Exposing the ugly truth
about the Republican Party's diabolical plot to replace constitutional democracy with an oligarchic
It's the only rational explanation!
Why does the Republican Party zealously pursue policies so obviously counter to the best interests of ordinary Americans?
It can only be
Analysis of the News
Hall of Shame
Evil GOP Bastard of the Month
Prince of Darkness
Since the early 1990's, Perle and the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) has pushed for an American invasion of Iraq. The attacks of 9/11 pro-
Media Whores Online
Black Box Voting
People for the
for the Separation
of Church & State
All Hat No Cattle
Partisan Witch Hunt
Dubya's Dayly Diary
Since the New Deal, Republicans have been on the wrong side of every issue of concern to ordinary Americans; Social Security, the war in Vietnam, equal rights, civil liberties, church- state separation, consumer issues, public education, reproductive freedom, national health care, labor issues, gun policy, campaign-finance reform, the environment
and tax fairness. No political party could remain so consistently wrong by accident.
The only rational conclusion is that, despite their cynical "family values" propaganda, the Republican Party is a criminal conspiracy to betray the interests of the American people
in favor of plutocratic and corporate interests, and absolutist religious groups.
Why? Because they're evil GOP bastards!
Preemptive War continued
provided a convenient excuse to achieve Perle's imperial ambitions. He has also covered himself with glory as a lobbyist for the bankrupt Global Crossing. When journal- ist Sy Hersh revealed some of Perle's skullduggery, Perle threatened to sue him for libel. Instead, he resigned his Pentagon post after further revelations were publicized.
Support evilGOPbastards.com by using this link to purchase books and other merchandise from Amazon.com, or make a donation using the link at right.
A lot more can be accomplished with a kind word and a briefcase full of crisp hundred-dollar bills, than with just a kind word alone. Keep Scaife happy!
Bush & Iraq: A War in
Search of a Justification
A doctrine of "preemptive war"
will be detrimental to long-term
US national security interests.
March 1, 2003
All evidence points to an American offensive against Iraq beginning mid-to-late March. It's unlikely that a UN resolution will authorize this action. Even though a bare majority of the votes on the Security Council will have been successfully bought, a French, Chinese or Russian veto will scuttle any resolution author-
izing war -- favoring the less lethal (and thus, less destabilizing) policy of continued inspections and containment. This won't matter. US forces will attack Iraq anyway. Saddam Hussein will concentrate his forces in Baghdad and Basra -- necessitating bloody house-to-
house urban warfare, or more likely, devastating US airstrikes
on Iraq's civilian "human shields." The war will be quick, but the aftermath long and difficult.
The justification for this impending humanitarian disaster? That's a question the historians will have to puzzle through. We could offer the official Bush administration expla-
nations, but they're demonstrably false.
First among Bush's justifications
is that "The world changed after 9/11." That is indeed true, but it doesn't get us to an explanation of a policy that mandates: "If attack-
ed by X, retaliate against Y." To avoid having the obvious incohe-
rence of this policy exposed, the Bush political spin machine has labored mightily to associate Saddam Hussein with Osama Bin Laden. Unfortunately for the GOP propagandists, dissident elements in the British MI6 and CIA Senate testimony have exposed this assertion to be false.
Another oft-stated reason for Bush's attack on Iraq is "They've got weapons of mass destruction that they can provide to terrorist groups to use against us." That may be true, in that anything can happen in the realm of possibility. But rational governments base national defense strategies on probability -- not possibility.
The "evidence" for these assertions has been less than compelling. At the UN, Colin Powell resorted to artists' rendi-
tions of "mobile bio-warfare labs"
in tractor trailers constantly on the move (apparently the Iraqis aren't affected by Murphy's Law and don't worry about a possible catastrophe occurring due to a traffic mishap). A compound shown in a dramatic satellite photo was described by the secretary as a "terrorist chem-
icals and poison factory." Inter-
national journalists were invited to tour the dilapidated building and found no such facility.
Bush has repeatedly cited an "authoritative British intelligence report" that proved Iraq's menace to the region and the world. This too proved to be a fake -- copied and pasted from old magazine articles and other public sources -- but tweaking some of the original articles' mild language with more inflammatory terminology to emphasize the "threat."
The fact that Bush and Blair were forced to offer this plagiarized document indicates they had no "official" intelligence reports that support their claims. Furthermore, US intelligence has provided
no useful information to guide UN arms inspectors. If US intelligence had any credible evidence of Iraqi violations it would certainly be in the interests of the Bush adminis-
tration to reveal it to the UN inspec-
tors so they could go for the "gotcha" smoking gun. Instead
we get nothing but disinformation.
To recap: all of the justifications for war offered by the Bush administra-
tion have proved to be unverified at best, and utterly bogus at worst. As Tucker Carlson, the boyishly bow-tied Bush cheerleader on CNN's Crossfire squeals when confronted with these facts: "If all of these things are true, that means the president, vice-president, sec-
retary of state and secretary of defense are all lying," as if that possibility was so remote as to
In this brilliant demonstration of rhetorical ju-jitsu, GOP apologists like Carlson use the egregiousness of the truth to discredit anyone skeptical of Bush's justifications
While a majority of Americans is said to support Bush's Iraq policy, foreign governments have proved much less susceptible to the propaganda successfully employed by the Bush political team domes-
tically. As a result, US diplomats are resorting to bribery and threats to garner international support.
Even though it borders Iraq and presumably should feel most threatened by a dangerous Sad-
dam, Turkey has been haggling over the price of cooperation -- demanding up to $92 billion in grants and loans to allow the US
to stage operations from Turkish bases. As of March 1, the Turks have declined to allow American troops to open a Northern front
from their territory
If the stated reasons for the Iraq attack are false, what could the real purpose be? None of the rational possibilities bode well for long-range US interests. First and most obvious is oil. Capturing the world's second-most-productive oil fields is certainly a strategic objective of immediate economic benefit. However, such an act would rightfully brand us as a ruthless imperial power and ultimately be counter to US interests. Friendly Arab govern-
ments would fall due to popular outrage and Al Qaeda would undoubtedly grow more powerful.
If the conquest of Iraq isn't just an oil grab, an even more alarming possibility exists. If the Machiavellian master-
minds in the Bush administration (the same geniuses who forgot to allocate money for Afghanistan's stabilization and reconstruction in this year's budget) have a truly "coherent" policy, the invasion and occu-
pation of Iraq could merely be the first step in a series
of conquests. If the new Bush doctrine assumes that preemptive war is justified against any country that can possibly do us harm, surely Iran, Syria, Libya, Algeria, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan would also become targets
-- especially after unilateral US actions in Iraq further enflame religious and nationalist passions against us.
Another possible explanation for Bush's determination to go to war in Iraq is completely devoid of national security justifications. This crisis could have been manufactured just to enhance George W. Bush's political popularity. The actions of the Bush administration have been so shamefully deceptive that this possibility cannot be ignored.
As an unintended consequence of the Bush doctrine,
the comparison of the Bush administration's pragmatic response to the militarily potent North Korean nuclear threat versus the "total war" policy against a relatively weak Iraq will be instructive to every country on a potential US hit list. Those states will naturally begin crash programs to develop weapons of mass destruction as a deterrent against US invasion -- a proliferation nightmare disastrous for long-term American security interests.
Bush's doctrine of preemptive war violates the fundamen-
tal principle of all diplomacy and foreign policy: stability. Is there any doubt that a series of US invasions would lead to "tension" in China and Russia (along with the
rest of the planet)? It's not inconceivable that Gulf War II could escalate into WWIII. Do these guys really know what they're doing, or are they trying to send the message that we're just as homicidal as Al Qaeda?
Ironically, if just a fraction of the diplomatic efforts and money spent on Bush's designs on Iraq were to be expended on an equitable resolution of the festering Israeli/Palestinian conflict, the fundamental issue that motivates the Islamist terrorists that actually attacked
us on 9/11 would be eliminated.
As the war timer ticks down to H-Hour, Bush and his flacks are lecturing the UN about its relevance (i.e., willingness to rubberstamp US war policy), and demanding total Iraqi disarmament (so that we may
more easily invade their country). After evidence of Iraqi disarmament compliance had been demonstrated, Bush shifted to the non-UN-sanctioned demand for "regime change" through either coup or exile. Saddam won't abdicate, we will attack, and when presented with
certain defeat and death, Saddam will inflict the most deadly blows he can deliver.
The Iraqi people, whom President Bush often claims will be the object of a benevolent US liberation, will unfortu-
nately be trapped in the kill zone -- inconsequential collateral damage in a lethal contest of will between
Visit the highly recommended
Wage Slave Journal for their excellent "Score-
card of Evil" as well as other great content.
Need more proof that the Republicans are evil bastards?
Caught on Film: Bush Rhetoric Versus Reality
The October Surprise: The Reagan campaign committed treason against the US to ensure the defeat of Jimmy Carter in 1980, and got away with it
The Florida Republican Recount Riot: A Consortorium report on how paid GOP operatives circumvented the democratic process through mob violence
How heretical cult leader / convicted felon Sun Myung Moon achieved such influence over the Republican Party (and shameless televangelist lackeys like Jerry Falwell)
The GOP grand conspiracy begins: the abolition of the "Fairness Doctrine"
If it's about fairness, depend on Republicans to oppose it
Bush & Cheney corporate sleaze: The encyclopedia of Harken and Halliburton Scandals
List of influential right-wIng think tanks & foundations
"Our position is that whatever grievances a nation may have, however objectionable it finds the status quo, aggressive warfare is an illegal means for settling those grievances or for altering those conditions."
Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson,
the American prosecutor at the Nuremberg trials,
in his opening statement to the tribunal
From "Preventive War: The case against the war"
by Jonathan Schell
Support the Boycott of Rush Limbaugh's Advertisers
© 2002, 2003 evilGOPbastards.com -- All rights reserved.
Material herein (text and graphics) may be used for non-commercial purposes so long as they are unedited or unaltered, and the source, evilGOPbastards.com, is attributed.
The horrific reality behind the glib slogan of "regime