Wednesday 29 April 2009

Mexican Flu Outbreak 2009: SPECIAL REPORT

by Dr Leonard Horowitz

This unprecedented H1N1-H5N1 flu outbreak implicates the Anglo-American Vaccine Pipeline, says world leading consumer health protector, Dr. Leonard Horowitz

Consider the skyrocketing stock values of Novavax, Inc., precipitated by dozens of alleged flu deaths in Mexico. Then investigate the leading Anglo-American network of genetic engineers manipulating, mutating, and distributing these viruses. The evidence compels you, for the benefit of public health and safety to seriously consider, even decree, a conspiracy to commit genocide, according to this Harvard trained expert in emerging diseases.

Here, Dr. Horowitz urges an investigation of Dr. James S. Robertson, England's leading bioengineer of flu viruses for the vaccine industry, and avid promoter of U.S. Government funding for lucrative bio-defence contracts, along with collaborators at the US Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC). These suspects helped Novavax, Inc., in Bethesda, Maryland, produce genetically-modified recombinants of the avian, swine, and Spanish flu viruses, H5N1 and H1N1, nearly identical to the unprecedented Mexican virus that is allegedly spreading to the United States at the time of this posting. The outbreak was precisely timed to promote the company's new research and huge vaccine stockpiling contracts.

Scientists at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) are implicated through collaborations and publications involving private contracts with Novavax, a company that obtains its biosimulars through CDC Influenza Branch director, Ruben O. Donis, and Dr. Rick Bright, previously working with Donis at the CDC, now Novavaxs Vice President of Global Influenza Programs.

Descriptions of this virus is pathognomonic, or diagnostic, of a virus that came from Robertson's circle of friends, Dr. Horowitz charges. No other group in the world takes H5N1 Asian flu infected chickens, brings them to Europe, extracts their DNA, combines their proteins with H1N1 viruses from the 1918 Spanish flu isolate, additionally mixes in swine flu genes from pigs, then reverse engineers them to infect humans. The end product could only have ended up in Mexico via the United States from Britain in care of the CDC. The CDC had to have sent them to Novavax, where Rick Bright’s team is now implicated in a conspiracy to commit genocide—the mass killing of people for profit.

Mexican Flu Outbreak 2009: SPECIAL REPORT by Dr Leonard Horowitz
Full story/Permalink

Monday 27 April 2009

Baxter To Develop Swine Flu Vaccine Despite Bird Flu Scandal

The fox has been given the duty of guarding the henhouse

Steve Watson
Infowars.net

Baxter To Develop Swine Flu Vaccine Despite Bird Flu Scandal 270409flu2A U.S. based pharmaceutical company that just weeks ago was involved in a scandal involving vaccines tainted with deadly avian flu virus has been chosen to head up efforts to produce a vaccine for the Mexican swine flu that has seemingly migrated into the U.S. and Europe.

Baxter confirmed over the weekend that it is working with the World Health Organization on a potential vaccine to curb the deadly swine flu virus that is blamed for scores of deaths in Mexico and has emerged as a threat in the U.S., reports the Chicago Tribune.

Baxter has previously worked with governments all over the globe to develop and produce vaccines to protect against infectious disease or potential threats from bioterrorism. After 9/11 Baxter helped supply stockpiles of a smallpox vaccine and in 2003 the company was contracted to develop a vaccine to combat the SARS virus. In 2006 the UK Government announced plans designed to inoculate every person in the country with Baxter’s vaccines in the event of a flu pandemic.

However, Baxter has a very recent and most disturbing connection to flu vaccines.

As reported by multiple sources last month, including the Times of India, vaccines contaminated with deadly live H5N1 avian flu virus were distributed to 18 countries last December by a lab at an Austrian branch of Baxter.

It was only by providence that the batch was first tested on ferrets in the Czech Republic, before being shipped out for injection into humans. The ferrets all died and the shocking discovery was made.

Czech newspapers immediately questioned whether the events were part of a conspiracy to deliberately provoke a pandemic, following up on accusations already made by health officials in other countries.

Initially, Baxter attempted to stonewall questions by invoking “trade secrets” and refused to reveal how the vaccines were contaminated with H5N1. After increased pressure they then claimed that pure H5N1 batches were sent by accident.

Since the probability of mixing a live virus biological weapon with vaccine material by accident is virtually impossible, this leaves no other explanation than that the contamination was a deliberate attempt to weaponize the H5N1 virus to its most potent extreme and distribute it via conventional flu vaccines to the population who would then infect others to a devastating degree as the disease went airborne.

The fact that Baxter mixed the deadly H5N1 virus with a mix of H3N2 seasonal flu viruses is the smoking gun. The H5N1 virus on its own has killed hundreds of people, but it is less airborne and more restricted in the ease with which it can spread. However, when combined with seasonal flu viruses, which as everyone knows are super-airborne and easily spread, the effect is a potent, super-airbone, super deadly biological weapon.

Indeed, some have already suggested that the current scare could represent the use of such a weapon.

Now it has been announced that Baxter is seeking a sample of the potentially lethal never before seen form of swine/avian/human flu virus in order to assist the World Health Organization in developing a new vaccine, reaping billions in the process.

Why should Baxter be trusted, when they have already been proven to be at the very least criminally negligent, and at worst a prime suspect in attempting to carry off one of the most heinous crimes in the history of mankind?

The company has already put the safety of the entire human race at risk, and now, just a few weeks later, we’re expected to invest our confidence in them and take their shots with a smile and a still tongue?

As Mike Adams of Natural News has commented, “If you mail an envelope full of anthrax to your Senator, you get arrested as a terrorist. So why is Baxter — which mailed samples of a far more deadly viral strain to labs around the world — getting away with saying, essentially, ‘Oops?’”

WHO officials are reportedly still closely monitoring the investigation into Baxter’s contaminated flu vaccines, seemingly they are not too concerned. Perhaps we should be.

Full story/Permalink

Wednesday 22 April 2009

‘Superweed’ explosion threatens Monsanto heartlands

“Superweeds” are plaguing high-tech Monsanto crops in southern US states, driving farmers to use more herbicides, return to conventional crops or even abandon their farms.

The gospel of high-tech genetically modified (GM) crops is not sounding quite so sweet in the land of the converted. A new pest, the evil pigweed, is hitting headlines and chomping its way across Sun Belt states, threatening to transform cotton and soybean plots into weed battlefields.

In late 2004, “superweeds” that resisted Monsanto’s iconic “Roundup” herbicide, popped up in GM crops in the county of Macon, Georgia. Monsanto, the US multinational biotech corporation, is the world’s leading producer of Roundup, as well as genetically engineered seeds. Company figures show that nine out of 10 US farmers produce Roundup Ready seeds for their soybean crops.

Superweeds have since alarmingly appeared in other parts of Georgia, as well as South Carolina, North Carolina, Arkansas, Tennessee, Kentucky and Missouri, according to media reports. Roundup contains the active ingredient glyphosate, which is the most used herbicide in the USA.

GM protesters demonstrate near the French town of Toulouse in March 2008.

How has this happened? Farmers over-relied on Monsanto’s revolutionary and controversial combination of a single “round up” herbicide and a high-tech seed with a built-in resistance to glyphosate, scientists say.

Today, 100,000 acres in Georgia are severely infested with pigweed and 29 counties have now confirmed resistance to glyphosate, according to weed specialist Stanley Culpepper from the University of Georgia.

“Farmers are taking this threat very seriously. It took us two years to make them understand how serious it was. But once they understood, they started taking a very aggressive approach to the weed,” Culpepper told FRANCE 24.

“Just to illustrate how aggressive we are, last year we hand-weeded 45% of our severely infested fields,” said Culpepper, adding that the fight involved “spending a lot of money.”

In 2007, 10,000 acres of land were abandoned in Macon country, the epicentre of the superweed explosion, North Carolina State University’s Alan York told local media.

The perfect weed

Had Monsanto wanted to design a deadlier weed, they probably could not have done better. Resistant pigweed is the most feared superweed, alongside horseweed, ragweed and waterhemp.

“Palmer pigweed is the one pest you don’t want, it is so dominating,” says Culpepper. Pigweed can produce 10,000 seeds at a time, is drought-resistant, and has very diverse genetics. It can grow to three metres high and easily smother young cotton plants.

Today, farmers are struggling to find an effective herbicide they can safely use over cotton plants.

Controversial solutions

In an interview with FRANCE 24, Monsanto’s technical development manager, Rick Cole, said he believed superweeds were manageable. “The problem of weeds that have developed a resistance to Roundup crops is real and [Monsanto] doesn’t deny that, however the problem is manageable,” he said.

Cole encourages farmers to alternate crops and use different makes of herbicides.

Indeed, according to Monsanto press releases, company sales representatives are encouraging farmers to mix glyphosate and older herbicides such as 2,4-D, a herbicide which was banned in Sweden, Denmark and Norway over its links to cancer, reproductive harm and mental impairment. 2,4-D is also well-known for being a component of Agent Orange, a toxic herbicide which was used in chemical warfare in Vietnam in the 1960s.

Questioned on the environmental impact and toxicity of such mixtures, Monsanto’s public affairs director, Janice Person, said that “they didn’t recommend any mixtures that were not approved by the EPA,” she said, referring to the US federal Environmental Protection Agency.

According to the UK-based Soil Association, which campaigns for and certifies organic food, Monsanto was well aware of the risk of superweeds as early as 2001 and took out a patent on mixtures of glyphosate and herbicide targeting glyphosate-resistant weeds.

“The patent will enable the company to profit from a problem that its products had created in the first place,” says a 2002 Soil Association report.

Returning to conventional crops

In the face of the weed explosion in cotton and soybean crops, some farmers are even considering moving back to non-GM seeds. “It’s good for us to go back, people have overdone the Roundup seeds,” Alan Rowland, a soybean seed producer based in Dudley, Missouri, told FRANCE 24. He used to sell 80% Monsanto “Roundup Ready” soybeans and now has gone back to traditional crops, in a market overwhelmingly dominated by Monsanto.

According to a number of agricultural specialists, farmers are considering moving back to conventional crops. But it’s all down to economics, they say. GM crops are becoming expensive, growers say.

While farmers and specialists are reluctant to blame Monsanto, Rowland says he’s started to “see people rebelling against the higher costs.”

Full story/Permalink

Saturday 18 April 2009

Bank of England, Sterling and Government Treason

Many people believe that the Bank of England is a privately owned corporation. Many people believe that it’s owned by the Rothchilds.

NEITHER of these beliefs is true.

The truth is much WORSE.

by Mike Robinson

The story of the Bank of England is the story of the British Empire. The British Empire was never a political empire. It was always a monetary financial empire, as much a parasite on the people of Great Britain as the rest of the world. The idea of the Victorian’s British Empire bringing civilisation to the darkest parts of the world is one that needs real reconsideration by many Britons.

The Bank of England was originally set up as a core part of the British Empire - making huge profits from loans to the British East India Company and other tendrils of the Great British parasite. The mainstays of the trading activities of these companies were drugs, warfare and the looting of raw materials from poverty stricken nations.

As the banker to the Government, the Bank also did quite nicely from lending to the Treasury, thank you very much. In those days, the profits of the Bank went into the hands of the shareholders.

In 1844, the Rothschild inspired desire to take complete control of Britain came true with the Bank Charter Act. This gave the Bank of England the monopoly on the production of Sterling, and control of Britain’s money supply. In Northern Ireland and Scotland, where to this day commercial banks are allowed to print their own money, they must have one Bank of England note in reserve for every note of their own that they issue.

1946 brought the “nationalisation” of the Bank. At the end of WWII, Britain was more or less bankrupt, so it was agreed that instead of paying cash for the shares of the Bank, shareholders would receive 3% Treasury stock instead. With the 1946 Bank of England Act, all the Bank shares were transferred into the possession of the Treasury solicitor, and there they are to this day. It remains a corporation, not a government department.

In 1977, the Bank set up a wholly owned subsidiary called BANK OF ENGLAND NOMINEES LIMITED, (BOEN), a private limited company, no. 1307478, with 2 of its 100 £1 shares issued. According to its Memorandum & Articles of Association, its objectives are;-

“To act as Nominee or agent or attorney either solely or jointly with others, for any person or persons, partnership, company, corporation, government, state, organisation, sovereign, province, authority, or public body, or any group or association of them….”

Bank of England Nominees Limited was granted an exemption by Edmund Dell, Secretary of State for Trade, from the disclosure requirements under Section 27(9) of the Companies Act 1976 , because, “it was considered undesirable that the disclosure requirements should apply to certain categories of shareholders.”

Add that to the fact that the Bank of England is protected from prying eyes by its “Royal Charter” status and the Official Secrets Act. What have we got here?

In 1998, the final piece of the puzzle fell into place. In return for fixing the 1997 elections and getting New Labour into power, the Government enacted the 1998 Bank of England Act, which gave the Bank’s Court of Directors complete independence with regard to monetary policy.

