George W. Bush

[JefeStone]

Here Wendy, I will make it easy for you. This isn't conspiracy, it is basic U.S. History.


The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was an American neoconservative think tank based in Washington, D.C., co-founded in early 1997 as "a non-profit educational organization" by William Kristol and Robert Kagan. The PNAC's stated goal is "to promote American global leadership."Fundamental to the PNAC are the views that "American leadership is both good for America and good for the world" and support for "a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity."It has exerted strong influence on high-level U.S. government officials in the administration of U.S President George W. Bush and strongly affected the George Bush administration's development of military and foreign policies, especially involving national security and the Iraq War.


An initiative of the New Citizenship Project, a 501(c)(3) organization headed by William Kristol (Chairman) and Gary Schmitt (President),the Project for the New American Century is funded in part by such organizations as the Sarah Scaife Foundation, the John M. Olin Foundation and the Bradley Foundation.[5]
On January 26, 1998, in the PNAC's open letter to President Bill Clinton, its members explicitly called for a U.S. ground campaign to oust Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq.

The goal of regime change remained their consistent position throughout the Iraq disarmament crisis.They followed that up with a letter to Republican members of the U.S. Congress Newt Gingrich and Trent Lott.
On November 16, 1998, citing Iraq's demand for the expulsion of UN weapons inspectors and the removal of Richard Butler as head of the inspections regime, William Kristol, co-founder of the PNAC and editor of The Weekly Standard, called again for regime change in an editorial in his online magazine: "...any sustained bombing and missile campaign against Iraq should be part of any overall political-military strategy aimed at removing Saddam from power." Kristol states that Paul Wolfowitz and others believed that the goal was to create "a 'liberated zone' in southern Iraq that would provide a safe haven where opponents of Saddam could rally and organize a credible alternative to the present regime ... The liberated zone would have to be protected by U.S. military might, both from the air and, if necessary, on the ground."
The PNAC also supported the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (H.R.4655), which President Clinton had signed into law.
In January 1999, the PNAC circulated a memo that criticized the December 1998 bombing of Iraq in Operation Desert Fox as ineffective, questioned the viability of Iraqi democratic opposition which the U.S. was supporting through the Iraq Liberation Act, and referred to any "containment" policy as an illusion.
In September 2000, the PNAC published a controversial 90-page report entitled Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces, and Resources For a New Century.

From 2001 through 2002, the co-founders and other members of the PNAC published articles supporting the United States' invasion of Iraq. On its website, the PNAC promoted its point of view that leaving Saddam Hussein in power would be "surrender to terrorism."
On September 20, 2001 (nine days after the September 11, 2001 attacks), the PNAC sent a letter to President George W. Bush, advocating "a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq," or regime change:

...even if evidence does not link Iraq directly to the attack, any strategy aiming at the eradication of terrorism and its sponsors must include a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. Failure to undertake such an effort will constitute an early and perhaps decisive surrender in the war on international terrorism.

In 2003, during the period leading up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the PNAC had seven full-time staff members in addition to its board of directors.[1] According to Tom Barry, "The glory days of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) quickly passed but the website is still functioning and was updated as of Feb 8, 2007.[18][19]
As quoted in Paul Reynolds' BBC News report, David Rothkopf states:

Their [The Project for the New American Century's] signal enterprise was the invasion of Iraq and their failure to produce results is clear. Precisely the opposite has happened. The US use of force has been seen as doing wrong and as inflaming a region that has been less than susceptible to democracy. Their plan has fallen on hard times. There were flaws in the conception and horrendously bad execution. The neo-cons have been undone by their own ideas and the incompetence of the Bush administration.

PNAC appears to have stopped functioning in 2006 or 2007, although many of their goals are still being fulfilled. Gary Schmitt, former executive director of the PNAC, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and director of its program in Advanced Strategic Studies, countered that PNAC had come to a natural end:

[Frank 'N' Howie]

Um...Is it still to late to appoint a king?

