| By Administrator on Uncategorized For the honest historian, it comes as no surprise government either kills its own citizens or allows enemies to do the same in an effort to score propaganda points or as an excuse to commence hostilities. Examples are numerous, from FDR denying Americans passport and travel documents to let them flee the Japanese onslaught of the Philippines in the lead up to the Second World War (see US prisoners claim Roosevelt left them in Philippines deliberately) to Operation Northwoods, a plan drawn up by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to stage fake terror attacks in America (including assassination, airplane hijacking, and sinking of boats) in order to devise a pretext to invade Cuba. Indeed, some of us, routinely dismissed as tinfoil hatters, believe elements within the United States government engineered and executed the terrorist events of September 11, 2001, as a way to get the ball rolling on the “war against terrorism,” that is to say the war against Islam, currently heating up big time in the Middle East. Considering the above, and other examples, including the sinking of the Lusitania, a passenger ship loaded up with a secret cargo of munitions (a fact admitted by the decidedly less than conspiratorial Encyclopedia Britannica), which contributed indirectly to the entry of the United States into World War I, and the suspicious sinking of the Maine in the Havana harbor, used as a pretext for the United States to declare war on Spain in 1898, the allegation “Israel has deliberately allowed Hezbollah to retain some of it’s fire power, essentially for PR purposes, because having Israeli civilians killed helps them in the public relations war” should not be a startling or especially mind-boggling revelation. According to Tom Ricks, a reporter for the Washington Post, during an appearance on CNN’s Reliable Sources, citing “military analysts,” Israel “purposely has left pockets of Hezbollah rockets in Lebanon, because as long as they’re being rocketed, they can continue to have a sort of moral equivalency in their operations in Lebanon.” Or, put differently, if Hezbollah continues to rocket northern Israel, the IOF may claim “moral equivalency” and continue its push into Lebanon, once again to the Litani River, a plentiful source of fresh water that long ago figured into Israel’s calculations of its endangered water resources (see Angela Joy Moss, ICE Case Studies, Litani River and Israel-Lebanon), in fact a resource long coveted by the Zionists, going as far back as Chaim Weizmann in 1919 and, a few decades later, Ben-Gurion and Moshe Dayan, who advocated Israeli occupation of Lebanon up to the Litani River (see Stephen C. Lonergan and David B. Brooks, Watershed: the Role of Fresh Water in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict). Ronald Bleier wrote for the Middle East Labor Bulletin, Spring 1994: Zionist interest in the waters of Lebanon goes back as least as far as the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 when Chaim Wietzman wrote to the British Prime Minister explaining that because of its water requirements, a Jewish homeland in Palestine must include the Litani River. In the 50’s, Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Sharett recorded in his diaries that Moshe Dayan’s plan for the control of the Litani River was to “‘enter Lebanon, occupy the relevant territory’ then the ‘territory south of the Litani will be annexed to Israel and everything will fall into place.’” (Quoted in Amery, pp. 18-19)
In addition to establishing a “security zone,” or maybe we should call it a “fresh water for Israel” zone, allowing Hezbollah to fire rockets more or less unhampered into Israel, and thus killing a token number of Israelis, addresses the “moral high ground problem,” that is to say it neutralizes, at least for supporters of Israel, the troublesome fact the IOF has killed around a thousand Lebanese to date (no doubt this number is much higher), the vast majority civilians, a third to half children. In addition, it allows them to reduce Lebanon to ruins and impoverish its people, part of a well-documented Zionist goal in its own right (see Oded Yinon). If indeed Tom Ricks is correct—and the fact he works for the Washington Post should, at minimum, send up a red flag, as the Post was long ago co-opted by the CIA under Operation Mockingbird—it represents another example of government shamelessly using mostly gullible and unassuming citizens as little more than expendable pawns, as Hitler, Stalin, FDR, Mao, and any number of other cold-blooded leaders have done since time immemorial. |
No comments:
Post a Comment