Virus of violence unleashed on the world By William Bowles

27 August 2003

Everyday I scan the news heads from the various sources I receive (I can never keep up with it all obviously) and it’s clear that the US has unleashed a virus of violence on the planet. Just a short selection from the last few days paints the picture:


  • Israeli Occupation Forces Shoot Dead Two Teenage Brothers, Raid Palestinian Cities
  • Another U.S. soldier killed in Afghanistan
  • Another U.S. soldier dies in Baghdad attack
  • Israel Kills Hamas Leader, Militants Call Off Truce


  • Two US Soldiers Killed in Iraq, One Killed in Afghanistan
  • US helicopter fires on civilian vehicle
  • Afghan Governor Says 2 Troops, 4 Taliban Killed
  • 7 Kurds, 2 Turkish Soldiers Die in Batman Province Clash


  • Three Troops Killed in Basra Attack
  • Jewish terror suspect allegedly already carried out attacks
  • Six killed in fighting in Afghanistan
  • Last week, from August 17 to yesterday, more than 150 people died in terror-related incidents worldwide.


  • Cargo Ship Leaking Chemical Off S. Africa Also Carrying Uranium
  • IOF Assassinate Palestinian Activist, Wound 16 Teenagers in Nablus
  • 50 Dead In Bombay Blasts
  • UP to 50 Taliban Said Killed in Afghanistan
  • 12 Afghan Soldiers Die in Taliban Attack
  • Taliban kill 5 Afghan soldiers in ambush
  • A war without end?


  • Over 400 women kidnapped, raped in post-war Iraq
  • 4 people killed in another Israeli strike on car
  • Three Iraqis Killed in Najaf Blast–Shi’ite Group
  • Bystander Murdered, 26 wounded in Israeli missile strike
  • 1 U.S. Soldier Killed, 2 Wounded in Ambush


  • Many Dead In New Liberian Massacre
  • Iraq: Danish Soldier Was Killed By His Own Troops
  • Islamic center fire in Savannah, Ga., was arson
  • Bus Stop Blasts Hit Russian City
  • Monsanto Fined $700 Million for Poisoning People with PCBs

And this is by no means the total for the past six days. The terror has been unleashed and not by Al-Qu’eda but by the USUK declaration of war on the planet. And there seems no end to it. Bush’s statement that “these people [in Iraq] have declared war on the entire civilised world” is just too much to stomach, yet the media’s response to the mayhem is probably even more astounding. Principally it consists of a lot of whining about how Bush has failed to live up to his promises of winning the ‘war on terror’ and that in fact, unleashing terror on the world has had the opposite effect.

Today’s Independent (27/08/03) has the following to say on the imperium’s assault on Iraq and the resulting bloodbath and chaos:

“In presenting his [Bush’s] case for invading Iraq, he offered these arguments: the danger that Saddam Hussein presented to his people and the world, the suffering of ordinary Iraqis, and the imperative, after 11 September to root out terrorism, wheresoever it lurked….Iraq would no longer be a threat to anyone; Arab governments would understand the perils of opposing the US; terrorist organisations would pack up; and Israel and a Palestinian state could coexist in peace.”

I don’t know which planet the editor of the Independent lives on, but it’s obviously not the same one as I do.

Let’s have a look at what the Independent is saying here:

“[T]he imperative, after 11 September to root out terrorism, wheresoever it lurked”

I don’t remember this being part of Resolution 1441, indeed, missing entirely from the ‘reasons’ stated by the Independent are the WMDs. And it should be remembered that the principle reason the Independent ‘opposed’ the invasion was that it didn’t have the UN’s blessing.

It then goes on to make what is an even more outrageous statement:

“Arab governments would understand the perils of opposing the US”

So the invasion was about teaching Arab governments a lesson and getting them to tow the imperium’s line? I don’t remember the Independent telling me this back in March.

“[T]errorist organisations would pack up”

Pack up what? Being terrorists? Pack up and go ‘home’? What drivel, what nonsense this all is! Does the Independent’s editor really expect anybody to take this kind of crap seriously?

And the Independent’s principle objection is not that any of the above has absolutely nothing to do with the Independent’s ‘objections’ but that:

“It hardly needs to be stated how far Mr Bush is from attaining any of these objectives.”

So the objectives are okay with the Independent, it’s the fact that Bush failed to acheive them that is the problem. Well I’m glad I know now.

And finally, the Independent tells us that by flattening Iraq and occupying it:

“Israel and a Palestinian state could coexist in peace.”

So this is yet another reason for the invasion that the Independent offers us that they didn’t tell us about before. Yet “It hardly needs to be stated how far Mr Bush is from attaining any of these objectives.” Is the Independent telling us that none of these results were foreseen by anyone? Where was the Independent when this country went to war, having drinks with its fellow blind, deaf and dumb journos in the bar of the UN in New York?

The editorial goes on to say:

“The Israeli-Palestinian road-map, which was Mr Blair’s reward for his unconditional support, is in shreds.”

And whose fault it is this? The much vaunted ‘road-map’ which even a complete idiot could see was a non-starter, was never part of any rationale I’ve ever seen for Blah’s backing of the US. Indeed the ‘road-map’ didn’t even exist back in March 2003. And to call it a reward is nothing short of obscene given the level of violence that has been unleashed on the Palestinian people and the fact that from the very day it was published, Sharon’s 12 or 14 ‘conditions’ blew it out of the water. How can the Independent even suggest that Blah was being ‘rewarded’ for the UK’s complicity in the illegal, immoral and globally destabilising results of the invasion is just beyond me. Blah should be punished not rewarded for the war criminal he is.

And finally, rubbing some more salt into the wounds of the Arab world, as well as taxing my credulity beyond all acceptable bounds, it says:

“Britain and others have failed to shame them [Arabs] into helping.”

And how pray, did Britain and others (whoever these ‘others’ are) not only fail to shame them, but what exactly is it that they were trying to shame them into doing? Accepting the invasion and subjugation of a neighbouring Arab country? Accepting the genocidal destruction of the Palestinian people? Accept the threats against Syria (as well as actual incursions and murder of Syrian citizens)? Obviously, the only thing acceptable to the Independent is the complete surrender of the Arab world to the demands of the West. Well at long last, we see the real face of the ‘liberal’ media for what it is, so I suppose it’s not all negative.

Flying saucer spotted at the Hutton inquiry: Aliens blamed for leak
Frankly, I’m totally fed up with the Hutton ‘inquiry’. We’ve learned absolutely nothing we didn’t already know except how the ‘boy’s have gotten together save Blah’s craven butt from being dumped. And they’re still peddling the same old rubbish in the Indie about what an ‘honourable’ man Blair is even if he has got it all wrong, not that they’re saying that because it’s all Campbell and Hoon’s fault. Campbell for wanting to be a spook and not sticking to ‘presentation’ and Hoon for feeding Dr Kelly to the wolves.

The issue of war and chaos is nowhere to be seen and indeed as I point out above, it’s all Bush’s fault anyway, but you knew that all along didn’t you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.