US Invasion of Iraq-Updates

[Ocean Breeze]

Annan: Iraq worst terrorist centre now


Tuesday 06 September 2005, 14:24 Makka Time, 11:24 GMT


Kofi Annan: Young Muslims' anger is exacerbated by Iraq



Related:
Annan warns of rising Iraq violence
UN: Iraq unrest may thwart polls
Annan pleads for Muslim support
Annan rules out early Iraq return



Tools:
Email Article
Print Article
Send Your Feedback




UN chief Kofi Annan says Iraq has become what he calls an even greater terrorist centre than Taliban-ruled Afghanistan, as attacks attributed to al-Qaida's wing surges in Baghdad and the west of the country.



Annan told the BBC on Monday that many young Muslims feel angry and that situation has been exacerbated by what is happening in Iraq.

"They feel victimised in their own society; they feel victimised in the West. And they feel there's profiling against them," he said. "And the Iraqi situation has not helped matters."

Annan added: "One used to be worried about Afghanistan being the centre of terrorist activities. My sense is that Iraq has become a major problem and in fact is worse than Afghanistan."

The interview with the UN secretary-general was broadcast after al-Qaida in Iraq claimed responsibility for a daring daylight assault against the Interior Ministry in Baghdad, killing two policemen.

Anti-terror bill

For their part, Iraqi MPs on Tuesday debated behind closed doors a sweeping anti-terror bill that envisages widening the scope of crimes subject to the death penalty in order to quell the violent uprising.


The MPs were holding a second day of secret debate on a new anti-terror law which proposes the death penalty not only for those guilty of terrorist acts, but also for their accomplices and those advocating "sectarian strife".



A new bill would make attacks on
security forces a capital offence

The bill, which is still subject to amendments, envisages eight offences that could qualify as terrorist acts punishable by death.


These include "violence ... vandalism against public buildings ... forming armed gangs ... and using explosives to kill people".


Possible offences also include "advocating sectarian sedition or civil war through arming citizens or mobilising them to carry arms against each other".


Attacking Iraqi soldiers and police, as well as diplomatic missions in the war-torn country, could also lead to execution, the proposed law decrees, as could kidnapping for political, sectarian, ethnic or racial reasons.


"The culprit or accomplice in the act would be executed" along
with "the instigator, the plotter, and whoever assists in any of the aforementioned crimes", according to the draft.

Draft constitution

Earlier, on Monday, Iraq's president said he and another top Kurdish leader had agreed to changes in the draft constitution to mollify concerns among Arab countries that the wording in the charter loosened Iraq's ties to the Arab world.

The language at issue describes Iraq as an Islamic - but not Arab - country, a concession to the non-Arab Kurds who form about 15% of the Iraqi population.


Talabani has agreed to changes
in the draft constitution


In a statement released by his office, President Jalal Talabani said he and Massood Barzani agreed "to accept some amendments deemed vital for the Islamic and Arab worlds concerning the Arab League because Iraq is a founding member in the Arab League".

Talabani did not specify what changes in the language had been agreed to by him and Barzani, head of the Kurdistan Democratic Party.

Some Iraqi officials said last week that the changes could keep the description of Iraq as an Islamic state but add wording about Iraq having been a founding member of the Arab League.

Sunni Arab negotiators said at the time that such language might satisfy the Arab League but not them.

surprise, surprise.. :x

 

[Ocean Breeze]

THE US PLANS A LONG, LONG STAY IN IRAQ
Eric S. Margolis


September 6, 2005

The catastrophe inflicted by hurricane Katrina unfortunately obscured some bombshell news about Iraq last week.

The US Air Force’s senior officer, Gen. John Jumper, stated US warplanes would remain in Iraq to fight resistance forces and protect the American-installed regime `more or less indefinitely.’

Gen. Jumper let the cat out of the bag. While President George Bush hints at eventual troop withdrawals, the Pentagon is busy building four major, permanent air bases in Iraq that will require heavy infantry protection.

Jumper’s revelation confirms what this column has long said: the Pentagon plans to copy Imperial Britain’s method of ruling oil-rich Iraq. In the 1920’s, the British cobbled together Iraq from three disparate Ottoman provinces to control newly-found oil fields in Kurdistan and along the Iranian border. The Sunni heartland in the middle was included to link these two oil regions.

London installed a puppet king and built an army of sepoy(native) troops to keep order and put down minor uprisings. A powerful British RAF contingent, based at Habbibanyah, was tasked with bombing serious revolts and rebellious tribes. In the 1920’s, government minister Winston Churchill authorized use of poisonous mustard gas against Kurdish tribesmen in Iraq and Pushtuns in Afghanistan (today’s Taliban). The RAF crushed all revolts against British colonial rule.

This is exactly what Jumper has in mind. Mobile US ground intervention forces will remain at the four major `Ft. Apache’ bases guarding Iraq’s major oil fields. These bases will be `ceded’ to the US by a compliant Iraqi regime.

The supreme weapon of modern warfare, the US Air Force, will police the Pax American with its precision-guided munitions and armed drones.

The USAF has developed an extremely effective new technique of wide area control. Small numbers of strike aircraft are kept in the air around the clock. When US ground forces come under attack or foes are sighted, these aircraft are vectored to the site in minutes and deliver precision-guided bombs on enemy forces. The effectiveness of this tactic has led Iraqi resistance fighters to favor roadside bombs over ambushes against US convoys.

