Flying the False Flag - The Intricate Denial of American Imperialism

Since our nation's founding, our government has used false flag missions to sink our own ships or deliberately provoked other nations to attack us in order to justify acts of war and conquest with strong public support. But around the 1960's, the military-industrial complex really grew a brain and instead of targeting specific nations or peoples, they decided to start targeting ideologies. Why? Because this allows a nation to invade any country they want that support such ideologies, and they can do it without public support or government checks and balances. These wars on ideologies also allow the government to put enough fear into the public convincing them to give up their rights in the name of security, and giving lots of power to covert agencies like the CIA to perform top secret missions unknown to the public. First it was Communism (Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Cold War), then the war on drugs (Panama, Colombia, South America), now a war against dictatorships and terrorism (Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, North Africa).
It is obvious that America, like all great empires before it, has always been on the offensive in regards to securing subordinate nations, conquering and acquiring territory and resources, and taking more power from the people and putting it into the hands of the few through utilization of fear and uniting citizens against a common, yet non-specific, enemy. This has made manipulating the public and stripping them of their rights much easier for those in power because without a specific enemy, they can point the finger at anyone or anything and justify an offensive, and often violent, attack on any sovereign nation that can be linked to targeted ideology.
The invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, two of the longest wars in our nation’s history, were brought forward by the false-flag operations on 9/11 that unfolded with precision in front of our eyes as the idiot box filled our heads with the horrific and traumatizing drama that unfolded that day. Under such stress, duress, anger, and fear, the American people weren’t thinking about their rights being stripped away from them or the Bush administration using the events of 9/11 to fuel enough public support to justify invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. The “War on Terror” followed giving Bush and the Feds the rights to invade our privacy, investigate us with no probable cause, and gave the Bush Administration the ability to invade not one, but two, sovereign nations. Nations that we used to supply intelligence, weapons and training to in order to fight the Soviets, or even each other in the case of Iran and Iraq.
I have been called a nut job, a conspiracy nut, crazy, idiotic, ridiculous, Mel Gibson, etc, etc, etc. But I stand to this day, with conviction, that the events of 9/11 and the events that followed, such as Bush blaming Bin Laden to invade Afghanistan and accusing Hussein of possessing weapons of mass destruction to invade Iraq, were part of a planned and executed false-flag mission. Like all military false-flag missions before it, both implemented and not implemented (sinking of the USS Maine, sinking of the Lusitania, sinking of the Athenia, FDR’s “8 Insults to Japan”, the “surprise” attack at Pearl Harbor, espionage and covert ops in Korea and Vietnam, the Gulf of Tonkin incident, Operation Northwoods, supporting both sides of a war between Iran and Iraq, the invasion of Kuwait), the events on September 11th were either directly executed or blatantly allowed by the military-industrial complex in order to provoke the American public into supporting a war. In the case of 9/11, the war would rage against global terrorism and Islamic radicals.
Such support would allow the US to invade sovereign nations in the Middle East in search of “terrorist regimes”, securing those nations by placing our troops on their soil, and propping up puppet regimes that enjoy protection and power in exchange for American access to resources. And since, theoretically, terrorism can exist anywhere, the US is now justified in their invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, and possibly future conflicts with Syria and Iran. These areas are rich in oil and other natural resources, vital to the opium trade, and are strategically located to the west of one of our nation’s largest global threats, China, and to the north is our nation’s other long-time enemy, the Russians. Any way you cut it, Americans are just expanding their territory and conquering lands for imperial and geopolitical gain. But since you can't make an omelet, or in this case a conquest, without breaking eggs, with eggs being American soldiers lives and/or mental health, you have to make sure you make the soldiers and the people at home feel like the conquest is justifiable, necessary, and must be done at all costs.
Some people just can’t admit that the American nation is an empire, like the British or the Roman Empire. And just like the British and the Romans, those in power are hungry for more money, more power, more resources, and more of the things that make a nation wealthy and secure. And when the American people are war weary and not ready to sacrifice their sons to conquer and pillage, you have to liven them up with fear and make them feel endangered by any means possible, even if it means staging attacks on your own people and property. Just like they say with business, “if you’re not growing, you’re dying,” and the same holds true for global hegemony. And with every false flag we have flown to incite the American people to go to war, we have mobilized, defeated, and conquered.
        Americans are imperialistic, despite our strategic attempts to deny that we are conquerors at heart. But just like the British and the Romans, we appear to be crumbling from the inside out as our reach expands further and further while at home our education is failing, infrastructure deteriorating, industry shrinking, money inflating, government corrupting, and citizens turning against one another over divided party lines. What do you think? Is America an empire? Would our government and military-industrial complex go so far as to stage attacks on Americans to provoke devastating, yet profitable, wars? Are we rotting from the inside out as our American empire grabs beyond it's reach?

That’s Amore!

       Ahh, love! It’s a powerful emotion that all people experience in some form or fashion in their lifetime. People love all sorts of things. There are all sorts of people, places and things that we claim to love through our lifetime. Who, where, and what we love is what defines us as individuals. It’s what motivates our thoughts, words, and actions. It’s what makes life worth living day to day and what brings joy to our existence.
Although love takes different forms (familial, platonic, sexual, etc) and even though you can love a person, place, or thing, the personal feelings associated with love are typically the same from all forms; joy, satisfaction, a sense of belonging, and typically a feeling of being rewarded because you are getting some sort of protection, companionship, and/or pleasure for that which you love.
But here is my beef with love. People often put love on a pedestal high above the other primitive emotions that play into our psyche, and sometimes even above logic and rationality. Some even go so far as to say that God is love.  Now what this assumes is that love is somehow better, different, or more virtuous than all of the other emotions. In fact, all of our other primitive emotions are often referred to as “sins” or transgressions including envy, lust, wrath, greed, gluttony, sloth, and pride, which are all natural, instinctual reactions built into our minds. So what’s the deal? Why is love given special treatment as opposed to the other primitive emotions that we badmouth and are often encouraged to avoid in life?
Is it because love is associated with joy and happiness? What? Like the other emotional “sins” listed above don’t put smiles on all our faces? Our envy and greed is what motivates us to succeed, to accomplish, to conquer, to accumulate wealth. Our lust motivates us to find sexual partners and enjoy sex. We love to stuff our faces and drink until we can’t stand. We grin ear to ear when we can take a nap on a rainy afternoon instead of mowing the lawn. And we love to see ourselves excel and boast about our abilities. What some people call “sin” is what all people call pleasure. You can tell because from the above emotional “sins” is where the most profitable industries in our society are spawned, including the industry of religion itself.
And before you say these emotional “sins” have a dark side, are you honestly going to tell me that love doesn’t have a dark side? Love, like any other emotion, can overpower our logical reasoning and rationality, which make us do some really stupid shit. Some people go broke, some people get abused, some people break from their family, and some people just go fucking crazy in the name of love. Stalking, abuse, depression, suicide, drugs. All of these things can easily creep from the ashes of love when we lose someone, someplace, or something for which we had a legitimate and strong love. And what about the feeling of attachment and dependence that we get from love, which makes letting go that much more punishing?
And it’s not as if love doesn’t hold hands with some of our other primitive emotions. People often say that all of the “sins” of humanity go hand in hand,  some closer than others. Does love not go hand in hand with lust? Lust is typically what initiates a relationship between two lovers even if they wait to engage in sex. What about envy? Show me one married man or woman that doesn’t get jealous when their spouse hits on or is hit on by another potential partner. What about wrath? Vengeance and violence are very intertwined in some loving relationships. Me and my older brothers were frequently violent towards one another growing up, but I have no doubts that I loved my brothers then and love them now. And pride? Nobody wants to be with a partner or friend or family member that they aren't proud of being with for whatever reason. Respect is a part of love.
        The truth is that love is just like all of the other primitive emotions in our minds. There is a light side and dark side to it, and it should always be self-examined and scrutinized by rationality and logical reasoning. Just like envy, and lust, and sloth, and gluttony, and wrath, and pride, and greed, the emotion of love can be very gratifying, but it can also punish you. Love is NOT all pleasure and and reward, and if it is left unchecked by our higher, less primitive mind, love can be just as destructive and dark as it is creative and joyful. God is not love. God is logical reasoning and rational thought, which should always govern the more primitive emotional capacities of the mind, including that of love.

"Us and Them"

Some popular terms have emerged from the reactions to the widening gap between rich and poor in America. The lowly "99%" and the noble "1%" have become common terms in political conversation. Reading between the lines, it's easy to tell this is just a numerical way to describe "us" and "them" and unite people against a common enemy. From this I started to think about this concept of "us and them" and its role in our societies.

Eventually, my thought process led me to the question "Can any human society function without a common enemy to keep it's population united and cooperative?" Growing up in America, my experience supports the idea that developing the "us and them" concept is essential to domestic stability. America has always had a common enemy to rally against. First the British, then Mexico, then our own countrymen, then Native Americans, then Spain, then Germany, then Axis, then minorities, then Communism, now the Middle East and international terrorists.

But a look at world history shows that all nations, past and present, simply flow through a series of "us and them" cycles. Whether the conflict is for territory, resources, money, religion, women, or whatever else, every society always maintains a "them" as a rally point for its people. A mechanism to keep peace domestically by giving everyone else a common enemy to worry about and prepare to do battle with.

And honestly, I don't think society could function without this mechanism. It's hard enough to keep peace and prosperity domestically with a real and threatening common enemy, so having none at all could prove to be an unwise decision. Even in our political system we have a tendency to split the population into two or three "parties" as opposed to having a truly open election. Better to have your population split into two groups instead of twenty or thirty, right? And while the upper class continues to control leaders right in front of our eyes, we're to busy fighting with our neighbors about whether we are elephants or jackasses.

Perhaps human beings just aren't capable of working together for the common good. Maybe we can't get along with each other if we don't have a common enemy to unite ourselves against. By far the most fruitful economic system to date has been capitalism, a system based on harnessing human greed to create production. So is it far fetched to think the "us and them" mechanism is the best domestic policy, a system based on harnessing human fear to create unity and maintain cooperation amongst citizens?

It's an interesting concept that works it's way into every society, usually designed and implemented by the "1%". Ever wonder how in a nation of over 300 million people, 3 million people can tell the other 297 million people what to do? But that's a different conversation all together...

Hot Under The Collar - Decorative Towels

There have been countless times where I have washed my hands and face (ok, maybe just a few times) and while dripping wet with squinty eyes and floppy wrists, I've reached over beside the sink, grabbed the towel on the rack, and then it happens. A decorative bow rips into your hand flesh. Or a small fake pearl makes an indentation on your forehead. And who can forget that sensation of lacy embroidery raking across your face? And then, as you walk from the bathroom still damp and noticeably chaffed, the host of the house proceeds to scorn you for using the decorative towels. For using the what!?

That's right, ladies and gentlemen, the first edition of Hot Under The Collar will feature my hatred for the infamous decorative towel. Talk about taking the function right out of the form. I'd really like to find the estrogen-filled think tank that came up with this one. At what point during the meeting did the homosexual turn to the woman and say, "Let's make a towel, but it won't actually be a towel. We'll cover it with lace, pearls, ribbon, glitter, and maybe even embroider our names or initials on them. And even though its not for drying off, and even though we will harass any guest that uses it like a towel, we'll still hang it right next to the tub, sink, or shower."

And where should this decorative towel hang, you may ask. Well, right on the towel rack, of course. A device conceived, manufactured, and installed to serve one purpose and one purpose alone; to hold the cloth tool we call the towel. So, naturally, we should hang something on the towel rack that we do not consider to be an actual towel. Doesn't it become a "wall hanging rack" at that time, or what!? And the real kicker, as stated above, is that the female or homosexual host then has the audacity to get frustrated when someone uses the decorative towel AS A FUCKING TOWEL!!! Well, excuse me. How silly of me to assume this sheet of cotton linen hanging next to the sink on the towel rack isn’t a towel used for drying my hands and face.

I mean, could you imagine if straight men did this?

Bob: "Well, hello there neighbor."
Neighbor: "Hey, Bob. My fence needs mending. Mind if I borrow your hammer and fix 'er up?"
Bob: "Not at all. Hammer is right over there on the tool rack."
Neighbor: "Ah, here we are. I'll just grab this here hammer and..."
Bob: "Um, excuse me neighbor. Just what in the Hell do you think you're doing?"
Neighbor: "Just grabbing the device that looks like a hammer over here on the tool rack, just like you said."
Bob: "I said grab the hammer, not the decorative hammer. My initials are clearly embroidered on the handle, there. Didn't you notice the lace on the nail claw?”
Neighbor: "Fuck off, Bob."

There, I hope that little analogy displayed the absurdity of using any functional tool as a piece of decor, especially decorative towels. And that, folks, is what makes me Hot Under the Collar this week.