Click or Tap Icons to Share! Thank you!

Authored By  :
Published On :
Last Updated :

NOTE: This article or series has not been updated recently. As such, it may possibly contain some outdated information, and/or ideas and beliefs which I no longer embrace, or which have changed to some degree.



Returning to the political angle of our discussion, as I said a moment ago, regardless of whether he was loved or hated, it doesn't change the fact that Saddam Hussein was nevertheless the globally-recognized leader of Iraq; and Iraq was, and is, an internationally-recognized sovereign nation. Having said that, everything that George Bush has done in regard to Iraq and Saddam Hussein since the war began, has been contrary to International Law; a law which Mr. Bush claims to recognize and uphold. Mr. Bush has unilaterally acted contrary to the general consensus of the world body of nations, which clearly agreed that the UN weapons inspectors, lead by Mr. Hans Blix, should have been given more time to complete their tasks. But as we all know, or should know, that is exactly what Mr. Bush and his team feared the most. Not only did they fight against the inspectors from the very beginning, by showing no faith in them, by trying to discredit their level of expertise, and by criticizing their slow results, but they were also afraid that in the end, Mr. Blix might issue a final report in which Saddam Hussein would be cleared of all charges; in which case the sanctions would be lifted; and Iraq would be welcomed back into full fellowship with the world body of nations, with Saddam Hussein still in power.

Mr. Bush could not take that chance, because he had his own agenda; which as in previous instances, was contrary to the agenda of the United Nations. Thus, President Bush chose to huff and puff and threaten, and apply pressure to the UN, until it finally backed down, the UNMOVIC team left Iraq, and Mr. Bush was allowed to start his war, with Tony Blair faithfully bringing up the rear as he seems to enjoy doing. Well, if you follow the news closely, then you will already know that Mr. Blair has been taking just as much heat back in Great Britain, as President Bush has in the United States, regarding their deceptive game. Blair deserves it for having foolishly followed Bush into an illegal, unprovoked war.

As I have told our mailing list members before, the United States of America has basically adopted a policy of "Shoot now and ask questions later". That seems to be the essence of Mr. Bush's foreign policy in regard to Iraq, and it is a very dangerous policy; particularly because the leaders of several other nations have since publicly adopted the very same policy. They figure, "If America can do it, so can we". For example, following the Bali attack, Prime Minister John Howard publicly stated that Australia reserves the right to strike preemptively, in order to save Australian lives. Israel has likewise adopted a similar policy with its well- publicized assassinations of Palestinian militant leaders and operatives. In fact, I was just reading yesterday where the Deputy Defense Minister of Israel, Zeev Boim, publicly stated that the blind spiritual leader and founder of Hamas, Sheik Ahmed Yassin, is "marked for death", and had better hide underground; which was obviously a reference to how Saddam Hussein was hiding in a hole in the ground at the time of his capture.

So as you can plainly see, America's leader has in fact set an extremely dangerous precedent, which others are eager to follow. He has opened the proverbial Pandora's Box. If wars can now be initiated based upon mere suspicions and fears, without any real clear-cut proof of guilt, or any evidence of an "imminent threat" and major loss of life, then this world is in very serious trouble, and may God help us all! Sadly, the questions are now finally being asked, but it is a little too late. The war has already been waged, a beast has been let loose, and the so-called "evidence" has been found to be bogus.

The situation is clearly spiraling out of control in Iraq with each passing day, regardless of what the White House may say. Remember; they are in damage control mode and will not tell you the truth. Even as I've been proofreading this series in order to add it to our website, shocking events continue to occur in Iraq. Major American news agencies are now reporting that early this morning, Sunday, another bomb attack occurred right near the main gate of the American occupation headquarters, which is located in the Republic Palace Hotel, on the bank of the Tigris River, right across from central Baghdad. They are currently reporting at least twenty-three people dead; two or more of them Americans, and the rest Iraqis; as well as at least sixty people wounded; and those figures may possibly change as more information is made available. This attack now raises American casualties in Iraq to over five hundred,; and there is no doubt in my mind that Mr. Bush is deeply concerned.

The minute that L. Paul Bremer III leaves Iraq for a few days, the Iraqi defenders strike right at the heart of the American operations. It is obvious that as long as these kinds of deadly attacks are occurring, there is no way that sovereignty can safely be handed over to the Iraqis by June, as the Americans are promising to do. In fact, they continue to say that the transfer of power will occur on that date, in spite of this most recent attack. As a result of these kinds of attacks, it seems to me that the United States is stuck in Iraq until true peace can be achieved. Mr. Bush has unwittingly trapped himself in a quagmire, and there is no way out at this point, without him looking like a coward, as well as a traitor to the Iraqis. Bush knows that he cannot promise them a new nation, peace, democracy and freedom, and then just run off and abandon Iraq -- as he obviously did with Afghanistan -- when the going gets rough; even if the 2004 election is drawing closer by the day. He needs to stay the course and fulfill his stated objectives to the Iraqis, even if those objectives were merely a cloak of deception.

