segovius
06-17-2006, 05:52 AM
This is important and fascinating. The US forces claim to have found a letter in the rubble of Zarqawi's bombed house. Text Here (http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/Iraq/2006/06/15/1634921-ap.html).
Passing quickly over the 911-passport-esque issue of how so many articles could survive precision strikes by 500lb bombs there are only two possibilities: it is real or it is a fake. I don't know which and it is not my point to express an opinion but let's proceed logically:
1) If it is a fake then it is more proof of US continued lying (or black-ops if you prefer) in relation to Zarqawi. That is to say, whether you agree with that analysis or not, the US faked it and are presenting it as real.
2) If it is real and Zarqawi wrote it then it is a wake-up call for all wing-nuts or supporters of the US admin's current foreign policies as it clearly spells out disturbing facts.
And this is what is interesting: out of the only two possibilities it clearly shows a very disturbing pattern relating to current Bush admin policies. I will demonstrate with examples that are self-evident and explain for those who might find it uncomfortable and not clearly understand the import. Remember - these words were written EITHER by Zarqawi or someone in US employ, they are the only two possibilities:
1) Firstly, 'Zarqawi' draws a distinction between his group and the resistance. This is clearly admitting that they are two separate things - but worse, he clearly states that his group opposes the resistance and supports the US troops (for reason he later explains).
This to my mind would tend to suggest the letter is genuine. It is not the sort of thing (one would hope) that even a US spook would risk putting out there. And of course the situation the ground with Iraqis being murdered daily supports this.
'Zarqawi' lists the measures his group take against the resistance:
However, here in Iraq, time is now beginning to be of service to the American forces and harmful to the resistance for the following reasons:
1. By allowing the American forces to form the forces of the National Guard, to reinforce them and enable them to undertake military operations against the resistance.
2. By undertaking massive arrest operations, invading regions that have an impact on the resistance, and hence causing the resistance to lose many of its elements.
3. By undertaking a media campaign against the resistance resulting in weakening its influence inside the country and presenting its work as harmful to the population rather than being beneficial to the population.
4. By tightening the resistance's financial outlets, restricting its moral options and by confiscating its ammunition and weapons.
5. By creating a big division among the ranks of the resistance and jeopardizing its attack operations, it has weakened its influence and internal support of its elements, thus resulting in a decline of the resistance's assaults.
There are more in the linked article - point 3 is particularly interesting and pertinent to my theme as it not only shows that the group have a policy of media propaganda but they can successfully implement it. This is key and so far such a source has not been identified. What is the nature of this propaganda and its media?
But now to my my main point to which the above is the background - remember, Zarqawi's group (which still is operational) either has a sophisticated propaganda network or the US is making all this up and being highly irresponsible in doing so.
Zarqawi goes on to identify the resistance as predominantly Shi'i and, not surprisingly, to frame the conflict as being against them. This is fairly well-known anyway but this is the shocker:
Consequently, to embroil America in another war against another enemy is the answer that we find to be the most appropriate, and to have a war through a delegate has the following benefits:
1. To occupy the Americans by another front will allow the resistance freedom of movement and alleviate the pressure imposed on it............
7. A war between the Americans and Iran. We have noticed that the best of these wars to be ignited is the one between the Americans and Iran.......
The question remains, how to draw the Americans into fighting a war against Iran?
Hence, it is necessary first to exaggerate the Iranian danger and to convince America and the west in general, of the real danger coming from Iran, and this would be done by the following:
1. By disseminating threatening messages against American interests and the American people and attribute them to a Shi'a Iranian side.
2. By executing operations of kidnapping hostages and implicating the Shi'a Iranian side.
3. By advertising that Iran has chemical and nuclear weapons and is threatening the west with these weapons.
4. By executing exploding operations in the west and accusing Iran by planting Iranian Shi'a fingerprints and evidence.
5. By declaring the existence of a relationship between Iran and terrorist groups (as termed by the Americans).
6. By disseminating bogus messages about confessions showing that Iran is in possession of weapons of mass destruction or that there are attempts by the Iranian intelligence to undertake terrorist operations in America and the west and against western interests.
And this is the crux - here you have a list of what 'Zarqawi' says need to be done to draw the US into a war with Iran. Such things can be seen to correspond to reality on the ground.
Now this letter is either true or it is a fake. Let's refine the options:
1) If it is true then it inevitably follows that:
The propaganda you are hearing and following about Iran's nukes is very likely emanating from Zarqawi.
The path Bush is following by his 'stand' (that the wingers support) is essentially a trap.
The US admin is blindly and unknowingly following a script written by the terrorists and therefore doomed to lost the WOT.
Before considering the ramifications of the 'false' view, let's just look at point 3 there: this militates against the 'real' hypothesis and virtually proves it is a product of US intel.
Think: how could the US continue on it's path of confrontation with Iran having found such a letter? If the letter is genuine and states exactly this and the US continue......well, it is right up there with ignoring the warnings pre-911.
2) If it is false then it inevitably follows that:
The US is behaving irresponsibly - to say the least - in suggesting that the policy they are pursuing re Iran could in fact be the product of a terrorist plan and not based on actuality. think about that for a moment -if Iran really are planning nukes and the US is committed to a diplomatic solution then what purpose can creating this fiction possibly serve/ It can only benefit terrorists surely?
Seriously, I would like to hear from supporters of Bush and those who believe Iran to be a real threat - if this document is real then does it change your view? Or are you going to continue to sleepwalk into a 'terrorist' trap? Or perhaps you have some alternate justification?
Let's hear em - send em in on the usual number....
Passing quickly over the 911-passport-esque issue of how so many articles could survive precision strikes by 500lb bombs there are only two possibilities: it is real or it is a fake. I don't know which and it is not my point to express an opinion but let's proceed logically:
1) If it is a fake then it is more proof of US continued lying (or black-ops if you prefer) in relation to Zarqawi. That is to say, whether you agree with that analysis or not, the US faked it and are presenting it as real.
2) If it is real and Zarqawi wrote it then it is a wake-up call for all wing-nuts or supporters of the US admin's current foreign policies as it clearly spells out disturbing facts.
And this is what is interesting: out of the only two possibilities it clearly shows a very disturbing pattern relating to current Bush admin policies. I will demonstrate with examples that are self-evident and explain for those who might find it uncomfortable and not clearly understand the import. Remember - these words were written EITHER by Zarqawi or someone in US employ, they are the only two possibilities:
1) Firstly, 'Zarqawi' draws a distinction between his group and the resistance. This is clearly admitting that they are two separate things - but worse, he clearly states that his group opposes the resistance and supports the US troops (for reason he later explains).
This to my mind would tend to suggest the letter is genuine. It is not the sort of thing (one would hope) that even a US spook would risk putting out there. And of course the situation the ground with Iraqis being murdered daily supports this.
'Zarqawi' lists the measures his group take against the resistance:
However, here in Iraq, time is now beginning to be of service to the American forces and harmful to the resistance for the following reasons:
1. By allowing the American forces to form the forces of the National Guard, to reinforce them and enable them to undertake military operations against the resistance.
2. By undertaking massive arrest operations, invading regions that have an impact on the resistance, and hence causing the resistance to lose many of its elements.
3. By undertaking a media campaign against the resistance resulting in weakening its influence inside the country and presenting its work as harmful to the population rather than being beneficial to the population.
4. By tightening the resistance's financial outlets, restricting its moral options and by confiscating its ammunition and weapons.
5. By creating a big division among the ranks of the resistance and jeopardizing its attack operations, it has weakened its influence and internal support of its elements, thus resulting in a decline of the resistance's assaults.
There are more in the linked article - point 3 is particularly interesting and pertinent to my theme as it not only shows that the group have a policy of media propaganda but they can successfully implement it. This is key and so far such a source has not been identified. What is the nature of this propaganda and its media?
But now to my my main point to which the above is the background - remember, Zarqawi's group (which still is operational) either has a sophisticated propaganda network or the US is making all this up and being highly irresponsible in doing so.
Zarqawi goes on to identify the resistance as predominantly Shi'i and, not surprisingly, to frame the conflict as being against them. This is fairly well-known anyway but this is the shocker:
Consequently, to embroil America in another war against another enemy is the answer that we find to be the most appropriate, and to have a war through a delegate has the following benefits:
1. To occupy the Americans by another front will allow the resistance freedom of movement and alleviate the pressure imposed on it............
7. A war between the Americans and Iran. We have noticed that the best of these wars to be ignited is the one between the Americans and Iran.......
The question remains, how to draw the Americans into fighting a war against Iran?
Hence, it is necessary first to exaggerate the Iranian danger and to convince America and the west in general, of the real danger coming from Iran, and this would be done by the following:
1. By disseminating threatening messages against American interests and the American people and attribute them to a Shi'a Iranian side.
2. By executing operations of kidnapping hostages and implicating the Shi'a Iranian side.
3. By advertising that Iran has chemical and nuclear weapons and is threatening the west with these weapons.
4. By executing exploding operations in the west and accusing Iran by planting Iranian Shi'a fingerprints and evidence.
5. By declaring the existence of a relationship between Iran and terrorist groups (as termed by the Americans).
6. By disseminating bogus messages about confessions showing that Iran is in possession of weapons of mass destruction or that there are attempts by the Iranian intelligence to undertake terrorist operations in America and the west and against western interests.
And this is the crux - here you have a list of what 'Zarqawi' says need to be done to draw the US into a war with Iran. Such things can be seen to correspond to reality on the ground.
Now this letter is either true or it is a fake. Let's refine the options:
1) If it is true then it inevitably follows that:
The propaganda you are hearing and following about Iran's nukes is very likely emanating from Zarqawi.
The path Bush is following by his 'stand' (that the wingers support) is essentially a trap.
The US admin is blindly and unknowingly following a script written by the terrorists and therefore doomed to lost the WOT.
Before considering the ramifications of the 'false' view, let's just look at point 3 there: this militates against the 'real' hypothesis and virtually proves it is a product of US intel.
Think: how could the US continue on it's path of confrontation with Iran having found such a letter? If the letter is genuine and states exactly this and the US continue......well, it is right up there with ignoring the warnings pre-911.
2) If it is false then it inevitably follows that:
The US is behaving irresponsibly - to say the least - in suggesting that the policy they are pursuing re Iran could in fact be the product of a terrorist plan and not based on actuality. think about that for a moment -if Iran really are planning nukes and the US is committed to a diplomatic solution then what purpose can creating this fiction possibly serve/ It can only benefit terrorists surely?
Seriously, I would like to hear from supporters of Bush and those who believe Iran to be a real threat - if this document is real then does it change your view? Or are you going to continue to sleepwalk into a 'terrorist' trap? Or perhaps you have some alternate justification?
Let's hear em - send em in on the usual number....