt is a source of global money supply. Just another part of the system enginered to supply the US with a permanent advantage over other Nations whilst keeping those other Nations permanently under-heel.

If you trip over to our "Money" section you will see our brief about how the Global Economy is rigged for the benefit of a minority and to the disservice of the majority. Money flows from Poor to Rich not because the poor are stupid but because Money buys Power. When you have the power to destroy a Country's Economy then that Country's Government will use Tax Payer's money to keep bailing out the Financial System instead of reforming it. The odds are stacked against the majority in the Casino Economy because the rich make the Table Rules. And on this Table it is the Dollar that is in charge and American runs the show. It is the only game in town.

In 1944 the Nations met to agree the post-War Economic system, at Bretton Woods. Despite good arguments put forward, that International Trade should be conducted in an independent currency, American vetoed the idea. The Americans were concerned about losing their export surplus and plunging into depression. So they rigged the game permanently in America's favour. This is the root cause of the Third World Debt that can never be repaid. What is more they insisted that Oil be traded in Dollars. America was in a strong political stance because it funded the free-world's fight in World War Two. It was the only ally to come out of the War stronger than when they went in. Mainland USA had not even been bombed. As the rest of the World owed America big-time then the American pretty much wrote the rule book. They got everything they wanted. They called the shots. The only consolation was that the Dollar was pegged to Gold (at the time). This last crumb of comfort was removed by Nixon in 1971.

Due to the significance of Oil in the modern Economy the petro-dollar came a de-facto world currency. It is kept on ice in large amounts in Central Banks around the Globe. It is the new Gold. $11 trillion is held in banks OUTSIDE the USA. It alone is the basis for US wealth. American make think they have a special place in God's scheme but only their currency does. America exports $2 billion a day to keep itself afloat. It needs the World Economy to keep investing in American money and cajoles any country whose consumption is not up to spec. Why? Because the consumption services the Dollar Debt. America's internal Debt is $33 trillion. Foreign Investors own $2.7 trillion more in US Assets than Americans own of foreign assets.  Oil producing nations have a huge stack of petrodollars and have nothing else to do with it other than to invest them in America.

The US is running a huge Trade Deficit. America's Balance of Payment Deficit for 2005 was $805 billion. If foreigners stopped buying dollars then the Federal Reserve would have to destroy Domestic Dollars to prevent inflation. The Dollar value would drop dramatically. Ironically this would benefit the US because its foreign Debt is kept in dollars. Poor countries are not allowed to keep their debt in their own currency. Even more ironically America's own exports would become more competitive. It makes you wonder what they are scared of.

Trade as Power

In the 1800's British Free Trade enthusiasts saw Free Trade as a way of undermining the nationalistic desire for war. In theory they were right but such systems quickly run out of control as they are hijacked by various powerful self-interest groups. Both Adam Smith and David Ricardo were known for there extensive writings about the ethics of markets. They believed that Government should not interfere with the Business operations of ethically run businesses. A far cry from today's free-for-all. Greed is not good. The first experiment in free trade collapsed in the First World War. After World War Two free trade was on the backburner as the peoples of Britain 'took back' what they felt they had earnt by winning the war, ie, a welfare state and national health system. During this period the economies of many countries improved - even those of the poor. However by the 1970's this social contract was deemed to have failed and Margaret Thatcher came to power in 1979 promising a revolution in how things would be done. She was followed a year later by Reagan in the US and the mould was set.

In both countries Industry collapsed and unemployment sky-rocketed. Crime, bankruptcies, family breakdown and infant mortality followed suit. The income gap rose to its highest for a hundred years. However, the British and Americans had it good. They were, at least, in charge of their own destinies unlike the poor countries.  The World Trade Organisation (WTO) was formed in 1995 to deregulate/regulate World Trade. Since the US call the shots the effect was largely to strip the weaker trading partners of any protections they were previously able to use. The WTO robbed Politicians of the freedom to operate their economies for the benefit of local populations. Food becomes a cheap commodity used to purchase petrodollars rather than feed the local citizens. When the US and Britain were developing their infant industries they were protected. However, any attempt by a poor country to do the same is shot down by the WTO. Whilst rampant economic growth has stripped the natural assets of nature the WTO has guaranteed that environmental protection cannot be used to protect anything. Even better - Military production is exempt from free trade regulations. The making of bombs and guns can be subsidised by Government. Like it needs it.

Poor countries are now locked in a trap. They are not allowed to play by the rules that the old colonial empires used to develop their empires, ie, trade protection. Instead they have become a quiet backwater where first worlders can pick up cheap labour and even cheaper raw materials. Meanwhile the US protects its own Industries with a vengeance. You name it, from Cotton to Steel, from Defence to Ports, there is nothing that won't be done to protect American products from foreign competition. Outside the luxurious world of the elite anger boiled over and by 2000 there were signs of collapse in Trade Talks. Rioters appeared on the streets at every major gathering of World Leaders. Something was very, very wrong. For there was another way. Despite Mexico signing up to the NAFTA in 1992 its economy stagnated. Meanwhile, over in Vietnam, which had been the victim of a US Trade Embargo until 1994, no WTO or IMF Policies were adhered to. Vietnam was not even a member of the WTO (unlike poor Mexico). Vietnam imposed its own import tariffs and quotas and its economy prospered. In Vietnam poverty decreased dramatically and the economy grew at 5% a year.

Others weren't so lucky. Between 1980 and 2001 the price of sugar was down 75%, cocoa 66%, rice 65% and cotton 58%. Rock bottom agricultural prices are destroying the livelihoods of farmers across the globe yet every cow in Europe receives a subsidy of $2.62 EVERY day. That exceeds the daily income of half of the population of the entire planet. Look closer at why. US Cotton Farmers receive a $4 billion subsidy every year to produce ONLY $3 billion worth of cotton. Thus the price of cotton is held artificially low because the US essentially gives it away. This destroys the livelihoods of Cotton Farmers in Nigeria. Even worse, in one of India's Cotton-growing regions, 1200 farmers KILLED THEMSELVES in 18 months. In the 1970's Kenya was largely self-sufficient in food now they import large quantities. Local production has been turned over to export. In the 1990's a Coffee Farmer in Ethiopia earnt £1.95 (GBP) per kilo. By 2000 this was down to £0.12p. The price of coffee is now so low that in Tanzania children no longer go to school. Families face starvation. Meanwhile the profits of Nestlé reached a record high due to low commodity prices. In the race to the bottom the Coffee growers of Tanzania are in competition with other growers in Indonesia or Brazil. All for a cheap cup of coffee.

Tanzanian growers could invest in the Coffee Processing Industry that would keep some of the profits at home. They tried it but the processed coffee would only attract a higher import tariff from the Rich Industrialised Northern countries. They couldn't win. They weren't even allowed to develop their way out of poverty. The rules are stacked against them. Adam Smith advocated that each country had the right to develop its own processing industries. He described any means to prohibit this development as a "manifest violation". These words were written in a section of the "Wealth of Nations" obviously long forgotten by the likes of Nestlé. No poor country has a competitive advantage in any product or service now that capital and investment is mobile. A Corporation need only go and buy the land or business in any poor country and do it themselves whilst exporting all the profits. Ricardo's law of comparative advantage doesn't apply as with all the other laws of classic economics and free trade. Free trade was not meant to be the law of the jungle. It had its ethical conditions. Conditions completely ignored by the Washington Consensus.

In the meantime the increasing reliance upon essential goods from further and further away bleeds away at community self-reliance. Ships account for 4.5% of global CO2 emissions and this is growing by 15% a year. Aeroplanes account for an equivalent of 6% a year. All this will stop when Oil availability declines. Rich countries will have lost the knowledge to produce life's essentials whilst the poorest will lose all income from exports. A brighter future only comes from rejecting Globalisation and embracing "Relocalisation".

Power Over the Poorest

America was not the cradle of civilisation. Persia was. Modern day Iran and Iraq. Homo Sapiens first evolved in Africa. For millions of years we spread throughout the lands and indigenous cultures sprung up. These existed in harmony with their surroundings for thousands of years. They had culture and language in the harshest of living environments. They had music and dance. In Greece they invented democracy and in China they invented Gunpowder - for fireworks. In the Arabian Peninsular Mathematics and Astronomy evolved. Islam offered a classless society. Egyptians built Pyramids. Others created great art, jewellery and ceremonies. For 4000 years mankind's population remained constant and in balance with nature and everyone's share of Solar power.

Then came Fossil Fuel Capitalism. European Empires grew. Railways & Steam Ships could send armies to the furthest corner of the Earth. The Armies of European Empire looked at the ancient wisdoms and civilisations and saw them as worthless. They were backward. So they slashed and burnt until all that was left was a hollow shell of what was there before. Peoples who had lived sustainable lifestyles for a thousand years were snuffed out and their knowledge lost. in 1908 Gandhi surveyed the damage and wrote "should India ever resolve to imitate England it would be the ruin of the nation".

By 1949 the European Empires had been smashed by two World Wars and America was in the ascendant. US President Truman stood at a cross roads. Should he repeat the mistakes of previous Empires or would he tread the same path? He chose. He declared those countries outside of America and Europe as "underdeveloped" in need of greater "prosperity". He chose to lead these people into a golden age of modernity based upon the Western model alone. He had learnt nothing and a new cycle of slash and burn started. But this time it was far worse. America believed that everyone could share the riches without sacrifice. It was a massive failure.

Generations that had lived in harmony with the land found themselves in shanty towns. After fifty years of persistent failure the population had skyrocketed over and above the planet's carrying capacity. Global agriculture had been turned inside out. Rather than farmers being custodians of the land, the modern farm became just another Business. The land became a sponge to soak up pesticides, herbicides and fertilisers all made from oil & gas and supplied by the same large chemical Corporations that supplied the only strains of seed that would grow in this chemical cocktail. The soil died and there was no going back to the old ways. Monoculture displaced permaculture. A culture of dependency developed. People who never needed developing in the first place found themselves developed to the point of extinction. Suffering on scales previously unimagined spread throughout the world.

Even now right-wing evangelicals for 'sustainable development' tell us that everything will sort itself out if only the poor were to become rich. This is despite the game being rigged in favour of enriching those who are already rich. The problem, they tell us, is not too much development, but too little! With friends like this who need enemies? Given a fresh start tomorrow the poor nations could not even start working backwards to a sustainable existence due to their burden of odious debt. When conquering Empires occupied someone else's country they would write-off any debts that country had to any third-party and refuse to pay them. Now the shoe is on the other foot. Now the poorest are in debt, to the rich and powerful, there is no question of it being written off. Recall the stories of how American and European Central Banks would step in regularly to prevent Banking collapse bought about by bad bets placed in the Casino Money Markets? Such bail-outs have not come the way of countries like Zambia who in 2007 was actually sued by Private Trust for $30 million of a debt that had already been reduced to $4 million. A British court found against Zambia and awarded the private company $55 million.

Debt is poverty. Debt for poor countries was created in Dollars rather than local currency. Rich Country debts are kept in their own currencies. So the balance of power remains with the IMF. Could you imagine the IMF telling America what Fiscal Policies the US needs in order to pay off its debt? When the local currencies of poor countries devalued the value of the debt increased. These countries could not declare themselves bankrupt. The IMF kept making loans to countries in the full knowledge that they could never repay the capital. Just an ability to repay Interest was enough. Loans were not linked to capital investment projects that would generate revenue. Skewed trade rules prevented indigenous development of industry for economic growth. Only basic materials and food could be sold. Loans were frittered away on luxury developments of no future value. The IMF insists that any failed indigenous company's debts would be converted into Government Debt which has no basis in law. Ever wondered why the commodity price of coffee fell so low? Every poor country was told to produce the same basic foodstuffs to sell for export, so they all grew the same crop and created a glut. Agricultural prices plummeted. Loans could no longer be repaid. Interest payments alone would cripple the poorest. Over three million people in Malawi faced starvation when their maize crop was taken to repay debt.

Since 1960 Third World Debt has never decreased. Between 1980 and 1996 sub-Saharan Africa paid twice the amount of Interest on Debt than the total amount owed. The IMF and World Bank demand good governance from the Debtor Nations yet dictate policy to them. An African country typically spends only 7% of its budget on social services whilst 40% goes on servicing its debt. Many of the profits from precious metals in Africa are siphoned off by multinational Corporations instead of being taxed to pay off debt. In fact the IMF encourages the shifting of Tax Burden FROM Corporations and to the local population. And Dollar Debt ensures that the only way to pay it is by earning Dollars. The US cannot lose. No wonder such odious debt is now permanent. It is a matter of deliberate policy as it allows the Rich economies to keep growing in the full knowledge that they are taking a bigger and bigger portion of the diminishing pie that is this planet's natural resources.

From South Africa to Burkina Faso new Governments have inherited the odious debts of previous corrupt regimes. Many of these countries have been devastated by AIDS, War or Apartheid and desperately need money for rebuilding the shattered lives of their people. In the Democratic Republic of Congo debt repayments are $260 for every man, woman and child. Yet in the 1997 Asian Financial crash the IMF paid off $120 billion in bad debts. The money went to the rich western investors who had lost money. Banks are literally paid for making bad decisions. Yet around the world poor people die for the poor decisions of people they have never met. Western Creditors are always first in line for handouts. Not an image that Western Governments are keen to emphasise. IMF policies only benefit Rich Western Creditors. If the World Bank put as much imagination into protecting the lives of countless millions of the world's most disadvantaged, rather than filling the pockets of their rich associates, then the problem of odious Third World Debt would have been conjured out of existence years ago by creative accountancy or Government handout. Such Debt is only 3% of the Global Total. Its disappearance would hardly cause a ripple. It is retained in order to maintain the balance of power between the Rich Countries (primarily America) and the poor.

Power Against Democracy

Reformist Leaders in the 1960's and 70's - such as Lumumba in the Congo, Sukarno in Indonesia and Allende in Chile - came to power promising wealth redistribution. However they were unable to implement these policies due to their odious debt. Not that it mattered anyway. The US (who always views such policies as Communism) staged coups in all these countries. Despots loyal to the US, such as Mobuto, Suharto and Pinochet, took the reigns of power. Even today any country that is unwilling to hand over its natural resources to the big American Corporations will find their power undermined by US-sanctioned coup attempts. Just ask Chávez, Morales and Correa in Latin America.

In a 1996 declaration Osama bin Laden made it clear that the grievances of Al Qaeda were purely political. He wanted Saudi Arabia to be free of the despotic rule of the House of Saud. He opposed US support for the Monarch and Israel. After 9/11 he again made it clear that the attacks were simple reprisals for American (and its allies) attacks upon Muslims in Palestine, Chechnya and Iraq. We are meant to accept as normal that only America has the right of reprisal. Yet the people of the Middle East are angry. And why shouldn't they be? Palestine has been humiliated and ground to dust for fifty years with the direct Political and Military support of the US. Half a million children died in Iraq due to sanctions. US support for Israel's multiple invasions of the Lebanon won them no friends. Falluja destroyed. Torture, rendition, Guantánamo, Abu Ghraib and the narrow-minded focus on extracting as much Oil as possible have all taken a heavy toll. Yet America is proud of a tradition that includes the throwing off of the yoke of the British Empire that, in comparison, was a minor tiff over taxation. If America had, historically, suffered on the scale of the Arabs they too would be rallying to a flag of any freedom fighter who would give them hope. This is human nature. The British too thought the American Independence movement were just terrorists. Look where that got them. Even Ho Chi Minh saw the American Independence struggle as a model for the liberation of Vietnam from French Colonial rule. Imagine his disappointment when the Americans put Japanese, then the French back in charge after World War II. Look where that got America.

However, we know that terrorism is just a façade, a useful instrument of Western Political policy. It serves purely a domestic purpose in suppressing the excesses of Democracy at home. If you need new laws to legalise internment without trial or wire taps then 'terrorism' is your perfect excuse. Current laws passed in the heat of the moment are showing no signs of repeal and no signs of doing any good. They are fear-driven and inappropriate. Abandonment of fair trials and the due process of law is just one more recruiting sergeant for extremists. There is no War on Terror. Each new Terrorist event is dramatic yet on the scale of the problems the society faces it is quite small and, statistically a long, long, way behind such things as Heart Disease and Traffic Accidents in claiming the lives in the citizenry. Yet we hear no clamour for a "War on Drunk Drivers". The shock Troops and Special Forces have yet to be parachuted in to a hospital near you to take over Cancer Research. Devoting Military muscle to a problem such as Terrorism is an enormous waste of money that could be better spent elsewhere. The threat is actually tiny in comparison to what all that military expenditure could buy in terms of real security. Money spent on cluster bombs could supply fresh drinking water to millions of children and win the hearts and minds of a million more who may consider another path other than suicide bomber. If we really wanted to defeat Terrorism the answers are cheap and simple. We must stop exporting it and practising it ourselves. Terrorism is a crime and we should preach from a position of good example. Currently the West has no moral authority on the matter whatsoever.

Military Power

The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) commits member states to disarmament. Other states would promise not to acquire nuclear weapons in return for assistance with the peaceful use of nuclear power. Immediately after the treaty was signed in 1968 the US, Britain and France got down, in earnest, to completely ignoring their pledges. Their first action? They gave the bomb to Israel. Never in all history has there been a more calamitous example of pouring fuel upon a fire. To this day the IAEA Inspectorate has never been allowed to tour the site in the Negev Desert where the bombs are kept. The US, Russia and France have all developed new types of nuclear weapon in violation of treaty obligation. The US is quite open about the fact that it is developing such weapons for Tactical use.

In fact the Pentagon is extremely explicit in exactly what sort of nukes is on its wish list, how it will use them, when and against whom. Seven countries are named as primary targets for pre-emptive strike. Not retaliatory. Pre-emptive. The US Military will even use nuclear weapons in any conflict it thinks it is losing. This is a highly threatening position for any country that is not the United States. The US has declared itself judge, jury and nuclear executioner. When other countries feel threatened they develop their own bombs. Just look at the comparison between North Korea (has the bomb - not invaded) and Iraq (didn't have any Weapons of Mass Destruction - invaded). The lessons are clear and everyone's security is undermined by the actions of the original nuclear powers. Yet they continue to blame the victims. Being a member of the nuclear club is now seen by Western Politicians as enhancing their country's international standing and influence. The British Government actually admit this. What example is this?

Even worse: the British Trident system is steered by an American-controlled GPS system. So we can't even use it to enhance British security against the REAL threat to global peace and security. The British deterrent is just an arm of the American military system. Hence it is useless and should be done away with as rapidly as possible. Today one nation, above all, feels invulnerable from Nuclear threat. The US is developing its own space-based platform for missile destruction. There goes the balance of power. The US has already used Nuclear weapons twice against undefended cities packed with civilians. A deliberate act of mass extermination for which no one should ever trust them again.

What is the chance of the Rule of Law returning to World Affairs to keep in check this rogue nation? Judges ruling on a German Army Major, who refused to obey an order implicating him in the invasion of Iraq, acquitted him. They stated that UN Charter permits States to go to war under only two conditions:

1. self defence
2. when authorised by the UN Security Council

Since the "Coalition of the Willing" had not satisfied either count then the Invasion was, de-facto, illegal. Resolution 1441 contained no such authorisation. How many British and American leaders have since faced War Crimes charges? In fact there have been numerous attempts through the legal system in Europe to have Dick Cheney indicted for the crimes of Abu Ghraib. He may have to think twice before travelling to Europe in future. Many brave peace protestors in the UK have faced the force of new anti-terror laws because they broke into secure military bases housing weapons of mass destruction. They felt (rightfully so) THEY were enforcing the law. Well, someone has to.

