The Big Lie: Bush* is fighting the 'war on terrorism' in Iraq

[Q]

- The Necons formulated a plan in the 90s in anticipation of their coming to power in 2000: PNAC: "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century," A Report of the Project for the New American Century.

- This is the plan the Bush* administration is now setting in motion - almost to the letter: Weapons in space. A new generation of 'bunker busting' nuclear weapons. More military bases and domination of the middle east. Unprecedented increase in military/defense spending. And a 'Pearl Harbor' type event to push it all along.

- It's interesting how everything went according to plan. A cynic might say that it's too much of a coincidence that a Pearl Harbor like event did indeed happen and that the Neocon's wish list was fulfilled within less than two years after they took control of the American government by election fraud.

- It's probably safe to say that none of this could have taken place without 9-11. Americans had no interest in 'shocking and awing' Iraq into oblivion, killing thousands of innocent Iraqis and US troops or occupying Iraq.

- We're in Iraq for one reason: The Bush* administration lied about the connection between Iraq and 9-11 and bullied our representatives into supporting a preemptive strike. Although they now parse words and distort the record...before the invasion the Bush* administration assured Congress and the American people that Saddam was capable of and had intentions to attack the US with 'weapons of mass destruction'.

- With the willing help of the corporate media...Americans were suckered into supporting an invasion and occupation of Iraq based on false pretenses, fabrications, exaggerations and outright lies. This leads to the mother of all questions: Did the Neocons allow 9-11 (a Pearl Harbor-like event) to happen or did they simply take advantage of it after the fact?

-

[phillybri]

1. My favorite RW talking point:

"I'd rather have the terrorists attacking our troops in Iraq than in the streets of New York."

:grr:

[Q]

3. Just one of the talking points...

...to cover the true intentions of the Bush* regime.

- Sorry...I changed the title while you were responding. I believe the only way we can get to the truth about the invasion and occupation of Iraq is to discuss 9-11. One leads directly to the other...and explains the secrecy of the Bush* admin.

[NewJeffCT]

4. My response

Would be - just like we had to fight the Commies in Vietnam instead of in San Francisco & LA...

[Q]

5. Could you elaborate?

- First...I changed the title of the thread and you seem to be responding to the other queries.

- That aside...are you suggesting that the United States had good reason to be in Vietnam?

[NewJeffCT]

9. No

I meant that the now-discredited Domino Theory was the reason we were given for going in to Vietnam.... i.e., we had to fight them Commies in Vietnam, or else we would be fighting them in San Francisco and LA in the future, as one by one, like dominoes, the rest of the world would fall to the evil godless Commies.

It seems to be the same reason the right wing gives for being in Iraq - it's better to fight them in Iraq than to fight them in NY.

[Q]

11. Thanks...

- But the fact remains: Bush* ISN'T fighting a war against anything in Iraq.

- Democrats ask how can we possibly beat Bush* in 2004 with half the country and the media on his side? The answer could be that we need to circumvent the media with the truth about what really happened on 9-11...the connection between the Bush and Saudi royal family...the connection between Bush* and the bin Ladens...and the MANY lies Bush* told to drive this nation into an unnecessary war.

[BuelahWitch]

27. I agree Q

This whole war was based on several lies. Bush needs to be held accountable.

[phillybri]

25. Awesome point....

Thanks!

[Q]

2. And now you know why Cheney's National Energy Policy...

...was hidden from view. It included references to the plan to conquer Iraq and share the spoils of war.

- Could it be that Bush* refuses to support an investigation into 9-11 or release related Saudi documents for the same reason? Did the Bushies actually put together a plan with the Saudis that included allowing 9-11 to happen and the invasion of Iraq? Have we forgotten that MOST of the hijackers were from Saudi...and none were from Iraq?

- Ask questions. Demand answers.

[Q]

6. Democrats must stop pretending that Bush's* war has any credibility...

...it's the only way we're going to expose the truth about 9-11 and stop the Bush* Doctrine in its tracks.

- Bush* isn't fighting a war on terrorism. He's using the death of 3000 on 9-11 to advance his own political career and keep the GOP in power.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

14. Q as always you are right on!...this is exactly the point ........

it was NOT Saddam's men who flew those polanes on 911 into the WTC and Pentagon!!!! Iraq and Saddam had NOTHING to do with terrorism!!!

