Ex-líder iraquiano Saddam Hussein capturado
M?rcio Os?rio
ler mais alguma coisa que ligue o rádio, a TV, leia nos jornais, nas
revistas ou consulte a Internet. Ou faça um exame de DNA no dito cujo.
Vão pra suas casas e peguem o estojo pro teste.
m
Luiz
Também vi a notícia na Folha e na BBC, mas ainda não há detalhes.
LC.
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Max Dias
gengivas, o teste de DNA foi feito e pronto, o barbudaço É mesmo
Saddam Hussein, e não o Capitão Haddock exilado por Tintin, como
alguns já tinham afirmado. Parabéns Marcio pela prontidão,
Agora, isso me leva a uma intrigante pergunta: porque os testes
(forenses) de DNA aqui no Brasil demoram um mês? Resposta possível:
para dar tempo de negociá-los?
Max
"M?rcio Os?rio" <marcio...@hotmail.com> escreveu na mensagem
news:9ce21c98.0312...@posting.google.com...
MBocciaMcArt
nunca se saberá.
Só saberemos que CNN vai faturar, idem Bush eleiçoes:
com inclusive " plantações na boca de um cara, se Sadam mesmo,
qui lo sa ! " : Bush terá seu salvo-conduto de re-eleiçao, e perdao
via essas plantações, certamente.
- Para testes DNA ou arcada dentaria : só se se tivesse
as devidas reais provas de EXAMES ANTERIORES do Ex-Lider,
enquanto no PODER. Quem as tem ?
Vamos ver ate onde chega esse teatro do Bush !
-Mas eu nao o acompanharei mais.
marcio...@hotmail.com (M?rcio Os?rio) wrote in message news:<9ce21c98.0312...@posting.google.com>...
ARIEL GOES
E e' ele mesmo!!!
Os apoiadores do Saddan podem chorar, hehe
Ariel
>marcio...@hotmail.com (M?rcio Os?rio)
>Date: Sun, Dec 14, 2003 4:48
>Message-id: <9ce21c98.0312...@posting.google.com>
ARIEL GOES
capital, radios played festive music, drivers honked their horns and passengers
on buses and trucks chanted "They got Saddam, they got Saddam," as word of the
former dictator's capture spread from car to car and shop to shop on a
sun-filled Sunday afternoon.
Let the Celebration Begin
U.S. troops stationed around the country cheered when they heard the news and
held back as Iraqis fired their guns in the air. Iraqi journalists gave U.S.
officials a standing ovation and cheered wildly when video of a captured Saddam
was shown during a news conference announcing the arrest.
But not everyone was happy and many said they wanted proof that the man in U.S.
custody is the real Saddam Hussein.
"I heard the news, but I'll believe it when I see it," said Mohaned al-Hasaji,
a 33-year-old who owns a cosmetics shop on Baghdad's bustling Karada street.
"They need to show us that they really have him."
Outside his shop a paper boy sold copies of Sunday's edition of Shaheed, or the
Witness, a weekly newsmagazine whose cover story was graced with photos of
Saddam and banned headline that asked "Who's the real Saddam?"
At the Palestine hotel, where foreign journalists and American contract workers
are staying, Abil Daoud was sad.
"We lost our only hope and now we are stuck with the Americans," said Daoud,
who is employed by U.S. troops as a local security guard. Some called Saddam a
"coward" for getting caught. Others were glad he didn't die a martyr.
"He killed my son Mohammed and he tortured his people," said Halem a-Jassen,
40, as she celebrated in the street.
Members of the Iraqi Communist Party, which was banned and persecuted under
Saddam's rule, passed around bags of candy and raised red flags outside their
party headquarters.
A Shiite cleric named Azhad al-Faili thanked the Almighty "for ridding the
world of the tyrant."
Ayet Bassem, who wore the traditional black cloak of religious Muslim women,
was overcome with a sense of relief.
"Things will be better for my son," she said, clutching the hand of
six-year-old Zenalbadin. "My son now has a future."
With random gunfire in the streets, she said it was time to go home and leave
the shopping for later.
Worried shopkeepers hurried to close up their businesses early and get home
before the shooting increased.
Among them was Yehya Hasson.
"I'm very happy. Now we can start a new beginning."
12/14/03 10:38 EST
Copyright 2003 The Associated Press
henri
Max, eu estava no meio do livro "Dude, Where's My Country" de Michael More e
agora a estoria ficou velha e sem gosto :-(
Acharam o Sadam, o Marcio voltou... humm... suspeito!
H
"Max Dias" <maxx...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:brhq6i$3csqt$1...@ID-170798.news.uni-berlin.de...
Lise Sedrez
resistência E os ataques terroristas, o cenário é um. se acabar só com a
resistência, o cenário é outro. Se Não mudar nem um nem outro, o que
acontece?
E o que os Eua vão fazer com o ditador? A administração bush está doida
por um grande gesto de legitimidade, e um julgamento a la Nurenberg...
ou pelo menos como o de Milosevic. Mas eles tem sido contra tribunais
internacionais desde o início... O que acontece com Saddam? Vai para
GUantanamo? Genebra? Julgado no Iraque mesmo? (que é o que eu acho que
vai acontecer). Neste caso, quais as leis? Crimes de guerra ou crimes
contra sua própria população? Sim, porque desobedecer regulação da
ONU--o que deu a desculpa para a guerra--não dá responsabilidade criminal.
Só o que me faz ranger os dentes é pensar como a administração de bush
vai usar a captura de Saddam para a re-eleição. Fora isto, tomara que
melhore a situação no Iraque.
Lise
Lise Sedrez
resistência E os ataques terroristas, o cenário é um. se acabar só com a
resistência, o cenário é outro. Se Não mudar nem um nem outro, o que
acontece?
E o que os Eua vão fazer com o ditador? A administração bush está doida
por um grande gesto de legitimidade, e um julgamento a la Nurenberg...
ou pelo menos como o de Milosevic. Mas eles tem sido contra tribunais
internacionais desde o início... O que acontece com Saddam? Vai para
GUantanamo? Genebra? Julgado no Iraque mesmo? (que é o que eu acho que
vai acontecer). Neste caso, quais as leis? Crimes de guerra ou crimes
contra sua própria população? Sim, porque desobedecer regulação da
ONU--o que deu a desculpa para a guerra--não dá responsabilidade criminal.
Só o que me faz ranger os dentes é pensar como a administração de bush
vai usar a captura de Saddam para a re-eleição. Fora isto, tomara que
melhore a situação no Iraque.
Lise
Lise Sedrez
resistência E os ataques terroristas, o cenário é um. se acabar só com a
resistência, o cenário é outro. Se Não mudar nem um nem outro, o que
acontece?
E o que os Eua vão fazer com o ditador? A administração bush está doida
por um grande gesto de legitimidade, e um julgamento a la Nurenberg...
ou pelo menos como o de Milosevic. Mas eles tem sido contra tribunais
internacionais desde o início... O que acontece com Saddam? Vai para
GUantanamo? Genebra? Julgado no Iraque mesmo? (que é o que eu acho que
vai acontecer). Neste caso, quais as leis? Crimes de guerra ou crimes
contra sua própria população? Sim, porque desobedecer regulação da
ONU--o que deu a desculpa para a guerra--não dá responsabilidade criminal.
Só o que me faz ranger os dentes é pensar como a administração de bush
vai usar a captura de Saddam para a re-eleição. Fora isto, tomara que
melhore a situação no Iraque.
Lise
Luiz
> E o que os Eua vão fazer com o ditador? A administração bush está doida
> por um grande gesto de legitimidade, e um julgamento a la Nurenberg...
> ou pelo menos como o de Milosevic. Mas eles tem sido contra tribunais
> internacionais desde o início... O que acontece com Saddam? Vai para
> GUantanamo? Genebra? Julgado no Iraque mesmo? (que é o que eu acho que
> vai acontecer). Neste caso, quais as leis? Crimes de guerra ou crimes
> contra sua própria população? Sim, porque desobedecer regulação da
> ONU--o que deu a desculpa para a guerra--não dá responsabilidade criminal.
Lise.
O presidente do Conselho de Governo do Iraque já havia anunciado,
antes da captura de Saddam, a criação de um tribunal de crimes de
guerra para julgar os dirigentes iraquianos, noticiado pela BBC em
http://www.bbc.co.uk/portuguese/noticias/story/2003/12/031210_iraqueg.shtml
Como o anúncio foi antes da captura, falavam em julgar Saddam à sua
revelia.
Até então, entre outras, as acusações eram a morte de 8 mil integrantes
do clã curdo Barzani, em 1983; o uso de armas químicas no dia 16 de
março de 1988 contra curdos na cidade de Halabja, que matou 5 mil e
feriu 7 mil pessoas; e a morte de 300 mil muçulmanos xiitas depois da
Guerra do Golfo, em 1991.
O tal tribunal se ocuparia com os crimes cometidos de 14 de julho de
1968, dia em que o partido Baath chegou ao poder, até 1º de maio deste
ano, dia em que Bush declarou o fim da guerra.
Não é pouca coisa.
(-BobLaranja.)
<maxx...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Agora, isso me leva a uma intrigante pergunta: porque os testes
>(forenses) de DNA aqui no Brasil demoram um mês? Resposta
>possível: para dar tempo de negociá-los?
Bem lembrado, Max. Quando a empregada ninfeta do mal-uf exigiu
o teste de DNA para comprovar a paternidade de seu filho, ele trocou
a amostra e pelo esperma de seu motorista, ouvi dizer. E' a esperteza
vencendo a Ciencia, mais uma vez.
-BobLaranja.
(-BobLaranja.)
wrote:
>E agora, Jose'? Digo, Márcio? Se a captura de Saddam acabar com a
>resistência E os ataques terroristas, o cenário é um. se acabar só com a
>resistência, o cenário é outro. Se Não mudar nem um nem outro, o que
>acontece?
Boa pergunta, Lise. Eu acho que nao vai mudar muita coisa,
porque um semi-indigente piolhento socado num buraco nao
poderia mesmo liderar coisa alguma. Ele e' mais util a causa
iraquiana sob os holofotes da CNN. Sera' que vao deixa-lo falar?
Sei nao...
E a vida continua no Iraque: cheney et caterva espoliando o pais,
hillbillies&chicanos sendo explodidos diariamente, enquanto o
cowboy tenta a reeleicao.
E o Salam Pax esta' mudo...:-(
-BobLaranja.
Luiz
> Só o que me faz ranger os dentes é pensar como a administração de bush
> vai usar a captura de Saddam para a re-eleição. Fora isto, tomara que
> melhore a situação no Iraque.
Lise.
Apesar de saber que trata-se de um ditador assassino, sanguinário
e cruel, ao ver no vídeo aquela cara enrugada, com barba crescida
e cabelos desalinhados senti pena. Parecia um desses mendigos que
a gente vê pelas ruas, um Karl Marx esmolambado.
Quer procê?
Fausto Arinos de A. Barbuto
Me admira como não o executaram no ato. O sujeito deve ser um
arquivo ambulante. Agora que o pegaram, o que fazer com ele?
---Fausto
"Max Dias" <maxx...@yahoo.com> wrote in message:
> A Fox acabou de confirmar que é o homi mesmo. Tiraram amostras das
> gengivas, o teste de DNA foi feito e pronto, o barbudaço É mesmo
> Saddam Hussein, e não o Capitão Haddock exilado por Tintin, como
> alguns já tinham afirmado. Parabéns Marcio pela prontidão,
> Agora, isso me leva a uma intrigante pergunta: porque os testes
> (forenses) de DNA aqui no Brasil demoram um mês? Resposta possível:
> para dar tempo de negociá-los?
> Max
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.550 / Virus Database: 342 - Release Date: 09/12/2003
ARIEL GOES
eu tenho a ligeira impressao que os gringos preferiam que o Saddan tivesse dado
um tiro nos miolos quando viu que nao tinha mais jeito,mas o ex-ditador deve
ter outros planos, nao acredito que os gringos querem este circo que sera
criado com o julgamento.
Quem sabe o Saddan tem um AS de espadas debaixo da manga...
Agora as atencoes serao voltadas todas contra o Bin Laden, pelo jeito o buraco
em que ele vive e' bem mais fundo. :-).
Ariel
>"Fausto Arinos de A. Barbuto" fbarbut...@spam.yahoo.ca
>Date: 12/14/03 4:10 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <briu69$3ql3f$1...@ID-184581.news.uni-berlin.de>
Lise Sedrez
(-BobLaranja.) wrote:
>
>
> E o Salam Pax esta' mudo...:-(
Tá não, Bob. Ele tem uma entrevista em audio hoje no Guardian
Mas eu tenho curtido muito o blog de uma garota do Iraque, riverbend. Dá
um olhada em http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/
Lise
Lise Sedrez
liberado da prisão inglesa porque não tinha condições de ficar num
tribunal. Tribunal é mais do que estes caras deram para seus opositores.
O que eu tenho medo é que o julgamento de Saddam Hussein se transforme
no julgamento de legitimação desta guerra--que para mim são duas coisas
bem separadas.
Outra das minhas dores de barriga é o que esta captura levanta de bola
para seres como Bush, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Berlusconi, Aznar, e (em
menor escala, ainda tenho simpatia pelo cara) Blair.
Por outro lado, efeitos colaterais de guerra, desta vez na oposição, já
levantaram a bola para Chirac, um corrupto de marca maior, e para Le
Pen--o que é apavorante.
Lise
Luiz
> O que eu tenho medo é que o julgamento de Saddam Hussein se transforme
> no julgamento de legitimação desta guerra...
Lise, isto será inevitável. Os louros são do vencedor. Como disse
a Globo, foi o melhor presente de natal que Bush pode receber.
> Outra das minhas dores de barriga é o que esta captura levanta de bola
> para seres como Bush, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Berlusconi, Aznar...
Esta turma deverá sair bem fortalecida, principalmente o Wolfowitz
que parece ser mentor intelectual e principal conselheiro de Bush
em termos armas e guerras.
Fausto Arinos de A. Barbuto
"ARIEL GOES" <arie...@aol.com> wrote in message:
> eu tenho a ligeira impressao que os gringos preferiam que o Saddan tivesse dado
> um tiro nos miolos quando viu que nao tinha mais jeito,mas o ex-ditador deve
> ter outros planos, nao acredito que os gringos querem este circo que sera
> criado com o julgamento.
Concordo, Ariel, mas isto me faz voltar à minha pergunta original: por que
não o executaram no ato após uma simulação de resistência, então? Não
acredito no bom-mocismo do americano em geral e dos G.Is em particular.
Macacos me mordam se não montarem o circo do julgamento no próprio
Iraque, longe das vistas e câmeras do mundo.
---Fausto
Fausto Arinos de A. Barbuto
"henri" <henri...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message:
> Acharam o Sadam, o Marcio voltou... humm... suspeito!
Se houvesse eleição para a "Frase da Semana do SCB" eu votaria
nesta. ;-)
---Fausto
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.551 / Virus Database: 343 - Release Date: 11/12/2003
(-BobLaranja.)
wrote:
>Mas eu tenho curtido muito o blog de uma garota do Iraque, riverbend. Dá
>um olhada em http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/
Eu ja' conhecia o Baghdad Burning. E' o primeiro link do Salam.
Muito bom.
-BobLaranja.
MBocciaMcArt
and surpassed by CNN green-money-profits-fullOIL, que nem
paciencia tenho mais de escrever sobre essa bulshit , E, bahhh:
a todo esse teatrinho infantil de fotos e videos do little bush:
E, que merda de emoçaozaço estao passando os pobres iraquianos:
vitimas de mais ESSA MASSIVA CONSPIRAÇAO com soh midia arregada
da CNN e do bushinho, a explorar sentimentos, com nada mesmo de
realidades comprovaveis, e... as mas linguas até ja dizem
que Saddam sofreu ja tortura por semanas... a extrairem dele
( sozia ou clone de Saddam, ou tecno plasticado ):
as verdades todas que bush deseja a se re-eleger. hehehehe
E, Re: texto que diz nada com nada, mas soh explora emoçoes
absurdas, como tudo o mais que a CNN " tenta " INFORMAR. :
De:ARIEL GOES (arie...@aol.com)
Assunto:Re: Ex-líder iraquiano Saddam Hussein capturado
Grupos de discussão:soc.culture.brazil
Data:2003-12-14 10:46:11 PST
Envie uma continuação para esta mensagem
"(-BobLaranja.)" <bobla...@vegetarians.com> wrote in message news:<rbnptvgcb9rdp2ivv...@4ax.com>...
MBocciaMcArt
Lise Sedrez <lse...@stanford.edu> wrote in message news:<3FDCD51...@stanford.edu>...
Loopcineo Rogrigues
> E' isso ai, corda no pescoco do filho de puta!
> E e' ele mesmo!!!
> Os apoiadores do Saddan podem chorar, hehe
> Ariel
Ariel, olha só quem foram os apoiadores do Saddam:
We Finally Got Our Frankenstein
and He Was In a Spider Hole!
by Michael Moore
December 15, 2003
Thank God Saddam is finally back in American hands! He must have
really missed us. Man, he sure looked bad! But, at least he got a free
dental exam today. That's something most Americans can't get.
America used to like Saddam. We LOVED Saddam. We funded him. We armed
him. We helped him gas Iranian troops.
But then he screwed up. He invaded the dictatorship of Kuwait and, in
doing so, did the worst thing imaginable -- he threatened an even
BETTER friend of ours: the dictatorship of Saudi Arabia, and its vast
oil reserves. The Bushes and the Saudi royal family were and are close
business partners, and Saddam, back in 1990, committed a royal blunder
by getting a little too close to their wealthy holdings. Things went
downhill for Saddam from there.
But it wasn't always that way. Saddam was our good friend and ally. We
supported his regime. It wasn't the first time we had helped a
murderer. We liked playing Dr. Frankenstein. We created a lot of
monsters -- the Shah of Iran, Somoza of Nicaragua, Pinochet of Chile
-- and then we expressed ignorance or shock when they ran amok and
massacred people. We liked Saddam because he was willing to fight the
Ayatollah. So we made sure that he got billions of dollars to purchase
weapons. Weapons of mass destruction. That's right, he had them. We
should know -- we gave them to him!
We allowed and encouraged American corporations to do business with
Saddam in the 1980s. That's how he got chemical and biological agents
so he could use them in chemical and biological weapons. Here's the
list of some of the stuff we sent him (according to a 1994 U.S. Senate
report): * Bacillus Anthracis, cause of anthrax. * Clostridium
Botulinum, a source of botulinum toxin. * Histoplasma Capsulatam,
cause of a disease attacking lungs, brain, spinal cord, and heart. *
Brucella Melitensis, a bacteria that can damage major organs. *
Clostridium Perfringens, a highly toxic bacteria causing systemic
illness. * Clostridium tetani, a highly toxigenic substance.
And here are some of the American corporations who helped to prop
Saddam up by doing business with him: AT&T, Bechtel, Caterpillar, Dow
Chemical, Dupont, Kodak, Hewlett-Packard, and IBM (for a full list of
companies and descriptions of how they helped Saddam, go here).
We were so cozy with dear old Saddam that we decided to feed him
satellite images so he could locate where the Iranian troops were. We
pretty much knew how he would use the information, and sure enough, as
soon as we sent him the spy photos, he gassed those troops. And we
kept quiet. Because he was our friend and the Iranians were the
"enemy." A year after he first gassed the Iranians, we reestablished
full diplomatic relations with him!
Later he gassed his own people, the Kurds. You would think that would
force us to disassociate ourselves from him. Congress tried to impose
economic sanctions on Saddam, but the Reagan White House quickly
rejected that idea -- they wouldn't let anything derail their good
buddy Saddam. We had a virtual love fest with this Frankenstein whom
we (in part) created.
And, just like the mythical Frankenstein, Saddam eventually spun out
of control. He would no longer do what he was told by his master.
Saddam had to be caught. And now that he has been brought back from
the wilderness, perhaps he will have something to say about his
creators. Maybe we can learn something... interesting. Maybe Don
Rumsfeld could smile and shake Saddam's hand again. Just like he did
when he went to see him in 1983 (see the photo here).
Maybe we never would have been in the situation we're in if Rumsfeld,
Bush, Sr., and company hadn't been so excited back in the 80s about
their friendly monster in the desert.
Meanwhile, anybody know where the guy is who killed 3,000 people on
9/11? Our other Frankenstein?? Maybe he's in a mouse hole.
So many of our little monsters, so little time before the next
election.
Stay strong, Democratic candidates. Quit sounding like a bunch of
wusses. These bastards sent us to war on a lie, the killing will not
stop, the Arab world hates us with a passion, and we will pay for this
out of our pockets for years to come. Nothing that happened today (or
in the past 9 months) has made us ONE BIT safer in our post-9/11
world. Saddam was never a threat to our national security.
Only our desire to play Dr. Frankenstein dooms us all.
Yours,
Michael Moore
mmf...@aol.com
www.michaelmoore.com
Loopcineo Rogrigues
Olha só esse artigo escrito por uma mulher inteligente como voce. Leia
e depois me diga quem é pior, Bush ou Saddam:
Got Saddam But Not Much Else
by Maria Tomchick
December 15, 2003
Saddam is in custody, but the war's not over yet. The U.S. faces
several important hurdles in the bringing the war to an end and
extricating U.S. troops from a seemingly endless fracas.
The most critical problem involves the ceaseless guerrilla attacks.
According to a series of interviews with Iraqi guerrillas conducted by
the French Press Agency, the guerrillas are composed of three main
groups, only one of which supports Saddam Hussein. Of the other two
groups one is Iraqi Islamists, who are fighting to drive the infidel
Americans from Iraq's holy places. The third group is composed of
nationalists -- disaffected, anti-Saddam, former Baath party members
and other pan-Arabists -- who are fighting a war of liberation. And,
unsurprisingly, these groups often coordinate their attacks, to
devastating effect.
Nor is it safe to assume that the pro-Saddam faction is now beheaded.
U.S. military officers said that, when they pulled Saddam Hussein out
of his hole in the ground, he had no radio or other communications
equipment. Clearly, he wasn't coordinating any attacks, issuing any
orders, or in charge of any guerrilla movements.
The main value of having Saddam in custody is that it removes a
symbol, a source of inspiration for a sizable contingent of the
guerrillas. But to hope that this will bring an immediate end to the
war is to forget how adaptable human loyalties are. If Saddam Hussein
has not been directing guerrilla attacks, someone else surely has, and
that person or group of people command as much or more loyalty than
Saddam ever has. In the end, a figurehead is merely a figurehead; the
people who do the practical work -- who have the face-to-face contact
and provide the weapons and money -- are the ones who command the
loyalty of their troops. And not all the guerrillas look to Saddam for
inspiration -- not when there are plenty of other reasons to rebel in
Iraq these days.
Take, for example, U.S. military tactics in the Sunni triangle, which
have increasingly mirrored failed Israeli military tactics in the
Occupied Territories. This past week, both U.S. military planners and
Israeli sources have told the press that, yes, U.S. military officers
have studied Israeli tactics in the West Bank. And they are now
applying those lessons in Iraq.
Such tactics include: destroying buildings suspected of being
guerrilla hideouts, bulldozing the homes of suspected guerrillas and
their family members, arresting the relatives of suspected guerrillas
and/or people who may have information about the guerrillas, and
surrounding entire villages with razor wire, forcing the occupants to
pass through a single checkpoint in order to come and go. If people
can't make it back through crowded checkpoints before curfew, they
have to spend the night in the desert. At these checkpoints, Iraqis
must show ID cards issued by the U.S. military and printed only in
English. Humiliated Iraqis are drawing clear parallels to the
Palestinian situation, and that should be a warning sign for the U.S.
military. Unfortunately, it's going unheeded.
Lt. Col. Nathan Sassaman, the man in charge of surrounding the village
of Abu Hishma with razor wire, told the New York Times, "With a heavy
dose of fear and violence, and a lot of money for projects, I think we
can convince these people we are here to help them." A sign posted on
the wire fence reads "This fence is here for your protection. Do not
approach or try to cross or you will be shot."
One of the "heavy doses of fear and violence" that the U.S. military
is currently employing is the use of assassination squads, modeled on
the same squads the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) have used in the West
Bank and Gaza Strip. The U.S. military's new Task Force 121 is being
trained by the IDF at Fort Bragg to carry out assassinations of
suspected guerrilla leaders. The Guardian newspaper of London recently
noted that U.S. special forces teams are already operating inside
Syria in an attempt to kill "foreign jihadists" before they cross the
border, raising questions of "who is a jihadist and how do we define
that?" and "how do we know who's planning to cross the border?" -- not
to mention the ultimate question of the legality of assassination
under international law.
At least one of those questions can be answered. A principle planner
behind Task Force 121 is Lt. Gen. William "Jerry" Boykin who, in
October, told an Oregon church congregation that the U.S. is a
"Christian army" at war with Satan. Such fanatics will stretch the
definition of "foreign jihadists" to cover whomever they wish to
target. And such brutal tactics will be as successful in Iraq as
they've been in the Occupied Territories, where assassinations have
led to ever more militant attacks against Israeli troops and
civilians.
On the "money for projects" end, the Bush administration has failed
miserably so far. The major donor's conference in October brought
large pledges, but few of them have been honored because of the
deteriorating security situation in Iraq and the ongoing, world-wide
economic slump. The bulk of the money for reconstruction in Iraq will
come from the U.S. -- money that is swiftly disappearing into the
pockets of U.S. corporations, like Halliburton, which was recently
excoriated for an overpriced contract to ship gasoline into a country
that holds the world's second largest oil reserves.
The rest of the funds will come from the World Bank and the IMF in the
form of loans. But, before those funds can be released, the U.S. has
to negotiate with Iraq's pre-war debtors to forgive massive loans left
over from the Saddam era. In typically brilliant fashion, the Pentagon
issued a directive last week that bars French, German, and Russian
corporations from bidding on contracts for reconstruction in Iraq.
Well, guess who owns most of Iraq's pre-war debt? European nations and
Russia, that's who. Vladimir Putin, offended by the Pentagon's action,
last week adamantly refused to forgive some $8 billion of Iraq's
Saddam-era debt.
Failed military tactics, failed financial policies -- it's all in a
day's work for the Bush administration. Finding Saddam Hussein
certainly won't make up for incompetence at the top.
Maria Tomchick's writings have appeared on Alternet, Znet, the
CounterPunch website, Common Dreams newswire, MotherJones.com and
AntiWar.com. I am a co-editor and contributing writer for Eat The
State!, a biweekly anti-authoritarian newspaper of political opinion,
research and humor, based in Seattle, Washington. Eat the State! can
be found online at http://www.eatthestate.org.
Mc.Eagle
Iraque, o real motivo da invasão parece ter sido mesmo o petróleo
iraquiano, Sadam não é nenhum anjinho, deve ser julgado por seus
crimes sim, mas por um tribunal internacional.
Mc.Eagle
MBocciaMcArt
iferr...@mac.com (Loopcineo Rogrigues) wrote in message news:<2576764c.03121...@posting.google.com>...
-------
mais uma GRANDE sintese do iferramenta, Parabens .
iferr...@mac.com (Loopcineo Rogrigues) wrote in message news:<2576764c.03121...@posting.google.com>...
> Ariel,
>
> Se voce financia e arma um terrorista com WMDs, o que acontece
> contigo? Eu suponho que voce acabaria no galinheiro de
Guantanamo bay
> e sentaria numa cadeira eletrica. Porém, se os mesmo babacas da
> extrema direita, que hoje conduzem o Bush regime, financiam e
armam
> tiranos, monstros e ditadores pelo mundo afora, o que acontece
com
> eles? Nada! Eles apenas armam um circo de horrores, um
linchamento
> qualquer na CNN, para o povo otario admirar, e acaba tudo por
isso
> mesmo. Ou seja, eles apenas se livram dos monstros que não
interessam
> mais e cuidam de criar outros.
>
> Porém, para aqueles que são honestos e tem vergonha na cara,
esses
> acham que os criadores tambem devem ser punidos, tambem devem
ser
> enforcados junto com seus monstros escrotos, para não fazerem a
mesma
> sacanagem outra vez. Se voce cria um monstro escroto, voce então
é
> responsavel pelos atos dele.
>
> O problema é que é impossivel punir o grande satanás, o grande
criador
> de monstros escrotos, pois esse possui WMDs capazes de destruir
o
> mundo mais de 20 vezes. O verdadeiro satanás pode fazer o que
bem
> quiser. Ele pode fazer igual ou pior do que Saddam e ainda posar
de
> mocinho almofadinha na CNN. Pode mentir e o povo otário
acreditará.
> Acaba que o linchamento de um monstro qualquer, coisa que não
resolve
> o problema, é apresentado na TV e fica tudo acertado, pois esse
tipo
> de espetaculo morbido distrai e ilude o povo bundão, como
acontecia
> nos shows de guilhotina das praças de Paris. Enquanto isso, o
grande
> satanás está por aí, criando outros monstros ainda piores.
>
> Pois é isso que está acontecendo no Iraque e no Afeganistão
hoje. A
> caixa de Pandora está aberta. A prisão e exposição grotesca do
Saddam,
> um dos muitos monstrengos criado por satanás, que não interessa
mais e
> está sendo descartado, só faz mesmo é adicionar mais revolta e
> humilhação contra o povo do Iraque. Deste modo, eu acho que a
> guerrilha só vai é piorar e a matança no iraque não vai acabar
nunca.
> Vai ser igual ou pior do que a Palestina, vai ser igual ou pior
do que
> o proprio regime do Saddam Hussein.
>
> Se as tropas americanas sairem, a coisa vira uma guerra civil
> generalizada e os rebelados acabarão engolindo o governinho
marionete
> de merda que os USA estão montando no Iraque. Com soldados
ganhando
> US$60 por mes, não vai ter ninguem que segure a barra.
>
> No Afeganistão é a mesma coisa, na hora que as tropas americanas
> sairem, o governinho bosta de traficantes de heroina que os USA
> instalaram nesse pais miseravel vai ser engolido pelos radicais
> malucos. Neguinho vai ser empalado em praça publica. Note que o
> Taliban já está voltando `a ativa.
>
> Se as tropas ficarem, vai ter guerrilha pelo resto da vida. Vai
ter
> muito red neck e cucaracha da US army acabando com a boca cheia
de
> formiga. E isso não é nada bom para uma campanha eleitoral
mentirosa.
> Vai chegar a um ponto em que CNN nenhuma vai conseguir maquiar
os
> fatos nem iludir os trouxas, o povo ignorante e egoista
americano vai
> acabar notando que está levando desvantagem. E aí a mesa vira.
>
> Ninguem aqui está a favor do Saddam ou do Bin laden. Eu,
> particularmente, estou é contra o Bush, porque eu gosto dos bons
> americanos (Michael Moore, Noam Chomsky, Madonna, Dixie
Chicks...). Eu
> amo a America de Martin Luther King. Esses merdas da extrema
direita,
> esses evangelicos fanaticos idiotas, a KKK, esses rednecks
ignorantes
> e toda essa turma nojenta que apoia o George Bush, esses não
> representam a verdadeira America que eu amo.
>
> Portanto, odeio o Saddam e o Bin Laden, pois esses vermes,
durante o
> treinamento que tiveram com a CIA perversa, adquiriram uma
psicose
> assassina da pior especie. Eles são iguais ao Bush, sendo que a
unica
> diferença está no fato de não serem almofadinhas covardes e
> mentirosos. Bin Laden fala a verdade na cara e foda-se. O Saddam
é
> muito mais macho do que o Dubya bichinha. Queria ver o Dubya num
> buraco de rato cheio de piolho. Acho que ele iria chorar e
tentar
> negociar o brioco com as tropas da captura.
>
> De qualquer modo, Saddam, Bin laden e até mesmo o Bush idiota,
esses
> são apenas empregados do grande satanás. Quero ver é prender o
chefe
> responsavel.
>
>
> arie...@aol.com (ARIEL GOES) wrote in message news:<20031215131345...@mb-m06.aol.com>...
> > Caro Hegel, voce nao e' o primeiro nem o segundo brasileiro
que vejo com pena
> > do Saddan.
> > Talves isso explica o porque de tantos assassinos andando
pelas ruas
> > brasileiras.
> > Ariel
MBocciaMcArt
>
> De qualquer modo, Saddam, Bin laden e até mesmo o Bush idiota,
esses
> são apenas empregados do grande satanás. Quero ver é prender o
chefe
> responsavel.
>
iferr...@mac.com (Loopcineo Rogrigues) wrote in message news:<2576764c.03121...@posting.google.com>...
----------
ARIEL GOES
Brasil e muitos outros.
Ariel
Loopcineo Rogrigues
> Parabens iferramenta:Re:
Obrigado MacArtista, para voce que gosta de artigo que coloca o dedo
na ferida e roda, tem esse daqui que é um tremendo chute no olho do cú
do evil empire:
Perpetual War, Perpetual Terror
By Manuel Valenzuela
"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition
of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military
industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced
power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our
liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted.
Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper
meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with
our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may
prosper together." ---- Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961
12/16/03: (ICH) "In the councils of government, we must guard against
the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought,
by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous
rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our
liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted.
Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper
meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with
our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may
prosper together."
---- Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961
In the United States last year there were over 11,000 deaths by
firearms. No other nation comes even close to matching this appetite
for death. That is eight thousand more than died on 9/11, but about
the same number as those innocent Iraqi civilians that perished by our
actions in Gulf War II. And the costs to society from injuries and
death due to firearms you ask? More than $60 billion. Those who
produce instruments of death in this country are not ignorant,
however; they know the statistics, they simply brush them aside.
Profit, after all, is much more important than stopping Americans from
arming themselves to the teeth and killing each other. What else
explains the gun lobby's attempts to go against common sense? The
Second Amendment must be honored and preserved, they say, even if the
Founding Fathers lived in times of muskets, Indians, English threats
and manifest destiny, never imagining the killing power of today's
firearms. It is no coincidence, then, that the same nation that allows
so many of its citizens to die at the hands of loaded weapons would
naturally export its appetite for human death abroad.
Today, the U.S. is responsible for 40% of all worldwide weapons'
sales. Tanks, fighter jets, artillery, helicopters, missiles,
landmines, machine guns, mortars, bullets, grenades, guns, you name
it, Guns'R'U.S. has it. Our nation supplies the world in instruments
of death. The United States' Military Industrial Complex (MIC) makes a
killing from death, suffering and destruction. It exists only if
people die. Its signature is everywhere; in the millions of landmines
buried worldwide and the millions of amputee victims, many of them
children. It can be seen in civil wars that ravage the developing
world, from Africa to Asia to Latin America. From sea to shining sea,
our weapons we can see, from the exponentially growing threat of WMDs
– many of which were distributed at one time by our own government –
to the military hardware of tyrants and dictators, war criminals and
warlords.
The MIC's front for assuring continual human violence is the US
government, the Pentagon in particular. President Bush has just
granted the Pentagon a military budget of $400 billion dollars for the
next fiscal year. That's $400,000,000,000.00. This, of course, does
not include our little warmongering expedition to the Fertile
Crescent, which by last estimates had already cost an additional $160
billion more. With so much of our money going to the Department of War
one has to wonder where our priorities are. Certainly not in
education, healthcare or in the creation of jobs.
The Pentagon and the Military Industrial Complex are one and the same,
having morphed over time to form the most lethal killing institution
the world has ever seen. Through a sliding and revolving door that
turns citizen soldiers into armament industry executives and company
officers into military policy makers, the MIC has embedded itself into
the military branch of the US government, thereby assuring itself of
unlimited contracts, access, information and profit. Military industry
executives and lobbyists have also slithered deep into top
administration positions, occupying vitally important posts that
decide national and foreign policy. Ex top government officials now
sit on boards of today's biggest suppliers of military might. One need
only look to the Carlyle Group to find the marriage between government
and MIC. George Bush the First had until recently sat on the board of
this powerful yet clandestine group. This intertwined dancing tango of
cronyism is exactly what Eisenhower warned about. Like a virus MIC has
spread itself throughout the hallways of the Pentagon, penetrating
from top to bottom through the disease called greed. Now one and the
same, the Pentagon and MIC have a common interest, motive and ability
to shape how funds are used and wars are waged.
The Pentagon is the Department of War, not Defense. It is in business
to kill, kill, and kill some more. Without war, violence and weapons
there is no Pentagon. And so to survive, to remain a player, wars must
be created, weapons must be allocated, profits must be made and the
Military Industrial Complex must continue exporting and manufacturing
violence and conflict throughout the globe. And, as always, in the
great tradition of the United States, enemies must exist. Indians,
English, Mexicans, Spanish, Nazis, Koreans, Communists and now the
ever-ambiguous Terrorists. The Cold War came to an end and so too the
great profits of the MIC. Reductions in the Pentagon budget threatened
the lifeblood of the industry; a new enemy had to be unearthed. There
is no war – hence no profit – without evildoers, without terrorists
lurching at every corner, waiting patiently for the moment to strike,
instilling fear into our lives, absorbing our attention.
We are told our nation is in imminent danger, that we are a mushroom
cloud waiting to happen. And so we fear, transforming our mass
uneasiness into nationalistic and patriotic fervor, wrapping ourselves
up in the flag and the Military Industrial Complex. We have fallen
into the mouse trap, becoming the subservient slaves of an engine run
by greed, interested not in peace but constant war, constant killing
and constant sacrifice to the almighty dollar. Brainwashed to believe
that War is Peace we sound the drums of war, marching our sons and
daughters to a battle that cannot be won either by sword or gun.
We are programmed to see the world as a conflict between "Us" versus
"Them", "Good" versus "Evil," that we must inflict death on those who
are not with us and on those against us. The MIC prays on our human
emotions and psychology, exploiting human nature and our still fragile
memories of the horrors of 9/11, manipulating us to believe that what
they say and do is right for us all. We unite behind one common enemy,
fearing for our lives, complacent and obedient, blindly descending
like a plague of locusts onto foreign land, devastating, usurping,
conquering and devouring those who have been deemed enemies of the
state, those who harbor and live among them, "evilones," "evildoers"
and "haters of freedom," all for the sake of profit and pillage,
ideology and empire. Power unfettered and unleashed, our freedoms die
and are released
The so-called "War on Terror" is but a charade, a fear-engendering
escapade, designed to last into perpetuity, helping guarantee that the
Military Industrial Complex will grow exponentially in power. It is a
replacement for a Cold War long ago since retired and unable to
deliver a massive increase in defense spending. Terrorists and the
countries that harbor them have replaced the Soviet Union and
Communists as enemy number one. With a war that may go on
indefinitely, pursuing an enemy that lives in shadows and in the haze
of ambiguity, the MIC will grow ever more powerful, conscripting
hundreds of thousands of our youth, sending them to guide, operate and
unleash their products of death.
Rumblings of bringing back the draft are growing louder, and if you
think your children and grandchildren will escape it, think again. In
a war without end, in battles that do not cease, the MIC will need
human flesh from which to recycle those who perish and fall wounded.
Empire building needs bodies and drones to go with military might,
instruments of death need trigger fingers and human brains, and, with
so many expendable young men and women being conditioned in this
so-called "war on terror," MIC will continue its reprogramming of
citizen soldiers from peaceful civilians to warmongering killing
machines. After all, "War is Peace."
Yet the Department of War, ever steadfast to use its weaponry, fails
to realize that no amount of money will win this war if the root
causes of terrorism are not confronted as priority number one. If you
get to the roots, you pull out the weed. If not, it grows back again
and again. But perhaps a perpetual war is what MIC has sought all
along. A lifetime of combat, a lifetime of profit, a lifetime of
power. Assembly lines of missiles, bombs, tanks and aircraft operate
without pause, helping expand a sluggish economy and the interests of
the Pax Americana. Profit over people, violence before peace, the
American killing machine continues on its path to human extinction,
and it is the hands and minds of our best and brightest building and
creating these products of decimation.
While we look over our shoulders for terrorists and evildoers, the
world ominously looks directly at us with both eyes intently focused
on the armies of the "Great Satan" and the "Evil Empire," not knowing
which nation will be attacked or on whom the storm of
satellite-guided-missiles will rain down on next. Every action has an
equal and opposite reaction. In becoming pre-emptive warmongers, we
are also becoming victims of our own making, helping assure a swelling
wrath of revenge, resentment and retaliation against us. If we kill we
will be killed, if we destroy we will be destroyed. The MIC is leading
us down a steep canyon of fury, making us a pariah, a rogue country in
the eyes of the world. We are becoming that which we fear most, a
terrorist state. As political scientist and ex-marine C. Douglas
Lummis has said, "Air bombardment is state terrorism, the terrorism of
the rich. It has burned up and blasted apart more innocents in the
past six decades than have all the anti-state terrorists who have ever
lived. Something has benumbed our consciousness against this reality."
Today we are seen, along with Israel, as the greatest threats to world
peace. When hundreds of thousands throughout the planet call Bush "the
world's number one terrorist," that less than admirable distinction is
automatically imputed onto the nation as a whole and the citizens in
particular. This can be seen in the world's perception and treatment
of us today.
When the day comes, not too far in the future, when one of our
metropolitan cities goes up in a mushroom cloud or in a vapor of
suffocation or when tens of thousands of citizens die of biological or
chemical demons, we must dive deep into our national psyche and
question why we allowed those in power to guide us down the road of
cause and effect, action and reaction. And, in the end, we must
realize that those same WMDs we once so gleefully created and exported
have come back to our shores, haunting us and our children for the
suffering we have helped spread onto the world through our idleness,
impotence to act and automaton-like acquiescence.
Can you imagine spending $400 billion dollars to alleviate poverty in
the Middle East, helping to educate millions who now get instructed by
hate-spewing madrassas? Can you imagine spending $400 billion dollars
to fight terror at its roots rather than at its extensions, helping to
improve the lives of millions who today have nothing to live for,
except martyrdom? Wouldn't $400 billion dollars go further than
perpetual bloodshed in the insidious war on terror if we alleviated
the suffering, ignorance and poverty of the world's poor, -- the roots
of terrorism – by helping to provide jobs, education and medicines
which would in turn spawn a sense of goodwill towards the U.S.? Could
it be remotely possible that our foreign policy, our support for
puppet dictators and monarchs, our quest for empire and resources and
our unyielding military, financial and political support of the
dehumanization of the Palestinian people by Israel all leads to the
subjugation, injustice, humiliation and misery of hundreds of millions
of people? Could this be why we are so hated throughout a world where
billions have nothing while we bathe in the spoils of abundance? As
long as MIC acts in our name, as long as it plunders humanity we will
be hated. Ghandi once said that "an eye for an eye only leads to more
blindness." If that is so, then our nation is on a collision course
with an ominous black hole whose darkness we shall not escape and
whose exit we will never again see.
Copyright: Manuel Valenzuela - man...@valenzuelas.net
Loopcineo Rogrigues
> Parabens iferramenta:Re:
Saca só esse daqui MacArtista, esse tambem kicks ass:
America's Historic
Drift Into Fascism
By Jon Phalen
11-30-3
An organic reconsideration of US history and major "conspiracy
theories" of the past 40 years, including those pertaining to the 9-11
attack, and how they shed light on America's present drift into
fascism.
Hijackers?
What makes you think you actually KNOW what happened on those planes?
All four were obliterated, along with everyone on board, remember? No
crime scene, no direct evidence, no recognizable remains, no witnesses
whatsoever -- it's a blank canvas. How convenient for any party intent
on launching a new era of global imperialism, and willing to spin this
tragedy into a viable excuse. Indeed, all of the attack's consequences
are far better explained by this agenda than by Bin Laden's purported
death wish. Those presuming to examine this matter, i.e. ALL OF US,
need to recognize that such trickery is a timeless specialty of
governments.
And yet from that very day we have allowed the government-media
complex to focus all attention on one rather thin explanation: Crazy
Arabs did it! George W. Bush and his cabinet have made it known to us,
in the most arrogant terms, that they will brook no discussion of
other possibilities -- an edict most Americans, in their desperation
to believe in this man, seem to have embraced. The Bush Administration
even withholds its "proof" of Al Qa'eda's guilt; clearly, it considers
mere citizens too unimportant to require full explanations, and once
again, we're just rolling over and taking it.
The phrases 'spiritually broken' and 'morally adrift' come to mind...
Until the full case against Al Qa'eda is made available for public
review, we have absolutely no assurance that this "proof" isn't
exactly like the "proof" of Iraq's weapons programs -- i.e., a big fat
lie from top to bottom. On these terms, wholesale acceptance of the
hijacker scenario will continue to be what it has always been: a
pathetic display of blind faith in this administration's utterances,
and in those of its media accomplices. At present, it is astonishing
that anyone places faith of any kind in either party: by means of the
"WMD" debacle, both have proven themselves amoral, duplicitous, and
utterly devoid of humanity. Indeed, why do we give them so much as a
moment of our attention? No one with a lick of sense would do this.
A rigorous civilian investigation of 9-11 would help resolve such
doubts. If Bush and the rest were standing on firm ground, they would
fully support such a thing. Instead, they have worked to thwart both
its formation and its progress, using every resource within their
reach. Some time last year, they seem to have realized they were only
fueling suspicions this way, so Bush grudgingly approved an
"independent" investigation. The arrogance of this bunch is so
disabling, however, that they actually damaged their credibility even
further by naming Henry Kissinger to lead it. This is a man whose
dedication to "US interests" verges on homicidal psychosis (see his
treatment of Cambodians 1970, Chileans 1973, East Timorese and Kurds
1975, MUCH more). He could only be expected to skew this investigation
accordingly, i. e., to omit and cover up any issue not conducive to
empire building. Ironically, even Henry had the sense to admit he was
an inappropriate choice, thus resigning from this duty, whereupon Bush
immediately returned to his original tactic of stonewalling (1). Could
the man possibly have something to hide?
To appreciate the ugliest possibilities of the 9-11 attack, one must
first become aware of the continuous practice of such manipulations by
the entire progression of American politicians. The need to cultivate
this awareness is itself an enigma: if you have the honesty to see
this pattern at all, its full enormity, emerging over time, will at
some point cause your previous ignorance to amaze you. Imagine living
your entire life with an 800-pound gorilla, then realizing one day
it's not a sofa, after all. At the same time, finding this
enlightenment is challenging, because the relevant facts are usually
withheld from the public for decades, seldom appearing in mainstream
discourse even after they become common knowledge -- not because of
some grand conspiracy, but because legions of 'America Firsters,'
including most of the famous and powerful, simply don't want to hear
it. The telling of these facts is an affront to their most cherished
political assumptions. Invariably, they respond with hostile
apologetics, ranging from simple denial and ridicule to the claim that
such incidents are random and unrelated "mistakes." That they can
sincerely believe this 'unrelated' claim is remarkable, given the way
it crushes into dust under any burden of historical proof: America's
state crimes have been ethically monstrous, vast in both scale and
number, unilateral in their aggression, virtually uninterrupted in
their chronology, and very coherent in both motive and method. Certain
themes just keep popping up:
1) Greed, particularly for territory;
2) Supremacism, driven only partly by race, perhaps more so by
delusions of national grandeur allowed to ramify without limit;
3) An enthusiasm for "total war" -- i. e., the indiscriminate butchery
of entire populations. This seems most likely to happen when
"strategic" territories, resources, or victories are at stake. That
is, when those in authority feel they "must win," and so discard
principle to whatever extent is necessary;
4) The systemic corruption and antidemocratic functioning of every
level of American government, made abundantly clear by its relations
with sworn enemies of the public interest, namely corporations;
5) The bid for global empire that has all but defined the American
agenda since W.W.II, in flagrant violation of democratic principle.
This last "US interest," discussed openly by flacks and shills only
since 9-11 suspended all moral judgment on such matters, actually
represents the driving passion of our ruling elite, going all the way
back to the Revolution. Indeed, grasping the means of power, beginning
with sovereign domain, was their main motive for pursuing revolution
at all. Starting then and continuing ever since, they have whipped the
people up to support their warped appetites, even as they have
misrepresented them spectacularly. EVERY SINGLE TIME we as a people
have committed to a war of expansion, we have been duped into doing so
by their twin handservants, American politics and American media:
1776 to 1890
innumerable 'Indian wars'
In which the western frontier was pushed through the territories of
one Indian confederation after another, all the way to the Pacific. An
early and definitive example is George Washington's post-revolutionary
conquest of the Ohio Valley, where the Washington Family held deeds to
immense tracts of prime real estate never actually ceded by the
Indians. The lore that George was a "surveyor" is a populist
distortion; he was no blue collar grunt, laying out property lines to
earn a living. He was in fact the most ambitious of an elite family of
'land speculators' -- the colonial equivalent of venture capitalists
-- and his toils were in the service of his own family fortune.
Already one of the richest people in post-revolutionary America, he
was determined to get even richer through the sale of his Ohio
holdings, and wasn't about to be stopped by 'two-legged vermin' like
the Shawnees and Miamis. To this end, he abused his dominance of the
early federal government, arranging for Revolutionary War veterans (a
battle-hardened militia) to be compensated with "land warrants" deep
in Ohio's wilderness, far beyond his own holdings. He also encouraged
the issuance of large bounties, equivalent to several months' income,
for Indian scalps along the upper Ohio River. These were essentially
open murder contracts that targeted ALL Indians, regardless of age,
gender, or tribal affiliation. By this means, genocide was openly
subsidized for decades wherever intact Indian cultures presented an
obstacle to "progress." Primitive as media was, its role in all this
was crude but sufficient: posting the bounties while inflaming the
settlers' hatred with tales of Indian atrocities, real and imagined.
