A Review of Some of the Craziness in the Authoritarian, Nonconstitutional USA

The craziness referred to in the title above covers a very broad range.  The text below displays only a few examples of some of it.  I'm calling the USA Gov't "nonconstitutional" (as opposed to unconstitutional) because for many years our leaders have ignored large parts of the Constitution.  It's as though the document doesn't even exist.  Here's some of the craziness, as follows.

1.  Our politicians appear to believe that this also is in the Fourth Amendment:  "...none of the provisions of this Amendment apply if there's a national crisis or any threat to national security...or if Congress passes any Law that contradicts any part of this Amendment...".  Of course, none of that is in the Fourth Amendment, but that fact seems to matter not at all.  Certain parts of the PATRIOT Act and a few other Laws are in direct conflict with the Fourth Amendment.  Crazy.

2.  Once a week (or so), the President meets with others in the Executive Branch to decide which people in other countries are to be murdered with Hellfire missiles from weaponized drones.  Anyone so killed is automatically designated as an EKIA---enemy killed in action.  It doesn't matter if the person is Joe Suspect's grandmother ("collateral" damage) or Joe's ten-year-old son (more "collateral" damage).  They are all EKIA as far as our Gov't is concerned.  This all happens despite the fact that the Executive Branch has no Constitutional authority whatsoever to issue assassination orders.  That authority belongs only to Congress.  The only exception to that is during a war officially declared by Congress.  [We haven't had one of those since WW II.]  Crazy.

3.  According to a portion of the National Defense Authorization Act, our rights to "due process" and "innocent until proven guilty in a Court of Law" are negated if we are suspected of any kind of "terrorism".  [You would be surprised how little it takes to be a suspect in such a case.]  Crazy.

4.  Too many of our militarized Law Enforcement people now do not treat suspects properly.  Instead of innocent until proven guilty, suspects are demeaned, lied to, denied access to rest rooms, or much worse--- sexually abused, shot in the back, beaten or TASED after being handcuffed, or flat-out killed.  No, that isn't rampant in our society, but it's happening way too often.  Here's what's much more common:  nonviolent protesters are pepper-sprayed in the face with no warning, no "order to disperse"...or sometimes their eyelids are held open by one or two officers while another one sprays directly into their eyes... all of this while peacefully exercising their Right to Assembly.  Crazy.

5.  While it isn't yet widespread, small drones have been used by Law Enforcement in lieu of a proper Search Warrant...another violation of our rights supposedly protected by the Fourth Amendment.  Crazy.

6.  Our Executive Branch now bombs other countries, puts combat troops into action in other countries, and in Syria shoots down one of their aircraft...all with no approval of Congress, no involvement of Congress at all, and certainly no declaration of war.  Crazy.

7.  As reported on Democracy Now, since March of this year, U.S.-led airstrikes in Iraq have killed about 700 civilians.  All this in a completely unconstitutional war.  Crazy.

8.  Our Military gurus want to send another 5,000 or so ground troops to Afghanistan...to a war with no end in sight...in a land deservedly known as the Graveyard of Empires.  Trump essentially said to Mattis:  go for it.  All ISIS (or the Taliban) has to do is fade back into the woodwork until we leave.  Trump wants to fulfill a campaign promise that's impossible:  "We will exterminate ISIS.".  The Russians couldn't do something similar with 500,000 troops there.  Crazy.
...............................................................
To any of you reading this who believe you are genuine "Conservatives" (not NeoCons), where is your outrage?  Our country is being destroyed by Militarists, Authoritarians, Corporatists, and Empire thugs...and you appear to be supporting the whole shebang.  Please stop drinking the Edward Bernays style Propaganda Kool Aid.  What will it take for you to wake up?  To those of you who believe you are genuine "Progressives", what are you doing in the Democratic Party?  Ever since 1992, that Party is firmly in the Land of Corporatism.  Please wake up.  We need organized, opposing political forces in this country so a Middle Way can be determined...instead of the Corporatist Dem v. Repub sham that we have now.

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

Afghanistan, Several Sane Politicians, & Perpetual War

Years ago, Elites (public and private) co-opted the Congressional powers to start a war, issue assassination orders, & make rules concerning captured enemies... and gave them to the Executive Branch.  The Powers-That-Be then announced that the entire world is a battlefield, and that the people we're fighting are neither soldiers or criminals.  Instead, they are "enemy combatants".  In this new Orwellian world, that means---according to most politicians---those enemies have no rights of any kind.  Furthermore, those people even suspected of being such an enemy also have no rights.  They can be kidnapped, rendered to allies with no ethics, tortured, held incommunicado, and even imprisoned indefinitely.  This is not only unethical, immoral, & unconstitutional, it's insane as well.

All of the above has resulted in Perpetual War...which is both Machiavellian and Orwellian.  It's also a very good thing for Mega Bankers and the War Industry...commonly referred to as the Defense Industry.

For ten years, I've been pointing out here on this blog that the Constitution is crystal clear on this whole issue.  Only Congress has the delegated power to start a war.  [Article I, Section 8]  The Executive Branch, with the President as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces [Article II, Section 2],  manages the war after it has been started by Congress.  The Supreme Law of the Land is so clear on this matter that one doesn't even have to be an attorney, much less a Supreme Court Justice, to understand it.  The Constitution also assigns Congress the power and duty to "...make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water".  [Article I, Section 8]  The CIA and the Military (i.e., Executive Branch) are not given that power.  Finally, only Congress has the power to issue "Letters of Marque and Reprisal" (assassination orders).  [Article I, Section 8]  The President does not have that power.

Imagine my joy when finally I heard on the News last night these words from Representative John Garamendi of California:  "Congress has the only power to declare war.  It's in the Constitution.  And yet, in all the seven and a half years I've been in Congress, we have never taken up the issue of war.".  He's one of ten Congress people who are co-sponsoring a legislative bill to de-fund the Afghan War... a war that's been ongoing for over sixteen years, and has no end in sight.  Three of the co-sponsors of the bill are Republicans and seven are Democrats.  At least it's a start.  From what I've heard so far, it doesn't return the powers (described above) stolen from Congress, but it's a start.

Those politicians in DC who believe that Laws passed by Congress and/or Executive Orders can over-ride the U.S. Constitution by transferring Congressional powers to the Executive Branch are violating their oath of office to "preserve, protect, and defend" that document.  The same is true of those who believe because the President is Commander-in-Chief, he/she has the power to decide when a war begins, who is to be assassinated, and which rules apply to captured enemies.  Being Commander-in-Chief does not mean one is allowed to ignore or bypass other parts of the Constitution.  Those powers have been seized by the Executive in an unconstitutional manner.  The President never had those powers, and still doesn't...at least, not legally.

Critics in office say the Supreme Law of the Land is out-of-date.  So...change it.  There are ways to do that...legally.  Critics then say, it's too difficult.  Yes, and purposely so, but it's not impossible.  It has been done over two dozen times.  Instead of violating your oath of office, get off your lazy butts and try to change it.  I suspect the reason none of you do is because then you also would have to deal with an Amendment for Term Limits...which would be the best change for this country in a good long while.

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

"The Drone Papers", and Obama the Assassin

This piece is a 10-16-15 REDUX---

"The Drone Papers", and Obama the Assassin

For a great overview of this subject and interviews with the investigative journalists involved, see today's newscast at Democracy Now (Friday, October 16, 2015).  I doubt you'll see anything like it on the Corporate Media outlets...which seem to be obsessed with the weather.

A whistleblower has supplied The Intercept.com with official secret documents regarding Obama's Drone Wars in Yemen, Somalia, & Afghanistan.  At their website (The Intercept), there's a series of articles based upon those documents:  "The Assassination Complex", "A Virtual Glossary", "The Kill Chain", "Find, Fix, Finish", "Manhunting in the Hindu Kush", "Firing Blind", "The Life and Death of Objective Peckham", and "Target Africa".  In a classified Pentagon study, officials found significant flaws in the Drone Program, including faulty Signals Intelligence (cell phone calls, texting, emails, etc.) and serious limitations in the drone technology itself.

Other of the Papers revealed that sometimes nine out of ten people killed are not the intended target.  [Anyone killed in a drone attack automatically is classified as an EKIA (Enemy Killed in Action)... even if that person is the target's grandmother.]  Also, reliance upon foreign intelligence is heavy, and in some cases, it's entirely possible that political opponents (especially in Yemen), not terrorists, were killed.  The Papers also revealed that in a few Afghan provinces, the residents opposed/resisted the Taliban...until Americans invaded their land.  There's much, much more, but I don't have the time or energy to cover it.  See the newscast at Democracy Now.

Obama is unconstitutionally targeting people for death.  A clause in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution makes it clear that only Congress, not the Executive Branch, can issue "Letters of Marque and Reprisal" (assassination orders).  Perhaps some people think, so what, he's killing terrorists who are a threat to us.  Too bad that's not always true...too bad that many more innocent people are being slaughtered than what we've been told by the Executive Branch, and too bad that we're not even at war with Somalia, Yemen, or Pakistan... all sovereign nations.  Pakistan, in particular, repeatedly has told our Gov't to stop bombing in their country.  Too bad that the Taliban now control more of Afghanistan than they ever did in the last fourteen years.  Too bad that Afghanistan is known (for very good reasons) as "The Graveyard of Empires".  The old Soviets had 500,000 Russian troops there...they lost that war.

Obama just recently stated (paraphrased):  "You know I'm not in favor of Endless War.".  All I know, Mr. President, is that's what you keep saying.  I see little to no evidence of the truth of that.  You claim these Drone Wars are not "war".  If that's true, then here's a thought for you:  you have no legal authority to order the murder of people around the world.  Who died & thus made you King?  Some of the people you're having killed probably were toddlers on 9-11-01.  Have they attacked us?  The fact is, even more than Bush-Cheney, you've maneuvered us into a present & future of perpetual war.  There's no end in sight.  There's no reasonable plan in sight.  Drone wars, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, and who knows what's next--- you're a warmonger, all in the name of national security.  Wow, what an original justification.  Here's another fact:  your military actions are making new terrorists and stirring up the old ones.  A final fact:  IT IS LAW ENFORCEMENT and everyday citizens who are keeping us safe from Terrorism...not your terrorist-creating, military maneuvers.  You've succeeded in making our Gov't's actions the number one generator of terrorists in the entire world.  You've beaten out Bush-Cheney in that regard.  I didn't think that was possible.

I (& many reputable analysts) think your military misadventures are because the economy here is in bad shape, our fiscal & monetary conditions are appalling, the dollar's world reserve currency status is being seriously threatened, and your implementation of the Big Stick around the world supposedly will hold it all together.  All you're doing is making enemies around the Globe, while at the same time, destroying our economy.  You people in the DC Ivory Tower need to wake up and pay attention.  You're not the Master, you're the Servant.

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

Several Insanities in the Western World, Especially the USA

Remember reading about the Age of Enlightenment, often cited as running from the late 1600's to about 1800, and sometimes called the Age of Reason?  It would appear that we humans are in need of a Second Age of Enlightenment.  Following are some of the things supporting such an assertion.  Let's begin with a somewhat trivial (compared to the others) example.

1.  Trump recently stated that "wages [in the USA] are too high".  What planet is The Don on?  Wages here essentially have stagnated for the last thirty years.  The cost of living has not.

2.  Our Fed Gov't and those of Russia & France are bombing ISIS in Syria...but, mostly thanks to the US,  they're not all cooperating with each other.  Is that a good plan?

3.  The Fed Gov't here denigrates Russia for sticking it's nose into Syria (a Russian ally) and for trying to increase its influence in the Middle East.  Are you kidding me?...talk about the pot calling the kettle black.  The US Gov't's primary foreign policy component is to stick its nose into just about every civil war in the world...especially in the Middle East and/or southern Central Asia.  Good grief!

4.  The US Gov't continues to kowtow to Saudi Arabia...not entirely, but significantly.  That's a troublesome issue because of the following.  Wahhabism, the Saudi State-sponsored extremist Sunni Sect, spreads its poison all around the world.  Radical, extremist terrorists are greatly encouraged by the Wahhabis; the roots of ISIS are in Wahhabism.  The DC Powers-That-Be know that...and yet they continue to support the House of Saud.

5.  The situation in Syria and Iraq is a complete mess.  [Over 7,000 airstrikes by the US Gov't haven't helped much at all...but they have pissed off a whole bunch of terrorists.]  In addition to the points above, the Gov't of Turkey is fighting ISIS...and fighting the Kurds, too...who happen to be fighting ISIS.  Certain leaders in the world seem to have lost their minds.

6.  The Taliban in Afghanistan now control more territory than they ever have since the US invasion.  So much for interfering in a civil war...and so much for "nation-building".

7.  Iraq now essentially is a failed State.  Ditto the last sentence above.

8.  The General in charge of the US program to train "moderates" to fight ISIS in Syria either has been or is going to be promoted.  The program was a complete failure.  About 5,000 were to be trained and equipped.  Five or so were put into battle; in short order they all were killed or captured...along with their weapons.

9.  Obama and most Republicans continue to push for approval of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).  Most Americans appear to be either oblivious to the Agreement/Treaty or against it.  The smallest bit of research should reveal to anyone that the TPP is bad news for average people.  It benefits only the Rich and Powerful.  For any politician to claim that it will make us more competitive and increase the number of jobs here is utter nonsense at best, and a bald-faced lie at worst.

10.  The War on Cash is well underway.  Under Civil Asset Forfeiture Laws here, any significant amount of cash on you now can be seized by Law Enforcement...without you being charged with anything.  The reason?  It's "suspicious".  In addition, the Powers-That-Be are pushing for a move to a cashless society.  One of the reasons is to prevent bank runs in the case of an economic/financial collapse.  Another reason:  those same Powers then will know, because of the National Surveillance State, every single purchase you make...or at least, they will have access to those records.  Consumer privacy will be gone.  I foresee a day when, if you use any cash at all, you'll most likely be deemed a "financial terrorist" or a run-of-the-mill criminal.

11.  The Police State in the USA continues.  Examples:  the Civil Asset Forfeiture Laws cited above; FBI Agents now writing their own Search Warrants (euphemistically titled "National Security Letters")...our Constitution is clear---a Judge must sign a Search Warrant; monitoring of people not even under investigation (the National Surveillance State); the militarization of local Police [a problem because the Police then act as though all citizens are their enemy...they have to, it's policy, it's "safe" procedure]; the almost unrestrained use of TASERs...which have killed people; shooting people in the back...for minor infractions [e.g., a homeless guy in New Mexico was camping outside of town...he turned to walk away from the cops & they killed him]; and many other examples.

12.  The Mega Banks, Mega Hedge Funds, and Mega Insurance Corporations have created, bought, and sold "Swaps" (Credit Default Swaps) to the tune of $550 trillion.  [The entire world's annual GDP is about $75 trillion.]  These Swaps do not make up all of the bizarre financial derivatives out in the Market (that total is about $1.25 quadrillion), but they are the ones that supposedly act as "insurance" against defaults on various contracts.  Should that Swap Bubble burst, as many reputable economists all across the political spectrum say it will, the whole world will be plunged into a Great Depression.  Who benefitted from the sale of these Swaps?  Oligarchs did...in the billions and billions...and billions.

13.  About 95% of world commerce is conducted either in dollars, the Pound, the Euro, or the Yen.  Every one of those currencies purposely is being debased (devalued).  That causes inflation in countries that don't have those as their currency...the emerging Markets, such as China, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, Brazil, etc.  Because of that, China is engaged in a Currency War with us...and because of that (and other reasons), the dollar's status as the world's reserve currency most likely will not last much longer.  Our Gov't tends to denigrate and blame China for all this.  The fact is, China is only protecting itself and its economy.  The U.S. is doing what many countries historically have done when they have way too much debt:  our Gov't, in a de facto way, is purposely debasing the dollar in order to cope with a massive debt...a debt that never will be repaid in full.  All gov'ts know that's what's happening.  My point here is this:  inflation is a currency event, not a price event.  In 1961, I bought a pair of Levi jeans for $3.95; the price of jeans now is anywhere from about $25 to $40.  In 1961, cigarettes were 25 cents a pack; now they're anywhere from $4 to $8 a pack.  That's because the U.S. dollar is worth less; it has been debased for decades via creating "money" out of thin air.  The chickens are finally coming home to roost, and the Fed Reserve is out of ammunition.

14.  Whether Democrats or Republicans are in power in the United States, Edward Bernays style Propaganda reigns supreme regarding war, the economy, and the "value" of the Rich and Powerful.  Again, please heed the words of Warren Buffett:  "We are in a Class War in this country, and unfortunately, my Class is winning.".  A big Amen to that, Warren.
..............................................................
Yes, I would say Humankind is in dire need of a Second Age of Enlightenment.
Not only my opinion.  Be Well

"The Drone Papers", and Obama the Assassin

For a great overview of this subject and interviews with the investigative journalists involved, see today's newscast at Democracy Now (Friday, October 16, 2015).  I doubt you'll see anything like it on the Corporate Media outlets...which seem to be obsessed with the weather.

A whistleblower has supplied The Intercept.com with official secret documents regarding Obama's Drone Wars in Yemen, Somalia, & Afghanistan.  At their website (The Intercept), there's a series of articles based upon those documents:  "The Assassination Complex", "A Virtual Glossary", "The Kill Chain", "Find, Fix, Finish", "Manhunting in the Hindu Kush", "Firing Blind", "The Life and Death of Objective Peckham", and "Target Africa".  In a classified Pentagon study, officials found significant flaws in the Drone Program, including faulty Signals Intelligence (cell phone calls, texting, emails, etc.) and serious limitations in the drone technology itself.

Other of the Papers revealed that sometimes nine out of ten people killed are not the intended target.  [Anyone killed in a drone attack automatically is classified as an EKIA (Enemy Killed in Action)... even if that person is the target's grandmother.]  Also, reliance upon foreign intelligence is heavy, and in some cases, it's entirely possible that political opponents (especially in Yemen), not terrorists, were killed.  The Papers also revealed that in a few Afghan provinces, the residents opposed/resisted the Taliban...until Americans invaded their land.  There's much, much more, but I don't have the time or energy to cover it.  See the newscast at Democracy Now.

Obama is unconstitutionally targeting people for death.  A clause in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution makes it clear that only Congress, not the Executive Branch,can issue "Letters of Marque and Reprisal" (assassination orders).  Perhaps some people think, so what, he's killing terrorists who are a threat to us.  Too bad that's not always true...too bad that many more innocent people are being slaughtered than what we've been told by the Executive Branch, and too bad that we're not even at war with Somalia, Yemen, or Pakistan... all sovereign nations.  Pakistan, in particular, repeatedly has told our Gov't to stop bombing in their country.  Too bad that the Taliban now control more of Afghanistan than they ever did in the last fourteen years.  Too bad that Afghanistan is known (for very good reasons) as "The Graveyard of Empires".  The old Soviets had 500,000 Russian troops there...they lost that war.

Obama just recently stated (paraphrased):  "You know I'm not in favor of Endless War.".  All I know, Mr. President, is that's what you keep saying.  I see little to no evidence of the truth of that.  You claim these Drone Wars are not "war".  If that's true, then here's a thought for you:  you have no legal authority to order the murder of people around the world.  Who died & thus made you King?  Some of the people you're having killed probably were toddlers on 9-11-01.  Have they attacked us?  The fact is, even more than Bush-Cheney, you've maneuvered us into a present & future of perpetual war.  There's no end in sight.  There's no reasonable plan in sight.  Drone wars, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, and who knows what's next--- you're a warmonger, all in the name of national security.  Wow, what an original justification.  Here's another fact:  your military actions are making new terrorists and stirring up the old ones.  A final fact:  IT IS LAW ENFORCEMENT and everyday citizens who are keeping us safe from Terrorism...not your terrorist-creating, military maneuvers.  You've succeeded in making our Gov't's actions the number one generator of terrorists in the entire world.  You've beaten out Bush-Cheney in that regard.  I didn't think that was possible.

I (& many reputable analysts) think your military misadventures are because the economy here is in bad shape, our fiscal & monetary conditions are appalling, the dollar's world reserve currency status is being seriously threatened, and your implementation of the Big Stick around the world supposedly will hold it all together.  All you're doing is making enemies around the Globe, while at the same time, destroying our economy.  You people in the DC Ivory Tower need to wake up and pay attention.  You're not the Master, you're the Servant.

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

Quagmires and Plain Craziness, in the USA and Abroad

1.  Our Gov't continues its two and a half decade war in Iraq.  If I recall correctly, that war started in 1990.  There were a few brief respites between then & now, but not many.  [I count "sanctions" as acts of war... because History does as well.]  Just prior to 1990, Saddam & our Gov't Oligarchs were best buddies.  He was taken OFF the Terrorist Watch List by Reagan, I think it was, because Iraq was in a war with Iran.  We continue on in Iraq not because of "spreading democracy" or "fighting terrorism" or whatever the current excuse may be, but rather because our access to Iraq's oil is not yet secure.

2.  Similarly, our Gov't continues to wage war (Gov't Oligarchs call it "counter-terrorism") in Afghanistan because geologists estimate that a one trillion dollar bonanza in minerals lies under the ground there.  [Some of those minerals are rare and just about mined-out everywhere else.]  The U.S. Gov't wants to secure access to that bonanza.

3.  Our President continues to meet every Tuesday with some number of other Executive Branch outlaws in order to choose which people to murder in "counter-terrorism" drone attacks.  [In most cases, such people are SUSPECTS.]  Again, I point out that such action by the Executive Branch is a direct violation of the U.S. Constitution.  One of the clauses in Article I, Section 8 clearly states that Letters of Marque and Reprisal (assassination orders) are to be issued by the Congress.  The Executive has no authority in that area.  Being Commander-in-Chief never has meant that the President gets to ignore some parts of the Supreme Law of the Land.

4.  Our Govt's Terrorist Watch List (or whatever the hack politicians call it) is completely illegal.  Admittedly, I'm not an attorney...thank Buddha-Mind (or "God", if you prefer); however, I do have a fairly good grasp of Logic and I'm very familiar with the Constitution.  I say that List is illegal because it accuses and harms people without them knowing about it until it's too late.  Plus, there's no appeal, no recourse, no chance to defend oneself.  You are deemed guilty until the Gov't changes its mind.  That whole scenario is not fair, just, or legal.  It's one more piece of evidence that we are in a Soft Fascist State.

5.  The Gov't of Turkey is now bombing both ISIS and the Kurds in northern Iraq, the same Kurds who are fighting ISIS.  Institutional idiocy.

6.  The Gov't of Germany (the richest country in Europe), along with the European Central Bank and others (including Hedge Funds), have refused to write-down Greece's debt to a point where it can be repaid.  After WW I, that's exactly the break that Germany got relative to its debt.  That's why, prior to Hitler, Germany was at the pinnacle of European culture and productivity.  The Germans were able to recover from WW I because their debt was reduced by their creditors.  [By the way, some portion of Greece's debt has been purchased at discounted prices by Hedge Funds, which stand to benefit greatly from the "Austerity" being imposed upon Greece.]  So now, pensions in Greece are being reduced to about $94 per month.  Public infrastructure will be sold to mega corporations.  Taxes will be raised in an already devastated economy.  Way to go, Germany, et. al.  Save the rich creditors, ruin Greece.  Great plan.

7.  The Police State in the USA continues on.  Read the headlines.  Plus, because cities & counties have lost so much tax revenue (due to Oligarchs moving manufacturing out of our country), in some places a driver can be ticketed & fined for having anything hanging from the rear view mirror...such as a deodorizer or a chain.  Then, too, there is Civil Asset Forfeiture.  With no charge, no indictment, no trial, nothing, your cash and other property can be seized by police because it's "suspicious".  For example, a significant amount of cash can be taken from you because the cop suspects that you may buy drugs with it...probable cause is not required.  Another example:  if you have certain tools in your car, they can be taken with no due process... because the cop thinks you're going to commit a burglary with them.  Have mercy.

8.  Saudi Arabia continues to behead people for "crimes" such as sorcery and blasphemy.  These barbarians are our allies, folks.  Again, have mercy.  Never mind that the State there sponsors the most radical form of Sunni Islam (Wahhabism) in existence... they behead people for "crimes" such as blasphemy and adultery.  Wake up, DC politicos.

9.  Obama continues to deny that his wars are war at all.  Instead, they are deemed "counter-terrorism".  Orwell would be proud.  The Constitution is clear about who can put this country at war... and it's not the President.  It appears, though, that very few Americans care whether or not our "leader" is violating the Supreme Law of the Land.  Amazing.

10.  It looks as though most Americans are gearing up for the phony national election next year.  For eight years, I've used this blog to detail why our whole political scene is a farce... so I won't repeat myself now.

Not just my opinion.  Be Well

US Combat CONTINUES in Afghanistan

Not too long ago, President Obama announced that the US combat mission in Afghanistan "has ended".  Like many of his utterances, this one also proved to be untrue.  It wasn't long after the announcement that the NYT reported this:  Obama had signed a secret order authorizing the remaining 10,800 troops to engage in combat.

Most recently, just the other day, the NYT also reported that combat night raids by US Special Forces had increased... now that the "combat mission in Afghanistan has ended".

Another lie from a Fed politician... go figure.

If there ever has been a President begging for impeachment, it is Barack Obama.  The man truly and literally is incredible.  Not only does he lie, but he violates the Constitution over and over.  [I've detailed such violations in several previous posts.]  Of course, he most likely won't be impeached because Republicans commit the same violations.  None of the DC politicians want a public discussion of why the President is not permitted to put this nation at war.  Only the Congress has the power to do that.

Not just my opinion.  Be Well

Obama's Wars = NeoCon, Kabuki Theater

On Democracy Now!, Jeremy Scahill (author of the NYT bestseller, Dirty Wars) described Obama's drone wars as "Kabuki Theater".  He implicitly referred to the Iraqi-Syrian ISIS War as the same.  Mr. Scahill is right on the money.  Let's also include the War in Afghanistan, the present purpose of which is unclear to just about everyone.  Any group having anything to do with 9-11 has left Afghanistan long ago.

Almost three years ago, Democracy Now! ran a clip of General Wesley Clark relating a story of his visit to the Pentagon just after 9-11.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8YtF76s-yM  An old colleague of his, another General, pulled him into his office and said that we were going to invade Iraq.  Clark asked "Why?", and his friend replied, "I don't know."...sometime later, General Clark was back visiting his friend and learned that the NeoCons at the highest levels had plans to invade seven Muslim countries and institute regime change.  Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Somalia were on that list.  So was Iran.  Such plans violate both the U.S. Constitution and International Law.

Enter Barack Obama, the Peace candidate in 2008...the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009.  The guy  was going to protect whistleblowers, close Guantanamo, institute a transparent Administration, restore credibility to the Executive Branch, and end wars.  This 2009 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize has bombed and/or launched missiles into Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, Somalia, and Syria.  [You couldn't make up this stuff if you tried.]  His war activities aren't that much different from those of the previous NeoCons...the guys who say he's a "socialist".  Obama, the fellow who protects mega bankers from prosecution, is the best friend of the private defense industry, and expands war to the point where it's perpetual...supposedly is a socialist.  Looks to me as though he's closer to being a NeoCon than anything else.  He's a lover of Crony Capitalism.  [His vaunted Obamacare is nothing more or less than a bailout of mega health insurance companies.  The "Leftist" Roosevelt Institute said exactly that in one of their analyses.]

Meanwhile, the Constitution is being violated, war "authorizations" either nonexistent ["...as Commander-in-Chief..."] or long expired ["...the Iraq War Resolution..."] are used to wage Perpetual War, the meanings of key terms (such as "imminent" and "war") are totally changed, innocent people are being killed, and phony threats are manufactured.  Jeremy Scahill thinks no one in Syria even has heard of the "Khorasan" Group.  If it does exist, best estimates are that the very few members are leaders of Al-Qaida...hardly a NEW threat, and no more of an "imminent" danger than they've been for years.

Kabuki Theater for sure.  Not just my opinion.  Be Well

The CURRENT WARS of Obama's Fed Government

The USA's Fed Gov't is involved in the following wars.  They are wars because Obama is having the U.S. Military (not Law Enforcement personnel) shoot at people and kill them.  That's war.  These all belong to Obama now.

1.  The Third Iraq War, the one launched just recently.

2.  The ongoing War in Pakistan, the one where the highest levels of our Gov't order Hellfire missiles to be shot (from drones) at SUSPECTS.

3.  Ditto the War in Yemen.

4.  Ditto the War in Somalia.

5.  The War in Afghanistan, our longest war, and the one nobody is quite sure anymore why it is that we're still there.  Obviously, the Carlyle Group, Halliburton, Raytheon, CACI, GE, Boeing, McDonnell-Douglas, and several other transnational mega corporations are enjoying tremendous benefits from that never-ending war, but surely that's not a good enough reason to STILL be there.  Is it?  Well, yes, if you are a member of the Plutocracy in a soft Fascist State such as the USA---where the public constantly is being bombarded with Edward Bernays style propaganda---then it is a good enough reason.  Follow the money; war is Big Business...very big.

Those are the wars of which I am aware and/or can remember at the moment.  Perhaps there are others as well.  Some may attempt to argue that those five wars really are all one war--- the War on Terrorism.  It's a tempting argument, and we certainly have been propagandized enough to believe it.  If, however, we engage in some critical thinking, that argument quickly falls apart.  Consider the following.
1.  The fanatics we're fighting are all in separate entities; there is no "central command".  There is no group with the title, "Terrorism".  So, for example, the Taliban (whose leaders we hosted here in 1997 in order to negotiate a pipeline in Afghanistan) have completely different objectives as compared to ISIS.  They only want to run Afghanistan, as they were doing in 1997 when we invited them here for a business deal.  [Query:  did our Gov't consider them nasty brutes then?  If so, why were we treating them as potential business partners?]
2.  The propaganda is this (especially amongst so-called "Conservatives"):  there is one group we're fighting; it's "the Muslims", in particular, the fanatical element of the Muslims.  Really?  So, are they Sunnis or Shiites?  The fanatics, the extremists in Islam (not the mainstream) are at each other's throats.  They are not one group.  They appear to be worried more about each other than about us.  Plus, from what I can see, the Taliban don't give a damn about anything except Afghanistan.  Us still being in that country is complete nonsense.  To think of "the Muslims" as a monolithic, homogeneous entity also is nonsense.
3.  Specifically, whose military are we fighting in this supposed "War on Terrorism"?  The people we're fighting are not in an Army; they are a bunch of heterogeneous criminal gangs (of a sort).  They each have their own agenda.  Should any of them ever attack the USA again, it is a matter for Law Enforcement, not our Military.  Most all of the plots against our country have been thwarted by LAW ENFORCEMENT Agencies, not our Armed Forces.  Soldiers are not cops, and shouldn't be expected to fulfill that function.

Finally, the five wars listed above are all illegal, unconstitutional wars.  Three uses of the military are permitted by the Constitution:  to repel invasions (of this country); to quell insurrections (in this country); and to enforce the laws of the land (in this country) when minor rebellions make that necessary---for example, the Whisky Rebellion of the late 1700s, or the refusal to integrate schools in the South in the mid-sixties.  No law trumps the Constitution, so the War Powers Act cannot be used legally to justify going to war for some reason other than the three scenarios listed above.

That leaves only TREATIES to justify wars outside the USA (if we haven't been attacked at home).  Treaties do trump the Constitution.  IF that's what's being used to justify the five wars above, I'd like to see those Treaties...especially the one with Somalia or any of its neighbors.  [As to Afghanistan, it wasn't the Taliban who attacked us on 9-11-01.  Their refusal to turn over Osama supposedly justified us going to war with Afghanistan.  The truth is:  the Taliban replied to our Fed Govt's request by saying essentially this:  show us some proof of his guilt and we'll turn him over to you.  Our Gov't refused.  Being a guest of an Afghan tribal society is a really big deal in their culture.  I think the Taliban's request for proof was reasonable.]  The funny thing is, I've never heard the DC Plutocrats use any Treaty to justify the wars in question.  Usually they claim the right to go to war based on the War Powers Act and/or the duties of Commander-in-Chief.  They certainly couldn't use a Treaty to justify invading Iraq in 2003; Saddam hadn't attacked any other country then, whether our ally or not.  The Bush Administration's justification was that Saddam was guilty of PRE-Crime.  [Explained in a previous post on this Blog.]  As Bush put it, "If we wait for the smoking gun, it will be too late."...sounds good, but that's a completely illegal reason to attack and invade another country.

Any way you examine supposed justifications for the above-listed wars, they turn out to be illegal, unconstitutional, unethical, and even immoral.  Welcome to the Soft Fascist States of America, a land I love, but sincerely regret the fact that we no longer have a representative government...and that's been true for decades.  Carroll Quigley was right in 1966.

It's a genuine shame.

Be Well

Afghanistan...

is known as "the graveyard of empires".  We've been there for something like thirteen years.  The country is the world's largest opium producer, the apparently corrupt Karzai Gov't no longer wants us there, the Taliban are not a threat to the USA, we've more or less decimated their country, a lot of the infrastructure we've built there already has fallen apart, our troops have been killed & maimed, billions of our dollars simply have evaporated, and Al Qaida long ago moved on to Yemen and elsewhere.  The fact that we're still there is just plain asinine.  Never mind the fact that it's an unconstitutional use of the U.S. Military.

Our Fed Gov't has been rotting from within for decades.  Meanwhile, We the People are Distracted by Propaganda & Circuses, Divided by Fraudulent Political Parties, and Conquered by the Super-Rich.

Enjoy the upcoming Fourth of July.

Be Well

Part II: The Bush-Obama Doctrines

PREFACE
These blog pieces should not in any way, shape, or form be viewed as "anti-American".  The principles of We the People in the USA have not been represented by the Fed Gov't for decades.  I'm talking about the principles of freedom, Free Market Capitalism, fairness, and justice.  Our Gov't has been co-opted by a fairly disorganized (but nevertheless effective) Oligarchy whose members don't believe in any of those things.  That has been going on for a very long time.  The dissidents in America are far more patriotic than the Oligarchs can ever hope to be or care to be.

Now, on to the Bush-Obama Doctrines, Part II.  [Many other Democrat and Republican Administrations could be included, but for clarity I'll stick with only those two.]

1.  Dictators around the world should be opposed... unless, of course, they march to the tune of the U.S. Fed Gov't.  Then they should be supported.  [Example:  the Feds fairly recently gave the military dictatorship of Egypt 1.5 BILLION dollars in aid.  This is the same dictatorship that conducts court trials of hundreds of dissidents at once; each trial lasts about 30 minutes.  This is the same dictatorship that overthrew a democratically elected government.  Previous to all that, the Bush Administration gave similar amounts of aid to the Gov't of the dictator Mubarak.]

2.  Continue to inundate the People with Edward Bernays style propaganda.  [Examples:  lies about NSA surveillance; lies about the health of our economy; lies about Oligarchs "creating jobs"; lies about the power of the Office of President; lies about the role of the U.S. in world affairs; lies about mega banks; lies about conflict of interest in DC;  lies about so-called "Free Trade" Agreements; and many other items too numerous to list.]

3.  Tell the People whatever you think it is that they want to hear... even if it's untrue, or utter nonsense.  [Examples:  "Saddam is linked to Al Qaida"; "Our troops will be out of Afghanistan by 2014"... a bit later--- "Our troops will be out of Afghanistan by 2016"; "This is not anything like our involvement in Vietnam"; "We will assure the People of Iraq and Afghanistan the right of free choice"; "They hate us for our Freedom"; "We're fighting them there so we don't have to fight them here"; "Our economy will collapse if we don't do this"; "Congress has NSA oversight"; "All NSA surveillance is authorized by a court...it's all legal and Constitutional" (no mention that it's the kangaroo, rubber-stamp FISA "court"... a secret court... and no explanation of exactly HOW/WHY it's Constitutional... because it isn't.); etc., etc., ad nauseum.]

4.  Originate (Bush) and continue (Obama) the concept of the Unitary Presidency... an absurd, false principle concocted primarily by John Yoo, former Counsel to Dubya.  It's basic premise is that the Office of President legally can bypass Congress, the Courts, or anybody when undertaking actions previously denied by our system of Checks and Balances in government.  [Google:  Unitary Presidency.]  The result has been to convert the Office of President into that of a virtual King.

5.  Prosecute war criminals and terrorists... unless, of course, those same people are in the U.S. Fed Gov't.  [Richard Clarke, former Counterterrorism "Czar" under Clinton, and for a short time under Bush, has stated publicly that he believes some of the actions of Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld measure up to "war crimes".  Noam Chomsky--- political dissident, political analyst, Professor Emeritus of M.I.T.--- has stated publicly that he believes the invasion of Iraq was in itself a war crime.  Other prominent people in the world believe the same thing.  I would ask this:  did Iraq, a country that did not threaten or attack the U.S., and also a country that we supplied arms to in the '80s (including chemical weapons), have sovereignty in 2003 or not?  Yes, Saddam was a brutal ruler; however, that has absolutely nothing to do with the Constitutionally permitted use of our military.  Nothing at all.  That war was completely unconstitutional.  It was an exercise in NeoImperialism & Big Bullyism perpetrated by a President and supported by Senator Obama who both are puppets of the mega corporation Oligarchy.  The Feds even provided tutorial conferences (relative to the war) for mega corporations, showing them how to belly-up to the Federal Money Trough, the Fed Gravy Train.]

6.  Sign International Agreements relating to war crimes and terrorism... but exempt the USA's Gov't from being subject to any prosecution under their provisions.  [That has been going on for decades.  The Fed Gov't always has self-immunized itself from any such prosecution.  That is understandable to some degree... until the Feds (as they often do) chastise some country or another for violating "International Law"... the Law to which the Feds are not subject... by their own insistence.  That is completely bizarre.]

Out of time.

Be Well

This and That

I certainly don't know the full story on the Crimea Crisis, and I have no affinity for the Oligarch, Putin...but I do know this much.  Any group of people, anywhere in the world, has the Natural Right to secede from the governmental institution ruling over them.  Government is not the Master...at least, that's the way it should be.  Unfortunately, most all governments in today's developed countries are Fascist in nature.  Again, I'm using FDR's and Mussolini's definition of Fascism:  the power of the State married to the power of BIG Business.  That situation is always totalitarian to one degree or another.  Whether or not the presence of Russian troops influenced the referendum in Crimea is beside the point...people have the Right to choose a different government.  My understanding is that Ukraine essentially has been two separate countries for decades anyway.  Plus, what happened there in 1954?  History matters.

Perhaps some Americans are unaware that in the late 1780s both New York and Virginia refused to ratify the Constitution until they were given assurances that withdrawal from the Union was permitted.  Such assurances were given... and believed... another Fed Gov't lie and broken promise.
--------------------------------------------------------

The highest levels of the USA Fed Gov't criticizing Russia's actions, and worse, proposing economic sanctions, is the absolute height of hypocrisy.  Remember Panama...and Poppy Bush?  Have you seen the acclaimed documentary, The Panama Deception?  Remember Iraq...not only the invasion, but previous to that, the economic sanctions that were responsible for the deaths of an estimated 500,000 children?  Let's go way back--- the "annexation" of Hawaii, which amounted to the theft of the islands from the indigenous Hawaiians by the US Gov't.  How about the invasion of the Philippines in the late 1890s, and the slaughter of thousands of indigenous people?  How about the theft of half of Mexico in the 1840s?  More recently--- after Osama escaped from Afghanistan, and Dubya Bush shifted the military effort to the invasion of Iraq, various "trial balloons" were sent up by the Feds and the Corporate Media to test the public mind relative to the proposed bombing and invasion of Afghanistan.  At that time, an international poll was conducted around the world asking if that was a good idea.  The results of that poll largely were suppressed... because the world in general overwhelmingly was against the idea.  Or, how about Pakistan, where the US Fed Gov't is killing hundreds of civilians (see previous post on this Blog) with drone strikes?

In addition, to hear Kerry talking about "International Law" violations by Russia is both tragic and comic.  The highest levels of the US Fed Gov't, throughout History (right up to present day), have violated International Law probably more than any other country on Earth.  In fact, the World Court has deemed some of the US actions as "acts of terrorism".  Naturally, the Corporate Media report almost nothing of that.  Fed Gov't hypocrisy abounds.

In no way should this essay be taken as some sort of support for Russia's actions in Crimea.  Putin is just as much an Oligarch as the puppets in DC.  The point here is that US criticism of his actions is nothing more than the pot calling the kettle black.  Plus, the Russian-speaking people in Crimea do have the Natural Right to choose their own government.  Governments are supposed to be the servants of the People.
------------------------------------------

In general, Oligarchies care about institutions, not people.  For the most part, Oligarchs view us as livestock.  To them, our purpose is to provide cheap labor and money to public and private institutions...which are controlled by the Oligarchs.

Consider "job creation" and the economy.  The Edward Bernays propaganda from the Oligarchy is that rich people create jobs; therefore, corporate welfare from the government is necessary.  In fact, the exact opposite is true:  consumers create jobs.  A corporate institution can manufacture all the widgits it wants to... for a time... but if no one buys those widgits, the corporation goes bust.  Numerous studies have shown that consumers drive about 70% of the economy.  When listening to the Corporate Media, one would think that the stock market is the main factor in the health of our economy.  Not true; actually, it's consumers (of both goods and services) who are the main factor in the health of the stock market and the economy.

Consider the Iraq War (which was completely unconstitutional).  Not too long ago, Alan Greenspan spoke publicly about the fact that it was politically incorrect to say so, but that war was "all about the oil".  That's a fairly amazing admission from an Oligarch.  Most of the world, including me, knew that already... but it was nice to hear.  One thing's for sure--- we didn't bring democracy, peace, freedom, and prosperity to Iraq; instead, we facilitated death, despair, corruption, and civil war.

Meanwhile, Obama, Kerry, McCain, et. al., criticize Russia in relation to Crimea... where, so far at least, not a shot has been fired by Russian soldiers.

Be Well

This and That

1.  I see by yesterday's headlines that Afghanimization is going about as well as did Vietnamization---Nixon & Kissinger's plan to turn over the fighting in Vietnam (back when) to the South Vietnamese Army.  Similar conditions exist in Afghanistan as existed in Vietnam during that war---a corrupt government, a native Army incapable of defending itself, a native people who do not support the corrupt/puppet government, and a native people who want us out of their country.  And yet we continue... completely ignoring the lessons of History.  Young troops being maimed & killed for the sake of the Corporatocracy...the Oligarchy...the Plutocracy...whatever you wish to call it...and, the estimated one trillion dollars worth of unmined minerals...the natural gas & oil pipeline corridors...Brzezinki's "American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives".  Shameful...and utterly so.  Apparently most Americans still believe that the present war is protecting us from TERRORISM, the Boogie Man that replaced the other Boogie Man, Communism.  Please.  That's about as true as the line that the Vietnam war was protecting us from Communism.  Let's see, N. Vietnam won...and life everywhere else went on pretty much the same.  No dominoes fell.  We now trade with Vietnam and visit there at will.

2.  Kudos to Snowden, the guy who blew the whistle on the NSA.  The NSA's actions were the result of orders from the FISA "Court", a secret "court" with absolutely no oversight by anyone...not Congress, not anyone... except of course, the Dictator-in-Chief (any President, not just Obama).  Where are the "checks and balances"?  Over the last 2-3 decades, the Executive Branch has seized an incredible amount of unconstitutional power.  Defenders of that obscenity can go on & on about how this or that secret action---with no oversight---prevented this or that calamity.  They miss the point---our Constitutional Republic cannot legally operate that way.  We have, in effect, an Outlaw Government.  Defenders of the current obscenity can go on & on about how, as Obama put it, "no one's conversations are being listened to".  Really?  How do we know?---there's no oversight.  Plus, the NSA actions included the internet.  I didn't hear anyone say, "no one's web surfing is being watched".  Again, how do we know...there's zero oversight.  Our Republic exists in name only...the checks and balances are long gone.  Long gone.

Be Well

Globalization: Part II, Players and Methods

The Players---

I'm sure you gathered from reading Part I that the IMF and World Bank are key players in the process of Globalization. [I consider them quasi-governmental bodies, rather than non-governmental.] Add to that the U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve, as well as the central banks of most of the other industrialized countries. It is believed by many serious writers that the IMF/World Bank are merely extensions of the policies of the U.S. Treasury, the Fed Reserve, U.K.'s Treasury, and the U.K.'s Bank of England.

While the above institutions are important, they are no more important than the non-governmental bodies: the transnational mega corporations, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR, founded in 1922) and its U.K. counterpart, the Royal Institute of International Affairs (aka, Chatham House), and the Trilateral Commission (founded in 1973 by David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski). The CFR and Chatham House are the anglophile Round Table Groups, described in the late Professor Carroll Quigley's 1966 book, Tragedy and Hope. The best quote from the book: "The tragedy is that we no longer have a representative government in this country, or any country; the hope is that the little people will come to accept that, because there is nothing they can do about it." Again...it was published in 1966. Quigley also claimed that the CFR was a front for the J.P. Morgan Company; keep in mind that the good professor (Bill Clinton's mentor at Georgetown University) was a very well respected historian and scholar.

In 1991, David Rockefeller stated publicly, "Surely it is preferable to have the world run by unelected, supranational, [business] elites rather than the nations of the past with their corrupt politicians." That is the goal of Globalization. The function of groups such as the CFR, Chatham House, and the Trilateral Commission is to provide the philosophical underpinnings, the unquestionable academic justifications, for the governmental policies that result in the implementation of Globalization. Consequently, the CFR publishes academic-level papers such as Building a North American Community (meaning, the North American Union), The End of National Currency, Bretton Woods II: Does the World Need a New Monetary System? (authored by Larry Summers, Obama's chief economic advisor), and Global Economic Governance. The Trilateral Commission pens scholarly papers such as Global Governance, Global Redistribution of Power, and Sovereignty and Intervention. The tremendous influence of these groups on governmental policy cannot be overstated; for all intents and purposes, essentially they formulate most of our nation's foreign policy and perhaps a good deal of our monetary policy.

The Methods---

There seems to be no particular chronological order to these methods; at times one must precede another, but mostly they are all taking place more or less simultaneously. I'll list them here, then expand on each one later: selection of Globalist candidates for national office, and then the marketing of them; introduction and justification of Globalist policies to the intellectual elite of the country; use of IMF/World Bank "Structural Adjustment Programs", thus facilitating U.S. corporate expansion to poor countries; Trade Agreements and the WTO (World Trade Organization); the use of "Economic Hit Men"; facilitating coups in uncooperative countries; the maintenance of approximately 800 U.S. military bases on foreign soil; and finally, invasion of uncooperative countries (which is a last resort).

Here's what a national election amounts to in the U.S.: the heads of transnational corporations and other members of the Oligarchy/ Corporatocracy, having identified and groomed pre-selected candidates from the two major parties, make massive campaign contributions (indirectly, through PACs) to both. One candidate or the other may be favored from time to time, but generally either one will do. [There is arguably only one major political party in the U.S.: the Transnational Mega Business Party, with a Republican faction and a Democrat faction.] As FDR once wrote to a friend, "In this country, candidates are selected, not elected." The campaign contributions are necessary because the candidates must be marketed to the voting public, and that requires expensive PR firms and multi-media advertising. PR firms run campaigns, not the DNC, DLC, or RNC. The public usually is not bothered with any details regarding Globalization.

Globalist policies must be "sold" to the intellectual elites because those elites are extremely influential in the Corporate Media, educational institutions, various community groups, the entertainment industry, and government at all levels. A relatively small percentage of the American public actually pays attention to important public matters, and it's useful to have them supportive of Globalist tools, e.g., NAFTA. As mentioned above, the intellectual think tanks (CFR, etc.) "justify" policies and tools to the intelligentsia via scholarly papers and even books. Often the mainstream, Corporate Media present summaries of think tank ideas to the general public.

A key method in terms of the Third World is to convince poor countries to take on massive IMF/World Bank loans...for "development". Attached to each loan or interest reduction on a previous loan are conditions, Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs), which require actions such as: cutting gov't expenditures, devaluing the currency, privatization of State-owned enterprises, lifting of trade restrictions, enhancing the rights of foreign investors, gearing the economy to exports, and removing price controls and/or State subsidies. Critics have referred to this as virtual extortion. As a consequence, Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) have replaced SAPs; however, their contents more often than not turn out to be essentially the same as the old SAPs. The money loaned doesn't go to job development or farm aid, rather it ends up in the wallets of companies such as Bechtel, Hochtief, or Halliburton. They are hired to build ports (for those exports), roads (to get the goods to the ports), water systems, and other infrastructure.

The use of Trade Agreements such as NAFTA to implement Globalization requires no discussion, except to say that there is some controversy regarding the status of NAFTA. Canada and Mexico claim that it's a Treaty; however, it received only 61 votes in the Senate. A treaty requires the approval of 67 Senators. Whether or not it's a Treaty is important because Treaties override U.S. laws.

The World Trade Organization (WTO) plays a major role in the implementation of Globalization. The WTO, headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, began in 1995 (replacing GATT) and is the only international body dealing with trade between and among nations. It makes the rules for 97% of all world trade, and publishes research papers such as, The WTO and Direct Taxation. No country can override the WTO's rules. Some critics have called the WTO an embryo world government, and claim that it favors rich countries over poor ones. In any case, it has impacted the sovereignty of member countries. A "treaty" of the WTO, the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), extended the world trading system to include the service sector; all WTO members are signatories to GATS. The GATS Treaty is the primary tool of the WTO for the implementation of privatization of services such as municipal water delivery and delivery of electricity.

Economic hit men (a la John Perkins, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man) are used to essentially extort/blackmail uncooperative countries, primarily poor countries. The "hit man" will point out to the leader of the country that his country has a World Bank/IMF loan that cannot possibly be repaid, thus the leader needs to do one or more of a number of things, such as voting a certain way in the U.N. on some issue, or favoring some private contractor regarding a large in-country project bidding process. "Oh, by the way, here's $100,000 for your trouble." Mr. Perkins was never 100% certain who his employer was, but eventually assumed that it was the CIA. His book was a NYT bestseller.

Coups as a tool of Globalization should be self-explanatory. The example of Indonesia was given previously. Sukarno would not cooperate with the IMF, so he was booted out. [Same thing with Allende in Chile.] The dictator Suharto in Indonesia allowed U.S. companies to move in and utilize virtual sweatshops for the manufacture of goods for stores such as the GAP and Old Navy. The U.S. and U.K. have participated in coups in fifty countries since 1953, when the CIA engineered the ousting of the democratically elected leader of Iran and installed the Shah. The Shah purchased millions of dollars of armaments from the U.S. and, of course, supplied us with a portion of our oil requirement.

The maintenance of about 800 U.S. military bases around the world is tied in to the final method: invasion of uncooperative countries as a last resort. A prime example is Operation Just Cause, the invasion of Panama in 1989. The dictator Noriega had become uncooperative, especially relative to Nicaragua, thus his drug informant days for the CIA were used as an excuse to invade...without admitting that he was a CIA operative. It all came out a few years later in a few books and the documentary film, Deception in Panama. At the time of the invasion, George Bush the elder was President here, Dick Cheney was the Secretary of Defense, and Colin Powell was the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Other examples include our invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. While 9-11 provided a fortuitous reason for the invasion of Afghanistan, Taliban representatives were told months before that date, "If you don't accept our carpet of gold [for a pipeline easement across Afghanistan], we'll give you a carpet of bombs." (According to a whistleblower) Plus, according to Brzezinski in 1998, control of Afghanistan, Iraq, Uzbekistan (where we now have a military base) and a number of other -stans in Central Asia was a "geostrategic imperative for American primacy". Read into that what you will. In the case of Iraq (which, even according to Bush, had nothing to do with 9-11), Saddam, our former ally, had become uncooperative relative to the petro-dollar. Prior to the invasion, he was on the verge of accepting Euros for oil. If allowed to proceed, that would have ended the petro-dollar and the dollar as the world's reserve currency. That, in turn, most likely would have resulted in a series of events ending with the collapse of our dollar. Plans to invade Iraq were formulated months before 9-11. Saddam, our big buddy in the '80s, had to go. [In the '80s, we supplied him with weapons in order to punish Iran for the overthrow of the Shah and the holding of American hostages. The result was the eight-year Iraq-Iran war.]

In Part III of this series, key understandings will be presented in order to tie everything together. In addition, there will be more on Latin America.

Government-Speak and Iraq

Remember "Doublespeak" from Orwell's book, 1984? That's "Government-Speak" in my title above. An example would be one of today's headlines: "Final U.S. Combat Troops Leaving Iraq". Really? The qualifier is: 50,000 "support" troops remain in Iraq. 50,000. Support troops apparently are trainers and/or advisors to the Iraqis.

It has been quite awhile since I served in the Army, but I'm fairly certain of one thing regarding Iraq. There are not 50,000 trainers/advisors left there. At most, my best guess is that there are about 5,000 such troops left in Iraq. The remaining 45,000 or so are combat troops waiting for orders to resume combat, if necessary. They are similar to the troops we still have in Korea, Germany, etc.

At the same time that "combat troops are leaving Iraq", that country's infrastructure is barely functioning. Electricity runs for only about two to five hours per day, and then only in bursts of approximately fifteen minutes at any one time. Safe drinking water is not always available. On top of that, Iraq does not now have a functioning government. Another election was held not long ago, but there was no clear majority, and the various factions have not yet formed a central government. Meanwhile, insurgents have ramped up attacks via suicide car bombs, IEDs (improvised explosive devices) and murder by gunshot. It's not exactly a stable situation.

Don't misunderstand, I'm very happy that about 10,000 more troops have left Iraq. I wish they all had left. My fear is that our Fed Government will be sending those 10,000 (plus a lot more) back before too long. I also suspect that many of my fellow citizens now will think that the Iraq quagmire is "wrapped up", over. I don't think that's the case. My guess is that it's a temporary withdrawal due to politics: Americans currently are fed up with both wars.

Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and several other -stans in Central Asia make up a big part of Zbigniew Brzezinski's, The Grand Chessboard, American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives (a 1998 book). Brzezinski, a true Globalist, along with David Rockefeller co-founded the Trilateral Commission (TC) in 1973. The TC is a Globalist, intellectual think tank which shares ideas and leadership regarding the problems and implementation of Globalism. In my opinion, The Grand Chessboard is the driving force behind our Government's foreign policy, and has been since about 1999.

I firmly believe that the Globalists in DC are drowning us in Government-Speak, especially regarding Iraq, Afghanistan, and the other -stans. We are not there primarily because of our desire to "spread democracy", or because of terrorist threats to America, or because certain foreign leaders are brutal. [We were very happy to be dealing with Saddam, the Taliban, and the Shah of Iran, all brutal dictators, when they were cooperating with us relative to oil, pipeline routes, and the continuance of the petro-dollar.] We are there to secure natural resources, transportation routes for those resources, and to preserve the almighty petro-dollar. Most importantly, it doesn't matter relative to this situation whether Republicans or Democrats are in power in DC. Both parties have been co-opted by the Globalists. [And no...it's not a conspiracy; it's right out in the open. Do a search for the membership of the TC, and one for the membership of the CFR. Conservatives may be surprised to learn that Dick Cheney once was the Director of the Council on Foreign Relations, the CFR.]

Saddam, our former ally, was preparing to accept Euros for oil just prior to our last invasion of Iraq. That's why he had to go. Had he been allowed to proceed, that would have been the end of the petro-dollar, and the end of the dollar as the world's reserve currency. That, in turn, would have meant total bankruptcy for the U.S. Our fiat dollar has virtually no value, except for the fact that it is the world's reserve currency. If and when that ends, the dollar most likely will collapse.

A few months before 9-11, representatives of the Taliban were invited here to negotiate a pipeline route across Afghanistan, needed by Big Oil. We knew how brutal they were, but no one in the Government squawked over that then. According to one whistleblower and intelligence agent, the Taliban were told, "If you don't accept our carpet of gold [for a pipeline easement], we'll give you a carpet of bombs."

As a serious observer of American politics for over half a century, I've noticed that with each passing decade national politicians have become more and more Orwellian. The Government-Speak now is nothing short of astounding, and the frequency of it is overwhelming. With unmitigated hubris, the Republican and Democrat Globalists lie to us...and with a completely straight face. Most of them have no shame whatsoever. It is my sincere hope that, come November, 99% (there are a few honest ones, but very few) of the incumbents are voted out of office. Please, I beg of you.

Leave Afghanistan

It is past time to get out of Afghanistan. Here's why---

1. The Intelligence Service (ISI) of Pakistan (supposedly our ally) aids the Pashtun Taliban. This is the same ISI that reportedly sent $100,000 to M. Atta, one of the 9-11 hijackers. This reason alone is enough to bring our battle-weary, frustrated troops home. These are the same troops who are given highly restrictive Rules Of Engagement, rules that are more suited to police officers than to combat troops.

2. The central government of Hamid Karzai and his brother is corrupt to the core. The Afghanis know this, and they know that we support the same corrupt, central government.

3. We are trying to establish a central government in a country that has almost no history of such a thing.

4. The Pashtun Taliban are at war with Karzai's government. Once again, we are in the middle of a civil war.

5. The new U.S. target date for withdrawal is 2014. The chances are good that by 2014 things won't be much "better" than they are right now. For certain, they'll be worse for us---more dead and disabled troops, more billions of dollars spent fruitlessly.

6. The Soviets committed 500,000 troops to their war with Afghanistan years ago...and they lost. Afghanistan is known as the "Graveyard of Empires" for very good reasons.

7. Polls indicate that over half the population in Afghanistan do not want us in their country any longer.

8. There are many, many more Al Qaida insurgents in Pakistan and Yemen than in Afghanistan. Intelligence estimates put the number of Al Qaida in Afghanistan at about 25-50, out of a total of approximately 25,000 insurgents.

9. Logic suggests that there's a high probability that Osama bin Laden is no longer alive. For one thing, why would he stop releasing video tapes that spurred on his fanatics?

I'll say it again: although there are obvious differences, the war in Afghanistan reminds me greatly of our involvement in Vietnam---corrupt governments in both cases, civil wars, restrictive Rules of Engagement, "winning hearts and minds", horrible losses of life (including "collateral damage"), billions of dollars, and Secretaries of Defense from the corporate world.

Here's who is benefitting from us being in Afghanistan: SAIC (Robert Gates was once on their Board of Directors); Halliburton/KBR; private security companies; and numerous other corporations in the defense industry. We probably also should include the Powers-That-Be in our own Fed Government, as the war allows more expansion of government and more intrusions into our personal lives (because it's part of the so-called "War on Terror").

It is long past time to get out of Afghanistan and Iraq. There is much more terrorism in the world now, as compared to before we invaded those countries. Not only that, but our loss of life, limb, and treasure is obscene. And for what... to combat terrorism? I don't think so.

Good for McChrystal!

Was it rude?...yes. Did it violate military etiquette?...yes. Was it good for his career?...I doubt it, but the guy is already a four-star General. Was he being stupid?...I don't think so. Did he not know what the impact of those remarks would be?...I think he did know.

There is no question that the civilian government should have control over the military. Does that mean that Generals and their staffs should never publicly disagree with the President or other members of the Administration? No, in my opinion, it doesn't mean that at all. I know it's the politically correct thing to do, but I think We the People have a right to know what the Generals who are prosecuting the war think about the civilians who are in control.

According to the reporter who broke the story, McChrystal and his staff have been extremely frustrated with the Obama Administration for quite some time. In my view, it's too bad that Westmoreland didn't speak up back in the Vietnam days. I believe that this situation in Afghanistan is similar to the one in Vietnam back when. In both cases, I don't think the Oligarchy that rules this country wants (or wanted, in 'Nam) to win the war. What they want is perpetual war. [See my previous post immediately below this one.]

I don't support either war that we're engaged in currently...the troops, yes, but not the wars. Obviously, then, I didn't support the "surge" in Afghanistan requested by McChrystal. [Surge---that's government-speak for expanding the war.] Nevertheless, I see his point of view. As McNamara once pointed out, historically it has taken a ratio of ten conventional troops to one guerilla to win an insurgency-type war. By the time McNamara realized that he had to count North Vietnamese Regulars (as well as Viet Cong) in that ratio, it was too late. [That would have meant one million American combat troops in 'Nam.] If we accept that historical ratio, in McChrystal's case that means
250,000 American/Allied troops in Afghanistan. He won't ever get that. The main reason he won't is not because it would be politically unpopular; rather, it is because the Corporatocracy/Oligarchy doesn't want a resolution in Afghanistan for awhile. In my opinion, that's because the American public hasn't yet been conditioned enough to accept our invasion of the next country, whichever one that happens to be.

No-Drama Obama (the Media gave him that tag, not me) easily could prolong the Afghan War by firing McChrystal. Actually, though, it doesn't much matter whether he does or not, because according to the historical ratio mentioned above, whoever leads the troops does not have enough of them to bring about a favorable resolution anyway. [Thank God...more troops would mean more blood and treasure expended in vain.] The fact is, we need to get out of both Iraq and Afghanistan ASAP. Even if we "stabilize" both countries, what happens when we leave? Major combat (by Americans) supposedly is over in Iraq and the country still is not stable. We can't stay in these countries forever, but that seems to be the plan.

The Corporatocracy, Hit Men, & the American Empire

This is old news, but it's applicable to today and well worth reviewing and remembering. It is all detailed in the book, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man (2004), by John Perkins, who was formerly an economic hit man for the Corporatocracy.

Perkins explains how, when a third world country has resources coveted by mega corporations and/or the Government in the US, those resources are obtained via the following process. If the country with the resources is not cooperative, a series of huge loans to that country is arranged through the World Bank. The money eventually goes to multi-national mega corporations such as Bechtel and Halliburton; they are hired by the country to build ports, industrial plants, roads, etc. When the country is so far in debt that it has little or no possibility of getting out of debt, economic hit men are sent in to strike a deal---for natural resources (such as oil), or favorable votes in the U.N., or agreements for certain other actions. If the economic hit men fail, then the "jackals" (assassins) are sent in, usually from the CIA; if they fail, then the military (as part of a "coalition") is sent in to bring about the desired regime change.

About 1959-1960 a very young, CIA-backed jackal by the name of Saddam Hussein attempted to assassinate the President of Iraq, Abdel Qassim. Qassim's major sin was that he was going to nationalize Iraqi oil. At the time, the Iraqi Petroleum Company (IPC) was 95% controlled by the US, Britain, and France. The assassination attempt failed, but Qassim was eliminated anyway not long after that; economic hit men had failed to dissuade him from his plan to nationalize all oil in Iraq, so the CIA orchestrated his demise.

In the early '70s, just after the OPEC oil embargo of the US, economic hit men were sent to the House of Saud in Saudi Arabia to strike the "deal of the century" for the Corporatocracy. President Nixon had taken the US completely off the Gold Standard (because the country was bankrupt) and there was great concern in the Corporatocracy that the world would not accept the US dollar as the globe's reserve currency. In the "deal of the century", the House of Saud agreed to sell its oil for dollars only and to purchase US Treasury Securities; in return the Saudis were guaranteed two very important things--- the Corporatocracy would see to it that they remained in power, and would invest in industry and infrastructure in Saudi Arabia. The economic hit men were successful in swinging the deal.

Saddam Hussein took power in Iraq in 1979. During the '80s, the Corporatocracy decided that they would propose the same deal to Saddam. After all, he was more or less "our man" against the Iranians at that time and was a great purchaser of US arms and munitions. The economic hit men went to Baghdad, but failed to convince Saddam to accept a deal. Jackals were sent in, but failed to assassinate him. The rest is, as they say, history. [He wasn't eliminated during/immediately after the original Gulf War for many reasons, and the explanation of those is too lengthy for this posting.]

The Corporatocracy's interest in Afghanistan began long before the tragedy of 9-11-01. Long story short: Western oil interests needed a pipeline across the country of Afghanistan. Finally, several months prior to our invasion of that country (and prior to 9-11), economic hit men negotiated with the Taliban concerning the proposed oil pipeline. Taliban representatives actually came to the US to negotiate. A deal seemed close, but the whole thing fell through. At that time, according to a French Intelligence analyst by the name of Brisard, CIA representatives told the Taliban representatives, "Either you will accept our carpet of gold [for the pipeline], or we'll give you a carpet of bombs." Then came 9-11; after that came our first invasion of Afghanistan, accompanied by a carpet of bombs. The entire story is detailed in the book, Bin Laden, The Forbidden Truth (2002) by Brisard and DasQuie (both intelligence analysts in France).

If even only a smidgin of all of the above is completely accurate and true, then the implications relative to our involvement in both Iraq and Afghanistan are obvious and telling.

[Another interesting book (in addition to the two mentioned above) is Robert Baer's See No Evil: The True Story of a Ground Soldier in the CIA's War on Terrorism (2002).]