not that my input matters a whole hell of a lot, but i've been looking more into how we got into this mess, and the backstory is amazingly convoluted and almost a stroke of genius....it all started by looking at a quote i remembered from gwb's campaign:

"I think one way for us to end up being viewed as the ugly American is for us to go around the world saying, 'We do it this way, so should you.'"

sounds good, right? isn't that one thing that many of the anti-war camps have been saying? it's textbook. so i found a ton of articles, and this transcript, which is a good place to start:

PETER MANSBRIDGE: As the prospect of an attack on Iraq moves closer to reality, some people are still wondering whether it was all pre-determined. Tonight, Neil Macdonald presents evidence that suggests the answer is yes, that the current confrontation with Iraq was actually scripted years ago.

NEIL MACDONALD (Reporter): These words were once uttered by George W. Bush, presidential candidate.

GEORGE W. BUSH (U.S. President): (October 11, 2000): But I think one way for us to end up being viewed as the ugly American is for us to go around the world saying we do it this way so should you.

MACDONALD: Now, one of the President's more recent assertions.

BUSH: The world has a clear interest in the spread of democratic values because stable and free nations do not breed the ideologies of murder. By the resolve and purpose of America and of our friends and allies, we will make this an age of progress and liberty.

MACDONALD: So, what happened? Well, September 11th happened obviously and George W. Bush had to rethink. But for many of those around Bush, there was no rethink. There didn't have to be. Long before September 11th, a small influential group of neo-Conservatives here in Washington had wanted to see the United States transformed into a sort of benevolent ruler, unchallenged, astride the world. And long before George W. Bush was elected, they sat down and wrote down a manifesto.

JAY BOOKMAN (Deputy Editorial Page Editor, The Atlanta Journal Constitution): It basically saying the United States has to take responsibility to enforce peace around the world and enforce what they call American principles and American interests.

MACDONALD: The document was effectively a charter of the project for a new American century, a neo-Conservative think tank in Washington.

BOOKMAN: The founding members included Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, of the Defence Department, Richard Pearl, head of Defence Advisory Board, Lewis Libby, Cheney's chief of staff, John Bolton, under Secretary of State for arms control, Eliot Cohen, who's on the defence policy board.

MACDONALD: Much of what these men wanted is coming true. They urged U.S. abandon the anti-ballistic missile treaty. It has. They wanted establishment of more permanent U.S. military bases abroad. That is happening in the Philippines and in Georgia and will likely happen in Iraq. They urge regime change as a goal of foreign wars, not just in Iraq. They wanted the U.S. as a global constabulary - their word - unburdened by the UN or world opinion preventing any challenge to U.S. dominance. But, they wrote, a year before September 11th, such aspirations are unlikely to be realized without a catastrophic and catalyzing event, like in Pearl Harbour. William Crystal, a leading neo-Conservative and director of the project for a new American century believes such goals are good and right and he's delighted with all the success but he says there's more to do.

WILLIAM CRYSTAL: We haven't persuaded the Bush administration of everything. I think we need to spend more on defence. I think they need to rethink their policy towards Saudi Arabia. They kicked the can down the road on North Korea but obviously they're going to have to deal with that.

MACDONALD: The U.S. is Gary Cooper in High Noon, says critics, standing tall, all alone, building a new American empire in a new American century. Neil Macdonald, CBC News, Washington.

this article seems a good primer as well, and caught my eye.

ok, some source materials....here is the website for the think tank "the project for the new american century." on their site, they have their "statement of principles." finally, here is the report. there was/is also a book, called "Present Dangers: Crisis and Opportunity in American Foreign and Defense Policy," whose manuscript doesn't seem to be available online.

what i find particularly disturbing is the notion that they almost "wanted" a new pearl harbor to come along so they could begin implementing this in earnest.

sound paranoid? of course it does. but it's been done in the past. there was a plan formulated by the joint chiefs of staff called "operation northwoods," which would involve:

"....the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.

The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.

....The Joint Chiefs even proposed using the potential death of astronaut John Glenn during the first attempt to put an American into orbit as a false pretext for war with Cuba, the documents show.

Should the rocket explode and kill Glenn, they wrote, "the objective is to provide irrevocable proof … that the fault lies with the Communists et all Cuba [sic]."

(quotes above from this article from abc news)

the plan is thought to have been nixed by robert mcnamara, but it was definitely red-lighted by kennedy later on.

sounds nuts, and that's all well and good, sure, but could it happen now? the answer is "of course."

"According to a classified document prepared for Rumsfeld by his Defense Science Board, the new organization--the "Proactive, Preemptive Operations Group (P2OG)"--will carry out secret missions designed to "stimulate reactions" among terrorist groups, provoking them into committing violent acts which would then expose them to "counterattack" by U.S. forces.

In other words--and let's say this plainly, clearly and soberly, so that no one can mistake the intention of Rumsfeld's plan--the United States government is planning to use "cover and deception" and secret military operations to provoke murderous terrorist attacks on innocent people. Let's say it again: Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, George W. Bush and the other members of the unelected regime in Washington plan to deliberately foment the murder of innocent people--your family, your friends, your lovers, you--in order to further their geopolitical ambitions.

again, rumsfeld is prepared to bait "terrorists" into attacking the united states, and you and i are the bait. again, yes, this sounds paranoid, but it's all here, if you look.

ok, now flash forward:

george bush and members of his administration call on tom dashle to limit or end their investigation of 911, "for fear of distracting them" from preventing terror.

bush assigns henry kissinger, a man with no great record of telling the truth, to head the investigation

the bush administration continues to hamper investigations into the causes of 911

again, i fully realize that this sounds incredibly paranoid, and i've read the "black-ops" reports which have remote-controlled airplanes flying into the twin towers under control of young navy personnel or whatever...i'm not convinced, and this isn't that. what i am attempting is a sober look at a progression of facts, most of which are far-flung and terribly difficult or impossible to find in the corporate media.

now, as a result of 911, we have a whole new america, a swaggering, imperialistic nation, with an known moron behind the wheel, a man who is obviously surrounded and dancing to whatever tune is called by a bunch of real washington heavyweights, the deep-policy wonks that no one used to really ever see or read about, combined with:

-a populace emotionally crippled by a huge terrorist attack
-a populace left intellectually lacking by years of education cuts used to boost military spending
-a press which does not question washington policy and does not dig for facts
-an atmosphere within the nation which questions the character of those who bring up thorny issues

it's genius, it really is.......i'm not one who really believes in all that conspiracy stuff, but this is really, really crazy...and i'm learning as i go, so i'm not really reading into everything with a jaundiced eye, as it were. and just think, this is from february 2001, and contains a great quote.......

"Many in the West think the propaganda war is lost. "

boy, many in the west were wrong, huh? whew!

the next step: why?

the other next step: how do you write about this stuff without looking paranoid??? maybe less bold type, i don't know.....any suggestions?

NeverCalm!