“Memorial Day will be celebrated … by the usual betrayal of the dead, by the hypocritical patriotism of the politicians and contractors preparing for more wars, more graves to receive more flowers on future Memorial Days. The memory of the dead deserves a different dedication. To peace, to defiance of governments.” -Howard Zinn

Memorial Day has just passed and as usual was filled with political pandering and the constant reminder to “support our troops.” The sad part is that those who are our real heroes are not the ones being lauded. The real heroes are the ones who have woken from their slumber to understand that the real purpose of war has nothing to do with freedom or with protection from the “evil-doers” but has everything to do with perpetual profits and fulfilling a sick lust for power by the 1%. They are the resisters who refuse to continue to follow illegal orders and they are the Veterans for Peace who come home shaken to the core with the realization that they have been responsible for unspeakable crimes against humanity and now call for peace and redress for those who have been harmed. And those I hold in highest regard are the whistleblowers, like Bradley Manning, who risk their freedom and their lives trying to bring us the truth of the carnage that is being done in our names. We should also honor the millions whose lives we have extinguished or destroyed who are rarely thought of or mentioned. And when you hear Obama’s or other presidents’ rhetoric about only fighting wars if they are necessary, which  is what is said every time they attack another nation, please stop falling for the lies Again US Armed Forces Day Pride in the Mass-Murder of Millions …

This one image says all that needs to be said about the futility and horror that is war, and it is worth a thousand words…

No More War!

What right does any person have to do this? It is bad enough that there are natural disasters (sometimes not as natural as one might think), but to actually bring this kind of pain, misery and anguish on another human being? In that first moment of Bush’s “Shock and Awe” attack against Iraq, all I could imagine was what it would be like to be a mother seeing her child blown up before her eyes. That thought never leaves me, and it is that which makes it impossible to fathom the depth of depravity of those committing those crimes against humanity and those ordering them. How do they kiss their children good night while killing other people’s children? Wouldn’t someone have to be a sociopath to carry out such carnage and show no remorse?

Obama is continuing the Bush blueprint in the quest for Empire, expanding from the Middle East into Africa, either by being actively involved in armed conflict, repeatedly using drones to bomb in country after country (what he considers moral ”precision bombing” that ends up wiping out whole families), and in preparation for future forays by positioning our special forces to instigate insurgency or by the use of threats, sanctions, propaganda and outright lies (think Iran). Other countries are on their knees because the United States is the biggest bully on the block – the real terrorists. Always keep in mind: The more conflicts, the more money the greedy sociopaths make.

“American Exceptionalism” is destroying any moral authority we may have had in the past. Can you only imagine what this government would do if some other country dared to drone us? And yet we feel justified to go from country to country doing exactly what you see in that photograph The Authoritarian Mind – Glenn Greenwald – Salon.com . We have a nuclear arsenal that can destroy the world a thousand times over, and we are the only country to ever use it. Yet we go around saying who can and who cannot have nuclear weapons. We call for freedom for protesters in the countries where we want the leaders deposed but remain silent when the leaders are our puppets and here at home protests are only allowed in government “free speech zones” where they cannot be seen and any others are trampled by our militarized police force on orders from the government.

When we close our eyes to the carnage being done in our name, we can no longer consider ourselves civilized. Open your hearts and souls to what you see in the photograph and break the silence. Remember, “None is so blind as those who will not see.”

As Dr. George Tiller said, “We have given war, pestilence, hate, greed, judgment, ego, self-sufficiency a good try. And it failed. We need a new paradigm that consists of kindness, courtesy, justice, love and respect in all our relationships.”
(full speech at the end of the article)

To my mind, one of the greatest anti-war speeches ever given:

Dahlia Wasfi Epic Speech on War – NO justice, NO peace.

Just as I was thinking that we could not sink any further into the abyss I was reminded how wrong I am…an 8-page New York Times article was published about what goes on behind closed doors at the White House. As if the many crimes encompassed in the picture above aren’t enough, the description of the steps taken to choose “nominees” for Obama’s “Kill List” (like for the Oscars?) are so bizarre and grotesque that I felt like I was going to throw up. As I read it, I kept thinking that it was a White House-generated piece to let us know how macho Obama is – I guess the bin Laden “killing” scenario wasn’t enough. He knows that he has the fake “progressive” apologist vote in the bag so he must be  going after the right-wing crazies who would just love a good drone-toting killer. It is particularly scary to think that if this is Obama keeping his promise about “transparency” then what they are not telling us must be really really bad!

Sometimes, a thousand words really is necessary and in this case, as visual as any picture…as brilliant a depiction of moral turpitude as I have seen:

Hymns to the Violence: The NYT’s Love Letter to Obama’s Murder Racket

I must, at last, admit defeat. I simply have no words, no rhetorical ammunition, no conceptual frameworks that could adequately address the total moral nullity exposed in Monday’s New York Times article on the death squad that Barack Obama is personally directing from the White House.  (“Secret ‘Kill List’ Proves a Test of Obama’s Principles and Will.”)

It is not so much a newspaper story as a love letter — a love letter to death, to the awe-inspiring and fear-inducing power of death, as personified by Barack Obama in his temporary role as the manager of a ruthless, lawless imperial state. In the cringing obsequiousness of the multitude of insiders and sycophants who march in goose-step through the story, we can see the awe and fear — indeed, the worship — of death-dealing power. This enthrallment permeates the story, both in the words of the cringers and in the giddy thrill the writers display in gaining such delicious access to the inner sanctum.

In any other age — including the last administration — this story would have been presented as a scandalous exposé. The genuinely creepy scenes of the “nominating process” alone would have been seen as horrific revelations. Imagine the revulsion at the sight of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld sifting through PowerPoint slides on “suspected terrorists” all over the world, and giving their Neronic thumbs up or down as each swarthy face pops up on a screen in front of them. Imagine the tidal wave of moral outrage from the “Netroots Nation” and other progressive champions directed at Bush not only for operating a death squad (which he did), but then trotting out Condi and Colin and Bob Gates to brag about it openly, and to paint Bush as some kind of moral avatar for the careful consideration and philosophical rigor he applied to blowing human beings to bits in sneak attacks on faraway villages.

But the NYT piece is billed as just another “process story” about an interesting aspect of Obama’s presidency, part of an election-year series assessing his record. It is based entirely on the viewpoints of Beltway insiders.  The very few dollops of mild criticism of the murder program are voiced by figures from deep within the imperial machine. And even these caveats are mostly tactical in nature, based on one question: “Does the program work, is it effective?” There is not a single line that ever suggests, even slightly, that the program might be morally wrong. There is not a single line in the story suggesting that such a program should up for debate or even examination by Congress. Nor is there even a perfunctory quote from mainstream organizations such as the ACLU or Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch — or from anyone in Pakistan or Yemen or the other main targets of Obama’s proudly proclaimed and personally approved death squad.

In other words, this portrait of an American president signing off — week after week after week after week — on the extrajudicial murder of people all over the world is presented as something completely uncontroversial. Indeed, the main thrust of the story is not the fact that human beings — including many women, children and men who have no connection whatsoever to “terrorism,” alleged or otherwise — are being regularly killed by the United States government; no, the main focus is how this program illustrates Barack Obama’s “evolving” style of leadership during the course of his presidency. That’s what’s really important. The murders — the eviscerated bodies, the children with their skulls bashed in, the pregnant women burned alive in their own homes — are just background. Unimportant. Non-controversial.

II.
Here’s how it works:

“Every week or so, more than 100 members of the government’s sprawling national security apparatus gather, by secure video teleconference, to pore over terrorist suspects’ biographies and recommend to the president who should be the next to die.

“This secret “nominations” process is an invention of the Obama administration, a grim debating society that vets the PowerPoint slides bearing the names, aliases and life stories of suspected members of Al Qaeda’s branch in Yemen or its allies in Somalia’s Shabab militia. … A parallel, more cloistered selection process at the C.I.A. focuses largely on Pakistan, where that agency conducts strikes.

“The nominations go to the White House, where by his own insistence and guided by Mr. Brennan, Mr. Obama must approve any name. He signs off on every strike in Yemen and Somalia and also on the more complex and risky strikes in Pakistan — about a third of the total.

“Aides say Mr. Obama has several reasons for becoming so immersed in lethal counterterrorism operations. A student of writings on war by Augustine and Thomas Aquinas, he believes that he should take moral responsibility for such actions.

“He realizes this isn’t science, this is judgments made off of, most of the time, human intelligence,” said Mr. Daley, the former chief of staff. “The president accepts as a fact that a certain amount of screw-ups are going to happen, and to him, that calls for a more judicious process.”

Again, words fail. Aides pumping reporters with stories about the wise, judicious philosopher-king consulting Aquinas and Augustine before sending a drone missile on a “signature strike” on a group of picnickers in Yemen or farmers in Pakistan. The philosopher-king himself nobly taking on the “moral responsibility” for mass murder. And the cavalier assertion that “a certain amount of screw-ups are going to happen” — a bland, blithe acceptance that you are in fact going to slaughter innocent human beings on a regular basis — precisely as if you walked up to an innocent man on the street, put a gun to his head and blew his brains out all over the sidewalk …. then walked away, absolved, unconcerned, and free to kill again. And again. And again. This psychopathic serial killing is, evidently, what Augustine meant by “moral responsibility.” Who knew?

Obama’s deep concern for “moral responsibility” is also reflected in his decision to kill according to “signature strikes” — that is, to kill people you don’t know, who haven’t even popped up on your PowerPoint slides, if you think they might possibly look or act like alleged potential “terrorists.” (Or if you receive some “human intelligence” from an agent or an informer or someone with a grudge or someone seeking payment that a group of people doing something somewhere might be terrorists.) This “moral responsibility” is also seen in Obama’s decision to count “all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants … unless there is explicit intelligence posthumously proving them innocent.”

Guilty until proven posthumously innocent! How’s that for “moral responsibility”? Here Obama has surpassed Augustine and Aquinas — yea, even great Aristotle himself — in this bold extension of the parameters of moral responsibility.

It is, I confess, beyond all my imagining that a national leader so deeply immersed in murdering people would trumpet his atrocity so openly, so gleefully — and so deliberately, sending his top aides out to collude in a major story in the nation’s leading newspaper, to ensure maximum exposure of his killing spree. Although many leaders have wielded such powers, they almost always seek to hide or obscure the reality of the operation. Even the Nazis took enormous pains to hide the true nature of their murder programs from the public. And one can scarcely conceive of Stalin inviting reporters from Pravda into the Politburo meetings where he and Molotov and Beria debated the lists of counterrevolutionary “terrorists” given to them by the KGB and ticked off those who would live and those who would die. Of course, those lists too were based on “intelligence reports,” often gathered through “strenuous interrogation techniques” or the reports of informers. No doubt these reports were every bit as credible as the PowerPoint presentations reviewed each week by Obama and his team.

And no doubt Stalin and his team were just as sincerely concerned about “national security” as the Aquinas acolyte in the White House today — and just as determined to do “whatever it takes” to preserve that security. As Stalin liked to say of the innocent people caught up in his national security efforts: “When wood is chopped, chips fly.”

Of course, he was an evil man without any sense of moral responsibility at all. In our much more enlightened times, under the guidance of a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate in the White House, we are so much wiser, so much better. We say: “A certain amount of screw-ups are going to happen.” Isn’t that much more nuanced? Isn’t that much more moral?

There is more, much more of this nullity — and rotting hypocrisy and vapid sycophancy — in the story. But I don’t have the strength or the stomach to wade any further through this swamp. It stinks of death. It taints and stains us all.

********

Dr. Tiller’s speech can be heard here (transcript below):
3 Years After George Tiller’s Murder, Reproductive Rights Face New Legislative Attacks, Hate Crimes
DR. GEORGE TILLER: I personally see a society that respects the integrity of its citizens to struggle with complex health issues and make decisions that are appropriate for them and their personal lives. I see a society that respects the religious differences of its citizens. I see a society that rejects hate, rejects judgmental condemnation, and rejects prejudice and racism. I see a government that honors the privacy of its citizens without unwarranted surveillance. I see a society where war is not an option—thank you—and the negotiation with mutual respect is the hallmark, rather than mutual self-destruction. I see a society where the welfare of all—I see a society where the welfare of all is equally important as the riches of the few. I see a world that discusses solutions without demanding its own answers.

We have given war, pestilence, hate, greed, judgment, ego, self-sufficiency a good try. And it failed. We need a new paradigm that consists of kindness, courtesy, justice, love and respect in all our relationships.

Work hard. Be a leader. Your way of life depends on it. And just look at the rest of the world. That’s the way the anti-abortion segment of our population wants the U.S.A. to be. And how do we do that? We do it the way we have always done things: we fail our way forward. We consider defeat a temporary inconvenience. And we never, ever, ever take no for an answer. Never take no for an answer. Work hard. Be a leader. The rest of your life depends on it, and the life of your sisters and brothers throughout the world depend on it. Thank you.