Home > Israel’s creationn of Hamas
Wars and conflicts International
War on Terror?? Islam-o-rama-fascism?? Real or just pap from the ends of the "repsonsible" news organs?
What’s all this Israeli support for terror groups all about? Us hayseeds is truly stumped:
Hamas, Son of Israel- by Justin Raimondo
Israel’s support for Hamas ’was a direct attempt to divide and dilute support for a strong, secular PLO by using a competing religious alternative - www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=8449
Heck, let’s go whole hog
Israel’s Hamas by George Szamuely
The New York Press Volume 15, Issue 17, April 2002
Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG), globalresearch.ca , 23 April 2002
READ GEORGE SZAMUELY’S INCISIVE ARTICLE ON SEPTEMBER 11 IN CRG’s Global Outlook, premiere issue on "Stop the War" provides detailed documentation on the war and September 11 Order/subscribe. Consult Table of Contents
The Bush administration’s most recent Middle East caper followed a trajectory we have become familiar with. Eschewing the usual "Israel is our greatest ally" windbaggery, the administration for once issued Israel a mild reproof to balance the standard demand that Yasir Arafat crack down on violence. Israel responded by telling the Americans where they could shove it. Israeli government spokesmen - aka most of America’s pundits - threatened to do to Bush what they did to his father when he had the temerity to insist that Israel not violate U.S. policy by using U.S. funds to build settlements on occupied land. As was to be expected, Bush beat a hasty retreat and professed himself satisfied with Israel’s actions. It was all Arafat’s fault again. He was not cracking down on terror...
The mantra that Arafat crack down on terror has always been a fraud. Who is to do this cracking down? Obviously, Palestinian police, security forces and courts. But they are the chief target of Sharon’s murderous onslaught. Sharon’s strategy today is the same as it was in Beirut in 1982. He wants to destroy and discredit the Palestinian Authority so as to ensure the Palestinians are left without a credible leadership. Chaos and anarchy on the West Bank would then provide Israel with the justification it needs to drive out the indigenous population and render the territory governable.
This has been longstanding Israeli policy. Starting in the late 1970s Israel helped build up the most fanatical and intolerant fundamentalist Muslims as rivals to the nationalist PLO. The terrorist organization Hamas is largely an Israeli creation. A UPI story last year quoted a U.S. government official as saying: "The thinking on the part of some of the right-wing Israeli establishment was that Hamas and the other groups, if they gained control, would refuse to have anything to do with the peace process and would torpedo any agreements put in place."
The PLO has long been aware of Israeli strategy. In their 1989 book, Intifada, Ze’ev Schiff and Ehud Ya’ari write that Fatah "suspected the Israelis of a plot first to let Hamas gather strength and then to unleash it against the PLO, turning the uprising into a civil war... [M]any Israeli staff officers believed that the rise of fundamentalism in Gaza could be exploited to weaken the power of the PLO..."
According to Robert Fisk, Israeli support for Hamas continued after the signing of the Oslo accords. One can be pretty sure that this strategy received strong encouragement from Washington, which has also seen the advantage of financing and supporting the most vicious and narrowminded Islamic terrorists on account of their antinationalist and antisocialist credentials. Hamas also served Israel’s purpose admirably by suggesting to the American public that the conflict in the Middle East pitted democratic Israel against all-or-nothing fanatics who wanted to drive the Jews into the sea. Israel’s refusal to surrender conquered land and its continued building of settlements in violation of innumerable UN resolutions could then all be justified as perfectly reasonable responses to an implacable enemy.
It helped to conceal the fact that it was Israel that refused to compromise. In February 1970 Egyptian President Gamal Abdul Nasser declared, "It will be possible to institute a durable peace between Israel and the Arab states, not excluding economic and diplomatic relations, if Israel evacuates the occupied territories and accepts a settlement of the problem of the Palestinian refugees." Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir dismissed the offer.
