Itinerant merchant and brigand

It was said that a traveling merchant was carrying his goods on the back of a camel, and was traveling between villages, hamlets and different cities, when he was suddenly intercepted by an armed bandit who requested to accompany him during his journey, in order to protect him from the bandits, so the merchant agreed and escorted the two of them. While traveling, the bandit ate and drank at the merchant's expense, and whenever they were looting the goods, he remembered the people's reaction if they heard of his crime. One day, the bandit asked the merchant - in a strange behavior - to curse him. The merchant was astonished by the strangeness of the request, and said: How can I curse you, when you are my companion of my journey and the protector of my trade, and we ate, drank and journeyed together?! The bandit insisted that the merchant curse him, who found himself forced - under threat - to curse his armed companion. Then the bandit attacked the merchant, beating and cursing, while he says: You curse me, and I did well to protect you, you “ungrateful”?! Then he took the "camel with what it carried", and set off, leaving the poor merchant to his inevitable fate.

In the story, the bandit was looking for a “moral justification”, to justify looting the goods, and when he did not find that justification throughout the journey, he fabricated it, so that the character of the “gentleman who protects the convoys of merchants” would not be revealed as a “criminal bandit”, and in order for the story to continue. Thieves and criminals who are looking for moral and logical justifications for their crimes.

This ploy - of course - is repeated throughout history through war criminals, leaders and leaders who are looking for justifications for their wars that they are waging to loot "camels with what they carry", at a time when they are talking about "the just punishment that befalls the ungrateful merchant", which appeared in the propaganda of "the bandits". “As a man who does not possess a degree of politeness or memorization of kindness.

On April 29, 1827, the French Consul, Pierre Duval, attended the council of the “Dey” Hussein, the ruler of Algeria, who demanded that he pay the debts owed by France to Algeria, amounting to 24 million francs from the wheat sales that Algeria was supplying to France during the French Revolution, but the consul responded arrogantly. : “France does not respond to a man like you.” My father only expelled the consul from his council, waving his fan in a state of anger, which the French government considered “an insult to the honor of France,” which is the pretext with which that government tried to prepare public opinion for an invasion. Algeria and its occupation, but for other reasons that have nothing to do with the Dey’s fan, but with his treasury and other treasuries in North and Central Africa and others, which are various colonial economic, political and military reasons, for which it was necessary to accuse the “Dey” of “insulting the honor of France,” and of stealing the money of French fishermen. On the Algerian coast, although Algeria was able to break the economic blockade imposed by European countries on France against the background of its revolution.

On the first of September 1939, Adolf Hitler ignited a war that claimed tens of millions of lives under the false pretext that Poland had attacked Germany, before the matter was later revealed about a group of thunderbolt soldiers in the Nazi army who attacked a German local radio on the border with Poland, on the grounds that they Polish soldiers, for Hitler to announce the beginning of the bloodiest war in human history, which ended with his suicide, the ruin of Germany and the collapse of the entire international system, a war whose real motive was the control of Europe by the Germans who represent the supreme Aryan race, according to the German Nazis.

The truth is the first victim of war, and this is a constant rule in most wars whose real motive is the tendency to dominate, and the banner raised in it is the banner of freedom, justice and human rights. We continue to follow the manifestations of that rule, and on March 19, 2003 the United States of America and Britain invaded Iraq with an outrageous lie, which is the presence of weapons of mass destruction in the regime of the late Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. Despite the denial of all the international inspection teams of the existence of these weapons, Washington mobilized all its means to convince the UN Security Council of the legitimacy of the war, and - at the time - US Secretary of State Colin Powell and his famous lie, which he supported with fabricated pictures of nuclear weapons in alleged mobile containers, which Powell showed pictures of on board in February 2003. As for Tony Blair, he warned at the time of Saddam Hussein’s missiles capable of reaching the heart of Europe, and when it became clear that all of this was a lie, the Americans deliberately invented another pretext for war, even after the occupation of Iraq, which is to spread democracy and rid Iraq of Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship, in the story Its witnesses are still alive. Although the lies were exposed, Blair continued his justifications that there were mistakes, but "Iraq and the world are better without Saddam Hussein," another lie added to the lie of Colin Powell, who later said that it was a "black point" in his life.

The chapters of the story of the itinerant merchant and bandit were repeated in Afghanistan, which was invaded by the armies of the Soviet Union under the pretext of helping the ruling ally party in Kabul, and invaded by America and the Atlantic countries under the pretext of the war on terrorism, and in many countries from Iraq to Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Ukraine and others, and so it was.

Today, Iran covers the reality of its expansionist sectarian wars against Arab countries with the slogan of resistance, which observers are aware of is just a cover for destructive sectarian wars that led to Tehran’s control of four Arab capitals, according to Iranian statements. On destroyed countries, it reflects the fact that Tehran employed them to serve its imperialist ambitions and regional ambitions, and that it has already been able to turn Arab lands into launch pads for its missiles and test fields for its weapons, and that it is expanding in the Arab region under the pretext of confronting American expansion, and it has come to dominate a number of Arab capitals with the justification of confrontation. Israeli hegemony, and that its eagerness to get the Americans out of the region is nothing but to replace them, in light of the weakness of the official Arab regime, and its inability to confront this Iranian overreach, which clearly works with the Israeli and Western domination in an area where all projects are present and the project is absent from it. thatIt represents the true will of its people.

This is how any war needs a justification, and it needs a banner and a bright title that motivates the public to support it and mobilizes recruits for it. With time, the matter reveals a pure lie, and other reasons for the war, unrelated to the raised slogans, and the facts become clear to the eye, but after the destruction of Malta, Yemen, Syria and Libya. And Afghanistan and Ukraine, and after looting the “immoral” merchant’s caravan at the hands of the “noble gentleman” bandit.