Both Major U.S. Parties Are Plagues On Humanity | PopularResistance.Org
Both Major U.S. Parties Are Plagues On Humanity | PopularResistance.Org
frame
popularresistance.org
https://www.popularresistance.org/both-major-u-s-parties-are-plagues-on-huma
nity/
Both Major U.S. Parties Are Plagues On Humanity
Screen Shot 2015-07-03 at 11.02.29 AM
There has never been a dime's worth of difference between the Clintons (Bill
and Hillary) and Barack Obama, and less than ten cents separates the
worldviews of these Democratic political twins from the Bush wing of the
Republican Party.
Each has their individual quirks. Barack destroys international order and
the rule of law while dabbling at song; Bill dismantled the U.S.
manufacturing base and threw record numbers of Blacks in prison as he toyed
with his trumpet; George W. played the fool who would Shock and Awe the
world into obedience; and Hillary is the evil crone that curses the dead
while screaming "We are Woman" like a banshee. But they are all the same in
their corporate soullessness.
They all lie for a living, and they live to lie. Hillary Clinton commingled
official and personal criminality through the medium of email. Knowing that,
in a life dedicated to crime, she could never successfully sequester her
private and public conspiracies, Hillary privatized all of her email
correspondence during her tenure as Obama's Secretary of State (in the
perfect spirit of neoliberalism). The fate of millions of Haitians whose
country's earthquake and development "aid" are under the Clinton family
thumb were doubtless bundled into the tens of thousands of messages she
erased on leaving Foggy Bottom.
Republicans have harassed her ever since, seeking an electronic smoking gun
to show Clinton's cowardice or lack of resolve to "stand up for America" and
"our troops" or some other nonsense. What the Benghazi affair actually
proves is that the Obama administration was just as intent as the
Republicans to maintain the fiction that the "rebels" put in power by seven
months of NATO bombing of Libya were not various flavors of Islamic
jihadists - some of whom were already turning on their erstwhile masters.
The U.S.-Saudi project to create and nurture the international jihadist
network is a bipartisan venture that dates back to Jimmy Carter's presidency
- and, therefore, nothing for Democrats and Republicans to fight about.
However, the GOP's churning of Clinton's emails does provide a glimpse into
her quest to run for president in 2016 as the woman who vanquished Muammar
Gaddafi ("Qaddafi" or simply "Q" in Clinton's usage).
"Hillary best expressed the ghoulishness of America's ruling duopoly."
A number of Clinton's correspondences were with Sidney Blumenthal, a former
Clinton family spin-master who wrote nasty things about Barack Obama while
working for Hillary's 2008 presidential campaign - which made it impossible
for her to hire him at the State Department. Nevertheless, Clinton needed
his talents for hype for the campaign ahead. Their emails in the summer of
2011 discussed how Hillary's status as stateswoman could soar when the
Libyan leader was finally eliminated. "This is a historic moment and you
will be credited for realizing it," wrote Blumenthal, feeding the crone's
huge gizzard of ego, according to an article in Monday's
New York Times. "You must go on camera," wrote Blumenthal. "You must
establish yourself in the historical record at this moment." Hillary was
anxious to seize the time to establish what Blumenthal described as "the
Clinton Doctrine."
The
Times piece somehow concludes that Obama stole Clinton's thunder with an
1,100-word speech, in late August, declaring: "The Gaddafi regime is coming
to an end, and the future of Libya is in the hands of its people." But
Hillary best expressed the ghoulishness of America's ruling duopoly two
months later, in October, when Gaddafi was savagely butchered by screaming
jihadists. "We came, we saw, he died,"
cackled the banshee.
In the annals of global diplomacy, no more vulgar words have been spoken by
a major power foreign minister or head of state. Yet, Clinton's calculated
quip perfectly encapsulates the bloodlust that is the common characteristic
of both the governing duopoly of the United States and their suckling
children in ISIS and the other proliferating al Qaida factions.
Thanks to Seymour Hersh, we now have a much
more plausible scenario for the May 2, 2011, demise of Osama bin Laden, the
"OG" of the U.S.-Saudi spawned global jihad, whose body will never be
located. Virtually the entire U.S. account of his death is a lie, repeatedly
contradicted on its own terms - another layer of fictional Americana in the
age of empire in decline.
"Jihadists find it difficult to take orders from 'infidels,' even when the
'Crusaders' are paying the bills and supplying the weapons."
