 |
|
||
|
|
|
 The Trial of Saddam Hussein We Never SawPosted on Jun 22, 2007
By Barry Lando On June 24th in Baghdad the Special Iraqi Tribunal is due to hand down a verdict against several of Saddam Hussein’s officials charged with the slaughter of some 180,000 Kurds during the Al Anfal campaign in 1988. The tribunal was established to prosecute those guilty of crimes against humanity during Saddam’s reign. Much as the Nuremberg Tribunal did with the Nazis, It was also supposedly meant to educate Iraqis and the world about Saddam and his barbarous regime and, at the same time, to bring a kind of closure to that nightmarish epoch. That at least was the fiction. The fact is that many of those complicit in Saddam’s crimes—some of the world’s most prominent leaders and businessmen, past and present—are missing from the dock. The full story of Saddam’s crimes will never be told. Which is just as planned. From the start, the tribunal was established, financed and advised by the United States, the same power that once helped arm Saddam, encouraged him and stymied attempts of others to rein him in. Even most of the forensic investigations—the excavation of mass graves and the examination of mountains of documents—were carried out under the supervision of U.S. investigators. To make the rules of the game perfectly clear, one of the tribunal’s regulations, constantly overlooked by the media, is that only Iraqi citizens and residents can be charged with crimes before that court. It is thus understandable that there has been no mention in the Baghdad courtroom of foreign complicity with Saddam’s crimes, such as the genocide of the Kurds. What is surprising, though, is how thoroughly the American media have played along with that charade. Take the dramatic account by John Burns in The New York Times of an event this past January when prosecutors presented damning recorded evidence of Saddam and his officials coldbloodedly discussing the use of chemical weapons against the Kurds. Advertisement “I will strike them [the Kurds] with chemical weapons and kill them all,” he was heard saying. “Who is going to say anything? The international community? A curse on the international community!” Some reporter might have pointed out that Chemical Ali had good reason for such assurances: Beginning in 1983—five years before the attacks on the Kurds—the U.S. had willfully ignored the fact that Iraqis were using chemical weapons against the Iranians. But more than just ignore the fact, for years the administration continued to block all attempts by the United Nations and later the U.S. Congress to condemn Saddam or impose sanctions against Iraq. Indeed, American satellite intelligence was used by the Iraqis to target Iranian troops. The U.S. continued to furnish that intelligence in 1988, even after it realized Saddam was also using chemicals against his own Kurds. American officials also refused to meet with Kurdish leaders who had evidence of the atrocities. Saddam, after all, was America’s de facto ally at the time in the war against Khomeini’s Iran. And even after the end of that war, until just weeks prior to Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait, George H.W. Bush and James Baker were still intent on wooing the tyrant with trade and credits. They saw Iraq as a major market for U.S. exports, not to mention as a prize for American oil companies. Both West and East, of course, had supplied Saddam with billions of dollars worth of weapons—of all kinds. Indeed, while the Al Anfal trial was going on in Baghdad, Dutch prosecutors in The Hague presented a document from Saddam Hussein’s secret service praising a Dutch businessman, Frans van Anraat, for “rendering outstanding services” by selling Iraq “banned and rare chemicals” during the Iraq-Iran war. Van Anraat was lauded by the Iraqis for daring to “expose himself to extremely dangerous consequences” by selling the chemicals; he also did so “at a reasonable price compared to other offers.” For instance, later this summer the tribunal is due to consider charges against almost a hundred of Saddam’s top officials for the massacre of tens of thousands of Shiites following the abortive uprising of 1991. Another possible defendant, George Bush Senior, might have been questioned in relation to what was probably the worst of Saddam’s crimes, the slaughter of tens of thousands of Shiites following the abortive uprising of 1991. The tribunal is due to consider those charges later this summer. The Shiites were answering the repeated calls by the first President Bush for a popular revolt. Such a call was rebroadcast in Iraq by clandestine CIA radio stations and printed in millions of leaflets dropped by the U.S. Air Force across the country. Problem was, the Iraqis didn’t realize until it was too late that Bush and Baker, his pragmatic secretary of state, didn’t really mean it. When it looked as if the insurgents might actually succeed, the American president turned his back. The White House and its allies wanted Saddam replaced not by a popular revolt which they couldn’t control but by a military leader more amenable to U.S. interests. So, as the United States permitted Saddam’s attack helicopters to devastate the rebels, American troops just a few kilometers away from the slaughter were ordered to give no aid to those under attack. Instead they destroyed huge stocks of captured weapons rather than let them fall into rebel hands. According to some rebels in Iraq, American troops prevented them from marching on Baghdad. Maybe I’ve missed something, but to date I’ve seen no such background given in U.S. media reports about the upcoming trial. But what if, instead of the special tribunal—or along with it—Iraq had established a “truth commission,” such as South Africa did after the defeat of apartheid? Imagine also the unimaginable: that the Iraqi government had kept Saddam alive long enough to testify about past relations with the rest of the world. How enlightening it would have been to hear the former tyrant recount his relief when he realized in 1991 that President Bush père was actually going to help him stay in power. Saddam might have also explained to what degree the mixed messages from the senior Bush and the State Department were responsible for his concluding there would be no adverse reaction from Washington when he invaded Kuwait in 1990. Can you imagine the headlines generated by Saddam and his officials describing the dealings behind the billions of dollars of arms they imported from across the globe as leaders from East and West battled for a share of the bonanza. How the German governments—east and west—for instance, closed their eyes as scores of German industries also helped Saddam build his chemical arsenal. Saddam might have had a few pithy remarks about the British under Margaret Thatcher, who were equally eager to cash in on the Iraqi arms gusher—Thatcher’s son included. It would have been instructive to hear Saddam detail his dealings with the French and Jacques Chirac, who sold the dictator a nuclear reactor in the 1970s, though it was clear Saddam was seeking weapons of mass destruction. Or the Iraqis might have heard from Saddam and others about the CIA’s participation in the coup of 1963 that first brought the Baath Party to power, the CIA providing it with lists of hundreds of suspected communists and leftists to be picked up, tortured and disposed of. Saddam back then was one of the young Baath torturers. But let’s return from such delusional speculation to the current status of the Special Iraqi Tribunal. Deep in the bunkered, barricaded confines of the Green Zone, the last redoubt of the American occupiers and Iraqi would-be rulers, prosecutors and defense attorneys argue over chilling evidence of Saddam’s genocidal killings while the judges and defendants sit and listen. They hear of entire families gassed, shot in the neck or the back and left for dead or buried alive. It’s a Kafkaesque play within a play. For just outside the Green Zone, across Baghdad and throughout many other parts of Iraq, there is a reign of terror that in its randomness and horror far surpasses the dread of Saddam’s era. It’s a play that—with Saddam no longer playing the starring role—has been performed to ever smaller audiences. Certainly millions of Iraqis—particularly the Kurds—will be glued to their television sets to watch the verdict handed down against Chemical Ali and his confederates. But there was no print media present for most of the recent sessions. Foreign media were even less interested. Almost all the NGOs that once followed every turn of the proceedings to ensure that they bore at least passing resemblance to accepted legal practices are no longer there. At times, there are hardly any spectators at all. That being the case, it’s very unlikely the tribunal will run its full course. The U.S. government is said to be cutting back on financial, material and staff support. There’s not much point in playing to an empty house. For more on the trial of Saddam Hussein and the Kurds, click here to see one part of a documentary by Barry Lando and Michel Despratx. To see the full documentary, search for “Barry Lando” at YouTube.com. Lando is also the author of Web of Deceit. Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment
|
HOME|Digs|Reports|Arts & Culture|Uncovered|Ear to the Ground|A/V Booth|Cartoons
Tags|Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation 
A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2009 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved. |
Obama’s Job Approval Slips Below 50%
Email
Print
Share
BlinkList
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Fark
Furl
Google
LinkedIn
Mixx
MySpace
NewsVine
NewsTrust
Propeller
Reddit
SphereIt
StumbleUpon
Technorati
TwitThis
YahooMyWeb
YahooBuzz
By Alan, June 30, 2007 at 10:46 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Saddam, Suhato, Pinochet, the Shah, are but a few who have been sponsored by the US government in it’s quest to dominate the world. Dead men tell no tales and Saddams death sentence for a paltry 130 supposedly slaughtered by him, was timely, fast and without any secrets spilled to the world. How Bush and co must’ve enjoyed all that. But then so did a vast number of equally brainwashed Americans. As they have over the years accepted Americam hegemony with pride albeit with their usual geographic, cultural lack of knowledge. As were the Germans all were guilty of the crimes of Hitler because they did nothing to stop it. Americans will only stop when they get equal punishment. That is the very same bombs and mayhem on their so precious land as they’ve given others over the years. How they cried over a couple of planes hitting some tall buildings in New York. The first ‘big one’ ever to hit the mainland of the USA. To see how they failed to deal with the hurricane Katrina is enough to tell you just what they can expect when they get back a little of what they’ve meted out to others for years.
They perhaps don’t realise it yet but they’re on borrowed time. They’ve antagonised the world at large so much that they’ll be no sympathy and certainly some rejoicing when it happens. It will come as more of the world grows tired of their meddling. People want to live in peace they do not want the so called democracy of the US which is plainly bought and as manipulated as any other banana republic. They certainly do not want the ‘holy roller’ brand of christianity which only talks of death and destruction. But it may be that mother nature will finally tip the scales when the people of the US begin to choke on their own garbage.
The CIA man talks of the water resouces of Iraq being paramount. I lived in Iraq for some years and saw how Saddam used the rivers Euphrates and Tigris to provide hydro-electric power to the nation. No doubt those same power stations are now idle due to US bombing. Just see what would happen if the Hoover Dam was laid to waste in California. It works two ways see. All this bull about anti missile defense is just that and it only needs one well aimed rocket to see to that.
But there’s more to come, from the feedback of the countless DU weapons in Iraq which have already taken thousands of American lives not mention Iraqis who are non people and who don’t count as humans!So by staying on the US death toll will rise incrimentally. But for the people who happily used agent orange on the civilian population in Vietnam. Some of the same kind of treatment is loong overdue and it’s coming.
So keep on playing with your toys that we outsiders are so jealous of, live your bloated lives and remember this that one day there will be a day of reckoning and think of all the ills that the US had bestowed upon the world. And reflect that how different it could’ve been had America stayed on the path of reason, innovation and non interference in other countries affairs.
Report thisBy A Khokar, June 29, 2007 at 6:30 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Too late; for the hero
Report thisThe famous shake hand with Rumsfeld on 20 December 1983, sent Saddam Hussein over the moon; he was given a freehand and became a worst dictator in the Middle East. Where it adversely resulted into mass killing of his opponents; it did bring in some good results in the field of job assigned by the god father- United States; He had waged a war of attrition against Iran and achieved a marked success in containing and depleting Iran. He was able to prove himself to be the best US ally and a staunch Proxy.
While he was walking over the moon; he took this bliss to be an ever lasting and was blinded to think beyond his nose. He attacked his neighbouring state Kuwait. But US had different plan. It was time to say; good by to the ‘valued friend’ and accordingly plugs were pulled. He had come to know this, in this Kuwait attack drama when he was horrified to find that he may not see another full moon. But when he had realised it; it was too late for the hero. On a very flimsy pretext his country was attacked by US and he found his regime lost and Iraq the dream land of his empire; reduced to the rubbles smouldering in some stone age- ghost land.
Later, in an obvious play let of his prosecution in the courts set by US; it was irony of his fate that the whole world knew in advance; what will be the out come of his show trail. To cover up the atrocities committed on the behest of US with the weapons and arsenals supplied by US and Europe against Iran and other vicious designs; a first hand witness Saddam Hussein, is successfully silenced. Although; he kept the ‘might of his self pride’ high till last and he did not bend his head till his neck snapped on the gallows.
But he left a lesson for all the dictators and installed monarchs of Arab world that while performing as proxies; (may be an active or passive); beyond the life of their bliss; only few things are certain; a colossal betrayal by their god father-US; and the humiliation; deprivation for their people and a gallows awaiting for the friends at the end.
——————————————
Love for all, Hatred for none
By Deborah, June 27, 2007 at 12:33 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
What many people in foreign lands fail to understand, and many Americans now depressed over the shambles this administration has made of our once proud Democracy, is we are a nation of laws & process.
Although I have a few answers I (as many Americans) havent quite figured out how to seize back control of our errant government.
I beg to differ. I think we do know the answer and that is why we are depressed.
**********
Revolution and a bloody one is the only way to get things back the way they should be should all diplomacy and reasoning fail. And yes, I mean here on American soil. Why we should find the idea of revolution so shocking when that’s pretty much how we began is beyond me.
I know it, you know, Congress knows it and so do Bush and Co.
The only question is will Americans get up out of their cozy middle class imitation lifestyles, pick up a gun and fight?
Report thisBy weather, June 26, 2007 at 4:32 pm #
Israel’s gifts to America
Acrimony, angst and a inexhaustable supply well-choreographed deceit - all very carefully dressed up w/the fraudulent and phony energy of a Hollywood production.
Report thisBy ctbrandon, June 26, 2007 at 2:46 pm #
Bottom line in regards to Saddam, the corporate elite gave him the power and encourgaed him to rule the Middle East to preserve their oil interests. Members of that elite group contain the most powerful Americans in the world.
After he served his purpose, they used 9-11 to launch a campaign of fear, and create links between Iraq, terrorism, and WMD’s that we now know were not real.
He was an evil man and deserved his punishment, but he was also a scapegoat for the real world leaders.
brandon
Report thishttp://www.actforyourself.org
By atheo, June 25, 2007 at 9:26 am #
Paul,
The purpose of posting the Wexner propaganda guidelines was to highlight the usefulness to the Israel lobby of ongoing focus on Saddam Hussein. Something that truthdig may be (inadvertantly) participating in.
Report thisBy PaulMagillSmith, June 25, 2007 at 4:54 am #
Sorry Atheo,
These were the opening statements of the following/preceding post:
‘Tis a rosy picture of the Wexner efforts you proclaim, Atheo, and by some of your comments am I correct in the assumption you are Jewish? Are you looking at things through an un-baised lens? The president of Wexner stated, “The Wexner Foundation strives to be a source of enduring benefit to humankind with a special commitment to strengthening Jewish leadership in North America and Israel.” What exactly does this mean?
Since there are actually so few Jewish people in the world, with a goodly portion already living in the USA, why don’t you all emigrate to the US and end all this turmoil in your region of the world? Understanding the premium Jewish people place on education, and a search for enlightenment, I would logically appreciate one of your immigrants rather than one of the illiterate illegal immigrants swamping our southern borders. Oh good…now people get to call me anti-Semitic
Report thisBy PaulMagillSmith, June 25, 2007 at 4:24 am #
I hope you understand from my last post I am in no way disparaging the Jewish people or the State of Israel; everyone needs somewhere to love, even if it is just a state of mind.
I do, however, take offense to some of the recent events, fostered by Israelis (including & especially radical elements such as Mossad, which I liken to our CIA), that have caused so much turmoil on the world’s stage. As decent people, Jewish or other, we can not allow religious divisions to come between us when opposing these elements contrary to world & regional peace. Wrong should be wrong despite religious affiliation. It’s a matter of honor, rather than politics…or religion.
I look forward to many relevant revelations in our conversations through Truthdig.org
Report thisBy atheo, June 24, 2007 at 10:52 pm #
Wexner Analysis: Israeli Communications Priorities 2003, was prepared for the Wexner Foundation, which operates leadership training programs such as the Birthright Israel project which offers free trips for young Jewish Americans to Israel, by the public relations firm the Luntz Research Companies and the Israel Project:
The world has changed. The words, themes and messages on behalf of Israel must include and embrace the new reality of a post-Saddam world.
In the past, we have urged a lower profile for Israel out of a fear that the American people would blame Israel for what was happening in the rest of the Middle East. Now is the time to link American success in dealing with terrorism and dictators from a position of strength to Israel’s ongoing efforts to eradicate terrorism on and within its borders…
Perceptions of Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are being almost entirely colored and often overshadowed by the continuing action in Iraq. Partisan differences still exist (the political Left remains your problem) and complaints about Israeli heavy-handedness still exist…
There will certainly be some people, particularly those on the political left, who will oppose whatever words you use, but the language that follows will help you secure support from a large majority of Americans. These recommendations are based on two “dial test” sessions in Chicago and Los Angeles conducted during the first ten days of the Iraqi war for the Wexner Foundation…
1) Iraq colors all. Saddam is your best defense, even if he is dead. The worldview Americans is entirely dominated by developments in Iraq. This is a unique opportunity for Israelis to deliver a message of support and unity at a time of great international anxiety and opposition from some of our European “allies.” For a year - a SOLID YEAR - you should be invoking the name of Saddam Hussein and how Israel was always behind American efforts to rid the world of this ruthless dictator and liberate their people. Saddam will remain a powerful symbol of terror to Americans for a long time to come. A pro-Israeli expression of solidarity with the American people in their successful effort to remove Saddam will be appreciated.
2) Stick to your message but don’t say it the same way twice. We have seen this in the past but never so starkly as today. Americans are paying very close attention to international developments and are particularly sensitive to any kind of apparent dogma or canned presentations. If they hear you repeating the exact same words over and over again, they will come to distrust your message…
3) It DOES NOT HELP when you compliment President Bush. When you want to identify with and align yourself with America, just say it. Don’t use George Bush as a synonym for the United States…
4) “SECURITY” sells. Security has become the key fundamental principle for all Americans. Security is the context by which you should explain Israeli need for loan guarantees and military aid, as well as why Israel can’t just give up land. The settlements are our Achilles heel, and the best response (which is still quite weak) is the need for security that this buffer creates.
THE TWO MOST IMPORTANT WORDS: SADDAM HUSSEIN
...let me be blunt. “Saddam Hussein” are the two words that tie Israel to America. They also just happen to be two of the most hated words in the English language right now.
Report thisThere are some who would say that Saddam Hussein is already old news. They don’t understand history. They don’t understand communication. They don’t understand how to integrate and leverage history and communication for the benefit of Israel. The day we allow Saddam to take his eventual place in the trash heap of history is the day we loose our strongest weapon in the linguistic defense of Israel.
By weather, June 24, 2007 at 10:27 pm #
The sad truth is before Israel, Islam was of little concern to America.
Report thisBy great_satan, June 24, 2007 at 5:53 pm #
Who saw the long Charlie Rose interview with Bush?
Report thisIn human/primate body language, the most obvious involuntary gesture exposing a lie is to suddenly reach behind the head with the right hand, usually then followed by scratching the back of the head or neck. It is a primate threatening gesture, but in humans is indicative of lying.
When Rose asked regarding the future of Iraq, Bush made this gesture. The questions weren’t only toward what Bush foresaw in Iraq, but what he intended. He of course answered that there was hope for the new Regime to stabilize the country and that such was his intent.
After he made this gesture when he was claiming his intent was to have a stable peaceful Iraq, he began to actually hold the wrist of his right hand with his left hand.
Conclusion: the goal is chaos. The goal is actually escalation of conflict, probably leading into the Iran war, nukes and all.
By PaulMagillSmith, June 24, 2007 at 5:27 pm #
Ernest,
Your comment (#80957) certainly is not off-topic. It’s all connected, but I believe traces directly back to Mossad & complicity with the Bush administration regarding the events of 911. Whether I’m correct in my views, based on a wealth of information we have been royally deceived & screwed, or even if I am wrong and things really happened as stated in the very suspect Official 911 Commission Report there are too many still unanswered questions to NOT re-open an examination of this critical event. We must know for certain or our country will ever be as divided as by the Civil War or Viet Nam. Thanks for the video link http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=964034652002408586 repeated because I’m sure it’s too important to miss. Unfortunately I only have dial-up here so must go to a friend’s to see it, but you can believe I will make the effort.
Thankyou for your link also, Atheo. (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fakealqaeda.html)
Report thisI’ve seen much of it before and early on smelled the Zionist/Mossad rat. And don’t anyone out there call me anti-Semitic because this has nothing to do with the Jewish people. As I was reading on a site just last night, “Not all Jewish people are Zionists, and not all Zionists are Jewish”. Further, there are rogue elements in Israel the Israelis don’t approve of, that are as out of control as rogue elements in America, and neither have the support of decent honorable people regardless of religion. In fact Torah Judaism & Zionism are incompatible and in opposition. A Google search of Judaism versus Zionism will reveal many good links explaining the difference if you are interested.
By cann4ing, June 24, 2007 at 3:40 pm #
Atheo, while both your reference to a fake al Qaeda and the matter I am about to post are a bit off topic, after reading that Mr. Kucinich plans to conduct hearings in September that will address unresolved questions about 9/11, another Truthdigger posted a link to a video that should be viewed by all—especially someone like myself who had, until watching it, been skeptical about the potential for official complicity.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=964034652002408586
For those who have a couple hours to do so, I think it is a must see. I would certainly be curious as to what impact this has on other Truthdiggers.
Report thisBy PaulMagillSmith, June 24, 2007 at 1:50 pm #
RE: #80532 by Lefty on 6/22 at 2:12 pm
(345 comments total)
“My enemy is Bush and the fascist/GOP, each and every one of them. I will not take the blame for their crimes. And, we should not be willing to take the blame for their crimes, either.”
Thankyou for pointing out to the world there is a distinct difference between how the American people think and how our government acts on various issues. Especially grevious is how our criminal executive branch has disregarded the expressed will of the majority of American citizens on issue after issue, often even of majorities in both the House & Senate, especially through the use of legally suspect ‘signing statements’.
What many people in foreign lands fail to understand, and many Americans now depressed over the shambles this administration has made of our once proud Democracy, is we are a nation of laws & process. Our Constitution, the basis for our legal system, may get temporarily twisted & perverted at times, but the test of time shows it never gets completely broken. Eventually the ship of state rights itself (or should I quip rights its rights), but the process is slow & arduous. The righting process is now well underway, with more and more Americans realizing they have made a serious mistake by putting a Captain Bligh at the helm of our ‘ship of state’.
One thing we have in our favor is, despite the fact the effects of dictatorships may last even generations, in the longer historical context tyrannies are temporary. The righteous ultimately triumph over the wicked, the sublime over the base.
One factor we have against us now, however, is never before in human history has a dictator had within their power the capability of destroying the entire human population, through overt acts instigating nuclear holocaust, or by greedy acts of neglecting climate change, that could ultimately lead to a planet devoid of any higher lifeforms. We stand at unique & dangerous crossroads, so timliness has now become a crucial element for civilization.
Although I have a few answers I (as many Americans) haven’t quite figured out how to seize back control of our errant government. It’s not a quandry easily resolved. The will of the majority is being thwarted by the controlling actions of an ever shrinking minority. We now have the numbers, but they still control the means. There is still enormous damage the neo-con fascist FOG (Friends Of George) people can do before the next election cycle, but as previously stated, since we are a nation of laws & process, the best we can do at the moment is damage control to keep our heads above water. We must hold everyone’s feet to the fire, Republican, Democrat, Independent, Green, or whatever, and agressively ask the tough questions of those running.
It is now every citizen’s duty, as patriotic defenders of the true Constitution (and I’m not talking of what Bush thinks the Constitution is about) to use every means possible to expose the lies we have been propagandized through fear to accept. We must rally & educate friends & neighbors with facts about wrong doings & blatant criminal acts of this administration, and propose workable logical solutions to the many problems we now face. A violent revolution is no longer a possibility because of technological advances in weaponry, but it may not even have to come to that since the majority of the military now seem to be catchin on they have been mis-used, abused, used, and duped into doing the bidding of a tyrant every bit as bad, deceptive, & decidedly more dangerous than Saddam Hussein.
Report thisBy Mudwollow, June 24, 2007 at 1:07 pm #
We = Homo sapiens.
Thanks for bringing up the absurdity of everything quickly becoming Al Qaeda this or Al Qaeda that. No more outrageous than the fictitious Jessica Lynch scam.
A fictitious president and a fictitious regime all struggling to appear real with the help of a fictitious press.
Report thisBy atheo, June 24, 2007 at 12:13 pm #
Fake Al Qaeda
“Ana raicha Al Qaeda” is colloquial for “I’m going to the toilet”. A very common and widespread use of the word Al-Qaeda in different Arab countries in the public language is for the toilet bowl. This name comes from the Arabic verb Qa’ada which mean to sit, pertinently, on the Toilet Bowl. In most Arabs homes there are two kinds of toilets: Al-Qaeda also called the “Hamam Franji” or foreign toilet, and “Hamam Arabi” or Arab toilet which is a hole in the ground. Lest we forget it, the potty used by small children is called “Ma Qa’adia” or “Little Qaeda”.
So, if you were forming a terrorist group, would you call yourself, “The Toilet”?
Is there really an independent “al queda” or just the groups that the CIA and Mossad created in the 80’s and flunkies who are taken with them?
More at:
Report thishttp://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fakealqaeda.html
By cann4ing, June 24, 2007 at 12:04 pm #
Atheo, you are suprised that the corporate media, Michael Gordon, in particular, would simply parrot the administration’s latest propaganda line of treating every Iraqi who takes up arms to resist this illegal occupation as al Qaida?
Gordon is not a journalist. He is a stenographer. Bill Moyers offered up some astute observations when he commented on Jim Lehrer’s belief that “unless an official says something is so, it isn’t news. Why were journalists not discussing the occupation in Iraq? Because, says Lehrer, the word ‘occupation’...was never mentioned in the run-up to the war.’ Washington talked about the invasion as ‘a war of liberation, not a war of occupation. So as a consequence, those of us in journalism never even looked at the issue of occupation.’”
Remember that it was Michael Gordon, who together with Judith Miller, co-authored a Sept. 8, 2002 front-page New York Times article, later cited by Richard Cheney on Meet the Press. In the article Gordon and Miller reported that “more than a decade after Saddam Hussein agreed to give up weapons of mass destruction, Iraq has stepped up its quest for nuclear weapons.” This was the article that presented the bogus claim that Iraq was acquiring aluminum tubes “intended as components of centrifuges to enrich uranium.”
Despite the fact that this article was also relied upon by Congress in the force authorization vote and that his own paper later issued a somewhat chiseling mea culpa, when pressed by Amy Goodman, Gordon because defensive and somewhat hostile, telling Ms. Goodman that she did not know how the press operated. He noted that, at the time the article was published, there were no other agencies in the US government disputing the view the tubes were intended as centrifuges. The IAEA did not come out with a contrary view until January and that, when it did, he was the one who co-wrote about it, along with James Risen—a piece which Ms. Goodman notes, was buried by the Times at p. A-10, whereas the original piece was given prominant front page exposure.
Missing throughout Gordon’s defensive diatribe was any hint of recognition that the need for his paper’s mea culpa could have been avoided if he and Ms. Miller had simply sought out the IAEA position “before” they went public with the article.
Report thisBy Enemy of State, June 24, 2007 at 11:53 am #
Atheo:
Good references.
There are two possibilities for this “everyone one we are fighting against is AlQaeda” syndrome:
(1) We have become really well focused, and only are targeting the AlQaeda in Iraq forces.
or
(2) It is plain old propaganda.
We may be trying to do (1), but with AQI being only a few percent of the insurgents -and supposedly the Sunni Tribal leaders fighting them for us, it seem highly unlikely we are that well targeted.
Report thisBy atheo, June 24, 2007 at 10:57 am #
Everyone we fight in Iraq is now “al-Qaida”
by Josh Marshall
It’s a curious thing that, over the past 10 - 12 days, the news from Iraq refers to the combatants there as “al-Qaida” fighters…
Until a few days ago, the combatants in Iraq were “insurgents”...now, without evidence, without proof, without any semblance of fact, the US military command is referring to these combatants as “al-Qaida”.
Welcome to the latest in Iraq propaganda.
That the Bush administration decided to begin using the term “Al Qaeda” to designate “anyone and everyeone we fight against or kill in Iraq” is obvious. All of a sudden, every time one of the top military commanders describes our latest operations or quantifies how many we killed, the enemy is referred to, almost exclusively now, as “Al Qaeda.”
But what is even more notable is that the establishment press has followed right along, just as enthusiastically. I don’t think the New York Times has published a story about Iraq in the last two weeks without stating that we are killing “Al Qaeda fighters,” capturing “Al Qaeda leaders,” and every new operation is against “Al Qaeda.”
The Times typically in the form of the gullible and always-government-trusting “reporting” of Michael Gordon, though not only makes this claim over and over, as prominently as possible, often without the slightest questioning, qualification, or doubt. If your only news about Iraq came from The New York Times, you would think that the war in Iraq is now indistinguishable from the initial stage of the war in Afghanistan that we are there fighting against the people who hijacked those planes and flew them into our buildings: “Al Qaeda.”
What is so amazing about this new rhetorical development not only from our military, but also from our “journalists” is that, for years, it was too shameless and false even for the Bush administration to use. Even at the height of their propaganda offensives about the war, the furthest Bush officials were willing to go was to use the generic term “terrorists”...
But now, support for the war is at an all-time low and war supporters are truly desperate to find a way to stay in Iraq. So the administration has thrown any remnants of rhetorical caution to the wind, overtly calling everyone we are fighting “Al Qaeda.” This strategy was first unveiled by Joe Lieberman when he went on Meet the Press in January and claimed that the U.S. was “attacked on 9/11 by the same enemy that we’re fighting in Iraq today”. Though Lieberman was widely mocked at the time for his incomparable willingness to spew even the most patent falsehoods to justify the occupation, our intrepid political press corps now dutifully follows right along.
Here is the first paragraph from today’s New York Times article on our latest offensive, based exclusively on the claims of our military commanders:
The operational commander of troops battling to drive fighters with Al Qaeda from Baquba said Friday that 80 percent of the top Qaeda leaders in the city fled before the American-led offensive began earlier this week. He compared their flight with the escape of Qaeda leaders from Falluja ahead of an American offensive that recaptured that city in 2004.
The article then uses the term “Qaeda” an addtional 19 times to describe the enemy we are fighting “Qaeda leaders,” “Qaeda strongholds,” “Qaeda fighters,” “Qaeda groups,” the “Qaeda threat,” etc. What is our objective in Iraq? To “move into neighborhoods cleared of Qaeda fighters and hold them.”
To refer to them as “Al Qaeda” so casually and with so little basis (other than the fact that U.S. military officials now do so) is misleading and propagandistic in the extreme…
What makes this practice all the more disturbing is how quickly and obediently the media has adopted the change in terms consciously issued by the Bush administration and their military officials…
salon.com
Report thisBy Verne Arnold, June 24, 2007 at 2:21 am #
#80814 by Enemy of State on 6/23 at 8:17 pm
Good post and thanks for the positive mention.
I agree, fear is the real enemy. It seems we always need a boogie-man.
Remember also; fear is a thief, do not let it steal from you.
Report thisBy Enemy of State, June 24, 2007 at 12:17 am #
Verne has some good points, about our combination of cluelessness and meddling.
RAE has some very good points. But Americas citizens are distracted by Paris Hilton, and missoing pregnant white women etc. The rest can be manipulated by issues like abortion, and gay marriage…
One cause, important, but clearly not the only one is fear. Remember Heinlein’s Dune, the “hero: had to keep telling himself “I will not fear. Fear is the mind killer”. That has been very much true in US politics, and our foreign meddling of the past half century. First we were scared witless of the commies. Then it was Iran (thats why we so strongly supported Saddam). Now it is AlQaeda. Notice how we keep conflating the various bad guys in Iraq, as AlQaeda -when in fact most are otherwise. Heck we I even read that Hamas was really AlQaeda! We have got to stop letting overblown fear destroy our ability to use critical thinking.
Report thisBy prosefights, June 23, 2007 at 11:17 pm #
Brzezinki has been charged with inciting saddam hussein to attack Iran in 1980.
Formal criminal complaint affidavit was docketed June 12, 2007 in New Mexico federal court.
Let’s all hope for peaceful settlement and see what happened.
Follow prosefights.org
Report thisBy great_satan, June 23, 2007 at 6:05 pm #
#80755 by Mudwollow
“We couldnt allow Saddam Hussein to dredge up the history of how America enabled him to gas the Kurds. We have spent way too much time and money turning Ronald Reagan into a conservative deity.”
You have the same semantics problem that I’ve been battling for years.
Report this“What’s this we stuff, paleface?”
From any perspective other than the most spiritually inclusive, I don’t consider the neo-cons, “we.” It is for damned sure they don’t think of us as “we,” even if you they might say so in propaganda.
By Mudwollow, June 23, 2007 at 5:59 pm #
That’s ridiculous. We couldn’t allow Saddam Hussein to dredge up the history of how America enabled him to gas the Kurds. We have spent way too much time and money turning Ronald Reagan into a conservative deity.
Report thisBy great_satan, June 23, 2007 at 5:12 pm #
#80728 by RAE
“I sure dont have any (legal) suggestions as to what to do about the mass hypnosis/hysteria that has gripped America, and since Im not an American, I should perhaps summon up whatever modicum of humility still remains within me and just shut up about it.”
Well, such was the point of the last oh three paragraphs or so of my dissertation!
Report thisPlease act! We want your support. We NEED international support from people and governments. Pressure your governemnt (wherever you are,) to pressure ours and remove any allegiance to our neo-cons, military industrialists and so on.
By RAE, June 23, 2007 at 4:18 pm #
I agree with Verne Arnold: “We are no longer protected by our countries borders and if we make truly bad judgments we may have to pay a very high price…”
And I agree with Lefty as he/she agrees with Verne Arnold: “I am an American, and I am not a monster. Neither we nor I, voted for any of these people. Neither we nor I support any of these people or any of their fascist policies, express and in fact.”
But somehow, folks, your REPRESENTATIVES have become your WORST ENEMIES. Foreign “terrorists” are the LEAST OF YOUR PROBLEMS!
I sure don’t have any (legal) suggestions as to what to do about the mass hypnosis/hysteria that has gripped America, and since I’m not an American, I should perhaps summon up whatever modicum of humility still remains within me and just shut up about it.
But the problem with remaining silent, however, is that we non-Americans get skewered when the American administration makes its “mistakes”... when American “monsters” rampage around the world causing havoc wherever and whenever it suits (profits) them to do so.
As was pointed out, American non-monsters apparently are not voting in sufficient numbers to prevent the “monsters” from hijacking your system and causing serious threat to the peace and safety of EVERY LIVING THING ON THE PLANET.
There is plenty of documentation of the misdeeds of the American military/industrial administrative complex. Instead of more essays illustrating how awful these bad folks in power can be (and are) we need to somehow get the American non-monsters off their lazy asses and into the voting booths… EDUCATED and HONESTLY INFORMED.
It’s almost impossible for me to believe “Average Joe & Jane” are actually so dim-witted and devoid of analytical abilities as to again vote in a pack of monsters. But I sure wouldn’t put any money on it. Americans seem incapable of not falling for HYPE, especially when it comes wrapped in the flag accompanied by dire threats of religious hellfire and damnation.
Report thisBy atheo, June 23, 2007 at 1:34 pm #
The war crime investigation that the US media won’t cover:
American Media Misses the Boat
USA Today and the USS Liberty
By ALISON WEIR
Capitol Hill, October 2003. It is a historic occasion. An independent, blue-ribbon commission is to release its findings from an investigation into an internationally significant 36-year-old attack on a US Navy ship that left more than 200 American sailors killed or wounded…
The commission announces explosive findings:
* That the attack, by a US ally, was a “deliberate attempt to destroy an American ship and kill her entire crew”
* That the ally committed “acts of murder against American servicemen and an act of war against the United States”
* That the attack involved the machine-gunning of stretcher-bearers and life rafts
* That “the White House deliberately prevented the U.S. Navy from coming to the defense of the [ship] never before in American naval history has a rescue mission been cancelled when an American ship was under attack”
* That surviving crewmembers were later threatened with “court-martial, imprisonment or worse” if they talked to anyone about what had happened to them; and were “abandoned by their own government”
* That due to the influence of the ally’s “powerful supporters in the United States, the White House deliberately covered up the facts of this attack from the American people”
* That due to continuing pressure by this lobby, this attack remains “the only serious naval incident that has never been thoroughly investigated by Congress”
* That “there has been an official cover-up without precedent in American naval history”
* That “the truth about Israel’s attack and subsequent White House cover-up continues to be officially concealed from the American people to the present day and is a national disgrace”
* That “a danger to the national security exists whenever our elected officials are willing to subordinate American interests to those of any foreign nation” and that this policy “endangers the safety of Americans and the security of the United States”
Newsworthy?
Not when Israel is the attacking nation. Not when Israel is the “ally”...
Apart from a few members of the alternative press and the excellent Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (not indexed by Lexis), this commission might as well not have existed as far as most of the US media is concerned—and therefore, the American public…
While AP did have a story on the Liberty on June 8th, the report, oddly, was filed from Israel and was sent out only internationally; US editors never saw it. Where the US media did produce stories, almost all (like the above AP story) gave the Israeli invention—that “investigations” showed it was accidental…
full article:
http://www.counterpunch.org/weir06232007.html
Report thisBy GW=MCHammered, June 23, 2007 at 12:55 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Sickos we’d like to see:
Sicko 2, Uncle Sam’s UnJustice System and Patriots’ Just Intervention
Report thisSicko 3, America’s Terminal Politics and the People’s Democratic Cure
Sicko 4, Who Knew? GOD’s Demise (Good Ol’ Dollar) Turns Manna from Heaven
By cann4ing, June 23, 2007 at 12:21 pm #
As an addendum to my previous post, discrepancies in coverage of chemical warfare by the U.S. corporate media are not new.
As Edward Herman & Noam Chomsky note in the introduction to the 2000 edition of “Manufacturing Consent” a marked discrepancy can be found between foreign and American coverage of the US use of chemical weapons in Vietnam. “Between 1961 and 1971…the US Air Force sprayed 20 million gallons of concentrated arsenic-based and dioxin-laden herbicides (mainly Agent Orange) on 6 million acres of crops and trees, besides using large quantities of…CS and vast amounts of napalm and phospherous bombs. An estimated 13% of South Vietnam’s land was subjected to chemical attacks….A 1967 study prepared by the head of the Agronomy Section of the Japanese Science Council concluded that US anticrop warfare had already ruined more than 3.8 million acres of arable land…, killing almost 1,000 peasants and over 13,000 livestock….
“Although the UN General Assembly did strongly condemn the use of chemical agents as contrary to international law by an 83-to-3 vote in 1969, it was powerless to act against the United States….During the Vietnam war, the use of chemicals was reported and criticized when it was first disclosed in 1966, but the subject was quickly dropped. The illegality of chemical warfare and the policy of starvation, and their effects on the victim population were virtually unreported.”
Just as the exposure of the Iraqi WMD canard had to await an invasion that was already a fait accompli, even then with the chiseling excuse that the administration and media were “misled” by bad intelligence, so the focus of the corporate media on US chemical warfare in Vietnam had to await a significant passage of time when the impact of such a discussion would not affect US policies in that country. Thus, Herman & Chomsky report that some 522 articles appeared in the NY Times, Washington Post, LA Times, Newsweek & Time during the ‘90s. The “vast majority focused on the harm done to US service personnel; only nine articles acknowledged the targeting of food crops…; only eleven discussed in any detail the impact on the Vietnamese environment; only three characterized the use of Agent Orange as a ‘chemical weapon’...; and in only two articles was it suggested that its use might constitute a war crime.”
Within the propaganda network (also known as the conglomerated corporate media), a war crime is only a war crime when it is committed by the officially designated “enemy.”
Report thisBy cann4ing, June 23, 2007 at 11:51 am #
The US corporate media has proven itself as capable of an abrupt reversal as would be required by the propagandists of George Orwell’s Oceania, especially when it comes to coverage over a single event, the alleged May 1988 gassing of the Kurds in Halabja.
This issue was the subject of a 9/29/03 segment of Democracy Now!
The basic facts of the event remain in dispute. Stephen Pelletier, a former CIA analyst, said he received an assignment to investigate the attack from the US Army. He contends Halabja was infiltrated by Iranians; that the decision to use chemical weapons was made by a local Iraqi commander (as opposed to Saddam & “Chemical Ali”) and that the Kurds were killed as “collateral damage.” He notes that a separate DIA investigation concluded “the Kurds had been killed by Iranian gas, not by Iraqi gas. And they determined this because the extremities were blue, and that indicated a cyanide-based gas, and the Iraqis didn’t have it.”
John Stauber noted that, in the wake of this event, Colin Powll, then Regan’s national security advisor, led the effort to block passage of a 1988 bipartisan Congressional effort to enact legislation to prevent genocide. During the buildup to “Operation Desert Storm” the Bush I administration avoided all mention of Halabja. “Halabja was mentioned in 188 news stories in the U.S. in 1988, the year it occurred. It was rarely mentioned…in subsequent years….Between the invasion of Kuwait on Aug. 2, 1990 and the end of Operation Desert Storm on Feb. 27, 1991, Halabja received only 39 mentions. And during the entire following decade, it barely averaged 16 mentions per year.” Stauber notes Halabja was resurrected in the press only after the Bush II administration began pushing for an invasion in Sept. 2002, with the number of mentions increasing to 57 in Feb. 2003, up to 145 by March 2003—the month of the invasion.”
On 9/28/03 Sec. of State Colin Powell, appearing on ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos,” asserted the March 1988 attack on Halabja, involved an instance where “Saddam Hussein gassed the people with VX, sarin, nerve agents, and it killed 5,000 people in one day…” On 4/8/06 the New York Times published a Reuters release that Sadaam Hussein and his cousin, Ali Hassan al Majeed (“Chemical Ali”) would face additional genocide charges, noting: “Majeed is best known for directing an unrealted poison gas attack against…Halabja in 1988 that killed 5,000 people….”
Report thisBy Paolo, June 23, 2007 at 10:00 am #
To paraphrase Ron Paul: “Have you never heard of BLOWBACK?”
Our Masters in Washington, Republican and Democrat alike, have long labored under the illusion that they can manipulate the world through foreign aid, through clandestine operations (like the one that put Saddam Hussein in power), or through outright war.
Then, they congratulate each other and give each other the MEDAL OF FREEDOM for the great job they did.
Don’t these creeps just make you want to hurl?
Report thisBy Bryan Morton, June 23, 2007 at 9:17 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Saddam’s real crime was the dumping of US dollars in trade for Euros. The only power the US has left is in keeping the Dollar recognized as the world’s currency. With the Federal Reserve Bank printing fiat currency and borrowing against it to the tune of over 8 trillion and climbing, that power is getting pretty threadbare. It’s a house of cards which could easily be upset. Why is Iran an enemy again? Not because of nuclear weapons. Not really. But because it too fears the collapse of the Dollar and has also begun dumping Dollars for Euros. Chapter 2?
Report thisBy Verne Arnold, June 23, 2007 at 3:51 am #
#80430 by atheo on 6/22 at 8:13 am
A War Crime or an Act of War?
By Stephen C. Pelletiere
New York Times
Friday 31 January 2003
“Thus America could alter the destiny of the Middle East in a way that probably could not be challenged for decadesnot solely by controlling Iraqs oil, but by controlling its water ”
Of course, I forgot about that. There is that old bait and switch again. Israel has been maneuvering for water in its battle with the Palestinians I believe they finally got it away from them.
Back on point this is one more reason to get rid of Saddam as soon as possible. We could not have him talking he might have gotten somebody to listen.
Good information, thanks.
Report thisBy shz, June 23, 2007 at 3:45 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Saddam’s hanging is like the quick dispatch of Lee Harvey Oswald and Timothy McVeigh. All dead before they could do much talking.
Report thisBy great_satan, June 23, 2007 at 1:08 am #
From the main article:
“It is thus understandable that there has been no mention in the Baghdad courtroom of foreign complicity with Saddams crimes, such as the genocide of the Kurds. What is surprising, though, is how thoroughly the American media have played along with that charade.”
Why is that surprising?
Report thisBy Mitch, June 22, 2007 at 6:23 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
WOW. Mr. Lando, that was a journalistic tour-de-force! Great read, excellent work. It’s a shame on our media system that these facts haven’t been pointed out anywhere else aside from alternative media outlets.
Report thisBy TruthSeeker, June 22, 2007 at 3:53 pm #
A Saddam trial would have been very embarrasing to the Western powers. He was our tyrant, no doubt about it. America was complicit in his crimes, yet they pale in comparison to the ones we alone are at present committing on a daily basis.
Perhaps we should have a tribunal and trial for our version of Saddam, Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney and of course the grotesque neocon cabal hijacking our nation. Now those would be trials I would pay to see!
For a very good article on what we have done in Iraq, I recommend “Holocaust Redux”. For a look at what the neocons have done to America, I recommend “Of Crazies, Neocons and the Enemy Within”.
Links:
http://valenzuelasveritas.blogspot.com/2007/06/of-crazies-neocons-and-enemy-within.html
http://valenzuelasveritas.blogspot.com/2007/04/holocaust-redux.html
Report thisBy 127001, June 22, 2007 at 3:47 pm #
I totally agree with Verne Arnold ...
