mercredi 16 février 2011

Alain Cotta : " Nulle part aujourd’hui il n'existe de démocratie directe, pas plus que représentative."

Rencontres - Les intervenants externes

leregnedesoligarchiesAlain Cotta, grand pourfendeur de l'euro devant l'Eternel, sort un nouvel ouvrage Le règne des oligarchies (éditions Plon).

Il accorde un bref entretien à Scripto sur ce sujet fondamental.

Entretien réalisé par Maurice Gendre

1- Pouvez-vous nommer les principales oligarchies qui dominent le monde ?

L’oligarchie des USA, celle de la Chine et, en 3ème rang le Royaume Uni.

2- Où ces oligarques se réunissent-ils, où vivent-ils ? Où sont situés les épicentres de leur pouvoir ?

L’oligarchie est un groupe d’individus dont les lieux de réunion varient en fonction de leur situation économique et sociale ainsi que les circonstances auxquelles ils doivent faire face. Comme il s’agit d’un ensemble d’individus tenant de la meute de loups ou du nuage d’étourneaux il ne possède pas de chef attitré pas plus que d’épicentre fixe.

3- Des ponts existent-ils entre ces différentes oligarchies, comment cela se traduit-il ?

Entre ces différentes oligarchies il existe plusieurs ponts, d’abord ceux qui concernent les membres ayant même profession. Les militaires de toutes nations communiquent ensemble à travers leurs exercices de stimulation guerrière et leurs écoles de formation. Les dirigeants des grandes entreprises se rencontrent de façon officielle et officieuse ce qui constitue la vie organisée des oligopoles mondiaux des grands produits et des matières premières. Les politiques se rencontrent lors des réunions, elles aussi, officielles G6, 8, G20 et plus secrètes. Quant aux super riches, ils ont leurs lieux de rencontre bien connus, Davos, Saint Barth et autres lieux de villégiature agréables. Entre ces quatre ponts plusieurs passerelles, de l’appartenance à ces réseaux organisés (Opus Dei, franc-maçonnerie, services secrets).

4- En parallèle, des tensions et des dissensions semblent de plus en plus se faire jour entre elles, quelles formes et quelles tournures peuvent prendre ces désaccords ?

Les tensions et dissensions sont intimement liées à l’affrontement des pouvoirs nationaux qui eux-mêmes constituent désormais la vie d’une espèce humaine mondialisée. Des accords et désaccords traversent la géo-politique purement nationale. Toutes les grandes entreprises quelque soit leur appartenance nationale ont en commun leur volonté d’accroître leur réactivité et leur pouvoir ; les politiques d’affirmer l’autorité des nations qu’ils représentent, et les super riches de vivre le plus tranquillement possible. A tout cela il faut ajouter l’importance que représente pour de nombreuses personnes leur appartenance à des religions qui ne sont pas toujours tentées par l’œcuménisme.

5- Y a-t-il un voire plusieurs points communs fondamentaux entre ces différentes oligarchies, à tel point que l'on puisse dire que ces oligarchies forment l'Oligarchie ?

Les différents points d’accords entre certaines oligarchies nationales et les éléments communs à chacune d’entre elles (dirigeants d’entreprise, politiques…) ne sont pas tels que l’ont puisse parler d’oligarchie mondiale. Ce qui n’empêche point de pouvoir imaginer qu’elle existera un jour et de s’interroger aujourd’hui sur les modalités de sa formation et peut-être même de considérer que cette naissance constitue la raison d’être de la mondialisation.

6- Sur quelles armes s'appuient ces oligarchies pour asseoir leur domination sur le monde ?

Essentiellement sur l’arme économique et militaire, qui avec l’argent et le sexe constitue l’une des trois forces structurantes de l’espèce humaine.

7- Comment ces oligarchies se protègent-elles de la vindicte des peuples ?

Elles disposent de plusieurs moyens de protection : la réussite économique, la corruption et les moyens de détourner de l’attention des masses, désormais très efficaces : Internet, Twitter, facebook et plus généralement tous les médias de communication. Ajoutons que la complexité croissante des problèmes posés aux différentes collectivités nationales écarte naturellement la participation d’un très grand nombre d’individus à cause soit de leur incompétence, soit de leur indifférence à l’égard de solution qui ont peu d’influence sur leur vie quotidienne.

8- Tout processus de changement, en apparence assuré par le peuple et d'inspiration démocratique, est-il condamné à n'être en réalité que le cache-sexe des intérêts d'une faction de l'Oligarchie contre une autre faction de cette même Oligarchie à un moment donné de l'Histoire ? Pour dire les choses plus brutalement : un soulèvement populaire a-t-il la possibilité de ne pas être téléguidé par des puissances extérieures et/ou supérieures ?

Les processus de changements d’inspiration démocratiques  ne peuvent aujourd’hui dissimuler leur rôle effectif. Nulle part aujourd’hui il n'existe de démocratie directe, pas plus que représentative. Partout où le pouvoir est exercé par des oligarchies qui ne sont pas représentatives, mais qui reçoivent en fait une délégation de pouvoir. L’évolution de toutes les techniques et la mondialisation de l’espace installent désormais les oligarchies comme le pouvoir dirigeant de toutes les organisations humaines : nation, famille, entreprise et religion.

L’inspiration démocratique a deux fondements. Le premier purement psychologique s’explique en ce que tout individu préfère croire qu’il est en démocratie plutôt que d’être lucide (« blessure la plus rapprochée du soleil » selon René Char) sur sa dépendance à l’égard d’une oligarchie. La seconde, plus sérieuse, consiste à invoquer la démocratie pour se prémunir des oligarchies attirées par un pouvoir personnel, proche des dictatures de fait, ainsi que le montre les mouvements actuels dans les pays arabes. En cette occurrence il s’agira, à notre avis, beaucoup plus d’un changement d’oligarchie que d’un quelconque établissement de la démocratie.

9- Quelles sont les plus graves menaces que ces oligarchies font peser sur le monde ? Comment s'en prémunir ?

L’oligarchie est devenu le mode naturel et général de l’exercice du pouvoir. Elle ne constitue pas d’autres menaces que celles tenant à l’usage exorbitant de son pouvoir.

Propos recueillis par Maurice Gendre

Report Vindicates Questions In Anthrax Conspiracy

Report Vindicates Questions In Anthrax Conspiracy
  •   The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Infowars.com Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store

Steve Watson
Infowars.com
February 16, 2011

Major Scientific Report Vindicates Unanswered Questions In Anthrax Conspiracy 160211detrick

A newly released report produced by a panel of independent scientists asserts that there was not enough scientific evidence for the FBI to convict their prime suspect in the 2001 anthrax attacks, vindicating those who have consistently pointed to a deeper conspiracy behind the case.

The $1.1 million report, commissioned by the FBI and produced by The National Academies of Sciences, concludes that the FBI has overstated the science in its investigation into microbiologist Bruce Ivins, who was identified by the FBI’s “Amerithrax Task Force” as the lone perpetrator of the attacks that killed five people and infected 17 others in the weeks immediately following 9/11.

The report casts doubt on the supposed link between a flask of anthrax found in Ivins’ office and letters containing bacterial spores that were mailed to NBC News, the New York Post, and the offices of then-Sen. Tom Daschle and Sen. Patrick Leahy.

“The scientific link between the letter material and flask number RMR-1029 is not as conclusive as stated in the DOJ Investigative Summary,” the 190 page report states.

“Although the scientific evidence was supportive of a link between the letters and that flask, it did not definitively demonstrate such a relationship, for a number of reasons,” said Dr. David Relman, a bioterrorism expert at Stanford University School of Medicine who served as vice chair of the review committee. “Our overarching finding was that it is not possible to reach a definitive conclusion about the origins of the B. anthracis in the mailings based on the available scientific evidence alone.”

“This shows what we’ve been saying all along: that it was all supposition based on conjecture based on guesswork, without any proof whatsoever,” Paul Kemp, a lawyer who represented Ivins, told The Washington Post.

“For years, the FBI has claimed scientific evidence for its conclusion that anthrax spores found in the letters were linked to the anthrax bacteria found in Dr. Ivins’s lab,” said Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa). The report “shows that the science is not necessarily a slam-dunk. There are no more excuses for avoiding an independent review.”

Ivins was found dead in 2008 from an apparent suicide, at the same time the government was about to indict him.

Ivins’ death provided a neat tie up to the case, which was officially closed last year by The Justice Department, concluding that Ivins had stolen the weaponized anthrax spores from the government lab at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases where he worked, without any accomplices.

However, a clear motive was never determined, and no one ever reported seeing Ivins prepare anthrax spores or mail the supposed letters.

The National Academies’ website notes, “The new report is limited to an evaluation of the scientific evidence and does not assess the guilt or innocence of anyone connected to the case.”

The DOJ and the FBI issued a joint statement in response to the panel’s report, which reads:

“The FBI has long maintained that while science played a significant role, it was the totality of the investigative process that determined the outcome of the anthrax case,”

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t

“Although there have been great strides in forensic science over the years, rarely does science alone solve an investigation.” the statement concludes.

The panel’s findings should bring new focus onto previous assertions by a former colleague and friend of Bruce Ivins, and the original suspect in the FBI’s investigation into the  attacks.

Shortly after Ivins’ death, Dr. Ayaad Assaad, an Egyptian-born toxicologist at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, declared that Ivins did not kill himself and was not behind the attack at all.

Assaad made the comments in an interview with a local Fort Detrick newspaper in September 2008.

The Frederick News Post reported:

Assaad, who worked in a U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease lab at Fort Detrick from 1989 to 1997 developing a vaccine for ricin, said in an interview Saturday he does not believe Ivins was guilty.

“He’s a great man. He’s honorable, sincere, honest and most important, he didn’t kill five people and he didn’t kill himself,” Assaad told the newspaper.

Assaad knew Ivins well, not only were they colleagues but their four children were all classmates In Frederick.

Assaad was extensively questioned by the FBI On October 1, 2001, a fortnight after the first anthrax letters were mailed. It later emerged that the FBI’s lead, a letter from an unidentified person who claimed Assaad was planning a biological terrorist attack, was false.

Major Scientific Report Vindicates Unanswered Questions In Anthrax Conspiracy 090908AssaadThe mystery letter identified Assaad as a former USAMRIID microbiologist and also pinpointed his time at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Chemical Defense at Aberdeen Proving Ground in Harford County, indicating that whoever sent it had access to detailed army records.

The anonymous letter was sent shortly after 9/11 but before anyone knew about the anthrax-laced letters. On October 5, 2001, about 10 days after the anonymous letter was mailed, Robert Stevens, Photo Editor of The Sun in Florida, became the first of five individuals to die from an anthrax infection, indicating that someone had wanted to frame Assaad for the attacks.

“This anthrax issue is part of a much bigger issue,” Assaad also commented. “The roots of corruption are so deep in (USAMRIID), and this is the thing that the people in Frederick don’t understand.”

Former government biological weapons legislator Dr Francis Boyle shares Assaad’s view that Ivins has been used as a patsy in a larger cover up.

“Ivins is only the latest dead microbiologist.” Boyle has previously stated, “You also have to tie into this the large numbers of dead microbiologists that have appeared since around the summer before these events, when the New York Times revealed the existence of the covert anthrax weapons programs run by the CIA, and that too is in the public record.”

Stock up with Fresh Food that lasts with eFoodsDirect (Ad)

In  September 2007, Ivins sent an e-mail to himself, in which he said he knew of the identity of the anthrax killer, without actually stating who he believed it to be. It is not known why he did this. Prior to his death in 2008, he told friends that government agents were hounding him and his family.

Related Reading:

Government Biological Weapons Legislator: Anthrax Inside Job Cover Up Continuing

Demand that the FBI Reveal How Much of Ivins’ Anthrax Sample was Taken by Other People

Insights Into the Question of Whether the Anthrax was Weaponized

The Anthrax Attack Was a Classic False Flag Operation Targeting Arabs

Hair Samples in Anthrax Case Don’t Match

Proof that Ivins Couldn’t Have Done It (At Least Not Alone)

Handwriting Analysis Fails to Tie Ivins to Anthrax Letters

The Killer Anthrax Did Not Even Originate at Fort Detrick

FBI said to have stalked Ivins’ family

Colonel Anderson Refutes False Allegations Against Dr. Ivins

Explained: Why The Anthrax Strain Was Found in Ivins’ Office

Questions about the Anthrax Suspect and His Interactions with Mental Health Professionals

Inside the tent, the best bioterrorist money could buy?

Olbermann Countdown: Anthrax Attacks Inside Job?

Scientists Question FBI Probe On Anthrax: Ivins Could Not Have Been Attacker, Some Say

Anthrax Suspect Was Involuntarily Committed to Psychiatric Hospital Shortly Before His Death

The FBI Admits It Has No Case Against Ivins

CIA Had Killer Anthrax

Anthrax Attack Was State-Sponsored Terror (But the State Was America)

My Conversation With a Ft. Detrick Scientist

Ivins Can Defend Himself in Court and Obtain Justice Against the FBI

Attorney: Ivins never knew he was ‘the suspect’

Ivins Could Not Have Applied High-Tech Coating to the Killer Anthrax

The Anthrax Cover-Up

The Biowar Story Not Told In The Aftermath Of A Scientist’s Suicide

Related video: Prof. Francis Boyle on The Alex Jones Show August 21, 2008 – Anthrax “Inside Job”

Kill Switch Beta: Government Blocks 84,000 Websites

Kill Switch Beta: Government Blocks 84,000 Websites
  •   The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Infowars.com Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
February 16, 2011

Under the banner of fighting child pornography, the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice knocked out 84,000 websites last week. The websites did not host or link to child pornography as the government claims.

“As part of ‘Operation Save Our Children‘ ICE’s Cyber Crimes Center has again seized several domain names, but not without making a huge error. Last Friday, thousands of site owners were surprised by a rather worrying banner that was placed on their domain,” reports TorrentFreak, a tech site.

Senator Joe Lieberman peddles his kill switch legislation under the rubric of the phony war on terror.

“Advertisement, distribution, transportation, receipt, and possession of child pornography constitute federal crimes that carry penalties for first time offenders of up to 30 years in federal prison, a $250,000 fine, forfeiture and restitution,” was the message visitors to the sites were greeted with after a judge signed a seizure warrant and Big Sis contacted the domain registries and instructed them to point the domains in question to a server that hosts the above warning message.

“However, somewhere in this process a mistake was made and as a result the domain of a large DNS service provider was seized,” writes Ernesto for TorrentFreak.

It is certainly possible although not probable the takedown was an error. It is more likely the sites were taken offline in calculated fashion in order to send a message – government has the ability to deny a large number of websites access to the internet.

In response to widespread protests and mass unrest, the authoritarian Egyptian government shut down the internet in late January. In addition, the Mubarak regime gave the order to shut off mobile phone service. “All mobile operators in Egypt have been instructed to suspend services in selected areas. Under Egyptian legislation, the authorities have the right to issue such an order and we are obliged to comply,” explained Vodaphone.

The government wants to implement a likewise system in the United States. Senator Joe Lieberman introduced a bill that would allow the Obama administration to pull the plug on the internet. The bill would amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 enacted during the manufactured hysteria following the events of September 11, 2001. According to the language of the bill, it would “enhance the security and resiliency of the cyber and communications infrastructure of the United States” by allowing the president to use a figurative “kill switch” and seize control of the web in response to a Homeland Security directive.

“Right now China, the government, can disconnect parts of its internet in case of war and we need to have that here too,” Lieberman told CNN last year.

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t

Myanmar shut down the internet in 2007 and Iran and China did the same in 2009. Governments crave the absolute power of denying millions of people access to the internet and other forms of telecommunication.

The Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset legislation is expected to be reintroduced into Congress this session. Late last month, Brandon Milhorn, Republican staff director and counsel for the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said that the Senate was revisiting the bill. Detractors call it the “internet kill switch” bill while supporters argue it is essential for our national security.

If passed, the law would give Obama and future presidents the ability to designate the internet – and other network computer systems – as vital to national security. If the government decided to shut down the internet or certain parts during a declared emergency – more than likely a contrived false flag event – it will not be “subject to judicial review,” in other words the Fourth Amendment will not apply. The power to declare such an emergency would not come from Congress.

An early version of the bill introduced by Democrat Jay Rockefeller and Republican Olympia Snow authorized the White House to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” and explicitly gave the executive branch the power to “order the disconnection” of networks and websites. House Democrats have taken a similar approach in their own proposals, according to Declan McCullagh writing for CNet News.

Webster Tarpley on Obama’s internet kill siwtch.

Blocking the access of 84,000 websites from the internet is not a mistake. It was a beta test by the government to test the technical aspects of the action and gauge response. The government is not in the business of seriously combating child pornography. Like the Mubarak regime in Egypt, the government in the United States is interested in having a mechanism in place to shut down the public internet or take out targeted websites and domains.

Stock up with Fresh Food that lasts with eFoodsDirect (Ad)

More and more people are flocking to the internet for news and information. Millions are ignoring the corporate media and the government propaganda it spews. Before the economy crashes completely and people take to the street like they are now doing in the Middle East, the government wants to have its internet kill switch firmly in place.

It may get the chance during this session of Congress.

Hillary Announces Expanded US Cyber-Coup Campaign

Hillary Announces Expanded US Cyber-Coup Campaign
  •   The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Infowars.com Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store

 

Tarpley.net
February 16, 2011

Wikileaks is Cass Sunstein’s “Cognitive Infiltration” Project; Assange plays Justin Bieber for Young Nihilists Across Globe.

See Clinton to Support Facebook Freedom, Fight Censorship.

‘Fox News Caught’ at #1 trend after Ron Paul hoax

‘Fox News Caught’ at #1 trend after Ron Paul hoax
  •   The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Infowars.com Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store

Infowars.com
February 16, 2011

Supporters have done it again, driving ‘Fox News Caught‘ to #1 in Google Trends this Wednesday, February 16, 2011, to make sure the rest of the media pay attention to the deception that was played on Congressman Ron Paul following the 2011 CPAC conference.

Paul, the most Constitutionally-conservative member of the House, won the CPAC straw poll for the second year in a row, but Fox got caught playing a dirty trick by broadcasting an old CPAC clip where Romney-followers booed. As Paul Joseph Watson summarized in his article, Fox “deceptively represented Paul’s 2011 CPAC straw poll victory with footage from 2010 event at which Mitt Romney supporters had loudly booed result.”

'Fox News Caught' catches top trends after Ron Paul CPAC hoax, #1 trend this Wednesday, February 16, 2011.

More from Watson’s article, ‘Fox News Caught In Shocking Dirty Tricks Stunt Against Ron Paul‘:

In a shocking act of mass public deception, Fox News attempted to skew Ron Paul’s 2011 CPAC straw poll win by representing it with footage from the previous year’s CPAC event, at which Mitt Romney supporters had loudly booed the result, another example of the continuing dirty tricks campaign being waged against Paul by the establishment media.

Congressman Paul replicated his 2010 victory over Mitt Romney by defeating the former Governor of Massachusetts for a second consecutive year at the annual CPAC conference.

However, before anchor Bill Hemmer introduced a segment concerning the story, Fox News played a clip of the 2010 announcement of the poll results, during which Mitt Romney supporters had loudly booed Ron Paul’s victory, passing off last year’s footage as representative of this year’s event.

Back in 2009, Fox host Sean Hannity was caught using footage from a heavily attended demonstration to beef the numbers for a Michelle Bachman rally.

Fox News Lies: CPAC Ron Paul Dirty Trick

Thanks for your help in a well-deserved media blitz to level the playing field against Fox’s deliberate deception. Politics is a dirty business; the GOP establishment slung everything they had at Ron Paul in 2008 and appear poised to do so again for the 2012 primary. Despite leading the GOP pack, Ron Paul has already been left off of major polls meant to establish leading candidates.

Meanwhile, this particular CPAC trick seems to have been exposed; here are a number of related postings from across the Internet:

AOL News: Fox News Caught Running Old CPAC Footage After Ron Paul’s Straw Poll Win?
Death + Taxes Magazine: Fox News Caught Smearing Ron Paul
Mediaite: Fox News: Airing Old CPAC Footage Showing Crowd Booing Ron Paul Was A “Mistake”
Daily Paul: Fox News Lies Exposed: Ron Paul CPAC 2011 Video
Information Liberation: Busted: Fox News Caught Faking CPAC Booing Reaction to Ron Paul Win
Federal Jack: EPIC MEDIA FAIL: Fox News Caught Faking CPAC Ron Paul Reaction Video
Daily News Update: Fox News Caught Lying Again!

RELATED:
PRNEWSWIRE: NIA Declares Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Front-Runner

Les racines anglo-saxonnes du mondialisme

Cette émission n° 37 de Méridien Zéro a été diffusée en direct le 13 février 2011. Elle est divisée en deux parties. La première est consacrée à la réédition de l’ouvrage « Les secrets de la réserve fédérale » d’Eustace Mullins paru aux éditions « Le retour aux sources » dont le gérant, François Sainz, était présent au micro de Méridien Zéro.

La deuxième partie s’intéressait à l’étiologie de cette weltanschauung mondialiste et plus particulièrement à ses racines anglo-saxonnes. Pour approfondir ce sujet, Méridien Zéro recevait Jean Patrick Arteault, collaborateur de la revue « Terre & Peuple Magazine.«