Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why aren't the democrats talking about PNAC

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 09:44 PM
Original message
Why aren't the democrats talking about PNAC
or for that matter, why doesn't the media cover it?

Most people have NO idea what PNAC is or their agenda

even democrats I have spoken with do NOT know what I am talking about

Why PNAC agenda, and the cosigners NOT talked about?

I never heard Kerry bring it up to any degree, and I sure as hell don't here any democrats even talking about it

I am left to conclude that either they agree with PNAC or are afraid of exposing the power behind it

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
niyad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
1. probably because anybody who does bring it up is looked down on as a
nutcase--the media appears to be complicit in a coverup--they certainly are not reporting anything.

I have harangued my local rag about this, and they profess total surprise and ignorance
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cyberpj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #1
25. -
Edited on Sun Aug-07-05 10:22 PM by cyberpj
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tenshi816 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 06:06 AM
Response to Reply #1
59. It's weird too, because the PNAC people
aren't exactly hiding - they've got their Statement of Principles all laid right out there on their website for the world to see, so isn't it strange when anyone (particularly journalists) professes ignorance?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
73. Exactly
Edited on Mon Aug-08-05 04:11 PM by Uncle Joe
"the media appears to be complicit in a coverup" At least since 1998.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
2. Wes Clark did
But he's about the only one.

And the media called him "nuts" and "coocoo" when he did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnnyBoots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 07:09 AM
Response to Reply #2
60. Chuck Rangel brought it up on Hannity once
and hannity almost crapped his pants before cutting him off and going to the GOP talking head.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oscar111 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
3. people for a new amer century?
right?

some neocon group?
sees US as top dog for this coming century, despite the booming chinese and indian economies?

despite our jobs going overseas?

strange ideas they have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Project for the New American Century.
Wanted a "Pearl Harbor" type event in 1999 to get American support for taking over Iraq.

Not only do they have strange ideas, but, apparently, they can see into the future. :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. a walk down memory lane with the PNAC BASTARDS
August 26, 2002


MEMORANDUM TO: OPINION LEADERS


FROM: WILLIAM KRISTOL


SUBJECT: Todays Speech by Vice President Cheney



I wanted to call your attention to the highly significant speech delivered today to the Veterans of Foreign Wars by Vice President Dick Cheney. The vice president lays out more comprehensively and forcefully than any senior administration official has so far the need for regime change in Iraq and the likelihood that preemptive military action will be required to achieve this result, and he responds effectively to recent critics of the Bush Doctrine.


The debate in the administration is over. The time for action grows near. Congressional leaders should seriously consider a resolution authorizing use of force when they return next week. Passing such a resolution as soon as possible would provide the president with maximum flexibility and an opportunity for tactical surprise, would strengthen his hand vis-a-vis our allies, and might embolden internal opposition in Iraq.



Vice President Cheney's Speech to the Veterans of Foreign wars
August 26, 2002

Thank you very much. Thank you, Jim, and I appreciate your introduction, and your strong leadership for the VFW



http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraq-082602.htm

WHERE IS THE MEDIA TO CALL THEM ON THE LIES!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petgoat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #5
69. Seeing Into the Future
PNAC member Rumsfeld was discussing terrorism with Rep. Christopher Cox
early on the morning of 9/11. "I've been around the block a few times,"
he said. "There will be another event. Therewill be another event." Two
minutes later Flight 11 crashed into the WTC.

Half an hour later, he did it again. He and Cox were watching the news
on TV. "Believe me, this isn't over yet. There's going to be another
attack, and it could be us." Moments later the Pentagon was hit.

Source--Dr. David Ray Griffin's "The New Pearl Harbor."

http://vancouver.indymedia.org/news/2004/06/141355.php

Now I know why they won't let Rummy resign. Either his psychic powers
are too valuable to lose, or his inability to keep his mouth shut makes
him too dangerous to let him run around loose!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueEyedSon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 09:49 PM
Response to Original message
4. Why aren't they talking about
Edited on Sun Aug-07-05 10:06 PM by BlueEyedSon
the takeover of our country by the corporate elite?
a war on false pretenses?
the rollback of every New Deal safety net for working people?
The Christian right destroying real democracy?
Voting machines owned by and/or controlled by one (i.e. the other ) party?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petgoat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. Google PNAC and Read Their Statement of Principles
It says the USA is the pre-eminent power on earth today, and it is our
responsibility to have a military buildup to extend our influence and
protect our interests. In other words, it's a plan for global domination.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples...

