An amusing cone of silence has descended over the CIA and Congress. Like the comical cone of silence in the old TV spy comedy, its purpose is to preserve secrecy, but it actually prevents communication. Both Panetta and Pelosi are telling the public that there is no way to determine the truth of what occurs during a CIA briefing. Why, then, are these briefings conducted? Is it just to pretend that the CIA is not a rogue agency?

Our news media seem not to be troubled at all by the manifest absurdity of state secrets being discussed in informal and undocumented circumstances, leading to confusion and nasty allegations of deceit. We are supposed to believe that this is standard procedure for intelligence professionals and high ranking members of Congress.

This clown circus of finger pointing confirms that the CIA has been nothing more than an unaccountable political tool of the Executive branch. These are the people who do the dirty work of the USA, and their briefing “procedures” ensure that no dirt stains the fingers of our elected officials.

Barak Obama has zero credibility in making the CIA accountable. His choice of the weak and malleable Panetta to “head” the agency is as big a mistake as Bush’s choice of Porter Goss. At the CIA, the inmates are running the asylum, and their antics are growing increasingly absurd.

The Obama personality cult took a while to firmly establish itself, but now that it has become entrenched, Obama is free to continue the evil practices of the Bush administration: endless war; secret government; and neo-feudal wealth redistribution. The reason Obama gave for blocking the release of torture evidence (protecting the troops) is exactly the same reason Bush and Rumsfeld used when attempting to block the release of the Abu Ghraib photographs. It is a shabby rationalization intended to protect torturers.

Reasoned criticism and moral outrage roll off Obama’s teflon coating just the way they did when Reagan was President. Nothing sticks, and the buck never stops at the White House. Obama could fly down to Guantanamo and personally execute one of the prisoners tomorrow, and some zombie on DKos would praise his statesmanlike action. The Obama government is now even more dangerous than the Bush regime, because the public enthusiastically supports the continuation of Bush policies by America’s new super-salesman. America is sinking deeper into evil as Obama smiles and the mob applauds.

* Obama is actively waging two hugely expensive and destructive wars while INCREASING the defense budget.

* Obama is blocking the prosecution of torturers, past and present, in the US government.

* Obama is enriching and aggrandizing the Wall Street firms that caused the financial crisis.

* Obama is preserving a profit-driven health care system that puts the interests of corporate health care “providers” above those of citizens.

* Obama is using secrecy, disinformation, and propaganda as the primary tools of his administration, while steadily breaking his campaign promises of “transparency” in government.

How much deeper do we have to sink into evil before the American people demand honest and accountable leadership? When will this darkness end?

As the economic collapse of the United States continues, we are getting very close to the point at which no amount of propaganda will conceal the magnitude of the problem. Rational observers are now experiencing a peak of cognitive dissonance as every corrupt “news” organization bleats out upbeat evaluations of truly dreadful economic statistics. After the breaking point is reached, the general public will share the stunned, disillusioned, and alienated outlook of the well-informed.

What happens to society in a state run by discredited propagandists? If the history of the Eastern Bloc totalitarian regimes is any guide, we can expect serious societal decay: alcoholism, drug abuse, family disintegration, and rising crime. When people no longer believe in the soundness of their government, they regress to more primitive (criminal) security arrangements, and often withdraw to the minimalist state of society, the Hobbesian war of all against all.

I fear that America will endure a dark era in which it slowly purges itself of the endemic dishonesty and corruption that destroyed its prosperity. People who have always taken the easy way out are about to learn that there is no easy way out. Still, we live, and so we must prepare for what is coming. Try to do the following.

1. Turn off your TV and never turn it on again.

2. Make backup arrangements for Internet connectivity in case your ISP fails.

3. Keep a spare computer and parts available.

4. Download and install a Linux operating system and Mozilla browser on your spare computer.

5. Buy tools and learn how to use them to perform useful services and maintain your environment (e.g., table saw, sewing machine, socket wrenches, multimeter, garden tools).

