»
Archives
»
Corner Pub #2
»
24
| Corner Pub #2 |
|
24 |
|
|
allan Senior Member
since 2000-04-09
Posts 620On the road 
|
History mimicking art 24 That’s all there is There is no more The clock is ticking down Inexorably to war Bush at his desk, fingers drumming Blair with his kids, stares at the floor The world watches the clock Ticking down through 24 The time of slaughter grows ever closer To heart-rending screams Of dying sons And disfigured daughters This time it’s for real But in real time it’s not the president But innocents who are in danger In the cradle of civilization Death comes from the sky And the brutal stranger 24 hours And the deadline looms In every Bagdhad doorway In 5 million rooms The roulette wheel spins their fate While the world holds its breath And death can’t wait The Amerikan smiles to think of killing Such arrogance is its own fate In the coalition of the willing Willing partners forward hate These 24 hours are a deadline in the sand Like the lines of dead on the Basra road The ghosts will return ever more To haunt America 24 For Rachel Corrie (1983 – 17 March 2003) Rafah: Rachel Corrie Murdered by Israeli Army http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/WO0303/S00233.htm Rachel Corrie, Nuha Sweidan and Israeli War Crimes http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1250.shtml voices in the storm:the road to basra http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/gulf/voices/3.html |
||
| © Copyright 2003 Allan Tierney - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Street Heart Member
since 2002-09-05
Posts 349Pennsylvania,USA |
I don't know what to say,Allan.I almost feel that I should be ashamed to be a human being. I went to the sites that you supplied and am in stunned horror.My friend,I can only say that I am taking to the streets again.No,not living on them again,but I am off to protest on them.I've had enough of this and can't stand anymore of this hatred and violence.Who can stop this,Allan?What can we do?I feel so blasted helpless.Sorry,I am panicking here and I wish so much that everyone could get along and that there wouldn't be leaders who inflict their injustices on their countries.I have the news on and am waiting for Bush to announce his reasons for this war.Allan,my friend,I ask that you join me in prayer and in peaceful action.My Heart is joined with you during this time. Your friend,Geoffrey [This message has been edited by Street Heart (03-17-2003 08:38 PM).] |
||
|
allan Senior Member
since 2000-04-09
Posts 620On the road |
Hello Geoff This is a time to be supremely angry my friend. The hypocrisy levels of Bush and the others who support him in this illegal venture are reaching a crescendo. Nothing can hide the truth that this has been planned since 9-11. The facade of respectability they sought for their war at the UN was denied them. Hans Blix CLEARLY stated that the inspections would only take a matter of months to complete their task. But this was not what Bush and Blair wanted to hear. They turned a completely deaf ear to this as the statement did not fit in with their pre-planned schedule of war. (Heaven forbid that sense and logic get in the way of the plans of the warmongerers.) France and the others stood firm on decent principles against the ploy of Bush and Blair to use the UN as veil of respectibility. the world has much to thank them for. Here in the UK things are really hotting up for the government. Last night Robin Cook, the most experienced foreign affairs minister this government ever had resigned at the unilateral stance of his government and its following of the US led timetable to war. Today another minister, that of health, has resigned. It is likely there will be other resognations today, both of senior ministers and more junior staff. There will be votes in the Houses of Parliament today on Iraq. last time there was a vote only a week ago 122 members of Tony Blair's Labour party voted against him. Today the vote against is likely to be much greater, perhaps even more than half his ministers will oppose him and this illegal war. No matter what occurs now a great victory has been one by France standing up to the current corrupt US administration. Thank heaven there have been a few states willing to raise their voices against the warmongerers. After Bush and Blair have their tawdry little slaughter there will be a rising movement to sweep them from power. Here in the UK the peace campaigners are calling for eveyone to leave their place of work on hearing that the slaughter has commenced. Demonstrations of all ages against the war are continuing and it is so heartwarming to see. Grannies Against The War and schoolkids in particular are making a wonderful stand. I join you gladly in praying for peace Geoff. Pray also for the hate-filled minds of any who will glory in death and war. They are lost in a spiral that will destroy them. All the very best my friend. Yes, we must take to the streets and shout we don't agree with this coalition of the willing butchers of Bagdhad. Take care of yourself. All the very best, Allan  [This message has been edited by allan (03-18-2003 04:05 AM).] |
||
|
Flower Member
since 2003-03-15
Posts 240California |
I must say I have read some of your stuff and of course it's no skin of off your nose, but I don't think I would like you very much; for a person preaching non-aggression you are very aggressive and bombastic and oft times just not nice at all. Just my opinion which is worth nothing at all. Love reading all these great writes. |
||
|
allan Senior Member
since 2000-04-09
Posts 620On the road |
Flower, your contribution is just as valid as anyone else's. |
||
|
allan Senior Member
since 2000-04-09
Posts 620On the road |
Flower, your contribution is just as valid as anyone else's. |
||
|
allan Senior Member
since 2000-04-09
Posts 620On the road |
Said K Aburish is the biographer of Saddam Hussein and no apologist for the tyrant. Here are a few selections from a very revealing interview with Mr Aburish: While he was in Cairo [in 1959], there's some belief that he may have had contact with Americans, with the CIA. What can you tell us about that? There is very good reason to believe that Saddam Hussein was in contact with the American embassy in Cairo when he was in exile. This is not strange, because alliances of convenience were taking place every day, and the United States was afraid that Iraq, under Kassem, might be going communist. So was the Ba'ath Party. So they had a common enemy, a common target -- the possibility of a communist take-over of Iraq. So there is a record of Saddam visiting the American embassy frequently, and there is a record of the Egyptian security people telling him not to do that. However, one must remember that at that time, Saddam was a minor official of the Ba'ath Party. He was not terribly important. And he was really following in the footsteps of other people who are much more important. And what would be the idea behind all this? The visits to the American embassy by Saddam Hussein and other members of the Ba'ath Party had one purpose, and one purpose only: to cooperate with the Americans towards the overthrow of General Kassem in Iraq. Kassem was slightly pro-communist and the Americans wanted to get rid of that danger. Allen Dulles described Iraq as the most dangerous part of the earth in front of a congressional committee. The Ba'ath thought Kassem was their enemy, so there was a mutuality there. ... There was a coup in Iraq in 1963. What do we know about the U.S. involvement in that coup? The U.S. involvement in the coup against Kassem in Iraq in 1963 was substantial. There is evidence that CIA agents were in touch with army officers who were involved in the coup. There is evidence that an electronic command center was set up in Kuwait to guide the forces who were fighting Kassem. There is evidence that they supplied the conspirators with lists of people who had to be eliminated immediately in order to ensure success. The relationship between the Americans and the Ba'ath Party at that moment in time was very close indeed. And that continued for some time after the coup. And there was an exchange of information between the two sides. For example it was one of the first times that the United States was able to get certain models of Mig fighters and certain tanks made in the Soviet Union. That was the bribe. That was what the Ba'ath had to offer the United States in return for their help in eliminating Kassem. Do we know to what extent Saddam Hussein was involved in the killings when he came back from Cairo? I have documented over 700 people who were eliminated, mostly on an individual basis, after the 1963 coup. And they were eliminated based on lists supplied by the CIA to the Ba'ath Party. So the CIA and the Ba'ath were in the business of eliminating communists and leftists who were dangerous to the Ba'ath's takeover. ... Jumping forward a few years to 1967 and the Arab-Israeli conflict, we've heard that the Soviets then looked to Baghdad in terms of gaining influence in the Middle East. And the Ba'ath Party also wants to get back into power. Describe in the run-up to the 1968 coup, the Cold War dynamics of what was going on in the Middle East, and in particular Iraq, and how the Ba'ath Party was able to use those dynamics to help them get back into power. In 1968, Iraq had a weak president who was beholden to Nasser, a follower of Nasser. But the defeat of [the Arabs by Israel] in 1967 meant that whatever government was in power when that defeat took place had to go. So the Ba'ath saw an opportunity in this and they thought the time has come for them to take over the country again. The background was extremely interesting. There were two things happening within Iraq at that time. They were developing their own oil and very close to giving the concessions for huge new oil fields, to the USSR and France. And the price of sulpher had shot up so greatly that they were about to mine the sulpher mines in the north and sell it in the world market. The United States didn't want either to happen. The United States wanted the oil for American oil companies; they wanted the sulpher for themselves. They thought that if Iraq went to the Soviet Union or France, Iraq would be lost to them. In this they were joined by the Ba'ath Party. The Party used the concessions for oil and sulpher as a bargaining point to endear itself once again to America. And they arrived once again at some kind of an agreement of collaboration between the two sides. On the American side negotiating for both the oil and sulpher was a well-known personality, Robert Anderson, the former secretary of treasury under Eisenhower. He met secretly with the Ba'ath and they agreed that if they took over power these concessions will be given to the United States. And so once again the United States was in the business of supporting the Ba'ath office for the government of Iraq. The Ba'ath was successful. This time Saddam Hussein played a key role. ... Regarding the building of weapons of mass destruction, when it came to an atomic weapon, why did you still believe that that was okay? I don't think there was any Arab in the '70s who did not want Saddam Hussein to have an atomic weapon. They wanted him to have military parity. Israel had atomic weapons. The Arabs wanted an Arab country to have atomic weapons. Iraq was the head of the pack and therefore all Arabs supported Saddam Hussein. I have news for you: I don't think there are many Arabs at this moment in time -- you can exclude me out of this statement at this moment in time -- who do not want Saddam Hussein to have an atomic weapon now. They don't look at it as weapons of mass destruction. They look at it as transfer of technology. That the Arabs have done it, the Arabs have joined the modern world. That's the way they see it. And that pleases them. The fact that Saddam Hussein eliminates people, kills innocent men, uses a chemical weapon against his own people, is actually in a way secondary to this image. The Iraqi people are concerned with the latter. They suffer because of the latter. But the Arab people outside of Iraq do not suffer because Saddam Hussein eliminates people, because he doesn't eliminate them. He eliminates Iraqis. So there is a division between the vision of Saddam Hussein that the Iraqis have and the vision of Saddam Hussein the rest of the Arabs have. To the rest of the Arabs, he is the man standing up to West. To the Iraqis, he is the man who dragged us into this state of misery. Unwillingly. After the revolution Saddam was still vice president and in July of 1979, he makes a visit to Amman. And, at the same time, he meets with CIA agents there. What is he doing? And what are the consequences of this trip? Before starting the war with Iran, Saddam Hussein went on a tour of several Arab countries. His first stop was Amman in Jordan. And there he had two things he did not have in other places: an indirect line to the Americans through King Hussein, who has always been a friend of America, and, the possibility of meeting three senior CIA agents who were there, not to spy on Jordan, but to use Jordan as a listening post for the rest of the Middle East. There is absolutely no doubt that Saddam discussed his plans to invade Iran with King Hussein. There is considerable evidence that he discussed his plans to invade Iran with the CIA agents that King Hussein prevailed on him to meet with. After that he flew to Saudi Arabia and there is a record of him telling King Fahd that he is going to invade Iran, and then after that, I think he had a stop-over in Kuwait and he did the same thing. What the trips did was to guarantee him American support in invading Iran. Financial support from the oil producing countries after their invasion and a channel to buy arms. One of the great unknowns or perhaps unthought of elements in the war between Iran and Iraq was the people who fronted for them in purchasing arms. Saddam had acceptable countries who fronted for him. Jordan bought arms for Saddam. Jordan is acceptable in the West. Egypt bought arms for Saddam. Egypt was acceptable. Saudi Arabia bought arms for Saddam. Saudi Arabia was acceptable. Iran did not have that advantage. Iran had Syria and Libya to front for it, and neither country was acceptable. So the flow of arms to Iraq was at the much higher scale. And they were more sophisticated stuff. They got more sophisticated pieces of armament than the Iranians. And this is why they prevailed in the end. So you can look at this picture as having begun with this tour that Saddam took immediately before he invaded Iran. He was protecting his back with conservative regimes, with pro-West regimes. He was not protecting his back with the USSR. As a matter of fact the USSR cut off the flow of arms to Iraq once it invaded Iran and Saddam had to rely exclusively on Western armaments for three years until the USSR changed its mind and start selling him again. They saw that they were losing out in Iraq because the West was willing to give him everything he wanted. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saddam/interviews/aburish.html Saddam: Secrets of his life and leadership [This message has been edited by allan (03-19-2003 05:54 AM).] |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
