Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Thursday, November 16, 2006
News today that the Bush Administration
is to intensify operations in Iraq, rather than concede to withdrawal,
and that domestically they are desperately attempting to pass
last minute warrantless surveillance legislation, indicates that
the Neocon leadership is more desperate, more determined and more
dangerous than ever.
The London
Guardian today reported that internal strategy documents
being prepared by long term Bush ally James Baker, under the guise
of the "Independent" Iraq Study Group, will advocate
"a last big push" to win the war involving an increase
of US forces by up to 20,000 soldiers.
An anonymous US official added: "Bush
has said 'no' to withdrawal, so what else do you have? The Baker
report will be a set of ideas, more realistic than in the past,
that can be used as political tools. What they're going to say
is: lower the goals, forget about the democracy crap, put more
resources in, do it."
According to the, official Baker has been
preparing a four point strategy in closed sessions with Dick Cheney.
The Four points are as follows:
So the order out of chaos begins. The fomenting of civil war,
as we have previously
documented, and former officials and Ambassadors
have testified, was part of a deliberate strategy to descend Iraq
into chaos in order that the solution of a US controlled sectarian
Iraq could finally be offered up. This is what we shall see unfold
under James Baker.
A Democratic Congress will therefore be responsible not for getting
the troops out of Iraq, but for putting more in there and beefing
up resources.
Journalist Chris
Floyd has described this move thus:
This is the "McCain Option":
somehow scare up tens of thousands of new U.S. troops, presumably
without a draft, and fling 'em into the fire, then, as Cox notes,
"take the cities street by street and hold them through a
massive security and intelligence clamp-down." But he also
notes the further undeniable truth: "It is of course politically
inconceivable, on either side of the Atlantic." However,
this is the only serious option that would not very likely lead
to full-blown civil war – mostly because it would unite
many of the Iraqi factions now at odds into the mother of all
insurgencies against the intensified occupation.
The democrats will have very little option
than to totally comply with Baker's recommendations, in an effort
to bring the conflict to an end before 2008. Iraq has been their
springboard to office. They will hardly be able to refuse to engage
with the issue when given the chance, especially now that Bush's
new best friend Nancy Pelosi has been confirmed as the House speaker.
The goal has of course always been to stay
in Iraq and establish long term occupying force there, not to
"liberate" the people, give them democracy and leave.
The war has as much to do with liberation and democracy as it
has to do with WMD. Thus the "democracy crap" has been
jettisoned from the now see through rhetoric.
Forthcoming events don't paint too pretty
a picture either. Russia’s
parliament has today warned that carrying out the
death sentence imposed on Saddam Hussein could provoke a new wave
of violence in Iraq:
“Carrying out the death sentence would
not resolve the current problems of the long-suffering Iraqi people
and could give rise to new ones, and lead to a new phase of harsher
confrontation, revenge and hostility,”
A more determined and desperate Neocon leadership
has also led others to predict an inflammation of the situation
with Iran.
As Iran makes a "final
step" in its nuclear program, senior government
officials have
stated that pre-emptive strikes may be on the table.
The Iranians have repeatedly
claimed that they are being threatened with force
by Israel, while the Israeli
ambassador has said that "US President George
W. Bush will not hesitate to use force against Iran in order to
halt its nuclear program,".
As point two of James Baker's Iraq strategy
will look to diplomatic cooperation with Iraq's neighbours, should
Iran be seen as refusing to cooperate with the strategy, this
may be used as a final excuse to impose isolation and a blockade
on Iran, possibly leading to conflict.
Leading Neocons such as Richard Perle and
Michael Ledeen, extremely disgruntled with the fierce criticism
they have recently received over the Iraq war, are now calling
for swift and decisive action.
Domestically things seem to be intensifying
also with the news that the outgoing Republican chairman of the
Judiciary Committee, Arlen Specter has made a
last-minute attempt at giving the Bush administration
what he calls the necessary "resources" for carrying
out its phone call and Internet surveillance within the law.
Sickeningly calling it "a significant
advance in protecting civil liberties", his 11 page proposal
presents a watered down version of Bush's "terrorist surveillance
program", which allows for warrantless surveillance so long
as any appeals against a given case are reviewed. The bill also
ensures a scale back of a 1947 law that governs reports on government
intelligence activities to Congress, requiring only that the chairmen
of each congressional intelligence committee be privy to those
documents.
Another section would allows warrantless
tapping into "foreign-to-foreign" communications, even
if Americans are involved in those exchanges.
In terms of other domestic issues Congressman
Ron Paul, speaking on the Alex Jones show last week, warned that
because Congressional power has switched to the Democrats, what
real Conservatism there was left in the House, to block programs
such as Bush's amnesty program for illegals, as well as the development
of the NAFTA Superhighway and the North American Union, is gone.
With Pelosi at the helm Ron Paul sees it as a forgone conclusion
that such policies will sail through.
"I think that's right, although I complain
about the two parties being exactly alike, I would say on this
amnesty issue and what's happened with the election, there probably
was a difference between the two. It is more likely with the Democrats
in charge, and Judiciary and the other major committees, and with
the President not really fighting for our national borders, he's
always argued for some type of worker program, yes I think there's
a much greater danger that that is going to be coming in the next
session."
It certainly seems that now, more than ever,
we should be on guard against a wounded and dangerous Neocon leadership.
The American people have shown that they do not trust them and
they want rid of them. In this sense, and with "impeachment
off the table", the Bush cabal has nothing left to lose.