Earlier, I rhetorically asked you why, when there are so many ruthless dictators around the world who oppress their people, did the United States of America choose to target Mr. Hussein? Allow me to ask you another pertinent question now; and again, the answer is rather obvious. Why did the USA, without any concrete proof, target Saddam Hussein over the WMD issue, when there are clearly other countries around the world, which do unmistakably possess nuclear technology, and some of which have outright refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty? More specifically, while Israel has never made a public declaration regarding its nuclear status, everyone in-the-know realizes that she does possess such technology. That being the case, why has she never been taken to task by the United States, to give an account of her nuclear inventory? Even though Israel refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the United States just turns a blind eye to the whole affair!

As I said, the answer is rather obvious. Unless it's playing hardball for some particular reason, such as because it wants a concession from one of its allies, the American Government does not normally make it a practice to openly embarrass it nuclear-owning friends; it only likes to expose and attack those nations which it doesn't like, such as George Bush's so-called "axis of evil". It will simply turn a blind eye to the misdeeds of its friends. Why does Israel have the right to possess nuclear weapons, while other nations such as Iran, North Korea, Libya, etc., do not? Is Israel such a peaceful country? Not by any means! Can you see the prejudice and the preferential treatment being given here to one of America's friends and allies?

If the elite nuclear club which formulated the NPT is really sincere about wanting to see the world completely rid of nuclear weapons, shouldn't it begin by cleaning up its own house first? Shouldn't it be leading by a clear example? How can it tell Iraq, Iran, India, Pakistan, Libya, North Korea or any other nation for that matter, to cease and desist, when they, the nuclear elite, are sitting upon the largest and deadliest nuclear, chemical and biological stockpiles in the entire world? I am reminded of some of our Lord's words when He exposed the hypocrisy of the Jewish Scribes and Pharisees of His day. Jesus said:

". . . The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not."


While some of you may not realize this, even the nuclear agreements between the United States and Russia are a big joke, and are really only meant for public consumption. Why? Because while both sides claim that they will cut back their nuclear arsenals by so many warheads by a certain year, the truth of the matter is that they are not really destroying them, they are only "decommissioning" them. In other words, if a moment of need arrived, the order could easily be given to reactivate them.

So why is it that nations like the USA and Russia don't lead by example by completely eliminating their nuclear weapons? Again, the answer is rather obvious. First, as I've already stated, it is their very nuclear stockpiles which allow them to retain their positions as the "kings of the mountain". In addition to this, in spite of all of the public back-slapping the Odd Couple has done before the cameras, the truth of the matter is that they really don't trust each other as much as they would like everyone to think they do. Considering the Texas oilman's background, and the ex-KGB man's history, is it really any wonder? Deep-seated beliefs and mistrust die hard.

And one final question which I would like to direct to our American civilian readers: Have you personally really ever felt threatened by Saddam Hussein? Have you personally ever woke up in the morning, shaking in your boots, and feeling like Saddam Hussein was going to blow your house off the map at any minute? I didn't think so. Considering that Saddam had highly-inaccurate SCUD missiles over a dozen years ago, which could barely make it to Israel, and that not one shred of evidence has ever surfaced to suggest that he possessed anything much more advanced than that, doesn't the idea of feeling threatened by Mr. Hussein in the continental USA, literally thousands of miles away from Iraq, seem rather ludicrous and far-fetched? Yet many of you agreed to Bush's war for that very reason. You believed the big lie. Shame on you! What in the world were some of you thinking?

Given all of the truth which has been revealed in the last few months, you can't even fall back on the fear that Saddam might have sold part of his nuclear arsenal to al-Qaeda. Why? Because not only did he not possess any working WMD himself, but as we have already seen, Saddam clearly had no desire or intention to even work with al-Qaeda; and Osama bin Laden had similar thoughts regarding working with Saddam, even though his people had approached him about doing exactly that. They had two different agendas. Case dismissed!

Now, it has occurred to me that some of you might possibly pose the question, "What if someday down the road, American forces in Iraq do discover Saddam's hidden nuclear, chemical and biological arsenals? Then what would you say? Would you take back everything you have written here?

Well, you know, I have given a lot of thought to this entire issue since it first began; and I have considered that kind of scenario. I would respond in the following manner. First of all, everything I have stated here is based upon official government and mass media releases. I haven't just drawn it out of thin air or made it up. The opinions I have expressed here are the result of factual information which any person can find on the Internet with a little bit of effort. Now, if any of that information is inaccurate in any way, or even outright wrong, then I cannot be held accountable for that. I can only formulate my opinions based upon the information that is available.

That issue aside, my view is this: If after some nine months of searching, they were finally able to find Saddam Hussein hiding in a small hole in the ground right under their noses, -- please note that they had searched near that site several times previously -- then I would think that they would have even less difficulty finding, in President Bush's own words, "thousands of tons of chemical agents", as well as thousands of "liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents", if they really existed. I mean, being a human being, Saddam Hussein possessed the ability to remain mobile. If US Forces got too close to him, he could just move to a new location. As you may recall, according to the American government and news sources, Saddam was supposedly changing location every few hours in order to avoid being caught; yet after a number of failed attempts, they finally caught up with him after receiving an important credible tip.

On the other hand, we are talking about "thousands of tons of chemical agents", and thousands of "liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents". That material would take up a considerable amount of space, as would a nuclear arsenal, or equipment to build a nuclear stockpile; and it could not just get up and walk away whenever the American forces got too close to it. Furthermore, with the Americans crawling all over the country, neither could it be secretly moved by the Iraqis. As I noted earlier, even the American officials stated that it was impossible for the Iraqis to have simply spirited such a huge amount of material out of their country, without the Bush Administration knowing about it. They have surveillance satellites, and other technologies which would have aided them in discovering any mischief on the ground.

In short, if it really existed in such large quantities as had been claimed by Mr. Bush, if at all, then it would have to have remained in the same location where the Iraqis had hidden it before the invasion began. In spite of months of searching, the UNMOVIC team found nothing. In spite of the American military forces searching since May of last year, they have likewise found absolutely nothing. They can find one man, Saddam Hussein, like a needle hidden in a haystack, yet they cannot locate thousands of tons, and thousands of liters of WMD, even though they possess all kinds of hi-tech equipment which is specifically designed to detect such things. Granted, Iraq is a large country, and there is a lot of desert out there which needs to be searched; but by this time, you would surely think that the UN, or the USA, would have found something; at least the tip of the iceberg; but they haven't. Are you starting to get the picture?

Perhaps we need to ask ourselves: Why is all of this info coming out right now, which is an embarrassment to the Bush Administration? Personally, I am beginning to wonder if it wasn't planned in advance. It is just a personal speculation on my part, but maybe it is true; you never know. What I mean is this: The White House knew all along that they were highly exaggerating the truth, and deceiving both the world and the American public; but they were willing to play the game if it would give them the opportunity to invade Iraq and take down Saddam Hussein. But they also knew that the time would come when they would have to slowly let the cat out of the bag, and reveal the truth, because such things eventually leak out anyway. It would obviously be risky business; but if they had already accomplished their primary goal in Iraq, as they now have, by taking down Saddam, then it would be time to slowly start taking themselves off the hook, before it got too close to the 2004 election; and that seems to be exactly what they may have been doing over the past several months. They seem to be unwinding the deceptive web they wove many months ago.

Carefully consider the following facts.

Contrary to popular perception, President Bush clarifies that Saddam Hussein cannot be directly linked to the 9-11 attacks. A few months pass by, and then Colin L. Powell announces that there was never any hard evidence which might substantiate a connection between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaeda network. Next a document is discovered in Saddam's possession, which conclusively proves that he was hesitant to work with Osama bin Laden. Finally, we are informed that bin Laden likewise had no interest in joining forces with Saddam Hussein. Can you see a subtle pattern of events? The primary two reasons which were put forth for going to war are slowly being destroyed. We are slowly but surely being weaned from the deception, as if a pre-determined script is intentionally being followed. Maybe I am just a crazy conspiracy theorist with a good imagination; or maybe there is some truth to what I have just proposed. We may never know.

The only other alternative, is to accept that Mr. Bush truly believed that the intelligence he was receiving was accurate, and was therefore convinced that Saddam really did possess tons of WMD. Now if that is indeed the case, then the fact that none have been found to date, in spite of the fact that almost two thousand qualified people from both the UN and the USA have been looking for them for many months now, makes Mr. Bush look rather stupid; and it also makes his intelligence people look very inept. Personally, I have a difficult time accepting this alternative. As the president, I think that Bush knew the facts all along; and that he went along with the deception from the beginning; and may have even put it in motion, as Paul O'Neill stated: Bush gave the order, and his people found the way to carry it out.