So if we add this all together, we have a nationally owned institution which has the monopoly in the production of the national currency, and has independent control of the country’s monetary policy in the hands of a Court of Directors who serve the private banking system as they have since the Bank was established.

Think about it - private banking control of our currency and monetary policy, fully independent of government. When Gordon Brown signed away government oversight of the Bank, he committed Treason on a scale not seen in Britain since the Heath government took us into what would become the EU.

Since 1998 we have seen the Bank rapidly inflate the money supply, while at the same time relaxing regulation on how banks could lend. No longer were banks required to have cash in reserve for loans they made. Instead the vast majority of currency entering the economy did so as a result of commercial banks entering some numbers into a ledger - money out of thin air, literally.

Working for the private bankers, the Bank of England set things up to maximise the returns for their banking colleagues’ speculative activities, in the full knowledge that as a nationalised institution, it would be the UK taxpayer who was carrying all the risk, and not, as would have been the case before 1946, the shareholders.

The Court of Directors is working for the Anglo/Dutch/Saudi empire - the still-alive-and-kicking hidden hand behind the British Empire of the Victorian age. So it’s no surprise that the solution they provide to today’s manufactured monetary financial collapse is to print more money. Their aim is to destroy the last vestiges of British sovereignty; for a hyper-inflated and hyper-devalued Sterling to be replaced by a single, global, currency, under a single world fascist government.

Gordon Brown announced the new financial infrastructure at the G20. He announced the new global currency - to be issued and managed by the newly reinvigorated IMF.

This has to be stopped. It has to be stopped now. We want our country back, before there’s no country left. We want our country back from the parasites that use one square mile of London as their base of operations. Back in a way it hasn’t been for about 250 years. Join is in this fight - come to the next British Constitution Group conference in London on the 13th June, and find out what you can do.

Full story/Permalink

Friday 17 April 2009

Robert Fisk: How can you trust the cowardly BBC?

The BBC Trust's report on Jeremy Bowen's dispatches from the Middle East is pusillanimous, cowardly, outrageous, factually wrong and ethically dishonest.

But I am mincing my words.

The trust – how I love that word which so dishonours everything about the BBC – has collapsed, in the most shameful way, against the usual Israeli lobbyists who have claimed – against all the facts – that Bowen was wrong to tell the truth.

Let's go step by step through this pitiful business. Zionism does indeed instinctively "push out" the frontier. The new Israeli wall – longer and taller than the Berlin Wall although the BBC management cowards still insist its reporters call it a "security barrier" (the translation of the East German phrase for the Berlin Wall) – has gobbled up another 10 per cent of the 22 per cent of "Palestine" that Arafat/Mahmoud Abbas were supposed to negotiate. Bowen's own brilliant book on the 1967 war, Six Days, makes this land-grab perfectly clear.

Anyone who has read the history of Zionism will be aware that its aim was to dispossess the Arabs and take over Palestine. Why else are Zionists continuing to steal Arab land for Jews, and Jews only, against all international law? Who for a moment can contradict that this defies everyone's interpretation of international law except its own?

Even when the International Court in The Hague stated that the Israeli wall was illegal – the BBC, at this point, was calling it a "fence"! – Israel simply claimed that the court was wrong.

UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 called upon Israel to withdraw its forces from territories that it occupied in the 1967 war – and it refused to do so. The Americans stated for more than 30 years that Israel's actions were illegal – until the gutless George Bush accepted Israel had the right to keep these illegally held territories. Thus the BBC Trust – how cruel that word "trust" now becomes – has gone along with the Bush definition of Israel's new boundaries (inside Arab land, of course).

The BBC's preposterous committee claims that Bowen's article "breached the rules [sic] on impartiality" because "readers might come away from the article thinking that the interpretation offered was the only sensible view of the war".

Well, yes of course. Because I suppose the BBC believes that Israel's claim to own land which in fact belongs to other people is another "sensible" view of the war. The BBC Trust – and I now find this word nauseous each time I tap it on my laptop – says that Bowen didn't give evidence to prove the Jewish settlement at Har Homa was illegal. But the US authorities said so, right from the start. Our own late foreign secretary, Robin Cook – under screamed abuse from Zionists when he visited the settlement– said the same thing. The fact that the BBC Trust uses the Hebrew name for Har Homa – not the original Arab name, Jebel Abu Ghoneim – shows just how far it is now a mouthpiece for the Israeli lobby which so diligently abused Bowen.

Haaretz gave considerable space to the BBC's findings yesterday. I'm not surprised. But why is it that Haaretz's top correspondents – Amira Hass and Gideon Levy – write so much more courageously about the human rights abuses of Israeli troops (and war crimes) than the BBC has ever dared to do? Whenever I'm asked by lecture audiences around the world if they should trust the BBC, I tell them to trust Amira and Gideon more than they should ever believe in the wretched broadcasting station. I'm afraid it's the same old story. If you allow yourself to bow down before those who wish you to deviate from the truth, you will stay on your knees forever.

And this, remember, is the same institution which said that to broadcast an appeal for medicines for wounded Palestinians in Gaza might upset its "neutrality". Legless Palestinian children clearly don't count as much as the BBC's pompous executives.

How do we solve this problem? Well I can certainly advise viewers to turn to Sky TV's infinitely tougher coverage of the Middle East and – I admit I contribute to this particular station – I can recommend the courage with which Al-Jazeera English covers Gaza and the rest of the Palestinian-Israeli war.

I can well see how BBC executives will say that this article of mine today is "over the top". Jeremy Bowen may indeed think the same. But the First World War metaphor would be correct. For Bowen and his colleagues are truly lions led by BBC management donkeys.

Full story/Permalink

Sunday 12 April 2009

The Road to Area 51

Backstory

After decades of denying the facility's existence, five former insiders speak out

by Annie Jacobsen

Area 51. It's the most famous military institution in the world that doesn't officially exist. If it did, it would be found about 100 miles outside Las Vegas in Nevada's high desert, tucked between an Air Force base and an abandoned nuclear testing ground. Then again, maybe not— the U.S. government refuses to say. You can't drive anywhere close to it, and until recently, the airspace overhead was restricted—all the way to outer space. Any mention of Area 51 gets redacted from official documents, even those that have been declassified for decades.
It has become the holy grail for conspiracy theorists, with UFOlogists positing that the Pentagon reverse engineers flying saucers and keeps extraterrestrial beings stored in freezers. Urban legend has it that Area 51 is connected by underground tunnels and trains to other secret facilities around the country. In 2001, Katie Couric told Today Show audiences that 7 percent of Americans doubt the moon landing happened—that it was staged in the Nevada desert. Millions of X-Files fans believe the truth may be "out there," but more likely it's concealed inside Area 51's Strangelove-esque hangars—buildings that, though confirmed by Google Earth, the government refuses to acknowledge.

The problem is the myths of Area 51 are hard to dispute if no one can speak on the record about what actually happened there. Well, now, for the first time, someone is ready to talk—in fact, five men are, and their stories rival the most outrageous of rumors. Colonel Hugh "Slip" Slater, 87, was commander of the Area 51 base in the 1960s. Edward Lovick, 90, featured in "What Plane?" in LA's March issue, spent three decades radar testing some of the world's most famous aircraft (including the U-2, the A-12 OXCART and the F-117). Kenneth Collins, 80, a CIA experimental test pilot, was given the silver star. Thornton "T.D." Barnes, 72, was an Area 51 special-projects engineer. And Harry Martin, 77, was one of the men in charge of the base's half-million-gallon monthly supply of spy-plane fuels. Here are a few of their best stories—for the record:

On May 24, 1963, Collins flew out of Area 51's restricted airspace in a top-secret spy plane code-named OXCART, built by Lockheed Aircraft Corporation. He was flying over Utah when the aircraft pitched, flipped and headed toward a crash. He ejected into a field of weeds.

Almost 46 years later, in late fall of 2008, sitting in a coffee shop in the San Fernando Valley, Collins remembers that day with the kind of clarity the threat of a national security breach evokes: "Three guys came driving toward me in a pickup. I saw they had the aircraft canopy in the back. They offered to take me to my plane." Until that moment, no civilian without a top-secret security clearance had ever laid eyes on the airplane Collins was flying. "I told them not to go near the aircraft. I said it had a nuclear weapon on-board." The story fit right into the Cold War backdrop of the day, as many atomic tests took place in Nevada. Spooked, the men drove Collins to the local highway patrol. The CIA disguised the accident as involving a generic Air Force plane, the F-105, which is how the event is still listed in official records.

As for the guys who picked him up, they were tracked down and told to sign national security nondisclosures. As part of Collins' own debriefing, the CIA asked the decorated pilot to take truth serum. "They wanted to see if there was anything I'd for-gotten about the events leading up to the crash." The Sodium Pento-thal experience went without a hitch—except for the reaction of his wife, Jane.
"Late Sunday, three CIA agents brought me home. One drove my car; the other two carried me inside and laid me down on the couch. I was loopy from the drugs. They handed Jane the car keys and left without saying a word." The only conclusion she could draw was that her husband had gone out and gotten drunk. "Boy, was she mad," says Collins with a chuckle.
At the time of Collins' accident, CIA pilots had been flying spy planes in and out of Area 51 for eight years, with the express mission of providing the intelligence to prevent nuclear war. Aerial reconnaissance was a major part of the CIA's preemptive efforts, while the rest of America built bomb shelters and hoped for the best.
"It wasn't always called Area 51," says Lovick, the physicist who developed stealth technology. His boss, legendary aircraft designer Clarence L. "Kelly" Johnson, called the place Paradise Ranch to entice men to leave their families and "rough it" out in the Nevada desert in the name of science and the fight against the evil empire. "Test pilot Tony LeVier found the place by flying over it," says Lovick. "It was a lake bed called Groom Lake, selected for testing because it was flat and far from anything. It was kept secret because the CIA tested U-2s there."
When Frances Gary Powers was shot down over Sverdlovsk, Russia, in 1960, the U-2 program lost its cover. But the CIA already had Lovick and some 200 scientists, engineers and pilots working at Area 51 on the A-12 OXCART, which would outfox Soviet radar using height, stealth and speed.

Col. Slater was in the outfit of six pilots who flew OXCART missions during the Vietnam War. Over a Cuban meat and cheese sandwich at the Bahama Breeze restaurant off the Las Vegas Strip, he says, "I was recruited for the Area after working with the CIA's classified Black Cat Squadron, which flew U-2 missions over denied territory in Mainland China. After that, I was told, 'You should come out to Nevada and work on something interesting we're doing out there.' "

Even though Slater considers himself a fighter pilot at heart—he flew 84 missions in World War II—the opportunity to work at Area 51 was impossible to pass up. "When I learned about this Mach-3 aircraft called OXCART, it was completely intriguing to me—this idea of flying three times the speed of sound! No one knew a thing about the program. I asked my wife, Barbara, if she wanted to move to Las Vegas, and she said yes. And I said, 'You won't see me but on the weekends,' and she said, 'That's fine!' " At this recollection, Slater laughs heartily. Barbara, dining with us, laughs as well. The two, married for 63 years, are rarely apart today.

"We couldn't have told you any of this a year ago," Slater says. "Now we can't tell it to you fast enough." That is because in 2007, the CIA began declassifying the 50-year-old OXCART program. Today, there's a scramble for eyewitnesses to fill in the information gaps. Only a few of the original players are left. Two more of them join me and the Slaters for lunch: Barnes, formerly an Area 51 special-projects engineer, with his wife, Doris; and Martin, one of those overseeing the OXCART's specially mixed jet fuel (regular fuel explodes at extreme height, temperature and speed), with his wife, Mary. Because the men were sworn to secrecy for so many decades, their wives still get a kick out of hearing the secret tales.

Barnes was married at 17 (Doris was 16). To support his wife, he became an electronics wizard, buying broken television sets, fixing them up and reselling them for five times the original price. He went from living in bitter poverty on a Texas Panhandle ranch with no electricity to buying his new bride a dream home before he was old enough to vote. As a soldier in the Korean War, Barnes demonstrated an uncanny aptitude for radar and Nike missile systems, which made him a prime target for recruitment by the CIA—which indeed happened when he was 22. By 30, he was handling nuclear secrets.

"The agency located each guy at the top of a certain field and put us together for the programs at Area 51," says Barnes. As a security precaution, he couldn't reveal his birth name—he went by the moniker Thunder. Coworkers traveled in separate cars, helicopters and airplanes. Barnes and his group kept to themselves, even in the mess hall. "Our special-projects group was the most classified team since the Manhattan Project," he says.

Harry Martin's specialty was fuel. Handpicked by the CIA from the Air Force, he underwent rigorous psychological and physical tests to see if he was up for the job. When he passed, the CIA moved his family to Nevada. Because OXCART had to refuel frequently, the CIA kept supplies at secret facilities around the globe. Martin often traveled to these bases for quality-control checks. He tells of preparing for a top-secret mission from Area 51 to Thule, Greenland. "My wife took one look at me in these arctic boots and this big hooded coat, and she knew not to ask where I was going."

