Bush's CIA Creating A 'New Saddam' To Take Over?
 

http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a2574.htm

The Voice of the White House

Washington, D.C., November 20, 2006: ?The word is slowly working its way downwards that Bush has no intentions of disengaging in Iraq. He will never disengage in Iraq. He will temporize, lie, talk out of both sides of his mouth at the same time but he will not leave Iraq. He might not get the odious Bolton in as U.S. Ambassador to the UN nor get a bill passed to give him the green light to tap all of our phones but he will never leave Iraq.

There is growing concern and even consternation in the ranks of the Weekend Warriors and their families that NG members are being activated to be sent to Iraq for some nutty ?Final Attack? that Bush and Cheney have dreamed up. If they come home before Bush?s term expires, it will be in rubber bags. I said before that as long as Bush is in the Oval Office, our men will continue to die in Iraq and Afghanistan.

This afternoon I had lunch with a CIA operative who was telling me, in hushed tones, that we were going to put an Iraqi general officer up to leading a putsch against the present régime there. We have picked him out, bribed the hell out of him and hope, fingers crossed, that he will establish the same control Saddam had. Seems the new government, supposedly in our pocket, isn?t, and Bush is screaming for them to go. The idea is for the military to take over, kill off all the politicians, Shiite and Sunni alike, totally, and then run the country as we want them to. And we get dibs on the oil!

Saddam used to work with the CIA so we should have left him in place. How many dead to learn that lesson??

there is no money in Saddam... :1orglaugh

I thought Cheney was already gone

The "Rothschild Formula";

1. War is the ultimate discipline to any government. If it can successfully meet the challenge of war, it will survive. If it cannot, it will perish. All else is secondary. The sanctity of its laws, the prosperity of its citizens, and the solvency of its treasury will be quickly sacrificed by any government in its primal act of self-survival.

2. All that is necessary, therefore, to insure that a government will maintain or expand its debt is to involve it in war or the threat of war. The greater the threat and the more destructive the war, the greater the need for debt.

3. To involve a country in war or the threat of war, it will be necessary for it to have enemies with credible military might. If such enemies already exist, all the better. If they exist but lack military strength, it will be necessary to provide them money to build their war machine. If an enemy does not exist at all, then it will be necessary to create one by financing the rise of a hostile regime.

4. The ultimate obstacle is a government which declines to finance wars through debt. Although this seldom happens, when it does it will be necessary to encourage internal political opposition, insurrection, or revolution to replace that government with one that is more compliant to our will. The assassination of heads of state could play an important role in this process.

5. No nation can be allowed to remain militarily stronger than its adversaries, for that could lead to peace and a reduction of debt. To accomplish this balance of power, it may be necessary to finance both sides of the conflict. Unless one of the combatants is hostile to our interests and, therefore, must be destroyed, neither side should be allowed a decisive victory or defeat. While we must always proclaim the virtues of peace, the unspoken objective is perpetual war.

alright - as much as some may dislike Bush and even I have a problem with his methods - this whole statement has a shitload of holes in it. First off - NO FUCKING CIA operative is going to tell YOU or anyone about sensitive material. They won't even tell their wives of what's going on in the office.

Secondly, Bush and the VP do not have a "get out of jail" free card when it comes to making decisions. The House and Senate belong to the democrats and more of the republicans are standing up against Bush. NO president can simply do whatever the hell he wants forever - that is what democracy is all about !!

Third - this war is NOT just about the USA - but the world is involved. As much as you may think that Americans can pull the wool over anyones eyes and get away with it - other governments will know if there is tampering going on in Iraq and stop any manipulation eventually.

In the end whatever evil and injustice has been done it will be corrected - remember they now have something called elections - so if Bush has rigged it so that a leader of his choosing is in power now - he will be gone shortly and a new leader that may not be manipulated will take over.

Finally after looking at the site you gave - I find it hard to believe honest news worthy non-biased reporting can be done by non-professionals who hide behind a 'hotmail' account. this sounds like a website created by someone who needs attention and is a theorist.

hmmmm...checking out the article...

that is RUMSFELD .....

.. and this is nothing to surprise anybody ... it is the modus operandi of the CIA in " third world " countries.