Ha Ha To the Axis of Evil Speech

Ok...I haven`t studied this issue well enough to make definitive statements, but there is something I do know: Iraqi people are/have been suffering horribly.

Now, here is what I don`t understand. Why is there a shortage of food and medicine in Iraq (any more than what the tragedy of poverty might bring upon any country)?

A food-for-oil program has been in effect under U.N. resolutions. US is the BIGGEST buyer of Iraqi crude oil under this regime. Saddam has also set up a fairly active system of busting prohibition on sale of oil (Americans call that smuggling, but I don`t blame Iraqis for that). Saddam has been selling oil to Turkey on a regular basis. Americans have looked the other way (not because they love Iraq but because Turkey - an important American ally - needs oil).

So what explains the malnutrition of kids in Iraq?

Very nice article.

There are actually two evils in this whole axis of evil situation: Saddam and the US foreign policy makers. Both are evil, everyone else is quite innocent, regardless of what Bush says. Saddam is the only Muslim leader I know of who attacked three different Muslim groups within a decade or so: Iran, Kuwait and Kurds. The US is the only nation I know of that encouraged and helped him in attacking Iran; encouraged him in attacking Kuwait (does April Gellispie ring a bell), and looked the other way while he was going after the Kurds.

According the Ramsey report (by ex-US attorney general Ramsey Clark), the US has directly and indirectly (through sanctions) killed over 500,000 Iraqis. Saddam is equally responsible for this. So both are heads and tails of the same evil beast, as far as Iraqis and the world is concerned (or at least should be concerned).

I am someone who dislikes Arabs, about as much as a person can without being a racist, but even I abhor the US policy towards Iraqis (even though Iraq has never done much for Pakistan).

People repeatedly point out the obsession Pakistanis and every other Muslim has in looking at everything as a Jewish conspiracy. This is true. The WTC attack wasn`t carried out by Israel, and 4,000 Jews in the WTC hadn`t taken the day off. But people need to realize the amount of control tiny Israel has over the US foreign policy, also. It is scary, the more one looks into it. I have been doing some research on the power of the pro-Israeli lobby in the US, for a story I am writing on Chowk, and the discoveries have been amazing. When push comes to shove, the pro-Israeli lobby in the US gives two hoots about the US, causing it all kinds of harm, and always votes in favor of Israel (even though the lobby consists completely of US citizens). This is about as unpatriotic as anyone can be.

One of the best ways to see the control of this lobby, is by noticing how out of line the US policy on the Middle East is, even in comparison with its NATO allies and EU. EU has gone nuts over the axis of evil comments. One cannot imagine that the US leadership is so stupid as to not understand this. The EU and OIC and Soviet bloc don`t normally agree on anything. Yet they agree on the stupidity of this comment.

Why is the US willing to piss off these three complete groups, which contains nearly all its allies? Simple. Because this is what Israel wants, whose demands are passed onto the US power circles, through the pro-Israel US powerful lobbies. While Iraq is debatable, what do American citizens gain by declaring Iran to be evil? The relations between Iran and the US were begining to get better as a result of the Iran actions during the Afghan war. Why this sudden axis of evil remark?

Because Iran was shipping arms to Arafat (the US has been sending ship loads of arms to Isreal on a weekly basis for the past forty years). And presto, the Israeli lobby consisting of powerful American men and women, immediately put US into a state of conflict with Iran. How many Americans have the Iranis every killed, or for that matter how many have Iraqis and Koreans ever killed. The US did overthrow a democratic govt. in Iran to put the Shah in power.

I think within the next six months Iraq will be attacked. Iran will not be attacked, but will continue to be threatened. American citizens and Iranis will again be in a state of cold war for no reason, other than a stupid remark by Bush, under the influence of the Israeli lobby. What does the average American gain from this? Nothing. But the average Isreali gains a hell of a lot.

If the US attacks Iraq, the EU and even NATO will remain neutral, or oppose the attack. Only UK will participate (the current no-fly zone over Iraq is only maintained by the USA and UK). Even Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iran (three countries actually threatened by Iraq, far far more than the US is threatened by Iraq) will not participate. The only Muslim country that will participate is the country considered by some to be, ``Pakistan`s role model,`` i.e. Turkey. They want to sort out the Kurds, once and for all. US aircraft will take off from aircraft carriers, and from Turkish bases, and will pound the sh//t out of Iraqis.

This may put the whole Islamic world in turmoil. The Gulf War and the Taliban war involved two Muslim groups who had actually attacked or assisted in attacking other countries. So the Muslim countries were all supportive, or neutral. Who have the Iranis and Iraqis attacked, right now? Should the US let lose all its wrath on them, just because ten to twenty percent of the US Senate regularly consists of very intelligent, capable pro-Israeli Jewish men/women. Or because 23% of the wealthiest Americans are Jewish. While I admire the success of these groups, I am scared by the complete control they have over the US foreign policy. If anyone doesn`t believe me, they should do some research.

I think Saudi Arabia is on the verge of a revolution. Their population is fed up of its monarchy`s double standards. Countries like Pakistan may see a resurgence of Islamic parties suppport, if the US attacks Iraq or Iran (specially Iran). The US will become even more vulnerable to terrorist attacks, if it attacks these two countries. The more innocent people the US kills, the more terrorists it creates. Only one country will gain, and that is Israel (and maybe Turkey, if the Kurds are weakened and Iraq does not split into three countries; Shia, Sunni and an fully independent Kurdistan).

If the US replaces Saddam with another pro-US dictator (two unique things about Saddam are that he is secular and he had been US ally for a long time (much like the Taliban, Saudis and Iran etc.) for most of his career), then I am afraid I would have to rank US foreign policy to be equivalent to those of any of the most historically evil ones. Since WW II, the US has bombed more armament on other countries, than any country in the history of the world. Yet US foreign policy makers continue to portray themselves to the models of virtue. US Presidents have killed many times more civilians than Saddam Hussein ever could (if you don`t belive me, read the Ramsey report, or AI reports). At the least the evil Soviet empire was up front about its foreign policy evils, and never claimed virtousity.

P.S. Pakistan is actually benefiting from all of this. The US has lost Iraq, Iran and the other Middle Eastern populations as an ally, due to Israeli pressures. Saudi Arabia is now close to turmoil in its relations with the US. The only country left is Pakistan. If the US attacks Iraq however, Pakistanis will also start becoming anti-US.

Vive le Canada!! If the US keeps letting Isreal hijack its foreign policy, at the expense of its own citizens, then the day the US starts its attack on Iraq or Iran, I am packing my bags and moving to Vancouver, Canadia; one of the few western countries whose humane domestic policy is matched by an equally fair and humane foreign policy. When was the last time Canada attacked anyone, or anyone attacked a Canadian.

Generally, Jews are sophisticated, Americans are friendly, and Arabs are morons. But, American citizens need to realize that by supporting all the rights and wrongs (without any judgement based on human rights) of Israel, they are creating an enemity for the US with Middle Eastern countries, who otherwise would actually be pro-America.

``It is a pity that more Muslims do not see behind the facade of America`s ``War on Terrorism`` and realise that it is really a war on political Islam.`` (Asif Naqshbandi)

Now that is sheer nonsense.

Here is world’s reaction -- to our country bumpkin – Texas’s Don Quixote’s – Jeeehaaad against “Axis of Evil” windmills.

Allies Hear Sour Notes in `Axis of Evil` Chorus

By DAVID E. SANGER

(New York Times)

(Excerpts)

WASHINGTON, Feb. 16 — As a new and glaring rift emerges between the White House and America`s allies over how to pursue the next phase of the war on terrorism, something odd has happened:

President Bush and his top aides now seem to welcome, even to egg on, the sharp differences prompted by Mr. Bush`s determination to expand his battle against what he calls ``evil`` regimes.

In private, his friends and closest aides report, Mr. Bush fumes about weak-kneed ``European elites`` and scared Arab leaders who, in his view, lack the courage to stand up to states that may one day provide terrorists with nuclear or biological weapons.

Today Mr. Bush departed for Asia saying that the goal of his trip was to strengthen his antiterrorism coalition.

But it was telling that even before Air Force One departed, the South Korean press was filled with denunciations of his inclusion of North Korea as part of the ``axis of evil,`` protesting that Mr. Bush was undercutting years of diplomacy aimed at luring the Stalinist North out of its frightfully armed shell with economic incentives.

In China, where Mr. Bush is making a delayed state visit, the country`s leadership has warned in the past few weeks of ``serious consequences`` if the president takes military action against Iraq. Beijing has voiced worries about a re-emergence of American unilateralism, which it thought had faded in the months after the Sept. 11 attacks.

But in the last two weeks, Mr. Bush`s strident tone has suggested just the opposite. In appearances across the country, he has built on the ``axis of evil`` phraseology of his State of the Union address, knowing full well that each repetition irritates and divides the countries he once hailed as his great coalition partners.

His national security aides — usually more attuned to how Mr. Bush`s words play Poland or Peru than Peoria — have begun to cite evidence that Americans are behind the broader mission of rooting out rogue states seeking weapons of mass destruction, even if the allies are not.

They compare Mr. Bush`s mission to Ronald Reagan`s single-minded goal of ridding the world of Communism.

They describe their boss as a man who emerged from the first phase of the war more convinced than ever that the United States alone has the power to complete its task, with the coalition if possible — and without them if necessary.

It is an America-first position that Vice President Dick Cheney voiced with particular clarity on Friday to the Council on Foreign Relations.

``America has friends and allies in this cause, but only we can lead it,`` he said in a ballroom filled with many of his old friends and former colleagues. ``Only we can rally the world in a task of this complexity against an enemy so elusive and so resourceful.

The United States and only the United States can see this effort through to victory.``

When America`s allies have begged to differ in recent days, they have found themselves engaged in open, public bickering with even with the most diplomatic members of Mr. Bush`s war council.

It started when France`s foreign minister, Hubert Védrine, dismissed Mr. Bush`s approach to Iran, Iraq and North Korea as ``simplistic,`` and Secretary of State Colin L. Powell shot back that his French colleague was ``getting the vapors.``

Then, all this week, there has been a far more telling war of words between Mr. Powell and Christopher Patten, the European Union`s foreign affairs minister.

Until a few days ago, he was a favorite of Washington conservatives for the tough line he took against China while serving as Britain`s last governor general to Hong Kong.

When Mr. Patten started off the tiff by accusing Mr. Bush of taking an ``absolutist`` approach to the world, Mr. Powell shot back that his old friend deeply misunderstood and said, ``I shall have a word with him, as they say in Britain.``

_______________________________________________

Before he had a chance, Mr. Patten published a lengthy rebuke of the administration in The Financial Times, saying that American success in Afghanistan had ``reinforced some dangerous instincts,`` including the belief that ``the projection of military power is the only basis of true security,`` that ``the U.S. can rely only on itself,`` and that allies were ``an optional extra.``

_________________________________________________

He is hardly alone in that view. The German foreign minister, Joschka Fischer, said this week that the Bush administration was treating coalition partners like ``satellites,`` a term clearly meant as a comparison to the old Soviet Union and its Eastern Bloc.

And then President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, Mr. Bush`s newest strategic partner, weighed in with the observation that the members of the antiterror coalition signed up to battle the Taliban and Al Qaeda, and ``Iraq is not on this list.``

Even Canada — America`s closest allies save for Britain — warned that any effort by the United States to act unilaterally in the next phase of the war ``will go nowhere.``(NYT)

There is a Iraqi guy who shows up on the Cable News shows claiming that he used to head the nuclear weapon program in Iraq before defecting to the US in 1994. According to him, Iraq will develop its first nuclear weapon by 2005. Iraq will never use it directly due to fear of retaliation. However, it may supply some terrorist outfit with such weapons to maintain plausible deniability, while inflicting massive destruction on the west or Israel. That is the doomsday scenario that the US is trying to avoid.

As far as Bush`s speech is concerned, it was more to intimidate these nations rather than starting any military mission. The intention is to fire a warning shot so that these countries will think several times before embarking on any adventure.

Spoken like true schizo desi/feudals........

