]]>position:absolute;

Revelations

"The Jewish people as a whole will be its own Messiah. It will attain world domination by the dissolution of other races...and by the establishment of a world republic in which everywhere the Jews will exercise the privilege of citizenship. In this New World Order the Children of Israel...will furnish all the leaders without encountering opposition..." (Karl Marx in a letter to Baruch Levy, quoted in Review de Paris, June 1, 1928, p. 574)

Friday, 26 October 2007

On The Eve Of Destruction

By Scott Ritter

Don't worry, the White House is telling us. The world's most powerful leader was simply making a rhetorical point. At a White House press conference last week, just in case you haven't heard, President Bush informed the American people that he had told world leaders "if you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing [Iran] from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon." World War III. That is certainly some rhetorical point, especially coming from the man singularly most capable of making such an event reality.

Pundits have raised their eyebrows and comics are busy writing jokes, but the president's reference to Armageddon, no matter how cavalierly uttered and subsequently brushed away, suggests an alarming context. Some might note that the comment was simply an offhand response to a reporter's question, the kind of free-thinking scenario that baffles Bush so. In a way, this makes what the president said even more disturbing, since we now have an insight into the vision, and related terminology, which hovers just below the horizon in the brain of George W. Bush.

When I was a weapons inspector with the United Nations, there was a jostling that took place at the end of each day, when decisions needed to be made and authorization documents needed to be signed. In an environment of competing agendas, each of us who championed a position sought to be the "last man in," namely the person who got to imprint the executive chairman (our decision maker) with the final point of view for the day. Failure to do so could find an inspection or point of investigation sidetracked for days or weeks after the executive chairman became distracted by a competing vision. I understand the concept of "imprinting," and have seen it in action. What is clear from the president's remarks is that, far from an innocent rhetorical fumble, his words, and the context in which he employed them, are a clear indication of the imprinting which is taking place behind the scenes at the White House. If the president mentions World War III in the context of Iran's nuclear program, one can be certain that this is the very sort of discussion that is taking place in the Oval Office.

A critical question, therefore, is who was the last person to "imprint" the president prior to his public allusion to World War III? During his press conference, Bush noted that he awaited the opportunity to confer with his defense secretary, Robert Gates, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice following their recent meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. So clearly the president hadn't been imprinted recently by either of the principle players in the formulation of defense and foreign policy. The suspects, then, are quickly whittled down to three: National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, Vice President Dick Cheney, and God.

Hadley is a long-established neoconservative thinker who has for the most part operated "in the shadows" when it comes to the formulation of Iran policy in the Bush administration. In 2001, following the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States, Hadley (then the deputy national security adviser) instituted what has been referred to as the "Hadley Rules," a corollary of which is that no move will be made which alters the ideological positioning of Iran as a mortal enemy of the United States. These "rules" shut down every effort undertaken by Iran to seek a moderation of relations between it and the United States, and prohibited American policymakers from responding favorably to Iranian offers to assist with the fight against al-Qaida; they also blocked the grand offer of May 2003 in which Iran outlined a dramatic diplomatic initiative, including a normalization of relations with Israel. The Hadley Rules are at play today, in an even more nefarious manner, with the National Security Council becoming involved in the muzzling of former Bush administration officials who are speaking out on the issue of Iran. Hadley is blocking Flynt Leverett, formerly of the National Security Council, from publishing an Op-Ed piece critical of the Bush administration on the grounds that any insight into the machinations of policymaking (or lack thereof) somehow strengthens Iran's hand. Leverett's article would simply underscore the fact that the Bush administration has spurned every opportunity to improve relations with Iran while deliberately exaggerating the threat to U.S. interests posed by the Iranian theocracy.

The silencing of informed critics is in keeping with Hadley's deliberate policy obfuscation. There is still no official policy in place within the administration concerning Iran. While a more sober-minded national security bureaucracy works to marginalize the hawkish posturing of the neocons, the administration has decided that the best policy is in fact no policy, which is a policy decision in its own right. Hadley has forgone the normal procedures of governance, in which decisions impacting the nation are written down, using official channels, and made subject to review and oversight by those legally and constitutionally mandated and obligated to do so. A policy of no policy results in secret policy, which means, according to Hadley himself, the Bush administration simply does whatever it wants to, regardless. In the case of Iran, this means pushing for regime change in Tehran at any cost, even if it means World War III.

But Hadley is simply a facilitator, bureaucratic "grease" to ease policy formulated elsewhere down the gullet of a national security infrastructure increasingly kept in the dark about the true intent of the Bush administration when it comes to Iran. With the Department of State and the Pentagon now considered unfriendly ground by the remaining hard-core neoconservative thinkers still in power, policy formulation is more and more concentrated in the person of Vice President Cheney and the constitutionally nebulous "Office of the Vice President."

Cheney and his cohorts have constructed a never-never land of oversight deniability, claiming immunity from both executive and legislative checks and balances. With an unchallenged ability to classify anything and everything as secret, and then claim that there is no authority inherent in government to oversee that which has been thus classified, the Office of the Vice President has transformed itself into a free republic's worst nightmare, assuming Caesar-like dictatorial authority over almost every aspect of American national security policy at home and abroad. From torture to illegal wiretapping, to arms control (or lack of it) to Iran, Dick Cheney is the undisputed center of policy power in America today. While there are some who will claim that in this time of post-9/11 crisis such a process of bureaucratic streamlining is essential for the common good, the reality is far different.

It is said that absolute power corrupts absolutely, and this has never been truer than in the case of Cheney. What Cheney is doing behind his shield of secrecy can be simply defined: planning and implementing a preemptive war of aggression. During the Nuremberg tribunal in the aftermath of World War II, the chief American prosecutor, Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, stated, "To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole." Today, we have a vice president who articulates publicly about global conflict, and who speaks in not-so-veiled language about a looming Armageddon. If there is such a future for America and the world, let one thing be certain; World War III, as postulated by Dick Cheney, would be an elective war, and not a conflict of tragic necessity. This makes the crime even greater.

Sadly, Judge Jackson's words are but an empty shell. The global community lacks a legally binding definition of what constitutes a war of aggression, or even an act of aggression. But that isn't the point. America should never find itself in a position where it is being judged by the global community regarding the legality of its actions. Judge Jackson established a precedent of jurisprudence concerning aggression based upon American principles and values, something the international community endorsed. The fact that current American indifference to the rule of law prevents the international community from certifying a definition of criminality when it comes to aggression, whether it be parsed as "war" or simply an "act," does not change the fact that the Bush administration, in the person of Dick Cheney, is actively engaged in the committing of the "supreme [war] crime," which makes Cheney the supreme war criminal. If the world is not empowered to judge him as such, then let the mantle of judgment fall to the American people. Through their elected representatives in Congress, they should not only bring this reign of unrestrained abuse of power to an end, but ensure that such abuse never again is attempted by an American official by holding to account, to the full extent of the law, those who have trampled on the Constitution of the United States and the ideals and principles it enshrines.

But what use is the rule of law, even if fairly and properly implemented, if in the end he who is entrusted with executive power takes his instructions from an even higher authority? President Bush's relationship with "God" (or that which he refers to as God) is a matter of public record. The president himself has stated that "God speaks through me" (he acknowledged this before a group of Amish in Pennsylvania in the summer of 2004). Exactly how God speaks through him, and what precisely God says, is not a matter of speculation. According to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, President Bush told him and others that "God told me to strike at al-Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did." As such, at least in the president's mind, God has ordered Bush to transform himself into a modern incarnation of St. Michael, smiting all that is evil before him. "We are in a conflict between good and evil. And America will call evil by its name," the president told West Point cadets in a speech in 2002.

The matter of how and when an individual chooses to practice his faith, or lack thereof, is a deeply personal matter, one which should be kept from public discourse. For a president to so openly impose his personal religious beliefs, as Bush has done, on American policy formulation and implementation represents a fundamental departure from not only constitutional intent concerning the separation of church and state but also constitutional mandate concerning the imposition of checks and balances required by the American system of governance. The increasing embrace by this president of the notion of a unitary executive takes on an even more sinister aspect when one realizes that not only does the Bush administration seek to nullify the will of the people through the shackling of the people's representatives in Congress, but that the president has forgone even the appearance of constitutional constraint by evoking the word of his personal deity, as expressed through his person, as the highest form of consultation on a matter as serious as war. As such, the president has made his faith, and how he practices it, a subject not only of public curiosity but of national survival.

That George W. Bush is a born-again Christian is not a national secret. Neither is the fact that his brand of Christianity, evangelicalism, embraces the notion of the "end of days," the coming of the Apocalypse as foretold (so they say) in the Book of Revelations and elsewhere in the Bible. President Bush's frequent reference to "the evil one" suggests that he not only believes in the Antichrist but actively proselytizes on the Antichrist's physical presence on Earth at this time. If one takes in the writing and speeches of those in the evangelical community today concerning the "rapture," the numerous references to the current situation in the Middle East, especially on the events unfolding around Iran and its nuclear program, make it very clear that, at least in the minds of these evangelicals, there is a clear link between the "end of days" prophesy and U.S.-Iran policy. That James Dobson, one of the most powerful and influential evangelical voices in America today, would be invited to the White House with like-minded clergy to discuss President Bush's Iran policy is absurd unless one makes the link between Bush's personal faith, the extreme religious beliefs of Dobson and the potential of Armageddon-like conflict (World War III). At this point, the absurd becomes unthinkable, except it is all too real.

Thomas Jefferson, one of our nation's greatest founders, made the separation of church and state an underlying principle upon which the United States was built. This separation was all-inclusive, meaning that not only should government stay out of religion, but likewise religion should be excluded from government. "I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself," Jefferson wrote in a letter to Francis Hopkinson in 1789. "Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent." If only President Bush would abide by such wisdom, avoiding the addictive narcotic of religious fervor when carrying out the people's business. Instead, he chooses as his drug one which threatens to destroy us all in a conflagration derived not from celestial intervention but individual ignorance and arrogance. Again Jefferson, in a letter written in 1825: "It is between fifty and sixty years since I read it [the Apocalypse], and I then considered it merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams."

Nightmares, more aptly, unless something can be done to change the direction Bush and Dobson are taking us. The problem is that far too many Americans openly espouse not only the faith of George W. Bush but also the underlying philosophy which permits this faith to be intertwined with the governance of the land. "God bless America" has become a rallying cry for this crowd, and those too ignorant and/or afraid to speak out in opposition. If this statement has merit, what does it say for the 6.8 billion others in the world today who are not Americans? That God condemns them? The American embrace of divine destiny is not unique in history (one only has to recall that the belt buckles of the German army during World War II read "God is with us"). But for a nation born of the age of reason to collectively fall victim to the most base of fear-induced theology is a clear indication that America currently fails to live up to its founding principles. Rather than turning to Dobson and his ilk for guidance in these troubled times, Americans would be well served to reflect on President Abraham Lincoln's second inaugural address, delivered in the middle of a horrific civil war which makes all of the conflict America finds itself in today pale in comparison:

"Both [North and South] read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other.... The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes.... [T]hat He gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living God always ascribe to Him?"

God is not on our side, or the side of any single nation or people. To believe such is the ultimate expression of national hubris. To invoke such, if one is a true believer, is to embrace sacrilege and heresy. This, of course, is an individual right, granted as an extension of religious freedom. But it is not a collective right, nor is it a right born of governance, especially in a land protected by the separation of church and state.

The issue of Iran is a national problem which requires a collective debate, discussion and dialogue inclusive of all the facts, and stripped of all ideology and theocracy which would seek to deny reasoned thought conducted within a framework of accepted laws and ideals. It is grossly irresponsible of an American president to invoke the imagery of World War III without first sharing with the American people the framework of thought that produced such a comparison. Such openness will not be forthcoming from this administration or president. Not in the form of Stephen Hadley's policy of no policy, designed with intent to avoid and subvert both bureaucratic and legislative process and oversight, or Dick Cheney's secret government within a government, operating above and beyond the law and in a manner which violates both legal and moral norms and values, and certainly not in the president's own private conversations with "God," either directly or through the medium of lunatic evangelicals who embrace the termination of all we stand for, and especially the future of our next generation, in a fiery holocaust born from the fraudulent writings of centuries past. The processes which compelled George W. Bush to speak of a World War III are intentionally not transparent to the American people. The president has much to explain, and it would be incumbent upon every venue of civic and public pressure to demand that such an explanation be forthcoming in the near future. The stakes regarding Iran have always been high, but never more so than when a nation's leader invokes the end of days as a solution.

Rense.com

9 Comments:

Blogger Xiaozhengmm 123 said...

2015-7-11 xiaozhengm
true religion
pandora jewelry
tory burch outlet
christian louboutin outlet
coach factory outlet
air jordan
kate spade uk
ray ban uk
coach outlet
ray bans
mcm outlet
burberry scarf
kate spade bags
pandora outlet
ralph lauren outlet
longchamp handbags
replica watches cheap
chanel online shop
coach factory outlet
tory burch handbags
chaussure louboutin
cheap beats
jordan shoes
michael kors outlet
cheap jordans for sale
ed hardy
toms shoes
ralph lauren uk
coach outlet online
true religion jeans
chanel outlet
mcm handbags
cheap oakley sunglasses
true religion outlet
louboutin
nike blazer low
polo ralph lauren
tory burch shoes
ralph lauren outlet
coach factory outlet

10 July 2015 at 21:26  
Blogger chenyingying9539 9539 said...

2015-7-11chenyingying9539
louboutin pas cher
coach factorty outlet
louis vuitton handbags
coach factory outlet
cheap soccer shoes
louis vuitton
cheap oakley sunglasses
timberland boots
louis vuitton
cheap jordans
louis vuitton outlet
michael kors outlet
burberry sale
louis vuitton
burberry outlet
oakley vault
fendi
sac longchamp
abercrombie outlet
coach factory outlet
cheap jordans
ray ban outlet
longchamp outlet
louis vuitton outlet
michael kors
prada outlet
cheap jordans
football shoes
louboutin
air jordan 13

