Black People : The Blueprint Of Cheney's New World Order For All To See

Discussion in 'Black People Open Forum' started by tigre35, Jul 21, 2003.

  1. tigre35

    tigre35 Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2003
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1
    So, NOW, you won't have all those pesky little questions bothering you regarding our government's intentions, here it is in black and white. They even signed it. All of them.


    Bush planned Iraq 'regime change' before becoming President





    By Neil Mackay




    A SECRET blueprint for US global domination reveals that President Bush and his cabinet were planning a premeditated attack on Iraq to secure 'regime change' even before he took power in January 2001.

    The blueprint, uncovered by the Sunday Herald, for the creation of a 'global Pax Americana' was drawn up for **** Cheney (now vice- president), Donald Rumsfeld (defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld's deputy), George W Bush's younger brother Jeb and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff). The document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences: Strategies, Forces And Resources For A New Century, was written in September 2000 by the neo-conservative think-tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC).

    The plan shows Bush's cabinet intended to take military control of the Gulf region whether or not Saddam Hussein was in power. It says: 'The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.'

    It also calls for the US to 'fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars' as a 'core mission'.

    describes peace-keeping missions as 'demanding American political leadership rather than that of the United Nations';

    l reveals worries in the administration that Europe could rival the USA;

    l spotlights China for 'regime change' saying 'it is time to increase the presence of American forces in southeast Asia'. This, it says, may lead to 'American and allied power providing the spur to the process of democratisation in China';

    l calls for the creation of 'US Space Forces', to dominate space, and the total control of cyberspace to prevent 'enemies' using the internet against the US;

    l hints that, despite threatening war against Iraq for developing weapons of mass destruction, the US may consider developing biological weapons -- which the nation has banned -- in decades to come. It says: 'New methods of attack -- electronic, 'non-lethal', biological -- will be more widely available ... combat likely will take place in new dimensions, in space, cyberspace, and perhaps the world of microbes ... advanced forms of biological warfare that can 'target' specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool';

    l and pinpoints North Korea, Libya, Syria and Iran as dangerous regimes and says their existence justifies the creation of a 'world-wide command-and-control system'.

    Tam Dalyell, the Labour MP, father of the House of Commons and one of the leading rebel voices against war with Iraq, said: 'This is garbage from right-wing think-tanks stuffed with chicken-hawks -- men who have never seen the horror of war but are in love with the idea of war. Men like Cheney, who were draft-dodgers in the Vietnam war.

    'This is a blueprint for US world domination -- a new world order of their making. These are the thought processes of fantasist Americans who want to control the world. I am appalled that a British Labour Prime Minister should have got into bed with a crew which has this moral standing.'

    www.sundayherald.com/27735

    --------------------------

    So, war is policy with them. They planned this all along. We do we listen to all of their other reasons when this is staring us un the face? Are we as stupid as they need us to be?

    Bookman finds further support for his theory in the President's National Security Strategy, available here. This is a document in which each administration outlines its approach to defending the country. The Bush administration released its plan on September 20. Bookman says,

    "In essence, it lays out a plan for permanent U.S. military and economic domination of every region on the globe, unfettered by international treaty or concern. And to make that plan a reality, it envisions a stark expansion of our global military presence."

    "The United States will require bases and stations within and beyond Western Europe and Northeast Asia," the document warns, "as well as temporary access arrangements for the long-distance deployment of U.S. troops."

    Bookman says it was not September 11 that inspired the change of course. Bush's plan appears to be "a blueprint" of the 2000 Report by the Project for the New Century, "a group of conservative interventionists outraged by the thought that the United States might be forfeiting its chance at a global empire."

    In turn, the 2000 report acknowledges a debt to a 1992 report by the Defense Department that "also envisioned the United States as a colossus astride the world, imposing its will and keeping world peace through military and economic power. When leaked in final draft form, however, the proposal drew so much criticism that it was hastily withdrawn and repudiated by the first President Bush."

    At the time the report was drafted, Richard Cheney was the Secretary of Defense and the primary author was Paul Wolfowitz, who at the time was defense undersecretary for policy. He is now deputy defense secretary.

    "Now, more than a decade later, the events of Sept. 11 have given those advocates of empire a new opportunity to press their case with a new president. So in debating whether to invade Iraq, we are really debating the role that the United States will play in the years and decades to come. "

    www.talkleft.com/archives/001069.html

    http://www.newamericancentury.org/publicationsreports.htm


    Middle East

    COMMENTARY
    US and the triumph of unilateralism
    By Jim Lobe

    WASHINGTON - When excerpts of the document first appeared in the New York Times in the spring of 1992, it created quite a stir. One senator described it as a prescription for "literally a Pax Americana". Indeed, the draft Defense Policy Guidance (DPG), which set forth the underlying assumptions for US grand strategy into the next century, was pretty astonishing.

