i said, i believe secretary wolfowitz got to him. >> paul wolfowitz, bush's deputy secretary of defense has had saddam on his personal enemies list for two decades. >> every time he survives something he sends a message to his enemies, i outlast my enemies, and if you are on the wrong list when i'm still around, you'll be in trouble. >> paul wolfowitz had become convinced that if we looked strongly enough, if we looked closely enough, we'd find the hand of saddam hussein behind virtually every terrorist attack on the united states. >> even before 9/11, wolfowitz and undersecretary of defense douglas fife had been driving administration policy on iraq. >> some of us believed you will have a saddam hussein problem forever unless you get rid of him. >> the entire group that calls itself the vulcans, the vice president, rumsfeld, wolfowitz, rice, all of these people who walked bush national security in the year before bush became president i think they all came in with an agenda that had iraq on the top of the list or certainly in the top three and they wanted to overthrow saddam hussein. >

wolfowitz. why do you suppose house speaker john boehner was so quick to sign on and back the resolution without knowing what the resolution's going to be? without knowing if the conditions that you and senator johnson are talking about are going to be in there. why do you think he jumped in so fast? >> i'm not here to read the speaker's mind. but i think what the president has done, quite unfairly, is to put the congress in an impossible situation because if they vote no, even on a bad resolution, it's going to have -- you said it up front. consequences for the presidency down the line. and on the other hand, if they go ahead and endorse a plan which doesn't really exist and which is weak and feckless and ineffective, that's also bad. so i think trying, as senator johnson is, to use the leverage of the congress to get the administration to commit to a serious strategy here and not just a one-off strike is i think the best you can make of a bad situation. >> senator johnson, last one to you, sir

and with gas. >> all right, paul wolfowitz, this is the problem i have with it. it seems to be clear evidence this time, assad or people acting on his behalf have unleashed these chemical weapons on their own people. that would seem to be the general consensus of the people. and yet, the consensus of dealing with it, it is terrible. but we can't deal with it, and america, who is supposed to be this great global power, says we're not doing that anymore. you're on your own. is that the sensible way for america to go? >> frankly, i don't think it is, and i don't think anyone is denying that 100,000-plus syrians have been killed, and the brutality of this regime, to say we're not going to take responsibility for what is going on in syria. we take responsibility when we do nothing. and we've done nothing for 30 months, two and a half years, when i believe we had a lot that we could do. and still a lot that we can do. although not as much as we could have earlier by empowering the syrians to defend themselves and put this regime on the ropes. maybe even get a peaceful

i said, i believe secretary wolfowitz got to him. >> paul wolfowitz, bush's deputy secretary of defense has had saddam on his personal enemies list for two decades. >> every time he survives something he sends a message to his enemies, i outlast my enemies, and if you are on the wrong list when i'm still around, you'll be in trouble. >> paul wolfowitz had become convinced that if we looked strongly enough, if we looked closely enough, we'd find the hand of saddam hussein behind virtually every terrorist attack on the united states. >> even before 9/11, wolfowitz and undersecretary of defense douglas fife had been driving administration policy on iraq. >> some of us believed you will have a saddam hussein problem forever unless you get rid of him. >>> the meeting notes show donald rumsfeld looking for one good enough to hit saddam hussein. >> we all looked at each other like what are they talking about? saddam hussein? osama bin laden hates him. >> the word goes out to the cia, the fbi and all the intelligence services, find the connection. first, though, the war on terror goes to afghan

wolfowitz look like a bit of a fool. but i think what's important about the episode -- to appreciate the importance of the episode, you have to appreciate in a sense the ideological context in which this debate, ll it the shinseki/wolfowitz debate, ideological context in had the debate occurs. the ideological context has two dimensions. first dimension is that wolfowitz came from a political camp generally referred to as neoconservatives who are committed to the proposition that the united states possessed the capacity to export democracy under t nations living autocrats like saddam hussein yearned to be liberated and to embrace democracy. and that, therefore, this -- our capacity and their yearning would combine to make this transition to democracy relatively neat and easy. and shinseki is saying, ain't going to happen that way. that's one reason why wolfowitz would go after shinseki. but there's a second reason. relating to a theory of war that also had come to be something of an ideology at this time. the theory of wa

secretary wolfowitz i appreciate you being on. up next the panel talks about inching closer to the threatening government shutdown and a lingering fight over funding the government while defunding obamacare. we'll be right back. congestion, for the smog. but there are a lot of people that do ride the bus. and now that the buses are running on natural gas, they don't throw out as much pollution into the air. so i feel good. i feel like i'm doing my part to help out the environment. how old is the oldest person you've known? we gave people a sticker and had them show us. we learned a lot of us have known someone who's lived well into their 90s. and that's a great thing. but even though we're living longer, up up to treat my low testosterone, i did my research. my doctor and i went with axiron, the only underarm low t treatment. axiron can restore t levels to normal in about 2 weeks in most men. axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18 or men with prostate or breast cancer. women, especially those who are or who may b

secretary wolfowitz i appreciate you being on. up next the panel talks about inching closer to the threatening government shutdown and a lingering fight over funding the government while defunding obamacare. we'll be right back. up up . people don't have to think about where their electricity comes from. they flip the switch-- and the light comes on. it's our job to make sure that it does. using natural gas this power plant can produce enough energy for about 600,000 homes. generating electricity that's cleaner and reliable, with fewer emissions-- it matters. ♪ i got this. [thinking] is it that time? the son picks up the check? [thinking] i'm still working. he's retired. i hope he's saving. i hope he saved enough. who matters most to you says the most about you. at massmutual we're owned by our policyowners, and they matter most to us. whether you're just starting your 401(k) or you are ready for retirement, we'll help you get there. hearty cheeseburger. creamy thai style chicken with rice. mexican-style chicken tortilla. if you t

road dissolves the canal springs day return from delivering neo-cons which never disappeared paul wolfowitz came back head like he was a michael jackson vigil extra this past weekend c.n.n. plugging what else was the only nazi has changed the false flag and. you know that old. greasy stuff happening twelve years ago in the run up to the war in iraq the difference now it's crazier nothing mad mad world as we were discussing much faster and out of control because we know if anything happens in syria even x. injure. he said that many syria is the flow whatever happens in syria spreads all spreading all over the region syria libya egypt television. gas fields in syria. so a company of. serious. question in the war on terror may be good for israel's expansion but the u.s. just gains new enemies. to speak to how can you as policy be against its interests traditionally the democrats got more than two thirds of the campaign contributions that flow into their federal elections from the aggressively israeli faction and that was earmarked support for israel was the condition of taking that money a cle

dissolves back on all screens they return from delivering neo-cons which never disappeared paul wolfowitz came back head like he was a michael jackson of the joint extra this past weekend c.n.n. plugging what else was it only nazi has changed the false flag and. you know that old. greasy stuff happening twelve years ago in the run up to the war in iraq difference now it's crazier mad mad world as we were discussing much faster and out of control because we know if anything happens in syria even a singular. he said that many syria is there. whatever happens in syria spreads all spreading all over the region in syria libya egypt television already granted gas fields in syria. to a company of. media. serious war drums but the question in the war on terror may be good for israel's expansion but the u.s. just gains new enemies the joins us dr kevin barrett great to speak to you how can you as policy be against its interests traditionally the democrats got more than two thirds of the campaign contributions that flow into their federal elections from the aggressively pro israeli faction and that

wesley clark, nicholas burns, paul wolfowitz and james steinberg.neral clark, tell us what you expect is the likely syrian response to a series of strikes as you say maybe two or three days of it. what do you expect them to do? hunker down or retaliate in some way? >> i think the greater likelihood is they will hunker down. if they try to retaliate, they may try to retaliate with some anti-ship missile with some force out in the mediterranean. obviously the air defense is going to try to shoot back at anything they've got a target on. >> james steinberg, if they do hunker down, part of the problem for the united states and the coalition operations is how do you know whether you've won? how do you -- what yardstick do you use at that point? let's say we're three days into this operation and we decide that's just enough and stop? >> well, i think you have to go into the operation first with a military objective, which is to decide what capabilities of his you want to damage or destroy and to have your own benchmark about what is the level of harm that

paul wolfowitz is joining me now live. thank you for being here.here's disagreement on what the objective is or should be. in your view, should it be to degrade and deter assad from using chemical weapons again, or do you think it should go further? >> there is a much larger issue here which is our theory of policy. we have been sitting on our hands doing nothing as assad slaughters his people over and over again, more than 100,000 syrians and now has taken it a step further with chemical weapons in a horrific way an i think it is doing nor mous mouse damage to american interests. i agree there's a parade of possible things that can go wrong and i don't want to pile on. i think the president has handled things very badly and we're in a bad situation because of that. the fact is, doing nothing has big consequences as well and i think they are bigger and one has to consider, too -- i wish the president hadn't thrown this in the lap of congress. it is looking for help for his own lack of leadership. but the fact is if the congress turns down the presi

bush dick cheney donald rumsfeld connelly's or rice colin powell and paul wolfowitz is that these six defendants planned and waged a war in violation of the nuremberg principle against aggression so she's alleging that the war was planned starting in one thousand nine hundred eighty eight small nonprofit called the project for the new american century which donald rumsfeld dick cheney and paul wolfowitz were members of and that after they planned the war they these people use nine eleven as a cover as an excuse to scare and mislead the american public and the international community to support a war and then she alleges that the war finally when it happened did not have proper legal authorization under various treaties including the u.n. charter the caliber and packed in the nuremberg charters so that's the heart of the case and it we you know the case was filed in march and as you mentioned in august on the part of justice filed this westfall acts are to fit cation which is a request to the court that these six defendants be essentially immunized from from civil proceedings ok and i

the main and the neoconservative mostly americans who also happen to be dual citizens people like wolfowitz and perle scooter libby all of those people and this document proposed. regime change in these middle eastern countries. overthrowing all of these independent middle eastern countries and imposing imperial control these people really do want to create greater israel. israel working with its partners. against the first democracy ever in the five thousand year history of egypt the indications are that they're going to keep stealing territory not only will they refuse to give back the golan heights they're going to take sinai they're already creating all kinds of instability in sinai they came right out and said that what they want is three little mini states in syria. syria's posts of a new axis of evil is that. israel saudi arabia and the hardliners here in the us who are in the pockets of both parties primarily the israelis are the real axis of evil but it's not going as planned since you assume. a best friend of iran two years of syria's president. is still in place and middle east r

certainly have seen that happen and i think a lot of people know of course the household names rumsfeld wolfowitz the bush obviously those are the names of the main neo con propagandists selling that the whole agenda that's been put in place since nine eleven i want instead for you to focus on a couple lesser known people want to talk about your book paul bremmer who is paul bremer and how does he tie into what happened on nine eleven. well grammer is most well known for having been the iraqi occupation governor after the u.s. invasion in two thousand and three he was selected for that job i don't know and he made a lot of very terrible decisions that would not make a lot of sense for someone who is trying to help the country for example this banding the iraqi army so forth but bremer has many other very interesting features about it since three he was also lang time assistant and retention citizen here who was selected by bush to lead the nine eleven commission originally he was also a terror propagandist throughout the nineteen ninety s. he led of commissions as commissions that worked to trans

certainly have seen that happen and i think a lot of people know of course the household names rumsfeld wolfowitz the bush obviously those are the names of the main neo con propagandists selling that the whole agenda that's been put in place in final that i want instead for you to focus a couple lesser known people who want to talk about your book paul bremmer who is paul bremer and how does he tie into what happened on nine eleven. well grammar is most well known for having been the iraqi occupation to go after the u.s. invasion in two thousand and three he was selected for the job by donald rumsfeld and he mean a lot of very terrible decisions that would not make a lot of sense for someone who's trying to help a country for example this banding the iraqi army so forth but rumor has it many other very interesting features about it since three he was lang time assistant and retention here who was selected by bush to lead the nine eleven commission originally he was also a tear group again this. throughout the nineteen ninety s. he led out of commissions as commissions that were transferred out of

we have general wesley clark, james steinberg, paul wolfowitz, and nicholas burns.t obama take action without congress? should he have even asked it or did he weaken the powers of his office?

what happened was, chainy and wolfowitz and that crowd managed to pump up terrorism.nd i think there's kind of an unconscious bias in the press. it's much more important to write about potential threats to national security than about more humdrum stuff. but you make a very good point, rachel. here's what i want to follow up on. i thought it was useful to threaten that strike, and if the syrians had not moved and the russians didn't involve, a very quick strike there. it never made sense to me to get involved the way john mccain want to in the whole civil war. but what we have now is a kind of a disconnect. it's clear that the american people have decided that this policy of intervention, militarily, into the internal affairs of iraq or staying in afghanistan else and where is a mistake. we should be taking the is next step. if we're not going to do that intervention, let's stop paying hundreds of billions of dollars a year to have a capability that we're not going to use. >> if there is a cultural lag, like you're describing, in the expert class and in the media on t

you sound just like paul wolfowitz in 2002. don't ever trust that the president has more information than we do and that we can't sit back and be baffled by this man trying to pretend that he is a passive actor on the world stage when he is the one that has framed the outlines of this debate and has put us in the position we're in. >> so let's talk about -- if we want to criticize the president for his decision, which i think is legitimate, there are other people's ideas out there that are very good, let's have a debate on the merits of what we ought to do and not play the washington blame game. this doesn't help. >> i don't even know -- >> we're focused on red line. >> dr. dean, i agree with you. >> figure out who he looks like. he looks like harrison ford's character in "the fugitive." when you said dr. dean -- >> not bad. >> it was the one armed man. >> yeah, the one armed man. >> one armed man -- >> dr. -- >> harrison ford's character. >> you say he should be looking for the one arm man. >> looking for the one arm man. >> i