The "Project for the New American Century" (PFTNAC) published it blueprint for the US Empire in June 1997. Only three years later (in September) it suggested that the revolutionary change required in US Foreign Policy (to make it even more belligerent) would only come about through "some catastrophic and catalysing event - like a New Pearl Harbor." A year later they got their new Pearl Harbor - to order. Bush Jnr declared himself a "War President" and went shopping in Congress for unlimited War Powers. He got them. He got them free from all Congressional Accountability. The right-wing reactionary take-over of power (suggested by the PFTNAC) was over. It was a bloodless coup (save for the lives of some 3000 innocents sacrificed for the greater good in New York and Washington). Events then followed their natural course as these things do. Parallels to the burning of the Berlin Reichstag were uncanny - only going to prove that those at the PFTNAC had read their history books. Shame Congress didn't. Hell they couldn't even remember how they were hoodwinked by the Gulf on Tonkin. Politics has a short memory.

With the new fascism came the usual Four Horsemen of dictatorship:

1. Curbs on Civil Liberties
2. Crushing of Domestic dissent
3. Legitimisation of Torture
4. Denial of the right to trial

(Saddam Hussein would have been proud.) Of course the US media played usual lapdog service to its new leader and shouted down any naysayer as being somehow unpatriotic. Somewhat oxymoronic and more evidence have how far from 'democracy' America had now strayed. The Emperor had no clothes but no one dare say it. The option of acting multi-laterally was never really on the table. Gaining agreement on how to respond to 9/11 was of no importance because the Pentagon had war-gamed the scenarios through a year in advance. The troops were already waiting in the planes since August. But acting outside international law was a habit for the Americans and their actions that year (and since) followed the same pattern set by them:

1. refusing to sign the Kyoto Protocol
2. violating of the Montreal Protocol on ozone-depleting products
3. rejecting the Clean Energy Plan
4. breaking the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
5. rejecting the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
6. withdrawing from the ABM treaty with Russia
7. violating the Biological and Toxic Weapons Convention
8. refusing inspection of its Weapons of Mass Destruction
9. refusing to sign the Treaty on the "Rights of the Child"
10. un-signing the treaty for an International Criminal Court
11. ignoring the Geneva Conventions
12. reneging on the Land Mines Convention
13. ignoring the Small Arms Treaty
14. allowing the Weaponisation of Space

...and so on.... You name it. From Business Corruption deals, to international accords on Racism, the Law of the Sea, Economic Espionage, harmful Tax competition and Extradition, the American Administration ignored them all. It wasn't that they considered themselves above International Law. They think they ARE the Law. This was no secret. "There is no United Nations" said John Bolton (US Ambassador to the UN!). "There is an International Community that occasionally can be led by the only real power left in the World - and that's the United States - when it suits our interests and when we can get others to go along." America can take what it likes. It is for others to give, they can expect nothing in return. Not even its closest allies.

In 2004 the Pentagon's "Interim Global Strike Alert Order" introduced the World to a new threat - FROM the US. It enshrined America's unilateral Right of Pre-emptive War. They can strike any country at any time for any reason. This includes Nuclear first strike. After World War Two the UN established (unanimously) that "to initiate a war of aggression [unsanctioned by International Treaty] is not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole". Nazi War Criminals were hung for this crime. The American Regime states that it is going to commit this crime and tells you - in advance that it is a matter of US policy. The Pentagon's 2006 Quadrennial Defence Review presented the case for a "Long" War on Terror. This is to be unlimited by either time or space. It could be fought in multiple countries for years to come. George Orwell's "1984" anyone? Given the example of North Korea the only defence left against American hegemony would be to arm your country with Nuclear Weapons. The race is on. Even former President Jimmy Carter was forced to admit "We have now become the prime culprit in global nuclear proliferation."

Despite an alarming pathological desire by the American regime to work without allies, a few loyal servants paid helped out. To the astonishment of the British people and most of the Government, Prime Minister Tony Blair threw his lot in with Bush. Astonishing because the young Tony was a Labour firebrand - the very last sort of Socialist you would expect to have common truck with the most reactionary right wing American Presidency, well, ever. The US didn't care much for fig leaves but Blair provided it. He wouldn't be forgiven.

The aggression and invasion of Iraq killed 650,000 men, women and children. And the war continues. The Pentagon and their Commander in Chief proudly talk about their war in Iraq against Al Qaeda. Of course, Al Qaeda were NOT in Iraq prior to the invasion. And what they term as "Al Qaeda" are probably indigenous 'freedom fighters'. If the Pentagon wanted "Long War" then they got one. This one will last for generations. Just as long as the Oil keeps flowing no one cares.

The US now has a military presence through out the middle east and to the Caspian basin. All Oil producing areas. And it is not coincidence. Meanwhile the neo-conservative obsession with Islam as the new Enemy in a Cold War starts to defy all reason and logic. After 15 years of US-backed mayhem in Somalia the Islamists took over and the warlords fled. By all accounts the Islamist ran a tight ship. They delivered order out of chaos. The people knew security again. Pride returned to Mogadishu. The warlord roadblocks were gone and, in their place came street cleaners. This golden moment wasn't to last. Despite the joy of the people the US Administration labelled the new rulers "terrorists". AC-130 Gunships were sent in to do their own form of street cleaning. The way was clear for a US-backed invasion of Somalia by its Christian neighbour - Ethiopia.

Military programs in the Pentagon system are no longer orientated around fighting conventional wars between nations. As the true nature of what we call "terrorism" is just war by the weak against the powerful, then all future conflict will be in an urban environment. Since no Nation-state can withstand the onslaught of the Pentagon War-Machine it will be left to the poor and dispossessed to carry on the fight. Crushing this kind of resistance to US hegemony, with the fewest possible US casualties, is now the order of the day. The US "Space Command" published the "Vision 2020" report. In it they wrote "The Globalisation of the World economy will continue with a widening gap between the haves and have-nots. From space the US would keep those have-nots in line." Hence you will have nowhere left to run with your Rocket Propelled Grenade launcher and AK-47. Needless to say, considering the amount of 'collateral damage' that even GPS and Laser Guided Bomb cause in built-up urban neighbourhoods we can only imagine the kind of damage that a space-based weapon would cause the neighbourhood, town or city in which are young freedom fighter lives. Regardless this is all a VERY frank admission by the US authorities that they recognise that, despite their free trade rhetoric, they know they are pursuing policies that will make the rest of the World poorer. And they are ready to fight anyone who gets in their way. Anyone. America has sidelined former allies (such as France) without a second thought if they didn't sign up to the program. Your country could be next, your town, your city, your neighbourhood. You.

Corporate/Political Power

"Fascism should be more properly called Corporatism, since it is the merger of state and Corporate power." - so said one Benito Mussolini, Italian Dictator of note. This gem has become well known as the Politicians of the Western Democracies have slowly, one by one, slipped into bed with the Corporations. Of course "Democracy" was not the concern of any Fascist Dictator. Likewise it has become less and less the concern of modern politicians. In the 2004 US Elections  500 Corporations contributed $1,200 million directly to one of the two main political parties. 99.75% of American citizens made no significant donations to political parties. You can pretty much see how that story ends. So what are all these Corporations buying exactly?  Access to Government. Britain and the European Parliament is slowly heading in the same direction but are still light years behind the American system.

American Corporate lobbyists have not only bought influence they are now IN Government. They lead Government Agencies, Advisory Committees and head up task forces. They ARE the US Government. In the 2004 Bush Jnr installed over a hundred officials who were once lobbyists or spokesmen for top Corporations. As a result the laws on carbon emission, drugs, health care, food safety, land use, logging, clean-air, pollution, social security, and so on all took a heavy denting in the interests of the new Corporate Masters in charge. (At last count there were 18 US States now suing the EPA over its failure to limit emissions from new cars and trucks.)

Two Corporations were particularly close to Bush Jnr - Enron and World Com. Enron donated $736,800 to Bush from 1993. They donated some £6 million since 1989 to both main US Parties (but 74% went to Republicans). 20,000 Enron Employees lost their jobs and most of their savings when it went under, but 144 Top Executives received a total of $310 million in compensation and $435 million in stock. After the scandals that shook those two to the ground (financial fraud) the US President leapt into action. He signed a directive in 2005 that made Businesses exempt from reporting transactions for reasons of "National Security" - that well know euphemism for "anything embarrassing to the current Administration". To date no charges have been filed against Enron's Chairman Ken Lay or CEO Jeff Skilling. The economic infrastructure for 1930's style Fascism is now fully restored to the United States of America.