Condoleezza Rice's Authoritarian Fantasy and Her CBS Enablers
By Staff News & Analysis - June 26, 2012

Rice spoke over the weekend at a Utah retreat of big Republican donors for Romney and her remarks were widely praised by attendees. "I talked about the need for American leadership, I talked about the importance of the United States to a more peaceful world, a world that has been quite turbulent in recent years, and needs a strong American anchor," she said. "I also talked about the essence of America, and I think perhaps that is what people resonated with, that this is a country in which people really believe that it doesn't matter where you came from, it matters where you're going and that we really need to concentrate on rebuilding our strengths as a country of immigrants, a country where it doesn't really matter your zip code so that you can get a good education, and the need to really pay attention to those strengths so that we can lead from an internal strength at home," she added. Asked where she disagrees with President Obama on foreign policy, she said she understands "how hard it is to be in the White House," but said the United States cannot "lead from behind." … "The United States has to have a view, it has to gather people around that view, and frankly, I think we need to do more of that, and the last several years I think we've been lacking on that front," she said. – CBS

Dominant Social Theme: The US is the freest country in the world and is enabling freedom everywhere.

Free-Market Analysis: This is an article (along with a video) that reports on former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice's determination not to be the vice presidential candidate for the Mitt Romney GOP campaign. But halfway through the article, the text takes a really weird turn toward Ms. Rice's political viewpoints as expressed above to a "Utah retreat of big Republican donors."

This caught our collective attention because not only is her presentation entirely wacky, it was "well received" by those that she presented it to and then further presented as a serious perspective on CBS television.

The point that stands out the most is her statement about the "importance of the United States to a more peaceful world" and that this world needs a "strong American anchor." While this might be true hypothetically, in reality the only way that America is important to peace is unfortunately its leaders' attraction to war.

The US in its current incarnation facilitates war. It is important to "peace" the way a weapon is important to violence, not as a deterrent but as an adjunct. Ms. Rice's statements therefore are far more revealing of the current state of the "formal" political and media dialogue that exists within the United States than they are as a summation of reality.

Under Ms. Rice and her boss the US military-industrial complex was given virtually free rein to pursue fairly major wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and smaller, less-reported wars in numerous other countries in the Mideast and upper Africa.

As we've pointed out before, along with numerous other alternative media publications, these wars resulted in the deaths or injuries not of thousands but of millions. The culprit is the depleted uranium weaponry in use by NATO and American forces. Here, from Wikipedia:

Normal functioning of the kidney, brain, liver, heart, and numerous other systems can be affected by uranium exposure, because in addition to being weakly radioactive, uranium is a toxic metal. DU is less toxic than other heavy metals such as arsenic and mercury. It is weakly radioactive but remains radioactive because of its long half-life. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry states that: "to be exposed to radiation from uranium, you have to eat, drink, or breathe it, or get it on your skin."

However, the Institute of Nuclear Technology-Radiation Protection of Attiki, Greece, has noted that "the aerosol produced during impact and combustion of depleted uranium munitions can potentially contaminate wide areas around the impact sites or can be inhaled by civilians and military personnel."[9] The U.S. Department of Defense claims that no human cancer of any type has been seen as a result of exposure to either natural or depleted uranium.

As early as 1997, British Army doctors warned the British MoD (Ministry of Defence) that exposure to depleted uranium increased the risk of developing lung, lymph and brain cancer, and recommended a series of safety precautions. According to a report issued summarizing the advice of the doctors, 'Inhalation of insoluble uranium dioxide dust will lead to accumulation in the lungs with very slow clearance – if any . . . Although chemical toxicity is low, there may be localised radiation damage of the lung leading to cancer." The report warns that 'All personnel… should be aware that uranium dust inhalation carries a long-term risk… [the dust] has been shown to increase the risks of developing lung, lymph and brain cancers."

Early in the Iraq war, it was estimated that the US had used some 1,000 tons of depleted uranium weapons. This is certainly the reason that even today, Iraqi doctors caution women in parts of Iraq not to have children because the rate of birth defects is so high.

Beyond birth defects is the injury and mortality itself which one could argue has affected not only millions in Afghanistan and Iraq but also many or even most of the soldiers that have served in these wars. The health problems that US soldiers have on returning home has been amply documented, though the blame has not been formally laid on depleted uranium.

While there is no way that apparently poisoning millions of people a continent away constitutes the spreading of "peace," the current stance and practice of the US military-industrial complex and its enablers is even worse.

Thanks to the R2P – the responsibility to protect standard passed by the United Nations back in 2005 – the US and its allies have actually escalated their attacks on the Middle East and Africa. R2P mandates that leaders of countries that are actively oppressing their people and putting them in danger need to be removed.

Of course, it is not clear who makes this determination. As we have seen in Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Syria and numerous other countries, the leaders of NATO and the political-military establishment of the US are deciding.

In fact, the decisions are entirely political and apparently designed to further the one-world ambitions of a Western power elite that is determined to create subservient leaders internationally so as to further its globalist ambitions.

Ms. Rice was evidently and obviously a facilitator of these plans as was her boss, US President George Bush. There is no doubt that Ms. Rice is fully aware of the elite's globalist plans and helped carry them out during her term in power.

There is also no doubt that those who run CBS and those at the top of the GOP are equally aware of what is going on in significant detail and are willing parties to it. Nonetheless, the charade continues. The US is positioned as a "shining light on the hill" and a beacon of peace.

What is most surprising and puzzling is that there is a torrent of information available on the Internet about what is actually taking place. For Ms. Rice, CBS and the GOP to position the US as they have does not illustrate a lack of comprehension so much as an inability to counter the exposure that has taken place regarding the West's endless warmongering.

In the end, Ms. Rice's positioning of the US and its endless warring may be seen as malicious dissembling but within a larger context it reveals to us once again the inability of the ruling classes to deal with the exposure they have received on the Internet and its ramifications.

The more they contradict evident and obvious reality, the more their credibility leaks away. These elite dominant social themes die by a thousand cuts. Once people cease to believe, their belief is almost impossible to resuscitate. This is the danger the power elite now faces but does not seem able to grapple with effectively.

After Thoughts

What is even more dangerous to them is that the Internet is a process, not an episode. The current cognitive dissonance will not dissipate any time but will in fact grow greater as power elite representatives continue to insist on a narrative that fewer and fewer believe in.