Today, US forces are storming Samarra in Iraq. As usual they claim to be killing only Iraqi fighters while the hospitals fill up with dead and injured women and children. So far so normal.
What is interesting about this new campaign is the military spokesman coming up with a new instance of calling black white and vice versa.
According to the BBC, the US military said the offensive was in response to what it called “repeated and unprovoked attacks by anti-Iraqi forces” and went on to explain that the assault aimed “to facilitate orderly government processes, kill or capture anti-Iraqi forces, and set the conditions to proceed with infrastructure and quality of life improvements for the people of Samarra”.
So the Iraqi resistance to foreign occupation is “anti-Iraqi”. How did they figure that one out?
Well, they know well enough what the real situation is, but by twisting language, they hope to obscure the truth.
Well, try this out. If the Iraqi resistance to foreign invasion is anti-Iraqi, then the invading US military must be anti-American.
So the anti-Iraqi forces must be pro-American, and the Americans, being anti-American must be pro-Saddam, pro-al Zarqawi and pro-al Sadr, and Mr. Bush has made it quite clear that if you ain’t for us you are against us, so the Iraqi militias are in fact doing the will of the White House in ridding the planet of terrorists.
It’s all clear now.