October 13, 2015

Hello-- Wake-up Time!


Like the majority of the Western world, I was raised with a set of implicit and explicit beliefs-- background presumptions of how the world works and what must be reality. In particular, there were certain beliefs about the United States that were supposed to be almost self-evident. That nation was the bastion of freedom and democracy, the protector of decency, the center of knowledge, and of all things desirable. That brief description sounds overblown today, yet for much of my life (the post WW2 age) those accolades were the mantle worn proudly by, not just official US gov't institutions, but by almost all Americans.

So proudly did they identify with those perceptions that less unctuous descriptors came to be added to Americans, such as arrogant, ignorant, and so on. But overall, the USA was acknowledged, if grudgingly at times, as the leader of the civilized world. Fifteen years into the third millennium, and that reputation is a shambles, both within and outside the country.

Nevertheless, there are still many souls who recognize how the US has fallen into disarray, yet they cling to the comforting myths of old, the perceptions of their youth, that, with the right president, things will return to their prior Elysian state. The dreamers figure that, despite its problems, they must still prefer the US stance over any other because the others are even worse. After all, that's what they've told us all our lives, right?

When I try to explain how the 'new world order' of the 21st century is really upside-down, and that the USA is no longer the White Knight, most of my hearers resist strenuously. This cannot be! Our media news outlets tell us so, don't they? It's 'them' that are the trouble-makers in the world-- Muslim extremists, Palestinians, Libyans, Syrians, and now, back in the spotlight, the Russians. It can't be the Americans; no never!

Well, come on readers; take a deep breath and examine the record, even the highly biased record presented by those mega-news broadcasters. I first became suspicious of the USG's image back in the 1980s, when Reagan was president. There was still a semblance of journalism in those days. When the 'Iran-Contra affair' hit the news, it became clear that the CIA was involved in dirty dealing, especially in Central America, where they were arming and training 'rebels' who were engaged in overthrowing elected governments who committed the unpardonable sin of being socialist.

We were supposed to believe that dirty tricks were essential in combatting the horrors of Communism that was creeping stealthily around the world. A training center in the bastion of democracy taught insurgents how to torture, murder, and intimidate populations of innocent peasants and force them to join the insurrections against their elected governments. (See history of Nicaragua, Guatemala, El Salvador). But this use of taxpayers' funds was fully justified by that imperative to eradicate Communism.

In 1989 the Berlin Wall came down, and shortly after, the USSR collapsed in internal chaos. Soviet Communism was no more; the Chinese were moving towards capitalism, and the world would enjoy peace at last. Not!

Within a mere year, the US found another excuse for a good 'dust-up' with a Third-Word, CIA-concocted adversary. Remember 'Operation Dessert Storm?' Saddam Hussein was suckered into an attempt to annex Kuwait, only to be attacked by his former friend, the cop on the world beat, Uncle Sam. Of course, the Iraqi army was massacred by the horrific air power of the US. 'Ironically,' (as if) many of the troops sent to that 'theatre' (good word) came home with 'Gulf War syndrome,' which is undeniably sustained by the statistics or anecdotes, but which was never explained by the experts. Of the many theories advanced, the one that makes most sense to me is the use of depleted uranium munitions-- a sword that cuts both ways, if you follow the image of radioactive dust blowin' in the wind.

People hadn't even forgotten the macabre photos of flash-burnt Iraqi soldiers' corpses staring out of empty sockets, when the US found itself meddling in another war. This time, they dragged their NATO allies, full bore, into the fray. So it wasn't a US war; no, it was a NATO intervention, if you please, into the fragmentation of Yugoslavia. This one became so complicated, with so many players, along so many crossed lines, that I gave up trying to understand it. Surely, NATO was wearing the white hats, stomping on the bad guys, and dragging their leaders to the International Criminal Court (which the US has adamantly refused to join... I wonder why).

Okay, that takes us to the late 1990s. As a side-show, we had the UN 'peace-keepers' (go ahead-- laugh) ordered to stand down and watch in Rwanda as Tutsi and Hou-tou neighbors killed each other in great masses, using handy tools like machetes and the like. In Yugoslavia, intervention 'to minimize civilian casualties' was imperative. In Africa, it was expedient to sit by and watch the bloodshed; go figure!

But wait; the 20th century wasn't over; there was more action to come. There was some kind of civil war going on in the horn of Africa, and the USA just couldn't resist a good fight. American forces got involved in Somalia, for God alone knows what reason, and with God alone knows what final result. But, when you've got a military machine that big, you've got to keep it functioning somewhere.

That takes us to the turn of the century. The hopes many had harbored for a new age of reason were dashed almost immediately with the 'terrorist attacks' on New York and DC. Like everyone over a certain age, I remember that day very well. I remember thinking 'this is beyond weird; it doesn't make sense!' By then, I was getting adept at finding info on the Internet, and began studying the 9-11 scenario. Obviously, the official stories (which often morphed) made no sense, yet we saw it happen on live TV. I knew that the USG itself must have been complicit; it was a question of how.

By now, 14 years later, many facts have emerged from the froth. I won't pursue that line here. My concern is what happened in the aftermath of 9-11. We were told by the media that 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia-- so the obvious response of Uncle Sam is to invade... Afghanistan, one of the poorest nations on Earth! And they've been raising hell there, ever since. After the first year, they completely forgot about bin Laden, so involved had they become in causing turmoil all over that country, not to forget getting the poppy farming up and running after the Taliban had shut it down.

George Bush junior seemed bent on pursuing business left unfinished by his daddy, so we were subjected to the disgraceful charade of Colin Powell at the UN, presenting cooked-up 'proof' of weapons of mass destruction being constructed in Iraq. No option but to invade another sovereign, puny nation, in Gulf War No. 2. More 'shock and awe,' more military and civilian deaths, more mayhem. And for what?

Come on, people! Am I the only one to smell the stench of con-job? And it never ends. Regardless of the fact that the US didn't 'win' anything in Iraq, didn't defeat anyone in Afghanistan, hasn't installed a credible government anywhere, hasn't made any friends among the developing nations... nonetheless, they want to continue invading countries that don't fall into line with their insane ambitions. Is that not crazy, or what? (So far, I hadn't mentioned Vietnam, which everyone expected, would have taught the USG something!)

Instead of barging into countries full-on, the USG has been using a slightly more subtle approach. To get rid of the uncooperative Gaddafi in Libya, the USG sent in their NATO stooges, giving France, Britain, and Canada the chance to bray about saving democracy and curbing terrorists, blah-blah.

In Syria, there was another uncooperative leader that had to go, to make the country safe for corporate cronies. This time, the USG leaned on their Saudi friends to put some money into funding a nice rebellion in Syria. There are religious reasons why the Saudis went along with the suggestion, and all hell broke out in that region. But, since that plan had obviously stalled and Assad was even prevailing, they had to escalate the fighting. Out of nowhere, there suddenly appeared something we called 'ISIS,' and they call the Islamic Caliphate. If Al Queda were 'bad,' these people are extremely bad. And they sprung up, trained, armed, and bellicose, overnight... think about that, folks.

All the while, altho Americans are getting uneasy about these wars and their loss of international respect, they seem resigned to looking on the bright side. The media tell them that somehow these wars are protecting America from terrorists; and secondly, in an economy that is suffering huge unemployment, the army provides an obvious opportunity for jobless young people. That's why, btw, nobody in the US talks about a draft-- it's not necessary.

If utter bedlam in the Middle East were not enough, the USG found another venue to exercise its idiocy. Altho an attempt had failed in 2004 to overthrow the government of the Ukraine, the USG shadow agencies-- 'democracy-promoting NGOs' funded by neo-con billionaire George Soros-- continued the game. By leveraging enough money, the USG created enough turmoil to send the democratically elected president, Yanukovich, packing to Moscow. Installing hand-picked puppets, the USG was ready to recognize a new regime and start sending 'aid' (i.e. military bases).

Naturally, Russia could not just stand by and watch this blatant annexation take place on their very door-step. The Russians swiftly arranged a vote in Crimea, which saw the populace opt to re-join Russia, as they had been part of Russia for centuries. In response, the USG used its economic muscle to impose trade sanctions on Russia-- a policy that was more damaging to the sanctioners than the sanctionee.

Now, all we hear in our media is how Russia has territorial ambitions, is trying to revive the Soviet Union, wants to absorb Ukraine, and so on and on. And, incredibly, a majority in the West seem to believe this baloney!

The take-away from all the above is this: since the end of the USSR, there have been ongoing wars around the world (primarily in the ME) and the common factor in all those conflicts is the presence of the USA (&/or its proxies, of which there are many). It's as if Uncle Sam is addicted to violence-- (small wonder, given the TV programs being produced and watched).

Russia and China, the only conceivable rivals to the American Empire, have been content to mind their business over those war-ravaged years. If they have built up their military abilities it's been in concern over the unending territorial ambitions of the 'world policeman.'

Another significant fact that has gone unnoticed by the vast masses in the West is the shift in US military policy. Using the Hollywood premise of 'pre-crime' prevention (from 'Minority Report') the USG feels quite justified in invading or replacing any foreign government that they think might pose a threat in some way. That seems to have been their reasoning in their treatment of those unfortunate ME countries... altho cynics can point to an array of other reasons involving access to crude oil, pipelines, fulfilling Israeli ambitions, and so on.

It's one thing for the mighty US military to go beat up some poverty-stricken, Third-World backwater; it's quite another to consider attacking a country like China, Russia, or even Iran. If, God forbid, the crazies in DC were prepared to attack those countries, they would expect to do so with an unannounced 'first strike.' Those countries know that; therefore they too must be prepared at any time to strike the USA if it appears that they may be attacked. It's a recipe for disaster.

If, after the obvious US-backed overthrow of the elected regime of Ukraine, many Americans still did not understand the evil game of the USG, we have the illustrative situation in Syria. With their bold move to respond vigorously to the invitation from the legitimate government of Syria, Russia is making clear the utter hypocrisy and illegitimacy of the US interference in that region.

While the USG gave itself the right to depose a legal head of government (Bashar al Assad), they cry bloody murder at the Russians for supporting him! While the US air force flies at will over Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, they scream in outrage about Russian jets straying close to those same borders. After a couple years of futile bombing of ISIS forces, 'accidentally' dropping munitions and supplies to those 'brutal terrorists,' the USG now cries foul that effective Russian actions against ISIS are somehow 'complicating the situation!' You bet they are, if you're just pretending to fight the very insurgents you helped train, arm, and fund!

Surely to goodness the point ought to be crystal clear to all but the dullest of onlookers-- the US government and its proxies have been causing havoc in the world for decades, all the while pretending to be 'supporting democracy' and 'fighting terrorists.' It's a travesty of immense proportions.

And-- notice carefully-- none of my observations or conclusions required referring to 'alternative' news sources (or 'conspiracy sources' if you still believe the mainstream). No; it's all quite self-evident, and becoming more so, all the time. You just have to use a minimum of insight and common-sense!

So, dear readers, it's high time to face the fact that Santa Claus is a fraud, the Tooth Fairy a myth, and the benevolent US government a monumental hoax. Please, grow up; wake up, and see reality!