Psychopaths Rule the World

Len Hart is a voice of sanity from the heart of Bush Country. Another excellent essay and advice from the Existentialist Cowboy. Ponerology gives the background. Educate yourself!

Blue Ibis

************************************************************
Psychopaths Rule the World

Len Hart
The Existentialist Cowboy
Tue, 03 Jun 2008 21:13 EDT

©Unknown

The psychologist Carl Jung estimated that in every 'society' could be found a 'psychopathic' thirty percent. It's sobering to think that over 60 percent of every society --even those we think most cultured --may be largely 'ruled' by about thirty percent who are utterly lacking the restraints that most of us associate with personal maturity, social cohesion, civilization itself.

A recent article by Dr. Kevin Barrett explores the dysfunctional underbelly of civilization which he says is "... largely the creation of psychopaths: all civilizations, he claims, are built upon 'slavery and mass murder'.

As I have written of Rome: it was in the death business having outsourced the more odious tasks to its 'Military/Industrial Complex' --the Praetorian Guard. Psychopaths, Dr. Barrett claims, are 'hard-wired to lie, kill, cheat, steal, torture, manipulate, and generally inflict great suffering on other humans without feeling any remorse, in order to establish their own sense of security through domination.' [See: Is George Bush A Psychopath?]

Earlier the psychologist Carl Jung estimated that as many as thirty percent of any population is certifiably psychopathic. Similarly, Dr. Gustav Gilbert, whose task it was to keep Nazi war criminals alive until they could be hanged, summed it up simply: evil, he said, was the utter lack of empathy. Hannah Arendt (The New School, New York) wrote of the 'banality of evil'.

It has been pointed out that 'normal people do not function like the Bushes, Clintons, Keetings, Stalins or Hitlers'. Dysfunctional and/or psychopathic GOP behaviors include the GOP habit of indulging self-reinforcing delusions, repeating failed strategies, and reversing the normal sequence of 'cause and effect'. The Bush administration, for example, will cite its own wars of aggression as justification for increasing military spending.

There is always the hope that as more become aware of this, steps may be taken to ameliorate the more overt and horrific effects which include the acts of genocide, heinous war crimes, indeed, war itself. [See: Of Bush and Evil: The Nature of his Crime Against Humanity]

There are some reasons for optimism. The GOP 'base' consists, interestingly, of about 30 percent of the population. I've often thought that 30 percent hard-core, GOP support to be the psychopaths described by Jung. Unless, the GOP can appeal to 'sane' people, it is sunk. In my article, I have made the case, that lately the GOP is losing support even among the thirty percent base (of Jung's description?). See: GOP Front-Runners Run Out of Wiggle Room

Is there hope that the world will achieve what author Henry Miller hoped would be a 'quantum leap'?

©Unknown

Until someone comes up with a 'silver bullet', the 'sane majority' must fight back with sanity itself. As the world witnessed at Tiananmen Square, the psychotic, totalitarian state simply crushes dissent with tanks, brute force and more insanity [See: 1989: Massacre in Tiananmen Square].

The same thing has happened in America. In 1932, under orders from Herbert Hoover, George S. Patton lead a cavalry charge against World I veterans encamped on the mall. Their only demand was that they be paid the 'bonus' money that 'our' government had promised them for their service in World War I.

By 4:45 P.M. the troops were massed on Pennsylvania Ave. below the Capitol.

Thousands of Civil Service employees spilled out of work and lined the streets to watch. The veterans, assuming the military display was in their honor, cheered. Suddenly Patton's troopers turned and charged. "Shame, Shame" the spectators cried. Soldiers with fixed bayonets followed, hurling tear gas into the crowd.

By nightfall the BEF had retreated across the Anacostia River where Hoover ordered MacArthur to stop. Ignoring the command, the general led his infantry to the main camp. By early morning the 10,000 inhabitants were routed and the camp in flames. Two babies died and nearby hospitals overwhelmed with casualties. Eisenhower later wrote, "the whole scene was pitiful. The veterans were ragged, ill-fed, and felt themselves badly abused. To suddenly see the whole encampment going up in flames just added to the pity."

-- The Bonus Army]

©Unknown

Later, during the commission of the war crime called 'Viet Nam', the Ohio National Guard opened fire on students who were not even protesting at Ohio State University. Four students were killed. There is now evidence that the Guard had been under orders to shoot and certainly, the guns were loaded with real bullets --not rubber!

