Plucking the Daisy
Plucking the Daisy
October 24, 2004
Updated on November 15, 2004
English ESPAÑOL Italiano Allemand ****
**Jean-Pierre Petit, astrophysicist, 2004 **
People of my generation should remember that it was a Brigitte Bardot film. But it's not that daisy I'm thinking of today. I'm thinking of an image that one of my readers gave me. In France and in many other countries, people pluck daisies. Power takes liberties, social gains, one after another. Since there is no longer any unity, no party or union capable of defending individuals or employees, everything falls apart silently. Each petal of the daisy does not react when its neighbor is pulled, without realizing that one day it will be next on the list.
No alternative solution is in sight, which is despairing. Periodically, Arlette Laguiller runs for elections, delivering her monotonous, bleating monologue. She talks about "the workers' party" and "the bosses." Although she denounces glaring injustices and erosion of social rights, her political message remains impoverished, nonexistent, like that of all those who claim to be "left," whether they consume caviar or not. Some speeches recall the theme of "self-management" of the 1968 radicals, the most beautiful nonsense ever imagined in our social history. No, companies don't function when workers' councils are in power. Communism didn't work either. But, of course, things are more complex. Even if there were good will (and honesty) in the USSR, this empire, built in the most violent autocracy, that of a butcher like Stalin, died of economic suffocation, forced by the United States to develop an arsenal that devoured the bulk of its gross national product. The USSR never had the means to have "butter and guns." All of this finally collapsed like a house of cards, and the Russians prove to be incapable of moving from one extreme to the other, from a "planned economy" that is stuck in a loop, to a market economy. It seems as if they have caught all our flaws at once, without benefiting from the few qualities of this system, and now the train stations of Russia are filled with young girls who prostitute themselves, the markets are full of elderly people selling rags to survive. The Soviet social safety net has been replaced by misery. In Cuba, the American mafia, promptly ejected by Castro, will not be long in reinstalling itself in what was its headquarters. The China of Mao inherited the iron rule of his great helmsman. There, they face the invasion of drugs by simply shooting anyone possessing even the slightest hallucinogen. China has emerged from the whims of its guru-leader, a writer who once played the role of a metallurgist with the efficiency we know. For those who don't know: by deciding that peasants would now produce their own steel in village blast furnaces. Meanwhile, on the other side, Stalin played the agronomist by deciding, just after the war, that his people would dramatically increase agricultural yields by "plowing at a depth of one meter" using tanks converted into tractors. The result, in entire regions, was to render the land infertile for a long time by taking the fertile soil one meter deep and putting on the surface a soil incapable of reacting to seeds.
In Arab countries, anxiety benefits religious leaders who offer their flock the hijab and the burqa as life rafts against the increasing Western moral confusion. This has the advantage of being simple, although the solution is over a millennium old. This being said, it has an answer to everything. It provides a strict, well-defined way of life, an ultra-stable social system, which accommodates all inequalities, and solutions to existential anxiety. Everything is planned. While Westerners drown their spleen in antidepressants, build walls, or blindly fire missiles under another Biblical law, the law of retaliation, on the other side, they provide an exit for the most desperate: suicide, with guarantees signed for beatification in the afterlife. Impeccable. But in Arab countries as in the United States, political leaders do not send their offspring to the slaughter. Death has always been for the poor, throughout history.
The system of Islamic fundamentalism is even imposing itself as an international political force. This system of suicide bombers is unstoppable. It is "the atomic bomb of the technologically underdeveloped" against which armed cowboys with lasers and thermonuclear weapons, supported by hypersonic spy planes armed with GPS-guided bombs, remain completely defenseless. Never before has such a situation been known. Historically, it is extraordinary. The European countries, on the other hand, resemble straw bales that only wait to catch fire. The Algerian war is there to show that things can deteriorate extremely quickly. The first bomb that explodes, the extreme right will bring out its dormant OAS. Who will initiate it? A good question. Who is pulling the strings? Who will launch the first wave of attacks in such or such European country? Religious leaders or... the Americans themselves, seeking a way to force the Europeans to join them in a "crusade" against terrorism?
Have the American hawks accelerated things by carrying out a totally Machiavellian self-attack on that famous September 11, clear as pipe juice? A sophisticated international political maneuver to have free hands and beautifully entangle themselves in insoluble and humanly catastrophic situations. Iraq becomes the Russian retreat. Historically, these two situations are comparable.
Science also does not offer a solution, collaborating closely with military-industrial lobbies (which seems to have become, nowadays, the clearest of "research and development activities"), a field where it discredits itself. It serves above all the race for the highest profit rates and the circuits of power, monopolies, in total irresponsibility, launching itself into the adventure of GMOs and many others. Occasionally, the common people question the great priests of science, the bearded men with suspenders or the wheelchair-bound ones, who behave like gurus who promise them... anything, who advance theories "which will be useful in a few centuries" because they are too advanced, talk about a "TOE," a "theory of everything." All of this is pitiful.
I have nothing to offer. It's just an observation. What is to be screamed about is the attitude of what we call our media. But what is a media? The definition of the Larousse is vague. It says "diffusion of mass culture." But it's not only that. Our media are the windows through which information professionals are supposed to inform us, to show us what is happening in the rest of the country and the rest of the world. In fact, we are flooded with stories of crushed cats, to better numb us. Every day our TV news channels drown us in trivialities to better hide the international news, settled in a few minutes. The Arte channel is the "alibi channel" where "important topics" are addressed, where facts from half a century ago are denounced without mercy, to better hide what is happening under our eyes today. It's worth wondering if these people have not become professionals of disinformation, actively or by mimicry. I don't know if there are still French people who believe in their media, in what emerges from their small screen, in what they can read in the columns of their newspapers (do you know that Le Figaro and L'Express are owned by Serge Dassault?). I saw recently an issue of Le Monde (a press organ that Dassault vainly tried to get his hands on, but "who owns this newspaper?" who still imagines that this press organ is "objective"?). I think it was the issue of October 19, 2004. A whole page was devoted to the extension of poverty in France. More and more unemployed, people "at the end of their rights," homeless, people evicted from their homes because they can't afford their rent, people in debt. Etc. There was an entire page. But I didn't see mentioned one of the major phenomena of our time, relatively recent, but which risks explosive expansion, which has been given a name: "offshoring" offshoring. It's very nice, as a discovery. It took a specialist in "communication" to choose this word, so little "loaded," so apparently innocuous, while it covers future miseries, an immense amount of future distress. A European law has passed, my friend Jacques told me. For "offshoring" it is no longer necessary for a company to be in difficulty. It becomes legal if "it increases its competitiveness."
In a bookstore, I saw books praising Europe, "so that we can build a strong Europe, to stand up to the Americans." This recalls the line from a Prévert poem:
Those who manufacture in basements the pens with which others will write that everything is fine
Globalization scares me. When it was a question of seeing the countries of the East enter "our beautiful Europe," I had imagined France invaded by Polish engineers, accepting to work with salaries much lower than those practiced here. I hadn't thought that it would not even be necessary to bring Polish engineers, technicians, or workers to our soil, but that it would be enough to "offshore the companies." We always lack imagination.
Do you remember robotics? We were supposed to move towards "a civilization of leisure." Men would no longer have to work, robots would do it for them and they would be idle. The reality is that this robotics, if it has increased productivity by employing workers who never protest, who don't need social coverage or sleep, vacations, has put millions of human beings out of work, like the "canuts," these textile workers, who were thrown on the streets by the appearance of the Jacquard looms. Unemployment paid by a "general social contribution," increasingly heavy.
Do you remember telecommuting? We were told "you won't need to move to work anymore. You will work from home." When we saw the jobs of workers disappear, people said "we will become a service-oriented population." False: what I hadn't thought is that the staff of a company could also be "offshored," including and especially those of service companies. I saw a report on employees living in Romania, working remotely for a French company, at a third of our salaries. And these people were happy. It's great, isn't it? Do you realize what is happening under our eyes? In the countries of the East, people cost three times less. Workers from India or China will cost ten to twenty times less. One of my friends has a small business. He told me, "in our products, 60% of the production cost is labor. I'll tell you something: next month I have appointments in the Czech Republic. It's not a loss of civic sense. Now it's 'this or disappear.'"
