brian carroll on Sat, 20 May 2006 12:32:56 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> preface to Part 3 (on policy) |
[several world-scale changes since writing Part 2, thus necessary to further understand the situation before continuing. a post on logic will follow which will be to consider the present situation as existing in two different worldviews/paradigms/realities/etc...] --- to continue with strategic planning for .US BLACKFLAG OPERATIONS it is important to once again clarify its reason and purpose. in the present situation in which there is an endless 'War of Terror' which has become a business-model for certain interests whom happen to profit from such a mode of global warfaring, the problems being 'fought' are not even being addressed and instead are being exacerbated so as to continue with the extension of this warfaring. to resolve issues of the 'War of Terror' would require a fair and just resolution of the mideast conflict between Israel and Palestine, for instance, in addition to another approach to diplomacy. none of this has been possible within 'War of Terror' modeling, because it is biased for making war, and doing so in a biased way that looks at only one-side of the situation. this 'governance' is happening outside of the 'public' checks-and-balances of representative government in the .US and instead the decision-making guiding the collective state of some 300 million citizens is being led by special- interests, which if taking account of these actions make .US citizens * less safe * and promotes further TERRORISM against .US citizens and interests, because of such contrarian policy. what has occurred, instead, is that through INSURRECTIONISTS both internal and external to the .US government, the policy of an ally has been out outsourced to the .US and subsidized by .US taxpayers which does not benefit .US citizens or the .US state, and has killed tens of thousands of innocent citizens in its pursuit, and some 2,600 .US soldiers fighting for a cause that exists outside of the domain of the .US constitution yet this INSURRECTIONIST POLICY is equated as being a natural extension of the constitution: that is, to put the .US government and .US voluntary military in service to another country to pursue its foreign policy objectives via fighting and dying on its behalf and for its strategic interests. any .US leader who advocates such strategic actions is doing so against the very interests of the state and its peoples and is incompetent in protecting and defending its public interests in a hostile and chaotic world. there is no law which can justify treason as patriotism. and yet, given a complex world, it may be possible that whatever the .US interests are in such a foolish policy as it was undertaken, that the good can still be salvaged from this misguided affair of state, if there is a wholesale change in leadership and direction from this point onward. that is, to rebuild what has been lost, and to take command and control of this situation so as to turn it around and secure the situation, begin .US troop withdrawals, while also engaging and addressing issues of nuclear peace, mideast peace, and a 2-state solution between .PS and .IL by which to resolve the 'War of Terror' and start the new millennium by building, not destroying it. in other words: what will be worth all the bloodshed and treasure? securing mideast peace. it will save the mission and put the sacrifices in the proper context in which they belong-- the ultimate goal is to secure a world at peace and allow it to work together for mutual goals and shared prosperity- this is what is required to begin on that path, which will both differentiate the 21st century from all preceding centuries while connecting it with the greatest events of the past, and define world civilization anew, at world-scale, and to govern in this realm. it is in this way that even though .US policy may have been wrong, that given the way things work with machineries of state, it may also have been 'necessary' in terms of how state automatically function in pursuit of their goals, as behavioral mechanisms, and in this paradox that there may still exist a human dimension whereby - it is true and believed - that there is some saving grace from all of this, and that should this current situation be turned around, that in the end, some centuries later, it may have allowed changes to occur that otherwise possibly would not have been able to, even if wrong and immoral. this is to say that, given the givens, and how politics work, that President Bush banked his presidency on this decision, as being the right one, for its transcendent aspects of being able to resolve the problems of mideast peace. at this point the only way that is going to happen is by taking another strategy which actually can and does resolve the ongoing and new problems, yet this requires the wholesale jettisoning of Neoconservative and status-quo policies in the mideast so as to secure a region-wide and worldwide resolution of these issues-- thus to save this situation and to enable resolution of the dimensions it has opened up, requires a total transformation of approach which can and will secure a mideast peace and vindicate the human dimension - of greater freedom, representation, respect, and cultural development - in the mideast, yet in a way other than planned by INSURRECTIONISTS who have become the biggest problem in the existing scenario. therefore, the sooner they stand down, the sooner the proper approach to moving forward with this situation will be able to occur, and if they truly want to live to see their ultimate goals accomplished, of mideast peace, they