Bookends

For the final posting for the month of May, I thought I would take a break from the analytical discussions of the ills of the world and end the month as I started it, with a story about living in Italy and my hobby of cycling. Just as the Primo Maggio or May Day celebration with the Topi family was due to my hobby of cycling, the last day of May ended with the Giro D’ Italia finishing its 100th anniversary with a time trial on the cobblestone streets of Rome. Nevertheless, even with cycling, there is a political aspect and how it fits into the whole geo-political puzzle.

The most obvious aspect to how a bicycle fits into the larger geo-political puzzle is the fact that the bicycle is a zero emission vehicle. While I do not have figures to support my claim, I am sure if more communities in warm weather states like Florida, California, and Arizona started to design communities with the bicycle as the sole means of transportation, future Presidents of the United States would not have to hold hands with a Saudi monarch and support one of the most repressive regimes in the world. A country where women are treated as second-class humans and it is illegal to even bring a bible into the country.

Perhaps American urban planners can look to the Austrians for a bit of inspiration in designing some future zero emission communities. A proposed Bikecity on the Danube River in Austria just outside of Vienna would be only 15 minutes by bike from Vienna’s center. The 50,000 square meter site will include 250 flats, a park and a hotel and will only be accessible by bike or on foot. Residents will be able to transport furniture and other large items by car or van and that there would be access for emergency vehicles. Shopping however, would need to be carried by man or bike power alone.



What makes this story so interesting is that Vienna is also home to OPEC. While I don’t expect to see any of the oil sheiks who work in the OPEC building to live in this community and ride a bicycle, the leaders of Austria know that oil is a finite resource and are at least doing something to prepare their country for this inevitability. Vienna, a city not known for its beaches or warm weather, has over 1,000 kilometers of bike lanes. American leaders in Miami, Orlando, Los Angles, San Diego, New Orleans, and dozens of other cities in America, should be embarrassed at this fact.

In addition to helping America become more energy independent from foreign countries, the bicycle would also help alleviate the growing epidemic of obesity in America. While most of the countries in Africa and other parts of the world would welcome that kind of problem, it depressing and alarming to see the high rate of obesity in America. Just as the political support for the SUV helped destroy Detroit, the lack of political support of the bicycle is contributing to the moral self-decay of Americans.

We have a responsibility to our future generations for a clean environment and a healthy life style. The bicycle, one of the best inventions of all time, is a key to that solution.

The decades old practice of exaggerating a threat for domestic political and financial gain

Advocates of a strong military believe that by increasing the military power of the United States, America will be able to increase its wealth and GDP. This belief is centered on one of the main aspects of National Security Council 68 (NSC 68) which believed that a strong military would not only provide greater security, but would also provide ever-increasing material abundance. When the main ideas of NSC 68 are viewed in a post cold war setting it appears that the main document, in which American statecraft was centered on over the last sixty years, still has a strong following in Washington D.C.

The key architects of NSC 68, such as Paul Nitze, were aware of the negative effects high taxes and debt caused by war and military expenditures can have on a nation’s economy. Nitze and the other principle authors of NSC 68 made the program more palatable by writing

“the economic effects of the program might be to increase the gross national product by more than the amount being absorbed for additional military and foreign assistance purposes”.

During the run up to the Iraq War in 2002 and 2003, Paul Wolfowitz used this same flawed logic of Paul Nitze on skeptical congressional leaders, to implement his goal of using American military power in Iraq to achieve an economic benefit. Testifying before Congress on March 27, 2003 Wolfowitz told reluctant leaders of Congress that Iraqi oil production in the post years of the initial attack and occupation of Iraq, would off-set the costs of the planned attack and occupation of Iraq.

Instead of raising taxes as any country would have to do when starting a war, the Bush Administration and the followers of Paul Nitze, incorrectly believed that an attack and occupation of Iraq would pay for itself. This tenuous argument has been proved false by the hundreds of billions of dollars borrowed by the United States from other countries to pay for the attack and occupation of Iraq. The only people who have benefited from the flawed logic of the neoconservatives have been the shareholders and executives at Exxon Mobile,Haliburton, KBR, and Blackwater. Perhaps this was the intended group the followers that Paul Nitze and his heirs like Dick Cheney and Ann Coulter speak about when using American military power for economic gain.

The zealous heirs of Paul Nitze like Paul Wolfowitz and Dick Cheney, who still believe in the main ideas of NSC 68, have increased the national debt of the United States by over 3.2 trillion dollars between 2002 and 2006. Award winning economists like Joseph Stiglitz predict that the war in Iraq and Afghanistan will add another 2 trillion dollars to that already staggering figure. But unlike spending the money on rebuilding American infrastructure or providing health care for all Americans, the amount of blood and treasure wasted in Iraq will only benefit a relatively few people in America.

Following the decades long practice of exaggerating a threat to the United States for a domestic political gain, Dick Cheney and his subservient boss, should be held more accountable for the high crimes and misdemeanors they have committed against the American people.

