|
Notify me of new HIR pieces!
|
||||||||||||
The Obama administration,
like any government, routinely makes public statements about its intentions,
values, and policy imperatives. For example, the Obama administration claims
publicly to be enemy of Iran[1] and friend of Israel. In fact, the US government
claims that “ ‘concerning policy, we have done
everything that we can that is in Israel’s security – and long-range
interests.”[2] But what if PLO/Fatah, also known
as the ‘Palestinian Authority,’ is a proxy of Iran? The US
government pushes very hard for Israel to give strategic
territory to PLO/Fatah in exchange
for a promise of ‘peace.’ So if PLO/Fatah
is helping Iran destroy Israel, the US government’s behavior is quite
interesting. About the
future PLO/Fatah state, the Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu states: “I think it's important to make
peace with the Palestinians. And I’m prepared to negotiate that peace right
away. ...They should have their own independent country.” Consistent with
this, Netanyahu is rushing to give PLO/Fatah
its independent state, and has even put Jerusalem on offer. But Netanyahu has
also said: “We should be assured that this country [the future PLO/Fatah state] is not used as a staging
ground for Iranian-sponsored terrorist attacks on us.” So if PLO/Fatah is a proxy of Iran, the Israeli
government’s behavior is also quite interesting.[3] One should
then ask: What in the world are the US
and Israeli governments doing? This must be answered, because PLO/Fatah,
like Hamas and Hezbollah, is indeed part of an Iranian offensive to destroy
Israel. We will show
here that PLO/Fatah has always been
and continues to be very closely allied with Iran. _____________________________________________________________ Table
of Contents █ Short
Preface (above) █ PLO/Fatah’s
role in Ayatollah Khomeini’s coup. █ PLO/Fatah’s
alignment during the Iran-Iraq war █
‘Estrangement’ leads to renewed love █
What are the US and Israeli
governments doing? _____________________________________________________________ PLO/Fatah’s role in Ayatollah
Khomeini’s coup The regime
that still rules Iran was inaugurated by Ayatollah Khomeini (see pictures,
top right), a ferocious Islamist terrorist who led the 1979 Iranian
Revolution that deposed the previous ruler, the Shah of Iran. With whom did
the Ayatollah Khomeini want to celebrate, right away and before sharing the
joy with anybody else? With Yasser
Arafat, then head of PLO/Fatah. It was just
two weeks after the Ayatollah Khomeini returned to Iran and took power
that the New York Times reported how Yasser Arafat had accepted an
invitation to visit Teheran. Why so soon? Why so much deference? Because the
Ayatollah Khomeini was grateful: “Palestinian sources said that Mr. Arafat’s
group had sent arms to the [Iranian] revolutionary forces in the last four
months and had trained Iranian guerillas since the early 1970s.”[4]
Only four days later Arafat was already in Teheran, celebrating the Iranian
theocratic Islamist revolution, and promising to help export it everywhere.
Wrote the New York Times: “Bantering and grinning, the guerrilla
leader declined to furnish details about support the PLO had given to various
Iranian guerrilla organizations.”[5] Fact: PLO/Fatah played a key role in the Iranian revolution,
arming and training Khomeini’s troops. Naturally,
PLO/Fatah expected the favor to be
repaid, and the Iranians rushed to state that they would honor their debts.
The Globe and Mail reported: [Quote from Globe and Mail begins here] Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat said
yesterday that Iranian guerrillas would fight alongside Palestinian forces
against Israel. ... Mr. Arafat, the first prominent
visitor to Iran since the revolution, said the Palestinian and Iranian aims
were identical. “We will continue our efforts until the time when we defeat
imperialism and Zionism,” he said. A close aide of Ayatollah Khomaini, Deputy Premier Ibrahim Yazdi,
also attended the inauguration of the PLO office and referred to the identity
of the two causes and the large number of Palestinian sacrifices in the PLO's
struggle against Israel. ... The son of Ayatollah Khomaini, Seyyed Ahmad Khomaini, a Moslem clergyman who also spoke at the
inauguration of the new PLO office, pledged Iran would continue its
revolutionary struggle until all Islamic countries had been set free. The bearded, black-turbanned
Seyyed Khomaini said: “We
will continue our struggle until we free all Islamic countries and hoist the
Palestinian flag together with ours.”[6] [Quote from Globe and Mail ends here] Soon after this Arafat bestrode the world stage as the
indispensable best friend of Khomeini, negotiating the safety of the
Americans held hostage in the US Embassy in Teheran at the request of
...(drum roll)... the US government.[6a] This makes it rather obvious
that the PLO was very powerful in Iran. In fact, the New York Times wrote
in November of 1980 that “The P.L.O. currently enjoys close ties with some of
the Iranian revolutionary leaders who rose to power with the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini,” including the Defense Minister
Mustafa Chamran and the leader of the Revolutionary
Guards Abu Sharif. “Like Yasir Arafat,” wrote the New York Times, “both
Abu Sharif and Mustafa Chamran are fervent
advocates of exporting Iran’s Islamic revolution to the rest of the Middle East
- in particular, to the conservative states of the Arab Gulf
” (emphasis added).
The Times also explained that PLO/Fatah had played a role in
the creation of the Revolutionary Guards (for it trained Abu Sharif) and in
creating the new Iranian secret police: SAVAMA (because Sharif and Chamran “relied heavily on their P.L.O. contacts” in
setting it up). The Times added: “The current head of the P.L.O.
network in Iran is Hani al-Hassan, alias Abu Hassan, a Jordanian citizen who
belongs to Arafat's inner circle of advisers. Before he was sent to Teheran,
Abu Hassan served as deputy chief of Fatah’s security department. He
enjoys a remarkable entree to Khomeini and other key members of the Iranian
regime -- so much so that one Western diplomat suggests that the P.L.O. envoy
should be counted as one of the most influential men in Teheran.”[6b] [emphasis added] The picture is clear. 1)
PLO/Fatah played a key role in the creation of the Iranian Islamist
terror state. a) It
armed and trained Khomeini’s troops for his revolution. b)
It helped create the all-important Revolutionary Guards. c)
It helped create the Iranian secret service SAVAMA. 2)
The idea of spreading Iranian Islamist terror everywhere was closely associated
with “the PLO’s struggle against Israel.” a)
Iran pledged itself to assist PLO/Fatah against Israel. b)
PLO/Fatah pledged itself to export
the Iranian Islamist Revolution. For years now
PLO/Fatah has been represented not only as unlinked to Iran, but also
as a secular organization, to be distinguished from the
‘fundamentalists’ and ‘Islamist’ Iranian terror proxies of Hamas and
Hezbollah. Most people accept this, and that is a testament to how a media
barrage can alter the perception of history. It is obvious, however, that if
Yasser Arafat’s ideology was to spread the Iranian Revolution, then he was an
Islamist. Historian Howard Sachar, writing in 1982,
agreed with how the New York Times represented things back then: “from the outset... the
Fatah’s reputation depended largely upon the success of its Moslem
traditionalist approach of jihad against Israel.”[6c] Not just any kind of jihad: Iranian jihad. _____________________________________________________________ PLO/Fatah’s alignment during
the Iran-Iraq war To understand
just how intimate the relationship between the Islamist Iranian government
and PLO/Fatah, one must take into account that such a strong alliance
with the Iranian Shiites angered almost every Arab government that was
supporting PLO/Fatah. One cannot imagine that they were pleased to
hear Arafat announce his goal of exporting the Iranian revolution to the Gulf
States (see above), because this would mean deposing the governments in the
Gulf States. And yet Yasser Arafat remained close to his friend Khomeini. A month after
the Iran-Iraq war broke out in late 1980, the Arab governments had sided with
Iraq and the situation had become politically dangerous for Arafat. So much
so that Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf states cracked down on their
Palestinian populations. “The reason,” reported the Globe and Mail,
“is that the authorities are suspicious of Palestinian ties to the militant
Shiite Moslems in Iran, who have vowed to export their Islamic revolution.”
And it observed: “Palestinian opinion, while reflecting the PLO’s reluctance
to choose sides in a war between its two allies, appears much more
pro-Iranian than that of conservative Gulf governments”
(emphasis added).[7] That was
October 1980. In December, this was the situation: [Quote from Washington Post
begins here] Dependent on fellow Arab governments
for virtually everything -- physical protection, diplomatic backing, arms,
money -- Arafat has had to watch helplessly as the Persian Gulf war split his
benefactors into antagonistic blocs with the PLO caught uncomfortably in the
middle. More damaging was the way the PLO’s
much advertised independence crumbled under the arm-twisting pressures of the
two camps. When the showdown came before last month’s divided Arab summit
meeting, Arafat and the PLO were forced by Syrian President Hafez Assad,
leader of the pro-Iran axis, to join a boycott of a summit whose aim was to
organize a long-term strategy for the Palestinians’ crusade against Israel.[8] [Quote from Washington Post
ends here] I would call
this remarkable. Even though the PLO was dependent on Arab states for everything,
when these states got together to plan a long-term strategy for the PLO’s
fight with Israel, the PLO sides with Iran. It was “uncomfortable,”
sure, but it sided with Iran. In March 1981
Arafat had a sympathetic meeting with Iraqi Shiites allied with Iran, as
reported by Tehran’s news service. [9] _____________________________________________________________ ‘Estrangement’ leads to renewed love But this could
not last. As observed above, the PLO’s entire infrastructure was based in the
Arab states. Soon the PLO was forced to take a more pro-Arab position. And
then, as the Iran-Iraq war was ending with the cease-fire in 1988, the
prelude to the Oslo ‘Peace’ Process was getting into high gear. This process
quite suddenly represented the terrorist PLO/Fatah as a moderate organization
that wanted to make peace. So to keep matters propagandistically consistent,
Iran just had to accuse Arafat of ‘treason’ against the Palestinian cause,
while Arafat just had to pronounce himself in public against Iranian
terrorism. Thus, for
example, when a bomb exploded in Tel Aviv in 1996, the Egyptian news agency
MENA reported that Arafat was blaming the Iranians: “Nabil Abu Rudaynah, adviser to Palestinian President Yasir Arafat, ...accused
foreign, non-Palestinian, elements in the region of being behind these
terrorist incidents to wreck the peace process. He specifically accused
Iran...”[10] Shortly
before that, Arafat had claimed that two Palestinians working for Iran had
tried to assassinate him.[11]
This is how a story of ‘estrangement’ between Arafat (formerly Khomeini’s
best friend) and the Iranian regime was built. But was it
true? Just one year
later, the Palestinian daily Al Quds reported that a top PLO/Fatah
leader had come back from Iran with a renewed relationship. What’s an
assassination attempt between friends? But in fact this made perfect
propaganda sense, because the newly elected Iranian president Mohammad
Khatami was supposed to be an Iranian Gorbachev pushing liberal reforms, and
Arafat was ‘making peace’ with Israel. Under this guise, an open friendship
could resume.[12] In 2002 the
Second Intifada, a series of hair-raising terrorist attacks against Israeli
civilians, was raging. This was Arafat’s -- that is to say, PLO/Fatah’s
-- war. Not even the mainstream Western media, so often a
cheerleader for Arafat, was denying that most of the violence was due to the
activities of Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, a Fatah terrorist group. Here
is the Times of London, in April 2002: “A new group directly linked to Yasser Arafat’s
Fatah movement through its Tanzim military wing,
the [Al Aqsa Martyrs] brigades are behind the majority of recent shootings and suicide attacks
against Israelis.”[14] And here is The Australian, in September of 2003: [Quote from The Australian begins
here] Israeli officials said documents captured
last year in a massive military raid on the West Bank after a series of
suicide bombings inside Israel showed the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, which
carried out many of the attacks, was an arm of Fatah, Arafat’s political organisation. They also said the documents proved the
Palestinian Authority’s intelligence apparatus, also headed by Arafat, was
involved in planning terror activity. Israeli officials said the documents
showed Arafat had personally authorised fund
transfers for such activity. ‘Arafat views terrorism as a legitimate tool for
obtaining the Palestinian national goal,’ said one official.[15] [Quote from The Australian ends
here] In the Second
Intifada, behind PLO/Fatah, was Iran. Here is the Christian Science
Monitor, writing
in January 2002 under the headline: “Palestinian ties to Iran, Hizbullah look firmer”: [Quote from the Christian Science
Monitor begins here] ...[T]he
once-frosty relationship between Iran and Arafat appears to have thawed since
the outbreak of the [second] intifada in September 2000. Iran, which opposes
Israel's very existence, is a staunch backer of the intifada, opening its
hospitals to wounded Palestinians, training fighters, and rallying support
for the uprising. In April last year, Tehran hosted a
conference for 34 Arab and Islamic countries and organizations. All the hard-line Palestinian groups were there as well as Hizbullah. But also attending was a representative of the
Palestinian Authority, Salim Al Zeenoun,
who admitted that the Oslo Accords had turned out to be a “sandcastle of
illusion.” Two months later, Arafat sent a
telegram to Iranian President Mohammed Khatami to congratulate him on his
re-election. “We look to all the people of the
Islamic world, foremost among them the Muslim Iranian people and their
faithful leadership, to support, aid, and assist [Palestine],” Arafat said.
He also asked Iran to “work fast to end this bloody and savage war which the
Israeli government has been waging for eight solid months.” Israel says that the military alliance
between Iran and Arafat and the scheme to smuggle a shipload of [Iranian]
weapons to the Palestinian Authority [the famous Karine
A incident] was born at around this time. [13] [Quote from the Christian Science
Monitor ends here] So PLO/Fatah, once installed inside Israel thanks to the Oslo ‘Peace’
Process, began functioning as a terrorist proxy of Iran. At the same
time, however, the road was being prepared for Mahmoud Abbas to posture as
the anti-terror ‘peacemaker.’ Notice what The
Australian wrote in September 2003: “Palestinian prime minister Mahmoud
Abbas resigned last month after Arafat refused to hand over control of the
security forces Abbas said he needed to make Hamas and Islamic Jihad halt
their suicide bombings.”[15] So, yes, the
terrorist activity is all being directed by Arafat, but when Abbas takes over
there will be peace, became the media message. In fact, the mainstream
Western media went quite out of its way to laud Mahmoud Abbas (alias Abu Mazen) as a supposed arch moderate. Only one
problem with this. The Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades -- the most violent
Palestinian terrorists, and the ones most involved in the Second Intifada
that Iran was sponsoring -- in fact preferred Abbas to their own Tanzim boss Barghouti as a
replacement for Arafat when the latter died. An Associated Press wire
dated December 2004 reports that: “Abbas already has been nominated as
Fatah’s presidential candidate, so Barghouti must
run as an independent. But as a leading Fatah member, he would likely
undermine Abbas’ prospects… Zakaria Zubeidi, the 29-year-old West Bank leader of the Al Aqsa
Martyrs’ Brigades, a violent group linked to Fatah, said he would back Abbas.
‘Barghouti. . .should
resign from Fatah,’ he told The Associated Press.”[16] It is already
clear that Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades was linked to Iran, because Iran was
sponsoring the Second Intifada, which was being waged especially by the
brigades. In fact, only two months earlier, with Arafat still alive, the Daily
Telegraph had reported: “Israel believes that much of the
Fatah-affiliated armed faction, calling itself the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades,
has now come under Iran's sway, especially in the West Bank.” Who were they
directly working with? None other than Hezbollah, the Iranian proxy Fatah is
supposedly so different from: “Scores of Palestinian attacks, accounting for
roughly a third of the 98 Israelis killed so far this year, are believed to
have been orchestrated by the Lebanese Hizbollah
movement.” Arafat did not deny this, though he tried to give it a different
spin: he claimed to be upset, and accused Iran of trying to “infiltrate Fatah.”[17] The upshot is that nobody was denying that Iran was heavily involved
with the PLO/Fatah terrorists, the same terrorists who pushed for
Mahmoud Abbas becoming the new PLO/Fatah
leader. Oh wait.
Somebody would deny the link between
PLO/Fatah and Iran. Guess who? The Israeli government. As Frontpage
magazine explained in 2007: “Iran’s direct
connection to Hamas is openly discussed and widely acknowledged. Where Fatah
is concerned, the issues are more complex; but the link has been established.
In March, Brig. Gen. (res.) Shalom Harari, a Senior
Research Scholar with the Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT) at the
Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya, wrote an
Issue Brief for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs in which he noted:
‘There is a growing strategic alliance between Iran and the radical
Palestinian forces in the territories. Iran is involved in supporting both
the Islamic factions and Fatah, as well. Today, at least 40 percent of
Fatah’s different fighting groups are also paid by Hezbollah and Iran.’ Corroborating Harari’s analysis, Maj.-Gen. Yoav
Galant, head of the IDF Southern Command, wrote an
Issue Brief for the JCPA one month later in which he observed: ‘A few years
ago, Fatah’s Al Aqsa Brigade in Judea and Samaria was bought out by Iran.’
Checks with various security and intelligence sources have provided
additional confirmation of this information. Iranian funding of Fatah is not
direct, but comes through the conduit of Hezbollah and goes in the main to Al
Aqsa Brigades. The
government of Israel... maintains that Al Aqsa, although originally a
spin-off from Fatah, is no longer part of Fatah and no longer answers to
Abbas. This spin makes it possible to continue to promote Fatah as
potentially moderate, in spite of Al Aqsa’s very radical connections. Experts
refute this scenario, however. Said one security source who provided
background information: ‘Abbas is formally the commander of Al Aqsa…he has
little to do with them to ensure deniability…but privately supports Al Aqsa.
US money to PA security agencies go to Al Aqsa people as well. Indeed, Abbas
has ensured that most of the Al Aqsa people are on the payroll.’”[17a] The Israeli
government goes out of its way to pretend that Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades is
not part of Al Fatah, thus supporting Abbas, who pretends that he has nothing
to do with them in order “to ensure deniability” for Al Aqsa’s murders of
Israeli civilians. The Israeli
government is covering for those who murder Israeli citizens. We have
already seen above how absurd the Israeli government’s position, for Abbas
owes his position to Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades: they were the ones lobbying
for him—marching in the streets, in fact—and intimidating his competition. So PLO/Fatah
(or the ‘Palestinian Authority’) is allied with Iran to destroy the State of
Israel. But the US
government wants PLO/Fatah to inherit strategic Israeli territory. And
the Israeli government is cooperating. What
are they doing? _____________________________________________________________ What are the US and Israeli
governments doing? It is now
probably a good idea to review HIR’s First Principles, in order to do some
hard thinking about US geopolitics. ARGUMENT A. Premise 1.
The way to do better geopolitics is to have a more accurate representation of
the intentions and capabilities of other players in the international system. Premise 2.
The Government of the United States, the most important geopolitical player,
has the strongest motivation to do better geopolitics. Therefore:
The Government of the United States works very hard to obtain a better
understanding of the intentions and capabilities of other players in the
international system. Fact:
CIA director George Tenet said in the year 1998 that the budget on that year
had been a little under 27 billion. Recently, a US
Intelligence official said in a press conference that the yearly budget was
now 44 billion. But the truth is that nobody knows for sure, because the budget for US Intelligence is a state secret. Hypothesis: The Government of the United States has very good
information—definitely better than my own—on which to base its geopolitical
decisions. ARGUMENT B. Premise 1.
The Government of the United States, for many years running, has been the
most powerful in the world. Premise 2.
Idiots don’t become the most powerful people in the world. Therefore:
The Government of the United States is not run by idiots. Hypothesis: If the Government of the United States behaves in ways that seem
idiotic to me, then a) there is something I don’t yet understand; or b) this
government has different values than my own. Or both. (And I have yet to
accept this, which is why I think the behavior is idiotic.) ARGUMENT C. Premise 1.
The true preferences of someone are revealed in his/her expensive behaviors. Premise 2.
Saying “My intentions are X” is not expensive but cheap. Therefore:
Speech acts (e.g. public and official declarations) don’t necessarily convey
information about the true intentions of a government. Hypothesis: If the Government of the United States consistently, year after year,
spends billions of dollars and achieves always similar results, and if these
results contradict the government’s publicly declared intentions, the
publicly declared intentions must be deliberate deceptions. US
Intelligence knows perfectly well everything that I have documented in this
article. And it knew it long before I did. Hence, the US Government is
applying very strong pressure on Israel to create a ‘Palestinian State’ run
by PLO/Fatah on strategic Israeli territory knowing full well that
PLO/Fatah is allied with Iran to destroy Israel. Is this
consistent with other expensive US Government behaviors? It is. A
recent example is the US reaction to the Mavi
Marmara incident. Recently one
ship in a Turkish flotilla on its way to Gaza, the Mavi
Marmara, refused to respect the naval blockade that Israel has imposed on
Gaza in order to prevent the Palestinians who live there from obtaining
weapons. This is because ever since the Israeli government withdrew its
troops and even evacuated the Jewish population of Gaza in order to give this
territory to the ‘Palestinian Authority,’ thousands of rockets have rained
from Gaza against the Israeli population. Informed that humanitarian aid
could be unloaded in the Israeli port of Ashdod and then transferred under
supervision to the Gaza Strip, the Mavi Marmara
preferred to shout insults over the radio (e.g. “¡Go back to Auschwitz!”) and
announced its defiance of the blockade. When the Israeli naval forces,
according to international law, boarded the ship, some of the passengers,
violent terrorists who meant to provoke an incident, attacked the soldiers
with tubes, clubs, hammers, knives, and other such weapons. This is
documented on film.[18]
The mainstream mass media has not shown these images, preferring to construct
a morality play where the ‘evil Jews’ ‘attack’ the ‘friends’ of the ‘poor
Palestinians.’ What was the
reaction of US president Barack Hussein Obama? The Montreal Gazette reported
on June 10, 2010: “The president Barack Obama said yesterday that he will
pressure Israel to find the way to relax the naval blockade on the Gaza
Strip...” Not only that: “The White House yesterday promised 400 million in
assistance for Gaza and the West Bank... The money... will be given to the
Palestinian Authority.”[16a] So president
Barack Obama, one of the best informed people in the world, has elected to
reward anti-Israeli terrorists for what he knows was a violent provocation.
First he makes it easier for anti-Israeli smugglers to get weapons into Gaza,
and then he sends a mountain of money to the Palestinian Authority, an
ally of Iran. This money, naturally, will be used to prepare more hostile
anti-Israeli terrorism (and to oppress further the Arabs that PLO/Fatah
supposedly ‘represents’ but in reality abuses daily). In the context
of the foregoing, the accusations of some that a close advisor of Obama
had something to do with the planning of the Turkish flotilla incident
are not exactly beyond the pale. Especially when we consider that the
advisor in question, John O. Brennan, who studied in Cairo, can speak
fluently in Arabic about the beauties of Islam. Truly there is
consistency here. As we have
documented on HIR, the entire history of US foreign policy toward Iran,
despite the loud public condemnations, is one of consistent and dramatic
assistance to Iran’s long-term goals.[19] US Intelligence also
understands perfectly well, and knew it long before I did, that Al Fatah was created by Hajj Amin al Husseini, a top leader of Adolf Hitler’s
Final Solution against the European Jews.[20] On the basis
of this evidence we may conclude that when President Obama’s chief of staff
Rahm Emmanuel states to a group of rabbis that “ ‘concerning policy, we have
done everything that we can that is in Israel’s security -- and long-range
interests,’ ” the Obama administration is lying.[2] If
the US government is lying, then we must consider the alternative hypothesis:
that the US Government -- not the American people, but the US Government --
is an enemy of Israel, and is trying to destroy it. Does this make
sense? It is
certainly consistent with HIR’s detailed investigation of US foreign policy
toward the Jewish people and state since the 1930s, which shows conclusively
that -- contrary to popular belief -- the US ruling elite has always worked
hard to undermine Israeli security.[21] Israeli
leaders are cooperating with this process, because they have not yet expelled
PLO/Fatah from Israel. On the contrary. Though they pretend to drag
their feet, they are engaged in an on-again, off-again process with PLO/Fatah
that (let’s face it) is designed to give it everything it wants, in exchange
for... Well, for nothing, because PLO/Fatah has not laid down its arms
and does not intend to. The Israeli government is also much better informed
than I am, and likewise knew everything I have reviewed here long before I
did. After all, my documentation is publicly available, and one of the main
targets of Israeli intelligence-gathering is, naturally, PLO/Fatah.
So what are
Israeli leaders doing? It is an important question. One
hypothesis says that Israeli leaders are doing something quite similar to
what their predecessors did in the prelude to, and during, World War II. HIR
has much documentation on this topic, but two articles in particular offer a
good place to start. First, to examine the consistent behavior of a string of
Israeli prime ministers, please read: ►”Leaders Lied, Jews died: Why have Israeli
leaders been lying to their fellow citizens about the PLO/Fatah?; Historical
and Investigative Research; 10 July 2007; by Francisco Gil-White (with the
editorial assistance of Ted Belman) To examine the
behavior of Israeli leaders during the Holocaust, please read: ► “The responsibility of the mainstream (Labor
Zionist) Israeli leaders during the Shoah
('Holocaust')”; from THE PROBLEM OF JEWISH SELF-DEFENSE: An HIR series;
Historical and Investigative Research; 21 February 2007; by Francisco
Gil-White If History is
indeed repeating itself, then the Jewish people is in great peril, for when
the causes recur, so do the consequences. And if the Jewish people is in
peril, then so are ordinary people all over the West, because 2500 years of
Western history show conclusively that periods of Jewish persecution coincide
with periods of savage oppression against non-Jews (a recent and dramatic
example is the 20th c. Holocaust).
