----- Original Message -----
From: vaidyasandeep2000
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 5:26 AM
Subject: [no-sanctions] Don't ask for the evidence, just nuke Baghdad
'There will probably be an announcement soon that our steel industry
was harbouring al-Qa'ida'
Mark Steel
Te Independent, 14 March 2002
The American military has become like one of these couples that
always goes on holiday to the same resort. They're sat in the
Pentagon muttering: "We always bomb the same place, every year. This
year we looked through the brochures and thought of bombing somewhere
new, like Yemen or North Korea, but in the end we thought we'd play
safe and stick with Iraq as usual."
Because Saddam has acquired "weapons of mass destruction". Just now,
at exactly the same time as the American military is on a roll and
can justify anything it wants by pointing to Ground Zero. What a
coincidence. And we know this is true because "there is evidence".
Well that pretty much wraps the case up, then.
Some politically correct types might ask what the evidence is, but
that's the sort of bureaucracy that snarls up any legal system. The
evidence is bound to be as damning as that produced by Nato chief
George Robertson when he held up an Iraqi canister and announced it
would be lethal if Saddam filled it with deadly anthrax. Just as a
bottle of lemonade would be lethal if you filled it with deadly
anthrax, which is why the axis of evil should include Iraq, Iran and
the Schweppes bottling plant in Sidcup.
What slightly confuses me is this. In 1991, following a 10-year war
in which Saddam had been allowed, indeed encouraged, by the Americans
to build up his military strength, the most destructive weapon he
came up with was the Scud. Which is probably safe to let off in your
garden as long as you make sure it stays upright and don't light it
while it's in your hand. But since then Iraq has been observed day
and night, pelted with cruise missiles and subjected to sanctions
that prevent almost all imports. Even ping-pong balls are banned,
presumably in case they're filled up with deadly anthrax.
Yet despite this, the place has got itself a pile of weapons of mass
destruction. Saddam doesn't need to rule Iraq, he could play Las
Vegas as the greatest magician in history. The climax of his show
would be to invite someone on to the stage and say: "We've never met
before, have we? Now I'd just like you to tell the audience if
there's anything destructive here, anything at all." Then � kazoom �
and out of a puff of smoke pops a beautiful assistant astride a silo
full of nuclear warheads. Then David Blaine and Uri Geller say: "How
the bloody hell has he managed that?"
It's also claimed that Iraq may have been connected to the attack on
New York. For this is now the excuse for every act of American
aggression. There will probably be an announcement soon that the
British steel industry was harbouring al-Qa'ida terrorists.
Each new stage of the war against terrorism makes it clearer that the
real aim has little to do with the twin towers and is a bid for what
the American military describes as "full spectrum dominance". Partly,
this entails revenge against anyone who's caused the US
embarrassment, starting with the most recent and going back, making
the named targets so far Iraq, Somalia, Iran and North Korea. Blair
ought to be careful. Historically speaking, after that it goes Japan,
Spain, the Confederacy, Mexico and then Britain.
But still Americans write in to newspapers such as this one, whining
about any criticism of their government's warmongering. They're like
a superpower version of Harry Enfield's Kevin the Teenager. Someone
only has to suggest that maybe they shouldn't threaten to frazzle
half the planet and they're screaming: "Oh it's so unfair. We're not
allowed to do anything."
Almost every week sees a new "post 11/9 film" in which American
soldiers blast their way heroically through a sinister land to
deliver democracy to ungrateful savages. Mel Gibson's next effort
will be to play Henry Kissinger parachuting into Santiago to help
General Pinochet to stop the Chilean parliament drowning a litter of
kittens.
In a typical article in one Sunday paper, an American writer lamented
how he had "thought twice" about becoming a father in this "post
September 11th world". Funny how it didn't bother him that he was
bringing a child into a post-napalming-Cambodia world or a post-Chile-
coup world or a post-Contra world. To the inevitable accusation that
this makes me "anti-American", I would point out that three of my
greatest living heroes are Muhammad Ali, Richard Pryor and Bart
Simpson. To suggest that anyone who questions the American military
is "anti-American" is like suggesting that someone who voices
concerns about the techniques of Harold Shipman holds an "instinctive
hatred of doctors".
But no matter how barmy they get, there will be Tony Blair, shoulder
to shoulder. Some people are suggesting that, by remaining faithful
to George Bush, our Prime Minister has won some influence over him.
This is true. Blair licks his arse so thoroughly that George now
listens to Tony's opinion as to whether he should lick his right
buttock first or his left
Campaign to End Iraq Sanctions - Ireland
Website: http://www.endiraqsanctions.net;
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage
