The New World Order
Is it a Promise?
The Month of May, 2004 started differently for senior Bush administration officials. All of a sudden, a new wave of wide spread attacks on the administration for Abu Ghraib scandal was ubiquitous. It forced Bush aides to make it a top priority to find a way to move past humiliating images. The same images that were intended to humiliate Iraqi detainees for “intelligence” backfired to become a shameful liability to deal with. But how could you move past it?
Before you knew it, a barbaric medieval sacrifice of a young American soul to the almighty paid off. The beheading of Nicolas Berg helped no cause, but that of arrogant warmongers in the Bush administration. As if they were waiting for it, they wasted no time to unleash their dogs out to exploit yet another tragedy of their own war only to mitigate the enormous public outrage over prisoner abuse.
At the same time they moved to block the release of additional images for the sake of protecting the rights of those who are charged with prisoner abuse. They also claimed it was to uphold the, self acclaimed, high standard of morality to protect the rights of detainees!
Yes, the same self appointed legislator, judge, and executor of international law and cross cultural, and religious morality who had no respect for Geneva Convention, who ridiculed United Nation, and who led a great nation to bravado over a dubious, if not false, cause for war, is now, claiming to protect the rights of Iraqi detainees!
This is the same administration that prevented pictures of troops coming home in coffins from being published because we have to respect their families' unexpressed wishes for privacy. Yet the killing of Nicholas Berg is different and they cannot honor his family’s expressed request that it NOT be publicized.
But let’s take this claim of high morality for its face value. The devil hides in two sets of standards that are applied to parties. Those who are charged with such heinous crimes have already entered plea bargaining with the prosecutor. How about their victims? Well, they may decide to throw some peanuts at them for compensation.
Don’t be sickened by appalling revelations that “Aside from the Red Cross report, The New York Times quoted counterterrorism officials as saying CIA interrogation methods used on al Qaeda suspects is so severe the FBI has told its agents to stay away from such sessions.” It is simply norms NOT exception to differentiate between accused. Who says people are equal? Who can claim FBI treated Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma bomber, the same way CIA treats al Qaeda suspects who are not even convicted yet? Aren’t their crimes exactly the same?
The double standards American government practiced for so long was never known to be so brutal, inhumane, and despicable. Not even during Vietnam War. You could always spin the fact to make a case that hatred for America was due to jealousy. Even its support for Israeli governments could be defended regardless of undeniable Zionist atrocities against Palestinians. Thanks to Bush administration for its notorious arrogance, such a case can no longer be made.
Instead a case has been made that the very act of taking those images was primarily for humiliating Iraqi detainees. “…Their sufferings, their pathetic pleas for mercy, were to be recorded - to add the final layer of degradation to their fate. And now I realize, too, that the pictures of the Iraqis so cruelly treated - so tortured …, were taken for precisely the same reason.” writes Robert Fisk “Someone decided that the photos would be the final straw, the breaking point, the moment of capitulation for these young men. … So … Who taught Lynndie and her boyfriend and the other American sadists of Abu Ghraib prison to do this?
It is not just Robert Fisk who asks this question. Almost everyone I talked to was curious to know why recording the sadist crime in pictures and video tapes. It is obvious; it was neither isolated nor accused felt they were engaged in a clandestine intelligence operation. So who trained them for this? And finally, why only a non westerner, General Taguba, in American Army stands up against it? To answer this question we must step back in time a bit.
But first let’s examine its value for intelligence. Let’s assume the ends justify the means. Let’s say these barbaric terrorists deserve what they get. Let’s come to the conclusion that the “intelligence” gathered by such despicable humiliation can be used to prevent them from killing innocent civilians.
Even if ends justify means, coming to that conclusion is not easy. The “widespread acknowledgement in the intelligence community (indicates) such measures were not an effective or reliable means of gaining accurate information…first-hand experience had taught veteran intelligence officers that the use or threat of extreme measures made suspects so scared that they would testify to almost anything they thought the interrogators wanted to hear. If they thought you wanted to hear Martians were behind an attack, the suspects would try to sell you that"
Thus, no claim for “intelligence” is valid because no reliable information can be gained by these extreme measures. Then again why doing it? The more you connect the dots, the more it resembles to a satanic cult activity systematically applied against Iraqi detainees by the undisputed army of the world. But, again, why?
If the application of such means does not lead itself to desirable ends, then what is the purpose? Why government hires people like Lane McCotter to oversee the Iraqi prisons “Lane McCotter resigned in 1997 under pressure as director of Utah Corrections Department after an inmate died while shackled naked to a restraining chair for 16 hours.”
Is it safe to draw a different conclusion? One based on imperialistic or religious objectives. Something like character assassination by humiliating native patriots who oppose occupation, which is what Arabs believe Israeli government has notoriously done against Palestinians for years, or for appeasing far rights hidden religious agenda against Muslims. “..a long tradition that goes back to the Crusades; that the Muslim is dirty, lascivious, unChristian, unworthy of humanity - which is pretty much what Osama bin Laden (now forgotten by Mr. Bush, I notice) believes about us Westerners. And our illegal, immoral, meretricious war has now brought forth the images that betray our racism” writes Robert Fisk.
American imperialism did not need religion to impose its unique position as the only superpower of the world. Besides, the September 11 tragedy actualized a distinctive prospect to win the hearts and minds of almost every people around the globe in sympathy. It was far right Christianity who exploited this unique opportunity. They had their men in the white house, in almost every corner of American government, and to some extent in the media. They wasted no time to wage their war against Islam.
Now let’s take a glimpse of the recent history. The 20th century is well remembered for being the scene of clashes of ideologies. It simply boiled down to a variety of capitalist school of thoughts on one side and different breeds of socialism on the other. Secularism was taken for granted on both sides of the isle. No one could even dream of religion becoming as powerful and as merciless as it manifested itself for the past couple of decades.
So we started the new millennium blindly handing over our worldly affairs to the realm of god. Given the collapse of the Soviet Union as an evil empire, and the rise of Khomaini to power, it was simply inconceivable not to invite bishops and rabbis to the party. It was supposed to be a sacred trinity after all.
We simply ignored a major historical fact. It is the historical reality that for the past hundreds of years, the three major religions could never resolve their differences, in peace. The long history of Jews, Christians, and Muslims is the broken record of divine rhetoric for peace and harmony, but satanic act of war and atrocity against each other.
The most notorious of which is church helping, in fact making, kings to recruit crusaders to take the holy city of Jerusalem! History tells us that when Crusaders took Jerusalem by storm on July 15, 1099; they massacred virtually every inhabitant to purify the city by washing it in the blood of the defeated infidels.
While history, in the making, never stops repeating itself, Bush’s war against terrorism does not come short of a new crusade against Islam. However, the new hymn is not tuned to Christianity, but to democracy! It sure reminds Muslims of Caliphs tyranny and invasion of sovereign countries in the name of Islam.
Israel on the other hand is the de facto beneficiary. It has already secured its democracy with unconventional atomic arsenal that is accountable to no International Agencies whatsoever. Israel’s only regret of atrocities against Palestinians is its timing. Otherwise it is comparable to that of pilgrims to native Indian Americans. Had it not been in this age, it would’ve been history.
Christian extremist, like their Muslim and Jew counterparts, have their own set of multiple standards. No Muslim will ever forget their calling Prophet Muhammad a terrorist. Yet they are shameless enough to claim that their mission is to purify Islam from fanatic Islamic terrorists! Did anyone call Timothy McVeigh a Christian terrorist? How easily the media forgot that of all acts of terrorism, his was a direct revenge for a Christian cult.
While Islamic mullahs capitalized on the untapped Muslim grievances against their unelected rulers. Jewish rabbis exploited the world’s sympathy for their suffering from Nazis. Finally, it was simply a natural consequence of the September 11 tragedy for a new born Christian to turn a political issue into religion. And that is how the new world order was sealed. It is the new era of religion or the old divine law, subject to interpretation, in new forms.
From the position of power, Jewish and Christian extremists try to use their economic, military and media might to force Muslims to abide by their rules. Having been deprived of elected governments, Islamic extremists are forced to go underground.
For a true believer of any of these 3 major religions, it is not hard to believe it is the end of the world. It is Armageddon alright, but no messiah in sight. No one is saved, and everyone is left behind. The military might of America and Israel terrorize innocent people. So do Al Qaeda and a myriad of other groups who have a different reading of Armageddon.
Armageddon, by religious definition, is a catastrophic conflict. It is the final battle between the forces of good and evil. The problem is that each party not only considers itself the true believer in good, but it is also convinced that others are forces of evil. So killing them and/or getting killed is both helping good and defeating evil.
If a far right evangelic Christian truly believes Bush is a new born Christian helping the forces of good, he does not hesitate for a moment to save him from any scandal. To take a very cruel reality as an example, the killing of Nick Berg as a Jew whose ancestors crucified Jesus did serve as a double edged sword against the forces of evil. It would have the same effect for an Islamic fanatic who does not believe in Jews right to exist. Dogmatically enough it would serve Jewish extremist by making a sacrifice of their own for a greater good.
Interestingly, only Islamic fanatics have a track record of proudly taking responsibility for their crimes. Others would have to blame it on Muslims to prove them barbarians. Yet, except for the dubious statement before the killing, neither Al Qaeda nor Al Zarqawi claimed or denied responsibility.
Something is definitely wrong, but irrelevant because it is no longer a matter of who did what. It is the vicious cycle of madness. It is the forces of power against the powerless rest of the world who never took part in the new world order, but suffers from it one way or the other.
May 22, 2004