Is Al Qaeda Just a Bush Boogeyman?

Robert Scheer

January 11, 2005

Is it conceivable that Al Qaeda, as defined by President Bush as the center of a vast and well-organized international terrorist conspiracy, does not exist?

To even raise the question amid all the officially inspired hysteria is heretical, especially in the context of the U.S. media's supine acceptance of administration claims relating to national security. Yet a brilliant new BBC film produced by one of Britain's leading documentary filmmakers systematically challenges this and many other accepted articles of faith in the so-called war on terror.

"The Power of Nightmares: The Rise of the Politics of Fear," a three-hour historical film by Adam Curtis recently aired by the British Broadcasting Corp., argues coherently that much of what we have been told about the threat of international terrorism "is a fantasy that has been exaggerated and distorted by politicians. It is a dark illusion that has spread unquestioned through governments around the world, the security services and the international media."

Stern stuff, indeed. But consider just a few of the many questions the program poses along the way:

• If Osama bin Laden does, in fact, head a vast international terrorist organization with trained operatives in more than 40 countries, as claimed by Bush, why, despite torture of prisoners, has this administration failed to produce hard evidence of it?

• How can it be that in Britain since 9/11, 664 people have been detained on suspicion of terrorism but only 17 have been found guilty, most of them with no connection to Islamist groups and none who were proven members of Al Qaeda?

• Why have we heard so much frightening talk about "dirty bombs" when experts say it is panic rather than radioactivity that would kill people?

• Why did Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld claim on "Meet the Press" in 2001 that Al Qaeda controlled massive high-tech cave complexes in Afghanistan, when British and U.S. military forces later found no such thing?

Of course, the documentary does not doubt that an embittered, well-connected and wealthy Saudi man named Osama bin Laden helped finance various affinity groups of Islamist fanatics that have engaged in terror, including the 9/11 attacks. Nor does it challenge the notion that a terrifying version of fundamentalist Islam has led to gruesome spates of violence throughout the world. But the film, both more sober and more deeply provocative than Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11," directly challenges the conventional wisdom by making a powerful case that the Bush administration, led by a tight-knit cabal of Machiavellian neoconservatives, has seized upon the false image of a unified international terrorist threat to replace the expired Soviet empire in order to push a political agenda.

Terrorism is deeply threatening, but it appears to be a much more fragmented and complex phenomenon than the octopus-network image of Al Qaeda, with Bin Laden as its head, would suggest.

While the BBC documentary acknowledges that the threat of terrorism is both real and growing, it disagrees that the threat is centralized:

"There are dangerous and fanatical individuals and groups around the world who have been inspired by extreme Islamist ideas and who will use the techniques of mass terror — the attacks on America and Madrid make this only too clear. But the nightmare vision of a uniquely powerful hidden organization waiting to strike our societies is an illusion. Wherever one looks for this Al Qaeda organization, from the mountains of Afghanistan to the 'sleeper cells' in America, the British and Americans are chasing a phantom enemy."

The fact is, despite the efforts of several government commissions and a vast army of investigators, we still do not have a credible narrative of a "war on terror" that is being fought in the shadows.

Consider, for example, that neither the 9/11 commission nor any court of law has been able to directly take evidence from the key post-9/11 terror detainees held by the United States. Everything we know comes from two sides that both have a great stake in exaggerating the threat posed by Al Qaeda: the terrorists themselves and the military and intelligence agencies that have a vested interest in maintaining the facade of an overwhelmingly dangerous enemy.

Such a state of national ignorance about an endless war is, as "The Power of Nightmares" makes clear, simply unacceptable in a functioning democracy.

Copyright 2005 Los Angeles Times

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-scheer11jan11,0,4938608,print.column

George Bush - prezident fiktivních krizí

Tento prezidentský úřad, více než který jiný, využívá klasických nástrojů propagandy. Je téměř nemožné si představit Bushův prezidentský úřad bez televize Fox News a pravicových rozhlasových stanic.

Prezidentem vymyšlených, fiktivních krizí, nazval George W. Bushe ve čtvrtek americký deník Washington Post:

Až budou zpětně historikové hodnotit Bushův prezidentský úřad, nejpravděpodobněji si povšimnou, že to, čím se Bush mladší odlišuje od ostatních amerických prezidentů, nejsou krize, které zvládl, ale krize, které si vymyslel. Charakteristickým rysem Bushova prezidentského úřadu jsou fiktivní krize. Ve snaze dosáhnout cílů, které si určil, než převzal úřad - totiž svržení Saddáma Husajna a privatizaci amerického sociálního zabezpečení - si George W. Bush vymyslel krize tam, kde žádné neexistovaly.

A tak se Irák stal jasným a bezprostředním nebezpečím pro americké domovy a krby, ježil se zbraněmi hromadného ničení, jaderný útok byl otázkou pár minut.

...

Tento prezidentský úřad, více než který jiný, využívá klasických nástrojů propagandy. Je téměř nemožné si představit Bushův prezidentský úřad bez televize Fox News a pravicových rozhlasových stanic.

Vzhledem k tomu, že zamlžování skutečností a fikce je tak důležitou metodou Bushovy vlády, je snad překvapením, že americké státní úřady nyní natáčejí "vládní informační reportáže", které předstírají, že jsou skutečnými, nezávislými televizními reportážemi, s falešnými reportéry, a nabízejí je lokálním televizním stanicím?

Je snad překvapením, že americké ministerstvo školství zaplatilo známému televiznímu komentátoru Armstrongu Williamsovi 241 000 dolarů, aby šířil ve svých pořadech jeho propagandu? Za Bushova prezidentství je úkolem každého státního úřadu šířit probushovské zpravodajství, jakýmikoliv prostředky.

Bush je výjimečným americkým prezidentem v tom smyslu, že investuje veškerou svou energii do šíření dezinformací - a je mu absolutně jedno, jak hrozivě škodlivý dopad má tato propaganda na demokracii. To mu jistě vyslouží místo v americké historii, uzavírá deník.

...

http://www.blisty.cz/2005/1/14/art21527.html

***************************************

Fox, CNN, MSNBC - All of you should be ashamed of yourselves. For MONTHS there was day to day coverage of 'what could their weapons do' and 'how far can they strike'... 'are they a threat to the US' - all the messages the Bush administration WANTED you to hear. Did they stop to actually investigate it? No. All they were doing was repeating a lie, and doing so in a manner that made MILLIONS of Americans feel threatened by "WMD" - the imminent "mushroom cloud" that was going to appear over Your City, USA.

Where is the credibility? How did internet bloggers and writers know what corporate media didn't? Maybe it's their spending and research budgets. (Insert Laugh) Billions in corporate dollars versus pocket change and common sense. How much sense does that make?

NOT FUNNY BUSH



I think we all remember this - At a black-tie dinner for journalists, Mr Bush narrated a slide show poking fun at himself and other members of his administration. One pictured Mr Bush looking under a piece of furniture in the Oval Office, at which the president remarked: "Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be here somewhere." After another one, showing him scouring the corner of a room, Mr Bush said: "No, no weapons over there," he said. And as a third picture, this time showing him leaning over, appeared on the screen the president was heard to say: "Maybe under here?"

Well I'm not Laughing. Families of those serving in Iraq aren't laughing. The thousands of dead civilians certainly aren't laughing.

Ignoring the fact that the war is still raging well past a year after it was declared "mission accomplished", there ARE no WMDs, there is no evidence that Iraq had anything to do with 9-11, and the torture scandal (and other widespread abuse) has made the United States the most despised nation on Earth. How do we pay back the world? We elect (thanks Diebold) Bush for a second term. Smooth.

...

vice: http://www.armageddononline.org/no-wmd.php

Syn železné lady přiznal účast na převratu

Syn bývalé britské premiérky Margaret Thatcherové se u jihoafrického soudu přiznal, že pomáhal financovat převrat v Rovníkové Guineji. Mark Thatcher musí zaplatit pokutu půl milionu dolarů. Jeho případ tím ale nekončí, čeká ho projednání dalších žalob.

Soud Thatcherovi předem slíbil, že v případě přiznání vyvázne s pokutou a nebude muset do vězení.

Syn železné lady musí zaplatit tři miliony randů, což je v přepočtu asi jedenáct a půl milionu korun. "Pokud peníze včas neuhradí, bude mu hrozit pět let za mřížemi," řekl soudce Abe Motala z Kapského Města.

Thatcher u soudu uvedl, že zaplatil vzbouřencům v Rovníkové Guineji armádní helikoptéru. Údajně se domníval, že bude použita na humanitární účely.

Slavná britská politička přijala verdikt nad svým synem s uspokojením. "Velmi se jí ulevilo, když se celý problém usadil a obavy z posledních měsíců utichly," komentoval tiskový mluvčí Margaret Thatcherové.

Mark Thatcher se nyní může vypravit za svou rodinou do Spojených států, do 18. února ale musí podat vysvětlení úřadům v Rovníkové Guineji. Nevelká země se značnými zásobami ropy ho viní z podpory politického puče.

Thatcher kvůli tomu ještě jednou stane i před soudem v Jihoafrické republice. Porušil totiž její zákon o mezinárodní vojenské pomoci. Líčení je naplánováno na 8. dubna.

Jihoafrická policie zatkla Thatchera loni v srpnu. Byl podezřelý, že pomáhal žoldákům, kteří plánovali svržení prezidenta Rovníkové Guineje. Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo v zemi vládne už pětadvacet let

http://zpravy.idnes.cz/zahranicni.asp?r=zahranicni&c=A050113_104812_zahranicni_lkr&t=A050113_104812_zahranicni_lkr&r2=zahranicni

Hledání zbraní v Iráku skončilo fiaskem
foto: Novinky

Američtí experti se vrátili v tichosti už před Vánocemi Kvůli násilí v Iráku a nedostatku nových informací skončila před Vánocemi v tichosti a bez výsledků mise amerických zbrojních expertů, kteří se snažili najít zbraně hromadného ničení, kvůli nimž prezident George W. Bush v březnu 2003 zahájil válku.
13.1. 2005 11:18

WASHINGTON - Listu The Washington Post vše pod podmínkou anonymity ve středu potvrdil činitel Ústřední zpravodajské služby (CIA). Podle něho šéf expertů Charles A. Duelfer v podstatě jen opráší zprávu s negativními závěry, kterou předložil loni 30. září.

CIA oficiálně nepotvrdila ukončení zátahu na irácké arzenály, které údajně hromadil bývalý diktátor Saddám Husajn, ale její zdroje podle listu WP potvrdily, že Duelfer v Bagdádu skončil a nebude nahrazen.

Zbrojní experti podle nich vyslechli každého, kdo měl co do činění se zbrojními programy Bagdádu, a prohlédli všechny lokality, kde arzenály mohly být.

Družicové snímky údajně dokazují, že některá zařízení byla vykradena a demontována patrně překupníky. Pro účely mise řízené Pentagonem vyčlenil Kongres podle deníku WP stovky miliónů dolarů, ale jejich vynaložení prý nebude veřejně vykázáno, ale zůstane utajeno. Potvrdil to i mluvčí vojenské rozvědky DIA.

http://www.novinky.cz/04/76/06.html

Comparison of Bush Administration Comments on Iraq's Weapons Before and After the Invasion

The Associated Press
Jan 12, 2005

Statements by the Bush administration before and after the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 on Saddam Hussein's weapons programs:

BEFORE THE WAR

"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us." - Vice President Dick Cheney, Aug. 26, 2002.

"The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly he can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud." National security adviser Condoleezza Rice, Sept. 8, 2002.

"After 11 years during which we have tried containment, sanctions, inspections, even selected military action, the end result is that Saddam Hussein still has chemical and biological weapons and is increasing his capabilities to make more." - President Bush, Oct. 7, 2002.

"Saddam Hussein is a man who told the world he wouldn't have weapons of mass destruction, but he's got them." - Bush, Nov. 3, 2002.

"The gravity of this moment is matched by the gravity of the threat that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction pose to the world." - Secretary of State Colin Powell, Feb. 5, 2003.

AFTER THE WAR

"Although we have not found stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, we were right to go into Iraq. ... We removed a declared enemy of America who had the capability of producing weapons of mass murder." - Bush, July 12, 2004.

"We got it wrong. We have seen nothing to suggest that he had actual stockpiles." - Powell, Oct. 1, 2004.

"We were all unhappy that the intelligence was not as good as we had thought that it was. But the essential judgment was absolutely right. Saddam Hussein was a threat." - Rice, Oct. 3, 2004.

"It turns out that we have not found weapons of mass destruction. Why the intelligence proved wrong I'm not in a position to say, but the world is a lot better off with Saddam Hussein in jail." - Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Oct. 4, 2004.

"He retained the knowledge, the materials, the means and the intent to produce weapons of mass destruction and he could have passed that knowledge on to our terrorist enemies." - Bush, Oct. 7, 2004.

"Based on what we know today, the president would have taken the same action because this is about protecting the American people." - White House press secretary Scott McClellan, on Wednesday.

http://freepress2005.blogspot.com/

Benjamin Franklin, the Occult and The Elite

A mason, Benjamin Franklin's links to occult secret societies have long been known. In the clip below, the History Channel talks about his involvement in the Hellfire Club, a secret society that conducted black masses and orgies.

In 1998, workmen restoring Franklin's London home dug up the remains of six children and four adults hidden below the home. The London Times reported on February 11, 1998:

"Initial estimates are that the bones are about 200 years old and were buried at the time Franklin was living in the house, which was his home from 1757 to 1762, and from 1764 to 1775. Most of the bones show signs of having been dissected, sawn or cut. One skull has been drilled with several holes. Paul Knapman, the Westminster Coroner, said yesterday: "I cannot totally discount the possibility of a crime. There is still a possibility that I may have to hold an inquest." (Scroll down to read the entire article)


video:

http://infowars.com/articles/occult/hellfire.htm

Could Nuclear testing create a tsunami?

This is a difficult topic to research, because much of the information surrounding nuclear testing is classified. During the Cold War there was fear of tsunamis produced by the detonation of nuclear bombs on the continental shelf off the East Coast of the US. A nuclear bomb was never detonated on the shelf, however a huge explosion did generate a tsunami during World War I causing vast destruction Any large disturbance that displaces a large volume of water can be a potential cause of a tsunami.

FTAA is about world government

Ron Bedell | January 11 2005

President Bush is pushing to pass the Free Trade Area of the Americas agreement. Bush insists that the North American Free Trade Agreement was a grand success and should be expanded to include nearly all the nations of the Western Hemisphere. The FTAA could be voted on by Congress in April.

The FTAA is not about free trade, in spite of its deceptive name. It is really about a power grab for internationalists. It will erode our sovereignty and independence even further than NAFTA has. It will be European Union 2. If Congress passes the FTAA, they will have given governmental authority to unelected, independent tribunals of foreigners, who will tell us what to do without any representation or control by U.S. citizens. They will issue orders to overrule our court judgments and laws of our nation. The FTAA is really about setting up a one-world government piece by piece.

If the FTAA is passed, we will lose our borders and about 500 million people living south of the U.S. will find it a lot easier to take up residence in the U.S. and take American jobs or even get on welfare. Moreover, more jobs will be lost overseas.

I am a Republican, but Bush is wrong here. Americans should write and call their congressmen and urge him to reject the FTAA to keep the U.S. independent, free and sovereign.

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/january2005/110105worldgovernment.htm

Ten things we learned in 2004 about 9/11

1. The World Trade Center Black Boxes were recovered, though officials perpetuate the lie that they weren't.

2. FEMA really did arrive early in New York City, for the "bioterror drill" Tripod II, and Rudi Giuliani's testimony to that effect before the 9/11 Commission is its only public testimony which remains officially untranscribed.

3. The Total Information Awareness program was ready to roll out before Sept 11, and John Poindexter's office was established in the Pentagon no later than Sept 12.

4. A recording of six air traffic controllers' same-day detailing of their communication with two hijacked planes on September 11 was purposefully destroyed by the FAA.

5. NORAD was conducting a live-fly simulation of multiple hijackings on the morning of 9/11, which effectively hamstrung a fighter response already compromised by exercises which took the bulk of interceptors far from the eastern seaboard.

6. Dick Cheney was running a separate command and control communications system on 9/11, which whistleblower Indira Singh recognized as having "the exact same functionality I was looking to utilize [for] Ptech," the high tech terrorist and intelligence cut-out that "was set up in the basement of the FAA" for two years before the attacks. (Go to this page to download video testimony of Mike Ruppert and Indira Singh on this subject.)

7. George Bush was unwilling to reluctanctly meet members of his reluctantly struck 9/11 Commission unless Cheney accompanied him, both were unsworn, their words were unrecorded and untranscribed, the meeting was private and in the White House, and the members' notebooks were confiscated afterwards.

8. That John Ashcroft made the case for Sibel Edmonds' State Secret Privilege gag order by claiming that disclosure of her testimony would "cause serious damage to the national security interests of the United States" suggests he is at least an accessory after the fact (Daniel Ellsberg believes Ashcroft deserving of jail time for his role in obstructing justice), as Edmonds has been able to say that her testimony involves "specific information implicating certain high level government and elected officials in criminal activities directly and indirectly related to terrorist money laundering, narcotics, and illegal arms sales."

9. Donald Rumsfeld confirmed what we knew all along, that Flight 93 was shot down, and the corporate media flew into damage control for the Pentagon, saying the Secretary "misspoke" and "stoked conspiracy theories."

10. As Pakistan wound down the search for Osama bin Laden and "prohibited" American forces based in Afghanistan from making cross-border incursions into the Tribal Areas, Musharraf was rewarded with the approving words that his continuing rule remains an internal matter for Pakistanis. (Afghanistan was, arguably, more cooperative in their attempt to bring bin Laden to justice, and Iraq was not a rogue nuclear state.)

We're getting there. Of course, they are there already, and have been for years. But we're catching on.

The big picture remains grim, and getting grimmer, but small pictures can still be pleasant ones. I hope yours are in 2005.

http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2004/12/ten-things-we-learned-in-2004-about.html

Osama bin Laden - - Had Some Help

http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=news_government&Number=293255425#Post293255425

Drobna poznamka k ovlivnovani lidske psychiky, zalozena na fyzikalni realite.
Existuji prinejmensim dva zpusoby, jak vytvorit dojem "slyseni hlasu".
1.Starsi "Microwafe auditory effect"
V 60.letech bylo pozorovano, ze si obluha radaru stezuje ne "cvakani v usich", ktere nebylo spojeno s akustickym signalem.Zkoumanim jevu se ukazalo, ze mikrovlny z jisteho rozsahu frekvenci a intenzite vytvari v kochlearnim aparatu tepelnou razovou vlnu, ktera vytvari u subjektu dojem, ze neco slysi.
Vhodnou modulaci lze takto vytvaret "hlasy".
2.Generace nizsich frekvenci diky nelinearite pomoci ultrazvuku
Pri jiste intenzite ultrazvuku jsou generovany vlny o nizsi frekvenci.Vhodnou modulaci lze opet vytvaret hlasy.Viz fa American Technology.Pokud mi je znamo tato zalezitost je momentalne testovana v Iraku.

Je jasne, ze oba zminovane efekty je mozne pouzit podstatne mene zabavnymi zpusoby...

New Pentagon Vision Transforms War Agenda

by Bruce K. Gagnon

Global Network Space Newsletter 16 Winter 2005
www.globalresearch.ca 6 January 2005

The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/GAG501A.html

1) NEW PENTAGON VISION TRANSFORMS WAR AGENDA

Pentagon transformation is well underway. The U.S. military is increasingly being converted into a global oil protection service. Secretary of War Donald Rumsfeld has a "strategy guy" whose job is to teach this new way of warfare to high-level military officers from all branches of services and to top level CIA operatives. Thomas Barnett is a professor at the Navy War College in Rhode Island. He is author of the controversial book The Pentagon¹s New Map that identifies a "non-integrating gap" in the world that is resisting corporate globalization. Barnett defines the gap as parts of Latin America, Africa, Middle East and Central Asia all of which are key oil-producing regions of the world.

In what Barnett calls a "Grand March of History" he claims that the U.S. military must be transformed in order to preemptively take control of the gap, so the U.S. can "manage" the global distribution of resources, people, energy, and money. (It has long predicted that the gap between rich and poor around the world will continue to widen and that the Pentagon will be used to keep the boot on the necks of the people of the third world to the benefit of corporate globalization.)

Barnett predicts that U.S. unilateralism will lead to the "inevitability of war." Referring to Hitler in a recent presentation, Barnett reminded his military audience that the Nazi leader never asked for permission before invading other countries. Thus, the end to multi-lateralism.

Barnett argues that the days of arms talks and international treaties are over. "There is no secret where we are going," he says as he calls for a "new ordering principle" at the Department of Defense (DoD). Barnett maintains that as jobs move out of the U.S. the primary export product of the nation will be "security." Global energy demand will necessitate U.S. control of the oil producing regions. "We will be fighting in Central Africa in 20 years," Barnett predicts.

In order to implement this new military vision," Barnett maintains that the U.S. military must move away from its often-competing mix of Air Force-Navy-Army-Marines toward two basic military services. One he names Leviathan, which he defines as the kick ass, wage war, special ops, and not under the purview of the international criminal court. Give us your angry, video game-playing 18-19 year olds, for the Leviathan force, Barnett says. Once a country is conquered by Leviathan, Barnett says the U.S. will have to have a second military force that he calls Systems Administration. This force he describes as the "proconsul" of the empire, boots on the ground, the police force to control the local populations. This group, Barnett says, "will never come home."

Barnett¹s plan is essentially underway today. New fast, flexible, and efficient projection forces with "lily pad" bases are now being developed for control of the gap. Over the next decade, the military will abandon 35% of the Cold War-era bases it uses abroad as it seeks to expand the network of bare-bones sites in the gap. The planned changes, once completed, will result in the most profound "reordering" of U.S. military forces overseas since the current global arrangements were set 50 years ago.

According to Michael Klare, professor of Peace Studies at Hampshire College, "American troops are now risking their lives on a daily basis to protect the flow of petroleum. In Colombia, Saudi Arabia, and the Republic of Georgia, U.S. personnel are spending their days and nights protecting pipelines and refineries, or supervising the local forces assigned to this mission."

Klare continues, "The DoD has stepped up its arms deliveries to military forces in Angola and Nigeria, and is helping to train their officers and enlisted personnel; meanwhile, Pentagon officials have begun to look for permanent bases in the area, focusing on Senegal, Ghana, Mali, Uganda and Kenya." The Wall Street Journal has reported that "a key mission for U.S. forces (in Africa) would be to ensure that Nigeria¹s oil fields, which in the future could account for as much as 25% of all U.S. oil imports, are secure."

National Guard units across the U.S. are now being assigned the task of developing on-going basing relationships with each nation on the African continent.

Role of Space Technology

The Bush administration is also exploring the possibility of expanding the emerging missile defense system into Eastern Europe as an element in the strategic containment of Russia, China and the Middle East. The Pentagon has been negotiating with Hungary, Romania, Poland and the Czech Republic about one or more of them hosting new missile defense bases. Oil-rich Iran is to be encircled by missile defense posts in Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

In order to pull all of this together the Pentagon claims it will need "a God¹s-eye view" of the world. A new "internet in the sky" is now being built for the wars of the future. Costing well over $200 billion, the new web would give war machines and military forces a common language, instantly emitting an encyclopedia of lethal information about all enemies.

According to Art Cebrowski, director of the Pentagon¹s Office of Force Transformation, "What we are really talking about is a new theory of war." The military wants to know "everything of interest to us, all the time," says one Pentagon insider. Military intelligence including secret satellite surveillance covering most of the Earth will be posted on the war net and shared with troops. "The essence of net-centric warfare is our ability to deploy a war-fighting force anywhere, anytime. Information technology is the key to that."

Thus U.S. military and economic control of the gap will be dependent on a system of networked computers. Fusing weapons, secret intelligence and soldiers in a global network what the military calls net-centric warfare will, they say, change the military in a way the Internet changed business and culture.

abyss: zkus adobe image ready anebo zmackni na klavesnici "print screen" a pastni si to do photoshopu, orez a uloz

Cover story

The other tsunami

While the sea may have killed tens of thousands, western policies kill millions every year. Yet even amid disaster, a new politics of community and morality is emerging. By John Pilger

The west's crusaders, the United States and Britain, are giving less to help the tsunami victims than the cost of a Stealth bomber or a week's bloody occupation of Iraq. The bill for George Bush's coming inauguration party would rebuild much of the coastline of Sri Lanka. Bush and Blair increased their first driblets of "aid" only when it became clear that people all over the world were spontaneously giving millions and that a public relations problem beckoned. The Blair government's current "generous" contribution is one-sixteenth of the £800m it spent on bombing Iraq before the invasion and barely one-twentieth of a £1bn gift, known as a soft loan, to the Indonesian military so that it could acquire Hawk fighter-bombers.

...

The hypocrisy, narcissism and dissembling propaganda of the rulers of the world and their sidekicks are in full cry. Superlatives abound as to their humanitarian intent while the division of humanity into worthy and unworthy victims dominates the news. The victims of a great natural disaster are worthy (though for how long is uncertain) while the victims of man-made imperial disasters are unworthy and very often unmentionable. Somehow, reporters cannot bring themselves to report what has been going on in Aceh, supported by "our" government. This one-way moral mirror allows us to ignore a trail of destruction and carnage that is another tsunami.

Consider the plight of Afghanistan, where clean water is unknown and death in childbirth common. At the Labour Party conference in 2001, Tony Blair announced his famous crusade to "reorder the world" with the pledge: "To the Afghan people, we make this commitment . . . We will not walk away . . . we will work with you to make sure [a way is found] out of the miserable poverty that is your present existence." The Blair government was on the verge of taking part in the conquest of Afghanistan, in which as many as 25,000 civilians died. In all the great humanitarian crises in living memory, no country suffered more and none has been helped less. Just 3 per cent of all international aid spent in Afghanistan has been for reconstruction, 84 per cent is for the US-led military "coalition" and the rest is crumbs for emergency aid. What is often presented as reconstruction revenue is private investment, such as the $35m that will finance a proposed five-star hotel, mostly for foreigners. An adviser to the minister of rural affairs in Kabul told me his government had received less than 20 per cent of the aid promised to Afghan-istan. "We don't even have enough money to pay wages, let alone plan reconstruction," he said.

The reason, unspoken of course, is that Afghans are the unworthiest of victims. When US helicopter gunships repeatedly machine-gunned a remote farming village, killing as many as 93 civilians, a Pentagon official was moved to say, "The people there are dead because we wanted them dead."

...

vice:

http://www.newstatesman.com/nscoverstory.htm

MATT: Klubek pyramidologu?