<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Ahmed's calendar: Third Day of the Condor = Apocalypse Now
Review: "A SCIENTIFIC revolution, according to Kuhn [the scientist/linguist author of THE THEORY OF SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTIONS], is not simply an addition to pre-existing knowledge. It is, within any field, 'a reconstruction of the field from new fundamentals'; a complete demolition of an old theoretical and conceptual structure and its replacement by a new one based on entirely different aims and premises. The old paradigm...attacked from the outside...cannot be defeated on the basis of its own rules for, as we have seen...these rules are not only inadequate to solve new problems which have begun to arise--THEY ACTUALLY PRECLUDE ANY DISCUSSION OF THESE PROBLEMS AT ALL."
Dr. Chris Knight, London
From BLOOD RELATIONS:
MENSTRUATION AND THE ORIGINS OF CULTURE
"[A] very selective history [as compiled here of 19th and 20th century presidents] demonstrates there are many varieties of presidential lies. Some concern grand policy matters, some concern secret government activity...Sissela Bok, the author of LYING: MORAL CHOICE IN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE LIFE, defines [a lie] simply as "an intentionally deceptive message in the form of a STATEMENT (emphasis his)"...I would propose a slightly different standard for White House occupants. If a President issues a statement, he or she has an obligation to ensure the remark is truthful... It is not enough for a president or White House contender to BELIEVE what he is saying is true; he/she [like scientists, doctors, journalists and other professionals whose careers are built on a basic understanding of honesty, research, integrity and the public trust] should KNOW it to be true--within reasonable standards...Lying in office not only poses a potential risk for [a sitting president], a president who lies is a risk to the nation. He might steer the country into a war under false pretenses. Or, if he comes to be regarded as untruthful by a significant portion of the public, he might fail to rouse the country for military action that is indeed warranted. A liar in the White House is a national security threat."
David Corn
THE LIES OF GEORGE BUSH
From the Introduction
(Published in 2003, before
the start of the Iraq war)
"This [neoconservative] focus on reintergrating Iraq into the regional framework of order under US hegemony was no doubt heightened by the fact that Iraq challenged the US monopoly over the oil trade, maintained through the fact that oil transactions occur in US dollars. Since 1971...the dollar has...become the de facto world reserve currency... Overall, since the world economy is fundamentally oil-dependent, this...lends the US a dominant trading advantage...In November 2000, Iraq began trading its oil in euros, and profited handsomely in the process. Iran, Venezuela and Russia--all key oil producers--have also considered and/or moved towards switching to the euro..."
"The real reason the Bush administration wants a puppet government in Iraq--or more importantly, the reason why the corporate-military-industrial network conglomerate wants a puppet government in Iraq--is so that it will revert back to a dollar standard and stay that way..."
Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed
BEHIND THE WAR ON TERROR
From Part Two, Chapter Seven: "False Pretexts"
and
Quote by
Wiliam Clark
"The Real Reasons for the Upcoming War
with Iraq: a Macroeconomic and
Geostrategic Analysis of the Unspoken Truth"
Independent Media Center, January, 2003
"An objective assessment of the 2003 war in Iraq...shows clearly that it was nothing less than a...colonial enterprise, fundamentally opposed to elementary humanitarian principles and motviated by longstanding imperial values."
Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed
BEHIND THE WAR ON TERROR
From the Postscript
Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed, the Mozart-like prodigy of modern of political analysis, has done it again. Rivalling some of the best of Noam Chomsky, Michel Chussodovsky and Arundhati Roy... definitively making all non-scientific, non-factually based analysis of American foreign policy irrelevant at best, heinously (though ironically) unpatriotic and inhumane at worst... with almost six hundred footnotes rivalling the nearly seven hundred that helped prove his case in THE WAR ON FREEDOM, Ahmed lays the inhumanity of American foreign policy in Iraq bare for any American with the courage to read it, and discover the true nature of its leaders. And, for a world that must prepare its very lives for the worst in us.
