Fredskoalitionen Göteborg

31 mars, 2006

250 000 iraker dödade och Iran hotas med minikärnvapen – allt för USAs hegemoniska ambitioner

Filed under: nya — ingrid @ 12:57


A the Lancet´s study

Minst 250.000 döda genom Irakkriget om Falluja räknas in i den tidigare Lancetstudien

B Will The U.S. Nuke Iran? Professor of Physics Highlights The Dangers

Den nya amerikanska kärnvapenpolitiken med möjlighet att använda kärnvapen även mot icke-kärnvapenstater finns formulerad i två regeringsdokument. Konventionella provsprängningar skall starta i amerikanska Nevadaöknen för att kalkylera verkningar av små minikärnvapen mot Irans underjordiska laboratorier.

A
This report in the British medical journal the Lancet is based on the work of teams from the Johns Hopkins University and Columbia University in the U.S., and the Al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad.

A similar methodology was used in the late 1990′s to calculate the number of deaths from the war in Kosovo, put at 10,000

The information was obtained as Iraqi interviewers surveyed 808 families, consisting of 7,868 people, in 33 different ”clusters” or neighbourhoods spread across the country.

In each case, they asked how many births and deaths there had been in the home since January 2002.

That information was then compared with the death rates in each neighbourhood in the 15 months before the invasion that toppled president Saddam Hussein, adjusted for the different time frames, and extrapolated to cover the entire 24.4 million population of Iraq.

The most common cause of death is as a direct result of a worsening ‘culture of violence’, mostly caused by indiscriminate U.S. co-ordinated air strikes, and related military interventions, reveals the study of almost 1000 households scattered across Iraq.

And the risk of violent death just after the invasion was 58 times greater than before the war. The overall risk of death was 1.5 times more after the invasion than before.

The on-going American Occupation has also created worsened civil strife as well as mass environmental destructions and related public health problems that is associated with American bomb-related released radioactive and other life-threatening pollutions.

The American Occupation has also prevailed over the neglect to the repairing of vital public services-related infrastructure, which include U.S.-led destructions of water systems.

The figure of 100,000 had been based on somewhat ”conservative assumptions”, notes Les Roberts at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, U.S., who led the study.

That estimate excludes Falluja, a hotspot for violence. If the data from this town is included, the compiled studies point to about 250,000 excess deaths since the outbreak of the U.S.-led war.

B
In an August 2005 issue of The American Conservative, former CIA officer Philip Girarldi raised the alarm over in-process Pentagon contingency plans drafted in preparation for another terrorist attack in the United States.

The response includes a plan for a massive air assault on Iran with the use of both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons regardless of whether Iran is any way involved in such an attack against the U.S.

After the warning physicists from around the world, including numerous Nobel laureates and prominent figures, signed a petition expressing their dismay at seeing the architects of Bush administration policy embrace the use of nuclear weapons as a tool in warfare like any other.

The new US policy to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear countries has been officially formulated in two US government documents Nuclear Posture Review delivered to Congress in December 2001 and Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations dated March 15, 2005.

In the new video produced with the support of volunteers of the Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran (CASMII), the UC San Diego Physicist and signatory to the petition

Dr Jeorge Hirsch outlines the devastating consequences that are certain to follow if the U.S. pursues a policy of deploying nuclear weapons. He urges the US public to ask the Congress to confront this possibility.

With Iran’s civilian nuclear program having been singled out for referral to the United Nations Security Council, destructive sanctions and/or military action against Iran seem imminent.

In this context, any U.S. policy that paves the way for the use of nuclear weapons is particular cause for alarm.

”We urge Iranian, U.S. and international media to take note of this alarming development in official U.S. policy and to meet their responsibilities in revealing its dire implications”

Russia has warned it will not support any attempts to use force to resolve the stand-off over Iran’s controversial nuclear programme.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4855644.stm

http://fredskoalitionen.blogspot.com
pg 4064380-1

Nätverket Fredskoalitionen är öppet för alla som stödjer en fredsplattform med
”USA ut ur Irak – Inget svenskt stöd till USAs krig”
”Erkänn irakernas rätt till självbestämmande och motstÃ¥nd”

mÃ¥ndag den 3 april kl 18.30 besöker chefen för ”Centret för Mänskliga Rättigheter och demokrati” Göteborg och hörsalen ”Dragonen” Sprängkullsgatan 19 arr:Utrikespolitiska Föreningen tillsammans med Fredskoalitionen.

Efter 15 maj besöker Bagdads museums chef Donny George Göteborg och talar bl.a om förstörelsen av Bagdads kulturskatter

27 mars, 2006

Loretta Napoleoni m.fl ser en stormakt på jakt efter argument för att börja bomba

Filed under: nya — ingrid @ 10:23

Foto:Dresden 1945
Terroristforskaren Loretta Napoleoni förutspår Iraks splittring och en amerikansk attack på Iran inom ett år
http://www.svd.se/dynamiskt/kultur/did_12209189.asp

USA ljög om att Abu Musab al-Zarqawi var länken mellan Saddam Hussein och Usama bin Ladin för att legitimera kriget mot Irak. Nu letar man bara efter en annan förevändning för en snar attack mot Iran.

Det säger terroristforskaren och författaren Loretta Napoleoni som heller inte ser någon oblodig lösning på inbördeskriget i Irak.

Det var den 5 februari 2003 som Colin Powell höll sitt berömda tal inför FN:s säkerhetsråd. Han presenterade den jordanske terroristledaren al-Zarqawi som den länk USA måste ha för att bevisa ett av krigets huvudargument, att Saddams Irak samarbetade med bin Ladins al-Qaida.

”Det var en lögn, precis som att Saddams massförstörelsevapen var en lögn. Al-Zarqawi var bara en av flera hundra liknande ledare över smÃ¥ terrorgrupper. Han hade tagit sig in i irakiska Kurdistan och det var deras underrättelsetjänst som informerade amerikanerna om honom.

Han bara rÃ¥kade vara pÃ¥ rätt plats vid rätt tid, eller hur man ska se det. Varken USA, jag eller nÃ¥gon annan terrorexpert hade hört talas om al-Zarqawi före den dagen”, säger italienska Loretta Napoleoni vars bok, Uppror i Irak: al-Zarqawis heliga krig (Leopard förlag), just kommit ut pÃ¥ svenska.

Hon är i grunden ekonom, men under många år har hon forskat om den internationella terrorismen och räknas som en av världens ledande experter på området. När SvD träffar henne i Stockholm sitter hon med resväskan redo för att resa vidare till Barcelona där hon också ska föreläsa om myten al-Zarqawi.

”Jo, han är en myt, men inte som en amerikansk konspirationsidé av den typ som florerade pÃ¥ bÃ¥da sidor av kalla kriget. Däremot i den bemärkelsen att han inte är sÃ¥ stor eller sÃ¥ verksam som politiker och medier har mÃ¥lat upp honom. Den ikoniska betydelse han har fÃ¥tt är skapad av västvärlden och ironiskt nog passar detta den sÃ¥ kallade jihadismens syften lika utmärkt. Vi har försett jihadismen med deras manuskript, kan man säga.”

Napoleoni ägnar en stor del av sin senaste bok till att berätta om al-Zarqawis bakgrund, hans person, samt den politisering och radikalisering som han genomgick i såväl fängelse som i möten med centrala ideologer inom den moderna, radikala salafismen som syftar till att inrätta islamistiska samhällen utan västinflytande.

I sin undersökning har hon nästan uteslutande använt sig av dubbelkollade förstahandskällor från såväl personer närstående al-Zarqawi, som tjänstemän inom CIA och MI 6.

I Irak har al-Zarqawi fortsatt att vara USA:s absoluta huvudmotståndare via en rad terrordåd mot bland annat shiiter och ockupationsmakten. Att han rimligtvis inte kan stå bakom alla dessa spelar mindre roll, menar hon. Hans önskade inbördeskrig i Irak är ett faktum och det spelar ingen roll vad USA:s nästa drag blir, säger Napoleoni.

– Jag tror tyvärr att det enda rimliga är att kalla hem trupperna och låta Irak lida igenom inbördeskriget tills folket tröttnar och tvingas till en fredlig lösning. Landet kommer att delas upp i tre stater: en sunnisk, en shiitisk och en kurdisk.

Och vad gäller USA:s förhållande till Iran, vad tror du händer där?
”De kommer att attackera Iran inom ett Ã¥r, det vill säga innan nästa presidentkampanj sätter igÃ¥ng. Inte med trupper, för det finns inga att tillgÃ¥, däremot med flygbombningar mot kärnkraftsanläggningarna.

USA letar nu efter argument att göra detta och sannolikt kommer man att gÃ¥ pÃ¥ Irans varningar om att utveckla kärnvapen, eller dess hot om attack mot Israel. Detta trots att Irans hot bara är retorik som man fört ända sedan 1988 respektive 1979″.

Du låter inte optimistisk.
”Nej, jag är mycket pessimistisk. Visst kan USA dra Bush inför rätta, men dÃ¥ kommer Dick Cheney som är ännu värre. Man ska komma ihÃ¥g att den amerikanska administrationen är extremt farlig.

De tvekade inte att presentera gigantiska lögner för att gÃ¥ in i ett krig som hittills kostat 100 000-tals människors liv. De närmaste tvÃ¥ Ã¥ren kan vi bara be om att de inte gör vad de vill göra i Iran”.

———-
”Uppror i Irak. Al-Zarqawis heliga krig” recension ovan av nyutgiven bok av Loretta Napoleoni 50 Ã¥r, bosatt i London och verksam vid London School of Economics.

Sedan doktorsavhandlingen om Röda brigaderna har hon skrivit mycket om internationell terrorism, bland annat Modern jihad (på svenska Oheligt krig) och Terror Inc.

För tillfället uppdaterar hon sin skönlitterära debut Dossier Baghdad, där hon förlägger handlingen till Iran. ”The next enemy” ska boken heta. Dessutom skriver hon en fackbok om globaliseringens effekter pÃ¥ terrorismens ekonomi.

———
Secret death squads feared among Iraq’s commando

BAGHDAD, Iraq — Among the varied armed security men on Baghdad’s streets these days, you can’t miss the police commandos. In combat uniforms, bulletproof vests and wrap-around sunglasses or ski masks, they muscle through Baghdad’s traffic jams in police cars or camouflage-painted pickup trucks, clearing nervous drivers from their path with shouted commands and the occasional gunshot in the air.

The commandos are part of the Iraqi security forces that the Bush administration says will gradually replace American troops in this war. But the commandos are being blamed for a wave of kidnappings and executions around Baghdad since the spring.

One such group, the Volcano Brigade, is operating as a death squad — under the influence or control of Iraq’s most potent Shiite factional militia, the Iranian-backed Badr Organization, said several Iraqi government officials and western Baghdad residents.

In the past six months, Badr has heavily infiltrated the Interior Ministry under which the commandos operate, the sources said. Badr also was accused of running the secret Interior Ministry prison raided by U.S. troops.


About 2 a.m. on Aug. 23, men in Volcano Brigade uniforms and trucks rolled into the streets of Dolay, a mixed Sunni-Shiite neighborhood of western Baghdad, residents say. ”I got a call from my cousins” around the corner, said Ahmed Abu Yusuf, 33, an unemployed Sunni. ”They told me to stay hidden because the Volcano were in the streets, arresting Sunnis.”

For three hours, the raiders burst into Sunni homes, handcuffed dozens of men and loaded them into vans. They ended the assault and drove out of the neighborhood just before the dawn call to prayer, which would bring men into the streets, walking to the local mosques, Abu Yusuf said.

Two days later and 90 miles away, residents of the desert town of Badrah, near the Iranian border, found the bodies of 36 of the men in a gully, their hands still bound and their skulls shattered by bullets. Two were the cousins who had phoned him the warning, Abu Yusuf said.

The Volcano Brigade’s commander, Bassem Gharawi, has denied his force committed the massacre. But Shiite and Sunni Iraqis close to the unit, some of them high-ranking security officials, said it took part — whether on its own or with the Badr militia.

”No one can talk openly about the Volcanoes because we could easily be killed,” said a government official who discussed the matter in hushed tones this month in a corridor away from his office.

..
A buildup of Iraq’s army and police is deemed necessary to stabilize the country and ultimately will permit a U.S. withdrawal.

In the past year, the U.S. military has helped build up the commandos under guidance from James Steele, a former Army Special Forces officer who led US counterinsurgency efforts in El Salvador in the 1980s. Salvadoran army units trained by Steele’s team were accused of a pattern of atrocities.

The first commando units — the Lion Brigade, Scorpion Brigade and others — were formed last year under a Sunni interior minister, Falah Naqib, and include many Sunnis who worked in the repressive security organs of Saddam Hussein’s Baath party.

The Volcano Brigade was built up under the current, Shiite-led government and ”is mostly made of (Shiite) men from the Badr militia,” said a Shiite source close to the unit. Like most of a dozen people interviewed about the commandos, he asked not to be named for fear of being killed.

If this year’s buildup of commandos in Baghdad is helping stabilize the capital, that cannot be measured in the civilian death toll, which has been running 10 to 20 percent ahead of last year, according to the city’s morgue. The morgue cannot handle the daily river of bodies, so it declines to take those of bombing victims. Still, it gets 1,000 to 1,100 people killed by gunfire or other means each month.

In the first two years of the occupation, Sunni extremists dominated the violence among Iraqis, notably with suicide bombings that killed hundreds of Shiite worshippers at shrines and religious festivals. Following the Shiites’ domination of the election in January for an interim government, Shiites seem to have been striking back, notably in attacks on Sunnis in Baghdad neighborhoods such as Dolay, Iskan, Ur and Shaab.

Execution-style massacres are now routine. In the 11 weeks since the Dolay victims were discovered in the desert, at least 17 groups of apparent Baghdad residents — 158 men in all — have been found dumped in empty fields, back streets or at Baghdad’s sewage plant, most shot to death with their hands tied, according to a compilation of reports from news agencies and Iraq Body Count, an Internet-based voluntary organization that monitors civilian casualties.

Many are the victims of the Shiite-Sunni battles in western Baghdad and, according to news agency and Iraqi press accounts, scores of them had last been seen alive in the hands of men in police uniforms.

Interior Minister Bayan Jabr denies his ministry condones such killings and has said his ministry is investigating human-rights abuses by police. The U.S. government has ”not been satisfied with the results of these investigations,” a Western diplomat said, and is ”pressing to make them public to demonstrate that Iraq’s security forces cannot operate in a culture of impunity.”

Jabr is a leader of Iraq’s most powerful Shiite political party, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq. The party’s longtime military wing, the Badr militia, was formed in Iran as an adjunct to Iran’s hard-line Revolutionary Guards to help fight the 1980-88 war against Saddam Hussein’s Baathists.

Jabr took the interior minister’s post after SCIRI won big in January’s vote, and he quickly named SCIRI and Badr loyalists to key security positions, said Shiite and Sunni sources in the ministry.

”Each sector of the police” has Badr cells, said Salah Matlaq, a leading Sunni politician and foe of SCIRI. They form a parallel command structure within the ministry and ”are able to operate on their own,

using police cars, uniforms and weapons for Badr operations, while people in leadership positions can say, some of them truthfully, that they don’t know about it,” he said.

Sunni and Shiite officials in two government ministries that monitor the commandos’ work said Matlaq’s description was basically correct, and said Volcano is one of the units most penetrated by the Badr militia

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/032906J.shtml

An ”Alliance” of Violence
by Dahr Jamail
29 March 2006

A disturbing trend noticeable in Iraq for quite some time now is that each aggressive Israeli military operation in the occupied territories results in a corresponding increase in the number of attacks on US forces in Iraq.

One of the first instances of this was the assassination of Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin in March 2004 and the reaction it set off across Shia and Sunni, ultimately spiraling into the siege and devastation of Fallujah.

Fallujah is but one example one may use to demonstrate how the ongoing use of heavy handed tactics by the US-Israel alliance is proving to be as suicidal as it is homicidal. US troops in Iraq and Israeli civilians in their homes can bear testimony to this, as they are the ones who bear the brunt. Not to mention the collateral damage in Iraq.

May 17, 2004, Washington

Cofer Black, at the time Coordinator for Counterterrorism for the US State Department, in a talk at the 2004 Policy Conference for the American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), said that of all the nations cooperating with the US in the global war on terror, ”none [is] more stalwart than the state of Israel.”

He told the audience of the powerful lobby group that ”Our two great nations will stand together to fight terror” and deemed the US-Israel Joint Counterterrorism Group
(JCG) ”an important part of our counterterrorism partnership.”

May 10, 2004, Fallujah, Iraq

The first US siege of Fallujah ended in early May, 2004, and on May 10th US forces abandoned all control of the city, handing it back over to the Iraqis.

April 4, 2004, Fallujah, Iraq

US military directed to launch the first, and eventually failed, revenge assault in retaliation for the four Blackwater USA mercenaries killed on March 31st. The siege caused severe casualties among the people of Fallujah, killing 736 people, over 60% of whom were women, children and the elderly, according to the director of Fallujah General Hospital.