[Q]

20. Yeah...but I feel like I'm posting to myself here...

- Logic dictates: If the 'war on terrorism' began because of the attack on 9-11...why isn't the Bush* administration going after those even THEY stated were responsible?

- To make matters worse...the Bushies have at least half of America and many Democrats convinced that Republicans are 'better' at national security issues and that only THEY can successfully fight this 'war' on terrorism. And then the Bushies tell us that this 'war' will last a 'very long time'....perhaps a 'generation'.

- The Bushies are suggestting that the US become a one-party government. They believe they can stay in power a 'very long time' if they can convince the American people that they're the only ones capable of protecting America.

- That's why we need to put an end to the scam that Bush* is 'protecting' America by attacking Iraq.

[Tellurian]

30. Hello, Q....

"- Everything Gore/Kennedy/Byrd predicted has come true. The Bushie Republicans are looking to establish a ONE PARTY STATE using perpetual war and fear to divide the country and stifle voices of dissent.

Of course, using a page out of Hitler's book in establishing, "The THIRD/FOURTH Reich"... and eventually disolving Congress, as did Hitler, when he disolved the Russian Parliament.

Look, there is enough existing evidence out there...what is holding up the bid for Impeachment, and why?

[Iverson]

7. once again

Well, duh!

Why more people don't see the lies, or care about the lies, or feel that enabling them is a poor political strategy is a mystery to me.

[Q]

8. Mass hysteria? Something in the water?

- I simply don't understand why we're all going along with the outrageous lies of the Bush* administration. I was amazed that so many Democrats praised Bush* for Saddam's capture...as though they had forgotten that the war itself is illegitimate.

- Many Democrats don't seem to understand that Bush* is going to use 9-11 and his 'successful' war in Iraq to secure another four years in our White House. How can the Democratic party allow this when EVERYONE knows Bush* has obstructed any attempt to investigate 9-11 AND pushed this nation into war based on lies and deceit?

[Iverson]

13. Well, Q, you care about truth. ...

Ruthless people who care only about stampeding toward an ever more egregious accumulation of power don't give a damn about truth. It's a mere roadblock or distraction for irrelevant liberal intellectuals like you, so that you can put on a show for them with your objections. Their lies are in your face, and mine, exactly because it's an expression of contempt by the powerful toward the dissenting. "Hee hee hee! Let's say that Iraq has WMDs and watch those fools go crazy!"

The hard part to take is that Mr. and Mrs. Middle America thinks that they care about truth, but are so muddled that they conflate it with complete irrelevancies and end up voting for Bush (and tolerating his theft of democracy) because he seems like the kind of affable dumbshit with whom they could have a beer.

[Q]

21. The truth to some is little more than a wave of a flag...

...and calling themselves 'patriotic'. It used to be that a patriot was someone who defended the Constitution/Bill of Rights and Democracy. But now patriotism has been redefined to mean something else entirely: blind obedience.

- What other conclusion is there than both parties are complicit in hiding the truth from the American people? Gore, Byrd, Kennedy and others have recently TRIED to warn us that the Iraqi war is not only a sham...but a cynical ploy to establish Republicans as the saviors of America. Iraq is about politics and empire.

[Iverson]

22. Well, perhaps Byrd and Kennedy ...

... haven't been good Democrats long enough to get a majority to listen to them.

[Q]

24. The NeoDems disregard the 'old school' Democrats...

...because the old schoolers still think about the people and their Constitution once in a while instead of how much cash they can pull in for the next election cycle.

- Everything Gore/Kennedy/Byrd predicted has come true. The Bushie Republicans are looking to establish a ONE PARTY STATE using perpetual war and fear to divide the country and stifle voices of dissent.

[rwork]

10. Going thru the channels last night

I ran across the D. Sawyer * interview. Listening for a few seconds, I heard her ask him about WMDs and not finding them. He was in his humble mode.( Instead of the chest out, in front of reporters mode) He said he was confident he did the right thing. I quickly hit the channel change button. The loss of 455 men and women over a war based on lies.Why won,t Diane ask him about his not serving his last year of military service? Ask him about the plastic turkey,Harkin oil, cocaine felony, and on and on.

[Q]

12. Confident? Are we expected to leave it at that?

- Bush* didn't give an answer to the question. The fact is he can't honestly answer questions about 9-11 or the Iraq war because he's nothing but a puppet and a front for the PNAC group of neocon warmongers.

