A Letter from the Leader: Should we bomb Iraq?

After taking part in a live phone-in programme broadcast by BBC Radio Sheffield on Sunday the 9^th of February, together Professor Gwynn Rowley (Lecturer in Geo-Politics at the University of Sheffield), the Rev. Clement John (The World Council of Churches, Geneva), and David Schoon (Solicitor for Amnesty International), the leader of the the Islamic Party of Britain, David M. Pidcock, issued the following statement: 

Professor Gwynn Rowley had replied to Radio Sheffield’s question “How seriously are the Iraqis taking the American and British threats to use force”: “Extremely seriously, because I think one has to see that the geopolitical context of this area is not defined by arms or by various chemical weapons. But by the United States position which is quite clearly stated elsewhere. Very, very briefly: the Carter Doctrine in the Middle East, there are three points to it. First of all the United States is primarily interested in the Gulf area in general that’s the first thing. Secondly it will not let any power dominate that area. And thirdly if any power seeks to dominate that area  the United States has the right to go in and essentially - eradicate it. So once one knows the geopolitical context - and one understands that - the idea that Saddam Hussein is a bad person and he’s got all these chemical weapons, is extra to that. The position is that the United States cannot allow any power to dominate that area, it is an area of prime geo-political concern.” 

Professor Rowley’s comments confirm the well founded suspicions among seasoned observers that this is the continuing manifestation of the American Administrations ‘population reduction programme’ devised by the three horsemen of the apocalypse Bush, Scowcroft & Kissinger as a means of checking the growth of populations in areas of strategic geopolitical significance - or, as one of them callously remarked as a way of: “Getting rid of the useless eaters.” In this particular case the “useless eaters” are Iraqi men, women and children both Christian and Muslim. For further clarification read the United States neo-Malthusian policy document NSSM 200 which calls for the reduction of populations by ‘Economic means where possible by military means where necessary.’  

The “Carter Doctrine” continues the British policy of “Strategic Denial.” This is now a joint Anglo-American policy which explains Tony Blair’s unequivocal support for Bill Clinton’s action. The Carter Doctrine, strategically Denies other countries unfettered access to oil. This includes the inhabitants of the oil-bearing regions themselves. The policy was established by Admiral Jack Fisher in the latter half of the 19^th century, once he discovered that British ships could travel much further on a bunker of oil than on a bunker of coal. Power still corrupts, and the power exercised through the private control of oil, like the private creation and control of money, corrupts absolutely the consciences of most, if not all, politicians who serve the aims and objectives of this truly Malodorous pair.  

In his excellent article in The Guardian: “The Weak Shall Inherit Nothing” Monday the 25^th of March 1991. Professor Noam Chomsky confirms that the central message of the White House [both then and now] on behalf of the New World Order, is one that Cecil Rhodes and subsequent Rhodes Scholars like Bill Clinton are compelled to echo: “We Are The Masters - You shine our shoes.” Chomsky states: “A truism about the New World Order is that it is economically tri-polar and militarily uni-polar. Recent events help one to understand the interplay of these factors. As the glorious “Turkey Shoot” began in the desert, the New York Times published a fragment of a national security review from the early days of the Bush Administration, dealing with “Third World Threats.” It reads: “In cases where the U.S. confronts much weaker enemies, our challenge will not be simply to defeat them, but to defeat them decisively and rapidly.” Any other outcome would be “embarrassing” and might “undercut political support” because “Much weaker enemies” pose only one threat to the United States “the threat of  Independence - always intolerable.”  

The United States, says Chomsky “Will support the most murderous tyrant (Saddam included) as long as he plays along, and will labour to overthrow “Third World Democrats if they (exceed or) depart from their service function. The documentary and historical records are clear on this score. (Significantly) The leaked fragment makes no reference to peaceful means. As understood on all sides, in its confrontations with Third World Threats the United States is “Politically Weak”; its demands are not likely to gain public support, so diplomacy is a dangerous exercise. (Therefore) a “much weaker” opponent must not merely be defeated but -“Pulverised” if the central lesson of World Order is to be learned: We are the masters, and you shine our shoes.” 

With the benefit of hindsight, Chomsky, and access to good archives - particularly the July 14^th 1980 edition of the Newsweek, (which contains a fully illustrated 4 page article on the Carter Doctrine entitled: “A Big U.S. Build Up In The Gulf”)  we are able to establish that, among the 20^th century’s ‘Faults of the Age’, political-hypocrisy is every bit as effective today as it was in earlier centuries, and just as adept at passing off its own particular vices as virtue.

The article states that: “When Jimmy Carter drew a firm strategic line around the Persian Gulf oil fields last January (1979) and warned the Kremlin not to cross it, his “Carter Doctrine” was so much bluff: America’s military assets in the region amounted to a trifling fraction of the Soviet power at hand. But since then, the Pentagon has been working flat out to build a U.S. strike force to defend the West’s oil sources…In the rocky flats of Nevada last week, 2,700 Air Force pilots and crew men  put combat planes ranging from A-10 tank killers to F-15 superfighters through a gruelling desert shakedown. In Georgia twelve F-4E Phantoms, the classic Mideast warplane, got ready to fly to Egypt this week for three months of manoeuvres with an Egyptian sister squadron…The disparate units are among those from all four services that fit together under a novel concept for the Pentagon: a fast off-the-mark Rapid Deployment Force designed to beat the Soviets to any developing showdown in the oil-fields   - …To give its fledgling Rapid Deployment Force credibility for the future, the Carter Administration has budgeted $10 billion to improve its reaction time over the next seven years…The Administration rejects any idea that its approach to the Middle East amounts to a lot of smoke and dash prompted by the exigencies of re-election politics. The key elements of U.S. policy, say spokesmen, are still to reduce U.S. dependence on imported oil and to make further diplomatic progress towards an Arab-Israeli peace…”

