it looks like rumsfeld and co. have been planning on attacking iraq for quit a while. read this pre-9/11 letter to president clinton. note the signatures.
<http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm>
if you have time, read the statement of principles on the linked page. check signatures on it too. World domination?
The proper question is, “Is Bush a dummy?”
it looks like to me that he is(was) an electable front-man for a group of individuals who want to control the world.
it looks like 9/11 gave them a reason imlementing their plan that the citizens of the US would accept. without 9/11, the public would not be willing to invade iraq
A better question is why the hell does Rumsfeld smile when talking about bombs?
It does look like he is a puppet.
There was an excellent documentary on this just recently on the ‘4 Corners’ program.
quote…
For more than 10 years the so-called neo-conservatives - led unofficially by Deputy Defence Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and Defence
Policy Board Chairman Richard Perle - have been bent on driving Saddam Hussein from Iraq.
It seems that the S11 tragedy was exploited to sway opinion in favour of attack. It is not about oil, it is not about WMD, it is about a belief in Americas Destiny.
You could easily argue that GWB is influenced by people with close ties to Likkud - Norm Podhoretz, Doug Feith, Richard Perle, and Wolfowitz.
Ah. Good. Others have discovered this. I referred to the PNAC website, which I knew of from other sources, in the “Blood for Oil Slogan” thread before coming across this one. Not trying to steal your thunder dp.
My attempt at humour failed 
Awww gee…come on Urban Ranger…we all had a chuckle…its OK.
Hurray!!! Someone else has finally copped onto that letter (I’ve posted it at least three times in the last week with no response), and the Project for the New American Century.
It’s totally evident: the plan was set five years ago. The war on Iraq was guaranteed the moment Bush was elected. The War on Terror is a convenient smokescreen.
(Don’t know if Bush is a puppet, but he’s certainly a muppet.)
Don’t forget that Bush chose to hire these people. Maybe he selected them because he thinks their views are correct.
Because explosions are cool. Big explosions are cooler. 40 kiloton non-nuclear blasts are coolest.
ghostrider, jimm, i didnt see your posts of the same letter. sorry for reposting the same material… i am surprised that your original posts are not still on the board being discussed. it seems to me that the public should be more aware of this information or care more.
The CFR!
The Birchers are right!
…!!
Apparently the conspiracy is bigger than anyone knows:
http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/iraq/text/0919cngr.htm
I didn’t say it was a conspiracy - I said the feelings of the current administration have been public for quite a while. WMD, and the other details of Bush’s public pronouncements are irrelevant: Hussein has been on the way out for a long time.
I don’t think they are necessarily exploiting 9/11. Regime change has been in the works for some time. Maybe in their minds 9/11 just added a sense of urgency to it.
Urgency, maybe, but adding Iraq into the War on Terror? Powell’s embarrassing attempt to link Al Qaeda to Iraq at the UN?
I guess it comes down to whether or not you think they are sincere in their statements that SH will collude with terrorists or use terrorism. If they are not sincere, then they are exploiting the situation.
I have reread the letter, it its true that nowhere do they say anything about terrorism. However it says
So they clearly believe SH is dangerous. I can believe at that time they considered the source of this danger would come from some sort of “pointing missiles at Israel” type of threat (which I would consider different than terrorism but I suppose others might call it “state terrorism”). However, even if they never considered terrorism at that time as another medium by which this danger is propagated, 9/11 could very well make them to think otherwise.
As far as Powell trying to link them to Al Qaeda, I agree the case has been overplayed. This is a mistake by the Administration IMO. I think there has very likely been contact between SH and Al Qaeda, but the evidence they have presented is not strong enough. Also, this does not imply collusion. There is however stronger evidence of their contact with other terrorist networks and I would even speculate that SH has formed his own networks (for those who think he wouldn’t trust other groups). More should be made of this.
But it has had the intended effect – about half of Americans believe some of the 9/11 hijackers were Iraqis.