| Author | Message | | Guest-400c | | Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2003 10:30 pm Post subject: Zionist Perle/Wolfowitz/Cheney Cabal DOES NOT Represent US |
| Zionist Perle/Wolfowitz/Cheney Cabal DOES NOT Represent US (and should not be allowed to damage US relations with Europe and the rest of the world in pursuit of their radical Zionist and oil driven agenda):
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subj: Re: URGENT ! URGENT! URGENT!
Date: 1/25/03 11:36:33 AM Pacific Standard Time
----- Original Message -----
In a message dated 1/25/03 2:33:59 AM Pacific Standard Time, writes:
Subj:Re: URGENT ! URGENT! URGENT!
Date:1/25/03 2:33:59 AM Pacific Standard Time
If that stooge Tony Blair is involved in a sneak US attack (can you imagine we are even talking in such terms about the USA???) we will re-open the Tower of London, just for him. And London Bridge will be decorated with that infuriating grin of his. The people over here will not stand for it. He tried to exclude one of our national newspapers from parliament yesterday claiming that 'propaganda' was not allowed in the building! Have you ever heard something so ridiculous? No propaganda in parliament? Now I know that Orwell has risen from the dead.
Reply:
That is very concerning... I think the best way to approach this situation is to let as many people as possible know (worldwide) that the JINSA (Jewish Institute of Security Affairs) Zionist extremist Perle/Wolfowitz/Cheney cabal in the Bush regime DOES NOT represent the interests of the majority in Britain (Europe) and in the USA... So when you are talking about the US government like such, it is right on because that cabal is the entity that is pushing us to invade Iraq for Israel and oil (and Blair is poodling right along with it) as the following URL (from your message board) conveys (access the posts included near the bottom of the first page there as well):
We're Going for Oil (and Radical Zionism):
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/uk-and-europe/2003/01/24/we-re-going-for-oil-and-radical-zionism.php
What do you think it is? Has Blair been offered a lucrative position with the Carlyle Group or with Cheney's Haliburton after he leaves the UK government (because he apparently won't get re-elected going against the vast majority of Brits like he is doing currently by poodling along with the Perle/Wolfowitz/Cheney cabal which has wanted an invasion of Iraq for years). Or does the Mossad have something on him with regard to blackmailing him.. Or is he under the influence of the Zionists like our ZOG (Zionist Occupied Government) is.. Keep in mind that former UK Prime Minister John Major started working for the Carlyle Group after he left office (maybe even before!).
I spoke with MP Tam Dalyell last night (as he is mentioned again in that Daily Mirror article found via the URL referenced above), and he was appreciative of the latest poll info that I had conveyed (in that 61 percent of the US public wants to give the UN inspectors more time) and that 2/3 of the US public does not want an invasion of Iraq without the UN.... Yet, despite such, I wake up to read (included below) what I just did on the AOL news page. Also keep in mind that it is in the interest of the Zionist extremists (like that Wolfowitz/Perle/Cheney cabal and their extremist Likud cronies in Israel like Netanyahu) to have the UN dissolve (because if it does, the rogue state of Israel does not have to finally comply with all those UN Security Council Resolutions that it has been in defiance of for decades), and the Zionist extremists get what they apparently want which is a reallignment of the Middle East with the US and Israel against the rest of the world (for the most part).
DAVOS/BAGHDAD (Jan. 25) - The United States said on Saturday at least a dozen nations would back an attack on Iraq, even without a fresh U.N. resolution, but Arab and European leaders appealed for weapons inspectors to be given more time.
In Baghdad, a man wielding three knives tried to enter the headquarters of the U.N. inspectors, but was stopped by guards, a U.N. spokesman said. In a second incident, a man tried to stop a convoy of U.N. cars carrying inspectors.
The incidents, which occurred as U.N. teams were leaving for the field, were the first of their kind since Iraq grudgingly let the inspections resume in November after a four-year break.
The inspectors are to give the U.N. Security Council a progress report on Monday, which could begin a countdown for a U.S. invasion to force Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to disarm.
U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell told reporters on his way to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, that potential U.S. allies would prefer a new council resolution authorising force against Iraq, but would not insist on one.
"We would not be alone, that's for sure. I could rattle off at least a dozen off memory, and I think that there will be more," Powell said.
However, The Washington Post reported on Saturday that the Bush administration, under pressure from allies abroad and Democrats at home not to hasten into war, was expected to let U.N. inspections go on for several more weeks at least.
Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa told Reuters in Davos that a U.S.-led war on Iraq could inflame the Middle East, fuelling popular anger and anti-American unrest.
"So why take that risk?" he asked, arguing that the inspectors should be allowed to pursue their task.
TURKISH INTERVENTION?
NATO member Turkey hinted it could send troops into northern Iraq if it saw a risk of the country breaking up in a U.S.-led war, or a threat to the ethnic Turkmen minority.
Prime Minister Abdullah Gul insisted Ankara had no territorial ambitions in Iraq, but said in Davos: "Not only the Turkmens but also the Kurds are our relatives there... We want to protect all of them if there is a massacre there."
Gul, due to meet Powell later on Saturday, would not say whether Turkey would let U.S. troops invade Iraq from its soil, but suggested the decision might hinge on a new U.N. resolution.
European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana was quoted as saying he favoured a second resolution and more time for the U.N. weapons to assess Iraq's weapons programmes.
"(The inspectors) have to have all the tools and time they need to be able to carry out their inspections thoroughly," Germany's Bild am Sonntag newspaper quoted him as saying in an interview due to appear on Sunday.
Iraqi Parliament Speaker Saadoun Hammadi told reporters in New Delhi that his country would "use every method to inflict damage and casualties against those who invade our country."
The United States, assembling formidable forces around Iraq, is racking up pressure on Baghdad to obey U.N. demands that it abandon its alleged chemical, biological and nuclear arms programmes. Iraq says it no longer has such programmes.
Warplanes patrolling a "no-fly" zone declared by the United States and Britain over southern Iraq attacked an air defence facility on Friday, the U.S. military said on Saturday. The raid was in response to threats to coalition aircraft, it said.
A man thought to be an Iraqi scientist, accompanied by Iraqi officials, visited a Baghdad hotel used by U.N. inspectors, a day after the White House accused Iraq of "wilful defiance" by refusing to let scientists be interviewed privately.
It was not immediately clear if he had been questioned, either in private or with Iraqi "minders" present.
Powell said nations that backed last year's Security Council resolution 1441, which gave Iraq a final chance to disarm, could not duck out of their responsibilities if Baghdad disobeyed.
"We cannot now start shrinking because the going is getting tough," he declared. "The burden is on Iraq. Iraq must comply or it will be made to comply by military force."
SECURITY COUNCIL SPLIT
France, China and Russia, three of the five veto-holding members of the Security Council, have opposed any rush to war with Iraq by the other two, the United States and Britain.
Differences over Iraq have sparked a rancorous transatlantic dispute between Washington and key European allies.
German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer said on Saturday Iraq had "no room for tactics or manoeuvring" in its dealings with U.N. weapons inspectors if it wanted to avert war.
Fischer, who has angrily rejected U.S. criticism that Germany and France were isolated in Europe in trying to avert an Iraq war, was in Cairo for talks with his Egyptian counterpart.
U.N. chief arms inspector Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), are expected to tell the Security Council on Monday that Iraq's cooperation with their teams has been insufficient.
"Have they been proactive in providing evidence that will help inspectors do their jobs? No they haven't, and they need to do that," IAEA spokesman Mark Gwozdecky told Reuters in Vienna.
Bush, who has voiced impatience with the inspections process, will deliver his State of the Union speech on Tuesday.
Powell gave no indication of how long Bush was prepared to wait, but suggested no decision would be taken until Bush sees British Prime Minister Tony Blair at Camp David on January 31.
