Starting with first principles and the scientific method
America First Books
Featuring ebooks that find a truer path in uncertain times

Kevin Alfred Strom Archive


The Iraq Quagmire

American Dissident Voices broadcast
November 15, 2003
by Kevin Alfred Strom


It's November now. And in November 2003, as we near the end of a year characterized by Washington's most craven submission to Jewish power in its history, it's good to reflect on what American Dissident Voices and National Vanguard have been saying since the year began.
2003 started out with ominous saber-rattling and outrageous lies by the neocons and their mouthpieces in the press and the Bush administration. The goal of the liars was to get the United States to invade Iraq, topple its government, and erect a Jew-friendly puppet regime in its place. The liars who promoted this war were of the same tribe -- and, in most cases, actually the same people -- as those who hate America and all her traditions and who are strenuously doing all they can to replace Americans with imported fellaheen, cheap labor and race-polluters from the Third World. But the Jewish liars cynically used American patriotism, something they laugh at in private, to stimulate outrage about the terror attacks of 9/11 and to get us to fight Israel's enemies in the Middle East.
First, Americans died and their savings were spent to replace the Islamic government of Afghanistan on the pretext that we would thereby destroy al-Qaeda and kill or neutralize Osama bin Laden. Needless to say, we have done neither.
But Iraq was the real target of the neoconservative Jews who have essentially taken over the Republican party and the conservative movement in the United States. They had been salivating over the prospect of putting a Zionist puppet government in Iraq for years, and their Project for the New American Century had even issued a detailed plan for doing exactly that in the mid-1990s. The Jewish state had known of the 9/11 hijackers before the fatal flights, but did not warn Americans. Some writers have alleged that the hijackers were patsies and the real impetus for the downing of the Twin Towers came from Israel, much as the Muslim hijacking of the Achille Lauro in 1985 was instigated and run -- probably without the knowledge of the patsies -- by Jewish operatives behind the scenes. In the case of the Achille Lauro, the goal was to tarnish the reputation of the Palestinian cause by causing the death of the only wheelchair-bound and helpless hostage on the ship, Leon Klinghoffer, a man who "just happened" to be Jewish and whose death caused headline-amplified grief all over the world.
[ ]
The 9/11 attacks, as was even admitted by Jewish leaders, caused Americans to experience what Jews experience on an almost-daily basis -- attacks and killings by pro-Palestinian Muslims -- and therefore created a 'bonding' between Israel and the United States and a desire on the part of Americans, who could not see through the deception, to attack what they thought was the obvious source of the problem: the anti-Israel Muslims. Whether or not the terrorist cell was secretly being run by the Mossad, or just observed and possibly nudged along by them, the result was the same: a propaganda triumph and the near-total capture of American military might by Israel.
[ ]
A few days ago Scotland's Sunday Herald confirmed this when they said "Benjamin Netanyahu was asked what the terrorist strikes would mean for US-Israeli relations. He said: 'It's very good.' Then he corrected himself, adding: 'Well, it's not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy [for Israel from Americans].'" And indeed it did exactly that.
And so, the blind Americans were led to conquer Iraq for their Zionist masters. Now, I'm not necessarily opposed to conquest -- conquest has often been Nature's way of rewarding the strong and the great with the land and the resources they needed to actualize their greatness. But in an ever more crowded and nuclear-armed world, conquest isn't what it used to be. Before spilling our blood and trying to conquer Iraq or anyplace else, a careful cost/benefit analysis should have taken place -- an analysis based on what's best for White America, not what's best for Israel. The non-White world is numerically stronger than the White world, and conquest of non-White lands would just mean more non-White biomass for our nation to deal with. And considering the racial treason of the current nominal leaders of the United States, more non-Whites would just mean more miscegenation and destruction of the White gene pool. And White civilization certainly isn't suffering from a lack of territory -- for the size of our population, a small minority of the human population of planet Earth, we really do control a large amount of land. Our primary problem is securing our existing territory -- or at least a substantial part of it -- for White people only. Conquering Iraq would just make that situation worse, especially when you consider the possibility of refugees from the war and a future wider war wanting to come to America and Europe. And we'd have to consider the economic costs, too, as well as the costs in White American blood to do the deed.
But none of these factors were even a consideration to the Perles and Wolfowitzes who run the Bush regime. They didn't intend to conquer Iraq to benefit America. They intended to conquer Iraq to utterly disable it as a threat to Israel, and they have no intention of using it or its resources or its people to benefit the United States in any way. To the United States, the Iraq adventure will just be a giant toilet down which we pour endless quantities of our irreplaceable sons' and daughters' blood and limitless billions of dollars which could be used to benefit the people of the United States. In other words, America will come out of the Iraq debacle genetically impoverished and incalculably poorer than she was before -- and the only beneficiary will be speculators who made the right bets and the state of Israel.
What did we tell you as this war was gearing up? Let's compare what the National Alliance told you -- and what the neocons who run Bush told you -- with what has happened so far.
