Skip to content

PNAC Cabal Warns Congress to Back Off Libya – Fear of Terror Makes People Stupid – Obama Signs Agenda 21 Related Executive Order

June 22, 2011

PNAC Cabal Warns Congress To Back Off Over Libya

  • The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Infowars.com Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store

Neocon group calls for increase in military action against Qaddafi

PNAC Cabal Warns Congress To Back Off Over Libya 010311top
Image: Wikimedia Commons

Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
June 22, 2011

The chicken hawk neoconservatives that make up the Project For A New American Century cabal have written on open letter to House Republicans warning them not to reduce or cut funding for U.S. involvement in the military aggression against Libya or face becoming an ” irresolute” nation.

The group, now re-named The Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI), also claims that though it shares with Congress “concerns” over the conduct and justification of the military mission, “The problem is not that the President has done too much… but that he has done too little to achieve the goal of removing Qaddafi from power.”

Last week, the House voted to prohibit the use of funds for American military operations in Libya, following an amendment, introduced by Democratic representative Brad Sherman from California, invoking the War Powers Resolution, a 1973 law that limits presidential powers on sending troops abroad into combat zones without the consent of Congress.

The amendment was part of a military appropriations bill that is still to be approved as a whole. The measure is also still to be approved by the Senate.

In response, earlier this week, forty-one PNAC alumni, including Paul Wolfowitz, James Woolsey, Karl Rove, William Kristol, Liz Cheney and Robert Kagan, signed the letter (PDF) stating:

“The United States should be leading in this effort, not trailing behind our allies. We should be doing more to help the Libyan opposition, which deserves our support. We should not be allowing ourselves to be held hostage to U.N. Security Council resolutions and irresolute allies.”

In what is clearly a veiled threat, the group called on the United States to “see this effort in Libya through to its conclusion,” adding: ” For the United States and NATO to be defeated by Muammar al-Qaddafi would suggest that American leadership and resolution were now gravely in doubt—a conclusion that would undermine American influence and embolden our nation’s enemies.”

They urged Members of Congress to fully support U.S. military involvement in Libya and exhibit “moral leadership despite political pressures to do otherwise.”

The full text of the letter and list of signatories appears at the foot of this article.

Almost all signatories of the PNAC letter are also members of the Council on Foreign Relations, still effectively the steering committee on U.S. foreign policy.

PNAC/FPI has been pushing for regime change in Libya since the beginning, before military operations even started. The group wrote a similar letter to the president in late February, calling for immediate military action to help bring down the Libyan government.

Bill Kristol said at the time that he wished the U.S. would send in ground troops “sooner rather than later.” adding, “we cannot leave Gaddafi in power, and we won’t leave Gaddafi in power.”

As we have recently documented, Infowars has received alarming reports from within the ranks of military stationed at Ft. Hood, Texas confirming plans to initiate a full-scale U.S.-led ground invasion in Libya and deploy troops by October.

In pursuing a continued military assault on Libya, Obama is following orders just like Bush did before him from the same neocons that called for domination of the Middle East and North Africa on the back of “a new Pearl Harbor,” just one year before 9/11.

Everything that has transpired since 9/11 has been an ongoing fulfillment of the PNAC Statement of Principles.

——————————————————————

An Open Letter to House Republicans

We thank you for your leadership as Congress exercises its Constitutional responsibilities on the issue of America’s military actions in Libya.  We are gravely concerned, however, by news reports that Congress may consider reducing or cutting funding for U.S. involvement in the NATO-led military operations against the oppressive regime of Libyan dictator Muammar al-Qaddafi.  Such a decision would be an abdication of our responsibilities as an ally and as the leader of the Western alliance.  It would result in the perpetuation in power of a ruthless dictator who has ordered terrorist attacks on the United States in the past, has pursued nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, and who can be expected to return to these activities should he survive.  To cut off funding for current efforts would, in short, be profoundly contrary to American interests.

We share the concerns of many in Congress about the way in which the Obama administration has conducted and justified this operation.  The problem is not that the President has done too much, however, but that he has done too little to achieve the goal of removing Qaddafi from power.  The United States should be leading in this effort, not trailing behind our allies.  We should be doing more to help the Libyan opposition, which deserves our support.  We should not be allowing ourselves to be held hostage to U.N. Security Council resolutions and irresolute allies.

What would be even worse, however, would be for the United States to become one of those irresolute allies.  The United States must see this effort in Libya through to its conclusion.  Success is profoundly in our interests and in keeping with our principles as a nation.  The success of NATO’s operations will influence how other Middle Eastern regimes respond to the demands of their people for more political rights and freedoms.  For the United States and NATO to be defeated by Muammar al-Qaddafi would suggest that American leadership and resolution were now gravely in doubt—a conclusion that would undermine American influence and embolden our nation’s enemies.

In Speaker Boehner’s June 14, 2011, letter to President Obama, he wrote that he believes “in the moral leadership our country can and should exhibit, especially during such a transformational time in the Middle East.”  We share that belief, and feel that now is the time for Congress to exhibit that moral leadership despite political pressures to do otherwise.

Sincerely,

  Elliott Abrams Bruce Pitcairn Jackson Danielle Pletka
  Gary Bauer Ash Jain John Podhoretz
  Max Boot Frederick Kagan Stephen G. Rademaker
  Ellen Bork Robert Kagan Karl Rove
  Scott Carpenter Lawrence Kaplan Randy Scheunemann
  Liz Cheney William Kristol Gary Schmitt
  Seth Cropsey Robert Lieber Dan Senor
  Thomas Donnelly Tod Lindberg Michael Singh
  Eric Edelman Michael Makovsky Henry D. Sokolski
  Jamie Fly Ann Marlowe Marc Thiessen
  Reuel Marc Gerecht Clifford D. May Kenneth Weinstein
  John Hannah Joshua Muravchik Paul Wolfowitz
  William Inboden Martin Peretz R. James Woolsey

——————————————————————

Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.net, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham in England.

——————————————————————————

 

Fear of Terror Makes People Stupid

  • The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Infowars.com Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store

Washington’s Blog
June 22, 2011

Scientists note that fear of terrorism makes people stupid.

As I’ve repeatedly noted, FBI agents and CIA intelligence officials, constitutional law expert professor Jonathan Turley, Time Magazine, Keith Olbermann and the Washington Post have all said that U.S. government officials “were trying to create an atmosphere of fear in which the American people would give them more power”.

Indeed, the former Secretary of Homeland Security – Tom Ridge – admits that he was pressured to raise terror alerts to help Bush win reelection.

In the real world, as the National Safety Council notes:

– You are 17,600 times more likely to die from heart disease than from a terrorist attack

– You are 12,571 times more likely to die from cancer than from a terrorist attack

– You are 11,000 times more likely to die in an airplane accident than from a terrorist plot involving an airplane

– You are 1048 times more likely to die from a car accident than from a terrorist attack

–You are 404 times more likely to die in a fall than from a terrorist attack

– You are 87 times more likely to drown than die in a terrorist attack

– You are 13 times more likely to die in a railway accident than from a terrorist attack

–You are 12 times more likely to die from accidental suffocation in bed than from a terrorist attack

–You are 9 times more likely to choke to death on your own vomit than die in a terrorist attack

–You are 8 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist

–You are 8 times more likely to die from accidental electrocution than from a terrorist attack

– You are 6 times more likely to die from hot weather than from a terrorist attack

(Moreover, the chair of the 9/11 Commission said that the attack was preventable).

Indeed, much of our debt is due to the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and elsewhere.

And yet the top American military and intelligence officials say that debt is the main threat to our national security. See this and this.

So by over-reacting, we are causing real, substantial and lasting damage to our country. (It is admitted by Bush, Cheney and others that the Iraq war was actually about oil, and the Afghanistan war was planned before 9/11, but this essay takes at face value the government’s claims that the wars have been for self-defense.)

