Source to Matthews: From The Moment Cheney Was Elected “All He Wanted To Know About” Was Iraq
Source to Matthews: From The Moment Cheney Was Elected “All He Wanted To Know About” Was Iraq
Yesterday on Hardball, Chris Matthews revealed that a well-placed source told him Cheney was set on invading Iraq as soon as he was elected Vice President. Watch it:
Transcript:
Let me not let one guy off the hook here, that’s Cheney, Bob. I talked to someone last night who knows better about this than anybody — off the record — who told me the first thing Cheney wanted when he got the vice presidency, during the transition of 2000, what he wanted was not a briefing on the world, all he wanted to know about, where do we stand in Iraq? He was keyed on that decision from day one, long before 9-11, and it certainly looks like these guys weren’t surprised by the decision to go to Iraq. They had it in their mind ahead of time.
While Matthews didn’t name his source, former administration officials also claim plans to invade Iraq preceeded 9/11.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
NOT A SURPRISE
but what is surprising,,, is that even knowing this,,, Matthews still thinks this Administration can be liked and trusted.
Cant he put 2+2 together.
Evil lying assholes +
Hoirrible crimes against constitution, country and humanity =
unsupportable, impeachable scoundrels ??
March 8th, 2006 at 10:46 amNo freaking kidding- this should have been obvious to anybody- I remember telling my wife in 2000 that if we “elect” Bush, we will end up in Iraq.
As for Matthews, unless he is willing to name names he can go back to kissing Boehner’s ass for all I care.
March 8th, 2006 at 10:49 amWhat do you expect from a Republican. We need to impeach as soon as possible.
March 8th, 2006 at 10:50 amA glimmer of fair reporting from Matthews Chris.
Oh wait. . . sorry; I always get those first-names-for-last-names people mixed up
March 8th, 2006 at 10:53 amMatthews isn’t supposed to be a patriot or even a reliable news source. He’s an entertainer like all the other talking heads in cable TV news. Animosity is temporary, residuals are forever.
March 8th, 2006 at 10:55 amDid Mathews forget to take his ass kissing pills yesterday?
March 8th, 2006 at 10:56 amAnd the Right will counter with:
Well, what is wrong with planting the seeds of Democracy and usurping an EVIL leader?
These people always have an answer that the mindless masses will subscribe to…it’s so easy for them because most people are dolts.
March 8th, 2006 at 10:56 amMSM playin’ catch up with the indi media?
I tink I caw’t a clue…I did, I did
March 8th, 2006 at 10:56 amIf it was “off the record”, then why did he report it on national TV?
More evidence of Matthew’s excellent “journalism.”
March 8th, 2006 at 10:57 amGood question Jim. I wondered that myself.
March 8th, 2006 at 10:59 amAs some and some may not know, Messrs Cheney, Kristol, Perle, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz–the Bush administration’s most thoughtful, active, and boisterous proponents of attacking/invading/occupying Iraq–have been martially fantasizing about Saddam Hussein since the 1990s.
In fact, Messrs Cheney, Kristol, Perle, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz formed the Project of the New American Century as a vehicle to actualize their vision of spreading democracy throughout the world militarily.
President Bush is basically their cheerleader, their `useful idiot’.
How so?
Prior to 9/11, there is *no* evidence at all that GW Bush espoused their ideology. He’s never written or uttered a word about liberalizing the ME prior to 9/11.
Messrs Cheney, Kristol, Perle, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz seized the reins of US national security policy during the fear and confusion after 9/11 so that they could actualize their plans for spreading democracy throughout the world militarily.
This should be well-known.
March 8th, 2006 at 10:59 am#9, 10
Since he can’t seem to form coherent sentences it may just be that ‘off the record’ meant ‘on the condition of anonymity’ in Matthews speak. Actually, I wouldn’t be surprised. He slips up alot and I can see how he could make the mistake, if that’s what it was. He’s not a journalist so I doubt he has the ‘on the condition of anonymity’ stuck in his mind. The ‘official’ was probably one of his guests:) Or made up…
I actually wouldn’t put it past him to have made it up. He may have need some time filler. And then again, he could just be quoting all the stories on Cheney’s Iraq obsession and attributing them to himself. Yah, meglomania.
If he says that it’s to counter what ‘we’ have been accusing him of, rightly, that he’s essentially a GOP operative. You know, the sop to media matters. He’s very aware of the criticism but he’s a cross between one of Fox’s shock jocks, Tucker, and a respectable newsman. He hides in the newsman spot. Actually he’s like a lively Larry King, as in younger and more agressive/opinionated. But Larry King is also a republican tool:)
Judd,
March 8th, 2006 at 11:06 amDon’t make this a positive for him on the whole. He’s made so many contradictory statements about Iraq in the past that some of those should be used ‘against’ him here.
Really nothing new.
The real challenge is to wake up the American soft middle third to this fact.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:06 amHey God. Glad to know you’re out there. If you don’t mind, I have to say it’s about time you got into this argument. We’ve really needed your help with these guys.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:06 amI have to say, that trusting unnamed sources is a bad idea. This administration likes to plant misinformation. Look what happened to Dan Rather and CBS.
This post holds no paticular suprise to me. It has been shown repeatedly, that Bush, Cheney and crew were looking to invade Iraq.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:07 amI’m sure that Sen.Roberts will make sure that we learn the truth, just as he did with domestic surveilance. Where’s Che when you need him.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:09 amWait… Chris Mathews reported this?
Holy heck. Not only are the elected Republicans jumping from the U.S.S. Bush, but now all of the conservative-loving “journalists” are doing so, too.
Wow.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:09 amDon’t know if I agree 100% God. Of course you know who his daddy is.
So you’re saying that junior is off the hook and worthy of your humble forgivness because he’s an idiot in your eyes?
BTW-What do you listen to on your IPod?
March 8th, 2006 at 11:10 amYah, Matthews throws this stuff out every once in awhile to make himself look ‘balanced’. I think some his audience actually buys it in that he’s someone they can ‘respect’ as taking both sides into account. Seriously. It’s because he takes an ‘agressive’ tone with some of his guests on both sides. That’s what makes him popular. It’s his somewhat tough tone sometimes.
He’s not balanced and his prominent guests, on the repub side, do not get the ‘tone’ or tought questions. He likes to use his agressive side on people he doesn’t mind moderately annoying.
Yes, he is a shock jock/newsman/Larry King hybrid.
He’s made so many claims that are pro-Iraq invasion and pro-Cheney/Bush that this should be countered by such claims.
Including all the various garbage he’s put on everyone else.
perhaps Matthews sees times are changing? Bush is losing his power to Congress. Time to jump ship. That or he thinks cheney is resigning?
March 8th, 2006 at 11:11 amPerhaps the GOP’s montly check to Chris Mathews was late in getting to him, and Chris is just firing a shot across the bow.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:12 amThe whole Bush agenda was in an article in the magazine Foreign Affairs January/Febuary 2000 issue by Condi. There have been numerious confirmations of this agenda since then. So why are people are finding this “new” in 2006? It just shows a lack of intellectual curiosity. This may be why Chris relates so well to George.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:12 amnow I KNOW why Georgie didn’t get right up and do something that morning in the classroom…
March 8th, 2006 at 11:15 amPerhaps it’s a floor fixation, didn’t like seeing his Daddies face on the barr— I mean palace floor……
read something yesterday about an obsession with his rug in the Oval Office, seems it’s a metaphor for his POSITION.
As for Chainee, there’s a sick little doggie.
The emerging history of how he and Rumpsfelt and Wolfowitz entrenched themselves in Gerald Ford’s administration makes my heart sick. They had their deviations and desires for power incubating for a long time. They are reaping the fruits of their labors, as the people of the world pay the price.
It is very cleary to any intelligent person that the Bush admin wanted to invade Iraq from Day 1. The attack on 9/11, which Iraq had nothing to do with, gave them the perfect excuse that they were looking for.
That right-wing morons cannot understand this is beyond my comprehension.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:17 amOnly in America is this new news.
Our press Sucks!
March 8th, 2006 at 11:19 amWe are wasting our breath here, we need to take this moral outrage to the polls and to the streets. That is the only way these croiminals will be driven from power.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:19 am18, what do you disagree about?
GW Bush is not a neocon.
He’s a cheerleader, pure and simple.
I’d absolutely would love to be corrected.
However, he’s no where to be found in the intellectual formation of his own doctrine.
There is no evidence.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:20 amNeoconservatives believe the masses of a society can be better controlled internally if there is a perceived external enemy. The external enemy does not have to be real but perceived as real.
For example, people within societies overcame their differences to work together to destroy their common enemy (Germans etc.) during WWII. This conquering of internal strife and differences resulted in a national camaraderie, after victory, those who survived the war soon lamented the loss of national camaraderie as internal strife resumed. In this example the external enemy was real.
When Cheney was put in charge of the presidential transition (the period between the election in November and the accession to office in January), Cheney used this opportunity to stack the administration with his neoconservative hard-line allies including Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith, Bolton and Libby. The Neoconservative’s main problem when they came to power was how to implement a neoconservative agenda in a democracy, not just that, but a democracy with a liberal majority.
This problem was solved when an opportunity arose – 9/11. Neoconservatives used the collective ‘revenge’ will of America post 9/11 as a pretext to invade the middle-east (part of the neoconservative geopolitical agenda for many years, ref AEI link below) – this also created an external enemy to help develop national camaraderie and polls reflected this – they were in the 80% support range.
Bush knew Americans really wanted revenge as well as security, because of this national attitude, few seriously questioned Bush’s motive (WMD) for invasion. Opposition from Democrats was weak (and are now seen as ‘Republican lite’ following the disastrous failures in Iraq and a looming war with Iran).
AEI (American Enterprise Institute)
From the AEI link above:
March 8th, 2006 at 11:22 amIn a January 2003 speech at an AEI dinner celebrating the life of neocon(servative) godfather Irving Kristol, President Bush underscored the institute’s impact. After commending AEI for having “some of the finest minds in our nation,” the president said…… “We meet here during a crucial period in the history of [the United States], and of the civilized world. Part of that history was written by others; the rest will be written by us.”
Cheney’s real motive
Harris,
Bush agenda?
Surely, you means the Messrs Cheney, Kristol, Perle, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz agenda.
Dr Rice, like Bush, is totally new to Neoconservatism.
They are not part of this highly trained group of Straussians and Hobbesians.
Eg.. Fukuyama just historically outlined Neoconservatism in the NYT. Bush and Rice are in absentia.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:25 am26 – I agree. G W has no intellect to speak of. Therefore he could not be involved in the intellectual formation of any doctrine. He is a cheerleader, plain and simple.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:26 amMatthews ‘revelation’ is not new news, its old news.
As far as I can tell the new news here is that he supposedly has an insider talking to him, the anonymous source.
Give us his or her name Chris, that will make news.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:29 amGee, you think that their irrational desire to invade, convert and control Iraq blinded them intentionally or not, to all other problems such as Al Queda? It’s been my theory since about 9/12.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:30 amGod, you are correct – Condi and George are just the “talking heads” for the Cheney, Kristol, Perle, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz for the Project of the New American Century as you pointed out.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:31 am29- GWB was not in anyway involved in the 1990s intellection formation of the so-called “Bush doctrine”. That is just a marketing slogan.
I find it palpably laughable that GWB wishes to form his own think tank about democracy, since prior to 9/11 he has NO history whatsoever with democratizing countries thru military force.
Messrs Cheney, Kristol, Perle, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz have been vociferously writing, speaking, and doing since the 1990s!
Bush will always be their cheerleader.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:32 amPersonally, I don’t care who brings this story up — each time it’s put before the public, someone else begins to realize that invading Iraq was one big con.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:34 amThe first thing wrong with Matthews’ comments yesterday is that they were “off the record” — not unlike reports in teh papers where “unnamed sources” say…. so he is playing the role of a journalist today in simply reporting what “he said/she said.” Not that we haven’t heard this before from honorable people who reported same in books and editorials.
Secondly, he believes Cheney was obsessed with Iraq from day one, but does that stop him from supporting Bush&Co? Does he question their integrity, their honesty or the veracity of their claims? He may oppose them (now) on the war but why does he trust them on other matters?
Bush is simply too uncurious, too un-intellectual, too unlearned to be anything more than the puppet on a string for the guys behind the curtain.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:34 amNuclear War Against Iran this month
The launching of an outright war using nuclear warheads against Iran is now in the final planning stages.
Coalition partners, which include the US, Israel and Turkey are in “an advanced stage of readiness”.
http://www.rense.com/general69/nuke.htm
March 8th, 2006 at 11:34 amWhy is this news??? Hasn’t this Chris Matthews read Richard Clarke’s book? These stupid fucking Repugnicans who switch on their patented deer-in-the-headlights stare when the truth heads its ugly rear, should all get individual Oscars at the end of the Bush reign or terror – or the end of democracy – whichever comes first and fastest.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:35 amPerhaps, though, the thoughts, words, and actions of Messrs Cheney, Kristol, Perle, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz will benefit mankind in the future.
If history is any guide and with Fukuyama’s piece in mind, its doubtful.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:37 amThe current vice president and the other boob were not elected in 2000!
March 8th, 2006 at 11:37 amBush is not a neocon, the neocons hijacked the administration from him, read my proof in post#27 links.
Mark, there was nothing irrational about the neocons desire to invade Iraq, they knew exactly what they were doing and why. I will explain,
Saddam was conducting an oil-for-food program you might have heard of? He was conducting this in Euros, not dollars, this threatened the banks that underwrite the (dollar) oil exchanges. Also, This is cited from page 29-30 of ‘Neoconned Again’ from a neoconservative called Dr. Edward Luttwak(statements made prior to the war in Iraq):
Dr. Edward Luttwak, the internationally renowned author, lecturer, historian, military strategist and Pentagon consultant said, “We are going to bomb Iraq back into the Stone Age. Saddam is not like the Saudi Princes who spend the bulk of their lives outside of their country, and who fritter away the Kingdom’s oil profits on prostitutes and bottles of champagne in Paris. No, Saddam is building railways! Creating electrical networks! Highways and other important elements of a serious State infrastructure! After eights years of war against the Iranian regime of Khomeini, he desperately needs to demobilize his Republican Guard, which incorporates so many of this technical elite, in order to rebuild the war-devastated country. These people are his technicians, his engineers. If they are put to work in the way Saddam wishes, they will rapidly make Iraq the most advanced power in the region, and we cannot allow this to happen.â€
March 8th, 2006 at 11:39 ambuy the book
British Gary is dead on. In addition, the oligarchy always believes that the ends justify the means. They think big and the “ends” is about the expansion of their already obscene wealth and power but unfortunately for “the rest of us” the “means” requires war pawns, deception, controlled chaos (until your oligarchs are incompetent and things spiral out of control as they have today) and much death. They know exactly what it takes to drive their geopolitical goals.
Pax Americana is anti-democratic by nature and fascistic by design. Everything that the M$M feeds the masses is intended to deceive.
Once they’ve whipped up sufficient hysteria regarding the Iranian threat, they will be responsible for triggering WWIII and I fear it will be a nuclear confrontation.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:40 amMatthews didn’t believe Paul O’Neill or Richard Clarke when their books came out and they faced the cameras and told what they knew — he DOES believe however, an anonymous source who talked to him off the record — Tweety has an ego problem among other faults.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:41 amone of the main aims of the neoconservatives is to support Israel’s campaigns against the Palestinians and to make the Middle East safe for Israel. Hence Dr. Edward Luttwak’s comments.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:42 amdumbya was a figurehead, pure and simple.
Darth Cheney, Rummy and their cabal called the shots the whole way.
The rest of the republican heirarchy knew, they didn’t say a word. All they really wanted was the power of the pulpit, and they didn’t care what marionette they put in that pulpit so long as they knew they could yank the strings.
So, repubs sold out the most cherished values of their country for power. Who’se a treasonous scum now tdf?
March 8th, 2006 at 11:47 amAnon, I do not think there will be a nuclear war but I can see why China and Russia are coming together to ’stabilise a fictitious nation’.
I do not think there will be a nuclear war because (when) Bushco invade Iran (to stop the oil Bourse – oil traded in Euros not dollars – initiating on the 20th March 06), China will probably aquire Taiwan from Bushco as part of a trade deal and secure their oil supplies.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:50 amBritish Gary
Contrary, the Administration hijacked the neo-con agenda. Iraq was a business decision, just look at Chaney’s public comments when he was CEO of Halliburton. Iraq was a low hanging fruit with the second largest oil reserves largely untapped due to sanctions. The goal was to get the oil flow going to capacity via invasion, then implement the larger business deal The Middle East Free Trade Agreement.
Remember, the two constants of this Administration: Crony economics and Politicization.
March 8th, 2006 at 12:13 pmBritish Gary,
Here’s another book…..
America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order
World Affairs
The Vision Thing
Reviewed by Stanley I. Kutler
Sunday, August 15, 2004; Page BW05
Stefan Halper and Jonathan Clarke are experienced, conservative foreign policy experts. Halper served as deputy assistant secretary of state in the Reagan administration, and Clarke had extensive service in the British diplomatic corps. In America Alone they document the neoconservative capture of American (and British) foreign policy, under the guise of a War on Terror, to reorder Middle East politics and initiate a newly proclaimed doctrine of preemptive war. Halper and Clarke are insiders who know the players and the sources. Their thoughtful, insightful work spans ideological and partisan differences, a rare phenomenon in these times.
The authors understand the two-centuries-long history of American foreign policy. Detente, bipartisanship and respect for the views of allies are at the center of that history; they are not, as the neocons would have it, notions of weakness best replaced by a militant American world view and unilateralism. Halper and Clarke blend realism and idealism. For them, victory in the Cold War resulted from a firm U.S. adherence to the doctrine of containment and a moral authority rooted in fostering the idea of a free, open society. Now, the authors contend, President George W. Bush and a band of ideological zealots have put that moral authority at risk.
America Alone levels a broad indictment against the Bush administration, which in the name of the war on terror has launched the Iraq war, mounted an assault on personal liberties at home, engaged in a purposeful deceit of the media and the public (both of which suspended any critical judgment) and, above all, has inflicted terrible damage on U.S. moral authority and international legitimacy. The chief culprits for the authors are the neocons, who are depicted as conspirators who hijacked American foreign policy.
March 8th, 2006 at 12:18 pmTHE BIG NEWS SHOULD BE THAT MATTHEWS THINKS THIS IS BIG NEWS.
EVERYONE KNEW CHENEY AND THE NEOCONS HAD A HARD-ON FOR SADDAM EVEN DURING THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION AND WERE BENT ON INVADING IRAQ COME HELL OR HIGH WATER. HELL, THEY EVEN WROTE IT UP IN AN AD THEY PLACED IN SEVERAL NEWSPAPERS.
MATTHEWS IS SURPRISED BECAUSE HE’S A BUSH FLUNKY THROUGH AND THROUGH.
March 8th, 2006 at 12:22 pm46, Contrary, the Administration hijacked the neo-con agenda. Iraq was a business decision, just look at Chaney’s public comments when he was CEO of Halliburton.
That’s another way of looking at things.
Mr Cheney is also a founding member of the Project for the New American Century.
He’s sort of the crazy aunt in the attic without a degree type of Neoconservative.
As for the oil, the James Baker Inst produced a report addressing SH as a threat who may have to be dealt vis-a-vis the US Dept of Defense.
That sly old fox is getting off scott free on this one.
March 8th, 2006 at 12:25 pm#26
In a re-read of your post…there is no arguement- you are likely 100% correct as far as junior being a neo-con. (No desire or attempt to prove you wrong nor argue the point)
Dick and the “boyz” were daddies friends first. I guess guilt by association (family name and ties) is unfair in considering junior himself a neo-con. Is junior a puppet? You bet.
You never said anything about letting him off the hook either. Perhaps I should not have included that comment. But I’ve heard local rethugs spout how Bush is really OK but he was just led astray. Helps sell the religion issues if it’s not Junior the “good christian” but those whom led him astray at fault. Makes me sick.
(The IPod thing was meant as a joke from the other thread.)
#19
Make way for VP Rice!
March 8th, 2006 at 12:29 pmcitizen80203, I think it’s more complex than the Administration hijacked the neo-con agenda. I completely agree with the Crony economics and Politicization.
This is what I think in addition, the neocons made a break for power when Cheney was put in charge of the presidential transition and brought the neocons with him.
Neoconservative goals converge with Bush’s goals;
Neocon goal 1. invade middle east to ensure Israel remains the dominant force thus protecting Israel (think about the religious connections too e.g.
the religious right believe that God gave all of Palestine to the Jews, and American fundamentalist congregations spend millions to subsidize Jewish settlements in the occupied territories. The major link between the conservative think tanks and the Israel lobby is the Washington-based, Likud (conservative) -supporting Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA). The most fervent supporters of Likud in the Republican electorate are Southern Protestant fundamentalists (evangelists).
Bush goals, to invade the middle-east for the following 3 reasons;
1. prevent Iran trading in petroeuro
2. increase security of America
3. the rapture, by inference, for his right-wing base
I contend the administration had it’s own agenda separate from the neocons but it never really mattered because their agendas converge for different reasons.
God, thanks for the info, I will buy the book, cheers.
March 8th, 2006 at 12:40 pmBritish Gary, I am familiar with all of that stuff about the oil for food program and the Euro/Dollar issue. I’ve also been pretty familiar with our friends at the PNAC and their global vision for America to dominate either militarily or politically the middle east and other resource rich regions.
March 8th, 2006 at 12:40 pmUnleash The Energy!
http://www.halliburton.com/
March 8th, 2006 at 12:42 pmIn fact, Messrs Cheney, Kristol, Perle, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz formed the Project of the New American Century as a vehicle to actualize their vision of spreading democracy throughout the world militarily.
President Bush is basically their cheerleader, their `useful idiot’.
Comment by God #11
If TREASON is punishable by…
…why are these traitors still allowed to pontificate, obfuscate, and prevaricate?
March 8th, 2006 at 12:43 pmThis certainly did not come as a SURPRISE to me.
When I heard that Rumhead was appointed Minister of Offinse I contacted, via e-mail, several sources I had left in D.C.
}this was a Cheney appointment. Bush had nothing to do with about 50% of his cabinet, it was all Cheney.
The first thing Cheney told Rumsfeld to do was to formulate plans to go to war with Iraq. Rummy informed Cheney that he already had such CONTINGENCY plans, but Cheney threw him out of his office, telling him he wanted REAL plans, and wanted them NOW.
Some commenters are right, Bush is not one of the original neo-cons. He is a know nothing, low IQ nazi lover who tied his coat tails to Cheney, hoping that Cheney would immortalize him.
I told my source that Rumheads plan of only using a little over 100,000 troops in Iraq would not work, but his reply was that Cheney and Rumsfeld felt this was a cakewalk and the whole thing would be over in three months.
Oh how wrong they were.
March 8th, 2006 at 12:44 pmI’m sure there are no Democrats/Liberals/Progressives who ever doubted Cheney’s ambitions. In my opinion, it’s not surprising that Matthews reported it. With rumors that Cheney will resign after the mid-term elections due to conflicts between him and Bush, the true Bush lovers (read a$$ kissers) are beginning to distance themselves from Cheney.
March 8th, 2006 at 12:45 pmConsidering Clinton and Albright wouldn’t shut up about it I can understand why.
March 8th, 2006 at 12:51 pm# 40 Saddam was conducting an oil-for-food program you might have heard of? He was conducting this in Euros, not dollars, this threatened the banks that underwrite the (dollar) oil exchanges.
Comment by British Gary
Exactly. And since Iran is poised to do essentially the same thing, invasion, indeed, seems imminent. The question is, will this administration invent some reason for the invasion, or will there be another (timely) terrorist attack, that will be attributed to Iran?
March 8th, 2006 at 12:52 pmThe problem with releaving intentions to attack Iraq before 9/11 is that it brings into question the cause of 9/11 itself.
Did the US plan 9/11? Doubtful.
Did we create the perfect conditions to let 9/11 happen? You’d have to ask the Taliban (provoked in the 6 months prior by the Bush Administration) and the FBI (who refused to listen to clear warnings from the Minneapolis office) and the President (who was delivered a clear warning in his PDB, then went on vacation).
Bottom line, there are questions.
March 8th, 2006 at 12:57 pmWell, what is wrong with planting the seeds of Democracy and usurping an EVIL leader?
As long as it happens somewhere other than here, I’m assuming.
March 8th, 2006 at 1:03 pmhi lily, there has been a reason around for months now, Iran WMD – according to Bushco Iran is not far away from a bomb. With UN sanctions Bushco/neocons will enter the Iran arena. That’s why they’ve been securing FTA deals with the UAE. Bushco only needs the SW corner of Iran which contains 90% of the countries oil and is conveniently located next to a country they have already invaded. Coincidence?
March 8th, 2006 at 1:05 pm‘Come in and have a seat chris, as you know your ratings are dropping like lead. Maybe you better do a 180 to save your job here.’ ‘Ok boss’. “It’s the NEW chris, nevermind what I spewed before, listen to me NOW.”….please,please listen to me…please?
March 8th, 2006 at 1:12 pm#62 – Iran will be attacked, that is absolutely true. AND I thank the left-wing Democrats who spent the last three years crying that Bush has been too soft on Iran. They reap what they sow.
March 8th, 2006 at 1:12 pmDrew (#59),
As I said in in a previous post, I would have thought the notion that the 9/11 attack had been planned was far fetched, at best. But after some research, I have serious doubts. If you have the time, please, please read the information below:
http://prweb.com/releases/2006/1/prweb338782.htm
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/
March 8th, 2006 at 1:16 pmBritish Gary, I understand what you say, and no, I don’t believe it’s coincidence. But there still needs to be a trigger to set off a US invasion.
March 8th, 2006 at 1:18 pmBritish Gary
I agree that Chaney brought them in. However, Chaney is a neo-con only to the extent of using the PNAC to further corporate economic goals. It does get a little murky, about where idealistic and economic goals are concerned. But the overall influence of a true neo-con is idealism, “the projection of American power making the world safer”. Granted, f**ked up idealism, but idealism none the less.
Now look at Chaney’s statements (and I am paraphrasing) of: “sanctions don’t work, better to let market influences decide”, and “the threat from Iran is economic not military”. Combine these statements with his actions to under cut trading sanctions in both Iraq and Iran through foreign subdivisions of Halliburton, and you get to the real driving force of Chaney, profits.
My point is that it is misleading (not you but in general) to ascribe a neo-con agenda to the administration. It overlooks the prime motive, crony economics.
March 8th, 2006 at 1:20 pmthank you all for ignoring today’s troll tour who is brought to us by the good folks at the RNC.
Thanks. We appreciate it.
March 8th, 2006 at 1:25 pmlily, please don’t think I was being sarcastic, I wasn’t. E-mail is cold as it lacks intonation. I think the trigger will be via the UN route as lends credence. I know it’s ironic.
March 8th, 2006 at 1:28 pmThe surprise is that Matthews had this on his show. This must be the bi-polar part of his personality. I quit watching his show because he leads one to think he’s sane by reporting on real facts (such as this one) and then he turns around and compliments someone like Boener, and the comment that if Bush pulls off democracy in Iraq, he belongs on Mt. Rushmore.
I had a thought that perhaps the Bush administration ignored the pre 9/11 PDB in hopes there would be a small attack on the U.S. (like the previous WWT attack) and that would give them the foot in the door to invading Iraq. I don’t think they knew it would be such a huge attack, because they have no imagination, but I wouldn’t put it past them to think there might be a small attack they could exploit.
Cheney’s been plotting the gutting of America for 30 years, and he’s been plotting the invasion of Iraq since the end of the Gulf War.
March 8th, 2006 at 1:42 pmAnyone remember a time or news week article about three years ago detailing how Cheany was a hard sell on Iraq and that the defense and state departments really had to work hard to convince him to go with it? Or am I remembering the article wrong?
March 8th, 2006 at 1:42 pmcitizen80203, as you say I am not ascribing a neocon agenda to the administration, I am saying their goals converge for different reasons. The neocons are ideologues, not opportunists. I agree they are motivated by crony economics as well as Zionism.
March 8th, 2006 at 1:51 pmthe whole thing would be over in three months.
Isn’t that what the Germans said before launching “Barbarossa?”
March 8th, 2006 at 2:03 pmThe neo-cons did not hijack the Bush administration. They created it, because they knew bush was usable. Hell they picked him and Cheney ran the campaign to keep it on track. Cheney was the head of Bush’s VP committee, the neo-cons must have laughed when old dead-eye-dick found himself as the best candidate for bush’s VP. The swiftboating of McCain in South Carolina primary was a reaction to keep McCain from stealing the nomination from them they had worked so hard to get that far. They had a plan and no senator from anywhere was going to derail them. Once the nomination was sewn up they moved the rest of the neo-cons in.
March 8th, 2006 at 2:12 pmbang on Clif
March 8th, 2006 at 2:15 pmThere is a mountain of concrete evidence that says it Impeachment time. We need to build the movement toward that with targeted actions and pressure on wimpy democrats.
March 8th, 2006 at 2:17 pmThis Poem could have been written about the world right now.
The Second Coming — W. B. Yeats
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all convictions, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
March 8th, 2006 at 2:20 pmSurely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
66: My point is that it is misleading (not you but in general) to ascribe a neo-con agenda to the administration. It overlooks the prime motive, crony economics. Comment by Citizen80203
Crony economics is one part as seen through the eyes of the critic.
Defense contracts is another part.
Energy contracts is another part.
Spreading democracy thru the US military is another part.
However, “crony economics” is not something that has been directly written and talked about by Messrs Cheney, Kristol, Perle, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz, i.e. the Bush administration’s most thoughtful, active, and boisterous proponents of attacking/invading/occupying Iraq.
What we see today is the actualizing of their worldview.
