It's a bit of a mixed feeling to realize that millions and millions of people who didn't get this distinction two, four or six years ago now understand that the "political' issues we now face aren't about right and left, they're about right and wrong. On one hand, what took you so long? On the other, thank God and welcome aboard.Although the media has downplayed it -- it doesn't fit with the general stupidization program of creating a lot of heat but very little light -- more and more actual conservatives and even members of the religious right are coming to see the Bush-Cheney regime as a rogue administration and a thin cover for criminal enterprise. Such right wing stalwarts as former Georgia Rep. Bob Barr and Richard Viguerie (one of the architects of the far right wing) have formed an organization to protect our civil liberties from our own government. Chuck Baldwin, an associate of Jerry Falwell, has become an open 3 advocate of impeachment and writes a very articulate column.
These folks are far bolder than the Democrats in this regard, and they will play a key role when impeachment happens -- and it will.Now some of you reading this who have a deeper spiritual understanding of love, forgiveness and the ways in which we do indeed create our own reality might be wondering "Gee, this whole impeachment thing seems pretty 'anti'. Shouldn't we be focusing on what we want instead of what we don't want?"Indeed, the point can be made that the failure of the Democrats in 2004 -- aside from the minor issue of voting fraud in Ohio and Florida -- had to do with John Kerry's approach of "Vote for me, I'm not as bad as George Bush," and failure to articulate any compelling positive vision. However, the real issue goes much deeper.
Ending The American Hostage Crisis
It has nothing to do with loving or hating George Bush, whose policies have educated and awakened more Americans than all of the "progressive" leaders combined. It does have to do with what we need to recognize as the American Hostage Crisis. The American people -- and particularly our soldiers in Iraq -- are being held hostage by a ruthless <>criminal cadre (this is not hyperbolic invective; the definition of "criminal" is "one who commits crimes"). The people up until now have been blackmailed into supporting a war of choice with the cynical cry, "Support our troops." As if our troops sent themselves over there and now we have to rescue them.
The people of America are now at a crossroads that will determine whether the world continues hurtling down the highway to hell, or whether we change course in the direction of our true human potential, what Swami calls "humanifest destiny." I say the world because if the United States honors the intentions of our founders and accepts the evolutionary role of genuine self-governance, the entire world will cheer -- and breathe a sigh of relief. Under the guise of true moral authority, we will be able to isolate the sociopathogens in the world and deal with them as criminals instead of what we're doing now -- killing the people the criminal elements are holding hostage, and creating new converts for the criminals.
There is something positive to be built, but it cannot be built on a foundation of lies. That is why the so-called "surge" or any other policy to "stay the course" in Iraq will not succeed. The entire structure -- why we're there, what's been happening since we got there, what our future intentions are -- all lies. Those troops we are "supporting" are being sent in as surrogate targets for George Bush and the American empire, an empire that isn't even ours but belongs to a slew of multinational corporations that could care less whether America lives or dies. That's what American soldiers are discovering, sadly, that their most ardent "supporters" at home have been unwilling to face. Until now.
America's next step -- and only step -- that can take us forward is to bring the Bush-Cheney regime to justice. This isn't about vengeance, it isn't about punishment. It's about truth. That element that has been so lacking in our political environment that it has caused a spiritual, psychological and political heartsickness in the heartland. This basic lack of integrity -- that even those who overtly believe the lies still feel deep down in their guts -- is why we have the Don Imuses and the Ann Coulters. Those are the people who keep us occupied with weapons of mass-distraction, who help us aim our rage at the wrong targets.
Their brand of free speech is what Caroline Casey calls a "toxic mimic" of the real thing. The freedom of speech and freedom of press the American revolutionaries risked life and fortune for wasn't so our "commonest" of commentators could sling invectives like "faggots" and "nappy-headed ho's" but to empower citizens by letting them know what's going on. In this regard, the record of our so-called "free press" is dismal, if not traitorous. Try initiating a real conversation about the unanswered questions and unquestioned answers regarding 9/11. There you will find a stone wall of silence, or loud screaming to drown out the truth. While up until now, very few have wanted to "go there," more and more people are awakening to the tragic truth that "there" has already come "here."
Cutting the Legs Out From Under Their Story
Just over two years ago, after what many of us realized was a stolen election (with Barbara Boxer the lone Senator to stand and raise the issue), I wrote a piece about the wall of lies. In the midst of the frustration and despair that many of us felt, I predicted the wall of lies would crumble. It wasn't a difficult prediction to make. In these times when the veil is being lifted everywhere, the "irony curtain" is no exception.
I wrote that the illegitimate "legitimacy" of the Bush-Cheney regime rested on a three-legged stool. The first leg was the belief they were fairly elected in 2000 and 2004. The second was the Iraq War and the reluctance of people to "change horse's asses in the middle of an extreme." The third was 9/11, and the official account of what happened that day.
At this writing, one leg is completely gone and another is severely splintered. More than two thirds of Americans now see the Iraq War as an unmitigated disaster, and a large portion of our armed forces are demoralized and angry. It is now being termed "an unpopular war," a phrase that begs the question, "And when exactly was the last 'popular war'?" Wait a minute ... I think I have it. The last popular war was the Battle of the Groups at the Brooklyn Fox Theater ... Dion and the Belmonts vs. the Drifters. I think it was 1960.
As for the legitimacy of the "elections", that issue broke through the soundless barrier a year ago when RFK, Jr. published his article in Rolling Stone. Timing is everything, and the timing of that article coincided with a general "upwising." Having seen mounting evidence of lying, cheating and stealing on the part of Rove and company, a critical mass of Americans (or at least Democrats) were able to accept the inconvenient likelihood that the Republicans cheated to win the election too. This awakened awareness and the voter mobilization that followed helped the Democrats win control of both Houses of Congress, despite any shenanigans. As lame as you may think the Democrats are, this was the first important step of restoring the balance of power and the rule of law. I contend it could not have happened without the widespread awareness that the Republicans were getting set to steal elections again.
So here we are. The "leg" called the Iraq War is gone. The "leg" called "these people were elected legitimately" is badly compromised. And yet, like the mad monk Rasputin, Bush and Cheney are still standing behind their stone wall. Subpoenas notwithstanding, they've entrenched and have no intention of giving in one iota. Because as soon as they do, the avalanche of revelations will cause their downfall. How long can this holding pattern go on? It can definitely go on indefinitely. Unless we as a nation allow the 9/11 story to break through the soundless barrier. When this leg gets chopped off, Bush and Cheney will be gone.
More importantly, the truth will be revealed so that we can collectively "face the music" and set a new course. Never has any nation been in this position. Nazi Germany was forced to face their heart of darkness only by military defeat. Soviet Russia collapsed under the weight of its own unworkability. But now, for the "land of the free" to finally earn that name and claim our true inheritance, we must face what is perhaps the most profound betrayal in our 200 year history.
A Straussian Waltz Down a Slippery Slope
Although we would like to believe that the principles that guided America's founding fathers are still in operation, the sad truth is that the principles of truth, justice and transparency have been overridden by a new operating system called "neo-conservatism" which is neither "neo" nor conservative. The "neocon" is actually a very old con called "the end justifies the means." And that brings us to Leo Strauss, the man considered the "founding father" of neoconservatism.
Leo Strauss, who was born in Germany and who taught at the University of Chicago from 1949-69, brought Machiavelli into the machine age. He unabashedly believed in manipulation and deception, all of which he deemed necessary to rule the unruly masses. According to Shadia Drury, author of and the American Right, Strauss believed that "those who are fit to rule are those who realize there is no morality and there is only one natural right -- the right of the superior to rule over the inferior."
Strauss was a strong believer in religion -- as a way of imposing "moral law" on the populace, who would otherwise be out of control. He would have agreed with Marx that religion was the "opiate of the masses," only he had no qualms about being a drug dealer. The rulers, of course, didn't have to live by the rules of religion. Says Ronald Bailey, science correspondent for Reason magazine: "Neoconservatives are pro-religion even though they themselves may not be believers."
In the tradition of Thomas Hobbes, Strauss believed humans are inherently evil and need strong external control -- and an external enemy. As he once wrote, "Because mankind is intrinsically wicked, he has to be governed. Such governance can only be established, however, when men are united -- and they can only be united against other people."
According to Drury, Strauss believed that "if no external threat exists, one has to be manufactured." Interestingly enough, Strauss's neocon disciples William Kristol, Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle (along with Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld) helped found a think tank called the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) in the 1990s. A PNAC document, Rebuilding America's Defenses has been a guiding force for the Bush-Cheney White House. According to PNAC, the only way to assure America's safety in the 21st century is by being the only superpower on the block, what they referred to as Pax Americana. Of course, since the Iraq War many around the world are calling it a "Pox Americana."
Perhaps the most telling quote in the Rebuilding America's Defenses document refers to needing a "catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor" to mobilize the masses for this undertaking (pun intended). The neocons insist this was an innocuous quote taken out of context. However, when seen in the context of Leo Strauss's core beliefs, it's easy to make the connection and see the 9/11 attacks as the "catalyzing event" that launched the so-called "war on terror." In fact, author and theologian David Ray Griffin called his sober account debunking the official 9/11 story The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11. Whether or not the attacks were an "inside job," they were certainly used in classic Straussian fashion to create national unity and control through perpetual war.
Griffin, a well-respected mainstream theologian who has written and edited 30 books, contends that the official 9/11 story has been given the "halo of religious mythology." Like the infallibility of the Pope in the Church or the primacy of matter in scientific materialism, questioning the official 9/11 story is taboo. Consequently, most people fail to see the red flags that are literally in plain sight:
The official story was in place within 48 hours of the event, before any investigation was undertaken.
The official "remedy," the so-called Patriot Act (a 342-page document that many legislators signed without reading), appeared as if by magic and was ratified in an atmosphere of panic -- right on the heels of Democratic legislators receiving packets of deadly anthrax, a crime that has never been "solved."
No satisfactory explanation has ever been given as to how and why the world's most sophisticated air defense system "stood down" in the most deadly attacks ever on American soil. And no one was held accountable.
Transcripts of testimony released at the insistence of 9/11 families -- from firefighters, police and eyewitnesses -- mention over and over again a "series of explosions" and the towers coming down in their tracks, "just like a planned demolition."
When there finally was an investigation, only testimony supporting the official version of the story was allowed. Imagine, if you will, a court case where there was no conflicting evidence ... case closed.
Time to Face Our Own Not-Seeism
The fact that these blatant contradictions have never been officially addressed stands as stark testimony as to how well weapons of mass-distraction have been used to keep the official story in place. Yes, the mass media has been complicit in failing to present an alternative view, and in marginalizing anyone suggesting otherwise as a "conspiracy nut." But it goes far deeper than that. The persistent "invisible belief" in America's intrinsic goodness makes it incomprehensible that the government in the "land of the free" would perpetrate something that horrendous against its own citizens. Like the Germans who heard about the death camps and were told it was "American propaganda," most Americans won't question the official story because the horrendous implications are too awful to contemplate. But the "Not See" era is about to end.
I'm going to apologize in advance for using a distasteful metaphor that many of you will find repugnant. But since this is the image that keeps coming to mind, I'm going to have to risk it. Think back when you were in college. You were at a party and had a little too much to drink. You're feeling wobbly and a bit nauseous. You are on the teeter-totter of a decision -- to throw up or not to throw up. Throwing up. Ugh. You don't want to do it, it's disgusting. But then you realize, you have to do it. It is something the body is telling you to do, and you also know that when you've expelled the mess you will feel so much better.
That is where our body politic is today. We've literally had it up to here. But we've been reluctant to expel the toxins for all to see. Last year at this time, I had contracted to write a story on David Ray Griffin called Unquestioned Answers: A Non-Conspiracy Theorist Takes Aim at the Official 9/11 Story for a local mainstream publication. In the six weeks from the time the editor reluctantly okayed the story until the time I handed it in, she had undergone a change of mind. She told me, "I have come to believe the American government did indeed have something to do with the attacks, and the very thought of it makes me sick to my stomach."
Having to swallow what we've been asked to swallow over the past several years, purging might be the very best cure. So now the question is, what to do and how to do it?
There seem to be two approaches to the 9/11 issue. One involves jumping into the details of the mystery itself and trying to figure out specifically what happened. The problem here is what has already occurred -- squabbling about the details, one group of believers in one conspiracy theory accusing another of spreading disinformation.
The other approach is the one I took with the David Ray Griffin article I published last year. Focus on stepping outside the official story, removing its "halo" and asking if indeed, it is the likeliest story. Here's why. No amount of "evidence" will convince anybody unless they are open to the possibility of the premise. The breakthrough will occur when a critical mass of people begin to put it together for themselves.
What opened me to a premise I was -- like David Ray Griffin -- initially closed to was reading about the "false flag" operations done by NATO during the Cold War and those like Operation Northwoods that was proposed but not initiated here (you can read brief accounts about those in the above-linked article on David Ray Griffin). When I combined this information with the realization I'd already come to -- that Bush, Cheney, Rove & Company were capable of anything they could get away with -- I had bridged the gap.
Time to Cut Off the Tale That's Been Wagging the Dog
What we face right now is perhaps the greatest opportunity for freedom yet experienced in America. It is an invitation to become "political adults" and step outside the puppet show called electoral politics and take a look at the inner workings behind the "irony curtain." It is here -- and only here -- that transformational change can take place. It's as big a step as our Founding Fathers made "eleven score and eleven" years ago by declaring themselves sovereign and government a servant.
We do this by educating ourselves and taking heart that so many people are awakening a new field of understanding now. There are many sites but here is a good one to start with because it offers a surprising list of well-known people in all areas of endeavor who question the official tale that has been wagging the dog for the past five years. Another excellent educational site is Mark Robinowitz's Oil Empire site because he offers some very sharp distinctions for sniffing out the truth when there are many different stories.
Finally, we must address this undressing of the cloak of secrecy with healing intent. In other words, we must be able not just to picture but to "feel" what it will feel like to no longer have to fear our own government. We must allow ourselves to see those inside the military, government and intelligence services who have not been "ethically-cleansed" coming forward with the missing pieces of the true story. We must begin now to create a "container" for truth, reconciliation and healing.
Every indication is that there are individuals at all levels of government and influence who are waiting only for a critical mass of Americans to be able to "hold" the true story. Once there is a "listening" for the truth, the truth will out. We encourage the truth through our own courage, and by speaking about politics outside the box as matter-of-factly as the media speaks about politics inside the box.
The simple secret to bringing down the wall of lies is this. When enough people see through the wall, it will cease to exist.
May "Good" bless us all.