should support those willing to work in the middle and the gray-areas who can see this through to the next stage, and work together with others * on the same-side *, the human side of this world coin, instead of pursuing machined solutions that only dehumanize and work against peaceful and just resolutions. this is not about politics - this is about governance. local, national, and world governance and in whose name and interest it is pursued. if it is pursued in the shared 'human' interest, if it is in .IQ or between .PS and .IL, it is different than if it is pursued in the name of religion or nationalism or ideology or culture. as humans everyone has a stake in seeing humanity triumph over the out- of-control machineries of state which can automatically launch nuclear weapons strikes or counterattacks by default of programming in intensities as they exist today. thus, there is a moral obligation to not forget the humanity involved, in stoking nuclear rhetoric, as this situation can become dangerous to the point where it is a competition only between machines. which is the entire problem with the 'War of Terror' rhetoric: the dehumanization of the enemy as 'terrorists' has turned people, humans who are defending their homes and their children and families in Iraq, into 'terrorists' -- which is disingenuous and even strategically blasphemous as to accurately depicting the situation as it exists, and not as it is ideologically believed to be in a distorted model of reality as it is wished to be, so as to justify the current approach which is unjust and immoral, because it is based on lies, deceits, and deception in pursuit of goals which are contrary to the ideas (.US Constitution) which are placed in their service, to pursue, as if it is all based on divine action. that is, torture, collective punishment, arbitrary destruction, -- based on a stategy and ideas not only incoherent, they are without truth. the .US military needs to stop its pursuit of machine-based decision- making whose programming has been hacked by the NEOCONS and start to serve the human cause in its policies. this is the _only way to turn this situation around: to realign with the fundamental and original principles of the .US constitution, to uphold these principles, as they will protect the .US military and its citizens and will allow the horrendous relationships that now exist to be re-established once changes take place with .US BLACKFLAG OPERATIONS. that is, the .US military needs to regain respect and honor that has been lost to the lies and abuses of being misled on this misguided and illegal international action, and doing so will secure their return and also place them in service to the overriding goals of the .US state which is the human cause, which can be found in all situations now underway, and whose basis for strategy will help secure the end of this 'War of Terror' by resolving the core issues which underly all of these ongoing conflicts-- thus, there is not only hope and reason to believe this can be turned around-- there is the opportunity to take where things exist today, with the .US military where it now exists, and to strategically transform this situation through their actions in largely non-combat policy missions, GOODWILL missions, which will achieve the ultimate goals by which these actions were undertaken: only a route different than the NEOCONS intended. and by pursuing such a course, in cooperation and along with the help from others both regionally and at world-scale, will be able to transform and rebalance the basic geostrategic relationship from a world at war to one that established a world at peace. this is not an overstatement if considering the existing context is of endless war, generated by the mideast conflict at world-scale, while to resolve this in a mideast peace settlement with regional development via infrastructural projects would be to transform the existing destruction into one of peaceful building, which nullifies the need for an endless 'War of Terror' through its achievements. needless to say, everyone can find a place in working toward this shared goal, no matter where on the spectrum they may exist, if warriors or neoconservatives even. that is, to refrain from working against such a peaceful and innovative resolution of the existing situation, to give it a chance to succeed, and allow those willing to take the necessary risks to take them, and to support them in the ways possible, so as to improve the odds that doing the impossible may not only be necessary, it becomes the only way through this. and there will be war and death and terror until this basic fact is realized, that only human beings can resolve this situation in a way that works for everyone, where all gain 2/3rds of what they need, while not getting everything (3/3) - this requires compromising or letting go of 1/3rd of ideological views where one gets all they can demand, which allows a grey-area to exist, to enable coexistence. this is to say, 'work with us' as human beings, else in working against humanity one is to place themselves in league with machines and their automated and dehumanized development which is, it has been proposed, the underlying reason for these conflicts, and which can and will be addressed in terms of modes of governance, by reconfiguring these (constitutional) relationships between citizens and their states, and issues of constitutional representation (human citizens/corporate machines) as soon as this situation can be brought under the command and control of .US BLACKFLAG OPERATIONS and navigated in such a way as to serve the .US populace and its human interests, and contribute to resolving world conflicts as a human state in relation to other human states, and not as it now exists, as dehumanized corporate machines seeking to dominate the planet via out- of-control hegemonic policies. this is the choice, both internally and externally, as to questions of present development (via machines which govern humanity versus humans which govern machinery) and the reconfiguring of world order in these terms will help bring about transformation at world-scale which ultimately will enable the (new) reality at this scale to be accurately modeled and accounted for in decision-making which enables engaging the problems we share as humans living on the planet (poverty, climate change, illiteracy, disease, etc). this world ecosystem and the organic development of its circuitry, in defense of our shared human interests, gives reason to hope versus only despair the terms by which are present is now being mediated, in 20th century ideologies that are limited by the 20th c. ideologues who can only serve this binary worldview and its limited and distorted and 'backward' modeling of things: which is unreality itself. thus, to continue with .US BLACKFLAG OPERATIONS [outside.US] is necessary to secure this new option in a sea of despair and to use the shared vision and constellation of ideas by which to navigate together towards these new shores on the horizon. to keep in mind the purpose of government, to steer in the best direction, whether it is for individuals or larger collective states, and to make a choice as to whether this guide will be sentient, feeling, loving human beings who strive for greater good, or the inhumanity of our machinery, which has become like a beast, enslaving us as it grows into a monster which seeks to destroy our very own existence. to those in the daydream utopia of the .US, this may only seem like fiction, yet to those who suffer the consequences of decision-making which has no actual human interest in its core operations, it should be rather clear when human morality has given way to machines, and their immorality, which becomes fascism -- and those who support it are in no uncertain terms themselves also FASCISTS. and, if the existing situation is such that the STATUS-QUO in its day-to-day existence, actually _breeds FASCISM -- then there is also a culpability of the average citizen, who is enslaved to such a state of affairs that oppresses humanity itself-- that the little decisions to go along with things as they are has a terrible and exacting price: humans are being killed to grow this machine, and sooner or later you will be next. until things are changed, transformed, this malfunctioning mechanism itself abolished and then reconstituted within a different arrangement that balances the human and machine interests, and governs according to higher ideals, not base materialism where humans are equated with machines, and policies pursued in the name of religion by politicians actually serve an evil agenda. with this in mind, the following seeks to outline further steps to take to secure this new arrangement. none of which is arbitrary in its pursuit as to the goals described, all of which becomes necessary and a first step towards taking back our destiny from machines... --- the situation that exists both inside and outside the .US with regard to the pursuit of "War of Terror" policies are based on a BIASED decision-making process which exists outside of public checks and balances -- and go's about declaring people 'TERRORISTS' in a way that places any such actions in a context of illegality and immorality, and worthy of lethal engagement by .US military force, as if this warmaking is necessary to the collective defense and protection of the .US constitution and democratic governance, no less. every thesis needs to be able to be disproved, else it exists beyond the realm of shared reasoning and exists only in terms of faith or belief in ideas which may themselves run counter to reality. as such, the 'War of Terror' stands in disregard of uncomfortable *facts* which disprove its assertions about the nature of reality and the ineffectiveness of its own modeling to engage issues it is espoused to be doing. instead, this "War of Terror" instead exists in the realm of THEORY, and not scientific theory in which peer review places the ideas in some context of checks and balances, and experiments are needed to justify the theory, and instead in the theorization of language games in which one can declare a model of reality to be the truth, as one sees it, and can meander along such a path, reliant only upon their power to dictate such a path, no matter if the half-life of its relation to facts outside itself and its own hall of mirrors become an infinitely small slice of relativistic thinking and perception which is equated with a universal vantage point. and no matter what anyone says or does, this 'personal subjective truth', contingent upon only those things as seen from a given perspective, is somehow equated with representing an accurate and balanced view of the infinitely more complex situation which is based on collective reasoning, not privatized reasoning which becomes a fixed-marketplace of ideas in which to exchange views which are self-similar, in an empire of ideas, a private empiricism, said and believed to represent the state of affairs as they exist, as these are their representations, within such a methodology which is detached from the basic requirements for public considerations. in other words, this is to say the 'War of Terror' is all very postmodern, in the sense of critically failure of ideological proportions, which exists in terms of loopholes of big ideas, and then taking any given particular exploit and suddenly calling it all that exists, and the new standard by which things should be weighted, judged, explained, etc. all the while, exempt from peer-review because of the babbling din of 'intellectual' discourse has everyone speaking without saying anything of substance with regard to the actual underlying issues. it is the triumph of relativism and amoral if not immoralism, to weigh and juggle options and decision-making as if its exists on these very terms- and not something fundamentally else, other, underneath which is much more sinister, known, and undermined by the acceptance of this as the status quo approach to issues of war or peace. academism has been militarized in that, by appropriating its own hypocritical bureaucracy which accepts this industrial ideologism -- it justifies policies which utilizes language games which are ultimately 'head games' in pursuit of policies, a complex camouflage by which to enact a FASCIST agenda via this very status quo. with regard to this issue of 'theory-based' warfare, devoid of reliance on facts or evidence or even truth itself, and the policies which autogenerate it, as if a set of programmers were set about to making such a task for the machinery of state, by which to function... it is this same dynamic which is seen in the .US GOVERNMENT in which this very same aspect of communication via DISCOURSE has become an issue and seemingly only an issue of language games, by which to mediate and influence events, as they are designed... this is to say that the .US Congress, those in the House and Senate who 'legislate' ideas (making laws) are held in a unique position with regard to this aspect of THEORY: because if it exists in the realm of the sciences, this theorization would mean one thing while if it exists in the realm of the humanities, it would mean something else entirely. that is, it may be that a LAW could be the outcome of a theory which has proven itself to accurately model the nature of reality as it exists, via peer review and observation and experiments, and through its accurate representation of a situation, and its not being 'disproven' in its own claims, may be considered in some way to exist as a known standard of how things operate and exist. and thus can be incorporated in the basic modeling of events and their dynamics, functioning, etc. this usually being based on mathematical modeling and physical experiments which place the reality of the ideas in relation to the material realm, in which the validity and veracity of ideas is brought under intense and complete scrutiny to achieve a high-quality and refined knowledge of what is claimed to be true versus what actually exists, as truth, of what is observed. on the other side of this culture (ref. CP SNOW) there is the use of 'THEORY' that equates with non-mathematical approach to ideas which enable that which can exist _in language_ to become its own type of system of representation of the nature of things, ideas, in which this process of peer review and verification happens within language itself, as its own system of peer review -- which is detached from material or physical nature in the sense that experiments are self- contained within language itself, within ideas, and are not necessary to map into the empirical realm by which others can validate or disprove any assertions being made, for their claims of universality of representing a situation as it is perceived to exist. what instead may *only* function as HYPOTHESES in language, unproven speculations, can take on the mantel of existing as if defining a universe of THEORETICAL LAW - merely by thinking something is true, which thus allows it to exist as truth, in one's own subjective relativist point of view of any given events, which, if embedded in a hierarchy of power or consensus-based marketplaces of ideas, can automatically validate the worth or value of such information as if it has more universal value, theoretically, than it may actually have, with regard to modeling a given reality. in other words, THEORY in this sense is detached from a modeling of reality which is based on checks- and-balances of outsiders who may disprove the ideas or claims being made, in terms of their universality, and this has become the status quo in academics today. that is, if you say it is true, it is, if you believe it and just keep writing. when things get trapped in 'discourse' this does not invalidate the point of view, this validates it by extending it as a viewpoint which can sustain existence through reasoning that is equally or relativistically as valid as any other viewpoint, yet moreso if it is taken on as the overriding point of view by which things are reasoned. in this way, what is STATUS QUO may in itself validate the championing of a given chosen relativism for a greater universality around which ideas are supposed to gravitate, by mere consensus that cannot be disproven by facts -- because it is assumed to carry some quality of legislating a given reality, by declaring its perspective as paramount, by which to empirically order and relate to events. in this sense it may be more fictional than anything else, reliant upon a given context or particular set of facts by which to perceive an issue or idea, yet able to edit out anything that may seek to challenge this view, for the priority of having such a point of view based on individualist and demographic legitimacy. that is, some right to represent a point of view, however it may be conceived to exist, by a given subject, on any other given subject, as one sees fit. the situation in day-to-day affairs may exist in-between these views, where this personal subjectivism and impersonal objectivism are found to overlap between the realms of mathematics and language, in that the reality exists in a muddled middle ground in which logic and psychological identity of the observer navigates this realm and how ideas and observations and observers exist within it. and in this way, the ideas of THEORY overlap between one view which is based in physical law of sciences and another view which is based on mental law of language and communication and representation. it is in such a way that when the .US Congress or .US Mass Media mediates ideas, it is to happen in such a complex realm where 'truth' exists in a spectrum of interpretations which range from 'what can be thought' to 'what can be proven'. and that the modeling of events, based on the accurate representations of reality, as it exists and not merely as it is believed or hoped to exist, relies upon the integrity of the thinking and those doing this thinking... for, if thinking is ultimately a game, by which one can compete over which version of the truth 'wins' - regardless of the actual truth of the nature of reality, and instead of a truth which exists simply because it is the consensus -- it is 'created' or legislated to exist, far beyond the realm of facts on the ground, where this truth becomes law, because it is willed as such, -- that this relativist's reality can thus claim a universal perspective by which to mediate and empiricize (as Empire, if you will) events, by declarations of truth as one see's it, and which is verified and built and strengthened by all others who can, likewise, see it the same way, -- that in 'mass' media and a mass culture that at this SCALE of ideas, that a view or representation of events which finds its justification by a status quo approval of its modeling as if an accurate or best representation of the reality, regardless of the actual facts and instead, as a given option or choice by which to choose between views-- that the choice of *these given facts* over another set of relativistic facts can enable an arbitrary and ungrounded reality to be represented and pursued, as if defining a collective situation that exists only in fantasy and is largely based on fictitious accounting that is never squared with outside viewpoints and can be progressed until the very threshold where the unreality of this modeling is faced by its antithesis, in reality. in other words: the fiction that is the War of Terror finds its antithesis in events which contradict its version of events, and invert what is being claimed as being unreality itself. (9/11 and Iraq, or .PS democracy as terrorism, torture as democracy, etc.). the purpose for delving into this is because .US policy and .US decision-making is based upon such a scenario by which, thinking people pursue ideas in ways that can be totally detached from reality itself, and beyond any checks and balances, in terms of the basic philosophy of ideas and their interaction-- by the biases inherent in the nature of thinking today, language, communication, etc. and, thus, whether a citizen or a representative in government or the leadership of the collective state itself, all exist within this given context in which ideas are mediated, 'resolved' through some decision-making in governance, by which to take actions on behalf of the many interests, somehow charting a course that is supposed to get from A -> B, in a way that accurately models events so as to actually go from point A -> B and not from point A -> Z, where things exist today. for instance, pursuit of the 'War of Terror' was supposed to secure certain objectives and a worldview which verifies its approach as effective in representing what is going on, and in securing this reality via a mode of interaction which has proven itself disastrous. such NEOCONSERVATIVE policy could only be further pursued, regardless of facts, truth, or reality, if it were happening beyond any of these, in the realm of postmodern THEORY in which physical and material facts do not matter as to the hypothesis, as it has become pure IDEOLOGY, and cannot be disproven to the true believers, who have faith in their own constructions no matter evidence to the contrary. thus, while WAR may be the most material of events, what drives this warmaking may itself be detached from material checks-and- balances altogether, in that material truth is unnecessary in holding accountable the ideas in which tens of thousands have died on behalf of bad, if not unfit ideas, not to speak of evil agendas, etc. this is to say that the 'truth' of a given perspective such as the 'War of Terror' can become separated out from the 'reality' of this very same 'War of Terror' -- and the two can proceed apace to such a degree that the 'thesis' of the idea is ultimately only able to be disproven by the reality of these ideas as they exist opposed to a given modeling of events, -- this is to say that the 'reality' ultimately becomes the antithesis to the THEORY, which is not based on facts or truth or representing reality itself, and as such the THESIS ('War of Terror') finds its antithesis in reality outside of its controlled interpretation and private modeling of events, and it is at this point that its hollowness and vacancy of truthfulness is seen for what it is, by outside observations that readily prove it is not capable of accurately modeling what it claims to model, and instead may be an absolute failure as an idea, to model what it claims to, in terms of ideas, in that it is based on subjective and relativistic and even falsity and lies which distort the true situation as it exists, in the experimental evidence -- and that to somehow be obliged to the further pursuit of this set of ideas would be to pursue them based on 'faith' and 'hope' and 'belief' in ideas proven to be wrong, inaccurate, and unfit for representing the situation, and to continue on such a path, _as ideas- in terms of truth, thinking, reasoning-- which is not based on any of these. in this way it could be said that this 'War of Terror' is an ideology that is based on a HYPOTHESIS which does not model the actual situation being encountered, yet it is pursued as if it is a THEORY of what exists, yet not in terms of physical sciences and what this entails and instead of in terms of the use of language and communication by which to secure a view in a hierarchical system by which to exploit this private subjective relativistic viewpoint into a mass mediated environment that is supposed to represent world reality of all citizens in a fight of good against evil, as if it is actually in the best interests of the human public, existing in objective terms, and somehow definitive of a universal battle by which all souls will be weighed at the end of this long and extenuating armageddon... instead of engaging this situation as it exists, it is this very BABBLE that has become the generator of the policies which themselves are TERRORIZING human citizens worldwide in the name of the automated and inhuman development of machineries of state, as they are scaled from automaton individuals by the millions, who accept this as a model of engagement, as it is the status quo and the default in the mediating of events, via philosophy-- and therefore, at the level of ideas and their role in this programming of TERROR, and the need for the state of machinery whether individual or national or global to exist in this paradigm of the 'War of Terror', it is up to this thinking to also be conquered and transformed -- so as to align itself with the option of Mideast Peace by which to provide the legislators of ideas, ourselves and our own governance and self- representations which scale up to the world of affairs as they exist, to most accurately model and represent what is known to be true, by way of reasoning and debate, with public checks and balances, by which to navigate in such realms -- when instead today no one can share common communication based on shared facts because the basic philosophy of relativist ideologies of the 20th century holds onto human minds, privatizing them and obliterating the shared intelligence that could exist, for a lesser reality of what can be accomplished by holding onto the formatted egos of institutions (i.e. machines) which seek to represent the nature of reality as if it were simply a matter of manufacturing what one believes to be true. ultimately it is a question of the theology if not theocracy of ideas, in a democratic, versus their secular philosophical appraisal by which to accurately represent what exists as it exists, without the supernatural agendas one may claim their ideas entail, yet which exists beyond peer review or critique or even the ability to disprove a THESIS, which itself exists to be disproven so as to evolve and adapt and refine itself: and instead policies and people and ideas exist in this muddled realm of non-scientific THEORY, which is only HYPOTHESIS and not self-declaring law-making of the mind, which is ignorant to the degree one believes themselves omnipotent to another perspective of events, and winds down their own internal clock of integrity until the total hypocrisy is laid bare for all to see... say, like the 'War of Terror' having almost no merit whatsoever in the ideas it espouses to expertly pursue as geostrategic policy, having been a total failure which has sunk the .US state yet which still seeks to govern regardless of any facts standing in the way. to say that the current leadership in the .US is unfit to govern is the understatement of the past few millennia, to say that furthering of any decision-making by these 'representatives' be allowed to continue, as if it is to uphold any reasonable oath of office, is beyond reason, and too kind for what has occurred under their direction. this is sheer incompetence and disregard for truth and reality and people are dying every hour due to these decisions which cannot and will not be transformed by those who created this situation to begin with. they have zero legitimacy in terms of ideas, and are incapable of continuing on in their positions of leadership as this is to serve them, at their limits, while the state suffers under their guidance. the current administration should not be supported any further in policies and they should immediately step down and resign their positions of leadership and allow a new government to be formed, via constitutional convention as previously stated. so too, legislators who are in the .US Congress who support ideas and create policies in this realm are likewise totally incompetent to pursue the interests of public .US citizens, as human beings, in the existing mechanism and should themselves disavow themselves of continuing on in this charade of democratic governance-- by publicly recognizing this .US system of governance is totally broken and that a constitutional convention should be called, and the elections of 2006 postponed by each party in search of fixing what is now unable to work until it is abolished and reconstituted under new rules of engagement. someone has to speak reality to the existing misrepresented truth, that the the nature of governance today is incapable of effectively sustaining its own core functioning, in terms of constitutional democracy and not in terms of a corporate dictatorship that now exists, indefinitely, and will be extended by whatever next politician steps in to take over representing this state of perpetual TERROR. (1) this is not good enough, and this is surely not democracy as it is based on the .US constitution, and the rule of law and not the arbitrary interpretations of private men. as said, this can thesis can be proven, and the existing modeling disproven, in public debate, via reasoning which can be checked and balanced by other views, and in such a democratic forum it would be arguable as to what the actual legal constitutional actions would be necessary to resolve this situation, if it is accurately representing the situation as it exists. this has been argued to be that the .US military takes COMMAND and CONTROL over the .US Government so as to stop this wrong-headed and wrong-minded pursuit of policy which is actually MADNESS which automatically is developing the TERRORISM that it seeks to destroy, which is the business model of INSURRECTIONISTS who are in the process of destroying the democratic state as it was once constituted. and as such, this is a state of emergency which until it engaged, threatens every citizen and the world itself, with hidden consequences of waiting indefinitely to change the course of events as they are unfolding, so as to pursue another and better course for humanity. versus the private dictates and aberrations and beliefs of a given man and his kind and his self-interests and business objectives. in such a way it is in this realm of ideas, which is based in a context of 20th century philosophy and thinking, that those who are doing the thinking and representing and decision-making are themselves components which are creating (necessitating) this 'War of Terror' by default of the status-quo functioning of the state, as it works against the spirit of its original constitution and human constituency. this is not debatable if in the realm of facts, yet can be avoided by language games and the one-way short-circuiting of mass media. as such this is to take a stand against the illusion of continuing along this charted course, as if it is going to end up any other place than where it has been going for 5+ years, and into the future with each new ideological component added to its inner workings. it must be stopped, annihilated in terms of its automated functioning, and this situation brought under human command and control, by which to rebalance what is not working and what is working against human interests, so as to bring an end to this ongoing madness. including the generation and pursuit of bad ideas in the form of policies and law-making that run counter to reality, as it exists, and instead is a realm of fantastic fiction in which what is claimed to be dealt with through expertise of representatives, is instead only a charade and a caricature which serves no one except the automated machinery of inhuman development and those who serve and represent it, as part of this cybernetic organism, choosing to represent the interests of this machinery over those of human citizens. if domestically or in foreign policy. in this way, the continuation of BLACKFLAG OPERATIONS must take into account this inner working of .US policy making as being critical to the failures now underway, in that it automatically creates more problems than it is solving and must be brought under .US COMMAND and CONTROL so as to have a chance at establishing MIDEAST PEACE via .US policy. it is not possible given the existing configuration because the legislatures exist outside of constitutional law in their own functioning, and are beyond public checks and balances as they represent special interests, in particular those of the Neoconservative machine. therefore, .US BLACKFLAG OPERATIONS would short-circuit this and place .US policy in the hands of public citizens once again, so as to secure the policy maneuvers and public agenda necessary to transform this endless global war into a sharing of global peace. [cont. Part 3] --- urls --- // if not a dictatorship of corporate democracy now, when? [1] Bush challenges hundreds of laws: President cites powers of his office By Charlie Savage, Globe Staff | April 30, 2006 http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/04/30/ bush_challenges_hundreds_of_laws/ "'President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution.' ... "Bruce Fein, a deputy attorney general in the Reagan administration, said the American system of government relies upon the leaders of each branch ''to exercise some self-restraint." But Bush has declared himself the sole judge of his own powers, he said, and then ruled for himself every time" [2] Rice, Rumsfeld block access to secret detainees: ICRC http://go.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml? type=topNews&storyID=12184135&src=rss/topNews 'Kellenberger said: "No matter how legitimate the grounds for detention, there exists no right to conceal a person's whereabouts or to deny that he or she is being detained."' .. 'The former senior Swiss diplomat said that the ICRC (International Committee of the Red Cross) would continue to seek access to such people as a matter of priority.' .. 'The main objective of his annual visit this week was for the ICRC to be granted access to "all persons held by the U.S. in the context of the fight against terrorism, an issue he first raised with the U.S. government over two years ago," the agency said.' GUANTANAMO BAY PRISON // public service announcement OPEN for international human rights & Red Cross inspections CLOSE for violating human rights in the name of democracy # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net