Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Oh man, gimme some humor please....

Yikes.......... a little levity! Levity over here....! Somebody....?!

Ah, thank goodness.

Here we go....


Backyard Blitzkrieg

BushHoax.gif (image)

Things we've been wondering about

Handy guide to the housing market

The comedic genius of Alan Greenspan

Republicans and Democrats: a brief parable

The quest for common ground

What will Democrats do? ~ This Modern World

Exploring the Mysteries of the Quantum Cheneyverse

Sorry, we're you saying something?

How the news works - once again

The Neocon Gameshow

Ok - this one's a tad dark:
Extraordinary rendition or free surprise vacation?

Um....this one too:
CIA Backed Saddam: Thanks for the Memories

Ya, and this one:
Bush is not a Nazi - So stop saying that!

Ah, one more:
Stephen Colbert: Enjoy the Police State

But not this one. This one is smiley: happy clown candy land!
Changes - Presidential Candidates feat. Bowie

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, January 19, 2008

Smedley Butler and the Business Plot

How corporate America nearly destroyed democracy in the United States in 1933

It is unsurprising that powerful vested interests in business and government, as well as many within the media and academia who are devoted to these powers, attempt to shape perceptions, distort or conceal information, and do so with considerable success, even in relatively free and ostensibly democratic societies. What is almost amazing, however, is that at least one event of the greatest significance in the past one hundred years, was successfully erased from history and the peoples' awareness almost completely. I am talking about the little known "Business Plot" of 1933, in which a number of the most powerful of the American business elites, including individuals from General Motors, Prescott Bush, grandfather of George Bush Jr., J.P. Morgan and the Rockefeller dynasty, attempted to seize the White House by military coup, and to install a fascist regime in America. Americans as well as people across the Western world, indeed, the world as a whole, should know about his dark scheme by the business elite to destroy democracy, a scheme which would have been successful but for the integrity and courage of U.S. Major-General Smedley Butler.

We are extraordinarily fortunate that the business elite chose the wrong man for the job - that Smedley Butler, very intelligently, listened to the plotters' plans and went along with them long enough to find out who was involved, and then went immediately to Washington, and testified before Congress as to the atrocity which was being planned by some of the most powerful U.S. citizens and business "leaders."

This was the last straw for the highly decorated General. He wrote what should be required reading for all high school students, "War Is A Racket," in which he declared he has been a "gangster for capitalism" for over thirty years, on three continents. After having been corporate America's man for so long, leading the charge to secure territory, resources, cheap labour and markets for U.S. business interests, he was asked to go one step further in the betrayal of his conscience, and perform the same function at home: destroy democracy and install a business-friendly dictatorship. His stomach turned, his conscience revolted, and the rest, is history - or it would be, if it had not been erased.

In order to correct this dark and dangerous silence, it is important that Smedley Butler's tale now be told. In his own words:

“The U.S. has routinely destroyed democracy throughout the globe while its leaders spout words about spreading democracy.

“I spent thirty-three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country’s most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism....

“I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.

“During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.”

– Major-General Smedley Butler, 1933.


"According to retired Representative John W. McCormack, former Speaker of the House, if the late Major General Smedley Butler of the U.S. Marine Corps had not been a stubborn devotee of democracy, Americans today could conceivably be living under an American Mussolini, Hitler, or Franco.

"An ironic aspect of the conspiracy General Butler unmasked is that few Americans have ever heard about it, or even know anything about the general.

"Former Speaker McCormack told the author, “In peace or war he was one of the outstanding Americans in our history. I can’t emphasize too strongly the very important part he played in exposing the Fascist plot in the early 1930’s backed by and planned by persons possessing tremendous wealth.”

"The crucial events of the plot to seize the White House unfolded between July and November, 1933, with hearings before the McCormack-Dickstein Committee begun in New York City on November 20, 1934. On November 26 the committee released a statement detailing the testimony it had heard, and its preliminary findings. On February 15, 1935, the committee submitted to the House of Representatives its final report, verifying completely the testimony of General Butler.

"There is strong evidence to suggest that the conspirators may have been too important politically, socially, and economically to be brought to justice after their scheme had been exposed before the McCormack-Dickstein Committee of the House of Representatives. The largely anti-Roosevelt press of the New Deal era scotched the story as expeditiously as possible."
(From The Plot To Seize the White House, by Jules Archer)


The story resurfaces:

In July of 2007 an American investigative journalist, John Buchanan, broke through more of the fog surrounding these largely buried events of critical importance to our understanding of both history and on-going political-economic realities of power in society. What he found was that in addition to the details already outlined here, it is established beyond any doubt that Prescott Bush, George Bush Jr's grandfather, was indeed involved in this grim and sinister plot. After this reporter again broke through the icy chill of silence and forgetfulness, a U.K. newspaper picked up the story, the Guardian, followed by the BBC, which did a full documentary on the subject. Since that one brave and determined journalist sought and found the truth, and unearthed the story in July 2007, there has been a growing revelation and interest surrounding this most astonishing, or at least, striking of events. Smedley Butler should be read and honoured, and the Business Plot both studied, and more importantly, learned from. The next coup against democracy may not be so direct, but no less dangerous. The price of freedom is in truth, eternal vigilance. This is neither paranoia nor "conspiracy theory" but simply a clear and honest understanding of history.

Research summary:
J. Todd Ring
(Free use with attribution)

(My apologies for the primitive formatting of this article. I'll polish it later. Content first.)


Articles, videos and books:


The White House Coup - BBC Documentary: US Business elite attempt to install fascism in America, 1933

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/document/document_20070723.shtml


The Plot to Seize the White House, by Jules Archer

http://www.wanttoknow.info/plottoseizethewhitehouse
http://www.amazon.com/Plot-Seize-White-House-Conspiracy/dp/1602390363/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-3462640-4229555?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1173652210&sr=8-1


By the way, the Bush family really does have a history of fascist sympathies and Nazi collaboration - something we might want to know: (Search "John Buchanan" Bush YouTube, if this link is deleted)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1D6fxyOtVeI


In Search of History - The Plot to Overthrow FDR - History Channel

http://www.amazon.com/Search-History-Plot-Overthrow-Channel/dp/B000FKP0NM/ref=pd_sim_b_img_2


War Is a Racket: The Anti-War Classic by America's Most Decorated General, Two Other Anti-Interventionist Tracts, and Photographs from the Horror of It

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0922915865/ref=pd_cp_d_2?pf_rd_p=316286001&pf_rd_s=center-41&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B000FKP0NM&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=13W9ZK7QKVFS2SMPXX4C


Maverick Marine: General Smedley D. Butler and the Contradictions of American Military History

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0813109574/ref=pd_cp_d_3?pf_rd_p=316286001&pf_rd_s=center-41&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B000FKP0NM&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=13W9ZK7QKVFS2SMPXX4C

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, May 16, 2007

The Right Kind of Confusion: Conservative Divisions and the Collapse of the Right

The Conservative Party of Canada seems to be a strange mixture of competing and conflicting ideologies, as Devin Johnston pointed out in Countdown Until the Conservative Party Disbands Again. His post sparked reflections on the state of conservative parties and alliances in Canada and the U.S. Here are a few thoughts. To begin with, I think it’s helpful to distinguish some of the ideological or philosophical currents that are lumped together under the label of “the right” or “conservative”. The first that comes to mind for many is crass servility to corporate power, however, there is of course, much more complexity to the right than that.

One element within that loose category called “conservative” or “the right” is the current which comprises social conservatism. As Devin again, nicely summarized: “Social conservatism is the premise that there is one “right” way of living in a community and one “right” set of values, beliefs and ideals. Social conservatives advocate the suppression of the rights and freedoms of minorities through the state imposition of white male Christian heteronormative values. [In Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia, it would be Arab male Islamic heteronormative values; and in both cases, class prejudice and class warfare are more than a little present – they are in fact central.] Classical liberals precisely reject any attempt by the state to dictate beliefs and values to citizens.” Well put. You could say it is Thomas Hobbes versus Thomas Paine.

Another current is populist, with strong values of grassroots democracy. Closely related but more emphatic in its wariness of centralized power is the libertarian current. Populists may be social conservatives, although there is an uneasy tension in this inherent contradiction; but any genuine libertarian will disavow state interference in the lives of citizens, including same sex marriage, de-criminalization of marijuana and other hot-button issues for social conservatives.

Classical liberalism places a high value on freedom, and distrusts what libertarians call the “nanny state.” Libertarians therefore have an uneasy alliance with the right, as the right is uncomfortably full of social conservatives who want to regulate everything from who you sleep with to how you brush your teeth. Libertarians can for these reasons be found forming alliances with the left when conditions are right. (No pun intended.) It is not necessarily that they are fickle, but more that they are looking for political representation within a system and political climate that is far more statist, centralist, elitist and authoritarian than they would like to see. Depending upon the policies - or promises - of the right or left, they may go either way, and this can at times be an informed and intelligent choice.