Footnotes and
Further Reading [1] Last Friday it was reported
that “Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is pushing for another round of
United Nations sanctions against Iran.” Here,
the US government is projecting that Iran is the bad guys and that the US
will work to undermine Iran. SOURCE: “Obama the appeaser; The transnational dove
has left a vacuum that Iran is filling”; The Washington Times, May 21, 2010
Friday, B, COMMENTARY; Pg. 3, 777 words, By Jeffrey T. Kuhner
SPECIAL TO THE WASHINGTON TIMES [2]
A week ago, President Obama’s chief of staff Rahm Emmanuel stated to a group
of rabbis that “ ‘concerning policy, we have done
everything that we can that is in Israel’s security – and long-range
interests. Watch what the administration does.’ ” Here, the US government is
projecting that Israel is the good guys and will work to strengthen Israel. SOURCE: “US ‘screwed up’ message on Israel, Emanuel
tells rabbis. Officials deny administration changing view on Israeli nuclear
policy”; The Jerusalem Post, May 16, 2010 Sunday, NEWS; Pg. 1, 1197 words,
HERB KEINON, JTA contributed to this report. [3] Interview With Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu; CNN; July 7, 2010 Wednesday; NEWS;
International; 5805 words; Larry King [4]
“The PLO announced today that its chairman, Yasser Arafat, had accepted an
invitation to visit Teheran soon. It also said that followers of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini had seized the former Israeli
diplomatic mission in Teheran, and the PLO had accepted an offer to turn it
into a Palestinian embassy. Wafa,
the Palestinian press service, reported that the Ayatollah’s forces had
contacted Mr. Arafat by telephone yesterday and proclaimed their solidarity
and gave their thanks. Palestinian sources said that Mr. Arafat’s group had
sent arms to the revolutionary forces in the last four months and had trained
Iranian guerillas since the early 1970s.” SOURCE: P.L.O.
Is Cool to Dayan Remarks; Statements Given Prominence; By MARVINE HOWE
Special to The New York Times. New York Times (1857-Current file). New York,
N.Y.: Feb 15, 1979. p. A12 (1 page) [5]
“An exultant Yasir Arafat, leader of the Palestine
Liberation Organization, proclaimed here today that the Iranian revolution
had ‘turned upside down’ the balance of forces in the Middle East. ‘Today Iran, tomorrow Palestine,’ he said. Mr. Arafat received a pledge from Ayatollah Khomeini
that the Iranians would ‘turn to the issue of victory over Israel’ after Iran
had consolidated its strength, the Teheran radio reported. …Bantering and grinning, the guerrilla leader
declined to furnish details about support the PLO had given to various
Iranian guerrilla organizations, saying: ‘It is enough that we are here, and no matter how
much we have helped we cannot offer as much back as the Iranian people have
offered us. It is enough for us to be among the Iranian people. Asked whether the Palestinian movement felt
‘stronger’ since the Iranian uprising, he said: ‘Definitely. It has changed completely the whole
strategy and policy in this area. It has been turned upside down.’ ” SOURCE: Arafat,
in Iran, Reports Khomeini Pledges Aid for Victory Over Israel; Visit a Sign
of Iran's Sharp Turn; ARAFAT, IN TEHERAN, PRAISES THE VICTORS; By JAMES M.
MARKHAM Special to The New York Times. New York Times (1857-Current file).
New York, N.Y.: Feb 19, 1979. p. A1 (2 pages) [6]
“Four more generals executed; PLO, Iran will fight Israel, Arafat says”; The
Globe and Mail. Toronto, Ont.: Feb 20, 1979. p. P.10 [6a] “Grand Theater: The US, The PLO, and the Ayatollah
Khomeini: Why did the US government, in 1979, delegate to the PLO the task of
negotiating the safety of American hostages at the US embassy in Tehran?”;
Historical and Investigative Research; 10 December 2005; by Francisco
Gil-White [6b] “The P.L.O. currently enjoys
close ties with some of the Iranian revolutionary leaders who rose to power
with the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. One of the
most intriguing delegates at the Fatah conference in Damascus at the end of
May, for example, was Arbas-Agha Zahani whose nom de guerre is Abu Sharif. He was then the
head of the Ayatollah's Revolutionary Guards, or Pasdaran
Enghelab, a post he resigned in a power play in
June that was designed to weaken the position of the relatively ''moderate''
President Abolhassan Bani-Sadr.
(Abu Sharif was subsequently reappointed deputy chief of the Pasdaran Enghelab.) Abu Sharif
rose to a position of influence thanks to the patronage of the present
Iranian Defense Minister, Mustafa Chamran. Like Yasir Arafat, both Abu Sharif and Mustafa Chamran are fervent advocates of exporting Iran’s Islamic
revolution to the rest of the Middle East - in particular, to the
conservative states of the Arab Gulf. Abu Sharif's links with Arafat, Abu Jihad and other
key figures in the P.L.O. leadership date back to the early 1970’s, when he
attended a guerrilla training course at a Fatah camp in Lebanon. After the
downfall of the Shah, Abu Sharif and Mustafa Chamran
relied heavily on their P.L.O. contacts for help in setting up a new secret
police to replace the Sha's notoriouus
Savak. A special P.L.O. unit, whose members had
received intelligence training in the Soviet Union, was dispatched to Teheran
to assist in rooting out ‘counterrevolutionaries.’ Abu Sharif repaid his
personal debt to the P.L.O. by successfully lobbying -- with the backing of,
among others, one of the Ayatollah's grandsons -- for a big Iranian
contribution to the Palestinian war chest and for the dispatch of more than
200 Iranian ‘volunteers’ to fight with the P.L.O. in southern Lebanon The current head of the P.L.O. network in Iran is
Hani al-Hassan, alias Abu Hassan, a Jordanian citizen who belongs to Arafat's
inner circle of advisers. Before he was sent to Teheran, Abu Hassan served as
deputy chief of Fatah’s security department. He enjoys a remarkable entree
to Khomeini and other key members of the Iranian regime -- so much so that
one Western diplomat suggests that the P.L.O. envoy should be counted as one
of the most influential men in Teheran.” [emphasis added] SOURCE:
“TERROR: A SOVIET EXPORT”; New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New
York, N.Y.: Nov 2, 1980. pg. A.42; by Robert Moss NOTE: though the
PLO supposedly rooted out “counterrevolutionaries” to help create the
Ayatollah’s new secret service, exiled Iranians were pointing out that the new SAVAMA
was almost identical in all its personnel to the old CIA-created SAVAK.
