Chalabigate
"Weapons of Mass Deception"
2005-01-14
The Honey Pot
Jihad Al Khazen
Al-Hayat 2005/01/14
Although I feel I am writing obvious things, like health is better than sickness, yet I say that there will be winners and losers in Iraq, and I hope Iraq will win.
Saddam Hussein was toppled with the least possible losses, and he was followed by a flow of blood, tears and destruction. We all said that the U.S. administration planned for war, not for peace. This is what the Arabs, the Europeans and George Bush's opponents, like John Kerry and Pat Buchanan, said, to the extent where it became a general conviction.
Personally, I gradually changed my opinion, which is after all an opinion and might be right or wrong, yet I tend to believe that the absence of an agenda for the occupation is the "agenda", for the neo-conservatives sought destroying Iraq and succeeded, which does not mean that George Bush himself was very skilful in such a conspiracy. Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld did not plan to destroy Iraq, for the administration executed the policy the neo-cons' established and promoted, and the result is the current situation.
Paul Bremer supervised the destruction of Iraq's cohesion while his background did not permit him to "build nations" for he was a former diplomat under Reagan and a terror expert who established a security company encompassing economic concerns while he wasn't an economist.
After General Jay Garner worked for a while, Paul Bremer came to reflect the destruction wing victory over the Department of State and the Iraq future's project. He encompassed the moderate Iyad Allawi and other Iraqi refugees who thought that the fall of Saddam should be followed by fast social and economic reforms, the establishment of a free trade market and the restoration of services. He also encompassed radicals like Ahmad Chalabi and others who wanted to destroy Iraq and then build it back again. By this, they agree with the neo-cons who were probably surprised by holding the reins of power so fast and behaved with radicalism and abstinence that destroyed Iraq or almost.
As soon as Bremer held the reins of power in Baghdad, he drove away 500,000 employees, among which are the soldiers of the army and the government's servants within the framework of removing the Baath aspects, which left the country without a daily management that provides the minimum possible services like water, electricity and health care. He then opened the country for imports without taxes, customs, supervision or protection.
Bremer followed his clever decision against all those who work in the government by attending an economic summit in Jordan from where he declared his will to privatize 200 public companies. He issued series of economic decisions I describe, with responsibility and reservation, as "criminal" for would he want to destroy Iraq he wouldn't find a better way. Decision 37 reduced taxes on the companies' profits from 40% to 15%, while decision 39 allowed the foreign companies to transfer their profits, 100%, abroad, and to sign contracts for 40 years, in addition, the decision 40 welcomed the foreign banks in Iraq under the same conditions.
In other words, the occupation violated Iraq. Just like the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan found war on Iraq was illegitimate, the economic decisions were stridently against the international law.
The interim government headed by Bremer was found on the basis of the UN Security Council resolution taken in May 2003, "which is a resolution taken after a huge U.S. pressure exerted on the member countries" and which gave the U.S. and Britain the aspect of the legitimate occupation force. However, the resolution also called for committing to the 1949 Geneva Convention, The Hague instruments that ban the occupational force from possessing buildings, lands or forests, or even the interests of the occupied country, for they all remain the property of the occupied people.
The occupation force acted like if it possessed the country and issued illegitimate laws I hope the new Iraqi parliament will seek canceling them immediately.
Senator John said that Iraq is a honey pot that attracts flies and indeed, it attracted Halliburton and Bechtel and met the neo-cons' interests in destroying Iraq with all sorts of terrorists. The result is that we no longer talk about Iraq as a model for democracy in the Middle East but about the possibility of a civil war and endless terror and destruction.
Will the Iraqi elections be able to come up with a parliament able to stop the security, economic and social collapse? I think that we are asking too much if we expect that the parliament will be born amidst terror, boycotting and occupation and will be able to solve problems I think that were all made up to forbid Iraq from getting well.
However, the current leaderships are still able to offer limited services to the citizens, if they overcome their confessions and old and new complexes, and worked for the whole Iraq and not only for one confession of region.
Some neighbors think that the American trouble in Iraq will hold back a rightist administration in Washington from thinking about new wars. This is what we are hearing about a foreign insurgence in the Iraqi internal affairs, while I think that this is an exaggeration for the occupation forces are covering their weakness through oppressing the ever increasing resistance and terror by accusing Syria and Iran and other countries.
In addition to the occupation lies and exaggeration, the policy of supporting terror will not last long because terror targets everyone and the U.S. was wrong many times, yet it was right by launching war on terror, and it is all the Arabs and Muslims' duty to help it in launching this war because it has higher potentials to do so.
Meanwhile, we hope Iraq will get out of its crisis and that elections would be the first step toward the national salvation.