It is also manipulation by the U.S., thinking they are all-powerful and immune from consequences.
Sad.
We are nothing but monsters in a monstrous world.
Report thisBy Dale Headley, June 22, 2007 at 3:19 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
This was a completely phony trial from beginning to grisly end. Foreign lawyers (like Ramsey Clark) were denied, partly through death threats, the ability to defend him. Why? Because they would have exposed the truth. Even Saddam’s quick execution was designed to get rid of him before he could implicate officials high up in the American government complicit in his crimes.
Report thisBy Michael Boldin, June 22, 2007 at 1:21 pm #
The sad reality, is that the dictator, the murderer, the tyrant - Saddam Hussein - was actually telling the truth about WMD’s, terrorism and the like before the war.
And, the “leader of the free world,” the president - George Bush - was the only telling untruths.
What a sad place we’ve sunk to when this is reality.
Some follow up reading:
“Saddam was Right and Bush was Wrong”
Report thishttp://www.populistamerica.com/saddam_was_right_and_bush_was_wrong
By atheo, June 22, 2007 at 12:13 pm #
A War Crime or an Act of War?
By Stephen C. Pelletiere
New York Times
Friday 31 January 2003
It was no surprise that President Bush, lacking smoking-gun evidence of Iraq’s weapons programs, used his State of the Union address to re-emphasize the moral case for an invasion: “The dictator who is assembling the world’s most dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages, leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind or disfigured.”
...But the truth is, all we know for certain is that Kurds were bombarded with poison gas that day at Halabja. We cannot say with any certainty that Iraqi chemical weapons killed the Kurds. This is not the only distortion in the Halabja story.
I am in a position to know because, as the Central Intelligence Agency’s senior political analyst on Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war, and as a professor at the Army War College from 1988 to 2000, I was privy to much of the classified material that flowed through Washington having to do with the Persian Gulf. In addition, I headed a 1991 Army investigation into how the Iraqis would fight a war against the United States; the classified version of the report went into great detail on the Halabja affair.
This much about the gassing at Halabja we undoubtedly know: it came about in the course of a battle between Iraqis and Iranians. Iraq used chemical weapons to try to kill Iranians who had seized the town, which is in northern Iraq not far from the Iranian border. The Kurdish civilians who died had the misfortune to be caught up in that exchange. But they were not Iraq’s main target.
And the story gets murkier: immediately after the battle the United States Defense Intelligence Agency investigated and produced a classified report, which it circulated within the intelligence community on a need-to-know basis. That study asserted that it was Iranian gas that killed the Kurds, not Iraqi gas.
The agency did find that each side used gas against the other in the battle around Halabja. The condition of the dead Kurds’ bodies, however, indicated they had been killed with a blood agent—that is, a cyanide-based gas—which Iran was known to use. The Iraqis, who are thought to have used mustard gas in the battle, are not known to have possessed blood agents at the time.
These facts have long been in the public domain but, extraordinarily, as often as the Halabja affair is cited, they are rarely mentioned. A much-discussed article in The New Yorker last March did not make reference to the Defense Intelligence Agency report or consider that Iranian gas might have killed the Kurds. On the rare occasions the report is brought up, there is usually speculation, with no proof, that it was skewed out of American political favoritism toward Iraq in its war against Iran.
I am not trying to rehabilitate the character of Saddam Hussein. He has much to answer for in the area of human rights abuses. But accusing him of gassing his own people at Halabja as an act of genocide is not correct, because as far as the information we have goes, all of the cases where gas was used involved battles. These were tragedies of war. There may be justifications for invading Iraq, but Halabja is not one of them…
We are constantly reminded that Iraq has perhaps the world’s largest reserves of oil. But in a regional and perhaps even geopolitical sense, it may be more important that Iraq has the most extensive river system in the Middle East…that [could] bring the waters of the Tigris and Euphrates south to the parched Gulf states and, by extension, Israel… With Iraq in American hands, of course, all that could change.
Thus America could alter the destiny of the Middle East in a way that probably could not be challenged for decades—not solely by controlling Iraq’s oil, but by controlling its water…
http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/020303C.htm
Report thisBy carlito paquito, June 22, 2007 at 12:04 pm #
Now why in God’s name would our “Free Press Media” want to broadcast probably the trial of the century about the leader of Iraq which supposedly prompted us into this nightmare to begin with? No Paris Hilton? OJ Simpson? or Nicole Smith? I don’t see the value in a “Democracy Free Press” otherwise. I hope you all realize I’m trying to do a poor Stephen Colbert imitation;)
Report thisBy JKoch, June 22, 2007 at 11:46 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Saddam’s trial would have been more convincing if the principal charges consisted of crimes against fellow Sunnis or perhaps wreckless initiation of wars. His conviction for crimes against Kurds or Shiites may leave some Sunnis feeling the execution was sectarian payback, as the hanging video seemed to corroborate. Were Iraqis vinidcated, or merely the fanatical Sadrists?
Nice to think that a “fair” trial might have allowed a full parade of “facts” about the past. However, it would have been difficult to assemble disinterested, credible witnesses. Saddam himself would never have furnished any reliable testimony, only rants and posturing. Nor would he have written any sort of Eichmann apology or Speer confession. At best, it would have been a combination of tall tales and rants.
A megalomaniac distorts the past even in his own mind and no longer remembers anything but his own shining ideas about himself, his feats, or his grandeur. Unfortunately, this is a mental disorder that even some US leaders and CEOs display too.
Report thisBy weather, June 22, 2007 at 10:53 am #
The sad, firm and irrevocable truth is
Report thisbefore Israel, Islam was of little concern to America.
By Verne Arnold, June 22, 2007 at 10:19 am #
This is not new news for me…I have followed this for more than 20 years.
I now live outside of the U.S. and the single most poignant statement I hear from people from all over the world is…you Americans have no idea about the world around you. Youre so isolationist.
At first, I took exception to that statement, but after thinking about it, I would now have to agree its true.
Armed with that information is there any doubt as to why we are in this total cluster fuck of a situation?
We (Americans) have tacitly refused to accept any responsibilities for the monsters we have created through more decades than I care to remember; in all of the hemispheres extant on this planet. There is no place on Earth untouched by our debauchery.
Those that have no idea about the realities of the world around them are doomed to make very bad, profoundly damaging decisions. We are no longer protected by our countries borders and if we make truly bad judgments we may have to pay a very high price beyond our wildest imagination and our borders will no longer guarantee safety. Our safety and security is guaranteed by compassionate and just decisions. This will only come to be with a true and just world view, not by assuaging corporate interests.
We are far from this position at this time.
Report this