voodoo-modest
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Dec 18, 2014 3:31 am




Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
 the zionist plan for middle-east, 1982 [arab spring] 
Author Message
WUP Media
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 12:44 pm
Posts: 2010
Location: france
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 25 times
Unread post the zionist plan for middle-east, 1982 [arab spring]
as_salàm 'alaykùm,

for the sake of the info, i open thus this dedicated topic on it, not only willing to double-post, rather attempting to highlight it on wup, awaiting from it that, as i did myself in google searches, find a board wherein you can find such info ... and wish israel been exposed as even only a few of what it really is ... spread it inshà ALLAH ...


[IMPORTANT]


The Zionist Plan for the Middle East

1982, publicated by world zionist organization, 14 february.

yinon plan on wikipedia is only available in french, but also appeared in the commonly known as the "Clean Break" report, 1996*.


Quote:
*A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm (commonly known as the "Clean Break" report) is a policy document that was prepared in 1996 by a study group led by Richard Perle for Benjamin Netanyahu, the then Prime Minister of Israel.[1] The report explained a new approach to solving Israel's security problems in the Middle East with an emphasis on "Western values". It has since been criticized for advocating an aggressive new policy including the removal of Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq.

...

"Moving to a Traditional Balance of Power Strategy"

"Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq — an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right — as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions."


"Since Iraq's future could affect the strategic balance in the Middle East profoundly, it would be understandable that Israel has an interest in supporting the Hashemites in their efforts to redefine Iraq,including such measures as: visiting Jordan as the first official state visit, even before a visit to the United States, of the new Netanyahu government; supporting King Hussein by providing him with some tangible security measures to protect his regime against Syrian subversion; encouraging — through influence in the U.S. business community — investment in Jordan to structurally shift Jordan’s economy away from dependence on Iraq; and diverting Syria’s attention by using Lebanese opposition elements to destabilize Syrian control of Lebanon. .. Were the Hashemites to control Iraq, they could use their influence over Najf to help Israel wean the south Lebanese Shia away from Hizballah, Iran, and Syria.

1996




quoted from the yinon plan:

The plan operates on two essential premises. To survive, Israel must 1) become an imperial regional power, and 2) must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states. Small here will depend on the ethnic or sectarian composition of each state. Consequently, the Zionist hope is that sectarian-based states become Israel’s satellites and, ironically, its source of moral legitimation.

1982



entire plan on .pdf:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/The%20Zionist%20Plan%20for%20the%20Middle%20East.pdf




The master plan for the Middle East in a nutshell. Oded Yinon an Israeli strategist proposed breaking up Arab countries, to create greater Israel. All the events in the middle east so far indicate that this plan is being carried out in secret.




Is Israel Inciting Genocide Against Alawites as Prelude to Creation of Kosovo-style Enclave in Syria?

12 Jul 2012

Within the past week, fellows at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies have used rather unfortunate analogies to describe the plight of Syria’s besieged Alawite minority.

The comparison of the Alawites to two of the region’s least popular interlopers in Arab and Muslim memory was hardly calculated to endear them to an already resentful Sunni majority.

...


http://www.pacificfreepress.com/opinion/12020-kosovo-treatment-for-syrias-alawite-minority.html

_________________
Là ilàha illà ALLAH
Mùhammad ar-Rasool ALLAH (sA'aws)


Ummà's Victory goes with the destruction of Reeba (Usury)
the zionist plan for middle-east, 1982 [arab spring]
the dogma of the trinity
The Controversy of Zion [masterpiece for understanding]
two opposed forces make standing the Pyramid


Sun Jul 15, 2012 4:23 am
Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on TuentiShare on SonicoShare on FriendFeedShare on OrkutShare on DiggShare on MySpaceShare on DeliciousShare on TechnoratiShare on TumblrShare on Google+
Profile
WUP Media
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 12:44 pm
Posts: 2010
Location: france
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 25 times
Unread post Re: the zionist plan for middle-east, 1982 [arab spring]
YINON PLAN wrote:
This is not a new idea, nor does it surface for the first time in Zionist strategic thinking. Indeed, fragmenting all Arab states into smaller units has been a recurrent theme. This theme has been documented on a very modest scale in the AAUG publication, Israel's Sacred Terrorism (1980)*, by Livia Rokach. Based on the memoirs of Moshe Sharett, former Prime Minister of Israel, Rokach's study documents, in convincing detail, the Zionist plan as it applies to Lebanon and as it was prepared in the mid-fifties.

...

Contrasted with the detailed and unambiguous Zionist strategy elucidated in this document, Arab and Palestinian strategy, unfortunately, suffers from ambiguity and incoherence. There is no indication that Arab strategists have internalized the Zionist plan in its full ramifications. Instead, they react with incredulity and shock whenever a new stage of it unfolds. This is apparent in Arab reaction, albeit muted, to the Israeli siege of Beirut. The sad fact is that as long as the Zionist strategy for the Middle East is not taken seriously Arab reaction to any future siege of other Arab capitals will be the same.

Khalil Nakhleh July 23, 1982



* Israel's Sacred Terrorism: A Study Based on Moshe Sharett's Personal Diary and Other Documents

The recently published Personal Diary of Moshe Sharett (Yoman Ishi. Tel Aviv: Ma'ariv, 1979, in Hebrew) now offers a decisive and authoritative contribution to the demystification of the myth of lsrael's security and its security policies. Between 1933 and 1948 Sharett guided the foreign relations of the Zionist movement, as head of the Jewish Agency's Political Department, and from 1948 to 1956 he was lsrael's foreign minister. In 1954 and 1955 he was its prime minister as well. The following pages present extracts from Sharett's diary demonstrating the following points:



1 .The Israeli political /military establishment never seriously believed in an Arab threat to the existence of Israel. On the contrary, it sought and applied every means to exacerbate the dilemma of the Arab regimes after the 1948 war. The Arab governments were extremely reluctant to engage in any military confrontation with Israel, yet in order to survive they needed to project to their populations and to the exiled Palestinians in their countries some kind of reaction to lsrael's aggressive policies and continuous acts of harassment. In other words, the Arab threat was an Israeli-invented myth which for internal and inter-Arab reasons the Arab regimes could not completely deny, though they constantly feared Israeli preparations for a new war.

2. The Israeli political/military establishment aimed at pushing the Arab states into military confrontations which the Israeli leaders were invariably certain of winning. The goal of these confrontations was to modify the balance of power in the region radically, transforming the Zionist state into the major power in the Middle East.

3. In order to achieve this strategic purpose the following tactics were used:

a) Large- and small-scale military operations aimed at civilian populations across the armistice lines, especially in the Palestinian territories of the West Bank and Gaza, then respectively under the control of Jordan and Egypt. These operations had a double purpose: to terrorize the populations, and to create a permanent destabilization stemming from tensions between the Arab governments and the populations, who felt they were not adequately protected against Israeli aggression.

b) Military operations against Arab military installations in border areas to undermine the morale of the armies and intensify the regimes' destabilization from inside their military structures.

c) Covert terrorist operations in depth inside the Arab world, used for both espionage and to create fear, tension and instability.



4. lsrael's achievement of its strategic purpose was to be realized through the following means:

a) New territorial conquests through war. Although the 1949-50 armistice agreements assigned to Israel a territory one-third larger than had the UN partition plan, the Israeli leadership was still not satisfied with the size of the state, the borders of which it had committed itself to respect on the international level. It sought to recover at least the borders of mandate Palestine. The territorial dimension was considered to be a vital factor in Israel's transformation into a regional power.

b) Political as well as military efforts to bring about the liquidation of all Arab and Palestinian claims to Palestine through the dispersion of the Palestinian refugees of the 1947-49 war to faraway parts of the Arab world as well as outside the Arab world.

c) Subversive operations designed to dismember the Arab world, defeat the Arab national movement, and create puppet regimes which would gravitate to the regional Israeli power.





Quote:
Then he [Ben Gurion] passed on to another issue. This is the time, he said, to push Lebanon, that is, the Maronites in that country, to proclaim a Christian State. I said that this was nonsense. The Maronites are divided. The partisans of Christian separatism are weak and will dare do nothing. A Christian Lebanon would mean their giving up Tyre, Tripoli, the Beka'a. There is no force that could bring Lebanon back to its pre-World War I dimensions, and all the more so because in that case it would lose its economic raison-d'etre. Ben Gurion reacted furiously. He began to enumerate the historical justification for a restricted Christian Lebanon. If such a development were to take place, the Christian Powers would not dare oppose it. I claimed that there was no factor ready to create such a situation, and that if we were to push and encourage it on our own we would get ourselves into an adventure that will place shame on us.

...

Sharett responded a few weeks later:

Mr. David Ben Gurion March 18, 1954 Sdeh Boker.

.... A permanent assumption of mine is that if sometimes there is some reason to interfere from the outside in the internal affairs of some country in order to support a political movement inside it aiming toward some target it is only when that movement shows some independent activity which there is a chance to enhance and maybe to bring to success by encouragement and help from the outside.



Israeli Newspaper Reveals Government's Attempt to Stop Publication of Israel's Sacred Terrorism.

Following are major excerpts from an article by Israeli Member of the Knesset Uri Avneri, published in Hoalam Hazeh, September 23, 1980, entitled "Sharett's Diary for the Arabs." The booklet uses quotations from Sharett's diary to illuminate eight affairs which took place during the fifties. Livia Rokach did clean work. All her quotations are real. She did not ever take them out of context, nor did she quote them in a way that contradicts the intention of the diary writer. To any person who is familiar with Israeli propaganda, such quotations may have a stunning effect...

...

2.The plan for the occupation of Southern Syria Sharett reveals that Ben Gurion, Dayan and Pinhas Lavon requested in February 1954 to exploit the toppling of the Syrian dictator, Adib Shishakly, by occupying southern Syria and annexing it to Israel. They also requested to buy a Syrian officer who would acquire power in Damascus and establish a pro-Israel puppet government. These things seem more actual today in light of the deteriorating position of Hafez al-Assad and Israeli declarations in this regard.



entire israel's sacred terrorism study .pdf



YINON PLAN


Egypt is divided and torn apart into many foci of authority. If Egypt falls apart, countries like Libya, Sudan or even the more distant states will not continue to exist in their present form and will join the downfall and dissolution of Egypt. The vision of a Christian Coptic State in Upper Egypt alongside a number of weak states with very localized power and without a centralized government as to date, is the key to a historical development which was only set back by the peace agreement but which seems inevitable in the long run.13

22

The Western front, which on the surface appears more problematic, is in fact less complicated than the Eastern front, in which most of the events that make the headlines have been taking place recently. Lebanon's total dissolution into five provinces serves as a precendent for the entire Arab world including Egypt, Syria, Iraq and the Arabian peninsula and is already following that track. The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unqiue areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel's primary target on the Eastern front in the long run, while the dissolution of the military power of those states serves as the primary short term target. Syria will fall apart, in accordance with its ethnic and religious structure, into several states such as in present day Lebanon, so that there will be a Shi'ite Alawi state along its coast, a Sunni state in the Aleppo area, another Sunni state in Damascus hostile to its northern neighbor, and the Druzes who will set up a state, maybe even in our Golan, and certainly in the Hauran and in northern Jordan. This state of affairs will be the guarantee for peace and security in the area in the long run, and that aim is already within our reach today.14

23

Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other, is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel's targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria. Iraq is stronger than Syria. In the short run it is Iraqi power which constitutes the greatest threat to Israel. An Iraqi-Iranian war will tear Iraq apart and cause its downfall at home even before it is able to organize a struggle on a wide front against us. Every kind of inter-Arab confrontation will assist us in the short run and will shorten the way to the more important aim of breaking up Iraq into denominations as in Syria and in Lebanon. In Iraq, a division into provinces along ethnic/religious lines as in Syria during Ottoman times is possible. So, three (or more) states will exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad and Mosul, and Shi'ite areas in the south will separate from the Sunni and Kurdish north. It is possible that the present Iranian-Iraqi confrontation will deepen this polarization.



