Mark it on your calendar. It seems we've finally entered the Soviet era in America.
You remember the Soviet Union, now almost 20 years in its grave. But who gives it a second thought today? Even in its glory years that "evil empire" was sometimes referred to as "the second superpower." In 1991, after seven decades, it suddenly disintegrated and disappeared, leaving the United States -- the "sole superpower," even the "hyperpower," on planet Earth -- surprised but triumphant.
The USSR had been heading for the exits for quite a while, not that official Washington had a clue. At the moment it happened, Soviet "experts" like Secretary of Defense Robert Gates (then director of the CIA) still expected the Cold War to go on and on. In Washington, eyes were trained on the might of the Soviet military, which the Soviet leadership had never stopped feeding, even as its sclerotic bureaucracy was rotting, its economy (which had ceased to grow in the late 1970s) was tanking, budget deficits were soaring, indebtedness to other countries was growing, and social welfare payments were eating into what funds remained. Not even a vigorous, reformist leader like Mikhail Gorbachev could staunch the rot, especially when, in the late 1980s, the price of Russian oil fell drastically.
Looking back, the most distinctive feature of the last years of the Soviet Union may have been the way it continued to pour money into its military -- and its military adventure in Afghanistan -- when it was already going bankrupt and the society it had built was beginning to collapse around it. In the end, its aging leaders made a devastating miscalculation. They mistook military power for power on this planet. Armed to the teeth and possessing a nuclear force capable of destroying the Earth many times over, the Soviets nonetheless remained the vastly poorer, weaker, and (except when it came to the arms race) far less technologically innovative of the two superpowers.
In December 1979, perhaps taking the bait of the Carter administration whose national security advisor was eager to see the Soviets bloodied by a "Vietnam" of their own, the Red Army invaded Afghanistan to support a weak communist government in Kabul. When resistance in the countryside, led by Islamic fundamentalist guerrillas and backed by the other superpower, only grew, the Soviets sent in more troops, launched major offensives, called in air power, and fought on brutally and futilely for a decade until, in 1989, long after they had been whipped, they withdrew in defeat.
Gorbachev had dubbed Afghanistan "the bleeding wound," and when the wounded Red Army finally limped home, it was to a country that would soon cease to exist. For the Soviet Union, Afghanistan had literally proven "the graveyard of empires." If, at the end, its military remained standing, the empire didn't. (And if you don't already find this description just a tad eerie, given the present moment in the U.S., you should.)
Click here for the rest of this fine article
Friday, June 18, 2010
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Meltup
May 14, 2010
NIA Announces Release of 'Meltup'
The National Inflation Association is pleased to announce the release of 'Meltup', a new nearly one-hour documentary about how the U.S. economy is at the beginning stages of a currency crisis that will ultimately lead to hyperinflation.
Meltup features Gerald Celente, Peter Schiff, Ron Paul, Marc Faber, Jim Rogers, Tom Woods, and others. The documentary proves through facts and statistics how hyperinflation in the U.S. is now inevitable and how Americans could soon see the end of entitlement programs they have become dependent on to live and survive.
This is a must watch hour long video from Inflation.us. It is now making the viral rounds, and has already had about a half million views in just four days.
Please forward to your friends and neighbors. Inflationist or deflationist, the facts behind this video are undeniable. It is time for the truth about our economy to break through the propaganda machine.
NIA Announces Release of 'Meltup'
The National Inflation Association is pleased to announce the release of 'Meltup', a new nearly one-hour documentary about how the U.S. economy is at the beginning stages of a currency crisis that will ultimately lead to hyperinflation.
Meltup features Gerald Celente, Peter Schiff, Ron Paul, Marc Faber, Jim Rogers, Tom Woods, and others. The documentary proves through facts and statistics how hyperinflation in the U.S. is now inevitable and how Americans could soon see the end of entitlement programs they have become dependent on to live and survive.
This is a must watch hour long video from Inflation.us. It is now making the viral rounds, and has already had about a half million views in just four days.