The need for an alert and knowledgeable citizenry

The early beginnings of the national security state and the militarized mind set in US foreign policy can be traced back to the Cold War era and the President of the United States being influenced by non-elected members of an inner circle of advisors belonging to the National Security Council. The danger to the American people and the institution of democracy in America is that these men connected to the national security state apparatus often put their personal ambitions of political power before the interests of the United States. The decision by the Obama administration to deploy 30,000 American troops to Afghanistan after being encouraged by the Joints Chief of Staff, which is a part of the national security state apparatus, is an indication of this trend.

Starting with President Harry Truman, former Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal, and his heir Paul Nitze, exaggerated the strategic capability of the former Soviet Union in what became known as the bomber gap. Dick Cheney took a page from Forrestal’s demand for early action with his one percent doctrine. This doctrine believed that if there was a one percent chance of an enemy having a weapon of mass destruction, the United States was inviting apocalyptic defeat if it did not act in pre-emptive self-defense.

The manipulation of data and exaggerations of threats to the United States continued during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. Following the launch of the Soviet Sputnik I in October 1957, a committee known as the Gaither Report where Paul Nitze was a principal author, called on President Dwight D. Eisenhower to increase military spending and that the United States was falling far behind the Soviets in missile capabilities. Eisenhower, who had access to U-2 spy plane surveillance of the Soviet Union’s actual capabilities, was not impressed. Democrats, who controlled congress, instantly went on the attack, charging that Eisenhower was leaving the United States open to Soviet attack. By 1960, Democratic presidential candidate John F. Kennedy was still hammering away at the supposed "missile gap" between the United States and much stronger Soviet stockpiles.

Even with the demise of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, the United States was not allowed to reap a “Peace Benefit” due to commissions such as Donald Rumsfeld’s 1998 “Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States”, was commissioned by the U.S. Congress to identify and evaluate the ballistic missile threats posed to the United States. Like the Bomber and missile gap in the 1950s and then the latest ballistic missile gap in the 1990s, the members of these commissions manipulate the facts and magnify the danger.

While many historians view the National Security Council document known as NSC 68 as one of the main pillars in post World War II American foreign policy, viewing the document written in secret back in 1950 takes on a totally different perspective in the post cold war era. The highly classified document written for President Truman in 1950 declared that the United States although at the zenith of its power, was in the “deepest peril” of its existence. Paul Nitze and other members of the national security state apparatus exaggerated the threat from the Soviet Union and believed that the Soviet Union wanted to “impose its absolute authority over the rest of the world”.

The decades long practice of following the dogma in NSC 68 by the political leaders in America since the time of John F. Kennedy, has lead the American people to be indoctrinated to believe some of the propaganda in this document. One such example is how Nitze demonstrated how sowing panic as a means of driving the policy making process could be so effective for people who believed America should use force in its foreign policy, as opposed to diplomacy.

Prominent neoconservatives of the modern political era have become heirs of Paul Nitze and his doctrine of fear mongering tactics. Some of these neoconservatives include Frederick Kagan a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute who wrote a 1999 article in the SAIS Review entitled, “Back to the Future: NSC-68 and the Right Course for America Today”. It should be noted that the American Enterprise Institute in a conservative Washington D.C. think tank and was the location where Dick Cheney recently made a speech criticizing the Obama administration’s early days in power and its national security policy.

Other neoconservatives like Max Boot wrote similar articles encouraging the use of force, such as his 2003 article entitled, “What’s Next? The Foreign Policy Agenda Beyond Iraq”, and Thomas Donnelly’s publication, “The Underpinnings of the Bush Doctrine” also published by the American Enterprise Institute in 2003.

Countering this fear mongering and promoting the use of force, more American citizens should take the advice of former President Dwight D. Eisenhower when he emphasized the need for the American public to be “an alert and knowledgeable citizenry” to guard against the abuse of power by a “military industrial complex”.

Beware of the Chicken Hawk

During the recent Memorial Day weekend, the main steam media failed in its responsibility to identify the reckless treatment of American troops by former vice- President Dick Cheney and the chicken hawk support of the war by the conservative radio talk show host, Rush Limbaugh. Instead of reporting the story as a battle within the Republican Party, the press should have highlighted the fact that Dick Cheney and Rush Limbaugh never served in the military. The media in America also failed to report how the war in Iraq and Afghanistan that these chicken hawks eagerly wanted is now bankrupting America with the increase of the national debt which exploded by 3.015 trillion dollars under Dick Cheney between 2002 and 2006 while the Republican Party controlled the entire federal government.

While chicken hawks like Dick Cheney and Rush Limbaugh like to chant the Republican Party mantra of national security and the war on terrorism, it is interesting to note that neither of these men ever felt it important to put on a uniform and serve their country. When Dick Cheney was of military age and his country needed him, he accepted several student and family-related draft deferments. In addition to Dick Cheney getting several draft deferments, another pro-Iraq War chicken hawk and the former senior advisor to President Bush, Karl Rove, also received several draft deferments.

The mainstream media and the 24-hour cable news outlets should not be giving Dick Cheney the media exposure to protect his legacy and the failed policies of the Bush administration such as the War in Iraq, the leaking of an undercover CIA agent’s identity, the federal response to Hurricane Katrina, and the military detention facility of Guantanamo Bay. Instead of allowing Cheney to second-guess and protect his own personal legacy, the press in America should report on issues that are more important and leave the internal squabbling of the Republican Party inside Washington D.C.

It is disconcerting to read all the press coverage Cheney received at a conservative Washington D.C. think tank, while news stories like the one of KBR being awarded a bonus for the second-rate and borderline criminal negligent work it performed in Iraq that resulted in the deaths of American service members is under reported or not at all.

The betrayal of the sacred trust that America gives to military veterans

The recent adulation by President Obama in his Memorial Day speech honoring the military veterans was rather tenuous and transient. This statement is not a politically motivated tirade or a harangue against the Obama administration but rather an analysis based on my own personal experience with the Obama administration and the US government in general as a decorated military veteran.

If Mr. Obama and his administration were honest about their desire to treat veterans with admiration and respect, than a military veteran like myself, should have at the bare minimum received a reply from his administration from the application I completed to work for his new administration. In addition to my military experience, I have also demonstrated my interest in government and civil service when I worked as an election official in the 1998 and 2000 elections. Further elevating my eligibility to be considered for a government position are the two degrees I posses in political science and a certification in international law.

As Mr. Obama said himself: “We have a responsibility to serve all of them as well as they serve all of us,and yet, all too often in recent years and decades, we, as a nation, have failed to live up to that responsibility. We have failed to give them the support they need or pay them the respect they deserve. That is a betrayal of the sacred trust that America has with all who wear and all who have worn the proud uniform of our country.”

The change that Obama promised to bring to the White House and the way the US government is run does not seem to be materializing. The policy and practice of giving lucrative jobs and positions to politically connected people that the Bush administration did while veterans who served their country are left out in the cold, still seems to be the norm in Washington DC.

As a member of the military, I did my part when the United States government asked the US Navy to keep the vital shipping lanes of the Persian Gulf open and safe to international shipping. Working long hours under hazardous conditions and away from my family, I am proud of my military service and the work I did in support of US interests at that time.

The Veterans Employment Opportunities Act (VEOA) of 1998 gives veterans who qualify, a preference and eligibility to veterans with 3 or more years of continuous active service access to jobs that might otherwise be closed to them. In addition to military service, the VEOA Act of 1998 also allows veterans such as myself who also have earned a meritorious medal for combat service to be granted preference points for government positions.

The rhetoric of Mr. Obama’s recent speech is hollow when considering the fact that his administration fails to follow through on speeches like this. In addition to the Obama administration, the business as usual behavior of the House and Senate is evident when the phone calls I have made and emails I have written to my elected leaders asking for help remain unanswered.

As a decorated military veteran this Memorial Day, I have not been given the respect or the support that Mr. Obama says that all veterans should receive.

A protracted war of an indeterminate nature

Instead of Americans getting bombarded with statements from politicians like Obama and Cheney, more Americans should be listening to members of the academic community like Andrew Bacevich.

A retired Colonel who started his military career in Vietnam, Andrew Bacevich is now professor of International Relations and History at Boston University. He has become one of the most vocal critics of the "Long War," as Defense Secretary Robert Gates dubbed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Paraphrasing General Bruce Palmer's account of the Vietnam War, Bacevich said that our country is once again "mired in a protracted war of an indeterminate nature, with no foreseeable end to the US commitment."

The Long War, as Bacevich exclaimed, has become the second most expensive war in US history (second only to WWII). Now that we our facing trillions in debt, Bacevich urged Congress to question the reasons for escalation in Afghanistan. "We just urgently need to ask ourselves whether or not the purposes of the long war are achievable, necessary, and affordable.
Like Bacevich, I also served in the military and understand the problem facing America. I hope you take the time out of your busy lives to listen to the attached video.

The failure of the US press and a free pass for KBR- Part III

Larraine McGee with a photo of her son, Staff Sgt. Christopher Everett. He was electrocuted on a base in Iraq from work performed by KBR.

Since the beginning of February 2009, I have documented and shared the incredibly immoral behavior of the military contractor Kellogg Brown and Root (KBR), a subsidiary of Dick Cheney’s Halliburton corporation. This sad episode is a classic example of the dangers that never ending wars pose for a democracy, the deteriorating standard of living for average Americans, and quality of democracy in America.

As if the story of a military contractor performing shoddy electrical work that resulted in several American service members being electrocuted was not bad enough, the politically connected company later received another military contract for 35 million dollars to continue performing electrical work in Iraq. However, just when you think that this story could not get any worse, it was recently reported by the Associated Press that KBR recently received $83 million in bonuses for the electrical work it performed in Iraq.

