More Deception from the War Criminal

Bush`s State of the Union address did not describe
the deplorable State of the Union. The speech`s
importance consists of Bush`s plea to Congress to please
let him fool them one more time in order that he can
attack Iran and start a bigger war that Congress will
have to support in order to support Israel.

That is all the president had to say.

The "surge" of US troops for Iraq is another
deception. The surge`s purpose has nothing to do with
achieving victory in Iraq. Its purpose is to counter the
pressure from the American public, Congress, and the US
military to withdraw US troops from Iraq. Once a
withdrawal begins, the

neoconservative misadventure in the Middle East is
at an end before its goals can be achieved. Delaying the
withdrawal by proposing an escalation and provoking a
debate gives Bush and Israel time to orchestrate an
attack on Iran.

No one in Congress or print and TV media is prepared
to call Bush on this transparent deception. Instead,
critics focus on the fact that the surge cannot succeed.
For example, in the Democratic response to Bush`s
address, Senator Jim Webb, who served as Secretary of
the Navy under President Reagan,

stressed the recklessness and cost of Bush`s
invasion of Iraq:

"The President took us
into this war recklessly. He disregarded warnings from
the national security adviser during the first Gulf War,
the chief of staff of the army, two former commanding
generals of the Central Command, whose jurisdiction
includes Iraq, the director of operations on the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, and many, many others with great
integrity and long experience in national security
affairs. We are now, as a nation, held hostage to the
predictable and predicted disarray that has followed."

Senator Webb is the best that the Democrats have and
with

Ron Paul the best that Congress has. Yet, not even
Webb can cut to the chase.

Consequently, while Congress wastes time with
non-binding resolutions against the surge in Iraq, Bush
proceeds to implement plans to start war with Iran.

I have said that the only hope of stopping Bush from
initiating war with Iran is for the leadership of both
parties in both houses of Congress to make unequivocally
clear that Bush will be

impeached if he attacks Iran without the approval of
Congress. Even this might not be enough. The Bush Regime
is capable of orchestrating an incident, such as an
attack on a US aircraft carrier, that can be blamed on
Iran and, in that way, sweep Congress along on a
patriotic outburst against "Iranian aggression
against US forces."

Many of the people who have come to oppose Bush`s war
in Iraq mistakenly believe that Bush is a good person
who is trying to protect America, but that he is going
about it in the wrong way and is too inflexible to learn
from his mistakes. They have no clue as to the evil
agenda that guides the Bush Regime.

The Bush Regime is the first neoconservative regime
in US history. Bush hides the neoconservative agenda
behind "the war on terror," which essentially is
a hoax. The main purpose of the neoconservatives`
"war on terror" it to eliminate any effective Muslim
opposition to Israel`s theft of Palestine and the Golan
Heights.

To silence Muslim opposition to Israel`s theft of
Arab lands, the US must eliminate or intimidate Middle
Eastern governments that are not under US control–Iran,
Syria, and Hezbollah which governs southern Lebanon. The
US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq have failed to
establish US control, but they have left both countries
in a destructive civil war. Israel`s invasion of Lebanon
appears to have renewed civil war in that country.

Bush is not going to be forthright about the
neoconservative agenda, because he knows it is one that
Congress and the American people must be manipulated and
maneuvered into accepting. However, neoconservatives
themselves are very forthright about their war plans.
Let`s listen to their most recent pronouncements.

On January 23, former Republican Speaker of the
House, Newt Gingrich, a leading neoconservative, told a

conference in Herzliya, Israel, that the United
States and Israel were in danger of nuclear attack from
Iran. The crazed Gingrich, who is considering a run for
the US presidency in 2008,

said: "Our enemies are fully as determined as
Nazi Germany, and more determined than the Soviets. Our
enemies will kill us the first chance they get. There is
no rational ability to deny that fact."

Gingrich says: "We don`t have the right language,
goals, structure, or operating speed, to defeat our
enemies. My hope is that being this candid and direct, I
could open a dialogue that will force people to come to
grips with how serious this is, how real it is, how much
we are threatened."

Who are "our enemies?" Why, Iran, of course.

Iran is such a dangerous determined enemy that
"the threat of a nuclear Holocaust" hovers over the
US and Israel. "Israel is in the greatest danger it
has been in since 1967." The US could "lose two
or three cities to nuclear weapons, or more than a
million people to biological weapons. Freedom as we know
it will disappear."

Another American presidential hopeful, Mitt Romney,
told the Israeli audience that Islamic jihadism was
"the nightmare of this century." Israel, Romney
declared, "is facing a jihadist threat that runs
through Tehran, to Damascus, to Gaza." Hezbollah, he
declared, is not fighting for a Palestinian state but
for the destruction of Israel.

The world has not experienced this level of
warmongering since Hitler.

Also at the Israeli conference was US Undersecretary
of State Nicholas Burns, who added fuel to the fire by

alleging without any evidence that "Iran is
seeking a nuclear weapon, there`s no doubt about it.
There`s no debate among experts. It`s seeking a nuclear
weapon at its plant at Nantz."

A truthful statement, which no one any longer expects
from any member of the Bush Regime, would be that the
weapons inspectors of the International Atomic Energy
Agency have pored over Iran`s nuclear program and have
found no evidence of a weapons program. A number of
experts, such as Gordon Prather, have fiercely disputed
the propagandistic claims of an Iranian nuclear weapons
program.

What concerns experts is that once Iran has succeeded
with a nuclear energy program, it could go on, in the
absence of inspections, to develop nuclear weapons in
about 10 years. However, as a signatory nation to the
non-proliferation treaty, Iran would undergo the
inspections, as it was doing prior to the recent
provocations orchestrated by the Bush Regime. In
contrast, Israel has not signed the non-proliferation
treaty and has a large number of nuclear weapons, the
existence of which Israel has denied for years.

Burns told the Israeli conference that the US will
not allow Iran to go nuclear. This is an extraordinary
statement, because every signatory country to the
non-proliferation treaty has the right to develop
nuclear energy. Some people speculate that an
oil-producing country doesn`t need nuclear power.
However, oil is Iran`s only significant export. The less
Iran uses its own oil, the greater its exports.

Burns told the Israelis that "We are committed to
our alliance with Israel. We are committed to being
Israel`s strongest security partner. I can`t remember a
time when the relationship between our two countries was
stronger than it is today."

Chief US neoconsevative Richard Perle told the
Israeli conference that President Bush would give the
green light if US military involvement was needed for a
successful strike on Iran.

According to the Israeli press, "Perle
hypothesized a nightmare scenario, saying: `In
possession of nuclear weapons, or even in possession of
nuclear material, Iran is perfectly capable of using its
terrorist networks to enable others to inflict grievous
damage.`"

Former Israeli defense minister Shaul Mofaz, who met
privately with Burns prior to their joint appearance at
the Herzliya conference, said that 2007 would decide the
future of the Middle East.

Mofaz declared, "The year of 2007 is a year of
decisiveness. Iran of 2007 has all the components to
threaten us existentially, and the whole of the region."

Any expert or knowledgeable person who examines these
statements sees nothing but unsupported assertions,
paranoid speculations, fear- mongering and blatant lies.
It is on this basis, and this basis alone, that the Bush
Regime will initiate war with Iran.

Iran is being set up by the identical propaganda
machine that set up Iraq with fearful imagery of "mushroom
clouds over American cities" and nonexistent
"weapons of mass destruction."

After years of blaming al-Qaeda for the Iraqi
insurgency, the Bush Regime propagandists have suddenly
switched gears and now are blaming Iran for the failure
of the US occupation in Iraq and for the deaths of US
troops. The Bush Regime recently arrested Iranian
diplomats in northern Iraq and made charges so
preposterous that the charges were even rejected by
Bush`s Kurdish and Iraqi allies. Powerful US naval
attack fleets have been stationed off Iran`s coast, and
attack aircraft have been moved to Turkey and other
locations on Iran`s borders.

Meanwhile, Iran has done nothing.

Iran has refrained from arming and encouraging its
Iraqi Shi`ite allies to join the insurgency against US
troops. Iran could deliver the weapons that can knock
out US tanks and helicopter gunships, thus eliminating
the US military advantage from the conflict.

Neoconservative and Israeli propagandists have spread
the lie that the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,
has declared Iran`s intention "to wipe Israel off the
map." This lie is today regularly repeated even by
such formerly careful newspapers as the New York Times
and London Times.

A number of experts have examined the speech by the
Iranian president. What Ahmadinejad actually said was a
direct quote from the deceased Ayatollah Khomeini:
"The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must
vanish from the page of time." The experts explain
that in the context of the text of the speech, what is
being said is that peace in the Middle East requires
regime change in Israel. In place of a Zionist regime
hell bent on stealing more land from Muslims, Zionism
will pass away and Israel will cease its aggressive
policies and live at peace with its neighbors.

A great number of Western experts agree that the
problem in the Middle East is neither Islamic jihad nor
Israel per se, but Zionism, which keeps Israel on a land
expansionist course at the expense of Arab peoples.

The failure of US policy in the Middle East is the
failure to deter Israel from this Zionist policy. A
large number of Israelis are opposed to this policy and
recognize that Zionism is the cause of Israel`s conflict
with Arabs.

The real problem that Americans face is that the
Zionist influence on US policy is so powerful that
instead of dealing with the real cause of strife in the
Middle East, the US is about to join Zionism in
attempting to eliminate all Muslim opposition to Zionist
expansion.

Bush`s "war on terror" and Iran`s alleged
nuclear weapons are just propagandistic cover for the
real agenda, which is to silence opponents of Zionist
expansion.

The fanaticism of Zionists has been made clear by
their ferocious attack on President Jimmy Carter, who
stated in his current book both clearly and reasonably
that the only path to peace in the Middle East is for
Israel to accept a viable Palestinian state.

Carter has done more for peace between Israelis and
Arabs than anyone. Moreover, Israel, as opposed to
Zionism, has had no greater friend or stronger supporter
than Carter. But because Carter pointed out Zionism`s
role in the conflict, America`s most decent and truthful
president was demonized.

The unjustified Zionist attack on Carter should tell
everyone where the real problem lies.

COPYRIGHT

CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

Paul Craig Roberts
[email
him] was Assistant
Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration.
He is the author of

Supply-Side Revolution : An Insider`s Account of
Policymaking in Washington;
 Alienation
and the Soviet Economy and

Meltdown: Inside the Soviet Economy,
and is the co-author with Lawrence M. Stratton of


The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and
Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name
of Justice. Click

here for Peter
Brimelow`s Forbes Magazine interview with Roberts
about the recent epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.