Pacific Free Press was launched in March 2007 by Dutch-Canadian Richard
Kastelein of V.O.F. Expathos, in the Netherlands along with Chris Cook- CFUV radio journalist and Editor in Chief of Pacific Free Press. Cook is based in , Victoria, British Columbia.
The mission of Pacific Free Press is simple: to dig out nuggets of truth from
the slag-heap of lies, ignorance and witless diversion that has buried
public discourse today. Pacific Free Press provides a new venue for
disseminating hard news and insightful, fact-based analysis of the
harsh realities too often ignored or distorted by the mainstream press.
Down in the Flood: The Senate's Blank Check for War on Iran
by Chris Floyd As you may know -- unless you rely on the corporate media for your news, of course -- yesterday the U.S. Senate unanimously declared that Iran was committing acts of war against the United States: a 97-0 vote to give George W. Bush a clear and unmistakable casus belli for attacking Iran whenever Dick Cheney tells him to.
The bipartisan Senate resolution the brainchild (or rather the bilechild) of Fightin' Joe Lieberman affirmed as official fact all of the specious, unproven, ever-changing allegations of direct Iranian involvement in attacks on the American forces now occupying Iraq. The Senators appear to have relied heavily on the recent New York Times story by Michael Gordon that stove-piped unchallenged Pentagon spin directly onto the paper's front page. As Firedoglake points out, John McCain cited the heavily criticized story on the Senate floor as he cast his vote.
It goes without saying that all of this is a nightmarish replay
of the run-up to the war of aggression against Iraq: The NYT funneling
false flag stories from Bush insiders. Warmongers citing the NYT
stories as "proof" justifying any and all action to "defend the
Homeland." Credulous and craven Democratic politicians swallowing the
Bush line hook and sinker.
To be sure, stout-hearted Dem
tribunes like Dick Durbin insisted that their support for declaring
that Iran is "committing acts of war" against the United States should
not be taken as an "authorization of military action." This is
shaky-knees mendacity at its finest. Having officially affirmed that
Iran is waging war on American forces, how, pray tell, can you then
deny the president when he asks (if he asks) for authorization to
"defend our troops?" Answer: you can't. And you know it.
This
vote is the clearest signal yet that there will be no real opposition
to a Bush Administration attack on Iran. This is yet another blank
check from these slavish, ignorant goons; Bush can cash it anytime.
This is, in fact, the post-surge "Plan B" that's been mooted lately in
the Beltway. As you recall, there was much throwing about of brains on
the subject of reviving the "Iraq Study Group" plan when the "surge"
(or to call it by its right name, the "punitive escalation") inevitably
fails. Bush put the kibosh on that this week ("Him not gonna do nothin'
that Daddy's friends tell him to do! Him a big boy, him the decider!"),
but that doesn't mean there isn't a fall-back position or rather, a
spring-forward position: an attack on Iran, to rally the nation behind
the "war leader" and reshuffle the deck in Iraq.
Of course, the
United States is already at war with Iran. We are directing covert ops
and terrorist attacks inside Iran, with the help of groups that our own
government has declared terrorist renegades. We are kidnapping Iranian
officials in Iraq and holding them hostage. We have a bristling naval
armada on Iran's doorstep, put there for the express purpose of
threatening Tehran with military action. The U.S. Congress has
overwhelmingly passed measures calling for the overthrow of the Iranian
government. And now the U.S. Senate has unanimously declared that Iran
is waging war on America, and has given official notice that this will
not be tolerated. It is only a very small step to move from this war in
all but name to the full monty of an overt military assault.
We've
said it before and we'll say it again: there is madness at work here.
There is no other word for it. As I noted a few years ago:
Homo
sapiens is the only species that dreams of its own total demise. Our
brief history of conscious thought is replete with vivid scenarios of
the end of life on earth....Religion has produced most of these --
giddy, voluptuous nightmares of universal extinction, usually by fire,
at divine order. A favored remnant is always saved in such tales, of
course, but only after being transformed into some different, higher
order of being. The gross human body -- that bleeding, fouling,
endlessly replicating sack of earth -- is gleefully consigned to
eternal oblivion.
It seems that some ineradicable nihilism
pervades us, like a virus, now dormant, now flaring: something in us
that wants to die, to be done with the long, overhanging doom of
mortality -- and to take the world with us. Our grandiose visions of
the future seem to hide, at their core, a secret, desperate anxiety
about the profound meaninglessness of existence -- an anxiety that
often disguises itself in elaborate fantasies of the afterlife, in
dreams of "dominance" for one's "own kind" (nation, tribe, faith, race,
ideology, etc.), or in the eroticizing of death, war and destruction.
Instincts
for preservation, sentiments of affection, the drive for pleasure --
from the most basic bodily urges to the most sublime creations and
apprehensions of the intellect -- act as counterweights to this dark
virus, of course. They provide for most of us, most of the time, enough
fragments of meaning -- or at least sufficient distraction -- to get on
with things, without too much resort to world-engulfing visions or the
extremes of nihilistic anxiety.
On the individual level, the
calibration of these competing impulses can be intricate, subtle,
ever-shifting, because the individual mind is so complex and
all-encompassing, yet also so enclosed, so unlockably private as well:
an infinitely supple tool for managing the conflicts and contradictions
of reality. But on the broader level -- species, nation, group -- human
consciousness is, of necessity, a far more blunt and brutal instrument.
There,
our brain-fevers and anxieties rage more virulently, lacking the
counterweights of individual feeling and the quick, intimate
responsiveness of the private mind. In the group-mind, the fantasies
that root in the muddy fear of meaninglessness can emerge full-blown.
Thought and discourse are reduced to broad strokes, slogans, codes and
incantations, with little correspondence to reality. Awareness of this
tendency can mitigate some of its effects; but the group-mind's
fundamental falsity and irreality almost invariably infects the
thoughts and actions of group leaders -- and eventually many of the
group members as well.
Thus we can sometimes say, not entirely
metaphorically, that nations "go mad," hurtling themselves toward ruin,
embracing self-destruction, lusting for violence and death, sick with
nihilism -- although this sickness is always painted in the colors of
patriotic fervor or religious zeal, or both
Now draw these
dangerous streams together, and you have a portrait of the blunt and
brutal group-mind at work in the leadership of the world's most
powerful nation. The folly, fantasy and death-fetish of the Bush Regime
-- long evident to anyone who cared to see -- were finally "revealed"
in the mainstream media recently by the quasi-official Establishment
oracle, Bob Woodward. His latest insider portrait, Plan of Attack,
offers -- in the usual, easily-gummed pabulum form -- a few tastes of
the bitter truth behind the Regime's mad, ruinous war crime in Iraq.
The
corrosive nihilism at the heart of the enterprise ate through the
gaudily-painted surface most tellingly in a single anecdote. Woodward
asks George W. Bush how he thinks history will regard his adventure in
Iraq. Bush, gazing out the window, shrugs and waves the question away.
"History, we don't know," he says. "We'll all be dead." No fine,
faith-filled talk here about God and Jesus and the immortal soul
responsible for its actions throughout all eternity -- the kind of
zealous patter Bush favors in public statements. This was just the
cold, rotten, meaningless core of his grand vision: "We'll all be
dead." So who cares? Après moi, le deluge.
Who would have
thought the floodwaters of this death vision would have risen so high
again so soon? Yet here they are again, beating against the gates.
UPDATE:
Jonathan Schwarz points out that all of the Senate's Democratic
candidates for president voted for Lieberman's Iran War amendment:
Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, and Joe Biden. Just in case you were
expecting a saner foreign policy after the 2008 election.
Vote for Paul or Kucinich written by a guest,
July 13, 2007
Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich were recently the only Congressmen who voted against a bill in the House to urge the UN to change the President of Iran with genocide. These two Presidential candidates are the only hope for our future. Please listen to what they say and don't dismiss them for not having a chance.