soldier girl





  • A public inquiry into the death of an Iraqi man in British custody was shown a video of a British soldier screaming at hooded prisoners. The first day of the wide-ranging inquiry in central London heard that Baha Mousa, a 26-year-old hotel receptionist who died in Basra, southern Iraq, died after a "struggle" with two soldiers. Images of the video allegedly showing abuse by a British soldier


    fort carson Soldiers from an Army unit that had 10 infantrymen accused of murder, attempted murder or manslaughter after returning to civilian life described a breakdown in discipline during their Iraq deployment in which troops murdered civilians, a newspaper reported Sunday.

    Some Fort Carson, Colo.-based soldiers have had trouble adjusting to life back in the United States, saying they refused to seek help, or were belittled or punished for seeking help. Others say they were ignored by their commanders, or coped through drug and alcohol abuse before they allegedly committed crimes, The Gazette of Colorado Springs said. The Gazette based its report on months of interviews with soldiers and their families, medical and military records, court documents and photographs. Several soldiers said unit discipline deteriorated while in Iraq.

    "Toward the end, we were so mad and tired and frustrated," said Daniel Freeman. "You came too close, we lit you up. You didn't stop, we ran your car over with the Bradley," an armored fighting vehicle. With each roadside bombing, soldiers would fire in all directions "and just light the whole area up," said Anthony Marquez, a friend of Freeman in the 1st Battalion, 9th Infantry Regiment. "If anyone was around, that was their fault. We smoked 'em." Taxi drivers got shot for no reason, and others were dropped off bridges after interrogations, said Marcus Mifflin, who was eventually discharged with post traumatic stress syndrome.

    "You didn't get blamed unless someone could be absolutely sure you did something wrong," he said Soldiers interviewed by The Gazette cited lengthy deployments, being sent back into battle after surviving war injuries that would have been fatal in previous conflicts, and engaging in some of the bloodiest combat in Iraq. The soldiers describing those experiences were part of the 3,500-soldier unit now called the 4th Infantry Division's 4th Brigade Combat Team. Since 2005, some brigade soldiers also have been involved in brawls, beatings, rapes, DUIs, drug deals, domestic violence, shootings, stabbings, kidnapping and suicides.

    The unit was deployed for a year to Iraq's Sunni Triangle in September 2004. Sixty-four unit soldiers were killed and more than 400 wounded - about double the average for Army brigades in Iraq, according to Fort Carson. In 2007, the unit served a bloody 15-month mission in Baghdad. It's currently deployed to the Khyber Pass region in Afghanistan. Marquez was the first in his brigade to kill someone after an Iraq tour. In 2006, he used a stun gun to shock a drug dealer in Widefield, Colo., in a dispute over a marijuana sale, then shot and killed him. Marquez's mother, Teresa Hernandez, warned Marquez's sergeant at Fort Carson her son was showing signs of violent behavior, abusing alcohol and pain pills and carrying a gun. "I told them he was a walking time bomb," she said. Hernandez said the sergeant later taunted Marquez about her phone call.

    "If I was just a guy off the street, I might have hesitated to shoot," Marquez told The Gazette in the Bent County Correctional Facility, where he is serving a 30-year prison term. "But after Iraq, it was just natural." The Army trains soldiers to be that way, said Kenneth Eastridge, an infantry specialist serving 10 years for accessory to murder. "The Army pounds it into your head until it is instinct: Kill everybody, kill everybody," he said. "And you do. Then they just think you can just come home and turn it off." Both soldiers were wounded, sent back into action and saw friends and officers killed in their first deployment. On numerous occasions, explosions shredded the bodies of civilians, others were slain in sectarian violence - and the unit had to bag the bodies.

    "Guys with drill bits in their eyes," Eastridge said. "Guys with nails in their heads." Last week, the Army released a study of soldiers at Fort Carson that found that the trauma of fierce combat and soldier refusals or obstacles to seeking mental health care may have helped drive some to violence at home. It said more study is needed. While most unit soldiers coped post-deployment, a handful went on to kill back home in Colorado. Many returning soldiers did seek counseling.

    "We're used to seeing people who are depressed and want to hurt themselves. We're trained to deal with that," said Davida Hoffman, director of the privately operated First Choice Counseling Center in Colorado Springs. "But these soldiers were depressed and saying, 'I've got this anger, I want to hurt somebody.' We weren't accustomed to that." At Fort Carson, Eastridge and other soldiers said they lied during an army screening about their deployment that was designed to detect potential behavioral problems. Sergeants sometimes refused to let soldiers get PTSD help or taunted them, said Andrew Pogany, a former Fort Carson special forces sergeant who investigates complaints for the advocacy group Veterans for America.

    Soldier John Needham described a number of alleged crimes in a December 2007 letter to the Inspector General's Office of Fort Carson. In the letter, obtained by The Gazette, Needham said that a sergeant shot a boy riding a bicycle down the street for no reason. Another sergeant shot a man in the head while questioning him, lashed the man's body to his Humvee and drove around the neighborhood. Needham also claimed sergeants removed victims' brains. The Army's criminal investigation division interviewed unit soldiers and said it couldn't substantiate the allegations. The Army has declared soldiers' mental health a top priority.

    "When we see a problem, we try to identify it and really learn what we can do about it. That is what we are trying to do here," said Maj. Gen. Mark Graham, Fort Carson's commander. "There is a culture and a stigma that needs to change." Fort Carson officers are trained to help troops showing stress signs, and the base has doubled its number of behavioral-health counselors. Soldiers seeing an Army doctor for any reason undergo a mental health evaluation.


    david kelly

    A close confidante of Government scientist Dr David Kelly has demanded a new investigation into his death. Mai Pederson, a US Air Force linguist who served in Iraq with Dr Kelly’s weapons inspection team, has called on Attorney General Baroness Scotland to carry out a ‘formal, independent and complete review’ into the ‘suspicious circumstances’ of his death.

    Ms Pederson’s intervention comes a week after The Mail on Sunday disclosed that a team of doctors are mounting a legal challenge to the Hutton Inquiry’s conclusion that he committed suicide.

    The inquiry, commissioned by Tony Blair, ruled that the 59-year-old used a blunt gardening knife to slit an artery on his left wrist in July 2003 after swallowing co-proxamol painkillers. His death, near his Oxfordshire home, came after he was exposed as being the source for a BBC news report questioning the justification for war in Iraq.

    But the doctors say the wound to the tiny artery could not have caused his death and that the dose of painkillers he took was not fatal. Now, Ms Pederson, 49, has lent her weight to their demand for a formal inquest and the release of the autopsy report, which has been kept secret.

    In a letter delivered to Baroness Scotland last Thursday, Ms Pederson’s lawyer said: ‘Given the absence of a coroner’s inquest and the perpetual secrecy surrounding the post-mortem examination, it is painfully obvious that this matter cries out for a formal, independent and complete review. Ms Pederson fully supports and adds her voice to such an effort.’


  • US blocked probes into Afghan massacre

    kelly cook todd

    Since the Iraqi war there have been a number of high profile individuals involved directly or indirectly with investigating the war who died in unusual circumstances. Three of them were all walking in the countryside and hills when they died.

    The first and most sinister is Dr. David Christopher Kelly CMG (May 14,[1] 1944 – July 17, 2003) who was an employee of the United Kingdom Ministry of Defence (MoD), who was an expert in biological warfare and a former United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq. Kelly's discussion with Today Programme journalist Andrew Gilligan about the British government's dossier on weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq inadvertently caused a major political scandal. He was found dead days after appearing before the Parliamentary committee charged with investigating the scandal.

    On July 17, 2003 at about 15:00, Kelly told his wife that he was going for a walk, as he did every day. He appears to have gone directly to an area of woodlands known as Harrowdown Hill about a mile away from his home, where he allegedly ingested up to 29 tablets of painkillers (co-proxamol, an analgesic drug). He then allegedly cut his left wrist with a knife he had owned since his youth. The Hutton Inquiry reported on January 28, 2004 confirming that Kelly had committed suicide.

    The second was Robin Cook who in a column for the Guardian four weeks before his death, Cook caused a stir when he described Al-Qaeda as a product of a western intelligence: “ Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaida, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians.

    At around 2:20 pm, on 6 August 2005, whilst walking down Ben Stack in Sutherland, Scotland, Cook suddenly suffered a severe heart attack, collapsed and lost consciousness. The lingering questions about Robin Cook's death HERE

    The third was Chief Constable Michael J. Todd who had been investigating on behalf of the Association of Chief Police Officers the extraordinary rendition(torture) flights conducted by the CIA to transport detainees.

    Todd was reported missing by Greater Manchester Police, rescue teams from Llanberis, North Wales, started a search for him at 01:00 on 11 March 2008. After being alerted by hill walkers who found personal possessions, they found Todd's body in the Bwlch Glas area of Snowdon.The post-mortem report initially found "no obvious cause" of death.

    The common thread is that they were all involved in investigating the Iraq war and the torture claims after and had been critical of the British and American governments involvement in an illegal war. Let this be a warning to anyone who attempts to expose the British government not to walk alone in the woods or hills as it seems it is an ideal place to be bumped off.

  • Dr.David Kelly

  • Robin Cook

  • Chief Constable Michael J. Todd



    blairwar The Brussels War Crimes Tribunal and the newly established Blair War Crimes Foundation are building a case for the former British prime minister’s prosecution.

    These are extraordinary times. With the United States and Britain on the verge of bankruptcy and committing to an endless colonial war, pressure is building for their crimes to be prosecuted at a tribunal similar to that which tried the Nazis at Nuremberg. This defined rapacious invasion as “the supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes [sic] in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole”. International law would be mere farce, said the chief US chief prosecutor at Nuremberg, the Supreme Court justice Robert Jackson, “if, in future, we do not apply its principles to ourselves”.

    That is now happening. Spain, Germany, Belgium, France and Britain have long had “universal jurisdiction” statutes, which allow their national courts to pursue and prosecute prima facie war criminals. What has changed is an unspoken rule never to use international law against “ourselves”, or “our” allies or clients. In 1998, Spain, supported by France, Switzerland and Belgium, indicted the Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet, client and executioner of the west, and sought his extradition from Britain, where he happened to be at the time. Had he been sent for trial, he almost certainly would have implicated at least one British prime minister and two US presidents in crimes against humanity. The then home secretary, Jack Straw, let him escape back to Chile.


  • The real terrorist is in the White House

    School orders boy to cover his T-shirt

    'The Real Terrorist Is In The White House' is called a distraction by school officials

    Thirteen-year-old Stephen Truszkowski said he's doing what his mother taught him to do - standing up for his beliefs.

    But officials at Everett Meredith Middle School in Middletown say he is doing something else - becoming a distraction.

    Truszkowski wore a white, short-sleeved T-shirt to school Friday with the words, "The Real Terrorist Is In The White House," written in black on the front, and "End the Tyranny" written on the back.

    School officials told him the shirt was inappropriate and if he didn't cover it up, he would be suspended.

    ‘We don’t want our loved ones who died in 9/11 used as an excuse to start war’ 5 September 2004

    illuminati deathwish The Protesters: Relatives of terror victims are foremost in the mass demonstrations that show not everyone loves Bush

    DAN Jones starts to cry. He’s in the middle of Union Square in New York City and he’s trying to explain how his children felt when they lost their favourite uncle – his brother-in-law – on September 11, 2001. Jones is one of the founders of the September 11 Families for Peaceful Tomorrows organisation and it’s been a rough week for him.His brother-in-law, he feels, has been wrapped in the Stars And Stripes and his death expropriated by the Republican Party, which has come to town just days before the third anniversary of the attacks on America for its pre-election convention.

    The decision to hold the convention just a few blocks from the site where nearly 3000 people died in the World Trade Centre attacks has been condemned by many opponents of the Republican Party as a gross exploitation of America’s suffering. Each day of the convention has invoked the memory of 9/11 as a reason to “never forget and never forgive”; each day delegates have called on September 11 as a reason to justify war.

    If the convention and the memory of his family’s loss has made this a harrowing week emotionally for Jones, then it’s also been a hard few days for him physically too. He’s just completed the mammoth task of dragging a 5000lb tombstone – inscribed with the words “to the unknown civilians killed in war” – from Boston to New York in time for the convention. The “Stonewalk” saw some 500 people, led by Jones, pulling this hulk of granite along the same route that the planes which crashed into the twin towers took when they were taken over by the 9/11 hijackers.

    The Tombstone now takes centre stage in Union Square. This usually bohemian, bustling little patch of ground has now been turned into a shrine for all those who have died since 9/11. Surrounding the tombstone are 978 pairs of boots – a set for every soldier who has died in Iraq. Hundreds of kids’ shoes and women’s shoes and the shoes of men are there as well – each pair representing a dead Iraqi. The names of all those who have died during the invasion and occupation of Iraq are being read out as Jones tries to describe the pain and anger his family has felt – pain at losing his children’s uncle, Bill Kelly, and anger at the Bush administration for using their suffering, as they see it, as an excuse for war across the globe.

    Bill Kelly was at a breakfast meeting at the Windows on the World restaurant at the World Trade Centre when the first plane struck. His body was never found. “My children lost their favourite uncle,” says Jones, a 39-year-old social worker in the New York school system. “We didn’t want to see any other family going through what we did. My children are still very afraid. The shock and horror hasn’t left them. No other children anywhere in the world should go through what they went through. The city in which they live saw planes crashing into buildings and the buildings falling down.

    “We knew that if our country waged war that other families would be put in the same position that our family was put in – children would lose uncles and parents, people would lose their brothers and sisters, parents would lose their children.

    “We wanted justice, not war. War is no way to get justice. It took a long time for the man who blew up the plane over Lockerbie to come to justice, but it happened in the end. We wanted this pursued as a crime, not to be considered as an act of war. The war in Afghanistan has not brought those who plotted my brother-in-law’s murder to justice. And the war in Iraq has certainly not served that purpose either.”

    The tombstone that he and the other members of September 11 Families for Peaceful Tomorrows dragged to New York is meant to quietly and symbolically show their President what they think of his foreign policy as he staged his party’s national convention.

    Not every protester is as eloquent as Jones and the 200 or so other families in his organisation, but nearly all share his sentiments.

    Since last Sunday – the day before the convention started – New York has been a sea of protest. Sunday alone saw some 200,000 people take to the streets in a demonstration aimed solely at one man – George W Bush. The poor, the homeless, military veterans, former police officers and firefighters who responded to 9/11, the gay community, the unemployed, anarchists, hippies, Muslims, Christians, soccer moms – someone from every segment of the myriad ways of life in America – has taken to the streets of New York this last week to tell their President to stop what he is doing and to let him know that they want him out of the White House this November. Most have been dignified and some have been silly – such as the panty protest down at Battery Park where women flashed their knickers bearing slogans like “F*** Bush”. Only a very few have been violent and a handful have been pointless – there was more than a couple of wasted stoners desperately wandering New York looking for something to protest about but unable to locate the nearest demonstration.

    The police arrested more than 2000 people, many for the slightest infractions. The NYPD has operated a policy of pre-emptive arrest, cracking down hard on anyone who so much as steps out of line. But although draconian, the police were mostly not too heavy-handed with the protesters. That’s not surprising.

    Few would have had the guts to test the patience of the police in a city that looked as if martial law had been declared. Giant spy blimps floated over the city as helicopters patrolled the skies. On every street corner in Manhattan there were dozens of police officers. Streets were blocked off in all directions by anti-car bomb barriers. Flotillas of motorcycle cops sped around as officers on horseback and with batons drawn idled in the streets. Madison Square Garden itself looked as if it was under siege, ringed by secret service agents, the National Guard and thousands of police officers armed to the teeth. This was not a city taking any chances. New Yorkers were sure that there was going to be a terrorist attack.

    The Republicans have delighted in disparaging the demonstrators as a bunch of leftie hippies who have cost the city a fortune in security.

    The response from the demonstrators is that the Republicans should have taken their convention somewhere else. But Jones is not the type of protester that the Republicans are likely to pick on. He’s their worst nightmare – a victim of terrorism who is also a pacifist and an opponent of America’s wars. As bells ring in Union Square for everyone who has died in the Iraq war, Jones says: “The philosophy of our organisation is to highlight civilian deaths. Our family members went to work, got on aeroplanes, went to breakfast, responded to an emergency and were killed because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. We don’t want our loved ones used as an excuse to start war. Yet the death toll of the innocent people in Iraq and Afghanistan just keeps going up. Like our families, these people were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

    “We just want peace and justice. Our organisation takes its name from something that Martin Luther King said – ‘wars are poor chisels for carving out peaceful tomorrows’. That’s all we want – a peaceful tomorrow, and these wars we are involved in are no way to bring that about. The stone that we’ve brought to New York is a compliment to the tomb of the unknown soldier. It is a mark of respect to the suffering and anguish of the families of soldiers who have lost loved ones overseas. It’s a reminder about the human toll of war.’

    As Jones speaks the names of Iraqi children are read out. “Some of them were just two years old,” Jones says. “I have children and it is horrible to think of the one day of terror that we lived through in New York.

    “But the nightly bombings in Iraq is terror raining down every day, and the soldiers over there wondering each time a car passes whether or not it is going to blow them up are living with a constant threat of death.”

    American politics, Jones says, has become a “fiery cocktail”. “These wars haven’t made my country safer,” he adds, “and even if they had, the means aren’t justified. The entire world is a far more dangerous place, due in large part to the actions of my government.”

    Jones believes that what is happening overseas is an act of revenge. He quotes an old college buddy of his – a navy veteran – who told him that it was military doctrine that no army should take part in a war for the sake of vengeance because it is dishonourable and the military lives or dies by its honour.

    “If the horror of those pictures from Abu Ghraib prison hasn’t shocked us into admitting that we have no moral authority any more, then I don’t know what can stop this,” he says. “The genie is out of the bottle and I don’t know how to get it back in. I wish I did.”

    Jones hasn’t lost hope though. He says he and all the other millions of protesters around America have to keep on protesting for their children and the belief in a “peaceful tomorrow”.

    “My children miss their uncle greatly,” he says, coughing as his voice fills up with tears. “Their experiences have prepared them for life at much too young an age.

    “It’s painful for them, very painful. It’s painful for all of us – both here and abroad. The pain has to stop.”

    CITIZENS FOR PEACE 9 April 2004

    CITIZENS FOR PEACE - Cobb County, GA
    Educational AMERICA HATED

    Essay taken from: "WHY DO THEY HATE US?"
    Warren S. Apel American Embassy School, New Delhi, India

    Americans like to believe that the United States is a great country. And in many respects we are correct. Compared to many countries in the world, we are lucky to have the political freedoms, the quality medical care, education system, and low poverty that we enjoy. We figure that no one should hate us – they should all want to be more like us. It’s this belief that caused George W. Bush to make his famous quote: "I'm amazed that there is such misunderstanding of what our country is about, that people would hate us. . . like most Americans, I just can't believe it. Because I know how good we are. . ."Why was America a target of terrorism? For the last year, just the act of posing this question has been tantamount to justifying the actions of those terrorists who struck the United States. If asking the question was excusing the terrorists, then changing our attitudes or conduct was "giving in to their demands." Until recently, there has been no chance of actually changing the way America conducts itself at home or abroad. Now that we’ve had more than a year to calm down, perhaps it’s time to change our way of thinking, our attitudes, and our actions.

    When we ask the question "why do they hate us?" we don’t want a complicated answer. Americans don’t want to hear that we’ve been doing anything wrong. We want to hear "they are jealous of our freedoms." We want to generalize that Arabs are crazed and violent, acting without logical motivation. U.S. Congressman Brad Sherman stated in a meeting of the Committee on International Relations that "we are resented for our power, envied for our wealth and hated for our liberty." This kind of placating reassurance may comfort Americans, but it is far from the truth. Other countries have freedoms, wealth and liberty. Why weren’t Sweden, Canada, or Holland the target of any recent terrorism?

    The main motivation of Osama Bin Laden is simple: the American military presence in Saudi Arabia desecrates the holy cities of Mecca and Medina. It makes sense that to be good world neighbors, we should remove our military bases from Saudi Arabia. We have a huge military presence in the Middle East, mostly to ensure America’s supply of cheap petroleum. We can stop provoking Arab terrorists without "giving in to their demands." If we spent more money developing alternatives to petroleum, we wouldn’t need to work as hard as we do in protecting our access to it.

