Dear Friends,
I would like to deal with a very important subject regarding the immediate future
of our people.
This last week we saw a bombing in Bali, Indonesia and the death of hundreds
of people some of who simply disappeared and their bodies have not been found.
The identification of the remainder is continuing and many are waiting for some
positive sign of their lost loved ones.
As many of you know I went to Bali some two months ago for a reconnaissance
for a feast site for our local churches and also for the international singles.
What I did not mention was the fact that on that visit I visited the Sari club,
which was the target of the bombing in Bali. I was concerned at the operations
of the club and its exposure to terrorist operations. The nearby Paddy's also
was a problem. Sari was noisy, packed and the haunt of most westerners to Bali
on a regular basis. I personally could not remain there for any period. I went
home after talking with a young couple with whom I had dinner in a restaurant.
It was a western culture foreign to Indonesia that had been imported there among
Hindus who have fewer problems with such activities than do Muslims.
Australians and other westerners went to Bali on a regular basis and it was,
and probably still is a key tourist centre for the thirties and under.
What has not been appreciated is that Indonesia does not behave in this way
except for a much quieter style of disco/karaoke. It will thus be a type of
behaviour unaffordable by, and objectionable, to most Indonesians. It will thus
be a constant soft target when we wish to engage in any operations against Islam
or even in our commercial operations. One might ask how this terrorist activity
was undertaken in Bali and who was behind it. Such questions preoccupy our forensic
teams right now.
The Indonesians have taken a number of people into custody and an ex-Air Force
officer had admitted to making the bomb. He was allegedly dismissed earlier
from the force for impropriety.
The Indonesians are cooperating and President Megawati Sokearnoputri is now
trying to ensure action is taken to deal with the terrorist cells there, although
Indonesia formally denies that there are any Jemaah Islamya or Al Qaeda cells
in Indonesia. The Armed Forces have denied involvement and they have even denied
that they use the military C4 explosive, which is surprising to say the least.
Much is being made of this attack and attempts are being made non-stop to link
it to Al Qaeda and Iraq.
One could and should ask a number of questions about the actions in the USA
and the Commonwealth, about our potential involvement in these activities, and
just what we actually know about the terrorist links.
How far does our involvement go in the face of a declaration of war by our nations
against other nations and on what grounds?
We have an obligation to make alive and not just obey the injunction thou shalt
not kill. We have examined the law on this matter in the paper Law and the Sixth
Commandment (No. 259) at www.ccg.org/english/s/p259.html
How might we view the matter?
The continental USA was attacked on September 11 2001, and with commendable
restraint the US armed forces waited until they had amassed information and
a force and then went after a target that had openly supported the force they
had identified as being behind the attacks. That was Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda
network. They had been studying this problem for some time and, in fact, wanted
an excuse to get rid of the administration in Afghanistan, which was the Taliban
regime.
The oil interests wanted the Taliban out so that the Khazak oil could come out
via Afghanistan and Iran into the Gulf. Iran was agreeable but the Taliban wanted
too much money. Thus 9/11/2001 was a perfect excuse for these actions regardless
of the truth of Al Qaeda involvement. Their involvement merely reinforced an
action already determined as necessary from other sources.
The existence of other ethnic warring factions in the area and high levels of
expertise among the Special Forces groups made this action relatively easy and
clean for the US administration.
George W. Bush is not a gifted President. He is not articulate and makes basic
errors in the English language. Prior to 11 September 2001 he had a low approval
rating. The events of 11 September 2001 shot him to the highest approval ratings
in the history of polls. He stayed there while he delivered action based on
terrorist issues and took the focus away from the economic woes of the USA,
which are becoming steadily worse.
The "war on terrorism" allowed the most draconian peacetime legislation
we have seen in a long time. The basic tenets of our liberty are being undermined
in the west. It appears that is so we will make fewer objections in being brought
into the European Legal Napoleonic Code quasi-Fascist system in the not too
distant future. Many of our middle military officers are behind this European
New World Order and they view anyone who speaks for the British system and against
the European system as a threat. I heard one tell another to make a report on
me after a speech I gave at a function to which they were invited. They do not
seem to see that their new international loyalties are direct treason against
their people and the interest of free men everywhere.
I spoke with a US woman in Hawaii recently who seemed to be aware of the problem
and also aware that the US people seem to be oblivious to the real and serious
dangers they face. She said that an opinion poll was recently circulated based
on the contents of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
of America. People were asked if there was too much freedom. They said yes there
was too much freedom, and too much freedom of speech, and so on. When informed
of the basis of the poll and the contents of the first amendment they were reportedly
puzzled but most did not see that the very liberty they enjoyed was enshrined
in a Constitution they were now prepared to pull down to maintain their comfort
zone. Our education is being destroyed to the extent that we are being enslaved
by ignorance and double standards. Many of the double standards are visible
in the actions regarding the Middle East and the USA.
There seems to be no direct connection between Al Qaeda and Iraq.
However, we have another serious and illogical problem with which we must deal.
That is the previous Gulf War action against Iraq. Saddam Hussein's foolish
actions then were a direct threat to US Oil interests and to the Bush family
itself. The former president Bush went into Iraq after marshalling approval
and support and protected Kuwaiti oil interests and his own. He did not finish
the job for very serious reasons, most of which were not published.
Now eleven years later we are faced with another problem so it seems.
Osama bin Laden might still be alive, who knows? Who knows where he is? However
we do know where to find Hussein and Iraq, and we can tie the enemy into a less
nebulous national public image for American spin-doctors.
As most are aware, some people asked me what would happen in the previous Gulf
War in 1991. I said then that the USA would go in and do what they did in Vietnam,
and that was to fail to put a soldier in the last foxhole. And then they would
have to return some time later and do the job again, and it was only then that
they would be faced with immense casualty figures. Hussein was right when he
said America simply does not have the political will to fight a war of attrition.
They do not have the psyche for it in these modern times. I did not tell those
who asked me the question, that the US and British Commonwealth would be going
in under the second Bush President for even weaker reasons, as that would merely
have confused the issue.
The lack of resolve will make this coming war even more dangerous. The approval
ratings are superficial sabre rattling and will dry up with the first body bags.
We have no coherent reasons for going to war. None have been presented. None
appear evident.
By US criteria, the United Nations would have the same level of concern about
Britain, and the USA, and France, and Russia. Each of the permanent members
of the Security Council has weapons of mass destruction. They have nuclear weapons,
bio-chemical weapons and they have tested them in the open environment. The
USA stated recently that it was targeting North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Russia and
Afghanistan with nuclear weapons.
Iraq has made no such claim. It has been found to be attempting to obtain the
facilities to make nuclear weapons. These actions do not constitute grounds
for UN intervention and control and if it did, orders and sanctions would be
against the Security Council itself, and which orders could never be enforced.
North Korea has just announced that it has been engaged in nuclear activity
with the intent of nuclear arms production. No action is even hinted at in regards
to North Korea and a cynic might suggest that the reasons relate to their absence
of oil.
Moreover, each nation is entitled to arm itself with the weapons at its disposal
or take action to equip itself with weapons that will ensure its survival.
If a nation can be interfered with on the basis of its attempts in this regard,
then action must logically be taken against the USA, Britain, France and Russia.
Clearly, the logic used in the war rhetoric is deficient.
There must be more to it than meets the eye.
The Bush Administration is intent upon war with Iraq. This must be seen as distinct
from the Pentagon, which is against it. Even senior intelligence officials are
against it and have leaked threat analysis, which shows a low or limited threat
and no justification for war.
However, the opinion polls in the USA seem to be manufactured to show a support
for the war when all letters to the editors and expressions indicate otherwise.
Is the US media massaging the figures as it seems? We will know later, but by
then it will be too late and too many men dead to retrieve.
When will the USA invade Iraq?
The Bush Administration wants a war soon. It is thought that it cannot afford
to go before Christmas as that would further disrupt consumer confidence and
the US business lobbies, and so it must be after Christmas or take a much greater
economic hit. It can't be much later as the desert heats up in spring. So, we
could look at an action in January and over the following months, hoping to
have it over by summer in Iraq. Which January? 2003 is the most likely as 2004
is too late for the Bush Administration and the coming election. The economic
realities in the US will make it even more of a problem by then also.
The fact is that large numbers of heavy transport planes are being sent out
on operations as I write and they will be in position by the end of October
it seems from the scale of current build-ups. Thus, we are ready for a war anytime
from November onwards.
Once the war commences, it is legitimate for all activities to be undertaken
against the parties. Thus, we will see the release of biochemical and other
agents.
Once major losses occur in the Allied forces in Iraq, nuclear weapons will probably
be used.
Baghdad has between 6 million and 10 million people strong, depending on where
the boundaries are drawn. Saddam Hussein is in the middle of that mass in a
nuclear shelter. Stalingrad was an easier target for the Nazis. Our men will
be eaten up by attrition.
Thus, the informed groups in the USA are in opposition to it. The populace as
a whole has not thought much about it at all. They are going along with it because
of the rhetoric, and the ease of Afghanistan, and there is no real sacrifice
and visible cost as yet. That will change rapidly as the first body bags come
home. This time the USA and British Commonwealth will have to do it alone for
the critical period.
The Commonwealth will face a greater problem at home as well and will become
ensnared in war on a number of fronts.
The UN is now faced with a US "tank" that it cannot stop. What should
it do? Law is based on its blind application. Justice must be uniform and not
in respect of persons.
The US and Britain have the option of totally annihilating Iraq the moment they
engage in nuclear or biochemical activity against them. It is an insane act
to commence a war that will see the destruction of one's own people.
The application of international action cannot be by whim. It might also be
argued, and I have heard it so argued by Britons, that New York was the target
of terrorism because it, through its Irish and Jewish population supported war
and also terrorism in Ireland, UK and Palestine. It is a miracle that Britain
is behind them in view of the activities in Northern Ireland and Britain through
the IRA. However the Commonwealth sees its broader interests.
What should a Christian do? The answer is to make one's voice heard if possible
in the halls of reason.
What will happen in the future?
If this war continues to be played out, then we will see many dead as a result.
The conflict may harness a Muslim counter reaction. The next or later terrorist
attacks will be in New York by ship-carried nuclear weapons and against other
targets, such as Sydney and San Francisco and elsewhere. Remember, there are
a hundred or more nuclear weapons missing for a decade or more, and some of
which have by now found their way into Islamic hands. However, of one thing
we can be sure. New York will pay in blood for this war if it comes about. The
escalation will continue and the demons will attempt to destroy the power of
the US and British Commonwealth, as that is the only thing that has kept the
world free of this beast power for the entire 20th century.
Does a Christian shrink from standing up for right and truth because they might
die? No! But they must do it on a just and logical basis and apply God's Laws
equally. A Christian and Muslim both have an obligation to restrain a madman
who would enter his home and kill his family. So too is it with the nation.
May God bless us all and keep us from harm in these coming days of trouble.
Wade Cox
Coordinator General
© Copyright 2002 Christian Churches of God, All Rights Reserved
