global terrorism and scapegoats

Corinne, married with no kids, once made a mistake at work and since then she's been blamed for everything that goes wrong, whether it's in her department or not, so she knows what it's like to be made a scapegoat and she understands the ultererior motives of the globalists -- all of whom, according to her, are little better than terrorists.

"If that sort of thing can happen to a little thing like me," laughs Corinne, "then I can understand why someone like Saddam Hussein gets blamed for 9/11 and every terrorist activity anywhere in the world. Sure, he's an evil monster and deserves to be hanged, but invading Iraq was an evil, monstrous thing to do, too."

"As soon as Bush announced the axis of evil." says Corinne, "I knew that Iraq rather than Iran or North Korea was going to get targeted, and I knew that Saddam was going to bear the brunt for Bush's failure to capture Osama. Someone had to be made a scapegoat, and Saddam was it."

"Theoretically, any country has the potential to produce chemicals of mass destruction," adds Corinne, "so it is the potential and capacity to use such weapons that needs to be examined, along with the motive for doing so."

"Why would Iraq, Iran or North Korea want to use weapons of mass destruction against the USA, and do they have the geographic and military capacity to do so?"

"Iran's military presence was decimated following the US supported war on Iran conducted by Saddam many years ago," explains Corinne. "Iran is unfriendly towards the USA because of its support of Iraq in that war, but it has no known program of chemical weaponry or use and it definitely does not have the geographic or military capacity to launch any sort of attack on the USA."

"Similarly, Iraq's military presence was decimated following the UN supported Gulf War of 1991," says Corinne. "The Gulf War was legitimate as it was a consequence of Iraq's invasion of Kuwait - a protectorate set up by Great Britain to safeguard oil supply -and Iraq is definitely unfriendly towards the USA because of its participation in that war. But despite its past program of chemical weaponry and the use of same on its own dissidents Iraq has willingly accepted UN inspectors to confirm it has no ongoing program."

"Iraq was a hardly a threat to the US in terms of weapons of mass destruction," explains Corinne, "and it also did not have the geographic or military capacity to launch any sort of attack on the USA."

"Also," adds Corinne, "it may have had the geographic capacity to attack British protected Kuwait and US protected Israel but it did not have the the military capacity to do so. It was no real threat."

"Unlike Iraq and Iran, North Korea has nuclear capacity," says Corinne. "It has a formidable military presence and has been locked in a stand-off with America over the US protected South Korea for nearly half a century - a situation that is getting worse rather than better over the years."

"If the potential to produce and use weapons of mass destruction against the USA were truly the main concern of Bush," explains Corinne, "then North Korea would have been the logical target, not Iraq, because its regime is secretive - nobody knows what is going on there."

"Geographically, North Korea does not have the capacity to launch any sort of attack on the USA, but it most definitely does have the geographic capacity as well as the military capacity to attack Japan and US protected South Korea."

"North Korea, not Iran and Iraq, is thus a far more potential enemy for the USA," says Corinne, "but to impose any sort of action on North Korea in terms of the War of Terror cannot be justified without a terrible price being paid."

"North Korea is isolationist and pays no attention to UN dictates. To achieve security from any sort of attack by North Korea, America would need to use massive military force."

"Support for a war on North Korea would not be gained at home," says Corinne," nor in the UN. There is nothing to tie North Korea with 9/11 or any terrorist activity."

"Furthermore, victory would be not assured against such a formidable military force as North Korea, and basically there would be nothing tangible to be gained by going to war with North Korea - expect, of course, for the reunification of the country."

"Similarly, although targeting Iran would be easier in terms of a fundamentalist Islam connection - possibly an al-Qaeda link," says Corinne, "there is nothing tangible to be gained by such action."

"So, we're left with Iraq," sighs Corinne. "There's everything to gain in terms of the world's richest oil fields, and nothing much to lose besides a bit of human collateral. It was expected to be a pushover and initially it was."

"After the quick and relative painless Afghanistan pushover, the military machine was fired and ready for more," explains Corinne. "Bush couldn't get Osama and the al-Qaeda, so he needed another target to wreak revenge on for the 9/11 tragedy."

"Iraq was the perfect target and Saddam was the perfect scapegoat."

"Iraq is a Islam nation so it was not be too hard to foment fear at home that it is harboring some terrorists," explains Corinne. "It was a pushover in the 1991 Gulf War and was weakened by 12 years of sanctions against it and would be another easy victory."

"Also, Iraq is unfinished business," explains Corinne. "Bush's father had wanted to get rid of Saddam but the UN didn't sanction a regime change. Despite the UN not supporting a war, Section 1433 gave the USA a loophole to go in and invade the country on its own if necessary."

"Bush maintains that the potential to produce and use weapons of mass destruction against the USA was a valid reason to focus attention on Iraq," says Corinne, "and in failing to allow the UN weapons inspectors the time they need to do their job and prove Iraq's claim that it had no such weapons, Bush showed that he wants war and revenge for 9/11 and that weapons of mass destruction had nothing to do with it."

"Because Bush knew that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction," says Corinne, "he needed a big excuse to go to war and win the support of allies."

"This excuse came in the final weeks before invading Iraq when rumors were spread that Osama and Saddam were in cahoots," says Corinne. "This was a lie because Osama hates Saddam and his liberal Islamic beliefs more than the Americans do, and vice versa!"

"And then finally Saddam's human rights record was trotted out."

"Very few people had cared about Saddam and his human rights abominations before this," explains Corinne. "All of a sudden, the world's attention became focused on shredding machines allegedly used for human extermination."

"All other despots and their human rights abominations were conveniently ignored."

"I watched in disbelief as the world was whipped by the US propaganda machine into wanting to get rid of the Saddam regime," sighs Corinne.

"A war ostensibly against weapons of mass destruction had become one against Saddam and his regime."

"Saddam had supplanted Osama."

"As nasty as Saddam is," says Corinne, "he had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11 and to use him as a scapegoat for Osama's abominations is an abomination in itself."

"The whole nasty operation was so similar to the sort of office politics that go on where my husband and I work that I despair of any imperfect human goverment being capable of governing us honorably and rationally," says Corinne. "We'd be better off with computers doing the job."

This story first appeared as saddam the scapegoat

globalized murder

Like most Christians, if not most people of any faith, Adrienne -- a working wife and mom -- was raised to negotiate her way through conflict, to turn the other cheek if necessary and to focus her charity at home. She is totally against war of any kind and believes globalization -- other than spreading Christianity -- is evil.

"Life's too short to make enemies," says Adrienne, "but the conduct of this war against terror has overturned everything I was raised to believe."

"Either I have been lied to all of my life -- in which case I have been a victim of pacifist propaganda," says Adrienne, "or our government is run by evil people and in not protesting this war and stopping it we are all accessories to a terrible crime."

"As I see it, the weapons inspectors were doing their job in Iraq, the regime was complying with UN requirements and no 'smoking gun' was found that indicated Iraq was producing weapons of mass destruction."

"By refusing to allow the weapons inspectors the time they needed to complete their task and prove to all concerned that Iraq was, indeed, no threat to anyone," explains Adrienne, "Bush proved that he wanted a violent conflict and had no intention of allowing peaceful negotiations to work."

"Just imagine how this scenario plays out in our private lives," says Adrienne. "If we had a dispute with a neighbor, for instance, and we took the matter to court and were told to give the neighbors six months to remove whatever offensive material they had on their property, do we have a right to ignore what the court says -- claiming six months is too long to wait -- and go in there and murder them all?"

"Don't tell me that we have one law for individuals, and another for governments," says Adrienne.

"Civilization is built upon civility or it isn't, and if it isn't then I need to reassess everything I was brought up to believe."

"No matter how much I may despise my neighbors because they are brutal people, had a religion that differed from mine and stored material offensive to me on their property," says Adrienne, "I have no desire to invade their property and murder them. I trust in legal negotiations to work the problem out, and if it doesn't pan out to my satisfaction then I would be prepared to move rather than kill them."

"Does this mindset make me a fool?" asks Adrienne.

"Apparently so," she answers, "because my government wasn't even prepared to let legal negotiations run their course!"

"Instead, my government got fed up waiting for the weapons inspectors to do their work and took the law into its own hands."

"I don't believe Iraq ever had any weapons of mass destruction, and if it did then it certainly wasn't planning on using them on us in a country half a world away with more weapons of mass destruction than the rest of the world put together."

"All of which means," sighs Adrienne, "that my government invaded Iraq because it didn't like Saddam and his regime and wants to overthrow the regime and set up a puppet government it can manipulate."

"If my government can do this," reasons Adrienne, "then my neighbor can invade my property because it doesn't like me and my family, and it can murder us, too, for the same reasons."

"And if my government can do this," adds Adrienne, "then other governments can do this, too. North Korea can march into South Korea, China can invade countries to the south and west and all of the Arab nations can do the same."

"My government has set a precedent and because so few nations and individuals protested there is going to be no end to war and the sanitized murder that invading nations commit."

"I was brought up to believe that murder is murder when you know what you are doing, when you're aware of the consequences of your actions," says Adrienne, "and my government planned this war and whatever it says about collateral damage and other sanitized terms it's still murder to me."

"I can't be the only person perplexed by what my government has done," sighs Adrienne. "I can't be only person feeling ashamed to be part of a nation that is seen by most of the rest of the world as a nation of bullies and evil monsters."

"And yet I am aware that to think the way I do I am essentially expressing traitorous thoughts," muses Adrienne, "and this perplexes me even more because I love my country."

"Of course I am as concerned about the death of our troops in this war as I am about the Iraqi civilians that get killed," adds Adrienne, "and of course now that the war has gone on for long I want it to end as quickly as possible in our favor so that we don't end up being called losers as well as murderers, yet I will always regret that we didn't take the peaceful course set down by the United Nations."

"The weapons inspectors should have been given all the time they needed to find the weapons of mass destruction that Bush claimed Iraq was producing and stockpiling," says Adrienne. "And if such weapons were found then the war needed to be a UN mission, not a unilateral strike by the USA."

"What is a few months or even a few years when we are talking about human lives -- not just those of innocent civilians but also military personnel?" asks Adrienne.

"My kids are asking questions and I feel useless at explaining what is happening," sighs Adrienne. "This war goes against everything my husband and I have taught them."

"I'd like to know what sort of Christianity Mr Bush follows because it sure as hell isn't the same one we use to guide our lives," says Adrienne. "All that old testament stuff -- eye for an eye, stoning to death and other acts of brutality in the name of God -- isn't in our good book."

Adrienne's story first appeared as war is sanitized murder! and is reprinted with permission.