The first day, there was some brutality; the Guard bayonetted two men, one a disabled veteran, who had cursed or yelled at them from cars. The following day, May 4th, the Guard, commanded with an amazing lack of military judgment, marched down a hill, to a field in the middle of angry demonstrators, then back up again.

Seconds before they would have passed around the corner of a large building, and out of sight of the crowd, many of the Guardsmen wheeled and fired directly into the students, hitting thirteen, killing four of them, pulling the trigger over and over, for thirteen seconds. (Count out loud--one Mississippi, two Mississippi, to see how long this is.) Guardsmen--none of whom were later punished, civilly, administratively, or criminally--admitted firing at specific unarmed targets; one man shot a demonstrator who was giving him the finger.

The closest student shot was fully sixty feet away; all but one were more than 100 feet away; all but two were more than 200 feet away. One of the dead was 255 feet away; the rest were 300 to 400 feet away. The most distant student shot was more than 700 feet from the Guardsmen.
--Kent State, May 4, 1970: America Kills Its Children]

What tactics are left the people when 'insane' governments monopolize military force and weaponry. For the longer term, the people must realize that governments have no powers but those given them by the people. This is as true for totalitarian states as it is for democracies. As was said in the sixties: drop out! Don't feed the beast. Secondly, as we have seen, passive resistance is no guarantee that the 'establishment' will not murder in the name of the state --a mere 'legal abstraction'. One of the most cogent strategies that I have seen recently was found on OpEd News:

I will not work for you, buy from you, fight for you, or die for you, until the criminals are gone from the halls of our government."

That is a strategy that I have adopted; it will, at least, assuage your conscience. Many, however, don't have the luxury of going 'cold turkey'. Even so --there is little excuse for enriching Wal-Mart. There is NO excuse whatsoever for watching Fox or patronizing its advertisers. With any luck and some publicity, we might even begin an advertisers boycott of Fox. Now ---THAT will change things in the Fox boardroom. The sound of money 'walking' is the sound of people 'talking'. And telling the truth.

With a bit of study, consumers should seek out local merchants and local companies while boycotting multi-nationals that are clearly a part of the problem.

The 'corporate' structure of American society is, itself psychopathic. Despite what is written by economists with regard to 'economies of scale', local firms often do a better job than multi-national conglomerates whose only purpose is the enrichment of some one percent of the population. Local firms put money back into the community by hiring local talent and expertise. Local firms were once the backbone of the nation and the soul of viable communities where, now, we have only bedroom suburbs and Potemkin villages. Corporate society is a fascist cancer.

These days, it is possible to get a lot of information about companies on the 'net. Boycott any business having anything to do with the Military/Industrial complex. The obvious boycotts are the oil companies. Unless a car is ABSOLUTELY essential, get a bike or use public transportation. Some cities, like Houston, have come around to the use of TRAMS but very late in the game. Still --late is better than never.

Martha Stout's Latest in the Huffington Post

The Huffington Post gave Dr. Martha Stout some air time for this most insightful column. Of particular interest is that the comment section (almost) uniformly in agreement with her conclusions was CLOSED after only 26 entries? The PTB must have been terrified of the degree of social proof that could be generated by leaving this article open to comment by the rabble. You can comment on the SOTT site or on the Forum

Blue Ibis
********************************************
George Bush's Paranoia War

Dr. Martha Stout
Huffington Post
Fri, 05 Oct 2007 15:02 EDT

Extreme fear is a first-rate weapon, neuropsychologically speaking. Unlike ordinary experiences, which are organized in the cerebral cortex, traumatic experiences stay "stuck" in the limbic system, an emotional, evolutionarily older area of the brain. As our lives go along, these chaotic memories can be triggered in us by reminders of the traumatic event, even in new situations that are far less dangerous. Triggering this neurological "switch" causes us to react fearfully--as if the trauma were happening all over again-- and temporarily derails our ability to think and act rationally in the present.

When the president of the United States behaves in ways that redouble the population's fears, his behavior is a psychological issue. When the White House uses advertising specialists to instill in our minds terrifying visual images of mushroom clouds above American cities, American psychologists should be concerned, to say the least. When our chief executive dwells yet again on "death and destruction" in a speech he makes as we observe the sixth anniversary of our national trauma--and tells us that if we hinder his war policy, our enemies will "come here to kill us"--it's time for professionals who know about the effects of psychological trauma to speak up. As such a professional, I invite any person of reasonably sound mental health to engage in this brief and illuminating fantasy:

Imagine for a moment that somehow the American presidency falls to you, instead of to George Bush, and that, for reasons known only to you and your conscience, you accept the position. Not long after you move into the Oval Office, the United States is hit by a disastrous terrorist attack. Counterterrorism measures that should have been attended to long ago must now be designed at emergency speed--protective systems for the skies, the ports, the nation's nuclear facilities, its food supplies--but you can see that, just now, your stricken countrymen are scarcely able to think at all. Their physical and psychological landscapes have been disfigured by inscrutable "others" from a distant part of the world, and they are deeply traumatized and subclinically paranoid. The resonance of their fear is almost palpable. In this uniquely vulnerable state of mind, three hundred million people turn to you en masse, and, prepared to trust your answer implicitly--to cling to it, even--they ask you the following question: What should we do now?

I believe that, as you looked out on millions of your countrymen lost in fear and grief, you would experience an overwhelming desire to help them. You would earnestly want to bring them some comfort and peace, so they could protect themselves, heal, and rebuild. And--exiting this little fantasy exercise and returning to the reality of the last six years--perhaps, like me, you've been repeatedly saddened to witness that not everyone in such a rare and influential position experiences a desire to assist his own nation in recovery and real self-protection.

That some of our leaders didn't display this sort of heartfelt reaction has been understandably difficult for Americans to acknowledge out loud. As playwright and McCarthy victim Arthur Miller wrote, "Few of us can easily surrender our belief that society must somehow make sense. The thought that the state has lost its mind and is punishing so many innocent people is intolerable." But, if we curb our wish to forget a painful truth, we can recall that the rise of insanely self-interested fear politicians is a phenomenon as ancient as the existence of hierarchical society itself. The heartless cultivation of fear has been used politically at least since the first century BC, when the Sicarii and the Zealots committed public assassinations to terrorize the Romans in ancient Palestine. We saw it in Joseph McCarthy's reign of paranoia over the US in the 1950s, and we're seeing it again now.

Extreme fear is a first-rate weapon, neuropsychologically speaking. Unlike ordinary experiences, which are organized in the cerebral cortex, traumatic experiences stay "stuck" in the limbic system, an emotional, evolutionarily older area of the brain. As our lives go along, these chaotic memories can be triggered in us by reminders of the traumatic event, even in new situations that are far less dangerous. Triggering this neurological "switch" causes us to react fearfully--as if the trauma were happening all over again-- and temporarily derails our ability to think and act rationally in the present.

A disaster-made glitch in the brain makes us unusually vulnerable to influence, and herein lies a convenience for ambitious authoritarians. In The Paranoia Switch, I coin the expression limbic war to refer to the activities of a fear monger who increases his political power by repeatedly triggering traumatic memories in the brains of individuals who have lived through a group calamity. A politician doesn't have to know anything about the neuropsychology of trauma to conduct such a limbic war. It's like sex, in the sense that you don't need to understand biology to participate.

Is our president a scaremonger? Is George Bush waging a limbic war against us? Is he truly cold enough to be using the fear generated on September 11, 2001, as a kind of renewable resource to maintain his political power and further his own agenda? To help answer this question, I'd like to post a summary of the list I provide in The Paranoia Switch--ten behaviors observable historically in leaders who have used fear to keep people in line:

1) Unsurprisingly, leaders who use fear as their primary political strategy speak repeatedly of dangerous people and frightening situations. They address other topics too, and may even use humor. But somewhere within virtually every communication, there will be several references to danger, and to just how frightened people must not forget to be.

2) Fear politicians frequently offer descriptions of catastrophic events that might happen in the future, and of other such events that would have happened had the plans not been thwarted.

3) Such leaders are prone to accuse those who disagree with them of being disloyal to the group and/or naive.

4) Fear brokers tend to look, act, and speak like the people found in their constituencies, sometimes almost in caricature. The fear broker's self-presentation tends to be that of an adequately educated person, but not a worldly or intellectual one. If from a region where the people speak with an accent, such a leader is likely to nurture this characteristic in himself.

5) Fear mongers often behave like archetypal parents. A fear-mongering leader may imply that, though the people are his brave charges, they cannot be expected to be so courageous and strong as he, and therefore, they must always rely on him. He demands to be trusted, and promises that he will never abandon them or give up on his goals.

