Betting pool? 
The difference, and the extremely important point, is that these mooks got together to cook up all these plans, including tossing over Saddam and then moving on to ‘democratize’ the Middle east years before Dub got into power. And then all got themselves either directly elected or somewhere into the administration.
Apparently, you think this is all bunk because you dislike the poster who brought it up. Would it help some of you to know that my awareness of PNAC came from an extremely serious documentary on no less than that bastion of Serious Journalism, the CBC?
So let me get this straight – the people who were involved with PNAC are now in government positions and trying to put in place the ideas that they supported while at PNAC? And this is a conspiracy how?
Red Fury, I hate to tell you this, but usually when people get government jobs (especially at that high level), they tend to try and change policy to make government do things that they want government to do. It’s a relatively new thing, I know, and we’ve only had since 1789 to get used to it in this nation.
Well, for one thing, PNAC was never just another DC think-tank. Its membership included some really heavy hitters, people who had been in government in the first Bush Admin (and before that, in some cases) and who had reasonable expectation of being in again during the next Pub Admin, and who remained powerfully connected at all times. Remember, also, that even during much of the Clinton Admin there was a Pub majority in both houses of Congress, and Clinton himself was not entirely resistant to neocon influence, viz, his stated policy of “regime change” in Iraq. PNAC was not exactly a shadow government during those years, but these guys were never wandering in the wilderness as you imply. Some think-tanks are just idea shops; some are a great deal more.
Be fair. The OP never uses the word “conspiracy” except in quotes.
And I’m sure I speak for at least a few when we thank you for stating honestly that your main use for this forum is to fart into it.
Depends. In your case, the fart in question is a two-toner. Starts out low, then climbs a full octave. It’s really quite impressive.
Which of the people who are bothered by PNAC’s past influence consider it a conspiracy? I don’t think of it as a conspiracy at all, but that doesn’t make it any less of an issue.
Edit: I see BrainGlutton beat me to it.
Yet I can’t help but notice that one of PNAC’s nemeses is none other than Zbigniew Brzezinski, who served as the Trilateral Commission’s first executive director.
What else is the Pit for?
Oh, so the problem is that it had a memembership? So what? And that it had heavy hitters? As opposed to lightweights? The thought their party might be in power agian? Wow. Devastating. And these heavy hitters in a poitical think tank were connected to powerful politicians? Yikes. With those connections you’d thiink they end up in some other field. And I never said they were wandering in the wilderness. They were a think tank. A heavyweight one. They had connections to—Eek—powerful politicians.
I’m not trying to bust your balls here, Brainglutton, but the big problem you and the OP seem to have with the PNAC is that you disagree with their politics and they were successful in instituting their ideas. I’m still waiting for that dumbell OP to explain himself. I’m sure he appreciates your attempted assistance.
[Quote=BrainGlutton**What else is the Pit for?[/Quote]
Hey, you won’t get any argument out of me on that.
Well, I certainly don’t consider PNAC, as such, a conspiracy. (Some of its members did eventually get involved in a highly criminal conspiracy, but that’s not quite the same thing.) But it doesn’t have to be a conspiracy to be an Evil Organization.
Boo.
The Illuminati are not dead!
They’re just pining for the fnords!
Yes, but they’ve fallen on hard times.
Last I heard, they were shining up Fords…
You can do better than that.
Um. Who uttered the word ‘conspiracy’ other than the OP in quotes; and that use was indicating that it can hardly be a ‘conspiracy’ since all PNAC’s plans were right there in the open for all to see, where they remain.
I have a hard time understanding why anyone would not be troubled that, long before this bunch had even fielded Shrub, they had already written the blueprint for what’s going on today; they would begin by unseating Saddam and then extending ‘influence’ via Iran and Syria. Folks, this was written in the late 90s. Point is, it’s one more indication that this whole sham over ‘saving Iraqis from Saddam’ was cooked up long before any terrorist even considered flying a plane into a highrise.
Frankly, I think the terrists gave PNAC their wish come true. Not that I’m saying PNAC wanted Americans to die, but an excuse (flimsy as it was) to fake a reason to go at Saddam and Iraq was what they needed to put the plan in action.
And ‘Project for The New American Century’ has always :eek: me. If ever a hegemon were to write a caption for its wet dream, that would be it.
Bullshit. They’ve all had their Trilateralists and Bilderburgers and Freemasons, and possibly the most pervasive group, the Episcopalians.
You’re just too blinded by the “D” or “R” after their name to notice.
It’s all just a cover for the Z.O.G.
I keed! I keed!