The war machine’s propaganda outlets try to brainwash us into believing that attacking Iraq somehow made the world a better, safer place. The latest justification for why we attacked Iraq (after all the previous excuses for why Bush decided to attack oil-rich Iraq turned out to be lies) is the claim that we’re waging a war against terror (as if waging war wasn’t an act of terror itself) to end terrorism.
So, how’s that working out? Not so well, apparently. According to a State Department report, terrorism is up 30%.
A State Department report on terrorism due out next week will show a nearly 30 percent increase in terrorist attacks worldwide in 2006 to more than 14,000, almost all of the boost due to growing violence in Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. officials said Friday.
So, let me get this straight… We supposedly attacked Iraq to fight terrorism, and yet terrorism has gone up by one third. I’m not a mathematician, but to me that sounds like we’re achieving the opposite effect of the stated objective. Or in other words, we’re losing.
And Harry Reid had the nerve to point out the obvious. How DARE he? Recently he made the comment that the Iraq war is lost, and the right-wing propaganda outlets were all over him, trying to demonize him for being honest.
Apparently right-wing pundits hate honesty as much as “they” supposedly hate freedom. Whoever “they” happen to be on any given day. The Sunnis, the Shiites, Iraqis, Iranians, Arabs, Muslims, Persians, the UN, Canadians, Mexicans, Europeans… take your pick. According to right-wing hate mongers, “they” all hate us for our freedom.
This entry was posted on Saturday, April 28th, 2007 at 10:51 pm and is filed under Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
To call it a “War on Terror” was the wrong label in the first place. It implies that you are fighting an organised, monolithic agency that has a central base, instead of the diametrically opposed groups who can’t even agree on the colour of shit, that they actually are.
Bush’s “War on Terror” has succeeded - in giving these erstwhile fragmented groups a common goal, which means these former enemies are now becoming allies, albeit on a fragile basis.
Harry Reid, plus a few retired Generals, are now venting their ire on what is argueably the worst administration ever to to elected by a democratic society at the expense of the democracy they fought so long and hard to attain.
In all European history this has happened once (Adolf Hitler) and the European Union is continuing to put up safeguards to prevent this from ever happening again.
One safeguard is a rotating Presidency - the Prime Minister of each member state becomes EU president for a maximum of 6 months - the EU now comprises of 27 member states + 9 candidates.
A President/Monarch in Europe is only a FIGUREHEAD whose only real function is to rubber-stamp legislation, is NOT allowed to veto, but is allowed to put forward a counterpoint for further discussion on any issue he/she disagrees with.
As Winston Spencer Chuchill once said ” Propaganda only works while you’re winning”, which is what the current administrationmis having to come to terms with now.
[…] mentioned previously, the latest State Department statistics show that terrorism has gone up by 30% last year. So the “War on Terror” is an abject failure (something the republicans will never […]