The Real Reason for the Occupation of Iraq, Noam Chomsky, et. al.
Part of the problem in the strategy of those who hope to disseminate truth to other people is that they fail to recognize the real reason America invaded and occupied Iraq causing basically a win/win (so they think) outcome of controlling vast oil reserves and/or causing an ever expanding genocide of muslims both Shi'i and Sunni......the problem is that most do not realize the US would never have invaded had they believed Iraq would remain a pro Sunni (Saudi backed) "secularist" state.
They knew what was to come (the Shi'i crescent). So why don't most of the posters on this site know that?
Where's yer brains people?
Here is a fine piece about one of the engineers of the "War Against Terror" which is well done and based on some of Noam Chomsky's brilliant reasoning (noting that Mr. Chomsky visited with Sayyed Nasrallah just before the invasion last year...and I might add my daughter had the pleasure of hearing him speak at the American University of Beirut (where my older daughter is a graduate from the school of sociology):
"If [Iraq is] more or less democratic, it'll have a Shiite majority. They will naturally want to improve their linkages with Iran, Shiite Iran. Most of the clerics come from Iran... So you get an Iraqi/Iran loose alliance. Furthermore, right across the border in Saudi Arabia, there's a Shiite population which has been bitterly oppressed by the U.S.-backed fundamentalist tyranny. And any moves toward independence in Iraq are surely going to stimulate them, it's already happening. That happens to be where most of Saudi Arabian oil is. Okay, so you can just imagine the ultimate nightmare in Washington..."
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=10185
"Chomsky isn't making this stuff up. One can get quick confirmation of Chomsky's characterization of this "ultimate nightmare" scenario from the key "realists" of Republican foreign policy establishment -- folks like Bush Sr., former National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft, former Secretary of State James Baker, and Colin Powell. When presented with a Shiite uprising against Saddam Hussein in 1991, the "realists" opted to leave Saddam in power, rather than let the nightmare become reality. In a co-authored 1998 memoir, A World Transformed, Bush Sr. and Scowcroft insist that they acted to preserve "the long-term balance of power at the head of the Gulf" (p.489). In his 1995 memoir The Politics of Diplomacy, James Baker recalls that he didn't want to "play into the hands of the mullahs in Iran, who could export their brand of Islamic fundamentalism with the help of Iraq's Shiites and quickly transform themselves into the dominant regional power" (p.437). Colin Powell, in his 1995 memoir My American Journey, is equally blunt. "Why didn't we finish him off?... In March, the Iraqi Shiites in the south rose up in arms... But our practical intention was to leave Baghdad enough power to survive as a threat to an Iran that remained bitterly hostile toward the United States"" (pp.512, 516).
The article further goes on:
Wurmser (*a key neoconservative War on Terror engineer) directly confronts so-called "realist" fears regarding Shiite power in Iraq:
"The ensuing chaos of any policy that generates upheaval in Iraq would offer the oppressed, majority Shi'ites of that country an opportunity to enhance their power and prestige. Fear that this would in turn enable Iran to extend its influence through its coreligionists has led Britain and the United States, along with our Middle Eastern allies, to regard a continued Sunni control of Iraq as the cornerstone for stability in the Levant. Saudi Arabia in particular fears that any Shi'ite autonomy or control in Iraq will undermine its own precarious stability, because an emboldened Shi'ite populace in Iraq could spread its fervor into Saudi Arabia's predominantly Shi'ite northeastern provinces. The Saudi government also fears that this upheaval could spread to predominantly Shi'ite Bahrain, or to other gulf states with large Shi'ite minorities." (TA, p.73)
Iraq was invaded because the Zionist jews wanted it so, and they talked the puppet US regime into invading.
Your lies are becoming transparent.
http://carmenisacat.blogspot.com/
..of the word do you consider yourself a muslim, particularly one who supposedly hates "sectarianism" and you address me as Crypto Jew and a liar leftfield?
You have strayed more than a few inches from the truth and it shows.
I have now ceased to be a Muslim? Because I have pointed out the obvious lie you give in your blog that Quote "the problem is that most do not realize the US would never have invaded had they believed Iraq would remain a pro Sunni (Saudi backed) "secularist" state."
Iraq under Sadam was not Pro Sunni, nor was it backed by the Saudis. Sadam was a Baathist (a Socialism, given birth by a Christian named Michel Aflaq and supported by a largely Christian minority within and outside Iraq) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Aflaq.