So, what of those urban legends—the UFOs studied in secret, the underground tunnels connecting clandestine facilities? For decades, the men at Area 51 thought they'd take their secrets to the grave. At the height of the Cold War, they cultivated anonymity while pursuing some of the country's most covert projects. Conspiracy theories were left to popular imagination. But in talking with Collins, Lovick, Slater, Barnes and Martin, it is clear that much of the folklore was spun from threads of fact.

As for the myths of reverse engineering of flying saucers, Barnes offers some insight: "We did reverse engineer a lot of foreign technology, including the Soviet MiG fighter jet out at the Area"—even though the MiG wasn't shaped like a flying saucer. As for the underground-tunnel talk, that, too, was born of truth. Barnes worked on a nuclear-rocket program called Project NERVA, inside underground chambers at Jackass Flats, in Area 51's backyard. "Three test-cell facilities were connected by railroad, but everything else was underground," he says.
And the quintessential Area 51 conspiracy—that the Pentagon keeps captured alien spacecraft there, which they fly around in restricted airspace? Turns out that one's pretty easy to debunk. The shape of OXCART was unprece-dented, with its wide, disk-like fuselage designed to carry vast quantities of fuel. Commercial pilots cruising over Nevada at dusk would look up and see the bottom of OXCART whiz by at 2,000-plus mph. The aircraft's tita-nium body, moving as fast as a bullet, would reflect the sun's rays in a way that could make anyone think, UFO.
In all, 2,850 OXCART test flights were flown out of Area 51 while Slater was in charge. "That's a lot of UFO sightings!" Slater adds. Commercial pilots would report them to the FAA, and "when they'd land in California, they'd be met by FBI agents who'd make them sign nondisclosure forms." But not everyone kept quiet, hence the birth of Area 51's UFO lore. The sightings incited uproar in Nevada and the surrounding areas and forced the Air Force to open Project BLUE BOOK to log each claim.

Since only a few Air Force officials were cleared for OXCART (even though it was a joint CIA/USAF project), many UFO sightings raised internal military alarms. Some generals believed the Russians might be sending stealth craft over American skies to incite paranoia and create widespread panic of alien invasion. Today, BLUE BOOK findings are housed in 37 cubic feet of case files at the National Archives—74,000 pages of reports. A keyword search brings up no mention of the top-secret OXCART or Area 51.
Project BLUE BOOK was shut down in 1969—more than a year after OXCART was retired. But what continues at America's most clandestine military facility could take another 40 years to disclose.

ANNIE JACOBSEN is an investigative reporter who sat for more than 500 interviews after she broke the story on terrorists probing commercial airliners. When she isn’t digging into intelligence issues for the likes of the National Review, she’s snapping together Legos with her two boys.

Full story/Permalink

Saturday 11 April 2009

Royal Mint is warned that one in 20 £1 coins is fake

BBC study finds fake rate is twice as high as first thought

The pound in your pocket may be worth even less than you thought. According to an investigation by the BBC, as many as one in 20 £1 coins may be a forgery – double the Royal Mint's estimate.

Willings, a company that specialises in detecting counterfeit coins for the banks and vending-machine industry, said that as many as 73 million may be circulating. The recession provides an additional incentive for people to turn to less legitimate methods of making money and the scale of forgery appears to be rising. In the last quarter of 2008, the Royal Mint removed 270,000 fake pound coins from circulation, compared with 97,000 for the whole of 2007. The Royal Mint said: "We are concerned at the apparent upward trend."

A spokesman for Willings said: "We would estimate that as many as 5 per cent of coins we test are fakes. We've been collating them for the past four months or so, and already have a collection of several hundred.

"We can manage a 50 to 60 per cent detection rate while the machines being used by the Royal Mint can only pick up around 30 to 40 per cent."

The former Queen's Assay Master Robert Matthews added: "The Mint is really trying to play down the problem and keep it as low-key as possible. They've not produced any publicity material for banks to tell us how to differentiate between real and fake coins. They don't want to undermine public confidence in the coins – you might get people refusing to take them."

A further challenge to the pound comes from the Swaziland lilangeni coin, worth about 14p and extremely similar to the British coin. While Royal Mint is making little comment, there is an outside chance that the authorities will be forced to withdraw the existing coins and replace them with a design that is harder to copy.

Full story/Permalink

Wednesday 8 April 2009

Going for gold: How the world's mints are coining it

The world's mints are coining it as unprecedented numbers of savers search for safer investments

A few years ago his visits to the mint, founded more than 800 years ago, might have seemed eccentric. No longer. From the Russian Georgy Pobedonosets to the American Eagle, gold coin production is being cranked up in mints around the world to satisfy customers believing the assets may be immune to the global financial crisis.

Russia's state-controlled Sberbank says it has never seen such strong demand for investment coins. In Australia, the Perth Mint had to suspend new orders for gold coins because it could not keep pace with overseas demand. And, in America, the US Mint says sales of its one-ounce American Eagle gold bullion coins rocketed by more than 400 per cent to 710,000 ounces in 2008. "The demand for gold and silver," said US Mint spokeswoman Carla Coolman, "has been unprecedented."

Austria's Philharmonic, named after the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra, was the world's best-selling gold coin in the last quarter and sales soared 544 per cent in the first two months of 2009. "There is no sign of demand abating," Austrian Mint's marketing director Kerry Tattersall said. Sales this year are expected to exceed 2008's record levels. "At present, production is struggling to keep up with demand."

Hans Dieter Rauch, who sells both collectors' and investors' coins in his boutique on Graben, one of Vienna's most exclusive shopping streets, said revenues rose 300 per cent last year. "It's the man in the street, not particularly rich people but normal citizens like you and me," said Mr Rauch, 65, monitoring the fluctuating price of gold on a screen in his back room.

Gold hit a record high of $1,030.80 (£700) an ounce in March 2008 and last month rose back above $1,000. Jewellery sales by cash-strapped Americans and Europeans have helped to slow the metal's rise in recent weeks.

The Czech Republic's Komercni Banka this month added gold coins and bars to its traditional portfolio of products. Even the Central Bank of Armenia is at it, issuing 10,000 gold coins with a Zodiac signs design. And, in New Zealand, Michael O'Kane, head bullion trader at the mint, said it was averaging a month's transactions in a day.

Wealthy investors are more likely to invest in bars than coins as the premium for production costs is lower, said Wolfgang Wrzesniok-Rossbach, head of sales at the precious metals group Heraeus. "If you buy a kilo bar you have to pay the surcharge for producing the bar, which is pretty low, only once" he said. "If you buy 30 1oz coins, which would be about equal to a 1kilo bar, you have to pay 30 times that amount."

Coins have the edge for small investors who want flexibility and appreciate their aesthetic allure. Demand is for more than physical products: in the past few years, gold has been sought after for speculative gains, with interest in gold-backed funds in particular soaring. But since the financial crisis accelerated last autumn, interest in coins and bars has increased, with investors seeking security rather than profit.

Other manufacturers are reducing output and jobs, but the Royal Canadian Mint quadrupled capacity to produce its bullion gold and silver Maple Leaf coins in late 2008, and the Austrian Mint is producing in one week what it usually churns out in a month. It has extended its shifts throughout the night and weekend and recruited more workers to cope with the surge in demand.

Full story/Permalink

Tuesday 7 April 2009

Duch - 'US helped Pol Pot's rise to power'

A man watches a live feed of the trial of Khmer Rouge prison chief Duch

(reuters)

A man watches a live feed of Duch's trial

Anne Barrowclough

The Khmer Rouge's most notorious prison chief told a Cambodia war crimes court today US policies in the 1970s contributed to the rise of Pol Pot's genocidal regime.

Kaing Guek Eav, or 'Duch,' the brutal director of the infamous torture centre S-21 said he believed the Khmer Rouge regime would have died out had the US not supported the right wing military government that removed Prince Norodom Sihanouk from power in a 1970 coup.

Duch, who is on trial charged with crimes against humanity and war crimes, made the claims as part of a detailed testimony of his own journey from maths teacher to fanatical communist revolutionary.

Earlier, he told the UN backed tribunal that he had 'sacrified everything' to the revolution, but had realised early on that it would end in 'disaster'.

During the four years the Khmer rouge were in power from 1975 - 1979, over 1.7 million Cambodians - nearly a quarter of the population - died from starvation, disease and execution. Between 1977 and 1979 Duch himself presided over the deaths of up to 17000 victims who were brought to S-21 to be interrogated and murdered.

Last week, he took the stand to express his remorse at the atrocities committed under his command. As his trial entered its second week he took the stand again, this time to desribe his part in the rise of the Khmer Rouge.

Describing the tangled politics of Cambodia as the Vietnam War raged on the country's eastern border, and the Khmer Rouge recruited peasants and intellectuals disillusioned with Prince Sihanouk's autocratic regime, he said he believed Pol Pot's revolution would have come to an end in 1970 if US policy had not presented him with a 'golden opportunity'.

"I think the Khmer Rouge would already have been demolished," he said. "But Mr. Kissinger (the then U.S. Secretary of State) and Richard Nixon were quick (to back General Lon Nol, the right wing coup leader), and then the Khmer Rouge noted the golden opportunity."

Pol Pot seized on the US intervention in Cambodian politics as a propoganda tool to increase recruitment, and build power as it battled Lon Nol's regime between 1970 - 1975. The coup led to a significant increase in support from the Vietnamese communists which was to prove crucial in bringing Pol Pot to power.

Duch had begun the day recounting his personal odyssey to revolution, describing how he became interested in politics in 1957 and decided to join the Khmer Rouge in1964.

He said his parents were sympathetic to his belief in fighting oppression but afraid for him, because he risked arrest and imprisonment.

"I sacrificed everything to the revolution," the 66-year-old told the court.

When he decided to go to the countryside to become a full-time Khmer Rouge cadre, he went to say goodbye to his parents, he said.

"My father was shocked," he recalled, but gave him a lucky wristband. His friends presented him with a watch.

He was first given the job of teaching morality to his fellow guerrillas, but abilities of the meticulous former school master were swiftly recognized by his superiors, and he was put in charge of interrogation at a security prison known as M-13 in a jungle stronghold.

As prisoners and documents were sent to him, he saw that, even before the Khmer Rouge had taken power, its members were accusing, arresting and killing each other.

"I said to myself, 'Oh, this is going to be a disaster,'" he testified.

Duch is the first of five former Khmer Rouge leaders to be tried by the Extraordinary Chambers of the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC), and the only one to apologise for his war crimes.

His trial comes as once again allegations of corruption threaten to overshadow the court's proceedings.

Peter Taksoe-Jensen, the U.N. assistant secretary-general for legal affairs, isto meet government and tribunal officials this week to discuss allegations that Cambodian personnel at the ECCC were forced to pay kickbacks to obtain their positions.

Defense lawyers and human rights groups suggest that the allegations, if unanswered, could destroy the tribunal's credibility.

Full story/Permalink

Pre-emptive nuclear strike a key option, Nato told

A Trident missile

A British Trident missile. Photograph: AP

The west must be ready to resort to a pre-emptive nuclear attack to try to halt the "imminent" spread of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, according to a radical manifesto for a new Nato by five of the west's most senior military officers and strategists.

Calling for root-and-branch reform of Nato and a new pact drawing the US, Nato and the European Union together in a "grand strategy" to tackle the challenges of an increasingly brutal world, the former armed forces chiefs from the US, Britain, Germany, France and the Netherlands insist that a "first strike" nuclear option remains an "indispensable instrument" since there is "simply no realistic prospect of a nuclear-free world".

The manifesto has been written following discussions with active commanders and policymakers, many of whom are unable or unwilling to publicly air their views. It has been presented to the Pentagon in Washington and to Nato's secretary general, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, over the past 10 days. The proposals are likely to be discussed at a Nato summit in Bucharest in April.

"The risk of further [nuclear] proliferation is imminent and, with it, the danger that nuclear war fighting, albeit limited in scope, might become possible," the authors argued in the 150-page blueprint for urgent reform of western military strategy and structures. "The first use of nuclear weapons must remain in the quiver of escalation as the ultimate instrument to prevent the use of weapons of mass destruction."

The authors - General John Shalikashvili, the former chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff and Nato's ex-supreme commander in Europe, General Klaus Naumann, Germany's former top soldier and ex-chairman of Nato's military committee, General Henk van den Breemen, a former Dutch chief of staff, Admiral Jacques Lanxade, a former French chief of staff, and Lord Inge, field marshal and ex-chief of the general staff and the defence staff in the UK - paint an alarming picture of the threats and challenges confronting the west in the post-9/11 world and deliver a withering verdict on the ability to cope.

The five commanders argue that the west's values and way of life are under threat, but the west is struggling to summon the will to defend them. The key threats are:

· Political fanaticism and religious fundamentalism.

· The "dark side" of globalisation, meaning international terrorism, organised crime and the spread of weapons of mass destruction.

· Climate change and energy security, entailing a contest for resources and potential "environmental" migration on a mass scale.

· The weakening of the nation state as well as of organisations such as the UN, Nato and the EU.

