[Prec. per data] [Succ. per data] [Prec. per argomento] [Succ. per argomento] [Indice per data] [Indice per argomento]
Fw: [ANSWER]: Response to Bush and Powell's U.N. presentation
- Subject: Fw: [ANSWER]: Response to Bush and Powell's U.N. presentation
- From: "Nello Margiotta" <animarg at tin.it>
- Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2003 08:18:30 +0100
----- Original Message ----- From: "A.N.S.W.E.R." <answer.general at action-mail.org> To: <answer.general at action-mail.org> Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 12:56 AM Subject: [ANSWER]: Response to Bush and Powell's U.N. presentation > RESPONSE TO BUSH & POWELL'S U.N. PRESENTATION > > George W. Bush went on national television this afternoon > to announce "the game is over," meaning that the other > U.N. countries had to make their decision about whether to > resist their own population's opposition to war, in order > to support his planned aggression against Iraq. Bush's > speech was part of a well-choreographed follow-up to the > presentation by Secretary of State Colin Powell yesterday > before the United Nations. > > Bush is trying to convince the world that war is > inevitable in order to break the will and spirit of the > vast multitude around the world who desire to stop this > war. Instead, our movement around the world will continue > to vigorously build mass opposition -- the only actual > political obstacle that can stop Bush, Cheney and the > Pentagon. > > The following is a response released by the A.N.S.W.E.R. > Coalition after Powell's February 5 U.N. speech: > > Colin Powell's presentation to the United Nations was an > example of Alice in Wonderland-type propaganda. Reality > has been turned upside down. At the very moment that Iraq, > hobbled by 12 years of devastating sanctions and ongoing > U.S. bombing, is surrounded by a heavily-armed invasion > force of more than 100,000 troops, fighter aircraft, > warships and high tech conventional missiles, and is > threatened with a nuclear strike, Powell argued that Iraq > poses a great threat to "peace." > > The Pentagon has disclosed its plan to maintain peace by > carrying out an opening blitzkrieg on Iraq of more than > 3000 bombs and missiles in the first 48 hours. This plan > is titled "Shock and Awe" by the administration. 300 to > 400 Tomahawk cruise missiles will rip through Iraq on the > first day of a U.S. assault, which is more than the number > that were launched during the entire 40 days of the first > Gulf War. On the second day, another 300 to 400 cruise > missiles will be sent. "There will not be a safe place in > Baghdad," said one Pentagon official. "The sheer size of > this has never been seen before, never been contemplated > before," the official said. One of the authors of the > Shock and Awe plan stated the intent is, "So that you have > this simultaneous effect, rather like the nuclear weapons > at Hiroshima, not taking days or weeks but in minutes." > (CBS News January 27, 2003, New York Times, February 2, > 2003) > > General Powell is routinely referred to in the media as > the moderate or "dove" inside the Bush administration. It > is important to remember that it is the same Colin Powell > who, at a press briefing shortly after the conclusion of > the 1991 Gulf War when asked his assessment of the number > of Iraqi soldiers and civilians killed, which had been put > at over 100,000, answered, "It's really not a number I'm > terribly interested in." > > Is there justification for war? What Bush's war places in > jeopardy is enormous. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis may > be slaughtered. Tens of thousands of service members will > be sent to risk their lives. The economic cost, estimated > between $200 billion to $2 trillion will loot the U.S. > treasury and mortgage future generations, depleting funds > that could provide essential human needs such as > education, healthcare, childcare and jobs. > > What circumstances could justify these certain risks and > losses? None that were presented by Powell. Laying out his > case, Powell presented no threat issued by Iraq against > the U.S. or anyone else. Powell's presentation had a > two-fold purpose. It was not merely to "make the case" for > war, it was also intended to redirect the attention of the > people of the U.S. away from the Bush administration's > real objectives in recolonizing the Middle East. Using > smoke and mirrors and misdirection, Powell engaged in > dramatic fear-mongering, even going so far as to reference > the anthrax attacks that originated in the U.S. from U.S. > stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, to suggest that > bombing Iraq will make the U.S. safer. > > During his entire presentation Powell never mentioned the > word "oil," and yet the whole world knows that Bush and > his corporate clients are already drawing up plans for the > seizure of Iraq's oil reserves. For public consumption the > talk is disarmament or democracy, but behind closed doors, > the administration is meeting with oil industry executives > to divide up Iraq's oil fields. (Wall Street Journal, > January 16, 2003) Far from democracy, Bush intends to > install a U.S. military dictatorship under General Tommy > Franks to rule Iraq. In his column of February 5th, Thomas > Friedman, Iraq invasion cheerleader, approvingly laid out > the future for Iraq, "Iraq will be controlled by the iron > fist of the U.S. Army and its allies, with an Iraqi > civilian 'advisory' administration gradually emerging > behind this iron fist to run daily life..."(New York > Times, February 5, 2003) > > Powell has presented no threat, no plan, no capability. Is > there justification for waging a first strike war of > aggression, for bombarding the people of Iraq with massive > firepower? Who really poses the greatest threat to world > peace? > > Powell's presentation was much about Iraq's hypothetical > and in any case much diminished weaponry, while the > Pentagon is preparing to launch a devastating attack on > Iraq using very real weapons of mass destruction -- > possibly including nuclear weapons. On the issue of > weapons of mass destruction, Powell asserts that the Iraqi > government may hope to possess nuclear weapons someday. It > has not been lost on the whole world though that in recent > weeks, the Bush administration has left open the option of > actually using nuclear weapons against Iraq in the coming > conflict and reserves for itself the right to carry out > first strike nuclear war against even non-nuclear > countries as part of a new military doctrine recently > announced by the Pentagon. > > Powell claims that if the U.N. does not support U.S. > military aggression and conquest of Iraq, in violation of > its Charter, that it will lose its "relevancy." History > will remember with great irony Colin Powell's statement > that we must stop the leader who "has pursued his ambition > to dominate Iraq and the broader Middle East using the > only means he knows, intimidation, coercion and > annihilation of all those who might stand in his way." > > The Bush Administration is not racing to deter an imminent > danger posed by Iraq. They are racing to prevent our > movement from becoming an insurmountable obstacle to war. > Let's all pledge to intensify our work in these crucial > coming days and weeks. > > A report from the February 5 New York City protest in > response to Powell's speech can be found at: > http://www.internationalanswer.org/news/update/020503undemo.html > > -------------------------------------------- > > For information about the FEBRUARY 15 INTERNATIONAL DAY OF > ACTION, including local and regional event listings, > transportation to regional events, downloadable flyers, > and ways you can list your local plans, go to: > http://www.internationalanswer.org/campaigns/f15/index.html > > FOR MORE INFORMATION: > http://www.InternationalANSWER.org > http://www.VoteNoWar.org > dc at internationalanswer.org > New York 212-633-6646 > Washington 202-544-3389 > Los Angeles 213-487-2368 > San Francisco 415-821-6545 > > To make a tax-deductible donation, go to > http://www.internationalanswer.org/donate.html > > Sign up to receive updates (low volume): > http://www.internationalanswer.org/subscribelist.html > > ------------------ > Send replies to answer at action-mail.org > > This is the ANSWER activist announcement > list. Anyone can subscribe by sending > any message to <answer.general-subscribe at action-mail.org> > To unsubscribe <answer.general-off at action-mail.org>
- Prev by Date: Fw: niente diretta?
- Next by Date: ''The nuclear bomb hoax''
- Previous by thread: Fw: niente diretta?
- Next by thread: ''The nuclear bomb hoax''
- Indice: