By Captain Eric H. May
"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong." -- Voltaire
Ecclesiastes was right when he wrote that there is nothing new under the sun. The Thursday assassination of Pakistani reformer Benazir Bhutto gives the world a fresh reminder of the old lesson that those who lead the way invite attack. Clearly Bhutto herself was aware of this grim reality, since she had discussed it months earlier in a letter to supporters laying the blame for her possible assassination squarely on the shoulders of Pakistani strongman Pervez Musharraf.
The devilish details of Bhutto's death have all Pakistan raising hell with a wave of riots that could turn in to a revolution before all is said and done. Her frenzied supporters demand answers to questions that their government does not have the credibility to answer satisfactorily. Where was her security at the fatal moment? Who fired the shots that rang out across the crowd, the pistol waving gunman in grainy photos from the scene or the sniper reported by Bhutto supporters? After being shot and then suicide bombed, why does the official autopsy report released a day later claim that neither bullets nor bombs had anything to do with her death?
Some Middle East experts estimate that two thirds of Pakistanis believe that Musharraf and the corrupt Establishment upholding him were either guilty of committing the Bhutto murder, allowing it it to happen or covering up details after it happened.
"We also have to work, though, sort of the dark side, if you will." -- Dick Cheney
All the sound and fury from Southwest Asia would signify nothing in America if the vast majority of Americans believed that the United States of "unitary executive" Bush was fundamentally different from the Pakistan of military dictator Musharraf. The vast majority of Americans, though, believe that the Bush League is capable of any level of mischief. In fact, the two thirds of us who detest him also believe that Bush and the corrupt Establishment upholding him were either guilty of committing the 9/11 mass murder, allowing it it to happen or covering up details after it happened.
In these troubled days, it is quite credible to innumerable US citizens that we have been neoconned into standing our republic on its head. The new millennium was dubbed the New American Century by Ivy League Bush Boyz and Israel-first Zionazis, then on 9/11 -- the date number coinciding with our national emergency code -- a manufactured terror spectacular began a counterrevolution against our Declaration and Constitution. Our new King George established secret prisons, torture chambers and imperial wars, while snatching away civil rights all the way back to Magna Carta.
To a sizable chunk of the American electorate, the radical analysis in the paragraph above seems to be a fair exposition of our current political crisis, and the inability of such views -- or indeed of any anti-establishmentarian views -- to find expression in the mainstream media is just so much more proof that the System is flawed, the Establishment is inimical and the New American Century has always been a Bush League codeword for a dictatorial New World Order.
"I think we're at a point right now where they're still hoping I will go away, but the fact that they've started to attack me means that we are annoying them." -- Ron Paul
Since 9/11, the Internet has become the printing press of the Second American Revolution, fearlessly exploring issues that would never receive the imprimatur of the Globalist/Zionist mainstream media, political parties or apathetic academics. Its power is so unsettling to the elites and their pet projects of the Homeland State and Global War that in recent months the House and Senate have declared war upon it as an instrument of homegrown terror.
To the elites the most dreadful of all netizens is Dr. Ron Paul, the 10-term independent Republican from Texas, whose bread and butter as a presidential candidate is the freethinking Internet user. Paul has boldly proclaimed his presidential bid "The Ron Paul Revolution," and lived up to this billing by proposing the abolition of Homeland Security and the Global War. He envisions and proclaims vastly increased individual liberty and vastly reduced taxation. Organized efforts by the mainstream media to restrict or ridicule his message have only made it and his political base grow larger. He has been dubbed "Dr. No" for his prescription of less government to heal our sickly body politic, and there is a real possibility that untold millions of Americans will say yes to Dr. No in the upcoming state primaries.
To end where I began, there is nothing new under the sun, and those who propose radical treatments for radical maladies should be aware of that fact. To give credit and praise when and where it is due, Dr. No has spoken publicly on the dangers of his reformist -- even revolutionary -- candidacy, and pledged to continue forward. The Internet has been abuzz for weeks with rumors, reputedly from inside the American power elite, of considerations and contingencies to "remove" the candidate and candidacy that threaten to roll back the 9/11 counterrevolution. Across the World Wide Web those who long for a return to freedom remind themselves that the last candidate to endanger the powers that be as much as Ron Paul was Ross Perot, who temporarily abandoned his bid for the White House in 1992, claiming that an earlier King George Bush -- father of the present King George Bush -- had threatened him and his family with the CIA. As Ross Perot and Benazir Bhutto would agree, running for office can be a harrowing experience, one from which those without the courage of conviction would simply run away.
# # #
Captain May is a former Army military intelligence and public affairs officer, as well as a former NBC editorial writer. His political and military analyses have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, the Houston Chronicle and Military Intelligence Magazine. For his homepage and schedule of upcoming interviews, refer to:
Captain Eric H. May