The Storm Before the Calm


From the ‘Desert Storm’ to the recent ‘Shock and Awe,’ we are witnessing a gathering storm of tyranny that every age has to witness before experiencing a period of relative calm.  In every age, tyranny touches its peak with full legitimacy and popular acceptance before facing its destiny.

We need not spend hours comparing the gathering storm of present tyranny with the tyrannies of the distant past or understanding how Nazis, in recent past, rallied almost every German behind Hitler’s extremist approach.

All we need is visiting the New York Times pages and seeing with our eyes how history is repeating itself -” this time with more sophisticated tools at the disposal of the no-more-covert fascists.

“The Calm Before The Storm,” by Friedman (April 13, 2005) is a classic example of how the promoters of fascism are equating the gathering storm of  tyranny with calm. A quick analysis of this piece is enough to show ho all the “recognized,” “mainstream” and “credible” newspapers are acting in the services of the Nazis of our age.

This op-ed piece is just eight hundred and forty-one words and 11 paragraphs. However, it is replete with repetition of the derogatory term “Jihadists” no less than eight times in the last six paragraphs; “terrorist” three times; “Baathists” three times and “Al Qaeda” two times. Imagine the image of an enemy it is trying to create.

The theme in this little piece swings between arousing the feelings of insecurity; the fear of the coming storm; complaints about “unprotected ports and borders”; appreciation of the US invasions and harder visa policies, and further suggestions for staying the illegitimate “course in Iraq” and staying tyrannically “extra-vigilant at home.”

Don’t forget that all these themes are finding a space in just 841 words because they don’t need any explanation. The mindset has already been created and these small op-eds are just reminders to keep that mindset fresh.

All opposition and resistance to the wars launched on the basis of lies and nothing but repetition of the same lies are demonized in two pejorative terms: “Jihadists and Baathists.” The sum and substance of the 841 words piece is: The US is safe because of its invasions abroad and draconian measures at home.

Despite these measures, the propagandist would complain that security “is still so lax” and there is still need to “stay the course in Iraq.” Playing with the fear factor begins with the title, “The Calm before the Storm,” and taken to the climax right in the very introductory paragraph: “I’ve got my own pet theory about what’s produced this period of calm – and, more important, why it may be coming to an end.”

Nazis had the same pet theories which they regurgitated a million times to make every German fearful. The hatred and fear the war mongers spread at that time pales by comparison with what we get from the New York Times and other leading dailies in the US.

To cover the official lies and exonerate the criminals in the US administration, people like Friedman blame the grand deception on the “bungling of U.S. intelligence, and the C.I.A.’s relying on bogus informants.”  

This is an outright attempt at fooling the public with saying that the multibillion dollar agencies and intelligence apparatus failed to see what the seemingly worthless sources of alternative could see from day one.

CIA was not blind to tell a bogus from real informant, nor was there any bungling on the part of US intelligence. The public mindset is gradually unfreezing but the propagandists still believe that these cheap shots would go through unchallenged as ever.

In a US turned upside down, where even well known public representative cannot pass through the airport checks without facing the harassing tactics of the security agencies, the pro-21st-century-Nazi’s analysts want to make us believe that the “private terminals is still so lax that if you showed up in a Saudi headdress with a West Virginia driver’s license under the name of "Billy Bob bin Laden" and asked for flight directions for your chartered Learjet to Lower Manhattan, there’s a good chance no one would stop you.”

Friedman goes on to say that there have been no terrorist attacks because “Al Qaeda no longer has a whole country from which to plan, train and coordinate terrorist attacks with impunity.”

Those who belong to that region and those journalists who closely observed the Taliban’s last days in power and their relationship with Osama and his fellow Arabs remember well that Osama’s imaginary forces did not “effectively controlled a country.”

The Taliban were so keen in establishing good relations with the outside world that they put all kinds of sanctions on Arabs and virtually kept Osama under a kind of house arrest with no communication equipment and no permission to see journalists from outside.

Even journalists who could manage to get permission from top Taliban officials to see Osama, were not allowed to take a tape recorder of camera with them, lest they capture some kind of inflammatory remarks which would hurt the Taliban’s image.

Dr. Aymen Al Zawaheri used to bitterly criticize the Taliban’s changed attitude and complain that all they get from the Taliban in response to their comments and requests is total silence and just smiles. And now Friedman comes to tell us that Osama and his friends “effectively controlled the country.”

The fear-mongering war lord in the pages of the New York Times goes on to say: “I fear that we may now be entering the most dangerous period since 9/11. Why? Because I’ve always believed that one of the most important reasons there has been no new terrorist attack in America has to do with the U.S. invasions of both Iraq and Afghanistan. It is not only that the Bush administration has taken the fight to the enemy, but that the enemy has welcomed that fight.”

These statements are in total contradiction to the widely known facts. Despite the 12 years long genocidal sanction on Iraq and despite the loss of 1.8 million, not a single “Ba’athist” or “Jihadist” came to attack the United States.  It is a universally recognized fact that Iraq has nothing to do with what happened in September 2001. How come the War Lord, Mr. Friedman, still struggles to make us believe that by invading Iraq “Bush administration has taken the fight to the enemy.”

To cover the lies and crimes Friedman creates the image of us and them and equates reversal of the criminal occupation to the defeat of the United States. To shore up support for the continued massacre in Iraq, he writes: “To the extent that the Baathists and Jihadists have a coordinated strategy, their first priority, I think, is to defeat American forces in the heart of their world.”

Look at the use of “I think” here. Why should Friedman just think; he must be sure this is the intent provided he could imagine another country starving 1.8 million Americans to death and then invading and occupying it to impose its will on an indefensible nation.

Those who stand against tyranny would definitely not rest till they defeat the occupiers, but it does not mean that they would aim for a tit for tat response and aim to occupy the invaders’ homeland as well.

This is how the propaganda war lords are trying to shore up support for continued occupations and war.

Furthermore the rant of Baathists and Jihadists doesn’t stick because everyone knows how ex-Baathists have been reinstated to former jobs.[1]

Most of them are playing a lead role in intelligence and security forces. The White House itself confirmed that the administration was moving to change a postwar policy that blocked members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath Party from Iraqi government and military positions.[2]

What the American War Lords would not tell the public is the fact that Ba’athists themselves are the victims of violence in Iraq, because no one trusts them and their victims are out to settle scores with them as well. We would not have known this if there were no impartial reporters like Robert Fisk out there.[3]

Even the American generals were begging for relaxation to allow them to bring back former Baath Party members, including senior Iraqi Army officers.[4] It simply shows that everyone is welcomed and acceptable as long as he supports the present day tyrants. All those who expose their lies, point to their crimes and stand to protect their rights are terrorist, Jihadists, Ba’athists and so on.

Making up a false case always leave many contradictions and loopholes. The Goebble’s mouth piece of our age, the New York Times, failed to link Iraq to 9/11. Through its war lords, Friedman Kristoff and others, it now tries to show that the US has done right to “Take the war to the enemy.” It appeals for supporting and continuing the war, because it is important to defeat the enemies “in the heart of their world.”

At the same time, it is necessary to keep pumping more fear and make the public believe that even if the US defeat the enemy, it would be able to “launch a spectacular, headline-grabbing act of terrorism in America” just to “mask, and compensate for, just how defeated they have become at home.” Only a fool would believe this logic.

The words: “So let’s stay the course in Iraq, but stay extra-vigilant at home,” is a clear sign of supporting barbarism abroad and tyranny at home. That’s how fascism was taken to its peak yesterday. That’s how we are witnessing the same in our age.

For supporters and promoters of the modern day Nazis and fascists, it must be a period of calm. For the rest, it is a period when the storm of tyranny gathers to unleash more death and destruction than we have seen since 1990.


[1]. Role of Iraqi ex-Baathists examined: Council studies reinstatement of members to their former jobs 

Robert Moran, “U.S. eases rules for ex-Baathists,” Knight Ridder Newspapers, 04/24/04

“Intelligence – Berlin to Baghdad, the Pitfalls of Hiring Enemy Intelligence,” Foreign Affairs Magazine, ay83412/timothy-naftali/berlin-to-baghdad-the- pitfalls-of-hiring-enemy-intelligence.html?mode=print

[2]. Policy easing to bring Baathists into new Iraq (Agencies) Updated: 2004-04-23 10:41

[3]. Rober Fisk: Hooded men executing Saddam officials, The Independent, December 28, 2003.

[4]. Eric Schmitt, “US generals discuss promoting ex-Baathists: U.S. Generals Fault Ban on Hussein’s Party, ” April 21, 2004.