SADDAM HUSSEIN AND GEORGE BUSH: WHOSE IS THE WORST EVIL?
William Mark Hardiker | 26.12.2003 23:57 | Analysis
Saddam Hussein. IS he just another in a long line of brutal dictators held up as examples by Western leaders to deflect from the abuse of human rights from all quarters?
SADDAM HUSSEIN: JUST ANOTHER "EVIL" SCAPEGOAT.
William Hardiker 27/12/03
Introduction
It would appear that another of humanities "heinius creatures", "brutal monsters", "scumbag killers" along with many other oft cited adjectives within the mainstream press to entertain the insatiable human perversity within us to condemn, not on the basis of Religous precepts, for if such were so western society would cease to function overnight, but by fallible human weilders of global power such as Bush, Blair and to a far lesser extent, Australia's Prime Minister John Howard, who purport despite continuous and conspicuosly exposed personal failings, to determine and make moral and ethical judgements upon those and that which contemporary societies must necessarily rely upon in order to co-exist harmoniously on this crowed fragile planet and not lose the essencial and vitaly important dictums which maintain our faith in the common good rather than resort to the disasterous scenario of each (nation and individual for himself, or for want of a better adjective ,the forces of "evil") that without some agreed and accepted notion of sound moral and ethical standards inherrant to everyday human existence, be they of a religous, spiritual, scholarly, Intellectual, or something other little else seems to matter much.
This appears to constitute differentation between "good", as perceived by our elites from "evil" iwithin the context of a highly complicated and globally intertwined co-habitation. Thus I ask you. Whose is the worst evil? George .W. Bush, or Sadam hussein's?
It appears that Saddam Hussein, ex-employee of the American Government has been extracted from his metaphorical "haystack" in Iraq. If that which all of the worlds media who have naturally have leapt upon this marvellous news (a word of caution here. The news is wonderful for the number of papers it will sell. The tyrants capture being a matter of mere inconsequence. If the events of the past week have been factual, rather than the perfectly feasible possibility that high-tech make over artists within the CIA and other subversive orgnizaions have not been been up to thier usual tricks and summoned to present a ‘long American incarcerated Saddam’ presented to the gullible, docile and aneithatized domestic American (and worlds) people via corporate state controlled media as a much needed Christmas present at this opportune moment ie, in the face of escalating Iraqi insurgencies. Death, suffering and misery amongst US military personel is entirely unnacceptable in Iraq especially at Xmas, and growing domestic concern and unrest is not doing George W any favors on the home front.
One
As the festive season in the West approaches, and life becomes increasingly ugly for coalition troops facing an insurgency of increasing intensity, the coalition is not only gloating over it's latest acquisition and praising it's own efforts, but those Nations such as Great Britain and Australia who have long opposed the death penalty are happily agreeing to it's application in this "perfectly ordinary" case of "extraordinary" human rights abuse by yet another of histories "evil men". There is much relief for all the wrong reasons for George W Bush and his team of empire builders, and all the right reasons for a world desiring peace and security. Questions of crime and punishment are bringing to light some interesting contradictions from those who profess to be Christian States and who have long abandonned the death penalty such as the America's two key allies inIraq; Great Britain and Australia.
Jesus Christ reportedly advised his apostles, "Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone". Australia's Prime Minister has already eagerly consented to stamp his seal of approval to put Saddam Hussein to death should that be the verdict of any trial. How ironic indeed that he who is eager to cast the first stone is he who blatantly lied to the Australian people regarding Iraqi asylum seekers "throwing their children into the ocean", and going on to an election campaign campaign using the slogan "we don't want people like that in this country", in order (believe it or not) to persuade a nation to re-elect him and his far right wing government for a third term in office.
There is a well known (to Australians) piece of comic film making in which two characters, one full of "over the top: ideas, the other a realist who in response to every grand schemes of his cohort replies in a dry monotone", "your dreaming" that puts me in mind of the Bush Administrations latest attempt to quell the violence and insurgency in Iraq. Quite cleaely,"they're dreaming". Those filmed for the worlds eager media corps celebrating the fall of Saddam’s statue at the beginning of the present occupation, and now the similar scenes of jubilation of a "chosen" crowd of cheering Iraqi's although guaranteed to manipulate world opinion once again, does not reflect the reality in an occupied State. This is such a fundamental point, but one which so many refuse to acknowledge. It is simplicity itself in terms of propagandist methodology.
People by nature en-masse will be moved and emotional. Many can even display euphoria without being aware of >what it is that is moving them. Such has been proven in studies of crowd behaviour. Close range cinematography of isolated groups of the most, emotive and active sends a powerful message, but what proportion of the population of Iraq do such scenes represent? Few of those who read the non-mainstream press are un-aware of that which is at play beyond the publicly sanctioned propaganda used to distract from the "real" political and geo-strategist realists amongst us face a difficult task, being as it were up against a highly effective, no expense spared, State propaganda apparatus.
Two
There are so many important contradictions and 'facts' that do not hold up to the mildest scrutiny but for most, such hardly seems to make any difference. Thus the questions raised as to how effective dissent can be, no matter how well researched, verified and promoted. Can it penetrate the wall of disengaged fatalist self-obsessed individuals concerned only with their own personal survival? it may well be that words re no longer enough for such mind numbing complacency in the face of a ruthlessness that threatens the future survival of humanity. An important point of particular interest is that relating to Great Britain and Australia. The only two countries that committed military forces to the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Both of these States have abandoned the death penalty as the ultimate punishment, yet both condone such, should any court impose it upon Saddam Hussein. In reality Saddam may have been a tin-pot dictator of an impotent Middle East State due largely to Western Sanctions (which caused the deaths of millions and immeasurable suffering) and arms embargoes for the past decade, since Iraq fell foul of US foreign policy, but Saddam is being held up to the world as the embodiment of the evil that the fraudulent "war on terrorism" is hoped to evoke in the psyche of the worlds peoples. In other words, Saddam Hussein is but a small player in a far bigger agenda.
That the Christian world finds no contradiction in its treatment of this man is difficult to reconcile and for Christians themselves, I would be interested to hear them justify their stance. The principal teachings of Jesus Christ as written by the apostles in the Bible state clearly "forgive thy enemy". Christian teaching in the West has become, like so many things, corrupted and meaningless professed Christians such as Australian Prime Minister John Howard see no contradiction in refusing refugees asylum from oppression, persecution and war. He believes that to lie, deceive and knowingly condemn a people is acceptable Christian behaviour. The West is spiritually corrupt, the Church ridden with Priests who sexually abuse minors and claims of widespread decadence are not only irrefutable but also a fact of modern Christianity.
It is simply not possible to maintain that in the 21st century the United States is either "Christian", "Democratic" or "Peace-loving". Let us briefly reflect upon the proceedings that have led us to the present point. The push for war long before March 2003 was based upon Hussein's arsenal of 26,000litres of Anthrax, 38,ooo litres of botulinus toxin, 1000,000pounds of Sarin gas, along with 30,000 munitions capable of delivering these agents to the streets of America. Not to mention the false claims of Uranium from Niger to be used in nuclear weapons. Also, Al qaeda terrorists were closely associated with Iraq who was ready and willing to use the listed weapons against Americans and it's allies. Absolutely none of these agents have since been discovered. There is also no evidence of Alqaeda affiliations. Hussein, contrary to State Department and Presidential claims had nothing to do with the September 11 attacks in the US. A fact that prompted President Bush to make such a declaration himself. It is now widely accepted that such "evidence" was invented to scare the American people into supporting and condoning an unjust, illegal and >immoral war against a harmless State.
The "war" (italics used to signify that the event cannot be considered a war in any sense whatsoever) has thus far made a few Bush cronies such as Vice President Dick Chenney and other Neo-Conservatives rich beyond they're wildest dreams of avarice. Halliburton, Chenney's global multi-national corporation has had the pick of the crop of Iraqi reconstruction contracts.
The lies, adapted as the claimed evidence failed to materialise and the empathis became predicably one of "humanitarian concern for an oppressed Iraqi people. The powers of good. The peaceful freedom loving altruistic USA changed the ground rules to matters regarding human rights abuses. The century old American propaganda system did not fail to convince a brainwashed world. For generations in the West Russia was spelt E-V-I-L and America G-O-O-D.
As one Iraqi named Kashid Ahmed Saleh was reported saying in the New York Times a week ago, " we are fighting for freedom and because the Americans are Jews. The governing council is a bunch of looters and criminals and mercenaries. We cannot expect that stability in this country will ever come from them. The principal is based upon religious and tribal loyalties. The religious principal is that we cannot except to live with infidels. The prophet Mohamed, peace be on him, said, "hit the infidels wherever you find them. "We are also a tribal people. We cannot allow strangers to rule over us". Such words could be interpreted equally valid within a Western anti-Islamic fundamentalist context.
Conclusion
The "capture" of Saddam Hussein will entrench amongst moderate Iraqi's and Arabs in general the belief that there is now no good reason for the US and coalition forces to remain in Iraq yet four permanent military bases are intended for the country. The Americans have no intention of departing. I am sorry to report that the war may now begin in earnest. Saddam Hussein cannot be put on trial publicly by the Americans for the obvious reasons that he may very well cite American complicity in his crimes during the past thirty years and the "back pay" he is owed by the US government. Saddam Hussein, as is now abundantly clear, was never a threat to the US or the world. His capture will not increase the prospects for the peace and security of the planet or for the US. If anything, we can expect a contrary scenario developing. This world will remain an increasingly dangerous place for you, your children and future generations until the number one aggressor and terrorist State learns to use it's global hegemony taking into consideration issues of morality, ethics, altruism, equity and human rights.
Wiliam M Hardiker 27 12/03
willhardiker@hotmail.com.au
William Hardiker 27/12/03
Introduction
It would appear that another of humanities "heinius creatures", "brutal monsters", "scumbag killers" along with many other oft cited adjectives within the mainstream press to entertain the insatiable human perversity within us to condemn, not on the basis of Religous precepts, for if such were so western society would cease to function overnight, but by fallible human weilders of global power such as Bush, Blair and to a far lesser extent, Australia's Prime Minister John Howard, who purport despite continuous and conspicuosly exposed personal failings, to determine and make moral and ethical judgements upon those and that which contemporary societies must necessarily rely upon in order to co-exist harmoniously on this crowed fragile planet and not lose the essencial and vitaly important dictums which maintain our faith in the common good rather than resort to the disasterous scenario of each (nation and individual for himself, or for want of a better adjective ,the forces of "evil") that without some agreed and accepted notion of sound moral and ethical standards inherrant to everyday human existence, be they of a religous, spiritual, scholarly, Intellectual, or something other little else seems to matter much.
This appears to constitute differentation between "good", as perceived by our elites from "evil" iwithin the context of a highly complicated and globally intertwined co-habitation. Thus I ask you. Whose is the worst evil? George .W. Bush, or Sadam hussein's?
It appears that Saddam Hussein, ex-employee of the American Government has been extracted from his metaphorical "haystack" in Iraq. If that which all of the worlds media who have naturally have leapt upon this marvellous news (a word of caution here. The news is wonderful for the number of papers it will sell. The tyrants capture being a matter of mere inconsequence. If the events of the past week have been factual, rather than the perfectly feasible possibility that high-tech make over artists within the CIA and other subversive orgnizaions have not been been up to thier usual tricks and summoned to present a ‘long American incarcerated Saddam’ presented to the gullible, docile and aneithatized domestic American (and worlds) people via corporate state controlled media as a much needed Christmas present at this opportune moment ie, in the face of escalating Iraqi insurgencies. Death, suffering and misery amongst US military personel is entirely unnacceptable in Iraq especially at Xmas, and growing domestic concern and unrest is not doing George W any favors on the home front.
One
As the festive season in the West approaches, and life becomes increasingly ugly for coalition troops facing an insurgency of increasing intensity, the coalition is not only gloating over it's latest acquisition and praising it's own efforts, but those Nations such as Great Britain and Australia who have long opposed the death penalty are happily agreeing to it's application in this "perfectly ordinary" case of "extraordinary" human rights abuse by yet another of histories "evil men". There is much relief for all the wrong reasons for George W Bush and his team of empire builders, and all the right reasons for a world desiring peace and security. Questions of crime and punishment are bringing to light some interesting contradictions from those who profess to be Christian States and who have long abandonned the death penalty such as the America's two key allies inIraq; Great Britain and Australia.
Jesus Christ reportedly advised his apostles, "Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone". Australia's Prime Minister has already eagerly consented to stamp his seal of approval to put Saddam Hussein to death should that be the verdict of any trial. How ironic indeed that he who is eager to cast the first stone is he who blatantly lied to the Australian people regarding Iraqi asylum seekers "throwing their children into the ocean", and going on to an election campaign campaign using the slogan "we don't want people like that in this country", in order (believe it or not) to persuade a nation to re-elect him and his far right wing government for a third term in office.
There is a well known (to Australians) piece of comic film making in which two characters, one full of "over the top: ideas, the other a realist who in response to every grand schemes of his cohort replies in a dry monotone", "your dreaming" that puts me in mind of the Bush Administrations latest attempt to quell the violence and insurgency in Iraq. Quite cleaely,"they're dreaming". Those filmed for the worlds eager media corps celebrating the fall of Saddam’s statue at the beginning of the present occupation, and now the similar scenes of jubilation of a "chosen" crowd of cheering Iraqi's although guaranteed to manipulate world opinion once again, does not reflect the reality in an occupied State. This is such a fundamental point, but one which so many refuse to acknowledge. It is simplicity itself in terms of propagandist methodology.
People by nature en-masse will be moved and emotional. Many can even display euphoria without being aware of >what it is that is moving them. Such has been proven in studies of crowd behaviour. Close range cinematography of isolated groups of the most, emotive and active sends a powerful message, but what proportion of the population of Iraq do such scenes represent? Few of those who read the non-mainstream press are un-aware of that which is at play beyond the publicly sanctioned propaganda used to distract from the "real" political and geo-strategist realists amongst us face a difficult task, being as it were up against a highly effective, no expense spared, State propaganda apparatus.
Two
There are so many important contradictions and 'facts' that do not hold up to the mildest scrutiny but for most, such hardly seems to make any difference. Thus the questions raised as to how effective dissent can be, no matter how well researched, verified and promoted. Can it penetrate the wall of disengaged fatalist self-obsessed individuals concerned only with their own personal survival? it may well be that words re no longer enough for such mind numbing complacency in the face of a ruthlessness that threatens the future survival of humanity. An important point of particular interest is that relating to Great Britain and Australia. The only two countries that committed military forces to the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Both of these States have abandoned the death penalty as the ultimate punishment, yet both condone such, should any court impose it upon Saddam Hussein. In reality Saddam may have been a tin-pot dictator of an impotent Middle East State due largely to Western Sanctions (which caused the deaths of millions and immeasurable suffering) and arms embargoes for the past decade, since Iraq fell foul of US foreign policy, but Saddam is being held up to the world as the embodiment of the evil that the fraudulent "war on terrorism" is hoped to evoke in the psyche of the worlds peoples. In other words, Saddam Hussein is but a small player in a far bigger agenda.
That the Christian world finds no contradiction in its treatment of this man is difficult to reconcile and for Christians themselves, I would be interested to hear them justify their stance. The principal teachings of Jesus Christ as written by the apostles in the Bible state clearly "forgive thy enemy". Christian teaching in the West has become, like so many things, corrupted and meaningless professed Christians such as Australian Prime Minister John Howard see no contradiction in refusing refugees asylum from oppression, persecution and war. He believes that to lie, deceive and knowingly condemn a people is acceptable Christian behaviour. The West is spiritually corrupt, the Church ridden with Priests who sexually abuse minors and claims of widespread decadence are not only irrefutable but also a fact of modern Christianity.
It is simply not possible to maintain that in the 21st century the United States is either "Christian", "Democratic" or "Peace-loving". Let us briefly reflect upon the proceedings that have led us to the present point. The push for war long before March 2003 was based upon Hussein's arsenal of 26,000litres of Anthrax, 38,ooo litres of botulinus toxin, 1000,000pounds of Sarin gas, along with 30,000 munitions capable of delivering these agents to the streets of America. Not to mention the false claims of Uranium from Niger to be used in nuclear weapons. Also, Al qaeda terrorists were closely associated with Iraq who was ready and willing to use the listed weapons against Americans and it's allies. Absolutely none of these agents have since been discovered. There is also no evidence of Alqaeda affiliations. Hussein, contrary to State Department and Presidential claims had nothing to do with the September 11 attacks in the US. A fact that prompted President Bush to make such a declaration himself. It is now widely accepted that such "evidence" was invented to scare the American people into supporting and condoning an unjust, illegal and >immoral war against a harmless State.
The "war" (italics used to signify that the event cannot be considered a war in any sense whatsoever) has thus far made a few Bush cronies such as Vice President Dick Chenney and other Neo-Conservatives rich beyond they're wildest dreams of avarice. Halliburton, Chenney's global multi-national corporation has had the pick of the crop of Iraqi reconstruction contracts.
The lies, adapted as the claimed evidence failed to materialise and the empathis became predicably one of "humanitarian concern for an oppressed Iraqi people. The powers of good. The peaceful freedom loving altruistic USA changed the ground rules to matters regarding human rights abuses. The century old American propaganda system did not fail to convince a brainwashed world. For generations in the West Russia was spelt E-V-I-L and America G-O-O-D.
As one Iraqi named Kashid Ahmed Saleh was reported saying in the New York Times a week ago, " we are fighting for freedom and because the Americans are Jews. The governing council is a bunch of looters and criminals and mercenaries. We cannot expect that stability in this country will ever come from them. The principal is based upon religious and tribal loyalties. The religious principal is that we cannot except to live with infidels. The prophet Mohamed, peace be on him, said, "hit the infidels wherever you find them. "We are also a tribal people. We cannot allow strangers to rule over us". Such words could be interpreted equally valid within a Western anti-Islamic fundamentalist context.
Conclusion
The "capture" of Saddam Hussein will entrench amongst moderate Iraqi's and Arabs in general the belief that there is now no good reason for the US and coalition forces to remain in Iraq yet four permanent military bases are intended for the country. The Americans have no intention of departing. I am sorry to report that the war may now begin in earnest. Saddam Hussein cannot be put on trial publicly by the Americans for the obvious reasons that he may very well cite American complicity in his crimes during the past thirty years and the "back pay" he is owed by the US government. Saddam Hussein, as is now abundantly clear, was never a threat to the US or the world. His capture will not increase the prospects for the peace and security of the planet or for the US. If anything, we can expect a contrary scenario developing. This world will remain an increasingly dangerous place for you, your children and future generations until the number one aggressor and terrorist State learns to use it's global hegemony taking into consideration issues of morality, ethics, altruism, equity and human rights.
Wiliam M Hardiker 27 12/03
willhardiker@hotmail.com.au
William Mark Hardiker
e-mail:
willhardiker@hotmail.com.au