Next came Anwar Sadat’s peace offer of Feb 4, 1971. He announced before the Egyptian parliament "that if Israel withdrew her forces in Sinai to the passes I would be willing to reopen the Suez Canal; to have my forces cross to the East Bank...to make a solemn declaration of a cease-fire; to restore diplomatic relations with the United States and to sign a peace agreement with Israel..." Israel’s response was the same as before: no return to pre-1967 borders and the establishment of a settlement on occupied Egyptian territory at Yamit, near the Gaza Strip.
In 1977 Sadat took the extraordinary gamble, knowingly risking his life, of flying to Jerusalem in the hope of persuading Israel to respond to his magnanimity and sign a comprehensive Middle East peace treaty. Though the Israelis refused to make any concessions on the Palestinian issue, their apologists have been smugly congratulating themselves ever since for their amazing generosity in withdrawing from occupied Sinai and even destroying the settlements they had built there. Even these "concessions" were fiercely resisted in Israel by, among others, Golda Meir.
Twenty years later, Ehud Barak’s hopelessly inadequate offer at Camp David was vehemently denounced by the Safires and Krauthammers as "appeasement." It set the stage for today’s insanity.
Copyright © George Szamuely, The New York Press 2002. Reprinted for fair use only
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/SZA204A.html
Dont forget Benjamin Freedman’s essential speech:
www.iamthewitness.com/DarylBradfordSmith_Freedman.html
Ben Freedman became so disgusted with the Zionist movement that he changed his name from the Jewish spelling (Friedman) and he exposed some of the diabolical plots that helped set the stage for the endless wars in the Mideast.
Forum posts
23 July 2006, 01:01
Fake Al Qaeda <- just 5 grinning Israelis
www.whatreallyhappened.com/fakealqaeda.html
’Al Qaeda’: How the Pentagon/ CIA Made an ’Enemy’
www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=80&contentid=2420
"Al-Qaida,(sic) literally ’the database,’ was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians," admits former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook.
ISRAELI ROOTS OF HAMAS
www.prisonplanet.com/archives_hamas.html
Is ’Al Qaeda’ the modern incarnation of ’Emmanuel Goldstein’?
www.whatreallyhappened.com/goldstein.html
Posted May 8, 2006
Is "Al Qaeda" the modern incarnation of "Emmanuel Goldstein", the arch-villain manufactured by the state to rule the population with fear? Is it really far-fetched? If one can accept a real terrorist organization willing to kill people for their political aims, is a fake terror organization willing to kill people for their political aims any less possible. Once you accept that there can be one group of people willing to commit acts of terror you must accept that there can be a second group equally willing to commit acts of terror to blame on the first group.
23 July 2006, 01:27
And, all of these machinations, and all of the money spent to subvert and twist realities favorable to the United States and its satellite, Israel, has worked to give Americans, amongst other "good" things, $3.35/gallon gasoline. What a success!
23 July 2006, 22:49
Here’s the road map for the coming years. Translated by the wonderful Israel Shahak:
Here’s a few excerpts:
Israel’s plans to fragment the Arab States are outlined
"Egypt:
Egypt, in its present domestic political picture, is already a corpse, all the more so if we take into account the growing Muslim-Christian rift. Breaking Egypt down territorially into distinct geographical regions is the political aim of Israel in the Nineteen Eighties on its Western front.
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 movement 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.
Lebanon:
Lebanon’s total dissolution into five provinces serves as a precedent 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 unique 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:
Syria will fall apart, in accordance with its ethnic 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.
Iraq:
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.
Saudi Arabia:
The entire Arabian peninsula is a natural candidate for dissolution due to internal and external pressures, and the matter is inevitable especially in Saudi Arabia. Regardless of whether its economic might based on oil remains intact or whether it is diminished in the long run,
the internal rifts and breakdowns are a clear and natural development in light of the present political structure.
Clearly the US taxpayer and soldier will be expected to play and ENTHUSIASTIC role in all of this. Bad old A-rabs...excuse me, terrorists, and all that horsesh*t.
www.freearabvoice.org/ZionistConspiracy_DivideTheArabWorld.htm