- I don't care if Bush* feels 'confident' that he did the 'right thing'. The facts prove otherwise. Democrats made a huge politcal mistake when they let him off the hook and agreed not to 'pursue' his lies about 9-11 and Iraq. Yet...these are the very things that may well put him back in office.

- The media treats Bush* like a 12 year old...afraid to ask him 'adult' questions. They don't want to give the people the kind of information that makes them 'informed voters' or that may damage Bush's* reputation or chances in 2004. It should be obvious by now that the media not only supports Bush's* obstruction of the 9-11 investigation and his unnecessary Iraq invasion...they're also supporting his bid for the WH.

[truthspeaker]

15. Dems in Congress need to keep repeating this

The war in Iraq has nothing to do with preventing terrorism

Bush lied about WMDs

The occupation was poorly planned and is being executed poorly

Iraqis want their own government and they want us out

Repeat

[ElsewheresDaughter]

16. kick

[leftchick]

17. What the soldiers say....

What galls me to no end is when the soldiers in Iraq refer to the Iraqis as terrorists and their mission as fighting terrorism. When that is seen on Murkin TV it just helps to perpetuate the "war on terra" myth.

[Q]

23. How can an Iraqi child be a 'terrorist'?

- But the American empire doesn't care about killing children...referring to them as collateral damage. Hell...they've stopped counting the bodies of those who get in the way of Bush's* 'righteous' bombs.

- We know why the Bushies call them terrorists. If they told the truth...that many are only trying to defend their 'homeland' against an American occupation...they'd have to call them 'freedom fighters'.

- The Bushies have no right to occupy Iraq...even if terrorists were found there. The Iraqi people shouldn't have to pay with their lives for Bush's* war of greed and empire.

[bobthedrummer]

18. 9/11, the Saudis, Pakistan, PNAC, BCCI, IranContra, Iraqgate...

there is ample food for thought as to why we aren't fighting terrorism in Iraq or even Afghanistan which had a record poppy harvest.
The Saudis
http://cryptome.org/soil/soiled-dove2.htm
Pakistan
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO111A.html
BCCI
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/KUP310A.html
9/11
http://www.wanttoknow.info/911timeline2pg

[Q]

19. Bush* insists that he's fighting a 'worldwide war' on terrorism...

...but he's not doing it in the name of the people. This has been a Neocon plan from the beginning.

- Is it a coincidence that the PNACers needed and got an excuse 'like' 9-11 to attack Iraq?

[Q]

26. I was going to let this thread die a natural death...

...but other threads/posters are intimating that Democrats MUST support war(s) or be branded 'conspiracy nuts' and unpatriotic.

- Well...it's not a conspiracy that Bush* knew that a terrorist event might take place and did nothing to prevent it. It's NOT a theory that Bush* lied this nation into war.

- This isn't a lefty or 'liberal' position. It's the truth and the Democratic party becomes complicit if they don't inform the people about what really happened.

[tlcandie]

28. There is no war on terror just like there is no war on drugs....

You call it one thing for the those who aren't willing to move past their FAUX channel while you are in essence doing something else. Slight of hand...smoke and mirrors.

There is a lawsuit by a 9-11 widow taking this regime and all who knew anything prior to 9-11 and did nothing to stop it. I've looked at the legal document and I surely hope that something happens there. I can't believe anyone would take a case if there was no documentation and it was merely only conspiracy theory.

If you look at the buildup of US bases and the resources of oil and natural gas in the ME you will see what this is about...empire. The empire will be used to rule the world when we have our hands on all outlets of oil/gas/water and whatever else they think is important to lord it over other people.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/military.map.html

People aren't looking past Iraq or their noses. What is going on behind the tables, under the tables, behind the curtains in sweetheart deals and blackmail? What has the PNAC document stated? Have they veered from PNAC?

This regime has stated that the war on terror will be long and hard battle with lots of sacrifice.

Long = unending
Hard = lots of $$$$ and freedoms that we lose for the sake of empire
Sacrifice = deaths of our sons, husbands, fathers, daughters, etc. and INNOCENTS

A vote for * = unending war to conquer resources

Are we developing more nuclear weapons now so that when we run up against China and Russia we can drop them or use them as threats? What is the end game goal? War on terror is suggestive not definitive. War on terror means controlling all resources so others are answering to you for their needs. Control/manipulation of all people under one tyrant.

We've only begun.

[Must_B_Free]

29. Astute summary, Q

We all know this, but it was articulated well here.

Keeping kicked