    But there’s no reason to assume that our presence in Saudi Arabia is the only thing Americans are doing wrong in the eyes of the rest of the world. We isolate ourselves from the rest of the world – reneging on treaties and breaking promises. We decide unilaterally that our need for nuclear missile testing, land mines, and gas-guzzling SUVs outweighs the nearly unanimous global decisions to cut back on those planetary disasters. Our children are sedentary and overfed to the point of unhealthy obesity while millions of children elsewhere starve. We look down on countries where gender equity and voter rights aren’t as strong as they are in America; however, many people in those countries see us as barbaric and backward for our use of capital punishment and rampant gun possession. For many people in Europe, Americans are bumbling tourists, complaining that waiters in France don’t speak English well enough – then returning home to vote on English-only legislation. There’s a joke in Europe that you can tell an American in a crowd: they’re the one who speaks only one language and doesn’t know where Canada is.

    If we are to peacefully co-exist with the rest of the world, we’ll have to start learning about them. Americans see Palestinians as terrorists because we do not understand the politics of the Middle East well enough. American newspapers are grossly lacking in news from other countries. The "world" segments of network television news offer glimpses of earthquakes and train crashes in exotic foreign locations, without any substantive reporting on political situations, causes of famine, or roots of conflict. Americans have become so desensitized to human suffering that the U.S. media simply chooses not to report on many of the world’s most important news stories – for example, the Indonesian genocide of the people in East Timor was almost never covered in American newspapers. People in Australia and New Zealand were aware that the American government condoned the violence, and even supplied Indonesia with the weapons that were used – but Americans remained blissfully ignorant of the situation.

    Traveling around the world makes one realize just how ignorant Americans are about the rest of the world. Taxi drivers in Cairo, Egypt know the names of nearly every major politician in the world – reading and chatting about world politics is a dear hobby to many of them. Americans would be hard pressed just to name the leaders of the G-8 nations. In fact, I would wager that few Americans even know the countries that make up the G-8. The current push in American education to "return to the three R’s" is certainly not going to help this situation. If anything, American education should be promoting world awareness, global thinking, teamwork, and international awareness. Perhaps in a generation or two we could have a nation of world citizens.

    But ignorance and holy desecration are far from America’s worst public image problems. Our self-declared status as the world’s most important superpower may make Americans feel safe and significant, but it causes many others around the world to see us as a threatening, egocentric bully. We declare our support to other nations when it is beneficial to America – regardless of how that nation treats its citizens, elects its officials, or behaves with its neighbors. We supported the dictatorship of Suharto in Indonesia because that country supplies most of the oil in the Pacific Rim. We provided support, weapons and training to "freedom fighters" in Central America who are almost indistinguishable from the people we label "terrorists" today. The role of the US in the training of Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban is conveniently overlooked in the American media. The United States has managed for years to ignore the brutal persecution of the people of poor countries like Tibet, Myanmar, and Cambodia, yet we rushed to the support of Kuwait because it is an oil-rich country that we can take advantage of.

    The American people take it for granted that when we fight a war, we’re doing it to help restore democracy around the world. When we remove one ruler, and replace him with one that America has hand picked, it’s hardly a move towards increasing the amount of global democracy. In fact, while we talk about democratic principles, we ought to bear in mind that, to a large number of people in the world, George W. Bush himself is not the democratically-elected ruler of the United States. To people from nations where nepotism and bribery are a way of life, it makes sense that Bush’s victory was determined by the governor of Florida -- Bush’s brother -- and not by the people of America. But that hardly puts us in the position to "restore democracy" through military action.

    Those military actions are part of our public image problem. We have a hard time making firm friendships with Arab nations because we shift our alliances so often. We made close friends with Gamel Abdel Nasser when we thought that an alliance with Egypt would be politically advantageous. A few years later, we were supporting attempts to overthrow his government. Before Iraq was declared part of the "axis of evil," America oversaw the coup that put Saddam Hussein and the Ba’ath Socialist Party in charge of the country. Our friendships flip-flopped between Iraq and Iran – we were close with the Shah of Iran, then a few years later we armed and financed Saddam Hussein and helped him invade Iran. In hindsight, it appears that our decision to give Iraq materials and training in the production of chemical and biological weapons might not have been a good one. While President Reagan was bombing Libya, we were engaging in arms deals with Iran, one of Libya’s close allies – and one of the countries that America now considers an "instigator of international terrorism."

    Is it any wonder that Arab nations hate us? At the very least, these countries should be wary of making alliances with us. We have a history of sending the CIA in to take out our "friends." The American people’s lack of interest in or knowledge of these matters helps fuel the fire of popular opinion. We have no objection to the military actions against the Taliban in Afghanistan because we see them as the agents behind the attacks on America. On September 10th, the Taliban were just considered fundamentalists who treated women poorly – not terrorists or enemies of America. A few weeks later, more than a few Americans openly supported the idea of destroying the entire country with nuclear weapons. Not many Americans discussed or remembered the American role in Afghanistan a few years earlier. In 1995, America was supporting the Taliban financially and militarily, while allowing and encouraging countries like Egypt and Algeria to persecute, imprison and execute their fundamentalist Muslim populations. Why were we propping up the hardest-core of the hardcore Muslim governments? They were fighting our common enemy, the Russians. And in an effort to help American kids "just say no" we assisted the Taliban in their religious goal of eradicating opium fields. Seven years later, we were eradicating the Taliban themselves.

    And now that the Russians are no longer our enemies, we ask for their assistance in our "war against terrorism." In yet another example of our Nation’s ability to quickly change its opinion, we made a questionable moral tradeoff to gain Russia’s support. A few years ago, we were labeling their genocide against the people of Chechnya "ethnic cleansing." To gain the support of Russia, George W. Bush has changed that label – now the Russians are "fighting terrorism" when they labor at continuing Stalin’s goal of eradicating the Chechen people.

    Americans have a hard time remembering our enemies. At any one time, there may be ten or so countries on our current "axis of evil." Right now, we know that Afghanistan is one of the "bad guys." But what about Pakistan? We need to use their land to help if we end up invading Iraq, so we’ll likely become temporary friends with them. It’s hard to tell if we’re allies with Syria, Lebanon, or Iran right now. But while most Americans forget who our enemies are, those enemies will never forget. America is such a large, powerful country – throwing our military and economic power around as we like – that once we’ve placed some country on our list of "bad guys" the citizens of that country will likely hate us forever. While American citizens quickly forget which countries American planes were bombing a few years ago, the people of Cambodia, Libya, Sudan, and Beirut will always remember those explosions with the same level of recall we have for the images of those planes hitting the twin towers.

    It’s good for America that we’re finally asking the right questions – that we’re interested in why people hate us. It would be great if we admitted that our foreign policy favored deceit, greed, and petroleum over human lives and freedoms. The world would be a better place if we decided to re-evaluate how our policy affects the people of the Middle East and South Asia. If we re-thought our economic sanctions, we could reduce some of the world’s poverty – the proven breeding ground of terrorists.

    But beyond those lofty goals, if we have the foresight, we can also predict what people will hate us for next. It shouldn’t be hard. Indeed, one hundred Nobel Laureates have agreed that the most pressing danger to world peace is not the isolated acts of terrorist individuals or governments, but the legitimate demands of the world’s economically disadvantaged people. America has the power to join the world and ratify the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, the Convention on Climate Change, the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaties, and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. If we continue to insist that every American’s personal wealth and lifestyle are more important than the lives of the other people on our planet, we will have a whole lot more people hating us than we currently do.

    Most of the world’s poor live in equatorial climates in large cities near water. Global warming, caused by the dependence on fossil fuels by the wealthy few, has already begun to threaten the lives of the world’s poorest people. Recent flooding in Prague, China, and Bangladesh have killed hundreds and displaced thousands. America’s fascination with the sport utility vehicle has indirectly caused forest fires in Australia, glacial landslides in Russia and typhoons in Singapore. Worldwide drought and famine will be increasing over the next decade, but America refuses to even consider reducing its levels of fossil fuel consumption. President Bush declares such actions to be "not in the United States' economic best interest;" however, the World Council of Churches has declared this global slap in the face to be a "betrayal of (America’s) responsibilities as global citizens."

    We have to realize that increasing our short-term economic best interest might not be the best plan of action. It’s time to start thinking of the future, and not just the short-term gains of our actions. America’s addiction to fossil fuels and red meat is wreaking havoc with global weather patterns. We control a huge percentage of the world’s money, food, and fuel. We have the power to change. We can rethink our military and economic presence in South Asia and the Middle East. We can work harder at developing clean fuels and renewable energy sources. If we can finally see the value in compromise, we can apologize to the world and sign the treaties George W. Bush pulled us out of. We can work in the economic best interest of the whole world. Perhaps once we start doing that, fewer and fewer people will hate us.

    "Why do they hate us?" If we are ready to ask the question, we must be ready to change. We should not listen to Nationalist zealots like Rep Sherman, who warn that America "cannot and dare not change our foreign policy, because to placate Mr. Bin Laden and his gang is impossible. . . . To placate them is dishonorable." Changing our foreign policy must not be seen as placating Osama Bin Laden, nor as dishonorable. What we must do is understand why other people in other countries hate us, accept that we will be always hated by a few, but work to improve ourselves and our image – even if that doesn’t seem like it’s in our "economic best interest."

    Jessica: I am no hero... It was just White House Lies 8 November 2003

    US soldier slams dramatic tales of her Iraq rescue I'm just a survivor, I did nothing.. I was just in the wrong place at the wrong time Private Jessica Lynch

    Rescued soldier Jessica Lynch feels used by the US military and has denounced their dramatic account of her capture as propaganda. The 20-year-old denies she did anything heroic when she was taken prisoner in an Iraqi army ambush.

    And far from deserving the Bronze Star she was awarded for bravely going
    down fighting in a gun battle in which 11 colleagues died, she did not fire
    a single shot.

    In an interview to promote her book about the 10 days from being grabbed on
    March 23 to a snatch ``rescue'' from an Iraqi hospital, she debunks each
    false claim.

    NO, I'm not a hero. ``I don't look at myself as a hero. My heroes are ...
    the soldiers that are over there, the soldiers that were in the car beside
    me, the ones that came and rescued me.

    "I'm just a survivor. I did nothing ... I was just there in that spot, the
    wrong place, the wrong time."

    No, I didn't go down fighting. "I'm not about to take credit for something
    I didn't do. I did not shoot, not a round, nothing. When we were told to
    lock and load, that's when my weapon jammed. I did not shoot a single
    round. I went down praying to my knees. And that's the last I remember."

    NO, there was no dramatic shoot-out when I was rescued.

    "Although anyone, you know, in that kind of situation would go in with
    force, not knowing who was on the other side of the door."

    YES, I was a tool of US propaganda.

    "It hurt in a way that people would make up stories that they had no truth

    Asked whether the military's account bothers her, she told ABC's
    interviewer Diane Sawyer: "Yeah, it does. It does that they used me as a
    way to symbolise all this stuff."

