Friday, 28 September 2007

RHETORIC AND TACTICS IN BRITISH FOREIGN POLICY

‘Time to learn and move on’?

Sukant Chandan*


This weeks annual national Labour Party conference is witnessing the party’s leadership doing all that they can to distance themselves from the Blair years which are synonymous with Islamophobia, war, lies and deceit, known as ‘spin’ in modern British political parlance, all of which has alienated wide sections of the electorate from Labour. If anyone might have been in doubt that such a grand exercise was taking place Prime Minister Brown initiated proceedings with a speech, usually scheduled at the end of the conference, for over an hour long which gave one sentence each to Iraq and to Blair. The primary reason for this public relations stunt is that Britain under Blair failed to make a success in its aims, the most infamous now being the invasion of Iraq based on ‘dodgy’ intelligence, i.e., a war of aggression conducted on the basis of lies. If Iraq had gone smoothly with the Iraqis welcoming the US and Britain, then Blair may still have been in charge and continuing to be at the forefront of the US and UK’s plan for a ‘New Middle East’ and much more beyond. Why a people would welcome those countries which were responsible for dilapidating UN sanctions and intermittent bombing raids for a decade and a half can only be known to the policy makers in Whitehall. It has been left to the insurgency in Iraq and Afghanistan to ensure that the world knows loud and clearly that the occupation is not welcome and that Blair’s name has gone down in history as one of the most brutal, cynical and utterly failed military adventures in modern history.

Additionally, the US and UK’s agenda for the region was aborted due to the continuing defiance of the Palestinian people, who to much of the world’s surprise elected Hamas, seen by most in the West until very recently as the archetypal reactionary Islamist terror group. Hamas won the election and engaged the West in a successful media and diplomatic campaign to show that they are a legitimate and reasonable mass movement for national liberation. Playing one last desperate card before his time was up, Blair gave full backing to the bloody Israeli assault on Lebanon last summer, which ended in the historic defeat of Israel, or at the very least gave a hard and fast lesson to Israel that it could not invade a neighbouring Arab country with impunity.

These failed campaigns have led to the alienation of considerable sections of the British electorate towards the Labour administration, be it from the Muslim community or the liberal political classes. The opposition Tories and Liberal parties took their advantage of Labour woes and Labour lost many council and parliamentary seats up and down the country, while losing all of Scotland to the Nationalists. Hence the panic in Labour circles and the operation to extract what Labour saw as the primary and on-going cause of the problem – Tony Blair. The ever-so-smooth handover of power from Blair to Brown was a barely disguised attempt to manage and contain any further fall-out from the political disasters that had plagued Labour.

Labour has now moved away from Blairite out-right and open aggressiveness of the last decade and reverted back to its political style of the late 1990s, choosing its targets for foreign meddling a little more carefully and aiming at countries which the political classes in Britain would find much more agreeable, such as Myanmar, Zimbabwe and Sudan, all causes for a veritable ‘white mans burden’. As a result Brown’s speech at annual Labour conference this week was noticeable, apart from its vacuousness, for barely mentioning Iraq and Afghanistan or his former boss’s name.

On the second day Foreign Secretary Miliband then tried to present Labour, not as a government trying to dominate the Muslims, which is what some ‘very educated’ Pakistanis told him, but a champion of their rights. With the intention of coming across as a liberator of Muslims, he spoke in favour of including Turkey in the EU, resolving the Kosovo issue and also helping the people of Darfur in Sudan. The message was reinforced by the politically correct photo opportunity of a Muslim woman complete with headscarf from Darfur who delivered a speech preceding Miliband’s. He gave assurances that there were mistakes made vis-à-vis Iraq; what they were we were not told but we assured us that it was ‘time to learn and move on’. It is expedient for Labour to ‘move on’ from their former debacles in Iraq, but what lessons have they learnt? If the public are ignorant as to knowing what all this really means, if it means anything at all, is it right that we should forget the fact that it was these very same people who were leading ministers in the Labour government under Blair and as such politically leading the charge into Iraq. Surely the Iraqi and Afghani people deserve of a lot more than a momentary reassurance that some mysterious lessons have been learnt.

It was left to Defence Secretary Des Browne to expand on what lessons Labour have possibly learnt from the past ten years in office. Echoing Karzai and the UK ambassador to Afghanistan, he talked of engaging the Taliban in a peace process as like Hamas, the Taliban are not going away. He also argued that Afghanistan is unlikely to be able to sustain a western style democracy and that its legal and political system will have to be rooted in Islamic law. At first sight this seems to be encouraging as undeniably peace cannot be reached in Palestine or in Afghanistan without nationalist forces which reject the occupation being engaged in a process towards independence. Unfortunately Browne’s subsequent comments made clear that there is no real desire on part of the British to leave in Afghanistan in peace; he argued that Britain will have to remain there for ‘at least decades if not generations’, and that the campaign was one of the ‘noblest causes of the 21st Century’.

In fact Browne’s comments about engaging the Taliban are not dissimilar to what the occupation forces are attempting to do in Iraq; a counter-insurgency tactic to divide the resistance off from one another so as to weaken and strategically defeat it. During the Vietnamese war this was known as the ‘Nixon doctrine’, or put more simply ‘getting Asians to fight Asians’. It has often been the case in armed conflicts that when an occupying army is unable to win by outright brute force other political means are used to attempt to weaken the insurgents, this is what is partly taking place in Iraq today and what is being attempted in Afghanistan. History has shown that in a context of an occupation by a big nation of a small one, the forces of national resurgence are often stronger than that of those who succumb to the enticements of the occupying forces. This was recently and infamously exemplified by the assassination of Iraqi Sunni tribal leader turned US ally, Abu Risha. As for the NATO cause in Afghanistan being one of the noblest of this century, Labour seems unable to learn the lessons from experiences of over one hundred and fifty years, let alone the last ten. The nineteenth century in Afghanistan is replete with examples of the British failing to subdue a people who in response harassed and chased them away time and time again. Many Afghanis are adamant that this too will be the fate of the NATO occupation of their country.

The Labour Government seems to be coordinating its tactical approach with the US, as witnessed by Bush’s address at the UN General Assembly where he hardly mentioned Iraq or the Middle East and focused instead on Myanmar, a thinly veiled attempt by the West at pushing the Chinese around in the lead up to the Olympics. This avoidance of conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan is due to the insurgents in these countries having made these military campaigns by the West an embarrassment, something to be avoided at all costs in the media and at diplomatic conferences, rather than any noble cause to be paraded in public which they hoped it would be. Labour has returned to its humanitarian populist rhetoric of the late 1990s, but remains deeply involved in Iraq and Afghanistan. Its honeymoon period in government in the late 1990s was followed by a period in which it dropped more bombs than all previous British governments combined since the Second World War. Today US and UK standing in the world is a great deal more shaky than it was in the 1990s as a result of the moral and military failures in Iraq and Afghanistan, and only a person betraying a profound sense of naivety can say that they will not resort to aggression once more to shore up their precarious position in the world.

*Sukant Chandan is a London-based freelance journalist, researcher and political analyst. He runs two websites: http://ouraim.blogspot.com/ and http://sonsofmalcolm.blogspot.com/ and can be contacted at sukant.chandan@gmail.com

Wednesday, 26 September 2007

BRIGADES OF THE 1920 REVOLT STATEMENT TO THE WORLD


The Hidden Facts

[Video of this statement can be seen here]

Free people of the world, we believe it is time to provide
you with another updated report on the status of the war as
we in the resistance factions perceive. We have several
indications from the fields and from within the puppet
government in Baghdad that the tactics used by the
occupation forces have developed, yet the strategic aims
that drive them, remains the same and in order to clarify
the nature of such developments we must return to the
facts.

The invasion of Iraq was based on lies mainly as we all
must not forget, that the previous government was stocking
weapons of mass destruction and had links to the infamous
Al-Qaida. After the initial stages of this war, the world
discovered the scale of the White House deception. To avoid
accountability and responsibility, the declared reasons
gradually shifted to spreading democracy and taking the war
to them; as if the Iraqi people were responsible for the
events of 9/11. Buying time, while testing different
tactics to achieve any levels of success that maybe
marketed as a victory or achievement, became a priority.

The project then collapsed, and the Pentagon woke up to a
new reality. The Iraqi people did not welcome an invasion,
as some traitors have guided. And the Iraqi Army which
could not engage such a superior force with its outdated
equipment in a classic battlefield, has handed over the
cities to the occupier.

