Tuesday, December 27, 2011

Just War Theory

In the 21st century, "Just War Theory" is, in a word, irrelevant. Even if we were to stipulate, for the sake of argument, that, in theory, a war could be "just," the conditions at the present time make such a theory untenable in practice. The problem is now (and, in my view, has always been) the profit motive. Profit achieved by means of fair and equitable trade is one thing; profit achieved by armed robbery is quite another.

War is big business. Arguments about "just war" are nothing but "language on holiday" as Wittgenstein would say.

Monday, December 19, 2011

Poem By William Heyen

Written about the First Gulf War:

13. (Conventions)

"This might be an oxymoron," says (I swear) a Pentagon spokesman
beginning to whine, "but why can’t we have a civilized war?"
Meaning, I suppose, that when an American airman
bombs your neighborhood, killing maybe a few dozen
& maiming maybe a hundred in body & maybe a thousand in mind,
& he’s one of the few planes hit & he has to eject,
& after you’ve done the best you could to drag
victims out from under debris & you’ve washed the blood
out of your eyes as best you could & you’ve captured the bastard,
you should treat him according to the Geneva Conventions,
as gentleman prisoner of war, a name & rank & service number
who deserves a shower & clean clothes. You must not,
as I would, as you should, I swear, if such a technician
killed your wife & children, you must not drive steel
splinters into his eyes until they reach his civilized brain.

Sunday, December 18, 2011

An Accurate Chronology of American History

Read it and weep:

1. Neolithic period
2. European colonialism and slavery
3. Revolution and the republican interlude
4. Civil War and manifest destiny
5. The Great War: Shine, perishing republic
6. American empire

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

A Beautiful, though Futile, Gesture...

Ex-Salt Lake Mayor Rocky Anderson, Former Democrat, Launches Third Party Presidential Bid Against Obama, GOP

The Reagan Legacy


It would be wrong to attribute the present state of our former republic to Ronald Reagan. Reagan did not start the republic's decline into imperial corruption, he just helped to shift it into high gear. But those of us who remember pre-Reagan America--an imperfect place, without question--cannot help but remark how Reagan's two terms in office changed the atmosphere of our civil society. By "changed" I mean poisoned. Our political process was not only flooded with money--there was nothing new about that--but the imperial presidency became the latest outlet for Hollywood's dream factory. Madison Avenue took over. The B-movie actor Reagan was emblematic of the transition. Real participatory democracy--which had already been on the ropes since the debacle of George McGovern's ill-fated Presidential bid in 1972 and Ted Kennedy's ill-fated challenge to Jimmy Carter in 1980--fled the scene. What took its place was collective self-delusion about a "new morning" in America. And the Democratic Party, in its final betrayal of the American people, signed on.

I say its "final betrayal" not because it was the Party's last betrayal, but because it was the Party's ultimate one.

Look no farther than the Presidency of Barack Obama. From what I hear, Obama reads biographies of Reagan and holds him up as his hero.

First time as tragedy, second time as farce.

Thursday, December 8, 2011

What Would Carl Sandburg Write Today?

He published his poem "Chicago" around 1916. Here we are, a century later:

Arms supplier to the world,
Net exporter of violence, debtor to the nations;
Best to bone up now on your Spengler and Gibbon,
This ship of militaristic fools is going down.

Bankrupted by the wholesale conversion of our economy to militarism, we depend on the rest of the world to supply our basic needs. When the precarious bubble of our rapacious capitalism finally bursts, who will pick up the pieces?

Monday, December 5, 2011

Dear Dr. Pangloss:

Don't get me wrong, I am encouraged by OWS, but it is just the first stirrings of discontent. So far, the militarized corporatocracy has nothing to fear. Remember: money buys time and the criminals we are up against have more money than god. Which is what they are counting on. They can wait out OWS. And winter is coming.

The next time the economy takes a nose-dive and unemployment in the U.S. leaps from 10 to 20 or 30%--that's when the real action is going to begin. But it will be desperate, not enlightened, action, and we'll see tanks in the streets of US cities. In the White House situation room, they are probably watching film footage of Tiananmen Square from '89 and planning their next move.

The late, great Chalmers Johnson's Dismantling the Empire is a bracing read. No, it's not Hegel's Panglossian Phenomenology of the Spirit, but Hegel was wrong. Brilliant, but wrong.

Johnson understood the problem quite clearly. We are in a new imperial age. And empires take centuries to run their course. So the question becomes: How do we conduct ourselves with integrity and plant seeds for the empire's eventual demise (long after you and I have passed from the scene)?

Shelter the flame of Jeffersonian democracy; recall the utopian ideals of lower-case "r" republican government; honor the Prophetic tradition; lead lives of prayerful decency and good will towards all.

And remember:

Friends don't let friends join the military.

Ask yourself:

What Would Whitman Do?

Thursday, December 1, 2011

Agency of Rogues


From Chalmers Johnson, Dismantling the Empire (NY: Metropolitan Books, 2010), p. 78:

Nothing has done more to undercut the reputation of the United States than the CIA's "clandestine" (only in terms of the American people) murders of the presidents of South Vietnam and the Congo, its ravishing the governments of Iran, Indonesia (three times), South Korea (twice), all of the Indochinese states, virtually every government in Latin America, and Lebanon, Afghanistan, and Iraq. The deaths from these armed assaults run into the millions. After 9/11, President Bush asked, "Why do they hate us?" From Iran (1953) to Iraq (2003), the better question would be, "Why would they not?"

Friday, November 25, 2011

Life Under Military Occupation...

No, I'm not talking about Egypt, Iraq, or Afghanistan or, frankly, most of the planet that is inhabited by human beings. I am talking about the contiguous states of the continental U.S.

We are living under military occupation. A military occupation that maintains a stranglehold upon our economy; a military occupation that functions through civilian surrogates in the so-called "defense" and "security" industries. Call it, in the words of President Eisenhower, the military-industrial-complex. Call it whatever you like: just make sure that you understand that the people of the United States are not free. We are living under military occupation and, consequently, under the constraints imposed by what Seymour Melman once termed "the permanent war economy."

The "Occupation Movement" will not succeed until it becomes a "De-militarization Movement," or, in other words, an "Anti-Military Occupation Movement."

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

The Worm In The Apple

On his web-site, Michael Moore shares with us the "vision statement" that he and forty or so other individuals crafted for the OWS "General Assembly." Here it is:

We Envision: [1] a truly free, democratic, and just society; [2] where we, the people, come together and solve our problems by consensus; [3] where people are encouraged to take personal and collective responsibility and participate in decision making; [4] where we learn to live in harmony and embrace principles of toleration and respect for diversity and the differing views of others; [5] where we secure the civil and human rights of all from violation by tyrannical forces and unjust governments; [6] where political and economic institutions work to benefit all, not just the privileged few; [7] where we provide full and free education to everyone, not merely to get jobs but to grow and flourish as human beings; [8] where we value human needs over monetary gain, to ensure decent standards of living without which effective democracy is impossible; [9] where we work together to protect the global environment to ensure that future generations will have safe and clean air, water and food supplies, and will be able to enjoy the beauty and bounty of nature that past generations have enjoyed.

Let me preface my comments by stating that I am a fan of Michael Moore's. I started out somewhat skeptical of him and his motives back when he made "Roger & Me." I am frequently disappointed by the theatrical grand-standing that his films routinely contain. I find such stuff distracting and largely irrelevant; I suppose he feels that he is injecting some light-heartedness into grim subject matters. I am happy to agree to disagree with him on this point and move on.

What is most important for me about Michael Moore is that he is sincere. I believe that his heart is in the right place. If this country consisted of 300 million Michael Moores, I would have very little to blog about--which would be a relief.

My criticism: I find point # 5 troubling to say the least. The worm at the heart of the apple of the American experiment is the doctrine of manifest destiny. The militarization of the federal government of the United States began with the Civil War and has continued to escalate ever since. After WW2, Americans no longer questioned the notion of a "standing army"--something that the architects of the Constitution understood would be the death of our democracy. They were right: it has been. Over 50 cents on every dollar we pay to the Federal treasury goes to the Pentagon to pay for accumulated war debt from the past and present military adventures. Point # 5 is essentially a blank check for the militarized corporatocracy to continue its present course.

Why? Because it implies that it is "our job" to police the world (and McDonalds-ize it while we're at it). The American mythology of the City on the Hill, the Beacon to the Nations, is invoked whenever the corporatocracy wishes to justify foreign "intervention" (read: "open new markets"). The British East India Company had its own militias. Our multi-national corporate conglomerates beat that: they cut costs by having the U.S. taxpayer foot the bill for their "private" militias (the U.S. military).

I notice that Michael Moore's agenda is "domestic." It is refreshingly old-fashioned liberal. Unfortunately, to dissociate domestic and foreign policies is not only schizophrenic, it is blind to the prevailing structure of U.S. politics and the structure of our economy. It is, therefore, self-deceptive. When I was in Egypt in 2004, just after Bush and Co. stole their second election, I found Egyptians very interested to discuss domestic U.S. politics. One person said to me: "I wish that when Americans went to the polls they realized that they do not vote only for themselves but for the rest of us as well." What happens in Vegas does not stay in Vegas. No Imperium is an island entire unto itself, etc.

Leo Tolstoy saw the problem quite clearly at the end of the 19th century: militarization. He called upon everyone who considers him or herself a Christian to refuse military service. Today, we are all servicing the military because, on the one hand, we finance it with our tax dollars and, on the other, we turn a blind eye to the fact that it is in the business of realizing our dreams of manifest destiny. The military's strangle-hold upon our economy is the very heart of the problems that we face; the only viable solution to those problems is de-militarization.

If OWS were to recognize that the problem is the militarization of the U.S. economy and all that that entails, and begin to call for the de-militarization of our culture and society, there would be more than pepper spray used on peaceful protesters. There would be slaughter in the streets. And then it would be over. But so long as the OWS General Assembly and Michael Moore and others continue to talk around the problem rather than confront it, i.e., so long as they continue to recommend just another "soft liberal" rearrangement of the deck chairs on the Titanic, they can have their "revolution." Some concessions will be made just to mollify the squeaky wheels. But the underlying structure of rule by violence will remain in place. I read point # 5 as euphemistic; translated it means: business as usual.

The revolution will not be televised, youtubed, or tweeted.

Friday, November 11, 2011

Rather than Continue to Piss in the Wind, this Armistice Day, Dismantle the Wall Street-Pentagon Axis of Evil

An Open Letter to the OWS Movement:

A little guerilla theater never hurt anyone. That said, the 1% have dealt with this sort of thing before, and they have a successful protocol for neutralizing it.

1. Ignore it.
2. Break some heads and see how far they can get with that.
3. Gauge public reaction to the head breaking.
4. Ignore it.
5. If public reaction is too unfavorable, identify some underlings to use as scapegoats.
6. Scapegoat the underlings.
7. Gauge public reaction to the scapegoating.
8. Ignore it.
9. If the public continues to clamor, offer token concessions (e.g., forgive interest on selected college loans or home mortgages).
10. See how many people can be bought off to go home--usually a pretty large percentage.
11. Isolate the remainder that refuses to be bought off and go home.
12. Arrest and/or kill the remainder.
13. Lay low for a few decades.
14. Begin process of slowly dismantling the concessions.
15. Gauge public reaction to the slow dismantling.
16. Ignore it.

Chris Hedges has reported that JP Morgan Chase has donated $ 4.6 million to the NYC Police Foundation. That should keep the OWS stuck behind yellow tape for a good long time.

Even so, the squeaky wheels will be greased.

Just remember: Jesus was sold down the river for 30 pieces of silver.

If the OWS is to become something truly revolutionary, it needs visionaries. An MLK, a Malcolm X, a Bobby Kennedy in his Presidential bid. Of course, that is when the "lone gunman," that recurring figure in American politics, will take the stage.

You're not up against amateurs. They know what they're doing and they have the resources necessary to buy lives, consciences, assassinations and, most importantly, silence and time.

Think how extraordinary a phenomenon was FDR. Born into the 1%, he was comfortably living the life expected of him until one morning he woke up and couldn't move his legs. Crawling across the floor to the bathroom, it suddenly occurred to him that being in the 1% could not protect him from polio. He never forgot this insight; in a sense, he was radicalized. But then radicalism was in the air in the early part of the 20th century. Unlike today.

BHO should have grown up with FDR's insight; he had every reason to. He learned how to talk as if he did. But he's no FDR. He's not even an RFK.

OWS needs friends in high places if it is going to succeed. Otherwise, it will be managed and, eventually, commodified, like everything else in this country.