Read also their letter to Clinton dated 1/98 in which they demand that
he overthrow Saddam Hussein. They say diplomacy is not working and only
a military solution will do.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueEyedSon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #8
16. I know all about the PNAC, they are certainly one of the problems
we have here today

they are one of the political forces trying to take control of US policy

some of these forces are complicit with each other, some knowingly, some not
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #4
14. Yes sir, one wonders...are they THIS clueless? I say no, which can only
mean they are complicit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. I do know that the public IS CLUELESS
and they make no effort to find out

I would love a zogby poll to ask if anyone has heard of PNAC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shanti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 01:08 AM
Response to Reply #18
50. i'd lay odds
that it wouldn't be over 25 percent and that's on the high end. PNAC is the * regime's manifesto.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #50
52. It would be better titled the Cheney regime manifesto.
It's Cheney, Skooter Libby, Donald Rumsfeld (and Paul Wolfowitz) who are listed as members, along with Jeb Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnnyBoots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 07:12 AM
Response to Reply #52
61. Bolton too
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnnyBoots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 07:14 AM
Response to Reply #61
63. Most of Bush's big time appointees have been PNAC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
psychopomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #52
65. PNAC member lists found here
in my sig:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nookiemonster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #14
35. Yes.
Unfortunately, I tend to agree.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yorkiemommie1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 09:54 PM
Response to Original message
6. it seems to be the GOP's operating manual

http://www.newamericancentury.org /

I'm always talking about it and have gotten lots of blank stares.

I mention PNAC in my lttes too.


... from their Statement of Principles...

" We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.


As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 09:54 PM
Response to Original message
7. 'Cause pronouncing it sounds like a sick sneeze.
And rational people have a problem that any group of sane people could actually take that route.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petgoat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. rational people can't believe any sane people would take that route
Look at the signatories to the letter and the statement.

Cheney, Bennet, Jeb Bush, Wolfowitz, Kristol, Perle, Rummy, Abrams,
Bolton, Khalilzad, Woolsey, Armitage, Libby, Podhoritz.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
European Socialist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 09:57 PM
Response to Original message
9. The media owners are probably secret members of PNAC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. I truely believe some of them are
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
raccoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #9
68. It would certainly explain a lot of things. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:00 PM
Response to Original message
12. Signed, sealed, and disribued game plans of the "New Pearl Harbor"
made by the very group in office now -and yett none dare speak of it.

Cynthia McKinney, Charlie Rangle, and a few others are the only ones telling truth.

Is it not evidence of treason?

INFURIATING.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. THE SILENCE IS AN OUTRAGE
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sintax Donating Member (891 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #12
23. Add to that list Maurice Hinchey
talks about it every town meeting. Of course Hinchey, McKinney, Rangle-the cream of a baleful crop-aren't marquee players so no press. Of course they get no press so they aren't marquee players.

Everyone in the beltway knows WTF is going on. many are cowards, Many are complicit.

There is alot of cross-pollination and inbreeding in DC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:05 PM
Response to Original message
17. Frankly? Too esoteric & conspiratorial for Joe Six-Pack
Just my take. This nation has sunk to a low common denominator of what outrages it. One Cindy Sheehan will trump 100 discussions about PNAC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leyton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #17
41. Yup, I agree.
You have to pay pretty close attention to know what PNAC or DNC or RSCC or DLC or TGIF or any of that is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #17
67. If I may be frank, I say it wouldn't be these things if the candidates
and/or membeers of the alleged 'opposition' made any effort to speak of the treasonous truth.

SIGNED, SEALED, DISTRIBUTED. PNAC= "New Pearl Harbor"...from thier own fucking documents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
halsaxby Donating Member (94 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:06 PM
Response to Original message
19. This is what Nader is talking about...
when he says that there is little difference between Democrats and Republicans. I am certain that the DNC is well aware of PNAC and their goals. The reason why they don't speak out about it is that they are afraid of angering campaign contributors (big oil, defense, etc). Ever wonder why Kerry was so muted during his campaign? For the same reason and it cost him the election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:11 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. That is my point
and when they cover Nader, they only cover him as a spoiler, NOT what his ideas are

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:08 PM
Response to Original message
20. We do. They want to be known as PNAC. We call them neocons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. No, it is NOT the same thing
Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush

Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes

Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle

Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz

Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen

Donald Rumsfeld Vin Weber George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz

THESE ARE THE COSIGNERS OF PNACs STATEMENT OF PRICIPLE

I do not believe even the freepers realize who they are
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #22
28. No - those are all the neocons. Steve Forbes wants the 16th Amendment
repealed. That is the Income Tax Act.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
havocmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:21 PM
Response to Original message
24. Recommended cuz there is not enough said even on DU about this
group and their stated goals.

Lots of people read DU to learn. Let's get this on the gratest page and keep it up for awhile. Might reach some more citizens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnyCanuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:22 PM
Response to Original message
26. PNAC 101 Thread started by LunaC here:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cyberpj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:22 PM
Response to Original message
27. Been asking that one since pre-election! None of my LTTEs get through
through either.

Although I have managed to get print on other topics, any time I mention PNAC I get nothin'.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catrina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:37 PM
Response to Original message
29. The only Democrat I remember
speaking about it was Sen. Robert Byrd. He gave the Senate a book by Michael Ledeen and implored them to read it and to see for themselves the ideology of those who were getting us into war.

www.bendermandefense.org
www.pinsforpatriots.com
www.talknation.org
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alfredo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:45 PM
Response to Original message
30. I do. I link their "Rebuilding America's Defenses" to current
behavior of the bush junta. If I have a quote I can give them I do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bunny planet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 10:51 PM
Response to Original message
31. I think Charlie Rangel talked about it on air, perhaps on Faux, a couple
of weeks ago. Can't remember exactly what show, but he was shouted over and told he was a conspiracy theorist for bringing it up. I think more and more Dems should bring it up, in a provacative way, give the link, or quickly get it in to google Project for a New American Century. Randi Rhodes talks about it all the time, even gives search tips to find the Pearl Harbor reference more easily for people just visiting the site for the first time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
charlie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 11:09 PM
Response to Reply #31
34. Yep
Factcheck.org got swamped with massive traffic and TV and print coverage when that dumbass Cheney mentioned them (sending people to a source that proved he was a liar, way to go Dick). It doesn't take much.

My fear is that most would find the PNAC site oh-so-reasonable and the notion of preserving American preeminence hardly an objectionable idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbieinok Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 04:25 AM
Response to Reply #34
55. agree that many would think it's our divine right to rule the world
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petgoat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #34
70. The Statement of Principles is Sugar-Coated, Sure
but considered with knowledge of the lies that led us into the Iraq
debacle and PNAC's expressed wish in 1/98 to give up on diplomacy and
overthrow Saddam militarily, it's not real difficult to read between the
lines and connect the dots: the Statement says we are the pre-eminent
power in the world today, and then calls for a military buildup.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #31
49. I agree
I know the liberals and progressives bring it up, but it is absent in ever other way

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbieinok Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 04:24 AM
Response to Reply #31
54. how can it be conspiracy theory when it's in plain sight on their webpage?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnnyBoots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 07:13 AM
Response to Reply #54
62. On the surface they are just a "Conservative Think Tank"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
charlie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 11:02 PM
Response to Original message
32. Kucinich
brought them up in one of the presidential primary debates. It's the only time I recall hearing the name during prime time TV.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spock_is_Skeptical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 01:00 AM
Response to Reply #32
48. yes... I do think you are right, I think he did mention it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 11:04 PM
Response to Original message
33. Because the Democrats have their own version in the PPI
Somebody please explain how Will Marshall is not a neoconservative.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #33
36. Will Marshall is a signatory to at least one of their manifestos.
I posted about this quite a long time ago -- during one of the endlessly recurring debates about the DLC -- so I don't have the link at hand.

But he's one of them, he's signed on to their agenda. And then he has the freakin' GALL to tell the left to sit down and shut up!

Back before the 2002 DU changeover, Heddafoil (where is she now?) posted extensive research on the true nature of the DLC, where their funding came from, the connections to the neocons -- all that stuff. I tried to preserve it, but my computer had a meltdown and I lost all my old bookmarks.

Too many people don't understand the deep politics behind the facades, it gets so very frustrating at times...

sw

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 11:19 PM
Response to Original message
37. A more recent entry of events surrounding PNAC.
Edited on Sun Aug-07-05 11:26 PM by shance
This is from a blog entry at TVnewslies.org. I have no idea of the source.

http://tvnewslies.org/blog/?p=78

<<Here is what has recently changed:

1.The public is beginning to catch on to what is going on. Questions are being asked. Answers are being demanded.

2. There is a groundswell of public interest in the events of 9/11. A great deal of new evidence has been uncovered by the independent 9/11 research community that exposes the official story of 9/11 as the real conspiracy theory. A great deal of evidence points to government complicity, at least to the level of permitting the events to unfold. The media can no longer stem the grass roots information campaign taking place. The more people examine the findings of the independent community, the more they realize that something sinister is at hand. One can not view the uncovered information without becoming suspicious about what the Bush administration knew and when they knew it.

3. The Plame investigation is coming to a head. According to recent reports, indictments have already been issued or are underway. The investigation reportedly goes far beyond the leak of a CIA agent, and has looked into illegalities by people at the highest levels of government concerning 9/11 and the war in Iraq.

4. If we get past the midterm elections and vote rigging is under control, there is a chance that many members of Congress will be getting their walking papers. If Republicans lose control of Congress there is a chance that impeachment proceedings will take place. The grounds for impeachment of the President and Vice President have been clearly established - and include the high crimes of lying to Congress, and manipulating intelligence information for political gain.

What does all this mean?

Lets consider the most recent rumors that involve the indictment of people in high places.

Such an event will mean the end of the PNAC dream.

This is why they have to work fast, before any such indictments are issued or before too much truth gets out. This administration cannot risk letting Americans know really took place on 9/11. That, too, would mean the end of the PNAC dream.

The last pieces of the PNAC power structure were just put in place.

John Bolton is Ambassador to the UN. He is PNAC.

Zalmay Khalilzad is Ambassador to Iraq. He is PNAC.

Paul Wolfowitz is the head of the World Bank. He is PNAC.

So are Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Scooter Libby.

Need I go on? If undeterred, they can proceed at full speed with their global domination agenda. Only now things dont look to good, and if the rumor about the indictments is true, something will have to be done. This something, according to the rumor mill, will be a false flag terror operation in the form of a limited nuclear attack on our own soil. This will permit the PNAC crazies to freeze our government, implement martial law and maintain absolute dictatorship level powers indefinitely. Dont put it past this dangerous gang of radicals to do this.

Here are my two cents: In my scenario George W. Bush does not survive an attack. I say this for several reasons:

1. Bush is not a PNAC member. Cheney runs the show. Bush has been a burden for these people. They have to teach him what to say, how to present his little issues, tutor him, give him his sound bites, etc. He could not even handle one hour in front of the friendly 9/11 Commission by himself; Cheney had to accompany him. He had nothing to do with creating the PNAC agenda and by getting him out of the way Cheney and crew can move faster and harder.

2. If George Bush were no longer President, it would add to the power of the PNAC crew. If you think they assumed great power because 3,000 anonymous Americans died, just imagine how much more power they can assume after claiming that terrorists are a great enough threat to get to an American president. Bush would be the sacrificial poster boy. He would have served his purpose and would no longer be needed. He would provide PNAC with more power than they ever could achieve if he had lived. An interesting side note is that George W. Bushs Skull and Bones nickname is Temporary! Interesting, to say the least.

3. Also, look for a hit on Chicago . The records and principles involved in the Plame investigation have to be eliminated. Just as a great deal of Enron information perished in the WTC, the criminal evidence against PNAC members must disappear. How convenient that would be.

4. (Added 05-Aug-2005) - If the event takes place at night it would also be an indication of a false flag operation. It would help prevent being caught. For instance if a device is delivered by air, eye witnesses will not be able to see the plane or missile that delivers or detonates the device. Then again, with a micro nuke a device can be delievered, placed and detonated by timer or remote. Just some thoughts.

Do I know for certain that any of this will happen? NO, OF COURSE NOT! The idea that the US will experience a nuclear terror event and it will unfold as I describe IS INDEED A CONSPIRACY THEORY.

I repeat THIS IS A CONSPIRACY THEORY!!! However, the information used to compile my theory, most notably the goals and motives of the PNAC crazies is NOT THEORY; it is FACT.

And if my frightening theory got you to pay attention to the people who are really running this country, this blog entry has accomplished its goal. >>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 11:29 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 01:24 AM
Response to Reply #37
51. excellent points
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 11:36 PM
Response to Original message
39. I didn't realize that Bolton was PNAC. Certainly seems to pose
the question if it is George Bush Jr. who is actually the one nominating "his" appointments?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shelley806 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 11:46 PM
Response to Original message
40. Nominated...and kicked.
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buddyblazon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-07-05 11:53 PM
Response to Original message
42. I bring it up everytime I get into political arguments....
on the other non-political boards I frequent. I ALWAYS include the link.


And I have yet to have one of them click the link. They refuse. They call me a loon. I tell them it is fact, and all they need to do is click the link and do some reading. But the reply I always get is something along the lines of, "I don't need to read your looney links to realize you're a loon.".

I had one Repub click it. After five minutes, he declared that, "It's interesting stuff. I don't have the time to read it, though. And you're a loon."

These situations piss me off so much, my Irish blood boils and I wish we were face to face for a beat down, a restraining, and hours of PNAC reading and education...a la Clockwork Orange. I'm not a violent man. But when I present people with facts and history, and they refuse to even attempt to ingest it for fear it may shake their meaningless jingoistic thought patterns, well THAT will get my fists clinched.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shelley806 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 12:06 AM
Response to Original message
43. I view PNAC as a sub category of neoconservatives. Many JINSA
members and AIPAC members are also PNAC members or neocons. What is this link? Another strange link is The Federalist Society. And MOST of them are listed as War Profiteers, which is of course their disguised raison d'etre. (Google war profiteers, or warprofiteers.com)Scary people IMHO. A quote I wrote down recently from a blog spot that I came across during a search (I think on Roberts)stated "the founders of PNAC, this horrid RW conglomerate, are the same thirsty bastards that are now running our country!" People definitely need education on this. Thanks for the post; let's keep it kicked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shelley806 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 12:16 AM
Response to Reply #43
44. Just found my notes on some current and past JINSA members...
Cheney, Bolton, Feith, Perle, James Woolsey, Michael LeDeen, Michael Rubin, Irving Moskovitz...not complete.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 12:32 AM
Response to Original message
45. When Tony Blair was asked about PNAC he said it was an internet conspiracy
theory. Seriously. So either he is an utter fool or a huge liar or, mostly likely, both.
Brazen, they are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #45
71. If we had a real 'opposition' here, they would make such
statements impossible. It is by the very silence of the Dems that the junta is allowed its tyranny. Blair can get away with it just as the Cons here do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeTheChange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 12:37 AM
Response to Original message
46. Because the issues are saturated right now..
PNAC is serious shit.. most people cant keep plame, siebel, cindy, roberts and downing street straight, much less PNAC. PNAC is a whole kind of evil that the United States just is not ready to deal with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 12:38 AM
Response to Original message
47. Google
Democratic Party & PNAC .... 57,600 hits


DLC & PNAC ..... 6,670 hits



Compare this:

"The neoconservative Project for the New American Century (PNAC) has signaled its intention to continue shaping the government's national security strategy with a new public letter stating that the "U.S. military is too small for the responsibilities we are asking it to assume." Rather than reining in the imperial scope of U.S. national security strategy as set forth by the first Bush administration, PNAC and the letter's signatories call for increasing the size of America's global fighting machine."

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/barry.php?articleid=4799




with THIS from the DLC Ohio Convention July 2005:

"The DLC's Blueprint for Change, distributed in Columbus, includes proposals for:

-- Increasing the size of the U.S. military by 100,000 personnel and assuring the services can recruit on college campuses. "


http://www.thebluestate.com/2005/07/dlc-wanting-to-rest...



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibDemAlways Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 01:51 AM
Response to Original message
53. PNAC scares the shit out of people.
I know a guy who considers himself an independent. He works for a television production company that develops programming for the history channel, and he is always open to new ideas. I told him everything I know about PNAC, urged him to learn more, and suggested that this would make an interesting topic for a documentary.

He not only told me the executives would never go for it, he wouldn't even let me e-mail him the PNAC link. He didn't want it on his computer. Was terrified someone would find out he'd been looking into it and fire him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
evilqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 04:49 AM
Response to Original message
56. Consider this...
The documents on the PNAC website are the signed confessions of murderers, to be used as evidence against them at some point in the future. The files there need to be mirrored all over the web, and particularly at archive sites, like cryptome.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lannes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 05:30 AM
Response to Original message
57. Would be great if Conyers did a "show and tell"
With blown up pictures of the website in congress if he hasnt already.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KayLaw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 05:32 AM
Response to Original message
58. The St. Pete Times
They had an article about PNAC a couple years ago. They left out the part about needing a second Pearl Harbor to motivate Americans to go along with their plans.

No one who talks about it should feel kooky -- it's quite real.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Agent Orange Donating Member (12 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 07:30 AM
Response to Original message
64. Was Kosovo a PNAC project?
I can't figure out why no one (except the brilliant DUer Tinoire) talks about this page:

http://www.newamericancentury.org/balkans.htm

It would make sense that both parties are in agreement with PNAC, as there is little to no opposition from the Democrats. IIRC Kerry actually endorsed the new bush "first strike" policy during his campaign.

Hey Tinoire, hope you post more often!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 11:43 AM
Response to Original message
66. Well let's see here
Some Dems are members of PNAC, others are silenced by their corporate masters who support PNAC. That only leaves one or two who are actually in a position to talk about it, and their thoughts on the matter go into the MSM's black hole and disappear forever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leeroysphitz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 04:10 PM
Response to Original message
72. Why aren't the democrats talking about PNAC?
Because they haven't been instructed to by their corporate paymasters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goldmund Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-09-05 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #72
75. Bingo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-09-05 11:27 AM
Response to Original message
74. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 09th 2020, 06:53 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC