portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting united states

government | imperialism & war | police / legal selection 2004

John kerry's Version of Project for a New American Century

Researchers and investigative reporters are fascinated with the neoconservatives, that group of American empire peddlers who turned George W. Bush into a junkie war criminal. A similar group, the New Democrats, has been pushing its own dangerous brand of U.S. hegemony but with much less fanfare. Just one more reason not to vote for Skull and Bones.
'It's Time to Get Over It'

John Kerry Tells Antiwar Movement to Move On

Researchers and investigative reporters are fascinated with the neoconservatives, that group of American empire peddlers who turned George W. Bush into a junkie war criminal. A similar group, the New Democrats, has been pushing its own dangerous brand of U.S. hegemony but with much less fanfare.

The leading mouthpiece for the New Democrats' radical interventionist program could be our next president. John Kerry, the frontrunner in the quest for the Democratic Party presidential nomination, has been promoting a foreign policy perspective called "progressive internationalism." It's a concept concocted by establishment Democrats seeking to convince potential backers in the corporate and political world that, if installed in the White House, they would preserve U.S. power and influence around the world, but in a kinder, gentler fashion than the current administration.

In the domestic battle to captain the American empire, the neocons have in their corner the Partnership for a New American Century while the New Democrats have the Progressive Policy Institute. Come November, who will get your vote? Coke or Pepsi?

In fall 2000, PNAC released Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century. It's a blueprint for "maintaining global U.S. preeminence, precluding the rise of a great power rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests."

In fall 2003, members of PPI joined with other tough-minded Democrats to unveil Progressive Internationalism: A Democratic National Security Strategy, a 19-page manifesto that calls for "the bold exercise of American power, not to dominate but to shape alliances and international institutions that share a common commitment to liberal values."

The New Democrats don't begrudge the Bush administration for invading Iraq. They take issue with the Bush administration's strategy of refusing to invite key members of the international community to the invasion until it was too late. The neocons' unilateralist approach, the New Democrats believe, will ultimately harm U.S. political and economic dominance around the world.

"We are confident that a new Democratic strategy, grounded in the party's tradition of muscular internationalism, can keep Americans safer than the Republicans' go-it-alone policy, which has alienated our natural allies and overstretched our resources," the New Democrats say in their foreign policy manifesto. "We aim to rebuild the moral foundation of U.S. global leadership by harnessing America's awesome power to universal values of liberal democracy. A new progressive internationalism can point the way."

Proponents of "progressive internationalism" are a lock to control leadership positions at the State Department and key civilian posts at the Pentagon in a John Kerry administration. How do we know this? Because these New Democrats obviously ghostwrote Kerry's campaign book, A Call to Service: My Vision for A Better America. Place the Progressive Internationalism manifesto and Kerry's chapter on foreign policy side by side and you'll immediately notice the similarities.

On page 40 of In A Call to Service, Kerry writes: "The time has come to renew that tradition and revive a bold vision of progressive internationalism." What is this tradition to which Kerry refers? As he describes it, Democrats need to honor "the tough-minded strategy of international engagement and leadership forged by Wilson and Roosevelt in the two world wars and championed by Truman and Kennedy in the cold war."

Now, turn to page 3 of the New Democrats' manifesto. It reads:

"As Democrats, we are proud of our party's tradition of tough-minded internationalism and strong record in defending America. Presidents Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry Truman led the United States to victory in two world wars and designed the post-war international institutions that have been a cornerstone of global security and prosperity ever since. President Truman forged democratic alliances such as NATO that eventually triumphed in the Cold War. President Kennedy epitomized America's commitment to "the survival and success of liberty."

Like the neocons, Kerry was not impressed by France's stance against the U.S. invasion of Iraq. On page 51 of his book, he writes:

"I hope by the time you read this book that the UN has been usefully employed as a partner in the reconstruction of Iraq and that Jacque Chirac has ceased his foolish rebellion against the very idea of the Atlantic Alliance. America, which has always shown magnanimity in victory, should in turn meet repentant Europeans halfway, not ratchet up the badgering unilateralism that fed European fears in the first place."

There's much to digest in this paragraph. Perhaps the most interesting nugget is Kerry's statement that the United States should "meet repentant Europeans halfway." Hmmm, John, could you elaborate on what sins the Europeans committed for which they must repent?

On page 50, Kerry details his beef with Old Europe:

"The Bush administration is by no means the only culprit in the breakdown in U.S.-UN relations over Iraq. France, Germany and Russia never supported or offered a feasible policy to verify that UN resolutions on Iraq were actually being carried out. ... Our British, Spanish and Eastern European coalition allies are eager to rebuild European unity."

Throughout the foreign policy sections of the book, Kerry does his best to convince the reader that he would not run from his role as war criminal in chief if elected president.

Perhaps the most repulsive section of the book is where Kerry discusses the Vietnam War and the antiwar movement. On page 42, Kerry writes:

"I could never agree with those in the antiwar movement who dismissed our troops as war criminals or our country as the villain in the drama. That's one reason, in fact, that I eventually parted ways with the VVAW [Vietnam Veterans Against the War] organizations and instead helped found the Vietnam Veterans of America."

If the United States was not a villain in the "drama" of the Vietnam war, then who is to blame for the million-plus Vietnamese who were killed during the 20-year period of naked U.S. aggression that ended in 1975? Surely, John, you don't wish to blame certain communist dead-enders in Vietnam for the carnage?

On the next page, Kerry informs his reader that it's time we stop questioning U.S. foreign policy intentions:

"As a veteran of both the Vietnam War and the Vietnam protest movement, I say to both conservative and liberal misinterpretations of that war that it's time to get over it and recognize it as an exception, not as a ruling example, of the U.S. military engagements of the twentieth century. If those of us who carried the physical and emotional burdens of that conflict can regain perspective and move on, so can those whose involvement was vicarious or who knew nothing of the war other than ideology and legend."

This last passage is probably the most unsettling part of Kerry's book and one that every advocate of the Anyone-But-Bush 2004 election strategy should read before heading to the polling station in November.

In this one passage, Kerry seeks to justify the millions of people slaughtered by the U.S. military and its surrogates during the twentieth century, suggests that concern about U.S. war crimes in Vietnam is no longer necessary, and dismisses the antiwar movement as the work of know-nothings.

Kerry and his comrades in the progressive internationalist movement are as gung-ho about U.S. military action as their counterparts in the White House. The only noteworthy difference between the two groups battling for power in Washington is that the neocons are willing to pursue their imperial ambitions in full view of the international community, while the progressive internationalists prefer to keep their imperial agenda hidden behind the cloak of multilateralism.

homepage: homepage: http://www.pressaction.com/pablog/archives/001294.html#001294

Kerry the annointed replaces Bush the appointed 11.Feb.2004 13:23

tom

Good post. I haven't read the book, and probably won't, now.

It is interesting to note that Kerry is the husband of the widow of the son of HJ Heinz-- one of the pre-eminent "internationalists" of the WWII generation, and one of the founders of the Bilderberg Group (a semi-secret organization that some believe actually run the world-- the human part of it, at least.)

Also interesting to remember that Sen Heinz was killed in a rather mysterious plane crash (hit from underneath by a helicopter) while he was serving on the Tower Commission investigating Iran-Contra. And further interesting to note that Sen Tower was also killed in a somewhat mysterious plane crash at about the same time.

Bush has done his job for these people. His star is now falling (even O'Reilly says so) as Kerry's rises. The alternation of the faces of Janus goes on.

Historically speaking, this has been a remarkably un-bloody revolution-- unless you count WWI and WWII, Viet Nam, Latin American anti-insurgency and the Gulf Wars as part of the revolution, which in some sense, they are.

In any case, the Global Elite has won-- welcome to Neo-Feudalism. The world is now "owned" by a very few people, and remarkably, most of the people in the US think they are middle class or upper middle class!

You have to admire this triumph of social engineering!

A Bonesy Millionaire's Vision 11.Feb.2004 13:57

57

Disaster of Convenience - John Heinz' Widow Marries John Kerry
by Sherman Skolnick

 http://www.skolnicksreport.com/ootar26.html
President Ronald Reagan . . . was implicated in the Iran-Contra situation. . . . funds secretly given to the Iranians were skimmed off to finance the counter-revolutionaries in Nicaragua, to evade the Boland Amendment, prohibiting the U.S. from financing the Contras as they were called.

At the time Daddy Bush, as Vice President, denied he knew anything about this. He said he was "out of the loop" and thus not told what was going on. Later facts brought out by the Independent Counsel showed otherwise. In later years, some Congressmen an d other insiders admitted that they thought about impeaching President Reagan but thought it would be a bad thing for the nation. Working on a report on the Iran-Contra mess was a commission headed by Senator John Tower (R. Texas). For short, it was cal led the Tower Commission. In 1991, when he was unfairly defamed in being rejected by the Daddy Bush Administration for Secretary of Defense, Tower began grumbling he was going to bring out some dirty secrets of the elder Bush then President. Convenient ly, Tower perished with his daughter in an apparent sabotaged plane crash in April, 1991. About the same time, Senator John Heinz (R., Penn.), heir to the Heinz Ketchup fortune was himself snuffed out when his airplane was hit fro! m below by a helicopter. Although some believed it was foul play, others contended the helicopter pilot, examining whether the Heinz plane could not lower the landing wheels, slammed into the plane. Others raised the sinister version that the whirlybir d pilot wanted somehow to commit "suicide". Heinz' widow married Senator John Kerry (D., Mass.), long connected to the American CIA. Senator Kerry in investigating the dope traffic through his subcommittee, conveniently covered up the role of the espion age agency money laundry, Bank of Credit and Commerce International, BCCI, that also financed the campaigns of a group of senators including Kerry.

NEW CHIEF OF SECRET POLITICAL POLICE
 http://www.skolnicksreport.com/spoliticalp.html

Please note. Senator Kerry is no sweet angel. He is an expert reputed blackmailer and cover up artist. He is married to the widow of the late U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania, John Heinz, heir to the ketchup and canned beans fortune. Heinz died in a sabotaged plane crash in 1991, just as he was planning to expose U.S. government complicity in several domestic and foreign political assassinations.

As to the infamous BCCI, Sen Kerry himself had a conflict of interest in that he headed a group of U.S. Senators who accepted campaign funds from the worldwide spy-money laundry-murder machine BCCI. Kerry's subcommittee refused to delve into the highly pertinent Chicago branch office of BCCI and their Chicago twin, a branch of Italy's largest bank, owned in part by the Vatican, Banca Nazionale Del Lavoro, BNL. [Suppressed BNL records as to the secret private partnership of the Elder Bush and Saddam Hussein were the subject of my exclusive story, in Spotlight, August 19, 1991, referred to earlier.]

John Kerry's Multimillionaire Wild Wife
repost - Guardian  http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1141394,00.html
Stormy and eccentric, multi-millionaire Teresa Heinz Kerry is not obvious First Lady material. But with her stepdaughters she is helping her husband scoop the Democratic presidential candidacy. Suzanne Goldenberg reports

 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/02/279913.shtml


Bonesy vision 11.Feb.2004 17:31

tom

So there you are--

Kerry is part of the same conspiracy as Bush-- they have different roles to play.

I suppose it wouldn't be so bad if it was just like the old days with a few fabulously wealthy individuals lording over the grovelling masses-- I could accept that. The trouble is, they are destroying thousands of other species and ruining the planet. But the planet will strike back. It always has before.