REVEALS MAJOR U.S. INTEREST IN IRAQ IS OIL
APOLOGIZES FOR WAR, BUT WANTS TO KEEP PRESENCE
YORK, Aug. 1, 2007---On the July 29, as a guest of Wolf Blitzer's "Late
Shays, a U.S. representative
from Connecticut, apologized for the War in Iraq, but said America's
energy interests would be served by a continued presence in Iraq.
Charlie Rangel, a U.S.
representative from Harlem, New York who shared
the TV podium with Shays, was surprised at Shays's frank
"I didn't make a good vote when I
voted to have our troops go to Iraq," Shays said.
was his usual calm and concilliatory-sounding self. He went on to make
a rather significant admission.
"Sixty-five percent of the world's energy is in this area. We just
can't walk away. We need to leave in a very methodical and sensible
way," Shays said.
then chimed in, "You know, this is the most honest
thing that's been said. If we
are concerned about the oil, if that's the reason we went there, then
forget all these weapons of mass destruction and Al Qaida 9/11.
And he said it. That's why we want the defensive military bases there.
It's all a question of oil. "
Shays then answered, "It's
about energy, Charlie."
Rangel said he thought Shays would eventually come around to supporting
withdrawal as the next election
Shays lamented that
there was not a more bipartisan effort to forge an agreement on Iraq.
But Rangel viewed this as a cop-out. Perhaps he saw Shay's
call for bipartisanship as just a way of skewing legislation more in
direction of the Bush administration's current policies.
Shays takes a rather negative stand toward Iran, a
peace-loving but oil-rich nation that Bush and his dangerous cronies
would love to
loot at the soonest possible moment. His remarks make me believe that
he is a "Council Baby,"
meaning that he is a member or fellow traveler of the Council
Foreign Relations (http://www.cfr.org/)
(CFR), a body that basically attempts to fashion foreign
policy in ways that are anti-democratic and deleterious to the United
States and the world. The CFR
people are masterful at making it look like they agree with you, while
truly taking a stand in the opposite direction. For example, an apology
for the invasion of Iraq is accompanied by a reason for the United
States to keep
troops there, the net effect being just a rubber stamp on the war.
Marvelous. This is Ms. Clinton's stand as well.
The reader may not be aware of it, but there is a sort of CFR party,
with its partisans sometimes falling in the Republican, and sometimes
in the Democratic, camp. They can be spotted a mile away. For example,
Colin Powell, whose name was often thrown around as possible
presidential material, is a CFR member. He really stood for nothing.
That's how you can spot them. Someone like Barak Obama, with tons of
money behind them that came virtually out of nowhere, is very likely a
CFR creation. The scent is strong. McCain is another. He tried to
straddle the fence and got
slammed in the crosscurrents.
These folks may seem to lose elections from time to time, but they
appear again, apparently unscathed, as CFR functionaries. A lost
election is considered a battle scar, but not by any means a bad mark
againt a CFRer. Jack Kemp, the once-conservative member of Congress, is
a good case in point. We know he seemed to leave the political arena a
long time ago, but he recently resurfaced as the head of a CFR study
group on Russia, mouthing policy prescriptions that ostensibly amounted
to keeping America's spy network in that country under the pretext of
fighting for democracy. Russian President Vladimir Putin would have
none of it.
We hope Shays resigns or distances himself from the Council on Foreign
Relations, adopts Mr.
Dennis Kucinich's plan http://kucinich.house.gov/Issues/Issue/?IssueID=3750
for withdrawal from Iraq, and takes a
productive and positive approach to U.S. relations with the
peace-loving Islamic nation of Iran.
Friends, I've read a few of Bush's recent executive orders, and
it appears that those who interfere with Administration policy in Iraq,
even by simply voicing opposition, may be held in violation of the
nation's national security and may be imprisoned under Bush's emergency
powers. Hope this doesn't alarm you.
Back to home page