    Jessica flew home to Palestine, West Virginia, to a hero's welcome after US
    TV networks soaked up the version of her dramatic capture, her brutal
    imprisonment and audacious rescue against heavy resistance.

    She says it was just bad luck when she was a private in a unit which took a
    wrong turn and came under fire.

    Jessica suffered serious spinal injuries when her vehicle crashed.

    Yesterday, she said that when she found her gun had jammed she was helpless
    but Private First Class Lori Piestewa tried to protect her and went down

    Jessica said: ``She wasthere for me she had my back the whole time.

    It is during the "three lost hours" after the ambush in which her mind went
    blank that Jessica says she was raped.

    For nine days, she was held in a hospital in Nasariyah where she was
    terrified of attack or being poisoned by the food.

    But she was treated with kindness until US special forces swooped for her
    with TV cameras to recordit all. In truth, the Iraqi soldiers had fled the
    day before.

    She feared for her life until a man told her: "We're American soldiers.
    We're here to take you home."

    She replied: "Yeah, I'm an American soldier too."

    She said it was "obviously a dumb thing to say" but is the title of her new

    "I would not let go of his hand," she said. "I was not going to let him
    leave me."

    Jessica was invalided out of the army and still cannot use her right arm.

    DEFYING HITLER 10 May 2003

    Take heed USA /UK

    How can an entire society go crazy? That is the question pondered by the late Sebastian Haffner, an ordinary German who was astonished and ashamed at the changes that overtook his country in the 1930s.

    His 1939 memoir, unpublished until 2000, describes the incremental and then unstoppable rise of Nazism from the perspective of a skeptical humanist who found himself unwillingly swept away.

    The English translation, published last year, is entitled "Defying Hitler," but that is misleading. (The original title was "Geschichtes eines Deutschen," The Story of a German.) In fact, the absence of real defiance, the actual inability to mobilize even minimal resistance to the tide of militant nationalism described by the author is part of what makes this such a striking and suggestive work. Readers may draw their own analogies.

    See this representative review of "Defying Hitler" by Charles Taylor from, September 3, 2002 (thanks to YL for the suggestion):

    THE SPOILS OF WAR 9 May 2003


    When Germany entered Poland in WW2 with little resistance from the rest of the world it was only a matter of time before the reality sank in that other countries were a target .

    If Germany or Japan had moved in to take over IRAQ as the UK/USA have done there would be a far bigger outcry throughout the world than there already is. The USA/UK propaganda machines are working OVERTIME such as the BBC/CNN suggesting even now all of this was lawful and necessary.Hitlers propaganda machines did the same when Poland was invaded as all being justified, that media now attacking any dissenters against the war.

    Now that the troops are in ,the control is being left there with no intention of moving out like Germany did with Poland . The USA/UK in viewing other middle east countries for take over make BUSH /BLAIR look more like HITLER /MUSSOLINI using force for GREED .

    They have been publicly funding the internal asset stripping of fathers and their childrens future inheritance for years right across the USA/UK in secret family courts while much of the worlds media has done nothing to expose asset stripping on the same scale as GERMANY during the last war when millions lost their homes and assets and were flung into the street . Ask any man across the UK/USA who had identical treatment from the USA/UK backed secret star chamber court systems.

    But it was never going to be enough, now those sinister forces are looking to the middle east to do the same asset stripping on a world wide stage.The media that has protected that corrupt machine continues to do so but not while the technology EXPOSES the huge lie being promoted as Hitlers machine did but without the technological advances man can use today. The days when superpowers deviously suggest we have unbiased media presenting the real facts is absurd .We all know that media has been perpetrating a huge lie for so very long ,protecting the establishment and elites corrupt laws which are doing appalling damage to families right across the western world. They have done there damnest to hide what they do. However it requires the people to truly expose the collusion by the state monster propaganda machines as they can NO longer get away with telling the big lie.

    This is a warning shot to those editors controlling the output and lies being told to the people.Those days are numbered while there status remains unchecked. Like Hitler in time it will all fall and mainly due to the dedication of many worldwide who have set in motion communications which will ensure a sinister secret society controlled media no longer hides the tyranny being enacted throughout the western world. The same kind of media coverage that aided and abetted the deranged rantings of a madman.

    The Scottish election has shown the people are no longer listening to the flawed commentary which is still being used to manipulate and mind control. That shift in time will include media that has backed for so very long the illusion they have devised to keep us all from knowing the full truth .Like our courts they only survive by maintaining those lies which is now BEING EXPOSED WORLDWIDE.


    There can be few men that have not made the connection between the DV GENDER BASED PROPAGANDA in the UK and USA pumped out by tv stations who have been complicite with the CLEAR brainwashing of the masses against MEN ,the fathers of our children. Domestic violence is the FRONT being used to hide what the stealth murdering monsters in their wigs and regalia get away with and who make any tyrant pale by comparison.

    Go to any court house across the UK or USA and you will find some of the biggest tyrants who have for many years been destroying the lives of our good men using false and fabricated lies. They then help themselves to our good mens assets ,while abusing their children by separating them in the most despicable EVIL and cruel system that can be found anywhere in the world .

    TO see BUSH and BLAIR(a lawyer and QC) make a case for war against tyrannical forces in the middle east while they FAIL to accept they are responsible for those very forces acting lawlessly throughout the UK /USA and identical to the asset stripping done during the last world war. ALL of it being covered up by a collusive media who have deliberately kept most of it SECRET identical to the SECRET courts they use to appallingly destroy our good men in that hypocrisy .

    Any man who has faced that utter tyranny in the UK/USA courts
    must be looking on the build up in Iraq and seeing a similar pattern ,though a less noticable comparison ,when fathers have tried to take action to protect their family from those human rights abuses of government funded judges using the most devious psychological means possible, less obvious than physical injury, but every bit as damaging in its torturous effect.

    Any man cut off from his child knows there is NO pain can compare with that utter horror and all of it used to break his spirit with an onslaught from all sources set in motion by that secret system.
    Men who have faced such appalling abuses must see the Iraq attack as similar to how their own lives have been imploded by the very tyrannical forces now entering Iraq to do more harm to innocent children set in motion by the same elite evil POWERMONGERS who have stripped MILLIONS of fathers in the UK/USA bare .

    That New World Order brigade have imposed a war on MEN on both sides of the Atlantic and when they are not helping themselves from inside their OWN countries they use the same lawless powers to help themselves to other countries assets when that GREED is not contained .

    Watch the similar pattern of hate mongering propaganda being used in DV adverts and the build up to war campaigns .
    They are made by the same propaganda merchants and used by the same tyrants who have been helping themselves to our families futures for many many years unimpeded.
    Men can believe none of it, as it is ALL a front for the continued abuse of men worldwide by an elite few controlling us all in that SECRECY.

    BUT NOT FOR MUCH LONGER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Anyone who supports the separation of a child from the protection of good fathers are part of that sinister network ensuring children are open to abuse by a state machine already proving to have some of the worlds worst child abusers .Doctor Harold Shipman is a perfect example of PROFESSIONALS who lawlessly murdered for years without any checks to protect us all from mass murderers hiding behind their professional front .He is the tip of a very big iceberg as the UK /USA have mass murderers in every court protected by the same system that allowed Shipman to go unnoticed for years.

    No one needs to go to the middle east to find tyrants they have been amassing across the UK/USA only because of the failure of ALL systems to EXPOSE that evil .
    However TECHNOLOGY is now showing how clearly we have been fooled for so long


    From the PROPAGANDA that emanates from both the UK and the USA you could be given the impression MEN have it all to live for ,yet nothing could be further from the truth . Presently there is enough evidence to show these two countries are maybe the most dangerous places in the world for men to reside .NEVER in the history of MAN have they equally done more HARM to our families using judiciaries and those who abuse power who have their fingers on the destruct button for our good men and fathers who have tried to hold together their lives against the enormous pressures they face from laws that have destroyed so many mens lives.

    To hear both countries regimes dictate that our strong and brave men should go and fight and kill more children from the same regimes presently appallingly abusing our good men and their children in the aftermath of divorce must be causing many men to heave at that hypocrisy. These countries already promoting the DEATHS of men by the WAR being raged against them in those evil societies who's media support the extreme feminism being used as a vicious weapon to put men in their place as seemingly the lowest form of life in the gender fascism they fund and promote.

    We face an attack on MEN that has never been seen in our history from an elite evil few controlling the worlds economies and a judiciary they keep sweet and who THEY use to remain rich and powerful by raping and plundering the millions of MEN who find themselves dragged through their secret courts which are DESTROYING mens lives on a daily basis.

    Our good MEN lose EVERYTHING and many have lost their lives fighting a system intent on doing so much irrepairable damage .We intend to EXPOSE why WAR is already taking place across the UK and the USA but well hidden and the enormous damage and carnage being covered up by a conspiring media which has full knowledge of that destruction but fails to ensure the WORLD is informed while the STEALTH MURDERERS continue that killing spree.


    Comment Tony Howden(FFI/IMO member)

    Aye, add Canada and Australia please, the carnage wrought wherever this evil operates is pervasive, the only ones to gain from it are the legal caste, who care nought for ordinary men, women and children and all for profit, for them "Gender Feminism" is just a smoke screen a means to an end which allows them a pat in on the back and a pad in the purse.

    Apparently New Zealand is to be the next target, God help 'em!


    Dustin Hoffman to lead silent war protest at the Oscars

    Dustin Hoffman is reportedly set to spearhead a silent anti-war demo at this weekend's Oscar ceremony.
    The actor will be joined by Ben Affleck and Julianne Moore by wearing pins in the shape of a peace symbol.
    Meanwhile, Tom Hanks is the latest celebrity to boycott the ceremony - along with Will Smith.
    The Road To Perdition star said he and wife Rita Wilson would be staying away from the Los Angeles ceremony.
    Fashion designers Giorgio Armani, Donatella Versace and Matthew Williamson are also expected to stay at home, according to the Daily Mirror.


    Will Smith has announced he will not be attending the Oscars because of the war against Iraq.

    The actor has asked to be excused from Sunday's ceremony, claiming that he feels uncomfortable attending.
    It is thought he is the first Hollywood star to pull out of the annual event, which is to go ahead without its traditional red carpet arrivals.
    In a statement, Smith's publicist Stan Rosenfield said: "He felt uncomfortable in attending and respectfully asked to be excused.
    "There's no agenda, there's no speeches. He just felt uncomfortable in attending."

    Cate Blanchett is also rumoured to have dropped out of the Los Angeles ceremony, where she is set to present one of the awards.
    But her spokeswoman told the actress is still planning to attend.


    Elite Sets the Stage for World War Three 26 March 2003

    By Henry Makow Ph.D.

    Something very worrisome is happening. Some of Rockefeller's best toadies oppose the Iraq war. But Rockefeller and his ilk are responsible for this war. What gives? It appears the global elite is dividing its minions into two "house teams" again. The last time this happened we had the Fascist-Communist slugfest called World War Two. The same satanic cabal controlled both sides and picked Germany to take the fall. This time, the U.S., Britain and the "coalition of the willing" are on one side. On the other are France, Germany, Russia and China.

    The centre of global power is moving to China, Europe and Russia. I see a world war over Korea, or more likely Iran and control of Middle East oil. The U.S., overextended from Kuwait to Korea, will come up short. My guess is that the US will find itself increasingly isolated and vilified as a result of the Iraq war. I suspect the hidden agenda is to bring down the world's last superpower; to replace the UN with a new instrument of "world government"; to kill a lot of people, and to wean Americans off democracy and their high standard of living.


    Jimmy Carter, Nelson Mandela, George Soros, Mikail Gorbachev and Walter Cronkite are all globalist elder statesmen-for-hire. Curiously, they all oppose the Iraq war. Jimmy Carter, a creation of Rockefeller's "Trilateral Commission" publicly supported more UN inspections. Mikhail Gorbachev said the war is a big mistake. Nelson Mandela called it a "tragedy" and warned Bush was plunging "the world into a holocaust." Financial maven George Soros said:" The Bush doctrine is grounded in power; legality and legitimacy are decorations." Finally, Walter Cronkite, who is linked to Rockefeller's CFR warned:

    "We are going to be in such a fix when this war is over, or before this war is over. Our grandchildren's grandchildren are going to be paying for this war. I look at our future as, I'm sorry, being very dark." The leaders of Russia, France, Germany and China also voiced opposition with uncharacteristic bluntness. They must have the OK of the global money masters. "Military action ... is a big mistake," Vladimir Putin said. " Iraq has presented no danger..." China urged the US and Britain to halt their military actions. France, Russia and Germany all refused a U.S. request to close their Iraqi embassies. North Korea apparently is preparing for war. Even in England, major newspapers like The Mirror have been scathing in their criticism of Tony Blair. British newspapers belong to the same clan. I suspect England will defect to Europe's side before this fiasco is over.


    Before World War Two, a faction of the British elite built up Hitler. This was known as the "policy of appeasement." After Hitler fell into the trap of attacking Poland, they did a "sleight of hand" and replaced the accommodating Chamberlain with the defiant Churchill. Iraq is a similar trap. The United States has squandered the sympathy and good will it earned on Sept 11. The images of the World Trade Centre have been replaced in the world's mind by the spectacular explosions in Baghdad. The US comes across as a bully too cowardly to pick on anyone its own size. Notch this victory up beside its thrashing of Grenada, Panama and Serbia. The gloating by US TV commentators is particularly distasteful to the outside world The damage to America's moral authority is incalculable. After this war, who will have sympathy for Americans if Chinese atomic bombs rain down on Los Angeles and New York? The devil degrades his victims before he destroys them.


    For almost 100 years, the American leadership class has belonged to an international cabal that is determined to dissolve all human loyalties, including the nation state, and establish a global tyranny. George Bush, who is part of this cabal, has led the American people into a trap. Who in their right mind would deliberately alienate 1.3 billion Muslims? Of course Hussein is a bad man but this is not the motive. The U.S. is acting as gofer for the Zionists and the oil cartels, two leading parts of the cabal. They will come out ahead while Americans will foot the bill and take the brunt of Muslim indignation. Can the U.S. even count on Israel? At his trial, Israeli Spy Jonathon Pollard was called "the greatest traitor in the history of the United States" (Gordon Thomas, Seeds of Fire, p.31-32). In the words of CIA Director George Tenet, Pollard, an American Jew, stole "every worthwhile intelligence secret we have." In the year prior to his arrest in Nov. 1986, Pollard transmitted "over 360 cubic feet of top secret paper to Israel," his trial was told. According to Thomas, Israel's Mossad routinely trades information and technology with China's Secret Intelligence Service. (482) Pollard's information could have commanded a pretty price. Thomas says the theft from Los Alamos of the last 50 years of US nuclear research was also a joint Mossad-Chinese operation (33). He says an Israeli team inspected the American EP-3 spy plane the Chinese forced down in April 2001. (487)

    But Israeli espionage must be seen in the context of the treachery of the American political elite in general. During the Clinton Administration, there was massive transfer of critical military technology to China. For example, in late 1994 the Chinese bought and dismantled a McDonnell Douglas plant in Columbus OH that allowed them to produce ultra-modern airplanes and silkworm cruise missiles. This technology transfer is continuing under the Bush Administration. Consider the recent sale to China of a GM plant in Valparaiso IN, laying off hundreds of workers and moving sophisticated equipment used for making smart bombs. This transfer of nuclear and other technology to China is reminiscent of what took place after World War Two when secrets of the atom bomb were provided to Russia. (See George Jordan USAF (ret) From Major Jordan's Diaries 1952.)

    Can you see the pattern? Russia and China belong the cabal and are being used to subjugate the United States. China is to be the new hub because its people are already used to tyranny. In another parallel with the past, American industry is relocating to China and other low-cost countries. At least 3.3 million US white-collar jobs and $136 billion in wages will shift there by 2015. (See The New American magazine, March 10, 2003). Similarly, Wall Street invested heavily in Nazi Germany in the 1930's. Standard Oil (through subsidiary I.G. Farben), General Motors, Ford, ITT and IBM were mainstays of the Nazi war machine. In conclusion, while Americans are distracted by jingoism and jiggle, they are being set up for a nasty fall. The leadership class has already "left the building" as it were. The end of the Iraq war will find the United States isolated and reviled. As the Bush cabal tries to push its advantage, it will come into conflict with China and other nuclear powers. A major confrontation will ensue and an overextended US will be humbled. Americans will take a greatly reduced place in a new world order. Americans should direct their anger not at their country but against their political and cultural elite, which is corrupt, cowardly, and traitorous.


    As the propaganda continues, as the controlled media tells us about the evidence that never was, the Iraqi terrorist connection that is, though it is not, except in Oklahoma City, where the controlled media says it is not when it is, this is a time that each American must implement great discernment like never before. And among other things, we must cut through the phony differences between the political parties, and various other theatrical events whose actors claim to oppose one another. We must realize that while we are breaking free of these deceptions, the future of our country is hanging in the balance. Frankly, many of us are seeing that the USA is ready to collapse under the weight of its own corruption.

    Included in the phony media propaganda is the idea that anyone who speaks against Gulf War II, is not only unpatriotic, but is not supporting our troops (as if our government even cares about these troops as the government has been exposed for performing experiments on the troops, over and over again, and then denying liability). Because most of our front-line troops are young and have had to sit through a watered down, government funded education, most are not aware of the words and phrases that describe treason that illustrate U.S. government history: Pentagon Papers, Agent Orange, Gulf War Illness, Incubators, Magic Bullets, The Warren Commission, The Maine, Pearl Harbor, . . . and as we are now finding out, 911 part one and two, Oklahoma City, Waco, Iraqi Oil fires, Northswood, . . .

    Last night, on March 17, 2003, a day in infamy, Bush has again proven to be a mere shrub of a President. But why not, since the apple rarely falls far from the tree. But let us not be deceived. Bush is doing nothing more than has his predecessors. His threat for war, is simply the next step in ushering in the New World Order by making sure the USA is seen as the global terrorist. This time, we use ridiculous, unsubstantiated "evidence" that continually is proven to be a lie, to attempt to justify this war. Folks, are we really so ignorant to think that any government would be so stupid, as to use plagiarized, dated and obviously forged documents to "prove" its trumped up claims? Instead, wouldn't a lying government like ours, with unlimited resources, just make up the evidence out of thin air so there would be no such obvious trail and flaw in the "evidence?"

    These continual, and intentional, Keystone-cop-like blunders, are forcing the world to unite against us in the form of The United Nations. The U.N. is becoming a major world power right before our eyes, and I believe it is being accomplished by design, in this big theater, as our government leaders are a part of the Bildebergers, CFR, Trilateral Commission and other, who's who world organizations, which have made known their Globalyst agendas.

    The United State's Constitutional interests are not the interests of the globalists. There exists an enormous conflict of interest, between our leadership's oaths of office and their oaths and agendas to the Globalyst's. And as we watch, there is a race to the finish line between these two interests. I think many of you can see that the Constitutional interests are falling further and further behind each day.

    Gulf War II is just a part of that race and another step ahead for the one-world government. Yes, welcome to the New World Order friends, brought to you by our present and past Presidents and their agents, and by our castrated Congress, crooked Judges and other reptiles! Of course, this move will need to have another "Pearl Harbor" event soon in order to silence its critics and justify the war so hang on to your chairs friends.

    But the reason I write this article is not just to define the real problem, but it is to talk about solutions. It has been said that a true Patriot does not love his government, but loves his country and watches his government. This obligation must be taken on by each and every one of us, including and especially our Military, in order to maintain a Republic. It is more than clear, that both the people and the military have failed miserably in this duty up until now. We have slept while our rogue leaders have reproduced until there is now a supersaturation of snakes in the grass. We have not as a people said No More!

    Interestingly, in Bush's speech, the shrub told each Iraqi soldier that using the excuse that you are just following orders or doing your job is not an excuse for fighting in opposition to U.S. government interests. Well, today, I say this to our own military. Just doing your job, is no excuse. Furthermore, even if this war were a legitimate excuse for following orders, which it is not, you are not doing your job by putting blind loyalty in this government and doing as it demands without taking responsibility for your actions. You took an oath to defend our Constitution, and to defend against enemies both foreign AND DOMESTIC. You never took an oath to defend a rogue government working against the Constitution and against the American People. Military, I ask you: Are you loving your country and watching your government?

    You ask, well, what are we supposed to watch? How do we watch our government? Well, the people of this nation can help you since some of us have been busy of late, watching our government rape its people. For example, did you know that the very First Amendment to the Bill of Rights tells the government that each person has a right to speak against the government and to have the government redress the people's grievances? Do you understand that in direct opposition to this, that America is holding political prisoners in prison cells because they spoke against the system? Yes--American citizens in jail for exercising the First Amendment. As an example, the dentist who investigated the WACO victims deaths, and found the government story to be a lie has been in jail for four years, and is being drugged in order to be "fit" for trial. Is that the American way you learned about? When we don't watch our government, this is what happens. When we don't love our country, we become slaves to government tyranny.

    Where is our military so we can support you? Are you aware that last year, there were 766 recorded federal judicial complaints from the people (there were many more that the courts criminally did not record), and of these 766, only ONE judge was censured and it was private so America does not even know what Judge it was or what he/she did? Yes, the judges get to decided for themselves if they did anything wrong--oh and you can't sue them either, even if they have acted criminally and they are appointed for life). Military, are you watching our government? When we don't love our country, we become slaves to government tyranny.

    Are you aware that right now, Rose Lear, a 100 pound woman from Michigan is on a hunger strike desperately trying to force the government to redress our grievances, and after about 15 days, and with Ms. Lear near death, the government is STILL IGNORING HER and us? Where is our "free press to report this to the people?" Where is our military? When we don't love our country, we become slaves to government tyranny.

    Are you aware that we have foreign troops on our soil right now while this crooked government is shipping you overseas to fight the phantoms and weapons of mass DISTRACTION and other diversions? Do you really think our government cares whether you are protected, captured, or gassed? Are you watching your government and loving your country or just following orders? Where are you so we can support you? When we don't love our country, we become slaves to government tyranny.

    Are you aware that our government has been reported and in at least one case has been tried and found liable of systemic pedophelia, and these "officials" are still holding office, without prosecution, and are still overseeing the taking of our children for their dastardly deeds? Where are you? We want to support you? Are you watching our government and loving our country? When we don't love our country, we become slaves to government tyranny.

    It has been said that "[t]here are moments in history when a door for massive change opens. Great revolutions for good or for evil occur in the vacuum created by these openings. It is in these times that key men and women, even in entire generations, risk everything to become the hinge of history, that pivotal point that determines which way the door will swing. . ." (Lou Engle). I say, we want to support you, our troops, and we want you, our troops, to support the people of the United States and your oaths, to defend against enemies both foreign and domestic.

    Come and guard our borders and help us get rid of foreign troops on our soil. Help us to get this rogue government to redress our grievances which they are refusing to do. Help us get rid of these Acts recently passed that have taken Constitutional rights away in 15 minutes time (the length of time it took to pass Patriot Act One). Assist us in cleaning up the media, which has no duty to tell the truth according to our unaccountable courts of injustice. Stand by us, side by side, as we boot out the federal reserve and have our country make its own money so that we no longer have the best leaders money can buy. Help us guard our voting booths so we can replace these crooks with some legitimate candidates including elected judges (not appointed), who love their country and understand that people will be watching them and holding them accountable. Help us trap the snakes and put them in the cages they used against innocent people, while we free those who have been unjustly accused and imprisoned. Let us all break free of our chains that have enslaved us.

    Stand with us, the people of the United States, in loving our country and watching our government, and as we demand that everyone follow the laws of the land. Understand that although you think you are facing the enemy, you have been facing the wrong way. This is a time for great good or great evil. If we refuse to follow evil, good will prevail. No force is necessary, just numbers saying No More! So come on home and work with your fellow Americans. We can start by protecting our borders. We want to support our troops!

    Kennedy's web site

    IS BUSH NUTS?. 15 March 2003

    by William Thomas Senior reporter
    Lifeboat News
    What drives a man to go against the wishes of his countryfolk and the entire world community - including the presidents of Russia, China, France and Germany?

    How can a professed Christian continue to defy church leaders worldwide -
    including the Bishops of Britain and the Pope? How does he rationalize
    breaking the commandments of his God, which clearly prohibit coveting
    another's property, theft of their oil, and mass murder of defenseless

    How can he ignore his own generals when they complain, "We're advocating a
    policy that says we will invade another nation that is not currently
    attacking us or invading any of our allies." [Capitol Hill Blue Jan, 22,

    To those who deem it unseemly to count the brick's on one man's load, let us
    recall that this unelected President is one brick short of killing what the
    UN fears could be up to a half-million people in Iraq. This massacre could
    easily see Pakistan's government - and its 30 to 40 nukes - falling to an al
    Qaeda/Taliban majority. Bush's announced plans to attack North Korea and Iran
    have already prompted both countries to hit the nuclear gas pedal, virtually
    assuring a "nuclear event". And his $5 trillion blowout has taken the
    American economy to a $2 trillion deficit in two short years. As ignored
    global warming triggers Extreme Weather Events, frightened Nobel
    price-winning economists warn that GW's proposed $600 billion tax cut is
    "fiscal madness" - "a very serious economic error" that will collapse the
    country in exactly the same way the ex-Soviet Empire went bust buying and
    deploying so many arms in so many places. Ditto Imperial Rome.

    Are these the acts of a rational person?

    Not since Nixon's famous freak-outs in the White House, which saw National
    Security Adviser Henry Kissinger ordering military commanders to ignore
    nuclear launch orders from their Commander-In-Chief, is it so urgent that we
    examine a president's cognitive capacities. [The Trial of Henry Kissinger]

    It might be useful to scrutinize the following findings. While everyone "goes
    nuts" from time to time, the salient question is whether traits described
    below dominate and drive today's presidential decisions. Is a man called by
    other government reps, "an idiot" "an imbecile" "dangerously incompetent" and
    "a moron" competent, capable and qualified to direct America's unchallenged
    military might?

    Read on. If you dare.

    "Is The 'President' Nuts?" asks Carol Wolman, M.D. "Many people, inside and
    especially outside this country, believe that the American president is nuts,
    and is taking the world on a suicidal path." [Counterpunch Oct. 2, 2002]

    A board-certified psychiatrist in practice for 30 years, Dr. Wolman feels
    compelled to understand the "psychopathology" of man "under tremendous
    pressure from both his family/junta, and from the world at large." Dr. Wolman
    wonders if GW is suffering from Antisocial Personality Disorder, as described
    in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Fourth Edition:

    "There is a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of
    others: 1) failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful
    behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for
    arrest; 2) deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or
    conning others for personal profit or pleasure; 5) reckless disregard for
    safety of self or others; 7) lack of remorse by being indifferent to or
    rationalizing having hurt, mistreated or stolen from others."

    GW Bush is highly regarded for "kicking" the twin demons of cocaine and
    alcohol addiction. If he is still off both wagons - and there is no proof
    that isn't - such a triumph, encouraged and aided by his wife, is

    When probing the mysteries of GW's brain chemistry, a key point to ponder is
    that damage done to brain cells from drug abuse is permanent and

    Quaker and university professor Katherine van Wormer co-authored the
    definitive, 2002, Addiction Treatment. This expert writes that "George W.
    Bush manifests all the classic patterns of what alcoholics in recovery call
    'the dry drunk'. His behavior is consistent with being brought on by years of
    heavy drinking and possible cocaine use." [Counterpunch Oct. 11, 2002]

    "Dry drunk," explains the professor, "is a slang term used by members and
    supporters of Alcoholics Anonymous and substance abuse counselors to describe
    the recovering alcoholic who is no longer drinking - one who is dry, but
    whose thinking is clouded."

    Such an individual is 'dry' but not truly sober. Such individuals tend to go
    to overboard. A good example of Bush' "polarized thinking" is his call for
    "crusades" based on "infinite justice" for "evil-doers" comprising an "axis
    of evil".

    Bush's "obsessive repetition" also remind this professor, "of many of the
    recovering alcoholics/addicts I had treated." Van Wormer worriers, "His
    power, in fact, is such that if he collapses into paranoia, a large part of
    the world will collapse with him."

    Paranoia? Impatience? Rigid judgmental outlook? Grandiose behavior? Childish
    behavior? Irresponsible behavior? Irrational rationalization? Projection?

    - these are all "dry drunk" traits.

    Van Wormer observers that Bush's pompous pledge: "We must be prepared to stop
    rogue states and their terrorist clients before they are able to threaten or
    use weapons of mass destruction" is a projection from the world's leading
    rogue state preparing to attack with nuclear weapons.

    "Bush's tendency to dichotomize reality" should be emphasized. Prof. van
    Wormer describes this is as either/or reasoning - "either you are with us or
    against us". A White House spokesperson puts it this way: "The President
    considers this nation to be at war, and, as such, considers any opposition to
    his policies to be no less than an act of treason.'' [Capitol Hill Blue Jan,
    22, 2003]

    Bush's binges were legendary. Van Wormer describes "years of binge drinking
    starting in college, at least one conviction for DUI in 1976 in Maine, and
    one arrest before that for a drunken episode involving theft of a Christmas
    wreath." She adds:

    "The Bush biography reveals the story of a boy named for his father, sent to
    the exclusive private school in the East where his father's reputation as
    star athlete and later war hero were still remembered. The younger George's
    achievements were dwarfed in the school's memory of his father. Athletically
    he could not achieve his father's laurels, being smaller and perhaps less
    strong. His drinking bouts and lack of intellectual gifts held him back as
    well. His military record was mediocre as compared to his father's as well.
    [He went AWOL] "

    In Fortunate Son, Bush himself explained: "Alcohol began to compete with my
    energies ... I'd lose focus". Though he once said he couldn't remember a day
    he hadn't had a drink, he quickly added the giveaway phrase that he didn't
    believe he was "clinically alcoholic".

    Van Wormer notes that "Bush drank heavily for over 20 years until he made the
    decision to abstain at age 40. About this time he became a 'born again
    Christian' - going as usual from one extreme to the other." When asked in an
    interview about his reported cocaine use, he answered reasonably, "I'm not
    going to talk about what I did 20 to 30 years ago".

    One motive driving Dubya could be his need "to prove himself to his father -
    to achieve what his father failed to do - to finish the job of the Gulf War,
    to get the 'evildoer' Saddam." Adds van Wormer, "His drive to finish his
    father's battles is of no small significance, psychologically."

    According to Van Wormer, "scientists can now observe changes that occur in
    the brain as a result of heavy alcohol and other drug abuse. Some of these
    changes may be permanent."

    Van Wormer characterizes this damage as "barely noticeable but meaningful."
    Researchers have found that brain chemistry irregularities caused by long
    bouts of drinking or drug abuse cause "messages in one part of the brain to
    become stuck there. This leads to maddening repetition of thoughts."

    One of these powerful "stuck" thoughts, says van Wormer, is that "President
    Bush seems unduly focused upon getting revenge on Saddam Hussein ('He tried
    to kill my Dad'), leading the country and the world into war, accordingly."

