A Father and His Son Rape the Same Nation

Two Texas Stallions Rape the Same Mare

For those who are offended by the grossness of this title, there is this question:  Which do you think offends ALLAH more? The grossness of this title? Or is He infinitely more offended by one relatively small, mostly Muslim nation being deliberately and brutally raped twice by the father and son leaders of a large, predominantly Christian nation? Yet, the evidence presented in this paper will reveal that a double rape has actually occurred with many eyes to see but with far too few lips to condemn.

The radical Rabbi from Tarsus in the first Century A.D., vigorously condemned the immoral activity of a certain church member in Corinth , Greece who was a “born again” Christian.This immoral “born again” man was somewhat openly having sexual relations with the wife of his own father.Although the father’s wife was apparently consenting to the son’s sexual advances, for unknown reasons, it was only the man involved who received the severe condemnation from GOD’s apostle and not the woman.  However, the other “born again” Christians associated with the Corinthian church were also severely condemned for openly tolerating this blatantly immoral activity between the son and the wife of his father. These believers somehow did the amazing mental gymnastics that enabled them to be proud of this immorality that one of their church members was openly involved in. 

So, what do you think this former Rabbi decided should be the appropriate punishment for this uniquely immoral son who was openly involved in such vile sexual activity?This now Christian apostle who later became the author of the majority of the New Testament, pronounced that this born again son should be turned over to Satan (Shitaan) for his sinful nature to be destroyed in order for his soul to be ultimately saved. So now I ask, in view of the harsh punishment that this one “born again” son in Corinth received for consensual intercourse with one woman who was married to his father, what should be the worthy punishment for one “born again”son from Washington D.C. who raped the same nation his father had previously raped?  As President of the United States, with deliberation and premeditation, President George W. Bush chose to violently rape the same mostly Muslim nation twelve years after his own father, as President, had with considerable deception raped this same vulnerable and suffering nation.  This question about suitable punishment is extremely serious since it involves a son head of state of a large, powerful, predominantly Christian nation choosing with great deceit, to brutally rape a relatively small, mostly Muslim nation, the very same Muslim nation that his President, father had previously raped.

As you seriously consider what should be the deserved punishment for this “born again” rapist President in view of the apostle Paul’s recommended severe punishment for another immoral “born again” man from first century Corinth Greece, please take these three relevant factors into consideration.

The son from Corinth ’s sex with the wife of his father, though disgustingly immoral, it was still only sex with one woman, not the rape of a nation, and it was consensual, not rape. In vivid contrast, this President chose to violently rape a whole nation and it was definitely against that sovereign nation’s will.  It was not consensual. 

This President shamefully chose to rape the same nation that his own father had previously raped.  This is in contrast to the New Testament situation in Corinth where both the father and son had consensual relations with the same woman and neither of them violently raped the woman.

This current President will not admit that his rape of this vulnerable, mostly Muslim nation is wrong.  Instead, he uses the same convenient cover for his rape of an entire nation that is a common excuse among even serial rapists.He uses the cover of blaming the victim for causing the rape.For instance, a rapist will frequently say, “If she had not dressed the way that she did, I would not have raped her. Therefore, you cannot truly call it rape, because she virtually asked for the rape to happen.”

Quite similarly to the stereotypical criminal rapist, the second President Bush is not willing to acknowledge that he has actually raped Iraq.  Instead, he stubbornly sticks to his contrived story that: “Their nation did certain illegal acts that a sovereign nation had no right to do.Also, a few persons in their nation or at least a person or two may have had conversations with a person or two in a very bad organization and they may have discussed a few of their citizens doing something bad to our nation in the future.  So if we kill enough Iraqis perhaps we will kill the unknown and unidentified persons who may have planned to do something to the U.S. at an unknown future time.

Following this convoluted line of reasoning, he further claims, “Therefore, if you insist on calling what we are doing to Iraq rape, then you must at least admit that it was pre-emptive rape by us.  For there was always at least the remote possibility that if we had not had the presence of mind and the courage to rape many of them first, there is always the possibility that a few of them may have raped us later.For you must understand that it is our inalienable right as a benevolent super power to use overwhelming military force against a sovereign Middle Eastern, mostly Muslim nation until all of its citizens stop their wicked resistance to the type of government that we feel that it is our responsibility to coerce the Iraqi citizens to peacefully embrace.    For by our making certain that all Iraqi citizens have had opportunity to embrace our enlightened form of Democratic government, we have eliminated any potential for any Iraqi people to have any motivation to attack our own benevolent peace loving nation in the future.  For how could they even think of attacking us after we have so caringly demonstrated our love for them by us sacrificing so much to bring them Democracy?

Of course that is a caricature of the President’s reasoning but it still follows his basic train of thought if he were to be honest about what he actually expected the Iraqis response to be to American forces invading and occupying Iraq.  This is the crazy line of reasoning of a man who is badly out of touch with reality but still thinks that this type of rationale justifies our nation forcing our will (raping) on Iraq.  Consequently, what should the temporal and eternal punishment be for the son of a rapist President whose father, as President also chose to violently rape an entire nation?  And please base your answer in light of the son from the Biblical city of Corinth , Greece, having the dreadful punishment of being turned over to Shitaan (Satan) for his human nature to be destroyed for the consensual sex that he had with the one wife of his father. Also, what do you think the temporal and eternal punishment should be for the U.S. Christian community who did the immoral mental gymnastics required in order to actually be proud of, and to re-elect a born again Christian President who has deceived his own nation in order to justify his giving the orders to rape an entire predominantly Muslim nation?

A QUICK LOOK AT TEXAS STALLION NUMBER TWO

Its eyes looked terrified like it had just seen or heard a deadly rattle snake. Its sharp hooves flashed high through the air, then returned to the ground, violently kicking up the dust.It’s ears were laid back with its nostrils flaring wildly.  Snorts, grunts and other loud horse noises pierced the otherwise silent air.This stallion (an un-castrated male horse used primarily to get female horses pregnant) was certain that it had sniffed the attractive scent of a mare (a female horse) in heat, who was ready to get it on with this excited stallion.  The more than eager stallion could not be restrained.A rope tied to the United Nations building would not have succeeded in restraining this lustful stallion that had convinced itself it had smelled the amorous scent that every fiber of its being longed to smell.I will refrain from putting in writing any additional graphic details describing this aroused stallion in order not to offend readers.  Yet, if graphic details are required to help us hate the rape that has occurred against the valuable Muslims and Christians of Iraq, I would risk using crude language. 

It was only minutes after I had decided to use the lust driven stallion as an appropriate metaphor for President George W. Bush and his Administration in its virtual lustful desire to have war with Iraq.  Then I recalled that I had previously written a paper quoting our President’s exact crude words expressing his own frantic desire to “F..K Saddam”Those precise two words were quoted in the March 31, 2003 Time Magazine article which confirmed how disgustingly appropriate my lustful stallion metaphor of our partially mentally disabled U.S. President actually is.The Time article courageously quoted the President’s foreign policy proclamation he initially made to three Senators and Miss Condoleeza Rice.  The three Senate members were meeting with the refined National Security Advisor in her private office discussing in a professional manner how helpful it would be to have Arab leaders and U.N. members more involved in direct discussion with the President of Iraq so that the impending war could possibly be avoided. In the middle of their discussion, though uninvited, the U.S. President seemed to trot up to the door. It quickly became obvious that he became agitated when he picked up the scent of the conversation being about Saddam Hussein.As soon as he became stimulated and excited in this way, he was no longer in the mood to give serious attention to reasonable discussion.Admittedly, Time magazine made no mention of his nostrils flaring or his ears being laid back.Nor did the article speak of his hooves flashing through the air or that his eyes were almost bulging out of their sockets.Nevertheless, you get the impression that the scent of the conversation definitely aroused him or in street language turned him on.But he did make one loud horse noise revealing the extent of his lust, just before he galloped out of sight down the White House hallway. His obvious urgency made it seem as if he was anxiously searching for the mare with whom he was so excited to get it on.  But, being the President of the United States, he wanted to appear Presidential to Miss Rice and the Senators so he cleverly mixed his horse noise with a succinct foreign policy statement regarding his future plans for Iraq.  “F..K Saddam! We’re taking him out!”  But after he made this short horse sound, he was apparently so agitated about engaging his romantic victim that he at least temporarily forgot other victims with whom he also was so desirous of getting it on.So he failed to mention his intense desire to “f..k” the tens of thousands of the precious people of Iraq who have suffered violent deaths during his romantic encounters with their President.Nor did he mention his no less intense desire to “f..k” so many in the American Military who have needlessly but courageously sacrificed their lives in order for their American President to enjoy his “f..k” with the President of a sovereign nation who he obviously considers to be inferior and to be much less presidential than himself.

A SHOCKING, DEPRESSING INSIGHT

As I had been previously writing the defense of my conviction that the sincere Peacemaker, King Hussein of Jordan could have actually prevented the first Gulf war had he received reasonable U.S. support and had not been betrayed by both the Bush administration and Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, suddenly a light was turned on in my mind. I was absolutely one hundred percent wrong in thinking for one second that this capable King could have prevented the first Gulf War.  It became obvious that I was, along with many others, making wrong assumptions about what could have prevented the two Gulf Wars from occurring.

My five Wrong Assumptions

First of all, I wrongly assumed that U.S. leadership valued the lives of our own military men and women and the civilian lives of the Iraqis so much that we would have done everything in our power to have avoided both wars with Iraq if it had been reasonably possible to avoid those two bloody wars.

Secondly, I tend not to accept the reality that there are many factors that cause our leaders to conclude that wars with Iraq have many more advantages than disadvantages.Consequently, these U.S. leaders conclude that to not take full advantage of having a beneficial war when the opportunity presents itself would be extremely damaging to our long term national interests.

Thirdly, with the filtered and biased media bombardment that we all have received about an admittedly brutal dictator like President Saddam Hussein, I was too quick to always assume that it was consistently him who was the cause of any potential war with Iraq.I simply failed to accept the reality that our leaders would resort to almost any pretext in order to manipulate Saddam Hussein like a puppet on a string so that he always appeared to be the only cause of the wars.This was done in order to insure that we would have international support for the wars so that our own covert goals that we have convinced ourselves are crucial to our long term national interests, could only be accomplished through bloody wars with Iraq.

Fourthly, I tend to assume that our nationally elected leaders are basically honest and truthful and forget that they have hidden agendas that they want us common people to know nothing about.So, I tend to strongly resist believing the reality that certain amoral leaders, despite their religious public images, manipulate truth like it is a puppet on a string.This is quite similar to how they consistently manipulate Saddam Hussein to do what they need him to do so that he is always the one to blame for a war and not our leaders. 

Fifthly, concerning only the first Gulf War, I wrongly assumed that my government would do everything it reasonably could do to persuade Saddam Hussein to withdraw his troops from Kuwait, not dreaming that they would do the exact opposite. They actually did everything that they could do to manipulate him to keep his troops in Kuwait so that they would have the internationally acceptable pretext for the war they so badly wanted.I failed to accept the true reality that even if Saddam Hussein had gone forward at a Christian Billy Graham rally and suddenly had changed all of his values and his policies, once these leaders had decided that a war with Iraq was what  they needed and wanted, they would have found a way to have it despite a “born again” Saddam Hussein.

After coming to grips with my five quite false assumptions and after evaluating a whole series of relevant and related factors, which each helped make especially the second Gulf War inevitable, I became 100% convinced of this horrible reality.Two different Bush Administrations run by two different Bushes, both became dead set that they wanted and needed their wars with Iraq.  Consequently, given the strong Arab cultural factor of avoiding total humiliation, there was virtually no way that Saddam Hussein could have prevented either one of these stubborn, committed, powerful Presidents of the world’s most militarized nation from getting what they were convinced that they so badly needed for their long term geopolitical interests – two bloody wars with Iraq.

When many separate but related realities concerning multiple forces which included even statistically defying coincidences concerning various factors, one particular outcome became inevitable. Each factor, coincidence and reality relentlessly compelled two distinctly separate Bush Administrations to each make the immoral choice to be the initiators and facilitators of two quite preventable bloody wars with Iraq.  To put it bluntly, U.S. policy makers which included considerable input from amoral, pro-Israel, Neoconservative strategists who were strongly committed to a policy of the destabilization of most Arab nations but especially to the destabilization of Iraq, were convinced that the U.S. had far too much to lose by not having war with Iraq.  Consequently, these policy makers strategically scattered throughout the various departments of the U.S. government would not have allowed any organization such as the U.N., or any facts or any power on earth from preventing them from relentlessly pursuing bloody war with Iraq. 

Since the U.S. benefits from being a respected member of the world community of nations which are governed by civilized standards of law and order, our leaders and policy makers labor furiously to protect our international image.  Consequently, because our leaders do unacceptable, devious things behind the scenes, they find themselves needing to lie, deceive and alter reality in order to protect America’s valued international image.The now risen West Bank man from Bethlehem vividly compared religious leaders of his day who were intent on always appearing as good and pure to others, but behind the scenes doing evil acts, to white-washed tombs.  These graves were made to appear nice on the outside by painting them with white.But if you were to see the contents inside of the tombs, they were full of dead men’s bones and skulls.

Similar to how the Bethlehem man described the decayed inside of those first century religious hypocrites, the first Bush Administration deviously labored behind the scenes to make it appear that Saddam Hussein had become only a madman lusting for power, a sort of badness personified.However, in total contrast to this supposed all badness of Saddam Hussein, the U.S. deviously portrayed itself to its public as sincerely attempting in every way to avoid war.  Furthermore, our always righteous nation certainly would not acknowledge any intentionally unrevealed motives that could cause people to think for one second that going to war with Iraq would have any strategic advantages for the U.S.

So the first Bush Administration quite hypocritically never came close to admitting that it had manipulated circumstances with Iraq because it had long range geopolitical needs to fulfill in the Middle East which a war or wars with Iraq would help them accomplish.Stated another way, the efficient and amoral U.S. spin artists were always quite successful in making it consistently appear that it was only the Iraqi madman who was the sole instigator and entire cause of the U.S. wars with Iraq.  Consequently, never did the U.S. have any guilt whatsoever.Therefore, the multiple strategic, cumulative geopolitical needs and goals of the first Bush Administration were never publicly acknowledged.  More importantly, they were never publicly debated as to whether they were worthy causes for the horrible human cost to all the nations involved.This is not even to mention the economic cost or the horrible environmental degradation.It was always too exceptionally convenient to avoid admitting any U.S. culpability in bringing about the wars since our nation had the unique luxury of having such a blameworthy Muslim national leader to heap all blame upon.

Yes, it was obvious to our policy specialists that our nation did have pressing global priorities and geopolitical concerns which wars with Iraq could go along way toward temporarily solving.But they considered it to be quite counterproductive to our national interests and injurious to both our public and to our international images if we would openly acknowledge or call attention to these uncomfortable realities.However, whether we will admit it or not, it was these unacknowledged factors which literally propelled and compelled our national leaders to prefer a war with Iraq in 1991 infinitely more than it preferred avoiding a war with Iraq.Thus, the major solution to their public relations dilemma was the unique luxury they enjoyed of being able to fall back on their good luck of dealing with a national leader who had well publicized ego needs and well advertised territorial aspirations.This fortuitous circumstance made it in popular C.I.A. terminology, a “slam dunk” for both Bush Administrations to consistently shift the focus from long range strategic geopolitical concerns of the U.S. to President Hussein’s aggression, his murders of his own people and his potential to possess weapons of mass destruction becoming the relevant issues.  Consequently, this unique circumstance enabled the two Texas Bush boys to ride the same Trojan horse to two successive bloody wars with Iraq, receiving only minimal international resistance to their first war and easily defeatable international resistance to their second war.  Additionally, a relatively unsophisticated President Hussein was so easily manipulated that our amoral policy experts consistently exploited his erratic behavior as a convenient smokescreen to cover our covert strategies and our own less than honorable geopolitical intentions.Therefore, it was extraordinarily convenient to manipulate him to appear to be more of a regional threat and more of a threat to the continental U.S. that in reality he was.

Our unethical Vice President, Dick Cheney, could not in his wildest imagination have created a prototype of a Middle Eastern leader more uniquely suited to effectively aid this Vice President in his desire to invade Iraq than Iraq’s President Saddam Hussein.  This one special leader, even without the assistance of Osama Bin Laden, enabled this exceptionally negative Vice President to need to use only one side of his appearing to be disabled mouth, to accomplish something amazing.He quietly but convincingly stirred up unprecedented paranoia among U.S. voters about what this one leader of a small Middle Eastern nation might do to the Northern part of the western hemisphere.This feared Vice President’s seemingly spontaneous observations shared on talk shows, etc. about the menacing dangers of Saddam Hussein were more than enough to accomplish two exceptionally negative outcomes.His twisted comments provided hysterical support for the second unnecessary war with Iraq.  But just as significantly, his irrational fear inspiring comments implying that Iraqi type 9/11 terrorists were on America’s doorstep provided the extra impetus needed for one intellectually challenged Texas cowboy with enough votes to win a second term as President of The United States.

It was unanimously recognized by both Bush’s inner circles, that containing Iraq and even fighting an occasional brief war with Iraq was always a good deal for the U.S.  Small wars with Iraq (which the second war was supposed to be) neatly fit with several of our regional strategic goals as well as fulfilling some of our national long range oil needs and economic needs and a number of Israel’s needs.  For instance, Saddam’s frequent outspoken threats and his evil local activities conveniently provided us with an internationally acceptable excuse to have a strategically helpful strong military presence in the area.This conspicuous presence provided vital security for the smooth flow of economically obtainable Persian Gulf oil which sustains both the U.S. and world economies. The strong Middle Eastern military presence was also available to aid Israel or any of the oil producing Persian Gulf states in case of an emergency.

As for Saddam Hussein having been the evil force in the region that caused two wars, to put it bluntly, we desperately needed him.  The U.S. could not have accomplished its perceived strategic purposes in the region without him responding to our covert manipulations in the cooperative fashion that he did.  But mainly it was Dick Cheney who finally decided that having him as Iraq’s President was no longer in the strategic interest of the U.S. because he was always in the way and interfered with our leading the way in developing Iraq’s immense oil reserves, which was a vital next step.But before President Saddam Hussein was captured and imprisoned, it must be acknowledged that the Persian Gulf nations including Saudi Arabia did need U.S. fire power in the region, but not a war, in order to protect them from an Iraq which had become too strong and threatening to the region.  This was true even if you do not factor in the major threat that a strong, united Iraq under Saddam Hussein’s leadership posed for the nation of Israel.  But the yet to be played out potential irony of that sensitive situation in this.The U.S. may have conveniently set the stage for the Shia majority in Iraq to form a future alliance with the overwhelming Shia majority of Iran.  In the quite likely event that the U.S. is unsuccessful in preventing this scenario, this large Shia block composed of both Iranian Shia and Iraqi Shia will be much more of a threat to the region and also more of a threat to Israel than the U.S. Neoconservative instigators of the second Iraq war could have ever imagined.They will undoubtedly be more of a threat than even a united Iraq could have been when President Saddam Hussein with his strong autocratic hand kept his large Shia majority in check.

As for the issue of Iraq having been the main cause of the two Gulf Wars and the U.S. only responding to the aggressive activities of Iraq who supposedly initiated the two wars, the reality is this.It was not Iraq who was the U.S. adversary.Rather, it was always the U.S. who was the adversary of Iraq.  Thus, it was strictly the U.S and not Iraq which deceptively caused each of the two wars with Iraq to occur.

Significantly, the profound insight of the comic strip philosopher, Charlie Brown, precisely identifies who the enemy was who caused the two bloody, preventable Gulf Wars.

“We have met the enemy and He is Us!”

We will now return to our metaphor of the U.S. being a mighty Texas stallion so attracted and turned on by the scent or aroma which emanates from the female horse and is craving the immediate attention of the stallion.  However, our analogy takes an unnatural twist as it is applied to the U.S. and Iraq.  This is due to the U.S. stallion being so inordinately lustful in desiring to initiate vigorous “sexual” activity with the object of its lust that this clever stallion violates all natural laws in its pursuit of the one to whom it is so attracted. Consequently, the mare does not need to be giving off any aroma whatsoever for this stallion to be out of its mind in its desire to immediately “get it on” with the mare.

The U.S. plain and simple, did not need Iraq to be in heat and giving off the natural scents and aromas which ordinarily are required to attract the male un-castrated stallion.  The U.S. stallion was so wild about getting it on and so clever, that it simply manufactured its own scents and aromas in order to have an excuse to initiate its sexual conquest.  But since it had great difficulty being honest to whomever listened, that it claimed it was only attracted to the Iraqi mare because it was giving off such strong attractive scents. 

The evidence, when examined, is quite conclusive that neither Bush Administration needed a genuine natural scent emanating from Iraq in order to attract it to aggressively pursue war with that sovereign nation.  The U.S. was not only capable of manufacturing its own attractions to Iraq but also was so successful in the art of deception, that it tricked the rest of the world, the gullible Congress and the even more gullible American public, that the attractions which led to the vigorous “sexual” activity all came from Iraq and that none came from the U.S.It is absolutely amazing that two Texas Bushes can gather around them such competent, highly professional spin artists that they were able to convince the vast majority of national leaders that it was Iraq and not the U.S. who was the evil villain in both wars.

So expertly did the two Bush Administrations media controllers and spinners deceive the American public, the Congress and the entire community of nations, that focus was successfully shifted away from what our foreign policy experts had covertly decided that wars with Iraq could provide for the U.S.

What the U.S. Media Control Artists Did Not Tell Us

About Why We Needed the Two Wars With Iraq

Wars with Iraq would finally provide for us unique opportunities to be the ones in control of exporting and developing Iraq’s mostly untapped huge oil reserves, the second largest in the world, with only Saudi Arabia having more.(Vice President Dick Cheney constantly emphasized that Saddam Hussein would need to be either dead or in prison for these vitally needed reserves to be successfully developed.)

We need wars with Iraq as an excuse to keep large numbers of our military in the Persian Gulf region and to develop military infrastructures in different nations in order to provide an extra incentive for wealthy Arab nations such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the U.A.E., etc. to think twice before they would withdraw their substantial savings from U.S. accounts.This enormous amount of money invested in U.S. accounts contributes greatly to our government’s deficit financing. If these hundreds of billions of dollars were suddenly to be transferred to other nations, our financial system could face collapse. 

We needed the first war with Iraq in order to have a pretense to station huge numbers of troops in oil rich but vulnerable and wary Saudi Arabia so we could develop a significant military base infrastructure in that nation in case of future Gulf region emergencies or in case of an emergency in Saudi Arabia itself.Significantly, even if our present friends in the Saudi monarchy became our former friends and decided to deny us our assumed right to use the military infrastructure we had developed even though we needed them for a specific Persian Gulf emergency, we would not consider their denial as binding.If need be, we think that we can use force to regain this strategic advantage of using bases in Saudi Arabia. 

We needed a war with Iraq in order to have legitimacy in posting our vast military throughout the region in order to provide extra security for our American out-post, Israel. 

We needed wars with Iraq not to ultimately stabilize Iraq as a strong, stable Arab democracy.That is a nice dream and a convenient cover story, but a strong, stable Iraq would be much too great of a regional threat to Israel.  So we needed wars with Iraq in order to destabilize Iraq and to fragment it so that it cannot be a challenge to Israel. 

We need wars with Iraq in order to obtain international legitimacy in positioning our military throughout the region in order to keep Arab regimes which are now friendly to the U.S. remaining friendly.This will keep the oil flowing that keeps the global economy going which the present stability and future prosperity of the U.S. is desperately dependent upon.

Shockingly, though these important long range strategic purposes for a U.S. war or wars with Iraq were so obvious, the U.S. Republican Bush Administrations were amazingly proficient in keeping the media focus away from any issues which reflected badly on the U.S.  So the manipulated U.S. media conveniently avoided these crucial U.S. reasons for actually lusting after the wars with Iraq by obediently staying focused on what the public had been expertly conditioned to want to hear about.  So we were fed a steady diet of the strident brazenness of Iraq for daring to challenge the U.S. by suddenly invading the helpless, innocent nation of Kuwait and thus trying to gain control of all the Middle East oil and potentially paralyzing the world’s economy.Or, regarding the reasons for Iraq causing the current war, there was the imminent threat of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction.  Iraq’s possible link to 9/11, Iraq’s possible link to the Al Qaeda terrorists, Saddam Hussein and his sons inhumane cruelty to so many vulnerable citizens of his own nation and of his mass murder of those of his own people who were not sufficiently cooperative.  Each of these significant concerns were steadily fed to us in such a way that they kept our attention diverted from what the two clever Bush Administrations wanted our attention diverted from.  The U.S. had strong reasons for wanting both wars and nothing was going to prevent them from having both wars; not Saddam Hussein; not the U.S. public, not the U.N.; not the congress; and certainly not international outrage. 

Therefore, even though we will not openly acknowledge it, our lust for the long term benefits of what wars with Iraq provided us was so essential that we will manage to find what will always appear to the American Congress and to the American public to be legitimate excuses for not backing off from declaring a war on Iraq even when Iraq truly gives us no legitimate reason for a war with her.

RAPE

So inevitable did it become that the mighty U.S. stallion would force its unwanted “sexual” violence on the Iraqi mare that the violent activity was not close to resembling either consensual war or consensual “sex”.  Instead, the violent activity became the violent R-A-P-E of a relatively weak Iraqi mare that was giving off no actual scent of being in heat, by a mighty U.S. stallion.Significantly, in addition to being mighty, this stallion is clever.In fact, it is so clever that so far it has succeeded in convincing a gullible U.S. voting public to actually believe the most ridiculous lie of all. The U.S. public has been led to believe by the present Bush Administration that all the violence now occurring in Iraq is the direct result of one flagrant crime. It is the mighty U.S. Stallion who is courageously fighting to resist being brutally raped by the lustful, criminal Iraqi mare.

You may protest and say that at least when the older, more honest Bush was President, that Iraq gave the U.S. stallion a strong unmistakable scent when Iraq invaded Kuwait, fully realizing that its invasion was a clear invitation to the U.S. to come to Iraq’s rescue and to have war with Iraq over Kuwait.  WRONG!

I will readily acknowledge that Iraq’s Baath party was not an angelic group. But neither was it a totally stupid group.  However, it was sufficiently stupid that it trusted the U.S. to keep its words which the U.S. publicly voiced on three different separate occasions by three different State Department Officials, that “The U.S. has no plans to defend Kuwait.”  The important background is that Iraq was well aware that the U.S. knew that Iraq was legitimately upset with the way that France and Great Britain had deliberately kept Iraq weaker by giving the new nation of Kuwait strategic land and water access that Iraq felt was legitimately its own.Iraq was also fully aware that the U.S. knew of at least two other serious financial grievances that Iraq had against Kuwait which concerned multiple billions of dollars. So Iraq’s leaders put out diplomatic feelers to U.S. officials in order to see if the U.S. had serious plans to defend Kuwait if Iraq was to attempt to handle its three enormous grievances with Kuwait through an invasion of that nation.Iraqi leadership knew that protocol dictates that the U.S. had to be subtle in its answers to Iraq’s indirect inquiriesto the U.S. about whether we would look the other way if they invaded  a small Arab neighbor.  Or, would we only make loud noises that they shouldn’t have invaded but not make direct military intervention?  They knew that the U.S. could not make direct answers back to indirect Iraq inquiries by sending official letter to Iraq saying: “Dear Saddam Hussein, We do not want you to invade, but if you do invade we will just make a lot of official protest.  But don’t worry because we will keep our guns in our pockets and not take any military action against Iraqi forces.We know that this is just a matter between Arab-Muslim Brothers, so just solve it in your own way.  Sincerely, Uncle Sam”

No, President Saddam Hussein was not hoping for such a ridiculous reply.  But when he did hear three different State Department Officials making clear public announcements that the U.S. had no plans to defend Kuwait, he felt that he had received the kind of unequivocal indirect reply that he was hoping for in order to give him the go ahead.

With those three clear announcements by the U.S., the trap for Iraq had been baited with the small, vulnerable nation of Kuwait being the delicious live bait.  Those announcements left no doubt in the naïve mind of Saddam Hussein that the U.S. considered it mainly an Arab problem between two Arab nations as Ambassador April Glasby had implied with Saddam when he had personally met with her. Conveniently, for the U.S., President Hussein was not politically astute enough to realize one cold reality.Though the U.S. may boast about being a Christian, truth telling, moral nation, our officials will lie, lie, lie when it means concealing a trap that we have set, and baited with live people bait in order to get what we want.After he had invaded and we began making threats about destroying his army if he did not immediately withdraw, President Saddam Hussein realized that he had made a fatal mistake in believing this “Christian” nation’s blatant lies about having “no intention to defend Kuwait.”  He also realized that due to his horribly bad judgment in trusting us to be honest in our replies to his honest questions, that we had him in our trap and that the only way out was overwhelming personal and national public humiliation.  The alternative was to have the blood of his soldiers begin to flow like a river and that was what the U.S. strongly preferred.  As he expected, we made the conditions for his withdrawal from Kuwait so humiliating and unsatisfactory, that he could not possibly leave without being totally humiliated before the whole Arab Muslim world.  In the midst of the well planned wicked conspiracy to trap President Saddam Hussein with Kuwait was President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt.  He was either purposely or inadvertently cooperating with the Bush Administration to double-cross ALLAH’s unsuspecting, trusting peacemaker, King Hussein, who had at one point convinced Saddam to withdraw.So finally, with so many determined forces united against him, the President of Iraq had no face saving choice but to engage in a bloody, horrible war with the U.S. and its manipulated coalition and to be decisively defeated.

Two significant lessons which Saddam Hussein learned from this experience was to never trust the supposed Christian U.S. again and to be just as devious with us in the future as we had been with him.

Returning to the lustful stallion analogy, though the Iraqi President had taken serious precautions to give off no scents, or aromas or signals that he wanted to engage the U.S. in the violence of war, and we had lured him into Kuwait with our lie that, “We have no plans to defend Kuwait,” instead of engaging in any activity that was close to consensual, the mighty stallion of the U.S. raped and raped Iraq.  Then, after a few years passed, a younger stallion, the Texas colt of the first stallion rapist and just as devious as the first, began raping Iraq again.This occurred when the equally deceitful son of the former Texas rapist figured out another clever way to convince just enough of the gullible U.S. that the Iraqi mare once again was giving off clear signals that it was having another overwhelming desire to be brutally raped. 

Somehow the expert spin artists had successfully convinced a majority of the predominantly Christian America that Iraq could not wait to again enjoy the unparalleled masochistic pleasure of having their sovereign nation brutally raped again by the U.S.  Butas before, the mare clearly indicated that it was desperately, without begging, trying to prevent itself from being raped again by the mighty U.S. stallion.  So, once again Saddam Hussein was ruthlessly forced into the no win position of choosing war over disgraceful humiliation.  This was the position the U.S. purposely put him in when it conveniently refused to believe both the leaders of Iraq  and U.N. weapons inspectors that Iraq did not have any WMD that they were momentarily going to use against other nations including the U.S.But why should the U.S. choose to believe both U.N. weapons inspectors and Iraqi leaders when the intelligent, articulate U.S. ally, Tony Blair had almost hysterically explained to his people that the arrival of missiles with lethal war-heads was imminent?In fact, so imminent was the threat that his office emphasized that the weapons of mass destruction could be on their way within 45 minutes. So zealous was Prime Minister Blair to make this wild distortion believable, that he was willing to coerce to suicide one of his trusted and respected weapon’s scientists, Dr. David Kelly, who dared to expose his “sexed-up” distortions to the B.B.C.

Though U.S. voters can be deceived and both houses of the U.S. congress can be deceived, and Britain can be deceived, ALLAH cannot be deceived.  As He clearly observes a larger percentage of the citizens of Iraq being much more innocent than the percentage of the innocent citizens in the U.S., the righteous character of ALLAH reveals that he will not continue to tolerate this brutal rape of an innocent people.  (How can the majority of U.S. citizens dare to claim innocence when they re-elect brutal men to office.  This occurred when they allowed themselves to be shamefully manipulated by calloused schemers such as Carl Rove and the alleged bank swindler, Ahmed Chalabi. This is to name only two among many of the amoral spin artists.) 

To top off the immorality that is happening to Iraq, the ring leader of Iraq’s rape, President George W. Bush, claims a unique communication with the spiritual Father of the Risen Messiah.He publicly proclaimed that he does not need any advice from his own father, the former President.  This is because he communicates directly with the Father above.If this is actually true, we must ask this sincerely religious President why the Father of the man of peace, Jesus, seems to hate Muslims and Christian Iraqis so much by directing him to kill so many of them and make their nation suffer so much?

Did not the ancient Malak Daoud/King David have a person such as our President in mind who appears to blatantly misuse the name of GOD when he wrote these desperate words in Psalm 139.  He portrays himself crying out in anguish from the depths of his heart:

“If only you would slay the wicked, O God!

Away from me, you blood thirsty men!

They speak of you with evil intent;

Your adversaries misuse your name.”

Yes, a living King Hussein could have prevented both wars if Saddam Hussein were the main cause of both wars.But he was not the main cause of either war.The unscrupulous, blood thirsty Bush Administrations were the real problem and this current Bush Administration continues to be the cause of overwhelming suffering for innocent, vulnerable Iraqis.

For example, before the first Gulf War when the first Bush Administration was gathering its coalition to mercilessly attack Saddam Hussein, a true born again Christian and a former U.S. President had a sincere crises of conscience.  Former President Jimmie Carter decided that he had a moral responsibility to violate established U.S. protocol and voice a strong opinion against the standing President concerning a war situation.  Since he was totally against the Administration’s justifications for the impending war against Iraq, he sent a sincere letter to each member of the coalition.From what I remember reading in the respected U.S. Foreign Affairs Journal, he stated his moral and political reasons for his opposition to the war and I presume that he urged the manipulated nations to withdraw from the coalition on moral grounds and on the grounds that the war would cause much more harm than good.I do not believe that any members withdrew from the coalition based on the Carter letter.However, I do note that all Arab nations are conspicuously missing from the few nations who have supported this second unnecessary, immoral, destructive war and occupation.

Please prayerfully consider the following two lists of 20 and 29 factors which primarily paved the way for the two bloody U.S. wars with Iraq.  After critically evaluating them please draw your own conclusions about which nation was the main cause of the two horrible wars which occurred under both father Bush and son Bush.  Also, please factor into your answer the following reality.Since ALLAH knows infinitely more about the cause of the wars than the 49 total factors that I have thought of, which nation and which Administrations do you think ALLAH will hold the most responsible for these two horrible, bloody wars and one bloody occupation?

I have listed three possible options regarding which nation mainly caused these wars or please think of any other option you consider more appropriate.  (I have made no attempt to disguise which option I consider to be the most appropriate.)

Option 1.Both wars were primarily cause by Iraq and its devious leader, Saddam Hussein.

Option 2. Both wars were more or less mutually caused with the responsibility for both wars to be mutually shared.

Option 3.Both wars were pure and simple covertly and deviously manipulated, caused and initiated by the father and son Bush Administrations in response to both geo-political and other enormous pressures from special interest groups. However, through expert media control and manipulation, both wars were made to appear that the ruthless dictator, President of Iraq, was their primary if not sole cause of both bloody wars.

Factors Indicating That The U.S., Not Iraq

Needed The First Gulf War and Manipulated It to Occur

(Note:  A few of these factors have previously been listed in a somewhat different context.)

Factor 1.The U.S. Administration was well aware that Iraq had historical claims on at least some of the land now occupied by the Kuwait nation and that Iraq’s President had openly expressed his resentment over the way that the outside European nations of France and the U.K. had given themselves the authority to arbitrarily divide up Arab land and had unfairly awarded strategically important sea coast territory to a new state it had created; Kuwait.The U.S. was also quite aware that Iraq was seriously considering a limited invasion of its Arab neighbor, Kuwait over this and other issues.

Factor 2.The U.S. had been made aware that Iraq considered that Kuwait’s slant oil drilling in the waters of Kuwait was stealing billions of dollars in potential revenues from Iraq.  The U.S. also had been made aware that Iraq was also considering at least a limited invasion of its Arab neighbor Kuwait over this and other disagreements.

Factor 3.The U.S. was well aware that Iraq considered that Kuwait legitimately owed it billions of dollars for expenses Iraq had recently incurred in its war with their common enemy Iran, which was fought partially for the benefit of Kuwait.  The billions of dollars Kuwait owed Iraq was without even factoring in all the rivers of blood the Iraqi soldiers shed in Kuwait’s behalf.Iraq was well aware that the U.S. realized that Iraq was seriously considering a limited invasion of its Arab neighbor Kuwait over these legitimate war debts and other issues.

Factor 4.Though Iraq definitely knew that the U.S. was well aware of Iraq’s serious grievances with Kuwait and was definitely considering a limited invasion of its neighbor Kuwait, which at the worse would be a limited war with Kuwait and a possible occupation similar to how Israel now occupies Palestine .  But Iraq also knew that the U.S. realized Iraq would not risk war with the U.S., if the U.S. were going to defend Kuwait.  Therefore, Iraq put out diplomatic feelers to the U.S. to use if the U.S had plans to defend Kuwait if Iraq carried through with its obvious plans to invade Kuwait.  So the U.S. deliberately and systematically had three different State Department officials make official announcements stating: “The U.S. has no plan to defend Kuwait.”  So, the U.S was not even subtle in the flagrant and devious way that it manipulated Iraq into a war with the U.S. that Iraq took back-door diplomatic steps to avoid.  Yes, Iraq did believe that it did have serious enough grievances with its Arab neighbor to solve those grievances with an invasion that could lead to a limited war. But it could have led to no war with all of the grievances being solved in the stronger Iraq’s favor.But instead of encouraging negotiations, the U.S. deliberately with malice manipulated a serious situation between two Arab neighbors into a threat to the whole region that was designed to turn out to the geo-political favor of the U.S.  The deception definitely gave the U.S. the desperately wanted and politically needed internationally acceptable pretext to get a stronger foothold in the Middle East through a manipulated war with Iraq. 

Factor 5.The U.S. was certain that Iraq had chemical weapons that it wanted to destroy. But it also wanted to destroy Iraq’s capacity to produce atomic and potential nuclear weapons.

Factor 6.Irresponsibly, U.S. leaders operate our government’s spending on the ridiculous assumption that more money is always available through deficit financing for any project it desires such as a small Middle Eastern war.  But much of the huge U.S. debt is covered by the investments and savings in the U.S. of wealthy Persian Gulf nations like Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the UAE.So the U.S. definitely wanted a greater U.S. troop presence in the region to provide a strong incentive for wealthy Persian Gulf nations to not consider transferring money in the U.S. to European or other funds thus jeopardizing the fragile and vulnerable U.S. financial system.

Factor 7.The U.S. desperately wanted a greater Persian Gulf Military presence to provide security for our long term access to lower cost Persian Gulf oil.Our U.S. transportation system, our industrial base, our broad based economy and our entire way of life would dramatically deteriorate if our Middle East oil supply was seriously interrupted. 

Factor 8.U.S. strategists desperately wanted the war with Iraq in order to prevent any possibility of Iraq gaining control of the majority of Persian Gulf oil.This Iraqi control of oil would severely endanger the entire world economy by controlling both the flow of the oil and the price of the oil.

Factor 9.The U.S. was quite anxious to destroy at least part of Iraq’s military might and part of its economic infrastructure in order to weaken it both militarily and economically so it would be less of a threat especially to our ally Israel but also less of a threat to all Persian Gulf nations.

Factor 10.Whether there was a secret agreement or no agreement, the U.S. had a special ally in the equally devious Hosni Mubarak of Egypt who derived great satisfaction in undermining King Hussein’s peace making efforts with Saddam Hussein.The fork tongued Murbarak actually diverted attention away from the U.S.’s attempting to manipulate the war to occur by blatantly lying to U.S. congressmen and Arab leaders, telling them that King Hussein had a secret agreement with Saddam Hussein to help the King of Jordan gain personally from Iraq successfully conquering Kuwait.

Factor 11.The U.S. deceptively worked covertly to undermine if not sabotage the peace maker King Hussein’s potentially successful efforts to convince Saddam Hussein to withdraw from Kuwait in order to eliminate the need for a war.

Factor 12.After Saddam Hussein was successfully encouraged to invade Kuwait by the U.S., this deceptive nation then did everything it conceivably could to discourage Iraq from withdrawing from Kuwait.  This included negotiating with him to withdraw in such a way so as to maximize his humiliation so that he would not withdraw so that the U.S. wouldcontinue to have an internationally acceptable pretext for war.

Factor 13.After the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the U.S. needed as much public and congressional support as possible to back the war.  A great deal of enthusiasm in behalf of the war effort came from an exceptionally devious and evil means.  A New York Public Relations firm stooped very low to earn big bucks for their stockholders. They designed a public relations scam for the government of Kuwait so that it was certain to help Americans hate Iraqi soldiers and Saddam Hussein even more than the deceptive Bush Administration had already inspired them to hate Iraqis. 

Americans were even more emotionally outraged against Iraq when they personally heard the first hand testimony of a terribly emotionally upset Iraqi woman.  She testified that she had helplessly watched in shock as calloused Iraqi soldiers ripped new born Kuwaiti babies out of their incubators and ruthlessly threw them to the maternity ward floor to die so the Iraqis could steal the incubators and take them back to Iraq.  It was weeks or months later after these reported atrocities had done their damage and the horrible image had been deeply planted in the minds of outraged Americans that the truth came out.  Of course the truth came in quick news releases that most Americans did not become aware of.  The Kuwaiti government had paid a New York firm hundreds of thousands of dollars to invent the story and to coach a Kuwaiti Princess on how to emotionally deliver the story in the most dramatic way possible.  This blatant lie was invented in order to plant seeds of hatred in the American public’s mind so the American government would be justified in taking the most extreme measures against Iraq and its people anytime it suits U.S. needs and purposes.

Factor 14.An additional aspect of the gigantic lie that the Kuwaiti Princess told with the quite willing professional assistance of a U.S. public relations firm is this.The U.S. firm was in it for the money and did not at all care about how unethical and immoral it was to publicly portray ordinary Iraqi soldiers as cruel baby bashers who had no concern for the lives of innocent Muslim babies.So if that one great, damaging and significant lie finally got exposed months after the damage was done, how many other lies did not get exposed which aided the U.S. mindset to have such strong antagonism toward Iraq but have no antagonism against a dishonest, unethical, amoral, immensely effective U.S. propaganda machine?  Yet, they came up with this blatant lie in order to smear with the same broad brush of shame, the entire military of Iraq even though the people of Iraq are known for their nobility and culture. But they deserve our sympathy and understanding and not our blame for having had the bad luck of living in an Iraq ruled by Saddam Hussein and in an Iraq hated by the Bush clan.In a way, their bad luck is similar to the present bad luck of Americans living in an American ruled by President Bush, Dick Cheney and the Republican Neoconservatives who in many ways rival the Baath party in the evil they do for the unfortunate people under their thumbs.Yet, the evil, unscrupulous U.S. Public Relations firm carefully coached the devious Kuwaiti Princess on how to most effectively make her lies convincing in order to produce the maximum hate in the heart of Americans toward the to be pitied Iraqi military.

Factor 15.For the first Bush Administration to have been effective in deceiving both the American public and the international community so that they did not realize that the U.S. virtually manipulated Iraq to invade Kuwait so that we could have our desired war with Iraq, the U.S. needed presidential leadership with the appropriate background, preparation and training.George W. Bush with his C.I.A. leadership experience fit the bill perfectly. And how could anyone be suspicious of a President who came across as sort of a bumbling fool?They just would not conceive of him being the one to pull off one of the most bloody deceptions in American history which certainly rivaled President Lyndon Johnson’s Gulf of Tonkin lies that brought about such a multitude of needless deaths in Vietnam.  So, despite appearing bumbling, the senior Bush had mastered the highly specialized craft of secrecy, diversion, deceit and most importantly, deception.  It is overlooked by most people that he had been the successful head of what at that time was a feared and respected organization, America’s world renowned C.I.A.

Factor 16.Both the Israeli government and the powerful AIPAC (American Israeli Public Affairs Committee) in the U.S. were putting unrelenting pressure on the first Bush Administration to take military action against Iraq well before the manipulated Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.  They each feared that such a large predominantly Muslim Arab nation fully united under such a powerful leader, was an imminent threat to the relatively small, isolated nation of Israel, even though Israel has both nuclear weapons and the potential protection of the U.S.

Factor 17.The multiple tentacles of the powerful military-industrial-complex (which President Eisenhower had so wisely and sternly warned the American Public about its pervasive negative and manipulative influence) with its virtual army of powerful and effective lobbyists were relentlessly pushing the Administration, the lower and upper houses of the Congress, the Pentagon and the State Department to find a pretense for a military confrontation with Iraq in the months previous to Iraq’s manipulated invasion of Kuwait.The following reality cannot be over emphasized.Once Iraq’s hoped for invasion of Kuwait finally occurred which provided the U.S. with its internationally legitimate pretence to militarily intervene, one thing was absolutely certain.There was no way that any of these powerful groups would allow the already war eager Bush Administration to allow President Saddam Hussein to negotiate a peaceful withdrawal from Kuwait after all the strenuous efforts by so many to gain this golden opportunity for this strategically necessary war with Iraq. 

Factor 18.If the first Bush Administration had demonstrated integrity and had done the honorable thing by honestly answering Iraq’s sincere inquiries about whether we would defend Kuwait if Iraq invaded, from the U.S. standpoint, that would have created a double set of serious problems.First of all, we would have lost all the advantages that we would gain from such a war.  Secondly, if Iraq had been discouraged from invading, there would have been no first Persian Gulf war, that could have been a potentially great loss for the U.S. financially.  For if Iraq had cancelled plans for invading Kuwait because they realized that the U.S. would make Iraq pay a heavy price for an invasion both militarily and by much of their vital infrastructure being destroyed, this absence of such a bloody and destructive war would have brought much more stability to the entire Persian Gulf region.But this increased stability would have created an even worse economic situation for the U.S. because it would further worsen the already problematic U.S. export-import deficit.With such increased stability we would lose out on selling vast amounts of expensive, military weapons and war supplies to the vulnerable nations of the Persian Gulf region. Regional stability is a dreaded enemy of the often greedy U.S. weapons salesmen.They are dependent on a certain amount of regional paranoia when they are trying to persuade wealthy Persian Gulf Princes and especially Saudi Princes to negotiate huge, expensive weapons purchases for which the middle men receive excessive commissions.  If these opportunistic middlemen cannot convince their oil rich governments that there are tangible threats to their nations due to regional instability, their government’s responsible financial officers will not provide the money to make these huge, expensive purchases.This significant loss of sales for the U.S. arms merchants then causes the dangerously gigantic export-import deficit or balance of trade deficit as it is known, to be even more perilous for our nation.So once more, war, not peace, regional tension, not regional stability, make a significant contribution to helping relieve a precarious and pressing U.S. economic problem and provide badly needed jobs for those employed in the arms industry.

Factor 19.A truly noble super power, which the U.S. proclaims to the world that it is, is serious about maintaining peace in the Middle East.So, if the U.S. had truly been serious about preventing rivers of blood from being shed in a needless war in Iraq, it would have acted quite differently when there were unmistakable signals that Iraq was giving serious consideration to invading Kuwait.  A worthy superpower operating without devious hidden agendas, when it received word of the specific, serious grievances that Iraq was having with its small neighbor Kuwait, would not have immediately commenced making secret plans on how it could make certain that the grievance were not  solved diplomatically through negotiations.  For that superpower to instead work with stealth behind the scenes to nourish the situation into a full scale war in order to accomplish its own geopolitical goals, exposes that superpower to be a Machiavellian tyrant.  It convincingly proves that it is not the benevolent superpower which it announces to the world that it is.

When the U.S. became aware that Iraq had the following three serious, specific grievances with Kuwait, it had a regional humanitarian responsibility to make certain that appropriate outside Arab negotiators or other agreed upon mediators, become immediately involved in taking whatever steps were necessary in order to resolve the situation peacefully.

The Three Serious Iraqi Grievances Which Required Diplomatic Resolution

Iraqi leaders were convinced that they had the historic right to possess at least parts of Kuwait because of their conviction that the U.K. and France had swindled them out of their rightful land when they had arbitrarily drawn up the map for the Arab nations of what land each nation would possess.

Iraqi leaders were convinced that oil rich Kuwait owed Iraq billions of dollars that it was reluctant to pay.  The money was supposedly owed as reasonable payment to Iraq to help cover billions of dollars, not to mention rivers of blood which Iraq had expended in its long and costly war with their common enemy of Iran because the war was fought by Iraq partially in behalf of Kuwaiti and Saudi interests. 

Iraq wanted Kuwait to pay it more billions of dollars to compensate for the oil revenues which Iraq was losing due to slant oil drilling by Kuwait in disputed waters between Kuwait and Iraq.

Therefore, due to these three specific reasons as well as Iraq having other serious concerns, U.S. officials had been made aware that Iraq was seriously considering an invasion of its smaller Arab Muslim neighbor, Kuwait.So senior U.S. leaders were well aware that they had a moral and international responsibility to initiate other more honorable and constructive options than war regarding Iraq’s significant concerns.But, in order to achieve certain of its own long range geopolitical goals, U.S. leaders made an evil, myopic, selfish choice.They not only chose to ignore the need to heal these festering grievances, but they deliberately, with malice of forethought, converted these negotiable concerns into a savage bloodbath and almost into a regional conflagration. 

Factor 19.Instead of the first Republican Bush Administration serving the Arabs of the Middle East who supply oil to much of the world with the integrity they deserve, this group of dissemblers have undoubtedly surpassed certain infamous Israeli leaders with their sophisticated ability to lie, practice deceit and excel in deception. Furthermore, the elder Bush appeared to be contemptuous of his sacred responsibility to ALLAH to set a positive example of integrity for at least his eldest son.But the father did prove to be an exceptionally effective teacher for his son who is now the U.S. President.It is much too obvious to many Americans and to others that the son did learn from his cunning father the complicated craft of deceit and deception.

Factor 20.In the midst of all the brazen lying that enabled the U.S. to lure Iraq to invade Kuwait, and to be unable to withdraw once they invaded, was this one lie that was sort of humorously exposed for being the grandiose lie that it was.  The Administration continued to vehemently deny that it had any knowledge in advance that the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait was going to occur.Despite their insistent denials, their un-suppressable craving for Pizza exposed each of them for being what they were:highly paid professional prevaricators.

According to a major Washington D.C. daily published soon after the invasion, there is a popular pizza delivery restaurant from which the majority of the Bush associates orders their take-out pizza on the nights they stay at their offices late to watch late breaking news events on television.  On the night that no one was supposedly expecting any invasion to occur, so many Washington D.C. insiders were staying late to watch the “secret surprise invasion”, that they ordered pizzas to eat while they watched.Consequently, they brought great joy to the staff of the pizza delivery restaurant.  The “secret” invasion of Kuwait enabled the take-out restaurant to set a new record for the number of pizzas they delivered to the totally surprised staff.

This is just one more sad commentary on that Administrations lack of ability to tell the truth about anything.  It is indeed desperately sad however, that these supposedly moral men placed so much higher value on having their stomachs full of pizza than on taking responsible actions to make certain that valuable Arab Kuwaiti and Iraqi Muslims and Christians did not have their lives destroyed due to a preventable war.But ALLAH truly does take note of each wicked deed done against His precious human beings who inhabited Kuwait and Iraq.  Even when others have long forgotten these horrible U.S. crimes at commission and omission, He will never forget.  Nor will ALLAH ever forget the families of American military personnel who were deceived into sending their loved ones to be violently sacrificed to a Strategic Idol of Blood in the first of two contrived wars with Iraq if they were not virtual rapes of that predominantly Muslim nation.