Pentagon

Sibel Edmonds' latest essay makes a strong case that, among the powerful in government, there is no principled interest in protecting Americans from the legitimate threats posed to them. Shedding more light on the corrupting influence of big lobbying, Edmonds shows once again that real security for Americans is routinely sold out for profit. The 9/11 attacks have not changed this basic fact. Edmonds' "foreign agents by default," like the treasonous James Baker, routinely trump up false threats and ignore true ones, all to keep the flow of cash coming for themselves and their sponsors. As 9/11 skeptics have argued for two years now, the 9/11 Commission Report was simply a well-publicized effort to create the appearance of due diligence while assuring that no real structural changes to the corrupt status quo would occur. The hint of resignation in Edmonds' last paragraph may indicate that the enormous pressure she has been under has taken its toll. This would certainly be understandable. Ironically, in her resignation she comes closest to telling the truth of the matter. Congress will not address core corruption. Its most powerful members are deeply complicit in the corruption (see Edmonds' own pointed expose of Dennis Hastert's influence-peddling, for example), and in fact cannot rise to the level of power without becoming corrupt themselves. This is the way the game is played. Electing a handful of new Democrats will not change this - not, at least, without citizens applying continuous, and enormous public pressure. Two caveats: Edmonds does seem to underestimate the motivation that domestic members of the investor class have on their own to steal the future of American citizens. Carlyle Group-type corruption should not be blamed on the corrupting influence of foreign interests. The American kleptocrats need no push from foreigners. Second, Edmonds does not pay enough attention to the way that Washington trumps up the terror threat to keep the public off balance, making it easier to fund aggressive wars and shift hundreds of billions from 'butter to guns.' Still, Edmonds' diagnosis is important for helping to build public consciousness around the ruinous impact of the normalization of investor class lobbying.

In the tradition of Mohandas K. Gandhi, Slesinger's plea for a maximum sentence forces his accusers and would-be jailers to confront the true gravity of their actions. Gandhi said, "If you believe in what you are doing, give me your stiffest sentence. If you don't, then resign." And even though Slesinger's situation cannot be compared to Gandhi's in terms of raw sacrifice, the principle at stake remains the same.