The assassins' camp

The Camp of Assassins

The Camp of Assassins

April 8, 2006

There is always a moment in life when one must choose a side. For me, that choice was made long ago.

We live in strange times. One could say that lies have always been part of human history, throughout all ages. Few historical figures have hands unstained by blood. Very often, they delegate the dirty work. Take de Gaulle, for example, our "last historical figure," the "Great Charles," as some called him. I believe that more and more people know that he was limitless in his cynicism. Recently, France 2 broadcast a retrospective on the de Gaulle years, featuring a mix of recreated scenes and archival footage. At one point, the General learns, in the residence provided to him by the British, that the Anglo-Americans have landed in North Africa without informing him. He is awakened in the middle of the night by his aide-de-camp and is furious. He exclaims:

*- I hope the Vichy troops give them a hard time. *

This is one phrase too many, driven solely by excessive personal pride. What de Gaulle did not know was that the British had placed microphones in that house before providing it to him, and that this phrase was recorded. Afterwards, people wonder at the distrust Churchill and Roosevelt had towards him.

I have cited in my columns another anecdote, this time referring to the Algerian War. In November 2004 fell the anniversary of "the Storming of the Bastille" for the Algerians, which corresponds for them to a wave of attacks across the country. Our media gave very muted coverage to this event, broadcasting programs at impossible hours. The best written document I have found is a special issue of Science et Vie titled Algeria 1954-1962, the Last War of the French. On the cover: Revelation: Money for Gas, How France Paid the FLN. The dossier can be found on page 106. It is barely believable.

This is not second-hand testimony but an excerpt from a recording made on magnetic tape. Ill, Delouvrier wanted to ease his conscience. I can already imagine you going to Google and typing "Paul Delouvrier." Do it; you will have some serious surprises. The man has become an emblematic figure. An institute bears his name, whose motto is "Look further to see more clearly." You won't believe it.

One can have made such shocking revelations and still survive history with dignity. Astonishing...

So there are things we learn decades later. When they emerge. But even if they emerge, they can sink back into human oblivion.

All of this continues today. But it is even more enormous. The key to our contemporary history, what ignites everything, is September 11, 2001. There is a DVD, self-published by the American Jimmy Walter, who spent four million dollars producing it, which revisits issues initially raised by a Frenchman, Thierry Meyssan, as early as 2002, through two works: "The Terrorist Propaganda Machine" (L'Effroyable Imposture) and "The Pentagon Conspiracy" (Le Pentagate). I know, the problem is huge and the hypothesis monstrous. This is what ensures the longevity of such a lie, of an imposture so unimaginable, practically without historical precedent, if one excepts the idea, to which more and more people adhere, that Roosevelt was perfectly aware of the preparations for the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor but let it happen "because it was the only way to get American public opinion to accept its participation in the war against the Nazi hordes." Indeed, the day after the attack, Americans were lining up at recruitment offices. Roosevelt perhaps saw long-term. The threat of the "Axis" (Berlin-Tokyo) was serious. The Japanese had already built an impressive armed force. They had the world's largest battleship, the Yamato. Their ambitions to control the Pacific were clearly displayed. Like the Nazis, lacking natural resources and confined to their island, they demanded their "living space." Roosevelt perhaps knew that these powers, Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany, would not stop, that their conquest ambitions were... planetary. And that is not wrong. Think of the rockets of that visionary, Von Braun. After the V2, designed to attack England, the Nazis would have developed intercontinental rockets. Imagine what would have happened if Heisenberg and von Weizsäcker had not deceived Hitler about the possibilities of using fission by deliberately overestimating the critical mass of uranium (read The Heisenberg Affair, Albin Michel).

The logic of history. A logic that leads to actions that may seem unimaginably cynical. But isn't that what politics is, "realpolitik"?

In geopolitics, on a planetary scale, one sees far, one sees big. De Gaulle didn't give a damn about the pieds-noirs, about this "French presence" in North Africa. For him, Algeria was Hassi-Messaoud, because of the oil, Hammaguir, for rocket tests, and Reggane for the bomb, "his" bomb, intended to ensure the security and greatness of France.