As reported by the Associated Press, Jim Childs, an electrical inspector hired by the Army to help inspect U.S.-run facilities in Iraq testified that 90 percent of the wiring done by KBR in newly constructed buildings was done improperly. That figure translates into an estimated 70,000 buildings where troops live and work in Iraq where electrical safety is not up to code.

Jim Childs worked in Iraq for the military's Task Force SAFE, which was created last year to inspect and oversee repairs in about 90,000 U.S.-maintained facilities in Iraq. The Associated Press has reported previously that about a third of the inspections conducted have so far turned up major electrical problems.

Although the former defense industry lobbyist William Lynn, who is now the Deputy Secretary of Defense at the Pentagon said that the bonuses were not paid after Army began to investigate the work done by KBR, no one should believe the comments from someone with an obvious conflict of interest when it comes to military contractors.

Contributing to the problem of the abuse of military contractors like KBR is that most Americans do not know the scale of the military infrastructure in Iraq. Most Americans are also unaware that the military contracts given out to these politically connected corporations are profit plus. The tens of thousands of workers out of work in America should be marching upon Washington and demanding a stop to this kind of waste of taxpayer money. The 118 million dollars of taxpayer money given to this one military contractor is enough money to give 25,000 Americans a yearly income of 47,200. Put another way, if this money was spent in America and not in a country thousands of miles away, the standard of living for more Americans would be rising, as opposed to falling.

Most Americans think that because the election is over and Barack Obama is in the White House that they can go back to watching American Idol and Dancing with the Stars. Most people feel that they cannot do anything about the corruption and borderline criminal behavior of corporations like KBR and Halliburton. The politician in America relies on this kind of ephemeral engagement from the public and is one of the main reasons why over 93 percent of incumbents get re-elected.

Until more Americans begin to demand that their powerful central government start spending more money on domestic programs like mass transit and health care, and Americans become more involved in taking back their country from an elite political class, the continuing economic and political crisis in America will only get worse.

A de facto one-party state in American politics

When Americans view other countries with a one party system like Cuba and China, they understand the dangers a one party rule has on the freedom of its people. They understand that a governing class of elites will often get corrupted and become more interested in their own personal self-preservation in order to enjoy the benefits of being in power. While America has two major political parties, the surprising reality is that the United States has become a de facto one-party state. Andrew Bacevich articulates this in his latest book, Limits of Power- The End of American Exceptionalism when he refers to the legislative branch of the US government as being controlled by an Incumbents Party. When the US Congress is viewed in this context, is easier to understand why US forces are still occupying two foreign countries and why the change demanded by voters in the 2006 mid term elections and the recent 2008 elections is still not taking place.

The de facto one party state claim made by Bacevich is supported by examining the percentage of incumbent senators and representatives winning re-election. In 2006 for example, of the 391 incumbents in the House of Representatives who ran for re-election, 396 of the incumbents won re-election. In the Senate, 27 of the 33 incumbents running for re-election won. The numbers speak for themselves.

Divide total number of incumbent victories by the total amount of races an incumbent ran in, then multiplying the answer by 100, and you get a staggering 93 percent.

391-22= 369 (House of Representative races)
33-6=27 (Senate races)
369+27= 396 (Total number of incumbents winning re-election)

396/424 = 93%

Curious of the 2008 election trend in the “Historic Election” of Barack Obama that saw large increases in the rate of African American and other voters participating in the election, I conducted my own analysis of the percentage of incumbents winning re-election in 2008. Of the 406 total number of House of Representative incumbents who ran in 2008 election, only 24 were defeated. In the Senate 26 out of the 32 incumbents who ran for re-election were victorious.

406-24= 382. (House of Representative races)
32-6= 26(Senate races)
382 + 26 = 408 (Total number of incumbents winning re-election)

408/438 = 0.93 = 93 %

This data is astonishing and should be a clear example as to why American troops are still in Iraq even after the 2006 election that created a democratic majority in both houses of Congress. The status quo of the political class is demonstrated when the new speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi proclaimed that, “they (the American people) want a new direction in Iraq. ..tough accountability leading to the responsible redeployment of our troops”.

Unfortunately, for the American service members deployed in these far way countries and the American taxpayer, the redeployment Ms. Pelosi and the Incumbent Party was referring to in 2006 was a redeployment of US troops to Afghanistan.

The Inherent Defects of the National Security State

The French foreign commentator Alexis de Tocqueville in 1835, wrote in his famous book Democracy in America, “All those who seek to destroy the liberties of a democratic nation ought to know that war is the surest and shortest means to accomplish it”

The recent public confrontation between the Speaker of the House and the Central Intelligence Agency is clear evidence of the power of the national security state apparatus and the erosion of democracy in America. This erosion of democracy is directly related to the open-ended wars being waged by the American military in far away countries like Iraq and Afghanistan. The public distancing of the White House of Ms. Pelosi also demonstrates the power the national security apparatus, which provides the foundation of power for the executive branch and the president-emperor. Due to this political arrangement, Obama is the person least inclined to challenge or publicly acknowledge the defects inherent in the apparatus of the national security state.

If Ms. Pelosi wanted to get the get the upper hand in this Washington D.C. power struggle and actually exert the power given to her by the United States Constitution, the Speaker of the House should have began discussions to implement legislation in Congress, to create more public oversight into what the Central Intelligence Agency and other institutions within the national security state do. The lack of public oversight by elected members of congress over the national security state is due to the fact that most of the politicians in Washington are part of a political system where the national security state provides these same politicians with status, prestige and sources of tremendous wealth.

The linkage between the national security state, the military, and the political class in Washington D.C. is clear when a historical analysis of the deception by American officials with the CIA and other intelligence agencies is looked at more closely. One of the most notable examples is the CIA’s public disclosure on the status of the former Soviet Union during the Cold War. While any undergraduate political analyst knows the linkage between a country’s economic power and its military power, during the Cold War, the American public was deceived into thinking that the Soviet Union was much stronger than it actually was. During the cold war, CIA analysts and other government officials often referred to the Soviet Union as an “Upper Volta with missiles”. It was this deception by American officials that supported the ever-growing military defense budgets of the cold war era, and contributed to the national debt being increased under the Reagan administration with a compliant Congress. The rhetoric of Ronald Reagan and the conservative “hawks” in his administration, made the phrase “Evil Empire” to be associated with the Soviet Union and the justification of the massive peacetime military build up in the United States.

In addition to Alexis de Tocqueville, previous American statesman have tried to warn of the dangers that war causes on liberty and democracy. In a very powerful quote, James Madison, who said, “Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few…No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare”

The lack of initiative on the part of Ms. Pelosi to challenge the power of the National Security State should be alarming to more Americans. If Ms. Pelosi who is the leader of Congress and the third person in line to be President, is unwilling to represent the interests of the public, than the domination of the many by the elitist few is continuing in America.

The rhetoric of fascism in America and the realpolitik support of it by American leaders

With the Republican party out of power and desperate for a way to energize its base of supporters and sway more independent voters in America, some republican leaders and right wing political activists in America are beginning to try and label Obama as a fascist. This attempt to label Obama as a fascist is laughable and displays the level of ignorance some political activists and media personalities like Glenn Beck have on the subject of political movements and political philosophies. If any political party is more closely linked to fascism in American, than it is the conservative right wing republican party in America. The more important issue however is that both political parties in America will use this term for domestic political advantage while actually supporting fascist and authoritarian regimes around the world in conducting American foreign policy.

The partisan attack dogs like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Saul Anuzis are ignorant of the fact that the Italian government and country that is a NATO member, is made up of members of a fascist political party. The support of the fascist political movement in Italy has grown so strong in Italy in the last five years, that political posters are openly displaying the straight-arm salute that Mussolini and Hitler supporters would do in the past. In addition to the government coalition being composed of fascist supporters, the Minister of Defense in Italy and the leader of the House of Deputies in Italy are both members of the fascist party.



The hypocrisy that republican and democratic leaders pursue in supporting leaders like Silvio Berlusconi and Gianfranco Fini dishonors all the military service members who sacrificed their lives defeating fascism in Italy. Someone should tell these right wing zealots about the political composition of the government in Italy and how an ever-growing number of Italians are nostalgic for the era when Mussolini ruled Italy. As an American, it disgusts me that American leaders are directly supporting some of these fascist supporters by providing jobs for them in the dozens of military bases that occupy the Italian peninsula.

The ever-rising culture of militarism in America and the never-ending conflict of war in far away countries like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan and hundreds of military bases the military industrial complex needs to support these conflicts, will only further fuel America’s own fascism movement.

As the famous American novelist who was the first American to be awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature once said, "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross."

Pork sizzling on the asphalt in Riley County Kansas

It appears no staffer at the Obama administration change.gov website ever took the time to read my memo I sent them on how to rebuild the American economy, put more Americans back to work, and create a lasting infrastructure to make America more energy independent in the future. With almost every other major industrial country and all the other G8 countries are embarking on scores of high speed, light rail, and other mass transit systems, American leaders are demonstrating their continued ignorance to the benefits of mass rail and mass transit systems.

While I do agree that some of the major public works projects are needed in some parts of the country, the 18.9 billion dollars of public money however, should have been spent on developing mass transit systems. These mass transit systems would create millions of jobs in the future by having American workers building something that can passed on to future generations. The paving of roads and building of bridges is only a stopgap measure that will only benefit a few counties in the United States and is not connected to a larger strategic goal for the nation to embark on.

In an excellent example of why more people should stop watching cable news outlets, and get more of their information from the Internet, and print media, the Associated Press recently conducted an in-depth analysis of the transportation stimulus dollars that President Barack Obama promoted as a way to create jobs.

The AP analysis found that in the 5,500 planned transportation projects nationwide that states are planning to spend 50 percent more per person in areas with the lowest unemployment than in communities with the highest.

The analysis by the AP also highlights an excellent example of the power and influence of the military industrial complex in American politics and US government. The report by the AP highlights the fact that communities that do not need the money are given funds , as opposed to areas with higher unemployment and more Americans needing help are ignored. The AP analysis discovered that Elk County, Pa., is not receiving any road money despite its 13.8 percent unemployment rate. While the military and college community of Riley County, Kan., with 3.4 percent unemployment, will benefit from about $56 million to build a highway, improve an intersection and restore a historic farmhouse.

Home of Fort Riley and the US Army Big Red One Division, the amount of money being allocated to Riley County Kansas, which is also a military district, is no coincidence and is another example of the growing blight of militarism in the American Republic.

With all the misappropriated tax dollars going into Riley County, it would be fitting if that historic farmhouse gets restored as a pig farm, for all that pork the county is receiving.

What better opportunity to attach a video that talks about pork.

Death in Rome- The Case of Aldo Moro

The Internet is an amazing source of information and communication. As part of a follow up to a previous posting on the death of Aldo Moro, I hope you have the time to watch a documentary produced by Michel Noll regarding the 1978 kidnapping and assassination of Italian politician, and former Prime Minister Aldo Moro.

Death of a Democracy

31 years ago on May 9, 1978 the body of Aldo Moro, a prominent Italian leader of the Christian Democrat political party in Italy, was found in the back of a car parked in the center of Rome. He was killed after being held as a political prisoner for over 55 days by the militant left wing terrorist group the Red Brigades. Similar to the circumstances surrounding the assassination of President Kennedy, the political assassination of Aldo Moro is steeped in intrigue and conspiracy theories. Moreover, like the Kennedy assassination in America, the killing of Aldo Moro will be identified by future historians as the defining moment when democracy died in the Italian Republic.

As in most circumstances involving politics, the kidnapping and eventual killing of Aldo Moro is not as it appears. While the political leaders on both sides of the Atlantic want the public to believe the main narrative of how the militant wing of the Red Brigades kidnapped and eventual killed the former Prime Minister, when the facts are examined closer and in the perspective of Cold War, there are many reasons to question the facts given by Italian leaders.

Considering the well-known and dissolute activities of Giulio Andreotti who was the Prime Minister at the time of Aldo Moro’s kidnapping and eventual death, the existence of a secret Masonic lodge of over 1,600 members of the Italian state including heads of the secret services, mass media outlets, and members of Parliament, anyone can begin to question the story given by Italian leaders at the time. With each passing year, the true motives behind the kidnapping and killing of one of the Italy’s most courageous and honorable men becomes clearer.

During the 1970s and 1980s, members of the Italian state like the head of the secret services, Pietro Musumeci, were collaborating with members of the secret P2 Masonic Lodge, to conduct a Strategy of Tension in Italy. Due to the large popular support the P.C.I. had in Italy, members of the P2 Masonic lodge with support from the CIA, wanted to wage a propaganda war by staging violent acts and trying to blame the left for them.

In well-documented cases, far right groups were often helped by the members of the P2 Masonic Lodge like Pietro Musumeci, planted bombs, which killed over two hundred Italians. Some of the more brutal acts of terror the far right groups performed include the bombing of the Bologna train station waiting room where 85 people were killed and another incident in 1984 where a train was bombed killing 15 people and wounding more than a hundred.
Despite the Red Brigades being known as a terrorist group, the P2 Masonic Lodge killed more Italian citizens and conducted more acts of terrorism than the militant wing of the Red Brigades ever did. It should be noted that the then business man Silvio Berlusconi was a member of the P2 Masonic Lodge.

Contrasting the selfish motives Giulio Andreotti often pursued when he was in power, Aldo Moro was an honorable leader and was most likely killed because he tried to bring the communist party (P.C.I.) into government. Although the P.C.I. had 30 percent of the population voting for them in the 1960s and 1970s, the more conservative and Washington D.C. pawn Giulio Andreotti would always form a coalition government with the other political parties in Italy in order to exclude the communists from power.

Perhaps one of the most interesting clues to the real motive that led to Aldo Moro being killed was the warning he received from the Henry Kissinger in 1974 during a state visit to America when Aldo Moro was the Foreign Minister. When Moro told Kissinger his plans to bring the P.C.I. into government, Kissinger told Aldo Moro that this would viewed in the US as “profoundly dangerous and mistaken.” A later meeting with an unnamed intelligence official left Moro fearful for his life. The official told Moro he must abandon any idea to incorporate the communists “…or you will pay dearly for it.”

The Danger of Military-Keynesian in American Politics.

The recent report of 20,000 jobs being created at two Pentagon agencies to audit and manage military contracts is the latest example of the decades old practice of military-Keynesian in America. Instead of creating job growth and economic prosperity in America by investing and building light rail systems for all the major cities and towns in every state in America for example, the military industrial complex interests in Washington have been allowed to serve their own interests at the expense of the long-term interests of the American people. The announcement by the Obama selected and rubber stamped by Congress former defense industry lobbyist William Lynn, is concrete proof that Obama and his administration are not doing anything to change politics in Washington. Instead of creating a new bureaucracy that serves the military industrial complex interests with service industry jobs, the Obama administration should be re-investing into America infrastructure, while at the same time creating high paying white collar and blue collar jobs in manufacturing.

It is disappointing that the Obama administration inner circle of advisors are not willing to risk any political capital to challenge the vested interest of the military industrial complex in America and pursue a more populist agenda of high stable job growth. There is an incredible opportunity right now in American politics for the Obama administration to take advantage of the inner party struggle and disarray of the Republican Party that would weaken and ultimately destroy that political party. Countering the decades long social issue manipulation of American workers who have been deceived into supporting the Republican Party, the leaders of the Democratic Party should be looking to the American blue-collar worker as their sole priority.

The importance of an economy producing goods as opposed to services is evident when analyzing the downfall of all the previous world empires. While Americans may be enticed and fooled to believe that they are immune to such historical trends, many academic scholars in the field of political science have written numerous papers on the need for a country to produce manufactured goods. Quoting the offensive realist political scientist John Mearsheimer, “the rise and fall of great powers over the past two centuries has been due in good part to changes in the distribution of wealth among major actors in the international system”.

The linkage to the economic prosperity of a country and its military might is usually equivalent. What should be ringing alarm bells in every Americans sub conscious in the fact that while America has the largest military in the world and the highest defense spending, America’s share of the world’s GDP has fallen in the last decade. In addition to the decrease in the share of world GDP, America accounts for only thirty percent of the world’s GDP but accounts for nearly 40 percent of world defense spending.

With most of the military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan being financed by borrowing money and increasing both the federal budget deficit and national debt, the United States is spending too much on its military budget, which is not producing any productive goods and services for its citizens. The purchase of arms from politically connected corporations is a form of corporate welfare and leads to vested interests in the military industrial complex to exploit the fear and insecurity of Americans in the post September 11th context for “their own parochial gains”.

If Mr. Obama and his inner circle of advisors were true patriots, they would reverse this alarming trend and embark on a massive rebuilding of America. Starting the groundwork and support for mass rail systems in each major city would be an excellent goal for the administration by the end of the year.

My Combat Military Experience in the Persian Gulf on YouTube!

It is amazing all the things you can find on YouTube. While doing a bit of research into the status of the US Navy ship I served on during my time in the US Navy, I came across a video of a military operation I was involved in the Persian Gulf. This military operation is known as Operation Praying Mantis and is described as a naval battle between US and Iranian forces.

The military operation was a response by the United States after one of her frigates, the Samuel B. Roberts (FFG-58), struck a sea mine deployed by the Iranians with the intention to harass oil tankers in the Persian Gulf. At the time, Iran and Iraq were at war and the United States at the time was providing protection for Kuwaiti and most likely Iraqi flagged oil tankers. The United States even went as far as re-flagging all the Kuwaiti oil tankers with the American flag, so in any case that a Kuwaiti oil tanker hit a mine, it would be like an attack on the Unites States. This incident demonstrates the historical significance that US leaders placed on foreign oil and the need to secure it for the American economy.

During the military operation, my job was an airman on the flight deck of the U.S.S. Trenton (LPD- 14)where I was involved in launch and recovery operations of the rotary wing aircraft we had on our ship. The flight deck of the ship was reconfigured for the mission to the Persian Gulf to allow to support a Marine helicopter squadron with nine helicopters. Normally configured to handle only two helicopters at a time, the new flight deck alignment allowed four Cobra helicopters to operate at the same time which would later become standard flight deck configuration for all the amphibious transport ships in that class of ships.

While the three other ships in the task force were attacking some Iranian naval assets foolish enough to engage the Americans, Marines who were a part of our ships company had the mission to destroy an Iranian oil platform, which was being used by Iranian forces as a local base to launch attacks on international shipping.

With armed Cobra attack helicopters providing air support, a squad of marines landed on the platform and placed high explosives to render the platform useless for future use. During the air assault, I operated a 40mm grenade launcher along the flight deck in case it was needed to defend the ship. Below is a picture of some marines inspecting a ZU-23 23mm automatic anti-aircraft gun on the Iranian Sassan oil platform. This anti-aircraft was later brought back to my ship where we all took turns playing around on it.


The military operation earned me three military medals including Meritous Service, Armed Expeditionary and the Meritorious Unit Medal. More important this experience allowed me to serve my country and know first hand the hard work, sacrifice, and duty the men and women of today’s armed forces are doing. This military experience gives me more credibility when I discuss the military industrial complex and gives me a level of experience other political analysts do not posses.

A partially free Press equals a partially free Country

To help celebrate World Press Freedom Day on May 3, the independent nongovernmental organization, Freedom House released its annual assessment of press freedom in the world. Coming as no surprise, the independent organization classified Italy as the only partial free country in Western Europe. As my long time blog followers know, this is due to the media control of Silvio Berlusconi who is also the Prime Minister of the country. In a region of the world that has one of the highest rankings for press freedom, Italy is the only western European country to be classified as a country with a partial free press. This low ranking of press freedom in Italy is directly related to the lower level of democracy in the country as compared to other countries in the region and the world.

When you compare the international rankings of press freedom, levels of corruption in government, and the ranking of how democratic a country is, the lists are closely related. In all the surveys of the aforementioned categories, most of the northern Scandinavian countries like Sweden, Denmark, and Finland are all in the top five. While Italy is ranked as being the 43rd country in press freedom, 42nd for the least corrupt, and 34th and the only country in western Europe to be classified as a flawed democracy in the Economists 2007 Democracy Index. I am using the 2007 Economist Magazine ranking and not the 2008 ranking because I believe the 2008 ranking is not accurate.

Besides the fact that Silvio Berlusconi is once again Prime Minister, Italy, slipped back into the Partly Free category with free speech due to more laws passed by the political class here in Italy, which would make it easier to sue someone in court for libel. Like similar legislation passed by the Italian political class, these new libel laws were aimed at protecting their interests and the expense of democracy and more transparency in government. In addition to the new libel laws passed by the government, freedom of the press in Italy has suffered due to increased levels of intimidation of journalists by organized crime and far-right groups. One such example of this intimidation is the case of Roberto Saviano who wrote a detailed account of the Naples area mafia clan known as the Gomorrah.

The importance of a free and vibrant press is very important to a democracy. The authors of the United States Constitution recognized this importance and is one of the reasons why they included freedom of speech and the press into the first amendment of the Bill of Rights. While most Americans would question and not tolerate a politicians control of a mass media medium such as a newspaper or a cable news channel, most Italians do not feel there is a conflict of interest of Silvio Berlusconi owning media outlets and also being the Prime Minister.

Until the Italian political system is changed in Italy and conflict of interest legislation is passed by the government, the media power that Berlusconi yields in Italy will be passed onto to his appointed political heir. This will only further decrease the level of democracy in Italy and lead to a more authoritarian regime.

Europeans work to live while Americans live to work

I first heard the expression, “Americans live to work, while Europeans work to live”; from a French girl I met on a train in Switzerland. Bemused by the expression, as I began to think more about how American workers are treated, I began to see where this saying got its origins. Perhaps no better illustration of this expression is the fact that while the holiday has its origins in the American labor movement and is celebrated around the world as a day to commemorate the worker, in America the First of May is just another working day.

While most American and European citizens who hear that expression will think of the generous amount of vacation days given to European workers, the more important aspect of the difference between the American and European worker should be viewed from a social-political perspective. When viewed from this perspective, anyone can see how the American worker has been exploited by the two party political system in America and has no political representation in America. This was evident to me during the 2008 election when Barack Obama never mentioned a minimal vacation standard for all American workers, regardless of job income, education, or social status.

When America is viewed from an international perspective, the exploitation of working class Americans workers and the inequality of these workers compared to workers from less wealthy economies become clearer. This is ironic due to the fact that America is the richest economy in the world, but a majority of its citizens and its workers has a lower standard of living as opposed to people living in smaller less prosperous economies. As a social scientist I see no difference in the term all men are created equal, and all workers are created equal. Like the American political system where the elites interests are often protected at the expense of the majority of the population, the same can be said for working class people in America.

When I was in America growing up, I was indoctrinated to associate the International Workers' Day celebration on the First of May, with the Soviet Union’s parade of military weapons through Red Square. The elites in American society wanted to link the May Day celebration of workers right to Soviet Union communism and socialism. Perhaps one of the most ironic aspects of this portrayal is the fact that almost all the countries of NATO, who were aligned against the Soviet Union, were also celebrating International Workers Day with public events or time with their families. In Italy for example, May Day is known as Primp Maggio and a majority of Italians celebrate the day with family eating fava beans and pecorino cheese.

The longer I have lived in Social Europe and have compared my work experience in America with the Italian and European system, the more I have seen how this expression is true. A few concrete examples include the generous amount of national holidays in European countries along with a standard amount of vacation time for all employees regardless of social economic status. For example, in Europe, it is a law that each worker should have at least the same amount of vacation time. While the time may vary from country to country, here in Italy, the standard amount of vacation an employee is entitled to is three weeks.

Europeans who I talk to are often shocked to learn that some workers at large corporations in American like Wal-Mart and Home Depot have to work an entire year before they are entitled to five working days off. While some Americans may view this as a fact of the American system, when viewed from an international perspective, you begin to see how American workers have been exploited.