an area of the map for world news.
February 2002 issue of
World Press Review
(VOL. 49, No. 2)
in the Cross Hairs
Bush Can Fool No One
Ahmad, Al-Thawrah (Internet publication of Iraqs
ruling Baath Party), Baghdad, Iraq, Nov. 29, 2001
Perhaps the U.S.
president believed his news media that he had achieved a great
and fast victory in Afghanistan. He began to act as a victorious
man, using hollow, arrogant language, making threats and reshuffling
the cards to achieve an objective sought by his Zionist team.
Bush, however, can fool no one. Certainly he would not be able
to fool us. If he wants to repeat the massacre he committed
and the destruction he caused in Afghanistan, this is his business.
residents listen to President Saddam Hussein (pictured
in the mural) addressing the nation, Dec. 18, 2002 (Photo:
Bush and all the strategists and experts behind him seek to
capitalize on the post-September situation to serve scenarios
that were devised in advance to achieve U.S goals. It is now
obvious that the aggression against Afghanistan was committed
not because of Bin Laden, but with the purpose of rewriting
the geopolitical equations in the U.S.s interest. Bush
strives for the permanent goal of keeping the Iraqi situation
as it is, meaning that the blockade, daily air attacks, the
anomalous situation in the northern part of the homeland, illegitimate
interventions, and the media and diplomatic wars will continue.
Thus, Bush began to talk about the return of inspectors to Iraq
to prove that Iraq is free of weapons of mass destruction. But
what does this have to do with the Afghanistan issue? Is the
aim behind the U.S.-organized international fanfare, under the
slogan of combating terrorism, not meant to maintain the blockade
No matter how hard Iraq works to prove that it is free of weapons
of mass destruction, the United States will find a reason to
maintain its hostile stance toward it, as the experience of
more than a decade shows. Former [U.N.] weapons inspectors revealed
the nature of interventions and practices that the United States
carried out through the weapons-inspection teams. Many of these
inspectors admitted that the United States incited them to act
in a provocative way and tasked them with spying missions.
In 1998, these inspectors behaved in a way that prompted aggression
under a prior agreement with Washington, as subsequent revelations
indicated. Furthermore, senior officials of the inspection committees,
such as [Rolf] Ekeus, acknowledged that Iraq was virtually free
of weapons of mass destruction. Ekeus also testified that Iraq
fulfilled 95 percent of its obligations six years ago. Even
his successor, [Richard] Butler, said that the files on nuclear
and chemical weapons were closed. But what did the Security
Council do in return for Iraq, other than maintaining the blockade
and allowing the aggression to continue?
If Bush wants to get rid of the weapons of mass destruction,
let him implement Article 14 of Security Council Resolution
687 that calls for removing these weapons from this region,
including the Zionist state. [The resolution was passed in April
1991, acknowledging the sovereignty, territorial integrity,
and political independence of Kuwait and Iraq. Section
14 states that the actions to be taken by Iraq...represent
steps toward the goal of establishing in the Middle East a zone
free from weapons of mass destruction..., and the objective
of a global ban on chemical weapons.WPR]
Why does he keep coming after a country that implemented the
Security Council resolutions, but leaves, or rather supports,
a terrorist state that is full of all kinds of deadly weapons
and does not care about any Security Council resolutions?
Bush should calm down and be careful in uttering his threats,
because Iraq is not the kind of country that bows to threat.
We know very well how to survive, resist, and move forward despite
everything. Experience has proved this fact.