*W*H*Y* doesn't the general public know about PNAC?? What about YOU??

[checks-n-balances]

If not, it's understandable. It's not your fault! It's because the press has been almost silent about it, because if they had, people would have so many more dots connected about Iraq.

I wanna know WHY!?

I'm talking about the Neocons' Project for the New American Century.

It's got to be the biggest and most important story almost totally ignored by the U.S. press in modern history. It's BIG.

The news and all the stories about Iraq dwell on the periferal "reasons" we're in Iraq (the debate about Saddam/al-Qaida connection, WMDs, etc.), but those were only fabricated justifications for making Iraq Step One in the Neocon plan for the U.S. exerting its empirical power in the Middle East. It was their justification for LYING (Leo Strauss, guru for neocon Paul Wolfowitz, believed it was OK for the Ruling Class to tell "Noble Lies" to the little people).

They waited a long time to use world events for their political advantage. The neocons were just WAITING for something like 9/11 to happen!

So I'm still asking:

why, Why, WHY??? has the press been so silent about it?

Do they think we don't care - or maybe it's not "interesting" or (God forbid) not "sexy" enough?

Has this story been suppressed by Bushco/RWers/Neocons? Or is it just another example of the stealth secrecy of this administration?

Is somebody afraid that worldwide awareness of it could put us at even greater security risk?

Do they still not know about it THEMSELVES, or what???

Do any of you have a CLUE?

Is anybody else as mystified about this as I am? Anybody?

==============================================================

IF THIS IS THE FIRST YOU'VE HEARD OF THIS, READ BELOW:

This article from Sept. 2002 is a must-read - please do so and pass it on. Finding it was a real watershed event for me:

"The President's Real Goal in Iraq" by Jay Bookman: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2319.htm

And here's another must-read - a DU thread called LEO STRAUSS AND THE NEO-CONS:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=sh...

[Stew225]

1. I'm trying but admit that I didn't know about this.

Thanks for sharing.

[CharlesGroce]

2. Yes most of us have heard of PNAC....

but have actually decided that it is better to fight (politically) the right wing disease which has taken our government and threatens to engulf our society through their control of the media in more direct means than a four letter acronym synonomous with conspiracy. Conspiracy theories are easily dismissed because of the stigma attached to the phrase, but facts are facts. Talk about facts, talk about what those fools have done, talk about what they will do, but not what they agreed to do once in power.

[CharlesGroce]

4. A little more

We all know what we're dealing with, we're just waiting to effectively deal with it.

[CharlesGroce]

6. well I guess

you should talk about all of that.

[checks-n-balances]

11. I used the PNAC acronym because it fits better into a subject line

I couldn't care less if people know what it stands for. I wonder what the basically decent and well-meaning Republicans would think if they knew the FACT that our vice-president has been a part of this group from the beginning? A group that wanted to invade Iraq back in the 1990's?? That's a FACT that EVERYBODY should know.

Try to remember that DU is the exception, and that most of the general public has no idea about these unelected leaders. Some of their members are on the talk shows, like Kristol, and Wolfowitz is our Deputy Sec'y of Defense, for cryin' out loud.

I was MAD AS HELL when I found out about this and it made me realize the extent to which we have all been lied to.

I, for one, don't want this government run by people who were ready to do "what they agreed to do once in power." It tells me what kind of people they are, and that the present administration has these kinds of people at the helm. Because although they've now been partially exposed, they basic character has NOT changed. What gives this ideological think tank the idea that THEY make those decisions for us, let alone for the world?

Our democracy can survive only with an informed electorate. And they're mostly in the dark about this group of people who have done enough damage already.

On edit: grammar corrections.

[eaprez]

3. Old Story....

... The neocons were just WAITING for something like 9/11 to happen!

SOME SAY WAITING - SOME SAY CULTIVATING A 9/11

[Hoping4Change]

5. I didn;t know either and I thought I was well informed.

However I have seen the acronyn but never checked out what it meant.

Thanks for the heads up.

[CharlesGroce]

7. Check it out...

these people actually planned the events unfolding now. Surprised?

[Stephanie]

8. If you'd look at the threads below this one on the page

you'd see that we do know about it. We know a lot:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=110&topic_id=80&mesg_id=80

[checks-n-balances]

12. Don't misunderstand - I wasn't saying that nobody here knows about it!

Thanks for the link - I didn't have that one.

Of course, I'm fully aware that it's old news to most of DU, and I was providing those who DIDN'T know with some links. I expected most other DUers to know, because I've seen references to it occasionaly within discussions. So perhaps it was an issue over a year ago on this board, but some of us weren't here yet! So I was looking for some answers from some of you longer-time members.

Sorry if my post sounded accusatory or alarmist. First, I wanted some of you engaged about this, so I guess it got the attention of you all, anyway. Second, sorry if it wasn't connected that well or as well-worded as it could have been. I have an extremely slow dial-up connection & suddenly had problems with pop-ups today. Then after I spent a long time typing everything, I touched the wrong key and the whole thing was wiped out, links and all! So this thread was a hasty re-write from memory.

I'm not at all saying the neocons caused 9/11. But they were waiting for the kind of situation that would give them justification for sending military forces to the Middle East - specifically Iraq. Didn't their document say that it would take an event the likes of a Pearl Harbor? Their idea was to begin with Iraq, then either Syria or Iran, etc. (Remember when, out of the blue, Bush named these countries, and Korea, as the AXIS of EVIL?) The problem is, amazingly, it's been ignored by the press.

So back to my original question: WHY HAS THE PRESS BURIED THIS STORY?

Perhaps if it hadn't been ignored, we would all understand that our little adventure in Iraq was not based on WMDs, kindly liberating the Iraqi people, exporting democracy, or fighting terrorism. The talking heads have been discussing Iraq for almost two years, but I've yet to hear anyone say in our mainstream ("liberal") media, "It's because a handful of people wanted to invade Iraq back in the 1990's, and they took advantage of the opening made by 9/11 made it happen." If they had, more people would have known the truth about Bushco & the neocons. Then perhaps we wouldn't have gone to Iraq. And we would have concentrated on al-Qaeda like we should have.

As you can see, this is bugging me no end!

I've been wanting to write about this for a long time but haven't had the chance to put it all down.

Anyway, it's like the press has pieces of this puzzle on the floor in front of them in their broadcast studios, but they either can't see it, have been told to ignore it, or they just don't want to bother putting it together for their American audiences.

We all know the press have fallen down on their jobs during this administration. But this story uncovers the secrecy, arrogance, absurdity, and recklessness (and I'd add, the insanity) of this administration better than any other. Fortunately, more people are discovering they've been lied to, but they don't fully know WHY.

If we don't see this as part of our history and our country doesn't know that this has happened, IMHO it's more likely to happen again.

However, I have to give credit to the few print journalists who have reported it. I could be wrong, but I think Jay Bookman of the AJC was one of the first, and still one of the few to do it within a mainstream newspaper. Thank God for courageous journalists like him.

So back to my questions:

- Anybody want to venture a guess as to why the press has kept a lid on this one? (To me, that is a news story in itself!)

- And...If THEY don't expose this and make it common knowledge, how will people ever find out about it? How do WE do it - not necessarily on this site, but "out there"?

BTW, those who were new to this, please start a thread sometime with your thoughts to keep this subject alive. Or perhaps DU should have a few "orientation articles" for newbies, including one on this subject.

Thanks, everybody, for the discussion.

[gatorboy]

9. Wow!

When you brought it up I had to check my favorites and there was the page I completely forgot about. Someone mentioned this to me a few months back and I had to check it out. Creepy stuff.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqmiddleeast2000-1997.htm

[Hoping4Change]

16. HI there gatorboy

Welcome to d Undergound. :hi:

[Nite Owl]

10. Hope that Moore's F 9-11

helps to bring this and so many other things to light.

[checks-n-balances]

13. Thank you again, Stephanie, for that great link - everyone should bookmark

Sorry, I didn't know about it, but it's really extensive.

Looks like some of the newspapers here have covered this story after all. But I'm sure lots of people besides me missed them! Not surprisingly, it does look like much of the print coverage came from the international press, not U.S. Maybe it's just not a "TV-friendly" type of story, but that's the one medium that has mentioned it very little. That's unfortunate, since that's the only news source of so many.

Still, maybe this raises a small issue for DU. Is it possible to make NEOCON IDEOLOGY (as well as RELIGIOUS RIGHT IDEOLOGY) separate topic categories, or would that be too much? Or maybe sub-categories of the BUSH & CONSERVATIVES topic?

Or, besides the FAQs for newbies about message board how-to's, wouldn't it be great to have an "orientation corner" or "Newbie must-reads" of sorts for brand new DUers, with some essential articles included? Just so they'll know some of the basics that other people here & there are talking about? DU has been a great source of info for me and lots of others, I'm sure. (I doubt this, but may it could even enlighten some of the lurking freepers if they'd read something like that when they first get here! In my dreams, probably...) I know stuff like that takes more work and more time, which is in limited supply for all of us.

Anyway, just a thought. And thanks for the info, Stephanie, and sorry I was a little defensive in my reply to you. I'm really impressed with that thread, and believe me, I really wasn't referring to DU when I was talking about media silence.

BTW, folks, sorry I couldn't stop posting on my own thread. I'll shut up now!

[Stephanie]

14. Here's an old thread from the archives of GD:

New to DU? Heres your =======> Intro to PNAC

You are welcome to copy and re-post. I think it's been a while and you are right that we assume everybody knows about PNAC when in fact many don't.

[Hoping4Change]

15. "Newbie-must -Read. Necon catagory." Fantastic ideas.

I hope DU sees this. I thought I was well informed but I didn't know about PNAC. I have seen the acronym enough times but it never struck a chord.

Personally I think that referring to something this important and so under reported with an acronym is a big mistake.