    Grandiosity is another major trait of former addicts brain-damaged by their
    addiction. Bush has reversed the successful, five-decade old U.S. policy of
    containment and no first strikes. Now he says, Americans can attack anyone,
    anywhere at any time with any weapons of their choosing - including banned
    cluster bomb munitions, radioactive explosives and nuclear bombs.

    According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, a person suffering from
    Narcissistic Personality Disorder, "Has a grandiose sense of
    self-importance-exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be
    recognized as superior without commensurate achievements."

    Sound familiar?

    This personality is preoccupied with fantasies of power and being loved. Such
    a person requires "automatic compliance". He or she is "exploitative" of
    others, "lacks empathy, is unwilling to recognize or identify with the
    feelings and needs of others." And also "shows arrogant, haughty behavior or

    "This set of characteristics," says Dr. Wolman, not too reassuringly, "may
    describe Rumsfeld and Cheney better than Dubya."

    For those who, like Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stieglitz, warn that Bush "has
    been captured by a small group of ideologues," Dependent Personality Disorder
    describes someone who "has difficulty making everyday decisions without an
    excessive amount of advice and reassurance from others." [CBC Feb. 10, 2003]

    From a Jungian perspective, writes Dr. Wolman, "Dubya may be identifying with
    an archetype - something out of Revelations, perhaps, whereby he sees himself
    as an instrument of God's will to bring about Armageddon." Concurs Katherine
    van Wormer, "To fight evil, Bush is ready to take on the world, in almost a
    Biblical sense."

    Is Bush's belligerence bent on securing another oil fix? Katherine van Wormer
    believes that a Portland peace protestor's sign, "Drunk on Power" nailed it.
    Says this quiet Quaker, "The drive for power can be an unquenchable thirst,
    addictive in itself."

    Senator William Fulbright agrees. His bestseller, The Arrogance of Power
    defined power politics as the pursuit of power. "The causes and consequences
    of war may have more to do with pathology than with politics," Fulbright

    A key "dry drunk" trait is impatience. Bush, who often describes himself as
    "a patient man", is not. Just four weeks after inspectors went into Iraq, he
    called for obliterating Baghdad. "If we wait for threats to fully
    materialize", Bush pointed out to West Pointers, "we will have waited too
    long". Translations: It's okay to attack projections of our own fearful
    imaginings - in case those phantom threats someday become real.

    Alan Bisbort's "Dry Drunk - Is Bush Making a Cry for Help?" appeared in
    American Politics Journal. Bisbort believes that Bush's "incoherence" when
    speaking away from prepared scripts is a classic sign of addicted brain

    For Bisbort, another "dry drunk" tip-off is Dubya's irritability with anyone
    who dares disagree with him - including Germany's new leader, who insists he
    is opposing Bush's folly in Iraq as a concerned long-time friend of America.
    (Schroeder's wife is American.)

    Another "Dry drunk" sign says van Wormer, is Dubya's "dangerous obsessing
    about only one thing (Iraq) to the exclusion of all other things."

    Van Wormer's bottom line prognosis: "George W. Bush seems to possess the
    traits characteristic of addictive persons who still have the thought
    patterns that accompany substance abuse. The fact that some residual effects
    from his earlier substance abuse - however slight - might cloud the U.S.
    President's thinking and judgment is frightening, however, in the context of
    the current global crisis."

    The Toronto Star recounts how NYU author and media critic Mark Crispin Miller
    attempted to catalogue GW's verbal gaffes. Some favorites: "The vast majority
    of our imports come from outside the country." "If we don't succeed, we run
    the risk of failure."

    "The future will be better tomorrow."

    "He meant it for a laugh," wrote the Star. "Not now."

    The author of Boxed In: The Culture of TV believes "Bush is not an imbecile.
    He's not a puppet. I think that Bush is a sociopathic personality. I think
    he's incapable of empathy. He has an inordinate sense of his own entitlement,
    and he's a very skilled manipulator. And in all the snickering about his
    alleged idiocy, this is what a lot of people miss."

    Miller's judgment - that an unelected president might suffer from a clinical
    personality disorder - is much heavier than being called the global village
    idiot. "He has no trouble speaking off the cuff when he's speaking
    punitively, when he's talking about violence, when he's talking about
    revenge. When he struts and thumps his chest, his syntax and grammar are
    fine," Miller mentions. "It's only when he leaps into the wild blue yonder of
    compassion, or idealism, or altruism, that he makes these hilarious

    Bush even has trouble repeating comforting clichés. "Fool me once, shame ...
    shame on ... you," Long, uncomfortable pause. "Fool me - can't get fooled

    While the world was laughing, Miller saw something darker. "What's revealing
    about this is that Bush could not say, `Shame on me' to save his life. That's
    a completely alien idea to him. This is a guy who is absolutely proud of his
    own inflexibility and rectitude," wrote Miller.

    Miller says that Bush saying, "I know how hard it is to put food on your
    family" is not 'cause he's stupid, but "because he doesn't care about people
    who can't put food on the table."

    When Bush is envisioning "a foreign-handed foreign policy," Miller contends
    it's because he can't keep his focus on things that mean nothing to him.
    "When he tries to talk about what this country stands for, or about
    democracy, he can't do it," Miller observes.

    According to Miller, this is why GW is so closely watched by his handlers.
    "Not because he'll say something stupid," the Star paraphrased, "but because
    he'll overindulge in the language of violence and punishment at which he

    "He's a very angry guy, a hostile guy," Miller says. "He's much like Nixon.
    So they're very, very careful to choreograph every move he makes. They don't
    want him anywhere near protestors, because he would lose his temper." Adds
    this media expert, "It would be a grave mistake to just play him for laughs."

    Confronted by a man who will not listen to anyone but a few "chickenhawks"
    urging worldwide war, why shouldn't we feel depressed? Not surprisingly, we

    Seventy percent of U.S. pastors constantly fight depression. Right now,
    almost three million Canadians are seriously depressed. (Multiply by four or
    five for approximate U.S. figures.) We can't blame GW for this. Or the fact
    that suicide is the 3rd leading cause of death in 15 to 24 year olds. But as
    the man responsible for perpetrating a worldwide bummer, George isn't
    helping! [; National Institute of Mental Health]

    If it's politically incorrect to ask these questions, how "correct" is it to
    launch 800 cruise missiles and thousands of one-ton bombs on a captive urban
    population already suffering the ravages of deliberately imposed hunger and

    Another big clue to Dubya's displays of dementia comes in "photo-ops" showing
    him slugging back diet Coke with other Aspartame addicts, like Chicago's
    mayor Richard Daley. Their beet red faces spell either embarrassment over
    Bush's hijacking of America, or aspartame poisoning. [Chicago Sun Times,
    Sept. 27, 2002]

    According to Carol Guilford, an Aspartame expert and support worker, the
    President-Select's "pretzel" pratfall was most likely an Aspartame seizure.
    Bush, like Carter, Al Gore and millions of Americans, is addicted to this
    constant caffeine hit. Among the FDA's listed 92 symptoms for Aspartame
    poisoning are: "Difficulty Swallowing", "Fainting" and "Unconsciousness".

    Bush's facial lesions, removed as a result of "Too much sun" is another sign
    of Aspartame poisoning. So was his recent knee surgery: Aspartame depletes
    synovial fluid lubricating the joints.

    Would you drink 6 to 12 cans of formaldehyde a day? It turns out that
    methanol in Aspartame converts to formaldehyde in the tissues. As Guildford
    wrote to USN Captain Eleanor Marino, Physician to the President (Feb. 21,
    2002): 10% of a 200mg can of diet soda is straight methanol wood alcohol!
    Methanol is such a gross cumulative poison, the EPA's limit for drinking
    water is 7.8 mg daily. For serious addicts like Bush, the methanol intake can
    exceed 32 times the EPA's recommended limit..

    Now the punch line: Clinical case studies shows that, among other symptoms,
    Aspartame ingestion results in "mind fog", feeling "unreal", poor memory,
    confusion, anxiety, irritability, depression, mania, and slurred speech.
    [Neurology 1994]

    Alcohol-related brain damage is not helped by chugging formaldehyde. James
    Turner, consumer protection lawyer and author of The Chemical Feast learned
    that an Oct. 1980 FDA inquiry found that the formaldehyde formed by Aspartame
    actually eats microscopic holes and triggers tumors in the brain.

    That finding banned Aspartame from the food supply. But three months later,
    Searle CEO Donald Rumsfeld told that pharma giant's sales staff he would get
    Aspartame approved pronto. The next month, the FDA commissioner was replaced
    by Dr. Arthur Hayes. In Nov. 1983 the FDA approved aspartame for soft drinks.
    Under fire for accepting corporate bribes, Hayes went to work for Searle's
    public-relations firm. Searle lawyer Robert Shapiro coined the name
    NutraSweet. Monsanto bought Searle. Rumsfeld received $12 million for his
    help. Shapiro now heads Monsanto.

    The same "revolving door" swings wide for arms makers and the oil mafia. The
    Big Question is: Why hasn't Dick warned George that the diet drinks he's
    swilling are eating his brain and making him crazy?

    Crazy? Am I calling the President-Select of the Excited States crazy? Not me.
    As a journalist, I can only point out that published medical evidence goes
    frighteningly far in explaining GW's behavior. For certain, this good ol' boy
    should go in for a brain scan before being allowed to command more firepower
    than the next 11 nations combined. If George W. Bush is not crazy - he's sure
    acting like it.

    The Matrix is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth


    By Anonymous

    PeaceNik: Why did you say we are we invading Iraq?

    WarMonger: We are invading Iraq because it is in violation of security council resolution 1441. A country cannot be allowed to violate security council resolutions.

    PN: But I thought many of our allies, including Israel, were in violation of more security council resolutions than Iraq.

    WM: It's not just about UN resolutions. The main point is that Iraq could have weapons of mass destruction, and the first sign of a smoking gun could well be a mushroom cloud over NY.

    PN: Mushroom cloud? But I thought the weapons inspectors said Iraq had no nuclear weapons.

    WM: Yes, but biological and chemical weapons are the issue.

    PN: But I thought Iraq did not have any long range missiles for attacking us or our allies with such Weapons.

    WM: The risk is not Iraq directly attacking us, but rather terrorists networks that Iraq could sell the weapons to.

    PN: But coundn't virtually any country sell chemical or biological materials? We sold quite a bit to Iraq in the eighties ourselves, didn't we?