There are still people who imagine that the enemy of the United States is the Arab countries. But no, the enemy is further away. It is... China. A formidable adversary. The confrontation is ultimately inevitable. The Americans won an economic war against the Russians. By pushing the Soviets to arm themselves to maintain "parity," they caused the collapse of their economy. They do not want to lose the next economic war, against China. And things are moving very fast. The development of the Middle Kingdom depends on oil. Afghanistan, the handover in Iraq, and now the views on Iran have nothing to do with the "war on terror." Conditions had to be created for this geopolitical turning movement, whatever the cost.

Who makes such decisions? I don't know, but they are made. It is only afterwards that we decode history, if we are still alive to do so. September 11 is the contemporary Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt merely contented himself with letting it happen, giving orders not to move. In the United States, things very likely went much further. So far that any investigation immediately proved impossible, and anything that could resemble evidence was made to disappear as quickly as possible. Did you know that the rubble of the Pentagon was removed... 48 hours after the event? Did you know that the steel from the Twin Towers was hastily sold to Asian companies and that practically everything disappeared very quickly, that no expert was able to examine these debris?

We will have to fight. This is the lock of our contemporary history. Who hasn't exclaimed: "It's not possible they did such a thing!" But think about it. It's just a matter of scale. There is perhaps an old word to bring back, it is the word "honor." Look at him, in the photo above, this man who ended his career as director of EDF and leaves his name to an institute with pompous mottos. Paying the Fellaghas so they wouldn't blow up a gas pipeline, giving them enough to buy bullets that will kill Frenchmen, isn't that dishonorable? How can one live with such a skeleton in the closet?

What you fail to realize is that the monstrous is at every crossroads of history. But the cries of the victims only reach those who decide to eliminate them in a very muffled way. Remember Stalin's phrase:

- One death moves me. A million deaths is a statistic....

Take people like Bush, Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice. Are they aware that soldiers are dying in Iraq because of them? American soldiers and Iraqi civilians. I don't think so. All of this must be abstract to them. One can be responsible for millions of deaths without ever having seen a drop of blood in one's life. One must also understand how "decisions" are made.

Take, for example, this gas pipeline affair. One can imagine a meeting presided over by de Gaulle.

*- General, what are we doing about the Saharan gas? - What do you mean? - Well, a gas pipeline is difficult to secure and easy to sabotage. - It is very important that this French gas reaches the metropole. France's energy independence depends on it. - Yes, General, but that doesn't solve the problem. - My dear Delouvrier, I appointed you Delegate General in Algeria so that you would solve problems, not to bother us with details. The gas must continue to be transported to the port of Bougie, no matter what. Is that clear enough! - Yes, General.... - Good, next question. *

This is how decisions are made, "in high places." Subordinates interpret the words and half-words of "historical figures," take care of the dirty work, with little risk since they will be "covered" anyway. Where have you seen, except in this revelation made in the columns of this special issue of Science et Vie, that the memory of Paul Delouvrier has been tarnished in the slightest?

Let's continue playing this little game of imaginary conversations. In American politics, George Bush is probably just a pawn. He is the actor to whom the script is handed. It is not even certain that he attends important meetings. His idiotic face, that of an ex-alcoholic, is legendary. Cheney (on the left in the photo) is already more "in."

Dick Cheney and George W. Bush

Who sits during these decision-making processes? Hard to say. Condoleezza Rice, perhaps?

Condoleezza Rice

*- What are we doing about this Scholars for Reopen 911 movement? - What do the reports say? - It's spreading a bit. For now, it's just academics talking, but if we're not careful, it could gain momentum. - Hmm. We can't have these intellectual and academic fools replaying the campus movie from the Vietnam era. We need to calm them down a bit. What do you think, Candy? - Yes, I also think we need to calm them down. It shouldn't be too difficult. We have people for that, don't we? - Yes, we have people. - Well, let those people do their job. We pay them to do this job, don't we? - Understood, it will be done, madam. - Next question? *

Then the machine starts up. Someone picks up a phone. Some names are selected.