Large urban societies would require enormous financial
support and the funds found in Iraq's Banks would
eventually disappear in the hands of looters. New funds
would be required. Bush cannot simply ask for more funds
from the US tax payer. But now that Bush controls Middle
East Oil, he has no option but to increase the
international price of oil, to cover the increasing cost of
occupying our Country. This decision was the next mistake,
we in the resistance were praying for. The additional
revenues that would be available for Bush would also be
available for other oil producing states, mainly Russia,
Venezuela, and Iran. Each would benefit from the extra
revenues in enforcing their position in the international
arena. Russia today after five years is stronger and is
rebuilding its previous glory.Iran, which aided US
intervention in Afghanistan then Iraq succeeded in using US
power to weaken two fronts; build a larger and more
powerful army, fund its nuclear ambitions, and support any
organization in the Middle East that is opposed to Israel
and the US, regardless of sect or agenda, in an attempt to
extort the US into giving any concessions a defeated and
cornered White House could spare. Venezuela today
nationalized many of its industries reviving its economy
and having more to say, when it comes to oil pricing. China
has a growth rate that is confidently reaching the 4th. As
for Europe, it is lost in between. With a Euro currency too
strong to allow a considerable rise in exports, a union
which requires restructuring before accepting new members,
a birth rate that is at its lowest due to strains and
taxations on its working class, and energy requirements
that increase along with costs, the future of Europe and
its weak governments is not so promising. Europe, must find
ways to enforce its own will and interests and work in
conjunction with Russia to restore world stability and
balance. As for the fragile sheikhdoms that export oil in
the Arabian Gulf, we assure you that they are exporting at
maximum output. They are also in fear of Iran which could
easily cause havoc by firing a few missiles across the
Gulf. This will devastate the stock markets, and booming
property based industries which add up to their financial
back bone. They also cannot publicly assist the Iraqi
Resistance until the US simple evacuates to avoid being
labeled as funders of terrorism.

In Iraq, Bremer disbanded the Iraqi Army, giving us more
men and eagerness to free Iraq of its occupiers. And the
amount of weapons stocks we stored will last us for fifty
years if not more.

The White House faced with all this, decided that a puppet
government would assist in reducing the financial and
administration strains in Iraq, Bush then turned to the
Kurdish Parties and the Persian backed militias for
assistance. But, at what cost? Neither Turkey will accept
an independent Kurdish state on its southern borders, nor
Iran, will stop at simply aiding the US and easing its
burden by controlling the south of Iraq and have the US
concentrate their efforts on central Iraq. On the contrary,
the puppet government's ministries of influence such as the
Interior and Defense, were handed over to the Iranian
backed militias. Clarifying even more the secret
arrangement between the US and Iran. Here the White House
believed that by trying to enforce sectarian violence
amongst Iraqis the level of attacks on US troops will be
reduced, but this tactic, as we also predicted, has also
failed. Iraqis have a high rate of intersect marriages, and
that deprives anyone the ability to divide such a society
by sect. Also the amount of killings and sadisticbrutality
of these militias has left the US and its puppet government
in Baghdad exposed internationally. Today these militias,
have become the major source of instability in Iraq.

We must also not forget that the atrocities at Abu-Ghraib
prison and the use of chemical weapons on our civilians
added to the failure. The Pentagon then increased the
numbers of security contractors who have a high price tag,
and gave them more field duties, this way if any are
killed, there figures are not disclosed as is the case with
the green-card soldiers. Also today the number of security
contractors in Iraq is almost equal to the amount of
military personnel. As for the Islamic Party which claims
it represents the Sunnis in the puppet government; they
have played all their cards with no positive gains, and
more pressure is being enforced on them by us, to withdraw,
and deprive it from its legal status. We know they will
pull out sooner or later for they have nothing to offer to
the Iraqi people. And staying in power will do more harm.

The Pentagon and under order of Rumsfield resorted to a new
tactic. If Iraqis are not accepting what the US wants, they
must simply leave Iraq. In essence, change people of Iraq.
Make them refugees in neighboring countries until they
dissolve in their hostsocieties. And when these counties
complain, bullyor bribethem into silence. True, it will
effect our people and create an imbalance in the
composition of our society, but again to our advantage. Our
people who leave as refugees will be safer, and when they
find jobs whatever they may be, in neighboring countries,
they provide the minimums for their families and acquire
the working skills required to rebuild Iraq after victory.

Free people of the world as this conflict develops we are
more sure of our predictions and analysis. And the foreign
players in Iraq today have reached the state where their
interest are no longer common. There is more to disagree on
and conflict is present. And looking at all the details of
the timeline of this conflict as we have explained, we do
not see one correct decision or action taken on the part of
the US. Not one single positive achievement. This by far,
is the most costly pack of lies any criminal has come up
with. This is why Bush today, is alone and isolated in his
own little world. All his generals and strategists cannot
offer him a solution. His people do not believe in him and
his army of looters and thieves is lost, tired, and
disoriented. The true reasons of this war as we all know is
oil, world domination, corporate government, and the
guarantee of existence to the so called state of Israel.

Here we must not forget that the Iraqi Resistance, and
despite all the reservations that some might have, has set
a unique example that will be studied by historians and
analysts for years to come. Most importantly it has taught
the world of oppressed nations and societies that a self
sufficient resistance movement in our modern times is
possible, and can destabilize the most powerful opponents
let alone local governing bodies that cooperate with
imperial powers. They are much easier to remove and
eradicate and this reverses the known equation. One free
man, can change the outcome of a day.

The Resistance has proved to the world that it is through
morality and determination that you can achieve and gain
your rights and that ideological pretext that is marketed
by the US media as being the cause of this war, is nothing
but another lie. Religions have coexisted for thousands of
years in peace, why is it now a problem. Idealogic and
religious fanaticism on all sides is only the excuse and
not the reason which is economic gain and influence. The
Resistance has also proved that the highly consumable
capital based economies cannot fight long wars, and their
greed for energy to sustain a specific lifestyle will
eventually grind humanity into a global market of
exploitation and slaveryonly to be followed by total
collapse. Capitalism as is tested more and more with less
energy available will eventually fail.

In all what we have stated, we are proud to say that the
Iraqi Resistance has and continues to redefine the meaning
of the word conquest .

We also extend our hands again and again to thosetroops in
Iraq who are still holding on to their morality and
humanity, to those who do not want to be part of this
crime, that the doors of our mosques and churches will
always remain open for. And we in the resistance will honor
your humanity and will assist you in discreetly taking you
out of Iraq into neighboring countries where you will not
be prosecuted and labeled as deserters. We know there are
many amongst you who want to leave, but we can only help if
you gather the courage to express sorrow, remorse, and
detachment from this crime.

We have smuggled out tens and tens of honest men who
thought they were coming to Iraq for a cause. Only a few
cases such as US Marine Wassef Ali Hasoun who was captured
then during interrogationit was clearly evident that this
man was not a criminal and thus, we could not harm him. We
undertook the task of taking him out of Iraq to safety. We
are usually more heavy handed with punishment, when we find
people of Arab or Iraqi origin who aid the US.

Another is a supplies driver by the name of Mohammad Ali
Sanad, who was working for a Kuwaiti company that was
supplying goods to US Bases. During interrogation and
extensive dialogue it was clearly evident that this man was
sorry for what he did, even the transport company he worked
for, known as "Faisal al Neheet" stopped its cooperation
with the occupation, closed its offices in Baghdad, and
left.He was also released and these are only two examples
that we can declare only because the cases went public, as
we do not intend to jeopardize the lives of others we
helped.

We also extend our appreciation and respect to all the
honorable people around the world, the heroes of dignity
and freedom, the brave men and women of the
anti-globalization and Peace movements. We in Iraq are
thankful and grateful for all what you have done and your
continued efforts to end this conflict and confront the
white collarcriminals of corporate governments. May God
bless you all and continue to engulf you with patients and
resolve.

To the American people we say, you have finally awakened
and the millions of honorable people amongst you have now
realized that the Iraqi people are not your enemies, and
they are not responsible for your grief. It is your troops
which occupied our country, and not us yours. The arrogant
war criminal who rules in your name has humiliated your
nation military honor and we believe, that a democracy that
is not willing to fight for its own freedom, is no better
that a raw dictatorship. Your great efforts to remove the
ware criminal from the White House has changed the equation
in your government tremendously. But it to great
disappointment that Bush is insisting even more in his
arrogance to go against your will in ending this war. Bush
does not respect his own people and we believe that because
he knows that a political solution will not be reached

with the Iraqi Resistance, he will leave to democrats a
heavy burden by the time he leaves office. He cannot
comprehend that a few good men have brought has project in
the Middle East to a complete halt. Bush cannot stay in
Iraq where he is caught between the fire of the resistance
and that of Iran.

