So Who’s Next?
edited: Thursday, April 10, 2003
By Shezray Faisal
Posted: Thursday, April 10, 2003
Become a Fan
Syria's Assad:'We will not wait' to be next U.S. target.’
America is bombing nations. Iraq is down! Next please!
While I write this, American tanks are loitering the streets of Baghdad. The world is glued to news channels wondering if America has more countries on its agenda? Former U.S. Senator and Democratic presidential candidate George McGovern thinks so. According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
“President Bush intends to invade North Korea and Iran after finishing with Iraq.”
"Even now, these wars are being planned by the current administration," McGovern said. "I'm positive, based on conversations with people close to the White House, that plans are in place for the next invasions."
It’s tediously clear that America is not going to hit the brakes yet. But why is Bush adamant on changing the political map of the Middle East? Well, if we look deeply into the matter, its America and Israel that benefit from this so-called war against terror.
This is how: Iraq's financial support for Palestinian freedom fighters will be gone, the Arab conviction that a drastic, violent alternative to a negotiated settlement for itself will be demoralized. Yasser Arafat will be discredited as Saddam's closest Middle East ally and the perception that United States as too weak to force any compromise from Arabs or Palestinians will change. It’s all comes down to oil and dividing Syria, Iraq and Iran into little states and crowning Israel as the superpower of the region.
Irrespective of what bland explanations the US government comes up with, the truth remains that Muslims are being targeted and prevented from helping one another by slapping UN resolutions in their faces, resolutions that America follows or breaks at its own free will. And then they wonder why Muslims call for Jihad. This is called self-defense! Kpeesh?
If America thinks it is breaking down Muslim nations bit by bit, its dead wrong. It’s only poking at a sleeping monster. It might have displaced the Taliban and may think its still uprooting al Qaeda but its actually only certifying their claim that the U.S. is determined to control their region, is an enemy of every Muslim states and convincing Muslims from all walks of life to join them in Jihad. America’s policy toward Iraq has alienated most of the important political secular and religious actors who had been averse to join with radical anti-American forces until now. America might be planning years ahead; al Qaeda’s timeframe is decade-to-decade, generation-to-generation.
American is a proud and independent nation that claims that it will trample any homeland it perceives as a threat yet ironically it submits to the dictates of a foreign nation, none other then Israel. You don’t agree? Then why has there been continuous unrest and warfare in the Middle East since 1948, the fateful year when Israel was founded? Haven’t you noticed that America perceives Islam as a threat since the collapse of communism in 1991? Why were Washington and New York attacked on 9/11, why not London or Madrid? Why is Bush obsessed with annihilating Iraq while popularity polls are plunging?
Your answer is I*S*R*E*A*L!
Is it so hard to put two and two together?
The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is one of the root causes of the deeply embedded enmity between the East and the West. It’s a barrier between them that keeping world peace at a perpetual edge. Israel wants to be the supreme power in the Middle East, it wants a cut of what US gains in its war against terror.
Its high time that the world learns a lesson from the Jewish history, read Benjamin Ginsberg's intellectual bombshell: "The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State". Jews financed liberal groups and propagandized the public in the liberal revolutions. Helped established the Third Republic in France in the 1870s. Gained imperialism in Jewish-dominated press in Britain in the late 19th-century that benefited Jewish finance. In the Soviet regime they were in leading posts and in majority in the secret police and the propaganda agencies; hence always becoming prominent targets. They have a history of wiggling their way up to power by hook or crook and now they reign in America, twisting American foreign policy.
Welcome to the congress! 11% of the Senators are Jewish, tell me how can that be justified when the Jewish population in US is only around 1.7%. What happened to representation of other minorities? This is exactly what Former Secretary of State James Baker meant when he called the Congress "Little Knesset (Israel's Parliament)".
The American Governments swing like a pendulum between the interests of the American people and the Pro-Israel politics. Yet they are greedy for Jewish money and votes and don’t have the courage to face a backlash from the Pro-Israeli Media. Saying no to the Shylocks is putting an end to a political career or putting a nation’s name on the "Hit List”. Its not that the American leaders are blind, they have made themselves feeble. Read on…
"I've never seen a president --I don't care who he is-- stand up to them [the Israelis]. It just boggles your mind. They always get what they want.... If the American people understood what grip those people have on our government, they would rise up in arms. Our citizens don't have any idea what goes on."