The USAF uses the same combat air patrol tactic in Afghanistan, with even more success. In fact, this technique works well anywhere with fairly open terrain. The US is developing three major air bases in Pakistan, and others across Central Asia, to support its plans to dominate the strategic region’s vast oil and gas reserves.

While the USAF is settling into West Asia, the mess in Iraq continues to worsen. Last week’s so-called `constitutional deal’ was the long-predicted, US crafted pact between Shia and Kurd giving them Iraq’s oil and virtual independence. The proposed constitution actually assures American big business access to Iraq’s oil riches and markets.

The furious but powerless Sunni were left in the lurch. Sunnis will at least have the chance to vote on it in a 15 September referendum, but many fear it will be rigged.

The US reportedly offered the 15 Sunni convention delegates $5 million each to vote for the constitution -but was turned down. No mention was made that a US `guided’ constitution for Iraq clearly violates the Geneva Conventions.

Chinese Taoists say you become what you hate. In a zesty irony, the US now find itself in a similar position as demonized Saddam Hussein. Saddam had to use his Sunni-dominated army to hold Iraq together by fighting Kurdish and Shia rebels. His brutal police jailed tens of thousands and routinely used torture.

Today, Iraq’s new ruler, the US, is battling Sunni insurgents, (`al-Qaida terrorists,’ in the latest Pentagon double—speak), rebuilding Saddam’s dreaded secret police, holding 15,000 prisoners and torturing captives, as the Abu Ghraib outrage showed. Much of the Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama National Guard were in Iraq this week instead of at home.

Meanwhile, the Kurds are de facto independent, the Shia are playing footsie with Iran, and large parts of Iraq resembles the storm-ravaged US Gulf Coast – or vice versa.

with CNN devoting virtually 100% of its coverage to N.O and Katrina followup........it can be easy to get diverted from the other main issue ........IRAQ. (fortunately , CNN is not the only continuous NEWS broadcasting system.)

 

[Jo Canadian]

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Iraq reconstruction stops as US regime quietly cancels funding




*** The reconstruction of Iraq, which the US and UK promised to do with they invaded, has been 'abandoned'. There is a well-known saying, "Don't start what you can't finish." The US regime promised to set aside Iraq's oil money for rebuilding the country, but the cash they took is in fact being spent on other things. The money all ends up being diverted through US companies in what could be seen as the biggest embezzlement and money laundering operation in world history. Much of Iraq's reconstruction money has simply been described as 'missing' are several documented examples where multi-billions of dollars of it have been systematically 'lost' from official US accounts, supposedly disappearing forever without a trace. ***

Iraq rebuilding under threat as US runs out of money

Key rebuilding projects in Iraq are grinding to a halt because American money is running out and security has diverted funds intended for electricity, water and sanitation, according to US officials.

Plans to overhaul the country's infrastructure have been downsized, postponed or abandoned because the $24bn (£13bn) budget approved by Congress has been dwarfed by the scale of the task.

"We have scaled back our projects in many areas," James Jeffrey, a senior state department adviser on Iraq, told a congressional committee in Washington, in remarks quoted by the Los Angeles Times. "We do not have the money."

Water and sanitation have been particularly badly hit. According to a report published this week by Government Accountability Office, the investigative branch of Congress, $2.6bn has been spent on water projects, half the original budget, after the rest was diverted to security and other uses.

The report said "attacks, threats and intimidation against project contractors and subcontractors" were to blame. A quarter of the $200m-worth of completed US-funded water projects handed over to the Iraqi authorities no longer worked properly because of "looting, unreliable electricity or inadequate Iraqi staff and supplies", the report found.

Both Democrats and Republicans in Congress also said administrative bungling had played a part.

Stuart Bowen, the US special inspector general for Iraqi reconstruction, said he was reluctant to ask for cash immediately after Hurricane Katrina: "It is an issue that we need to address at the right time."

He said non-US sources might be asked to plug the gap.

After Congress approved funding two years ago, oil, electricity, water and sanitation facilities were found to be more degraded than expected. Amid the chaos and corruption of the post-Saddam administration, insurgents also began to target the infrastructure and anyone working for the US or the Iraqi government.

It is in this context that many of the estimated 20,000 foreign security contractors now in Iraq - some paid more than $1,000 a day - are employed. Mr Bowen said $5bn had been diverted to security.

Some areas now get less than four hours of electricity a day, and there has been a surge in cases of dehydration and diarrhoea among children and the elderly. The cost of providing enough electricity for the country by 2010 is put at $20bn.

Fuel shortages have produced mile-long queues at petrol stations. Crude oil production is around 2.2m barrels a day, still below its pre-war peaks, according to the Brookings Institution in Washington.

There have been improvements: the health ministry says the overall rate of disease among children under five has dropped; parts of Baghdad are noticeably sprucer; and thousands of schools have been built or rehabilitated. Electricity generation has recently climbed above pre-war levels.

But the house appropriations foreign operations subcommittee is losing patience.

"It seems almost incomprehensible to me that we haven't been able to do better," said Don Sherwood, a Pennsylvania Republican. Another Republican, the committee chairman, Jim Kolbe, said the Bush administration's vision of stabilising Iraq by funding reconstruction was "a castle built of sand".

· US and Iraqi troops detained 200 men, including 150 foreigners, near the town of Tal Afar yesterday. Meanwhile, near a farming town south of the capital, police found 17 people shot dead, possibly victims of a sectarian massacre; and in Basra British troops investigated two blasts that killed four US security contractors in a convoy and 16 Iraqi civilians at a restaurant on Wednesday.


