The Bush administration appears to be scrambling to not lose face as its' blatant imperialism against the people of Iraq derails and his policy of pre-emptive aggression unravels. Many people were reluctant to support Bush' war without U.N. or allied support. The fact is, at this juncture Bush has neither. Only Britain, AmeriKKKa's lapdog, Spain and Italy are in Bush's corner. Even Israel which would be a prime beneficiary of a regime change in Iraq, and a U.S. occupational force in the region must, for political reasons, recuse itself from high profile support of Bush's agenda.

The massive anti-war demonstrations around the world even before the invasion of Iraq and Turkey's courageous rejection of US foreign aid bribes and their refusal to allow AmeriKKKan troops to use Turkey as a staging ground for an assault on Iraq seriously undermined Bush's war plans. Revelations Secretary of State Colin Powell's "irrefutable intelligence" about Iraqi WMD and links to international terrorism were taken from a graduate student's out dated research paper and that Condoleeza Rice ordered "dirty tricks" against six key Security Council members to intimidate them into siding with the U.S. on a new war resolution have further damaged the administration's credibility, despite the pliant mainstream media's incessant pounding of war drums.

What Bush & Co. arrogantly refused to entertain was that the vast majority of the world's inhabitants wouldn't approve of or support this war and would actively oppose it! Bush attempted to justify this war by misleading folks into believing Iraq was a threat to the US and Saddam Hussein had supported international terrorists, something his CIA has repeatedly denied! Colin Powell gained brownie points with the AmeriKKKan public by urging restraint and by counseling going through the UN as a way to build a broad multilateral coalition and favorable PR. Most people concurred thinking that if the UN supported the US position they too would back it.

My question is this, if there is no evidence Iraq is a threat to AmeriKKKa nor is there any proof Saddam Hussein supports international terrorism, would people still support this war even if Bush & Co had been successful in convincing the UN to go along with their charade? Would the people who oppose Bush's imperialist agenda have acquiesced just because the UN gave their okay and sanctioned a regime change and occupation of Iraq thereby approving AmeriKKKa's expropriation of Iraqi oil fields? Right is right and wrong is wrong! Why would this war be any less immoral or disastrous just because the UN Security Council caved in to Bush's wishes?

As this scenario played itself out I started thinking about what is it the proponents of the New World Order really want? Is it Iraqi oil, geo-strategic positioning in the region, or people to look to the United Nations as a vehicle for to solve global problems? Could Bush hit the trifecta again and get all three? What better way to get rank and file AmeriKKKans who for the most part are extremely jingoistic to think outside their nationalistic box, to think in terms of an international organization to resolve a pressing issue like the pending war in Iraq than to have one of the "cooler heads" within an insanely imperialistic administration suggest AmeriKKKa seek UN support for their nefarious plans?

Yes we live in a global community but the people pushing for a New World Order have an entirely different agenda. Their goal is to surreptitiously rule the world by controlling all of its resources, lands and labor. Bush and Co. are proponents of the New World Order just as his father and Bill Clinton were (it's not about political party, it’s about class affiliations). What if this Iraq issue was really designed to get Joe and Jane Sixpack more comfortable with the United Nations dictating or influencing AmeriKKKan foreign policy?

Right is right and wrong is wrong. Bush is wrong, this war and the other interventions about to jump off in Columbia and the Philippines are wrong. They are wrong because neither the people of Columbia nor the rebels there have done anything to AmeriKKKans. Nor have the rebels in the Philippines done anything to us. If a course of action or government policy is wrong or immoral, it shouldn't matter who supports it, if it is wrong the people should refuse to authorize, sanction or support the government or its immoral laws. The same thing goes for the United Nations!

The United Nations has no real power, if they did they'd enforce sanctions against nations like Israel who have also disobeyed unanimous UN resolutions! Right is right and wrong is wrong. Where do we stand, which side are we on, the side of right or the side of wrong? Do we cross over to the side of wrong just because the UN or George Bush says so? I don't think so! Remember genocide against the indigenous inhabitants and the kidnapping and enslavement of Africans were sanctioned by the AmeriKKKan government and carried out by people who thought they were being law abiding citizens. Rosa Parks broke the law by refusing to give up her seat on the bus. In doing so she helped break the back of AmeriKKKan racial cast and oppression. Here's another scary thought, everything Hitler did in Germany was legal!

POSITIVELY BLACK 3/6/03