|
Notify me of new HIR pieces!
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What caused this war? Triggers have causes, and causes have prior
causes... Historical and Investigative Research - 23 July 2006 There is something curious about the current
conflict on Israel’s northern border with Lebanon: it began in Gaza, on
Israel’s southern border. Earlier this month, on 5 July, the Jerusalem Post
was reporting on events as follows: “The IDF
[Israeli Defense Forces] has raised the level of alert along the northern
border with Syria out of fear that [Syrian] President Bashar Assad would
launch a strike against Israel in response to a recent IAF [Israeli Air
Force] buzz [fly over] of his palace. Syrian
military forces, IDF officers confirmed Tuesday, have also gone on high alert
and the assumption in the IDF is that Assad would order a harsh military
response if Israel decided to take additional steps against Damascus in
relation to the kidnapping of Cpl. Gilad Shalit in the Gaza Strip. The type of
[Syrian] response is unknown at this stage but officers said it could be a
missile strike on IDF installations or communities in the North. Another
possibility, military sources said, is that Syria would use its proxy -- the
Hizbullah in Lebanon -- to launch an attack against Israel in its place.”[1] Hezbollah indeed attacked. So the sequence of
provocations immediately precipitating the current armed exchanges appears to
be the following: 1) Hamas
terrorists in the Gaza Strip kidnapped an Israeli soldier; 2) Israel
reacted against the Hamas masters in Syria; 3) Syria
unleashed Hezbollah against Israel; 4) Israel
retaliated. What is the link between point 1 and point 2? When
Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit was kidnapped in Gaza, why did Israel complain
to Syria? The same Jerusalem Post article explains: “Last week,
four IAF [Israeli Air Force] fighter jets buzzed [flew over] Assad’s summer
residence in Latakia, Syria, to try to pressure him to persuade
Damascus-based Hamas leader Kahled Meshaal to release Shalit [Damascus is the
capital of Syria]. Senior defense officials said Tuesday that Israel was
considering taking additional steps against Syria as part of its overall
effort to retrieve the abducted soldier.” The terrorist organization Hamas, which controls the
West Bank, is being run from Syria. The attacks from Gaza, too, are Syrian attacks.
And according to some Hamas and Hezbollah are now deeply intertwined,
stemming from “Hezbollah's role in training the Hamas cadres.”[1a] Thus understood, the sequence of events is as
follows. The genocidal pet, Hamas, bent on the destruction of Israel, staged
a provocation that caused Israel to react against the master, Syria. This
same Syrian master then used the Israeli reaction as an excuse to unleash its
other pet Hezbollah -- another terrorist group pledged to destroy Israel
through genocide -- on Israel’s northern border. Now, if we telescope a bit further back into
history, but not very far, the sequence of relevant and causally linked
events becomes the following: 1) Israel
evacuated Gaza; 2) terrorist
attacks against Israel staged from Gaza flourished and
escalated; 3) Hamas
terrorists in the Gaza Strip kidnapped an Israeli soldier; 4) Israel
reacted against the Hamas masters in Syria; 5) Syria
unleashed Hezbollah against Israel; 6) Israel
retaliated. If we examine our new point 1, we find lots of
interesting things. For example, when Israel was disengaging from Gaza, it
reached an agreement with Egypt that defies belief. On 4 September 2005 the Associated
Press wrote: “As part of an
agreement with Egypt, Israel will withdraw its troops from a patrol road
along the Gaza-Egypt border, and 750 Egyptian troops will deploy there to
prevent arms smuggling into Gaza. The Israeli
Defense Ministry said Sunday the Egyptians would begin taking up positions
along the border in the coming days.”[2] Egypt is a country that in the past has launched
wars of extermination against Israel,[3]
and yet the Israeli government made Egypt the guardian of Israel’s security
along the Egypt-Gaza border after evacuating Gaza. Are you gasping?
You should be. Let us now enlarge the context a bit. Post-Disengagement Gaza is under the total control
of Islamist terrorists dedicated to the extermination of the Jewish people.
