- "Could it be that the former Iraqi dictator has
actually been in U.S. custody (or under house arrest) for some time, and
that the administration waited until it needed this public relations boost
to announce Hussein's capture to the world?"
-
- In the seven months since the fall of Baghdad, U.S. troops
have clumsily and fruitlessly searched for the dictator believed to pose
the greatest threat to world peace and security. A military that could
not stop terrorist attacks carried out by alleged suicidal hijackers armed
only with box cutters on 9/11 should have surprised no one with their abject
incompetence in finding and apprehending Saddam Hussein. However, suddenly
Saturday, a US military contingent 600 strong came upon a hole in the ground
in southeast of Saddam's hometown of Tikrit, and voila! There he was!
-
- Both the timing and the circumstances of Hussein's capture
are highly suspect. In recent days, the Bush administration has faced intense
international condemnation over its policy of excluding "uncooperative"
nations from sharing in the spoils of the war with Iraq. In addition, Halliburton,
an energy company of which the current vice president is former CEO, now
faces a congressional investigation for its skullduggery in the price of
the oil it delivered to Iraq. Furthermore, there have been recent signs
that the Bush's election prospects have begun to erode, owing primarily
to his administration's atrocious and indeed criminal foreign policy and
his appalling inattention to domestic matters.
-
- The appearance of a bearded Saddam Hussein on international
television, with several hundred thousand dollars in U.S. currency in his
possession should immediately instill doubt. Why would he be so well endowed
financially and yet appear so unkempt? If he were trying to elude U.S.
occupation forces, why would he not make himself completely unrecognizable?
In fact, Saddam's face is unmistakable despite the uncharacteristic beard.
Could it be that the former Iraqi dictator has actually been in U.S. custody
(or under house arrest) for some time, and that the administration waited
until it needed this public relations boost to announce Hussein's capture
to the world? Such a suggestion may at first seem preposterous, but it
would not be the first such psychological tactic ever employed. Other examples
include the spectacular lies and distortions relating to 9/11, the bogus
"The War on Terrorism" and the Jessica Lynch hoax.
-
- Moreover, is it not a compelling coincidence that the
formation of an Iraqi war crimes tribunal preceded his capture by only
a week? And, why an Iraqi war crimes tribunal (comprised of U.S. puppets)
and not an international one? Perhaps the Bush administration knows that
the United Nations and other world bodies will not be duped by U.S. propaganda.
-
- Finally, that Saddam Hussein will be charged with war
crimes and genocide is staggeringly disingenuous. While Hussein is undeniably
a criminal, it is the United States that has destroyed Iraq and killed
2 million of its people with genocidal sanctions. It is the United States
that has flagrantly violated international law in pursuit of regime change
in Iraq, and it is the United States that bears full responsibility for
bringing Hussein to power.
-
- Since the United States brought Saddam Hussein to power
after the assassination of Abdul Karim Kasim, any charge of war crimes
or genocide should be brought not only against the former Iraqi leadership,
but also against every U.S president since and including John F. Kennedy
(obviously deceased presidents would be tried in absentia).
-
- The U.S. boasts a long history of deposing and installing
leaders as Washington's and Wall Street's "interests" have required.
In addition to the American CIA's installation of Saddam Hussein, examples
include: The Somozas in Nicaragua, Battista in Cuba, the Shah of Iran,
Salazar in Portugal, Marcos in the Philippines, Pinochet in Chile, Stroessner
in Paraguay, the Duvaliers in Haiti, Trujillo in the Dominican Republic,
Mobutu in The Congo, Suharto in Indonesia, the government of South Africa
during apartheid, and even Pol Pot in Cambodia.
-
- Seldom, if ever, did any of the aforementioned dictators
elicit a word of censure from their benefactors in the Oval Office.
-
- Saddam Hussein is likely to face some form of justice,
whether in a legitimate international tribunal, or in some U.S. orchestrated
kangaroo farce. To the extent that he has dealt with his political adversaries
violently and that he has long been a willing accomplice in U.S. atrocities,
he should be brought to decisive and conclusive justice.
-
- But, will the real war criminals and authors of genocide
ever be brought to justice? The final chapters of that book have yet to
be written.
-
- Copyright © 1998-2003 Online Journal. All rights
reserved.
-
- http://www.onlinejournal.com/Commentary/121603Diaferia/121603diaferia.ht
ml
|
