Who's Online

We have 395 guests online

Popular

2535 readings
Iraq: Conspiracy of the NeoCons PDF Print E-mail
Justice News
Friday, 16 January 2004 12:05
Fred Knelman: To truly understand the U.S. invasion of Iraq o­ne must join all the relevant dots, beginning in 1990 when a group of extreme neoCons issued a report followed by the formation of the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) involving the same group and the 1992 Defense Policy Guidance document with the same agenda, leading to their becoming the power core in the Bush administration in 2000 and its Defense Guidance Planning (DGP) documents, all of the above supporting the military overthrow of Saddam Hussein and, above all, the acquisition of Iraq?s large oil reserves. Most of the above documents were leaked to the press.

Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 19:08:52 -0800

From: Fred Knelman < This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it >

Subject: "Iraq:...."

IRAQ: THE CONSPIRACY OF THE NEOCONS

F.H. Knelman, Ph.D.

To truly understand the U.S. invasion of Iraq o­ne must join all the relevant dots, beginning in 1990 when a group of extreme neoCons issued a report followed by the formation of the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) involving the same group and the 1992 Defense Policy Guidance document with the same agenda, leading to their becoming the power core in the Bush administration in 2000 and its Defense Guidance Planning (DGP) documents, all of the above supporting the military overthrow of Saddam Hussein and, above all, the acquisition of Iraq?s large oil reserves. Most of the above documents were leaked to the press. Thus all the dots were known and yet the major multimedia ignored them for twenty-three years. A further important point is that the neoCon group, led by Rumsfeld and Cheney was, almost from the beginning, looking for a compelling reason to launch the war against Iraq. The 9/11 terrorist act provided that reason, when also supported by a group of outright lies, i.e. Iraq had weapons of mass destruction threatening the U.S., they were importing uranium from Niger and they were linked to the terrorist group Al Quaeda. Thus 9/11 was actually welcomed as providing the launching impetus to the war.

We have always been loath to accept conspiracy theories. Rather, we have coined the concept, ?the conspiracy of the like-minded?. This is how cults operate. In the same way we are experiencing a conspiracy of the neoCons. However, beyond their like-mindedness, they have actually conspired in the case of the war against Iraq. This is completely borne out when we join all the dots we have identified. And, with no exceptions, the major multimedia has failed to do this, although a number of individuals and groups have done so.

Then o­ne more dot was further revealed with the release of a book, ?The Price of Loyalty?, written by Ron Susskind, which included former Treasury Secretary Paul O?Neill?s accusations. O?Neill, who attended National Security Council meetings, alleged that Bush had made the decision to invade Iraq ten days after his inauguration in 2000. O?Neill had kept some 19,000 National Security Agency high-level documents. He also stated that there was a great emphasis o­n oil. All this was not just a matter of discussion but the actual preparation to go to war. The O?Neill accusations became hot media property but not o­ne treatment identified all the data, beginning in 1990. O?Neill had been fired as Treasury Secretary due to his opposition to a second round of tax cuts. He was opposed to the huge deficits and wished to protect social security. Bush?s response was to quote Reagan, i.e. ?Deficits don?t matter?.

O?Neill appeared o­n ?60 Minutes? o­n January 11, 2004. He provided a penetrating picture of a disengaged president, using an insightful phrase of Bush as ?a blind man among the deaf?. His na?vete was revealed o­n the above television program when he said, ?Why would I be attacked for telling the truth ?? ?60 Minutes? showed more integrity than any other major media treatment of the O?Neill revelations but they, too, failed to join all the earlier dots. The entire historical context of the capture of political power by the Rumsfeld-Cheney gang was the missing piece of the puzzle that would have completed the picture. It is as though we live in two separate information worlds which do not share critical material. The major media knows the truth but will never reveal it.

Not yet satisfied with the Bush administration?s policy, the two super-hawk neoCons - Richard Perle and David Frum, have released a ?Manual for Victory? in the war against terrorism, a meaningless phrase in itself. Their new book, ?An End to Evil: How to Win the War o­n Terror?, is, in effect, a proposal to declare and carry out war against all countries they have identified as opposed to the U.S.

Appearing o­n CNN?s ?Wolf Blitzer Presents?, o­n January 3, 2000 these notorious neoCons first denied that the president was planning to go to war with Iraq ten days after he took office, not mentioning that they were prepared to do so a decade before. They feel that the Bush administration is not sufficiently dedicated to complete the war against terror and the fulfillment of the American defeat of all its enemies and all ?evil? in the world. They want to rededicate the U.S. in its war against terrorism, feeling the current policy is waning. They support the overthrow of all leaders and countries that they define as a threat, which amounts to the destruction of the Arab world, with a barely hidden agenda of protecting Israel. They also support the violent overthrow of all countries whose policies are an impediment to the U.S. completion of its mission of global domination. This is reduced to all countries that disagree with U.S. policies or threaten its supremacy. Blitzer plays his usual role, which always lacks a real dedication to reveal the true reality. They attacked the State Department as attempting to reconcile global conflicts when they should be fighting terrorism. A target of theirs is Colin Powell, who they accuse of talking to these enemies. The U.S. must always be prepared to use force to gain its ends. The true title should be ?The End of Good? or ?The Triumph of Evil?. They would not talk to their enemies but rather destroy them. They cited North Korea as an example of U.S. diplomatic failure. They would have the U.S. carry the biggest stick and use it wherever there is any opposition. They cite Sharon as an example of the ideal leadership. They even added, ?We should force European governments to choose between Paris and Washington?. In effect, they are calling for a complete policy of preemption and unilateralism without reservations.

Even the better of the Democratic presidential candidates has not gone all the way in criticizing the Bush administration. None of them have joined all the dots. While Dean, Kerry and Kucinick are the best choices, o­nly the latter has gone further, in fact too far to be electable. We can o­nly hope there will be a Democratic president with the courage to bring Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld to justice for their crimes - civil. military and international.

Finally, of interest is a sixty-one page study by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, which criticizes the Bush administration for ?systematically? misrepresenting the threats posed by Iraq. Some 1600 experts were involved in this comprehensive review of Iraq?s alleged weapons of mass destruction. What has become clear from this study ?is that this war wasn?t necessary?, (Joseph Cirincione, author of the six-month study). It also stated that Iraq?s nuclear and chemical weapons programs were known before the war and posed no threat. Thus o­ne of the major reasons used by the Bush administration for the war has now been totally refuted. The others have now been withdrawn as ?intelligence errors?, an oxymoron for planted lies. We can o­nly conclude that the war against Iraq was a conspiracy of a group of neoCons now established in the Bush administration.

Last Updated on Friday, 16 January 2004 12:05
 

Latest News