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 Dick 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
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.'
The PNAC document supports a 'blueprint for maintaining global US
pre-eminence, precluding the rise of a great power rival, and shaping the
international security order in line with American principles and
This 'American grand strategy' must be advanced for 'as far into the future
as possible', the report says. It also calls for the US to 'fight and
decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars' as a 'core
The report describes American armed forces abroad as 'the cavalry on the
new American frontier'. The PNAC blueprint supports an earlier document
written by Wolfowitz and Libby that said the US must 'discourage advanced
industrial nations from challenging our leadership or even aspiring to a
larger regional or global role'.
The PNAC report also:
* refers to key allies such as the UK as 'the most effective and efficient
means of exercising American global leadership';
* describes peace-keeping missions as 'demanding American political
leadership rather than that of the United Nations';
* reveals worries in the administration that Europe could rival the USA;
* says 'even should Saddam pass from the scene' bases in Saudi Arabia and
Kuwait will remain permanently -- despite domestic opposition in the Gulf
regimes to the stationing of US troops -- as 'Iran may well prove as large
a threat to US interests as Iraq has';
* 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';
* calls for the creation of 'US Space Forces', to dominate space, and the
total control of cyberspace to prevent 'enemies' using the internet against
* 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';
* and pinpoints North Korea, Libya, Syria and Iran as dangerous regimes and
says their existence justifies the creation of a 'world-wide
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.'
This kinda crap is dumbass hypocrisy, i'm suprised you fall for it womb. This sorta 'us and them' conspiracy nonsense is dangerous in the wrong
hands and you know that.
HYPOCRISY is your enemy
oh i hate capitalism, so what are you gonna do about it? nothin i'm gonna watch tv, support immoral industries and buy my food and clothes from corporations
oh i hate the US they have always been evil, so europe is os much better of course, i mean it's not like we exploit the rest of the world at all oh no not at all
bullshit, stop blaming our faults on a mysterious 'them' and focus on the truth at hand.
love thy enemy but defy them
viva la revolucion socialisme, ils ne passerat
Talking shit again I'm afraid. Too many of your opinions are constructed simply by contradicting what you perceive to be the stereotypical viewpoint
misguidedly associated with a certain opinion or statement. Do you really have trouble believing that article? It's undoubtedly as likely to be true
as any war-related newspaper or TV journalism we're being shown on a daily basis. The fact is - articles like that are rarely picked up on, because
the media has an agenda. Do you doubt this?
Of course, we were all too shocked by the human tragedy of September 11th to question the claim that they'd unearthed a hijacker's passport from the rubble very same day. Yet this was reported as news. To quote my stand up act, finding the passport within ten hours among eleven million tons of rubble is like trying to find a needle on a planet populated entirely by haystacks.
If they can get away with that kind of thing, I think the emergence of such a secret document the article I posted refers to, whether it's genuine or not, is as newsworthy as anything else that's reported. Only this would never be reported, so it's a good idea to share it on the internet.
Your undoing is that you assume too much when you argue. It's not true that if I think one thing, I must think another, so deal only with what's presented to you. In this case, it was just an article from a newspaper - I hadn't yet expressed an opinion on it. I certainly don't remember claiming to hate capitalism or the US, or that Europe was any better than the US. Although I do believe that the sentiments expressed in that article are very probably true. And so it should be told.
Still, I'd love to be enlightened on what "the truth in hand" exactly is.
If you want a reply read it all, i think i got carried away though
You don't have to tell me that mossad or the cia could easily have planned something like september 11, i don't read the newspapers if i can help it, it's all capitalist run bullshit. i prefer bbc worldservice radio because it's functional. I also make use of the internet when time allows because this gives me access to more radical veiw points.
The truth in hand is community and anti-capitalist resistance through non-participation. eg this is why i don't drink and try not to shop at tescos etc
Through methods like the hardcore scene ethic we can use a resistant community as a socio-political base against capitalism. This is 'the truth in hand', it is corny and it has it's flaws but it really gets people organised and together. This and democracy are more important than rallies, sometimes i feel politics is lost in the abstract. The scen really does exist and helps keep kids off drugs and directs people into youth socialist organisations and community work, examplesinclude youth centres, homeless shelters, refugee centres (shameless plug for STAR) and free trade or cooperative ownership community stores and on a wider scale christian food charities, groups like AID and the peacecorps.
I just think that its pointless to criticise the US when the UK and europe is just as much at fault when it comes to causing problems, for example Iraq, who sold saddam the materials for much of his arsenal, who sold him the materials to make nerve gasses which he i currently still using against the Kurds, i can tell you who, us.
I see your point but using conspiracy theories is pointless, there's no need the evils of capitalism stare you in the face. Conspiracy theories are dangerous, Hitler had a similar one based around a 'judaeo-bolshevik plot with the bankers of new york', you see how accusing mossad as i did is only a step away. Plus don't forget who else is ready to jump on these conspiracy theories. I'm sure the ayatollah in iran is rubbing his bloodstained hands with glee right now, don't forget what saddam and the ayatollah stand for, sexism, murder, and racism.
While the capitalist west fare little better when you analyse our foreign policy and ideology as regards the third world, you mustn't forget who Saddam and the like are and what they've done and would do if they had the power of the west.
Anyway i rant and display my socio-political bias on fequent occaisions, i think the article could well be right but we have no concrete proof and it iis unneccessary and dangerous to bring up such issues when there is no clear need to do so, focus on constructive positive action rather than negative conspiracy mongering.
I'm just saying be careful, think ahead and always read between the lines is all
Saying "It's pointless to criticise the US when Europe is just as bad" is stupid. I'll criticise Europe in a seperate conversation, but right now
I'm talking about the US. Pretty much all news is negative conspiracy mongering - I'm just trying to redress the balance by mongering some negative
conspiracies that are different to the ones mongered to us on a daily basis. Too many people (Hello, Dunnerz) believe "our side" are the good guys,
when it should be pointed out that America is the world's biggest terrorist and a greater threat to world peace than any other nation. That's kind
As much as I admire the intentions behind your ethics, the fact is, the world is fucked. It's too late. We weren't supposed to evolve to the point of mining the earth's core for minerals to weld into machinery capable of killing large numbers of people from a long way away. It's too late for community resistance and feeble protest marches. Ironically, terrorism is now the only answer. This doesn't have to involve murder. But the fact is, the bad guys are in control, and some seizing back has to be done. If not by force, then by wrenching control back of their greatest weapon - the media. Protests are barely newsworthy anymore, but a kidnapped celebrity would be able to get any statement at all broadcast on air, even if it was, say, the article I posted above.
Unfortunately, while people are occupying themselves with community resistance and anti-capitalist ethics, somebody else is going to use a nuclear weapon. There's not enough time. Either decide to seal yourself off, emigrate somewhere outside of everyone's blast radius and commit yourself to your personal life and the love of those close to you - or stop faffing around with leaflets and protest marches and take back control by any (moral) means necessary.
If i thought it would acheive anything i'd raze tescos to the ground as long as i was sure they were empty, and then i'd take out the sun HQ and
shoot off every sattelite dish etc etc
But of course that will acheive diddly squat, democracy is what we fight for so use it, vote socialist.
Community ethics and community resistance are most important because you use them to unite prople and fight against hypocrisy and nihilism, the true enemies of society.
Hate ideas not people, people are just people, frightened and flawed. Remember that we are all the same. Evil is afterall, the absence of empathy.
[Edited on 3-2-2003 by xjohnx]
I see you're going down the spout-random-nonsense-rather-than-addressing-the-points-I-made road again. As I said, it's too late. Drastic measures are needed because the bad guys now have nuclear weapons. They're not gonna wait for us to get our little protest community together before they use them. I said nothing about razing Tesco to the ground - capitalism (in itself) is the least of our problems now, although it's spawned some greater problems that are threatening all our lives. There's not enough time to convert enough people without hijacking or subverting the media. The necessary political change would take centuries to implement - we don't have that long. Every day the media is filling people's heads with ideas that justify the dangerous terrorism that's being carried out in all our names. That needs to change if we're to hold out any hope, otherwise the protesters will always, always be in the minority.
Capitalism is the problem, capitalism is the wrong at the heart of the problem, think of all the flaws of 'liberal' western democracy, they all boil
down to money and lust for economic power.
Capitalism has one weakness, unlike facism it requires the participation and manipulation of people rather than brute force to acheive it's objectives. Capitalism has many weapons eg the Cigarette, the chain store, the television etc etc but we can fight these and in doing so eat the heart out of capitalism. We remove the exploiting influence and we can have a just, democratic world.
I would say that some direct action is useful aslong as noone is getting hurt by it, but without total passive resistance, the action will acheive nothing as it has no constructive element and no base of realistic support.
'The people have started to educate,
Their friends their comunities and families,
and we'll have a more concious caring society'.....Youth of Today
if it wasnt for capitilism, we would all still be living in mud huts made of sh1t.
there is a thin line tho