I tried to leave the following comment, in its abbreviated form of course, for this article but did not succeed. What I have to say is of course irrelevant anyway since no one pays any particular attention. Must be it is something I say! Or may be it's just who's saying it? Or maybe it's just not being heard? The white man's burden, and the native informant's, alongside every irrelevance, is frequently heard widely! Not only that, but these heavily accoladed and profoundly learned folks are eagerly invited for expressing their opinions in important venues and policy forums where crimes and punishments, empire and its victims, are narrated and formulated by the lackeys of the 'ubermensch' themselves. Well, thanks to email, web and ethersphere, I can put up my valuable opinion on a soapbox in my own pious corner of the Hyde Park. Other than enabling me to vent, and thus helping to glorify the vaunted Western freedom of speech while simultaneously reducing Prozac sales, it has little substance.
Freedom of speech is the biggest red herring of modernity, the biggest hijacking of commonsense, the biggest theft of a political right with a clever magician's trick in the service of empire! For one can trivially observe with even an iota of sensibleness, that all the freedom to speak in vacuum can still lead to death by asphyxiation! Give the public all such abstract freedoms – sure looks good on paper, and lulls the masses into deep hypnosis of self-glorification of their Democracy. It is not the freedom to speak, but the freedom to be heard, that is the meaningful right to be accorded by Constitutionalism, and legislated into existence. Focussing on freedom of speech is like focussing on freedom to breathe – no one can legislate it in or out, except to deny it by force. It is therefore a bogus irrelevance as the fundamental of Constitutional governance, except to formulate a police-state wherein even Bill of Rights cannot exist on paper other than in its Orwellian formulation. Bizarre – when even these abstract rights cannot exist in empirical practice because of the highjacking ab initio of the first principle, through the formulation of a bogus right and pulling public relations wool over the people's mind!
Based on that universal political right of freedom to be heard, whether or not the state presently accords it, but a moral mind must admit to it, permit someone who will willingly argue and assert – in the most learned way of course – what's in the comment below, and Edward Bernays style public relations Tribunals like Russell's and Brussels which today are more akin to tweedledee and tweedledum arguing justice before the Queen of Hearts in Alice in Wonderland than anything else, may yet transform from a pathetic toothless paper tiger to one with some real biting teeth. All the unvarnished empirical comprehension of victor's justice notwithstanding!
Project Humanbeingsfirst's Comment:
From NYT Magazine, Ron Suskind, Oct. 17, 2004:
'“That's not the way the world really works anymore,” he continued. “We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.” '
How to overturn that empirical statement in such a Tribunal? With commonsense!
Instead of rehearsing history of faits accomplis in the constructs of the history's actors, prevent new acting, new history-making, by charging the puppetmasters behind the history's actors! Put them in the spotlight. Highlight their agendas and their conspiracies to have chosen errand-boys be their history's actors. Until such time, those statements in the NYT are simply empirical. Only the uber-brilliant pretend otherwise.
The tragedy is that even the self-proclaimed moralists and justice seekers do not approach the solution-space in this way. Since I refuse to accept that I am really all that brilliant, being in reality only a down to earth plebeian, I am forced to observe of the moral bankruptcy of the moralists themselves. How can they ever bring justice to the plebeians? They have become merely the ineffectual narrators studying the Anglo Saxon's shit left behind by history's actors! "Hmmm..... tastes good - here, you try it". No thank you. The crimes of omission far outstrip the crimes of commission – for the former continually enables the latter! What is craftily omitted in the conniving service of empire is outlined here:
The only way plebeians know of seeking redress and justice on their own is the age-old modus operandi of Madame Defarge's knitting basket! Not very encouraging! Speak what is meaningful now and perhaps risk an individual assassination, or humanity will collectively pay later!
by Zahir Ebrahim Written April 17, 2008 - Updated April 22, 2008. The abominable shared fates that unite Iran (“Bush and Iran,...
by Zahir Ebrahim Written April 26, 2008 - Revised May 2, 2008. Douglas J. Feith, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, in his Hearing...
by Zahir Ebrahim March 31, 2007: I wrote this essay as the Preface to "Prisoners of the Cave" during 2003. That was four years ago....
by Zahir Ebrahim It appears that a majority of conscionable peoples opposed to their nation's war mongering for “imperial mobilization” in...
by Zahir Ebrahim Sunday April 06, 2008. It is à propos to begin this brief observation in 2008, on a cloudy Sunday morning while...
Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites