Israeli army rescue workers remove a body from the rubble of the Taba Hilton hotel, which was carbombed the previous evening, leaving at least 24 confirmed dead, in Taba, Egypt, on the border with the southern tip of Israel Friday, Oct. 8, 2004.
A second bombing at about the same time rocked another resort town just south of Taba, on the Red Sea coast of Egypt.
Photo: AP/Heidi Levine
Bush, Sharon, and the World
Counterpunch September 18/19, 2004|
The Real Story of Vietnam Veterans Against the War: Continued
By the time large numbers of U.S. troops arrived in Vietnam, the country had been partitioned, and in South Vietnam, a new revolutionary nationalist movement had arisen called the National Liberation Front (NLF) known to the Americans as the "Viet Cong."
By 1965, the NLF had been waging a war for several years against the corrupt, dictatorial South Vietnamese government in the southern capital of Saigon.
The U.S. invaded to prevent the NLF from coming to power.
Washington sent a huge army, eventually reaching more than 500,000 troops, and it employed the most destructive weapons to destroy the bases of the NLF in the countryside.
For the mainly working-class soldiers who the U.S. sent to fight the Vietnamese people, the war was a huge shock.
The young troops had been told that all "struggles for national liberation" were Communist conspiracies, emanating from the ex-USSR or China.
They were trained for a war like the Second World War, involving set-piece battles between great armies.
Instead, U.S. GIs found themselves fighting a peasant guerrilla army of young men and women.
Washington's strategy was for a "total war" so soldiers were ordered to burn down villages, destroy large areas of the countryside and kill as many NLF fighters as possible.
The war sickened many U.S. soldiers, seeming to be a pointless exercise in destruction.
I was a redcoat
Others began to realize that they were fighting on the wrong side.
Bill Ehrhardt, a Marine in Vietnam, said the reality of the war produced a "staggering realization."
"In grade school, we learned about the redcoats, the nasty British soldiers that tried to stifle our freedom," he wrote.
"Subconsciously, but not very subconsciously, I began increasingly to have the feeling that I was a redcoat."
GI RESISTANCEto the war began much earlier than people realize today.
In June 1965, Capt. Richard Steinke, a West Point graduate stationed in Vietnam refused to board an aircraft that was supposed to take him to a remote Vietnamese village.
"The Vietnamese war," Steinke said, "is not worth a single American life."
He was court-martialed and dismissed from the Army.
The whole thing was a lie
In February 1966, ex-Green Beret Master Sgt. Donald Duncan, who had served in Vietnam, published a powerful indictment of the war titled "The whole thing was a lie!" in the left-wing Ramparts magazine.
Duncan was a militant anti-Communist, but his experience in Vietnam transformed his view of the war.
Duncan became convinced that the majority of the South Vietnamese were "either anti-Saigon or pro-Viet Cong or both."
The Fort Hood Three, a trio of U.S. Army privates James Johnson, Dennis Mora, and David Samas, all members of the 2nd Armored Division stationed at Fort Hood, Texas refused to serve in Vietnam.
The three were from working-class families, and they denounced the war as "immoral, illegal and unjust."
They were arrested, court-martialed and imprisoned.
The Real Story of Vietnam Veterans Against the War by : JOE ALLEN
In 1967, U.S. Army Dr. Howard Levy refused to train Green Berets at Fort Jackson, S.C.
Levy argued that the Green Berets were "murderers of women and children" and "killers of peasants."
He was court-martialed and sentenced to 27 months in a military prison.
The colonel who presided at Levy's court-martial said: "The truth of the statements is not an issue in this case."
As left-wing historian Howard Zinn wrote, "The individual acts multiplied.
A Black private in Oakland refused to board a troop plane to Vietnam, although he faced 11 years at hard labor.
A navy nurse, Lt. Susan Schnall, was court-martialed for marching in a peace demonstration while in uniform, and for dropping antiwar leaflets from a plane on navy installations."
Breakdown of Russia's Tsarist armies
These individual examples of resistance would crescendo into mutinies and desertion, as whole groups of soldiers, sailors and pilots refused to fight the war.
One U.S. colonel described the collapse of U.S. forces as equivalent "to the breakdown of [Russia's] Tsarist armies during World War I."
In 1967, the growing antiwar movement at home led to the founding of Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) by Jan Barry. Barry was an army veteran who had been stationed in Vietnam in 1963.
He was disturbed by what he saw there and later dropped out of West Point to pursue a writing career.
During 1967 and 1968, hundreds of veterans joined the VVAW, but the organization virtually disappeared into Eugene McCarthy's campaign for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination in 1968.
The group revived over the next two years as a result of a political awakening of Vietnam veterans around such issues as their ill treatment at Veterans Administration hospitals, public exposure of the war crimes committed at My Lai, and the killing of student antiwar demonstrators at Kent State University following Richard Nixon's invasion of Cambodia in 1970.
This revival brought new members who came from mostly working-class families and who had witnessed some of the worst combat of the war.
The most famous was Ron Kovic, whose life was depicted in the film Born on the Fourth of July.
Al Hubbard, a Black veteran, raised the need to address the racist treatment of African American soldiers and veterans.
John Kerry also joined at this time.
But what made him so different was that he was from a wealthy background and had political connections at the upper levels of the Democratic Party.
The two historic events organized by the VVAW that would catapult the organization into the leadership of the antiwar movement were the Winter Soldier Investigation and protests in Washington, D.C., called Dewey Canyon III.
The VVAW gave the name "Winter Soldier" to its war crimes investigation as a reference to Tom Paine's tribute to the soldiers who stayed the course during the darkest days of the American Revolution in the 18th century.
Testified about atrocities they participated in
The "new winter soldiers," as they saw themselves, hoped to end the Vietnam War by exposing U.S. war crimes.
Al Hubbard said that the purpose of the investigation was to show that "My Lai was not an isolated incident," but "only a minor step beyond the standard official United States policy in Indochina."
The Winter Soldier Investigation (the full transcript of testimony is available online) took place in Detroit in January and February of 1971.
During that weekend, more than 100 veterans from Vietnam testified about the atrocities that they participated in or witnessed.
Another 500 to 700 veterans came from across the country to listen.
The statements of the vets were painful, gut wrenching and tear-filled, riveting and shocking everyone present.
Sgt. Jamie Henry said that he witnessed the murder of 19 women and children during his tour of duty, which he reported to superiors, but got no response.
Henry explained how the racism ingrained in soldiers made such atrocities possible.
"You are trained 'gook, gook, gook,' and once the military has got the idea implanted in you that these people are not humans...it makes it a little bit easier to kill 'em," he said.
Hundreds of veterans flooded into the VVAW after the hearings a sign of how dramatically the Winter Soldier Investigation spoke to their own experiences.
Other hearings modeled on the ones in Detroit were held across the country, and members of Congress publicly called for official investigations into the charges that the Winter Soldiers raised.
Next came Dewey Canyon III.
The five days of protest in April 1971 were named after Dewey Canyons I and II, Pentagon code names for two "limited incursions" translation: invasions of the country of Laos, which bordered Vietnam.
The VVAW described the demonstrations as a "limited incursion into the country of Congress."
As many as 2,000 Vietnam veterans came to Washington to protest the war and the treatment they received from the government that sent them to fight.
The protesters mercilessly harassed the political establishment in Washington.
They sat in at the U.S. Supreme Court to protest the illegality of the war.
They humiliated Strom Thurmond, the racist bigot and pro-war senator.
Veterans and Gold Star mothers who had lost a child in the war succeeded on a second attempt to make their way into Arlington National Cemetery to lay a wreath for the U.S. dead in Vietnam.
Jan Barry presented a Congressional delegation with a list of 16 demands from the VVAW, which included: "immediate, unilateral, unconditional withdrawal" of all U.S. forces from Indochina; amnesty for all Americans who refused to fight in Vietnam; a formal inquiry into war crimes; and improved veterans benefits.
Medals "symbol of dishonor, shame and inhumanity."
There were two high points to Dewey Canyon III.
One was Kerry's powerful speech before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, in which he asked, "How can you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam?
How can you ask a man to die for a mistake?"
The moment made Kerry into one of the most recognized figures in the antiwar movement.
The second and far more important was a ceremony in which veterans "returned" their medals to the U.S. government, by throwing them over a fence in front of the U.S. Capitol building.
Jack Smith, a highly decorated ex-Marine sergeant, was the first to go. He said that his medals were a "symbol of dishonor, shame and inhumanity."