Please forward to your friends and neighbors. Inflationist or deflationist, the facts behind this video are undeniable. It is time for the truth about our economy to break through the propaganda machine.
Friday, May 14, 2010
Third Step Prayer
This is the prayer that I pray every morning. I find that it is only when I can get out of myself and approach real humility that the blessing of God comes upon me. It is only when I can get out of myself and approach real humility that I can be of service to my fellow man.
"God, I offer myself to Thee--to build with me and to do with me as Thou wilt. Relieve me of the bondage of self, that I may better do Thy will. Take away my difficulties, that victory over them may bear witness to those I would help of Thy Power, Thy Love, and Thy Way of life.
May I do Thy will always!"
"God, I offer myself to Thee--to build with me and to do with me as Thou wilt. Relieve me of the bondage of self, that I may better do Thy will. Take away my difficulties, that victory over them may bear witness to those I would help of Thy Power, Thy Love, and Thy Way of life.
May I do Thy will always!"
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution
For too long we have been too complacent about the workings of Congress. Many citizens had no idea that members of Congress could retire with the same pay after only one term, that they didn't pay into Social Security, that they specifically exempted themselves from many of the laws they have passed (such as being exempt from any fear of prosecution for sexual harassment) while ordinary citizens must live under those laws. The latest is to exempt themselves from the Healthcare Reform that is being considered...in all of its forms. Somehow, that doesn't seem logical. We do not have an elite that is above the law. I truly don't care if they are Democrat, Republican, Independent or whatever. The self-serving must stop. This is a good way to do that. It is an idea whose time has come.
Have each person contact a minimum of Twenty people on their Address list, in turn ask each of those to do likewise.
In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one proposal that really should be passed around.
Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution
"Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States."
Have each person contact a minimum of Twenty people on their Address list, in turn ask each of those to do likewise.
In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one proposal that really should be passed around.
Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution
"Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States."
Sunday, January 17, 2010
La Respuesta del Padre
Se tirita con el frío
Escondida en el cuarto oscuro
Y llora.
Sus labios y dedos azules
Y su aliento blanco vapor
Un calendario fuera de su año y motas de polvo
Y una ventana negra sin cortina,
Sacudida por rafagas de lluvia hacen el cuarto más vacio
Pero una bolsa de lana de oveja se inclina a la pared
Dejado por la mujer que abandonó el cuarto
Y la niña saca puñados de lana
Para hacerse un nido en el piso
Ella trata de acurrucarse entre la lana suelta
Sus pestañas baten como alitas pequeñas
Pero no logra dormir y los recuerdos dolorosos vienen…
Su padre, ebrio, amenazante "¿Qué haces aquí niña?"
Y él la miraba con ojos de vidrio negro
Libres de la chispa de emoción y consciencia
"¿Por qué vienes aquí niña? Nadie te quiere aquí."
Y la pequeña se levantaba y salió derrotada otra vez
Escondiendo sus lágrimas de él que la engendró
Sopla más fuerte el viento norte sobre los techos de Puerto Montt
El viento encuentra las grietas y agujeros
Y se mete silbando en el cuarto viejo
La niña tirita con frío y con miedo
Y llora sacudiendose el pecho, ya desesperada y completamente sola
Antes del alba ella se pone de pie en sus piernas pequeñas
Y saca los pelos de lana pegados a su ropa vieja
Y sale a la calle
No resiste más a la soledad
El viento corre gritando por la calle
Los techos suenan
Cuando chocan las planchas con los balazos de lluvia
Ella camina entumida, cuesta abajo hacia el Puerto
Sus manos y pies le arden con el frío
Y la lluvia le empapa la ropa
Se detiene frente a la entrada de una tienda
Se pone debajo del alero de su techo
Y ella llora otra vez
Su pecho sacude con el llanto
"¿Qué sería de mi?"
Y mira arriba, su cara blanca del frío, empapada de lluvia y lágrimas
"Diosito, ¿no me quieres? Estoy tan solita Señor…."