Blair and Bush talked by telephone on Friday to coordinate their stance ahead of Blix's report, Blair's spokesman said.
JAN. 27, 2003 (COL. 3) NOT OUR FINEST HOUR BY CHARLEY REESE President Bush's political dilemma … he wants to go to war with Iraq, while most of the world does not … is in large part a product of the administration's rhetoric, a mix of dogmatic statements and, on occasion, obvious falsehoods. If the administration's line had been ``We think Iraq might have weapons of mass destruction'' or ``We have reason to believe they have, etc.,'' it would have had some wiggle room. Instead, the administration insisted dogmatically that Iraq does have weapons of mass destruction. So, people are now asking: Where are they? Where's your proof? Where's the evidence? U.N. inspectors haven't found a shred of evidence. Unfortunately for Bush's scheme, the answer is that there isn't any evidence. That does not mean such weapons don't exist; it simply means that the CIA and the British intelligence agencies don't know. What most U.S. officials have been relying on, in their contention about Iraq's weapons, are in fact statistical discrepancies. In 1999, when the previous U.N. inspection outfit issued its final report, it said that so many tons of this or that were ''missing.`` Now, for something to be missing, it must have previously existed and been known to have existed by the people who say it's missing. In fact, what was ''missing`` was the difference between U.N. estimates and guesses about the Iraqi inventory and what the Iraqis declared and U.N. inspectors found. But it is highly unlikely that the Iraqis could accurately have counted every shell fired in a desperate eight-year war with Iran. It is highly unlikely that any accurate inventory was possible of how many weapons were destroyed by the massive bombing in the first Gulf War. So what all this argument is about is a difference in guesses and estimates, not in actual physical weapons. Bush's rhetoric has painted him into a corner. He's trying to convince the world that Iraq, virtually toothless militarily and economically incapacitated, is an ''imminent threat`` to the whole world. It's hard to make the case when his own generals boast they can take Iraq in a three-week war. As for Saddam developing some weapon and giving it to a terrorist, there are plenty of countries with such weapons, so terrorists have a lot more places to shop than Iraq. The former Soviet Union is awash still with biological and chemical weapons, even nuclear weapons, that by all accounts are poorly guarded. I don't think Bush will be deterred by the facts. He will launch a war, because his purpose from Day One has been to establish a U.S. presence on top of the world's second-largest known oil reserves. You will notice there has been no talk about an ''exit plan`` for Iraq. That's because the United States doesn't plan to exit Iraq. Bush really is going to open the gates of hell by permanently involving us in this most dangerous area of the world. Bush's ego seems to be growing much faster than the economy. Notice that he more and more uses the personal pronoun … ''I`` am sick and tired, he says, and ''I`` have no desire to watch the rerun of an old movie. This is an emperor talking, not the president of a republic. The relationship between two sovereign nations is not a matter of personalities. Bush's personal feelings and prejudices are not the basis on which U.S. government policy should be formulated. Bush doesn't seem to take criticism very well, and he tends to resort to name-calling when world leaders disagree with him, as if mere disagreement were a mortal sin. Well, Saddam Hussein is no Hitler; George Bush is no Winston Churchill. And this war will definitely not be our finest hour. (Write to Charley Reese at P.O. Box 2446, Orlando, FL 32802)
01/25/03 09:35 ET
U.S. - IRAQ INVASION LIKELY TO BEGIN WITH STATE of the UNION, Tuesday
by
Michael C. Ruppert
January 24, 2003, 1930 PST (FTW) - Serious international developments are indicating that the first stages of the U.S. invasion of Iraq will begin unilaterally no later than next Wednesday and most likely as the President delivers his State of the Union address to Congress on Tuesday night.
The Associated Press reported today, in a story little noticed by mainstream American press, that the Japanese government had today urged all Japanese citizens to leave Iraq as soon as possible. Japan has large numbers of its nationals working in Iraq in various trade and oil-related business ventures. According to a second report today on CNN Headline News the Japanese advisory was specific that all Japanese citizens should be out of the country by next Wednesday at the latest.
The Japanese alert was followed by a simultaneous advisory from the U.S. State Department issuing a worldwide alert to all Americans traveling overseas. According to another AP story, State Department officials tried to downplay the significance of the warning, "but officials were unable to say when the last such advisory had been issued." A worldwide alert for U.S. citizens is extremely rare and suggests that the administration is concerned about a global backlash against Americans traveling overseas. Cautionary advisories are normally isolated to specific countries or geographic regions.
The invasion of Iraq will most likely commence with a massive aerial campaign in which the U.N. and many military analysts have predicted widespread collateral damage with heavy civilian casualties. One recent UN estimate suggested that the total Iraqi casualty count for the entire operation could exceed 500,000.
This decision should not be taken as a surprise. In recent weeks support for the obvious U.S. intentions, both worldwide and at home, has been declining rapidly. At the time this story was written a contemporaneous CNN poll showed that 62% of those responding believed that the United States should not attack Iraq without UN approval. Politically, the Bush administration has seen that this situation is not going to improve. Every delay in an attack to which the administration has already committed not only risks greater military, political and economic opposition but also increases the risk that U.S. ground forces will be engaged in desert fighting in hot summer weather. Recent moves by both the French and Russian governments to approve new trade and development agreements with the Hussein government might also weaken U.S. economic control in a post-Saddam regime.
With crude oil prices at two-year highs and with U.S. oil reserves at 27-year lows the signs of a crumbling U.S. economy made themselves felt again today with a more than 200 point drop in the Dow Jones Industrial average. The Bush administration has apparently decided to roll the dice now in a go-for-broke imperial conquest that has as its primary objective the immediate control of 11 per cent of the world's oil reserves.
In many previous stories FTW has documented how the Iraqi invasion is but the first in a series of sequential worldwide military campaigns to which the United States has committed. All of these are based upon globally dwindling oil supplies and the pending economic and human consequences of that reality. On January 21st, CNN Headline News acknowledged, for the first time, the reality of Peak Oil and accurately stated that "all the cheap oil there is has been found." The story also acknowledged that there was only enough oil left to sustain the planet for thirty to forty years and that what oil remained was going to become increasingly more expensive to produce and deliver.
It is likely that the resiliency of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, in his effort to resist U.S.-inspired strikes by wealthy Venezuelan industrialists, has had an impact on this decision by the Bush administration. Venezuela, which is the third largest foreign importer of oil to the U.S., has seen its U.S. deliveries cut to a fraction of normal levels in recent weeks. Within the last week oil analysts have been predicting shortages and price spikes similar to those of 1973-4 if U.S. oil stocks were not replenished quickly. The administration's apparent decision to launch the attacks against Iraq appears to be at least a partial acknowledgement that Chavez is successfully resisting U.S. pressure to oust him.
Chavez angered multinational investors and financiers recently by moving to increase the share of oil profits retained in Venezuela for the benefit of its people.
Today's announcements signal that the world is entering a period of danger not seen for forty years. That the announcements from the Japanese government and the State Department came on the same day that the Department of Homeland Security became active and its Secretary Tom Ridge was sworn in seems an unlikely coincidence. Previous reporting from FTW had indicated that even massive protests and non-violent global resistance would prove ineffective in preventing an Iraqi invasion. And our predictions that the Bush junta had prepared for all the worst-case scenarios, including domestic unrest and worldwide opposition appear to be vindicated.
The administration has clearly issued a statement to the world. "Screw you. We're going to play this game any way you want to play it. And we're ready for anything that comes."
Only time will tell if they are correct. | |  | | Guest-400c | | | | Guest-400c | | | | Guest-400c | | | | Guest-400c | | | | Guest-400c | | | | Guest-400c | | | | Guest-400c | | | | Alpha | | | | Alpha | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