6. Invest in improving your relationships with family, friends, and neighbors. You will need their good will.

7. Practice honesty and reliability in all of your dealings with others.

8. Participate in the Internet community by sharing all useful information you have.

9. Avoid contact with and reliance on anyone who knowingly makes false statements.

10. Minimize your dependence on cash transactions.

The money culture is slowly collapsing. It will eventually be replaced by a culture based on esteem. Cultivate esteem and disengage from money to help rebuild our society.

On Monday, the New York Times front-paged a long, detailed investigative article on Tim Geithner, the Treasury secretary who is looting the nation’s public funds to enrich Wall Street executives. Not surprisingly, the article points out that Tim has lots of pals on Wall Street. What is a surprise is that he was offered the job of head of Citigroup in 2007 while serving as President of the Federal Reserve Bank of NY. You got that right: one of the chief “regulators” of the banking industry was offered a highly lucrative position as the head of one of the banks he was regulating.

What the NYT article does not point out is that this is how the stealthy corruption of our public officials works. Geithner was not just offered a job, he was implicitly offered assurance that Wall Street would take care of him financially as long as he took care of Wall Street. If Geithner had been busting heads and cracking down on Citigroup’s policies, he never would have received such an offer, and the implication of the offer was that if he started to crack down he would never again receive a similar offer. Geithner’s willingness to play ball with Wall Street led to his installation as Treasury Secretary, and now we see the fruits of “deep capture” of that high office: a lavish give-away program that has Wall Street salaries soaring again while the nation remains mired in recession and record setting deficits are funneling taxpayer cash into “private sector” institutions.

Just a few days earlier, the Washington Post ran an article on Judge Bybee, the issuer of an infamous White House opinion “legalizing” torture. It seems Judge Bybee was promised an appointment to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, but first Gonzales wanted him to do a little bit of dirty work in the Office of Legal Counsel. Of course there was never an explicit deal, but the torture was approved, and the judgeship granted. Bybee knew that if he had antagonized the Bush administration by resisting their demands to make torture legal he could kiss his seat on the bench goodbye. So he did the dirty deeds.

The perfection of legalized corruption is the main reason why no change of elected officials will clean up the United States government. The practice of controlling politicians and political appointees with tacit quid pro quos is legally impregnable. Only far-reaching reforms requiring rigid separation of public and private sector careers can overcome this stealthy form of corruption, and it is the corrupted politicians who would have to pass these laws. A new form of government must arise to end the insidious and destructive practices of stealthy, legal corruption. Building this new governmental structure should be the political goal of the citizens of the world. My book-in-progress on the Netstate is one step towards that goal. The first chapter can be read here:

https://www.docudharma.com/diar…

How is this for motivation?

Bybee’s friends said he never sought the job at the Office of Legal Counsel. The reason he went back to Washington, Guynn said, was to interview with then-White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzales for a slot that would be opening on the 9th Circuit when a judge retired. The opening was not yet there, however, so Gonzales asked, “Would you be willing to take a position at the OLC first?” Guynn said.

Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/…

After Bybee approved the torture memo, he was made a Federal Judge by Bush. Is there now any longer a mystery about how an ambitious lawyer would authorize a memo legalizing torture of captives? This is how legal corruption works: all you have to do is make the quid pro quo tacit, and the devil’s work gets done.

A new plot possibility is becoming evident in the final fade-out of the Bush administration. The rift between Bush and Cheney, who have spoken only once since Obama took office, may be explained by the tardy realization on the part of Bush that he was played for a fool by Cheney. In his last sorry months in office, Bush may finally have realized that uncle Dick ruined his Presidency, his family name, and his place in history.

But payback is a bitch, especially when dealing with someone as mean and vindictive as Junior Bush. I believe that Cheney was rebuffed by Bush in the final days – not just in the matter of pardoning Libby, but that he was denied blanket pardons of Bush’s whole sick crew, including Cheney, Addington, Libbey, the torture lawyers, and the rest of the Bush White House gangsters who might face prosecution. In short, Bush has left Cheney twisting in the wind. This explains both Bush’s low profile since leaving the White House, and Cheney’s frequent CYA appearances. Cheney is fighting desperately to avoid being dragged into a criminal prosecution with no chance of a Presidential pardon. Cheney’s position is now very vulnerable. He was always a master of back-room maneuvering under the protection of a powerful public figure. Now he must fend for himself, and with each ugly, defiant display of his demeanor, he invites the prosecutors to draw nearer.

I believe that there may be enough surviving documents, emails, and supportable recollections to send Dick Cheney to prison for war crimes. Convicting Cheney would be a fitting repudiation of the loathsome Bush era if Bush was nothing more than a sad little puppet dangling from Cheney’s strings. Perhaps the puppet will have his revenge.

We seem to have lost sight of a fundamental motivating factor in the torture controversy: torture made good political theater. The theatrical dimension of the punishment of America’s foes was made plain to me when I first saw pictures of Guantanamo captives kneeling in their orange jump suits. At first I thought that they were kneeling in prayer. Then I realized that they were in two lines facing in opposite directions. They were being made to kneel to humiliate them. (Later, I learned that they were also blinded and deafened by sensory deprivation gear.) Americans did not recoil from the humiliation of these prisoners (a clear violation of the Geneva conventions). No, most Americans delighted in the vengeance inflicted on the “worst of the worst.”

Not coincidentally, at the same time that the Bush administration’s theater of cruelty began its productions, the FOX television network launched the popular series “24,” which regularly featured the torture of terrorist captives. This torture was consistently depicted as successful and appropriate to dealing with the terrorist threat. Thus, the case can be made that Bush, Rove, Cheney, Rumsfeld and their whole sick crew were using torture of captives to enhance the political popularity of the Bush administration. The mob was howling for vengance, and Rove, Bush, and Cheney gave it to them.

But mobs cool down, and in the cold gray light of dawn, as we survey America’s tattered reputation, the unavoidable question is “What were they thinking?” I submit that the answer is that Bush and Rove were thinking about the political gains to be achieved from feeding retributive violence to a bloodthirsty mob. It would be a grand reprise of an ambitious young Texas governor earning the praise of his savage constituents by setting a national record for executions. Bush used his record of eagerly killing convicts to rise to the Presidency, and he intended to increase his power by brutalizing captive “terrorists.”

The theater of cruelty has closed, temporarily, but many Americans have fond memories of its exciting productions, and they resent Obama for questioning the quality of its shows. Theaters can’t exist without an audience, and the torture scandal is ultimately a reflection of the blind, vindictive cruelty of the American people.

Hail Obama! Our new Emperor has banned the torture of captives. This means that for four or eight more years there will be no torture. Then we must hope that the next Emperor will reach the same decision. The people know that the word of the Emperor (officially known as the President) is supreme. That is why the Emperor’s spokesmen tell us to put our minds at ease. All that matters is the Emperor’s will. The law may provide amusement or employment for many earnest people, but when it comes to matters of state, it is the Emperor who decides, for he is the guardian of our national security.

When did the American President become an emperor? Was it on September 11, 2001? Was it during the rule of FDR, or Lyndon Johnson, or Nixon? Nobody can quite remember. But everyone agrees that Imperial leadership is emotionally gratifying. There is something stirring in the bold figure and inspiring words of Emperor Obama. He rises above the petty bickering of the legislature and commands the respect and admiration of his devoted citizens. Here is a great leader! When comes such another?

The looting operation commonly known as the US Government’s financial rescue plan will accelerate now that we know the next move in this cynical game. Up to now, the hundreds of billions of dollars supplied by taxpayers to dishonest and incompetent financial institutions have been LOANS. In theory, at least, the recipients pledged to repay the taxpayers once their businesses recovered. Now we learn that Geithner and Summers, the embedded agents of Wall Street intend to convert these loans to STOCK. What’s wrong with that? Here’s what is wrong:

1. Common stock holders, unlike bond holders or secured lenders, have no assurance of any return on their investment. All they are entitled to are stock certificates and an invitation to the shareholders’ meeting. Bankruptcy of the company in which they own stock usually results in a TOTAL LOSS.

