Archive for August, 2010

The Great Collapse of the Chicago Climate Exchange

August 27, 2010

Update: Nov 18, 2010
Death to the Chicago Climate Exchange ($7.40 to a nickel per CO2 ton, the market has spoken)

By Patrick Henningsen
Editor
Aug 28th 2010
21st Century Wire

Plagued by a free fall in carbon emissions prices and the perennial failure of Washington to pass any binding Cap and Trade Bill, it seems that the Chicago Climate Exchange is on its last leg, announcing that it will be scaling back its operations.

Chicago Climate Exchange or CCX, is North America’s sole voluntary, legally binding greenhouse gas trading and carbon “offset” projects in North America and Brazil. Rueters reported on Aug 11th that Intercontinental Exchange Inc, the operating body who purchased the struggling CCX in May this year, will be scaling back major operations this month, a move that includes massive layoffs. This is likely due to the complete market free-fall of their only product… carbon emissions.

Anthony Watts from the climate watchdog website Watts Up With That posts a graph from the CCX which shows carbon prices dropping like a stone, bottoming out this week at the embarrassingly low figure of 10 cents per tonne. Compare this to trading prices during its brief hay day in May and June 2008 where market highs reached $5.85 and $7.40 respectively, and you can say that most investors will be evaluating carbon as one of today’s more worthless commodities.

What a difference a year makes. It’s been nine months since the world watched the bottom drop out of a much-hyped UN Climate Summit in Copenhagen back in Dec 2009, with its neo-colonial and UN Global Government taxation agenda exposed within the first days of the summit. One of the keystones of the Climate Change alarmist movement was its audacious attempt to create a functioning market by monetizing the atmospheric trace gas known as CO2. Since last year, a number of scandals like Climategate have penetrated mainstream conversation, putting a rather awkward limp in the once nimble Man-Made Global Warming movement. Hence, apocalyptic frenzies and fears have dissipated and carbon prices around the world have continued to be pummelled by the market.

Monetizing CO2: the carbon neutral dream that no country could ever afford.

A Financial ‘Boondoggle’

Unlike most real markets, the carbon market was created by banks and governments so that new investment opportunities could seamlessly dovetail with specific government policies. It’s a fantasy casino based on a doctrine of pure science fiction. Certainly, gaming the system has always been at the top on the agenda of the new green eco-trader. Most people, investors included, might innocently ask the fundamental question, “what’s the point of having a CO2 commodities market?” The answer to that question should be obvious by now, and you can certainly look to the initial stakeholders in the various international climate trading bodies for a ‘Who’s Who’ list of individuals that have actively been pushing the global warming concept from its inception.

As American’s own CCX nears total collapse, climate alarmists and their vested partners are pinning their hopes on Europe and Climate Exchange Plc. With most European countries happily singing from the same EU song sheet, institutional investment in the carbon market has seen a slightly more sustained existence. Europe’s socialized historical habit of subsidizing anything and everything means that it has been a better safe haven for something as radical as a carbon market. Many financial analysts would say that carbon requires a relatively steady price of around €40 a tonne in order to spur industrial investment in cleaner technologies, but unfortunately, Copenhagen failed and the announcements of emissions cuts are not coming as expected. Perhaps the reality gap is beginning to set in between governments’ political capital in climate change and the peoples’ ability to believe in global warming. Either way, the market will not be able to deliver such lofty figures, which is why real investors are getting out of the carbon market in 2010.

The front end of this game of ‘supply and demand’ is heavily reliant on governments making lofty announcements about future emissions targets. The logic here is that cutting emissions increases demand for carbon allowances. In the absence of such a restriction of the market, it was expected that the price would fall, and naturally that’s exactly what happened. In 2008, it cost European traders €31 to pump out a tonne of CO2 into the atmosphere, but today it will set you back about half that at €15. You will be hard pressed to find any financial wizard/pundit giving a sermon on a bullish carbon market in the near future- it’s just not happening anymore.

On the back end of the game, things are a bit shadier to say the least- some might call it a recipe for corruption. The industrial monopoly power giants and other green businesses who are ‘well connected’ are of course, being allocated free EU Carbon Allowances until 2012, but from 2013 some sectors will have to pay for 20% of their allowances (those with weaker political influence in Brussels), rising each year to 60% in 2020. Many government/power company ‘green initiatives’ will automatically result in high energy price to consumers, which naturally means guaranteed profit increases for those same corporations (see Enron).

Off-set scam

Carbon trading is underpinned by an equally dodgy product called ‘carbon off-sets”, most of which are taken on face value by the buyer. Not based on an actual ton of carbon emitted, rather governing agencies are issuing certificates for a fictional commodity of emissions not emitted. A rather wild concept. Worse than this however, it is near impossible to verify which of these thousands of so-called off-set projects in the developing world are actually legitimate. In the coming years, we will no doubt see or read a number exposes detailing the depths of this fantastic green scam.

Get in early and then get out

The formula: create an investment vehicle, hype the new commodity, buy low, watch share prices rise, sell high. The result is money, lots of it. In some cases it’s been about driving up the share prices of companies Gore’s group has already invested in. The fact that the original shareholders of the CCX have already bailed out with their sale to Intercontinental Exchange Inc. for a modest $600 million earlier this year only reinforces the reality that its creators have already lost faith in their elaborate invention. Likewise, the self-styled leaders of the climate change crusade Maurice Strong and Al Gore have already cashed in carbon fortunes already, whilst other active politicians like US President Barrack Obama, and United Nations IPCC Chief Rajendra K. Pachauri (arguably the world’s wealthiest retired railway engineer) are engaged in similar play with their own financial interests in the Carbon Markets.

Like all government rigged quasi-commercial schemes, the only real beneficiaries are the initial shareholders- a special inner circle who are naturally ahead of the curve knowing about legislation and policy before it comes into existence. They are sometimes called the great and the good, the in-crowd, or the smartest men in the room (again, see Enron). Of these, almost all have jumped ship out of the market while their preferred shares– or in the case of the larger energy and manufacturing monopolies, their gratis “carbon allowances” given to them free by their governments- are still worth something. If you’re on the inside, it’s simple: get in early, make money and then get out.

   If you are in any doubt as to the level and expense of climate change propaganda, just watch this promo for Copenhagen.

   Another well-craft propaganda piece that cynically employs a child actor to deliver the message of certain doom.

Climate change based on science fiction

Pointing out the obvious is always a painful thing in the world of human affairs. The real reason for the complete and total failure of the concept behind trading an atmospheric gas like CO2 is something few within the green block will dare to even mention now, and it’s the same reason why the whole movement will go down in history as one of the most flamboyant efforts in the history of economics. It’s not just hubris. The whole idea behind making CO2 a commodity was to make it expensive and thus reduce the amount produced, which would (they hoped) reduce the effect of anthropogenic(man-made) global warming, or ‘climate change’ as it’s now commonly referred to. There was only one massive problem with this equation- there has been no global warming since 1998. So despite the hundreds of millions, perhaps billions spent on research and computer models addressing this possibility, no scientist or body has been able to show that man’s CO2 contribution has had any effect on the global temperature. Another massive blind spot for climatists is their almost religious denial that the sun might have any effect on the earth’s climate (studies show that it does, of course)- a major sore spot in any debate on global warming.

Placed in its proper historical context, we can see that the man-made global warming movement was a classic merger of radical Collectivist ideas and huge financial opportunities. Men like Maurice Strong looked for their moral positions to be anchored by a small group of hand-picked ‘scientific authorities’, a latter day technocracy if you will. On the opportunist side we also see those same scientists who have made  their careers, many millions of dollars over the last decade alone, on grants to prove that global warming was somehow happening. Other financial opportunists will include Al Gore, scores of companies like Carbon Fund and a multitude of charities soliciting millions in donations to save the planet, all of whom were hoping to cash in on this non-event until its financial opportunities eventually die out.

To date, the timeline of the planned green economy has moved at an impressive pace. If you step back and marvel at the timing and combination of the climate change movement and carbon trading business it’s enough to make you dizzy. Advanced positioning promised fortunes for those with inside knowledge before the global warming PR cycle went orbital in 2006. Never has the world seen a more stunning collusion between government(include the UN here) and big business, a tango that makes fascist enterprises like Mussolini’s Italy or Franco’s Spain look like mere student internships.

Still hoping for some silver lining in this otherwise cloud of failure, most diehard green activists are laying the blame on governments for giving away too many free carbon coupons in recent years. Certainly there is a valid economic point there, but greens were all too eager to get into bed with Wall Street and the Fabian Socialists in order to realize their dream of a new utopia. The current color-blind global financial system based on derivatives, futures and sub-prime gambling products will eventually take down the carbon market altogether, as speculators prey on untapped markets, selling more worthless paper to an ever decreasing naive minority. In the wake of the dot com boom and the housing boom, Wall Street certainly tried to make environmentalism sexy and trendy for investors, but we can see now that the results speak for themselves- CO2, a penny stock for kids. “Roll up, roll up. Anyone want a tonne of CO2 for 10 cents?”

In the end it’s just another age-old tale of big business, grovelling academics, power politics… and easy money(see also: slush fund). So it doesn’t require an expert to tell you that the carbon market was doomed to fail from the beginning. Let’s just hope it doesn’t require another Wall Street-style bailout.

—-

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: EXCLUSIVE VIDEO REPORTS FROM COPENHAGEN 2009

SHORT FILM: “HOPENHAGEN”

—-

About the author: Patrick Henningsen is a writer, filmmaker, communications consultant and managing editor of 21st Century Wire.

Contact: pj.henningsen @gmail.com
—-

 

RELATED NEWS…

Final Collapse of the Carbon Market in US 

—-

The 9/11 Zapruder Film: Building What?

August 27, 2010

21st Century Wire
August 27, 2010

  Building what? Preview this upcoming TV ad to be aired on NYC local affiliates.

  Narrated by actor Daniel Sunjata (Rescue Me, The Bronx is Burning), compares the new footage of Building 7 with the JFK Zapruder Film.

If you are new to this information, you may want to sit down and make a cup of tea first. The volume of testimonial and physical evidence pointing towards 911 events that differ greatly from the official party line is now overwhelming. There was a third skyscraper that dropped on that day, and it’s amazing how many people are unaware of this fact. More interesting still, this third building, WTC Building 7, was not even mentioned in the lengthy government issued 911 Commission Report. It is by anyone’s measure- the elephant in the front room. No plane hit this 47 story skyscraper and it stood no less than a football field away from WTC Towers 1 & 2, yet- it fell into its footprint in 6 seconds flat… arguably, a feat that could only be accomplished if it was wired for demolition in advance. Interested? Any further questions… ask your physics professor. See the animation below…

"Honey, why is there a bottle of red pills in the cabinet...?"

“You take the blue pill – the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill – you stay in Wonderland…”

The difference between the JFK Zapruter Film and footage of Building 7 is that it hasn’t taken 20 or 30 years for many millions of people to seriously question the official narrative of what actually happened. We are in Wonderland.

For more info, visit their website: 
http://www.buildingwhat.org

A New Independent Poll is Needed on Iran

August 23, 2010

By Patrick Henningsen
21st Century Wire
August 23, 2010

Infowars.com Editor Kurt Nimmo’s recent piece entitled Corporate Media Poll Claims Majority of Americans Support Iran Attack, raises a number of key and timely points on the quality of Rasmussen’s poll sampling and whether such a poll actually represents American public opinion on this particular issue. But let’s take this a step further and try to construct our own independent poll on the Iranian question, one which will more accurately reflect real public feelings on this impending geopolitical face-off.

Far from being objective, the Rasmussen Poll was designed to lend support an existing policy- to test the public waters on a Pentagon-planned pre-emptive military strike on Iran. The actual results produced are far from useful in measuring the country’s true public opinion on the matter, much less America’s willingness to add a new front to its already bloated global “war on terror”. In addition to this, their poll  contains some obviously loaded questions- questions which solicit amateur opinions on facts which polling participants are not even privy to know one way or the other. The Rasmussen Poll contained questions like:

1. Iran is an enemy?

2. Iran’s uranium enrichment program is developing nuclear weapons?

3. If Israel attacks Iran, the United States should lend a helping hand?

Clearly, polling participants cannot have an opinion on a factual matter like whether or not Iran’s uranium enrichment program is developing nuclear weapons. Therefore, the results from such questions are fairly useless, unless, however, Rasmussen is trying to measure the level of  the public’s disinformation on that issue (there is a touch of irony there). The last question is particularly loaded in itself, casually characterizing US support of Israel as a mere “helping hand”, but not considering for a second whether or not Israel’s pre-emptive strike is wrong in the first place. The US mindset has become so conditioned in accepting Israeli policy objectives (regardless of their effects on real US interests), therefore this is reflected in standard language we see throughout corporate media polling. Here we can see the way in which these types of mainstream corporate  polls are used to reinforce and construct a simplistic streamlined  groupthink on very complexed issues.

Spreading more democracy: grown men in Washington are getting desperate to play with their new toys again.

By asking a series of loaded and pejorative questions as they have done, Rasmussen can only produce poll results akin to that of an uneducated angry mob, thus containing very little useful information which can be used later in intelligent political discourse on the subject. Rather, these type of polls are used as supports within a larger propaganda exercise.

The painful lessons of 2001 and 2003 should be clear by now- that the US and its allies can and will go to war on the basis of fabricated intelligence and will do so without a declaration from Congress, preferring instead to use a House Joint Resolution Authorizing a Use of Force against the country it wishes to attack. This has already been set in motion by HR 1553: Expressing support for the State of Israel’s right to “defend itself” with a pre-emptive attack– you can’t get any more Orwellian than that. Nonetheless, it goes without saying that certain public opinion polls are key tools used by Washington and her major media outlets for bolstering any pre-emptive strike which is on the drawing board.

Alex Jones has commissioned polls in the past on very important issues, the results of which have been valuable in building a case for common sense. Of all the issues that are facing Americans directly today, none is potentially more hot than a US or US-supported pre-emptive strike on Iran. It would certainly be a valuable exercise should Infowars.com consider commissioning its own independent Zogby Poll into whether Americans really consider Iran a national security threat. A new poll should contain questions which gauge relevant public opinions and not whether participants believe general hearsay, rumours of possible intelligence on Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions, or general mainstream media propaganda designed to prime the war pump- all of which were demonstrated by Rasmussen’s latest hit piece on Iran.

An independent poll should probe into the essential and fundamental questions about Iran including:

1. Would you support a pre-emptive US strike on Iran?

2. Is Iran a genuine threat to US national security?

3. Do you think that the Iranian threat is being exaggerated?

4. Do you see parallels between the current campaign to characterize Iran as a WMD threat and the previous case against Iraq?

5. Should Israel be launching a pre-emptive strike on Iran?

6. Is the US obligated to support Israel if it carries out a pre-emptive strike on Iran?

With so much at stake, we cannot afford to get the fundamentals of this conversation wrong. What could be worse than another fake war that will cost our economy billions(trillions?) and our morality a priceless fortune? The conversation about Iran must be set straight on record and free from the obvious spin we have become so used to in The New American Century. Together, conscious members of the alternative media must keep working to reframe the conversation based on the principles of critical thinking, rather than the predictable mainstream media’s popular innuendo that caters to the whims of the mob.

One would hope that better and more intelligent polling might influence better and more intelligent foreign policy.

