the dark brown river

Thursday, July 28, 2005

the bombshell on flight 77

Subject: the bombshell on 77.
Date: 27 July 2005 12:02:23 IST

an invitation to collaborate on a film script.

this is a general invitation to contribute your ideas to
a film script. both the script itself, and what to do with
the script if and when it reaches completion, are open
to suggestions from the contributors. if you read on you
will begin to see the general direction in which the story
is headed. needless to say that no ending has been,
nor can be, scripted at this stage.

the bombshell on flight 77.
(or alternative title.)

1. barbie doll, an investigative television reporter, thinks
that she has landed one of the big stories of all time when
she investigates the democratic white house. barbie is a
blonde bombshell with looks as well as brains. she thinks
that she has identified the channel whereby department
of defense funds, 'unaccounted for' at the pentagon, are
transferred to offshore locations, to be used as a slush fund.
this fund then being deployed to ensure that money allocated
to defense budgets continues at its already high level.

2. the matter is so sensitive that she waits until the return
of the republican party to the presidency before raising a
matter likely to sink the democrats, politically, for a long time
to come. her informants will be reluctant to risk their careers
by going public, and certainly not before then.

3. unknown to barbie doll and her husband ken, the big
revelation which she expects to make their political and
journalistic fortunes is both unwelcome and dangerous - the
republican party is, if anything, more deeply involved in the
offshore 'gravy train' than their democratic opponents, and as
well as that, are busy investing it abroad to 'short' the dollar,
which their policies are designed to sink.

4. meanwhile in new york a reissued report on the 1993 world
trade centre bombings raises questions in the minds of everyone
who reads it. (a) who really carried them out ? (b) what would
have happened if the bomb had succeeded in toppling the
towers ? (c) what is going to happen when the towers have to
be demolished at the end of their useful life ? and will manhattan
be buried in dust from the demolition charges ? and (d) who
will pay to clean up, or who will pay to have the towers taken
down floor by floor, if the insurers insist that it is to be done that
way ?

5. these questions become more urgent when computerisation
of office work means that all buildings which are lacking space
between floors in which to route wiring and connections, are
potentially obsolete. the bill to retro-fix the towers looks like being
some $800 million - rising further, if the work is put off for a few

6. the film will have background sub plots drawn from middle
eastern politics and arab hi-jackings, of the kind without which
any contemporary drama would be incomplete. ( these sub-plots
are not part of the cooperatively produced script, as any fool
could come up with a number of these.)

7. the action opens with the swearing in of one of the greatest
and most brilliant and effective of united states presidents in a
generation. (audiences will appreciate that they are being drawn
in to a fictional scenario.)

8. in the fictional tale, they are given to understand that all is not
well between barbie and ken, in spite of outward appearances.

9. ken insists that the story will have to be buried, as there is no
chance of taking on both political parties at once. in fact he now
realises that there was little chance of taking on even one political
party, as the republicans would be happy enough with a narrow
defeat of the democrats in an election, but by burying them totally
they would risk reprisals against their own past illegalities. it is
always reasonable to assume that a party has past sins to uncover,
( this sad fact being in no way unique to america.)

10. but barbie is stubborn. ken is dismayed to find that he has
discovered a fundamental incompatibility between them, for
while both of them are ambitious for themselves and for america,
barbie genuinely, when the chips are down, puts america first.

11. ken now sees a new danger - he appreciates better than barbie
how many people stand to lose from barbie's story coming out. in
the first climax of the film a blazing and bitter row is scripted, in
which he accuses his wife of risking all that they have worked for,
for the sake of a damn fool story that takes on the combined
might of the political parties, the defense contractors, the pentagon,
and the president. barbie leaves in tears.

12. barbie bravely goes to confront her informants, which include
whistleblowers deep inside the pentagon, to tell them that the
launch of the story is on hold, indefinitely.

cut to ken's office where he is seen lifting a secure telephone . . .


this is the point at which the script is thrown open to the contributors.

it is a film script, so it has to walk a line between what is dramatic
and what is believeable. the following hypothetical script is included
as an example of the kind of thing audiences will refuse point blank
to accept as being remotely possible, and which would thus be more
or less unmarketable -

hypothetical script -

13. in the belief that the story is about to break, the people whom ken
has approached activate a plan, the outline of which has been around
for several years for this very eventuality. they offer ken the choice of
cooperating in his wife's disappearance, or disappearing with her. he
knows how easily their 'double suicide' could be arranged. he asks
what he has to do to save himself and his career. . .

14. meanwhile, to ensure that the potential (as yet unidentified)
pentagon whistleblowers are eliminated, plans to assassinate them
individually have been rejected in favour of blowing them up, all in
one go, together.

15. the day before this is to be accomplished, the news is released
to the media that an enormous sum of money is 'unaccounted for'
in the pentagon budget. this news gets buried in the next day's
dramatic events, as the conspirators have anticipated.

16. on the morning of the coup, the accounts section of the pentagon
in washington explodes in a ball of flame, and on the very same day
the new york offices of the c i a, the f b i, and the s e c, all collapse in
a controlled demolition, the immediate area having been previously
cleared of firemen and other potential witnesses. most pentagon
whistleblowers are wiped out by the explosions, while any that
survive are understandably intimidated. no one is killed in new
york, but files are irretrievably lost in both locations.

17. these events escape media attention because of a 'special
effects' sub plot of a diversionary nature - the twin towers of the
world trade centre are demolished after apparent suicide attacks,
while thousands of new york office workers are still inside. this
daylight spectacular is on live television, but is replayed endlessly
for anyone who happens to miss it. battered by real life drama
that they cannot understand, the viewers are ready to swallow
whatever explanations the media have ready to hand. smoke
machines are used to add smoke of various unlikely colours
to the scene.

18. the film ends with ken ringing the television station with the
news that barbie was a passenger on the plane - the very plane
which has exploded in the pentagon accounts department, and
which has disintegrated into unrecognisable fragments in the heat
of the fire that follows the crash.


(contributors to the script are free to use their own imagination, but
will be expected to come up with something better than this . . . the
middle eastern angle has potential and could be developed further.)

good luck.

Tuesday, July 19, 2005

a lazy day in september 01.

unidentified voice - 'mohammed, will we do it now, or after the coffee ?'

(no answer).

(air traffic control continues to monitor the flight flying westwards for another fifteen minutes.). . .

same day - sarasota elementary school.

andrew card, presidental aide - 'your coffee's going cold.' (later amended by white house spin doctors to 'america is under attack.')

(the president looks irritated but makes no reply.)

ari fleischer next holds up a card on which is written - 'don't say anything yet. i can make a fresh pot. it's no trouble. honest.'

same day - secure location on u s a f base, not far from washington d. c.

'they're on again sir. another one hi-jacked. that must be the third or fourth.'

(reply indistinct.)

'they sound quite excited, sir.'

'o.k. tell 'em we'll get back to 'em.'


"oh major -'

'sir ?'

'is that goddam kettle boiled yet ?'

Saturday, July 16, 2005

free advice to china ?

there is a lot of talk about whether the markets have failed to understand the significance of 'peak oil.'

when this discussion is over - who will adjudicate the winners ? who will deliver the verdict ? or will we all go our separate ways a little wiser but still holding diverse views ?

no, the market is always right.

the market is made possible by people holding slightly differing views. ( a market in which everyone holds the same view is called a panic.) if the market is 'wrong' - then place your correct bet and make your fortune. there will be slight movement in your chosen direction and the market will be right once again. if you insist that the market is still 'wrong' - bet again tomorrow.

keep teaching the market a lesson about peak oil, and get incredibly rich. if there is a flaw in the peak oil theory somewhere - then the market will teach you a lesson.

so you will either get a fortune or an education. it looks like a win-win situation to me.

if you own oil, pump it, sell it, and use the money to bet on the oil futures market. that is a lot less risky than leaving the oil in the ground, or even in storage tanks above ground. o yes, and as you buy oil futures you will be stimulating the market price of the oil that you are about to sell next.

some people i know would actually prefer the supply of oil to be a bit more secure. they have 1,300,000,000 people, massive dollar reserves, and nuclear weapons. someone send me the address of their website and e mail and i will let them know how it can be done.

except that without the insecurity the futures price would soar. so it seems that you get an education in this business whichever way you turn . . . .