(Admiral Thomas Moorer of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. (See Washington Report 12/1999, p.124 quoting from Andrew Hurley's book, "One Nation Under Israel")
"I am aware how almost impossible it is in this country to carry out a foreign policy [in the Middle East] not approved by the Jews... terrific control the Jews have over the news media and the barrage the Jews have built up on congressmen.... I am very much concerned over the fact that the Jewish influence here is completely dominating the scene and making it almost impossible to get congress to do anything they don't approve of. The Israeli embassy is practically dictating to the congress through influential Jewish people in the country"
(Sec. of State John Foster Dulles in Feb. 1957 quoted on p.99 of Fallen Pillars by Donald Neff)
Organized Jewry is walking corridors of powers in all arenas. The European Jews founded Hollywood Studios; almost Nine Major Media Conglomerates that control most of the world media are owned or directed by Jews. Jewish editors, journalists, or columnists are a monopoly in comparison to any other ethnic group. If you are anti-Israel or pro-Islam, there is no space for you in the Washington Post, Wall Street Journal and Op-Ed pages etc. CNN, Fox News, NBC are not interested in inviting you. The bottom line is that there is ZERO TOLERANCE in America’s Media for any criticism towards Israel or Jews in general.
They will never let the world forget the Holocaust that they brazenly exploit and cannot acknowledge the historic fact that it is man who practices his inhumanity on fellow human beings. Yet ironically the Jews in Israel are propagating the same crimes against innocent Palestinians. Like Alfred M Lilienthal said, “What else can account for the anomaly by which the once persecuted have adopted the philosophy of their chief persecutor?” The American leaders corrupted by campaign financing laws support Israel for money in exchange for funds, weapons, and veto power at the U.N. Will no one stand up against the "Palestinian Holocaust”?
Did anybody stand up for Afghanistan? Has anybody really stood up for Iraq? Will they stand up against the next victim? Or will the knowing nations fight by themselves. Like Syria's Assad: “We will not wait to be next U.S. target.”
U.S. has no choice but to mistrust Syria. Why? Because of its implacable opposition to Israel of course! Until recently, Damascus had shown passive acceptance of military action and it voted in favor of Security Council Resolution 1441 yet it later called for suicide missions and allegedly allowed busloads of Syrians to head for Iraq to fight against U.S. and British forces and letting the Arab Street take off steam. It’s been an outspoken critic of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, opposing efforts at the United Nations for a second Security Council resolution specifically authorizing war.
Now its alarmed by the collapse of its neighbor and ally. Wedged between Turkey and Iraq it is rightly fearful of Washington in control in Baghdad and Ankara in charge up in the north. Syria may be in questionable occupation of parts of Lebanon and may maintain a substantial arsenal of missiles equipped with chemical warheads. Furthermore if it enters the war against US, Israel is likely to want to step in, as Ariel Sharon could not tolerate sitting on the sidelines.
Iran however, might just prove to be the litmus paper to test the European-American relations’. France, Germany, and other western European countries have worked quietly and steadily to improve relations with Iran and their correlation with it is free of the embittered historical memories that remain from the U.S. role in the overthrow of Mossadeq in 1952 and the embassy siege of 1979-80.
Iran was stung when President Bush listed it as part of the "axis of evil," along with Iraq and North Korea. It had two main concerns: firstly that the shrines are kept intact so it moved some Republican Guard forces to the shrines, which are believed to be off-limits to American weapons and complicated U.S. plans to fight those units. Secondly that the fighting remained inside Iraq and there is no spilling over the Basra borders to root out guerrillas.
What complicates matters it that the Badr Brigade, the armed wing of the Tehran-based Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq comprising of Iraqi exiles (share the Shiite branch of Islam with Iran) is ready for action. Ayatollah Mohammed Baqir Hakim said in Tehran that U.S. troops would face armed resistance if they stayed in Iraq once Saddam is overthrown and that thousands of troops were stationed inside and outside Iraq, ready to resist any foreign occupation. As usual Rumsfeld had a reply: "we're suggesting they not interfere." Anybody hear the warning bells?
Now Iran will have the Americans on both sides of them, in Afghanistan to the east and in Iraq to the west. They will imagine, quite logically, that Iran is America's next target. Since oil is the lure, the Iranian connection in George Bush's speech gains significance. Iran has remarkable combination of oil reserves, massive gas reserves, potential control of the Straits of Hormuz and a geographical location at the heart of southwest Asia. Even a dimwit can tell that Iran is therefore a perfect answer to controlling an unstable yet crucial region. But then America has always been laudable at global chess.
Now the present proximity of U.S. forces will cause serious concern in Tehran, bolster support for the more conservative elements, particularly among the clerics, allow an opening for Russia to expand its influence in the country and obviously increase Iran's desire to develop its own strategic deterrent, based largely on missiles and chemical and biological weapons.
A new realignment is bringing together political forces against the United States in Muslim nations and new nuclear powers. Bush has already raised his eyebrow concerning North Korea and many have reason to believe that Pakistan might be on his ‘hit list’ too.