*- We have a Michael Zebuhr, in the activist genre. He's one of the leaders. - Well, calm down this Zebuhr. - Ok, Dick, I'll put guys on it. *

And here is what it looks like:

An "our man" took care of calming Zebuhr down. This researcher was intercepted outside a restaurant in Minneapolis on March 25th, as he was leaving accompanied by his sister, a friend, and a woman named Suzanne Strong. The man demanded her bag, threatening her. She handed it over without difficulty. The scene took place in front of many people who gave their testimonies to the police. After seizing the bag, the man put a bullet in Zebuhr's head, in cold blood, without any altercation. All witnesses confirm this. The goal pursued by the unknown man was not to steal the lady's bag; it was to kill this researcher, to "calm the others."

Michael Zebuhr

This is how it happens in the United States. Fifteen years ago, I came to French Canada, to Quebec, to give three lectures in different cities. At the end of each one, people came up to me.

*- Mr. Petit, I believe you don't quite realize where you are. Here, you think you are in Canada, but you are... in the United States. The border with the USA is only fifty kilometers away. In the room, there were CIA people who came to listen to you. What you told us was very interesting. But look at us, if you continued this kind of speech, they wouldn't give you more than a few months to live. Someone would pick up a phone, and your case would be quickly settled. *

There will be other murders like that of this young researcher. Murders or "disappearances," or "suicides." But this won't stop the Americans, because Americans are infinitely braver than we are. It is the country of extremes. One finds there the most revolting cynicism and cruelty, at the same time as the strongest courage and altruism.

I assure you, it takes serious courage to dare to question the official theses about September 11 when one lives there. This assassination is just the beginning. The monster will kill again, because it is threatened. The file contains too many implausibilities, too many glaring traces. The only thing preventing Americans and Europeans from taking the leap is the monstrosity of the act. If September 11 is not a terrorist attack, then it is a self-inflicted attack that caused the death of three thousand US citizens. I know, it is... very hard to swallow.

Here, we had our Cassandras. Thierry Meyssan was the first to dare the impossible.

Thierry Meyssan

His impact reveals the power of the book. One must then look at the operations that followed. One must review, dissect, frame by frame, the hallucinatory program broadcast by the Arte channel on April 13, 2004, during which journalists like Philippe Val, editor-in-chief of Charlie Hebdo, pilloried a Thierry Meyssan who was not present to defend himself. It is unimaginable.

In this program, we will hear the "sociologist" Pierre Lagrange. I refer you to his own words.

It is a program produced and presented by Daniel Leconte.

Here is what a voice-over tells us when the credits appear:

*- First film: "September 11 Did Not Happen." Leconte begins by evoking what he immediately calls: "the extent of the delirium." He adds:

*- No, September 11 is not an attack orchestrated by Bin Laden and his killers to bring America to its knees. September 11 would be a gigantic manipulation, thought out, planned, and executed masterfully by the American army, to shock public opinion so that America could deploy its troops in Iraq and reshape the Middle East. Yeah, right.... The thread is huge, and yet, the sauce will take. What happened for so many people to fall into stupidity? Return to this shipwreck of intelligence. Here is "September 11 Did Not Happen," a Doc en Stock film for Arte (producer Daniel Leconte), signed by Barbara Necek and Antoine Vitkine.

A voice-over in the film begins by revisiting the thesis initiated by Meyssan, concluding:

*- Of course, all of this is false. Yet these tall tales were written, published, and distributed on a large scale around the planet. Who is hiding behind these improbable stories, and how did we come to offer platforms to these delusions? This is the story of this film, the story of a defeat of reason. *

We are not allowed to make a copy of this program available to internet users, due to copyright issues. It is regrettable that the Arte channel did not see fit to do so. This would allow people to form their own opinion. At most, one could extract a few still images and written transcriptions. Incidentally, if a reader could construct the complete written transcription of this program, accompanied by a few still images obtained by screen capture, it would be a useful service.

It continues, still in voice-over:

*- These disaster fictions, hundreds of thousands of us swallowed them, all over the world. From the day after September 11, 2001, the planet was seized by a real conspiracy fever. Thierry Meyssan's "The Terrorist Propaganda Machine" was translated into 28 languages and distributed in fifty countries. *

The voice then evokes what launched Meyssan's book, a "spot the difference" game, qualified as "flawless marketing strategy," and this voice says:

- The principle is simple: always the same photos and answers that are written in advance (...)

I am not going to describe this film in detail, which dishonors the journalistic profession with its amalgams. As one of my readers has posted the entire film, including this revolting debate, I could provide a precise commentary. This "conspiracy theory" is abundantly linked to "Holocaust denial" (non-existence of gas chambers). Everything goes. Meyssan published his book in Germany with a publisher who also publishes an extreme-right review. So, of course.... etc... etc....

Lagrange's remarks dishonor him as an academic, as an intellectual. It is difficult to imagine that he can claim to be a sociologist. Several figures intervene in this file, including journalists. Gunther Latsch, from Der Spiegel magazine, evokes the counter-investigation he conducted.

Gunther Latsch, from Der Spiegel

The German newspaper is presented "as the reference in investigative journalism." It was enough for him to make "a few phone calls to show that none of this held water." The program ends with a "debate." Present are:

*- The host, Daniel Leconte, also producer of the program and the Doc en Stock documentary, broadcast. - Gunther Latsch, from Der Spiegel. - Philippe Val, editor-in-chief of "the very serious newspaper Charlie Hebdo." - Rémi Kauffer, writer, journalist, professor at Sciences Po, author of a book published by Grasset, "The Weapon of Disinformation." *

These four crucify Meyssan... in his absence. But why would they have invited him onto the set since what he says is nothing but a web of lies?

Gunther Latsch evokes "simple common sense" and mentions "criteria of plausibility." Philippe Val agrees with him.

- Yes, simple common sense is enough....

This debate dishonors the profession of journalist. Are these men aware of it? One senses in these "professional journalists" their aversion to "this amateur journalism emanating from the net." Three times the host insists on recommending the reading of "the excellent work by Guillaume Dasquié and Jean Guisnel, published by La Découverte."

*- In this work, everything is there, everything is explained, dismantled. *

Jean Guisnel is a senior reporter at Le Point and an associate professor at the Associated Military School and Saint-Cyr. Guillaume Dasquié is a teacher at the University of Marne-la-Vallée, author of the book Secret Affair: Intelligence Services Infiltrate Companies, Flammarion 1999.

I read this book, which was sent to me by a reader, whom I thank in passing.

The back cover:

As these authors write, commenting on the starting point of Meyssan's book:

*- Everything rests on simple deductions from photographs. *

The two authors then consult experts. Here is the result of their analysis. One of them, Jacques Rolland, a former Air Force general, former fighter pilot, is presented as an expert in plane crashes. He explains that the arrangement of debris is not the same depending on whether the plane hits the ground more or less tangentially or (as can happen in military plane accidents) when, on the contrary, it plunges vertically towards the ground. The figures below are extracted from page 39 of the book.

Diagram 1, the "flat plunge." The aircraft bounces and breaks apart. Diagram 2, it hits the ground vertically:

The aircraft is shown in profile. The image on the right suggests that, like the gannet diving into the sea, it folds its wings. Everything: the fuselage, the engines, the wings, is apparently contained within a small "crater." This image probably comes from a course taught at the War College by one of the people involved. One can imagine, at the limit, that a fighter jet, with delta wings, compacted on itself and hitting the ground vertically, with furthermore the resistant part of its structure: the shaft of its one or two engines, made of steel, located in the immediate vicinity of the axis, could produce a "crater" after impact. For a airliner, this would merit more extensive explanations. Indeed, the engines are very offset from the axis of the aircraft, which is itself made of less perforating materials. But let's turn the page. The book provides us with the interpretation of what happened during the impact of the Boeing 757 with the Pentagon:

That's that. You will find nothing else in this work regarding counter-investigation. So this is what "reduces to rubble" the "revisionist" thesis. These few pages suffice to illustrate what Gunther Latsch and Philippe Val qualify as "common sense" and "criteria of plausibility." But have they even read this work?

