rkm: “Now is the time for your tears”

2004-11-04

Richard Moore

      From: G77
      Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 19:25:04 EST
      Subject: Re: rkm: some thoughts
      To: •••@••.•••
      
      At 21:05  they stopped counting for half an hour to hack ALL
      the voting machines by modem and add  15% margin It took 20
      minutes -  all anchors  of networks kept their mouth shut as
      good as possible.  See the tape of CNN Larry King had a lot of
      difficulty with it  !


Friends,

Our tree of possible futures seems to have been trimmed down
considerably. Kerry did not win nor is he contesting the vote.
Either of those, if I had been forced to express an opinion,
would have seemed more likely than an outright Bush victory.
In fact we have every reason to suspect that this election has
been stolen. We've seen many solid reports regarding
disenfranchisement of voters and the unreliability of computer
voting. And yet nothing significant was done to correct those
known problems. In such a close election, only a few percent
of selective votes need to be 'miscounted', or disallowed, in
order to swing the electoral outcome. In a recent posting to
newslog, "Stolen election?", we see one tentative study that
shows a mysterious 5% bulge in Bush votes in precisely those
states which used electronic voting. Everywhere else,
according to the study, the exit polls match the outcomes. But
in the electronic states the outcomes give Bush 5% more than
the exit polls indicated. This is exactly the kind of result
one would expect from systematic electronic vote tampering.
(By the way, at the bottom is a list of recent postings to
newslog.)

But whether the election was stolen by election fraud, or
enabled by the fundamentalist-fascist cult, the outcome is the
same: the USA is now under the control of an overt fascist
regime supported by an aggressive cult following. Before this
election, we could think of the neocons as a one-time anomaly.
They had bullied their way into the White House, they had made
enemies in the conservative establishment, they had revealed
that they were mad men -- and now we had the chance to vote
them out. It would have all been a bad dream and it would be
over. Not any more. It's now official: their approach has been
approved by the people of America. We've seen the torture
photos, we've seen the lies and the disaster in Iraq, we've
seen the Patriot Act, we've seen taxpayer money being gobbled
up by Halliburton, we see the economy collapsing, and yet --
Americans voted, officially, for more of the same. As Bob Dylan
would put it, "Now is the time for your tears."

The fascists now have a firm grip on power; their boldness can
only increase; and they will claim a broad mandate for their
agenda. In their first four years they have established a
solid foundation in support of their future programs. They
have turned Iraq into a forward military base whose stated
purpose, in the PNAC agenda, is to facilitate further
invasions, obtain control of petroleum resources, and help
establish global US military (and economic) hegemony. The
perceived failures in Bush's Iraq policy do not prevent this
expansionist agenda from proceeding. Indeed a wider war,
quite likely a nuclear one, would be a handy way out of the
Iraq quagmire. In a shoot-em-up air war the US has an
overwhelming advantage, and it makes for 'good television'.
Much better for PR than images of roadside bombs. Stores will
be filled with T-shirts that say "Nuke 'em!".

I would be REALLY surprised if the neocons do not force a
confrontation with Iran and North Korea within the next two
years, and perhaps much sooner. They've established the
foundation for their PNAC agenda, they've gotten their
mandate, and it would be quite extraordinary if they did not
proceed on to the next logical steps... the rest of the 'axis
of evil'. The saber-rattling around Iran has already begun,
and Israel now has the necessary bombs to launch the initial
attack. 

Now that Bush has won, I imagine the countdown has begun for
the attack. Presumably some re-deployments of forces will be
needed, and of course there will be the usual demonization
campaign in the media against Iran and it's leaders. There
will also be the question of relations with the EU and
Britain. There are many possibilities there, a spectrum all
the way from arrogant-US-unilateralism across to
increased-EU-support-for-imperialism. I don't know how that
will pan out, but the neocons will probably want to establish
those choices prior to entering a new attack theater. As we
watch these developments, we will be seeing the progress of
the countdown.

What we need to be aware of --  as the neocons, Israelis,
Russians, and Chinese clearly understand -- is that expanded
military confrontations in the Middle East and in Asia would
be very likely to lead to escalation. Both North Korea and
Iran are reported to have advanced cruise missile systems (the
sunburn) which is able to reliably deliver nuclear warheads to
urban targets and which can take out a modern US aircraft
carrier. If a nuke were to take out Tel Aviv, or Seoul, or a
US carrier, those would provide an 'incident' that would be
used to justify whatever escalation plans the neocons might
have in mind. Certainly such an incident would enable nuclear
weapons to be included in the American response.