Y baja la cara,
Derrotada se sienta en el escalón de la entrada de la tienda
Pierde el sentido en las manos y piensa de morirse…
"Por favor Señor, por favor Señor"
Alguién le toca
Ella abre los ojos y levanta la mirada para ver
Dos ojos cafes, llenos de amor
El perro le lame las lágrimas
Y ella abraza el cuerpo caliente del perro vago
Hasta que aclara el cielo
Escondida en el cuarto oscuro
Y llora.
Sus labios y dedos azules
Y su aliento blanco vapor
Un calendario fuera de su año y motas de polvo
Y una ventana negra sin cortina,
Sacudida por rafagas de lluvia hacen el cuarto más vacio
Pero una bolsa de lana de oveja se inclina a la pared
Dejado por la mujer que abandonó el cuarto
Y la niña saca puñados de lana
Para hacerse un nido en el piso
Ella trata de acurrucarse entre la lana suelta
Sus pestañas baten como alitas pequeñas
Pero no logra dormir y los recuerdos dolorosos vienen…
Su padre, ebrio, amenazante "¿Qué haces aquí niña?"
Y él la miraba con ojos de vidrio negro
Libres de la chispa de emoción y consciencia
"¿Por qué vienes aquí niña? Nadie te quiere aquí."
Y la pequeña se levantaba y salió derrotada otra vez
Escondiendo sus lágrimas de él que la engendró
Sopla más fuerte el viento norte sobre los techos de Puerto Montt
El viento encuentra las grietas y agujeros
Y se mete silbando en el cuarto viejo
La niña tirita con frío y con miedo
Y llora sacudiendose el pecho, ya desesperada y completamente sola
Antes del alba ella se pone de pie en sus piernas pequeñas
Y saca los pelos de lana pegados a su ropa vieja
Y sale a la calle
No resiste más a la soledad
El viento corre gritando por la calle
Los techos suenan
Cuando chocan las planchas con los balazos de lluvia
Ella camina entumida, cuesta abajo hacia el Puerto
Sus manos y pies le arden con el frío
Y la lluvia le empapa la ropa
Se detiene frente a la entrada de una tienda
Se pone debajo del alero de su techo
Y ella llora otra vez
Su pecho sacude con el llanto
"¿Qué sería de mi?"
Y mira arriba, su cara blanca del frío, empapada de lluvia y lágrimas
"Diosito, ¿no me quieres? Estoy tan solita Señor…."
Y baja la cara,
Derrotada se sienta en el escalón de la entrada de la tienda
Pierde el sentido en las manos y piensa de morirse…
"Por favor Señor, por favor Señor"
Alguién le toca
Ella abre los ojos y levanta la mirada para ver
Dos ojos cafes, llenos de amor
El perro le lame las lágrimas
Y ella abraza el cuerpo caliente del perro vago
Hasta que aclara el cielo
Monday, December 28, 2009
Do we need a new reserve currency?
From the Emirates Business 24/7 magazine
By Insead Knowledge on Sunday, December 27, 2009
A new global currency should replace the US dollar as the international reserve currency, as the long-term deterioration of America's economy and the greenback is fuelling a "currency-regime crisis", says Martin Wolf, associate editor and chief economics commentator of the Financial Times.
Wolf, who has honorary doctorates from three universities, bases his argument in part on the Triffin dilemma, an economic paradox named after economist Robert Triffin. The paradox shows that the US dollar's role as a global reserve currency leads to a conflict between US national monetary policy and global monetary policy. It also points to fundamental imbalances in the balance of payments, particularly in the US current account.
Account deficit
Speaking at an event organised by the Singapore Institute of International Affairs, Wolf said Triffin believed that the host nation of a global reserve currency will inevitably run up a huge current account deficit that would consequently undermine the credibility of its currency and adversely impact the global economy. "You can't have an open globalised economy that relies for its ultimate liquidity on the currency of one country. That was his [Triffin's] argument. And, therefore, he said the Bretton Woods system would break, which it did. And exactly the same thing happened with Bretton Woods II, which is the system of pegging.
"So I agree with this. And I'm absolutely convinced now, in a way that I was not three or four years ago, that we cannot continue with a genuinely global economy which relies on national money, and that's not sold by just adding another couple (of currencies). It actually means having a global money."
Indeed, Wolf said he's in complete agreement with China's Central Bank Governor Zhou Xiaochuan, who has argued for a new global currency "most credibly and convincingly".
"On the dollar, there is nothing to support this currency except the Chinese government and a few other governments that are prepared to buy it," said Wolf. "Anybody can look at the arithmetic of the fiscal deficit, the monetary policy, the external balance, which has improved but largely because of the recession, the dollar is not adequately supported." The US currently has a national debt in excess of $12 trillion (Dh44trn) or almost $40,000 per citizen, with a debt to GDP ratio of more than 85 per cent. In the July-September quarter, the US current account deficit rose sharply by 10.3 per cent from the previous quarter to $108bn. In the past year, the US dollar index, which measures the performance of the greenback against a basket of currencies, has also fallen significantly.
Click Here to read the rest of the article
By Insead Knowledge on Sunday, December 27, 2009
A new global currency should replace the US dollar as the international reserve currency, as the long-term deterioration of America's economy and the greenback is fuelling a "currency-regime crisis", says Martin Wolf, associate editor and chief economics commentator of the Financial Times.
Wolf, who has honorary doctorates from three universities, bases his argument in part on the Triffin dilemma, an economic paradox named after economist Robert Triffin. The paradox shows that the US dollar's role as a global reserve currency leads to a conflict between US national monetary policy and global monetary policy. It also points to fundamental imbalances in the balance of payments, particularly in the US current account.
Account deficit
Speaking at an event organised by the Singapore Institute of International Affairs, Wolf said Triffin believed that the host nation of a global reserve currency will inevitably run up a huge current account deficit that would consequently undermine the credibility of its currency and adversely impact the global economy. "You can't have an open globalised economy that relies for its ultimate liquidity on the currency of one country. That was his [Triffin's] argument. And, therefore, he said the Bretton Woods system would break, which it did. And exactly the same thing happened with Bretton Woods II, which is the system of pegging.
"So I agree with this. And I'm absolutely convinced now, in a way that I was not three or four years ago, that we cannot continue with a genuinely global economy which relies on national money, and that's not sold by just adding another couple (of currencies). It actually means having a global money."
Indeed, Wolf said he's in complete agreement with China's Central Bank Governor Zhou Xiaochuan, who has argued for a new global currency "most credibly and convincingly".
"On the dollar, there is nothing to support this currency except the Chinese government and a few other governments that are prepared to buy it," said Wolf. "Anybody can look at the arithmetic of the fiscal deficit, the monetary policy, the external balance, which has improved but largely because of the recession, the dollar is not adequately supported." The US currently has a national debt in excess of $12 trillion (Dh44trn) or almost $40,000 per citizen, with a debt to GDP ratio of more than 85 per cent. In the July-September quarter, the US current account deficit rose sharply by 10.3 per cent from the previous quarter to $108bn. In the past year, the US dollar index, which measures the performance of the greenback against a basket of currencies, has also fallen significantly.
Click Here to read the rest of the article
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
New Contract for America? Or same old crap again?
The Republican leadership has come up with a new Contract for America that continues to offer a counterpoint of big government to the Democrats' version of big government. Here are the ten points of the Contract for America drawn up by Dick Army:
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Republican National Committee identifies ten (10) key public policy positions for the 2010 election cycle, which the Republican National Committee expects its public officials and candidates to support:
(1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama’s “stimulus” bill;
(2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run health care;
(3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;
(4) We support workers’ right to secret ballot by opposing card check;
(5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;
(6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;
(7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;
(8) We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;
(9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and
(10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership.
RESOLVED, that a candidate who disagrees with three or more of the above stated public policy positions of the Republican National Committee, as identified by the voting record, public statements and/or signed questionnaire of the candidate, shall not be eligible for financial support and endorsement by the Republican National Committee.
By including numbers 6 and 7 the Republicans have flatly stated that they will not reduce DoD or intelligence expenditures. The only way that thay can continue to fund two wars and massive presence around the globe is to deal with the Democrats in Congress. That means that the Republicans will not be able to cut any social spending programs and therefore their number 1 point is absolutely impossible.
The rest of the points do not greatly impact the budget and are there mostly to attempt to differentiate mainstream Republicans from Democrats. Some of the points are important, but do not address the existential problem of an out-of-control Federal behemoth. This list of points will result in more unpayable debt and more government, not less.
Now I saw a list on digg.com to replace the list that the Military Industrial Complex wrote for Dick Armey. Here it is:
1. Balanced Budget
2. Tort Reform
3. Repeal the 17th Amendment
4. Term limits
5. End the War on Drugs
6. End all funding of other nations
7. Exit strategy for all miltary involvement overseas
8. Abolish the IRS/Tax code and institute a progressive flat tax for everyone living above poverty level. No exemptions!
9. All congressional salary, benefits require 2/3 vote from public.
10. Any civillian conviction requires dismissal of the Congressman or Senator from Congress
That got me thinking....
I haven't had time to write a list yet, but I might change a couple of Mr. h8f8kes points. In the meantime, what do you think?
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Republican National Committee identifies ten (10) key public policy positions for the 2010 election cycle, which the Republican National Committee expects its public officials and candidates to support:
(1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama’s “stimulus” bill;
(2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run health care;
(3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;
(4) We support workers’ right to secret ballot by opposing card check;
(5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;
(6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;
(7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;
(8) We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;
(9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and
(10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership.
RESOLVED, that a candidate who disagrees with three or more of the above stated public policy positions of the Republican National Committee, as identified by the voting record, public statements and/or signed questionnaire of the candidate, shall not be eligible for financial support and endorsement by the Republican National Committee.
By including numbers 6 and 7 the Republicans have flatly stated that they will not reduce DoD or intelligence expenditures. The only way that thay can continue to fund two wars and massive presence around the globe is to deal with the Democrats in Congress. That means that the Republicans will not be able to cut any social spending programs and therefore their number 1 point is absolutely impossible.
The rest of the points do not greatly impact the budget and are there mostly to attempt to differentiate mainstream Republicans from Democrats. Some of the points are important, but do not address the existential problem of an out-of-control Federal behemoth. This list of points will result in more unpayable debt and more government, not less.
Now I saw a list on digg.com to replace the list that the Military Industrial Complex wrote for Dick Armey. Here it is:
1. Balanced Budget
2. Tort Reform
3. Repeal the 17th Amendment
4. Term limits
5. End the War on Drugs
6. End all funding of other nations
7. Exit strategy for all miltary involvement overseas
8. Abolish the IRS/Tax code and institute a progressive flat tax for everyone living above poverty level. No exemptions!
9. All congressional salary, benefits require 2/3 vote from public.
10. Any civillian conviction requires dismissal of the Congressman or Senator from Congress
That got me thinking....
I haven't had time to write a list yet, but I might change a couple of Mr. h8f8kes points. In the meantime, what do you think?
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Larry Wilkerson Talks About The End Of The American Empire
Colonel Larry Wilkerson, former assistant to Colin Powell and Pentagon war-planner speaks truth to empire. This half hour video is an intelligent analysis of the future of the USA and its debt-based, militaristic government.
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Do Dead Men Make Videotapes?
There is a question that I have been asking myself for a few years now and I do not understand why this question isn’t asked by someone in media, at last in alternative media.
First I’ll write the question and then the reasoning behind it, then I would like as many people as possible to give their opinions as to which is the right answer.
