Title: ENRAGING 1.4 BILLION WORLDWIDE MUSLIMS -- "BLOOD IN THE STREETS" STRATEGY -- Part 1 - Sexual Abuse and Specific Humiliation of Iraqi Prisoners --- UPDATED 18:27 hours EDT, May 6, 2004
Resources to aid your Understanding
Learn how to protect yourself, your loved ones!
Stand by for insights so startling you will never look at the news the same way again.
YOU ARE NOW ON
THE CUTTING EDGE
If you have not yet read NEWS1631, "Blood In The Streets" Strategy, please stop right now to read it, for this article will not make sense to you until you understand the precepts contained within this previous article. This strategy calls for a military force possessing the huge technological advantage to provoke the other side into a military conflict. Once the all-out conflict is under way, the military force possessing the huge advantage can easily destroy the other side without suffering significant casualties.
If our premise is correct, we postulated in March, 2002, then we should see attempts on the part of the United States and Great Britain to so alienate and enrage Muslims throughout the world that we provoke Islamic country after country into attacking us. Thus, we felt in March, 2002, that we would be taking steps in this Iraq conflict to stimulate the kind of anger, rage, and hatred which would drive these countries to war.
Is this strategy being followed? You can be the judge after carefully reading the following news stories.
"Torture Chambers and Rape Rooms"
President Bush: "A year ago I did give the speech from the carrier saying we had achieved an important objective, accomplished a mission, which was the removal of Saddam Hussein', Bush said. 'As a result, there are no longer torture chambers or mass graves or rape rooms in Iraq." ["Bush defends `Mission Accomplished' as casualties mount in Iraq", BY RAFAEL LORENTE, South Florida Sun-Sentinel, Posted on Fri, Apr. 30, 2004; http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunherald/news/politics/8562530.htm]
White House: "White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Tuesday that Bush first became aware of the allegations of abuse some time after the Pentagon began looking into it but did not see the pictures until they were made public and did not learn of the classified Pentagon report until news organizations reported its existence ..." ["Senator suggests Iraq prisoner abuse more widespread, panel launches 'open' investigation", By Robert Burns, Associated Press, 5/4/2004, reprinted in Boston Globe, 5/4/2004; http://www.boston.com/dailynews/125/wash/Senator_suggests_Iraq_prisoner:.shtml]
White House spokesman Scott McClellan has just revealed a very important fact when he said that "Bush first became aware of the allegations of abuse some time after the Pentagon began looking into it", as the Boston Globe is reporting, above, what time frame was that? Carefully notice the following words:
"Bush first became aware of the allegations of abuse some time after the Pentagon began looking into it..."
When did the Pentagon "begin" their investigation? In January. When did they conclude their investigation and issue their report? In February, this year! However, this situation becomes even clearer when we review the following article from Australia:
American Military: "The US defence force has confirmed that Bush was kept informed of the investigation into the American torture chambers in Iraq - completed in February" . ("An empire in moral crisis", By Margo Kingston, smh.com.au., May 2, 2004, http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/05/02/1083224655715.html
Take note of the important facts in this single statement:
* "The US defence force has confirmed..." -- Our own forces have told us that they were investigating this matter before Bush uttered this April 30 promise
* "Bush was kept informed of the investigation ..." -- Since the Pentagon report was finalized in February, 2004, it is logical to believe that he knew of these facts before April 30, when he promised the American and Iraqi peoples that we had removed all these terribly dictatorial "tools" from Iraq. The words, "was kept informed" denote continual action, the action of being kept informed as the investigation proceeded.
Therefore, is it likely that President Bush knew of the Pentagon revelations when he promised us that all such devices to abuse people had been eliminated from Iraq.
UPDATE: On May 6, after this article originally went to print, Fox News published a "Timeline" of the prison abuse scandal. As the Pentagon began to investigate prison tortures and sexual abuses on January 13, Rumsfeld was informed on or about January 15, 2004, and he then told President Bush! Listen:
NEWS BRIEF: "Timeline: Iraq Prison Abuse Scandal", Fox News, May 6, 2004, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,119224,00.html
" Jan. 13: A Member of the 800th Military Police Brigade tells superiors about prison abuses, and Pentagon officials are informed. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld is told a day or so later. Shortly afterward, Rumsfeld tells Bush."
We are left with the distinctly distasteful picture that, when President Bush claimed that our invasion had removed all "torture chambers and rape rooms" from Iraq, he knew the allegations that American and British troops were regularly torturing, raping, and sexually abusing Iraqi soldiers in our custody! This is a fact that all Evangelical Christian supporters of President Bush must get hold of right now! Too may Christians who genuinely love Jesus are allowing Bush to deceive them as to his true nature. Too many Christians are refusing to even consider the systemic corruption that President Bush has suffered because of his stubborn life-long membership in the Satanic secret society, Skull & Bones! President Bush has wrongly been so closely identified as a de facto leader in the Christian Right, and his policy of invasion of Iraq have been so wrongly classified as being driven by Biblically prophetic beliefs, that if his reputation is shot down in flames, the reputation of all Christians may suffer irreparable damage! We shall speak more of this possibility in Part 3 of this series.
