From jad@ckuxb.att.com  Ukn Jan  8 12:06:31 1993
Received: from att-out.att.com by css.itd.umich.edu (5.67/2.2)
	id AA17190; Fri, 8 Jan 93 12:06:29 -0500
Message-Id: <9301081706.AA17190@css.itd.umich.edu>
To: pauls@css.itd.umich.edu
Date: Fri,  8 Jan 93 11:53:30 EST
From: jad@ckuxb.att.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Article 18917 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa,misc.activism.progressive
Subject: Part 2,  LURE TO WAR: Bush Sucks Saddam Into Kuwait [Stockwell]
Message-ID: <1993Jan7.221147.18683@mont.cs.missouri.edu>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy 
Originator: rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Keywords: LURE TO WAR: Bush Sucks Saddam Into Kuwait [Stockwell]
Sender: news@mont.cs.missouri.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: The Turing Project, Public Access Internet Host
Approved: map@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Lines: 158

        I made the following transcript from a tape recording 
        of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
               WBAI-FM (99.5)
               505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
               New York, NY 10018       (212) 279-0707

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
                        (continuation)
JOHN STOCKWELL:
And then the whole world waited, on the 15th and 16th, for the
kickoff of this great modern war. Now some people waited, or had
been waiting, longer than others. I found myself in the position,
albeit a country boy from Texas who grew up in Africa, but you know
-- reading books and having seen a little bit of this stuff from 
the National Security Council level -- I had been able to predict,
nine months ahead of time, that the U.S. would invade Panama.    
And this was not a shot in the dark. This was an analysis of the
United States and George Bush -- for whom I worked at the end of 
the "Angola Secret War", where I was the task force commander for
a subcommittee of the National Security Council, and he was the
CIA Director responsible for fending off the Congress.               

Let me hasten  to say that this is a very nice man to be around.
He's considerate. He's personable. He has high positive energy.   
If your child gets sick, even if you're way down on his staff,
you'll get a postcard in the mail very promptly, saying:           
 "Very sorry about Johnny" -- shaking hands with people, smiling
and remembering names; a considerate, decent person at the human
level. And then, of course, he has rationales for what he does, and
we're going to be talking about these things. But I gave speeches
at American University in November, and then at the House of Commons
in England in early December. Again, C-SPAN managed to get a film 
of this, a video, and they played it on national television eight
times when the invasion occurred, because in those speeches, I had
predicted the invasion and analyzed why. Then, about a year ago,   
I predicted this war. And again, this was not a shot in the dark.
This was a cold, sober, careful analysis of the United States: 
where it was, and why it would need a war; and of George Bush:   
and why he would take the nation into war.

Now that's what I want to go through tonight, if I possibly can,  
is to give you all the essential elements and understanding of how 
I was able to make those predictions, so that you will be able to
predict the next war. Because there certainly will be another one
after this one, unless we can intervene and break the cycles, and
make a profound change in the United States System. My point is that
we know how these things work. It isn't magic. It isn't classified.
It isn't secret.   Since the Vietnam War, the Establishment -- the
Military Establishment, as I call it -- Eisenhower called it the
Military-Industrial Complex -- the Military Establishment, which is
the very powerful central engine in our society, in our permanent
War Complex, has been working to erase the stigma of the Vietnam War
and has been telling us that it was doing that.

President Reagan came into office saying that he would teach the
nation how to fight war again, to make us stand tall -- and then, 
of course, pouring huge resources into the Military, and glamorizing
the Military, bombing Libya, invading Grenada, and [waging]
low-intensity warfare against Nicaragua, but rehearsing for the
invasion of Nicaragua. Interestingly enough, they were prohibited
by the Military, by the Pentagon, by the Defense Department, from
invading Nicaragua, actually, because the [American] People were
solidly against it. And so, the Secretary of Defense, in public
speeches, said: "No, not with my Defense Department, unless you can
persuade the People to support it."  They couldn't make their sale,
and we were spared the horror of our doing this thing on Nicaragua.

Now at the same time, through these years, people like Harry
Summers, a colonel, teaching at the War College, writing his book 
on strategy, analyzing the Vietnam War for the failures of the
Vietnam War, not apologetic, not that it was a wrong war.
Not at all!  He was saying that what we'd done wrong was we had
failed to orchestrate the war and to organize and motivate the
American People to support it; and that it went on too long, and we
didn't win, and we didn't go in decisively enough with a major  
military strike. The Military has always maintained that if they 
could have gone in, all out, they would have won in Vietnam very
efficiently, and that they were hamstrung by the politicians, and
were prevented from fighting a good war. Dean Rusk, when he came out
of office and retired, he said that the next war cannot be fought 
in the eye of the television camera with the Public second-guessing
the generals as they're making decisions on the battlefields.     

Now, you'll notice the interesting thing about that is,            
 One: that he was wrong. He didn't understand that they could so
captivate the nation that they could fight the war in the eye of 
the television camera. But it was a censored television camera, 
with the media playing along in the censorship. But perhaps the most
significant thing about his statement was the fact that he was
absolutely, blithely confident that there would BE another war.

Most of us were presuming that, because of the trauma of the Vietnam
War, we had learned that these things are not cool, that they don't
work, that we should never do them again. They maintained -- the
Military -- that if the United States had gone in massively in
Vietnam, with nukes, if they had to, and won in a few months time,
the American People would have supported it, and there would have
been no trauma.  General Gavlett[sp], in the South Command in
Panama, when they were trying to invade Nicaragua, he was saying:
"The American People love a good bash, but you've got to get it over
with in about six weeks time or it'll go sour on you.  You can't
afford to have the war still going on while the body bags      
start coming home."

Now since then, as part of this preparation for this war, this
enormously successful preparation for this war -- leading the nation
into war and restoring the Military Complex -- they've been
preparing for greater control of our society. Now this is where it
gets a little creepy:                                         

They've been laying down a series of laws. I don't have time in  
the lecture to go through them, but as a matter of fact, I do list
all of them that I was aware of in one chapter  of this book that's
coming out now [THE PRAETORIAN GUARD] -- the National Security laws,
which work to give them control of the Press, control of passports;
they can stop Jane Fondas and Seymour Hershes from traveling and
reporting from places like Hanoi, or My Lai scandals, and such.
Seventy percent of the Federal judges have been or will be appointed
by President Reagan and President Bush to enforce their National
Security laws. FEMA was created here in California, at California's
Special Training Institute, under Governor Reagan, with his support,
then converted into FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency,
with all of its plans to suspend the Constitution, declare martial
law and incarcerate however many people they have to to establish
rigid control of this country.

Meanwhile, they've been working on an utterly phony Drug War, and
the truth is coming out now. [This drug war] is so preposterous that
William F. Buckley has joined with Anthony Lewis in publishing a
book together to protest the Drug War with its phony rationales. 
But the point of this Drug War is that they have obliterated the
Bill of Rights. Under the Drug War, they now have the right to pick
up people off the street, based on the signature of a DEA officer
saying that you're a drug distributor, with a judge rubber-stamping
the thing, without trial, and they can take your house, your car,
whatever you've got, as well as taking the money with which you
would hire an attorney to defend yourself. [They now can] blow off
your protections under the laws: [the principle of] innocent until
proven guilty, and all these basic American traditions, as they work
to establish their National Security State with what is evolving
into a World Security State, instead of just a national system.
                      (to be continued)
*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

        The America Public is evidently in dire need of the truth, 
        for when the plutocracy feeds us sweet lies in place of the 
        bitter truth that would evoke remedial action by the People,
        then we are in peril of sinking inextricably into despotism.

        So, please post the episodes of this ongoing series to 
        computer bulletin boards, and post hardcopies in public places,
        both on and off campus. The need for concerned people alerting
        their neighbors to overshadowing dangers still exists, as it 
        did in the era of Paul Revere. That need is as enduring as
        society itself.
      
             John DiNardo