27 April 2003
Paul Bremer, the new ‘Gauleiter’ of Iraq
George Bush has appointed Paul Bremer as the ‘civil administrator’ of Iraq in what the Independent calls ‘a victory for Colin Powell…in the running skirmishes with Mr Rumsfeld’s Pentagon…’.
Victory? For who? As per usual, the Independent would have us believe that there’s some kind of battle between the ‘moderates’ represented by Colin Powell and the ‘neo-cons’ represented by Donald Rumsfeld, so I did a little researching on Paul Bremer and far from being a ‘moderate’, he’s part and parcel of the same pack of conservative wolves that run the Pentagon, the State Department, the CIA, the FBI, the NSA and of course, the Department of Homeland Security.
Bremer and the ‘terror’ business
Bremer is managing director and senior advisor for Political and Emerging Risks for MMC Enterprise Risk, part of Marsh McLennan Companies (MMC), which puts the frighteners on businesses about their exposure to political and other risks and which earns MMC annual revenues of $5.9 billion. Now here’s a man (and a company) that has a vested interest in ‘terror’ and does quite well out of it thank you (shades of Halliburton Inc.). Not surprisingly, Marsh offers its clients its own version of a Homeland Security package complete with various ‘threat’ levels.
What Bremer thinks of Iraqis Bremer served as ambassador-at-large for counter terrorism in the Reagan administration from 1986 to 1989 and was managing director of Kissinger Associates. Perhaps a couple of quotes from the new ‘civilian administrator’ of Iraq will give you an idea of what Bremer thinks of Iraqis (and what they can expect from him):
“And I think the general attitude in our [the Reagan] government was to let the Iraqis kill the Iranians. That seemed like a pretty good way to deal with the problem [of the Iraq-Iranian War].” – Interview with PBS Frontline
“We’re going to be on the ground in Iraq as soldiers and citizens for years. We’re going to be running a colony almost,'” – Source: Cincinnati Business Courier, February 23 2003 http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2003/02/24/daily23.html
Bremer and the New American Century
And following the fall of the Soviet Union, his opinions are in line with all the other ‘neo-cons’ of the Bush administration:
“The fall of Soviet Communism left the United States, it’s commonly remarked, in a position of basically international dominance. I would argue that it is a position of international dominance: political, economic, military, even cultural, that is without precedent in world history.”
Speech before the Los Angeles World Affairs Council on December 6, 2001Bremer is also a senior advisor to Americans for Victory over Terrorism (AVOT) a project of http://www.empower.org where he is in good company with people such as William J Bennett, Frank Gaffney, Lawrence Kadish, James Woolsey and Ruth R Wisse. Also, check out these sites for more on where Bremer comes from, http://www.avot.org/stories/storyReader$29 and http://avot.org/stories/storyReader$131
Bremer and the Homeland Security Act
“The new report on homeland security was put together by more than 30 former high-ranking government and military officials working under the sponsorship of the Heritage Foundation, a conservative public policy research organisation here in Washington…. Paul Bremer is co-chair of the task force that produced the report.” Source: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2002/01/mil-020108-202db203.htm
Bremer on Civil liberties
And Bremer’s views on civil libertiesand ‘anti-terrorism’ are also quite illuminating:
“We believe that if (our recommendations) are followed, Americans will be safer from terrorist attacks here and abroad, without any loss of their civil libertiesand constitutional rights,’ said L. Paul Bremer, chairman of the National Commission on Terrorism.”
How this squares with what he said later in this CNN interview I’ll leave up to you to decide:
“Track international students, panel suggests”
Among the commission’s recommendations:
o Track international students in America. ‘A small minority may exploit their student status to support terrorist activity,’ the report cautions. It says the government should keep an eye on such things as changes in students’ study plans — a switch from an English literature major to nuclear physics might arouse suspicion, for example.
o Allow the military to lead the response to any major terrorist attack on U.S. soil, as opposed to the FBI or the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The military has more advanced communications and logistics than those two agencies, Bremer said. ‘We’re not recommending martial law,’ he said in response to critics of the idea.
o Loosen restrictions on the FBI and CIA in opening investigations of terrorist suspects or using informants who may have unsavoury backgrounds.’ June 5, 2000 Source: http://www.cnn.com/2000/US/06/05/curbing.terrorism.02/index.html
Just five letters worth of difference between martial law and democracy?
”The National Commission on Terrorism, created by Congress two years ago, recently released its recommendations, including placing the military in charge of controlling civilians after a terrorist attack. ‘We’re not recommending martial law,’ said commission chairman L. Paul Bremer. ‘we’re just recommending military control. There’s a big difference there, at least five letters worth of difference. It’s not the same thing at all.’
“Thugs [are] simply good kids gone bad’ says Bremer’The report also recommended that the FBIand CIAbe better able to hire criminals and suspected criminals. Responding to the charge that the CIAshouldn’t hire thugs or other ‘unsavoury sources’, Bremer said ‘We feel that ‘unsavoury sources’ and ‘thugs’ does these folks a disservice. We prefer to think of these job applicants as simply good kids gone bad. We feel that the CIA can play a rehabilative role in American society.” Source: http://www.hypocritae.com/?ART=27
Would you let guy this baby-sit your kids?
Creepy Paul Bremer
But I think this quote from the ‘American Politics’ Website kind of sets the tone for Bremer and his ilk:
‘Creepy Paul Bremer, the dashing New York terrorism ‘expert,’ and former ambassador to The Netherlands (which brings to mind revelations from the Dutch intelligence service proving that Prescott Bush helped finance Hitler before and during World War II) appears on television day after day to stir nationalism in American bones. Bremer, who is also a former partner of mortified Chilean and Laotian hit-meister Henry Kissinger, was on television this morning doing his job — for his clients, not the nation — by flogging the terror horse to increase fear among US citizens, to reinforce the latest Bush ploy raising the ‘Terror Meter’ simply to increase America’s fear and, consequently, proclivity for war.’ Feb 3, 2003 by Jeff Coopersmith Source: http://www.americanpolitics.com/20030210Koop.html
The ‘Nebulous [dim, hazy, dark, obscure and vague] Terror Network’
Today’s Independent carries a piece about the two young British ‘terrorists’, one of whom died in the bombing in Tel Aviv. On page one we find the following:
“For the shadowy power brokers of Mossad, the Israeli secret service, it was confirmation of long-held suspicions that a nebulous Islamic terror network with connections from Syria to Pakistan had found a rich recruiting ground in the terraced streets of British towns and cities.”
Now this assertion has nothing to back it up except the fact the writer believes this is what Mossad believes to be the case. But check out the wording, especially the idea that a ‘nebulous Islamic terror network exists’.
My thesaurus lists the following alternate meanings for nebulous: indistinct, confused, dim, hazy, dark, obscure and vague. The choice of the word nebulous is not accidental for it carries an entire universe (excuse the pun) of associations, chiefly that any network which is by definition nebulous is like Saddam’s WMDs, extremely hard to find.
In the same paragraph we find the phrase, ‘rich recruiting ground’ and again the phrase is not accidental as it implies all kinds of things without actually substantiating anything. In other words it’s a nebulous (vague) concept. Firstly, why is it ‘rich’? Because there’s lots of Moslems living in British towns and cities? And secondly, that they’re being ‘recruited’. By whom? Why the nebulous Islamic terror network of course.
And what of the ‘terraced streets’? Now we’re entering the world of ‘Psycho’ where, behind lace curtains there lurks an ‘Islamic terror network’, who no doubt, when they’re not plotting are watching ‘Coronation Street’?
And further, just in case we’re not getting the message the piece carries another message, the implication that somehow Syria and Pakistan are involved. How? We’re not told. But the choice of these two countries is no accident as firstly, Syria is allegedly behind the ‘suicide’ bombings and the two Britons are, it’s assumed, of Asian descent. Another nebulous (dim, hazy, dark, obscure and vague) assertion.
And what of Mossad’s ‘confirmation of long-held suspicions’? Again, my thesaurus gave me the following definition of suspicion (guess): notion, idea, impression, surmise, conjecture, supposition and imagination.
Like pretty much all the coverage of the ‘Islamic terror network’, little is actually said but a lot is implied. But the damage is done. The reader is ‘terrorised’ with words.
Contrast this coverage with that of the Israeli settlers on the West Bank, many of whom are of North American origin, from places like New York and countries in Europe. Are they part of an ‘international conspiracy’ to take over Palestinian land? When will I see a piece in the Independent which reads something like the following:
“Palestinian security services believe that a nebulous international land theft network with members in the US, France, and other European countries, is behind the decades-long illegal takeover of Palestinian land on the West Bank.”
Of course, it’s not as dramatic as a ‘terror network’ but given the connection between the two, putting them together paints an entirely different picture.