agreeing with kofi

In light of my mini rant yesterday, I thought the following was relevant.

Even though I do not always agree with United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan, he has recently made a statement with which I completely agree -

Annan called the US-UK 2003 invasion of Iraq illegal, unsanctioned by the UN and told Britain's BBC World Service radio that the war in Iraq was contributing to Muslim anger throughout the world.

"I think there are many Muslims that are extremely unhappy today.

"Unhappy because they feel victimised, they feel isolated, they feel victimised in their own society, they feel victimised in the West, and they feel this profiling against them. And the Iraqi situation has not helped matters," he said.

"In fact one used to be worried about Afghanistan being the centre of terrorist activities; my sense is that Iraq has become a major problem and in fact it's worse than Afghanistan."

Annan said, what we all know, that the invasion of Iraq ought to have been approved by the 15-member UN Security Council and it never was, making that action, in effect, illegal and against the UN Charter to which all those nations as part of the Axis Against Evil are also signatory.

Hello?? As I said below ... these people, these Muslims, these Iraqis did not ask for this war, a war which we are told is freeing them but which they are telling us, is killing them.

George Bush has set up a dichotomoy - in his own words, 'we the free' are on the side of 'Good' and 'they' are 'Evil' - and with this Good vs Evil construction, Good can never win until it completely defeats Evil.

But what is the 'Evil'?? Is it Saddam Hussein?? Is it the Sunni or the Shi'ite?? Is it the Muslim factions who will not cooperate with the US?? Is it it Osama Bin Who??

That has NEVER been properly clear.

WHY?? Because George Bush is not really trying to remove the 'Evil" ... he is trying to get the OIL.

And the cost of this ingenious crusade is innocent lives on both sides of the great divide. Innocent American soldiers. Innocent people in a London morning rush-hour. Innocent Iraqi women, children, farmers, academics, moderates. These are the people who are paying the cost for this immoderate war; for this huge massive F-up.

Prime Minister Tony Blair has accused Islamic militants of using Iraq and Afghanistan as an excuse for attacks and for recruitment and leaked documents showed Blair's security services had warned war would inspire terrorism at home. Big surprise there ... if someone invaded my homeland and on THEIR OWN AGENDA dictated who should be ruling and who could not (in this case pro-US vs anti in Iraq) ... and if that someone continued to disrespect my culture and religion; flaunted international and humanitarian laws; and disemminated false propaganda ... well, you can understand how Bush's own extremist religious crusade (he did say "GOD told him to do it") has fed an extreme response on the other side.

Back to Good defeating Evil. Bush has set up a division and sided his western counteparts. He has made it so that the US/UK led coalition cannot succeed unless every obstacle in its way is obliterated. Only he hasn't told us what those obstacles ARE. He intimates its Osama; he said its Saddam; he suggests its illegally stockpiled weapons; he said its the warring factions iin Afghanistan; he said its the warring factions in Iraq. The truth is he is using any scrap of an excuse he could find to get into Iraq and gain power over the oil reserves.

It is never going to be so black and white - this Good vs Evil. WE are not Good. IF we say we are, then we MUST say who is Evil. George Bush has not done that. Basically anyone now, whom he labels as against his crusade, is in that category - and that is very very dangerous, because it's not about Good and Evil then, its about who is on George's side and who isn't. He is a self-proclaimed judge and executioner - what has forced western countries to side with him - "either you are with us or against us" - love that quote George!! He TOLD the wstern world that American Freedom was Good - that ANYTHING that attcked that was bad. Leaves a LOT of room for what falls into the Evil basket.

He has turned the whole Middle East region (again!!) upside on its head and now wields his Big Stick without legitimacy or responsibility. Once again, the US wants to control the region, to put in leaders in the region who are allied with the US, allied with Saudi Arabia.

The backlash is the acts of terror seen in London and in New York and now expected in every Western city in the world. The US-UK led coalition said they went in to dig out the terrorists. yet they did this knowing that the obverse effect would be to force Islamic moderates to extremism, knowing that their unsanctioned war would engender more aggression and acts of terror.

So if they knew that - why did they go in the way that they did?? Simple. Again - this war was not to remove the source of terrorism or stock-piled nuclear weapons in Iraq. They went for OIL. Or, at least, George Bush went for oil and we in the West followed him like the self-deserving robots that we must be.

Kofi is right. But what he says should not come as a great shock. It's common sense and self-preservation. What is motivating further acts of terror is also what has motivated us to side with Bush - an intense desire for self-preservation for our way of life. The West, by their actions, have judged the rights of Iraqis less worthy; less 'good'; less free; and less right. And this is the penance we pay - further restrictions on our freedom by our own governments.