April 2, 2004, Iraq

Speaking on al-Manar TV, Muqtada al-Sadr pledged, ”From here I announce my solidarity with the genuine unity announced by Hezbollah general secretary Hassan Nasrallah with the mujahideen movement Hamas. Let them consider me their striking hand in Iraq whenever the need arises. As the martyr Sheikh Ahmed Yassin said, Iraq and Palestine have the same destiny.”

March 31, 2004, Fallujah, Iraq

Four Blackwater USA mercenaries killed in Fallujah in an attack avenging the assassination of Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. Nine days after the assassination, the bodies of four mercenaries from Blackwater USA were burned, chopped into pieces, dragged behind vehicles bearing posters of Sheikh Yassin, and finally put on display by being hung from a bridge.

Pamphlets were distributed at the scene which declared the attack against the four men as having been carried out in the name of Yassin. It was also reported by several Arab media outlets at the time that a group known as the ”Phalange of Sheikh Yassin” claimed responsibility for the attack, and that the deaths of the four men were meant as a ”gift to the Palestinian people.”

March 28, 2004, Baghdad, Iraq

The head of the CPA, Paul Bremer, ordered the closing of the al-Hawza newspaper, the mouthpiece of Muqtada al-Sadr. One of Sadr’s spokespeople, Sheikh Mahmud Sudani, told reporters at the time that al-Hawza had attracted censure because of its strong critique of the killing of Sheikh Yassin by Israeli forces. The closing of this paper was a primary factor that led to the first violent uprising called by Sadr against the occupiers.

March 26, 2004, Iraq

Four days after the assassination of Yassin, thousands of followers of the Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, carrying portraits both of Yassin and Sadr, demonstrated after Friday prayers in protest of Israel’s action by burning Israeli flags, chanting ”No, no to Israel” and ”No, no to occupation.”

In Najaf, an Imam with the extremely powerful political party the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) called for demonstrations outside the revered Imam Ali mosque. Similar demonstrations were also held as far north as the city of Mosul.

The demonstration began promptly after it was ordered, with protesters
shouting, ”Death to Israel, death to America.” Other demonstrations continued across Iraq daily for weeks after the assassination, denouncing Israel’s actions. Even US-appointed puppets in Iraq’s Interim Governing Council expressed grave concerns that the killing of Yassin, who was highly respected throughout the Arab world, would escalate violence in Iraq. This concern materialized within hours, as blood began to flow throughout central and southern Iraq.

On the same day Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who commands more followers than any leader in Iraq, political or spiritual, released an unusually staunch statement of criticism, referring to the assassination of Yassin as ”an ugly crime against the Palestinian people” with an injunction, ”We call upon the core of the Arab and Islamic nations to close ranks, unite and work hard for the liberation of the usurped land.”

March 22, 2004, Gaza

While he was being wheeled out of his morning prayer session in his wheelchair on March 22, 2004, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin was assassinated by US-built Hellfire missiles fired by a US-built helicopter piloted by members of the Israeli military. The quadriplegic elder die along with two of his bodyguards and six bystanders. The half-blind Hamas leader was replaced by his son Rantissi, who was also murdered shortly after his father, on April 17th.

There was a clear connection between events in Gaza and what these generated in Iraq.

This act of state-sponsored terrorism by the Israeli government was opposed even by British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, who said, ”It [Israel] is not entitled to go in for this kind of unlawful killing and we condemn it. It is unacceptable, it is unjustified and it is very unlikely to achieve its objectives.”

Reaction from the United States? The usual feeble inauthentic mumblings of ”We condemn this attack.” Once again actions spoke far louder than words when the US vetoed a UN resolution condemning Yassin’s assassination.

Cofer Black later became Vice President of Blackwater USA, the erstwhile employer of the four mercenaries killed in Fallujah.

The ongoing alliance of unbridled and unbalanced military aid flowing into Israel from the US has gone unchallenged for years. ”Since 1976, Israel has been the largest annual recipient of US foreign assistance, and is the largest cumulative recipient since World War II,” according to an Issue Brief for Congress from 2002.

This US military support to Israel has caused, especially in Iraq, an incredible backlash against US troops and contractors. This is not helped by the fact that much of this aid comes in the form of weapons. Israel is one of the largest importers of weapons from the US, and in the last decade alone, Israel purchased

$7.2 billion in weapons and other military equipment. As a result, Israel is now the proud owner of the largest fleet of F-16 fighter jets outside of the United States.

I found it to be common knowledge in Iraq that, during the last six years of the Clinton presidency, the US gave Israel free weapons and ammunition, such as M-16 rifles, grenade launchers, .50 caliber machine guns and the ammunition for all of them.

The reputation of the US in the region has been further demolished both by the failed occupation of Iraq and by its perpetual support for Israeli policies, generally viewed with contempt throughout the Arab and Muslim world. The ongoing violations of international law by both countries don’t exactly assist matters either.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who had given the ”green light” for the Yassin operation, monitored its progress in real-time video transmitted from the Israeli military helicopters. His ecstasy was accompanied by complete dismissal of all international criticism.

Ask any US military commanders how they feel about the deaths of US soldiers in Iraq generated by revenge attacks in reaction to Israeli military policy against Palestinians. The consensus is an overwhelming thumbs down regarding the effectiveness of the strategy. One could ask the families of the four Blackwater USA mercenaries who were killed in Fallujah on March 31, 2004, as well.

The four men were killed in a revenge attack that had twofold causes – reports had been coming out of Fallujah for months about assassinations, rape and thefts carried out by ”plain clothed” men working for the US military. But more pertinent to this particular attack is the date on which it occurred.

I remember seeing photos of Sheikh Yassin in several areas of Baghdad and Abu Ghraib while both entering and exiting Fallujah on April 9 and 10, during the US attack on the city. The photos of the slain Hamas leader were pasted on the sides of cars, trucks, roadside food stalls and even some houses.

It would appear that Cofer Black had left Israeli Prime Minister Sharon out of the cooperation loop of his counterterrorism strategy, as the Israeli military was being instructed by Sharon to carry out operations that engendered severe repercussions in Iraq and took the form, and continue to take the form, of dead American soldiers.

Not so coincidentally, less than a year after the first siege of Fallujah, on Feb 4, 2005, Cofer Black was named Vice-Chairman of Blackwater USA. The press release proudly announced his arrival in the company’s leadership, asserting that during his time in the State Department Black’s responsibilities included ”coordinating US Government efforts to improve counterterrorism cooperation with foreign governments, including the policy and planning of the Department’s Antiterrorism Training Assistance Program.”

Is it perhaps possible that despite a 28-year career in the Directorate of Operations at the CIA, Black was unaware of Sharon’s plans to murder Yassin, or was unable to stop it, or most likely, approved of this methodology?

The latter possibility seems most likely when we consider the instances of direct Israeli involvement with US policy on the ground in Iraq that have long since come to light.

”One step the Pentagon took was to seek active and secret help in the war against the Iraqi insurgency from Israel, America’s closest ally in the Middle East,” wrote Seymor Hersh in the New Yorker

in December, 2003, ”According to American and Israeli military and intelligence
officials, Israeli commandos and intelligence units have been working closely with their American counterparts at the Special Forces training base at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, and in Israel to help them prepare for operations in Iraq.”

Israeli commandos are expected to serve as ad-hoc advisers – again, in secret – when full-field operations begin. Neither the Pentagon nor Israeli diplomats would comment. ”No one wants to talk about this,” an Israeli official told me. ”It’s incendiary. Both governments have decided at the highest level that it is in their
interests to keep a low profile on US-Israeli cooperation” on Iraq.”

Hersh also told the BBC that his sources had confirmed the presence of Israeli intelligence personnel operating inside Iraq.

During that same month, it was reported that Israeli counter-insurgency specialists were sent to Fort Bragg to teach American special forces how to control an unruly Iraqi population. Also during December 2003, it was reported that ”Israeli advisers are helping train US special forces in aggressive counter-insurgency operations in Iraq, including the use of assassination squads against guerrilla leaders, US intelligence and military sources said on Monday,” and ”The

Israeli Defense Force (IDF) has sent urban warfare specialists to Fort Bragg in North Carolina, the home of US special forces, and according to two sources, Israeli
military ”consultants” have also visited Iraq. US forces in Iraq’s Sunni triangle have already begun to use tactics that echo Israeli operations in the occupied territories, sealing off centers of resistance with razor wire and razing buildings from where attacks have been launched against US troops.”

Iraqis are all too aware of this, and I even saw this played out on the ground in Samarra as far back as December 2003. I interviewed a family whosehome was demolished
by military bulldozers after a roadside bomb detonated near it hit a passing US patrol.

This, coupled with collective punishment of the city by cuts in electricity, water and medical aid, had everyone infuriated, and continues to do so today as these policies gain in scale, frequency and intensity.

These collective punishment tactics have been imposed, to one degree or another, in other cities in Iraq, such as Fallujah, Abu Hishma, Siniyah, Ramadi, areas of Baghdad, Balad and Baquba, to name just a few. Iraqis see the collective punishment meted out by Israeli military forces in Palestinian neighborhoods in the occupied territories via Arab satellite television networks, and are horrified to witness the very same tactics being applied on their soil.

Another destructive link highlighting the intertwined policies of the two countries is Abu Ghraib. In July 2004, after the torture scandal broke, Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, the US officer at the heart of the Abu Ghraib scandal, told BBC she had evidence that Israelis helped interrogate Iraqis at another detention facility in Iraq.

Karpinski told the BBC she’d met a man who told her he was from Israel while she was visiting an intelligence center with a senior US general. ”I saw an individual there that I hadn’t had the opportunity to meet before, and I asked him what did he do there, was he an interpreter – he was clearly from the Middle East,” she said. ”He said, ‘Well, I do some of the interrogation here. I speak Arabic but I’m not an Arab; I’m from Israel.’”

I’ve spoken with several Iraqis who had been tortured in various military detention facilities throughout Iraq. Several of them testified to being interrogated by Israeli Mossad (an Israeli intelligence agency).

Another event that sent shock-waves throughout Iraq was the news from December 2004 that detainees in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, were tortured and, according to FBI agents
, one detainee was wrapped in an Israeli flag and subjected to extremely loud music in order to shake his resistance to his interrogation.

It is clear that the longer the two countries continue with the use of their brute military power as the prime strategy in their war on terrorism, the greater grows the threat to the civilians they claim to protect.

http://www.chris-floyd.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=285&Itemid=
Mogadishu on the Tigris: The Reality of Bush’s Iraq, 16 November 2005

The Independent provides more depth and perspective to the breaking story about the Iraqi torture chamber uncovered yesterday: Raid on torture dungeon exposes Iraq’s secret war.

Some excerpts from The Independent: Yesterday, 24 hours later, the Prime Minister, Ibrahim Jaafari, promised an investigation after the shocking demonstration of how paramilitary units working for the government, and death squads allegedly linked to it, are waging a savage war in the shadows.

People are arrested and disappear for months. Bodies appear every week of men, and sometimes women, executed with their hands tied behind their backs. Some have been grotesquely mutilated with knives and electric drills before their deaths.

The paramilitaries are not held responsible for all the deaths – some are the work of insurgents murdering supposed informers or government officials, or killing for purely sectarian motives.

You very seldom see American soldiers on the streets of Baghdad now. The Iraqi police are in evidence outside, but so are increasing numbers of militias running their own checkpoints – men in balaclavas or wrap-around sunglasses and headbands, with leather mittens and an array of weapons. An American official acknowledged: ”It is getting more and more like Mogadishu every day.”

Travelling through the Iraqi capital you meet Muqtada al-Sadr’s Mehdi army; fellow Shias from the Badr Brigade; the Kurdish peshmerga; as well as Western and Iraqi security guards.

Then there are Iraqi soldiers and policemen, government paramilitaries, special police commandos and a group which prides itself on being the most feared, the Wolf Brigade of the interior ministry.

Many of the allegations from Sunni leaders of abuse are against the 2,000-strong Wolf Brigade, which was formed in October 2004 after training with US forces and first saw action during the widespread disturbances in Mosul last year…

Although the US forces had ridden to the rescue on this occasion, many of these units have been created, trained and armed by the Americans. According to reports, $3bn (£1.7bn) out of an $87bn Iraq appropriation that Congress approved last year was earmarked for the creation of paramilitary units to fight the insurgency.

Vincent Cannistraro, the CIA’s former head of counter-terrorism, said: ”They set up little teams of [Navy] Seals and special forces with teams of Iraqis, working with people who were in senior intelligence under the Saddam regime.”

Iraqi politicians in the new regime have repeatedly accused the CIA of refusing to hand over control of the recreated Iraqi intelligence service to the Iraqi government, and the paramilitaries are run by Adnan Thabit, allegedly a former CIA ”asset”.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2092574,00.html
MI5 ‘helped IRA buy bomb parts in US’:

A FORMER British Army mole in the IRA has claimed that MI5 arranged a weapons-buying trip to America in which he obtained detonators, later used by terrorists to murder soldiers and police officers.

In a book to be published next month, the spy, who uses the pseudonym Kevin Fulton, describes in detail how British intelligence co-operated with the FBI to ensure his trip to New York in the 1990s went ahead without incident so that his cover would not be blown.

He claims the technology he obtained has been used in Northern Ireland and copied by terrorists in Iraq in roadside bombs that have killed British troops.

In the book, Unsung Hero, Fulton tells of his double life in which he had to play a convincing IRA man while working for the British. “You cannot pretend to be a terrorist,” said Fulton, who now lives outside Northern Ireland. “I had to be able to do the exact same thing as the IRA man next to me. Otherwise I wouldn’t be there.”

His allegations that the security services helped to obtain weapons that killed their own members follow revelations about British infiltration of terrorist groups and collusion in paramilitary killings.

The issue has been the subject of investigations by Lord Stevens, the former Metropolitan police commissioner.

Fulton’s book will include claims from his own experience that MI5 and the Special Branch of the Royal Ulster Constabulary colluded in the murder of their own officers and soldiers and allowed agents to be killed.

Fulton, a married Catholic now in his forties, was serving in the army when he was recruited by military intelligence to infiltrate the IRA. He later worked for the Force Research Unit, a covert branch of the Intelligence Corps set up to infiltrate paramilitary groups.

For 13 years Fulton was an IRA terrorist, involved first in courier runs, later as a driver and enforcer, and finally as a master bomb-maker in a unit in Newry, Co Down, credited with numerous advances in explosive technologies. “I was recruited as a serving British soldier,” he said. “I was in the Royal Irish Rangers. I agreed to go into the IRA as a soldier.”

Security sources have said Fulton was implicated in numerous bombings and shootings, allegations on which he declines to comment. He has said his handlers knew the nature of his role but ignored his warnings of forthcoming bomb attacks, including the Omagh atrocity, which killed 29 people in 1998.

Fulton and four other members of his unit in Newry pioneered the use of flash guns to detonate bombs. This technology was used in a bomb that killed Colleen McMurray, an RUC officer, in 1992. Her colleague Paul Slaine lost both his legs in the attack. He was later awarded the George Cross for his bravery.

Fulton claims he tipped off his handlers about this attack but they allowed it to go ahead to protect agents. “Two days before the attack on Slaine and McMurray I knew my officer commanding was using what we called a doodlebug, a horizontal mortar” he said.

“I told my MI5 handlers and they took me to London for two days. The day I came back the bomb went off. The police were taken off the streets to allow the bomber to get in, set the device and get out.”

The trip to America came after the killing of McMurray, when the IRA had built sufficient trust in Fulton for commanders to send him abroad to buy remote control infrared devices that would allow IRA teams to refine the flash technique and detonate explosives from up to a mile away.

When he told his MI5 handlers about the mission, they arranged with the FBI to procure the detonators for Fulton.

In this month’s edition of Atlantic Monthly, Fulton outlines how an MI5 agent was sent ahead of him by Concorde to make preparations. He has also described the trip in interviews with The Sunday Times over the past few months.

In New York he attended a meeting with FBI agents and British intelligence officers. There he agreed to expose IRA operatives in America to the FBI. However, the same terrorists, who were arrested months later, were first allowed to procure and send the infrared technology to the IRA. Fulton claims this technology was used in the Troubles and forms the basis for insurgent bombs in Iraq.

A spokesman for the security service declined to comment.

Torture and Task Force 121 :
March 27, 2006
By Sarah Meyer
http://indexresearch.blogspot.com/2006/03/torture-and-task-force-121.html
The CIA Paramilitary are not considered as ‘part of the armed forces,’ are therefore exempt from the Geneva conventions,” i.e. not governed by the laws of war. “The Special Activities Staff (SAS) is one of the least known covert units operating on behalf of the US Government.”

