Constitutionless

Japan just voted for its Peacexit - or is it Democracexit? After securing a 2/3 majority in the House of Councillors, Shinzo Abe is getting closer to his lifetime dream: undoing the nation's postwar constitution and restoring the fundamentals of the imperial rule that disgraced it.

The UK doesn't have a constitution to protect, and it doesn't have a clue how to cope with the Brexit mess that left the whole political spectrum in shambles. David Cameron, Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage, Jeremy Corbyn, all lost face, leaving to Mother Theresa May the tough job of caring for untouchable issues. At least, something is working in the UK this Summer: Sadiq Khan got elected, and the Chilcot Report exposed Tony Blair's responsibility in George W. Bush's Iraq imposture**.

Europe doesn't have a constitution, but it remains ruled from 101 Constitution Ave NW, Washington, DC 20001, the headquarters of Goldman Sachs, a company that gave us Draghi, and is hiring Barroso. Mario Draghi is certainly not Jean-Claude Trichet, Jose-Manuel Barroso is certainly not Jacques Delors, and Hollande is not even Giscard. Where's there's no political will...

No constitution? No problem: 101 Constitution's so easy to learn! Just dial Constitution 101, and ask for instructions from Goldman Sachs

Israel doesn't have a constitution, and it helps when you want to circumvent the rule of international law. In the 2008 and 2012 tradition (see "Deja vu all over again"), I expect Bibi Netanyahu to seize the US election year opportunity and further fuel tensions with Palestine. It would only take a few skirmishes to start the fireworks... who wants to bet?

blogules 2016
Since 2003, nonsensical posts about noncritical issues in nonenglish (get your blogules transfusion in French)
NEW: join blogules on Facebook!!! and Twitter (@stephanemot, @blogules)

Follow Us

* "Japan votes Peacexit - if not Democracexit" Seoul Village 
** reminder: "Invasion of Iraq: The Bush Legacy in 3 Impostures"

ISIS the end of Iraq?

Again, the end of Iraq was sealed in 2003 with the invasion led by the Theocon-Neocon duet Bush-Cheney (as usual, from my 7-year-old "Universal Declaration of Independence From Fundamentalism"):

"For fundamentalists from all religions, George W. Bush turned out to be the best person at the best place at the best moment.

His strategy should look like a total failure to whoever considers the Iraq quagmire, the Palestinian fiasco, or the worldwide surge in terror. But to the contrary, Bush's strategy proved a complete success.

Because George W. Bush didn't act as a President of The United States of America in the interest of his country.
And George W. Bush didn't even act as a Republican in the interest of his party.
George W. Bush acted as a fundamentalist in the interest of fundamentalism.

(...)

Bush did not wage a war on terror but in favor of it : instead of focusing on terrorist networks and reducing their ground (ie by fighting injustice and poverty, promoting peace in the region and especially between Israel and Palestine), he deliberately infuriated the Muslim world and helped fundamentalists recruit new flocks of followers. And he targeted a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 but everything to do with peace in the region.

A new playground for international terrorism, the end of Iraq as a united country, civil war here, the rise of a new form of fundamentalism in Iran when reformers were "threatening" the Khomeini generation, the failure of Fatah and the victory of Hamas... all this was not collateral damage but the very aim of his sick game."

If George W. Bush deliberately set the region on fire, Barack Obama proved a poor fireman. He got Bin Laden and pulled out the troops as promised, but couldn't fix the whole mess. Furthermore, his sincere goodwill was not really rewarded, like that lovely Nowruz speech: it did lead to an Iran Spring, but didn't come with any back-up when the regime crushed it. Spinned by the GOP ahead of the elections, the Benghazi fiasco deprived the POTUS from all hope of convincing the rest of Washington to act in Syria or anywhere else. 

So for now, the new Bin Laden, self-proclaimed Caliph Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, is fearing much less Uncle Sam than Vladimir Putin or - who knows - Xi Jinping. Heck, even Francois Hollande looks scarier. 

All al Baghdadi needs to make it perfect is a GOP victory this November.

blogules 2014
Since 2003, nonsensical posts about noncritical issues in nonenglish (get your blogules transfusion in French)
NEW: join blogules on Facebook!!! and Twitter (@stephanemot, @blogules)

Follow Us

Invasion of Iraq: The Bush Legacy in 3 Impostures

It's been 10 years since the invasion of Iraq, and I won't repeat my usual rant. In case you missed the previous episodes, here are 3 messages you should remember:
 

***

1) The invasion of Iraq was meant to spread fundamentalism worldwide, not democracy in Iraq:

Always keep this in mind: "George W. Bush didn't act as a President of The United States of America in the interest of his country. And George W. Bush didn't even act as a Republican in the interest of his party. George W. Bush acted as a fundamentalist in the interest of fundamentalism."

I wrote the "Universal Declaration of Independence from Fundamentalism" to expose the imposture of fundamentalism (a totalitarian, political program advertised as a universal, religious program), the way it undermines both democracy and religion, and the ways to defuse the sick ping pong between supposedly opposed extremists.

As I posted for the 5th anniversay of this masquerade ("Iraq - 5 years of success for fundamentalists"), the invasion of Iraq was a triumph: as expected, it boosted fundamentalism and terror worldwide. "Mission accomplished".

And we should consider ourselves lucky these lunatics didn't go all the way (see "Iran : who wants war and why").


***

2) Oil was the means of corruption, not the aim of the game, and the undermining of US democracy was not just collateral damage:

To make it short: theocons set the agenda with the help of neocons (what better duet than Bush-Cheney to achieve this?), and sold the war to paleocons*.

In other words: the aim of the game was to undermine democracy (the theocon - fascist purpose), and the official cause an intervention to free a country from its dictator (typical neocon stuff), but in order to launch the war, the blessing from the oil and defense lobbies was needed (enter the paleocons).

The only thing missing was an alibi for immediate action. A clear and immediate danger. The outrageous lies and forged cases about WMDs or Saddam-al Qaeda ties did the trick.

Of course, there was always the risk of nosy reporters doing their jobs, of citizens exercising their rights to transparency.

The Patriot Act became effective more than one year before the invasion. The trickier part was the media, and the Bush Administration offered a deal to US majors: don't get at us until after the 2004 elections** and we'll help you consolidate your power. At the head of the FCC, the son of Colin Powell did his best to alter competition laws, and was instrumental in the concentration that followed at a critical moment in the history of traditional press, broadcasting, and internet. Michael Powell went as far as organizing a phony forum to settle the case just weeks ahead of the invasion. He later joined the RAND Corporation.

In general, the Bush administration more or less successfully tried to undermine the separation of powers at the root of democracy:
. executive? too far (right) reaching, and totally unaccountable.
. legislative? corrupt, and producing anti-democratic laws
. judicial? promoting torture and the negation of all rights
. media? at best embedded, at worst accomplice
. netizens? brainwashed by pervasive propaganda, monitored by a dystopian state
. ....
. and, of course, the theocons' priority: destroying secularism, the pilar of democracy. Again, mixing religion with politics, education, science... is the best way to attack democracy and religion at the same time (see "France, secularism and burqa : a political issue, not a religious one")

Yes, a lot of money was at stake. For the religious lobbies that pushed against the separation of church and state as well as for the military and oil lobbies. And the mass plundering of Iraqi resources is only one side of a scheme that turned record surplusses into record deficits (among other vital rescue missions: saving private Halliburton... a charity movement that continued in another Gulf, following Kathrina - see "Red blogule to Halliburton and the 40 thieves").

But the corruption reached much deeper, to the very fundamentals of democracy.
 

***

3) The Arab Spring owes nothing to the Iraq War, to the contrary:

 
George W. Bush and his fan club try to sell us the Arab Spring as the consequence of his invasion of Iraq, a "liberation war" that "spread democracy across the region", but this imposture is totally unacceptable.
 
First, Bush's crusade contributed to silencing moderates, and strengthening radical islamists as the only political force capable of taking power.
 
Second, his illegal invasion for anti-democratic purposes cannot be compared to self determination movements aiming at genuine freedom and democracy. The only nation Bush ever tried to build was a theocracy: he may be an inspiration for islamists, certainly not for actual freedom fighters.
 
Third, the Bush administration did serve as an example in the region, but not in the arab world (see "Israel accepted as true the choice between its security and its ideals").


 
***
Justice has yet to be done, and I guess the last words of Tomas Young (in "The Last Letter") are worth remembering:
"A Message to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney From a Dying Veteran": "I hope you will be put on trial. But mostly I hope, for your sakes, that you find the moral courage to face what you have done to me and to many, many others who deserved to live. I hope that before your time on earth ends, as mine is now ending, you will find the strength of character to stand before the American public and the world, and in particular the Iraqi people, and beg for forgiveness.".

And as always, we should expose and denounce the impostures, and blow the whistle each time a government tries to alter the separation of powers or to play with the fundamentals of democracy.


blogules 2013
Since 2003, nonsensical posts about noncritical issues in nonenglish (get your blogules transfusion in French)
NEW: join blogules on Facebook!!! and Twitter (@stephanemot, @blogules)


* ... and if the "anticons" were not yet in the picture, they're not a model for democracy either: "the Tea Party is not just an alternative to the Republican or the Democratic parties, but the very negation of the republic, the very negation of democracy" (see "Grand Old Parting - enter the anticons")
** Heck, even until the 2008 elections for most of them (see "The Silence of the Lambs (War in Iraq and US networks)"). How dare collaborators give lessons after such a disgrace (see "What Fareed Zakaria got wrong")?

Delusion Points - an interview with George W. Bush

From blogule's Agence Fausse Presse, this exclusive interview of former President George Walker Bush covers the most controversial parts of his memoirs ("Derision Points" - 2010 Drown Publishers, 7 pages, $75.6):

Katrina, paint it black:

blogules: "You say Katrina represents an all-time low for you. Can it possibly be lower than your forged war, you near-death pretzel experience, or those shoes thrown at you during the last throes of your insurgency against US democracy ?"

GWB: "Some people said I was a racist and that's simply not true. A dangerous, hardcore, fundamentalist lunatic maybe, but a racist...? that's not fair. Even my dog Barney is black."

Chairman of the Waterboard:

blogules: "You write that allowing waterboarding was the right thing to do since your personal team of torture promoters considered it legal. Have you ever tried it ?"

Dubya: "Of course I did : when I was younger I tried almost everything, remember ? Actually, that's the way I managed to quit drinking. And that's the moment when I learned that Dick Cheney was a guy I could rely on."

blogules: "He waterboarded you himself ?"

W: "Dick loves board games."

DUI with Barbara:

blogules: "In your book, you mention a disturbing episode with your mother, when you drove her to the hospital after her miscarriage".

Georgie: "Oh, that...? That's how I recall it now but as you know, I was not always myself back then. Still now I've got flashes with different versions playing in my head. In one of them, Mom carries a pink baby elephant in a jar, and it looks and smells like gimchi. Maybe a gift from Reverend Moon, a friend of Dad's, who knows ?"

blogules: "But you said it was a trauma for you back then."

W: "Yep. I was quite disapointed by her. When she first mentioned a miscarriage, I understood she won a beauty pageant at the local GM dealership."

No WMD, no regrets:

blogules: "You dared say you were disapointed not to have found any Weapon of Mass Destruction in Iraq, but your invasion was the right decision anyway ?"

Fundamentalist in Chief: "The extreme right decision, to be more accurate. Come on... You're perfectly aware that our case for Iraq was completely forged, and our intel cooked to the bone. We invaded Iraq to give a boost to Muslim and Christian fundamentalism, and we succeeded beyond our wildest dreams."

blogules: "In a nut/bombshell: Mission accomplished ?"

Bush Jr: "Not yet: according to our plan, there must be a final war between Israel and Iran, then Jesus comes back, and ultimately the Texas Rangers win the World Series."

blogules: "I guess I can wait to read the next volume of your memoirs."


blogules 2010

CIA to Blackwater : Kill, Baby, Kill

Government outsourcing according to Bush-Cheney ?

. To Halliburton: drill, baby, drill

. To Blackwater: kill, baby, kill

Even if Blackwater didn't succeed in capturing nor killing jihadists*, the contractor managed to kill at least 17 Iraqi civilians in 2007. A small step compared to the hundreds of thousand deaths caused by that illegal invasion, but a giant leap for a private corporation.

So as someone said, Mission: accomplished.

And Magna cum laude according to standards set by then Amerikan rulers, most notably :

. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, a.k.a. The Chief Torture Officer, head of the Destruction of Justice

. Vice President Dick Cheney, a.k.a. The Chairman of the Waterboard, a supervillain with a knack for illegality and infamy.

. President George W. Bush, a.k.a The Fundamentalist in Chief, a stubborn again theocrat under whose rule America ended up one Supreme Justice away from outright fascism.

We don't know yet what CIA's Leon Panetta will come up with next, but expect more public outcries than five years ago when, even as all abuses were perfectly known, Dubya's Weapons of Mass Disinformation earned him a clear mandate from American voters to keep digging.

Eric Holder, this is your time to shine and restore justice in the US.

blogules 2009

* see "C.I.A. Sought Blackwater's Help to Kill Jihadists" (NYT 20090819)

Lobby Dick Tries To Retire, Fails To Retract

As the newly reformed League of Justice (D.C. Serious Comics) consider putting behind bars the Supervillains who disgraced America over the past 8 years, one of their most abject leaders resurfaces.

Last time we saw The Evil Doctor Cheney, he was pitifully escaping with his master Victor von Dumb in an helicopter. Their lair had just been raided by Captain America, who even humiliated von Dumb in public with his most powerful weapon ; a loud and concise X-ray speech exposing the imposter. The hero then threw this protective shield over the nation : "We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals".

It's hard to tell whether von Dumb will ever recover from his wounds. Somewhere deep into the darkest swamps of Amerika, The Rover is probably trying to revive his creature. D.C. Serious Comics declined to comment, but a sequel could be in the making under the title "Amerika Doomed : The Legacy".

We do know for sure the man known as Lobby Dick is still alive. Yesterday, he even rose from his armchair to deliver a "State of the Union with John King" address on CNN.

The Anchorman's hulk of a body was protected by a 8-inch adamantium-reinforced glass table, but for good measure King cast a few spells on The Creepy Veep, using quick hand gestures on his Magic Screen : as some of the Supervillain's most shameless moments were instantly brought back to life, there was no chance anyone in the audience could misinterpret his snarl for a friendly smile.

King first asked Doc Dick what he thought about Captain America's first weeks in power :
- "This League of Justice is dangerous : they are changing the very definitions of democracy, justice, freedom, science... cancelling all the much needed reforms we brought to the dictionnary over the last eight years. Next thing you know, even listening to Rush Limbaugh will be considered cruel and unusual punishment".
- "Well... isn't it already, I mean technically ? And what do you think about the use or abuse of the new superpower called Stimulus ?"
- "You sometimes do need a stimulus to get things going. For instance, when I don't get an answer or when I get an answer that I don't like, electroshocks can prove useful. But this Stimulus is a joke. Let's be clear : this country needs bullets, not bullet trains. Tax cuts for the rich, ax cuts for the poor. And a nationwide pipeline network".
- "... connected with new oil fields in Alaska, I presume ?"
- "Nah... oil should keep circulating on trucks, gas-guzzling trucks doing circles, virtuous circles. This country needs pipelines for water."
- "Pardon me... did I hear "water" ?"
- "You did. Getting water all across the nation is a major challenge for this millenium : we want to democratize waterboarding - no child left behind."
- "But that's insane !"
- "Yeah. Look how poor John McCain lost his bearings... I'm sure he refuses to promote waterboarding because Arizona is too dry."
- "Wasn't it because he was tortured in Vietnam ?"
- "That's a question of vocabulary. There was no CNN at the Hanoi Hilton back then, talk about cruel and unusual punishment..."

King offered the criminal an opportunity to redeem himself : "come on, Doc, now that your ruling days are behind you, now that you have nothing to lose... why not confess that you could have done or said things a better way ?"

Hissing and shrugging, von Dumb's sidekick refused to retract :
- the collapse of the Twin Towers ? "The DemoTeam did it, we tried to save Freddie and Fannie, but this infamous gang deliberately refused to strip them from their most dangerous powers when it was still possible"
- the Deficit ? "yet another creature from the DemoTeam - we found the fingerprints of The Dude all over it. Plus we had to reprint all procedure manuals... and by the way, do you know how much it costs to build a soundproof torture chamber ?"
- the Big Bang ? "We were caught in a global tempest and had to cope with the same crisis as our allies - rumors that the crisis originated from our own labs, our very homes, are bold lies"
- Shock and Awe ? "My only regret : the CIA didn't do their job and provided us with poor intel... but luckily enough, I was there to correct them and forge the case for the invasion of Iraq. Going at a Supervillain was the right thing to do. Everybody is definitely better off now, don't you think ? Iraq has ceased to exist as a united nation, Persia has recovered its Superpower status, new enemies keep popping up from all over the planet... more than ever, this World needs Amerika."

- "And how about The Scoot ?"

The Dark Lord's face turned even more somber as The Anchorman mentioned the case that almost tore the Doc Cheney - von Dumb couple apart in the last throes of their assault on democracy : "Victor and I slightly disagreed on that one, granted. I think it has something to do with my partner's hypocrisy. That's probably the reason why he keeps hiding his true fundamentalist face behind a mask of compassion. But make no mistake : he is as dangerous as I am."

USS War Censorship Sunk

Robert Gates announced the end of the ban on photographing caskets of war dead*, a ban initiated by George H. W. Bush during the 1991 Gulf War.

To me, this tells a lot about a country willing to make peace and end war, and puts an end to a shameful tradition of hiding the truth to the US audience.

Remember how US Weapons of Mass Disinformation used to make a show of "surgical strikes" and other "clean war" impostures ?

Remember how the first pictures of scores of caskets, lined up in an army aircraft on its way from Baghdad, caused a scandal not because of the reason why those unlucky people where sent to death in the first place, but because such "un-American" images could undermine the morale of a nation at war ?

Remember how W. got reelected because he had the courage to take the decision of going to war, and not kicked out of the White House because he was coward enough to dodge his own military duties decades earlier, and crazy enough to take that doomed decision on the sole basis of his own fundamentalist's hidden agenda ?

Of course, let us not be fooled by the timing of Gate's announcement : the Defense Secretary is not only speeding up the withdrawal process (now US viewers must all understand it's better to get the heck out of Iraq as scheduled), but also pointing out fundamental differences between Obama and Bush at the very moment when journalists take notice of some similarities in the way war is being waged.

The Bush-Cheney propaganda era may be over, some positive spin can't hurt.

Can it ?


* as long, of course, as each family agrees - see "Pentagon OKs media photos of war dead overturning Bush's 1991 ban" (NY Daily News 20090226)

Next Stop : Pakistan

They have fled Iraq for Afghanistan. For many, it was a way back to where it all started. Others learned their trade in Iraq, a giant terrorist training camp created by George W. Bush in his fundamentalist crusade in a country that really didn't need this kind of touristic resorts.

Now that a surge is on the way to Kabul and Southern Afghanistan, they are touring Pakistan beyond their usual Northern safe havens.

Pakistan is not safe, and the economical, social, and political situation worsened since last November, when I wrote these already gloomy lines (see "Lessons from Mumbai ?") : "The main target in the Mumbai attacks was Pakistan, the weaker link, and the democracy the most likely to fall for fundamentalism if the international community fails to help it help itself."

44 started using the same military quick fixes as 43/36* : air strikes as "surgical" as Israel's bombs on Lebanon or Gaza. But make no mistake : diplomacy is on its way. Not the naive, vintage dovish kind of diplomacy, but resolute and fair.

Diplomacy is on its way, and Barack's most lethal weapons are on their way : ahead of Hurricane Hillary, "diplomatic equivalent of a hydrogen bomb" AfPak envoy Richard Holbrooke met with Hamid Karzai... and The H. Bomb clearly avoided the kind of toasts Carter shared with Shah Reza Pahlavi over 30 years ago.

Last week, a local governor made an international show of a bonfire of puppy crops and illegal drugs seized in his region. A small step for Afghanistan, but a major leap out of the loop for ever the media magnet Karzai.

A surge on the ground, elections and potentially new faces at the helm of the country... change is probably coming to Afghanistan.

A Taliban surge, a catastrophic economic downturn, déjà vu short sighted legal and constitutional compromises with fundamentalists, radical factions fueling the seeds of civil war... change is surely coming to Pakistan.

President Obama must keep his eyes on the ball. Keeping in mind the fact that dancers are once again changing ballrooms.


* not Lyndon Baines Johnson but George Walker Bush : 43 has just been awarded the 36th position in the best POTUS contest. Dubya's behind Hoover but before Fillmore - the latter does have the name of a villain in a Harry Potter book, while W. enjoys the fame of Daddy Herbie (41 went up from #20 to #18).

Allahwood's Walk of Shame

Muntazer Al Zaidi, an Iraqi journalist turned terrorist was caught launching Weapons of Mass Destruction at George W. Bush¹.

Broken arm and ribs for the victim... "the victim" referring not to the target, but to the journalist... That should be Retaliation Size 10 on the Bush-Cheney Torture Scale, I guess.

Zaidi lost his honor as a journalist², but made his point as a revolted citizen.

Nikita Khrushchev made his point by banging his own shoe on his desk... History will remember different tales about 43 : choking on a pretzel, asking for permission to pee, taking a lesson about My Pet Goat instead of his responsabilities, and once again³, exposing his formidable talent for dodging, ducking, and even lame-ducking.


1 - 9/11 Truthers ("9/11 Truthers Knockin' At Your Door" - 20081207) claimed that the shoe had been tele-guided by CIA operators so that it would crash on the US flag instead of the POTUS - a false flag scenario meant to trigger a war between US and Middle Eastern shoe manufacturers.
2 - an interesting twist of fate when you consider how journalism has been handled with during Bush's terms (see "How much for a journalist ?" - 20050113)
3 - meet "The Washington Dodgers" (20080925), the nut house that George built.

October Surprise : W. delivers FL to McCain

Dubya eventually picked Syria to deliver the October Surprise McCain needed (red flag provoquing an artificial tension). Smart move : putting economy behind security was one thing, but boosting AIPAC vs JStreet may help the GOP keep FL red.

W. : "Here is the October Surprise you needed, John. My unprovoqued aggression of Syria will put economy behind security, and Florida is yours."

Mc : " Thanks, my friend. Do I need to put the bombs on my campaign budget ?"

PS (addendum 20081027) - the US attack Syria because the US didn't defend Syria enough : "Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem of Syria accused the United States earlier this year of not giving his country the equipment needed to prevent foreign fighters from crossing into Iraq. He said Washington feared Syria could use such equipment against Israel."(IHT 20081026 "US choppers attack Syrian village near Iraq border")

Bonus : TNL endorsement of McCain-Palin by Ferrell / Bush :

Debate # 2 : XXIst Century wins

In a dull re-run of the previous debate*, McCain lost one of his last chances of changing the dynamics of his erratic campaign.

Even on his own turf (Town Hall format), and even with the help of Tom Brokaw (the ultimate loser tonight : he didn't even prevent the Senator of Arizona from reaching across the aisle and shaking hands with a member of the audience), McCain lost.

Condemned to control himself in front of the camera (which did catch some angry moments in the background, though**), stuck to XXth century role models (clumsily courting Reagan fans), and XXth century solutions that are not solutions (like Tina Fey's Palin plegdes to "fix it" in every sentence, he keeps saying "I know how to" without actually telling how), McCain lost.

Claiming a "vision of the future" but exposing a vision of the past while the next President set the pace for the next century, McCain lost.

Referring to other people's ideas while the next President articulated views that resonated in everybody's minds, McCain lost.

Moreover, Barack Obama won. Against the XXth century's last presidential candidate, he smacked grand slam homeruns on economy and health care, but he also claimed Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan (leaving only "tiny" Georgia to Sakash's pal)***. 

Tonight, many Americans must feel even more comfortable with such a Commander in Chief.

McCain ? His "vision of the future" doesn't point to the White House. If he truly wants to save the country, he must first win the McCainistan war and second lose the November elections.

* see "Debate # 1 : McCain didn't lose, and President Obama spared him" 

** watch him grab his chair in the background while Obama's speaking. The chair didn't break and that's the only difference with Amy Poehler / Hillary during Fey's first SNL stunt.

*** in the process, great admissions on "I don't understand" (... why invade Iraq instead of fighting terrorists where they actually were) or "Government intrusion" (... to crack down big corporation abuses) - funny : we didn't even hear once the word "maverick" tonight...

The New Energy Expert Doesn't Blink - She Winks

Tonight, we met the latest version of Sarah Palin. A mix between the RNC pitbull and the brawling Ross Perot.

We've been winked at, mavericked, joesixpacked, hockeymommed, heckovulotted, mainstreeterlikemeed, youbetchized, wakdawaktakdataked by the new self proclaimed national expert in energy issues.

Tonight, Joe Biden was controling himself (he only managed to lose the gay-lesbian voters, who anyway won't rush to Sarah Read My Lipstick Palin*). Like Obama the other day**, he missed opportunities on economics (he could for instance denounce the politics of "fear" of her opponent).

But he didn't blink when it came to put a label on the Bush legacy ("an abject failure") or Dick Cheney ("the most dangerous Vice-President in History"). And he shed a tear that looked more genuine than Palin's fake and nervous compassion. Besides, his support of Israel sounded more sincere than her AIPAC leaflet... The true "natural" was the one who didn't have to train clumsily to look and sound like one.

As expected, Palin fared better than many thought, but only in appearance. I'm not sure everybody will be fooled, but at least some hardliners must feel some relief.

Biden wasn't fooled, but he too must be feeling some relief.

You don't debate with someone who doesn't believe in debate. You don't debate with someone who thinks he/she is always right and never make mistakes. You don't debate with someone who thinks there is no such thing as evolution.

You just speak and listen to this person speak. And hope he or she will never be in a position to nominate Supreme Justices.


* Gobernator III doesn't read newspapers (see Couric interview) but I know she subscribes to such publications as AmericanRifleman, The Neo-Creationist, Theocon Weekly, or the Bushnomist (the First Dude is rumored to favor an Alaskan skin magazine (Of Moose and Men).
** see "Debate # 1 : McCain didn't lose, and President Obama spared him".

What Fareed Zakaria got wrong

If one reads Fareed Zakaria's latest attempt to save his own face, "What Bush Got Right" was actually to stop being Bush*.

What Fareed Zakaria got wrong was to stop being the Fareed Zakaria that brilliantly denounced the lack of understanding by the American people of what was going on after 9/11.

That Fareed Zakaria was carefully taken care of by the hawks that sold the invasion of Iraq : an invitation at the prestigious 2003 Bilderberg Meeting, a briefing by top White House figures, and a promotion as Editor of Newsweek International.

Zakaria spent the following months justifying the invasion of Iraq, and the following years trying to clumsily justify himself.

And yes, Bush got something right : everything. But as a fundamentalist, not as the POTUS.

* Newsweek August 18-25, 2008 issue.

The Silence of the Lambs (War in Iraq and US networks)

The surge is working. Iraq is not an issue for November elections. Everything is fine, go back to sleep and don't forget to cast a Republican ballot later this year.

Now more about the coming war between Iran and Israel*, brought to you by the dream team that delivered "Shock and Awe" to your doorsteps (by the way... ' want some more yellow ribbons to decorate your front yard ? hurry up and enjoy our special pre-foreclosure rebates).

USA's top 3 networks (ABC, CBS, NBC) each devoted an average 60 weekday minutes of Iraq war coverage over the first half of 2008. That's 20 seconds per day, compared to 1 mn in 2007**.

And what 20 seconds ! The propaganda can be summed up with : "Mission Almost Accomplished", democracy is catching, thugs are losing the battle, and if you read through these few lines you can almost believe our boys will get the heck outta there sooner than expected.

Before the 100 years mentioned by John McCain anyway - this guy has lost his bearings and is confusing with the age of his great-grandson. But it doesn't matter for the GOP : Iraq remains a key electoral issue but Mac is tied with Obama (43% each according to Gallup**). If news reports were more accurate, I guess he would be lagging behind by 20 points or more.

If you are in the US and under the spell of those Weapons of Mass Disinformation, please read such articles as "Reporters Say Networks Put Wars on Back Burner" from the NYT***. Or if you want to watch actual news, tune in to Global Pulse's video on LinkTV (including the refreshing no bull...t interview of CBS News' Lara Logan by Jon Stewart)**** :



* see see "Iran : who wants war and why" (20070925)
** Gallup "Obama Has Edge on Key Election Issues" (20080624)
** "Reporters Say Networks Put Wars on Back Burner" (NYT 20080623)
*** "War isn't news anymore ?" (Global Pulse 20080626 on LinkTV), relayed by the CMD (20080706)

Iraq - 5 years of success for fundamentalists

"Mission Accomplished" : five years later, Iraq is dead. Around one million Iraqis are dead. Around four million Iraqis have been displaced by the war. Collateral damage : moderates from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Palestine, Israel, Lebanon, USA, and the rest of the World are, more or less literally, either already dead or on their way.

Five years later and as expected and announced in these virtual pages*, fundamentalism is blooming because from the start this war was meant by fundamentalists in favor of fundamentalisms (of all shapes and sizes - Islamists, Christian, Jewish... you name it).

The war in Iraq ? Five years of total success for George W. Bush.

I'm talking about the fundamentalist, not the POTUS. His Mission is Accomplished indeed : he served a second term and further destroyed the US democracy from the inside, he boosted the influence of Christian fundamentalism across the US and made possible its revival across Europe, he put creationism and theocracy back on the national and international maps... His one last task to perform ? The most important and beautiful to his own eyes : to ignite the mother of all wars between Israel and Iran in order to provoque the return of the Christ**.

Just to remind you things can go even worse than the combination of a military defeat, a moral collapse, and a massive recession.

If you happen to be a US citizen, you have the power to stop this. Unite and lobby your representatives, and vote wisely.

And remember this : of the 3 remaining major candidates for Bush's job (as a POTUS), only one had from day one a sound vision of what's happening in Iraq and the World beyond. And still now, only Barack Obama condemns this war as a wrong answer to terror and as a gift to the ennemies of democracy.


* and beyond, thanks to wonderful readers from America, France, Iran, Israel, Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and so many other wonderful places where such blogules as the "Universal Declaration of Independence from Fundamentalism" (20070809) have been quite popular.
** see "Iran : who wants war and why" (20070925)

3:10 to Yuma... and New York

Talking about Red Phone moments... let's consider the efficiency of Barack Obama's answering machine.

The Clinton campaign has been broadcasting an ad across the Lone Star state featuring a phone ringing at 3 in the morning ; a "Terminator I" scene with kids sleeping and a nuclear threat above their heads : "your vote will decide who answers the call". Brrrrr...

Here's Obama's answer : "In fact, we have had a red phone moment: It was the decision to invade Iraq. Senator Clinton gave the wrong answer. George Bush gave the wrong answer. John McCain gave the wrong answer".

1, 2, 3. That's called a strike out, Hillary. And without the help of Roger Clemens. Nor the help of Roger's helps. Nevermind the fact that that guy was born in Ohio and raised in Texas.

Barack is famous for his powerful tone but Hussein does have jug ears too, mind you. You want to be careful about what you say and the critics you use, which may be used against you.

John McCain recently experienced a similar knock-out answer. Obama considered the possibility to return to Iraq if al Qaeda were to come back there some time after the US withdrawal, and Senator McCain replied "I have some news: Al Qaeda is in Iraq (...), it’s called Al Qaeda in Iraq". To which Barack punched this final "I’ve got some news for John McCain, that is there was no such thing as Al Qaeda in Iraq until George Bush and John McCain decided to invade".

Ouch.

Reminds me of a certain Cassius Clay. Beyond the loud mouth and the elegant dance on the ring, this young fella has quite a powerful fist.

And unlike Muhammad Ali, this guy won't even have to convert to Islam nor to change names in order to find peace.

Iran : who wants war and why

Some influent people want Iran at war with Israel at any cost, whatever the motive, ideally before the end of this year but anyway before the end of George W. Bush's mandate.

Don't look for rational explanations for this war.

Just like with Iraq, this war has nothing to do with WMDs, nor with removing a despot and spreading democracy. And just like with Iraq, this even isn't about oil.

No wonder we see exactly the same pattern : Cheney preparing false flag scenarios, Weapons of Mass Disinformation brainwashing US minds to turn Iran into the Evil Kingdom, hawks forging "proofs" including illegal smuggling of nuclear designs while the intelligence community tells the opposite, the local leader dubbed "the new Hitler", a clear and immediate danger of nuclear attack denied by the international agency in charge of the inspections... and of course the same warnings by experts : be careful, such a war would be a terrible mistake for the Iranian people, for the future of democracy in the region, for the international fight on terror, and to the contrary a perfect boost for the enemies of democracy.

Because this war is about religion. Or kind of. And the people most eager to ignite it are fundamentalists : Islamist fundamentalists who believe in the return of the Mahdi, Christian fundamentalists who believe in the second coming of the Christ. According to their crazy prophecies, Israel must face Iran in a final war that will lead to these joyful events and the rule of God himself*. Never mind the fact that the bulk of the World's population gets erased from the map in the process.

So here we are, John and Jane Smith, sitting on a sofa and watching madhatters pretending to take care of the countries that put them in charge : Ahmadinejad praying the same prayer as George W. Bush, both wanting the same bloodbath for similar reasons.

Here are John and Jane Smith, complaining about the way Bush deals with Iraq and ready to follow him in another crusade, even crazier and more suicidal.

Here are John and Jane Smith, horrified by a President having an affair with an intern but not at all alarmed by a President ready to cause a human tragedy thousands of times more catastrophic than the war in Iraq.

Here are John and Jane Smith, with the only weapon able to stop this mess : impeachment.

Will John and Jane Smith be found guilty for not doing anything ?

* see : "Jesus vs Mahdi prophecy"

General Petraeus in "surge" of credibility

As Lobby Dick Cheney taught us a while ago, insurgents are in their "last throes" in Iraq. And the US army is winning the war on terror. And Osama bin Laden is about to be "smoked out".

And "the surge" in US troops to Iraq has been a complete success, adds General Petraeus.

What is the outcome of the said "surge", Sarge ?

Baghdad looks a little bit quieter these days, because fewer US troops are killed there these days, not fewer Iraqi civilians.

Baghdad looks a little bit quieter these days, because it is being "pacified". Not by your troops but by the civil and sectarian war you ignited with this invasion. The traditional Sunni-Shi'ite mix belongs to the past, an ugly separation wall to the present, and the partition of Iraq to the future.

Baghdad looks a little bit quieter these days, because the surge helped insurgents to export chaos and terror in parts of the country that had been relatively spared until now. Parts that would have proved useful come the time of reconstruction.

Bush wanted this surge to accelerate the collapse of Iraq and the final destruction of any hope of reconciliation between the parties. And now he is asking for more time to fulfill this agenda.

Bush should be the one to answer the questions, not Petraeus.

Bush should be the one accused of betrayal, not Petraeus*.


* see MoveOn's ad "General Petraeus or General Betray Us ?"

Forging another case for Iran

Model democracy Amerika abducted some more citizens illegally on a foreign soil. Iranians in Irak. Just the kind of peace initiatives that region needs...

Bush-Cheney already forged a case for the invasion of Irak, and they're at it again. If America doesn't wake up, something really nasty is bound to happen. Time to impeach both of those enemies of peace and democracy.

Elsewhere : the Kremlin said Anna Politkovskaya was killed by Chechen terrorists, and Russian Prosecutor - General Yury Chaika said Anna Politkovskaya could only be killed by foreign-based ennemies of the Kremlin. Does it mean that the Kremlin considers Chechnya a foreign country ? Or more simply that in this FSB dreamland, the Putin clique doesn't care anymore about the credibility of their lies ?

Hope ? Some echoes of my "Universal Declaration of Independence from Fundamentalism" in Nablus...

Universal Declaration of Independence From Fundamentalism

1 - What is fundamentalism ?

At the beginning, the word used to designate a deviant Protestant movement but now, it can be applied to trends found in all major religions.

Fundamentalism means the total submission of a people to a strict set of principles.

Fundamentalism is not about religion (the pretext behind the means), but about politics (the actual aim of the game) ; ultimately, fundamentalism is about the total control of society in a caricature of theocracy.

Fundamentalists are humans who build the set of strict rules and define what is true and what isn't, generally developing a simplistic doctrine based on their own biased interpretation of ancient religious scriptures that can be interpreted in as many ways as there are human beings. Since fundamentalists consider their doctrine as absolute, perfect, good and unfailable, anything growing out of it is necessarily wrong, corrupt and evil, and thus has to be eradicated in order to purify the world. Beyond what people do or say, fundamentalists intend to control and judge what people think.

Fundamentalism is totalitarian because all human activities should abid to the rules, starting with the pilars of democracy : political debate, science, education, justice, information... any field where intelligence can bloom and expose the limits of a basic propaganda.

The same logic can be found in the Discovery Institute’s Wedge strategy : the ultimate goal of Intelligent Design is to undermine science and education, key entry points for fundamentalists. ID has nothing to do with science but everything to do with politics, starting with the artificial legitimation of religion at the root of the social system, and ultimately the restoration of theocracy.

The worst enemy of a fundamentalist is a person from the same religion who preaches tolerance, reason, and respect of the differences between individuals and cultures. Charismatic pro-peace leaders who happen to be people of faith, sometimes even former respected warriors : Yitzhak Rabin, Ahmad Shah Massoud…

The most embarrassing enemy of a fundamentalist is a "competing" fundamentalist from the same religion. The sales pitches are basically similar, but it brings the notion that there is not only one good answer to the question. At least one is necessarily wrong, it is more difficult to claim the true version. The best way is to either destroy this enemy or find a way to merge both franchises into a more powerful band.

The best ally of a fundamentalist is a fundamentalist from a "competing" religion. Each one becomes the "evil" of the other one, feeding him with new arguments. The more radical the opponent, the better : fear makes propaganda sound more credible and moderates less audible.


2 - Why did fundamentalisms gain momentum recently ?

Fundamentalist movements have always existed in most religions, but were traditionally limited to small circles around isolated radical doomsayers. They tend to blossom in periods of materialist decadence and crises because they leverage on basic fears : fear for one's own life and future, fear for the loss of identity and values of a whole society... In times of uncertainties, fundamentalists offer simple answers, clear visions of a brighter afterlife… and order. With a full set of golden rules.
Like fascism, fundamentalism feeds from the failures of democracy, from the intolerable gaps between peoples kept in poverty and underdevelopment on one hand, and rich corrupt regimes on the other. "Ideally", people must be fed up with their rulers, and not believe anymore in the rules supposed to hold the society altogether. An ailing dictatorship will provide a perfect background, but the fundamentalists' best moments come when self-proclaimed model democracies give the worst examples to the world. Most islamist fundamentalisms find their roots in the abuses of colonization, the failures of decolonization (not to mention the disastrous management of the creation of Israel or India / Pakistan), and many were infuriated by the aberrations of the Cold War. They usually reach power when Western democracies start sending the wrong signals at the wrong moment.

For fundamentalists from all religions, George W. Bush turned out to be the best person at the best place at the best moment.

His strategy should look like a total failure to whoever considers the Iraq quagmire, the Palestinian fiasco, or the worldwide surge in terror. But to the contrary, Bush's strategy proved a complete success.

Because George W. Bush didn't act as a President of The United States of America in the interest of his country.
And George W. Bush didn't even act as a Republican in the interest of his party.
George W. Bush acted as a fundamentalist in the interest of fundamentalism.

Right after 9/11, the whole world was behind him and the USA, but this man refused to lead the world towards peace and mutual respect. Instead, he decided to send the worst signals to the worst people, deliberately triggering a sick race between fundamentalisms. Bush's first speech after 9/11 was meant to clarify the framework for his fellow fundamentalists thanks to one single word : "crusade". In other words : let's go back to the good old times when people fought for religion, we fundamentalists are ruling the show, and I will play on the very ground Bin Laden hoped I would.

Because "the Sheik" new perfectly what kind of leader he was facing : a (stub)born again Christian fan of fundamentalist Billy Graham, a man who set from the start his mandate in a theocratic frame by saying some Higher Being was in charge and driving his decisions. Dubya not only made Bin Laden the official "evil" figure of his crusade, but he happily obliged by becoming the official "evil" figure for Islamists. Everything he did was meant to fuel hatred, sideline the moderates (ie those coward weasels in the West, promoters of the Israeli-Palestinian peace agenda in the Middle East...), and sabotage all attempts of peace or reconciliation. Where multilateralism and pragmatism was the answer, he avoided all forms of debates and sticked to his radical black vs white, us vs them, good vs evil rhetoric.

During the 2004 US presidential campaign, I raised a few eyebrows a couple of years ago by dubbing Bush a fascist, pointing out the disturbingly accurate echoes of Benito Mussolini’s definition of fascism in BC00’s Amerika. The propaganda reacted with a karlrovishy counterattack on the weak point : all of a sudden, Bush was facing “Islamofascists”. The actual fascists were at the other end of the spectrum… but that other end is a mirror, and fundamentalism fueling fundamentalism, propaganda feeding counter-propaganda, extremists ideas became mainstream. Beyond fundamentalism, other forms of radicalism could gain momentum across the world. In Far-East Asia, ultra-nationalists took over Japan, and state revisionism became common in the Archipelago as well as in China.

Bush did not wage a war on terror but in favor of it : instead of focusing on terrorist networks and reducing their ground (ie by fighting injustice and poverty, promoting peace in the region and especially between Israel and Palestine), he deliberately infuriated the muslim world and helped fundamentalists recruit new flocks of followers. And he targeted a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 but everything to do with peace in the region. A new playground for international terrorism, the end of Iraq as a united country, civil war here, the rise of a new form of fundamentalism in Iran when reformers were "threatening" the Khomeini generation, the failure of Fatah and the victory of Hamas... all this was not collateral damage but the very aim of his sick game.

The war in Iraq has been misunderstood as a war for oil led by neocons. The fact is theocons used neocons because they could sell the war to SIGs and thus to Congress. The hidden agenda was not about securing energy sources but about spreading fundamentalism, and if hardcore neocons truly believed in the democracy spreading agenda, theocons knew perfectly the outcome of this madness.

Paleocons followed because money flew from the budget surplus to the hands of greedy SIGs, with significant crumbs ending up on their own laps. Paleocons followed because the official propaganda combined with Karl Rove’s witchcraft made sure 2004 elections would be a landslide victory for Bush. Paleocons were fooled because they thought it would be a victory for the GOP.

I warned Republican voters before November 2004 : if Bush wins, the Republican party loses its soul and is bound to implode. Letting this man invade Iraq was criminal negligence, (re)electing him a strict liability crime by the American people against American values.

The 2004 elections celebrated the rise of Christian fundamentalism across the US at a level never reached before. If not mainstream at this stage, it gained significant social and political power in areas where demographic tides are changing the very shape of the country. Whatever the outcome of the 2008 elections, the USA are shifting towards more internal and self-centered dynamics, and theocons are more likely to bloom in such an environment.

Bush has been isolating the US from external influences, refusing any kind of accountability for his acts but for the dialogs he pretends to hold permanently with The Lord Almighty. At home, he shunted the Congress and his not so fellow Republicans. Away, he switched off the Kyoto protocol, unplugged the Geneva Convention (with the benediction of his Chief Torture Officer Alberto Gonzales), and tried to destroy the UN from the inside (with the help of Bolton the UN bomber). He even bypassed the WTO with series of bilateral FTAs or rather unilateral PTAs (Protectionist Trade Agreements).

A dedicated fundamentalist, Bush has been methodically destroying America from the inside, corrupting justice, science and education with a caricature of religion and paving the way for theocracy. This man is a total fake : a New England brat pretending to be a Texas hunk, a coward pretending to be a soldier, an amoral fundamentalist pretending to be a compassionate saint, a theocrat pretending to spread democracy, a weak wannabe who should never have been the most powerful man on Earth.

If you think the worst happened in Iraq, consider this : this man is planning an even craziest sequel in Iran.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wrote to George W. Bush he shared the same approach of religion. The fact is both are fanatics who expect important visits in a near future ; respectively the return of the Mahdi and the second coming of the Christ. And along with by a bunch of fundamentalists from all confessions (Christian, Muslim and Jewish), they share a more than weird doomsday scenario: the final clash between Iran and Israel will lead to those much awaited visits.

This Commander in Thief only has a few months before giving up power. He is working on peace all right, but rather of the eternal kind.

Compared to such madhatters, Islamist fundamentalists who kicked the Shah out of Iran back in 1979 look like moderates. No wonder Bush does his best to help Ahmadinejad stay in power.



3 - What can be done to undermine fundamentalism ?

Like fascism, fundamentalism needs a permanent state of fear, war and propaganda to survive, and is defeated by democracy at its best : exemplary, fair, just and respectful.

America cannot be respected if it doesn’t respect its own values ; those of a model democracy.

The war on terror should be waged at its roots : helping Afghanistan out of despair and out of the reach of Talibans, converging towards a fair resolution of the Israel / Palestine crisis, focusing on poverty and injustice across the World.

The only way out of Iraq is to fire those who deliberately misfired. Bush and Cheney should be prevented from spreading more chaos and impeached… Easier said than done, but removing Gonzales would be a significant first step forward.

Moderates should speak up across the political spectrum : Dems or Reps, we share certain values and think our leaders betrayed them. We may not overpower them as quickly as we’d like to, but we want to tell the world that we want America back on track, we are not going to let that happen again, and we will do our best to get rid of fundamentalists among us.

Humility will make America stronger : it takes courage to give up arrogance. Besides, there is no other way to get out of what is basically a moral collapse (not to mention to claim any kind of leadership back in the future).

The aim is not to please atheists and condemn believers but to expose fundamentalists, especially among those who are supposed to defend justice, education or democracy. You don’t want to ignite a witch hunt the McCarthy way (are you or have you ever been a fundamentalist ?), but rather to promote transparency over the hypocrisy and confusion fundamentalists are feeding upon.

I’m asking for a much needed reverse burden of proof : nowadays, lawmakers are terrorized by fundamentalists and it should be the other way round. Instead of harassing the bulk of the candidates with questions regarding their private life, we should be forcing fundamentalists to come out in the open, give democracy the lead over the theocratic agenda. Lawmakers shouldn’t be compelled to demonstrate confusingly why they are good believers, they just should clearly tell that they don’t support fundamentalism and that, whatever they believe in, religion should not mix with politics in this country. Ultimately, if some people want religion to rule politics, let them found their own party like they do in other countries.

Once again, I’m not promoting atheism, but defending democracy. And in the US, a cultural change is needed. The fact is America has always allowed too much confusion between the religious and political spheres ; been too tolerant with sects and fanatics that are not compatible with democracy (partly because it was built by people who sometimes fled Europe for religious reasons - ie the Mayflower pilgrims). For a European such as me, it can be upsetting to hear the leader of a supposedly model democracy finish his acceptance speech with “so help me God”. And it is upsetting to see secular democracies under the pervasive threat of fundamentalists in the EU as well (lobbying for the mention of the Christian heritage in the Constitution, for the promotion of creationism and ID… with the benediction of a rather ambiguous Pope ; Benedict XVI).

Beyond the US and EU political microcosms, all moderates should voice their hope for a sounder and more transparent system. This new “we the people” should reach across the world, wherever moderates are threatened by fundamentalists, and not only in the usual hot spots : the race for juicy market shares is raging all over Asia.

Why not A Universal Declaration of Independence from fundamentalism, that perennial enemy of peace, freedom and democracy ?

blogules 2007

---

ADDENDUM 20090117

"What is required is a new declaration of independence, not just in our nation, but in our own lives -- from ideology and small thinking, prejudice and bigotry" - Barack Hussein Obama (Baltimore, January 17, 2009).

Change has come to America.

---

digg this