Clinton was hard-pressed to imagine how she might trump the president's bin
Laden death-watch extravaganza. Her opportunity came five months later, when
she delivered her gruesome paraphrase of Julius Caesar on the occasion of
Col. Gaddafi's murder. In the context of Washington's deeply racist foreign
policy, Gaddafi and bin Laden were equally deserving of death, although
Gaddafi was among the most fervent and effective fighters against Islamic
jihadists: his government was the first in the world to request a global
arrest warrant against bin Laden.
The Libyan Islamists were quickly transferred to the new
U.S.-NATO-Saudi-Qatari front lines in Syria. The CIA station in Benghazi was
at the center of the action - and got burned in the wild and unwieldy
process of herding jihadists, who find it difficult to take orders from
"infidels," even when the "Crusaders" are paying the bills and supplying the
weapons.
The U.S. consulate and CIA station in Benghazi were attacked on September
11, 2012. The next day, the Pentagon's intelligence agency issued a report
predicting that a "Salafist principality" - another term for an Islamic
State - would likely arise in Syria as a result of the war, and that
"Western countries, the Gulf States and Turkey are supporting these
efforts." Moreover, the establishment of such an Islamic "principality"
would create "the ideal atmosphere for AQI [al Qaida in Iraq, which became
ISIS, ISIL and the Islamic State] to return to its old pockets in Mosul and
Ramadi" in Iraq - events that have since transpired.
The Defense Intelligence Agency report didn't say so, but the "Western
Powers" included the United States, through its CIA.
"The Pentagon warning about the rise of an Islamic State may have had some
effect on U.S. policy in Syria."
The document was declassified this year as the result of a suit by a
libertarian right-wing legal outfit. The people of the world continue to be
fed the fiction that the U.S. is engaged in a long, twilight struggle
against al Qaida Salafists whose international network was created by, and
continues to benefit from, "Western countries, the Gulf States and Turkey."
However
, the 2012 Pentagon warning about the rise of an Islamic State may have had
some effect on U.S. policy in Syria. One year later, in September of 2013,
President Obama backed off from his threat to bomb Syria in "retaliation"
for a chemical missile attack against civilians - a crime much more likely
committed by western-backed Salafists. The conventional wisdom is that the
Russians tricked a hapless Secretary of State John Kerry into agreeing to
the peaceful, internationally supervised destruction of Syria's chemical
arsenal; or that the refusal of Britain's Parliament to go along with an air
assault on Syria made the U.S. position untenable; or that Obama feared
losing a vote on the issue in the U.S. Congress. None of this rings true to
me. The United States is not easily deterred by the opinions of Europeans,
who in the end accept Washington's acts as a
fait accompli. And, it was not clear that Obama would have lost the vote in
Congress - a vote that he requested, while at the same time declaring that
he did not need the legislature's permission to "punish" Syria for crossing
his "red line."
I think that high Pentagon officials and elements of the Obama
administration - probably including the president, himself - took the
Benghazi disaster and the Defense Intelligence Agency report to heart, and
decided that it was better to keep bleeding the Syrians and their Russian,
Lebanese and Iranian allies through a prolonged war, than to bomb al Qaida
into power. For the U.S., regional chaos is preferable to the triumph of
the, ultimately, unmanageable Salafists - unchained.
The thirty-plus year war against Iran would, however, be ratcheted up. The
Bush administration was snatched back from the brink of a military assault
against Teheran in 2007 when - to the great consternation of Vice President
Dick Cheney - all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies declared, publicly and
unanimously, that Iran had
abandoned its nuclear weapons program, years before.
"President Obama claims the right to disregard and methodically undermine
international law through "humanitarian" military intervention."
The spooks reaffirmed their consensus in the 2010 National Intelligence
Estimate - again, that there was no evidence Iran has any intention of
making a bomb. The Obama administration has since avoided asking the
intelligence agencies for their analysis on the issue, knowing they would
get the same answer. Instead, they rely on Israeli propaganda, pick and
choose various "experts" from inside and outside the arms control
"community," or simply put forward unsupported statements on Iran's
capabilities and intentions: the Big Lie. While Bush was humiliated by facts
supplied by his own intelligence experts, Obama has escalated the
confrontation with Iran, applying crippling sanctions and the whole range of
low-level warfare, in close collaboration with Israel - proving, once again,
that Obama is the "more effective evil."
