Globo-CoprnNo small irony attended the announcementrnby FBI Director Louis Freeh onrnJuly 4 of last year that his bureau was establishingrna “legal attache” office inrnMoscow, and not only because thernagency of the U.S. government historicallyrnresponsible for counterespionagernhad finally penetrated the capital cityrnof its old adversary. July 4, as antiquariansrnmay remember, is IndependencernDay, and what was being announced onrnthis particular occasion was yet anotherrnquiet step away from the concepts ofrnnational independence, autonomy, andrnsovereignty—not, to be sure, quite asrnlarge a step as NAFTA, GATT, or therntransfer to the United Nations of commandrnover American troops and thernpower to order the United States to go tornwar, which came later in the summerrnwith the invasion of Haiti, but a definiternstep nonetheless and an important one.rnUnlike the traditional observation of Julyrn4, however, there were no fireworks,rnsave in the pyrotechnic oratory withrnwhich the new chief globo-cop sought tornedify his audience.rn”We have no time to waste,” JudgernFreeh puffed. “The enemy has alreadyrnbroken through the gates,” and the creationrnof the Russian branch of the “legalrnattache” office—known as “LEGATS”rnin the Global Newspeak that is now replacingrnreal languages—was by nornmeans unprecedented. Unveiled nearrnthe conclusion of a 10-day tour of therncapitals of Eastern Europe, the LEGATSrnon the Volga was in fact the 22nd FBI officernto be established abroad for the ostensiblernpurpose of keeping tabs on drugrnsmugglers, terrorists, white collar criminals,rnethnic cleansers, octogenarian janitorsrnfrom Dachau, white racialists whornrefuse to spy for the BATF, indoor smokers,rnunlicensed religious crackpots,rngunowners who buy more than one gunrna month, businessmen who clean uprnswamps on their own property, and otherrndangerous and unsavory folk whosernworldwide wickedness purportedlyrntranscends the capacities of poor littlernold sovereign megastates to bring themrnto heel. With his fellow bureaucratrnThomas Gonstantine of the Drug En-rnPrincipaiities & Powersrnby Samuel Francisrnforcement Administration and some 20rnother law enforcement potentates fromrnthe Justice and Treasury departments.rnJudge Freeh oozed about the “beginningsrnof a global strategy against organizedrncrime” and sternly intoned thatrn”organized crime groups are working tornsupplant governments, and any governmentrnthat ignores the fact does so at itsrnown peril.” All that was missing fromrnthe well-orchestrated performance was arnpicture of the insidious Dr. Fu Manchurnto lend concrete detail to Judge Freeh’srnadumbrations of a vast, sinister, and allrnbut invincible criminal conspiracyrnagainst civilization itself.rnIt has long been recognized that everrnsince the collapse of the Soviet Unionrnthe architects of the “New World Order”rnhave searched for a new enemy. SaddamrnHussein was and periodically continuesrnto be useful for mobilizing troops whenrnthe incumbent President needs a quickrnwar to see him through an election or torntake the proletarians’ minds off a celebrityrnhomicide trial grown tiresome, butrnHussein and similar Hitleroids are neverrnsufficiently convincing to justify thernlong-term structural planning the globalrnleviathan needs. Nor, by themselves,rnare the various drug cartels, terroristrngangs, secret societies of Nazi war criminalsrnplotting to clone each other andrntake over the planet next Thursday, orrnany of the other pathetic stock villainsrnwith which the masses are manipulatedrninto believing we still have serious enemiesrnand therefore still need a megastaternto protect us against them.rnBut if you lump all these odd charactersrntogether, call it “organized crime,”rnand claim that only new heights of governmentalrnpower on a global scale canrncontrol or contain or otherwise save usrnfrom the organized criminals, thenrnyou’re in business. That, of course, isrnwhat Judge Freeh and his platoon ofrnmegacrats were up to in their junket tornEastern Europe last summer. The depictionrnof global organized crime as arn”threat” against which the United Statesrnand other nations must pool their jointrnresources is in part driven by the selfinterestrnof aging professional Gold Warriorsrnand an elite of national securityrnmanagers who in the absence of threatsrnto national security would be forced tornsell real estate and insurance. Thus, RoyrnGodson and William Olson of the NationalrnStrategy Information Geuterrn(NSIG), a stable of Reaganite GoldrnWarhorses in the I970’s and 80’s, havernnow turned their energies from craftingrnapologies for the intelligence services tornthinking up plausible rationales for pretendingrnthat we really need to fear pimpsrnand drug peddlers in Burma and Thailand.rn”Global networks” of criminalrngangs, they argue, “provide mobility, anrneffective communications infrastructurernand international connections for criminalrnenterprise,” and according to a coverrnstory by Leslie Alan Horvitz in Insightrnmagazine last summer, these “networks”rndeal in illicit goods and services in thernsame way as multinational corporations.rn”Godson and Olson estimate that internationalrncrime rings outperform mostrnFortune 500 companies.”rnWell, no doubt they do, but the existencernof transnational crime is hardlyrnnew—it was known in the modern worldrnat least as long ago as the Garibbean piratesrnof the 17th and 18th centuries—rnand hardly constitutes a valid reason forrncentralizing law enforcement powers inrnnew transnational structures. Pirates likernBlackbeard and his comrades were dealtrnwith summarily by the fleets and citizensrnof sovereign nations, and it never occurredrnto anyone in those days to pretendrnthat it was necessary to set up newrntransnational bureaucracies to performrnfunctions that existing national governmentsrncould and did perform. But ofrncourse a legitimate concern over transnationalrncrime is not the only, and maybernnot even a real, rationale for creatingrnglobal police. The Insight article alsornquoted liberal Senator John Kerry ofrnMassachusetts, not exactly an old GoldrnWarrior, who held hearings on internationalrncrime last year and who soundsrnlike a National Review editor of thern1950’s contemplating communism.rn”The overall international organizedrncrime threat to our interests is more seriousrnthan we had assumed,” SenatorrnKerry trembles. “Organized crime is thernnew communism, the new monolithicrnthreat.”rnBut of course organized crime, evenrnat its worst, is in no sense a “monolithicrnthreat.” It is a loose conglomerate ofrn8/CHRONICLESrnrnrn