    Written by two relatively obscure political appointees in the Pentagon's policy office after the Gulf War, it boldly called for permanent US military pre-eminence over virtually all of Eurasia - to be achieved by "deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role" and by pre-empting states believed to be developing weapons of mass destruction.

    It foretold a world in which US military intervention would come to be seen "as a constant fixture" of the geo-political landscape and Washington would act as the ultimate guarantor of the international order. Indeed, the draft failed to even mention the United Nations.

    The paper was essentially a vision of a world dominated by the unilateral use of US military power to ensure international stability, promote the US national interest, and prevent the rise of any possible challenger for the foreseeable future.

    The leak, apparently arranged by someone in the military brass worried about the costs of enforcing such an imperial vision, sparked major controversy. At the insistence of then-National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft and Secretary of State James Baker, the final DPG was toned down to the point of unrecognizability.

    But the draft's strategy clearly retained a central place in the hearts and minds of its two authors and their boss, then-Pentagon chief **** Cheney, until new circumstances might offer a more auspicious moment. That moment came on the morning of September 11 last year.

    At that moment, Cheney had already become the most powerful vice president in US history, while the draft's two authors, Paul Wolfowitz and I Lewis Libby, had risen to the posts of deputy defense secretary and Cheney's chief of staff, respectively.

    In the year since then, these three men, along with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and like-minded officials elsewhere in the administration, have engineered what former UN ambassador Richard Holbrooke recently described as a "radical break with 55 years of bipartisan tradition" in US foreign policy making.

    http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/DI10Ak03.html


    What more does ANYONE need to know that they are criminals of the HIGHEST (and, lowest) kind?


    People need to know this. Send it to everyone.

    Peace.
     
  2. tigre35

    tigre35 Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2003
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1
    Consider Yourself Informed

    This is the ONLY reason Bush wants war. (proof supplied below)

    His "handlers" have been wanting it and he's the chosen figurehead/puppet/frontman.

    If he DOESN'T accomplish their objectives, they'll throw him the wolves. So, he is between a rock and a hard place. The whole world is against him but, his masters have planned this for too long and it has cost so much and they are so close. They've already started to award big contracts to Halliburton and other "friends".

    Jesus, they put their evil intentions in writing a decade ago. Why are these people in power? Why doesn't the media discuss this as THE REASON for this war? Why aren't our elected officials combatting this group with everything they have?

    Instead, they give them a blank check. MY GOD. You all have failed us and will continue to do so next week if you don't start acting like this gang of criminals have a clearcut objective that ANYONE can see in horrific detail in plain english.

    What the hell is wrong with all of you? This is NOT speculation nor my opinion, it's a matter of public record. If you want to know what they're going to do next, just read some more of the document. Jeez. Do your jobs or stay off my television, acting legitimate.

    Their plan says they have to invade, Saddam or no Saddam. What are we going to do about these high crimes and malicious intentions? We even have an advantage because we have their plans to explain why they are behaving as they are and we can see what's next: war, no matter what. We can stop this "Axis Of Evil".

    Since this plan is a plan for world domination by force (and, it says it IS), what are the people who conceived of it, the ones who will execute it? Say it with me, an "Axis Of Evil"...

    Except, it's so many perpetrators involved, it's more of a killer cult.



    When is somebody going to interview THIS writer?

    Project for a New American Century

    By William Rivers Pitt
    t r u t h o u t | Perspective

    Thursday 27 February 2003

    "In the counsels of Government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the Military Industrial Complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes."

    - President Dwight Eisenhower, January 1961.

    George W. Bush gave a speech Wednesday night before the Godfather of conservative Washington think tanks, the American Enterprise Institute. In his speech, Bush quantified his coming war with Iraq as part of a larger struggle to bring pro-western governments into power in the Middle East. Couched in hopeful language describing peace and freedom for all, the speech was in fact the closest articulation of the actual plan for Iraq that has yet been heard from the administration.

    In a previous article from February 21, the ideological connections between an extremist right-wing Washington think tank and the foreign policy aspirations of the Bush administration were detailed.

    The Project for a New American Century, or PNAC, is a group founded in 1997 that has been agitating since its inception for a war with Iraq. PNAC was the driving force behind the drafting and passage of the Iraqi Liberation Act, a bill that painted a veneer of legality over the ultimate designs behind such a conflict. The names of every prominent PNAC member were on a letter delivered to President Clinton in 1998 which castigated him for not implementing the Act by driving troops into Baghdad.

    PNAC has funneled millions of taxpayer dollars to a Hussein opposition group called the Iraqi National Congress, and to Iraq's heir-apparent, Ahmed Chalabi, despite the fact that Chalabi was sentenced in absentia by a Jordanian court to 22 years in prison on 31 counts of bank fraud. Chalabi and the INC have, over the years, gathered support for their cause by promising oil contracts to anyone that would help to put them in power in Iraq.

    Most recently, PNAC created a new group called The Committee for the Liberation of Iraq. Staffed entirely by PNAC members, The Committee has set out to "educate" Americans via cable news connections about the need for war in Iraq. This group met recently with National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice regarding the ways and means of this education.

    Who is PNAC? Its members include:

    * Vice President **** Cheney, one of the PNAC founders, who served as Secretary of Defense for Bush Sr.;

    * I. Lewis Libby, Cheney's top national security assistant;

    * Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, also a founding member, along with four of his chief aides including;

    * Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, arguably the ideological father of the group;

    * Eliot Abrams, prominent member of Bush's National Security Council, who was pardoned by Bush Sr. in the Iran/Contra scandal;

    * John Bolton, who serves as Undersecretary for Arms Control and International Security in the Bush administration;

    * Richard Perle, former Reagan administration official and present chairman of the powerful Defense Policy Board;

    * Randy Scheunemann, President of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, who was Trent Lott's national security aide and who served as an advisor to Rumsfeld on Iraq in 2001;

    * Bruce Jackson, Chairman of PNAC, a position he took after serving for years as vice president of weapons manufacturer Lockheed-Martin, and who also headed the Republican Party Platform subcommittee for National Security and Foreign Policy during the 2000 campaign. His section of the 2000 GOP Platform explicitly called for the removal of Saddam Hussein;

    * William Kristol, noted conservative writer for the Weekly Standard, a magazine owned along with the Fox News Network by conservative media mogul Ruppert Murdoch.

    The Project for the New American Century seeks to establish what they call 'Pax Americana' across the globe. Essentially, their goal is to transform America, the sole remaining superpower, into a planetary empire by force of arms. A report released by PNAC in September of 2000 entitled 'Rebuilding America's Defenses' codifies this plan, which requires a massive increase in defense spending and the fighting of several major theater wars in order to establish American dominance. The first has been achieved in Bush's new budget plan, which calls for the exact dollar amount to be spent on defense that was requested by PNAC in 2000. Arrangements are underway for the fighting of the wars.

    The men from PNAC are in a perfect position to see their foreign policy schemes, hatched in 1997, brought into reality. They control the White House, the Pentagon and Defense Department, by way of this the armed forces and intelligence communities, and have at their feet a Republican-dominated Congress that will rubber-stamp virtually everything on their wish list.

    The first step towards the establishment of this Pax Americana is, and has always been, the removal of Saddam Hussein and the establishment of an American protectorate in Iraq. The purpose of this is threefold: 1) To acquire control of the oilheads so as to fund the entire enterprise; 2) To fire a warning shot across the bows of every leader in the Middle East; 3) To establish in Iraq a military staging area for the eventual invasion and overthrow of several Middle Eastern regimes, including some that are allies of the United States.

    Another PNAC signatory, author Norman Podhoretz, quantified this aspect of the grand plan in the September 2002 issue of his journal, 'Commentary'. In it, Podhoretz notes that the regimes, "that richly deserve to be overthrown and replaced, are not confined to the three singled-out members of the axis of evil. At a minimum, the axis should extend to Syria and Lebanon and Libya, as well as 'friends' of America like the Saudi royal family and Egypt's Hosni Mubarak, along with the Palestinian Authority, whether headed by Arafat or one of his henchmen." At bottom, for Podhoretz, this action is about "the long-overdue internal reform and modernization of Islam."

    This casts Bush's speech to AEI on Wednesday in a completely different light.

    Weapons of mass destruction are a smokescreen. Paeans to the idea of Iraqi liberation and democratization are cynical in their inception. At the end of the day, this is not even about oil. The drive behind this war is ideological in nature, a crusade to 'reform' the religion of Islam as it exists in both government and society within the Middle East. Once this is accomplished, the road to empire will be open, ten lanes wide and steppin' out over the line.

    At the end of the day, however, ideology is only good for bull sessions in the board room and the bar. Something has to grease the skids, to make the whole thing worthwhile to those involved, and entice those outside the loop to get into the game.

    Thus, the payout.

    It is well known by now that **** Cheney, before becoming Vice President, served as chairman and chief executive of the Dallas-based petroleum corporation Halliburton. During his tenure, according to oil industry executives and United Nations records, Halliburton did a brisk $73 million in business with Saddam Hussein's Iraq. While working face-to-face with Hussein, Cheney and Halliburton were also moving into position to capitalize upon Hussein's removal from power. In October of 1995, the same month Cheney was made CEO of Halliburton, that company announced a deal that would put it first in line should war break out in Iraq. Their job: To take control of burning oil wells, put out the fires, and prepare them for service.

    Another corporation that stands to do well by a war in Iraq is Brown & Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton. Ostensibly, Brown & Root is in the construction business, and thus has won a share of the $900 million government contract for the rebuilding of post-war Iraqi bridges, roads and other basic infrastructure. This is but the tip of the financial iceberg, as the oil wells will also have to be repaired after parent-company Halliburton puts out the fires.

    More ominously is Brown & Root's stock in trade: the building of permanent American military bases. There are twelve permanent U.S. bases in Kosovo today, all built and maintained by Brown & Root for a multi-billion dollar profit. If anyone should wonder why the administration has not offered an exit strategy to the Iraq war plans, the presence of Brown & Root should answer them succinctly. We do not plan on exiting. In all likelihood, Brown & Root is in Iraq to build permanent bases there, from which attacks upon other Middle Eastern nations can be staged and managed.

    Again, this casts Bush's speech on Wednesday in a new light.

    Being at the center of the action is nothing new for Halliburton and Brown & Root. The two companies have worked closely with governments in Algeria, Angola, Bosnia, Burma, Croatia, Haiti, Nigeria, Rwanda, and Somalia during the worst chapters in those nation's histories. Many environmental and human rights groups claim that Cheney, Halliburton and Brown & Root were, in fact, centrally involved in these fiascos. More recently, Brown & Root was contracted by the Defense Department to build cells for detainees in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The bill for that one project came to $300 million.

    Cheney became involved with PNAC officially in 1997, while still profiting from deals between Halliburton and Hussein. One year later, Cheney and PNAC began actively and publicly agitating for war on Iraq. They have not stopped to this very day.

    Another company with a vested interest in both war on Iraq and massively increased defense spending is the Carlyle Group. Carlyle, a private global investment firm with more than $12.5 billion in capital under management, was formed in 1987. Its interests are spread across 164 companies, including telecommunications firms and defense contractors. It is staffed at the highest levels by former members of the Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations. Former President George H. W. Bush is himself employed by Carlyle as a senior advisor, as is long-time Bush family advisor and former Secretary of State James Baker III.

    One company acquired by Carlyle is United Defense, a weapons manufacturer based in Arlington, VA. United Defense provides the Defense Department with combat vehicle systems, fire support, combat support vehicle systems, weapons delivery systems, amphibious assault vehicles, combat support services and naval armaments. Specifically, United Defense manufactures the Bradley Fighting Vehicle, the M113 armored personnel carrier, the M88A2 Recovery Vehicle, the Grizzly, the M9 ACE, the Composite Armored Vehicle, the M6 Linebacker, the M7 BFIST, the Armored Gun System, the M4 Command and Control Vehicle, the Battle Command Vehicle, the Paladin, the Crusader, and Electric Gun/Pulse Power weapons technology.

    In other words, everything a growing Defense Department, a war in Iraq, and a burgeoning American military empire needs.

    Ironically, one group that won't profit from Carlyle's involvement in American military buildup is the family of Osama bin Laden. The bin Laden family fortune was amassed by Mohammed bin Laden, father of Osama, who built a multi-billion dollar construction empire through contracts with the Saudi government. The Saudi BinLaden Group, as this company is called, was heavily invested in Carlyle for years. Specifically, they were invested in Carlyle's Partners II Fund, which includes in that portfolio United Defense and other weapons manufacturers.

    This relationship was described in a September 27, 2001 article in the Wall Street Journal entitled 'Bin Laden Family Could Profit From Jump in Defense Spending Due to Ties to US Bank.' The 'bank' in question was the Carlyle Group. A follow-up article published by the Journal on September 28 entitled ' Bin Laden Family Has Intricate Ties With Washington - Saudi Clan Has Had Access To Influential Republicans ' further describes the relationship. In October of 2001, Saudi BinLaden and Carlyle severed their relationship by mutual agreement. The timing is auspicious.

    There are a number of depths to be plumbed in all of this. The Bush administration has claimed all along that this war with Iraq is about Saddam Hussein's connections to terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, though through it all they have roundly failed to establish any basis for either accusation. On Wednesday, Bush went further to claim that the war is about liberating the Iraqi people and bringing democracy to the Middle East. This ignores cultural realities on the ground in Iraq and throughout the region that, salted with decades of deep mistrust for American motives, make such a democracy movement brought at the point of the sword utterly impossible to achieve.

    This movement, cloaked in democracy, is in fact a PNAC-inspired push for an American global empire. It behooves Americans to understand that there is a great difference between being the citizen of a constitutional democracy and being a citizen of an empire. The establishment of an empire requires some significant sacrifices.

    Essential social, medical, educational and retirement services will have to be gutted so that those funds can be directed towards a necessary military buildup. Actions taken abroad to establish the preeminence of American power, most specifically in the Middle East, will bring a torrent of terrorist attacks to the home front. Such attacks will bring about the final suspension of constitutional rights and the rule of habeas corpus, as we will find ourselves under martial law. In the end, however, this may be inevitable. An empire cannot function with the slow, cumbersome machine of a constitutional democracy on its back. Empires must be ruled with speed and ruthlessness, in a manner utterly antithetical to the way in which America has been governed for 227 years.

    And yes, of course, a great many people will die.

    It would be one thing if all of this was based purely on the ideology of our leaders. It is another thing altogether to consider the incredible profit motive behind it all. The President, his father, the Vice President, a whole host of powerful government officials, along with stockholders and executives from Halliburton and Carlyle, stand to make a mint off this war. Long-time corporate sponsors from the defense, construction and petroleum industries will likewise profit enormously.

    Critics of the Bush administration like to bandy about the word "fascist" when speaking of George. The image that word conjures is of Nazi stormtroopers marching in unison towards Hitler's Final Solution. This does not at all fit. It is better, in this matter, to view the Bush administration through the eyes of Benito Mussolini. Mussolini, dubbed 'the father of Fascism,' defined the word in a far more pertinent fashion. "Fascism," said Mussolini, "should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power."

    Boycott the French, the Germans, and the other 114 nations who stand against this Iraq war all you wish. France and Germany do not oppose Bush because they are cowards, or because they enjoy the existence of Saddam Hussein. France and Germany stand against the Bush administration because they intend to stop this Pax Americana in its tracks if they can. They have seen militant fascism up close and personal before, and wish never to see it again.

    Would that we Americans could be so wise.

    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.

    Listed below are a number of article you will find helpful in exploring the role played by the Project for a New American Century. You may find it helps your study to study the articles in the order that they are listed.

    1) Blood Money:

    2) The Origins of the Bush Iraq War Plan:

    3) The war against Iraq and America’s drive for world domination:

    4) **** Cheney’s Song of America:

    5) A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm

    Click here for further reading on this topic. and here

    PDF Downloads

    The National Security Strategy of the United States of America

    PNAC: Rebuilding Americas Defenses

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1937.htm
     
  3. tigre35

    tigre35 Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2003
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1
    Send This To Everyone, Media, Friends...

    So, the dots have been connected for the challenged even to see what's going on. Do your jobs and save us. So far, the citizens have been the ones fighting. Pelosi said she knew nothing of this group, even though they run the country. She said such a line-up of characters was scary.

    This info is old news. It should've been VIGOROUSLY ATTACKED then and those who conceived of it discredited frrom ever having power. But, this is like making a child molester a camp director.

    To actually attempt to carry out such a plan is an impeachable offense in and of itself. But, they've fabricated so many lies that you have a long list of treasonous offenses that are well-documented. All of their lies have been debunked publically/globally. That's enough to impeach right there.

    You let them impeach Clinton for alot less. Here. you have a secret, private agenda being played out right in front of you.

    Somebody once said something to the effect of "Most lies aren't designed to actually fool anyone but, to give the morally irresponsible an excuse not to act"

    And, that other quote went something like: "The only thing EVIL needs to for it to win, is for good people to do nothing..."

    I know I paraphrased, forgive me, I didn't feel like looking for the actual quote.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads - Blueprint Cheney's World
  1. Ecks
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    746
  2. ProphetikGeneral
    Replies:
    856
    Views:
    45,276
  3. Asomfwaa
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    629
  4. MRS. LADY
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    1,049
  5. $$RICH$$
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    892