Don't you think there is reason to be somewhat worried about what is considered "serious journalism"?

In fact, if the illustrator had wanted to stick closer to the facts, he would have had to draw this:

The true configuration the 757 should have had at the moment of impact

Based on the trace emanating from these photographs on which Meyssan had dwelled somewhat, one would obtain this drawing. You are left to imagine this aircraft, piloted by terrorists with only a few hours of training on light aircraft, hitting the facade at the indicated spot after performing a low-altitude approach at a speed between 650 and 800 km/h, with its two engines 60 cm from the ground! All the professional pilots I consulted told me:

*- That, we couldn't do! *

Add to this the absence of impact marks from the wing spars, the engines, the tail, the intact lawn while the plane was full of kerosene, the absence of debris, bodies, etc...

I had already indicated on my site what method would allow everyone to agree. The stakes, of importance, would merit a proper reconstruction. It would suffice to have a Boeing 757, at the end of its potential, where authentic human bodies would be placed. And everything else: kerosene, suitcases. The target: an exact copy of this wing of the Pentagon, in terms of its mechanical structure. One could add, in the rooms, furniture, including wooden desks or books, similar to those seen appearing intact after the collapse of the building. Guidance of the aircraft by "radio beam," towards a target beacon. A perfectly mastered technique. Adjustment of ground altitude with a radar rangefinder. In front of the building, one would place everything that could be photographed, including a nice surface of lawn. And one would watch what happens. The whole thing could be set up in perfect conformity with "the official thesis."

It would not be the American officials who could have carried out this reconstruction since, according to them, there is no ambiguity, no problem. However, Arab countries would have perfectly had the means to finance, anywhere, such an operation. The world press would have been invited to film, then to inspect the damage, to note the consequences and effects of the crash. One could have seen how an aircraft of this size could have folded up and embedded itself in a three-meter by three-meter hole, how tens of thousands of liters of kerosene could have ignited without scorching the lawn.

Such a reconstruction would, as it stands, still be possible. Why have steps of this kind not been initiated? Thierry Meyssan once gave me an answer, over the phone.

*- The chancelleries of the various countries know perfectly well what to expect. There are those who feel solidarity with the United States and who say that if the scandal broke, the whole West would suffer the consequences. As for the others, they have been very clearly warned by the Americans themselves: "move, even just a little finger, and our response will be war." *

If one questioned the four people present on the set of this Arte program, they would probably tell us that the assassination of Michael Zebuhr is just a simple common crime and has nothing to do with the fact that he was one of the pillars of the Scholars for Reopen 911 movement. It just happened, that's all. A question of "common sense and criteria of plausibility."

Let's move on to other subjects ****

London studies possible strikes against Iran

Sunday, April 2, 2006, 06:26 AM -

The British government will hold a secret meeting on Monday with officials from its armed forces to discuss possible air strikes against Iran, the Sunday Telegraph reported, citing a senior Foreign Office official. The meeting would allow for an examination of the consequences of such strikes to destroy Iran's capacity to build the atomic bomb, the British weekly adds. The senior official cited by the Sunday Telegraph estimated that air strikes, under American leadership, would be "inevitable" if Iran did not comply with the UN Security Council's injunction on Wednesday to end its uranium enrichment activities within 30 days.

The United States, Russia, China, Great Britain, and France, the five permanent members of the Security Council, plus Germany, met this week to study means of action in case Tehran ignored this ultimatum, the newspaper recalls.

The United States hopes that a possible military operation would have a multinational character, but British defense officials believe that Washington is ready, if necessary, to launch air strikes alone or with Israeli help, the Sunday Telegraph further states. According to the source cited by the newspaper, the operation would be limited to air strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities, an invasion of the kind seen in Iraq being currently excluded.

