Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Israel Shamir: Lobster for Iran

Expand Messages
  • World View
    Lobster for Iran By Israel Shamir http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shamireaders/messages Iran s biggest threat since Nazis, said Israeli defence minister Shaul
    Message 1 of 1 , May 4, 2006
      Lobster for Iran
      By Israel Shamir

      "Iran's biggest threat since Nazis," said Israeli defence minister
      Shaul Mofaz, according to the Guardian; "The world must not wait!
      Since Hitler we Jews have not faced such a threat" as presented by
      Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who "further stirred international outrage by
      calling on Israeli Jews to be resettled in Europe" (...thus the Guardian).

      These guys are hard to please! In the 1930s, Hitler called for the
      Jews to be resettled outside of Europe, and they declared war on him.
      Now Ahmadinejad calls for the resettlement of Jews in Europe, and the
      Jews still respond with a war cry. That is, unless the Guardian missed
      the point in its report, and the outrage actually came from the
      Europeans who preferred the Palestinians to serve as unwilling host to
      these difficult guests.

      Anyway I beg to differ: President Ahmadinejad is the biggest threat
      since Gerard de Nerval, a flamboyant French poet, promenaded a lobster
      on a blue ribbon lead, just as one exercises a dog, along the Palais
      Royal gardens in order to épater le bourgeois. A truly poetic soul, an
      enfant terrible if ever there was one, Ahmadinejad aimed to wake us up
      from our over-long after-dinner nap. What can the Iranian do if `Jews'
      is the only magic word that awakens us from this slumber? Sexual
      innuendos would not bestir even a child fresh from his AIDS-awareness
      lesson. An attack of Christianity would be warmly applauded by the
      undeniable masters of European minds, Messrs Sauerkraut and Finkelrot.
      In this post-modernist age, when the Vagina Monologues have entered
      the matinee repertoire, it is not that easy to épater the increasingly
      blasé bourgeoisie. If Ahmadinejad would call for the resettlement of
      six million European Muslims outside of Europe, nobody would raise an
      eyebrow with the possible exception of Oriana Fallaci and M. Le Pen,
      who might object to his plagiarism. If he were to call for the erasure
      of France from the world map, the French would not sit up and pay
      attention: they think there is already a Brussels directive to this

      I admire Ahmadinejad. Not as a politician: let the Iranians judge him
      on this merit. Not as a divine: I leave this to the Muslims. But as a
      true poet who unveiled our hypocrisy and slaughtered our last sacred
      cow. This is the only possible explanation of his deeds and words:
      Iranians have really no reason to care about the Jewish holocaust, one
      way or other. Nobody accuses them, not even Mr Yehuda Bauer of
      Jerusalem's Holocaust memorial institute, who is prone to accuse the
      World and its niece for failing to save the Jews. The Persians from
      Cyrus to Hosroes to Mohammad Resa Shah were always good to Jews, and
      even in these mad days there is a large and flourishing Jewish
      community in Iran. Ahmadinejad spoke about the Holocaust like Hillary
      conquered Everest – because it presented a challenge!

      The innocent revisionist historians were so excited when he toyed with
      an idea of "finally discovering the truth". They prepared their
      well-thumbed books and diagrams of gas consumption and body heat. But
      Ahmadinejad is interested in the hard facts of World War II about as
      much as Nerval was interested in exercising his lobster. Acceptance of
      Holocaust dogma is a sign of submission to the Tel Aviv–New York Axis,
      a sign of the new colonialism. Ahmadinejad refused it just as St Paul
      refused to accept the Noahide laws: not because St Paul wanted to
      partake of pagan sacrifices, but because he did not want to take his
      orders from the Jews.

      The European leaders, the docile supporters of patent war criminals,
      of George W. Bush, the murderer of umpteen Iraqis, Afghanis and sundry
      Arabs, of Shaul Mofaz, the murderer of an eight-year-old girl (among
      hundreds of others) he killed last week in besieged Gaza, all sat up
      and expressed their outrage. They did not object when Israel strafed
      and bombed defenceless Gazans. When Israeli politicians threatened to
      turn Iran into "radioactive desert", they did not describe it as "a
      call to genocide". By his challenge, president Ahmadinejad saved the
      honour of human race, as only a poet can do.

      I admire Iran, for the fiery crimson of their rose gardens and for the
      azure of its old mosques, for the ravishing beauty of its women, whose
      black eyelashes enhance the whiteness of their skin shining through
      their black chadors. I admire Iran for its marvellous painting that
      overcame the iconoclastic ravages. I admire Iran for the spiritual
      subtlety of its poets, who united their love to women with their
      adoration of God in one undivided chant just as the Song of Songs did.
      Their Rumi and Jami, Sa'adi and Ferdousi, Hafiz and Khayyam were of
      the most daring and sincere poets who ever graced our earth.
      Ahmadinejad is heir to their tradition, a daring mocker of our
      hypocrisy, a boy who saw through the emperor's new clothes. Even if
      the ham-fisted Yank should flatten this daredevil, and burn the rose
      gardens of Shiraz just as he once incinerated the blossoms of
      Nagasaki, we may be proud of Ahmadinejad, our contemporary who dared
      to tread on the tiger's tail.


      The European and American reaction to Iran's nuclear program was that
      of Uncle Tom's slaveowner, Simon Legree, on learning of an escaped
      slave. How does this dusky dare to touch the white masters' toys?
      Their empty talk of an "Iranian threat" is designed for the ignorant:
      Iran has never, ever attacked a European nation since the wars for
      Anatolia in the 5th century BC; whereas European imperialists have
      repeatedly occupied and controlled Iran, most recently in 1942, or by
      proxy in 1953, when they deposed democratically-elected Mosaddeq and
      returned to dominate this ancient nation.

      Yes, the old colonialism is dead. England can't rule over Iraq, nor
      France over Algeria, but the new collective colonialism, that of the
      imperialist Core of highly industrialised Western nations over the
      rest of the world, is hardly any better. The old masters have decided
      to pool their resources and powers to rule their erstwhile slaves
      together. They switched from the Athenian model where a citizen had
      his slave, to the Spartan model, where slaves belong to all Spartans.
      In this new collective imperialist universe, the US is the arm, the
      enforcer of this new colonialism, while the mind, the ideology is
      supplied by a vast syndicate that unites and coordinates the majority
      of newspapers and networks of both left and right from Madrid to
      Moscow and from Texas to Timbuktu, despite their pretensions of
      competition and rivalry.

      This syndicate is the real powerbase of what two American professors,
      John Mearsheimer of Chicago, and Stephen Walt of Harvard, (M&W for
      short) politely called `Israel Lobby in the US', though this syndicate
      has other fish to fry beside that of the State of Israel's. While
      fully approving of M&W's endeavour, we should say: they minimised
      rather than exaggerated the problem, for it is a global, rather than a
      local (the US) phenomenon. The fearsome AIPAC is just the visible tip
      of iceberg below which are miles and miles of solid ice: media lords,
      chief editors, their pundits, Masters of Discourse, in short. As if by
      a magic wand, the Iranian crisis made it visible to the naked eye:
      they have all cried out in one mighty voice like the legion of demons
      in the Capernaum synagogue in response to Christ's words.

      In his thought-provoking speech Ahmadinejad said: "The vast Zionist
      network has been at the service of the imperialists for decades." This
      is open to an argument whether the Zionist network serves the
      imperialists, or the imperialists serve this network. It's an example
      of Managerial Revolution: Jews were managers for the imperialists,
      until they took over the show, some would say. Oh no, they remained
      docile to their imperialist overlords, argue others. Whatever position
      we take, the Zionists and the Imperialists are surely integrated and
      intermeshed, and if one accepts the idea of the Iranian threat to
      Israel, one subscribes to this demonic network.

      The nations that refuse the Masters of Discourse are subjugated by
      force. A nuclear weapon serves as a great equaliser, as did the Smith
      & Wesson gun in the Wild West. In order to prevent too much
      equalisation, the American pioneers kept guns out of native hands. The
      same policy now drives the West in its attempts to keep nuclear power
      out of reach of Iranians.

      A few days ago I was invited to a live discussion on Russian TV
      Channel One, where the Moscow BBC bureau chief rhetorically asked why
      a peaceful Iran would need ballistic missiles, and he listed the
      Iranian missile arsenal. He could not answer the question of why a
      peaceful Britain would need ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons!
      Actually, why would anybody need one? But if England, with its long
      and bloody history of subjugating the Third World from Ireland to
      Japan, may have these toys, then it is likewise the duty of any
      important country willing to protect its populace from the Western
      masters' whims.

      Yes, Iran is still working on a peaceful program of atomic energy, but
      if and when that country decides to build the bomb, we may support
      this decision, as it would enhance peace. Actually, few people did
      more for the cause of world peace than Julius and Ethel Rosenberg and
      their associates Harry Gold and Klaus Fuchs. These wonderful men
      passed the secrets of American-built nuclear weapons to Russia, and
      thus saved Moscow and St Petersburg from the fate of Hiroshima.
      Without their heroic deed, the colonial masters would have turned
      Russia into a radioactive desert. Joseph Stalin passed the know-how to
      emerging China, and this was a very good deed -- otherwise the
      Americans wouldn't have hesitated to nuke Vietnam as they did Japan.

