Ellsberg Calls for Actions to Prevent War with Iran

I don't see how they can do it, without incurring severe punishment by the world community, of one kind or another. I don't see how China, for instance, can sit by and do nothing while one of its major sources of oil is attacked for no other reason than that U.S. global corporate predators want the oil. (The nuke issue is a ruse, in my opinion.) China holds a big chunk of our debt paper. And a couple of months ago, I read a brief news report--which was quickly buried--that China, Russia and India were holding a meeting on how to curtail the lawless U.S. We may find ourselves in WW III.

More ground work needs to be done to prepare the way for such an attack, which I have little doubt that Hillary will pursue, following Bush. But--unless the Bush Junta and Congress are literally the enemies of the United States, and are out to destroy this country, by INVITING the retaliation of nuclear powers and our economic debt-holders--I don't see it happening. It is insane.

The OP mentions that Ellsberg thinks there has been a coup within the Bush Junta. That is possible, I suppose, but the evidence is more persuasive that there has been a coup AGAINST the Bush Junta--exhibit no. 1 being Rumsfeld's ouster, and exhibit no. 2 being Rove's ouster, neither of which were connected to the '06 elections, in my opinion. Exhibit no. 3 is Gonzales' ouster. And--connected to these exhibits is Nancy Pelosi's statement, the day after the elections, that "impeachment is off the table." I think we've had a very dicey situation within our government, to be sure. But it appears to me that a direct attack on Iran has been headed off. I think it's possible that that is what Pelosi traded--no impeachment of the principles, Bush and Cheney, in exchange for no attack on Iran--an attack which we have no ground forces available to follow up with, and which could easily escalate militarily, as well as result in severe economic retaliation.

The situation with the captured British sailors seemed made to order for Cheney's trigger finger, but it was headed off--and Pelosi traveled to the Middle East that very week. A further consideration is what would happen to Israel in WW III (Chinese, Russian, Indian and/or Pakistani involvement) or in the general worldwide Muslim jihad that would likely occur. There might be hesitation in militarily attacking the U.S.; but less hesitation at attacking Israel. Also, Iran is no pushover--softened up by Gulf War I and twelve years of sanctions and no-fly-zone bombings under Bush I and Clinton--it's not an easy win for the Bushites and the U.S. military, as Iraq was. It is simply NOT POSSIBLE for current U.S. forces--stretched to the max in Iraq and Afghanistan--to attack, invade and occupy Iran. The only way to conquer it would be to nuke it back to the stone age, and that would surely ignite a worldwide conflagration.

We tend to forget, too, that OTHER major parts of the world (in addition to major powers like China) despise the U.S. Venezuela, for instance, which supplies 15% of our oil, could simply turn off the spigot (which I believe Hugo Chavez said he would do, if the U.S. attacked Iran), and that sentiment is very widespread in South America. The Bush Junta has almost no friends. It is holding onto its few allies with huge bribes, or serious kneecapping.

I think, instead, that the U.S. policy will be continued squeeze, saber-rattling, bullying, arm-twisting, with regard to sanctions on Iran, and fomenting hostility to Iran, and a long term project to weaken it, as well as instituting a military Draft here, and some measure of fiscal responsibility. We are looking at a ten trillion dollar deficit. We can't keep this up. Economic collapse is a serious threat--not to mention ECOLOGICAL collapse if immediate, drastic steps are not taken to curb global warming and slow down deterioration of the biosphere. To start a new war in these circumstances, against a well-armed foe, is akin to the insanity of Tsar Nicholas in WW I--which brought down the monarchy--only this is much, much worse.

Yes, I think Bush and Cheney are capable of such insanity, and I think they are, literally, enemies of the United States. But I don't think that of much of our military leadership, nor of our political establishment in general. I think our political establishment is the enemy of democracy, but not the enemy of the country. They believe that THEY are the country, not us--not we, the people. We are just their slave labor and cannon fodder--and the milk cow from which they continue to squeeze taxes and ungodly profits. And they will not deliberately bring the country down, even with global corporate predators and war profiteers calling the shots. So I think that the political establishment--and possibly a segment of the corporate rulers--have acted to curtail Bush/Cheney, probably with some help from insider dissenters in the military.