[JefeStone]

When the project started, it was not intended to go forever. That is why we are shutting it down. We would have had to spend too much time raising money for it and it has already done its job. We felt at the time that there were flaws in American foreign policy, that it was neo-isolationist. We tried to resurrect a Reaganite policy. Our view has been adopted. Even during the Clinton administration we had an effect, with Madeleine Albright [then secretary of state] saying that the United States was 'the indispensable nation'. But our ideas have not necessarily dominated. We did not have anyone sitting on Bush's shoulder. So the work now is to see how they are implemented.

As of July 8, 2008, The Project for the New American Century website says: "This Account Has Been Suspended Please contact the billing/support department as soon as possible." Edit, as of August 22, 2008, The Project for the New American Century website appears to be back up and running.
The Project for the New American Century website states the following "fundamental propositions": "that American leadership is good both for America and for the world; and that such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle."
Its original "Statement of Principles" of June 3, 1997, posted on its current website, begins by framing a series of questions, which the rest of the document proposes to answer:

As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's pre-eminent 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?

In response to these questions, the PNAC states its aim to "remind America" of "lessons" learned from American history, drawing the following "four consequences" for America in 1997:

• we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;
• we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;
• we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad; [and]
• we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

While "Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not be fashionable today [1997]," the "Statement of Principles" concludes, "it is necessary if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next."

Open letter to President Clinton on Iraq

On January 16, 1998, following perceived Iraqi unwillingness to co-operate with UN weapons inspections, members of the PNAC, including Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and Robert Zoellick drafted an open letter to President Bill Clinton, posted on its website, urging President Clinton to remove Saddam Hussein from power using U.S. diplomatic, political, and military power. The signers argue that Saddam would pose a threat to the United States, its Middle East allies, and oil resources in the region, if he succeeded in maintaining what they asserted was a stockpile of Weapons of Mass Destruction. They also state: "we can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War to continue to uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections" and "American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council." They argue that an Iraq war would be justified by Hussein's defiance of UN "containment" policy and his persistent threat to U.S. interests

[MorbidMolly]

Thanks Jefe......you damn sure made it easier for me......awesome

[Frank 'N' Howie]

Gaw...You are makin me read Jefe! What is this world comin to...

[MorbidMolly]

Gaw...You are makin me read Jefe! What is this world comin to...

Suck it up Jules.......I`ll share my Lucky Charms if it`s any consolation.......

[Mach2]

Gaw...You are makin me read Jefe! What is this world comin to...

He's trying to smoke you.

[beatlebaby4]

All I'm gonna say is WOW, I just popped in to see what's up and now I'm popping out. It's getting a bit too nasty in here for me. Be nice guys

[michihunt]

I hate political threads because we will never agree. Let's agree to disagree.

[cindyt]

Um...Is it still to late to appoint a king?

LOL. Good one.

[cindyt]

I'm coming out of left field--no pun intended with a conspiracy theory: The Illuminati supposedly controls everything that happens in the world.

[Noelle Page]

So who's the HMFIC (to borrow a cute acronym from Cleanskull) of the Illuminati?

[cindyt]

OJ?

[cindyt]

IDK. But I ran across the Illuminati while researching Brandon Lee The webmaster blamed them for Bruce and Brandon's death. He said the Lee family had long ties with the I and broke the rules, so they had to be eliminated.

Another site said that every new president of the USA are told straight off that they were mere puppets and if they didn't do as the Illuminati ordered they would be killed.

[xenaswolf]

Who or what are the Illumnazis?

[ichabodius]

Who or what are the Illumnazis?

Love it!

[ichabodius]

Who or what are the Illumnazis?

http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illuminati
Its also a role playing game from Steve Jackson! Remember Car Wars?

[xenaswolf]

Oops, guess I need spell check LOL

[MorbidMolly]

Oops, guess I need spell check LOL

OH NO YOU DON`T............that was fricking PRICELESS.........I shall use it in future endeavors........LMAOOOOOOOOO

[Seagorath]

Separated at birth?...

[WendyK]

Separated at birth?...

I think they both look kinda cute...

Jefe.. as far as you want to belive in the lib drivve by liberal media thats fine, I don't care.I started to fact check and my eyes went crossed literally! ( Not Liberaly). MC Cain 08/ Palin 09!

This does not mean you won Jefe...

[WendyK]

Why is our president in the entertainment thread??

[Armcast]

The original post was about the movie depicting the assassination of President Bush.

[WendyK]

The original post was about the movie depicting the assassination of President Bush.

Oh, thanks. It should be moved.

[djdeath-hag]

Oh, thanks. It should be moved.

I'm inclined to leave this thread here, as was stated the o.p. was about a movie. (Also cuz I think W. is sorta entertaining....not my personal taste but humorous, nonetheless.

[WendyK]

I don't consider our president ( like him or not) entertaining. That's fine DJ I respect your opinion..

[djdeath-hag]

I understand your feelings & respect them Wendy....however, the initial post was about "Death of a President", so I still believe this thread belongs where it is. If one of the other mods wants to over-ride my decision, I have no qualms with that.
*Note: I have no qualms with anything, except in-fighting. I'm a lover, not a fighter.

[WendyK]

I understand your feelings & respect them Wendy....however, the initial post was about "Death of a President", so I still believe this thread belongs where it is. If one of the other mods wants to over-ride my decision, I have no qualms with that.
*Note: I have no qualms with anything, except in-fighting. I'm a lover, not a fighter.

I know Dolly Head! We are cool! I will just leave this thead alone.

[Frank 'N' Howie]

*Blows a party horn to lighten the mood*

[ShatteredMirror]

Why is our president in the entertainment thread??

Maybe because he is the biggest clown in the world?

[Frank 'N' Howie]

Maybe because he is the biggest clown in the world?

*Bends over and takes one for the team....*

Ouch baby, very ouch...

[DeadRinger]

Hot damn - just reading this thread makes me relieved that I'm not American....

[Frank 'N' Howie]

Hot damn - just reading this thread makes me relieved that I'm not American....

Can I move in with you?

[neilmpenny]

My best friend is a communist and we have more civil conversations than what I've seen on this thread. I'm not taking up for either candidate or party, can't stand either one of 'em (nor their picks for Vice-Prick). Politicians are notorious for lies and double-speak (and our sitting AND former presidents have been prime examples of that). Also, neither party looks or acts like the party my parents knew...they've both evolved---actually I should say DEvolved---into partisan snake pits and lie/spin factories.

Also, the media is incredibly complicit in all this--fanning the partisan flames to the point of absurdity. Virtually ALL of the media are involved in this nonsense--so where do we go for solid journalism? Where do we get the truth? Media outlets and journalists (and I'm not talking about EDITORIALISTS here--two different animals--supposedly) need to keep their personal and/or corporate views to themselves and report the FACTS and nothing but the FACTS--and stop giving more "time" to one party/politician over another. Equal time, equal consideration--otherwise, what's the point? I can listen to someone's diarrhea of the mouth for hours and if they're only giving me their (or their corporate parent's) spin what the fuck do I learn from that discourse? Nothing, except some supposed "pundit's" personal opinion. We don't NEED any more pundits for fuck's sake, we need the facts. Anyone, ANYONE out there that might be prepared to deliver those facts in an unadorned package, without all the bells, whistles and BULLSHIT??? If so, I'm not acquainted with them. (And YES, I know I'm whistling in the wind with this, it's never going to happen--but I can at least imagine a world where the truth is still important, can't I)?

*and while we're on that subject, it would be a great help when those posting a laundry list of 'facts' that the source of those facts is noted so that we may use our critical thinking skills in deciding whether to give credence to the poster or not. If they're your own facts that you've personally analyzed and vetted, great, say so and tell us your sources. If not, tell us from whom the information is coming--otherwise they really are just words floating on a page with no anchor. Opinions are of course everyone's own--but when stating/quoting supposed facts, understanding the source of those facts is critical to them being taken seriously, imo.

I don't trust MSNBC, CNN, FOX, any of them--including the local news here in S.F. which is so one-sided it's pathetic--and that makes me VERY afraid, because I'm only getting the information THEY want me to have. Doesn't that bother anyone else?

I just wish we here could rise above all this and talk about these things without interjecting either venom or hysterics. Because frankly I think we're better than that--and better than them.