“The Fall of the Republic”

August 22, 2010

Party guests left to right: Tim Geithner, John Kerry, KSM, Oprah, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Axelrod, Barack Obama, Michelle Obama, Hillary Clinton, Party Crashers #1, Rahm Emanuel, Eric Holder, Party Crashers #2, Harry Reid, John Edwards, Bluto, Andy Stern, Bill Clinton, Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Barney Frank, Kevin Jennings Statues left to right: Che Guevara, Saul Alinsky, Obama, Chairman Mao and last but not least, old Vlad Lenin. (PICTURE: http://www.thepeoplescube.com)

(CLICK PICTURE TO ENLARGE)

Marvel here at one of the great Neo-classical masterpieces, “The Fall of the Republic”, chronicling the rise, slide and fall of this once great Constitutional Republic. It’s an age-old scene where the characters may change but the story doesn’t. An empire in decline, a happy time when style reigns over substance and political expediency is the order of the day. The latest cast of rather likely contemporary players, each  flanked by their legates and court scribes, together they are swept into positions of influence and intoxicated by the all-elusive prize… frolicking and partaking the multitude of spoils on offer, a variable orgy of the political power- as the republic is reduced to mere ashes all around them. What could be more glorious?

As natural as it is unmistakable, this is all in the name of ‘progress’.

As the super state grows to epic proportions, what of the common man? In the words of Marie Antoinette: “Let them eat cake.”

See the original post of this picture here.

It’s Time to Turn the Master Key

August 15, 2010

The time has come for a mass awakening of consciousness. “If it’s not right, then don’t do it. If it’s not true, then don’t say it”. And just like that, the pyramid shall crumble…

    An alternative speech inspired by the film V for Vendetta.

The 'tache that never goes out of fasion.

Textbook Doublethink: SPLC’s Latest Effort Attacks Constitutionalists

August 13, 2010

By Patrick Henningsen
Editor
August 13, 2010
21st Century Wire

The Southern Poverty Law Center’s latest Associated Press release entitled, Baffling beliefs mark Sovereign Citizen theories, is the organization’s most recent effort to marginalize large blocks of the population it deems to be a domestic threat. Closer examination of this, as well as other documents, reveals a systematic pattern of media manipulation and disinformation aimed squarely at the American people.

In the latest release the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) identifies,  “the number of people who now consider themselves sovereign citizens, Americans above the law who adhere only to the Constitution and follow a revised history of the United States”.

For any students of critical thinking, the SPLC is employing a 20th century propaganda technique know as doublespeak. Here the SPLC attempts to construct the doublethink idea that such Americans who adhere only to the Constitution are “above the law”.

Next it offers out proponents of sound money by railing against them, “The gold standard and bankruptcy: Belief that the country went bankrupt in 1933 when it suspended the gold standard and no longer had collateral to back its loans.” By spinning the conversation in one direction, the SPLC uses what is actual fact in the US and what few economists and historians will argue- that the country is bankrupt and has no real collateral for its loans, but then proceeds to paint this real-and-present economic reality as a ‘conspiracy theory’ propagated by so-called extremists.

And finally, in a grand demonstration of doublespeak that would dazzle even Eric Blair, the SPLC uses the accusation of “Straw Man” claiming that domestic extremists have concocted a series of false ideas in order to attack the ruling establishment. This is an interesting double-reverse spin move on the part of the SPLC. The irony in such a claim made by an organization like the SPLC could not be any more poetic, as they themselves have worked tirelessly, and spent countless millions building legions of their own Neo-Nazi and white supremacist ‘straw men’ in order to discredit multitudes of genuine modern political movements, fledgling activists and paleoconservative groups- a fact evident throughout their own activities and published reports.

This one is from their own Annual Report: “The SPLC sent a letter to committee chairmen with oversight over homeland security and the armed ser­vices in July after the Intelligence Project found dozens of personal profiles on a neo-Nazi website where indi­viduals listed “military” as their occupation. The letter called for an investigation and a true zero-tolerance policy that prohibit extremists from serving in the mili­tary.”

Controlling the market on 'hate': SPLC's media mouthpiece and agent of influence Mark Potok.

By using textbook doublespeak, the SPLC aims to propel further doublethink into the national public conversation, with the ultimate aim of creating a groupthink situation, where most Americans are mindlessly parroting the same lines they have been fed by the mainstream media outlets. The object of this game is to first frame and thus control all debates which fall into the categories that this organization has flagged as ‘dangerous’ to America. When the SPLC says ‘extremist in the military’, what it really means is any soldier who it identifies as belonging to, or affiliated with any group, or group sub-set that the SPLC itself defines as “extremist”. According to the SPLC this might include anyone who is affiliated with Patriot groups, Immigration reform, Anti-abortion, 911 Truth, We R Change, Oath Keepers, Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Gun Owners of America, and the list goes on.

Genuine citizens concerned about the dangers of domestic Cointelpro and propaganda campaigns would do well to take a closer look at the organization known as the Southern Poverty Law Center and also pay attention to the predictable spin which it continues to shamelessly produce on cue. It’s also interesting to note how the SPLC uses its cloak of nonprofit status and gains an almost direct pipeline to nearly all of the major US media outlets. In PR terms, this is a near military operation and cannot be achieved without coordination from the higher echelons of both sides of that equation.

The SPLC was founded in 1971 by civil right lawyers Morris Dees and Joseph Levin Jr., and by anyone’s estimate, this organization would have been a key chess piece in a post-reform South where political power struggles and spheres of influence rubbed together to form the political landscape we have today. This is also an organization which has, on record, been penetrated and used by the FBI. Their current head of Intelligence, Mark Potok, has curiously been attached to past events including the 1993 siege in Waco, the rise of militias, the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and the trial of Timothy McVeigh. Hardly the “objective observer” it advertizes itself to be, the SPLC has become a trusted dispenser of carefully selected talking points which form a wider political agenda, synchronizing its messaging with similar US-based front organizations like the ADL, the ACLU and AIPAC. Note the timing and frequency of their releases which always precede or follow certain domestic current events and which are almost certainly inserted to suppress real debate and discussion on real issues which are facing the United States.

The SPLC Money Machine

It advertises itself as “The Southern Poverty Law Center is a nonprofit civil rights organization dedicated to fighting hate and bigotry, and to seeking justice for the most vulnerable members of society.” The SPLC’s own 2009 financial report boasts a total operating fund support and revenue of over $31,000,000. No doubt this bureau employs some young  community legal workers and may even perform some cursory function helping certain people in need, but it’s main function has become that of a media spin  machine. We can see that it has the financial resources and media clout to run heavy and sustained information campaigns, as well as physically target its stated adversaries, namely Patriot groups, lawful local militia groups and Constitutionalists. It is, in effect, one of many attack dogs used by the ruling elite in order to dilute genuine dissent amongst the growing ranks of vocal Americans.

The SPLC has also taken credit for the resignation of former CNN anchorman Lou Dobbs, gloating in its annual statement, “When news anchor Lou Dobbs used his CNN program to promote the bogus claim that President Obama is not a native-born U.S. citizen, the SPLC called on CNN to take Dobbs off the air, citing his history of promot­ing immigrant-bashing conspiracy theories and myths… It marked the end of a five-year effort by the SPLC to educate and inform the public – and Dobbs – about the baseless conspiracy theories and anti-immigrant propaganda promoted on his show.”

Fingerprints on most major domestic events

Interestingly, it advertizes itself to be the self-appointed defender against domestic extremists, while at the same time the SPLC is promoting the likes of Bill Ayers (including a link between the FBI’s and the SPLC’s websites), a man actually convicted of domestic terrorism as he carried out a series of bombings within the US.  There are many publicly documented links between the SPLC and the FBI which should really raise suspicion as to the depths to which this supposed nonprofit entity actually goes, most notably the SPLC’s links to informants within the FBI alleged ‘sting’ operation at Elohim City and direct connections to Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh. More recently, the SPLC has provided close coverage of FBI informant Hal Turner and his bizarre trial- a story of minor importance in grand scheme of current events, but very telling by the fact that the SPLC will shepherd along such a story where a compromised FBI informant is implicated. All these connections between the FBI and the SPLC are of course, no mere coincidence. Any educated reader can easily glean from the SPLC’s own news releases and coverage, the sophisticated reverse-spin and antiquated 1970’s-quality left-wing cover which has become a signature of the SPLC media machine. It’s become predictable to the point of ridiculousness.

OKC's Tim McVeigh was connected to the SPLC and the FBI's operation at Elohim City.

Most notable of the SPLC’s inventions is the concept of the “hate group”, a racially-loaded term which carries no real legal weight and is not defined by any federal statutes, yet it’s a phrase which this supposed legal organisation uses ad nausium to support any infinite number of accusations against an equally infinite number of people in the US. The SPLC has also concocted the sister term  “hate group activities” in order to discredit any lawful community organizing by so-called “hate groups”.  To this day, the SPLC still touts Neo-Nazis and Klansman as major players in their hate matrix, even as the rest of America watched those groups descend into comic book status.

The SPLC has also pioneered the concept of “domestic extremist”, a weapon it has deployed numerous times and in different contexts to support their own alarmist claims and support a multitude of disinformation campaigns. Naturally, Patriot groups, anti-Obamacare activists, Immigration Reformists, protests against Israeli aggression, 911 Truth demonstrations, Oath Keeper meetings, Tea party gatherings and the time-honored marches on Washington would all fall under their catch-all definition of ‘hate activities’.

Modern media trends

The reality behind this office is that it no longer serves as a real and useful independent legal bureau, but rather an out-dated and clumsy propaganda tool for social engineering in the United States. Handlers of this organization may believe that the SPLC is working like a well-oiled machine, ever-effective at infecting the mainstream media with its own choice talking points. But like all tired institutions who rely on the traditional heavy and passive linear News 1.0 operating system(aka the ‘spoon-fed’ system), they can only watch as their model of traditional propaganda distribution becomes increasingly outdated by the day, as millions of active web surfers embrace the more sophisticated News 2.0 model, a model which rewards the readers and viewers who choose to dig, research, corroborate and verify their information- as opposed  to accepting information(and obvious spin) on face value.

A real danger does exist however when organisations like the SPLC begin to profile Americans according to their own labels and then supply their information to  Department of Homeland Security (DHS) fusion centers, and finally distribute them to local police agencies. The irony appears yet again- the SPLC claims to be protecting Americans from Neo-Nazis and what it is really achieving is moving America closer to a real Nazi-style or Stasi-esque system of persecution in America.

Americans need to become better guardians of their language, not allowing the likes of the SPLC to create divisive abstract concepts and dump doublethink all over the news for its own gain. This organization has been shown to be nothing more than a money machine, a dinosaur which makes its living on peddling its own brand of fear and propaganda to the highest bidder. Dated and bloated, thankfully it’s an organization in decline.

MIDTERM WARNING: We Are Being Set-up for Another Fake War

August 11, 2010

Sporting the traditional department-issued pearl necklace and looking ever worse for wear: the USA's unofficial War Secretary.

21st Century Wire
August 11, 2010

Editor’s Note: As autumn gradually rolls around and US midterm elections just ahead, we are hearing the tell-tale beats of the war drum repeatedly throughout the US media. Iran is clearly a target of the US and Israel in their bid to up the stakes and add a third theatre to the current global war on terror, flanked by Pakistan and North Korea (Russia and Venezuela also getting some minor airtime). The war drums have been banging for Iran for quite some time now and recent intensity indicates that a bombing raid may be months, if not weeks away. Overstating Iran as a nuclear threat will unfortunately suffice in US opinion polls. Watch this space.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has added another dimension to this latest chapter of the fabled New American Century, as she takes the Vietnamese side in their current dispute with China over a set of small islands in the South China Sea. Clinton claims that these islands are “in the US national interest”. Are they really? America, much less the world, cannot affort another multi-front conflict. Trends Research director Gerald Celente explains in clear English why Clinton and the rest of Washington are blowing rather dangerous hot air…

  In case you are baffled by current events, Gerald Celente lays it on the line.

Obama’s CIA Pedigree and the Reality Behind ‘Brand Obama’

August 9, 2010

Editor’s Note: The video below features an address by award-winning journalist John Pilger where he reveals the truth behind the marketing and branding phenomenon known as Barrack Obama. As Americans begin to see past the ‘Hope and Change Hoax‘, we are able to learn more about the reality behind Brand Obama which is slowly seeping in to the public light. This piece prefaces the article below which outline’s Obama’s unique CIA roots…

  Award-winning journalist John Pilger plays the part of Toto, pulling the curtain back.

Michael Leon
Veteran’s Today
August 9, 2010

WMR [Wayne Madsen Report] previously reported on President Obama’s more than one year employment by a CIA front operation, Business International Corporation, Inc. (BIC) of New York after his graduation from Columbia University in 1983.

However, the State Department’s recent revelation in response to a Freedom of Information Act request that the pre-1965 passport files of Obama’s mother, Ann Dunham Soetoro, were destroyed in the 1980s, has re-ignited suspicions that Obama’s mother worked for the CIA under non-official cover (NOC) cover in Indonesia while married to Lolo Soetoro Mangunharjo, a retired colonel in General Suharto’s CIA-backed ranks. Soetoro and Dunham married in 1965 after meeting at the University of Hawaii. That same year, the CIA-backed Suharto launched an anti-Communist coup that saw leftist President Sukarno eventually ousted from power and up to one million suspected Communists, including many ethnic Chinese Indonesians, massacred by government troops. Obama recently lifted a ban on U.S. military support for the Indonesian Red Beret KOPASSUS special operations forces imposed after the unit committed human rights abuses in East Timor in the late 1990s. The 12-year ban, imposed by the Clinton administration, was maintained by the Bush administration.

Barrack Obama, aka 'Barry Soetoro' taking a drag on his Winston during his Studio 54 "wild years".

In 1967, Dunham moved with six-year old Barack Obama to Jakarta. In 1966, as Suharto consolidated his power, Colonel Soetoro was battling Communist rebels in the country. Dunham moved back to Hawaii in 1972, a year after Obama left Indonesia to attend school in Hawaii, and she divorced Soetoro in 1980. Soetoro was hired by Mobil to be a liaison officer with Suharto’s dictatorship. Soetoro died in 1987 at the age of 52. Ann Dunham died in 1995, also at the age of 52. Obama, Sr. died in an automobile accident in Kenya in 1982 at the age of 46. Obama, Sr. attended the University of Hawaii courtesy of a scholarship arranged by Kenyan nationalist leader Tom Mboya. Obama and Dunham married in 1961, however, Obama, at the time, had a wife back in Kenya. Obama and Dunham officially divorced in 1964, the same year Dunham married Soetoro.

Files released by the State Department on Dunham’s name-change passport application lists two dates and places of marriage to Soetoro: March 5, 1964, in Maui and March 15, 1965, in Molokai — almost a year’s difference. In her 1968 passport renewal application, Barack Obama’s name is listed as Barack Hussein Obama (Saebarkah). In passport renewal and amendment applications filed from Jakarta, Dunham uses two different names: Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro and Stanley Ann Soetoro.

Read full article

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

August 2, 2010

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, their 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 pre-conditioned 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, worshipping 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 unknoweable”.

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. And 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 neo-fuedal 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. Recently it seems that 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 (ect)”.

   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 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 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 dystopic 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 programing 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 afterall…

   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 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. Software can be rigged and cracked, 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 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