The car bombs that have plagued Iraq for months have baffled many trying to understand the insurgency the U.S. Occupation faces.
Original link:
http://www.prisonplanet.tv/members/reports/062904carbombings.htm
Original link:
http://www.prisonplanet.tv/members/reports/062904carbombings.htm
Having begun only a few months into the occupation, the first attacks were on the U.N. Headquarters in Iraq, the Red Cross, and the Jordanian Embassy. Later, several mosques and religious leaders were targeted. More recently the car bombs have been aimed exclusively at the fragile Iraqi Police infrastructure. Besides the similar forensic nature of all these bombings, the common denominator in these attacks is that they are targeted exclusively at Iraqi and non-American entities.
Considering that the main enemy of the insurgency is the U.S. Occupation and its soldiers and officials, the selection of these targets is strange and counter-intuitive. If these terrorists’ goal is to end the U.S. Occupation, their actions are sure to bring about the exact opposite result. By attacking and destabilizing the fledgling Iraqi Police infrastructure nationwide, they are ensuring that the U.S. military occupation will continue longer. Without a native police force, even if a future Iraqi government wanted to expel the U.S. military, they would be unable to do so without creating total chaos. In fact, as goes the progress of building a native police force for Iraq, so goes Iraq’s ability to one day break free from occupation. By deliberately attacking the former, these terrorists decrease the likelihood of the latter ever occurring. But perhaps this is precisely their goal.
Responsibility for these horrific attacks has been placed squarely on Al-Queda terrorists who’ve infiltrated Iraq, led by the U.S.’s new boogeyman Abu Musab Al Zarqawi. Zarqawi, who was first introduced as a character in the theatrical “War on Terror” during the run-up to the Iraq War, has been steadily built up by U.S. Officials and the media as the face of Al-Queda terrorism in Iraq. Many months ago, the military claimed to have intercepted a letter from Zarqawi to Osama bin Laden chronicling his efforts in Iraq. In the letter, Zarqawi details plans to spark civil war in Iraq and laments that the Iraqis like the Americans too much to join him. As absurd as the letter was, the situation got even more comical when, in a scene reminiscent of the fake 9/11 evidence trail, the military claimed to have discovered Zarqawi’s passport in a raid conducted on one of his “safe houses”.
If Zarqawi does exist, which is highly doubtful, and is leading a group of foreign Islamic fanatical terrorists, their murdering of fellow Muslims and impoverished Iraqis would seem to break every tenet of Islamic Faith. In addition to prolonging the U.S. Occupation, the attacks Zarqawi is accused of have killed hundreds of Iraqis, including women and children, and nearly no Americans. What kind of a tactic is this in an Islamic Jihad?
Zarqawi has also been assigned responsibility for the beheadings of Nick Berg and Kim Sun-il. Close examination of the Nick Berg video and the circumstances surrounding it have lead many to conclude that this was actually a CIA psy-op. And as details emerge about the beheading of Kim Sun-il, including his plea to his South Korean government in English, there are good reasons to believe that his beheading was staged as well. Given the phony nature of the public crafting of the Zarqawi mythology, the totally un-Islamic nature of the attacks, and the direct evidence of U.S. complicity in the Berg incident, the car bombings that Zarqawi is accused of deserve special scrutiny.
Absent from nearly all western media articles about these bombings is any mention of a suicide bomber, or an occupant in the car as it exploded. Compare this to the brief biography of Palestinian suicide bombers that are given in every story about terrorist attacks in Israel. Given this lack of information, it is reasonable to assume that the cars are not occupied when they explode, making them of a different variety of terrorist attack. A similar model for this type of attack would be the Oklahoma City bombing, or the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. But an even closer parallel to these attacks are the car bombings carried out in Iraq, admittedly, by the CIA in the early 1990s. The U.S. hand-picked Iraqi Prime Minister Dr. Iyad Allawi was in charge of this CIA operation, which included blowing up school buses full of children. So, accusing the CIA of engaging in car bombings in Iraq would not be as accurate as accusing them of resuming car bombings in Iraq.
The main obstacle to coming to any solid conclusion about who’s behind these suspicious car bombs, however, is the lack of access to the physical and circumstantial evidence of the crimes. This information simply is not available to anyone outside of Iraq. But despite this many observations can be made simply by asking the all-important question: “Who benefits?” As anyone who has read PNAC’s documents knows, one of the chief strategic aims in invading Iraq was to establish massive military bases in the country which could be used as a staging ground for invading Iraq’s neighbors. And, of course, there is the goal of controlling Iraq’s oil and oil revenues. Both of these goals require the long-term presence of the U.S. Military in Iraq. However, if a sovereign government chosen by the Iraqi people ever came in to power, opinion polls show clearly that the U.S. would immediately be asked to leave. But as long as violence and chaos reign in Iraq, and the country is unable to marshal its own police force, no government will be in a position to demand such a withdrawal. So here, as with 9/11, we must choose between two scenarios: that these car bombings are genuine and have simply fallen into the Pentagon’s lap by a stroke of luck, or that the CIA is actually behind the bombings. When trillions of dollars and Global Empire is at stake, nothing is left to chance. Based on the evidence cited above, I conclude that these car bombings are most likely the latest fake terrorism perpetrated by the Military-Industrial Complex.
Considering that the main enemy of the insurgency is the U.S. Occupation and its soldiers and officials, the selection of these targets is strange and counter-intuitive. If these terrorists’ goal is to end the U.S. Occupation, their actions are sure to bring about the exact opposite result. By attacking and destabilizing the fledgling Iraqi Police infrastructure nationwide, they are ensuring that the U.S. military occupation will continue longer. Without a native police force, even if a future Iraqi government wanted to expel the U.S. military, they would be unable to do so without creating total chaos. In fact, as goes the progress of building a native police force for Iraq, so goes Iraq’s ability to one day break free from occupation. By deliberately attacking the former, these terrorists decrease the likelihood of the latter ever occurring. But perhaps this is precisely their goal.
Responsibility for these horrific attacks has been placed squarely on Al-Queda terrorists who’ve infiltrated Iraq, led by the U.S.’s new boogeyman Abu Musab Al Zarqawi. Zarqawi, who was first introduced as a character in the theatrical “War on Terror” during the run-up to the Iraq War, has been steadily built up by U.S. Officials and the media as the face of Al-Queda terrorism in Iraq. Many months ago, the military claimed to have intercepted a letter from Zarqawi to Osama bin Laden chronicling his efforts in Iraq. In the letter, Zarqawi details plans to spark civil war in Iraq and laments that the Iraqis like the Americans too much to join him. As absurd as the letter was, the situation got even more comical when, in a scene reminiscent of the fake 9/11 evidence trail, the military claimed to have discovered Zarqawi’s passport in a raid conducted on one of his “safe houses”.
If Zarqawi does exist, which is highly doubtful, and is leading a group of foreign Islamic fanatical terrorists, their murdering of fellow Muslims and impoverished Iraqis would seem to break every tenet of Islamic Faith. In addition to prolonging the U.S. Occupation, the attacks Zarqawi is accused of have killed hundreds of Iraqis, including women and children, and nearly no Americans. What kind of a tactic is this in an Islamic Jihad?
Zarqawi has also been assigned responsibility for the beheadings of Nick Berg and Kim Sun-il. Close examination of the Nick Berg video and the circumstances surrounding it have lead many to conclude that this was actually a CIA psy-op. And as details emerge about the beheading of Kim Sun-il, including his plea to his South Korean government in English, there are good reasons to believe that his beheading was staged as well. Given the phony nature of the public crafting of the Zarqawi mythology, the totally un-Islamic nature of the attacks, and the direct evidence of U.S. complicity in the Berg incident, the car bombings that Zarqawi is accused of deserve special scrutiny.
Absent from nearly all western media articles about these bombings is any mention of a suicide bomber, or an occupant in the car as it exploded. Compare this to the brief biography of Palestinian suicide bombers that are given in every story about terrorist attacks in Israel. Given this lack of information, it is reasonable to assume that the cars are not occupied when they explode, making them of a different variety of terrorist attack. A similar model for this type of attack would be the Oklahoma City bombing, or the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. But an even closer parallel to these attacks are the car bombings carried out in Iraq, admittedly, by the CIA in the early 1990s. The U.S. hand-picked Iraqi Prime Minister Dr. Iyad Allawi was in charge of this CIA operation, which included blowing up school buses full of children. So, accusing the CIA of engaging in car bombings in Iraq would not be as accurate as accusing them of resuming car bombings in Iraq.
The main obstacle to coming to any solid conclusion about who’s behind these suspicious car bombs, however, is the lack of access to the physical and circumstantial evidence of the crimes. This information simply is not available to anyone outside of Iraq. But despite this many observations can be made simply by asking the all-important question: “Who benefits?” As anyone who has read PNAC’s documents knows, one of the chief strategic aims in invading Iraq was to establish massive military bases in the country which could be used as a staging ground for invading Iraq’s neighbors. And, of course, there is the goal of controlling Iraq’s oil and oil revenues. Both of these goals require the long-term presence of the U.S. Military in Iraq. However, if a sovereign government chosen by the Iraqi people ever came in to power, opinion polls show clearly that the U.S. would immediately be asked to leave. But as long as violence and chaos reign in Iraq, and the country is unable to marshal its own police force, no government will be in a position to demand such a withdrawal. So here, as with 9/11, we must choose between two scenarios: that these car bombings are genuine and have simply fallen into the Pentagon’s lap by a stroke of luck, or that the CIA is actually behind the bombings. When trillions of dollars and Global Empire is at stake, nothing is left to chance. Based on the evidence cited above, I conclude that these car bombings are most likely the latest fake terrorism perpetrated by the Military-Industrial Complex.
e-mail:
Comments
Display the following 9 comments