Home | About | Donate

Chilcot Report on Iraq Invasion Shows Threat of Lesser Evils


Chilcot Report on Iraq Invasion Shows Threat of Lesser Evils

Peter Bloom

After almost a decade of waiting, the Chilcot report is finally being released today promising to uncover the real reasons for the UK’s disastrous decision to invade Iraq. While British political elites are dealing with the aftermath of this political bombshell, the media and population are once again demanding answers for this costly and unnecessary war.


I haven't finished the article, but had to respond to this:

"Nevertheless, it is to easy to merely stop analysis at the fact that Blair and his militant cohorts “lied.” It is crucial to understand their larger worldview that formed and legitimized these actions. Specifically, it was founded on a misguided and ultimately quite radical assumption that any and all measures where necessary to prevent the threat of terrorism – regardless of how small the risk or high the potential cost."

It's VITAL that when peeling back the Lotus of Lies that led up to the already planned ("The Project for a New American Century" holds the blueprint) invasions, that the SEMINAL trigger--which so many recognize was a false flag--be equally scrutinized.

After all, if the event that is passed off as an act of Terrorism is instead seen for what it was, then the entire pretext used by the U.S. MIC and its NATO allies--in their rabid pursuit of outside terrorists is also based on total lies and fabrications.

This is a VERY difficult abyss to face. After all, just as War of Aggression is cited as THE SUPREME crime (by the Geneva Conventions) because from it stem all other crimes, the manufacture of a False Trigger (of which there are many other obvious historical precedents) gave rise to unleashed aggression which stamped out over one million lives while destroying the homes, livelihoods, and infrastructure that supported many millions more... a percentage of which now seek solace, security, and shelter in Europe (as befitting Karmic blow-back).

Here is one link (there are MANY):


Many smart people prove to be decent chess players; and chess players must think ahead several (if not more) moves on the board.

In parallel, those elites who wish to continue their control of world populations must plan ahead many moves.

It's not a "conspiracy theory" to show how Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan worked in sync to begin the process of divesting government of its watchdog powers (unless those powers were put in service to the 1%... industry's moguls and bankers).

Nor is it a conspiracy to notice certain unmistakable parallels such as Blair acting like Bush to turn the so-called Liberals (or what Peter Bloom defines as "the left") into a willing accomplice to foreign wars.

I made the point a few weeks ago that it's possible that the Clintons were TASKED with maintaining the Democratic Party's BRAND name while essentially converting it into another entity serving the MIC and Big Business: The former Republican purview.

It was intentional. Stealth!

The same thing happened in U.K.

Coincidence? I think not.

Therefore, if individuals who serve Right Wing Interests PRETEND to represent the opposition, but in fact don't do so, at what point must the labels be newly calibrated to fit what's actually true... and going on?

"If this was indeed criminal – as it increasingly appears to be – it was crime that both the respectable Right and Left are equally guilty. Indeed, it is arguable that so-called “liberal interventionists” have even more blood on their collective hands as their vocal support threatened to give these actions a false veneer of “moderation.”

The LEFT'S VOICE was wiped out via infiltration by those who pretended to represent those stances typical to the LEFT while acting as complete COUNTERFEITS!

All that to maintain the ILLUSION that choice was still operational and Democratic systems still functioning.


Alas, rule by inverted language and the power of Oxymoron!

Liberal Hawks!

And now this:

"The risk of this centrist extremism..."

The CENTER is never related to extremes or extremism. THAT is why it's called center or centrist.

When words are divested of meaning a number of things happen:

First, people have no common currency through which to form ideas or shape strategies.

Second, cognitive dissonance results. Words no longer mean what they once did in the same way that food that once was healthy is now laced with lethal chemicals and cancer-causing detritus.

Third, it's a drag living in such a mind fuck! Where all the media talking heads repeat the Necessary Lies and Official Narratives in ways that normalize them. Then, the percentage of the population that is fully awake, mortified by what it sees, and paying attention is NOT believed by those caught up in the dense webs of illusion.

I wrote about this Final Phase of the Piscean Age in a book by that title published more than a decade ago, and I spoke about the dangers of mass deception.

Just as I took a course in "Puerto Rican Family" in college (part of my Sociology minor) and scored a perfect "100" on the final exam, the actual experience of LIVING in that culture stunned me on all levels.

Same with what I am witnessing about the dissembling deceptions and delusions of our times.

