Satellite or parasite state? [View All]

THE BUSH-Sharon partnership has reached a shameless level. Following a public rebuke of the Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for his intention to take unilateral steps towards a final settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict, the Bush administration backtracked and replaced its words of reproach by words of praise. While the words of rebuke carried Colin Powell's signature, the words of praise carried the radical Zionists'.

The sudden change of stance has more to do with getting the Jewish vote in 2004 than with advancing the peace in the Middle East. While the Jewish vote is critical for George W. Bush, it is business as usual for radical Zionists. No matter who loses the 2004 American presidential election, radical Zionism will be a winner. With George W. Bush's Zionist neoconservatives on the right and Joe Lieberman's pro-Israel Democrats on the left, Israel will most likely sustain its parasitical relationship with the American people indefinitely.

Radical Zionists and their right and left American cronies have always countered the above commonsensical statements by falsely claiming that Israel should be unconditionally supported because the latter is a democracy and a close ally of the US. According to a number of dictionaries, an ally is a supporter, a helper and a partner. Can one think of a battle that Israel has fought alongside the United States? How about the current conflict taking place in Israel's backyard, Iraq?

If the state of Israel is so strategically important for the United States, why is the former watching as American men and women are killed everyday in Iraq to make Israel safer? I once read an interesting description of how in a parasitical relationship between animals one eats into the other's skin and then internal organs until the victim dies.

http://www.jordantimes.com/Mon/opinion/opinion4.htm