Tuesday :: Jul 4, 2006

The Last Other

by pessimist

I'll scratch your back, Osama Goldstein, if...

I once heard Vincent Bugliosi - the prosecutor who put Charles Manson behind bars - claim that with sufficient circumstantial evidence, he could convict anyone. I really wish we could get him back to work chasing after Bu$hCo, for the evidence is piling up that the entire 'War on Terror' is a conspiracy - the crime Bugliosi said was the easiest to bring about a conviction.

In his [hypothetical] opening statement would Bugliosi say:

Emmanuel Goldstein is a state manufactured arch-villain in George Orwell's 1984. Goldstein represents the bogeyman used by all regimes to represent the "them" who are against "us".

'Al Qaeda' the modern incarnation of 'Emmanuel Goldstein'.

Has fantasy become reality? Perhaps.

When torturing Winston [Smith], O'Brien tells him the simple and brutal truth:
"The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power... Power is not a means, it is an end... The object of power is power."

Both Bu$hCo and Al Qaeda actions tend to support that view, but Bu$hCo recognized one simple fact that Orwell overlooked: doublethink is too complicated. It's much better to have rabid followers who don't think at all.

We now present the evidence of collusion.

On Oct. 29, 2004, just four days before the U.S. presidential election, al-Qaeda leader Osama bin-Laden released a videotape denouncing George W. Bush. Some Bush supporters quickly spun the diatribe as “Osama’s endorsement of John Kerry.”
But behind the walls of the CIA, analysts had concluded the opposite:
that bin-Laden was trying to help Bush gain a second term.

This was the payback:

The Central Intelligence Agency has closed a unit that for a decade had the mission of hunting Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants, intelligence officials confirmed Monday. The realignment reflects a view that Al Qaeda is no longer as hierarchical as it once was, intelligence officials said, and a growing concern about Qaeda-inspired groups that have begun carrying out attacks independent of Mr. bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

Other elements aided and abetted the conspiracy - for reasons of their own:

Al-Qaida leaders sold out Abu Musab al-Zarqawi to the United States in exchange for a promise to let up in the search for Osama bin Laden, the slain militant's wife claimed in an interview with an Italian newspaper, La Repubblica. The woman, identified by as al-Zarqawi's first wife, said al-Qaida's top leadership reached a deal with U.S. intelligence because al-Zarqawi had become too powerful.

She claimed Sunni tribes and Jordanian secret services mediated the deal.

End of presenting the evidence of conspiracy.

Despite all the rhetoric about how well things are going, even Bu$hCo Party insiders are willing to reveal certain truths which a non-thinking populace would overlook:

The US ambassador to Baghdad, Zalmay Khalilzad, has said the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi last month has had no impact on the violence.

US forces cannot police the nation:

A Shiite legislator escaped an assassination attempt Sunday when a roadside bomb missed his convoy in downtown Baghdad _ a day after a female Sunni legislator was kidnapped by gunmen from her car.

Gunmen abducted Iraq's deputy electricity minister and 19 bodyguards after ambushing their convoy in eastern Baghdad on Tuesday, police and Interior Ministry sources said. It comes three days after gunmen kidnapped Sunni legislator Taiseer Najah al-Mashhadani and seven of her bodyguards in a northern district bordering Sadr City.

The so-called government of Iraq is falling apart over these attacks:

The largest Sunni Arab bloc in parliament will stop attending the legislative meetings until a kidnapped colleague is released, the head of the group said Sunday. "We in the Iraqi Accordance Front have decided to suspend our participation in parliament meetings until our sister is released," al-Dulaimi said, putting the blame for her kidnapping on security officials because they are responsible for the safety of Iraqis.

Effective leadership is a must if a nation is going to go to war. BuzzFlash takes inventory on Owwer Leedur - and he fails, as usual:

Next time Bush does a phony PR op on the Hollywood Crawford Ranch Set, he might wear a T-shirt that says, “I Bombed Afghanistan To Rid The World Of Terrorists And All I Got Was Osama’s Driver.”

Because that’s pretty much the case. Bush has spent America into bankruptcy enriching war profiteers and the only thing he can honestly emblazon on his T-shirt is: “I Bombed Afghanistan To Rid The World Of Terrorists And All I Got Was Osama’s Driver.”

After all, the Taliban are back in full resurgence, Afghanistan is experiencing record poppy (heroin) crops, Bush’s puppet “President” has said that all the American killing won’t stop terrorism ­ and, of course, Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar are still at large.

