MIND CANDY FOR THE MASSES ... by The Cosmic Messenger

The upcoming battle over confirming President Bush's judicial nominations seems innocent enough if you're willing to accept the establishment media's depiction that it's a struggle between liberal and moral forces within American society to determine our nation's destiny through the federal court system. To date, I'm not convinced this explanation is valid and believe something more sinister is the motive. By recasting the American judiciary, a corporate imperialist such as this President would effectively have in place the final piece of a deliberate strategy to run the U.S. government without labor, human rights and environmental laws impeding his quest to turn our country into a cooperative playground for wealthy capitalists. It's as if Bush wants to substitute corporate law for the American Constitution. If successful, he can move on to altering international statutes through a bully representative such as John Bolton at the United Nations.

Although capitalism is a proven, viable economic system if implemented fairly, its sustainability is dependent on perpetual subjunction of other markets. As it exhausts trade opportunities within these venues, there's a demonstrated tendency to aggressively try and extend profits by consolidating power through authoritarian methods. The tools for accomplishing this focus on monopolizing the economic, military, informational and political segments of a country and converting them to produce more wealth. Under Bush, three of these objectives have been fulfilled in the United States. Passage of the Bankruptcy Bill this year was central to solidifying the President's authority because it gives him an economic lever over the American population similar to the way in which the World Bank and IMF controls the destinies of Third World countries. This legislation makes it nearly impossible for our citizens to escape repayment of financial liabilities at a time when personal debt is historically high. As their burdens accumulate without a sound legal remedy for relief, people become more submissive to ideas proposed by the ruling elite with less critical examination of the consequences. The recent bankruptcy of United Airlines illustrates this point. Although talk of strikes has emerged in response to employees loss of retirement pensions, it's unlikely they'll materialize because most individuals realize such action could result in termination creating higher personal indebtedness for them.

The ultimate effect is the will of the people becomes subjugated to policies contrary to their interests but efficient for the owners of production.

With this kind of strategic advantage over the common people of the United States, Bush senses it will be relatively easy to win confirmation of his judicial nominees with minimal dissent. Neither the media or the majority of Congress will offer anything but token opposition because both have been corrupted by the same unprincipled corporate influence embraced by the executive branch of our government in a death grip for liberty. By placing his candidates within the judicial system, the President is gambling he'll have established a network of friendly judges whom he can rely upon when disputes occur involving his corporate agenda. Whether a labor conflict such as the dissolution of United Airlines' pension plan ordered by a federal judge or a disagreement over First Amendment rights, the goal is assigning officials who would interpret applicable laws favorable to their interests. Two examples, both involving guaranteed civil liberties demonstrate how the potential for abuse exists and would enable the military to assist corporate imperialism's drive to solidify its power.

The first involves the recent release of Edwin Wilson from a federal penitentiary which most of the corporate media ignored. Wilson was convicted in 1983 of supplying explosives to the Libyan government while acting covertly under the direction of the CIA as a way to win favor and a strategic foothold within oil countries of that region. However, when President Reagan took office the strategy was abandoned and denials about operations were issued. Wilson found himself out in the cold, deserted by the CIA and viewed as a loose end who knew too much about this failed approach to Middle East policy. Enticed to return to a U.S. territory in 1982, he was arrested and brought to the mainland for trial in federal court. He was convicted by prosecutors based on a written memo submitted by a CIA officer which stated Wilson wasn't in their employment at the time. The allegation was later proven untrue which led to a reversal of his sentence in 2003. The case is relative because it shows what extremes both the government and its intelligence agency are willing to collude to achieve a corporate objective of acquiring control of assets it desires. Wilson was valuable as long as he could play a positive role assisting them to gain this. Once a different plan was developed, he became dispensable even if it meant lying under oath to make him disappear for life. Ironically, several of the attorneys who conspired with the CIA to declare Wilson guilty are presently federal judges while one is senior counsel at the World Bank. The situation has ominous overtones considering all might be called upon by Bush to address similar legal challenges brought to them by the Administration in their current positions. It's uncertain whether any of them would voluntarily recuse themselves from deliberating germane matters.

The other example is equally crucial and perhaps substantially more important because it involves a proposed Bush nominee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, William Haynes. In his previous capacity as general counsel for the Department of Defense Haynes was instrumental in developing policy guidelines which ignored Geneva Convention rules concerning war prisoners, establishing the Pentagon's military tribunal plan for trying captives and generating rules for incarceration of U.S. citizens without counsel or judicial review. According to the organization, "HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH", Haynes told them in 2003 through written correspondence the, "United States policy condemns torture," without acknowledging whether it was actually being implemented. Its Executive Director Kenneth Roth alleges the response was evasive and failed to admit the U.S. has a legal responsibility to protect POW's as agreed upon in United Nation standards.

Not unexpected considering Haynes, in conjunction with recently appointed United States Attorney General Alberto Gonzales were instrumental in developing policies meant to circumvent pertinent international law and have been declared illegal by numerous civil rights organizations throughout the world. Their implementation at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba and the Abu Ghraib Iraq prison sought to legitimize torture in the name of national security. With both of these men serving Bush in the the federal judicial system, the President is sufficiently immunized from prosection for international crimes of inhumane treatment while his corporate supporters are secure knowing a wall of legal protection envelopes their front man enabling him to pursue the goal of global domination without jeopardy.

The lesson analogous to each of the preceding cases shows what can happen when appointed representatives of government conspire with one another to fulfill a corporate ambition. In the Wilson case, federal prosecutors allegedly accepted a false, written deposition from the CIA condemning an innocent man to a maximum security prison for the past 22 years of his life. For their silence, each was rewarded with other key positions in government. The latter example is alarming because Haynes is being recommended for a federal judgeship by Bush, presumably after his diligent efforts to rewrite U.S codes involving management of war prisoners so both the Administration and the military could trample over their civil rights. Ultimately, the motivation in each instance was to cover up acts of illegal U.S. aggression against foreign governments or its citizens so corporations could exploit their oil resources. It's been a covert pattern practiced repeatedly by representatives of both Adminstrations in concert with our Intelligence agencies from Central America to the Middle East the past 80 years.

With John Bolton at the United Nations, Paul Wolfowitz's appointment to the World Bank, John Negreponte serving as Intelligence Director, Condi Rice globe trotting as U.S Secretary of State and U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales providing legal cover the imperialistic tendencies of international corporate mind think appear secure. All that remains for total conquest, is to control the federal judiciary of our government. Neocons hope to accomplish this by submitting judicial nominations acceptable to their religious constituency and advocate for a straight up or down vote if opposition develops. Is the scheme mind candy for the moral crusaders who blindly assist them or a poison pill for democracy enabling industrialists to take complete power of our government ? The choice between bitter and sweet will be made soon. Let's hope the outcome preserves freedom for all rather than advancing the interests of only a few.


This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

UNHOLY ALLIANCE ... by The Cosmic Messenger

Did anyone besides myself notice how slanted the coverage of Pope Benedict's election was by the American corporate media ? From the moment the plumes of white smoke appeared and bells tolled announcing the Cardinals' choice, the press began to characterize him as a policy dinosaur whose opinions contrasted the views of some Christians. My impression was they wanted to limit public discussion of him to a few controversial social issues known to be divisive and considered sacred to religious fundamentalists. By narrowly shaping opinion this way, the communication industry avoided debate about the immorality of President Bush's economic policies which are taking precedent over spiritual issues in citizen's minds according to the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll.

Rather than broadening discourse about Church doctrine to include its disdain for the inefficiency of free enterprise, beliefs were targeted which alienate either women or gays. This occurred the week of April 19 when many leaders and organizations in the U.S. were asking for a national public observance of, "Equal Pay Day," to show how unfair compensation impacts American families. Carelessly framing the exchange of views about an issue as critical as this wasn't a media oversight but deliberate and comes at a time when monopoly capitalism enjoys a distinct advantage over the working class of our country. The wealth being generated isn't evenly distributed throughout the economic spectrum resulting in disproportionate amounts of income going to the owners of US capital rather than the workers. Although the price inflation accompanying productivity expansion helps industrialists buy other assets to further consolidate their control of the economic and political system, it's devastating workers who rely on the low wage jobs produced by the service economy. As their purchasing power decreases, many find themselves at or below poverty level regardless of how many jobs or family members work. Income distribution has deteriorated so badly that one in five US children is impoverished according to statistics released by the non profit advocacy group, Responsible Wealth. The total number of poor in the country is estimated to be 40 million .

Much of the inequality has resulted from policies put in place by President Bush which grant tax breaks to corporations and high net worth individuals. This combination of reduced levies has impacted the nation in several ways, none of which are beneficial to the country as a whole. The most significant effect is the United States Treasury has been drained of revenue sources creating massive debt which foreigners are reluctant to finance without some government assurance it can be repaid. Spending on the Iraq occupation and the expected trillions privatising Social Security worsens the situation. Equally significant is one percent of our country now owns a third of its wealth giving the United States the highest level of income disparity among advanced nations. Bush's concept of wealth management based on tax sheltering for millionaires and corporations is the worst fraud perpetrated on our nation since its inception. The ownership society he envisions, moves America away from the goal of individual economic parity we held sacred for most of this century and segregates us by our ability to amass wealth. Under the President's plan, individuals able to save for their retirement, health care and education receive tax incentives while those less fortunate are considered statistical casualties left behind.

Regrettably, more Americans are becoming victims of rather than sharing in Bush's new approach. Most will never accumulate the savings needed to take advantage of the credits being offered because of record personal debt and low wages which are unable to keep pace with rising inflation. These factors along with high gasoline prices have combined to put the national savings rate at a record low of just 0.2 percent suggesting families are spending far more than they earn. Despite working harder, fewer citizens are able to benefit from their efforts because they have less disposable income. Much of the earnings are being spent for social programs formally provided by the government. As individual liabilities mount, the rewards for compiling assets become meaningless to the average person while the "American Dream" slips further from their grasp. We've been transformed from a manufacturing country providing a decent standard of living for most of its citizens, into one based on consumerism stigmatized by job insecurity and stagnant wages insufficient to meet the demands of our soaring personal costs.

This undesirable situation won't change until the message creating the dilemma is modified. It must begin with political parties in the United States reevaluating their priorities to ensure the morality of their policies are spread sensibly across both the array of social and economic issues impacted. Focusing on tax breaks for the wealthy doesn't accomplish this goal. It shrinks federal spending by reducing social programs which a majority of US citizens still depend on because they don't earn a living wage sufficient enough to compensate for the services being cut. Receiving a living wage is good for both employers and employees. When a worker is compensated fairly turnover and absenteeism is reduced lowering the recruitment/training costs of a business. Ultimately, both morale and loyalty to a company increase. As an individual's income rises, their reliance on public aid decreases the demand for housing subsidies, medical help, food stamps and other forms of government assistance. Public education, roads and health care are funded adequately because more tax revenue is derived from increased levels of productivity and as people buy more.

Conservatives in both parties have wed themselves in an unholy political alliance with a submissive corporate media the past four years to broadcast a course of action which idolizes compiling material goods. It's a philosophy vague on economic details but astute at moralizing the consequences if the public wavers in accepting the plan. Whenever dissension arises about wealth distribution issues, hawks recast it within a religious context tainting the debate with a false sense of ethical urgency knowing the mainstream press will follow accordingly. If Americans are to regain a commensurate stake in their society, it must begin by electing officials dedicated to restoring economic equality to them through fair living wages rather than demagoguing select religious issues so that only corporations can prosper. There's nothing honorable about cutting daycare assistance for single mothers, Medicaid to a states's poor, reducing senior's retirement checks or lowering EPA standards so that one percent of the U.S. population can pay less taxes. If these reductions come at the expense of our health or the environment, aggregate society has achieved nothing.


This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.