Someone told me: "we could put on products 'made with French labor.' But who would put that? A consensus will be created. The opportunity is too big and the phenomenon is now too accepted. And then, what is '100% made in France' now? Nothing. Tomatoes are Spanish, screws are German, processors are made in Asian countries. By employing the Czechs, the Poles or the Chinese, we will make a lot of money."
Where are we going like this? What politician could still tell us that we are going somewhere? In a liberal system, capital, the production system moves to where it ensures the highest profit rate, that is, to regions of the globe where social coverage is the weakest. It's logical. As it becomes possible, thanks to this globalization, to "offshore" practically all activities, including now services "thanks to the Internet," we are moving towards a lowering of living conditions for workers and a loud increase in the incomes of the "new rich" or the "old rich" who will become a bit richer, benefiting from higher profit rates and lower charges.
This is where our democracies are converging, now taking on the appearance of complete nonsense. What can be done? Practically nothing. There is no alternative policy, just a choice between one evil and another.
The poor countries will benefit. China is awakening, as predicted by Pierrefitte in a bestseller "The Day China Awakens." A billion people are thirsty to consume, to travel, to see their standard of living rise. But everything will happen as in communicating vessels. The workers in the "rich countries" where we live will pay the bill and it will be infinitely expensive. It seems that a big employer said, "we will continue offshoring until French workers accept to be paid like the Poles." I have a friend who is an educational advisor in a high school near Paris. She recently placed an ad to recruit a monitor, a simple monitor ("line up with your classmates"). She saw people with a master's degree. She asked them: "but why are you applying?" Answer: "it's better than a factory job and at least you see people." Signs of the times. All of this will become common in the few years to come. What is our government's response? Chirac decides the creation of "employment houses."
No one says this in our media. We are entertained with TV games. In these games, people "win" ("We will see how much you win"). Watching "Star Academy," young people dream of an easy way out of their dirt, to achieve fame and easy money. This is what fascinates: all these "jobs" that seem within reach of anyone: singing, hitting a ball, acting. We wave before us the mirage of TV shopping. Everything that could make humans think disappears (the last scientific show E = m6 is now just a sponsored show, in the form of "games"). Readers, viewers are like the panicked passengers of a sinking ship. They see people with first-class tickets heading towards luxurious lifeboats, real "rescue yachts" (in all the press houses you will find the magazine Yachting, with a wide selection of lifeboat models for the wealthy). But the passengers in the hold, nothing is planned. They only feel that the ship is listing and sinking, while on the stern the orchestra plays "Closer to Thee, My God" and a Fellini-like pope continues to oppose the use of condoms.
The consumption of antidepressants is increasing. But why? What do these people have to drug themselves like that? Isn't life beautiful?
I learned one thing. The Israelis have received, ten days ago, two thousand GPS-guided, self-guided bombs, capable of hitting their target within a few meters. The press is beginning to report on it, at the end of the page. This development has its logic. The Americans are completely bogged down in Iraq. By acting alone, they have completely discredited the UN, whose resolutions are now just pieces of paper. No one believes for a moment in the existence of "massive destruction weapons" in this country, the pretext for this invasion. In fact, the goal was different. Iraq has very important oil reserves. It is the only country that would have been able to, by increasing production, lower the price of crude oil and thus exert pressure on the Saudi regime, which finances the Koranic schools around the world, as well as all extremist movements. It does so because in the country these radical Islamic forces are extremely powerful. Bin Laden is Saudi. The ruling family in Saudi Arabia has not controlled the country for a long time. There remained the "oil" weapon, and behind it the American rule, through Aramco. But all of that is over. Which country can the United States threaten? Where is this domino strategy that claimed that by destabilizing Iraq, all other Arab countries would follow? Uncle Sam is struggling.
Attacks on pipelines reduce crude oil production. As a result, the price of oil rises. By one of these whims of the economy, the dollar falls. As a result, America can export freely and the Western economies are doubly destabilized. But, in relation to the Saudis who are now making a fortune, the effect is the opposite of what was desired. Great. Bush and his gang have stuck their finger in the eye up to the shoulder. What should be done? Invade Saudi Arabia? Parachute special forces into Mecca, threatening to blow up the Kaaba? At the Pentagon, it must have been considered.
