Matching Grant Challenge
BruceMatch
We’re slowly making headway in our annual fund drive, but not nearly fast enough to meet our make-or-break goal.  On the bright side, a generous CounterPuncher has stepped forward with a pledge to match every donation of $100 or more. Any of you out there thinking of donating $50 should know that if you donate a further $50, CounterPunch will receive an additional $100. And if you plan to send us $200 or $500 or more, he will give CounterPunch a matching $200 or $500 or more. Don’t miss the chance. Double your clout right now. Please donate.
 unnamed

Yes, these are dire political times. Many who optimistically hoped for real change have spent nearly five years under the cold downpour of political reality. Here at CounterPunch we’ve always aimed to tell it like it is, without illusions or despair. That’s why so many of you have found a refuge at CounterPunch and made us your homepage. You tell us that you love CounterPunch because the quality of the writing you find here in the original articles we offer every day and because we never flinch under fire. We appreciate the support and are prepared for the fierce battles to come.

Unlike other outfits, we don’t hit you up for money every month … or even every quarter. We ask only once a year. But when we ask, we mean it.

CounterPunch’s website is supported almost entirely by subscribers to the print edition of our magazine. We aren’t on the receiving end of six-figure grants from big foundations. George Soros doesn’t have us on retainer. We don’t sell tickets on cruise liners. We don’t clog our site with deceptive corporate ads.

The continued existence of CounterPunch depends solely on the support and dedication of our readers. We know there are a lot of you. We get thousands of emails from you every day. Our website receives millions of hits and nearly 100,000 readers each day. And we don’t charge you a dime.

Please, use our brand new secure shopping cart to make a tax-deductible donation to CounterPunch today or purchase a subscription our monthly magazine and a gift sub for someone or one of our explosive  books, including the ground-breaking Killing Trayvons. Show a little affection for subversion: consider an automated monthly donation. (We accept checks, credit cards, PayPal and cold-hard cash….)

pp1

or
cp-store

To contribute by phone you can call Becky or Deva toll free at: 1-800-840-3683

Thank you for your support,

Jeffrey, Joshua, Becky, Deva, and Nathaniel

CounterPunch
 PO Box 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

Chronicle of a Quagmire Foretold

The Deceivers

by CHRIS FLOYD

"How many deaths will it take till he knows
That too many people have died?"

Bob Dylan

Yes, and how many times must the truth be told before it conquers the lies? Again and again, the brutal realities behind the rape of Iraq that it was planned years ago, that the aggressors knew full well that their justifications for war were false and that their invasion would lead to chaos, ruin and unbridled terror have been exposed by the very words and documents of the invaders themselves. Yet the reign of the lie goes on, rolling toward its final entrenchment in November.

Last week, as hundreds of Iraqi civilians were being slaughtered by insurgents and invaders, as more pipelines exploded, more hostages were seized, more families sank into poverty and filth a death spiral ably described by Patrick Cockburn in CounterPunch and The Independent the cynical machinations of the oh-so-Christian Coalition of Bush and Blair were revealed yet again. This time it was a tranche of leaked documents from March 2002, a full year before the war: reports to Tony Blair from his top advisors, stating plainly that the intelligence about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction was unsubstantiated, that there was no connection between Saddam and al Qaeda, that there was no legal justification for invading the country, and that any such invasion would lead to years of bloody, chaotic occupation, the Daily Telegraph (an arch-conservative, pro-war paper) reports.

Even more remarkably, Blair was told that the likely end result of the invasion would be after years of horrific turmoil the rise of yet another Saddam-like tyrant, who would then try to acquire the very weapons of mass destruction that the Coalition attack was ostensibly designed to destroy. In fact, Blair was told, with Iraq hedged in by a powerful Iran to the east and a nuclear-armed Israel to the west, any Iraqi leader, even a democratic one, will eventually seek WMD to defend the country.

