Some Raw E-Mail From Our Readers
March 23, 2003

Bring the War Home//Recruit to the LP

There's too much to read these hectic, nightmarish days.  Depression and burn-out may be affecting many of those devoted to equality and justice.  I offer the following as a beginning antidote to the potential mental health problems we face.  Admittedly partisan in favor of the Labor Party, it was a message to the leadership of the Metro Detroit LP..... Bob Mast


Subj: Bring the War Home//Recruit to the LP
Date: 3/18/03 2:21:57 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Robertmast

The following is an email quote from an old Detroit friend who I recently visited.  I left him some LP materials, but made no pitch for him to join the party.

After having read the Labor Party's position on the Iraqi Invasion and National health
Care, I have decided to join the Labor Party. I thought you might find this curious, since your providing me with this literature was instrumental in my decision.


My friend Andy never was known as a radical, nor would he necessarily march in an antiwar demo or seriously support a "left" program like the Labor Party offers.  But without arm twisting, he joined the LP because of our antiwar resolution and the Just Health Care Campaign.  This is very meaningful.  

Perhaps this is the first time since the 1996 Founding Convention that the present mix of economic, political, and social conditions can seriously facilitate our party's growth.  Much of the LP constituency keeps in touch with current events.  Many know of the connections among U.S. imperial foreign policy, oil depletion, an economy in cyclical crisis, ascendency of a fascist-like ruling class, impotence of the Democratic Party, weakness of organized labor, castration of the safety net, a declining quality of life for the working class, and erosions of freedom.

This package of knowledge can be depressing.  Today, on the near eve of the Iraq attack, television was reporting on ways people are finding to cope with stress.  They're all traditional, self-oriented ways:  drinking, doping, sexing, exercising, shopping.  

But current knowledge also has another side to it.  It can be a call to organize an alternative - the Labor party - for all those who are ready to mobilize and fight our internal rogue enemy on the political battleground.  If you carefully read the LP's 16-point program, especially between the lines, you will find a set of objectives intended to dramatically restrain the excesses of capital while restoring more power and social welfare to the working class.  Not a call for revolution, our program is very radical for the times, and can appeal to many, many people.

Successfully bringing this program to the attention of our widely ranging constituency may be eventually illegal under the Patriot Two Act.  But I would see any serious successes we would have as a litmus test of American democracy, a test even more fundamental and pure than those emerging out of antiwar activism.  Why?  Because as a political party, the LP has a certain institutional legitimacy that even the right-wing claims is valid in this land of freedom and democracy.  

On the other hand, our program represents a long range, strategic, legal, and democratic challenge to political power. Thus, our party is ultimately more "subversive" than are those projects concentrating only on laudable and worthy programs like civil rights, environment, and peace.  The LP is in the strange position of simultaneously being institutionally legitimate and practically subversive.

Notwithstanding the hawkish claims that the war on terrorism will last indefinitely, what happens after this nightmare hot war recedes from the spotlight?  The class that rules will still rule, and the working class will continue to deteriorate.  How will the energies, talents, and resources of the millions of antiwar activists be rededicated?  Will most of them disappear from view as happened after Vietnam?  

We have a window of opportunity before us.  Surely these are times to broadcast the LP program and actively recruit into the Labor Party.  It's true that our constituency has rallied to the antiwar struggle.  Many, to their credit, will continue to make war their highest priority.  Others also may now be conscious of the necessity to build an independent political force from the working class, and begin the difficult job of restructuring politics in this country.  

The first small step is to provide the LP program to our friends, relatives, neighbors, and workmates. Some may join our party on their own, as did my friend noted above.  Others will join if only they are asked.  When LP recruiting was on the upswing around 1998, the Party's slogan was "each one recruit one, that will double the party." We must make that our slogan once again.  Some of the new members will have the vitality, commitment, and leadership skills that the Labor Party needs.


Responding to KC Labor Statement on the War

With 3 kids from the neighborhood over there right now, who are sons  and grandsons of UNION MEMBERS, it is time for those who are against the war to SHUT THE HELL UP!

The state of GA has over 30,000 citizens over in the middle east now to fight and help free the citizens of Iraq.

