freeze

 

freeze warning -- 

for the rest of the day

they still talk of war

 

 

And so it begins: WWIII

 

 Germany is sending troops on a permanent deployment to a foreign nation for the first time since World War II. Germany had agreed to deploy troops to Lithuania back in June but did not set an official date for deployment at that time. Lithuanian Defense Minister Arvydas Anusauskas met with German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius on Monday to discuss a multi-year “Roadmap Action Plan.”

 

"Multi-year" he says ... ha ha ha ha!

“The eastern flank has now moved to the east, and it’s the duty of Germany to protect it,” Pistorius said Monday during a joint press conference. Around 4,800 troops will be permanently positioned in Lithuania, arriving in increments from 2024 until 2027. Pistorius called the move historic and likened it to the troops stationed in West Germany during the Cold War to protect the nation from Soviet aggression. Lithuania borders both Russia and Belarus. 

For years, Putin has said that Russia would not respond well if cornered by NATO. He attempted to broker numerous deals to prevent “NATO aggression” and avoid a large-scale conflict. But NATO is not an organization of peace.

“We will ensure reliable deterrence and we will be ready to [defend] NATO. We are sending a clear signal with this step to those who present a threat to peace and security in Europe,” Pistorius commented.

 

Who? ... the USA, England and Ukraine?

 

 He also noted that taxes must be raised to support this new NATO deterrent plan but did not elaborate on how they will extort their own citizens to pay for the war that they so desperately want.

 

 No updates on an American civil war just yet. Wait for it. That will depend on the military and what side they eventually pick.

 

with thanks to  Armstrong Economics

 

LIfe and Death In the Construct of a Media Invented Bubble

Upon review of an Armistice Day post I recently offered here, it occurred to me I should include some statistics regarding our involvement of these various wars of attrition and goal seeking status we've become blithely accustomed to in our lifetimes and beyond.

World War I produced 10% civilian casualties.

World War II rose to a 50% civilian casualty rate.

The Vietnam War escalated the deaths of civilians to 70%.

The most recent Iraq and Afghanistan Wars are estimated to have incurred targeted population to a rate of 90% civilians killed.

I feel rather embarrassed.

I must have missed the 'dis'?

 

 The United Nations (U.N.) says it is battling mis- and disinformation on social media and beyond through what it calls a "digital army" located across the globe.

So ... is the misinformation in the room with us now? 

 

uh oh. If you scroll down the news column you'll find the New York Times, Washington Post, Guardian, Der Spiegel, Le Monde, etc , there.  

Then there's the Google and Microsoft terms of service you agreed to. The list of "features" that claim to make your internet experience more mind dulling; college campus mission statement and policy; your health insurance provider/hospital and the doctor who prescribed your Covid shot; US Dept of State press releases, I haven't even mentioned television yet.

Hey. I'm just wingin' it here ...

Good luck. You're gonna need it. Except for something ...

completely different.  

 

You can still question the amount of falsehoods presented to you by the media and the institutions supporting them, every single day, in your private thoughts. You may even dare mention your conclusions in private conversation - with someone you trust.

Historically, in times of war - the Russian operation to save the Donbass residents persecuted by the US supported coup is not a declaration of war but a Right to Protect operation in support of UN resolution 2202 and in response to the abandonment of the Minsk 

Treaty agreements dashed by its Western overseers in favor of "conquering" an independent nation with no imperial ambitions - emotions, and the rhetoric that inspire them run at a fever pitch.

This makes corresponding about "current events" a matter that should be approached with caution. If, as a nation, all its citizens had similar concern, it wouldn't be an issue. The governing body would serve at the people's will.

 

As it stands, all our data is currently collected for further review by a hodge podge of secretive agencies that operate in league with the major communication giants seeking a foothold of dominance to be the government's primary advocate dispensing official, approved, information. The evidence is accruing rapidly of just such an instance of corporate/government liaison and cooperation, much like that which occurred in World War II, for example.

The exact details haven't yet been fully revealed, though the rhetoric is boundless. Most 'agents' involved operate behind a veil of 'national security'. Recent court cases of national importance have been rushed to prosecute to avoid Congressional scrutiny. Depending on your point of view, you may have witnessed cases of media biases.
 

In personal communications, therefore, caution should prevail. Again, I point out historical events that aptly reveal our imperfect, human nature. 

As for this blog post? You have no idea of how difficult it was to include this addendum to the original post.

 

It's not the first time. Nor will it be the last. It seems that shedding light on the issue subdues those who would darken our doorstep.

 

If I was a bettin' man; feel lucky, yet?

 

From Anti-War.com

On Thursday, a group of Republicans introduced a bill in the House and Senate that would reaffirm NATO’s Article 5 does not override congressional war powers. The effort was led by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and Reps. Chip Roy (R-TX) and Warren Davidson (R-OH).

“I introduced a resolution reasserting that Article 5 of the NATO Treaty does not supersede Congress’s responsibility to declare war or authorize military force before engaging in hostilities,” Paul wrote in Responsible Statecraft.

NATO’s Article 5 outlines mutual defense commitments of the 31-member alliance but does not automatically mean the US must intervene militarily if a NATO ally comes under attack.

“For decades, many legislators have incorrectly interpreted Article 5 as an obligation that unquestionably commits the United States to provide military support should a NATO ally be attacked,” he wrote.

Article 5 states: “The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force.”

Paul noted that while NATO members are required to assist each other in the event of an attack, military action is not mandated. “Furthermore, Article 11 of the NATO Treaty states that the provisions of the Treaty are to be carried out in accordance with each country’s respective constitutional processes,” he wrote.

The legislation Paul introduced would express that Article 5 does not “supersede the constitutional requirement that Congress declare war or authorize the use of military force prior to the United States engaging in hostilities.”

The bill was cosponsored in the Senate by Mike Braun (R-IN), Mike Lee (R-UT), Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), and Josh Hawley (R-MO). Hawley was the only senator to vote against Sweden and Finland joining NATO. Explaining his reasoning for the vote, Hawley said he wants the US to focus on building alliances in the Asia Pacific, as he is a major China hawk. Paul voted “present” on admitting Sweden and Finland.

In the House, the Article 5 legislation was cosponsored by Reps. Dan Bishop (R-NC), Troy Nehls (R-TX), Harriet Hageman (R-WY), Paul Gosar (R-AZ), Andy Biggs (R-AZ), Andrew Clyde (R-GA), Matt Rosendale (R-MT), and Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA).

NATO’s Article 5 does not override US Congress’s war powers

 

 

 Neo-Con US Senators Blumenthal and Graham hold up a quote by President Puddin' Head

 

 The WAPO and NYT are already running puff pieces claiming a nuke exchange would be an "inconvenience", and suggest using Duck tape and plastic bags over doors and windows.

Just not in my back yard. How's your garden?

NATO’s Article 5 does not override Congress’s war powers

We must make clear that ‘an attack on one is an attack on all’ does not automatically trigger a US military response.

June 22, 2023

Written by
Senator Rand Paul

 

When faced with questions relating to America’s role in the world, we would be wise to heed the advice of our Founding Founders. George Washington urged distance from the “frequent controversies” of Europe. Thomas Jefferson pursued a course of “peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.”

As NATO continues its post-Cold War expansion, it is worth pointing out that, by its own terms, the NATO Treaty does not commit Americans to the military defense of our allies. To that end, I introduced a resolution reasserting that Article 5 of the NATO Treaty does not supersede Congress’s responsibility to declare war or authorize military force before engaging in hostilities.  

For decades, many legislators have incorrectly interpreted Article 5 as an obligation that unquestionably commits the United States to provide military support should a NATO ally be attacked. To support their assertion, those who pine for a perpetual Pax Americana paraphrase Article 5 of the NATO Treaty by stating that, “an attack against one or is an attack against all.” 

But that is not exactly what Article 5 states. Article 5 states, “The Parties agree that an armed take against one or more of them . . . shall be considered an attack against them all and . . . each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense . . . will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith . . . such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force…” In other words, NATO allies are committed to assist each other in the event of an attack, but military action is not mandated, and the United States maintains its sovereign capacity to determine what kind of response is warranted. 

Furthermore, Article 11 of the NATO Treaty states that the provisions of the Treaty are to be carried out in accordance with each country’s respective constitutional processes.

The Constitution grants to Congress the sole authority to determine where and when we send our sons and daughters to fight. We cannot delegate that responsibility to the president, the courts, an international body, or our allies. This is a constitutional responsibility that all members of Congress have freely taken and one that the American people expect us to uphold.

I proposed the same text of my resolution when the Senate was considering the inclusion of Sweden and Finland into NATO. At the time, some of my colleagues questioned my approach, and one in particular argued that that my proposal would demonstrate to our allies that the United States is going “wobbly” on Article 5. I would argue that our men and women in the field do not want Congress to go wobbly on the Constitution.

