english.daralhayat.com 2008/12/04 20:43 GMT

Ayoon wa Azan (Puppet Master)

Jihad Al Khazen Al-Hayat 2004/08/18

When Ralph Nader said that the Israeli player is the moving the strings of the White House and Congress puppet, he was accused by Jewish pressure groups, of promoting the idea of the control of Jews over the United States. He insisted on his stance, and I insist with him; a well-known current example on this is that because Israel is worried from the Iranian nuclear program, the U.S. insists on terminating it.

It has been weeks that I am reading declarations or officials' comments in Israeli newspapers, which all agree on the danger of the Iranian nuclear program. If I could summarize the Israeli opinion in one article, it would be the editorial of Eitan Haber in Yedioth Ahronoth, the most popular Israeli newspaper. He said that nothing is more important for the State of Israel, than the declarations of National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice; as the hope, prayer, and conviction is that the U.S., despite who will become President, would ban the Iranian bomb, through diplomatic means, as well a military intervention.

On July 17, I wrote an article about the negotiations to constitute a coalition government in Israel, and I said that the history of the past decades show that the Israelis never formed coalition governments except when they wanted to go into war against Arabs… If I wanted to record here my feeling that the coalition government might undertake a strike against Iran in order to destroy its nuclear power, despite the fact that I have not read anything about this objective within the current coalition negotiations.

I might have preceded the debate about the Iranian nuclear program of two weeks at least; but it seems that I was two decades late in understanding the developments of the American-Israeli policy. I was, with the background of Israel's destruction of the Iraqi nuclear facilities via an air raid, expecting, or warning, of a similar raid against Iran. But the Israeli power in the U.S. has increased during the last two decades, to an extent that the Israeli player, who is moving the strings of the American puppet, is assigning this strike to the U.S., on the behalf of Israel, like it did in the war on Iraq.

The talk of Eitan Haber was not only an opinion about this issue, as Menashe Amir wrote in Ma'ariv that all American leaders have issued clear warnings concerning the Iranian nuclear plans. Also, another journalist wrote a comparison between the U.S. on the one hand, which states that it will take some action, and openly threats, but then does whatever it wants, like it happened in its war against Saddam Hussein; and between Israel on the other hand, which, if it wanted to do something against its enemies, it remains silent. What is meant here is that the American administration openly threatens Iran, and the Israeli government is silent, which means that it is hiding something. Is this why I did not hear anything a month ago?

Israeli commentators are excused if they think that the U.S. would do the dirty job on behalf of Israel, as President Bush clearly announced last week that the Iranian nuclear program worries him, and he vowed to maintain an international diplomatic pressure on the Iranian government, in order for it to stop its ambitions in building a nuclear bomb.

The President's talk about an international diplomatic effort is simply a response to his Democrat rival John Kerry, who criticized the individualism of the decisions of the Bush administration, and its lack of negotiating with its allies. But Miss Rice was more honest two days later, when she said during a television program, that the U.S. will not allow the development of nuclear weapons, and that President Bush is studying all the means available to him in order to stop the Iranian nuclear program.

The message "all means" was clear, as it did not make an exception of a military strike, although the talk was about the International Atomic Energy Agency issuing of a warning to Iran next month; this latter has to either give up its nuclear program, or face an international isolation and boycott that the U.S. wants to change into sanctions.

The problem in the issue of sanctions is that Iran is not Saddam Hussein's Iraq; no country in the world is like Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Thus, it is probable that the Western allies, China, and Russia refuse to go through such an American plan, so the domain remains open to a military strike. And if the U.S. does not undertake this on the behalf of Israel, then this latter would undertake it under the full political protection of America.

Ayatollah Khamenei accused President George Bush of eradicating the race, and Israeli of being a gang of criminals; but these attacks will not deter America and Israel, as behind the campaign against Iran, there is the same neo-conservatives cabal that worked for the war on Iraq, which resulted in the killing of 1,000 American and British soldiers so far, for the sake of Israel, considering that the blood of thousands of Iraqis does not matter to them.

Deputy Secretary of Defense and head of the Israeli evil mob in the administration Paul Wolfowitz, is the one who led the campaign for war on Iraq, and presented 100 lying pretexts for undertaking it; nevertheless, he was not punished or held accountable, and is now leading the campaign against Iran, along with Lewis Libby, Douglas Feith, John Bolton, and the evil horns like Charles Krauthammer of the Washington Post, Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise, and William Kristol of the Weekly Standard.

Wolfowitz will appear before Congress commissions to say that 54 American soldiers were killed in Iraq during the month of June, and 42 were killed in July. It seems that a higher number will be killed this August. But Wolfowitz does not say that he is responsible, along with his fellow neo-cons, for the killing of these soldiers. Thus, he does not find any embarrassment in promoting a war on Iran, which might lead to the death of a higher number of Americans.

Would a war against Iran, or an abortive strike that Krauthammer is working for, be the "October surprise" that would allow George Bush to win the elections in November? Or would it be the head of Osama bin Laden?

Krauthammer, Ledeen, and Kristol wrote that the world could not wait for the results of the diplomatic pressure on Iran, and wants a preemptive strike, because this is what Israel wants; as they are fully Israelis, and have an extremist, killing Likudnik loyalty.

As citizens of the Middle East, we ask for the disarmament of the region from nuclear weapons. But, if Israel would remain the only country with nuclear power, then we ask that Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt in particular, possess similar weapons, in order to stop Israel from attacking Egypt, Syria, and every country the U.S. and Israel are trying to control.

<h1>Ayoon wa Azan (Puppet Master)</h1><h4>Jihad Al Khazen     Al-Hayat      2004/08/18</h4>When Ralph Nader said that the Israeli player is the moving the strings of the White House and Congress puppet, he was accused by Jewish pressure groups, of promoting the idea of the control of Jews over the United States. He insisted on his stance, and I insist with him; a well-known current example on this is that because Israel is worried from the Iranian nuclear program, the U.S. insists on terminating it.        It has been weeks that I am reading declarations or officials' comments in Israeli newspapers, which all agree on the danger of the Iranian nuclear program. If I could summarize the Israeli opinion in one article, it would be the editorial of Eitan Haber in Yedioth Ahronoth, the most popular Israeli newspaper. He said that nothing is more important for the State of Israel, than the declarations of National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice; as the hope, prayer, and conviction is that the U.S., despite who will become President, would ban the Iranian bomb, through diplomatic means, as well a military intervention.On July 17, I wrote an article about the negotiations to constitute a coalition government in Israel, and I said that the history of the past decades show that the Israelis never formed coalition governments except when they wanted to go into war against Arabs… If I wanted to record here my feeling that the coalition government might undertake a strike against Iran in order to destroy its nuclear power, despite the fact that I have not read anything about this objective within the current coalition negotiations.I might have preceded the debate about the Iranian nuclear program of two weeks at least; but it seems that I was two decades late in understanding the developments of the American-Israeli policy. I was, with the background of Israel's destruction of the Iraqi nuclear facilities via an air raid, expecting, or warning, of a similar raid against Iran. But the Israeli power in the U.S. has increased during the last two decades, to an extent that the Israeli player, who is moving the strings of the American puppet, is assigning this strike to the U.S., on the behalf of Israel, like it did in the war on Iraq.The talk of Eitan Haber was not only an opinion about this issue, as Menashe Amir wrote in Ma'ariv that all American leaders have issued clear warnings concerning the Iranian nuclear plans. Also, another journalist wrote a comparison between the U.S. on the one hand, which states that it will take some action, and openly threats, but then does whatever it wants, like it happened in its war against Saddam Hussein; and between Israel on the other hand, which, if it wanted to do something against its enemies, it remains silent. What is meant here is that the American administration openly threatens Iran, and the Israeli government is silent, which means that it is hiding something. Is this why I did not hear anything a month ago?Israeli commentators are excused if they think that the U.S. would do the dirty job on behalf of Israel, as President Bush clearly announced last week that the Iranian nuclear program worries him, and he vowed to maintain an international diplomatic pressure on the Iranian government, in order for it to stop its ambitions in building a nuclear bomb.The President's talk about an international diplomatic effort is simply a response to his Democrat rival John Kerry, who criticized the individualism of the decisions of the Bush administration, and its lack of negotiating with its allies. But Miss Rice was more honest two days later, when she said during a television program, that the U.S. will not allow the development of nuclear weapons, and that President Bush is studying all the means available to him in order to stop the Iranian nuclear program.The message "all means" was clear, as it did not make an exception of a military strike, although the talk was about the International Atomic Energy Agency issuing of a warning to Iran next month; this latter has to either give up its nuclear program, or face an international isolation and boycott that the U.S. wants to change into sanctions.The problem in the issue of sanctions is that Iran is not Saddam Hussein's Iraq; no country in the world is like Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Thus, it is probable that the Western allies, China, and Russia refuse to go through such an American plan, so the domain remains open to a military strike. And if the U.S. does not undertake this on the behalf of Israel, then this latter would undertake it under the full political protection of America.Ayatollah Khamenei accused President George Bush of eradicating the race, and Israeli of being a gang of criminals; but these attacks will not deter America and Israel, as behind the campaign against Iran, there is the same neo-conservatives cabal that worked for the war on Iraq, which resulted in the killing of 1,000 American and British soldiers so far, for the sake of Israel, considering that the blood of thousands of Iraqis does not matter to them.Deputy Secretary of Defense and head of the Israeli evil mob in the administration Paul Wolfowitz, is the one who led the campaign for war on Iraq, and presented 100 lying pretexts for undertaking it; nevertheless, he was not punished or held accountable, and is now leading the campaign against Iran, along with Lewis Libby, Douglas Feith, John Bolton, and the evil horns like Charles Krauthammer of the Washington Post, Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise, and William Kristol of the Weekly Standard.Wolfowitz will appear before Congress commissions to say that 54 American soldiers were killed in Iraq during the month of June, and 42 were killed in July. It seems that a higher number will be killed this August.  But Wolfowitz does not say that he is responsible, along with his fellow neo-cons, for the killing of these soldiers. Thus, he does not find any embarrassment in promoting a war on Iran, which might lead to the death of a higher number of Americans.Would a war against Iran, or an abortive strike that Krauthammer is working for, be the "October surprise" that would allow George Bush to win the elections in November? Or would it be the head of Osama bin Laden?Krauthammer, Ledeen, and Kristol wrote that the world could not wait for the results of the diplomatic pressure on Iran, and wants a preemptive strike, because this is what Israel wants; as they are fully Israelis, and have an extremist, killing Likudnik loyalty. As citizens of the Middle East, we ask for the disarmament of the region from nuclear weapons. But, if Israel would remain the only country with nuclear power, then we ask that Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt in particular, possess similar weapons, in order to stop Israel from attacking Egypt, Syria, and every country the U.S. and Israel are trying to control.