Home
Archives
Subscribe
About Us
Contact Us
Links
Special Features
Cartoons
Submissions
 
Our Founding Documents
The United States Constitution
Bill of Rights
Amendments to the Constitution
The Federalist Papers
 
Attack on America
 
 
 

McClellan, Your Vote, Your Money, Energy and Deception in 2008

June 9, 2008


As the author of three books, it is obvious to me that the motivation and the timing for the release of former Bush press secretary Scott McClellan's book is a marketing strategy. As the Wall Street Journal points out, McClellan "had a revelation that the Administration used 'propaganda' to sell the war, though this means he himself was chief propaganda minister for three years during which he expressed no similar qualms. Mr. McClellan settles various personal scores, and in particular seems bitter about former deputy chief of staff Karl Rove. White House aides can defend themselves, and we'll let others speculate about Mr. McClellan's motives for turning on his friends.

"We'd merely note that the book's publisher is PublicAffairs, an imprint founded by left-wing editor Peter Osnos and which has published six books by George Soros. PublicAffairs is owned by Perseus Books, which is owned by Perseus LLC, a merchant bank whose board includes Democrats Richard Holbrooke and Jim Johnson, who is now doing Barack Obama's vice presidential vetting. One of Perseus's investment funds, Perseus-Soros Biopharmaceutical, is co-managed with Mr. Soros."

This is not a scenario for sharing truth. The timing and the comments about meetings he didn't attend appear to be connected to vengeance, money and fame. We are now supposed to believe he knows something he didn't know while working in the White House or, that he did know at the time and simply lied to the public about?

The facts are relatively simple: if Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, which he used against both Iran and the Kurds in the 1980s, why did the 105th Congress pass and President Bill Clinton sign Public Law 105-235 in August of 1998 which states: "Whereas Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threaten vital United States interests and international peace and security: Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Government of Iraq is in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations, and therefore the President is urged to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations."

Saddam Hussein's own generals believed he had weapons of mass destruction. In 2003 as American troops approached Baghdad, it was widely reported in the world media that once the "red line" around Baghdad encompassing the cities of Tuz Khurmatu, Bayji, Ar-Ramadi, Karbala, Al-Hillah, Al-Kut, and Al-Miqdadiyah was breached that Saddam would order the chemical weapons used, as they were against Kurds and Iranians.

If Saddam Hussein still had chemical weapons in 2003, why didn't he use them? For that matter, why didn't he use them in Desert Storm in 1991 to maintain his capture of Kuwait? According to my son, who was the battalion surgeon for the 1st Marine Battalion of the 7th Regiment that recaptured Kuwait City, there were two reasons why they were not used: (1) the speed the Marines moved against the Iraqi troops and (2) the U.S. Air Force blew up most of his chemical weapons in bombing raids. The chemical warning device on his ambulance, however, did go off numerous times, which indicated chemicals were still around.

It is almost a given in the year 2008 that whatever the problem, somehow it will be blamed on either George W. Bush, or the Republicans. On the other hand, I have received some information lately that points out there are others in the world that just might be the cause of some of our problems, especially the high price of oil. Somehow, that also is President Bush's fault, in spite of the fact that Al Gore strongly urged in his 1992 book, "Earth in Balance" to sharply increase the cost of gasoline in order to cut consumption" and in May of 2001 George W. Bush urged Congress to pass Energy Independence legislation. Congress has refused to do so for 71/2 years.

Max Whitmore wrote recently in Money News, "that 95 percent of what you hear about the dollar and oil is gibberish designed either to sell something or to bring influence to bear for political reasons. But, that has been going on for centuries and will never change. In this case, however, it is just that the stakes are far, far bigger."

For months I have been deluged with e-mail informing me that we are, or will soon be in a serious recession and that we need a savior who will "change" things in Washington. Only, so far I have not seen a very important first sign of recession - a serious drop in the number of jobs available. And, about the only "change" I am hearing about involves the confused politics of 1960s which caused de-funding the Vietnam War. That in turn led to the death of millions of people in Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam, expedited the communist take-over of Southeast Asia and destroyed much of the respect other nations once had for the USA.

Max Whitmore's observation about the price of gas is very much to the point in this election year. He observes: "The folks behind this push are the same ones that brought us the 1973-74 gas lines and changed the world's financial power centers forever. Only this time the reason for the move by these folks is quite different.

"The oil producers can see the handwriting on the wall. Oil will soon become just one of many power sources in the world. The so-called alternative fuel sources will force oil producers to reduce their price per barrel by a huge margin and for good in the next five to seven years. To "make hay while the sun shines" so to speak, the oil powers are using their huge money pools to run up prices that then translate into higher prices per barrel, even when nothing has changed, especially production costs.

"All the talk of running out of oil is nonsense. If we want it bad enough, we could do what the Nazis did in WWII and just make it in chemical plants. Did you know that German scientists did just that over 50 years ago and maintained their entire war machine with synthetic fuel?"

Ninety-two percent of Germany's aviation gasoline during WWII was made in German plants from coal. And, we don't even have to do that. The major media generally ignored a speech in Congress by my own Congressman, Chris Cannon, who pointed out that oil from shale in Utah, Colorado and Wyoming could be immediately available at about $30 a barrel. That would be about $100 less than OPEC is charging these days.

Our problem is not a shortage of oil, but the deception that has made it impossible to access our own vast oil resources, along with an incompetent Congress that has refused repeatedly to address the energy problem or pass the legislation needed to unlock America's energy resources. Rep. Cannon will shortly introduce a bill to immediately allow extracting oil from shale - so, if you are tired of paying nearly $4 a gallon for gas - tell your members of Congress that if they don't support efforts for the USA to become energy independent - you will work for a candidate who would vote for energy independence to take his or her place.

Copyright ©2008 Mary Mostert

 


Home Current Issue About Us Cartoons Submissions
Subscribe Contact Links Humor Archive Login
Please send any comments, web site suggestions, or problem reports to webmaster@conservativetruth.org