One thing that is true, is that the election is not that far away; so if Bush and his team did want to take themselves off the hook, now would certainly be the time to do it. Please remember what I said earlier in part one. The American public has a short memory span and a tendency to forgive and forget. In spite of everything that Bush and his cronies have done to deceive the American people into accepting his war, there are still a lot of people who like Mr. Bush, and who would, and will, vote for him in November. If the Bush Administration is truly weaning the American public from the deception right now, I wouldn't be surprised if they take it so far as to one day say, "Oops! Sorry! We goofed! Our intelligence was wrong. Saddam never had any WMD as we supposed; but it is a good thing that we got rid of him anyway, because he was a tyrant to his own people". Given the nature of the American people, I think a lot of them would accept that and not blink an eye, and still vote for Bush this coming November.

To complete my answer regarding the possibility that they may still find some WMD in Iraq, allow me to add these final thoughts. Given that the UNMOVIC team never found anything; given that the US teams have never found any WMD after nine months of searching for them; given that the USA has even begun to pull out part of their search teams; and given that the American military has had so much time to do whatever they want in Iraq beyond the eyes of international scrutiny, it would require a lot to convince me personally, of any evidence which might surface at this late date. My skeptical nature would cause me to strongly wonder if it might not have been planted; either to save the election for George Bush, or perhaps for America to save face before the world. Quite frankly, I don't think that they even really care what the world thinks. They didn't care when they illegally attacked and invaded Iraq, did they? They took down Saddam Hussein as planned, so they got what they wanted. Whether or not they will get the rest still remains to be seen. As I said before, over five hundred American casualties, and still rising, must surely worry President Bush. He may have his Viet Nam.

Mr. Bush still has nine months left to soften up the American public, and make them forget his deceptions; that is, if the Democrats will let him, which I doubt. They are going to be hitting the president hard in every way that they can. If you read the news a lot as I do, then you can see signs of the Bush re-election strategy everywhere. For example, have you noticed how they've been working really hard to tell us that the status of the American economy is improving? Don't be surprised if that kind of talk continues all the way up to the election. Unemployment and a weak economy are some of the things which are dragging down Bush's points in all the opinion polls; although I personally don't put much faith in those polls, being as they are so manipulated, and based on such a small percentage of the general populace.

Have you also noticed how Mr. Bush has been wooing his big rich friends with the controversial tax cuts? Or how about the fact that he is also wooing the much-needed Christian Right with his talk of having a marriage clause amended to the Constitution of the United States? Of course, you will also notice that he has not made a firm commitment to do that, but has only more or less threatened to do it, if the gay and lesbian community continues to push for legalized marriage for gays and lesbians. Yet at the same time, in a recent remark, Mr. Bush also seemed to be straddling the fence, because while he stated that he is of the opinion that marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman, he also said that people can do what they can do legally, as long as it is according to the laws of their state. So Bush is really sending mixed signals there.

And don't forget the Latinos. Oh yes, Bush is trying to win them as well. What do you think giving temporary work visas to millions of illegal migrant workers from Mexico is all about, if not winning the vote of America's large Mexican population? Between that, and Bush's recent trip to Mexico, plus the fact that Mexican-Americans seem to idolize General Sanchez, the man who is leading the forces in Iraq, Bush may very well have the Latino vote in his pocket.

The new urgency with which the Bush Administration is trying to turn over sovereignty to the Iraqis is another sign that they are becoming nervous as the election draws closer. For months and months, Mr. Bush snubbed the United Nations and the opinion of the world; but as I stated earlier, now that rebuilding Iraq is proving to be a lot more difficult of a challenge, with the Kurds making demands, and the Shiites making demands, and the Sunnis making demands, and American soldiers still dying over there, the President is suddenly appealing to Kofi Annan and the United Nations, to step in and offer some assistance with the upcoming caucus-style elections. However, until now, Mr. Annan has been rather cautious regarding intervening at this particular moment.

The UN Secretary General's concern seems to be three-fold. First of all, as a result of the devastating attack on the UN headquarters in Baghdad this past summer, which, as you may recall, left twenty-two people dead, he is obviously concerned about the continuing security situation. The fact that American soldiers, Iraqis, and personnel from other countries continue to die, certainly doesn't help to build his confidence. Second, Mr. Annan is concerned about the very nature of the electoral process being proposed by the Bush Administration. Not only is it very complex, but the bottom line, as the Iraqis understand, is that it will not be a true democratic election by any means. Thus, Mr. Annan is hesitant to offer UN involvement at this time, as it will appear as if he is rubber-stamping the American deception. Third, Mr. Annan does not wish for the United Nations to be used by the Bush Administration as another tool for them to win the presidential race; and that is exactly how it would appear, were the UN to concede to Mr. Bush's wishes. As you may have heard, just a few days ago, there was a very large protest in the southern Iraqi city of Basra -- a city which is mentioned in the Scriptures by the way -- in which tens of thousands of Iraqis participated, under the inspiration of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. As I noted earlier, they are insisting on open, democratic elections.

So my point is, the Bush team is very busy right now, doing damage control over the Iraq dilemma, as well as trying to consolidate Bush's support base all across the country.

If you, the reader, are a citizen of the United States of America; and if you voted for George Bush during the last presidential election; and if you have been so naive as to support his current war in Iraq, then I truly hope that this series is serving as a wake-up call for you. I hope that your desire to know the truth is stronger than your American patriotism. I hope that you can now see how your president has lied to you, and deceived you, and manipulated you since this whole sad affair began. Again I am reminded of a verse from the Scriptures which perfectly describes the Endtime when it says:

"But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived."


If you are politically active, and if it is your intention to vote this coming November, then I hope that you will vote wisely, and choose a man who is known for his honesty, his integrity, and his Christian values, if such an individual exists in the current presidential race. That is for you alone to determine. Personally, I do not consider myself a part of this world according to the Scriptures, so I do not participate in the election process. If you do vote, don't be swayed by mere words and political rhetoric; because as I am sure you realize, politicians will say anything before a camera in order to win your vote. They will tickle your ears and promise you the world, and then give you none or very little of it. Promises last about just as long as the election does.

Before switching gears in this series, allow me to add just a few more comments. I am sure that it's rather obvious that I strongly disagree with Mr. Bush regarding his decision to go to war against Iraq. I am convinced that he deceived the American public, either knowingly, or possibly due to his own ignorance, because he is manipulated by others. While he has made a few decisions, or taken a few stands with which I can agree, nevertheless, he is not without reproach; and the Iraq war will be a stain on his presidency, just as war was a stain on the reign of King David of old. It was because he was a man of war, the Scriptures tell us, that the Lord did not allow David to build the temple, as we see here:

"Then David the king stood up upon his feet, and said, Hear me, my brethren, and my people: As for me, I had in mine heart to build an house of rest for the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and for the footstool of our God, and had made ready for the building: But God said unto me, Thou shalt not build an house for my name, because thou hast been a man of war, and hast shed blood."


Aside from the illegal war in Iraq, Mr. Bush has not shown sufficient interest in caring for the poor, but rather has bowed to the pressures of special interest groups, and has favored the rich and the elite through tax cuts which will further fill their pockets while doing nothing to help the little man at the bottom. The Bible clearly states:

"If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works."


"Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world."


So the point is, Mr. Bush needs to put more actions behind his words, and behind his verbal display of Christianity, as otherwise, he is just another hypocrite. As a result of his ties to the oil and gas industry, Mr. Bush's environmental record also leaves a lot to be desired. Pulling out of the Kyoto Protocol was a real tragedy, and has had a negative reciprocal effect. Following America's lead, others nations have also begun to back-pedal on their commitment to ratify and abide by the terms of the Kyoto Protocol, and it is now all but dead. In the Book of Revelation, we are told that God will destroy those who destroy the Earth; and some of the activities being championed by Mr. Bush are doing just that:

"And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth."


As we conclude this series in part four, we will begin to address the important issue of how American intervention in Iraq, and the capture of Saddam Hussein, affects our current understanding of Endtime prophecy. This will include looking at such issues as the Beast of the Book of Revelation and the King of the North found in the prophecies of Daniel; the deadly wound of the Beast; Turkey and Syria's possible roles in Endtime events; the bold move towards democracy in Iraq; America's Middle East agenda; the dangers faced by Syria and Iran; the possible destruction of America; possible delay in the Endtime Countdown and the not-so-imminent Return of Jesus Christ; the "Pre-Tribulation Rapture" theory; the destruction of Babylon the Great by the Beast and the Ten Horns; theories concerning Babylon's possible identity of Babylon; the power of the oil weapon; the globalists and their New World Order; John Lennon's "Imagine"; the birth and destruction of "New Babylon"; and our duty to God as Endtime Christians. I trust that you will join me for the conclusion of this series.

⇒ Go To The Next Part . . .

Click or Tap Icons to Share! Thank you!

---

---

Please avail yourself of other areas of the Bill's Bible Basics website. There are many treasures for you to discover.