SOURCE

The Guardian, "Iraq rebuilding under threat as US runs out of money", 9 September 2005.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1566176,00.html

have not heard this in "mainstream" media..... Hmm. So what do we have here?? Invade, rape and pillage and abort after manipulating all of their resources to the US advantage???


(Lest we forget the Iraqi victims of the US invasion.....while we are being distracted 24/7 by Katrina and her fallout...

 

[Nascar_James]

THE US PLANS A LONG, LONG STAY IN IRAQ
Eric S. Margolis


September 6, 2005

The catastrophe inflicted by hurricane Katrina unfortunately obscured some bombshell news about Iraq last week.

The US Air Force’s senior officer, Gen. John Jumper, stated US warplanes would remain in Iraq to fight resistance forces and protect the American-installed regime `more or less indefinitely.’

Gen. Jumper let the cat out of the bag. While President George Bush hints at eventual troop withdrawals, the Pentagon is busy building four major, permanent air bases in Iraq that will require heavy infantry protection.

Jumper’s revelation confirms what this column has long said: the Pentagon plans to copy Imperial Britain’s method of ruling oil-rich Iraq. In the 1920’s, the British cobbled together Iraq from three disparate Ottoman provinces to control newly-found oil fields in Kurdistan and along the Iranian border. The Sunni heartland in the middle was included to link these two oil regions.

London installed a puppet king and built an army of sepoy(native) troops to keep order and put down minor uprisings. A powerful British RAF contingent, based at Habbibanyah, was tasked with bombing serious revolts and rebellious tribes. In the 1920’s, government minister Winston Churchill authorized use of poisonous mustard gas against Kurdish tribesmen in Iraq and Pushtuns in Afghanistan (today’s Taliban). The RAF crushed all revolts against British colonial rule.

This is exactly what Jumper has in mind. Mobile US ground intervention forces will remain at the four major `Ft. Apache’ bases guarding Iraq’s major oil fields. These bases will be `ceded’ to the US by a compliant Iraqi regime.

The supreme weapon of modern warfare, the US Air Force, will police the Pax American with its precision-guided munitions and armed drones.

The USAF has developed an extremely effective new technique of wide area control. Small numbers of strike aircraft are kept in the air around the clock. When US ground forces come under attack or foes are sighted, these aircraft are vectored to the site in minutes and deliver precision-guided bombs on enemy forces. The effectiveness of this tactic has led Iraqi resistance fighters to favor roadside bombs over ambushes against US convoys.

The USAF uses the same combat air patrol tactic in Afghanistan, with even more success. In fact, this technique works well anywhere with fairly open terrain. The US is developing three major air bases in Pakistan, and others across Central Asia, to support its plans to dominate the strategic region’s vast oil and gas reserves.

While the USAF is settling into West Asia, the mess in Iraq continues to worsen. Last week’s so-called `constitutional deal’ was the long-predicted, US crafted pact between Shia and Kurd giving them Iraq’s oil and virtual independence. The proposed constitution actually assures American big business access to Iraq’s oil riches and markets.

The furious but powerless Sunni were left in the lurch. Sunnis will at least have the chance to vote on it in a 15 September referendum, but many fear it will be rigged.

The US reportedly offered the 15 Sunni convention delegates $5 million each to vote for the constitution -but was turned down. No mention was made that a US `guided’ constitution for Iraq clearly violates the Geneva Conventions.

Chinese Taoists say you become what you hate. In a zesty irony, the US now find itself in a similar position as demonized Saddam Hussein. Saddam had to use his Sunni-dominated army to hold Iraq together by fighting Kurdish and Shia rebels. His brutal police jailed tens of thousands and routinely used torture.

Today, Iraq’s new ruler, the US, is battling Sunni insurgents, (`al-Qaida terrorists,’ in the latest Pentagon double—speak), rebuilding Saddam’s dreaded secret police, holding 15,000 prisoners and torturing captives, as the Abu Ghraib outrage showed. Much of the Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama National Guard were in Iraq this week instead of at home.

Meanwhile, the Kurds are de facto independent, the Shia are playing footsie with Iran, and large parts of Iraq resembles the storm-ravaged US Gulf Coast – or vice versa.

with CNN devoting virtually 100% of its coverage to N.O and Katrina followup........it can be easy to get diverted from the other main issue ........IRAQ. (fortunately , CNN is not the only continuous NEWS broadcasting system.)

There is always FOXNews. The most reliable news souce.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

The Splendid Failure of Occupation
Part 36: George Bush occupies Iraq
B. J. Sabri, Online Journal Contributing Writer



September 10, 2005—Considering U.S. machinations, maneuvers, spins, lies, and changing rationales to invade and occupy Iraq, is it not surprising that the Bush regime survived and still rules the United State?

Two structural pillars support Bush’s survival: (1) the military power of the United States—it shields the U.S. government from international accountability, (2) the anti-democratic, corrupted, and monopolistic nature of the American political order—while the people are impotent to prosecute the crimes of the system, the system will never prosecute itself.

Ideologically though, the Bush regime survived by managing hate, fear, and propaganda. But, propaganda is the natural terrain on which the regime thrives. Take the swift defeat of Iraq after three weeks of massive bombardment and land “skirmishes” (Baghdad fell without resistance), Bush depicted it as a demonstration of American prowess and technology. Militarily, however, taking into account the formidable military power of the U.S. vis-à-vis Iraq—already collapsing under a 13-year old U.S.-U.N. siege—that depiction is worthless.

Not even the duration of Bush’s blitzkrieg is significant in the annals of wars. For instance, in June 1967, the illegal settler state of Israel (Britain, other western powers, and the USSR installed it on Arab land with U.N. resolution 181), defeated Egypt, Syria, and Jordan in only six days. As for Hitler, the inventor of blitzkriegs, he defeated Poland in a month, Denmark and Norway in two months, powerful imperial France in six weeks, Belgium in 17 days, Holland in five, Yugoslavia in 11, and Greece in three weeks. [Source]

After hyper-inflating Iraq’s threat and then invading it for that bogus reason (in January 2003, Bush declared in mangled semantics, “Iraq poses catastrophic danger that requires us to confront the danger of catastrophic violence posed by Iraq”), the swiftness with which the U.S. defeated it did not generate swift conquest, but soon transformed into a dire incubus for the invaders.

Similarly, the ease with which the U.S. toppled the legitimate regime of President Saddam Hussein did not correspond with equal ease to conquer his country. I used the terms, legitimate and president, because by all standing international covenants despite America’s pretentious to the contrary, Saddam Hussein is still the legitimate president of Iraq regardless of the nature of his regime or our opposition to it.

The United States, itself, supplied the precedent to this concept of legitimacy. When Saddam Hussein invaded and occupied Kuwait for over six months in 1990, the U.S., after defeating Iraq in 1991, restored the Kuwaiti ruler to power, as the legitimate leader of that country. For the record, and based on the turbulent history and static traditions of the Middle East, regardless of any criticism directed against their practices or nature, the ruler of Kuwait is no more or less legitimate than Saddam Hussein or any other Arab ruler.

Furthermore, it is now about time to revise the term “dictator” to name a regime’s strongman, for reasons that having nothing to with opposing or accepting dictatorship, but for the way that Washington is using that term. First, when a strongman ends his alliance with Washington, this turns him immediately from a “man whom we can deal with,” “moderate,” or a “president” into a “dictator.” Second, the noun, “dictator” has become a weapon of propaganda and a motive for war against nations that oppose Washington’s polices.

A recent example of a strongman’s imperialist rehabilitation is Pakistan's Pervez Musharraf. When Musharraf overthrew the elected government of Pakistan and became, de facto, the “dictator” of Pakistan, the U.S. called him, in fact, “dictator” and “military ruler,” and Britain slammed Pakistan with sanctions. But when he allied himself with Washington and London after 9/11, he became, “His Excellency, President Musharraf.”

Concerning the illegality of Hussein’s removal, consider the following: the United States invaded Iraq without valid reasons, outside established international legality, and removed the Iraqi president from power in contravention of the U.N. charter. First, if the United States does not acknowledge the binding authority of that charter, it should not have used it to expel Iraq from Kuwait in 1991. Second, since the United States violated the charter to invade Iraq in 2003, then it should have withdrawn from the United Nations immediately prior to the invasion to rescind its obligations toward it. Simultaneously, however, that move would have meant that the United States breached the charter for political expediency hence the U.N.—if it were independent—should have punished it.

Upholding Hussein’s status as the legitimate president of Iraq, therefore, should be and is independent from our opposition to his regime. Categorically, since the U.S. invasion was illegal, so was Hussein’s removal, no matter how all theoreticians of imperialism would rationalize it.

As for the issue of Hussein’s legitimacy; for 24 years since he became president without election, all countries (including the United States who shook hands with him) recognized Iraq as a sovereign state, Saddam Hussein as its president, and exchanged ambassadors with Iraq. The point of this discussion is that rejecting aggression requires rejecting its outcome. The moment politically motivated selectivity approves certain items but excludes others, the whole edifice of how to confront aggressions would collapse. As a result, to state that Hussein is no longer the legitimate president of Iraq means accepting the whole concept of the illegal occupation of Iraq.

This discussion is neither about the restoration of Hussein to power nor in defense of his regime. My argument is that the United States used two separate issues as alibis to invade and occupy Iraq: (1) Hussein’s theme as a “dictator” and (2) Iraq’s right to own WMD to counter Israel’s threat to annihilate the Arabs with nuclear weapons, as well as deterrence against American interventionism in the Middle East, which the invasion of Iraq proved.

Now that Bush is occupying Iraq, what is he doing in that country to turn it into an undeclared colony of the United States?

In the following discussion, I shall answer these questions by starting out from two perspectives. First, by reprising the historical analogy of the Original Peoples of the United States and relating it to the Iraqi people; and second, by giving an overview of the military conquest of Iraq as a process with phases and targets.

The U. S., Iroquois, and Iraqis: the Immediate Results of Imperialist Policy

In parts, 32 and 33 of this series, I addressed the issue of the Original Peoples of the United States and tied it, ideologically and practically, to the conquest of Iraq. In addition, I also used Alexander Hamilton as a prototype for George H. Bush and his son, George W. Bush as all three men, albeit Hamilton was never a president, espoused similar ideology of extermination and empire.

Arguably and as it concerns the imperialist history of the United States, it does not matter which president or politician is employing aggression, intervention or mass destruction to achieve empire. It could be Jefferson, Jackson, Taylor, Hamilton, Polk, McKinley, T. Roosevelt, Truman, Johnson, Nixon, Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, or Bush Jr. As if per hereditary rituals, every four or eight years, the sitting American president must designate an enemy and immolate it on the altar of American supremacist racism, political ideology, and capitalistic greed. In short, U.S. violence makes part of a larger national scheme or a national tradition.

The basic tenets of this tradition pivots around one and only one purpose: destroy anyone that stands in the way of the American Power. German historian Karl Dietrich Bracher exemplified my concept of the American tradition when he discussed Nazism:

Hitler and National Socialism were in a long-standing tradition. . . . They were not unfortunate accidents, not incomprehensible derailments in the path of German history; they were as Konrad Heiden said, a “German tradition.” [Italic added] [Quoted in: The PSYCHOPATHIC GOD, Adolf Hitler, by Robert G. L. Waite, Da Capo Press, 1977, pp, 269]
Assuming that Bracher defined the concept of “national tradition” in the right political frame, it follows that if Hitler’s violence were in line with the German tradition, then U.S. violence is in line with the American tradition. However, Bracher, as a historian of the Weimar Republic, was somewhat biased or even dogmatic. From the Holy Roman Empire through Bismarck and to Hitler, not all German history was violent, and even if it were violent, it did not share the motives of Nazism. Moreover, Bracher’s over-preoccupation with idealistic democracy made him see all the things under two contrasting colors.

Not so with the American tradition: this has been systematic, consistent, codified, institutionalized, violent, imperialist, and interventionist, every step of the way, from the origins until present.

By force of this conclusion, both, Alexander Hamilton and George W. Bush make part of that tradition; and both typify the duality that characterized the American system whereby public statements of policy or state’s philosophy does not reflect, correspond, or identify with the actual directives of power and its real aims. Let us examine Hamilton’s duplicitous thought.

Hamilton, the Idealist

From Hamilton’s papers: The Farmer Refute, February 23, 1775:

Upon this law, depend the natural rights of mankind, the supreme being gave existence to man, together with the means of preserving and beatifying that existence. He endowed him with rational faculties, by the help of which, to discern and pursue such things, as were consistent with his duty and interest, and invested him with an inviolable right to personal liberty, and personal safety. . . . It is true, that New-York has no Charter. But, if it could support it's claim to liberty in no other way, it might, with justice, plead the common principles of colonization: for, it would be unreasonable, to seclude one colony, from the enjoyment of the most important privileges of the rest. There is no need, however, of this plea: The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for, among old parchments, or musty records. They are written, as with a sun beam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself; and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power. [Emphasis added]
Hamilton, the Exterminator

The following is a directive, dated May 31, 1779, that Hamilton wrote with his own hand, authorizing Major General John Sullivan on how to deal with Iroquois:

To lay waste all the settlements around . . . That the country may not be merely overrun but destroyed. . . . But you will not by any means, listen to any overture of peace before the total ruin of their settlements is effected. . . . Our future security will be in their inability to injure us and in the terror with which the severity of the chastisement they receive will inspire them. [Emphasis added] (Quoted in Facing West . . . , Richard Drinnon, pp, 331.)
If you noticed, the sentence, “Our future security will be in their inability to injure us and in the terror with which the severity of the chastisement they receive will inspire them” is nothing else but the progenitor fascist ideology of “preemption” embraced by George W. Bush and Zionists allies. This proves my often-stated contention that the American political-ideological system is a closed loop, self-reproducing mechanism incapable of change or progress.

By comparing the situations of Iroquois and Iraqis, it should not be difficult to see the similarity that sealed their history. One important outcome of both histories is the way by which the U.S. government opted to destroy both nations and their social structures. In the case of Iroquois, the combination between American greed, attitudes, mentality, and ideology resulted in the physical decimation of the Iroquois as people, as well as the destruction of their political state: the Iroquois Confederacy. In 1779, the Iroquois who reached their apex of power in 1680 and formed a highly developed polity that included six closely related Native groups: Cayuga, Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Seneca, and Tuscarora ceased to exist as a political entity. Other large advanced Native confederacies destroyed by the United States were the Seminole, the Caddo, and the Creek.

Likewise, after over 3,000 years of continuing vibrant civilizations including Acadian, Sumerian, Assyrian, Babylonian, and Arab, and despite past wars and invasions, the U.S. destroyed the historical continuity of Iraq as a nation, as national character, and as a state in just 13 years of wars, sanctions, invasion, and brutal occupation.

To speculate on history, had the newly formed U.S. colonialist government not destroyed the Iroquois and other Indian political state-like entities, these could have well developed into a higher form of modern nation-states, and kept their own culture, form of government, and economy. Likewise, had the United States not used imperialism, fascism, and Zionism to destroy Iraq, Iraq as a nation might have been able to recover despite its regime.

Incidentally, how did the American government resolve the issue of the U.S. Indian holocaust and the dissolution of preexistent Indian polities? The Congress of The United States issued a Machiavellian scheme that, in effect, was the prototype for the apology to Hawaii adopted in 1993 (read part 31).

On September 16, 1987, the U.S. government issued Senate Concurrent Resolution 76 with which it intended erasing the record of 400 years of massacres committed by U.S. settlers and governments against the Original Peoples. I am extracting here articles 1 and 2 of the resolution that are relevant to my argument:

(1) The Congress, on the occasion of the 200th Anniversary of the signing of the United States Constitution, acknowledges the historical debt, which this Republic of the United States of America owes to the Iroquois Confederacy and other Indian Nations for their demonstration of enlightened, democratic principles of government and their example of a free association of independent Indian nations.
2) The Congress also hereby reaffirms the constitutionally recognized government-to-government relationship with Indian Tribes, which has historically been the cornerstone of this nation's official Indian policy.
Comment

Article 1, S. C. R 76, is the highest expression of nonsense. Every written word is nothing but rhetorical vacuity, a worthless sugar pill to surviving Native Nations, and a cynical absolution of the United States from crimes that time would never erase. Are we to believe that the Reagan administration (notorious for its shallow intellectual and political essence), and the Congress (notorious for its theatrical deliberations) acknowledge the “enlightened, democratic principles of government and their example of a free association of independent Indian nations?”
Debunking Article 1: Just as Hamilton was two-faced, so was President Ronald Reagan who acted in line with the American tradition. Reagan (who once attributed environmental pollution to trees) publicly exposed his utter hypocrisy on the spirit of resolution 76 thus proving it was just ink on paper. . . . Nine months after its adoption (June 30, 1988), Reagan told a Russian audience the following: “Maybe we made a mistake in giving Indian reservations. . . . Maybe we made a mistake in trying to maintain Indian cultures. Maybe we should not have humored them in that, wanting to stay in that primitive life style. May be we should have said: No, come join us, be citizens along with the rest of us.” [Facing West . . . Richard Drinnon, preface, pp, xiii]
As for article 2, it is a brazen act of calumny. First, the validity of the statement, “hereby reaffirms the constitutionally recognized government-to-government relationship with Indian Tribes” is null. What the Congress was juxtaposing are two unequal realties: (1) the government of the United States, which is a state, endowed with national sovereignty, independent economy, army, legislature, and representations at foreign states, and (2) Indian tribal governments. The latter type of government has no traits of modern sovereignty or statehood except management of inter-tribal affairs and relations with the federal government of the occupying power—the United States of America.
Second, the sentence, “which has historically been the cornerstone of this nation's official Indian policy,” is another calumny of historical proportion. The cornerstone of America’s Indian policy during four centuries of conquest was extermination, land confiscation, and destruction of the natural rights of the rightful owners of the land.
Conclusion: One hundred years after the final destruction of the preexisting Indian states and social polities, Ronald Reagan’s Congress, hypocritically spoke of Indian governments and their relations with the U.S. government as based on “relations among equals.”

Not ironically, 105 years after McKinley issued his proclamation for the “benign assimilation” of the Filipinos, and fifteen years since Reagan left office, along came George W. Bush, a common street bully, psychopathic demagogue, and perfectly in line with the American national tradition, singing the slogan of “freedom” and “democracy” to the Iraqis.

After he invaded and occupied Iraq, George Bush organized a farce in two acts: (1) the Iraqi “election” and (2) the Iraqi “constitution.” This is fine except that Washington imperialist Zionist think tanks scripted and directed these two “marvels” of maneuvering colonialism to implement the American conquest of Iraq under the approval of collaborating Iraqis and the continuing violence by the occupation force.

To continue, after hailing the “historical” Iraqi election, George Bush installed a government made of local pro-occupation figures and Iraqi CIA agents. But here is the histrionic climax of Bush as Iraq’s “liberator”: he called the occupied Iraqis, “free,” and Iraq’s American-appointed “government,” the “democratic government of Iraq.”

Because various political, economic, and ideological forces planned the military conquest of Iraq, what did they do to transform the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait into the future conquest of Iraq itself? In addition, and taking into consideration the anti-occupation resistance, what has the U.S. been doing in its attempts to transform the occupation into a permanent conquest?

Next, Part 37: Iraq, America’s lab of horror

 

[Ocean Breeze]

CBS/AP) In a new Web posting, an Islamic insurgent group offered to pay bounties for the deaths of Iraq's Shiite prime minister and other top officials in retaliation for an offensive against a militant stronghold in northern Iraq.

The Islamic Army in Iraq, which has previously claimed responsibility for kidnapping and killings of foreigners, called on its "holy fighters to strike the infidels with an iron fist."

The statement offered $100,000 for killing Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari; $50,000 for Interior Minister Bayan Jabr; and $30,000 for Defense Minister Sadoun al-Dulaimi.

"What the American forces and Iraq's traitors, the tails of the infidels, did in Tal Afar is a genocide to the Sunni people in this great city," the statement said.

A U.S. and Iraqi military offensive against Tal Afar resulted in the deaths of 157 insurgents and the capture of 291 suspects. Brig. Gen. Abdul Aziz Mohammed-Jassim, spokesman for the Iraqi army in Tal Afar, said at least six Iraqi soldiers and six civilians were killed in the operation.

It was not possible to verify the authenticity of the statement, which surfaced on an Islamic Web site that often posts extremists' materials.

In other developments:


A huge car bomb exploded outside a popular restaurant in Baghdad's upscale Mansour neighborhood Monday night, witnesses said. Hospital officials reported at least one person was killed and 17 were wounded. A doctor at Yarmouk Hospital said most of the victims were women.


Police in eastern Baghdad reported finding the bodies of 10 unidentified men, their hands tied and shot to death.


Gunmen shot and killed a bodyguard of the mayor of Mahmoudiya, a town about 20 miles south of Baghdad. The mayor was unhurt, police said.


Two Kurdish security guards died and three were wounded when gunmen opened fire on their vehicle in the northern town of Mosul. On the city's outskirts, police said they found two badly burned dead bodies.


In Baghdad's southern neighborhood of Dora, two men were killed in separate drive-by shootings, police said.


In Kirkuk, unidentified gunmen opened fire on a police car and killed the two policemen inside. The city, 180 miles north of Baghdad, has been the scene of numerous such attacks.

Al-Jaafari toured Tal Afar on Monday — ignoring an alleged al Qaeda threat to strike with chemical weapons — to congratulate Iraqi soldiers and commandoes for successfully rousting militants from the insurgent stronghold near the Syrian border, Iraqi television reported.

