Bloggers Wonder About Clinton Diplomat Meeting

A couple of blog threads yesterday were discussing the purpose of Secretary Clinton's unprecedented Diplomat meeting. If one understands the mission of the US State Dept and has followed recent world events, then the reason for the meeting is very clear.

Our State Dept and embassy network is about furthering "American Interests".
American interests currently involve oil, military hardware, and perceived scope of power.
The middle east as all know is the last great reserve of black gold. Egypt (and Israel) are our projections of power into the region. If Egypt falls to pure "democratic forces" the future of US influence in the region is questioned. If oppressed people in other US-client states see Egypt fall, then other less powerful nations may have the same fate.

Then there is the business of US foreign aid. Oppressive client states serve as conduits through which tax payer dollars go to defense industry companies. Massive amounts of corporate welfare is disguised as foreign aid. "We give you a few billion, but it must be used to purchase American weaponry." Egypt is the largest recipient of foreign aid behind Israel.

The likely aim of Clinton's massive meeting is to put the fire under some diplomat ass. Tell them to get out of the embassy, make better contacts within the local society. America cannot continue to keep getting surprised with its pants down if it is to maintain its status quo.

I wish the meeting were more along the lines of firing most of the staff. The administration should take the radical steps of dismantling the empire, shrinking our embassy staff and maybe eliminating our military bases as well. Our empire can die a slow reaction filled death or we can actively dismantle it, thereby have more control over its future.

Diplomatic Scramble?

NY Times posted an article I found interesting, "Diplomatic Scramble As Ally Is Pushed To Exit".
By MARK LANDLER, HELENE COOPER and DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

"Last Sunday at 2 p.m., a blue-and-white Air Force jet left Andrews Air Force Base bound for Cairo. On board was Frank G. Wisner, an adroit ex-diplomat whom President Obama had asked hours before to undertake a supremely delicate mission: nudging President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt out of power."

Why is Obama sending ex-diplomats to quietly nudge a leader of another nation out of power? How far up the scale of puppet government does Egypt go? It's like he's firing some Secretary within the US government.

"But it is also one of political calculations, in Cairo and Washington, which were upset repeatedly as the crowds swelled. And it is the story of a furious scramble by the Obama White House — right up until Mr. Obama’s call Tuesday night for change to begin “now” — to catch up with a democracy movement unfolding so rapidly that Washington came close to being left behind."

Why is the self-proclaimed beacon of democracy, the US, catching up with democracy? We should be cheering it on at every opportunity, obviously except when it involves our totalitarian allies. And what are our diplomats scrambling for? There should be nothing surprising about what is happening in Egypt, considering Tunisia a week earlier. But just like the fall of the USSR, our intelligence agencies are caught unprepared again.

"At the Saturday meeting, the officials also agreed that Mrs. Clinton would start calling for “an orderly transition” when she taped a round of interviews for the Sunday talk programs. Administration officials were already smarting from not coming out more fully in support of the protesters earlier. In particular, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. had been criticized for an interview with “NewsHour” on PBS on Thursday, in which he answered “no” when the host, Jim Lehrer, asked if the time had come for Mr. Mubarak to go."

Who are we, or for that matter, anyone outside of Egypt, to determine how a people chose exercise their political choice?

"American officials had also been in close contact with Vice President Suleiman, who may be playing a particularly pivotal role in managing the transition of power. American and Egyptian officials who know him well describe him as both a cunning operator and Mr. Mubarak’s closest aide. He is also considered the figure with the largest base of support in Egypt’s security forces because his work as intelligence chief built him deep ties with the internal security police and the military."

So this is Mubarak's his successor? Omar Suleiman. He is a CIA asset closely involved in our rendition program. Not a stalwart for transparency, human rights, nor democracy.

"And for the United States, can an Egypt without Mr. Mubarak serve American interests in the Middle East?"

So what are American interests in the Middle East? Oil? Regional Control? Religious Crusade? Protector of Israel?

Egypt has been a loyal projection of American military power into the region; and ally on several fronts, but most recently as a favorite destination of CIA renditions. It has received the second highest amount of US foreign aid behind Israel. Being a powerful military in the region and neighbor to Israel, one may assume that this aid pacifies any potential aggression against Israel. But our relationship with Egypt is deeper than that. This aid is almost entirely in the form of armaments. American tax dollars given to Egypt with the stipulation that it be used to buy American military weapons to build it arsenal. Industrial welfare payments washed via international aid.

So Washington is loosing one of its prized cloaks covering the large amount of corporate welfare to our Military-Industrial Complex. Besides the bureaucrats in Washington, Wall Street and the Pentagon may be scrambling soon. One less dictator to make billions of dollars off of. Main Street however, should start cheering. This is potentially billions of dollars saved, hopefully destined for domestic use.

Main Street can learn something from the streets of Cairo, the power of grassroots mobilization.

From Hope to Hopeless Criminal

Last week the White House announced it authorized the CIA to assassinate an American citizen. "It can't possibly be the law that American citizens enjoy greater legal protection from being wiretapped than from being placed on a government kill list," said the ACLU's Ben Wizner.
The proper response should have been, "it can't possibly be lawful to murder anyone without trial!" But truly, I wasn't surprised by the announcement. Wahsington's decade long track record of black ops crimes is well documented. The Change We Can Believe In have been underwhelming at best. Whenever given a chance to implement change, Obama has done nothing but maintain the despotic practices of the previous regime in Washington.
Drone attacks? Increased them.
Illegal occupying forces in foreign lands? Increased them.
Numbers of innocent civilians murdered? Increased them.
The list can go on and on and on....

Obama has proven himself a failure, a failure because he continues to ignore how these imperialistic endeavors destroy our economy and erode our international goodwill. He willfully nurtures an abusive and power lusting executive branch that has grown unchecked for almost a century. He is a failure for changing nothing.

These brazen criminal acts are likely the death throes of a dying empire. May the innocent be spared from the sinking ship. Sadly, silence does not equal innocence.

Deserving the Nobel?

"What has President Obama actually accomplished?"

remarks Michael Steele, chairman of the rival Republican party, in response to news of President Obama winning the Nobel Peace prize. Valid comment by itself. But when placed alongside the drivel spewing from Republicans and their internet agents, one sees the irrationally combative, insular, and tribal nature of American politics, where one cannot congratulate a fellow American for winning a benign award if he belongs to a different political party. Although the comments are malicious and prejudiced, are they correct? Is President Obama undeserving of the Nobel Peace prize? Why did the Nobel committee chose him?

"There is no way Barack Obama earned it in the nominations period"

says conservative blogger Erick Erickson. I'm not on the Nobel board, neither is Erickson, but its safe to assume they were aware of his longevity in office. They're also undoubtedly aware of what President Obama has or hasn't accomplished. So why give him the prize? Faux News may use the reflex excuse of liberal bias, however I feel he received the award for two reasons.

The first being his presidential campaign. Millions of world citizens were energized by Barack throughout 2008. After 8 years of military extremism and burgeoning economic chaos, people were finally united in hope across the world, believing that change was possible. Even the most ardent Obama critics, such as myself, cannot ignore how he captivated the globe. Secondly, I believe, he received the award for who and what he is not. Obama is not the instigator of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. He is not George W. Bush. Was giving this award to his successor pejorative slap in the face of President Bush? I hope so.

Do I feel Obama deserves the Nobel Prize? Not yet. As energizing and inspiring he was in 2008, he fails to end Bush's adventures in the Muslim world. He fails to put pressure on oppressive apartheid Israel. And Obama hasn't the courage to confront his criminal financiers from Wall St. who caused our current financial crisis.

However, Obama symbolizes something larger than either his accomplishments or failures. He signifies our hope for change, peace, an end to the rising tide of oppressive oligarchical fascism. The Nobel committee recognized not just his ability to inspire but that you were willing to invest in him. Awarding Obama the award reflects this; the Nobel is indirectly award to you. Deserved for your passionate debates with colleagues, attendance at rallies, support of progressive groups. Cumulatively these actions demonstrated your yearning for different direction.

I hope Obama comes to deserve this award in the future. I also hope you to stay aware and force elected politicians to follow through on the spirit of change you demonstrated in 2008. Complacency is not an option.

Israeli Egg on Obama's Face

Other presidents have known that talk of "Middle East peace" is a charade. A magic show. A sleight of hand pacifier to bide time for Israel land grabbing. It's Zionist version of "Don't ask don't tell". Don't ask about their nuclear arsenal, Israel won't tell. Don't ask blah blah, you get the picture. In the upper echelons of US government, this must be common knowledge. That's why no US president engages Israel / Palestine conflict until they're heading out of the White House, and only then half-heartedly. That's until Barack Obama. He entered the White House promising to tackle Middle East peace early in his term. I applauded his enthusiasm, albeit naive. But for someone hailed as a pragmatist, he has no historical perspective on the Middle East conflict. His ineffective engagement to date has resulted only in Israeli egg on his face. As passively talks of peace, Israel remains defiant of his wishes and his credibility as world leader takes a hit every time Israel throws egg in his face.

A recent omlet landed in the Oval Office via Avigdor Lieberman. "Israel's Foreign Minister has ruled out any permanent peace deal for years to come, even as the US envoy to the region called for swift resumption of peace talks," says James Hider of TimesOnline. While castrating Obama's envoy but essentially nullifying any peace talks, Lieberman says "What is possible to reach is a long-term intermediate agreement ... that leaves the tough issues for a much later stage." Doublespeak. What is there besides contentious issues? The status of Jerusalem. National borders. Palestinian right of return. Settlers. These are all serious matter. But Lieberman is happy to ignore these issues, let hatred fester, meanwhile Palestine remains an illegally occupied bantustan. How long do we wait? Until Palestinians to have no land to call home. Or until the Palestinian people are no more.

Israel obviously has no respect for Obama. Since taking office, Obama's representatives have been completely ignored by Israel, usually leaving Tel Aviv utterly embarrassed. Obama inspired hope in the world with his "change we can believe in". Sadly, Israel neither believes in Obama's change nor wants change to the status quo. As a sovereign nation, that is Israel's prerogative. That does not allow the US, nor the world to watch as idle spectators.

Acutely, Israel is not to blame, Obama is. Israel has been defiant of any country or world body that doesn't agree with its zionist ambitions for decades. This is nothing new. The recent failures in Middle East peace belong to Obama. He has lacked the understanding, conviction, and fortitude to deal with his ally effectively. He lacks the courage to mete out reprimands, whether in economic, military, or diplomatic arenas. Since Israel will remain obstinate and Obama will likely remain impotent in Tel Aviv, he should at least tell them how he likes his eggs cooked.

Silencing of Sibel

Heard about Sibel Edmonds? She’s the FBI agent that discovered the treasonous connections between Bush government officials and foreign agents. She actually discovered that there is audio recorded proof that Washington and Downing St were dividing up before 911. When she attempted to expose this crime, then Attorney General Ashcroft issued a gag order on her citing States Secrets Privilege.

Secrets are interesting; a secret is leverage, its power. A magician uses this advantage to amaze us. When government holds secrets, it has leverage over its citizens. William Proxmire warned “Power always has to be kept in check; power exercised in secret, especially under the cloak of national security, is doubly dangerous!” Even worse, what if the secret is knowledge of a crime? Well we must question a government that would protect said secret unless it were complicit in the crime.

What we know of John Ashcroft, this maneuver doesn’t surprise. He claims states secrets privilege. I say "No shit!" Most criminals want their crimes to remain a secret; America arms its traitors with legal ammunition to avoid justice. Fortunately, most of the world acknowledges the criminality of the Bush regime. Unfortunately most world citizens are not in a position bring that regime to justice. What does surprise me is that 8 years on, no major media outlet wants to touch this story.

We are all grateful for Ms. Edmonds bravery. She has spoken truth to power, sharing one more piece of evidence exposing the deception behind America’s illegal invasion of Iraq. Her story also warns us how a pathological lack of transparency is poisoning American democracy. For an insightful look at American government deception read A Nation of Secrets by Ted Gup.

Friendly Beer Summit

The notion that the Gates arrest was unrelated to race is preposterous. That it happened in Boston, a city with history of tense racial division, is not surprising. Sgt. Crowley’s response, although blurred with racism, reflects an underlying sentiment of police superiority, their contempt for those who question their authority, as if it didn’t come from the people they police. Our president recently remarked how he considers America exceptional among nations; untimely as it was, this incident is neither novel nor uncommon. And while talking heads debated who was to blame, I wondered why there wasn’t a 5th person at the White House Beer Summit, the 911 caller.

We are engaged in a war for the future of America. Distractingly the corporatist recruit your mind to sacrifice your child’s and grandchild’s earnings, and enlist your friends to fight on battlefields of blood and oil, the war will be won in your home, your neighborhood. The true battle for hearts and minds need be fought right outside your door.

How many of us know our neighbors? Introduced ourselves to the new family on the block? Look out for suspicious activity on the street? Do we consider our homes to be in neighborhoods anymore?

Most decisions in life aren’t black or white; we generally find a balance in life. We live in the gray. We are forced to choose between being watchful nosy neighbor or selfish uninvolved recluse. But even in this seemingly innocuous gray area, racism or perhaps unfamiliarity clouds our judgment, creates situations where a man gets arrested for entering his own home. I wasn’t with the 911 caller that Thursday in July. I don’t know if the voyeur’s line of sight was obscured by an errant leaf or untrimmed hedges. I do know that this all-seeing-eye doesn’t know his neighbor from Adam. And probably hasn’t apologized for their involvement in this situation. And this bothers me.

America is in trying times. The empire is imploding, slowly. Now is the time to build partnerships, alliances bigger than income, race, or color-state we were born. The future isn’t hopeful when we can’t introduce ourselves to our neighbors. Perhaps we can start being an exceptional nation by walking across the street and inviting the neighbor over for a Beer Summit.

"To love our neighbor as ourselves is such a truth for regulating human society, that by that alone one might determine all the cases in social morality."

-John Locke