Let's Connect the Dots - Part 5

In 2000, Al Gore won the Presidential election by over 500,000 votes nationwide. But that didn't matter. Why? Because the American electoral system was set up to be not quite a democracy. Moreover, State officials cheated and got away with it. And before a full recount of Florida's election results, the “Supreme” Court decided George W. Bush (Jr.) should be President. This was all the more suspicious because the “Supreme” Court was stacked with five Republicans, who had been chosen by previous Republican Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, who had essentially stolen the 1980 election. It sure looked like payback time for Justices Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas, O'Connor, and Kennedy to me.

(For more information on the thefts of the 2000 and 2004 Presidential elections see the Greg Palast documentary The Election Files.)

I'm not claiming that the military/industrial complex was behind the stealing of the 2000 election. They have plausible deniability. The Republicans did it. But Republicans are well known for supporting the military/industrial complex practically unwaveringly. And by the way; events since the 2000 election have shown that the military/industrial complex has benefited immensely.

Al Gore was and is an environmentalist. Like President Carter before him, Al Gore would have been far more inclined to have resorted to renewable energy than to go to war over oil.

And most likely, Al Gore would have reacted to the 9/11 attacks as President Bill Clinton did in 1993 – by treating them as crimes, not acts of war. Al Gore would not likely have created Homeland Security. And it isn't very likely Al Gore would have ordered the invasion of Iraq – when none of the 9/11 terrorists are claimed to have been Iraqi.

America and the world would have been a different place if George W. Bush had not been prematurely declared President by the “Supreme” Court.

But, since the differences between Democrat leaders and Republican leaders isn't perceived as vast; Americans didn't bother to stand up for Al Gore. There were protests, but most Americans never got off the couch.

We all now know that although there may not be a vast difference between Republicans and Democrats, there is a significant difference.

The first important issue on the agenda of the Bush Jr. administration was to cut taxes. And the second was to deficit spend on the war on terror.

The tax issue kept everyone's attention for the first few months of the President George W. Bush term. The biggest chunk of the tax break was for the rich. There are two issues I have with this. First; this transferred the burden of paying for the military/industrial complex to the poor and the middle class. We all know that the rich have more influence on our government. And if they are not stuck with the bill for wasted tax dollars, they won't be as inclined to reduce that waste. Second; some among those rich are owners, investors, or executives for military/industrial complex companies. A tax break for them tends to maximize their profits – at the expense of the rest of us.

...If it were just about this tax break, we could deal with it. But there has been a devastatingly disturbing trend for the past 50 years of taking more and more from everything else in the Federal budget to pay for “defense.” This hurts every non-defense related government function. In other words, this hurts everyone. And at its worst; we are allowing poor people in America to die so that we can kill poor people on the other side of the world.

What is especially interesting about this particular tax cut is its timing. Looking back, this was the only time the Bush Jr. administration could have pulled this off. After the 9/11 military response, it wouldn't have been practical to give tax breaks. It's as if the Bush Jr. administration had scheduled the invasion of Iraq after the tax breaks were passed. And according to the Bush Transportation Secretary Paul O'Neill, that's essentially what they did.

Paul O'Neill was present at the very first George W. Bush administration National Security Council meetings. He claims that; “From the very beginning, there was a conviction, that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he had to go.”... “It was all about finding a way to do it.” Paul O'Neill even remembers President George W. Bush saying; “Go find me a way to do this.”

During the first nine months of President Bush's first term, there was practically no public mention of terrorism by anyone from the administration. Richard A. Clark, Bush Jr.'s (and previously Bush Sr.'s and Clinton's) Counter-terrorism Czar, claims that terrorism was on the back burner for months (though it had been of extraordinary importance to the Clinton administration). When Richard A. Clark was finally granted a briefing with President Bush, only about a week before the 9/11 attacks – he warned Bush of an imminent attack. But since Clark didn't have specifics, Bush essentially ignored his warning.

This could have been an oversight. But it also could have been planned. Maybe the Bush administration didn't want to know about any potential terrorist attacks. (The cynical might even suspect that the Bush administration was checking to see if Richard A. Clark was onto them.)

When one also considers the fact that many members of President George W. Bush's administration (Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Elliot Abrams, Lewis (Scooter) Libby, and John Bolton) had planned to militarily dominate the world – it would make sense they wanted some attack to happen to initiate a Pearl Harbor-like American response. These high level members of Bush Jr.'s administration had also been members of the Project for a New American Century, a neo-conservative think tank that had planned out the policy document Rebuilding America's Defenses that stated; “Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.” (italics mine) 
 

Now let's think back about when the neo-cons wrote this document; Rebuilding America's Defenses. It was the late 1990's. The Soviet Union had collapsed a decade earlier. The only nation to challenge America militarily since then was Iraq, and it had lost spectacularly – and consequently; President Clinton had significantly reduced military spending. Almost every civilian in the country thought that made sense. But that meant the merchants of death were having to do without. And, of course, the military/industrial complex has a huge influence on politics. Rebuilding America's Defenses made total sense to them – financially. So, apparently, the military/industrial complex will support any politicians who want to increase “defense” spending – for whatever reason. Think about that. What this means is that there is a constant financial pressure to militarize America – essentially to push us towards despotism – and it's been this way for decades. (This is what President Eisenhower warned us about.) 

The future members of President George W. Bush's administration showed their hand in this document. They wanted to dominate the world militarily. They wanted to “secure American geopolitical leadership” and “preserve an international security environment conducive to American interests” and “preserve American preeminence through the coming transformation of war.”

They were hoping for a new Pearl Harbor – to usher revolutionary change – so that they could dominate the world.

...And then there was what looked like another coup d'état during the 2000 election.

...And then there was another Pearl Harbor – in the 9/11 attacks and the anthrax attacks.

...And then there were multiple invasions and plans for invasions of nations on Bush's (essentially the Project for a New American Century's) “Axis of Evil” list.

Is it any wonder people are suspicious?...

...And then the mass media, the neo-cons, and the like try to convince us that these suspicious people are all just a bunch of crazy conspiracy theory nuts?

This fits right in with what one would expect from a disinformation campaign.

Which makes us even more suspicious.

I won't talk a lot about the 9/11 conspiracy theories. There are people who have studied this in much greater detail than I have. I recommend the documentary 9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out

(Even if there was not a 9/11 false flag conspiracy; we now live in much more of a police state and our tax dollars are still flowing by the billions to the military/industrial complex.)

...And then one week after the 9/11 attacks, numerous anthrax letters were mailed to members of the news media and two Democratic Senators. The letters appeared to be from Islamic terrorists, but samples of the anthrax were soon analyzed and found to be weapons grade American anthrax. The FBI tried to blame another “lone-nut,” but it didn't make sense. Bruce Ivins was an anthrax scientist. He would have known other scientists would find out it was American anthrax. And recent evidence continues to point away from the FBI's lone nut. Bruce Ivins' lab wasn't capable of making the type of anthrax used.

So, someone or some group stole weapons grade American anthrax from a highly secure military installation – didn't quite know what they were doing – mailed it to a few enemies – and tried to blame it on Muslim terrorists – and when that didn't work, they blamed a patsy. This strongly suggests a false flag operation. Or maybe worse. Maybe whomever did this wanted to kill everyone in Congress – maybe even everyone in Washington DC... But don't worry, White House staff had been taking a powerful antibiotic to keep them from getting anthrax for almost a month before anyone know about the anthrax attack. Hmm...

...And then 13 days after the 9/11 attacks, The “Patriot” Act is introduced. Now think about this; within 13 days this bill gets introduced to Congress. I find it very difficult to believe a bill like this could have been written in such a short time. Bills usually take months to write. Meaning it likely had already been written by the time the 9/11 attacks took place.

Which means the Neo-Conservatives (at the very least):

Wanted to dominate the world.

Had hoped for a “new Pearl Harbor.”

Looked the other way until a terrorist attack happened in America.

Had likely prepared for it – by writing the “Patriot” Act – beforehand.

Had likely prepared for it – by preemptively taking a powerful antibiotic to prevent them from catching anthrax.

And then invaded a country that had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks.

And what about the worst-case possible scenario – that there is a powerful warmongering proto-facsist group of elitists in America who have manipulated our government for decades? And this loose knit group of profiteers has cheated, lied, and maybe even killed a President or even planned a terrorist attack or two to gain a hold of temporary dictatorial power? Moreover, this group may hold sway over our intelligence community? And worst of all, this group is collectively so irresponsible that America is doomed to collapse under their “leadership”?

I'm sure the neo-cons didn't see themselves as the worst thing that could happen to America. But the neo-cons are not all of the problem. There are the greedy military profiteers. There are the polluting oil and fossil fuel energy companies. There are the gambling banksters. And there are a number of other monopolistic and tax evading groups taking advantage of every dirty trick they can think of. When you combine all of the awful things they are doing together, it doesn't make for a pleasant world. But apparently; the takers in America accept all this ultimately-self-destructive behavior... as long as they get to be the king of refuse hill.

But that's not what most Americans are like. Most of us would rather share than steal. We want to help each other. We don't want to harm the world. Most of us want to make the world a better place.

Back in 2002, Senator Paul Wellstone was the most outspoken liberal member of the Senate. He had opposed Bush/Cheney on the tax cuts, the SEC, and on the invasion of Iraq. Obviously, Senator Paul Wellstone had become an obstacle to neo-con power. Vice President Dick Cheney had even threatened him. Senator Paul Wellstone probably would have filibustered the Homeland Security Act. And he wanted to further investigate 9/11. But Senator Paul Wellstone died in a mysterious airplane crash – along with his family. It had all the signs of a third world CIA (or some other intelligence group, possibly even private) assassination.

Now think about this. Not long after two Democratic Senators were mailed American weapons grade anthrax, another Democratic Senator gets killed in a plane crash without any plausible cause. This wasn't 50 years ago. But just like the Kennedy's assassinations, the investigation looked like a cover-up. And the military/industrial complex benefited. Imagine the chilling effect the likely assassination of a dissenting Senator must have had on Congress...

Looking back, there might even be a pattern of airplane crashes of outspoken American public officials. The liberal Republican Senator from Pennsylvania, John Heinz, was an outspoken critic of the Vietnam war. His plane crash was as mysterious as Senator Paul Wellstone's. Former Senator of Texas, John Tower, who had been chair of the commission that had investigated the Iran/Contra scandal, also died in a plane crash. And as I had mentioned earlier, House Majority leader Hale Boggs died in a plane crash after revealing that the Warren Commission was a farce.

Maybe our chickens have come home to roost.

Decades ago, the nations south of the U.S. had warned us; that if we treated them like banana republics, eventually the dysfunction would spread – eventually the economic hit men, jackals, and greedy corporations would turn their eye on America. They warned us that eventually our nation's tactics of greed would be used against us. Those warnings seem so prophetic now.

We Americans live in a nation who's leaders are forced to take bribes (campaign contributions), afraid of being run out of Washington by manipulations of the mass media, are likely blackmailed by the NSA, and possibly even fearful of being assassinated like President John F. Kennedy or Senator Paul Wellstone.

...And the people who actually pull the strings of these “elected” puppets want us to think that if only we wait until the next election, maybe things will be different.

Well, maybe things can be different. But not if we continue to play by plutocracy rules.

And what are plutocracy rules?

