Dog Skin Report: Back To The Future

EDITOR'S NOTE: The following is a concatenation of recent emails received from the Dog Skin Report - "Political pointers for those with a keen sense of smell". The Dog Skin Report is a fantastic free news and commentary by email service available via links at the end of this item. Each item consists of a brief introduction from the Top Dog followed by a link – so in other words it is a blog – an email blog, and a goodun. – The Scoop Editor

Friends,

I think today is a good time to examine some of the things that were said during the run-up to the Iraq war, and in it's early days. Here's the first. Ladies and Gentlemen, presenting Richard Perle, in his own words, on March 21, 2003, just over a year ago:

Warmest regards,
Top Dog

Thank God for the death of the UN
Its abject failure gave us only anarchy. The world needs order
Richard Perle
Friday March 21, 2003
The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,918812,00.html

Saddam Hussein's reign of terror is about to end. He will go quickly, but not alone: in a parting irony, he will take the UN down with him. Well, not the whole UN. The "good works" part will survive, the low-risk peacekeeping bureaucracies will remain, the chatterbox on the Hudson will continue to bleat. What will die is the fantasy of the UN as the foundation of a new world order. As we sift the debris, it will be important to preserve, the better to understand, the intellectual wreckage of the liberal conceit of safety through international law administered by international institutions.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,918812,00.html

Friends,

As I mentioned in Part 1 (Richard Perle), today is a good time to examine some of the things that were said during the run-up to the Iraq war, and in it's early days. Here's Part 2: Ladies and Gentlemen, presenting Colin Powell, in his own words, on March 26, 2003, just over a year ago:

Warmest regards,
Top Dog

U.S. Says Will Not Cede Control of Iraq to U.N.
Wed Mar 26, 5:20 PM ET
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=584&ncid=584&e=4&u=/nm/20030326/pl_nm/iraq_usa_un_dc

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States will not cede control of Iraq to the United Nations if and when it overthrows President Saddam Hussein, Secretary of State Colin Powell said on Wednesday.

"We didn't take on this huge burden with our coalition partners not to be able to have a significant dominating control over how it unfolds in the future," Powell told a House of Representatives subcommittee.

"We would not support ... essentially handing everything over to the U.N. for someone designated by the U.N. to suddenly become in charge of this whole operation," he added.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=584&ncid=584&e=4&u=/nm/20030326/pl_nm/iraq_usa_un_dc

Friends,

As I mentioned in Part 1 (Richard Perle) and Part 2 (Colin Powell), today is a good time to examine some of the things that were said during the run-up to the Iraq war, and in it's early days. Here's Part 3: Ladies and Gentlemen, presenting Ken Adelman, in his own words, on February 13, 2002, just over two years ago:

Warmest regards,
Top Dog

Cakewalk In Iraq
By Ken Adelman
Wednesday, February 13, 2002; Page A27
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A1996-2002Feb12?language=printer

Even before President Bush had placed Iraq on his "axis of evil," dire warnings were being sounded about the danger of acting against Saddam Hussein's regime.

Two knowledgeable Brookings Institution analysts, Philip H. Gordon and Michael E. O'Hanlon, concluded that the United States would "almost surely" need "at least 100,000 to 200,000" ground forces [op-ed, Dec. 26, 2001]. Worse: "Historical precedents from Panama to Somalia to the Arab-Israeli wars suggest that . . . the United States could lose thousands of troops in the process."

I agree that taking down Hussein would differ from taking down the Taliban. And no one favors "a casual march to war."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A1996-2002Feb12?language=printer

Friends,

For Part 4 of Back to the Future, we will revisit a message I sent out over a year ago, on April 2, 2003.

Next week Bob Woodward's latest book will be out. It apparently says that Bush made the decision to invade Iraq in November 2001.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/17/international/middleeast/17BOOK.html?ei=5062&en=ac0ce4ad7f9d6f19&ex=1082779200&partner=GOOGLE&pagewanted=print&position=

Allow me to quote Al Franken: "LIAR!"

Woodward has long been a stooge of the military, as anyone who has read "Silent Coup" knows. See the following books:

http://dogskinreport.com/books-dog-eared.htm#deep_truth

http://www.historyamericas.com/Silent_Coup_The_Removal_of_a_President_0312051565.html

Here's a brief bit from an online review of Silent Coup:

The other primary bombshell dropped in "Silent Coup" is the very under-reported fact that journalist Bob Woodward was, astonishingly, a former Naval Officer involved in extremely sensitive communications intelligence, and that Woodward almost certainly briefed Alexander Haig and others in the Nixon White House in an official capacity prior to his departure from the Navy and rapid rise to the unlikely position of star reporter for the Post, and, conveniently, the lead newsbreaker in the Watergate matter! This direct link between Woodward and the Nixon White House should have disqualified Woodward from reporting on the matter. It did not disqualify him, because those who should have known about the link apparently either didn't know, or didn't care.

Which brings us to the current Woodward book. The article below directly contradicts it, suggesting that plans for the invasion of Iraq began immediately after 9/11, an account incidentally, confirmed by Richard Clarke and Paul O'Neil. Indeed, if one digs into the bowels of this administration, one finds the invasion of Iraq to date from 1997, and the Project for the New American Century. We have written about this several times in the past. Here we find the entire merry band of plotters. Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Armitage, Abrams, Perle, Bennett, Woolsey, Bolton, Kristol, Jeb Bush, Steve Forbes, Dan Quayle, Lewis Libby, etc. arguing in 1998 for an invasion of Iraq.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm

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

Yes indeed, this is a fine bunch. They got their invasion, under the cover of 9/11. Now it's time to reel them in with their own words.

Warmest regards,
Top Dog

U.S.-Led Coalition Planned Iraq Invasion More Than A Year Ago
Big News Network.com Wednesday 2nd April, 2003

http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/?sid=5503e0720ce3e19c/

The United States, Britain, and Australia were planning an invasion of Iraq more than a year ago, long before U.S. President Bush raised the issue with the United Nations.

The revelation was made in an article published Wednesday, in the well-respected weekly Australian publication, The Bulletin.

At a meeting in early April last year, at the time of the Queen Mother's funeral in London, Prime Minister Blair reportedly asked the Australian Prime Minister John Howard, the Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien, and New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark, if they would join a United States-led attack on Iraq.

Unbeknownst to Chretian and Clark, Australia had already become part of a U.S.-British-Australian military axis, that had set it's sights on removing the Saddam Hussein regime.

http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/?sid=5503e0720ce3e19c/

© Scoop Media