6) Leaders who practice fear politics tend to admonish people over "moral" issues, and use shame to exert control. As a typical example, a sexuality-related topic (an issue around marriage, childbearing choices, homosexuality, etc.) will be introduced into a popular discussion that had nothing to do with sexuality, and then notes of shame or sin will be blended into the altered debate. These actions on the part of the leader may temporarily distract people from their original concerns.

7) In a seeming contradiction, fear brokers praise the group for being moral and heroic. A scare-mongering leader tends to speak of how much more God-fearing, principled, selfless, and admirable the people of his nation are than all the other peoples of the world.

8) Fear-mongering leaders project personal infallibility. When asked the direct question, "Do you feel you made a mistake?" the answer is always no, regardless of how conspicuous the mistake.

9) Such leaders tend to be secretive, and to be certain that other people, too, are keeping dangerous secrets. Scare-tactic politicians are often obsessed with gathering information about their countrymen, though much of this information may be objectively meaningless.

10) Whatever their tongue, fear leaders use language that pulls for primitive emotions: words and concepts (in the group's language) such as vengeance, cowardice, and good versus evil. In addition, fear politicians are associated with a skewed pronoun usage, specifically the frequent use of the third person plural--they--as in declarations of what they are doing to us. In contrast, moral leaders tend to employ the first person plural--we--as in references to what we (the people) can do to help ourselves.

This, in abridged form, is the book's list of ten behavioral characteristics of political fear mongers. Where George Bush is concerned, doing the math is not hard. (I don't know what you came up with, but I counted ten out of ten.) It is my hope, as a trauma psychologist and as a citizen, that we will choose a very different kind of leader in 2008, one who will not engage in an emotional war against us, and who is wise enough not to imagine that our worst fears are his best friends.

Comment: Dr. Stout has touched on some very important ponerological concepts: the 'special psychological knowledge' of pathological individuals, the hysterization of society and its manipulation (see Transmarginal Inhibition), the similarity between pathocracies both present and past, the use of paramoralisms.

Unfortunately, she seems to still be under the illusion that the American people have the ability to choose a better leader in 2008. If we take her comparison to the fear-mongers of old a step further, we can see that such leaders are not above election fraud--they will do anything in their power to keep power, and that includes providing the illusion of choice and freedom.

Taking the comparison even further, we can see that such a political system would have no qualms about murdering its own citizens for similar purposes. Dr. Stout also seems to be under the illusion that foreign "terrorists" committed the attacks of 9/11. A quick read of Dr. David Ray Griffin's books on the subject (especially his latest, Debunking 9/11 Debunking) and SOTT's own 9/11: The Ultimate Truth, would demonstrate the absurdity of such a position.

That being said, Dr. Stout's books are an invaluable source of relevant information. Check out her latest, The Paranoia Switch, as well as her previous books: The Myth of Sanity and The Sociopath Next Door.

Then and Now, Zionist Style

Not a lot to add here, except the U.S. recently committed 30 BILLION ("yes, with a B") more of your tax dollars to support this inhumanity. Not only does it deprive you in the US of decent schools, good affordable medical care, safe roads and other things that make a life livable, it makes EVERY U.S. taxpayer complicit in these crimes. Think about that.

Blue Ibis
*************************************************************

Gaza: The Auschwitz Of Our Time

Khalid Amayreh
Coastal Post
Wed, 29 Aug 2007 23:21 EDT

In 1940, several months after invading Poland in September 1939, the Nazis forced about 500,000 Jews into the Warsaw Ghetto, surrounding it with a high wall. Tens of thousands died from hunger and disease. Eventually, 300,000 were sent to death camps, mainly Treblinka in eastern Poland.

Similarly, Israel is now incarcerating nearly a million and a half helpless Palestinians in the Gaza Strip into a hell similar in nature to the Warsaw Ghetto. The Gaza concentration camp is not only fitted with a wall, but also with every conceivable tool of repression, such as electric fences and watch towers manned by Gestapo-like trigger-happy Jewish soldiers who shoot first and ask questions later.

Moreover, thousands of Israeli soldiers, are surrounding Gaza in a hermetic manner, shooting and killing any Palestinian trying to escape, e.g. enter Israel to search for work or even food.

Palestinian kids survive on bread and tea

Even Palestinian kids playing soccer near the hateful fences, are routinely riddled with bullets or reduced into pieces of human flesh by the "most moral army in the world."

As a result of these genocidal designs, Gazans in the thousands are dying of malnutrition and illness resulting from anemia. Moreover, Children in great numbers are surviving on a meager and totally inadequate diet consisting mainly of bread and tea.

This week, this writer contacted several Gaza families and asked to speak with the kids. The answers I received were truly horrifying. I did speak with 10 kids and was shocked to find out that seven of the kids told me their diet during the previous week consisted mainly of bread and tea in addition to some tomatoes.

The grown-ups, especially the parents, wouldn't reveal the extent of the unfolding tragedy they are facing. They would only say a terse "al hamdulillah" (thank God). But the tone of their voices tells us that they are in real distress.

The Gaza Strip made into the largest detention camp in the world

The harsh blockade of Gaza didn't start in mid June when Hamas took over the small seaside region after defeating and ousting the American-backed Fatah forces led by Muhammed Dahlan and cohorts who had been planning, with American dollars and arms, to murder the Hamas leadership in order to receive a certificate of good conduct from the Bush Administration and Israel.

In fact, Gaza has been effectively under siege since 2000 when the second Palestinian intifada or uprising broke out. Since, then Gazans have been barred from exporting their products and produces.

Moreover, Israel, which has been telling the world that it had ended its occupation of Gaza, still retains full control of the Rafah border crossing with Egypt, thus reducing the Gaza Strip into the largest detention camp in the world.

To make a long story short, Gazans are being pushed into a situation very similar to that which prevailed at the Ghetto Warsaw. They are not allowed to work (unemployment in Gaza stands at more than 70%), they are not allowed to travel abroad, they are not allowed to enter Israel for work, they are not allowed even to go fishing offshore since Israeli gunboats would open fire at any fishing-boat daring to go more than a mile off the shore.

The criminal and draconian measures are meant to further impoverish Gazans to the extent that they won't be able to purchase food.

The declared Israeli goal behind starving and tormenting the people of Gaza is to force them to revolt against the democratically-elected government, led by the Hamas movement, and settle for a quisling-like government that would sell-out Palestinian national rights, including the paramount right of return for Palestinian refugees uprooted from their homes and villages by Jewish gangs in 1948, when Israel was created.

It is believed that up to two thirds of the inhabitants of Gaza are refugees. Hence, the intensive repression and coercion being meted out to these people in order to force them to give up their right to return to their homes and villages in what is now Israel.

It is crystal clear that Israel is steadily but certainly effecting a Nazi-like approach toward the people of the Gaza Strip.

The PR-conscious Israeli government, however, is hoping that the world will not take proactive measures to expose the creeping genocide in Gaza . This is why Israel is allowing limited shipments of food products, such as flour and cooking oil, into Gaza, to avoid a possible international outcry.

However, the supplies are conspicuously meager and don't meet the basic nutritional needs of the vast bulk of Gaza children.

Unfortunately, the United Nations Relief and Work Agency (UNRWA) seems to be conniving and colluding with Israel to keep the unfolding Gaza tragedy as silent as possible.

UNRWA officials do make idle statements from time to time, warning of an impending "humanitarian crisis" in Gaza. However, the UN agency often refrains from "saying it as it is," probably for fear of upsetting the Israelis and the Americans, who apparently don't like to hear words like "starvation, and concentration camps" with regard to the situation in Gaza find their way to the international media.

Israel is undoubtedly the central culprit in this man-made tragedy in Gaza, since it is up to her to allow Gazans to obtain food and export their products and especially their produces to the West Bank. Such a step, which would cost Israel nothing, would help Gazans obtain some meager income to feed their children.

However, Israel, as always, has apparently chosen to be faithful to long traditions of callousness and moral depravity, not unlike the way the Nazis treated their victims.

US administration, Abbas as guilty as Israel

But Israel is not the only guilty party in this tragedy. The US is actually as criminal as Israel, since the Bush administration is urging Israel to keep up the pressure on Gaza.

In fact, American officials keep congratulating their Israeli colleagues on the "success" of the blockade against Gaza. I wonder what kind of politicians are those who enjoy watching children starve to death? [Hint: try here] Are they human beings or cannibalistic beasts? This question ought to be directed to Condoleezza Rice whose behavior toward the Palestinian people is probably a thousand times worse than the behavior of the worst American white slave masters toward here forefathers.

Maybe it is naive to appeal to Rice's sense of justice and morality since her manifestly criminal record with regard to the Palestinian cause leaves no doubt as to the woman's unethical and evil character.

But if the Bush administration, which has been carrying a holocaust in Iraq, and Israel, which has been effecting ethnic cleansing in Palestine in the name of Jewish nationalism, can be "excused" on the ground that only evil can be expected from evil governments, the Palestinian regime of Mahmoud Abbas has no excuse whatsoever to collude and connive with Israel against the very people it is claiming to serve. [Psychopaths recognize each other, and band together when it serves their individual interests.]

Such behavior, including the tacit and implicit encouragement of Israel to tighten the blockade of Gaza, and keep hundreds of thousands of encircled Gazans hungry and thoroughly tormented, characterizes quislings and agents of a foreign occupation.

Clearly, Abbas and his aides have much to explain to the Palestinian people. They also have much to atone for. This is if they still possess any sense of shame. [Don't bet on it. They will tell you they are good patriots.]

Listening for Truth Amid the Drums of War

As seen here, the drums are getting louder. Will you let them drown out your ability to think??

Blue Ibis
**************************************************
The Next War Draws Nearer

Scott Horton
Harper's Magazine
Mon, 27 Aug 2007 16:41 EDT

Hardly a week passes in which I don't get a message from someone within the great bureaucratic wasteland on the Potomac about the Bush Administration's latest schemes relating to war against Iran. Now we're going through another one of those periods in which the pace is quickening and the pitch is becoming more intense. I continue to put the prospects for a major military operation targeting Iran down as "likely," and the time frame drawing nearer. When will Bush give the go ahead? I think late this year or early next would be the most congenial time frame from the perspective of the war party. Some of the developments that go into my call:

* Labeling the Revolutionary Guards as 'Terrorists.' Last week the Bush Administration floated the idea that it would schedule Iran's Revolutionary Guards (an official part of the Iranian government) as a terrorist organization. This is related to the Administration's propaganda drive to portray the Revolutionary Guard as deeply engaged in training terrorists in Iraq. (Iran is deeply engaged in outfitting and supporting factions loyal to it in Iraq, as is Saudi Arabia and other states.) Of course, the Revolutionary Guards answer directly to Supreme Leader Khamenei, so in taking this position, the Bush Administration is essentially saying that it has decided to ditch an initiative that focuses on skirting Ahmadinejad by going directly to Khamenei - that is, it is limiting its diplomatic options, yet again. No real surprise there, since it's clear - notwithstanding statements from Condoleezza Rice about the exhaustion of diplomatic approaches - that the White House (read: Dick Cheney) places no store whatsoever in a diplomatic effort for Iran.

* Preparation for a 'Dirty War'? The branding of the Revolutionary Guard as terrorists raises troubling prospects with respect to targeting and military operations in Iran. Based on prior Bush Administration postures (adopted with respect to the Taliban, and units of Saddam Hussein's military), it would mean that they are denied Geneva Convention protections in the coming war and could be treated to "highly coercive interrogation techniques" (i.e., torture) if captured. In sum, it looks like the Bush Administration is busily preparing for another "dirty war."

* Costing for Ground Operations in Iran. In the last two weeks the Department of Defense has begun pushing regular contractors very aggressively for "unit costs" to be used for logistical preparations for reconstruction and ground operations in a certain country of West Asia. In the last week, the requests have gotten increasingly harried. And what, exactly, is the country in question? Iran.

* 'There Will Be an Attack on Iran.' Former senior CIA analyst Bob Baer has a piece in the current Time Magazine called "Prelude to an Attack on Iran." Baer also sees a quickening pace and an increasing likelihood of a sustained military assault on Iran, driven by the Neocons. Baer develops the scenario, showing how the Revolutionary Guards will be portrayed as terrorists, they will be linked to armor-penetrating projectiles used in Iraq, and this will be taken as a pretext to wage a war against Iran. He quotes an Administration official who says these explosive devices "are a casus belli for this Administration. There will be an attack on Iran."

* Bolton Wants Bombs in Six Months. John Bolton appeared on Fox News and was asked a question based on Bob Baer's report. Bolton "absolutely hopes" it is true that bombs will start falling on Iran within six months.

* The Predictable Role of Fox News. Fox News is intimately intertwined with the Administration's propaganda machine, as a study of its coverage of the run-up to the Iraq War shows (and similarly, its decision to all but pull the plug on more recent coverage of the dismal situation in Iraq). Producer Robert Greenwald has done a terrific summary of how Fox News continues a propaganda build-up to support military action against Iran which closely parallels what it did for its masters in the run-up to the Iraq War. Catch the video here.