We now have the multiple bombings of the train in Mumbai, India; Afghanstan; Iraq; Israel has now declared war on Gaza; America wants to do something about Iran; and there is still the ongoing question of Chechnya and Russia. What have these oil interests and globalist wrought.
aint nothin new or unusual,,,, always gone on n always will,,,, .. why is it so hard for people to fathom that everything that goes on today has gone on in the past,,,, all it is is a new era, n a slightly different bitch angle...
Iraq was something new and unusual, we attacked and now occupy a sovereign nation that was not a threat to our security and was already restricted by united nations sanctions. The American people were fed the lie that this action would stabilize this area. Now we are looking at ways to justify doing the same with Iran. And we allow Israel to act like one of the biggest bullies on the globe, without employing sanctions against them. Even if it has historically happened in the past, that is no reason to assume that we have to consider it inevitable. If we could rein in the rich, powerful and greedy interests in the world the little man could continue to go on toiling peacefully for a living withouut being manipulated by those that seek to profit by the death and destruction of others.
______________________________________________________Trading blood for oil7/12/2006 11:30:00 AM GMT SourceMany analysts have suggested that the United States invaded Iraq in alliance with Britain on March 20, 2003, mainly to steal its oil wealth and not because of any of the lies presented by the American and the British leaders in the run up to war, including the former Iraqi leader’s never-proved ties to Al Qaeda network and the alleged weapons of mass destruction that threatened the security of the United States and the entire world. But the U.S. authorities still insist that the invasion of Iraq was to liberate Iraqis from the brutal regime. The U.S. has never been that keen or caring about democracy and freedom. On the contrary, America’s interference in any country, diplomatically or militarily had always been aimed at building big business with stolen resources, using the labour of poor or enslaved people. This isn't ancient history, the U.S. is using the very same policy up till now, best example is Iraq. The American President George W. Bush’s recent visit to Iraq was another attempt to brainwash the angry American troops and convince them that they’re winning the war, part of a larger and “honorable mission” aimed at rooting out terror in our world his so-called “war on terrorism”.(So what about US it is the Master of terrorism, let's start from US) Bush, now getting ready for his mid-term elections, is trying to shift the U.S. public’s attention away from the fact that killing innocent Iraqi civilians in a misguided war and the army’s disgraceful behaviour including torturing and abusing prisoners are the main reason behind the worldwide negative sentiments against Americans. No matter how hard the American President tries to deliver an image opposite to what’s actually taking place in the war-ravaged country, violence and bloodshed will persist and the conflict will continue, for Bush is fighting the systems and not the causes, stated an opinion column on Columbia Daily Tribune. What the U.S. President failed or intentionally chose not to acknowledge is the reason why Iraqis are willing to die to inflict any harm on the U.S. forces. It’s because the vast majority of the Iraqi nation now understands that the U.S. forces didn’t come to liberate, but to implement a certain agenda that includes exploiting the Arabs’ resources, especially Iraq’s, and establish military bases in 120 countries. It’s the U.S. continuous attempts to police the world, forcing its policies on other countries’ political systems, ousting governments and placing puppet ones. If the U.S. wanted to help the Iraqi nation it would have offered that in a different way, may be help it fight illiteracy, disease and poverty. (no thanks they don't need it from US we cannot trust it)Because of the U.S. foreign policies, the world now sees Bush as the biggest terrorist of all. ___________The U.S. doesn’t intend to leave Iraq, not even if stability and security were restored in the country, an evidence for that is the massive new U.S. Embassy being built beside the Tigris River in Iraq. The reason that brought the U.S. to Iraq, is the same reason why it would stay there; “protecting a steady oil supply”.______________________________________________________*Peace and love* Yours Sincerely, Cat Stevens
gardener, Iraq is nothing new and unusual. The same dynamic applied to our invasion, occupation and internal political manipulations in Vietnam decades ago. This is the modus operandi of our armed forces and the Pentagon cronies who oversee their expansionistic expeditions against weaker nations. Such is the insatiable lust for control, power and profit of our Military Industrial Complex and all which serve it. Until "we the people" begin pulling the politicos out of their seats and the Chiefs of Staff from the insular walls of the criminally secretive Pentagon, nothing will change.
Vietnam was even more insane. We went in there at the request of the UN and the French. I still don't undstand the purpose, I don't think anyone does. But at the time the US entered Vietnam there was an armed conflict already in progress. Supposedly we were fighting the communist threat, but you know I never really bought into that whole cold war mentality. I couldn't see that communism was ever truly a threat to the way of life of the average American or the human rights of others. There again I think the military industrial complex manufactures boogie men just to sell their products.
Militarism and the Corporate Welfare State By Charles Sullivan SourceCharles Sullivan is a photographer, free lance writer and social activist residing somewhere in the hinterland of West Virginia. He welcomes your comments at earthdog@highstream.net. 07/11/06 "Information Clearing House Link: Allah knows Best*Peace and love* Yours Sincerely, Cat Stevens
Cat and Topolm you guys need to try and make your responses smaller, most of today's Americans won't bother to read through your lengthy posts. You need to reply only to one issue at a time. I know almost everything you guys post are relevant, but how many actually wade their way through posts that go over two or three paragraphs. Not really a criticism, just a suggestion. I think we are all trying to education, and inform those that are just getting their news through the nightly sound bites on the news.
I also want to go on record saying that one of the things that reinforced my opposition to the war, was when I saw the museum in Baghdad looted. To me that showed what the American objective was and it wasn't any benefit this conflict could bring to the world or the Iraqi people. That museum held treasures that can never be replaced or measured and it was so low on the American priorities that it was never considered as a world treasure, worthy of protection. So how do we expect the lives of normal Iraqi citizens to be held in any regard. http://www.post-gazette.com/World/20030416museum0416p3.asp http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/apr2003/loot-a19.shtml Maybe Cheney or some member of the Bush family now has a Mesopotamian bust displayed in their living room. But I think they are more interested in filling their bank accounts than protecting the history of the world. Haven't seen much on the news about what was recovered or destroyed, guess that's not really news worthy. We had many tanks parked around Sadaam's statue, why weren't they parked in front of museum that held treasures the world can never recover.
From second link. Make of it what you will, but I am embarrassed that this happened while we were busy watching a stupid statue pulled down.
gardener I could post the link for that Article, but what I did is I highlighted the important things, so I think I made it easy to them =)*Peace and love* Yours Sincerely, Cat Stevens
