Neo-conspiracy... or piracy of the neo-cons

At the genesis of the Bush-2 administration, “good” was created and separated from “evil.” And evil was cast upon nations threaded by the breeding of terrorist cells, and the darkest evil became the hellish trinity: the “axis of evil.” And militants of neo-conservatism saw that Democracy needed to be saved once again. The axis of sixty years ago, Berlin-Rome-Tokyo, was now replaced by the triad of regimes from Baghdad-Tehran-Pyongyang.

Then, as luck would have it, the White House was given the magic wand, the perfect weapon to combat caution or reason: an infamous attack on America in 2001. “Nine-eleven” became more than a date; a numerical proclamation not only as to our vulnerability as a nation, but as to the danger of preserving our constitutional rights as free men. Americans had been accustomed for years to dial 911 for help; the embryo “orwellian” government in Washington was now free to use the same 911 to lend credibility to any action it may take, no matter how unjust, tyrannical or farfetched.

To most neo-cons, a new World Order is in the hands of America, as explained in an article written by William Kristol and Robert Kagan, published in the July/August 1996 issue of Foreign Affairs. Explaining how the United States is no longer a “city on a hill” as envisioned by John Quincy Adams, they write, ”What may have been wise counsel in 1823, when America was a small, isolated power in a world of European giants, is no longer so, when America is the giant. Because America has the capacity to contain or destroy many of the world’s monsters, most of which can be found without much searching, and because the responsibility for the peace and security of the international order rests so heavily on America’s shoulders, a policy of sitting atop a hill and leading by example becomes in practice a policy of cowardice and dishonor.” Preemptive military action and regime change are not only acceptable but required for neo-cons in order to prevail in situations where America knows what is right and just. And yes, America must feel free to take unilateral action as it sees fit.

But it is not Quincy Adams, or how the leadership in this country viewed our standing in the world almost two centuries ago. At a time when this country, already a giant, was leading the fight in World War II, FDR defined unequivocally how Americans viewed their place in a world at peace: “The structure of world peace cannot be the work of one man, or one party, or one nation…it must be a peace which rests in the cooperative effort of the whole world.” Other presidents since that time have not in essence veered from this path… until now.

And just who are these neo-cons? In American media parlance, they are just conservative Joes (and a handful of Janes) not to be differentiated from any other Americans with a political inclination just “Right of Center.” It should be said that you need to scan the international media, or visit Internet chat rooms (non-US) which engage in socio-political discussion, to get a clearer understanding as to who these people are, their philosophy, and their present influence in the government of the United States . Names like Cheney, Kristol, Wolfowitz, Perle, Ashcroft, Schmitt, Edelman, Shulsky, Kagan, Khalilzad, Libby, Podhoretz, to name but a few, have little resonance in the US as “far right” ideologues. But they are.

Conspiracy, plot, machination, collusion, intrigue, cabal… secret plans or schemes, all of them. Can any one of these terms be applied to America ’s reason for invading Iraq ? Perhaps there was no conspiracy in Washington , but unquestionably there was pervasive deceit. Our present political leadership seems to be marching in the same goosestep and chanting the same martial airs. Leo Strauss’ disciples, in a formidable display of influence in every sphere of government, and other lesser neo-conservatives, have taken over the ship of state, and the flag of bones and skull flies side by side with the stars and stripes. Much more than conspiracy, it appears to be piracy of the cons. With the transposition, we end up with same letters, same syllables, and same results.

Now, as the pseudo-patriotism in some of the population starts to fade, perhaps in part due to a dab of contrition for the mess that the United States has created in Iraq , Bush’s pre-war statements are starting to be challenged. But Bush feels confident that he does not have to circle the wagons… not yet. So he calls Blair to bring some relief, some coherence. Blair does just that, and very successfully before Congress; although a chat-friend from the U.K. was quick to point out that it may turn out to be but a mirage, and that Tony Blair is deeper in trouble than our own Dubya… since the Brits are not half as tolerant as the Americans in matters of lies and deceit. I will close the column with his harsh assessment of Blair’s oratory before America ’s legislative bodies:

“You Yanks are incredibly Anglo-gullible. Just because you have an inarticulate president, it should be no reason for Blair to charm your ears with a ten-quid sycophantic speech. It was really a pitiful, embarrassing site to watch, as the representatives of the American people were mocked with cheap flattery, and a play to their patriotic vanity; a replica of what Sir Laurence Olivier did with the Hollywood crowd at an Oscars’ presentation a couple of decades ago. Little wonder our actors and pop-stars do so well in the States. You gave our deceitful PM the Congressional Gold Medal, which will likely be followed with knighthood shortly after we force him to move out of No. 10 Downing Street. Rest assured that our Parliament won’t give your Bush the time of the day, much less a medal, to thank him for the fiasco he got us into.”