Politics...Iraq...Old or New Agenda?

Just wanted to share something that has been around for a while.
Check out the website. It makes you wonder how deep the Rabbit hole
goes? The Matrix...? here is the site...Just think, A few came
together and said this is what we feel should be a priority. SLowly
but surely it became the agenda of a few became the agenda for a
nation, for a world. Peep the names below...How many now have
positions in Bush's cabinet, and within Federal Agencies?

By the Way, There has been NO talk of ASHCROFT lately. What in the
hell is he up to? We have the Patriot Act...Our attention has swayed
and refocused to the election. To Kerry repeating John Edwards' words
that Cheney thanked Edwards for during the vice presidential debate
regarding Cheney's lesbian daughter. BTW, It wasn't like Edwards or
Kerry outed her. Anyway, keep doing your own independent
investigation of truth. The Television is a tool used by those who
control it...It's not a truth box. Get another view of us, read
foreign press, news, etc.

Letter below taken from the following link:

http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm
__________________________________________________
______________________


January 26, 1998

The Honorable William J. Clinton
President of the United States
Washington, DC

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing you because we are convinced that current American
policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a
threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since
the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address,
you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for
meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to
enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S.
and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should
aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from
power.
We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but
necessary endeavor.

The policy of “containment” of Saddam Hussein has been
steadily
eroding over the

past several months. As recent events have demonstrated, we can no
longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War coalition to continue to
uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN
inspections. Our ability to ensure that Saddam Hussein is not
producing weapons of mass destruction, therefore, has substantially
diminished. Even if full inspections were eventually to resume, which
now seems highly unlikely, experience has shown that it is difficult
if not impossible to monitor Iraq’s chemical and biological
weapons
production. The lengthy period during which the inspectors will have
been unable to enter many Iraqi facilities has made it even less
likely that they will be able to uncover all of Saddam’s secrets.
As
a result, in the not-too-distant future we will be unable to determine
with any reasonable level of confidence whether Iraq does or does not
possess such weapons.

Such uncertainty will, by itself, have a seriously destabilizing
effect on the entire Middle East. It hardly needs to be added that if
Saddam does acquire the capability to deliver weapons of mass
destruction, as he is almost certain to do if we continue along the
present course, the safety of American troops in the region, of our
friends and allies like Israel and the moderate Arab states, and a
significant portion of the world’s supply of oil will all be put
at
hazard. As you have rightly declared, Mr. President, the security of
the world in the first part of the 21st century will be determined
largely by how we handle this threat.

Given the magnitude of the threat, the current policy, which depends
for its success upon the steadfastness of our coalition partners and
upon the cooperation of Saddam Hussein, is dangerously inadequate. The
only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that
Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass
destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake
military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it
means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now
needs to become the aim of American foreign policy.

We urge you to articulate this aim, and to turn your Administration's
attention to implementing a strategy for removing Saddam's regime from
power. This will require a full complement of diplomatic, political
and military efforts. Although we are fully aware of the dangers and
difficulties in implementing this policy, we believe the dangers of
failing to do so are far greater. We believe the U.S. has the
authority under existing UN resolutions to take the necessary steps,
including military steps, to protect our vital interests in the Gulf.
In any case, American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a
misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council.

We urge you to act decisively. If you act now to end the threat of
weapons of mass destruction against the U.S. or its allies, you will
be acting in the most fundamental national security interests of the
country. If we accept a course of weakness and drift, we put our
interests and our future at risk.

Sincerely,

Elliott Abrams Richard L. Armitage William J. Bennett

Jeffrey Bergner John Bolton Paula Dobriansky

Francis Fukuyama Robert Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad

William Kristol Richard Perle Peter W. Rodman

Donald Rumsfeld William Schneider, Jr. Vin Weber

Paul Wolfowitz R. James Woolsey Robert B. Zoellick