Thus, libertarians have more in common with classical liberals - or even left libertarians, who are in truth their estranged cousins - than with social conservatives. It is the espoused values of limited government, freedom, populism, and fiscal conservatism of the right that has attracted the support of libertarians, but if we look to the actual record of the right in Canada and the U.S. we can see that these values were only for public consumption, not for actual practice. Libertarians, populists, fiscal conservatives and advocates of freedom have been sold a bill of goods. More directly, they have been lied to.

The U.S. became the world’s biggest debtor under Reagan, who ballooned the debt to record levels with his tax cuts for the rich and corporations, combined with massive military spending, which is piped through the Pentagon system to form what amounts to corporate welfare for the military-industrial complex - all the while praising the free market, fiscal prudence and shrinking big government. Orwell would nod to Reagan’s handlers. Bush I carried on the tradition, and Bush II has pushed the debt up to $8 trillion - to the point where the dollar, the U.S. economy, and likely the U.S. government will soon collapse, as leading economists have noted with urgency.

All the while, throughout this spending spree by the right in the U.S., government got bigger and bigger, encroachment on personal lives and liberty grew, and erosion of civil rights and freedom is now at crisis point: the constitution itself is at question. It is not clear that democracy will survive in America. The merger of the state and corporate world has been taken to near complete lengths. Eisenhower’s warning has become stark reality.

Both of these trends - wildly indulgent corporate welfare, bringing the nation to the brink of bankruptcy, and grossly inflated powers of government encroaching on civil liberties and freedom - disgust and revolt the libertarians who have in the past supported the Republican and Conservative Parties.

In Canada, Mulroney took the conservatives into the realm of Thatcher, Reagan and neoconservatism - a flat betrayal of the history and traditions of the party. It was under Mulroney that the deficit and debt ballooned, while Trudeau is wrongly blamed. Trudeau and the Liberals faced recession and the OPEC crisis, Mulroney simply sold out the country to the corporate barons. I am no fan of the Liberal Party, but the truth must be told. It was not spending on social programs that drove up the debt, as the right wing media and “think tanks” (read corporate propaganda tools) convinced many to believe.

It was a combination of deliberate slashing of government revenues under Mulroney and successors (including Martin) by way of lavish corporate tax cuts, combined with the strong arm tactics of the international financial community which held our national debt and demanded increasing returns on “investment” by way of interest payments, which created the inflated deficits and growing debt. In the U.S. and Canada, as well as Britain and other Western nations, Keynesian economics and New Deal policies was blamed for fiscal imbalance, cynically and dishonestly, while the real culprit was welfare-state capitalism: hand-outs and tax breaks for the rich and the business elite - with a roll-back for ordinary people of all the gains made over decades and generations, with wages falling and social programs slashed.

This is the true story of the `80’s and `90’s in Canada: cut social spending by claiming a debt crisis - a debt crisis that was created consciously by slashing corporate taxes. It is a win-win situation for the corporate sector: greatly reduced taxes, and a disintegrating social safety net which means people are increasingly desperate and will work for less and less pay. Wonderful for corporate Canada. A tragic betrayal for the people of the country. And this scheme was authored and orchestrated by both Liberals and Conservatives from Mulroney on, all the while speaking of fiscal responsibility and loyalty to the people of Canada. Sickening deceit is what it is.

What we have in the Liberal and Democratic Parties, is a divide between traditional liberals and neoliberalism. Traditional liberals value freedom, democracy, and at least some measure of equality. Neoliberalism surrenders all values to one: compliance with the corporate masters. In the Republican and Conservative Parties, we have a similar division: between traditional conservatives and neoconservatives. Neoconservatives, like neoliberals - being two sides of the same boot-licking serve-the-man philosophy - have surrendered all values to the one over-riding principle: don’t bite, but fervently serve the hand that feeds you - that is, corporate America, or in Canada, Bay Street.

The conflict between social conservatives and libertarians within the broad realm of the right makes political alliances on the right tenuous at best. When you add in the split between genuine fiscal conservatives on the one hand, and on the other hand, neoliberals/neoconservatives (two sides of the same coin) who dominate the party leadership of the right in both the U.S. and Canada (along with all of the major parties), and who speak of fiscal responsibility while engaging in patronage, pork-barreling and corporate welfare to obscene degrees and in grossly hypocritical if not Machiavellian fashion, you have a potential rift that can quickly turn explosive. Witness the present meltdown of the American Republican Party. These divisions are tearing the party to pieces, and not even the most shrill and Orwellian fear-mongering or GWOT rhetoric can keep this machine from flying apart.

Social conservatives are fleeing the Republican Party, as are fiscal conservatives. Libertarians are simply appalled, and feel they have been lied to and betrayed. Republicans under the neocons have alienated the Christian right, the traditional conservatives and the libertarians. All that is left is a few scared suburbanites and the handful of super-rich who are the real constituency of the neconservatives. The party is disintegrating. The game is now open. The political landscape in the U.S. is shifting rapidly.

A maverick like Ron Paul could potentially seize on this disruption in the Republican Party, and capture support that would normally go to someone like Bush or Giuliani. With the Democrats making themselves the party of spineless non-opposition to the horrors and corruption of the neocons (Hilary and Obama being two cases in point), the dark horses like Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich actually stand a chance.

Not that I place much hope or even interest in electoral politics in the present or immediate future, believing that they are largely irrelevant by virtue of a general vacuity of both vision and courage, and viewing grassroots movements as the real source of social change, both historically and in the foreseeable future; but some basic sanity and human decency in the realm of parliamentary politics would be a refreshing change.

Getting back to Canadian politics, if the rhetoric versus reality chasm is exposed more thoroughly in the case of the Conservative Party, and the already existing internal divisions made clear, so that a healthy debate among conservatives can occur, the results will likely be the splintering of “the party” but also the resurrection of democracy among the right. That would not be a bad thing.

Basically, the Conservative Party in Canada, as well as the Republican Party of the United States, are parties of, by and for big business and the corporate lobby, but they have to get elected by voters, and not simply gather “donations” from the business elite to get elected; thus they have to lure social and fiscal conservatives, populists and libertarians into thinking that these parties actually have some substantial allegiance to something other than the pursuit of money and power through service to the corporate elite. This is the primary flaw and fatal internal division within the parties of the right: they are built upon a lie.

Of these five elements that we have identified within the right - social conservatism, fiscal conservatism, populism, libertarianism, and service to corporate power - it is almost without exception the one single principle of service to the corporate elite which consistently wins out; all other values are for rhetorical purposes only - they can, will be and have been dispensed with whenever they conflict with the over-riding principle: serve the masters.

Show the people the lie, and the façade falls apart. Then you have a party exposed for what it is: neoconservative, not genuinely conservative – which is a party of class warfare: serve the moneyed aristocracy, as Jefferson decried, and fool the people into serving themselves up on the altar of mammon.

Devin Johnston hits the nail on the head when he says, “At any rate, it is clear to me that the Conservative Party is a pathetic attempt to unite people who are in fact completely at odds with one another in order to destroy a common enemy: godless socialism.” (At least that was the case up until the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the official enemy.) It can be added however that polls in Canada as well as the U.S. show consistent and overwhelming popular support for socialist-leaning policies and views. There is in Canada and the U.S. overwhelming popular support for universal public health care. Overwhelming support for universally accessible education. Overwhelming support for a guaranteed social safety net to protect the poor, ill, injured, disabled and elderly from the ravages of an unfettered monopoly capitalism. An overwhelming majority – generally approaching 80% - believe that the economic system is inherently unfair, the gap between rich and poor is widening, and that the rich get richer while the poor get…..something other. (This latter point by the way is not socialist, but simply a matter of the intelligent or merely common sense observation of the undeniable facts.)

In a nation-wide poll of American citizens the core socialist dictum of “From each according to his ability; to each according to his need” was felt to be such a matter of common sense and common human decency, that over 70% of Americans believed it must have come from the U.S. Constitution. It was, of course, a statement made by none other than Karl Marx. This is why the New Deal policies of FDR in the U.S. Democratic Party and Trudeau in Canada, were so immensely popular: they approximated the ideals of fairness, justice, equality and compassion, even though they were watered down by virtue of existing within an fundamentally unchallenged economic framework of monopoly capitalism. The populace leans left, as it has for generations, while the economic system maintains power in the hands of the few, with the results that political parties have done more to serve the interests of the powerful than those of the people.

If the rhetoric is cut through, the popular support vanishes; and all that is left of the parties of the right in Canada and the U.S. is a servile allegiance to corporate America and Bay Street. Poke the balloon. The time is right to burst this bubble of delusion.

The only other prop holding up this rape and pillage party apparatus of the right is the scare tactics of the Global War on Terror; and that too, is failing. A whole other discussion would be necessary to dissect this campaign of state terrorism which is in effect, and by design, a war, not on terror, but on democracy. For the time being, let it suffice to say that this is not a war that the power elite – being the corporate elite and their political servlings – can win.

When it comes to dismantling the basic structures of democracy, disemboweling the safeguards of basic human rights and freedom, and nullifying a two-hundred year old tradition of constitutional democracy, they will fail. The values of democracy, freedom and human rights have been too deeply imbued in the people of the Western world for these to be given up without a fight – in fact, without a powerful resistance movement.

600,000 or more dead in Iraq to “fight terrorism” and “sow democracy” – in truth, as most now admit, to fight imperial wars for control of world energy supplies - this is terrorism at its finest; or most brutal. The anti-terrorist legislation of post-9/11 paranoia and propaganda, most notoriously the U.S. Patriot Act and Military Commissions Act: this is not the safeguarding of “our way of life” – this is not the “defense of liberty and freedom.” This is the destruction of constitutional democracy and civil rights. This is the criminalization of dissent. This is a Machiavellian lie of the greatest proportions. And this is becoming evident even to the staunchest defenders of the “war on terror.”

The propaganda war that upholds corporate power now, after the red scare days have passed - the tactics no longer effective with the absence of the Soviet Union and the collapse of the Eastern Bloc - the only rhetoric that upholds this fragile and crumbling edifice of corporate power, short of brute force itself, is the lie of the war on terror. Frighten the people, and they will support “strong leaders” and repressive measures at home, as well as imperial warfare abroad, disguised as self-defense. But the propaganda war is failing. Either there will be another terrorist incident, which will bolster the effectiveness of the propaganda, and again rally the people into supporting their own slavery, the surrender of their rights and freedoms, and the wars of empire around the globe, or the propaganda campaign will collapse, and with it, the power elite that serves, and is in power to serve, the power of the rich and the corporate world. The latter is not likely to be allowed to happen, so watch out for the former.

In the short term, a renewed campaign of what the political elite and agencies like the CIA call “political warfare” and “psychological warfare” – what used to be called propaganda when there existed a bit more honesty in the political arena – is likely to be invoked; and in the short term, there may yet be temporary, Pyrrhic victories for the corporate elite and their servants who present themselves as popular leaders of the right (or the center or left, a la Clinton, Martin, Blair). This is, or should be, a cause for concern. In the not too distant future however, and in fact, in the very near future, such Machiavellian machinations as are won by acts of great deception are unsustainable, and will collapse. They are indeed collapsing as we speak. We need to hasten the demise of these dangerous delusions - at least, that is, if we are at all alive to our human hearts and minds, and care not to see unnecessary suffering, madness or destruction on this small and beautiful, fragile planet. We need to break open these bonds of confusion, examine them, and tear them asunder. They will collapse upon examination. All that is required is the light of day.

J. Todd Ring

May 16, 2007


Posted by: jtoddring, in New Deal, Trudeau, Keynesian economics, debt, FDR, Democratic Party, social conservative, fiscal conservative, Liberal, deficit, Reagan, Mulroney, Martin, Harper, Hilary, Obama, Thatcher, Bush, Clinton, libertarian, Global War on Terrorism, conservatives, Canada, Canadian politics, capitalism, corporate rule, Hobbes, war on democracy, corporatism, election, Conservative Party, Republican Party, neoconservatism, war on terror, American politics, U.S., neoliberalism, right, conservative, politics

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, April 07, 2007

Iran: Oil, Nukes & War, Pretexts for Martial Law

On nukes in Iran – or rather, the second WMD pretext for mid-east war:


The U.S. Defense Intelligence estimate, as well as the analysis made by the CIA, tells us that Iran is 10 years away, at the earliest, from developing nuclear weapons. Why then the rush to set off a powder keg in the Middle East? Clearly this is another WMD scare tactic to create a pretext for war, as we saw in 2003 with Iraq. It was a lie then, and it is a lie now. The real motive is oil.

The biggest threat by far, with regards to nuclear weapons, is not from the few that Iran might possibly develop over the coming 10 years, but from the global conflict between already existing nuclear super-powers – the U.S., Russia and China – that might erupt as a result from a U.S. attack on Iran. If we are at all sane, we will do everything in our power to keep the U.S., Israel or NATO from attacking Iran and throwing a match into this powder keg. Any future danger posed by Iran pales completely in comparison to the danger we all face if the U.S. or Israel launches an attack. (See War on Iran: A Most Dangerous Gambit.)

If we are genuinely concerned with nuclear proliferation, there are far saner voices than those of Bush, Cheney and Rice. Military analyst Sergei Plekhanov is one. He warns that the most serious threat posed by Iran lies not in any future arms development in that nation, but in the aforementioned possibility of conflict between nuclear superpowers that may be set off by a U.S. attack on Iran. With Iran, Russia and China having formed a military and economic alliance, the danger is real. Joint military training maneuvers have already begun.


“When we think about the danger of nuclear war nowadays, the mind zeros in on North Korea and Iran and stays there, preoccupied with the fact that North Korea has a few nuclear bombs, while Iran may or may not build a few of its own in the next decade. The international community is tying itself in knots trying to respond to the colossal threats to world peace and security that these two countries present.

“Now, the reality is that of the world’s estimated 22,000 nuclear weapons, about 21,000 belong to the U.S. and Russia, each of the two possessing nearly equal numbers and keeping about 1,000 of them ready for launching within 30 minutes.

“If we should worry about the existence of nuclear weapons with their unique capacity to put an end to human life on this planet, it is odd that we overlook the thousands and peer at the murky single digits through a magnifying glass and tremble with fear.

“What happened to the clarity of mind that defined world thinking about nuclear weapons 20 years ago, when it was obvious that the really dangerous nukes were those in massive numbers that the Americans and the Russians trained on each other and were ready to use on a few minutes’ notice?

“The new U.S.-Russian relationship, as it is currently evolving, contains a potential for very serious threats to international security. In a major international crisis, conflict between the two major nuclear powers may escalate to extreme levels.”

- Sergei Plekhanov, Truthdig - The Nightmare Scenario

For a sane response to the question of nuclear weapons in the Middle East, we should listen less to Bush, Cheney and Rice, who are proven liars, and more to the people like Sergei Plekhanov and senior CIA veteran analyst Ray McGovern.


“Preaching to Iran and others about not acquiring nuclear weapons is, indeed, like the village drunk preaching sobriety — the more so as our government keeps developing new genres of nuclear weapons and keeps looking the other way as Israel enhances its own nuclear arsenal. Not a pretty moral picture, that. Indeed, it reminds me of the Scripture passage about taking the plank out of your own eye before insisting that the speck be removed from another’s.”

- Ray McGovern, senior veteran CIA analyst for 27 years,

from JFK through Bush I, co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity


“The ideal approach would, of course, be to destroy all nuclear weapons in the world and ban them for the future, with a very intrusive global inspection regime to verify compliance. A total ban is worth holding up as an ideal, and I think we must. But this approach seems unlikely to bear fruit over the next four years. So what then?

“How about a nuclear-free Middle East? Could the US make that happen? We could if we had moral clarity — the underpinning necessary to bring it about. Each time this proposal is raised, the Syrians, for example, clap their hands in feigned joyful anticipation, saying, “Of course such a pact would include Israel, right?” The issue is then dropped from all discussion by U.S. policymakers. Required: not only moral clarity but also what Thomas Aquinas labeled the precondition for all virtue, courage. In this context, courage would include a refusal to be intimidated by inevitable charges of anti-Semitism.

“The reality is that, except for Israel, the Middle East is nuclear free. But the discussion cannot stop there. It is not difficult to understand why the first leaders of Israel, with the Holocaust experience written indelibly on their hearts and minds, and feeling surrounded by perceived threats to the fledgling state’s existence, wanted the bomb. And so, before the Syrians or Iranians, for example, get carried away with self-serving applause for the nuclear-free Middle East proposal, they will have to understand that for any such negotiation to succeed it must have as a concomitant aim the guarantee of an Israel able to live in peace and protect itself behind secure borders. That guarantee has got to be part of the deal.

“That the obstacles to any such agreement are formidable is no excuse not trying. But the approach would have to be new and everything would have to be on the table. Persisting in a state of denial about Israel’s nuclear weapons is dangerously shortsighted; it does nothing but aggravate fears among the Arabs and create further incentive for them to acquire nuclear weapons of their own.

“A sensible approach would also have to include a willingness to engage the Iranians directly, attempt to understand their perspective, and discern what the United States and Israel could do to alleviate their concerns.

“To remember why the United States is no favorite in Tehran, one needs to go back at least to 1953 when the U.S. and Great Britain overthrew Iran’s democratically elected Premier Mohammad Mossadeq as part of a plan to insure access to Iranian oil. They then emplaced the young Shah in power who, with his notorious secret police, proved second to none in cruelty. The Shah ruled from 1953 to 1979. Much resentment can build up over a whole generation. His regime fell like a house of cards, when supporters of Ayatollah Khomeini rose up to do some regime change of their own.

““The crazies” are not finished. …In an immediate sense, with U.S. military power unrivaled, they can be seen as “crazy like a fox,” with a value system in which “might makes right.” Operating out of that value system, and now sporting the more respectable misnomer/moniker “neoconservative,” they are convinced that they know exactly what they are doing. They have a clear ideology and a geopolitical strategy, which leap from papers they put out at the Project for the New American Century over recent years.