We have never been in such a mess since the post-war period. Before, we lived with the risks of the Cold War. There was the Cuban missile crisis. We saw the images where Russian submarine commanders said, "yes, we had thermonuclear torpedoes in our tubes." But today the risk is totally different. While the Berlin Wall no longer appears, in the form of fragments, only in modern art museums, the economic war is declared. It is raging on all fronts. China is a bustling and industrious ant hill that is experiencing exponential growth. In sports halls in the country, hundreds of Chinese learn foreign languages, shouting nationalist slogans. The Opium War, they will make us pay for it, and dearly.
So, the United States can no longer threaten anyone. How to invade another country? With what troops, what men? The poor people who hope to obtain American citizenship are beginning to understand that you can simply be killed senselessly at this game. So the Iranians decide to do isotope enrichment. In short: they are preparing the first Arab atomic bomb. Not the first of a Muslim country since the Pakistanis already have theirs. But those have the Indians, who also have theirs, ready to drop on them if they make a move. Iran already has missiles with sufficient range to hit Israel.
The Israelis warned in October: if within four months, by February, no one has stopped this nuclear race in Iran, they will destroy the Iranian nuclear installations, with their GPS-guided bombs, piloted during descent, precise to the meter. These are people who don't joke. They have already destroyed Osirak, the nuclear reactor that the French had built for ... Saddam Hussein (these same French who have nuclearized Iran, by the way). But who can do something? Who can forbid Iran from pursuing its Grand Work? The United States, the UN?
It's like Monte Carlo. What are the options?
-
Understanding that the Israelis will carry out their threats, the Iranians will slow down at the last moment.
-
Or? .......
The Israelis have no choice. Of course, they have nuclear weapons on board submarines that cruise in the Mediterranean. They have their "deterrence force." It is said that they have 200 thermonuclear warheads. But their country is so small that with a few bombs it could simply be erased from the map. It's tempting. But, well, if it were to happen, an Israeli submarine would fire a missile right on Mecca and the various major Arab cities would be erased from the map.
What do you choose? If it happens, the third world war could begin in February. But it may not happen.
At random, go to the nearest church and light a candle. I'm going right now. I have no other idea.
At the moment, the question that is agitating French media is the opening of a gay pay TV channel with four pornographic films per week. Patrick Sébastien talks about a friend of his who runs a brothel and adds that "politicians are among the most perverse." Literally fascinating. Can you imagine a young Muslim watching this kind of show in his neighborhood? The impression is simple. Our Western society is in full decomposition. What do people do when a society decomposes? Either they give in completely, plunge into depression, drugs, all possible drugs, or they seek "certainties," a "strong power," "firm laws." Currently, I find that there are only three possible options:
1 - You watch TF1 every night, gradually increasing the doses and you are stuffed with Prozac 2 - You become an extremist, from one side or the other. 3 - You try to think for yourself (that's the hardest).
On my site I spoke about the death of my friend Jacques Benveniste, who "was killed on the spot" on the front of scientific fundamentalism, stupidity, irrationality, selfishness and ignorance." I asked people to send letters to his lab. Simple gesture. Response rate: 1%. Indifference? No, saturation effect. In France, people are overwhelmed by their problems, their worries, they are lost, desperate, become passive. I think I'm beginning to understand them better. I don't know if I would like to be twenty years old today. Often, among friends of my generation we say: if we were to be rejuvenated by 45 years, what would we do? No one can find an answer. It recalls the famous line:
God is dead, Marx is dead and I myself don't feel very well ---
October 25: A flash from Associated Press dated today indicates that Iran is leaving the door open to negotiations regarding its nuclear program, hoping the issue will not end up on the desk of the UN Security Council. France, Germany and the United Kingdom have warned Tehran that most European countries would support the United States if they referred the issue to the Security Council and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) demanding that Iran stop its uranium enrichment operations by next November 25. The Europeans have offered civil nuclear assistance in exchange for the suspension of uranium enrichment operations, leading to the development of nuclear weapons. Iran is currently building centrifuges (for uranium enrichment) which the IAEA has asked to dismantle. The United States openly accuses Iran of running a program focused on building nuclear weapons.
October 26: On the Voltaire Network website, confirmation of the information
The United States will deliver 5,000 GPS-guided bombs to Israel
As part of the military assistance agreements with Israel, whose budget for this year is $2.16 billion, the United States is preparing to deliver 5,000 precision-guided heavy bombs (our photo), including 500 one-ton bombs for deep penetration used to reach underground facilities. This delivery corresponds to the arsenal needed for a massive operation of two or three days by the Israeli Defense Forces targeting nuclear reactors under construction, uranium enrichment sites and Iranian military defense systems. Iran maintains that it only seeks to develop a reliable source of energy for its power grid. Limiting its domestic oil consumption would proportionally bring significant export benefits, strengthening its regional position against Israel and US troops stationed in Iraq. In the event of Israeli attacks on its civilian nuclear installations, Tehran has stated it will retaliate by destroying Israeli military nuclear installations with the consequences that can be imagined.
"Iran can hide its nuclear ambitions from some but not from Israel" Source: Los Angeles Times Reference: "Iran May Hide Its Nuclear Ambitions From Some, but Not Israël", Bennett Ramberg, Los Angeles Times, December 10, 2003.
Bennett Ramberg was a political analyst in the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs under the presidency of George Herbert Walker Bush. He is the author of Nuclear Power Plants as Weapons for the Enemy.
At the beginning of 1981, Moshe Arens, chairman of the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Security Committee, declared that Israel would not allow Iraq to acquire nuclear weapons. A few months later, Israel bombed the Osirak reactor. Today, the statements of the head of Mossad and the Israeli Minister of Defense suggest that it is Iran that is at the top of Israel's target list. The failure of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to resolve the issue makes an Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear installations likely. Israel knows how Iran is acquiring nuclear weapons as it has done the same to build its arsenal. Israel had its nuclear reactor built by the French and acquired heavy water from Norway, claiming it would be used for peaceful purposes. The Eisenhower administration asked for guarantees and received promises from Israeli authorities. Kennedy even asked for inspections, but they yielded nothing. Israel became a nuclear power despite the American threats to suspend aid, which were just bluff. Today, unless Tehran confesses and dismantles its program, Israel risks attacking Iran.
November 3, 2004: I am struck by the relatively low number of visits to this page. But perhaps it is too uncomfortable to face such depressing realities. Bush has just been re-elected with a very clear majority. There is no longer any question of invoking electoral fraud. Obviously, the film by Moore had no impact ... on the American population. Gédebeliou now has free hands in all sectors, including the judiciary, and believes he is more inspired by God himself. The whole world is certainly filled with leaders who believe they are inspired by God, certainly. Thus, the prediction of André Malraux: "The third millennium will be metaphysical or it will not be" is coming true. He was right, except that it was not exactly what we had first thought.
The Voltaire Network has echoed the statements of Ali Akbar Nateq-Nuri, advisor to Iranian leader Ali Khamenei, who on November 3, 2004, told a correspondent from The Australian that if the country had to answer for its nuclear program before the UN Security Council, the oil embargo it would implement could push the price of oil beyond $100 per barrel. He also called the suggestions made by Europe under pressure from the United States to persuade Tehran to abandon its uranium enrichment project to avoid Security Council sanctions "ridiculous." The Iranian parliament has just voted in favor of continuing the program, which does not violate non-proliferation treaties or international laws, as long as it is intended for civilian use. "If the second OPEC producer were to stop its oil sales on the international market, this would be a disaster for consumers," explained Nateq-Nuri. The United States, on the other hand, is actively preparing for such a supply disruption, which would allow them to reap the fruits of the chaos they have sown in the Middle East.
If the information coming directly from Israel is accurate, the Israeli countdown, which sets the attack against Iranian nuclear sites for February 2005, has therefore been activated. We advise our readers to start stockpiling sugar, as the French have always done in case of international tensions. Israeli extremists would consider assassinating Sharon because he decided to abandon parts of the "Holy Land," the "Promised Land of Yahwe," to non-Jews. The way things are evolving seems to indicate that coexistence between Jews and Palestinians can no longer be considered. This dramatization of the situation is not without recalling the tragedy of the Algerian war, where everything was considered, including, after some time, a division of the territory between the pieds-noirs and the Algerians. Since this solution was violently rejected by the extremists of both sides, everything turned into an abominable massacre. According to documents recently broadcast on television, which I would like to have a copy of, Divx or at least VHS, the violence of the conflict that bloodied North Africa, marked by massacres, terrorist attacks, and the systematic use of torture on both sides, is not inferior in this respect to the violence of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Everything ended, after the Evian agreements, with the desperate flight of a million pieds-noirs to the metropolis and the abominable abandonment of tens of thousands of harkis who had chosen the French side (in Algeria, an Algerian could not remain neutral under the violent pressures exerted by both sides). Some, who had tried to reach France, which they believed was not a land of asylum but... their homeland, for which their fathers had shed their blood in the conflicts of 14-18 and 39-45, were sent back to Algeria where they were tortured and killed, considered traitors. But Israel is not Algeria.
What will happen? Will the Jewish State itself carry out this geographical segregation, even if it means de facto recognizing the existence of a Palestinian state? It would have to evacuate the important buffer zone of its settlements in the West Bank. Does Sharon have this in mind? If so, one can imagine the excitement of the supporters of "Greater Israel" (the one of King Solomon). But does Israel have any other choice? See the news of November 15, 2004.
I will end with an authentic anecdote. In the 1970s, when the world seemed threatened by a nuclear war, an English retired couple decided to emigrate, choosing a place in the world that seemed to them the least vulnerable possible regarding potential military operations. A place uncomfortable, but apparently quiet.
They settled in the Falkland Islands, also known as the Malvinas. ---
November 11, 2004: The Fools' Festival.
I had never heard of Raffarin, the man who leads the major political actions in France. I had only glimpsed this short man on television; fat, without charm, with a flat nose and a dull eye. And suddenly, during an interview, he came to life. His eye lit up, his speech became fluent. I felt like I was facing a man trying to sell me an insurance contract or a vacuum cleaner. The performance was remarkable for a man so poorly endowed by nature. He wielded the power of conviction, used all the tricks of political speech, answered the questions asked as a seasoned duelist who evades blows with a flexibility that would not suggest his stocky build. He praised himself, flattered everyone, mentioned successive reforms. Almost, he would make us believe he has a solid plan and is leading us somewhere.
In all countries, there is the same character, who sells his "policy" and that of his party, insistently. He greets "the dedication of teachers" while specifying that in the current system, education must adapt to the needs of the times, to "the market". If the managers of the big television networks must educate their viewers to make them beings [ready]. Those that our National Education must form are those who will become future unemployed. And for these, is general or scientific culture necessary?
The planet is globalizing. Employment moves where it is the cheapest. The rest is literature. We, inhabitants of developed countries, do not realize the scandalously high level of our standard of living, the dizzying extent of our multiple social advantages. If we were aware, we would mute our legendary grumbling. Raffarin is Pangloss saying to Candide: "No, everything is not good, in fact everything is for the best in the best of all possible French worlds". And for our leaders who think of American patents, Chinese labor, cheap foreign raw materials, the French are nothing but parasites that must be anesthetized, confined, silenced, and dulled. We are nothing more than useless mouths among billions of men, obedient workers, beautifully ready to be exploited and indoctrinated in exchange for living conditions that were ours half a century ago or more, which seem miraculous to them.
There is no solution. These demands, these aspirations are too powerful and will crush us in the few decades to come. It is the new order of things. Riding the crest of this wave, people who think only of their personal interest. On the front stage, communication professionals charged with selling, making us swallow all the pills. Occasionally, one reads (more than hears) that the media could increasingly become the relay of power and profit systems. Isn't that logical since they are increasingly in the hands of the great owners of this world? The Americans are just beginning to realize it.
Bush, with his look of an old hanger-on, was re-elected in a chair. His complicit smile caused havoc. Kerry, with his look of a repressed seminarian, was no match. If Schwarzenegger were of American origin, he would certainly become the future president of this absurd country where the machine to brainwash is running at full speed. If one day the law is amended, and some are thinking seriously about it, who would be a match against this well-rehearsed actor, next to whom Ronald Reagan would look like a lamentable dog?
The American vote has placed unlimited powers in the hands of the hawks, and they will enjoy themselves heartily. The Taser is becoming widespread and is no longer an instrument of order maintenance or neutralization of dangerous individuals, but an instrument of intimidation, even torture. With weighted needles connected to a high voltage source, an individual collapses, unconscious for several minutes. It then becomes possible to implant a chip smaller than a grain of rice without the person's knowledge. The implantation can be subcutaneous or intramuscular, leaving a mark on the skin that can be mistaken for a mosquito bite and will disappear in a few hours. The person will not know that he has been thus equipped, and even if he suspects it, he will not be able to locate the implant, already undetectable by radio. And if this were proven, the aliens would be there to take the blame, as for the crop circles, microwave weapon tests, or the cattle mutilations, cancerous weapon tests.
They will implant en masse, in the USA and elsewhere, "for security reasons". They will equip criminals, the homeless, demonstrators or simply dissidents, rebels. They will create chips impossible to extract without harm to those who carry them, the size of a grain of sand, placed in minutes at the deepest part of the brain of individuals to be controlled. They will allow, thanks to the GPS system, to locate them anywhere in the world, to follow their movements. The chips, playing the role of receiving antennas, can convert ordinary radio-electric signals into waves affecting human behavior. Others will generate sound signals below the threshold of audibility, emitted during the sleep of individuals in order to better condition them. Always "for security reasons". More aggressive chips can cause cancers, tumors. In these, there will even be no electronics. A microgram of plutonium is enough to kill a man. Which victim could prove that it was implanted without his knowledge? Admit it, you hadn't thought of that. A microscopic cancerous weapon, implanted in ten seconds using a simple syringe and a long needle. Brain tumor? That will be blamed on mobile phones, which are otherwise harmful. Americans have catchphrases they create that can summarize anything. There, it is:
Kill me softly
(Kill me gently)
You doubt it? That's because you know nothing about the advances in nanotechnology. Do you know that there are drones the size of insects and that others, as big as sparrows, flying at 50 km/h, guided by GPS, equipped with an autopilot and a video camera the size and weight of a one-cent coin can spy on enemy lines from tens of kilometers away, enter a building, kill all members of a council using an explosive charge weighing ten grams. One day will come when, to escape terrorism, wild or state, it will be necessary to equip your windows in advance with... mosquito nets. These same drones can deliver bacterial or... nuclear charges.
Believe me, everything that scientists can imagine will be built, tested and used "for security reasons". Many gadgets in this direction have been operational for years.
The world in which you live is devoid of the slightest intelligence and the slightest compassion, and you don't know it. Are there cancerous, genetic weapons? Of course there are. These are the famous depleted uranium shells. It's up to you to believe that no one had foreseen their long-term effects on the local population.
The Fools' Festival is only beginning. The world we live in resembles a patchwork. In some areas, people have been killing each other for decades, death crosses the street, it hides in every field, every path. In others, people live in complete anesthesia. The first want to escape daily life, a mortal anxiety, the second, as Aldous Huxley predicted in 1920 in the "Brave New World", take their daily dose of soma and go to dull themselves by watching a "smelling cinema" designed by "emotions engineers". Do not neglect the messages of science fiction, which has always been the most fantastic machine to predict the future we have had.
November 15, 2004:
Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency have reached an agreement at the last minute. The IAEA received on Sunday, November 14, an official letter from Iran confirming that Iran had decided to suspend its isotope enrichment operations. "We have agreed to suspend almost all activities related to enrichment," said Mr. Rouhani after a meeting with the ambassadors of the three European countries in Tehran. "The suspension is valid for the duration of the negotiations" aimed at a long-term cooperation agreement that the Europeans offered in exchange for the suspension, explained a close associate of Hassan Rouhani, Hossein Mousavian, without specifying a duration. "The negotiations will begin on December 15," he specified.
The report of the agency to the 35 governing states, including Iran's agreement, comes at the last minute before a meeting of the Council on November 25 in Vienna. During this meeting, it will be decided whether or not Iran will be referred to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions.
Regarding the "Algerian War" file
Back to the Big Brother summary
Back to the Guide Back to Home