The
war on Iraq technically started on the 20th of 3rd 2003. Recently we have had
the anniversary of this event. It was marked with worldwide protests of condemnation.
In Sydney, very few people attended (probably 2500 maximum). This has lead me
to question why this is so? Is it because Australians don’t care? Are
we misinformed and believe that all is well in Iraq? Are we so dissattached
to this war that we don’t know enough? Has Australian society, and that
of the world for that matter, created such a extensive isolation through economical
distraction and Consumerist brainwashing that we no longer care or realize the
world we live in? Either way I have decided that either people are just misinformed
or as humans we are innately selfish, evil and callus. Maybe people really DO
realize their standards of living are dependant on the suffering of others?
But then, that wouldn’t answer the question of why we accept the war on
Iraq? Iraq was never directly or indirectly the reason for Australia’s
high standard of living. And with oil prices at an all time high, if this theory
were to be true we should have every man and his dog out on the streets asking
for an end to the war.
Well unfortunately this isn’t happening. Below I have written up a “work
in progress” outlining the reasons why the war on Iraq is illegitimate,
illegal, and psychotic amongst a plethora of other things.
I will attempt to outline the following issues:
ISSUE
(1)-9/11, and
the connection with Iraq. Does it exist? What are the background reasons for
these connections?
ISSUE (2)-Depleted Uranium, or DU.
Hidden truths?
ISSUE (3)-the USA and Genocide in Iraq.
Is this possible?
ISSUE (4)-weapons of mass destruction
ISSUE (5)-before Iraq version 2. What had the inspectors
achieved?
ISSUE (6)-Saddam Hussein. How could we get rid
of him without war?
ISSUE (7)-the USA and Saddam, what are the connections?
ISSUE (8)-order of operations. Can we determine
anything from US forces actions entering Iraq?
ISSUE (9)-9/11 we cried, we questioned, we mobilized.
Bombs over Baghdad, we kept on eating whilst watching the 7o/clock news.
ISSUE (10)-other issues. The UN, US troops deserting
etc
9/11,
and the connection with Iraq. Does it exist? What are the background reasons
for these connections?
When the planes hit those buildings there is documented evidence that American
civilians started to blame Iraq. People instantly question the big nosed Arab
as the culprit. Weather it was an Arab or not is irrelevant now anyway. It has
been proven for some time now that there is no connection whatsoever between
Iraq, Saddam, and 9/11. Saddam never trained the pilots of those planes, never
met or had connections with Bin Laden and is now happily in American custody
eating cookies and milk.
Below is a excerpt from the Washington Post Sept. 11 commission Thursday, June
17, 2004;
“The staff report said that bin Laden "explored possible cooperation
with Iraq" while in Sudan through 1996, but that "Iraq apparently
never responded" to a bin Laden request for help in 1994. The commission
cited reports of contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda after bin Laden went to
Afghanistan in 1996, adding, "but they do not appear to have resulted in
a collaborative relationship. Two senior bin Laden associates have adamantly
denied that any ties existed between al Qaeda and Iraq. We have no credible
evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States."
Although the Bush
administration purported to links, there was absolutely none. This therefore
throws out the theory that Iraq needed to be invaded for “retaliation”
for 9/11. For the reasons why Bush labeled Iraq as a necessary target it pays
to understand the USA’s right wing ideologies. For this, visit "project
for new american century"
It has been noted by social and political analysts that for quite some time
now, that the USA has been attempting to attack Iraq and finally control the
Middle East “properly”. Now some people may consider this is Hogwash.
That the US is a fair and democratic nation, here is an excerpt from the “Islamic
Political Thought” that will give you some insight as to why the USA wanted
so desperately to take control of Iraq, and the greater Middle East:
"In February 1990 Saddam joined Egypt, Jordan and North Yemen in forming the Arab Cooperation Council, an economic alliance intended to compete with the Saudi-led Gulf Cooperation Council. However, simultaneously with the reintegration of Iraq into a regional bloc and Saddam's emergence as a regional leader, relations between Iraq and the United States worsened. Ostensibly America had supported Saddam during his war with Iran in order to stem the spread of Islamic fundamentalism, but the Irangate affair and the secret delivery of US arms to Iran convinced Saddam that America had backed him as a matter of convenience and would eventually turn against him. After the war with Iran ended the Americans began trying to contain him through withholding economic aid and exposing the brutality of his regime, and Saddam decided that they were out to overthrow him. Saddam responded by attacking American hegemony in the Middle East and asking for the withdrawal of the US fleet from the Gulf. He coupled that with threats to 'burn half of Israel' if it resorted to military action against any Arab country”. Taken from Institute of Islamic Political Thoughtn http://www.ii-pt.com/web/articles/us.htm
the
reasons for labeling Iraq as a 9/11 culprit were vast. No other situation in
the near future would have given the US this chance. As Condoleeza Rice stated
“How do you capitalize on these opportunities?”
Donald Rumsfeld on Sept 11 2001 6 hours after the attacks said “it
might be an opportunity to hit Iraq. Go massive, sweep it up, things related
and not”
Quotes like these can only be made on pre disposed opinions (see new American
century ideologies), and pre disposed plans. The USA new it wanted to attack
Iraq, weather 9/11 was expected isn’t important at this time, what matters
is that the world has been lied to several times by the country that labels
itself as “the shinning beacon of democracy” with these quotes,
along with the 9/11 commission findings and an ability to look back at history
there is a strong certainty that the USA would always have attacked Iraq. This
is the action of a Rogue state, of a dictatorial State.
Depleted
Uranium, or DU. Hidden truths?
Depleted uranium (DU) is a byproduct of the process during which fissionable
uranium (uranium 235) used to manufacture nuclear bombs and reactor fuel is
separated from natural uranium, a heavy metal found in soil and water everywhere
on earth, mainly in trace quantities.
DU (uranium 238) is about 40 percent less radioactive than natural uranium,
but it remains radioactive for 4.5 billion years. Because it is such a highly
dense metal -- heavier than lead or steel -- it is prized for its abilities
to both penetrate military armor and provide shielding against attack.
Upon impact, DU produces extremely fine uranium oxide dust that is both chemically
toxic and radioactive. Easily spread by wind, it is inhaled and absorbed into
the human body and absorbed by plants and animals, becoming part of the food
chain.
continued page 2..... if you have any information that you think should be added email us on rcunderground@yahoo.com.au
PAGE
(1), PAGE (2), PAGE
(3), PAGE (4), PAGE (5), PAGE (6), PAGE (7), PAGE (8),