        20 August 2004 Iran might launch pre-emptive strikes to
        protect its nuclear facilities if they are threatened, Defence
        Minister Ali Shamkhani said in remarks broadcast on 20 August
        2004. "We won't sit with our hands tied and wait until someone
        does something to us," Shamkhani told Arabic channel Al
        Jazeera when asked what Iran would do if the United States or
        Israel attacked its atomic facilities. "Some military leaders
        in Iran are convinced that the pre-emptive measures that
        America is talking about are not their right alone," he added
        in Persian. "Any strike on our nuclear facilities will be
        regarded as a strike on Iran and we will respond with all our
        might."

This inherent potential for escalation becomes an additional
destabilizing element in the scenario. If everyone is
expecting escalation, then everyone has an incentive to take
preemptive action, if they feel they will eventually be forced
to get involved and that waiting would put them at a
strategic disadvantage. Hence Iran has already talked about
taking action first, although in that case I can see no
advantage for them in such a course. China and Russia both
know that their turn on the chopping block will come
eventually. 

The PNAC agenda clearly calls for US hegemony in all regions,
and as long as China and Russia continue to exist as
independent nuclear powers that agenda cannot be fulfilled.
The US has been busily building advance military bases in
South Asia, to some extent 'surrounding' Russia and China.
Bush has been rushing the deployment of a missile defense
system, which is one of the system components you'd want in
place, however functional, prior to a nuclear exchange. A
massive US Navy exercise was carried out very recently in the
seas around China, a provocative show of force in China's
backyard.

When the neocons make their moves on Iran and North Korea they
will be playing with fire, and they know it. They'll need to
be on hair-trigger red alert, just in case, and that fact
itself will further destabilize the situation. And even though
it would mean suicide for them, I strongly suspect that the
leadership in North Korea and Iran (as indicated above) would
respond to any attack with their most powerful weapons
systems. These might be nuclear or biological. Even with
conventional explosives, a sunburn can take out a carrier.

Israel is a further destabilizing influence, and a very
dangerous one. To some extent they can be seen as the attack
dogs of the neocon program, able to take actions allegedly 'on
their own', which might be officially 'disavowed' by the White
House. (Plausible deniability.) But the Israeli leadership
cannot be trusted to be team players, not even by the neocons.
"Trust only in ourselves and see to our own defense" is their
de facto motto. They could take out the Iranian nuclear
facilities on their own initiative, and what could Washington
do about it? Even if the attack was unauthorized, Bush would
have no choice but to come the aid of ally Israel, presuming
that the Iranians responded with damaging effect. And
regardless of how the fight with Iran begins, Israel might
have its own plans about accelerating the escalation scenario.
They are a scary bunch. They, like the neocons, seem to
believe in Revelations (apocalypse now).

None of this is news to the political and military leadership
of Russia and China. Indeed, China and the US have been
engaged for some time in an arms race, not that the mass media
seems to have noticed. The US is going for high-tech,
satellite-supported, control-of-theater, first-strike
capability, while China is going for a focused strategic
defensive capability. China can't win a nuclear war with the
US, but they want to be able to inflict enough damage to deter
an attack. Russia's situation vis a vis the US is more or less
the same as China's, except that Russia has a more
comprehensive strategic capability. 

Neither power has any way of estimating the neocon's
willingness to accept casualties. China seems to think that
taking out a carrier task force would deter an attack. If so,
they don't understand the Pearl Harbor syndrome. In the light
of current missile technology, carrier task forces are now
strategically out  date, as were the battle ships left in port
when the Japanese attacked. The neocons would be happy to
sacrifice a carrier task force with its crew -- if that gave them
the green light for an all out attack on a major power. That's
the kind of people we're dealing with, the kind who are in
charge of this world of ours. They are the real terrorists,
and they are every bit as evil as those who blow up
restaurants, or those who led the Third Reich.

All of these players will be on high alert when the neocons
take their next step in their drive for hegemony, a step
perhaps to be initiated by unilateral Israeli action. The
confrontation, whether it escalates more widely or not, will
be seen by all players as a move on the bigger chess board. If
the US is allowed to clobber and occupy Iran, it will have a
formidable position on the doorstep of Central Asia, and it
will be able to maintain the petrodollar. If the US is allowed
to clobber and occupy North Korea, then the handwriting is on
the wall for China. Will Russia and China be yielding decisive
advantages to the US by permitting such further expansionism?
They protested the invasion of Iraq, but they took no strong
steps to prevent it. Do they perhaps see themselves as facing
an appeasement scenario? Might they be drawing a line in the
sand, as did Britain and France in the case of Poland in 1939?
Does it ever pay to appease a fascist aggressor who has published
a Mein Kampf / PNAC agenda?

And, to bring in one more possible future, I still refuse to
put to rest the possibility of a conservative coup in the USA.
It seems less likely now, with the election being uncontested
and all. But in light of the danger of all-out nuclear war,
the continued unpopularity of the neocons in some elite
circles, and with readily available evidence on which to
indict the neocons for treason and crimes against humanity, it
is not inconceivable that some faction in the Pentagon might
yet choose to save all of our asses. Military tribunals, tanks
in Washington, and the whole nine yards. 

Although our tree of possible futures has been seriously
trimmed by the recent election, it seems that we are still on
the cusp of a major chaos point. It is inconceivable that the
neocons will fail to continue their expansionist agenda.
Perhaps they can get by with it one more time in Iran, as they
did in Iraq. Perhaps not. Many forces are at work and the
situation is of life-and-death importance to the various
players. The next few years, or less, will be highly volatile.
More volatile even than I've indicated so far. There is also
economics to consider.

I wrote in the previous essay about global stagnation, and the
inevitable economic-depression conditions to be experienced in
the West. Europe is lagging behind in this race to the bottom,
but Brussels is keeping up relentless pressure to catch up.
Our attention is currently on the neocons, but meanwhile the
neoliberals have been continuing their slash and burn economic
project. Bush has turned Clinton's budget surplus into the
greatest deficit the world has ever known. With the latest tax
cuts, it is impossible to describe the USA as being in any
real sense solvent. We're in debt up to our eyeballs, and we
have no way of even staying even. We're sinking into debt
quicksand. And there's nothing accidental about it. Bush is
finishing the job that Reagan started: the intentional
dismantlement of the US economy. Once again, the US is leading
the way to the neoliberal bottom -- the privatized state.
("This war is brought to you by Carlyle-Halliburton, your
friendly local war corps.")

In the third world, as has been described in many of our
postings, many nations are totally controlled by the IMF by
means of debt. The nations simply can't operate without new
funding from the IMF, and in return they are forced to accept
comprehensive and suicidal economic programs (structural
adjustments) as dictated by the IMF. Bush is pushing the US
into that same position. The neocons will only be able to
pursue their programs by taking on new debt. 

In a real sense, the US government is on the verge of going
into receivership by those who hold the debt -- which is
basically the big international banks and financiers. As a
condition of extending more credit, conditions can be
demanded. Alan Greenspan will explain to us the 'market
realities', and tell us why we can't afford health care, or
social security, or education, or whatever. The fact of debt
provides a mechanism by which austerity programs can be
implemented with minimal political damage. "We don't want to
do this to you, we simply have no choice." The Republicans in
Congress will have few qualms about bowing down in this way to
the princes of wealth, and signing over to them whatever
national sovereignty yet remains.

At a macro level, this economic transaction can be
characterized as a wealth transfer from the US taxpayer,
present and future, to large banks and financiers. For
generations to come, a major percentage of the earnings of
every American will be siphoned off to subsidize the
capitalist elite in the name of 'debt repayment'. We'll pay
much more in this way than we ever would have paid in taxes to
support the programs that were instead financed by borrowing.
You know what happens when you put everything on your VISA
card and let the interest mount up. Meanwhile the expenditures
which might have gone to funding those programs are instead
being siphoned off to corporate contractors, particularly the
neocon crony companies. We're witnessing a wholesale robbery
from current and future generations.

As Kerry supporters recover from their shock and awe at the
election results, they will begin to realize that four years
under a radical and emboldened leadership is going to be a
very long time. They won't be thinking any longer about
electoral politics, any more than you would think about next
Christmas on December 26. Liberals, progressives, and
activists will soon realize that they are under siege. Not only in
the USA but throughout Europe. 

The anti-war, anti-globalization, and environmental activists
will realize that the Final Days are near. Either we do
something now, or resign ourselves to a fully regimented,
1984-ish, third-reichish millennium. And in the background
will be brewing the grapes of wrath -- economic collapse. Why
some of the most economically devastated communities support
Bush is a mystery I'll never understand, but sooner or later
the grassroots left and right are going to realize they are on
the same side. "There is no left and right, only up and down.
All the fat cats up there having a good time, while the rest of
us are down here struggling to survive." (Carolyn Chute).

Besides the volatility of the military situation, there is
then also a volatility threatened by potential civil unrest.
The neocons are well aware of both domains of volatility, and
in honor of the domestic domain we have the Patriot Act and
Homeland Security, as well as FEMA. The fact is that we don't
have any rights anymore.

Consider this:

      http://context.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2004/10/22/120.html

      Now we know, from their own words, that the Bush Regime is a
      cult -- a cult whose god is Power, whose adherents believe
      that they alone control reality, that indeed they create the
      world anew with each act of their iron will. ...You think this
      is an exaggeration? Then heed the words of the White House
      itself: a "senior adviser" to the president, who, as The New
      York Times reports, explained the cult to author Ron Suskind
      in the heady pre-war days of 2002.
      
      First, the top Bush insider mocked the journalist and all
      those "in what we call the reality-based community," i.e.,
      people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious
      study of discernible reality."
      
      Suskind's attempt to defend the principles of reason and
      enlightenment cut no ice with the Bush-man.
      
      "That's not the way the world really works anymore. We're an
      empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality," he
      said. "And while you're studying that reality, we'll act
      again, creating other new realities, which you can study too,
      and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors
      ... and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
     
Yes indeed, this is the time for your tears.

But then, on the other hand, it always seems to be darkest and
coldest before the dawn. Tears of despair, if shared, can
become tears of hope. The Bush victory is a slap in the face
of humanity, and it could be a slap that awakens. We Western
activists need to take a deep breath, and envision commitment
for the long haul. We can take heart from our brothers and
sisters in Venezuela, Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, and Cuba,
who are finding ways to declare their sovereignty and see to
their own survival in the face of corporate globalization and
the PNAC agenda. 

The vast majority of the people of the world, including the
Western middle classes, are being abandoned by global
capitalism. Those who actually benefit from this system are an
ever-shrinking minority of top corporate executives, some
technical functionaries, and our wealthy ruling elites. How
small will that circle need to become before it can no longer
hold us in subservience? When will the global grassroots wake
up to the fact that we are being hoodwinked, swindled, and
enslaved? When will we realize that we are the people and we
are unstoppable?

As our arrogant neocon apologist claimed above, "when we act,
we create our own reality". He is right. If you have the means
and the guts, you can create reality. That's what Werner
Erhard meant by being "at cause" instead of "at effect". The
fascist regime has laid down the gauntlet. They are aiming to
create a nightmare reality, wherein they hope to preserve some
kind of walled community for themselves, a kind of final Green
Zone. For the rest of us, the time has come to do or die. Will
we awaken to the danger in time? Will we realize that we are
all in this together? Will we find our common strength?

At this chaotic cusp, the range of possible futures is great
indeed. The only thing for sure is that the old days are gone.
We didn't know it at the time, but that was as good as it was
ever going to get -- those were the 'good old days'. But as we
face the uncertain future we need not be at the mercy of
chaos and chance. Indeed we cannot be. We are one of the
potential actors in the drama, and we have a responsibility to
our species to take up our burden and play the role that
history demands of us.

best regards,
rkm
http://cyberjournal.org


newslog list archives (recent):
    http://cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?lists=newslog

      30 Oct 2004 - Karl Rove: America's Mullah 
      30 Oct 2004  - Memories of Bush at Harvard Business School 
      30 Oct 2004  - Pat Buchanan on Bush 
      31 Oct 2004  - BBC report Sparks Florida Vote Storm 
      31 Oct 2004  - MER: Iran Next - Part 1 
      01 Nov 2004  - rkm: some thoughts 
      01 Nov 2004  - BREAKING: Judge: Ohio 'Poll Challengers' Unconstitutional 
      01 Nov 2004  - Urgent warning for US voters using voting machines 
      02 Nov 2004  - "One Day Left", by Michael Moore 
      02 Nov 2004  - Bush's EPA Uses Kids as Guinea Pigs 
      02 Nov 2004  - Paul Krugman: The Emperor is naked 
02 Nov 2004  - Arundhati Roy: elections, global power, empire, lies and 
resistance 
      02 Nov 2004  - Update: G.O.P. Can Challenge Voters at Ohio Polls 
      03 Nov 2004  - rkm: some thoughts 
      04 Nov 2004  - Sidney Blumenthal: Bush Unbound 
      04 Nov 2004  - Stolen election? 
      04 Nov 2004  - MER: Iran Next - Part 2 

Share:

ekbonus bahis forum linkegit.com