© Zahir Ebrahim
April 17, 2010
Seven years later!
Another American President elected on the 'CHANGE' ticket.
Yet, predictably, nothing has changed. American military occupation and decimation of Iraq and Afghanistan continues right alongside Israel's in Palestine. Both Iran and Pakistan are in the gun-sights of invasion and actively being destabilized from within with fabricated “insurgency” to soften up the targets. Pakistan's own mighty military is waging war upon its peoples at the behest of its foreign masters as “counter-insurgency”, with full support from aerial “drone attacks” being run by the CIA and the Pentagon, and with full-ground assist from empire's own private mercenary military, the Blackwater/Xe. Global Governance is the open focus. All the global turbulences, both manufactured ones (global war on terror, global financial collapse, global epidemics), as well as fictitious (global warming, others), are being harvested as the pretext to usher in world government. The following, appearing in the Financial Times of December 08, 2008, accurately sums up the real motivation behind the “new pearl harbor” of 911 and the subsequent pursuit of the endless “war on terrorism”:
'I have never believed that there is a secret United Nations plot to take over the US. I have never seen black helicopters hovering in the sky above Montana. But, for the first time in my life, I think the formation of some sort of world government is plausible. A “world government” would involve much more than co-operation between nations. It would be an entity with state-like characteristics, backed by a body of laws. The European Union has already set up a continental government for 27 countries, which could be a model. The EU has a supreme court, a currency, thousands of pages of law, a large civil service and the ability to deploy military force. So could the European model go global? There are three reasons for thinking that it might. First, it is increasingly clear that the most difficult issues facing national governments are international in nature: there is global warming, a global financial crisis and a “global war on terror”.' (Gideon Rachman, And now for a world government, Financial Times, December 8, 2008)
I wrote in my letter to the Financial Times' editor on December 11 (which obviously wasn't published, read its full text at http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/12/responseto-ft-gideon-rachman-worldgov.html )
'And there you have it, right from the mouthpiece of high finance, the shill for the New World Order, the media asset of the intelligence apparatus, testing the water temperature. This time, the FT's chief foreign affairs columnist lets the full caboodle out of the bag, saying exactly what Project Humanbeingsfirst has been warning about: that the most natural solution to global fictions and global manufactured crises will be presented as “world government”. ... This instance in the Financial Times editorial is the most egregious testing of the waters because it brings all the manufactured global boogiemen together, and exactly posits their solution-space as “world government”. It brings to full circle implementation these ominous words of G. Edward Griffin from 'The Capitalist Conspiracy': “Create conditions so frightful at home and abroad, that the abandonment of personal liberties and national sovereignty, will appear as a reasonable price for a return to domestic tranquility and world peace.”'
Creating the pretext for world government was the prime-mover agenda behind Zbigniew Brzezinski's The Grand Chessboard. In 2003 when I wrote this book, I had taken Brzezinski at face value that American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives was the core agenda of the hectoring hegemons – from PNAC to Pentagon. The empirical facts on the ground over the past several years through the successive wars and financial crises conclusively betray that the mantra of American Primacy was only a most diabolical pretext. Empirically observing, what kind of asinine American Primacy is it that's making America as a nation go progressively broke and into trillions of dollars in debt which no one can justifiably explain; its national sovereignty eroded piece by piece into the clutches of supranational organizations like the UN; and it becoming the most hated and reviled Christian nation on earth? And this was done to America entirely by Zionist-Jewish masterminds running America's top think-tanks and foundations, like the CFR and the AEI. George W. Bush, by his own admission on the eve of launching his invasion of Iraq in search of its fictitious WMDs, stated of the latter: “Some of the finest minds of our nation are at work on some of the greatest challenges to our nation. You do such good work that my administration has borrowed twenty such minds. I want to thank them for their service.” (speaking at the AEI on February 26, 2003). President Obama has pretty much drawn from the same sacred cesspool of Zionist-Jewish misanthropes to run his Administration and the White House.
No, most assuredly, American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives is not the real purpose of all this global mayhem. It was only a mantra like “Islamic Fundamentalism”. It is the primacy of the financial oligarchs! The globalists who own America and Europe primarily through interlocking controls of its private central banks, are using the unchallenged sole superpower's muscles as a battering ram to finally cement their own long conspired agenda for world government. That's the real prime-mover force behind the fabricated “war on terrorism” in order to globally seed and fabricate the requisite “revolutionary times” from which other crises could follow. In the American context, to overspend its resources into crises, to eventually collapsing it into a regional supranational state, the North American Union, just like the European Union, as the baby step towards One-world government. That could not so easily be accomplished for a fervently nationalistic and well endowed peoples like the American masses, what with all their Constitutionally guaranteed civil liberties, their massive industrial capacity, their lucrative job markets across many sectors. Unless of course, the proposal was presented to them at the barrel of the domestic gun in a state of helplessness in an offer which they could not refuse. Namely, the North American supranational Union being the only viable solution for containing and overcoming the many manufactured international and domestic crises that America finds itself mired in. The modus operandi had clearly been outlined by the CFR as far back as 1974 in The Hard Road to World Order:
“In short, the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built from the bottom up, rather than from the top down. It will look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion’ to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault. Of course, for political as well as administrative reasons, some of these specialized arrangements should be brought into an appropriate relationship with the central institutions of the U.N. system, but the main thing is that the essential functions be performed.”
The diabolical play of the globalists on the grand chessboard throughout the twentieth century, through the three horrendously manufactured World Wars, and still on-going in this synthetic World War IV in the twenty-first century makes a great bedtime story: progressively breaking up the Old World Order comprising a few huge Christian and Muslim colonial empires dominated by the old aristocracy into initially a large number of often warring new nation-states in stages; re-combining them into a handful of supranational unionizing regional states; to eventually give birth to the New World Order of a single One World Government of the “Zion that will light all all the world”. The global power transfer from Christian-Muslim domination into exclusively Jewish domination through an unfathomable global bloodshed is simply remarkable – considering no one even dares to publicly recognize it as such even today!
Zbigniew Brzezinski, a polish Jew, in his co-strategizing in other people's blood on the evolving grand chessboard with his cohorts from the many think-tanks and foundations since the Brzezinski-Carter White House, while claiming to be directing American foreign policy, has exclusively been directing the Rockefeller-Rothschild driven globalist agenda for World Government. His book, The Grand Chessboard, which is the subject of Prisoners of the Cave, is a Machiavellian blueprint for the end-stages of America's destruction as a sovereign nation-state, and not the prima facie one for acquiring America's “full spectrum dominance” as deceptively portrayed in its subtitle: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. The blueprint is entirely diabolical in its overt strategizing for American Primacy, a Straussian Noble Lie at multiple levels. While Brzezinski accurately portrays the political science and the dynamics of “imperial mobilization” under conditions of “democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization”, it is a path to making America go financially bankrupt and suffer a currency collapse. That is all the pretext needed to create the fait accompli. That is in fact the sheer brilliance of the plan.
The faits accomplis of “history's actors” are irreversible by the very nature of its Machiavellian design:
“We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.” (Senior Bush Advisor, The New York Times, October 17, 2004)
The only way to preempt that design is for the public to act BEFORE the history's actors act. That can never happen because Machiavelli 101 dictates that when plans are inchoate and easily disreputable, the state must take precautions to ensure that they are not derailed. Thus enter social engineering – manufacturing consent and dissent to keep the public otherwise engaged. Once orchestrations and plans are completed and matters reach execution phase, the history's actors take over the moment a “catalyzing event” makes embarking on it practicable. It is too late for the public to do anything at that time but “study what we do”. Most will simply get tired after a while.
We can see that already in play. The world's public today has been made remarkably quiescent despite the horrendous atrocities being committed by the American military in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, causing ripples of “diffuse violence” to percolate throughout the “Global Zone of Percolating Violence”. Even America's own top military commander, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, had the cold chutzpah to brazenly proclaim without fear of any future Nuremberg accountability: “We have shot an amazing number of people, but to my knowledge, none has ever proven to be a threat,” (New York Times, March 26, 2010)
There are not even any “focus groups” of protests any more. The handful of conscionable Western rebels still making noise here and there do so entirely ineffectively. They bizarrely tend to focus on comparatively lesser order crimes, and former crimes, while the many elephants in the bedroom still defecating all over the place are blithely ignored.
The following Open Letter to Dr. Francis Boyle, the law professor who filed criminal charges in the International Criminal Court against the previous George W. Bush Administration for crimes of torture, sums up the state of affairs, including a daring but rational future course of action to follow which can be far more effective:
'Open Letter to Francis Boyle, the Moral Law Professor, on the Ignored Iraqi & Afghani Victims of Imperial Mobilization
Date: January 31, 2010
Subject Re: International Criminal Court Complaint Filed Against Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Tenet, Rice, Gonzales By Prof. Francis A. Boyle
Dear Dr. Francis Boyle:
In reference to your complaint filed with the ICC against the previous errand-boys who occupied the White House, would it be rude to notice that the higher order bits of using 911 to “goosestep the herrenvolk across international frontiers” ; the subsequent “shock and awe” visitations upon largely civilian population-centers and civilian infrastructures ; the decimation of millions of Iraqis/Afghanis ; subverting of the United States into a pre-planned police-state ; fabricating crises upon crises to propose pre-planned solutions in order to systematically usurp national sovereignty as per the diabolical modus operandi set by the Council on Foreign Relations in their own documents: “In short, the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built from the bottom up, rather than from the top down. It will look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion’ to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.” – have all been overlooked to pursue the relatively lower order crimes of “extraordinary rendition” upon a few individuals with the highly dubious statement: “I doubt very seriously that the Accused would have inflicted these criminal practices upon 100 White Judeo-Christian men.” ?
We only wish there was one decent 'Christian' man or woman alive in the hallways and beltways of Western academe and among the legal fraternity who might even attempt to capture the angst of the tens of millions of Iraqis/Afghanis still barely alive and who still await someone who will file legal charges against the monumental crimes that have been perpetrated upon them and their millions of murdered kin.
We fervently hope that you, Professor Francis Boyle, might be such a person. That you will file pertinent charges in the ICC, for both culpability and restitution, on behalf of the untold millions already dead in Iraq and Afghanistan, many more suffering with their entire national fabric, ancient heritage, and even their DNA despoiled in a crime so stupendous that “it is a mystery whose parallel may only be the one of Sinai when something was revealed to mankind.”
For surely, it is inconceivable that you make complete obeisance to Western standards of morality by focussing on this lower order crime in the presence of un-addressed higher order monumental crimes – a morality which brazenly asserts from the highest pulpit of law in this land of the free:
“Nothing is more certain in modern society than the principle that there are no absolutes, that a name, a phrases, a standard has meaning only when associated with the considerations which give birth to nomenclature. To those who would paralyze our Government in the face of impending threat by encasing it in a semantic strait-jacket, we must reply that all concepts are relative.” -- Justice Vinson, U.S. Supreme Court, 1951 AD
And as you venture to focus on the higher order real monumental crimes against humanity, we hope you will not remain content by focussing merely on the errand boys. That you will see the connections between the quest for “Global Governance”, fabricated crises from pandemics to global warming, the seeding of “revolutionary times” across the “global zone of percolating violence” to make “imperial mobilization” possible which otherwise is “inconceivable in normal times”, and the “history's actors” who drive war-mongering policies and orchestrate wretched events from their Zion in the Middle East to their Zion in the Western capitals, not the least of which is Washington DC, in the expectation of creating the ultimate “Zion that will light up all the world”.
And that, as you pursue the highest order crimes, you will not shy away from going directly for the jugular of the prime-movers behind the scenes of all the war-mongering 'errand boys' fronting for them in the Western capitals as the duly elected representatives of a duped Western peoples, including those presently occupying the White House. This was, lamentably enough, already pleaded to no avail in the following editorial when your lonely fraternal brother, Mr. Vincent Bugliosi, courageously asserted that “Murder Trumps Torture”, but inexplicably failed to also simultaneously assert the legal and moral commonsense that prime-movers trump trigger-pullers: Who is more guilty of monumental war crimes - the prime-movers or trigger pullers? April 09, 2009.
Attempted prosecution of state-criminals on 'petty charges' without also prosecuting their criminal aiders and abettors who 'legalize' and propagandistically justify their brazen acts of aggression, and therefore are entirely culpable in toto for “all the evil which follows” ; staying silent on punitive as well restitutive compensation for their victims, is [all] a legal sham that is only waiting to be torn down by some courageous people. We hope, Dr. Francis Boyle, that you might be one such precedent setting spark which ignites the moral imagination of many to follow. The world has had enough from the dispensers of victor's justice!
I have no great note of optimism to share in April 2010. I have no idea what the future holds. My country is likely to become the next Afghanistan or Iraq – perhaps sooner than Iran. But I do know one thing: that maggots really can't tell the difference six feet under, between who was the hectoring hegemon and who its victim. But if there is indeed something more to man than what the nihilist Social Darwinians seeking worldwide population reduction would like humanity to believe, then perhaps the soul extractor can. And if there is a soul extractor, then the script for the final outcome of “war on terrorism” cannot possibly conclude in the inferno for the 'untermensch' mankind.
April 17, 2010
California, United States of America
© Zahir Ebrahim
March 31 2007
I wrote this book during April-May 2003. That was exactly four years ago. What has changed in America since then? Has this book become obsolete even before it got published? With another aggression against another defenseless nation in the offing, I inexplicably find the American peoples still quite absorbed in the pursuits of their 'American Dream' and hardly anyone gives a damn! Those handful who do, are entirely neutralized, with the efficacy of their anemic protests exactly ZERO! And I continue to hear the same nonsense as I heard in 2001 and 2002 and 2003 and 2004 and 2005 and 2006, and once again in 2007, from my American friends, colleagues, and from the general mainstream population, about the necessity of lifetime of battle against the 'terrorist Islamists' and 'evil doers' which is “Not [even] a Clash of Civilizations, It's a Clash between the Civilized World and Barbarians” as per its 'notable exponent Daniel Pipes', and the “primacy imperative” of the so called “preemption” in self-defense of a Goliath superpower state possessing the largest and widest assortment of the most horrendous 'Weapons of Mass Destruction' against defenseless nations. The roots of the 'jihadi terror', taking its toll on the civilians in many nations – so deliberately unleashed by Zbigniew Brzezinski and the CIA with the clarion call of “God is on your side” to “have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war” – now cleverly 'forgotten' by the 'profound American intellectuals' as its rotten fruits are deftly re-harvested for another “imperial mobilization” by purposely sustaining its growth in the very modus operandi employed to presumably fighting it. What is indeed the purpose of this so called 'war on terror'?
Who are the real terrorists, the real war mongers, the superterrorist monumental criminals from whom “all the evil that follow[ed]”?
Is it the “populist democracy” in the lone superpower nation who cleverly enable their elected leaders to commit monumental crimes through their uncourageous acceptance of barbarianism upon defenseless nations that they watch on their television screens, never mind that they prefer to not read the multiple 'American Mein Kampfs' existing among them? Or is it only their testosterone laden legally conspired leadership who abuse their authority in the name of the peoples because “hegemony is as old as mankind” and “radical Islam, sometimes called Islamaism” works really well as the quintessential “doctrinal motivation” du jour for “imperial mobilization”? Can the hectoring hegemons be checkmated on the Grand Chessboard by ordinary peoples? If not that fear, why would the fiction of 'war on terrorism' be even erected? It is to that fear of the hectoring hegemons that this plebeian book and its preface spoke to four years ago which no publisher deemed worthy enough to print. It's relevance today four years later?
You dear reader be the judge!
And as a judge, you are also obligated to issue the final verdict – a peoples of conscience, or a barbarians in suits?
Sometimes, binary choices are indeed the only choices as your favorite American President George W. Bush Jr. has already informed you.
It's now your judgment to identify to which of the two sides you belong: “either you are with us or with the [super]terrorists”!
© Zahir Ebrahim
More than half a dozen publishers had turned my book down by early 2004 despite a sterling letter of commendation by the famous American historian Howard Zinn who had very generously read two earlier drafts, and I pretty much abandoned the effort. I was very depressed that tons of garbage sits on American bookshelves, but my message of conscience wasn’t deemed good enough to see the light of day. I was becoming asphyxiated from all the freedom of speech you could want in America in total vacuum. And watching the behavior of the American public continually saluting the flag even when they could see the dead and the dying and doing absolutely nothing as the mass deception of WMDs quickly unraveled before their very eyes, and instead, reelecting George W. Bush Jr., for a second time, I became so disgusted, I threw the manuscript away. However, this renewed talk of attacking Iran in 2006 has given me the additional motivation to dig the manuscript out once again and this time prepare it for an internet release.
The material in the book is the same as when it was first penned, with the addition of copious footnotes. I have judiciously refrained from tempering with much of my original writing or update facts as new revelations have occurred, because this is a snapshot of what was transpiring in April of 2003 as viewed from the eyes of a Muslim writing a message from his heart to the American peoples. It is not a history text. And unfortunately, it is just as relevant today as it was two years ago. I would love nothing more than this message to become obsolete – for therein lies my success. However I am quite convinced now that nothing will come out of the book. No one really cares, and few mainstream people in America really read non-fiction books, let alone something as serious as this one that requires considerable reflection and soul searching. A thousand books have been written since America attacked Iraq, all of my predictions in this book and those of other dissenters already published came true – the Iraqis resisted, and the Americans attempted to create a servile client-state, and all of these are already in the public eye. The exposé of the horrible prison tortures of innocent civilian men and women, and “all the evil that [has] follow[ed]” the American initial aggression and invasion of conquest is open for all to see. Yet the past two years have also shown me that the American public really does not care. And when it does, it is only because of its own casualties – exactly like what Zbigniew Brzezinski had predicted in The Grand Chessboard. Despite my pessimism of ever reaching the eyeballs of the mainstream audience of America, never mind their conscience, I am compelled to make these humble writings available on the internet. For I do not know what else I can do as an ordinary powerless individual who has had it up to his neck and is not willing to take it anymore!!
In this foreword, I would like to elaborate upon how and why, I as an ordinary foreigner (not some academic or scholar), not even a citizen of the United States, but living in America for over a quarter century as a Permanent Resident alien, know what is going on in the minds of the hectoring hegemons, and the American public does not. And why is it that such public pronouncements as those made by PNAC (Project New American Century), Pentagon’s Joint Vision 2020, the White House’s preemption doctrines in its National Security Council and Nuclear Posture Review papers, and Zbigniew Brzezinski’s book The Grand Chessboard, exist publicly? Furthermore, despite their easy public access, no one in the mainstream media has even today, almost four years after 911, questioned the motive that is blatantly visible in these writings for the “new Pearl Harbor”. And if it was indeed ever mentioned, it quickly disappeared from the horizon, while all the pundits on television repeat the mantra of “Islamic Fundamentalism”, and members of the Bush Administration regularly refresh it for them as the most significant threat to world peace since the demise of the USSR, with even the most respected journalists and other scholarly personalities in the American society joining the chorus.
Even those who offer their dissent, do so premised on the axiom of 911 being an invasion from abroad, or the cost to American lives being too much. In other words, the majority of dissent is not based on primarily moral issues of bombing other nations, or on challenging the deception of 911, but on how much it is costing the Americans and what a quagmire Iraq has become, with resolute I told you so echoing across the pundit landscape who proudly strut their wisdom before the America public. Thus had it not been a quagmire, and had fewer Americans been killed, it would have been just peachy to invade even more nations.
Even “arguably the most important intellectual alive”, Noam Chomsky, has bought into the 911 story of the George W. Bush Administration in promoting the idea of invasion from abroad by one Osama Bin Laden, and thus being instrumental in getting Bush reelected despite all the overt gestures towards his opponent John Kerry. I believe this is the case throughout America when debate was never allowed to focus on what has become the unquestioned axioms of 911, but rather was immediately diverted to the corollaries and other theorems based on such axioms, even by the majority of those handful who expressed dissent in public writings. Even the facade of 911 inquiry commission was in fact very cleverly used by the Bush Administration to pass what was earlier called Patriot Act II, in the guise of 911 security reform Act. Incredible! It’s like being in Alice in Wonderland, where all the ordinary characters think everything is normal, except Alice! Only Lewis Carroll and his publisher know the reality.
My book refocusses on the very premise of this axiom as it systematically dismantles the deception on a very broad canvas from the unique perspective of an ordinary Muslim whose peoples are bearing the brunt of this “imperial mobilization.” All those who have helped make this axiom successful, in my humble opinion, have blood on their hands, whether or not they may choose to acknowledge it. Indeed, it is immaterial what the important and the visible peoples think anymore, or what they acknowledge and don’t acknowledge, for we all know what they have thought and said over the past four years, be they on the Right, Left, Center, Up, Down, in the Government, or in the dissent space – for the audience of this book is the American peoples, not their monumental intellectuals, nor their monumental criminals.
It is the informed and fair judgment of the American peoples that is of significance in having the last word in much the same way as the American Jury’s, composed only from ordinary citizens adjudicating on the crimes of anyone, including the mighty. And so will be the judgment of a 'Robert Jackson' in the future when he will coldly assert: The plans of the aggressor for aggression were just as secret as the PNAC on the Grand Chessboard, just as the original Robert Jackson had asserted at Nuremberg before proceeding to hang the Nazi leadership:
“The plans of Adolf Hitler for aggression were just as secret as Mein Kampf, of which over six million copies were published in Germany.”
How did I learn about these plans? I actually only uncovered PNAC, JV2020, and the Wolfowitz’s chauvinist doctrines of preemption that he had supposedly been pushing since 1990, after 911, when I started scratching my head at the inexplicability of it all the moment some 19 Muslim hijackers’ names were announced, and the public was informed that they had learnt flying on flight simulators and had told their instructors that they weren’t interested in learning how to land! If Bin Laden was so smart at having planned such an outrageous attack and counted on such brilliant executioners who did it so flawlessly after only learning to fly on simulators, he was pretty stupid at having enlisted idiots who would deliberately leave such a trail of evidence behind, including statements that they weren’t interested in landing – so that either they would risk being uncovered before the attack, or their attack foiled while in progress, or after a successful attack, America would know exactly whom to go bomb in retaliation!
Only one of these aspects could be true, either they were brilliant military tacticians and strategists, or nincompoops from a three stooges movie who succeeded despite themselves, but the incongruence could not exist simultaneously on this large scale military style invasion project, except in a Hollywood spoof.
Having already read Brzezinski’s Grand Chessboard and Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations several years earlier, I immediately grasped the new pearl harbor concept the moment America deployed to bomb Afghanistan without adequately explaining or investigating any of the events of 911, such as the incredible air defense failure after the Government had reliably apprehended at 8:28 am that the first plane was hijacked, on top of this bizarre explanation for who did 911 (see Chapter 5). The entire discourse in America started spinning around earlier forewarnings and other red herrings, entirely ignoring to bring up the crucial question in public debate that okay, what happened after 8:28 am on 911 once the fact of hijacking was established? Why was there still no air defenses when it is actually part of normal and established FAA and NORAD operating procedures? Very simple questions. No one was asking. Neither is anyone asking today in America’s mainstream, given that so much has already been apprehended from Donald Rumsfeld's “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence”. Major “imperial mobilization” has been launched on this maxim, more than several hundred thousand peoples have been killed or otherwise effected, and entire nations have been bombed to oblivion with monstrous Daisy Cutters, all based on his maxim. But no serious and impartial investigation can be launched on the same maxim. Nor can the famous and the scholarly intellectuals in America question the integrity of the facile statements of 911 by the Government on the same maxim. While these intellectuals write fancy treatise on their responsibilities as intellectuals, but when it comes time to put it into action on the most momentous exhibition of the mendacity of power since World War II, they are amazingly impotent. And despite the availability of even this convenient maxim that is handed to them on a platter, and behind which they can seek refuge if they lack the raw boldness of a gadfly, their “reputation” seems to be their primary concern rather than the quest for truth and repelling of falsehoods.
I started to reread Brzezinski and Huntington very carefully once again, then reread the entire voluminous Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, and the Mein Kampf of Hitler. The similarities between the rising crescendo of WMDs and the propaganda that William Shirer had recorded as having transpired in the Third Reich, and the similarities between ZB’s and Hitler’s descriptions of their respective imperatives and how to get them, were ominous, except that ZB’s were more polished and more sophisticatedly put. I got really paranoid as many more light bulbs went on in my head which had not gone on when I had originally read them. I had just taken Brzezinski’s book as theoretical, as being from the pen of a Cold War warrior now retired and indulging in some arm chair warrior fantasies. I didn’t understand that hectoring hegemons never retire until they are six feet under. I had also dismissed Huntington’s book as an ignoramus's work not to be taken seriously, as it was replete with obvious disinformation and tortuous conclusions that were easy to spot by anyone who knew anything about the subject. Now both were being egregiously put into practice, and the latter’s book did not appear so silly anymore, but rather shrewd and calculated.
The first time I had read Huntington with the lens of ‘here is an interestingly titled book from a prominent Harvard professor, let me see what he has to say’; the second time I read it with the lens ‘let me understand how deception is created and its seeds planted in a free society that is not too knowledgeable about the rest of the world’. The second reading showed that the obviousness of his distortions, coming from a top branded American University like Harvard, had some deeper strategic thinking behind it. Huntington is also involved in national security and other strategic studies as a prominent professor and intellectual at Harvard, and couldn’t be just a simple moron like Harvard’s President, Lawrence Summers, who recently claimed women were inherently not as smart as men. I was wondering how people like that become President’s at prestigious American universities, until once again I uncovered during my research that the same Harvard President had also written how the industrialized nations should dump their waste in developing nations while he was at the World Bank in the 1990s. With Wolfowitz now as the head of the World Bank, it is only shortsightedness to underestimate the power of the dark side, or the people who wield it. Huntington’s theme from portions of his book relevant to the topic at hand is systematically dismantled in Chapter 9. Based on this new found respect of the doctrinal scholars for their craft, and realizing that we were entering a phase with the hastily approved Patriot Act I that could only lead to the Fourth Reich in America, I started attending antiwar teachins and protest marches with my family, and began talking to prominent Vietnam war dissenters about governmental lies.
And that is when I first heard about the PNAC – from antiwar teachins. Ordinary people like me, engagingly concerned about what was happening, had uncovered more material from public sources and the analysis of history, than the entire mainstream scholarship and media apparatus in the United States of America.
This is shockingly not surprising. And this must be of concern to the American peoples – how some handful of ordinary activists can uncover truth so easily without needing any top secret clearances. Why isn’t truth shielded better, especially when it is the incriminating type? Why is it so damn easily accessible in America? Never mind why most can’t see it, or their inability to connect the dots, because that is a well understood matter and that matter has been adequately covered in Part-II of the book, as the book title Prisoners of the Cave would reflect.
Here, it is important to attempt to unravel the psychology behind making such incriminating documents and pronouncements publicly available, because at first glance, it appears rather counter intuitive. It often leads the unsuspecting American commentators and journalists to read into it that since it is so blatantly put, there must not be anything insidious behind it that needs unraveling, and they take it on face value. Thus Donald Rumsfeld for instance, was asked on some ABC news program in 2004 about the PNAC letter that he had signed advocating invasion of Iraq, and the letter itself was flashed briefly on the screen. Rumsfeld's curt answer however, that it was his private opinion before he became the Secretary of Defense, did not elicit any intelligent followup questions from the interviewer (whose name I forget), even about why as Secretary of Defense did he then immediately order preparations be made for attacking Iraq right after 911? Indeed, many of the same guys who signed on to PNAC (see Exhibit A) had been members of the Bush Sr. Administration during the first massacre of Iraq in 1991, and it was Bush Sr. himself who had deliberately left Sadaam Hussain in power after destroying his military; the same military that as Vice President for eight years under Reagan, he had helped arm and sustained to fight Iran on his behalf and had sent Rumsfeld as the special envoy to advise Sadaam, and it was indeed his own CIA that had backed Sadaam to power in 1963 and 1968. It was the same faces who had now clamored for removing Sadaam after installing him. All these followup questions were missing, even the most obvious one that the report available from the same PNAC website where the interviewer (or his script writer) had found the letter, was also the term “new pearl harbor” mentioned, and why was 911 being gratuitously used as the new pearl harbor for “imperial mobilization”?
If I had been the interlocutor of Donald Rumsfeld, as my last question to him, I would have point blank asked him whether he had himself orchestrated 911 with remote control of the planes. And let his obvious answer be officially recorded for posterity, although I can bet that he would have tried to dodge a straight of course not response by showing some indignation like he wasn’t going to dignify the question by answering it, or how dare I imply that he had committed treason and yelling at me. Perfect – for those are indeed the thoughts that I would want to be seeded in the mainstream public discourse with this anger trap, and forcing him to make the infamous statement: I am not a liar is what I would have gunned for.
However, the failure of the American and world press for such obvious and logical followups is not the point under discussion. The point here is, why make such chauvinist pronouncements like the PNAC documents, the White House’s NSC and the NPR, and The Grand Chessboard public in the first place?
I feel there is indeed a Machiavellianess behind such public writings, for upon face value, it is illogical to make such unabashed and incriminating pronouncements such as “new pearl harbor” public by a ruling elite hell bent on “imperial mobilization”, and actually having a multifaceted vested interest in a “new pearl harbor” pretext to scare its “populist democracy” to go along. One might think they’d be more effective keeping it secret, as they indeed keep all the real secrets, secret. The real top secrets only get revealed after the deed is fait accompli, and well into the future as the famed declassification process, or as an occasional egotistical confession – almost always remorseless autobiographies or posthumously published diaries. The following is my limited attempt at unraveling this question, and I will let the readers decide if it makes sense to them in the light of all the rest of the evidence that is also presented in this book. If it does make sense, they must worry about what has become of their society, that truth and falsehood are now indistinguishable in such a free society, with all the freedoms known to man in their laps. How easy it has been to make prisoners of the cave in such a free society! If my unraveling doesn’t make sense to them, then they must answer this question for themselves, for it is indeed a conundrum that begs my favorite question “why”.
So to carry this thought further, it was rather disturbing that in 2002, I had discovered blatant statements from the people immediately within the Bush Administration that directly matched ZB’s made in 1996/97. And indeed available so openly, that they are still available as of this writing. I knew that actual receipts for their complicity in 911 would never be found, if indeed there, but the proof of intent for “imperial mobilization” was right there. The more I studied and reflected, the more it all came together, and the more compelled I was by my conscience to protest publicly in anti-war demonstrations on American streets with my family. The deception of “war on terrorism” was plainly manifest, as were the dead bodies, and the theology of foreign policy that had created it, and who were the bastards behind it all.
When the FBI showed up at my door as the bombing of Iraq was just underway – the combative piece of my mind that I gave them is recorded in my essay “They dared to knock on my door” in Part-1 of the book.
This is the kind of effort and time, as well as a natural suspicion of any ruling elite in general, that it took me to educate myself to know the specific reality behind this “war on terrorism”, apart from the general commonsensical questions that come to any reasonable mind regarding the remarkable failure of all air defenses on 911 (see Chapter 5). I call this effort activism, and in the present context, I define it as the intellectual effort required to unravel the web of deception, to expose the mendacity of all incantations of power, and to oppose it effectively as a moral imperative. I am a stay at home dad taking care of my children and could muster both the motivation (my own innocent people being killed), and the free time that is needed to study and think for effective activism. From there to standing up for myself was a very short step indeed, almost instinctive, and quite spontaneous!
How many in America can afford this luxury of time for such activism amidst their busy weekday routine of put the bread on the table, and their compulsively consumerist weekend routine of shop till you drop and drive kids to soccer games lives? Only a handful. And this is what the imperial planners and the ruling elite in America have always counted on, in addition to creating the mindset of blind patriotism among the masses from kindergarten onwards, when the first salute to the flag is given by an American child at age five.
Thus the hectoring hegemons aren’t shy of boldly making their writings publicly available, because the mainstream populace in America is too busy pursuing their American Dreams to have the time to read and reflect in order to be able to connect the dots from Machiavellianly spinned pieces of prose, and to relate them coherently to distant reality that is often only expressed in the inner pages and obscure bylines of major newspapers like the New York Times and rarely if ever on television from where the majority get informed. And even when some intelligent peoples may suspect something, they often lack the self-interest to do anything about it. This changes rather dramatically when they actually start seeing their own flesh and blood in body bags. Then they sit up and take notice due to the new found self-interest, and connecting the dots don’t matter anymore because their own dead are now before them.
If the strategic thinkers can understand that the American public is body bags averse in their own self-interest, but couldn’t care less for other peoples’ body bags if the victims were properly demonized as “unworthy victims” – as the name “war on terrorism” actually implies its victims to be – so can the “unworthy victims” also understand that their most potent self-defense is to send more body bags home to America regardless of cost to themselves. It is the same mindset in Israel, where Jewish lives are inherently treated as more “holy”, and thus more “worthy” than Palestinian lives. This was also the major cause of Israeli withdrawal from South Lebanon after two decades of military occupation. The Israelis lost approx. 800 Jewish soldiers, while they killed, or got killed, more than 25000 Lebanese due to Hezbollah's unflinching resistance. The cost of military occupation became more than it was worth in “worthy victims” lives. While this formal terminology of “worthy” and “unworthy” victims is from Noam Chomsky, the understanding of this concept is easily apprehended by the local populace who are victims of the hectoring hegemons, and they don’t need any pedantic formalisms from American scholarship to describe their pain and suffering and the loss of their loved ones.
The control of mass media on the one hand from where the American masses get the totality of their information, and the suicide bombers from among the victims on the other, are just different sides of the same coin. The former wants to keep the American public prisoners of the cave so that they can build empire without interference from the “populist democracy”, the latter wants to free them so that they may come to the victims’ rescue by shocking them into sitting up and taking notice of their own self-interests. The victims can unfortunately only do it by the supreme sacrifice of their most precious possession, for only that can shock the prisoners of the cave into sitting up and noticing their chains. From there, to breaking out of their chains due to sheer self-interest of protecting their own loved ones, is a very very short step indeed.
This was demonstrated to the world during the protests that filled the streets during the Vietnam war when 50,000 dead American soldiers brought the American people out in the streets. They could tolerate a devastated country far out of sight with over ten to twenty times that number dead, and murdered by their own dead sons for no reason other than the ideology of their Presidents and their ruling elite; they could not tolerate their own loved ones dead. Even the term “murder” is still not used to reflect their loved ones’ deeds as they are glorified with memorials, and neither are the bombed out victims of Indochina remembered nor their society compensated, because such “awakening of the conscience” is purely emotional self-interest.
None of this is very profound, just commonsense 101. It only seems to escape the American public until self-interest strikes.
Thus letting the public have PNAC and JV2020, and the White House’s NSC and NPR like documents, is part of the arrogance of power when they know that they have the public under full control as prisoners of the cave, so long as they can mitigate their self-interest from coming into play. Thus note all the modern research in robotic and remote controlled drone based warfare technology to reduce American military casualties, where MIT, my own alma mater, is leading the research.
Indeed, these documents, such as the deceptive open letters written by PNAC to American Presidents openly advocating war on Iraq under the mantra of WMD, when the reality is known to all in the Pentagon and the American and British military who routinely bombed Iraq for twelve years, that none remained in Iraq as it had been entirely disarmed, and as evidenced in this Wall Street journal quote from 1999: “After eight years of enforcing a no fly zone in northern [and southern] Iraq, few military targets remain. ‘We're down to the last outhouse,’”, is in fact setting up the stage for full scale propaganda in the future. Its target is not the President to whom the letters were addressed, but the unsuspecting general public, to mold public opinion. By judiciously planting terms like “clash of civilizations” and “weapons of mass destruction” and “Islamic fundamentalism” years in advance, these “collateral” language constructs acquire a dynamics of their own in the hands of obliging stenographers in the press and script reading actors (oops anchors) on television.
Indeed, one might even ask oneself why give such a lame excuse for who did 911? Why not make it more sophisticated and air tight? That understanding is easy to apprehend if one realizes that the consumers of these lies are not cynical people like me, but the trusting people in the masses who do not possess the time or inclination to think, and believe simple lies repeatedly told them more easily than complex ones – right out of Hitler’s propaganda thesis in Mein Kampf:
“All propaganda must be popular and its intellectual level must be adjusted to the most limited intelligence among those it is addressed to. ... The receptivity of the great masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan.”
Thus two things are achieved simultaneously: a) an ego trip of arrogance of power that blatant supermorality can go unchallenged in the society by even its best scholars, and thus an indication to the hectoring hegemons of how successful has been the efforts at social control by the ruling elite in an open society like America; and b) seeds from which the fruits of war and conquest can be profitably harvested in the future in a populace that is not so inspired by imperial visions, and has the choice to not go along.