“Crony economics” is a consequence that has come about thru their designs on the world.
March 8th, 2006 at 2:22 pm73, The neo-cons did not hijack the Bush administration. They created it, because they knew bush was usable.
I agree.
Bush and Rice are their useful idiots.
Prior to 9/11, they are *not* on record as advocating any of the principles that they have been cheering for lately.
Messrs Cheney, Kristol, Perle, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, et al. have dedicated large portions of their time and energy for the liberalization of the ME thru the military.
Bush and Rice have not uttered or written word one.
He’s been used.
March 8th, 2006 at 2:29 pmrepublican |riˈpəblikən|
adjective
See Criminal
March 8th, 2006 at 2:35 pmLily (#64)
I would lend some thought to the theory if there wasn’t a better piece of logic to consider: Never blame conspiracy for things that are too easily blamed on incompetence.
March 8th, 2006 at 2:46 pmThey could’ve not be able to invade afghanistan and especially Iraq without 9/11.
March 8th, 2006 at 3:00 pmMore details here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1036571,00.html
Please read
#80 Drew, courtesy of a certain William of Ockham – Ockhams razor!
March 8th, 2006 at 3:00 pm[...] came before 9/11 and not after. That would be our credibility and moral standing in the world. Permalink| [...]
March 8th, 2006 at 3:55 pm#73 clif
March 8th, 2006 at 4:05 pmIt looks like a number of us are in total agreement with you.
I just love Chris Matthews new album. Oh wait, that’s Dave.
This is the right wing boot licking fascist apologist were talking about.
Got more news for you Chris, WE NEVER LEFT IRAQ!
Clinton bombed the hell out of Iraq in his administration.
This Iraq invasion has been going on since Rumsfeld installed Saddham Hussein back in the Reagan years.
In the US media though, they have VERY short memories.
They’re all like, wow man, Cheney wanted to go invade Iraq from day one of his regime.
Nevermind that the US has been invading Iraq ever since Reagan. Nevermind that the US has been invading countries around the world and continues to support dictators for fun and profit.
It’s all so we can breed more families and shop some more people.
China owns the means of production and the US is their mercenary running dog.
Got to keep those Wal Marts full people! Got to keep all those new kids popping out at three additional per second in the consumer goods loveys.
Breed and shop and kill and breed and shop and kill for more.
Humans are just primates in cars.
March 8th, 2006 at 4:23 pmMarie that is the history of the repugs from 2000 as I remembered it.
March 8th, 2006 at 4:24 pmWhat a Pathetic thing corporate MSM is, was, and will continue to be.
March 8th, 2006 at 4:33 pmThis is what war looks like
I feel more sorry for the Iraqis than I will ever do for Bush his generals and most of the American Population EVER
March 8th, 2006 at 5:46 pmThat heartrending picture should be hanging in the Oval Office.
March 8th, 2006 at 6:07 pmTweety spent the entire hour talking about Clinton and the divisions within both parties.
March 8th, 2006 at 6:08 pmNo mention of Abramoff, even while Hitchens was a guest.
Tweety is shilling for his brother and the thug party — he can’t be bothered with anything else.
#11 God: Yes, you are quite correct. George Bush is just the dummy front. The amiable, likeable guy everyone (that’s brain dead that is) would like to have a beer with while the real president, Dick Cheney and the rest of his Project for the New American Century cabal twist and shread the constitution and bill of rights to suit their sinister lust for greed, power and absolute control.
These people don’t give a damn about freedom and/or democracy. They don’t care about you whether you’re a republican or democrat or whatever else you label yourself as. They just want it all at the barrel of a gun and guess who has to fight for their morally corrupt agenda. The less fortunate, the people that see the military as the only way out of whatever despair is encompassing their lives.
I, for one, don’t want the likes of Dick Cheney ruling anything much less the world. Their entire convoluted, cockamamie ideas have been an incredible, 100% bust in Iraq. Now, they’re doing everything they can to piss off Iran and Syria. Russia is even questioning our motives. I know they are not as powerful as the old Soviet Union, but they are certainly no pushovers.
Is this the kind of world you want to live in? Or how about one where we revel in each other’s cultures instead of having them be used to foster our fears. We certainly wouldn’t want any other country or entity coming into the United States and telling us how to live and conduct our business. So by that thought what gives the United States the right to go into other countries (and we have a very checkered history of doing just that) and manipulate the way they want to live. But if we’re going to be consistent then we need to invade the United Arab Emirates. They don’t have democracy. They are a dictatorship. They have a questionable record on human rights. They recognized the Taliban and Osama bin Laden. No, we don’t want to do that. We want to sell them control of at least 6 major ports. How’s that for this administration wanting to have it both ways? What’s the price? $6.8 billion? That’s what’s more important than the safety of the 280 million citizens of our country. Money and control for just a tiny fraction of the inhabitants of this world. The rest of us get George Bush’s dog and pony show. These people are more suited for the psyciatric ward than they are for Washington, D.C. We need to have them removed from office. And that right soon!
March 8th, 2006 at 6:13 pmI am wodering… does anyone here remember reading about the origins of Bush’ “Shock and Awe” campaign? Years ago now, it seems, I read an article regarding the Cheney Cabal, and it was stated in the article that “Shock and Awe” was originally a paper or a military plan devised by Powell during the 1980’s. Am I remembering this correctly? I am just trying to remember at this point if it was indeed a plan to invade Irag, or just a military plan of invasion under “certain circumstances”. Just wondering, as I recall Powell somehow had his foot in this fiasco also, whether he had intended to or not…. any ideas?
March 8th, 2006 at 6:41 pmThe UN will NOT sanction Iran. This will not bother the neocons one bit though.
The US WILL NOT attack Iran. They have arranged it with Israel, the lap dog of the US, to start the bombing on word from the White House.
Cheney and Rumhead will give the signal when they are good and ready, knowing they are going to throw the world into chaos.
Six months after this goes down a gallon of gas will be about seven dollars a gallon, thanks to the pukes. Your dollar will be worthless. Everything will be traded in Euros.
March 8th, 2006 at 6:47 pm# 81 dsm: Excellent article, a must read for everyone. Anyone still wondering why we’re in Iraq go here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1036571,00.html.
March 8th, 2006 at 6:48 pmWar for democracy. Don’t kid yourselves. It’s just a front. It’s all about the oil.
March 8th, 2006 at 6:49 pmBUSH/CHENEY = HITLER/GOERING. BOTH SETS GUILTY OF CONSPIRACY, PLANNING AND WAGING A WAR OF AGGRESSION. CRIMES AGAINST PEACE. TORTURE/HOMICIDE OF POW’S = CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY. NUREMBERG TRIBUNAL RULINGS.
March 8th, 2006 at 6:53 pm#93 paul
March 8th, 2006 at 7:04 pmI share a very similar theory concerning the future.
#68 British Gary, I took no offence to your post, nor did I consider it sarcastic.
#80 Drew and #82 Gary,
I have a degree in Physics and Math. I’m not trying to flaunt anything. It’s only a BS, and not from a very prestigious school. I just want to indicate that I have more than a rudimentary understanding of Physics. Reading this article below, I found no flaws, logical or physical. I can’t dimiss this as a wild conspiracy theory. Many facts are presented along with a great deal of circumstantial evidence that points in the same direction. Without those facts? Yes, I would consider it a theory. But I don’t believe these facts can be disputed.
btw, I also took a couple of philosophy courses.
http://911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html
March 8th, 2006 at 7:48 pm*offense…spelling was never my strong suit.
March 8th, 2006 at 7:51 pmI really don’t understand why there’s any question whether George Bush et al were planning to invade Iraq before they took control of the government. Doesn’t anybody remember that in his campaign for the Republican nomination in 2000, Bush SAID he would invade Iraq, and that when told that most Americans and people around the world wouldn’t like it, he said, “I have a secret plan: I’m going to do it anyway.”?
March 8th, 2006 at 8:22 pm100. Doesn’t anybody remember that in his campaign for the Republican nomination in 2000, Bush SAID he would invade Iraq, and that when told that most Americans and people around the world wouldn’t like it, he said, “I have a secret plan: I’m going to do it anyway.�
????????????????
Profile: George W Bush
By William Hague
(Filed: 06/10/2002)
(snip)
By way of illustration, I recall a conversation I had with him in the summer of 2001 when I asked him how he would deal with Europe’s opposition to his Ballistic Missile Defence programme. Pointing out that a number of other countries would in the end go along with it, he confided to me, “I have a secret plan: I’m going to do it anyway.” http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2002/10/06/do0606.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2002/10/06/ixop.html
March 8th, 2006 at 9:09 pm95, War for democracy. Don’t kid yourselves. It’s just a front. It’s all about the oil.
It is partially about the oil.
It is partially about defense contracts.
Messrs Cheney, Kristol, Perle, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz–the Bush administration’s most thoughtful, active, and boisterous proponents of attacking/invading/occupying Iraq–have been writing, speaking, and acting for the sake of democratizing the ME thru force since the 1990s.
Their record is widely accessible and well-known.
March 8th, 2006 at 9:13 pm#100 – Robert Weingart,
March 8th, 2006 at 9:14 pmThat was in reference to the missile defense fiasco. See:
http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2002/10/06/do0606.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2002/10/06/ixop.html
Remember the shield that was a prime directive of his first term? I wonder why that one has slipped under the covers of darkness? Could it be because it will never work?
We must also not forget the 2002 State of the Union Address:
March 8th, 2006 at 9:57 pmhttp://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/jan2002/bush-j31.shtml
This was posted more than a year before the Iraqi fiasco.
I just saw this tantalizing tidbit on Raw Story: Nothing further yet.
March 8th, 2006 at 10:06 pm
Well-done America, and her citizens!!!
It’s only taken America three long arduous years for people to come to the realization that George W. Bush and his cohorts had planned to invade Iraq, as soon as he had stepped foot into the White House.
‘The Project for the New American Century’ should have had people worrying from the off. Bush and his administration wanted a foothold in the Middle East, and invading Iraq was the perfect solution.
When you have some of the most hawkish of the hawks in your inner circle, there was only going to be one outcome ‘WAR’. They made sure George W. Bush was in the White House as the American President, and then set about implementing their right-wing ideological blueprints, to impose their American ideals, in the Middle East.
When you have right-wing ideologues, with the presence of Vice President Dick Cheney, Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Defence Policy Board chairman Richard Perle and Deputy Defence Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, what did anybody expect?
The following article describes perfectly what America was up against, as soon as the Bush and his cohorts obtained power.
Article Webpage Address: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1665.htm
The Project for the New American Century.
The People versus the Powerful is the oldest story in human history. At no point in history have the Powerful wielded so much control. At no point in history has the active and informed involvement of the People, all of them, been more absolutely required. William Rivers Pitt: 02/25/03
The Project for the New American Century, or PNAC, is a Washington-based Think-tank created in 1997. Above all else, PNAC desires and demands one thing: The establishment of a global American empire to bend the will of all nations. They chafe at the idea that the United States, the last remaining superpower, does not do more by way of economic and military force to bring the rest of the world under the umbrella of a new socio-economic Pax Americana.
The fundamental essence of PNAC’s ideology can be found in a White Paper produced in September of 2000 entitled “Rebuilding America’s Defences: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century.” In it, PNAC outlines what is required of America to create the global empire they envision. According to PNAC, America must:
* Reposition permanently based forces to Southern Europe, Southeast Asia and the Middle East;
* Modernize U.S. forces, including enhancing our fighter aircraft, submarine and surface fleet capabilities;
* Develop and deploy a global missile defence system, and develop a strategic dominance of space;
* Control the “International Commons” of cyberspace;
* Increase defence spending to a minimum of 3.8 percent of gross domestic product, up from the 3 percent currently spent.
Most ominously, this PNAC document described four “Core Missions” for the American military. The two central requirements are for American forces to “fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars,” and to “perform the ‘constabulary’ duties associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions.” Note well that PNAC does not want America to be prepared to fight simultaneous major wars. That is old school. In order to bring this plan to fruition; the military must fight these wars one way or the other to establish American dominance for all to see.
Why is this important? After all, wacky think tanks are a cottage industry in Washington, DC. They are a dime a dozen. In what way does PNAC stand above the other groups that would set American foreign policy if they could? Two events brought PNAC into the mainstream of American government: the
disputed election of George W. Bush, and the attacks of September 11th. When Bush assumed the Presidency, the men who created and nurtured the imperial dreams of PNAC became the men who run the Pentagon, the Defence Department and the White House. When the Towers came down, these men saw, at long last, their chance to turn their White Papers into substantive policy.
Vice President Dick Cheney is a founding member of PNAC, along with Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Defence Policy Board chairman Richard Perle. Deputy Defence Secretary Paul Wolfowitz is the ideological father of the
group. Bruce Jackson, a PNAC director, served as a Pentagon official for Ronald Reagan before leaving government service to take a leading position with the weapons manufacturer Lockheed Martin.
PNAC is staffed by men who previously served with groups like Friends of the Democratic Centre in Central America, which supported America’s bloody gamesmanship in Nicaragua and El Salvador, and with groups like The Committee for the Present Danger, which spent years advocating that a
nuclear war with the Soviet Union was “winnable.”
PNAC has recently given birth to a new group, The Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, which met with National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice in order to formulate a plan to “educate” the American populace about the need for war in Iraq. CLI has funnelled millions of taxpayer dollars to
support the Iraqi National Congress and the Iraqi heir presumptive, Ahmed Chalabi. Chalabi was sentenced in absentia by a Jordanian court in 1992 to 22 years in prison for bank fraud after the collapse of Petra Bank, which he founded in 1977. Chalabi has not set foot in Iraq since 1956, but his Enron-like business credentials apparently make him a good match for the Bush administration’s plans.
PNAC’s “Rebuilding America’s Defences” report is the institutionalization of plans and ideologies that have been formulated for decades by the men currently running American government. The PNAC Statement of Principles is signed by Cheney, Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld, as well as by Eliot Abrams, Jeb Bush, Bush’s special envoy to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad, and many others. William Kristol, famed conservative writer for the Weekly Standard,is also a co-founder of the group. The Weekly Standard is owned by Rupert
Murdoch, who also owns international media giant Fox News.
The desire for these freshly empowered PNAC men to extend American hegemony by force of arms across the globe has been there since day one of the Bush administration, and is in no small part a central reason for the Florida electoral battle in 2000. Note that while many have said that Gore and Bush
are ideologically identical, Mr. Gore had no ties whatsoever to the fellows at PNAC. George W. Bush had to win that election by any means necessary, and PNAC signatory Jeb Bush was in the perfect position to ensure the rise to prominence of his fellow imperialists. Desire for such action, however,
is by no means translatable into workable policy. Americans enjoy their comforts, but don’t cotton to the idea of being some sort of Neo-Rome. On September 11th, the fellows from PNAC saw a door of opportunity open wide before them, and stormed right through it.
Bush released on September 20th 2001 the “National Security Strategy of the United States of America.” It is an ideological match to PNAC’s “Rebuilding America’s Defences” report issued a year earlier. In many places, it uses
exactly the same language to describe America’s new place in the world.
Recall that PNAC demanded an increase in defence spending to at least 3.8% of GDP. Bush’s proposed budget for next year asks for $379 billion in Defence spending, almost exactly 3.8% of GDP. In August of 2002, Defence Policy Board chairman and PNAC member Richard Perle heard a policy briefing from a think tank associated with the Rand
Corporation. According to the Washington Post and The Nation, the final slide of this presentation described “Iraq as the tactical pilot, Saudi Arabia as the strategic pivot, and Egypt as the prize” in a war that would purportedly be about ridding the world of Saddam Hussein’s weapons. Bush
has deployed massive forces into the Mid-east region, while simultaneously engaging American forces in the Philippines and playing nuclear chicken with North Korea. Somewhere in all this lurks at least one of the “Major Theatre Wars” desired by the September 2000 PNAC report.
Iraq is but the beginning, a pretence for a wider conflict. Donald Kagan, a central member of PNAC, sees America establishing permanent military bases in Iraq after the war. This is purportedly a measure to defend the peace in the Middle East, and to make sure the oil flows. The nations in that region, however, will see this for what it is: a jump-off point for American forces to invade any nation in that region they choose to. The American people, anxiously awaiting some sort of exit plan after America defeats Iraq, will see too late that no exit is planned. All of the horses are travelling together at speed here. The defence
contractors who sup on American tax revenue will be handsomely paid for arming this new American empire. The corporations that own the news media will sell this eternal war at a profit, as viewership goes through the stratosphere when there is combat to be shown. Those within the administration who believe that the defence of Israel is contingent upon laying waste to every possible aggressor in the region will have their dreams fulfilled. The PNAC men who wish for a global Pax Americana at gunpoint will see their plans unfold. Through it all, the bankrollers from
the WTO and the IMF will be able to dictate financial terms to the entire planet. This last aspect of the plan is pivotal, and is best described in the newly revised version of Greg Palast’s masterpiece, “The Best Democracy Money Can Buy.”
There will be adverse side effects. The siege mentality average Americans are suffering as they smother behind yards of plastic sheeting and duct tape will increase by orders of magnitude as our aggressions bring forth new terrorist attacks against the homeland. These attacks will require the
implementation of the newly drafted Patriot Act II, an augmentation of the previous Act that has profoundly sharper teeth. The sun will set on the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
The American economy will be ravaged by the need for increased defence spending, and by the aforementioned “constabulary” duties in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. Former allies will turn on us. Germany, France
and the other nations resisting this Iraq war are fully aware of this game plan. They are not acting out of cowardice or because they love Saddam Hussein, but because they mean to resist this rising American empire, lest they face economic and military serfdom at the hands of George W. Bush. Richard Perle has already stated that France is no longer an American ally.
As the eagle spreads its wings, our rhetoric and their resistance will become more agitated and dangerous.
Many people, of course, will die. They will die from war and from want, from famine and disease. At home, the social fabric will be torn in ways that make the Reagan nightmares of crack addiction, homelessness and AIDS seem tame by comparison.
This is the price to be paid for empire, and the men of PNAC who now control the fate and future of America are more than willing to pay it. For them, the benefits far outweigh the liabilities.
The plan was running smoothly until those two icebergs collided. Millions and millions of ordinary people are making it very difficult for Bush’s international allies to keep to the script. PNAC may have designs for the control of the “International Commons” of the Internet, but for now it is the staging ground for a movement that would see empire take a back seat to a wise peace, human rights, equal protection under the law, and the preponderance of a justice that will, if properly applied, do away forever with the anger and hatred that gives birth to terrorism in the first place. Tommaso Palladini of Milan perhaps said it best as he marched with his countrymen in Rome. “You fight terrorism,” he said, “by creating more justice in the world.”
The People versus the Powerful is the oldest story in human history. At no point in history have the Powerful wielded so much control. At no point in history has the active and informed involvement of the People, all of them, been more absolutely required. The tide can be stopped, and the men who
desire empire by the sword can be thwarted. It has already begun, but it must not cease. These are men of will, and they do not intend to fail.
William Rivers Pitt is a New York Times bestselling author of two books -
“War On Iraq” (with Scott Ritter) available now from Context Books, and “The Greatest Sedition is Silence,” available in May 2003 from Pluto Press.He teaches high school in Boston, MA.
March 8th, 2006 at 10:52 pmThanks, Mick Caine: I copied the entire article.
March 8th, 2006 at 11:21 pmNick Caine,
March 9th, 2006 at 12:28 amYou can excuse Marie for knobbing your first name. This regime has so angered sane patriotic Americans that we are off a key or two when we type.
Regards,
Walt
Why is Matthews’ “revelation” news? Both Paul O’Neill and Richard Clarke attended cabinet meetings inmmediately after Bush was inaugurated and the only item on the agenda was the Iraq invasion.
March 9th, 2006 at 8:11 am#106 Nick Caine
March 9th, 2006 at 8:56 amWalt’s right — I just saw my typo! My bad.
106: Well-done America, and her citizens!!! It’s only taken America three long arduous years for people to come to the realization that George W. Bush and his cohorts had planned to invade Iraq, as soon as he had stepped foot into the White House.
HINT: George W. Bush was not at all involved in the planning. The planning started in the 1990s.
Bush is not a founding member of the PNAC; he is not a Straussian; he is not a Hobbesian; he is a useful idiot of the PNAC.
Bush is no where to be found in the 1990s formulating of the plans to liberalize the ME or in the developing of strategies to spread democracy with the US military.
“Bush and his cohorts had planned to invade Iraq, as soon as he had stepped foot into the White House.”
After over ten ardous years and volumes of readily accessible info you still think >>>Bush
March 9th, 2006 at 9:06 amMatthews has openly fantacized about making love with Bush, so he needs therapy badly! He must be let go from his TV show to be committed to a mental institution!
March 9th, 2006 at 10:31 amwe knew bush was planning on iraq when he was governor. why wouldn’t cheney. we all knew what cheney represented. so why are these folks so behind and raising fuss? come, on. everyone knew this. dead heads in washington, i swear.
March 9th, 2006 at 12:00 pmto the sheeples, let the education of your great whitehouse begin!!! as i sit back and watch you deny, lie and hide!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
March 9th, 2006 at 12:03 pm13: we knew bush was planning on iraq when he was governor
Do you have any evidence that Bush was planning Iraq when he was governor of Texas.
From the 2000 Gore-Bush debates, one gets a very different picture.
Plus, I’ve never read about Bush writing a paper or giving a speech about democratizing the ME that predates 9/11.
Bush’s apparent *total* lack of activity with regard to democratizing the ME stands in stark comparison to Messrs Cheney et al. who have loudly banging the drums of war, forming think tanks, writing papers, deliving speeched, etc.
Please, provide the evidence.
I’d like very much to be corrected.
So far, it seems Bush is just a `useful idiot’, a cheerleader for the REAL neocons.
March 9th, 2006 at 12:59 pmThe Bush administration first started to escalate the situation in the Iraqi No-Fly Zones on February 16th, 2001. That’s about four weeks after he took office. This was the first time ground targets within Iraq were taken out. See:
March 9th, 2006 at 1:49 pmhttp://transcripts.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/meast/02/16/no.fly.zones/
That continued until August 2002, when proactive raids on Iraqi targets were initiated. See:
http://www.historyguy.com/no-fly_zone_war.html
116, The Bush administration first started to escalate
Do really think Mr Bush has been in charge *instead* of Mr Cheney?
What we see today policywise is what Mr Cheney, Mr Rumsfeld, et al have been talking, writing, and acting upon since the 1990s.
Prior to 9/11, Bush was not frequenting think tanks at all for giving speeches about the policies being enacted today.
He’s a useful idiot, pure and simple.
March 9th, 2006 at 2:38 pm#117, That was why very careful to use the term “Bush administration”. W himself was remiss in not reining in C&R.
March 9th, 2006 at 5:03 pmIf at first you don’t succeed:
March 9th, 2006 at 5:10 pm#117, That was why I was very careful to use the term “Bush administrationâ€. W himself was remiss in not reining in C&R.
199, W himself was remiss in not reining in C&R.
Again, I think you are giving way too much power to Boy George.
It really has never been his admin.
But, obviously, it its the Bush admin in the conventional sense.
I guess I can’t even think in those terms since its so incredibly obvious he’s a cheerleader and a clerk for R & C and nothing more.
March 9th, 2006 at 6:45 pmGee, thanx Tweety for that revelation, but I think most of us KNEW about this already! Anything new on impeachment or better yet, INDICTMENTS?
March 9th, 2006 at 7:07 pmGod, in your omnificence, what will be in post 199?
March 9th, 2006 at 7:13 pmBy the by, God, he has the means, he only lacks the will (and a brain).
March 9th, 2006 at 7:17 pmIt’s impeachable that the Vice President wanted to know the state of affairs in Iraq? You Dems are addicted to unsupportable opinions.
March 12th, 2006 at 10:40 amDo you believe Bush/Cheney wanted to go to invade Iraq from the get-go? Take this poll at wipoll.com
March 15th, 2006 at 1:04 amConcerning: Comment by A Concerned Citizen:
“This was his plan from the start!!! Bankrupt the USA, Allow Oil companies to RAPE the WORLD and pass the buck to the inheritors of all this blood for oil…..our children, grnadchildren and their kids……how we allow this to happen without a fight is beyond me…..call your corrupt govenment official and let them know how you feel….yell at them so they get the point….harrassment is better than blood
Comment by A Concerned Citizen — March 21, 2006 @ 2:50 pmâ€
__________________
Good for you! This is exactly what your spineless governement wants you and ever other activist to do so the NSA can start recording your conversations and reserve a jail cell for you in the future !
Do you realize that everytime you support Corporate America by spending your paycheck on the new and latest thing, you are actually supporting the war effort. Is this not what the Oil Companies want? and all the Rich Elite – who own all the Fortune 500 companies – Want? War?
If you really want to put pressure on the Government as an individual, I sugget you get CORPORATE AMERICA where it hurts, “in the pocket bookâ€.
Here is what I did starting back in May of 2003 just 2 months after the War was started to help force change in my own way. I hope 85 Million Americans will do what I have done or some of it to help force change!
A month after the IRAQ I decided to close down my business.
I filed bankruptcy a year later and without a lawyer! (very difficult to do) and I was able to Keep Everything to sell in the future and live on for a few years without having to work!
I have since quit working at all.
I have not paid any federal taxes in 3 years. “If you don’t make 10K a year, you don’t pay taxes, its that simple !
I don’t have a credit card ! So I have a “Balanced Budget†!
My cellphone is $10 a month ! (Trac-Phone…. Best deal on the Market – No Cotract)
I buy things at yard sales (No taxes)!
I go to outreach programs for food and clothing!
I don’t buy products from certain manufactures who give money to Republicans !
I went to 8 different insurance agent offices until I found the cheapest rate possible, in writing!
I will continue driving the same vehicle until the IRAQ War is over.
I have based my current actions in life and liberty on how to do my part to help stop this WAR, Each action I take is carefully evaluated to see if I can do it in a way to save money. This miser minded approach will allow me to not work for Corporate AMerica, Not spend my money in Corporate America Stores; and I will never have to pay back the money that this “Borrow and Spend President†has used in this immoral WAR !
____________
Now, not everyone can do what I have done and use a crazy “Give Up Your Life†way to revolt but, I will only do this until the WAR in IRAQ is over. I will then try and get back to normal, or what ever that is.
Consider these options in revolting against this Corrupt Corporate America (Government):
Shop until it hurts to find the best price and only buy what is absolultely necessary to survive on a new balanced budget! Yes, that means all the credit cards have to GO! and get a ATM Debit Card that takes money out of your 1 and only checking account.
Tell the family that do to the “HIGH COST OF GASOLINE†and possible economic problems in the near future as a result of G.W. Bush bankrupting America (Insert what you want to say) some things need to be changed for just a little while!
New Rules: 1-10.
You can come up with all kinds of things that can piss off your spouse, children, etc. but, that is not what you wan to do to help stop the WAR in IRAQ.
Choosing to limit excess pleasures and put money towards bills and get out of DEBT!
Who needs 5 cell phones?
Who needs to eat out every night of the week?
Who needs to rent new videos/movides every night?
Who needs to have premium channels?
Who needs to have 1, 2 or 3 new cars that suck on gas (SUV’s)?
Who needs to have multiple homes (Housing Market bubble is here – Sell Now)?
Who needs to working a full-time slave job just pay the bills and other peoples taxes?
Who needs to join a gym when you can walk and run at a park, etc.
_____________________
It wont’ be easy save money and help stop the war if you don’t evaluate and plan properly!
Take a seat and spend 3 hours a night for a full week to draw a “reduction of expenses until the war is over planâ€. Get feedback from each family member on “If we had to cut back on some things, what could go?â€
Most likely your going to get some strong, “What’s the Problem; I can’t do that; We have money in the bank, don’t we?; We can sell the house in the future, pay off the bills and retire in the future with all kinds of money, right?â€
I live on a day by day basis with not a worry. Don’t get me wrong, it is not where I want to be at this pion in my life but, that is the beauty of it all -
“I can move or even leave this country if I want to as I don’t owe a dime to anyone!†No bills, no restraints, no problems.
Think about what you can do to limit expense until the WAR IS OVER!
Think about what things you can to do to limit tax payments unitl the WAR IS OVER!
After you get your plan going, convence other family members to do the same thing until the WAR IS OVER!
Since today, March 21, 2006 at his 10 am. (EST) news confernece, Bush made it perfectly clear he has no intentions of pulling our troops out of IRAQ, it is vitally important that you plan to stay the course on a “Reduction of Expeses to Fight the War Plan†for 2 years.
If only 85 million people would do this! What a differece it would make to force policy changes.
We could all say “You are either for the war or against the war†and watch as Elite would call their spin doctors for help!
Well it works for me, and it could work for you.
Do it today.
I call it, “Revolt, Stop Supporting Warâ€
RJC Oklahoma
March 21st, 2006 at 4:24 pm[...] Vice President Cheney has also made up his mind: From the moment he was elected all he could think about was Iraq. See http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/ for more indications that President Bush has not been upfront about his intentions to invade Iraq. Filed under: Giant Stones | [...]
May 15th, 2006 at 3:00 pm[...] Chris Matthews proved himself useful yesterday as he revealed that a "well-placed source" informed him that Vice President Dick Cheney had his mind set on Iraq (transcript from Think Progress): Let me not let one guy off the hook here, that’s Cheney, Bob. I talked to someone last night who knows better about this than anybody — off the record — who told me the first thing Cheney wanted when he got the vice presidency, during the transition of 2000, what he wanted was not a briefing on the world, all he wanted to know about, where do we stand in Iraq? He was keyed on that decision from day one, long before 9-11, and it certainly looks like these guys weren’t surprised by the decision to go to Iraq. They had it in their mind ahead of time. (emphasis from Think Progress) [...]
December 2nd, 2006 at 4:23 am