The views of some zealots moreover can be very dangerous as
well, as in the case of ideologues like the neoconservatives. They spurred on
the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld administration to declare war on
Equally provocative if not also equally dangerous are
religious zealots. They have invariably been supportive of war efforts and
sometimes instigators of them throughout recorded history. The Christian
Zionists, for instance are an inflammatory bunch trying to egg the
Think tanks and front groups
Unlike the zealots, front groups and think tanks don't usually shout out their support for this triumvirate. Think tanks are more cerebral than visceral, although some can be quite hawkish. Front groups camouflage their real purpose, euphemize it, or obfuscate it.
Those two groups are among more than 120 groups that Right Web, an outfit that "tracks militarist efforts to influence foreign policy" has on its list (http://rightweb.irc-online.org). A tiny sample of the others includes the American Enterprise Institute, the Bipartisan Policy Center, the Claremont Institute, the Committee on the Present Danger, the Emergency Committee for Israel, the Ethics and Public Policy Center, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, Freedom House, the Heritage Foundation (hawkish Senator Jim DeMint is resigning to head up this hard right "think" tank at a salary ten times his senatorial pay), the National Endowment for Democracy, the New American Century, and the NGO Monitor. You can probably tell from their titles which ones are the most suspicious. The motto of one of them is "fighting terrorism and promoting freedom" but it could surely speak for the rest also regardless of their titles.
Conspirators have goals in common. Even competitors may be conspirators when they have goals in common. Conspirators do not need to conspire in the dark but they are not about to publicize their intentions and motives unless they are cloaked in propaganda for public consumption.