Obama has nearly completed knocking off victims on the "
hit list" of countries that George Bush was working on when General Wesley
Clark ran across it in 2002
. Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Somalia have been invaded since then, and Sudan
was stripped of a third of its territory. Only Iran and Lebanon remain
intact and outside the U.S. imperial umbrella.
The Republican-Democratic duopoly plays tag-team in promoting the
Project for a New American Century - a doctrine promulgated by
neo-conservatives in 1997 that has served as the guiding light of both the
Bush and Obama administrations. The differences between the two teams are
merely rhetorical. The Bush regime is described as "unilateralist," although
it employed the same "Coalition of the Willing" approach to aggressive war
as does the Obama administration. President Obama claims the right to
disregard and methodically undermine international law through
"humanitarian" military intervention, whereas Bush claimed to be "spreading
democracy." Same weapons systems, same mass murder, same objective: U.S.
domination of the planet.
"The spooks reaffirmed their consensus in the 2010 National Intelligence
Estimate, that there was no evidence Iran has any intention of making a
bomb."
There's nothing democratic or humanitarian about the U.S. imperial project.
Therefore, its maintenance requires the deployment of 24-7 psychological
operations worldwide, but directed primarily against the U.S. public.
Republican strategist Karl Rove was far more honest than his Democratic
counterparts when he explained to a reporter, back
in 2004:
"We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while
you're studying that reality-judiciously, as you will-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."
Election seasons are reality-creation festivals, during which the two
corporate parties pretend to put forward different visions of the national
and global destiny - when, in fact, they answer to the same master and must
pursue the same general strategy.
The continuity of GOP-Democratic rule - the near-identical depravity - is
horrifically evident in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where six million
people have been
slaughtered by U.S. surrogates since 1996: the largest genocide since World
War II. Successive U.S. administrations - Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and
Barack Obama, assisted by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice,
the high U.S. official
most deeply implicated in the entirety of the genocide - have armed,
financed, and covered up the Congolese holocaust. Each administration has
collaborated with its predecessor to hide the crime and obscure the question
of guilt - and then to continue the killing.
Decent people do not vote for political parties that produce such fiends,
who deserve Nuremburg justice of the capital kind. Any talk of "lesser
evils" is both stupid and obscene.
Both Major U.S. Parties Are PlagueBoth Major U.S. Parties Are Plagues On
Humanity | PopularResistance.Org
pf-core frame
list of 3 items
Print
PDF
Email
list end
list of 3 items
100% Text Size
Remove Images Remove Images
Undo
list end
Close
Both Major U.S. Parties Are Plagues On Humanity | PopularResistance.Org
frame
popularresistance.org
https://www.popularresistance.org/both-major-u-s-parties-are-plagues-on-huma
nity/
Both Major U.S. Parties Are Plagues On Humanity
Screen Shot 2015-07-03 at 11.02.29 AM
There has never been a dime's worth of difference between the Clintons (Bill
and Hillary) and Barack Obama, and less than ten cents separates the
worldviews of these Democratic political twins from the Bush wing of the
Republican Party.
Each has their individual quirks. Barack destroys international order and
the rule of law while dabbling at song; Bill dismantled the U.S.
manufacturing base and threw record numbers of Blacks in prison as he toyed
with his trumpet; George W. played the fool who would Shock and Awe the
world into obedience; and Hillary is the evil crone that curses the dead
while screaming "We are Woman" like a banshee. But they are all the same in
their corporate soullessness.
They all lie for a living, and they live to lie. Hillary Clinton commingled
official and personal criminality through the medium of email. Knowing that,
in a life dedicated to crime, she could never successfully sequester her
private and public conspiracies, Hillary privatized all of her email
correspondence during her tenure as Obama's Secretary of State (in the
perfect spirit of neoliberalism). The fate of millions of Haitians whose
country's earthquake and development "aid" are under the Clinton family
thumb were doubtless bundled into the tens of thousands of messages she
erased on leaving Foggy Bottom.
Republicans have harassed her ever since, seeking an electronic smoking gun
to show Clinton's cowardice or lack of resolve to "stand up for America" and
"our troops" or some other nonsense. What the Benghazi affair actually
proves is that the Obama administration was just as intent as the
Republicans to maintain the fiction that the "rebels" put in power by seven
months of NATO bombing of Libya were not various flavors of Islamic
jihadists - some of whom were already turning on their erstwhile masters.
The U.S.-Saudi project to create and nurture the international jihadist
network is a bipartisan venture that dates back to Jimmy Carter's presidency
- and, therefore, nothing for Democrats and Republicans to fight about.
However, the GOP's churning of Clinton's emails does provide a glimpse into
her quest to run for president in 2016 as the woman who vanquished Muammar
Gaddafi ("Qaddafi" or simply "Q" in Clinton's usage).
"Hillary best expressed the ghoulishness of America's ruling duopoly."
A number of Clinton's correspondences were with Sidney Blumenthal, a former
Clinton family spin-master who wrote nasty things about Barack Obama while
working for Hillary's 2008 presidential campaign - which made it impossible
for her to hire him at the State Department. Nevertheless, Clinton needed
his talents for hype for the campaign ahead. Their emails in the summer of
2011 discussed how Hillary's status as stateswoman could soar when the
Libyan leader was finally eliminated. "This is a historic moment and you
will be credited for realizing it," wrote Blumenthal, feeding the crone's
huge gizzard of ego, according to an article in Monday's
New York Times. "You must go on camera," wrote Blumenthal. "You must
establish yourself in the historical record at this moment." Hillary was
anxious to seize the time to establish what Blumenthal described as "the
Clinton Doctrine."
The
Times piece somehow concludes that Obama stole Clinton's thunder with an
1,100-word speech, in late August, declaring: "The Gaddafi regime is coming
to an end, and the future of Libya is in the hands of its people." But
Hillary best expressed the ghoulishness of America's ruling duopoly two
months later, in October, when Gaddafi was savagely butchered by screaming
jihadists. "We came, we saw, he died,"
cackled the banshee.
In the annals of global diplomacy, no more vulgar words have been spoken by
a major power foreign minister or head of state. Yet, Clinton's calculated
quip perfectly encapsulates the bloodlust that is the common characteristic
of both the governing duopoly of the United States and their suckling
children in ISIS and the other proliferating al Qaida factions.
Thanks to Seymour Hersh, we now have a much
more plausible scenario for the May 2, 2011, demise of Osama bin Laden, the
"OG" of the U.S.-Saudi spawned global jihad, whose body will never be
located. Virtually the entire U.S. account of his death is a lie, repeatedly
contradicted on its own terms - another layer of fictional Americana in the
age of empire in decline.
"Jihadists find it difficult to take orders from 'infidels,' even when the
'Crusaders' are paying the bills and supplying the weapons."
Clinton was hard-pressed to imagine how she might trump the president's bin
Laden death-watch extravaganza. Her opportunity came five months later, when
she delivered her gruesome paraphrase of Julius Caesar on the occasion of
Col. Gaddafi's murder. In the context of Washington's deeply racist foreign
policy, Gaddafi and bin Laden were equally deserving of death, although
Gaddafi was among the most fervent and effective fighters against Islamic
jihadists: his government was the first in the world to request a global
arrest warrant against bin Laden.
The Libyan Islamists were quickly transferred to the new
U.S.-NATO-Saudi-Qatari front lines in Syria. The CIA station in Benghazi was
at the center of the action - and got burned in the wild and unwieldy
process of herding jihadists, who find it difficult to take orders from
"infidels," even when the "Crusaders" are paying the bills and supplying the
weapons.
The U.S. consulate and CIA station in Benghazi were attacked on September
11, 2012. The next day, the Pentagon's intelligence agency issued a report
predicting that a "Salafist principality" - another term for an Islamic
State - would likely arise in Syria as a result of the war, and that
"Western countries, the Gulf States and Turkey are supporting these
efforts." Moreover, the establishment of such an Islamic "principality"
would create "the ideal atmosphere for AQI [al Qaida in Iraq, which became
ISIS, ISIL and the Islamic State] to return to its old pockets in Mosul and
Ramadi" in Iraq - events that have since transpired.
The Defense Intelligence Agency report didn't say so, but the "Western
Powers" included the United States, through its CIA.
"The Pentagon warning about the rise of an Islamic State may have had some
effect on U.S. policy in Syria."
The document was declassified this year as the result of a suit by a
libertarian right-wing legal outfit. The people of the world continue to be
fed the fiction that the U.S. is engaged in a long, twilight struggle
against al Qaida Salafists whose international network was created by, and
continues to benefit from, "Western countries, the Gulf States and Turkey."
However
, the 2012 Pentagon warning about the rise of an Islamic State may have had
some effect on U.S. policy in Syria. One year later, in September of 2013,
President Obama backed off from his threat to bomb Syria in "retaliation"
for a chemical missile attack against civilians - a crime much more likely
committed by western-backed Salafists. The conventional wisdom is that the
Russians tricked a hapless Secretary of State John Kerry into agreeing to
the peaceful, internationally supervised destruction of Syria's chemical
arsenal; or that the refusal of Britain's Parliament to go along with an air
assault on Syria made the U.S. position untenable; or that Obama feared
losing a vote on the issue in the U.S. Congress. None of this rings true to
me. The United States is not easily deterred by the opinions of Europeans,
who in the end accept Washington's acts as a
fait accompli. And, it was not clear that Obama would have lost the vote in
Congress - a vote that he requested, while at the same time declaring that
he did not need the legislature's permission to "punish" Syria for crossing
his "red line."
I think that high Pentagon officials and elements of the Obama
administration - probably including the president, himself - took the
Benghazi disaster and the Defense Intelligence Agency report to heart, and
decided that it was better to keep bleeding the Syrians and their Russian,
Lebanese and Iranian allies through a prolonged war, than to bomb al Qaida
into power. For the U.S., regional chaos is preferable to the triumph of
the, ultimately, unmanageable Salafists - unchained.
The thirty-plus year war against Iran would, however, be ratcheted up. The
Bush administration was snatched back from the brink of a military assault
against Teheran in 2007 when - to the great consternation of Vice President
Dick Cheney - all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies declared, publicly and
unanimously, that Iran had
abandoned its nuclear weapons program, years before.
"President Obama claims the right to disregard and methodically undermine
international law through "humanitarian" military intervention."
The spooks reaffirmed their consensus in the 2010 National Intelligence
Estimate - again, that there was no evidence Iran has any intention of
making a bomb. The Obama administration has since avoided asking the
intelligence agencies for their analysis on the issue, knowing they would
get the same answer. Instead, they rely on Israeli propaganda, pick and
choose various "experts" from inside and outside the arms control
"community," or simply put forward unsupported statements on Iran's
capabilities and intentions: the Big Lie. While Bush was humiliated by facts
supplied by his own intelligence experts, Obama has escalated the
confrontation with Iran, applying crippling sanctions and the whole range of
low-level warfare, in close collaboration with Israel - proving, once again,
that Obama is the "more effective evil."
Obama has nearly completed knocking off victims on the "
hit list" of countries that George Bush was working on when General Wesley
Clark ran across it in 2002
. Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Somalia have been invaded since then, and Sudan
was stripped of a third of its territory. Only Iran and Lebanon remain
intact and outside the U.S. imperial umbrella.
The Republican-Democratic duopoly plays tag-team in promoting the
Project for a New American Century - a doctrine promulgated by
neo-conservatives in 1997 that has served as the guiding light of both the
Bush and Obama administrations. The differences between the two teams are
merely rhetorical. The Bush regime is described as "unilateralist," although
it employed the same "Coalition of the Willing" approach to aggressive war
as does the Obama administration. President Obama claims the right to
disregard and methodically undermine international law through
"humanitarian" military intervention, whereas Bush claimed to be "spreading
democracy." Same weapons systems, same mass murder, same objective: U.S.
domination of the planet.
"The spooks reaffirmed their consensus in the 2010 National Intelligence
Estimate, that there was no evidence Iran has any intention of making a
bomb."
There's nothing democratic or humanitarian about the U.S. imperial project.
Therefore, its maintenance requires the deployment of 24-7 psychological
operations worldwide, but directed primarily against the U.S. public.
Republican strategist Karl Rove was far more honest than his Democratic
counterparts when he explained to a reporter, back
in 2004:
"We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while
you're studying that reality-judiciously, as you will-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."
Election seasons are reality-creation festivals, during which the two
corporate parties pretend to put forward different visions of the national
and global destiny - when, in fact, they answer to the same master and must
pursue the same general strategy.
The continuity of GOP-Democratic rule - the near-identical depravity - is
horrifically evident in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where six million
people have been
slaughtered by U.S. surrogates since 1996: the largest genocide since World
War II. Successive U.S. administrations - Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and
Barack Obama, assisted by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice,
the high U.S. official
most deeply implicated in the entirety of the genocide - have armed,
financed, and covered up the Congolese holocaust. Each administration has
collaborated with its predecessor to hide the crime and obscure the question
of guilt - and then to continue the killing.
Decent people do not vote for political parties that produce such fiends,
who deserve Nuremburg justice of the capital kind. Any talk of "lesser
evils" is both stupid and obscene.
Both Major U.S. Parties Are Plague