If Bush is actually conducting a “war on terror,” Afghanistan is further proof that he is a spectacular failure.

We take a short detour to present evidence to back up the BuzzFlash conclusion:

Coalition troops are reviewing security procedures after the deaths of at least 10 Afghans working as translators for the American-led coalition in the last month a military spokesman said.

* Five of the translators were among eight workers killed in a bus bomb June 15 on their way to work at the American base outside Kandahar, Major Innis said.

* Two more translators were killed during combat operations in southern Afghanistan in the last month, he said.

* One died in an attack in Helmand province Saturday while working with British troops

* and one was killed in Zabul province a month ago as he worked with American troops.

* Three other translators were killed this week as they were driving on their own west of the city of Kandahar, when they ran into a Taliban checkpoint on the road, Major Innis said. The translators were armed and engaged in a gunbattle, he said. A fourth translator managed to escape, according to a colleague.

A translator interviewed by telephone, who asked not to be named for fear of reprisals, said he had just resigned from his job because of the threat of violence. Taliban supporters were spreading leaflets around warning people against working for the foreign military, he said, and he knew of two colleagues who had been killed in the last week.

He spoke about a translator named Ahmed Shah being shot and killed by Taliban insurgents while on a picnic with friends in Sangesar, a town west of Kandahar last week. When the Taliban came across the group, they accused the translator of working for the American military.

When he told them he would quit immediately, they reportedly said: "It's too late," and shot him dead in front of his friends,
the translator said.

Another translator was shot dead in the street in Loya Wala, a northern district of the city this week, he added. He did not name the translator but said the man had continued his job with the coalition despite receiving threats from the Taliban.

The translator who resigned from his job Saturday said he had felt under threat for some time and always covered his face with a scarf as he arrived and left the American base at Kandahar airfield. He said he noticed men sitting on motorbikes outside the entrance, watching who was going in and out of the base, and suspected they were Taliban spies.

A translator working for The New York Times in southern Afghanistan has also received indirect threats from people known to be close to the Taliban. These people said he had been spotted driving into the Kandahar base and described his car, citing the number plate.

The message from the Taliban, passed to a relative, was:
"Tell him to stop working for the Americans."

Americans in Afghanistan aren't the only ones in danger - UK told to expect more casualties in Afghanistan. This indicates that The Other White Oilman's Burden is failing due to inept leadership as well:

[C]oncern is growing in the UK and beyond that there may not be enough troops to carry out a mission that has had to change to meet the challenge of a resurgent Taliban.

We now return you to the BuzzFlash article linked above:

If Bush and Cheney are ever prosecuted for war crimes, BuzzFlash certainly doesn’t advocate prosecuting their drivers. Bush and Cheney are the responsible parties, along with their conspiring staffs.

Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar, among other key terrorists, are on the loose ­ and Bush is focused on the right to UnConstitutionally frame a taxi cab driver.

Any American concerned about their safety should take a page from the Republican book
and start firing salvos at the White House, the GOP Congress, and the Right Wing Echo chamber
for conducting a failed war on terrorism that puts us all at risk.

Instead, for some nebulous reason (pressuring Saddam for a plea bargain?), the United States Government is chasing after an otherwise-defenseless woman:

Jordan stands by Saddam Hussein's daughter
July 03, 2006

AMMAN: Jordanian Prime Minister Maaruf Bakhit warned on Sunday that deposed Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's daughter Raghad was under the royal family's protection after the US-backed Iraqi government named her as among its most wanted fugitives. Raghad and her mother Sajida were named on a new list of 41 "most wanted" people accused of supporting the persistent Sunni Arab insurgency against the Shiite-led Iraqi government.

"The presence of Mrs Raghad Saddam Hussein and her children in Jordan is motivated by humanitarian considerations," the premier told the official Petra news agency. "She is the guest of the Hashemite royal family (of King Abdullah II) and under its protection as a seeker of asylum" in accordance with Arab tradition, Bakhit added.

He said that Raghdad had fulfilled the conditions of her asylum in the Key regional US ally by refraining from engaging in "any political or media activities."

Since a formal reminder issued in 2004, Saddam's daughter has rarely abused her asylum in the Jordanian capital to issue statements to the press.

The Jordanian premier insisted his government had yet to receive any formal extradition request for Raghdad from the Iraqi authorities. "Any such request will have to be made according to the procedures in force in Jordan and Jordan will handle any request it receives in the appropriate manner," he said.

The Iraqi 'government' lapdogs are calling the Jordanian bluff:

Iraqi national security advisor Muwaffaq al-Rubaie told reporters in Baghdad Sunday that their extradition was being sought by his government.

I'm sure that Bu$hco wishes they could threaten Mrs Raghad Saddam Hussein and her children with the sort of anti-civilian war our GIs are conducting in their homeland:

A recently discharged Army private has been arrested on charges of raping an Iraqi woman and killing her and three family members four months ago in their house, federal prosecutors said Monday. The former soldier, Steven D. Green, 21, had recently been discharged from the Army for a "personality disorder," the prosecutors said. They said Mr. Green and other soldiers had discussed the rape in advance and carried out the crimes after drinking alcohol, leaving a checkpoint and changing from their uniforms into black clothing.

That prior planning to disguise themselves indicates intent.

A criminal complaint made public by the prosecutors on Monday charged that Mr. Green shot the three family members, including a child, with an AK-47 assault rifle found in the house in Mahmudiya before he and another soldier raped the woman. Citing interviews with unnamed participants, the document alleges that Mr. Green, his face covered with a brown T-shirt, then "walked over to the woman and shot her several times." It says the soldiers returned to the checkpoint with blood on their clothes and agreed that the episode was "never to be discussed again."

A witness testifies to the murders, the rape, and a conspiracy to conceal their participation.

When Jessical Lynch was a captive of the Iraqis, the wrong-wing was all over the story, making dire threats against Iraq should she be harmed. What have they to say about this?

The Washington Post's veteran Baghdad correspondent Ellen Knickmeyer revealed earlier Monday that the woman allegedly raped, killed and then burned by U.S. troops in Iraqin March was only 15 years old, and her name was Abeer Qasim Hamza.

Soldiers had apparently made advances toward the attractive teen in the days before she was killed in Mahmudiyah. Her mother felt the soldiers might come to seize her during the night, and she planned to let her sleep at a neighbor's house.

Knickmeyer closes her account with this:

"Reached by telephone Saturday at his home in Iskandariyah, south of Mahmudiyah, a member of the extended family would not discuss the incident. 'What is the benefit of publishing this story?' said Abeer's uncle, Bassem. 'People will read about this crime. And they will forget about it the next day.'"

That's what happens with a people who don't think at all. They do forget, and that is Playing into bin-Laden's Hand:

Considering the Iraq War is lumbering toward its fourth year, America has spent some $500 billion, there is no end in site, and the United States' debt is nearing a tipping-point -- why wouldn't bin-Laden rather fight us "over there" instead of fighting us here?

Bush and Republican's hollow mantra, "We're fighting them there, so we don't have to fight them here," seems to be a course destined for, if history is any indication, certain and complete disaster. That mantra might make for good political spin, but it also forms the foundation for complete defeat.

[T]he reality concerning "We're fighting them there, so we don't have to fight them here," is that bin-Laden really wants to fight us there and not here. September 11, 2001, was merely the method and means by which bin-Laden tricked Bush and Republicans into fighting a war on his terms.

That is, unless the American people would rather believe Bush and Republicans while ignoring the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point:

"Al Qaeda's strategic vision involves challenging the United States and its allies overseas using small- to medium-scale attacks, according to an online book available on extremist websites that has become the seminal jihadi textbook. The first English translation of the text is being circulated this week among DOD and government policy circles.

"The translation is being released by the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point. As ABC News reported last month, the Center has been translating thousands of declassified insurgent and extremist documents that were seized in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"Abu Bakr Naji, an al Qaeda insider and author of the book, The Management of Savagery, believes that the 9/11 attacks accomplished what they needed to by forcing the U.S. to commit their military overseas. He says 9/11 forced the U.S. to fall into the 'trap' of overextending their military and that 'it began to become clear to the American administration that it was being drained.'"

What is most interesting about bin Laden and al-Qaeda's approach to fighting the United States, is that it isn't anything new. Are we forgetting that during the Reagan era this is the tactic America trained al-Qaeda's precursor -- the Mujahideen -- to use against Soviet Russia, and that it was first employed in the modern era by Colonial America against the British Empire?

The irony is that the approach was designed by none other than Alexander Hamilton. [P]eople like Rove, Rumsfeld and Cheney who developed the Iraq strategy -- Rove the political concept and Cheney-Rumsfeld the "boots on the ground" aspect -- and [who] pretend to know and understand Hamilton, are on the brink of being defeated by al-Qaeda who, like Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam, used that particular Founding Father's plan for defeating a superpower in conflict.

Hamiltonian Federalism that supported a powerful and controlling presidency, made him an attractive figure. Apparently, that is where the Conservative's understanding of Hamilton's contributions ends.

The war wasn't going particularly well for the colonists and many doubted whether or not it was even possible for a rag-tag and relatively poorly-funded group of people to succeed in defeating an empire like England. The Colonists' realized Washington's Army could not fight toe-to-toe with King George's military machine. After all, their victories against Britain's forces were few and far between.

Hamilton's background had been in financing and "keeping books" for various businesses and ventures. Hamilton examined the empire's "books" and discovered that in order to attain victory the Colonies didn't need to defeat the King's men on the battlefield. What Hamilton saw in the Empire's books was a military paper tiger.

England's debt was staggering! The British Empire's Army was being financed through taxation and, more importantly, money borrowed from other countries. After discovering the King's financial reality, Hamilton no longer viewed the British Army as being all that formidable. He perceived them for what they were...a lot of fancy uniforms being propped up by massive debt.

Hamilton convinced General Washington and others that victory could be achieved through a long, grinding, protracted, and most of all, costly stream of never-ending skirmishes. Hamilton correctly believed that fighting the war in this manner would undermine support for the war at home -- taxpayers get tired of having their money spent on foreign occupations while they suffer at home -- and, too, would cause foreign investors to lose faith in Britain's ability to succeed and, thereby, refuse to continue lending King George money for the war.

Hamilton designed the framework by which an inferior force can defeat any superpower: Extend the war beyond all reason, squeeze the taxpayers, and scare off foreign investors. The sheer weight of the superpower's debt will eventually lead to its defeat.

Ho Chi Minh certainly wasn't a capitalist, but he was a "revolutionary" and unashamed of making known the American revolutionary experience, as being the foundation in his struggle against the United States.

America's CIA trained and financed Afghanistan's Mujahideen in the same tactics in relation to their fight against the Soviets. The Mujahideen, of course, would later be taken over through a coup-de-tat of sorts, by none other than Usama bin-Laden. The Mujahideen's new leader, bin-Laden, would later name the group "al-Qaeda", or the base.

So, upon further review: Knowing that the Combating Terrorism Center's own assessment of bin-Laden's grand strategy makes it clear that the terrorists want to "fight us over there" and not here, what do Bush and Republicans really mean when they say, "We're fighting them there, so we don't have to fight them here."?

More importantly for the United States and every American: what does it mean that bin-Laden is employing Hamilton's blueprint for defeating a superpower against Bush and Republicans?

It means that there will be more disgusting and inflammatory crap like this thrown into already-angry Muslim faces:

A Marine who wrote and performed a song about killing members of an Iraqi family has temporarily shelved the tune, a record producer said Monday.

"Hadji Girl" surfaced in a four-minute video on the Internet. In the clip, Belile sings about a Marine who falls in love with an Iraqi woman and then encounters hostility from her family. Relatives kill the woman, prompting the Marine to gun down the family members.

Cpl. Joshua Belile planned to record "Hadji Girl" with Hits Music Studios, and the conservative talk program "The Mike Church Show" planned to be the first to air it, said Jimm Mosher, co-owner of the North Carolina studio.

But the 23-year-old Iraq veteran nixed the plans late last week, he said. "We got a call from him and he just said he couldn't do the recording at this time," Mosher said. "I was led to believe that he had it from high command that he wasn't to record the song."

Mosher said Belile still plans to record the song. Belile has said he will leave the military when his five-year enlistment ends in October 2007. "We're wanting to record and produce it," Mosher said. "I think it tells a great story."

Tell this great story instead - Osama's strategy is winning:

American Majority Says Iraq War Pointless
Angus Reid Global Scan : Polls & Research
July 4, 2006

- Many adults in the United States regret their federal government’s decision to launch the coalition effort, according to a poll by Bloomberg and the Los Angeles Times. 54 per cent of respondents think the situation in Iraq was not worth going to war over, down four points since April.

The coalition effort against Saddam Hussein’s regime was launched in March 2003. At least 2,539 American soldiers have died during the military operation, and more than 18,600 troops have been wounded in action.

In May, it was revealed that there were inconsistencies in the original report of an incident that took place in Hadithah on Nov. 19, 2005. An official statement from the U.S. military claimed that "marines returned fire" when "gunmen attacked (their) convoy with small arms fire" after a roadside bomb exploded.

However, video evidence suggests that 12 U.S. Marines could have killed 24 unarmed Iraqis. A preliminary probe into the incident found that the Marines provided a false account of what happened. Two official enquiries—one led by the U.S. Army and another by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS)—have been ordered. 66 per cent of respondents say these reports do not change their feelings about the war in Iraq.

Polling Data

All in all, do you think the situation in Iraq was worth going to war over, or not?

Jun. 2006
Worth 41%
Not worth 54%
Not sure 5%

Apr. 2006
Worth 38%
Not worth 58%
Not sure 4%

Jan. 2006
Worth 45%
Not worth 50%
Not sure 5%

As you may know, there have been reports that American troops in Iraq may have killed unarmed Iraqi civilians during military operations. Do reports like that change your feelings about the war in Iraq in any way, or don’t they affect your feelings about the war one way or the other?

More supportive 6%
Less supportive 23%
No change 66%

Don’t know 5%

Source: Bloomberg / Los Angeles Times
Methodology: Telephone interviews with 1,321 American adults, conducted from Jun. 24 to Jun. 27, 2006. Margin of error is 3 per cent.

If the media were able to do their job with a thinking populace, they might attempt to reveal that Osama is just a front, useful to Bu$hCo to control their emotions, thoughts, and actions. He might well be the real brains behind the Bu$hCo Coup of America (and now, maybe Mexico?).

Orwell tells us - through the character O'Brien - that Emmanuel Goldstein is the leader of Big Brother, not the friend of the proletariat he pretends to be. Would it be such a stretch, considering the examples of cooperation between the US 'government' and Al Qaeda I presented above, to think that Osama likes his Muslim Che role and willingly plays along?

Rich kids like Osama and George live in a very different world from the rest of us, and it wouldn't be so hard - considering the plethora of previous examples from history - that some sort of a 'Let's play War!' arrangement between them is underway.

Orwell saw this could happen, and how this sort would think:

"Power is in inflicting pain and humiliation. Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.

Do you begin to see, then, what kind of world we are creating? It is the exact opposite of the stupid hedonistic Utopias the old reformers imagined. A world of fear and treachery is torment, a world of trampling and being trampled upon, a world which will grow not less but more merciless as it refines itself.

Progress in our world will be progress towards more pain.

The old civilizations claimed that they were founded on love or justice. Ours is founded upon hatred.

In our world there will be no emotions except fear, rage, triumph, and self-abasement. Everything else we shall destroy - everything.

Already we are breaking down the habits of thought which have survived from before the Revolution. We have cut the links between child and parent, and between man and man, and between man and woman. No one dares trust a wife or a child or a friend any longer.

But in the future there will be no wives and no friends. Children will be taken from their mothers at birth, as one takes eggs from a hen. The sex instinct will be eradicated. Procreation will be an annual formality like the renewal of a ration card.

We shall abolish the orgasm. Our neurologists are at work upon it now.

There will be no loyalty, except loyalty towards the Party. There will be no love, except the love of Big Brother. There will be no laughter, except the laugh of triumph over a defeated enemy. There will be no art, no literature, no science.

When we are omnipotent we shall have no more need of science. There will be no distinction between beauty and ugliness. There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed.

But always -- do not forget this, Winston -- always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless.

If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face -- for ever."

Are we to care if the ultimate victor in this Rich Kid War is a fascist corporatist - or a Wahhabist Muslim fanatic? Neither of these sides is our friend, and both have demonstrated as much through their actions.

We have the power - as Osama told us, although for different resons and motives, to end this BS before it turns into the 'glorious' War To End All. We need to act, and our next chance is in November.

We have to see to it that all electoral counts are true and accurate, and that there are no shenannigans like in Ohio, Florida, and Mexico. We have to eliminate the foreces of forever war from our side of the conflict.

Otherwise, will one of us be the one who encounters The Last Other to ask the question "who won?"

Copyrighted [©] source material contained in this article is presented under the provisions of Fair Use.


This article contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of democracy, economic, environmental, human rights, political, scientific, and social justice issues, among others. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with
Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material in this article is distributed without profit for research and educational purposes.

pessimist :: 9:48 AM :: Comments (10) :: TrackBack (0) :: Digg It!