| |
|
I am concerned about all the reports about military coup happening. 4-Star General gets canned. Is there really a war going on behind the scenes between the Bush crowd and the powers that be? I am trying to figure out all the gossip about a military coup. Where are we headed? And what is behind the exorbitant crude oil prices? Any Zetas comments on this?
We stated when Bush stole the 2004
election that the Puppet Master was furious, as he had wanted a
respected Viet Nam vet, John Kerry, to bring a rebelling US military into
line, a situation that certainly would not occur with Bush continuing in
office. Why does the Puppet Master care? Because the US Military has and
is being used to protect his assets and interests, at home and abroad. The
massive US Military, equal in size to the combined military of
all other countries in the world, has bases everywhere, and the man with
the gun gets cooperation with US interests abroad. Chosen as much for
their weaknesses as for any skill
or political savvy they may posses, Puppets are expected to allow their
strings to be pulled, once installed into office, but Bush and those
around him had let the power of the US Military go to their heads. They
would be king. They would commandeer all the oil fields in the world, and control what they foresee
as the prime commodity in the Aftertime, black gold.
Bush busting promptly began, the
first volley financial. Despite all lies to the contrary, the health of
the US economy is plunging, more layoffs, more bankruptcies, overinflated
and underfunded and utterly dependent upon investors from
abroad. What has the situation been since the 2004 election was stolen?
Rising interest rates at the Federal Reserve, which the Puppet Master
controls, while the US economy plunges. Logical only when one considers
that the Puppet Master plans to decapitate the US bureaucracy, and
plunging the US government into a financial crisis with a sudden
withdrawal of funds from the Fed and from countries abroad which he has
great influence with, will be one weapon at his disposal. Bush, meanwhile,
having formerly been an alcoholic, is now drunk on continued spending
sprees, his foray into Iraq a hemorrhage he refuses to address. Weapon one
- financial disaster, with the US Congress frantically looking to cut
expenses in the face of the Bush Administration's adamant insistence that
their conquest of oil fields continue, and now into Iran.
The second Bush busting volley is unveiling political corruption within
the Bush Administration. Shall we count the ways this has emerged? The
Downing Street memo, demonstrating clearly that Bush lied to the public
about his plans to invade Iraq; the Valerie Plame outing, which has Karl
Rove and the office of Dick Cheney front and center and is currently
before a grand jury; war profiteering via Haliburton, with contracts
skipping the bidding process and fraudulent invoices being rewarded with
bonuses. Where this is not yet seen as removing Bush from office, it has
an eroding effect on the Congress and the public. Little by little the
fingers of loyalty weaken and let go. Where the public stance is loyalty
to a President that had been sworn in, in front of a Congress that failed
to challenge the 2004 election, the depth of this loyalty is now paper
thin. Election fraud, via Diebolt voting machines that had votes for 1/3
of the nation recorded without a paper trail and the central tabulating
machines admittedly editable from a laptop in a parking lot nearby - all
ignored by the loyal Republican Congress. With the 2006 elections
approaching in the Fall of 2005, should a Congressman worry? Weapon two -
the changing face of Congress.
The third Bush busting volley is eroding public sentiment for what Bush
had hoped would be a war time Presidency. What war? The one that was waged
based on a lie? The one that was for any reason but to defend
America from terrorism? The one that was to make America free from worry,
a safer place? For public sentiment to erode, the media must cooperate,
and anyone taking the pulse of the media lately must admit there has been
a change. Look behind the newscasters to see the hand at the
helm of the major media outlets. It is not Bush and company.
Though they can suppress reports by asserting a national security
rational, they cannot dictate the tenor and tone of the news. Where the
Downing Street memo received little press, Karl Rove was dragged about on
major media endlessly for his alleged role in the Plame outing. Public
exposes are not over in this battle for the hearts and minds of
the US public, as more are in the wings and awaiting their time. The
public has already decided they no longer approve of their President, not
for his performance in Iraq, nor on the economy, and there is little left
except respect for the Office of President to shore him up. Weapon three -
an angry public.
What is the synergy, during a decapitation process, between economic
quagmires, Congressional alarm, public disgruntlement, and the Military
balking? Each magnifies the other. A war effort that has strong public
support does not get challenged by Congress, regardless of legalities. A
President viewed as genuinely concerned about the public interests is
forgiven economic quagmires by the public. And when the argument is that
national security is at stake, the safety of the American public at issue,
then the media hesitates to criticize the leadership. But when this
leadership has been exposed as utterly lacking in integrity, out for self
profit, and breaking both the intent and letter of the law with aplomb,
what then? When Congress begins to vote against the Bush White House
wishes, what then? When the public polls show the support for the
President and his policies diving for the bottom, what then? A feeding
frenzy begins. Where this has terrified some within the Bush White House,
the prevailing mode has been stubborn refusal to change. This is not the
resolve of strength, but the rigidity of the weak. This is the 2 year old,
having a tantrum, insisting on his way.
Enter the role of the military. They were, of course, disappointed to have
as their assigned Commander-in-Chief a man who avoided his duty during the
Viet Nam war to the extent of being AWOL in the reserves. The truth of
this was not lost on the military, which has its own information channels,
but the military is restrained from speaking out against a sitting
Commander-in-Chief, so the truth of this is lost on the public. They did,
of course, advise against invading Iraq, and were bitter when their advise
was not taken. Follow this with a disastrous Rumsfeld plan to rush to
Baghdad, leaving the supply routes vulnerable, and you have the setting we
see today in Iraq, endless battles and endless dead and maimed soldiers.
Moral is far worse than during Viet Nam, a story not allowed to be told.
Where the military is based on command and control hierarchy, in theory
following the Commander-in-Chief , there is a second tradition - rebellion
by hapless blundering. Prison torture, carried out by mercenaries
reporting directly to Rumsfeld, is revealed by military photos. Oops. This
goes beyond information leaks, it affects deployment and cooperation, and
if blundering does not suffice, then refusal begins.
Bush may think that firing a top general will set an example to the rest,
and stop what has become increasingly an open rebellion in the military,
but the opposite will be the effect. For every head cut off, more will
grow. Bush sees the grim military faces, forced to attend his frequent pep
talks to the public using them as backdrops, and imagines this
cooperation. Has he not noticed the smiles fading? The lack of applause,
even on orders? The word gets down to the lower echelons, that the
officers no longer consider Bush their commander, and rebellion is afoot.
This flashes about on the Internet as rumors of a coup, but this is not
the result. The result is increasing refusal to follow direct
orders. Up and down the line. Just how many court martials can the
military entertain, simultaneously? Historically, when a military turns
against a king, the king has lost his footing and is doomed. This is
particularly so when the king foolishly starts attacking the military! But
such is the arrogance of those in the White House at present, who think
themselves impervious to corruption trials with an Attorney General long a
close personal friend of Bush, and impervious to impeachment trials with a
Republican House and Senate, and impervious to public and world opinion as
the assignment of a hated UN envoy recently shows.
What next? A Shakespearean drama is about to unfold, with the synergy of
undercutting of the Bush Administration creating a maelstrom under him
that will astonish those who thought him strong. Bush busting, a
decapitation of his influence such that the US is no longer run
from the White House, but is on auto-pilot according to law and
conscience. Such is the Puppet Master's plan, and there has not been a
battle instigated by this Puppet Master that he has lost. The outcome is
certain.
- Signs of the Times #1488
- Four-star general sacked [Aug 10] 'In an extraordinary move, the Army sacked a four-star general who was the subject of a Defense Department investigation into alleged sexual misconduct, an official said Tuesday. Gen. Kevin P. Byrnes, commander of Army Training and Doctrine Command, was approaching retirement when the decision to relieve him of duty was. Byrnes, 55, a Vietnam veteran, ranked third in seniority among the Army's 11 four-star generals. In his position as commander of Training and Doctrine Command, Byrnes oversaw all Army training programs and the development of war-fighting guidelines. Among the four-star general or flag officers to have been relieved of command in recent years was Navy Adm. Richard C. Macke, sacked as commander of Pacific Command in 1995 for remarks he made about the case of U.S. Marines accused of raping a 12-year-old Japanese girl. Gen. Michael Dugan was fired as chief of staff of the Air Force in 1990 for comments to reporters about planning for the 1991 Gulf War.