Thursday, November 11, 2010

Did we need Wikileaks to condemn the Iraq war?

Whistle-blower website Wikileaks has released in October a massive classified (now declassified) CIA document, causing, rightfully, a wave of outrage all over the world.

I have gone through a good part of the huge volume of documents (around 400,000) uploaded on the Iraq Warlogs website and I failed to find something I didn't know already. Let's be clear, WikiLeaks' service is by all means needed, and world's population has all rights to know what is going in Iraq, but did we not know already?

Did we not know that occupying troops are killing pregnant women, children, civilians in Iraq? Did we not know that the US carries out torture frequently and strives to hide it? Have we already forgot Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo? And what about the School of Americas, for that matter, where torture has been taught since the Cold War?

More importantly, now that WikiLeaks has released the infamous "Iraq" files, don't we know that the same horrors are taking place in this very moment in Afghanistan too?

Interestingly, as Gordon Duff has highlighted in one of his latest articles, in the massive volume of leaked secret files there is no mention of Israel/Mossad activities, despite their role in the Iraq war is sadly no secret.

Writes Mark Weber:

Whatever the secondary reasons for the war, the crucial factor in President Bush’s decision to attack was to help Israel. With support from Israel and America’s Jewish-Zionist lobby, and prodded by Jewish “neo-conservatives” holding high-level positions in his administration, President Bush – who was already fervently com mitted to Israel – resolved to invade and subdue one of Israel’s chief regional enemies.

This is so widely understood in Washington that US Senator Ernest Hollings was moved in May 2004 to acknowledge that the US invaded Iraq “to secure Israel,” and “everybody” knows it. He also identified three of the influential pro-Israel Jews in Washington who played an important role in prodding the US into war: Richard Perle, chair of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board; Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary; and Charles Krauthammer, columnist and author.

The absence of such a key player in the Iraq war gives at least food for thought, and makes me raise some questions.

The official excuses the Bush administration gave to the US citizens in order to accept a war that everybody knew would have turned into a disaster were many and diverse.

It started with Saddam Hussein giving shelter to "Bin Laden", most wanted by the FBI "in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. These attacks killed over 200 people. In addition, Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world."

Apart from noticing that Bin Laden is not wanted for the 9/11 attacks, it might also be worth remarking that the claim that he was hiding in Iraq was so weak that it got immediately confuted.

What then? Plan B was ready: Saddam Hussein had an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and was preparing an attack against the United States. Although the UN inspectors have never found any WMD, on March 19th 2003 Bush launched the invasion of Iraq, causing the death of 1,421,933 Iraqis, almost five thousands US military personnel, more than two thousands international force troops, bringing about the destruction of a sovereign country, its culture, its society, violating its present, past and future, provoking a massive wave of refugees who now live in miserable conditions in neighbouring countries.

Part of the files released by WikiLeaks focused on the role Iran has had in smuggling arms into Iraq, and mainstream media, along with self-styled "independent" bloggers were swift to begin the umpteenth smear campaign against the Islamic Republic. At a quick glance, in fact, it seems almost that Iran has played a bigger role than the United States in the invasion and destruction of Iraq.

However, Iranian people must not be surprised about this new hostile wave, as anti-Iran campaigns are an ongoing topic within Western media. A little more than a year ago, in fact, in the occasion of Iranian presidential elections, President Ahmadinejad has been the target of most Zionist media outlets in Western countries. Since 2009, every now and then, European and American media don't waste any occasion to attack Iran.

Now that "mainstream" operations, fake "coloured" revolutions and ineffective economic sanctions have clearly failed, WikiLeaks comes along and paints Iran as one of the key players in the Iraq war. Although the evidence of Iran's involvement in the Iraq war is close to non-existent, much of mainstream media and fake independent bloggers have been participating in this new propaganda adventure.

What is the aim of such new smear campaign? Are the United States being pushed into another war/disaster by their "friend" Israel? Are they preparing the public mind for an attack against Iran? Do all those fake independent bloggers, so vehement advocates of human rights, know that a war against Iran will bring unprecedented destruction and mass killings? Do they know that once the war is waged there is no way back?

The result of Wiki psyop seems to be a "leak" especially made for the big public, in which it's carefully reported what mainstream media can't write as it would automatically appear as nothing more than propaganda. Which actually is. In fact, mainstream media are exactly the place where we can find most pieces of this new "leaked intel". Just another attack against sovereign Iran, one of the many that shows that Western powers are running out of ideas on how to bring down the Islamic Republic.
Related Posts Widget for Blogs by LinkWithin