"Monday's meeting will attempt to anticipate the consequences for Great Britain of such an attack," particularly for British interests in Iraq and Afghanistan, this source added. "There will be no invasion of Iran, but the nuclear sites will be destroyed. This is not something that will happen imminently. (It will be) perhaps this year, perhaps next year," the same source stated, arguing that the Israeli attack in 1981 against the Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak had shown that "a limited operation constituted the best military option."

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice refused to rule out the use of force against Iran on Friday during her visit to Great Britain, even though it is not currently on the agenda.

"The American President (George W. Bush) never rules out any option. However, we recognize that this is not currently on the agenda. We are in a process that, we believe, can work diplomatically," she said.

London studies possible strikes against Iran

Sunday, April 2, 2006, 06:26 AM -

AFP

The British government will hold a secret meeting on Monday with officials from its armed forces to discuss possible air strikes against Iran, the Sunday Telegraph reported, citing a senior Foreign Office official. The meeting would allow for an examination of the consequences of such strikes to destroy Iran's capacity to build the atomic bomb, the British weekly adds. The senior official cited by the Sunday Telegraph estimated that air strikes, under American leadership, would be "inevitable" if Iran did not comply with the UN Security Council's injunction on Wednesday to end its uranium enrichment activities within 30 days.

The United States, Russia, China, Great Britain, and France, the five permanent members of the Security Council, plus Germany, met this week to study means of action in case Tehran ignored this ultimatum, the newspaper recalls.

The United States hopes that a possible military operation would have a multinational character, but British defense officials believe that Washington is ready, if necessary, to launch air strikes alone or with Israeli help, the Sunday Telegraph further states. According to the source cited by the newspaper, the operation would be limited to air strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities, an invasion of the kind seen in Iraq being currently excluded.

"Monday's meeting will attempt to anticipate the consequences for Great Britain of such an attack," particularly for British interests in Iraq and Afghanistan, this source added. "There will be no invasion of Iran, but the nuclear sites will be destroyed. This is not something that will happen imminently. (It will be) perhaps this year, perhaps next year," the same source stated, arguing that the Israeli attack in 1981 against the Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak had shown that "a limited operation constituted the best military option."

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice refused to rule out the use of force against Iran on Friday during her visit to Great Britain, even though it is not currently on the agenda.

"The American President (George W. Bush) never rules out any option. However, we recognize that this is not currently on the agenda. We are in a process that, we believe, can work diplomatically," she said.

Apart from that, it seems that the Iranians possess the Russian supersonic cruise missile "Sunburn." This weapon would constitute a very serious threat to units of the American fleet, insofar as these missiles would perform most of their approach at Mach 2.9 in mountainous regions where they would not be detectable by Awacs aircraft.

To learn more about this Russian supersonic cruise missile, type "sunburn missile" on Google.

Apart from that, information regarding the opening of an oil exchange in Iran, in Euros, is unclear and sometimes contradictory.

Regarding Iraq, the American government is relatively satisfied. Indeed, the number of American deaths per year seems to be stabilizing. As disorders increase, this indicates that Iraqi law enforcement forces must increasingly "take over," which was the goal, wasn't it?

I often receive letters from young readers who express their concern, if not their absolute pessimism about the future that seems to be prepared for them by their elders, in all countries of the world. Question: what could save us from a good apocalypse? I hear people on all sides saying, "Normal, on this planet, there are too many people. It will have to be reduced significantly, one way or another."

That is one point of view.

But what could suddenly change the course of this catastrophic scenario? Suddenly having energy in abundance. I will remain very attentive to the result recently obtained by Gerry Yonas, at the Sandia laboratory, New Mexico. Two billion degrees is not nothing. I paid to download the article for 25 dollars, immediately. I assure you, it is worth it.

I summarize, schematically. I will return to this subject when I have more precise information. Yonas is an ace at short circuits. He has long known how to produce pulses of 20 million amperes and sends all of this into a sort of "birdcage," whose "bars" are made of thin stainless steel wires.

