2000: THE SECRET BLUEPRINT
THE YEAR THE WORLD BECAME OUR OYSTER

By: Jim Moore

I only wish to God this information weren't true.

I offer it only because (l) it was an article in the London Sunday 
Examiner, by Neil Mackay, a reporter who has no qualms about "telling 
it like it is", and (2) because Americans are entitled to get all the 
facts we can about President Bush's rush to war.  

Grab your socks. They're about to be knocked off. . .  

Recently, instead of "getting rid of Saddam Hussein", you may have 
heard Bush use the term "regime change" when referring to Iraq. There 
appears to be a good reason for this.  

MacKay reports that a recently uncovered, secret blueprint for 
the creation of a 'global Pax Americana' (American empire) was 
drawn up for Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, Lewis 
Libby (Cheney's chief of staff), and Bush's younger brother, Jeb.  

The document reveals that the Bush cabinet planned to attack Iraq 
to get a "regime change", even before Bush officially took office 
in January 200l. If you don't believe this, you can be forgiven.  

But the document also spells out something much more ambitious, 
and sinister, than attacking Iraq---which already has a surplus 
of domestic and foreign dissenters.  

Drawn up in September, 2000, by the neo-con think-tank Project for 
the New American Century (PNAC), the document, entitled "Rebuilding 
America's Defences, Strategies, Forces, and Resources for a New 
Century (whew!), reveals that the Bush administration intended to 
take control of the whole Gulf region, whether or not Saddam Hussein 
is in power.  

In other words, the stated objective isn't just to depose a dictator, 
it's to establish an Empire, with "fighting and winning multiple, 
simultaneous theaters of war as its core mission."  

Dangerous idea? Read on.

The plan shows that the United States, for decades. has wanted to play 
a more significant and permanent role in Gulf region "security." To do 
that, the United States needed to put a larger American force in the Gulf 
region, over and above any Iraqi threat.  

Now, let me ask you this: Have we, or have we not, been hearing just 
such rumblings lately from the administration? Like the need to deal 
with "other enemies of democracy", such as Iran, Libya, Syria, perhaps 
even Egypt and Saudi Arabia; all Arab states, and all mortal enemies of 
Israel.  

Waxing poetic, the blueprint for this global master plan then describes 
the American forces used overseas as "the cavalry on the new American 
frontier." As if imbuing world domination with visions of John Wayne 
in a covered wagon will soften the harsh reality of some American 
soldiers never coming home...  

And there's more. The plan for U.S. domination of the world scene has 
ramifications that go far beyond dethroning dictators and filling body 
bags.  

Here are just a few.

It mentions the UK as" the most effective and efficient means of 
exercising American global leadership." (Which may explain Blair's 
lapdog relationship with Bush.)  

It demands American political leadership without the "interference" 
of the United Nations. (Finally, admitting the UN's irrelevance for 
the past 50 years.)  

It requires keeping American troops in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, even 
if they oppose it. (What are friends for?)  

It means increasing American military influence in Asia, and a "regime 
change" in China to a democracy (If we think we can budge China, let's 
make it a Republic instead.)  

It calls for American control of cyberspace to prevent use of the 
internet by "enemies" of the U.S. (Personal opinion mail: here today, 
gone tomorrow.)  

It hints that the U.S. itself may develop biological weapons and 
transform them from the realm of terror to a politically useful 
tool. ( Do as I say, not as I do.)

It pinpoints North Korea and some Arab states as dangerous regimes 
which justify a world-wide, command-and-control center, with America 
at the controls, of course. (We can't control ourselves, but controlling 
the world is a breeze.)  

Commenting on this report about U.S. plans for "empire" building, 
Tam Dalyell, the Labor MP, father of the House of Commons, and a 
leading rebel voice in England against war with Iraq, said this: 
"This is garbage from right-wing think-tanks stuffed with chicken-hawks
--- men who have never seen the horror of war but are in love with the 
idea of war. Men like Cheney, who were draft dodgers in the Vietnam war.  

"It's a blueprint for U.S. world domination, in a new world order of 
their making. These are the thought processes of fantasist Americans 
who want to control the world. I am appalled that a British Labor 
Prime Minister should have got into bed with a crew which has this 
moral standing."  

And in turn, this writer is appalled that cabinet members in an 
American administration would even consider such an imperialistic 
blueprint.  

On the other hand, it suggests that our "need" to go to war is about 
more than just oil or Israel. It's about oysters.  

"Published originally at EtherZone.com : republication allowed with 
this notice and hyperlink intact."  

Jim Moore is a free-lance political writer and is a regular columnist for 
Ether Zone.

Published in the March 3, 2003 issue of Ether Zone.
Copyright (c) 1997 - 2003 Ether Zone.

                                -==-

Source: Ether Zone - http://etherzone.com/2003/moor030303.shtml

( Project for the New American Century - http://www.newamericancentury.org/ )

Cheers, Steve..

---