Posts Tagged ‘Afghanistan’

The 9/11 Conspiracies

September 11, 2016


Propagandists of the established order say:”Conspiracy theorists are mad”. They know, or hope, that most people know no history: most of history is the fruit of conspiracies.

As Pharaoh Ramses III wrote in stone in 1175 BCE: “The foreign countries (i.e. Sea Peoples) made a CONSPIRACY in their islands… No land could stand before their arms…” Islands such as Sardinia, Sicily, etc. had conspired to attack the rich G8 of the Bronze Age civilization of the Eastern Mediterranean. Result of this conspiracy? Civilization collapsed so badly over a century, that even writing itself was lost.

For decades, I met smart behinds who told me only crazies thought conspiracies were interesting. Then there was 9/11. Even the smartest cretins had to admit, from the bottom of their obscure minds, that it was a conspiracy. Clearly, a conspiracy of Al Qaeda. But not just a conspiracy of Al Qaeda: president Carter, Reagan, Clinton and Bush conspired with Muslim terrorists, and president Obama has sung the praises of their ideology, Islam (also known as “Salafism”). One knows a conspiracy best, when the emperor has no clothes. Here is the American leadership, naked in the White House, for all to see, and few to understand:

Reagan Meets With Muslim Terrorists at the White House. That Conspiracy Led To 9/11

Reagan Meets With Muslim Terrorists at the White House. That Conspiracy Led To 9/11

[Smart idiots will say:’Oh, because you think these people flew the planes in the World Trade Center? It’s hard to answer idiots. Try with a chipmunk. Idiocy is easy, intelligence, difficult.]

If one conspiracy, why not more? It was astounding that, three years after the world soccer cup in Paris, the USA was completely undefended. Was that deliberate? A conspiracy of inaction, maybe? Acting up, by not defending oneself against an obvious threat? Was Bush and his friend Clinton subconsciously looking for reasons to invade and destroy Iraq, maybe? Just speculating.

A country such as France has air patrol ready to take off with fast (2,530 km/h) supersonic interceptors. The interception time, anywhere, anytime is 5 minutes, at most. Israel, of course, has even shorter interception times. In 1998, during the world cup, the French Air Force flew CAP (COMBAT AIR PATROL) above the Stade de France. (After centuries of fighting Muslim terrorists, that was only natural.)

There was plenty of time to intercept the planes of 9/11, had interceptors been ready anywhere in the north-east USA (a civilian in civilian clothing took off after the jets in an unarmed military F15, in one of the weird events. An unarmed interceptor could have crashed in a civilian jet: the Nazis used that method in April 1945 against US bombers… However that guy did not catch up.).

The surface area of France is comparable to the north-east heartland of the USA. For Christmas 1994, six Jihadists tried to crash a jumbo jet hijacked in Algeria, on Paris. They were all killed, and the passengers all rescued. Starting on September 14, 2001, CAP has been flown over the USA and Canada. There was no CAP before that. 

Many believe that 9/11 was actually a conspiracy of the US government. In a sense, we already see there was: not having any air defense over the USA was more than weird.

The detailed reasonings of those who think the US government dynamited the towers are silly, counterfactual, erroneous. But a friend of mine, whom I knew for decades, is not just a mountain climber (thus calm), but also a top notch, white, US born engineer in charge of checking nuclear plants and dangerous gas pipelines in earthquake country. He is also not political.

My friend does believe that there are reasons to believe that 9/11 was a US government conspiracy. He is a top notch engineer, so he cannot be easily written off, as a basket case from “the basket of deplorables” (to quote Hillary Clinton). Various subtle indices look very suspicious to him. So what’s up? Hence we see that those who believe that the US government set up 9/11 can be very serious, and much more versed in matters logical and technological than, say, president Obama.

How come? The answer is obvious: they are right, in some sense. They correctly perceive that the US government’s modus operandi is to set-up conspiracies within conspiracies. (And little do they know: much of Twentieth Century history was a conspiracy, still undetected, and quaint technologies such as “Quantitative Easing”, are themselves conspiracies. All they have in common is they profit always the same class.)


The US Government’s Actions, In the Most Important Sense, Set Up 9/11:

Did agents of the US deep state plant explosives in the World Trade Center? Obviously not: the poorly conceived buildings, basically large steel tents, collapsed on their own. In 1945, a bomber lost in the fog, hit the Empire State Building. The skyscraper caught fire so badly and thoroughly that the elevators’ cables melted.

Yet the Empire State is well-built, with concrete and a honeycomb structure. Contrarily to the World Trade Center, the Empire State did not see its structure melt. A cab stuffed with rescuers and wounded crashed to the ground from the top, after its cable melted… The elevator emergency braking worked, and all, although wounded some more, survived.

Osama Bin Laden was a peaceful scion of plutocrats, managing family business in Turkey, when he was contacted by the CIA and SIA (Saudi Intelligence Agency). OBL was then made into the second main agent of US imperialism in Afghanistan (the first one being Pakistan’s Intelligence Agency). Pakistani intelligence advocated striking soft targets, such as schools. Pakistan acted under American orders, all along. The idea was to make Afghanistan dysfunctional, if not an American province.

As usual, the leaders and owners of the USA wanted absolutely that the French (!) or Russian commercial and diplomatic empires be made as small as possible.  

The American Deep State & Secret Agencies Plotted With Islamists To Frustrate French & Russian Secular Interests

The American Deep State & Secret Agencies Plotted With Islamists To Frustrate French & Russian Secular Interests In Afghanistan

Front row, from left: Major Gen. Hamid Gul, director general of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate (ISI), Director of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Willian Webster; Deputy Director for Operations Clair George; an ISI colonel; and senior CIA official, Milt Bearden at a Mujahideen training camp in North-West Frontier Province of Pakistan in 1987. (source RAWA)

My father was involved in geological missions which revealed that Afghanistan’s soil was rich in minerals. After that, all hell broke loose, as Pakistan attacked Afghanistan covertly (obviously under US orders). As that was not enough, president Jimmy Carter outright ordered direct all-out secret war against Afghanistan, on July 3, 1979. To learn it from the horse’s mouth, one can consult:

(That interview of Carter’s National Security Adviser was censored in the USA, as it appeared only in the French version of that magazine! Censorship helps conspiracies, this is why the New York Times blocks all my comments, even if innocuous, and three words long.)

The idea of Carter was the same as it would be with Bush and Iraq: one way to make the USA stronger, is to make other countries weaker.

French intelligence people have asserted that Osama Bin Laden met with US intelligence officials, even when the USA was already in open conflict with Al Qaeda.

Speaking of conspiracies, is Barack Obama the founder of the Islamist State? As Trump asserted? In a sense, yes. It was under Obama’s watch, he was the main actor (as Trump said). Obama and Clinton took active measures to insure that Syria would be in the mess it presently is.

In particular, the deliberate destruction of Iraq by the USA, exactly what US oilmen and frackers wanted, could only bring forward a desperate resistance of deplorables such as the Islamist State fighters.

Sad is the state of US politics, when it is a greedy, self-inflating tycoon who has to tell the fundamental truth, because American intellectuals did not dare to, or, worse, were incapable of even having these thoughts.

Did higher-ups in Saudi Arabia finance the 9/11 attacks? Probably. Bin Laden was then cut-off, officially, from its wealthy family. So where did the considerable money for organizing 9/11 come from (the plot was larger than just the four planes which killed 2,996 people). It is also clear that much larger amounts of Arabian money fostered all sorts of terrorism and ‘radicalization”, worldwide since the 1930s. Now, of course, “Arabian” money does not really exist. Ultimately that was all about dollars circulating, and recycled on Wall Street (yes, Dollars, not Euros: Saddam Hussein lost his life for forgetting the difference)

So it is excellent that Congress voted unanimously to let families sue the State of Saudi Arabia. If we want to outlaw Salafism, as I proposed (and now Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet, a French presidential candidate, supports the idea… so I support her), we have to outlaw Saudi Arabia under its present ideology and legal system.

Today, the resolutely clueless Obama, hell-bound, as usual, to make us all stupid, started his 9/11 tribute by quoting the god in the name of whom the planes were crashed in the towers.  THE PRESIDENT: “Good morning. Scripture tells us, “Let not steadfast love and faithfulness forsake you…write them on the tablet of your heart.”

Well, this is a circus. The 9/11 hijackers killed in the name of the exact same scripture, which Obama quotes from approvingly, about the exact same god. And Muslim are going to celebrate the willingness of Abraham to kill his son, just because the same God told him to. The Old Testament, the New Testament, and the Qur’an all say, in all too many places, to kill unbelievers, miscreants, homosexuals, and this or that category of people.

By quoting “Scripture” as it were the ultimate ideology, the highest morality, Obama is winking at the terrorists who killed thousands of innocents on 9/11. Surely he is chuckling inside (as he orders drone strikes on civilian gatherings, just because he can).

By using Fundamentalist Islam as a weapon, starting in the 1930s, the USA used an unpredictable dragon to foster its oil agenda. Soon enough, the God of “Scripture” became the official god of the USA, inscribed by Congress in 1954:”In God We Trust”, replacing the old secular motto.

That was the least problem. The bigger problem, is that fostering of the desert God, and his will to human sacrifice made the West irrational.

But then, of course, that is the ultimate conspiracy. The only way great masters can exploit multitude of small people, is by making them so irrational that they lose track of their self-interest and of what is human, and what is not human. That was Reagan’s job, that was Clinton’s job, that was Bush’s job, and it has been Obama’s greatest success. Just because of Obama’s lofty rhetoric, and the color of his skin, nobody seems to have observed what he was really doing.

Fostering plutocracy further. But his employers will be grateful next year. That Nobel Prize on day one was just a foretaste of riches to come. Absolute power rots minds absolutely.

The 9/11 hijackers killed in the name of the exact same scripture, which Obama quotes from so approvingly today. Clueless, or devilish? Satanic, of course: we don’t call it plutocracy, the rule of Pluto, also known later as ‘Satan’, for no good reason. By quoting “scripture”, Obama exonerates “scripture”, just where scripture killed 2,996 people (yes, I included the hijackers). Because exonerating “scripture” from the act those who believe in it accomplished in its name, does not just binds us to “scripture” some more. It also means that we learn to ignore the main reason why those suicidal attacks happened. In other words, president Obama is teaching us to accept to be stupid.

Making those it subjugates stupid is an elite most self-preserving strategy.

Patrice Ayme


January 29, 2015

A conspiracy occurs when a number of individuals together (“con”) breathe (“spirare”).

Conspiracy doesn’t imply necessarily plotting, although, in the case of the Great Bitter Lake Conspiracy, a conspiracy launched by president Franklin Roosevelt, the famous “Democrat”, this is exactly what happened. Three quarters of a century later, we are still in the thick of it.   

History is made mostly of… conspiracies. Those who don’t want to learn about conspiracies, don’t want to learn about history. A friend, Paul Handover of Learning From Dogs, attracted my attention to the British movie, “Bitter Lake”.

“Bitter Lake” is about the conspiracy between American plutocracy and Saudi plutocracy. Plutocrat Roosevelt was freshly flown from Yalta, to the Great Bitter Lake, on the Suez Canal. The idea was to steal the Maghreb, and the Middle East from the French and the British, by making a theocratic alliance, with Abdulaziz Ibn Saud.

Abdulaziz Ibn Saud had proclaimed himself king of Arabia in 1932, after conquering most of it, with British military help. The Saud family ascent rested on an alliance with Wahhabi Islam, an extremely intolerant version of Islam, which interprets the sacred texts of Islam literally (Wahhab followed an earlier fanatic, who had been condemned to death, for Islamist Fundamentalism in… 1200 CE, more than eight centuries ago).

Abdulaziz Ibn Saud had established an authentic “Islamist State“. It made a natural partner to US oilmen, and US financiers. This partnership extends to this day: look at Obama preventing pursuits against the Saudis for 9/11, their financial support of the Islamist State, and the friends the Clintons keep.

At Yalta, Roosevelt had warmed up, by giving half of Europe to his Comrade Stalin. (Plutocrats of the world naturally unite!) That should break the back of Europe, if Hitler had not done enough already (correctly thought the US Deep State).

Never mind that Poland had fought the Nazis courageously the Nazis, at a time when the USA was militarily and diplomatically collaborating… with the Nazis (or maybe, precisely, the Poles had to be punished!) Roosevelt had to be strict: the French had successfully escaped from the military occupation (AMGOT) he had set-up for them.

Having warmed up at Yalta with its continent-sized gift to Stalin, US president Roosevelt was ready to make a diabolical pact with Abdulaziz Ibn Saud. After all, the Brits had shown the way, decades earlier, and it had been a bloodbath. This would organize the world economy for the “American Century”.

The USA agreed to protect Saudi Arabia, as the UK had done earlier. In exchange for oil, and the recycling of the profit in the worldwide dollar system, controlled by the USA. this became even more pronounced under Obama…

The movie “Bitter Lake” exposes (some) of the American plutocracy led conspiracies which led to the devastation, among other things, of Afghanistan, and other constituencies, thanks to the Wahhabist Islam it unleashed on the world.

Readers of this site will be familiar with the general ambiance.

One caveat: all what is in the documentary and makes American plutocrats (Roosevelt) and their servants (Reagan) look bad, is correct. However the real situation, the real badness is way worse. (For example the secret, official USA intervention in Afghanistan was under Carter, on July 3, 1979. However the real even more secret intervention, through the Pakistani ISI was even earlier and even more vicious.

So is history all conspiracies, and nothing but conspiracies?

Not quite. (Although in nearly all cases, whatever the spark is, the new situation is handled with new conspiracies: breathing together is intrinsic to the human experience!)

Sometimes civilizations are brought down by occasional natural cataclysms: a volcano exploding, accompanied by earthquakes, and a tsunami helped to bring Cretan civilization down. Earlier, a great flood had brought the Sumerian cities down, drowning them all (that flood is probably alluded to in the Bible). It did not look man-made, but it was (from human impact up rivers from abusive land usage). The Sumerian cities brought many invention central to Western civilization (the bicameral representation, the alphabet). Up the Euphrates and Tigris basins, agriculture and herding ravaged the soils and made them unable to store water. At the same time salination ruined the delta.

The Maya, after millennia of establishing a great and dense civilization resting on intense agriculture and a sophisticated, gigantic hydraulic system, with huge canals and dams, stumbled into a century long, drastic drought, just when they were losing control of their ecology (they over-harvested their key construction tree, to the point they had none, and were forced to switch to inferior species, for example).

Thus, even natural disasters are not, quite often, not that natural: the hand of Homo has been all over, for a long time. The Mongols knew this. After Genghis Khan took control of Northern China, having exterminated the Buddhist Xia, and conquered the Han, his generals insisted that he should destroy not just the Chinese population, but also the Chinese ecology (by destroying the forests, and making the landscape suitable to Mongolian species such as goats, horses, etc.).

Genghis Khan wanted to save Chinese civilization: he refused.

Sometimes one great leader can do more than Jesus ever did. (Genghis as the Jesus Jesus never was: the inversion of all certainties. The Mongol leader was actually educated by Christians, Nestorian Christians.)

And then there is determinism, inertia.

Often plutocracy gets established through sheer inertia, because of the power of compounded interest. This is why many a civilization sent the wives to the funeral pyres, with the Great Leader.

I have a personal connection to Afghanistan. Although I never visited, my parents did, several times, in the 1970s. Geology opens many doors.

As it happened, my dad was among a European group of geologists working for the Afghan government, who discovered Afghanistan’s riches… In the 1970s. All hell broke loose shortly thereafter. I have narrated in the past why I think that this was not a coincidence: the USA wanted its cake, and did not feel the same about Afghans, Russians… and the French.

I write about these sorts of things, day in, day out. But most people prefer the opium of feel-good… Pet a dog, dream about (being) celebrities…

In the end, “Bitter Lake” accuses the growth of the financial system, and its connection with the military-industrial complex (Ike warned about), corruption.

Readers of this site knows that plutocracy, as a controlling mind of its own, had started before the inception of World War One.

Nowadays, plutocracy is an apex of glory and mind control. Giant American global corporations, the 200 largest ones, do 100 billion dollars of tax evasion through Luxembourg alone. Each year. Many are media companies. Wonder why stories make no sense?

Juncker directed that. Now he is head of the European Commission, and insist Greece shall pay every single penny of its debt. Pluto insists little ones shall pay.

Oh, by the way, the real name is “Great Bitter Lake“, not just “Bitter Lake”. It’s actually a bitter ocean we are all drowning in.

In any case, the movie “Bitter Lake” is good start. A bit of what is going on, through the Afghan microscope. Much is made of the sci-fi movie Solaris, where a planet changes the minds of those who mess with it. Well, sure. But it’s not Afghanistan. That planet is planet finance, planet Pluto, and it’s malevolent.

Bitter Lake” ends this way: “At the end of Soviet science fiction film, Solaris, the astronauts returns to Earth. Everything seems real enough but somehow he does not trust in anything any longer…

Our leaders seem to have lost faith in anything. And the simple stories they tell us don’t make sense any longer. The experience of Afghanistan  has make us begin to realize that there is something else out there, but we don’t have the apparatus to see it. What is needed is a new story, and one that we can believe in.”

Well, I have that story. And that “apparatus”. But, by definition, it’s out of the comfort zone. As usually defined.

Patrice Ayme’


July 9, 2013


Abstract: Having a republic (Res Publica, “public thing”) is not just nicer to the public, in everyday life, it’s, more vitally, a military advantage, when war comes.  It’s not a coincidence that Rome accomplished most of its military successes when it was a Republic, or still, although a “Principate”, not far removed from one: under Augustus, worldwide, Rome was the closest society to a full blown Republic. That gave it tremendous military advantage: decisions were taken rather collectively. Thus after debates, hence more intelligently, in the average.

The important concept here is the notion of “public”. Rome crashed militarily from too much fascism, for too long and for no good reason, bringing the dreadful consequence of lack of public support, let alone a lack of creative input… which can only come from the minds of the many, the public.

A modern example? The USA stealth war in Afghanistan (1979-2013) and the rise of the USA as a surveillance state were engaged secretly and pursued without public debate. For example, why did US President Carter order a secret attack on Afghanistan on July 3, 1979? First, why was that order secret? Because, of course, it was ordered for no good reason! Thus the war in Afghanistan had no real public support (the public didn’t even know about it), and was not engaged for intelligent reasons one could justify. Time to cut the secrecy, and bring back the public. If one does not want to kiss the republic goodbye, that is.


When the fall of Rome is evoked, old fashion historians focus on military events at the end of the Fourth and beginning of the Fifth Century. Or they brandish hundreds of entangled causes of decay.

Superficially, indeed, the Roman empire cracked because it lost a crucial battle:

Adrianople: Fascism Is From One Mind, & If An Idiot, Toast

Battle of Adrianople: Fascism Is From One Mind, & If That Mind Is An Idiot, It Is Toast

The military crash of Rome blossomed at the Battle of Hadrianopolis, August 9, 378 CE, when the Gothic cavalry decisively annihilated  the extremely experienced Oriental Roman field army (including the emperor Valens, single-minded author of the disaster).

(Although the mysterious defeat and death of Augustus Julian in Mesopotamia (earlier, in 363 CE) was more fateful.)

The disaster at Hadrianopolis/Adrianople was a near fatal blow to the prestige, military, economy and tax base of the core of the empire. The empire was unable to recover for a number of reasons. In particular because plutocrats were too mighty to be taxed.

In 400 CE, the legions were ordered out of Britain and the Rhine Frontier. The Franks, shock troops and nation “infeodated” (under treaty and oath) to the empire were left in charge. Instead of having the defense of the empire staying a public thing, it was subcontracted!

However, during the winter solstice of 406 CE, the Rhine froze over, and an enormous coalition of savage Germanic nations charged through Gallia and Hispania, all the way to Africa (in the case of the Vandals).

That was the fatal blow to the Western empire, the “Occidental Part”. Population and economy collapsed. The Vandals, from their African redoubt, established an empire that reigned on the Western Mediterranean, cutting the grain trade, starving Italy, shutting down international trade, etc.

The Goths seized Rome four years later (410 CE). A century later, the Franks, in a full consultation with the Consul Anastasius (who reigned in Constantinople as Augustus for 27 years until his death at age 88), would finally destroy the Goths at the Battle of Vouillé, in 507 CE. Rome, that is, Constantinople, then made Clovis Consul.

Real Man: Clovis Killed King Alaric Himself

Real Man: Clovis Killed King Alaric Himself

Thus 101 years exactly after the savages broke through, the Romans (aka the Franks) turned things around militarily at last. True, they had been busy meanwhile, destroying the cause of all that turmoil, the Huns (who had pushed the Goths and other Germans west, to start with).

Vouillé had avenged Hadrianopolis. 129 years later. History can unfold slowly, although it goes faster these days.

But the most interesting question is what happened at Hadrianopolis.

And, even more fascinating, why did it happen?  Roughly, the defeat happened because the Roman system was fascist, with one single jealous man at the top. The intelligence of the collective was reduced to the intelligence of one.

Actually it was a bit more subtle: the top emperor, Valens, was jealous of the success of one of the top generals, Sebastian, who had defeated some Goths, and of his nephew, the young Gratian, emperor in Occident, who had also defeated fierce enemies, the Alamani (the Franks would finally destroy those “All Men” two centuries later).

Valens wanted his own victory. Although everybody in the Roman military structure, including the officers in his own field army, and the Frank Richomeres, head of Gratian’s guard, told him to wait for Gratian’s army, which was only 400 kilometers away. So Valens marched his army ferociously for 7 hours over difficult terrain in full sun, and when thoroughly exhausted and dehydrated, engaged battle, without even knowing where the redoubtable Gothic cavalry was.

One man had taken all the decisions, all the wrong decisions. The one-man-alone-in-command factor was the fundamental cause of the defeat.

One can compare with two other spectacular defeats, this time the defeat of famous Republics. At Cannae an enormous Roman army was annihilated by Hannibal. What happened? The Romans fell into a trap: Hannibal retreated to give the Roman center an illusion of victory, drawing it in, and then enveloping the entire Roman body with cavalry, squeezing it, similarly to what would happen, six centuries later, at Hadrianopolis.

At Cannae, the Roman army was unwise, imprudent, outsmarted. However the army was not engaged in a march of obvious idiocy because of one man’s folly, as it would be at Adrianople. If it had been, that would have been stopped right away (as happened say when the French army tried to defeat the Brits in Toulon; as France was a republic, Napoleon, then just a captain, was able to contest the strategy of his superiors, was supported by politicians, and won a great victory).

The same hold for the defeat of France in May 1940. Just like Hannibal at Cannae, but on a much grander scale, Hitler and his generals, thoroughly desperate to start with, decided to be lucky, as that was the only thing that could save them. It did. They conceived the phantasmagoric plan to draw in the army of the Republic, by smartly attacking the Netherlands first.

Just as the Romans at Cannae and Hadrianopolis, sure of victory, the French rushed in their elite armor and armies forward. Then the Nazis, undetected thanks to Lady Luck, and how crazy their strategy was, cut them from behind.

So the difference is subtle. It’s a question of degree. The mind of one, versus the mind of the many. At Hadrianopolis, the orders given to the army were outright insane. All top military officers begged emperor Valens to reconsider. He refused, because he could, being the head fascist. But his head was no good. It was permeated by Christianity, that is, superstition.

At Cannae and the Battle of France, the armies of the Republics, blinded by hubris, confronted adversaries who were desperate, in all logic, and thus could only try to be lucky. And they were.

Then, of course, luck carries only that far against the intelligence and character that a superior public brings. Rome took seventeen years to defeat Carthage (218 BCE-201 BCE), the French republic, thanks to its reluctant, or even initially hostile, but finally enthusiastic allies, six years to annihilate the Nazis.

Conclusion? War is always the most serious business. One has always to be ready for the worst. Hubris ought not to be invited. And the public is both the brains and hearts of war.

The USA started the war in Afghanistan by 1979, under Carter, to block the Afghans, Russians and… despised French to exploit the resources in Central Asia without profits for Washington/Wall Street, and to show all who was the boss (Brzezinski claimed it was just to destroy the USSR, but he is dissembling).

At the same time, to make war by proxy, the USA decided that Pakistan’s dirty work in Afghanistan was best complemented by others. So Washington recruited Bin Laden and other fanatics, in cooperation and collaboration with Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, and its collaborator and enemy, the Saudi Inter Service directorate (notice all these people are alive and well).

That attack on Afghanistan was hubristic, greedy, full of imperial overstrech. Those adjectives count as three moral negatives. In Afghanistan, the USA had, at best, only one (fake) moral positive: namely the specious, devious argument that their rogue mercenary Bin Laden had attacked from there. (Yeah, and who made Bin Laden into a soldier of god, and armed him, to start with?)

Perhaps the most important asset in a long war, is moral superiority. Morality is the extension of war to the realm of the possible.

Moral superiority is why, ultimately, the Republics won against the fascists Hannibal and Hitler. Or why, ultimately, the Franks defeated the Goths (the Franks were tolerant, inclusive, more civilized, and supportive of the 97%; not so with the Arian, exclusive Goths).

Reciprocally, lack of Roman moral superiority is why the Romans were defeated by the Goths (both sides were Christian; but the Goths had made a peace proposition that was advantageous to Rome, and that Valens rejected hubristically).

A fourth moral negative in Afghanistan is that the USA made a cynical usage of a primitive superstition, precisely because it was primitive, hateful, and illogical. Right from the start, in 1979, the USA fought to establish, or re-establish, fundamental Islam in Afghanistan (as the USA had done in Iran, or Pakistan, let alone Saudi Arabia or Egypt).

Once again the prominent tactic was that superstitious people can be easily manipulated, as the CIA had done in Iran, by instrumentalizing the Shiites against PM Mosaddegh (culprit of oil nationalization, and general insolence). However, Afghanistan, as a republic, and the benign monarchy before that,  had been pretty much free of superstition and at peace, so the USA strived to re-impose, twice, on Afghanistan a fascist, sexist interpretation of Islam.

This is no way to win a war. Morality cannot foster, or tolerate, big contradictions. As it is, the West has nothing much to defend in the Islamist republic of Afghanistan. Best to negotiate directly with the Taliban. Or, barring that, to just withdraw.

One lesson of the Roman military collapse, was too much energy was spent fighting war in the Middle East without enough overall civilizational superiority to win once and for all. All this energy playing military Sisyphus was as much energy that was not spent on the crucial frontiers: the Balkans, and, especially, the Rhine-Danube gap. Or reacquiring civilizational superiority.

Instead, what we presently observe is that the USA is turning stealthily into a military regime, complete with secret supreme court of surveillance and secret laws. How can one have secret laws in a res PUBLICA? Are not laws the architecture? Are they not public, by definition, in a republic?

It’s time to stop that drift. Obama should yank the USA out of Afghanistan, after making to the Taliban an offer it can’t refuse. He should also remember that Rome rotted from inside first. The more secret the rot, the worst the gangrene. Industrial strength secrecy has no place in a Re-PUBLIC. Moral force is domineering for wars, and the survival of civilization, in the fullness of time.

History is not just complex. It has meta-layers of complexity, as psychology does, and because psychology does, on the grandest scale. Those who do not want to learn from history, do not want to learn from psychology.



Patrice Ayme


January 21, 2013

[This is not just a little reminder, most people in the US have no idea this happened, and consider you insane to entertain such a notion!]
National fables can be the ultimate enablers of mass destruction. One such fable is that the USA was attacked on 9/11 by evil forces the US government had nothing to do with.

The conflict in Afghanistan killed three millions Afghans, while wounding and displacing much more civilians than that. This conflict was instigated by the USA’s CIA, through its agents in Pakistan instrumentalizing Islam. The conflict took a turn for the worst when the White House of demoncrat President Jimmy The Very Pious Carter put its full weight behind it, as will be revealed below:

The following interview of Brzezinski in Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998, was never published in the USA, for obvious propaganda reasons (that issue of Le Nouvel Observateur was available in the USA, minus the following offending interview, so as to leave We The People of the USA in comfortable, cozy darkness). And please realize that the real truth is even worse for the USA, whose role in Afghanistan, even before Carter’s unilateral attack, was already a war crime:

Question of Nouvel Observateur: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, Obama’s Defense Secretary, stated in his memoirs [“From the Shadows”], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?

Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secret until now, is completely different. Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.

Secret Agencies of The USA Organized A Muslim Fundamentalist Mess In Afghanistan, Using Pakistan ISI, And Saudi SIA, To Block French & Russian Influence There

Secret Agencies of The USA Organized A Muslim Fundamentalist Mess In Afghanistan, Using Pakistan ISI, And Saudi SIA, To Block French & Russian Influence There, & Trip The USSR Into An Invasion

Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?

B: It isn’t quite that. We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn’t believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don’t regret anything today?

B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?

B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?

Q: Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.

Zbigniew Brzezinski: NONSENSE!

Thus the USA did attack the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. The CIA and its Saudi equivalent got the good idea of recruiting a god crazy scion of Saudi Arabia’s second plutocratic family, Bin Laden. It was a good choice: Bin Laden was also an engineer and a manager, he quickly organized a powerful army of fanatics well-financed by friendly plutocrats. The CIA suggested to attack soft targets, such as schools, and the tactic was highly effective.

After 2001, the USA installed in Afghanistan a theocracy (as a holy book is the basis of its constitution).

By "Any Outside Force" Carter Meant The French Republic Private Mining Companies, Not Just The Soviet Ones. Read Between The Lines.

By “Any Outside Force” Carter Meant The French Republic Private Mining Companies, Not Just The Soviet Ones. Read Between The Lines.

Theocracy comes naturally to the USA. The Bible provided with a mood favorable to holocausts, as, after all, the god found in the Bible so indulged. Thus the Bible was central to enabling the eradication of the original inhabitants (and doing so with a good conscience). On January 21 a benediction was given on the steps of the Capitol as part of Obama’s election. In a discourse that the worst of the Taliban no doubt applauded, Rev. Luis Leon informed us that “without the blessing of God” we would be abominable monsters. It was fascinating to see the leadership of the USA bowing to the Reverend’s horrible declarations.

The situation in the Republique du Mali is completely different: it’s a secular state, an independent democracy, which called the United Nations to intervene, and the UNSC agreed, unanimously. The French Republic is just implementing that resolution.
Patrice Ayme’
For seeing the war of the USA against Afghanistan in a wider context; An obvious argument is that it did not escape USA strategists that the resources of Afghanistan were best tapped by the USA, rather than by France and the USSR.

“Greatest Nation On Earth”? Really?

September 7, 2012


What Else? Not Much. 

The Higher The Assassin Climbs, The More It Shows Its Bottom.


[Those who spurn critical thinking can take the blue pill offered by Krugman, trying desperately to mumble vaguely positive about who history may abstract as the assassin in chief! Uncritical thinking: what mussels do.]


“We work harder and smarter than anyone else.” 

Thus boasted Obama at the democratic convention. If a politician in France proffered such a lie, voters would think he was not just deranged, but nationalistically crazed. What’s true instead? We are much less employed:

Employment Ratio Prime Age Population

If one had an ethical graph, it would crash through the floor. Obama stood on its head 25 centuries of Ius Belli (see below). Assassination without due process is the only category where Obama unquestionably surpassed G. W. Bush (Bush had implemented free drugs for seniors, effective immediately, so, in a sense, Bush beat up Obama at the health care game: Bush really did something major, and positive, while president).

The naive may object that the collapse of employment was not Obama’s making. But the opposite is pretty much true. Obama approved, with the republican presidential candidate, John McCain, in a showy way, the decisions of the Bush administration. Obama even left the main engineer in charge, tax avoiding New York Fed chief Tim Geithner. Geithner is still in place, having presided over a collapse of employment.

Plutocrats, starting in ancient Rome, have always loved unemployment, because it transforms the People into hungry pigeons who eat in their hands, humbly. Nothing makes Pluto happier that this daily humiliation.

Moreover Obama resurrected Larry Summers, and took him as economic guru, starting in August 2008. This is exactly when unemployment rolled over, big time. The obvious causal relationship is that, at the time Summers gave a presentation to Obama about the importance to save the criminals, the banksters, and re-establish their wealth. that, in turn, gave the Bush administration a green light to do just that. So, instead of playing FDR, that means, stimulator to the economy, Obama played stimulator to banks.

A the time Bush was lost, his dreams smouldering, and checked out (and not just out of Iraq). Geithner, Summers, and the Mc Cain advisers were all in agreement to save the banksters, and damn the real economy. So here we are. Worldwide.  

Instead what had to be done, ALL OVER, was what was done to save the car industry. Obama did it, but just for the car industry (I gave explicit recommendations on how to do it in other industries, so it was possible to do so, obviously… Trillions were spent on the banks, for the banks, by the taxpayers, order of Obabush.)

Mr. Summers was the architect of the sustainable crushing of the economy by an unregulated bubble of financial derivatives and activities, under money hungry resident Clinton. It made the economy red hot under Clinton, and after that, it imploded. For this, people are much grateful to Clinton.

People are mesmerized by Clinton, like birds by a mamba. Something about bird brains, that even mambas understand.

Verily, the much despised Greeks work 2,100 hours a year (that’s because Greece is the country with the most family owned businesses). Koreans work 2,200 hours, and USA citizens work “only” 1778 hours. At least 15 nations work more per hour than the USA… In the OECD alone.

These numbers are known by all serious people. So why is Obama seriously lying to the thunderously applauding multitude? Why is the pseudo left multitude applauding those serious lies? So that they can better forget that their great leader is busy reverting 25 centuries of civilization, replacing justice by assassinations, in the best tyrant style?

It is revealing to compare the French and USA presidential elections. Raw nationalism is very strong, all too strong, in the USA. Nationalism is even viewed as a moral duty, in the USA. In France, among other European countries, nationalism is viewed with intense suspicion, so one does NOT go shrill that way, there. In France, nationalism reeks of insufferable bad manners (except in the despised National Front, despised precisely because of its nationalist rhetoric). 

After all, when the Nazi tanks rolled in, the most important mental force in plain view was nationalism. Nationalism is the “Na” in Nazism.

So no wonder nationalism is not hot in Germany anymore, either. And that’s very gut.

Civilization is not made just of things one does, but also of things one does not do anymore. Lying about other countries is a very bad habit to have. Just as it is a rather bad habit not to reveal that the USA attacked the Republic of Afghanistan, with the help of its henchmen in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, more than 35 years ago. Attacking people, killing millions, for no good reasons, has consequences. In the fullness of time.

True, Rome killed and enslaved millions in Gaul; but there were good reasons, said Caesar, although the Senate stridently disagreed. The judgement of history, and of most of the Celts themselves, at the time, and even more afterwards, was that Caesar was right. So killing millions is not necessarily bad. (Anyway, conflicts cascaded in Celto-Germania, and Caesar did not start the war, the Helvetes did.)

Killing more than ten million Germans was the price to get rid of Nazism; there was an excellent reason. In Afghanistan, all the reasons of the USA, to sow religious war there in the 1970s, were terrible, anti-civilizational, and part of the price is the unravelling of the constitution of the American Anglo Republic into an unprincipled Principate.

The official story about how 9/11 came about, is an enormous lie. In truth, the USA attacked civilians on the other side of the Earth, and that was followed by a counter-attack, more than a quarter of a century later, after the primeval action of the USA led to the death of several millions in Afghanistan.

The truth is mean, but it is the truth. And even so called “god” cannot do anything about it.

“We are endowed by our creator… we are the greatest engine of growth and prosperity that the world has ever known…” We we we we… Is that a mutation of the self satisfied he he  he he of G. W. Bush?

We, we, we, we have a president who is personally acquainted with his “creator“. Was that creator UBS, or Wall Street? Those were the only creators in plain sight, for the objective observers (except for the millions of suckers like me, all the little tini tiny creators who helped decisively Obama come to power, last time, of course. But then he forgot us all, because we were not banksters!).

Speaking of that great other USA president, G. W. Bush, his CIA tortured those it captured for Qaddafi first. Hey, what are friends for? “We work harder and smarter than anyone else.” Indeed, some world records may have been shattered. Torture records and cover-ups records are piling up. For the whole world to contemplate.

Some victims were left dangling from manacles around their wrists and feet for four months straight (interview on French TV from a famous survivor captured in Asia by the CIA). This assuredly demonstrates that USA torturers can get lazy: leaving a guy to hang around for four months does not smack of hard work. Besides those CIA goons are not that smart, because they forgot to kill all those they tortured, so now they speak (at least to non USA media).

People will say: “Oh, that was Bush, that was before”. Right. Things have become much worse, as a policy of systematic assassination by robots is being conducted worldwide, even on USA citizens, even on some of those who are still children. People should meditate this carefully: do they want a world where a so called “commander in chief” selected by some tribe with 4% of mankind go around the world, assassinating people without judicial process?

The Roman Republic leaders, 25 centuries ago, found such a notion atrocious, repulsive, uncivilized. Some of Rome worse terrorist adversaries received a sort of legal process (for example, Jugurtha, Vercingetorix, Simon bar Giora and John of Giscala; the former three were judged and executed, the latter, condemned to life imprisonment). These events were, in order of people killed, relative to the population then, and the danger they represented to Rome, greater, by orders of magnitude, to relatively puny 9/11. Still the Romans kept their constitutional cool, they applied due process to the criminals.

Formidable adversaries such as Josephus, the top Jewish general in the (treacherous Judea war) in the end was adopted by emperor Vespasian, and inherited his mansion, in Rome.

And the Romans kept their constitution intact, whereas Obama considers he has right of life and death on anybody, worldwide, without a semblance of due process. Definitively a violation of Ius Belli and international law. Say the millennia.

The Romans knew that “Ius Belli“, the Law of War, killing the adversary philosophically, was more important than killing the adversary physically. Obama confuses looking cool as a chap, and cold blooded assassination. Worse: goose stepping behind, cheering and applauding Obama’s exhibitionist love for his family, a circus for little children, USA citizens are carefully arranging their forgetfullness about what the Romans knew, 25 centuries ago. Namely that it matters when one goes and kill people, that everybody understand why, and that the cause be just.

The main axis of France’s foreign policy, since May 8, 1945, has been to re-educate the Germans in the way of peace and love. Franco-German reconciliation has been number one top priority. This was not compatible with nationalism, and that is why France did not seize one square kilometer of German territory after the Nazi defeat.

I turned the TV on, to watch the democratic convention, and here were sexy girls speaking like they knew it all, telling the USA what to think. They were movie actresses, and the crowd just loved them. With a teleprompter, any mental retard who knows how to read can work harder and smarter than anyone else.

Talking about plastic surgery, here was Vice President Jo Biden. All excited, and delivering a pretty good speech. He celebrated, (for want of a better word),  the death of more than 6,000 soldiers, and 50,000 wounded some so very severely, he marvelled with exorbited eyes. The RESOURCE WAR, aka “war against terrorism“, brought a tear eyed evocation. Biden finished on :”God bless you, God bless you!

God bless you for what? Destroying Afghanistan since 1978, just because “yes, we can

What struck me, beyond Joe’s predictable rhetoric, was how Biden had suffered from plastic surgery. His eyebrows were angling up, then came down hard on the side. His eyelids were wide open, as if he had been immensely struck by the incongruity of it all, after been hit on the head. What did that creature remind me of? It felt familiar. Yes. Those Batman movies, with the Joker. OK, I am not a specialist of Batman, and I have not really seen the movie, just extracts, so I cannot explore further what Biden has been trying to say by being a real life imitation of the joker incarnated by Jack Nicholson. Is it all a joke? Is that what he wants to say?

Another contrast with France was the so called “First Lady” that introduced “the love of my life“. Nobody of importance in the USA is aware that the “First Mansemantics was invented by Augustus, Rome’s first life long tyrant. But, even Augustus, did not introduce the ridiculous notion of “First Lady“. Who are the Last Ladies?

And why is the First Lady’s sex life so important? Sorry, I meant romantic. Hey, go easy on the steroids, by the way, those shoulders… And why does the resident instrumentalize his daughters? “Malia, Sasha, we are so proud of you… and tomorrow you have to go to school.” Why is that national news? Why does the president’s official business includes telling his daughters he is proud of them? It’s not obvious? He did not think of it before? He needs a teleprompter to communicate with his family? 

And why are taxpayers paying 100 million dollars for this pathetic, clownish circus?

Are USA citizens so deprived of these things they need to see them on TV? I was amused when Michelle made a huge smile off sync while telling the story of someone who could not afford health care. It was meant to express compassion, but the timing and intensity were off. With these little things sincerity, or lack thereof, shines through. Can one work the appearance of a heart harder and smarter than anyone else? A question much of the world has for the USA.

Michelle…I love you so much” Thus Obama does not just love to coolly assassinate citizens, worldwide. His love is all encompassing. And the other clown who smiles, immensely touched by this apparent revelation, just made to her, watched by hundreds of millions. And they embrace, and embrace… Why don’t they go all the way? Would not that augment the audience? Worldwide exhibitionism. What happens when it turns out that the president was sleeping around with the hordes, as happened so many times in the past, with many other presidents? Maybe all these drugs they are given to perform 24/7, like circus animals who would never, ever, rest in a cage.

For that matter, how come ex-resident Clinton, now filthy rich, is immensely popular while everybody should know, by now, that he planted, with his gardener, Larry Summers, the seeds of the financial disaster? Namely plutocratically engineered derivatives to the horizon, devouring the world economy? Is WE THE PEOPLE dominated by masochism?

So why the exhibitionism? Because when there is enough style, it can displace substance. And when the substance is banksterism as far as the eye can see, it’s best hidden in plain sight.

The best joke was Obama’s content empty discourse. He even forgot to mention “Obamacare” also known as the “Affordable Care Act”. His sycophants used to call that monstrosity his “signature achievement“. And here he was, refusing to sign his achievement again! Tell us it’s not true, Barry-Barack, tell us that you do not just say what the polls tell you to say.

Health care is much improved, just wait for the bill. Apparently Obamacare has become better not talked about. (True the ACA is supposed to increase how much most people are supposed to spend in health care: the act may be affordable, but is it care? The Republicans have noticed that Obama proposed to reduce the funding of Medicare by $750 billion… So naturally they pounced on that, while proposing to transform Medicare into Vouchercare. Democrats are screaming it ain’t fair, as if that were not predictable. Either they are lying, or they really have puny brains)

In truth, Obama and his Pelosi plutocrat carefully wasted time when they had total control with a health care plan that will not work (because it does not have a sustainable mechanism for cost control). They agitated the ACA as the red flag it was, thus distracting the attention of the People away from the banksters (neither jailed nor even prosecuted), and from Quantitative Easing (print money for the banks that caused the crisis), and from allowing banks to use loans as rents for over-valued properties (over-valued by the banks themselves), while they, those Pelosi plutocrats, were keeping the taxes on the hyper rich at rock bottom, more than ever, and closing their eyes on giant loopholes in taxation (such as billionaires borrowing instead of spending).

Did I mention the tripling of troops in Afghanistan? (The Iraq withdrawal was pre-set by Bush the torturer, but that did not prevent Obarack to claim success for it, whereas, in truth, he was kicked out by the Iraqis, after trying to stay.)

The Pelosi plutocrat has long posed as a leftist, while owning Sugar Bowl, among other things. Never mind that Sugar Bowl had plotted with Royal Gorge LLC to destroy a huge amount of wilderness to extent both resorts (now an ad hoc conservation group has saved the wilderness from the claws of Pelosi plutocrat and her kind).

Hope has been tested“. Obama has switched from being the candidate of hope to the candidate of “hopeful“. So cars will go twice further “in the middle of next decade” (news: they already do, in Europe, and they will anyway, even in the USA, when oil hits $200 a barrel). OK, could have been worse: Obama could have passed a law to improve cars in the middle of next century, and improve health care by selling body parts. Small favors are better than no favors. Four more years of empty promises, and love of my life celebrations. In the Roman Republic the two Consuls were elected for a year, and rotated supreme authority every month. OK, Romans did not have plastic surgery honey babies to tell them what to think.

Obama finally left the stage, after bellowing about the “greatest nation on earth“. A god nut, Timothy Cardinal Dolan, archbishop of New York, took the stage to deliver a general blessing. May this land of the free never lack those willing to grab guns, and kill others, said the holly man in substance, as he circled several times around the notions pertaining to “men in uniform“.

‘One nation under god, so dear god, bless the USA.’

The old fat man of god was a nice contrast with the young sexy actresses who had warmed up the scene before. Sex and the City of God. Even more weird was the gun fanatic who got shot in the head (with many others) and came to be rolled out as a great hero, whereas all she proves is that, even before being pierced by a bullet, she did not think right.

But 73% of USA citizens attach the greatest importance to shooting other USA citizens. A problem when crazies get crazier: craziness is viewed as heroism (for further reference, see our historical guinea pigs, the Nazis: the deeper they got in their madness, the madder they got).

So what is Obama proposing to do, by the way? Change you can’t believe in! Obama is mostly proposing to do what he did not do when he was in total control, namely rising taxes on the rich, and imposing a minimum tax of 30% on the hyper rich. It’s safe to propose it now, his masters have determined: he is not in control anymore (the Republicans are). So his masters told him: OK, go ahead, tell them what they want to hear, the Dream, the American Dream.

We work harder and smarter than anyone else. Who is that “we” who haunts us? The plutocrats?

Raising taxes on the rich is also insufficient, in any case: it won’t solve the deficit, right now augmenting at one trillion a year, for a grand total of 16 trillion dollars, nearly as much as the 17,6 trillion GDP of the European Union.. . And certainly higher than the 15 trillion dollars USA GDP. (European countries have an Added Value Tax of at least 15%, by law, 17.5% in France and Germany, up to 20% in Great Britain, 23% in Greece. That reduces deficits, but Obama does not know what it is, although I wrote extensively about it, and offered him a book, where it is, black on white.)

Partisans such as Krugman speak only of a USA deficit of around 10 trillion dollars, allowing the USA to look slightly better than France or Germany. How do they do it? How do they cheat? Partisans of USA greatness omit what the USA government borrowed from USA government funds whose spending in the future is mandated by law.

By the way, recent graphs show the USA GDP going up by leaps and bounds, whereas the EU’s stagnates (with Germany not enough to compensate Britain rolling over, lower, while Italy and Spain sink, and France is going nowhere). This looks good, for the USA, but it means nothing. Inefficiencies, waste, jams, and the intrusion of pay services in what ought to be free (like school and care) augment GDP artificially, or, let’s say in ways that cannot be compared!

Obama crowed that he had signed free trade agreements that allowed to sell lots of products stamped “Made in America”. Never mind that “America” is not an official country.

Never mind that the free trade agreements with Panama, Columbia, South Korea, were long stalled, because of the fear for USA jobs, and passed… by the Republican Congress in October 2011. The democratic crowd roared its approval, of the great Obama victory, grabbing his pen to sign on Republican policy, I guess. I am also for free trade… But only if and when everything else been equal. Actually the USA administration (and also Europe) are claiming that China dumps solar panels. Among other things.

Obama forgot to put a carbon tax, so his ‘5 millions‘ renewable energy jobs did not materialize. (By comparison Sweden passed a carbon tax in 1990, to great success for employment and CO2, let alone energy independence.)

Nationalist frenzy, and plutocratization, are hard to reverse. Citizens of the USA view as a self evident truth that they got attacked on 9/11 by a country they had nothing to do with, as they were careful, and still are careful, to NOT learn what really happen. Namely they do not want to read that the USA was engaged in a war of aggression in Afghanistan as early as 1978. (Shortly after three government sponsored Franco-Afghan geological missions under Dr. Laparent, found great mineral wealth. Is the Afghan war just a Franco-american conflict?)     

Zbigniew Brzezinski, Carter’s National Security Adviser, stated in 1998, to the French “According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujaheddin began… after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan… But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise:

Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.… We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.” [Le Nouvel Observateur (Paris), 1/15/1998] After Brzezinski’s confession, other US officials who denied US involvement prior to the Soviet invasion, also changed their story. (For instance, Charles Cogan, head of the CIA covert aid program to Afghanistan at this time.)

For a fuller quote and a more comprehensive story see:

By the way, it’s really hard to search the web, in the USA, only in the USA, about the Pelosi plutocrat‘s plutocracy, or Carter’s henchmen terrorizing Afghanistan. It’s not just the People Republic of China which manipulates the search engines.

But it works: the professional killer who was leader of the section who killed Bin Laden, although increasingly cynical in all sorts of ways, really believed that the USA was treacherously attacked on 9/11. Attacked, sure. Treacherous? Not so fast. That soldier had no idea that USA henchmen instructed the Islamist Fundamentalists to attack civilian objectives in Afghanistan, and, preferably school for little girls, a full generation earlier. (No, I will not bother to make a search for this from the USA; I would come empty. But, overseas, the documentation is plentiful.) 

Obama also strokes the dream of the unprovoked 9/11 attack.

Whatever happens, plutocracy will soon elect its next USA president. It would be funnier, if it were Biden. With his distorted face, he looks the part. Joker.

Obama has accomplished his role, that of a vaccine against change. You can read through his face his great interrogation: are they, my rich friends, replacing me with one that they would like more? So he mouthed the change-y thing unconvincingly. He took the left for granted, giving it only pittance. All the horrors inaugurated by G W Bush were left in place, more, even more terrible, were added. Worst: the left took Obama for granted Brown skin, lofty rhetoric, what could go wrong?

Fact is, although the assassination program and its death panel is going strong, the economy is going, at best, nowhere (in France, EU, or the USA) once population change is factored out. See the fawning Krugman, September 7, admitting in a burp of honesty, speaking of employment:“A plunge and a stabilization at a depressed level, which has now gone on for almost three years. Everything else is just noise.” (By the way, Krugman is now looking at the employment ratio, which I long advocated as more pertinent than the U numbers.)

Systems of minds are dynamic. As they go on, they become their own initial conditions. Plutocratization is hard to stop. In Rome it got unfettered after Hannibal’s forever wandering cataclysm. The situation got ever worse. 160 years later, the Republic had fallen. Augustus, of course re-established the Republic, formally speaking, so he claimed. With a caveat: he was to be known as the “First Man In Rome.” Princeps. Or as the French, always inclined to abstraction, put it: prince.

Whatever that was, whatever that is, it’s not democracy. Certainly not democracy as the Greeks understood it, and not even democracy as the Romans understood it. An abomination looking for a catastrophe is more like it. In the fullness of time, sometimes the present itself turns into a golden legend, as the floor disappears below a civilization.

Yes we can! Yes we can! Yes we can! Chanted Obama and his helpers four years ago (me among them). Yes, he could. Asssasinate whoever the death panel Obama instituted at the White House wants. This has been Obama’s presidency greatest breakthrough, its true signature achievement. Not fighting climate change. Not bringing jobs. Not rolling back metastatic kleptocratic finance. No. It’s all the way back to the jungle. Yes We Can! Assassinate. Whoever we want. For whatever they do.

And yet ethics was invented for economics, not just survival. When the god fearing Carter sent his assassins to Afghanistan, he set the groundwork for 9/11… And probably much worse to come (the USA has helped Pakistan’s Islamist regime make thermonuclear weapons, thus enabling a potential thermonuclear 9/11).

Nastiness does not just propagates, it feeds on itself. Not that the plutocrats mind. In hell, all fired up, ready to go, their lord dwell. When plutocracy turns into an avalanche, civilization is swept away.


Patrice Ayme


September 11, 2011


Abstract: Some of what is below will shock Americans. But most people, worldwide, are aware of these facts, or are penetrated by the only mood compatible with these facts. If the USA wants to fight the world, it will not win, especially if it starts from a counterfactual logic.

I have documented this assault many times, for example in “Obama Commemorates 9/11 His Way.” But the USA, as a propaganda machine keeps on whining it was the very definition of innocence, and that an unfathomably cruel, unexplainable attack came to them on 9/11/01. Other nations which committed crimes, have explored them with more enthusiasm, in the last century. But of course, that was after the crimes stopped, and their instigators were put out of power.

The answer to 9/11 by the USA, turned into an attack on the world and civilization. It was entirely inappropriate. Many crimes against humankind were committed, in the name of vengeance, by the USA. “Dead Or Alive”, “If Not With US, Against Us!”, “Geneva Conventions Are Quaint” as Bush and his co-conspirators put it, and acted accordingly. Nearly none of these crimes were prosecuted (except for a few dimwit soldiers caught with video tapes).

The appropriate answer to 9/11 would have been a massive police action to redress a criminal act by a gang of a few people. It was certainly criminal, on the scale of an attack against human rights, to go destroy Iraq, a natural enemy of bin Laden, and make Americans so stupid that they would support that insanity enthusiastically. It was also criminal, on the scale of crimes against mankind, to create a mess in Afghanistan, and use the country mostly as a shooting gallery to test all sort of new weapons and justify a gargantuan military budget.

As it was, 9/11 could be viewed as a shameful attack for the modern apologists of socio-political Islam, which showed its true colors. However, 9/11 turned into something worse, and that was not the work of the Muslim Fundamentalists. 9/11 became an even more shameful event, a reply by the Western powers denying the superiority of Western civilization.

Let me explain. Attacking countless countries for no good reason, made, and is making, a bad situation much worse (the hyperlink I gave above is to Scientific American: we are talking about a scientific phenomenon here). The USA replied to a gang of criminals by war, a massive attack, ongoing, against hundreds of millions of people. A gang got criminal, a country outdid them, on an enormous scale.

(Yes, Iraq + Afghanistan + Pakistan is already well above 220 million people. And now war is made with robots, worldwide, just like in science fiction horror movies; the U.S. government conducts attacks with robots against entire countries, without even a semblance of democratic process, and its usage of thousands of non uniformed private mercenaries to do so is deeply troubling: the uniformed SS were judicially found to constitute a criminal organization after WWII).

When one dollar is spent in Afghanistan or Iraq, 85 cents is spent on the military-industrial complex in the USA. Much of the rest goes into corruption. A cause well worth dying for, indeed, and the American policy led to the death of millions. Is that what the Americans are celebrating on 9/11 when their leaders quote Allah’s psalms? Do I misunderstand something? 1,300 governmental organizations and 2,000 private companies are part of the state police in the USA (exercise: translate “state police” into German…) Of course it cost money, a trillion dollar a year, two-third of the primary budget of the USA, hence the American deficit.

Is the USA turning into old fashion Assyria? All military, no brainy?

Criminally insane societies have existed before, and only rarely do they succeed to transmogrify into higher, more sustainable types. Generally they get lethally entangled in their own lies, delusions and evil ways.




Interesting what you can watch on French TV: a long documentary from inside Al Qaeda, including extensive revealing interviews with bin Laden closest confident and bodyguard, Abu Jandal (that is, “Father of Death“), who considered bin Laden his uncle, and thus his father. Although he turned FBI informant in the meantime, his heart is still with Osama. He presently lives in Yemen. His heart is still with bin Laden, but he is wondering if it is all morally correct, and he remembers asking hard questions to bin Laden about the killing of hundreds of innocent Muslims, and wounding 5,000 Kenyans.

The most revealing part of the documentary was the interview of the CIA officer, Mike Scheuer, who directed the hunt against bin Laden under Clinton (and thereafter). From 1985 to 1992, Scheuer had worked in the jihad against the socialist regime in Afghanistan and its Soviet allies. He admits that bin Laden killed Russians, that was all what counted for most American officials, and so that was good enough to make him a close ally of the USA, as far as they were concerned.

Scheuer revealed to French TV that his team had localized bin Laden and top Saudi princes, in March 1999, in Kandahar province, Afghanistan. The Princes set-up a landing strip for their huge C130 planes. Out of them came immensely expensive carpets, a lavish camp, complete with huge tents and a 30 meters communication mast. Those worthies were hunting fauna with falcons in the desert.  At the time, bin Laden, having engaged in massive bombings against American embassies, was already American public enemy number one. The satellite showed exactly where bin Laden’s tent was, on the side, far away, with just one or two bodyguards, and his very regular comings and going to join the others in prayer and other events.

Scheuer asked Clinton for the authorization to strike, and Clinton did nothing, for a full month. The CIA became much more insistent, and suddenly the camp was evacuated in a hurry, between two passages of the satellite. A few days later, Saudi Arabia announced the purchase of eight billion dollars worth of F16s fighter planes. Mike Scheuer cooly said, on French TV, that Clinton warned the Saudi Crown Prince, through Richard Clarke.

Scheuer added that it “appeared obvious”  that the purchase came in exchange for the warning. Some would say that, in the USA, one does not need traitors: the president himself commits high treason. But that would be considered anti-American by many, so I will abstain from drawing such a conclusion publicly (I want to thank a partner at an international law firm for advising me about a typo in an earlier version of these remarks).



Are the Middle Ages descending some more above New York? The Caliph went there, and spoke on September 11, 2011. The Caliph is a very serious person, venerated by all, at least formally so. The Caliph intoned psalm 46 of his sacred book:

God is our refuge and strength! A very present help in trouble. Therefore, we will not fear.” (Read more.) He will not fear, especially because he was talking behind armored glass. So it is in plutocracy: trust God, and back it up with brute force.

So it goes with Osama, or whatever the particular spelling of his name at this point. Hope you don’t fear my more advanced philosophy, oh primitive Caliph from before the Middle Ages!Philosophy goes through bullet proof glass.

God is for us a refuge and a force!”  is how Osama talked, how Osama thought, and apparently it is still the way he talks, and the way he thinks. In other words, assassinate Osama, and he is still here, preaching with the same words, from the same book, in the name of God, refuge and force. Not only Osama was made into a martyr, but he talks louder than ever.

God as refuge and force: It is clearly the same idea, and the same sense of justice. Be dumb if you want, but philosophers will notice that you laud the very psychological mechanism, and the very same God which allowed 19 fanatics to crash planes into buildings. So do you disapprove of that act, crashing planes in the name of psalm 46, or do you keep on preaching that psalm, the reason for that act, as far as most, or all, of the 19 assassins were concerned?

Americans may revere Obama, as Egyptians used to revere Mubarak, and the Soviets, Stalin, and the jihadists, Osama. It’s not just in the USA that the established order is clinging to its metaphysics. In Morocco, Mohammed VI (yes, six!) has rolled forward a “new” constitution, but Islam is still what it is based on (besides having all the powers in the hands of that plutocrat, Mohammed VI). That means: women not to inherit as men do, among other things.

As Muhammad Atta and is 18 accomplices crashed their planes, no doubt they screamed in their heads: “God is for us a refuge and a force!” The force was with them! What is the difference with bin Bush and Bushama? Same language, same ideas. (“bin”, or “ben”, means “son”, I point out for those who don’t get the joke, that Bush was the son of Bush, himself the son of still another Bush, that one a pal of Adolf Hitler, another strident lover of “God”, and also of the Qur’an.) Of course, some will cynically observe that Muhammad Atta and his co-criminals killed much fewer people, and have carried war to just one country.

If one loves the reasoning and reject its products only when inconvenient, one ought to be the object of spite. At least from philosophers.

Stupidity has to be reinforced, in the USA, on every September 11. Upon stupidity does leadership as the Americans know it, strongly depends, with its force and its “God”.

Bin Laden was killed in the very center of the center of Pakistani military power. Yes, Pakistan and its Inter Service Intelligence, which the USA used already forty years ago, to attack Afghanistan. And Americans still don’t understand that they are manipulated, or, do not want to understand the various evil conspiracies that their own government set-up, because they are still persuaded they profit from it, and they can just hate the pawn, bin Laden who turned against them, so that hopefully no other pawn will turn again.

When the snake bites its own tail, has it learned anything? Apparently not, and the venom is going to its head.



Meanwhile I visited one of these new museums where one can walk through a rain forest, complete with live parrots, birds, and tropical butterflies, with my little 23 months old well of wisdom leading the way. At the bottom of that particular installation, there was only water, with enormous fishes, some up to 2 meters long. And pretty butterflies were flying all over. A friend saw a fish trying to swallow one.

Butterflies are all wings, antennas, and bellies.  Their heads are not prominent, they are barely visible. Still, none of the butterflies fell in the water. If we think about it, this is quite remarkable:  the only explanation is that butterflies make a theory that it would be very bad to fall in the water, so they don’t try it.

How come butterflies are so clever and American leaders are so stupid? The only plausible explanation is that American leaders are paid to be stupid, and are deliberately stupid, as when Obama insists that the USA was attacked out of the blue on 9/11, as if the USA had not been making war in Afghanistan for 21 years, and in Iraq for more than a decade, killing millions in various ways (many of them children).

But how come individual Americans do not see that they are falling in the drink? How come the butterflies themselves are more clever than Americans?

How come it’s only individual Arabs who are trying for spring? How come only individual Arabs have stopped listening to leaders who speak in the name of so called “god”?

It is well known that G. W. Bush intended to invade Iraq well before 9/11. Iraq had nothing to do, whatsoever, with 9/11, except as the later provided with a convenient excuse for invading the former, by telling all the needed lies, however enormous, just like the friend of the grandfather of Bush recommended to do.

The first meeting to plot the invasion of Iraq by the resident of the White House was on September 17, six days after 9/11. It is as if Bush needed 9/11, and was ready for it, his way. Does that explain the coolness Bush affected towards reports on his desk about Al Qaeda plotting an attack on the USA?

Reminder: no aerial defenses were ready in the USA, whatsoever, in anticipation of 9/11.

9/11 had been tried on Paris in 1994, seven years earlier, and was prevented by the usage of French lethal force. The French Air Force and missile forces had been ready for decades. Intervention times are in minutes, or even, when specifics attacks were feared, in seconds. Same in Israel, of course.

The USA is the land of conspiracies. There is a well paid plot against undermining those who think the climate is changing. Some climate scientists even get death threats. The reason? American fossil fuel plutocrats are used to kill to stay rich. If they are running out of Arabs to kill, they can always threaten to kill Americans.

In the USA, there is even a plot against the theory of evolution. As Obama says:”God is refuge and a force!” Stupidity is a force which gives plutocracy meaning.   

After the attack on a few buildings by a gang of criminals, the USA reacted by attacking many countries. It was entirely appropriate: it was more of the same criminal insanity which, precisely, led to 9/11.

Reminder: only a few thousand Americans have died from the Middle East war the USA engaged in, so far. By adding the dead on 9/11 plus the dead soldiers and mercenaries in Iraq and Afghanistan, one does not reach 10,000 Americans dead. Yet (but trust Obama to make it so). By contrast, ever since the USA attacked Afghanistan on July 3, 1979, yes, in 1979, the USA has visited 9/11 everyday on the Middle East, so to speak, or, at least once a month,  on millions of people.

The Americans may have the oil to burn, and 9/11 to celebrate, as they do, but Middle Easterners count their dead at the hands of the USA, by millions. Indeed. That is what Americans ought to try to understand.

Besides, the dead on 9/11 is not all the work of bin laden and his co-conspirators. The World Trade Center towers were very poorly designed: they collapsed from a fire. The Empire State Building was hit by a bomber decades earlier, and there was a very important fire, and the elevators fell down, their cables melted. But the architectural design of the 1930s, in distributed load bearing, was careful, and far from the silly tent like structure of the World Trade Center.

Why a tent like design for the WTC? Because the plutocrats attached a lot of importance to an open floor plan. Trading floors, ladies and gentlemen, it’s all about trading things one did not create oneself. Osama Bin Laden, a structural engineer, expected only the upper floors to burn, and the steel to melt:”It’s all we had hoped” said Bin Laden in a taped discussion. Bin Laden never expected the towers to come down (and he was the most optimistic of his fellow plotters; the others had no idea how vulnerable the New York skyline was; perhaps, had they know, they would have arranged things to strike a bit later, causing much more deaths, as up to 50,000 people worked in the towers… By the way my own spouse nearly worked for a few weeks in the WTC towers a few months earlier, and I did visit the WTC, so I am not completely disconnected from the whole thing in another universe.)



So the USA is becoming insane, quoting with approval the very idea it claims to be the victim of, psalm 46. In its latest “stimulus” proposal, Obama, the pseudo democrat, proposes tax cuts to the funding of Social Security and Medicare. He finds that stimulating, and it is the largest part of his “stimulus”, and also the only part which his bipartisan partner, the Tea Party, will pass. More insanity. Or maybe not: if he pleases his masters enough, Obama will vacation in Bali much more. What is truly insane is that the American People does not seem to notice the manipulations.

OK, Israel, a would be democracy without a constitution, is also going insane, thinking it can steal land and water forever, and nobody will notice, because it has some understandings with the dictators around. Meanwhile the dictators are going, and French diplomats are helping the Palestinians prepare their case for a state (which will open all sorts of help, finance and trade for them; it’s not all about annoying Israel).

Let’s step a little backward: how does insanity arise in nations (example Germany a century ago), or even in multinational empires (example Achaemenid Persia)?

Assyria was nation with its own language which founded a giant empire which reigned over many other nations. It lasted about a thousand years. It became ever more successful with successive waves of increasingly demented, or let’s say, over ambitious militarism. It even invaded and occupied distant Egypt. In the end, Mesopotamia to its south, and all the rebellious national powers, all around, revolted. They could not defeat the Assyrian army, so they destroyed the Assyrian population first, to starve the hated enemy. Nowadays very few people call themselves descendants of that Assyrian super power. Although there are still plenty of Egyptian, and they seem to remember that they come from a super power which lasted millennia, and which, differently from Assyria, founded its power more on the mind, and less on the fist. A lot of what is called Greek mathematics originated in Egypt, Egypt is a co-developer of the alphabet, and it had a very long and friendly close cooperation with Crete, Europe’s master civilization. Moreover, a lot of what is called Jewish civilization evolved in Egypt much earlier, including monotheism. Plus Egypt had some very powerful female Pharaos. Assyria stays only famous for terrorizing Egypt, and the entire world, with its military-industrial rampage.

Another example of deep insanity was Rome. Both the top Greek cities and Rome rested their socio-economy on slavery. Unsurprisingly, those enslaving republics turned into enslaving  plutocracy. It was a pathology: superior Crete did not rest on slavery and its associated exaggerated plutocracy. Neither did the Celto-Germans rested their social organization on slavery. And it is indeed how the Greco-Roman slave society finished: the Germans, namely the Franks, took over and outlawed slavery (Jesus Christ, a supporter of Caesar, had nothing against slavery, although he complained about the rich, and, one could say, plutocracy.) Thus evil Greco-Roman society transmogrified into a newer version of the advanced Western civilization, closer to the much older Cretan model.

The Aztecs practiced industrial cannibalism. That was their undoing: Cortez was able to recruit enormous native armies made of the potential dinners of the Aztecs. Without native help, the Aztecs would not have been defeated. Cannibalism was also the God, the refuge, the strength, of the Aztecs, as their economy would have been otherwise incapable of producing enough proteins to support an army of 250,000 professional killers (I mean: soldiers).

Nazism was another example of criminally insane society. As with the Aztecs, the insanity was central to their power: mass murdering racism allowed Hitler to provide his supporters with wealth. For a few years.

In all the preceding cases, the pathologies which affected them led to the destruction of the societies. Sometimes a pathological society reforms itself under a less virulent form. Stalinism provides an example, the North American English colony and its ensuing enslaving, genocidal racism, is another: both societies reformed themselves.

However cases such as Assyria show that a society can relapse under virulent form over centuries, until it gets finally destroyed. This sort of precedent is most troubling for the USA, which does not seem to have reached a sustainable morality, or even the proclivity to generate enough curiosity to elucidate the causality at work in what ails it so deeply.



A number of very deep mistakes, of the exploitative and hubristic type, led the USA to 9/11. Since then, even worse mistakes have been committed, by the USA, such as acting out of vengeance, rather than justice, throwing civilization to the war dogs, and showing no inclination to learn anything important, as the assassination of bin Laden by a small man, and the hysteria with which it was welcomed, showed.

When the president of a major country acts like a mafioso, a capo di capi, silencing an encumbering accomplice, a stray soldier, justice has a problem. Arresting criminals is important, be it only because we have to analyze their exact reasons, so that they can be addressed, and neutralized in the future.

One will never repeat enough the following. Operatives of the USA’s “intelligence” agencies taught bin Laden to terrorize by attacking civilian objectives (schools!), in Afghanistan. American “intelligence” operatives thought that was smart, just as the USA thought it was smart to create a war in Afghanistan. By July 1979, the American intervention in Afghanistan was direct (instead of just through Pakistani intelligence). Why cannot Americans focus on those facts? Because they can only vote for the bipartisan party, and his bipartisan president?

Reading the preceding, the reaction of normal, well educated Americans will be intense disgust against the misfit who wrote these lines. It does not matter if the message may be correct, it is just an anti-American insanity to utter it. Such insanity has to be rejected by upright Americans with the single mindedness of ancient Germans rejecting entirely the suggestion that something like Auschwitz could even exist. Not such an insane comparison: Amnesty International knows of 70,000 cases of individuals processed in American torture centers, worldwide, outside of any legal set-up. In truth, it’s most certainly hundreds of thousands who have been treated unlawfully.

Van Jones, the green energy Czar of Obama had to resign just because he signed a petition in 2004 asking to make a congressional commission about a possible role of the government of the USA in 9/11. It depends what “government” means, and what “role” meant.

Historically, it’s the USA which attacked Afghanistan in cold blood in 1979, causing the death of MILLIONS of Afghans. Historically, the USA and Saudi intelligence recruited the pious bin Laden and turned that son of a plutocratic family worth more than 40 billion dollars into a fierce jihadist attack dog. Historically too, outside of the USA, it is well known that the CIA had figured out that some particularly dangerous associates of bin Laden had moved to the USA, and did not tell the FBI (this was finally reported on “60 minutes” on 9/11/11, by Lara Logan, after the first version of this essay came out on Greenwitch Meridian Times!)

Islam, like its mentors, Christianity and Judaism, are war like terror religions. So that fanatics rediscovers this periodically is no wonder. Maybe it’s time to understand that the West rose higher, because Christ was just a device, a crowbar… for a higher purpose.

The worst thing for the highest civilization is to make a shrine to insanity, on the ground of multiculturalism. Multiculturalist respect was not extended to Aztecs, so why should we extend it to fanatics of other religions who also practice human sacrifices? Because 9/11 was just a big human sacrifice. Where the Celts would regularly burn 100 inside a mooing metallic bull, bin Laden and company burned 3,000, once. I love beautiful mosques and cathedrals. However I hate it when people are reduced to mooing.

Multiculturalism is intolerable, says transculturalism.

Disrespecting civilization destroying insanity ought to be a moral principle against demented interpretations of Americanism, or Islamism, or any ism of the lowest type. And the more millions practice them, the more disrespect we should flaunt for these inferior forms of intellectual fascism.

To put it clearly, if crudely: if the solution to the problem of cannibalism, or sacrifice, is to kill the cannibals, or human sacrificers, once and for all, so be it. This is basically what the Romans did with the Celts and Carthage.  To warm up, we can kill the respect directed to them. One should also kill all respect for those who have decided to devolve, as the USA did with the Patriot Act, torture, summary imprisonment, executions, and a thorough refusal to examine why their boy Osama, whom the CIA lovingly trained went berserk.



Why such stupid policy of replying to religiously inspired crime with global war? Well, just look at the budget of the military-‘intelligence’-industrial complex: it became gigantic in the USA, leaving the rest of the planet, the economy, and common sense far behind. The pseudo democratic resident of the white House made the situation worse (his specialty).

Thus it turns out that stupidity was clever, from the point of view of military industrial devils and their plutocratic supports. The same applies for the assassination of bin Laden: it turned him into a martyr, into the one who had to be silenced, because he was so right (what else?). That, too, was very stupid, except, of course if the goal was to extend the war for decades to come. And so it is that as Osama is dead, Obama quotes exactly the psalm that Osama would have wanted to quote for the tenth anniversary of 9/11.

The plutocracy loving government of the USA, by creating war situations all over, and then engage in combat, has created a mechanism to justify the enormous existence of the trillion dollar military-“intelligence”-industrial complex. Should one sees 9/11 part, in some sense of a vast conspiracy to keep the USA on a war footing? I expose, you decide. Remember Clinton tipping off the Saudi Crown Prince about the danger bin Laden was in, though. But, right, you won’t hear it on American TV. When a tree falls in a forest, and no American is there to hear it, it probably did not happen. It’s only when big towers fall in the niddle of New York that Americans notice something is up, or rather down. In other words, not kosher. Wait until Israel implodes. But I am getting ahead of the facts…

So what do we hear now? A French citizen has just claimed that he brought millions of dollars, in cash, from African presidents to Chirac (before he became president) and Villepin. Both men are going to sue, they have to, so we should learn more. Hopefully the rot, in Europe will not stink to the same high heavens.

The war between plutocracy and democracy is ongoing. Pluto manipulates underground, makes itself invisible, enlightenment and openness fight back, as the Babylonians knew this already so much, 4,000 years ago, that they made a religion out of it. Times to embrace that more advanced wisdom, and forget Osama-Obama’s psalm 46, and its Biblical sense of vengeance as justice.  

A good start would be to start an investigation upon the accusation of high treason proffered by one of the highest officers at the CIA against a former president of the USA. In a much older society such as France, investigation of former head of states is nearly routine. Actually Chirac is not just under investigation, but on trial, for corruption. Accusations against Bush and Clinton are much more serious.


Patrice Ayme



Forever War

June 23, 2011


Obama spoke in his clipped style again, as if we were all on a nuclear submarine in combat, and our duty was clear. He is excellent at lofty rhetoric masking as little change as possible from one more disaster he seems to view as an acceptable status quo. That cool comfort with the unacceptable is the apparent trademark of his presidency. Some presidents fix disasters, others live with them. Hey, got the big jet to fly around, and I golf with whoever. Cool, no?

Bush II was the “decider” of thoroughly lamentable decisions, Clinton got rich by selling the country to plutocracy, Carter started the war in Afghanistan… much more of this, and soon Bush I and Reagan will appear to be leftist geniuses of probity and vision.

So let’s recapitulate: Obama claims that, by the end of 2012, he will have withdrawn from Afghanistan the troops he put in what he called the “surge”, as a good Bush parrot. However, he forgot to mention that he would have kept in the troops of the augmentation he put in, or rather the doubling of troops he put in, before his “surge”. How do you spell Pinochio?

The war in Afghanistan has lasted nearly ten years, making it the longest in the history of the USA (although the French and British records about waging a long war are not threatened for these nations, by a factor of at least 15…) Under Obama, the number of Western dead and casualties has nearly doubled. Many allies are in Afghanistan by solidarity with the USA, but their patience is getting thin. Canadians, for example, got huge losses in Afghanistan (as high as the USA in relative numbers). If the allies leave (as Canada may in 2011), the situation for the USA will get much worse.

When Obama got to the presidency, there were 34,000 American troops in Afghanistan. Now there are 101,000.

Obama is going to withdraw a token number of troops from Afghanistan, out of the 101,000. He speaks of 10,000 by year end. An equivalent number could resign from the official military, and get in the private military through the back door.

There are 90,000 private USA contractors in Afghanistan, in direct, or indirect military roles.  Outstanding contracts to the private army are 12 billion U.S. dollars. If one adds non USA NATO and non NATO troops, one gets around 250,000 invaders in Afghanistan, supposedly helping.  But actually barking incomprehensible orders, and you better obey them, if you are a native, because they will kill you with their huge weapons if you don’t, and feel good about their “duty” and “service”.

The number of professional Western killersextraordinary men and women in uniform” (as Obama puts it) in Afghanistan went from 60,000 to around 250,000, under Obama’s exalted vision. Two years ago the official cost of the war in Afghanistan was 60 billion a year, now it is officially 120 billions, one billion every three days.  That does not count secret spending. And that is just for the USA. (All together just France, Britain, Italy and Germany have more than 20,000 troops in Afghanistan, hundreds have died.)

Sorry for crossing the words “professional killers“. What else are they doing there? According to official Pentagon statistics, HALF OF THE “EXTRAORDINARY MEN AND WOMEN IN UNIFORM” HAVE KILLED AN AFGHAN. Extraordinary, indeed. With allies like that, who needs death? Kill them all, Allah will recognize his own.

One should not confuse defending freedom, and defending fiefdom.

Afghanistan is the fief of the military industrial complex, and the electronics, advanced tech complex. Having a huge army in Afghanistan also profits the oil and gas industry, as armed forces of the West allows it to control Central Asia. It also allows to remind the Muslim Fundamentalists, otherwise employed by the West in Saudi Arabia or Pakistan, who is really the boss, namely those who apply force for the heck of it in Afghanistan, just because they can.



So what is the mission in Afghanistan? Assistance says Obama. Assistance of what? Assisting the Muslim fundamentalist regime in Kabul of the corrupt Karzai. Oh, yes, because the constitution of Afghanistan is all about the Qur’an. It is not a secular constitution, as, say, in Turkey (a constitutional, secular democratic republic). That turkey does not fly.

As David Brooks, a conservative editorialist at the NYT points out:”Discouraging reports about aid in Afghanistan should drive us to consider the deeper forces underlying societal instability. Hint: It’s not always about the material stuff.”

 Afghans hate the guts of the West. The fact that the constitution is Islamist makes it worse, encourages them to hate the secular, democratic West. Allah is neither secular, nor democratic.

Moreover the “aid” is not helping, because it short circuits the entire country, the people of Afghanistan, while making a show of helping them. Under the guise of efficiency, aid workers deal only with themselves. Thus, instead of helping Afghanistan, aid to Afghanistan is destroying Afghanistan.

A conference of experts at Wilton Park in Britain had to admit that there was a “surprisingly weak evidence base for the effectiveness of aid in promoting stabilization and security objectives” in Afghanistan.

Result: attacks of Afghan troops against Western coalition troops is at all time high. Yes Afghans in the Afghan military attack coalition troops supposed to help them, kill Western troops. As I already alluded to, the number of attacks and the dead they cause has never been higher.



Yes, one had to understand that the mission in Afghanistan is worse than colonialism. The private contracting and the aid are a metastatic cancer. The way they are done by the Crusaders (to use local semantics, unfortunately all too appropriate).

Old fashion “colonialism”, when it was most “successful” (say in India, Ceylon, Afrique Occidentale Francaise… Or for that matter British colonial America!) rested on having the natives themselves manage their own country. The colonial occupier gave only the general direction to the natives, who were empowered to do the job. This is not what is done in Afghanistan, let’s say it, once again.

Senegal was “conquered” with ten French officers, and 5,000 Senegalese soldiers. India was administered with as little as 1,500, and never more than 3,000, British civil servants (heading an immense government of hundreds of thousands of Indian civil servants).

It may be time to realize that the West and its allies are actively doing way worse than old fashion colonialism would ever do in Afghanistan. So what are we after? War for the sake of war? Behaving like crazed maniacs so everybody will leave us alone, because obviously the world is our oyster? Killing time by killing people?



Lunatics have proposed to limit the powers of Obama to wage war in Libya. But, mostly, the USA supports the logistics of the French and British in Libya (many French and British bombers are still not based forward, so they require huge air refueling; the French are planning to move their Rafale stealth bombers to Sicily, their Mirages are already in Crete; initially British Tornadoes, doing most of the British bombing, were based in Britain!) In Libya France and Britain fight a well defined dictator in their backyard, the situation is the same as when they got a United Nations mandate to intervene in Bosnia. (There too, the French had fired the first shots, although it pained the French military to attack their old allies the Serbs.)

Besides the oil and gas in Central Asia, and the implied threat on all regimes which would stop obeying the West, the USA is already engaged in an active war against Pakistan. Limiting Obama in Libya could lead to limit him in Pakistan.

Pakistan is another Islamist regime. With 200 thermonuclear warheads. Paid in part, those nukes, by terror specialist Bush! There Obama is not at fault, and he could argue that the Afghan war is now all about Pakistan. Although not at fault, it is not clear that his present strategy with Pakistan is the best (although it served Bin Laden), because it does not treat the fundamental problem.

The fundamental problem of Pakistan is its very reason for being in existence, is its Islamist constitution. Why do you need Al Qaeda, the base, when the basics of Islamism are already fundamentally the law? Say that a guy called Muhammad is a bunga bunga, and Pakistani judges in black robes will condemn you to death. When you add dozens of thermonuclear bombs to the mix, you get a country much more dangerous that Hitler’s Reich. Maybe we should talk about that aloud. Instead of sending robots to bomb them, as Obama, obeying the military industrial complexed, does unlawfully. 

So the Pakistani ISI surrendered Bin Laden to Obama. So what? A hamburger for the American eagle? Happy now? What about the nukes? This may all end with an eagle in every pot (Henri IV of France contented himself in 1600, with a hen in every pot).

The USA has fostered Islamism. Or rather rekindled it, starting with FDR, because it made it easier to extract oil and control, and cause trouble. Of course Islamism and modern weapons are a bad mix. So now the USA paradoxically supports Islamist regimes, while threatening or even fighting them.

Supporting what we combat is a recipe for eternal war. Of course that is the effect looked for by the afore mentioned suspects. The way those cynics see it, so much the better, because the forces of the West will stay at war, fully trained, with the best weapons, and a huge army in South Asia, on the doorstep of China, watching Russia from below.

Progressives should realize that Islam is a carefully entertained excuse in all this. Supporting the Islam which we combat under the label of “terrorism” is a recipe for eternal war. More exactly, supporting Islamist regimes is an evil contradiction for democratic secular states. That includes supporting Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, whatever the Muslim Brotherhood and its friends in the military are preparing in Egypt, etc.

Support cannot be withdrawn suddenly, of course, but a deliberate, official push should be made to de-Islamize ALL constitutions. And de-dictatorialize them. We are not in the 19C anymore. Their backyard is our backyard. Or rather, our potential battlefield next door. Think about it: our present world is basically the size of a naval battlefield of the early 20 C, considering the speed and capability of weapons today.

It would be wiser, and more peaceful, to battle ferociously with ideas, now, instead of waiting for bombs to explode, tomorrow.

Morocco, a country of 40 million,  is a striking example: the king, who has, in many ways more power than his dictatorial, blood covered dad, has introduced grandiloquently mostly cosmetic changes, leaving him still an absolute dictator, his son ready to lead in turn, when he reaches…18. France and the USA should not tolerate this, and order him to move apace towards a constitutional monarchy.

Now, of course, the plutocratic elements are interested to keep potential wars in reserve. So deeply rooted conflicts are carefully tendered and fostered. Just as with Hitler, democracies end up nourishing the enemy, proffering respects. The situation with China being is a case in point: what is the plan there? Make China, presently a dictatorship, so strong that it can go berserk about the South China Sea, Taiwan, or something else?

Time to go deep, and exit the Obama black hole of war more years. War guaranteed until 2014? When do we negotiate for real? Oh, I forgot, ending that war is not part of the true plan. With a bit of luck, the war will transmogrify some more…


Patrice Ayme

Military-Industrial Metastasis

July 27, 2010


The ways of plutocracy are mysterious to conventional wisdom. As I tried to explain, Hitler was supported by American plutocrats. So, as American soldiers fought the Nazis on the beaches, they fought against what American plutocracy had paid and instigated. Now we learn from Wikileaks that American taxpayers are financing the Pakistani who help the Taliban. Even, it is said, with anti-aircraft missiles. US tax dollars may be used as seed money for a protection racket associated with a narcotics-trafficking. And so on.

Obama’s main stimulus has turned out to be his Afghan war, a "war of his own choosing" as the Republican Party Chair pointed out.

Don’t laugh: it’s not funny, and great progress in robotics and how to kill, bribe, and maim people are been made. Even regenerative medicine profits from it, as American military hospitals have succeeded to regrow exploded soldiers’ muscles by using ECM (Extra Cellular Matrix). That was the first story on "60 Minutes" last night.

"60 Minutes" was a show which helped discredit the Vietnam War, by exposing the truth in the 1960s. Now the show finds more profitable to expose, rather than explode, the Plutocratic fantasy line. War is good, because it regenerates. See it on "60 Minutes". Besides, the USA is a poor victim from 9/11. Cry now, and rise the flag. As Obama’s soaring rhetoric has it: "We harness the skills and ingenuity of the most dynamic country on Earth to reach a better day."

Reaching a better day, necessitates apparently, all the skills and ingenuity of the most dynamic nation. For that most dynamic nation, better days are nothing obvious.

"We are in that region of the world because of 9/11" [July 26 2010] says Robert Gibbs, the modestly intelligent guy who talks in the stead of the president. The president has speech writers, speech givers, besides various minders. The US presidency is an organization which is very strong, a bit like a bacterial film: you don’t know what it’s made of, besides many organisms collaborating within the corruption and slime which make them strong.

The pathetically ignorant Gibbs obviously paid no mind to the fact that the USA has been the ally and sponsor of Pakistan for more than 50 years, nor to the organizing or sending by the USA of legions into Afghanistan headed by the Pakistani Inter Service Intelligence (ISI) and, later, bin Laden, more than 30 years ago, with the best weapons and the worst doctrines about attacking soft targets (schools…).

Is it crass ignorance, or crass dishonesty, Mr. Gibbs? Or just plain greed and cowardice? Probably a mix. Nietzsche explained a lot by the Will To Power, and it is overwhelming in politicians.

Last night, encouraged by the regeneration of soldiers coming back mangled from Afghanistan, I filled up with more propaganda from Leslie Stahl of "60 minutes". She was making fun of "The Narrative", which is how she called what Muslim youth say about the USA. That was the second story on "60 Minutes", praising the war in Afghanistan, as the way to civilization. I felt ever better about the American way of life and death. I did not bother to listen to the third story, it was probably about "sports", or "celebrities" to ease down the preceding 40 minutes of Afghanistan war propaganda.

Ms Stahl pontificated about "how much we talk past each other". She demonstrated that by taking a completely incredulous tone, as she related that Muslim youth are so insanely uneducated that they believe that a CIA employee organized 9/11, so that the USA would attack Muslims in the Middle East. No, really? Stahl impressed, from her astounded, derisive tone, that only insane maniacs would believe such a thing. By using such a method, the Big Lie, as Hitler called it, the Nazis were made strong for a while, with the force of their empty minds. Too honest that Hitler; it gave a pretext for the French republic to attack him. He would have done better for himself by practicing more hypocrisy.

This Leslie Stahl piece was indeed as good as any of the best propaganda from the not so good Dr. Mr. Goebbels. One could tell from the exaggeration of her tone, the way her transitions were lagging, her lack of background emotion, that Ms. Stahl knew she was lying through her teeth. She was not talking from her heart, but from her memory, remembering carefully what her minders told her to say.

By the way someone from the New York Times admitted today that the NYT sometimes sits for years on information embarrassing to the government of the USA. Never mind that Jefferson said that it was more important to have a free press, than to have a government.

Stahl lies for money, and, according to the Plutocratic doctrine, all is fair in money and greed. Even somebody like her ought to know that bin Laden was, for about two decades, the CIA’s most important operator.

Whether bin Laden operated under order, or not, for 9/11, is irrelevant. Bin Laden was CIA, and was taught by the CIA how to give it good to the Soviets and Afghan socialists. That he then gave it good to Americans too is, on the face of it, first a problem for the CIA and those who gave orders to the CIA, or for those who revere them (in a way 9/11 is a natural extension of Ronald Reagan’s ways and means: just replace Afghanistan by the USA, and keep the same bin Laden). According to some in the French secret services, bin Laden met with high level CIA operatives, in between attacks against assets of the USA. A similar charge against the top ISI executive in Pakistan, meeting with Taliban before major Taliban attacks has just been made in documents revealed today by Wikileaks.

Those who live by bombing will die by bombing.

The secret "intelligence" apparatus of the USA is now so gigantic, it is dwarfing anything of that nature that existed before (with the possible exception of Stalin’s NKVD, but Stalin and the NKVD were fighting a war of annihilation with Hitler’s Germany, whereas right now nobody is credibly trying to annihilate the USA, meaning that the present apparatus is there for another purpose).

The Washington Post recently exposed the size of the secret services of the USA (nearly a million individuals with "Top Secret" clearances, a total budget unknown, but in excess of 75 billion dollars). How should we call it? The Geheime Staatspolizei, the Secret State Police? Just asking…

If one adds the budget of this Secret Police to the official defense budget, plus annex departments as "Energy" (in charge of nukes), one reaches about a trillion dollar. By comparison Bush’s total federal budget (even with Bush’s deficit spending!) was only 1.5 trillion dollar. This is not growth anymore, it’s metastasis. Metastasis of "defense", defending against common sense, because one cannot imagine anything else that would be as big to be defended against with such enthusiasm.

Which brings us to the latest revelations, the 92,000 secret Pentagon documents revealed by Wikileaks. Some reveal war crimes and deliberate misstatements about civilian deaths from black operations by Americans, inside Afghanistan. Seven Afghans children killed, plus a score of women: who cares? Certainly "Task Force 373", a mix of Delta Force and Navy Seals, does not have to worry. In 1944, prestigious SS officers having killed French civilians were ordered arrested by the West Front commander (Marshall Erwin Rommel). But in today’s USA, Afghan civilians are not even worth a lie: the information never reaches the public, and officials do not bother about it.

The 92,000 documents include detailed accusations that U.S. ally Pakistan is actively helping the Taliban. (Why not, with all the children killed by American rockets, as if they were nameless vermin?) But, of course, Pakistan was created in its present form to precisely support Muslim Fundamentalist insurrections, as it did for decades in Afghanistan and Kashmir.

Apologists for the present Afghan policy claim that there is no choice, but to cooperate with the corrupt Afghan Muslim Fundamentalist dictatorship of Karzai and the corrupt Pakistan Muslim Fundamentalist republic. But this is completely false. Those two regimes, differently from Iran, are client regimes: they survive because of Western support. They ought to be forced to change their constitution on a secular model. Iran used to be a client fascist regime of the USA, and so was its religious Fundamentalist opposition, demonstrating that religious fanaticism can backfire. And it will always backfire, but this lesson was not heeded in Afghanistan.

Why should one force Afghanistan and Pakistan to be officially secular states, as Indonesia is? Because it would force a philosophical choice on the Afghan government, police and army, thus engaging them on the more advanced civilizational side, having the courage to deny obscurantism. That would be the sane basis on which to base the anti-insurgency effort, because it would permit the correct, Western compatible, education of the youth. (As it will not happen, the next best choice is to pull out, and have the courage to admit that those who organized that war were idiots of the worst type.)

But of course winning the war is not what those who are behind the enormous Militaro-Industrial metastasis wants. Eternal war is what they want. Obama, no doubt, does not want to come to grief, so he will play along. Remember the still mysterious circumstances of JFK’s death.

Not all men are cowards. For example, those who sail or climb, for pleasure, are no cowards: they enjoy playing the game of life, risking all for their ideals, finding satisfaction by refining their mental mastery upon the elements. JFK was no coward, but it’s exact opposite: an authentic war hero (so was his late elder brother). Those who play table tennis and other mild interior sports are not about the place of man in nature and fate, but about ersatz of nature. Afghanistan is an ersatz of a war, a form of organized crime to stimulate a particular type of economy, and fascism.

We have seen that in the past. No need to go to the fiction of Orwell’s "1984". It happened for real.

Towards the end of the Roman empire, Roman emperors were actually paying the Huns, and then the Huns attacked the empire, repeatedly, but not too hard. Why? Because the threat of the Huns allowed the emperors to justify fascist structure of the empire (normal people were not aware that the Barbarians who attacked them were paid by those who commanded them). It went further than that: just as the USA used bin Laden and the Arabs to attack socialist Afghans, the Roman high command used the Huns to commit outright genocide (of the Burgonds).

The same game was played by the Romans with other hostile forces, even with the Arabs. But then, in the later case, propelled by a new religion, Islam, one day, the Arabs did not play the game, and they annihilated by surprise the Roman army, 160,000 strong, four times the entire Muslim force.

In the next few decades, the Muslims overwhelmed two-third of the Roman empire, and all the Persian empire. After crushing the Visigoths in Spain in a few years, they spilled into Francia, and met the (practically) secular Franks (721 CE). The Franks did not negotiate, they just fought back, using everything. The Muslim invaders were crushed, so they tried again (732 CE). And were crushed again. In a last spasm, they mustered all their forces and came back strong five years later, with even a fleet on the sea, spilling half way up central France, and over Italy.

But Charles The Hammer was ready, with new taxes, new heavy cavalry, and the Muslims were crushed again, and the (Umayyad) Arab Caliphate in Damascus fell, crushing forever bin Laden’s dream. The Arab empire had been the largest empire that ever was, until that time (five million square Roman/American miles). It had lasted just a century. How long for the American empire?

Of strong convictions strong victories and strong civilizations are made. Of wishy-washy they are not. But what else to expect from the bipartisan soul?



Dysfunctioning minds dysfunction not just at the highest civilizational level. They will dysfunction even in the silliest corners, and thus can their dysfunctioning be detected objectively.

An example with the Obama administration is the question of trains. It is not a difficult problem: it has been solved in many countries. But trust the American toddler for its "skills and ingenuity of the most dynamic country" in finding a hare-brain plan. Or more exactly, hare and turtle brain plan.

Apparently the scheme for high speed trains in the USA, as concocted by the brainy White House, is to run high speed trains on the same lines as the heavy, extremely slow freight trains. The idea is to invest in secondary garages where the freight trains will park as the fast trains zoom by. Now, granted that it is cheaper to do that rather than full blown Very High Speed lines.

In a country such as France, freight trains move at 160 kilometers per hour (100 mph), which makes possible passenger trains to run on the same lines, at the same speeds.

However, in France, and the rest of the world, dedicated Very High Speed lines are built for trains going around 320 kilometers per hour (the latest High Speed Lines are made for 400 km/h). Nobody tries to mix speeds, because it’s obviously inviting catastrophe, and the requirements for the lines are quite different, in many ways. All the more since, in the USA, freight trains can be sometimes seen, going at no more than 30 km/h (20 mph), from horizon to horizon.

As it turns out, freight trains are profitable in the USA. Once the Obama administration plan is enacted, that will stop to be the case, high speed trains will be slow speed, and, if they do not vibrate themselves to destruction, from the inadequate lines, they will collide with freight, and each other.

However, the USA is the country of freedom, freedom from logic that is, and freedom from the grand wide world too, because its government officials do not know that no other country in the world has chosen to run hyper slow freight with fast trains, and that, for very good reasons. And so it goes. This is the familiar pattern in the USA: ignorance of the rest of the world, doubled with exaggerated self confidence. (Many peoples, around the planet, have learned the hard way to not ignore others’ wisdom, and to not be over confident, especially when it’s based in nationalistic overconfidence.)

Freedom from logic, freedom from information, infeodation to plutocracy and the militaro-industrial-congressional conspiracy, such is the high speed way to a collision with reality. Metastasis, ultimately, eats the mind.

Patrice Ayme

Way Out Of Afghanistan, Version 2010

June 23, 2010



Abstract: General Stanley McChrystal, a former chief of the U.S. military’s secretive special forces, and US and NATO commander in Afghanistan, has been recalled to Washington, as US strategy there has collapsed, while his staff talked too frankly about the clowns they take orders from. American theatrics in Afghanistan, after the unopposed selection of Karzai as "president" are now going from gross to grotesque.

Instead of accusing generals for trying to do the impossible that they were ordered to do, I propose a completely new strategy. OK, it’s too smart, so I plead guilty on all counts.


The armies of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization cannot win in Afghanistan. This is a philosophical truth. The essential force of the army of democracy is philosophical correctness, and, in particular, moral correctness. There is neither in the Afghan war.

The present stage of that war has lasted nine years, 50% longer than it took for France and Britain to defeat Hitler (3 September 1939- 8 May 1945). World War II was won, because it was philosophically and morally correct, so the West could go all out in all ways. WWII started with the two leading democracies, France and Britain, having declared war to Hitlerian fascism which, financed by Americano-German plutocrats, fed by Texaco and Standard Oil, had attacked Spain (1936). Unfortunately, crucially supported by evil American corporations, Hitler succeeded to conquer Austria, Czechoslovakia, Spain (February 1939), and then Poland (Fall 1939). Hitler immediately started the physical elimination of the Polish population (destroying flour mills and opening Auschwitz to this effect; the holocaust of Poles preceded the holocaust of the Jews by a full 20 months).

The democracies made unconditional war to Nazi Germany: their aim was the total destruction of Nazism, with no negotiations whatsoever.

With Imperial Japan the concession was made, at the last moment, to keep the war mongering hypocritically fish collecting emperor in place as figurehead. In a smart counterpart, emperor Hiro Hito stepped to the plate, and courageously forced Japan to surrender. Hiro Hito, meek and feeble looking, faced a massive rebellion from the top generals and admirals, who were firmly committed to suicide all of Japan. Instead they finally realized that they, and not Japan, had failed their Lord, and committed Hara Kiri, as they had to. Thus Hiro Hito, with his amazing act of last minute, but drastic courage, redeemed himself in the eyes of history.

Will Obama redeem himself in the eyes of history?

Obama’s rescue of the malevolent Big Bank managers, and lenders, paying the thieves, instead of expropriating them, all Americans, and actually all of NATO, pay for every day, as the Western economy teeters on the verge of utter collapse. Since the thieves got back to what they do best, stealing everybody, ignoring the economy, fostering social destitution of the multitudes, in brazen violation of their fiduciary duties, BP style..

Obama’s strategy in Afghanistan is just as ill conceived. Even the arrogant and ignorant George Bush had too much brains, culture, and even, let’s say it, honesty, for extending that ill conceived war. G. W. Bush knew the Afghans, and even its Taliban, had not started that war, and that the official US discourse on it was deeply misleading. Other alien creatures had pulled the strings, and they came from another continent.

As I said countless times, the Constitution of Afghanistan, as stupidly decided by the manipulators in Washington, is Islam (it was not always so in the past). Thus NATO is fighting for a literal interpretation of the Qur’an, and that is a total violation of the basic principle of Western democracy, which is secular. (In spite of Obama evoking God 17 times in one small speech from the Oval Office.)

Now, the Taliban is also fighting for radical Islam. So what is the difference between NATO fighting for radical Islam and the Taliban fighting for radical Islam? Well, the Taliban is made of Afghans, they die at home. NATO’s army is made of boys dying very far from home. That is why Canada and the Netherlands will pull out their combat troops soon. The Canadian government is conservative, but it campaigned for the pull out during the last elections.

Americans, perhaps ignorant, like George Bush, of the rest of the world, often make a show of making fun of their NATO allies.

However, Canada’s fighting personnel suffered 148 killed in Afghanistan, proportionally 50% more than the USA.

The war, as it is, is lost. Karzai government is one of the world’s most corrupt (otherwise why would it support this charade?). To survive, in Afghanistan, one needs to be bipartisan: half Taliban, half corrupt. Obama should know: he desperately wants to be bipartisan, although it is just to please money and power. In Afghanistan, being bipartisan saves lives of those who are. And their families.

For NATO to win, one would need to re-build a correct theory of the philosophical battle at hand.

But, to do that, a serious revisitation of history is in order. Indeed the war in Afghanistan is war against Pakistan’s Inter Service Intelligence, the ISI, by proxy. They are the ones feeding the Taliban. Just like bin Laden, the ISI is a creature of the USA. But the ISI has thermonuclear weapons. In any case, the USA is fighting its own malevolent creatures in AfPak, and the creatures not only have good reasons to be irked, but there are fighting their master, the American plutocratic-military complex, and they know it well. They know what makes American plutocracy tick.

Technically NATO is in Afghanistan because of 9-11, the first attack ever against a NATO member. But it has got seriously long in the tooth. What used to be a justifiable war years ago has turned into something straight out of George Orwell’s "1984".

At this point it is tempting, as general McChrystal pointed out, for politicians to contrive to make it appear that the US Army lost the war. Whereas, of course, the politicians are 100% responsible. They ordered the generals to fight a war that had been already lost philosophically.

In the history of the West, there is not one case that a war was fought for religion, and won.

When Obama insist that NATO is in Afghanistan to fight Al Qaeda, he is either ill informed, or not genuine. Why not be more genuine and claim to be in Afghanistan to fight the CIA? After all, the CIA created Al Qaeda (maybe not under that name, and maybe a lot through the ISI, but in the financing, men and the methods). It was American policy, since 1945, to use fundamentalist Islam first mostly against the imperialists, France and Britain. That worked well for the USA, procuring vast quantities of oil and influence, until nowadays, when said Muslim Fundamentalists have discovered they were played like violins. So now they play for themselves, with their own violins. In the next step of their enlightenment, they will use Islam as the Franks used to manipulate God, as something one does not really believe in, but which is most convenient to conquer with.

So what is the way out? Certainly not to accuse US generals: they tried their best, but they did not have a chance. The correct way out is to review the entire effort from scratch, and propose an alliance with the Taliban…

Obama talks as if Al Qaeda was a problem. But it’s not much of one. Muslim Fundamentalists tried to crash a jumbo jet on Paris in 1996, French commandos killed the six terrorists, and all passengers were rescued. Israel and France have known for decades of the crash-jets problem, and have had active counter measures in place, for decades. The USA was taken with its pants down in 2001, because American politicians were arrogant. There was not even an armed air patrol in the air (which both France and Israel have on a constant basis).

The real problem is next door: the dozens of militarized thermonuclear rockets in Pakistan, hidden below the world’s highest mountains.

The Taliban may be tempted to accept a peace proposal, because not only could one make an offer they could not refuse: send over the lithium and niobium, we will develop you to the max. Honest Afghans have known for a long time that their problems start with Pakistan. With Pakistan and its ISI.

To make a NATO-Taliban alliance would be a bit delicate, since the main supply route of NATO goes through Pakistan, and since it would involve the dismantlement of Pakistan. But Pakistan is a bad idea whose time should not have come. And its nukes will have to go, and it better be nicely.


Patrice Ayme


P/S: 1) Pa in Pakistan is for Pashto (presently cut in half by the AfPak border). That is why Pakistan may not survive, a considerable nuclear improvement.

2) The tactics used in Iraq by Bush, on a small scale, was to do just the preceding, since an alliance was proposed to the Suni resistance. It seems that effort was headed by general Petraeus. So he would be a natural to “design and lead our new strategy” in Afghanistan (as Obama put it, looking pretty much the Chief, for a considerable change, ;-)!)

Afghanistan: Washington’s One And Only “Job”.

December 1, 2009


The Afghan War Is Not What Washington Claims It To Be.



Key concepts: Some may find hilarious that Obama would follow the disastrous Iraq war plan in Afghanistan, complete with Bush’s "surge".

No "handler" told Obama that the Americans have lost the Iraq war: Americans are hated there, will achieve nothing good in Iraq looking forward, but, meanwhile, they have burrowed in their bases, and, just like groundhogs in their tunnels, they proclaim victory on the grand outside.

However, for Obama, that Americans don’t know they lost in Iraq is apparently a panacea: he will now apply this remedy to Afghanistan. Do these guys know how to spell d-u-m-b? Why are they so desperate? Not knowing enough is sometimes an advantage, as Germans thought until 1939. But it works only that long, as the Germans found out the hard way by 1945.

The reasons given, and the methodology followed, for fighting a never ending war in Afghanistan do not make any sense, in first analysis. In particular, the insistence that Afghanistan’s main income, poppy fields, cannot be legalized, makes no sense, since it is legal in plenty of major Western countries.

In second, higher order, analysis, it seems clear that the minds of the top advisers in the USA are clouded, not just by their groundhog “success” in Iraq, but, more deeply, by a misreading of the history of the twentieth century.

A ferocious war was fought in Europe between fascism and racism on one side of the Rhine, and democracy, republicanism and human rights on the other. This war profited the USA handsomely. However, now that democracy, republicanism and human rights, are increasingly winning, worldwide, the USA cannot use its old trick of hiding behind fascist screens, faking benevolence, while pulling very nasty strings.

Now the silly imperial strategy of the USA is in full sight. Those American strategists, misreading everything, from history to the mood of the planet, seem persuaded that, if they pile up hubris high enough, they will win.

And how do those geniuses define victory? Well, there is what they say, and what Obama repeats on their behalf. And then there is reality: those lamentable strategists of the USA want a massive military architecture throughout Southern Eurasia. They want a crucial pipeline through Afghanistan, to extend their influence in Central Asia, they want forever bases in the region, and the present war is just a pretext: a forever war, for these forlorn souls, will be a success. The military-industrial complex and Wall Street have to be fed, and that means to be feared, and have a reason to exist. And then, there is an even more horrendous computation (reminiscent of when Wall Street was supporting Hitler, and the American people was looking somewhere else).



Obama claimed that he would outline his Afghanistan strategy, adding, “I feel very confident that when the American people hear a clear rationale for what we’re doing there and how we intend to achieve our goals, that they will be supportive… After eight years — some of those years in which we did not have, I think, either the resources or the strategy to get the job done — it is my intention to finish the job.

"Clear rationale"? It will have to be a clear fiction, because the rationale of the USA in Afghanistan is an entanglement second to none, thoroughly obscure, and the reasons of which were never exposed to the population of the West.

"Finish the job"? Which job is that? Happy to see Obama found a job somewhere outside of Goldman Sachs (where Geithner the handler sent 38 billion dollars, or maybe 65 billions, according to the latest… But why to count, when one is in love?)

Then Obama operated an apparent U turn on the Climate Summit in Copenhagen. Well, in truth, that U turn was a fake-out (see preceding post, November 30, or the annex below).

Which brings us to the question: why would the USA, which, with its factories in China, is making a joke of its CO2 smothering of the planet, expect help in Afghanistan?



Ever since 1945, with FDR, the government of the USA has propped up Islamism, to divide and conquer the Middle East (this is not a lousy conspiracy theory of mine, but an historical fact; as an amusing aside, Israel did something similar lately; Israel propped up Hamas, for a decade, to weaken the PLO…. This has backfired too, but on a much smaller scale!).

This encouragement, and manipulation of Islam, went all the way to the active support, by the USA, of Muslim fundamentalists (starting clearly with support to the Saudi monarchy, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, and Iran’s Shiites in the early 1950s).

In Afghanistan, the USA used bin Laden and his Arabs as shock troops against the Soviets, and taught them to attack soft civilian targets. The idea was that socialism was bad for the Middle East, whereas Jihad was good.

Result: 9/11 was planned by former employees of the CIA (I insist: that is what bin Laden and friends were, for 20 years). No need to go to Afghanistan to find the culprits for 9/11. Going to Washington is enough to reveal the miscreants. What is therefore needed, should one be sincere in fighting the forces that brought 9/11, is war against the thought system that fed and nurtured Osama bin Laden, and it originated in the USA.



Why is the USA in Afghanistan? OK, the official line is that initially Muslim terrorists from Arabia, who had been encouraged, trained, financed and armed by the government of the USA, to make and win a war in Afghanistan, turned against their former master, the USA, and, using methods taught to them by the CIA, committed a terrorist attack on U.S. soil, killing 3,000.

So the USA, and its allies, using the methodology of guilt by association, invaded Afghanistan, and, ever since, have been busy killing Afghans in Afghanistan, while whining hypocritically about the threat of terrorism in the USA… from Afghanistan! (Reminder: the Nazis whined about "terrorism" a lot, ever since they set fire to the Reichstag in 1933. In the end, they had two dozens divisions fighting "terrorism" in France and Yugoslavia alone; that is why they got so muscular in Ukraine and Byelorussia, where they used extermination to impose themselves.)

But this is quite a bit a circular logic: the USA had been making war in Afghanistan for at least a quarter of a century before 9/11 (through its Muslim fundamentalists allies in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan… and Afghanistan, and various agents in its employ, including bin Laden). So after Washington caused mayhem in Afghanistan for a quarter of a century, people based in Germany, Saudi Arabia, and… the USA planned an attack which had been sketched by long time CIA employees who happened to be in Afghanistan at the time.

So now Mr. Obama sees a "job" in Afghanistan, and he is determined to "finish" it.



Please remember that the USA gave more than 100 million dollars in the last eight years, to the nuclear bomb program of Pakistan, a Muslim fundamentalist state. That is even better than training, arming, financing and exciting bin Laden for a quarter of a century. We are talking nukes here. And now we are told that shivering Afghans hiding in their own mountains, clutching an old rifle, refugees from their own villages, are a major terrorist threat against the West.

The mental manipulation is blatant. Why did the USA give money for Muslim fundamentalist nukes? Is accusing Afghans of terrorism, and going out to fight them, a way to assuage one’s anti-terrorist credentials, so as to cover-up the fact that the USA has been enabling nuclear war in South Eurasia?

Remember, the nukes-for-Pakistan idea came from the same strategic operatives who used to finance and arm bin Laden, and his consorts, and then instructed them to attack schools rather than military objectives. The end result is that a bad situation got much worse, and now the military industrial complex (Eisenhower’s semantics) is enjoying itself in Iraq and Afghanistan. Was helping Pakistan with nukes part of the same approach to ensure the forever war? To feed the military industrial complex?

Yes, Iraq, an ally of the USA a few years prior, was also attacked through guilt by association. It was alleged it had nukes. Now some of the very people who pushed and organized that war are making millions for oil contracts.

To make sure that, when the government of the USA makes war in Pakistan, there will really be nukes in Muslim fundamentalist hands, now, the USA is outright financing said nukes.

Of course, Iraq was attacked because of its oil. But why to make it so that Pakistan can start a nuclear world war? Was not bin Laden already bad enough? Did not the fact that the USA and its CIA encouraged, financed, excited and overthrew democracy in Iran, using Shiite fundamentalists of their own making, another example that came back to bite civilization? So why nukes for Pakistan? So that New York City can be nuked, next time? Why to make a bad situation that much worse? Why is the USA so much on the side of devolution and mayhem?



It’s the syndrome of the world wars, which seems to be affecting the unconscious of American strategists: the two world wars created the American empire, so more world wars ought to bring even better things. Thus they resonate, in their simplicity.

That reasoning is born out of hubris, and a misreading of history. How come? Well, previously, over three centuries, the nascent USA always profited from making bad situations worse. Be it with the Indians, the African slaves, the French, the English, the Mexicans, even the Confederates, and certainly in the war with Spain, war brought ever more profits to the USA. For the USA, war was never a two way street, as it has been for all European powers.

The world war between French republic and racist fascism boosted by Prussian imperial militarism was the ultimate God-sent for the USA. Then the American support of Muslim fundamentalism brought plenty of oil and influence, while allowing to chase away the Europeans from the scene, because the Europeans did not use religious fanaticism anymore to push a profitable agenda (the method had been introduced by Charlemagne; the practice was discontinued, sometimes after the Conquista, under Charles V, for cause of primitivism).

Unfortunately for the USA now, to believe that the USA will necessarily profit from the next world war is of course erroneous. The earlier entanglements were special cases, especially because the rest of the world was naïve relative to the USA, and tended to see the USA as savior rather than perpetrator (the U.S. army was the savior, Wall Street was the perpetrator).

During the two world wars of the twentieth century, one had, first of all, a confrontation between a republic and democracy, France, and a fascism and racism, which had mesmerized Germany.

The dimensions that the conflict of 1939-1945 took in Europe were astounding. In 5 weeks in May-June 1940, the Battle of France, the bloodiest battle of the Western front, saw 180,000 soldiers, dead (moreover, untold numbers of Dutch, Belgian and French civilians died). Together, Franco-Britannia and Germany engaged against each other more than 400 divisions. Later, Stalin got involved with its own 600 divisions. Thus more, much more, than 1,000 divisions of Europeans got involved in WWII (Nazi Germany alone had 18 million soldiers in the Wehrmacht, plus more than a million in the SS and the like…)

By comparison, the USA never had more than 67 divisions in Europe, during WWII, and most U.S. troops did not even see combat (the same guys tended to do all the fighting).

Same during WWI. The first massive engagement of American troops involved three divisions. That was at the Second Battle of the Marne, a last minute trap set by the French military command, which destroyed the might of the Imperial German army. The French had more than 44 divisions in the successful counterattack of that particular battle, at one particular point (more divisions were involved earlier and later).

Thus, other nations did most of the work, both in WWI and WWII. Other nations did most of the suffering, and the dying in both world wars. The USA came in spectacularly, and very effectively, using enormous industrial might, to the rescue of victory in both world wars. Nowadays the industrial comparative advantage of the USA is not what it used to be. However, whereas the USA pulled many of the strings behind the scene to make the situation worse, during both world wars, nowadays, it is front and center instigator of trouble. And everybody can see this.



To this day, many do not know, and many do not want to know, that "Wall Street" (aka American plutocracy) financed Mussolini, Hitler, Lenin and Stalin. Fine. It would require to study history. But how to explain the recent American financial and technical support for the Muslim fundamentalist bomb of Pakistan? (The manipulators will tell you that it was to make such nuclear bombs safer. Similarly, By that token, Auschwitz and other extermination camps, whose existence was well known, were not interfered with, during WWII, so as to not disrupt the peace…)

So Obama wants to "finish the job". "Finish the job"? What job is he talking about? The job of insuring economic ruin at home while encouraging an ever-increasing supply of terrorists and American haters abroad? The job of propping up one of the most corrupt Muslim fundamentalist regimes in the world? The job of feeding the military-industrial complex, sponsoring and committing torture, in secret camps, and deliberately engaging in an aerial war with robots that has already killed thousands of innocent people in Pakistan. while lying about it and thus destroying the Bill of Rights of American citizens? Or the job of accomplishing all of them simultaneously?

The Constitution of Afghanistan is Muslim fundamentalist. Why is NATO, the USA, the West, fighting for a religious superstition, Muslim fundamentalism, whereas their own Constitutions forbid religious entanglements?

Why is Karzai’s Muslim fundamentalism superior to the Taliban’s Muslim fundamentalism? Obama, who posed as a Muslim scholar in Cairo, ought to explain to us how each single tribe’s own version of Muslim fundamentalism is so inferior to Karzai’s that it is worth using lethal force to destroy these traditions, which have often been in force for a millennium.

Obama, who himself used illegal drugs for well over a decade, is suddenly gung ho to destroy the opium trade in Afghanistan, the main source of foreign income of Afghanistan for centuries.

Why does Obama want to starve Afghanistan? Would not making Afghans poorer and hungrier make them angrier? So does Obama want the war to never end? Many countries, such as France, Australia, or Turkey, which have other sources of income, are officially allowed to flood the planet with medical variant of opiates. Why not allow Afghanistan to join the legal, medical drug trade? Does Obama favor some peculiar drug suppliers? If so, why is it worth dying and killing for that peculiar choice?

The real reasons for the Afghan war, as I said, is to feed the military industrial complex, occupy militarily Central Asia, built a pipe through Afghanistan to extract Central Asian oil directly.

The reason for supporting a Muslim fundamentalist country such as Pakistan and helping it to fabricate its nukes, is the secret hope that may be it will turn out as it did with the French and Indian Wars (= Seven Year War). Then the super powers, France and Britain, encouraged by the Americans, tore each other up, allowing the Americans to become not just independent, but in an excellent position to massacre the Indians and steal their land (which neither the English nor the French would have allowed, not that much, not that fast).

So gloomy strategists in the USA may hope that a nuclear mess involving Pakistan, India and China, may just be what the doctor ordered. But first one needs a war, and one needs enraged Islamists with their fingers on nukes. This is of course highly vicious, and twisted, but history has seen many such criminal lunacies blossom in the past.


Patrice Ayme

Annex: Yes, Obama will be at Copenhagen, yes, the USA will propose to abate its CO2 production. So far, so good, and this no doubt impressed a lot of people, including me. But then I read after the headlines, and what I saw consisted into not so subtle insults to the international community.

Yes, Obama would attend, but he would not stay for the conference. So the decisions at Copenhagen would be taken with the USA doing an empty chair policy. 66 head of states would stay until the end of the conference, when the final decisions will be taken. But, with the USA not in attendance, this will be a repeat of Kyoto. The USA and its slave factories in China are, by far, the world’s number one CO2 malefactor.

If that was not bad enough, the USA announced a change of the measurement system. Obama announced grandly that the USA would reduce CO2 emissions by 17% from its 2005 level. 2005? Everybody has been measuring from 1990.

Now of course, the USA is a primitive country, the only country in the world to use the same units as in the Middle Ages (ounces, miles, feet, etc…), but by pushing ahead the date to 2005, the USA is blatantly self serving, not just mired in the past. The USA augmented its emissions of CO2 massively between 1990 and 2005. So, in truth, what Obama is proposing is to stand still.

By contrast Germany is holding on the target to reduce CO2 by 40% from its 1990 level, this is what the island states have asked for, and the European Union, 500 million people strong, is not far behind.

Rise, Republic, Plutocracy, Degeneracy, Fall And Transmutation Of Rome

Power Exponentiation By A Few Destroyed Greco-Roman Civilization. Are We Next?

SoundEagle 🦅ೋღஜஇ

Where The Eagles Fly . . . . Art Science Poetry Music & Ideas

Artificial Turf At French Bilingual School Berkeley

Artificial Turf At French Bilingual School Berkeley

Patterns of Meaning

Exploring the patterns of meaning that shape our world

Sean Carroll

in truth, only atoms and the void

West Hunter

Omnes vulnerant, ultima necat

GrrrGraphics on WordPress

Skulls in the Stars

The intersection of physics, optics, history and pulp fiction

Footnotes to Plato

because all (Western) philosophy consists of a series of footnotes to Plato

Patrice Ayme's Thoughts

Striving For Ever Better Thinking. Humanism Is Intelligence Unleashed. From Intelligence All Ways, Instincts & Values Flow, Even Happiness. History and Science Teach Us Not Just Humility, But Power, Smarts, And The Ways We Should Embrace. Naturam Primum Cognoscere Rerum

Learning from Dogs

Dogs are animals of integrity. We have much to learn from them.


Smile! You’re at the best site ever

Defense Issues

Military and general security

Polyhedra, tessellations, and more.

How to Be a Stoic

an evolving guide to practical Stoicism for the 21st century

Donna Swarthout

Writer, Editor, Berliner

Rise, Republic, Plutocracy, Degeneracy, Fall And Transmutation Of Rome

Power Exponentiation By A Few Destroyed Greco-Roman Civilization. Are We Next?

SoundEagle 🦅ೋღஜஇ

Where The Eagles Fly . . . . Art Science Poetry Music & Ideas

Artificial Turf At French Bilingual School Berkeley

Artificial Turf At French Bilingual School Berkeley

Patterns of Meaning

Exploring the patterns of meaning that shape our world

Sean Carroll

in truth, only atoms and the void

West Hunter

Omnes vulnerant, ultima necat

GrrrGraphics on WordPress

Skulls in the Stars

The intersection of physics, optics, history and pulp fiction

Footnotes to Plato

because all (Western) philosophy consists of a series of footnotes to Plato

Patrice Ayme's Thoughts

Striving For Ever Better Thinking. Humanism Is Intelligence Unleashed. From Intelligence All Ways, Instincts & Values Flow, Even Happiness. History and Science Teach Us Not Just Humility, But Power, Smarts, And The Ways We Should Embrace. Naturam Primum Cognoscere Rerum

Learning from Dogs

Dogs are animals of integrity. We have much to learn from them.


Smile! You’re at the best site ever

Defense Issues

Military and general security

Polyhedra, tessellations, and more.

How to Be a Stoic

an evolving guide to practical Stoicism for the 21st century

Donna Swarthout

Writer, Editor, Berliner

Rise, Republic, Plutocracy, Degeneracy, Fall And Transmutation Of Rome

Power Exponentiation By A Few Destroyed Greco-Roman Civilization. Are We Next?

SoundEagle 🦅ೋღஜஇ

Where The Eagles Fly . . . . Art Science Poetry Music & Ideas

Artificial Turf At French Bilingual School Berkeley

Artificial Turf At French Bilingual School Berkeley

Patterns of Meaning

Exploring the patterns of meaning that shape our world

Sean Carroll

in truth, only atoms and the void

West Hunter

Omnes vulnerant, ultima necat

GrrrGraphics on WordPress

Skulls in the Stars

The intersection of physics, optics, history and pulp fiction

Footnotes to Plato

because all (Western) philosophy consists of a series of footnotes to Plato

Patrice Ayme's Thoughts

Striving For Ever Better Thinking. Humanism Is Intelligence Unleashed. From Intelligence All Ways, Instincts & Values Flow, Even Happiness. History and Science Teach Us Not Just Humility, But Power, Smarts, And The Ways We Should Embrace. Naturam Primum Cognoscere Rerum

Learning from Dogs

Dogs are animals of integrity. We have much to learn from them.


Smile! You’re at the best site ever

Defense Issues

Military and general security

Polyhedra, tessellations, and more.

How to Be a Stoic

an evolving guide to practical Stoicism for the 21st century

Donna Swarthout

Writer, Editor, Berliner