Quote:
Why is it assumed that there is no special risk from the outside in the publication of such plans?

Such risks can come from two sources, so long as the principled opposition inside Israel is very weak (a situation which may change as a consequence of the war on Lebanon) : The Arab World, including the Palestinians, and the United States. The Arab World has shown itself so far quite incapable of a detailed and rational analysis of Israeli-Jewish society, and the Palestinians have been, on the average, no better than the rest. In such a situation, even those who are shouting about the dangers of Israeli expansionism (which are real enough) are doing this not because of factual and detailed knowledge, but because of belief in myth.





in yinon's plan, the Mùslim Community is literally dissected through an analysis based only on our differences existing among us ... that's why we must unite in spite of our actually "thin" differences.


zaid hamid wrote:
The plan is already in the end stages and we are still in denial. The plan of balkanization of Middle East and Af-Pak region involves us and the Muslim Middle East. The US war against "terror" is a war against us, within us, to balkanize us.


ALLAHùmma 3izzàtù_l_Islàm wa_l_Mùslimeen

_________________
Là ilàha illà ALLAH
Mùhammad ar-Rasool ALLAH (sA'aws)


Ummà's Victory goes with the destruction of Reeba (Usury)
the zionist plan for middle-east, 1982 [arab spring]
the dogma of the trinity
The Controversy of Zion [masterpiece for understanding]
two opposed forces make standing the Pyramid


Mon Jul 16, 2012 6:49 am
Profile
WUP Media
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 12:44 pm
Posts: 2010
Location: france
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 25 times
Unread post Re: the zionist plan for middle-east, 1982 [arab spring]
Image




America Adopts the Israel Paradigm

by Philip Giraldi, July 05, 2012


... accepting the Israeli definition of any critic as ipso facto a terrorist.

Since the Clinton administration, every senior diplomat or official dealing with the Middle East has had to pass through a vetting process to ensure full support of and deference to Israeli interests. Chas Freeman, who was named to head the National Security Council in 2009, was quickly forced to step down when it was determined that he was not sufficiently pro-Israel. Since 2001, many senior appointees throughout the federal government no longer make any effort to hide their strongly pro-Israel sentiments; witness the ascent of Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith, William Boykin, and Eric Edelman at the Pentagon under George W. Bush.

The Israelization of the U.S. national security model entered a new phase with 9/11, a disaster for America welcomed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as good news because it would bind the two countries together in the fight against what his country perceived as terrorism. In the first few days after 9/11, Congress invited Netanyahu to come to Washington to present his “we are all targets” speech, unleashing a flood of Israeli guidance on how to conduct the newly minted War on Terror. This involved a “with us or against us” policy toward all Islamic countries combined with enhanced security at home and considerable infringements of civil liberties. In short, Israel and its lobby, ably assisted by friends in Congress and the media, pushed the United States into becoming more like Israel to defend itself against what was essentially an overblown terrorist threat.

A book by Israeli Diaspora Minister Natan Sharansky was a potent symbol of the shift in American attitudes. The Case for Democracy began to make the rounds within the Bush administration with the president himself recommending it, stating that it provided a “glimpse of how I think about foreign policy.” Condi Rice was also seen reading the book and even quoted from it in a Senate hearing. Sharansky, who claims to be a human rights activist even though he has never accepted basic rights for Palestinians, subsequently helped Bush write his second inaugural address, with a bit of assistance from leading neocons Bill Kristol and Charles Krauthammer. The address pledged the United States to launch what was described as a “global freedom mission.” Sharansky’s embrace of the democracy concept for the entire world, particularly the Muslim part of it, has at its heart the objective of encouraging Arabs to evolve into weak democracies riven by tribalism and religious conflict. The Arabs would therefore be no threat to Israel. That strategy was first developed in “A Clean Break,” a list of recommendations presented to Prime Minister Netanyahu in 1996 by a group of American neoconservatives.


By exploiting the influence of well-placed officials in the Pentagon, Israel’s leaders began to see that the United States could become an instrument for across-the-board regime change in the Arab world. The first target was Iraq, which was supporting the families of Palestinians killed on the West Bank and Gaza. Israel, in line with the Clean Break strategy, sought to create a fragmented Iraqi state that would no longer be a threat. The incessant Israeli drumbeat for war was not the only element in the near hysteria that led to the attack on Saddam Hussein, but it was the key enabling factor.


http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2012/07/04/america-adopts-the-israel-paradigm/



scott mcconnell wrote:
When Benjamin Netanyahu was chosen as Israel’s prime minister in 1996, a handful of prominent American neoconservatives prepared for him a policy document entitled, “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.” The authors, several of whom would obtain influential posts in the George W. Bush administration, recommended an aggressive stance towards Syria, confrontation with Arafat, an effort to “wean” the Lebanese Shia away from Hezbollah, and the removal of Saddam Hussein from power. In his recent book Israel and the Clash of Civilizations, Jonathan Cook traces these recommendations to themes worked up by several right-wing Israeli strategists in the 1980s. The Israelis were proposing that Jerusalem cement its status as the Mideast’s dominant power by fomenting sectarian and ethnic strife in the surrounding states. As Oded Yinon, an Israeli journalist and former senior Foreign Ministry official, put it in a 1982 essay,

The total disintegration of Lebanon into five regional localized governments is the precedent for the entire Arab world including Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and the Arab peninsula, in a similar fashion. The dissolution of Egypt and later Iraq into districts of ethnic and religious minorities following the example of Lebanon is the main long-range objective of Israel on the Eastern Front. . . [I]n the long run the strength of Iraq is the biggest danger to Israel. . . Iraq can be divided on regional and sectarian lines just like Syria in the Ottoman era. There will be three states in the three major cities.12

Cook contends that strategists such as Yinon did not simply sell their vision to the neoconservatives and seek its implementation. The neocons interpreted these strategies as not only good for Israel, but good for America. Israel’s regional dominance and America’s control of oil could be assured through the same means, the fomenting of chaos in the Middle East and the break-up of its large states. Shortly after A Clean Break was published, its authors wrote another paper, predicting that, after Saddam Hussein was deposed, Iraq “would be ripped apart by the politics of warlords, thieves, clans, sects and key families.”13 Of the three authors who made this prediction, David Wurmser would four years later become Vice President Cheney’s top Middle East adviser, Douglas Feith would be Paul Wolfowitz’s chief deputy at the Pentagon, and Richard Perle would chair the president’s intelligence advisory board. Cook contends that these men understood full well that Saddam’s ouster would cause Iraq to collapse, and that chaos was not an accidental or unanticipated result of the invasion, but the intended one.





Image


in yinon's plan, the Mùslim Community is literally dissected through an analysis based only on our differences existing among us ...



Israel's Longstanding Middle East Plan


Image


In 1982, Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs senior advisor Oded Yinon published a revealing document for regional conquest and dominance. Still relevant today, it's titled "A Strategy for Israel in the 1980s, translated, edited, and retitled "The Zionist Plan for the Middle East" by distinguished Professor Israel Shahak (1933 - 2001), longtime activist, analyst, and outspoken Israeli critic.

Its publisher, the Association of Arab-American University Graduates called it "the most explicit, detailed and unambiguous statement to date of the Zionist strategy in the Middle East....Its importance....lies not in its historical value but in the nightmare which it represents," what thereafter continued to unfold.

Its two essential premises include:

● to survive, Israel must dominate the region and become a world power, and

● succeeding requires dividing Arab nations into small states - Balkanizing them along ethnic and sectarian lines as Israeli satellites, controllable satraps, the idea modeled after the Ottoman Empire's Millet (or nation) system under which local authorities governed confessional communities with separate ethnic identities.

Israel's 1967 Golan seizure and 1978 and 1982 Lebanon invasions followed the plan, Yinon noting "far-reaching opportunities for the first time since 1967, (created by the) very stormy situation surround(ing) Israel," resurrected whenever Israel wishes. Its method involves preemptive belligerence against Palestinians and regional states, making them all eventual targets to be weakened, fragmented, divided, and reconfigured under Israeli control.

In 1982, it included dividing Iraq into Shi'ite, Sunni, and Kurdish areas, what, in fact, unfolded after 2003, Shahak noting that:


"The plan follows faithfully the geopolitical ideas current in Germany of 1890 - 1933, which were swallowed whole by Hitler and the Nazi movement, and determined their aims for East Europe." They were then implemented from 1939 - 1941, "and only (a global alliance) prevented their consolidation for a period of time."

Citing the "early stages of a new epoch," Yinon said


"The existence, prosperity and steadfastness of (Israel) depend(s) upon its ability to adopt a new framework for its domestic and foreign affairs,"

based on securing its material needs through winnable resource wars and Arab world divisions.


"All the Arab States east of Israel are torn apart, broken up and riddled with inner conflicts even more than those of the Maghreb" (Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Mauritania, and Western Sahara). All the Gulf states are "built upon a delicate house of sand in which there is only oil." Jordan is in reality Palestine, Amman the same as Nablus.

Other Muslim states are similar. Half of Iran's population is Persian speaking, the rest ethnically Turkish. Turkey is half Sunni Muslim, the rest Shi'ite Alawis and Sunni Kurds. Today, Afghanistan's divisions are clearer, including Pashtuns, Tajiks, Hazaras, Uzbeks, Turkmen, and others. Pakistan also is comprised of Punjabis, Pashtuns, Sindhis, Seraikis, Muhajirs, Balochs and others.

From Morocco to India, Somalia to Turkey, stability is absent, "point(ing) to....a rapid degeneration in the entire region" to be exploited to Israel's advantage. Throughout the Middle East, depravation, including hunger and unemployment affect millions, potentially explosive problems only security forces can contain, giving Israel "far-reaching opportunities for the first time since 1967."

The Six Day War's strategic error was failing to give Jordan to the Palestinians, thereby "neutralizing" today's problem by removing them. "Today, we suddenly face immense opportunities for transforming the situation thoroughly and this we must do in the coming decade, otherwise we shall not survive as a state."

He recommended far-reaching foreign and domestic political and economic changes. He also called Israel's peace agreement with Egypt a mistake, said its economy depends on acquiring oil resources without which it could be destroyed, and named two ways to get them:

● directly by breaking the treaty; or
● regaining control of the Sinai indirectly, Egypt no military obstacle because of its internal conflicts.

In 1956, its myth as the Arab world's strong leader was revealed, reiterated in 1967. Its economy is also in crisis, making foreign help essential. Israel's strategic aim is to weaken it further by breaking it into distinct geographical regions. If accomplished, other countries may follow, including Libya and Sudan.


"The vision of a Christian Coptic State in Upper Egypt alongside a number of weak states with very localized power (and none centrally) is the key to a historical development which was only set back by the peace agreement but which seems inevitable in the long run."

Lebanon's division into five provinces is a precedent for the entire Arab world, including Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Syria, and the Arabian peninsula. Syria will divide into a Shi'ite Alawi coastal state, an Aleppo area Sunni one, another in Damascus, and the Druzes will set up their own. This outcome will guarantee peace and security in the long run, "and that aim is already within our reach today."

Oil rich/internally torn Iraq is a "guaranteed" Israeli target, more important than Syria. In the short run, it's Israel's greatest threat. A war with Iran will tear it apart, lead to its downfall, and perhaps fragment Iran, separating its oil rich Arab speaking province from the rest of the country. Confrontations elsewhere will cause further dissolutions.

