9-11: The "New Pearl Harbor" of the Zionist War Plan
by Christopher Bollyn
December 18, 2002
As a presidential candidate, George W. Bush’s inner cabal of Zionist war hawks
signed a secret Middle East war plan in the summer of 2000 that recognized that
America would need to experience a “new Pearl Harbor” if their drastic plans to
reshape U.S. defense policy to suit Israel’s agenda were to succeed.
The cabal of war fanatics currently advising the White House secretly planned a
“transformation” of defense policy years ago, calling for war against Iraq and
huge increases in military spending. A “catalyzing event – like a new Pearl
Harbor” was seen as necessary to bring about the desired transformation of the
U.S. military.
The huge increases in U.S. military spending that have occurred since the terror
attacks of September 11, 2001, were planned before President George W. Bush was
elected by the same men who are pushing the administration’s “war on terrorism”
and the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
The huge increases in U.S. military spending that have occurred since the terror
attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, were planned before President George W. Bush was
elected by the same men who are pushing the administration's "war on terrorism"
and the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Billions of dollars in additional
defense spending are but the first step in the group's long-term plan to
transform the U.S. military into a global army enforcing a terroristic and
bloody Pax Americana around the world.
A neo-conservative Washington-based organization known as the Project for the
New American Century (PNAC), funded by three foundations closely tied to Persian
Gulf oil, weapons, and defense industries, drafted the war plan for U.S. global
domination through military power. One of the organization's documents clearly
shows that Bush and his most senior cabinet members had already planned an
attack on Iraq before he took power in January 2001.
The PNAC was founded in the spring of 1997 by the well-known Zionist
neo-conservatives Robert Kagan and William Kristol of the Weekly Standard. The
PNAC is part of the New Citizenship Project, whose chairman is also William
Kristol, and is described as "a non-profit, educational organization whose goal
is to promote American global leadership." Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeb
Bush, and Paul Wolfowitz signed a Statement of Principles of the PNAC on June 3,
1997, along with many of the other current members of Bush's "war cabinet."
Wolfowitz was one of the directors of PNAC until he joined the Bush
administration.
The group's essential demand was for hefty increases in defense spending. "We
need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our
global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future,"
the statement's first principle reads. The increase in defense spending is to
bring about two of the other principles: "to challenge regimes hostile to our
interests and values" and "to accept responsibility for America's unique role in
preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our
prosperity, and our principles."
A subsequent PNAC plan entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies,
Forces and Resources for a New Century," reveals that the current members of
Bush's cabinet had already planned, before the 2000 presidential election, to
take military control of the Gulf region whether Saddam Hussein was in power or
not. The 90-page PNAC document from September 2000 says: "The United States has
for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security.
While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification,
the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the
issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."
"Even should Saddam pass from the scene," the plan says U.S. military bases in
Saudi Arabia and Kuwait will remain, despite domestic opposition in the Gulf
states to the permanent stationing of U.S. troops. Iran, it says, "may well
prove as large a threat to U.S. interests as Iraq has."
"A NEW PEARL HARBOR"
A "core mission" for the transformed U.S. military is to "fight and decisively
win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars," according to the PNAC. The
strategic "transformation" of the U.S. military into an imperialistic force of
global domination would require a huge increase in defense spending to "a
minimum level of 3.5 to 3.8 percent of gross domestic product, adding $15
billion to $20 billion to total defense spending annually," the PNAC plan said.
"The process of transformation," the plan said, "is likely to be a long one,
absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl Harbor."
I asked Christopher Maletz, assistant director of the PNAC about what was meant
by the need for "a new Pearl Harbor." "They needed more money to up the defense
budget for raises, new arms, and future capabilities," Maletz said. "Without
some disaster or catastrophic event" neither the politicians nor the military
would have approved, he said.
The "new Pearl Harbor," in the form of the terror attacks of 9-11, provided the
necessary catalyst to put the global war plan into effect. Congress quickly
allocated $40 billion to fund the "war on terrorism" shortly after 9-11. A
Pentagon spokesman told me that $17.5 billion of that initial allocation went to
defense. The U.S. defense budget for 2002, including a $14.5 billion
supplement, came to $345.7 billion, a nearly 12 percent increase over the 2001
defense budget. Similar significant increases in defense spending are planned
for 2003 (to $365 billion) and 2004 (to at least $378 billion) in line with the
PNAC plan.
“TOTAL WAR”
Veteran journalist John Pilger recently wrote about one of PNAC's founding
members, Richard Perle: "I interviewed Perle when he was advising Reagan, and
when he spoke about 'total war,' I mistakenly dismissed him as mad," Pilger
wrote. "He recently used the term again in describing America's 'war on terror.'
'No stages,' he said. 'This is total war. We are fighting a variety of enemies.
There are lots of them out there. All this talk about first we are going to do
Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq . . . this is entirely the wrong way to go
about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it
entirely and we don't try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a
total war . . . our children will sing great songs about us years from now.' "
"This is a blueprint for U.S. world domination — a new world order of their
making," Tam Dalyell, British parliamentarian and critic of the war policy from
the Labor Party said. "These are the thought processes of fantasist Americans
who want to control the world. This is garbage from think-tanks stuffed with
chicken-hawks," Dalyell said, "men who have never seen the horror of war but are
in love with the idea of war. I am appalled that a British Labor Prime Minister
should have got into bed with a crew which has this moral standing."