And if he leaves after all these losses and humiliation the
oil rich south of Iraq will be in the hands of Iran. And
this is what US strategy cannot accept. Bush's last attempt
and revenge will be to pull out of Iraq and plan its
disintegration into 3 geographically carved states. Then
strike the strategic assets of Iran, to bring its already
strained economy down to collapse.

Thus the democrats will be left with a Middle East that is
even more unstable than it is now. And despite our
knowledge that when it comes to strategic interests both
parties do not conflict and it is only the methods that
bear the difference, The democrats have a chance to end
this conflict in a face saving solution for the US, by
first declaring that they recognize the factions of the
Iraqi resistance as the representatives of the Iraqi people
and the Iraqi Republic. After which a negotiating team
would be arranged to negotiate your troop withdrawal,
compensation of Iraq, and matters of future interest. It is
only through the Iraqi resistance, that a solution may be
born.

Finally we say to Bush and those behind him. You can go all
you want with your plans, strategies, and executions, and
we with ours. Lead your troops into battle with every high
tech gadgetry and equipment, military science as ever
developed, and we will go as primitive and creative as we
can, creating the necessary gap that continues to deprive
you of the upper hand. Attack with all your force if we
leave you a trace, for so many traces were left for fool
arrogant. Hide all you true casualties and we will deprive
you of new recruits. Raise the oil prices more and
strengthen other aspiring nations we will deprive you of
ours, then raise the cost of occupation till we break your
bones in Baghdad and Babylon.

Wander the shelves of history in search of methods to
adapt, and we will confront you with a form of variable,
adaptable, and reversible asymmetric warfare that will set
the standard for years and years to come.

And may the best man win !

The Nineteen Twenty Revolution Brigades

Media Office

Baghdad, on the 8th of September 2007

Tuesday, 25 September 2007

UK DEFENCE SEC: PEACE PROCESS WITH TALIBAN INEVITABLE

Browne says UK will have to negotiate with Taliban

Pak Tribune

LONDON: THE UK will have to negotiate with the Taliban in the future to achieve peace in Afghanistan, Des Browne [pictured with British soldiers at an Iraqi oil field - OURAIM], the Defence Secretary, predicted last night.

Mr Browne also warned there was "no possibility" of establishing a
western legal system there and argued that an "Islamic-based"
solution must be accepted instead. Mr Browne said Britain must be prepared for a commitment in Iraq and Afghanistan lasting for decades - or even generations. He was speaking at a fringe event hosted by the IPPR think-tank at Labour's Bournemouth conference.

Mr Browne told delegates: "In Afghanistan, at some stage, the Taliban will need to be involved in the peace process because they are not going away any more than I suspect Hamas are going away from Palestine.

"But in my view, those who convene that process are entitled to say there are some basic parameters that people ought to apply to their engagement." He added: "People need to stay with these discussions, with these engagements, through their difficulties."

Mr Browne also said: "We must accept that we must find some solution that has its roots in Islamic law. "I don't want to tell you the colour of the face of the Swedish defence minister when I suggested to her it may be necessary for us, in order to get to where we want to be, for us to accept that there is some route through an Islamic-based legal system."

Sunday, 16 September 2007

FORMER HEAD OF CIA BIN LADEN UNIT, ANALYSES BIN LADEN's LATEST STATEMENT


Analysis of Osama bin Laden's September 7 Video Statement

By Michael Scheuer

JAMESTOWN
Terrorism Focus - September 11, 2007 - Volume IV, Issue 28

[Scheuer's book, (pictured) is recommended by Bin Laden in his latest video statement as a good explanation as to the US's failure to win the war against Al-Qaeda - Sukant Chandan, OURAIM]

The September 7 release of a new video statement by Osama bin Laden
puts to rest, at least for now, widespread speculation that he is
dead, retired, or has been pushed aside by his deputy, Ayman al-
Zawahiri [1]. With a newly trimmed and dyed beard, comfortable robes
rather than a camouflage jacket, and a clear and patient speaking
style, bin Laden achieved a major purpose of his speech before he said
a word: he clearly showed Muslims and Americans that he was still
alive, that he was healthy and not at death's door, that he spoke from
secure surroundings unthreatened by the U.S.-led coalition in
Afghanistan, and that he, al-Qaeda and their allies were ready to
continue the war. As usual, this message was wrapped in an as-Sahab
Productions video displaying high level production values [2].

Some of the substance of bin Laden's speech was partially new to him
specifically, but the West's failure to analyze what he and his
lieutenants have been talking about for the past few years was
repeatedly displayed by such foreign policy experts as a former deputy
director of the Central Intelligence Agency and New York Times
journalist David Brooks, both of whom suggested that bin Laden sounded
like a left-wing, 1960s Marxist blogger. The Islamist expert Walid
Phares even described him as "Trotskyite" (Family Security Matters,
September 10). Speeches by bin Laden and other senior al-Qaeda leaders
are intended to have an accumulating impact; that is, most of their
major speeches and statements build on those that have preceded them
over the past decade. Bin Laden and his associates assume, perhaps
incorrectly, that their Western foes will not treat each statement,
speech and interview as an isolated and unconnected event.

The commentators mentioned above and many other pundits-both right and
left on the political spectrum-have described bin Laden's speech as
something new and a blatant attempt to remain relevant in the
contemporary world. That is incorrect. Bin Laden has talked previously
on numerous occasions about the negative factors of capitalism and the
inequities and fragility of the U.S. economy; many of his post-9/11
speeches featured his bleed-America-to-bankruptcy scheme, as did
several of his interviews before 9/11.

In addition, al-Zawahiri and Azzam al-Amriki (the U.S. citizen Adam
Gadahn) have repeatedly spoken in detail about these themes [3].
Indeed, al-Zawahiri's extensive February 2005 essay, entitled "The
Freeing of Humanity and Homelands Under the Banner of the Quran,"
marked the start of al-Qaeda's now well-developed campaign of trying
to support and deepen already existing anti-Americanism among non-
Muslim groups-such as anti-Globalists, environmentalists, nuclear
disarmament activists, anti-U.S. Europeans and other "oppressed
people." These two men also have focused on the imperfect state of
black-white race relations in the United States and championed the
Islamic ideas of Malcolm X, and bin Laden-possibly for the first time-
hit on this theme in his September 7 statement. "It is severer than
what the slaves used to suffer at your hands centuries ago," bin Laden
said in regard to conditions for white and especially black U.S.
soldiers in Iraq, "and it is as if some of them have gone from one
slavery to another more severe and harmful, even if it be in the fancy
dress of the Defense Department's financial enticements" [4].

Western officials and journalists have also concluded that there is no
"overt threat" in bin Laden's new message. Unless these experts truly
believe that at some point in time bin Laden is going to explicitly
state the time and location of an attack, it is hard to understand how
they came to that conclusion. If Americans do not convert to Islam,
said bin Laden-and he probably is not expecting many takers-our duty
"is to continue to escalate the killing and fighting against you."
That seems a clear threat. Moreover, bin Laden's prolonged discussion
of his conversion offer is also clearly threatening in that it is an
action demanded by the Prophet Muhammad of Muslims before they attack
their enemy. As for another pre-attack requirement-multiple warnings-
al-Zawahiri and Gadahn have fired a great number of warnings at the
United States this year.

Finally, the new message's text and bin Laden's dyed beard seems to
have persuaded some Western commentators to superimpose their
fascination with celebrities and egos onto bin Laden. Since September
7, for example, Harvard's Dr. Noah Feldman-among others-described bin
Laden's cleaned-up personal appearance and the text of his statement
as an effort by the al-Qaeda chief to put himself in a position to
claim that "I was responsible for the American disaster in Iraq and
Afghanistan," attributing a huge dose of egotism to bin Laden's
performance (CNN, September 7). In reviewing the tape, such egotism is
hard to find. The first person "I" is used by bin Laden as a necessary
part of his offer to Americans to convert to Islam. He makes himself a
central player only because he is volunteering to guide Americans to
Allah. Asking Americans to "lend me your ears" to hear God's message
and then saying "I invite you to embrace Islam" constitute the role
bin Laden lays out for himself in this speech.

This point is made not to argue whether or not bin Laden is
egotistical, but to suggest that it would be unwise to believe that
our seemingly inevitable withdrawals from Iraq and Afghanistan will be
seen by Muslims or identified by al-Qaeda's chief as victories for
Osama bin Laden. Instead, they will be seen by Muslims and publicized
by bin Laden-as he did after the Afghans' 1989 defeat of the Soviets-
as victories for Allah and Islam; al-Qaeda will give the major portion
of credit to Iraqi and Afghan mujahideen. It is imperative, from bin
Laden's perspective, that Muslims worldwide see U.S. disaster in Iraq
and Afghanistan as Allah-granted victories for Islam and faithful
Muslims. This perspective of "God's victory" will further erode
defeatism in the Muslim world and galvanize far more support for the
jihad than any bin Laden claim of glory for al-Qaeda's efforts.
Indeed, such a claim would undercut much of what bin Laden has
accomplished, and he knows it.

Michael Scheuer served as the Chief of the bin Laden Unit at the CIA's
Counterterrorist Center from 1996 to 1999.

Notes

1. Osama bin Laden, "The Solution," as-Sahab Productions, September 7,
2007. It is worth noting that bin Laden also spoke in the plain and
direct manner of his pre-U.S.-presidential election speech of October
2004. The September 7 speech was without lengthy quotations from the
Quran, stories from Islamic history, or quotations from the Hadith.
Interestingly, at the end of the talk he drew the attention of
Christians to the similar beliefs that they and Muslims share
regarding Jesus and his mother Mary, and railed against what he called
"the fabrications of the Jews" against Mary. Having previously railed
against Christians as the "crusaders of the cross," this passage is
something of an anomaly for bin Laden.
2. When bin Laden did speak, the substance of his talk demonstrated
that he is still what Peter Bergen and Peter Arnett have described as
a "news junkie," and that he is completely capable of sating his
desire by following the adventures of U.S. interest rates and mortgage
defaults while likely inhabiting the terrain of Pakistan's North-West
Frontier.
3. Two of al-Qaeda's post-9/11 electronic journals-al-Nida and al-Ansar
-also published several analytical essays on these issues.
4. It seems fair to conclude that the American citizen Adam Gadahn has
contributed to broadening al-Qaeda commentary vis-à-vis U.S. economic
and social affairs. Born and reared by parents who propounded the
beliefs of the U.S. "hippy generation" that came of age in the 1960s,
Gadahn may well have imbibed an animus against capitalism and a taste
for analyzing U.S. history via the purported conspiracies of
capitalists. These seem to have seeped into bin Laden's rather
overdone criticism of capitalism. That said, the critique of
capitalism in bin Laden's new message and other statements by al-
Zawahiri and Gadahn have less to do with the traditional leftist-
socialist description of capitalism's evils and inevitable demise, and
more to do with emphasizing the ability of Islam to rectify societal
evils, promote social and economic equality and even lower taxes to a
limit "totaling 2.5 percent."

Friday, 14 September 2007

ON THE BRITISH DEFEAT IN BASRA

Tail between legs

AL-AHRAM WEEKLY

All the spin in the world can't change the facts on the ground in Iraq, writes Sukant Chandan

The British government promoted its occupation of Basra as an exercise more sophisticated and intelligent than that conducted by its ally the US in Iraq. From the moment the British hunkered down in Basra after the March 2003 invasion of Iraq it seemed the British government and much of the mainstream media never missed a chance to boast of the softly-softly, hearts and minds approach of its occupation. We were assured that this had everything to do with the experience it had gained in previous British military exploits, particularly in Northern Ireland, while the US was still learning lessons from their historic defeat in Vietnam. This projection of the fair-playing Brits was repeated ad naseum until a string of dramatic events were reported in the world media which put an end to this mythmaking. Events such as prisoner and detainee abuse by British soldiers and SAS special forces undercover operations apparently designed to foment civil strife exposed the British army as no different from any other hostile military occupier. Everyone outside the Ministry of Defence and Cabinet agrees that the British "deployment" from Basra Palace to the airport eleven kilometres out of the city is an outright sign of defeat.

The British army reassured the world that its experience in Northern Ireland had equipped it with the necessary lessons to be able to deal with southern Iraq. However, most people in the nationalist community in Northern Ireland might say that on this basis the Iraqis could only look forward to the British army becoming the main cause of their escalating problems. What the British learnt from Ireland is the simple lessons of counter-insurgency whereby the national rights of the people occupied are taken away by brute force. To this day many Irish are demanding that the British government own up to the many cases where they have been involved in extra-judicial killings or colluded in murders by death-squads. If the British experience in Northern Ireland was a bloody one, then one could have easily predicted that their experience with the Iraqis would not be much better, especially if one considers that the Iraqis had already seen a British occupation in the early part of the twentieth century, frequent British bombings during the years of UN sanctions, and that there was a cultural chasm between the British army and an Arab and largely Muslim people.

It was the events of 19 September 2005 which firmly put to rest any notion that the British were playing fair with the Iraqi people. Two SAS men in Arab clothes and head dress were arrested by Iraqi police at a checkpoint after refusing to stop and opening fire from their civilian car which was packed with explosives. They were arrested by Iraqi police and detained which led to British tanks smashing down the prison wall where the SAS men were being held and releasing them, but not before incensed Iraqis attacked the British army with petrol bombs and stones. A British soldier was captured on film fleeing from his tank in flames from a petrol bomb and being pelted by rocks from the crowd, an image which symbolises maybe more than any other the British experience in Basra. The world could see that the British had failed in Iraq. Anthony Cordesman, a specialist on the Middle East and military affairs at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, wrote recently that "the British decisively lost the south -- which produces over 90 per cent of government revenues and 70 per cent of Iraq's proven oil reserves -- more than two years ago."

September 2005 should have been the moment when the British realised that their attempt to train the Iraqi police force and win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people was an unmitigated failure. Unfortunately for countless Iraqis and the British soldiers, 168 killed so far, many more lives will be lost before Britain finally leaves Iraq.

In the fog of war, the 19 September events gave an insight into some of the types of covert operations being carried out by the occupying forces. But as suddenly as the dramatic events of SAS intrigue in Basra came to light, the burning questions asked by honest journalists passed away without any explanations. Sheikh Hassan Al-Zarqani, Moqtada Al-Sadr's spokesperson at the time, was adamant that the SAS was planning a "black op" against Iraqi civilians during a religious event to stoke-up sectarian strife. In light of the incessant civilian attacks in Iraq which go unclaimed by any resistance group, this is an area which urgently needs investigation but which hardly any journalists have looked into.

The notorious prisoner abuse by occupation forces in Iraq was not uniquely American, as three British soldiers were found guilty of this in May 2003 at Camp Breadbasket near Basra. There was also the case of hotel worker Baha Moussa who was beaten to death by British army personnel in September 2003. This culture of brutality and cover-ups in the army has been dramatised in the British film Mark of Cain. British Captain Ken Masters, who was commander of the Royal Military Police Special Investigations Branch, charged with investigating allegations of maltreatment of Iraqi civilians by British soldiers, was found hanged in his room in Basra on 15 October 2005. Masters had examined almost every single serious allegation of abuse of Iraqi civilians by British troops including the cases of the fusiliers convicted of abusing prisoners at Camp Breadbasket and a paratrooper who had been charged in connection with the death of Moussa. Masters was also thought to have been involved in the investigation into the events of 19 September. The British army stated that he was suffering from stress and could have been suicidal, although colleagues stated that this suicide of a married father of two who was due to return home within two weeks came as a shocking surprise.

The British army in Basra, Iraq's second city, was holed up in a small area in the palace in making troops easy targets for urban guerrilla warfare. No amount of experience in Northern Ireland could stop the guerrilla ambushes and the dozens of mortar attacks fired into Basra Palace daily. Prospects for the British army at the airport appear to be no better. Although they are not in a tough urban environment as before, they remain sitting ducks for mortars which have been fired there as well for some time.

The number of soldiers killed so far in 2007 is nearly double all of those killed in 2006. Meanwhile, it is no secret that the British have long considered the Iraqi police in Basra to be nearly completely infiltrated by militias which are now, according to the Brussels-based International Crisis Group, "seemingly more powerful and unconstrained than before."

A Mahdi Army commander detained by the British was released shortly before the retreat to the airport, seen by many as a deal brokered by the British with Al-Mahdi Army to allow them a peaceful retreat. While Sadr and Al-Mahdi Army have called the British retreat a victory mainly due to their force of arms, there are conflicting reports from the movement as to their military strategy towards the British at the airport. Some fighters from the Free Fighters of Al-Sadr state that they will continue with their armed struggle until their detained comrades are freed.

The British were no doubt relieved at Sadr's call for cessation of armed actions for a period up to six months to put his house in order. One of his spokespersons, Ahmed Al-Shabayni, in an interview on Al-Jazeera TV was more ambiguous, denying that Al-Mahdi Army is halting all operations against the occupation forces and stating that the occupation has no cause to be happy or relieved. Despite the different signals from Sadr's movement the British army retreated to the airport without harassment. One can be sure that the conflict between Al-Mahdi Army and the Badr Brigade, whom Al-Mahdi Army accused the British of working with in their fight with Al-Mahdi Army, will intensify now that the British are no longer involved on the ground.

The British have known from the outset that the Iraqi police were saturated by militias hostile to their presence but decided to stay on in Basra due to their alliance and agreement with US political and military strategy. Some have speculated that Gordon Brown has decided to abandon Basra so as to put a distance between himself and Bush. Most commentators agree that the US is alarmed by this British move, which leaves them with an untamed southern Iraq right at a time when Bush is desperately trying to show that the occupation is achieving some success.

Many see that it is the occupation that is on the run, and not the resistance. As for Brown's alleged distancing from Bush, the "redeployment" maybe an indirect bonus for Brown, but in the words of a recent Financial Times article title, Brown is jumping from the frying pan that is Basra into the fire that is Afghanistan, where British and other NATO forces are faring no better against a resurgent Taliban. Perhaps Britain's most senior and respected military commander, General Richard Dannatt, has put things most honestly in arguing that Britain should be preparing for a wider "generational conflict" in facing "a strident Islamic shadow over the world and a global conflict of values and ideas".

Britain seems intent on continuing its course of military confrontation with the Islamic world. Is it any surprise that there are people from Basra to Helmand who feel that it is only the language of armed resistance that can enable them to knock any sense into the British?

Tuesday, 11 September 2007

Al-QAEDA WITH AMERICAN CHARACTERISTICS

Bin Laden and 'Azzam the American'
Sukant Chandan*
September 11th 2007

Released in time for the 6th anniversary of the September 11th attacks on the World Trade Centre, the Pentagon and Camp David, Al-Qaeda's 'al-Sahab' media organisation has released Osama Bin Laden's first video statement from for nearly three years, followed by another today in which Bin Laden praises Abu Musab Walid, one of the 911 hijackers.

These statements generally accepted authenticity has put to
rest speculation that Bin Laden might have died, and has
put the West's most wanted man back into the forefront of
the politics of the 'war on terror'. The coverage that the
first video statement has been given throughout the
international media has proven again that Bin Laden is the
most important spokesperson on behalf of militant Islamism
even though his direct organisational involvement in
Al-Qaeda affairs may have possibly been curtailed. What is
most noticeable about this latest statement is the
stridently radical anti-capitalist rhetoric which many have
attributed to the influence of former white US citizen
Azzam Al-Amriki - 'Azzam the American' - previously known
as Adam Gadahn, the son of a Jew and a Catholic, who has
family members who live in Israel, who now runs al-Sahab,
Al-Qaeda's media wing. The British Telegraph on September
9th quoted former CIA covert operations officer Mike Baker
who stated that the Bin Laden statement 'has Adam Gadahn
all over it'. Amriki's own speeches and possible influence
on the statements of Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda's second leader
Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri, has raised an interesting development
in Al-Qaeda propaganda strategy in adapting its message to
the politics, history and even culture of US society.

Most recognize Amriki as being the main person behind the
al-Sahab media organisation, and it is thought that he runs
its editing suite from the back of a van somewhere in and
around the border areas between Afghanistan and Pakistan,
where Bin Laden and Zawahiri are also thought to be in
hiding. Amriki has previously made video statements in
English and is thought to be the third most important
spokesperson for Al-Qaeda. Although nominally involved in
al-Sahab he has been the only person apart from Bin Laden
in Al-Qaeda who has directed his messages specifically to a
US audience. It seems likely that Amriki is relied upon by
Bin Laden and Zawahiri, and also possibly more widely in
Al-Qaeda, as someone who is most sensitive to and
knowledgeable as to the most effective ways targeting the
US in its propaganda war.

Although Bin Laden and Zawahiri have directed many comments
and statements at the people and government of the US,
recent statements have shown that Al-Qaeda is attempting to
improve this particular media strategy. One of Zawahiri's
latest statements stated that Al-Qaeda is fighting on the
behalf of "all the weak and oppressed in North America and
South America, in Africa and Asia, and all over the world",
being possibly the first time that Al-Qaeda leadership has
stated that their struggle is also aimed at assisting the
world's oppressed. Zawahiri's statement also contained many
references to Malcolm X / Malik el-Hajj Shabazz, a figure
that still holds an emotive and profoundly political place
in the hearts and minds of radicals, Muslims and especially
Black people in the US. Zawahiri cited the famous militant
Black leader to call on Black soldiers in the US army to
recognise their historical and continuing oppression by the
US and to refuse to fight in a war that is not in their
interests; "And I tell the soldier of color in the American
army that the racist Crusader regime kidnapped your
ancestors to exploit them in developing their resources,
and today it is using you for the same purpose, after they
altered the look of the shackles and changed the type of
chains and try to make you believe that you are fighting
for democracy and the American dream ... And after you
achieve for them what they want, they will throw you out
into the street like an old shoe".

In Bin Laden's latest statement he takes up a similar theme
of racial divisions and tensions in US society by citing a
short Guardian Film which was syndicated by ABC about a US
Black soldier in Iraq; "Among them is the eloquent message
of Joshua which he sent by way of the media, in which he
wipes the tears from his eyes and describes American
politicians in harsh terms and invites them to join him
there for a few days. Perhaps his message will find in you
an attentive ear so you can rescue him and more than
150,000 of your sons …"

It has been speculated that Amriki is the person who is
essentially script-writing sections or even large parts of
Zawahiri and Bin Laden's speeches, this seems especially so
in the case of Bin Laden's latest video statement perhaps
drafting the entire speech. The question has to be posed:
is this an effective strategy on the part of al-Sahab? If
put into the historical context of conflicts in times gone
by, the current media strategy by al-Sahab has the
potential of being successful to some extent, and there is
even evidence that this is working on young people across
the West.

The period of Black, Hispanic and white leftist and
anti-imperialist movements of the 1960s and '70s in the US
saw these organisations ally themselves to struggles which
the US government considered a part of what was at the time
then the parallel of Al-Qaeda in terms of the way the
communists and the 'Evil Empire' were demonized and seen by
the US government to epitomize the very opposite of its
principles of American democratic and free-market values.
Significant sections, but by no means a majority of Black
political movements of Black radical movements in the US
have throughout the last century sympathized and even sided
with those the US are at war with. This has included Saddam
Hussein in the 1991 war, at which time influential rapper
Rakim in his pioneering Hip-Hop outfit with DJ Eric B
expressed support for Saddam Hussein with a mixture of
Third Worldist, Islamist and anti-capitalist lyrics on the
track 'Causalities of War':

… let's see who reigns supreme
Something like Monopoly: a government scheme
Go to the Army, be all you can be Another dead soldier?
Hell no, not me So I start letting off ammunition in every direction
Allah is my only protection
But wait a minute, Saddam Hussein prays the same
and this is Asia, from where I came
I'm on the wrong side, so change the target Shooting at the general;
and where's the sergeant?

One of the pet hate figures of the US establishment has
been the leader of possibly one of the biggest Black
political organisations: Louis Farrakhan, leader of the
Nation of Islam, whose international allies include Cuba's
Castro and Libya's Ghadaffi. One of the earlier leaders of
the Nation of Islam, Malcolm X, was well-known for
supporting practically any militant opposition to US power
in the world from guerilla movements Vietnam to the
Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the equivalent of the 911
attacks of its time.

Following the Zawahiri statement in which he quotes Malcolm
X, one of the best documentaries on Malcolm X's life and
political beliefs overseen by his wife Betty Shabazz, was
edited into a pro-Al-Qaeda version of the original film,
renaming it 'Prince of Islam'. This was also accompanied by
the release of a pro-Malcolm X rap song and video entitled
'By Any Means Necessary' by the clandestine rap group 'Soul
Salah Crew' with which the aforementioned 'Prince of Islam'
film opens. The music video and the 're-mixed' film are
popular on video-sharing websites, showing that Zawahiri's
statement has been successful in fusing Al-Qaeda's jihadist
ideology with the radical message of Malcolm X.

Further back in history we can find examples of white US
soldiers defecting to North Korea during the war against it
by the US in the early 1950s, who broadcasted radio
statements encouraging US soldiers to defect, and who also
played acting roles in North Korean propaganda films
portraying the ignorant and racially chauvinist American.
Then there is the case of Robert F Williams from Monroe,
North Carolina, maybe the person most responsible for the
rise of the Black Power movement in the early 1960s who
conducted radio broadcasts encouraging Black US soldiers in
Vietnam to defect and also got Mao Tse Tung to issue a
statement in support of the Black civil-rights movement at
a time that Mao and Red China were seen as irreproachable
anti-imperialist radicals by the US government. Today there
is no sign of any radical Black movement in open support of
Al-Qaeda, but judging from the fact that throughout history
sizeable sections of Black people who have no trust
whatsoever in the US system, one can be sure that Al-Qaeda
are receiving some sympathetic nods when they raise the
parallels between the history of US oppression of Black
people and the way in which they are treated today.

The South Asia Analysis Group states that the Bin Laden
statement reads more like the text of a disgruntled
American than that of an 'Arab Sheikh' and that 'there are
more allusions to contemporary American history than to
ancient Islam'. Most of Al-Qaeda's statements are highly
political, derided by some trends within Islam as being
concerned too much with politics. In their statements
Al-Qaeda raise events in Islamic history to prove a very
contemporary political proposition. Nevertheless, it is
true to say that this latest statement has very few
references to Islamic history apart from the last section
whereby Bin Laden explains that rather than being guilty of
massive anti-Semitic practices, Islamic history, especially
that of the 700 years of Islamic rule in Spain, proved that
it was under an Islamic government that Jews and Muslims
lived together in peace and security at a time when they
were both persecuted. Bin Laden points the finger at the
West as the architects and executers of the genocide
against the Jewish people; "They [Jews and Christians] are
alive with us and we have not incinerated them".

This section of the statement has been derided by many
commentators and analysts which is rather heavy on Islamist
rhetoric calling on people in the US to convert to Islam,
something which Al-Qaeda has done in many statements. It
should be remembered that many Muslims, including rather
reformist Islamic trends which Western governments tend to
encourage, see the obligation of dawa - a religious call -
to the West to convert to Islam as one of the greatest
challenges facing the Ummah - the international community
or nation of Muslims - in establishing peace and justice
which they see as only being possible under Islamic law. So
it should not come as any surprise that Bin Laden also
calls upon people in the West to do so, albeit with the
obvious difference being that refusing to do so might
result in terrorist guerilla attacks. However Al-Qaeda like
many Muslims believe Islam to be the only viable
alternative to what they see as the morally decadent nature
of the West. If yesterday it was Marxism or communism that
was seen by many as, on the one hand the greatest enemy of
the West, and on the other hand, as the best possible
alternative to Western democracy and capitalism, it
shouldn't be so shocking in a context where Islam is seen
as having replaced communism as the great threat, that it
is seen by many Muslims as the great alternative to Western
capitalist democracy. Bin Laden sees that only Islam can
save the people of the US, and that of those Islamic
countries with which it is fighting, from war and
exploitation as he does not see any effective movement in
the US that fights the wars against Afghanistan and Iraq,
let alone a cohesive political movement that is able to
fundamentally challenge the system. Bin Laden argues: "you
can still carry anti-war placards and spread out in the
streets of major cities, then go back to your homes, but
that will be of no use and will lead to the prolonging of
the war."

Bizarrely, Bin Laden has become one of the most well-known
personalities in the world that is championing
anti-capitalist, anti-racist and environmentalist demands,
and all the while favorably quoting one of the greatest
radical minds of our times: Noam Chomksy. It is rare, even
on anti-war demonstrations in the West, to find such
radical pronouncements as those from Bin Laden when he
calls on people who have 'previously liberated yourselves
before from the slavery of monks, kings, and feudalism', to
liberate themselves from 'the deception, shackles and
attrition of the capitalist system', a system he continues
to argue that 'seeks to turn the entire world into a
fiefdom of the major corporations under the label of
"globalization" in order to protect democracy.'

This Islamist leftist rhetoric has inspired annoyance in
some left-wing and radical circles in the West. While they
might share Bin Laden's radical comments they perhaps don't
appreciate Bin Laden picking holes in their political
strategies and movements so publicly. One has to wait and
see whether Chomksy shares this sentiment or like William
Blum, another leftist intellectual that Bin Laden has
previously praised, will be 'glad' about Bin Laden's name
dropping. If Bin Laden quoting Chomsky as a great writer
wasn't surreal enough, he goes on to praise the author of
the book Imperial Hubris, Michael Scheuer, currently one of
the main writers on the conflict-analyst organisation
Jamestown and former head of the CIA Bin Laden unit.
Scheuer has said in the past that "the Islamic media's
correspondents and editors work harder, dig deeper, and
think more than most of their Western counterparts."

This latest Al-Qaeda statement indeed shows that Bin Laden
has done his research, or perhaps Amriki has done the
legwork for him, in crafting a statement well-suited
politically to a US context. The calls for people in the
West to convert to Islam are not as outrageous and
important as they might seem; in this statement, like so
many others by Zawahiri, Al-Qaeda's main emphasis remains
the demand for a security pact with the people of the West
conditional on the cessation of hostilities against Islamic
nations, especially in the Arab world and in Afghanistan.
In this latest statement it is probable that Amriki has
helped Bin Laden gear this statement for a US audience. No
matter how much analysts, journalists and commentators
rubbish Al-Qaeda's attempts at developing a discourse that
aims to bridge the political and cultural chasm created by
Western mainstream media in the present conflicts, Al-Qaeda
are, as shown in the example of the Prince of Islam and
Soul Salah Crew song, achieving some successes in this
strategy. As for Amriki, one can imagine that Amriki is
rather flattered by the amount of attention and
responsibility that he has been attributed in Al-Qaeda's
media campaign against the West, in addition to being the
first person since 1952 to be charged with treason,
something which undoubtedly boosts his jihadi kudos, and
may well be satisfied with his efforts. Possibly Amriki's
aim at the very least is to have got people in the world to
take notice as to this the latest development of al-Sahab's
media campaign, something which he has achieved, and in so
doing, has contributed to one of the most extraordinary
cultural accomplishments of our times - Al Qaeda with
American characteristics.

*Sukant Chandan is a London-based freelance journalist and political analyst. He runs two blogs http://ouraim.blogspot.com/ and http://sonsofmalcolm.blogspot.com/ and can be contacted at sukant.chandan@gmail.com

Saturday, 8 September 2007

OSAMA BIN LADEN's VIDEO STATEMENT


As translated from Information Clearing House, also features video statement with English subtitles

"All praise is due to Allah, who built the heavens and
earth in justice, and created man as a favor and grace from
Him. And from His ways is that the days rotate between the
people, and from His Law is retaliation in kind: an eye for
an eye, a tooth for a tooth and the killer is killed. And
all praise is due to Allah, who awakened His slaves' desire
for the Garden, and all of them will enter it except those
who refuse. And whoever obeys Him alone in all of his
affairs will enter the Garden, and whoever disobeys Him
will have refused."

"As for what comes after: Peace be upon he who follows the
Guidance. People of America: I shall be speaking to you on
important topics which concern you, so lend me your ears. I
begin by discussing the war which is between us and some of
its repercussions for us and you."

"To preface, I say: despite America being the greatest
economic power and possessing the most powerful and
up-to-date military arsenal as well; and despite it
spending on this war and is army more than the entire world
spends on its armies; and despite it being the being the
major state influencing the policies of the world, as if it
has a monopoly on the unjust right of veto; despite all of
this, 19 young men were able - by the grace of Allah, the
Most High- to change the direction of its compass. And in
fact, the subject of the Mujahideen has become an
inseparable part of the speech of your leader, and the
effects and signs of that are not hidden."

"Since the 11th, many of America's policies have come under
the influence of the Mujahideen, and that is by the grace
of Allah, the Most High. And as a result, the people
discovered the truth about it, its reputation worsened, its
prestige was broken globally and it was bled dry
economically, even if our interests overlap with the
interests of the major corporations and also with those of
the neoconservatives, despite the differing intentions."

"And for your information media, during the first years of
the war, lost its credibility and manifested itself as a
tool of the colonialist empires, and its condition has
often been worse than the condition of the media of the
dictatorial regimes which march in the caravan of the
single leader."

"Then Bush talks about his working with al-Maliki and his
government to spread freedom in Iraq but he in fact is
working with the leaders of one sect against another sect,
in the belief that this will quickly decide the war in his
favor."

"And thus, what is called the civil war came into being and
matters worsened at his hands before getting out of his
control and him becoming like the one who plows and sows
the sea: he harvests nothing but failure."

"So these are some of the results of the freedom about
whose spreading he is talking to you. And then the
backtracking of Bush on his insistence on not giving the
United Nations expanded jurisdiction in Iraq is an implicit
admission of his loss and defeat there. "

"And among the most important items contained in Bush’s
speeches since the events of the 11th is that the Americans
have no option but to continue the war. This tone is in
fact an echoing of the words of neoconservatives like
Cheney, Rumsfeld and Richard Pearle, the latter having said
previously that the Americans have no choice in front of
them other than to continue the war or face a holocaust."

"I say, refuting this unjust statement, that the morality
and culture of the holocaust is your culture, not our
culture. In fact, burning living beings is forbidden in our
religion, even if they be small like the ant, so what of
man?! The holocaust of the Jews was carried out by your
brethren in the middle of Europe, but had it been closer to
our countries, most of the Jews would have been saved by
taking refuge with us. And my proof for that is in what
your brothers, the Spanish, did when they set up the
horrible courts of the Inquisition to try Muslims and Jews,
when the Jews only found safe shelter by taking refuge in
our countries. And that is why the Jewish community in
Morocco today is one of the largest communities in the
world. They are alive with us and we have not incinerated
them, but we are a people who don't sleep under oppression
and reject humiliation and disgrace, and we take revenge on
the people of tyranny and aggression, and the blood of the
Muslims will not be spilled with impunity, and the morrow
is nigh for he who awaits."

"Also, your Christian brothers have been living among us
for 14 centuries: in Egypt alone, there are millions of
Christians whom we have not incinerated and shall not
incinerate. But the fact is, there is a continuing and
biased campaign being waged against us for a long time now
by your politicians and many of your writers by way of your
media, especially Hollywood, for the purpose of
misrepresenting Islam and its adherents to drive you away
from the true religion. The genocide of peoples and their
holocausts took place at your hands: only a few specimens
of Red Indians were spared, and just a few days ago, the
Japanese observed the 62nd anniversary of the annihilation
of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by your nuclear weapons."

"And among the things which catch the eye of the one who
considers the repercussions of your unjust war against Iraq
is the failure of your democratic system, despite it
raising of the slogans of justice, liberty, equality and
humanitarianism. It has not only failed to achieve these
things, it has actually destroyed these and other concepts
with its weapons - especially in Iraq and Afghanistan- in a
brazen fashion, to replace them with fear, destruction,
killing, hunger, illness, displacement and more than a
million orphans in Baghdad alone, not to mention hundreds
of thousands of widows. Americans statistics speak of the
killing of more than 650,000 of the people of Iraq as a
result of the war and its repercussions."

"People of America: the world is following your news in
regards to your invasion of Iraq, for people have recently
come to know that, after several years of the tragedies of
this war, the vast majority of you want it stopped. Thus,
you elected the Democratic Party for this purpose, but the
Democrats haven't made a move worth mentioning. On the
contrary, they continue to agree to the spending of tens of
billions to continue the killing and war there, which has
led to the vast majority of you being afflicted with
disappointment."

"And here is the gist of the matter, so one should pause,
think and reflect: why have the Democrats failed to stop
this war, despite them being the majority?"

"I will come back to reply to this question after raising
another question, which is:"

"Why are the leaders of the White House keen to start wars
and wage them around the world, and make use of every
possible opportunity through which they can reach this
purpose, occasionally even creating justifications based on
deception and blatant lies, as you saw Iraq?"

"In the Vietnam War, the leaders of the White House claimed
at the time that it was a necessary and crucial war, and
during it, Rumsfeld and his aides murdered two million
villagers. And when Kennedy took over the presidency and
deviated from the general line of policy drawn up for the
White House and wanted to stop this unjust war, that
angered the owners of the major corporations who were
benefiting from its continuation."

"And so Kennedy was killed, and al-Qaida wasn’t present at
that time, but rather, those corporations were the primary
beneficiary from his killing. And the war continued after
that for approximately one decade. But after it became
clear to you that it was an unjust and unnecessary war, you
made one of your greatest mistakes, in that you neither
brought to account nor punished those who waged this war,
not even the most violent of its murderers, Rumsfeld. And
even more incredible than that is that Bush picked him as
secretary of defense in his first term after picking Cheney
as his vice president, Powell as secretary of state and
Armitage as Powell's deputy, despite their horrific and
blood history of murdering humans. So that was clear signal
that his administration - the administration of the
generals- didn't have as its main concern the serving of
humanity, but rather, was interested in bringing about new
massacres. Yet in spite of that, you permitted Bush to
complete his first term, and stranger still, chose him for
a second term, which gave him a clear mandate from you -
with your full knowledge and consent- to continue to murder
our people in Iraq and Afghanistan."

"Then you claim to be innocent! This innocence of yours is
like my innocence of the blood of your sons on the 11th -
were I to claim such a thing. But it is impossible for me
to humor any of you in the arrogance and indifference you
show for the lives of humans outside America, or for me to
humor your leaders in their lying, as the entire world
knows they have the lion's share of that. These morals
aren't our morals. What I want to emphasize here is that
not taking past war criminals to account led to them
repeating that crime of killing humanity without right and
waging this unjust war in Mesopotamia, and as a result,
here are the oppressed ones today continuing to take their
right from you."

"This war was entirely unnecessary, as testified to by your
own reports. And among the most capable of those from your
own side who speak to you on this topic and on the
manufacturing of public opinion is Noam Chomsky, who spoke
sober words of advice prior to the war, but the leader of
Texas doesn't like those who give advice. The entire world
came out in unprecedented demonstrations to warn against
waging the war and describe its true nature in eloquent
terms like "no to spilling red blood for black oil," yet he
paid them no heed. It is time for humankind to know that
talk of the rights of man and freedom are lies produced by
the White House and its allies in Europe to deceive humans,
take control of their destinies and subjugate them. "

"So in answer to the question about the causes of the
Democrats' failure to stop the war, I say: they are the
same reasons which led to the failure of former president
Kennedy to stop the Vietnam war. Those with real power and
influence are those with the most capital. And since the
democratic system permits major corporations to back
candidates, be they presidential or congressional, there
shouldn't be any cause for astonishment - and there isn't
any- in the Democrats' failure to stop the war. And you're
the ones who have the saying which goes, "Money talks." And
I tell you: after the failure of your representatives in
the Democratic Party to implement your desire to stop the
war, you can still carry anti-war placards and spread out
in the streets of major cities, then go back to your homes,
but that will be of no use and will lead to the prolonging
of the war."

"However, there are two solutions for stopping it. The
first is from our side, and it is to continue to escalate
the killing and fighting against you. This is our duty, and
our brothers are carrying it out, and I ask Allah to grant
them resolve and victory. And the second solution is from
your side. It has now become clear to you and the entire
world the impotence of the democratic system and how it
plays with the interests of the peoples and their blood by
sacrificing soldiers and populations to achieve the
interests of the major corporations."

"And with that, it has become clear to all that they are
the real tyrannical terrorists. In fact, the life of all of
mankind is in danger because of the global warming
resulting to a large degree from the emissions of the
factories of the major corporations, yet despite that, the
representative of these corporations in the White House
insists on not observing the Kyoto accord, with the
knowledge that the statistic speaks of the death and
displacement of the millions of human beings because of
that, especially in Africa. This greatest of plagues and
most dangerous of threats to the lives of humans is taking
place in an accelerating fashion as the world is being
dominated by the democratic system, which confirms its
massive failure to protect humans and their interests from
the greed and avarice of the major corporations and their
representatives."

"And despite this brazen attack on the people, the leaders
of the West -especially Bush, Blair, Sarkozy and Brown-
still talk about freedom and human rights with a flagrant
disregard for the intellects of human beings. So is there a
form of terrorism stronger, clearer and more dangerous than
this? This is why I tell you: as you liberated yourselves
before from the slavery of monks, kings, and feudalism, you
should liberate yourselves from the deception, shackles and
attrition of the capitalist system."

"If you were to ponder it well, you would find that in the
end, it is a system harsher and fiercer than your systems
in the Middle Ages. The capitalist system seeks to turn the
entire world into a fiefdom of the major corporations under
the label of "globalization" in order to protect
democracy."

"And Iraq and Afghanistan and their tragedies; and the
reeling of many of you under the burden of interest-related
debts, insane taxes and real estate mortgages; global
warming and its woes; and the abject poverty and tragic
hunger in Africa: all of this is but one side of the grim
face of this global system."

"So it is imperative that you free yourselves from all of
that and search for an alternative, upright methodology in
which it is not the business of any class of humanity to
lay down its own laws to its own advantage at the expense
of the other classes as is the case with you, since the
essence of man-made positive laws is that they serve the
interests of those with the capital and thus make the rich
richer and the poor poorer."

"The infallible methodology is the methodology of Allah,
the Most High, who created the heavens and earth and
created the Creation and is the Most Kind and All-Informed
and the Knower of the souls of His slaves and the
methodology that best suits them."

"You believe with absolute certainty that you believe in
Allah, and you are full of conviction of this belief, so
much so that you have written this belief of yours on your
dollar."

"But the truth is that you are mistake in this belief of
yours. The impartial judge knows that belief in Allah
requires straightness in the following of His methodology,
and accordingly, total obedience must be to the orders and
prohibitions of Allah Alone in all aspects of life."

"So how about you when you associate others with Him in
your beliefs and separate state from religion, then claim
that you are believers?!"

"What you have done is clear loss and manifest polytheism,
And I will give you a parable of polytheism, as parables
summarize and clarify speech."

"I tell you: its parable is the parable of a man who owns a
shop and hires a worker and tells him, "Sell and give me
the money," but he makes sales and give the money to
someone other than the owner. So who of you would approve
of that?"

"You believe that Allah is your Lord and your Creator and
the Creator of this earth and that it is His property, then
you work on His earth and property without His orders and
without obeying Him, and you legislate in contradiction to
His Law and methodology."

"This work of yours is the greatest form of polytheism and
is rebellion against obedience to Allah with which the
believer becomes an unbeliever, even if he obeys Allah in
some of His other orders. Allah, the Most High, sent down
His orders in His Sacred Books like the Torah and Evangel
and sent with them the Messengers (Allah's prayers and
peace be upon them) as bearers of good news to the people."

"And everyone who believes in them and complies with them
is a believer from the people of the Garden. Then when the
men of knowledge altered the words of Allah, the Most High,
and sold them for a paltry price, as the rabbis did with
the Torah and the monks with the Evangel, Allah sent down
His final Book, the magnificent Quran, and safeguarded it
from being added to or subtracted from by the hands of men,
and in it is a complete methodology for the lives of all
people."

"And our holding firm to this magnificent Book is the
secret of our strength and winning of the war against you
despite the fewness of our numbers and materiel. And if you
would like to get to know some of the reasons for your
losing of your war against us, then read the book of
Michael Scheuer in this regard."

"Don't be turned away from Islam by the terrible situation
of the Muslims today, for our rulers in general abandoned
Islam many decades ago, but our forefathers were the
leaders and pioneers of the world for many centuries, when
they held firmly to Islam."

"And before concluding, I tell you: there has been an
increase in the thinkers who study events and happenings,
and on the basis of their study, they have declared the
approach of the collapse of the American Empire."

"Among them is the European thinker who anticipated the
fall of the Soviet Union, which indeed fell. And it would
benefit you to read what he wrote about what comes after
the empire in regard to the United States of America. I
also want to bring your attention that among the greatest
reasons for the collapse of the Soviet Union was their
being afflicted with their leader Brezhnev, who was
overtaken by pride and arrogance and refused to look at the
facts on the ground. From the first year of the Afghanistan
invasion, reports indicated that the Russians were losing
the war, but he refused to acknowledge this, lest it go
down in his personal history as a defeat, even though
refusal to acknowledge defeat not only doesn't do anything
to change the facts for thinking people, but also
exacerbates the problem and increases the losses. And how
similar is your position today to their position
approximately two decades ago. The mistakes of Brezhnev are
being repeated by Bush, who -when asked about the date of
his withdrawing of forces from Iraq - said in effect that
the withdrawal will not be during his reign, but rather,
during the reign of the one who succeeds him. And the
significance of these words is not hidden."

"And here I say: it would benefit you to listen to the
poignant messages of your soldiers in Iraq, who are paying
- with their blood, nerves and scattered limbs - the price
for these sorts of irresponsible statements. Among them is
the eloquent message of Joshua which he sent by way of the
media, in which he wipes the tears from his eyes and
describes American politicians in harsh terms and invites
them to join him there for a few days. Perhaps his message
will find in you an attentive ear so you can rescue him and
more than 150,000 of your sons there who are tasting the
two bitterest things: "

"If they leave their barracks, the mines devour them, and
if they refuse to leave, rulings are passed against them.
Thus, the only options left in front of them are to commit
suicide or cry, both of which are from the severest of
afflictions. So is there anything more men can do after
crying and killing themselves to make you respond to them?
They are doing that out of the severity of the humiliation,
fear and terror which they are suffering. It is severer
than what the slaves used to suffer at your hands centuries
ago, and it is as if some of them have gone from one
slavery to another slavery more severe and harmful, even if
it be in the fancy dress of the Defense Department's
financial enticements."

"So do you feel the greatness of their sufferings?"

"To conclude, I invite you to embrace Islam, for the
greatest mistake one can make in this world and one which
is uncorrectable is to die while not surrendering to Allah,
the Most High, in all aspects of one's life - ie., to die
outside of Islam. And Islam means gain for you in this
first life and the next, final life. The true religion is a
mercy for people in their lives, filling their hearts with
serenity and calm."

T"here is a message for you in the Mujahideen: the entire
world is in pursuit of them, yet their hearts, by the grace
of Allah, are satisfied and tranquil. The true religion
also puts peoples' lives in order with its laws; protects
their needs and interests; refines their morals; protects
them from evils; and guarantees for them entrance into
Paradise in the hereafter through their obedience to Allah
and sincere worship of Him Alone."

"And it will also achieve your desire to stop the war as a
consequence, because as soon as the warmongering owners of
the major corporations realize that you have lost
confidence in your democratic system and begun to search
for an alternative, and that this alternative is Islam,
they will run after you to please you and achieve what you
want to steer you away from Islam. So your true compliance
with Islam will deprive them of the opportunity to defraud
the peoples and take their money under numerous pretexts,
like arms deals and so on. "

"There are no taxes in Islam, but rather there is a limited
Zakaat [alms] totaling only 2.5%. So beware of the
deception of those with the capital. And with your earnest
reading about Islam from its pristine sources, you will
arrive at an important truth, which is that the religion of
all of the Prophets (peace and blessings of Allah be upon
them) is one, and that its essence is submission to the
orders of Allah Alone in all aspects of life, even if their
Shari'ahs [Laws] differ."

"And did you know that the name of the Prophet of Allah
Jesus and his mother (peace and blessings of Allah be on
them both) are mentioned in the Noble Quran dozens of
times, and that in the Quran there is a chapter whose name
is "Maryam," i.e. Mary, daughter of 'Imran and mother of
Jesus (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them both)? It
tells the story of her becoming pregnant with the Prophet
of Allah Jesus (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them
both), and in its confirmation of her chastity and purity,
in contrast to the fabrications of the Jews against her.
Whoever wishes to find that out for himself must listen to
the verse of this magnificent chapter: one of the just
kings of the Christians - the Negus - listened to some of
its verses and his eyes welled up with tears and he said
something which should be reflected on for a long time by
those sincere in their search for the truth."

"He said, "verily, this and what Jesus brought come from
one lantern": i.e., that the magnificent Quran and the
Evangel are both from Allah, the Most High; and every just
and intelligent one of you who reflects on the Quran will
definitely arrive at this truth. It also must be noted that
Allah has preserved the Quran from the alterations of men.
And reading in order to become acquainted with Islam only
requires a little effort, and those of you who are guided
will profit greatly. And peace be upon he who follows the
Guidance."