Obama, George Orwell, Propaganda, and War

If I didn't know better, I'd say that Barack Obama is channeling the spirit of George Orwell.  Remember Orwell's classic, 1984?  That book easily could be re-issued with the title, 2014.  In the dystopian 1984, we have "doublethink", the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously... and accepting both of them.  In 2014, we have the Obama Administration one day announcing, "Make no mistake, we are at war with ISIS"; a week or so later, the President claims that it's not really a war.  We the People appear to accept both those propositions as true.

Also in 1984, we have "newspeak", a language with constantly shifting meanings of words, invented by the Totalitarian State in order to limit freedom of thought and any threats to the Regime.  Concepts opposing the policies of the State are "thoughtcrime".  In 2014, as just one example, we have the following.  During the nomination hearings for John Brennan as CIA Honcho, an official Justice Department document surfaced indicating that "imminent"---as in "imminent threat"---no longer means "immediate" or "liable to happen very soon"; the definition was changed to something like "may occur sometime in the future".  That's why the new Boogie-Man threat, the Khorasan Group, could be called an imminent threat.  Another example--- war is no longer war; instead, it's "counter-terrorism".  As to "thoughtcrime", we have the Feds banning Gov't employees from reading anything on the website, https://firstlook.org/theintercept/ .  Apparently if a Fed employee reads anything there, he/she is guilty of thoughtcrime.

In relation to Obama's drone wars, here's why the Feds claim there are almost no civilian casualties--- ANYONE killed by a Hellfire missile fired from a weaponized drone automatically is designated as an EKIA, enemy killed in action. The only way to change that designation is for someone to prove the victim's innocence.  In other words, if you're near the SUSPECTS, then you're guilty until proven innocent.  If that isn't Orwellian, I don't know what is.  [This info came from a Democracy Now! interview today with Jeremy Scahill, author of the book, Dirty Wars.]

Obama not only says one thing and then does the opposite, he also says one thing and means another.  Example of the first--- During his 2008 campaign, "Guantanamo, that's easy... just close it!", followed by cheers from the audience.  The Gitmo prison complex still is open.  Example of the second--- "ISIL consists of brutal terrorists who are attacking Iraq.".  What he means is this:  In large part, ISIS consists of former Baathist Generals & other high-ranking officers who were under Saddam and are trying to re-take their country.  They were, of course, referred to as "terrorists" by our Feds.  Bremer, the Iraq Occupation Czar under Bush, fired all 250,000 Iraqi Army personnel in 2003; by that action, he created a quarter of a million enemies of the USA.  Then the al-Maliki puppet government began discriminating against the Sunnis, further inflaming the former Baathist Generals.  They launched a civil war years & years ago.  It's called Blowback.  ISIS is not new.
[A bit of trivia:  I find it curious that the Obama Administration insists on referring to the rebels as "ISIL" when everyone else calls them ISIS.  The term "Levant" (the L in ISIL) must be especially important to the Administration for some unknown reason.]

Orwell quotes relevant to the current mess---
1.  "In a time of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."  [by a "potential terrorist"]
2.  "Big Brother is watching you."  [and today, largely accepted by a propagandized public]
3.  "...politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred, and schizophrenia."  [enough said]
4.  "All the war propaganda...comes invariably from the people who are not fighting."  [Amen]
5.  "War against a foreign country only happens when the moneyed classes think they are going to profit from it."  [a tough sell, but true]
6.  "If everybody believes it, does that make it true?"  [today... apparently so]

It would be unfair to blame only Obama for all this--- the lies, the half-truths, the propaganda, the Gov't-Speak, the policies benefitting primarily the Oligarchy, the killing of innocent civilians (including children), the deceit, the ignorance of foreign cultures, the creation of enemies, the hubris, the failure to abide by the Constitution, etc.  This all has been going on for decades.  That, however, in no way excuses Obama... or the rest of the highest levels of our government.

Not just my opinion.  Be Well

The Third Iraq War, Terrorism, and Common Sense

Let's set aside the U.S. Constitution for the time being.  Instead, let us view the current war situation from the standpoint of common sense...simple logic.  Query:  why would anyone believe any of the following to be true???

1.  The U.S. Gov't has been training and advising the Iraqi Army and security forces for about TEN years; therefore, we now need to train and advise the Iraqi Army and security forces.  [Ditto Afghanistan.]

2.  One way to defeat terrorism is to invade Muslim countries and bomb the hell out of them, thus further inflaming Muslim fanatics.  That is to our advantage.

3.  Another way to defeat terrorism is to launch weaponized drones into countries not at war with us and kill SUSPECTS.  Any collateral damage sustained will not further inflame either terrorists or non-terrorists.  They simply will accept it as, "oh well, that's war".  There will be no repercussions or Blowback.

4.  When we attack a faction [ISIS, for example] in a civil war [for which our destabilization of Iraq was partly responsible] BEFORE they attack or even threaten the U.S., we should not expect any retaliation on their part.  After all, they are "terrorists"...we are not.

5.  When we utilize inhumane practices such as "extraordinary rendition" and "enhanced interrogation", we should not expect that Muslim fanatics will retaliate in any way...or that any innocent people caught up in those abominations will become extremists.

6.  Because criminal extremists ignore borders, we can as well.  That's perfectly reasonable.

7.  "There will be no American combat ground troops in Iraq."  [He's giving us his word on that... and given the man's history with keeping his word, we should believe him.  Even if Obama is sincere & telling what he believes to be the truth, there is no way on Earth that he can know what may be required for that war in the future.]

8.  Another way to defeat terrorism is to intervene in civil wars.

9.  Another way to defeat terrorism is to kill the Head Honcho (Osama) of the extremists and then dump his body at sea.  There should be no Blowback from that.

10.  Another way to defeat terrorism is to maintain Army, Navy, and/or Air Force bases in Muslim countries... the very thing that Osama said was his reason for launching a terrorist campaign.

11.  Moving the U.S. Headquarters for the Third Iraq War from the Pentagon to the State Department shows that we are interested in more than just a military solution.

12.  ISIS was not responsible for 9-11; nevertheless, they are so similar to Al Qaida that we are justified in attacking them... and we can use the same "authorization" that we used about TEN+ years ago.  [There are no separate wars anymore...it's all one big, continuous war.]

13.  After we "defeat" ISIS, they won't simply fade back into the woodwork... to reappear later.  The military option really is the best primary method to crush Muslim terrorists.

14.  We can do it with no American combat troops on the ground.  Airstrikes and supporting the "moderate" rebels in Syria will suffice.  [These are the same "moderates" who recently beheaded six of their captives, and previous to that, sold a now-murdered journalist to ISIS for about $50,000.  No worries that they will be our allies.]

15.  All of this has absolutely nothing to do with access to oil or the estimated one trillion dollars worth of mineral resources (some of which are becoming very scarce in the world) beneath the ground in Afghanistan.  Nothing at all to do with any of that.  Your Gov't doesn't lie about such things.

Again, why would anyone believe any of that to be true?

Be Well

Ron Paul Wins Again

The second Republican debate is over. Early poll results show that Dr. Paul again is the most popular candidate.

He was the only one to discuss CIA-generated "blowback" in relation to 9-11, and was right on target. The G-man (Giuliani) wanted him to take back his statement about the results of an interventionist foreign policy, but Paul stood firm. Paul asked how we would feel if China had military bases here. He pointed out that the '79 Iran hostage crisis was a direct result of us installing the Shah in the '50s [BY OVERTHROWING a democratically elected government].

Now watch the Corporate Media characterize Paul as some kind of nut. They can't ignore his popularity anymore, so they'll try a different tactic---smear him...and the ignorant Republican base will buy it.

The Corporatocracy simply will NOT allow him to get the Republican nomination.

Write-in Ron Paul in 2008.