To know that a) is true, as an ordinary decent moral person of the populace not suffering from any superiority complex, ask yourself if you’d ever write something like these hectoring hegemons, while understanding that it would espouse a supermorality where you set yourself up as having a higher prerogative over other human beings. Your answer to yourself should clarify this matter for you.
To know that b) is true, just look around you. What Bernard Lewis introduced over a decade ago in Foreign Affairs magazine in 1990 (right after the demise of the USSR for which both Zbigniew Brzezinski as well as AEI have taken credit), and what Samuel Huntington argued equally long time ago in his what appeared at that time to be a silly book, is now ostensibly the basis of American Foreign Policy theology. Indeed, here is the full quote from Clash of Civilizations in which Huntington attributes the phrase to Bernard Lewis.
“In 1990 Bernard Lewis, a leading Western scholar of Islam, analyzed 'The Roots of Muslim Rage,' and concluded: 'It should now be clear that we are facing a mood and a movement far transcending the level of issues and policies and the governments that pursue them. This is no less than a clash of civilizations – that perhaps irrational but surely historic reaction of an ancient rival against our Judeo-Christian heritage, our secular present, and the worldwide expansion of both. It is crucially important that we on our side should not be provoked into an equally historic but also equally irrational reaction against our rival.'”
That is the only logical explanation for such blatantly chauvinist political writings existing in a “populist democracy” whose people are not inspired by dreams of “imperial mobilization” and world conquest. In totalitarian societies and dictatorships where the masses are more in physical chains rather than mental ones*1, and the ruling elite is not depended on the opinions of the masses in order to rule them, such writings are rarely if ever made publicly available. Why? Because such writings in dictatorships that betrays a supermorality, a higher order national prerogative, has no public utility. Quite the contrary, the ruling elite in such dictatorships endeavor to take on the public persona of high morality; baboons pretending to be moral beings before the public because all know their true reality and no one trusts them.
Whereas in America, we have baboons deliberately and unabashedly come across as baboons, and few can see it even then. I am not aware of such chauvinist national strategy documents advocating world conquest and self-apportioned national destiny being put out publicly for instance, by the ruling elite in the Soviet Union or China, or in any of the petty dictatorships in the Middle East and other developing nations that would betray a supermorality of the ruling elite (even when it may be espoused privately). This difference isn’t entirely due to freedom of speech, for the ruling elite in all dictatorships have all the freedoms they can want, and then some, and they still don’t make writings like these accessible to the general public. It appears to be solely an artifact of a free society of a superpower nation for deceptive social control in the absence of any other overt forms of control.
The prisoners of the cave metaphor is also true for the Israeli Jews but in a slightly different manner from the American context, and that dynamics is analyzed in Chapter 3, and Chapter 4. Despite Israel’s freer press and open and frank debate in the Hebrew society about their usurpation of Palestine, the brutal daily oppression of the Palestinians before the Israeli public’s very eyes continues right alongside the debate on new maps that show various new Biblical cities that will be recreated in Eretz Yisrael. This is because the Israeli Jewish public (modulo a few rabble rousers) is complicit with the Jewish State in their barbarism to achieve the imperial mobilization for Biblical Lebensraum that many have been led to believe since birth to be their divine birth right regardless of where they might be born on earth.
The Palestinians are merely lowly goyems to be trampled afoot as inherently “unworthy” victims “illegally” occupying the Jewish Lebensraum even when born there, and thus must be eliminated, or subjugated as slaves by the dictates of the Jews’ “holy” rabbinical teachings in the Talmud. This self perceived “holiness” that leads to a supermorality, coupled with the sustained indoctrination that preventing another holocaust is only possible by creating/expanding the Jewish State, is how these Jewish prisoners of the cave are systematically prepared for new crimes against humanity while the world spectates silently. Breaking their chains is a lot harder through activism alone as they labor under the weight of three thousand years of cultural history prescribed by their Rabbis in the Talmud. Their renaissance is not possible unless they undertake it themselves, and even then, highly unlikely to come to pass in the present generation.
Only a power-play that brings their own self-interests into focus, is the sole effective weapon against their naked aggression – for the antagonists’ strength is what defines morality for anyone who has multiple standards of morality. We easily observe this in the jungles as the “imperatives” of beasts where might is right prevails, but not always.
The way nature and mathematics work, the neo-imperialists are bound to lose with or without the help from their own peoples, with or without their own Machiavellian shenanigans, just as imperialist have always lost eventually – for the minnows are many, and the sharks are few, and the sharks need minnows more than the minnows need the sharks. A “poisonous” batch of minnows can easily wipe out an entire school of greedy sharks in one short meal.
*1 Quite contrary to the scenarios spinned in the prescient Hollywood movie '1984' where George Orwell also shows a public in mental chains except for the lone resistor, the empirical reality today in modern client-state dictatorships is that the public in dictatorships is far more suspicious, cynical, and the least bit trusting of their own ruling elite. It is the converse in open developed societies where the public is rather well fed and far more indoctrinated, tending to trust its ruling elite blindly. This is one of the reasons that imperialism du jour will fail, as it has always failed – but only after it has taken its toll and extracted its 'pound of flesh' for its gift of 'modernity' to humanity. The achievement of a progressive civilization is not in overthrowing it, for that is inevitable, but in preventing it to start with. Otherwise, as Brzezinski notes, “Hegemony” will indeed surely always remain “as old as mankind” taking its barbaric toll upon us all.