Tens of millions of amperes cause about a hundred metal wires to converge towards the axis in a few tens of nanoseconds

Two conductors carrying parallel currents attract each other. A "birdcage" tends to implode along the axis of symmetry. Gerry hoped for a few million degrees, perhaps ten or twenty. But sometimes Nature is kind. The implosion, which was impossible to predict, maintained its beautiful symmetry. Temperature reached at the end of compression, according to a plasma cord one and a half millimeters in diameter: two billion degrees (a reader thought I had misread and that it was... two million). Measured how? By evaluating the wavelength of the X-rays emitted. But there, surprise: summing the energy thus emitted, it exceeds by a factor of four the incident kinetic energy (that of the plasma atoms, launched at each other, until "stagnation conditions" are reached). Practically no explanation, except for a theory full of hypotheses that ambient magnetic energy would convert into thermal energy through MHD instabilities.

Gerry confirms that he has not yet conducted tests with anything other than a target made of heavy hydrogen, not with the mixtures mentioned below.

I think this is a great hope, because with 500 million degrees one can fuse a mixture of Lithium-7 and light hydrogen H1. Reaction products: helium (He-4). With a billion degrees, one can fuse Boron-11 and light hydrogen H1. Reaction products: three helium atoms (alpha particles) and still no neutrons!

In short, clean fusion, without waste, without radioactivity. How to exploit this energy? By direct MHD conversion, by compressing a magnetic field. One then obtains an induced current in the solenoid. Of this produced energy, one exploits a part and with the other one recharges a capacitor, which acts as a "flywheel." This is the "two-stroke fusion," which I described in 75 or 76 in an issue of Science et Vie.

At each cycle, how to reset the "birdcage"? It will probably have to be replaced by another system ensuring a well-axisymmetric start of the compression, for example by creating very ionized alleys using lasers, as suggested by a reader. Yonas indicates that he and his collaborators have considered various formulas going in this direction.

At the moment when humans are doing everything to attack each other, on a large scale, the golden age may be at our doors, in a few years. At the moment when we are about to break ground for the "steam engine of the 3rd millennium," aka ITER.

But beware, every discovery has its downside. Do not think it is difficult to produce tens of millions of amperes. In 1954, Andrei Sakharov, with his flux compression system, one meter long, had produced one hundred million amperes using a chemical explosive as primary energy. It's lying around somewhere on my site. I'll find it. No time today. A setup worthy... of a technical high school, or almost. By coupling with Yonas's idea, one can send these amperes into a "birdcage" 2 cm in diameter and 5 cm long, on the axis of which one places a "match" made of solid Lithium Hydride LiH. At the end, a charge constituting an "H" bomb, of unlimited power. In short, the H-bomb within reach of all countries that do not yet have it, without needing to go through isotopic enrichment and the A-bomb (as a match for the thermonuclear charge).

Yes, humans will have to choose.

Don't you think we are living in interesting times? Are the gods watching us out of the corner of their eye? We already had, in various books, the "Apocalypse" version, according to John, or according to "various traditions," often with converging dates (the famous 2012). And now the outsider solution seems to emerge, totally unexpected. With this energy and zero pollution, one can do... anything. Dig canals to bring water where there is none, pump it. One can heat those who are cold, transport billions of individuals without automatically asphyxiating and poisoning them. Let us hope that the Chinese will take an interest in this quickly. I hardly expect the French to follow suit. People who still have torpedoes propelled by propellers....

I am an incorrigible optimist. There are two guiding proverbs:

The future is written nowhere and be realistic, imagine the impossible

Am I going off the rails? Or, as another fool said: "this is technological delirium!"

No, because these two billion degrees were, until Yonas obtained them, considered an impossible challenge.

What are we going to choose: Life or Death? At the moment when everything seems to be falling into place for us to assassinate each other severely, Dame Nature offers us the solution, it seems. That is the impression I have. I would never have believed that such temperatures could be reached, until last week.

Back to the top of this page "The Camp of Assassins," from April 2006 ---

Back to Guide Back to Home Page** **

**Number of views of this page since April 9, 2006: ** ---