Home > Election 2004: Americans Endorse War, Religious Fanaticism And State Terrorism
Election 2004: Americans Endorse War, Religious Fanaticism And State Terrorismby Open-Publishing - Friday 5 November 2004
Election 2004: Americans Endorse War, Religious Fanaticism And State Terrorism
“Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act.” George Orwell
By Yamin Zakaria
11/04/04 "ICH" — The childish charade of this so-called ‘free’ election in the US has finally come to an end. This ‘free’ election was in fact not ‘free’ at all, when you consider that it offered a limited ‘choice’ of only two candidates. This fact alone shows that the US is already very close to a dictatorship. More importantly, both candidates had identical agendas that differed only in style but not in substance, which is not surprising since both were supported and handled by the same corporate Capitalism and Zionist lobbies that American democracy has become known for. In reality, this is a dictatorship that has entered through the back door under the illusion of a ‘free’ election.
For the rest of the world, the global audience was naturally focused on the issue of the US foreign policy. On this point, the difference between the two candidates was even more subtle and fundamental; the US-Lebensraum will surely continue, irrespective of who won the election.
It is time for those with a genuine free mind to reflect on the real implication of this election. What has resulted is another generation of obscure American foreign policy - a child born out of wedlock, this next illegitimate generation of US policy rises. The fact is that almost half the US population opposed George Bush and his war agenda but are now considered to be his legal guardian but now the masses are obliged to look after him for another four years by giving total obedience to his commands, one way or the other.
So, pseudo democracy ends and the American people must sit back now and be dictated to. They can of course voice their opinions through the mirage of free demonstrations but those with intelligence realize that vocal chords will have long worn out long these bastard policy children of party donors will relinquish their control.
Genuine change largely comes through aggressive and forceful confrontation; history has proven this time and time again. Demonstrations must escalate to have any impact on those sitting cushy at the top. If one can only travel back in time and talk with those Americans who fought against British imperialism in 1776, they would surely have laughed at these demonstrators who exercise their ‘freedom’.
British imperialism has been gradually replaced with homegrown corporate imperialism. The Afro-Americans, Hispanics and Asians find themselves in a similar situation. The free people of the world hope and look forward to the day when they revolt inside the US and gain real liberation and states like Texas are returned to the motherland, just as Kuwait was returned to Iraq for a short period of time back in 1991. For those hardnosed Republicans, moronic Bible Bashers speaking in tongues, KKK affiliates and those millions of Americans who have never ventured outside of their villages and towns, they ought to read a little into the history of the region that their nation is pillaging in the name of ‘freedom’, ‘democracy’, ‘oil’ and Jesus, the so-called god of ‘love’.
Let’s look at some of the attributes of this illegitimate foreign policy child and its implications.
It is not Usamah Bin Laden, but George Bush that claims to be in direct communication with the Creator. Bush, with his permanent smirk on his face, has convinced himself and his flock that the carnage in Iraq is part of a divine scheme. By implication, this must also include the conduct of his upright ‘Christian’ soldiers in Abu-Ghraib! It must also include the pilots and soldiers that deliberately shoot into the unarmed crowds in Fallujah and elsewhere despite being told that they pose no threat.
According to ‘Prophet’ (or you may pronounce as profit) Bush, God Almighty must have inspired those Christian US soldiers to eliminate the helpless enemy but then, where is this so-called God that your missionaries preach about? Where is their god that commands them to turn the other cheek and love their enemies? Is it the same god that has become a landlord over the area of Palestine, giving permission to any Jew around world to evict those who have lived there for centuries by any means? Is it the same god that inspired the US to tax (or steal) from the millions in poor countries through the dirty trade policies and international institutions and to lighten their guilt, raise money by holding annual charity events and pop concerts? Is it this so-called god of ‘love’ that propels god’s ‘chosen’ nation to build the most lethal and indiscriminate weapons?
This is the real religious fanaticism. Bush and his flocks are the prime examples of it -not the brave human bombers who defend their lands who are merely desperate people forced to take desperate measures.
If the secular West really despised religious fanaticism they would have picked up on the fact that the religious fanaticism of George Bush and his administration is politically motivated. The term religious fanaticism is only employed in condemning the heroic Mujahideen resisting the revolting Goliath. Like most hypocrites, the secular brigades are selective. They even wittingly or unwittingly endorse Biblical arguments as a basis for justifying the ethnic cleansing of Palestine; fulfilling God’s promise whilst condemning the Arabs/Muslims for referring to the religious dimension of the conflict! Are the Muslims obliged to accept the verdict of a Judeo-Christian god?
In contrast, if Usamah Bin Laden were ever to claim direct communication with God Almighty it would contradict Islamic teachings, for only Prophets of God have direct communication with God Almighty through divine revelation. Many take it for granted that Usamah Bin laden is a religious fanatic but anyone examining the facts can see the real fanatic is clearly Bush. Similarly, it is the speeches and sentences of George Bush that are far closer to that of a mad man or an imbecile rather than the well-composed message with a poetic touch of Usamah Bin Laden.
The recent revelation of the actual horrors of the civilian casualties, a war conducted in violation of the UN charter according to the General Secretary of the UN Mr. Kofi Annan, clearly makes these war crimes by any standards. George Bush is a terrorist and a mass murderer. But the world does not revolve around true justice but rather around “might is right”.
Will Bush continue on his current track and if so, what then is the implication of his election?
If the Iraqi’s can be punished for the actions of its dictator then by the same reasoning, a democratic nation can be punished for the actions of its leadership. This is especially the case when the population has approved the conduct of their leadership pro-actively thorough an election. Now, the entire US population is responsible for the carnage in Iraq and elsewhere unless they take immediate measures to distance themselves by taking further practical steps to remove George Bush.
In the same vein, the US is now preparing to implement the final solution for the women and children of Fallujah, creating more mass graves in the post Saddam era. Yet, we will keep hearing about the innocent US civilians of 9/11, but not the millions of innocents that has perished since 1948 or 1924 or even since 9/11. Moderates will be raised up high to selectively condemn those who are resisting whilst their deceitful lips will be sealed in the mounting civilian casualties in this phony war. There are no innocent US civilians now that they have endorsed Bush’s actions, past, present and future.
I may have offended those diehard liberals, freedom-fanatics, militant-secularists, democracy maniacs, republicans, conservatives, belligerent-moderates, confused-moderates, migrant-coolies, self-hating coolies. But you know people may dislike the taste of medicine although it can heal the body. Remember truth does not inherently lie in numerical majority but objectively assessing the merit of the arguments presented
Copyright © 2004 by Yamin Zakaria Email