Tuesday, February 28, 2006

Who was behind the Samarra blasts?

By Hassan Hanizadeh
Last Wednesday’s terrorist bombings of the holy shrines of the tenth and eleventh Shia Imams, Imam Hadi (AS) and Imam Hassan Askari (AS), in Samara, Iraq, was a very serious incident which increased the possibility of a civil war breaking out.
In addition, Shia Muslims all over the world are now accusing the U.S.-led occupying forces of complicity in the act.
The United States is suspect because it occupied Iraq on the pretext of establishing democracy in the country, but U.S. officials now realize that the democratic process has not turned out as they had planned and not benefited U.S. interests.
Thus, the U.S. has changed its approach and is now trying to create sectarian and ethnic strife in Iraq.
The obvious interference of U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad in preventing the formation of a national cabinet reflecting the vote of the majority of Iraqis proves that the U.S. contention that it seeks to establish democracy in Iraq is a blatant lie because the U.S. does not want to accept the results of the parliamentary election.
Khalilzad recently said that the Iraqi interior, defense, oil, and security affairs ministers must be approved by the U.S. and no one opposed to U.S. policy should be allowed to become a minister in the cabinet of Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari.
Khalilzad’s recent remarks and the fact that he is claiming a veto right over cabinet appointments indicate that the United States seeks to prevent the formation of a national government in Iraq by creating chaos in the country.
Alongside the U.S. efforts to trigger a sectarian conflict in Iraq, the Zionist lobby, surprised by Muslims’ united reaction to the Western media outlets’ insult of Prophet Muhammad (S), is now trying to break this unity.
The unholy alliance of the United States, the Zionist regime, and the terrorists operating in Iraq planned the bombing of the holy shrines in order to justify the continued presence of occupying forces in the country.
Of course, this treacherous plan to bomb the holy sites in Iraq will not be limited to the shrines of Imam Hadi (AS) and Imam Hassan Askari (AS). Other religious sites may also face the same fate in the future since the occupying forces are trying to ignite sectarian and ethnic conflicts in order to dismember the country into mini-states.
However, both the religious authorities in Najaf and the religious-political leaders in Iraq are well aware of this devious U.S. plot and have therefore called on Iraqis to foster unity and avoid impulsive reactions.
This call was welcomed by all Sunni and Shia Iraqis, who have condemned the terrorist actions of the occupying forces.
Of course, the Iraqi people, and particularly the religious authorities, are monitoring the suspicious activities of the occupying forces, and they will not allow religious differences to cause the country to break apart.
Therefore, after the formation of a national government, the entire Iraqi nation will call for the withdrawal of the occupying forces, and then there will be no option left for the foreign troops besides withdrawing from Iraqi territory.


Anonymous Jalal said...

Well, you deleted my comments. Well I am not surprised. That's typical of your rulers the mollahs. The days of the mollahs in Iran are numbered. I can't believe how they cannot see how they are hated by the people. marg bar jemhoori eslami.

2/28/2006 1:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Britain’s nuclear espionage

By our staff writer
A careful survey reveals the clandestine dimensions and unconventional activities undertaken by Britain to acquire nuclear weapons technology both before and after World War II.
The British government gained access to the United States’ nuclear expertise, particularly the process of producing nuclear bombs, through espionage measures. The cooperation of British nationals residing in the United States was an effective measure taken to gather the information and transfer it to Britain.
Documents published in the UK indicate that after Britain became aware of theories about atomic bombs and realized the power that would be bestowed on the possessors of such weapons, the British intelligence services began making efforts to gain access to the process of producing nuclear weapons.
Along these lines, the British government latched on to the United States, both covertly and covertly, to gain access to nuclear weapons technology, and simultaneously began to gather information about the nuclear capabilities of France, the Soviet Union, and Germany, focusing its efforts on sabotaging the nuclear programs of those countries, particularly Germany.
According to some documents, the British government never had the necessary expertise, resources, or information for producing or testing nuclear weapons, but, using their old colonial tricks, stole the information from other nations.
In addition to its espionage activities in the United States, France, Germany, and the Soviet Union, the British government also made efforts to employ nuclear scientists from Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union, the United States, China, and India to acquire the necessary expertise.
The colonization of Africa, the exploitation of the continent’s uranium reserves, and theft of equipment from Germany and the United States to equip British nuclear centers were essential for London’s nuclear weapons program.
The cold calculus of realpolitik also helped Britain realize its nuclear ambitions.
The outbreak of World War II, the establishment of the Eastern Bloc in Europe, the end of the colonial era and British imperialism, fear of France and the possibility that France and Germany would form an alliance created a critical situation for Britain that required the cooperation of officials in London and Washington to plan a strategic alliance for the post-WWII era.
Such motivations obliged both the United States and Britain to make a comprehensive decision, which historians call the great transaction.
In this transaction, the spheres of influence of the two countries were demarcated and both felt bound to form a strategic alliance.
They also agreed that the two partners could only impose their will on the post-WWII world, and particularly on the Soviet Union, Germany, Japan, and France, through bilateral cooperation in which the United Kingdom would be granted total access to all the nuclear technology and expertise of the United States.
Thus, nuclear equipment and expertise were transferred to Britain over a short period of time. This strategic cooperation, or special relationship, paved the way for further collaboration of the two countries in activities against many countries after World War II.
Relying on their illegitimate nuclear weapons, the United States and Britain imposed their demands on many countries, including Vietnam and Iraq, while they realized, and justified, their nefarious objectives by using their influence at the United Nations Security Council.
Because weapons of mass destruction bolster the hegemonistic power of a state, London is continuing the process of developing chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons.
Although Britain is currently producing conventional weapons for sale on the world arms market to boost its economy, it also maintains a formidable arsenal of unconventional weapons.
From what has been said, one can clearly recognize the double standards and discrimination of the British government, which has always sought to gain access to weapons of mass destruction but is now trying to prevent Iran and other countries from gaining access to civilian nuclear technology that they aim to use for peaceful purposes, such as the production of energy and agricultural and medical activities.
Nevertheless, it is quite clear that Britain will fail to achieve its goals, and that the aware people of the modern world, including those in the UK, will oppose the double-standard policies of the British government.
In The Cunning of History, Rubenstein also finds uncomfortable parallels between the Nazis and their opponents. For example, a Hungarian Jewish emissary meets with Lord Moyne, the British High Commissioner in Egypt in 1944 and suggests that the Nazis might be willing to save one million Hungarian Jews in return for military supplies. Lord Moyne,s reply: "What shall I do with those million Jews? Where shall I put them? Writes Rubenstein: "The British government was by no means adverse to the final solution, as long as the Germans did most of the work. " For both countries, it had become a bureaucratic problem, one that Rubenstein suggests we understand "as the expression of some of the most profound tendencies of Western civilization in the 20th century
Taking the issues from bottom to top, the three sets of facts which the citizens must know, are the following:
The simplest and most immediate set of facts which the citizen must know, is that the present-day neo-conservative movement in the United States was created by and is run from the highest level of the British oligarchy, through institutions such as the fascistic Mont Pelerin Society ("mother" of the Heritage Foundation), the international press-empire owned by Conrad Black's Hollinger Corporation, and the wealthy oligarchs whom Clinton-basher Lord William Rees-Mogg long served as chief editor of the London Times.
Most U.S. citizens are still deluded by the fairy-tale, that the British Empire no longer exists. The truth is, that while the ordinary people of the United Kingdom never really controlled their monarchy or its governments, less so today than ever before, the Queen of England is the head of state of sixteen nations, including Canada, Australia. New Zealand, Jamaica, and so on. The British Commonwealth, headed by the same monarchy, controls nations representing nearly thirty percent of the world population, and nearly one-quarter of the world's land-area. Through the City of London, the British monarchy controls not only the majority of the world's financial speculation, but also over sixty percent of the world's precious metals trade, and comparable portions of the world's strategic minerals, fossil fuel, and internationally traded food-supplies. London is also, incidentally, the acknowledged world headquarters for international terrorism, and the principal center of pilot-production for a large portion of international bad taste, as well.
The highest, and most important level of facts and ideas which any informed U.S. citizen must know, is the nature of the irreconcilable difference in morals and philosophy, which defined the British monarchy as, officially, the principal enemy of the United States, from 1776, until the inaugurations of the London assets known as Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, the same issues which defined the fierce quarrel between Prime Minister Winston Churchill and President Franklin Roosevelt, during World War II.
April 2001.
Geopolitics, Still Today!
The strategic issue within which I situate this discussion, is not, by itself, a new issue. Since approximately 1877, the British monarchy had always centered its geopolitical doctrine on ensuring the fostering of mutually devastating conflicts between Germany and Russia, as the central feature of its grand strategy. All important initiatives for the betterment of humanity, since the U.S. Civil War, have centered upon implicit cooperation of the U.S.A. with key nations of continental Eurasia for the kinds of economic development associated with the policies of Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, Friedrich List, and Henry C. Carey.
One should recall, that U.S. President Abraham Lincoln's defeat of the British monarchy's asset, the Confederate conspiracy, and the adoption of the U.S. economic model, by Russia, Bismarck's Germany, Japan, and others, in the aftermath the 1876 Philadelphia Centennial Exhibition, had created the conditions for building transcontinental railway systems, modelled on the U.S. precedent, within the Eurasian continent. This, for reasons I have detailed in earlier locations, was the prompting of the combined geopolitical and naval-development programs of the British monarchy over the period leading into Britain's orchestration of France and Russia for launching World War I against Germany, with support of such London assets as those faithful sons of the treasonous Confederacy, U.S. Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson.
Similarly, at the close of World War II, when Britain had been reduced to the relative status of a second-rate power in the world, Britain, using both traditional Venetian methods, and British agents and agents of influence inside the U.S.A., orchestrated the creation of the nuclear conflict between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. Thus London was enabled to exploit the effects of the missiles-crisis, to bring about the post-missiles-crisis self-destruction of both of London's leading strategic rivals, leading to both the present Anglo-American form of world domination, and the present push of the world at large not only into the greatest financial collapse in history, but also the economic brink of a threatened, planetary new dark age.
Throughout 1861-2001, the central issue-in-fact of world policy, takes the present form of the choice: between an efficient commitment to the cooperative economic development among at least most of the peoples of continental Eurasia; or, world domination by a new form of the old imperial maritime power of Venice's financier oligarchy, an Anglo-American "new Roman Empire," ruled by the fist of a U.S. "dumb giant" deployed, like the former and present U.S. Presidents Bush, as a restive, brutish lackey to the British Empire.
The most comparable

2/28/2006 2:37 PM  
Blogger Winston said...


Khamenei and his Mafia were behind the attacks

3/02/2006 2:42 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home