Posted November 21, 2003
I have been reading the Balkan Express for a long time and it has been difficult to watch the downward spiral of the Balkans along with the lives and liberties of its Slavic peoples. History has shown that a nation can only extricate itself from under the jackboot of empires when that empire itself starts to weaken and crumble. I find it ironic that the Muslim fundamentalism that U.S. foreign policy nurtured and supported in the Balkans has finally come full-circle. I will be eagerly awaiting Malic's assessment this Thursday of the presidential elections in Serbia and whether we are seeing a genuine course shift in the direction of the Balkans politics towards Europe and Asia versus "the West." Does US foreign policy still have the resources, and more importantly the will, to once again buy an election in Serbia with suitcases of cash to keep their vassals in power?
Sam Koritz replies:
Good call. The subject of this week's Balkan Express is indeed the Serbian elections.
What an exciting world we in which we live when our leaders are somnambulists.
Powell described his killer schedule in an interview Thursday with Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed, a reporter for a London-based Saudi newspaper (see "A Memorial to Politics," Washington Post):
"'So do you use sleeping tablets to organize yourself?' Al-Rashed asked.
"'Yes. Well, I wouldn't call them that,' Powell said. 'They're a wonderful medication not medication. How would you call it? They're called Ambien, which is very good. You don't use Ambien? Everybody here uses Ambien.'"
One may now understand why these people apparently do not remember what they have just said or what has just happened.
From Ambiens website (http://www.ambien.com/about5.asp):
"Sleep medicines may cause the special type of memory loss known as amnesia. When this occurs, a person may not remember what has happened for several hours after taking the medicine. This is usually not a problem, since most people fall asleep after taking the medicine. Memory loss can be a problem, however, when sleep medicines are taken while traveling, such as during an airplane flight, and the person wakes up before the effect of the medicine is gone. This has been called 'traveler's amnesia.' For more information about the effect of AMBIEN on memory, see important product information."
"Halfway to a Kurdish Triangle in Iraq"
You write, "The Kurds in Iraq, which make up about a third of the country's 25 million people..."
Where did you get these statistics? Or you made it up to drive your ill-informed agenda?
They say Shiites are the majority at 60% and now your Kurds make up 33.33% of the population which combine make it 99.33% of the population. The Sunni Arabs are now less than 1%. Get a little education before writing articles and pretending to be informed.
Eric Garris replies:
You published a story and mentioned a film made by Robert Greenwald,the films is entitled 'Uncovered' I believe it was recently made about the war in Iraq.
I would appreciate if you could direct me on how I could obtain a copy.
Eric Garris replies:
Here is the article: http://www.thenation.com/actnow/index.mhtml?bid=4&pid=1046 and here is the site to order copies: http://www.truthuncovered.com/index.cfm?ms=nation.
I'd like your recommendation on a book to purchase and give people who still believe the government-story on Pearl Harbor, a book that documents the behind the scene real story.
Eric Garris replies:
best book is Day of Deceit by Robert Stinnett. Here is the Amazon
page for it (a bargain at $11.20):
You can also check this archived page of ours, it has a lot of articles on the subject: http://www.antiwar.com/pearl.html.
Administration's 'Iraq TV'
I sure hope that none of the $87 billion dollars just appropriated for rebuilding Iraq is going to go into the new TV station the Bush administration is going to be broadcasting at us from Iraq. I don't want my taxpayer dollars going toward my own brainwashing!
Eric Garris replies:
I think that you Israel-haters forgot to put this on your front page: http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/360960.html. This is what happens when people like your website constantly ratchet up the hate. Your web site is as fair and balanced as FoxNews.
Eric Garris replies:
Saturday is normally our day off, but we will get the story up. I appreciate your sending it along, since most of our links come from readers. Most of them, however, don't automatically find failure to get stories up within an hour of their posting to be a sign of conspiracy or bias in an organization with only three full-time employees.
Please keep it a little more truthful. This is just not true: "Pentagon Bans Media Coverage of Soldiers' Funerals." You should have said "Pentagon Bans Media at Soldier's Gravesites in National Cemetery." I can't trust you if you spin things as bad as Bush does.
Eric Garris replies:
If the Bush administration won't let the American public see the coffins coming back with soldiers from Iraq or the wounded at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, then some group should stage a mock funeral procession in Washington, D.C. Each person in the procession could carry an American Flag and a sign with the name of a soldier who died in Iraq. Wouldn't it look impressive to see 400 flags and names? At the end of the procession, perhaps at the Vietnam Memorial, a memorial service could be held where the name of each soldier who died is read aloud, accompanied by the ringing of a bell. Using family members of the dead as well as celebrities and politicians would help to bring attention to such a display. TV coverage would be essential to get the point across to the nation. But it shouldn't be marred by protests or peace rallies or any other issue. It should be a solemn occasion done with dignity.
Does it matter who it was leaked by?
Eric Garris replies:
I have absolutely had it with the pathetic "news" organization called the FoxNews Channel. Its reporting is nothing short of shameless, and this week's "case closed" segment regarding the relationship between Saddam and al Qaeda is just one more example of the news station's pro war bias. The neoconservatives have proven to be masters of delivering "good news" right when they need it, and, throughout the course of this misadventure, there has never been a time when "good news" was more needed than now ("good news" consists of whatever news that might boost public support for the war).
If Fox is fair and balanced then I wonder why they have thus far failed to mention the fact that the Pentagon gave a press release last Friday debunking the Weekly Standard's story? The bottom line is that FoxNews channel should not be taken seriously, but I am afraid that the vast majority of the public does not understand the politics behind its reporting.
The American Empire will lose this war, of course, as it did the Vietnam war in 1975. The premises are even worse than they were in Vietnam: More American troops have been killed these seven months than the two first years in Vietnam and the U.S. Army intelligence this time is at a loss about who the resistance fighters are. The Iraqis are increasingly angered by the US aggression and humiliation and that makes them join the armed resistance.
Don't forget: this is a society built on tribes and clans. Whenever a clan member is killed, at least ten of his clansmen vow to take revenge. So the resistance will grow, and Dubya will soon face a West Bank the size of California. He will have to pull out in August '04 at the latest, or else he will not stand any chance whatsoever to win the presidential elections in November. I don't feel sorry for him. I feel very sorry, however, for the Iraqi people to have such formidable enemies: the hypocritical "humanitarian" U.N. who by their sanctions killed at least five thousand Iraqi infants every month for thirteen years a true genocide and a real Holocaust (according to UN official statistics confirmed by former assistant Secretary General Denis Halliday, who left the UN in disgust in 1998); and now that phony"Coalition" with its equally phony motives for waging war on Iraq: non-existent ties to al-Qaida and non-existent weapons of mass destruction. ...
Sorry, Mr. Lobe, I wish I could share your enthusiasm but a state where you don't have control over your own AIRSPACE! What kind of sovereignty is THAT! A demilitarized Palestine, what kind of Nation has no Military!? A defeated one! How will they defend themselves from further Israeli aggression? This is just another plot to destroy the Palestinians similar to how the Europeans did to the Native American's. But we are Muslims, we know what honor and dignity is and this is why we will never submit to anyone except the Creator of the Heavens and Earth!
"Verily, they are but plotting a plot (against you O Muhammad). And I (too) am planning a plan." (Quran 86:15-16)
"Who Are the Insurgents?"
Your website provided a link to this article in Time magazine which tries to identify the Iraqis who are attacking American and coalition forces. Apparently, the Pentagon and the news media are having trouble figuring who these insurgents are. I don't think that it is that difficult.
First, what would motivate an Iraqi to seek revenge against Americans? Well, if you killed a member of his family, he might seek revenge. If you maimed or injured his family or friends, he might seek revenge. If you bombed his home or town or place of business, he might seek revenge. There are other possible motivations for seeking revenge, but let's stick with these.
Now, second, how any Iraqis did the American and coalition forces kill in the recent invasion. The estimates range from 25,000 to 55,000. If each of those casualties has one angry relative, you have a sizable group of insurgents. If they have two or three angry relatives, you have a very large force.
Now add to that the number of Iraqis who were injured or maimed. No one knows this number, but it must be even larger than the Iraqi deaths. If each of those injured Iraqis has an angry relative bent on revenge, the size of the insurgent force increases dramatically.
Now add the number of Iraqi dead and injured from the first Gulf War. And then add the number of Iraqis who died or suffered from the twelve years of sanctions.
Who are the insurgents? The American military has recently killed or maimed large numbers of Iraqis and destroyed a great deal of their property. Who do you think the insurgents are? They don't have to be Saddam loyalists or Mideast terrorists. Iraq is filled with motivation for revenge. We put it there. Did we think that Iraqis wouldn't mind being killed or injured or having their homes and buildings blown up?
I opposed the Iraq war because I did not want to see American boys killed or maimed as a result of sloppy neocon thinking and deception. This same sloppy thinking and deception continues in their postwar quagmire.
Whatever it takes, it takes! If it takes a radical to rid this dictator then so be it! Our next president will need to promise two things to get elected.
1) On the day he-she is sworn in they will sign the order to bring our troops home!
2) Bring into effect a national health-care system like all civilized countries have! The Canadian plan will do just fine. Its your health and your childrens lives at risk!
As I sit at the keyboard putting my thoughts down I now hear on the radio that well over 400 Americans are dead since March 2003. What will be the magic number, how many more body bags, how many more senseless killings of our youth must we endure? All in the name of ego, money and power! ...
I agree with Charley Reese entirely about the fallibility of "intelligence". However he seems to have missed the most major source of error. That is that there are people with a vested interest in feeding you the wrong information. The more powerful someone is the more interest people have in misdirecting that power to their own aims.
In the case of Iraq, a number of people had a major vested interest in the US attacking Iraq. The most notable examples were various Iraqi exiles, like Ahmed Chalabi, who wanted the US to invade and hand the country over to them. The possibility that intelligence may have been faked makes the vast majority of intelligence is no better, probably worse, than consulting Nostradamus, reading a horoscope or similar.
Tom Clancy does give a rose tinted view of intelligence. Instead try reading John Le Carre's The Spy Who Came In from the Cold from the Russian point of view. The whole book is about a disinformation exercise to confuse Russian intelligence.
My own view is that the USA is so powerful, that it is so worth misleading, that so many people are trying to mislead it, that you might as well have done with it and disband the CIA. The "information" coming out of it is worse than useless.
How can anyone infer that Bush should be let off the hook? To do that would also infer that we have a political nonthinking idiot in the White House. By my book he is just as responsible as Rummy, Wolfie, et al.
think of giving Bush a "get out of jail" card is nauseating.
If I, a simple American woman, knew before the great "shock and awe"
the neocons should be responsible for their lies. But I see no
I remember tales emanating from the White House before Gulf War I talking about the mighty Iraqi army and Saddam's plans to build a nuclear bomb. The mighty Iraqi army, hungry, barefooted, tired either surrendered or were bulldozed into trenches.
This time around, I just waited to hear the big scary threat that would come from the White House. The most frightening threat to me was the threat of VX gas, of which one drop could kill. I resisted the fear that Saddam had such capabilities and still believed that Iraq, crushed in 1990 and sanctioned for 10 more years, was weaker, rather than stronger, certainly no threat to the United States.
Also, any member of Congress should have known that the doctrine of preemptive war was wrong, in spite of all the lies. As far as I can tell, only the Senator from West Virginia clearly and urgently raised his voice against such a dangerous precedent.
In short, The President was supported by the Congress and all are guilty. Listening to neocons is guilt.
What struck me in reading Alan Bocks article REMEMBER BOSNIA? were the population figures he gave for Bosnia. Alan Bock cited the CIA FACTBOOK to give the following population breakdown of Bosnia based on ethnicity: Bosniaks----48%, Serbs---38%, Croats---14%.
These figures are subject to dispute. After all, following the Weapons of Mass Destruction debacle, the yellowcake from Africa hoax, etc., why we should we put any especial credence in these CIA figures?
Based on religion, there are 40% Muslims in Bosnia, 31% Orthodox Serbs, and 17% Catholic Croats. There is also a large segment of undeclared and others in the population mix. Moreover, Bosniak is a recent coinage to refer to the Bosnian Muslims as an ethnic category (in fact, a revival of a very old term). The problem with the CIA figures is that they falsely imply that the Muslims or Bosniaks are close to a majority of the population in Bosnia. This has not been shown by the evidence.
Before the civil war in 1992 began, the population breakdown of Bosnia was roughly, 43% Muslim, 32% Serb, and 15% Croat. Since the war, Serbian refugees from Krajina have settled in Bosnia increasing the Serbian population. But the central question is: How did the Muslims gain 5% in population since 1992? Is it due to identification with Bosniak now? The ethnic category of Yugoslav was one that all three ethnic groups in Bosnia identified with so that would not account for the 5% growth. We have to ask: How accurate are the CIA population figures?
Bosnia demonstrates a total and complete failure of humanitarian interventions and military intervention in general by the US and the so-called international community. ... When Bosnia turned into a horrendous tragedy, a scapegoat needed to be found. The scapegoats were Serbian nationalism and Slobodan Milosevic. But the real problem in Bosnia was outside, foreign intervention seeking to create a country by decree. Warren Zimmermann, the last US ambassador to Yugoslavia, even candidly admitted that the US goal was support the Muslim position or side in the conflict and to defeat the Serbian position. In other words, the US had declared war on the Bosnian Serbs even before the civil war started.
Who started the war in Bosnia? All three groups agreed at Lisbon to settle the conflict in Bosnia peacefully and to ensure that each group was safeguarded from domination by the other(s). The US rejected this solution by the three parties themselves. The US wanted to impose a solution from Washington. We all know what happened in Bosnia after this decision by the US. ...
Why We March[ed]
This Thursday, 100000 people are expected to march through the streets of London in opposition to the state visit of President Bush. The protest organizers have gone to great lengths to emphasize that this is not an anti-American protest. In fact, the march will be led by a group of several hundred Americans living abroad. Together with the British public, we will proudly demonstrate our opposition to the policies of George W. Bush. It is thus appropriate to state our reasons for participating in this march.
By living abroad, we carry the responsibility of representing our nation to the rest of the world.
Recently, we have seen how anti-American feelings have become the norm, even among nations friendly to us. For those of us who have spent significant amounts of time overseas, it has been a trying and difficult time as we have continuously been subjected to criticism for the policies of our government. While the feelings of dissatisfaction were originally directed solely at President Bush, we have increasingly found ourselves the targets of anti-Americanism as well. Even those of us who did not agree with the politics of this administration were not spared. There remains a profound misconception in Europe that all Americans share the same beliefs and that, consequently, we all share the blame.
However, misconceptions about us were not limited to foreigners, as we have been subjected to much criticism from the homeland as well. Ad hominem attacks such as "appeasers, unpatriotic extremists and pacifists" were frequently leveled at us. Unless one has lived abroad during this time, it is difficult to understand how isolated we have felt. As Thursday approaches, it is likely that some will once again label us as un-American. However, next week we will voice our opinions when we unite as ordinary Americans, not radicals. We are Americans whose bonds have been tightened by our opposition to the policies of George W. Bush.
We march because we want to show our nation that we can disagree and still be patriots. We march alongside the citizens of the UK to show our common objections to the half-truths and exaggerations upon which the Iraq war was based. We march because we want democracy bestowed upon Iraq not by unilateral wars and weak alliances of convenience, but by genuine cooperation with the international community. We refuse to order "freedom fries" with our hamburgers and we realize that the "chocolate makers of Old Europe" make the best chocolate in the world.
We will not be told who is our ally and who is not. All of us have witnessed how the policies of George W. Bush have been detrimental to the image of the United States abroad.
We march for many diverse reasons; but most importantly, we march because we love the United States and want to hold it to an ideal that is higher than that of George W. Bush. That is why we march.
The neocons are not losing. They're just stalling for time with illusory infighting and the pretense of having a labile war strategy open to change as circumstances change. They have got America's foot in the door and that's all it takes to bring the rest of the corpulent American citizenry into the main foyer and then onto the dinning room for the big feast with plenty of "cooking oil" for the chefs. After all, it wasn't really a case of military adventurism as much as one of monetary adventurism. I can see several options for taking care of the civil /governing problem without losing the oil options. Hell, turning the Shiites on the Sunnis is easily one of those. Just hand over the governing quickly. Pull out the troops to isolated bases with only oil well protection as their responsibility. And then allow for the eventual civil war between Shiites and Sunnis to proceed with American troops lending assistance to neither and the problem about factions and all that diversity stuff will self-resolve.
We can bet the Shiites would be more than happy to "pogrom-out" the Sunnis and Hussein adherents. Once that's accomplished, America can go back to f*cking with the Shiites as they please. All the while, the oil can be made to finally flow into the Oil House coffers, unlike now, with the constant sabotage by the Hussein adherents, Sunnis and other ignorant phosphorescent revolutionists.
As far as Man's inhumanity to himself and others, that can be cleansed in the media "spin" cycle just like always. I'm sure you can think up even more sophisticated strategies as you seem to have, obviously, a keen sense for the diabolicality of the political mind.
Nope, I wouldn't be chuckling about loss just yet. We mustn't forget the Straussian streak of this administration and it's elitist belief that lying is good for the masses. Nothing that comes out of Washington is believable, so I would not base any inferential reasoning on the words of liars. It's like when the cretin says, "All cretins are liars." Round and round we go. Where the war stops, nobody knows. Good. That's just the way they like it.
New Party Needed
Being over 80 years of age, a U.S. Navy veteran with letters of commendation from President Harry S. Truman and Secretary of the Navy, James Forrestal, the following statements evolved from my love for God and country.
The status of our nation's future is being jeopardized by the potential of national chaos and turbulence. The components of this plot re: GREED, POWER, DECEPTION, FRAUD, IMMORALITY, MATERIALISM, SECULARISM and ATHEISM. Gentleness and purity have become sins replaced by glorified sex and violence and in a reversed analogy, for instance, the ACLU has replaced the Ten Commandments.
For more corroborative evidence, our greatest disgrace as a civilized nation is when we desanctified human life and permitted the slaughter of over 42 million innocent unborn who never made it out of the womb. It is an unjust law that deserves a 3 R rating: repulsive, repugnant and reprehensible.
Our Administration has violated the Constitution of the United States in sending American soldiers to war, as only Congress can declare war. Congress by thinking more of November 2004 has cowardly relinquished its elected duties. In addition, Congress acquiesced "carte blanche" to the 87 billions for Iraq, monies that should have been allocated toward the betterment of Americans and our country. My sympathies go out to 'all' who have been killed or wounded and to 'all' of their families.
In all of this debacle, I foresee the demise of the Republican and Democratic Parties. This has nothing to do whether one is conservative, liberal, moderate or to the right, to the left or to the center. It is because the American people are ready for a big change and want a government by and for the people, which was the originally initiated by our forefathers that wholeheartedly acknowledged the sovereignty of God.
There is hope that this change will come about when we have a strong leadership of great Americans initiating a new National Independent Party. We should go in quest of finding those competent and trustworthy to serve God and country. Due to personal endeavors, some may decline and others may accept. Lack of space permits me to offer only a few names: the Honorable Antonin Scalia, the Honorable Roy Moore, Mr. Patrick J. Buchanan, the Honorable Alan Keyes, Major General Patrick H. Brady, the Honorable Ron Paul and Mr. Joseph Sobran.
Fortunato, Oceanside, California