PNAC No More?

The website of the Bill Kristol’s Project for the New American Century (www.newamericancentury.org) has vanished. If you go to the site, you are diverted to another one that says, “This Account Has Been Suspended. Please contact the billing/support department as soon as possible.” A metaphor, perhaps, for the bankruptcy of the ideas that inspired the project and the strategic disaster that they produced for U.S. interests in Iraq, the greater Middle East, and the wider world?

You can still find most of PNAC’s documents — including its letters and their signatories — through www.archive.org, but it seems that the original site is gone for lack of payment. While the site became effectively dormant in 2005, its sudden disappearance is somewhat alarming. What does it say about the new American Century itself, particularly in light of the slew of recent books on the decline of American power and the end of unipolarity? A coincidence or an augury?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
avatar

Jim Lobe

Jim Lobe served for some 30 years as the Washington DC bureau chief for Inter Press Service and is best known for his coverage of U.S. foreign policy and the influence of the neoconservative movement.

10 Comments

  1. Quick, save the PNAC before it’s drowned in a bathtub!

  2. I can’t believe that a supposedly educated man is using a religious practice, augury, to illustrate his point. WTF?

    And the parallel between a website going unpaid and furiously hoping for America’s downfall seems pretty sketchy as well.

  3. Seems only fitting. Irving’s boy just published his third column in the Times laden with basic factual errors that even John P. Normanson could catch.

  4. The really funny part is that the provider of the webspace belongs to a chinese held company.

    The Chinese refusing to continue to finance the U.S. neocon dreams is really symbolic.

  5. “A metaphor, perhaps, for the bankruptcy of the ideas that inspired the project and the strategic disaster that they produced for U.S. interests in Iraq, the greater Middle East, and the wider world?”

    And a metaphor for how irrelevant and bankrupt the Times’ editorial page has become, as well?

    Is it true that John Mearsheimer used to get published in the Times but he’s now persona non grata?

Comments are closed.