26 mars, 2006

Ockupation och sekterism- läsvärd analys om Irak

Filed under: nya — ingrid @ 01:14



Iraq: Occupation and Sectarianism
by Ghali Hassan feb 23, 2006
www.GlobalResearch.ca

At the outset of the Occupation, it was clear that the U.S. would rule Iraq by breaking the country into mini states or regions and dividing the Iraqi population on ethnic and sectarian lines.

The Occupation-orchestrated violence between Iraqis was meant to provide a pretext for the long-term occupation of Iraq, and direct Iraqis anger away from the brutality and violence of the Occupation.

While on his recent unannounced (secretly sneak in) visit to Baghdad, Jack Straw, the British Foreign Secretary echoed the comment of the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq. Straw said “we are keen to see these two departments [defence and interior] in the hands of competent people, probably technocrats”, some one like Ahmed Chalabi or Iyad Allawi.

The comment had nothing to do with stopping the violence in Iraqi but much to do with the exercise of total US control on the Iraqi army and police. The latter could then be used against opponents of the Occupation.

Indeed, those who are involved in violence against Iraqis are working hand-in-glove with the occupying forces. Jack Straw is in Iraq to perpetuate more violence and more bloodshed.

It started with the deliberate destruction and dismantling of the Iraqi State, and the appointment on July 13, 2003 of the so-called Iraq Governing Council by U.S. Proconsul L. Paul Bremer.

The appointees – mostly expatriate quislings – were deliberately chosen and identified according to ethnic and sectarian criteria. They were encouraged and promoted to compete for power and positions.

Moreover, Paul Bremer initiated the criminal process of “De-Baathification”, which implied the liquidation of anyone associated with the Ba’ath Party as well as anyone with anti-Occupation nationalist views. “De-Baathification” is simply a murderous tool for inciting violence and destroying Iraqi society.

To cement these divisions within Iraqi society, the U.S. and its allies staged illegitimate and fraudulent elections. The latter were designed to establish sectarianism – not ‘democracy’ – as well as legitimise the Occupation.

Iraqis were promoted and encouraged to vote based on their religious and ethnic affiliations. Both the electoral system and the methods of voter mobilization applied by major players were meant to fan the flames of sectarianism rather than contribute to national unity and liberation.

There were no candidates or political parties with political ideologies, just religious and ethnic slates. In addition, the U.S.-drafted Constitution was there to cement and legitimise these various divisions. One wonders why Britain and the U.S. do not have the same ‘democratic’ system at home.

Another U.S. trigger for civil strife and security chaos in Iraq was the deliberate and criminal act of dissolving the Iraqi army and security forces and replacing them with ethnic and sectarian-based militias.

U.S.-trained militia, Iranian-trained militia and Israeli-trained Kurdish Peshmerga form the bulk of the new Iraqi army and police. Their lack of loyalty to the Iraqi nation as well as the rivalries and hostilities between these various militia ultimately serve the interests of U.S. forces.

These paramilitary groups are deployed to fight their Iraqi brothers belonging to different ethnic areas. This process thereby served to create ethnic tension and division.

Together with U.S. forces, the Peshmerga militia continue to perform arbitrary arrests, they are involved in brutal treatment of civilians, violations of residents’ rights and the theft of properties.

They are responsible for acts of deliberate ethnic cleansing in the regions of Tel Afar, Kirkuk and Mosul. It is all part of a U.S. policy of creating sectarian violence which eventually will lead to “civil war” and circumstances which will be used to justify the ongoing Occupation.

Furthermore, death squads trained and armed by the Occupation forces are torturing and murdering innocent Iraqis, including prominent Iraqi politicians, nationalist leaders, Iraqi academics and professionals. Even Iraqis who participated in the 1980s war to defend Iraq against the Iran are being targeted. The thugs are eliminating all those who are opposed to the Occupation.

This deliberate violence, which has swept Iraq since the invasion, has largely contributed to the disintegration of Iraqi society. This murderous campaign is based on the “El Salvador Option” – a U.S-created and financed ”civil war” in El Salvador in the 1980s.

The El Salvador Option was replicated in Iraq by John Negroponte. It has the full approval of the White House. Its aim is to terrorise the Iraqi population and enforce the Occupation.

Thousands of innocent Iraqis have been murdered in cold blood. A report by an Iraqi human rights group, Monitoring Net of Human Rights in Iraq noted that:

“Iraqi police sources revealed that till the end of March 2004 more than 1,000 Iraqi scientists were shot. A report, which was previously published by the U.S. State Department, confirmed the killing of 350 scientists specialized in nuclear science and 200 professors”.

After the recent criminal attack on the Askariyah shrine in Samarra – which has never been attacked for centuries –, all Iraqis without exception have condemned the attack. “This is a terrorist act that is aimed to fan a sectarian strife among Iraqis”, said Sheikh Ahmed Daye, member of the Sunni Association of Muslim Scholars.

The Occupation-appointed president Jalal Talabani said: “We are facing a major conspiracy that is targeting Iraq’s unity. We should all stand hand in hand to prevent the danger of a civil war”.

Others in the puppet government have pointed the finger at the U.S. Ambassador in Baghdad for inciting the violence and for interfering in Iraqi political and domestic affairs. Thousands of ordinary Iraqis took to the streets throughout Iraq denouncing the U.S. and Israel.

Samarra is like Fallujah. U.S. forces have attacked the Resistance city several times, and Donald Rumsfeld has threatened the city with destruction unless it surrenders.

Iraqis believe that the attack is a pretext for the U.S. forces to invade the city. The attack was not something new; similar attacks were perpetuated against other Iraqi cities in the past. These attacks were well-orchestrated to provoke one group of Iraqis against the other, and bring in U.S. forces as “peace brokers”.

Immediately after the attack on the Askariyah shrine, violence erupted in several localities in Iraq. Only the U.S. and Britain stand to benefit from the violence and bloodshed.

Iraqi sources argue that U.S. and British forces and their collaborators are behind every major sectarian killing and kidnapping in the country. After every act of killing of civilians, a specific Iraqi community is deliberately blamed for the violence.

“[W]e have widespread evidence that the outside forces are attempting to instigate a civil war here and Iraqis are conscious of that and have made determined effort not to respond to it”, said Dr. Saad Jawad, a political scientist at Baghdad University.

The arrest by Iraqi Police last September of two British undercover soldiers identified as “SAS elite special forces” and disguised as Arabs planning to detonate explosives-packed car in the centre of Basra was a case of Western perpetuated terrorism.

Bush and Blair have often used the pretext of preventing “civil war” to counter Iraqi demands for troops’ withdrawal. It is the old colonial cliché: The more the natives are divided, the easier to rule them and exploit them.

These diviisions are not internal. We are not dealing with ”an internal problem”: it is a Western-created problem. The war on Iraq is an act of aggression responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi men, women and children.

It consitutes a war crime committed to enhance U.S.-Israel domination of the Middle East and seize control of Iraq’s oil reserves.

The sectarian violence in Iraq has been deliberately created by the U.S. and Britain. Iraqis have overwhelmingly rejected the presence of foreign occupying forces.

The only way to end the violence is to respect the wishes of the Iraqi people by implementing a full and immediate withdrawal of foreign forces from Iraq.

23 mars, 2006

VittnesmÃ¥l här hos oss frÃ¥n Irak – Falluja

Filed under: nya — ingrid @ 14:11

OM USA:s massförstörelse av städer och den humanitära situationen i Irak

INTERVJU i Falluja 6 maj 2005 med Mr Muhamad Tareq, chefen för Centret för Mänskliga Rättigheter och Demokrati i Falluja utifrån att han och Dr Entisar Mohammad Ariabi, chefsfarmakolog på Jamouksjukhuset i Bagdad, besökte oss i Göteborg den 3 april 2006.

”Detta Center bildades den 18 januari 2004 pÃ¥ initiativ av vissa intellektuella här i Falluja. Det skulle representera befolkningens känslor och tankar och dokumentera de övergrepp som stadens invÃ¥nare utsattes för frÃ¥n ockupationsmaktens sida. De amerikanska soldaterna invaderade ocksÃ¥ vÃ¥rt eget kontor och förstörde inventarierna. De eldade upp papper och dokument, som för dem inte innebar nÃ¥gon fara. Vi förstod egentligen aldrig varför de utsatte kontoret för detta.

Men så upptäckte vi den enorma förödelse hela staden utsatts för. Frågan är varför. I början var Falluja en av de första städerna här i landet som visade upp en vilja att samarbeta med den patriotiska regeringen och förklarade att man inte ville ha med ockupationsmakten att göra. Om vi samarbetade med militär och polis skulle de representera regeringen. När invånarna önskade en fredlig lösning på konflikten tog man därför hit regeringens representanter för att diskutera saken.

Problemet var, att inte ens regeringen kunde göra något, trots att man fått till stånd ett tre dagars uppskov för att komma fram till en lösning. Dåvarande premiärministern Allawi spelade en stor roll för att underminera det hela.Han ställde omöjliga krav på att vi skulle lämna över Al Zarkawi levande till amerikanarna. Vi å vår sida visste inte var Al Zarkawi befann sig eller om han över huvud taget existerade.

Det var alltså omöjliga krav som ockupationsmakten ställde som intäkt för att angripa staden. Och det verkade beordrat uppifrån. Ändå måste vi erkänna attförsvarsministern Al Sachani verkade ha en vilja att lösa situationen på ett fredligt sätt. Så vi betraktar det som något de planerat sedan en lång tid tillbaka. Nu sedan vi återvänt efter bombningarna upplevde vi denna enorm förödelse.

Måga, många delar av staden var helt förstörda, vilket tyder på att där förekommit stora grymheter och övervåld från ockupationsmaktens sida. Då allt var var klart och man lät folk komma tillbaka, angavs antalet dödade till 1200 personer.

Vi själva kunde räkna kropparna som lÃ¥g utspridda till 400. Vi frÃ¥gade därför var resten fanns. De svarade att ungefär 400 lÃ¥g förvarade i kylrum och i olika containrar. ”Men det saknas fortfarande 4-500 personer”, pÃ¥pekade vi. VittnesmÃ¥l hade emellertid framkommit frÃ¥n familjer som överlevt. om massgravar efter summariska
avrättningar

Vi kunde identifiera en massgrav nära moskén och det fanns även andra mindre massgravar runtom i hela staden. Problemet var att de som tvingats vara kvar under bombningarna inte vågade anmäla sina försvunna familjemedlemmar av rädsla för repressalier. Vi misstänkte därför att det i dessa massgravar kunde finnas en hel del av de försvunna personerna. Men det är en omöjlig uppgift med våra begränsade resurser att hinna med att identifiera och rapportera alla försvinnanden. Ändå gör vi så gott vi kan.

En av the Guardiens journalister kom hit och filmade masslakten nära moskén och visade en del på TV. Vi uppskattar antalet civila dödade till 2500-3000 hittills. Men vi har ett omöjligt arbete framför oss. Detta att identifiera varje enskilt namn och få varje familj att ange sina försvunna medlemmar. Vi lever ju i en ohållbar situation och många känner sig inte säkra. Det gör arbetet mycket, mycket svårt.

Bakrunden till händelserna i Falluja och många andra städer där ockupationsmakten sett ett motstånd är, att en invasion redan från början förberetts mot dessa platser Ockupationsmakten säger att där förekommit många terroristaktioner, som de vill sätta stopp för. Man bildar då en kommitté i staden med representanter för regeringen och vissa klanledare och andra kända personligheter. Den ger man sedan en viss tid på sig att lösa frågan, annars anfaller man staden.

När det gäller Falluja började ockupationsmakten i sista stund ställa omöjliga krav om att utlämna Zarkawi levande. Annars skulle staden få ta konsekvenserna och bli anfallen. Men detta var en helt omöjlig uppgift, eftersom ingen vet om några sådana här figurer över huvud taget existerar.

De flesta tror att de är fantomfigurer skapade av ockupationsmakten för attlegitimera en invasion. Stadens representanter svarade därför att det hela var en omöjlig uppgift. Men om regeringen ville skicka sina soldater-och poliser för att leta igenom staden skulle man å sin sida hjälpa till och ställa upp med egna motsvarande resurser.

Då kom ockupationsmakten tillbaka med omöjliga krav om att staden hade 2-3 dagar på sig att ordna saken. Under tiden hade de också hunnit förbereda sig väldigt väl. Man hade omringat staden och deras satelliter finkammade den dygnet runt för att se vilka aktiviteter som försiggick. Samtidigt förklarade stadens representanter oupphörligt att de önskade lösa det hela på ett fredligt sätt.

Till slut sa ockupationsmakten -”Nu har tiden runnit ut eftersom ni inte velat uppfylla vÃ¥ra krav.” Det var alltsÃ¥ en ren teater frÃ¥n första stund frÃ¥n deras sida för att kväsa motstÃ¥ndet i varje stad, om de nu fann nÃ¥got. Sedan ställde de till med denna förödelse här i staden och dödade allra minst 2500-3000 människor.

De sa att de hittat vapenförråd som tillhört terroristerna.i vissa områdenDe kan självklart kalla det vad de vill. Men staden Falluja har visat motstånd mot ockupationen och från första stund förklarat, att man inte önkar ha några utländska trupper på sin jord. Då är det heller inte konstigt om amerikanarna har hittat vapenförråd.

Samtidigt har soldaterna sagt att de hittat 25 dödade araber i Falluja. Men om vi jämför dessa siffror med de 1200 dödade som amerikanarna uppgett, är detta ändå bara en bråkdel i sammanhanget och inte skäl nog att utsätta hela staden för förödelse och döda så många människor.

Dessutom måste man definiera vad man menar med ordet terrorist. Är det sådana som gör motstånd mot ockupationen? Enligt Genevekonventionen är en terrorist någon som ger sig på civila mål och dödar civila. Dessutom betraktar många araber Irak som en del av Arabvärlden och försvarar Irak som om det vore deras eget land. Det är därför inte konstigt om det funnits araber i Irak som kämpat mot ockupationen.

(anmIT: För tiotals år sedan invandrade stora mängder araber från bl.a Egypten till Irak fr.a för arbete i jordbruket. Idag har dessutom tiotusentals mer eller mindre kriminella krigare från Kurdistan eller Iran tagit sig in i Irak för diverse obskyra uppdrag eller som medlemmar i olika miliser)

De allra flesta dödade vi sett är civila människor, alltsÃ¥ familjer som i sina hem utsatts för massivt artilleri och flygbombningar och dÃ¥ hamnat under rasmassorna. Vi har sett dessa angrepp pÃ¥ civila och skickat in mÃ¥nga rapporter om det och de förbjudna vapnen till FN och andra internationella organ. FN sände dÃ¥ hit en egen delegation och en frÃ¥n WHO. Men ockupationsmakten förbjöd dessa att komma hit in. Det tyder pÃ¥, att man inte vill att omvärlden skall fÃ¥ reda pÃ¥ de grymheter som stadens invÃ¥nare utsatts för, vilka idag har det mycket, mycket svÃ¥rt.”

För de människor som flytt från Falluja och nu lever utanför stadsgränserna och vill ta sig in i staden, kan det ta upp till två dagar, såvida de inte äger några särskilda skäl. Själv har jag tillstånd från de irakiska myndigheterna att komma in för att uträtta mitt arbete. Ändå tar det 6-7 tim upp till en hel dag i anspråk. Detta är alltså ett omöjligt liv både för dom som bor innanför och dom utanför staden.

Vi kan heller inte röra oss fritt, för det är i stort sett undantagstillstånd hela tiden och folk kan inte vara ute på kvällarna. Ungefär 300 ärenden skickade vi för en månad sedan till det amerikanska rättsväsendet med krav på kompensation. Men det har inte hänt någonting och kommer väl heller aldrig att hända. De vägrar att göra något i dessa ärenden utan säger bara att det finns en överenskommelse, och att ärendet ligger hos den irakiska regeringen. Denna å sin sida säger att frågan tillhör ockupationsmaktens ansvar.

Så svaret på frågan om det irakiska folket kan bli vän med det amerikanska är: Ja, självklart kan vi det. Vi har hela tiden sagt att vi vill vara vän med alla folk. Vi vill inte ha några problem med någon. Det är vi som är invaderade, ockuperade och utsatta. Men för att vi skall kunna bli vän med det amerikanska folket, måste dom först och främst göra sig av med den hjärntvätt deras media dagligen utsätter dom för.

Vi har hört att det amerikanska folket är ett civiliserat folk som propagerar och kämpar för frihet och demokrati i världen. Det är motsatsen till vad vi ser idag av övergrepp och brott mot i stort sett alla normer och mänskliga rättigheter. Vi säger därför till det amerikanska folket att vi gärna är vänner med er. Förutsättningen är att ni beordrar er regering att dra tillbaka sina trupper frÃ¥n vÃ¥rt land. Vi kan inte acceptera detta – det mÃ¥ste stÃ¥ väldigt tydligt och klart. Vi vill leva i fred med hela världen, men accepterar inte att ockuperas och bli utsatta för dessa grymheter.”

Fler intervjuer från Falluja den 6 maj 2005 finner ni på http://ingrid-ternert.blogspot.com

20 mars, 2006

Efter tre Ã¥rs helvete – Riverbend, Lindeborg/Wijk om Västs stöd till fundamentalismen

Filed under: nya — ingrid @ 13:24

War is hell http://www.pennyallen.info/
http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/
Three Years…(utdrag)

It has been three years since the beginning of the war that marked the end of Iraq’s independence. Three years of occupation and bloodshed.

Spring should be about renewal and rebirth. For Iraqis, spring has been about reliving painful memories and preparing for future disasters. In many ways, this year is like 2003 prior to the war when we were stocking up on fuel, water, food and first aid supplies and medications.

We’re doing it again this year but now we don’t discuss what we’re stocking up for. Bombs and B-52′s are so much easier to face than other possibilities.

I don’t think anyone imagined three years ago that things could be quite this bad today. The last few weeks have been ridden with tension. I’m so tired of it all- we’re all tired.

Three years and the electricity is worse than ever. The security situation has gone from bad to worse. The country feels like it’s on the brink of chaos once more- but a pre-planned, pre-fabricated chaos being led by religious militias and zealots…..

I’m especially worried about the Arba3eeniya this year. I’m worried we’ll see more of what happened to the Askari mosque in Samarra. Most Iraqis seem to agree that the whole thing was set up by those who had most to gain by driving Iraqis apart.

I’m sitting here trying to think what makes this year, 2006, so much worse than 2005 or 2004. It’s not the outward differences- things such as electricity, water, dilapidated buildings, broken streets and ugly concrete security walls. Those things are disturbing, but they are fixable. Iraqis have proved again and again that countries can be rebuilt. No- it’s not the obvious that fills us with foreboding.

The real fear is the mentality of so many people lately- the rift that seems to have worked it’s way through the very heart of the country, dividing people. It’s disheartening to talk to acquaintances- sophisticated, civilized people- and hear how Sunnis are like this, and Shia are like that… To watch people pick up their things to move to “Sunni neighborhoods” or “Shia neighborhoods”. How did this happen?

I read constantly analyses mostly written by foreigners or Iraqis who’ve been abroad for decades talking about how there was always a divide between Sunnis and Shia in Iraq (which, ironically, only becomes apparent when you’re not actually living amongst Iraqis they claim)… but how under a dictator, nobody saw it or nobody wanted to see it.

That is simply not true- if there was a divide, it was between the fanatics on both ends. The extreme Shia and extreme Sunnis. Most people simply didn’t go around making friends or socializing with neighbors based on their sect. People didn’t care- you could ask that question, but everyone would look at you like you were silly and rude….

http://www.aftonbladet.se/vss/kultur/story/0,2789,795068,00.html
Kolonialkrigets kolportörer….(utdrag)

Irak i torsdags: USA inleder en ny offensiv mot ”rebeller” norr om Bagdad. Samma dag offentliggjordes en ny säkerhetspolitisk strategi med Iran i fokus.

För tre år sedan inleddes återkoloniseringen av Irak genom USA:s och Storbritanniens militära angrepp. Sedan dess har vi vant oss vid dagliga rapporter om våld och misär i det ockuperade landet. Det irakiska folkets motstånd har lagt grus i det amerikanska krigsmaskineriet och i USA växer antikrigsrörelsen. Sverige, liksom övriga Europa, upplevde rekordstora protester före kriget och först på sistone har besvikelsen ersatts av ett förnyat engagemang

Vi som då demonstrerade mot kriget hånades som Saddam-anhängare, förblindade av USA-hat. Dagens Nyheters ledarskribent Maria Carlshamre fann förfärande likheter mellan fredsvännerna och Brezjnev (16/2 -03).

Expressens politiska redaktör PM Nilsson hittade en tysk parallell till argumentet att Iraks olja lÃ¥g bakom USA:s krigshunger: ”nazistregimen hade exakt samma förklaring till Englands och USA:s inblandning i andra världskriget” (2/2 -03).

Jackie Jakubowski menade att demonstranterna drevs av ett USA-hat som har samma anatomi som antisemitismen (Judisk krönika nr 2/2003)….

Vi vill inte förtiga att enstaka liberaler – av det utrotningshotade socialliberala släktet – redan frÃ¥n början var kritiska till kriget. Barbro Hedvall gjorde för Arena hösten 2003 en svidande vidräkning med bombliberalerna – som ekade ohörd. Det är symptomatiskt att hon inte nämner Irak i sin egen tidning, DN.

MÃ¥nga opinionsbildare har pÃ¥ liberalers vis haft svÃ¥rt att principfast ta ställning; nervöst ändrar de sig frÃ¥n en stund till annan. Henrik Berggren tror ”inte ett ögonblick pÃ¥ att USA vill bli en ny kolonialmakt” – historiskt sett har kolonialismen visserligen ofta ”drivits av goda avsikter” – men trots det, skriver han, finns det risk att ”den goda utopin kan bli nykolonial” (DN 20/4 -03)….

SvD:s politiske chefredaktör PJ Anders Linder uttrycker det som att ”insatserna efter invasionen har lämnat mycket övrigt att önska” men ”det är mycket angeläget att Bush idag gÃ¥r mot sin hemmaopinion och klargör att det inte är aktuellt med forcerad reträtt.” (20/1 -05)….

Hösten 2005 bäddar Peter Englund in sig pÃ¥ en amerikansk bas i Irak, varifrÃ¥n han onekligen rapporterar i nattmössan. Det finns tvÃ¥ slags bomber i Irak, undervisar han DN:s läsare: ”dem som smäller inne i städerna och mest bara massakrerar oskyldiga” och ”dem som smäller ute längs vägarna och vars mÃ¥ltavlor är amerikanska soldater”.

Vi tvingas ofint pÃ¥peka att det finns ett tredje slags bomber i Irak. Bush, som den 1 maj april 2003 utropade ”mission accomplished”, har de senaste fem mÃ¥naderna lÃ¥tit öka bombningarna med 50 procent. Arton städer har bombats under samma period, mot nio under motsvarande period i fjol. Här intar den svenska akademiledamoten en kolonial- tjänstemans hÃ¥llning – herremaktens vÃ¥ld mot infödingar räknas inte…..

Englunds närsynta sniffande i jänkarnas kantinvanor (över elva helsidor i DN 9/10 och 6/11 -05) landar i en förutsägbar slutsats: ”Det första stora amerikanska misstaget var att alls invadera Irak; ett minst lika stort vore om man nu bara lämnade landet, i detta kaotiska, förvirrade, blödande och sönderslagna skick.”

Rimligen måste han även beklaga att Sovjet lämnade Afghanistan 1989 och Storbritannien Indien 1947

Efter sprängningarna i Madrid och London stÃ¥r det klart för de flesta att USA:s krig mot terrorismen inte bär annan frukt än mer terrorism. Detta tillsammans med tortyrskandalerna och irakiernas samstämmiga önskan om ockupanternas uttÃ¥g har gjort mÃ¥nga liberaler mer kritiska till ockupationen än de varit tidigare…..

Vad vi ser är en upprepning av liberalernas kluvna förhÃ¥llande till Vietnam: felet med Vietnamkriget var i deras ögon att USA förlorade det. Hade amerikanarna vunnit, skulle kriget ha hyllats som en seger för demokratin och friheten. Den liberala Ã¥ngesten kring Irak bottnar blott i rädslan för att USA ska misslyckas……

VÃ¥ldet och kaoset och det mänskliga lidandet tilltar för varje mÃ¥nad – och ruelsen och vÃ¥ndan hos de tappra plädoajörerna sipprar fram i allt stridare strömmar – men aldrig att de skulle dra den enda rimliga slutsats som vi som demonstrerar gÃ¥r ut med pÃ¥ gatorna i dag: USA ut ur Irak!

19 mars, 2006

Dikt samt tal av Sven-Erik Liedman och Henry Ascher på 3-årsdagen av Irakkriget

Filed under: nya — ingrid @ 19:18


Nedan en dikt och två av de uppskattade talen vid demonstrationen på treårsdagen av Irakkriget den 18 mars 2006 i Göteborg

Nyheter Från Födelsestaden , F-moll
av Khaled Ahmed Р18 mars p̴ tre̴rsdagen av Irakkriget

F ö d e l s e s t a d e n fortfarande belägrad
Folket är fast i en fälla
Förbjudet att gå ut
Fortlöpande förmörkelse
Framtvingad fasta
Förorenat vatten
Farligt att andas
Förrädisk frid

F ö r s v a r s l ö s a f a m i l j e r i väntan med
Farhågor på den förestående attacken
Förbön och rop för fred når himlen
Förgäves att hoppas på nåd
Fienden är på frammarsch
Framgången firas med fyrverkeri av vit fosfor
Förkolnade kroppar försänkta i sömnen
Förödelsens överlevande förvandlas till flyktingar

F u l l s k a l i g t f o l k m o r d
Förtvivlade föräldrar
Förgråtna barn
Fängslade fäder
Förtidigt födda och förvanskade barn
Förlorad framtid.

F a l s k a f ö r e v ä n d n i n g a r
Fastslagna fängelser och fler dolda fångläger
Fasansfulla förbrytelser förevigas med foto
Fläck av skam i fiendens ansikte
Fiendens förlovade frihet ger avsmak av förödmjukelse
Frihetens fana är fosforescent

F ö r f a t t n i n g e n f ö r p e s t a d
Förfalskade nyheter sprids som en farsot
Främmande figurer fortplantar förskräckelse
Fienden skapar fejd och splittring
Fester av blod bjuds dagligen
Förövarna fylls med skadeglädje
Förfädernas helgedomar förgrips och förstörs

F ö r e b u d om förbannelse och undergång
Förhistoriska föremål försvinner
Förbiflygande flyttfåglar faller
Fler anfallande flygplan faller
Fienden flyr i panik
Fienden är feg och gömmer sig bakom
Flerfaldiga fasader och förintelsevapen

F o l k e t s hjältemod förbryllar världen
Folkets försvar fortsätter – förstärks

Sven-Erik Liedman

En gång för länge längesen, när historien grydde över mänskligheten, grydde den först över det landskap som idag är Irak. I detta tvåflodsland kring Eufrat och Tigris skedde med stor sannolikhet några av de stora genombrotten i mänsklighetens historia.

Det är där som de tidigaste beläggen pÃ¥ drejskivor finns – drejskivan, denna fantastiska uppfinning som än i dag ger möjlighet att forma bÃ¥de de nyttigaste och de skönaste kärl och vaser.

Det är också där som det äldsta skriftsystemet tycks ha uppkommit och med det det mänskliga minne som sträcker sig bortom den enskilda hjärnan och den muntliga berättelsen.

Genom skriften kan vi komma i omedelbar kontakt med dem som levt för längesen. Det äldsta av diktverk, Gilgamesheposet, härstammar från Tvåflodslandet. Det var där som lagar skrevs ner för första gången. Där finns de äldsta biblioteken med väldiga mängder lertavlor.

I staden Nippur finns det privatbibliotek som är nästan 4000 Ã¥r gamla. För bara tjugo Ã¥r sedan hittade men i solgudens tempel – Shamashtemplet – i Sippar ett intakt bibliotek med 56 hyllor inmurade i väggarna och med lertavlor ordnade i samma system som de haft för 2500 Ã¥r sedan.

Det var i samma del av världen som kalifen al-Mansur grundade staden Baghdad för snart 1250 Ã¥r sedan och där den avancerade kultur som kännetecknade islam hade sitt självklara centrum. Det var där som den legendariske Harun ar-Rashid var kalif – han skänkte en klocka till Karl den Store i Europa som européerna inte sett maken till.

Det var detta land som kolonialmakten Storbritannien lade under sig i sin strävan att behärska världen. Efter första världskriget befästes det engelska herraväldet. Sedan dess har britter och efter hand också amerikaner betraktat Irak som sitt intresseområdet. Intresset har blivit intensivare ju begärligare oljan blivit.

En hårdhudad och skurkaktig diktator, Saddam Husein, utmanade de oljetörstiga västmakterna. Utmaningen blev krigsanledning när USA, den enda supermakten, hade både en president och en vicepresident som hade all sin rikedom och all sin framgång att tacka oljeindustrin. Bush, Chaney och Saddam Husesyn är alla som sardiner, inlagda i olja.

För tre Ã¥r sedan startade det ohygglig krig som George W. Bush förklarade avslutat den 1 maj för snart tre Ã¥r sedan men som likväl fortsatt med oförminskad styrka och ohyggliga lidanden alltsedan dess. Kriget föregicks av de mest omfattande demonstrationerna i mannaminne – men världens herrar, sÃ¥ demokratiska de än lÃ¥tsas vara, struntade i folkets röst.

- Vi är inte lika mÃ¥nga i dag som vi var dÃ¥, vÃ¥rvintern 2003. Jag hoppas att det inte beror pÃ¥ att mÃ¥nga ser det meningslöst att protestera. Tvärtom – borde slutsatsen vara – vi mÃ¥ste göra livet svÃ¥rt för maktens alla storpampar med vÃ¥ra protester.

Protesterna kan inte bara gälla den fruktansvärda kriget. De måste gälla hela sättet att konsekvent sätta makt före rätt som vi bevittnat alltsedan det så kallade kriget mot terrorismen inleddes. Se på Guantánamo! Se på Abu Ghraib! Se också på hur staten Israel till och med kan gå in i ett annat lands fängelse och hämta ut en misshaglig fånge där! På ett mer utmanande sätt kan man knappast visa att rätten är underkastad makten.

I denna utförsbacke mot tilltagande rättsupplösning har inte Sveriges regering eller dess ledande politiker visat någon lust att hamna på efterkälken. Även här skall demokratin försvaras genom inskränkningar i demokratin. Tomas Bodström har ett leende lika fagert och lika falskt som Tony Blair.

Sveriges regering har inte heller visat något kurage gentemot krigsherrarna i Irak eller mot övertrampen av rättvisan. Den 90-årige Sverker Åström, vars diplomatiska karriär sträcker ända tillbaka till 1939, gick häromdagen ut med en stor protestartikel i Dagens Nyheter mot regeringens exempellösa flathet gentemot Guantánamo, Abu Ghraib och annat liknande.

Inte ett ord fick han till svar! Man kunde åtminstone hoppas att Persson och Freivalds skämdes! Men nu går Göran Persson ut och förklarar stolt att Tony Blair skall hjälpa honom att vinna valet i höst. Tony Blair! en lismande politiker som visat sig vara en lika inpiskad lögnare som Bush i Irakfrågan!

Man kan med ängslan frÃ¥ga sig vad den borgerliga oppositionen skall kontra med – nÃ¥gon livligare vakthÃ¥llning kring internationell rätt kan man knappast vänta sig pÃ¥ den kanten. Kommer Reinfeldt att engagera Bush i sin kampanj? Eller fÃ¥r man nöja sig med Fog Rasmussen och Pia Kiaersgaard?

Sverige säger alltså ingenting om koncentrationslägret i Guantánamo. Ett koncentrationsläger är det nämligen! Inför det ordet kan en och annan kanske invända: men inte skall man ända jämföra Guantánamo med vad nazisterna gjorde. Till detta måste man svara: nej, det kan inte jämföras med nazisternas utrotningsläger. Men det kan jämföras med deras koncentrationsläger. Koncentrationslägret är ingen nazistisk uppfinning. Hitler och hans anhang lånade både idé och ord från britterna.

De första ”concentration camps” inrättade i engelsk regi under boerkriget vid förra sekelskiftet. I Guantánamo utsätts människor för omänsklig behandling, för tortyr och förnedring. De vet inte ens vad de är anklagade för. De vet inte hur länge de skall sitta inspärrade. Det är ohyggligt – lika ohyggligt som alla koncentrationsläger är var de än befinner sig, i Afrika, i Tyskland, i Sovjetunionen eller Ryssland, i Kina, i Amerika.

Förenta Nationerna är i färd med att utarbeta en ny internationell standard för mänskliga rättigheter. USA finner förslaget urvattnat. Det är fräckt i överkant. Men vem tror att en sådan standard verkligen skulle bli effektiv? Skulle den riktas mot Kina? Kanske som ett vagt mummel, men inte mer.

En politiker – nej, jag namnger honom inte igen – har sagt: ”Den som stÃ¥r i skuld är inte fri.” En stor del av USA:s krig i Irak bekostas av Kina. Hundratals miljarder dollar har lagrats i det landet. Om Kina skulle fÃ¥ för sig att sälja alla sina amerikanska dollar, skulle dollarn sjunka som en sten.

Nej Kina kan fortsätta att avrätta tusentals av sina medborgare. Det enda land som bryter mot alla vedertagna mänskliga rättighet och som nu verkligen hotas – är Iran. Där finns en regim lika motbjudande som Saddam Husseins. Men är det anledningen till det nya vapenskramlet? Ack, glöm det. Iran har ocksÃ¥ olja, mycket olja.