The reason I like you so much mate is because I think you are a class act.

[Frank 'N' Howie]

JACK for PRESIDENT!!!

[Noelle Page]

JACK for PRESIDENT!!!

Oh no....please do not force us to choose between Jack and John Trim.

A Trim/O'Lantern or O'Lantern/Trim ticket won't work, too heavily San Francisco.

[Jack-O-Lantern]

JACK for PRESIDENT!!!

I respectfully decline, though thanks for the kind thought! I wouldn't take that job if it were the last one on earth.

Oh no....please do not force us to choose between Jack and John Trim.

A Trim/O'Lantern or O'Lantern/Trim ticket won't work, too heavily San Francisco.

And you're right Noelle, an S.F.-heavey ticket wouldn't stand a CHANCE of flying--hope Gavin Newsom's listening. Fuhgedaboutit pal, ain't happening...

[Armcast]

I respectfully decline, though thanks for the kind thought! I wouldn't take that job if it were the last one on earth

Jack, please look towards your patriotism. If your country calls, you must serve. We're going to begin a "Draft Jack" campaign.

Campaign slogan?
Tired of being "jacked"? Vote Jack!

[Noelle Page]

But if Jack challenges John Trim it will tear the FAD Party apart!!!!!

[Jack-O-Lantern]

Jack, please look towards your patriotism. If your country calls, you must serve. We're going to begin a "Draft Jack" campaign.

Campaign slogan?
Tired of being "jacked"? Vote Jack!

LOL!
Here's mine: "Take Jack OFF that ballot! Now!"

[Armcast]

LOL!
Here's mine: "Take Jack OFF that ballot! Now!"

Haaaa! That actually might work...though it could cause some confusion as folks might misunderstand which of the two main candidates (the jack off's) to remove from the ballot...

[Frank 'N' Howie]

John and Jack...Both are funny if ya think about it...Your either in the shitter or playin with your manly mound...Hmmmm...

[secretsquirrel13]

Jack, my friend, you truly ARE a class act!! If you won't run, may we at least show our appreciation by showering you with compliments and maybe a fresh baked pie or two??

[JimC]

I've already got John Trim posters up in my office; can't change candidates now...would make me look "flighty".

I've already replied too many times, "You NEVER heard of John Trim?!!!"

Ain't politics grand?

Gives you something to love and something to hate; all at the same time.

Now if we were lucky, like so many other countries, we would only have one political party; and only one candidate; for whom we would all have to vote.

Sadly, we are offered choices; and forced to vote for one candidate out of many through the primaries; and one out of two in the general election.

Just vote for your choice, guys...but do vote!

A lot of people world wide wish they could!

[Noelle Page]

[From the smoke-filled back room]:

Look.....Trim's face is on the tea towels. O'Lantern's heart's not in it.....give Jack a primo speaking spot at the convention....maybe some cabinet post.....we can't back out now.

[JefeStone]

As much as I think John would be a great president, please keep this thread about George W. Bush. Thanks.

[Jack-O-Lantern]

Jack, my friend, you truly ARE a class act!! If you won't run, may we at least show our appreciation by showering you with compliments and maybe a fresh baked pie or two??

LOL now PIES I'll take anytime, anywhere. Even a jackoff can enjoy a good pie

And to keep this this thread on topic, here's my comment for the day:

Georgie poo, how about addressing the country in these dark days?
Could we get a word? Or two? Asking too much? Guess so....

[Noelle Page]

Yknow Jack I wondered the same thing...usually he's pretty on top of those things...I guess you have to carefully consider what you say and when.....is he waiting for more stuff to shake out?

Like I said before, I do wish Alan Gtreenspan would STFU!

[JefeStone]

I would think he is keeping quiet about the state of the economy to help out the McCain campagin.

[Jack-O-Lantern]

Yknow Jack I wondered the same thing...usually he's pretty on top of those things...I guess you have to carefully consider what you say and when.....is he waiting for more stuff to shake out?

Like I said before, I do wish Alan Greenspan would STFU!

Amen. Greenspan needs to shut that pie hole. He does indeed love to hear himself pontificate. He's NOT helping.