Al-Hayat
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Al-Hayat 2005/01/14
Although I feel I am writing obvious things, like health is better than sickness, yet I say that there will be winners and losers in Iraq, and I hope Iraq will win.
Saddam Hussein was toppled with the least possible losses, and he was followed by a flow of blood, tears and destruction. We all said that the U.S. administration planned for war, not for peace. This is what the Arabs, the Europeans and George Bush's opponents, like John Kerry and Pat Buchanan, said, to the extent where it became a general conviction.
Personally, I gradually changed my opinion, which is after all an opinion and might be right or wrong, yet I tend to believe that the absence of an agenda for the occupation is the "agenda", for the neo-conservatives sought destroying Iraq and succeeded, which does not mean that George Bush himself was very skilful in such a conspiracy. Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld did not plan to destroy Iraq, for the administration executed the policy the neo-cons' established and promoted, and the result is the current situation.
Paul Bremer supervised the destruction of Iraq's cohesion while his background did not permit him to "build nations" for he was a former diplomat under Reagan and a terror expert who established a security company encompassing economic concerns while he wasn't an economist.
After General Jay Garner worked for a while, Paul Bremer came to reflect the destruction wing victory over the Department of State and the Iraq future's project. He encompassed the moderate Iyad Allawi and other Iraqi refugees who thought that the fall of Saddam should be followed by fast social and economic reforms, the establishment of a free trade market and the restoration of services. He also encompassed radicals like Ahmad Chalabi and others who wanted to destroy Iraq and then build it back again. By this, they agree with the neo-cons who were probably surprised by holding the reins of power so fast and behaved with radicalism and abstinence that destroyed Iraq or almost.
As soon as Bremer held the reins of power in Baghdad, he drove away 500,000 employees, among which are the soldiers of the army and the government's servants within the framework of removing the Baath aspects, which left the country without a daily management that provides the minimum possible services like water, electricity and health care. He then opened the country for imports without taxes, customs, supervision or protection.
Bremer followed his clever decision against all those who work in the government by attending an economic summit in Jordan from where he declared his will to privatize 200 public companies. He issued series of economic decisions I describe, with responsibility and reservation, as "criminal" for would he want to destroy Iraq he wouldn't find a better way. Decision 37 reduced taxes on the companies' profits from 40% to 15%, while decision 39 allowed the foreign companies to transfer their profits, 100%, abroad, and to sign contracts for 40 years, in addition, the decision 40 welcomed the foreign banks in Iraq under the same conditions.
In other words, the occupation violated Iraq. Just like the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan found war on Iraq was illegitimate, the economic decisions were stridently against the international law.
The interim government headed by Bremer was found on the basis of the UN Security Council resolution taken in May 2003, "which is a resolution taken after a huge U.S. pressure exerted on the member countries" and which gave the U.S. and Britain the aspect of the legitimate occupation force. However, the resolution also called for committing to the 1949 Geneva Convention, The Hague instruments that ban the occupational force from possessing buildings, lands or forests, or even the interests of the occupied country, for they all remain the property of the occupied people.
The occupation force acted like if it possessed the country and issued illegitimate laws I hope the new Iraqi parliament will seek canceling them immediately.
Senator John said that Iraq is a honey pot that attracts flies and indeed, it attracted Halliburton and Bechtel and met the neo-cons' interests in destroying Iraq with all sorts of terrorists. The result is that we no longer talk about Iraq as a model for democracy in the Middle East but about the possibility of a civil war and endless terror and destruction.
Will the Iraqi elections be able to come up with a parliament able to stop the security, economic and social collapse? I think that we are asking too much if we expect that the parliament will be born amidst terror, boycotting and occupation and will be able to solve problems I think that were all made up to forbid Iraq from getting well.
However, the current leaderships are still able to offer limited services to the citizens, if they overcome their confessions and old and new complexes, and worked for the whole Iraq and not only for one confession of region.
Some neighbors think that the American trouble in Iraq will hold back a rightist administration in Washington from thinking about new wars. This is what we are hearing about a foreign insurgence in the Iraqi internal affairs, while I think that this is an exaggeration for the occupation forces are covering their weakness through oppressing the ever increasing resistance and terror by accusing Syria and Iran and other countries.
In addition to the occupation lies and exaggeration, the policy of supporting terror will not last long because terror targets everyone and the U.S. was wrong many times, yet it was right by launching war on terror, and it is all the Arabs and Muslims' duty to help it in launching this war because it has higher potentials to do so.
Meanwhile, we hope Iraq will get out of its crisis and that elections would be the first step toward the national salvation.
Al-Hayat
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Milton Frihetsson, 22:15
