Notes On The Greatness Of The American People

In the recent past, readers of the Winter Patriot community blog have been treated to two articles from a contributor calling himself "Truth Excavator", one extolling the virtues of non-violent resistance and the other urging a new awakening of American consciousness, or a new expression of American conscience, or something, and ending with the following words:

Only a great and virtuous people are capable of bringing justice to their deprived leaders, and correcting the wrongs endorsed by generations of government officials. But if there ever was a people in history who could pull off such a task, it is the American people.

"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." - Thomas Jefferson

Unfortunately for "Truth Excavator" and those who find this line of reasoning attractive, the greatness of the American people is not only a myth but an extremely destructive one.

The myth is most notably promoted by your so-called leaders, who by its use demonstrate quite clearly that they know more about you than you know about them. In particular, they know that flattery will get them everywhere, because you are far too ignorant, far too arrogant, too inward-looking, too self-absorbed, too addicted to your daily fiction, to ever vote for anyone so bold as to tell you the truth about yourself, your country and its role in the world, or the body politic itself -- of which you are a vanishingly insignificant member.

Instead they talk about how proud they are to be American, and how proud you are to be American, and how they know the great people of this great nation will support them in their great campaign to become the next great president, senator, congressman, governor, attorney general, dog-catcher, or whatever. God Bless America, this great and wonderful country. Or something.

The myth of the greatness of the American people is -- to use Lincoln's famous words -- altogether fitting and proper under the circumstances, which is to say it is necessary to the American political landscape for several interconnected reasons. In addition to the most transparent of flattery, the myth provides invaluable support for American exceptionalism, the mass-murderous fiction according to which the United States is never obliged to acknowledge -- or apologize for -- or rectify -- the damage it does to the rest of the world, where it slaughters innocent people by the millions and poisons square miles of landscape by the hundreds of thousands, all in the name of spreading democracy, or stability, or prosperity, or security, or whatever they think you'll believe next year.

As Sarah Palin stated when she was running for the Vice-Presidency:

"America is a nation of exceptionalism. And we are to be that shining city on a hill, as President Reagan so beautifully said, that we are a beacon of hope and that we are unapologetic here [...] as a force for good in this world."

As I explained at the time: This is political code, very thinly veiled, which means:

"It doesn't matter that we have killed thousands of our own people, and millions of foreigners, in our quest for global empire, because we are exceptional, and immune to the laws that apply to ordinary nations.

It doesn't matter that we have turned millions of people into refugees, depriving them of what little they had before we decided to "liberate" them, because we are a beacon of hope.

We don't even have to apologize for destroying Iraq, and Afghanistan, and Somalia, and Pakistan, nor for the covert and proxy warfare we are currently waging against Iran, and Russia, and China, and Venezuela, and many other countries which have never attacked us, because we are God's chosen people, in His shining city, on His hill."

None of this nonsense would be even remotely plausible without the fundamental lie: that Americans are inherently so "good" that they can be collectively called "great", with no hint of irony whatsoever.

As if that weren't enough, the myth also obscures the reality of American prosperity: that it is not solely or even primarily the product of American ingenuity and the inherent greatness of the American people, but of brute force, brutally applied. The story of American wealth begins with a continent rich in natural resources, devoid of natural enemies and protected from the rest of the world by two oceans, conquered through genocide and developed by slavery, fed by the most rapid destruction of resources mankind has ever seen, and growing by hammering the rest of the world, murdering innocent people and stealing the resources to which the victims and their progeny should have been entitled. For this you congratulate yourselves, and your politicians congratulate you, as righteous Christians whose worldly wealth signifies your holiness. Or something.

But no, your so-called leaders will never tell you any of this, and neither will your so-called news media. And even though the plain and horrible truth is available -- and always has been -- in your local library, and -- relatively recently -- on the best (read: least-popular) internet sites, you mostly choose to avoid it. And this avoidance is altogether fitting and proper as well, since your continuing denial allows you to go on about your life in "peace" and "quiet", secure in the "knowledge" that regardless of whatever trouble awaits you and your country, your inherent greatness -- and that of your friends and neighbors -- will certainly come to the rescue, if only it can be awakened. Or something.