Smith offered an apology to the Vietnamese people "whose hearts were broken, not won," because of "genocide, racism and atrocity."
Hundreds of veterans followed.
The Dewey Canyon III demonstrations were the lead story every night on the television news and on the front page of newspapers across the country.
The face of the antiwar movement until then associated mainly with college students had changed for millions of people.
The Vietnam War ended for most Americans in January 1973, when Richard Nixon announced a peace settlement though, in fact, the fall of Saigon, which marked Washington's final defeat, was still two years away.
The VVAW played an important role in bringing about the end of that war and to this day, the organization continues, having joined the protest against Bush's latest invasion of Iraq.
The struggle of U.S. soldiers against the war and their organization, the VVAW should be remembered, celebrated and defended.
That means challenging the Swift Boat Veterans' version of history.
And it also means challenging the John Kerry of today, who wants to run away from this antiwar legacy.
Joe Allen writes for the Socialist Worker.
Bush vs. Kerry: The fake debate
"Pre-emptive" attack on Iran
ON MAY 6, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a resolution that, in effect, authorized a "pre-emptive" attack on Iran.
The vote was 376-3.
Undeterred by the accelerating disaster in Iraq, Republicans and Democrats, wrote one commentator, "once again joined hands to assert the responsibilities of American power."
The joining of hands across America’s illusory political divide has a long history.
The native Americans were slaughtered, the Philippines laid to waste and Cuba and much of Latin America brought to heel with "bipartisan" backing.
Wading through the blood, a new breed of popular historian, the journalist in the pay of rich newspaper owners, spun the heroic myths of a super-sect called Americanism, which advertising and public relations in the 20th century formalized as an ideology, embracing both conservatism and liberalism.
In the modern era, most of America’s wars have been launched by liberal Democratic presidents Truman in Korea, Kennedy and Johnson in Vietnam, Carter in Afghanistan.
The fictitious "missile gap" with the former USSR was invented by Kennedy’s liberal New Frontiersmen as a rationale for keeping the Cold War going.
More than 3 million deaths
In 1964, a Democrat-dominated Congress gave President Johnson the authority to attack Vietnam, a defenseless peasant nation offering no threat to the United States.
Like the non-existent WMDs in Iraq, the justification was a nonexistent "incident" in which two North Vietnamese patrol boats were said to have attacked an American warship.
More than 3 million deaths and the ruin of a once bountiful land followed.
During the past 60 years, only once has Congress voted to limit the president’s "right" to terrorize other countries.
This aberration, the 1975 Clark Amendment, a product of the great anti-Vietnam War movement, was repealed in 1985 by Ronald Reagan.
During Reagan’s assaults on Central America in the 1980s, liberal voices such as Tom Wicker of the New York Times, doyen of the "doves," seriously debated whether or not tiny, impoverished Nicaragua was a threat to the United States.
This is lesser evilism.
Although few liberal-minded voters seem to have illusions about John Kerry, their need to get rid of the "rogue" Bush administration is all-consuming.
Representing them in Britain, the Guardian says the coming presidential election is "exceptional."
"Mr. Kerry’s flaws and limitations are evident," says the paper, "but they are put in the shade by the neo-conservative agenda and catastrophic war-making of Mr. Bush.
This is an election in which the whole world will breathe a sigh of relief if the incumbent is defeated."
The whole world may well breathe a sigh of relief; the Bush regime is both dangerous and universally loathed; but that is not the point.
We have debated lesser evilism so often on both sides of the Atlantic that it is surely time to stop gesturing at the obvious and to examine critically a system that produces the Bushes and their Democratic shadows.
...Every modern president has been, in large part, a media creation.
Thus, the murderous Reagan is sanctified still; Murdoch’s Fox News Channel and the post-Hutton BBC have differed only in their forms of adulation.
And Clinton is regarded nostalgically by liberals as flawed but enlightened.
Yet Clinton’s presidential years were far more violent than Bush’s, and his goals were the same: "The integration of countries into the global free market community," the terms of which, noted the New York Times, "require the United States to be involved in the plumbing and wiring of nations’ internal affairs more deeply than ever before."
The Pentagon’s "full-spectrum dominance" was not the product of the "neo-cons" but of the liberal Clinton, who approved what was then the greatest war expenditure in history.
According to the Guardian, John Kerry sends us "energizing progressive calls."
It is time to stop this nonsense.
Liberal Carter laid the ground for Bush.
SUPREMACY IS the essence of Americanism; only the veil changes or slips.
In 1976, the Democrat Jimmy Carter announced "a foreign policy that respects human rights."
In secret, he backed Indonesia’s genocide in East Timor and established the mujahedeen in Afghanistan as a terrorist organization designed to overthrow the Soviet Union, and from which came the Taliban and al-Qaeda.
It was the liberal Carter, not Reagan, who laid the ground for Bush.
In the past year, I have interviewed Carter’s principal foreign policy overlords, Zbigniew Brezinski, his national security advisor, and James Schlesinger, his defense secretary.
No blueprint for the new imperialism is more respected than Brezinski’s.
Invested with biblical authority by the Bush gang, his 1997 book The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geo-strategic Imperatives, describes American priorities as the economic subjugation of the Soviet Union and the control of Central Asia and the Middle East.
His analysis says that "local wars" are merely the beginning of a final conflict leading inexorably to world domination by the U.S.
"To put it in a terminology that harkens back to a more brutal age of ancient empires," he writes, "the three grand imperatives of imperial geo-strategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected and to keep the barbarians from coming together."
It may have been easy once to dismiss this as a message from the lunar right.
But Brzezinski is mainstream.
His devoted students include Madeleine Albright, Clinton’s secretary of state, who described the death of half a million infants in Iraq under the American-led embargo as "a price worth paying," and John Negroponte, the mastermind of American terror in Central America under Reagan and currently "ambassador" in Baghdad.
Also a Zionist
James Rubin, who was Albright’s enthusiastic apologist at the State Department, is being considered as John Kerry’s national security adviser.
He is also a Zionist; Israel and its role as a terror state is beyond discussion.
|U.S. Militarism paid for this|
John Pilger on the "choice" in Election 2004
Cast an eye over the rest of the world.
As Iraq has crowded the front pages, American moves into Africa have attracted little attention.
Here, the Clinton and Bush policies are seamless.
In the 1990s, Clinton’s African Growth and Opportunity Act launched a new scramble for Africa.
Humanitarian bombers wonder why Bush and Blair have not attacked Sudan and "liberated" Darfur, or intervened in Zimbabwe or the Congo.
The answer is that they have no interest in human distress and human rights and are busy securing the same riches that led to the European scramble in the late 19th century by traditional means of coercion and bribery known as multilateralism.
The Congo and Zambia possess 50 percent of world cobalt reserves; 98 percent of the world’s chrome reserves are in Zimbabwe and South Africa.
More importantly, there is oil and natural gas in west Africa, from Nigeria to Angola, and in the Higleig Basin in Sudan.
Lead Contra invasion of Nicaragua
Under Clinton, the African Crisis Response Initiative (ACRI) was set up in secret.
This has allowed the U.S. to establish "military assistance programs" in Senegal, Uganda, Malawi, Ghana, Benin, Algeria, Niger, Mali and Chad.
ACRI is run by Col. Nestor Pino-Marina, a Cuban exile who took part in the 1961 Bay of Pigs landing and went on to be a Special Forces officer in Vietnam and Laos and, under Reagan, helped lead the contra invasion of Nicaragua.
The pedigrees never change.
None of this is discussed in a presidential campaign in which John Kerry strains to out-Bush Bush.
Little appears in the American papers
The multilateralism or "muscular internationalism" that Kerry offers in contrast to Bush’s unilateralism is seen as hopeful by the terminally naive; in truth, it beckons even greater dangers.
Bush, having given the American elite its greatest disaster since Vietnam, writes the historian Gabriel Kolko, "is much more likely to continue the destruction of the alliance system that is so crucial to American power.
One does not have to believe the worse the better, but we have to consider candidly the foreign policy consequences of a renewal of Bush’s mandate.
As dangerous as it is, Bush’s re-election may be a lesser evil."
With NATO back in train under President Kerry, and the French and Germans compliant, American ambitions will proceed without the Napoleonic hindrances of the Bush gang.
Little of this appears even in the American papers worth reading.
The Washington Post’s hand-wringing apology to its readers on August 14 for not "pay[ing] enough attention to voices raising questions about the war [against Iraq]" has not interrupted its silence on the danger that the American state presents to the world.