You’ve got the PLO terrorists, whose controlling core, Al Fatah, was created
by a leader of Adolf Hitler’s Final Solution (yes -- skeptics should
consult the footnote).[4] Or else you
have Hamas, created by the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, an organization that
was an enthusiastic ally of the Nazis in WWII. In fact, the father of
Fatah/PLO (Hajj Amin al
Husseini) was the go-between for the Muslim
Brotherhood (Hamas's parent organization) and the Nazis -- these are all the
same people.[5] Both
organizations, Fatah/PLO and Hamas, are pledged in their constitutions to
destroy Israel via the extermination of the Jewish people,[5a]
and despite the appearance of a public rivalry they are in fact deeply
intertwined and eagerly cooperate at all levels.[6]
Gaza was given to these people. But this is not all: a Pentagon study declared that,
without Gaza, Israel cannot survive.[7] In
the jargon of the military, Gaza is strategic. So. We have the following: A) The
government of the Jewish state took a territory indispensable to Israeli
security, Gaza, and cleansed it of its Jews (made it judenrein, as the
Nazis would say), giving it to genocidal organizations tracing their roots to
the WWII Nazi extermination of the Jewish people; and then B) the
government of the Jewish state asked Egypt, a country that has launched
anti-Jewish wars of extermination in the past, to “prevent arms smuggling
into Gaza,” which is to say, it asked it to stop arming the spawn of
the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, across the ‘border.’ What are we to make of such facts? As with any set of facts, we should propose a theory
to explain them. Those who defend the view that the Israeli government is
patriotic do not have a very good theory because it generates all sorts of
absurdities (and absurdities are the things to avoid in a theory). So
the hypothesis I defend is that the Israeli government has been
corrupted by those who once again are attempting to destroy the Jewish
people. This hypothesis does account for the facts, and that is always
a virtue in a hypothesis. Once you adopt my view lots of otherwise crazy
things begin to make sense. For example, about the kidnapping of Corporal Gilad
Shalit, “Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz, chief of the Israeli military, said during a
news conference hours after the raid that… ‘There is no doubt that this
caught us by surprise.’”[8] The way he speaks you get the impression that Dan
Halutz ordered an investigation to determine whether or not he himself had
been caught by surprise, and this investigation concluded that he was caught
by surprise, leaving Dan Halutz “no doubt” that he was indeed caught by
surprise. But why? Why was he caught by surprise? Because Dan Halutz
cannot anticipate that genocidal terrorists spawned by the Nazi Final
Solution, once in full control of Gaza, will team up with the Egyptians to
escalate their terrorist violence? But then “Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz” should not
be “chief of the Israeli military,” should he? He should be fired. Of course, Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz has not been fired
because Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz works for the same Israeli government that
ordered the Gaza Disengagement. In fact, Halutz was appointed to head the
entire Israeli military on 1 June 2005, right in the middle of the
Disengagement process, and he carried it through.[9]
Halutz is careful always to sound like a hawk, and this often makes
Israeli patriots quite glad; but in fact Halutz’s ‘hawkish’ statements always
appear designed to deal a propaganda blow to the Jewish state, and his
behaviors have dealt a grave material blow to Israeli security. Given that Halutz is one of the architects of
Israel’s disintegration, the fact that he is now retaliating against
Hezbollah suggests that perhaps Hezbollah’s recent escalation was simply too
much terrorism too soon, putting the corrupt Israeli government -- which
cannot be completely immune to Israeli opinion if it is to remain in
power -- in a bind. Thus, we have seen the Israeli government do what some of
us thought it might never do again: retaliate against the terrorist enemies
of the Jewish state. This has a number of consequences that we will analyze
in this series and which contribute to making the process of destroying
Israel a bit difficult to get back on track. But whose grand strategy is it that now faces a bump
in the road? Who is it that has corrupted the Israeli government? If we telescope a bit further into the past, the
sequence of relevant and causally linked events becomes: 1) The US
ordered the Israeli government to evacuate Gaza (and northern Samaria, in the
West Bank) and give it to the terrorists[10]; 2) Israel
evacuated Gaza (and Northern Samaria) 3) terrorist
attacks against Israel staged from Gaza flourished and escalated; 4) Hamas
terrorists in the Gaza Strip kidnap an Israeli soldier; 5) Israel
reacts against the Hamas masters in Syria; 6) Syria
unleashes Hezbollah against Israel; 7) Israel
retaliates. It is the US ruling elite that is ultimately
preparing Israel's destruction. Or at least this hypothesis is consistent
with HIR’s documentation of a century’s worth of US foreign
policy toward the Jewish people and state.[11]
(And consistency with the facts is always a virtue in a hypothesis.)
Up next I will examine the possibility that Syria’s
itchy trigger finger is compromising what I believe is the US ruling elite’s
carefully planned strategy for the destruction of Israel.
_____________________________________________________ Footnotes and Further Reading [1] Standoff in north as Israel Syria raise alert level, The
Jerusalem Post, July 5, 2006, Wednesday, NEWS; Pg. 8, 372 words, Yaakov Katz
Ap Contributed To This Report. [1a]
"Political and military analysts in Egypt and Israel said the recent
events seemed to stem from a growing relationship between Hamas and
Hezbollah. While there is no direct evidence of coordinated attacks, several
analysts said they believed that the two kidnappings were part of a plan
reflecting a trend that began several years ago, with Hezbollah trying to
teach Hamas its methods. 'What took place from Hezbollah today, in my
opinion, is tied to their relationship with Hamas,' said Dr. Wahid Abdel
Meguid, Deputy Director of the Ahram Center for Political and Strategic
Studies in Egypt. 'Hezbollah developed a strong relationship with Hamas, the
most manifest form of this relationship is Hezbollah's role in training the
Hamas cadres.'"
[2] Palestinian
leader hopes to resolve border crossing dispute 'very soon', Associated Press
Worldstream, September 4, 2005 Sunday, INTERNATIONAL NEWS, 583 words, IBRAHIM
BARZAK; Associated Press Writer, GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip [3]
1964-1967 -- Although Israel suffered terrorist attacks from its Arab neighbors
during these years, when they staged a full-scale military provocation, the
US refused to help; from “IS THE US AN ALLY OF ISRAEL: A Chronological look
at the evidence”; Historical and Investigative Research; by Francisco
Gil-White. [4] The
most complete documentation on this is here:
Some of this material was originally published here:
[5] “…as Italian
and German fascism sought greater stakes in the Middle East in the 1930s and '40s
to counter British and French controlling power, close collaboration between
fascist agents and Islamist leaders ensued. During the 1936-39 Arab Revolt,
Admiral Wilhelm Canaris, head of German military intelligence, sent agents
and money to support the Palestine uprising against the British, as did
Muslim Brotherhood founder and "supreme guide" Hassan al-Banna. A
key individual in the fascist-Islamist nexus and go-between for the Nazis and
al-Banna became the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin el-Husseini --
incidentally the later mentor (from 1946 onward) of a young firebrand by the
name of Yasser Arafat.”
From the article below you will see that Hamas is
proud of the Nazi Hassan al Banna, and you will see that Hamas uses the same
propaganda the German Nazis used. You will get a sense for the Hamas
worldview. Comment extra:
Islam and Israel: The new anti-Semitism: A document once used by the Nazis to
stir up hatred of Jews and long known to be a forgery is once again being
circulated, this time by Muslim scholars. David Aaronovitch challenged them,
The Observer, June 22, 2003, Observer News Pages, Pg. 26, 1831 words, David
Aaronovitch [ OBSERVER TEXT: ] WE GOT TO Abdel-aziz al-Rantisi a couple of weeks
before the Israelis almost did. Our yellow taxi-bus had taken us down an
anonymous side-street in Gaza city, and stopped outside a grey-black
four-storey apartment block. There was no decoration on the ground or first
floors, just bare concrete steps, with no banisters. One flight up we passed
a room in which a sub-machine gun sat, ownerless, on an armchair beside a
sunny window. Mr Rantisi was in the room above. The Hamas leader, a famous hardliner in that
organisation of hardliners, was going, I hoped, to answer a specific
question. Why, in article 32 of the Hamas covenant, was there an approving
reference to a document, an anti-Semitic forgery of the early twentieth
century, once described by a leading historian as a ‘warrant for genocide’? The Protocols of the Elders of
Zion - supposedly a transcript of a meeting of the
world’s top Jews, called to discuss the achievement of world domination - was
concocted by an ultra-orthodox member of the Tsar’s secret police, Sergei
Nilus in about 1903. By the early 1920s it was being widely circulated in
Europe and America, was later taught in the schools of Nazi Germany and is
now to be found on any good neo-nazi web-site near you. It is the classic of
Holocaust-era anti-Semitism, portraying the Jews as a conniving,
Machiavellian race… So what on earth is it doing in the twenty-first
century manifesto of an Islamic movement? The Covenant says that ‘the
Zionists’ want an Israel that extends from Cairo to Basra, and then next
stop, the world. ‘Their plan,’ says Mr Rantisi’s Covenant, ‘is embodied in
the Protocols of the Elders of Zion,
and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying.’ RANTISI IS SERIOUS and measured (he was once a
paediatrician [!]). His windows are veiled against surveillance, there
is a picture of Hassan al Banna, murdered leader of the Egyptian Muslim
Brotherhood, on the wall. ‘When I first heard about this document
[meaning the Protocols of the Elders of Zion],’
says Rantisi reasonably, ‘I didn’t want to believe it, but then I saw what
was happening in Palestine, and I could see that it was genuine.’ That is his
answer. (…) There is a great deal to shudder about. The amount
of anti-Semitic literature, journalism and television in Arab countries is
voluminous. The more sophisticated Arab governments, however, who tolerate
this stuff, understand the need to turn a less contorted face to the West,
with its anti-racist liberal campaigners. They play it down, or ignore it. It
isn’t easy, though. When you are confronted with the collected
anti-Semitisms of the post-11 September Arab world, what is most striking is
the weirdness of journalists and politicians raiding the ancient political
sewers of old Europe for arguments. Take the example of what is called the
‘blood libel’. This is the old medieval story of how Jews kidnap Christians,
kill them and use their blood in arcane rituals [see here
for a short historical perspective on Western antisemitism]. We had a spate
of these tales in England in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, and many
Jews lost their lives as a result. So what on earth is the blood libel doing in a
column in the respected Egyptian mass daily paper Al-Ahram , in a book by the
Syrian defence minister and in broadcast sermons from various Palestinian
mosques? The libel in question is the 1840 Damascus case, in which several
Jews (including a David Harari) ‘confessed’ to the Ottoman authorities -
under torture - to kidnapping a priest and stealing his blood. Holocaust denial is another widespread feature of
Arab discourse, but for different reasons. In a school in Gaza, a middle-aged
teacher of English interrupted my interview of several of his pupils, and
launched into a tirade against the Jews. Were they not behind all wars? Had
they not caused trouble wherever they were? Had they not caused troubles even
for the Germans? ‘When?’ I asked him. ‘Before the reign of Hitler,’ the
teacher replied. A few blocks away I met Dr Musa Al-Zubut, chairman
of the Palestinian Legislative Council education committee, who had been
trying to go and meet his colleagues in Ramallah for several weeks, but had
been prevented by the Israelis. He was explaining why the history books for
the new Palestinian curriculum contained no reference to the Holocaust. Zubut
said he knew that the Holocaust was ‘of course’ exaggerated. It was not, he
said, ‘1 per cent of what we have suffered in Palestine’. Besides, even if
every Jew had been killed, what was that to do with the Palestinians? Is this anti-Semitism? Or is it a profound ignorance
about European history? Gaza is bad, but in two days in September 1941 at
Babi Yar near Kiev, 34,000 Jews were shot by the Einsatzgruppen… Elsewhere in Gaza, some of the most combustible
imams preach against the Jews on the basis, they claim, of the Koran itself.
