Caught an ABC radio interview of the Attorney General in August. My reaction after listening? The guy is a slippery eel or a full blown fruitcake.
The Attorney General responds to questions shot his way with a "duck and weave" formula, Blind Freddie would discern unmistakably this official is plainly not an authentic article? You can judge Ruddock is more a Lilliputian; a consequential government employee so he should be an important public servant? But his behaviour is more hired hand! Bet my bottom dollar this fruit cake is a puppet to hegemony seekers outside official public recognition?
The Attorney General’s language is chock a bloc full of distortion, little honesty is injected on the job. An indispensable characteristic of a real attorney general embodies accuracy and honesty; examination of this fruit cake's gazette is such judicious traits have cut class.
Moral and fair defence of the Australian citizen’s rights is abandoned for pathetic fallacious public relations, and a model of arrogance hidden within intimidation and coercian of the citizen whilst prosecuting the pampered darling, an endless war against terror. Ruddock rapes the citizen whilst he pretends to uphold the law - as he interprets its revision for Australia’s constituent police state.
The Attorney General confers sleeze and manipulation; he is a master of sophistry, responds to inquiry with bluster delivered inside non-answers. His public face is tedious and flat; misrepresentation through a string of laborious clarification, mingled with enough legalese to fool most. His is a bluster technique holding authoritative ground with interviewers and listener alike, by autocratic officious puffiness he restrains reality and truth from sight.
A listener grows tired fishing for a cohesive and authentic response. Half expect interviewers to wrap up interviews with Ruddock. Waiting and anticipating Ruddock will eventually reply with at least one straight answer about David Hicks is tiring. With a basic question, “When is Hicks being returned to Australia and what is the Government doing to help the situation?” Its a run around the bush Ruddock adopts to [not] answer the question. The top justice man in Canberra is a slippery eel or a fruitcake.
Asked about the return of David Hicks to Australia from Guantanamo military base after Hicks has been in the lock-up for 5 years? Croaked with nervousness, quivering with deceit Ruddock unhesitatingly clouded Canberra’s position with his I’m not my own man reply. Saying, “…such matters take a long time”. Talk about failure to demonstrate one iota of concern about Hicks case.
I conclude [with legion of others] Ruddock takes inaction to ensure Hicks stays far from Australia for the longest possible time. To the interviewer’s credit she reminded Ruddock of the five years already Hicks has been in Guantanamo and still detained in USA custody, still in jail. By asking, “How much time does it take for Hicks to be returned?”
Judging by Ruddock’s vacuity our Attorney General answers questions in a fashion that betrays him working to a nefarious agenda, a contrived opposing agenda of Australia. He is a puppet, a voice of subservience in obsequiousness to the Bush administration and its liberty killing focus?
24 Sept 2006
Howard government to launch Australia into illegal war
It has become conceivable the Howard government is going to senselessly embroil Australia in an undeclared criminal war against Iran and Syria. Undeclared by Canberra who intends to throw our military - whose responsibility is Australia’s defence - to go to war in a country half way around the globe against Iran in war initiated by mentally short changed idiots occupying the White House. This country still ranks as a cheap colonial boy, at heal to Anglo/American dogs, when will we break the shackles that control Canberra?
The Australian flag will be bloodied and spoiled by innocent victims as our troops obey orders they should not obey. This nation will be remembered in history as nothing less than duplicitious bastards wearing the yoke of cheap mercenary sharp shooter. There is not a single politician in Canberra in the Liberal party or the ALP who will excape being branded as a war criminal and accomplice to preemptive war.
God almighty Canberra is going to launch an attack against a sovereign nation, against innocent people, Iran presents no threat whatsoever to Australian interests or US interest for that matter.
Australia’s military is already deployed in the southern Iraq province of Al Muthanna, from here they will redeploy to attack Iran’s sovereign territory. Their mission is to seize the assets of that country’s oil fields located in the province of Khuzestan, where most of Iran’s oil fields are located.
The United States will use a crushing aerial bombardment of Iran [and Syria]; Canberra will launch military assets to be sacrificed as a faithful slavish partner to murder innocent Iranians all to steal that nation’s oil fields. That Australia’s criminals in government are in readiness to throw this nation into warfare behind a pack of screwball mumbo-jumbo exposes the immoral and corrupt politicians in office.
Punching above his significance Foreign Minister Downer is now priming the populace with sophistry and blathering of sanctions against Tehran if it doesn’t stop its so called rebel nuclear program. Get one thing straight Downer, the Iranians have every right to a nuclear program. No rules of any kind are broken; Iran has not betrayed any protocol and exhibits no threat. Downer is striving to whitewash the verity with indoctrination to set a path of propaganda. If anything this only demonstrates that any suspending should be Downer’s idiocy, the man is unfit to hold the post of foreign minister, his blabbing neck is overdue for suspending from the public arena.
The Australian flag will be bloodied and spoiled by innocent victims as our troops obey orders they should not obey. This nation will be remembered in history as nothing less than duplicitious bastards wearing the yoke of cheap mercenary sharp shooter. There is not a single politician in Canberra in the Liberal party or the ALP who will excape being branded as a war criminal and accomplice to preemptive war.
God almighty Canberra is going to launch an attack against a sovereign nation, against innocent people, Iran presents no threat whatsoever to Australian interests or US interest for that matter.
Australia’s military is already deployed in the southern Iraq province of Al Muthanna, from here they will redeploy to attack Iran’s sovereign territory. Their mission is to seize the assets of that country’s oil fields located in the province of Khuzestan, where most of Iran’s oil fields are located.
The United States will use a crushing aerial bombardment of Iran [and Syria]; Canberra will launch military assets to be sacrificed as a faithful slavish partner to murder innocent Iranians all to steal that nation’s oil fields. That Australia’s criminals in government are in readiness to throw this nation into warfare behind a pack of screwball mumbo-jumbo exposes the immoral and corrupt politicians in office.
Punching above his significance Foreign Minister Downer is now priming the populace with sophistry and blathering of sanctions against Tehran if it doesn’t stop its so called rebel nuclear program. Get one thing straight Downer, the Iranians have every right to a nuclear program. No rules of any kind are broken; Iran has not betrayed any protocol and exhibits no threat. Downer is striving to whitewash the verity with indoctrination to set a path of propaganda. If anything this only demonstrates that any suspending should be Downer’s idiocy, the man is unfit to hold the post of foreign minister, his blabbing neck is overdue for suspending from the public arena.
25 July 2006
Attorney General Ruddock is Oddball over anti-terrorist laws
Consider for a second Attorney General Ruddock’s failed logic, his peremptory pain-in-the-ass hogwash. His conclusion from his tit tat with the ACT’s Jon Stanhope highlights a view that terrorists across this land hold a common thread? That common thread is their convergance of evil… a need to commit terror unleashed by annihilative minds only at sites where “weak” anti-terroism law enforcement exists?
Ruddock believes anti-terrorist fun and games will be handicaped by dissimilar laws between Canberra and Bondi Junction. This might be a display of paltry faith in law enforcement and the intelligence community? With different anti-terrorism thinking for officers to grapple with in the face of fighting the war on terror it could send some over the mental enforcement edge.
The Attorney General’s oddball sapience edifies an abstract, perhaps eerie rendition of anti-terrorism policing. Ruddock’s argument is hammered in noisy leaps against the sovereignty of others judgments, especially officials such as the qualified Jon Stanhope - who don’t play the anti-terrorism card Ruddock’s way.
Ruddock operates a peculiar “doctrine of inference” - it’s folklore, but it fundamentally believes terrorists unleash horror and sabotage in territories and places where laws are pithy – [compared to Ruddock’s version of enforcement]. If it’s a frail anti-terrorist law it fails Ruddock's acid test, that is not being equal to his expert appraisal. The result is substitution of the whole ball of anti-terrorist wax for a resize to suit Ruddock. Canberra cogitates that conformity across Australia equals we’re all safer?
By extrapolation of Ruddock’s thesis… we can form a loose clarity able to breathe security from the threat of frightening [government inflamed?] terrorism. The many strategic cool targets across this real estate can take advantage of Ruddock’s thinking - we will detour terrorists to hit only designated sitting ducks by location.
The plan is renounce anti-terrorism laws in remote areas of Australia. In isolated pockets such as King Island in Bass Strait; we will abandon anti-terrorist laws for designated special low-law intensity sites. Any indecent terrorist stunt or planned terrorist event would be unleashed under this policy away from the rest of the country. Isolated places in Bass Strait are the perfect terrorist sitting duck. By preserving terrorists under the easy-go low-law anti-terrorist program we are miles safer in this war on terrorism game.
We’ll designate the site a low-law terrorist heaven, it will attract the menace, [terrorism I mean, not Ruddock]. It can work, install make believe cardboard fuel dumps, fake ammo dumps and a couple of military HQ like buildings with visiting politicians lolly gagging around, hands behind their backs! Erect mock cardboard cutouts of tourists for a full “bring em on” effect. [Don’t you just love these cool Bush team rallying slogans courtesy Ruddock and Howard’s administration’s White House pals]?
Its common knowledge terrorists make beelines at targets exposed inside territory with go-easy interrogation and special sentencing. If we erect signs in airports to inform visiting terrorists of where the pithy anti-terrorist enforcement exists, we’ll garner our fair share of terrorists like flies to a jam jar. A King Island terrorist jam jar. This measure could protect a terrified citizenry from the threat Ruddock stresses is ready to chew our asses to shreds.
A bold move would be to advertise our go-easy anti-terrorist law regions around the global - reflective of the globalisation policy adopted in Canberra. Signs for inbound terrorists at our gateway airports and in our neighbour’s airport terminals, sea-lanes and wherever entry points for terrorists to walk in exist will be integral to direct the traffic.
Identifying where terrorists enter Australia is simple… Ruddock is a freaking whiz bang on the terrorism argument. He’s the official to pinpoint terrorist gateways, wherever he says, that’s where we sit signs.
The signs advice would also tell terrorists if they are caught detonating a terrorist event on King Island - we’ll go easy on them. What’s the loss in a few milkers, windy fields and noisy sea birds in exchange for the nation’s security? Sacrifice King Island for the safety of the nation.
Any protest by King Island citizens? The Attorney General can introduce penalties against disruption. A five-year jail sentence for non-conformity with Canberra’s neo-con fascist kings sounds about right. Ruddocks “Across Oz Same Same Easy Grasp Terrorism Laws” are the way to fly if you want to stay out of harm. Ruddock will avoid disquiet by imposing a prison term on all citizens who talk about what’s happening to them at King Island. Blab and publicise what happened to you at Ruddock’s hands… you would be sentenced under anti-terrorism provisions. Although it won’t matter for heaven’s sake if apprehended citizens want to blab anyway. Who will know where King Island is? Ruddock and Howard can be matriarchs of Australia’s King Island Guantanamo. Such a turn-on, an oddball like Ruddock would wet his pants over such an idea? Troublemakers could be locked up Guantanamo style without explanation.
As for this nonsense with Jon Stanhope “stuffing up the Ruddock way.” Stanhope’s strife means his time to learn to fall in line with the other sheepish premiers and state chiefs? The time is ripe for Ruddock to adopt another Bushite rallying cry winner, ‘Your either with us or against us!” Runing with this biggie of the New World Order, he can shove it down the throats of tremulous Aussies, it might turn the people against tall poppies like Stanhope and any others thinking out of line.
All in the name of heading off danger the Oddball says is ahead!
Ruddock believes anti-terrorist fun and games will be handicaped by dissimilar laws between Canberra and Bondi Junction. This might be a display of paltry faith in law enforcement and the intelligence community? With different anti-terrorism thinking for officers to grapple with in the face of fighting the war on terror it could send some over the mental enforcement edge.
The Attorney General’s oddball sapience edifies an abstract, perhaps eerie rendition of anti-terrorism policing. Ruddock’s argument is hammered in noisy leaps against the sovereignty of others judgments, especially officials such as the qualified Jon Stanhope - who don’t play the anti-terrorism card Ruddock’s way.
Ruddock operates a peculiar “doctrine of inference” - it’s folklore, but it fundamentally believes terrorists unleash horror and sabotage in territories and places where laws are pithy – [compared to Ruddock’s version of enforcement]. If it’s a frail anti-terrorist law it fails Ruddock's acid test, that is not being equal to his expert appraisal. The result is substitution of the whole ball of anti-terrorist wax for a resize to suit Ruddock. Canberra cogitates that conformity across Australia equals we’re all safer?
By extrapolation of Ruddock’s thesis… we can form a loose clarity able to breathe security from the threat of frightening [government inflamed?] terrorism. The many strategic cool targets across this real estate can take advantage of Ruddock’s thinking - we will detour terrorists to hit only designated sitting ducks by location.
The plan is renounce anti-terrorism laws in remote areas of Australia. In isolated pockets such as King Island in Bass Strait; we will abandon anti-terrorist laws for designated special low-law intensity sites. Any indecent terrorist stunt or planned terrorist event would be unleashed under this policy away from the rest of the country. Isolated places in Bass Strait are the perfect terrorist sitting duck. By preserving terrorists under the easy-go low-law anti-terrorist program we are miles safer in this war on terrorism game.
We’ll designate the site a low-law terrorist heaven, it will attract the menace, [terrorism I mean, not Ruddock]. It can work, install make believe cardboard fuel dumps, fake ammo dumps and a couple of military HQ like buildings with visiting politicians lolly gagging around, hands behind their backs! Erect mock cardboard cutouts of tourists for a full “bring em on” effect. [Don’t you just love these cool Bush team rallying slogans courtesy Ruddock and Howard’s administration’s White House pals]?
Its common knowledge terrorists make beelines at targets exposed inside territory with go-easy interrogation and special sentencing. If we erect signs in airports to inform visiting terrorists of where the pithy anti-terrorist enforcement exists, we’ll garner our fair share of terrorists like flies to a jam jar. A King Island terrorist jam jar. This measure could protect a terrified citizenry from the threat Ruddock stresses is ready to chew our asses to shreds.
A bold move would be to advertise our go-easy anti-terrorist law regions around the global - reflective of the globalisation policy adopted in Canberra. Signs for inbound terrorists at our gateway airports and in our neighbour’s airport terminals, sea-lanes and wherever entry points for terrorists to walk in exist will be integral to direct the traffic.
Identifying where terrorists enter Australia is simple… Ruddock is a freaking whiz bang on the terrorism argument. He’s the official to pinpoint terrorist gateways, wherever he says, that’s where we sit signs.
The signs advice would also tell terrorists if they are caught detonating a terrorist event on King Island - we’ll go easy on them. What’s the loss in a few milkers, windy fields and noisy sea birds in exchange for the nation’s security? Sacrifice King Island for the safety of the nation.
Any protest by King Island citizens? The Attorney General can introduce penalties against disruption. A five-year jail sentence for non-conformity with Canberra’s neo-con fascist kings sounds about right. Ruddocks “Across Oz Same Same Easy Grasp Terrorism Laws” are the way to fly if you want to stay out of harm. Ruddock will avoid disquiet by imposing a prison term on all citizens who talk about what’s happening to them at King Island. Blab and publicise what happened to you at Ruddock’s hands… you would be sentenced under anti-terrorism provisions. Although it won’t matter for heaven’s sake if apprehended citizens want to blab anyway. Who will know where King Island is? Ruddock and Howard can be matriarchs of Australia’s King Island Guantanamo. Such a turn-on, an oddball like Ruddock would wet his pants over such an idea? Troublemakers could be locked up Guantanamo style without explanation.
As for this nonsense with Jon Stanhope “stuffing up the Ruddock way.” Stanhope’s strife means his time to learn to fall in line with the other sheepish premiers and state chiefs? The time is ripe for Ruddock to adopt another Bushite rallying cry winner, ‘Your either with us or against us!” Runing with this biggie of the New World Order, he can shove it down the throats of tremulous Aussies, it might turn the people against tall poppies like Stanhope and any others thinking out of line.
All in the name of heading off danger the Oddball says is ahead!
23 July 2006
Obvious if Lebanon Had Nuclear Deterrence Israeli Government Could Go Screw Itself
If Lebanon possessed the same shielding miltary hardware of North Korea would the murdering swines of Israel’s Devil Government still launch their pre-planned offensive against [claimed Hezbollah] targets on Lebanese territory?
A crushing bombing “strike and awe” execrable mayhem on Lebanon, an offensive calculated to inflict intense casualties on innocent humanity and destroy noncombatant infrastructure. Irrefutable evidence IDF devastation targeted against innocent civilians including children, foreign tourists and massive deliberate destruction of homes, commerce and basic utilities. The blowing up of power generation, water plants and road infrastructure severs any possibilty for survival of daily life for the Labanese people.
So extensive is the reckless squandering of life and ruin perpetrated on Lebanese territory it raises the shocking examination of what the hell is Israel’s intent? My conclusion is Israel’s reason is a premeditated aim to ignite, enrage and engage the widest and deepest potential angered Arab response. It is to provoke Arab counteraction for the magnitude of slaying and mayhem in Lebanon? In particular the targets are Iran and Syria, to pull them into war against Israel, thereby triggering a seemingly defensive USA military response in retaliation.
It may seem effortless for Israel to pour destruction on Southern Lebanon, whilst the IDF only need worry itself from a modest capability of small misiles and small arms fire from Hezbollah. The copiously armed IDF would be subservient in rank were its bullheaded onslaught faced with a fully armed nuclear Lebanon.
The cruelty of Israel against civilians by its lunatic military cocksureness can only be checked, only be repeled when the target nation readies in its armourery the tactical authority of nuclear deterrance. This is the power that can deter - the force to shield by mutal assured destruction [MAD] that weapons of mass destruction could enforce. Technically superior weaponry to Israel gives the same protection. If Lebanon could stare the Israeli bully in the face and counter their aggression with a nuclear weapon it would instil a little more respect before unleashing the Zionist dogs of war.
Clearly an overwhelming case supports the responsibility of Arab states that share a border with the Devil state of Israel to have the same deterrence power as North Korea. It is found a necessity for protection.
A nuclear-armed Lebanon would have detered the beligerant Nazi brute of Zionist Israel from attacking. The feral attack in subsidy of neo-fascist warmongers of the Bush/Cheney Washington would be checkmated.
How could the Israeli Government perpetrate egregious war crimes with imunity on their insane road of igniting a "clash of civilization’s" Armageddon - if faced by the reprisal of nuclear deterrence?
This is why Iran and Syria must have nuclear weapons.
A crushing bombing “strike and awe” execrable mayhem on Lebanon, an offensive calculated to inflict intense casualties on innocent humanity and destroy noncombatant infrastructure. Irrefutable evidence IDF devastation targeted against innocent civilians including children, foreign tourists and massive deliberate destruction of homes, commerce and basic utilities. The blowing up of power generation, water plants and road infrastructure severs any possibilty for survival of daily life for the Labanese people.
So extensive is the reckless squandering of life and ruin perpetrated on Lebanese territory it raises the shocking examination of what the hell is Israel’s intent? My conclusion is Israel’s reason is a premeditated aim to ignite, enrage and engage the widest and deepest potential angered Arab response. It is to provoke Arab counteraction for the magnitude of slaying and mayhem in Lebanon? In particular the targets are Iran and Syria, to pull them into war against Israel, thereby triggering a seemingly defensive USA military response in retaliation.
It may seem effortless for Israel to pour destruction on Southern Lebanon, whilst the IDF only need worry itself from a modest capability of small misiles and small arms fire from Hezbollah. The copiously armed IDF would be subservient in rank were its bullheaded onslaught faced with a fully armed nuclear Lebanon.
The cruelty of Israel against civilians by its lunatic military cocksureness can only be checked, only be repeled when the target nation readies in its armourery the tactical authority of nuclear deterrance. This is the power that can deter - the force to shield by mutal assured destruction [MAD] that weapons of mass destruction could enforce. Technically superior weaponry to Israel gives the same protection. If Lebanon could stare the Israeli bully in the face and counter their aggression with a nuclear weapon it would instil a little more respect before unleashing the Zionist dogs of war.
Clearly an overwhelming case supports the responsibility of Arab states that share a border with the Devil state of Israel to have the same deterrence power as North Korea. It is found a necessity for protection.
A nuclear-armed Lebanon would have detered the beligerant Nazi brute of Zionist Israel from attacking. The feral attack in subsidy of neo-fascist warmongers of the Bush/Cheney Washington would be checkmated.
How could the Israeli Government perpetrate egregious war crimes with imunity on their insane road of igniting a "clash of civilization’s" Armageddon - if faced by the reprisal of nuclear deterrence?
This is why Iran and Syria must have nuclear weapons.
3 June 2006
Is Saudi Arabia the Intended US Military Target - Not the Iranian Noise?
There is a tangible volume of speculation and inside intelligence washing across Internet sites and some print media the White House will launch a military attack on Iran as early as June or July.
The sabre rattling and hissy fits between Iran and the USA over Iran’s alledged peace-destroying program of nuclear electric power generation, with the US administration accusing Iran of building nuclear bombs – in spite of contrary evidence that such is not the case.
Provocative agitation from Israel’s Zionist government warns of Armageddon and oblivion of the state of Israel if the US does nothing to stop Iran. Even though Iran has an international legal abiding right and unequivocal freedom to persue a peaceful nuclear program. The verbal exchange of pointed and provocative statements between the Bush administration, Israel and Iran is just too notably visible, provocative and widely seen on public radar to my liking. The threat of US build up of attack on Iran is clearly attaining a saturated profile. I pause to now consider suspecting a diversionary smokescreen is being spawned. The Iran issue may be a diversion from the genuine event proposed by the White House and Pentagon planners. A devious and more judicious use of military hardware could be pointing to an attack directed against another claimed global threat to the world’s oil supplies. Government manufactured terrorist incidents could in fact be on the drawing board to produce conflict inside another Middle East State, resulting in American imperialist interference to once again protect the global peace.
Direct open conflict may not be on the cards today with Iran. The big game in the US gunsight I suspect is simpler toast of Saudi Arabian oil. Lay aside momentarily any design or demented intent of the White House to deliberately precipitate and destroy totally a shaky world politic and doomed global economics. Any indefinable rationale the Bush administration adopts to justify its push for total global conflict and economic collapse will truly be the stuff of madmen. I’ll conclude US hegemony is still the game in town and total world conflict at the hands of madmen has not yet reached fever point? Likely America’s grave economic sinking sand its failing dollar hegemony to turn the globe upside down is the event to curtail right now. How can this best be achieved?
Why would the USA attack Iran after so much advance ground shaking has given the Iranians a heads up to militarily prepare for a US offensive? The negative effect of restricted global oil suppy to the West if Iran withdraws supply, either by political intent or infrastructure destruction doesn’t make a lot of sense no matter which way I try to imagine events? The only winners will be profit in the hands of oil companies from sky rocketing oil price, but even this would be short lived as demand plummets to make mince meat of any long term gain to oil majors.
We know what a weakling the USA military in on the ground performance is; electing to attack small and substantially inferior equipped oponents to confrontation with well-armed and prepared forces. Now that Iran has installed sophisticated weaponry mentally prepared its forces and people for possible attack from the Great White Satan and categorically stated it will defend to the last man and ensure major military upset of conditions for US forces in Iraq. How the dickens can the USA make inroads on Iranian regime change or grab Iranian territory given the above influences that to me all appear as impediments to USA hegemony?
It’s a colossal assumption, but if the Bush administration is not yet inclined to completely throw the globe into utter confusion and potential global conflict – but instead seeks to enhance US hegemony over global affairs. Another simpler and powerful inroad into control over the Muslim world and control of vital oil resources points to a different target. Saudi Arabia makes more military and economic sense to invade - if minimal US casualties, propping up the petro dollar and maximum global influence is the objective?
The level of increasing media reporting welling up of Saudi Arabian terrorist links, of unsettled conditions in the Kingdom, the recent death of King Fahd and subsequent dissent within Saudi Arabia’s ranks, this alerts me to conclude Saudi Arabia may be propagandised as the bogey man and intended takeover target. The victim in America’s sights could very well be a surprise attack on the biggest oil pearl of them all. A successful takeover of the House of Saud carries great economic influence and broad predominance of geopolitical shaping if hegemony is the Bush administration’s prominent design. Saudi Arabia is an easier and weaker target than Iran to subjugate to the USA military machine. It is probably internally more divided than the political and religious establishments of Iran.
Consider Saudi Arabia is the plum oil exporter in the Middle East, the US intelligence communities possess substantial knowledge of Saudi military and physical assets than it has of Iran’s full preparation to defend itself. A huge volume of development in Saudi Arabia was constucted by US contractors and managed by American expatriates.
Any takeover of Saudi Arabia by USA forces will make it hazardous for Iran to justify a military response by its own forces. An attack in reprisal by Iran against USA naval assets or other ships to block the passage of oil through the Strait of Hormus - if the US does not attack Iran herself is a virtual guarantee Iran will not risk to expose herself to subsequent US attack. Potential global sanctions against Iran through interpretation of Iran as a culpable party in escalating wider Middle East conflict when USA forces have not bombed Iran herself. Furthermore European powers will be loath to side with Iran if the USA is holding immediate Saudi territorial advantage, contained oil resources and holding economic strings of physical authority over who gets Saudi oil.
The Pentagon spin-doctors and White House black propaganda units will unwaveringly link the next major government sponsored terrorist attack and accompanying massive loss of life to rogue units inside Saudi Arabian instability. Accusing the House of Saud directly as the guilty party as responsible for the terrorist attacks would be a stretch.
But a direct link with rogue al-Qa’eda infiltration of Saudi security forces and wide tensions spilling over into terrorist elements inside Saudi territory that is destabilising the Kingdom and therefore security of global oil supplies is quite achievable and believable to Americans. If Iran were seen to conspicuously hinder the USA war on terrorism during a “friendly” USA takeover [invasion] of Saudi Arabia that is claimed to protect peace, protect life, establish stability in the region, whatever reason. Iran's actions would be depicted as preposterous retaliation against USA friendly action in Saudi Arabia. Iran would be unlikely to risk global exposure of herself to accusations from the Bush administration or Israel as an accomplice to the terrible terrorism that has just ocurred - under a fashioned spotlight of US propaganda backed by main street media complicity.
The sabre rattling and hissy fits between Iran and the USA over Iran’s alledged peace-destroying program of nuclear electric power generation, with the US administration accusing Iran of building nuclear bombs – in spite of contrary evidence that such is not the case.
Provocative agitation from Israel’s Zionist government warns of Armageddon and oblivion of the state of Israel if the US does nothing to stop Iran. Even though Iran has an international legal abiding right and unequivocal freedom to persue a peaceful nuclear program. The verbal exchange of pointed and provocative statements between the Bush administration, Israel and Iran is just too notably visible, provocative and widely seen on public radar to my liking. The threat of US build up of attack on Iran is clearly attaining a saturated profile. I pause to now consider suspecting a diversionary smokescreen is being spawned. The Iran issue may be a diversion from the genuine event proposed by the White House and Pentagon planners. A devious and more judicious use of military hardware could be pointing to an attack directed against another claimed global threat to the world’s oil supplies. Government manufactured terrorist incidents could in fact be on the drawing board to produce conflict inside another Middle East State, resulting in American imperialist interference to once again protect the global peace.
Direct open conflict may not be on the cards today with Iran. The big game in the US gunsight I suspect is simpler toast of Saudi Arabian oil. Lay aside momentarily any design or demented intent of the White House to deliberately precipitate and destroy totally a shaky world politic and doomed global economics. Any indefinable rationale the Bush administration adopts to justify its push for total global conflict and economic collapse will truly be the stuff of madmen. I’ll conclude US hegemony is still the game in town and total world conflict at the hands of madmen has not yet reached fever point? Likely America’s grave economic sinking sand its failing dollar hegemony to turn the globe upside down is the event to curtail right now. How can this best be achieved?
Why would the USA attack Iran after so much advance ground shaking has given the Iranians a heads up to militarily prepare for a US offensive? The negative effect of restricted global oil suppy to the West if Iran withdraws supply, either by political intent or infrastructure destruction doesn’t make a lot of sense no matter which way I try to imagine events? The only winners will be profit in the hands of oil companies from sky rocketing oil price, but even this would be short lived as demand plummets to make mince meat of any long term gain to oil majors.
We know what a weakling the USA military in on the ground performance is; electing to attack small and substantially inferior equipped oponents to confrontation with well-armed and prepared forces. Now that Iran has installed sophisticated weaponry mentally prepared its forces and people for possible attack from the Great White Satan and categorically stated it will defend to the last man and ensure major military upset of conditions for US forces in Iraq. How the dickens can the USA make inroads on Iranian regime change or grab Iranian territory given the above influences that to me all appear as impediments to USA hegemony?
It’s a colossal assumption, but if the Bush administration is not yet inclined to completely throw the globe into utter confusion and potential global conflict – but instead seeks to enhance US hegemony over global affairs. Another simpler and powerful inroad into control over the Muslim world and control of vital oil resources points to a different target. Saudi Arabia makes more military and economic sense to invade - if minimal US casualties, propping up the petro dollar and maximum global influence is the objective?
The level of increasing media reporting welling up of Saudi Arabian terrorist links, of unsettled conditions in the Kingdom, the recent death of King Fahd and subsequent dissent within Saudi Arabia’s ranks, this alerts me to conclude Saudi Arabia may be propagandised as the bogey man and intended takeover target. The victim in America’s sights could very well be a surprise attack on the biggest oil pearl of them all. A successful takeover of the House of Saud carries great economic influence and broad predominance of geopolitical shaping if hegemony is the Bush administration’s prominent design. Saudi Arabia is an easier and weaker target than Iran to subjugate to the USA military machine. It is probably internally more divided than the political and religious establishments of Iran.
Consider Saudi Arabia is the plum oil exporter in the Middle East, the US intelligence communities possess substantial knowledge of Saudi military and physical assets than it has of Iran’s full preparation to defend itself. A huge volume of development in Saudi Arabia was constucted by US contractors and managed by American expatriates.
Any takeover of Saudi Arabia by USA forces will make it hazardous for Iran to justify a military response by its own forces. An attack in reprisal by Iran against USA naval assets or other ships to block the passage of oil through the Strait of Hormus - if the US does not attack Iran herself is a virtual guarantee Iran will not risk to expose herself to subsequent US attack. Potential global sanctions against Iran through interpretation of Iran as a culpable party in escalating wider Middle East conflict when USA forces have not bombed Iran herself. Furthermore European powers will be loath to side with Iran if the USA is holding immediate Saudi territorial advantage, contained oil resources and holding economic strings of physical authority over who gets Saudi oil.
The Pentagon spin-doctors and White House black propaganda units will unwaveringly link the next major government sponsored terrorist attack and accompanying massive loss of life to rogue units inside Saudi Arabian instability. Accusing the House of Saud directly as the guilty party as responsible for the terrorist attacks would be a stretch.
But a direct link with rogue al-Qa’eda infiltration of Saudi security forces and wide tensions spilling over into terrorist elements inside Saudi territory that is destabilising the Kingdom and therefore security of global oil supplies is quite achievable and believable to Americans. If Iran were seen to conspicuously hinder the USA war on terrorism during a “friendly” USA takeover [invasion] of Saudi Arabia that is claimed to protect peace, protect life, establish stability in the region, whatever reason. Iran's actions would be depicted as preposterous retaliation against USA friendly action in Saudi Arabia. Iran would be unlikely to risk global exposure of herself to accusations from the Bush administration or Israel as an accomplice to the terrible terrorism that has just ocurred - under a fashioned spotlight of US propaganda backed by main street media complicity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)