Never nationalists defending their homeland
Bush’s rating has risen in the polls to more than 50 percent, a level at this stage in the campaign at which no incumbent has ever lost.
The virtues of his "plain speaking," which the entire media machine promoted four years ago, Fox and the Washington Post alike, are again credited.
As in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, Americans are denied a modicum of understanding of what Norman Mailer has called "a pre-fascist climate."
The fears of the rest of us are of no consequence.
The professional liberals on both sides of the Atlantic have played a major part in this.
The campaign against Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 is indicative.
The film is not radical and makes no outlandish claims; what it does is push past those guarding the boundaries of "respectable" dissent.
That is why the public applaud it.
It breaks the collusive codes of journalism, which it shames.
It allows people to begin to deconstruct the nightly propaganda that passes for news: in which "a sovereign Iraqi government pursues democracy" and those fighting in Najaf and Falluja and Basra are always "militants" and "insurgents" or members of a "private army."
Never nationalists defending their homeland, and whose resistance has probably forestalled attacks on Iran, Syria or North Korea.
Subjugation of national economies to a system dividing humanity as never before
The real debate is neither Bush nor Kerry, but the system they exemplify.
It is the decline of true democracy and the rise of the American "national security state" in Britain and other countries claiming to be democracies.
In which people are sent to prison and the key thrown away.
Whose leaders commit capital crimes in faraway places, unhindered
Then, like the ruthless Tony Blair, invite the thug they install to address the British Labour Party conference.
The real debate is the subjugation of national economies to a system dividing humanity as never before and sustaining the deaths, every day, of 24,000 hungry people.
The real debate is the subversion of political language and of debate itself, and perhaps, in the end, our self-respect.
Depleted Uranium used by the U.S. military
ANGER, DEATH, ANGER, DEATH, ANGER, DEATH
| "Precision strike" |
www.democracynow.org Thursday, September 30th, 2004|
Best hope for the rest of the world is that Bush should win and sink the whole empire into complete isolation and hopefully into its perdition.
AMY GOODMAN: We turn now to Imad Khadduri.
He's a former Iraqi nuclear scientist with the Iraq Atomic Energy Commission from 1968 to 1998.
He's author of the book, Iraq's Nuclear Mirage. Welcome to Democracy Now!
Can you talk about your reaction to the top U.S. weapons inspector's report?
IMAD KHADDURI: The reaction I had was: What good would it do now?
A lot of blood has been shed in Iraq; thousands tens of thousands of people have died.
And I am also appalled by the reaction.
Still forty to fifty percent of the American people, who are going to vote in about four weeks, still believe that there was some untrue connections between that awful regime of Saddam and Al Qaeda.
The whole thing is so distressing that these facts They should be in a war crime tribunal with Cheney in front and Bush and Rumsfeld behind him.
But they're doing nothing.
I mean, they are just now debating points and they are just raising the level of rhetoric.
But the crime has been done.
The occupation has been awful.
Sham of what is to be called democracy
And this is what distresses me more most about this report.
It's just too late.
And it shows me the sham of what is to be called democracy.
I mean...yesterday there were...news that were so blatantly obvious to anybody who was watching the news.
Israel comes out and says that the Gaza plan is intended to indefinitely delay the establishment of a Palestinian state, for example.
And then the Israeli government says: "Well, that that U.N. ambulance didn't have an S.A.M. rocket.
In fact, we were mistaken.
Sorry about that; but we've killed fifty people in Gaza, nonetheless."
Then Dick Cheney's TV interview was just so full of lies, and the main media it isn't carrying it all that in one day.
To me, the whole truth about Iraq is so horrible that it would even sink Kerry instantaneously.
Because he is a 'me-too' candidate.
The best hope for the rest of the world, apparently, I have come to believe, is that Bush should win and sink the whole empire into complete isolation and hopefully into its perdition.
Now, you see, the problem is not that the problems or the causes are not known.
We know them better every day.
The problem is that those causing the world's miseries are powerfully and deeply entrenched in their positions of power, and that it would take massive, sustained violence, unfortunately, to dislodge them.
AMY GOODMAN: I just want to ask you to reiterate this point that you made, to see if I understand you correctly.
You're saying that you think Bush should win to isolate the United States further?
IMAD KHADDURI: Well, I yes.
That's what I'm saying.
Now, I didn't come with that of my own.
Six months ago, when there was the Spain Madrid train bombing and ten days later the Al Qaeda issued a statement on that, that was six months ago.
They said, we will ask all operations to be halted in Spain, giving the Spanish people the chance to vote and perhaps withdraw, and they did.
Now, the second part of that statement, declaration, was not published, was not widespread in the west.
Bin Laden: I really wish that you would win next November election.
I did translate it and send it to the Toronto Star.
It wasn't published there.
What did it say?
In it Osama Bin Laden was hoping, was saying to Bush: "I really wish that you would win next November election, because you are the only one who can convince the Muslims of the of the with your with your intransigence and violent approach, it will convince the Muslims that American military postures and foreign policy is against their interests.
Therefore I have asked all operations to be suspended from the United States until the election.
And after that, every event will have its own discourse."
Now, he said–this is Osama Bin Laden saying–that if Kerry comes into into power, he will again ameliorate the whole situation.
Asked all of his operations to stop in the United States until the November elections
He will sugar-coat it to the Muslims, thinking that he's giving them democracy, or whatever.
So that's why he was wishing Osama was wishing Bush, that he should be winning; and that's why he asked all of his operations to stop in the United States until the November elections.
Now, when two months ago there was this big fiasco about the financial district among the attack by terrorists, and the red or orange alert came, again I sent it to the Toronto Star, a day earlier on Sunday.
And I told Bill Schiller, he's the political editor of the Star, I said, "Look this is a hoax.
Bin Laden doesn't intend to strike because he said so a few months ago.
He has a policy on this."
What I'm saying now is apparently apparently, with all these lies coming to bear, coming to light, and what is being done about them, really?
He owns the world
Is the American public still who is really in a very litmus test of its own democracy.
American democracy is really at risk these days.
And still, American public still think, and the and this misconception that they have been they have been painted over with the mass media, they still believe in these lies.
What hope is there but for this to continue and until it's until its termination?
That Bush should stay, him and Cheney He owns the world.
We simply live in it, but he owns it, he and Bush, apparently.
That's the only way for it, I believe, to shorten the occupation of Iraq is for their policy to simply flop.
Best hope for the rest of the world is that Bush does win and sinks this whole empire in its own folly
But if Cheney comes and I mean if if Kerry comes and starts spending more time and trying to build coalitions, in the meantime much more Iraqi blood will be shed in that course.
Therefore, I say, as I said again, and I am reiterating, that the best hope for the rest of the world is that Bush does win and sinks this whole empire in its own folly.
AMY GOODMAN: I don't know if you watched the vice presidential debate between John Edwards and Dick Cheney
IMAD KHADDUR: Yes, I did.
AMY GOODMAN: But when John Edwards talked about the lack of a coalition and that ninety percent of the casualties were U.S. forces, Cheney corrected him and said, "You're belittling the other members of the coalition, and particularly the Iraqi casualties."
What is your response to that?
IMAD KHADDURI: Thomas Friedman, when he went into Basra the first week of the occupation, he wrote in The New York Times, that the poverty is just fascinating.
It's just so inducive for the Americans to prove the democracy and to and to, in a sense, transform Iraq, because of the poverty that he saw.
Now this is reflecting the neo-conservative thinking that these societies are so downtrodden, they're so poor that the American McDonald's and American Wal-marts will simply win them over immediately.
This has bearing on what's happening today.
What you're doing actually is for a handful of money
There's been so much unemployment in the past year-and-a-half in Iraq.
And things are very desperate as far as living conditions are concerned.
Many of the young people are very much attracted by money, by the salaries offered to be in the army and the police.
And that's why they're going there by the hundreds.
Now, the resistance is trying to either to tell these people that what you're doing actually is for a handful of money.
You are turning your weapons against your own people, as happened in Najaf, in Samarra, in Fallujah and Ramadi and many cities in the north, and the south and the middle, central.
So, it is true.
Cheney is true saying that the Iraqis have about 900 have been killed, which is the same as the American number, practically.
It's about 1,060 now.
But these people, they are just as we say, they are the fodder for the grinding stone.
If Cheney thinks that is belief in American democracy
They're not fully trained.
They're not well trained.
They're there for the couple of dollars that they're getting a month to feed their families.
Now, if Cheney thinks that is belief in American democracy, he is again lying.
He is again far away from the truth.
They are not the coalition.
They are trying to live, these people.
So, he Cheney should not mix his facts.
The people like the Australians and the British aren't there for just for the money.
They're there because they are for the United States, or other reasons of their own.
But the people the Iraqi people who are dying now.
They're not for Cheney.
They're not dying for Cheney.
They're dying for their own families.
Depleted Uranium its use in Afghanistan, Iraq, Balkans
Photos of Iraq children being born deformed
US Congress too stupid or gullible, and have killed many.
I would suggest that any member of the US Congress who had voted for it,
should be barred from ever running for any public office in America ever again!
US veteran Mothers against the war:
So anyway that filth-spewer and warmonger, George Bush
was speaking after the tragedy of the marines in Ohio...
Suicide Bombing Blair, Bush
Suicide Bombing is response to foreign occupation
Will stop once troops withdraw
Cowardly attacks by air killing men women and children in their homes, often never seeing those they kill as the drones or aircraft fly back to the cowardly bases If they kill only the husband, see how they care for the family they have destroyedAfghanistan Western Terror States: Canada, US, UK, France, Germany, Italy Photos of Afghanistan people being killed and injured by NATO
"None of that spilling of secrets for crass political retribution
could have gone on without her knowledge and approval,
and thus complicity.
Little of it could have happened without her participation,
if not as a leaker herself,
at least with her direction and with her scripting."
Condoleezza Rice Iraq Rove
As Jews we march with the Palestinians and raise their flag!
His Majesty King Abdullah The American Magazine November 1947
Norman Finkelstein, Professor Marc Saperstein and Middle East Journal
U.S. Bombing of Fallujah
the Third World War continued: Chechnya, North Ossetia, Ingushetia
More atrocities - Ahmed and Asma, story of two children dying
Iraq's real WMD crime - the effects of depleted uranium
World War Two soldiers did not kill Kill ratio Korea, Vietnam. Iraq.
Afghanistan - Terror?
Photos over past three months.
Aid agencies compromised by US actions
The Iraq War - complete listing of articles, includes images
The House of Saud and Bush
All with U.S. Money: US and Israel War Crimes
All with U.S. Money:
Israel agents stole identity of New Zealand cerebral palsy victim.
(IsraelNN.com July 15, 2004) The Foreign Ministry will take steps towards restoring relations with New Zealand. New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark today announced she was implementing diplomatic sanctions after two Israelis were sentenced on charges of attempting to obtain illegal passports. Despite Israeli refusal to respond to the accusations, the two are labeled in the New Zealand media as Mossad agents acting on behalf of the Israeli intelligence community.
Foreign Ministry officials stated they will do everything possible to renew diplomatic ties, expressing sorrow over the "unfortunate incident".
Projected mortality rate of Sudan refugee starvation deaths Darfur pictures
Suicide now top killer of Israeli soldiers
Atrocities files - graphic images
'Suicide bombings,' the angel said, 'and beheadings.'
'And the others that have all the power - they fly missiles in the sky.
They don't even look at the people they kill.'
The real Ronald Reagan
Nicaragua, Guatemala, El Salvador, South Africa
Follow the torture trail...
Cowardly attacks by air killing men women and children in their homes, often never seeing those they kill as the drones or aircraft fly back to the cowardly bases If they kill only the husband, see how they care for the family they have destroyed Afghanistan Western Terror States: Canada, US, UK, France, Germany, Italy Photos of Afghanistan people being killed and injured by NATO
When you talk with God were you also spending your time, money and energy, killing people? Are they now alive or dead?
Photos July 2004
Photos June 2004
Lest we forget - Ahmed and Asma, story of two children dying
Photos May 2004
American military: Abu Gharib (Ghraib) prison photos, humiliation and torture
- London Daily Mirror article: non-sexually explicit pictures
Photos April 2004
The celebration of Jerusalem day, the US missiles that rained onto children in Gaza,
and, a gathering of top articles over the past nine months
Photos March 2004
The Iraq War - complete listing of articles, includes images
Photos February 2004
US missiles - US money - and Palestine
Photos January 2004
Ethnic cleansing in the Beduin desert
Photos December 2003
Shirin Ebadi Nobel Peace Prize winner 2003
Photos November 2003
Atrocities - graphic images...
Photos October 2003
Photos September 2003
|Kewe Archives||kewe archives||kewe archives||TheWE.cc|