Robert Fisk’s World: Right to the very end in Iraq, our masters denied us the truth

Robert Fisk’s World: Right to the very end in Iraq, our masters denied us the truth

The sentence ‘millions of Iraqis now live free of oppression’ is pure public relations

Saturday, 2 May 2009

'We acknowledge," the letter says, "that violence has claimed the lives of many thousands of Iraqi civilians over the last five years, either through terrorism or sectarian violence. Any loss of innocent lives is tragic and the Government is committed to ensuring that civilian casualties are avoided. Insurgents and terrorists are not, I regret to say, so scrupulous."

This quotation comes from the Ministry of Defence's "Iraq Operations Team, Directorate of Operations" and is signed by someone whose initials may be "SM" or "SW" or even "SWe". Unusually (but understandably), it does not carry a typed version of the author's name. Its obvious anonymity – given the fact that not a single reference is made to the civilians slaughtered by the Anglo-American invasion and occupation of Iraq – is no surprise. I, too, would not want to be personally associated with such Blair-like mendacity. What is astonishing, however, is that this outrageous letter should have been written this year.

..............................

........... Here is another quotation from his execrable letter. "It is important to remember that our decision to take action (sic) in Iraq was driven by Saddam Hussein's refusal to co-operate with the UN-sponsored weapons inspections... The former Prime Minister has expressed his regret for any information, given in good faith, concerning weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, which has subsequently proven to be incorrect."

I am left breathless by this lie. Saddam Hussein did not "refuse to co-operate" with the UN weapons inspectors. The whole problem was that – to the horror of Blair and Bush – the ghastly Saddam did co-operate with them, and the UN weapons team under Hans Blix was about to prove that these "weapons of mass destruction" were non-existent; hence the Americans forced Blix and his men and women to leave Iraq so that they and Blair could stage their illegal invasion. I saw Blix's aircraft still on the ground at Baghdad airport just two days before the attack. Note, too, the weasel words. Blair did not give his information "in good faith", as SM claims. He knew – and the Ministry of Defence knew (and I suppose SM knew) – they were untrue. Or "incorrect" as "SM" coyly writes.

..................
more:
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fiskrsquos-world-right-to-the-very-end-in-iraq-our-masters-denied-us-the-truth-1677680.html

with georgie porgie. his response was he did not debate terrorists

Why?

It's the dominator's rationalization that the dominated are responsible for being dominated. It's the abuser's rationalization that the abused are responsible for being abused.

Because of that rationalization, Hitler could claim that the Jews put themselves in the position of being gassed. Because of that rationalization, every abused wife who leaves their husbands put themselves in the position of being tracked down and shot and every abused child "asked for it".

This is the way the sociopaths, and non-sociopaths operating in sociopathic systems, make themselves believe that they still have some scruples, and that they aren't completely sold out to evil. Even while their own acts are working to teach them otherwise.

I'm sure SM is still rationalizing that the world wanted to be lied to about Saddam Hussein.

This is the way people like SM think: Lies don't have to be believed, just tolerated.