|
|
 |
Exposing Zionist myths about Hezbollah and IranBy Paul J. Balles* 10 August 2006
Paul J. Balles exposes the Zionist myth that Lebanon's Hezbollah is a proxy for Iran and that Iran wants to wipe Israel off the map - a myth which may hide an Israeli intention to rid occupied Palestine of the Palestinians.
It is a myth, not a mandate, a fable not a logic, and a symbol rather than a reason by which men are moved. - Irwin Edman
Nothing is more difficult than competing with a myth. -Françoise Giroud
The invasion and occupation of Iraq were based on a myth created by the neo-conservatives in America, trumpeted by George W. Bush and spread by a Zionist-controlled media.
That myth, as most people outside of the USA now know, was a fictionalized account of non-existent weapons of mass destruction in Saddam Hussein's non-existent arsenal.
What really transpired was that "dual loyalists" in the American administration wanted to eliminate any possibility of Iraq developing a destructive force that could endanger Israel. The so-called dual loyalists - with names like Perle, Wolfowitz, Wurmser and Feith - were and still are more loyal to Israel than to America.
Now, a new assault orchestrated by the Zionists is moving forward with the aid of another myth that Iran wants to develop a nuclear arsenal to "wipe Israel off the map".
The invasion of Lebanon is part of that myth. When Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers on Lebanese territory, the Israeli's leapt at the opportunity to use that as an excuse to attack Lebanon, provoking Hezbollah to retaliate.
The Zionist argument about defending Israel from attack is a sham. The only attacks by Hezbollah on Israel since they were run out of Lebanon in 2000 have been retaliatory when attacked by Israeli forces.
The reason for the sham excuse by Israel to attack Lebanon: the Israelis knew that, if they provoked them, Hezbollah would respond in kind. During this time, while bombing Lebanon to smithereens, the Zionist propaganda machine has been at work.
In case you've missed the propaganda, here's how it goes: "Israel must defend itself against attackers. Hezbollah is attacking us. Hezbollah is supplied by Iran through Syria."
The conclusion of the sham argument is this: Hezbollah's attacks on Israel prove that Iran wants to wipe Israel off the map. Everyone knows that Hezbollah and Syria couldn't accomplish this. Their complicity only reveals that Iran has willing allies in the (propagandized) plans to destroy Israel.
The next part of the sham argument goes thusly: since Iran wants to eliminate Israel, according to its president, and since it insists on its right to develop a nuclear capacity, and since they're lying about wanting nuclear power for peaceful purposes, Iran must be attacked and destroyed.
What's wrong with the argument? Iran's president did not say that Israel (the country) should be wiped off the map. That interpretation of what he said was based on a fraudulent translation of Ahmedinejad's speech.
The president's comment was "Imam [Khomeini] said: This regime that is occupying Qods [Jerusalem] must be eliminated from the pages of history".
As one commentator wrote: "The perfidious thing about this translation is that the expression 'map' can only be used in one (intentional) way: a state can be removed from a map but not a regime, about which Ahmadinejad is actually speaking."
Carrying the myth forward, G.W. Bush said, based entirely on the misinterpretation of Ahmedinejad's speech: "The threat from Iran is, of course, their stated objective to destroy our strong ally Israel. That's a threat, a serious threat. It's a threat to world peace; it's a threat, in essence, to a strong alliance. I made it clear, I'll make it clear again, that we will use military might to protect our ally, Israel."
The truth was that Iran advocated a regime change in Israel. As Anneliese Fikentscher and Andreas Neumann observed, "To commute a demand for removal of a 'regime' into a demand for removal of a state is serious deception and dangerous demagogy."
The myth that Iran would be a nuclear threat to Israel is the most ludicrous part of the Zionist propaganda campaign and the most dangerous part of the neo-cons' deliberate and irrational deception.
When and why would Iran pose a nuclear threat to Israel? The answer is irrefutable: Iran could not conceivably consider a nuclear attack on Israel as long as the Israelis occupy what Ahmadinejad referred to as "our dear Palestinians".
The only conceivable danger to Israel from Iran - even if Iran had nuclear weapons - would be (1) if the Palestinians were eliminated from Palestine, and (2) if Israel then attacked Iran.
If Israelis keep harping on the sham argument about the potential danger from Iran, knowing that the Iranians would never target Palestinians, the only logical deduction is that Israel plans to rid occupied Palestine of the Palestinians.
No one wants to see Iran develop a nuclear bomb. By the same token, no one should want to allow Israel to keep its estimated 200 nuclear warheads. On the other hand, a nuclear warhead in Iran's arsenal could very well keep Israel from turning the entire Palestinian population into homeless, hopeless, lifeless refugees.
*Paul Balles is a retired American university professor and freelance writer who has lived in the Middle East for 38 years. For more information, see http://www.pballes.com.
Copyright © Redress Information & Analysis.
All rights reserved.
|
|