THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY is a compelling factual history of neoconservatism and its influence on US Foreign Policy in the Middle East during the first decade of the twenty-first century. Click on image above for details.

Monday, October 30, 2006


Does anyone remember the worldwide furore that was created when, in 1954, Pope Pius XII said: “How many young girls there are who see nothing wrong in following certain shameless styles like so many sheep. They would certainly blush with shame if they could know the impression they make, and the feelings they evoke, in those who see them.”[1]

No? That’s because there wasn’t one.

And what about the outrage across the Western world that was caused by Mary Anne Moresco when she wrote in The Catholic Exchange: “The damage immodest dress does to the purity of a young girl’s soul is like the damage cigarettes do to a human lung: Very slowly, over time, it is left dark and malfunctioning.[2]

You don’t recall the outrage? Again, that’s because there wasn’t one.

So, one needs to ask, why has the Australian Islamic cleric Taj Din al-Hilali’s outburst about the way women dress hogged the headlines in Australia and, indeed, around much of the Western world for the last couple of days?

Could it have something to do with the fact that he is a Muslim? Could it have something to do with the fact that he is the most senior Muslim in a John Howard-dominated anti-Muslim Australia who has riled the West with his pro-Islamic comments, particularly with regards to the struggles of the Iraqi and Afghan peoples against the Western invaders?

Australia’s Prime Minister, John Howard, has very skilfully as good as personally promoted further persecution and discrimination against Islam when he said in response to al-Hilali’s remarks: “What should happen and I’ll say it again, is that the Islamic community has got to take this matter in hand themselves, and if they don’t then there is the risk that people will use their failure to do so against them, however unfairly, and I really am asking the Islamic community to come up to the crease and handle this matter themselves.”[3] Otherwise – what, John Howard?

[1] Bishop Mark A. Pivarunas, ‘Modesty in Dress’, CMRI, 21 June 1996. Available online: Accessed 30 October 2006.
[2] Mary Anne Moresco, ‘Where Has Modesty Gone?’, The Catholic Exchange, 7 December 2005. Available online: Accessed 30 October 2006.
[3] John Howard, ‘Transcript of the Prime Minister the Hon. John Howard MP Doorstop interview, Finley RSL Club’, 27 October 2006. Available online: Accessed 30 October 2006.

Monday, October 23, 2006


The headline in today’s UK Telegraph indicates that President Bush and his top generals think they may have found a way out of Iraq that will save them face – they are hinting that they may actually withdraw troops – and one needs to read this to believe it – as punishment for the continued violence.[1]

The Telegraph report said: “…benchmarks would be set covering progress in the Iraqi military, police and economy that if missed would result in the imposition of "penalties" by Washington.” The report went on to say that these “…would include "changes in military strategy", which could mean troop cuts or redeployment within Iraq…”

It seems the ‘Coalition of the Willing’ are now scrambling to find ways out of the Iraq disaster. The UKs Tony Blair is hoping that the Iraqis can take over ‘security’ in the areas currently ‘held’ by the British so that British troops can be withdrawn. Blair is clearly hoping the talks currently being held in London with Iraqi government officials will lead to withdrawal sooner rather than later.[2]

[1] Oliver Poole and Damien McElroy, ‘America may penalise Iraq if it fails to stop the violence’, UK Telegraph, 23 October 2006. Available online:;jsessionid=LPKALVYJFMZKFQFIQMFSFFWAVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2006/10/23/wirq23.xml Accessed 23 October 2006.
[2] Patrick Wintour and Michael Howard, ‘Blair gives Iraq 12 months to be ready for handover’, UK Guardian, 23 October 2003. Available online:,,1929000,00.html Accessed 23 October 2006.

Monday, October 16, 2006


Since the recent failure of the Israelis and the US to provoke war with the Iranians by attacking Lebanon, Israel has had to think again about how they and the Americans can provoke or at least find some excuse for them to justify an attack on Iran before the US midterm elections in order to revive Bush’s rapidly diminishing chances of actually retaining control of Congress. Now, it seems, the right-wing Israel Zionist government thinks it may have come up with an answer.

The Israeli right-wing Zionist propaganda website Debkafile has recently claimed that the Hamas Interior Minister, Said Siyam, had met with his Iranian counterpart, Mostafa Pour-Mohammadi, in Tehran where arrangements were made, so Debkafile reports, “…to transform Hamas’ military wing, the Ezz e-Din al Qassam, into a crack operational arm of the Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, and Gaza into a second Lebanon.”[1] As if to compound this story a recent report in the UK Telegraph states that Hamas is threatening to break the ceasefire it has with the Israelis if the Israelis continue their attacks in the Gaza.[2] Meanwhile, The Jerusalem Post adds fuel to the fire by reporting that, “Hamas is smuggling advanced weaponry including anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles into the Gaza Strip, changing the tactical military picture there, the head of the IDF intelligence directorate's research department told the cabinet on Sunday.”[3]

One need not have too many guesses as to where these weapons are coming from. The finger of blame is being firmly pointed either directly or by inference at Iran.

Already the level of Israeli activity in the Gaza is being drastically raised with some 22 Palestinians, many of them civilians, having been killed in recent days as Israeli aircraft launched missile attacks on Palestinians suspected as being militants. All it would take now is for Hamas to react with some new weapon, real or imagined by Israel’s propaganda machine, for the Israelis to accuse Iran as being directly involved in Palestinian ‘terrorism’ for Israel and the US to justify an attack on Iran.

[1] Special Military Report, ‘Tehran Arms Hamas for a Double-Barreled War Option and Gaza as Second Lebanon’,, 13 October 2006. Available online: Accessed 16 October 2006.
[2] Tim Butcher, ‘Hamas threatens to break ceasefire after Israeli air strikes’, UK Telegraph, 16 October 2006. Available online: Accessed 16 October 2006.
[3] Herb Keinon and Yaakov Katz, ‘IDF: Military picture in Gaza changing’, The Jerusalem Post, 15 October 2006. Available online: Accessed 16 October 2006.

Monday, October 09, 2006


There’s nothing new in the seemingly recent idea that US interests may be better served by Iraq being split into essentially three separate and autonomous states in the classic divide and rule style reminiscent of colonial days. In April of 2003, just a few weeks after the launch of the invasion of Iraq, the Australian Prime Minister, John Howard, let the cat out of the bag of US plans for a post-war Iraq when he suggested that a federation modelled on Australia’s system of government could operate in Iraq.[1] Howard must have realised that he had spoken prematurely and out of turn with his suggestion because as far as I am aware he hasn’t spoken of it since and certainly hasn’t claimed the idea as being his own.

Since Howard wouldn’t dare make suggestions off his own bat about how the US should deal with a post-invaded Iraq, especially a suggestion that has such deep ramifications about US foreign policy toward Iraq, one can only assume that Howard was aware of US intentions and plans for Iraq’s ultimate fragmented political future long before it became public knowledge that this maybe what the US has now planned for Iraq. That being the case furthermore, one can assume that this is what the US had planned for Iraq all along which would explain why the US and the coalition of the willing have been seemingly so inept at stopping the ethnic and sectarian violence.

If this indeed is what has happened then one also then needs to ponder to what extent the occupying forces have been ‘inept’ at stopping the violence and how much of the violence was actually provoked by the occupying forces in order to frame a situation whereby a divided Iraq may well seem to be seen as an answer to the problem. It would certainly keep the Israelis happy and, of course, the US would need to hang out in Iraq for a very long time while the new federation of states settled themselves in.

[1] ‘Aussie system could suit Iraqis: PM’, Lateline, Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 14 April 2003. Available online: Accessed 9 October 2006.


The right-wing liar-supporting mainstream press are really scrapping the bottom of the propaganda barrel with this story. According to a report in Rupert Murdoch’s The Australian, “Al-Qaeda plotted to murder the entire Australian cricket team in their change rooms during last years Ashes tour of Britain…”[1]

This opening line served to suck in the dumb and gullible in Australia by initially mentioning only the Australian team in this Australian newspaper to an audience that Australian Prime Minister John Howard is trying to convince that Australia is specifically a target of Islamic terrorists not because of Australia’s close relationship with the US and Australia’s involvement in the war in Iraq, but because ‘they hate our values’.

Upon reading the rest of the story one finds that the entire fairy tale drifts from mildly humorous to absolutely ludicrous as we are then asked to believe that the whole plan was called off because – and one has to read this to believe that someone could actually write this without cracking a smile – one of the plotters was a cricket fan. And then, just in case the ‘Poms’ (friendly Australian colloquialism for English ex-pats living in Australia) who continue to support the English team didn’t feel left out of this fear-mongering ploy, we learn that the English cricket team, as well as the Australian team, were also to be targets.

This fear-mongering garbage is almost up there with last August’s panic when no aircraft were blown up over the Atlantic which resulted in a totally unprecedented lack of loss of life and this complete lack of loss of life, so we were told, was on an unimaginable scale.[2]


[1] Andrew Ramsey and Simon Kearney, ‘Al-Qaeda plotted Ashes gas attack’, The Australian, 9 October 2006. Available online:,20867,20547569-601,00.html Accessed 9 October 2006.
[2] Damian Lataan, ‘I was flying across the Atlantic, quietly minding my own business, when suddenly nothing happened!’, lataan.blogspot, 11 August 2006. Available online: Accessed 9 October 2006.