- State of the Zionist Empire Three Years After the
Invasion and Occupation of Iraq
- Erklärung von Irakerinnen und Irakern im Exil
zum Dritten Jahrestag der Besetzung des Irak
- Statement by Iraqi expatriates on the Third
Anniversary of the Occupation of Iraq
- Three Years...
- Abu Ghraib Files: ALLE Fotos und Videos
- Lehren aus dem Irakkrieg? Fangen wir mit der Geschichte
der Vereinigten Staaten an
- The Iraqi Resistance
Three Years after Shock & Awe
- Reparationen für Irak
Forderung von Noam Chomsky
- "Lügende, dreckige Gauner"
Der Propagandakrieg der USA
- Auftrag erfüllt
Propaganda für US-Militär kein Problem
State of the Zionist Empire Three Years After the
Invasion and Occupation of Iraq
Hassan A El-Njajjar, Al-Jazeerah.info
March 20, 2006
Three years ago, on March 19, 2003, US President George Bush ordered
US forces to invade and occupy Iraq using two pretexts. He claimed
that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, implying that it would
threaten the US with them. He also claimed that Iraq had links with
Alqaeda organization, which attacked the US in September 11, 2001,
in an attempt to end the US military presence in Saudi Arabia. Later,
a bipartisan Committee found no bases for these two pretexts. The
Committee concluded that Iraq neither had weapons of mass destruction
nor had any links with Alqaeda.
Then, why did the US invade and occupy Iraq?
Researchers have found that the Zionist rulers of the American Empire
had expressed their intention to invade Iraq during the 1990s. This
was expressed in a blueprint written by Wolfowitz, Pearl, and Feith
well before they came to power. However, in my book about the 1991
Gulf War "The Gulf War: Overreaction & Excessiveness" (which was
rejected by about 50 US publishers), I argued that leaders of the
Zionist Empire considered Iraq as a threat to be dealt with as far
back as 1988. Back then, the Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin
and his foreign minister Shimon Peres pronounced the first public
announcement about targeting Iraq, as it came out stronger from the
eight-year Iran-Iraq War.
Right away, Zionist ideologues and propagandists in the US academia,
think tanks, corporate media, and government started preparing the
population for not only targeting Iraq, but also for replacing the
fallen Communism with the new "villain" of Islamism. A new cold
war was badly needed to replace the first one, which ended with the
collapse of the Soviet Union, in the late 1980s.
These Cold War II entrepreneurs included Bernard Lewis and Huntington
in the academia, researchers of the Washington Institute for Near
Eastern Policy (WINEP), researchers and authors publishing in Foreign
Affairs, the journal of the Council on Foreign Relations, media
demagogues like Steve Emerson and Danial Pipes, and an army of Israelfirsters
in the corporate media of the Empire.
The pro-Israel officials in the Bush Sr. administration (Brent
Scowcroft, Dennis Ross, Bob Kimmit, and Richard Haass) got the
Rabin-Peres message and did everything in their power to make
sure that the 1991 Gulf War would happen. They encouraged Kuwait
to challenge Iraq and assured Iraq that the US had no business
to interfere in the inter-Arab disputes, which was a green light
for Saddam to invade Kuwait and thus to fall in their trap.
They refused all peace initiatives to allow Iraqi forces to withdraw
from Kuwait without war. The objective was to destroy the Iraqi
economic, military, and infrastructure capabilities. The 1991 Gulf
War resulted in killing about 150,000 Iraqis and the destruction of
Iraq, ending it as a potential threat to Israel.
Despite this great service Bush Sr. did to Israel, he was fired by
defeating him in the 1992 election. He made a terrible mistake when
he could not understand the power of the Zionists in the media and
government. He refused to give Shamir the loan guarantees he requested
to expand illegal Israeli settlements in the Palestinian occupied
territories.
The pro-Israel foreign policy team in the Clinton administration upheld
the regime of sanctions imposed on Iraq by the Bush Sr. administration,
in order to soften the country for the planned future invasion and
occupation. Amazingly enough, Dennis Ross and William Cohen were in the
team though they were Republicans. The team also included Sandy Burger
and Madeleine Albright, who will be remembered in history for her
infamous statement that the death of half a million Iraqi children as a
result of sanctions was worth it.
In brief, the invasion and occupation of Iraq has nothing to do with
the pretexts of weapons of mass destruction and links with Alqaeda.
It also has nothing to do with Bush Jr. or his administration per se.
It has everything to do with the Zionist Empire and its plans of world
domination. The US and American presidents have been used as tools to
achieve the objectives of this Empire.
In case we're joined by new readers who still haven't heard of the
terminology or the subject, they can research the US military bases
around the world. In one count, these reached 700 in 156 countries.
If this is not an Empire, what is it? I suggest that they start with
the following link for that endeavor:
http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/20040910_2004BaseStructureReport.pdf
Another direction is researching the US military spending, which
exceeds the military spending of most industrialized nations combined.
The US, as a nation-state does not need a fraction of these amounts
of military spending. The only explanation is that these amounts serve
as the military budget of an Empire, not a nation-state. I suggest
that they start with the following link for this subject:
http://www.csbaonline.org/4Publications/Archive/R.20050517.FY06Bud/R.
20050517.FY06Bud.pdf
The third and most decisive evidence about how the US, as a nationstate
exploited and actually expended by the Zionist Empire, is
studying the US national debt, which has reached $8.3 trillion.
It doesn't need a rocket scientist to associate the US military
spending with the US national debt. As a start, I suggest the
following link for studying this aspect:
http://aljazeerah.info/Special%20Reports/Different%20special%20reports/
US%20National%20Debt.htm
But why calling it a Zionist Empire? Why not a US Empire?
The answer simply is that the US nation-state is harmed by the very
characteristics of the Empire: The huge military spending, the large
number of military bases abroad, and the unprecedented national debt.
For an in depth analysis, see my article: Zionism, the highest stage
of imperialism Actually, the US has no foreign policy of its own, as
a nation-state. Everything it does abroad serves Israel, the military
industrial complex, and multinational oil companies. Moreover,
successive wars since WWII made the US hated by the nations it fought
wars against, and there have been many of them. Wherever, President
Bush shows up in the world (like in his last trip), he faces angry
demonstrations protesting his presence and American foreign policy,
particularly wars. Hundreds of billions of dollars in trade deficits
every year indicate among other things a boycott of US products.
American civilian industries are apparent victims of the Empire. Thus,
though Americans are forced to finance the Empire and supply it with
the military equipment and the soldiers it needs to impose its will
on other nations, it is not a US Empire. It is harmful to the US and
it is harmful to the American people.
At the same time, the US foreign policy is mainly a protection
and execution of Israeli policies in the Middle East and the
world. Successive US governments never objected to anything Israeli
governments said or did. One historical exception was President
Eizenhower, when he ordered the Israeli government to withdraw from
Gaza Strip and Sinai in 1956, following the Israeli occupation of
these Arab territories during the Anglo-French invasion of the Suez
Canal area. Successive US administrations, Republican and Democrat
alike, slavishly adhere to Israeli policies that aim at the
subjugation of Arabs and Muslims generally, and the Palestinian
people in particular. Even the present stand off against Iran, it
aims ultimately at maintaining the Israeli nuclear hegemonic and
monopolistic status in the Middle East.
Israel and whatever its government says or does is sacred for American
politicians, military leaders, and journalists. None of them dares to
criticize the Israeli government or even Israeli politicians. If they
do not express loyalty publicly, they are dead silent towards Israeli
daily atrocities against the Palestinian people.
Both US political parties, Republicans and Democrats alike, compete
to serve Israel, express loyalty to it, and to its policy. The best
example of showing such loyalty is attending the annual convention
of the Israel-lobbying organization, AIPAC. The vast majority of US
politicians in Congress and in the executive branch of the federal
government attend the AIPAC annual conference and maintain a loyal
relationship to it through adopting every initiative it produces,
usually in service of Israeli policies.
The two main US political parties are so much controlled by
politicians who are loyal to Israel first that the contest between
them has become a contest between Christian Zionists in the
Republican Party and Jewish Zionists in the Democratic Party.
In the 2004 presidential election, the Democratic contenders
were all Jewish or Jewish related. Lieberman and Clark are Jewish
openly, John Kerry is Jewish by descent as his parents and his
brother are Jewish, and Howard Dean is married to a Jewish woman.
On the Republican side, Christian Zionists contend that their loyalty
to Israel is due to the promise of God to Jews to give them the
Holy Land. Aside from the fallacy of adopting a foreign policy on
basis of religion, this is an erroneous reading of the Bible. God
never promised the Holy Land to Jews. Rather, the Promise was to
the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The Palestinian people
represent these descendants more than anybody else in the world today.
They followed Jesus Christ, then most of them accepted Islam. Majority
of Jews, particularly those of Eastern European origins have no roots
in the Middle East and are not descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob. Thus, the biggest problem of Christian Zionists is confusing
Jews for descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For more details,
see my article: The Promised Land
Since Henry Kissinger, American foreign policy is executed mainly by
Jewish officials. Wolfowitz, Pearl, Feith, Dennis Ross, Richard Haass,
Albright, Sandy Burger, William Cohen, Bolton, Abrams, Kurtzer, Bremer,
Sataloff, to name some. As a consequence, the US foreign policy is
mainly a body of rules designed to support Israeli policies. This
goes contrary to the principle of checks and balances in government.
Actually, there have to be Muslim and Arab Americans appointed as a
counter-balance for Jewish Americans in every government department or
agency if this principle is to be upheld. There are about 8-10 million
Muslims and two million Arab Americans in the US. Where are they in
government? How many members of Congress have Arabs and Muslims in
their staff to counter-balance the influence of their Jewish staff?
Where are Arab and Muslim journalists in the corporate media? Actually,
the lack of Arab Americans and Muslim Americans in positions of
decision making in the executive branch, Congress, and the media
contributes to this blind followship to Israeli policies.
So, what has the US invasion and occupation of Iraq done to the US,
Iraq, the Middle East, and the world?
Concerning the US, the war expanded the police state through expanding
the Patriot Act, increased the military spending to unprecedented
levels in human history, and sank the country so deep in debt to the
verge of economic collapse.
The US invasion and occupation of Iraq has destroyed the Iraqi state
and changed Iraq from the most progressive and secular Arab state into
a disintegrating society, failing state, and fighting ethnic factions
in a bitter civil war.
With regard to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the Bush hands-off
policy and the invasion and occupation of Iraq gave support to the
Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories. The Israeli occupation
government expanded illegal settlements, re-invaded Palestinian
cities and villages, imprisoned President Arafat, and adopted a blunt
assassination policy against Palestinian activists. The PalestinianIsraeli
peace process is gone with the wind, as the American Civil War
movie title says. Even after Hamas had won elections in the most free
and fair elections in the world, which is showing its willingness to
make peace with Israel, negative reactions from the Israeli and US
governments may kill this last hope for peace between Palestinians and
Israelis.
The Bush administration launched attacks all over the world against
Islamic groups and Muslim individuals in a way that people everywhere
understood that the US is fighting Islam and Muslims. Battles had
been fought not only in the Middle East but also in North Africa,
Yemen, Pakistan, and as far east as the Philippines. US prisons have
spread all over the world, with abducted Muslims being transferred
from one country to another in a way that not only embarrassed many
nations but also showed them as losing their sovereignty over their
territory.
The world has been horrified when leaked photos and videos showed the
brutality and torture of Iraqi prisoners in Abu Gharib, Guantanamo,
and Afghanis held in privately contracted prisons in Kabul. Then
came a wave of photos designed to provoke emotional reactions from
Muslims all over the world, such as desecration of the Holy Qur'an in
Guantanamo Prison, then the anti-Islamic cartoons in Denmark, which
were reprinted afterwards by European and US publications. To what
level of immorality are we degenerating and for what?
But the most damage has been done to the UN, as the world body that
brings nations together not only for peaceful cooperation in all
aspects of life, but also for resolving international disputes
peacefully. The US has shielded Israel from any pressure to observe
the UN resolutions that give the Palestinians their inalienable
rights, such as their right for freedom, self-determination,
establishing their state, repatriation in their ancestral homeland,
and compensation for the losses they suffered. Not only the US has
encouraged Israel to continue ignoring the UN resolutions 181, 194,
242, and 338 but it also ignored the UN Security Council and invaded
Iraq against the will of the international body. Humanity will need
a long time to overcome this US contempt for the UN.
What about September 11, 2001 Attacks?
Proponents of the permanent-war strategy to control the world often
cite the September 11 attacks as the cause of the pre-emptive war on
Iraq and the "war on terror" in general. The answer to this claim is
simple: Let's list down events in a historical chronology. Quickly,
we'll discover that history did not start on September 11, 2001.
Proponents of the Empire went to war against Iraq in 1991. But after
evicting Iraqis from Kuwait, they did not withdraw US forces from the
Arabian Peninsula generally, and from Saudi Arabia in particular. This
led to Alqaeda attacks against the US interests and personnel in Saudi
Arabia (Al-Khober), then in Africa (the Embassies), and finally against
the New York Trade Center in the 1990s. When all of these attacks did
not convince the Clinton administration to withdraw US forces from
Arabia, then Alqaeda attacked the US in September 11, 2001. The link
was very obvious to the extent that the Bush administration withdrew
US forces from Saudi Arabia directly after the 2003 US invasion of
Iraq. Had this happened earlier, September 11 attacks could have been
avoided.
So, what's the state of the Zionist Empire, right now?
The state of the Zionist Empire is bad and its crown jewel, the United
States, is on the verge of financial collapse. The rulers of the Empire
are more like Cold War dinosaur warriors than 21st century statesmen
who care about their people and the world they are living in.
What's the solution?
The solution is the immediate US withdrawal from Iraq, Afghanistan,
and the Arabian Peninsula, as a first step to be followed by closing
all US military bases abroad. The US government should correct its
invasion mistake by going back to the UN asking for international
forces to replace US forces over there. The longer the US forces stay
in Iraq, the longer the Civil War, the harder the suffering of the
Iraqi people, and the more American casualties.
More important is that the Israeli occupation government has to be
bluntly told by the United States government that it has to withdraw
from the Arab occupied territories (Palestinian, Syrian, and Lebanese
territories). It has to go back to the 1967 borders. The Israeli state
should adopt a constitution that defines its citizens and its borders.