A relatively new emphasis on certain passages leads these religious leaders
to proclaim the eternal untrustworthiness of Jews, going back to the days of
the Prophet. In this country last May, a Muslim preacher from Stratford, East
London, was convicted of several counts of incitement to murder, partly based
on a taped sermon entitled ‘No Peace with the Jews’. Faisal claimed that his
views were merely those of the Koran, which - if true - would be profoundly
worrying. (…) In Cairo I met the film producer Mounir Radhi. A
self-proclaimed anti-racist, his last film concerned the relationship between
a Muslim and a Coptic boy in a suburb of the Egyptian capital. His next,
however, will be about the events in Damascus in 1840. But in Radhi’s project
the blood libel has gone through a strange metamorphosis. Father Tomas is
still killed by David Harari, but not for his blood. No, now he is murdered
to prevent him speaking about a Zionist plot to move Jews from Damascus to
Palestine. Radhi is almost certainly sincere, but his story is
nonsense. There were no Zionists in 1840, and Damascus and Palestine were
then part of the same Ottoman province. This is just a mutation of the blood
libel to suit modern politics, with Jews (sorry, Zionists) plotting to steal
land rather than blood. Radhi may be an anti-racist, but he is perilously
close to being an anti-Semite. Still, it is mildly encouraging that Radhi’s film
does not show mad Jews eating blood-baked matzohs, in the way that the Syrian
defence minister believes they did. (…) [ OBSERVER TEXT ENDS HERE ] [5a] The
1968 PLO Charter states the objectives of the PLO as follows. Article 9 says
that “armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine.” That’s worth
chewing on for a second, because the PLO could have written the same thing
like this: “it is required that Palestine be liberated in the act of killing
people.” Killing which people? This is relatively obvious. Article 15 of the
PLO Charter states that it is “a national duty to repulse the Zionist
imperialist invasion from the great Arab homeland and to purge the Zionist
presence from Palestine,” and article 22 declares that “the liberation of
Palestine will liquidate the Zionist and imperialist presence.” In other
words, the PLO, which organization asserts that ‘Palestine’ may be
‘liberated’ only in the act of killing people, explains that its goal is
purging and liquidating -- that is to say, exterminating -- “Zionists.”
Hamas is always saying in public that it means to
destroy Israel, but in case that were not enough, article 32 of the Hamas
Charter states very clearly that “Leaving the circle of struggle with Zionism
is high treason” (so one may not negotiate with Zionists). The following article quotes and analyzes the Hamas
spokesman's genocidal perspective on the Gaza Disengagement:
[6] The
following is stated in article 27 of the Hamas Charter:
To see how closely Hamas and the PLO have cooperated
in the killing of both Arabs and Jews, visit:
[7] The following
piece quotes the relevant portions of the Pentagon study and analyses it in
its political context, with links to the original document (to go directly to
the Pentagon study, see further below):
<
PENTAGON STUDY: »» This Pentagon document was apparently
declassified in 1979 but not published until 1984. It was published by the
Journal of Palestine Studies:
»» And by the Jewish Institute for
National Security Affairs: »» And as an appendix in:
[8] Palestinians
Use Tunnel To Attack Israeli Post; 2 Soldiers Killed, One Kidnapped in Raid
at Gaza Border, The Washington Post, June 26, 2006 Monday, Final
Edition, A Section; A16, 1188 words, Scott Wilson, Washington Post Foreign
Service, JERUSALEM June 25 [9] Dan Halutz |
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. [10] The following
two pieces contain material relevant to the US role in the Gaza
disengagement:
[11] “IS THE US AN
ALLY OF ISRAEL?: A CHRONOLOGICAL LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE”; Historical and
Investigative Research; by Francisco Gil-White. |
Notify me of new HIR pieces!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Hezbollah Hizbollah Hizbu'llah Hizb
What is Hezbollah?
What is Hizbollah?
What is Hizbu'llah?
What is Hizb'allah?
'allah