Because of internal and external pressure, the entire Arabian peninsula is vulnerable, especially Saudi Arabia. Jordan won't threaten in the long run after dissolution. "There is no chance that (it) will continue to exist in its present structure for a long time." Thus, Israel's policy should be transferring Jordanian power to Palestinians, hastened by Occupied Territory emigration, resulting in "Arabs to Jordan and the Jews to the areas west of the river. Genuine coexistence and peace will reign over the land only when Arabs understand that without Jewish rule between Jordan and the sea they will have neither existence nor security." Jordan is their only alternative, giving Israel more land cleansed of Arabs.

Otherwise,


"we shall cease to exist within any borders. Judea, Samaria (the West Bank and Jerusalem) and the Galilee are our sole guarantee for national existence....Rebalancing the country demographically, strategically and economically is the highest and most central aim today."

Changes transforming world Jewry make Israel the only existential option. "Our existence is certain." Nothing can "remove us (either) forcefully or by treachery (Sadat's method)."

Some important points are stressed:

● Israel's military alone can't occupy more territory. The solution - rule by "Haddad forces" or "Village Associations," controllable local authorities, dissociated from their populations, Israeli garrisons strategically positioned between the mini states. Making it feasible depends on keeping Arabs divided.

● Yinon's plan was published to win over Israeli society, especially its elites able to influence others. Problems about Arabs awareness are minimal, given their divisions and inability to understand Israeli society.


http://www.a-w-i-p.com/index.php/2010/10/20/israel-s-longstanding-middle-east-plan


Image

Mùslim unity absolutely petrifies the Zionist entity. It is the antithesis to Israel's Fission* Field Warfare.

*Fission is defined as ‘the act or process of splitting into parts.’ In a more scientific explanation, fission is defined as ‘division of the atomic nucleus into two lighter fragments releasing energy. In a nuclear power station, fission occurs slowly, while in a nuclear weapon, very rapidly. In both instances, fission must be very carefully controlled.’

When applied to daily shifts on the geopolitical front, the first definition is self explanatory. The second definition however, requires a bit of dissection. The ‘nucleus’ of a stable society is the peaceful, brotherly and harmonious interaction between its people. To split this nucleus through fission, thus disrupting the interaction and establishing division, the variable needed is any type of bombardment.

Once the nucleus is split, the energy released is that which resembles misunderstanding, enmity, frustration and even hatred. Since the fission itself is controlled ‘very carefully,’ the manipulators must also induce the bombardment. This bombardment can be directed at either side of the divided societal ‘nucleus,’ fomenting an ever-expanding atmosphere of perpetual blaming and infighting. By constantly injecting deception into the enclaves where the newly formed ‘fragments’ have been divided, they remain quite incognizant of the reason that they have been split from their harmonious core to begin with.




Quote:
Sustaining this division in nations which aren’t fully aligned with the greater globalist agenda, also known as ‘hostile environments,’ tips the geopolitical scale in the favor of the manipulators and their agents who designed the bombardment. There is an entity that has mastered this political fission, or ‘fission field warfare.’ And that criminal entity is Israel.



Image

Israel's Fission Field Warfare is the highest degree of false flag terrorism.


http://www.maskofzion.com/2011/02/israels-fission-field-warfare-pakistan.html

_________________
Là ilàha illà ALLAH
Mùhammad ar-Rasool ALLAH (sA'aws)


Ummà's Victory goes with the destruction of Reeba (Usury)
the zionist plan for middle-east, 1982 [arab spring]
the dogma of the trinity
The Controversy of Zion [masterpiece for understanding]
two opposed forces make standing the Pyramid


Tue Jul 17, 2012 5:27 am
Profile
WUP Media
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 12:44 pm
Posts: 2010
Location: france
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 25 times
Unread post Re: the zionist plan for middle-east, 1982 [arab spring]
Palestine, aimed since centuries ...


Benjamin Franklin, Constitutional Congress, May 1787, Philadelphia.

For over 1700 years the Jews have been bewailing their sad fate in that they have been exiled from their homeland, they call Palestine. But, Gentlemen, should the world today give it to them in fee simple, they would at once find some cogent reason for not returning. Why? Because they are Vampires, and Vampires do not live on Vampires.



Bernard Lazare, XIX century wrote:

'To this general belief are added the suspicions, often justified, against the Jews addicted to magical practices. Actually, in the Middle Ages, the Jew was considered by the people as the magician par excellence; one finds many formulae of exorcism in the Talmud, and the Talmudic and Cabalistic demonology is very complicated.

Now one knows the position that blood always occupies in the operations of sorcery. In Chaldean magic it had a very great importance...

Now, it is very probable, even certain that Jewish magicians sacrificed children; hence the origin of the legend of ritual sacrifice.'




Image


"Freemasonry was a good and sound institution in principle, but revolutionary agitators, principally Jews, taking advantage of its organization as a secret society, penetrated it little by little.

They have corrupted it and turned it from its moral and philanthropic aim in order to employ it for revolutionary purposes.

This would explain why certain parts of freemasonry have remained intact such as English masonry.

In support of this theory we may quote what a Jew, Bernard Lazare has said in his book: l'antisemitisme:

'What were the relations between the Jews and the secret societies? That is not easy to elucidate, for we lack reliable evidence.

Obviously they did not dominate in these associations, as the writers, whom I have just mentioned, pretended; they were not necessarily the soul, the head, the grand master of masonry as Gougenot des Mousseaux affirms. It is certain however that there were Jews in the very cradle of masonry, kabbalist Jews, as some of the rites which have been preserved prove.

It is most probable that, in the years which preceded the French Revolution, they entered the councils of this sect in increasing numbers and founded secret societies themselves. There were Jews with Weishaupt, and Martinez de Pasqualis.

A Jew of Portuguese origin, organized numerous groups of illuminati in France and recruited many adepts whom he initiated into the dogma of reinstatement.

The Martinezist lodges were mystic, while the other Masonic orders were rather rationalist; a fact which permits us to say that the secret societies represented the two sides of Jewish mentality: practical rationalism and pantheism, that pantheism which although it is a metaphysical reflection of belief in only one god, yet sometimes leads to cabalistic tehurgy.

One could easily show the agreements of these two tendencies, the alliance of Cazotte, of Cagliostro, of Martinez, of Saint Martin, of the comte de St. Bermain, of Eckartshausen, with the Encyclopedists and the Jacobins, and the manner in which in spite of their opposition, they arrived at the same result, the weakening of Christianity.

That will once again serve to prove that the Jews could be good agents of the secret societies, because the doctrines of these societies were in agreement with their own doctrines, but not that they were the originators of them."


Bernard Lazare, "l'Antisemitisme". Paris, Chailley, 1894, p. 342; The Secret Powers Behind Revolution, by Vicomte Leon De Poncins, pp. 101-102.



chaim weismann, 1920 wrote:
"We told the authorities in London; we shall be in Palestine whether you want us there or not.


"You may speed up or slow down our coming, but it would be better for you to help us, otherwise our constructive force will turn into a destructive one that will bring about ferment in the entire world."




"The League of Nations is a Jewish idea.

We created it after a fight of 25 years.

Jerusalem will one day become the Capital of World Peace."


Nahum Sokolow, During the Zionist Congress at Carlsbad in 1922




"The Jewish people as a whole will be its own messiah. It will attain world domination by the dissolution of other races, by the abolition of frontiers, by the annihilation of monarchy which has always been the support of individualism, and by the establishment of a world republic in which the Jews will everywhere exercise the privilege of citizenship.

In this new world order, the Children of Israel, who are scattered over the world, will furnish all the leaders without encountering opposition; and this will more particularly be the case if they succeed in getting the working masses under their control.

The governments of the different peoples forming the world republic will, through the victory of the proletariat, fall without difficulty into the hands of the Jews.

It will then be possible for the Jewish rulers to abolish private property, and everywhere to make use of the resources of the State.

Thus will the promise of the Talmud be fulfilled, in which it is said, that when the Messianic time has come, the Jews will have the property of the whole world in their hands."


Baruch Levy, Letter to Karl Marx,
La Revue de Paris, [owned by Rothschild], p. 54, June 1, 1928




antisemitic controversy of zionism



Image


Theodor Herzl (journalist), world zionism organization founder [wzo] , first zionist congress, Basel, switzerland, 1897.

"It is essential that the sufferings of Jews... become worse... this will assist in realization of our plans...

I have an excellent idea... I shall induce anti-Semites to liquidate Jewish wealth...

The anti-Semites will assist us thereby in that they will strengthen the persecution and oppression of Jews. The anti-Semites shall be our best friends."



Theodor Herzl wrote:
"If whole branches of Jews must be destroyed, it is worth it, as long as a Jewish state in Palestine is created."




Winston Churchill, "Zionism versus Bolshevism: A Struggle for the Soul of the Jewish People." Sunday Herald article, London, February 8, 1920.

"In violent opposition to all this sphere of Jewish efforts rise the schemes of the International Jews.

The adherents of this sinister confederacy are mostly men reared up among the unhappy populations of countries where Jews are persecuted on account of their race. Most, if not all, of them have forsaken the faith of their forefathers, and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world.

This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxemburg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide revolutionary conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing.

It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Webster has ably shown, a definite recognizable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution.

It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworlds of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of the enormous empire.

There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creating of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistic Jews. It is certainly the very great one; it probably outweighs all others.

With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders...

In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astounding. And the prominent if not the principal part in the system of terrorism applied by the extraordinary Commissions for combating Counter Revolution has been take by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses.



Image


Winston Churchill wrote:
The war time Premier (Winston Churchill) said he "thought the problem of a National Jewish Home in Palestine was too big to be handled by one single nation alone. Favors joint inquiry."

"I am strongly in favor of a joint inquiry by the United States and Great Britain." adding "As you probably know I am a Zionist from the beginning."


(Philadelphia Record, January 11, 1946; And Men Wept, by Catherine Palfrey Baldwin, p. 83).




[a must-see documentary]

the use of the jewish religion and its follower base,
to create a world united kingdom,
under lucifer and the cabala,
by the setting up of a jewish state.

the zionist movement was started and enabled by the monopoly owners of wealth,
who gained that wealth through usury,
jews who turned away from god, made themselves gods on earth,
follow lucifer and other secret beliefs, don't care about the ordinary people,
making money the world's religion, putting the planet into debt.

ordinary jews who are good people, trusting of their leaders,
are used for:

a) israeli population
i) to justify israel's existence
ii) to work its farms and factories
ii) to defend the state militarily

b) international pawns, bishops, rooks, knights, kings and queens
i) to support and promote israel
ii) to manage their farms and factories

c) fuel.. anti-jewish words create pity for the victims.. jews and 'their' state.
anti-jewish sentiments are made on purpose
to create the picture that anyone critical of israel must like or be like hitler.
so the more there is anti-jewish sentiment,
the more it justifies this claim that the jews need their own state,
to be free of the 'rest of the world' being 'anti-semitic'




Herzl wrote:
“It is essential that the sufferings of Jews. . . become worse. . .
this will assist in realization of our plans. . .
I have an excellent idea. . .
I shall induce anti-semit...



Image

_________________
Là ilàha illà ALLAH
Mùhammad ar-Rasool ALLAH (sA'aws)


Ummà's Victory goes with the destruction of Reeba (Usury)
the zionist plan for middle-east, 1982 [arab spring]
the dogma of the trinity
The Controversy of Zion [masterpiece for understanding]
two opposed forces make standing the Pyramid


Wed Jul 18, 2012 5:39 am
Profile
WUP Media
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 12:44 pm
Posts: 2010
Location: france
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 25 times
Unread post Re: the zionist plan for middle-east, 1982 [arab spring]
Jacques Attali born 1 November 1943 in Algiers, French Algeria) is a French economist, writer and senior civil servant.

Former adviser to President François Mitterrand and first president of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, he founded the non-profit organization PlaNet Finance and was nominated President of the Commission for the Liberation of French Economic Growth. He is also Founder and President of A&A, a consultancy firm. He published more than fifty books, including essays and novels.

He belongs to the top 100 public intellectuals in the world, according to the Foreign Policy Magazine (May/June 2008)


Image



_________________
Là ilàha illà ALLAH
Mùhammad ar-Rasool ALLAH (sA'aws)


Ummà's Victory goes with the destruction of Reeba (Usury)
the zionist plan for middle-east, 1982 [arab spring]
the dogma of the trinity
The Controversy of Zion [masterpiece for understanding]
two opposed forces make standing the Pyramid


Wed Jul 18, 2012 6:20 am
Profile
WUP Media
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 12:44 pm
Posts: 2010
Location: france
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 25 times
Unread post Re: the zionist plan for middle-east, 1982 [arab spring]
Quote:
Israeli analyst Mordechai Keidar has predicted the collapse of the state into five or six mini-states as once existed under French occupation in the 1930s.



Image


‘New’ Middle East not so new: scholar

David Lazarus, Canadian Zionist Federation , Thursday, March 1, 2012

The Arab Spring is more like an Islamist winter, says Arab-world scholar Mordechai Kedar, with countries degenerating into fragmented, tribal strife, violence and Islamic fundamentalism.

But in some ways that could be to Israel’s benefit, Kedar, a lecturer at Bar-Ilan University who is associated with the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, argued at the Canadian Zionist Federation eastern region’s recent annual Zave Ettinger Memorial Lecture in Montreal.

“The Syrian state is fragmented, so that’s good for Israel,” Kedar said to an audience of about 100 at Beth Israel Beth Aaron Congregation.

The Syrian regime under Bashar Assad, who is now reportedly killing his own people because they want his ouster, failed to create any sense of “awareness” of one peoplehood that could have helped the country move toward independence, instead of continuing on as an Iranian client-state.

“Assad was seeking legitimacy, but that is not going to happen,” said Kedar, who speaks Arabic fluently.

Kedar said he recently launched another research centre at Bar-Ilan that will require scholars to have knowledge of Arabic and other languages, because that is essential for proper understanding of the Arab world.

He is still asked about his controversial 2008 interview in Arabic on the satellite TV news channel Al Jazeera – still viewable on YouTube – in which he asserted that Jerusalem belonged to the Jews, “when your forefathers… were burying girls alive and worshipping pre-Muslim idols…”

During his synagogue talk, Kedar was less polemical but still characteristically blunt. The Arab Spring and the democratic “new Middle East” that was supposed to come about after the Egyptian government fell about a year ago is obviously not going to happen, in Kedar’s view.

“This, of course, became the mantra of journalists,” but, he asked, is the “new” Middle East really new?

In Egypt, he said, three-quarters of the Egyptian regional council is “very Islamist.”

In Libya, leader Moammar Gadhafi is dead, but “everyone is fighting each other.”

In Morocco, there are now free elections, ostensibly a positive development, but that is tempered by the success of Islamists in those same elections. In Tunisia, Kedar said, tribalism abounds, as does Islamist encroachment and influence. Iraq, he noted, has 74 tribes, with its many clans fighting among themselves in a relatively small country, not to mention the ongoing strife between Sunni and Shiite Muslims.

“It’s not like Canada,” Kedar said, “where you have 20 rivers every 10 kilometres. Iraq is a failing state.”

In spite of the influence of modernism from the West, Kedar said, the vast majority of the Middle East has not budged from the mores and traditions that have kept the Arab world prisoners of its past.

In this environment, he said, Israel remains the only real democracy in the Middle East, and a society where issues like women sitting in the rear of public busses pales by comparison.

“Israel is a bastion of stability and sanity,” he said.

Even if you think Israeli-Arabs are “second-class” citizens in Israel, “they would prefer to be second class there than first class somewhere else in the Middle Eastern alternatives,” Kedar said.


http://www.cjnews.com/canada/%E2%80%98new%E2%80%99-middle-east-not-so-new-scholar

_________________
Là ilàha illà ALLAH
Mùhammad ar-Rasool ALLAH (sA'aws)


Ummà's Victory goes with the destruction of Reeba (Usury)
the zionist plan for middle-east, 1982 [arab spring]
the dogma of the trinity
The Controversy of Zion [masterpiece for understanding]
two opposed forces make standing the Pyramid


Fri Aug 03, 2012 9:37 pm
Profile
WUP Media
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 12:44 pm
Posts: 2010
Location: france
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 25 times
Unread post Re: the zionist plan for middle-east, 1982 [arab spring]
Dismenbering the Syrian State and the NATO's Fallacies related to it, acting as an israeli client; the BottomLine:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/syria-and-the-sham-of-humanitarian-intervention/5337490


Image


I continue to be amazed with the ease with which the dividing line is blurred between what is real and what is fiction in the reporting on Syria by the Western media. The press in the U.S. continues to dutifully report on the “objective diplomacy” by the Obama administration to broker a “peaceful” resolution to the conflict in Syria. However, those stories of noble and innocent efforts to avert the catastrophic human suffering that has eventually engulfed Syria has sanitized the bloody complicity of U.S. policy. Diplomacy, for the U.S., has meant calling for regime change from the outset and then encouraging Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Israel, their client states in the region, to arm, train and provide political support for a military campaign with the objective of effectively dismembering the Syria State.

Two years later, with tens of thousands killed, millions uprooted and the delicate social fabric of the country shredded by sectarian brutality, the next phase in the propaganda war leading to more direct intervention by the West to finish off the regime is being organized in the form of a peace conference scheduled to take place in June.