Ask the people of Iraq how THEY feel about this.

Unionists should not be involved in ANY protest against our government in the war on Iraq. This is not a Vietnam scenario!
Fraternally yours,
Jimi Richards
Teamster member of Local 728
Atlanta, GA

From: "Blake" <>
Subject: iraqi children

Read Letters from Iraqi students as the US kills collected by the Iraqi Peace Team (  Also I compiled the attached document that has selections of a Bush Speech last September juxtaposed with facts and links to under-reported news)

Al-Adamia Secondary School for Girls – Baghdad

March 3, 2003

Dear Friends,

We love you and want to see you and we hope all the world live in peace and love each other like the flowers in one garden in heaven. Please urge your government to let us live in peace.

Best wishes,

Somiea, Anfal, & Yasamin (we are 18 years old)


Al-Adamia Secondary School for Girls – Baghdad

March 3, 2003

My name is Rasha. I’m 18 years old. I want to say that I love the world and I love peace. I don’t want war. Why do you want to kill the smiles on our faces? We want to learn and live in peace. I want to be a dentist, so how could I make that if the war happened? We are a peaceful people. We love peace. We love American people, so why do you want to kill us? I pray for the God to avoid us the war, and I hope for whole the world the peace and love. I want to be friends and keep in touch with you. Let us spread love among us.

With all the best,

Rasha Ali Abdul-Raheem, age 21


Al-Mustafa Secondary School for Girls – Al-Amal City,


March 8, 2003

Dear Friends,

I’m Hind Salaam. I want to tell you that I only dream for the future. I want to be a doctor after I end the preparatory school, because I love to help people and I hate the death. But I don’t understand why America insist on bombing Iraq people. We love the people of America although Bush want to kill us, because we know that you didn’t hate Iraqi people. And I want you do your dreams.

Hind Salaam, age 17


Qataiba Secondary School for Boys – Saddam City,


March 9th, 2003

We love Iraq as we love our parents, and we love the people of the world. I wish that I can keep in touch with you. Please help us. I have many dreams to the future.

Ahmed Camas


Al-Adamia Secondary School for Girls – Baghdad

March 10th, 2003

Under the threatening of the American government of every day, we live and continue our daily life. We go to school, to work, visiting each other, but still we have the hope of getting over this crisis. God will help us and save our country from this war. If war will arise the coming few days, I might not be able to continue writing my own diary. We don’t know what is going to happen... We might die .. and maybe we are living our last days in life.

I hope that everyone who reads my diary remember me and know that there was an Iraqi girl who had many dreams in her life, but war has destroyed all her dreams and her dreams will never come true.

Thuraya El-Kaissi, age 17


Al-Adamia Secondary School for Girls – Baghdad

March 11th, 2003

They were talking in TV about the war. Now we couldn’t do anything, just pray for God to save us and all Iraqi people. And I wished that we all live in peace, because if there was a war they will destroyed all our dreams. So please be with us in our case. Because we are human like any others and we have all rights be live in peace. Thank you.

Lubna Saad, age 17


Al-Adamia Secondary School for Girls – Baghdad

March 15th, 2003

I started watching the t.v. and the daily news and this news all about the same – about America’s threat and this threat and this war is injustice .. I don’t know if I could stay wrote this letters because maybe my life is too short and the responsible is America .. am just a young girl, am just 17 year old, and am not afraid from America or the death cause my fate is not in the hands of America but in the hands of God .. and if I didn’t die in these days I will always hate the American Government.

Sarab El-Anne, age 17


Qataiba Secondary School for Boys – Saddam City, Baghdad

March 18, 2003

In the Name of God, Most Merciful, Most Compassionate We thank you for your help and sympathy, and we thank you for your feelings, because we feel for any student that says inside your heart, for any American student that says, "Stop the war."

We apologize now, for all the people in America, and we do not hate you.

Ali Mehson Rahim, 17 years old
Imad Ali Said, 18 years old
Kadham Jawad Taher, 18 years old
Ahmed Hashim, 17 year old



"We can't allow the world's worst leaders to blackmail, threaten, hold freedom-loving nations hostage with the world's worst weapons."

The government with the world’s largest nuclear arsenal: The US

Some Countries bombed by US since 1947: Panama, Nicaragua, Cuba, Guatemala, Iraq Grenada, Yugoslavia, Bosnia, Sudan, Libya, China, Korea, Laos, Cambodia, Indonesia, Belgian Congo, Vietnam, Lebanon. [See ‘Killing Hope’ by William Blum]

The US is contemplating preemptive nuclear strikes against non-nuclear powers.


"This is a nation [Iraq] run by a man who is willing to kill his own people by using chemical weapons"

The US sold Chemical and Biological weapons to Iraq up until March of 1992, including Anthrax, VX nerve gas, West Nile fever germs, botulism. [see "How did Iraq get its weapons? We sold them." The Sunday Herald, Sept. 2002. ]

See also: Texas Set for 300th Execution (by lethal injection) And don’t forget that the US is planning to use illegal chemical weapons against Iraqi civilians in after the slaughter:

Minimum number of the ten biological materials suspected in Iraqi warfare research that were supplied by U.S. firms: 9 [Harpers Index, Jan. 2002]

The US increased support and weapons sales to its ally, Saddam Hussein, 5,000 Iraqi Kurds were gassed to death in 1988. Rumsfeld PERSONALLY met with Hussein in 1983 as the US was coddling the Iraqi dictator and supplying it with chemical and biological agents

"I'm deeply concerned about a leader who has ignored the United Nations for all these years, refused to conform to resolution after resolution after resolution, who has weapons of mass destruction"

The United States of America opposes the UN Agreement to Curb the International Flow of Illicit Small Arms, withholds dues to the UN Human Rights Commission, refuses to obey the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Tribunal, refuses to sign the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the International Land Mine Ban Treaty (along with China and Iraq), rejected the Kyoto Protocol, still uses cluster-bombs and depleted uranium, withdrew from the International Conference on Racism, is the only G8 nation to oppose the International Plan for Clean Energy, refused to sign and ratify the UN's International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and refuses to ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, the 1979 UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. In 1986, the International Criminal Court found the US guilty of international terrorism for mining harbors in Nicaragua.


"If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately end all support for terrorism and act to suppress it -- as all states are required to do by U.N. Security Council resolutions."

The US Government’s terrorist training camp at Ft. Benning, Georgia teaches torture, execution and blackmail. Its ‘graduates’ are responsible for countless massacres, rapes, ‘disappearances’, and paramilitary slaughter of civilians in support of various corrupt, and repressive US-Sponsored Latin American regimes. [see] Read also about the terrorists in the Bush II administration: And don’t forget about Henry Kissinger, the genocide supporting, war criminal "Elder Statesman" (who was first appointed to lead the 9-11 investigation despite his own planning and support for terrorist activities on Sept. 11th 1973 in Chile.)


"The United States has no quarrel with the Iraqi people.  They've suffered too long in silent captivity.  Liberty for the Iraqi people is a great moral cause and a great strategic goal"

Approximate of Iraqi civilians killed by the US/UN sanctions: 1.5 Million [UNICEF]

Number of Iraqi children who die every month due to the sanctions: 5,000 [UNICEF]


"[Saddam Hussein] blames the suffering of Iraq's people on the United Nations, even as he uses his oil wealth to build lavish palaces for himself and to buy arms for his country."

Dick Cheney, the former CEO of Halliburton oversaw $23.8 Million in oil industry contracts with Iraq between 1988 and 1999, using legal loopholes. (Financial Times of London). Cheney still receives payments from Halliburton, so don’t forget to see also: Firm Linked to Cheney Wins Oil-Field Contract: Of course an imperial war is also great way to detract from corporate crime…as Cheney and Halliburton are under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission

"Twelve years ago, Iraq invaded Kuwait without provocation. And the regime's forces were poised to continue their march to seize other countries and their resources."

Twelve years ago, the United States bombed and invaded Panama, captured Manuel Noriega, and installed a puppet regime. Noriega was a drug-trafficker paid by the CIA who eventually fell out-of-favor with the US for his lack of enthusiasm in assisting the US in its terror/genocide campaign in Central America, that claimed hundreds of thousands of civilian lives in Guatemala, Nicaragua, and El Salvador. At least 4,000 Panamanians were murdered in the invasion. Afterwards a regime more accepting of US policy in Central America was installed in Panama.