1. We told you that the claims by Bush and his handlers that Iraq was working with al-Qaeda were lies. The head of the UN team tasked with monitoring and countering al-Qaeda, Michael Chandler, is certainly in a position to know. But he says that, despite all their efforts, not a single piece of information has come to light indicating that Iraq had anything to do with al-Qaeda or the 9/11 attacks. Even Zionist stringpuller Paul Wolfowitz admits that now. He was interviewed in August, when the occupation was a fait accompli, by conservative radio personality Laura Ingraham, and was asked when he first came to believe that Iraq was behind the 9-11 terrorist attacks. He replied "I'm not sure even now that I would say Iraq had something to do with it." And yet Wolfowitz and the other warmongers were singing a different tune when they needed Bobby Jo and Billy Sue to get enthusiastic about killing Iraqis, and the popular perception fostered by the Jewish media is still that occupying Iraq is a part of our 'war on terror' directly connected to preventing another 9/11.
[ ]
[ ]
2. We told you that the main claim used to justify the conquest of Iraq, that Iraq had hidden 'Weapons of Mass Destruction,' was a lie. Bush and his handlers repeated again and again that Saddam Hussein had such weapons and that his possession of these weapons was a direct threat to the United States of America. Americans were given the distinct impression that another 9/11-like event was in the immediate future -- this time launched by Iraq -- unless we did something now. Little Johnny and Jane might fry in their schoolyards unless we toppled Saddam now. And, too busy earning money, paying taxes, and getting on with their lives, Americans believed the serious-faced 'administration spokesmen' when they uttered these lies on national television. But, as we told you, they were indeed lies. No weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq. There was no threat whatsoever to the United States of America.
Even as early as May of this year, the Bush administration admitted as much after being embarrassed at the intense searches for such weapons turning up nothing. Scotland's Sunday Herald reported that "Senior officials in the Bush administration have admitted that they would be 'amazed' if weapons of mass destruction (WMD) were found in Iraq..."
As the war reached its climax, and the administration shills knew their Weapons Hoax would be exposed soon, they started changing their justification for the war from saving us from 'terrorism' to 'bringing freedom and democracy' to the Iraqis. What a sleazy bunch of liars they are, and shame on anyone who believes them.
[ ]
3. We told you that the assertion by the neocons that the American forces would be welcomed as 'liberators' was a lie and that the supposed 'mass demonstrations' of welcome in Iraq were staged. That's been shown to be true again and again. The scene in which Saddam's statue was toppled in Baghdad was staged from start to finish. As aerial photographs taken at the time have now shown, the US military sealed off the area and a few dozen imported Arabs affiliated with the criminal-linked Iraqi National Congress jumped up and down while network commentators induced fake tears as they spoke of the flag that flew on 9/11 being draped over the "new Hitler"'s face. And we revealed on this program how controlled media reporters had used image editing programs to make the staged demonstrations look much larger than they were. Embarrassed by the uncensored Internet showing up their lie factories, the Zionists have pretty much stopped faking demonstrations these days. It wouldn't be too believable anyway -- it's pretty obvious the occupiers are none too popular in Iraq.
[ ]
4. We told you that Jews and Zionists would be placed in positions of authority in Iraq. The chief occupation administrator in Iraq is hyper-Zionist Paul Bremer of Kissinger Associates. Need I say more?
[ ]
[ ]
5. We told you that the Iraqis would coalesce along religious and ethnic lines, all opposed to the invasion forces, and that one of the most powerful groups would be the Shiite Muslims, supported by their co-religionists in Iran. This is exactly what is happening. Once the open occupation ceases, do you think that these people are going to be friendly to America? Do you think that newly-liberated radical Shiites are going to love America more than the secular Baathists did? They may have had their military taken away from them -- and their children may start being indoctrinated by the new Jewish media being set up in Iraq, who will lure them away from their traditional ways with a combination of sexual degeneracy, rock and rap music, and whatever else it takes to break the culture's hold on its children. But all of this will just enrage the majority of the Muslim population in the short term, and another generation and yet another nation will join the uncounted billions who now see America as just an arm of their Jewish enemy.
6. We told you that claims of imminent use of chemical weapons by Iraq against American troops were bogus. We heard about chemical-laced shells. We heard ominous reports of a ring of barrels circling the capital, full of deadly toxins ready to be released that would kill everyone within miles as Saddam pursued a scorched-earth policy to deny Iraq even to his own people if he couldn't have it. But guess what? No chemical weapons were used. Another Jewish lie. The ones with chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons are the Zionists. They're the ones who endanger America. They're the ones who endanger the world, as Iraq never could and never did.
7. We told you that the economic consequences of this war would be significant. Bush just asked for $87 billion -- that's 87 thousands of millions of dollars -- to 'reconstruct Iraq.' Much of this will go to military operations, some will go to payoffs to get powerful Iraqis to 'go along' with the occupation regime, a small amount will actually go to replacing Iraqi infrastructure destroyed by the Jews' janissaries, and some will be siphoned off by crooks and corrupt officials, many of them Jews. This $87 billion doesn't even count what we've spent on destroying Iraq already, which is variously estimated at $20 billion to $60 billion dollars -- and some observers say expenses are mounting at a billion dollars per week. Accepting the lowest estimate and adding that to the $87 billion requested by Bush, we come up with an extremely conservative figure of $107 billion. On a yearly basis, that would be almost $300 million a day -- and it hasn't yet been a year since the war began, so the daily bill will be even higher.
And consider this: There are 3128 counties, parishes, and independent cities in the United States. If we had had no war in Iraq, we could have given each county a gift of more than $34,000,000. That's the very least this first round of the Zionist War has cost you. And for the most part, that's not money that's flowing back into the American economy. That's money, goods, and resources that we're never going to see again. That's your labor, your family members' labor, your retirement, your parent's pension and social security, the security of our veterans and elderly Americans, the future of our children, our schools and hospitals, all going up in smoke to help Israel rule the Middle East.
8. Most important of all, we told you that the Iraqis and other Muslim and Arab peoples were going to resist this conquest of their land, and that there would be a price paid in blood for our being hired killers for the Zionist side. This has been proved again and again, day after day, as Americans lose their lives in that burning prison camp called Iraq. Never a week goes by without American losses. There are sometimes long stretches where Americans are killed every day. Coalition deaths now exceed 400 and other casualties exceed 2,000. I'm watching the wires as I'm producing this show, and I see that several have been killed in just the last few hours.
The argument put forth by the Perles and Wolfowitzes early in this stinking war was that the only reason the Iraqis fought against their grand coalition was because they were afraid that Saddam and his secret police would kill them if they didn't. American Dissident Voices and the National Alliance called them on that lie right away, pointing out that the Hussein government was so unafraid of its own people that it was arming them as quickly as possible with freely available firearms. It's the current occupation government that has required the Iraqis to turn in their privately-owned weapons or face lethal consequences.
And now that Saddam's government has collapsed and no longer has any authority or ability to intimidate or coerce Iraqis, the fight against the occupiers not only continues but intensifies. These people are not fighting because Hussein has a gun to their backs. These people are fighting to take their country back, just as we predicted they would.
And some of them, at least, know who is responsible for their nation's plight. On October 26th, a sophisticated rocket attack involving at least six separate missiles hit the al-Rashid hotel in Baghdad, where visiting leaders of the occupying forces are known to stay and where in fact Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz was staying on that particular day. Eighteen were injured -- one U.S. soldier was killed -- and Zionist plotter Wolfowitz went unharmed this time. A US Military spokesman, Lieutenant Brian Dowd, said: "There is no guarantee we can protect against this kind of thing unless we have soldiers on every block."
I recently attended a lecture by a soldier who just returned from Iraq. He says that some of the US soldiers, despite the fact that they have a nasty job to do, are trying to show the Iraqi people that we are aware of our own oppression at the hands of the Zionists. He recounts the story of the Iraqi peddler who didn't understand much English, but smiled broadly when the soldier drew a Star of David on a scrap of paper with the word 'Israel' written under it -- and then ripped the paper to shreds and trod on it with his military boots. Other soldiers say that many of our fighting men are wising up to how America has been hoodwinked into this war, and some are even starting to openly refer to Paul Wolfowitz, the recent escapee at the al-Rashid and one of the war's main architects, as 'Wolfman Jew.' Jew-awareness is running high now, and it transcends class and occupation and political orientation.
Let me ask you a question. Has flattening and occupying Iraq ended terrorism? Has it made Americans safer? Did destroying the Taliban make us safer? Let me ask you another question. What makes the Arabs and Muslims hate us? Could it just possibly be our killing them and occupying their countries and funding and supporting people who have been killing them and herding them into concentration camps for decades? Would ending our support for aggressive Zionism -- which would almost instantly cause our European allies to end their support for Zionism, too -- make America safer? Would it go a long way towards solving the terrorism problem? Would it heal the rift between America and much of Europe? Think about it. Open your mind to the idea that Israel's interests and America's interests are not the same.
If we can build a broad consciousness of how 'Wolfman Jew' and his accomplices have raped America, raped the White race, and raped the world -- and if we have the will and dedication to turn that consciousness into action -- then the sacrifice of billions of dollars and the priceless blood of our people in Iraq will not have been in vain.


For the latest contact, donation, and other update information regarding Kevin Alfred Strom, please visit his web page at Please also visit, and Prices, addresses, and availability information pertaining to materials cited in his works are subject to change.

Please also visit the America First Institute donation page.




Flag carried by the 3rd Maryland Regiment at the Battle of Cowpens, S. Carolina, 1781

© America First Books
America First Books offers many viewpoints that are not necessarily its own in order to provide additional perspectives.