Skip to content


February 9, 2013


And so it was that on February 7, during a Senate Armed Services committee hearing in which Penetta and Dempsy gave testimony, that cultural duplicity as shroud of democratic, civilian rule that covers the true relationship of the Pentagon itself as the real executive power in the United States of America in its relationship with the rest of society, was momentarily brought down.

And it was clear form this testimony and from the comments made by certain Senators in their interrogations, that the White House, back on September 11, 2012 had no role whatsoever as regards to the confusion that was publicly created in regards to how the violence in Bengasi, Libya was handled; that it was, at all moments, a Pentagon operation which the President was not part of although he may have been superficially informed, and that Hilary Clinton and Susan Rice, and even the State Department itself were “held out to dry” as public fall guy in the days and weeks following.

And Senator Graham, of South Carolina, most aggressively held Penetta and Dempsy to statements that communicate exactly this narrative and image of the Pentagon as true executive power that serves itself of US Democracy, even of the US Congress itself, in the form of a cloak or shroud of constitutional legitimacy.

But Graham did not then rise in his fury and force both Penetta and Dempsy to give him, then and there, an understanding of exactly how these two individuals conceived of the Senate, of the very constitutional authority Penetta and Dempsy where in that moment addressing.

And no one else, either, in that hearing room seemed to be ready to take the next steps as logical inferences.

Because how could this be taken, ultimately, to the US public and Graham’s South Carolina voting constituency, of either racial persuasion?

How can even the New York Times address this and the political fraud it constitutes, and the de facto accomplices in makes the political economic caste of elite power in this country?

And my personal interest is understanding how this is morally accepted by the individuals, on all sides of the Pentagon, that make up this fraud as US Democracy itself.

And during that very hearing as televised by C-Span, I began to take a few notes, even before Sen. Graham got his turn to ask questions:

1)PATRIOTISM: There is a constant appeal to this concept and it clearly serves the purpose of allowing individuals to necessarily put back or put away all together their own personal moral convictions. This appeal is constant in the protocol and procedures, from what I could see, in the Senate itself. In fact it is necessary for Senators to constantly affirm themselves as “patriots” by labeling the career of any military officer or government bureaucrat, no matter how irrelevant it truly was as, ‘service’; but this term can never be conferred onto a 20, 30 or 40 years of minimum wage jobs and the life of macro economic services any individual in that context functionally carries out with regards to the rest of society; but what he or she sure ain’t gonna get is healthcare insurance.

2)DEATH: There is also a constant appeal or reference to the loss of human life, to the image of Death that, according to what I saw lords over the minds and conscience of these people and that, when you spend time in this scenario of government as an observer, has the power or effect of sucking you, too, under the folds of its black robes along with all the other Senators, soldiers and Secretaries of Defense.

3)STATE OF WAR: It is pretty obvious for everybody that, as of September 11, 2001, the American psyche, especially at a government level, is besieged and afflicted by a bunker mentality and the need to face and fend off the cosmic threat of Death and aggression to American children, their dogs and the “American way of life”; and they seem themselves at the mercy of global rogue elements in what they call the “war on terrorism”; but this is a most intentional strategy of confusion for it allows for the re-enactment of a most corporate society, WWII response as the supreme Pentagon fantasy of a military-driven human condition.

4)WE/US AND OUR: These pronouns are constantly used in reference to US government or society, and it seems to me, to be the consequence of the points 1, 2, and 3: that we are before the most Niebuhr of phenomenon in which personal moral conviction and criterion must be subtly overrun and annulled by this collective plight that the US power elite offers as governance to the American Public.

And as a final inference, this basically leaves Obama as master showman of democratic distraction for dummies, which is how you are clearly seen by the powers that be.

But I, for one, will never vote again.

Not me, baby!

I will not live life through the eyes and soul of a child!

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s