By Chris Floyd

As the fog of war emanating from Washington spreads over the world, smothering us all in its impenetrable haze of posturing and propaganda, you must hold on to one hard fact, one demonstrable, incontrovertible truth:

The warmongers are liars.

This is not an opinion. It is a matter of public record.

The team now marshaling the overwhelming power of the United States toward a war of aggression against Iraq is largely the same group that directed the first Gulf War under the current president’s father. To whip up hatred and bloodlust for that earlier conflict, Dick Cheney, Colin Powell and other Bush operatives resorted to blatant deception, crude propaganda and outright perjury before Congress. And there is every sign that they’re doing it again.

This history of deceit was outlined last weekend by The Christian Science Monitor. The newspaper uncovered no secret files, no deep-sixed documents or classified material; it merely reviewed confirmed incidents that were reported in mainstream publications at the time.

Although George Bush I had been an enthusiastic supporter of Saddam Hussein, Iraq’s 1990 invasion of Kuwait was considered a step too far. After all, Bush had extensive business ties to Kuwaiti royalty, going back 30 years; his CIA-connected company, Zapata Oil, had drilled Kuwait’s first offshore wells. Saddam had to be slapped down — and Bush had no compunction about shedding American blood to protect his partners and his investments.

Otherwise, the attack was a godsend for the beleaguered president. Bush’s mediocre administration was floundering in the polls. His small-time 1989 aggression against Panama — when he and Colin Powell killed a few thousand civilians to get at their drug-dealing CIA employee, Manuel Noriega — failed to goose his numbers. Yet a big war against “an evil aggressor” would surely raise Bush’s standing.

What’s more, it would eat up that silly “peace dividend” — the proposed shift from military to domestic spending at the end of the Cold War — which threatened the profits of his patrons in the arms industry. It would also allow the United States to establish a military foothold in the region: a vital step in the long-range strategic plans then being crafted by Defense Secretary Dick Cheney to secure American dominance over the world economy in the coming century — “by force if necessary,” according to one of the planners, Zalmay Khalilzad, now Bush’s “special envoy” to Afghanistan.

But how to convince the American people to intervene in a falling out among thugs in the far-off desert? Hit them in the pocketbook, of course. The internal Arab struggle was pitched as a dire threat to the American economy. Cheney solemnly announced that Hussein had massed a huge military force on the Saudi border. In a matter of days, Cheney said, Saddam could seize the Saudi fields and cut off the main US oil supply. Only war would save American jobs.

But it was all a lie. The St. Petersburg Times (of Florida) obtained satellite imagery of the Kuwaiti-Saudi border: There were no troop concentrations there, just empty desert. Military intelligence reports confirmed the absence. Yet this phantom border buildup was given as the main reason for ditching negotiations and moving to war. Cheney refused to explain the anomaly.

Then came the atrocity stories. A comely Kuwaiti lass testified before Congress that she had seen Saddam’s evil minions ripping innocent babies from hospital incubators. Outraged congressmen repeatedly cited this abomination in their calls for war. Bush I cried that Saddam was “worse than Hitler.” (And given the fact that Bush’s father did business with Hitler — even after Germany declared war on America — he perhaps had some unique insights in this regard.)

But the atrocity stories were also a lie, part of a $10 million PR campaign to “sell” the idea of war to the public. The comely lass was in fact the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to Washington — where she had safely passed the invasion, having seen neither incubators, dead babies nor a single Iraqi marauder.

Now the lies are beginning again. Bush Junior proclaimed last week that the United States “had all the evidence we need” to justify aggression. His proof? A United Nations report on Iraq’s “nuclear rearmament.” But just hours after Judge George rendered his guilty verdict — with Deputy Blair nodding eagerly at his side — the White House admitted that Bush had “misrepresented” the case entirely: the UN report “supported no such conclusion.”

Meanwhile, Cheney warned that Saddam would use this nonexistent nuclear capability to — what else? — seize control of Saudi oil and destroy the US economy. He and Bush and Blair continually intoned the same mantra: “Inaction is not an option.” Yet last week the United States and Britain sent 100 warplanes to obliterate an Iraqi communications complex — just another round in the 11-year campaign of regular attacks on Saddam’s military facilities. An odd sort of “inaction.”

But perhaps Cheney too has unique insight into evil dictators: He was Saddam’s business partner in the 1990s, helping the murderer restore the oil fields destroyed in the Gulf War. (A nice racket, that: Blow things up, then get paid to rebuild them.) Saddam’s “Hitleritis” was obviously in remission then — as long as he filled Cheney’s pockets. So in the coming weeks, as the “evidence” for military aggression mounts, hold hard to this one fact: Nothing — absolutely nothing — the warmongers say can be taken at face value. The historical record is clear: They will lie to make war. It’s that simple. It’s that horrible.

Source: Moscow Times