Reason noted in 2006:

Already, security measures—pervasive ID checkpoints, metal detectors, and phalanxes of security guards—increasingly clot the pathways of our public lives. It’s easy to overreact when an atrocity takes place—to heed those who promise safety if only we will give the authorities the “tools” they want by surrendering to them some of our liberty. As President Franklin Roosevelt in his first inaugural speech said, “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself— nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.” However, with risks this low there is no reason for us not to continue to live our lives as though terrorism doesn’t matter—because it doesn’t really matter. We ultimately vanquish terrorism when we refuse to be terrorized.

In April, Reason pointed out:

“Many people will focus, much of the time, on the emotionally perceived severity of the outcome, rather than on its likelihood.” They add, “With respect to risks of injury or harm, vivid images and concrete pictures of disaster can ‘crowd out’ the cognitive activity required to conclude and consider the fact that the probability of disaster is really small.” Activating the emotional centers in the amygdala shuts down the operation of the executive functions of the pre-frontal cortex. Taking advantage of this flaw in reasoning, the researchers observe, “In this light, it should not be surprising that our public figures and our cause advocates often describe tragic outcomes. Rarely do we hear them quote probabilities.” In other words, politicians and activists deploy sob stories to scare the public into demanding regulations on activities they dislike.

***

“If we look across dozens of cases, we can observe a pattern in which salient but extremely low probability risks are sometimes met with excessive responses,”

***

Satirist H.L. Mencken memorably summarized this democratic dynamic: “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

———————————————————————

 

Obama Signs Agenda 21-Related Executive Order

| Print |  E-mail
Written by Raven Clabough   
Wednesday, 22 June 2011 12:04
 

President Obama signed his 86th executive order (13575) on June 9, which established the White House Rural Council (WHRC). According to The Blaze, the Executive Order seems to be in line with the United Nations radical Agenda 21, as it is designed “to begin taking control over almost all aspects of the lives of 16 percent of the American people.”

Evidence of this can be found in Section One of the Executive Order, which reads:

Section 1. Policy. Sixteen percent of the American population lives in rural counties. Strong, sustainable rural communities are essential to winning the future and ensuring American competitiveness in the years ahead. These communities supply our food, fiber, and energy, safeguard our natural resources, and are essential in the development of science and innovation. Though rural communities face numerous challenges, they also present enormous economic potential. The Federal Government has an important role to play in order to expand access to the capital necessary for economic growth, promote innovation, improve access to health care and education, and expand outdoor recreational activities on public lands.

As the Executive Order references “sustainable rural communities,” it raises a few eyebrows, since that is one of the key phrases found in the UN plan for sustainable development known as Agenda 21. The order admits that it intends to seize greater power over “food, fiber, and energy,” items that are key to human sustenance.

The mission and function of the White House Rural Council, according to the Executive Order, is as follows: “The Council shall work across executive departments, agencies, and offices to coordinate development of policy recommendations to promote economic prosperity and quality of life in rural America, and shall coordinate my Administration’s engagement with rural communities.”

The order has no qualms about revealing the levels of authority it hopes to achieve. In order to reach the mission set out, the order states it will “make recommendations to the President, through the Director of the Domestic Policy Council and the Director of the National Economic Council, on streamlining and leveraging Federal investments in rural areas, where appropriate, to increase the impact of Federal dollars and create economic opportunities to improve the quality of life in rural America.”

Analyzing the language of the document, The Blaze questions, “is there a hint that a ‘rural stimulus plan’ might be in the making? Will the Federal government start pumping money into farmlands under the guise of creating ‘economic opportunities to improve the quality of life in rural America?’ ”

The order also states that the WHRC will “coordinate and increase the effectiveness of Federal engagement with rural stakeholders, including agricultural organizations, small businesses, education and training institutions, healthcare providers, telecommunications services providers, research and land grant institutions, law enforcement, State, local, and tribal governments, and nongovernmental organizations regarding the needs of rural America.”

In other words, the federal government will seemingly control every aspect of rural America.

The order’s mention of “nongovernmental organizations” (NGOs) should be disconcerting, as NGOs are unelected, often government-funded organizations that are key to Agenda 21.

Executive Order 13575 asserts that the WHRC will “coordinate Federal efforts directed toward the growth and development of geographic regions that encompass both urban and rural areas, and identify and facilitate rural economic opportunities associated with energy development, outdoor recreation, and other conservation-related activities.”

As observed by The Blaze, “When did outdoor recreation become a conservation-related activity?”

So who will be heading these opportunistic efforts? The following is a list of members who will be serving on the new council, which will be headed by Tom Vilsack, the current Secretary of Agriculture:

(1) the Department of the Treasury; Timothy Geithner

(2) the Department of Defense; Robert Gates

(3) the Department of Justice; Eric Holder

(4) the Department of the Interior; Ken Salazar

(5) the Department of Commerce; Gary Locke

(6) the Department of Labor; Hilda Solis

(7) the Department of Health and Human Services; Kathleen Sebelius

(8) the Department of Housing and Urban Development; Shaun Donovan

(9) the Department of Transportation; Ray LaHood

(10) the Department of Energy; Dr. Steven Chu

(11) the Department of Education; Arne Duncan

(12) the Department of Veterans Affairs; Eric Shinseki

(13) the Department of Homeland Security; Janet Napolitano

(14) the Environmental Protection Agency; Lisa Jackson

(15) the Federal Communications Commission; Michael Copps

(16) the Office of Management and Budget; Peter Orszag

(17) the Office of Science and Technology Policy; John Holdren

(18) the Office of National Drug Control Policy; R. Gil Kerlikowske

(19) the Council of Economic Advisers; Austan Goolsbee

(20) the Domestic Policy Council; Melody Barnes (former VP at Center for American Progress)

(21) the National Economic Council; Gene B. Sperling

(22) the Small Business Administration; Karen Mills

(23) the Council on Environmental Quality; Nancy Sutley

(24) the White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs; Valerie Jarrett

(25) the White House Office of Cabinet Affairs; and such other executive branch departments, agencies, and offices as the President or Secretary of Agriculture may, from time to time, designate. Chris Lu (or virtually anyone to be designated by the 24 people named above).

The Blaze says of the list, “It appears that not a single department in the federal government has excluded from the new White House Rural Council, and the wild card option in number 25 gives the president and the agricultural secretary the option to designate anyone to serve on this powerful council.”

Even more notable than the levels of power being achieved by the creation of this new council is the various connections to Agenda 21.

For example, Valerie Jarrett served as a member on the board of the Local Initiatives Support Coalition (LISC), which uses the language of Agenda 21 and ICLEI as their webpage descriptively explains the organization’s work to build “sustainable communities.”

Likewise, Melody Barnes is the former Vice President of the George Soros-funded Center for American Progress. Soros is a prime advocate of Agenda 21 and in fact, his Open Society provided $2,147,415 to ICLEI.

Additionally, Hilda Solis and Nancy Sutley, through their environmental endeavors, appear to be connected to Agenda 21. In 2000, Solis received an award for her work on “Environmental Justice.” Sutley served on the Los Angeles Metropolitan Water District and supported the low-flow toilets, which are now being revealed as costing more money and creating an odor problem in the city of San Francisco.

Finally, the timing of the Executive Order is a bit suspicious, since the administration is meeting with a number of Agenda 21 operatives at the end of the month. ICLEI reports:

ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA (ICLEI USA) and U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) today announced the launch of the National Press Club Leadership Speaker Seriesto be held on June 28. The event’s inaugural keynote speaker will be the Honorable Sha Zukang, Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20), whose keynote address, The Road to Rio+20, will explain the role of key global and national stakeholders, and the impact and vision of this historic conference.

Fortunately, Americans are becoming increasingly aware of the radical agenda being pushed by the U.N. and supported by this government, and have hosted a number of anti-ICLEI rallies this week, with more planned in the future.

Advertisements
No comments yet

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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: