Wednesday, July 14, 2004
We Were Right Wrong Financially Sound To Go Into Iraq
Amid reports of flawed intelligence, exaggerated claims, and secret documents, this article from the L.A. Times finally reveals the truth about our reasons for war in Iraq.
As is usually the case, it was about money. Numerous blogs have been pushing this idea for months now; Michael Moore even alluded to this in Fahrenheit 9/11; now, a major newspaper. Could our media be turning a corner? Doubtful.
Do you remember the Oliver Stone movie JFK? Donald Sutherland's character, known only as X, was a former Black Operatives official who stated that war equals money. This has never been more true than it is now. Companies like Lockheed/Martin made billions in the destruction of Iraq and now companies like Halliburton are making billions in the reconstruction.
Energy companies stand to benefit greatly from the U.S. friendly Iraqi government's access to the country's large oil reserves. Now we don't know anyone in the White House that has an interest in oil reserves. Our National Security Advisor didn't sit on the board of Chevron or anything like that. Our Vice President didn't oversee the operation of any company making a profit from this war.
To quote the article: "We see no conflict of interest in using our knowledge and contacts in Iraq that we developed through our previous work with the INC to support economic development in Iraq."
- In the months and years leading up to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, they marched together in the vanguard of those who advocated war.
As lobbyists, public relations counselors and confidential advisors to senior federal officials, they warned against Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, praised exiled leader Ahmad Chalabi, and argued that toppling Saddam Hussein was a matter of national security and moral duty.
Now, as fighting continues in Iraq, they are collecting tens of thousands of dollars in fees for helping business clients pursue federal contracts and other financial opportunities in Iraq. For instance, a former Senate aide who helped get U.S. funds for anti-Hussein exiles who are now active in Iraqi affairs has a $175,000 deal to advise Romania on winning business in Iraq and other matters.
And the ease with which they have moved from advocating policies and advising high government officials to making money in activities linked to their policies and advice reflects the blurred lines that often exist between public and private interests in Washington. In most cases, federal conflict-of-interest laws do not apply to former officials or to people serving only as advisors.
As is usually the case, it was about money. Numerous blogs have been pushing this idea for months now; Michael Moore even alluded to this in Fahrenheit 9/11; now, a major newspaper. Could our media be turning a corner? Doubtful.
Do you remember the Oliver Stone movie JFK? Donald Sutherland's character, known only as X, was a former Black Operatives official who stated that war equals money. This has never been more true than it is now. Companies like Lockheed/Martin made billions in the destruction of Iraq and now companies like Halliburton are making billions in the reconstruction.
Energy companies stand to benefit greatly from the U.S. friendly Iraqi government's access to the country's large oil reserves. Now we don't know anyone in the White House that has an interest in oil reserves. Our National Security Advisor didn't sit on the board of Chevron or anything like that. Our Vice President didn't oversee the operation of any company making a profit from this war.
To quote the article: "We see no conflict of interest in using our knowledge and contacts in Iraq that we developed through our previous work with the INC to support economic development in Iraq."
