Former Indiana Congressman Writes About Run Up to Iraq War (Entire Three Part Series)

Hostettler voted against the war resolution on what he believed to be a “violation of well established principles of a conservative foreign policy.” He draws on the writings of the Founding Fathers, particularly John Jay and James Madison, who articulated a clear and cogent doctrine on when and by whom a declaration of war should and could be made. His first objection to the war resolution was that it delegated the decision to attack Iraq from the legislative branch to the executive branch. Article I, sec.8 of the Constitution clearly states that, “Congress shall have power to…declare war…[and] to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces.” Hostetller boldly states that with that vote, “the Congress effectively transformed the republic into a monarchy when it conveyed the most important governmental authority to President Bush.”

His second objection to the resolution was what he believed to be, “the violation of the principle of proportional response.” It is without question to any attentive person, whose sole information is not from neo-conservative talk radio, that Iraq was not involved in the 9/11 terrorist attacks, did not possess “weapons of mass destruction”, and posed no immediate or imminent threat to the United States. As a member of the House Armed Service Committee, Hostettler discloses that each meeting he was present at, the available intelligence on Saddam’s threat level he received and reviewed was insufficient if not negligible at best.

Hostetller was dismayed that the intelligence provided to the U.S. Intelligence services overwhelmingly came from the now discredited Iraqi National Congress, a U.S. funded opposition group led by Ahmed Chalabi, who in 1992 was convicted in absentia for embezzlement, fraud and currency-trading irregularities while serving as chairman of the Petra Bank in Jordan. This disinformation peddled by the Iraqi National Congress was then manipulated by an organization, the OSP, created in the Pentagon to assist the secretary of defense’s office in its assessment of the intelligence gathered by the United States government from this group. The Office of Special Plans, (OSP), was under the direction of Under Secretary of Defense Douglas Feith, who with the INC had a common interest in seeing Saddam Hussein removed from power. As Hostetller examined this relationship between the INC and the OSP, he soon began to see the truth emerge as to why the Bush Administration invaded Iraq.

The OSP was staffed with American Zionists. This is a fact. Hostettler rightly concludes that the OSP assessed, manipulated and disseminated the disinformation from the INC to the media, the Congress and the public, using the 9/11 terrorist attacks as a pre-text for the implementation of the 1996 Zionist white paper, “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,” which is a “thesis for the economic and physical security of Israel.” This white paper was co-authored by Feith and other American Zionists for then Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanayhu. In President Bush, whose world view is rooted in a Christian Dispensationalist theology, the American Zionists in the State and Defense Departments had a willing participant to carry out their military objectives to “secure the realm” for Israel.

The reason for the war was not that Saddam was connected to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, or that he had “weapons of mass destruction,” or that he posed an imminent threat to America’s security, but that the American Zionists in and around the Bush Administration wanted to remove Saddam in the interest of Israel’s security. Hostettler’s answer on why America was lead into war is disconcerting, but all too true.