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

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

Obama's Latest War Propaganda

On 60 Minutes this past Sunday, Our President essentially said this (paraphrased) about the current ISIS war:  it's not really a war; instead, it's counter-terrorism.  The unmitigated gall of the man finally has surpassed that of Dubya Bush & Dick Cheney...which I didn't think was possible.  Mr. Obama, though I am loathe to lecture a President, I shall... simply because you appear to be in dire need of it.

You're not fooling us.  We know full well that you recognize the following.  When the military of one country crosses borders into other countries and then launches missiles and/or drops bombs, thus killing people and destroying infrastructure, that's known as war.  Your attempt to sidestep the issue of your violating the U.S. Constitution by saying it's not really war is grossly pathetic.  Incidentally, Mr. President, the NYT's editorial board & a Law Professor who wrote a Times Op-Ed piece agree that you are violating the Supreme Law of the Land.  [The fact that the Times agrees is truly monumental.]  Just so you know:  we know that your latest war propaganda (it's not really a war) is BOGUS.  The fact that you have a Constitutional Law background further convinces me that you, as well, know that it's bogus.  [Anyone who needs more convincing might want to ask Glenn Greenwald (a former Constitutional Law attorney and present day Pulitzer-Prize-winning independent journalist) about it.]

As to Republicans at the highest levels in our Gov't, you should all be thoroughly ashamed of your lack of action relative to defending the Constitution.  Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot:  both branches (Democrats and Republicans) of the only major political party in the USA---the Mega Transnational Corporatist Party--- abandoned the Supreme Law of the Land decades ago.  In spite of that (and because of that), you should all be thoroughly ashamed.  You're all apparently putting the State-Corporate Complex ahead of We the People.

After WW II, when the name of the War Department was changed to the Defense Department, someone (I forget who) remarked:  that's Gov't-Speak for--- from now on, all our wars will be aggressive (as opposed to defensive) and/or unconstitutional.  That person was prophetically correct.

Lastly, as I pointed out in my previous post (with examples), no military can defeat a terrorist organization.  History has proven that.  [There may be an exception in the record.]  Terrorists are criminals; terrorism is a Law Enforcement issue.  In general, military personnel are not cops and shouldn't be expected to function as such.  Recent illegal wars by the U.S. Fed Gov't serve the primary function of enriching huge, transnational corporations.  That is so obvious that it's painful.

[Sidebar---  Steve Kroft of 60 Minutes, the journalist who interviewed President Obama, is one of the very, very few Corporate Media employees who exposes the Corporatocracy.  Kudos to Mr. Kroft!]

Not just my opinion.  Be Well

Obama's Lies Increase in Size and Number

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/09/28/u-s-officials-invented-terror-group-justify-bombing-syria/

If it weren't so tragic, it would be absolutely comical.
1.  A President decides that he (alone, all by himself) can launch a war.
2.  Problem:  The Constitution says otherwise.  [The NYT's editorial board agrees.]
3.  Problem:  ISIS is not currently a threat to the U.S. or its allies...except for Iraq, which is finally supposed to be defending itself...and is now engaged in a civil war.
4.  Problem:  the public is sick to death of unending wars.
5.  Problem:  this war has no U.N. backing either...just like Bush's war.
6.  Problem:  mid-term elections are approaching.
7.  Solution---
WALLA!...Wallah!...Viola!---
There's a new Boogie-Man, more horrible than ISIS, and he's coming to get us!
Any day now!
[Even if that were true, it's a Law Enforcement issue.  Besides, History has demonstrated that a military cannot defeat a terrorist organization.  Remember British Palestine and the Jewish Irgun?  Remember Batista and Castro?  Remember Iraq?  In the longest war in our history, have we yet defeated the Taliban in Afghanistan?]

The propaganda for this new, current years-long war should be obvious to even the most die-hard Obama worshipper, Fed Gov't lover, and Oligarchy apologist.  Come on, people don't really believe this load of crap, do they?  It's interesting now that the illegal war has been launched, officials and the Corporate Media have backed off concerning the immediacy of the new threat.  Big surprise...not.

By the way, The Intercept website is unique in that the Fed Gov't has banned its employees from reading anything on it.  That's a bit like book-burning.  Be aware that if you read the article above, most likely you'll run a risk of being considered a "potential terrorist" by the largest terrorist group in the world--- the highest levels of the U.S. Fed Gov't.  Of course, you'll be the wrong kind of potential terrorist.  Many of us feel that we're free to read whatever the hell we want to in this country, so we go to the site daily.  You may not want to take that risk... unless you really desire some independent, non-corporate news.  [The Gov't hasn't banned Democracy Now! yet; you also can get non-corporate news there.]

Meanwhile, we're bombing both ISIS and Al Qaida (the Nusra Front) targets in Syria, two groups who hate each other and are rivals.  Plus, Human Rights Watch (a fairly conservative rights-watch-group) is calling for an investigation into a U.S. Tomahawk missile strike that allegedly killed five children and wounded other civilians.  If it happened that way, once again your tax dollars are killing children...not 500, as in Gaza, but even ONE is too many.

