The Cult that is running the country

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Just read and interesting ARTICLE from WIlso, the hudband of Valerie Plame.



It is a section from his book about the outing of hs wife as a CIA Undercover Agent in response to his revealing the complete fabrication of the Nigerian-Uranium claim used to justify the invasion of Iraq . . . remember that . . . when an official committed High Treason, and seems to have gotten away with it?!?



anyway. the article is also a good analysis of the Bush administration and how it is truly a small cult of extremists:



There are some great quotes:
Quote:

In perhaps the most eloquent and scathing critique of the consequence of the administration's having lied about why it believed it needed to go to war, Zbigniew Brzezinski observed in an October 2003 speech that during the Cuban missile crisis, Secretary of State Dean Acheson offered to show French President Charles de Gaulle satellite photos of Soviet nuclear missile installations in Cuba to support President Kennedy's request for support in the event we had to go to war. De Gaulle replied that he did not need to see the photographs, as President Kennedy had given his word and his word was good. Who would now ever take an American president at his word, in the way that de Gaulle once did?



The article talks about how the Neo-cons 'recruited' from the military, with Albert and Roberta Wohlstetter tapping people and interviewing them on their ideological foundations.

Wohlstetter taught at U of Chicago and was a mentor to Wollfowitz and Perle, he was an architect of the Nuclear arms strategy under Reagan, He was respocible for the exagerated claims about the Soviet military capability that lead to huge spendings . . .but he was also very responcoble for shifting the focus to the middle-East.



He talks about how Lutti was known to have been interviewd by the Wohlstetter's, and what about Lutti?
Quote:

former Navy Captain William J. Luti. In the Bush administration he holds the post of Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs. Luti also supervised the Office of Special Plans, described in a seminal 2003 New Yorker article by Seymour Hersh as "a separate intelligence unit ... in the Pentagon's policy office."



It was through these special offices that so many of the rumors, gossip, and unsubstantiated intelligence about Iraq were passed directly to senior White House officials, notably Vice President Cheney, and were accepted without first being subjected to the rigorous analysis of the $30-billion-a-year intelligence community. American intelligence, which routinely sees and sifts thousands of bits of information daily, has had years of experience developing an analytical capability that can assess precisely whether the information we are receiving is fact or fiction. Short-circuiting this process -- or, in the vivid term Hersh adopted for the title of his disturbing article, "stovepiping" information directly into policy-makers' hands -- is dangerous. Addressing his investigation directly to Luti's enterprise, Hersh added: "This office, which circumvented the usual procedures of vetting and transparency, stovepiped many of its findings to the highest-ranking officials" in the administration.



And about this office of Special Plans . .. see the thread about Pentagon insider who spoke out, Col Kwiatkoski: SPEAKS OUT

The article, unsurprisingly points out that there are numerous cells withn teh current administration that have more power than usual Government councils due to their power to circumvent the usual channels of checks and balances, and due to secrecy, but, more importantly it shows that all the main members are related to, if not direct signatories on the Project for the New American Century also known as the Pax Americana doctrine . . .which recommends US invasion of the ME and its occupation . . . written in 1997 -!!!!



It also discusses Libby and Elliot Abrams, mostly how they were on attack mode, trying to smear Wilson's character for revealing the Niger lie, but also how they tie into this small group of Ideologues who seem to be running things all based on the Pax Americana model.



Anyway it is an interesting article, he is not Hemingway, but it touches on some intersting things: mainly how interconnected this group is, how secretive and mean-spirited and above the law.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 36
    alcimedesalcimedes Posts: 5,486member
  • Reply 2 of 36
    pfflampfflam Posts: 5,053member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by alcimedes



    Bet you've waited along time to use that.



    lame.
  • Reply 3 of 36
    jubelumjubelum Posts: 4,490member
    A cult running this country? Since when?



    There has been a cult running this country since before 1776.

    Check your history of Washington DC and the Founders.
  • Reply 4 of 36
    alcimedesalcimedes Posts: 5,486member
    no, lame is your latest crusade. you used to actually post worthwhile stuff on occasion. you've been obsessed lately. get over it.
  • Reply 5 of 36
    jubelumjubelum Posts: 4,490member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by alcimedes

    get over it.



    ... And give up his crown as the king of conservative/Republican/Bush--bashing threads? Killing him would be more civil than depriving him of that singular pleasure in life...
  • Reply 6 of 36
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by pfflam

    Just read and interesting ARTICLE from WIlso, the hudband of Valerie Plame.



    It is a section from his book about the outing of hs wife as a CIA Undercover Agent in response to his revealing the complete fabrication of the Nigerian-Uranium claim used to justify the invasion of Iraq . . . remember that . . . when an official committed High Treason, and seems to have gotten away with it?!?



    ...




    When did Bush claim that Iraq tried to buy Uranium from Nigeria?
  • Reply 7 of 36
    pfflampfflam Posts: 5,053member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Jubelum

    ... And give up his crown as the king of conservative/Republican/Bush--bashing threads? Killing him would be more civil than depriving him of that singular pleasure in life...



    Killing me? . . . and Trumpt gets pissed when we call him names.



    I think that the relationship of the administration to the expressed statement of Ideology known as the Pax Americana Doctrine is very important and needs to understood: It needs to be recognized by Conservatives for what it is: it is extremist and is the real motivation for this unfortunate invasion of Iraq and its consequent derailing of the WOT.
  • Reply 8 of 36
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    Wilson confirms the report that Iraq wanted to buy Uranium from Niger.



    Wilson LIED!



    Here



    Quote:

    It was Saddam Hussein's information minister, Mohammed Saeed Sahhaf, often referred to in the Western press as "Baghdad Bob," who approached an official of the African nation of Niger in 1999 to discuss trade--an overture the official saw as a possible effort to buy uranium._._._.





    In his book, Wilson recounts his encounter with the unnamed Niger official in 2002, saying, he "hesitated and looked up to the sky as if plumbing the depths of his memory, then offered that perhaps the Iraqi might have wanted to talk about uranium." Wilson did not get the Iraqi's name in 2002, but he writes that he talked to his source again four months ago, and that the former official said he saw Sahhaf on television before the start of the war and recognized him as the person he talked to in 1999.



  • Reply 9 of 36
    fellowshipfellowship Posts: 5,038member
    I like pfflam and am not so sure it was a wonderful idea to derail this thread via the tactics used. The way I see it,,, If a person is interested in a thread let them contribute to it and let the pathways of discussion manifest.



    BUT



    If you happen not to care for the thread by all means step back into the lobby of choices and pick another thread to read and / or participate within. To come into a thread that you may personally not care for and rip it or the author to shreds is just not the right thing to do I would argue.



    The way I see it if each member would simply leave a thread quietly which they do not find to their liking a thread will quietly fade into the distance if it is not given play. Those that are interested in the topic of a thread can keep it going and those not interested can find other material to read.



    I just felt the need to weigh in with this.



    There is not one poster here I disrespect.



    Fellowship
  • Reply 10 of 36
    pfflampfflam Posts: 5,053member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Scott

    Wilson confirms the report that Iraq wanted to buy Uranium from Niger.



    Wilson LIED!



    Here




    You are saying that Hussain did infact try to get Uranium and Bush's speech was not incorrect?



    BTW, I don't want to sign-in to that newspaper, perhaps you can quote something that substantiates what you are saying. . . .because what you just quoted says nothing!
  • Reply 11 of 36
    jubelumjubelum Posts: 4,490member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by pfflam

    the Pax Americana Doctrine is very important and needs to understood: It needs to be recognized by Conservatives for what it is: it is extremist and is the real motivation for this unfortunate invasion of Iraq and its consequent derailing of the WOT.



    You are entitled to your opinion. Even if it is wrong.



    Kerry, Feinstein, Kennedy, Schumer, Levin, Daschle, Clinton, and Rangel are all extremists. Hitler was an extremist, like Uncle Joe Stalin. Donald Duck was an extremist on Planet X. The Founders and Framers were extremists with tea and muskets. You are an extremist, and I am an extremist, and we both get exactly ONE vote... in theory.



    If standing firm for something makes you an extremist by default, where can I get my patch?



    Jesus the Christ was an extremist. And I LOVE Him.

  • Reply 12 of 36
    alcimedesalcimedes Posts: 5,486member
    except for the inevitable circle jerk that ensues. the same 6 people pat eachother on the back about how great they are (and it's not limited to any one party's cheerleaders).



    i swear, one dozen members who contribute nothing of worth to AI now account for half the posts in AO. ugh.



    sorry, i'll stop now.



    pfflam, i miss the old you. that's all.
  • Reply 13 of 36
    pfflampfflam Posts: 5,053member
    I am sorry, but this Bush character is serious and I can not stand to have him win . . . and the reasons for my feeling this way are finding their way on these boards . . . and I feel that it is important to let them be seen.



    Now, as for why they are extremists and we are not, it is because they will covertly force their agenda on the American people without debate, they see nothing but the greater truth of their grand 'Vision' . . .and I find that extremist . . and I don't think that ordinary fiscal Conservatives or Democrats or even most Libertarians are not extremists in this way. . . . though some of all of those groups are of course.
  • Reply 14 of 36
    jubelumjubelum Posts: 4,490member
    I don't think anyone here has missed your level of personal loathing for GWB. Your point has been made. And made. And made. We get it. Heck, some of us even agree with you.



    It's just getting so boring and predictable - any time the smallest morsel or bad news comes out that can be laid at the conservative half of this country- here we go. Time to report that something has gotten a reaction.



    I wonder how many people have left AI altogether because of the daily assault on them and what they believe in. I don't want to lose otherwise valuable members because they are constantly assaulted with how wrong they are in every way and must be taken out at any price.



    You hate Bush? Fine. But thread after thread posting isn't changing any minds. It's just a private club for the leftist Wrecking Crew, waiting to pounce on a dissenting opinion.



    In short, we get it. But there are over 14000 other people here also besides you. You do not become "more right" simply by juggling the multiple basher threads you've started.
  • Reply 15 of 36
    pfflampfflam Posts: 5,053member
    One thing that I think you a slightly wrong abou, and this thread exemplifies it: I think that Conservatives should be upset about this guy too, and I respect many conservative ideas and people. . . . This 'cult' (hyperbole yes but?!) is more than just Conservatives being Conservative
  • Reply 16 of 36
    jubelumjubelum Posts: 4,490member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by pfflam

    One thing that I think you a slightly wrong abou, and this thread exemplifies it: I think that Conservatives should be upset about this guy too, and I respect many conservative ideas and people. . . . This 'cult' (hyperbole yes but?!) is more than just Conservatives being Conservative



    I'll give you that. The GWB cult is there with a certain small number of people. But the average Republican is not in that group of androids. Most conservatives I know are more than a little pist at GWB for the edu bill, farm bill, and other such fiscal fubars.



    There are some who are fanatical about people who are themselves fanatical about their ideology. Happens on both sides of the isle.



    \



    <flags bartender> Let me get you a drink, pfflam.

    <goes to jukebox and plays "Cult of Personality">



  • Reply 17 of 36
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by pfflam

    Wohlstetter



    Don't forget that Chalabi also studied under Wohlstetter at Chicago, too. As did Zalmay Khalilzad.

    Quote:

    Nuclear arms strategy under Reagan, He was respocible for the exagerated claims about the Soviet military capability that lead to huge spendings



    And that's the strategy that they all claim won the Cold War, thus creating the justification for applying the same model to Iraq.



    If you study wohlstetter's work and strauss' writings (especially with the Republic close by), it's perfectly clear where this political philosophy came from. It's a perfect synthesis of the two: one part wohlstetter's worst-case models combined with the straussian view that all politics is and should be total deceit, both internally and externally, and you have current Iraq policy.



    Of course, it gets more interesting the more you actually study it. It is very much like a cult because the core is extremism. Wohlstetter was about focusing on the absolute worst-case possible, while Strauss' interpretations of plato are so out there his followers of all kinds are widely regarded as creepy quasi-devotees because of their passion for the odd, almost religious contortions of plato.
  • Reply 18 of 36
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Jubelum

    The GWB cult



    The GWB cult is irrelevant in terms of foreign policy. GW is just the man of the moment for these guys. They have been elbowing their way into senior republican foreign policy spots for decades, gaining initial real strength with reagan and formally grouping into PNAC during Clinton.



    GW is disposable to them.
  • Reply 19 of 36
    pfflampfflam Posts: 5,053member
  • Reply 20 of 36
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    And we haven't even touched on Shulsky yet. PHD from Chicago same year as Wolfowitz (just a couple after Chalabi) and famous Strauss protege. Took those skills of his right over to the Office of Special Plans.
Sign In or Register to comment.