``...we do not want to have a godless, secular, society where gays are considered the same as heterosexuals, where children abuse their parents, where women are encouraged to display their flesh for the titillation of men (who own all the porn chains etc) in the name of liberation and teenagers become bulimic and anorexic trying to look like models in the magz (cos these are the only type of women they want!), where old people are sent off to old people`s homes to die, a civilisation where ``god`` is officially declared dead (naudhubillah), where the children are told that there is no afterlife, etc etc etc...``

N. Sahib,

This is bit of an generalization isn`t it? Some of this is appalling and fantastical...

Mr. Khar,

Interesting piece. Could a few questions be clarified?

1. What forms of government were prevalent in Iraq before Saddam Hussein?

2. To what extent have Iraqi citizens into governmental processes?

3. Since Saddam`s ``heroic`` stance against America, how many Iraqis have died of malnutrition, bombs and disease? How had Hussein avoided being hurt?

4. How is Saddam Hussein safeguarded from internal coups?

5. Who are the democratic dissenters and how are they diffused? By whom?

6. Although you bring up the example of the unfortunate Bush Jr., could you enlighten us on the well known rumors that Hussein is known to be an extremely brutal man, particularly in regards to Iraqi women in his personal life?

regards

Ummm, so olemme see if I get this straight...Iraqi people love to sing and dance, therefore we should tolerate Saddam.

The ``Evil`` in Axis of Evil was not a characterization of the Iraqi people, or for that matter the Iranian or the North Korean, but their ruling regimes. Yes, the US made a tactical mistake by supporting the regime in the 80s, when Iran looked to be a greater evil. But so did the allies make a mistake in Munich and before. Does that mean that world war two should not have been fought?

Nothing in this article brings forth an alternative perception on Saddam. If the point was to humanize the Iraqi people, it was made. But the article also brought forth the extreme terror in which the Iraqi people live. Why are the defenders of Islam so ready to condemn an entire nation to terror just to prove political points? Can anyone say with a straight face that Saddam is a leader who works for the benefit of the people?

Saddam is an inhumane leader to his own people, and is a threat to the outside world as well. The reason the US wants to take him out is because of the latter reason. But can the defenders of Saddam really give a single reason on why he should be defended, instead of pointing out American inconsistencies?

I can see that after Sept 11, the advocates of violence against the west had disappeared. Now they seem to be crawling out of the woodwork again. A consistent war against terror is the need of the day.

THE DEVILS AT WORK

Read the doings of the veritable Rakshasas on earth. My dear Indians, this war against jihadis is going to be very painful for all of us, but we will have to fight the jihad

http://www.indian-express.com/ie20020218/nat9.html

Militants’ new mantra in Valley: Kill them young

In the last two months, 25 children, mostly under ten, were slaughtered

....

‘‘Aj to baad terey bachey nahin darengey (From today onwards your children will not fear the knock on the doors),’’ militants told Mithu Ram, killing four of his family members, including two daughters aged eight and 12. These words continue to haunt him even now.

Yet another tragic chapter in the life of a father in Jammu and Kashmir, who will mourn his young ones throughout his life.

Militants, dressed in Pathani suits and speaking in Gojri, killed eight members of two Hindu families in Narla village today. Ram’s was one of them.

Earlier, in January this year, eight children were killed by Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) militants in Mendhar tehsil of Poonch district. They did not even spare a pregnant woman.

Before this the militants had opened fire on a child, who in order to save his father a village sarpanch, had clung to him.

Sitting outside the trauma ward of the GMC Hospital in Jammu, Mithu with blood splattered all over his shirt, looks at her convalescing three-year-old daughter.

Unmindful of the bullet wound on his arm, Mithu tells every passerby: ‘‘The militants were right, now onwards my children will never fear the knock on the door. As they are no more to hear that.’’

‘‘In fact when the chopper came to evacuate the injured, Papal was not ready to go. She insisted on taking her mother along,’’ said a tearful Ashok.

When militants knocked at the door of Mithu’s house in the night, the family was fast asleep. As they pointed guns at the sleeping children, Mithu’s wife Jatti fell at their feet praying for mercy on the children.

‘‘Inhan ney kujh wi nahin dekhya, inhan no na maro (They have yet to see the world, don’t kill them),’’ Jatti is said to have told militants.

Mithu said these words hardly had any affect on them. The militants, without a second thought, shot his wife and the children.

Now attending to their injured kin, Mithu and the others fear that the gunman are still around in their village and if security is not given to them the militants might return.

oye Naqshbandi, tooonay article parha bhee hai kay sirf title parh khar bhonkh raha hai?

Iraq is a considerably secular nation which is paying for the misdeeds of its autocratic ill-educated leader who is often seen in a purple or a yellow suit and whose favorite movie is the God father.

A timely article! Well done! It is a pity that more Muslims do not see behind the facade of America`s ``War on Terrorism`` and realise that it is really a war on political Islam. They do not care whether you are clean-shaven, bearded, wear the hijab, don`t wear the hijab, wear a turban, wear a topi, a fez or whatever--if you are a Muslim AND if you are willing to criticize America`s attitude and behaviour towards the Muslim world and Islam then you are labelled a ``fanatic`` and an ``obscurantist`` and a ``fundo``-your crime being that you do NOT want America (and its allies) to exploit the Muslim holy lands and rob all our nations of their mineral and other natural resources just to keep big, fat, gluttonous Americans at home happy; nor do you WANT your children to grow up with secular views. Nor do you want our sacred lands to be ``defended`` or ``protected`` by America [Our Prophet sao=id that two religions could not remain in Arabia]. If you are intelligent enough to say that WE want to do what is in OUR interests as Muslims both in this world and the Hereafter according to OUR beliefs and protect OUR ``strategic and vital interests`` just as you do why do you get so upset? If Iran, Iraq are an axis of evil for ``trying to develop weapons of mass destruction`` then why isn`t Israel. Or to be even more blunt why do YOU have the largest stockpiles of such weapons in the world then?

They will then give you a load of bullshit answers about how they are ``civilised`` and a democracy and will not use them (forgetting Japan!) and the world is safe if THEY have them but if Muslims have them then suddenly the world becomes a more dangerous place! What they are really saying is that they want to have them so they can rule the world and force everyone else to tow the line and say `Yes, sir` to their dispicable way of life which they are trying to envelope the world in and most of all so that they can remain economically prosperous at the expense of the others, especially the Muslims as we are the only ones to say, hang on we do not want to have a godless, secular, society where gays are considered the same as heterosexuals, where children abuse their parents, where women are encouraged to display their flesh for the titillation of men (who own all the porn chains etc) in the name of liberation and teenagers become bulimic and anorexic trying to look like models in the magz (cos these are the only type of women they want!), where old people are sent off to old people`s homes to die, a civilisation where ``god`` is officially declared dead (naudhubillah), where the children are told that there is no afterlife, etc etc etc...

For this and other reasons we are now the Enemy. And the saddest thing is that even as they bomb Aghanistan (so that US oil companies can have access to central asian oil) and kill innocent Palestinians (who are fighting for the liberation of their homeland), plans are already under way to again bomb Iraq. And the Muslim leaders by and large are silent and all too happy to go along with this. Those members of the Ummah who protest are either ridiculed and called backwards and obscurantist fundamentalists, or if that doesn`t work, jailed, or killed.

We ask Allah for strength in these dark times for the Ummah of Sayyidina Rasul Allah sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam who informed us that a time would come when the unbelievers would invite each other to attack the Muslims the way people invite one another to a banquet. And that is now happening before our very eyes. The saddest part is that we expect no better from the kuffaar but when Muslims agree with this and applaud it the mind boggles!

May Allah give victory to the Muslims. ameen.

Very illuminating piece for Mr. Khar here.

Saddam Hussain may be sleeping in his own bed
or beds (we hear that he moves around often) but
he certainly needs to be out of the sleeping quarters and lives of ordinary Iraqi`s, the sooner the better.

And a question for the author, my fellow brother from ``Bakistan`` (some just cannot pronounce the letter ``P`` correctly).
Any relationship to ``My Feudal Lord`` Mr. Khar?

Ras

Chowk Staff:

Lagna eh maiN unnah thi gaya waaN. MaaN Sameer lalay na mazmoon nazar naiN aana piya.

Khar saab baooN vadhiya likhnay o.