And one last thing: it's not just Wall Street. It's the Wall Street-Pentagon Axis of Evil. Until OWS makes that connection and focuses its energy against the true enemy of our democratic aspirations--the military junta that runs this country behind the charade of civilian governance--the movement will just be pissing in the wind.

Sunday, October 23, 2011

If It Was True In 1950...

"Our world is more and more given over to the power of words, and of words that have been in great measure emptied of their authentic content. Such words as liberty, person, democracy, are being more and more lavishly used, and are becoming slogans, in a world in which they are tending more and more to lose their authentic significance." Gabriel Marcel, 1950.

Friday, October 21, 2011

NATO Criminality

One ought to question why NATO forces, having taken Ghaddafi alive, did not protect their prisoner. Was it because he has always been a loose cannon and they could not risk his divulging aspects of his long history of associations with the U.S. and other NATO governments? This is how our government does business these days: like common criminals.

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Dr. Johnson On Lying and War-Making


"Among the calamities of War may be justly numbered the diminution of the love of truth, by the falsehoods which interest dictates and credulity encourages. A Peace will equally leave the Warrior and Relator of Wars destitute of employment; and I know not whether more is to be dreaded from streets filled with Soldiers accustomed to plunder, or from garrets filled with Scribblers accustomed to lie."

I would call this a conflict of interest.

Sunday, October 16, 2011

Of Lying and War-Making


Today there does exist an indissoluble connection between lying and war: today, I emphasize, for we are not asserting that there is some necessary and logical connection between the mere notions of lying and making war. But in the actual world we are living in it is impossible not to recognize that making war is linked to lying, and to lying in a double form: lying to others and lying to oneself; and these two forms themselves, for that matter, are very closely linked and perhaps not even ideally separable from each other. --Gabriel Marcel, 1951.

In the People's Republic of Berkeley...

Friday, October 14, 2011

The Story of Civilization

Since at least the urban revolution of 3,000 BCE, human civilization has been constructed upon violence and other forms of coercion. At some point in 2005, I believe, I decided, finally, to opt out. By that I mean I began to publicly advocate NON-VIOLENT resistance to and, ultimately, a NON-VIOLENT overthrow of the United States government.

The U. S. government ought not to take this personally, however; I advocate the same approach to every government. I am, by political conviction, a Chomskian Left Libertarian. Which is to say, an Anarchist.

I won't go into all of the twists and turns of thought and practice that led me to this political position, but I will offer a few milestones:

1. In Middle School I read a book (recommended by a friend) on the trial and execution of Sacco and Vanzetti; I read the New Testament for the first time then and also Thoreau's Walden and Civil Disobedience and John Hersey's Hiroshima.

2. I went to law school and practiced law for ten years. There are few educations better suited to exposing the difference between the rhetoric of law and government and the reality of law and government than that--if, I hasten to add, you refuse to surrender your intellect and conscience. During this period I also read and wrestled with Leo Tolstoy's interpretation of the Gospel.

3. In late 2001 or early 2002, I emailed Noam Chomsky and asked him what he would suggest someone interested in Anarchism as a political philosophy should read. He quickly replied with his "short list." I got started...

These are but a few of the ingredients that led to my "conversion" to Left Libertarianism. The bottom line for me, I suppose, is that Anarchism and a commitment to non-violent non-cooperation with agencies of coercion are not at all unrelated ideas. In my view, you cannot have one without the other. The story of civilization as it has evolved over the last 5,000 years is one of violence. Consequently, any revolution that resorts to violence is not a revolution at all: it is, in fact, more of the same.

I will not participate in any violent revolution: it is a contradiction in terms.

I will, however, continue to call for the NON-VIOLENT overthrow of existing regimes, the summoning of popular assemblies to construct new constitutions, and a way of life that runs counter to civilization as it presently manifests itself all over the world.

Tuesday, October 11, 2011

The Silence of the Liberals

"Bad men could never do the harm they actually accomplish, unless they were able to induce good men to become, first their dupes, and then their more or less willing, more or less conscious accomplices." --Aldous Huxley

It astonishes me how Liberals close their mouths and avert their eyes when the crimes of Barack Obama are mentioned--the same Liberals who claimed to be outraged by the criminality of George W. Bush. Now that Obama has out-Bushed Bush with the extra-judicial killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, the silence of the Liberals grows deafening.

Monday, October 10, 2011

The Extra-Judicial Killing of Anwar al-Awlaki

By ordering the extra-judicial killing of U.S. citizen Anwar al-Awlaki, Kcarab Amabo has shown himself, yet again, the Step-n-Fetchit of the ruling class.

His complete disregard of the U.S. Constitution and the laws of the United States in this matter--laws that he publicly swore to uphold at his inauguration as President of the United States, de-legitimizes his presidency.

A warrant should be issued for Amabo's arrest. The charge: homicide.

Monday, September 26, 2011

Occupy Wall Street Protest Enters Second Week; 80 Arrested at Peaceful March

Occupy Wall Street Protest Enters Second Week; 80 Arrested at Peaceful March

The ballot box is a placebo. If there is to be authentic change in this country, it will take place when masses of people take to the streets. Let us hope this is the beginning. I fear, however, that the forces of reaction have too tight a hold on the sources of information, and the ideological state apparatus is, as yet, too powerful. The American people don't imagine Democracy: they imagine that they have one.

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Let's Talk Politics

The Tea-Partiers have one thing right: we need a new Constitution. I've been advocating a non-violent people's revolution designed to force a Constitutional convention since at least 2005. Thomas Jefferson took the position that EVERY GENERATION of Americans should tear up the Constitution they have inherited and draft a new one.

The problem with the Tea-Partiers is that they want to draft a Constitution that will benefit rich, frightened, white people. But we already have a Constitution that does that. The Tea-Partiers think it doesn't do enough of that. Their idea of democracy is a franchise limited to white, property-owning males and the women who will vote as they do.

If you want to talk politics, don't get caught up in the corrupt political theater that passes for politics in this country. We have government of the corporations, by the corporations, and for the corporations. The so-called "two-party" system is completely compromised since both parties are entirely beholden to the militarized corporatocracy. Therefore, if you want to talk politics, start talking about the non-violent people's revolution that will bring about a Constitutional convention. Talk about the potential risks and rewards of this venture versus the risks and rewards of "staying the course." Talk about how we might begin to set in motion the wheels of such a revolution, and how we might accomplish it without playing into the hands of the Tea-Partiers.

We need a plan of action. Politics as usual in this country is just re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

The CIA's Islamist Cover Up

is the title of a New York Review of Books Blog article by Ian Johnson dated August 30, 2011. Blogger is for some reason unwilling to allow me to link to it. In any event, my guess is that the CIA's involvement with so-called "Islamist" groups is far more extensive and sinister than the author of this article seems to believe and, hence, the efforts taken by the CIA to maintain the cover-up will continue to be strenuous in the extreme. That said, it is interesting to see this subject broached in a major U.S. publication. Not that it will make any difference...

From "Grey Eminence"

"Bad men could never do the harm they actually accomplish, unless they were able to induce good men to become, first their dupes, and then their more or less willing, more or less conscious accomplices." --Aldous Huxley

Sunday, September 11, 2011

Cutting Off the Head of the Snake

On August 23, 1994, the United States Congress passed a joint-resolution (H.J. Res. 131) declaring December 7th "Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day." President Bill Clinton signed this resolution into law (P.L. 103-308)--a mere half century after the bombing of Pearl Harbor.

Why did it take the government so long to get around to passing such legislation? Well, for one thing, the number of World War II veterans still living was dwindling. There was no doubt concern that Americans would forget what had happened on that day in history--the Japanese attacks had killed or wounded more than 3,000 Americans.

Decades before the Federal Government acted to create an official reminder (not, however, a national holiday), I learned of the significance of this date in elementary school. My father was a World War II veteran. I knew the date and what had happened.

I would be surprised to learn that my education was unique in that regard. Back in the 1960's, we were taught American history in public school. We also learned that there was some controversy about what happened on December 7, 1941--specifically, that there was speculation concerning the degree of intelligence concerning the attacks in the hands of the Roosevelt White House prior to the event. Hearings were conducted and high ranking military personnel were found "derelict" in their duties and relieved of their command.

I was brought up with both facts and questions. I was aware of Pearl Harbor and remembered it annually--without the prompting of the Federal government. The tragedy was not exploited for political purposes nor was a fetish made out of it.

There is another reason that it took the Congress so long to officially recognize December 7th as an annual "day of remembrance." In the 1940's, there was an actual war going on in Europe, North Africa, and East Asia. There were real armies, navies, and air forces aggressively on the move attacking and terrorizing civilian populations. This is not the case today. To prevent the so-called "War On Terror" from fading from the memories of all but the most paranoid among us, it must be continually manufactured by our Orwellian Federal government in cooperation with its State and local allies and their supine corps of compliant journalists.

This is not to say that there is no real threat. Credible terrorist plots are being hatched every day in the Pentagon and at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia. I'm all for "cutting off the head of the snake"--isn't that what the assassination of Osama bin Laden was supposed to do?

I've read Op-Ed pieces lately in which the author opines that OBL's memory is more dangerous than the man himself when he was alive--for now his inspiration to would-be terrorists is the stuff of legend, larger than life. Paradoxically, these same pundits support the continual exploitation and fetishization of 9/11 through "days of remembrance" like the present one. But it's no paradox, really: they are terrified that they might lose the only thing which supports their adrenalin addiction and gives their lives form and meaning.

The American people need to recognize where the true threat of terrorism is coming from and act to prevent it. Barry Glassner's classic work The Culture of Fear is in print, "updated for our post 9/11 world." When this book becomes required reading for every American school child; when American school children are once again raised with both facts and questions; if and when the conditions of democracy ever return to our shores again, the head of the snake will be cut off and the frightened citizens of these Orwellian States of Amnesia will once again experience the euphoria that swept the country in 1991 when the Soviet Union fell and all the Communist cells that were secreted throughout the United States bent upon overthrowing our government and depriving us of our way of life were thwarted...

By the way, what happened to all those Communist cells? They vanished into the thin, paranoid air from which they had been dreamed up in the first place.

Saturday, September 10, 2011

Colin Powell Expresses "Regret"

If Kcarab Amabo had any integrity, he would turn against his benefactors and let Colin Powell be the star witness in the prosecutions of Bush, Cheney, Rice, and Rumsfeld.

Colin Powell talks to Al Jazeera - Americas - Al Jazeera English

The Walrus and Carpenter Syndrome: Weeping For the Oysters As You Devour Them












In the United States, this is called "compassionate conservatism," an ideology that Kcarab Amabo enacts without explicitly avowing:

... The Walrus and the Carpenter
Walked on a mile or so,
And then they rested on a rock
Conveniently low:
And all the little Oysters stood
And waited in a row.

"The time has come," the Walrus said,
"To talk of many things:
Of shoes--and ships--and sealing-wax--
Of cabbages--and kings--
And why the sea is boiling hot--
And whether pigs have wings."

"But wait a bit," the Oysters cried,
"Before we have our chat;
For some of us are out of breath,
And all of us are fat!"
"No hurry!" said the Carpenter.
They thanked him much for that.

"A loaf of bread," the Walrus said,
"Is what we chiefly need:
Pepper and vinegar besides
Are very good indeed--
Now if you're ready, Oysters dear,
We can begin to feed."

"But not on us!" the Oysters cried,
Turning a little blue.
"After such kindness, that would be
A dismal thing to do!"
"The night is fine," the Walrus said.
"Do you admire the view?

"It was so kind of you to come!
And you are very nice!"
The Carpenter said nothing but
"Cut us another slice:
I wish you were not quite so deaf--
I've had to ask you twice!"

"It seems a shame," the Walrus said,
"To play them such a trick,
After we've brought them out so far,
And made them trot so quick!"
The Carpenter said nothing but
"The butter's spread too thick!"

"I weep for you," the Walrus said:
"I deeply sympathize."
With sobs and tears he sorted out
Those of the largest size,
Holding his pocket-handkerchief
Before his streaming eyes.

"O Oysters," said the Carpenter,
"You've had a pleasant run!
Shall we be trotting home again?'
But answer came there none--
And this was scarcely odd, because
They'd eaten every one.

--Lewis Carroll

Friday, September 2, 2011

A Key Distinction

Since Barack Obama looks so much like his evil Bushian twin Kcarab Amabo, how is one supposed to tell them apart? Easy. Barack Obama was a vertebrate; Kcarab Amabo is not.

"You're Going To Reap Just What You Sow..."

"I think it is correct to say that depoliticized or aestheticized submission, along with all of the different forms of, in some cases, triumphalism and xenophobia, in others, apathy and defeat, have been principally required since the 1960's to allay whatever residual feelings of desire for democratic participation (also known as 'a danger to stability') still existed ... the argument is that too much democracy is bad for governability, which is that supply of passivity which makes it easier for oligarchies of technical or policy experts to push people into line. So if one is endlessly lectured by certified experts who explain that the freedom we all want demands deregulation and privatization or war and that the new world order is nothing less than the end of history, there is very little inclination to address this order with anything like individual or even collective demands. Chomsky has relentlessly addressed this paralyzing syndrome for several years."--Edward Said
Most Americans today are like Winston Smith at the end of 1984: sitting in the cafe, drinking the watered-down, greasy-textured gin, and waiting for the bullet in the back of the head. Everybody's gearing up for the 9/11/11 orgy of triumphalism and xenophobia, apathy and defeat. We will see Kcarab Amabo arm in arm with W. and other criminals. Now for a little bracing Lou Reed irony: "You're going to reap just what you sow..."

Monday, August 22, 2011

Libya's Future

I assume that the future of Libya that has been on the drawing board in foreign capitals and corporate boardrooms for some time now looks like this:

1. Oil supplies guaranteed to the U.S. and Europe with the majority of oil revenues to be divided up by foreign corporations;

2. Libya's Mediterranean coastline to be "developed" as a playground for wealthy foreign nationals: golf courses, beach resorts, luxury hotels, five-star restaurants, maybe even a casino or two;

3. The people of Libya recruited to work for subsistence wages in the hospitality industry or in the oil fields.

Am I forgetting something?

Oh, yes! How could I forget?

The other opportunity for the people of Libya will be in the military and para-military police forces. After all, how else will the corporate state be able to protect visiting foreign nationals from the depredations of the poor and disenfranchised? Such militias will be important stake-holders in post-Gaddafi Libya and, consequently, will come to be seen by ordinary Libyans themselves as avenues of social and economic advancement.

Eventually, a charismatic figure (like the Colonel of 4 decades ago) will rise up through the ranks and get the idea in his head that the system as it stands is corrupt. If it is vulnerable to revolution, revolution will ensue. Then the cycle will repeat itself.

So much for the blood of the martyrs who dreamed of freedom.

Do I mean to say that I think Gaddafi should remain in power? Of course not. He is a criminal: a murderous buffoon. He should live to see his day in the ICC.

But when I think of the blood that has been shed, is being shed even now, and will continue to be shed for dreams that have already been auctioned off to the highest bidder, I cannot help but think that there has to be an alternative future--not only for Libya, but for the rest of us as well.

Unfortunately, unless and until there is a revolution in consciousness among the peoples of every nation--a consciousness that recognizes that (1) the globalizing corporate state does not have their best interests in mind and (2) they can and must do something to re-configure the present world order--I have little confidence in the outcome of any revolutionary action that is aided and abetted by the police power of established corporate states.

When Gaddafi is overthrown--an event that appears imminent--I am afraid that we will have to add Libya to the list of newly formed failed states: alongside Iraq and Afghanistan.

Ask Yourself:

Do you honestly believe that NATO's involvement in Libya has been a charitable venture?

Do you honestly believe that nation states act altruistically?



The Libya War argument

The Libya War argument

Thank you, Glenn. Personally, I can't wait to see who will get the Plutocrats's seal of approval as the next oppressor of the Libyan people. Any country that has oil revenues like Libya will not be allowed to determine its own fate (i.e., democracy).

Thursday, August 18, 2011

My Theory


Shortly after the Presidential election of 2008, the victorious candidate, Barack Obama, was kidnapped, bound and gagged, and locked in Dick Cheney's basement, where he has been subjected to daily water-boarding ever since.

The Democan-Republicrats then substituted Obama's evil Bushian twin, Kcarab Amabo, to take his place.

Yes, it is a theory that strains credulity, but no more so than the complete ideological about-face that the winner of the 2008 election has performed since taking office.

If the man who presently occupies the Oval Office is, in fact, Barack Obama and not Kcarab Amabo, one must sadly conclude that Obama is no different than any other successful member of the American political class; he lacks all conviction but one: power is the sole object of politics--obtaining it and retaining it for as long as possible. Say anything you have to, promise what you must, it does not matter.

Amabo's great contribution to the advancement of people of color in the U.S. was not his election so much as his daily demonstration that a black man in high office can be as craven as any white man in high office. Race is therefore irrelevant.

Is this a great country, or what?

Wednesday, August 17, 2011

Obama’s bloody “endgame” in Afghanistan

Obama’s bloody “endgame” in Afghanistan

Deep, deep down in your heart, you know that what the author of this article is saying about the Afghan War and the role of the plutocracy in its instigation and perpetuation is true. Deep down, you know this. What is stopping you from admitting the truth to yourself?

The Islamo-Bolivarian threat - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

The Islamo-Bolivarian threat - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

I wonder what it's like to be in the fear industry. It's lucrative, no doubt about that. Probably accounts for a large percentage of the U.S. GNP. Fear is our number one export and domestic consumption remains strong. I hope everybody is gearing up for the big 9/11/11 orgy of fear, national self-pity, and jingoism. Expect to see W and Kcarab Amabo arm in arm at Ground Zero...

Sunday, July 31, 2011

"1st September 1939" by W.H. Auden (poetry)



The strangled impotence of speaking the truth in the face of war; war is but collective criminality; those who prepare for war, who aid and abet others in preparation for war, those who participate in war are all, without exception, criminals.

Wednesday, July 27, 2011

Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Sunday, May 8, 2011

The day bin Laden vanished forever - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

The day bin Laden vanished forever - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

I hate to rain on everyone's parade, but one can reason on the basis of blind faith, or one can reason on the basis of wishful thinking, or one can reason on the basis of evidence. Call me old-fashioned, but I stubbornly insist upon the third of those three options.

Saturday, May 7, 2011

One Can Reason On The Basis of Blind Faith

or one can reason on the basis of wishful thinking, or, one can reason on the basis of evidence. The last of those three options is always my preference, though I know that such rationality makes me appear quite eccentric in the USA of 2011. Still, I stubbornly persist.

The NYT reported that the CIA closed down its "capture OBL" unit in late 2005. A variety of reasons for this action were given at the time, e.g., the agency's "evolving understanding" of how "al-Qaeda functions," but certainly one plausible reason was that it was known then, in intelligence circles, that OBL was dead.