Wednesday, July 06, 2005

the lusitania lecture.

it may be that i am one of those who have an internet
personality that is at odds with their everyday demeanor.

so this irritable, confrontational and hectoring lecturing
persona exists mostly in cyberspace, and would be
unrecognisable to the grannies in wheelchairs whom i
deal with in the course of the day -

i hope -

nevertheless -

this lecturing persona has something to say to you. we
live in extraordinary times in which things are happening
unlike anything that happened before. well almost unlike -

in 1915 the sinking of the lusitania off ireland had a major
effect upon the decision of america to join in the first world

the attack on pearl harbour had an even more direct effect
upon american public opinion and the decision to go into the
second world war.

and 9/11 has supplied the catalyst for the united states to
enter the third world war - or to those who number the cold
war and the collapse of the soviet system as the third one -
the fourth world war.

and to this sorry list we have to add a bogus event in the
rise to power of one of the neo conservatives' secret heroes -
the role of the bogus reichstag fire in the rise of adolf hitler.

when history is written, these events appear as political and
military events. other people write economic histories, about
keynes, the gold standard, and the 1929 great crash. but in
the unfolding of real history the economic and the political do
not divide as neatly into separate chapters as they seem to
in the text books written decades later.

i have for some time been troubled by the tendency to suggest
what amounts to overall global economic reform, as though this
could somehow take place in a political, military, and historical
vacuum - and without reference to the people now in power.

to avoid getting sidetracked by the personality of the front man -
( the man whom i personally believe is not actually formulating
policy but merely articulating, or inarticulating, modern style
propaganda known as 'spin') - we could just talk about 'power'
itself, or 'vested interests.' or we could adopt an acronym
for these - vested interests, currently entrenched - 'v i c e.'

to make any worthwhile contribution you have first to come to
terms with the utter ruthlessness of powermongers, and also with
a phenomenon known as 'the banality of evil.' you have to see
that if hitler were alive today, just as he was in the late1930s, but
armed with an overwhelming arsenal of nuclear weapons, and
with access to modern television and communications, - he
would most probably be coming across as quite a reasonable
sort of guy doing his best in difficult circumstances.

if you are buying the spin, the spin that 'v i c e' is on your side,
patriotic, god fearing, compassionate, visionary . . . then i despair
of you. if you have spent the weekend watching a line up of
white middle aged millionaires using the distressed condition
of africa as a way to sell more pink floyd albums and further
increase their own celebrity value, and swallowed that story whole -
. . . then i despair of you. if you believe that organic farming puts
food on the table without the expenditure of oil . . . then i despair
of you. and if you believe that steel-framed skyscrapers collapse
neatly as a result of intense large fires caused by aviation fuel, . . .
then i despair of you. if you believe that steel-framed skyscrapers
also collapse neatly as a result of small fires and totally unassisted
by aviation fuel, then i believe that you are either pulling my leg, or
are already in the pay of the agents of 'v i c e.'

perhaps your mind is beginning to form the words 'conspiracy theory'
to itself. if so, then use your computer to surf the current conspiracy
theories. is barbara olsen really still alive and in the south of
transformed by plastic surgery ? i despair of all that stuff too.

the conspiracy theories all point to the criminal guilt of the vested
interests currently entrenched. none that i have seen have any clue
as to where we should go from here. they are in some way as negative
and malevolent as the vested interests which form the subject of their

so we have the hard ruthlessness of the vested interests, ( and the
'american century' neo conservative think tanks form the peak of
that pyramid ) - and we have the good intentions of the gullible
people of the 'new age', harmlessly dissipated by the distraction of
a concert or two - and our hazardous path lies somewhere between.

i believe that the 'new age' is over, and i hope that the 'new world
order' will never succeed in its unfolding plan for a privately owned
global government.

this is july 2005. clap your hands to the tune of the middle aged
knights and millionaires on the one side, serenading the lying
mass murderers on the other. between these extremes, we
have to find another path, before history finds one for us.