2. The voting rights of stock can be engineered to deprive certain classes of stockholders of representation. This can be done by subtle, incremental degrees, so that the public slowly loses the control that would properly be associated with a large equity position. All a crooked bank has to do is get the government to agree to convert its equity into a class of stock that has restricted voting rights. Since Geithner and Summers are Wall Street puppets, their complicity in this matter is assured. Anything that restores investor “confidence” in the markets is OK with them.

3. A large equity position usually translates into representation on the board of directors, another important means of control that should be available to taxpayers owning substantial amounts of stock in a company. However, the appointment of “zombie directors,” removes this threat to management. The government-appointed directors of AIG have already demonstrated their completely ineffectual presence and thus provided an impressive example of how not to represent the interests of taxpayers.

Conversion of US Treasury loans to stock without securing the rights of stockholders for the taxpayers is the perfect form of “nationalization” for Wall Street. The gangsters at Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, Citigroup, and B of A will receive vast infusions of taxpayer cash, while continuing to operate irresponsibly and paying themselves lavish bonuses. The taxpayer “stockholders” will either lose everything in massive bankruptcies and reorganizations or receive nothing in return for their huge investment as their equity is rendered meaningless by cunning management maneuvering.

This is legalized looting of the Treasury, and Obama’s administration is directly responsible for it.

The Netstate Project is the creation of a book describing the rise of an Internet-based world government. I am writing this book in installments on Docudharma and cross-posting the text to other blogs. All of the writings of the Netstate Project are in the public domain and may be copied and distributed freely.

1.2 You Can’t Get There From Here: The Argument of Discontinuity

“You can’t get there from here” is the punch-line of an old joke in which a lost traveler asks for directions only to be told that his journey is impossible. I will use it as a plain English simplification of my first argument for explaining why the Netstate will supplant geostates. There is no practical way that a set of territorial states can effectively manage the affairs of a global, electronically-linked society. There is no viable path of evolutionary continuity that will allow geographically organized states to properly manage global affairs on a collaborative basis. It may be argued that a sufficiently detailed and sophisticated set of multilateral agreements could be developed to seamlessly integrate the laws of all nations and enable friction-free global electronic communications and commerce. But how would this outcome differ from the political subordination of geostate law to that of a supervening Netstate?  And how could such a cumbersome, multilateral process possibly keep pace with the rapid natural tempo of development of Internet-based phenomena? There is no practical path toward achieving the great benefits of utility of the Netstate that preserves the existing powers and prerogatives of the geostates. As geostates fail to generate the political structure necessary to sustain a networked world, the resultant political vacuum will contribute to the formation of the Netstate.  

I wrote the Netstate essay in 1997 and never published it. Although I was a keen observer of the rise of the blogs and had ample opportunity to set up my own soapbox, I shrank from publishing a profoundly radical view of technology-mediated political evolution. In part, I was put off by the ferocity of blogosphere debate. I viewed with repugnance the personality-based blogging that dragged down every attempt to create fruitful discourse into a demolition derby of colliding egos and business interests. In short, I was afraid. The circumstances of the world are very different today. The optimistic enthusiasms of the Internet bubble have given way to a paralyzing dread of economic and ecological calamities, and reason itself is under steady assault, as coherent thought is displaced by a babble of fragmentary perspectives and sophistries. I now fear that if no radical and coherent vision of a better way forward is made available, confusion and cynicism will prevail.

It is a strange irony of Internet communication that that successive new modes of human interaction appear to be regressing in their ability to handle complexity. The typical early Web era essay had 10x more content than the typical blog article, and the typical blog article has 10x more content than the typical reader response post, and the typical blog post has 10x more content than the typical cellphone text message or twitter tweet. Perhaps the next big thing after twitter will be tweaks: witty exchanges of TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms). My response to this entropic spiral of increasingly trivial and incoherent communication will be to expand the Netstate essay into a book which I will write and edit here, on Docudharma, as a series of blog essays. I can think of no better way to conform to Docudharma’s motto of “Blogging the Future.”