Now that a large number of facts that relate to the war in Iraq, the Bush administration, and American society have been presented I am going to give my interpretation of these facts.
The Bush administration was assembled years prior to the 2000 presidential campaign. The common tie that the members of the Bush administration share is their position on American global preeminence, their shared vision of preemptive war, and their shared goal of invading Iraq. The Bush administration has claimed several times that war with Iraq was not the primary focus of the administration prior to 9/11, but if that is the case then why are so many members of the administration, which was put together prior to 9/11 and in fact actually prior to the year 2000, members of the PNAC and related to issues in Iraq. If someone were simply putting together an administration with no intention of going to war with Iraq, then why would virtually all of the members of the administration just happen to be people actively involved in developing long term pans to invade Iraq?
The fact is, this wouldn't happen. The fact is that the Bush administration was assembled by conservative leaders, both public and private, who have a vested interest in the invasion of Iraq and the promotion of an American foreign policy of preemptive warfare and American global military and economic domination, as well as an understanding of the precarious position that the American economy was in due to the growing strength of the European Union and the euro. These people may or may not actually believe that their actions are in the best interests of the global community. I suspect that the altruism of the individuals involved differs on a per person basis. I suspect that some of the proponents of a strategy of American global preeminence believe that it is in the best interests of the world and humanity, and I suspect that some are simply more concerned with the ways in which they can directly profit from this type of strategy, and some are simply nationalists who don't think in terms of a global community, they only think in terms of us vs. them.
What is clear is that this administration has demonstrated that they believe that the end justifies the means. They have goals and they will reach them in any way that they can, including deception of the American people, illegal actions, and at any monetary cost.
Once the Bush team was assembled in the mid to late 1990s a strategy for election was constructed. The entire agenda from the beginning was that it was essential to engage in war with Iraq and to use the war with Iraq as the springboard for American global preeminence and as a way to disrupt the European Union and weaken the role of the euro in international business.
I believe that the first major step towards the execution of the plan to win the White House and engage in war with Iraq was the prosecution of Bill Clinton in the Whitewater/ Monica Lewinsky scandal. As was previously stated, over $47 million dollars was spent on these investigations. At the time there was a lot of controversy about the investigation because it seemed so out of control, and in fact it was out of control and over blown.
The reason that this was done is because those backing the 2000 Bush administration and war on Iraq needed to make sure that George W. Bush would win the 2000 elections in order to execute the plan. The attacks on Clinton were used as a way to investigate Al Gore and other Democrats to try and dig up dirt on them to use in the 2000 campaigns, and as a way to harm the public image of the Democratic Party to help ensure a Republican victory in 2000, which would of course be Bush.
So even at this early stage, in 1998, proponents of war with Iraq were already involved in manipulating public opinion and using tax dollars to promote their private agenda of war on Iraq and American global preeminence; this was the beginning of the coup.
When Colin Powell was being asked why he would not run for president in 2000 he made the claim that he had personal reasons for not wanting to run for president even though many Americans wanted him to. I believe that the real reason that he did not run was because he was already part of the future Bush administration which at that time had the intention of going to war with Iraq. Powell simply could not disclose this information for obvious reasons so he made up personal reasons why he didn't want to run.
During the 2000 campaign George Bush received more money than any previous presidential candidate. Every effort was made to ensure that Bush would win the election, which is why his fund raising was so strong. This was more than just a typical presidential election; it was a critical step in advancing a large and complex plan for American global domination and the promotion of the special interests of a small number of wealthy individuals and corporations, and for mitigating the threat of the European Union to the American economy.
During Bush's presidential campaign Bush lied on numerous occasions and used deceptive tactics and statements, such as claiming credit for Texas' Patient's Bill of Rights, which he vetoed the first time it was sent to him and then he refused to sign the second bill that was sent to him, when it already had a veto proof majority backing it. That is just one small example of how he misrepresented himself in the campaign.
The real crime though took place on Election Day in Florida where George Bush's brother was governor. Jeb Bush is not only George Bush's brother, but he is also a signer of the PNAC statement of principles and thus was affiliated with plans to invade Iraq prior to the 2000 elections. This gives Jeb two motives, which are actually related to each other, for conspiring to effect the outcome of elections in the state of Florida; one in order to support his brother and the other to support plans for an invasion of Iraq.
What is actually most likely is that Bush was chosen to run for president because of the Bush family ties that would be able to be used to ensure his successful election through any means necessary; its not that Jeb helped his brother win because he was his brother, it is that George Bush was chosen as the best possible candidate to enable the plan to invade Iraq to take place because of his connections in the first place, including Jeb's influence in the state with the third largest number of electoral votes while George obviously already had influence in Texas, another state with a large number of electoral votes.
The Bush administration took office with the intention of going to war with Iraq. Clearly the events of September 11th, 2001 catalyzed these events. That is not to say that the Bush administration would have necessarily moved for a war with Iraq on their own, but they were clearly looking for any possible excuse to get involved in a war with Iraq. When the attack on September 11th happened there was an immediate effort to draw links to Saddam Hussein.
"Rumsfeld wrote, according to a later CBS News report, that he wanted 'best info fast. Judge whether good enough [to] hit S.H. at the same time. Not only UBL' - meaning Osama bin Laden. He added: 'Go massive. Sweep it all up. Things related and not.'"
http://www. philly. com/mld/dailynews/2003/01/27/news/local/5025024.htm
Of course all possibilities had to be explored, but its plain to see that there was a desire to "hit" Saddam Hussein (S. H. ) and that it was not a case of discovering evidence that linked Saddam to the attacks, but an initial desire to link Saddam to the attacks.
When evidence that linked Saddam to the attacks could not be produced the administration resulted to fabrication of evidence, as has already been exposed in the section entitled "The Bush administration has repeatedly lied to support the war".
Many people have suggested that the Bush administration was in some way connected to the September 11th attack and that the Bush administration may even be responsible for the attack. I have not seen ample evidence for this, but the fact that the investigation into the 9/11 attacks has been so secretive and so under funded certainly does not engender a lot of confidence that some level of conspiracy did not take place. I believe that at this time it's not productive to attempt to build a case that relies on claims that the Bush administration was involved in the 9/11 attacks. There is no solid evidence to prove that they were that I am aware of.
What all of this suggests of course is that the invasion of Iraq was part of a long term plan that involved manipulation of the American public and subversion of the American political system. Of course that statement by itself may sound absurd to many people, but I have laid out the evidence for this as well as historical proof that this wouldn’t be the first time that this has happened in the United States (which is really just a small sampling of evidence that such actions have taken place before), and that in fact most people still don't understand the ways in which Americans have been manipulated as a society in the past and still are being manipulated today.