All of this echoed similar warnings given to George W. Bush by the State Department, the CIA, top military brass even his own father. Most of these alarms were reported obscurely at times in the press before the invasion. The Coalition’s maniacal drive to war without evidence or provocation was later confirmed again, often obliquely by Congressional probes, the 9/11 Commission, the Hutton Report, the Butler Report, Bush’s official WMD investigators and a raft of revelations by top insiders on both sides of the Atlantic, such as Robin Cook, Richard Clarke, Bob Graham, John O’Neill and others.

The public record, available to anyone who wants the truth, is undeniable: the war was waged on false pretenses and the war leaders knew it. They knew it would bring unimaginable death and suffering to multitudes of innocent people in Iraq and to thousands of their own soldiers and civilians as well. They knew it would lead to more terrorism, more chaos, more insecurity in the world. Yet they plunged ahead anyway, deliberately deceiving their own people with a poison cloud of lies, exaggeration and bluster. Why? Because for the warmongers, the game was worth the candle: the loot, the power, the "dominance" to be won was an irresistible temptation.

The Telegraph exposé centered on papers prepared for Blair’s March 2002 summit with the true ruler of the United States: Dick Cheney. As often noted here, Cheney was a key figure in the corporate/militarist faction Project for the New American Century, along with Don Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and other bloodthirsty elites. In September 2000 before Bush was installed as the faction’s White House frontman PNAC issued the final version of a plan, years in the making, to ensure American geopolitical and economic "dominance" through military control of key oil regions and strategic pipeline routes, either directly or via client states. This would be accompanied by a "revolutionary" transformation of American society into a more war-like state: a transformation that PNAC said could only be accomplished if the American people were "galvanized" by "a catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor."

The conquest of Iraq was a vital cog in this long-range plan, and the depredations of the Baath Regime the worst of which occurred with the full support of PNAC’s top players during the Reagan-Bush years had nothing to do with it. The Cheney-Rumsfeld group put it plainly in 2000: the need to establish a military presence in Iraq "transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein." Likewise, 9/11 and "the new threats in a changed world" evoked so often as a justification by the warmongers were equally irrelevant to an invasion planned years before the CIA’s ex-ally Osama bin Laden obligingly provided that longed-for "new Pearl Harbor."

What’s more, the warmakers knew that Saddam’s WMD arsenal and weapons development programs had been dismantled at his order in 1991. This was confirmed in 1995 by crateloads of documentary evidence supplied by top defector Hussein Kamel, Saddam’s son-in-law and WMD chieftain as Time Magazine reported years ago. It was confirmed again by UN inspectors, who independently verified the elimination of 95 percent of Iraq’s WMD arsenal before they were summarily pulled out of the country ahead of a US-UK punitive strike in 1998.

Any remaining questions about Iraqi WMD stoked by false intelligence provided by paid agents of the Pentagon’s war clique (Ahmad Chalabi), the CIA’s hired terrorist leader (Iyad Allawi), and assorted Iranian and Israeli agents were carefully hedged with doubts, caveats and qualifications from U.S and UK intelligence officials. But Cheney and his frontman were having none of that sissy caveat stuff. As one CIA officer revealed to investigator James Bamford: "We were told if the president wants a war, it’s your job to give him a reason to go to war." As ordered, cooked intelligence was then served up piping hot.

Bush, Blair, Cheney and the rest knew all of this when they made their decision to launch what the Nuremberg Tribunal called "the supreme international crime": aggressive war. Now they are openly planning a new blitzkrieg to crush all resistance to their profit-seeking conquest: an assault conveniently set after Bush’s re-installation as frontman which they know will churn through countless innocent bodies like a meat grinder.

So when they stand before the world to justify the coming outrage, remember this, and hold to it: everything they say about their war is a lie. And it has been from the beginning.

CHRIS FLOYD is a columnist for the Moscow Times and a regular contributor to CounterPunch. His new book, Empire Burlesque: The Secret History of the Bush Regime, is now available at www.globaleyefloyd.com.