Jonathan Gold Hits the Nail on the Head
I felt this would be a good follow up to my rant last night about PNAC, and the plans for Iraq before 9/11. With so many people coming to terms with this administration wanting to hit Iraq so long ago, perhaps they will begin questioning how this administration could possibly have accomplished their goals without 9/11.
We sit here all day thinking of the most compelling piece of evidence that the Government was complicit in 9/11 when it's staring us RIGHT IN THE FACE.
What were our Government's intentions BEFORE 9/11?
Reporter Ron Suskind said that he received documents from "White House Insiders", including Paul O'Neill. The titles of those documents were as follows:
"Plan for Post-Saddam Iraq."
"Foreign Suitors For Iraqi Oilfield Contracts"
Paul O'Neill himself described a meeting that took place a few days after the first inauguration where "It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying 'Go find me a way to do this."
What about Afghanistan? Would we have invaded Afghanistan had it not been for 9/11?
According to BBC's George Arney, Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October.
Just yesterday, Rep. Peter King said, "We would not have invaded Iraq without 9/11".
According to Bob Woodward's book, "Plan Of Attack", Paul Wolfowitz said, "The terrorist attacks of Sept 11 created an opportunity to strike."
So... were they hoping and praying that 9/11 would take place, or did they make it happen?
I've prayed my ass off before to a God I no longer believe in, but I can honestly say that a massive attack against the United States, in the timeframe that they specified, is a tad more than any God could give.
All that planning would seem pretty pointless without 9/11 eh? Read the PNAC document.
Please feel free to rant away in the comments here, or on Gold's forum here.