Some Clear Reasons

Date Sat, 22 Mar 2003 060438 -0800 (PST)

From "Kathleen O'Nan" <>

To "O'Nan, Kathleen" <>

Subject Clear Reasons for the Invasion, at last

X-Mailer Earthlink Web Access Mail version 3.0

This is worth forwarding


All right, let me see if I understand the logic of this correctly. We are

going to ignore the United Nations in order to make clear to Saddam


that the United Nations cannot be ignored. We're going to wage war to

preserve the UN's ability to avert war. The paramount principle is that


UN's word must be taken seriously, and if we have to subvert its word to

guarantee that it is, then by gum, we will. Peace is too important not to

take up arms to defend. Am I getting this right? Further, if the only way


bring democracy to Iraq is to vitiate the democracy of the Security


then we are honor-bound to do that too, because democracy, as we define


is too important to be stopped by a little thing like democracy as they

define it.

Also, in dealing with a man who brooks no dissension at home, we cannot

afford dissension among ourselves. We must speak with one voice against

Saddam Hussein's failure to allow opposing voices to be heard. We are

sending our gathered might to the Persian Gulf to make the point that


does not make right, as Saddam Hussein seems to think it does. And we are

twisting the arms of the opposition until it agrees to let us oust a


that twists the arms of the opposition. We cannot leave in power a


who ignores his own people. And if our people, and people elsewhere in the

world, fail to understand that, then we have no choice but to ignore them.

Listen. Don't misunderstand. I think it is a good thing that the members


the Bush administration seem to have been reading Lewis Carroll. I only


someone had pointed out that "Alice in Wonderland" and "Through the


Glass" are meditations on paradox and puzzle and illogic and on the

strangeness of things, not templates for foreign policy. It is amusing for

the Mad Hatter to say something like, `We must make war on him because he


a threat to peace,' but not amusing for someone who actually commands an

army to say that.

As a collector of laughable arguments, I'd be enjoying all this were it


for the fact that I know--we all know--that lives are going to be lost in

what amounts to a freak, circular reasoning accident.


Peter Freundlich is a freelance journalist in New York

Pray for wisdom, wage peace and support the 320,000 troops poised for


Bring them home! ALIVE, WELL AND NOW!

Full and immediate restitution for injured Gulf War Veterans!

From: "Blake" <>
Subject: Fw: [ocpj] Doublespeak--Twenty Lies of George W. Bush




> ____________________________________________________________________


> News & Analysis: Middle East: Iraq


> By Patrick Martin


> Monday night's 15-minute speech by President Bush, setting a 48-hour

> deadline for war against Iraq, went beyond the usual distortions,

> half-truths, and appeals to fear and backwardness to include a

> remarkable number of barefaced, easily refuted lies.


> The enormous scale of the lying suggests two political conclusions: the

> Bush administration is going to war against Iraq with utter contempt for

> democracy and public opinion, and its war propaganda counts heavily on

> the support of the American media, which not only fails to challenge the

> lies, but repeats and reinforces them endlessly.


> Without attempting to be exhaustive, it is worthwhile listing some of

> the most important lies and contrasting Bush's assertions with the

> public record. All of the false statements listed below are directly

> quoted from the verbatim transcript of Bush's remarks published on the

> Internet.


> Lie No. 1: "My fellow citizens, events in Iraq have now reached the

> final days of decision."


> The decision for war with Iraq was made long ago, the intervening time

> having been spent in an attempt to create the political climate in which

> US troops could be deployed for an attack. According to press reports,

> most recently March 16 in the Baltimore Sun...





> one of the first National Security Council meetings of his

> presidency, months before the terrorist attacks on the World Trade

> Center and Pentagon, Bush expressed his determination to overthrow

> Saddam Hussein and his willingness to commit US ground troops to an

> attack on Iraq for that purpose. All that was required was the

> appropriate

> pretext--supplied by September 11, 2001.


> Lie No. 2: "For more than a decade, the United States and other nations

> have pursued patient and honorable efforts to disarm the Iraqi regime

> without war."


> The US-led United Nations regime of sanctions against Iraq, combined

> with "no-fly" zones and provocative weapons inspections, is one of

> brutal oppression. The deliberate withholding of food, medical supplies

> and other vital necessities is responsible for the death of more than a

> million Iraqis, half of them children. Two UN officials who headed the

> oil-for-food program resigned in protest over the conditions created in

> Iraq by the sanctions. The CIA used the inspectors as a front,

> infiltrating agents into UNSCOM, the original inspections program. The

> CIA's aim was to spy on Iraq's top officials and target Saddam Hussein

> for assassination.


> Lie No. 3: "The Iraqi regime has used diplomacy as a ploy to gain time

> and advantage. It has uniformly defied Security Council resolutions

> demanding full disarmament..."


> Iraq has never "defied" a Security Council resolution since the end of

> the Persian Gulf War in 1991. It has generally cooperated with the

> dictates of the UN body, although frequently under protest or with

> reservations, because many of the resolutions involve gross violations

> of Iraqi sovereignty. From 1991 to 1998, UN inspectors supervised the

> destruction

> of the vast bulk of the chemical and biological weapons, as well as

> delivery systems, which Iraq accumulated (with the assistance of the US)

> during the Iran-Iraq war, and they also destroyed all of Iraq's

> facilities for making new weapons.


> Lie No. 4: "Peaceful efforts to disarm the Iraqi regime have failed

> again and again because we are not dealing with peaceful men."


> According to the Washington Post of March 16,




> referring to the 1991-1998 inspection period: "[U]nder UN supervision,

> Iraq

> destroyed 817 of 819 proscribed medium-range missiles, 14 launchers, 9

> trailers and 56 fixed missile-launch sites. It also destroyed 73 of 75

> chemical or biological warheads and 163 warheads for conventional

> explosives. UN inspectors also supervised destruction of 88,000 filled

> and unfilled chemical munitions, more than 600 tons of weaponized and

> bulk chemical weapons agents, 4,000 tons of precursor chemicals and 980

> pieces of equipment considered key to production of such weapons."


> Lie No. 5: "The Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the

> most lethal weapons ever devised."


> The Washington Post article cited above noted that CIA officials were

> concerned "about whether administration officials have exaggerated

> intelligence in a desire to convince the American public and foreign

> governments that Iraq is violating United Nations prohibitions against

> chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons and long-range missile

> systems." The article quoted "a senior intelligence analyst" who said

> the inspectors could not locate weapons caches "because there may not be

> much of a stockpile."


> Former British Foreign Minister Robin Cook, who resigned from the Blair

> government Monday in protest over the decision to go to war without UN

> authorization, declared, "Iraq probably has no weapons of mass

> destruction in the commonly understood sense of the term." Even if Iraq

> is concealing some remnants of its 1980s arsenal, these would hardly

> deserve Bush's lurid description, since they are primitive and

> relatively ineffective. "Some of the most lethal weapons ever devised"

> are those being unleashed by the United States on Iraq: cruise missiles,

> smart bombs, fuel-air explosives, the 10,000-pound "daisy-cutter" bomb,

> the 20,000-pound MOAB just tested in Florida. In addition, the US has

> explicitly refused to rule out the use of nuclear weapons.


> Lie No. 6: "[Iraq] has aided, trained and harbored terrorists, including

> operatives of Al Qaeda."


> No one, not even US government, seriously believes there is a

> significant connection between the Islamic fundamentalists and the

> secular nationalist Ba'athist regime in Iraq, which have been mortal

> enemies for decades. The continued assertion of an Al Qaeda-Iraq

> alliance is a desperate attempt to link Saddam Hussein to the September

> 11 attacks.


> It also serves to cover up the responsibility of American imperialism

> for sponsoring Islamic fundamentalist terrorism. The forces that now

> comprise Al Qaeda were largely recruited, trained, armed and set in

> motion by the CIA itself, as part of a long-term policy of using Islamic

> fundamentalists as a weapon against left-wing movements in the Muslim

> countries. This policy was pursued from the 1950s and was escalated

> prior to and during the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, which ended

> in 1989. Osama bin Laden himself was part of the CIA-backed mujaheddin

> forces in Afghanistan before he turned against Washington in the 1990s.


> Lie No. 7: "America tried to work with the United Nations to address

> this threat because we wanted to resolve the issue peacefully."


> The Bush administration went to the United Nations because it wanted UN

> sanction for military action and it wanted UN member states to cough up

> funds for postwar operations, along the lines of its financial shakedown

> operation for the 1991 Persian Gulf War. Bush's most hawkish advisors,

> such as Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Cheney,

> initially opposed going to the UN because they did not want diplomacy to

> slow down the drive to war. They only agreed after Secretary of State

> Colin Powell argued that the pace of the US military buildup in the

> Persian Gulf gave enough time to get the UN to rubber-stamp the war.


> Lie No. 8: "These governments [the Security Council majority] share our

> assessment of the danger, but not our resolve to meet it."


> This is belied by virtually every statement on Iraq issued by the

> governments of France, Russia, China, Germany and other countries

> opposed to military action, which have repeatedly declared that they see

> no imminent threat from Iraq. Bush brands his opponents on the Security

> Council as cowards, as though they were afraid to take action against

> Saddam Hussein. These countries were, in fact, increasingly alarmed--by

> the United States, not Iraq. Insofar as they summoned up resolve, to the

> shock of the Bush administration, it was to deny UN support for the war

> that Washington had already decided to wage.


> Lie No. 9: "Many nations, however, do have the resolve and fortitude to

> act against this threat to peace, and a broad coalition is now gathering

> to enforce the just demands of the world."


> Only three nations are contributing military forces to the war: 250,000

> from the US, 40,000 from Britain, and 2,000 from Australia. The other

> members of the "broad coalition" are those which have been bribed or

> browbeaten to allow the US to fly over their countries to bomb Iraq, to

> station troops, ships or warplanes on their territory, or provide

> technical assistance or other material aid to the war. None will do any

> fighting. All are acting against the expressed desire of their own

> population.


> Lie No. 10: "The United Nations Security Council has not lived up to its

> responsibilities, so we will rise to ours."


> Bush defines the UN body's responsibility as serving as a rubber stamp

> for whatever action the United States government demands. In relation to

> the UN, however, the United States does have definite responsibilities,

> including refraining from waging war without Security Council

> authorization, except in the case of immediate self-defense. Under

> Article 42 of the UN Charter, it is for the Security Council, not the US

> or Britain, to decide how Security Council resolutions such as 1441 are

> to be enforced. The US decision to "enforce" its interpretation of 1441

> regardless of the will of the Security Council is a violation of

> international law.


> Lie No. 11: "If we must begin a military campaign, it will be directed

> against the lawless men who rule your country and not against you."


> The widely reported US military strategy is to conduct an aerial

> bombardment of Iraq so devastating that it will "shock and awe" the

> Iraqi people and compel the Iraqi armed forces to surrender en masse.

> According to one press preview, US and British forces "plan to launch

> the

> deadliest first night of air strikes on a single country in the history

> of air power. Hundreds of targets in every region of Iraq will be hit

> simultaneously." Estimates of likely Iraqi civilian casualties from the

> immediate impact of bombs and missiles range from thousands to hundreds

> of thousands, and even higher when the long-term effects are included.


> Lie No. 12: "As our coalition takes their power, we will deliver the

> food and medicine you need."


> This is particularly cynical, since the immediate consequence of Bush's

> 48-hour ultimatum was the withdrawal of all UN humanitarian aid workers

> and the shutdown of the oil-for-food program, which underwrites the

> feeding of 60 percent of Iraq's population. As for medicine, the US has

> systematically deprived the Iraqi people of needed medicine for the past

> 12 years, insisting that even the most basic medical supplies, like

> antibiotics and syringes, be banned as "dual-use" items that could be

> used in a program of biological warfare.


> Lie No. 13: "We will tear down the apparatus of terror and we will help

> you to build a new Iraq that is prosperous and free."


> The goal of the Bush administration is to install a US puppet regime in

> Baghdad, initially taking the form of an American military dictatorship.

> It is no exaggeration to say that the US government has been the leading

> promoter of dictatorships around from the world, from Pinochet of

> Chile to Suharto of Indonesia to Saddam Hussein himself, who, according

> to one recent report, got his political start as an anti-communist

> hit-man working in a CIA-backed plot to assassinate Iraq's

> left-nationalist President Qasem in 1959.


> A classified State Department report described by the Los Angeles Times

> of March 14 not only concluded that a democratic Iraq was unlikely to

> arise from the devastation of war, it suggested that this was not even

> desirable from the standpoint of American interests, because

> "anti-American sentiment is so pervasive that elections in the short

> term could lead to the rise of Islamic-controlled governments hostile to

> the United States."


> Lie No. 14: "Should Saddam Hussein choose confrontation, the American

> people can know that every measure has been taken to avoid war and every

> measure will be taken to win it."


> This combines a lie and a brutal truth. The Bush administration has

> taken every possible measure to insure that war takes place, viewing the

> resumption of UN weapons inspections with barely disguised hostility and

> directing its venom against those countries that have suggested a

> diplomatic settlement with Iraq is achievable. In prosecuting the war,

> the Bush administration is indeed prepared to use "every measure," up to

> an including nuclear weapons, in order to win it.


> Lie No. 15: "War has no certainty except the certainty of sacrifice."


> There will be colossal sacrifices for the Iraqi people, and sacrifices

> in blood and economic well-being for the American people as well. But

> for Bush's real constituency, the wealthiest layer at the top of

> American society, there will be no sacrifices at all. Instead, the

> administration is seeking a tax cut package of over $700 billion,

> including the abolition of

> taxation on corporate dividends. Major US corporations are in line to

> reap hundreds of millions of dollars in profits from the rebuilding of

> Iraqi infrastructure shattered by the coming US assault. These include

> the oil construction firm Halliburton, which Vice President Cheney

> headed

> prior to joining the Bush administration, and which continues to include

> Cheney on its payroll.


> Lie No. 16: "[T]he only way to reduce the harm and duration of war is to

> apply the full force and might of our military, and we are prepared to

> do so."


> Every aggressor claims to deplore the suffering of war and seeks to

> blame the victim for resisting, and thus prolonging the agony. Bush is

> no different. His hypocritical statements of "concern" for the Iraqi

> people cannot disguise the fact that, as many administration apologists

> freely admit, this is "a war of choice"--deliberately sought by the US

> government to pursue its strategic agenda in the Middle East.


> Lie No. 17: "The terrorist threat to America and the world will be

> diminished the moment that Saddam Hussein is disarmed."


> No one, even in the American military-intelligence complex, seriously

> believes this. US counter-terrorism officials have repeatedly said that

> a US conquest and occupation of Iraq, by killing untold thousands of

> Arabs and Muslims and inflaming public opinion in the Arab world and

> beyond, will spark more terrorism, not less.


> Lie No. 18: "We are now acting because the risks of inaction would be

> far greater. In one year, or five years, the power of Iraq to inflict

> harm on all free nations would be multiplied many times over."


> This is belied by the record of the past twelve years, which has seen a

> steady decline in Iraqi military power. Saddam Hussein has never been a

> threat to any "free nation," if that term has any meaning, only to the

> reactionary oil sheikdoms of the Persian Gulf and to neighboring Iran,

> all

> ruled by regimes that are as repressive as his.


> Lie No. 19: "As we enforce the just demands of the world, we will also

> honor the deepest commitments of our country."


> The demands of the world were expressed by the millions who marched in

> cities throughout the world on February 15 and March 15 to oppose a

> unilateral US attack on Iraq. Bush seeks to have it both ways--claiming

> to enforce previous Security Council resolutions against Iraq ("the just

> demands of the world"), while flagrantly defying the will of the

> majority of the Security Council, the majority of the world's

> governments, and the vast majority of the world's people.


> Lie No. 20: "Unlike Saddam Hussein, we believe the Iraqi people are

> deserving and capable of human liberty... The United States with other

> countries will work to advance liberty and peace in that region."


> For "the Iraqi people," substitute "the Egyptian people," "the people of

> the Arabian peninsula," "the Pakistani people" or those of other

> US-backed dictatorships, not to mention the Palestinians who live under

> a brutal Israeli occupation that is supported by Washington. Does the US

> government believe that any of them are "deserving and capable of human

> liberty?" When the parliament of Turkey, under the pressure of popular

> opposition, voted to bar the US from using Turkish territory to invade

> Iraq, the Bush administration appealed to the Turkish military to

> pressure the government into overturning this democratic decision.


> Copyright 1998-2003 World Socialist Web Site. All rights reserved.


> In the last 24 hours, over 200,000 acres (494,000 hectares) of

> rainforest have been destroyed in our world. Fully 13 million tons (28.6

> million kilograms) of toxic chemicals have been released into our

> environment. Over 45,000 people have died of starvation, 38,000 of them

> children. And

> more than 130 plant or animal species have been driven to extinction by

> the actions of humans. The last time there was such a rapid loss of

> species was when the dinosaurs vanished-and all this just since

> yesterday.


From: <>
To: <>
Subject: Protests in Vienna
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 12:58:04 +0100

Here some informations from Austria which could be interesting for you:

"Day X" saw some 8.000 pupils up from the age of 12 leave their schools in an "illegal" strike action. The kids were very angry, their main slogans were " Hands Off Iraq!", "Long live international solidarity" and "No bombs on Bagdad".

The same afternoon, some 15.000 people marched through Vienna, demanding an end to war. The demonstration ended up at the US-embassy, which was heavily protected by police in riot gear.

Yesterday, saturday 22nd, 50.000 people participated in a large Anti-War-demonstration in the capital. For the first time, even the Austrian Federation of Trade Unions (OeGB) appealed to it's members to participate in an anti-war-action in the streets. But, in fact, this appeal was a mere lipservice - the "labor contingent" consisted of some dozens full-timers of the Trade Unions. Despite several postings and letters to the OeGB, this organization which maintains close links to the AFL-CIO bureaucracy, did not sign the international appeal, issued by USLAW.

Several organizations of the far left (among them the organization I belong to, the AGM, Workinggroup Marxism), tried to counterpose class-specific slogans to the merely Anti-American slogans that were shouted by some groups ("USA - international central of genocide", "USA-SA-SS", "Down down USA"). Via loudspeakers we informed about USLAW, the demonstrations in the USA (there were only little reports in the Austrian mass media) and emphasized our solidarity with American workers opposing war.


Kurt Lhotzky, Vienna, Austria

An Exchange

Mr Nupson

I have long said that Saddam Hussein is an evil dictator. That was my position in 1982 when Donald Rumsfeld was in Baghdad glad-handing Saddam, his sons, and other gangster leaders of the Baath regime. Of course the U.S. was backing him at the time, encouraging a senseless, bloody eight-year war with Iran—the first combat since World War I to see the use of poison gas.

I also know that almost all of the Arab nation allies of the U.S. and Britain are dictatorships as well. No one in Washington is considering killing them or encouraging their "impeachment."

Having gone through the Vietnam experience perhaps I don't find the fact that our government lies to us about their true objectives as shocking and incredible as some of the younger generation.

A lot of good people on both sides in this war are going to die or suffer hardship. It won't be to bring democracy to Iraq. It won't be to disarm "weapons of mass destruction"—clearly Iraq has no such weapons since none have been used in what is obviously a final battle.

The human and tremendous material sacrifices of this war are to establish the Bush Doctrine—the intention to intervene militarily anywhere, any time, for any excuse to advance the perceived interests of American Big Business.

We at Labor Advocate think this is not only morally and legally wrong; it is also counter to the interests of the working class majority in the United States. That's why we oppose this war, call for an end to the bombing and bringing our troops safely home where they belong.


Bill Onasch

At 0501 PM 3/22/03 -0600, you wrote

How would you get rid of Saddam H. I don't think the people in Iraq can impeach a president with out fear of life if we would have sent a hit team to remove or kill Saddam H. we would have been critized for that also. do you admit Saddam is a evil person



--- EarthLink The #1 provider of the Real Internet.