June 10, 2006
Bush has the gall to "hail" the killing
of Zarqawi while simultaneously asserting that nothing will change in
Iraq. We are repeatedly told
that Zarqawi was the "mastermind of sectarian attacks in Iraq", but now
that he is dead, absolutely nothing will change, the attacks will
Bush states all of this with the surity of a man that knows exactly
who is carrying out the attacks in Iraq and that he can count on them
Do not, even for one second, be foolish enough to think that the
timing of Zarqawi's death was anything but a carefully planned
operation designed to force the American people to find new faith in
the righteousness of the war on non-existent Islamic terror, and
thereby prop up the failed state that is America under the Bush
The official file on Zarqawi, whose real name was Ahmad Fadil
al-Khalayleh, tells us that he was born in Jordan. Barely literate, he
became a petty criminal until the call to arms came with the Soviet
invasion of Afghanistan. After his time in the terror training camps of
Afghanistan Zarqawi returned to his home with a radical Islamist
agenda. The intersting part of his file, the part that is generally
omitted from such reports, is that the training camps in Afghanistan
before and during the soviet invasion of that country that Zarqawi
attended, were funded and run by the CIA, making Zarqawi and others
like him, assets of the US government.
Consider the words of Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser, in an interview in the 15-21 January 1998 edition of Le Nouvel Observateur
Question: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates,
stated in his memoirs ["From the Shadows"], that American intelligence
services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the
Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security
adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this
affair. Is that correct?
Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA
aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the
Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But
the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise.
Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first
directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in
Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I
explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a
Soviet military intervention.
Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action.
But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked
to provoke it?
B: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.
Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that
they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United
States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a
basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?
B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had
the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me
to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I
wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the
USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry
on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about
the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.
Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?
B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban
or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the
liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
Q: Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.
B: Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn't a global Islam.
Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion.
It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But
what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate
Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian
secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries.
Zarqawi was on the CIA's books for over twenty years and when the
Neocons came to power in 2000, they immediately went about the task of
gathering together a group of likely fundamentlist Islamic patsies to
take the rap for the Neocon's planned war on fake Islamic terrorism.
On Wednesday morning at 6am, a U.S. airforce F-16 dropped two 500lb
bombs on a single isolated safehouse outside the city of Baqubah, 30
miles northwest of Baghdad, where, we are told, Zarqawi was staying
with 5 comrades. In doing so, the NeoCons sacrificed a valuable
'Islamic terrorist' bogeyman. That is not to say, however, that Zarqawi
was actually in that "safe house".
As Craig Unger reported in his Vanity Fair article
yesterday, during the 70's and 80's, Neocons like Michael Ledeen made
something of an artform out of inventing stories of Communist threats
to America. In our 'New American Century', these skills of the Neocons
are being put to use in inventing equally bogus stories about Islamic
terrorism. In Zarqawi, we had a creation of people like Michael Ledeen.
As such, there is no reason to believe that Zarqawi was actually in
that "safe house", or that he has been in Iraq in recent years.
Have you ever seen the effects of a 500lb bomb? Have you ever seen
the effects of two? Generally, such bombs will obliterate everything in
the immediate vicinity leaving a large crater at the site of the
bombing and cause extensive damage over a wide area. Take the
opportunity to watch the video on CNN of the bombing. Notice the extent
of the massive explosion.
Now look at the below image of the house before it was bombed:
Realise that after these bombs, absolutely no trace of this house would be left.
Indeed, here is an image of what was left of the house:
Now look at the below image of Zarqawi who, we are told, was in the
house at the time these two massive pieces of ordenance were dropped,
essentially on his head:
An abrasion on his cheek and a cut on his forehead and above his
left eye. All of which leads us to conclude that either 'al-Zarqawi'
really was a super human Islamic terrorist or someone in the US
government thinks we are all very, very stupid.