The admissions by John D Rockefeller in his “Reminiscences” that: “One of our (Standard Oil’s) greatest helpers has been the State Department in Washington” and that: “Our Ambassadors Ministers and Consuls have aided to push our way into new markets to the utmost corners of the world.” Provides further evidence to support Washington reporter Jack Anderson’s  assertion in 1967 that: “..the State Department has often taken its policies out of the executive suites of the oil companies. When big-oil can’t get what it wants in foreign countries, the State Department tries to get it for them. In many countries, the American Embassies function virtually as branch offices for the oil combines…The State Department can be found almost always on the side of the ‘Seven Sisters’, as the oil giants are known inside the industry. Just as the Rockefellers make sure their capos are running “our” perennially disastrous foreign policy, you can bet your last devalued dollar that the Rockefeller Mafia controls the national and international money game. The Rockefellers have made the Treasury Department virtually a branch of the Chase Manhattan Bank.”

This runs counter to the views put forward by George “read my lips” Bush, who stated during the conflict that: the whole purpose of the Gulf War had nothing to do with oil. This wildcat Oilman, and former head of the CIA was well aware of the game being played out in the oilfields of Kuwait. Furthermore, the 1990 December 17^th edition of MEDNEWS the French, Middle East Defense News bi-weekly, carried the following information on its front page: “After an extensive investigation, conducted in Europe, Baghdad, and in the U.S., Med- News presents some astonishing facts. It was U.S., industry, with the explicit approval of the U.S., Department of Commerce (DoC), that provided some 40% of the high-tech content of Iraq’s most advanced weapons R & D center, Saad 16. One of the most shocking episodes  of U.S. -  Iraqi strategic cooperation involves a long series of export licences approved by the United States Department of Commerce, for sophisticated high-tech equipment that went directly to Iraq’s ballistic missile site, chemical weapons, and nuclear programs. Information obtained from the Commerce Department’s Bureau for Export Administration shows that the DoC was not acting out of ignorance when it approved the licences. On the contrary, the Iraqis exposed their intentions clearly in a series of letters and diagrams the DoC simply chose to ignore. The total number of licenses approved for dual use exports to Iraq has not yet been determined. A preliminary list subpoenaed by the House sub-committee on Consumer and Monetary Affairs contained 477 cases. A subsequent list, according to a December 4 Reuters report, contained 696. Between Oct.1, 1986 and Aug 2, 1990, Commerce approved 494 licence applications valued at $728 million. The Committee is now working on a fifth such list submitted to the Commerce Department. The most egregious case involves twenty DoC licenses for equipment that was shipped directly to Saad 16, Iraq’s principle ballistic missile and nuclear research facility (MD 3,12)”.

Pulverising the innocent people of Iraq for “errors of judgement” made by the United States Department of Commerce in backing their protégé Saddam is typical behaviour of both the British and American establishments - for they both serve the same bankers: As the saying goes: “No matter who you vote for, a man from Rothschild’s or Warburg’s gets in”.

Saddam was brought to power by the same forces that brought Adolf Hitler to power in the 1930’s, namely the Federal Reserve of  New York and the Bank of England: Winston Churchill was going to hang its longest serving governor, Montagu Norman, for his part in it. Like Saddam, they built him up to knock him down and in so doing established the State of Israel. Every subsequent conflict has been used to expand the borders of Greater Israel which will, if the advocates of World Government  succeed with Ben Gurion’s vision, include the entire land mass between the Nile and the Euphrates - represented by the two blue stripes above and below the hexagram on the national flag of Israel which, incidently, includes the northern part of Saudi Arabia and the City of Medina. Not so surprising when you realise that the real Mount Sinai is located in Midian on the Saudi side of the Gulf of Aqaba. A word from the prophet Micha in the ears of those who favour creating a greater Zionist State through aerial bombardment for which read Aerial Sharron and Aerial Netanyahu: “heads of the house of Jacob and princes of the house of Israel that abhor judgement, and pervert all equity. They build Zion with blood and Jerusalem with iniquity.” Micah iii 9-12.

With Rochefoucauld’s description of hypocrisy clearly in mind (“L’hypocrisie est un hommage que le vice rend a’ la vertu”- Hypocrisy is homage paid by vice to virtue), we are compelled to ask the following questions of Mr. Robin Cook:-

1. WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.

·       What role did the British Government play in preparing the use of depleted uranium against the Iraqi people? (i.e., Useless eater’s operation “Faded Gene”) 

2. INTERNATIONAL LAW .

·       Why is this Government encouraging the flouting of Protocol 1, Add. Geneva Conventions 1977, Pt.4, Sec.1, Ch.3, Art.54 against Iraqi civilians? 

3. U.N.RESOLUTION 986

·       What action will be taken by the British Government regarding the fact that only 50% of the agreed, and urgently needed food & medicine has been allowed into Iraq from phase 1.    

4.THE PARLIAMENTARY GROUP FOR WORLD GOVERNMENT.

     HOUSE OF COMMONS. LONDON SW1.

·       Is he - Robin Cook - still a member? 

Author: David Pidcock

Date Published: Winter 1998

Back To Top