This would make sense if the Islamist Iranians and PLO/Fatah all
answered to the same (US) master. Otherwise it is very strange. [6c] Sachar,
H. 1982. A history of Israel: From the rise of Zionism to our time. New York:
Knopf. (pp. 698) [7]
MANAMA BAHREIN -- MANAMA, Bahrein (AP) - Saudi
Arabia and other Persian Gulf states have tightened restrictions on an
estimated 400,000 Palestinians since the outbreak of the Iran-Iraq war,
diplomatic sources say. A ban on political gatherings by Palestinians has
been imposed and strict visa requirements are being rigidly enforced. The
reason is that the authorities are suspicious of Palestinian ties to the
militant Shiite Moslems in Iran, who have vowed to export their Islamic
revolution. Other sources said that Yasser Arafat, head of the
Lebanon-based Palestine Liberation Organization, has reassured Persian Gulf
governments that his guerrilla movement would never upset the stability of
the oil- rich area and ordered his representatives in Gulf capitals to remain
neutral in the Iran-Iraq conflict. “The PLO has been treading a delicate path
of neutrality between Iraq and Iran and that has not been easy,” one Arab
diplomat said. “Iraq, and all other Arab powers, insist
that the PLO must put its political cards on the table and declare its
unchangeable commitment to the Arab cause against that of the (non-Arab)
Persians.” At the same time, Iranian leaders are reported to have asked the
Palestinians to support Iran in return for their support of the guerrilla
movement. Palestinian opinion, while reflecting the PLO’s
reluctance to choose sides in a war between its two allies, appears much
more pro-Iranian than that of conservative Gulf governments.” [emphasis
added] SOURCE: “Gulf
states tighten hold on Palestinians”; The Globe and Mail. Toronto, Ont.: Oct
23, 1980. p. P.14 [8]
“War, arab Feuding Leave Arafat, PLO in Disarray;
Gulf War and Arab Feuding Leave Arafat and PLO in Disarray”; The Washington
Post, December 14, 1980, Sunday, Final Edition, First Section; A1, 1487
words, By Loren Jenkins, Washington Post Foreign Service [9] “Arafat's
Meeting with Iraqi Da'wah Party Delegation”; BBC
Summary of World Broadcasts, March 3, 1981, Tuesday, Part 4 The Middle East
and Africa; A. THE MIDDLE EAST; ME/6663/A/8; , 395 words. TEXT: BBC Summary of World Broadcasts A delegation representing the Da'wah
Islamic Party in Iraq met with Brother Yasir Arafat
the Chairman of the PLO Executive Committee and member of the delegation
commissioned to study the issue of the war that has been imposed on Iran by
the Iraqi regime, at noon today. The spokesman for the Iraqi Da'wah
Islamic Party briefed Brother Arafat on the measures of suppression,
oppression and banishment that have been carried out by the infidel Tikriti regime against the Iraqi Mujahidin. The
spokesman, who supported his statement with pictures, statistics and
documents, added that during the past year alone, Saddam's regime had killed
and executed 100,000 Iraqi strugglers. The spokesman added that the Iraqi
regime's suppressive measures have escalated to the extent that even women,
children and old men are not spared. They, too, have been subjected to
tyranny, injustice, imprisonment and execution. The spokesman stressed that the stance of the
government of the Islamic Republic of Iran did not represent the stance of
the Government and people of Iran alone, but also the claims of more than
60,000 exiled Iraqis and the claims of the help- less Iraqi people. Speaking
to Brother Arafat, the Iraqi spokesman added: We ask you, as a true
revolutionary, not to deal with us in terms of international political principles
and international relations; we call upon you to help our voice of truth be
heard through- out the world and to pressure Saddam's bloody infidel regime
to change its position on the oppressed Iraqi people and end the war he has
imposed on both of the Muslim peoples in Iraq and Iran. Then one of the Iraqi mujahidin spoke and said to
Brother Arafat: O Brother Abu Ammar, I am a
struggler and revolutionary just as you are, and my duty is to fight at your
side against the Zionist regime and for the liberation of Palestine and not
to be exiled by Saddam's regime to Iran after a period of torture. Then the
struggler showed the marks that remained on his body after being tortured by
the Iraqi regime to Brother Arafat, and said that the torture carried out by
Saddam's gang against the Iraqi mujahidin was much more than that carried out
by the Zionist entity against the Palestinian combatants. Seeing and hearing
all this, Brother Arafat could not prevent his tears of sympathy for the
Iraqi brothers from falling. . . [10]
“PALESTINIAN REACTION; Arafat's adviser accuses Iran of sheltering
terrorism”; BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, March 5, 1996, Tuesday, Part 4
The Middle East; THE MIDDLE EAST; AFTERMATH OF TEL AVIV BOMBING; EE/D2553/ME,
326 words [11] “
‘SABOTAGE’ ATTEMPT; Two pro-Iran Palestinians reported arrested for plotting
to kill Arafat”; BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, February 21, 1996, Wednesday,
Part 4 The Middle East; THE MIDDLE EAST; ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN AFFAIRS;
EE/D2541/ME, 79 words [12]
“Bethlehem: Brig-Gen Abu Khalid al-Lahham, who
recently returned from Iran, said that Hojjat ol-Eslam Mohammad Khatami is considered a close friend of
Palestine and the Palestinian people, as well as a personal friend of
President Yasir Arafat. Moreover, he called him the
Iranian Napoleon and described him as Iran's saviour. In an exclusive interview, Lahham
said... the new Iranian leadership will strive to refute its image of
exporting revolution and interfering in the internal affairs of other people. On the internal level, the new leadership will
engage in building a free economy and will allow freedom of thought and faith
and the formation of political parties. Lahham,
who arrived in Iran 10 days before the elections on an assignment by
President Yasir Arafat, added that the new
leadership will support the Palestinian people with all their leaders and
inclinations, including the peace process, but it will fight to defend its
role and presence as a major Middle Eastern state. The Palestinian people
will be able to ask for Iran's support” SOURCE:
“Arafat adviser visits Iran, brings message of support for Palestinians”; BBC
Summary of World Broadcasts, June 12, 1997, Thursday, Part 4 The Middle East;
THE MIDDLE EAST; ISRAEL; ME/D2943/MED, 428 words [13]
“Palestinian ties to Iran, Hizbullah look firmer”;
Christian Science Monitor (Boston, MA), January 18, 2002, Friday, WORLD; Pg.
08, 1353 words, Nicholas Blanford Special to The
Christian Science Monitor [14] “A
bitter taste for vengeance”; Sunday Times (London), April 7, 2002, Sunday,
Features, 2938 words, Marie Colvin in Ramallah [15]
“Arch-terrorist or hero of peace: Arafat's enduring image”; The Australian,
September 25, 2003 Thursday All-round Country Edition, WORLD-TYPE-
FEATURE-BIOG- YASSER ARAFAT; Pg. 8, 1079 words, Abraham Rabinovich [16] Barghouti
Seeking Palestinian Presidency, Associated Press Online, December 1, 2004
Wednesday, INTERNATIONAL NEWS, 836 words, MOHAMMED DARAGHMEH; Associated
Press Writer, RAMALLAH, West Bank [17]
“Israel believes that much of the Fatah-affiliated armed faction, calling
itself the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, has now come under Iran's sway,
especially in the West Bank. Scores of Palestinian attacks, accounting for
roughly a third of the 98 Israelis killed so far this year, are believed to
have been orchestrated by the Lebanese Hizbollah
movement. The Shia group pioneered the use of suicide bombings
in the 1980s, kidnapped westerners and successfully drove the Israeli army
out of south Lebanon in 2000. Hizbollah is now a
political party in Lebanon. ‘Hizbollah is a finger of
Iran's hand,’ the senior Israeli security source said. ‘In the past year we
can see increasing Iranian influence in Palestinian attacks on Israel. ‘The same people sometimes receive money both from
Arafat's headquarters and from Hizbollah. If the
attack succeeds in causing fatalities, they get a bonus from Hizbollah.’ Another security source said Hizbollah
rewards Palestinian cells to the tune of $5,000 ( pounds
2,900) for each Israeli killed. Israel regards Teheran as its mortal enemy, and has
every interest in presenting Iran as a dangerous state sponsor of
international terrorism. But on the issue of penetrating Fatah, Israel is in unusual
agreement with Palestinian leaders. Yasser Arafat, the Palestinian ‘president’ who has
been confined to his Ramallah headquarters for more than three years, said
this week that Hizbollah was trying to infiltrate
Fatah. He said Iran was financing radical Islamist groups,
and denounced Iran's spiritual leader, Ali Khamenei. He said: ‘Khamenei is working against us. He is
giving money to all these fanatical groups. Khamenei is a troublemaker.’ ” SOURCE: “Iran
‘in control of terrorism in Israel’; Hizbollah,
described as a ‘finger of Teheran's hand,’ is said to be paying $5,000 for
every Israeli killed.” Anton La Guardia reports from Tel Aviv; THE DAILY
TELEGRAPH(LONDON), October 15, 2004, Friday, 803 words, by Anton La Guardia [17a] “The Fatah–Iranian Connection”; Frontpage
June 8, 2007; By Arlene Kushner. [18] The Israeli soldiers were under
orders to protect civilians (apparently no matter the cost,
because they defended themselves, at first, with non-weapons such as paint-ball
guns). It was only after one of the wounded Israeli soldiers was thrown
from the upper deck and the lethal weapons of the soldiers were taken from
them by the attackers, that their fellow soldiers opened fire to protect
them. The result was that some of the attackers died. The images of the brutal attack against the Israeli
soldiers—a blood curling lyinching—are available to
the public. [19] “Will the US attack Iran?: An
alternative hypothesis”; Historical and Investigative Research; 23 February
2006; by Francisco Gil-White [20] “How did the ‘Palestinian
movement’ emerge? The British sponsored it. Then the German Nazis, and the
US”; from UNDERSTANDING THE PALESTINIAN MOVEMENT: An HIR Series, in four
parts; Historical and Investigative Research; 13 June 2006; by Francisco
Gil-White [21] “Is the US an ally of Israel?: A chronological
look at the evidence”; Historical and Investigative Research; by Francisco
Gil-White |
Iranian dictator the Imam or Ayatollah
Khomeini and PLO/Fatah leader Yasser Arafat:
Notify me of new HIR pieces!
|
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