Over the years, there has been a disturbing trend of executive overreach, undermining the checks and balances that our founders established to prevent such abuses of power. Collective defense should not be used as a pretext to bypass the constitutional requirement for congressional approval. By clarifying that the NATO Treaty does not supersede the Constitution, we can respond to those who would deceive the public about what America’s commitments are and renew our commitment to the highest law in the land. Respecting congressional war powers does not hinder our national security or imply a disregard for treaties. On the contrary, it ensures that the decision to use military force is subjected to rigorous scrutiny and debate by the representatives of the people, just as our Founding Fathers intended.

We must continue to show our fealty to the Constitution and elevate diplomacy to the forefront of United States foreign relations. For years I’ve led the fight to return war-making powers to Congress where they belong, and I’m proud to continue those efforts by introducing this resolution with support in the Senate and House of Representatives. It’s long past time that we respect the balance of power and reassert Congress’s voice.

Responsible Statecraft

The False Flag Has Been Identified

 

 South Carolina, if you do not demand to impeach United States Senator Lindsey Graham, you are going to be responsible for the destruction of Western Civilization.

 

Not for the first time thus far in the conflict, accusations of false flag events involving radioactive material are flying, after Ukraine's President Zelensky accused Russia of plotting a "terrorist attack" on the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant which is to result in an intentional radiation leak, according to a Thursday video statement.

"Intelligence has received information that Russia is considering the scenario of a terrorist act at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant – a terrorist act with radiation leakage," he claimed. "Radiation has no state borders. Whomever it will hit is deterred only by the direction of the wind," Zelensky added.

The Ukrainian leader further claimed to have evidence to back his assertions about the plot, but the Kremlin has blasted all of this as "another lie". Russia has also stressed that an international team of UN-backed nuclear experts have been on-site observing safety protocol and proper operations.

Zelensky is in essence alleging Moscow is plotting a false flag attack on the very facility its own forces have long been occupying and controlling. Russian forces have overseen the local staff which keeps the nuclear plant, Europe's largest, in operation. It had for the past year-and-a-half been subject to sporadic shelling, with both sides frequently blaming the other for putting all of Europe at risk.

Zelensky said he received intelligence about the impending major security incident, and has passed it along to other countries including the United States, the Europeans, and even China, Brazil and India.

"This time it should not be like Kakhovka," Zelensky also said in the video, a reference to the hydroelectric dam which blew up and resulted in devastating, deadly flooding in the southern region earlier this month. Kiev has maintained Russian forces did it, while skeptics have noted it would be tantamount to Moscow shooting itself in the foot, given the dam's destruction created a huge risk to Crimea's water supply, as even the NY Times has underscored.

While Zelensky offered no evidence or any concrete details to back his new and alarming warnings surrounding the Zaporizhzhia power plant, he concluded his video message by saying, "the world has been warned, so the world can and must act."

 This “intelligence” comes just as Ukraine’s widely hyped counter-offensive is failing miserably (as predicted, including by Pentagon leaks). A dangerous moment.

                                                         source:  Zerohedge

 

  

(The weekend edition of the German business daily headlines: 

"This isn't a counter-offensive. It is a bloody crash test.") 

 

The Ukrainian Counter-Offensive Had No Chance. NATO Failed To Explain That.

The 'west' pushed Ukraine into a hopeless counter-offensive based on false assessments and wild expectations.

'Western' training for the mobilized Ukrainian forces did not bring up more capable soldiers than Soviet training would have done. Those who watched NATO stumble in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya should have recognized that.

 

                                source: Moon of Alabama.org

 

Choosing the term "counter-offensive" is not neutral. It’s a communication device suggesting that the Russians have launched an "offensive" to seize Ukraine ... In reality, the Russians have never attempted to take Kiev and have no intention of invading Ukraine.

 But Volodymyr Zelensky has interrupted the negotiations he was conducting with Moscow and enacted a law prohibiting their resumption.

 

                                         Source: VoltaireNet.org 

 

 

And the Trolls Just Keep on Coming!

 

Astroturfing For More War In Ukraine

Fellaraktar🇺🇦@fellaraktar - 14:46 UTC · May 29, 2023

As a British citizen I want to say that arming Ukraine is the single best use of tax payer money for decades

My only criticism is that the west aren’t sending enough, fast enough

Ukraine is paying for political posturing with the lives of their sons and daughters

Do more now

---

Karen Goetz📯🇺🇦 @KarenGoetz362 - 22:18 UTC · May 29, 2023

As a German citizen I want to say that arming #Ukraine is the single best use of tax payer money for decades. My only criticism is that the west aren't sending enough, fast enough. Ukraine is paying for political posturing with the lives of their sons and daughters. Do more now!

---

Oksanna Oricia (Оксана Збігла) 🇺🇦🇨🇦 @Roxanne_Oricia - 1:46 UTC · May 30, 2023

As a 🇺🇦 #Canadian I want to say that arming #Ukraine is the single best use of taxpayer money in decades.

My only criticism is that the west isn’t sending enough, FAST enough.

Ukraine is paying for political posturing with the lives of their sons & daughters.
#ArmUkraineNow ✊🏼

---

Thomas C. Theiner @noclador - 4:57 UTC · May 30, 2023

As an Italian citizen I want to say that arming Ukraine is the single best use of taxpayer money for decades.
My only criticism is that the west aren’t sending enough, fast enough.
Ukraine is paying for political posturing with the lives of their sons and daughters.
Do more now!

---

brit engr 🇬🇧 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🇺🇦 @brit_engr - 8:15 UTC · May 30, 2023

As a British citizen, I want to say that arming Ukraine is the single best use of taxpayer money for decades.
My only criticism is that the West aren’t sending enough, fast enough.
Ukraine is paying for political posturing with the lives of their sons and daughters.
Do more now!

---

bitiv @bitiv30 - 9:29 UTC · May 30, 2023

As a #Romanian citizen, I want to say that arming #Ukraine is the single best use of taxpayer money for decades. My only criticism is that the West isn’t sending enough, fast enough. Ukraine is paying for political posturing with the lives of its sons and daughters. Do more now!

---

Anne @KidsFromUkraine 🌷❤🌻 @AnneFella - 17:03 UTC · May 30, 2023

As a 🇳🇱#Dutch citizen I want to say that arming #Ukraine is the single best use of taxpayer money in decades. My only criticism is that the west isn’t sending enough, FAST enough. Ukraine is paying for political posturing with the lives of their sons & daughters. #ArmUkraineNow

---

Thibaud Ochem @Thibaud_Ochem - 18:51 UTC · May 30, 2023

As a 🇫🇷 citizen I want to say that arming #Ukraine is the single best use of taxpayer money 4 decades. My only criticism is that the West isn't sending enough, fast enough.🇺🇦is paying 4 political posturing with the lives of their sons & daughters. Do more now! #weapons4Ukraine

---

MH @Mickhavoc - 1:14 UTC · May 31, 2023

As a Canadian citizen I want to say that arming #Ukraine is the single best use of taxpayer money for decades. My only criticism is that the west aren't sending enough, fast enough. Ukraine is paying for political posturing with the lives of their sons and daughters. Do more now

---

Bogdan Stech @BogdanStech - 22:07 UTC · May 31, 2023

As a #Poland citizen, I want to say that arming #Ukraine is the single best use of taxpayer money for decades. My only criticism is that the West isn’t sending enough, fast enough. Ukraine is paying for political posturing with the lives of its sons and daughters.

 

                                                                         ---

 There are many more such tweets.

 You might even call it "perception management".

 

 

What you see is not what you get

Try logging in to a password protected account with windows, one that uses your email as an identifier, any email, for that matter, that you have chosen  ... the now familiar - even to three-month old babes suckling at their mother's lap top - "pop-up" that lists your google accounts may appear. Doesn't everyone have one? They're as prevalent as pennies in US currency, probably just to collect a DNA sample of every US citizen, but otherwise useless, some might say - no one wants them, but propriety demands we accept them.

Or you could discard them in the dish provided next to the register. Or make a little pile of zinc plated copper, the original copper metal content degraded by the Treasury due to inflation and excessive discretionary spending. Many governments devalued their currency by reducing the metal content of their coinage, although a few still exist despite that ordeal.  Rome is an egregious example if only for its Imperialist intentions and sudden, yet inevitable decline.

Or, as I sometimes do, throw them on the sidewalk outdoors for some scrounger to make theirs one lucky day ... an old wive's tale taught to gullible children.

Except now, depending on the site you've chosen, the list might just include a demand that you must choose your Google Account to provide access. Try it again, the same demand.You might try to take a screen shot, but it disappears when you do.

No access is allowed without it. Or, so you think. Go ahead. Click on it. You're in a hurry and it's just a stupid email account. One that's easy to remember  ... annoying, yes, like a small electrical shock, the denial, you've had it before.  And, as you may have "learned",  the way to avoid it again is to click the "right" button to get your reward ...

