>I'm overposting, so vats nu? But I need to rebut the assertion that:
>"...this strategy was decided upon by the Council on Foreign Relations."
>
>I never said that, nor do I believe that they are the sole 'players'
>in a race to the bottom of the 'cultural and ethical sink'.
You quoted this approvingly:
At 4:46 PM -0800 2/26/06, Leigh Meyers wrote:
>Civil war is plan B (see below), and that plan is becoming
>an actuality as US forces lose the ground war in Iraq.
>
>So...
><...>
>Is the bombing of the Golden Mosque the final phase of a much
>broader strategy to inflame sectarian hatred and provoke civil war?
>
>Clearly, many Sunnis, Iranians, and political analysts seem to
>believe so. Even the Bush administration's own documents support the
>general theory that Iraq should be broken up into three separate
>pieces. But, is this proof that the impending civil war is the work
>of foreign provocateurs?
>
>The final confirmation of Washington's sinister plan was issued by
>Leslie Gelb, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, in a New
>York Times editorial on 11-25-03. The CFR is the ideological
>headquarters for America's imperial interventions providing the
>meager rationale that papers-over the massive bloodletting that
>inevitably follow. Gelb stated:
>
>"For decades, the United States has worshipped at the altar of a
>unified Iraqi state. Allowing all three communities within that
>false state to emerge at least as self-governing regions would be
>both difficult and dangerous. Washington would have to be very
>hard-headed and hard-hearted, to engineer this breakup. But such a
>course is manageable, even necessary, because it would allow us to
>find Iraq's future in its denied but natural past."
><...>
>http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12063.htm
>