Moreover, it has to give up its nuclear arsenal and live peacefully
with its neighbors. Israelis have to relinquish their dream of a
greater Israel that extends from the Nile to the Euphrates, which is
causing all this trouble the world over. Peace can be achieved by the
Israeli withdrawal from the Palestinian territories and the Israeli
recognition of the rights of the Palestinian people. The Zionist Empire
is harming everybody in the Middle East. It hasn't brought peace to
the Israelis and their neighbors.
Where do we go from here?
The American republic is in real danger unless the American people
wake up and take action. The only hope is voting for candidates
who put America first before the Empire. People should vote for
politicians who pledge to put America first and pledge to stop
supporting wars against the world. Candidates running for Congress,
whether Republicans or Democrats, should pledge to do that.
Otherwise, they should be voted out of office. More important is
that the third parties should get together in an umbrella organization
or coalition that pledges to put America first and that opposes
military adventures overseas. We need to bring home as soon as
possible not only our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan but also from
Germany, Japan, and everywhere. We don't need 700 military bases in
156 countries. This is draining our financial, economic, and human
resources and making us the enemy of so many nations.
We need to correct our course as soon as possible before it is too
late. We still remember the collapse of the Soviet Union and the
breaking away of its republics. We still remember the humiliation
the Russians felt when they couldn't even bring home their troops
from east Germany because they didn't have the resource to do so.
Let's end the Empire and keep the United States, before it's too late
and we lose both.
Let's stop our politicians' humiliating loyalty to Israel.
Let's stop all aid to the Israeli occupation government until it
withdraws from the Palestinian occupied territories and leave the
Palestinian people alone.
Let's put America first, before the Zionist Empire.
Dr. Hassan A El-Najjar is the Editor of aljazeerah.info.
Article nr. 21742 sent on 21-mar-2006 03:07 ECT
The address of this page is : www.uruknet.info?p=21742
The incoming address of this article is :
www.aljazeerah.info/20%20o/State%20of%20the%20Zionist%20Empire%
20Three%20Years%20After%20the%20Invasion%20and%20Occupation%
20of%20Iraq%20By%20Hassan%20A%20El-Njajjar.htm
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m21742&hd=0&size=1&l=x
Erklärung von Irakerinnen und Irakern im Exil
zum Dritten Jahrestag der Besetzung des Irak
18. März 2006
Wir, die Unterzeichner dieser Erklärung, sind irakische Arbeiter,
Angestellte, Studenten, Wissenschaftler, Akademiker, Schriftsteller,
Künstler, Freiberufler und Geschäftsleute. Wir sehen mit Schrecken
das schreckliche Leid der Bevölkerung unseres Landes unter einer
illegalen fremden Besatzung und stehen mit der Friedensbewegung
auf der ganzen Welt, die heute an drei Jahre brutaler militärischer
Besatzung erinnert. Durch diese Besatzung wurden Hunderttausende
von Menschen getötet und verletzt und Millionen aus ihren Wohnorten
vertrieben; sie hat das Leben einer ganzen Bevölkerung erstickt und
ihre Umwelt vergiftet, die physische Infrastruktur, die Zivilinstitutionen
und die für das Überleben notwendigen Netzwerke unseres
Landes zerstört, unsere Kultur angegriffen und Heiligtümer entweiht,
unsere Menschen mit perverser Grausamkeit und in rassistischer
Absicht entwürdigt, Söldner und Todesschwadronen ins Land gebracht
und unser Land mit einer Korruption und gegenseitigen Aufhetzung
überzogen, die unser ganzes Volk bedroht.
Wir unterstützen den Aufruf zu weltweiten Demonstrationen am 18.
März und die Forderung nach Abzug sämtlicher fremder Truppen aus
dem Irak, der Auflösung aller US-Stützpunkte und einem Ende der
US-Herrschaft über die wirtschaftliche und soziale Politik des
Irak und der Einmischung der USA in die inneren Angelegenheiten
des Irak.
Wir sind überzeugt, dass die Besatzung der Hauptgrund für die heutige
unsichere Lage im Irak ist, da sie das gegenseitige Misstrauen unter
den Irakern fördert und die Saat der religiösen Zwietracht und des
ethnischen Konflikts sät. Die Besatzung hat die Korruption genährt,
zu einem kriminelles Bandentum geführt and ist hauptverantwortlich
für das Treiben mörderischer, sektiererischer Terroristen und Verbrecher.
Die US-Besatzung hindert die Iraker an der Überwindung der
Hinterlassenschaft von 35 Jahren einer korrupten, bösartigen Diktatur
und Jahrzehnten von Sanktionen und Krieg. Sie verheißt nichts außer
noch mehr Krieg der ein oder anderen Form für eine ganze Generation.
Wir glauben nicht, dass die Besatzung unser Land vor einem Bürgerkrieg
schützt, sondern dass im Gegenteil sektiererische Angriffe und die
Drohung mit dem Bürgerkrieg als Vorwand dienen, die Besatzung zu verl
ängern.
Nach dem internationalen Recht hat die Bevölkerung des Irak ein
legitimes, unveräußerliches Recht auf Widerstand gegen die Besatzung.
Wir fordern alle Teile der irakischen Zivilgesellschaft, sämtliche
politische Aktivisten und alle sozialen und religiösen Führungspers
önlichkeiten auf, fortan jegliche Treffen und jegliche Kommunikation
mit US-amerikanischen, britischen und sonstigen Besatzungsvertretern
und Militärkommandeuren im Irak und stattdessen einen
echten nationalen irakischen Dialog in die Wege zu leiten, der den
genuinen patriotischen Widerstand mit einschließt. Wir dürfen den
Vereinigten Staaten nicht erlauben, ihren Krieg durch irakische
Stellvertreter zu führen, und die irakischen Sicherheitskräfte
werden nur dann Legitimität gewinnen, wenn sie mit der US-Besatzung
brechen und ihre Tätigkeit dem Dienst an der irakischen Bevölkerung
widmen. Wir rufen die Mitglieder der neuen irakischen Armee und
Polizei und die zivilen Beamten und Angestellten in Regierung,
örtlichen Behörden, öffentlichen Institutionen und staatlichen
Unternehmen auf, die Zusammenarbeit mit den US-amerikanischen und
britischen Besatzungsstreitkräften einzustellen und jeden Kontakt
mit offiziellen Vertretern der USA oder Großbritanniens außer zum
Zweck von Verhandlungen über einen sofortigen Abzug zu boykottieren.
Unser Ziel muss die Beendigung der abnormen Beziehungen zwischen
dem Irak und den Vereinigten Staaten und die Herstellung gesunder
zwischenstaatlicher Beziehungen sein, die auf der Unabhängigkeit
und Souveränität des Irak, gegenseitiger Achtung und den Prinzipien
des internationalen Rechts beruhen.
Der friedliche Widerstand, der Widerstand mit anderen Mitteln und die
Verweigerung der Kooperation mit den Vertretern und Streitkräften der
Besatzung im Irak müssen darauf hinarbeiten, dass das neue irakische
Parlament sich weigert, als Feigenblatt der Besatzungsstreitkräfte
zu fungieren. Nur so können die neuen staatlichen Institutionen
und politischen Prozesse die Achtung und Akzeptanz der Bevölkerung
gewinnen. Die Iraker wollen Einheit, Frieden und Stabilität, um ihr
in Trümmer gegangenes Leben wieder aufzubauen und ein nationales
Programm des Wiederaufbaus und der Entwicklung beginnen zu können.
Die amerikanische und englische Bevölkerung und die ganze Welt können
dem Irak helfen, indem sie größtmöglichen Druck auf die US-amerikanische
und britische Regierung ausüben, zusammen mit den Streitkr
äften der so genannten "Koalition der Willigen" all ihre Truppen
und Stützpunkte aus dem Irak abzuziehen, das mit Krieg und Besatzung
gegen die Bevölkerung des Irak verübte Unrecht anzuerkennen und
einen vereinten, demokratischen und vollständig unanhängigen Irak
bei seinen Wiederaufbaubemühungen zu unterstützen.
Übersetzung: Michael Schiffmann
Professor Abbas Alnasrawi, Vermont, USA
Professor Tareq Ismael, Alberta, Kanada
Dr. Scheherazade Hassan, Paris, Frankreich
Dr.Sami Albanna, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
Dr. Kamil Mahdi, Exeter, Großbritannien (GB)
Dr. Mohammed Alwan, Boston, USA
Sami Ramadani, London, GB
Professor Kamal Majid, London, GB
Ghazi Sabir-Ali, Bath, GB
Dr. Ahmed Al-Kawaz
Dr. Haifa Jawad, Birmingham, GB
Ja'far al-Samarrai, Toronto, Kanada
Sabah Jawad, London, GB
Hani Lazim, London, GB
Fenik Adham, London, GB
Mayada Akrawi, Genf, Schweiz
Dr. Ali Al-Assam, London, GB
Dr. Nada Shabout, Texas, USA
Valerie Sabir-Ali, Bath, GB
Dr. Nadje Al-Ali, Exeter, GB
Rashad Salim, London, GB
Zaid Albanna, San Francisco, Kalifornien, USA
Ali Al-Shahwani, Neuseeland
Badia Albanna, Takoma Park, Maryland, USA
Nesreen Melek, Toronto, Kanada
Mumtaz Kamala, GB
Nadhim Al-Qazzaz, GB
Dr. Jennan Ismael, Sydney, Australien
Fay Mahdi, London, GB
Dr. Adnan Aldaini, Exeter, GB
http://www.antikriegsforum-heidelberg.de/irakkrieg2/statement/
erklaerung_exil_3j.html
Statement by Iraqi expatriates on the Third
Anniversary of the Occupation of Iraq
March 18, 2006
We the undersigned expatriate Iraqi workers, students, scientists,
academics, writers, artists, professionals and business people,
witnessing with horror the destruction of our people under an illegal
foreign occupation, stand together with the peace movement throughout
the world in commemorating three years of a brutal military occupation
that has killed and maimed hundreds of thousands, displaced millions,
blighted the lives of an entire population and spoiled their
environment, shattered our country's physical infrastructure, its
civic institutions and its life-support systems, assaulted our culture
and desecrated sacred sanctuaries, violated people with deviant
cruelty and racist intent, implanted mercenaries and death squads, and
encouraged corruption and sedition that threaten us as a people.
We support the call for world-wide demonstrations on 18 March and
the demand for the withdrawal of all foreign troops from Iraq, the
dismantling of US bases, and an end to US domination of economic and
social policies and its interference in domestic Iraqi affairs.
We believe that the occupation is the main cause of insecurity in Iraq,
encouraging mistrust among Iraqis, and fomenting sectarian strife and
ethnic conflict. The occupation has nurtured corruption and fostered
gang crime, and it bears primary responsibility for the activities
of murderous sectarian terrorists and criminals. The US occupation
prevents Iraqis from overcoming the legacy of 35 years of corrupt and
vicious dictatorship and of decades of sanctions and war. It promises
nothing except more war of one kind or another for a generation to
come. We do not believe that the occupation acts as an insurance
against civil war, but that sectarian attacks and the threat of civil
war are being used to prolong the occupation.
The Iraqi people have a legitimate inalienable right, under
International Law, to resist the occupation. We call upon all Iraqi
civil society and political activists, community and religious
leaders to cease forthwith all meetings and communications with
US, British and other occupation officials and military commanders
in Iraq, and to pursue instead a national Iraqi dialogue that is
inclusive of the genuine patriotic resistance. The United States
must not be allowed to wage its war by proxy, and Iraqi security
forces will only gain legitimacy if they break links with the US
occupation and dedicate themselves to the service of the Iraqi
people. We call upon officials in the new Iraqi military and police,
together with civilian officials in government, local authorities,
public institutions and state enterprises to end co-operation with
US and British occupation forces and to boycott all US and British
official personnel, except for withdrawal negotiations.
The objective must be to terminate the abnormal relationship between
Iraq and the United States and to establish a healthy state-to-state
relationship that is based on Iraqi sovereignty, independence, mutual
respect and the principles of international legality.
Peaceful resistance, resistance by other means, and non-cooperation
with occupation forces and officials must be a prelude for the new
Iraqi Parliament to remove the fig leaf of legitimacy from the forces
of occupation. Only then would the new state institutions and political
process gain respect and acceptance. Iraqis want unity, peace and
stability in order to rebuild their shattered lives and to pursue a
national programme of reconstruction and development.
The American and British peoples and the whole world can help Iraq
by exerting maximum pressure upon the US and British administrations
to remove all their troops and bases, along with the forces of the
so-called "Coalition of the Willing" from Iraq; to acknowledge the
injustice committed against the people of Iraq; and to help a unified
democratic fully independent Iraq in a reconstruction effort.
Professor Abbas Alnasrawi Vermont, USA
Professor Tareq Ismael Alberta, Canada
Dr Scheherazade Hassan Paris, France
Dr Sami Albanna Bethesda, MD, USA
Dr Kamil Mahdi Exeter, UK
Dr Mohammed Alwan Boston, USA
Sami Ramadani London, UK
Professor Kamal Majid London, UK
Ghazi Sabir-Ali Bath, UK
Dr Ahmed Al-Kawaz
Dr Haifa Jawad Birmingham, UK
Ja'far al-Samarrai Toronto, Canada
Sabah Jawad London, UK
Hani Lazim London, UK
Fenik Adham London, UK
Mayada Akrawi Geneva, Switzerland
Dr Ali Al-Assam London, UK
Dr Nada Shabout Texas, USA
Valerie Sabir-Ali Bath, UK
Dr Nadje Al-Ali Exeter, UK
Rashad Salim London, UK
Zaid Albanna San Francisco, CA, USA
Ali AlShahwani New Zealand
Badia Albanna Takoma Park, MD, USA
Nesreen Melek Toronto, Canada
Mumtaz Kamala UK
Nadhim Al-Qazzaz UK
Dr Jenan Ismael Texas, USA
http://www.idao.org/2006/03/statement-by-iraqi-expatriates-on.xml
Saturday, March 18, 2006
Three Years...
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.
School, college and work have been on again, off again affairs. It
seems for every two days of work/school, there are five days of sitting
at home waiting for the situation to improve. Right now college and
school are on hold because the "arba3eeniya" or the "40th Day" is
coming up- more black and green flags, mobs of men in black and
latmiyas. We were told the children should try going back to school
next Wednesday. I say "try" because prior to the much-awaited
parliamentary meeting a couple of days ago, schools were out. After
the Samarra mosque bombing, schools were out. The children have been
at home this year more than they've been in school.
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 acquaintancessophisticated,
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.
I remember as a child, during a visit, I was playing outside with one
of the neighbors children. Amal was exactly my age- we were even born
in the same month, only three days apart. We were laughing at a silly
joke and suddenly she turned and asked coyly, "Are you Sanafir or
Shanakil?" I stood there, puzzled. `Sanafir' is the Arabic word
for "Smurfs" and `Shanakil" is the Arabic word for "Snorks". I
didn't understand why she was asking me if I was a Smurf or a Snork.
Apparently, it was an indirect way to ask whether I was Sunni
(Sanafir) or Shia (Shanakil).
"What???" I asked, half smiling. She laughed and asked me whether I
prayed with my hands to my sides or folded against my stomach. I
shrugged, not very interested and a little bit ashamed to admit that
I still didn't really know how to pray properly, at the tender age
of 10.
Later that evening, I sat at my aunt's house and remember to ask my
mother whether we were Smurfs or Snorks. She gave me the same blank
look I had given Amal. "Mama- do we pray like THIS or like THIS?!"
I got up and did both prayer positions. My mother's eyes cleared and
she shook her head and rolled her eyes at my aunt, "Why are you asking?
Who wants to know?" I explained how Amal, our Shanakil neighbor, had
asked me earlier that day. "Well tell Amal we're not Shanakil and we're
not Sanafir- we're Muslims- there's no difference."
It was years later before I learned that half the family were Sanafir,
and the other half were Shanakil, but nobody cared. We didn't sit
around during family reunions or family dinners and argue Sunni Islam
or Shia Islam. The family didn't care about how this cousin prayed
with his hands at his side and that one prayed with her hands folded
across her stomach. Many Iraqis of my generation have that attitude.
We were brought up to believe that people who discriminated in
any way- positively or negatively- based on sect or ethnicity were
backward, uneducated and uncivilized.
The thing most worrisome about the situation now, is that
discrimination based on sect has become so commonplace. For the
average educated Iraqi in Baghdad, there is still scorn for all
the Sunni/Shia talk. Sadly though, people are being pushed into
claiming to be this or that because political parties are promoting
it with every speech and every newspaper- the whole 'us' / 'them'.
We read constantly about how `We Sunnis should unite with our Shia
brothers...' or how 'We Shia should forgive our Sunni brothers...'
(note how us Sunni and Shia sisters don't really fit into either
equation at this point). Politicians and religious figures seem to
forget at the end of the day that we're all simply Iraqis.
And what role are the occupiers playing in all of this? It's very
convenient for them, I believe. It's all very good if Iraqis are
abducting and killing each other- then they can be the neutral
foreign party trying to promote peace and understanding between
people who, up until the occupation, were very peaceful and
understanding.
Three years after the war, and we've managed to move backwards in a
visible way, and in a not so visible way.
In the last weeks alone, thousands have died in senseless violence
and the American and Iraqi army bomb Samarra as I write this. The
sad thing isn't the air raid, which is one of hundreds of air raids
we've seen in three years- it's the resignation in the people. They
sit in their homes in Samarra because there's no where to go. Before,
we'd get refugees in Baghdad and surrounding areas... Now, Baghdadis
themselves are looking for ways out of the city... out of the country.
The typical Iraqi dream has become to find some safe haven abroad.
Three years later and the nightmares of bombings and of shock and awe
have evolved into another sort of nightmare. The difference between
now and then was that three years ago, we were still worrying about
material things- possessions, houses, cars, electricity, water, fuel...
It's difficult to define what worries us most now. Even the most
cynical war critics couldn't imagine the country being this bad three
years after the war... Allah yistur min il rab3a (God protect us from
the fourth year).
http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/
In German:
http://www.freace.de/artikel/200603/190306b.html
Abu Ghraib Files: ALLE Fotos und Videos
http://www.corriere.it/openxlink.shtml?http://www.salon.com
http://www.salon.com/news/abu_ghraib/2006/03/14/chapter_2/index.html
http://www.salon.com/news/abu_ghraib/2006/03/14/introduction/index.html
Der Chefredakteur von 'salon.com' Joan Walsh hat heute alle
279 Fotos und 19 Videos von Abu Ghraib veröffentlicht. Das
Brisante daran ist, daß bisher unveröffentlichte Pentagonanalysen
der Fotos und die Geschichte hinter den Fotos auch publiziert
werden. Die Rolle der Geheimdienste wird ebenfalls analysiert.
Grüße, Sylvia Weiss
http://hometown.aol.de/irakseite
Lehren aus dem Irakkrieg? Fangen wir mit der Geschichte
der Vereinigten Staaten an
von Howard Zinn
ZNet Kommentar 18.03.2006
Der dritte Jahrestag von Präsident Bushs Irakdebakel ist ein wichtiger
Tag, um darüber nachzudenken, wie diese Administration so viele Leute
narren konnte, den Krieg zu unterstützen.
Meiner Meinung nach gibt es zwei Gründe - Gründe, die weit in unsere
nationale Kultur zurückreichen.
Der erste Grund ist die Abwesenheit jeglicher historischer
Perspektive (in unserem Land). Der zweite ist die Unfähigkeit,
über die eigenen nationalen Grenzen hinauszudenken.
Wenn wir unsere Geschichte nicht kennen, sind wir Frischfleisch für
karnivore Politiker bzw. für Journalisten und Intellektuelle, die
diesen Fleischfressern das Besteck reichen. Aber wenn wir etwas über
unsere Geschichte wissen, wenn wir begreifen, wie häufig es schon
vorkam, dass uns unsere Präsidenten belogen haben, werden wir uns
künftig nicht mehr narren lassen.
Präsident Polk belog die Nation bezüglich der Gründe für den Krieg
gegen Mexiko im Jahre 1846. Mexiko hatte kein "amerikanisches Blut
auf amerikanischem Boden" vergossen. Vielmehr war es so, dass Polk
und die Sklavenhalteraristokratie halb Mexiko wollten.
1898 log Präsident McKinley über die Gründe für die Invasion in Kuba.
Er wolle die Kubaner von spanischer Kontrolle befreien, sagte er. In
Wirklichkeit wollte McKinley die Spanier aus Kuba haben, um die Insel
für United Fruit und andere amerikanische Konzerne zu öffnen. Präsident
McKinley belog uns auch über die Gründe für den Krieg gegen die
Philippinen. Wir wollen die Filipinos "zivilisieren", sagte er. Der
wahre Grund war, wir wollten dieses wertvolle Stück Land im fernen
Pazifik besitzen - selbst um den Preis, Hunderttausende Filipinos töten
zu müssen.
Präsident Wilson belog uns über den Eintritt Amerikas in den Ersten
Weltkrieg - ein Krieg, der angeblich geführt wurde, um "die Welt
sicher für die Demokratie zu machen". In Wahrheit ging es beim Ersten
Weltkrieg darum, die Welt für den weiteren Aufstieg Amerikas zur
Macht zu sichern.
Präsident Truman log, als er sagte, die Atombombe wurde über Hiroshima
abgeworfen, weil Hiroshima "militärisches Ziel" war.
Was Vietnam angeht, haben alle gelogen - Präsident Kennedy in Hinblick
auf die Dimension unserer Involviertheit (in diesen Krieg), Präsident
Johnson über den Golf von Tonkin und Präsident Nixon über das heimliche
Bombardement Kambodschas. Alle zusammen behaupteten sie, der Vietnamkrieg
habe das Ziel, Südvietnam kommunismusfrei zu halten. In Wirklichkeit
wollten sie Amerikas südvietnamesischen Außenposten am Saum des
asiatischen Kontinents behalten.
Präsident Reagan log über den Einmarsch in Grenada. Er sagte, die Insel
sei eine Bedrohung für die Vereinigten Staaten. Das stimmte nicht.
Bush senior belog uns über die Panama-Invasion (bei der Tausende
normaler Panamanesen starben). Bush log über die Gründe für den
Angriff auf den Irak 1991. Dabei ging es wohl kaum um die Verteidigung
der Integrität des Staates Kuwait. Es ging um die Sicherung der
amerikanischen Macht über den ölreichen Mittleren Osten.
Und da existiert noch eine größere Lüge: die arrogante Idee, Amerika
sei das Zentrum des Universums, wir seien ein bewundernswertes, ein
überlegenes und tugendreiches Land.
Falls wir im Angesicht der Welt um uns herum von der Prämisse, der
festen Überzeugung, ausgehen, die Vorsehung habe unsere Nation mit
einzigartigen Tugenden ausgestattet - mit Tugenden, die Amerika jeder
anderen Nation auf Erden moralisch überlegen machen -, werden wir den
Präsidenten wohl kaum infrage stellen, wenn er davon spricht, Truppen
an diesen oder jenen Ort zu entsenden, hier und dort bomben zu lassen,
um irgendeinem (buchstäblich) gottverlassenen Ort Tugenden wie Freiheit
oder Demokratie und natürlich 'free enterprise' zu bescheren.
Stellen wir uns ein paar harten Fakten, die im Widerspruch stehen zu
der Idee einer einzigartigen, einer tugendhaften Nation.
Wir haben eine lange Geschichte der 'ethnischen Säuberungen', zu der
wir stehen müssen. Amerikanische Regierungen haben Millionen Indianer
von ihrem Land vertrieben. Das Mittel der Wahl waren Massaker und
Zwangsumsiedlungen.
Wir müssen uns unserer langen Geschichte der Sklaverei, des Rassismus
und der Segregation stellen - Geschichte, die noch nicht zu Ende ist.
Wir müssen uns der nach wie vor gegenwärtigen Erinnerung an Hiroshima
und Nagasaki stellen.
Es ist keine Geschichte, auf die man stolz sein könnte.
Für unsere Führer ist es ganz selbstverständlich: Wir haben aufgrund
unserer moralischen Überlegenheit das Recht, die Welt zu dominieren.
Vielen Menschen haben sie diesen Glauben schon eingepflanzt.
Republikaner und Demokraten teilen diese Vorstellung.
Worauf gründet die Vorstellung unserer moralischen Überlegenheit?
Ein ehrlicher Blick auf uns, als Nation, könnte uns auf Kommendes
vorbereiten - auf das nächste Lügen-Bombardement als Begleitmusik
für den nächsten Vorschlag, einen neuen Teil der Erde unsere Macht
spüren zu lassen.
Vielleicht inspiriert uns der ehrliche Blick dazu, unsere Geschichte
neu zu gestalten. Wir müssen unser Land den Lügnern entwinden, die
es regieren. Sagen wir 'nein' zu nationalistischer Arroganz. Auf
diese Weise wird es uns möglich sein, uns mit Menschen auf der ganzen
Welt zu verbünden. Unser gemeinsames Anliegen heißt Frieden und
Gerechtigkeit.
Howard Zinn war im Zweiten Weltkrieg Bomberpilot der amerikanischen
Air Force. Berühmt wurde sein Buch 'A People's History of the United
States (deutsch: 'Eine Geschichte des Volkes der Vereinigten Staaten'
(Schwarzerfreitag)) sowie 'Voices of a People's History of the United
States' von Howard Zinn/Anthony Arnove
Übersetzt von: Andrea Noll
Orginalartikel: "Lessons of Iraq War Start With US History"
http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2006-03/18zinn.cfm
http://www.zmag.de/artikel.php?id=1759
The Iraqi Resistance
Three Years after Shock & Awe
Jack Random, www.dissidentvoice.org
March 21, 2006
"For misleading the American people and launching the most foolish
war since Emperor Augustus in 9 BC ... Bush deserves to be impeached
and, once he has been removed from office, put on trial."
-- Martin Van Creveld, Israeli Military Historian
"Five to seven years. No less. In five to seven years, Iraqi army is
OK."
-- Iraqi Army Officer, San Francisco Chronicle 3/16/06
On 15 February 2003, I joined the largest worldwide protest in history
on the streets of San Francisco. I carried a simple sign reading:
BUSH/ENRON/WWIII. 33 days later, without United Nations approval, our
president christened the invasion of Iraq with the infamous Shock &
Awe campaign.
Three years later, we are more shocked than awed.
The president issues yet another call for perseverance in the war
effort. As yet another offensive is unleashed upon the inhabitants
of the Sunni triangle, he asks for American patience and Iraqi unity
against the resistance. The truth is the Iraqi resistance is the
only cause that can unite the Iraqi people.
Meantime, Senator Dianne Feinstein charges that the war is more
difficult now because of the administration's incompetence. One
more round of a familiar Democratic refrain: More troops, better
planning, better equipment and more allies to prosecute an
immoral war.
The truth is the war in Iraq was doomed to failure from the very
moment Congress handed the president a blank check and a loaded
gun to initiate the doctrine of preemptive strike. Would we really
be better off now if we had sacrificed more soldiers and punished
the Iraqi resistance with even greater deadly force?
Message to Senator Feinstein and her war-loving friends: The problem
is not the efficiency of the killing machine; it is that the cause
is morally bankrupt.
The truth about Iraq is: We have become the front line of the
Shiite militias. Of course they want us to stay and secure a Shiite
government. When the mission is complete and the Sunni resistance
is crushed, they will give us a choice: Leave or face a new
resistance. They will seize control of the resources we have
contracted to international corporate profiteers and they will take
possession of the monstrous military installations we have constructed
for permanent occupation of the oil fields. They will form a new
alliance with Iran, establish a variation on Shari'a law, and say
goodbye to their former allies. (If you believe that Russia, China
or even India will take our side in the new equation, you may well
be catastrophically wrong.)
If we refuse, we will be compelled to pick up the pieces of the Sunni
resistance, change sides and fight alongside the same soldiers we
currently condemn as terrorists.
The truth about the Iraqi resistance is: There are no terrorists --
none. Even if we accept the neocon definition of terrorism (which
conveniently exempts sovereign nations -- otherwise, Shock & Awe would
be the operative model), an act of terrorism requires the intent to
terrorize. In Iraq, the intent of roadside or suicide bombs is not
to terrorize the most powerful military force on earth but to exact a
price on the enemy occupiers and their collaborators.
Whether we accept it or not, the Iraqi resistance is engaged in a
civil war because the occupying nation has taken sides. If we had
been told three years ago that we would sacrifice American blood
and treasure to establish Shiite rule in Iraq, we would have had
no part in it.
All this lip service to the cause of democracy is a charade, a deadly
farce, and a perversion of American ideals.
Democracy is not a cause for war. Like foreign occupation, it is
a cause for rebellion from within. Democracy in America has a very
different meaning than democracy in Iraq. In America, it means that
two parties controlled by the same corporate interests alter the
rules of the game until the majority will of the people is virtually
obscured. Democracy in Iraq means total Shiite dominance and
inevitable civil divide.
You do not impose a state of war on any nation for any reasons other
than a real, direct and imminent threat or an ongoing process of
ethnic cleansing or genocide. (Clearly, this was not the case in
Iraq where the vilified dictator is facing trial for crimes committed
fifteen years before the invasion.) If your only reason for war is to
change the form and nature of government, you have denied the people
the fundamental right of self-determination -- a right that includes
the choice between peace and rebellion.
Any reasonable criteria for justified war would disallow the invasion
of Iraq, an aggressive act of war perpetrated by a deceptive, corrupted
and ideologically driven administration. (Such criteria would also
preemptively prohibit an act of aggression against Iran, a nation
infinitely more threatened than threatening.)
We may not favor the form and nature of any number of governments
around the world but it is not for us to determine by military means
which will stand and which will fall. We have embraced far too many
despots to defend such a distinction as grounds for war.
As the Bush administration continues to promote its dark doctrine
of military supremacy and preemptive strike, at this juncture of
international affairs, there is not a single nation on earth less
peaceful and more threatening than our own.
The truth about Iraq is: We were wrong at the inception of the war; we
have been wrong for three years, and we continue to be wrong today.
It would be the first time since the Bush administration took office
that it appealed to the international community without a covert
agenda. As citizens of a nation that has willfully violated the
cardinal principle of international conduct through aggressive
war, we should request that a neutral body negotiate a simultaneous
truce between the warring factions (Shiites and Sunnis with Kurdish
engagement) and the withdrawal of all occupying forces. The only
acceptable condition of withdrawal is the safety of our soldiers and
their replacement by a legitimate peacekeeping force.
Save for a continued occupation, all options should be on the table,
including shared oil revenues and civil divide.
We have inflicted great harm upon the world and we have paid a great
price yet our sacrifice is little when compared to what the people
of Iraq have endured -- even if we allow for the demise of a ruthless
dictator.
We are not miracle workers; we cannot change water into wine. We
cannot transform the sands of Arabia into a democratic Garden of
Eden and we cannot expect to profit from our gross and criminal
misdeeds. We can only hope to make amends.
Let us begin by ending the occupation and beginning the long process
of transforming our own political system so that disasters like the
presidency of George W. Bush never happen again.
Jack Random is the author of Ghost Dance Insurrection (Dry Bones
Press) the Jazzman Chronicles, Volumes I and II (City Lights
Books). The Chronicles have been published by CounterPunch, the
Albion Monitor, Buzzle, Dissident Voice and others. Visit his
website: Random Jack. http://jazzmanchronicles.blogspot.com/
:: Article nr. 21797 sent on 22-mar-2006 07:31 ECT
:: The address of this page is : www.uruknet.info?p=21797
:: The incoming address of this article is :
www.dissidentvoice.org/Mar06/Random21.htm
Reparationen für Irak
Forderung von Noam Chomsky
23.03.2006
Wie der Harvard Crimson am Mittwoch berichtete, hat sich der USProfessor
und politische Autor Noam Chomsky vor einer Gruppe von
Politikstudenten für Reparationszahlungen der USA an den Irak
ausgesprochen.
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=512297
"Wir haben bei ihnen Schulden für die Invasion und für 10 Jahre
Sanktionen, die eine Gesellschaft zerstörten und einen Tyrannen
stärkten", so Chomsky.
Er argumentierte, daß der Grund für den völkerrechtswidrigen Angriffskrieg
nicht die "Verbreitung von Demokratie" gewesen sei, wie die USRegierung
unter George W. Bush behauptete, nachdem andere vorgebliche
Kriegsgründe wie der Besitz von Massenvernichtungswaffen sich als
Lügen erwiesen hatten. Er ließ hierbei allerdings außer acht, daß die
"Verbreitung von Demokratie" auch unter völkerrechtlichen Aspekten
keineswegs ein akzeptabler Grund für einen Angriffskrieg ist.
Die USA hätten den Krieg vielmehr geführt, um eine Hegemoniestellung
gegenüber China zu erhalten und im Irak eine US-gestützte Marionettenregierung
einzusetzen, so Chomsky.
Er ging sogar so weit, den US-geführten Angriffskrieg gegen den
Irak mit dem Angriffskrieg Nazi-Deutschlands gegen Frankreich zu
vergleichen.
"Wenn die Deutschen in Vichy in Frankreich eine Umfrage durchgeführt
hätten, bezweifle ich ich, daß 87 Prozent der Befragten gewollt hätten,
daß die Deutschen verschwinden", so Chomsky. Er bezog sich hierbei
auf eine kürzlich veröffentlichte Umfrage im Irak, der zufolge sich
87 Prozent der Iraker für einen Abzug der US-Truppen aus dem Irak aussprachen.
Chomskys Forderung ist auch eine deutliche Kritik an der US-Politik,
würde die US-Regierung doch im ersten Schritt behaupten, bereits große
Summen für den Wiederaufbau des Iraks bezahlt zu haben. Ein auch nur
oberflächlicher Blick in den Irak offenbart allerdings, wie schlecht
die Sicherheits-, aber auch die Versorgungslage im Irak sind, so daß
von einem tatsächlichen "Wiederaufbau" sicherlich kaum die Rede sein
kann.
http://www.freace.de/artikel/200603/230306b.html
"Lügende, dreckige Gauner"
Der Propagandakrieg der USA
11.12.2005
Ein am Sonntag in der New York Times erschienener Artikel beleuchtet
das Ausmaß der Anstrengungen der USA, Propagandameldungen in ausl
ändische Medien einzuschleusen.
Dabei sprechen schon die nackten Zahlen Bände. Die im US-Militärst
ützpunkt Fort Bragg im US-Bundesstaat North Carolina beheimatete
"Fourth Psychological Operations Group" ist ausschließlich damit
beschäftigt, wie sie es nennen "wahrheitsgemäße Nachrichten" zur
Unterstützung der Ziele der US-Regierung zu verbreiten. 1.200 USSoldaten
gehören dieser Einheit an.
"Wir nennen unsere Sachen Informationen und den des Gegners
Propaganda", sagte US-Oberst Jack N. Summe, damals der Kommandeur
der Einheit, in einem Anflug von Selbstkritik im Juni. Selbst im
Pentagon "betrachten uns einige Mitarbeiter für Öffentlichkeitsarbeit
geringschätzig" und seinen Worten zufolge als "lügende, dreckige
Gauner". Diese Auffassung kann allerdings kaum verwundern. "Wir
brauchen nicht den journalistischen Prinzipien der Objektivität zu
gehorchen", so Summe. "Wir erzählen einem ausgewählten Publikum die
US-Seite der Geschichte."
Als kürzlich bekannt wurde, daß das Unternehmen Lincoln Group im Irak
Medien für die Verbreitung von US-freundlichen Propagandaartikeln
bezahlte, sagte der "nationale Sicherheitsberater" Stephen J. Hadley,
US-Präsident George W. Bush sei wegen der Angelegenheit "sehr
beunruhigt". Offenbar war Bush allerdings höchstens beunruhigt, weil
diese Information plötzlich an die Öffentlichkeit gelangt war. Die
Lincoln Group sagt Dokumenten des Pentagons zufolge von sich, über
1.000 Artikel in irakischen und anderen arabischen Zeitungen untergebracht
zu haben. Dabei wurde und wird viel Wert darauf gelegt, daß
die wahren Urheber - die vielfach in Fort Bragg sitzen dürften - unbekannt
bleiben. Insgesamt hat Lincoln Group Verträge über mindestens
25 Millionen US-Dollar erhalten.
Dies ist aber keineswegs das einzige Unternehmen, das derartige
Aufgaben übernimmt. Beteiligt an der Verbreitung dieser "einseitigen
Wahrheiten" ist unter anderem auch die Rendon Group. Dieses Unternehmen
war schon im Jahr 1990 durch eine geplante und inszenierte
Lüge entscheidend am Beginn des ersten Krieges der USA gegen den Irak
beteiligt. Die Rendon Group inszenierte zusammen mit der Werbeagentur
Hill & Knowlton den Auftritt eines 15-jährigen Mädchens vor dem USKongre
ß. Tränenüberströmt erzählte das Mädchen namens Nayirah dort,
wie sie gesehen habe, daß irakische Soldaten Babys aus Brutkästen
rissen und sie auf den Boden warfen, wo sie starben. Später stellte
sich heraus, daß sie in Wahrheit ein Mitglied der königlichen Familie
Kuwaits und Tochter des kuwaitischen Botschafters in den USA ist und
das ihre Geschichte vollständig erfunden war. Zu dem Zeitpunkt war der
Krieg allerdings schon längst geführt worden.
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11486
"Irakische Medien" haben von den USA bisher fast 100 Millionen USDollar
"Unterstützung" erhalten. Es fällt nicht schwer, die an diese
Gaben geknüpften Bedingungen zu ermessen. Derartige Manipulationen
beschränken sich aber keineswegs allein auf den Irak.
So finanziert die "US-Behörde für Internationale Entwicklung" (USAID)
unter anderem auch 30 Radiosender in Afghanistan, was die Hörer aber
nicht wissen. Die Behörde ließ dort auch zehntausende MP3-Player-
ähnliche Audiogeräte mit bereits abgespeicherten Nachrichten durch
ein Unternehmen verteilen, das zusicherte, daß es "keine Verbindung
zu den USA" geben würde. Selbstverständlich waren die Geräte so
konstruiert worden, daß sie nur diese abgespeicherten Nachrichten
und keine anderen Dateien abspielen können.
Zwar existiert in den USA ein Gesetz, daß die Verbreitung von
staatlicher Propaganda innerhalb der USA untersagt, aufgrund des
weltweiten Nachrichtenverkehrs wird dies durch die Verbreitung
von zahllosen Propagandameldungen im Ausland - die nicht untersagt
ist - aber zweifellos mittlerweile umgangen. Angesichts des hier
getriebenen personellen wie finanziellen Aufwands zur Beeinflussung
von Menschen scheint die Frage, welche vermeintlichen "Informationen"
bisher nur nicht als Propagandalügen enttarnt wurden, sicherlich
angebracht.
http://www.freace.de/artikel/200512/111205a.html
Auftrag erfüllt
Propaganda für US-Militär kein Problem
24.03.2006
Einem Bericht der New York Times vom Mittwoch zufolge hat eine
"Untersuchung" des US-Militärs kaum überraschend ergeben, daß
die - wiederum vom US-Militär beauftragte - Verbreitung von
Propaganda in irakischen Medien durch ein Unternehmen nicht zu
beanstanden ist.
Die Lincoln Group hat vom US-Militär Verträge im Gesamtumfang von
mindestens 25 Millionen US-Dollar erhalten. Dieses Unternehmen
Dokumenten des Pentagons zufolge selbst, über 1.000 Artikel in
irakischen und anderen arabischen Zeitungen plaziert zu haben.
Diese sollten die Besatzung und die USA in ein positives Licht
rücken. Dabei wurde ausdrücklich in den Zeitungen nicht die Quelle
der Artikel genannt, so daß es für die Leser aussah, als handelte
es sich um reguläre Artikel. Tatsächlich bezahlte die Lincoln Group
allerdings für den Druck der Artikel, die häufig von Sonderkommandos
des US-Militärs verfaßt werden. Bis zum Jahr 2010 sollen im Rahmen
bereits an drei Unternehmen vergebener Verträge insgesamt 100
Millionen US-Dollar für diese und andere Arten der Verbreitung von
Propagandameldungen ausgegeben werden.
http://www.freace.de/artikel/200512/181205b.html
http://www.freace.de/artikel/200506/110605a.html
Das Ergebnis der "Untersuchung" - immerhin wurde sie von einer
zumindest möglicherweise mitschuldigen Partei durchgeführt - wurde
bisher nicht offiziell vorgelegt, sondern der New York Times von
nichtgenannten Mitgliedern des US-Militärs vorab mitgeteilt, da sie
nicht der Erlaubnis hätten, offizielle Erklärungen gegenüber den
Medien abzugeben.
Beamte des Pentagons und des US-Militärs im Irak betonten, daß der
mit der Lincoln Group abgeschlossene Vertrag uneingeschränkt Bestand
habe. Die Arbeit des Unternehmens solle Befehlshabern im Irak zufolge
fortgesetzt werden, bis dem widersprechende neue Richtlinien im Irak
oder durch das Pentagon herausgegeben würden.
Auch wenn das Ergebnis dieser "Untersuchung" letztlich kaum überraschen
kann, so ist doch bemerkenswert, daß dieses Thema der US-Regierung
offenbar derart wichtig ist, daß auch nicht ein einzelnes Unternehmen
oder einige Einzelpersonen als Einzeltäter "geopfert" wurden, wie dies
auch bei den Folterungen von Gefangenen geschehen ist. Obwohl nach
Bekanntwerden der Praxis dieser Propagandaverbreitung die Empörung
unüberhörbar geworden war, wird diese Beeinflussung der öffentlichen
Meinung anscheinend als derart wichtig erachtet, daß sie um jeden Preis
fortgeführt werden muß.
http://www.freace.de/artikel/200603/240306a.html
>>>-----------------------------------------------------------------<<<·
>> GIV Mailinglist : http://mailing.giv-seiten.info <<·
>>>-----------------------------------------------------------------<<<·
http://www.giv-seiten.info/www.giv-archiv.de/2002/Oktober/021031GI.010
>> Kasnazaniya / Casnazaniyyah: http://video.giv-seiten.info <<·
>>>-----------------------------------------------------------------<<<·
>> Further Informations about Iraq and Palestine: <<·
>> <<·
>> GIV-Pages Online : http://www.giv-seiten.info <<·
>> GIV-Page : http://giv.giv-seiten.info <<·
>> Iraq-Page : http://irak.giv-seiten.info <<·
>> Jemen-Page : http://jemen.giv-seiten.info <<·
>> Jordanien-Page : http://jordanien.giv-seiten.info <<·
>> GIV-Archiv : http://archiv.giv-seiten.info <<·
>> GIV-Archiv : http://www.giv-archiv.de <<·
>>>-----------------------------------------------------------------<<<·
|