A second or third refusal and the aggravation is removed - along with any chance of forming a class action lawsuit for violation of anti-trust laws. 

Google can be the very definition of Persistent, but they're not stupid. You might even say that statement defines a zero-sum game, but with certain qualifications required of its participants.

Try it and you'll see ... It's fun living on the edge, isn't it?

 

 

 
You may ask, "Why would the USA go to such incredible lengths to create a dystopian apparatus to control media, communication and even our speech?"

 This is why.

 

So, who is in control of US policy?  When Biden uttered the phrase “I’m deviating from the script, am I going to get in trouble” don’t you understand that someone is scolding him if he speaks his own mind?

 

 

 

 

long way there

 

two cemeteries -- 

it was a long way there

this Decoration Day

 (*)

 

... buy a used car from this man?

Revisiting Ron Paul's 2004 House-Floor Speech Calling For Disbanding NATO, or, How We All Got Schlonged

 

 On March 30, 2004 - just over 19 years ago, then-Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) concluded a United States House of Representatives statement with a strong admonition regarding the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and US involvement in it.

 

Read Paul’s 2004 statement here:

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution. I do so because further expansion of NATO, an outdated alliance, is not in our national interest and may well constitute a threat to our national security in the future.

More than 50 years ago the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was formed to defend Western Europe and the United States against attack from the communist nations of Eastern Europe. It was an alliance of sovereign nations bound together in common purpose — for mutual defense. The deterrence value of NATO helped kept the peace throughout the Cold War. In short, NATO achieved its stated mission. With the fall of the Soviet system and the accompanying disappearance of the threat of attack, in 1989—1991, NATO’s reason to exist ceased. Unfortunately, as with most bureaucracies, the end of NATO’s mission did not mean the end of NATO. Instead, heads of NATO member states gathered in 1999 desperately attempting to devise new missions for the outdated and adrift alliance. This is where NATO moved from being a defensive alliance respecting the sovereignty of its members to an offensive and interventionist organization, concerned now with "economic, social and political difficulties…ethnic and religious rivalries, territorial disputes, inadequate or failed efforts at reform, the abuse of human rights, and the dissolution of states," in the words of the Washington 1999 Summit.

And we saw the fruits of this new NATO mission in the former Yugoslavia, where the US, through NATO, attacked a sovereign state that threatened neither the United States nor its own neighbors. In Yugoslavia, NATO abandoned the claim it once had to the moral high ground. The result of the illegal and immoral NATO intervention in the Balkans speaks for itself: NATO troops will occupy the Balkans for the foreseeable future. No peace has been attained, merely the cessation of hostilities and a permanent dependency on US foreign aid.

The further expansion of NATO is in reality a cover for increased US interventionism in Europe and beyond. It will be a conduit for more unconstitutional US foreign aid and US interference in the internal politics of member nations, especially the new members from the former East.

It will also mean more corporate welfare at home. As we know, NATO membership demands a minimum level of military spending of its member states. For NATO’s new members, the burden of significantly increased military spending when there are no longer external threats is hard to meet. Unfortunately, this is where the US government steps in, offering aid and subsidized loans to these members so they can purchase more unneeded and unnecessary military equipment. In short, it is nothing more than corporate welfare for the US military industrial complex.

The expansion of NATO to these seven countries, we have heard, will open them up to the further expansion of US military bases, right up to the border of the former Soviet Union. Does no one worry that this continued provocation of Russia might have negative effects in the future? Is it necessary?

Further, this legislation encourages the accession of Albania, Macedonia, and Croatia — nations that not long ago were mired in civil and regional wars. The promise of US military assistance if any of these states are attacked is obviously a foolhardy one. What will the mutual defense obligations we are entering into mean if two Balkan NATO members begin hostilities against each other (again)?

In conclusion, we should not be wasting US tax money and taking on more military obligations expanding NATO. The alliance is a relic of the Cold War, a hold-over from another time, an anachronism. It should be disbanded, the sooner the better.

In 2012, Ron Paul's bid for the Republican Presidential nominee was abruptly stymied.
At the convention that year, the tally was close enough to broker the convention - maintain enough delegate's votes to break the front runner's advantage of pre-assigned delegates, and subsequently, sweep up enough support from those unhindered in choice to win the nomination in extra ballots. 

After a voice vote over a last minute rule change to block Dr. Paul, the motion overwhelmingly rejected in the Dr.'s favor, the Convention chairman instead recited,  "the ayes have it" , reading each word directly from a teleprompter.

