Global Eye
The Deceivers
By Chris Floyd
Published: September 24, 2004
How many times must the truth be told
before it conquers the lies?
Again and again, the brutal realities behind the rape of Iraq -- that
it was planned years ago, that the aggressors knew full well that their
justifications for war were false and that their invasion would lead to
chaos, ruin and unbridled terror -- have been exposed by the very words
and documents of the invaders themselves. Yet the reign of the lie goes
on, rolling toward its final entrenchment in November.
Last week, as hundreds of Iraqi civilians were being slaughtered by
insurgents and invaders, as more pipelines exploded, more hostages were
seized, more families sank into poverty and filth, the cynical
machinations of the oh-so-Christian Coalition of Bush and Blair were
revealed yet again. This time it was a tranche of leaked documents from
March 2002, a full year before the war: reports to Tony Blair from his
top advisers plainly stating that the intelligence about Iraq's weapons
of mass destruction was unsubstantiated, that there was no connection
between Saddam and al-Qaida, that there was no legal justification for
invading the country, and that any such invasion would lead to years of
chaotic occupation, The Daily Telegraph (an arch-conservative, pro-war
paper) reports.
Even more remarkably, Blair was told that
the likely end result of the invasion would be the rise of yet another
Saddam-like tyrant, who would then try to acquire the very weapons of
mass destruction that the Coalition attack was ostensibly designed to
destroy. In fact, Blair was told, with Iraq hedged in by a powerful
Iran to the east and a nuclear-armed Israel to the west, any Iraqi
leader, even a democratic one, will eventually seek WMD to defend the
country.
All of this echoed similar warnings given to George W. Bush by the
State Department, the CIA, top military brass -- even his own father.
Most of these alarms were reported -- obscurely at times -- in the
press before the invasion. The Coalition's maniacal drive to war
without evidence or provocation was later confirmed -- again, often
obliquely -- by Congressional probes, the 9/11 commission, the Hutton
report, the Butler report, Bush's official WMD investigators and a raft
of revelations by top insiders on both sides of the Atlantic, such as
Robin Cook, Richard Clarke, Bob Graham, John O'Neill and others.
The public record, available to anyone who wants the truth, is
undeniable: The war was waged on false pretenses -- and the war leaders
knew it. They knew it would bring unimaginable death and suffering to
multitudes of innocent people in Iraq -- and to thousands of their own
soldiers and civilians as well. They knew it would lead to more
terrorism, more chaos, more insecurity in the world. Yet they plunged
ahead anyway, deliberately deceiving their own people with a poison
cloud of lies, exaggeration and bluster. Why? Because for the
warmongers, the game was worth the candle: The loot, the power, the
"dominance" to be won was an irresistible temptation.
The Telegraph expose centered on papers prepared for Blair's March 2002
summit with the true ruler of the United States: Dick Cheney. As often
noted here, Cheney was a key figure in the corporate/militarist faction
Project for the New American Century, along with Don Rumsfeld, Paul
Wolfowitz and other bloodthirsty elites. In September 2000 -- before
Bush was installed as the faction's White House frontman -- PNAC issued
the final version of a plan, years in the making, to ensure American
geopolitical and economic "dominance" through military control of key
oil regions and strategic pipeline routes, either directly or via
client states. This would be accompanied by a "revolutionary"
transformation of American society into a more warlike state: a
transformation that PNAC said could only be accomplished if the
American people were "galvanized" by "a catalyzing event -- like a new
Pearl Harbor."
The conquest of Iraq was a vital cog in this long-range plan, and the
depredations of the Baath Regime -- the worst of which occurred with
the full support of PNAC's top players during the Reagan-Bush years --
had nothing to do with it. The Cheney-Rumsfeld group put it plainly in
2000: The need to establish a military presence in Iraq "transcends the
issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein." Likewise, 9/11 and "the new
threats in a changed world" -- evoked so often as a justification by
the warmongers -- were equally irrelevant to an invasion planned years
before the CIA's ex-ally, Osama bin Laden, obligingly provided that
longed-for "new Pearl Harbor."
What's
more, the warmakers knew that Saddam's WMD arsenal and weapons
development programs had been dismantled at his order in 1991. This was
confirmed in 1995 by crateloads of documentary evidence supplied by top
defector Hussein Kamel, Saddam's son-in-law and WMD chieftain -- as
Time magazine reported years ago. It was confirmed again by UN
inspectors, who independently verified the elimination of 95 percent of
Iraq's WMD arsenal -- before they were summarily pulled out of the
country ahead of a U.S.-British punitive strike in 1998.
Bush, Blair, Cheney and the rest knew all of this when they made the
decision to launch what the Nuremberg Tribunal called "the supreme
international crime" -- aggressive war. Now they are openly planning a
new blitzkrieg to crush all resistance to their profit-seeking
conquest: an assault -- conveniently set after Bush's re-installation
as frontman -- which they know will churn through countless innocent
bodies like a meat grinder.
When they stand before the world to justify the coming outrage,
remember this, and hold to it: everything they say about their war is a
lie. And it has been from the beginning.
Annotations
Hell: Notes From the Iraqi Inferno
Salon.com, Sept. 23, 2004
If America Were Iraq, What Would it Be Like?
Informed Comment, Sept. 22, 2004
Secret Papers Show Blair Was Warned of Iraq Chaos
Daily Telegraph, Sept. 18, 2004
Details of Leaked Blair Papers
Daily Telegraph, Sept. 18, 2004
Into the Abyss: The Week Iraq's Dream of Peace Fell Apart
The Independent, Sept. 18, 2004
U.S. Plans Year-End Assault to Take Iraqi Rebel Areas
New York Times, Sept. 19, 2004
Optimism in London, Carnage in Iraq
The Independent, Sept. 20, 2004
The War is Lost, Say U.S. Generals and Military Experts
Salon.com, Sept. 16, 2004
Iraq had no WMD, Says Top U.S. Inspector
Associated Press, Sept. 17, 2004
The Slow-Motion Wreck of American Values
Salon.com, Sept. 22, 2004
American Dominance
The Bergen Record, February 23, 2003
Rebuilding America's Defenses
Project for a New Century, September 2000
America's Empire of Bases
Common Dreams, Jan. 15, 2004
Bush
Planned Iraq 'Regime Change' Before Becoming President
Glasgow Sunday Herald, Sept. 15, 2002
War Crimes, Crimes against Humanity, and Command
Responsibility
Naval War College Review, Spring 1997
The Militarization of U.S. Foreign Policy
Foreign Policy in Focus, February 2004
Iraq Leak Has Blair Back in the Firing Line
The Observer, Sept. 19, 2004
Reagan's WMD Connection to Saddam Hussein
Freedom Foundation, June 18, 2004
Iraq War Illegal, Says UN's Annan
BBC News, Sept. 16, 2004
Innocents Die in 'Precision' U.S. Attacks
The Sunday Times, Sept. 19, 2004
White Says Iraq to be Occupied, Whether or Not Saddam
Flees
U.S. Department of State, March 18, 2003
U.S. Intel Officials Have Bleak View for Iraq
ABC-TV News, Sept. 16, 2004
The Enemy is Us: Bush Turns Information Warfare on
American People
Salon.com, Sept. 22, 2004
Iraqgate: Confession and Coverup
Consortiumnews.com, May/June 1995
Copyright
© 2004 The Moscow Times. All rights reserved.
|