Here’s the question:
Are the US military and intelligence services totally incompetent or is the CIA producing the Osama bin Laden videos and audio recordings?
A or B. Are we pathetically unable to achieve a relatively simple objective or have we killed the chief terrorist and now cynically make him speak from the tomb in order to justify the endless war?
The reason that this question should be asked is that since the 11th of September of 2001, 24 Osama bin Laden tapes have been released and at least some of the tapes have been confirmed by the CIA as authentic.
We have spent well over a trillion dollars and have killed or been the direct cause of the deaths of somewhere between 150,000 and over a million deaths in our far-ranging War on Terror™. We have overthrown a couple of governments, destabilized a few more and are currently threatening another. We have imprisoned tens of thousands, have tortured hundreds and have had at least one hundred men die in our captivity as a result of torture in order to pursue this “war”.
The goal of the War on Terror™ has been changed over the 8 years since it officially began, but its central tenet has always been the destruction of the international Islamic terrorist organization, Al Qaeda. Although there is considerable doubt in some quarters if the organization has ever really existed, the US and British governments have released thousands of press releases over the last 8 years that, when compiled, identify an incredibly capable and powerful organization determined to bury Western liberal civilization. The Al Qaeda we have come to know in released CIA reports has done its job; it is terrifying.
So if the purpose of our brutal and economically ruinous War on Terror™ is the annihilation of al Qaeda, why haven’t we been able to keep Osama and his handsome sidekick from making all those videos that exhort the faithful to keep killing the infidels? And why have George Bush and Dick Cheney and Robert Gates all said the bin Laden is “irrelevant”? Why do we continue to hear that al Qaeda is the reason for our war from Mr. Obama while at the same time we are told that Mr. bin Laden (the leader of al Qaeda) is irrelevant? It does not make any sense whatsoever to think that an organization is dangerous enough to warrant 8 years of war, but the leaders of that organization are irrelevant. Osama was considered irrelevant in 2002 and he still is today . The war against al Qaeda goes on and on and new bin Laden tapes are still distributed three or four times a year. Can't we find this fellow and end his propaganda campaign?
Please step back, clear your mind and look at this anew. We kill thousands, occupy foreign countries, waste trillions of dollars, to dismantle enemy forces, but the leadership of those enemy forces is considered irrelevant. Every time that enemy leadership releases a video it is immediately front page news around the world. This is absurd. It needs to be questioned. It would be side-splittingly funny if so much death and suffering were not involved.
So are we incapable of using our drones and satellites and eavesdropping equipment and data mining and torture and bribery to find a 6´4” Arab in Pakistan? Is the combined might of the US military machine incapable of shutting down his video production? If so, I submit that all our military is suited to do is to kill and menace civilians (thereby creating an endlss supply of "terrorists") and all our intelligence services are capable of is listening in on Americans’ private phone conversations and cobbing together falsified justifications for war.
On the other hand, Osama might just be dead as Benazhir Bhutto made clear a number of times. . But if Osama is dead, then his videotapes must be made by the CIA. The CIA is reputed to be more skilled in video and digital imaging verification than anyone else in the world. So they could not be fooled by a couple of Arabs with a copy of Macromedia. If they say the tapes are real, they are real or the CIA is lying. Why would they lie? Because they want the tapes to justify the Endless War. And in that case, who made the tapes? The CIA of course.
What do you think? A or B?
A.- The US intelligence services are pathetically incompetent
b.- Osama is as dead as a doornail and his tapes are made by the CIA to keep the Endless War going.
Update: Jan 9th 2010:
The BBC has just written an article with the same theme, that Osama is either:
1.- dead and someone is faking the tapes
or
2.-alive and US Intelligence can't find him
However the BBC fails to come to the obviou conclusions that in case #1, the only possibilty of faked tapes is from the CIA and NSA and that in case #2 that US military and Intelligence have spent trillions and have not found Osama bin Laden. They are therefore incompetent.
First I’ll write the question and then the reasoning behind it, then I would like as many people as possible to give their opinions as to which is the right answer.
Here’s the question:
Are the US military and intelligence services totally incompetent or is the CIA producing the Osama bin Laden videos and audio recordings?
A or B. Are we pathetically unable to achieve a relatively simple objective or have we killed the chief terrorist and now cynically make him speak from the tomb in order to justify the endless war?
The reason that this question should be asked is that since the 11th of September of 2001, 24 Osama bin Laden tapes have been released and at least some of the tapes have been confirmed by the CIA as authentic.
We have spent well over a trillion dollars and have killed or been the direct cause of the deaths of somewhere between 150,000 and over a million deaths in our far-ranging War on Terror™. We have overthrown a couple of governments, destabilized a few more and are currently threatening another. We have imprisoned tens of thousands, have tortured hundreds and have had at least one hundred men die in our captivity as a result of torture in order to pursue this “war”.
The goal of the War on Terror™ has been changed over the 8 years since it officially began, but its central tenet has always been the destruction of the international Islamic terrorist organization, Al Qaeda. Although there is considerable doubt in some quarters if the organization has ever really existed, the US and British governments have released thousands of press releases over the last 8 years that, when compiled, identify an incredibly capable and powerful organization determined to bury Western liberal civilization. The Al Qaeda we have come to know in released CIA reports has done its job; it is terrifying.
So if the purpose of our brutal and economically ruinous War on Terror™ is the annihilation of al Qaeda, why haven’t we been able to keep Osama and his handsome sidekick from making all those videos that exhort the faithful to keep killing the infidels? And why have George Bush and Dick Cheney and Robert Gates all said the bin Laden is “irrelevant”? Why do we continue to hear that al Qaeda is the reason for our war from Mr. Obama while at the same time we are told that Mr. bin Laden (the leader of al Qaeda) is irrelevant? It does not make any sense whatsoever to think that an organization is dangerous enough to warrant 8 years of war, but the leaders of that organization are irrelevant. Osama was considered irrelevant in 2002 and he still is today . The war against al Qaeda goes on and on and new bin Laden tapes are still distributed three or four times a year. Can't we find this fellow and end his propaganda campaign?
Please step back, clear your mind and look at this anew. We kill thousands, occupy foreign countries, waste trillions of dollars, to dismantle enemy forces, but the leadership of those enemy forces is considered irrelevant. Every time that enemy leadership releases a video it is immediately front page news around the world. This is absurd. It needs to be questioned. It would be side-splittingly funny if so much death and suffering were not involved.
So are we incapable of using our drones and satellites and eavesdropping equipment and data mining and torture and bribery to find a 6´4” Arab in Pakistan? Is the combined might of the US military machine incapable of shutting down his video production? If so, I submit that all our military is suited to do is to kill and menace civilians (thereby creating an endlss supply of "terrorists") and all our intelligence services are capable of is listening in on Americans’ private phone conversations and cobbing together falsified justifications for war.
On the other hand, Osama might just be dead as Benazhir Bhutto made clear a number of times. . But if Osama is dead, then his videotapes must be made by the CIA. The CIA is reputed to be more skilled in video and digital imaging verification than anyone else in the world. So they could not be fooled by a couple of Arabs with a copy of Macromedia. If they say the tapes are real, they are real or the CIA is lying. Why would they lie? Because they want the tapes to justify the Endless War. And in that case, who made the tapes? The CIA of course.
What do you think? A or B?
A.- The US intelligence services are pathetically incompetent
b.- Osama is as dead as a doornail and his tapes are made by the CIA to keep the Endless War going.
Update: Jan 9th 2010:
The BBC has just written an article with the same theme, that Osama is either:
1.- dead and someone is faking the tapes
or
2.-alive and US Intelligence can't find him
However the BBC fails to come to the obviou conclusions that in case #1, the only possibilty of faked tapes is from the CIA and NSA and that in case #2 that US military and Intelligence have spent trillions and have not found Osama bin Laden. They are therefore incompetent.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)