Angry shouting and calls for order broke out in the stadium with other calls for point of order. An abuse of Parliamentary Procedure had just been blatantly exposed on national television! More booing and cat calls turned the agenda into havoc.

It was to no avail. The chairman simply ignored the protests, adjourned the meeting, and turning his back on the assemblage, then walked, unrepentant, directly the off stage.

The only real anti-war candidate in 50 years had just been bamboozled.


So, what's next? Without a doubt, every western leader, led by the US' unelected, Neo-Con faction currently domineering all US foreign policy, is in a collaboration to prolong Ukraine's ten years of civil war against the domination of its own citizens.  The eventual goal is to incite a world war with Russia, which is currently involved enforcing UN resolution 2202 that would allow the Ukraine's disabused population the right to autonomy and self-representation. Since 2014, 20,000 of those men, women and children have been assassinated with the aid and knowledge of the conspirators.

The end game, without listing other factors, most likely means the dissolution of the United States as a country within the next ten years. That is, the USA will lose any endeavor to conquer the rest of the world. It should outlast the EU, however, by some good measure. They have destroyed their own bond market already.

The interim? This is gonna hurt. Might even leave a mark. Bandit may just earn his name. At least it won't be dull.

74th Year and Still Going Strong!

I get emotional in the morning

 ... and I haven't even had my coffee yet. 

Now, if only I can get my US Congress to get off it's collective behind and follow their oath of office. We have a constitutional crisis currently. Our executive branch - read that as the State Department - has promoted war in the Ukraine since 2014, spending well over a hundred billion dollars, in fact, ably supported by our media machine and a captive, NATO apparatus.

Not to discount the thousands of deaths incurred due that scurrilous strategy.

Well, US citizens? If you're of a like mind and see this post, before it disappears, contact them to assertively let your feelings be known. If enough participate, even from the safety of your own home, they will relent. I know. I've seen it succeed. You might even try this one, simple trick;                                                                  

Send faxes en masse to your Congressperson. The reason being, faxes are so  ... tactile. They make a right bloody mess of the office floor, while a career politician's sensitivities run to one goal; re-election.  I've always said, 

"The US Congress is the weakest link in the chain."   

Rattle it.

Now, just look at these kids. they give one hope, don't they? 

戦争法案強行採決に反対する国会前緊急抗議行動 (2017)

 

         A thicket of summer grass
             is all that remains
          of the dreams and ambitions
                of ancient warriors

      Matsuo Basho; Tr. by Nobuyuki Yuasa

 

 

 

Black Helicopters: zero dark thirty . . . . . again

 

I remember the Black Helicopters. That's right, I saw them. They hovered right over the crib, shaking the rafters, the pulse of their rotors like a bass drum played double time deep in a black cat bone. I didn't know whether to fall screaming to the floor or run into the street shouting platitudes to glory and firing my riot gun indiscriminately at erstwhile targets hidden in shadows. 

 

I wasn't the only one. It seems our own River City had been chosen, along with other metropolises across the nation, as practice grounds for doppelganger constructions born of the sands of Araby and beyond. San Diego was one, Dallas another and others, all without prior notice a dozen or so years after the Big One - 9/11. 

 

Actually, I went out on the roof to observe a squad of choppers, a hairsbreadth over 100 feet above, maneuvering like the bats that rose from the Mississippi on many a summer evening, door gunners and missiles glinting menace on that moonlit night. I could almost reach out and touch them.

 

The paper was headlined with explanations the next morning. It had been an exercise to protect our freedoms after all, in league with our now infamous efforts to save the world from "terr'ists" while spreading Democracy afar. 

 

Visiting the supermarket later in the day, I questioned the two off duty policeman stationed there to quell shoplifters if they had been informed, and, to the purpose of such an exercise. 

 

The officer responding boomed, "You don't want Bin Laden attacking us again, do you?", in proper authoritative tones, as though he were addressing the village idiot.

 

I didn't have the heart to remind him that Bin Laden had died quietly of kidney disease in Pakistan well over a decade before.

the fog of war --

even the general 

dons his battle fatigues

 

 

 

Concealed

 

... Maidan to Minsk,
the flag's true colours

concealed in a haze

(*)

 

 

balloon watch

 

 

                    (*)

 

 

 

Hawk

the banded hawk waits

its glare impenetrable

as if from above

how neglectful not to admit

war is on the horizon

 (*)

winter sparrows

 

 

      :::

 

thin heat

 

a war brews

continents away --

 this thin heat