10 July 2015 at 21:57  
Blogger Gege Dai said...

20151203xiaodaige
ugg boots
air jordan 11
tory burch outlet online
nfl jerseys
ugg boots uk
ed hardy clothing
supra shoes
ugg clearance
hollister clothing
moncler outlet
ray-ban sunglasses
mulberry outlet store
air jordan shoes for sale
rolex watches,rolex watches,swiss watches,watches for men,watches for women,omega watches,replica watches,rolex watches for sale,rolex replica,rolex watch,cartier watches,rolex submariner,fake rolex,rolex replica watches,replica rolex
air max 90
rolex watches outlet
michael kors outlet
louis vuitton,borse louis vuitton,louis vuitton sito ufficiale,louis vuitton outlet
discount oakley sunglasses
michael kors outlet
ralph lauren uk
converse shoes
kobe 9
cyber monday 2015
barbour jackets
mcm backpack
lacoste pas cher
hermes belt for sale
michael kors canada
canada goose outlet
fitflops sale
mac cosmetics
chanel handbags outlet
ray ban outlet
tods shoes
mulberry uk

4 December 2015 at 01:43  
Blogger John Gibson said...

I have no idea about the on eve of destruction. For many days i have searched for academic writing services to edit my essay. But i did not find any best. later one of my friend suggested essay expert for m. After i used their service o score d good grades in my essay presentation. I am really happy with their services.

20 May 2016 at 03:04  
Blogger Zhenhong Bao said...

tiffany outlet
fitflops clearance
longchamp pliage
hermes birkin bag
hermes birkin
louis vuitton handbags outlet
beats by dre
true religion jeans
prada sunglasses
michael kors outlet
louboutin pas cher
michael kors handbags
air max 90
thomas sabo uk
adidas wings shoes
hermes bags
fitflop clearance
bottega veneta outlet online
herve leger outlet
ralph lauren polo
michael kors outlet online
prada outlet online
chrome hearts
calvin klein underwear
mulberry handbags
ralph lauren uk
longchamp
nike huarache
tiffany jewellery
tory burch outlet online
toms shoes
coach factory outlet
mulberry handbags
swarovski crystal
ralph lauren polo
20160623zhenhong

23 June 2016 at 00:46  
Blogger chenlina said...

chenlina20160705
michael kors handbags
coach outlet
louis vuitton outlet online
oakley sunglasses
nike air max 90
toms outlet
kobe 10
toms shoes
coach factory outlet
christian louboutin shoes
michael kors outlet clearance
coach factory outlet online
ray ban sunglasses
cheap air jordans
coach outlet store online
nike factory outlet
true religion jeans sale
air max 90
michael kors outlet
louis vuitton outlet
michael kors handbags
michael kors outlet
tiffany outlet
gucci handbags
louboutin shoes
coach outlet
ray ban sunglasses
louis vuitton outlet
air jordan 8
ralph lauren outlet
michael kors outlet online sale
louis vuitton outlet
timberland outlet
cheap jordan shoes
authentic louis vuitton handbags
air huarache
louis vuitton outlet
juicy couture
ralph lauren outlet
louis vuitton
as

5 July 2016 at 01:11  
Blogger Fangyaya said...

michael kors outlet clearance
hollister clothing
louis vuitton handbags
ghd hair straighteners
coach factory outlet
nike roshe flyknit
ray bans
fitflop sandals
gucci outlet
michael kors handbags
michael kors outlet
rolex watches outlet
nike air max
coach outlet
cheap jordan shoes
ralph lauren polo
louis vuitton outlet
coach factory outlet
nike outlet store
michael kors outlet
ray ban wayfarer
coach outlet
louis vuitton
jordan 8s
jordan retro
cheap oakleys
louis vuitton bags
adidas superstar
louis vuitton outlet
jordan 13
kobe shoes 11
coach outlet
louis vuitton outlet
michael kors outlet
asics outlet
kate spade handbags
toms outlet
coach outlet store online
kobe 11
hollister clothing
20168.1chenjinyan

31 July 2016 at 20:37  
Anonymous Laundry service in Noida said...

The world war III is not necessary. They can left this problem by taking the right decision. There are also Laundry service in Noida who provides the best service for their clients. Each one is happy with their service.

6 September 2016 at 08:50  
Blogger soma taha said...

There's definately a great deal to learn about this issue
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/water-leaks-20.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/water-leaks-19.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/water-leaks-18.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/water-leaks-17.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/water-leaks-16.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/water-leaks-15.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/water-leaks-14.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/water-leaks-13.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/water-leaks-12.html
http://www.prokr.net/2016/09/water-leaks-11.html

25 October 2016 at 00:19  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

myself@london.com