Is It Really a “War On Terror”? Parts 7 & 8 of 11


Deanna Spingola
September 21, 2005
George W. Bush, portraying himself as just a regular down-to-earth guy, took office 20 Jan 2001 and immediately installed several controversial neoconservatives into the Pentagon and into the White House as defined in Bush’s War of Terror, part 6. The new administration did not have to formulate an agenda as it was already completed and is entitled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century”. This blueprint for transforming America into a global hegemony was created in September 2000 by the Washington based Project for a New American Century when it appeared that their presidential puppet might just win the election. That victory was finally cinched when the Florida voting fiasco[1] was ultimately settled in court.[2] Incidentally, Florida’s governor Jeb Bush is a charter member of the Project for a New American Century.This nefarious group’s proposal for American military action briefly includes the following:
“Establish four core Missions for U.S. military forces:”

  • Defend the American homeland.
  • Fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars.
  • Perform the “constabulary” duties associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions.
  • Transform U.S. forces to exploit the revolution in military affairs to ensure long term superiority of U.S. forces.

America’s transformation, per the document, also recommends the following:

  • Increase military spending.
  • Build American military bases in Central Asia and the Middle East.
  • Remove all non compliant regimes.
  • Control of all the world’s energy sources.
  • They are willing to use nuclear weapons to achieve American hegemony.
  • Control the New International Commons of space and cyberspace.
  • Play a permanent role in the Middle East which transcends the regime of Saddam Hussein.[3]

Again in “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century” we find the following statement:

“Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”[4]

Read the complete PART 7 here.


Deanna Spingola
October 25, 2005

There was a horrific crime committed on 9/11 – the mass murder of nearly three thousand people and thousands more injured. This catastrophic crime impacted every U.S. citizen on that day and in numerous ways in the months and years that followed. Our fears enabled an ever encroaching government to pass legislation designed to suspend many of our personal freedoms as well as create additional bureaucracy to further regulate our existence. Our apprehensions over the visual, “shock and awe” effectiveness of a stealthy sinister enemy overshadowed any concerns over loss of our constitutionally guaranteed privileges. Interesting – with every opportunistic crisis, natural or man made, our government metastasizes – with our quiet compliance and their massive spending of taxpayer money.

Despite government’s obvious inept emergency response failures and blatant unaccountable incompetence, average trusting citizens thoughtlessly believed, and continue to believe, the incessant propaganda via the government friendly televised media and rationalized away the unthinkable. Some citizens naively expect better of them with the very next calamity or the one after that. There will be more. Any unimpeded action guarantees continuation. Experimental tests are always used to evaluate our tolerance levels and gullibility.

This high magnitude crime required extraordinary planning, communications, power, training, preparation, strategy and most important – coordination. The initial questions should have been: Who had motive, opportunity, weapons access, technology, knowledge, desire, skill and manpower? Who benefited? What did three thousand deaths accomplish? Any astute criminal investigator examines murder motives such as anger, passion, thrill-kill, jealousy, greed, power or disposing of anyone who poses a threat. But what was the motive for multiple civilian deaths?

Read the complete PART 8 here.


~ by swfreedomlover on January 30, 2008.

One Response to “Is It Really a “War On Terror”? Parts 7 & 8 of 11”

  1. All of this BEGS the Question, Who have they already picked to continue the program? I guess we will find out if anyone but Ron Paul wins. As an aside interest, I found this link:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: