It is well-known that the CIA is given a blank cheque of billions of dollars every year to predict the future, if not control it. It is equally well-known that CIA’s failure rate in predicting the future is 100%. Some examples of this debacle are the Iranian Revolution of 1979, 9/11, and the present Egyptian Revolution. The CIA is always caught sleeping at the very moments the world start burning. So it looks as if the burden of predicting the future has fallen on the shoulders of an unemployed outcaste like me freezing outside the Gates of ‘Paradise Norway’ like the ‘unemployed’ Huns roaming outside the Gates of Paradise Rome.

So from 2011, the CIA has someone to worry about – ‘Rattan Mann, the Hun’ knocking at the Gates of the Pentagon. From now on I will not only take up the mantle of an ‘Alternative King of Norway’ but also of an ‘Alternative CIA’ pitching my predictions against theirs.

Maintaining my new column, Quo Vadis Mankind, on NFP would be my ‘main covert operation’ as the ‘Alternative CIA’, just as wikileaking my New Year’s Messages via NFP is my ‘main ceremonial duty’ as the “Alternative King of Norway”.

Brave Heart Cybercitizens, This is my third 'Alternative King's Message'.

My prime obsession, 'wikileaked' into cyberspace via the NFP, is with corruption and racism in high places in Norway. Till now few have believed me, and mine has been a cry in wilderness, because the whole world is made to think that Norway is Cleaner than the Cleanest. But now I have been vindicated. For the first time (at least to my knowledge) an established news media, BBC World, has raised the question whether Sweden (Norway's Big Brother) is as clean as everybody is forced to believe.

I refer to BBC's article of 9 December, 2010, "Is Sweden as clean as it seems?". I will not discuss this article except to remark that "taking or giving bribes" is not the only definition of corruption. There are many other issues that fall under this umbrella.

As I have said many times, if Sweden, and especially Norway, appear Super Clean, it is simply because they don't allow anybody to raise this long-overdue 'BBC question'. But knowing Sweden and Norway better than BBC does, I am afraid, sooner or later BBC would be forced to regret having asked this question.

I want to rise or fall with my predictions, rather than with the amount of painful 'white noise' I make on various TV channels. So here is my 'prediction' as to how history will look at the 'War on Terror'.

The 'War on Terror' started with the famous (infamous) declaration by president Bush that it is a 'Crusade'. Later he regretted using those words but actually he was right - in a way he wished he were not. In fact, history will call it a Crusade because the 'War on Terror' has all the defining characteristics of a Crusade.

This is my first prediction.

Let us go back to the Crusades of the Middle Ages. Two of its main defining characteristics were:

1) It lasted for almost four hundred years.

2) It ended (actually pettered out) without a clear winner or loser. This is in sharp contrast with the two World Wars where the vanquished were brought to their knees within 5 years.