What We Sow, We Harvest
The title of the post comes from statements made by Hillary Clinton, referencing the short-sighted foreign policy of the US arming the Mujahideen against Russia in Afghanistan. It’s a refreshingly candid statement.
But that was over two years ago, plenty of time to conveniently forget how an expedient ends-justify-the-means approach to fighting the Evil Empire (Russia) blew back in our collective faces (9/11).
Is it impossible for this country to learn from it’s blunders abroad?
Apparently so. And as proof, check this out: Obama’s administration is trying to achieve the same goal as Al Qaeda. Let me say that again. Obama and the TERRORISTS WHO ATTACKED AMERICA want the same thing: the destruction of the Syrian Regime.
This point became crystal clear when that new head terrorist guy who took the place of America’s frenemy, Bin Laden, recently called for jihad in Syria.
Gee, how awkward. Too bad Obama has already demanded Assad step down, and declared that America marches in lockstep with Israel. So no diplomatic poker playing here. Instead, US foreign policy seeks to again exploit the R2P for another imposed regime change.
Why? Could the answer be as simple and stupidly short-sighted as Iran?
Because if it wasn’t for aligning with Iran, it seems like Bashar al Assad is totally the kind of secular dictator that America, under different circumstances, could tolerate. To prove I’m not totally nuts in making that assertion, I offer this link showing how Vogue magazine once fawned over his wife, Asma al Assad, then later tried to scrub itself clean.
Getting back to that lockstep with Israel thing, it makes sense the Obama administration has the same goal as the evil terrorists who attacked us, because Israel is all too eager to work with terrorists as well:
Israel is working with an Iranian terror group to kill Iran’s nuclear scientists, U.S. officials have told NBC News. They say Israel is financing, training, and arming Iranian dissidents known as the People’s Mujahedin of Iran, a group designated as terrorists by the U.S. since the 1970s, when members allegedly killed U.S. service members. They later broke with the Iranian mullahs. Five nuclear scientists have been killed since 2007, often by a motorcycle rider attaching a magnetic bomb to the scientist’s car. U.S. officials say the Obama administration is aware of the assassinations.
Diana Johnstone’s featured piece at Counterpunch is very much worth reading. Here is a snip:
And who are these rebels? We simply do not know. Someone who may know better than we do is Osama bin Laden’s successor as head of al Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri, who is seen on a video urging Muslims in Turkey and neighboring Arab states to back the Syrian rebels.
With uncontrolled armed groups fighting for control, the insistent Western demand that “Assad must step down” is not really even a call for “regime change”. It is a call for regime self-destruction.
As in Libya, the country would de facto be turned over to rival armed groups, with those groups that are being armed covertly by NATO via Turkey and Qatar having an advantage in hardware. However, the likely result would be a multi-sided civil war much more horrific than the chaos in Libya, thanks to the country’s multiple religious differences. But for the West, however chaotic, regime self-destruction would have the immediate advantage of depriving Iran of its potential ally on the eve of an Israeli attack. With both Iraq and Syria neutralized by internal religious conflict, the strangulation of Iran would be that much easier – or so the Western strategists obviously assume.
To approximate what’s happening globally: shit’s getting really fucked up, and there’s an inevitability being actively constructed toward war with Iran.
Domestically, the big banks got the handjob of justice with their foreclosure settlement. Good for them. Help piddle down a few billion in principal for a crash that wiped out trillions.
The domestic opposition, OWS, and its subsidiary occupations, are caught in a myriad of difficulties. The big flare up came from Chris Hedges, stirring it up with his piece titledBlack Block: The Cancer in Occupy.
A great response came from this piece, Self-Critical Reflections from the Santa Rita Jail.
Another great response came from this open letter to Chris Hedges.
And then there’s the latest from Hedges, where he says this:
How do we fight back? We do not have the tools or the wealth of the state. We cannot beat it at its own game. We cannot ferret out infiltrators. The legal system is almost always on the state’s side. If we attempt to replicate the elaborate security apparatus of our oppressors, even on a small scale, we will unleash widespread paranoia and fracture the movement. If we retreat into anonymity, hiding behind masks, then we provide an opening for agents provocateurs who deny their identities while disrupting the movement. If we fight pitched battles in the streets we give authorities an excuse to fire their weapons.
All we have, as Vaclav Havel writes, is our own powerlessness. And that powerlessness is our strength. The survival of the movement depends on embracing this powerlessness. It depends on two of our most important assets—utter and complete transparency and a rigid adherence to nonviolence, including respect for private property. This permits us, as Havel puts it in his 1978 essay “The Power of the Powerless,” to live in truth. And by living in truth we expose a corrupt corporate state that perpetrates lies and lives in deceit.
This conversation happening about how to resist is absolutely critical right now, because we’re not Greece. Not yet.
But Greece is the future if the methods of squeeze are adopted. And it’s not austerity hawks circling above us, but vultures.