#i saw this thing on the oa forums once that was like

[nemaliwrites]

Happy National Novel Writing Week

[inthepantheon]

Answers, Part III

My body aches.  I pop six painkillers into a glass of water and watch them fizz aggressively. I never thought I would need mortal medicine, but they seem to work. If I take enough… Worse than the pain, though, is the huge sense of loss that follows me around like a second shadow. The hind’s blood Alastor, the Avenger, infected me with, has robbed me of my abilities. What am I without my abilities? I’m neither god nor mortal. I’m just a...a...I don’t know anymore. The humiliation is unbearable. No-one can know. I would never live it down. Prometheus: the Titan who lost his gifts. The so-called God of Forethought who couldn’t foretell his own downfall. I would be the laughingstock of the God Complex, a source of constant ridicule. Or worse, pity. I down the water and rest my head in my hands. Argos places his chin on my lap, looking up at me sympathetically with his multi-colored eyes. I stroke his ears, and he slowly wags his tail. Come on, Pro, snap out of it! He seems to urge. He doesn’t know what’s going on, but he can tell that something is wrong. After Alastor left me on top of Mount Caucasus, I was angry. I swore that I would have my vengeance, that I would make him suffer, but then a sense of reality kicked in. He had outwitted me at every opportunity, and that was when I had my abilities. Now I have to face him weaponless, what chance do I have? Disbelief and the need to rationalize followed: he couldn’t have obtained hind’s blood. It was virtually impossible...the effects would wear off soon...I had embellished the events in my mind. No. It was real enough, and realization paved the way for an overwhelming sense of sadness over the pathetic god I had become. It felt like I was grieving for a lost friend, and my self-loathing paralyzed me. I couldn’t think, I could barely move. I had lost all motivation and couldn’t see the point of going on. After a few days, the sadness waned, and I knew that I couldn’t continue in such a sorrowful state. Now I just feel hollow. I’m adrift, and I desperately need some wind in my sails to get me going. I need to look forward rather than back, but every time I try, I stare into a mirror. I bang my fist on the table in frustration, and Argos walks away, sensing my mood. I didn’t mean to frighten him. He’s the only thing keeping me together. “Sorry, boy,” I mutter and grab a pile of papers in front of me. I have work to do. And a lot of it. Demeter went missing a while ago. I’m not the only one with problems. That thought provides a crumb of comfort, although I worry for her. I always liked Demeter, and I hope it’s nothing serious. Anyway, her role as Legal Counsel to the OA has filtered through to me. Temporarily, at least. It’s not a position I wish to hold on to, but needs must, I suppose. It would seem that she was fighting a lot of fires at the point she went missing. Now I’m getting all of her emails, so I busy myself trying to get on top of it. It’s a much-needed distraction. And then an email lands for her.  It seems trivial, and usually, I would skip straight past it, but something about it catches my eye. I re-read it a few times. Demeter requested some searches on someone named Eric Draven, but they have come back blank. There is an apology for the delay; she made the request a few months ago, and it’s been forgotten. Eric Draven. Where do I know that name? I carry on with some work and allow my subconscious to get the answer for me from the depths of my mind. The Crow. It’s a film from the nineties with Brandon Lee as the lead. He was shot for real during the filming, and he died from his injuries. He plays a character called Eric Draven, who is brought back to life to avenge the murder of his fiance and himself. I watched it not so long ago, which is why the name seemed familiar. Now I’m intrigued. Why was Demeter undertaking searches on someone named Eric Draven? I look at the date the request was sent and then dig into Demeter’s calendar to see what she was doing on or around that time. There’s nothing that looks relevant, so I check her account. I discover an email chain dated a few days before the request was sent from e.draven@dravenproperties.com. It’s not a particularly interesting read. The emails tell me that Eric had an unstated proposition he wanted to make in relation to the God Complex, and he wanted to arrange a meeting with Demeter to discuss it. Demeter requested further information, and he pushed back to say it would be in her interest to meet up with him. He confirms his name and the name of his company - Draven Properties. Demeter then agreed to meet him, but there is no correspondence after that. I look at the filing system to see if there are any records of the meeting and find a file note. Demeter was certainly thorough.  Attendance with Eric Draven I agreed to meet with Mr. Draven today to discuss a ‘proposition’ he had. He was quite insistent. He came to the office with three files and said that he had a proposal in relation to expanding the building. Mr. Draven then started to cough. When the cough turned violent, I went to get some water, but on my return, he had recovered. He then asked if we could postpone the meeting to a later date as he was not feeling well. I said that I saw no reason he could not send details about the proposal by email in the first instance, and he agreed. As an aside, I have undertaken some preliminary searches on Eric Draven and the company ‘Draven Properties’ but could not find anything other than a holding website for the company. As far as I can see, there are no companies registered with that name. I have paid for some additional searches to be undertaken as the entire event was rather peculiar. I will wait to see what comes back. D.       I know that Demeter will have undertaken rigorous searches, but nevertheless, I search for the company and ‘Eric Draven’ and find nothing other than the holding page she mentioned. The company doesn’t exist, so whatever ‘Eric’ came in for wasn’t bona fide, to use a legal phrase.  Then I search for the owner of the domain name. Often such results are hidden, it’s seen as necessary to protect the user’s privacy, but it seems I’ve gotten lucky because they must not have ticked the right box. The owner’s name is listed as Eric Draven, but the associated email address is a_a_avenger781@gmail.com. A shiver goes down my spine. The domain name must have been purchased before the website with its new email address was created, and so it was registered using Eric’s old email address. Could a_a_avenger781@gmail.com be him? Is that how he found all that information about me? From Demeter’s office? My personal file would be in there with my number, my address, and everything OA had gathered on me over the years. It would explain how he knew so much, how he was able to stay one step ahead. Knowledge is power.  I undertake some searches of the new email address and play about with the parameters on the search engine. It seems a_a_avenger781@gmail.com has been quite vocal on dozens of forums using the username The Crow, but he reveals no information about himself. All the forums relate to discussions and conspiracy theories on murders and violence from all around the world. I follow the trail to a message thread from several years ago. In it, a user, Falcon101 complains about her husband cheating on her with her best friend. The Crow responds by promoting a website where she can pay for retribution. The Crow claims to have used the site himself and was very satisfied with the result. Falcon101 is interested, and The Crow provides some instructions. I follow them. But this isn’t the sort of site you can find on a normal browser. For this, I’m going to need something called Tor, because I will need to enter the dark web. A place where you can’t find anything by searching. A place where people can hide in the shadows and avoid detection.  I take a deep breath. I’ve looked at the rabbit hole, and now I need to venture down it. I download the software and continue with the instructions. This is it.  A website called The Avenger. This is where Alastor sells his services.  It must be.  I scroll through what’s on offer, and it makes me feel sick. There’s stuff on there that would have you screaming for Freddy Krueger to come back. It promotes everything from mind tricks to violent death, each with a price in Bitcoin next to it. There are even reviews. All of them 5*. I look through the site and place violent death in the cart. It then asks me for details: who, when, where, why, how. There are some suggestions for the how that makes my blood curdle. I make up some false information, and then it asks for 30 Bitcoins upfront. The final payment of 40 Bitcoins is payable once the act is completed. That’s a lot of money, like hundreds of thousands of dollars. I was hoping to find a connection I could work with, but all I’ve done is make myself feel sick. There’s a box to tick to say that you have accepted the terms and conditions. What on earth could be in the terms and conditions?  I click on them out of curiosity. They are surprisingly well written and explain what happens if you are dissatisfied with the service or wish to cancel an order like you’re buying socks or something. And then I spot something. A common mistake when terms are copied. The small print towards the end of the terms has not been amended, and they refer to a company called A. A. Construction. It’s in the text lawyers would call boilerplate. The text everyone glosses over. The text no-one cares about. The terms must have been drafted for A. A. Construction and then bastardized for this site, but whoever changed them forgot to edit the boilerplate. They probably got bored.    I close the dark web and return to my normal browser. I feel like I need a shower after that, but I’m excited. I have a lead. I run a search for A. A. Construction and find that it exists. It’s a construction company incorporated a few years ago, and it has one shareholder: Alex Arnold. I look at the company details and discover that it has a large portfolio of properties. Alex Arnold’s address is listed on the records as the company’s registered address, which is not uncommon. But it is not particularly helpful.  I look instead at the original incorporation document for the company, available for a small fee, and I hit the jackpot. I have Alex Arnold’s personal address, and it’s a penthouse in the affluent side of town. I know the location well, I’ve walked past it many times and stared up at the flats with their Juliet balconies and wondered what they were like inside. I search the company’s website to look for an image of Alex Arnold, but there is nothing. I carry out some image searches on Google, but it comes up with soccer players and actors. I try one last search using Alex Arnold’s name, the name of the company, and the name of a charity event that is mentioned on the website.  An image pops up of a newspaper article.  I click on it and zoom in. There are a lot of people in the picture, but in the background, I spot someone who is wearing sunglasses and looking extremely uncomfortable.  It’s him. Alastor. Alastor is Alex Arnold and Eric Draven. The construction company must be his way of cleaning his money. Not only that, but I also have his address. I know how to find him. Quite what I will do with the information, I have no idea, but knowledge is power.  I need to think...I need a vacation. Read the full article

[newsnigeria]

Check out New Post published on Ọmọ Oòduà

New Post has been published on http://ooduarere.com/news-from-nigeria/world-news/insights-on-the-iran/

Insights on the Iran deal, BRICS and Venezuela

by Pepe Escobar (cross-posted with The Asia Times by special agreement with the author)

An exclusive interview with former Brazilian foreign minister Celso Amorim on how BRICS came into being, how the nuclear deal was done with Tehran and how the South dealt with Chavez

Brazil is once again in the eye of a political hurricane, after President Jair Bolsonaro’s appearance at Davos and explosive revelations directly linking his clan to a criminal organization in Rio de Janeiro.

With his administration barely a month old, Bolsonaro is already being seen as expendable to the elites that propelled him to power – from the powerful agribusiness lobby to the financial system and the military.

The new game among the elites of a major actor in the Global South, BRICS member and eighth biggest economy in the world consists of shaping a scenario capable of rescuing one the great frontiers where global capitalism is expanding from total irrelevancy.

That includes the possibility of a “soft coup”, with the Bolsonaro clan sidelined by the Brazilian military rallying around the vice-president, General Hamilton Mourao.

Under these circumstances, a conversation with former Brazilian foreign minister Celso Amorim is more than sobering. Amorim is universally recognized as one of the top diplomats of the young 21st century, a symbol of the recent past, under President Lula, when Brazil was at the top of its game as a resource-rich continental nation actively projecting power as a BRICS leader.

I had the pleasure of meeting Ambassador Amorim, who is also the author of ‘Acting Globally: Memoirs of Brazil’s Assertive Foreign Policy’ in Sao Paulo. Here are some highlights of our conversation – from the birth of BRICS to the current Venezuela crisis.

BRICS – the most important group in the drive towards a multipolar world – is a very dirty word in Washington. How did it all start?

I had met [British economist] Jim O’Neill a few times, who first talked about BRIC, which was not yet a group and nobody saw as a group. This may sound pretentious, but it’s a curious story. I told him, ‘It is you that invented the BRICS, right?’ He said, ‘Yes, of course, I’m very proud of it’. Then I replied, ‘Yes, but I’m the one who made it happen’. Well, it was not exactly me – under the Lula government and all that it entails. The first action in terms of creating the BRIC group – still without an “S” – came from Sergey Lavrov, in a meeting we had in New York in 2006. They had the RIC [Russia, India, China], but they did not hold many summits. And we had IBAS [India, Brazil, South Africa]. Both China and Russia were always trying to get into IBAS. There was the idea that these were three great democracies, each one in a continent and in a major developing country – so the Russians and Chinese might have thought, ‘we also want to get in, why not, because we are not democracies?’ IBAS was also present in the commercial G-20 at the WTO, and IBAS had similar ideas about reform of the UN Security Council; so the geopolitical interests were not the same.

Then Lavrov proposed BRIC as a forum, I think maybe to find some more equilibrium inside the RIC. I always talked in terms of BRICS, so one day he asked me ‘Why do you say BRICS?’ and I replied, “because it’s plural, in Portuguese’, so in a sense, we were already anticipating the entry of South Africa.

We first agreed we would have a meeting on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly. Lavrov and I already had something more substantial, the Indians and the Chinese just read a speech, so it looked like there would not be a consequential follow-up. Next year we met at the Brazilian UN mission, outside of the UN, and decided to do it later out of New York. Lavrov then offered Yekaterinburg, where we had the first ministerial meeting in 2008, and then next year the first presidential summit, also in Yekaterinburg, and in Brazil in 2010. It was here that the idea of BRIC was expanded into BRICS – through a dinner that concluded IBAS and inaugurated BRICS.

At the time, did you think about expanding to other top emerging economies, such as Indonesia, South Korea, Turkey, Iran?

IBAS was born on the second day of President Lula’s government [in January 2003], out of an idea to create a group of developing countries, around seven or eight. I thought a larger group would be very complicated, based on my experience – how to coordinate positions and engage in concrete projects. For instance, Egypt would have to be a member.

When did you start to seriously discuss practical steps towards the emergence of a multipolar world – such as trade in members’ currencies? Was it in 2010?

In 2010 certainly, we had the idea of trade using each member’s currency, not yet the idea – that happened under the Dilma government – of the BRICS bank. But we were already talking about the coordination of our development banks. The concept of multipolarity, the Russians may have been the first to outline it. What I do remember about the use of the concept was by the French, especially when there were serious divergences about the attack on Iraq.

Former French foreign minister Dominique de Villepin insisted on it.

Villepin, yes, but even Hubert Vedrine [foreign minister under Jacques Chirac from 1997-2002] before him, who came up with the concept of ‘hyperpower’. So the ones who spread the concept were the French, and we adhered to it, among developing countries. The French, when they talked about the expansion of the UN Security Council, they said they were in favor regarding Germany and Japan, but also ‘three great nations of the South’, Brazil included.

The Lula government started in January 2003. Geopolitics at the time was conditioned by the war on terror. We were already expecting the invasion of Iraq. How did you, in the first days of January 2003, knowing that Dick Cheney and the neocons were about to turn the Middle East upside down, with direct and indirect repercussions on the Global South, how did you start conceiving a multi-vector Brazilian foreign policy? Which were the priorities?

I think neither President Lula nor myself used the term “multipolar” – even though the concept was already on the table. We wanted to have good relations with the US but also with the largest developing countries. When we started the greatest problems were the Free Trade Area of the Americas [FTAA], so we had to look for other partners; the WTO and negotiations in the Doha round; and Iraq. The combination of all these led Brazil to get closer to India and South Africa, to a great extent via the WTO, and because of Iraq, we got closer to Russia, Germany and France. When President Lula went to Davos…

That was Lula’s first Davos, right?

Yes, but first he went to the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre [in Brazil], then he went to Davos. The message was the search for an equilibrium; to do business, of course, but based on the idea of democratic social change.

Were you discussing Iraq in detail with Russia, Germany and France?

Yes, we were, with Schroeder in Germany and Chirac, as well as Villepin at the Security Council. And there was a fourth problem: Venezuela. Lula had already talked about it with Chavez. During the inauguration of President Gutierrez of Ecuador, Lula’s first foreign trip, on January 15, Lula proposed, in a meeting in a room full of presidents, the creation of the Friends of Venezuela Group, at a moment when the crisis was acute, even though the country was not as debilitated as today.

Already in January 2003 was there neocon pressure on Brazil in relation to Venezuela?

I think they did not know how to deal with Lula and the new government. But they were very strong on Venezuela – especially [US diplomat] Roger Noriega. And yet they saw Brazil was proposing something and accepted it. Fidel was against it, but Chavez, in the end, was convinced by Lula. And this is also relevant for today. Lula said it in so many words; this is not a Friends of Chavez group, it’s a Friends of Venezuela group. So this must also include the United States, Spain and Portugal – under conservative administrations. That was a way to escape from the OAS [Organisation of American States] and its penchant for the Monroe doctrine [the US policy of opposing European colonialism in the Americas].

I used to talk to Colin Powell quite frequently – and not to receive instructions. There were many issues he wanted to know about, and he trusted Brazil. He had a notion of the importance of Brazil, our capacity for dialogue.

Switching to the Obama era, tell us about the role of Brazil, alongside Turkey, in the Iran nuclear negotiation, when you clinched a deal in Tehran in less than 24 hours, only for it to be smashed by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton the next day.

It was a long process, followed by 19 hours of negotiations, the Iranians tried to reopen one of the issues, both Lula and Erdogan refused. What facilitated our role as mediators was that the US had its hands full in the Middle East. I already had contacts with Javier Solana, then a sort of Foreign Affairs Minister of the EU, and also [Egyptian diplomat] ElBaradei, from my time at the UN. Obama, in a meeting of the G-8 + 5 in Italy, during a bilateral with us, he said three things: ‘I extended my hand and they did not answer’; ‘We need to solve the nuclear dossier’; ‘And I need friends to say what I cannot say’. What we did in the end, because we thought it was the right thing to do, with a lot of work and facing hardships, was exactly what the Americans wanted. One month before the deal I thought it would not happen. But then we received a letter from Obama, and to my greatest surprise, that was a reiteration of the same initial three points.

Hillary always had a different position. I foresaw her reaction as a possibility. We talked on the phone, in Madrid, when I was coming back from Iran, and I said, ‘Look, in Brazil we have this expression, ‘I didn’t read it, and I didn’t like it’. She did not want a deal. In a phone call before my trip, she was adding some other points of discussion and I said, ‘Hillary, this is a trust-building agreement. And these points that you mention were not in the letter delivered by your own President’. I’m not exaggerating, what followed was a silence lasting half a minute. So I thought; did she read the letter? Or she read it, and because they are a great power they can do what they want, and we have to take it, and adapt to it?

So what about China and Russia accepting the American line – no deal, more sanctions?

I know the sweeteners that made them accept it – concessions on the sanctions front. But geopolitically…

What’s your informed hypothesis?

There are two. This was a problem they did not solve. Who’s part of the global directory? The five permanent members of the Security Council. Now we have two developing countries, who are not even part of the Security Council, and they solve it? By coincidence, both were non-permanent members of the Security Council at the time. The other thing is whenever we are discussing a nuclear issue, the five get closer, because they are all nuclear powers.

What’s your insider view, as a statesman, of Vladimir Putin, demonized 24/7 in the US as a major existential threat to the West?

The first time I saw Putin face to face was when he received three nations from the Group of Rio, and the main topic of discussion was Iraq. That was before the invasion in March 2003. What most impressed me was his great knowledge of the dossiers – something you usually don’t expect from presidents. He’s extremely sharp, very intelligent, obviously cares for Russian interests but at the same time pays attention to the balance of power. A very realist politician. I don’t see him as a great idealist. He’s like a 19th-century politician, very conscious geopolitically.

Now, in the South American chessboard, regarding the Venezuelan crisis, we are seeing a direct confrontation between the four major poles of Eurasia – Russia, China, Iran, Turkey – against the US. And with another BRICS member, Brazil, siding against Russia and China.

In a multipolar world, we now have a huge test, because Brazil presides over the BRICS in 2019. How is Brazil going to be seen inside BRICS? There used to be an atmosphere of trust inside BRICS.

I’ve got to say that based on my experience at the Security Council, when I was ambassador, during the government of Fernando Henrique Cardoso [from 1995 to 2003], the Russians and the Chinese gave immense weight to respect for national sovereignty. In terms of international law, they always stress non-intervention. I hope we won’t have a confrontation like Vietnam in our region. But when President Trump says that all options are on the table, he’s obviously accepting a military solution. This is very dangerous. I see a very sound Brazilian position coming from General Mourao [the Brazilian vice-president]. And yet the Foreign Ministry says Brazil will support politically and economically a government that does not exist – so that already means intervention.

On a personal level, in the drive towards multipolarity, what is the most important story in the world for the next 10 or 20 years? What is the issue that drives you the most?

I think that the fundamental theme is psychological – and also civilizational. It’s respect for The Other – and the acceptance of alterity. And this also concerns international relations. We need to understand that the common good is part of our well-being. This reflects on individual attitudes, in internal attitudes in politics, and in international relations. Look at the current, violent attack on multilateralism. We should see that it’s better to work multilaterally than capitulate to the law of the jungle.