Lastly, the Republicans, the other branch of the Mega Transnational Corporatist Party in the U.S., are no better.  The Oligarchy rules.

Be Well  
p.s.  I love this Land, but Democrats and Republicans have subverted our Gov't to the point where it's now a soft Fascist Police State primarily serving mega, transnational CORPORATIONS at the expense of the rest of us.  We can end this abomination peacefully.  STEP ONE:  stop drinking the Propaganda Kool Aid.

Obama Should be Impeached for...

violating the Constitution and his Oath to preserve, protect, and defend it.  Finally, a Law Professor and the editorial board of the NYT  have the same assessment of the Constitution as I do.  At least now someone does... publicly.  [See link below.]

So, why aren't the Repubs all over this?  Probably because they want the same illegal power that Obama has.  They, too, have ignored the Constitution... and they want to be able to do it again relative to war.

As I've said more than once, at the highest levels we have an OUTLAW Fed Gov't.  There's no question about that...none whatsoever.  Both political parties violate the U.S. Constitution... especially in regard to war.

http://reason.com/blog/2014/09/12/obamas-war-on-isis-betrays-the-constitut?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reason%2FHitandRun+%28Reason+Online+-+Hit+%26+Run+Blog%29   

Let's be perfectly clear:  the Executive Branch has NO Constitutional authority to put this nation at war.  Legally, only the Congress can do that.  The Commander-in-Chief cannot legally ignore parts of the Constitution just because he's the Head Honcho of the military.  What has been done relative to war by various Administrations ever since the end of WW II is blatantly unconstitutional.  In addition, the War Powers Act does not supercede the Supreme Law of the Land; Congress must declare war.

Not just my opinion.  Be Well      

p.s.  Reason.com is a biased source, but I cited the piece because it reported the unprecedented view of the NYT's editorial board.  [The NYT agrees that Obama's ISIS war violates the U.S. Constitution.] Lastly, in the interest of accuracy, the NYT's editorial board (or perhaps it's Reason.com---hard to tell the way the article is written) has the following technical error in its opinion. It refers to "Article 8" concerning the fact that the Congress declares war.  It's not Article 8, but rather Article 1, SECTION 8.  

Fanatics, Oligarchs, Propaganda, and What's Really Important

Below is my Reply to a friend's email & an article he attached.

Another attempt to paint all Muslims as terrorists.  Mohammed was warlike because when Islam was founded, polytheistic beliefs reigned supreme at the time in that region of Arabia, & their adherents all attacked Muslims...attempting to run them out of the region or kill them.

Yes, fanatics/extremists exist...a tiny fraction.  You often ask why Moderate Muslims don't speak up.  Perhaps in most cases they're afraid of being murdered by the nutcakes.  Perhaps they fear they'll be attacked by "Right-Wing American Patriots" for defending Islam... a distinct possibility in this country.  Some have spoken out, denouncing the fanatics...I've seen the videos.  Then there are those clips cherry-picked by Fox, Beck, etc. that show the opposite.

If Muslims (of any stripe) break the law, then arrest them, try them, sentence them, & incarcerate them.  It's a Law Enforcement issue, not a military one.  The whole thing is Oligarchical, Boogie-Man Propaganda...and apparently, it works quite well.  Sorry, but you'll never convince me otherwise.  It's nothing but a huge DISTRACTION [from the ravages of Corporatism].  Yes, criminals exist; but to think that all Muslims are criminals is sheer nonsense.  To quote the "Koran" (as many do), thus "proving" one's case, is ridiculous.  Anyone can quote similar crap in the "Holy Bible"... one of the bloodiest tales in existence.  It doesn't prove anything.  Taking things out of context is such an easy gig.  It boggles my mind that some Americans can be misled so easily.  

This country really deserves to be ruled by Oligarchs and Propaganda...it's such an easy sell to the majority of We the People... and, the Entertainers on the Fox network so obviously are not objective, not professional news people, and not at all concerned about the Republic of the USA.  They're as bad as the clowns on CBS, CNN, NBC, etc.---the ones that serve pablum in place of news---Fox is just a different extreme [of the same distraction].  They are all the networks of the super-rich... and, as Machiavelli knew, the super-rich must sell the concept of the-Boogie-Man-is-coming if they are to remain in power.  "The Prince" must be very pleased with the USA today.  [End of Reply]

.........................................................................

The most important political issues for Americans today have nothing to do with Muslims or terrorism.  Instead, they are:  the loss of much of our manufacturing base; the crimes inherent in Financialization; Crony Capitalism and the State-Corporate Complex in general; the fraud of Globalization; the ignoring of the Constitution whenever convenient; and the ongoing conversion of the USA into a Police State.  Genuine participatory democracy does not exist here.  The Middle Class continues to shrink.  Jobs created by the super-rich more often than not are worth a tinker's damn.  Wages essentially have stagnated for thirty years, but the Oligarchs' incomes have increased by 700%.  Americans now can be arrested on our soil and held incommunicado indefinitely... no warrant, no lawyer, no habeas corpus, no trial.  Most other issues are nothing but distractions.

Partly 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