web site in the
All Rights Reserved
P.O. Box 356, Kingsville, MD 21087.
for one year. $1 for sample]
Views expressed are not necessarily shared by editorial committee.
Responses (positive or negative) up to 250 words are welcome.
Names will be withheld on request.
CENSORSHIP IN ANOTHER FORM:
WALL STREET JOURNAL
DENOUNCES IMAM WARITH DEEN
In a smear story seemingly aimed at the
destruction of Imam ‘Umar's
economic base and the denial of job opportunities
to him, the Wall Street
Journal published a story on February 5, 2003
which has the following
How a Chaplain
To an Inmate Flock
Radical New York Imam Chose
Clerics for State Prisons;
Saudi Arabia's Helping Hand"
[All those are on page one, top left. Then the
ENTIRE page A13 is devoted to
the same story with the headline: "How a Muslim
Cleric Spread Extremism in
If you would like to protest, call the Wall
Street Journal at: 212-416-2000
It seems that the
are out to smear
anyone whose viewpoint does
not fit into the government version. We are
waiting for Imam ‘Umar's response
before we comment further.
Colin Powell's 'Show and Tell' was Full of Holes
First the show and then the spin!
displayed the front page of the
Jerusalem Post which claimed that Powell's
performance in the Security
Council was "irrefutable." Most observers found
Powell's show unconvincing
and even ridiculous. It appeared as if the
Secretary General had put together
a patchwork of itty bitty anecdotes which were
supposed to create a pattern.
Let's look at some of his claims:
1. One of his main points was that Iraq has
"mobile laboratories" for WMDs.
Mr. Powell offered diagrammatic reconstructions
of large trucks or lorries
supposedly used for such labs. Obvious question:
If there are such "mobiles"
why does the U.S. not have an aerial photo of
them? Why the dummy drawings?
2. Aerial photos of storage areas were shown with
LABELS stuck on the photos
telling us WHAT THOSE PLACES WERE SUPPOSED TO BE.
In real life, buildings do
not have labels stuck on like that! In other
words, the audiences were being
told what to believe about those buildings and
those trucks. [So now if Iraq
has any storage place and uses trucks to take
things out of it, we are to
believe that it's a place for WMDs because the
CIA stuck a label on its
3. The CIA had prepared for Mr. Powell a collage
of "phone conversations"
between Iraqi officers. [These were actually
quite funny the way they were
dubbed in English.] Now, these conversations
might have taken place anytime
between 1991 and 1998. Powell insisted they were
recent. One showed that an
officer was going to evacuate a "modified"
vehicle. It was not clear how that
was supposed to be a crime. Another
"conversation" had the words "nerve gas"
conveniently inserted in it.
3a. Such conversations can easily be fabricated.
The CIA has no lack of Arab
agents who are willing to play any role against
their own people. The FBI has
been recruiting at "Islamic" conventions in
4. Most unconvincing was the attempted connection
with Al-Qaida. It appears
that northeastern Iraq has a group known as Ansar
al-Islam which is
sympathetic to Jihad. Unfortunately for Mr.
Powell's argument, Saddam Hussain
is not in control of that part of Iraq. If anyone
is to be blamed for the
development of an Islamic movement there, it is
America's Kurdish puppets and
agents who have not been able to defeat the
4a. Then there is the case of al-Zarqawi. His
crime: after being wounded by American bombing in
he dared to get medical treatment in
Baghdad. So now if a Muslim opposes America and
gets treated in Iraq, that
makes Iraq a terrorist state connected to
Al-Qaida. That must be the most
preposterous argument for war in a long time.
Hitler's friend Goebbels would
have smiled at that, seemingly a story right out of the
repository of "evidence" and "guilt by assocation" which is now
commonplace on the U.S.
5. Again and again we hear the accusation that
'Saddam gassed his own
people.' No imparial investigation has every been
carried out to prove any
such gassing. The attack on Halabja is available
only on an Iranian wartime
propaganda video. [Ironically, at that time the
U.S. was on the side of Iraq.]
A Jewish organization known as
Human Rights Watch,
coming out of New York, and people like Hitchens throw around
charges of "mass murder" of Kurds
by Saddam. Nothing of the sort has ever been
proven by any Islamic or world
court agency. First the Shah of Iran and later
(post Gulf War) the U.S.
instigated segments of the Kurds to rise up with
weapons. The rebellions were
crushed. How can Iraq be blamed for crushing
armed rebellion? The U.S. did
not spare "rebels" in WACO who had weapons INSIDE
their compound. Should
Saddam have said to the Kurds: You have USA
supporting you, so I'll let you
overthrow my government.
[Many Kurds support Saddam, as the recent parade
of 50,000 volunteers in
Mr. Powell glibly accuses Saddam of
brutalities. By comparison, the
U.S. has suffered ONLY ONE attack on its mainland
and the citizens of this
great country have already lost one fourth of
their rights. Iraq has been
under threat from the U.S., Britain, NATO,
Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran.
There is hardly any trick in subversion which has
not been used against Iraq.
1. Forty two days of bombing by the U.S. and
NATO, with tens of thousands of
2. Destruction of Iraq's infrastructure by U.S.
3. U.N-U.S. embargo and sanctions which have led
to more than two million
civilian deaths, mainly children, according to UN
4. Steady attempts to lure away Iraq's scientists
4a. Alleged distribution of fake money by the
on a huge scale inside Iraq.
5. Numerous bombing and missile attacks by the
U.S. after the Gulf War ended.
6. The CIA has infiltrated the length and breadth
of Iraq, so much so that it
even succeeded in recruiting Saddam's
sons-in-law, whom he then lured back
Is it a surprise that Saddam has struck back
ruthlessly at his enemies?
Mr. Powell should have been the last person
preaching war against Iraq.
He has betrayed the people of America who have
been demonstrating in the
streets in every city denouncing the war of
It's a Jewish war. Mr. Powell should have
stayed out of it. He is simply
being used. Looks like he has not listened to
what the African-American
people are saying - what Belafonte and Baraka and
have said - even what Jesse Jackson and Sharpton have said.
2003-02-08 Sat 09:03ct