Just before 7 a.m. on Sunday May 23, startled security guards inside Terminal 2E at Roissy-Charles de Gaulle noticed tiny spider cracks appearing in one of the support walls of the building. Acting like lightning, the guards started an immediate mass evacuation of the entire terminal, and radioed French police for urgent assistance. Had those guards not acted as quickly as they did, more than 500 staff and passengers would have died in the giant mangled pile of rubble which appeared shortly thereafter. France might thus have suffered its very own Mini 9-11, possibly forcing a reluctant Paris to join the hysterical 'War on Terror' raging on the other side of the Atlantic.

             While dust clouds still partly obscured the quarantined terminal disaster area, and no one including media was allowed within 500 yards of the building, the New York Times suddenly went into extra-sensory-perception mode, blandly reporting that, "Rescue workers converged on the site to search for survivors of the accident, which appeared to have been caused by a structural failure, rather than a bomb" … "It is not clear whether the collapse was caused by a structural flaw in the shell, the failure of supporting pillars beneath it or some other reason. But the elliptical arch [of the roof] pushed the limits of conventional vault design, with the curvature continuing beyond the vertical without abutments other than the reinforcing steel hoops to stop it from spreading".

             We will return to this impossible and obviously pre-prepared claim later in the report, but a clue to Wall Street's motive for this particular El-Al'eda terrorist attack was provided two days later, when the New York Times gloated, "The collapse of a passenger terminal at Roissy-Charles de Gaulle Airport near Paris on Sunday is likely to cause wide ripples in French industrial circles, perhaps even affecting the introduction of the Airbus A380 superjumbo jet, Europe's answer to the Boeing 747".

 

            Those readers who sincerely believe  the only current Wall Street crusade is that being visibly directed against oil-rich Muslim countries in the Middle East, will shortly have to come to terms with Wall Street's less visible but even more fanatical crusade against 'Old Europe' and Russia. Though stealing Iraq [or Saudi Arabia's] crude oil reserves is essential to the long-term survival of America, any such victory will fail completely if Europe and Russia are allowed to form an alliance, thereby forming the biggest superpower on the face of  the earth.

            This is the really big battle, and the Zionist Cabal in New York has been covertly chipping away at Russia and Europe for more than twenty years, while at the same time planning the Draconian "Fortress Americas" as a final redoubt, should their plans be uncovered or fail for other reasons.  The victor in this gargantuan but largely unseen battle will win the right to monopolize world trade, in partnership with China, for perhaps the next century or even longer, while the loser will unquestionably be relegated to third-world status.

            Though 'trade' covers a vast array of products and services both tangible and intangible, four component parts are especially important at the dawn of the twenty-first century.  The absolute control of life and death is represented by the pharmaceutical and aerospace-defense conglomerates, while generic tourism in one form or another leads the charge in securing vast sums of transient currencies, and in capturing the 'hearts and minds' of an increasingly mobile global public. None of the above would be able to operate without crude oil, which is therefore the fourth of these important components.

            Very few readers in the west realize that a mere eighteen months ago, Russia overtook Saudi Arabia as the world's biggest single national producer of crude oil and gas products, a position it had been striving to achieve for more than twenty years. In fact, Russia very nearly achieved dominance during the mid eighties, right up to the point when the Zionist Cabal instructed President Ronald Reagan to sabotage the Siberian pipelines.

            This successful covert American operation led in turn to the first tit-for-tat micro nuclear reprisal in the current ongoing series. On 6 June 1988 a micro nuke no bigger than a coffee cup went critical in the compressor room of  Occidental's Piper Alpha platform in the North Sea. As the screeching white-hot fireball reached half the temperature of the sun in six microseconds, and instantly vaporized the top structure of the Alpha platform, the subliminal message was clear.  Russia would not tolerate any more Zionist interference in its internal affairs, especially not in its internal oil and gas affairs.

 

 

            This presented the Zionist Cabal with a nightmare problem, resolved just a few short years later by American Ambassador April Glaspie. At her last confidential meeting with President Saddam Hussein of Iraq before Kuwait was invaded, Glaspie gave the Iraqi President the green light. ""We have no opinion on your Arab-Arab conflicts," she told Hussein, "such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary [of State James] Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction ... that Kuwait is not associated with America." President Hussein unfortunately fell for this obvious ruse, and the rest is vividly recorded history.

            Thus the Zionist Cabal had terminally fixated on expanding the Jewish State east to the Euphrates and beyond, without ever stopping to ponder how it would then be able to transport its plundered crude oil home across 7,000 nautical miles of hostile ocean, dotted here and there by silent Russian and French hunter-killer submarines, and fast radar-opaque minelayers.

            To an extent, Wall Street's attention was deflected by the simultaneous rising trade threat of the European  defense industry, headed by the incredibly profitable aerospace sector. During the last century, no other sector has bestowed more profit and prestige on its shareholders than the ubiquitous plane makers, especially those engaged in the manufacture of flagship long-range commercial airliners. Since the end of World War II, Boeing has completely dominated this market, effectively allowing America to control commercial aviation in western skies. Then as if out of nowhere, Airbus Industries came on the scene. As I wrote in June 2003:

            "Though Airbus sales had been very slow since 1969, the consortium adopted a far more aggressive stance in the early nineties, to the point where it threatened Boeing's virtual monopoly of the commercial airliner market. If the Americans saw this as a serious threat, they were quite right to do so. Back in 1969 the European manufacturers produced only 10% of all commercial airliners, despite having one quarter of all airline business worldwide. By its 30th birthday in December 1999, the Airbus Consortium would be reveling in its new 50% share of the global airliner market.

            "Apart from its new aggressive sales stance, Europe had another weapon in its arsenal that could not be matched by America under any circumstances, in the shape of the supersonic Concorde. If the Airbus sales team wished to close an important sale, they had this infuriating habit of turning up in one of these sleek and truly awesome aircraft, described countless times as "the sexiest airliner in the world". Sexy or not, Concorde was and still is the absolute guarantee of European aircraft industry excellence.

            "By the mid-nineties, these two-hundred-ton white darts had been flashing backwards and forwards across the Atlantic every day of the week at twice the speed of sound, for more than twenty years non-stop without serious incident. A free ride in Concorde, and a glass or two of vintage champagne, was nearly always enough to convince even the most reluctant airline executive to choose Airbus over Boeing." A link to this Concorde sabotage report is provided at the bottom of the page.

            It is beyond any doubt that the deliberate sabotage of  Concorde was designed to put the brakes on Airbus sales, especially on the growing sales of the giant double-decker A 380 Super Jumbo, an aircraft so opulent that it puts the aging Boeing 747 flagship completely in the shade.  Depending on the airline, all passengers will enjoy greatly increased legroom, access to a proper in-flight bar, and room to walk around and stretch their legs. Some operators including Singapore Airlines even plan to have a gym on board. In simple terms, the giant A 380 is light years ahead of the elderly Boeing, with fuel costs around 20% less overall, meaning that everyone is a winner apart from American aerospace in general, and Boeing shareholders in particular.

            Just two weeks before Terminal 2E inexplicably collapsed at Roissy-Charles de Gaulle,  Airbus [now part of  European Aeronautic, Defense Space] celebrated the complete assembly of its first Super Jumbo in a vast hangar at Toulouse. Champagne corks popped wildly as VIP visitors were escorted around the huge construction facility, and firm orders climbed above 130 aircraft. No small achievement in a world beset by synthetic 'Muslim terrorism' largely invented by Wall Street, with a majority of Americans intimidated into not flying at all. But then these giant 21st Century airliners are not destined for America.

            While Americans are obliged to submit to extraordinary indignities at their own airports courtesy of the Draconian "Department of Homeland Security", the rest of the world [apart from Australia] has gone in the opposite direction. France, Germany, Russia and even China nowadays welcome tourists as honored guests rather than terrorist suspects, meaning that their tourism revenues have gone through the roof. Arrival in Paris, Frankfurt, Moscow or Beijing means being greeted by cheerful immigration officials before being shown to a cab rank or bus stop. You are certainly NOT bullied by paranoid American officials into providing photographs, fingerprints, retinal scans, and, perhaps in the near future, anal probes as well.

 

             It is right here that we begin to see what was so terribly wrong about the instant bland pronouncement by the New York Times on May 23, that the collapse of Terminal 2E "appeared to have been caused by a structural failure, rather than a bomb".  Ever since the World Trade Center attack in 2001, all Americans including reporters at the New York Times have been behaviorally conditioned to believe that airports, and the airliners which use them, are the favorite prime targets of 'Muslim Terrorists'. The sight of a turban or Islamic  headdress in the wrong place at Dulles Airport is enough to trigger a panic attack by security staff, and any little old lady who passes wind in the wrong place at the wrong time, runs the risk of a very personal body search for hidden heavy weapons.

            Barely concealed paranoia runs deep at American airports nowadays, leading one to ask what the New York Times would have written if, instead of Terminal 2E at Roissy-Charles de Gaulle, the arrivals building at Chicago O'Hare Airport had suddenly collapsed without warning on May 23. But you already know the answer, don't you? While thousands of National Guardsmen rounded up innocent passengers for interrogation by Homeland Security, the New York Times would have accused Syria, Iran, and North Korea of a deliberate terrorist attack. The amazingly creative possibility of "structural failure" would have been laughed at.

            So who or what prompted the leading Zionist rag to obscure reality with a bald lie, just after the El-Al'eda attack on Terminal 2E,  and long before any reporter had been granted access to the building? Clearly the editorial staff were obeying orders from further up the food chain, because the object of this particular attack was not to achieve the maximum number of dead, but rather to subtly undermine global confidence in the terminal building, the only one in the world constructed specifically to handle the sumptuous Airbus Super Jumbo.

            Back in July 2000 as he taxied Concorde Flight 4590 away from the passenger terminal at Roissy-Charles de Gaulle, Captain Christian Marty had no idea that his aircraft had been creatively sabotaged is such a way that, minutes later, his damaged left undercarriage spacers and crippled #2 engine would drag Flight 4590 left of the runway, and straight into Jacque Chirac's Presidential Boeing waiting at the distant holding point for a pre-arranged viewing of the spectacular take off. One only has to imagine the public relations impact of Concorde and the President of France perishing in a single giant explosion, to realize that the European aerospace industry would have been doomed overnight, with orders for the Airbus Super Jumbo cancelled by all potential customers.

 

            How Christian Marty coped we will never know, but he somehow managed to drag Concorde off the ground and leapfrog over the Presidential Boeing, though by then it was certain that he and his own crew would shortly die. With 25%  of its total engine thrust gone, and thus unable to attain essential V2 flying speed of 222 knots, Concorde was doomed and eventually tore into "La Patte d' Oie" at Gonesse, just a few miles from the airport. This particular sabotage certainly contributed to the early retirement of Concorde itself, but it fell short of  completely undermining public confidence in the European aerospace industry, the minimum requirement needed for Boeing to maintain its commercial monopoly in the west.

            Clearly something else had to be done to help things along, and it must be said that the El-Al'eda attack on the only terminal building custom designed for the Airbus Super Jumbo, was quite clever in the psychological sense. Though the Zionist Cabal has not yet managed to sabotage a flying A 380, trashing its terminal building was certainly the next best thing. Think about this very carefully, because the subliminal message is quite simple. If the French cannot build a lousy terminal building without it falling down in a light breeze, how safe will you feel flying in a giant Super Jumbo designed and built by the same nation?  Hence the initially inexplicable determination of the New York Times to make you believe the collapse of Terminal 2E was due to structural failure [shoddy workmanship]  rather than terrorism.

            The reality is quite different of course. The design of Terminal 2E is avant garde, but the building was conceived with the strictest technical requirements and is made of classic materials like cement. When Architect Paul Andreu quickly flew back from China where he is working on an opera house, he told the newspaper L'Humanite "I can't explain what happened. I just don't understand it". Indeed not, but that was shortly after he arrived, and before discovering that one of the support walls had dropped into an underground cavern, which had suddenly appeared as if from nowhere. Naturally enough the spectacular domed roof followed the support wall downwards, but it did not fracture, as can be seen in the photographs at the top of this page.

            One can reasonably ask how any underground cavern can suddenly appear in land that had been so carefully surveyed prior to construction. Especially as Terminal 2E has its own network of steel-reinforced underground service tunnels, including those leading to the nearby underground railway station. In the casual opinion of one senior man currently investigating the sabotage, the collapse was most likely caused by deliberately reducing the tensile strength of one steel service tunnel in particular, positioned directly under the portion of the terminal that collapsed.  Final conclusions will have to wait until after the judicial investigation.

            The level of resistance to the Airbus Super Jumbo in Boeing's own back yard is now becoming much too obvious. Though the aircraft can easily use the same turning and parking space as a Boeing 747, it needs extended terminal support for the increased number of passengers, which is likely to total about 550 on most flights. Airbus says 14 international airports are currently equipped to handle the A 380, but most of these are in Europe and Asia, with not a single one in the United States. Virgin Atlantic Airlines said in May that it would have to put off delivery of it's A 380s because of delays in the preparation of Los Angeles International Airport.  In turn, Los Angeles said that it would be ready "to accommodate the A380 with the highest standards of safety when the first airline begins using the aircraft".  Catch 22, isn't it? Presumably Los Angeles intends to throw in a few extra deck chairs when the first Virgin flight has already taken off from London Airport.

            Though this report has shown a shocking level of bias and Draconian behavior on the part of US officials, which is likely to alienate every potential tourist and thereby destroy America's once-booming tourist industry, it would be a mistake to assume that this is down to bureaucratic incompetence alone. It seems quite possible that there is an alternative agenda, if only because the Zionist Cabal on Wall Street does not wittingly throw away good money if there is any way to prevent it.

            On the available evidence, it seems possible that America is now in the preliminary stages of 'lock down' for the implementation of "Fortress Americas", linked below. The war in Iraq is lost, and unless the Zionists can snatch Saudi Arabia's reserves by stealth as US forces retreat down the Persian Gulf, America is going to be critically short of oil. This will cause considerable unrest back home. If at the same time the defense and aerospace industries in America should collapse and create massive unemployment, the likely combined response by the American public simply doesn't bear thinking about.

          Under these circumstances, the Zionist Cabal would be determined to exert rigid direct controls on what it has left, i.e. the United States of America and her people, while excluding all others ranging from unnecessary foreign businessmen to unwanted foreign tourists. In my casual opinion based on observation, Fortress Americas is now closer than ever before.

 

          

            Predictably perhaps, I remain permanently barred by American multinationals including Yahoo and PayPal, in what appears to be an ongoing attempt to obliterate my Internet presence completely. Life is never easy for a former combat veteran living on a miniscule disabity pension, but it has to be admitted that this multinational stranglehold has managed to make life even harder still.    

            If you appreciate these intelligence reports and would like to help their continuation by assisting financially, please click on the donate button below, which will redirect you to my donations page and an online payment provider.

            For those who do not like online donations of any kind, I can personally process Australian Dollar or Pound Sterling checks, and convert almost any banknote into usable currency. My snail mail address is "J. Vialls", 45 Merlin Drive, Carine, Western Australia 6020. If anyone out there has online Internet banking and the desire to donate, please direct the funds to my Western Australia bank account shown here. Thank you for caring.

                                                                        Account name:      J. Vialls

  

 

 

 

 

            If you were ever seriously considering flying on the new European A 380 Super Jumbo Airbus when it goes into service during late 2006, you'd better forget it. This was the clear message when the new French-designed A 380 terminal collapsed in Dubai, the second such collapse in less than six months. You work it out: If the "stupid" French cannot even manage to design a safe static concrete air terminal incapable of flight, then how on earth could they possibly co-design a giant airliner superior in every respect to the Boeing 747?

            "The Dubai A 380 terminal 'accident' happened at 1100 (0700 GMT) according to building workers quoted by AP. They said about 150 workers were at the site at the time. Most construction workers in the UAE come from South Asia, although the airport authorities have not confirmed the nationalities of those involved in the accident.

             "The new terminal, to be used by Emirates airline, is due to open for passengers in 2006. It has been designed by France's Aeroports de Paris (ADP) and will be in the shape of a giant plane wing almost 1km long (1,100yds).

            "An ADP official in Dubai said the firm was not involved in the construction of the terminal. The French company also operates Charles de Gaulle airport in Paris, where a roof at a new terminal collapsed in May, killing four people."

             Clear enough for you? The French have actually admitted designing the terminal building for Dubai Airport, which seems to confirm their incompetence when it comes to engineering both civil and mechanical. Better fly Boeing then, or should we?

 

            An actuary is a person who produces probability tables which determine the likelihood of a potential future event, normally for insurance companies. Say for example a young man comes along and asks for a million dollars worth of insurance because he wants to fly his untried home made jet aircraft under the Brooklyn Bridge at Mach 2. No problems, sensing a quick kill the actuary would probably calculate a 99.9% probability of a fatal outcome and suggest an insurance premium of 1.2 million dollars payable cash in advance, which should cover the young man's funeral, and the actuary's corporate expenses with change.

            However, task the same actuary with assessing the probability of a major airliport terminal collapsing and it would be a very different matter, or at least it would have been before the sudden collapse of the first dedicated Airbus A 380 Super Jumbo terminal at Paris Charles de Gaulle. Up until that point in time  no major airport terminals had collapsed anywhere in the world, making them extremely profitable items to insure, i.e. constant providers of moderate cash flow for investors in the form of insurance premiums, at almost zero risk of insurance payout. Marvellous, just what the banker ordered...

            Now imagine yourself as the actuary tasked with insuring ten more dedicated A 380 airport terminals, when two out of the only four nearing completion anywhere in the world had already  collapsed. All of a sudden your world has been turned upside down, and your probability tables no longer have any meaning.  Although these terminals are only two out of about 10,000 world wide [a risk of one in five thousand], they represent fifty percent of the dedicated A 380 terminals, suddenly dramatically shortening the odds of catastrophic loss to a staggering risk of one in two, if you dare to insure any airport terminal with the name "Airbus" attached to it.

           By now you will have got the picture. The overall probability of two out of the only four A 380 terminals in the world spontaneously collapsing by accident still has to be based on the estimated total of 10,000 airport terminals world wide, leading any actuary to believe instantly that the collapses were in all probability not accidents at all.

           Next there is the "rate" to be taken into account, meaning the frequency of such events per year or per month, depending on your chosen calculations. Let us assume that before the Paris Charles de Gaulle collapse on 23 May 2004, not one of the 10,000 airport terminals world wide had collapsed, meaning that you have 10,000 x 40 terminal/year units free of liability. Put simply, before 23 May 2004 you had 400,000 superb income-generating accident-free terminal/year units of unhindered investor revenue.

            Then, as if out of nowhere, you get two accidents not only within a single year, but within half of a single year.  How? The fact that both of these' accidents' [the only two in forty years...] are linked to the same single controversial airplane, sends the probability of deliberate sabotage rocketing sky high.  In fact, so high that my calculator ran out of zeroes.