    WM: That's ancient history. Look, Saddam Hussein is an evil man that has an undeniable track record of repressing his own people since the early eighties. He gasses his enemies. Everyone agrees that he is a power-hungry lunatic murderer.

    PN: We sold chemical and biological materials to a power-hungry lunatic murderer?

    WM: The issue is not what we sold, but rather what Saddam did. He is the one that launched a pre-emptive first strike on Kuwait.

    PN: A pre-emptive first strike does sound bad. But didn't our ambassador to Iraq, April Gillespie, know about and green-light the invasion of Kuwait?

    WM: Let's deal with the present, shall we? As of today, Iraq could sell its biological and chemical weapons to Al Quaida. Osama BinLaden himself released an audio tape calling on Iraqis to suicide-attack us, proving a partnership between the two.

    PN: Osama Bin Laden? Wasn't the point of invading Afghanistan to kill him?

    WM: Actually, it's not 100% certain that it's really Osama Bin Laden on the tapes. But the lesson from the tape is the same: there could easily be a partnership between al-Qaida and Saddam Hussein unless we act.

    PN: Is this the same audio tape where Osama Bin Laden labels Saddam a secular infidel?

    WM: You're missing the point by just focusing on the tape. Powell presented a strong case against Iraq.

    PN: He did?

    WM: Yes, he showed satellite pictures of an Al Quaeda poison factory in Iraq.

    PN: But didn't that turn out to be a harmless shack in the part of Iraq controlled by the Kurdish opposition?

    WM: And a British intelligence report...

    PN: Didn't that turn out to be copied from an out-of-date graduate student paper?

    WM: And reports of mobile weapons labs...

    PN: Weren't those just artistic renderings?

    WM: And reports of Iraqis scuttling and hiding evidence from inspectors...

    PN: Wasn't that evidence contradicted by the chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix?

    WM: Yes, but there is plenty of other hard evidence that cannot be revealed because it would compromise our security.

    PN: So there is no publicly available evidence of weapons of mass

    destruction in Iraq?

    WM: The inspectors are not detectives, it's not their JOB to find evidence. You're missing the point.

    PN: So what is the point?

    WM: The main point is that we are invading Iraq because resolution 1441 threatened "severe consequences." If we do not act, the security council will become an irrelevant debating society.

    PN: So the main point is to uphold the rulings of the security council?

    WM: Absolutely. ... unless it rules against us.

    PN: And what if it does rule against us?

    WM: In that case, we must lead a coalition of the willing to invade Iraq.

    PN: Coalition of the willing? Who's that?

    WM: Britain, Turkey, Bulgaria, Spain, and Italy, for starters.

    PN: I thought Turkey refused to help us unless we gave them tens of billions of dollars.

    WM: Nevertheless, they may now be willing.

    PN: I thought public opinion in all those countries was against war.

    WM: Current public opinion is irrelevant. The majority expresses its will by electing leaders to make decisions.

    PN: So it's the decisions of leaders elected by the majority that is important?

    WM: Yes.

    PN: But George Bush wasn't elected by voters. He was selected by the U. S. Supreme C...-

    WM: I mean, we must support the decisions of our leaders, however they were elected, because they are acting in our best interest. This is about being a patriot. That's the bottom line.

    PN: So if we do not support the decisions of the president, we are not patriotic?

    WM: I never said that.

    PN: So what are you saying? Why are we invading Iraq?

    WM: As I said, because there is a chance that they have weapons of mass destruction that threaten us and our allies.

    PN: But the inspectors have not been able to find any such weapons.

    WM: Iraq is obviously hiding them.

    PN: You know this? How?

    WM: Because we know they had the weapons ten years ago, and they are still unaccounted for.

    PN: The weapons we sold them, you mean?

    WM: Precisely.

    PN: But I thought those biological and chemical weapons would degrade to an unusable state over ten years.

    WM: But there is a chance that some have not degraded.

    PN: So as long as there is even a small chance that such weapons exist, we must invade?

    WM: Exactly.

    PN: But North Korea actually has large amounts of usable chemical, biological, AND nuclear weapons, AND long range missiles that can reach the west coast AND it has expelled nuclear weapons inspectors, AND threatened to turn America into a sea of fire.

    WM: That's a diplomatic issue.

    PN: So why are we invading Iraq instead of using diplomacy?

    WM: Aren't you listening? We are invading Iraq because we cannot allow the inspections to drag on indefinitely. Iraq has been delaying, deceiving, and denying for over ten years, and inspections cost us tens of millions.

    PN: But I thought war would cost us tens of billions.

    WM: Yes, but this is not about money. This is about security.

    PN: But wouldn't a pre-emptive war against Iraq ignite radical Muslim sentiments against us, and decrease our security?

    WM: Possibly, but we must not allow the terrorists to change the way we live. Once we do that, the terrorists have already won.

    PN: So what is the purpose of the Department of Homeland Security, color-coded terror alerts, and the Patriot Act? Don't these change the way we live?

    WM: I thought you had questions about Iraq.

    PN: I do. Why are we invading Iraq?

    WM: For the last time, we are invading Iraq because the world has called on Saddam Hussein to disarm, and he has failed to do so. He must now face the consequences.

    PN: So, likewise, if the world called on us to do something, such as find a peaceful solution, we would have an obligation to listen?

    WM: By "world", I meant the United Nations.

    PN: So, we have an obligation to listen to the United Nations?

    WM: By "United Nations" I meant the Security Council.

    PN: So, we have an obligation to listen to the Security Council?

    WM: I meant the majority of the Security Council.

    PN: So, we have an obligation to listen to the majority of the Security Council?

    WM: Well... there could be an unreasonable veto.

    PN: In which case?

    WM: In which case, we have an obligation to ignore the veto.

    PN: And if the majority of the Security Council does not support us at all?

    WM: Then we have an obligation to ignore the Security Council.

    PN: That makes no sense.

    WM: If you love Iraq so much, you should move there. Or maybe France, with all the other cheese-eating surrender monkeys. It's time to boycott their wine and cheese, no doubt about that.

    PN: I give up!

    (Source: Unknown)

    A Woman to Replace Saddam 22 March 2003

    by Wendy McElroy ,

    Reports are circulating that President Bush intends to divide a post-Saddam Iraq into three sectors: north, south and central. Two retired U.S. generals would separately administer the north and south while the central sector, including Baghdad, would be overseen by a woman: Barbara Bodine , a former ambassador to Yemen.

    Reaction to this news — and to the eventuality itself — will be interesting, not only among Arabs but also from the American left, especially from left-wing feminists.

    Bodine, 54, has been described as "an American diplomat with a taste for danger and an ambition to advance the cause of Arab women." She also shares the Bush administration's belief that most Muslim people want democracy.

    Bodine's "taste for danger" is evidenced by the dramatic history of her former posts to the Middle East. During the Iran-Iraq War in the early '80s she was the deputy principal officer in Baghdad. Prior to the 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, she was deputy chief of mission in Kuwait and endured a 137-day siege by Iraqi troops of the U.S. Embassy. She was the U.S. ambassador to Yemen in 2000 when the USS Cole was bombed. In 2001, she survived an airplane hijacking.

    In short, Bodine is qualified. But she also embodies two other attributes: She is a woman; and, she is right-wing.

    Bodine's sex may be a problem for some Arab states with whom she would have to negotiate. Saudi Arabia, for example, is notorious for its draconian attitude toward women. Let alone non-Arab, non-Muslim women in positions of power. The Arab League, when informed of the post-Saddam plans, reportedly expressed outrage.

    Iraq itself is likely to see Bodine's gender as an insult. Although Saddam wooed Western favor by implementing pro-woman policies in the past (for which U.S. feminists have seemed to praise him), those advances collapsed as Western favor became an unachievable goal.

    In general, the Arab world does not welcome nor want women in power, especially power over men. Bodine's presence may be a stumbling block to the stability of any post-Iraq solution. And Bush may be trading off a foreign advantage for a domestic one.

    Because, domestically, the appointment of Bodine is a brilliant move. Left-wing feminists are not going to applaud her, however progressive her goals for Arab women may be. They will either remain silent — as they are right now — or they will condemn.

    The condemnation will be delivered through faint praise with a punchline of criticism. For example, they will say, "Bush has sent Bodine into an impossible situation as a sop thrown to Iraqi women while he denies abortion rights to American women." Organizations like NOW hate Bush for his position on abortion and they will be willing to ignore the plight of Muslim women if it distracts one whit from their own domestic goals. (Kay Hymowitz expands on this point in her excellent article entitled, "Feminists to Muslim Women: Drop Dead.")

    Bush's strategy in appointing Bodine (if rumors are true) is "brilliant" because it embodies what I call "outflanking the opponent on the left." Translation: He is taking the left's cherished principles and applying them in a manner that benefits him and makes them choke.

    The principle: Women should be in positions of power. Appointing Bodine would do that. The principle: Arab women need equal rights. Appointing the pro-woman Bodine would further that.

    If left-wing feminists believe in their own principles, they will leap to their feet, applauding madly. But Bodine is right-wing and this guarantees that their posteriors will remain seated, planted firmly on their hands.

    The left is good at outrage. It is good at yelling "sexist," "racist," "exploiter," "hypocrite" ... fill in the ad hominem blank. They are wretched at dealing with anyone who applies their own principles better than they do because this pulls the moral high ground out from under them.

    Consider another "outflanking on the left" move ... namely, Miguel Estrada's nomination as the first Latino on a federal appeals court in Washington. The pro-minority Democrats are opposing him with all their might because he is right-wing. This allows Republicans to counter with the leftist-sounding accusation that Democrats are "anti-minority," "anti-Hispanic." It is good strategy.

    The Bush administration's stated intention to appoint Bodine, in and of itself, does the same thing to left-wing feminists. On what grounds can they object? On what grounds can they not applaud?

    The unspoken reason will be that Bodine's career is rooted deeply within Republican interests. She has served under Reagan, George Bush Sr. and the current Bush presidency. Bodine has also worked for Bob Dole and Henry Kissinger. And Democrats have criticized her loyalty to Republican administrations before.

    The criticism will fall on deaf ears. Bush seems to be positioning Bodine to assume swift control of central Iraq. She has been recalled from her sabbatical at the University of California to serve as the senior civilian on a Pentagon taskforce considering the reconstruction of post-Saddam Iraq.

    Playing the "Bodine card" is an aggressive move by the Bush administration. It is likely to complicate any resolution to post-Saddam Iraq. But it is also likely to solidify Bush's domestic support if only because it clips another feather from left-wingers.