To prevail, the generals call for an overhaul of Nato decision-taking methods, a new "directorate" of US, European and Nato leaders to respond rapidly to crises, and an end to EU "obstruction" of and rivalry with Nato. Among the most radical changes demanded are:

· A shift from consensus decision-taking in Nato bodies to majority voting, meaning faster action through an end to national vetoes.

· The abolition of national caveats in Nato operations of the kind that plague the Afghan campaign.

· No role in decision-taking on Nato operations for alliance members who are not taking part in the operations.

· The use of force without UN security council authorisation when "immediate action is needed to protect large numbers of human beings".

In the wake of the latest row over military performance in Afghanistan, touched off when the US defence secretary, Robert Gates, said some allies could not conduct counter-insurgency, the five senior figures at the heart of the western military establishment also declare that Nato's future is on the line in Helmand province.

"Nato's credibility is at stake in Afghanistan," said Van den Breemen.

"Nato is at a juncture and runs the risk of failure," according to the blueprint.

Naumann delivered a blistering attack on his own country's performance in Afghanistan. "The time has come for Germany to decide if it wants to be a reliable partner." By insisting on "special rules" for its forces in Afghanistan, the Merkel government in Berlin was contributing to "the dissolution of Nato".

Ron Asmus, head of the German Marshall Fund thinktank in Brussels and a former senior US state department official, described the manifesto as "a wake-up call". "This report means that the core of the Nato establishment is saying we're in trouble, that the west is adrift and not facing up to the challenges."

Naumann conceded that the plan's retention of the nuclear first strike option was "controversial" even among the five authors. Inge argued that "to tie our hands on first use or no first use removes a huge plank of deterrence".

Reserving the right to initiate nuclear attack was a central element of the west's cold war strategy in defeating the Soviet Union. Critics argue that what was a productive instrument to face down a nuclear superpower is no longer appropriate.

Robert Cooper, an influential shaper of European foreign and security policy in Brussels, said he was "puzzled".

"Maybe we are going to use nuclear weapons before anyone else, but I'd be wary of saying it out loud."

Another senior EU official said Nato needed to "rethink its nuclear posture because the nuclear non-proliferation regime is under enormous pressure".

Naumann suggested the threat of nuclear attack was a counsel of desperation. "Proliferation is spreading and we have not too many options to stop it. We don't know how to deal with this."

Nato needed to show "there is a big stick that we might have to use if there is no other option", he said.

The Authors:

John Shalikashvili

The US's top soldier under Bill Clinton and former Nato commander in Europe, Shalikashvili was born in Warsaw of Georgian parents and emigrated to the US at the height of Stalinism in 1952. He became the first immigrant to the US to rise to become a four-star general. He commanded Operation Provide Comfort in northern Iraq at the end of the first Gulf war, then became Saceur, Nato's supreme allied commander in Europe, before Clinton appointed him chairman of the joint chiefs in 1993, a position he held until his retirement in 1997.

Klaus Naumann

Viewed as one of Germany's and Nato's top military strategists in the 90s, Naumann served as his country's armed forces commander from 1991 to 1996 when he became chairman of Nato's military committee. On his watch, Germany overcame its post-WWII taboo about combat operations, with the Luftwaffe taking to the skies for the first time since 1945 in the Nato air campaign against Serbia.

Lord Inge

Field Marshal Peter Inge is one of Britain's top officers, serving as chief of the general staff in 1992-94, then chief of the defence staff in 1994-97. He also served on the Butler inquiry into Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction and British intelligence.

Henk van den Breemen

An accomplished organist who has played at Westminster Abbey, Van den Breemen is the former Dutch chief of staff.

Jacques Lanxade

A French admiral and former navy chief who was also chief of the French defence staff.

Full story/Permalink

Saturday 4 April 2009

More IMF Economic Medicine Is Not the Solution

by Michel Chossudovsky

Full story/Permalink

New World Order: Still A Conspiracy Theory?

Wikipedia still thinks so, despite hundreds of pronouncements during G20 summit

New World Order: Still A Conspiracy Theory? 030409top

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Despite the fact that the term “new world order” was mentioned in connection with the G20 this week hundreds of times by both global leaders and in news reports, it is still regarded as a “conspiracy theory” by that bastion of truthiness, Wikipedia.

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown himself yesterday announced that the G20 heralded the creation of a “new world order” which would involve increased global regulation of economic markets.

A Google News search provides well over a thousand results of reports including the term “new world order” over the past couple of weeks.

Despite the fact that world leaders have been talking about a “new world order” for decades, in the context of the political agenda to diminish the power of sovereign states in favour of a move towards global governance, it was still regarded as a delusion of paranoid conspiracy theorists by the establishment media until relatively recently.

Now even Fox News and Sean Hannity are throwing their arms in the air and admitting that the “conspiracy theorists were right” as the agenda for global government is openly announced.

However, the online encyclopaedia Wikipedia, which is notorious for being completely infested with maniacally obsessive trolls, crooked insiders, and establishment apologists, claims that in its warped version of reality, the “new world order” as a sinister concept is still a nebulous conspiracy theory.

New World Order: Still A Conspiracy Theory? 030409shot1
New World Order: So-called “conspiracy theorists” had to endure decades of ridicule for daring to claim such a political agenda existed - now it’s openly discussed in every major news outlet.

New World Order: Still A Conspiracy Theory? 030409shot2
But according to Wikipedia, it’s still a “conspiracy theory”.

Wikipedia attempts to make the differentiation by claiming that the new world order in the context of a sinister, undemocratic, and ultimately totalitarian political agenda, is a characterization embraced only by paranoid conspiracy theorists.

Presumably, Wikipedia is only willing to accept the fact that an agenda to create a new world order exists if that new world order equates to a happy, loving, positive move, where world bankers and global elitists really have the best interests of all of us at heart. Forgive us for being somewhat sceptical of that conclusion.

In reality, as we have exhaustively documented, the new world order has nothing to do with saving the world and everything to do with centralizing power and control into the hands of a gaggle of criminal globalists who are concerned about nothing other than increasing their domination over the planet - at the expense of the rest of the population.

The new world order is totalitarian by its very nature - shifting power away from sovereign countries to global institutions which have no accountability to the general public whatsoever, and through which the public has no voice or influence. That cannot be defined as anything else but undemocratic. There is no such thing as a “benign” new world order.

This very agenda was again enunciated this week by World Bank President and and Bilderberg elitist Robert Zoellick, who openly admitted the plan to eliminate national sovereignty and impose a global government during a speech on the eve of the G20 summit.

Speaking about the agenda to increase not just funding but power for international organizations on the back of the financial crisis, Zoellick stated, “If leaders are serious about creating new global responsibilities or governance, let them start by modernising multilateralism to empower the WTO, the IMF, and the World Bank Group to monitor national policies.”

Proponents of a new world order have always disguised their rhetoric with flowery notions of achieving some kind of global utopia, but behind the scenes the real agenda has always been sinister, nepotistic and anathema to any reasonable notion of democratic freedom.

It’s about time the establishment media stopped parroting the words of globalists and blithely repeating the term “new world order” like it was going out of fashion, and actually started asking real questions about what it really means.

Full story/Permalink

G20 Agreement must be rejected

(LPAC)—In response to the release of the official communiqué today at the conclusion of the G20 summit in London, Lyndon LaRouche stated that "what they are proposing is the equivalent of recommending the use of cyanide for the cure of a headache. It is a permanent cure."

LaRouche was immediately referring to the assumption underlying the entire statement: "We believe that the only sure foundation for sustainable globalization and rising prosperity for all is an open world economy based on market principles, effective regulation, and strong global institutions." The statement further states: We are undertaking an unprecedented and concerted fiscal expansion ... that will, by the end of next year amount to $5 trillion, raise output by 4 percent, and accelerate the transition to a green economy."

LaRouche characterized the above statements as "tantamount to the confessions of an assembly of lunatics."

"This is fascism in its British form of Oswald Mosley. Mosley would be ecstatic, he and H.G. Wells who was backing Mosley back in 1933. At that time the City of London's allies on Wall Street supported Mussolini, as did the great American pragmatist, John Dewey. They also supported Hitler as the German Mussolini.

"This is fascism combined with insanity. It is a case of the criminal mind going insane."

LaRouche stated that he hoped "there will be enough patriotic men and women in the U.S. Congress to prevent the adoption of this agreement. It would be the death of the U.S. and much more besides. It has to be stopped. It must be stamped out now."

Today's Financial Times publishes a column by Andrew Ward entitled "Can Obama make the difference?" In it he makes the point that in his account of the London economic conference in 1933, a conference which FDR boycotted in his opposition to British imperialism, HG Wells wrote that Roosevelt was the "last hope for mankind. There was no other personality visible who even promised to exorcise the spell that lay upon the economic life of the race. It was Roosevelt's conference or nothing."

Unfortunately, contrary to Roosevelt's rejection of HG Wells' fascist Open Conspiracy for world government at that time, President Obama has done just the opposite.

In a press conference after the conclusion of the G20 summit Obama endorsed the entire agenda of Gordon Brown, personally expressing his appreciation for the work of Brown and his entire staff. Moreover, he claimed to have himself played a decisive role in "forging a consensus."

LaRouche pointed out that the British suckered him based precisely on this profile he has of himself as the forger of consensus. As a consequence, LaRouche said, Obama is "on the edge of going down. They didn't have to control him, because he could control himself. This is tragic."

"This agreement cannot be accepted," LaRouche said. "If it were, it could very well lead to riots in the United States, the the breakup of the nation and to terrorism. Therefore, this must be rejected. The U.S. must not sign any treaty agreement with these elements. No patriot will allow this to be confirmed, no matter which side of the aisle he or she is on. To sign this would be to betray the United States.

"This is one ego trip from which the President may return, but the nation may not come back. The price of his ego trip is too high a price to pay. No man has a right to have his ego used in this way. Our country can't be put into jeopardy, humanity can't be put into jeopardy, because he wants to win a popularity contest."

Full story/Permalink

Gordon Brown hails creation of a ‘New World Order’ out of crisis

Britain G20 Summit

Britain’s Prime Minister Gordon Brown, left, greets US President Barack Obama as he arrives for the G20 summit at the ExCel centre in London, Thursday, April 2, 2009. AP Photo

Gordon Brown announced the creation of a “new world order” after the conclusion of the G20 summit of world leaders in London.

Telegraph | Apr 3, 2009

By Andrew Porter, Robert Winnett and Toby Harnden

The Prime Minister claimed to have struck a “historic” deal to end the global recession as he unveiled plans to plough more than $1 trillion into the world economy.

“This is the day that the world came together to fight back against the global recession,” he said. “Not with words but with a plan for global recovery and reform.”

Barack Obama, the US President, hailed the deal as a “turning point” for the global economy which would put it on the path to recovery.

However, critics pointed out Mr Brown had been unable to secure agreement on a new co-ordinated fiscal stimulus package that he and Mr Obama had been urging. The Prime Minister has staked his political future on securing a deal at the summit.

Under the $1.1 trillion (£750 billion) agreement, which followed several days of intense negotiation, struggling economies will be offered money provided to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) by wealthier nations.

The G20 leaders also agreed restrictions on bankers’ pay, rules to target tax havens and hedge funds and a new financial early warning system to prevent a future economic meltdown.

“Today’s decisions, of course, will not immediately solve the crisis. But we have begun the process by which it will be solved,” Mr Brown said. “I think a new world order is emerging with the foundation of a new progressive era of international co-operation,”

Following the announcement of the deal at the ExCeL conference centre in London’s Docklands, the FTSE share index closed up more than four per cent. Other stock markets around the world also rose sharply.

The conclusion of the summit also coincided with the release of figures that suggested the British economy could be starting to recover. House prices have risen and the Bank of England claims that lending to businesses has improved.

Mr Brown’s delight at securing the agreement — which had been under threat from Nicolas Sarkozy, the French President, and Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor — was evident.

The success was echoed by Mr Obama. “By any measure the London summit was historic,” he said. “It was historic because of the size and the scope of the challenges that we face and because of the timeliness and magnitude of our response.”

Mr Sarkozy, who had threatened to walk out of the talks unless he got action on tax havens, said a “page has been turned” on the old financial model, the “Anglo-Saxon model”.

One trillion dollars will be made available to the IMF and, in turn, to countries threatened by the downturn. However, Mr Brown made it clear that he did not intend to apply for funds for Britain, despite opponents warning that the country will soon need a bail-out due to the growing deficit in the public finances.

Mr Obama, who leaves Britain after a three-day visit on Friday morning, played an important part in brokering the deal, in particular French concerns over the deal on tax havens. A senior White House official said the President took Mr Sarkozy to a corner of the room for a chat. He then acted as a go-between with President Hu Jintao, of China until they both agreed to a solution put forward by Mr Obama.

As The Daily Telegraph disclosed on Thursday, a key part of the global rescue package included united action to curb excessive pay to bankers and traders.

Downing Street will be relieved that the summit has not proved a failure, despite Mr Brown not securing some of his earlier objectives, notably a second round of fiscal stimulus.

Full story/Permalink