dopalganger

dopple... regarding http://suicidegirls.com/boards/Current+Events/25569/

the Project for a New American Century are the ones who said all we need is a new pearl harbor so we can dominate the world. rumsfeld, jeb (or neil?) bush, wolfowitz, perle, etc are all members... it should be easy enough to find. PNAC i think they go by.

wow dude. i was referring to the post by s5 below
hence the word "regarding" and the page where you asked for a credible source.

s5 said:
well, stokula, to be fair, when the bush admin's foregin policy think-tank publishes a report in 2000 saying that some "catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor" would help move along their plans for shuffling around the middle east, it gets some people thinking.

you, doppleganger, replied: *dare i ask for a link to a credible source of this information?*

i then wrote to you telling you the specific name of the group s5 was talking about~ the Project for a New American Century~ so you could find a link to a credible source on your own.
that's all.

instead of thinking "hey maybe these guys aren't just sitting around screwing with me on the boards" and actually checking out what anyone was referring to, you just leave rudeness on my page about pathetic, factless claims and some sarcasm... the same kind of thing that got the thread closed to begin with.

so here's a link and quote to exactly what s5 was talking about. the exact same thing you describe as pathetic and factless.
by a congressman, to the current house of representatives.

hon.rep. Ron Paul on july 10th 2003

The Project for a New American Century, as recently as September 2000, likewise, foresaw the need for 'a Pearl Harbor event' that would galvanize the American people to support their ambitious plans to ensure political and economic domination of the world, while strangling any
potential rival.

Recognizing a 'need' for a Pearl Harbor event, and referring to Pearl Harbor as being 'lucky' are not identical to support and knowledge of such an event, but this sympathy for a galvanizing event, as 9-11 turned out to be, was used to promote an agenda that strict constitutionalists and devotees of the Founders of this nation find appalling is indeed disturbing. After 9-11, Rumsfeld and others argued for an immediate attack on
Iraq, even though it was not implicated in the attacks.

The fact that neo-conservatives ridicule those who firmly believe that U.S. interests and world peace would best be served by a policy of neutrality and avoiding foreign entanglements should not go unchallenged. Not to do so is to condone their grandiose plans for American world hegemony.

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr071003.htm

or.....
a prominent British political figure~ Labour Party Member of Parliament Michael Meacher, wrote a major feature focusing on Cheney's Project for a New American Century grouping, in the London Guardian on Sept. 6.
where he says:

We now know that a blueprint for the creation of a global Pax Americana was drawn up for Dick Cheney (now vice-president), Donald Rumsfeld (defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld's deputy), Jeb Bush (George Bush's younger brother) and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff).

The document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences, was written in September 2000 by the neoconservative think tank, Project for the New American Century (PNAC).

The plan shows Bush's cabinet intended to take military control of the Gulf region whether or not Saddam Hussein was in power. It says "while the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."

The PNAC blueprint supports an earlier document attributed to Wolfowitz and Libby which said the US must "discourage advanced industrial nations from challenging our leadership or even aspiring to a larger regional or global role". It refers to key allies such as the UK as "the most effective and efficient means of exercising American global leadership". It describes peacekeeping missions as "demanding American political leadership rather than that of the UN". It says "even should Saddam pass from the scene", US bases in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait will remain permanently... as "Iran may well prove as large a threat to US interests as Iraq has". It spotlights China for "regime change", saying "it is time to increase the presence of American forces in SE Asia".

The document also calls for the creation of "US space forces" to dominate space, and the total control of cyberspace to prevent "enemies" using the internet against the US. It also hints that the US may consider developing biological weapons "that can target specific genotypes [and] may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool".

Finally - written a year before 9/11 - it pinpoints North Korea, Syria and Iran as dangerous regimes, and says their existence justifies the creation of a "worldwide command and control system". This is a blueprint for US world domination. But before it is dismissed as an agenda for rightwing fantasists, it is clear it provides a much better explanation of what actually happened before, during and after 9/11 than the global war on terrorism thesis. This can be seen in several ways.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1036571,00.html


and the document itself. i'd say read the whole thing~ it's a blast. but that specific pearl harbor reference is on page 63.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf


for real, man.... why would someone sit around on SG and post a bunch of useless crap with nothing to back it up?
especially someone who runs the site like s5?

i just want to have good honest debates, and look at hot pics of foxy girls.