In the Ohio Territory, these tactics rapidly progressed to open war,
orchestrated by Washington against Tecumseh's Shawnee Confederation,
and then to the total extermination and westward displacement of the
Ohio tribes (2).
1846 to '48
The Mexican War:
Beginning in 1818, when the Oregon Territory was acquired, American
imperialists developed an intense interest in California. Simply
adding it piecemeal to their territorial inventory wouldn't have
worked, however: it was too isolated, too defensible by the Mexicans.
To take California, all of northern Mexico -- what is now California,
Nevada, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and portions of Oklahoma,
Kansas, and Colorado -- would have to be taken, requiring the
invention of some PRETEXT for doing so. In 1836, American
"adventurers" (freelance political operatives) instigated a regional
coup in the Mexican province of Texas, splitting it off to form an
independent country, the Republic of Texas. Nine years later, this
nation was annexed as the 28th state. Immediately afterward, President
Polk made the predictable move of sending belligerent military
incursions into disputed lands along the new border with Mexico. The
Mexicans replied with patrols of their own, and then clashes
developed, leading to the "spilling of American blood on American
soil." Or so the press told it (their bias could be summed up in a
phrase they coined around this time: "Manifest Destiny"). In fact, the
soil in question was situated between the Nueces and Rio Grande
rivers, an area both governments held equal claim to. But no matter --
the people eagerly accepted this distortion, Polk got his dirty little
war, and then proceeded to steal something like 650,000 square miles
of territory from our next-door neighbor. Add to this the previous
criminal acquisition of territory from Mexico, i.e. the "Lone Star
State," and the area usurped approaches one-third of the contiguous 48
states, or HALF of what was originally Mexico (3).
Some years later, a fantastic mineral strike in this stolen territory
-- the Comstock Lode -- would provide the Hearst Family with an
immense fortune, soon parlayed by William Randolph into an infamous
media empire.
1898 to '99
The Spanish-American War/Philippine Campaign:
Though still a colonial client of Spain during the 1880s and '90s,
Cuba was also a hotbed of insurrection, thanks to the efforts of Jose
Marti and others. By 1898, the Cuban independence movement had Spain's
colonial government on the ropes. The prominence of blacks among the
rebels made this situation alarming for fin de siecle American
royalists, among whom "Darwinist" (i.e. proto-Nazi) political thought
was at the height of its popularity. Also, having just recently
subdued the last free-roaming Indian tribes back home, their passion
for grabbing other people's land could now be expanded into the
Caribbean, Central America, and Pacific, via expanded activities of
that handy agency, the US military. So in the fall and winter of
1897-98, the Hearst syndicate and other news organizations were
blasting Americans with "yellow journalism" on the subject of Cuba --
sensational and often ludicrous accounts, custom made to induce
support of US military intervention. The public thus primed, the
sinking of the battleship USS Maine in Havana Harbor gave McKinley all
the excuse needed to commence grabbing up not only Cuba, but also
Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. It was in the Philippines that
the US military took "total war" beyond North America for the first
time. Encouraged by the Filipino's uncanny resemblance to Native
Americans, US troops mass-murdered something like 25% of the civilian
population. As imperial outrages go, this was the equal of anything
that's happened since (4).
A 1975 investigation led by Admiral Rickover determined that the
Maine's hull was breached by an explosion originating INSIDE the ship.
This could have been a spontaneous "coal-bin explosion," or it could
have been a bomb placed by an imperialist traitor. As with 9-11, this
catastrophe neatly erased any inconvenient witnesses to its real
mechanics.
1917 to '18
World War I:
Three years into the "Great War," it looked as though Germany would
defeat Britain and France, our primary capitalist hosts in Europe. Big
financiers like J. P. Morgan and John D. Rockefeller, who between them
had billions invested "over there," weren't about to just sit back and
watch this happen. They barked orders to their underling, Woodrow
Wilson, who then declared war, using German interference with US
shipping activities as a feeble pretext. Leading up to this, the media
minions whipped the public into a war frenzy, basing their wildly
manipulative propaganda on incidents such as the sinking of the
Lusitania, two years earlier. Funny thing about the Lusitania: it's
hold contained a secret, illegal, and massive cargo of ammunition and
other materiel bound for Liverpool, and its passengers were used as
unwitting human shields for this cargo by the US government, which is
why they died. Neither Wilson nor the media of the day ever admitted
any of this (5).
The dynamics behind America's entry into World War II were virtually
identical. Over 500,000 Americans died in these two wars, with 875,000
more wounded, and an additional and unknown number emotionally
shattered, all of which brought untold misery to their families and
communities. Given the choice between destroying all those lives or
allowing the likes of Morgan and Rockefeller to suffer the tragedy of
somewhat less obscene wealth, our "representatives" chose the former
as the lesser sacrifice.
1941 to '45
World War II:
France already lying crushed beneath Hitler's war machine, and Britain
under a devastating siege, the White House was once again compelled to
intervene on behalf of its capitalist masters, whose European
investments had grown two magnitudes since the close of W.W.I. Unlike
Wilson, however, FDR did a truly brilliant job of constructing a
pretext. in September of 1940, Germany, Italy, and Japan signed the
Tripartite Pact, a treaty committing all three countries to
counterattack against new foes faced by any one of them. This gave
Roosevelt a back door into Europe via the Pacific. Beginning one month
later, and fourteen months prior to the Pearl Harbor attack, he
launched secret military and economic operations against the Japanese
Empire, obstructing its only access to oil, rubber, and other
strategic resources. The Japanese response to this blockade -- open
hostilities against the United States, beginning with a crippling
preemptive attack on the Pacific Fleet -- was entirely predictable. In
fact, it was Roosevelt's whole purpose in setting up the blockade:
Nearly unanimous "isolationist" sentiment at home was his first
military target, and precipitating a "vicious sneak attack on US soil"
was his deliberate design for destroying that sentiment. For this
reason, he concentrated the Pacific Fleet in Hawaii as never before,
where it would be seen as an imminent threat by Japanese generals. He
then withheld intelligence of Japan's attack preparations from Pearl's
top officers, continuing to exclude them even when radio intercepts
revealed the movement of a Japanese carrier group toward Hawaii (6).
From 1941 to '46, and again in 1995, Congress investigated "the
intelligence lapses that made this sneak attack possible" no less than
NINE TIMES. On all of these occasions, officials of the Roosevelt
Administration and the Office of Naval Intelligence perjured
themselves and concealed vast amounts of evidence to preserve the
historical fictions surrounding the Pearl Harbor attack. To this day,
the NSA claims "national security" as its basis for withholding
relevant material from the public. "National security" stands
revealed, then, as a euphemism for this government's ruthless grip on
power -- a thing that certainly would be threatened, were we to become
fully aware of the treacheries it spawns. This context radically
transforms "national security" rhetoric into an ideal excuse for all
sorts of betrayals and deceits, and this seems to be it's actual
interpretation among those who "safeguard" it.
The agonies of Jews, Slavs, Gypsies, etc. under Hitler, not to mention
those of the Chinese and Koreans under the Japanese Empire, were
incidental at best to US motives for pursuing W.W.II, both before and
during. It was only afterward that the camps were seized upon as a
full-blown "pretext in retrospect" to maximize America's apparent
heroism. With each year that has passed since, this myth has been more
shamelessly advanced, so that now some stunning percentage of
Americans believe that "halting genocide" was their government's main
motive for waging war at all.
1945 to '89
The Cold War (a.k.a. W.W.III):
was launched by the closing episode of W.W.II, i. e. the atomic
bombing of Japan. President Truman's official rationalization for the
bombing, trumpeted ad nauseum by the media of the day, was that it was
the only way to end the war quickly, thus avoiding a horrific
house-by-house assault of the entire Japanese Archipelago. In fact,
the Japanese were already making conditional surrender overtures.
Accepting their terms, however, would have made Truman's victory
conditional as well, and he was determined to humiliate them. Even the
total surrender he insisted on was only a few months away, by all
signs. Meanwhile, the war in Europe having ended in May, the Russians
were now free to join the allied fight against this old enemy of
theirs, and were preparing to do exactly that. Given enough time to
enter the Pacific War, they would have claimed a portion of Japan upon
its surrender, just as they had recently claimed the eastern half of
Europe. To keep the Soviets from horning in on this pending crown
jewel of America's Pacific Empire, Truman needed his total victory
immediately, and The Bomb gave him an irresistible means by which to
secure it. As an early devotee of anti-Communist paranoia, he was also
confronting the Russians with a demonstration of America's 'invincible
technological prowess.' Finally, his decision to vaporize 200,000
Japanese civilians was made easier by his avowed hatred of the entire
race (7).
The cover provided by the Cold War enabled the United States to pursue
its largest campaign of expansion by far, extending its economic and
strategic tentacles into every corner of the planet and even into
space by means of literally hundreds of "anti-Communist" initiatives,
interventions, and proxy wars. Our present "global hegemony," a source
of endless glee for Bush and other miscreants, didn't "just happen" --
it was the overarching and unspoken goal of US Cold War politics.
Another important thing to understand about the Cold War: the "War on
Terrorism" is directly adapted from it, just as the Cold War itself
developed directly from W.W.II, which was in turn a direct consequence
of W.W.I, which was Germany and Britain vying with one another for
world domination -- a contest America ended up winning. What an epic
of greed-crazed murderous lunacy! One that the present regime seeks
only to perpetuate, and for the same reasons as always: expansion and
consolidation of empire.
1950 to '53
The Korean War:
To coerce public support for this war, the press and the Truman
Administration whipped up public hysteria about the "Red Menace!" that
was then "swallowing up" obscure Far Eastern precincts. No mention, of
course, that the mounting anti-US sentiment in those precincts
resulted entirely from collaboration between US occupation forces and
the Japanese fascists they were supposedly there to remove. This
collaboration ranks as one of the most arrogant foreign policy
blunders in US history. For people throughout the Far East, it was an
unbearable betrayal, as it effectively prolonged what had already been
one of the most gruesome and protracted military occupations EVER.
Similar dynamics had already developed in mainland China, a hornet's
nest so immense that withdrawal quickly resolved as our only sane
option. And also in the Philippines, where US troops and Huk rebels
started out fighting side by side to expel the Japanese. Indigenous
sovereignty being the Huk's ultimate goal, the Americans began killing
them, too, as the Japanese were subdued. Two thousand miles from all
these places, in French Indochina, the exact tensions seen in Korea
arose AGAIN in response to brutal French/Japanese collaboration --
abetted by American field agents, naturally (8).
In all four places, revolutionary leaders greatly admired America's
political tradition of anti-colonialism and self-determination, and
sought to claim these values for their own countries. They even made
earnest attempts to form friendships with the US; they thought
colonialism was a 'european thing,' so that we must therefore be 'the
good guys.' For strategic planners back in Washington, all this was at
odds with their grand design for the Far East: now being vacated by
its previous colonial tenants, it was seen as a "power vacuum," fairly
begging for RE-colonization according to America's obfuscated formula
of puppet politics and corporate infiltration.
American society has yet to recover from the "Red Menace!" propaganda
barrage, which soon became a constant theme of international news
coverage, and remained so for the next 40 years. As a means of
inducing mass paranoia and public consent to limitless militarization,
the "Red Menace" lost its punch following the collapse of the Soviet
Union, necessitating its replacement with a more robust methodology --
the "Terrorist Menace!" Nazi Germany and Israel being the great
innovators of this second method, America owes a great debt to both of
them.
1965 to '73
The Vietnam War:
By way of manipulating Congress into granting him war powers, LBJ
reprised the "vicious sneak attack" gambit with his brazen lies
regarding such action by the North Vietnamese against US Navy vessels
in the Gulf of Tonkin. Beginning in 1969, Nixon and Kissinger expanded
on this crime enormously, adding Laos and Cambodia to North Vietnam as
targets of a redoubled 'total war' initiative. Several million tons of
cluster bombs were then used to totally destroy vast civilian
districts in all three countries (districts simply crawling, mind you,
with subsistence farmers bent on global domination). All of which
exactly repeated the pattern of the Korean War -- right down to
America not winning (9).
As huge as the American effort against Vietnam was, it was just one
element of a yet more enormous strategy of military encirclement
(a.k.a. "containment") directed against mainland China. Other elements
were: the permanent and massive US military presence in Japan; a
similar presence in Thailand; unlimited military and economic support
to Chiang Kai-Shek's exile government on Formosa (Taiwan); the Korean
War and subsequent permanent US military presence in Korea; a strong
strategic interest in India, including covert support of an otherwise
preposterous nuclear weapons program; also, a US-equipped and -trained
covert army of Chinese "nationalists" in eastern Burma, within what
became known as the "Golden Triangle." It was here that the CIA first
learned of the marvels of the international heroin trade.
To advance its "interests," the US government has manipulated the
affairs of every region of the planet on this same incredible scale,
and continues to do so. Other hotspots include Europe, the Middle
East, Central Africa, and all of Latin America and the Pacific.
1991 to 2003
The Gulf War / "No-fly Zones" / Sanctions:
To con Americans into backing this outrage, Daddy Bush and his media
bed-buddies told a couple real whoppers. First there was the one about
the satellite photographs of a massive Iraqi invasion force assembling
on the northern border of Saudi Arabia (10). Then there was the Kuwait
Incubator Hoax, an inventive revival of the childish "babies on
bayonets" propaganda of World War I -- as told by a child, no less
(11). As it turned out, Operation "Desert Storm" was merely the
opening episode of a ruthless destabilization program, aimed primarily
at hapless civilians, that would continue for over a decade, killing
no less than 500,000 Iraqis in a fairly obvious attempt to turn them
against their head of state. This fulfills any sane definition of
terrorism, and is probably the most grandiose recent example of the
state-sponsored variety. It was maintained with enthusiasm by the
Clinton Administration.
2001 to present
The "War on Terror" (a.k.a. W.W.IV):
Pretexts include: 1) the 9-11 attack; 2) this Administration's
single-minded incrimination of Al Qa'eda (a CIA proxy), backed up with
such things as; 3) an obviously fraudulent videotape of Osama
"confessing;" 4) the conceit that Al Qa'eda's guilt justified a
full-scale invasion of Afghanistan (the combined strike force for
which began building up at least six months prior to 9-11, disguised
as a "war game"); 5) an implied equation between Al Qa'eda and Iraq's
Ba'athite regime, and; 6) the absurd fantasy that Iraq, a country left
all but helpless by the previous campaign, might pose a real threat to
the world's deadliest strategic power.
By rights, I should have included the Civil War in this run-down: all
the ingredients are there, with antidemocratic preservation of domain
being equivalent to expansion. Also, the fable that 'freeing the
slaves' was its entire purpose has to rank among the wildest
disinformation campaigns ever perpetrated upon Americans by our "free
press."
Though they never precipitated the full-scale wars their authors had
in mind, a few other nasty episodes are especially relevant to 9-11:
Operation "Northwoods"
A Pentagon plan for a massive "false flag" terror campaign against
American citizens, the purpose being to provide pretext for a
full-scale invasion of Cuba. If approved, it would have entailed such
things as sniper attacks on random US citizens (a la the DC sniper),
terrorist bombings, and a bogus missile attack on an unmanned,
remote-controlled US airliner in the Caribbean, the plane's fictitious
passengers to be reported as "entirely lost." All of this was to be
carried out by US intelligence agents posing as Cuban operatives,
whose dirty work would translate directly into the sort of massive
public manipulation campaign this government always launches when it
sees profit in war. The Northwoods plan was called off by Robert
McNamara only when it was submitted for executive approval, having
already been approved by every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
(12).
Northwoods would never amount to anything more than a glimmer in some
agency psychopath's eye. In Europe, however, the CIA's most deranged
anti-leftist terror tactics were actually implemented ...
Operation "Stay Behind"; Operation "Gladio"
As part of a larger US withdrawal strategy following W.W.II, the CIA
created underground right-wing militias throughout Western Europe, to
be activated as guerilla armies in the event of invasion by the
Soviets. These were known as "Stay Behind" forces; they were a rogue's
gallery of mercenary scum, dominated by devout ex-Nazis recruited by
SS-cum-CIA agent Reinhard Gehlen. As the years passed and the Soviets
failed to provide the anticipated invasion, the Stay Behinds resorted
to other means of justifying their CIA paychecks. All across Europe,
beginning in the 1950s, they morphed into right-wing hit squads and
terrorist groups. They participated in massive CIA-NATO
destabilization efforts against the Soviet Bloc countries,
assassinating Soviet officials, sabotaging industrial plants and
public infrastructure, and generally terrorizing civilian populations.
The pattern should be familiar from similar terror campaigns against
Cuba and Nicaragua.
In East Berlin, the activities of Stay Behind units were the primary
reason for the construction of the Berlin Wall. The Stay Behinds did
not limit their mayhem to the Soviet Bloc, however; as time passed,
their attention turned more and more to equivalent activities within
their NATO home countries. Throughout Western Europe, particularly in
Italy, leftist politics had a stronger following than it has seen in
the US since the 1930s, and the Stay Behinds were the CIA's primary
footsoldiers in its "dirty tricks" campaign against this percieved
enemy. In a psy-war effort to alienate the public from the political
left, they launched bogus left-wing terror outfits (the
"Baader-Meinhof Gang") or framed real leftist undergrounds (the "Red
Brigades") for atrocities they committed themselves. In Italy, where
the Stay Behind operation was code-named "Gladio," agents posing as
left-wing extremists perpetrated many public bombings during the '70s,
killing at least 300 people. These culminated in the August 1980
Bologna Train Station Bombing, which killed 86. The 1978 kidnapping
and murder of Aldo Moro was another Gladio exploit. These activities
had one purpose: to portray the political left as public enemy number
one, thus isolating it domestically while building consent for
military escalation and NATO aggression against the Soviets (13).
* * * * * * * * *
So what's it all about, anyway, all this intrigue and stomping of
jackboots on distant shores? Thanks to its unrivaled military strength
and exceptional geographic isolation (oceans make bitchin' moats),
this country is all but perfectly invulnerable to invasion, and
repelling invaders would seem to be the only defensible function of
armies. No one's invaded this country since the War of 1812, when
British expeditions came out of Canada, Florida, and the Gulf of
Mexico. Don't expect a repeat anytime soon. Although a massive one,
the Pearl Harbor Attack was still just a raid, on what at the time was
this country's farthest-flung primary military base.
To keep the entire planet under its thumb, our government burdens us
with the gargantuan cost of the world's largest military, which it
mostly uses to crush pitiful rebellions in the remotest and poorest
corners of the world, places we truly have no business being in. This
is exactly like a bully swaggering around a schoolyard, shaking down
all the little kids. Is that really how you want your government
representing you to the rest of the world? Shouldn't DOMESTIC policy
take priority instead? Things like adequate health care and effective
primary education -- programs that would serve the wants and needs of
YOU, their citizen, whom they claim to be their master. But this is
not their priority, and never has been. The geometric growth of this
economy, by various forms of conquest, is their abiding passion, with
domestic policy being attended to almost as an afterthought. To force
our consent, they hypnotize us with lurid visions of one boogeyman
after another, maintaining childish fear as our primary political
sensibility, keeping us dependent, trusting, stupid, distracting us
from our own self-interests...
Why is that?
WHO BENEFITS??
The average American, who spends his or her life chained to the
machinery of wealth production, watching their share of its output
dwindle steadily, sure as hell doesn't. The stratum of society that
truly gains from all this just happens to be the same one that finds
employment in high-level intelligence positions: big-time spooks like
Kermit Roosevelt, the Dulles brothers, Nelson Rockefeller, George H.
W. Bush -- i. e. America's ruling families. In their parlance, "US
Interests" is just doublespeak for global empire and corporate
colonialism, and these have always been the real purposes behind their
warmongering.
All told, these wars killed over a million US soldiers, along with
many times this number of civilians and combatants in the lands
invaded, and this isn't even touching on the dozens of proxy wars that
have been the American Empire's main battle front for going on sixty
years. All of these millions of people, American and foreign alike,
were MURDERED by a government intent on advancing the interests of a
tiny minority while betraying the rest of humanity; a government
willing to wield its power in their service in any manner, including
technological and economic terror campaigns waged against entire
national populations. And yet this government has the audacity to call
itself a "beacon of hope to the world!" And the majority BELIEVE
THEM!! It simply amazes.
America's shadowy patricians were already too powerful before the Cold
War. And then decades of public hysteria borne of imminent nuclear
annihilation delivered them into the fabled realm of "absolute power."
This has been pretty obvious. Americans have avoided realizing it only
by actively pursuing a mental state of utter denial on this subject,
sort of like the three monkey icons of Shinto. Thanks to this
determined ignorance, keeping the rest of us in the dark has been
childishly easy for people like the Bushes. They can even be
incredibly brazen and sloppy and get caught red-handed, as with
Watergate. No biggy: just tell all the boobs it was Nixon acting
alone, assisted by his best buddies, who just happened to be, um, CIA
agents. Yah. They'll never notice this story's unbelievable stench;
they'll be too relieved at having any sort of excuse to NOT think
about it. You know, just like when the Warren Commission's whitewash
came out.
One hypothesis is particularly good for sending 'America Firsters'
into an apoplexy of denial: that the political culture now emerging in
Washington is actually a product of 40 years of covert penetration
into the Executive Branch. To substantiate this, one need look no
further than the lineage of our present "leader." His grandfather,
Prescott Bush, was a military spy during W.W.I, a key financial
collaborator with the Nazis, and a US Senator. His father, George H.
W. Bush, was heir to the CIA realm under our most infamous
presidential regime, a fixture in presidential politics for 20 years,
and all in all one of the creepiest figures ever to darken the
American political stage. The 'quiet coup' that brought this man to
power traces back to the Eisenhower Administration, when the utterly
creepy "National Security" underworld first became a secret and
malevolent force in national politics -- a force whose power is still
nearly impossible to measure. There are ominous glimpses, though: in
1960, Eisenhower's VP and political heir, Richard M. Nixon, was
shouldered aside by John F. Kennedy, who over the next three years
developed grave misgivings about this underworld and its power. Then
he ended up dead, and yes, his assassination DID stink of black ops,
as did the similar jobs on Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, and his kid
brother "Bobby," who would have been the SECOND Kennedy to sour
Nixon's presidential hopes, had he lived to see the 1968 election...
Though the CIA denies it, several independent sources identify George
H. W. Bush as a high-ranking agent during the Kennedy Administration,
commanding covert operations against Cuba. The ships used in Operation
"Zapata" (the "Bay of Pigs" invasion) were named by him, it is said,
after members of his family. Those names indeed correspond with those
of his wife and children. Among the most conclusive sources is an
official memorandum from J. Edgar Hoover, dated November 29, 1963,
which refers to a "Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency"
(14). The memo refers to Bush's evaluation of emotional reactions to
Kennedy's assassination among Cuban exiles under his watch.
From here, Bush the Elder went on to become a protege of Richard
Nixon's, was a mid-echelon member of his cabinet beginning in 1971,
had very interesting connections to CREEP, and somehow eluded
Congress's Watergate dragnet.
Watergate and a few other incidents proved that Nixon had a most
unwholesome relationship with the CIA. Once this scandal had
hemorrhaged to the point that Congress could no longer avoid taking
action, containing the damage could be seen as the main theme of its
response -- a hallmark of Congressional investigations. There was far
too much eagerness to examine this matter only in terms narrowly
relating to impeachment, thus leaving larger questions wholly
unexplored: did the Watergate break-in really happen on Nixon's
orders, or was the intelligence underworld acting on its own, using
'dirty tricks' to prop up their man in the White House, exactly as it
has on countless occasions for entire puppet governments all over the
world? In the latter case, letting Nixon take the fall would have been
an extreme measure, but possibly the only sure way to divert attention
from an abhorrent and illegal power structure, thus preserving it.
Nixon himself would have been a likely author of this tactic, as it
was he who trumped Congress' investigation by resigning, whence the
entire matter was eagerly dropped.
Bone-tired of Watergate in any case, the public was predisposed to
accept Nixon's implied guilt as the final answer: "responsibility
can't go any higher than the President, right? Harry 'the buck stops
here' Truman said so." In reaching this conclusion, we were assisted
by major media organs, which immediately began spinning this as
Watergate's "final resolution." In fact, this conclusion resolved
nothing -- it left the most crucial questions hanging in mid-air, soon
to be shrouded in rhetoric by professional apologists from all
quarters. Its only definite outcome was the softening of a renewed
public spirit of scrutiny and resistance, which in turn allowed a
deadly authoritarian cancer to resume its march throughout our body
politic. After going underground for seven years, this cancer emerged
in full force as the Reagan Administration.
Dubya's announcement last April of another bogus 'conclusion' -- that
of his Hitlerian conquest of Iraq -- had a strikingly similar effect.
Once again, mounting vigilance was undone by a well-timed lie,
universally disseminated.
Following Nixon's resignation, Poppy finally hit the big-time when
Gerald Ford named him Director of the CIA. After toppling Carter, he
became VP himself, and for the next twelve years was at the center of
the Reagan era's continuous parade of treasonous covert operations. A
few highlights: 1) the campaign to prevent an "October Surprise," in
which Bush & Co. induced the Iranians to delay release of the American
embassy hostages, thus undermining Carter's re-election bid; 2) an
inhuman terror campaign against the people and government of
Nicaragua, even after Congress declared it illegal, at which point the
CIA was forced to devise covert funding arrangements such as 3)
"Iran-Contra" and 4) operation "Watchtower." This last episode, which
was going on around the time of Bush Senior's succession, is easily
the most incredible: the CIA was a major domestic smuggler and
distributor of "Crack" cocaine during the late '80s, when this drug
became an inner-city plague (15).
At this point, the CIA was contemptuously wiping its ass with the
Constitution, and got completely away with it. If this were truly the
America the Boy Scouts taught you to believe in, the exposure of
operation "Watchtower" would have destroyed the CIA.
Late in Reagan's second term, 60 minutes was granted a horrifying
personal interview with Ronnie and Nancy in the Oval Office.
Horrifying because, even though Reagan's Alzheimer's wasn't disclosed
for several more years, it was perfectly obvious the man was totally
gone. Faced with a steady stream of unscripted questions from Mike
Wallace, Reagan's usual patter rapidly degenerated into stark senile
mumblings. Desperate to conceal her husband's incoherence, Nancy kept
practically thrusting her face into the cameras. This is consistent
with puzzled accounts of writers and artists of the time, who, as
dinner guests of the Reagans, were mystified as to how such an oaf
could present himself so effectively on television.
All of which implies a striking parallel between the Reagan Presidency
and that of Bush II: in both cases, Bush Senior can be discerned as
the man behind the curtain, while the "president" is a mere speech
reader, whose real job is to keep the public distracted with his
amiable, vacuous, universally televised performances. Dubya's main
puppeteers -- Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Powell -- are all Poppy's
cronies, going all the way back to the Nixon Administration. The five
Supreme Court Justices who put Junior in power are also
Nixon/Reagan/Bush cronies, and their cancellation of democratic
process was a classic "installation," reminiscent of the CIA's
long-running antidemocratic escapades throughout the world.
It has Poppy's pawprints all over it.
If not for daddy's influence, Silver Coke-spoon Boy would be lucky to
find work fishing golf balls out of water hazards at the local country
club. This is obvious, and widely acknowledged. Most Americans,
however, aren't willing to examine the enormously sinister
ramifications, given Poppy's background, of the Bush Family's dynastic
grip on American politics. Most Americans, after all, are a
weak-minded lot -- though harassed by apparitions of unprecedented
corruption, they lack the courage needed to fix their gaze upon them.
Which brings us to 9-11...
The most venerable means of transmitting control inputs from a plane's
cockpit to its various aerodynamic control surfaces (rudder, ailerons,
etc.) is via a system of cables, i.e. "aircraft cables." With the
introduction of huge planes during and after W.W.II, unassisted human
arms could no longer provide the force needed to actuate
proportionately huge control surfaces, and so hydraulic assist devices
and fully hydraulic control systems were developed. The introduction
of autopilots and landing guidance systems over the next three decades
layered yet another 'control system' over this one, an electronic
layer capable of manipulating the hydraulics directly and thus flying
the plane on its own. In the 757- and 767-series planes boarded by
"the hijackers," Boeing expanded this layer enormously, making it much
more sophisticated and integral to the continuous operation of these
planes. For one thing, it continuously monitors such things as
attitude, acceleration, turn rates, etc., and if necessary can assert
exclusive control of the hydraulics at any time, modifying or even
overriding pilot decisions that would otherwise result in drastic
maneuvers, inappropriate for passenger service. Though meant to
provide an added margin of safety in the event of gross pilot error,
this arrangement introduces an ominous new dimension: in a very real
sense, the humans on the flight deck have only tenuous control of
flaps, rudder, etc.; the computer, the arbiter between the two, allows
them direct control only on it's own immutable terms. If the computer
can override the pilot some of the time, a potential exists for it to
override the pilot ALL of the time. This is a vulnerable arrangement,
as anyone who has dealt with a virus should know. In other words, the
advancing dependency on avionic interfaces has brought with it an
advancing potential for the total electronic co-optation of those
interfaces. As they have grown exponentially in complexity, so too has
the number of entry points by which such co-optation might be
effected. All that was needed was for technologists to devise a "back
door"...
Enter the US government and its defense contractors, who began joint
development of remote flight control and flight circumvention
technology at least two decades ago, using the full force of their
virtually infinite R&D resources. The existence of these programs, and
of the resulting technology, was verified soon after 9-11 by a panel
of commercial and military pilots participating in an independent
inquiry (16).
The existence of such technology IN ANY FORM raises intriguing
questions/possibilities about 9-11: 1) could the planes have been
hijacked via this technology alone? 2) Were they? 3) Remote hijacking
and on-board hijacking are not mutually exclusive scenarios; if there
were actual human hijackers on those planes, their plot may have been
remotely co-opted by another party they knew nothing about, leaving
them as horrified as anyone when the planes took control of themselves
and banked straight into buildings.
Photographic evidence and eye-witness accounts support the idea that
the override functionality of the planes' computers was somehow
defeated, allowing "the hijackers" to make prohibited maneuvers. For
example, there are multiple photographs and video clips showing AA
Flight 175 making an outrageously hard turn into the second tower.
According to official information, the plane that hit the Pentagon
also made aerobatic descent maneuvers worthy of a fighter pilot. To
have flown the planes in this manner, Atta and the rest would have
needed 1) advanced large plane skills, and 2) a way to defeat the
planes' avionic systems. Since that flight school they attended in
Venice, Fla. probably didn't offer a course titled "Hot-dog Maneuvers
with Airliners 101," they must have possessed these abilities already,
so why would they have bothered with flight lessons at all? Any
benefit they realized in terms of understanding new control layouts
would have been at the cost of increased exposure, thus endangering
their mission. On the other hand, if they were as inexperienced as the
presstitutes tell us ("I just want to learn how to steer"),they
couldn't possibly have flown the planes this way at all, which means
someone else must have.
However distasteful, there is a real possibility that remote
circumvention occurred on those planes, a possibility that any
credible investigation would hardly ignore. All the more so because
the necessary hardware isn't just a cockamamie theory: a fully
developed, totally programmable remote flight control platform
actually exists. Suggestively named the "Flight Termination System,"
it is manufactured by Systems Planning Corporation of Rosslyn,
Virginia, which maintains web pages devoted to the FTS and various
subsystems:
A system overview:
http://www.sysplan.com/Radar/FTS
The transmitter hardware:
http://www.sysplan.com/Radar/CTS
Related software:
http://www.sysplan.com/Radar/MkVSW
The CEO of Systems Planning's international division, Dov Zakheim, is
a long-time DoD and Republican Party insider, and a founding member of
the Neoconservative cult. While Bush was still Governor of Texas,
Zakheim became one of his closest advisers, counseling him on defense
technology and strategic aspects of Middle Eastern affairs. After the
2000 "election," Rummy rewarded Zakheim with a low-profile but
strategically important position -- Comptroller, i.e. head money man,
of the Defense Department.
Zakheim also co-authored the Heritage Foundation's infamous tract,
"Rebuilding America's Defenses," in which the Bush Administration's
entire design for renewed global conquest was laid down a full year
prior to 9-11. On page 63, the authors note that timely implementation
of their ideas would require "some catastrophic and catalyzing event
-- like a new Pearl Harbor."
see for yourself:
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
To identify the expansionist motive behind the "9-11 Wars," one need
look no further than this document. Echoing Ziggy Brzezinski's
thoughts in "The Grand Chessboard," the authors identify the Persian
Gulf / Central Asian region as the world's greatest geopolitical
prize, and recommend that decisive control of this region be made a
top strategic priority.
The remote control scenario also neatly punctures the 'yada-yada
objection' always employed by conspiracy theory critics: "It couldn't
have happened that way, because too many people would have known, and
someone would blab..." In fact, the most sensitive part of this plot
would be that of anticipating or enabling nineteen flesh-and-blood
"hijackers," and yet this part of the scenario is all but universally
accepted. Nineteen men backed by a larger organization schemed to get
on those planes and take control of them, and then they did; everyone
knows they did because CNN has stated this "fact" about ten thousand
times and counting. As for exactly WHICH organization did the backing,
well, there's a saying about 'dead men' ...
Once the patsies were in position, the rest of this scenario -- the
"really unbelievable part" -- could have been carried off in its
entirety by a tiny team wielding extravagant technical skills and
multimillion-dollar equipment. No larger conspiracy is necessary. As
for the apparent complicity of the entire government and media, this
is mostly just cynical opportunism and jello-brained obedience rising
to the occasion -- a response easily anticipated by the real
conspirators, for whom history provides a never-ending parade of
examples on which to base such expectations.
Mind you, this is not to say that remote circumvention is definitely
what happened. On its face, this scenario is wildly improbable.
Speaking of improbable, what about four airliners being taken over
simultaneously and used as missiles? Since this actually happened, we
have no choice but to consider fantastic scenarios, and since the
official scenario is itself an unsubstantiated "conspiracy theory,"
competing scenarios should also receive serious attention. Our
reluctance to question official doctrine on this matter is a symptom
of the societal role most of us have been bred and trained for: to be
ever-faithful hounds, tails thumping the floor as we contentedly slorp
the hand of class authority. Such credulity also becomes inevitable
when the alternative is so unbearable: if someone in Bush's position
is capable of lying to us about something as huge, as gut-wrenchingly
horrible as 9-11, then everything we believe about this country --
about the nature of civilization itself -- might just be childish
nonsense...
Most people simply don't have the guts to go there.
Given a desperate enough need to sustain the childish belief in
government-as-benevolent-father, a person will adapt that belief to
any circumstance. The behavioral end result can resemble courage;
indeed, we are taught to regard it as the DEFINITION of courage.
Actually, it's one of cowardice's darkest moments. Even a casual
examination of Nazi Germany, where this phenomenon was rampant, will
drive this point home.
It's almost funny, the way people readily see the threat of
technological circumvention presented by Diebold's electronic voting
machines, yet when the subject switches to the "Flight Termination
System," which is every bit as real, and to the exactly parallel
possibilities it represents vis-a-vis 9-11, they suddenly retreat into
profound and combative denial. It's as if a threshold has been crossed
into a realm of possibilities too vile to entertain, so they simply
don't. Never mind that this country's operatives have been traveling
the world, perpetrating similar horrors, for all of the past century.
Rather than acknowledge the possibility of a unifying pattern, Joe
Average would much rather 'shoot the messenger.'
Every so often, such people establish a new high-water mark for
cowardice and facultative stupidity, and the present is definitely one
of those times. After all, the official 9-11 scenario they cling to
with such desperate faith comes from only one source: the Western
"intelligence community" -- the most brazen, systematic, resourceful,
and interlocked association of habitual liars this world has ever
seen. As should have been made clear by the 'British dossier' scandal
of last winter, the credibility of this bunch goes past zero into the
negative: pending airtight proof, anything they say should be
reflexively deemed a lie. You may remember that MI5 also provided the
identities of "the 19 hijackers" -- information that soon also became
quite suspect. At least six of the hijackers, possibly as many as
nine, are still alive in the Middle East -- a pretty good alibi,
considering. Several of these ex-suspects had their passports or other
IDs stolen from them over the years, and it's entirely possible that
all 19 hijackers had stolen identities, meaning they could have come
from anywhere, or been absent altogether. The US media was pretty
slack about acknowledging this at the time, and since then has dropped
this ball entirely (17).
Rather than allow the "intelligence community" to render every detail
of our comprehension on this matter, we would be much wiser to
carefully identify and discard every assumption they hand us.
Far from being a source of independent corroboration, our "free press"
is more like a public relations contractor for the spooks. This is
because the entire fourth estate AND the governments of the West,
including their intelligence services, are essentially employees of a
single entity: the US-dominated coalition of international
corporations -- by several magnitudes the largest concentration of
wealth in human history.
The subjugation of governments by such an entity is hardly
unprecedented. The Twentieth Century saw several extremely unsavory
examples. It's called Fascism. You don't need to take my word for this
-- just peruse the opinions of acknowledged experts:
Benito Mussolini:
Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism
because it is a merger of State and corporate power.
Franklin D. Roosevelt:
The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate
the growth of private power to the point where it becomes
stronger than the democratic state itself. That in its essence
is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a
group or any controlling private power. Among us today
a concentration of private power without equal in history is
growing.
For many Americans, the word 'fascist' instantly evokes jackbooted
Germans wearing Swastikas and stuffing Jews into ovens. In fact, that
representation is a cardboard diorama, empty of nuance and
historically specific almost to the point of meaninglessness, which is
why the closet fascists who own the media keep force-feeding it to
you.
Fascism is certainly a violation of every noble and enlightened
political impulse. To advance their agenda, fascists must bring about
a mass rejection of egalitarian and democratic ideals, and seem to get
the best results by inflaming and feeding upon common fears and
popular bigotries -- racist, nationalist, classist, religious,
political, etc. ANY set of bigotries, suitably stimulated, will
provide fertile soil for fascism, and the incurably ignorant, always a
majority, are easily swayed by such methods -- fascism is a dictator's
fantasy formula for subverting democracy. Bigotry, however, isn't
fascism's whole essence; it's simply an expedient means by which
fascism's agents, classic political pragmatists, consolidate the
monolithic pattern of government corruption that is their true calling
-- a syndrome America has been sliding into deeper and deeper
throughout its history. Just look at the consistent warnings from all
the presidents who noticed this trajectory and tried to alert a nation
of groveling candy-asses:
Thomas Jefferson:
I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our
moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge
our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to
the laws of our country.
Abraham Lincoln:
The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace
and conspire against it in times of adversity. It is more
despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy
and more selfish than a bureaucracy. It denounces,
as public enemies, all who question its methods or throw
light upon its crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern
Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. Of the two,
the one at the rear is my greatest foe.
I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves
me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country.
As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned ....
An era of corruption in high places will follow and the money
power will endeavor to prolong its reign by working on the
prejudices of the people... until wealth is aggregated in a few
hands ... and the Republic is destroyed.
Theodore Roosevelt:
Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible
government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no
responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible
government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt
business and corrupt politics is the first task of the
statesmanship of today.
Franklin D. Roosevelt:
The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know,
that a financial element in the large centers has owned
the government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.
Dwight D. Eisenhower, from his farewell address, 1961:
In the councils of government, we must guard against
unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought,
by the military-industrial complex. The potential for
the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
John Kennedy took Eisenhower's warning to heart, apparently. During
the last year of his life, as he contemplated a second term and his
own final contribution to history, he resolved to reverse America's
moral and civic death-spiral, a.k.a. "the Cold War." His ideas
included: ending the CIA's freedom from oversight; abandoning the
country's rabid anticommunist stance, beginning with de-escalation in
Vietnam; normalizing relations with Cuba and Moscow; by doing these
things, redirecting Washington's immense weapons budget into sweeping
domestic reforms (18). What's more, Kennedy's popular mandate was
strong enough by this time that he probably would have succeeded.
From the viewpoint of the corporate capos that truly rule this
country, one aspect of the Cold War was all-important: it was a pork
barrel straight out of their wildest dreams of avarice. Watching
Kennedy plant his feet and reach for its plug, these 'absolute power'
addicts would have been sorely tempted to seek his removal by any
means. As it just so happens, several of them were also supreme
civilian commanders of the 'National Security' apparatus, meaning they
had direct control of the most suspect means of effecting that removal
(19).
Since Kennedy's death, dire warnings about corporate power have been
conspicuously absent from the pronouncements of American presidents.
Funny, huh? By daring to stand on his conviction that it was he, not
them, who held the reins of American society, Kennedy quite possibly
forced the financial elite to make an example of him. Since that time,
their supremacy has been unchallenged by politicians.
It's as if democracy itself 'got whacked' by the Corleones and
Gambinos! Fortunately for them, Americans are kept too delusional to
notice.
* * * * * * * * *
On the strength of the fear-driven and essentially mindless popular
mandate that followed the 9-11 attack, the Bushes and their kind are
now concluding a plan they began formulating long before 1963:
transforming this country into an abomination, a clinically exact
violation of everything their core public THINKS it believes in. The
situation is a three-ring circus of ironies: People like the Bushes,
Ashcroft, etc., don't operate in a vacuum; they don't suddenly and
magically "seize power," any more than Hitler did.
The history of the Nazis holds many lessons of great value to
present-day Americans. Among the more important: political lunatics
become dangerous only when whole populations lose their marbles enough
to deliver them into real power. Truly, it's absurd to blame amoral
monsters who insinuate themselves into high places. OF COURSE they're
going to do that; it's why they were born. The sensible object of that
disgust is 'The People' who allow them to stay there; who idly watch
as other groups suffer, too stupid to realize that tomorrow the guns
will turn on them; The People, who hand these scumbags ALL of their
power by becoming eager footsoldiers in the global mafias they create.
Helen Keller knew this:
"Strike against war, for without you no battles can be fought!
Strike against manufacturing shrapnel and gas bombs and all other
tools of murder!
Strike against preparedness that means death and misery to millions of
human beings!
Be not dumb, obedient slaves in an army of destruction!"
So did Emma Goldman:
"How long would authority ... exist, if not for the willingness of the
mass to become soldiers, policemen, jailers, and hangmen."
No matter what label a government assigns itself -- democratic,
communist, etc. -- The People who live under that government, who are
its real repository of power, have an uncanny way of getting exactly
what they deserve. If a government has descended into utter moral
dissolution, and its people actually deserve better, they will summon
the courage to do what's right for themselves, as did the French, the
Russians, the Cubans. If a government is basically sound, but its
people are grotesque petulant infants gobbling at giant tits of
material excess, then it won't be long before that government sees its
opportunity to build jail cells around them. Why not? Frantic
tit-suckers aren't likely to notice, and if they do, a jail cell isn't
so unlike a womb. If by some bizarre chance they should actually
protest, they can simply be told it's for their own safety. Infants
are easily duped with such talk, which they will regard as irrefutable
when backed up with lurid cartoons showing "The Enemy In Action!!"
This was the context in which Jefferson used terms like 'inalienable'
and 'self-evident.' People determined to discover their own power will
find a way. So will those determined to live as slaves. The role of
government is secondary. If the American people didn't deserve this
buffoon president and his panel of corporate handlers... if this were
other than a land of selfish tit-feeders, spoiled insane... if "The
Home of the Brave" didn't ring quite so false... then the outrage of
the 2000 "election" would have unleashed a nationwide tsunami of
riots, martial law would have been declared, and the ruling class
would have hastily dumped him before things REALLY heated up.
As it stands, Dubya's sickening success is owed primarily to a curious
"political awareness," shared by a decisive majority of Americans:
intuitively, they know they're on the sugar-dumpling end of the global
economy. If staying there means everyone else gets hurled at birth
into a fuming acid bath, well that's okay, too -- just don't ask them
to notice.
Just as rampant corruption is symptomatic of fascist governments, this
'let them eat cake' mindset is also typical of the national
populations that sustain those governments through their complicity
and inaction. Corruption isn't just a disease of governments, elites,
etc. -- it's a creeping contagion that infects whole societies,
eventually reducing them to colonies of moral bacteria. If the wealth
of a society is large enough that this degeneracy can progress long
enough, its members become so drained of the essentials of character
that whatever 'Great Things' they've accomplished become like marble
temples built on a lake of pus.
America, for example, once had a heroic reputation among
freedom-seekers around the world. Starting many years ago, the keepers
of that legacy grew so arrogant, so artless, that their attempts to
disguise their selfish motives became transparent to the average
ten-year-old, so now America finds itself becoming an object of
generalized hatred. And deservedly: when an elite cult of villains and
cowards waylays all the governments of the world by holding a nuclear
gun to their heads, they SHOULD be hated, and that's exactly what this
government did while its subjects snoozed at the Big Boob these past
five decades. The aggrieved parties will of course be deemed "just
jealous" by the press, whose pronouncements are both source and
product of the tit-feeder mentality.
With Buffoon & Co., the pretenses are now so tissue-thin that even
Americans should have no trouble seeing through them. The one thing
stopping them is all-determining: they don't want to. This sort of
delusion even extends to self-described "liberals," who love to vomit
the platitude that "America's PEOPLE can't be held responsible for the
excesses of their GOVERNMENT."
I wish one of these nutless wonders would explain to me exactly how
this works; from where I sit, ultimate responsibility for the criminal
conduct of this government belongs to THEM. After all, thirty years
ago most of them were intensely aware of this government's capacity
for evil. Since then, they've been seduced by accumulations of
property, privilege, and mental lethargy, thereby settling into
America's most selfish middle class generation EVER. Watching them
recite fatuous denials to themselves, I'm reminded of the French Court
under Louis XVI. Their stock concept of 'political involvement' --
filling in a ballot once a year -- hardly seems likely to fix a
goddamn thing, since the forces of wealth clearly have both major
parties in their pocket. By all indications, they don't even care; the
interests of wealth have become their own. If Bush's 2000 installation
left any doubt about collusion between the
two parties, Schwarzenegger's triumph in California just removed it.
The California Democratic Party simply HAD TO KNOW that Gray Davis
was history, so why did they fail to put all their marbles behind ONE
potent alternative candidate? They can't strategize on their own
behalf worth a damn, but they sure do a bang-up job for the repugs. Is
it insane to wonder if they both get their marching orders from the
same place?
Voting should certainly be part of a larger strategy -- it may not
mean as much as we're told, but at least it's something. Real change,
however, would seem to require much more from us: open dissent and
resistance, civil disobedience, total rejection of bourgeois
sensibilities, including careerism, as this is the path taken by most
on their journey into apathy and selfishness. It's no wonder, then,
that causing each of us to nurture dreams of professional glory has
long been this country's most lavish
"philanthropic" project. Our unprecedented university system -- is
it really about giving us all a leg up, or is it a clever and utterly
cynical social engineering program? As they hand out huge endowments,
what do the bloodless billionaires really mean with all their malarkey
about "investing in the future." The working class is the true home of
the political left. Demographically and politically, it once dominated
this country, and thoughtful people didn't always have reason to flee
from it. Now it's a defeated mass of Bush-boosting, TV-mesmerized
morons. When class assignment at birth is an immutable life sentence,
intelligent members of an exploited class tend to become
revolutionaries. By its very nature, the "classless" careerist ethic
solves this problem by identifying the gifted among them as young as
possible and reassigning them to a separate social order, where
they're supplied with selfish reasons for staying quiet. Added
together, their class defections and betrayals make up the
aforementioned billionaires' "return on investment." Divide and
conquer, divide and conquer...
In so many ways, the true genius of American politics has been in
making sure the average slob has far too much to lose by rejecting
bourgeois temptations. The tragedy of this design is that it makes us
all full partners in the prevailing order of plunder and corruption.
During the Great Depression, poverty was so rampant here that this
formula began to unravel, prompting our keepers to feign benevolence
with an improvised Head Amputation Prevention System, otherwise known
as "the New Deal." Given the power of the information technology now
at their disposal, they seem to be preparing to let it unravel again,
this time to be replaced with an all-seeing electronic security state.
This is probably the real reason behind the USAPATRIOT Act, rampant
domestic spying, mounting repressive tactics and nationalist
propaganda, vast enlargements of prison infrastructure, and so on.
Kudos to all the technological utopians out there; far be it from them
to realize that those in power always pervert emerging technology into
a means of grabbing even more power.
The American political scene is now becoming so ominous that many
Americans are finally waking up, achieving real political awareness
for the first time in their lives. As they discover reality, they
are finding themselves in a horrifying predicament: this country is
but a few steps away from becoming an overt dictatorship, and the
Neo-cons seem determined to go the distance. All they need to do at
this point is arrange another "Pearl Harbor." Anything short of
massive, uncompromising civil disobedience seems unlikely to stop
them, and the vast majority of Americans are unlikely to engage in any
such thing. Incapable of even noticing how bountiful their lives are,
what could possibly induce them to reflect on the malevolent work by
which that bounty has been concentrated, or to acknowledge the rights
of people and other beings, living and dead, from whom it has been
stolen? The hopelessness of the situation is deepened by the
relentless and all but inescapable onslaught of commercial media,
whose role of promoting this exact selfishness and civic apathy is now
performed with incredible audacity. Most of these "Good Americans"
just trudge along mindlessly in the rut indicated by their message,
willfully oblivious to its subtexts.
America's malaise isn't entirely a product of conscious effort, but
on the other hand, none of it is accidental. How is this possible?
The main thing people use "logic" for is to conceal even from
themselves the mediocre nature of their true motives. America's
corruption, like that of all nations, is an organic phenomenon, i. e.
it is neither orchestrated nor needs to be. It has been advanced not
by the lurking efforts of secret circles so much as by the main thrust
of American culture. Those frontiersmen in Ohio, for example, scarcely
needed the inducements Washington offered them; they were eager to
exterminate the Indians and steal their land. And so it goes. By such
means, the corruption of our entire civic culture has been advanced by
all of us, through habits of thought that lie beneath the level of
consciousness -- for example, in the sane and humane alternatives we
consistently choose to NOT consider. Again, media's leadership in this
area has been inestimable.
My gratitude to those who have protested and been civilly disobedient
over the years is beyond measure -- they are the true bearers of
Liberty's flame -- but I am doubly contemptuous of those among them,
seduced by privilege, who have ended up swinging to the other side.
They are the very soul of corruption, and traitors even to their own
dreams.
Here's the richest irony of all: Bush's most avid supporters are a
puritanical bunch. They attend church. They pray on streetcorners.
They bludgeon the unwitting with their sanctimonious talk of God,
Family, and the American Way. So convinced are they of their moral
superiority, they have no qualms about marching toward even greater
material gluttony over a pavement of charred corpses. In fact, they
seem to see this as a divine quest. You don't need a doctorate in
Theology to know that if Hell is real, its inmost pit has got to be
reserved for hypocrites such as these.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Notes:
1) Even now, the "independent commission" is shot through with
incredible conflicts of interest, exemplified by the present
chairman's financial ties to members of the Bin Laden Family. Such a
panel can hardly be expected to deviate from the gutless pattern of
past "investigative commissions": the Warren Commission, the
Rockefeller Commission, the Iran-Contra hearings, etc.
Chossudovsky, Michel. Who's Who on the 9/11 "Independent" Commission.
see http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO307B.html
2) Churchill, Ward. A Little Matter of Genocide: Holocaust and Denial
in the Americas, 1492 to the Present. (San Francisco: City Lights
Books, 1997) pp. 209 - 214
3) Zinn, Howard. A People's History of the United States, 1492 -
Present. (New York: Harper Collins, 1999) pp. 149-169
4) ibid, pp. 297-320
5) ibid, pp. 359-376
6) Stinnett, Robert. Day of Deceit: the Truth About FDR and Pearl
Harbor. (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000) See ALL
7) many historical documents support this analysis, including:
United States Strategic Bombing Survey, Summary Report (Pacific War)
(Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1946) p.26:
"Nevertheless, it seems clear that, even without the atomic bombing
attacks, air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient
pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need
for invasion... Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts,
and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders
involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31
December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan
would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped,
even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had
been planned or contemplated."
8) Blum, William. Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions
Since World War II. (Monroe, Maine, USA: Common Courage Press, 1995)
pp. 21-23, 39-43, 50, 51, 122-127
9) ibid, pp. 129-145
10) Heller, Jean. Public Doesn't Get Picture With Gulf Satellite
Photos. St. Petersburg Times, 1/6/1991
11) MacArthur, John R. Second Front: Censorship and Propaganda in the
Gulf War. (New York: Hill and Wang, 1992) pp. 37-77.
12) Bamford, James. Body of Secrets: Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret
National Security Agency from the Cold War Through the Dawn of a New
Century. (New York: Doubleday, 2001) pp. 82-91
13) Blum. Killing Hope. pp. 106-108
14) A scanned copy of this memo can be seen in
http://www.internetpirate.com/bush.htm -- scroll down
15) Webb, Gary. Dark Alliance. San Jose mercury News, 9/18/1996
available online at:
http://home.attbi.com/~gary.webb/wsb/html/view.cgi-home.html-.html
16) de Grand Pre, Donn; Col. US Army (Ret.). The Enemy is inside the
Gates
available online at http://scribblguy.50megs.com/evidence.htm#THE%20E
NEMY%20IS%20INSIDE%20THE%20GATES
17) multiple sources:
Kennedy, Dominic. Suicide Hijackers Hid Behind Stolen Arab Identities.
London Times, 9/20/01
MacFarquhar, Neil. A Nation Challenged: The Hijackers; Confusion Over
Names Clouds Identities of Attackers on Jets. New York Times, 9/21/01
available online at <http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/21/international/middleeast/21IDEN.html>
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/21/international/middleeast/21IDEN.html
Jeffery, Simon. Special Report: Terrorism in the US. The Guardian,
9/21/01
available online at http://www.guardian.co.uk/september11/story/0,11209,601550,00.html
Harrison, David. Revealed: the men with stolen identities. The Daily
Telegraph, 9/23/01
available online at http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/23/widen23.xml
Author unknown. Hijack 'Suspects' Alive and Well. British Broadcasting
Corporation, 9/23/01
available online at http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/middle_east/newsid_1559000/1559151.stm
18) Hepburn, James. Farewell America. (Vaduz, Liechtenstein: Frontiers
Publishing, 1968) see ALL.
Available online at http://www.voxfux.com/Kennedy/farewell/farewell00.html
19) The most suspect parties here are Nelson Rockefeller and his
demonic lackeys, the Dulles brothers. The threads implicating
Rockefeller in Kennedy's death are explored rigorously in:
Colby, Gerard and Charlotte Dennett. Thy Will Be Done -- The Conquest
of the Amazon: Nelson Rockefeller and Evangelism in the Age of Oil.
(New York, USA: HarperCollins, 1995)
Loopcineo Rogrigues
arie...@aol.com (ARIEL GOES) wrote in message news:<20031216113242...@mb-m04.aol.com>...
Lise Sedrez
Não tenho certeza de que toda esta turma vendia armas para o Saddam.
Russia, França, Alemanha, sim; durante a guerra contra Irã, os EUa não
só venderam armas, como ajudaram com inteligência e treinamento. O
Brasil tinha comércio e outros acordos sobre petróleo com o Iraque, mas
não tinha idéia que tivesse vendido armamento. Aí seria o Riba ou o
Hegel quem saberia dizer.
E eu tenho a impressão que WMD não foram vendidas, mas desenvolvidas
pelo Saddam. Ele pode ter comprado a tecnologia, componentes e treinado
cientistas em outros países, mas comprar o bicho já prontinho, não
acredito, não.
L.
João Luiz
Lise Sedrez schrieb:
> Brasil tinha comércio e outros acordos sobre petróleo com o Iraque, mas
> não tinha idéia que tivesse vendido armamento.
O Astros II foi desenvolvido praticamente por solicitação do Iraque.
> E eu tenho a impressão que WMD não foram vendidas, mas desenvolvidas
> pelo Saddam. Ele pode ter comprado a tecnologia, componentes e treinado
> cientistas em outros países, mas comprar o bicho já prontinho, não
> acredito, não.
Os EUA deram algumas cepas de bactérias. Isso é praticamente comprar o
bicho pronto. Até colocando isso dentro de uma garrafa e lançando à
coquetel molotov já constitui um ataque com arma bacteriológica.
JL
Lise Sedrez
> In typically brilliant fashion, the Pentagon
> issued a directive last week that bars French, German, and Russian
> corporations from bidding on contracts for reconstruction in Iraq.
> Well, guess who owns most of Iraq's pre-war debt? European nations and
> Russia, that's who. Vladimir Putin, offended by the Pentagon's action,
> last week adamantly refused to forgive some $8 billion of Iraq's
> Saddam-era debt.
>
> Failed military tactics, failed financial policies -- it's all in a
> day's work for the Bush administration. Finding Saddam Hussein
> certainly won't make up for incompetence at the top.
>
Puttin foi na verdade o único que realmente se recusou a aceitar a
chantagem financeira. Depois da captura de Saddam, França e Alemanha já
aceitaram renegociar o débito.
Pior do que ter os EUA como bully do mundo, é descobrir que bullyness
compensa...
L.
(-BobLaranja.)
Loopcineo Rogrigues
Essa matéria foi escrita antes do Chirac e Schroder terem aceitado a
chantagem. Eu acho que a noticia de que Chirac e Schroder haviam
"cooperado" saiu no mesmo dia que essa matéria foi publicada. Sim, ela
errou, mas isso aconteceu porque a mulher não tinha bola de cristal.
Lise Sedrez <lse...@stanford.edu> wrote in message news:<broocn$3ue$1...@news.Stanford.EDU>...
Loopcineo Rogrigues
A Imbel vendeu para o Saddam milhares de taques Urutu e foquetes Astra
2. Eles foram usados na guerra com o Ira e na invasão do Kwait, sendo
destruidos logo em seguida pelos aviões A-10 dos USA. Tambem, a
Volkswagen Brasil vendeu milhares de Passats e Voyages para o iraque
(que estão rodando e sendo explodidos até hoje). A Sadia vendeu
toneladas de frangos assassinados e a Camargo Correia construiu
represas, quarteis e etc. Conheço gente brasileira que foi trabalhar
no Iraque, nessas construções. Ganharam muita grana.
Lise Sedrez <lse...@stanford.edu> wrote in message news:<brocvc$f4c$1...@news.Stanford.EDU>...
Loopcineo Rogrigues
benção americana, que inclusive repassava tecnologia. A prova disso é
que, depois da guerra do golfo, devido a ordens vindas de Washington,
o Brasil nunca mais vendeu nada, nem um chiclete para o Iraque.
Pode-se dizer que o Brasil tambem participou do embargo.
Lise Sedrez <lse...@stanford.edu> wrote in message news:<brocvc$f4c$1...@news.Stanford.EDU>...
Loopcineo Rogrigues
João Luiz <nao.fu...@org.net.com> wrote in message news:<3FDFD4B7...@org.net.com>...
Loopcineo Rogrigues
gatinha? Nesse filme, a gatinha havia chegado em Paris, de NYC, com
uma mala igual a da esposa do personagem feito pelo Ford. Então, a
mulher do Ford foi sequestrada e ele notou que a mala dela era de
outra pessoa e havia sido trocada. Ele acabou descobrindo a dona da
mala, que era a gatinha (mulher do Polansky na vida real, bem parecida
com a Natasha gostosa). Nisso, eles descobriram que, dentro de um
souvenir, uma pequena estatua da liberdade, havia um transistor de
bomba atomica. Acaba que o filme se torna um perseguição de gato e
rato. Ford e a gatinha procuravam a esposa, enquanto ambos eram
perseguidos por agentes da Mossad e do Iraque. O Ford negocia a troca
da mulher pelo transistor e encontram os agentes iraquianos na beira
do Rio Sena, Nisso chega a Mossad atirando e a gatinha acaba morrendo
com um balaço no perna, junto com os agentes iraquianos. Ford, já com
a esposa resgatada, de sacanagem, para o desespero dos agentes da
Mossad, que pulam atras, então joga o transistor dentro do rio Sena, e
o filme acaba.
Pois bem, nesse filme, do qual eu acho que foi feito antes da guerra
do golfo, o Polansky tenta mostrar que a França, com o apoio secreto
de gente nos EUA, vendia peças e tecnologia para o Saddam fazer bomba
atomica. Mas o sonho nuclear iraquiano acabou quando Israel bombardeou
as usinas atomicas de Osiris e Tamuz do Iraque, nos anos 80.
Coincidentemente, o piloto dessa missão que destruiu as usinas
atomicas iraquianas, era o astronauta israelense que foi torrado no
ultimo desastre do onibus espacial, tendo as sua cinzas sido espalhada
sobre a cidade de "Palestina" Texas.
João Luiz <nao.fu...@org.net.com> wrote in message news:<3FDFD4B7...@org.net.com>...
(-BobLaranja.)
Rogrigues) wrote:
>...Tambem, a Volkswagen Brasil vendeu milhares de Passats e
>Voyages para o iraque (que estão rodando e sendo explodidos até hoje).
Correto, Gafa. O mal-uf, numa daquelas viagens-de-mascate iguais a
do tipo que o Mula fez recentemente pelos paises arabes, vendeu (e,
logico, deve ter pego sua comissaozinha) de uma so' vez 50.000
Voyages 1.8 pro Iraque. E olhe pra' que serve hoje esta frota dos
anos 80:
http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/folha/galeria/images/2003121401.jpg
E' a industria brasileira participando do processo de redemocratizacao
do Iraque.
-BobLaranja.
Loopcineo Rogrigues
na epoca, eu acho que a CIA fazia o seguinte: Assim como fizeram com
os curdos, quando a CIA vendia armas para esses rebeldes justamente
para eles serem massacrados por Saddam, tomando o devido cuidado para
que eles não tivessem sucesso, ou tambem, durante a guerra Ira x
Iraque, quando os EUA, secretamente, vendiam informaçoes e peças de
reposição para o Ira, enquanto apoiavam o Saddam, para ver o circo
pegar fogo e fazer a guerra se extender mais, eu acho que faziam o
esse jogo com as peças de bomba atomica.
Enquanto a CIA vendia, secretamente, peças de bomba atomica, atraves
da França, que dizia vender tecnologia nuclear para criaçao de
eletricidade. Então, essa mesma CIA tambem passava as informações para
a Mossad. Nisso, depois de vender as peças e tecnologias por uma
fortuna, os Israelenses iam lá e jogavam areia na parada, destruindo
tudo.
Eu acho que engavam e faziam o Saddam de otário. Tiravam o dinheiro do
trouxa e depois aplicavam a traição, como fazem os traficantes
bolivianos, que vendem cocaina para o otário e logo avisam ao irmão
policial, que extorque a vitima, tendo o traficante então a cocaina de
volta, para vender para o proximo otário.
Enquanto isso, Israel está cheio de bombas atomicas escondidas, sendo
que agente arabe nenhum nunca conseguiu evitar nada.
João Luiz <nao.fu...@org.net.com> wrote in message news:<3FDFD4B7...@org.net.com>...
Loopcineo Rogrigues
de massa está ligado a industria belica e outras corporações que
bancam a democracia americana, trombeteadas por uma grande agencia de
propaganda chamada Hollywood e mainstream media, das quais são
propriedade dos mesmos caras ou grupelhos. Veja como a media e
Hollywood mexem com a cabeça do povão, com 90% de violencia e noticias
ameaçadoras. Além de causar o medo, isso tambem causa o odio contra
aquilo que geralmente é erroneamente colocado ou julgado como o diabo
maligno. Assistir TV e filme de Hollywood é engolir sapo revolto
amargo de odio, a pessoa fica com raiva, sempre rola o conflito entre
o bem e o mal, e nisso a pessoa fica afim de matar o vilão, que no
caso agora é o Saddam Hussein,.
Deve ser por isso que o Arnoldão foi eleito, pois esse trauma da
violencia e do odio apresentado como lavagem cerebral na media, o
constante conflito televisivo entre o bem e o mau, contra o vilão esta
no coração dos eleitores otários, as pessoas votavam pensando
inconscientemente que o exterminador do futuro mataria o Bin Laden e o
Saddam Hussein. Temo que essa seja a raiz nutriz, ou motivo emotivo,
do grande odio do povo americana contra Saddam. Isso é curioso porque
esse povo não sabe porra nenhuma de historia, não le jornal decente,
não sabem nem onde fica o Iraque. Deve ter sido por isso que a captura
de Saddam Hussein fez tanto sucesso. O povão americano é ignorante,
assistiu novela e vibrou com a captura do vilão. As pessoas
comemoravam como se fosse uma vitoria do Flamengo. Todos ligados na
TV.
Mas o que eu quero mesmo falar é sobre a parada de inteligencia.
Poderiamos fazer uma analogia entre o SCB e a inteligencia, para
entender bem como funciona a coisa. Voce sabe muito bem como
funcionam as tacticas sacanas. Lembra do travesti Marcela, do Ariel
Goes falsificado, do Sergio Soares, que na verdade era não sei
quem...Pois é assim que acontece no mundo do terrorismo e da
inteligencia. A CIA, a Mossad, a KGB...todos eles tem ligações entre
si, eles tem ligações com os terroristas tambem. É como aqui no SCB,
nos estamos todos ligados, jogando o mesmo jogo, e as alianças e
politicas se fazem, as vezes atraves da falsidade, babaquice e taticas
sujas.
Assim como o neo nazista se travestia na figura simpatica e
inteligente de Lise Sadrez, para chamar a atençao e ser ouvido, a
CIA, Al Qaeda, Mossad, e etc tambem fazem o mesmo. O GVB sabe muito
bem disso, pois a coisa com ele foi bem mais complexa, chegou a ficar
paranoico, formando a imagem diabolica de Lia em sua mente, como se
ela estive por detras das sacanagens, que eram de autoria do NG
inteiro.
Se voce ver um post neo nazista babaca posando de Lise, voce então
desconfia. Pode não ser a verdadeira Lise. Assim, na minha opinião,
aconteceu com esses ataques de 9/11, sendo que a Lise não era Lise
nenhuma, pois a verdadeira Lise estaria de ferias numa ilha no Brasil,
nem Neo Nazista era neo nazista, poderia haver um uma terceira pessoa
na jogada, enganando os otarios.
Veja essa ultima ameaça terrorista contra o Vaticano, anunciada pela
mossad. Ora, o Vaticano sempre se posicionou contra Bush e Israel,
apoiam Arafat, Tarik Aziz foi recebido pelo Papa... Por que a Al Qaeda
iria quer atacar o Vaticano? Os católicos não tem problemas com o
Islam, defenderam o Saddam e o Iraque,,. Quem tem problema com o Islam
e Saddam Hussein são os judeus e os evangelicos protestantes da
extrema direita americana. E os ataques na Turquia? Isso interessa ao
turco islamico?
Então, como a policia tem ligação com o trafico, as coisas não são
como parecem ser. Foi assim tambem com Saddam Hussein, deve ter sido
com o 9/11 e muitas outras coisas. Voce deveria ler o Scanner Darkly,
do Phillip K. Dick.
arie...@aol.com (ARIEL GOES) wrote in message news:<20031216113242...@mb-m04.aol.com>...
ARIEL GOES
radares que nao funcionaram durante as invasoes.
Ariel
> Lise Sedrez lse...@stanford.edu
>Date: 12/16/03 5:53 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <brocvc$f4c$1...@news.Stanford.EDU>
ARIEL GOES
O Brasil vendia com a autorizacao dos EUA, Tinha a bencao americana, ordens
vindas de Washington, etc.
E eu que pensava que o Brasil era um pais soberano...
Ariel
>iferr...@mac.com (Loopcineo Rogrigues)
>Date: 12/17/03 3:28 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <2576764c.03121...@posting.google.com>
Lise Sedrez
minha ignorância. Sorry, guys! :(
L.
Loopcineo Rogrigues
O problema é que eu não sei qual é o pior: viver sob a ditadura de
Saddam ou viver sob o regime de Bush. Veja só as coisas que estão
fazendo, o Saddam deve estar morrendo de inveja:
Americanos arrombam e revistam casas em Samarra
Samarra, Iraque - Soldados americanos explodiram os portões de casas,
arrancando gritos de mulheres e crianças, e derrubaram as portas de
oficinas e ferros-velhos numa batida gigante em busca de militantes
pró-Saddam e a fim de esmagar a resistência à ocupação. A batida, que
começou antes da alvorada e durou até o meio de manhã, teve como alvo
a cidade de Samarra, ao norte de Bagdá, onde se acredita que existam
cerca de 1.500 guerrilheiros em atividade.
Participaram da operação mais de 2.000 soldados. Pelo menos 12
supostos guerrilheiros foram presos. Outros fugiram, aparentemente
alertados com antecedência.
"Os chaveiros vão ganhar um dinheirão", disse um soldado americano,
rindo, no distrito industrial da cidade, onde as tropas usaram
marretas, pés-de-cabra, explosivos e até veículos blindados para pôr
abaixo portas de armazéns, oficinas ou depósitos de ferro-velho.
AP
"(-BobLaranja.)" <bobla...@vegetarians.com> wrote in message news:<25g0uvkoqfvi19hio...@4ax.com>...
Loopcineo Rogrigues
Se o Brasil fosse um pais soberano, ele continuaria exportando
galinhas e voyages para o Iraque, mesmo depois do embargo imposto
pelos USA. Paramos de vender, coisa que criou prejuizo na nossa
balança comercial, porque os Americanos mandaram. Por que o Brasil não
mandou os USA a merda, por que o Brasil entrou nessa onda do embargo?
Cuba e Coreia do Norte não aderiram o embargo. A França, Russia e
Alemanha tambem já estavam, por debaixo dos panos, vendendo coisas
para o Iraque. Por que o Brasil tambem não fez assim? Por que tivemos
que tomar as dores dos Americanos? O Brasil não tem nada haver com os
problemas entre USA e Saddam.
Continuamos vendendo galinha para os Sauditas, pais islamico medieval
controlado por uma familia real tirana, que corta cabeça de neguinho
na praça publica, onde as mulheres não podem tirar carteira de
motorista, onde o adulterio feminino é punido com decapitação,
enquanto os homens podem ter quantas mulheres quiserem. Isso acontece
porque os sauditas são aliados americanos. Sendo assim, a gente tem a
permissão de vender galinhas para os caras. Não vendemos voyages
porque as elites corruptas sauditas só andam de mercedes para cima.
Já o Saddam, ele era linha dura e impiedoso com a oposição, esmagava
as conspirações curdas e shiitas a ferro e fogo, mas ele tinha umas
vantagens em relaçao aos sauditas, iranianos e a esse governete de
merda que os US estão montando no Iraque.. O Saddam não era ladrão
como foram os milicos brasileiros, o cara fazia palacios particulares
mas tambem investia no desenvolvimento do pais. Antes das guerras, o
Saddam investiu horrores na infraestrutura do Iraque, mas coisa foi
toda destruida pelos americanos nos anos 90.
Nos anos 70, o Saddam modernizou o Iraque sim. Colocou redea curta nos
bossais idiotas shiitas, fanaticos religiosos da pior especie. O
Iraque se tornou um pais rico, com bons salarios, boa qualidade de
vida, um lugar onde o povo vivia muito bem. Mas como eu já disse
antes, tudo foi destruido pelos americanos.
O Saddam fez universidades onde as mulheres eram benvindas. Caso não
saiba, o Saddam era secular, não admitia mistura de fanatismo
religioso islamico com governo nem educação. É por isso que o Bin
Laden, os shiitas e os talibans eram inimigos dele. Agora, com o novo
governinho marionete americano, os shiitas ganharam mais poderes do
que os sunitas, o Iraque retrocedeu no que diz respeito a
interferencia dos radicais fanaticos islamicos no governo. As mulheres
que não tampam a cara estão começando a ficar preocupadas, as
babaquices religiosas medievais estão voltando a cena.
De qualquer modo, na epoca dos anos 80, se os Americanos tivessem
essa pendenga com o Saddam, não venderiamos nada, como aconteceu
durante o embargo e como acontece hoje. Isso porque os US manipulam o
FMI e o banco mundial. Se o Brasil desobedecer as ordens de
Washington, os gringos cortam o nosso credito, tiram o dinheiro daqui
e o nosso pais vai a falencia do dia para a noite. É por isso que o
Lula paga boquete para o Bush, acata as ordens dele e do FMI. O Lula
está agindo de forma mais direitista do que o proprio FHC, liberando o
brioco para a Monsanto e etc. Voce acha que isso aconteceu por acaso?
arie...@aol.com (ARIEL GOES) wrote in message news:<20031217130817...@mb-m01.aol.com>...
Loopcineo Rogrigues
Depois da Guerra do Golfo I, depois que o Saddam estava rendido,
embargado e inspecionado por fiscais da ONU, com no fly zones e o
caralho. ele ainda conseguiu esmagar uma revolta curda. Segundo
consta, os americanos autorizaram Saddam a usar seus helicopteros para
arrebitar os curdos com fogo de metranca. Enquanto isso, caças
americanos voavam em cima da matança, para observar.
Isso aconteceu porque a revolta curda não interessava para a Turquia,
pais que gentilmente abriga bases americanas de onde saiam os ataques
aereos americanos. Devemos lembrar que os turcos vem massacrando os
curdos há mais de 50 anos, há mais tempo que o Saddam. A diferença é
que os turcos nunca usaram armas quimicas, mas mataram do mesmo jeito.
arie...@aol.com (ARIEL GOES) wrote in message news:<20031214133624...@mb-m22.aol.com>...
> E' isso ai, corda no pescoco do filho de puta!
> E e' ele mesmo!!!
> Os apoiadores do Saddan podem chorar, hehe
> Ariel
>
>
>
> >marcio...@hotmail.com (M?rcio Os?rio)
> >Date: Sun, Dec 14, 2003 4:48
> >Message-id: <9ce21c98.0312...@posting.google.com>
> >
> >Forças americanas prenderam-no. Pronto. Tá dada a notícia. Quem quiser
> >ler mais alguma coisa que ligue o rádio, a TV, leia nos jornais, nas
> >revistas ou consulte a Internet. Ou faça um exame de DNA no dito cujo.
> >Vão pra suas casas e peguem o estojo pro teste.
> >
> >m
ARIEL GOES
eu tive o trabalho de procurar uma revista Manchete, de abril de 1982, e' um
dos pouquissimos itens que ainda possuo, das coisas que veram na minha bagagem
quando me mudei para ca.
Eu me lembrava que na revista tem uma foto do Maluf, na epoca governador de Sao
Paulo, juntamente com Sandro Pertine, na epoca presidente italiano e Saddan
Hussein em Baghda, (tem ate um quadro do Saddan na parede, ele bem mais novo)
Embaixo da foto esta escrito, Governador de Sao Paulo teve encontro especial
com "os tais" e assinou acordos.
Na reportagem embaixo diz que acordos foram assinados em privadas negociacoes
de intercambio tecnologico, para os proximos 5 anos.
A reportagem mais enche a bola do Maluf doque da detalhes.
Eu li a respeito na Times, um pouquinho antes da guerra do golf, de que o
Brasil tambem vendia armas pro Saddan.
Na revista em que relacionava o poder militar do Iraque descrevendo o arsenal
com fotos, numeros de avioes, tanks, armamentos em geral e onde foram
fabricados, por incrivel que pareca, muito poucas dessas armas eram de
fabricacao americanas, a maioria eram russas, francesas, yuguslava, tanks
brasileiros, etc. Me lembro tambem sobre a mencao dos tais radares
brasileiros...
Ariel
>Lise Sedrez lse...@stanford.edu
>Date: 12/17/03 12:12 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <brqdc2$e5r$1...@news.Stanford.EDU>
Hermes
blog do iraquiano "salam pax" (http://dear_raed.blogspot.com)
uns tempos atrás, que faz referência ao episódio, incluindo
rumores locais de um possível envolvimento dos veículos em
comércio bélico (blog de 30/12/02):
"... Non-Iraqi readers will not get the Brazilian car reference. In
the early eigties the Iraqi State Company for cars imported
thousands and thousands of a VW Passat made in Brazil
(rumor was that this was part of a clause in an arms deal or
something, who knows?). this car was very cheap, it was
everybody's second or third car in the house. your bratty kid
wants a car? buy him a Brazili (which means brazilian).
the problem was it was the worst car you can imagine. not
suited for the heat of Iraqi summer it broke down spectacularly,
the next batch was a bit better but still rubbish. until this day it
is the most common and affordable car in iraq. It is so part of
Iraqiness in the eighties there are songs about it. but it is still
rubbish. ..."
Hermes
MBocciaMcArt
ENGESA, e depois Imbel: inumeros tanques, carros de combate leves
e pesados, e muitos armamentos. Pergunte ao Jose Witaker Ex-Presidente
da falida ENGESA, com sede na marginal do rio pinheiros,
perto de Interlagos, aaquela epoca; E, vendeu tambem da PROMON
Engenharia S/A - Projetista Internacional,
mas sediada em Sao Paulo: inumeros projetos de tudo... ao Iraque:
eletronica componentes de aparelhos de guerra, Pontes, Estradas, etc...
inumeros itens a fortalecer o IRAQUE: no caso de invasoes, ja
previstas por Saddam Houssein...
-E, Participei de colaboraçoes nesses projetos, hehehehe
arie...@aol.com (ARIEL GOES) wrote in message news:<20031217185350...@mb-m15.aol.com>...
João Luiz
Loopcineo Rogrigues schrieb:
>
> Oi Lise,
>
> A Imbel vendeu para o Saddam milhares de taques Urutu e foquetes Astra 2.
Só orrigindo: o Astros II era da Avibrás e não da Imbel.
JL
MBocciaMcArt
desculpes me, mas nem leio esse artigo, pois sequer se sabe...
quem eh esse anonimo e-mail, sem site, nem possivel veracidade PORTANTO:
Copyright: Manuel Valenzuela - man...@valenzuelas.net
iferr...@mac.com (Loopcineo Rogrigues) wrote in message news:<2576764c.03121...@posting.google.com>...
> ? many of which were distributed at one time by our own government ?
> is no war ? hence no profit ? without evildoers, without terrorists
> of terrorism ? by helping to provide jobs, education and medicines
MBocciaMcArt
is very plenty of GREAT INFORMATIONS, / but this one..: is not,
and nonene GREAT refferences, as only seams to BULSHIT WORDS.
Re:
MBocciaMcArt
EXPORT para o IRAQUE, via PROMON Engenharia S/A e Engesa tambem vendia:
leia : busca : ENGESA e PROMON - neste ng de meus posts: pelo
google.com.br
Lise Sedrez <lse...@stanford.edu> wrote in message news:<brocvc$f4c$1...@news.Stanford.EDU>...
MBocciaMcArt
IRAQUE desde 1983 : projetos e equipamentos MUITISSIMOS.
MBocciaMcArt
IMBEL: foi a sucessora( nao oficial sucessora) da ENGESA por
benesses MUITAS do GOV-BR,
a SER CRIADA como IMBEL, e.. com... após a falencia da ENGESA S/A: por
** favoritismos do GOV-BR aa falida, para o ex-Presidente da ENGESA:
Jose Witaker.**, que foi ou... eh Presidente da IMBEL.
MBocciaMcArt
sciences increased and ARMS developed FROM USA technology,
and ALSO : Brasil technology EXPORTED to IRAQUE.
iferr...@mac.com (Loopcineo Rogrigues) wrote in message news:<2576764c.03121...@posting.google.com>...
MBocciaMcArt
pois sei e vivi NA REAL atividade do Brasil exportar ao IRAQUE via :
ENGESA e PROMON, : equipamentos e obras e mais OBRAS, e.. dai...:
muitos brasileiros terem se casado com iraquianas, e...:
ainda estarem la vivendo, e desde 1974.
"Hermes" <e...@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:<mXnEb.485924$0v4.21...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
MBocciaMcArt
pois so fala de sua memoria de conversas de buteco...! , e
nada exclarece , nem referencias deu aqui nesse post. :-))
- vais dormir um pouco mais nessas ideias, sem pé nem referencias?
iferr...@mac.com (Loopcineo Rogrigues) wrote in message news:<2576764c.03121...@posting.google.com>...
Loopcineo Rogrigues
referencia e ve se não amola:
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=4685
mbo...@rj.net (MBocciaMcArt) wrote in message news:<add06f5.03122...@posting.google.com>...
Max Dias
(Em que lingua esse cara pensa? Escreve como o mestre Yoda!)
A referencia é excelente, Gafa.
O que espanta no americanos é o "consumismo histórico", onde a
confiabilidade nesses truculentos se vai de uma vez. Fazer acordos com
os EUA é considerado estúpido até por eles mesmos.
Max
"Loopcineo Rogrigues" <iferr...@mac.com> escreveu na mensagem
news:2576764c.03122...@posting.google.com...
MBocciaMcArt
faca a amolar ninquem, pois só dizem oque lhes vem aa cabeça,
sem comentarios precisos, e vejo isso tambem do LINK do
cantor Loopcineo. Eu tambem estou sem paciencia a detalhes...
de comentarios do LINK, pois que : independente, PROLIXAMENTE
fala o site LINK. Bahhh...
PS.: Artista eh assim..: de sensibilidade e visao geral,
e com um puco mais de precisao objetiva, que os dois aqui
postantes, que se perderam nas entrelinhas e realidades,
e: ( sequer falo de *verdades*... : *nestas*, nunca acredito
como únicas ) :-)) so sorry... : 2 posts vazios de Vcs dois
a me ... tambem " encherem o saco "...
conforme suas proprias FUGAS da realidade, e sem referencias
concretas...: AINDA... sobre esse TEMA.
E... vejas que muitas vezes: ja enaltecí a realidade dos
dois postantes, em outros assuntos-TEMAS; mas...
agora : estariam PISANDO NA BOLA da imprecisao de palavras;
-Ainda assim provem me ... EM CONTRARIO,
pls. :-))
"Max Dias" <maxx...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<bs6qv9$9vdh9$1...@ID-170798.news.uni-berlin.de>...
MBocciaMcArt
>Escreve como o mestre...
Nem tanto... mestre... :-))
E, ... Boas Festas a todos do ng SCB, hehehe, apezar de...
tantas amabilidades... debatetorias... :-))
"Max Dias" <maxx...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<bs6qv9$9vdh9$1...@ID-170798.news.uni-berlin.de>...