COVERT ECONOMIC WARFARE AS INSTIGATOR OF MILITARY ACTION
Of the many painful and unquestionable facts revealed in this monumental book, the most important is the paradigm shift in American foreign policy perception waiting for people; a paradigm shift in perception that happens inevitably with the understanding of this one concept: economic warfare. In much the same way the concept of "emotional incest" dismantles the entire bedrock philosophy of Freudian psychology (where the children are supposedly asking for it), Ahmed shows how the United States, at the end of the Cold War, all but forced Kuwait to manipulate the oil prices in 1990 by dumping oil into the market at half its cost value, effectively bankrupting the Iran-war damaged, oil-based Iraqi economy. This form of overt economic warfare declared by Kuwait--and covertly supported by the US--demanded a response from Saddam Hussein that actually started with his protests in the United Nations (unliek his normally brutal methods)--but led inexorably to military invasion when Kuwait refused to stop as his people were starving, and the UN did nothing. And Hussein's 1991 invasion of Kuwait, as Bush, Sr. knew it would, rationalized a) the invasion of Iraq in 1991, b) the continuance of the military build-up in America after the end of the Cold War, and c) virtually all foreign policy in the Middle East to the present day. The culture killing sanctions--economic warfare part II--came next, and lasted until the present military war. Human life in the Middle East means less than nothing to most of our administration--and not really much here as well, considering the current body count of our soldiers.
I will say no more about this book except this: do not pretend to call yourself an American of any kind until you find the moral courage to read it.
Rating:
Summary: Oil and power
Review: Ahmed's analysis of the war in Iraq contains at least a big part of the truth, and, for me, the essential part.
The war was/is all about control of Middle east oil, because Iraq possesses probably the world's biggest inexpensive and high quality oil reserves.
As Ahmed clearly explains, our technological civilization is totally dependent on oil and the actual oil reserves are now being depleted at a rate of about 2 per cent each year. Control of the oil price is a crucial problem for the West, if it wants to keep its actual living standard.Saddam, in fact, began to act independently as an oil producer and even asked to be paid in Euros (see an important article in the English paper 'The Guardian' of February 26 2003). If this policy should be adopted by other oil producers, the US would not only lose control of the oil reserves, but even of the oil price. Fundamentally however, Ahmed's analysis is based on respect of basic human aspirations: freedom, independence, human rights. One could say that his analysis is naïve (or idealistic), and contrary to 'normal' human behaviour, which is search for power, dominance, unchallenged hegemony. The citations of George F. Kennan and Madeleine Albright in this book are most typical (or should I say, cynical) in that respect.
Ahmed's book is a magnified example of the deeds of an unchallenged political and military power. Of course, as he proves time and again, the international sanctions against Iraq were illegal. Of course, they were intended to the fall of Saddam and the installation of a pro-Western government.
And unfortunately, nobody who wields total power (one needs another analysis why some nations got it and others not) has not exploited it in his own interest or lost it without a struggle (see the masterful analysis of power by Laura Betzig). As a matter of fact, Ahmed himself stops short of giving an opinion on the Iranian situation during and after the reign of the by the author much admired Ayatollah Khomeini, who installed an Islamic shiite oligarchy in Iran. Respect of human rights on the international level can only be imposed by supranational authorities (the UN, an international court). But if these authorities try to take measures against 'vital' interests of one of its members and if that member has enough power, it will neglect all the resolutions and even completely disregard them. Even if it knows that its behaviour equals or installs the 'law of the jungle'.
It is crucial for world peace that the UN should wield international power and be able to impose sanctions. But there is another alarming and frightening aspect of the war in Iraq: freedom of speech was curbed in order to hide the truth.
If the author is correct that US troops fired deliberately at journalists whom they considered not loyal to their cause, then this is the same as the barbarous demolition of the library of Pergamon. This book is a compelling, provocative and must read.
Rating:
Summary: Brilliant ,Erudite , Gripping.
Review: Author gives an excellent account of run up of events leading up to the Anglo-American assault on Iraq.Author's arguments unassailable based on irrefutable logic.
Economic considerations prompted US UK to invade Iraq.Of late US has become vulnerable to energy shocks with domestic production unable to cope with increasing demand.This has led to occasional blackouts in places like California.Prior to Iraq war America's oil inventories fell to the lowest level since 1975 with the country on the verge of drawing oil from 'Strategic Petroluem Reserve'
Iraq under Saddam Hussein was becoming what author says a ' swing producer'.In other words he was turning oil tap on and off whenever Baghdad felt that such a policy was suiting its interests.Hussein even contemplated removing Iraqi oil from the market for extended periods of time which would have sent crude oil prices soaring.
Besides Hussein began to challenge US monoply on oil trade.We all know oil trade is transacted in dollars.Hussein switched the trade to Euros.As a result dollar's value diminished by 17 percent.Were other oil-producing countries like Nigeria, Iran Venezuela to follow suit dollar's value would erode.Hussein's measures , in short, threatned America's economic , military pre-eminence.So he was ousted replaced by pro western stooge subservient Illad Allawi.
Bush- Blair team went to absurd lengths to justify invasion of Iraq.Intelligence on Iraq's WMD capability was cooked up distorted ,exaggerated to bolster case for war .Blair even had the gumption to claim that Iraq had lethal weapons which could be activated in 45 mts and was poised to strike British bases in Cyprus.An argument that sound ridiculous because we know from inde sources between a period from 1992-98 98 percent of Iraq WMD was destroyed along with infrastructure to make those weapons. Bush-Blair team ,I feel ,deliberately mislead their people to make a case for war.
Fact goes that Iraq could be invaded easily because it did not have weapons to defend herself.Britain US saw to it Iraq was fully disarmed begore unleashing their armies.In this they were helped by UN Security council which did the dirty work of disarming Iraq.It looks from this train of events that ' right to self-defence ' belongs to few coutries in the west.This a a covert form of racism.Be that may, US UK have taught coutries like N Korea ,Syria, Iran an ugly lesson better arm yourself with nuclear weapons if you want ot deter possible future hostile action.
What US UK want unfettered, unrestrained access to oil of resource-rich Middle East.What they fear most is indigenous nationalsm. Controlling the region by force is nothing but fascism and will not sove problems plaguing the region.It will breed resentment leading to vicious form of 'blowback'a term used by prominent American academic Chalmers Johnson.This term isused to denote negative inevitable consequences stemming from American imperial policies.
Author says it is possible to make western world immune to oilshocks.This can be done by exploring alternative sources of energy and changing fuel consumption patterns of people.
Book contains intersting facts pertaining to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait,anthrax scare in US which many in the west may find hard to digest . Truth sometimes is unpalatable.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent, And I'm Jesus!
Review: Mother of god. This book gives you the facts; actually - it smacks you in the face with them. No words can explain the truth that this book exposes; maybe, "skim-da-bam-da-boom-da-diddly-bom-boom". Read it as soon as you can!
Rating:
Summary: A Work of Genius
Review: This book carries accolades from Gore Vidal and John Pilger, but for me, even at the age of 25, Ahmed's work already surpases theirs. Nafeez Mossadeq Nafeez is quite simply the best political commentator writing today. His 'War on Freedom' took a line of thinking that I had previously dismissed as the domain of conspiracy theorists and made a solid case for it, backed by meticulous research. This level of research is again evident in 'Behind the War on Terror'. This time there is no element of speculation, it is all solid fact. The history of western intervention in Iraq from the end of the first world war to the present date is clearly documented in a highly readable and convincing manner.
Ahmed's arguments simply shatter those of pro war camp, it's a shame that his voice isn't more widely heard, especially in an age where most jounalists seem to parrot official lies and offer no critical analysis at all. I am tired of hearing their pathetic arguments of 'well would you have kept him in power'. The war cannot be seen in isolation. The sanctions against Iraq that denied them clean water supplies thus causing over a million to die from preventable diseases can only be seen as Biological warfare. It is an incredible but little known fact that two heads of the UN humanitarian mission in Iraq resigned calling the sanctions genocide. The pretext for these horrific sanctions (though by no means justified) and the war was that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. As this has proven to be untrue the real reason has become more apparent. It was simple naked imperialism, a grab for oil.
Both Blair and Bush have constantly conjured up a picture of Saddam as a dangerous monster, undoubtedly this is true. But it was their (and their predessors) actions that caused the deaths of over one million Iraqis beteen 1991 and 2003. This has to be termed one of the crimes of the century and the proponents of it should stand trial for crimes against humanity. The real tragedy was that it was commited under the authority of the United Nations, who broke their own charter by using this method of mass punishment. Genocide has occured before by the hands of dictators but when the worlds senior most governing body is responsible that is truly a nightmare scenario.
The sanctions were clearly a method of destroying the fabric of Iraqi socity and the moral of the Iraqi people so that they would have agreed to anything if it meant they were removed, even an invasion by oil grabbing imperialist powers. Ahmed's explanation of this, the Iran/Iraq war and subsequent western interventions is quite brilliant. I look forward to his future publications and would implore everyone to read this book. I can only hope that his work receives wider media access, because the world needs it. I sincerely believe he is a great genius of our time.
Rating: 
Summary: A good yarn
Review: This book makes two major claims. First that America caused Saddam and then plotted to starve his country and remove him from power. Second that 'the west' conspired to ruin the oil for food program. But neither of these main avenues of assault are accurate in the least bit. First of all Saddam actually took power himself, Saddam chose to invade Iran using Soviet supplied weapons, Saddam chose to gas the Kurds and Saddam chose to invade Kuwait. How is it that America gets blamed because some dictator is off his rocker? The reality is this argument is just as fallacious as saying that America caused 9/11 by training the Mujadeeen to fight the Soviets in the 80s. These arguments take all responsibility from the person enacting the crime, almost like saying France create Hitler and therefore caused the death camps due to reparations. The second assumption is that the oil for food program money ever went to food. The reality is that the program created 2 billion dollars in commissions for U.N fat cats and that the rest of the money went to give Saddam more weapons. Why doesn't Saddam get any blame for starving his people? he is the one that led his nation on a disastrous war against most of his neighbors. This book twists facts and history to create a plot that pitches itself to the 'I hate America' crowd while providing no evidence or truths in its telling the story of the Middle east. In the end this book gives no credit to the actual leaders like the Ayatollah or King Hussein who play an important role in their region, rather it gives all the responsibility for every wrong doing to 'the west'. Seth J. Frantzman
Rating:
Summary: A good yarn
Review: This book makes two major claims. First that America caused Saddam and then plotted to starve his country and remove him from power. Second that 'the west' conspired to ruin the oil for food program. But neither of these main avenues of assault are accurate in the least bit. First of all Saddam actually took power himself, Saddam chose to invade Iran using Soviet supplied weapons, Saddam chose to gas the Kurds and Saddam chose to invade Kuwait. How is it that America gets blamed because some dictator is off his rocker? The reality is this argument is just as fallacious as saying that America caused 9/11 by training the Mujadeeen to fight the Soviets in the 80s. These arguments take all responsibility from the person enacting the crime, almost like saying France create Hitler and therefore caused the death camps due to reparations. The second assumption is that the oil for food program money ever went to food. The reality is that the program created 2 billion dollars in commissions for U.N fat cats and that the rest of the money went to give Saddam more weapons. Why doesn't Saddam get any blame for starving his people? he is the one that led his nation on a disastrous war against most of his neighbors. This book twists facts and history to create a plot that pitches itself to the 'I hate America' crowd while providing no evidence or truths in its telling the story of the Middle east. In the end this book gives no credit to the actual leaders like the Ayatollah or King Hussein who play an important role in their region, rather it gives all the responsibility for every wrong doing to 'the west'. Seth J. Frantzman
Rating:
Summary: Fine exposure of US state brutality
Review: This fascinating book presents official sources documenting the US ruling class's strategy for world domination, centrally for controlling the oil of the Middle East. In particular, it shows how the US's rulers adopted Saddam Hussein, used him for more than 30 years, and then turned against him when he disobeyed them.
Ahmed cites the American state propagandist Samuel Huntington, "Muslims ... fight non-Muslims far more often than do peoples of other civilisations." Huntington could note how many wars the US state has waged against 'non-Americans' - 74 since 1945.
The USA's precursor empire, Britain, claimed that in the Middle East it was fighting "to defend the area against the brand of Arab nationalism", that is, against its people! Similarly now, the occupying forces in Iraq claim to be defending the country - against its people!
For nearly 30 years, Saddam Hussein was one of the CIA's men in the Middle East, an obedient dictator. The CIA helped Hussein in the 1963 and 1968 coups, giving him lists of trade unionists to be killed (5000 in 1963 alone).
In 1980 Iraq attacked Iran, after the US government had given Iraq the green light to invade. There were no frantic US-British efforts at the UN to denounce Iraqi aggression! In 1982, the US government took Iraq off its list of terrorist states. Later, after Iraq had used US-supplied chemical weapons, the US government increased its licensing of dual-use technology exports to Iraq.
In 1990, Thatcher and Reagan encouraged Kuwait not to negotiate with Iraq. Then the US government assured Iraq of its neutrality, while planning its attack. The US government told us that Iraq was threatening Saudi Arabia - but commercial satellite pictures showed no Iraqi troops on the border. The Pentagon's photos, which it said proved that the troops were there, remain classified.
As for the sanctions against Iraq, the US government knew from the start that sanctions would 'fully degrade' Iraq's water treatment facilities. In 1999, the ethical Blair government prevented the shipment of vaccines to Iraqi children. "Iraqis will pay the price while he [Saddam] remains in power" said the US Deputy National Security Adviser Robert Gates. The genocidal sanctions clearly broke the Geneva Conventions against harming civilians.
Now the occupiers are opposing elections, because the wrong people would win - yet more proof that the war was never about democracy, but about oil and obedience.
<< 1 >>
|
