'Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world-benefaction.'

That refrain from “altruism and world-benefaction” was in a bipolar world that was emerging from the ashes of World War II, for which Kennan emphasized the necessity of dealing “in straight power concepts” as the very corner stone of America's foreign policy going forward:

'We should dispense with the aspiration to "be liked" or to be regarded as the repository of a high-minded international altruism. We should stop putting ourselves in the position of being our brothers' keeper and refrain from offering moral and ideological advice. We should cease to talk about vague and--for the Far East--unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of the living standards, and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.'

In the unipolar world of the sole superpower's hectoring hegemony today, where the term “unipolar” was rather bluntly defined in 2007 by the Russian President Wladimir Putin thusly:

“what is a unipolar world? However one might embellish this term, at the end of the day it refers to one type of situation, namely one centre of authority, one centre of force, one centre of decision-making. It is world in which there is one master, one sovereign. And at the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within. And this certainly has nothing in common with democracy. Because, as you know, democracy is the power of the majority in light of the interests and opinions of the minority.”

we have empirically seen the barbaric lengths to which the United States has gone to introduce its “Grande baille of the New World Order” from Iraq 1990 to Iraq 2008, to the point of it now actively planning preemptive nuclear attacks on developing nations unwilling to follow the diktats of “one master, one sovereign.” Only an adversely indoctrinated person would deny this empirical reality today, however colorfully it might be embellished as the “war on terrorism”.

Please think before acting – please analyze why, systematically, and consistently, all efforts by well intentioned peoples have been inefficacious in preventing new wars? That, if any attack on Iran was postponed due to the American 'loose nukes', it was likely entirely because courageous commanders within the American military establishment refused to follow immoral orders?

Could it be because the real patriots of America have been cleverly co-opted by endless red herrings, and by deliberate focus on the 'leaves' instead of the 'roots' and the 'DNA' of the disease leading to new leaves continually being created by the same diseased tree of infamy?

Yet inexplicably, we observe courageous whistleblowers like Ms. Edmonds entirely silent on matters of “imperial mobilization” of her own adopted nation, or that 911 could have been an inside job because the “imperial mobilization” and dramatic increase in defense spending to affect the military transformation that immediately followed was precisely predicated on such a shockingly catalyzing event – the “new pearl harbor”!

She is also silent on how 911 could possibly have occurred in an armed to the teeth superpower without treasonous peoples on the inside aiding and abetting in its operational planning, logistics, and execution. And not just aiding and abetting inadvertently through their incompetence, or aiding and abetting thugishly by being in the pay of foreign governments, both of which Ms. Edmonds asserts likely caused an otherwise preventable 911 from occurring, but aiding and abetting in actually making 911 happen on purpose as a deadly military covert-ops by a rogue cabal inside the United States upon the American nation like Hitler's 'Operation Canned Goods' and the 'Reichstag fire'! For the latter definition of aiding and abetting, the ultimate in treason, she is silent. One imagines that like Noam Chomsky and Robert Fisk, she too believes that 19 Muslim jihadis, controlled by a man on a dialysis machine in the Hindu Kush and armed with laptops and cell phones, trumped the world's largest most sophisticated superpower into lowering its air defenses, into not following routine operational procedures, and suspended the laws of physics by demolishing the towers at free fall speed.

Ms. Edmonds is bizarrely mute on the empirical observation – which requires no interpreters or translators or intermediaries – that the towers collapsing into their own footprints is suspiciously similar to how buildings collapse under expert controlled demolition. Nor is she willing to opine on the logical implication of the highest levels of treason that would be involved in such a case if the empirical evidence of the eyes, years of experience, and the rational mind are taken as the starting point of forensic analysis instead of the facile unproven theoretical expositions from the Pentagon and Popular Mechanics. Indeed, she seems entirely fixated in her untiring efforts, to draw attention to, and elevate the threat from, the boogiemen 'pirates', who are now, in effect, made out to appear more real and less fictitious because real identifiable 'treasonous thugs' from within the US Government themselves sold the bad guys America's nuclear secrets for a song! (Sibel Edmonds' words, non-utterances, and omissions gleaned in only these references: A B C D E F G H I J K L as of 03/24/08)

Therefore, it is legitimate, it may be tortuously argued under certain ripe conditions, to nuclear decimate both Pakistan and Iran, in order to claim back America's stolen nuclear secrets that Ms. Edmonds is drawing attention to as an insider whistleblower. Especially if it's carried out in the guise of retaliatory-response to another even more horrendous 911 as President Bush himself prognosticated on February 13, 2008 is imminent: “terrorists are planning new attacks on our country ... that will make Sept. 11 pale by comparison”. Or even in response to another Gulf of Tonkin scenario that Congressman Ron Paul had prognosticated on January 15, 2007: “I am concerned, however, that a contrived Gulf of Tonkin- type incident may occur to gain popular support for an attack on Iran”. Or in response to perhaps an entirely different scenario that will appear so publicly shocking at the time of its occurrence that it would necessitate Martial Law in the United States, and hurriedly lead to nuclear 'retaliatory' “shock and awe” upon all pre-planned targets. That such reasons for nuclear retaliation and preemptive nuclear strikes are not far fetched is ominously foreshadowed in build-up statements from American military commanders such as this one reported in Pakistani newspaper Dawn on February 7, 2008: 'Defence officials told Congress on Wednesday that Al Qaeda is operating from havens in “under-governed regions” of Pakistan, which they said pose direct threats to Europe, the United States and the Pakistan government itself. ... Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, predicted in written testimony that the next attack on the United States probably would be launched by terrorists in that region.' More of such ominous statements building up the boogieman in the Hindu Kush can be gleaned in this open letter to a Pakistani General warning Pakistan's leaders that they are unwittingly (or perhaps deliberately) suiciding that country by continuing to engage in the American fiction of the 'War on Terror' which has made Pakistan “Terror Central”, the “very petri dish of international terrorism”.

But it suffices to examine the above cited Adm. Michael Mullen's clairvoyance even with a modicum of one's own commonsense and a bit of un-indoctrinated rationalism.

“Next attack on the United States”? Is it so easy to attack a Goliath superpower isolated on a continent with a natural coastline from sea to shining sea and which spends trillions of dollars on its high-tech defense? Some barefoot mullahs with sticks and box cutters can so outwit the sole superpower and reduce it to such shambles that it has to enact draconian laws and deny its own civilians their own Constitutionally mandated Bill of Rights and Democratic existence? Then what's the point of all this defense spending if some “under-governed regions” of Pakistan can “pose direct threats to Europe, the United States”? Why not just take all that monies and put a roof over every man woman and child on the planet, provide everyone with clean drinking water, primary medical care, K-16 education, and lifetime livable-pension after retirement? And still have monies left over to build libraries, roads, and social services for all? That would most assuredly take the wind out of the sails of all terrorism – unless of course Daniel Pipes is to be believed, that it's not the peoples, but radical Islam and Islamism which is the enemy! That, it's "Not [even] a Clash of Civilizations, It's a Clash between the Civilized World and Barbarians". Even there, such genuine altruism and world-benefaction would surely eliminate the fertile recruiting grounds that are harvested through economic conscription and dead bodies created by the imperial bombings itself! Thus if despite this enormous defense spending, the American military-industrial complex failed to protect the Americans that they now cannot even disclose their true identities in most countries of the world, and often have to pretend that they are Canadians, shouldn't some peoples be demanding that the Pentagon be dismantled and its enormous kitchen-sink budget used for the good of the majority of the ordinary peoples of the United States?

Because these statements from the American President and his military commander can only be true at the 'unbirthday party' with the 'Mad Hatter' and the 'Dormouse' boisterously singing the war song “United We Stand”, it is not difficult to imagine the purpose of this facile charade of governmental secrecy behind Ms. Edmonds' travails. Indeed, these FBI recordings may become a tortuous setup to authenticate the supposed 'nuclear signature' of the fateful tipping point, wherein, nuclear attacks on targeted countries would finally be deemed acceptable by the public – when once, just contemplating its use was unimaginable because of the MAD deterrence that had kept the world precariously perched on the edge of Armageddon for 40 years. When the conditions are ripe, all of a sudden, Ms. Edmonds' wishes for Congressional inquiry may get granted! It will be determined that the nuclear signature of the terrorist event matched that of 'loose nukes' based on stolen American technology, hijacked from Pakistan by the Taliban and al-qaeeda, and squirreled into Iran and used by them to inflict shocking harm to the peoples and interests of the United States! For an outlandish scenario where this could plausibly be sold to the gullible American public no differently than the facile pretexts of WMDs to invade Iraq, see “Wakeup to the grotesque reality of the 'Grand Chessboard'”.

 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5