King: 'How fares our cousin Hamlet?'

Hamlet: 'Excellent, i' faith; Of the chameleon's dish: I eat the air, promise-crammed;'
I awoke from a nap with that passage tripping through my mind. What on earth does that mean? I wondered, as I pulled down the Bard from my bookshelf, and thanked the God of Helpful Editors, for sending me one who had noted in the margins:
"chameleon's dish", i.e., the air (which was believed to be the chameleon's food); Hamlet willfully takes "fares" in the sense of "feeds".
Air, huh? So I took a sniff, then a huff, and then a great, big, deep gulp of air. Unlike Hamlet, however, I cannot say that I "fared" very well with my serving of "the chameleon's dish". No, not at all.

First there was the appetizer:

Michael Collins Piper:
In the November/December 2006 issue of Foreign Policy magazine, the small-circulation but highly influential publication of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a leading New World Order "think tank," well known Neo-conservative publicist Joshua Muravchik is calling for his fellow "neo-cons to admit their mistakes . . . and start making the case for bombing Iran."
What mistakes? Have they all been lined up before a firing squad and justly executed for high treason to the human race while I was napping? Aren't they all still quite happily at work - at the taxpayer's expense (why does that phrase, "at their expense", suddenly taken on such an ominous connotation?) - aside from the occasional scapegoat like Libby?

Muravchik may have been saying "mistakes"; but he was thinking "crimes". It's more like a bungled bank robbery - one bank guard was killed accidentally (can't actually use the word "accidentally" about psychopaths, since they just don't give a d***), so they decide to kill all the witnesses.

Collins Piper continues:
Muravchik - who operates out of the American Enterprise Institute (which includes top neo-conservative mastermind Richard Perle among its chief tacticians) - says that "Make no mistake, President Bush will need to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities before leaving office." He goes on to say to his fellow war-mongers: "We need to pave the way intellectually now and be prepared to defend the action when it comes."

There's no question about it: the neo-conservatives are determined to destroy Iran, just as they destroyed Iraq. It's been one of their longtime geopolitical goals and they refuse to permit public dissatisfaction with what's happened in Iraq to deter them from accomplishing what they intend.
Boy, I'm never gonna try that dish again. Moving on to the next course, I dug into this:

United States
Since 1954, when the CIA conspired in the downfall of newly installed Iranian Prime Minister Mossadegh after he threatened to nationalize the oil industry, and the U.S. enabled the fervent anti-Communist Shah Pahlevi to gain power, U.S. foreign policy towards Iran has had a single trajectory; to make an enemy of Iran's post-Shah governments (1979).

The U.S. government:

In 1980, allowed the deposed Shah to enter the U.S. for medical treatment, despite Iranian protests. This event provoked extremists in Iran to seize the American embassy and hold embassy officials captive.

During the 1980's, provided arms and support to Iran's enemy, Iraq, in the eight-year war between the two nations.

In 1987 moved warships into the Straits of Hormuz to protect the Persian Gulf shipping, interfered with Iranian shipping, and caused losses to Iran's small navy.

On July 3, 1988, shot down an Iranian civilian airliner in Iran territorial waters and killed all 290 civilian passengers.

Since 1967, actively supported Israel, Iran's most ardent enemy.

For a decade, supplied arms to Gulf nations that became antagonists of Iran.

Since 1980 has proposed and implemented a variety of sanctions against Iran.

In February 2006, according to The UK Telegraph, prepared "last resort" plans for "devastating bombing raids backed by submarine-launched ballistic missile attacks against Iran's nuclear sites."

In 2006, still maintained, for strategic reasons, U.S. warships in the Persian Gulf close to Iranian borders.

On 15 Feb. 2006 proposed to ask for $75 Million To Promote Democracy in Iran.
That disagreed with me too. I forgot that I had a long-term unpleasant relationship with that dish.

Finally, there was dessert. That, at least, would be better - wouldn't it?

Chalmers Johnson, author and professor emeritus of the University of California, San Diego:
Whether Americans intended it or not, we are now seen around the world as approving the torture of captives at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, at Bagram Air Base in Kabul, at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and at a global network of secret CIA prisons, as well as having endorsed Bush's claim that, as commander-in-chief in "wartime," he is beyond all constraints of the Constitution or international law. We are now saddled with a rigged economy based on record-setting trade and fiscal deficits, the most secretive and intrusive government in our country's memory, and the pursuit of "preventive" war as a basis for foreign policy.
There! That was much better. But then, my stomach was still feeling pretty queasy, so I decided I would go through this dessert very carefully, just in case.
I had set out to explain how exactly our government came to be so hated around the world. As a CIA term of tradecraft, "blowback" does not just mean retaliation for things our government has done to, and in, foreign countries. It refers specifically to retaliation for illegal operations carried out abroad that were kept totally secret from the American public. These operations have included the clandestine overthrow of governments various administrations did not like, the training of foreign militaries in the techniques of state terrorism, the rigging of elections in foreign countries, interference with the economic viability of countries that seemed to threaten the interests of influential American corporations, as well as the torture or assassination of selected foreigners....
So far, so good. The passage continues:
The fact that these actions were, at least originally, secret meant that when retaliation does come - as it did so spectacularly on September 11, 2001 - the American public is incapable of putting the events in context. Not surprisingly, then, Americans tend to support speedy acts of revenge intended to punish the actual, or alleged, perpetrators. These moments of lashing out, of course, only prepare the ground for yet another cycle of blowback.
I felt like I was going to throw up!

There it was, a Prevarication Sandwich Cookie! He says all those nice, true things - and then slips that slimy lie right in between the two wafers of truth:

"...that when retaliation does come - as it did so spectacularly on September 11, 2001..."

Everybody knows 9/11 had nothing to do with retaliation, but everything to do with false flags. But then I should have known better. The introduction to the article spelled it right out for me:
Empire Vs. Democracy

Chalmers Johnson
January 31, 2007

Chalmers Johnson is a retired professor of Asian Studies at the University of California, San Diego. From 1968 until 1972 he served as a consultant to the Office of National Estimates of the Central Intelligence Agency.
And you know what they say: "You never leave The Company." Next time I'll read the wrapper more closely.

Waiter: "Your after dinner mint, sir."

Me: "Thank you." I'm thinking, they can't possibly mess this up:

But then... From Newsweek:
I Have Had My Differences With Members of the Press. But it's Nothing That Burying them Under Tons of Earth Won't Solve

Does President Bush have it in for the press corps?

Touring a Caterpillar factory in Peoria, Ill., the Commander in Chief got behind the wheel of a giant tractor and played chicken with a few wayward reporters. Wearing a pair of stylish safety glasses--at least more stylish than most safety glasses--Bush got a mini-tour of the factory before delivering remarks on the economy.

"I would suggest moving back," Bush said as he climbed into the cab of a massive D-10 tractor. "I'm about to crank this sucker up."

As the engine roared to life, White House staffers tried to steer the press corps to safety, but when the tractor lurched forward, they too were forced to scramble for safety.

"Get out of the way!" a news photographer yelled. "I think he might run us over!" said another.

White House aides tried to herd the reporters the right way without getting run over themselves. Even the Secret Service got involved, as one agent began yelling at reporters to get clear of the tractor. Watching the chaos below, Bush looked out the tractor's window and laughed, steering the massive machine into the spot where most of the press corps had been positioned.

The episode lasted about a minute, and Bush was still laughing when he pulled to a stop. He gave reporters a thumbs-up.

"If you've never driven a D-10, it's the coolest experience," Bush said afterward.

Yeah, almost as much fun as seeing your life flash before your eyes.
God, the irony, the bloody, death-dealing, psychopathic irony. You see, the D-10 bulldozer that Bush bravely commandeered, laughing maniacally, is exactly the same machine that Caterpillar sells to the Israeli army who also laugh maniacally as they use them to demolish Palestinian homes for no good reason, sometimes with Palestinian families still inside. It was also the device used to run over and kill American peace activist Rachel Corrie.


Manager: Why did that gentleman go running out the restaurant screaming just now?

Waiter: I don't know, sir. It must have been something he ate.