We have been trying to alert our readers for a very long time
that President Bush's spiritual fruits are rotten to the core. We have published
a list of his "Evil Fruits vs Good
Fruits" and encourage you to study them carefully. If you realize that
Bush's spiritual fruits have always been rotten, this current scandal will be
easier to understand and to convey to people in your Sphere of Influence.
THE FACTS -- AND THEY ARE NOT PRETTY
Before we get into this section, let us clarify one matter succinctly. Whereas the British government is trying to cast doubt upon the authenticity of the claims of sexual abuse and torture of Iraqi prisoners, the American government has not tried to deny the legitimacy of the allegations. All our government has tried to do is to limit the scope of the damage being done to our reputation and our effort in Iraq. As the above quote from the Australian news service demonstrates, the White House spokesman admitted the Pentagon had been investigating the reports, had issued a final report in February, this year, and had kept President Bush informed along the way.
Our government has admitted the allegations, and is now just trying to minimize the damage!
Some Bush supporters are already trying to defend him by saying that, even if the abuse allegations are correct, we must remember that similar abuse by Saddam's men was much, much greater; therefore, the Iraqis are still better off with us controlling them rather than Saddam. This thinking is totally fallacious for the following reasons.
1. Moral high ground demands perfection, at least as close to perfection as human organizations can achieve
2. Once you lose moral high ground, you are seen as little better than the "bad guy"
3. This investigation is ongoing, and the abuse seems to be spreading. Already, some news stories are talking about similar abuses in Afghanistan. Therefore, we do not yet know for certain that this type of abuse is limited to just a "handful". Further, credible organizations are now stepping forward, saying they have heard stories of such type of abuse from the very beginning of our occupation. If Amnesty International and the International Red Cross knew of our abuses, you have to understand that our intelligence apparatus and our political leadership were also aware.
4. If you know military Command and Control, you will realize that this type of behavior could not possibly have occurred without official support far up the line.
Now, let us examine some of the news stories, beginning with a report on the original New Yorker article that started this entire story.
NEWS BRIEF: "TORTURE AT ABU GHRAIB: American soldiers brutalized
Iraqis. How far up does the responsibility go?", by SEYMOUR M. HERSH, The
New Yorker, Issue of 2004-05-10, Posted 2004-04-30
"In the era of Saddam Hussein, Abu Ghraib, twenty miles west of Baghdad, was one of the worlds most notorious prisons, with torture, weekly executions, and vile living conditions. As many as fifty thousand men and womenno accurate count is possiblewere jammed into Abu Ghraib at one time, in twelve-by-twelve-foot cells that were little more than human holding pits."
During the preparatory period leading to the invasion of Iraq on March 20, 2003, President Bush and Prime Minister Blair trumpeted to a skeptical world that we needed to invade Iraq for two major reasons. First, Saddam was alleged to possess Weapons of Mass Destruction of such vile capability that he could launch them on his neighbors in just 45 minutes and he could ship them to Al Qaeda to be used in terrorist attacks. Secondly, Saddam was said to be such a brutal dictator to his own people that he needed to be removed. America and Great Britain were to be Iraq's savior, and the Iraqi people were to welcome us with open arms once we overthrew Saddam.
However, once it became very apparent to every discerning citizen that Saddam did not possess Weapons of Mass Destruction, and probably never did, Bush and Blair performed an "about-face" and began to emphasize our moral high ground. This change in justification went like this: We were justified in invading Iraq even if Saddam possessed no WMD because he was mistreating his people so badly. Pro-Bush apologists picked up on this line of justification immediately, acting as if they had just received a "talking points" fax from the White House. President Bush spoke to this line of justification just days ago -- April 30 -- when he stated, "As a result [of our invasion of Iraq], there are no longer torture chambers or ... rape rooms in Iraq."
Now we have reason to believe the President lied.
Let us continue with our New Yorker expose' on this horrific subject. Notice the time frame imbedded within this story about what Bush knew and when he knew it.
"Abu Ghraib was now a U.S. military prison. Most of the prisoners, howeverby the fall there were several thousand, including women and teen-agerswere civilians, many of whom had been picked up in random military sweeps and at highway checkpoints. They fell into three loosely defined categories: common criminals; security detainees suspected of 'crimes against the coalition'; and a small number of suspected 'high-value' leaders of the insurgency against the coalition forces."
"Last June, Janis Karpinski, an Army reserve brigadier general, was named commander of the 800th Military Police Brigade and put in charge of military prisons in Iraq ... In an interview last December with the St. Petersburg Times, she said that, for many of the Iraqi inmates at Abu Ghraib, 'living conditions now are better in prison than at home. At one point we were concerned that they wouldnt want to leave'. A month later, General Karpinski was formally admonished and quietly suspended, and a major investigation into the Armys prison system, authorized by Lieutenant General Ricardo S. Sanchez, the senior commander in Iraq, was under way. A fifty-three-page report, obtained by The New Yorker, written by Major General Antonio M. Taguba and not meant for public release, was completed in late February. Its conclusions about the institutional failures of the Army prison system were devastating." [Ibid.]
Notice that this report into our operation of the entire "Armys prison system" in Iraq was written by a Major General acting on behalf of the relatively new top general in Iraq, Lieutenant General Ricardo S. Sanchez. Since "scuttlebutt" is such an important part of the US Army in keeping men from top to bottom informed, one can only conclude that General Sanchez had learned of potential problems in the Army's Iraqi prison system through such "scuttlebutt" and had ordered the investigation.
Note, also, that the time frame is exactly what was reported in smh.com.au, above. In January, the investigation was far enough along to cause General Karpinski to be "formally admonished and quietly suspended" from her duties. Even though this investigation was never meant for "public release", White House spokesman McClellan admitted that Bush had been kept informed of the investigation that was concluded in February. Therefore, how could the President boldly state on April 30 that no "torture chambers" and "rape room" existed in Iraq anymore, when he knew that our military police had been carrying out just that kind of activity?
The New Yorker then told us of specific acts of torture and sexual abuse being practiced "systematically" and illegally by our military police:
"Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees; pouring cold water on naked detainees; beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair; threatening male detainees with rape; allowing a military police guard to stitch the wound of a detainee who was injured after being slammed against the wall in his cell; sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick ..." [Ibid.]
"Another witness, Sergeant Javal Davis, who is also one of the accused, told C.I.D. investigators, 'I witnessed prisoners in the MI hold section . . . being made to do various things that I would question morally. . . . We were told that they had different rules'. [Ibid.]
These actions seem totally out of character for the traditional American soldier. We have always been guided by a "higher ethic" or at least we thought we were. Our Chain of Command immediately set out to characterize these illegal and indefensible actions as being perpetrated by a very small group of men who had gone completely out of control. Brig. General Kimmit said that these actions were not representative of his Army! However, after serving in US Army Intelligence for nearly 4 years, I have some real doubts and questions:
1. Where is the normal, expected Chain of Command to whom every single military policeman would be responsible every minute of every day? General Karpinski complained that the CIA and Military Intelligence had operational control over the prison at Abu Ghraib, not she. Military Chain of Command is set up to prevent exactly this type of activity from ever occurring.
2. Why weren't these soldiers psychologically profiled as being deviant so they could never, ever get into position to carry out such horrific abuses as the New Yorker is reporting? All soldiers are vigorously psychologically profiled, starting at the entrance exam, continuing on into Basic Training, and into Advanced Individual Training (A.I.T.). The major purpose of this type of profile is to ferret out those people whose attitudes and values and behavioral tendencies are incompatible with US military standards. Once on duty, certain soldiers -- like Military Police -- are supposed to be regularly profiled to ensure that their values have not been eroded so they might start acting in a manner incompatible with military regulations.
In other words, these deviant men and women who regularly tortured and sexually abused Iraqi prisoners should never have gotten so far into the Army system that they would even be in position to abuse. Therefore, it is not enough to complain that these type of men doe not represent traditional Army values; one has to realize that a horrific breakdown in Army Command and Control had to occur well before these soldiers arrived at Abu Ghraib! Thus, the investigation must run right up toward the top of the Army and Pentagon leadership.
This New Yorker article stated this to be fact. Listen:
"The problems inside the Army prison system in Iraq were not hidden from senior commanders ... As the international furor grew, senior military officers, and President Bush, insisted that the actions of a few did not reflect the conduct of the military as a whole. Tagubas report, however, amounts to an unsparing study of collective wrongdoing and the failure of Army leadership at the highest levels. The picture he draws of Abu Ghraib is one in which Army regulations and the Geneva conventions were routinely violated, and in which much of the day-to-day management of the prisoners was abdicated to Army military-intelligence units and civilian contract employees. Interrogating prisoners and getting intelligence, including by intimidation and torture, was the priority." [Ibid.; Emphasis added]
The New Yorker article noted that a previous Army internal investigation was, at best a failure, and at worst, was a cover-up. Listen:
"(General) Ryder undercut his warning, however, by concluding that the situation had not yet reached a crisis point. Though some procedures were flawed, he said, he found no military police units purposely applying inappropriate confinement practices. His investigation was at best a failure and at worst a cover-up. Taguba, in his report, was polite but direct in refuting his fellow-general." [Ibid.]
Therefore, the Army had a chance last Fall to put an end to this sorry affair,
but chose to whitewash it instead.
Ultimately, the "buck stops" at the President's desk, especially if he was kept informed as the Taguba investigation was continuing.
How much evidence existed upon which to make these allegations? This New Yorker Magazine article addresses that issue next:
"There was stunning evidence to support the allegations, Taguba added'detailed witness statements and the discovery of extremely graphic photographic evidence'. Photographs and videos taken by the soldiers as the abuses were happening were not included in his report, Taguba said, because of their 'extremely sensitive nature'. [Ibid.]
Make special note of the strong nature of the evidence to support the torture and sex abuse allegation: "stunning evidence"
These "sensitive" pictures taken by the soldiers may not have been included in General Taguba's report, but they are certainly circulating the Internet and major news groups the world over. While "60 Minutes" showed some of the abusive pictures, the Internet showed them all, and they are most shocking. We will not print them on this site, because of their extreme pornographic nature. However, many people -- including Christians -- who desperately want to get the truth so they can arrive at a genuinely honest understanding of this issue, may want to examine these pictures. Only then can you get your "mental arms" around the gravity of this issue. The smh.com.au article, quoted above, ("An empire in moral crisis", at http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/05/02/1083224655715.html) contains a direct link to these pictures. Once into this article, you will find two words hotlinked -- "memoryhole". You will see that this word is underlined, indicating a hotlink. If you want to see the sexually abusive pictures inflaming the Arab world right now, this links will provide them.
You can also view these pictures at: http://members.iinet.net.au/~sauterp/iraq/ -- Warning: these pictures are vivid
These are the pictures inflaming the Arab world right now.
One other factor in this situation needs to be reiterated. One major reason this scandal is breaking out so widely and is so incapable of being suppressed is that the soldiers who were torturing and sexually abusing the Iraqi prisoners were so proud of their "work" that they would take pictures simply to send to others involved in Iraqi prison work. In many instances, American soldiers would even "creatively stage" a scene just so they could show other what they were doing. The one M.P. who was outraged enough to "blow the whistle" on the abuse received these pictures on a CDROM! Abuse was so routine that the perpetrators felt no compunction to hide their activities; this fact alone seems to suggest that the abuse was far more widespread than just in this one facility and just with seven soldiers.
Let us review the news story that brings out this situation even better than the quote, above, from the New Yorker.
NEWS BRIEF: "Troops 'Swapped Hundreds of Abuse Pictures' ", The Scotsman, By Andrew Woodcock, Political Correspondent, PA News, Sun 2 May 2004
"Hundreds of photographs have been taken of British servicemen mistreating Iraqi civilians, it was claimed tonight. Troops serving in southern Iraq have been swapping the pictures among themselves, said the unnamed soldiers from the Queens Lancashire Regiment who sparked furore over the weekend by releasing photos apparently showing UK personnel abusing an Iraqi prisoner. The potentially explosive claims, if proven, would contradict Prime Minister Tony Blairs assurance that any misconduct in British ranks was 'exceptional' and limited to a handful of servicemen."
Going back to the original New Yorker expose', we see that the defense attorney for one of the accused makes a strong case that the authority to torture and sexually abuse Iraqi soldiers came from way up the military command. Listen:
"Myers, who was one of the military defense attorneys in the My Lai prosecutions of the nineteen-seventies, told me that his clients defense will be that he was carrying out the orders of his superiors and, in particular, the directions of military intelligence. He said, 'Do you really think a group of kids from rural Virginia decided to do this on their own? Decided that the best way to embarrass Arabs and make them talk was to have them walk around nude? 'In letters and e-mails to family members, Frederick repeatedly noted that the military-intelligence teams, which included C.I.A. officers and linguists and interrogation specialists from private defense contractors, were the dominant force inside Abu Ghraib' ... Gary Myers, Fredericks civilian attorney, told me that he would argue at the court-martial that culpability in the case extended far beyond his client. 'Im going to drag every involved intelligence officer and civilian contractor I can find into court', he said. 'Do you really believe the Army relieved a general officer because of six soldiers? Not a chance." [New Yorker, op. cit.]
The American general in charge of this prison strongly stated that the CIA and Military Intelligence operated that prison, not her. Listen:
NEWS BRIEF: "US general suggests military intelligence had role in abuses", Channel News Asia, 2 May 2004
"WASHINGTON: A US Army Reserve general whose soldiers were photographed abusing Iraqi prisoners said Saturday the prison cellblock involved was under the tight control of military intelligence, which may have encouraged the abuse, according to the New York Times. Brigadier General Janis Karpinski told the newspaper in a telephone interview that the special high-security cellblock at the Abu Gharib prison outside Baghdad had been under the direct control of Army intelligence officers, not the reservists under her command."
Now, this whole situation is beginning to make sense and it is the kind of
sense we predicted in March, 2002, when we wrote NEWS1631
-- our policy is to take actions which would deliberately enrage the Muslims
so they would take action against us. Thus, this prison abuse scenario would
have to be directed by someone other than Regular Army. The CIA and Military
Intelligence fit the bill very nicely.
With this thought firmly in your mind, let us examine how each of the various
types of abuse are directed at sensibilities uniquely possessed by Muslims.
SEXUAL DEVIANCY AIMED AT SPECIFIC MUSLIM SENSITIVITY
As I read of the specific actions the British and American abusers were using to torture and humiliate these prisoners, I was taken aback by the realization that each type of abuse seemed directed at a specific Muslim sensitivity. Let us review these documented specific tortures and humiliations so you may see the point that someone with insight into the Muslim mind had to have created these specific kinds of abuses.
* Urinating on the prisoners -- this act is considered by Muslims to be especially demeaning. Even though most cultures would agree that this type of action humiliates, Muslims take it very personally [New Yorker, op. cit.]
* Forcing male prisoners to simulate oral sex on other males -- One of my sources is an American woman married to a Muslim. She was horrified to learn of this specific type of abuse, as she said, "All Muslims I have ever met are incredibly 'homophobic'." In NEWS1429, we reported that the Russian KGB was able to blackmail a young Egyptian man to become the head of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) simply because he was gay and the Russians had the video tape! That young Egyptian is now known as Yassir Arafat! Most of Muslim culture is extremely homophobic.
Other pictures now being distributed on the Internet show stacks of nude men on top of nude men in the form of a pyramid. Once again, this type of abuse is aimed at the particularly sensitivity in the Islamic culture of any type of male-to-male activity. These nude Iraqis forced to stack one on each other would have been horrified.
* An American female soldier, identified in the New Yorker article as "Private England, a cigarette dangling from her mouth, is giving a jaunty thumbs-up sign and pointing at the genitals of a young Iraqi, who is naked except for a sandbag over his head, as he masturbates." [Ibid.]
However, when you look closely at slightly different pictures of Private England, you will see where she seems to have her right hand resting on the buttocks of her hooded Muslim victim, while her left hand seems extremely close to his genitals.
Muslims will recoil at the spectacle of an infidel female soldier even looking upon a naked man. That aversion will turn to furious indignation when that female soldier is part of the military police group coercing Iraqi males to masturbate while nude and while publicly standing in front of the female. But, the horror to the Muslim mind does not end there. Many Muslims are so against any kind of male-to-female touching that a woman cannot directly give an object to a man for fear that her fingers will touch his hand! This American woman married to a Muslim tells me she has consistently seen instances where a woman who wants to give a man some quarters will first have to place the quarters on a table so the man can pick them up! Male-to-female contact is forbidden, even externally to body parts such as fingers and hands.
Therefore, if Private England actually touched any of the prisoners being forced to masturbate, that female-to-male touching of the private sexual organ or of any part of his body would be horrifying to the prisoner to a degree we cannot comprehend. Going back to the argument put forth by Attorney Myers, above, does anyone think that a simple female private in the US Army would know enough about the sensibilities of Islamic men to carry out this kind of action?
Let us consider one more aspect of the reports that Private England was poking fun at Iraqi men being forced to masturbate. Muslim men are required to immediately ritually wash all bodily fluids off their private parts after sex. Therefore, the question arises, does it not, as to whether these Iraqi men forced to masturbate were allowed to wash their own bodily fluids off afterwards? If they were not allowed this ritual cleansing, their sense of alienation and humiliation only deepened.
But, more to the point, the hundreds of millions of Muslims all over the world will immediately wonder if these men were allowed to ceremonially wash themselves after their masturbation was completed. Many ordinary Muslims will rush to judgment, believing that we did not allow this ritual washing. Their outrage will just increase.
* Photos also showed scenes in which female soldiers were standing in front of naked prisoners taking photographs. Such activity is considered very humiliating to an Islamic person. As one professor of Middle Eastern Studies said: "Being put on top of each other and forced to masturbate, being naked in front of each otherits all a form of torture [Ibid.]
This is very true. However, now that these pictures are out in public, the Muslims being humiliated number in the hundreds of millions. Entire populations of Muslims in some countries are absolutely, positively reeling with rage.
* Some of the photos on the Arab website "albasrah" showed Coalition soldiers -- unclear whether they were American or British -- anally raping two Iraqi women dressed in the tradition black garb. Being raped by an infidel soldier is one of the highest forms of torture and outrage imaginable in the Muslim world. However, some Islamic cultures consider a woman raped to be so "unclean" as to warrant her being stoned to death! Even though she may be physically overwhelmed, and clearly the resisting victim, some Islamic cultures require her to be killed. Sometimes, they even kill an offspring which has resulted from the rape! Therefore, victims of rape from Coalition Forces might face a death sentence once they return to their home!
Some organizations, such as WorldNetDaily, are reporting that these rape scenes were not true, that they were taken from European porn sites. When we checked the original Arab site again, we noted that the site was down. These rape scenes may have been taken from porn sites; however, the rest of the sexual abuse is very real, as our own internal investigation has revealed and admitted.
However, in the world of propaganda, it does not now essentially matter whether these rape scenes are real, for they are now out in the public and are part of the very real pictures of other types of sexually degrading activity. At this point, we have to refer back to our propaganda quote from Adolf Hitler, quoted above:
"Truth is not what is; truth is what people perceive it to be".
However, even the Army's report noted instances of rape. Listen to just one instance in the official Army investigation:
NEWS BRIEF: "U.S. Army report on Iraqi prisoner abuse: Complete text of Article 15-6 Investigation of the 800th Military Police Brigade by Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba, NBC News, Updated: May 04, 2004, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4894001/
"6. (S) I find that the intentional abuse of detainees by military police personnel included the following acts: k. (S) A male MP guard having sex with a female detainee."
We have already learned that Major General Taguba concluded this report in February, 2004, and that the Pentagon kept President Bush informed as the investigation was proceeding. Therefore, contrary to what the President affirmed on April 30, "rape rooms" do still exist in Iraq, but this time they are operated by American soldiers!
Thus, it is not too much of a stretch to believe the rape scenes which WorldNetDaily are insisting were staged for European porn sites.
If Illuminati purpose in this entire sordid affair was to deliberately provoke worldwide Islam against us, these rape pictures have served their purpose. Millions upon millions of Muslim people will view these rape scenes, compare them to the admittedly real sexual abuse scenes described above, and conclude the rapes occurred also. In the minds of hundreds of millions of Muslims, America and Great Britain stand condemned for all these sexual crimes.
Remember, also, that the pictures released to the press were a "handful"; however, we learned from The Scotsman, above, that such pictures number in the hundreds and were being passed around the soldiers involved in the abuse! The total scene seems much, much larger than just a "handful".
BEATING PRISONERS TO DEATH!
Additionally, the photos released also showed that we were beating prisoners to death! Since many of the Iraqi people were not enthusiastic when we originally conquered Iraq, how much more resistant do you think they will be now that they know that some Iraqi prisoners are being beaten to death? Our repeated proclamations that we want to "win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people" sound rather shallow now, don't you think?
NEWS BRIEF: "U.S. probes Iraqi prisoner deaths", By Alan Elsner, Reuters News, May 5, 2004
"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Two Iraqi prisoners have been murdered by Americans and 23 other deaths are being investigated in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States says as the Bush administration tries to contain growing outrage over the abuse of Iraqi detainees ... McClellan said Bush first learned of allegations of abuse sometime after the charges were elevated to top military officials in January."
Notice that this Reuters story reports that the primary concern of the Bush
Administration now is to try to "contain growing outrage over the abuse
of Iraqi detainees", not necessarily to arrive at the full, complete, and
unvarnished truth. Remember that the Illuminati loves "investigations"
for they control the investigators, thereby assuring a "Not Guilty"
verdict. Whether we are talking about the Warren Commission investigating the
murder of President Kennedy, or the Clinton investigation into his sexual escapades,
or the obviously biased 9/11 Commission, the Illuminati loves these types of
investigations because they control the outcome. Therefore, do not expect these
"investigations" to arrive at any semblance of the truth; rather,
expect that they will limit the amount of upward political damage.
The bottom line answer posed by the New Yorker Magazine as to how far up the line of command the guilt rises is partially answered by the quote above, as one accused soldier reported to his family via email that "the military-intelligence teams, which included C.I.A. officers and linguists and interrogation specialists from private defense contractors, were the dominant force inside Abu Ghraib."
Does the proverbial buck stop at President Bush's desk? White House spokesman Scott McClellan told us on May 4 that the President became aware of the Pentagon investigation some time after it began, an investigation concluded and wrapped up in February, 2004. Further, we learn that Bush had been kept informed as the investigations proceeded. On April 30, President Bush assured us all that no " torture chambers or ... rape rooms" existed in Iraq.
Since the President knew in February of the sexual abuse and torture of Iraqi prisoners, it seems that he flat-out lied on April 30. The buck does seem to stop at his desk. We repeat: Conservative and Evangelical Christians must get hold of this issue and get hold of it quickly. We have kept a record of all the evil spiritual fruit emanating from President Bush since his inauguration to demonstrate that he has to be judged on his fruit and not on his phony declaration of conversion. This unfolding scandal further demonstrates Bush's evil fruit.
MUSLIM ANGER POURING FORTH
Not surprisingly, Arab reaction is white-hot with anger.
NEWS BRIEF: "US worse than Saddam, Arabs say", The Age, May 1, 2004, http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/05/01/1083224628877.html
"Photographs showing US soldiers abusing Iraqi prisoners drew international condemnation today, with Arabs saying the US campaign to win the hearts and minds of Iraqis was now a lost cause. 'This is the straw that broke the camel's back for America', said Abdel-Bari Atwan, editor of the Arab newspaper Al Quds Al Arabi. 'The liberators are worse than the dictators. They have not just lost the hearts and minds of Iraqis but all the Third World and the Arab countries', he said."
This paragraph comes pretty close to making our point, above, that hundreds of millions of Muslims worldwide are going to be absolutely, completely outraged by these abuses. They will look at the total range of the types of abuses being perpetrated and will immediately understand that these abuses were carefully calculated to attack specific Muslim sensitivities, and that realization will further fuel their hatred and outrage.
Let us now go back to this article for more understanding of the Arab reaction:
"The publicity could not have been worse in the Arab world, with the sexual humiliation in the pictures especially shocking. 'That really, really is the worst atrocity', Atwan said. 'It affects the honour and pride of Muslim people. It is better to kill them than sexually abuse them'." [Ibid.]
We could not agree more. We also realize that these specific types of abuse most likely did not originate from the privates and sergeants who carried them out, but by officials far higher up in the military and civilian Command and Control chain of command who knew exactly what types of abuse would humiliate Muslims the most.
Let us examine some individual comments from Muslims throughout the world:
"They (Americans) said Saddam committed crimes against the people, now they are committing more vicious crimes in front of the whole world," said Yemeni university student Faez al-Kaynai'. Many said the photographs shattered the credibility of the United States as a promoter of democracy and human rights." [Ibid.]
"Egyptian Mahmoud Walid, 28, said: "It quite clearly showed to me the whole insanity of this war. These soldiers are being touted as the saviours of the Iraqi people and America claims to be the moral leader of the world, but ... they have been exposed, the whole world sees them as they really are." [Ibid.]
"Jamal Khashoggi, media adviser to Saudi Arabia's ambassador in London, said US officials responsible for policy in Iraq should be held responsible for such acts, which he said reflected "deep contempt" for Arabs." [Ibid.]
Even Illuminist organizations are criticizing our torture and sex abuse. When one Illuminist criticizes another, you know you are looking at the outworking of a large planned scenario, one which calls for the classic struggle known as the Dialectic. Human Rights Watch is just as committed to Illuminist goals as are George Bush and John Kerry. Listen to their criticism:
"The New York-based Human Rights Watch said Washington should investigate the superiors of soldiers accused of abuse. 'The brazenness with which these soldiers conducted themselves ... suggests they felt they had nothing to hide from their superiors', said Kenneth Roth, executive director of the organisation." [Ibid.]
The original New Yorker article agreed! Superior officers were supportive of this torture and sexual abuse. Listen to SSG Frederick, one of those men now accused:
"At one point, Frederick told his family, he pulled aside his superior officer, Lieutenant Colonel Jerry Phillabaum, the commander of the 320th M.P. Battalion, and asked about the mistreatment of prisoners. 'His reply was Dont worry about it. [New Yorker Magazine, Ibid.]
I have not read whether L.Col. Phillabaum is one of the soldiers accused of this torture and sexual abuse! Likewise, Frederick noted the complicity of CIA officers in his letter home to his family.
"The military-intelligence officers have 'encouraged and told us, Great job, they were now getting positive results and information', Frederick wrote. 'CID has been present when the military working dogs were used to intimidate prisoners at MIs request'. NOTE: MI stands for Military Intelligence.
Frederick even addressed the issue of Muslim prisoners being beaten to death.
"In November, Frederick wrote, an Iraqi prisoner under the control of what the Abu Ghraib guards called 'O.G.A.', or other government agenciesthat is, the C.I.A. and its paramilitary employeeswas brought to his unit for questioning. 'They stressed him out so bad that the man passed away. They put his body in a body bag and packed him in ice for approximately twenty-four hours in the shower. . . . The next day the medics came and put his body on a stretcher, placed a fake IV in his arm and took him away'. The dead Iraqi was never entered into the prisons inmate-control system, Frederick recounted, 'and therefore never had a number'.
This last fact should tell you that the military prison system was set up to facilitate the torture and abuse. As a matter of routine course, this victim should have been processed and given a number prior to his "interrogation". Because prison and CIA officials skipped this routine step, you have to wonder whether they intended to kill him before they ever brought him into the prison.
Finally, let us review another Illuminist organization severely criticizing the equally Illuminist American military establishment.
NEWS BRIEF: "Troops 'have been abusing Iraqis for a year' ", By Marian Wilkinson, Herald Correspondent in Washington, and agencies, smh.com.au, May 5, 2004
"At least four Iraqi detainees have died in British custody in the past year, one as a result of torture, says the human rights group Amnesty International, while the CIA admits it is investigating the death of a prisoner under interrogation ... Amnesty issued a disturbing report on Iraq last month detailing allegations of torture and ill-treatment by US and British forces in Iraq that are remarkably similar to the evidence that has now surfaced. But its report indicates that the abuses began when US-led coalition forces gained control of Iraq in April last year and took place throughout the country."
Thus, Amnesty International is alleging that our abuse of prisoners began as soon as we took control of Iraq in April, 2003, and continues even to today. When President Bush issues his required statements of personal horror and repugnance about this disaster, remember this fact -- this abuse has been going on for fully one year! As we stated earlier, President Bush had been "kept informed" of the investigation which concluded in February, 2004, and still got up on April 30 to announce that Iraq had no torture chambers or rape rooms!
"BLOOD IN THE STREETS" STRATEGY AT WORK HERE?
In late March, 2002, we posted our story, NEWS1631 entitled, "Blood In The Streets -- A Perfect Blueprint For The Upcoming Slaughter of Iraq First, And Then All Muslims". Our premise was that one of our purposes in invading Iraq in the first place was to stir anger, hatred, and fury against the West generally and Israel secondarily. We believe this goal is exactly the reason we perpetrated these abuses in the first place, and the reason our officials allowed the soldiers committing the abuses to feel so comfortable they would actually share "hundreds of photos" with other soldiers similarly abusing their prisoners. These abusers felt so comfortable that their superiors would protect them they actually posed photographs to impress other soldiers in other prisons.
Prior to the invasion, discerning Iraqis knew that we had poisoned them with Depleted Uranium munitions in Gulf War I, and then had lead a fight in the United Nations from 1991-1999 to deny medical assistance to the country's medical establishment. Many thousands of Iraqis knew exactly why so many babies were being born without body parts and without functioning brains. As Coalition Forces prepared to invade in March, 2003, these Iraqis knew they were going to get a stiff new dose of D.U. poisoning.
During the Occupation, beginning in April, 2003, Iraqis have been further enraged by our brutal methods of firing on civilians and civilian neighborhoods. In Newsletter041704, we noted the news story in which British officers were complaining that American military forces were deliberately killing civilians.
These vivid pictures and accompanying stories are likely to take all of these previous resentment and focus them in a very deadly manner. We may be seeing a "critical mass" developing amongst the Muslim peoples of the world, building into a combination of anger and hatred that will overthrow pro-Western governments like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan on the one hand, while goading already hostile governments like Iran into planning and coordinating a most violent response.
All this anger from these various factors is now mixing together in a mighty cauldron, increasing in intensity and volatility. All the region would then need would be the "trigger" to explode this cauldren into "critical mass".
What action can possibly trigger the entire Muslim population? I do not believe it will be any one event, not even this terrible litany of torture and sexual abuse. Rather, many actions and attitudes on our part will build a mixture of anger and rage amongst Muslims, awaiting the final spark to set everything off. What might that spark be? We believe the destruction of the Dome of the Rock may be that final spark, as we detailed in NEWS1404, Arafat may be planning to destroy the Dome at just the right moment in order to drive all Muslims into that coveted "critical mass" where they will attack Israel in such overwhelming numbers that even Israel's modern weapons cannot prevail. Even if the Dome is destroyed by earthquake, Israel would be blamed.
After all we have done to outrage Muslims, the destruction of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem is likely to be the final element needed to cause a major explosion in the Muslim world against everything Western.
We believe that the Illuminati is attempting to goad the combined armies of Islam into attacking our forces, possibly in wave after wave after wave, so we can destroy them in exactly the manner described in "Blood In The Streets" [Read NEWS1631 for full details]. In the late 1980's, when I was just beginning my study, I discovered that the Illuminati long ago decided to eliminate all followers of Monotheistic Religions, Islam, Jews, Christians. However, given the sheer numbers of Muslims throughout the world, and given their propensity to fanaticism, the Illuminati chose to build them up into that global threat they envisioned just so they could annihilate them all. Islam is the first of the Monotheistic Religions to be targeted for extinction.
If you are one of those who have believed the pro-Islamic rhetoric coming from the Bush Administration since 9/11, let us offer this recent story from Asia Times.
NEWS BRIEF: "Has Islam become the issue?", By Spengler, Asia Times, May 4, 2004
"Nothing shows up the shallowness of
the American neo-conservatives better than the choice of a French Catholic,
Professor Alain Besancon, to fire a first salvo against Islam in the May issue
of their flagship journal, Commentary. His essay, 'What Kind of
Religion is Islam', re-states the millennium-old Christian case against Muslim
theology, while barely hinting at why theology has any bearing on the civilizational
conflict now under way. Nonetheless, a Rubicon has been crossed, for Islam itself
has become the issue, rather than terrorism, dictatorship, slavery in the Sudan
or mistreatment of women."
"Until now the conservative establishment carefully toed the White House line, namely that 'this is a war against terrorism, not against Islam' ...In a nutshell, Islam, according to Besancon, is not one of the three Abrahamic religions, but a pagan throwback, not a 'revealed religion' in the sense of Judaism and Christianity, but a reversion to the 'natural religion' of the pagan world ... Besancon takes note of 'the characteristic Islamic denial of the stability and consistency of nature - the world is not governed by an unchanging natural law' ... Muslims, Besancon concludes, misappropriate the identity of the God of Israel, put an entirely different God in His place, and worship it as if it were an idol ... If the remote, arbitrary, crypto-pagan god of Islam bears no imitation, as Besancon puts it, what political conclusions should one draw? Tragedies are tragedies precisely because the protagonist has no choice but to walk into a trap that he cannot possibly anticipate. We now are in the second act of the great tragedy of the 21st century, in which the terrible secrets hidden from the actors gradually are revealed to them. Buy another packet of crisps and stay in your seat: this is where it gets interesting."
Thus, a systematic attempt now seems underway by the "Neo-Conservatives" (Bush Administration?) to convince Americans and the peoples of the world of the necessity of waging war on Islam. At this Asia Times article, the title succinctly states the content. "Has Islam become the issue?" Yes, Islam has become the issue, and "a Rubicon has been crossed", as our abuse of prisoners and our brutality against civilians in the past year demonstrates all too well.
The gauntlet has been thrown down against the peoples and the armies of Islam. We want them to attack us so we can annihilate them with our vastly superior weaponry. We know that, once the war begins, Israel will be caught up in the maelstrom, enabling her to bring her vast weaponry to bear. The only question left to answer is whether the governments of Islam will accept the fatal challenge.
One final note along prophetic lines: Bible scholars have long noted the apparent absence of several notable Arab countries in End Times events. Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and Iraq seem to be totally missing in the lineup of nations at the End of the Age. We have already noted that the Palestinians are the House of Esau (NEWS1422). Many scholars have long ago concluded that the reason these Arab countries are missing from the End of the Age lineup is that they have been destroyed prior to the time Antichrist comes to the world scene. Are these "missing" countries going to be destroyed in the "final birthpangs" (World War III) which will finally "give birth" to Antichrist? We can only wait to see.
Are you spiritually ready? Is your family? Are you adequately protecting your loved ones? This is the reason for this ministry, to enable you to first understand the peril facing you, and then help you develop strategies to warn and protect your loved ones. Once you have been thoroughly trained, you can also use your knowledge as a means to open the door of discussion with an unsaved person. I have been able to use it many times, and have seen people come to Jesus Christ as a result. These perilous times are also a time when we can reach many souls for Jesus Christ, making an eternal difference.
If you have accepted Jesus Christ as your personal Savior, but have been very lukewarm in your spiritual walk with Him, you need to immediately ask Him for forgiveness and for renewal. He will instantly forgive you, and fill your heart with the joy of the Holy Spirit. Then, you need to begin a daily walk of prayer and personal Bible Study.
If you have never accepted Jesus Christ as Savior, but have come to realize His reality and the approaching End of the Age, and want to accept His FREE Gift of Eternal Life, you can also do so now, in the privacy of your home. Once you accept Him as Savior, you are spiritually Born Again, and are as assured of Heaven as if you were already there. Then, you can rest assured that the Kingdom of Antichrist will not touch you spiritually.
If you would like to become Born Again, turn to our Salvation Page now.
We hope you have been blessed by this ministry, which seeks to educate and warn people, so that they can see the coming New World Order -- Kingdom of Antichrist -- in their daily news.
Finally, we would love to hear from you.
You can contact us by mail or email.
God bless you.