[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Editorial See other Editorial Articles Title: Mike Whitney: BUSH'S WAR ON PERCEPTION; THE BOMBING OF THE GOLDEN MOSQUE Mike Whitney: BUSH'S WAR ON PERCEPTION; THE BOMBING OF THE GOLDEN MOSQUE We’ve heard a lot about the bombing of Samarra’s Golden Mosque lately. Bush has brought it up twice in the last week alone. It’s a critical part of the administration’s rationale for the occupation of Iraq, so we can expect to be reminded of it nearly as often as 9-11. The destruction of the Golden-dome Mosque took place in February 2005 and has been identified as the "catalyzing event" that plunged the country into sectarian violence. That, at least, is just the official version. No one knows really what happened because the administration refused to conduct an independent investigation and the media excluded any account that didn’t square with the Pentagon’s spin on events. What we’re left with is mere speculation. Here's what we know: Less than 4 hours after the explosion, the Bush public relations team cobbled together a statement that the bombing was the work of Sunni extremists or al Qaida terrorists. But, how did they know? They didn’t have witnesses on the ground in Samarra and they’ve never produced a scintilla of evidence to support their claims. It may be that the administration simply saw the bombing as an opportunity to twist the facts to suit their own purposes? After all, the incident has been a propaganda-bonanza for the Bush team. They’ve used it to support their theory that Iraq is "the central battle in the war on terror" and that "we must fight them there if we don’t want to fight them over here". It’s become one of the main justifications for the occupation; implying that the US military is needed as a referee to keep the warring factions from killing each other. It’s all just nonsense that’s designed to advance the administration’s political agenda. If there had been an investigation, it would have shown whether the perpetrators were experts or not by the placement of the explosives. There’s a good chance they would’ve found bomb-residue which could have determined the composition of the material used. Forensics experts could have easily ascertained whether the explosives came from Iraqi munitions-dumps (as suggested) or from outside the country (like the USA, perhaps?) The incident may well have been a "false flag" operation carried out by US intelligence agencies to provoke sectarian violence and, thus, reduce the number of attacks on American troops. In any event, as soon as the mosque was destroyed the media swung into action focusing all of its attention on sectarian violence and the prospect of civil war. The media’s incessant "cheerleading" for civil war was suspicious, to say the least. In the first 30 hours after the blast, more than 1,500 articles appeared on Google News providing the government version of events without deviation and without any corroborating evidence; just fluff that reiterated the Pentagon’s account verbatim and without challenge. 1500! Now that’s a well-oiled propaganda system! Most of the articles were "cookie cutter-type" stories which used the same buzzwords and talking points as all the others; no interviews, no facts, no second opinions; simple, straightforward stenography---nothing more. The story was repeated for weeks on end never veering from the same speculative theory. Clearly, a great amount of effort was being exerted to convince the American people that this was a significant event that would reshape the whole context of the war in Iraq. In fact, the media blitz that followed was grander than anything since 9-11; a spectacular display of the media’s power to manipulate public opinion. There were a few articles that didn’t follow the party-line, but they quickly disappeared into a cyber-"black hole" or were dismissed as conspiracy theories. One report in AFP said that the bombing "was the work of specialists" and the "placing of explosives must have taken at least 12 hours". The article continued: "Construction Minister Mohammed Jaafar said, 'Holes were dug into the mausoleum’s four main pillars and packed with explosives. Then charges were connected together and linked to another charge placed just under the dome. The wires were then linked to another charge placed just under the dome. The wires were then linked to a detonator which was triggered at a distance." Of course, what does that prove? Perhaps, al Qaida has skilled explosives experts? But why not investigate? After all, if this was the "catalyzing event" which was thrusting the country towards civil war; why not have the FBI come in and have a look-around? A professional team of investigators could have quickly determined whether highly-trained saboteurs were operating in the area. (which meant that American troops would be at greater risk) Isn't that worth checking out? Nope. The Pentagon did nothing. There was no effort at all to find out who might have been involved. It was an open and shut case; wrapped up before the dust had even settled in Samarra. Very strange. Apparently, there was at least one witness who was interviewed shortly after the bombing. He said that he heard cars running outside the mosque "the whole night until morning" but, he was warned "to stay in your shop and don't leave until morning". At 6:30 AM the next morning, the vehicles outside the mosque left. 10 minutes later the bombs exploded. None of the people living in the vicinity of the mosque were ever questioned. Likewise, the Construction Minister Mohammed Jaafar has never resurfaced in the news again. I expect that his comments in the newspaper may have had something to do with his sudden disappearance, but then maybe not. (…) The Bush administration set out to apply its neoconservative theories in Iraq by deliberately destroying the social fabric of Iraqi society so they could rebuild the country according to their "free market" neoliberal ideology. The neocon principle of "creative destruction" was used with lethal precision and with devastating effects; the country is now in a state of total ruin. The Pentagon's counterinsurgency strategy was developed long before the mutilated bodies of Sunni men began showing up daily bobbing along the Euphrates River. It's part of a broader plan to dominate the entire region through military force. The purpose is to extend the Bush Caliphate--the "new world order"-- throughout the entire Middle East. Somewhere along the line, things went horribly wrong and the Pentagon warlords lost control of their "brainchild" in the Interior Ministry. Now the Shiite death squads operate independent of their American overlords purging Baghdad of its Sunni population and laying the foundation for a future Islamic state. Events are simply beyond Bush's control. As author William Lind said recently, "The forces our invasion and destruction of the Iraqi state unleashed, far overpower any army we can deploy to Iraq, surge or no surge." The neocon plan to decimate Iraqi society by inciting sectarian violence (divide and conquer) was concocted long before the destruction of the Golden dome Mosque. In fact, the blowing up of the mosque was probably an attempt to disguise US involvement in the random bombings (markets, mosques, busy streets etc.) and death squad activity which soon spread throughout the Sunni heartland. Consider Bush's comments in his speech to the nation last week: "The violence in Iraq has overwhelmed the political gains the Iraqis had made. Al Qaida terrorists and Sunni insurgents recognized the mortal danger that Iraq's election posed for their cause. And they responded with outrageous acts of murder aimed at innocent Iraqis...They blew up one of the holiest shrines in Shia Islam-the Golden Mosque of Samarra-in a calculated effort to provoke Iraq's Shia population to retaliate. Their strategy worked Radical Shia elements; some supported by Iran, formed death squads. And the result was a vicious cycle of sectarian violence that continues today." Is that what happened or is this just a clever way of shifting the blame from the real perpetrators of the bloodshed to the victims of Washington's dirty war? read in full… QUOTE OF THE DAY: "The president knows that because the troops are in harm's way, that we won't cut off the resources. That's why he's moving so quickly to put them in harm's way" -- Senator Nancy Pelosi on ABC's "Good Morning America." # posted by zig : 1/20/2007 11:39:00 AM
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: tom007 (#0)
Now Bush and his administration want us to believe Iran is responsible for the actions of Sunni insurgents in Iraq. Not very plausible. I suppose anything is possible, but, before I believe this, I have to see evidence.
Katrina was America's Chernobyl.
It was 2006 ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Askari_Mosque Golden Mosque By Dahr Jamail 2-24-6 http://www.rense.com/general69/whwow.htm Bombing the Golden Mosque; Bush's psy-ops war in Iraq by Mike Whitney The moral and constitutional obligations of our representatives in Washington are to protect our liberty, not coddle the world, precipitating no-win wars, while bringing bankruptcy and economic turmoil to our people. ~Ron Paul
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||