Search:

Surplus Oil 'Arab' League income to fund American Subversion?

[ Posted On: 2007-04-15 ]

In earlier articles we focused on the need for punishment of the Sunni thugs of Saddam, as the entire Nazi party was eliminated in postwar Germany. We also explained that the various extremist and terrorist sheikhs are treacherous in their negotiations with the Americans, using Western argumentation to support something that is islamically wrong, namely the imposition of Islam as official religion of a preponderantly Muslim country. We clarified that Islam can be the official religion only within the frame of the Islamic Caliphate, and only a bogus-Muslim sheikh would ignore this reality. The treacherous murderous sheikhs have their agenda to implement, and to do so they do not hesitate to use Western argumentation, something the naive Americans are not perspicacious enough to detect. However, these are not the only problems with the Draft Text for ‘Iraqi’ Constitution.

There is a growing danger from the part of prepaid journalism exercised by ignorant American journalists, who attempt to diffuse pessimism, glumness and distrust for the Bush Administration.

Perhaps this sheds light where the surplus Saudi Oil income has gone. American authorities should rather check to what extent pessimist writing is connected to pro-‘Arab’ League and Islamic Terror lobbying in the States.

Could one think of a British journalist writing in 1940 – thanks to Franco Spanish funding – an article entitled "Someone Tell the Prime Minister the War Is Over"?

Yet, today, at a moment the ‘Iraq’ War against Islamic Terror enters its most critical phase, we read daily articles like that. "Someone Tell the President the War Is Over" by Frank Rich is a recently published subversive nonsense that found its way to The New York Times and helps foster pessimism among the American ranks (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F10E17F83E5A0C778DDDA10894DD404482).

The article starts with a paragraph like this:

"A president can't stay the course when his own citizens (let alone his own allies) won't stay with him. The approval rate for Mr. Bush's handling of Iraq plunged to 34 percent in last weekend's Newsweek poll - a match for the 32 percent that approved L.B.J.'s handling of Vietnam in early March 1968. (The two presidents' overall approval ratings have also converged: 41 percent for Johnson then, 42 percent for Bush now.) On March 31, 1968, as L.B.J.'s ratings plummeted further, he announced he wouldn't seek re-election, commencing our long extrication from that quagmire."

Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger made also a comparison with Vietnam but stated clearly that what is now at stake for the World’s security is much more significant than what was in Vietnam.

What people like Frank Rich seem to ignore is that the War will be Over with the extinction of the Islamic Terror or it will never be over. The values of the American Founding Fathers call for a permanent effort against the forces of obscurantism, tyranny and inhumanity. If Frank Rich wants to write about the ‘Iraq’ War, he should first get a ground experience through contacts with the various ethnic and religious groups of martyred Mesopotamia, who in their outright majority support and work with the American forces against the Sunni thugs of Saddam, and the extremist sheikhs of a bogus-Messianic paranoia.

American Justice should examine to what extent sentences like the following do not harm national American interests by spreading false information and pessimism in wartime: "The president's cable cadre is in disarray as well."

The erroneous argumentation of Frank Rich is best revealed at the following excerpt:

"The president said that "we know that Iraq and Al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade," an exaggeration based on evidence that the Senate Intelligence Committee would later find far from conclusive. He said that Saddam "could have a nuclear weapon in less than a year" were he able to secure "an amount of highly enriched uranium a little larger than a single softball." Our own National Intelligence Estimate of Oct. 1 quoted State Department findings that claims of Iraqi pursuit of uranium in Africa were "highly dubious."

It was on these false premises - that Iraq was both a collaborator on 9/11 and about to inflict mushroom clouds on America - that honorable and brave young Americans were sent off to fight."

In this text, Frank Rich makes an equation that is not easily discernible. If we assume that these promises were ‘false,' "honorable and brave young Americans were sent off to fight" on false promises, true, but this situation helped uncover the real dimensions of the Saddam tyranny, and the USA have had the moral obligation to establish humanity, civil order and Human Rights within a realm of thugs and illiterate sheikhs, who intend to pursue their agenda up to the total destruction of the West, which is actually what they continuously develop while hysterically and inhumanly screaming in their bogus-Islamic khutbahs (religious sermons prior to the Friday prayer).

If honorable and brave American soldiers died on supposedly ‘false promises,' this would be true only for those who died up the arrival in Baghdad. And these are very, very, very few.

The American soldiers killed after Saddam’s dethroning have died fighting for a completely different cause. What is at stake now – for America, the West, and the civilized Muslims, who are oppressed in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and so many other countries and have no possibility to speak loudly against bogus-Islamic sheikhs like Shaarawi, Qradawi and Zawahri – is whether Barbarism will expand in the name of an altered Islam throughout Iraq first, and then to other neighboring countries, threatening the West with nuclear disaster.

As for the rest of Mr. Frank Rich’ text, we let the average reader go through and evaluate whether it was written by an American hand or by the Secretary of Ossama Bin Laden and the ‘Arab’ League lobbyists:

"Nothing that happens on the ground in Iraq can turn around the fate of this war in America: not a shotgun constitution rushed to meet an arbitrary deadline, not another Iraqi election, not higher terrorist body counts, not another battle for Falluja (where insurgents may again regroup, The Los Angeles Times reported last week). A citizenry that was asked to accept tax cuts, not sacrifice, at the war's inception is hardly in the mood to start sacrificing now. There will be neither the volunteers nor the money required to field the wholesale additional American troops that might bolster the security situation in Iraq.

WHAT lies ahead now in Iraq instead is not victory, which Mr. Bush has never clearly defined anyway, but an exit (or triage) strategy that may echo Johnson's March 1968 plan for retreat from Vietnam: some kind of negotiations (in this case, with Sunni elements of the insurgency), followed by more inflated claims about the readiness of the local troops-in-training, whom we'll then throw to the wolves. Such an outcome may lead to even greater disaster, but this administration long ago squandered the credibility needed to make the difficult case that more human and financial resources might prevent Iraq from continuing its descent into civil war and its devolution into jihad central."

This is what the terrorists’ agenda needs! Contrarily to that, the American administration still has the possibility:

a) to adjust the correct punishment to the Sunni thugs of Saddam,

b) to help the Kurds, the Christian Aramaeans, the Mandaean Aramaeans, the Turkmens, the Yazidis, the Armenians and the Persians live peacefully in Sunni-and-Shia-free federal provinces, and

c) to help progressive Shia master the extremists within the limits of a Shia federal province.

Central government is not the way to pacify Aram Nahrain – Mesopotamia, and Iraq as name must be abolished; it has long been the hateful name of a Cemetery.

Article Source: http://www.afroarticles.com/article-dashboard

About The Author: Dr. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis - is Orientalist, Assyriologist, Egyptologist, Iranologist, Islamologist, Historian and Political Scientist. Dr. Megalommatis, 49, is the author of 12 books, dozens of scholarly articles, hundreds of encyclopedia entries, and thousands of articles. He speaks, reads and writes more than 15, modern and ancient, languages.

| View Profile & All Articles By: Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis |

		Post Comment
		Blog This Article!
		Discuss Article in Forum(s)
		Publication \| Reprint Terms

Please Rate this Article

Not yet Rated

Click the XML Icon Above to Receive The Middle East Articles Via RSS!

| Category Feeds | All-in-one Feed | Other Feed & Syndication Options |

Additional Articles From - Home | Politics | The Middle East

	Print This Article
	Post Comment
	Add To Favorites
	Email To Friends
	Ezine Ready \| Syndication
	Make PDF Article
	Post To del.icio.us
	Post To Furl
	Add To Google Bookmarks
	Submit To Netscape
	Add To Yahoo! My Web
	Add Main Feed To Outlook
	Post to BookMarks @ AfroArticles.com

	Post To BookMarkAfrica.com

Site Home

Article Categories

More Search Options

Site Map

Submit Articles

Top Authors

Most Recent Articles