Pakistan might not have oil reserves but it has a history of Islamic militancy support especially for Afghanistan's Taliban regime before Sept. 11. Regional specialist Peter Tomsen said that Pakistan's military intelligence unit is the "cement that held the Afghan model together," He further added that Musharraf’s removal of some military officers after strengthening relations with the US has no effect since those officials continue to direct the work of Pakistan's Islamic militants from their retired status.
Pakistan not only has nuclear warheads but also zeal for Islamic brotherhood amongst the masses. Protests are gathering momentum that the Khilafat would have never allowed America to undermine the security of the Muslim Ummah as Pakistan has done. Muslim radicals want to establish Khilafah, which will pursue an independent foreign policy, call for Jihad and salvage the Muslim Ummah from colonialism.
Also there has been much said about Pakistani nukes falling in the hands of dangerous rudiments hence their safety is dubious. India fears that and is vocal about it. It been edgy since after the attack on India's parliament and is waiting to see to what extend it can use America’s war against terror for its own purposes although America has warned against any such notions.
Right now Pakistan is an ally, once this pawn is of no further use, America might decide to keep its dirty hands clean and instead give India a green signal but it doesn’t want a blowup while Pakistan is a nuclear rival to India.
Solution: Take out Pakistan’s nuclear assets. But this move will not help America’s war against terrorists. It will be viewed as a collective war against Islam, period. Already Muslims are protesting that Pakistan is being given negative coverage in the western media because it is an Islamic country with nuclear weapons.
It’s been politically suicidal for Pakistan to trust the US with its national security. Bush Jr. needs a marionette in Musharraf like Bush Sr. found one in Saddam in the bygone days. America is a colonizing nation; it will try to breakup any nation that openly supports and aids Palestine or threatens its omnipotence like the Soviet Union did. What on earth is Pakistan thinking of? That Bush Jr. might have more integrity then Bush Sr. and might overlook Pakistan as an ally? Since when can camels learn how to fly?
Well whether they can or not, they have somehow managed to fly across borders and taken over capitals. So if you are planning to visit Baghdad or Tehran while Israel rubs its hands together in anticipation, you might as well be greeted with a sign saying: 'Closed For Maintenance'!
Benjamin Ginsberg's "The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State,"
‘Israel: America's Shame’ Mohamed Khodr
‘The Zionist Connection II: What Price Peace?’ Lilienthal, Alfred M.
Want to review or comment on this article?
Click here to login!
Need a FREE Reader Membership?
Click here for your Membership!
|Reviewed by Saad Omer
|Uncle Sam, Uncle Sam, have you any fool?
Yes sir, yes sir, he's in the rule...
"One for Saddam and one for Taliban
One for Pakistan, who jumps again and again!"
|Reviewed by Alexander Shaumyan (Reader)
|Very good article with excellent points.|
|Reviewed by Sheeraz Saadat
|Well lets see whos next but one things for sure. Its the beginning of the End for the US. Im a firm believer of the fact that, in this world, u cant get away with injustice. Hitler didnt, Saddam didnt, Bust wont either!
|Reviewed by Qamar Abbasi
|Good writing.. I agree with your points/concerns.
|Reviewed by Muhammad Ali Panhwar
|I agree with your point of view but I dont see this matter black & white as you do. Lets try to answer few simple questions;
1, What were the causes which helped United States emerged as a powerful nation till now?
2, What should we do to become more powerful?
Thank You for sharing.
|Reviewed by J Michael Kearney
|First, this is extremely well written. You might think of expanding into a book, by adding onto your themes and going deeper into some of these areas.
I do have some disagreements. Israel was constructed by Britain and the U.S.in the wake of WW II. The Arab world had alligned itself with the Axis Powers (Germany, Italy and Japan) both times.
Today, Israel acts as a sattelite for the West (England & America) in the Mid-East and that's why the U.S. and Britain insist that Israel "has a right to exist," and that any building of a Palestinian State will have come with assurances from the entire region that Israel's right to exist is accepted.
I think both Bush & Blair are committed to the getting nuclear weapons out of the hands of nations like North Korea...and other such nations. I don't believe that either India or Pakistan would be considered in that category. At any rate, it would be impossible to suggest de-nuking Pakistan without de-nuking India at the same time, but even such "mutual disarmament" is distrusted.
How do two sides that have a history of mistrust, come to trust in the other's disarmament?
I also believe that Iraq will be returned to Iraqi control almost immediately. Some will argue that "a pro-Western government" has been installed, but a repressive regime like Hussein's, and one that openly supported Hammas' suicide/homicide bombers is untenable to both the U.S. and Britain.
Just some of my thoughts on the matter.
Once again, fine writing!