When the authorities who are responsible for accumulating evidence, preserving it, and presenting it, refuse or fail to live up to their responsibilities, one has reasonable room for doubt.

Wednesday, May 4, 2011

It Is Reasonable To Ask

Let us return to July, 2001.

Osama bin Laden is hospitalized in Dubai for treatment of a serious kidney ailment.

It is reasonable to ask how his health fared in the subsequent decade, living as he must have for some part of the time in fairly primitive circumstances--he was, after all, a fugitive from justice in the third world.

Is it possible that he died of natural causes sometime during the 10 years that elapsed between September 11, 2001 and May 1, 2011?

If he did die of natural causes in that period, would the intelligence services of the United States or its allies learn of his death?

If the intelligence services of the United States did learn of his death by natural causes in that period, would this information be disclosed to the American public?

Was not Osama bin Laden worth more to the War On Terror alive and at large as a bogeyman than he would be if he were dead?

Would not Osama bin Laden's death by natural causes rob the American people of the satisfaction of revenge on bin Laden for the crimes against humanity of which he was accused (but for which he was never tried)?

Do the aforementioned possibilities represent incentives for members of the United States government involved with the War On Terror (some of whom have, in fact, profited from it handsomely, e.g., Richard Cheney) to withhold the intelligence of Osama bin Laden's death by natural causes from the American people?

Has interest in the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden among members of the American public not cooled in recent years?

Upon taking office in January 2009, was President Obama briefed as to the current intelligence on Osama bin Laden?

If Osama bin Laden had passed away prior to Barack Obama's taking office, or during his first term as President, would not President Obama be informed of this fact?

As of April 2011, was not Barack Obama campaigning for re-election?

As of April 2011, were not Barack Obama's prospects for re-election in 2012 less than certain (to put it mildly)?

Have the stories concerning the alleged assassination of Osama bin Laden in May of 2011 been consistent or shifting?

Has the American public been provided proof of Osama bin Laden's assassination?

Are "good taste" and "decorum" adequate justifications for withholding evidence from the American public in a matter vital to the national interest?

Have officials of the United States government not provided false or misleading information to the American public regarding other matters vital to the national interest in the recent past?

When will members of the American public begin to demand that U.S. government officials provide it with evidence of claims that it makes relative to matters vital to the national interest?

Tuesday, May 3, 2011

Bin Laden was Unarmed When Shot Dead

US: Bin Laden was unarmed when shot dead - Americas - Al Jazeera English


Bin Laden's code-name among US forces was "Geronimo." That speaks volumes. I guess it had to be either that or "Nat Turner." Is it possible that racist-imperialists have a sense of irony? Somehow I doubt it.

Oh, and by the way, a U.S. government spokesman has "clarified" that Bin Laden was not using his wife as a "shield." That's a little trope we picked up from the Israelis, just in case the murder of women and children who "get in the way" happens to offend anyone's sensibilities.

We Killed Osama bin Laden, Now Let’s Kill the Myth - New America Media

We Killed Osama bin Laden, Now Let’s Kill the Myth - New America Media

Wonderfully sane and informed commentary.

Monday, May 2, 2011

Maybe I'm Just Old-Fashioned...

...but it used to be that when you killed public enemy no. 1, you provided proof to the public. Like this picture of John Dillenger laid out in the morgue.


I'm not anxious to see a dead body, but it strikes me that, in the case of Osama Bin Laden, some such photograph should have accompanied the reports of his killing.

Now, I know that images can be manipulated via computer, so perhaps a photograph like the above photo of Dillenger still would not be conclusive proof. Even so, I find it odd that such proof was not immediately provided to the public.

Now with the passage of time, the emergence of such proof will become more and more suspect.

I don't doubt that Bin Laden is dead. My question is: has he been dead for several years and has that fact been concealed from the American public?

For a long while, he was worth more to the U.S. government alive and at large than dead. Until this recent news, he has been largely forgotten. Perhaps this is the final Bin Laden card the U.S. Government had to play.

What if he died of natural causes a few years ago? What if he died in the initial pounding of the mountains in Afghanistan in late 2001? Who would have known?

The claim that he was flown to the Arabian Sea within hours of his death in an effort to be responsive to "Muslim sensitivities" just does not seem credible.

If the U.S. Government desires to be responsive to Muslim sensitivities, it can begin by withdrawing all troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, stop drone attacks in Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Yemen, and Libya, and stop propping up dictators throughout the Arab world.

Burying a Muslim at sea who did not die at sea is a very odd reading of fiqh.

It appears to me to be an attempt to dispose of a body--if, in fact, such a burial at sea even occurred.

Pardon my skepticism, but we are talking about the government that invented Saddam's WMDs, a heroic death for Pat Tillman, staged the Jessica Lynch rescue, etc., etc.

The killing of Osama bin Laden

The killing of Osama bin Laden

Wait a minute...No withdrawal of troops? No ticker-tape parade?

Bin Laden's Body

The NYT is reporting that Bin Laden was "killed" north of Islamabad and then "buried at sea."

What's that about? His body was flown to the Arabian Sea to be disposed of?

I think the American people have a right to see the body of the man they have been taught to fear for a decade.

The NYT also reported that he was conveniently "shot in the head"--making identification all that more difficult.

I have felt for a long time that Bin Laden has been dead for years.

This story is for domestic U.S. consumption.

Analysis: Killing the alibi - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

Analysis: Killing the alibi - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

Now we can end the wars we started in Afghanistan and Iraq and bring all the troops home to ticker-tape parades, right? By the way, what's this story in the NYT about Bin Laden being buried at sea?

Friday, April 29, 2011

Petraeaus Should Not Head the CIA

All the Reasons Petraeaus Should Not Head the CIA | | AlterNet

Obama sees to it that the Iraq and Afghan wars will continue in perpetuity.

DOJ Drops Probe of Whistleblower Who Exposed Bush-Era Domestic Spying

DOJ Drops Probe of Whistleblower Who Exposed Bush-Era Domestic Spying, Thomas Tamm: "The Bottom Line Is I Don’t Think I Ever Broke the Law"

In 1973, Richard Nixon was threatened with impeachment and hounded out of office for crimes that represented less of a threat to the U.S. Constitution than George W. Bush's warrantless wiretapping in 2004. And yet, Bush and his co-conspirators faced no sanctions for their crimes and to this day are free to drink martinis and watch the sun rise.

Sunday, April 24, 2011

The Beijing Consensus

The time has come for the PRC to intervene in world history...

Critical Montages: Pax Sinica for the Beijing Consensus: "Theoretically, China can pursue global Keynesian policy in addition to domestic Keynesian policy, which would go some way toward countering ..."

Friday, April 1, 2011

Cornel West and the fight against injustice - Riz Khan - Al Jazeera English

Cornel West and the fight against injustice - Riz Khan - Al Jazeera English

With the tragic loss of Manning Marable, we need Br. West now more than ever...

Thank You FAIR

Keeping on top of the disinformation campaign is a big job.

"Flickers" of al-Qaeda in Libya

Keeping fear alive while trying to keep your story straight: how do we maintain the fiction of "freedom-hating" al-Qaeda and/or Hezbollah in the face of popular revolution? It's a quandary for the fear-mongers, but I'm sure they'll come up with something. Lately there has been mention in the media of "flickers" of al-Qaeda being detected among the Libyan rebels. It appears that NATO's brass has floated this first lame trial balloon. Expect more of this rhetoric as newly democratic governments across the region fail to fall in line with the Washington-Tel Aviv-Riyadh axis...

Thursday, March 24, 2011

The Orwellian States of Amnesia

The American Empire has normalized permanent war. Its docile subjects do not object. There are no citizens here, only subjects: emasculated to a man.

Thursday, March 17, 2011

Saturday, March 12, 2011

An Open Challenge To Rep. Peter King: Let's Talk Radicalization.

Yes, Rep. King. At the risk of derailing your ambition to become the next Joseph McCarthy, let us pause for a moment to scrutinize what it is that you seem to fear: the "radicalization" of American Muslims.

Since you reassure us (in the classic formula of bigots everywhere) that "some of your best friends" are Muslim, it is not Muslims that you fear, but "radicalization."

So let's talk radicalization. As if stripping organized labor of collective bargaining rights isn't radical; as if the Patriot Act's roll-back of civil liberties isn't radical; as if billion-dollar tax-payer bail-outs of billionaires orchestrated by the Federal government isn't radical; as if the illegal invasion and military occupation of foreign states isn't radical; and these are just a few of the highlights from the past decade.

And then there is the resurgence of white supremacist violence (I mean non-governmental white supremacist violence, as distinguished from that which is sponsored by the Pentagon and police departments all over this country).

Really, Rep. King, what planet are you living on? You are the paradigm case of a demagogue and of an American who, like so many in this country, fears the wrong enemy.

Please read the post-9/11 edition of Barry Glassner's The Culture of Fear: Why Americans Are Afraid of the Wrongs Things,

and then re-think your life.

Thursday, March 10, 2011

Violent vs. Non-Violent Revolution

I desperately wish to see the Libyan revolution succeed. That said, I fear it may, in the end, prove a cautionary tale.

Sunday, February 27, 2011

Sunday, February 20, 2011

Time for the U.S. to Get a Clue

It is time for deep cuts to corporate welfare: with the so-called "defense" industry number one on the chopping block. Look how the empire is failing.

Saturday, February 19, 2011

صوت الحريه (Voice of Freedom) | Video Cafe

صوت الحريه (Voice of Freedom) | Video Cafe

One of the musicians told a CNN reporter, "These were our weapons of the revolution" (referring to their musical instruments, their voices, their hopes, their tears).

Sunday, February 13, 2011

Interesting Reflection

On the Egyptian Revolution.

Egypt's army dissolves parliament - Middle East - Al Jazeera English

Egypt's army dissolves parliament - Middle East - Al Jazeera English

If only we could send all of Washington packing...

From 9/11 to 2/11: A Sermon in the Key of Tough Love

This is the journey that our fear-ridden, navel-gazing fellow Americans must take: from the obsessive victim-hood of a criminal act that the federal government chose to cover-up in textbook Orwellian fashion (i.e., through sensational, testosterone-driven media manipulation and jingoistic militarism) rather than properly investigate (recall that the crime scene was not preserved for forensic purposes but quickly "cleaned up" for exploitation and hallowed as "ground zero") to the celebration of "people power" in fearless, non-violent regime change as we have been privileged to witness in Tunisia and Egypt.

To paraphrase John Lennon: the Reagan-Bush II era is over (if we want it).

Somebody should tell President Obama. He loves to ride bandwagons. Someone should really let him know that the train he should be riding is, even now, leaving the station.

Rise up my fellow citizens of the Invisible Whitmanian Republic! Facebook and Tweet and WikiLeak your way to a new consciousness!

And when you've finally decided to stop feeling sorry for yourselves that a group of nameless, faceless, uppity brown men got the drop on you and made a spectacle of your holy places (the symbols of global capitalism and U.S. militarism), you can start to feel empowered by the fact that a much bigger group of (largely anonymous) uppity brown men and women and children have embraced and put into action on the streets of their capital cities ideals that you espouse with your lips while denying with your hands and feet and tax dollars.

Rise up! Rise up! Your resurrection lies in insurrection! Rise up, unless true liberation and democracy are no longer your birthright. Rise up and show the world that we, too, have a right to determine our destiny free from plutocratic despotism and violence. Rise up now or forever hold your peace!

Friday, February 11, 2011

Reflections in the Aftermath of Mubarak's Departure






















According to the Angry Arab News Service, this is how Mubarak managed to sneak out of Cairo...

Satire aside, this has been a truly beautiful day. The message Egypt has sent to the entire Arab world is unmistakable: Pay attention! This is how it's done. If we could dislodge Mubarak, you, too, can dislodge your US-Israeli-Saudi-backed regimes.

I believe we are on the cusp of a new era.

As usual, the US power elite were caught flat-footed. While Obama waffled, tear-gas canisters stamped with "made in the USA" told the anti-government protesters in Tahrir Square all that they needed to know about the true position of the United States in this affair.

As the elation begins to wear off, the mantra of the victorious revolutionaries of Egypt and Tunisia must be this: the price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

The forces of reaction will not be dormant. You may rest assured that measures are being taken by despotic regimes (including our own) to contain and undermine popular revolution wherever it may stir.

Anyone who watched Obama's speech in response to Mubarak's departure is forewarned. Obama makes great speeches; ignore his words. He is an accomplished liar. Pay attention to his delivery, his body language. He was anything but celebratory. He finished his remarks and quickly turned and left the room. He entertained no questions. He needed to get back to the Situation Room and the deliberations of the Plutocratic War Party.

I would not be surprised to learn that, at this moment, the Israelis are planning a diversionary strike on Iran, with US-Saudi backing.

I am not saying that this will happen. I am saying: Put nothing past the Plutocratic War Party. They were caught flat-footed; they will move quickly to regain the advantage.

Emissaries from the PWP are doubtlessly calling upon the Egyptian Supreme Military Council with attache cases stuffed with cash.

While the people celebrate, money is changing hands.

Nevertheless, WikiLeaks is on the case. And social networks are showing how, in the hands of the saavy and the motivated, the people can organize and catch the plutocrats off guard.

Hacktivistas have also flexed their cyber-muscles and it does not take a crystal ball to predict that we will witness more of their sort of subversive action.

It will take some time for the Plutocratic War Party to adjust to these new weapons of People Power--but adjust they will.

In the meantime, the people of the world need to keep the enemies of freedom off balance.

McWorld can only be dismantled by means of a hundred thousand little peaceful jihads.

Rise up young lions of the Invisible Whitmanian Republic! You have nothing to lose but your chains...

Hosni Mubarak resigns as president - Middle East - Al Jazeera English

Hosni Mubarak resigns as president - Middle East - Al Jazeera English

MABROUK TO THE EGYPTIAN PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!

Monday, February 7, 2011

What We Are Witnessing: A History Lesson

Today, throughout the Arab world, but also in other poverty-stricken countries (e.g., Bangladesh), we are witnessing popular push-back against the War Lords of the Global Plutocracy.

The War Lords of the Pentagon, the War Lords of the so-called "Defense" industry of the United States, have counterparts--partners in oppression--throughout the world.

Sometimes these War Lords rule openly (as in Mubarak's Egypt), sometimes they prefer to work behind the scenes--putting what the Pentagon likes to term a "civilian face" upon their activities (prime examples: the United States, the Russian Federation, the two Chinas, Turkey). But, whether open or clandestine, the rule of the War Lords is almost universal throughout the globe.

It has been thus since the rise of the city-state in Mesopotamia during the urban revolution of 3,000 BCE.

The rise of the city-state made possible concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the few--the few that worked in concert with the violent, on the one hand, and the priestly class (typically apologists for power) on the other.

In response to the huge disparities of wealth and power that began to characterize what we now call "civilization" (literally, "citification"), there also rose up prophetic figures in diverse cultures throughout the civilized world. These figures challenged the right of the few to horde the wealth of their societies and to eat bread baked with the blood of innocents. In the process of articulating their protest, these figures ushered in what the philosopher Karl Jaspers termed the "Axial Age." They also founded (unintentionally) traditions which underlie many of the world's major religions.

Of course, the priestly/apologist tradition stands cheek by jowl with the popular prophetic tradition in these same major religions; this fact may help to explain the longevity of these religions: both oppressor and oppressed can draw water from the same well.

Because the repertoire of human behavior remains fairly constant over time, we ought not to expect to see the cycle of oppression and push-back end any time soon. We appear to have entered a new historical cycle.

The only light to lessen the darkness of this deep tunnel that humanity has dug for itself is that periods of push-back frequently result in short-term periods of genuine reform. The prophetic populace does obtain some degree of relief from the plutocratic war lords (usually at the price of extortion); and, for a time, the plutocrats withdraw to their villas and gated communities.

In response, the general populace itself retreats into a false sense of security (the sentiment which typically identifies one as a member of the fabled Middle Class).

After a generation or so, the plutocrats begin to implement their revanchement through the instruments of power that are always at their command.

We who identify with the prophetic populace should enjoy the approach of our latest "Prague Spring" while we can: and make the most of it. Genuine concessions can and will be made by the plutocracy if we remain vigilant and insist.

Rise up young lions of the Citified World! You have nothing to lose but your chains!

True, you will, in terms of economic reality, only exchange slavery for share-cropping or, at best, wage slavery; but in terms of your self-respect, you will truly glimpse the Promised Land.

Is that it? you ask. Is that the best we can achieve?

If history is any guide, I'm afraid so.

Paradise belongs to the eschatological future. Even the prophets themselves warned us of that.

An Ominous Development

Read the American Leftist's post re: deployments of US military to Egypt. It appears that the militarized corporatocracy that runs this country intends to secure Egypt's corporatized militocracy's hold on power--by arms if need be.

Sunday, February 6, 2011

Fresh violence erupts in Tunisia - Africa - Al Jazeera English

Fresh violence erupts in Tunisia - Africa - Al Jazeera English

Meanwhile, in Tunisia, the revolution continues...

The Question You Have To Ask Yourself














Is this: Just how difficult would it be at this point for the Obama Administration to throw Mubarak under the proverbial bus?

The answer, which is becoming increasingly clear, is this: extraordinarily difficult.

Why? Because, over the last thirty years, Mubarak has gained admission to the exclusive ranks of the global Killers Club--a fraternity which Barack Obama joined upon his election to the U.S. Presidency--and there is honor among Killers.

To throw Mubarak under the bus would violate the sacred bond that exists among the members of this group.

You see, these are very special people. They are law-makers who function above the law. And where laws are acknowledged by these people, they are not laws subject to moral strictures. This is a status enjoyed by very few human beings on this planet.

Therefore, if Obama were to suddenly acknowledge that there are limits--legal limits--applicable to Hosni Mubarak, or moral limits applicable to any laws, why, might there not also be legal and moral limits applicable to the Presidential actions of Barack Obama? So much for extraordinary rendition or executive assassination orders. So much for the pillaging of the middle class by the Wall Street financiers of the militarized corporatocracy--or, in the case of Egypt, the corporatized militocracy.

Such an acknowledgment would not only complicate Obama's life, it would constitute an act of treason towards the one group of people to whom Obama owes unquestioning loyalty.

No, no, not the American people, dear reader! The global Killers Club.

Now do you understand why Mubarak Obama is not at liberty to throw Obama Mubarak under the bus?

It's a question of honor and loyalty, not a question of justice or morality.

If you had thought otherwise, gentle reader, you must have been laboring under the burden of a category mistake.

Category mistakes are a common form of confusion, of a lack of conceptual clarity. Such mistakes are easily rectified.

If you have any further questions, let me refer you to Mr. O'Brien. His success rate in clearing up such conceptual confusions is very high. He has pioneered revolutionary techniques in this field. Frankly, I think he may be a future Nobel Laureate. By God he should be--if there's any justice in this world!