The broadcast, which showed no pictures of the Iraqi leader, said he was in the region despite a previously unreported insurgent threat to unleash chemical weapons against the force of 5,000 Iraqi soldiers and commandos, backed by 3,500 troops from the U.S. 3rd Armored Cavalry regiment, who stormed into the city Saturday.

talk about a three ring diaster circle. Iraq, Afganistan, and New Orleans. Nice going booorish booosh..

 

[Ocean Breeze]

DUBAI (Reuters) - An Iraqi militant group has offered up to $100,000 for killing the prime minister and top officials who launched an offensive on rebels in a northern town, according to an Internet statement posted on Monday.

The Islamic Army in Iraq, among several insurgent groups fighting U.S. troops and Iraqi forces, said Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaafari and the defense and interior ministers should die for the fighting in Tal Afar.

"The leadership of the army has issued orders to all the mujahideen to intensify their attacks... to avenge the mass extermination occuring in Tal Afar," said the statement which was not dated but bore the group's logo.

The statement could not be immediately verified. It put a $100,000 price on Jaafari, $50,000 for Interior Minister Bayan Jabor and $30,000 for Defense Minister Saadoun Dulaimi.

U.S. and Iraqi troops are hunting rebels and foreign fighters in Tal Afar, a city of 200,000 near the Syrian border.

On Sunday, the leader of Iraq's al Qaeda, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, accused the U.S. army of using poison gas on the town to "finish off the mujahideen."

 

[JomZ]

ITs funny how we went from Terrorists, Insurgents, and Al Qaeda to Rebels, Foreign Fighters, and Mujahdeen fighters.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Re: RE: US Invasion of Iraq-Updates

ITs funny how we went from Terrorists, Insurgents, and Al Qaeda to Rebels, Foreign Fighters, and Mujahdeen fighters.

indeed. soon they will all have to wear name tags with their association on them.......just to keep "their" identities straight.

Can get very very confusing.... when the terminology changes faster than those Bush bombs drop.(and KILL)

 

[no1important]

RE: US Invasion of Iraq-U

US 'could cut 50,000 Iraq troops

The US could withdraw up to 50,000 of its troops from Iraq by the end of the year, Iraq's president has said.

I think America is real short on manpower. Seemed to be a shortage for Katrina devastation. Plus not so many people signing up for the armed services either since "W" illegal occupation started. That is probably the real reason why so many may leave.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Bomb blast kills -Baghdad


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4244068.stm

 

[JomZ]

More Killing
More Carnage
More Death

This is the Democracy the world's most powerful nation has built?

 

[no1important]

RE: US Invasion of Iraq-U

Between the quagmire in Afghanistan, Iraq and New Orleans, it makes one wonder if they really are as powerful as they want the world population to believe.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Re: RE: US Invasion of Iraq-U

Between the quagmire in Afghanistan, Iraq and New Orleans, it makes one wonder if they really are as powerful as they want the world population to believe.

this very thought is on most people's minds now. The "image" and bluster/bragging is one thing......the reality is showing itself to be something else. Consider the quagmires that you mentioned and add the amount of DEBT they are in now.....and things are not in good shape at all. Even their space program ( the ONE area of progress and achievement one could realistically admire for some time )......is flakey now. (funding issues, tech issues, quality control problems....). The whole fabric of the US has changed dramatically since bush came into the oval office. ......and NOT because of 9-11 ( as some are inclined to excuse it)..... as even though it was a disastrous attack......it was not the first on US "interests".

The US is so out of favor with the rest of the world, it would be concerning to be the US . All the help for Katrina etc is for the PEOPLE ........not the bush regime.

One almost....feels sorry for them. ......but stops short when one realizes that it is they that are the author of their own misfortune.

(IMHO....

 

[Ocean Breeze]

From the "Christian " Contingency....


Bush Support Eroding as Christians Condemn Iraq Involvement
by Jano Gibson

With increasing frequency, Christians are condemning U.S. military involvement in Iraq.

And the growing unrest among Christians threatens to erode President Bush's most loyal base.

"We had no plan for making the peace. We continue as a superpower to be arrogant. . . . And we have acted as though all is well, when, in fact, daily we have reports of suicide bombings and more disruptions in Iraq," said the Rev. Bob Edgar, general secretary of the National Council of Churches, a coalition of mainline Protestant and Orthodox denominations.

"Just like with Hurricane Katrina, (Bush) doesn't want to hear people say `it didn't go well,' " said Edgar, a Democrat who was president of Claremont School of Theology from 1990 to 2000.

In the buildup to war, Bush told Americans that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. The despot has been deposed, but WMDs have not been found. U.S. troops remain in Iraq while the fledging government adopts a constitution and trains its own security force.

"The president has said we will be in Iraq no longer than we are needed there," said White House spokesman Ken Lisaius.

Two months after Bush declared major combat in Iraq completed in May 2003, most Christians thought the United States had acted prudently, according to a poll by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.

Those agreeing with the military effort were 68 percent of white mainline Protestants, 74 percent of white Catholics and 79 percent of white evangelicals. Mainline denominations are those that originated in Europe and include Lutherans, Episcopalians and Methodists.

The survey numbers fell during the following two years.

A poll last July by the Pew Forum showed 56 percent o f white mainline Protestants and 54 percent o f white Catholics supported military involvement. Even among evangelicals, who helped Bush win re-election, support had fallen by 11 percentage points.

Richard Cizik, vice president of governmental affairs for the National Association of Evangelicals, which did not publicly endorse the war but has been a Bush backer, seemed surprised Friday when he was told 68 percent of evangelicals still thought invading Iraq was the right thing to do.

"It's probably attributable to general support of the president," Cizik said.

Many, though, are growing tired of reports of U.S. casualties.

At the invitation of local anti-war activists, including Progressive Christians Uniting, Medea Benjamin is scheduled to speak this morning at Pilgrim Place, the Christian retirement community in Claremont. The 11 a.m. speech will be held in Decker Hall, 665 Avery Road.

The anti-war crusader, who is not religious, has worked for years with interfaith groups promoting peace.

"The teachings of all the major religions teach peace and tolerance, universal love. Unfortunately, we humans have strayed too much from those basic teachings, often in the name of those religions," said Benjamin, founding director of the human-rights group Global Exchange.

In San Bernardino, up to 20 people Jewish, Catholic, Quaker and Protestant have held a vigil each Wednesday for the past month on E Street, behind City Hall.

"From a religious perspective, this is not a just war," said the Rev. David Kalke of Central City Lutheran Mission in San Bernardino, a vigil organizer. "We haven't been attacked. The reason for going to war hasn't been substantiated. The lost of life has been tremendous on both sides."

Nearly 1,900 U.S. troops have died in Iraq since March 2003. Thousands of insurgents and Iraqi civilians have, too.

To be sure, many Christians opposed military action long before the conflict began. So changing attitudes shouldn't be attributed to new moral understandings, said John C. Green, a religion and politics expert at the University of Akron in Ohio.

But Green said the practical argument against war has become more persuasive: No sign of WMDs, the Abu Ghraib prison scandal was an international embarrassment, states like Ohio and California are facing heavy casualties, and the Iraqi government is struggling to get off the ground.

Christians still favor how Bush is handling Iraq more than the general public, where only two of five agree with the president, recent surveys show. Last month, before Hurricane Katrina made landfall, the president's job approval rating was 42 percent, according to an Associated Press/Ipsos poll.

"Regardless of polls, he is going to continue to do what is right for the American people," said Lisaius, the White House spokesman. "This is something that transcends politics. This is about the safety or our country and the safety of people around the world."

But Iraq also is another wedge issue for liberal and conservative Christians.

"Evangelicals want to support this president and want to believe this war, in the long run, is going to make a big difference on behalf of democracy and freedom of religion and civil rights in the whole region," said Cizik.

He does not believe Iraq is dividing Christians but said it eventually may.

"But if the (Iraqi) constitution doesn't guarantee those rights, it might shed whole new light on what we are fighting for and dying for there."


*****************[/quote][/url]

 

[Ocean Breeze]

MSNBC Breaking News
------------------------------------------------------

Al-Qaida in Iraq leader purportedly declares war on Shiites, Iraqi troops -

 

[Ocean Breeze]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1126692934248_5/?hub=TopStories


deadliest series of attacks.......in a long time. all the platitudes and promises from the bush regime do not disguise the mess(plural) it has created.BY CHOICE. Over inflated ego's have a pattern of messing things up.... and this is no different.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,374622,00.html

Iraq carnage continues.. :evil: :twisted: :x

Iraq in dispair after yet another massacre




More than 100 killed in day of Iraq slaughter

At least 88 people were killed and more than 220 wounded early today when a suicide bomber detonated his vehicle near a group of construction workers in Baghdad, police said. Hours earlier, 17 men were executed after they were dragged from their homes north of the Iraq capital.

A car bomb hit an American military convoy in eastern Baghdad, and police said that two US soldiers were wounded, though that was not confirmed by the US military. Another car bomb exploded alongside an Iraqi National Guard convoy in the northern Baghdad district of Shula, killing at least two people, authorities said.

In central Baghdad, just a few hundred meters from the Rashid Hotel that houses diplomats and foreign contractors, a suicide car bomber attacked a US convoy, police said. Fourteen Iraqi police officers were injured, although it was not clear whether there were US casualties.

Iraqi lawmakers, meanwhile, agreed on last-minute revisions to the contested draft constitution in an attempt to appease the disgruntled Sunni minority that has formed the core support for the country's virulent insurgency.

The first Baghdad blast targeted a crowd of casual labourers in the Kazimiyah district, where the population is almost entirely Shiite. They were gathering before going to work on nearby construction sites, said police Maj. Musa Abdel Kerim. He said the suicide driver drove his car into the gathering before detonating the explosive charge. One report said that the bomber lured his victims with promises of work.

Sunni militants have mounted a series of attacks on the Shiites in an apparent effort to provoke retaliation and a sectarian conflict. Two weeks ago, nearly 1,000 people were killed in a stampede on a nearby bridge during a Shiite religious procession. Many were trampled and crushed to death, but others drowned after falling 30 feet into the Tigris.

The executions at Taaji, 16 miles north of Baghdad, came after gunmen wearing military uniforms surrounded a village early today.

Police Lt. Waleed al-Hayali said the gunmen detained the 17 victims after searching the village. They were handcuffed and blindfolded and were later shot at a site one mile from the village.

The dead were members of the Tameem tribe, al-Hayali said. The gunmen looted the village before fleeing.


SOURCE

The Independent, "More than 100 killed in day of Iraq slaughter", 14 September 2005.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

------------------------------------------------------
MSNBC Breaking News
------------------------------------------------------

Ten police officers, five others killed in blast in Baghdad, police say. -

Could get explosive. Civil war???

( gotta wonder how "thankful " the Iraqis are to bush for his "generosity"... :roll: