Jefferson's Eyes

The Bush administration launched an unprovoked, pre-emptory attack on Iraq based on the argument that Saddam Hussein's possession of Weapons of Mass Destruction posed an imminent threat to the security of the American people. The world now knows, of course, that Saddam had no such weapons or capabilities and that the Bush administrations employed fabrication and falsehood to lead the American people into an immoral war, without a viable plan for peace-keeping, reconstruction or exit.

As the occupying power, the Bush administration has felt obligated to avoid the appearance of being an occupying power out for control of Iraq's oil fields. Accordingly, Bush has repeatedly assured the world that Iraqi oil "belongs to the Iraqi people."

Now, isn't that the truth of it? To whom else, pray tell, might it belong?

According to the Bush administration, Iraqi oil revenues can be utilized to rebuild Iraq's war-torn infrastructure. These resources can also serve to alleviate the fiscal burden on America, as an active moral agent who should not have to bear the burden of reconstruction as well as the burden of destruction. That was a nice thought, but that is not how things have worked out.

The U.S. Occupation Coordinator, L. Paul Bremer, has now concluded (Washington Post, August 27, 2003) that Iraq's oil revenues will not nearly cover the bill for Iraq's reconstruction, which is "almost impossible to exaggerate."

Aside from that remark and the remarkably awkward situation into which it places America, there is another reason for concern with this issue. That concern, as always with the Bush administration, involves the "logic" beneath administration policies and the disconnect between what the administration preaches and what it practices.

If Iraq's oil "belongs to the Iraqi people" (as it does), then any effort to establish a decent capitalistic democracy in Iraq would require that control of these resources be turned over to a handful of corporations, entities that have a life of their own and a purpose over and above that of the nation and the people, entities that would depend and thrive on "influence-for-a-fee" Iraqi government. Given the corporate background and Enronized-affiliations of the Bush administration, one wonders if these people even know what they are talking about, because what they are talking about sounds like Democracy for Iraq and Despotism for America. Isn't the the Bush administration supposed to be on America's side?

But, of course, the conservative right wing is not on "our" side, the people's side, and never have been. Right wing neoconservatives do not hate "the people," but they legitimately see this very concept as a potentially-lethal threat to conservative notions of dominion, with the rightful and deserving few leading the ignorant and mindless masses. Right wing neoconservatives have fought and lied their way into political dominion and, nevermind how they did it, they deserve and they demand a little genuflection before their authority.

If, on the other hand, the Bush administration is actually being honest with the people and Iraq's oil actually "belongs to the Iraqi people" (as it does), then the question remains as to whom American oil belongs.

If American oil does not belong to the American people, then one wonders why Iraq's oil belongs to the Iraqi people. If, on the other hand, American oil does belong to the American people, then the Bush administration has a marvelous opportunity to regain the general public's support. Renewing its' focus on domestic problems in America, the Bush administration could call upon the American military to seize control of American oil fields on behalf of the people. This action would be firmly in keeping with their views and approaches in Iraq, and it would be the first time the Bush administration will have taken action in the interest of Democracy and the American people.

The overriding characteristic of Bush administration policies is an across-the-board inconsistency. In other words, the Bush administration has no need for and, therefore, no grasp whatsoever of elementary human logic. One cannot say up and point down, simple as that. Is this too complicated for some people?

The people's new found disregard for logic is the result of their new found JudeoRomanism (the result of right wing propaganda), a cultural approach which has never required logic since Constantine decided that compassion made a great cover for conqueroring the western world. The Bush administration provides tax cuts for the rich because the economy is so good, and tax cuts for the rich because the economy is so bad. The Bush administration proposes democracy for Iraq and it thrives on despotism in America.

If the American people are to be responsible for the actions of their government, they will necessarily have to begin by being responsible to themselves. This, of course, involves thinking for oneself and being one's own judge of other's judgements (as both the first Christian and Thomas Jefferson would have it).

At the moment, many Americans, encouraged since World War II to live in a profoundly materialistic and competitive "here and now" world, make effort to preserve themselves by not thinking at all, going along with lunacy in order to protect and preserve a world without time for thought. Many people are, without knowing it, only making effort to leave unchallenged their personal metaphysical assumptions, assumptions about the seat of knowledge, authority, morality, justice and fairness in the world (properly the people) and assumptions about what causes what in the world (an intellectual arena in which JudeoRomanism has been consistently wrong from the beginning).

The people can no longer afford to allow the Bush administration to get away with lying, living and leading on the lunatic fringe in the heart of the JudeoRoman world. In a democracy, this mentality properly exists only on the fringe, not in the seats of government. Making that so, by separating church and state, was the genius of our Fathers.



			Iraqi Oil Democracy and American Oil Despotism A ROUSING EXAMPLE OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION'S "LOGIC
		The Bush administration launched an unprovoked, pre-emptory attack on Iraq based on the argument that Saddam Hussein's possession of Weapons of Mass Destruction posed an imminent threat to the security of the American people. The world now knows, of course, that Saddam had no such weapons or capabilities and that the Bush administrations employed fabrication and falsehood to lead the American people into an immoral war, without a viable plan for peace-keeping, reconstruction or exit. As the occupying power, the Bush administration has felt obligated to avoid the appearance of being an occupying power out for control of Iraq's oil fields. Accordingly, Bush has repeatedly assured the world that Iraqi oil "belongs to the Iraqi people." Now, isn't that the truth of it? To whom else, pray tell, might it belong? According to the Bush administration, Iraqi oil revenues can be utilized to rebuild Iraq's war-torn infrastructure. These resources can also serve to alleviate the fiscal burden on America, as an active moral agent who should not have to bear the burden of reconstruction as well as the burden of destruction. That was a nice thought, but that is not how things have worked out. The U.S. Occupation Coordinator, L. Paul Bremer, has now concluded (Washington Post, August 27, 2003) that Iraq's oil revenues will not nearly cover the bill for Iraq's reconstruction, which is "almost impossible to exaggerate." Aside from that remark and the remarkably awkward situation into which it places America, there is another reason for concern with this issue. That concern, as always with the Bush administration, involves the "logic" beneath administration policies and the disconnect between what the administration preaches and what it practices. If Iraq's oil "belongs to the Iraqi people" (as it does), then any effort to establish a decent capitalistic democracy in Iraq would require that control of these resources be turned over to a handful of corporations, entities that have a life of their own and a purpose over and above that of the nation and the people, entities that would depend and thrive on "influence-for-a-fee" Iraqi government. Given the corporate background and Enronized-affiliations of the Bush administration, one wonders if these people even know what they are talking about, because what they are talking about sounds like Democracy for Iraq and Despotism for America. Isn't the the Bush administration supposed to be on America's side? But, of course, the conservative right wing is not on "our" side, the people's side, and never have been. Right wing neoconservatives do not hate "the people," but they legitimately see this very concept as a potentially-lethal threat to conservative notions of dominion, with the rightful and deserving few leading the ignorant and mindless masses. Right wing neoconservatives have fought and lied their way into political dominion and, nevermind how they did it, they deserve and they demand a little genuflection before their authority. If, on the other hand, the Bush administration is actually being honest with the people and Iraq's oil actually "belongs to the Iraqi people" (as it does), then the question remains as to whom American oil belongs. If American oil does not belong to the American people, then one wonders why Iraq's oil belongs to the Iraqi people. If, on the other hand, American oil does belong to the American people, then the Bush administration has a marvelous opportunity to regain the general public's support. Renewing its' focus on domestic problems in America, the Bush administration could call upon the American military to seize control of American oil fields on behalf of the people. This action would be firmly in keeping with their views and approaches in Iraq, and it would be the first time the Bush administration will have taken action in the interest of Democracy and the American people. The overriding characteristic of Bush administration policies is an across-the-board inconsistency. In other words, the Bush administration has no need for and, therefore, no grasp whatsoever of elementary human logic. One cannot say up and point down, simple as that. Is this too complicated for some people? The people's new found disregard for logic is the result of their new found JudeoRomanism (the result of right wing propaganda), a cultural approach which has never required logic since Constantine decided that compassion made a great cover for conqueroring the western world. The Bush administration provides tax cuts for the rich because the economy is so good, and tax cuts for the rich because the economy is so bad. The Bush administration proposes democracy for Iraq and it thrives on despotism in America. If the American people are to be responsible for the actions of their government, they will necessarily have to begin by being responsible to themselves. This, of course, involves thinking for oneself and being one's own judge of other's judgements (as both the first Christian and Thomas Jefferson would have it). At the moment, many Americans, encouraged since World War II to live in a profoundly materialistic and competitive "here and now" world, make effort to preserve themselves by not thinking at all, going along with lunacy in order to protect and preserve a world without time for thought. Many people are, without knowing it, only making effort to leave unchallenged their personal metaphysical assumptions, assumptions about the seat of knowledge, authority, morality, justice and fairness in the world (properly the people) and assumptions about what causes what in the world (an intellectual arena in which JudeoRomanism has been consistently wrong from the beginning). The people can no longer afford to allow the Bush administration to get away with lying, living and leading on the lunatic fringe in the heart of the JudeoRoman world. In a democracy, this mentality properly exists only on the fringe, not in the seats of government. Making that so, by separating church and state, was the genius of our Fathers.
			Additional editorial commentary from the Deist point of view will appear on this page from time to time.

			\| HOME \| INTRODUCTION \| TABLE OF CONTENTS \| PURCHASE \| DIALECTICS \| VISIT RUSHMORE \| ABOUT AUTHOR \|