If you want to peddle Zionist lies knowingly you will be considered to be a shill, idiot, or Zionist by me. Since this is largely a anonymous forum I only have your words in this blog to go by. and you
http://carmenisacat.blogspot.com/
..you also miss the part where I politely asked Traveller to not address me ala Rhiannon as "MP"?
Perhaps you did.
And no...I don't think you've ceased to be anything at all. I have no idea why people like you seem to think that just because people like me tell you the truth about your behavior that I've said anything at all about your faith in Allah, his Quran, Judgement Day, the angels, the messengers or tawhid.
Perhaps you need to put on your reading glasses next time and you also need to stop saying foul mouthed things like liar and crypto Jew to actual muslim posters.
My best advice and Allah is the best witness.
Peace on anyone who deserves it.
"Even if it were true, who cares"
Noam Chomsky
Do you really want to cite someone that has such a cavalier attitude toward 911? Chomsky basically states that all authoritarian regimes benefited from 911; However, he does not want to investigate the 911 since it diverts from the real issues. Wow! Masterful DOUBLE SPEAK!!!!
Ms.Potter please consider his statements before citing his work.
http://carmenisacat.blogspot.com/
Noam Chomsky happens to be a Nasrallah supporter or were you not aware of it?
But I highly doubt you even read the lengthy article which isn't even about Noam. It is about neocon strategy and the so-called buffoonery of same.
They did not invade Iraq just for the oil...after all...they already were getting the oil from Saudi Arabia due to a sweetheart deal post AWACS. You probably weren't as up to date on that or have a very, very poor memory of it.
Alas...I remember the glorious days when I used to live with the AWACS folks on a little compound that is no more, Wadi Laban, which sits just below the Kings receiving rooms in Riyadh. We used to call it B-2....we moved in there when the defense contractors started losing contracts in Saudi and had to rent out their unoccupied and already leased dwellings there.
It was the first compound hit in this phase of the War on Terror and the Al Q chapter of Islamic history.
Read the article people prior to digressing on what you think it is about.
That usually works best.
Next to Ginsberg
I sat next to Ginsberg in 1979,
saw King Fahed being ushered into the ER
wrapped in a pink blanket to disguise him,
he pee'd on my friend in the ICU.
Jack Nicholson ordered coffee from me once
at the Little America Truckstop in Flag,
a pack of cigarettes rolled up
in the sleeve of his black t-shirt
(then he started marrying waitresses).
I lived next door to a man that was
beheaded for building Apaches.
My husband ran into Gene Hackman at the Taj Majal
and Elvira let him encircle her for a picture
down in Atlanta at a convention.
Someone I know told me Goldie Hawn was a real witch
in a five star hotel and Kurt was as handsome
as he was in The Computer Wore Tennis Shoes
(which I mistakenly called, The Computer War Tennis Shoes)
and Steve Pearl told me the Dalai Lama would visit
the city park and I hoped to be able to pet him.
A poem about ignorance and destiny. Sad but merry at the end there.
In Memory of Paul Johnson, beheaded by Al Qaeda operatives in Riyadh. It seems many years ago now.
since you seem to "know" so much about the CIA born organization, tell us all about it and its fabled "operatives."
---------------------------------------
"Money" has no value - people do.
Tell me who is responsible for 911. If we can not agree on this fact then why should I listen to you?
Quote:
The New War Against Terror
October 18, 2001 - Transcribed from audio
recorded at The Technology & Culture Forum at MIT
He starts the talk with 2 assumptions:
* The first one is just what I assume to be recognition of fact. That is that the events of September 11 were a horrendous atrocity probably the most devastating instant human toll of any crime in history, outside of war.
* The second assumption has to do with the goals. I’m assuming that our goal is that we are interested in reducing the likelihood of such crimes whether they are against us or against someone else.
If you don’t accept those two assumptions, then what I say will not be addressed to you. If we do accept them, then a number of questions arise, closely related ones, which merit a good deal of thought.
I should have elaborated a bit more on the Chomsky perspective. Chomsky frames the debate within well defined and socially acceptable boundaries. Liberals suggests US aggression is about controlling middle-east oil reserves and or US policy is about establishing democracies in the middle-east. However, I feel that American middle-east involvement has nothing to do with the official rationales but rather it is about Israeli ambition to expand its territory and sphere of influence. Since 911 is the reason for America's involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan then a scholarly investigation into who perpetrated the terrorists attacks is necessary before offering a rationale for the current strife. In other words, if 911 is the basis for the war on terror then it stands to reason the we need to know who did it before discussing American military interventionism and its implication on the region. Chomsky's perspective is it happened lets focus on the consequences. This is a technique to frame the debate and limit the ideas that can be brought to light.
http://carmenisacat.blogspot.com/
...that Sunni fundamentalists do exist and they did cut off the head of my neighbor Paul Johnson.
Now. Is that enough of a knowledge for you or are you the type of person who believes there is no such thing as a "Sunni fundamentalist" Ms. Wave?
Now. If you want to start over then I suggest you change your inflammatory tone of voice. I think I've gone to GREAT lengths to dispell this horrendous picture of me you accepted from an "unknown" internet troll.
The least you can do now is stop trying to force me to explain to you Sunni fundamentalism which most of you believe does not exist.
Why on earth would people want me to explain something that THEY don't believe exists at all!
Oh. It does. Just because these groups are exploited by the US..that does not absolve them from responsibility.
In that...you are all misguided as muslims and as non.
they were financed, directed and orchestrated by the US.
No one absolving anyone of responsibility for their conduct even if it's directed by zionists.
But, that doesn't mean we should feed into the illusion that they are a spontaneuous group of "sunni fundamentalists" without exposing the agenda of their puppeteers.
---------------------------------------
"Money" has no value - people do.
Sheesh If i came into a persons house and talked like MP i would expect to be thrown into the street.
At least try to be remotely civil OK?
First you take D.C. Then you take New York.
Quote:
No one absolving anyone of responsibility for their conduct even if it's directed by Zionists.
But, that doesn't mean we should feed into the illusion that they are a spontaneuous group of "sunni fundamentalists" without exposing the agenda of their puppeteers.
NOW CONSIDER IF THE ZIONIST ARE MANGING THE VIOLENCE IN IRAQ THEN IT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO DISCUSS THE EVENTS PRIOR TO THE IRAQ WAR NAMELY 911. This is why I harp on Chomsky. He deflects the conversation away from the root cause. Zionism
I would ask maggieporter how she documents the facts of statements like this one. "In Memory of Paul Johnson, beheaded by Al Qaeda operatives in Riyadh. It seems many years ago now."
maggieporter | Mon, 2007-07-30 20:59
This is why we 'cut and paste' articles. In this way, we are more assured of the truth of the statements made. I know that the beheadings I've seen on video and heard about have been BLAMED on Al Qaeda operatives but anybody can put on a mask or hood and claim they are Al Qaeda. I am only required to consider the truth in this type of reporting...not believe it as the ' Gospel' truth: unless there is substantiated proof. Peace be to you.
http://carmenisacat.blogspot.com/
Right.
US and Israeli operatives are blowing themselves up for "the cause".
US and Israeli operatives are holed up in Nahar al Barad and robbed a bank prior to slitting the throats of the Lebanese army soldiers.
Right.
Paul Johnson was a wonderful neighbor. He sent pages from the Quran home to his mother and brother (they'd been abandoned by Paul's father when he was very young). That is why he used to make extra hamburgers when he barbeque'd and he'd invite all the neighborhood kids over because he really liked the idea of having kids around. He and his Thai wife didn't have any and he especially took to three children whose father had kidnapped them from their American mother and fed them all sorts of lies about her...he'd leave those kids without food or proper supervision and Paul always took the time to try to give them the attention they desperately needed.
Paul's body was photographed and the culprits were in a giant shootout in Riyadh...they found the house where he was beheaded and it was spattered with blood and tissue.
You are not only living on Mars but you belong there.
Al Q is real. They are very misguided people without any proper leadership. Compared to Hezbollah who knows who each and every one of its members are...who knows who "thinks" they belong to Al Q but I assure you...they are easy to convince. By the FBI who sets them up and makes young men believe they are fighting the Great Satan and helps them to incriminate themselves. This is not the same as Hezbollah and how on earth you people do not see the difference...and support people who basically want to cleanse Shia from the planet (they are called takfiris and are a remnant of the Kharjites) is beyond me.
You are hypocrits.