|
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
"If it were not for
the strong support of the Jewish
community there would be no war with Iraq"
|
The Independent (on Sunday) London - 9 March 2003, page 1 |
|
Not in our name, Mr Blair
The die is cast. President Bush says he will go to war with or without the backing of the UN. Tony Blair indicates he will support him. The senior UN weapons inspector, Hans Blix, asks to be given more time - a few more months at most. His request is brushed aside by the US and the UK governments. ... It is a sad reflection on Mr Blair's position, locked in an alliance with President Bush, that we hold out no hope that he will use his influence to avert a rush to war. Yet before he leads this country into a conflict it does not want, with consequences too ghastly to contemplate, we urge Mr. Blair to reflect again on the motives and justification for a pre-emptive strike unparalleled in modern times. None of the shifting causes for war have been convincing, and are even weaker now, on the eve of a military campaign. "Iraq poses a threat to the region" After the failed invasion of Kuwait, there is no evidence that President Saddam, much weaker now than in 1991, is embarking on another suicidal attack. With the destruction of some of his weapons over the past few weeks he is weaker still. A war against Iraq is a much surer way of destabilising the region. Arab states opposed to President Saddam are also against the war. With good cause they resent US double standards, tolerating a bloody stand-off between Israel and Palestine, while attacking Iraq. As Clare Short – still a member of the Cabinet – has observed, there is also a risk of a humanitarian catastrophe. War, rather than President Saddam, poses a threat to the region. "There needs to be regime change" There is no consistency in the war aims. Is the objective to remove the weapons of mass destruction or to remove Saddam? Yesterday Saddam accused Bush and Blair of being "liars". The old tyrant is wrong. They are confused and incoherent, rather than mendacious. There is a strong case for regime change in North Korea, several Arab states, Israel, Pakistan and China. What if another country decides there is a case for regime change in the UK? The arguments for regime change in Iraq, while superficially compelling, are a recipe for international anarchy. |
| Iraq will not be able to pose a threat to world peace in the next 20 years, a CIA report stated. How can Iraq then be a threat in the next three months? Only three more months time the weapons inspectors require to complete their job! Yet, Bush can't wait that long, war must be waged, death and destruction must be delivered, now. This proves that it is not about disarmament, it is about ruling the world. |
The Jewish community wants the war against Iraq and America jumps
|
http://njdc.org/readNews.php?show=292&subcat=3 |
| Moran’s
Talk of Jewish Control is "Stunning"
NJDC in the News - 03/07/03 Washington, DC: According to a March 5th article published by The Connection Newspapers of northern Virginia, Congressman James Moran (D-VA) – speaking in Reston, Virginia on Monday night – "…blasted the Bush administration for its rush to war but saved some of his harshest criticism for Jewish leaders in the United States. "If it were not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq we would not be doing this," he said. "The leaders of the Jewish community are influential enough that they could change the direction of where this is going and I think they should." |
America and Israel (USrael) are economically emptied, indeed bankrupt. America's trade and budget deficits will lead to a total financial crash in a foreseeable time. Yet, America "spends far more on defence than the bigger countries in Europe." --The Independent, London, March 9, 2003, p. 10. Israel only exists because of America's and Germany's financial infusions. Both, America and Germany, are milked dry, therefore Israel's end is looming on the horizon. The budgets of both countries (USrael), cannot be met by generated income. Thus, a collapse of USrael is as inevitable as the collapse of the Soviet Union was. By securing the remaining natural resources of the world, USrael believes it could generate sufficient tribute from the rest of the world to maintain its military power and thus, securing its existence.
You do not have the evidence.