. . . not have passed any resolutions that even hinted at possible support for any such invasion. The president breached an operative condition of the Constitution of the United States of America to inform the US Senate without any knowingly falsified information. Bush knew he was giving the Senate falsified, concocted information. His actions led to the deaths of many tens of thousands of people, many of whom were US citizens in the military. It is worse than manslaughter.
How did he get to be in charge? How could the American people be so that they deserve such a leader?
The Downing Street Memo really is only a piece of the picture that George W. Bush had been planning to attack Iraq at his first opportunity.
I mentioned above that George W. Bush also wanted to out do his father. That aspect has more to do with his personality and choices than any single thing. His father, George H. W. Bush, was a decorated naval aviator and had been a US congressman, chairman of the Republican National Committee, United States ambassador to the United Nations, US envoy to Marxist-Communist China, director of the Central Intelligence Agency, two-term vice president and one-term president of the United States.
He had expelled Saddam Hussein from Kuwait in what was called the Gulf War. However, he stopped short of full-scale invasion of Baghdad citing a number of reasons for not invading including becoming bogged down in a quagmire, "incalculable human and political costs," and "going beyond the international law."
George H. W. Bush was also a believer in the non-neocon foreign policy principles of maintaining regional balances of power and for the use of containment over raw aggression (to limit human casualties).
He is also the one who had called Reaganomics voodoo economics and the use of smoke and mirrors.
His son totally disagrees and has been out to prove his father wrong: To show him up. He has wanted to show that he is more able and more intelligent than his father. He wants his father to live in his, George W's, historical shadow and not the other way around. These are terrible motives for seeking leadership.
None of this is to say that George H. W. Bush was someone to follow. His administration supplied Saddam Hussein with chemical weapons, equipment, and training. He whitewashed the Iran-Contra Scandal of the Reagan administration by giving presidential pardons to a number of Reagan's people who had violated the law via Iran-Contra (not that forgiveness is wrong, but that wasn't his motive). He also failed to capitalize on the tearing down of the Berlin Wall.
According to Mickey Herskowitz (who was replaced as George W. Bush's autobiography ghostwriter for Bush's 2000 campaign for not casting Bush in a positive enough light) George W. Bush felt that his father had squandered his political capital at the end of the Gulf War. Mickey Herskowitz had some twenty meetings with Bush during which Bush was rather candid according to Herskowitz. Herskowitz came out later with aspects of those interviews.
George W. Bush felt that to gain political capital, a president should have a war. Bush was aware that a president's poll numbers go up during wars. The people rally around the president lending support to the effort. Ronald Reagan's handlers used this tactic as the US invasion of Grenada on October 25, 1983. The timing was a distraction from the US Marine barracks bombing in Beirut, Lebanon just two days earlier. Bush's people also knew well the gain in political capital of British prime minister Margaret Thatcher over the British Falklands War of 1982. Even Bush's father had gained in the polls via the Invasion of Panama in 1989.
Bush-41 presided over the Panamanian invasion in which over four thousand Panamanians were killed many of them executed with their hands tied behind their backs and shot in the back of the head. There were over a dozen mass graves uncovered that the US military had dug and into which it had bulldozed hundreds of bodies of civilians including children and old people. These are the same kinds of underground stories filtering as light through the dark curtain of US propaganda such as concerns the mass graves in Afghanistan dug and filled under US supervision. Remember, it is difficult to get the truth when people are afraid of being accused of treason and sedition by the warmongers who lead the nation.
Here's an example of the satanic neoconservative mentality.
Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business. – Jonah Goldberg, April 23, 2002, National Review.
How can anyone follow such monstrous talk? How is any unrepentant soul saying such diabolical things still being listened to let alone still being highly paid in drumming up such sentiments? Where is the shame? Where is the conscience? How can a system that rewards such words escape tribulation? Such talk is, among other things, intended to drum up controversy for the sake of making money through increased notoriety. It is completely transparent and extremely shallow. Those who follow that lead make of themselves kindred spirits. Regardless, the self-pollution that results from such statements runs deep. The contagion that is the sentiment behind such statements is deplorable.
