Ok, and now I reach a point that I cannot surpass the opportunity to blog about. For one thing, it is the hot topic yet to reach the streets here in Perth(and most of the world), I have been telling people about it for weeks before (in preperation for) todays hearing on the DSM in Washington.
For those who do not know about the Downing Street Minutes, it is basically a catalyst for the "impeech Bush" campaign, and is also "key evidence" confirming the fact that Bush and his administration undermined the constitution of the US, by lying blatantly to congress and the general public, and further more by fixing the facts to build a case for invasion of Iraq.
If you are not quite sure that this was actually the case, here are a few of the things I have noted (I have a list of many many more, and a very comprehensive guidline can be found here
This was all in one month SHORTLY AFTER Bush obtained office -----
From the moment he took office, Bush made noises about "finishing the job his father started." (Time Magazine)
George Bush’s former treasury secretary Paul O’Neill asserts that Bush took office in January 2001 fully intending to invade Iraq and desperate to find an excuse for pre-emptive war against Saddam Hussein.
Testifying at his Senate confirmation hearing former General Colin Powell, who was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the Gulf War, said Bush wanted to “re-energize the sanctions regime” and increase support to Iraqi groups trying to overthrow Hussein. Powell also said Hussein, “is not going to be around in a few years time.” (Air Force Magazine Online)
Vice President Dick Cheney, who was defense secretary during the war against Iraq, has also suggested a Bush administration might “have to take military action to forcibly remove Saddam from power,” as has current Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. (Cato Institute)
---------- Do you think there is anything sus about this sudden emergence of Invasion fever??? "Finish what daddy did", its like a child killing his mother because his father hates her.
And for those of you who wonder what Iraqi's mean when they say "we have become used to war anyway" before the invasion in 2003, well, its things like this, not because they all want each other dead because they arent this type of shiite or sunni or kurd or turkmen ---
February 16, 2001 Twenty-four US and UK warplanes bomb sites near Baghdad. Bombings within the no-fly zones have previously been common, but these are more widely noted and criticized. (CNN)
---- Why didnt I know about this here in perth? I remember 1998 but not in 2001 ???
and if you still don't believe that they have DECIDED THAT IRAQ MUST BE TAKEN, TO SECURE AMERICA's ECONOMIC STABILITY IN THE FUTURE, DIGEST THIS ONE:
April 2001: The Strategic Energy Policy Challenges For The 21st Century describes America's "biggest energy crisis in its history." It targets Saddam as a threat to American interests because of his control of Iraqi oilfields and recommends the use of 'military intervention.'
Commissioned by James Baker, the former US Secretary of State under Bush Sr., it was submitted to Vice-President Dick Cheney in April 2001 -- a full five months before September 11. It advocated a policy of using military force against an enemy such as Iraq to secure US access and control of Middle Eastern oil fields. (Sunday Herald)
--- While I am trying not to out-source too much, this one has been covered too well by other people, so I will continue my argument with this next point courtesy of http://www.rawstory.com/ Just incase you still don't believe that Bush and his Administration wanted Iraq and a hold over the Middle East long before the War on Terror or any 'imminent threat' releases were issued. Enjoy.
September 12, 2001
According to Richard A. Clarke: "I expected to go back to a round of meetings [after September 11] examining what the next attacks could be, what our vulnerabilities were, what we could do about them in the short term. Instead, I walked into a series of discussions about Iraq... I realized with almost a sharp physical pain that Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were going to try to take advantage of this national tragedy to promote their agenda about Iraq...By the afternoon on Wednesday [after Sept. 11], Secretary Rumsfeld was talking about broadening the objectives of our response and "getting Iraq."
"On September 12th, I left the video conferencing center and there, wandering alone around the situation room, was the president. He looked like he wanted something to do. He grabbed a few of us and closed the door to the conference room. "Look," he told us, "I know you have a lot to do and all, but I want you, as soon as you can, to go back over everything, everything. See if Saddam did this. See if he's linked in any way."
"I was once again taken aback, incredulous, and it showed. "But, Mr. President, Al Qaeda did this."
"I know, I know, but - see if Saddam was involved. Just look. I want to know any shred--" On the Issues ("Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror," by Richard A. Clarke)
September 15, 2001
Four days after the Sept. 11 attacks, Bush gathers his national security team at Camp David for a war council. Wolfowitz argues that now is the perfect time to move against state sponsors of terrorism, including Iraq. But Powell tells the president that an international coalition would only come together for an attack on Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, not an invasion of Iraq. The war council votes with Powell. Rumsfeld abstains. The president decides that the war's first phase will be Afghanistan. Iraq will be reconsidered later. (PBS)
And to make a long story short, they formed a group to "investigate" the "belief" that Saddam Hussein was "linked to Al-Qaeda" and Sept 11, they call themselves "the Cabal". The Cabal was launched in days after Sept 11 to produced a skein of intelligence reviews that were to help shape public opinion and future American policy towards Iraq. They relied on data "gathered" by other intelligence agencies and also on information "provided" by the Iraqi National Congress, or I.N.C., the exile group headed by Ahmad Chalabi.
This goofball Ahmad Chalabi is about the only common enemy of all Iraqi's. He virtually drove into Iraq with his gang and looted and ruined the country with American support. The so-called-government ministers can't stand him, the American's can't stand him, Irani's can't stand him and nor can the Iraqi people.
He went into exile for fruadulent and exploitative behaviour, though corruption is common among most politicians, not many are as blatantly corrupt as Chalabi. He knew that there could be much for him to gain from Iraq once more after the American's invaded if he could only play his cards right, and the US could actually succeed (which unfortunately they didnt/wont).
So here we have it, Iraqi's most corrupt man, America's most corrupt politicians and military chiefs, and innocent civilians, thousands of bombs and premeditated murder of thousands of Iraqi and American troops for a barrel of what? Sweet Fuck All.
Peek Oil has hit, no amount of Iraqi oil would fix the problem the US economy faces, though a strong and supportive Iraqi people could have helped them, or a strong group of allies who they had decided to actually help out for once could save them... But unless they regain the support and favour of Iraqi's, they will not gain the support of the world, and their economy will consequently go to shit and then we will all have to bail out the US middle/working-class......... They are victims of this too, not the cause.
To me this is clear enough indication that it was in Bush's view America's best interest to invade Iraq, and he did what he thought was best. Had it been done correctly, instead of through deceit and without the immediate re-establishment of a widely-supported and friendly government after Saddam was Removed/Captured, then it could have been possible to have the US come out on top, so it would have made sense at least their reason for wanting to invade.
This is not to say it would justify invasion, infact it would fall far short. You wouldnt murder someone because they wont drive you to the shop for a packet of smokes, so why would you murder someone for not giving you petrol for your car to get smokes? to me it is all the same.
It is established then, if you are still reading that Bush wants to invade Iraq from before he was even elected, and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were in on it too, it made strategic sense to them and the world is just a big chess board they call their domain.
Anyway, there was this pesky little problem. September 11 meant they must invade Afghanistan first. So they did, then they started distracting people with stories of Iran and North Korea, so they could show some true evil and then put "Iraq" in the same sentance to create the so cold "Axis Of Evil".
To get back to the point, The Downing Street Minutes hearing this morning will bring all of these things into light, and it marks the beginning of the first CONGRESSIONAL HEARING/INVESTIGATION into Bush's mis-use of Presidential Powers and breaking the constitution. Many of the highly experience 122 Congressmen that signed up @ http://www.conyersblog.us/ were on the Clinton board, and have seen other such issues arise over much-lesser ordeals, and now that the proof is out there they are sure the impeechment process is called for.
Soon enough Bush will face his own foe, his own fear, his own failure.
Soon, we the people will rejoice again. We will rally in victory, in happiness and unity.
We will show our power to the world through blogs, through parties and protest.
The truth is out there and the movement is built, it is structurely sound and secure. WE DIDN'T GIVE UP THIS TIME.
The US economy, its' president, his cronies and Donald Fucking Rumsfeld are on their way down, I only hope they don't take the American People and the World with them....