- So 'Zarqawi' is finally dead. It was
an interesting piece of news that greeted us yesterday morning (or was
it the day before? I've lost track of time). I didn't bother with the pictures
and film they showed of him because I, personally, have been saturated
with images of broken, bleeding bodies.
-
- The reactions have been different. There's
a general consensus amongst family and friends that he won't be missed,
whoever he is. There is also doubt- who was he really? Did he even exist?
Was he truly the huge terror the Americans made him out to be? When did
he actually die? People swear he was dead back in 2003.
-
- The timing is extremely suspicious:
just when people were getting really fed up with the useless Iraqi government,
Zarqawi is killed and Maliki is hailed the victorious leader of the occupied
world! (And no- Iraqis aren't celebrating in the streets- worries over
electricity, water, death squads, tests, corpses and extremists in high
places prevail right now.)
-
- I've been listening to reactions- mostly
from pro-war politicians and the naïveté they reveal is astounding.
Maliki (the current Iraqi PM) was almost giddy as he made the news public
(he had even gone the extra mile and shaved!). Do they really believe it
will end the resistance against occupation? As long as foreign troops are
in Iraq, resistance or 'insurgency' will continue- why is that SO difficult
to understand? How is that concept a foreign one?
-
- "A new day for Iraqis" is the
current theme of the Iraqi puppet government and the Americans. Like it
was "A New Day for Iraqis" on April 9, 2003 . And it was "A
New Day for Iraqis" when they killed Oday and Qusay. Another "New
Day for Iraqis" when they caught Saddam. More "New Day"
when they drafted the constitution.
-
- I'm beginning to think it's like one
of those questions they give you on IQ tests: If 'New' is equal to 'More'
and 'Day' is equal to 'Suffering', what does "New Day for Iraqis"
mean?
-
- How do I feel? To hell with Zarqawi (or
Zayrkawi as Bush calls him).
-
- He was an American creation- he came
along with them- they don't need him anymore, apparently. His 'influence'
was greatly exaggerated and he was the justification for every single family
they killed through military strikes and troops. It was WMD at first, then
it was Saddam, then it was Zarqawi. Who will it be now? Who will be the
new excuse for killing and detaining Iraqis? Or is it that an excuse is
no longer needed- they have freedom to do what they want. The slaughter
in Haditha months ago proved that. "They don't need him anymore,"
our elderly neighbor waved the news away like he was shooing flies, "They
have fifty Zarqawis in government."
-
- So now that Zarqawi is dead, and because
according to Bush and our Iraqi puppets he was behind so much of Iraq's
misery- things should get better, right? The car bombs should lessen, the
ethnic cleansing will come to a halt, military strikes and sieges will
die down. That's what we were promised, wasn't it? That sounds good to
me. Now - who do they have to kill to stop the Ministry of Interior death
squads, and trigger-happy foreign troops?
-
- http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/2006_06_01_riverb
endblog_archive.html#114988627694074375
-
|