      The Russian nuclear shield is the only thing Gorbachev and Yeltsin did
      not break down in their destruction of the Soviet Union, probably
      because they did not expect the patriotic forces to ever return to
      power in Moscow. This shield allows the Russians to disregard the
      nagging of Frau Merkel, and gives them their freedom of choice: to
      sell their oil and gas to Europe or to turn the stream towards China.
      It allows the Belarus people to have the president they elected by
      huge majority: without it, Lukashenka would share the fate of Noriega
      and Milosevic for his steadfast refusal to sell the assets of Belarus
      to George Soros. Let Iranians, too, have this freedom of choice, and
      restore balance in the region.

      And to sincere well-wishers of our Israeli well-being I'll say: Iran
      is no danger. The truth is, the Jews could live extremely well in
      Palestine. By making peace with the native inhabitants in 1948, we
      would have kept our common home, Palestine, as the hub of the Middle
      East with Iraqi oil coming to Haifa refineries and trains from Baghdad
      to Cairo flying by Lydda and Jaffa, with Muslim pilgrims coming to al
      Quds on their way to Mecca, with Christians walking in the footsteps
      of Christ from Bethlehem to Nazareth and with Jews doing their aliya
      (this word meant an annual pilgrimage to Jerusalem like the Hajj,
      rather than a permanent immigration to Palestine as Zionists wont). We
      would prosper beyond our wildest dreams, as the prophets promised, if
      we were to kick the nasty old habit of separateness and dominance.

      It is not too late even now, sixty years and many deaths later. For
      this purpose, we may take the advice of Ahmadinejad: let the exclusive
      Jewish state be eliminated from the map of the region to be replaced
      by one state of all citizens of the land, Jews or not. "The right to
      govern belongs to all people of Palestine, be they Muslims,
      Christians, or Jews", said Ahmadinejad, and by golly, only a Jewish
      supremacist may object to his words.

      When I said this at the TV discussion in Moscow, I was attacked by the
      Chairman of a Russian Jewish Congress and Director of a Zionist Middle
      East Institute, a greasy and spotty bully of a man with hanging belly,
      a living cartoon from Der Sturmer, with the fitting name Satanovsky.
      "Watch out, - told me Satanovsky after the show, - apparently you have
      never been beaten hard enough. Here in Moscow we know of no restraints
      of democracy, my Jewish lads will tear your balls off like they did to
      many men like you. Israel should remain a Jewish state forever". Such
      Jewish Mafiosi are the real leaders of the Jewish Lobby and chief
      supporters of the Jewish state abroad. These sort of people lead the
      Jewish organisations in Russia, in America and elsewhere. They need a
      Jewish state to escape their lands in the hour of wrath, but we, the
      ordinary citizens of Israel, do not need it.

      However, the Mafia can't rule forever. I take heart in the words of
      Ahmadinejad: "The young tree of resistance in Palestine is blooming
      and blooms of faith and desire for freedom are flowering. The Zionist
      regime is a decaying and crumbling tree that will fall with a storm.
      (Remember the parable of the barren tree? - ISH) Palestine is the
      meeting point of right and wrong. The destiny of the region will be
      decided in the land of Al-Qods and it will be a great honour to share
      in the victory of Palestine." The victory of Palestine is our victory
      and we shall be happy to share in it.

      "Now, will there be a war?," one is often asked. I have no full
      confidence of George Bush, he does not share his plans with me. But
      while the gatekeepers of the Left say that Oil is the reason for the
      war, in my view Oil can be the reason for peace. As the price of oil
      has now crossed the $70 threshold, President Bush must decide whether
      he will survive its hike above $120 -- whether his voters in the red
      states will happily accept the advice of an American Jewish Congress
      pundit and director of their Israel/Middle East Office Eran Lerman
      (previously of Israeli intelligence) to stop driving cars every other
      day. Bush has the power to steer the US away from its perilous course,
      and tell to the Jewish Congress pundits to shove it.

      And to my Israeli countrymen: I'll remind you of our age-long
      tradition of friendship with Iran. Two thousand years ago, a picture
      of the Iranian capital city Susa was presented on the Eastern gate of
      the Jewish temple in Jerusalem. Mishna (Berakoth 9) called for being
      especially careful towards it: "never show disrespect to the Eastern
      gate!" According to Rambam, this was done so that they would have the
      fear of the king of Persia upon them. This tradition is worth
      remembering and carefully preserving.



      To subscribe to this group, send an email to:

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.