Al-Sadr:
Hussein (Noriega, Qaddafi, Ayatollah) of the Future
- by Erik Fortman
-
(Posted here by Wes Penre for
Illuminati News, August 19,
2004)
Looking back on the
protagonists of America's past, clear patterns emerge. With that as the
basis of this article, I would like to present to you Muqtada al-Sadr. He is
currently in a fight for his life against the growing wrath of the U.S. war
machine. His militia, a group that he would be allowed to have through the
Second Amendment, is actually holding their own, taking down choppers and
'ghosting' American soldiers, by engaging briefly, then fleeing into the
night. This was done despite the fact that precision bombing is taking place
on specific al-Sadr targets. Why has this rag-tag holy man, the equivalent
of a Neo-Nazi minister, would be able take on the world's only supposed
super-power is beyond me. Or is it? What if, now that Bush I's villains are
being slain by Bush II, W. is replacing the patsies for Bush III, a future
president in the form of Jeb or George P., Jeb's son.
The Muqtada al-Sadr incident,
if he doesn't die in the next few weeks (and I don't think he will), is
disturbingly similar to prior enemies cum comrades cum enemies again. Take
Saddam Hussein, for instance. Let us not forget that he was backed by the
CIA, propped up by Neo-cons to fight the Shah of Iran (who
was,
incidentally, put in during the '50's. Read Sherman Skolnick.) Then, he
attacked Kuwait and became our enemy. Yet, our Iraqi envoy assured Saddam
that the Kuwait exchange was not an American issue just prior to his
invasion. Nevertheless, he became our enemy; we went to war and won; then we
left him in power. Left him in power? Stormin Norman was for the
eradication of Saddam during Gulf War I. Colin Powell was for leaving the
dictator in power. Then, then-President G.H.W. Bush turned our back on the
Kurds who were slaughtered for rising up against the government. Now, it is
the Kurdish grave mantra om-ed by the new Bush administration.
So, how will Muqtada al-Sadr's
career go? At first, he was our tentative friend. It was al-Sadr who helped
other clerics keep the peace, and give America a chance to show what she
could do for the ravaged country. The Council on Foreign Relations has been
proven to be an Illuminati vehicle. Even they agree that al-Sadr was against
Saddam, and his high cleric father and uncle were both killed by Hussein.
That explains why he and his militant Islamics allowed the U.S. to take down
the tyrant of Iraq. Then they go unruly. Why? That is very simple, and the
CFR admits the truth. Because of its anti-Americanism (something that could
be said about thousands of zines, rags, and websites in America from the far
left and far right fringes), al-Sadr's newspaper was forced to stop
publishing. So, let me get this. America wanted to take away a man and a
movement's first amendment right to free speech and press. Then, we get mad
at him when he takes up arms. The next thing Bush has America do is ask
Muqtada's brigades to drop their arms and disband. After taking away their 1st
Amendment right, granted by God, we are now trying to take away their 2nd
Amendment right to defense, granted by God. Once we get those two, it will
be easy to take away all the rest: freedom of religion, to a fair trial,
from torture.
Ah, but recent developments
are going on even as I write this on Tuesday, August 17, 2004. It seems that
the big, bad American Army can't take out a reported 10,000-man militia
holed up in a graveyard. B.S. I'm telling you, he is going to be our
bogeyman of the 2010's. Fox News reported earlier today that "a delegation
of Iraqis arrived in Najaf amid more violence Tuesday to try to help
negotiate an end to a bloody Shiite uprising there." Well, what do we expect
them to do? We've taken away their ability to speak in a public forum, and
we seek to take away their ability to protect themselves. Perhaps Michael
Moore was lucid when he called al-Sadr a freedom fighter. What would you do
if a foreign, non-Christian giant military came in and said you couldn't
talk bad about them, even when they sexually tortured people and took
pictures of it? Would you give up your gun and rights, or would you band
together with other Christians and try to defend yourselves? The answer is
clear.
Back to the delegation: I
believe that if not this diplomatic olive branch, some peace treaty will be
procured. America will eventually leave. Al-Sadr, an admittedly backward,
theocratic, fundamentalist, will then take over the country. Taliban II. An
attack an our embassy, or heaven forbid, another attack on U.S. soil; it's
back to Iraq to take care of a crazy cleric who should be either 1. Dealt
with today, or 2. Allowed to do what he wants as long as he doesn't attack
America. And, all that's assuming we get out of Iraq and quit meddling in
Arabic affairs. Perhaps then al-Sadr's newspaper will find its own new
bogeyman, instead of whipping a dead horse in the slowly decaying greatness
that is now the United States.
This is my first definite
attempt at conjecture. I could be proven wrong by evening. History proves
that I have a reasonable chance of being correct, though. The U.S. never
allows a democratically elected government to be installed after we meddle.
That wouldn't be good for 'U.S.' interests. Our globalist masters had us
prop up Hussein, Noriega, Qadafi (our friend again, for now). Even Stalin
was, in effect, allowed to rule by the globalists. We merely followed their
orders, as we have ever since 1913. Whether it is South and Central America,
Africa, Asia, or the Middle East - America and England, prefer the
dictatorial model. We did give Japan, South Korea, and half of German the
democratic choice. But all of these merely balanced communism in whatever
sector needed it.
Will Muqtada al-Sadr be the
next Saddam Hussein? Most can't see the future. But, I present to you a
clear record of American involvement in engineering the rise of scum,
usually through the CIA (and the School of the Americas). Look for the duel
with his militia to end in diplomatic immunity, which I think I heard on Fox
News on television. If al-Sadr comes out unscathed in the next week,
remember his name. I believe we will hear from him again.
About an hour after writing
this, al-Sadr announced that he was inviting the Pope to mediate the
conflict. Now, if America actually allows true democratic elections, you can
rest assured that Muqtada will have some thing to do with the new
government. Here we go again.