Chris Floyd, writing recently about "the gut-wrenching footage unearthed by Wikileaks", had a few kind words to say about the greatness of the American people:

The American people are simply too good, too just to let stand such a foul besmirching of their national honor. After all, didn't they rise up as one after the Abu Ghraib atrocities were revealed in 2004, and boldly oust the architects of these crimes in the ensuing presidential election? Didn't they take to the streets in their millions when first Bush and then Obama claimed the right to have any citizen put to death without charges or trial simply by declaring the victim a "suspected terrorist"? Didn't a great groundswell of public ire force Congress to open impeachment proceedings against George Bush and Dick Cheney for their Soviet-style gulag of concentration camps and systematic tortures -- and threaten similar justice for Barack Obama's continuation and cover-up of this system? Didn't the American people demand a national day of mourning and atonement when they realized that hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis had been murdered in a war based on false pretenses and cynical manipulation?

So let us have faith in the American people. They have proven time and again in this last decade that they will not countenance crimes and atrocities being committed in their names. They will not abide leaders who unleash a war machine of blood money and blind fury against innocent people. When push comes to shove, when the truth is revealed to them, they will always -- always -- do the right thing.

To Floyd's summary, one might add ... um ... interminably. The mythical greatness of the American people goes on and on and on.

The "people of good conscience" Jefferson was talking about have remained silent -- or else they were falsely assumed to be "of good conscience". So much for American "greatness".

It might seem surprising to see this mythical quality extolled by a writer who opposes the endless wars of empire. But as Chris Floyd noted in a more recent post, this is the sort of analysis we often get from

... American "progressives" -- almost of all whom are deeply marinated in their own brand of American exceptionalism ...

We don't expect that sort of "marinated analysis" around here, though ... at least not usually. Usually we make it clear here that the greatness of the American people is on a par with the greatness of sharks.

To comment on this post, please click here and join the Winter Patriot community.

Dear Troops ...

Tonight I drove past a "Christian" church with sign saying this:

THANK THE TROOPS. WRITE A LETTER.

So I did. And here it is:

Dear Troops,

Thou Shalt Not Kill.

Please always remember this Commandment, and go find a job which does not require you to violate it.

Thank you very much.

Sincerely,
WP

To comment on this post, please click here and join the Winter Patriot community.

Endless Lies, Endless War: Obama Accepts The Democratic Nomination

Arthur Silber's most recent post draws attention to the speech last night in which Al Gore said:

We can tell Republicans and independents, as well as Democrats, exactly why our nation so badly needs a change from the approach of Bush, Cheney and McCain.

After they wrecked our economy, it is time for a change.

After they abandoned the search for the terrorists who attacked us and redeployed the troops to invade a nation that did not attack us, it's time for a change.

Silber highlights Gore's mention of the fact that Iraq did not attack us, and draws the logical conclusion:

Therefore, the United States was not acting in self-defense. The invasion of Iraq was an act of aggression. Thus, the invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq constitute an ongoing war crime, indeed a huge, horrifying series of ongoing war crimes. The war crimes continue today, and will continue tomorrow.

There's nothing very startling in this, of course. Regular readers of this page -- and many other websites, such as Silber's -- have known this for a long time. The startling part, as Silber says, is actually hearing it someplace other than the internet.

As I heard that phrase this evening -- "and redeployed the troops to invade a nation that did not attack us" -- I froze for several seconds. I couldn't believe Gore had said it, or that I had heard it. I doubt that even one commentator will say a word about it.

Kudos to Arthur Silber for catching -- and pointing out -- this tiny bit of truth in Al Gore's speech. Every now and then we get a bit of truth from a politician. It's always unexpected, and it's almost always shocking.

But there was an exceptionally vicious lie in the very same sentence, and Arthur Silber didn't pay it any attention. So I will.

Of the Bush administration, Al Gore said :

they abandoned the search for the terrorists who attacked us

but this is not even remotely true, except when parsed as political code.

If by "they abandoned the search for the terrorists who attacked us", Gore means "they didn't capture Osama bin Laden", then he's technically correct: They didn't capture Osama bin Laden.

But then again, they were never trying to capture him. They were trying to capture Afghanistan!

Furthermore, it wouldn't have done them any good if they had captured him, because Osama bin Laden didn't attack us on 9/11. And if Al Gore or Arthur Silber or anyone else has information to the contrary, they should contact the FBI immediately.

As Barack Obama pointed out in his acceptance speech last night, America is not a nation of whiners.

So rather than whine about how we've been deceived, and how we continue to be deceived, about the facts of 9/11 ... rather than whimper about how all the 9/11 lies are trumpeted by all the national figures of both major parties ... rather than snivel over the fact that these lies are blasted at us every day by both the major and the minor media ... rather than gripe about how all these transparent lies are consistently given a pass in very disturbing places, even by some highly respected and extremely dissident writers ...

No, no, no, no, let's not do any of that!

Instead let's take a moment to savor a few of Obama's remarks on foreign policy:

You don't defeat a terrorist network that operates in eighty countries by occupying Iraq. You don't protect Israel and deter Iran just by talking tough in Washington. You can't truly stand up for Georgia when you've strained our oldest alliances. If John McCain wants to follow George Bush with more tough talk and bad strategy, that is his choice but it is not the change we need.

We are the party of Roosevelt. We are the party of Kennedy. So don't tell me that Democrats won't defend this country. Don't tell me that Democrats won't keep us safe. The Bush-McCain foreign policy has squandered the legacy that generations of Americans -- Democrats and Republicans have built, and we are here to restore that legacy.

As Commander-in-Chief, I will never hesitate to defend this nation, but I will only send our troops into harm's way with a clear mission and a sacred commitment to give them the equipment they need in battle and the care and benefits they deserve when they come home.

I will end this war in Iraq responsibly, and finish the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan. I will rebuild our military to meet future conflicts. But I will also renew the tough, direct diplomacy that can prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and curb Russian aggression. I will build new partnerships to defeat the threats of the 21st century: terrorism and nuclear proliferation; poverty and genocide; climate change and disease. And I will restore our moral standing, so that America is once again that last, best hope for all who are called to the cause of freedom, who long for lives of peace, and who yearn for a better future.

These are the policies I will pursue.

Let's give Barack Obama the courtesy of taking him at his word.

Let's listen when he tells us what he wants to do.

Specifically, then, Obama wants to :

• defeat a terrorist network that operates in eighty countries
• finish the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan
• protect Israel
• prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons
• stand up for Georgia
• curb Russian aggression

And in general, Obama promises to:

• rebuild our military to meet future conflicts
  
• send our troops into harm's way with a clear mission, and
  
• restore our moral standing, so that America is once again that last, best hope for all who are called to the cause of freedom, who long for lives of peace, and who yearn for a better future

I find it notable, though not surprising, that even though Obama wants to send our troops into harm's way with a clear mission, he says nothing about whether this future mission might be justified in any way.

There's heavy irony in Obama's conclusion, because he says he wants to "restore our moral standing", but he seems to have no idea how that could be done.

We cannot defeat a terrorist network that operates in eighty countries by attacking only two of them, can we? But if we attack all eighty, how will that enhance our moral standing?

How can we finish the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan? How many more sleeping children will we have to kill to do it? And will that bring us a better future?

Three weeks ago, Georgia started a war against Russia -- with American backing. If we stand up for Georgia, will that show that we long for lives of peace?

Russia, having suffered an unprovoked attack, responded much less violently than America would have done. If we use this event as a reason to curb Russian aggression, will that demonstrate how much we long for a better future?

What if the Russians had attempted to curb American aggression -- in Iraq, for instance? Or in Afghanistan?

Israel, armed to the teeth with the only nuclear weapons in the region, continues to wage a brutal campaign of repression against the Palestinians, and keeps trying to drag America into a war with Iran, which has neither nuclear weapons nor any way to produce them. How can we enhance our moral standing, and move toward our longed-for lives of peace, and protect Israel at the same time? By using nuclear weapons against Iran to make sure Iran never develops nuclear weapons?

No, no, no, no, no! It makes no sense!!

We should start by recognizing that America never was the last or the best hope "for all who are called to the cause of freedom".

We should realize that every time our President -- whoever he may be -- sends "troops into harm's way" without justification, their presence serves to deprive other people of their freedom -- and we should also realize that this is exactly what they are sent there to do.

We should press for full and open investigation of the crimes of 9/11 -- and all the false-flag terror preceding 9/11, too. We should demand that the perpetrators be removed from office and held fully accountable for their actions.

Above all, we should start telling the truth about all these events, because there's no other option: those of us who long for lives of peace, and who yearn for a better future, don't want to see endless war based on endless lies.

We'll never see peace based on lies -- but that's all we're going to get, from any national representative of either major party.

And everybody else is locked out.

I didn't watch Obama's speech last night. I didn't watch Al Gore either. Instead I went to bed early. And as I was drifting off, I had a waking-dream, or a "day-mare", or whatever you want to call it ... in which Barack Obama accepted the Democratic Presidential nomination with these words:

If I am elected, I promise to invade all the countries America hasn't already invaded, starting with the Islamic ones.

And if I am re-elected, I promise to re-invade all the countries America has already invaded.

As a vision of the future, it seemed too ludicrous to mention -- but it was a good deal more accurate than most of what you'll be reading in the mainstream media today.

As Arthur Silber says, you can have your choice of war criminals.

You can have your choice of liars, too.

Care to comment on this post? If so, click here and join the Winter Patriot community.

A Nation Of Vicious Idiots: Waging Endless War Against The Third World, And Proud Of It

All sorts of people make all sorts of noise about all sorts of things including "unity" and "tolerance" and "all men are created equal".

At the risk of offending believers of conventional wisdom, at the risk of challenging fundamentalist interpretations of our supposedly perfect founding documents: BS!

All men are not created equal. You can tell just by looking at them. Some are tall, some are short. Some are thin, some are fat. Some are smarter than others. Some are left-handed. And so on.

But when it comes down to what really matters, there are essentially three types of Americans: those who enjoy living in a country that wages continuous war against the third world, those who abhor it, and those who know nothing about it whatsoever.

Watch this video and you will never again fall into the third category.

The War Against the Third World: What I've Learned About U.S. Foreign Policy

CIA covert operations and US military interventions since World War II. A video compilation of footage and speeches recorded in the 1980s and 1990s. What you didn't learn in school and don't hear on the mainstream media.

(If you can't see the video, click here.)

Now...

If you enjoy living in a nation that wages continuous war against the third world, if you can kill, maim and torture for fun and profit and call it serving your country, if you are proud of what your country has done and want to see more of it, you should be reading bob cassiday, who wrote:

What a motley crew the party of Carter and Clinton has produced for this election season. Once the party of Andrew Jackson, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and Harry Truman, you have a whole different mindset among this collection of union thugs, abortion advocates, flag burners, and hippies. It is no wonder that their front runner is the loudmouthed wife of the former President, Hillary.
...

Mike Gravel, I have no respect for any candidate who wants to legalize narcotics. Not to worry, this guy won't get anywhere. Oh, and thanks for helping end the draft, Mike, so we can raise generation after generation of men who are not asked to serve their country.
...

If the apathy is fading, the American people are starting to pay attention, and the "great silent majority" is starting to make some noise and fight back against all of the Leftist baloney they have been fed for the last forty years, that is bad news for the Democratic Party.

Speaking of Harry Truman, speaking of forty years ago, let me make one thing perfectly clear:

It didn't have to be like this. It didn't have to be anything like this.

I can barely type at the moment, but I can copy and paste pretty well. The following comment is still germane, IMO, even though I typed it a couple of years ago, on another blog, in response to a commenter who espoused the ideas that war is the answer and Vietnam is the proof:

In case you weren't paying attention, let me remind you: the Vietnamese people had never done anything to the United States -- but we waged war on them anyway. In that war we killed about 2 million Vietnamese civilians. We also made about 4 million Vietnamese people homeless. Our reckless use of chemical weapons such as Agent Orange caused widespread cancer and birth defects. Nixon's secret and illegal bombing of Cambodia destabilized a friendly government and left a power vacuum that was filled by the genocidal regime of Pol Pot -- leading directly to the deaths of another 2 million innocent people.

And what good has come of it? In 1975 when American troops finally left, Vietnam adopted a communist nationalist government, the very thing we were supposedly trying to prevent. So in that sense, we did not achieve a single thing. And more than 4 million people died for nothing.

Nothing, Jose. They died for no reason at all unless you count the fact that people who should have known better thought war was the answer.

Ho Chi Minh was a friend and ally of the USA during World War II, Jose. Did you know that? An American intelligence agent (Archimedes Patti) gave him his first weapons. Did you know that? Ho Chi Minh helped America throw the Japanese out of Indochina and he wanted to help us throw France out as well. But FDR was dead and so was his notion of "self-determination for all peoples". And harry truman was now the president and he was not only totally uninformed on world affairs but he was also a vicious little prick. And when harry truman told Ho Chi Minh to go buck a water fuffalo, that was the end of any chance for peace and stability in the region.

If the USA had stood with its wartime ally, Ho Chi Minh; if the USA had embraced the idea of Vietnamese national self-determination rather betraying it; if the USA had stood by its announced principles after the war, rather than rejecting them in favor of French colonialism; modern Vietnam's government would certainly be nationalist -- as it is today -- but it might very well be anti-communist, and it might even be pro-American. Ho Chi Minh would never have gone to Russia and China for help if he could have obtained help from the USA.

But no! truman told Ho to go screw and what was the result? Millions and millions of innocent people dead -- millions and millions more innocents homeless -- untold grief and anguish in America as well as Southeast Asia -- and all because some vicious little prick thought more war was the answer. In fact the answer was simple -- but harry truman was not about to tell the French to get their armies the hell out of Vietnam and let the Vietnamese people live their lives in peace -- even though it would have made perfect sense, even though the American government had trumpeted the principle of self-determination all through the war, and even though America, having rescued the French from the Nazis, did not owe France one thin dime...

Yeah, I know: That was then, this is now. Now the answer is not for American troops to be planting explosives in Iraqi cars and trucks in a transparent attempt to trigger a civil war. Now the answer is not for Americans to contaminate Iraq any further with our radioactive ammunition. Now the answer is not more indiscriminate bombing of residential neighborhoods. Further violence by Americans in Iraq can only make this horrible situation even worse.

And as for you, Jose, I've had enough of your bullshit. Why don't you take your five bucks [it has been reported that disinfo bloggers are paid $5 per post] and hit the road? In fact, why don't you go spend some time with the people who share your views? Why don't you just click here and start being all you can be?

That's right, Jose! Put your soft tissue where your mouth is! Enjoy the war, always remember that war is the answer, and don't worry. We'll still be your friends, even though we're staying here -- and that's a good thing, too, because you're gonna need friends like us to bury your sorry ass when it comes home in a box.

I spelled harry truman's name in lower case back then as a sign of respect. None.

Speaking of bob cassiday, his rant against Mike Gravel drew a comment from Brad Spangler, to wit:

Re: "Oh, and thanks for helping end the draft, Mike, so we can raise generation after generation of men who are not asked to serve their country."

Good news! You're still young enough to enlist. :)

To which the vicious ignorant prick replied:

I'm too old, have a career, a wife, and a daughter. Were I 21, unmarried, without a daughter, I'd bee in uniform right now.

If that's not good enough of an answer for you, bring back the draft.

It goes without saying that this is chickenhawk bullshit of the most pungent variety. Sacrifice other people's lives and limbs in the wars I want our country to fight. But not me. I have a family. I have a career. I'm better than other people: let them die while I enjoy my life.

This guy's serious. And he's far from alone.

Watch some of his buddies throw a stun grenade at a shepherd for a joke -- and record it on video (WMV: Right-click here and "Save As..."). bob cassiday would be laughing along with them if he were 21, single, childless and jobless. And he's not even smart enough -- or decent enough -- not to say so in a very public place.

On the other hand, some Americans are actual human beings, with brains and hearts, who feel pain and emotions such as empathy, and who believe mass murder and grand theft -- and throwing a stun grenades as a "joke" -- are sins against Almighty God and crimes against humanity, even if the victims live elsewhere; even if the victims live differently.

There will be no unity. There will be no tolerance. There will be no third category.

Are you with us or against us?

A Bachelor of Espionage with a Minor in Anthropology

Fears over CIA 'university spies'

A CIA scheme to sponsor trainee spies secretly through US university courses has caused anger among UK academics.

The Pat Roberts Intelligence Scholars Program pays anthropology students [...] up to $50,000 (£27,500) a year.

They are expected to use the techniques of "fieldwork" to gather political and cultural details on other countries.

Britain's Association of Social Anthropologists called the scholarships ethically "dangerous" and divisive.
...
The ASA's president, John Gledhill, told the BBC News website the scholarships could foster suspicion within universities worldwide and cause problems in the field.

He said: "Anthropologists go all over the world for long periods and gain detailed knowledge of places, such as Iraq or South America.

"This is information which would be useful in security circles, which is not what anthropology is for."

I'm sorry to tell you this, Dr. Gledhill, but that's what we call "September 10th thinking".

Maybe you were away on a dig, sir, but as of September 11th, 2001, America is at war -- and our war is endless and all-consuming. Therefore, anthropology, like everything else, is at the mercy of the war.

Dr Gledhill said: If people on the ground in foreign countries get the idea that some anthropologists work for the CIA, then they are not going to feel like being very friendly."

I'm very sorry, Dr. Gledhill. You really must get in from the ancient burial grounds more often, sir. The United States of America does not give a rat's ass about your "people on the ground in foreign countries". We can't afford to, sir, because our war is endless and all-consuming.

In fact, sir, the United States of America doesn't even give a rat's ass about its own "people on the ground -- at home or in foreign countries"! And we can't afford to care about that, either, sir, because ... yessir, it's endless and all-consuming, sir.

So please don't take any of this criticism personally. I know you mean well, but it's all about the war, sir. And forgive me for saying so, sir, but my country has gone crazy.

Felix Moos, an anthropology professor at the University of Kansas, defended the scholarships.

He wrote in the journal Anthropology Today: "The United States is at war. Thus, to put it simply, the existing divide between academe and the intelligence community has become a dangerous and very real detriment to our national security at home and abroad."