Där, liksom i Irak, skulle ett utländskt erövringståg omöjliggöra för den opposition som finns att ändra landet i demokratisk riktning. Men vad är demokratin värd? Vad är den värd gentemot några miljoner fat olja?

Till detta kan vi bara svara: Den är lika mycket värd som vi gör den, genom att vara ständigt aktiva, ständigt vaksamma medborgare. Det är vi, folket, som kan göra demokratin levande. I dag drar vi ett litet strå till demokratins stack. Vi måste fortsätta att göra det i morgon också, och i övermorgon!

Henry Ascher

”Alla människor är födda fria och lika i värde och rättigheter.” Detta är ju den första artikeln i Deklarationen om mänskliga rättigheter skriven omedelbart efter andra världskrigets förfärande erfarenheter.

Västvärldens ledare brukar hävda att denna princip utgör grundvalen för den västerländska demokratin och dess humanism. ”Alla människor … lika värde…” Det är en viktig tanke. Men idag, 3 Ã¥r efter att USA pÃ¥började kriget mot Irak, mÃ¥ste vi frÃ¥ga oss betyder den nÃ¥got utöver de högtidliga proklamationerna? Spelar den nÃ¥gon roll i det verkliga livet?

Jag var inbjuden för att tala om Israel-Palestinakonflikten. För att försöka göra effekterna av muren på något sätt begriplig för dem som lyssnade gör jag ett tankeexperiment. Jag föreställer mig att muren är förlagd till Göteborg. Staden är delad. En del av muren spärrar av Vasagatan utanför lokalen där jag pratade.

Människor kan inte ta sig till jobbet, till skolan, till sjukhuset, till sina barn, till vänner och släktingar. Har man tur släpps man igenom någon av de få portarna. Men då får man köa i timmar och risken finns alltid att soldaterna trakasserar eller stoppar en. Eller att man kommer fram men inte hem.

Under diskussionen efter mitt föredrag reser sig en äldre man. ”Om jag riskerade att en bomb briserade pÃ¥ spÃ¥rvagnen när jag Ã¥kte, ja dÃ¥ skulle jag vara glad om det fanns en mur i Göteborg”, säger han. Innan jag ens hinner börja fundera pÃ¥ ett svar ställer sig en ung tjej upp. ”Du som talar om bomber pÃ¥ spÃ¥rvagnarna! När du säger att du skulle vilja ha en mur, vilken sida av muren tänker du dej att du befinner dej pÃ¥ dÃ¥?”

Som färsk läkare arbetade jag i palestinska flyktingläger i Libanon på 80-talet. Vi svenska läkare och sköterskor blev ofta hembjudna till människor som delade med sig av sina erfarenheter. Att sitta på golvet i ett skjul med tak av korrugerad plåt och genom 70-80-åriga kvinnor och män få betrakta vår del av världen utifrån, genom deras ögon, var en stark och omskakande upplevelse som jag bär med mig än idag.

Det jag förstod den gången var att människor i denna del av världen ständigt blivit lurade av ledarna för våra länder. Grundlurade, på varje upptänkligt sätt!

De gamla berättade hur palestinierna stödde britterna under första världskriget mot den turkiska ottomanska ockupationen mot löfte om självständighet. I själva verket hade England och Frankrike långt innan kriget var avgjort delat området mellan sig och ritat upp nya skrivbordskonstruerade gränslinjer och stater. Sedan har det bara fortsatt genom alla år.

Och inte var det bättre i Irak. Irak skapades som stat efter första världskriget när Storbritannien konstruerade landets gränser av ett antal oljerika provinser och såg till att Nationernas Förbund, FN:s föregångare, gjorde det till ett brittiskt protektorat.

Saddam Hussein tog makten i en USA-stödd statskupp för att förhindra nationalisering av oljan. Han fick sitta kvar för att han gjorde det USA ville genom att fängsla, tortera och avrätta medlemmarna i det inflytelserika irakiska kommunistpartiet.

USA sålde vapen till Saddam Hussein för att Irak skulle kriga mot den USA-fientliga regimen i Iran och när Irak höll på att vinna kriget började man sälja vapen också till den andra sidan för att hålla kriget igång, kontrollera området genom att försvaga båda länder och samtidigt tjäna pengar.

Men demokratin då, hur är det med den? I Bushs senaste tal till nationen nämnde han ordet demokrati inte mindre än 10 gånger. Vid hälften av tillfällena handlade det om demokrati i Mellanöstern. Men för människorna i större delen av världen, de vanliga enkla människorna, har detta ord kommit att betyda något annat än för oss i väst.

När USA talar om demokrati betyder det för dem Abu Ghreib, Falluja, Guantanamo och bomber över Afghanistan och Bagdad. Det betyder 100 000 döda irakier, krig och en förstörelse vi bara sett början av.

Få av oss i väst vet att det funnits mängder av demokratiska rörelser och regimer i Mellanöstern alltsedan det tidiga 1800-talet. Varenda en av dem har krossats, utan något undantag. Varför då? Jo det första en verkligt demokratisk regim gör är förstås att se till att landets befolkning får kontroll över råvarorna, att de får del av vinsterna.

Och detta är inte något en stormakt som USA är det minsta intresserat av. Det är t.ex. därför den demokratiskt valde och omvalde Hugo Chavez i Venezuela, världens 5:e oljeproducerande land, demoniseras samtidigt som Venezuela hotas av ett amerikanske militäringripande.

Sanningen är att samtidigt som USA använder bristen på demokratiska regimer i Mellanöstern, något som man alltså i högsta grad själva är orsak till, för att motivera sin militära närvaro, sina krig och sin ockupation av området, så är man i själva verket livrädd för en verklig demokratisk utveckling i världens fattiga råvaruproducerande länder.

USA:s världspolitik handlar överhuvudtaget inte om demokrati eller mänskliga rättigheter. Det handlar om frihet. Men inte den frihet deklarationen om mänskliga rättigheter handlar om. Särskilt inte om alla människors lika rätt till frihet och i all synnerhet inte om att vi alla skulle vara lika mycket värda.

Det handlar om USA:s ensidiga ”frihet” att kontrollera rÃ¥varumarknaden pÃ¥ sina egna villkor, och dÃ¥ särskilt oljan. Den som inte hÃ¥ller med mÃ¥ste ställa sig frÃ¥gan varför USA sÃ¥ länge stödde Saddam Hussein, varför man fortfarande stöder Saudiarabiens och Kuwaits kvinnofientliga diktaturer.

Om vi bara lyssnar till människorna i flyktinglägren eller i Bagdads förstäder så behöver vi inte förvånas över deras vrede och ilska, t.ex. över USA:s vapenskrammel mot Irans påstådda kärnvapenhot samtidigt som samma USA ger Indien sin välsignelse att utveckla kärnvapen och samtidigt som Israels kärnvapen inte ens behöver inspekteras eftersom USA tycker det är OK att de står utanför FN:s internationella atomövervakningsorgan IAEA.

Detta är inte frihet, inte demokrati och inte principen om människors lika värde. Det är hyckleri och inget annat. Och hyckleri har för människor i den fattiga delen av världen blivit essensen i Västmakternas agerande i demokratins namn.

Om vi intresserar oss det allra minsta för att lyssna på dessa människor, de som befinner sig på fel sida av muren, så är det inte heller särskilt förvånande att Hamas vinner det palestinska valet, ett val som t.o.m. USA kallade demokratiskt fram tills valresultatet stod klart.

För den palestinska regeringen under Arafat och Abbas hade ju valt den fredliga vägen. De hade kompromissat och gjort eftergifter och ingått vapenvila. De hade vädjat till Israels och västregimernas tal om demokrati, mänskliga rättigheter, till talet om alla människors lika värde.

Och vad har resultatet blivit? Palestiniernas situation har aldrig aldrig varit sämre än nu! 50% befinner sig under fattigdomsgränsen, undernäring breder ut sig, hälften av alla barn är traumatiserade. Den olagliga muren byggs vidare djupt inne på ockuperad mark.

Och vad gör Israel, USA och EU? Vad gör Göran Perssons regering? Man ställer krav på eftergifter. Men inte av ockupationsmakten utan av de ockuperade palestinierna! De skall erkänna Israel och lägga ned motståndet. De skall erkänna ingångna avtal.

Samtidigt kan Israel lugnt fortsätta ockupationen och krossa den palestinska stat man erkänt i avtal men aldrig i verkligheten tillåtit. Man kan lugnt fortsätta med utomrättsliga avrättningar och, som nu i veckan, kidnappningar av politiska ledare (självklart utan att riskera att terroriststämplas).

Man kan ockupera alltmer mark, bygga ut bosättningar, tillåta beväpnade bosättare att trakassera palestinska bönder och förstöra deras skördar. Israel kan lugnt ta sig in i palestinska områden när de behagar och göra vad de behagar.

De kan fortsätta att stjäla palestinska tullpengar och det kan vara alldeles säkra på att ingenting alls kommer att hända dem, åtminstone inte från USA:s och västvärldens regeringar.

Israel hade aldrig kunna agera såhär i strid, mot internationell rätt, Haagdomstolens beslut om muren, FN-resolutioner och Oslo-avtalet, om man inte haft USA bakom ryggen, det USA som på mindre än 5 år startat krig mot Afghanistan och Irak och hotar Iran, Venezuela, Kuba, Nordkorea, Syrien för att inte nämna alla länder där man försöker manipulera regimerna.

Men idag, 3 år efter ockupationen i Irak påbörjades, reser sig ropen från demonstrationståg över hela världen, från 100 000 döda i Irak, från flera tusen döda unga amerikaner som med löfte om den drägliga framtid USA annars förvägrade dem tagit värvning. Var är massförstörelsevapnen? Var finns kopplingen mellan de grundmurade fienderna Saddam Hussein och Al Quaida?

Idag vet hela världen att det vi sa när vi försökte stoppa kriget för 3 år sedan är sant. Ingen offensiv i världen, vare sig mot Samarra eller någon annanstans, kan dölja kejsare Bushs pinsamma nakenhet. Han bluffade precis som pappa Bush gjorde med kuvöserna i Kuwait, de som fick USA:s kongress att besluta om det första kriget mot Irak.

Ändå serverar media återigen okritiskt USA:s krigsförberedande propaganda om Iran som bygger kärnvapen, Kuba som hotar USA, Venezuelas demokratiskt valde president Chavez som hotar demokratin, o.s.v., o.s.v. Och vår regering sväljer det villigt, nu som då.

Efter tre år börjar nu USA inse att de inte kan besegra det folkliga motståndet i Irak. I det läget tar man till den för dem näst bästa metoden: att härska genom att splittra för att på så sätt försvaga motståndet och åtminstone förhindra att någon annan får kontroll över Irak och dess olja.

Detta kan man uppnå genom att provocera fram inbördeskrig eller genom att splittra upp landet i olika delar. När vi betraktar vad som händer i Irak idag skall vi inte glömma att scenarion med bombdåd, provokatörer, dödsskvadroner och terrorgrupper har använts åtskilliga gånger under historien, både av USA och tidigare stormakter.

Jag vet inte vem som häpnade mest, mannen eller jag, den där gången flickan frågade om vilken sida av muren han befann sig på. Men han tystnade. Och själv har jag tänkt mycket på hennes svar sedan dess.

Det är så självklart för oss som haft turen att födas i den rika världen, det är liksom hela existensens utgångspunkt och förutsättning, att vi befinner oss på rätt sida, alltid på rätt sida. Om muren, om gränsen, om skiljelinjen mot fattigdom och förtryck, mellan de imperialistiska länderna och de koloniserade. Vi är vi. Och? dom är alltid dom.

Men gränsen är tunn. Vi kunde lika gärna fötts pÃ¥ den andra sidan. ”Tänker dom inte pÃ¥ att de kunde vara dom?” sa en av mina pojkar förvÃ¥nat när han var 6 Ã¥r och jag försökte förklara för honom om rasistiska attacker mot flyktingar.

Tänker dom inte på att de kunde vara dom? Är det inte egentligen just precis så enkelt? Det kunde vara vi. Inlevelseförmågan är en djupt mänsklig egenskap och kanske en av de egenskaper som gör oss just till människor.

Vi som samlats här idag har något gemensamt. Och vi har något gemensamt med alla andra som idag demonstrerar runt om i världen mot USA:s krig i Irak. Vi tänker på att vi kunde vara dom. Att vi skulle kunna bo på andra sidan muren.

Vi hyllar tanken på alla människors lika värde och rättigheter, på verklig demokrati och verkliga mänskliga rättigheter. Och vi menar att de som förvägras den rätten, som lever under ockupation i enlighet med folkrätten har rätt att göra motstånd.

Och vi vet att den dag de länder som idag kontrollerar världen inte bara använder dessa ord som tomma floskler utan lever upp till deras verkliga innebörd, ja den dagen kommer vi att kunna riva alla världens murar…

17 mars, 2006

Resolutionen p̴ demonstrationen mm РDagens ̦destrauma efter exakt 3 ̴r av ockupation

Filed under: nya — ingrid @ 19:10

Fredskoalitionen i samarbete med Nätverket Stoppa USAs Krig arrangerade i Göteborg demonstrationen pÃ¥ treÃ¥rsdagen av Irakkriget. 1000 personer med Kiriakis trummor i täten demonstrerade för USA ut ur Irak – Inget svenskt stöd till USAs krig. Inget krig mot Iran- Inga svenska soldater till Afghanistan, mot islamofobi och inskränkta demokratiska rättigheter.

En stark dikt om hemstaden Samarra framfördes av Khaled Ahmed och mycket uppskattade tal framfördes av prof Sven-Eric Liedman, UV-ordföranden Ida Gabrielsson, barnläkaren Henry Ascher samt Kaleem Schekh från Islamska Kulturcentret

Mötet antog med acklamation denna resolution till regeringen
——————————–
Till den svenska regeringen

Nu inför treårsdagen av USA:s invasion av Irak pågår de största flygattackerna på länge mot människor i samhällen utanför Samarra norr om Baghdad.

Medan amerikanska soldater urskillningslöst bombar irakiska byar, får den fruktade Badrmilisen och Peshmergas göra det smutsiga jobbet på marken.

Det är inte situationen i Irak som banat väg för detta. Med tanke på ansträngningarna att forma en fungerande regering är det sämsta möjliga tillfälle.

Den verkliga anledningen att bomba irakiska bybor från luften har snarare med amerikansk inrikespolitik att göra: Den här offensiven ska överskugga den besvärande rapporteringen om Irakkriget och ge sken av att USA fyller en uppgift i Irak..

Vad har då Sverige med detta att göra? Idag kan vi inte säga att Sverige står utanför, utan vi bidrar. Visserligen inte med trupper som i Afghanistan utan med svensktillverkade vapen som den nya träffsäkra granaten Excalibur.

Så när amerikanska luftvärn riktar in sina vapen mot civila mål även i irakiska städer kommer amerikanska soldater att använda svensktillverkade missiler.

Detta innebär att redan nu kan svensktillverkade vapen döda oskyldiga familjer i Irak. Helt i strid med det svenska förbud som gäller för export av krigsmateriel till krigförande länder.

Men vilka ger den svenska regeringen rätt att på detta sätt stödja USA:s krig mot det irakiska folket? Detta kan aldrig vara i linje med svensk utrikespolitik.

Vi kräver därför av den svenska regeringen att protestera mot de nya terrorbombningarna av den irakiska befolkningen.

Och att exporten av vapen till USA:s krig omedelbart upph̦r. Inget svenskt sțd till USAs krig! USA ut ur Irak Рomedelbart och villkorsl̦st!

……………
Petter Larsson 2006-03-23 i Aftonbladet
”UppÃ¥t för vapenexporten”

Regeringens skrivelse om den svenska vapenexporten som presenteras i går visar att Sverige säljer mer vapen än någonsin.

2005 såldes krigsmateriel för 8,6 miljarder, en ökning med 18 procent sedan 2004. Den svenska vapenexporten har därmed fördubblats under 2000-talet och Sverige har kvalat in på listan över världens tio största vapenexportörer.

Bland kunderna finns diktaturer som Saudiarabien, Tunisien och Pakistan, liksom krigförande länder som Storbritannien, USA, Polen, Italien och Danmark. Precis det som riksdagens riktlinjer för exporten syftar till att förhindra.

Men vad är väl regler när man har en hel vapenindustri att tänka pÃ¥. Den är visserligen utlandsägd numera, men ger ändÃ¥ jobb i Sverige. Jag tror det ytterst är sÃ¥ enkelt. NÃ¥gra tusen svenska jobb – till priset av att stödja övergrepp, diktaturer och anfallskrig.

Regeringen gömmer sig bakom den specialmyndighet, Inspektionen för strategiska produkter, som bestämmer över exporten. Egentligen ska regeringen själv ta ställning till principiellt viktiga exportbeslut, men så sker nästan aldrig.

