Machiavelli & Marx Debate V

Machiavelli and Marx Debate – V

                         Machiavelli’s Second Rebuttal                                     

                             Chronicled by Theosophus 

 

It is easily recognized by those who consider present and ancient affairs that the same desires and passions exist in all cities and people, and that they always existed. So that for whoever with diligence examines past events, it is an easy thing to foresee the future in any Republic, and to apply those remedies which had been used by the ancients, or, not finding any of those used, to think of new ones from the similarity of events.

Niccolo Machiavelli

Philadelphia: Friday,  May 20th, 2011.

More than two years have passed since Marx gave his first rebuttal.  As with the 15-month break following Machiavelli’s initial refutation, the length of debate presentations was the reason given for the interruption and everyone expected it to be brief.  However, finding a time opportune for both men, and for the moderator, Judge Andrew Napolitano, and reserving Temple University’s popular Walk Auditorium, extended the delay.

Watching the polemicists enter the hall and take seats on the stage, it was obvious the self-confident, patronizing Machiavelli of opening statements was back. The irritability and tenseness displayed during his first rebuttal was gone. Apparently he spent a lot of time reviewing Marx’s arguments during the interim and lost respect for them in the process. Walking briskly to the lectern, Machiavelli flashed his opponent a dismissive smile, turned to the audience and began:

Machiavelli:  “Good evening.”

“I want to express my gratitude to the American Philosophical Society again for sponsoring the debates, and, of course, my thanks to all of you for attending.”

“I intend to greatly accelerate the pace of the debate this evening.  To use an old film makers’ phrase, I’ll ‘cut to the chase’.”

“Before I start, however, let me emphasize that my goal is to disclose the objective truth about current socio-economic-political events! By which I mean ‘a truth that exists whether anyone sees it or not’.”

“Some of you may agree with Dr. Marx’s relativist proposition that ideas are true or false depending upon whether they describe one’s personal experience. If so, you, too, will find you’re unable to give an empirical refutation of my analysis.”

“Why?”

“Because it describes the logic of universal human experience, and whether you’re an absolutist or a relativist, a leftist, a rightist or a liberal, it is your truth as well as my own!”    

“Now to begin:”

“You will recall Marx and I agreed that doing scientific investigation means starting with a material description of a situation or event and reasoning your way to empirically verifiable conclusions.”

“We agreed that explicating a body of intangible aspirations is idealism, not science, however appealing the aspirations may be, however clever the explication.”

“Unfortunately for Herr Marx, the tacit assumption about human nature with which he undertakes his inquiry and, as a consequence, his conclusions regarding where our species is headed, could not be more idealistic.”

“The inhabitants of Marx’s illusory world are all self-directed creatures akin to wolverines and eagles.  Reasoning from that materially indefensible supposition, he decided a post-capitalist humanity is preparing to be born whose atheistic members will each judge for themself what is true and what is false, and accordingly, how to act.”

“Being a scientist, I do my own reasoning about the real world, and in the real world the appropriate analogy for our species isn’t eagles and wolverines.  It’s horses, cows and wildebeast and, let’s be completely honest, sheep!”

“Real world humans are herd animals, and herd animals look to alpha personalities for  direction, they do not set courses for themselves.”

“It is our species nature to congregate in communities of followers whose thinking and behavior is decided by leaders. That describes how our ancestors lived in nomadic clans. It’s the way their successors have cohabited under feudalism; their consciousness and practice determined by potentates, kings, queens, emperors and ayatollahs.  Finally, it’s how every capitalist state is presently organized, with senators, judges, prime ministers and presidents determining what people think and do concerning issues of  consequence for themselves and the community.

“It’s a nation’s leaders who dictate which other states are enemies, which are allies, and they invariably decide the vital questions of war and peace.”

“The armies and navies of every state are hierarchically structured, with individuals of lower rank reflexively following the leadership of those above.”

“It’s leaders who decide the color and pattern of every nation’s flag, when it must be raised and lowered, where it can or should be displayed.  Leaders choose the country’s anthem, and determine when it will be sung. The follower majority then carry out the flag waving/displaying and the anthem singing.”

“Nor is this division of our species into leaders and followers restricted to matters of political import. It’s there respecting almost everything we humans think and do.”

“Is it not obvious that the youths of every nation are obsessed with liking the right music, having the right hair cut, the right jeans and the right shoes?  Los Angeles gang leaders require gang members to have the right tattoos, give the right greetings, wear the right colors, and the right caps, worn in just the right way.”

“Members of the upper class pay large sums of money to purchase the right designer watches, dresses, handbags, Italian suits and shoes.”

“Every religion, Catholic, Baptist, Jewish, Buddhist, Sunni and Shiia Muslim, demands and receives orthodoxy from its members regarding core ideas, as well as the iconic practices those core ideas dictate; and in each instance, the right core ideas and practices are determined by leaders past or present.”

“This species’ separation into leaders and followers is even manifest in the way people drive their cars. The majority of drivers tailgate; i.e., have follower personalities.  Leaders don’t tailgate for the simple reason they’re unwilling to relinquish control over their lives to someone they’re driving behind.”

“What is the material reason for our herd behavior?  It’s the same one identified by the ethologists, anthropologists and psychologists who study other herd creatures: Survival of the Species!

“Millions of years of hominid evolution–for we Homo sapiens, an additional two hundred thousand–have cached the species-protective herd behavior in our genes, where it neither can nor will be extirpated by Dr. Marx’s fantasized social reorganization.”

“In sum, respecting all the significant features of human existence, from politics, to religion, to music and art, to diet, medicine, sports and law, the majority of people possess neither the creative intelligence, the courage, nor the character, to make decisions most beneficial for themselves, or, more critically, for the species.”

“Marx abandoned reality and entered James Cameron’s Pandoran universe when he decided it’s going to be completely different in the future.”

“Imagine the chaotic mediocrity that would result if everyone elected to choose their own gods; diagnose their own ailments and write their own prescriptions; compose their own music and sing their own songs; and, act upon their personal opinion respecting how other people should be treated; in effect, make their own laws.”

“Yet that’s the post-capitalist world Marx envisions; a world in which he proposes you may be a carpenter in the morning, a physician in the afternoon, a song writer or a poet at night.”

“Dr. Marx would represent reality more accurately if he compared our species to ants.  Like ants we live in colonies built by workers, display strong tribal bonds, and, engage in wars fought by obedient soldiers.”

“In his opening statement Marx accused me of being preoccupied with recent history.  So let me accomodate him with a brief look at human phylogeny.”

“Describing his explanation for socio-economic-political change as scientific, Marx likened it to Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, ignoring Darwin’s proposition that every species not only evolves by way of, but benefits from, Survival of the Fittest! 

“As the late anthropologist Marvin Harris observed, The Origin of the Species ‘ends with an up-beat that reverberated throughout the remainder of the century: Thus from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object of which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows.”  

“Harris recognized it might be argued that the ‘idea of perfection through struggle was neither embedded in nor directed toward a theory of sociocultural evolution.’ However, he noted, in Darwin’s ‘first unpublished sketch of the theory of natural selection written in 1842, he was already convinced this theory included all mammals without exception!’”

“Marx argued at considerable length that capitalist nations dominate and exploit pre-industrial populations. To which a Darwinian realist (i.e., a scientific materialist), will respond: So what?”

“Is it not indisputable that our species has evolved only because some individuals, communities, nations, were more fit–in today’s vernacular, more progressive–than the ones they replaced?”

“For over 350,000 years Neanderthals were the dominant hominids in Eurasia.  Then, 50,000 years ago, Homo sapiens began moving in from Africa.  Better able to adapt to Eurasia’s climatic variations, and more sophisticated in their survival techniques, within 20,000 years our Homo sapiens ancestors had conquered the Eurasian continent(s) and Neanderthals were extinct.”

“To be sure, the Homo sapiens’ conquest of Eurasia was catastrophic for Neanderthals. But would anyone seriously propose the world would be better off today if Neanderthals had prevailed?”

“Dr. Marx and I will agree that Europe’s colonization of the New World involved the slaughter and subjugation of native inhabitants.  Millions of them died in the process, while others were forced to work as slaves in Latin American fields and mines.  The near-genocidal destruction of North America’s native communities which accompanied the seizure and occupation of their lands was bloody and brutal, and uncounted thousands of indians who had the temerity to resist were killed in what settlers conveniently and comfortingly labelled ‘wars’.”

“By any standard which is faintly humane, the practices described were deeply evil.  But having acknowledged that evil, is any member of this audience prepared to argue that the remarkable advancements in industry, art, medicine and science which ensued—advancements which have benefitted not only Americans but the world—would have occurred even if the brutal killing and expropriation of natives had not been carried out, if the settlers had returned to Europe and warring indian tribes continued to occupy this land?  Alternatively, would any of you contend our species would be better off—more evolved—if those advancements had not taken place?”

“The empiricists among you will object that my questions are themselves unscientific, and you’re right! To ask ‘What if Homo sapiens hadn’t replaced Neanderthals in Eurasia?’ and ‘What if European settlers hadn’t carried out a cruel and evil ethnic cleansing of the Americas?‘ is like asking ‘What if fish didn’t swim, birds didn’t fly, and lions didn’t feed on gazelles?’”

“It is the species nature of fish to swim, birds to fly, and lions to feed on gazelles. And it is Homo sapiens’ species nature to establish communities which they can some-times protect only through an evil ethnic cleansing, extermination or subjugation of another people.”

“The natives of this continent who settlers killed and cleansed would have done the same if their roles were reversed; a point they repeatedly demonstrated by their tribal battles.”

“Furthermore, however painful losers in the struggle may find it, the survival of the fittest process by which nature operates benefits not only the winners, but our species as a whole, i.e., humankind.”

“Dr. Marx would savor evolution’s brilliance while forswearing its brutality, denying the manifest reality they are integral to one another.”

“To quote from my instructive book, The Prince: ‘Theseus could not demonstrate his virtue if he did not find the Athenians dispersed.’ ‘It was necessary for Moses to find the people of Israel oppressed slaves in Egypt, so that to come out of servitude, they might dispose themselves to follow him.’” 

And the liberating vision this nation’s founders expressed in The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution and The Bill of Rights, would never have come into existence were it not for England’s persecution.”

“Revealing his objective understanding of the world, in Imperialism and the Anti-Imperialist Mind sociologist Lewis Feuer writes:‘When civilization has moved forward in the past, it has invariably been propelled by a strong imperialist movement.‘ Feuer cites the imperialist empires of Rome, Greece, France and Germany, the building of the British Empire, and the ‘progressive imperialism’ of the United States today; which, he recommends, should be carried out shorn of guilt.”

“Which brings us back to the vital question of leadership, and the indispensability of a great leader’s capacity for evil and deception.”

“As I said in my opening statement: ‘the foremost objective of a nation’s leader must be the preservation of the state upon which the lives and the well-being of his people depend.’”

“But, to reference The Prince again: ‘To maintain the state, it is often necessary for a leader to operate against faith, against charity, against humaneness, against religion.  Therefore it is necessary that he have a spirit disposed to turn as the winds and the variations of fortune command him, not to depart from good when he can, but to know how to enter evil when he needs to.’”

“Committed to the defense of his state and his people, possessing the superior courage, discipline and goodness required to embrace evil when it becomes imperative, a great leader recognizes that few of his followers have his stern fiber. He understands most men, to use Colonel Nathan Jessup’s admonishment of Lt. Kaffee in the film A Few Good Men,‘can’t handle the truth!’”

“Psychiatrists and psychologists call this inability to face unpleasant truths ‘being in denial.’ Surely, all of history testifies that the majority of people’s are unable to confront frightful, derisive or disparaging truths; that they turn to denial as reflexively as plants turn toward the sun; that the lies, myths and religions used to disown and justify their evil are as critical for them as food and water; and are, therefore, vital for the maintenance of the state and the consequent progress of our species.”

“In presenting a forthright analysis of today’s socio-economic-political universe and the U.S.’ place within it I’m assuming most of you are among the exceptions; that you have ‘type-A’ personalities and do not require the deceit and obfuscation needed to keep the herd in tow; that you have the courage and the intelligence to take an Objectivist look at the world.”

“Now to the interrelated political issues Americans are presently wrangling, and worrying, and in beneficent denial, about:”

“For more than two decades they have been engaged in an often heated debate over gun ownership and the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which declares: ‘A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.’”

“Advocates for a literal interpretation of the Second Amendment argue that besides being required for hunting, guns are needed to defend one’s home against criminals. A minority use the same argument to justify allowing people to conceal guns in their cars or clothing. ‘If guns are banned,’ the textualists exhort, ‘only criminals will have guns!’”

“Conversely, those who champion limiting or banning the possession of guns insist when the Second Amendment is given a strict interpretation it doesn’t accord with 21st century needs and conditions. If applied, criminals would readily obtain guns, they warn, and inquisitive children would find weapons hidden by their parents, rendering homes and streets less, not more, secure.  Automatic, semi-automatic and 50-caliber rifles didn’t exist when the Second Amendment was written, the gun control proponents observe, and such weapons are unsuitable for hunting or providing protection against home invasion and street crime. As for permitting concealed guns to be carried, they reason criminals and testosterone-driven hotheads would be the first to do so, again, making everyone less safe.”

“Unfortunately, while the arguments popularized by both sides are often clever and occasionally entertaining, they rarely have anything to do with the justification for the Second Amendment given by those who wrote it, thus precluding serious inquiry into whether that justification has relevance today!”  

“On their parts, constitutional attorneys and historians are of one opinion concerning why the nation’s founders wrote the Second Amendment, and, what it was they sought to accomplish.”

“During the French and Indian War between England and France (1754-63), most colonists enthusiastically sided with Britain, since France was claiming territory the colonists‘ growing population needed to acquire.”

“Only a decade later, however, England became the enemy when it determined to extract the exorbitant cost of the war from the colonies by taxing sugar and molasses, or stamps, or, what was considered the final affront, tea.”

“As the colonists’ resistance moved toward violence, England tried enacting laws to disarm them, and quartered troops in their homes.”

“Stephen P. Halbrook, a prominent constitutional attorney who has won three cases before the Supreme Court, records: ‘William Knox, Under Secretary of State in the British Colonial Office, circulated a proposal entitled “What is Fit to be Done With America? advocat/ing/ the creation of a ruling aristocracy loyal to the Crown, establishment of the Church of England throughout the colonies and an unlimited power to tax. To keep them servile, Knox offered the panacea of disarming all of the people and relying solely on a standing army’.”

“Knox was very specific, advising:‘The Militia Laws should be repealed and none suffered to be re-enacted & the Arms of all the People should be taken away, & every piece of Ordnance removed into the King’s Stores, nor should any Foundry or manufacture of Arms, Gunpowder, or Warlike Stores, be ever suffered in America, nor should any Gunpowder, Lead, Arms or Ordnance be imported into it without License; they will have but little need of such things for the future, as the King’s Troops, Ships & Forts will be sufficient to protect them from danger.’”

“The colonists’ leaders were soon convinced that the main threat to a people’s freedom comes from the armed forces of a government which has turned despotic, and, to guard against this threat the citizenry must always remain armed.”

When the Bill of Rights was being discussed, Elbridge Gerry (fifth vice-president of the United States) described the Second Amendment as ‘intended to secure the people against the maladministration of the government.’”

George Mason, considered the father of The Bill of Rights, inquired: ‘Who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people!’, he answered his own rhetorical question. Tench Coxe, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under George Washington, similarly contended: ‘The militia are the people at large.’”

“Richard Henry Lee, another framer of the Second Amendment wrote: ‘to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.’ ‘A militia are in fact the people themselves.’”

“In an article titledThe History of the Second Amendment, Professor David Vandercoy of Valparaiso University School of Law, recounts that despite discord over how much power to grant the central government, the Federalists and Anti-Federalists were unanimous in the belief that ‘governmental tyranny was the primary evil people had to guard against,’ and they intended the Second Amendment of the Constitution to ward off that ‘primary evil.’” 

“Vandercoy relates that when anti-Federalists voiced concern about the great power a central government with a standing army would have at its disposal, in a Federalist Pamphlet, Noah Webster responded: ‘Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every Kingdom of Europe.  The Supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.’”

“Finally, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton made the argument. According to Madison, any threat coming from the government’s standing army: ‘would be opposed by a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from amongst themselves, fighting for their common liberties’. While Hamilton reasoned: ‘If representatives of the people, elected under the proposed Constitution, betray their constituents, the people retain the right to defend their political rights and possess the means to do so.’” 

Halbrook summed the issue in a sentence: ‘the experiences of the American Revolution proved the right to keep and bear arms serves as the ultimate check that the founders hoped would dissuade persons at the helm of state from seeking to establish tyranny.”

“As for colonists needing guns to protect themselves from criminality, at the time the Bill of Rights was written, crimes which might call for defending one’s home with a weapon were rare. Big cities were mere townships by today’s standard: Philadelphia had about 30,000 inhabitants, Boston even fewer.”

“Most colonists lived on remote homesteads and had little money.  The economic activity between them mainly consisted of bartering corn, wheat, nails, animal pelts, cow hides and livestock; and theft usually involved stealing farm animals or implements, a pig perhaps, or a plow.”

“Historian William Nelson found that from 1776 to 1781 there were only 23 prosecutions for theft in the seven most populous Massachusetts counties combined, while between 1779 and 1786 there were 406 prosecutions for sexual offenses, most for fornication and adultery.  Blasphemy and not attending church on Sunday were also common crimes.”

“If the Second Amendment was obviously conceived and justified as a defense against government oppression; if protecting homes and individuals from criminals was considered an inconsequential issue and seldom mentioned; why, then, do both sides in the debate over gun possession focus exclusively on crime?”

“Has crime been increasing?”

“No, to the contrary, over the past two decades, the crime rate has fallen precipitously in the U.S., where the arms control quarrel has been most vociferous.”

“According to FBI statistics, there were 758.1 violent crimes per 100,000 people in the U.S. in 1991.  By 1999 the figure had dropped to 523, and in 2008 it was down to 454.”

“The homicide rate fell accordingly, from 9.8 homicides per 100,000 people in 1991, to 5.7 in 1999 and 5.4 in 2008.”

“On the other hand, despite the passage of two highly restrictive gun laws, crime in Britain has increased dramatically.”

“In 1977 England eliminated ‘defense of property’ as an acceptable reason for possessing a handgun. In 1988, following the shotgun massacre of 16 people and wounding of 15 others in Hungerford the year before, it passed a Fire Arms Act restricting the ownership of shotguns to individuals who could show a ‘compelling need’, and the guns would have to be registered.”

“In 1995 Britain started licensing/registering the possession of all firearms.  Then in 1996 a second mass killing occurred in Dunblane, Scotland, where 17 primary school children and their teacher were murdered by a former scout master.”

“Britain responded with the Firearms Act of 1997. All handguns were ordered confiscated, their ownership prohibited. Only shotguns and rifles would now be legal.  Moreover, acquiring one would involve ‘passing a 30-minute interview with a police officer’ who evaluated your ‘good nature, character, and suitability for owning a gun,’ determined whether you had a ‘valid reason‘ for having the weapon, personally verified you had the mandatory ‘lock box,‘ and were the only one who had a key.”

“As a result of these restrictive new laws, shotgun certificates went down by a third—from 971,000 in 1988 to 600,000 in 2001.”

“Yet, in the 3 years after the Firearms Act of 1997 was passed violent crime more than doubled in England and Wales: from 650 per 100,000 in 1997, to 1,400 in 2000; while during the same period it was falling in the U.S.”

“In 2002 the British Telegraph reported a new survey would ‘prove embarrassing’ to Home Secretary, David Blunkett, since it showed ‘people are more likely to be mugged, burgled, robbed or assaulted here /England/, than in America, Germany, Russia, South Africa or any other of the world’s 20 largest nations.’”  

“Using statistics provided by Britain’s Home Office and the FBI, Professor Gary Mauser of Canada’s Simon Fraser University did a comparative study which found that despite the Firearms Acts of 1988 and 1997, and the confiscation and prohibition of all handguns, England’s homicide rate ‘soared from 7.3 per hundred thousand for the year 1997-98 to 10.5 in 2000-01’, while homicide in the U.S. was dropping.”

“Mauser’s conclusion?  ‘Public disarmament is ineffective, expensive, politically divisive and undermines support for the police.’”

“In a 1999 Wall Street Journal article Halbrook recalled that during a 1994 talk show debate on banning assault weapons the host asked New Jersey Senator Bill Bradley, who supported the ban, if guns cause crime, observing that ‘in Switzerland all males are issued assault rifles for militia service and keep them at home, yet little crime exists there.‘“

“Bradley’s feeble response?  ‘The Swiss are pretty dull.’”

“‘Although there is more per capita firepower in Switzerland than any /other/ place in the world,‘ Halbrook adds, ‘it is one of the safest places to be.  To the delight of Americans who support the right to keep and bear arms, Switzerland is the proof in the pudding of the argument that guns don’t cause crime.’” 

“If banning guns can not be shown to reduce crime, might the confidence with which many U.S. politicians and their supporters advocate doing so testify that federal, state and local governments and the military no longer pose any threat to the American people?”

“To use William Knox’s justification for disarming the colonists: Will Americans ‘have little need of such things for the future’? Rather than presenting a hazard, are federal, state and local governments, the military and the police, ‘sufficient to protect them from danger’?” 

“In answering those questions, I will again concentrate on reporting the objective facts, cautioning you not to conclude I take either side on the issue; which is not the role of a scientist.”

“Challenges to the constitutionally guaranteed rights of Americans, including the gun control movement, had been growing modestly after the assassinations of President Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., and Kennedy’s brother Bobby, and the attempted assassination of President Reagan.  With the 9/11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, they exploded.”

“Absent any meaningful discussion or debate, the legislators who had taken an oath to defend the Constitution, issued a near-unanimous declaration of war against it.”

“Renowned for their discord, division and delay, forty-five days after 9/11 the House and Senate had passed the Patriot Act and President Bush had signed it into law; and with that, the Bill of Rights, the parchment Americans had considered a guarantee of their freedom from government oppression for 210 years, lay in shreds.”

In March, 2006 Congress passed, and President Bush signed, a modified reauthorization of the Patriot Act. Where the destruction of ‘constitutionally secured’ freedoms was concerned, nothing had been changed.  Having campaigned against the Patriot Act, in February 2011 President Obama signed a one-year extension of its invasive provisions.”

“The website ‘Concerned Citizens Against the Patriot Act’ has posted an account of the damage done to The Bill of Rights: 

Amendment I: ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press . . . ‘“

“The Patriot Act: ‘To assist terror investigation, the government may monitor religious and political institutions without suspecting criminal activity.’ ‘The government may prosecute librarians or keepers of any other records if they tell anyone the government subpoenaed information related to a terror investigation.’”

“Amendment IV: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” 

“The Patriot Act: ‘The government may search and seize Americans’ papers and effects without probable cause to assist in a terror investigation.’”

Amendment VI: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law; and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.”

The Patriot Act: ‘Americans may be jailed without being charged or being able to confront witnesses against them. The government may jail Americans indefinitely without a trial.’ And, ‘the government may monitor conversations between attorneys and clients in federal prisons and deny lawyers to Americans accused of crimes.’”

“From the time of its passage, lone Americans have responded to The Patriot Acts implications and applications with an indignation often bordering on rage.”

“‘The American people’s elected representatives in Congress endorsed the executive branch’s overthrow of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights,’ exhorted Paul Craig Roberts.”

“‘The Patriot Act is not what American patriots have fought and died for,‘ argued Representative Dennis Kucinich, in urging its repeal. ‘To allow our Bill of Rights to be nullified without judicial supervision invites tyranny.’” 

“‘I am not afraid of white supremacists’, wrote Pulitzer Prize winning former New York Times correspondent Chris Hedges: ‘I  am concerned about my own government. The Patriot Act did not come from white supremacists, it came from the White House and Congress.’”

“The Electronic Frontier Foundation observed: ‘The government can monitor an individual’s web surfing records, use roving wiretaps to monitor phone calls made by individuals “proximate” to the primary person being tapped, access Internet Service Provider records, and monitor the private records of people involved in legitimate protests. Government spying on suspected computer trespassers (not just terrorist suspects) requires no court order. Wiretaps are now allowed for any suspected violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, offering possibilities for Government spying on any computer user.’”

“The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) warned Section 802 of the Patriot Act expands the definition of terrorism to include not only acts of violence previously regarded as criminal, but even the non-violent activities of individuals and organizations which happen to make government representatives feel they’re being unduly pressured, proposing: ‘A person engages in domestic terrorism if they do an act “dangerous to human life” that is a violation of the criminal laws of a state or the United States, if the act appears to be intended to: (i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping.’”

“This extended meaning for terrorism, the ACLU urged, is ‘broad enough to encompass the activities of several prominent activist campaigns and organizations.  Greenpeace, Operation Rescue, Vieques Island, WTO protesters and the Environmental Liberation Front have all recently engaged in activities that could subject them to being investigated as engaging in domestic terrorism.’” 

“However, the ACLU is being timid when it conjectures the Patriot Act ‘could subject’ peaceful protesters to investigation as ‘domestic terrorists’. It is already being interpreted that way by the Justice Department, the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI and the Department of Defense.”  

“Alex Jones (InfoWars.com), observes federal law now ‘applies the Patriot Act to ANY violation of ANY federal or state law,’ making even misdemeanors a legal justification for ‘federal authorities to enter your home and search without any warrant, and, to charge you if you find out they’ve been there and make it public.’”

“John Grant relates that a Defense Department ‘Anti-Terrorism Awareness Course’ questionnaire inquires: ‘Which of the following is an example of low-level terrorism activity? A.) Attacking the Pentagon; B.) IEDs; C.) Hate crimes against racial groups; D.) Protests.‘  The Defense Department’s answer?  D.) Protests.’” 

“Roberts notes: ’American citizens have been imprisoned for giving aid to Muslim charities that the executive branch has decreed, without proof in a court of law, to be under the control of “terrorists.” Any form of opposition to the government’s wars and criminal actions can be construed as aiding terrorists and be cause for arrest and indefinite detention.’”

“‘Federal law makes it a crime to provide material support to any organization designated as a terrorist group by the Secretary of State,’ writes National Public Radio’s legal Affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg. ‘But the definition of material support includes not just providing weapons, money or bomb-making skills; it includes providing any sort of expert advice, training or personnel–including advice on how to resolve disputes peaceably or training on how to make human rights claims before the United Nations. The nonprofit Humanitarian Law Project has a long history of engaging in such activity, mediating international conflicts and promoting human rights. But it has stopped doing some of its work for fear of being prosecuted under the material support provision.’”

“‘The feds are monitoring email, personal phone conversations, and even personal letters from overseas,‘ charges Pastor Chuck Baldwin, ‘banks monitor and report financial transactions to the federal government.’”

“A September 2010 New York Times article disclosed: ‘broad new regulations are being drafted by the Obama administration /which/ would make it easier for law enforcement and national security officials to eavesdrop on Internet and e-mail communications like social networking Web sites and BlackBerries. . . . the White House plans to submit a bill next year which would require all online services that enable communications to be technically equipped to comply with a wiretap order. That would include providers of encrypted e-mail, such as BlackBerry, networking sites like Facebook and direct communication services like Skype.’”

“Paul Joseph Watson cites a Time magazine article which ‘details it is now perfectly legal in nine states for the government to attach secret satellite tracking devices to your car and monitor you wherever you go.’”

“Watson records that: Former FBI agents are helping local authorities train thousands of garbage collectors across the country as a nationwide internal spy force to report “suspicious activity” to police’”.

“And Kurt Nimmo relates: ‘the FBI has instructed Philadelphia tattoo shops to report customers who demand privacy, insist on paying with cash, engage in “suspicious behavior,” make “anti-U.S. comments,” or request tattoos that are “extremist symbols.”‘ The FBI also notified the tattoo shops to ‘be on the look-out for people who change hair color, style of dress, or shave beards between visits.’ According to the FBI’s designation, ‘suspicious people include those with missing fingers or hands, chemical burns, strange odors or bright colored stains on their clothing.’”

“The well-known civil rights lawyer Lynne Stewart was ‘disbarred and sentenced to 10 years in prison /merely/ for helping her client, convicted terrorist Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, communicate with his pro-violence followers in Egypt.’”

“A Defense Department document Jones obtained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request even treats the internet as ’part of its enemy’s ordnance’, declaring: ‘The Defense in Depth strategy should operate on the premise that the Department will “fight the net” as it would a weapons system.’’

“Watson found it’s already doing so: ‘In 2006 the United States Central Command (CENT-COM) announced a team of employees would be hired to engage “bloggers who are posting incomplete information” about the war on terror;‘ and in January 2009 ‘the U.S. Air Force announced a “counter-blog” response plan, aimed at fielding and reacting to material from bloggers who post “incomplete information” about the war on terror.’”

“The Pittsburgh Tribune reported Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell was ‘deeply embarrassed’ to find ‘Homeland Security officials had designated anti-tax protesters and other people who were exercising their First Amendment right to petition the government as a threat to the state’s infrastructure.’ “I am appalled by the information that was disseminated,” said Rendell. . . . Protesting is not a threat against infrastructure.  Protesting is a God-given American right.””

“President Obama’s liberal critics have complained that, despite his rhetoric, he’s done nothing to obstruct the country’s increasingly anti-democratic thrust.”

“Comedian and political pundit Jon Stewart remarked that while running for office Obama said he would: Prosecute the war on terror without undermining core American values; stop torture renditions to Bagram Air Base and other sites; close Guantanamo; restore Habeas Corpus, and allow terrorists to have their day in court; stop the warrantless wire tapping of Americans; provide protection for whistle blowers, and practice open government.’” 

“Having become president, Stewart lamented: ‘Obama has betrayed every one of those principles.’”

“But Stewart understated the objective situation.  As Chris Hedges points out, during his first year in office Obama actually ‘sought to exceed outrages of the previous administration in areas such as warrantless wire-tapping’ and ‘detention without trial.’”

“Attorney Deborah Weinstein cites an ACLU report which documents: ‘the Obama administration hasn’t merely continued a policy of targeting alleged terrorists, it has added a new wrinkle: American citizens, such as Anwar al-Awlaki, are being placed on the “okay-to-kill” list.’”

Moreover, when the U.S. declared Muslim cleric and American citizen Anwar al-Awlaki a ‘terrorist’ because of his incendiary sermons and said he would be assassinated without a trial, it forewarned the ACLU and the Center for Constitutional Rights that: ‘Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) rules prohibit lawyers from providing free representation to people on the terrorist list unless the government gives them permission’, and,‘violations trigger punishment of up to 20 years in jail and fines of up to one million dollars.’” 

“During the Cheney-Bush Administration the CIA maintained ‘black sites’ in Iraq Thailand, Lithuania, Morocco, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Kosovo, Poland, Syria, Jordan, Romania and Afghanistan, to which suspected terrorists were ‘extraordinary-renditioned’ for interrogation using torture.”

“On January 22nd, 2009, two days after taking office, President Obama issued an executive order closing the black sites and banning the use of torture, and in early February, Leon Panetta, chosen to head the CIA, said he would stop the ‘extraordinary renditions.’” 

“But three months later the International Red Cross disclosed a black site still existed at Afghanistan’s Bagram prison and was being run by a ‘relatively new organization’ called ‘the Defense Counterintelligence and Human Intelligence Center (DCHC); a torture program that, Andy Worthington remarked ‘could have been lifted straight from the Bush administration’s rule book.’” 

“The Open Society Institute reports Bagram prisoners are isolated in cold cells for long periods, subject to forced nudity and physically abused, and the Red Cross is not allowed access.”

“In July 2010, the Obama Administration ‘completed the handover of 9,250 detainees to Iraqi authorities’ ‘despite knowing there were hundreds of reports of alleged torture in Iraqi government facilities.’”

“Obama may have drastically reduced the number of extraordinary renditions and black sites, but the torture still occurs and, in total contradiction to both U.S. and international law, he has aggressively protected those who carry it out.”

“Civil Rights Attorney Glenn Greenwald recounts that according to the UN Convention Against Torture, which President Reagan signed: ‘Each Party State is required to prosecute torturers who are found in its territory, or, to extradite them to other countries for prosecution. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever,’ are allowed, ’whether a state of war or threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency may be invoked as a justification of torture.’ The law requires that ‘each State ensure all acts of torture are offenses under its criminal law.’”

“Twenty years later, notes Roberts, ‘U.S. Justice Department officials write memos authorizing torture, despite the ratified Convention Against Torture and the Geneva Conventions.’”

“In addition, Chris Floyd laments: the Supreme Court acquiesced to president Obama’s fervent request and, in a one-line ruling, let stand a lower court decision that declared torture an ordinary, expected consequence of military detention, while introducing a shocking new precedent for all future courts to follow: anyone who is arbitrarily declared a “suspected enemy combatant” by the president or his designated minions is no longer a “person.”  They will simply cease to exist as a legal entity. They will have no inherent rights, no human rights, no legal standing whatsoever — save whatever modicum of process the government arbitrarily deigns to grant them from time to time, with its ever-shifting tribunals and show trials.’”

“‘The Constitution is clear’, Floyd writes: ‘No person can be held without due process; no person can be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment.  And the U.S. law on torture of any kind is /likewise/ crystal clear: it is forbidden, categorically, even in time of “national emergency.” . . . And yet this is what Barack Obama — who, we are told incessantly, is a super-brilliant Constitutional lawyer — has been arguing in case after case since becoming president: Torturers are immune from prosecution; those who ordered torture are immune from prosecution. They can’t even be sued for, in the specific case now under review, subjecting uncharged, indefinitely detained captives to “beatings, sleep deprivation, forced nakedness, extreme hot and cold temperatures, death threats, interrogations at gunpoint, and threatened with un-muzzled dogs.” . . . /W/e have established as the law of the land and the policy of the United States government that whole classes of people can be declared “non-persons” and have their liberty stripped away — and their torturers and tormentors protected and coddled by authority — at a moment’s notice, with no charges, no defense, no redress, on nothing more than the suspicion that they might be an “enemy combatant,” according to the arbitrary definition of the state.’”

Giordano Bruno observes Obama has also upheld George W. Bush’s Presidential Directive 51 which, in a ‘national emergency,’ ‘dissolves all states rights and places the entire country under the purview of Northcom, and Homeland Security,’ using ‘continuity of government’ as a justification. The president can ‘declare a state of emergency for almost any reason /and/ members of Congress and even some members of Homeland Security who have requested to read the entire directive have been denied.’”  

“Obama chose Republican Harvard law professor Cass Sunstein to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.”

“Sunstein, relates Roberts, authored an article advocat/ing/ that the U.S. government create a cadre of covert agents to infiltrate anti-war groups and groups opposed to U.S. government policies in order to provoke them into actions or statements for which they can be discredited and even arrested.  Sunstein defines those who criticize the government’s increasingly lawless behavior as “extremists,” which, to the general public, sounds much like “terrorists.” In essence, Sunstein wants to generalize the F.B.I.’s practice of infiltrating dissidents and organizing them around a “terrorist plot” in order to arrest them.’”

“CounterPunch Newsletter author David Price disclosed that during the past five years: ‘without a word of public debate, let alone concern, the CIA has successfully implanted spy schools on 22 university campuses across the country, many of them labeled “Intelligence Community Centers of Academic Excellence. (ICCAE) . . . In the last four years ICCAE has gone further in bringing government intelligence organizations openly to multiple American university campuses than any previous intelligence initiative since World War II. The ICCAE-funded centers have different names at different universities. . . . at the University of Washington, ICCAE funds established the Institute for National Security Education and Research (INSER); Wayne State University’s center is called the Center for Academic Excellence in National Security Intelligence Studies; and Clark Atlantic University’s program is the Center for Academic Excellence in National Security Studies.’”

“‘With the economic downturn,’ Price writes, ‘university layoffs became a common ocurrence. Need breeds opportunism, and a scarcity of funds leads scholars to shift the academic questions they are willing to pursue and suspend ethical and political concerns about funding sources. Other scholars, unwilling to set aside ethical and political concerns, are keenly aware of institutional pressures to keep their outrage and protests in-house.’”

“This ‘spy school’ program, notes Alex Cockburn, hasspread with little public notice, media coverage, or coordinated multi-campus resistance.’”

“Finally, there are the myriad covert intelligence-gathering organizations Dana Priest and William Arkin described in their July 2010 Washington Post article ‘Top Secret America: A Hidden World Growing Beyond Control;a vast array that would earn the admiration of Orwell’s ‘Big Brother’, and distress Kafka’s Joseph K.” 

Priest and Arkin report this recondite world:

“‘. . . has become so large, so unwieldy and so secretive that no one knows how much money it costs, how many people it employs, how many programs exist within it or exactly how many agencies do the same work. . . . Some 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies work on programs related to counter-terrorism, homeland security and intelligence in about 10,000 locations across the United States.  An estimated 854,000 people, nearly 1.5 times as many people as live in Washington, D.C., hold top-secret security clearances. In Washington and the surrounding area, 33 building complexes for top-secret intelligence work are under construction or have been built since September 2001. Together they occupy the equivalent of almost three Pentagons or 22 U.S. Capitol buildings – about 17 million square feet of space. . . . Every day across the United States, 854,000 civil servants, military personnel and private contractors with top-secret security clearances are scanned into offices protected by electromagnetic locks, retinal cameras and fortified walls that eaves-dropping equipment cannot penetrate.’”

“Meanwhile, the FBI has begun doing the kinds of things these hidden intelligence agencies facilitate and Cass Sunstein recommends.”

“In a Democracy Now news report of September 28th, 2010, Amy Goodman described how: ‘Early in the morning on Friday, Sept. 24, FBI agents in Chicago and Minnesota’s Twin Cities kicked in the doors of anti-war activists, brandishing guns, spending hours rifling through their homes. The FBI took away computers, photos, notebooks, and other personal property.  Residents were issued subpoenas to appear before a grand jury in Chicago. It was just the latest in the ongoing crack-down on dissent in the U.S., targeting peace organizers as supporters of ‘foreign terrorist organizations” . . . Jess Sundin’s home was raided. She was the lead organizer of the St. Paul, Minnesota anti-war march on Labor Day 2008, that occurred as the Republican National Convention began. She described the raid:“They spent probably about four hours going through all of our personal belongings, every book, paper, our clothes, and filled several boxes and crates with our computers, our phones, my passport . . . with which they left my house.” They smashed activist Mick Kelly’s fish tank when they barged into his home.  The net cast by the FBI that morning included not only anti-war activists, but those who actively support a changed foreign policy toward Israel-Palestine and Colombia.  The warrant for Kelly sought all records of his travel, not only to those countries, but also all his domestic U.S. travel since 2000, and all his personal contacts.  No one was arrested.  No one was charged with a crime.”’”   

“Such raids, Ron Jacobs exhorted, ‘are an attempt to criminalize antiwar organizing.’”  

(“Fascism!”, someone in the audience suddenly shouted. Then silence. While it wasn’t clear who said it, people seated near the Fox News contingent were staring at Shepard Smith. Wearing a bemused expression, and acting as though he hadn’t heard the outburst, Machiavelli continued:)   

Black Agenda Report Editor Glen Ford proposed the raids have a more ominous significance, writing: ‘The Obama regime would not be going to so much trouble to systematically negate the Constitution just for the fun of it. They have a serious offensive in mind, which may have already begun. . . . A government that claims the right to kill U.S. citizens without even a whiff of due process and for reasons that are secret to the public and to the victim, has broken with every notion of the rule of law since the Magna Carta. The Obama Justice Department has spent every available hour since Inauguration Day building upon George Bush’s fascist logic in an attempt to fashion a flawless Orwellian police state doctrine in which secrecy and security are entwined like a strand of DNA. For targets not marked for oblivion, there awaits a grand jury with boundless powers to ensnare anyone, absolutely anyone.’”

“Ford is not alone in concluding fascism’s on its way.  Syndicated news-talk host Alex Jones was among the first to make that argument, on his radio show, his websites (InfoWars.com and PrisonPlanet.com), and in multiple DVDs.”

“Chris Hedges has also said it, predicting: ‘There will be no swastikas this time, but seas of red, white and blue flags and Christian crosses. There will be no stiff-armed salutes, but recitations of the Pledge of Allegiance. There will be no brown shirts but nocturnal visits from Homeland Security. The fear, rage and hatred of our dispossessed and confused working class are being channeled into currents that are undermining the last vestiges of the democratic state. These dangerous emotions, directed against a liberal class that as in ancient Athens betrayed the population, have a strong appeal.’” 

“Jones blames the U.S. descent into authoritarian despotism on international financiers who are working to build a global government they will control. Hedges faults the corporate state and its political minions. While Ford agrees with Dr. Marx that fascism’s a natural by-product of a capitalist order in deep crisis, concluding today ‘capitalism cannot be saved.”’

“Alarmed and angered by the increasing restrictions of/attacks upon personal freedom, several thousand young men, and a minority of women, have responded by founding over 200 armed militias. Many are veterans, some of the war in Iraq.”

“What the militia members share are a libertarian-conservative commitment to the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and a belief that the government, having mangled those protective documents, has begun carrying out illegal, immoral and increasingly violent attacks on Americans in order to secure authoritarian control.”

“The militias point to four major events as material evidence: the August 1992 Ruby Ridge, Idaho killing of survivalist Randy Weaver’s son Samuel by a U.S. Marshall and his wife Vicki by an FBI sniper; the BATF/FBI assault on the Branch Davidian compound of David Koresh at Waco, Texas in 1993, which killed 74 members of the church, including many small children; the 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, killing 168 people and wounding 450; and the 9/11 World Trade Center/Pentagon attack that took nearly 3,000 lives, and has resulted in the deaths of several hundred rescue and cleanup workers in the 9 years since.”

“Ruby Ridge and Waco both led to a sharp growth in the militias.  To those who joined, they revealed the government’s readiness to thwart the Constitution and its authors‘ intent, and, to declare Americans who didn’t submit enemies, then jail, or, at Ruby Ridge and Waco, kill them.”

“Randy Weaver was charged with making a threatening statement about the President and the Pope, and with sawing off the barrels of two shotguns.The first charge was subsequently found to be a lie told by a neighbor against whom Weaver had won a land dispute, requiring the neighbor to pay him $2,100 in ‘court costs and damages;’ and Weaver insisted the shotgun barrels were cut off by a BATF under-cover agent to whom he sold them.”

“However, to the militias, whether Weaver, a fundamentalist christian whose wife believed the apocalypse was immanent, had actually made threatening remarks in the presence of a neighbor or modified the shotguns was immaterial, since such charges are themselves unconstitutional.”

“The first abrogates the freedom of speech guaranteed by the First Amendment, they argue. And since the potential enemy the nation’s founders wanted Americans to remain armed against was their own government, for that government to declare sawed-off shotguns, automatic rifles or other defensive weapons illegal, their owners criminals, not only repudiates the Second Amendment and the reasoning of the country’s founders, it’s evidence the founders’ concerns were justified; and, it suggests the time they cautioned against may have arrived.”

“For militiamen the story of Ruby Ridge is simple: using false information and unconstitutional charges the U.S. Marshal Service (USMS) undertook a three-month operation against Randy Weaver, a law-abiding Green Beret veteran, even giving their operation a name: ‘Northern Exposure.‘ The operation led to Weaver’s dog and 14-year-old son being shot and killed by federal Marshals, and a Marshal killed by Weaver’s friend Kevin Harris. Informed of the Marshal’s death the FBI then sent in snipers instructed to ‘shoot on sight,’ without asking for surrender. FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi shot Vicki Weaver in the head through a door window while she held her ten-month-old son in her arms. In subsequent trials Randy Weaver was acquitted of all charges except a failure to appear in court, and Kevin Harris’ killing of the Marshal was found to be self-defense. In out-of-court settlements Weaver was paid $100,000, each of his three daughters $1 million, and Kevin Harris $380,000.“

“In short, for militiamen the Northern Exposure Operation at Ruby Ridge was a clear example of the U.S. government beginning to run wild.”

“The BATF/FBI assault on the Waco compound occurred the following year. Noted author and historian Gore Vidal describes the militiamen’s view of that incident and its implications when he writes:”

‘The Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, exercising its mandate to “regulate” firearms, refused all invitations from cult leader David Koresh to inspect his licensed firearms. . . .  /On February 28th, 1993/ more than 100 A.T.F. agents, without proper warrants, attacked the church’s compound while, overhead, at least one A.T.F. helicopter fired at the roof of the main building.  Six Branch Davidians were killed that day.  Four A.T.F. agents were shot dead, by friendly fire, it was thought. . . . followed by a 51-day siege in which loud music was played 24 hours a day outside the compound. Then electricity was turned off.  Food was denied the children.  Meanwhile, the Media were briefed regularly on the evils of David Koresh. . . . Janet Reno, then got tough.  On April 19 she ordered the F.B.I. to finish up what the A.T.F. had begun. . . . In defiance of the Posse Comitatus Act (a basic bulwark of our fragile liberties that forbids the use of the military against civilians), tanks of the Texas National Guard and the army’s Joint Task Force Six attacked the compound with a gas deadly to children and not too healthy for adults while ramming holes in the building. Some Davidians escaped. Others were shot by F.B.I. snipers. . . . Finally, during a six-hour assault, the building was set fire to and then bulldozed by Bradley armored vehicles. . . . It was a great victory for Uncle Sam, as intended by the F.B.I., whose code name for the assault was Show Time. . . . The April 19, 1993, show at Waco proved to be the largest massacre of Americans by their own government since 1890, when a number of Native Americans were slaughtered at Wounded Knee, South Dakota.’”

“The bombing of Oklahoma City’s Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building occurred on April 19th, 1995, exactly two years after the final assault at Waco, intensifying the militias’ dark suspicions.”

“According to the government, Eagle Scout and Gulf War veteran Timothy McVeigh carried out the bombing with an ammonium-nitrate-fuel-oil (ANFO) bomb placed in a Ryder rental truck.  And, except for Terry Nichols, a friend who helped him prepare the bomb, and Michael Fortier, another friend, who had foreknowledge and approved, McVeigh acted entirely alone.”

“But the government’s explanation was immediately disputed by highly qualified experts, as well as numerous witnesses.  Brigadier General Benton Partin, a retired Air Force explosives specialist, observed: ‘Within hours I was convinced someone was lying.’”

“Partin’s own investigation led him to conclude McVeigh’s ANFO bomb caused only peripheral damage; that most of the destruction was the result of demolition charges ‘set off at four critical columns of the reinforced concrete structure at the floor level of the third floor.’”

“Drawing up a detailed report, Partin sent copies to 75 senators and members of congress, who, he complained, ‘did nothing.‘  He began his July 30th, 1995 cover letter to Senator Trent Lott by recounting his familiarity with explosives:”

“‘I have spent 25 years in research, design, development, test and management of weapons development. This included: hands-on work at the Ballistic Research Laboratories; Commander of the Air Force Armament Technology Laboratory, and ultimately management responsibility for almost every non-nuclear weapon device in the Air Force, at the Air Force System command, Air Staff and the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) levels. I was also the first chairman of the OSD joint service Air Munitions Requirements and Development.’”

“‘Based on my experience in weapons development and bomb damage analysis, and on my review of all evidence available, I can say, with a high level of confidence, that the damage pattern on the reinforced concrete superstructure could not possibly have been attained from the single truck bomb. The total incompatibility of this pattern of destruction with a single truck bomb lies in the simple, incontrovertible fact that some of the columns collapsed that should not have collapsed if the damage were caused solely by a single truck bomb, and, conversely, some of the columns were left standing that should have collapsed if the damage had been caused solely by the truck bomb.’”

“Gore Vidal later obtained a classified report by two independent Pentagon experts who reached Partin’s conclusion, except that they added a 5th inside bomb.”

“Sam Cohen, a noted explosives expert, who invented the neutron bomb and participated in the Manhattan Project building of the atom bomb, agreed with Partin and the Pentagon experts, emphatically stating: ‘I believe demolition charges were placed in the building at certain key concrete columns and that this did the primary damage to the Murrah Federal Building. It would have been absolutely impossible and against the laws of nature for a truck full of fertilizer and fuel oil—no matter how much was used—to bring the building down.’”

“Numerous other experts voiced the same opinion, including: Dr. Ernest Paxson, an engineer with more than 30 years experience in defense projects; physics professors Dr. Robert G. Breene, and Dr. Frederik Hansen, the latter once a NASA research scientist; and physical chemist Dr. Roger Raubach.  Raubach commented: ‘I don’t care if they pulled up a semi-trailer with 20 tons of ammonium nitrate, it wouldn’t do the damage we saw there.” 

“Professional blaster Sam Gronning concurred, saying: “No truck bomb of ANFO out in the open is going to cause the kind of damage we had in Oklahoma City.  In 30 years of blasting, using everything from 100 percent nitrogel to ANFO, I’ve not seen anything to support that story.’” 

“Finding its thesis being shredded, the government gradually increased the estimated size of the ANFO bomb from 1,200 to 4,800 lbs.”

“But, when interviewed by David Hoffman, who authored the most comprehensive and plausible book on the bombing: (The Oklahoma City Bombing and the Politics of Terror), Gronning recalled: ‘I set off a 5,000 lb ANFO charge.  I was standing 1,000 feet from it, and all it did was muss my hair, take out the mud in the creek we were trying to get rid of, and shatter a few leaves off the trees around it.  It didn’t cause any collateral damage to the deeply set trees within 20 feet of it. My knowledge comes from practical handling of explosives, and my belief is that 4,800 lbs of ANFO wouldn’t have scuffed the paint on the building.’”

“McCurtain Daily Gazette investigative reporter J.D. Cash, who spent 11 years researching and writing about the Oklahoma bombing, observed that not one of the 100-plus people he interviewed, many of them experts in chemistry, demolition, seismology and explosives, found the government’s explanation believable.”

“In 1997 Elgin Air Force’s Wright Laboratory built a steel-reinforced structure similar to the Oklahoma City Federal building, and, using much larger ANFO bombs than McVeigh’s, tested its ability to withstand demolition. The 56-page Air Force report concluded:”

“‘It is impossible to ascribe the damage that occurred on April 19, 1995 to a single truck bomb containing 4,800 lbs. of ANFO . . . the damage at the Murrah Building is not the result of the truck bomb itself, but rather due to other factors such as locally placed charges within the building . . . The procedures used to cause the damage to the Murrah Building are more involved and complex than simply parking a truck and leaving . . .’”

“Finally, the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) report concluded the damage to the Murrah building would have required three times the quantity of ANFO described, an amount the Ryder truck could not possibly carry.”

“General Partin and others who rejected the government’s account noted that although the damaged Murrah building was a crime scene, and engineers said it would be much cheaper to rebuild than replace it, the government promptly had it leveled as a ‘health hazard’ and the debris buried; something General Partin predicted when he found his report being ignored.”

“With few exceptions, witnesses to the bombing all described two distinct explosions. While Dr. Paul Heath, who worked on the fifth floor of the Murrah building, experienced a single blast, most others insisted there were two.  Heath’s colleague Jim Guthrie said he ‘felt a boom and was picked up and thrown under the water fountain’, then ‘heard a second explosion and covered his ears.‘“

Diane Dooley, P.G. Wilson and Jane C. Graham, also at work in the building, likewise described two separate detonations.  Wilson told an investigator: ‘a second explosion came after the first one and shards of glass began flying in the office.’”  

“In videotaped testimony, Graham said: ‘I want to specify the first bomb . . . was a waving effect, that you got when the building was moving . . . perhaps an earthquake movement, and that lasted for several seconds.  About 6 or 7 seconds later, a bomb exploded. It was an entirely different sound and thrust. . . . The second blast not only was very, very loud, it was also very powerful.’”

“Hoffman interviewed others who were near, rather than in, the Murrah building at the moment of the bombing, and they, too, spoke of two distinct explosions. Delivery truck driver Hassan Muhammad told Hoffman: /T/he first explosion went off, and it was a loud explosion. And my friend who was coming out of the warehouse asked me what it was, because we thought it was a drive-by shooting . . . we got on the ground, and by the time we got on the ground another one went off, and that’s when all the windows came out.’”    

“Michael Hinton, who was riding on a bus nearby, said: ‘I had just sat down when I heard this violent type rumble under the bus . . . It actually raised the bus up on its side.  About six or seven seconds later another one which was more violent than the first picked the bus up again, and I thought that second time the bus was going to turn over.’”

“Attorney Charles Watts, who was in the Courthouse located across the street from the Oklahoma City Federal Building, told Media Bypass magazine he had also heard and felt two separate blasts.”

“Both seismographs in the region—one at the University of Oklahoma, located 16 miles from the epicenter, the other at the Omniplex Museum, just 4 miles away—registered two seismic events, 7 to 10 seconds apart. University of Oklahoma senior geophysicist Raymond Brown interpreted that as clear evidence there were two explosions, a conclusion with which his colleague Dr. Ken Luza and most other geophysicists who studied the matter agreed.”

“United States Geological Survey (USGS) geologist Dr. Thomas Holzer disputed the majority’s interpretation of the seismographs, proposing two separate waves from the same explosion traveled through the earth at different speeds and gave the illusion of two events: a ‘wave propagation phenomenon.’ To which Brown responded: ‘I will candidly say that we are having trouble finding that velocity difference,  We have not identified a pair of layers that could account for the ten second difference.’”

“The FBI abruptly ended any further examination and debate by taking possession of the seismograms and refusing to make them available.”

“However Hoffman, rather cautiously, observed: ‘Taken together, the evidence and witness accounts appear to indicate that there were at least two blasts on the morning of April 19th.’” 

“Then there was the matter of unexploded bombs said to have been recovered from the shattered federal structure.”

“Shortly after the rescue of injured survivors began, Channel 4 News and KFOR TV-5 reported the FBI had confirmed a bomb was found in the East side of the building.  Later, KFOR announced that bomb had been defused, while another, larger one, ‘had been discovered on the building’s West side and was being worked on’.  Channel 9 reported the Department of Justice (DOJ) had also confirmed the existence of two unexploded bombs. Oklahoma City Police Lieutenant Bill Martin told an investigator (on tape), that one bomb contained Mercury Fulminate, a ‘powerful explosive’ which Hoffman noted only the military can obtain. The April 19th radio logs of the Oklahoma Highway Patrol recorded that two unexploded bombs were discovered; and a ‘Department of Defense Atlantic Command memo indicated two unexploded bombs /were/ found in the building, as did a U.S. Forces Command Daily Log and a FEMA situation report.’”

“Suddenly, Hoffman observes ‘all these reports were . . . hushed up, and denied later on. . . . The additional bombs inside the building became a car-bomb outside the building, then a van containing 2,000 pounds of ANFO, then a truck containing 4,800 pounds.’”

“Immediately after the bombing, a Federal Grand Jury was impaneled to determine who was responsible. No less immediately, it became evident the government had already decided the Grand Jury’s finding: McVeigh and Nichols alone caused the disaster; their weapon an ANFO bomb.”

“Each Federal Grand Juror was given a handbook describing their authority, which included the power to call witnesses. But, the only ‘witnesses’ the presiding judge would allow to testify were people who had neither expertise in explosives nor evidence to offer about the bombing.”

“At first, the media spoke of the possibility McVeigh had accomplices besides Nichols. Many people claimed they saw McVeigh with other men on, or just before, the day of the bombing. Three workers at the auto body shop where he rented the truck gave detailed descriptions of a man they insisted was with him, an infamous John Doe #2.  The Federal Grand Jury was not permitted to hear from any of them.”

“Five-term Oklahoma State representative Charles Key, one of many who were angered by the government’s subterfuge, noted: ‘the federal prosecutors barred every single witness to John Doe(s) from the Federal Grand Jury.  Of more than 20 witnesses to one or more John Doe(s), none–not even one–were allowed to tell the Grand Jury what they saw. . . . Did you hear that right? Yes, you did.  As bizarre as it sounds, Federal Prosecutors were not allowing any of those witnesses to be seen or heard by the Federal Grand Jury. This gives “blind justice” a whole new meaning.’” 

“In disgust, Grand Juror Hoppy Heidelberg wrote a letter to presiding judge David Russell requesting that, as per the Jurors’ Handbook, he be allowed to call witnesses. The judge responded:”

“‘”Effective immediately, you are dismissed from the Grand Jury. Your obligation of secrecy continues. Any disclosure of matters that occurred before the Grand Jury constitutes a contempt of court. Each violation of the obligation of secrecy may be punished cumulatively.’”

“Heidelberg later told reporters: ‘I knew it was a coverup when they wouldn’t show a sketch of John Doe Two to the witnesses. They brought in all these people who knew nothing about the bombing, but they wouldn’t call the real witnesses who’d seen McVeigh at the crime scene. Why?  Because they all saw other men with McVeigh, that’s why, and they didn’t want the citizens of this country to find out about that.’”

“The BATF had a base of operations in the Murrah building.  Many of the firemen and police who arrived on the scene within minutes of the explosion reported the BATF field agents employed there all showed up afterwards. None had been killed or injured.”

“Bruce Shaw, whose wife worked in the federal building, told State Legislator Key that when he arrived to search for her a BATF agent told him: ‘‘You won’t find any BATF agents in the building because they were warned on their pagers not to come in this morning, and they’re now in debriefing.’  Shaw’s boss, Tony Brasier, who joined Shaw to look for his wife, corroborated the agent’s statement.”

“In a sworn statement, Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) Katherine E. Mallette said two BATF agents had passed her while she was preparing to take injured victims to the hospital in her ambulance and one said to the other: ‘Is that why we got the page not to come in today?’” 

“Another EMT who transported victims said she initially thought a gas line had exploded. Knowing the BATF had an office in the Murrah Building, she stated that when she ‘expressed concern’ about them to an agent at the site he replied: ‘We weren’t in there today.’” 

“Several people who worked at the Oklahoma City Federal Building insisted they saw bomb squad agents in full Hazmat gear congregating near the structure prior to the bombing.”

“With polls showing 70 percent of Oklahomans believed the government was engaged in a cover up, and that the Federal Grand Jury would not carry out a serious investigation, Key asked the House Committee of the State Legislature to do it. They ‘turned him down flatly.‘“

“Since Oklahoma law provides for the impaneling of a County Grand Jury if 10,000 residents request it, Key and Glenn Wilburn, ‘who lost two grand-children in the bombing,’ got 13,500 county residents to sign a petition and filed for an independent County Grand Jury investigation.”

“The reaction of state and federal authorities and the media to their petition was immediate and uniformly hostile. Presiding State District Judge Dan Owens officially blocked the petition, forcing Kay and Wilburn to appeal. When the Oklahoma Court of Appeals granted Key and Wilburn’s request, their opponents then appealed to the State Supreme Court.” 

“While the latter appeal was under consideration Oklahoma Governor Frank Keating, a former FBI agent who had once overseen the BATF, went on the attack, arguing: ‘raising questions would not bring one whit of intelligence to the process,’ that Kay and Wilburn were ‘off the reservation,’ and ‘howling at the moon.’” 

“County District Attorney Robert Macy and Attorney General Drew Edmondson joined in the ridicule, Edmondson accusing Key of a ‘wasteful witch hunt‘ and ‘the worst kind of paranoid conspiracy pandering.’”       

“The Daily Oklahoman and Tulsa World printed a total of nine editorial attacks on Key, Wilburn and their supporters. One Daily Oklahoman editorial exhorted: ‘As we argued when Key first set out on this course, the Legislature and its staff have no business investigating the bombing.  It was, and is, poorly equipped to do so.  The same can be said of a panel of local citizens. . . . ’ DROP IT MR. KEY!’”

“But on February 18th, 1997 the State Supreme Court of Oklahoma ‘miraculously,’ in Key’s words, ruled in Key and Wilburn’s favor.”

“Informed of the Court’s decision, Key enthused: ‘Now the forgotten families, survivors, and victims who died from the blast will have their right to a County Grand Jury and a full, open and truthful investigation.’”

“Like the majority of Oklahomans, Key and Wilburn anticipated the County Grand Jury’s investigation would answer specific questions: Was the primary damage to the Murrah Federal Building caused by McVeigh’s ANFO bomb, or, was it the result of more powerful explosives detonated within?  Did McVeigh have as yet unnamed accomplices? If so, who were they and what roles did they play?  To what extent were the BAFT, FBI and other government agencies involved in the bombing, and a subsequent attempt to coverup how and why it happened?”

“Convinced they already had partial answers to these question, Key, Wilburn and their supporters expected the jury to fill in the blanks and, most importantly, to discover material proof.”

Conscious of the numerous explosives experts who dismissed as silly the government’s contention McVeigh’s ANFO bomb did all the Murrah Building damage, aware no independent experts had come forth to defend it, they hoped the jury’s findings would give these and other critical facts respectability, and, that the media would feel compelled to report them.”

“Regarding McVeigh having as yet unnamed accomplices, based on testimony provided by a large number of witnesses, Key, Wilburn et al. believed the jury would find that he did, and, would not only identify them, particularly the mysterious John Doe #2, but would detail the parts they played. They were also confident the BAFT and FBI would be exposed as having been deeply involved in preparations for the bombing, as well as being responsible for the subsequent obfuscations.”

“In addition to the testimony of experts in explosives, demolition, chemistry and seismology, they expected the County Grand Jurors would hear:”

“*That the BATF and FBI had informants at Elohim City, a 400 acre compound located near Muldrow, Oklahoma, where members of The Covenant and the Sword, Aryan Republican Army, Aryan Nation, the Arm of the Lord, White Aryan Resistance and other extreme right Christian Identity organizations lived and operated.”

“*That BATF documents Key obtained revealed Carol Howe, a former beauty queen who began working as a paid BATF informant at Elohim City in 1994, had told her handler, agent Angela Finley, that two men, Andreas Strassmeir and Dennis Mahon, were planning to bomb the Oklahoma City Federal Building, and would probably do it on April 19th.”

“*That Strassmeir, the son of a prominent German politician, had been trained in ‘military intelligence operations’ at Germany’s Bundeswehr Academy, and, that he held ‘diplomatic Immunity’ to be in the U.S.”

“*That ‘a highly-placed source’ in the intelligence division of the FBI informed  McCurtain Daily Gazette reporter Cash that Strassmeir, like Howe, was a ‘paid BATF informant’ assigned to Elohim City. Cash would also testify that Strassmeir, who returned to Germany right after the bombing, personally told him he taught McVeigh how to build an ANFO bomb, suggesting he might be the elusive John Doe #2.”

“*That the government had shown no interest in extraditing Strassmeir, or in pursuing leads about his involvement, insisting witnesses to his presence with Mc-Veigh were simply mistaken; that they had actually seen Fort Riley Private Todd Bunting who, accompanied by a friend, rented a truck from the same body shop the day after McVeigh, and that a real John Doe #2 never existed.”

“Although Key did not appear to consider it crucial, many Oklahomans were hopeful the jurors would also investigate the ambiguous circumstances attending the deaths of three men who arrived on the scene immediately after the explosion: General Services Administration (GSA) planner Michael Loudenslager, whose office was in the building; Dr. Don Chumley, who ran a clinic nearby, and Oklahoma City police officer Terrance Yeakey.”

“For weeks prior to the bombing Mike Loudenslager had expressed alarm at the huge quantity of ordnance—guns, hand grenades and other explosives—the BATF and Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) were storing at the Murrah Building. When Loudenslager had the building’s Security Director file a complaint with the GSA, the Security Director lost his job. The Security Director’s wife operated the children’s Day Care Center in the building and, following remodeling—in accordance with the law—she asked Oklahoma City fire marshals to carry out a safety inspection. But when fire marshals arrived federal agents would not permit them to do the inspection, and the Day Care Center operator’s contract was then revoked.”

“Dr. Chumley and Terry Yeakey depicted Loudenslager as active in the rescue. At one point he was said to be ‘arguing heatedly’ with another man; probably, it was supposed, because he believed the BATF bore great responsibility for the bombing and fatalities.”

“Suddenly, despite reports of injured people screaming for help, the rescue operation was temporarily suspended while federal agents removed ordnance from the building.  According to Cash, they took out ‘hundreds of thousands of rounds of ammunition, boxes marked explosives, hand grenades, everything short of a Russian T-72 tank.’  During the ordnance removal the federal agents said they found Mike Loudenslager’s body at his desk where he had been killed by the explosion.”

“Dr. Chumley and officer Terry Yeakey were adamant that Loudenslager was alive after the bombing.”

“Then it was reported Loudenslager’s body was actually discovered at the base of a stairwell, where he had been crushed by a falling slab of concrete as he ‘headed for the second floor day care center‘ during the rescue, and that it ‘took two shifts of men working with jackhammers to free him’. However, Loudenslager’s ‘rescuers’ did not come forward to verify they played that role.”

“In addition to the strange accounts of Loudenslager’s death, Chumley and Yeakey were described as possessing damning information, and anxious to testify about the disturbing things they had witnessed. According to investigative reporter Michelle Moore, two uninjured federal agents, claiming they were in the building when it was bombed, requested that Dr. Chumley bandage them. When he refused they asked another doctor on site to do it, and Chumley threatened to report them.”

“An experienced pilot, with 600 hours of flight time and an instrument rating, Dr. Chumley took off from Tulsa airport in his private Cessna 210 on September 24th, 1995, five days after the bombing.  Reaching an altitude of several thousand feet, his plane suddenly dove into the ground, killing him instantly.”

“According to Federal Aviation Authority investigators, the throttle of Chumley’s Cessna was still set at cruise speed, the plane’s flaps and landing gear were up, and they could discern ‘no anomalies with the engine or airframe.‘ Nor did a ‘pathological examination‘ of Chumley’s body determine a condition which might have ‘contributed to the accident.’”

“Chumley’s stepson, Shaun Jones observed: ‘The thing that’s odd is Don was perfectly healthy. . . He was talking to the tower, and from one minute to the next he just went straight smack down into the ground.’

“The death of 30-year-old policeman Terry Yeakey was even more puzzling. A large man of 6‘ 3” and 275 lbs., Yeakey had remained at the devastated Murrah structure late into the night on the day of the bombing, and was credited with personally rescuing four victims.”

“When his ex-wife Tonia picked him up that evening, she said on getting into the car he agitatedly told her: ‘It’s not what they’re saying it is!  It’s not what they’re saying it is!’ ‘It’s all a lie!’”

“Over the next year, as Yeakey assembled several boxes of files detailing what he and others had witnessed, friends and family members described him as increasingly anxious. Tonia related that on one occasion, without calling in advance, which ‘was completely out of character’, he arrived at her door in the middle of the night to urge they remarry, saying otherwise she and their two children would not be covered by insurance in the event something happened to him.”

“Then, unexpectedly, on May 8th, 1996 Terry Yeakey was dead: a ‘suicide’ according to public records, although no autopsy was performed, and the police did not carry out an investigation.”

“Retired Tulsa police investigator Craig Roberts, who served as a marine sniper  during the Vietnam War, and was assigned by the FBI to help with investigating the Oklahoma City bombing, was one of many who rejected the idea Yeakey had killed himself.”

“On June 12th, 1998, Roberts sent a letter to Oklahoma City Police Chief M.T.  Berry, requesting an inquiry into Yeakey’s ‘suicide’ but was summarily rebuffed. On May 1st, 2006 he wrote to Berry’s successor, Chief William Citty, again urging an investigation of Yeakey’s death.”

“Roberts began his second letter with the observation he had worked on the bombing inquiry for several months and ‘found many discrepancies in the investigation that made me determine the whole story would never be told, and that things were being ignored or covered up . . . One instance I found extremely disturbing, and very suspect, was the death of one of your officers: Sgt. Terrance Yeakey. . . . Though it was originally written up as a suicide, I feel the evidence and facts point to a torture/homicide.’”  

“Explaining why he reached that conclusion, Roberts cited what he called ‘a few of the items that do not figure in a suicide’:

*Yeakey’s gunshot wound: /The/ gunshot was from the upper right side of his skull downward to an exit wound below his left cheek bone.  Hardly an angle of a self-inflicted wound. This wound would be consistent to one fired “execution style” into the skull of a kneeling victim from an angle above and to one side of the victim.

*/The/ wound was small caliber and left a small entrance and exit hole, with only “soot” at the entrance wound. It was a contact wound showing a barrel imprint,  but there were no blasting (staration) effects of muzzle gases on the wound margins.  This would be more indicative of a silencer that would absorb the gasses.  

There were multiple cuts on his wrists, inner elbows, and juglar veins. If he was going to shoot himself, why would he cut himself so many times?

His estranged wife, Tonia, told me she talked to the funeral home that received Yeakey’s body, and they told her there were rope marks around his neck, and  handcuff marks on his wrists–none of which are indicated in the official medical examiner’s report.

He was found in a field 1/2 mile from where his car was discovered by a Canadian County SO deputy.  He had, in the middle of the night, crossed a barbed wire fence, a ditch/creek, and then killed himself in the middle of a pasture. Why go to that trouble?  Why not just kill himself in his car, or his apartment?  

He told a friend the afternoon he disappeared that he was being followed, and as soon as he shook his followers he’d be back and meet him for dinner.  He also removed boxes of files from his apartment and had them in his car when he left to stash them in his mini-storage . . . The files were not in his car when it was found.

Did anyone ever attempt to find the bullet that allegedly was used at the scene?  If so, were ballistics tests done to link it with a particular gun? 

* Was a gun found at the scene, and was it his gun?  I ask this because it was relayed to me that no gun was found until an hour after his body was located.’” 

“‘There are many more unanswered questions . . . It would appear that this tragic event centers on what Terry Yeakey had in his files, and who wanted to make sure those files were never discovered. One question that needs to be answered is “what happened to those files Yeakey took with him that day to place in storage?’” 

“Despite the requests from Roberts and others, no investigation of Yeakey’s death was ever carried out.”

“As for the County Grand Jury Key and Wilburn expended so much time and energy seating, it met for 18 months, heard testimony from 117 witnesses, then issued a 21-page report which echoed the finding of the Federal Grand Jury: Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols were alone responsible for the bombing.”

“Given the conditions under which the jurors met, it would seem impossible for them to have reached a different conclusion.”

“The District Attorneys, ostensibly there to provide jurors with legal advice, focused instead on discrediting witnesses.”

“State of Oklahoma private investigator Cate McCauley, who served on McVeigh’s appellate team, complained:‘the judge in the case, the Oklahoma Attorney General, and on down the list, . . . have tried to sway this grand jury more than anyone else. They’ve said ordinary people cannot investigate a crime of this magnitude, that we are nothing more than a bunch of conspiracy nuts, that we have no legitimate interest in this.’” 

“Presiding judge William Burkett publicly stated the jury should be meeting to indict State Representative Key, rather than investigate the bombing.  He instructed jurors they were not to read ‘any media reports, books or magazine articles’ about the bombing; and, while they could listen to witness testimony and hearsay evidence, they could not use it to issue indictments, or to call additional witnesses, or, to reach their conclusions.”

“Investigator Pat Briley said Burkett’s order: ‘totally undercut the way grand juries run—state and federal. The way you get firsthand witnesses is you call credible secondhand, hearsay witnesses to get closer to the firsthand witnesses, you do an investigation, that’s the function of a grand jury.’”

“But the jurors followed Judge Burkett’s instruction. ‘We are all “bad guys” because we didn’t believe the official story’, one witness observed. ‘They listened to us, but could not accept any of it, and they decided we were all lacking in credibility . . . which is incredulous to me because of all the solid indisputable evidence that was laid at their feet.’”    

“David Hoffman sent jurors copies of his book, The Oklahoma City Bombing and the Politics of Terror, along with a cover letter.  When subsequently called to testify Hoffman was charged with ‘jury tampering,’ the only person indicted.”

“The media proved equally unwilling to challenge the government’s account of the bombing. According to Key, ABC was preparing a story about the government’s ‘prior knowledge’, /but/ the Justice Department became aware of it and contacted executives at ABC. Acknowledging the validity of the story they put extreme pressure on ABC not to air the report.’”

“There’s no question that the BATF and FBI were responsible for the Northern Exposure attack on Randy Weaver and the Waco disaster, since they not only acknowledged but defended those operations. However, you must decide for yourselves whether the militiamen, libertarians and leftists who insist those agencies were also involved in the Oklahoma City bombing, then worked to conceal their involvement, are correct.”

“Convinced they were, Gore Vidal, McVeigh’s attorney Stephen Jones, State Legislator Key, General Partin, and California Congressman Dana Rohrabacher hypothesized the bombing might have been the result of ‘a BATF-FBI sting operation gone bad.’  Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, a noted reporter and Business Editor of the Daily Telegraph, reached the same conclusion, saying ‘it was an FBI sting operation that went horribly wrong,’ and the government subsequently ‘covered it up.’”

“In interviews, and during his trial, McVeigh insisted he had acted alone. However, based on his personal investigation of the disaster and lengthy correspondence with McVeigh, Vidal concluded: ‘It may well be McVeigh did not do it. In fact, I am sure he didn’t do it. But when he found out he was going to be the patsy, he did something psychologically very strange. He decided to grab all the credit for himself, because he had no fear of death.’ Similarly, McVeigh’s attorney Jones said: ‘I don’t doubt Tim’s role in the conspiracy.  But I think he clearly aggrandized his role, enlarged it, to cover for others who were involved.‘ And Legislator Key stated: “I don’t know why McVeigh is saying it, but we know for a fact that when he claims he was the only one involved that this is a flat out lie.’”

“General Partin and others who insisted it would have been physically impossible for an ANFO bomb to destroy so much of the Murrah Federal Building, suspected McVeigh’s truck may also have carried a more powerful device, perhaps without McVeigh even being aware of it; that this device exploded first along with the ANFO bomb, destroying the Ryder truck and doing considerable damage to the outside of the building, followed 7-10 seconds later by the explosion of more powerful bombs placed within. McVeigh, they reasoned, might have been a super-patriotic patsy.”

“In an affidavit of March 2007, Terry Nichols stated former FBI official Larry Potts directed McVeigh to ‘orchestrate’ the bombing; that McVeigh said so prior to the bombing in a “slip of the tongue” when he was he was angry with Potts for “changing the target”.

(Pausing only momentarily, Machiavelli continued:)

“Then came the notorious September 11th, 2001 attacks on the New York World Trade Center and the Pentagon, claiming 3,000 lives.”

“Not only militiamen, but many libertarians and leftists, believe 9/11 proves the federal government has begun to turn on the American people.”

“I’m not going to review what they consider confirmation that the military, the CIA and other federal agencies were in some way complicit. Their arguments, evidence and analyses are exhaustive; and, since most of you are reporters, politicians and political scientists, I assume you already know them well.”

“If you do not—if ten years after that monumental event you remain unfamiliar with the reasoning of the 9/11 Truth Movement—I find your ignorance a verification that you look to the government and its minions for truth, rather than to your own ability to reason.”

“Understand I do not make this observation disparagingly!  To say it again, being a scientific materialist, I recognize our species’ preservation has always required a minority of leaders to lead and the herd majority to follow.  If you’re a member of the latter, where defending the nation and our species is concerned you play no less vital a role.”

“However, if you would understand the militias you must recognize that—right or wrong—they are convinced the government oversaw, or at least had prior knowledge of, the infamous 9/11 attacks. They’re aware 1452 professional engineers and architects share their opinion; as do 1,000-plus scholars, and over 300 commercial pilots, one of whom flew two of the 757s used in the attack. Prominent media figures, including investigative reporter Geraldo Rivera, who I see in the audience, and Judge Andrew Napolitano, the moderator of this debate, have also expressed doubt about the government’s  explanation of 9/11.”

“It’s no mystery, then, why militiamen see themselves as 21st century patriots akin to those who fought the American Revolution.”

“Accused of being bigoted rightwing extremists, pro-violence and racist by government representatives and the media, many militias have set up websites and posted ‘Mission Statements’ to counter those perceptions. To give you a few examples:”

Empire State Militia, 11th Field Force: ‘With very few restrictions, membership in the militia must be open to all citizens regardless of race, sex, religion or political affiliation. Units not open to public membership and/or which are organized for any purpose other than the support of Constitutional principals may be considered private armies and are not to be confused with the Constitutional “unorganized” militia.’”

“Pennsylvania 1st Unorganized Militia–Our Rights – Our Duties: to insure that all citizens-regardless of race, gender, religion or nationality, shall have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, as established and guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States of America.’”

Michigan Militia: ‘We hold that there is but one race, that being the human one, and that there is but one condition toward which it should strive, that being one of freedom. Everyone is welcome, regardless of race, creed, color, tint, or hue; regardless of your religion (or lack thereof); regardless of your political affiliation (or lack thereof); regardless of anything else: if you are an American who is capable of bearing arms, or /who/ wishes to support someone doing so, then you ARE the militia.’”

“Indiana Citizens Volunteer Militia: ‘We support a Constitutionally limited government and defend the American ideals of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. We are open to all Indiana citizens regardless of religion, race, creed, or sex. The militia, as an organization, has no religious theme; is not racial in nature; nor does it advocate terrorism or violence.’”

“The Virginia Militia: ‘The purpose of the Virginia Militia is to work for the restoration of all constitutional rights affirmed by the Constitution of the United States.  We assert that all power is inherent in the people and it is our right and duty to protect and defend this Republic against all enemies, foreign and domestic. . . .  We are not advocating the overthrow of the U.S. government, but we do advocate resistance to Unconstitutional legislation and executive orders. . . . All persons are welcomed in the Virginia Militia, the only requirement is a love of liberty, and a return to the ideals of our forefathers contained in the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution of the United States.’”

“Tall Grass Guard of the Nebraska State Militia: ‘We are open to all citizens regardless of race, sex, religion, or political affiliation. . . . The militia, as an organization, has no religious theme; is not racial in nature; nor does it advocate terrorism or violence. We welcome Americans of all races, cultures, and beliefs; we gain nothing from turning anyone away, regardless of the hue of their skin. . . . the militia is as diverse as the general population. There are, however, individuals or groups that claim to be militias that say they are of a superior race fighting the “great race war…to annihilate the mud people”. These individuals or groups are not militias – they are racists.’”

“Kentucky State Militia:  ‘We accept and welcome all who wish to preserve our freedoms and maintain a civilization we can be proud to leave our children and grandchildren; regardless of race, sex, or religion. We maintain a firm belief that every man, woman, or family may live, worship, and teach their children as they wish for so long as it respects the personal rights and beliefs of others. . . . as a group, KSM will not tolerate racism, anti-Semitism, or prejudice of sex. All are welcome and will be treated with respect.’”

“Given the convictions and concerns which bind them, militia members are understandably troubled that the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 has been rescinded. Posse Comitatus mandated that all uniformed federal troops ‘are prohibited from exercising police powers in any U.S. state or possession.‘  Only the Coast Guard was made exempt.”

“In 2006, under the rubric of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007, Posse Comitatus was amended to read:  ‘The President may employ the armed forces… to… restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition… the President determines …/that/ the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order.‘“

In a word, Posse Comitatus was declared dead.” 

“Those who sought to regenerate it grew optimistic when, under pressure from the states, the National Defense Authorization Act of 2008 stipulated the federal government could mobilize the federal army only if ‘constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect . . . ‘“ 

“Their optimism was extinguished on January 11th, 2010 when President Obama issued an Executive order ‘making the National Guard part of the military’s ‘Total Force’.”  

“Although Obama’s Executive Order established a ‘bipartisan Council of Governors, appointed by the president, to give advice, it removed any lingering confusion: The states’ National Guard units and federal armed forces had been assimilated. They were under Department of Defense (DOD) control, and, Posse Comitatus would not be resurrected.”

“The libertarian and militia response was immediate. PrisonPlanet.com headlined: ‘Obama Implements Bush’s Martial Law Councils’, while the Indiana Militia called the Executive Order ‘police state legislation.’”

“The Atheist Conservative website hypothesized the Obama Administration had an ulterior motive, saying the order: ‘strongly suggests’ the Council of Governors ‘is an incipient federal internal security authority which, to have any real function beyond “the exchange of views, information and advice”, might be intended to prepare a cover for the formation, with apparent states’ approval, of a national armed force for internal deployment.’”

“Pastor Chuck Baldwin agreed, writing:‘That more of us are not as concerned as we should be /about Obama’s Executive Order/ can be traced to the mistaken belief the American people have nothing to fear from an overreaching federal government. This is pure folly! As I have said many times, we have far more to fear from Washington, D.C., than from Iran, Iraq, North Korea, or any other potential terrorist state. It is Washington, D.C.—and Washington, D.C., alone—that has the power, opportunity, and propensity to squash our freedom and sell us into tyranny.’”

“Early the next month federal authorities dispatched National Guard troops to Pittsburgh following a heavy snowstorm, prompting Paul Joseph Watson to caution: ‘Hundreds of National Guard soldiers have been helping Pittsburgh’s emergency personnel respond to residents’ needs; and beginning tonight they’re going to be patrolling some city streets . . .  Americans are again being conditioned to accept the sight of troops patrolling the streets and dealing with domestic law enforcement issues under the pretext of National Guard soldiers “helping;” . . . the same soldiers who just months ago were also “helping” authorities brutalize innocent people during the G20 summit in Pittsburgh.’”

“Libertarians and militiamen point to the Obama Administration’s position on gun control as further confirmation the U.S. is becoming a fascist state.”

“At political rallies in Boise, Idaho and Duryea, Pennsylvania, and in a meeting with the press, candidate Obama reassured those who feared he would fail to honor the Second Amendment, saying: ‘I’m not going to take your guns away,‘ ‘I think you can take me at my word.’”

“President Obama, on the other hand, supports Attorney General Eric Holder’s anti-Second Amendment program.  Holder not only seeks to ban anyone whose name is on the Federal Terror Watch List from buying a gun, but to confiscate the guns of persons on the list who already own them.  Libertarians and militiamen note that the 400,000 people on the Watch List (the ACLU says 1,000,000) aren’t terrorists. They are activists who protest government policies; and, the militiamen assume, many are surely members of militias.’”

“Militia members and libertarians note that while the U.S. has been killing tens-of-thousands of innocent people in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq (collateral damage of its Mid East operations), President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are promoting the pending United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, which would ‘prohibit the transfer of gun ownership, require all guns to be micro-stamped for identification, and require Americans to turn over any banned firearms for destruction or face imprisonment.’”  

“Also alarming libertarians, independents, militamen and many leftists are the Obama Administration’s invasive airport security methods.”

“Libertarians and independents were the first to sound the tocsin about the back-scatter body scanners that the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in-stalled at 60 airports, and its stated intention to employ them universally.”

“The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) has filed a lawsuit to stop the use of scanners, calling it a flagrant violation of the Fourth Amendment.” ‘Without probable cause and a warrant, says EPIC’s Executive Director, Marc Rotenberg, ‘the government doesn’t have a right to peer beneath your clothes.’”  

“While the TSA insists the radiation from body scanners is harmless, many experts dispute that claim.”

Bloomberg News pointed out the Environmental Protection Agency has cautioned: ‘frequent exposure to low doses of radiation can lead to cancer and birth defects.‘  Frequent flyers will obviously receive a ‘frequent exposure to low doses.’”

“Dr. Michael Love, head of an X-ray laboratory at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine predicts: ‘Statistically, someone is going to get skin cancer from these X-rays.’ Dr. John Sedat, Professor of Biochemistry and Biophysics at the University of California, San Francisco agrees, proposing:‘’the dose of radiation delivered to the skin may be dangerously high.’ In testimony before the Congressional Biomedical Caucus, Dr. David Brenner of Columbia University observed radiation from the backscatter machines is most concentrated on the top of the head where 85 percent of basal cell carcinomas occur.”

“Apprehensive about the ionizing radiation, ‘Captain Dave Bates, president of the Allied Pilots Association, urged pilots to refuse back-scatter screening,’ saying: ‘Airline pilots in the United States already receive higher doses of radiation in their on-the-job environment than nearly every other category of worker in the United States, including nuclear power plant employees.’”

“Bates recommended pilots who refused body-scanning should also resist ‘private pat-downs,’ calling them ‘intentional humiliation’ and ‘demeaning.’”  

“In response to Bates complaint and the decision of two airline pilots to file their own Fourth Amendment lawsuits, the TSA subsequently decided airline pilots don’t need to be either screened or patted down after all.”

InfoWars.com and other libertarian/independent websites argue the use of scanners and mortifying pat-downs is but another aspect of the government’s effort to accustom Americans to invasion and control of their lives, yet more evidence of the Obama Administration’s malevolent intent.”

They cite Bloomberg’s disclosure that Obama pledged $734 million to deploy airport scanners, and Forbes revelation that ‘500 backscatter scanners mounted in vans’ and ‘capable of seeing through clothes and walls,’ are ‘being deployed on the streets of U.S. cities to search for vehicle-based bombs.’ “ 

“Following a November 16th, 2010 Drudge Report and a PrisonPlanet segment on the TSA’s decision to have agents put their hands inside baggy sweat pants, the subject of airport screening went ‘viral’ on the internet.”

“This much is indisputable: whatever justifications the TSA may give for back-scatter screening and pat-downs, and whether or not one accepts those justifications, EPIC is right when it argues both are gross violations of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution.

“The federal government has also begun searching for terrorists at popular tourist sites. Visitors to the Statue of Liberty and the U.S.S. Constitution find they, too, must go through invasive security systems, including metal detectors.”

“On September 29th, 2010, a ‘Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response (VIPER)’ team which included agents from Homeland Security, the Department of Transportation, and the Transportation Security Administration, conducted what it described as a ‘training exercise’ outside of Atlanta, Georgia, forcing trucks to pass through a ‘counter-terror’ checkpoint-inspection.”

“The next month a TSA/VIPER team arrived at the Tampa, Florida bus station to ‘pat down’ bus passengers; a TSA spokesman explaining the pat downs were done ‘in case we have to do it in the future.’”

“Then in December the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced it was installing checkout-counter ‘telescreens’ in 800 Walmart stores.  Among other things, the telescreens will implore customers: ‘If you see something, say something!’  The DHS called the telescreens another manifestation of it’s commitment to keep Americans safe, adding they will soon be installed at many large businesses, sports stadiums and 9,000 federal buildings.”

“Libertarians and independents have also pointed to South Carolina’s Subversive Activities Registration Act (SERA), and Senators John McCain and Joe Lieberman’s ‘Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention and Prosecution Act (S.3081)’ as giant steps toward the creation of a fascist America.”

Passed by South Carolina’s legislature in 2009 and ratified in February 2010, SERA mandates: ‘Every member of a subversive organization, or an organization subject to foreign control, every foreign agent and every person who advocates, teaches, advises or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States … shall register with the Secretary of State.‘“

“‘Under the sweeping terms of the law,’ writes Paul Joseph Watson, ‘members of tax protest organizations, the Tea Party movement and the States’ Rights movement based in South Carolina are all domestic terrorists if they fail to register their dissent with the authorities . . . If such groups don’t obtain what amounts to a license from the government to engage in free speech, their members face a $25,000 fine and 10 years in prison.’” 

“Watson pointed to the inherent irony, observing: ‘The right to overthrow a government that has become corrupt, abusive and completely unrepresentative of its electorate is enshrined in the Declaration of Independence – that’s how America came to be a Republic in the first place. Advocating or teaching that the people should “control” the government via their elected representatives is a basic function of a democratic society; but this law effectively makes it a terrorist offense.’”

“A few weeks later Senators McCain and Lieberman introduced their ‘Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010‘ in the Senate.”

“If S.3081 passes, notes AlterNet’s Liliana Segura, it ‘would set this country on a course to become a military dictatorship. . . . grant/ing/ the president the power to order the arrest, interrogation, and imprisonment of anyone–including a U.S. citizen–indefinitely, on the sole suspicion that he or she is affiliated with terrorism, and on the president’s sole authority as commander in chief.’”

“Segura cited the bill’s serpentine phraseology:”

“‘Whenever within the United States, its territories and possessions, or outside the territorial limits of the United States, an individual is captured or otherwise comes into custody or under the effective control of the United States who is suspected of engaging in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners through an act of terrorism, or by other means in violation of the laws of war, or of purposely and materially supporting such hostilities, and who may be an unprivileged enemy belligerent, the individual shall be placed in military custody for purposes of initial interrogation and determination of status in accordance with the provisions of this Act.’”

“In other words, said Segura: ‘If at any point, anywhere in the world, a person is caught who might have done something to suggest that he or she is a terrorist or somehow supports a terrorist organization against the U.S. or its allies, that person must be imprisoned by the military.’”  

“‘For how long?’ Segura asked, finding the answer to her question in a subsection of S.3081, which stipulates suspects ‘may be detained without criminal charges and without trial for the duration of hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners.’” 

“Senator Lieberman addressed the matter of how long ‘suspects’ could be detained in a press conference, saying: ‘I know that will be–that may be–a long time, but that’s the nature of this war.’”

“Equally ominous in the opinion of many libertarians, independents, militiamen and leftists, are the 72 federally funded Fusion Centers now located around the U.S.—one in every state, plus another 22 in major urban areas.”

“Established by the DHS and the Department Of Justice (DOJ), the role of the Fusion Centers is to acquire and share (‘fuse’) information with one another, the CIA, FBI, and Military intelligence organizations, as well as with state and local police.”

“According to the DOJ:The ultimate goal of a Fusion Center is to provide a mechanism where law enforcement, public safety, and private partners can come together with a common purpose and improve the ability to safeguard our Homeland and prevent criminal activity.  A police officer, firefighter, or building inspector should not have to search for bits of information. They should know to call one particular place–the jurisdiction’s Fusion Center.’

“In September 2009, the DHS announced: ‘classified military intelligence will be made available to state and local Fusion Centers, which function as information sharing hubs between DHS and state, tribal and local officials.’”

“Since 2004 the Fusion Centers have been granted more than $575 million in federal funds, and their work is further subsidized by multiple millions of dollars state and local police receive, directly and indirectly, from the federal government.”

“Fusion Centers!, their opponents note, at a time when crime is going down.”

“Along with the ACLU, libertarians, independents and leftists have registered anger and dismay about particular individuals and activities which given Fusion Centers have  identified as ‘subversive’ or ‘threatening.’

“In July, 2008 the ACLU won a Public Information Act lawsuit against Maryland. Agents of the Maryland State Police Homeland Security Intelligence Division (HSID) had infiltrated peace groups, the American Friends Service Committee, anti-death penalty groups, an immigrant rights group, a gay-transgender advocacy organization, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), the D.C. Statehood Green Party, the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, as well as protestors against Lockheed Martin, utility rate hikes, and biological warfare experiments. Information gleaned was then shared with the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Baltimore-Washington Fusion Center.”

“The ACLU remarked the HSID bulletins: ‘would be laughable except that they come with the imprimatur of a federally backed intelligence operation, and they encourage law enforcement officers to monitor the activities of political activists and racial and religious minorities.’”

“The Missouri Information and Analysis Center (MIAC), identified militia members, anti-abortion activists, conspiracy theorists, and people who supported Congressman Ron Paul and former Senator Bob Barr in the 2008 presidential election as ‘potential threats to U.S. security.’”

“In its February 2009 report, the North Central Texas Fusion Center ‘warned law enforcement officials about the threat that comes from Americans growing more tolerant of Islamic practices like foot-baths being installed in public places, and public schools scheduling prayer breaks to accommodate Muslim students.’ The report also cautioned police ‘to be aware of the protest activities of peaceful anti-war groups like Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (ANSWER)’.”  

“The Virginia Fusion Center’s 2009 Threat Assessment identified ‘subversive thought’ as ‘a marker for violent terrorism,’ and called ‘university-based student groups “radicalization nodes.”’ The VFC further ‘warned of the Muslim Brotherhood’s alleged strategy of boring from within by infiltrating different Islamic organi-zations and obtaining leadership roles,‘ and characterized the states’ black colleges as a ‘possible threat.’”

“‘A DHS analyst at the Wisconsin Fusion Center issued a report about protesters on both sides of the abortion debate,’ and the Tennessee Fusion Center included the ACLU as among the groups to be watched for ‘terrorism events and other suspicious activity’.”

“Sharing the libertarian/militia/leftist concern that the sharp move to the right occurring in the U.S. could end with large numbers of Americans being rounded up and imprisoned, in March 2009, Stewart Rhodes, a Yale Law School Graduate and former army paratrooper, founded Oath Keepers, a non-violent, non-partisan organization comprised of active members of the armed services, veterans, military reservists, Fire Fighters, Police Officers and National Guard.”

“Upon joining, Oath Keepers swear:

1. We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people.

2. We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people.

3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as ‘unlawful enemy combatants’ or to subject them to a military tribunal.

4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a ‘state of emergency’ on a state.

5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.

6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.  

7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.

8. We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to ‘keep the peace’ or to ‘maintain control.’

9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.

10.We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.

“The Oath Keepers membership is currently estimated to be about 6,000.”

(With that, Machiavelli abruptly closed the folder of notes to which he had been referring; a large folder for someone who spoke of “cutting to the chase.”  Opening a second folder, he continued:)

“Having given you an objective word-picture of the United States’ fractious national scene, I will now do the same for its international situation. Then, I’ll tie them together, making empirical sense of the government’s current practices foreign and domestic.”

“Let me begin by calling your attention to the accuracy of my predictions regarding the policies which defending the U.S. has prompted its leaders to implement in the Middle East.”

“While Herr Marx was exploring his egalitarian-Pandoran world and ruminating about an ‘allegiance to the human race,’ accepting our survival of the fittest species’ nature, in my opening statement I posited the following. I’ll quote myself at some length here:”

‘The industrial world is heading for a showdown over the Middle East’s oil and gas.’ I argued.”

‘The survival of the U.S. and maintenance of its dominant world position, requires that it gain control of Middle East oil.’ Most importantly, it must work to insure no other country, (particularly China), or group of countries, accomplishes that task.”

“Because the U.S. would be unable to compete for Iraq’s oil, I proposed, its only recourse was to use its unmatched military might to ‘seize control’ of the country; after which, to maintain its authority, I explained it would need to:”

“*’Annihilate not just Saddam but a large section of the Iraqi elite, its military officers, judges, doctors, lawyers, university presidents, engineers and chemists, who would otherwise demand a continuation of their favored situations.’”

“*‘Kill or drive from the country a few million middle class Iraqis, whose statuses it would likewise be impossible to sustain.’”

“*‘Destroy the economic, political and judicial system through which the Baathists held power, including the symbols of their authority.’”

“*‘Raze the infrastructure vital to the country’s existence: its electrical grids, telephone, water and sewage systems, its colleges and universities, rail lines and bridges.’”  

Doing the latter, I explained, ‘would help force middle class Iraqis out of the country by reducing their living standard to the bare-survival level.’”

“Once those things were accomplished, I reasoned ‘it would be necessary to break Iraq into several pieces, assigning control over each piece to that group which would be capable of defending its own authority and U.S. dominion.’”

“Finally, I stressed that while the conflict over Middle East oil and gas is principally between the U.S. and China, given the economic interdependence of those two countries, once the U.S. was victorious in the struggle it would need to consider the interests of the vanquished.  For the same reason, getting France, Germany, Japan and England to acquiesce to U.S. dominance in Iraq would make it imperative they, too, profitably acquire sufficient amounts of its oil to help keep their own economies running smoothly.”

“In other words, China and Europe would have to be cut in on the take.”

“How, then, has it all turned out?”

“Let me begin my answer to that question by quoting a November 2009 article written by retired CIA intelligence analyst Ray McGovern, which McGovern titled ‘The Bogus Success of the Surge.’”

“However, I’d like you to imagine Dick Cheney authored the article, and, that he called it: ‘The Spectacular Success of the Surge.’”

“Writing: ‘Gradually, the violence in Iraq did subside, from catastrophic to wretched,’ McGovern (Cheney) attributed this decrease partly to ‘Shiite leader Moqtada al-Sadr’s decision to call a unilateral cease-fire;’ to the ‘rapid targeting and killing of insurgent leaders;’ and, to ‘sophisticated biometrics and night-vision-equipped drones–with old-fashioned brutality on the ground, including on-the-spot executions of suspects.’”

“In addition, MCGovern (Cheney) continued, “other brutal factors further explain the decline in violence:’

“‘–Vicious ethnic cleansing had succeeded in separating Sunnis and Shiites to such a degree that there were fewer targets to kill. Several million Iraqis were estimated to be refugees either in neighboring countries or within their own.’”

“‘–Concrete walls built between Sunni and Shiite areas made “death-squad” raids more difficult, and “cantonized” much of Baghdad and other Iraqi cities, making everyday life for Iraqis even more exhausting as they sought food or traveled to work.’”

“‘–During the “surge,” U.S. forces expanded a policy of rounding up so-called “military age males” and locking up tens of thousands in prison on the flimsiest of suspicions.’”

“‘–Awesome U.S. firepower, concentrated on Iraqi insurgents and civilian by-standers for more than five years, had slaughtered countless thousands of Iraqis and had intimidated many others to look simply to their own survival.’”

“‘–With the total Iraqi death toll estimated in the hundreds of thousands and many more Iraqis horribly maimed, the society had been deeply traumatized.  As tyrants (Cheney’s word would be victors) have learned throughout history, at some point violent repression does work.’”

“Surely, Cheney-on-truth-serum could not offer a more roseate defense of the war and the brilliantly effective tactics employed; nor could one find a better illustration of pragmatic liberal denial than McGovern’s reference to the U.S. effort  as a “bogus success.’”

“Unfortunately, McGovern lamented (Cheney would have bragged), ‘this dark side of the “successful surge” was excluded from the U.S. political debate in 2008, much as the illegality of Bush’s original invasion had been treated as a taboo subject during the early years of the Iraq War.’”

“Need I point out the ‘exclusion’ was made possible by the indispensable lies told by Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, Rice, Powell and other members of the Bush administration?”

“Jesus’ admonition that ‘the truth will set you free’ might be valid in Pandora.  But we live in the real world, and in the real world truth often undermines the ability of leaders to protect their states and their people; a point implicit in Senator Lieberman’s assertion that Wikileaks’ disclosure of classified U.S. government truths ‘is probably the greatest act of espionage in our nation’s history.’”

As for evidence the U.S. now controls Iraq, note that the billion-dollar American embassy—the largest, most expensive embassy in the world, covering 104 acres and equal in size to the Vatican—opened on January 5th, 2009.”

“’Its scale reflects the importance of the U.S.-Iraq bilateral relationship,’ said  embassy spokeswoman Susan Ziadeh. ‘It reflects a more normal situation.’”

“Approximately 50,000 U.S. forces, and over 86,000 private contractors, remain in the country. The former are ostensibly there to ‘train and advise’ Iraqi military and police, but, like many of the private contractors, they are well armed and fully  prepared to engage in combat if called upon.”

“Four thousand, five hundred CIA-directed U.S. Special Forces are also staying in Iraq. Of them, Phyllis Bennis, a Senior Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies observed: ‘using a list of people to be killed or captured’, they will ‘run around the country and kill or capture anyone whose name is on the list, regardless of the validity of the intelligence which put their names’ there.”

“While it’s not yet clear how many of the 300-plus U.S. military bases will remain, four or five of the largest ones, particularly Ali, Al Asad and Balad—each a small city in size, with modern shops, restaurants and fitness centers, each able to handle the largest planes—unquestionable will.  So, too, will four bases equipped with missile launch pads, located 20 miles from Iran’s border.

“Using American weaponry, and acting in accord with personal interest, Iraqi troops will also fight for continued U.S. hegemony.  To paraphrase the classic metaphor: They know who’s buttering their bread!  On December 7th, 2010, Iraqi Air Force Brig. Gen. Sami Al Tamimy hosted a group of Americans who were wounded in his country and appreciatively told them: “I would like to thank you for all the sacrifices you’ve made to accomplish our wishes to build a safe and secure and democratic Iraq, and we promise you, we are going to work as hard as you did to accomplish these goals . . . Without all this hard work that you have done here, we would not be here in front of you, so thank you.’”

“You will recall I argued getting Iraq to be compliant would necessitate breaking the Sunni control over the country, since Sunnis made up much of the secure middle class and virtually all of the elite.”

“By 2006 the Sunni-cleansing had been largely accomplished.  Most of Baghdad’s Sunni doctors, judges, lawyers, scientists, teachers and other professionals were either murdered or driven into exile in Jordan or Syria.”

“When Sunnis still living in Iraq responded by joining with al Qaeda to attack American forces, the U.S. pressured the Iraqi government to create Awakening Councils comprised of 65,000 young Sunni men, each of whom the U.S. paid $300 a month to switch sides.”

“In 2009 the U.S. turned responsibility for financing the Awakening Councils over to the Iraqi government and their members began having trouble getting paid; creating new and sometimes violent tensions between Sunnis and the Shia dominated government.”

“Since a unified Iraq with a strong central government would be better equipped to resist U.S. authority, so long as disruptive conflicts between Shia, Sunni, Kurds, Christians and assorted warlords don’t get out of control, they are to America’s distinct advantage.”

“Many liberals and leftists argued oil was the exclusive U.S. objective when it invaded Iraq. Retired Army Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, former Secretary of State Colin Powell’s Chief of Staff, put it bluntly: ‘Dick Cheney went to Iraq for one reason: he went to Iraq for oil.’”

“Those who held that conviction now conclude the invasion didn’t pay off as intended.  To quote Alexander Cockburn:”

“‘If this really was a “war for oil,” it scarcely went well for the United States. Run your eye down the list of contracts the Iraqi government awarded in June and December 2009. Prominent is Russia’s Lukoil, which, in partnership with Norway’s Statoil, won the rights to West Qurna Phase Two, a 12.9 billion–barrel supergiant oilfield. Other successful bidders for fixed-term contracts included Russia’s Gazprom and Malaysia’s Petronas.  So either the all-powerful US government was unable to fix the auctions to its liking, or the all-powerful US-based oil companies mostly decided the profit margins weren’t sufficiently tempting.  Either way, “the war for oil” doesn’t look in very good shape.’”

“Of course, the war against Iraq wasn’t just for the oil.  As I explained in my opening remarks, oil was the United States’ ‘paramount concern’ in starting the war, and ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips and Chevron executives may have found the idea of having it all for themselves appealing, but that was not the objective of U.S. political leaders. Their objective was to prevent China and/or European states from acquiring command over the Middle East’s oil, since that would give them control of the global—and therefore the U.S.—economy.”

“Because a plentiful supply of low-priced oil is a prerequisite for the survival of every industrialized nation, if one of them, including the U.S., or any small group of industrial nations, were to gain exclusive control of Mid East oil it would make catastrophic wars not likely, but certain. Chinese, Russian, French, German et al. political leaders no doubt shared the concern of their U.S. counterparts that such an eventuality might occur.”

“For that reason, Cheney, Blair and other American and British leaders undoubtedly viewed their Iraq war as peace-making: a world-war preventive.”   

“To an objectivist, President Obama’s prosecution of the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan reveals he has been applying the same–dare I say Machiavellian–awareness to the rest of Eurasia.”

“Like Cheney, Obama understands the material common sense of the thesis Zbigniew Brzezinski presented in The Grand Chessboard:

“‘America’s global primacy’, Brzezinski argued, ‘is directly dependent on how long and how effectively its preponderance on the Eurasian continent is sustained . . . About 75 percent of the world’s people live in Eurasia, and most of the world’s physical wealth is there as well, both in its enterprises and underneath its soil. Eurasia accounts for about three-fourths of the world’s known energy resources’.”

“Brzezinski emphasized that the U.S. objective should not be to deny other states access to Eurasia’s vital resources, but rather, to secure continuing access for itself; and, most critically, to maintain the position of moderator, determining which other nations obtain how much of the prize.”

‘The most immediate task,‘ Brzezinski reasoned, ‘is to make certain that no state or combination of states gains the capacity to expel the United States from Eurasia, or even to diminish significantly its decisive arbitration role.’”

“Economist William Engdahl has given the same explanation for the U.S. war in Afghanistan. ‘Why is the U.S. in Afghanistan at all?‘ he asked. ‘Why the 30,000 troops and private mercenaries increases?‘ His answer? The objective is to prevent cooperation between China and Russia for control of oil and gas in that region.”

“To date, the material evidence suggests Brzezinski’s ‘Grand Design’ has been more-or-less working, albeit, with a great loss of life and an enormous expenditure of money.”

“It is certainly working in Iraq. The U.S. has prevented any other major power, or combination of major powers, from taking control of that country’s oil and keeping the U.S. out.”

“When the bargaining for Iraq’s oil was over, as Cockburn observes, but doesn’t objectively explain, fifteen international corporations from thirteen countries—seven of them small states—had secured contracts.”

“BP and China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC), got Rumaila, Iraq’s largest oil field, with a reserve of 17.7 billion barrels (bbls);  Lukoil (Russia) and Statoil (Norway) won West Qurna, Phase 2: 12.9 bbls;  Majnoon, with a 12.6 bbls reserve, went to Royal Dutch Shell (Netherlands) and Petronas (Malaysia); Royal Dutch Shell and ExxonMobil (U.S.) acquired West Qurna, Phase 1: 8.7 bbls; Japan’s Nippon Oil will join with Iraq’s National Drilling Company in developing the Nasiriyah oil field: 4.4. bbls.  ENI (Italy), Occidental Petroleum (U.S), and South Korea’s Korea Gas Corporation obtained the rights to Zubair oil field: 4.4 bbls.  And the Halfaya oil field’s 4.1 bbls will be tapped by CNPC and Petronas.” 

“Libertarians and leftists who contended U.S. oil corporations instigated the Iraq war ignored the fact that today only three of the world’s twenty largest oil companies are American; and two of those—ConocoPhillips and Chevron—are eighth and ninth on the list; ExxonMobil is number three. By themselves, American oil corporations couldn’t exploit Iraq’s oil even if given the opportunity.”

“The left could have made a more convincing case had it argued Oilfield Service Corporations incited the war, since seven of the ten largest are American; of which at least five, including Halliburton, are preparing to reap immense profits.

“In a February 2010 Houston Chronicle article, Monica Hatcher reported: ‘experts say U.S. oil field services companies should gain handsomely when Iraq begins ramping up production. Many of them have principal offices, headquarters or manufacturing facilities in Houston. . . .  Iraq will need technical services provided by Houston firms, as well as equipment such as wellheads, blowout preventers, pipelines, pumps, and drill bits.’” 

Turner Investment Corporation predicts Iraq’s daily oil production will increase from ‘2.5 million barrels per day to 4.2 million barrels by 2016,’ earning Baker Hughes, Schlumberger, Weatherford International, and Halliburton $40 billion in the process.  All four Oilfield Services companies are based in Texas.”

“The Oilfield Services corporations provide a wide variety of functions, including drilling, well-testing, technical support, logistics, production and enhancement.  Halliburton is contracted to drill 15 wells at Majnoon, Schlumberger to drill at West Qurna Phase1. Halliburton’s also assisting Italy’s ENI Corporation in devel-oping the Zubair field in Southern Iraq.”

“Given the great and growing importance of Eurasia’s oil and gas to Halliburton, in March 2007 David Lesar, the corporation’s CEO, announced he was moving its central office from Huston to Dubai.”

“Dick Cheney, the former head of Halliburton, and still heavily invested in that Oilfield Services company, began profiting from the Iraq war almost immediately.  The value of his Halliburton stock options soared from $241,498 in 2004 to more than $8 million in 2005; an increase of over 3,000 percent; the result of no-bid/no-audit contracts the U.S. government bestowed.”

“While Cheney-the-capitalist was undoubtedly pleased with that result, I submit Cheney-the-political-leader had more humanitarian objectives: defending his state, and preventing a global war for Middle East oil.”

“Another fundamental point ignored by libertarians and leftists is that the enormous cost of serving the world’s oil and gas needs today—the expense involved in drilling, shipping, refining, and delivery–can only be met if it’s shared.  In other words, Russian, American, Chinese, British, French, Japanese, Turkish, Malaysian, et. al. oil corporations must cooperate to survive!”

“And  cooperate they do, not just in Iraq, but all around the globe!”

“In 2006 ConocoPhillips (U.S.) purchased a 20% stake in Russia’s LUKOIL, and the two companies are working together to develop Siberia’s Yuzhno-Khylchuyu oil deposits. China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) has joined with Chesapeake Energy Corporation (U.S.) to drill in Southwest Texas; CNOOC holding a one-third share in the project. In 2007 China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) and Chevron (U.S.) signed a 30-year contract to tap the Chuandongbei natural gas field in central China, with Chevron holding a 49% share. CNPC has a 35% share in Royal Dutch Shell Oil Corporation’s (Netherlands/Britain/U.S.) subsidiary in Syria. LUKOIL purchased Getty Petroleum Marketing (U.S.) in 2000, and its stock is traded under that name on the New York Exchange.”

“The 1,100 mile Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil pipeline, which begins in Baku, Azerbaijan, passes through Tblisi, Georgia, and terminates at Ceyhan, Turkey, was built, and is owned/maintained, by a consortium of international oil corporations: Chevron, Hess and ConocoPhillips (U.S.); Itochu and Inpex (Japan); BP (United Kingdom); STATOIL (Norway; ENI (Italy); TOTAL (France); SOCAR (State Oil Corporation of Azerbaijan), and TPAO (Turkey).  Russia’s LUKOIL is currently arranging to join the consortium and will use the BTC pipeline to transport some of its own Caspian oil to market.”

“Kazakhstan’s Tengiz oilfield, at 12,000 feet the world’s deepest, is likewise a joint undertaking between LUKARCO, Russia 5%; KMG, Kazakhstan 20%; Exxon-Mobil 25%, and Chevron 50%.”

“The cooperative development of Iraq’s oil fields has already been described.”

“Then, there’s the proposed $7.5 billion Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) pipeline for transporting natural gas from the oilfields of Southern Turk-menistan, through Afghanistan to Multan, Pakistan, and on to New Delhi.”

“Originated by Unocal Oil Company of California in the late 1990s, TAPI  became Chevron’s plan when it purchased Unocal in 2005, and will be financed by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) which, like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, is principally under U.S. financial control and profit.”

“TAPI is the very large U.S. foot in Eurasia’s door, and it has been aggressively promoted by American leaders who have the required vision. In 2001 the Cheney-Bush Administration notified the Taliban then governing Afghanistan they must choose between ‘a carpet of gold and a carpet of bombs’ and allow TAPI to pass through their country. When they turned down a golden carpet, the U.S. drove them from power with a carpet of bombs.”

“President Obama will facilitate the herd’s remaining in denial with vague promises of pulling American troops out of Afghanistan in 2011. But the material evidence argues that to protect his nation and its people he can not and will not permit a pullout to happen.”

“Jeremy Scahill described the ever-deepening U.S. commitment in December 2009, observing: ‘There are 104,000 Department of Defense contractors in Afghanistan. According to a report from the Congressional Research Service, as a result of the coming surge of 30,000 troops, up to 56,000 additional contractors may be deployed. And there’s another group which often goes unmentioned: 3,600 State Department contractors and 14,000 USAID contractors. That means the current total U.S. force in Afghanistan is approximately 189,000 personnel (68,000 troops and 121,000 contractors.).’”

“Five months later, May 2010, Scahill predicted there would be an increase of between 31,000 and 61,000. “Within a matter of months,’ he estimated, ‘and certainly within a year, the United States will have upwards of 220,000 and 250,000 U.S. government-funded personnel occupying Afghanistan, a far cry from the 70,000 U.S. soldiers that those Americans who pay attention understand the United States has in Afghanistan.’ “

“They’re certainly not there to fight al-Qaeda, Scahill continued: ‘This is a country where the president’s national security adviser, GeneraL James Jones, said there are less than 100 al-Qaeda operatives, who have no ability to strike at the United States.’”

“Writing in September of 2010, International Herald Tribune op-ed columnist William Pfaff noted: ‘The Pentagon is constructing bases for the new arrivals /to Afghanistan/ on a giant scale with all the customary civilian appurtenances of American military life—fast food franchises, bargain-price exchanges and other amenities . . . This base construction would seem to suggest that, whatever the president’s views of where the United States stands with respect to Afghanistan and the Taliban in December, the American military is not planning to saddle up and go home.’”

“As with the BTC, protecting the U.S. will require its leader to insure TAPI is constructed/owed/operated by a consortium of international corporations; that U.S. corporations and financial institutions play predominant roles; that no world power(s) is able to deny the region’s gas to others; and, to the degree possible, that the U.S. acts as mediator.”

“To quote the Eurasia Review’s apt depiction of TAPI: ‘It is the finished product of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan.  It consolidates NATO’s political and military presence in the strategic high plateau that overlooks Russia, Iran, India, Pakistan and China.  TAPI provides a perfect setting for the alliance’s future projection of military power for “crisis management” in Central Asia.’”

“TAPI makes India key where trying to prevent China from becoming the dominant power in the region and easing the U.S. from the scene is concerned. As Lawrence Wilkerson said of America’s Eurasian reality:”

“‘Our new ally is India. Everyone in the United States military knows that. Our new area of operations is the Indian Ocean. That’s where the United States Navy’s going to concentrate. Its principal ally is the Indian Navy.  And that’s not just as a counterpoint to China’s power; it is also a statement of where we believe the strategic focus of the world is right now. And that’s because of things like the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India Pipeline (TAPI), for example. You know, oddly enough, our troops are laid out along, in Afghanistan, the path that the pipeline would take.’”

“Now to the conflict between the U.S. and Iran:”

“With India’s economy developing at a pace second only to China’s, its need for dependable low-cost energy grows accordingly, giving India two options: Access the natural gas of Southern Turkmenistan with TAPI, or, access the huge (9 percent of known world reserves) gas field in Iran’s South Pars via an Iran-to-Pakistan-to-India pipeline.”

“Iran has energetically promoted the latter.  In the mid-1990s Iran and Pakistan reached a ‘preliminary agreement’ to build an $8 billion Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline they euphemistically named the ‘Peace Pipe’; and in March 2010 they signed a formal accord to start work on the initial section, extending from South Pars to Pakistan’s Sindh province. At the latter juncture, Russia’s GAZPROM announced it was interested in assisting with ‘construction and management’; Iran invited China to get involved; and India, previously reluctant due to its dispute with Pakistan over Kashmir, and U.S. pro-TAPI counter-pressure, seemed ready to commit.”

“By further integrating the economies of Iran, Pakistan and India and making TAPI unnecessary, the Peace Pipe would go far toward restricting U.S. influence in Eurasia,  particularly if China participated; and Iran was pushing hard. On July 8th, 2010 Indian newsman Anjli Raval reported: ‘Iranian business leaders have arrived in India armed with jewelry boxes, saffron and optimism. . . . The Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline will top the agenda as Iranian and Indian officials sit down for two days of trade talks in New Delhi.’”

“On November 6th, four months after the Peace-Pipe-promoting Iranian businessmen visited India, President Obama landed in Mumbai for three days of mutually beneficial/profitable ‘discussions’.”

“According to World.press.org: on the very first day of Obama’s visit, 20 business deals worth a total of $10 billion were signed between the two countries. The deals included sales of Boeing passenger aircrafts, Boeing C-17 GlobeMasters to Indian armed forces, GE 107 F414 jet engines to the Indian Air Force, GE power turbines, and the setting up of a Harley Davidson assembly plant’.”

“Obama committed the U.S. to lifting the restrictions on defense and space industry exports to India imposed in 1998 after India tested nuclear devices.  India stated its intention to spend $100 billion on new armaments over the next decade, including an order for 126 advanced jet fighters, to be placed during the next fiscal year. And Obama made it clear Lockheed Martin’s F-16, Boeing’s F/A-18s, and other weapons are available.”

“With that, India backed out of the Peace Pipe project again. On December 11th, 2010, three days after Obama departed, the presidents of Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India met in Turkmenistan to sign an agreement for TAPI’s construction.”

“On February 10th, 2011 IndiaRealTime reported:‘American officials have launched a publicity blitzkrieg at the latest edition of the Aero India trade show in Bangalore. The U.S. has the largest foreign presence at the air show and is making a high-decibel pitch to sell advanced weapons systems, fighter jets and helicopters to India to capture a share of this lucrative market.’”  

“You now understand why Iran is currently the United States’ principal Eurasian opponent.  Unlike China, American corporations and financial institutions have no stake in—i.e., do not profit from—Iran’s energy production and distribution. Moreover, the investments they do have in Eurasia are menaced by Iran’s policies.”

“Besides threatening TAPI with the Peace Pipe, in January 2011 Iran signed an agreement with Syria to construct a natural gas line (the Islamic Pipeline) which would pass through, and meet the gas needs of, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Turkey, on the way (eventually) to Europe. According to Iran, when completed the ‘Islamic Pipeline’ would provide Europe with 110 million cubic meters of gas daily. In February 2011 officials from Iran, Iraq and Syria held meetings on the Islamic Pipeline in Tehran.”

“In addition, Iran already has 2 short pipelines taking natural gas from Turkmenistan to Iran. The first one Korpeje-Kordkuy, (120 miles) went on line in 1998. The second, Dovletabad-Sarahs-Hangeran (19 miles) opened in 2010. Together, the two lines carry 20 billion cubic meters of Turkmenistan’s natural gas to Iran annually; and Iran envisions linking them with the Islamic Pipeline to transport Turkmenistan’s gas to Europe.”

“Since 2001 Iran has also delivered natural gas to Turkey via the 1,601 mile Tabriz-Ankara Pipeline; and a second Iran-Turkey line, the Persian Pipeline, is at the planning stage.”

“As I’ve indicated, the U.S. is fighting back. Besides stopping (at least momentarily) India’s support for the Peace Pipe, and placing troops along the Helmand province route that TAPI will follow through Afghanistan, it has employed a variety of other tactics to counter Iran’s growing power in the region.”

“India buys 15% of its oil from Iran (350,000-400,000 barrels a day), and has paid the $12 billion-a-year bill via the Asian Clearing Union ACU).  On December 23rd, 2010, a month after Obama’s Mumbai visit, submitting to U.S. pressure, the Central Bank of India declared: ‘Indian companies which purchase Iranian oil and gas will no longer be permitted to use the ACU to send payment to Iran.‘ ‘Praveen Kumar, director of the South Asia oil and gas team,‘ explained the  bank’s decision, saying: ‘India is not left with much choice. It is as if their “big brother,” in the form of the United States, has told them not to do this.’” 

“In the summer and early fall of 2010 Iranian gas pipelines suffered a series of ‘mysterious explosions‘ which killed around 20 people and injured a greater number of others. Iran blamed the explosions occurring in Turkey on the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), the three within Iran itself on ‘poor maintenance.‘“ 

Iranian authorities are naturally interested in denying the U.S. is able to carry out attacks within its borders.  However, Britain’s Daily Telegraph reflected: ‘the high number of attacks on Iran’s gas pipelines . . . will inevitably raise suspicions that this is the work of professional saboteurs. The CIA, for example, is known to have a clandestine operation underway to destabilize the Iranian regime.’”

“Aware that under CIA auspices American Special Forces are operating in Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq, most Eurasian leaders consider the Daily Telegraph’s hypothesis convincing.”

“Given the complex web of shared economic interests that bind Israel to the U.S., and Iran’s backing of the Palestinians, Israel has needed no encouragement to support the U.S. offensive against the Peace Pipe, or the embargo of Iran. The recent discovery of large deposits of natural gas off Israel’s Mediterranean coast—gas it would like to sell Europe–has increased its enthusiasm for such policies.”

“According to the New York Times, the Stuxnet Worm that badly damaged many of Iran’s nuclear centrifuges was created and perfected by brilliant U.S. and Israeli computer programmers working at Israel’s Dimona nuclear complex.”

“But Iran isn’t about to concede in its battle with the U.S.; quite simply, because it can’t.  Iran’s population increased dramatically over the past few decades, from 27 million in 1968 to 73 million today, and to maintain economic viability it must sell ever-larger quantities of its oil and gas. To Iran’s great advantage, India and China, along with Turkey, Pakistan et al., need ever-larger amounts of both. China’s purchase of natural gas will increase by 22.6% in the next year alone, and India is close behind.”

“So, India will continue importing Iranian oil, and the $12-billion-yearly will be paid. Two months after the U.S. succeeded in stopping India from making oil payments through the ACU, it began routing them through Europisch-Iranische Handelsbank (EIH), an Iranian-owned bank based in Hamburg.”

“On its part, Iran will continue promoting the Peace Pipe. On February 8th, 2011 it announced that 90% of the pipeline within Iran has been completed. Under intense pressure from the U.S., Pakistani officials are claiming they lack the funds to work on the Pakistan portion of the pipeline. But they’re still showing interest in it, and they have consulted with Chinese banks about a loan. Finally, although their claims may be apocryphal, Iranian authorities insist Peace Pipe discussions with India are still taking place.”

“While the heads of major American energy companies, banks and defense industries have been celebrating the progress with TAPI, the interruption of Iran’s Peace Pipe effort, and recent U.S. military progress in Afghanistan, the U.S. still confronts major obstacles where remaining the decisive Eurasian authority, ergo, the dominant world power, is concerned.”

“Iran is the United States’ principal foe in the region. But as Congressman Paul Ryan, Alan Greenspan, Pamela Geller, and other Ayn Rand Objectivists I see in the audience understand, out of self-interest a nation’s closest allies sometimes behave like enemies, and its worst enemies sometimes act like friends.”

“China is a crucial ally of the United States insofar as it buoys the U.S. economy by financing its national debt, buys American products, sells Americans enormous quantities of its own, and, permits large corporations like General Motors to become major investors in Chinese manufacture. However, as a competitor for control of the Caspian Basin’s mineral wealth, China is an adversary second only to Iran.”

“In December 2009 China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) opened the 1139 mile China-Central Asia Pipeline to take natural gas from Turkmenistan, through Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, to the autonomous region of Xinjiang, China. The next year CNPC doubled the pipeline’s capacity; and it’s now finishing work on a second pipeline which, if it opens in 2012 as scheduled, will transport an additional 6 billion cubic meters of gas annually from Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan to China.”

“Russia, which obtains 70% of its export income from the sale of gas and oil, is the third formidable antagonist of the U.S. in the region. Via its Transneft Pipeline, Russia recently began selling China 15 million tons of Urals grade crude oil annually, drawn from its Western Siberia oil fields. With minimum U.S. involvement or cooperation, by 2013 China should be acquiring sufficient crude oil from Russia, and natural gas from Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, to meet its needs for the foreseeable future.”

GAZPROM has partnered with France’s EDF and Italy’s ENI to begin construction of a 2,062 mile pipeline to transport Russian gas from Novorosysk to most of Europe’s smaller countries, including Bulgaria, Serbia, Austria, Italy and Greece. If completed as planned, that pipeline, too, will significantly reduce U.S. power and influence in Eurasia.”

“While the U.S. is presently struggling to prevent China and India from becoming too close, as the Asia Sentinel recently observed: ‘Despite growing geopolitical tensions between New Delhi and Beijing, India-China trade has risen sharply over the past few years, so much so that China is poised to overtake the United States as India’s leading trading partner.’”

“According to Eurasia Review: ‘Russia and China have expressed interest in participating in the TAPI pipeline, but the U.S. will ensure that doesn’t occur. Washington’s vital interest in TAPI includes having an alternative route for Central Asian gas that will bypass the Russian pipelines‘ network.’”  

“The U.S. recently discovered huge new deposits of natural gas in Texas, Louisiana, Pennsylvania and Arkansas, and is experiencing a ‘gas glut’. But given distance, and the greater cost of its gas production, the U.S. can’t compete with Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Iran, or Russia where selling gas to China, India or Europe is concerned.”

“Finally, China and India are able to provide Eurasian gas and oil nations with all the low-priced manufactured goods the U.S. no longer produces.”

“To sum the problematic U.S. situation: where maintaining its authority in Eurasia, therefore globally, is concerned, the principal tools it has to work with are a fast-decreasing supply of money (much of it borrowed, at the very time China and India become daily more wealthy); oil and gas production and transmission expertise (which China and India are rapidly acquiring), and, force and the instruments of force!” 

As in Pakistan and Afghanistan, the U.S. is able to use satellite systems, drones and other high-tech ordnance, and send in troops armed with the latest sophisticated weapons to wreak its will.  It can also sell Eurasian states the arms needed to keep each other at bay and their own populations under control.”

“Nevertheless, despite its unparalleled weaponry, it’s unlikely the United States’ will long remain the dominant force in Eurasia.  To defend his state, Obama, or his successor, must continue the battle to provide American banks and corporations with maximum power and profitable investment in the region. But over the course of the next decade it seems all but certain that in serving their own interests China, India and Western Europe will turn the U.S. into the second or third level Eurasian, therefore world, authority, with China becoming Number One.”

“As a consequence, Obama must also work to insure that if and when his country loses its fight for dominance in Eurasia and the world, U.S. oil/gas/oilfield services corporations and financial institutions will already be so integrated with those of China and Russia that it is to the advantage of both nations to protect them, just as the U.S. is giving their interests consideration today.”

“Many libertarians are arguing the United States fomented the uprisings now sweeping North Africa and the Middle East. They could not be more mistaken.”

“The U.S. was tied to, supportive of, and made multiple billions of dollars yearly fromv arming and maintaining the despots, their pampered retinues, and brutal secret services which are threatened with being diminished or deposed.”

“Although there are religious fundamentalists among the protesters (e.g., Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood), the majority of Tunisian, Egyptian, Yemeni, Syrian, Jordanian, et. al. rebels are cellphone-packing enthusiasts for the modern, high-technology world. Insofar as they succeed in overthrowing their oppressive, dictatorial governments and take control, they are sure to push for greater industrialization/modernization of their nations’ economies, along with attendant opportunities like religious freedom and higher education.  For all the reasons I documented when discussing Iraq, the U.S. is not well-equipped to assist them, while China, Brazil, and to a lesser extent Russia, are.  As with Iran, for the foreseeable future the changes at work in these countries are most likely to increase U.S. reliance upon the Special Forces and other CIA operatives it is able to insinuate.”

“In a recent article political scientist Paul Amar described how beginning in the early 1990s, China, Russia and Brazil (very profitably) promoted the development of piecework and assembly factories in Egypt, ‘channel/ing/ an estimated $40-70 billion into Mubarak’s personal accounts’ as a reward.”

“‘If you stroll up the staircases into the large working-class apartment buildings in the margins of Cairo or the cement-block constructions of the villages,’ Amar observed, ‘you’ll see workshops full of women, making purses and shoes, and putting together toys and computer circuitboards for sale in Europe, the Middle East and the Gulf.”    

“Egypt’s long-established social order was transformed. Where the country’s lower and middle classes were formerly pacified with welfare and food subsidies, such social services were gradually removed and replaced with low-paid employment and loans.”

“‘Since economically disadvantaged applicants have no collateral to guarantee the loans,’ Amar notes, ‘payback is enforced by criminal law . . . . This means your body is your collateral /and/ the police extract pain and humiliation if you do not pay your bill.’”

“Destitute North African and Middle East lower classes, like those being exploited in Egyptian workshops, seek to ease their growing suffering, while millions of unemployed college-educated middle and upper-middle class youths want jobs.  China, Brazil and Russia can profit by accommodating them with the construction of factories to replace home workshops; factories that will be run by people of middle and upper-middle class origins, with workers from the lower class laboring for modestly higher wages; the police and military authorities no longer able to extract their present huge cuts.”

“For all the reasons I covered when discussing Iraq, it will be difficult for the U.S. to compete.”

(Machiavelli paused for more than a minute, shuffling papers and taking a drink of water, then resumed speaking, with the same confidence and conviction in his voice.)

“As promised, I’m now going to tie the national and the international together, providing you with an objective understanding of the policies Cheney/Bush—and today Obama—have implemented to hold America together. Most importantly, I’ll consider what the leader of the U.S. will be required to do in the future, and the material reasons why.”

“To date, I would rank President Obama among history’s good leaders. But to resolve the exigent problems confronting the United States it will not be sufficient for its leader to be merely good.  He, or she, must become great!  

“Unlike members of the herd, a great leader analyzes every situation with eyes unclouded by the myths, ideology and religion which keep them compliant. His sole objective, his virtue, is ‘preserving the state upon which the lives and the well-being of his people depend.’”

At the moment, it remains an open question whether Obama has the clarity, the courage, and, the capacity for evil, to meet that challenge.”

“As I’ve emphasized, and as Dr. Marx has acknowledged, though he insists ideas play a negligible role when it comes to determining history’s flow, every nation is held together by the shared perspectives of its members, and the more critical its situation, the more imperative a common consciousness becomes.”

“Where unifying his people around a common consciousness is concerned, a state’s leader might be likened to a border collie chasing recalcitrants back into the fold; except that for the leader of a state this often requires deviousness and deceit; and, just as defending their nations sometimes requires leaders to practice evil abroad, so too, there are occasions when they must practice it at home.”

“To use Brzezinski’s apt analogy, being the leader of a nation is like playing chess. The problem for the U.S. leader today is that—and I’m being generous—his arsenal has been momentarily reduced to a few pawns, a knight, a bishop and a rook.”

“To review the United States’ current economic situation:”

“Its national debt now exceeds $14 trillion, an amount equal to the country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP).The 100% mark,’ Giordano Bruno notes, ‘is often cited as the breaking point for most countries.’”

“Forty thousand U.S. factories closed during the last decade alone. While the government claims the unemployment rate is between 9 and 9.5 percent, the actual figure is nearer 20 percent and possibly above. Three million Americans have lost their homes since the economic crisis began, another 4 to 6 million are expected to do so, and 43.2 million people, roughly 14% of the nation’s population, are receiving food stamps.”

“With their tax receipts and municipal bonds’ sales down sharply, a growing number of American states face the possibility of defaulting on their debts, as do many cities. In a recent 60-Minutes interview, noted Wall Street analyst Meredith Witney predicted that between 50 and 100 U.S. cities will default this year.”

“For the past two decades U.S. leaders have relied on three financial instruments to maintain their country’s viability: borrowing trillions of dollars, mostly from Japan, China and the Middle East oil producing states; selling vast amounts of weaponry to non-industrial and industrializing states; and, taking advantage of the fact that the dollar has long been the international unit of exchange, creating money out of thin air.”

“All three wells are beginning to run dry.”

“Japan’s highly profitable agricultural and fishing industries were devastated by the March 11th earthquake and resulting tsunami, and by radiation pouring from the destroyed Fukashima-Daiichi nuclear power plant. Its automotive and high-technology industries were also seriously disrupted.  As a result, Japan, whose own national debt has reached 200% of its GDP, will not be able to continue purchasing the usual large amount of U.S. treasury bonds.”

“Aware it’s unlikely the U.S. will ever be able to pay it back, its economy requiring ever-larger investment due to its 9-10% annual growth rate, China is also showing signs of becoming a reluctant U.S. creditor. Mike Larson reports that: ‘In 2006’, China . . . /bought/ more than 50 percent of the increase . . . in /U.S./ Treasury debt sold to the public.’ ‘But by 2008 China’s share had fallen to 22 percent’. This while ‘the U.S. government raised its public debt by a record $1.2 trillion.’  In June, 2009, China became a net seller of U.S. Treasury notes and bonds, reducing its note and bond holdings by $25 billion.’ “

“‘Will China dump the rest of its estimated $876 billion hoard of U.S. Treasuries and crash the Treasury market?’, Larson wonders, noting: ‘that would crush the value of the Treasuries they own and cost them a king’s ransom. One thing seems clear,’ he concludes: ‘One of Washington’s most dependable sources of loans to finance our out of control deficits is drying up.‘”

“As for the United States’ Middle East financiers, with the international economic crisis continuing and much of that region aflame, the oil princes are having to protect their hegemonic existences by buying off, not just stepping on, more of their middle and lower classes. Saudi Arabia has spent an additional $150 billion that way since the North African-Middle East uprisings began. So the oil states, too, are less likely to be able and willing to purchase as much of the U.S. national debt as they have in the past.”

“Then there are the arms sales which have kept millions of American workers employed. India’s recent commitments notwithstanding, the global economic crisis and Mid East uprisings will almost certainly result in a reduction. Spending tens-of-billions of dollars on U.S. weaponry every year isn’t likely to be high on the things-to-do lists of Egypt, Yemen, Tunisia, Syria, et. al. when their uprisings are over, not even if their militaries retain much of their authority.”

“Finally, by creating money out of thin air and providing it interest-free to American banks and corporations, the Federal Reserve has enabled them to suck funds out of other countries by placing the money in their banks at high rates of interest, and, by buying up their farms and factories. As a result, many countries, led by Brazil and Malaysia, are erecting barriers to the U.S. profit-seeking dollars.”

“Known as the BRIC nations, Brazil, Russia, India and China have also started using their own currencies, rather than the dollar, to finance trade with one another. Accor-ding to a Thanksgiving Day 2010 report by the English edition of China Daily, Russia and China have signed an agreement to do so, and China already has a similar agreement with Brazil.”

“Dr. Marx may tell you that, like pollution, the grave economic problems I’ve described and the current global recession are evidence the U.S. capitalist system of production and distribution has reached its terminal stage.”

“But Marx, Ford and others who make that assertion are, quite simply, wrong!”

“Unlike the inflexible productive-distributive systems which preceded it, capitalism has time and again gone through an ecdysis when it suffered a profound crisis. And on every occasion, including the Great Depression of the 1930s, after shedding restrictive tissues in a process the famed Austrian-American economist Joseph Schumpeter called ‘creative destruction,’ capitalist nations have revived more energetic and enterprising than before.”

“In order to convince themselves a revolution is on the way, utopians—Marx and Ford on the Left, Chuck Baldwin, Alex Jones and others on the Libertarian Right—close their eyes to material reality.”

“Dr. Marx forgets that in all past revolutions the revolutionaries began organizing themselves around a well-defined theory long before the event: a Weltanschauung that described what needed to be changed, how it needed changing, and, who was standing in the way; i.e., a theory which precisely identified the enemy. That was true of the American and French Revolutions, as well as the so-called ‘communist’ revolutions in Russia and China.”

“What, then, is the revolutionary theory of today’s Left?”

“There isn’t any!  It doesn’t exist!” 

“Today’s Leftists have done no more than make hollow statements about what they should do. ‘We have to build that independent Left,‘ Naomi Klein told TV host Laura Flanders. ‘It has to be so strong and so radical and so militant and so powerful that it becomes irresistible.‘ ‘We don’t have structures to make the economically disposed of visible,‘ Klein grumbled, ‘We need progressive rage!‘“

“In other words, Klein was acknowledging there is no coherent Left understanding, let alone one which is revolutionary.”

“Numerous critics issue bits-and-pieces condemnations of capitalist America from the Left and the Libertarian Right, including Jeremy Scahill, Matt Taibbi, Peter Dale Scott, Alex Jones, Bishop Baldwin, Seymour Hersch, Paul Craig Roberts, Larry Flynt, Chris Hedges, Noam Chomsky, Governor Jesse Ventura and Michael Moore. And they occasionally suggest the need for a revolution: ‘Don’t Have the Revolution Without Me!‘, the title of Ventura’s book implores, while Baldwin exhorts: ‘We need a revolution, not a movement!’ But they haven’t begun to offer the kind of ‘How To’ analysis which has been a vital part of every revolution, and Moore’s documentary ‘Capitalism: A Love Story,‘ focuses on the very warts which Darwinian theorists like Schumpeter and Feuer consider the source of capitalism’s vibrance and originality.”

“Emphasizing that ideas always follow experience, in his long attack on Feuerbach Dr. Marx declared: ‘The existence of revolutionary ideas in a particular period presupposes the existence of a revolutionary class’. If Herr Marx abides by his own logic, he must conclude that since today’s Left isn’t presenting revolutionary ideas, there is no revolutionary class, and, there will be no revolution!’’

“Only Congressman Ron Paul on the Libertarian Right has offered a tightly reasoned analysis which has revolutionary implications.  But the stunted reception it has received is yet more evidence no revolution is impending.”

“In a clear and consistent voice Paul argues for the following:”

Closing nearly all of the United States’ 730 military bases abroad, thereby terminating its imperialist ventures. ‘Our world empire now costs us $1 trillion a year,’ Paul observes, asking: ‘How are we going to pay for it?’”

“On January 26th, 2011 Paul entered a burning condemnation of the U.S. policies which led to the First Gulf War into the Congressional Record.”

“Quoting Historian Mark Zepezauer, Paul said Saddam Hussein had been justifiably irate because Kuwait used slant-drilling equipment, purchased from National Security Council head Brent Scowcroft’s former company, to illegally pump $14 billion worth of Iraq’s oil.  ‘Slant-drilling is enough to get you shot in Texas,’ Zepezauer observed, ‘and it’s certainly enough to start a war in the Mideast.’”

“When Saddam complained about the oil theft to U.S. Ambassador April Glaspie, Paul recounted, Glaspie set him up for the invasion, saying: ‘The President has instructed me to broaden and deepen our relations with Iraq,’ To Saddam’s remark that if negotiations with Kuwait failed he intended to invade, Glaspie replied Secretary of State James Baker ‘had expressly instructed her to tell him the U.S. had no opinion on Arab-Arab conflicts like the one between Kuwait and Iraq.’ Then, when Kuwait refused to discuss the matter and Iraq invaded, the U.S. rebuffed Saddam’s repeated requests for consultation and sent in tanks and troops.”

“‘If Congress and the American people had known about this green light incident 20 years ago,‘ Paul concluded, ‘they would have been a lot more reluctant to give a green light to our government to pursue the current war–a war that is ongoing and expanding to this very day.’”

“Pointing to the CIA’s pivotal role in U.S. imperialist ventures, Paul advocates eliminating that problem by abolishing the CIA. In a January 2010 speech to a Libertarian audience, he queried: ‘There’s been a coup, have you heard?  It’s the CIA coup. The CIA runs everything, they run the military. They’re the ones who are over there lobbing missiles and bombs on countries. . . . They are a government unto themselves. They’re in businesses, in drug businesses, they take out dictators. We need to take out the CIA!’” 

“Paul’s Libertarian song was previously being sung only by the Left, which started condemning the CIA for being out of control in the early 1960s.”

“A cartoon by famed political cartoonist Jules Feiffer depicted an aide to President Kennedy rushing in to the oval office to announce they had just broken the code of the North Vietnamese, who had broken the code of the Chinese, who had broken the code of the CIA, and they now knew what the CIA’s policy for the region was.”

“In a November 2009 speech at the University of Minnesota, Pulitzer Prize winning reporter Seymour Hersch said of the CIA: ‘Congress has no oversight of it.  It’s an executive assassination ring essentially, and it’s been going on and on and on. They’ve been going into countries, not talking to the ambassador or the CIA station chief, and finding people on a list and executing them and leaving.’”      

“Fourteen months later, in a January 2011 speech given at Georgetown University, Hersch observed: ‘I’ve given up being disillusioned about the CIA.  They’re trained to lie, period.  They will lie to the president, they will certainly lie to the Congress, and they will lie to the American people.  That’s all there is to it.’”

Since the 1970s, the Left has also documented the CIA’s command of global drug running: first in South East Asia and Latin America, today in Afghanistan.”

“Paul has been no less eloquent about denouncing the “War on Terror,’ the Military-Industrial Complex, and federal financing of large corporations, which he calls ‘corporatism.’

“Regarding the ‘War On Terror’, Paul argues: ‘The loss of liberty, we are assured, will be minimal, short-lived, and necessary. Many citizens believe that once the War On Terror is over, restrictions on their liberties will be reversed. But this war is undeclared and open-ended, with no precise enemy and no expressly stated final goal. Terrorism will never be eradicated completely: does this mean future presidents will assert extraordinary war powers indefinitely?’

“‘Washington provides a vivid illustration of what our future might look like. Visitors to Capitol Hill encounter police barricades, metal detectors, paramilitary officers carrying fully automatic rifles, police dogs, ID checks, and vehicle stops. The people are totally disarmed: only the police and criminals have guns. Surveillance cameras are everywhere, monitoring street activity, subway travel, parks, and federal buildings. There’s not much evidence of an open society in Washington, DC‘.“  

“Of the Homeland Security Administration, Paul observed: ‘HSA sees a belief in the Constitution as terroristic.’”

“Like Marx, Paul is unwavering in his defense of free expression, arguing people should always have the right of dissent, and never be put in prison for exercising it. Condemning the World War I imprisonment of Eugene Debs for his dissension, Paul states categorically: ‘There’s only one kind of freedom: individual liberty.’  And, like Herr Marx, he concludes: ‘Government is the enemy of liberty.’”

”Paul has also been constant in his support of the Second Amendment, proclaiming: ‘The government wants to take away people’s guns, but everything the government does it does with guns, breaking into people’s houses with guns, going after farmers in their fields with guns’.”

“To the related question: What constitutes a proper or acceptable use of force by the people?, Marx and Paul again give the same answer.”

Marx was vehemently opposed to revolutionaries using violence to gain power.”

“Of the Blanquists and Jacobins who urged that course, he wrote: ‘Their business lies precisely in trying to preempt the developing revolutionary process, drive it artificially to crisis . . . to make a revolution without the conditions of a revolution. . . /i.e., the exhaustion of the productive-distributive order/.  They are the alchemists of the revolution, and they share all the wooly-mindedness, follies, and idees fixes of the former alchemists. They throw themselves on discoveries which should work revolutionary wonders:incendiary bombs, hell-machines of magical impact . . . Always busy and pre-occupied with such absurd planning and conniving, they see no other end than the next toppling-over of the existing government.’”

“According to Herr Marx, because everyone seeks, acquires and employs political power in defense of their own social existence, having more to protect, elites invariably dominate every society politically. As a consequence, if anti-capitalist revolutionaries succeeded in taking power through violence before that productive-distributive order had been drained of viability, they would discover that to stay in power they must defend first-and-foremost the capitalist elites.  Their  alternative would be to try and carry out equalitarian practices which a capitalist system does not permit. Irrelevant to the situation, they would then be deposed, very possibly killed.”

“In a letter to the American Socialist leader Joseph Wedemeyer, Engels expressed his concern that he and Marx might unwittingly suffer such a fate, writing:”

“‘I have a presentiment that, thanks to the perplexity and flabbiness of all the others, our party will be forced into the government one fine morning to carry out ultimately the measures that are of no direct interest to us, but are in the general interests of the revolution and the specific interests of the petty bourgeoisie; on which occasion, driven by the proletarian populace, bound by our own printed declarations and plans—more or less falsely interpreted, more or less passionately put forward in the partisan struggle—we shall be constrained to undertake communist experiments and extravagant measures, the untimeliness of which we know better than anyone else. In so doing, we lose our heads—only physiquement parlant, let us hope—a reaction sets in, and until the world is able to form a historical judgment of such events, we are considered not only beasts, which wouldn’t matter, but also bete, which is much worse.’” 

“However, like the nation’s founders, like militia members, like the Oath Keepers, and, like Dr. Paul, judging by his past behavior, Marx believes people have the right to use force to defend themselves against governmental oppression.”

“Biographer Francis Wheen relates that in February 1847 Marx’s mother sent him 6,000 gold francs from his father’s legacy. Marx was then living in Brussels, where German workers were coming under increasing attacks from the Belgian government. According to Marx’s daughter Jenny: ‘When the workers decided to arm themselves /and/ Daggers, revolvers, etc., were procured, Karl willingly provided money.’”

“Respecting a liberal approach to society’s socio-economic problems, Congressman Paul’s position again mirrors that of Dr. Marx. Those of you familiar with Marx’s writing will recall his attacks had two foci: capitalism as an oppressive system, and liberals as individuals who argued for easing the suffering of the working poor by making what Marx insisted were impossible adjustments in the capitalist productive-distributive order, rather than tearing it down. “

“Without exception, when Herr Marx went after specific personalities, or specific political organizations, they were never the lords of the capitalist system or their self-protecting/self-promoting organizations. They were liberals.”

“Marx was merciless in his assaults on the people he called ‘Bourgeois Socialists,‘ who sought to humanize capitalism. While giving them credit for ‘dissecting with great acuteness the contradictions in the conditions of modern production,‘ and ‘proving incontrovertibly the disastrous effects of machinery and division of labor, the concentration of capital and land in a few hands, overproduction and crises’, Marx accused them of being ‘desirous of redressing social grievances in order to secure the continued existence of bourgeois society.‘“

“French ‘reformists’ were also among those Marx dismissed as petty-bourgeois. ‘On hearing a new French party claimed to be Marxist’, Wheen relates, Marx responded: ‘in that case “I at least, am not a Marxist.’ ‘/T/hroughout his life,’ Wheen notes, ‘Marx found it both necessary and enjoyable to denounce the false gods and posturing messiahs of the communist movement.’“ 

“Of Ludwig Feuerbach, and Left Hegelians who proposed convincing the working masses to demand a reformation of capitalism by bringing them the truth it was the source of their suffering, in the Preface to The German Ideology Marx wrote: ‘The first volume of this present publication has the aim of uncloaking these sheep, who take themselves and are taken for wolves, of showing how their bleating merely imitates in philosophic form the conceptions of the German middle class.’” 

“Herr Marx even accused Napoleon Bonaparte of suffering from the liberal-reformist/capitalism-sustaining consciousness, saying Napoleon:‘wants to make the lower classes of the people happy within the frame of bourgeois society . . . Bonaparte would like to appear as the patriarchal benefactor of all classes.  But he cannot give to one class without taking from another.’”

“Who, exactly, were these liberals Marx spent so much time and energy condemning? ‘To this section, /he wrote/ belong economists, philanthropists, humanitarians, improvers of the condition of the working class . . . hole-and-corner reformers of every imaginable kind. They desire the existing state of society minus its revolutionary and disintegrating elements. They wish for a bourgeoisie without a proletariat.’” 

“Convinced ‘It is not the consciousness of men that determines their being, but, on the contrary, their social being that determines their consciousness,‘ Dr. Marx explained the liberal’s consciousness as a product of his having a petty-bourgeois existence within developed capitalist society; interest-wise, the liberal exists between the oppressors and the oppressed, a foot in either camp, an experience which produces ideas for reforming the capitalist structure as a result.”

‘In an advanced society’, Marx told Annenkov, ‘the petty bourgeois is necessarily from his very position a socialist on the one side and an economist on the other . . . he has sympathy for the sufferings of the people. He is at once both bourgeois and man of the people. Deep down he flatters himself that he is impartial and has found the right equilibrium’.”

“Herr Marx understood he was describing most of the people who professed to agree with him, observing:‘a large section of the German Communist Party is angry with me for opposing their utopias and declamations.’  ‘Our task,’ he said, ‘must be unsparing criticism, directed even more against our self-styled friends than against our declared enemies.’”

“Marx insisted that so long as workers have to operate within the capitalist system they can only acquire more during periods when the nation’s productive output is increasing. ‘This condition is the only one favorable to the worker,‘ he argued.‘ Here competition takes place among the capitalists. The demand for workers outstrips supply.‘ (e.g., American workers for three decades after WWII).”

“For the same material reasons, Marx held, carrying out a revolutionary replacement of the capitalist order or following their country into a war of acquisition is the only way workers can maintain their social existence when the country’s productivity is decreasing. All schemes for doing it through manipulations or modifications of the system bespeak the self-protective, petty-bourgeois interests of the liberals who  design them, and will fail.”

“Here too, like Marx, but unlike liberals, Dr. Paul seems convinced of the axiom that you: ‘cannot give to one class without taking from another.’ The Democrats are only ‘pretending to redistribute wealth’ Paul exhorts. ‘Under the gravy train approach those who distribute prosper while the poor suffer.’”  

Paul contends no practical distinctions can be drawn between the Democrat and Republican parties in this regard: ‘both believe in warfare and welfare.’ The majority of legislators in both parties serve their personal interests by having the U.S. borrow trillions of dollars to prop up the crisis-ridden system, Paul urges, rather than making the fundamental changes he considers not only imperative but inevitable. ‘The federal government cannot continue to spend a trillion dollars more than it collects in revenue each year,’ he asserts, predicting: ‘The passage of Obamacare will only be repealed once the United States enters bankruptcy as a result of its exploding national deficit and runaway spending.’”

“Of course, Congressman Paul does not agree with Marx’s Pandoran remedy of razing the capitalist productive-distributive system and building a hypothetical equalitarian framework in its stead. He has his own equally utopian recommendation: return to the, largely imaginary, capitalism created by the country’s founders, remove any laws that might impede its operation, then, stand back and enjoy the wondrous results.”

“Because both men are romantic dreamers, in the end, the most important thing Marx and Paul share is their irrelevance to current events. Although neither appears to have accepted it yet, the real world has written them off.”

“As I documented in my first rebuttal, the past 170 years have conclusively established that point with respect to Herr Marx.”

“Now let me make it about Congressman Paul.”

“Dr. Paul was the central figure behind the Tea Party movement at its birth during his 2007-08 presidential campaign. Millions of formerly apolitical young men and women were drawn to his pro-freedom, anti-imperialist, anti-Military-Industrial Complex, anti-Federal-Reserve, anti-Wall-Street, anti-big-federal-government plat-form; a platform which, except for his conviction that returning to a mythical past was the way to fulfill it, sounded like it could have been written by Marx.”

“Now, IF Paul had been relevant, anti-imperialist Leftists would have rushed to his side in support.”

“But, except for Governor Jesse Ventura, and occasional encouraging comments made by Moore—both of whom are more Libertarian than Leftist—they did not!  Instead, Leftists stood idly by and watched Liberals depict the Tea Party as representing the far Right pro-imperialism, pro-Military-Industrial-Complex, pro-CIA, pro-Wall Street camp of Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh, Andrew  Breitbart, Joseph Lieberman, James Woolsey, Jr., and the late Jerry Falwell.”

“Ignoring Paul’s fundamental theses, the Liberal media focused on the occasional racist posters at Tea Party meetings, and interviewed only the semi-coherent individuals they found in the crowds; people, incidentally, who many of Paul supporters suspected were CIA or Democrat Party plants.“

“With Liberal reformists intent on destroying it, with the herd majority reflexively following along, and Leftists taking no position, the Tea Party quickly came to represent everything Dr. Paul had been railing against. Within two years Dick Army, the billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch, and others on the extreme Right had taken it over and shoved Paul aside.”

“When that had been accomplished, the stupid racist posters and incoherent spectators mysteriously disappeared from, now markedly smaller, Tea Party crowds, adding weight to the hypothesis most were probably plants.”

“Chuck Baldwin, A.C. Kleinheider and other frustrated Party founders were left to grouse about the subversion of their organization.”

“Baldwin wrote: ‘/M/any of the Tea Parties are distancing themselves from Dr. Paul and embracing establishment players such as Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck.  Even Newt Gingrich is being courted. Watch out, Tea Party Nation: you’re in danger of losing your soul!  Newt Gingrich is not one of you.  He is not your friend.  He is an impostor. He will destroy you just like he almost single-handedly destroyed the Conservative Revolution of 1994.’”

“In a PostPolitics article of February 7th, 2010, Kleinheider declared: ‘The Tea Party movement is dead. . . . Sarah Palin drove a stake right through its heart live last night on C-Span in front of an unsuspecting audience. . . . Palin didn’t give a Tea Party speech . . . She gave a partisan Republican address.  The Tea Party I’m familiar with was more concerned about rejecting the bailout of Wall Street while looking for ways to reinvigorate the economy of Main Street rather than looking for al-Qaeda. The Tea Party I’m familiar with seemed more concerned about restoring the Republic at home than Democracy abroad. . . Almost from start to finish, Sarah Palin outlined an agenda that either ignored or de-emphasized the issues and the spirit that the Tea Parties were founded on.’”

“Earlier, Dr. Paul himself had observed: ‘The CIA is determined to take out the original Libertarian Tea Party.’”

“If so, it certainly has the requisite resources and skill.”

As the politically informed among you are aware, the FBI and CIA specialize in subverting movements which threaten the nation’s corporate interests, using everything from black-clothed/black-masked anarchist-impersonators who overturn and burn police cars and smash store windows at protests; to paid and/or patriotic informers/instigators who join/inform-on/disrupt threatening political movements and organizations; to damaging/destroying, personal relations and political associations with false rumors, money and sex; to, as in the case of Chicago Black Panther member Fred Hampton, murder.”

“Why did the Left stand by and, hands-in-their-pockets, watch the evisceration of Dr. Paul’s Tea Party occur?  What material explanation can one provide for this otherwise perplexing turn of events?”

“Could it be the Left was never really serious when it argued for ending U.S. imperialism, dismantling the Military-Industrial Complex, disenfranchising Wall Street and disempowering the CIA?”

“It seems unlikely that’s the answer.  Many Leftists have long considered those tasks the focal point of their lives, for some, a mission.

“Were Leftists perhaps repelled by Dr. Paul’s disdain for the government’s: ‘we’ll take care of you’ philosophy?”

“Not if they’re Leftists of a Marxist stamp!  As I’ve indicated, to date no one has been more scornful of that liberal theory and practice than Herr Marx!”

“Might the Left have been disturbed by Paul’s unwavering defense of the Second Amendment?”

“Again, not if they’re on the Marxist Left. As I also noted, Marx and Paul appear to have the same position respecting the people’s use of force: Violence should only be used in self-defense.”

“Might self-proclaimed Leftists have feared that the reduction in government Paul urges would be catastrophic for the nation’s weakest, the aged and the poor?”

“I suspect that explains why many of them just sat and watched.  If so, however, it reveals they were Liberals-passing-as-Leftists all along; the kind of personalities Marx called ‘sheep in wolves clothing.‘ Herr Marx, the ultimate Leftist, has always argued that the working masses will need to be hurting badly before they come together and carry out an anti-capitalist revolution.”

“‘To become an “intolerable” power,’ Marx wrote of the capitalist system, ‘i.e. a power against which men make a revolution, it must necessarily have rendered the great mass of humanity “propertyless,” and produced, at the same time, the contradiction of an existing world of wealth and culture, both of which conditions presuppose a great increase in productive power, a high degree of its development.’”

“Having convinced himself of the paradisal notion the proletarian revolution was approaching, in The German Ideology Marx proposed: ‘Thus things have now come to such a pass, that the individuals must appropriate the existing totality of productive forces, not only to achieve self-activity, but, also, merely to safeguard their very existence.’”

“He made the same point in The Communist Manifesto, writing: ‘the bourgeoisie is unfit any longer to be the ruling class in society, and to impose its conditions of existence upon society as an overriding law. It is unfit to rule because it is incompetent to assure an existence to its slave within his slavery’.”

“When he subsequently decided there was no prospect for revolution in England in the mid 1800s, Marx argued:‘A new revolution is possible only in consequence of a new crisis.’”

“In short, so long as the capitalist system can maintain the social existence of the workers, Marx insists there will be no socialist revolution.”

“Moreover, Dr. Marx wants far more than Paul’s reduction in the size of government. He argues for government’s complete abolition, reasoning that because ‘political power is precisely the official expression of antagonism in civil society,’ upon the dismantlement of capitalism, all politics and the political state will automatically cease to exist.”

“According to Herr Marx’s theory, the capitalist government will be replaced by a relatively small body of individuals who oversee an egalitarian distribution of the nation’s produce; each of them receiving the same remuneration as everyone else, each subject to immediate recall by the people.”     

“Marx and Paul both believe people should take care of themselves. What distinguishes their perspectives is that Marx entertains the utopian conviction that doing so requires the building of a post-capitalism egalitarian productive-distributive system in which the things individuals do to take care of themselves at once take care of everyone else.  Whereas, Paul makes the no less mystical assumption that if the government just abandons its ‘well care for you‘ consciousness and dismantles associated federal programs and agencies like Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and Environmental Protection, all of the country’s social problems will miraculously solve themselves.”

“In case you haven’t fully appreciated the parts American Liberals and self-styled Leftists played in bringing Paul’s irrelevance about, consider what Marx (and, by extension, a genuinely Marxist Left), would be sure to say about the Obama Administration.”

‘Unless Herr Marx has undergone a political metamorphosis, we can assume he would detail the petty-bourgeois practices of Obama and his liberal supporters in the legislature, the media, and the herd majority, arguing they were defending capitalism at a time when its preservation requires the government to step ever-harder on the working class, the aged and the poor; the very people Obama and his acolytes propose to assist.”

“Marx wouldn’t do this out of pettiness or pique, but because his relativistic theory demands it.”

“Marx is wrong when he argues I don’t understand that theory. I do! I just don’t happen to agree with it.  And I’m convinced that in instances like the present it leads him to reach absurd, i.e. non-materialist/non-scientific conclusions.”

“To spell it out:”

“Marx argues all our truths are partly products of objects and events that exist‘ out there,‘ and partly products of the arbitrary/self-interested way we define, categorize, and interpret those objects and events, our personal ‘in here’.”

“In response to the Rightists who call the Obama Administration socialist, assuming his reasoning has remained consistent, Marx will tell you that designation requires discarding the dictionary definition of socialism; a definition which was not only used by him and his 19th century contemporaries–enemies as well as allies–but, until the current global crisis, was being employed by virtually everyone else.”

“Webster’s defines socialism as: ‘ownership and operation of the means of production and distribution by society or the community rather than by private individuals, with all members of society or the community sharing in the work and the produce’.”

“Marx employed that definition in The Communist Manifesto, and again in his first rebuttal, arguing that under his fantasized socialism every worker will receive the same hourly wage, contributing to the community whatever he/she is able to contribute, the operative principle being: ‘From each according to his ability, to each according to his work.‘  Marx told you that following the failure of the Paris Commune he ‘modified his prediction slightly’, deciding for a brief period the highest paid in a socialist society might receive twice the income of the lowest.”

“Marx will therefore reason that when the Obama Administration uses hundreds-of-billions (now trillions) of dollars, of government (i.e., the people’s) money to finance large banks and corporations, paying their heads and their share-holders from millions to billions yearly, it practices state capitalism, not socialism. It hasn’t moved toward ownership and operation of the means of production and distribution “by society or the community,” but rather, by the capitalist government in the name of the community. And, as over-worked, underpaid or unemployed workers, forty-three million of them dependent on food stamps, will testify, they are light years away from ‘sharing in the produce’”.  

“According to Dr. Marx’s paradigm, when a capitalist state in deep economic crisis begins using the people’s money to prop up banks and corporations and maintain the hegemonic status of the elite, the question arises: Is the capitalist productive-distributive order nearing its terminal stage?, the stage at which he predicts capitalists will no longer be performing creative, job-producing, community-serving functions; but, like pampered leeches, will be bleeding-off the nation’s wealth.”

“Marx has been asking that question for a century-and-a-half, and he has always answered: Yes!” 

“Now, I’m willing to grant Marx the logical consistency of his theory. It’s quite remarkable in that regard.  The problem, to say it one more time, is his theory’s  detachment from the down-to-earth real world.”

“In the real world, the state-capitalist economies of Hitler’s Germany and Mussolini’s Italy came into being during the Great Depression, and both were completely dependent on government funding. But that dependency—which has waxed and waned ever since—obviously didn’t foreshadow the collapse of those countries’ capitalist systems.”

“Today China’s economy—the most state-capitalist that every existed—is enjoying a growth rate of over 9.5 percent, and, according to the latest International Monetary Fund (IMF) calculations, China will overtake the U.S. and become the world’s wealthiest/most productive nation in about 5 years. Does Dr. Marx consider this a portent that China’s economy is reaching its terminal stage?”

“Marx proposes that maintaining their own social existences forces the capitalists to capitalize the globe, dragging the people of every country in as producers and consumers, and the socialist revolution will not occur before that process has been completed.  Until then, he argues, capitalists will be able to ease their countries’ periodic crises by finding and exploiting new low-priced raw materials and cheap labor in less developed nations. Only when the international pool of cheap labor has been drained will the capitalists—their numbers markedly reduced by aggressive competition with one another—find the only remaining option for preserving their hegemonic existences is to join hands and drive the workers toward starvation.”

“At that critical juncture, Marx reasons, consistent with his proposition that: ‘A new socio-economic-political consciousness is always born of problematic new experiences; ideas never lead experience, they follow,’ having ‘nothing left to lose but their chains, the ‘Workers of the World’ will discover their survival requires that they formulate, then act upon, an egalitarian consciousness. Rising up together, Marx believes the workers will then dismantle the capitalist productive-distributive order and build a classless community in its stead.”

“To quote him about the process: ‘The proletariat can only exist world historically, just as communism, its movement, can only have a “world-historical” existence.‘  ‘Empirically, communism is only possible as the act of the dominant peoples all at once or simultaneously, which presupposes the universal development of productive forces and the world intercourse bound up with them.’”

“Marx described the twilight hour of capitalism he foresees in Das Kapital, depicting the international proletariat as suffering a rapidly growing diminishment at the hands of the capitalists: the traumatic diminishment needed to organize them for their mighty revolution:”

“‘Along with the constantly diminishing number of magnates of capital, who usurp and monopolize all advantages of this process of transformation, grows the mass of misery, oppression, slavery, degradation, exploitation; but with this too grows the revolt of the working-class, a class always increasing in numbers, and disciplined, united, organized by the very mechanism of the process of capitalist production itself.’”

“When did Dr. Marx expect this wondrous event to occur?  He was convinced the time was near-at-hand when he sent Kapital off to the typesetter in May 1867, 144 years ago.”

“And how is his predicted international alliance of workers proceeding?”

“Today, the workers of Western Europe and the U.S. are moving sharply to the Right, not the Left. In England, France, and Germany they’re becoming racist and turning on the low-paid Moslem workers their countries brought in to exploit, but in the current crisis no longer need.  American workers are showing a similar hostility toward the large population of illegal Mexican and Central American workers the U.S. has allowed to sneak across the border, their illegality necessary to keep their wages, as well as the wages of competing American workers, low.”

“Meanwhile, the self-proclaimed Leftists of Europe and the U.S., the vast majority of them intellectuals, not workers, are dispirited and confused; the American Left so benumbed it has failed to respond to the most implicitly anti-capitalist thesis of the time: that of Congressman Ron Paul.”

“Leftists are well aware that nearly all of the self-styled ‘anarchists’ who smash store windows and burn police cars at protests are federal, state or local authorities or their hirelings. They understand that’s why the ‘anarchists’ don’t get arrested and talk about it at length after every demonstration.  But, being thoroughly inept, they never take the small step of preparing beforehand to seize, handcuff, unmask and photograph 5 or 6 rampaging ‘anarchists’ and put their pictures on YouTube.”

“A Marxist American Left would detail the mutually self-serving ties between the Obama Administration and major American banks and corporations; the financial support the former receive from the latter; the ways in which members of the Administration are helping the capitalists carry out a further expropriation of the people they purport to represent. Accusing Liberals of submissively/self-interestedly, going along, a Marxist Left would place them firmly in the capitalist camp.”  

“But America’s self-styled ‘Leftists’ have done exactly the opposite. They’ve let Right-wing critics like Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin expose ties the Obama Administration and Liberal legislators have with large banks and corporations.  Having done so, Coulter et al. then call them socialists, not capitalists, pointing to the ties as evidence that all Liberal politicians–Democrat or Republican, are Marxist-sympathizing hypocrites who drain strength from the capitalist system, using welfare programs to bribe the nation’s least productive, while voraciously suckling its breast themselves.”

“In an anti-Liberal editorial Coulter related:”

“‘The New York Times reported that individuals associated with the securities and investment industry had given $9.9 million to the Obama campaign, $7.4 million to the Hillary Clinton campaign, and only $6.9 million to the McCain campaign. . . . Employees of Lehman Bros. alone gave Obama $370,000 compared to about $117,000 to McCain. . . . According to an analysis of Federal Elections Commission records by the Center for Responsive Politics, the top three corporate employers of donors to Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Rahm Emanuel, were Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and J.P. Morgan.  Six other financial giants were in the top 30 donors to the White House Dream Team: UBS, AIG, Lehman Bros., Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Merrill Lynch and Credit Suisse Group.’”

“On her conservative website Michelle Malkin observed: ‘The 50 wealthiest lawmakers were worth almost $1.4 billion in 2009, about $85.1 million more than 12 months earlier, according to The Hill’s annual review of lawmakers‘ financial disclosure forms. Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.) tops the list for the second year in a row.  His minimum net worth was $188.6 million at the end of 2009, up by more than $20 million from 2008. . . . Twenty-seven Democrats along with 23 Republicans make up the 50 richest in Congress . . . Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), with a net worth of $160.1 million, is the second-richest member of Congress . . . though his wealth declined by more than $4 million in 2009. . . . He is followed by Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), who saw her net worth leap to $152.3 million, a jump of more than $40 million from a year ago.  The rest of the top 10 are Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), McCaul Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.).’” 

“If you follow Right-wing websites like American Thinker, FrontPage Magazine, Right Side News and Atlas Shrugs, and the reconstituted Tea Party’s thinking, you’re aware that the mantra ‘liberals are socialists’ has gained fairly wide acceptance; in part, I suspect, because many liberals want to believe it themselves.”

“I think I’ve said enough about the never-never-land logics of Marx on the Left and Ron Paul on the Libertarian Right. Now I’ll return to the real world and consider what Obama—or whoever might replace him—must do to maintain the integrity of the United States.”

“Whatever your political persuasion, surely you will agree that in order to solve a problem one must first describe it. If you have the courage to confront reality, you’ll also agree I’ve done that respecting this country’s situation.”

“To recap:”

“The United States is $14.2 trillion in debt. It has the largest per-capita liability any nation’s ever incurred, that debt is growing rapidly, and major creditors, the Middle East oil states, Japan and China, are preparing to bail.”

“At great expense, and a considerable loss of American lives, the U.S. is managing to hang on in Eurasia.  While it must continue that struggle, promoting and defending its corporations’ investments, over the next decade China seems certain to become the dominant power, not merely in Eurasia, but globally, and India will threaten to move into second place.”

“China’s success isn’t the result of its having a more skilled or creative work force. Many of the things it sells–from power tools, to clothing, to TVs, computers and cars, are copies of American, Japanese or West European commodities; and not just product designs, but even the brochures used to advertise them, are commonly stolen, international copyright agreements be damned.”

“No, China is out-selling the U.S. for one simple reason!  It has markedly lower labor costs. Chinese workers are paid a fraction of what American (also German, French et al.) workers earn, and they don’t have the American workers’ elaborate skein of benefits respecting unemployment, union rights, health care, and retirement.”

“Herr Marx contends the problem will be solved with an international equalitarian revolution. But his workers of the world aren’t preparing to join hands and carry out a global proletarian struggle. They’re getting ready to fight one another to defend their way of life and their interests.  And no one, including self-described Marxists, is paying the least bit of attention to Dr. Marx.”

“Congressman Paul urges the United States should pull back from the international marketplace and become a more perfect replica of what it was 200 years ago; that Americans should concentrate on taking care of themselves. But nations, like people, can’t go home again. Attempting to employ the practices sufficient for maintaining the horse-and-buggy existence of 6 million people yesterday would be suicidal for 300 million high-technology-world Americans today.  In 2011, the success or failure of every capitalist nation is dependent upon its ability to compete in the global marketplace.  China is doing better at that every day, while the U.S. is rapidly falling behind.”

“When crippling economic crises occurred in the past, conservative Republicans argued the government should adopt a laissez faire approach and the problem would resolve itself, which meant the working poor would pay.  Presenting the lie they were going to accomplish the impossible and expropriate the wealthy, Democrats took the country into wars of acquisition.“

“Today, given the depth of the current crisis, the destructiveness of modern weaponry and the thorough integration of the global economy, neither approach will work. If the U.S. government does nothing, the nation’s economy will collapse, taking everyone down with it.  On the other hand, for any major capitalist nation–China, the U.S., Germany, France or Japan–to attack another would result in its own devastation, physical as well as economic.”

“The United States has but one option: it must regain the ability to engage in successful global competition. Which means its leader will have to confront the objective reality that the only way his country can survive the crisis is to build a labor force able to compete with those of China, India and Brazil. That means a low-paid work force which no longer enjoys a coddling safety net, but must fend for itself.”

“This, quite simply, is Ayn Rand’s hero John Galt’s hour!”

“To make sure you understand, let me be precise!”

“The U.S. leader must oversee the slashing, where possible, the elimination, of existing welfare programs: food stamps, school support funds, including Pell Grants, unemployment benefits, housing assistance, Medicare and Medicaid; and, the one which will be hardest to effect, Social Security. He must get the cost of labor down precipitously by overturning laws that enable workers to bargain for increased wages and improved working conditions through unions, and he will need to facilitate the illegal immigration of poor Mexicans, Guatemalans, Nicaraguans, and others willing to work for minimum compensation; that, too, will help keep the wage scale low.”

“At the same time, to encourage and assist the energetic and self-focused John Galt personalities required to save the U.S. by building and operating globally competitive factories, America’s leader will need to achieve a drastic reduction in their taxes, while ensuring large banks have ample funds to loan them, and, are protected from defaults.”

“The socio-economic chemotherapy I’m prescribing will be painful for American workers and their families.  But it will have to be taken if the nation’s vitality is to be restored. If it isn’t, and if the government tries to maintain the middle-class and poor with taxes imposed on the wealthy, the economy will collapse as U.S. capitalists profitably invest their money in other countries, including China, India, Russia, Indonesia, the Philippines, South Korea and Brazil; something many of them are already doing.  Furthermore, as the Darwinian scientists among you understand, over-the-long-run the recommended remedy will benefit workers along with everyone else.”

“As Lenin said of the Soviet Union when it found itself in a similar situation in the 1920s, it will be necessary for the U.S. to ‘take one step backward today in order to take two steps forward tomorrow.’”  

“Regarding this matter, let me quote from Herr Marx’s own first rebuttal.  Lenin, Marx noted: ‘argued that in order to industrialize the Soviet Union would need the expertise of its businessmen, engineers, metallurgists, chemists, biologists and other professionals, all of whom enjoyed a socio-economic status well above that of the average Soviet citizen.  Many of those professionals had already gone into exile in Western Europe or the United States. If the elite existence of those who remained was not protected Lenin insisted, they, too, would leave; making industrialization impossible, and socio-economic-political collapse a certainty.’”

“Now to address the million dollar question: Is President Obama up to the task?  While I’m not certain of the answer, so far he is doing astonishingly well.”

“Keep in mind that the deception required of a nation’s leader, like the denial required of the herd, is proportionate to the magnitude of the problem(s) confronted. Because ‘Tricky-Dick Nixon’ had the reputation of a zealous anti-communist, he proved to be the perfect leader for establishing rapprochement between China and the U.S. in the 1970s.”

“President Obama’s image is that of a leader who’s genuinely concerned about the unemployed, the sick, the aged and the poor, one who will defend them against Congressman Paul Ryan and other Objectivist legislators in the House and Senate, who openly argue for moving in the direction I advocate. That makes Obama well-suited for carrying out the requisite policies. He can appear to resist demands made by the Right, while giving in to them one-by-one-by-one. Glen Ford recently wrote Obama’s: ‘positively eager to dismantle the safety nets put in place in the 1930s.‘ Not many Americans will agree with Ford’s assessment, which suggests he may indeed be the right leader for the time.”

“At any rate, to date, President Obama’s talking and acting as I propose.”

“‘Everybody’s got to take a haircut!,’ he declared, as he and Congressional Liberals began joining with conservatives to protect the wealthy by removing not just hair, but several layers of skin, from the poor, the sick, the aged and the unemployed.”

“‘Everybody’s got to take a haircut!’  But each time unemployment benefits have run out the President and his Liberal House and Senate supporters have helped put through a brief extension for workers who recently lost their jobs; then, turned to other matters as a large and fast-growing number of long-term unemployed become destitute and disappear from view.”

“‘Everybody’s got to take a haircut!.’ In July 2009, the government’s watchdog agency predicted the cost of the federal bailout of large financial institutions, their executive officers and shareholders, might eventually total $24 trillion, $80,000 for every American. That figure has now been reached, richly rewarding a broad segment of the American elite, along with those of France, Germany, England and other countries.”

“‘Everybody’s got to take a haircut!‘ A September 2010, Forbes article titled: ‘The Rich get Richer,’ reported that under Obama’s watch the personal wealth of the 400 richest Americans had increased by 8 percent over the previous year.”

“‘Everybody’s got to take a haircut!’  Citing a Business Insider article, Bill Quigley related that in 2009 the top ten Hedge Fund Managers made more than ever: The highest paid got $4 billion. In descending order, the others received $3.3 billion, $2.5 billion, $2.3 billion, $1.4 billion; two managers earned $1.3 billion, another two $900 million, the least well-provided $825 million.”  

“‘Everybody’s got to take a haircut!’  While millions of middle class Americans are losing their homes, the profits of major banks, oil corporations and their share holders are soaring to new heights.”

“Everybody’s got to take a haircut! Polls were showing over 70 percent of Americans wanted a ‘single payer’ health care program. But Obama let the pharmaceutical and insurance corporations write his health plan; one which will not only protect, but greatly enrich, their executives and share holders, while providing coverage to a large number of previously uninsured people which more than 50 percent of them won’t be able to afford.  Reed Abelson began his Page One New York Times article of May 14th, 2011 with the observation: ‘The nation’s major health insurers are barreling into a third year of record profits, enriched in recent months by a lingering recessionary mind-set among Americans who are postponing or forgoing medical care.. . . The UnitedHealth Group, one of the largest commercial insurers, told analysts that so far this year, insured hospital stays actually decreased in some instances. . . . Cigna, another insurer, talked about the “low level” of medical use. . . Yet the companies continue to press for higher premiums, even though their reserve coffers are flush with profits and shareholders have been rewarded with new dividends.’

“Everybody’s got to take a haircut! ’I firmly believe in the right of workers to organize and bargain through unions.’, Obama emphasized. Then he stood aside as Liberal Republican and Democrat legislators helped conservative colleagues destroy the ability of the nation’s firemen to do so; and looked on silently as the governors of Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida and other states undertook all-out assaults on the union rights of state employees.”

“Everybody’s got to take a haircut! According to the 2010 Census, the illegal immigration of competitive low-cost workers had increased by 43 percent during the previous 10 years, and Obama’s new immigration plan will do nothing to reduce the flow.”

“‘Everybody’s got to take a haircut!’  Although polls have consistently revealed more than 85% of Americans don’t want the Social Security program touched, and Obama assures them it won’t be, in a recent interview the eternally honest and innocent Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, acknowledged: ‘I have to tell you, I have been on the phone to the very, very, very highest levels of the Obama Administration, and the responses I am getting are not assuring.  What I’m told is that no definitive decisions have been made on the issue of Social Security. I expect that is probably true.’”

“The details of the ‘haircut’ experienced by millions of middle and lower class Americans are well known. For many it’s been a scalping!  They’ve lost their jobs, their homes and savings, often their cars.”

“So, what kind of a haircut’ is the president proposing members of the upper class ought to take? Does he think Senators Kerry, Issa and Harman should forfeit a small portion of their wealth, perhaps 15 percent: $28,000,000, $24,000,000  and $23,000,000 respectively?  If they did, Kerry would still have over $158,000,000, Issa $136,000,000, and Harman $129,000,000. A middle class person who earned $50,000 a year and saved half of his/her income would have to work more than 5,640 years to acquire anything approximating those amounts.”

“Does the president believe senators and representatives should also have their salaries cut, maybe by the same 15 percent?”

“Has he suggested the yearly incomes of Hedge Fund managers should be limited to, say $1 billion?  The $50,000-a-year worker who saved half their wage would need to labor 40,000 years to amass that sum.”

“I suspect the majority of middle class Americans would regard all of the indicated restrictions not ‘haircuts,’ but modest trims.  Yet, Obama hasn’t made these or any other timid proposals. Although the wealth of upper class Americans is continuing to grow dramatically, practically speaking, he has done no more than suggest they ought to ‘take a haircut.’”

“To be sure, were Obama to get serious and specific the wealthy would accuse him of fomenting class warfare.  However, as most middle and lower class Americans know all too well, a class war has been raging for over two decades, and they are losing badly.”

“In other words, Obama’s ‘Everybody’s got to take a haircut!’ is subterfuge, a deception necessary for getting middle and lower class Americans to accept building the low-paid work force that’s vital if the U.S. is going to compete with China, India, Brazil and other industrializing nations; something it must do in order to survive!” 

“By now you should be aware Marx and I vehemently disagree about the impact ideas have on history’s course.”

“Dr. Marx assigns them almost none. According to his paradigm, people embrace the ideas which, if acted upon as true, will preserve their social existence with a minimum suffering of pain/the least disruption of their lives; i.e., everyone’s socio-economic-political consciousness is conservative.  In his opinion, that not only accounts for the system-preserving ideas of capitalist elites and the reformist ideas presented by members of the middle class, but the revolutionary egalitarian consciousness he predicts workers will acquire when they find it imperative to raze the capitalist productive-distributive structure in order to survive.  Marx has assigned his own ideas no greater importance, writing in a Preface to Das Kapital that he hoped the book might ‘lessen and ease the birth pangs‘ of the post-capitalist order.“

“For Marx, a Leftist who predicts a revolution’s coming is like the passenger of an ocean liner who shouts ‘Everyone get in the lifeboats, this ship is going down!‘  He will be ignored until-and-unless the ship’s engines have gone silent and waves are beginning to lap over the bow; by which time, aware of the crisis, other passengers will be issuing cries of their own.  At most, the first to do so will have ‘lessened and eased the pain‘ of achieving the requisite consciousness and abandoning the ship.”

“On my part, I consider it self-evident that if ideas were so inconsequential, leaders would never bother to lie.  If ideas were inconsequential, leaders wouldn’t dedicate so much time and energy to winnowing out and suppressing those which challenge the views/opinions their country must act upon in order to survive.”

“But lie, winnow and suppress they do, often with great sophistication. Leaders lie/winnow/suppress because they understand that a shared consciousness on subjects of great national significance is an indispensable component of a national program of action; that if the ideas about critical matters which are permitted respect in the market place become too disparate, in acting upon them people will tear the country apart, devastating everyone’s interests. To put it succinctly, leaders lie/winnow/suppress ideas in order to protect the state, and they protect the state in order to protect its people!”

“What instruments do U.S. leaders use to effect the requisite lying, winnowing and suppressing?  Everything from ridicule, to the influence with/control over the media that goes with their office, to their ability to help or hurt the political prospects of legislators who provide or withhold support; to the financial assistance they can furnish counties, cities and states; to their authority over government agencies, the military and national police, including Homeland Security, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the FBI and the CIA.”

“The major media’s coverage of gun control, Ruby Ridge, Waco, the bombing of the Oklahoma City Federal Building, 9/11, militias, the federal bailout program, the ‘anti-terrorist’ wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the conflict with Iran, and the Tea Party verifies the ability of U.S. leaders to frame/restrict the national discussion and debate about consequential issues.”

“When the president, his cabinet and other leading political authorities, treat the perspectives of Randy Weaver, David Koresh, General Partin, Noam Chomsky, Paul Craig Roberts, Peter Dale Scott, Gore Vidal, militia spokesmen and Tea Party founders as unworthy of entry into the market place, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, the New York Times, the Washington Post, Time and Newsweek fall in line and bring the herd along.”

“Noam Chomsky’s experience illustrates the power of U.S. leaders to establish limits for political thought. Chomsky is internationally recognized for his break-through work in linguistics. You’ll find him in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, and Newsweek, Time and other widely read periodicals have dealt with his discoveries in that field.  But although Chomsky, a Leftist, has written and lectured even more extensively and no less brilliantly about politics, a few dozen books and hundreds of articles on everything from the Vietnam War, to the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, he’s considered persona non grata by all the major media concerning those and related subjects.  You won’t see Rachel Maddow interviewing Chomsky on MSNBC, or Brian Williams on NBC, Katie Couric on CBS or Bill O’Reilly on Fox News, nor will you find an Op-Ed piece by Chomsky in the New York Times, which generally refuses to publish his letters-to-the-editor.”

“As I noted in my first rebuttal, Herr Marx is convinced that the shared ideas of people joined together in nations or classes always reflect–they never cause, nor can they transform–their material conditions. No matter how logical your arguments, he reasons, you won’t get people to alter their beliefs so long as those beliefs continue to express their experience:‘All forms and products of consciousness, he wrote, cannot be dissolved by mental criticism, by resolution into “self-consciousness” or transformation into “apparitions,” “spectres,” “fancies,” etc., but only by the practical overthrow of the actual social relations which gave rise to this idealistic humbug; not criticism but revolution is the driving force of history, also of religion, of philosophy and all other types of theory.’”   

“For this reason, Marx defends complete freedom of speech. According to his dialectic, if people embrace ideas you find absurd and/or reprehensible and reject your own, it tells you that the embraced ideas continue to be more representative of their material experience/interest, i.e. are for them more logical and true. Which, for Marx, simply means that by believing in and acting upon the ideas you consider absurd/reprehensible, at least for the moment, people can more effortlessly defend their Social Existence. ‘Freedom of the press, Marx argued, ‘proceeds on the presumption of anticipating world history, sensing in advance the voice of the people which alone has hitherto judged which writer was “competent,” which “incompetent.””  

“Try telling that to President Obama and the members of his Administration who ensure Chomsky’s ideas, and those of Paul Craig Roberts, Peter Dale Scott, Jeremy Scahill, Gore Vidal, et al., are not widely disseminated. For that matter, try telling it to Dr. Chomsky!

In his latest essay, ‘My Reaction to Osama bin Laden’s Death,’ Chomsky observed that if bin Laden was responsible for the deaths of 3,000 innocent Americans, George W. Bush bore an equally great responsibility for the death of more than 100 times that number of innocent Iraqis, killed for weapons of mass destruction which didn’t exist. Chomsky went on to question how Americans might react if an Arab military contingent seized Bush, shot him in the head, and dumped his body at sea.  However, Chomsky won’t get an answer to his question, since his article can only be found on a few Leftist websites, which members of the herd majority rarely, if ever, visit.”

“Now, I submit that Chomsky’s ideas, like those of many other Leftists and Rightists, are winnowed and suppressed for one simple reason: They’re true!  And, like the truths I covered about gun control, Ruby Ridge, Waco, the Patriot Act, militias, Fusion Centers, the Oath Keepers, and the U.S. wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, they are truths which threaten the integrity of the state.  In doing so–to refer to my opening statement–such truths also threaten the fundamental objective of Americans, which is: ‘to acquire physical, emotional and psychological security, find employment, build homes, feed and clothe their children, and raise them to share the values they hold dear.’”  

 “I noted ridicule is among the instruments leaders use to keep the herd in denial by winnowing and suppressing ideas which threaten the state.  Ridicule is wielded more effectively against the Right than the Left, since the Left argues for doing things that have not yet been tried, and it’s difficult-to-impossible to demonstrate an untested plan won’t work. The Right, on the other hand, either wants to continue an existing program that’s becoming problematic, or, return to one which previously failed.”

“To give you an example:”

“From 1989 until the early 2000s, some of Rush Limbaugh’s criticisms of the Liberal government’s ‘‘Let us take care of you’ theory and practice were commonsensical truths. Limbaugh argued the billions-of-dollars spent on welfare programs were draining initiative from lower-class Americans, just as feeding a family of feral animals will inevitably work against their self-reliance, (a point with which Herr Marx will undoubtedly agree, though he’ll insist the solution is to revolutionize the structure of society and forest, enabling people and feral animals to care for themselves).”

“Congress, Limbaugh continued, was also wasting billions on pork-barrel projects which procured campaign funds for the legislators who designed them, but were of little advantage to the majority of people in their districts, and none whatsoever to the nation. So too, Limbaugh contended, the billions spent on educational programs for indigent children provided well-paid employment for members of the rapidly-growing middle and upper-middle class bureaucracy which oversaw them,  but did virtually nothing for their intended recipients.  It would be far less costly, and more in line with the stated objective, he reasoned, to give scholarships directly to poor children so they could attend quality schools.”

But, Limbaugh merged and mingled his true ideas with a huge amount of bombast, then placed the truth-bombast totality within a framework of religious myth which, while crucial for keeping the herd pacified and in denial, was, as is always the case with myth, risky for a leader to personally believe.”

“For the government of George H.W. Bush, and, initially, that of Bill Clinton, the easiest way to winnow and suppress Limbaugh’s true ideas was to ignore them, just as they did with threatening truths which came from the Left; and the major media reflexively complied. While millions of adoring ‘dittoheads’ listened to Limbaugh’s talk-radio program daily, like the two presidents, and like Liberal politicians in general, CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, the New York Times and the Washington Post rarely mentioned his name.”

“Then, as the current economic crisis began making its initial appearance, during his second term Clinton started acting upon Limbaugh’s principal truths: slashing welfare funding to the bone, initiating an attack on pork-barrel spending, and reducing educational funding for the lower class. President George W. Bush, and now Obama, have gone even further with implementing the true part of the Limbaugh logic, leaving little but bombast to distinguish Rush, and making ridicule the most convenient way for the country’s leader and subservient media to deal with his declining appeal. No doubt sensing his growing irrelevance, Limbaugh has facilitated this last step by greatly increasing his bombast production, using insult to fill the hole left when the government appropriates one of his ideas. You’ll now see video-clips of Limbaugh on Lawrence O’Donnell’s, Ed Schultz’ and Rachel Maddow’s evening MSNBC shows, bouncing up and down, looking foolish, and spewing nonsense.”

“Ron Paul is presently receiving the same ignore-or-ridicule-him treatment. Being a popular Congressman, a Tea Party founder and a presidential aspirant, Paul’s occasionally a guest on Fox News, CNN or MSNBC.  However, the shows’ hosts studiously avoid asking him about such things as eliminating U.S. military bases, the CIA, the Patriot Act, the pro-imperialism/pro-military-industrial-complex Right’s subversion of the Tea Party, militias, Fusion Centers, the Second Amendment, the Homeland Security Administration or government suppression of free speech. If Paul begins to address one of the taboo subjects, they quickly redirect the conversation, usually to his opposition to a Liberal Safety Net, finding it easy to show that his incompletely-thought-out position on that issue is ridiculous.” 

“Today, as the treatment of Chomsky, Roberts, Ventura, Paul, Baldwin, Scott et al. reveals, to hold his state together has required the U.S. leader to lop off both ends of the true political continuum, until MSNBC appears to represent the Left, and Fox News the Right.  He knows his cutting is sufficient when Jon Stewart examines the reconstituted extremes and declares, as he did when interviewed by Rachel Maddow, that ‘the left-right narrative distinction is overblown;’ that the gap dividing Left and right is actually so insignificant the media should employ a ‘corruption vs. non-corruption dichotomy instead’, enabling Fox News and MSNBC pundits to stop insulting one another and engage in meaningful discussions.”

“Neither the true Left nor the true Right are happy with the idea amputations, of course.  Leftists complain they have no real access to the public via MSNBC, and Bishop Baldwin has registered the same criticism of Fox News for excluding representatives of the Libertarian Right: ‘Ask yourself why Fox News never (or hardly ever) invites non-establishment patriots to appear on their network’, Baldwin queries. ‘Why do you not see former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Paul Craig Roberts on Fox News? Why do you not see former Georgia Congressman and Presidential candidate Bob Barr on Fox News? Why do you not see former Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura on Fox News?‘“

“The answer, as I’ve indicated, is that under the present circumstances, to protect his nation and his people the leader can not permit it.”

“In concluding my brief rebuttal I’ll consider an issue of growing concern to many Americans and an obsession with Chris Hedges and some Libertarians: the possibility the U.S. will become a fascist state.”

(The word “concluding” brought an audible sigh (of relief?) from the audience, and Vice President Biden popped awake.  Machiavelli continued:)

“Let me begin by stating the obvious:”

“The demand for total conformity which existed in Nazi Germany, Mussolini’s Italy and Stalin’s Russia; the rounding-up and incarceration of millions of people for who they were or what they said; the German concentration camps, and the Russian Gulag, in which semi-starved prisoners worked 12-16 hour days as slave labor; the brutal beatings, torture, and death administered for disobeying whimsical orders, are something the majority of Americans can’t conceive of happening here.”

“Like the herd in every country, most Americans resist the idea their government would ever declare war on its people. They understand Russian, German and Italian governments have done so, also governments of China, Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Syria, Chile, Argentina, South Africa, Uganda and Rwanda.”

“But a government of the born-in-freedom United States?”

“Americans who are familiar with European history know that when Calvinist Protestants threatened the integrity of Catholic France in the mid-16th century, the government used the utmost violence against many of its citizens, an incident Marx referred to in his opening statement.”

“Called Huguenots, the first French Calvinist community was established in 1546.  Only fifteen years later there were already 2,150 Huguenot churches in the country, and some Huguenots had even acquired provincial and national offices, including Gaspard de Coligny, the Admiral of France.”

“However, in province after province the Calvinists posed a growing challenge to the political authority of the Catholic Church, and to the nobility the Church empowered; and the latter were responding.”

“Historian James A. Wylie recounts that on March 1st, 1562 the 2nd Duke de Guise had his troops attack 1,200 unarmed Huguenots who were holding a sermon in a barn in the little town of Vassy.”

“‘Entering the town, /the Duke/ met the provost, the prior, and the curate in the marketplace, who entreated him to go to the spot where the Protestants were assembled. . . . The congregation were suddenly startled by persons outside throwing stones at the windows, and shouting out, ‘Heretics! Rebels! Dogs!’ Presently the discharge of firearms told them they were surrounded by armed men.  The Protestants endeavored to close the door, but were unable from the crowd of soldiers pressing in, with oaths and shouts of ‘Kill! Kill! . . . Many of the congregation attempted to break through the roof, but they were shot down as they climbed up on the rafters.” When the shooting stopped, “from sixty to eighty persons had been killed, and 250 of them wounded . . . many of them mortally.’”

“As word of the Vassy Massacre spread throughout France, Wylie relates, Huguenots began to arm, and during the next 6 months, new and more extensive bloodbaths occurred.“

“At Tours 300 Protestants were shut up in their church, where they were kept three days without food, and then brought out, tied two and two, led to the river’s bank and butchered like sheep.  Children were sold for a crown apiece.  The President of Tours was tied to two willow trees and disembowelled alive. . . . Huguenots took refuge in the Capitol of Toulouse, where they were besieged, and finally compelled to surrender. Then followed a revolting massacre of from 3,000 to 4,000 Protestants. The Seine, the Loire, and the Garonne were dyed with Protestant blood, and ghastly corpses, borne on the bosom of the stream, startled the dwellers in distant cities and castles.’”

“Despite mounting conflict in the countryside, for the next decade the government tried to establish a Catholic-Protestant accord. But by the fall of 1572 it was obvious that would not be possible, and, that unless drastic steps were taken, the state of France was going to be torn apart.”

“Pressured by his councillors, and by his mother, Catherine de Medici, the insightful power behind the throne, King Charles IX acted.  On August 24th the 3rd Duke de Guise ordered his forces into Paris. Soldiers forcibly entered the apartment of Admiral Coligny, who Catherine liked personally, pulled him from his bed, stabbed him and tossed his body out of a window to the street.”

“With that, the battle against Huguenots turned into a national massacre.  Over the next month-and-a-half several thousand Parisian Huguenots were murdered and the killing swept the entire country. When it ended on Oct. 3rd, 50,000 Huguenots had lost their lives.  I.e., about the same number of Calvinist Protestants were killed in 6 weeks of slaughter as Americans during 10 years of the Vietnam War; and that in a country whose population of approximately twenty million was but a fraction of the United States’ during the 1960s and 70s.”

“To give you a more recent example:”

“When WWII ended, England was broke. What had been its most profitable assets in India had lost most of their value, the Indian economy was in crisis, and British authority was being resisted by a non-violent protest movement directed by Mahatma Gandhi. Taking the inevitable, and the least costly path, in 1947 England gave India independence.”

“When India’s economic crisis continued to worsen, Hindus and Moslems began struggling against one another.  Pushing Gandhi aside as irrelevant to the altered situation, the Hindu government then defended the newborn state’s integrity by overseeing a slaughter of Moslems. Children were murdered in their classrooms, adults in their Mosques; and Moslems used equally brutal tactics in fighting back.”

“Outnumbered and outgunned, the majority of Moslems were driven north into what became the states of East and West Pakistan; the latter later renamed Bangladesh.”

“In books and periodicals and on websites, Liberal Americans reveal they’re aware that the Cheney-Bush government oversaw the killing of several hundred thousand innocent Iraqis. Many have acknowledged that when President Obama doubled the number of drone strikes in Pakistan in 2010 more innocent people died; around 1,960, according to the Pakistani papers Dawn and News, most of them old people, women and children.  The Liberal New York Times recently reported that under U.S. auspices NATO bombed the home of Muammar el-Quaddafi’s son Saif, killing him and his three children, ages 6 months to 9 years; while the sleep of warm-family-man Obama is said to remain undisturbed.”

“Yet, for most Americans, the idea that President Obama, or any other U.S. leader, might someday declare a large number of the country’s citizens enemies and order the military to go after them still seems impossible to accept.”

“Remind them that Americans killed 600,000 of their own during the Civil War, two percent of the population, and imprisoned several hundred thousand more in concentration camps, where thousands died of starvation, and others often survived by eating cats, mice, rats and the morsels of food which merciful ‘enemies’ threw over the fences, and they will tell you that was the mid-19th century.  It could never happen today.”

“But could it?”

“Under the right circumstances: Of course it could!”

“Situations, conditions and environments change over time. Human nature does not! 

“The relevant question isn’t:‘Could America become a fascist state?,’ but, Will it?”

More precisely: Are the conditions which produced fascism in other countries coming into existence in the U.S.?  IF they are, and IF they reach fruition: Will the government have the ability and the determination to respond with fascistic brutality and oppression? 

“I submit an objective scientist must answer both questions Yes!”

“The most critical antecedent to fascism is the collapse of a nation’s economy, and at the moment the U.S. economy is lurching toward collapse.”

“Wall Street’s financial wizards have been able to prevent it from happening only by using derivatives and other Ponzi schemes; prompting Goldman Sachs’ CEO Lloyd Blankfein to eulogize their criminal operations with the observation his firm is: ‘Doing God’s work!’” 

“Directed and protected by the CIA, the illicit drug industry is also critical for keeping the U.S.’, as well as other western economies from going under.  In January 2009, Antonio Maria Cost, Executive Director of the United Nations Office on Drug and Crime (UNODC) told a reporter from the Austrian weekly Profil that during 2008 “drug money often became the only available capital when the crisis spiraled out of control”.

“Afghanistan, which produces more than 95 percent of the world’s opium, is vital in that regard.  William Engdahl noted: ‘According to Afghan sources, Karzai is the Opium ‘Godfather’ of Afghanistan. There is apparently no accident that he was and is today still Washington’s preferred man in Kabul.’”

“Craig Murray, Britain’s former Ambassador to Uzbekistan observed: ‘One thing that really makes me sick is a constant linking in the media to the opium trade, the heroin trade, and the Taliban.  Less than 10 percent of the heroin exported from Afghanistan is exported by Taliban-friendly people. Well over 50 percent is controlled directly by actual members of the Karzai government, including Karzai himself and his brother.  The biggest heroin dealer of all is probably General Dostum, who has just been brought back and who many in the Pentagon think should be empowered because of his fighting reputation. . . . In 2001, the Taliban had cut the heroin harvest down to virtually nil.  Last year it increased by 40 percent on top of a 60 percent increase the year before. And nowadays they don’t even export opium anymore. . . . They’ve got into value-added.  It’s all made into heroin before it’s exported now, and we know where: Dostum’s heroin factories. It’s done on an industrial scale.  Petrochemical tankers carrying the chemical precursors are sharing the same road as our troops.  But it’s done by the government we are protecting.’”

“While they offer no material evidence, some Liberals assure themselves the U.S. economic crisis has eased. On April 5th, 2011, Katrina vanden Heuvel, Editor and Publisher of The Nation, said the economy was ‘improving;’ and Reuters reported the National Bureau of Economic Research had found ‘The recession ended in June 2009, making it the longest downturn since World War II.” 

“However, Michel Chossudovsky, Bob Chapman, Michael Hudson, Gerald Celente, Mike Whitney, and other prognosticators who have a reputation for accurate analyses and forecasts, argue the crisis not only hasn’t been resolved, it will soon become much worse.”

“A noted economist, Chossudovsky writes that while President Obama’s budget plan ‘has the appearance of an expansionary program, a demand-oriented “Second New Deal” . . . in actuality, what we are dealing with is the most drastic curtailment in public spending in American history, leading to social havoc and the potential impoverishment of millions of people.’”

“Chossudovsky identifies ‘welfare, Social Security, Medicare and unemployment benefits,’ as among the things to be ‘slashed.’  In short, he describes the Obama Plan as the very kind of low-cost-labor-creating program I’ve argued the U.S. must adopt to remain a viable state.”

“Michael Hudson, a University of Missouri Economics Professor and former Wall Street analyst, observes that because American dollars are the international currency, the central banks of most countries, including Japan, China, and oil states, have had to purchase U.S. Treasury bonds and bills with the dollars their exporters exchange for domestic currency, that doing so ‘is built into the global financial system.‘ The United States then uses their money for ‘financing an enormous, hostile military build-up to encircle the major dollar-recyclers: China, Japan and Arab OPEC oil producers.’” 

In addition, Hudson relates, U.S. corporations have been aggressively buying large Asian and European companies and ‘privatized public enterprises,’ then, purchasing U.S. Treasuries with the profits those firms produce. That money, too, is used ‘to build enormous military bases to encircle the rest of the world, install radar systems, guided missile systems and other forms of military coercion.’ . . . The more “capital out-flows” U.S. investors spend to buy up foreign economies’ most profitable sectors,  . . . the more funds end up in foreign central banks to support America’s global military build-up.’ At the same time, foreign companies are denied ‘reciprocal rights to buy U.S. companies.’” 

“However, Hudson writes, the besieged countries have begun to retaliate. In 2007 China and Russia established the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO); the first to circumvent controlling dollars, the second to counter the growing U.S. military threat. In addition to acquiring ‘observer status’ in the SCO, Iran has made military agreements with both Russia and China.  Five former Soviet Republics, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Armenia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan have joined the CSTO, which Russia is pushing to militarize.  As noted earlier, along with China and Russia, Brazil, Malaysia and other countries are beginning to use their own currencies to finance their trade, rather than American dollars.”

“Hudson refers to the present U.S.-dominated global economy as ‘The financial end time.’”

“Gerald Celente, who founded and directs the Trends Research Institute, has an admirable record when it comes to political-economic forecast.  He predicted the 1987 stock market crash, the breakup of the U.S.S.R., the bursting of the dot-com bubble, the 2001 recession and the disintegration of the real estate market. For the past several years Celente has been arguing the U.S. economy will collapse with devastating consequences, massive unemployment and widespread violence, ending in a ‘Second American Revolution.’” 

“While Celente’s prediction has been attacked by many Liberals, it has been attacked mostly with insult, rather than argument or evidence.”

“Even Liberals who wax optimistic about the U.S. economy often present facts and figures which seem to counter their conclusions. On May 18, 2011, Fareed Zakaria, a popular pundit who’s had several discussions with Obama at the President’s request, reported that Obama’s program calls for the creation of 20 million jobs over the next decade, though only 1.7 million jobs were created during the past ten years.”

“As the media continually remind us, today most new jobs are low-paid and in the service industry: security guard, cleaning hotel rooms, or frying hamburgers at Mc-Donalds or Burger King.  Zacharia provided no insight whatsoever into the kind of jobs Obama envisions, nor, how they are to be ‘created’.”

“Writing on August 11th, 2010 Robert Reich, President Clinton’s Secretary of Labor, observed: ‘America’s biggest–and only major–jobs program is the U.S. military.  Over 1,400,000 Americans are now on active duty; another 833,000 are in the reserves, many full time.  Another 1,600,000 Americans work in companies that supply the military with everything from weapons to utensils.  I’m not even including all the foreign contractors employing non-U.S. citizens . . . . The Commerce Department reported Monday the only major metro areas where both net earnings and personal incomes rose last year were San Antonia, Texas, Virginia Beach, Virginia, and Washington D.C–because all three have high concentrations of military and federal jobs.’”     

“Pam Martens, who worked on Wall Street for 21 years and understands how the U.S. economy functions, has noted: As the number of jobs across the nation dwindles, more Americans are joining the military, lured by a steady paycheck, benefits and training.’”

“Factor in the  854,000 ‘Top Secret’ jobs Dana Priest and William Arkin reported, the workers making a dozen or so new crowd control instruments, the large and growing number of prison and private security guards, and the picture becomes disturbingly clear.”

“With American manufacturing outsourced and the economy held together with Ponzi schemes, drug-running and military spending, with all three of those shaky income sources increasingly threatened, and the government having to devastate the middle class to build a globally competitive workforce comprised of millions of low-paid workers, to quote Chris Hedges: ‘The next catastrophic attack, or the next economic melt-down could be America’s Reichstag fire!’”    

“If it is, what would America’s response to that Reichstag fire entail?  Gore Vidal told the Times of London: ‘The U.S. is headed for a military dictatorship because nobody else can hold everything together!’”

“Herr Marx talks a language of lawful predictability. I don’t!  Unlike biology and physics, the socio-economic-political world is governed by possibility and probability rather than certainty.”     

“That said, I consider it highly probable Hedges and Vidal are correct.”

“If the economy breaks, and the tens-of-millions of unemployed, homeless and hungry Americans Celente foresees begin disruptively protesting in the street, the police and the military will begin by using a variety of crowd control weapons: Tear Gas, Pepper Spray and Mace (tear gas shells fired at close range have killed many protesters); Rubber Bullets (which have also killed at close range); Rad-X Long-Range Acoustical Devices which cause excruciating pain and can break eardrums; Raytheon’s Assault Intervention Device, and other microwave weapons that burn the skin and can damage eyes, even cause blindness.”

“If the protesters then turn to violence, a recent U.S. Army War College Strategic Institute study spelled out what they can expect, saying: ‘Widespread civil violence inside the United States would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security.’  The Army War College very pointedly stated a ‘strategic shock’ might require the government to employ ‘military force against hostile groups inside the United States.’”

 “It’s clear what the War College means when it speaks of ‘defending basic domestic order and human security against hostile groups.’ It means using violence to protect capitalist corporations, businesses, banks and political institutions, from whatever number of Americans pose a threat to their existence.”

“In an article titled: ‘The Intensive Quiet Preparation for Martial Law,’ University of California (Berkeley), Professor Peter Dale Scott relates: ‘In late September 2008, at the height of the financial meltdown, The Army Times announced the redeployment of an active Brigade Army Team from Iraq to America, in a new mission that “may become a permanent part of the active Army.” The 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team has spent 35 of the last 60 months in Iraq patrolling in full battle rattle, helping restore essential services and escorting supply convoys. Now they’re training for the same mission–with a twist–at home.’”

“What if militias and Oath Keepers go to the people’s defense?

“They will be massacred!

“Their numbers and fire power would present no more than an adrenalin-producing challenge to the military, which would gun down Americans labelled ‘terrorists‘ with the same righteous  enthusiasm it’s felt when killing members of al Qaeda and the Taliban, or that police experience when going after common criminals. That’s how it was done in Nazi Germany and Stalin’s U.S.S.R., and that’s how it would be done here.”

“Don’t forget that the FBI, BATF, the CIA and state and national intelligence organizations have infiltrated most militias and will be well apprised of their plans. The FBI and BATF go to great lengths in that regard, even financing rural gun shops to acquire information.”

“The FBI and BATF are rumored to have infiltrated the Oath Keepers, and nine months after Stewart Rhodes founded his organization a group calling itself ’The Real Oath Keepers’ suddenly appeared with a 147 page pro-violence, anti-semitic screed it calls a ‘Training Manual’, the objective of which couldn’t be more apparent: make Rhodes Oath Keepers appear violent and anti-semitic.”

“Are the BATF and/or the FBI behind The Real Oath Keepers?   I’ll leave that up to you.”

“One can assume the FBI and BATF are also watching/infiltrating/manipulating the relatively new, loose-knit organization called ‘Sovereign Citizens.’” 

“At the moment, where the possibility of fascism coming to the U.S. is concerned, most Americans, with Liberals in the lead, are keeping their eyes tightly closed to avoid seeing the signs I’ve enumerated: The Patriot Act destruction of The Bill of Rights; Fusion Centers; Campus Spy Schools; unannounced and illegal raids on the homes of peaceful protestors; wiretaps without court orders; the use of indefinite detention and torture; airport pat-downs and back-screen body-scanners; VIPER Teams and telescreens; the dishonest portrayal of Militias and Oath Keepers as racist, anti-semitic and violent; the overthrow of Posse Comitatus; the Defense Department’s definition of peaceful protest as ‘terrorism’; the Army and Air Corp regarding the internet as an ‘enemy weapon’s system’; the stripping of citizenship from native born Americans—i.e., turning a birthright into a government-bestowed privilege; the FBI training of tattoo artists and garbage collectors to spy on other Americans; the McCain-Lieberman Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act; the denial of lawyers and other constitutionally ‘guaranteed’ legal rights to individuals who are opportunistically accused of terrorism; the focus on disarming the public by a government insanely armed; the Rightward shift on university campuses; the repeated Nazi-like references to ‘Our Homeland’.” 

“And if it happens, if the U.S. does become a fascist state, what will the majority of Americans do?”

“Liberals?  I think Hedges is probably right there, too.”

“Liberals, he wrote: ‘want to inhabit a political center to remain morally and politically disengaged.  As long as there is a phantom Left, one that is as ridiculous and stunted as the Right wing, the liberal class can remain uncommitted. If the liberal class concedes that power has been wrested from us it will be forced, if it wants to act, to build movements outside the political system. This would require the liberal class to demand acts of resistance, including civil disobedience, to attempt to salvage what is left of our anemic democratic state.’” 

“To put it less delicately than Hedges does: IF fascism comes to America the majority of Liberals will undoubtedly continue sleeping, their heads tucked securely up their butts.  Some will throw up their hands, declare the world’s gone mad, and occupy themselves with family matters.  Others will reason a sane person does not try to stop an earthquake, he tries to minimize its damage: Ergo, sane Americans should not attempt to stop the onrushing dark night of brutal oppression, but preserve a glimmer of light for the majority by secretly maintaining an enlightened-Liberal/anti-fascist consciousness.  In brief, they, too, will go along.”

“The ACLU, the Public Broadcasting System (PBS), National Public Radio, the Humanitarian Law Project, InfoWars, AlterNet, Democracy Now and other Liberal groups/organizations/websites and publications, will either reorient or be disbanded .”

“Conservatives?  Many now seem to be preparing for fascism, just in case.”

“In 2004, the Committee On The Present Danger, founded in 1950 to present the state-preserving lie that the Soviet Union constituted an ‘evil communist threat’, was revived to defend the equally absurd, but equally indispensable, Orwellian idea that the U.S. is currently engaged in a global ‘war on terror.’”

“Dr. Marx insists everyone genuinely believes the ideas which best defend their Social Existence, that such concepts are their truths.  While I agree the herd behaves that way, I give political leaders credit for more intelligence and sophistication.  Surely, Senators Jon Kyl and Joe Lieberman, former CIA director James Woolsey Jr., and other Committee On The Present Danger members are aware there’s no material evidence for their ‘war against terrorism’ proposition.  However, I believe they also understand the criticality of that lie for maintaining the integrity of their country.”

“Senators Lindsey Graham and Saxby Chambliss appear psychologically girded to embrace a fascist state.”

“In October 2009, the Libertarian newspaper American Free Press reported the two men had declared: ‘the U.S. military should not only bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities, but should launch an “all-or-nothing” war against the Persian country with the goal of obliterating it. . . . “If we use military action against Iran, we should not only go after their nuclear facilities,” Graham said. “We should destroy their ability to make conventional war. They should have no planes that can fly and no ships that can float.’  ‘Lindsey’s right,’ added  Chambliss, ‘It’s an all or nothing deal . . . A full-out military strike is what it would take.’“ 

“Judging by his comments, if fascism comes to America former Assistant Secretary of Defense Richard Perle will also sign on. Reporter John Pilger notes Perle has depicted the U.S. ‘War On Terror’ as having ‘no stages’. ‘This is total war!,’ he said. ‘We are fighting a variety of enemies. There are lots of them out there.  All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq . . . this is entirely the wrong way to go about it.  If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don’t try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a total war . . . our children will sing great songs about us years from now.’”

“Seymour Hersch has described leaders of the U.S. military’s Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) as fascism-ready.  In his Georgetown University speech Hersch related General Stanley McChrystal, who headed JSOC before becoming the top commander in Afghanistan, Vice Admiral William McRaven, who succeeded McChrystal as head of JSOC, and other senior commissioned officers, ‘are all members of, or at least supporters of, the Knights of Malta. . . . many are members of Opus Dei . . . They see themselves as the protectors of the Christians. They’re protecting them from the Muslims as in the 13th Century . They have little insignias, these coins they pass among each other, which are crusader coins. . . . insignia that reflect the whole notion that this is a culture war.’”   

“The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which frequently assists CIA, FBI and BATF operations, seems prepared to get aboard a fascist train.  In a 2010 report it included the Oath Keepers and the Constitution Party on its lengthy list of ‘hate groups;’ both of which preach a defense of freedom and the Constitution, not hate.”

“IF fascism comes to America, one need not be a Nostradamus to adumbrate the lie that will be used for its justification.”

“An economic collapse of the magnitude Chossudovsky, Hudson, Celente et al. envision would move millions of Americans radically Right or radically Left in their attempt to save themselves, joining Ron Paul and/or Marx in demanding an immediate end to the costly U.S. imperialist empire and the weapons manufacturing/Special Forces/mercenary/intelligence gathering, etc. industries used to maintain it.”

“Because those industries continue to provide sustenance for a majority of Americans, valued promotions for military officers, and tens-of-billions-of-dollars in profit for a large swathe of the U.S. elite, if millions of Americans begin rioting against the government that funds them, the curtain will come down.”

“The leader, in all likelihood a military man if Obama’s compassionate side weakens his resolve, will throw the protesters into the ‘terrorist‘ camp and they will be treated accordingly.”

“Loud voiced internet and media conservatives have already begun to sound hopeful about such an eventuality.”

“In an article recently posted on American Thinker, J.R. Dunn argued: ‘The time to open the second front is coming. . . . Consider how many times since the Vietnam War this country’s left has involved itself in activities that in saner epochs would have resulted in lengthy jail sentences. Support for the Sandinistas and the Salvadoran FMLN, the Nuclear Freeze movement (a KGB operation from start to finish), cooperation with Palestinian and related terrorist groups. In each case, the left continued its involvement until the bitter end; and in each case skipped off with no consequences.  . . . There is only one way this will end: people are going to die. Americans will be killed in large numbers and under the most horrifying circumstances in attacks that could very likely have been prevented. And when this occurs — as it must — what will the left do? The same as they did after 9/11. Grab a kid-size American flag from somebody else’s hand and stand waving it frantically until the moment of potential retribution is safely past. . . . So how do we respond? . . . We yank drunk drivers out of cars; we must also yank leftists out of the public sphere.  The second step is to identify them. Call them out by name, relentlessly and repeatedly. . . . The third step is to target them, isolate them and render them harmless. . . . We cannot allow ourselves to be backed down by thugs such as these.  To paraphrase Boccaccio: any tactic against such would-be tyrants is legitimate. There is a difference between dissent and desertion, criticism and undermining. That difference has been lost amid a fog of relativism in the past few decades. But behind that fog, the hard stone of reality remains. It’s no longer a game. People are going to die because of the actions taken by this country’s leftists. Recognizing those differences has become a matter of life and death.  . . . The terror conflict is a two-front war. It always has been, as reluctant as we have been to admit it. The time to open the second front is coming.’”

“FOX News pundit Glenn Beck reasons Leftist-communist members of the Obama Administration have joined forces with Muslim terrorists. Objectively, that’s a mad proposition. But it’s no more insane than the Hitlerian lie that Germany’s enemies were Capitalist-Communist-Jews; and a herd will follow the most preposterous theory if it’s vital for holding the state together.”

“Parroting Beck’s logic that the ‘terrorist’ enemies of the U.S. include ‘communists’ as well as Muslims, Randall Hoven, another American Thinker author, exhorts: ‘Some of you might be thinking it a bit retro to call someone a communist.  I am very aware that we cannot read what is written in the heart of another man.  But when a person is a member of the Communist Party, calls himself a communist, and justifies his arguments based on the teachings of Marx and Lenin, I think it safe to call him a communist.” (Following Hoven’s idealist logic, of course, the Borgias and Hitler were ‘Christians’.)

“David Horowitz, who gained notoriety as a Stalinist-Leftist in the 1960s and 70s, has moved his fascist sensibilities to the other side and now speaks of Leftwing Monsters.’”

“Citing Fritz Stern’s thesis that: ‘In Germany there was a yearning for fascism before fascism was invented,’ Chris Hedges contends today a large and growing number of Americans share that yearning.”

“Large banks and corporations would go along with fascism enthusiastically if millions of unemployed and hungry people were demanding their expropriation. Corporate profits are now greater than before the economic crisis began, reaching $1.7 trillion for the fourth quarter of 2010; and their executives are being richly rewarded; thanks in part to federal loans, which are really federal gifts, since they have been paying back the initial loans with money borrowed from the Federal Reserve at interest rates near zero.”

“IF fascism comes to America, it will be directed by Objectivists who comprehend our species nature.  I believe they will remind themselves of something Ron Paul and Marx forget: When a dark night of brutal oppression becomes necessary for maintaining the integrity of the state, it will be done.”

“Moreover, however bad it gets, it’s unlikely American fascism will cost anything approximating the 37-40 million lives forfeited to defend the world’s major capitalist systems during World War I, let alone the 60-80 million lost in World War II.”

“In a speech given at the Soviet Union’s Twenty First Party Congress in 1959, Nikita Khrushchev detailed the suffering and death of millions during the Stalin years. Stunned members of the Politburo broke into tears, crying’If only we had known!’; men who had done their damnedest not to know in order to survive.”

IF fascism comes to America, when it has ended, when the nation’s capitalist economy has been revitalized and it moves into the forefront again, Liberal American legislators will no doubt issue the same lament as they return the Constitution and Bill of Rights to their former place of prominence.”

“While Herr Marx is probably too much of an idealist to listen, I’m going to offer him a little objective advice:”

“There is only one thing over which we humans ever have complete control. Not our wealth. A bad investment, an economic crisis or an unforeseeable lawsuit can cost the most perspicacious individual everything they possess. Not our health. Even very health-conscious people contract typhoid, cholera, malaria, melanoma and other major diseases. And certainly not our lives. A lightening strike, plane crash, car accident, or one of the indicated illnesses, may result in our sudden death.  No, the only thing over which any of us have full authority is our personal integrity. One might, therefore, expect us to consider it our most valuable possession.  But, particularly at moments of crisis, integrity is the very first thing we humans forfeit in defense of our wealth, our health and our lives.”

“That’s how it was in the past! That’s how it is today! And, that’s how it will be tomorrow!

“Ever since World War II, Liberal Americans and British have asked in puzzlement: ‘How could they do it?’ of the modern and sophisticated Germans who turned East Europeans and Jews into slave labor, slaughtered Roma, homosexuals and other ‘undesirables,’ and carried out the Holocaust, all the while considering themselves good and honorable people.”

“America’s Liberals may live the answer to their question.”

(With that, Machiavelli abruptly ended his rebuttal, swept up his notes, and returned to his seat.  His “cut-to-the-chase” comment was almost twice as long as Marx’s Opening Statement, previously the longest presentation. Dr. Marx would not be speaking tonight.) 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s