Tired of hearing lies

Reading the name of Robert Fisk at the beginning of foreign articles creates a high interest to translate them because precise reports of this internationally known journalist on Middle East issue has provided the possibility to measure the formal policies for political activists across the world. He, who writes in the Journal of the London Independent, has written and published useful articles to clarify the minds of nations and politicians around the world, including "justifying the occupation of Israel by American Language," "Bush looks for war not justice!", " double standard in the war ", and ...
Report ahead is one of his new articles which retells Zionist corners and angles of plan of invading Iraq by US.
I think that ultimately nothing is for us but hearing lie. We are tired that they talk to us firmly, and they have placed us under bombardment of homeland policies remained from World War II, scary stories and misinformation, and telling us childish writings as news and information. We feel nausea of being insulted by political dwarfs like Tony Blair, Jack Straw and people like George Bush and his new conservative operations which have been busy by plotting and conspiracy and changing the political map of the Middle East for years for their interests.
So it is not surprising that explicitly deny of US data [on Iraq] in the United Nations by Hans Blix was relaxing and comforted minds. Suddenly we observe that Hans Blix of this area are able to disclose nature of the Americans as they have turned to unreliable Allies.
British people do not have a good memory of Saddam Hussein, as they did not have good ones from Abdel Nasser. But many Britons, unlike Blair, remember World War II; they will not be deceived by childish tales of Hitler, Churchill, Chamberlain, and tolerated policies. They do not like to be listeners of talk and moaning of men whose experience of war is limited to TV and Hollywood experiences.
Sure, there are still a few people who desire to enter into an endless war with Texas' executioner Governor, who ran away from service under the flag to go to Vietnam; the one who seeks to send poor Americans there to destroy a Muslim nation - that has no relation with crimes and atrocities against humanity in September 11. Jack Straw and Blair are unaware of all these points. He wants to deceive us by issue of danger of nuclear weapons of Iraq---of course Iraq has no such weapons--- and tortures and violence of a dictator [Saddam] who in a time was "among our friends", and US and Britain supported him.
But he and Blair can neither talk about the dark political map, which the administration of George has prepared, nor can discuss about "wicked men" (in the words of one senior UN officials) who have surrounded the President.
Opponents of the war are not timid. British are somewhat reluctant to fight. In the last few generations, they have implemented attacks and strokes on Arabs, Afghans, Muslims, Nazis, Italian Fascists and Japanese imperialists and Iraqis were among them, too; although we have tried to downplay realities of Air Force attack of Royal British on Kurdish rebels with the use of poison gasses in the first decade in 1930, when they are called to fight, only patriotism is not enough. Faced with the horror stories, Britons and many Americans will be much braver than Blair and Bush. As Thomas More in "A Man for All Seasons" says to Cromwell, the English people do not like to tell stories to children to scare them.
Perhaps Henry VIII's anger at the show, where he says: "have they thought of me as a fool?" can express the views of the British people about Blair and Bush. The British, like other peoples of Europe, are educated people. The trick is that their position against this shameful war may lead them to assume themselves more European.
Palestinian issue is more connected with this issue. The British do not have any esteem for the Arabs, but they smell unpleasant odor of injustice fast, and they will upset that a nation [Israel], which plays an important role in advancing US policies in the Middle East, wants to crush the Palestinians by using a colonial war. They induce us that the invasion of Iraq has nothing to do with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; a war which is as painful injury. Bush dedicated only 18 words to this issue in his speech, while Blair had no way away on this subject, therefore, he held a conference to make reforms in the Palestinian government, but since Ariel Sharon, Israeli Prime Minister, did not allow the Palestinian delegation to travel to London to participate in this conference, they were forced to attend the meeting via video-conference.
Despite all Blair's influence on Colin Powell, Secretary of Foreign Affairs, we should be very sorry that he could not convince Sharon to reconsider his decision. However, at least it must be acknowledged that although Sharon is considered as a war criminal for genocide in 1982 in Sabra and Shatila, but he also had a degrading treatment with Blair which such behavior was appropriate for him. Nor can Americans conceal the relationship between Iraq, Israel and the Palestine. Powell actually established relationship between these three in his speech in UN's Security Council while he was expressing dissatisfaction about Hamas, which martyrdom seeking operations of it cause misery for Israelis, and he also has an office in Baghdad.
Just as Paul was speaking about the mysterious al-Qa'ida men who support violence in Chechnya and the Pankisi in Georgia, in this way America let Vladimir Putin be free again for aggressive attacks and killings of the Chechens. Paul's strange statements on last twelfth September in General Assembly of the United Nations about necessity of supporting Iraqi Turkmens becomes completely clear when we find out that the Turkmen are two-thirds of Kirkuk's population, and Kirkuk is one of the largest oil fields in Iraq.
Bureaucrats, who incitement Bush to war, are often active members of the lobby group in Congress in the past or present, which call for the destruction of the most powerful Arab country and work for Israel for years. Richard Perle, one of Bush's most influential advisers, and Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, John Bolton Donald, Rumsfeld all fought to overthrow Iraq since years before choosing George W. Bush as president- if he was really selected- and this action of them was not to maintain the interests of the Americans or the British. A statement entitled as "complete failure: a new strategy in preservation of the security of the realm (www.israeleconomy .orgistarti. Htm)" called for war with Iraq.
This text was written for Benjamin Netanyahu, the future prime minister of Israel not the US, steering by a group led by Richard Perle. Of course, the destruction of Iraq, Keeper of monopoly of nuclear weapons, is in the hands of Israel, and so Israel can suppress the Palestinians, and Sharon also all imposes all Jewish settlements ready for operation on Palestinians.
Although Bush and Blair do not dare to raise the issue of fighting in favor of Israel with us and say that for this war our children are not supposed to stand in lines in front of the National Service Administration and listen to the words of American Jewish leaders, who passionately talk about benefits of fighting against Iraq. In fact, these brave American Jewish groups who now recklessly oppose this folly, were among the first individuals who pointed out this issue; how do pro-Israel organizations look at Iraq not only as a new source of oil and water, but they think that why not pouring water of the Euphrates river to arid regions of the near East (lands located on the east bank of the Mediterranean) by digging canals. It is no wonder that any discussion about this subject should be censored. As after Powell's speech in the United Nations, Professor Eliot Cohen, Professor of Hans Hopkins, wanted to act like that. Cohen's view was that public opposition to the war in Europe may still be related to "a kind of anti-Semitism and hatred towards Jews as evil people that it was thought it is dead (finished) years ago in the West. It should be noted that the stuff was opposed by many Israel's intellectuals including Uri Avnery who believe that the war against Iraq can cause increase of the number of Israel's Arab enemies, especially if Saddam attacks Israel, and if Sharon joins US in the war against the Arabs.
Insults and accusations of "anti-Semitism" may be observed implicitly in arrogant Rumsfeld's remarks about "old Europe". He spoke about "old" Germany during Nazism era and "old" France accused to be traitors. But Germany and the France that opposed the war are representatives of "modern" Europe; a continent that occasionally raises to oppose the killing of innocents. Rumsfeld and Bush are the ones, who are considered as "old" US' representatives and not "new" US, not America as Cradle of Liberty and not the US of Franklin Roosevelt. Rumsfeld and Bush are the symbols of old America who started killing the country's native Indians and started imperial adventures. This is "old" US which calls us to fight, the America which is tied to a new way of colonialism, the American which initially threatens to abandon the UN in this matter, and then does the same thing about the NATO. This is not the last chance for the United Nations or NATO, but it may be the last chance for the US by its enemies and friends to be seriously considered.
In these last days of peace, after second UN's resolution, Britain should not make a mistake, and later realize what the real story is. Issuance of license for the US by the United Nations notion does not mean legitimating the war, but it merely expresses the Security Council being influence by blackmail, threats and the absence of other members. Nevertheless, the absence of the Soviet Union allowed the US start an unrelenting war in the Korean peninsula under the flag of the United Nations. There is no doubt that after a quick military victory of the US over Iraq, if their dead are over our dead, then we will be faced with a wide range of opponents of the war that claim that they are the first pro-war ones. The original images of "liberated Baghdad" will show Iraqi children who sing the victory song for the crew of American tanks. But the real persecution and abuses are evident when the war ends; when the colonial occupation of a Muslim country begins by the US and Israel.
Problems still remain. Bush calls Sharon as "man of peace", but Sharon is still worried to be sentenced for the massacre in Sabra and Shatila, and this is why he has recently recalled his ambassador from Belgium.
I want to see Saddam's presence in the same court, and I want to see Rifaat Assad's trial for the massacre of 1982 in the city of Hama in Syria and all the Arab dictators and Israel's torturers.
Now the ambitions of the US and Israel are linked together and are almost synonymous. The aim of this war is oil and regional control. The leader of the ochlocracy is a deserter [George Bush] that deceives us and says this is an eternal battle against terror. British and most Europeans do not believe him. The fact is not it that Britons do not start a war for America's interest, but they do not want to fight for Bush and his friends, and if the issue of prime minister is concerned, they do not want to fight even for Blair.