1. The mass media is not allowed to tell the whole truth. Before the 2004 election, Dan Rather (at the time the most powerful reporter in America) reported on the news program 60 minutes that President George W. Bush had been both a draft dodger and a likely a deserter. Evidently his father, George H.W. Bush, who at the time was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives; put the fix in for Bush Jr. to evade the Vietnam War – and protect America from the Viet Cong in the Air National Guard in Houston. Moreover, Bush Jr. got to train to become a pilot, even though others were better qualified. And then, towards the end of his military service; no one remembers him around... I saw this 60 minutes report. It was well documented and quite plausible. But the owners of 60 minutes and CBS, Viacom, couldn't take the heat and essentially fired Dan Rather for revealing the truth. It was amazing to watch the mass media reporting about this. Every mass media “news” report focused on only one document and ignored everything else about the 60 minutes report. (The 60 minutes segment lasted over 15 minutes and included many documents.) It was like watching a pack of hungry dogs turn on one of their own. The truth never had a chance.
2. The plutocrats get to pick our candidates. (In case you don't remember; this is very similar to what used to happen in Soviet Union politics. Our electoral system works differently, but the results are the essentially same.) Money is so important in our elections that every candidate has to go begging to the plutocrats. Consequently, long before we ever get to vote; those with money get to decide who will even run. And who are they willing to risk money on? Well, let's think about it; they want someone they can control. That means they must generally pick candidates who expect payback after their term or someone they can blackmail. In other words, the plutocrats don't want the cream of the crop.
3. The plutocracy can manipulate election results. Exit polls from Ohio and Florida had shown Democratic candidate John Kerry had won by a significant margin. However, suspect paperless voting machines gave George W. Bush the win. But that was just the tip of the iceberg. Nearly half of the 6 million American voters living abroad (you know, like in the military) never received their ballots – or received them too late – after the Pentagon unaccountably shut down a state-of-the-art website used to file overseas registrations. A consulting firm, Sproul & Associates, which had been hired by the Republican National Committee to register voters in six battleground states, was discovered shredding Democratic registrations. In New Mexico, which was decided by 5,988 votes, malfunctioning voting machines mysteriously failed to properly register a presidential vote on more than 20,000 ballots (many of those cast by Native Americans). Nationwide, according to the Federal commission charged with implementing election reforms, as many as 1 million ballots were spoiled by faulty voting equipment – roughly 1 for every 100 cast. (And what's worse, after over 10 years, those paperless voting machines are still in use.)
4. Once the new leader is “elected,” no investigations will be held for past improprieties. Had John Kerry taken his rightful place as President, there might have been some investigations into 9/11, the lies that were told to Americans to get us to support the invasion of Iraq, and maybe even into the torture orders. But President Obama didn't do it. So I doubt that would have happened under John Kerry either. And why? The new leaders know two things; there would be repercussions and maybe even violent reprisals, and moreover, previous investigations (such as the 1977 investigation into JFK's assassination) didn't make any difference anyway.
5. A corrupt two party system rules America. American voters have two choices; proto-fascists or corporatists. Our politicians don't represent us. Every other developed nation on the planet has multiple parties. However, most Americans have no idea what proportional representation is, much less realize how bad we need it.
6. There is essentially a closed process of writing bills and treaties. For years, only industry lobbyists have been a significant part of the writing of bills relating to that industry. In many cases, the lobbyists actually wrote the bills! In the case of the Trans Pacific Partnership treaty, we citizens aren't even allowed to know what is going on in the treaty talks. Talk about the fox writing laws for the hen house! In America, the (powerful) criminals don't break the laws, they change them. And if they can't change our laws, they try to agree them away in trade agreements.
7. At the Federal level, no direct democracy exists. We don't get to vote on issues. There are no credible reasons Americans should be forced to only vote for a temporary king every four years. The obvious reason Americans don't vote on policy issues is the plutocracy doesn't care to know what we want.
8. And as the treatment of Occupy Wall Street shows; those who want to fix America are treated as criminals.

Continue to Part 6