It must be flooding all over because the angels are crying boatloads of tears... for all who suffer due to the crimes of so many sociopaths in such empowered positions.

THIS is good stuff:

"History will show that supporters of Iraq were at best “mistaken” and at worst criminal. Yet underneath these misdoings is a larger lie that continues to be presented as truth. That Western imperialism and its military industrial complex can be moderated – that it can be channeled into the cause of justice."


There is no way that this report will result in the "moderation" of the extreme elements that sit atop the neo-colonialist empire of corporate globalization. Seeking "full spectrum dominance" for their project, they feverishly convince themselves they're in their end-game, fast approaching total victory.

And they have major influence over most major institutions that might counter their plans.

Media is controlled by corporations, and distorts the reality it mediates, on behalf of those corporations and their bedfellows. Major political parties are little more than tools. Courts and judges have been pressured and largely vetted for compliance and non-interference. Global institutions are corrupted shells of whatever great ideals they may have embodied. Public consciousness is mis-educated at school, mis-represented on TV and in the press, distorted by marketing, public relations and "spin," wherever possible distracted by "entertainment," and when necessary repressed by brute force. Demagogues divide us with the rhetoric of hatred, otherness, difference and separation. Network and surveillance technology daily knit a tighter weave of control over information, communication, access and relationships. The workplace is a playfield for little tyrants who gleefully enforce the merciless controls of "human resources management." Etc.

Who's gonna stand up to these rampant human monsters who steer toward mass catastrophe? At some point, in some way, it's gotta be us. But it seems that the crystallization of mass outrage, will only occur after the complete breakdown of everything...


I would like to suggest the book "The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison," By Jeffrey Reimann. He uses criminal justice as a lens through which to see the ways in which elites practice the "pyrrhic defeat": the useful failure, the opportunistic exploitation of whatever the current mess happens to be. He lays out a convincing case that conspiracy is unnecessary for elites to achieve their needs.

That said, we DO have specific instances in which direct statements of nefarious agendae are available. Here are three examples.

  1. The Truman Doctrine was crafted behind closed doors, and presented publicly as being about Communism, when in fact it was privately about domestic affairs - the economy and social control. This was stated directly among his advisers.

  2. The meeting between Francis Schaeffer and top Republican operatives in the 70s establishing common cause around gay rights and abortion. This was again an instance where utterly tactical concerns were expressed in private, but the final presentation was couched in terms of values and public interest.

  3. The recent admission by John Ehrlichmann that Nixon's escalation of the drug war was deliberately targeted at the counterculture and black communities as a means of disrupting and marginalizing them as a political force. Once more, in private the subject is tactics, but in public the presentation is about values and public interest.

These are exceptional instances, and I believe they would be insufficient on their own to sustain these regressive trends. Plans like this need to be useful to a broad coalition of powerful interests and wealthy people, and then they will not need to be stated directly anymore, they simply become common sense, they become the new normal.

Education is a great example: I don't think there is any conspiracy to make low income students poorly educated, but there WAS a definite conspiracy to profit from the "untapped market" of privatization and test publishing. Yet publishing companies and education corporations could not have achieved their yields without the participation of hundreds of thousands of people who knew nothing about the broader tactical goals. I suppose Gramsci's ideas about hegemony come into play here, but really I think it's more down to earth and descriptive to talk about careerism. At any given moment, those in the middle of the ladder are best served by going along with the stated values of those higher than them. At any given moment, the failure of schools and the high arrest rates of low income communities serve to mitigate responsibility of elites for the poverty and chaos from which they profit.

Another great example I think is the punditry's relentless defense of Clinton and trashing of Sanders. While there are definitely examples of paid deception and conspiracy (the parade of currently employed consultants on the panel shows, presented as neutral experts), generally it would not be necessary for any national pundit to be told what stance would be more useful to their careers... no conspiracy required, just craven careerism.

No one needs to keep pulling the strings after a certain point... they just have to steer the conversation and the staffing if either goes off track. Not sure if any of that makes sense to you, it's a very challenging topic to write about, but I highly recommend Reimann's book, it's brilliant and crucial. Best wishes.


The development of the profession and practices of "human resources management" has been crucial to enforcing hegemony without ever referring to politics. Everything "makes sense" within the construct.

It may seem obvious through direct experience that the construct supports management in the workplace (although even here, the framing is all about fairness, and liability, and professional development, in the supposed shared interests of everyone). But it is more opaque to recognize that the construct supports the larger criminal project of looting class, as well as all the political crimes of the oligarchy.

It amounts to extensive, years-long training in not saying, and ideally not thinking, anything outside the defined norms, with your job, career, livelihood, and family on the line. It is not like "drinking the Kool Aid" it is more like absorbing the Kool Aid through the air you breathe. "Employees" tend to become "adjusted" to their deeply insulting roles, which adjustment has impacts far beyond just the workplace.

(And of course, the workplace experience builds on what is absorbed through the experience of "education," which is not about educating - which literally means drawing out of the person being educated - but is more about indoctrinating and pacifying the "educated.")


I just watched several TED TALKS and the content is related to your comment.

One of them revisited the Stanley Milgram experiments to show that it's mostly about conformity. Few ask where this penchant for conformity comes from. My answer is patriarchal religions.

Excuse me for seeming to veer off the subject when I am really widening the field of examples to make a particular case.

I have 2 dogs. One is a pure Shitzu and this dog could not BE more intuitive and obedient. I feel that this wonderful animal is an extension of my own essence in many ways. I was introduced to this breed by my daughter when I was tasked with driving her boyfriend's Shitzu (who'd never met me before) from Delray Beach Florida to her University--in Tallahassee.

I loved that dog from the get-go. He was very much like "a person."

Then my daughter got one. Same thing. So I followed suit.

However, I sired my dog and took one from the litter as "payment." No one was sure of the heritage of the female and the litter was quite diverse. While I try my best to be kind to this other dog, the fact that it's not a pure Shitzu shows in so many ways. She just doesn't "get me." She also doesn't listen and is rather a Houdini in the art of breaking free of leashes and other attempts (on my part) at harnessing her... shall we say, impulses.

So the above goes to this idea of BREEDING; nor do I think it only pertains to dogs.

I happen to believe in things like reincarnation, the evolution of the soul, karma, the Akashic record, and soul memory.

My point being that over centuries of strict religious indoctrination--quite often on threat of death--human beings were CONDITIONED to obedience and that entailed conforming to authority's rules.

Certainly cases of the town drunk hung out over the town square, paupers tossed into debtors' prisons, and worst of all... slavery, contributed to the behavior modification dynamics.

Thus when someone actually had the strong enough sense of self to disobey Milgram's essential TORTURE test, 90% of others would follow. Ditto, if no one did so, about 2/3rds would comply just at the behest of the authority figure.

Fashion works because of conformity. Why else would women not wear perfectly good clothing in order to buy the new year's fashions?

And why is built-in obsolescence still allowed when Mother Nature is sending screams of overkill that reverberate through every ecological system... and still the electronics companies present the latest generation of the latest gadget... year after year.

Conspiracy and complicity aren't required if conformity establishes both ends.

Remember how the covert agencies operate on that NEED to know basis so that the right hand is not told what the left hand is doing? Isn't that the perfect way to produce a gargantuan war machine?

I watched another TED TALK on torture at Abu Graib and yet another on how to heal addictions and addictive behavior. Before the speaker reached his conclusion I said it out loud--"The opposite of addiction is connection" and he offered the example of rats given really fun cages... in which case, they didn't mess with the cocaine. But if left with NOTHING to do, they went for the cocaine.

Many people are unaware that their actions contribute to the elaborate webs designed to effect evil.

A poster who went by DURRUTIX produced several wonderful documentaries and in one of them he showed how the TURNER model of industry operated. Prior to its deployment, the individual craftsman would stick with his work from start to finish and feel enormous pride in what he produced.

But the Turner Model essentially turned people into cogs with each one repeating the same task ad nauseum. This method not only dulls the spirit and deadens the soul, it also disconnects the individual from the larger work... and often, what's actually being produced.

I could talk about this and provide lots of other colorful examples. It's hot as hell here. It's been 95 degrees for days almost without pause and I shudder to think what August may be like. It's a huge effort to water the plants in this heat when it doesn't rain... and since I can't endure the local population that heads to the springs like rhinos in a safari park... I have to wait till near sundown to jump in.

I had it ALL to myself on July 4...

These are very difficult times to be awake, aware, and with open channels of empathy.

Craven careerism serves evil when there's no greater moral compass governing individuals' actions. The closer to the top a person is, the greater their view of all that's beneath them in the hierarchy that patriarchal capitalism built.

Did I answer your question?

Sometimes I prefer stream of consciousness. (I'll blame it on the heat.)

P.S. You write well and I look forward to further dialogs with you.