Herskowitz said the policy is, "Start a small war, pick a country where there is justification you can jump on, go ahead and invade." Bush wasn't satisfied with ousting the Taliban from power in Afghanistan. He had always had his eye on invading Baghdad.
According to televangelist Pat Robertson, George W. Bush said concerning preparing the American people for casualties invading Iraq, "We're not going to have any casualties." The Bush-43 administration claims Robertson, the founder of the Christian Coalition of America and the host of the T.V. show the "700 Club," is mistaken. Robertson neither pursued the issue nor recanted. Whether or not you are a fan of Pat Robertson, whom are you going to believe in this instance?
Pat Robertson, real Christian leaders don't issue calls to take out people
Pat Robertson called for the US covert assassination of Hugo Chavez Frias and then said he didn't. "If he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it," Robertson said. Then a couple of days later he said:
I didn't say assassination. I said our special forces should take him out, and take him out can be a number of things, including kidnapping. There are a number of ways to take out a dictator from power besides killing him.
However, George W. Bush said why the US should go to war with Iraq which reasons were deliberate lies and then changed his reasons for going to war after his lies were exposed. Can one believe either of these men: Robertson or Bush?
Now, the reaction to Pat Robertson's calling for the assassination of Venezuelan president Chavez Frias has been mundane. Even many of those calling it unchristian are not calling for pacifism and giving and sharing all in full faith in God's way. They don't know what unchristian is. The fact is that Pat holds himself out to tens of millions of his television viewing audience to be a worthy Christian shepherd for their souls. However, he has called for the wholly unchristian act of murdering Hugo Chavez Frias. Pat's words defile Pat and lead Pat's followers miserably astray. Do we judge Pat Robertson and condemn Pat Robertson? No. We call for him to repent with all of us in universal repentance.
Of course, Robertson is just stating what the US has engaged in before. The US has been deeply involved in assassination attempts so much so that then president Gerald Ford felt compelled to issue Executive Order 12333 outlawing such attempts. After all, Ford didn't want to be likewise targeted for assassination. More importantly, the liberal light was relatively bright at that time. Ford was embarrassed into issuing the order even though he was a Republican president. It was on the heels of the Watergate scandal, the Pentagon Papers, the whole Vietnam War debacle, and the findings of the US Senate Church Committee, etc.
Unfortunately, the clandestine training of assassins continued even in the open in the form of the School of the Americas that trained leaders of Latin American reactionary, capitalist death squads. Also, blatant assassination attempts continued.
In 1986 for instance, conservative US president Ronald Reagan, in direct contravention of Gerald Ford's Executive Order 12333 prohibiting the US from assassinating or attempting to assassinate leaders of other nations, ordered the bombing of the personal residence of Libya's leader, Muammar Gadafi hoping to assassinate Gadafi. Also unfortunately, that liberal light was weakened over the decades by the neoliberals (false liberals) to the extent that most US citizens couldn't understand why the US didn't just assassinate Saddam Hussein rather than invade Baghdad, Iraq. Of course, absent major additional imperialist actions, an assassination would not have resulted in US control of Iraq's oil.
Now, this whole Pat Robertson issue shows the mentality of the self-styled conservative Christians. Here is the wealthiest US televangelist calling for assassinating Hugo Chavez Frias who has so far been grossly mischaracterized by US conservatives. This assassination mentality is diametrically opposed to the mentality of Christ. It is wholly inconsistent with the message of Jesus.
He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much. (Luke 16:10).
Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:19).
The prohibition against assassination is a commandment. To be unfaithful in that commandment shows a mind incapable of leading the flock in righteousness. That mind is hypocritical. It is not focused on the light. Those who recognize the voice of Jesus know what I am saying here is true. They will not follow any conservative voices down that path. Nor will they follow any false liberal voices. What Pat Robertson called for was sin. What the self-styled conservative Christians are calling for is likewise sin. They are unjust in much. They are deaf to the righteous pleas of the poor. They want their reward now without righteousness and judgment and are getting it.
Even if one accepts Pat Robertson's qualifying statements concerning what he was thinking when he said what he said, calling for such an overthrow of Hugo Chavez Frias, who was elected in an open election and is so far no terror to good works, is also antichristian. Whether Pat was really thinking kill Hugo or just remove him from office, Pat Robertson was advocating what is antichristian. What is wrong that Pat Robertson made this error?
From the real-Christian standpoint, Pat is serving mammon. He is serving selfishness. He needs to exorcise the demons of lust. He called for ousting Hugo, because Hugo is not a capitalist but rather, one prays, ultimately a true believer in giving and sharing across-the-board. Pat sees any threat to capitalism as a threat to Christianity even though capitalism and Christianity are far from the same thing. Christianity will be the demise of capitalism. All the people who agree with Pat are called to repent. All the faithful viewers of the "700 Club" are called to convert to real Christianity.
More than any other person in America so far, Pat Robertson has led the charge in misleading people to believe that the right path for Christians is not only to be part of the system of the prince of this world of darkness but also to take it over. His followers become the tools of the prince of darkness.
Jesus went into the center of the world not to join the system by being that system's high priest in the temple. He went to save lost souls in that system. He went to save souls who might hear him and come out of the falsehood, come out in their hearts. That worldly system dominated the Hebrews in Jerusalem, the center of their world.
Pat Robertson led the charge into public office at all levels by his followers. Other so-called ministries were also onboard with this idea. They spread it amongst themselves and made it public. They haven't quite captured the federal government, but they have come close. They have though captured the Republican Party. They want one of their own at the head of government in the White House. Pat Robertson himself attempted to become the president of the United States.
Imagine Jesus Christ running for president of the US. He wouldn't have run for any office in the system.
Pat Robertson has made a business empire out of doing exactly the opposite of what Jesus called for and wants while claiming it all in the name of Jesus. Robertson has called people to take over the violent, coercive power of the prince of darkness and to use it as such in the name of Jesus. All of Pat's followers are walking in darkness. They are getting their reward now. They can, and do, read the Gospel, but they don't see it. Their hearts have been blinded to it by selfishness.
The Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN), the Christian Coalition of America (CCA), and Regent University were all started by Pat Robertson. The Christian Coalition of America was designed to train and coordinate or organize people starting at the lowest electoral positions such as school boards and the like and moving up over time to even the presidency. The Coalition also issues to the conservatives what it terms Voter Guides guiding people to vote for certain candidates. They also have used extensive get-out-the-vote efforts with conservative churches.
Some churches are copying that model and being challenged for violating the US tax code for non-profit churches campaigning for particular candidates.
There are other schools dedicated to false-conservative Christian precepts such as Patrick Henry College in Purcellville, Virginia; Liberty University started by Jerry Falwell (of the Moral Majority) also in Virginia; Bob Jones University in South Carolina; Oral Roberts University in Tulsa, Oklahoma, and many others.
The Coalition was extremely secretive. Candidates for small local offices with low voter-turnout were encouraged not to divulge their positions at all. The Coalition would inform the selected or targeted voters behind the scenes for whom they should cast their votes. The turnout would be large enough to assure the Coalition's candidate would win.
Ralph Reed, the political dirty-trickster, who ran the Coalition, likened it to "guerrilla warfare" and not giving away one's position to the enemy who won't know what hit him in an ambush.
Reed used Voter-ID tactics in which Coalition forces would call people to ask a series of questions. As soon as they determined they were speaking with a Democrat or a so-called liberal, they would end the phone supposed survey. They would continue on with the conservative and then tailor a computer generated form letter to that person from a Coalition candidate. The personalized letter would cover only those issues with which the voter agreed with the candidate. Any position where they disagreed would not be mentioned. This gave the voters the false impression that the candidate was a perfect match.
The Coalition was stripped of its tax-exempt status for endorsing candidates. It was also hit with racial-discrimination law suits filed by black employees who were treated as second-class citizens by the Old South/Deep South oriented Coalition.
The Coalition secretly supported David Duke's bid for governor of Louisiana. David Duke is the former head of the Ku Klux Klan. Duke garnered seventy percent of the white so-called evangelical vote. The Ku Klux Klan, of course, was always a white supremacist, ostensible Christian group. The so-called conservative Christian strength lies in the heart of the Confederate slave-states. This they have hidden behind what they call "family values." It is very bloodline oriented.
Look, the prayer-in-school, segregationist, states' rights, militarist types have been at this for centuries now. It's not new. This is just their latest drive for power.
What do all the neocons think will happen if a generation of false Christians has been pumped through those theocratic-training schools of the dominionists/reconstructionists come of age so to speak and still haven't come to see the real light? They will demand a high percentage of the highest offices of any political party they're in. Watch what happens then to US support for Israel when it doesn't start false-Christianizing. What will happen is what is meant by the expression "what goes around comes around." This will tear apart an already divided American house.
What do all the neocons think will happen if the brown-skinned people of America represent the majority? What will the white Ashkenazi Jews do if those brown-skinned Americans begin more and more to identify with the plight of the brown-skinned Arabs against those white-supremacist Jews? The struggle will further tear apart the already divided American house.
Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. (Matthew 5:25).
It means at the very least to come to a fair settlement on both sides. The side that takes unfair advantage will suffer negative consequences.
We are for real Christian dominance. Real means freely chosen, not forced. Real means serving. Real means spirit over DNA and skin color. The mean-father figure isn't Godly.
Robertson resigned in 2001 as president of the Coalition, and donations have since plummeted, moving to other false Christian, fascist groups.
It must be understood that Pat Robertson is a half-truth artist. He attempts to blend truth in with falsehood. He speaks against certain evils, but then he endorses and partakes of evils. He speaks for capitalistic greed and self-centeredness, for militarism, for the death penalty and other coercive measures, and other such things, all of which are anathema under the message of Jesus Christ.
Jerry Falwell's Moral Majority was supplanted by the Christian Coalition of America, so too has the Coalition been supplanted.
Robertson's high-tech, commercial approach really drove things. That approach is still in its supremacy within conservative circles. The Coalition, per se, though has been largely supplanted by several groups.
Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council were both started by James C. Dobson. Ted Haggard, mentioned several times elsewhere in this work, founded the New Life Church and has been president of the National Association of Evangelicals. There are new groups constant springing up.
This changing of the guard goes back to the beginning, so we can't tell you that it all started with Jerry Falwell. Falwell was actually preceded in his political influence by Billy Graham. Graham didn't expressly endorse candidates, whereas Falwell and his Moral Majority was deliberately started as a political organization so that the tax-exempt status of a religious coalition wouldn't arise. Of course, it is well remembered that the Moral Majority attracted primarily so-called conservative, born-again Christians. Contemporaneous with Graham was Billy James Hargis. Billy Hargis was the most virulent voice of the anti-communist, false Christians. He and Graham preached against holding all things in common. While Graham was denouncing holding all things in common, Graham actually said that Jesus taught in favor of private property against the commons. It's a lie!
As we have written herein, Jesus didn't say that in order to obtain life (real, eternal life in heaven) it is necessary to give up all personal property, but Jesus never preached in favor of private property against the commons. It is quite clear that Jesus led people in the direction away from private property. We won't rehash all the points right now though, since they have been well covered throughout this work.
Hargis's empire fell due to an apparent bi-sexual addiction. It is not unusual that those who scream the loudest against sexual depravity and for punitive measures, are themselves still deeply embedded in it. They make huge sums of money by railing against real problems. They are given huge sums by people who are genuinely concerned about moral corruption. Those followers are usually very well-meaning people. They just are operating under the half-truths they've been fed by the sideshow-variety preachers.
This doesn't mean that everyone against sexual depravity is engaged in it. However, where the lifestyle isn't consistent across-the-board, falling to temptations (sexual or otherwise) will occur.
Jim Bakker had the PTL Network (standing for Praise the Lord) and Heritage USA, Fort Mill, North Carolina. Heritage USA was a Christian theme park and real estate development that was third only to the two huge Disney theme parks in the US. Bakker's empire collapsed in the late 1980's due to his ...continues... Click next page number below.