Reply #4: I think Sen. Whitehouse is sincere and that a strong investigation of Bushwhack crimes

[Peace Patriot]

would be very good for the country, regardless of whether or not the Obama administration pursues prosecution. A thorough investigation, with as much publicity as possible, is one of the few ways--besides getting rid of the 'TRADE SECRET' voting machines--that we, the people, can help to insure that the Bushwhacks' massive crime spree doesn't occur again. While our own party wimped out on impeaching Reagan for his illegal war on Nicaragua, the Iran-Contra hearings in Congress did help curtail illegal, presidential war for a period of time, as well as helping to end U.S. complicity in a number of "dirty wars" in Latin America.

I'm all for investigation, openness, information to the people about what their government has done, a voice for the victims, and warning to our political leaders that they will at least risk exposure when they commit crimes. It is something of a deterrent, and a step toward justice.

The issue of prosecution is separate. The investigation can do as much as possible to identify crimes and perps--and can also aid potential prosecutors by being careful on matters such as immunity, the preservation of evidence, etc. But Congress has no executive power to prosecute, except as an impeachment body for current members of the other two branches of government (and for its own members). Impeachment can mean removal from office, not jail (unless the impeached official is pursued by the executive branch for crimes that are exposed in the impeachment process). So that issue is moot, as far as Bushwhack officials are involved. (It could conceivably be relevant to Bushwhack plants in different agencies, or to held-over appointments, such as that of Asst Sec of State for the Western Hemisphere Thomas Shannon, whom I think may be entangled in some very dirty Bushwhack business in South America.)

The apparent immunity that has been given to George Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and other principles of the Bushwhack crime spree, by someone, or some group, we know not whom, is not a matter that Senator Whitehouse or Congressman Conyers can address, obviously. (Obvious to me, anyway.) It's too big. It is outside of their sphere of power. And (I think) they would have no power--they wouldn't even be in office--if they were too defiant toward whoever is really pulling the strings. I frankly think that there was a counter-coup, within our government, to get Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld out, and probably to prevent their nuking of Iran. I think the timeframe is circa late 2006. And this is where Pelosi's strange announcement that "impeachment is off the table" came from--this counter-coup action. (Off what table, Nancy?!)

This is actually a more serious matter--or rather a deeper, more fundamental matter, as to our democracy and its long term prospects. Who is running this country? Who is responsible for Bush running around freely, off to Europe now to give $150,000 a pop speeches. (Gotta laugh at that--didn't Reagan get $2 million a pop?) Who is behind Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove and others getting off scott free--and, no little matter, with plenty of wherewithal (billions of our tax dollars and other money bilked from us and others; private armies created at our expense, etc.) to cause further trouble here and abroad?

I think the key is somehow Leon Panetta. And I have to laugh at people thinking he is a civilian. No way, friends. (Did you notice, when DiFi opened her mouth and criticized that appointment because of his "inexperience," how quickly she shut up, and how quickly that issue just went away? Pay attention, folks.) It may be a 'white hat' group within our secret government--likely working with Daddy Bush whose motive was to save Jr.--who got Bush/Cheney to agree to leave peacefully when the time came, and who engineered Rumfeld's ouster, and who spared the world from nuclear war in the Middle East--and thus preserved the remnants of our democracy that we see now, but this was not a pro-democracy action. It was more in the vein of preserving the status quo.

The origins of our situation go way back to 1963 and the CIA assassination of a sitting president, JFK, for his backchannels to Krushchev and Castro, and intention to END the "Cold War," and all of the CIA's proxy wars with the Soviet Union, way back then.* Also, their probable assassinations of RFK and MLK for similar reasons. To untangle where we are now, we have to start with then--with the reasons for those assassinations, covered up all these years. We have not really been a democracy since that time. In the war between JFK--who vowed, after the CIA's "Bay of Pigs" invasion of Cuba, to "smash the CIA into a thousand pieces"--the CIA won, and it was JFK's skull that was smashed into a thousand pieces. The civilian government lost. And we have been ruled by this secret government ever since.

Clearly, there has been a war within this secret government. Some of the visible aspects of it were items like the outing of Valerie Plame and the CIA's counter-proliferation network (the Brewster-Jennings network), and Rumsfeld's creation of the "Office of Special Plans"--a separate intelligence shop within the Pentagon, to circumvent the professionals at the CIA who opposed the war on Iraq (and perhaps opposed other Rumsfeld methods and projects).

We need to deal with this--or not deal with it, settle for the illusion of democracy. It is a lot to deal with. It is not an easy thing to face. And probably we won't deal with it, as a people. It will all simply disappear beneath the surface of things once again, and we will limp along in our Roman Empire decline, to our Roman Empire fall. Do we want a democracy? Or are we willing to settle for 'white hat' groups 'fixing things' for us, temporarily, and certainly not in our financial interest?

Democracy is a great idea, you know--one of the greatest ideas in human history--that, by equality and equal opportunity, and free speech and all the rest--the best wisdom, the best leaders, and the best ideas for the common good rise to the top. But if democracy is distorted--say, as it was with slavery then segregation--it doesn't work as well. All the talent and ideas of a class of people are excluded from the pool of available wisdom. And if democracy is distorted even more--as it is now--with a very top-heavy albatross of the super-rich and multinational corporate CEOs blockading openness and preventing masses of people (workers, the poor) from truly participating in government, and cement their power by secret means (our secret government, now reinforced with private, rightwing corporate 'TRADE SECRET' voting machines), then you end up with a leader like Barack Obama, who, talented, intelligent and well-intentioned though he is, cannot really serve the common good very well, neither by prosecuting the Bushwhacks for their many and dreadful crimes, nor by wielding the "big stick" that is so desperately needed to whack our corporate rulers upside the head--dismantle their corporate monstrosities, shut down their goddamn stock market, insurance scams and all the rest, defend our manufacturing capability, tax them through the nose, and so on.

We need a leader who says, with FDR, "Organized money hates me--and I welcome their hatred!" And we don't have it, because no such leader could survive the vetting of our secret government, which serves the rich and the multinationals.

I tend to think that the 'TRADE SECRET' voting machines are the key to peeling back the power of the people and entities who are really running things. It is not the whole problem, but it is an essential first step. I do think Obama was actually elected--don't know for sure, our voting system is so non-transparent, but it's probably true. And I'm also pretty sure that his mandate was significantly and fraudulently shaved, to curtail serious reform. And my guess is that about half of Congress, including some "Blue Dogs," were not elected--they were Diebolded into power. Money is also, of course, a big factor--it excludes the poor and even the middle class, and even the upper middle class, from running for office, without becoming beholden to "organized money" from the get-go. So, the best thing we could do to support more serious reform--if that is Obama's intent (or, like FDR, becomes his intent, after he takes a good look at things)--is to insure that we can re-elect him. Right now, we can't. The voting system is out of public control. It is nearly 100% non-transparent and privately run.

In sum, if you want Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and that lot of criminals in jail...

THROW DIEBOLD & ALL 'TRADE SECRET' CODE VOTING MACHINES INTO 'BOSTON HARBOR' NOW!

Essential first step.

-------

*(Recommended essential reading: James Douglass' new book, "JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters.")