Demagoguery & Propaganda, prelude to future wars.

It is apparent to any observer with a keen eye for truth and meaning that the Israeli media, Pro-Israeli lobby in America, and the zealous Israel supporters, are churning the soil for a series of fresh new wars. Their focus is aimed at two main audiences, the minds of the Israelis themselves and those of the international community.

In Israel, the rhetoric is same, raising feelings of insecurity about mounting threats, and as a result, serving to justify further militarization of their population and increasing armament.

On the international level, Jews and gentiles are made to feel similarly insecure as they are told that they due to the decision of the terrorists, and not as a result of Israel's muddled plans and illicit crimes, are now potential prey for a ruthless beast infused with hatred and bloodlust. Consequently, they immediately garner sympathy and support worldwide.

Equally important, the sense of insecurity begets a sense of urgency, coupled with a sense of responsibility, a feeling that something has to be done to protect and save Israel. When the pretext is created, and it will be, as it always has been created in the past, the war will proceed, and Israel's actions will seem natural and licit in the minds of all blind observers.

U.S. Attack on Iran: Mission Impossible?

The latest news on an attack on Iran by the U.S. is that there is no attack, according to U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney, who is currently in the midst of his 9-day Middle East cruise. Is this a surprise or is this not? Well, I think it is a little of both. The surprising part is that Mr. Cheney known as a warmonger, who thrives on war for his individual business purposes, denied an attack on Iran. At the same time, it should not be a surprise, since our U.S. economy has only deteriorated the past 5 to 7 years, and our army has been spread razor thin, which basically eliminates any effectiveness in any battle with Iran. Then the U.S. is faced with the sudden positions of major countries such as Russia who are suddenly confronting and criticizing U.S. foreign policy in the world, and could very possibly entail another cold war. Not to mention, Iran’s hard-hitting and vastly improving military capabilities where they supposedly introduced the fastest underwater missile in the world. Not to forget, that Iran also manufactures their own airplanes, long range missiles, etc. Plus, Iran has recently launched a satellite into space, which led to the U.S. shooting down one of their own satellites. Hmmm, I wonder why?

The U.S. proclaimed that the satellite was outdated and plain old “not working”. But, I personally doubt this is the case. There are two possible answers to why the U.S, would shoot down their own satellite in conjunction with Iran launching its own one. Either, the U.S. is trying to prove to Iran that they are capable of taking down any satellite they wish. Or, the fact that the Iranian military has reached new horizons, which evidently means that the U.S. now feels threatened from a highly capable Iranian satellite that the U.S. had to shoot down their own. Moreover that would be to prevent Iran’s highly capable satellite from drawing any transmitted data from the U.S. satellite.

Now at this instant, we are confronted with two answers which indicate two conflicting outcomes: Either, the U.S. is fully capable of launching a war and are trying to play the game of psychological warfare to begin with. Or, the second answer indicates that the U.S. is caught in a big pothole in places such as Iraq and Afghanistan, and are just worn-out in gauging another war. But my worry is that the U.S. launches a war even of they are incapable of launching one, stemming from the gaffes of some of our dim-witted government officials that is of course headed by Mr. Cheney himself…

"Experts" Still Beating Around the Bush

Last Friday, throngs of people gathered at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, some in solidarity with and others against, two political scientists, Professor John J. Mearsheimer and Professor Stephen Walt, who spoke on subject of the powerful American Pro-Israeli Lobby and its somewhat enchanting influence on both the public opinion and policy of the United States of America.

Honestly, I wasn't overly impressed with some of the opinions that the professors held at the close of the event; however, this does not make me neglectful and unappreciative of the admirable stance they took by speaking against the mighty Goliath that seems to have enslaved the will and minds of every influential mouthpiece in the public arena. In this meager contribution, I'll outline some of my opinions in regards to some of their thoughts.

First, let me begin with the 'infamous' question, that which concerns the existence of the state of Israel. The sacred unassailable paragon of democracy and justice that must never be questioned or subjected to anyones or any institutions analysis or oversight, because that is illicit, immoral and beyond the confines of decent and acceptable human behavior.

The professors affirmed their belief in the right of Israels existence, but also the existence of some form of Palestinian state, based on the UN partition plan, ignoring all the history and annexation that occurred before that ingenious plan was concocted. Hassan Nawash cleverly reminded the two professors that 35% of the Jews that lived at that time only owned 7% of the land before the partition, and that the problem lies in addressing why they deserve the lionshare of the land at the expense of the indigenous people, the Palestinians.

It seems that these professors, like many people who are somehow remotely detached from humanity and that are too engrossed with themselves, or a purely superficial reality, theoretical conjecture, or ink blotted papers, forget the nature of human beings, and the essence of the human spirit that simply doesn't submit its mind to simple promises or logical, flawed subjective plans, all that don't serve to remedy the ailments of peoples hearts, and serve to preserve their dignity, honor, and true justice, the true objective reality that exists on the scene of this conflict.

When will 'experts' learn that ideas such as 'land for peace', and other frail solutions will not and cannot ever solve the problem that exists. That a material promise cannot solve an immaterial problem, that gold cannot buy the collective consciousness of a people, or heal the countless wounds instilled through time.

Those few who spoke of challenging Israels right to exist, rightfully engaged in something that is permitted in any country or land in which a governing body governs the inhabitants of a land, and such an argument is not exclusive for Israel. If in America for instance, the government acts to oppress the people which it governs, then naturally, the people who gave the government its legitimacy, have a just right to demand that their rights be respected, and have the right to hold those that infringed on their rights accountable.

An apartheid state, must not exist in its apartheid nature - that doesn't entail the eradication of the Afrikaner population, and similarly, the dissolving of Israel in its current illegitimate form doesn't entail the eradication and destruction of the Jewish population. It does however include the elimination of a problem that has existed for six decades, the erasing of Palestine and the Palestinians off the map, minds, and hearts of humankind, a sentence, which the entire world doesn't feel or think is reprehensible.

I don't expect six hundred words to be sufficient enough to awaken the consciousness of the world, and that is why I implore every reader who takes a glance at my words, or anyones words, regardless of ones predisposition towards the issue being discussed, to investigate with an objective mind to seek the truth. It is not easy, it does appear to be gray, but believe me, even if you don't believe that causality is absolutely true, every effect has some reasonable cause, therefore, don't distract yourself with the effect, and shift your gaze and peer at the root cause, that which must be addressed.