Ellsberg's thinking is perhaps pre-Diebold. He says that folks like him within the military who swear an oath to the Constitution should come forward to expose plans to attack Iran. But what if they did? Would the war profiteering corporate news monopolies not twist or bury the story? And what would the consequence be, say, on next year's presidential election? Did Abu Ghraib have consequences? Did the WMD lies? Did unjust, heinous war? Who just re-funded and escalated the Iraq War, in the teeth of 70% opposition among the American people, and gave Bush/Cheney new spying powers, and passed a Senate resolution against a grass roots antiwar group? The 'Democrats'!

"News"--real news, truth that influences policy--is no longer an operable concept. Scandals--even scandals of unprecedented magnitude--have no impact on who wins elections. That's not how things work any more. We have suffered a coup, yes, but not within the Bush Junta. We have suffered a coup against our democracy by the political establishment--both Democratic and Republican--which, when it supported the takeover of our election system by rightwing Bushite corporations, using "trade secret" proprietary programming code in all the new, highly insider riggable voting machines, with virtually no audit/recount controls, destroyed our only means of enforcing the will of the people. Our political establishment destroyed our democracy, but our country still stands, for the moment.

So we are dependent on the hope that our political establishment is not suicidal--that it will not destroy the country by attacking Iran. I think we have reason to hope that that is true, but we no longer have any power to control what happens. In short, it wouldn't matter if a Daniel Ellsberg arose today, if the political establishment is determined to attack Iran. News monopolies like the NYT, and the Washington Post and AP, would go right along with it. They have no independence. And we have no electoral power to prevent such a thing--even if a "Pentagon Papers" on Iran were to make it to the internet. What then? Would Hillary be appalled, and make it an election issue?

As Josef Stalin is reported to have said: "Those who vote decide nothing. Those who COUNT the votes decide everything."

That's where we are--poor peasants, all of us, hoping that the powers-that-be are not insane. We have arrived at tyranny.

You may be right that a coup has already happened. Perhaps that was what Ellsberg meant at his speech.
Although the Downing St Memo should have been enough to overthrow the * regime If there is more info,
(and I'm sure there is) was to be released, I think at this stage the MSM would be all over it and if
they didn't pick up the ball then you can bet activist bloggers and groups would!!

its back on democracy--with the installation of wholly non-transparent, corporate-controlled voting machines and central tabulators--and the global corporate predators and war profiteers who are pulling our leaders' strings, will decide if and when the U.S. attacks Iran. If it has decided to attack Iran, no amount of whistleblowing from Pentagon insiders (or other insiders) will prevent it. Any disclosures will be muffled, twisted and blackholed by the corporate news monopolies, and it will have NO electoral consequences. And if it has decided to put off an attack on Iran (the most likely scenario--given Rumsfeld's ouster, in particular)--until they get more cannon fodder (a Draft), more foreign allies (say, with a change of regimes in DC), and stabilize/strengthen national financial viability--whistleblowing disclosures will not have been the reason why.

My point is that it's not up to the American people. Did exposure of the 100% WMD lies change anything? Did exposure of Abu Ghraib and other torture change anything? Did the continuing disclosures of massive theft by private, Bush-Cheney-tied corps in Iraq change anything? Has exposure of the most corrupt regime in our history--and possibly in the history of the human race--changed anything? This information is out there. The American people are largely aware of it (--which is why a whopping SEVENTY PERCENT of the American people oppose the Iraq War/Occupation). This information--largely driven by the internet and whistleblowers--has not changed anything.

The 'Democratic' Congress just ESCALATED the war, and larded Bush-Cheney with billions MORE of our non-existent money to keep killing Iraqis until they sign over their oil rights. This was done in the teeth of 70% opposition to the war by the American people. All that Pentagon whistleblowing on Iran would do is maybe boost that number to 80% or 90% (as the internet and word-of-mouth spread the word). The American people would STILL be powerless to prevent an attack on Iran, if our political establishment and its corporate puppetmasters decide to do it.

The problem is NOT information. The problem is POWER. What is our main power over our leaders? Our vote.

Back in Feb. '03, before the invasion, FIFTY-SIX PERCENT of the American people opposed the Iraq War. That is a significant majority. 56% would be a landslide in a presidential election (and believe me, it was). Yet the invasion went forward--with a significant majority in the U.S. against it, and the whole world against it. Electronic voting, run on 'TRADE SECRET,' PROPRIETARY programming code, owned and controlled by rightwing Bushite corporations, was instituted by Congress in the same month as the Iraq War Resolution (Oct '02), to control the vote counting as that big antiwar sentiment got bigger--now at 70%.

So the decision to go to war, and to occupy a foreign country, IS NOT OURS. Information about Bush-Cheney war planning against Iran would therefore make NO difference as to whether our young people and our tax dollars are appropriated for war against Iran. If war against Iran is decided upon, an incident will be invented to justify it, in the delusional corporate newsstream--a legitimizing tool that is growing very thin, to be sure, but that the war profiteers continue to employ (while they put nazi powers in place to defeat rebellion)--and we will then go to war a SECOND time, against our will.

Let me give you an example of how this works. In May '04, six months before the 2004 election, CBS was about to broadcast the Abu Ghraib torture photos, and to reveal that Bush went AWOL in his National Guard service during the Vietnam War. (Note: At that time, polls showed 63% of the American people opposed to torture "under any circumstances.") These CBS News stories were one of two serious threats against the Iraq War boondoggle (ouster of Bush-Cheney)--that is, revulsion against Bush-Cheney by the American people to such a degree that people would outvote the voting machines (or rebel, if the election was stolen). The other was that California Secretary of State, Kevin Shelly, sued Diebold, decertified their touchscreen voting machines (paperless e-voting), and demanded to see their source code. The horror and illegitimacy of the war was about to be exposed, in graphic form--along with the cowardice of the President. And the inherent fraudulence and illegitimacy of the new voting systems, that accompanied the Iraq War, was ALSO about to be exposed.

Three things then happened: 1) a probable Rovian sting within the chain of custody on the Bush AWOL story documents (having to do with the apparent re-typing of one of the documents on a later model IBM machine, although the CONTENT of that document was verified by other sources)--a sting that got the story killed and that got Dan Rather fired, after decades as CBS's linchpin news anchor; 2) CBS execs delayed broadcast of the Abu Ghraib torture photos (until they were about to be scooped by New Yorker magazine), and did everything they could to downplay the disclosure (limited it to one broadcast, with no pre-advertising, etc.); and 3) the corporate news monopolies went after Kevin Shelley, and destroyed his career with what turned out to be entirely bogus corruption charges (his office was hamstrung during the next six months--as to pursuing Diebold, and monitoring the '04 election--and he resigned in Feb. '05). (Shelley--elected in '02--was the rising star, among secretaries of state, nationwide, and was encouraging other secretaries of state to QUESTION and investigate these e-voting systems.)

They got Dan Rather. They got Kevin Shelley. And they got us. Bush-Cheney was re-installed, via rightwing corporate control of the voting system, and the ILLUSION of support for the war among the American people was MAINTAINED--tattered, contradicted by all polls, but MAINTAINED. The narrative was kept in tact, just barely.

So, if THAT was the effect of MILITARY whistleblowing in '04, what do you think the effect of military whistleblowing on Iran would be, now?

Let me add one other incident: Joe Wilson's whistleblowing on the WMDS, and David Kelly's simultaneous whistleblowing in the UK (British WMD expert and insider), June-July '03. Wilson's wife's career with the CIA was destroyed, and the lives of her family and those of her entire anti-WMD network were put at great risk; and, in the same week, David Kelly turned up dead, under highly suspicious circumstances.

When the corporate gangsters who are running things decide to hijack our military and kill hundreds of thousands of people in a corporate resource war, they will destroy careers and kill their own to achieve their goal. They will twist or blackhole any news stories that threaten to tear off the veil from their delusionary narrative. They will (and did) destroy democracy in the United States.

It's not a whistleblower that we need. What we need is a grass roots revolt against the rigged voting machines--a revolt that has already started, but that will probably take time, because the most viable venue for change is state/local jurisdictions.

The old antiwar movement does not seem to understand the nature of the coup that we have suffered. Back in the '60s, it was still possible for the American people to VOTE a president with an unjust war policy OUT OF OFFICE. That is essentially what occurred in 1968 (when LBJ decided not to run for a second term, after an antiwar candidate DID WELL in the New Hampshire primary). (Eugene McCarthy didn't even win it--he just did well.) In that context--and also with a much freer press--Ellsberg's disclosure of the Pentagon Papers could have an impact. With American democracy still alive and healthy--with transparent vote counting and a free press--the war profiteers had to take OTHER measures to prevent an antiwar candidate from winning the White House. (They followed up on the assassination of JFK with the assassination of his brother, RFK, who likely would have won the 1968 election.) (They also assassinated MLK, several months before. MLK was leading a strong black voting rights campaign.)

But now all they have to do, to prevent real representatives of the people from gaining power, is write a few lines of programming code. One hacker, a couple of minutes, leaving no trace. That's all it takes. And Bush-Cheney gets re-installed, and the war goes on. And a 'Democratic' Congress then endorses, escalates and re-funds the war, in spite of 70% opposition in the country.

It is futile to ask whistleblowers to come forward, when we, as a people, have been stripped of the power to act on that information.

It may be good for the whistleblowers' souls. And the truth, of course, is always helpful--and worth making sacrifices for--in any society, even an undemocratic one. But it will NOT change U.S. foreign policy on Iran. That is NOT up to us, no matter how much insider information is exposed. And that is the problem.

Think about how much crap we are supposed to have swallowed--as the delusionary narrative portrays things. Delusionary is the right word. It is an INSANE narrative, totally out of touch with the American people. And, often, we buy into it by dissing OTHER Americans as stupid sheeple--or uninformed. 'If they only knew the truth!' some of us cry. 70% of them have figured things out. They are not stupid sheeple. And the war goes on.

So will war with Iran--if and when our political establishment and its corporate puppetmasters decide to prosecute such an outrage. Continued brutal occupation of Iraq, and possible unjustifiable war on Iran--until we restore public control of vote counting. Even then, of course, it will be a struggle. But without transparent vote counting, we have no chance of winning it.

:(

:kick:

"But without transparent vote counting, we have no chance of winning it."

I do agree we need to get rid of the voting machines and go back to pen and paper!
But if the voting is so badly rigged, which we all pretty much know was tampered
with in places, how do you account for the 2006 Dem comeback? I am not a voting
machine expert but I've read some of what experts have said and they say that a
large voter turnout can override the e-voting tampering because it would be to
difficult to hide it. I still have hope that * won't take us into another war and I
really don't see how he could (not a ground war anyway) and that we will take back
the WH, and both houses completely in '08! We need to finish the job we started!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15621554/">Voter turnout a tad higher than last midterm
Democrats wooed more voters than GOP for first time in midterm since '90
Let's hope the turnout in '08 is even bigger this time!


This may just be a waste of time but it's all I've got! ;)

"how do you account for the 2006 Dem comeback?"

First of all, look at its effects. WAS it a "comeback"? This so-called 'Democratic' Congress ESCALATED and RE-FUNDED the Iraq War--in the teeth of 70% opposition by the American people, most of whom said that, when they voted, the Iraq War was their chief concern.

And this new 'Democratic' Congress didn't just escalate the war, they declared that "impeachment is off the table"; they gave Bush and Cheney MORE spying powers; and the Senate just passed a resolution against Moveon.org for expressing its opinion! Unbelievable!

I think we have to realize that the Congressional elections are ALSO rigged. We have a Congress that is the exact opposite of the American people. 70% of the American people oppose the war and want it ended; 60% to 70% of Congress votes to do the OPPOSITE. How can that be?

This is a great big country, and our election system is highly complex, and is influenced by many factors. MONEY, of course, is a big one. Billions poured into federal elections by the worst, most fascist interests in the country--big multinational corporations including the entire octopus of the war industry. Huge amounts of money also poured into lobbying in DC--and all of its overt and insidious controls over our 'representatives' including who gets to run for office. Also, it is documented that the DLC used money, power and influence (all corporate) to weed out anti-war candidates, and push pro-war 'Democrats' in primaries and in likely Democratic win areas. There are about 30 "Blue Dog" Democrats who were 'elected'--traitor Democrats who believe in cutting everything in the federal budget EXCEPT war spending. I heard them on C-Span just after the '06 elections, saying just this--and with Nancy Pelosi's endorsement. Who are they? They are the DLC's hand-picked, groomed and funded candidates, recruited to take advantage of the voter's revulsion at Bush-Cheney and the previous Congress, but who vote just like Bushites. So the game was rigged before anyone voted.

THEN you add in 'TRADE SECRET,' PROPRIETARY programming code, in all the new voting systems, owned and controlled by very rightwing corporations--with virtually no audit/recount controls. This is the 'coup de grace'--the final blow to any hope that the people can elect a Congress to do their will. With these non-transparent voting systems, almost any election in the country can be rigged. Close elections are easiest--just 'disappear' or switch small percentages of votes, here and there. And where an anti-war candidate and/or real progressive is winning, you might let him/her win, but "balance" that Congressional vote with TWO other stolen seats, where the vote was closer and easier to tweak without detection, or where a "Blue Dog" has been promoted to take advantage of voter anger.

The cleverest--and most diabolical--part of this is that people were VOTING FOR DEMOCRATS in the hope of change. In many cases, what they were getting was more of the same--'Democrats' who vote just like Bushites. So, the money, the power, and the influence--the result of decades of corporate corruption of our elections--sets the stage, and, as the American people become more and more angry and determined upon change, the "trade secret" vote counting kicks in, to thwart their will.

Yes, the people can outvote the machines. I think they did, in some cases, in '06*. But the problem is that these election theft corporations can COMPENSATE for the occasional aberration, because they now have control of the whole system and can shape Congress OVERALL. And the same capabilities come into play in the presidential elections, but with even more intensity, because the White House MUST stay in pro-corporate, pro-war hands. Money and power decides who can run; the war profiteering corporate news monopolies weed out any potential real populists, and Diebold and ES&S decide who wins, of the two pathetic 'choices' that are left. They may well decide to put a pro-corporate, pro-war 'Democrat' in the White House this time. Hillary appears to be the "made" candidate.

Again, our system is complicated. There are many levers of power. But the main ones--money, the "news" media and the vote 'counting' are all now in the hands of rightwing, multinational corporations. We can fight the money. We can fight the info wars. And we can occasionally outvote the machines, but we cannot defeat their NATIONWIDE control of election outcomes, with their "trade secret" code--because that is how they determine the OVERALL outcome.*

I'm not going to go into the numbers here, for '06. There have been studies. (See www.truthisall.net.) (TIA says we should have won 50 seats in the House, not 30, and many more antiwar candidates should have won.) I ask you just to consider the BASIC election CONDITIONS. Badass, rightwing corporations have achieved the capability of SECRETLY 'disappearing' and switching our votes, without leaving a trace. It is naive to presume that they are not using that capability. And it is also foolish not to realize that MOST of the Democratic Party leadership was/is IN FAVOR OF THIS--in favor of Bushite corporations 'counting' our votes with SECRET CODE.

Corporate-controlled 'TRADE SECRET' voting counting is the first thing that we have to peel back, in order to get some traction on other reforms (campaign contribution reform, basic accountability, more control of our public airwaves, prosecution of Voting Rights Act violations, etc.). It is the bottom line of democracy. We MUST restore transparent vote counting. It is an outrage--a fascist coup! tyranny!--that the public counting of our votes was taken away from us.

------------------------

*(One other factor in '06. Only one third of the Senate was up for reelection--so our ability to change that body was inherently limited. And several high-stakes Senate elections--Lieberman in CT, Feinstein in CA--were greatly influenced by money, and possibly by rigged machines. I heard that CT--although it has the old, unriggable lever machines, like NY--introduced electronic tabulators, or some kind of centralized electronics, just before the '06 election. And elections in CA have of course been rigged for some time. We just got a new Sec of State (Debra Bowen) who is trying to unrig them, without getting 'swift-boated.' Her election was one of the miracles of '06--the voters outvoting the machines.

(Re 2004: The fascists went all out on that one. Combination of the new highly riggable machines all over the country, voter purges (another capability of electronics), crude voter intimidation and vote suppression, corporate media lies, corporate media RIGGING of their EXIT POLLS--to force them to fit Diebold/ES&S's rigged vote 'count'-- getting Dan Rather fired from CBS (for Abu Ghraib and Bush AWOL stories), and on and on. They were not about to permit the election of someone (John Kerry) who would have been BEHOLDEN TO THE VOTERS and the GRASS ROOTS on the war and other issues. Elections are not stolen with the electronic rigging alone--but the electronic rigging gives them the ULTIMATE WEAPON against the voters. It lays the foundation for overall fascist outcomes, or comes to the rescue when the voters get really pissed--as they were in 2004. (The grass roots Dems blew the Bushites away in new voter registration, nearly 60/40, in 2004. People were flocking to the Democratic Party to oust Bush/Cheney. Where did all those votes go?) Electronic voting gives three multinational corporations CENTRALIZED control of our election outcomes. They make the machines and the central tabulators. They are the ONLY parties with a "right" to the innards of those machines. And they have successfully lobbied for NO AUDIT/RECOUNT controls. They were the critical factor in the 2004 stolen election. That's why their electronic election theft capability was fast-tracked across the country between 2002 and 2004, with no testing, no audit controls, nothing. This WAS the coup. The '06 Congressional elections were a slightly different set-up. The voters were even more pissed than in 2004, and determined to vote Democratic--FOR change--but were denied real antiwar candidates to vote for, in many cases. And THEN the votes were tweaked to assure an overall fascist outcome--the triumph of 'Blue Dog' Democrats who like Bush's war and toady to the Corporate Rulers. It LOOKED LIKE a "Democratic comeback," but it wasn't really--not on any substantive issue.)

Thanks for replying! :hug: No worries, no time schedule for replies here. ;)

I fear the same things you do, although you have a better gift of writing it all, then I do.
I agree with everything you said but my understanding is that Ohio and Florida got rid of the
Diebold machines. I could be wrong but I know I heard that FL was going to do that. And people
can vote absentee and maybe that'll help some and the voter ID is going to go to the SCOTUS to
be decided before the '08 elections and that also may help. Getting rid of the BD's won't be
easy and will take time, over a few elections, to clear them all out and a lot of voter education.

I helped to raise the registered voter ranks in '04 and in '06 and I think http://acorn.org/">ACORN did a fantastic
job and I think Dean's working really hard with his 50 State Strategy too, to get more people
over to our side but it takes boots on the ground and knocking on doors to do it! We need every
able bodied person out in their collective districts and actively spreading the word, if we're
going to make more gains this upcoming election.

Try to hang in there and try to stay positive. I know that's hard to do when things look so
dismal but we have to stay proactive and keep trying, no matter how gloomy things look right now.

Hell, http://capweb.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=z8EJ78%2FjIUlRQDIvBhdIezkrS5AZ4NXn">the new (today) WP poll says that the majority of those polled favor the Dems!

We're gaining but in small increments. Some say we'll gain 62 seats in '08!!

We also have to actively work to NOT elect any member of the DLC to the WH!!!

This may be of interest to you.

by Nostradamus has come

WWIII is coming if Cheney and Bush has any say over it

They may start it but I feel the military like Roman days will turn on its Emperor

Its all about the destruction of the american empire and America