Inte ens vapenförsäljningen till USA under brinnande Irakkrig har hamnat pÃ¥ dess bord. SÃ¥ kan hyckleriet nödtorftigt döljas – inte minst för de socialdemokratiska medlemmarna, vars kongress i höstas krävde striktare regler.

Och värre kan det bli. För ett år sedan föreslog regeringens utredare Anders Svärd att lagstiftningen ska anpassas till vad som faktiskt redan sker.

Bland annat skulle näringspolitiska hänsyn väga tungt. USA och andra länder som Sverige vill samarbeta militärt med skulle få specialregler.

Det var – tack och lov – för kontroversiellt. Utredningen las i malpÃ¥se. Men i mÃ¥ndags krävde Svenska freds, Diakonia, Amnesty, Röda Korset och Kristna fredsrörelsen att regeringen presenterar ett förslag före valet. PÃ¥ sÃ¥ vis skulle väljarna med öppna ögon kunna ta ställning till vapenexportens framtid.

A Fruktansvärda flygattacker mot Samarra – ett nytt Falluja?

B Gripande avskedsbrev från Gantanamofånge inför självmordet

C Är detta den stora katastrof Robert Fisk säger ligger i luften?

D Varför journalister blir mördade i Irak

A Fruktansvärda flygattacker mot Samarra – ett nytt Falluja?

Mer än 1500 koalitions- och andra trupper, mer än 200 stridsfordon, och mer än 50 Black Hawks helikoptrar deltar i anfallet nära Samarra där nyligen Guldmoskén sprängts i luften.

Den största bombattacken sedan 22 april 2003 med högst antal helikoptrar med hälften amerikanska trupper och hälften kurd- och shiadominerade trupper.

USAmilitären hävdar att efter bombningen av Falluja och städer uppÃ¥t Anbarprovinsen ”insurgents” har belägrat sig i Samarras omgivning. Den stad där specialister under en hel natt under utegÃ¥ngsförbudet för nÃ¥gra veckor sedan lyckades borra upp hÃ¥l i golvet och fylla dem med explosivt material för att sedan spränga den i luften – utan att gripas. En moské som tillhörde alla i Samarra, bÃ¥de sunni och shia…

Detta lyckades väcka upp hämndaktioner hos shia i fattiga områden. Dessutom dem tillhörande inrikesministeriets iranska Badremilisen, USAledda Vargmilisen etc. Vilka fler som låg bakom raiderna mot hundratalet sunnimoskéer är höljt i dunkel eftersom finansiärerna bakom dem sannolikt härrör både från USA och Iran.

Hela tre miljarder dollar ut den amerikanska återuppbyggnadsbudgeten på 18.7$ M var avsedda för uppbygget av miliser. Den veteran som var chef för dessa dödsskvadroner, Jim Steele med erfarenhet både från el Salvador, Vietnam och nu Irak, skall för någon tid sedan ha gett sig av från Irakt. Dödspatrullen är med andra ord självgående, men som Robert Fisk skriver: Vilka i yttersta ändan betalar? Det är samma fråga som ställs i samband med de kidnappningar som sker. Vem drar ytterst i trådarna?

Vilka har intresse av att driva Irak in i ett inbördeskrig? Vilka tjänar mest på att söndra och härska? Ett är säkert, de som inte tjänar på splittring är dem boende i de mellersta sunnidominerade delarna av landet.

Motsättningarna idag är snåriga och överenskommelserna i enskilda frågor många. Ett är emellertid säkert, det är civilbefolkningen som är de stora förlorarna.

B Gripande avskedsbrev från Gantanamofånge inför självmordet

Jumaa’s Suicide Letter

In fact, I don’t know where to begin… or how to begin… Josh, Khaled the interpreter… I feel very sorry for forcing you to see…It might be the first time in your life… to see a human being who suffered too much… dying in front of your eyes…I know it is an awful and horrible scene, but…I really feel sorry for you.

There was no other alternative to make our voice heard by the world from the depths of the detention centers except this way in order for the world to re-examine its standing and for the fair people of America to look again at the situation and try to have a moment of truth with themselves… why was no conclusion reached with regard to the detainees in Guantanamo, Cuba until now? Till when this tragedy will continue?

When will it end after all these years, and when will the detainees go back to their homelands, families, wives and children? When will this tragedy cease to continue… till when? The detainees are suffering from the bitterness of despair, the detention humiliation and the vanquish of slavery and suppression…

Josh, Khaled: Actually I spent nice hours with you… even though they were full of talking about my agonies, pains and grieves… I hope you will always remember that you met and sat with a “human being” called “Jumah” who suffered too much and was abused in his belief, self, in his dignity and also in his humanity. He was imprisoned, tortured and deprived from his homeland, his family and his young daughter who is in the most need for him for four years…with no reason or crime committed.

Remember that there are hundreds of detainees in Guantanamo –Cuba – they are in the same situation of suffering and misfortune. They were captured, tortured and detained with no offense or reason. Their lives might end like mine… When you remember me in my last gasps of life before dying, while my soul is leaving my body to rise to its creator, remember that the world let us and let our case down…

Remember that our governments let us down… Remember the unreasonable delay of the courts in looking into our case and to side with the victims of injustice… Remember that if there were people who are actually fair and who defend justice and defend the victims of injustice and if there are judges who are fair, I wouldn’t have been wrapped in death shrouds now and my family –my father, my mother, my brothers and sisters, and my little daughter – would not have to lose their son… forever… but what else can I do?

Take some of my blood… take pieces of my death shrouds… take some of my remains…take pictures of my dead body when I am placed in my grave, lonely…send it to the world.. to the judges…to people with live conscious… to people with principles and values, “the fair-minded”…

To make them carry the burden of guilt in front of the world for this soul that was wasted with no guilt it has ever done…

To make them all carry this burden in front of the future generations for this wasted soul that has done no sin…

To make them carry this burden of guilt in front of history for this soul that was wasted with no reason…

After this soul has suffered the worst by the hands of “the protectors of peace and the callers for democracy, freedom, equality and justice”…

There, in the very far east, at the other end of the ocean… there in the east… how many fathers, mothers, wives, siblings, children and other family members who are crying now for their imprisoned children at Guantanamo Bay –Cuba… Why…Why do they have to suffer the agony of separation and swallow the bitterness of deprivation from having their sons…

I am not the only one suffering …this anguish…my family is very much suffering too… My little daughter whom they destroyed her spirit because of my detention and having me taken away from her… sends me letters saying: “Dad please come to me… please come back to me…all the girls in my school have dads, except me?!… Dad, I need you…I want you to come back to me…please come back for my sake…

In fact, I don’t have an answer to her question…The answer to her question is there, with “the fair minded people”……….

C Är detta den stora katastrof Robert Fisk säger ligger i luften?

Is Another 9/11 in the Works?
By Paul Craig Roberts
03/15/06

If you were President George W. Bush with all available US troops tied down by the Iraqi resistance, and you were unable to control Iraq or political developments in the country, would you also start a war with Iran?

Yes, you would.

Bush’s determination to spread Middle East conflict by striking at Iran does not make sense.

First of all, Bush lacks the troops to do the job. If the US military cannot successfully occupy Iraq, there is no way that the US can occupy Iran, a country approximately three times the size in area and population.

Second, Iran can respond to a conventional air attack with missiles targeted on American ships and bases, and on oil facilities located throughout the Middle East.

Third, Iran has human assets, including the Shia majority population in Iraq, that it can activate to cause chaos throughout the Middle East.

Fourth, polls of US troops in Iraq indicate that a vast majority do not believe in their mission and wish to be withdrawn. Unlike the yellow ribbon folks at home, the troops are unlikely to be enthusiastic about being trapped in an Iranian quagmire in addition to the Iraqi quagmire.

Fifth, Bush’s polls are down to 34 percent, with a majority of Americans believing that Bush’s invasion of Iraq was a mistake.

If you were being whipped in one fight, would you start a second fight with a bigger and stronger person?

That’s what Bush is doing.

Opinion polls indicate that the Bush regime has succeeded in its plan to make Americans fear Iran as the greatest threat America faces.

The Bush regime has created a major dispute with Iran over that country’s nuclear energy program and then blocked every effort to bring the dispute to a peaceful end.

In order to gain a pretext for attacking Iran, the Bush regime is using bribery and coercion in its effort to have Iran referred to the UN Security Council for sanctions.

In recent statements President Bush and Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld blamed Iran for the Iraqi resistance, claiming that the roadside bombs used by the resistance are being supplied by Iran.

It is obvious that Bush intends to attack Iran and that he will use every means to bring war about.

Yet, Bush has no conventional means of waging war with Iran. His bloodthirsty neoconservatives have prepared plans for nuking Iran. However, an unprovoked nuclear attack on Iran would leave the US, already regarded as a pariah nation, totally isolated.

Readers, whose thinking runs ahead of that of most of us, tell me that another 9/11 event will prepare the ground for a nuclear attack on Iran. Some readers say that Bush, or Israel as in Israel’s highly provocative attack on the Jericho jail and kidnapping of prisoners with American complicity, will provoke a second attack on the US. Others say that Bush or the neoconservatives working with some “black ops” group will orchestrate the attack.

One of the more extraordinary suggestions is that a low yield, perhaps tactical, nuclear weapon will be exploded some distance out from a US port. Death and destruction will be minimized, but fear and hysteria will be maximized. Americans will be told that the ship bearing the weapon was discovered and intercepted just in time, thanks to Bush’s illegal spying program, and that Iran is to blame.

A more powerful wave of fear and outrage will again bind the American people to Bush, and the US media will not report the rest of the world’s doubts of the explanation.

Reads like a Michael Crichton plot, doesn’t it?

Fantasy? Let’s hope so

D Varför journalister blir mördade i Irak

One of those killed was Yasser Salihee. He was shot dead as he approached a US checkpoint on June 24 last year. In the previous weeks, Salihee had documented, for the Knight-Ridder news agency, dozens of cases of men being dumped at morgues after having been detained by the Wolf Brigade, the most notorious unit among the Special Police Commandos, and under the direct command of a US officer.

More recently, Iraqi journalist Atwar Bahjat was murdered while reporting on the bombing of the Al-Askari Mosque in Samarra on February 22 this year. Bahjat was a well known female television reporter working for Bahrain-based Al-Arabiya.

She and her news crew, Khalid Mahmoud Al-Falahi and Adnan Khairallah, were interviewing local witnesses who claimed that they had seen what looked like police commandos entering the Mosque prior to the explosion. There were also claims that US military forces had been heavily deployed in the vicinity the previous night.

Bahjat never got to complete her investigation. She and her news crew were apprehended by what appeared to be commandos, shouting: ”We want the anchorwoman.” The bodies of Bahjat and her two colleagues were found hours later. They had been shot dead.By the most notorious unit among the Special Police Commandos, and under the direct command of a US officer.

To date, some 65 journalists have been killed in Iraq since the US/UK invasion in March 2003, according to the internationally respected Committee to Protect Journalists. Iraq, says the CPJ, has become the deadliest recent conflict for journalists to work in.

This death toll in the space of three years compares with 66 journalists killed during the Vietnam War spanning two decades (1955-75).

In World War II (1939-45), 68 journalists were killed covering perhaps the worst conflagration in history which spread across three continents.

And in World War I (1914-18), in which the military death toll ran to 14 million, only two journalists are listed as being killed.

15 mars, 2006

Inf̦r 18 mars РUSA planerar Irak som koloni РDahr Jamail visar varf̦r

Filed under: nya — ingrid @ 09:17


Desto större anledning för oss att uttrycka vÃ¥rt nej till president Bushs lÃ¥nga krig ”mot terrorn”, som att kolonisera Irak. Nu pÃ¥ lördag 18 mars samling kl13 Götaplatsen för ”USA ut ur Irak – Inget svenskt stöd till USAs krig” med talare som Sven-Eric Liedman

March 14, 2006 Iraq: Permanent US Colony By Dahr Jamail

Why does the Bush Administration refuse to discuss withdrawing occupation forces from Iraq? Why is Halliburton, who landed the no-bid contracts to construct and maintain US military bases in Iraq, posting higher profits than ever before in its 86-year history?

Why do these bases in Iraq resemble self-contained cities as much as military outposts?

Why are we hearing such ludicrous and outrageous statements from the highest ranking military general in the United States, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Peter Pace, who when asked how things were going in Iraq on March 9th in an interview on ”Meet the Press” said, ”I’d say they’re going well. I wouldn’t put a great big smiley face on it, but I would say they’re going very, very well from everything you look at.”

I wonder if there is a training school, or at least talking point memos for these Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, because Pace’s predecessor, Gen. Richard Myers, told Senator John McCain last September that ”In a sense, things are going well [in Iraq].”

General Pace also praised the Iraqi military, saying, ”Now there are over 100 [Iraqi] battalions in the field.”

Wow! General Pace must have waved his magic wand and materialized all these 99 new Iraqi battalions that are diligently keeping things safe and secure in occupied Iraq. Because according to the top US general in Iraq, General George Casey, not long ago there was only one Iraqi battalion (about 500-600 soldiers) capable of fighting on its own in Iraq.

During a late-September 2005 Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Casey acknowledged that the Pentagon estimate of three Iraqi battalions last June had shrunk to one in September. That is less than six months ago.

I thought it would be a good idea to find someone who is qualified to discuss how feasible it would be to train 99 Iraqi battalions in less than six months, as Pace now claims has occurred.

I decided that someone who was in the US Army for 26 years and who worked in eight conflict areas, starting in Vietnam and ending with Haiti, would be qualified. If he had served in two parachute infantry units, three Ranger units, two Special Forces Groups and in Delta Force that would be helpful as well.

And just to make sure, if he taught tactics at the Jungle Operations Training Center in Panama and Military Science at the United States Military Academy at West Point, thus knowing a thing or two about training soldiers, that would be a bonus.

That person is Stan Goff.

”This is utter bullshit,” was Goff’s remark about the Pace claim of having 100 Iraqi battalions when I asked him to comment, ”He must be counting the resistance among his forces.”

Goff adds, ”That dip-shit [Pace] is saying he has 60,000 trained and disciplined people under arms … 65,000 with all the staffs … and almost 100,000 with the support units they would require. To train and oversee them would require thousands of American advisors. It must suck for a career Marine to be used so blatantly as a PR flak.”

Goff mentioned that Pace ”and everyone else” knows that the Iraqi forces, ”however many there are,” are heavily cross-infiltrated.

”He [Pace] is saying that the Bush administration is going to empower a pro-Iranian government with 100 ready battalions, when this administration was handed this particular government as the booby prize in exchange for Sistani pulling their cookies out of the fire during the joint rebellions in Najaf and Fallujah,” added Goff.

Further discrediting the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Goff said, ”To train 99 [battalions] since last September is a claim only the average American might swallow. The right question to ask is, where are they?

Where are they headquartered, and where are they in operation? Claiming operations security doesn’t count, unless they believe they can hide 100 units of 600 people each in Iraq … from other Iraqis … who are often related to them.”

He concludes, ”These guys have become accustomed to saying any damn thing, then counting on ignorance and apathy at home – along with hundreds of Democrats who need spine transplants – to get away with it. You can quote me on any of that.”

There’s a good reason why Pace and others are busy spewing smoke – it’s to hide the fact that there are no plans to leave Iraq.

While we’re addressing propaganda, we mustn’t leave out our brilliant military strategist and warrior for protecting human rights, the illustrious Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

On March 8th, Rice delivered the opening remarks on the release of her Department’s ”2005 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices.”

The introduction to the report says: ”In Iraq, 2005 was a year of major progress for democracy, democratic rights and freedom. There was a steady growth of NGOs and other civil society associations that promote human rights.” Uh, right.

This report is submitted to Congress by the State Department. I’ve often wondered if our politicians are just this ignorant, or simply horrifically misinformed like so many Americans. This report, perhaps, answers the latter.

My point is, if there is a concerted effort by high-ranking officials of the Bush administration to portray things in Iraq as going well, then why are there permanent bases being constructed in Iraq?

This media smokescreen from the likes of Pace, Rice and even ”sharp-shooter” Cheney, who recently said things in Iraq are ”improving steadily,” conveniently leads the American people toward believing there will eventually be a withdrawal of American soldiers.

But the problem with smokescreens is that pesky thing called ”reality.”

And in Iraq, the reality is that people like Pace, Rice, Cheney and their ever-eloquent front man aren’t telling the American public about their true plans for Iraq.

One example that provides some insight into their agenda is the US ”Embassy” which is under construction in the infamous ”Green Zone.”

As you read this, a controversial Kuwait-based construction firm is building a $592 million US embassy in Baghdad. When the dust settles, this compound will be the largest and most secure diplomatic compound in the world.

The headquarters, I mean ”Embassy,” will be a self-sustaining cluster of 21 buildings reinforced 2.5 times the usual standards, with some walls to be as thick as 15 feet.

Plans are for over 1,000 US ”government officials” to staff and reside there. Lucky for them, they will have access to the gym, swimming pool, barber and beauty shops, food court and commissary. There will also be a large-scale barracks for troops,

a school, locker rooms, a warehouse, a vehicle maintenance garage, and six apartment buildings with a total of 619 one-bedroom units. And luckily for the ”government officials,” their water, electricity and sewage treatment plants will all be independent from Baghdad’s city utilities. The total site will be two-thirds the area of the National Mall in Washington, DC.”

I wonder if any liberated Iraqis will have access to their swimming pool?

And unlike the Iraqi infrastructure, which is in total shambles and functioning below pre-invasion levels in nearly every area, the US ”Embassy” is being constructed right on time.

The US Senate Foreign Affairs Committee recently called this an ”impressive” feat, considering the construction is taking place in one of the most violent and volatile spots on the planet.

Then there are the permanent military bases.

To give you an idea of what these look like in Iraq, let’s start with Camp Anaconda, near Balad. Occupying 15 square miles of Iraq, the base boasts two swimming pools (not the plastic inflatable type), a gym, mini-golf course and first-run movie theater.

The 20,000 soldiers who live at the Balad Air Base, less than 1,000 of whom ever leave the base, can inspect new iPod accessories in one of the two base exchanges, which have piles of the latest electronics and racks of CDs to choose from. One of the PX managers recently boasted that every day he was selling 15 televisions to soldiers.

At Camp Anaconda, located in al-Anbar province where resistance is fierce, the occupation forces live in air-conditioned units where plans are being drawn up to run internet, cable television and overseas telephone access to them.

The thousands of civilian contractors live at the base in a section called ”KBR-land,” and there is a hospital where doctors carry out 400 surgeries every month on wounded troops.

Air Force officials on the base claim the runway there is one of the busiest in the world, where unmanned Predator drones take off carrying their Hellfire missiles, along with F-16′s, C-130′s, helicopters, and countless others, as the bases houses over 250 aircraft.

If troops aren’t up for the rather lavish dinners served by ”Third Country Nationals” from India, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh who work for slave wages, they can visit the Burger King, Pizza Hut, Popeye’s or Subway, then wash it down with a mocha from the Starbucks.

There are several other gigantic bases in Iraq besides camp Anaconda, such as Camp Victory near Baghdad Airport, which – according to a reporter for Mother Jones magazine – when complete will be twice the size of Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo. The Kosovo base is currently one of the largest overseas bases built since the war in Vietnam.

Camp Liberty is adjacent to Camp Victory – where soldiers even compete in their own triathlons. ”The course, longer than 140 total miles, spanned several bases in the greater Camp Victory area in west Baghdad,” says a news article on a DOD web site.

Mr. Bush refuses to set a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq because he doesn’t intend to withdraw. He doesn’t intend to because he’s following a larger plan for the US in the Middle East.

Less than two weeks after the fall of Baghdad on April 9, 2003, US military officials announced the intention to maintain at least four large bases in Iraq that could be used in the future.

These are located near Baghdad International Airport (where the triathlon was), Tallil (near Nasiriyah, in the south), one in the Kurdish north at either Irbil or Qayyarah (they are only 50 kilometers apart) and one in western al-Anbar province at Al-Asad. Of course, let’s not forget the aforementioned Camp Anaconda in Balad.

More recently, on May 22 of last year, US military commanders announced that they would consolidate troops into four large air bases. It was announced at this time that while buildings were being made of concrete instead of the usual metal trailers and tin-sheathed buildings, military officers working on the plan said consolidation plan was not meant to establish a permanent US military presence in Iraq…Right.

The US has at least four of these massive bases in Iraq. Billions of dollars have been spent in their construction, and they are in about the same locations where they were mentioned they would be by military planners back before Mr. Bush declared that major combat operations were over in Iraq.

It appears as though ”mission accomplished” in Iraq was not necessarily referring to guarding the Ministry of Oil and occupying the country indefinitely (or finding WMDs, disrupting al-Qaeda, or liberating Iraqis, blah-blah-blah), but to having a military beach-head in the heart of the Middle East.

Note that while US officials don’t dare say the word ”permanent” when referring to military bases in Iraq, they will say ”permanent access.” An article entitled ”Pentagon Expects Long-Term Access to Four Key Bases in Iraq,” which was a front-page story in the New York Times on April 19, 2003, reads:

”There will probably never be an announcement of permanent stationing of troops. Not permanent basing, but permanent access is all that is required, officials say.”

Why all of this? Why these obviously permanent bases? Why the beach-head?

A quick glance at US government military strategy documents is even more revealing.

”Our forces will be strong enough to dissuade potential adversaries from pursuing a military build-up in hopes of surpassing, or equaling, the power of the United States,” reads the 2002 National Security Strategy.

To accomplish this, the US will ”require bases and stations within and beyond Western Europe and Northeast Asia.”

Another interesting document is ”Joint Vision 2020″ from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, whose ”vision” is ”Dedicated individuals and innovative organizations transforming the joint force of the 21st Century to achieve full spectrum dominance [bold type theirs]: persuasive in peace, decisive in war, preeminent in any form of conflict [italics theirs].”

US policymakers have replaced the Cold War with the Long War for Global Empire and Unchallenged Military Hegemony. This is the lens through which we must view Iraq to better understand why there are permanent US bases there.

In the Quadrennial Defense Review Report released on February 6, 2006, there is a stated ambition to fight ”multiple, overlapping wars” and to ”ensure that all major and emerging powers are integrated as constructive actors and stakeholders into the international system.”

The report goes on to say that the US will ”also seek to ensure that no foreign power can dictate terms of regional or global security. It will attempt to dissuade any military competitor from developing disruptive or other capabilities that could enable regional hegemony

..or hostile action against the United States or other friendly countries, and it will seek to deter aggression or coercion. Should deterrence fail, the United States would deny a hostile power its strategic and operational objectives.”

In sum, what is the purpose of permanent US military garrisons in Iraq and the implicit goals of these government documents?

Empire.

12 mars, 2006

MILOSEVIC – TESTA DIN MEDIA

Filed under: nya — ingrid @ 03:14


It becomes a little less difficult to determine whether we have been informed correctly about Yugoslavia. Did they have a right to present the Nato war as ”humanitarian”? Did the Great Powers have secret strategies? Were there media lies told and war propaganda spread?

We recommend that you take this brief Media test in order to have a clear view, and to test how your medias are going to inform you in the coming hours.

MEDIA QUIZ
How good is our information
on the destruction of Yugoslavia?

1 Did the war begin in 1991 with the secessions of Slovenia and Croatia?
O Yes O No O Don’t know

2 Did Germany deliberately provoke the civil war?
O Yes O No O Don’t know

3 Did the US really remain ‘passive and disinterested’ during this war?
O Yes O No O Don’t know

4 Did the World Bank and the IMF help destroying this country?
O Yes O No O Don’t know

5 Did the media give a phony image of ‘our friends’ Tudjman & Izetbegovic?
O Yes O No O Don’t know

6 Did the media hide the essential history and geography of Bosnia?
O Yes O No O Don’t know

7 Was the topic ‘Serb aggressors, Croat and Muslim victims’ correct?
O Yes O No O Don’t know

8 Did Serbia initiate a program of ethnic cleansing?
O Yes O No O Don’t know

9 Did the media correctly report on Srebrenica?
O Yes O No O Don’t know

10 Were the first victims of the war killed by the Serbs?
O Yes O No O Don’t know

11 Was the famous image of the ‘concentration camps’ false?
O Yes O No O Don’t know

12 Were we given the true stories on the three large massacres in Sarajevo?
O Yes O No O Don’t know

13 Was the largest ethnic cleansing of the war committed by the Croat Army?
O Yes O No O Don’t know

14 Did the US use depleted uranium weapons also in Bosnia?
O Yes O No O Don’t know

15 Was the war against Yugoslavia the US’s ‘only good war’?
O Yes O No O Don’t know

ANSWERS:

1 1991 OR EARLIER?
Did the war begin in 1991 with the secessions of Slovenia and Croatia?

NO. In 1979, the BND (German CIA) sent a team of secret agents to Zagreb. Mission: to support Franjo Tudjman, a racist who actively promoted ethnic hatred and did all he could toward the break-up of Yugoslavia. Germany supported and financed this Croatian Le Pen, and sent him arms before the war.

To what end? Berlin never acknowledged the existence of the unified Yugoslav state which had courageously resisted German aggression in the two world wars. By once more breaking Yugoslavia into easily dominated mini-states, Germany sought to control the Balkans.

An economic zone it could annex in order to remove it from local authority, to export German products to it, and to dominate it as a market. And a strategic route toward the oil and gas of the Middle East and the Caucasus. In 1992, the Bavarian Interior Minister declared: ”Helmut Kohl has succeeded where neither Emperor Guillaume nor Hitler could.” (see the parallel maps ‘Yugoslavia in 1941–in 1991′, Liars’ Poker, pp 68-69)

2 GERMAN WILL?
Did Germany deliberately provoke the civil war?

YES. At the beginning of the Maastricht Summit in 1991, German Chancellor Kohl was alone in wanting to break up Yugoslavia and precipitously to recognize the ‘independence’ of Slovenia and Croatia, in defiance of both International Law and the Yugoslav Constitution. But the rise of German power would impose this madness on all its partners. Paris and London fell right in line.

According to The Observer of London: ”Prime Minister Major paid dearly for supporting German policies toward Yugoslavia which all observers said precipitated the war.” In effect, all the experts had warned that this ‘recognition’ would provoke a civil war. Why? 1. Nearly every Yugoslav Republic was a mix of diverse nationalities. Separating the territories was as absurd as dividing Paris or London into ethnically pure municipal districts.

2. By favoring the neo-fascist Tudjman and the Muslim nationalist Izetbegovic (who had in his youth collaborated with Hitler), it was certain that panic would be provoked among the important Serb minorities who had lived for centuries in Croatia and Bosnia. Every Serb family had lost at least one member to the horrible genocide committed by the fascist Croats and Muslims, agents of Nazi Germany in 1941-45.
Only Tito’s Yugoslavia had been able to bring about peace, equality and coexistence. But Berlin, then Washington, wanted once and for all to break this country they saw as being ‘too far to the Left’ (see question 4).

3 A PASSIVE USA?
Did the US remain ‘passive and disinterested’ during this war?

NO. Lord Owen, special European Union envoy to Bosnia, and later a well-placed observer, wrote in his memoirs: ”I greatly respect the United States. But in recent years (92-95) this nation’s diplomacy has been guilty of needlessly prolonging the war in Bosnia.”

What was its aim? While the Germans were busy taking control of Slovenia, Croatia and, eventually, Bosnia, Washington put pressure on Izetbegovic, the Muslim nationalist leader in Sarajevo: ”Don’t sign any peace agreements proposed by the Europeans. We will win the war for you on the ground.” Washington then prolonged for two years the horrible suffering inflicted on all the people of Bosnia.
By what means?

1. Setting aside all the advantages Berlin had gained in this strategic region of the Balkans. 2. Dividing and weakening the European Union. 3. Installing NATO as the Continental European policeman. 4. Restricting all Russian access to the Mediterranian Sea. 5. Imposing its military and political leadership on all the other wars being prepared.

Because the war against Yugoslavia was at the same time a non-declared war against Europe. After the fall of the Berlin wall, US strategies were geared toward stopping, at all costs, the emergence of a European superpower. So everything was done to weaken Europe militarily and politically.

4 WORLD BANK & IMF
Did the World Bank and the IMF help destroying this country?

YES. In December 1989, the IMF imposed draconian conditions on Yugoslavia which forced liberal prime minister Markovic to beg for aid from George Bush Sr. This ‘help’ was aimed at destabilizing and bankrupting all large state-owned businesses. The World Bank dismantled the banking system, laid off 525,000 workers in one year, then ordered the immediate elimination of two out of every three jobs. The quality of life fell dramatically.

These policies and the growing incidence of work stoppages in solidarity with displaced workers in all the Republics heightened the contradictions among the leaders of the various Republics to whom Belgrade could no longer provide financing. To get themselves out of this mess, the leaders had to resort to divisive tactics and invested greatly in nationalist hatreds. This war was ignited from abroad. Like so many others.

The war against Yugoslavia was a war of globalization. All the great Western powers sought to liquidate the Yugoslav economic system which they found too Leftist: with a strong public sector, important social rights, resistance to the multinationals… The real reason for these various wars against Yugoslavia can be read in this reproach (this threat?) from the Washington Post: ”Milosevic was unable to grasp the political message of the fall of the Berlin wall. Other Communist politicians accepted the Western model, but Milosevic went the other way.” (4 August 1996).

5 ”OUR FRIENDS”
Did the media give a phony image of ‘our friends’ Tudjman & Izetbegovic?

YES. The hyper-nationalist Croat and Muslim leaders were presented as the pure victims, great anti-racist democrats. But their past as much as their present should have alerted us:

When he took power, Franjo Tudjman declared: ”I’m happy my wife isn’t a Jew or a Serb.” He hurriedly renamed the streets that had carried the names of antifascist partisans, reinstated the money and the flag of the old genocidal fascist regime, and changed the Constitution in order to run off the Serbs.

During his 1990 electoral campaign, Izetbegovic reissued his ‘Islamic Declaration’: ”There can be neither peace nor coexistence between the Islamic religion and those social and political institutions that are non-Islamic.” He set up a corrupt and mafia-ridden regime based primarily on the lucrative black market and the hijacking of funds from international aid.

He called for assistance, with Washington’s blessings, from Islamic mercenaries, most notably from al Qaeda. Once the war had started, serious crimes were committed by all three camps, but by hiding these histories, the situation was rendered incomprehensible.

6 HISTORY & GEOGRAPHY
Did the media hide the essential history and geography of Bosnia?

YES. We were made to believe that the Serbs were the aggressors, that they had invaded Bosnia from outside its borders. In reality, three national groups had been living in Bosnia for a long time: the Muslims (43%), the Serbs (31%), the Croats (17%). And one should not forget that 7% of ‘Yugoslavs’ were born of mixed marriages or preferred to eschew narrow national identities.

Dividing Bosnia according to nationalities, as the EU did, was absurd and dangerous. Because this diverse population was completely intermingled: the Muslims lived primarily in the cities while the Serbs and Croats made up the peasantry and were dispersed throughout the sub-regions. Bosnia could not be divided without civil war.

In fact, the Serbs of Bosnia did not fight to invade the territories of ‘others’, but to save their own lands and establish corridors of communication between them. It was an absurd and bloody situation, with all the ravages of a civil war, but this civil war was provoked by the great powers.

7 ”GOOD GUYS” AND ”BAD GUYS”
Was the presumption of ”Serb aggressors, Croat and Muslim victims” correct?

NO. In command of the UN forces in Bosnia from July 1993 to January 1994, Belgian general Briquemont was well placed to declare: ”The disinformation is total (…) Television needs a scapegoat. For the moment, there is complete unanimity in condemning the Serbs, and that in no way facilitates the search for a solution.

I don’t think one can view the problem of ex-Yugoslavia and of Bosnia-Herzegovina only from the anti-Serb angle. It is much more complicated than that. One day in the middle of the Croat-Muslim war, we gave some information on the massacres committed by the Croatian army. An American journalist said to me: ‘If you give out that sort of information, the American public won’t understand anything.’”

It is not a question of denying the crimes committed by the Serb forces. The ideology one finds in the writings of Bosnian Serb leader Karadzic is extremely right wing. But in reality, after the break-up of Yugoslavia, on all sides, certain criminal and political forces used the methods of war to seize territory and riches. In the three camps – Croat, Muslim and Serb – militias committed grave crimes. To the detriment of all the people.

Thus, in August 1994, the Muslim nationalist leader in Sarajevo, Izetbegovic, attacked the Muslim region of Bihac, controlled by Fikret Abdic, who had distanced himself from Izetbegovic and wanted to live in harmony with his Serb and Croat neighbors. In this offensive, Izetbegovic was aided by six US generals.

Remaining silent to the crimes of ‘our friends’ but demonizing whoever resists us is classic war propaganda. Numerous media lies were totally fabricated by a US public relations firm, Ruder Finn. Colleagues of the famous Hill & Knowlton, who created the media lie about Kuwaiti incubators stolen by the Iraqis.

8 ”ETHNIC CLEANSING”?
Did Serbia initiate a program of ethnic cleansing?

NO. If one believes that ethnic cleansing was actually the program of ‘the dictator Milosevic’, one has to admit that this program was sadly ineffective. Because throughout the war years and still today, one of every five inhabitants of Serbia is a non-Serb. In Belgrade there are and have always been many minorities living without any difficulty: Muslims, Gypsies, Albanians, Macedonians, Turks, Hungarians, Gorans.

In reality, contrary to the image given by the press, Serbia is today the only state of the ex-Yugoslavia, along with Macedonia, that remains ‘multinational’. On the other hand, all the NATO protectorates – Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo – practiced an almost total ethnic purification.

Milosevic objected to the excesses committed by the Serb militias in Bosnia. His wife made several declarations against them. An embargo was even applied by Serbia against Karadzic. Certainly, part of Serb public opinion was influenced by racist nationalism. But this was due precisely to Germany and the great powers having plunged the country into civil war and thus into hatred.

9 SREBRENICA
Did the media correctly report on Srebrenica?

NO. First element. Even if it’s a matter of condemning abominable crimes, historical truth – necessary for reconciliation – is not served by the propagandistic processes that unreflexively use the term ‘genocide’, by the obfuscation of the fact that that some of the victims died in combat or by the systematic exaggeration of the numbers.

Inquests have determined that many of the ‘victims’ were found some months later voting in subsequent elections or even taking part in other battles with Izetbegovic’s army. This information was and remains obscured. We won’t here go into the argument over numbers which only serious historians will be able to sort out definitively.

Second element. Why did the media hide the events essential to an understanding of this drama? In the beginning, this region was inhabited by Muslim AND Serbs. The latter were run off in 1993 by an ethnic cleansing committed by the Muslim nationalist troops of Izetbegovic. French general Morillon, who commanded the UN force there, charges: ”On the night of the Orthodox Christmas, the holy night of January 1993, Nasser Oric led raids on Serb villages.

There were heads cut off, abominable massacres committed by the forces of Nasser Oric in all the neighboring villages.” (Documents of information from the French National Assembly, Srebrenica, t 2, pp. 140-154) The desire for vengeance does not excuse the crimes committed later. But why systematically hide the crimes of ‘our friends’?

Third element. Like other so-called demilitarized ‘safe havens’, Srebrenica was in reality an area used by the forces of Izetbegovic to regroup, the UN protecting them from total defeat. Astonishingly, Oric’s troops retreated from Srebrenica just a week before the massacre. French general Germanos: ”Oric had widely declared that they had abandoned Srebrenica because they’d wanted Srebrenica to fall. The ‘they’ was Izetbegovic.”

And why? It is interesting to return to a curious UN report, written a year and a half earlier by Kofi Annan: ”Izetbegovic had learned that a NATO intervention into Bosnia was possible. But it would happen only if the Serbs forced their way into Srebrenica and massacred at least 5,000 people [sic].” A massacred predicted a year and a half before it happened! (UN Report of 28-29 November)

General Morillon also informed us that ”It is Izetbegovic’s people who opposed the evacuation of all those who had asked to be taken out, and there were many.” His conclusion: ”Mladic fell into a trap at Srebrenica.”

10 FIRST VICTIMS
Were the first victims of the war killed by Serbs?

NO. June 28, 1991, the Slovenian police executed (at least) two unarmed soldiers of the Yugoslav national army who had surrendered at Holmec, a post on the Austrian border. This was acknowledged by the newspaper Slovenske Novice.

It has also been ‘established from the very beginning’ that three soldiers of this same Yugoslav army were executed at a post on the Italian border after surrendering themselves. (Facts and testimony reported to the ICY at The Hague, cfr Forgotten Crimes, Igor Mekina, AIM Ljubljana, 11/02/99).

11 CONCENTRATION CAMPS?
Was the famous image of the ‘concentration camps’ false?

YES. Fabricated by Bernard Kouchner and Médecins du Monde, this image showed some ‘prisoners’ held, seemingly, behind barbed wire. One of them had terribly protruding ribs. Kouchner had pasted beside the photo a guard tower from Auschwitz and the accusation ‘mass extermination’. To hammer home the message ”Serbs = Nazis”. He thus abetted a campaign of demonization launched by the US public relations firm Ruder Finn.

But the whole thing was faked and taken from a report by British TV channel ITN. The trickery became obvious when one viewed the footage shot at the same time by a local TV news crew. In reality, the British camera had been deliberately placed behind the two lonely strands of barbed wire that formed a fence surrounding an old enclosure for farming equipment. The ‘prisoners’ were on the ‘outside’ of the barbed wire.

Free because they were refugees in this camp to escape the war and the militias who would force them to fight. In the complete film, the only prisoner who speaks English declares to the ITN journalist three times that they are being well treated and are safe. The man with the protruding ribs (gravely ill) was called to the foreground when all his mates looked to be in too good a shape. Kouchner’s montage was a gross falsehood. (Cfr Liars’ Poker, p. 34)

There certainly were camps in Bosnia. Not for extermination, but rather for the preparation of prisoner exchanges. Violations of Human Rights were committed here. But why were the UN reports on this subject hidden from us? They accounted for six Croat camps, two Serb camps and one Muslim camp.

12 SARAJEVO
Were we given the true stories on the three large massacres in Sarajevo?

NO. Three times Western public opinion was shocked by these terrible images: dozens of victims blown to bits in front of a bakery or in the marketplace of Sarajevo. Immediately the Serbs were accused of having killed civilians by bombarding the city. This despite numerous contradictions in official communications.

But never was the public informed of the results of inquiries made outside the UN. Nor of the reports which accused the forces of president Izetbegovic. Furthermore, high Western officials knew about them but kept them carefully hidden. It was only much later that the editor-in-chief of the Nouvel Observateur, Jean Daniel, admitted: ”Today I have to say it.

I heard, in succession, Edouard Balladur (French Prime Minister at the time), François Léotard (Minister of the Army), Alain Juppé (Foreign Minister) and two ‘high-ranking’ generals, whose confidence I will not betray by naming them, tell me (. . .) that the shell fired on the marketplace was itself also from the Muslims! They would have brought carnage upon their own people! Was I afraid of this observation? Yes, the Prime Minister answered me without hesitating… ”(Nouvel Observateur, August 21, 1995)

Why these manipulations? As if by chance, each massacre took place just before an important meeting to justify some Western measures: an embargo against the Serbs (92), a NATO bombing (94), a final offensive (95). NATO and Izetbegovic applied an essential principle of war propaganda: justify the offensive with a media lie, a ‘massacre’ to shock public opinion.

The official version of the siege of Sarajevo hides several points: 1. The Serb forces certainly committed serious crimes. But the civilians who wanted to flee through a tunnel that permitted them to leave the city were stopped by the Izetbegovic regime. He wanted to maximize the clientele for his black market, hijacking international aid money. 2. It was especially important to present a black and white image of a victim people and their aggressors.

In reality, even in Sarajevo, Izetbegovic’s snipers regularly killed the inhabitants of Serb sections of the city without anyone ever speaking of it. 3. Some equally grave atrocities went down, for example, at Mostar. But here they were due to fighting between the Croat and Muslim forces who had long before run off all the Serbs.

13 THE LARGEST ”CLEANSING”
Was the largest ethnic cleansing of the war committed by the Croat army?

YES. On August 4, 1995, a hundred thousand Croat soldiers, a hundred and fifty tanks, two hundred troop transports, more than three hundred pieces of artillery, and forty missile launchers attacked the Serb population of the Krajina. More than 150,000 Serbs were forced to leave this region which they had inhabited for centuries. The worst atrocities of the war were committed: the Croat forces killed the elderly who could not flee, and burned 85% of the abandoned houses.

Clinton called the offensive ‘useful’. His Secretary of State said: ”The retaking of the Krajina could lead to a new strategic situation which might be favorable for us.” Worse yet: the United States advised Croatia in carrying out its offensive, according to an admission by the Croatian foreign minister. Furthermore, it was Washington that took charge of the ‘democratic’ training of this army. (Liars’ Poker, pp. 193-194)

14 URANIUM BOMBS
Did the US use depleted uranium weapons also in Bosnia?

YES. At an international conference, ”Uranium, the victims speak”, organized in Brussels in March 2001, a Bosnian doctor presented a Bosnian Serb forest ranger, a victim like many others of multiple atypical and fast moving cancers. after having been exposed to DU in areas of US bombardment.

A Bosnian health official laid out some statistics : the population of a Serb neighbourhood of Sarajevo bombed by US planes in 1995, (a population later expelled from that city), showed a five-fold increase in various types of cancer.
The weapons using depleted uranium allowed the US – but also France and Great Britain – to get rid of waste materials from their nuclear plants.

These by-products seriously pollute the earth as well as the underground water table, causing cancer, leukemia and monstrous birth defects (including babies born to contaminated GIs). In short, use of these depleted uranium arms transformed several countries into nuclear waste dumps for eternity. (video and brochure ”Uranium, the victims speak”).

15 THE ONLY ”GOOD WAR”
Was the war against Yugoslavia the US’s only good war?

NO. The United States tried to make believe that it had fought a humanitarian war. And to present itself, for once, as a defender of Muslims. But in reality Washington and Berlin provoked this war. Deliberately. In the selfish interest of conquering certain strategic objectives: the economic colonization of the Balkans, gaining control of the routes for transporting oil, and the fight for world domination.

The USA has never fought a humanitarian war. And it was not the fireman in this war against Yugoslavia, it was the firebug. It was the most guilty of inflicting suffering on all the people. The USA can not be, on the one hand, the friend of the Muslims in the Balkans, and, on the other, their worst enemy in Palestine and Iraq. The US is the Muslims’ enemy everywhere.

And the most dangerous enemy of all the people of the world. It threatens Syria, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, and some day even China. Because its war strategy has no other goal than to maintain an unjust economic order, to dominate and exploit every country on earth to the end of further enriching a small handful of super – billionairs.

This is why it is so important to unmask all the media lies and to make the truth known about the war against Yugoslavia: It was a war of aggression.

___________________________

In conclusion. An appeal.

We will not give you a ‘score’ to evaluate the degree to which you have suffered from media manipulations. That would be indecent. During this decade, too many innocents suffered and suffer still because of the disinformation orchestrated by the great powers in order to advance their imperialist domination.

And other people, closer to you, or yourself perhaps, have suffered another injury: knowing what was traumatizing you behind these orchestrated lies, but not being able to do anything about it. Such was the powerful indoctrination of the public consciousness.

The answers that we set forth here are the results of long research, which took a great deal of time and required detailed investigation to break out the truth. We would like only to show you that it is possible for each of you to escape the media’s hypnotic spell meant to make us accept the unacceptable.

What to do? It’s not enough, after the lies of each conflict, to say: ”Never again!” We must search without ceasing to understand what is truly at stake economically and strategically in each war. To yank the curtain on the puppeteers who pull the strings from off-stage. To organize collectively, to investigate more rapidly. And to spread more widely the results of these ‘media quiz’.

You can help reinforce the effects of the media quiz by contacting us. Because we must never become enured to this horror and cynicism.
http://www.michelcollon.info/mailinglist_en.php

11 mars, 2006

Inf̦r 3-̴rsdagen av Irakkriget den 18 mars Рoch Robert Fisks analys

Filed under: nya — ingrid @ 11:30

USA UT UR IRAK
efter tre år av eskalerat kaos den 18 mars

OMEDELBART
Inte tills ”de irakiska trupperna hunnit utbildas”. Dessa bataljoner har för övrigt bara blivit färre och färre och är dÃ¥ligt utrustade

FULLSTÄNDIGT
Inte förpassas till USAs över dussinet nya militär-och flygbaser. Kontrollen över oljan har alltid varit USAs mÃ¥l i Mellanöstern – inte stabilitet och äkta demokrati. Det var ocksÃ¥ anled-ningen till att den iranska folkvalda presidenten Mossadegh störtades av CIA för 53 Ã¥r sedan

VILLKORSLÖST
Inte att president Bush o oljeföretaget Halliburton lägger sig i irakernas rätt att styra sig själva

Om beväpnade män invaderar ditt hem, rånar, tillfångatar, torterar och dödar medlemmar av din familj och förstör allt de kommer åt. Då vill du ha ut dem omedelbart. Inte att de först tränar upp sig för att kunna städa efter sig, vilket f.ö är föga troligt de är intresserade av.

Dagens kaos i Irak är en direkt följd av ockupationen. Då finns ingen legitimitet för USA att stanna kvar i militärbaser och övervaka området med förarlösa bombflygplan och genom sin nickedockregering fortsätta plundra landet.

Det är upp till irakerna själva att bestämma om de önskar arabiska FNtrupper att skydda landet under en övergångsperiod. USA och NATO är redan komprometterade.

SLUT UPP
på demonstrationen på 3-årsdagen av irakkriget nu på lördag den 18 mars med samling Götaplatsen kl 13 med avmarch mot Gustav Adolfs Torg. Där skall Sven-Eric Liedman, Ida Gabrielsson och Henry Ascher hålla korta tal med apeller från Muslimska Kulturföreningen respektive Iraksolidaritet

Robert Fisk i ny australisk radiointervju РVilka ligger bakom terrord̴den i Irak?

Jag har misstankar men inga bevis och har tillbringat mycket tid med att försöka finna ut vilka det är som står bakom terrordåden i Irak.

Helt säkert har det Irakiska inrikesministeriet torterat människor till döds och det finns även folk som driver dödsskvadroner.

Jag tror de vill skapa en situation där just deras sida eller deras parti kontrollerar Irak.

Det är helt klart att motstÃ¥ndsrörelsen, de flesta sunnis, vill fÃ¥ ut amerikanarna. för att efterÃ¥t kunna säga ”vi befriade landet, vi vill ha en plats vid makten”.

Jag måste tyvärr säga att de överläggningar som nu äger rum sker på en liten yta i Gröna zonen bevakad av amerikanska tanks. De som förhandlar går inte ut på Bagdads gator och ser inte människorna där eller upplever bombningarna.

De som röstade för regeringen var framförallt shiiter. Människor vill rösta och vill ha frihet, men i så fall frihet från oss, men det accepterar vi inte. För vi vill fortsätta kontrollera Irak och se till att man gör som vi vill. Vi vill ha kontrollen över deras regering.

Jag menar, de hade ett demokratiskt val och vad händer? Bush tar telefonluren och säger come on, vi vill ha enighet, sätt igång.

Om USA drar sig tillbaka behöver man hjälp av Syrien och Iran för att kunna ge sig iväg utan risk för anfall från motståndsrörelsen inom dessa länder.

Jag har sagt det förut och det låter naturligtvis hemskt i amerikanska öron, men USA måste lämna Irak, de kommer att göra det och de kan inte göra det. Så råkar det vara.

Vad som är helt säkert är att någon önskar inbördeskrig.

Det är en alldeles för simpel förklaring att shiiter vill attackera sunnis och vice versa. Sunnis har aldrig haft denna sekteristiska inställning trots faktum att de är i minoritet och alltid regerat Irak. Detta är inget sekteristiskt samhälle utan ett klansamhälle där folk är ingifta med varandra.

De första som nämnde inbördeskrig var inte irakerna utan ockupationsmakten.

Vi vet fortfarande inte vilka som kan tänkas ligga bakom bombningarna av landet. Hur många namn har vi fått på självmordsbombare? Två av 320 stycken vid det här laget. Så varifrån kommer då dessa människor?

I varje fall kidnappas folk av ”människor som bär polisuniform”. Polisstationen vid Bagdads flygplats intogs och alla poliser avrättades av män som ”bar arméuniform”.

Vi hade samma problem i Algeriet och det tog ett tag innan vi insåg att att dessa var poliser och soldater. Med andra ord betalades de av myndigheterna själva.

Det vi har är dödsskvadroner och några av dem arbetar helt klart för regeringsmyndigheten i Bagdad. Ändå ser jag fortfarande inte detta som ett inbördeskrig. Men som sagt, någon önskar inbördeskrig.

Om du riktigt försöker och dödar tillräckligt många människor kanske du till sist framkallar något sådant.

Och alla ockupationsmakter säger samma sak: Vi talar inte med terrorister. Amerikanarna säger detta och de har inte läst historien. För till slut måste de göra det, och det kommer de också att få göra.

Vi älskar demokrati, såvida muslimerna väljer de personer vi själva vill. Som då vi hör att israelerna inte vill ha med Hamas att göra. Ändå är det de själva som skapat Hamas. När PLO var i Beirut och israelerna ville gå emot dem, bad de enträget Hamas att bygga upp fler moskéer och sociala institutioner i Gaza.

Se upp nu, jag använder inte ordet terrorist om någon. Visst finns det folk inom Hamas som stöder mord på oskyldiga civila, naturligtvis finns det det.

Men morden på Hamasledarna kommer att slå tillbaka på oss själva.

Den gång vi säger att vi skall döda bin Laden, vad öppnar vi då för honom att agera utifrån? Den gång vi vänder ryggen till internationell rätt, ger upp rättvisa och vill hämnd, då är det slut

Mellanöstern har aldrig tidigare varit i ett sådant fruktansvärt läge som nu, aldrig så farligt.

Jag har aldrig känt en sådan fara som i dagens Irak, aldrig.

Och som jag levt där och andats Mellanösterns atmosfär, då vet jag att någonting kommer att hända, jag menar inte 9/11, men någonting.

Som att amerikanarna drivs ut ur Irak.

Om detta skapar mer stabilitet i landet, nÃ¥ja det fÃ¥r man hoppas. Men om de lämnar är det ett väldigt slag mot USAs militära, politiska och strategiska prestige i världen, ingen tvekan om detta…

Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress