Here we go, the Rothschild's Celts getting excited about nothing

.
.
.
.
On cue, Admiral Mullen the son of a Hollywood PR agent is getting excited about nothing.

What was that Great American Celt who said, "Lies, damn lies and statistics"

Getting excited about Iraq NOW which is NEAR the drawn down timeline of all American troops by December 2011, and where the Iraqi government isn't too keen for ANY FURTHER EXTENSION of American troops in the country for obvious reasons............is very coincidental, suspicious and cynical.

Iraq was/is a war zone since America occupied the country in 2003 with 1,400,000 civilian deaths; 5,000,000 internal and external Iraqi refugees (War Crimes, Genocide, and crimes against humanity)

The massive infrastructure destruction of the country;

The country divided into 3 separate ethnic enclaves for the first time in history;

Black water/Xe mercs running amok;

Israeli security embedded with the Americans running amok;

In a country where the British security were running amok;

The American security running amok "The El Salvador option" against Iraq for doing 9/11, for having CIA Saddam as leader, for developing WMD's and threatening Israel; and for being dirty filthy sand niggers/towel heads.

In a country where $40-50 billion of public funds have disappeared unaccounted for with American crooks in the security taking the loot to the Gulf and depositing the money in banks there.

In a country where vast amounts of Iraqi oil has been exported to Israel, and other countries without any of the petro-$ proceeds going to the Iraqi government.

In a country where the USA arms and bribes the Sunni insurgents not to fight the USA.

In a country which is Failed State number 7 thanks to the USA.

In a country which is at the bottom of the Corruption Index list thanks to the USA.

In a country that has severe political corruption.

In a country that ran Abu Ghariab under America's watch and involvement.

If you have done a little bit of social engineering with the pro-Iran Shia's in power for the first time....and the Sunnis out of power after 1300 years, wouldn't there be a little bit of friction from such a move?

Admiral Mullen buddy buddy is a little bit late with his "concern" for the statistics of rising violence in Iraq isn't he?

THIS OPEN SIMPLE BASIC BULLSHIT OF BLAMING EVERYBODY ELSE FOR THE PROBLEMS CREATED BY THE USA HAS GOT TO STOP.


______________________

Mullen Twists Iraq Stats to Implicate Iran

No proof offered for Iran's alleged involvement

by Margaret Griffis, at antiwar.com

A month ago the Obama administration was suggesting Iran was behind an increase in attacks against U.S. troops. Giving very little evidence other than the assurance that Iran was backing militiamen in Iraq, U.S. officials seemed otherwise unable to explain why Iraq was suddenly becoming unstable again. A sudden upswing of U.S. fatalities did seem to point to something. Or did it?

Only a month later U.S. officials have now declared a dizzyingly quick success in a campaign to bring those figures back down. While an increase of 750 percent in one month seems like a lot — it comes out to 13 more deaths than May — several of the June attacks involved multiple deaths. Early in the month, five soldiers were killed in a single mortar attack. Was this better weaponry coupled with more attacks, or just plain luck on the part of insurgents? May had only two fatalities for the whole month, but April had clocked in at 11 deaths, while March registered only two. So was June even a significant statistical anomaly, let alone the result of intensified Iranian meddling?

It’s hard to know for sure — the "evidence" of Tehran’s involvement was pretty flimsy to begin with, but just as quickly as the perennial Iranian problem resurfaced, it was mysteriously re-corked. Admiral Mike Mullen, while on an unannounced visit to Iraq today, declared that the United States had beaten this mini-surge in violence through diplomacy with Iran and military operations in Iraq. Unfortunately, all the new declarations were as vague as ever, so it is unclear why exactly the casualty figures fell. It is true, though, that U.S. casualties dropped to only five deaths. Still, three months in 2011 saw even smaller numbers. And Iraqi casualties in July remained high even as the American toll fell dramatically.

More troubling than the usual fuzzy accusations is the fact that the United States is still participating in military operations in Iraq despite the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops almost a year ago. Over the weekend, one such operation went awry in Rufayat, a small town near Balad.

The American public has grown all too accustomed to collateral damage in Iraq, but one detail of this failed raid is particularly chilling. A son of a Sunni tribal elder Sheikh Hameed Hassan reported seeing his father handcuffed and led away from the house only to be found dead later, still handcuffed.

It is unclear whether American or Iraqi troops took the sexagenarian sheikh, but the raid echoed a controversial incident in Jubail last September, just as Operation New Dawn — the "advise and assist" operation — was in its infancy. There, U.S. troops arrived in helicopters to assist Iraqi soldiers. A suspect was sought, but civilians were killed and handcuffed at the whim of Iraqi forces — and quickly forgotten.

Separately today, another U.S.-involved raid drew the ire of one legislator who called on Iraq’s government to end operations and detentions involving U.S. troops. While the claim of beaten women and stolen money in Nukheilat seems on its face a bit exaggerated, it might not be. Last week, U.S. troops conducted raids in another southern town. Could events such as these be the true seed of anti-American attacks and not Iran?

Meanwhile, the question of whether U.S. troops will stay in Iraq remains unanswered. Iraq Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki promises that lawmakers will make that decision soon, but he has also hinted previously that U.S. military "trainers" can stick around without parliamentary approval. The U.S. State Department will also have its own contractor army, so more American deaths and botched raids are likely in the future, regardless of who is nominally running the show.

The folly of Iraq and the decline of America.

Obviously the attack on Iraq was about ameliorating Israeli paranoia, historically embedded by their Rabbis, and reinforced by personal experience dating back 3,000 years to the time of the Assyrians. These are psychopaths who stew in their past woes real or imagined----its called Judaism, whilst others less charitable prefer to call it the North African cult from hell. Its blatant paranoia and siege mentality keeps them united, and going.

Matters didn't help when Saddam let be known that he was a modern day reincarnation of Saladin-----(usual harmless basic Third World populism) , and by 1990, two years after the Gulf war with Iran had ended, he still maintained an armed force of 1,000,000 men with 4,000 artillery pieces and 6,000 tanks. Still spending 25% of the GDP on defense----defacto war footing. The Israelis were suspicious. By attacking Iraq's nuclear reactor Israel had entered into an undeclared war scenario with Iraq from 1981. The same with Syria now. The Israelis have an obsession with Muslim countries in the vicinity amassing too many tanks, and of course the other issue of concern to them, nuclear programs.

So what are the Israelis going to do now, when a dozen or so IAEA approved countries which are Muslim, embark on comprehensive nuclear programs---Turkey, Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Bangladesh...............the unintended result no less of the Jewish declared conquest for empire which has artificially pushed up oil prices to unacceptable levels and so poor Third World Muslim countries seek alternative cheaper forms of fuel as a consequence.

Israel is not The USA, and the USA is not Israel. Israel does however control two key institutions in the USA; the media and American politics. So this Jewish paranoia, stated above, was able to be translated/articulated into action on the ground against Iraq by the USA even though:

1) Iraq was an ally of the USA.

2) Saddam was a American picked agent from the 1960's, 'Out with the apprentice, and in with the master' popular saying in Iraq since 2003.

3) Iraq was good for American business in a healthy commercial way, and not as now in the corrupt invade/destroy/build in closed bids military/industrial 'commercial' way which benefit the few to the detriment of the overall economy.

4) Saddam defacto indirectly asked for American permission to attack Kuwait in 1990, which the Americans deceitfully gave.

Obviously Americans with their media and political system subverted have problems identifying whats good for their country, and what is good for Israel. The two countries interests aren't mutual. The inevitable result-----a rapid and accelerating American decline militarily and economically.

Jews are not good for Israel either. Come to think of it, I sometimes wonder why there was no Jewish state for the better part of 2000 years. Was it really all just bad luck? Or why they have been expelled from 79 countries over three millennium; from some countries several times. Or the peculiar history of Israel since 1948---as in the real history from non-Israeli sources.

Oil prices stand $110 a barrel, and could well go even higher to $200 a barrel by the end of the decade. In Iraq the 'real' price of a barrel if you factor in the security cost could be anything from $500--$800. Makes economic or strategic sense?---of course not. The ongoing war itself is fueling the spiraling oil prices. Better to have just done business with their ally and puppet Saddam Hussein, who at least wasn't massacring that many Iraqis as an absolute dictator. Then maybe oil prices could have been between $15-20 a barrel as in the mid--1990's.

So whats the future outcome, for Iraq and America? The Jews aren't going to back down, moderation, circumspection, retrospection isn't their forte (live for the moment as there isn't an afterlife---their motto), and in fact starting from the 'doves' like Peres, they want more ! and more! and more!

Which means in America a gradual drive towards dictatorship for absolute control of the country and its resources for their agenda's---hence the massive gulag program; gun ban program; police state program; fear and obey program; multiculturalism program---to weaken the WASP target group; dumbing down program..................its not going to be a pretty site in America, aka Soviet Union under Uncle Joe Stalin (Joseph David Jewison). There will be no shortage of dumb amoral WASP's to front their program's as there were no shortage of ethnic Christian Slav's fronting their program in the Jewish Bolshevik revolution from 1918, which killed 40-50 million of them. Clinton, McCain and of course CFR Obama........Hagee.....Roberts...

The Jews get paid for one fake holocaust but don't get to pay for a real kosher one against the Soviet people by them. Who controls the media?

In Iraq, 1 million dead, or 2 million since 1991, and 4 million internal and external refugees. Maybe a few more millions will die before the Jews are done---and the Eretz Israel project becomes patently obvious as a no can do.

_________________________________________________

American Confused Conservative

By Zymphora.

http://xymphora.blogspot.com/

Useful but fundamentally flawed article from the American Conservative by Robert Bryce on the amount of oil being used by the American military in killing the innocent civilians of Iraq, and the fact that almost none of it is coming from Iraq. We all remember how the neocons insisted that all that Iraqi oil was going to pay for the war and the occupation and the rebuilding (for the real world, see here and, taking into account the unreliable source, (Oh pleez!) here). There is a slow dawning that it is the cost of the fuel used by the Americans in Iraq - both the sheer quantity of it and the fact that the military has to source it at ultra-premium prices - that has led to an increase in the price of oil. Of course, the main reason for the price increase has been the fact that oil has been denominated in increasingly worthless American dollars. American Dollars are increasingly worthless due to the fact that the U. S. government had to finance the war by borrowing money it didn't have on a massive scale, thus permanently destroying the complicated mechanism by which the American economy soared on the basis of borrowed money, and leading directly to the current sub-prime crisis (aka, New Great Depression) and the plummeting American Dollar (aka, American Peso). The system of financing American consumerism was so finely calibrated that it simply couldn't take the competition for new borrowed money required by the American Treasury to pay for the Iraq war, and the house of cards came tumbling down.

The article is flawed for two reasons:

1. it refuses to abandon the idea that the war was fought for oil, even when everything in the article conclusively proves that it could not possibly have been fought for oil; and
2. it falls back on a no less silly argument - which is largely that of the American isolationist Right - that you can no longer control resources by fighting wars, based on the conservative view of the supremacy of international trade and markets.

The two issues are connected, and the connection shows how the American isolationist Right is no better than the neo-cons. (****Blogger's note: I disagree here with this point.......at least 'American firsters' or the Founding Fathers Principled Groups won't do silly unnecessary wars for a tiny country in the Levant. The so called 'Isolationist Right' which almost sounds like a dirty slur, whilst perhaps theoretically wrong on one point, are never the less broadly right on what is historically good for America, and have their loyalties in the right place. Americans do have options, and this doesn't have to be slomo Jewish train ride to hell. Its not all doom and gloom, and ONE of these options is Ron Paul. Now all we need is a leak of the 'song bird' files asap. And for the ordinary Americans to see the space cadet as he really is; a Zion puppet who passes on the baton mid term to Lieberman.)

We all know that the war wasn't directly about oil: it was a War For The Jews. We are also seeing a great danger that the next American Presidential election will be fought between two candidates for the More Wars For The Jews Party, a direct result of the failure to acknowledge the real reason for the attack on Iraq by the American chattering classes.

Falling back on market explanations won't help. The market doesn't explain years of Saudi cooperation, and the decision in the last few years that Saudi cooperation will become much more selective. It doesn't explain why every major oil company in the world that isn't associated with the Anglo-American Empire is getting hugely lucrative deals in Iran (and elsewhere in the Middle East). The rest of the world is completely fed up with Americans squandering their wealth on Wars For The Jews, partly because of the extreme immorality of these wars, and partly because of their extreme stupidity. People who have cooperated with the inevitability of American strength for decades have decided that they no longer can do business with people who are so stupid they can't even grasp their own basic self-interest. Oil development contracts are being awarded on the basis of ideology. Markets have very little to do with it.

The article is a classic example of what happens when you try to deal with a subject while avoiding the only issue that matters.

Why Did the US Invade Iraq?

By Zymphora.

Jim Lobe is slightly tentative in considering the question "Why Did the US Invade Iraq?", and settles on a combination of 'imperial reach' and, of course, Israel. He rightly rejects the light-Zionist theory of oil, which is practically an insult to the intelligence. I think that the sales pitch crafted by the Zionists to some American leaders did probably include an aspect of imperial reach, as that fitted into the 'end of history' ideas made popular in the 90s by some of the dumber American Empire academics, who felt that the U. S. had a once-in-a-lifetime chance to take over the entire world after the fall of the Soviet Union. The sales pitch was a trick, which is obvious to everybody now. The invasion of Iraq was just another War For The Jews.