Add to favorites Examiner Bio

US government wouldn't lie to start a war with Iran, would they? A look at the conservative history

   We hold these Truths as self-evident...

 

 

 

In history, the US Joint Chiefs of Staff unanimously approved of a US-initiated false-flag operation in 1962, named Operation Northwoods. The plan included killing American citizens and/or US military personnel, blaming Cuba, and then riding public anger for a military operation to invade Cuba.[1] False-flag operations have been used extensively in history to rally public opinion for an offensive war.[2]

 

Vietnam is a similar story of an illegal invasion; that time in support of a dictatorship in South Vietnam after the US rejected an election for the people of Vietnam to choose their own leadership. Most recently, President Clinton violated the UN Genocide Convention by taking no action during the Rwanda genocide of 1994 that killed between 500,000 and 800,000 human beings. In fact, Secretary of State Madeline Albright blocked UN Security Council action to prevent the slaughter: a simple proposal to increase UN troop presence from 2,000 to 5,000 from the request of Canadian Lieutenant-General Romeo Dallaire, the Commander of the UN troops in Rwanda.[3]

 

In addition, it’s useful to know that US refusal of International Laws and Treaties is common. The US is currently in violation of nine[4]:

 

 

 

Cui Bono? An economic motivation for the US invasions of Iraq and Iran is those countries’ shifts from selling oil exclusively in dollars to including Euros and Yen. The drop in demand for dollars would decrease the US government’s ability to fund programs by selling government securities. Saddam became the first OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) member to sell oil for Euros in November, 2000. President Bush’s Treasury Secretary, Paul O’Neill, wrote that the President began discussing removing Saddam as soon as he moved into the White House in January, 2001.[5] As soon as the US was prepared to export oil from Iraq, the currency was reestablished for dollars only.[6] Iran began accepting Euros in 2003; US rhetoric for attacking Iran began shortly thereafter. Iran increased their market for Euros in 2006.[7]

If another attack occurs against the US, false-flag or real, President Obama has the legal authority to declare himself the sole authority of US government, bypassing any authority of Congress and the Federal Court System. Under National Security Presidential Directive 51[8] (NSPD-51), issued May 9, 2007, if the President declares a “national emergency,” all government authority is “coordinated by the President, as a matter of comity with respect to the legislative and judicial branches.” This means that the President is the legal dictator of the United States, with only his discretion allowing influence by Congress and/or the Courts. Details of this plan are secret for “national security,” even to the members in Congress on the Committee for Homeland Security.[9] Just after passing the MCA, Congress also repealed the Posse Comitatus Act, and gave the President legal authority to command the state’s National Guard without consulting with state governors for the purpose of “suppressing public disorder.”[10]

 

If the President invoked NSPD-51 and the states’ National Guards to suppress public protest, Americans would have to be arrested and detained in large facilities. For the past several years, FEMA has been constructing and renovating such “camps” with Congressional funding.[11] The existence of detention camps for Americans was originally disclosed to the public in Congressional Hearings on the Iran-Contra scandal in 1987 under the name REX-84.[12]

 

Information Operations Roadmap is a program approved by Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld in 2003, and surprisingly released to George Washington University’s National Security Archive in a Freedom of Information Act request.[13] Wikipedia acknowledges its existence, but fails to inform of its content for government influence of American public opinion for support of US military operations. The existence of this document confirms governmental planning to replace fact with spin for the American public’s consumption.[14]

 

In 2000, CNN reluctantly acknowledged that they employ military PSYOPS (Psychological Operations Group) personnel at their news station.[15] The express purpose of US military PSYOPS is propaganda; to manipulate public opinion in favor of government military policy.

 

The Pentagon complied with Freedom of Information requests and released over 8,000 pages that confirmed beginning in January 2002, they recruited over 75 former military “experts” to be what they termed as their “surrogates” and “message force multiplies” to appear in major media to advocate for the War on Terror under the disguise of independent analysts.[16] They collectively appeared over 4,500 times to reinforce the government’s military positions while the media called them “military experts.”[17] The program was managed by the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs, Victoria Clark, funded by our tax dollars, and again had the express purpose of propaganda. The title for this episode that stuck was “PSYOPS on steroids.” The Pentagon claims to have discontinued the program.

 

Former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan confirmed that the Bush administration directly sent “talking points” to Fox News for their communication to the American public.[18]

 

Americans seem to be taking notice of at least some of this information. According to a poll by the Pew Research Center, the majority of the American public see the US major media news organizations as politically biased, inaccurate, and uncaring. Among those who use the Internet, two-thirds report that major media news do not care about the people they report on, 59% say the news is inaccurate, 64% see bias, and 53% summarize their view on major media news as, “failing to stand up for America.”[19]

 

A hypothesis to explain our government’s motivation to disinform the public in favor of Middle East wars that seems to be supported by the facts is to dominate the Middle East’s oil supply. Indeed, the Bush administration first named the Iraq war, “Operation Iraqi Liberation.”[20] Wikipedia used to have an article explaining that the project name was changed due to people wondering if its acronym, O.I.L., was the war’s real purpose. Regarding war with Iran, 90% of their oil and gas reserves are in the province that borders Iraq, most of which is right on the border, a tempting and nearby target should the control of oil be the objective.[21]

 

For those who cling to the notion that the purpose of the war was to remove a vicious dictator for the good of the Iraqi people and the safety of the world rather than for oil, consider that the US supports vicious dictators in Africa who cooperate with their oil exports to the US. The second and third largest oil producers of Africa are Angola and Gabon; neither belong to OPEC. In addition, Equatorial Guinea is a significant exporter of oil. All three countries have dictators at least as bad as Saddam. All three are on favorable terms with the US and were welcome to meet with President Bush.[22]

 

Also consider the CIA program, “Operation Mockingbird,”[23] disclosed to the public in the Church Senate Committee hearings in 1976, then reported in detail by Woodward and Bernstein in the Washington Post.[24] This was a fully implemented CIA program to spread disinformation throughout American media. CIA Director William Colby testified to the Church Committee that over 400 CIA agents were active in the US media to control what was reported through American mainstream television, newspapers, and magazines. President Ford fired Colby after his testimony, replacing him with George H. W. Bush. Bush Sr. ended the CIA’s testimony, stating that there were no other programs of concern to disclose and promising that the CIA would no longer influence the media.

 

An historical precedent of US government manipulation of the media that may have encouraged such a program was the successful cover-up of the destructive effects of the US use of nuclear weapons against Japan. After the US used the world’s most destructive WMD in history, General MacArthur closed southern Japan to reporters. The War Department hired NY Times Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, William Laurence, to report to the American public on the accomplishment of the US nuclear weapons program. Part of Laurence’s instruction was to specifically state that nuclear weapons had no danger of radiation. Laurence did so, discounting Japanese reports of radiation fallout poisoning as “propaganda.” Laurence was rewarded for his “reporting” with a second Pulitzer.[25]

 

I can’t answer with certainty why the Bush Jr. administration, President Obama and Democratic/Republican leadership, and our major media have lied about Iraq’s WMD, Iran’s right to nuclear energy, and “wiping Israel off the map.” The Constitutional response of impeachment hearings to consider if “high crimes and misdemeanors” have occurred is not seriously considered by leadership of either party. Democrat and Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, stated she’d support impeachment “if anyone knew of a crime” that had been committed,[26] but admitted that she had not read the Articles of Impeachment introduced by Congressman Kucinich and heard in the House Judiciary Committee.[27] I do observe that many historical governments have considered manipulating people toward their policy preferences as more important than objective reporting of the facts, civil conversation, and democratic vote. As you know, there is strong historical precedent for leaders of government preferring dictatorial powers rather than serving the will of the public. Indeed, President Bush joked on at least three occasions that a dictatorship in America would be easier than democracy as long as he were the dictator.[28] President Bush was also quoted by three White House sources of exploding in a meeting with Republican leadership over the Constitutionality of the Patriot Act, shouting, “I don't give a goddamn. I'm the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way. Stop throwing the Constitution in my face, it's just a goddamned piece of paper!”[29]

 

If this information is new to you, you’re welcome to be shocked and skeptical. Please confirm these facts for yourself. You are not welcome to disbelieve it. Disbelief means that you’re using your personal belief system to evaluate these claims rather than the factual evidence. I know that you have historical information of the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal. I also know that if this is your first time feeling the magnitude of these scandals you might be shocked. This process of fighting your way to the essential history and facts of policy, considering its economic costs and benefits, and determining your voice and vote is what US citizenry is all about.