“The very same men who, acting out of that paradigm, brought us the war in Iraq are now focusing on Iran, which they view as the only remaining obstacle to American domination of the entire oil-rich Middle East.

“Has everyone forgotten that deterrence worked for some 40 years, while for most of those years the U.S. and the USSR had not by any means lost their lust for ever-enhanced nuclear weapons?

“As was the case with Iraq two years ago, there is no imminent Iranian strategic threat to Americans — or, in reality, to anyone. Even if Iran acquired a nuclear capability, there is no reason to believe that it would risk a suicidal first strike on Israel. That, after all, is what mutual deterrence is all about; it works both ways.”

- CIA veteran Ray McGovern,

Attacking Iran: I Know It Sounds Crazy, But...


There is no rational basis for attacking Iran if our concern is the danger of nuclear warfare. This much should be obvious. What then are the real motives of the U.S.?

Peak Oil, Geopolitics & Imperial Warfare

Imperial warfare is, of course, not new to the U.S. or to the world, nor is it a recent invention of the Washington neo-conservatives. Economic interests and hegemony – first regional, then global – have been the primary and consistent over-riding objectives of U.S. foreign policy since the Indian Wars, the Mexican-American War, and the conquest of the gems of the Caribbean in 1898 during the Spanish-American War.


We have about 50% of the world’s wealth but only 6.3% of its population… In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality… We should cease to talk about vague and…unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of the living standards, and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts.”

- Chief long-term strategic planner for the U.S. National Security Council,
George F. Kennan, in a 1948 State Department Brief: the now-declassified NSC 68.


This is not new. Bush is only the latest of war criminals. He is the successor to empire - an empire that is in crisis and crumbling, desperate to shore itself up while it may still be possible.


“The Neo-conservative agenda under the Bush administration should be viewed as the culmination of a (bipartisan) “Post War” foreign policy framework, which provides the basis for the planning of the contemporary wars and atrocities including the setting up of torture chambers, concentration camps and the extensive use of prohibited weapons directed against civilians.

“From Korea, Vietnam and Afghanistan, to the CIA sponsored military coups in Latin America and Southeast Asia, the objective has been to ensure US military hegemony and global economic domination, as initially formulated under the “Truman Doctrine”. Despite significant policy differences, successive Democratic and Republican administrations, from Harry Truman to George W. Bush have carried out this global military agenda.

“What distinguishes the Bush administration in relation to the historical record of US sponsored crimes and atrocities, is that the concentration camps, targeted assassinations and torture chambers are now openly considered as legitimate forms of intervention, which sustain “the global war on terrorism” and support the spread of Western democracy.

“To reverse the tide of war requires a massive campaign of networking and outreach to inform people across the land, nationally and internationally, in neighborhoods, workplaces, parishes, mosques, schools, universities, municipalities, on the dangers of a US sponsored war which contemplates the use of nuclear weapons. The message should be loud and clear: It is not Iran which is a threat to global security but the United States of America.

“The corporate media also bear a heavy responsibility for the cover-up of US sponsored war crimes. Until recently these war preparations involving the use of nuclear weapons have been scarcely covered by the corporate media. The latter must also be forcefully challenged for their biased coverage of the Middle East war.

“What is needed is to break the conspiracy of silence, expose the media lies and distortions, confront the criminal nature of the US Administration and of those governments which support it, its war agenda as well as its so-called “Homeland Security agenda” which has already defined the contours of a police State.”

- Michel Chossudovsky, Professor of Economics, Ottawa University, founder and director of the Center for Research on Globalization

“Intelligent people realize that American claims to be a moral and democratic force are mere pretense behind which hides a policy of military aggression.”

- Paul Craig Roberts, former associate editor, Wall Street Journal

Imperial warfare has always been primarily about securing resources - land and labour being the first and most primary, followed closely by minerals and other resources. Control of energy resources - whether they be in the form of feudal land-holdings, slave holdings, serfs, forests, or more recently, the energy source the industrial world runs on, oil – has always been central to the objectives of empire.

The politics of oil, in this context, is the politics of empire, in one particular and very central facet. Peak oil simply adds to the urgency of controlling world oil reserves. With world oil production near or at its peak, oil prices will rise dramatically, the era of cheap energy will soon be over, demand will outstrip supply, and controlling world oil reserves, more than ever before, will mean holding global economic hegemony. The stakes are high for the seekers of empire; as they are high for the rest of us, due to the risks and bloodshed involved in such maneuvers for control.

The Real Threats We Face

We should bear in mind a few things. One, the CIA and Defense Intelligence have stated that Iran will not develop nuclear weapons for another 10 years. Two, the risk posed by Iran anytime in the near future is negligible compared to the extreme risks entailed in an attack on Iran. Three, the Bush administration lied repeatedly, and in much the same way, to get the American people to accept war on Iraq – which by all honest accounts has been a disaster, not to mention an atrocity. Four, both “pre-emptive war” and regime change are acts of aggression, and as such are war crimes under both international law and the U.S. Constitution. Five, with the nuclear proliferation pretext so manifestly a deceit, the objective of war on Iran is clearly control of the fourth largest oil reserves in the Middle East – which the neocons’ PNAC documents state clearly and explicitly. Six, such an attack would entail mass murder, and for no less vulgar reasons than control of energy reserves, economic hegemony, and imperial ambition.

Finally, a last consideration, and a very serious one, is the risk entailed in the pretext to war, and not simply in the act or war or the ensuing fall-out. This is, aside from the real possibility of WW III, one of the greatest dangers of an attack on Iran. The neocon “crazies” - as many apparently referred to them during the 1980’s and `90’s, before they came to the center of power in Washington - have made it clear in their “Project for a New American Century” (PNAC) planning and strategy papers, that their objectives of “full spectrum dominance” cannot be achieved in any short time, unless there is a “catalyzing event” of sufficient magnitude, another Pearl Harbour-type event. We had one such horrific event, but that may not be enough to expand the “Global War on Terror” at home or across the Middle East. A further pretext may be needed, and an unlikely source has warned of just that.

Former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinksi warned the Senate this February 1 of just such an “event.” Read the following carefully. Better yet, read “Zbig”’s statement, then watch the video clip as he emphasizes his stark warning.

“[A] plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran [is]… Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks, followed by accusations of Iranian responsibility for the failure, then by some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the US blamed on Iran, culminating in, quote/unquote, ‘defensive’ US military action against Iran…”
- Zbigniew Brzezinski, before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, February 1, 2007

YouTube - Brzezinski predicts provoking war with Iran.

A second 9/11 attack, possibly of greater magnitude, would be a horror in itself. But when we also consider General Tommy Franks statements on such an event, the horror becomes an even greater nightmare. Former NATO Supreme Allied Commander General Tommy Franks has stated that the next terrorist attack would likely be the end of democracy: the Constitution would be suspended, martial law declared, and Congress probably not reconvened.

The implications of what is unfolding are almost unthinkable. Yet, we would be wise to give them due thought. If there is no resistance to the madness being orchestrated, we may see a very dark time ahead. Fortunately, there is great, broad and world-wide popular resistance to this grim direction of what can only honestly be called Machiavellian imperial ambition. The resistance now must be galvanized. We may be in for a serious challenge ahead.

“If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.”

~ James Madison

“The spirit of this country is totally adverse to a large military force.”
- Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) 3rd American President

“Force is the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism.”
- Thomas Jefferson

“If there is one principle more deeply rooted in the mind of every American, it is that we should have nothing to do with conquest.” - Thomas Jefferson

J. Todd Ring

April 5, 2007

YouTube - Brzezinski predicts provoking war with Iran.

* White House brushes off CIA report on Iran: report | Top News | Reuters.com

Former CIA Analyst Ray McGovern: British Sailors the Justification for War against Iran?

The War on Iran - Michel Chossudovsky

Attacking Iran: I Know It Sounds Crazy, But...

Alex Jones Interviews Scott Ritter

Appetite for Oil Fuels America’s Warmongering

Smoking Gun:The CIA’s Interest in Peak Oil

Democracy Now! | Target Iran: Former UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter and Investigative Journalist Seymour Hersh on White House Plans for Regime Change

Rep.Ron Paul on Iran: The Next Neocon Target « Dissident

Truthdig - Interviews - Pentagon Whistle-Blower on the Coming War With Iran

Chomsky on Iran - It all comes down to control

Gangsters for Capitalism

A Timeline of CIA Atrocities

ZNet |Foreign Policy | American Empire For Dummies « Dissident

ZNet |Foreign Policy | We Had a Democracy Once , But You Crushed It

Iraq War Timeline: Lie by Lie

Truthdig - The Nightmare Scenario

War on Iran: A Most Dangerous Gambit.

Nuclear Bunker Buster Bombs againt Iran: This Way Lies Madness

Brzezinski: Avoid disaster with Iran

Evidence of US coercion of IAEA members against Iran revealed

Looking for a Gulf of Tonkin-like Incident

Why is the US press silent on Brzezinski’s warnings of war against Iran?

The Pentagon’s “Second 911″

The Other 9/11

***The Police State Is Closer Than You Think - by Paul Craig Roberts « Dissident

MSNBC's Keith Olbermann: U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights, Gone

Olbermann: Bush Signs Military Commissions Act

Olbermann: The Death of Habeas Corpus

Harvard Law Students Hold Funeral for US Constitution

Impending Police State in America: Interview with Professor Francis Boyle

Texas Congressman Urges Repeal of Neo-Fascist Laws

Bush and the Forbidden C-Word by Rev. William Alberts

The Criminalization of US Foreign Policy

Bill Moyers: The Secret Government - PBS Video

The Power of Nightmares: BBC Documentary Shreds the War on Terror Myth

Bill Moyers: Media, Democracy and Pillage by the Elite - Part 1

Mind Control - History Chanel Video Documentary

*** Even Conservatives Hate Republicans Now

Dems' Big Middle Finger to the American Voter

Empire v. Democracy: Why Nemesis Is at Our Door - by Chalmers Johnson and Tom Engelhardt

US generals ‘will quit’ if Bush orders Iran attack

America’s nuclear ticking bomb

Peak Oil intro - CBC 2min.

‘Living on an illusion’ - CNN video on oil depletion

How to avoid oil wars, terrorism, and economic collapse | EnergyBulletin.net | Peak Oil News Clearinghouse

Peak Oil alert - Houston Business Journal:

An Open Letter to Greg Palast on Peak Oil

Will The End of Oil Mean The End of America?

We Were Warned: Tomorrow’s Oil Crisis - CNN

The Oil Factor: Behind the War on Terror

The War for Oil - BBC - Part 1/3

War for Oil - BBC - Part 2/3

War for Oil - BBC - Part 3/3

Video - Robert Newman History of oil - Google Video

The Power of Community: How Cuba Survived Peak Oil - order video

Making Sweden an OIL-FREE Society

Oil Wars or Adaptation?

Iran attack would cause market chaos - The Business - London's First Global Business Magazine

OPEC sells the Dollar

Digital Journal - Tehran Times: Iran Has Started Substituting Euros for Dollars in Oil Sales

* Hysteria Over Iran and a New Cold War with Russia: Peak Oil, Petrocurrencies and the Emerging Multi-Polar World « Dissident

ZNet |Economy | China and the Dollar

ZNet |Economy | Dollar Crisis and American Empire

Crouching Chinese Tiger, Tumbling US Economy

Paul Craig Roberts:The Vicious Downward Cycle of the American Economy

War, Neoliberalism & Empire – Chomsky

YouTube - Eisenhower warns us of the military industrial complex .

Eisenhower's Worst Nightmare Now Harsh Reality For U.S. « Dissident

YouTube - Bob Dylan - Masters Of War - full version


YouTube - Texas Republican slams Bush "demented philosophy of conquest"

Gulf of Tonkin 2: Iran

Left-Right Alliance Against War? - by Jon Basil Utley

International Mobilization To Stop U.S. Attack on Iran « Dissident

StopIranWar.com


North America: Timeline to a Fascist State

Overview: Geopolitics 2006-2008

The Endgame is Unfolding

Whew, time for some good news

What Must Be Done: When corporatism and Leninism have both failed - part 1

What Must Be Done: When corporatism and Leninism have both failed - part 2

A Bit of Humour

Imperial Hubris and Brzezinski's Second Chance « Writings of J. Todd Ring

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, March 28, 2007

Imperial Hubris and Bzezinski's Second Chance

I'm not sure what Bzezinski's intentions are with his recent scathing criticisms of the Washington neocons. Has he had a genuine change of heart? Is he now opposed to imperial warfare? Or is he merely questioning the strategy of Bush and company in pursuing the natural prerogatives and noble objectives of empire?

This is the man who, in 1998, in a Paris interview, said he had no regrets as to having orchestrated the CIA funding, arming and training of Al Queda in Afghanistan, for the purpose of luring the Soviet Union into "their own Vietnam" - a war they could not win, that would cause destabilization of the Soviet regime, and hopefully contribute to its ultimate downfall. "Zbig" was the man who, as National Security Adviser to Carter, dreamed up and implemented the creation of the Mujahadeen. Imperial warfare is his specialty.

He is now getting up there in years, possibly reflecting on his life, and maybe has had a serious change of heart. Maybe this is Zbig's "second chance" - reflecting the title of his most recent book (which is ostensibly about America's second chance). Or maybe he is still the same old coldly calculating imperial strategist, and simply believes that the Bush administration is making bad strategic decisions in the rightful pursuit of continued global dominance. After all, he did write, explicitly in the foreword to his 1994 book, The Grand Chessboard, that after the fall of the Soviet Union, the U.S. emerged as the world's "first and only truly global superpower" - and that his intentions in writing this book were to outline precisely what must be done in order to maintain U.S. global dominance. He even said, we will have to "harken back to a more brutal imperial age."

If I were to take a pessimistic view, the following might be said. I'm not sure if this is accurate, not knowing the man personally, but here is one possible interpretation, and a rather skeptical one.

Brzezinski is railing now at the Bush order, not out of some new-found moral fervour, but because he is a died-in-the-wool strategist, and feels Bush is making poor strategic decisions. He wants the empire to flourish – zeig heil! – and knows the neocon gambit may cost the corporate elite the whole game. He’s in for the long haul, and wants to see a win – for the elite that he has so ruthlessly, mercilessly, shrewdly and with Machiavellian flair, supported and aided and abetted for years and decades, with all of his cunning and sophisticated strategic thinking.

What is interesting is not his new-found moral fervour, or ostensible morality, but his awareness and open statements about the turning tide: the world is changing, the game is being lost; the sea of humanity is rising up, and the BRIC alliance as well - though less importantly - threatens the global hegemony of the corporatist powers of the West.


Whatever Bzezinski's intentions are - and I don't follow his words or actions closely enough to know - his recent statements at least make three things clear. One, the Washington neoconservatives are engaging in imperial warfare in a manner that is full of foolish hubris and bespeaks imperial over-reach, according to Brzezinski; and I think we would have to agree. Bzezinski's argument seems to be that if such over-reach and hubris is followed, the American empire may collapse completely. Not a bad thing, if you ask the vast majority of the world's people, but a result that Bush and company certainly did not intend.

Second, a shift in global power is occurring, and the U.S. does not have the hegemony it once had. Brzezinski notes two major challenges to U.S. global hegemony. The first challenge is the rising power of Asia and the South, particularly the BRIC alliance - Brazil, Russia, India, China and others. The U.S. economy, as well as that of the EU, and the entire Western-based corporate empire as a whole, is rapidly being eclipsed by the rising giants of the BRIC alliance.

Thirdly, the second threat to U.S. hegemony, and the one that is more profound, is from that group referred to by the business press as "the other superpower" - the world's citizenry.

Whatever Brzezinski's motives, his warnings to the U.S. government on these three points should be read loud and clear - coming from a top level long-term strategic planner for the U.S. and Western business and political elite, we should take note. The end of the American empire is in sight. The end of empire per se may even be in sight. With the rising superpower of global citizen's movements, we may have an end to imperial warfare in our lifetimes, and perhaps soon. This is, in truth, a cause for hope.

I hope Brzezinski has in fact had a change of heart. But in any case, the real news is not the messenger, but the message. The tide has turned.


Brzezinski now:

YouTube - Brzezinski: Colonial war in post-colonial period does not work.

Zbigniew Brzezinski:US Terrorized by The Mantra War on Terror

YouTube - Zbigniew Brzezinski and Bill Maher 3-23-07


Brzezinski then:

No Regrets: Carter, Brzezinski and the Mujahadeen

Democracy Now! | Ghost Wars: How Reagan Armed the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan

YouTube - God is on your side! Zbig arms Mujahadin

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

North America: Timeline to a Fascist State

"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."

- James Madison

“Behind every great fortune is a great crime.”
- Balzac

The imperial adventure of Bush and company that may soon be launched against Iran could spell the final blow to democracy at home. Here’s how.

Common sense tells us the war in Iraq soon will spread to Iran. Fear of imaginary nuclear weapons or an incident involving Iran– whether planned or accidental– will rally the support needed for us to move on Muslim country #3. All the past failures and unintended consequences will be forgotten.

Even with deteriorating support for the Iraq war, new information, well planned propaganda, or a major incident will override the skepticism and heartache of our frustrating fight. Vocal opponents of an attack on Iran again will be labeled unpatriotic, unsupportive of the troops, and sympathetic to Iran’s radicals…

I smell an expanded war in the Middle East, and pray that I’m wrong. I sense that circumstances will arise that demand support regardless of the danger and cost. Any lack of support, once again, will be painted as being soft on terrorism and al Qaeda… I worry that before we can finish the war we’re in and extricate ourselves, the patriotic fervor for expanding into Iran will drown out the cries of, “enough already!....The agitation and congressional resolutions painting Iran as an enemy about to attack us have already begun.”

- U.S. Representative Ron Paul

Bush is the amalgamation of all the hideous and sad parts of the Republican Party. He is a Republican Frankenstein. He has the temperament of Barry Goldwater, the integrity of Richard Nixon, and the brains of Dan Quayle.

And we trust this guy with his finger on the button?

God help us all if he bombs Iran. And if you think he's not that stupid, you haven't been paying attention.

He says the idea of bombing Iran is "wild speculation." He also said we weren't wiretapping anybody without a court order. He says we're trying diplomacy first. That's exactly what he said about Iraq when we found out he was planning for the war all along. He says Iran is a gathering threat…

Now, who do you trust more -- George Bush or General Anthony Zinni? General Zinni is the former head of US Central Command. He said he saw no evidence of Iraqi WMD before the war. He thought we didn't have enough troops to get the job done right. And now he thinks going into Iran is an even worse idea. Is there a single American who really believes George Bush knows better than General Zinni?”

- Cenk Uygur, If You Liked the Iraq War, You’ll Love the War on Iran

The U.S. is set to attack Iran. Of this there is little question. There are doubts as to whether the military generals, or the people of the United States, will go along with it (Congress at this point is irrelevant, having neutered itself) – in fact, many military, intelligence and high level political elites are dead set against it, along with the majority of the population. Yet the neoconservatives and their timid “opponents” in the Democratic party appear to be blithely unconcerned with popular opinion, or that of any dissenters.

But how can the U.S. government get away with this – even domestically? More to the point, are they wiling to take such a great risk – a risk of complete loss of legitimacy at home, not to mention the fall-out world-wide – in order to achieve their goals of further dominance of energy reserves in the Middle East (which, by any rational assessment, is the true motive)? Even within the military, support for such imperial adventures is failing. Seventy-two percent of our troops now serving in Iraq say it’s time to come home. Two thirds of Americans oppose war on Iran. Senator Joseph Biden has warned that an attack on Iran would provoke a constitutional crisis in America. The crisis of legitimacy is deepening, and widening. U.S. political elites risk losing all if they push further with this “long war” agenda.

All indications are that they are willing to take the risk. It must be viewed therefore, as an act of desperation. The empire is falling, the emperor is in a panic, his minions and acolytes are fearful in the extreme, and desperate measures are perceived to be necessary to avoid total loss.

A gambit is in the offing, and it is a gambit of the greatest proportions and the greatest magnitude of danger to humanity. The U.S. government is set upon invading Iran, using nuclear weapons – “all options are on the table,” is the chorus we hear from Bush, Edwards, Hillary and other apparatchiks - against a relatively small and weak nation - though a much more formidable foe than Iraq, which it cannot subdue - in order to secure control of world oil reserves. In doing so, it will risk the unfolding of WWIII. Russia and China, both superpowers, and both nuclear powers, have entered into a formal military and economic alliance with Iran. Russia and China also have eyes set on the strategic prize of Iranian oil. The U.S. and NATO, backed by the EU, are willing, apparently, to risk global war in order to make a desperate bid to control the world’s energy reserves.

The Western empire of the U.S. and Europe is, after all, being eclipsed rapidly by the BRIC alliance – Brazil, Russia, India and China – and the business and political elite do not want to face the loss of their global economic dominance, which is rapidly slipping away.

“Madam Federal Chancellor already mentioned this.The combined GDP measured in purchasing power parity of countries such as India and China is already greater than that of the United States. And a similar calculation with the GDP of the BRIC countries – Brazil, Russia, India and China – surpasses the cumulative GDP of the EU. And according to experts this gap will only increase in the future.”

- Vladimir Putin, President, Russian Federation,

to the 43rd Munich Conference on Security Policy, February 2007

The U.S. economy is now a house of cards, its negative balance of payments, deficit and debt spiraling wildly out of control, beyond the realm of even imagination. The U.S. dollar is sinking, and will in all likelihood collapse in the near future.

The U.S. went from being the world’s leading creditor to the world’s leading debtor – thanks to the Vietnam War, the U.S. oil production peak, and the Reagan and Bush military spending and rich-man’s tax cut extravaganza. Bush Jr. alone pushed up the debt by $3.3 trillion since 2001. Globalization has gutted U.S. manufacturing. Everything is imported from China now. The U.S. now exports Hollywood and weapons, and little else. The U.S. trade deficit is now $700 billion a year. The debt is now $8.8 trillion. That is over half of the total value of all American stock – which is valued at $15 trillion. Overseas investors are financing the enormous U.S. deficit, and they are beginning to balk. China alone now holds $1 trillion in U.S. currency – in cash. The U.S. has to bring in $2.8 billion dollars a day – mainly from China – just to keep afloat. Now the head of China’s central bank says, “we have enough” of U.S. currency. The tap is running dry, and nobody wants to keep buying U.S. treasury bills and currency to keep this debtor nation propped up. The writing is on the wall.

“Historically whichever country has been the world’s leading lender, deploying its capital for use around the world has always accrued a particular kind of influence in world affairs, whether it’s the Dutch in the 17th century, or before that the Spanish in the 16th century, or more recently the British from the mid 19th century through the twentieth century or the United States in the great part of the 20th century after World War I.

“Again and again it has always been the world’s leading lending country that has been the premier country in terms of political influence, diplomatic influence and cultural influence. It’s no accident that we took over that role from the British at the same time that we took over from the the job of being world’s leading lending country. Today we are no longer the world’s leading lending country. In fact we are now the world’s biggest debtor country, and we are continuing to wield influence on the basis of military prowess alone. As an American citizen, I hope that we can continue to do this but I have to observe that the tides of world history do not speak well for that strategy.”

“This is not a normal state of affairs. And it’s certainly not something we expect to see from the world’s richest country. Back when Britain was on top they were lending money to the world, but we’re borrowing from the rest of the world. Our current account trade deficit is now more than our defense spending and incredibly we’ve been borrowing from the rest of the world like this for several years now. I think we’re going to reach a point where the rest of the world decides that they don’t want to lend to us. And that can be kind of traumatic.

- Harvard Economic Professor and former Chief Economist at the International Monetary Fund, Kenneth Rogoff, speaking in the documentary film TIME-BOMB: America’s Debt Crisis, Causes, Consequences and Solutions. Time-Bomb

Rogoff spoke like a typically understated professor when he said the coming economic crisis may be “kind of traumatic.” When the U.S. dollar goes down (not if) the U.S. economy goes with it; and more, the global economy will collapse as well. Central banks around the world are selling off the dollar, but not fast enough – U.S. currency comprises over 60% of global currency reserves held in the central banks and other financial institutions world-wide.

The U.S. and EU – or at least the corporate elite and the investment class which dominates political policy, both foreign and domestic – feel the need to do something now, in order to secure their global position of economic predominance, or else concede defeat, and watch the BRIC alliance of Asia and the South take precedence.

Given all of this, it is easy to see why the U.S. and its NATO allies in Europe are acting so desperately, why they would even consider such a desperate plan. It is end-game.

Controlling the Middle East means controlling over 65% of world oil reserves. The world’s economy runs on oil. To control world energy reserves is to ensure – it is hoped – one’s dominance of the global economy. The Western business elite and their political lap dogs must strike now, before the U.S. goes bankrupt and can no longer afford such extraordinarily costly imperial adventures, and seize the world’s largest remaining energy reserves - taking the greatest of risks, hoping to come out the other side having retained global economic dominance, without too much loss.

Yet, even if the neoconservatives in Washington and their cowardly silent accomplices in the Democratic party are willing to take such enormous risk, how can they get away with it without losing all credibility, all legitimacy at home, and thus be swept from power shortly after? This must surely be a consideration as well.

The people pushing for this extremely dangerous gambit in Iran are not stupid – Bush may be, but his advisors are most certainly not; nor are they willing to risk all on plans that are not well thought-out – reckless maybe, dangerous certainly, insane, quite possibly, but well deliberated, without a doubt.

The consideration of popular discontent and backlash against such an extremely unpopular plan as to invade Iran, has certainly been given ample thought and deliberation. The clear majority of American people now want an end to the war in Iraq. They certainly have no desire to expand the war into Iran. Any such attempt to invade Iran would be met with great hostility and disgust at home.

The risk to political elites in engaging in such a perilous and arrogant game of global power politics is that even if they succeed in gaining control over the Middle East and its oil treasures, and therefore have a shot at continued global dominance, in launching such a brazen and deeply unpopular escapade they risk losing all power at home, in the heartland of the empire. A pretext, a cover, a smokescreen is clearly needed, or the neocons and their allies may lose even if they win.

"Why, of course, the people don't want war," Goering shrugged. "Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship….voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

- Herman Goering, at the Nuremburg Trials, shortly before being sentenced to hanging for war crimes

“All war is based in deception.” - Sun Tzu

Therefore, in order to carry out this desperate plan to consolidate control over the world’s primary energy reserves, without losing power at home due to broad and deep-seated popular discontent and loss of legitimacy, it will be necessary to increase the sound and fury of the “War on Terror” to a true fever pitch, in order to whip the populace into such a frenzied state of panic that they will agree to almost anything, including the attack on Iran. All of this is unfolding now, and, judging by U.S. and NATO military build-up in the region, and by the statements being made by U.S. political elites, will likely unfold over the next few weeks to few months.

Remember that, “The events of Sept. 11, 2001, served as a trigger for full-scale enactment of the neoconservative program: the declaration of war on international terrorism and “the axis of evil,” the assertion of U.S. military superiority, the doctrine of preemptive war, the weaponization of space, etc... Support the new U.S. war or fall into the category of an enemy.

- Sergei Plekhanov, The Nightmare Scenario

What would bring the “War on Terror” propaganda to a point where the people of the U.S. may be outraged and fearful enough to support yet another war, when the American people already want out of the present war with Iraq? Most likely, only another crisis, another “catalyzing event”, another 9/11, would be enough to gain support for an expansion of the war on the Middle East. This, it would seem by logical analysis of the present unfolding events, is the most probable scenario, given that the Washington neoconservatives and their allies, particularly the Western business elite, are in a desperate position of being rapidly eclipsed, are desperate to shore up and consolidate their global dominance, via control of world energy reserves, and are simultaneously in a deep crisis of legitimacy at home already, and are unwilling either to risk losing global dominance through inaction in controlling the Middle East, or to lose power through a deepening crisis of legitimacy at home. The solution is simple, and simply Machiavellian: attack Iran, but justify it by staging a terrorist attack on home soil, which is then blamed on Iran.

Should this sound like the ravings of a paranoid “conspiracy theorist” (to use that tired red herring terminology), it would be wise to consider the testimony of one of the pre-eminent establishment intellectuals of the U.S., before the Senate this February 1. Former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brezinski stated clearly that the probable unfolding of events would include a terrorist attack on U.S. soil, staged by elements within the U.S. government, and blamed on Iran in order to justify the planned attack with a “defensive” cover.

“And I stress what I am about to say….[A] plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran [is]... Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks, followed by accusations of Iranian responsibility for the failure, then by some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the US blamed on Iran, culminating in, quote/unquote, ‘defensive’ US military action against Iran...”
- Zbigniew Brzezinski, former National Security Advisor, before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, February 1, 2007 (emphasis added)

This is not John Doe conspiracy theorist with his tinfoil hat – this is one of the leading long-term strategic planners for the National Security Council. We had better take such warnings seriously. It’s not often we get such a clear warning of imminent and grave danger.

Now, bearing this in mind, that the U.S. government is poised to make a grand escapade, an enormously dangerous gambit to secure Middle East oil reserves, and must create terror in order to create a cover and a pretext for such a war, which involves, in all likelihood, another 9/11; what else would another terrorist attack, probably of bigger proportions, entail? Well we don’t have to guess. Former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, U.S. General Tommy Franks was explicit. The next terrorist attack on the West will be the end of democracy. The Constitution will be suspended, and Congress will not likely be reconvened.

So, we are looking at the likelihood of an imminent attack on Iran, and the need to create a pretext in advance of any attack, which means, in order to pump up the War on Terror rhetoric and fears, quite possibly another 9/11. But we have Tommy Franks also saying that the next terrorist attack will be the end of democracy. So we may have a police state arising in the next few weeks to months, if we are to judge from these revelations. Horrifying, but a very real danger none the less.

There are many who cannot admit that such a scenario is possible. I would argue that such a response is willful naivete, judging by what we have seen before in history. There are great lengths that some will go in the pursuit of power, and the lust of gold. It would be wise never to underestimate the machinations of such Machiavellian men and women. Simply because the vast majority of us could never conceive of carrying out such ruthless and predatory acts, does not mean that there are not others who can – and do.

Add to this the statement by the U.S. Department of Defense’ number two official, Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England, in two internal memos sent to high level civilian and military officials, December 5 and February 15, that the “Global War on Terror” is to be completed by October 2008 – just one month before the next U.S. Presidential election. (The contents of these memos were reported by the Washington Post on February 28.) Note that the memos specified that job performance ratings would be judged on these whether the targets were met: that is, their pay would be affected. We were told this was a war without end. Not that I’d like to see it continue, but if the plan is to have “completed” the war by October 2008, the question that arises is, just how do the neocons and their allies plan to complete this “global war on terror” in just a year and a half?

Intelligent observers have recognized that the “Global War on Terror” (GWOT) has served as a cover for imperial wars - in the Middle East primarily, in order to control world energy reserves – as well as for an attack on civil rights and democracy at home. While the executive powers of the White House have been greatly expanded, draconian legislation has been introduced that provides the unconstitutional and illegal “legal” framework for martial law and a police state.

The general direction of the GWOT has been to consolidate corporate power over government, primarily by influence over a government out of balance, with extreme and excessive powers transferred to the executive, to suspend or destroy the constitution, human rights and freedom, to destroy democracy and create the mechanisms for a fascist order, and overseas, to attempt to secure world dominance through control of world oil reserves. What makes us think the “completion” of the GWOT would be any different in spirit and direction that what we have already seen? The completion would thus be the culmination of these trends: consolidation of power at home, in the heart of the empire, which means full-fledged fascism, and consolidation of power globally.

Most Americans, along with the majority of the world, now know that Bush and company stole the U.S. Presidential election of 2000 that brought them to power. One has to ask, given the anti-democratic record of this administration, do they intend to leave? October 2008 the war on terror is planned to be complete. Do the neocons and their corporate backers have plans for the next 18 months that would preclude holding the next election? I hate to think, but it is more than plausible; it seems in fact, quite probable.

Add to this the statement in England’s memos that, "At noon on Jan. 20, 2009, many of the civilian Department of Defense (DOD) leadership positions will transition to a new Administration Team. This change, coupled with the normal rotation of military leadership, could disrupt many of the management process changes currently underway in the Department." Therefore, "it would be highly desirable to complete current projects by the summer/fall of 2008." A potential disruption in the continuity of efforts to pursue the GWOT objectives, is to be avoided.

Bush has also made reference to “institutional continuity”, with regards to the implementation of the SPP and the de facto corporate government of the new North American Council on Competitiveness. Just what did Bush reveal about the thinking of his corporate backers when he referred confidently to “institutional continuity”? The SPP, which by any reasonable estimation is the entrenchment and institutionalization of continent-wide corporate rule, is slated to complete full “regulatory harmonization” across the three nations of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico in 2007. A political tsunami may be expected as a result, as the citizens of the three nations realize what has been invoked in their names. In order to ensure “institutional continuity” of the new order - the trans-continental corporate state - a military regime may need to be in place, as the people of the U.S., Canada and Mexico are known by the political and corporate elite to be overwhelmingly opposed to any institutional change such as the SPP which seriously undermines sovereignty and democracy. It is time to consolidate power at home, or so the thinking of the political and business elite would seem to be.

The above is an analysis of probabilities. It is not prophecy, nor is it speculation. It is an examination of the best evidence and indications available. Former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski has stated that at least major elements of this scenario are likely. I don’t have a crystal ball, but given the best available evidence, the scenario outlined above is, I would say, highly probable. I hope, I pray, that I’m wrong, but I don’t think so. However, as Yogi Berra, or some other source of down-home common sense put it, “It ain’t over `till the fat lady sings.” More to the point, “It ain’t over `till it’s over.”

It’s two down, bottom of the ninth, and the bases are loaded. We need to bring out our heavy hitter. We need to bring out our best. And the best is not some heroic figure on a white horse. The best is the best in us all. Now it is time to draw up all that is good and decent in humanity; now it is time to shine.

We need our best, and we need it from every last one of us. It will take the best of our courage, compassion and dedication to bring this sad era of corporatocracy and cynical fascism, swiftly to a close, and defeat it in its infancy. It will take the transcending of our perceived limitations. It will take us coming together in a spirit of kinship across humanity.

It will take our best. Now is the time to shine. Corporatism must be defeated. The attack on democracy must be defeated. Imperial warfare must now come to an end. The world has had enough. Enough!

"The spirit of this country is totally adverse to a large military force."
- Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) 3rd American President


"Force is the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism."
- Thomas Jefferson

"If there is one principle more deeply rooted in the mind of every American, it is that we should have nothing to do with conquest." - Thomas Jefferson

This is hardly the spirit of the Bush administration, nor is it the spirit of the neoconservatives or neoliberals that now “lead” – or rather, dominate – the Western world. It is, however, a spirit we would be wise to heed. And it would be wise to heed such words of common sense, and not just kind, moral, compassionate or just. To do otherwise would be to risk our own self-annihilation. Chomsky was right: it is now a matter of choice between hegemony or survival.

It may be that another pretext for the war in Iran – a Gulf of Tonkin event - will be found. It may be that the British sailor incident will be sufficient pretext. I doubt this will be enough in itself, but in any case, the completion of the GWOT, which is scheduled for this year according to the U.S. Defense department, will likely require a lock-down on power at home. And the full implementation of the overwhelmingly unpopular SPP and NACC will also likely require the suspension of liberties and the invocation of martial law in order to ram it through, along with a “catalyzing event” of sufficient magnitude to justify such extreme measures.

I don’t see how the power elite can pull off an expansion of the war in the Middle East, and more importantly, the completion of the GWOT, which by any reasonable analysis is a war on democracy, or the implementation of continental corporate rule via the SPP and NACC, without another major “catalyzing event” – to use the language of PNAC. Thus it would seem we should hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.

It may be that the new Pearl Harbour, the catalyzing event to spell the end of democracy at home, as Tommy Franks baldly described, will come not before an attack on Iran, but after, in apparent or actual response. Whatever the order of events, such an event is likely, and the results have already been predicted by Franks.

If we are lucky, and we work hard, we may be able to stop the war on Iran before it begins. Maybe the Bush administration and its backers will decide the risk at present is too great, and at least postpone the adventure. The thugs at the helm may also back down from launching another terrorist attack, for the moment – particularly if war against Iran is going to be postponed, or if another pretext for war is found or created.

I doubt either of these will be the case, but in any event, the war on democracy is very real, very deliberate, and escalating: whatever happens, democracy must be defended – at home, not overseas. Likewise, imperial warfare is an abomination on the face of the planet: it is time for the age of empires to end. This may not be as far off as it seems. Whatever happens in the interim, we must remain strong. The future is in our hands. It is not too late to reclaim our dreams.

We have faced the threat of fascism before. Our fathers and grandfathers fought this beast sixty some years ago. We defeated fascism before, and we will defeat it again.

How did we get to this point? First of all, we failed to head the warnings of Jefferson and others, two hundred years ago, that concentrations of financial power, particularly the new corporate aristocracy, were a grave and imminent threat to democracy.

Secondly, you could say, it is simply a matter of class – that “c” word that no-one likes to talk about. The elite of the investment class, which is now globalist, and has little allegiance to any particular nation, has gained such awesome power, that they feel they can make a bid for all power.

At the same time, the elite investment class also clearly recognizes that, while they dominate the economic and political spheres at present, they face a world-wide, deep and growing crisis of legitimacy. The global poll conducted by the World Economic Forum in 2002 showed, to the great disappointment of the Western financial and political elite, that business and political “leaders” now have about as much legitimacy and confidence in the eyes of the people, as used car salesmen and lawyers.

The power elite, to use sociologist C. Wright Mills’ expression, recognize that they presently have more power than ever before, but that that power is simultaneously highly vulnerable, unstable, tenuous and threatened. Thus, the power elite must consolidate power in the heart of the global financial empire now, while they still may be able to do so, before they watch themselves either slowly be eclipsed by the rising East and South, or be cast from power more swiftly by a collapse of legitimacy at home.

A third and more minor element in the drift toward fascism is the 1947 – 1954 CIA recruitment of 7,000 Nazis. While Europe was undergoing what was called “de-Nazification,” America was quietly undergoing Nazification. This in no small way has led the U.S. to where it is today: leader in the world in the war on democracy and freedom.

With America having gone the furthest, the fastest, in losing democracy, freedom and human rights, it may turn out that it is America that takes the lead in turning the tide, and restoring authentic democracy and freedom – and not overseas, by military aggression, but at home, and by example.

The war on democracy will ultimately fail. The people of the Western world have been steeped in the values of freedom, democracy and human rights for over two hundred years. When it finally sinks in that all of these things, which we now take for granted, are being stripped away, the people will not take it lying down. That I can assure you.

In the near term, however, I see insufficient resistance to this most obvious trend toward a police state. I think, at the time of this writing at least, that the powers that now threaten democracy and freedom at home, may in fact have some short-term temporary success. If this is the case, it will be a nightmare. I also believe that whether or not the powers that threaten democracy and freedom at home achieve the success they seek, even temporarily, there will be a very ugly time arise if they even make the attempt. Any end-game act of trying to lock down power at home, will bring in a very dark age. And I think we are in for an end-game attack.

The power elite may back down. I just thought a heads up was in order, in case they don’t.


Further information: articles and videos


The emergence of fascism in the West:

General Tommy Franks calls for Repeal of US Constitution

*** Habeas Corpus Your words are lies Sir - YouTube - olbermann 10-18-06

Eisenhower warns us of the military industrial complex. - Video: 1961 Farewell Address

The Secret Government: PBS video

Power of Nightmares - BBC Documentary

Mind Control: America's Secret War - History Channel Documentary

***Bush Moves Toward Martial Law

Habeas Corpus, R.I.P. (12/15 - 2006)

Demolishing Democracy At Home and Abroad - Noam Chomsky video

The Return of Total Information Awareness - Bush Asserts Dictatorial "Inherent" Powers

Examples of the president's signing statements - The Boston Globe

Air Force chief : Test weapons on testy US mobs - Sep 12 ...

*Private: Routine and systematic torture is at the heart of Americas war on terror | Columnists | Guardian Unlimited

* Top-Secret Torture - washingtonpost.com

* American Concentration Camps Soon? by Frederick Meekins

The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army - Los Angeles Times « Dissident

Noam Chomsky on Hegemony or Survival: America’s Quest For Global Dominance - audio

War on Terrorism Watch: CAUT Resource Website - Home Page

Global Ruling Class: Billionaires and How They ‘Made It’

* The Raw Story | Pentagon's number two suggests terror war will end in Oct. 2008

War on Iran:

YouTube - Brzezinski predicts provoking war with Iran.

If You Liked the Iraq War, You'll Love the Iran War

Olbermann, YouTube - Bush speaks before Iran war as he spoke before Iraq war

Iranians capture British sailors - Flashpoint for war?

Planned Attack on Iran : Bush Will Expand War Before Blair Resigns

Rep.Ron Paul on Iran: The Next Neocon Target « Dissident

Gary Leupp: Iran, a Chronology of Disinformation

Why is the US press silent on Brzezinski’s warnings of war against Iran?

Bush Faces Opposition on Iran Attack

Kucinich: 'Impeachment may well be the only remedy which remains to stop a war of aggression against Iran'

Bush Is About to Attack Iran: Why Can't Americans See it?

US Threats against Iran: War Plans and Pretexts in Place

The Next War: Public in the Dark about Government's Plans for War in Iran - Daniel Ellsberg

* "Cold War Shivers": War Preparations in the Middle East and Central Asia

Debating World Domination: Bilderberg Meets in Canada's Capital

ZNet |Foreign Policy | We Had a Democracy Once, But You Crushed It

StopIranWar.com

Scott Ritter warns an attack on Iran will also be the end of Democratic Party

YouTube - Brzezinski: Colonial war in post-colonial period does not work.

Truthdig - The Nightmare Scenario


U.S. Faces “Economic Armageddon”:

*** Former World Bank Chief Economist Predicts Global Crash within 24 months

* The Dollar's Full-System Meltdown

Time-Bomb

Economic " Armageddon " Predicted

Dollar Catching Asian Flu - Asia Times

OPEC sells the Dollar

Arab central banks sell dollar

As Dollar Plunges, Watch for US Government Bonds Sell -off - DEBKAfile –

The War To Save The U.S. Dollar - Trinicenter.com –

Fears for dollar as central banks sell US assets

BBC NEWS | Business | Is the global economy set for trouble?

Collapse of the Petrodollar Looming

Iranian Oil Bourse Opens for Business: A Final Step Toward US Dollar Collapse & Preemptive Nuclear Strike


An empire at twilight:

Superpower’s global dominance in question

50 Years After Suez, US Hegemony Ebbing Fast

"The United States is Terrified" - Noam Chomsky on Latin America's Move Towards "Independence and Integration"

The Crumbling Empire: Latin America and Asia Breaking Free of Washington's Grip - Noam Chomsky


The crisis of legitimacy:

Global corporate rule is now fragile

Confronting the Empire - Chomsky at the World Social Forum

The Global Crisis of Legitimacy of Liberal Democracy - Social and Economic Policy - Global Policy Forum

US generals ‘will quit’ if Bush orders Iran attack


9/11: Pretext for imperial war and the destruction of democracy

YouTube - Brzezinski predicts provoking war with Iran.

Looking for a Gulf of Tonkin-like Incident

** Senior Military, Intelligence, and Government Officials Question 9/11 Commission Report

9/11 Statement Signed by Prominent Americans

Scholars for 9/11 Truth

ONE IN 3 AMERICANS SAY U.S. AIDED 9/11 By THOMAS HARGROVE and GUIDO H. STEMPEL III - New York Post Online Edition: News

* Scientific Poll: 84% Reject Official 9/11 Story

* Radio Poll: 85% Of Canadians Believe 9/11 Inside Job

ABC News: U.S. Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba

National Security Archive - Pentagon Proposed Pretexts for Cuba Invasion in 1962

Venezuela's Chavez says Bush planned 9/11 attacks - video

War and Globalization - The Truth Behind September 11 - Google Video

Alex Jones, Bob Bowman at American Scholars Symposium - Google Video

The Pentagon's "Second 911"

North American Union: "New 9/11 crisis could be catalyst to merge U.S., Mexico & Canada."

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,