Coup d'etat

In the past I have argued that we, as a body politic, have become obsessed with ideology and defending our chosen side(s), parroting talking points as cleverly as possible in lieu of the exertions of thought, and actively avoiding the provocations of knowledge. Several weeks ago reasonably observant folks may have noticed there was a release of information by the National Security Archive (George Washington University) pertinent to our Iraq invasion. I had expected some comment on its existence, or mere recognition of its availability. Considering the myriad subjects discussed on blog sites, from TV shows, celebrity sex, sports, electoral politics, to creationism, it is significant in this age of empire and debt that the attention of the supposedly politically attuned somehow by-passed official documentation of aggressive war. I can only surmise heads are buried in sand as ideological defense and psychological avoidance of the verities of American militarism. It is much easier to be a member of the Tea Party than an actual conscientious patriot. It is much easier to let Madison Avenue contracted by billionaires sell what is in comparison a zero calorie politico/economic narrative than to look a trillion dollars of death and destruction in the face. There has been a coup d’état over the original American mind, and it has been perpetrated by the military/industrial complex and the empire-ists.

Those bothering to read this archived information may be tempted to argue it represents typical convolutions and messiness inherent in any policy formation. Standing alone it could be seen that way, but read for what it is, the trail of the implementation of a strategy developed by Zbigniew Brzezinski in his book “The Grand Chessboard”, which underpins a spectacularly more frightening manifesto entitled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”, alternately referred to as the PNAC (Project for a New American Century) paper, it exposes the Iraq war progression as edited script more so than improvisation or response to the chaos of the political universe. Orchestrated moves to “fix the facts” in facilitation of the agenda to establish American military dominance of the region, an objective that “transcended” Saddam’s rule, attest to the premeditated and inexorable march to war, independent of subsequent sham justifications. The calculated manipulation of the stimuli of fear and patriotism is on full display in the text of the archival material, and is simply the culmination of a similar exercise selling our Afghan adventure.

If a bowling ball is suspended five feet over a table and is released, scientists can calculate how much time it will take to impact the table top. They can also calculate the difference in the elapsed time if a 12oz. plastic cup is positioned between the ball and table. Yet, on that fateful day the Twin Towers crashed to the ground at free-fall speed, as if the seventy lower floors of each tower, undamaged by collision or fire, were molecularly undifferentiated from air. Afterward, the distinguished 9/11 Commissioners in league with the government/corporate media continued the nullification of the sciences of physics and engineering,and then became active proselytizers of the new, compulsory religion of 9/11. Those habituated to take solace in conventional ideology and the legend of American Exceptionalism will be indifferent to the difficulties of benign reconciliation of “official” scientific improbabilities of the events of 9/11 and their expedient perfect congruence with the optimal geo/military desires of the acolytes of Brzezinski - the authors of “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”. While others contemplating the irrationalities of the 9/11 myth and the fact that no weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq, might view the American public as a Pavlovian dog, kenneled in a Skinner Box, being force-fed an imperial hierarchy of needs by the Pharisees of PNAC.

After reading the seventy-six pages of “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”, and considering the debate over the propriety of use of public funds to address the domestic hardships of the neediest Americans, and the simultaneous obscene and immoral expense of the Napoleonic quest for world domination recast in the new American vernacular, I can’t help but wonder which side of the controversy resurrected Founding Fathers would find most adverse to the spirit of their Constitution and vision of America. Which would take priority, "We the People" or "We the Empire"?

Post Script Oct 25, 2010 - On Oct. 24, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Hugh Shelton, said to Christiane Amanpour on the news program "This Week" that there was a push for war in Iraq by Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz and other Pentagon officials, "that almost bordered on insubordination", unsupported by any credible intelligence linking Sadaam to 9/11. Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz are among the authors of "Rebuilding America's Defenses". The Grand Chessboard - Rebuilding America's Defenses - Empire.