Co-sponsored by Russia with a stake in maintaining the integrity of the Syria State, the U.S. approach to the conference, however, gives the impression that the gathering is a charade meant to mollify those elements in the U.S. Congress and public still hesitant to support another expensive military adventure. The U.S. demand that a peaceful solution to the conflict is predicated on a “transitional government” being established in which Assad should play no role, means effectively that there will be no serious attempt to resolve the conflict short of regime change and the surrendering of Syrian sovereignty. The U.S. position also confirms the real objective of the conference which is to justify more direct military intervention by the U.S. once the conference “fails” to bring peace.

While this is absolutely clear for many people around the world, the U.S. public, along with much of what used to be called the progressive and/or radical sectors, continue to be hoodwinked by some of the most crude and obvious manipulation I have ever witnessed. It was precisely the smooth efficiency with which the public was being manipulated that motivated me to write an earlier article on Syria that attempted to offer an explanation for the reasons why U.S. State propagandists, and I include the mainstream media in this category, have been so successful in confusing the general public and dividing the anti-war, anti-imperialist movement.

I believe part of their success has been due to the fact that they have used the concept of humanitarian intervention as one of their main tools. In my article, I made the argument that humanitarian intervention, along with the concept of the “right to protect” (R2P) has developed into the most effective ideological weapon the liberal human rights community provided Western imperialism since the fall of the Soviet State. Humanitarian intervention has proven to be an even more valuable propaganda tool than the “war on terror,” because as the situation in Libya and now Syria has demonstrated, it provides a moral justification for imperialist intervention that can also accommodate the presence of the same “terrorist” forces the U.S. pretends to be opposed to. And of course, in the eyes of the U.S. government, tyrannical and dictatorial governments that need to be deposed are only those that present an obstacle to the realization of U.S. geo/political interests—never those paragons of freedom and morality like Saudi Arabia and Israel.

As I said in my earlier article:


“Humanitarian intervention provided the U.S. State the perfect ideological cover and internal rationalization to continue as the global “gendarme” of the capitalist order. By providing the human rights rationale for the assertion that the “international community” had a moral and legal responsibility to protect a threatened people, mainstream human rights activists effectuated a shift in the discourse on international human rights that moved the R2P assertion from a contested legal and moral augment to a common-sense assumption. And because of their limited perspective, it did not occur to any of these theoreticians that what they propagated was a thinly updated version of the “white man’s burden.” The NATO intervention in Bosnia and Kosovo, the assault on Iraq to “save” the Iraqi people from Saddam Hussein, and most recently the NATO attack on Libya that brought to power a rag-tag assortment of anti-African racists, have solidified the idea among many in the U.S. that humanitarian intervention to protect human rights through aggressive war is justifiable. The consequence of this for U.S. policy makers and for the likely targets of U.S. aggression in the global South is that if properly framed, war could be moved back to the center of strategic options without much fear of a backlash from the American people—a development especially important for a declining power that appears to have concluded that it will use military means to attempt to maintain its global empire.”



The propagandists of the U.S. war strategy have been spectacularly successful in inculcating this shift in consciousness in the general population and the self-muting of the anti-war and anti-imperialist movements in the West, with the exception of a few organizations. The assertion of the right to unilaterally attack any State that it deems unfit for sovereignty is not a new articulation of White supremacist, imperialist ideology but in this current period where there are few constraints on the global exercise of “White power,” the internalization of this position by the European and U.S. publics, irrespective of ethnicity or race, has made the world a much more dangerous place for Black and Brown people: 50,000 killed in Libya, 80,000 in Syria, 1,000,000 in Iraq, and 30,000 in Afghanistan.

The normalization of war as a contemporary expression of the West’s responsibility to bring liberal democracy and capitalist freedom to the non-White hordes, and the fact that most of the people being killed in the process of “being saved” by the West are non-European, is a graphic confirmation of the White supremacist assumptions of humanitarian intervention. The people being “saved” by the West are framed as people who would embrace the Western way of life if given a choice. That is why Madeline Albright could say with a straight face that the “price was worth it” in response to the 500,000 children that died in Iraq as a result of U.S. sanctions.

So as the U.S. government prepares to wage war in Syria, the imperative for all of us who believe in peace and fundamental human rights is to attempt to persuade as many people as possible to choose peace instead of the war objectives of the 1%. The Syrian government has a significant social base that is made up of Alawites, Druze, Christians and significant numbers of Sunnis who fear the takeover of the country by Islamic fundamentalists. This is a fact that is being hidden from the public in the U.S. Those in the U.S. who would like to see an end to the bloodshed in Syria, and I believe that is the majority of people, should call on their representatives to support real initiatives for peace that respect the sovereignty of Syria and the desires of all of the people in that country.

But really what the people of Syria and the world want and many have demanded, is for the U.S. and its Western allies – the minority who make up 10% of the world but pretend to be the world – to intervene into their own societies who are experiencing their own humanitarian crisis brought on by a moribund capitalism and leave the rest of the world alone.

Ajamu Baraka was the founding Director of the US Human Rights Network ( USHRN ). Baraka is currently an Associate Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) and is editing a new book on human rights in the U.S. entitled: “The Struggle for a People-Centered Human Rights: Voices from the Field.”

He can be reached at Ajamubaraka.com


_________________
Là ilàha illà ALLAH
Mùhammad ar-Rasool ALLAH (sA'aws)


Ummà's Victory goes with the destruction of Reeba (Usury)
the zionist plan for middle-east, 1982 [arab spring]
the dogma of the trinity
The Controversy of Zion [masterpiece for understanding]
two opposed forces make standing the Pyramid


Wed Jun 05, 2013 7:43 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 7 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Wake Up Project Copyright 2013 All Rights Reserved

phpBB SEO
Wake Up Project

Like us on FaceBook!