9f479762   
   XPost: soc.culture.egyptian, soc.culture.turkish, soc.culture.vietnamese   
   XPost: soc.culture.pakistan   
   From: sinna_manni@yahoo.com   
      
   This month marks the tenth anniversary of the U.S. attack on Iraq, one   
   of the most egregious expressions of naked power and imperial ambition   
   since the Second World War.   
      
   The attack defied both an outraged world opinion — expressed by global   
   mass demonstrations  — and the United Nations charter. It also marked   
   a change from the previous veiled decorum of supposed adherence to   
   international law that defined post-war international relations.  The   
   Bush administration, armed with the ultimate expression of the   
   arrogance of U.S. exceptionalism – legislation passed by the U.S.   
   Congress – unleashed a murderous assault on the people of Iraq dubbed   
   “Operation Shock and Awe.”   
      
   Ten years later, the awesome consequences of that criminal assault are   
   clear. More than a trillion dollars spent, almost five thousand   
   American lives lost, more than 32,000 Americans wounded, estimates of   
   a million dead Iraqis and almost five million displaced, an epidemic   
   of Iraqi birth defects from “depleted” uranium, daily bombings,   
   devastated public services and the dismemberment of the country. Yet,   
   ten years later, no one, not one government official, has been held   
   accountable. The obvious question is: how is it that, in light of one   
   of the most heinous crimes ever committed by a State, there have been   
   no investigations, prosecutions or convictions of the officials   
   responsible for this assault?   
      
   The lack of accountability is even more incomprehensible in light of   
   the fact that it is now widely acknowledged that the real reason for   
   the Western invasion of Iraq had little to do with its concern about   
   weapons of mass destruction and everything to do with its desire to   
   steal Iraq’s oil.   
      
   American officials have long-since broken their silence on the phony   
   excuses proffered to the American people to sucker them into   
   supporting a war of choice against an Iraqi regime softened-up by a   
   decade of crippling sanctions. Antonia Juhasz,  in an article written   
   for CNN’s website, pointed out that the historical record is now   
   unambiguously replete with evidence that the real motivation to attack   
   Iraq was control of Iraq’s oil and that plans were being made as soon   
   as ten days after the Bush Administration took power to figure out how   
   to accomplish that objective.   
      
   But that was not the reason presented to the U.S. and the global   
   public. What was presented was the argument that Iraq possesses   
   weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) and that President Saddam Hussein   
   and his government, therefore, posed a threat to the world (meaning   
   the U.S.).  The “threat argument” was concocted to respond to any   
   questions regarding the justification for waging war against a   
   sovereign nation and was the basis for the ridiculous assertions by   
   the Bush Administration that there was some operational cooperation   
   between the government of Iraq and Ansar al-Islam, at the time loosely   
   identified with the Al-Qaeda network.   
      
   Anyone with an even cursory understanding of the relationship between   
   the Iraqi government and Al-Qaeda knew the assertion to be a laughable   
   one, as Saddam Hussein was universally hated by the radical Islamic   
   movement. However, with a compliant U.S. mainstream press and a U.S.   
   public notorious for being one of the most unsophisticated in the   
   world, it was relatively easy to not only make the argument that Iraqi   
   WMDs posed a threat to the U.S. but also that Iraq was somehow   
   connected to the attacks on 9/11.  The government was so successful in   
   planting this notion in American minds that even after an avalanche of   
   evidence to the contrary was revealed, in 2004 over 60 percent of   
   those who voted for the re-election of Pres. George Bush believed that   
   Iraq was somehow connected to 9/11.   
      
   So if it is clear that the concern for WMDs was an elaborate hoax and   
   that the attack on Iraq not only violated international law but even   
   violated U.S. law, where is the investigation by the International   
   Criminal Court?  Why don’t we see the likes of Condoleezza Rice, Dick   
   Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and their boss George Bush in the dock at a   
   Special Tribunal on Iraq?  And why has there been no accountability   
   even under U.S. law?   
      
   Why the continued impunity, when the facts indicate that a crime of   
   epic proportions was committed?  At a very minimum, there is enough   
   evidence to justify an investigation into the attempts to evade,   
   manipulate and distort U.S. law to further the narrow economic   
   interests of powerful interests in the Bush Administration. Don’t “we,   
   the people” deserve to know the details and role of the National   
   Energy Policy Development Group, chaired by Dick Cheney, that was   
   formed right after the Administration took power?   
      
   Who pays the price for impunity?   
      
   The Iraqi Government nationalized its oil sector more than 30 years   
   ago. But Western oil companies are now back. Riding in under the gun   
   of the coalition of the willing, Western companies have now taken over   
   the Iraqi oil sector, with 80 percent of production being exported out   
   of the country while Iraqis struggle to meet basic energy consumption   
   needs. So Western oil is doing fine.   
      
   Did the U.S. media learn anything from the Iraqi war? It should have   
   been clear that something had gone horribly wrong with a media culture   
   that could allow itself to be reduced to a mouthpiece and propaganda   
   machine for the U.S. Government.  Sadly, it does not appear that any   
   lessons were learned. What this episode has revealed is that by the   
   early 2000s, a corporate media culture had emerged in the U.S. that   
   embraced an ideological orthodoxy that framed its perception of the   
   world in terms that did not diverge substantially from the positions   
   and views of the economic and political elites in the country. The   
   result is a mainstream media culture today that is more than willing   
   to parrot the government’s line on the “big questions of war,” almost   
   without question.   
      
   The latest example if this role is the hysteria being whipped up by   
   the corporate media to push the Obama Administration to attack Syria   
   because of unconfirmed “reports” that it’s military has used chemical   
   weapons in the civil war that the U.S. orchestrated in the country.   
   Here again, we see that the media still passes on information from   
   unnamed governmental sources and when it takes editorial positions   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)