War Without End

Alpha · Last edited by Alpha on Sun Mar 13, 2005 1:11 am; edited 4 times in total

More war for Israel coming soon (in accordance with the 'A Clean Break: Strategy for Securing the Realm' agenda of the Zionist - JINSA/CSP/PNAC - Neoconservatives which James Bamford discusses via the following URL for pages 261-269 of his 'A Pretext for War' book):

'A Clean Break: Strategy for Securing the Realm' (from pages 261-269 of James Bamford's 'A Pretext for War' book):

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2005/02/11/a-clean-break-from-james-bamford-s-a-pretext-for-war.php

Treason at a high level: Pentagon Zionist Neocons, AIPAC and Israel:

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2004/09/08/treason-in-high-places-pentagon-zionists-aipac-and-israel.php

SCOTT RITTER SAYS U.S. PLANS JUNE ATTACK ON IRAN

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2005/02/21/scott-ritter-says-u-s-plans-june-attack-on-iran.php

WHO IS SENDING YOUR CHILDREN OFF TO DIE IN WAR?

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/offtowar.html

Neoconservatism is a Jewish movement (even though not all Jews support it) as the Zionist JINSA/CSP/PNAC Neoconservatives are using 'democracy and freedom/liberty' propaganda to mask their long desired war for Israel agenda as Professor Kevin MacDonald conveys in the following 'Thinking about Neoconservatism' article:

'Thinking about Neoconservatism' article:

http://www.vdare.com/misc/macdonald_neoconservatism.htm

Bush's Inaugaral Address: The Israeli Connection Continues

http://www.thornwalker.com:16080/ditch/snieg_inaugural.htm

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com

http://www.nowarforisrael.com

http://www.nogw.com/warforisrael.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/1877.asp

Converging U.S. Navy aircraft carrier groups in Middle East send strong message to Iran and Syria
Sudhir Chadda
Mar. 12, 2005

The U.S. Navy aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt is on the move in Atlantic Ocean and is possibly headed towards the Mediterranean Sea. The convergence of three carrier groups in the corridor of the Middle East will send very strong message to the Syrians and Iranians. There are indications that soon US is moving two more aircraft carrier battle groups to the Eastern Mediterranean Sea and the Persian Gulf. This will spell a formidable strike force for Iran and Syria who are in defiance on issues of Lebanon and Nuclear weapons development.

Outbound from Singapore, the USS Carl Vinson is currently crossing the Indian Ocean headed towards Middle-East. This will be the first time since February 2004 that US will have three major carrier groups stationed on and around Middle East.

Each of these carrier groups carry nearly 85 aircrafts and is capable of deliver precision-guided munitions. In addition there are anti-submarine aircrafts, airborne-early-warning and rotary-wing aircrafts. Because in the air refueling capabilities these aircrafts can operate from a long distance. The carrier groups are independent and can operate indefinitely.

U.S. military air bases in Turkey, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia and the three carrier groups will create a formidable force far superior to any military in the region.

In addition more than 100,000 battle hardened force in Iraq will be another major force in case US has to use force against Iran and Syria.

It seems American are preparing to deal with Syria and Iran in the next several months. The first priority right now is diplomacy in association with the Europeans and the rest of the world. But the leadership in Teheran and Damascus are taking notice of the power build up in the region.

There are seeds of democracy in Lebanon, Iran and Syria. The whole regions is getting a quick lesson on the benefits of democracy.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WORLD ARTICLES
Converging U.S. Navy aircraft carrier groups in Middle East send strong message to Iran and Syria
Sudhir Chadda
The U.S. Navy aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt is on the move in Atlantic Ocean...
READ MORE>>

Political unrest in Syria - Pro-Government supporters chasing the opposition demonstrators
Ira Laha
Syria experienced the first sign of political unrest.
READ MORE>>

India hopes for early resolution of Iran -US differences to facilitate Iran-India Gas Pipeline deal
PTI
India today hoped that US would be able to resolve its concerns with Iran before India...
READ MORE>>

US refuses International Court of Justice intervention in Americans holding foreigners in prisons – leaves Vienna Convention
Suniti Sen
The United States withdrew from the Vienna Convention.
READ MORE>>

MORE ARTICLES >>

Zionist Neocons after Syria for Israel

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=5150

Alpha

So are the Zionist (JINSA/CSP/PNAC) Neocons planning on Israel being attacked as a result of pushing forward with the rest of their long desired 'A Clean Break' (war for Israel) agenda (with attacks on Syria and Iran to come) that esteemed US intelligence writer James Bamford conveys via the following URL:

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2005/02/11/a-clean-break-from-james-bamford-s-a-pretext-for-war.php

Whose War?:

http://www.amconmag.com/03_24_03/cover.html

Treason at a high level: Pentagon Zionists, AIPAC and Israel:

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2004/09/08/treason-in-high-places-pentagon-zionists-aipac-and-israel.php

http://stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=27624

Patriot crews heading to exercise in Israel
By Steve Mraz, Stars and Stripes
Mideast edition, Wednesday, March 9, 2005

Raymond T. Conway / S&S
Sgt. Nigel Gomez, left, and Pvt. David Brickhouse answer questions last September about a Patriot Missile Launching Station at the U.S. Army Europe Land Combat Expo in Heidelberg, Germany.

U.S. Patriot missile crews stationed in Germany are once again headed to Israel to participate in a joint exercise with the Israeli military.

The exercise, called Juniper Cobra, is set to begin Thursday and continue until mid-April. Its purpose is to develop and improve air defense cooperation between the two nations, said Connie Summers, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Army's V Corps in Heidelberg, Germany.

Roughly 1,000 U.S. troops will participate in the computer-assisted and limited live-fire exercise, with Army soldiers making up the majority of the group.

Of the total U.S. force, about 500 soldiers with the 69th Air Defense Artillery Brigade based at Giebelstadt Army Airfield in Germany and the brigade's two Patriot battalions will take part in the exercise. The brigade's Patriot battalions are the 5th Battalion, 7th ADA in Hanau, and the 6th Battalion, 52nd ADA headquartered in Ansbach.

The remaining U.S. force, both active-duty and reserve, is composed of Navy and various communications and logistics support elements from the States and Europe, Summers said.

While the timing of the exercise comes amid increasing tension in the Middle East, Army officials said Tuesday that the missile exercise had been planned for a year.

“There is absolutely no connection with this exercise and any event in the region,” Summers said. “As always, we are interested in implementing lessons learned from training exercises.”

The deployment of the crews and their missiles is partly a signal to others in the Middle East but largely a reassurance to the Israelis, said Michael Desch, a political science professor at The Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University.

“The symbolic thing is this signals the American commitment to Israeli security,” he said.

As recently as January 2003, Patriot missile crews were deployed to Israel for the Juniper Cobra exercise. At that point, troops and materials were being deployed steadily to the Middle East in preparation for Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Also, Juniper Cobra took place in February 2001, which coincided with an Israeli prime minister election and continuing strife between Israelis and Palestinians.

In both instances, Army officials said the exercise had been planned a year in advance and was not prompted by the developing situations.

Patriot crews were sent to Israel in November 1998 for exercises. But shortly after arriving, the United States conducted Operation Desert Fox, which resulted in three days of strikes against Iraq sparked by tensions over U.N. weapons inspections.

The Patriot missile debuted in combat during the 1991 Persian Gulf War when Iraq fired Scud missiles toward Israel and Saudi Arabia. The high-speed missile was originally designed to strike down jets but was modified to intercept unfriendly missiles.

Its success in the Gulf War made the missile a household name in America.

Alpha

Mideast Duty For US May Include Israel

http://www.nowarforisrael.com

http://www.nogw.com/warforisrael.html

Mideast Duty For US
Troops May Include Israel
ArmyTimes.com
3-11-5

Troops serving in and near the Middle East might want to start getting used to the scenery.
Lawmakers and top military commanders say 2005 could well be a pivotal year in the history of the unsettled region.
And they say the continued presence of tens of the thousands of American troops is helping to create an atmosphere of stability and U.S. commitment ó so much so that there is even growing talk of troops taking part in any Israeli-Palestinian peace accord.
Sen. John Warner, R-Va., Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, renewed his longstanding call for NATO and U.S. troops to take part in an Israeli-Palestinian peace accord.
The death in November of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat has set the stage for renewed movement in the creation of a Palestinian state. And Warner said a NATO force with strong U.S. participation would be viewed as evenhanded in the volatile region because many of NATOs European allies have strong ties to Palestinian Arabs while the United States is viewed as a strong backer of Israel.
Marine Corps Gen. James Jones, NATOís top commander in Europe, said hes heard growing informal discussions at senior diplomatic levels in recent weeks about a possible NATO force for an Israeli-Palestinian accord.
When things get talked about at that level, my ears pick up,î Jones said at a March 1 Senate Armed Services Committee hearing.
At the hearing, Jones also told Warner he has been given ìno additional taskî to plan for a possible Israel peacekeeping mission. Still, the informal talk is reminiscent of discussion he heard in early 2003 that led to NATO participation in the Afghanistan mission, he said.
Iraqís Jan. 30 elections appear to have set the tone for growing movements of political reform throughout the region, Army Gen. John Abizaid, chief of U.S. Central Command, said at the hearing, adding that 2005 can be a decisive year for us,î an assessment echoed by several senior senators.
However, Abizaid cautioned that nothing in the Middle East moves in a straight line and that numerous setbacks could lie ahead.
As optimistic as I am, and as revolutionary as the times may be, we should not underestimate our enemies in the region,he said. There is fighting ahead. We should not kid ourselves.
The performance of Iraqi security forces during the elections provided a glimpse of how good they can be, Abizaid said, but the Iraqis must make significant progress in creating lines of communication and control between their new government and the military.
U.S. troop levels in Iraq peaked at more than 159,000 in late January, about 20,000 above pre-election levels. Abizaid said a massive U.S. unit rotation is underway that will reduce U.S. combat power by mid-March from 20 brigades to 17 brigades. But he was hesitant to commit to a timeline for further reductions.

http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=0-ARMYPAPER-698736.php

Alpha

Another excellent article by Israel Uri Avnery which conveys that the war in Iraq was for Israel via the JINSA/CSP/PNAC Neocon cabal that surrounds Bush:

http://www.counterpunch.org/avnery04102003.html

April 10, 2003

The Night After
The Easier the Victory, the Harder the Peace
By URI AVNERY

It is now fashionable to talk about "the day after". Let's talk about the night after.

After the end of hostilities in Iraq, the world will be faced with two decisive facts:

First, the immense superiority of American arms can beat any people in the world, valiant as it may be.

Second, the small group that initiated this war--an alliance of Christian fundamentalists and Jewish neo-conservatives--has won big, and from now on it will control Washington almost without limits.

The combination of these two facts constitutes a danger to the world, and especially to the Middle East, the Arab peoples and the future of Israel. Because this alliance is the enemy of peaceful solutions, the enemy of the Arab governments, the enemy of the Palestinian people and especially the enemy of the Israeli peace camp.

It does not dream only about an American empire, in the style of the Roman one, but also of an Israeli mini-empire, under the control of the extreme right and the settlers. It wants to change the regimes in all Arab countries. It will cause permanent chaos in the region, the consequences of which it is impossible to foresee.

Its mental world consists of a mixture of ideological fervor and crass material interests, an exaggerated American patriotism and right-wing Zionism.

That is a dangerous mixture. There is in it something of the spirit of Ariel Sharon, a man who has always had grandiose plans for changing the region, consisting of a mixture of creative imagination, unbridled chauvinism and a primitive faith in brute force.

Who are the winners?

They are the so-called neo-cons, or neo-conservatives. A compact group, almost all of whose members are Jewish. They hold the key positions in the Bush administration, as well as in the think-tanks that play an important role in formulating American policy and the ed-op pages of the influential newspapers.

For many years, this was a marginal group that fostered a right-wing agenda in all fields. They fought against abortion, homosexuality, pornography and drugs. When Binyamin Netanyahu assumed power in Israel, they offered him advise on how to fight the Arabs.

Their big moment arrived with the collapse of the Twin Towers. The American public and politicians were in a state of shock, completely disoriented, unable to understand a world that had changed overnight. The neo-cons were the only group with a ready explanation and a solution. Only nine days after the outrage, William Kristol (the son of the group's founder, Irving Kristol) published an Open Letter to President Bush, asserting that it was not enough to annihilate the network of Osama bin Laden, but that it was also imperative to "remove Saddam Hussein from power" and to "retaliate" against Syria and Iran for supporting Hizbullah.

Following is a short list of the main characters. (If it bores you, skip to the next section).

The Open Letter was published in the Weekly Standard, founded by Kristol with the money of ultra-right press mogul Rupert Murdoch, who donated $ 10 million to the cause. It was signed by 41 leading neo-cons, including Norman Podhoretz, a Jewish former leftist who has become an extreme right-wing icon, editor of the prestigious Encounter magazine, and his wife, Midge Decter, also a writer, Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Studies, Robert Kagan, also of the Weekly Standard, Charles Krauthammer of the Washington Post, and, of course, Richard Perle.

Perle is a central character in this play. Until recently he was the chairman of the Defense Policy Board of the Defense Department, which also includes Eliot Cohen and Devon Cross. Perle is a director of the Jerusalem Post, now owned by extreme right-wing Zionists. In the past he was an aide to Senator Henry Jackson, who led the fight against the Soviet Union on behalf of the Jews who wanted to leave. He is a leading member of the influential right-wing American Enterprise Institute. Lately he was obliged to resign from his Defense Department position, when it became known that a private corporation had promised to pay him almost a million dollars for he benefit of his influence in the administration.

That Open Letter was, in effect, the beginning of the Iraq war. It was eagerly received by the Bush administration, with members of the group already firmly established in some of its leading positions. Paul Wolfowitz, the father of the war, is No. 2 in the Defense Department, where another friend of Perle's, Douglas Feith, heads the Pentagon Planning Board. John Bolton is State Department Undersecretary. Eliot Abrams, responsible for the Middle East in the National Security Council, was connected with the Iran-Contra-Israel scandal. The main hero of the scandal, Oliver North, sits in the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, together with Michael Ledeen, another hero of the scandal. Headvocates total war not only against Iraq, but also against Israel's other enemies, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian Authority. Dov Zakheim is comptroller for the Defense Department.

Most of these people , together with Vice-President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, are associated with the "Project for the New American Century", which published a White Paper in 2002, with the aim 'to preserve and enhance this 'American peace'"--meaning American control of the world.

Meyrav Wurmser (Meyrav is a chic new Israeli first name) is Director of the Center for Middle East Policy at the Hudson Institute. She also writes for the Jerusalem Post and is co-founder of the Middle East Media Research Institute that is, according to the London Guardian, connected with Israeli Army Intelligence. MEMRI feeds the media and politicians with highly selective quotations from extreme Arab publications. Meyrav's husband, Davis Wurmser, is at Perle's American Enterprise Institute, heading Middle East Studies. Mention should also be made of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy of our old acquaintance, Dennis Ross, who for years was in charge of the "peace process" in the Middle East.

In all the important papers there are people close to the group, such as William Safire, a man hypnotized by Sharon, in the New York Times and Charles Krauthammer in the Washington Post. Another Perle friend, Robert Bartley, is the editor of the Wall Street Journal.

If the speeches of Bush and Cheney often sound as if they came from the lips of Sharon, one of the reasons may be that their speechwriters, Joseph Shattan, Mathew Scully and John McConnell, are neo-cons, as is Cheneys Chief-of-Staff, Lewis Libby.

The immense influence of this largely Jewish group stems from its close alliance with the extreme right-wing Christian fundamentalists, who nowadays control Bush's Republican party. The founding fathers were Jerry Falwell of the Moral Majority, who once got a jet plane as a present from Menachem Begin, and Pat Robertson of the Christian Coalition and the Christian Broadcasting Network, which help to finance the Christian Embassy in Jerusalem of J.W. van der Hoeven, an outfit that supports the settlers and their right-wing allies.

Common to both groups is their adherence to the fanatical ideology of the extreme right in Israel. They see the Iraq war as a struggle between the Children of Light (America and Israel) and the Children of Darkness (the Arabs and Muslims).

By the way, none of these facts are secret. They have been published lately in dozens of articles, both in American and world media. The members of the group are proud of them.

The Zionist general.

The man who symbolizes this victory is General Jay Garner, who has just been appointed chief of the civilian administration in Iraq.

He is no anonymous general who has been picked accidentally. Garner is the ideological partner of Paul Wolfowitz and the neo-cons.

Two years ago he signed, together with 26 other officers, a petition organized by the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, lauding the Israeli Army for "remarkable restraint in the face of lethal violence orchestrated by the leadership of the Palestinian Authority," which is certainly news to the Israeli peace forces. He also stated that "a strong Israel is an asset that American military planners and political leaders can rely on."

In the first Gulf War he praised the performance of the Patriot missiles, which had failed miserably. After leaving the army in 1997, he became, not surprisingly, a defense contractor specializing in missiles. It was alleged that he landed non-competitive Pentagon contracts. This year he obtained a defense contract for $ 1.5 billion, as well as a contract for building Patriot systems in Israel.

Therefore, there can be no better candidate for the job of chief of the civilian administration in Iraq, especially at a time when contracts for billions of dollars for reconstruction have to be handed out, to be paid for by Iraqi oil.

A new Balfour declaration.

The ideology of this group, that calls for an American world-empire as well as for a Greater Israel, reminds one of bygone days.

The Balfour declaration of 1917, that promised the Jews a homeland in Palestine, had two parents. The mother was Christian Zionism (among whose adherents were illustrious statesmen like Lord Palmerston and Lord Shaftesbury, long before the foundation of the Zionist movement), the father was British imperialism. The Zionist idea allowed the British to crowd out their French competitors and take possession of Palestine, which was needed to safeguard the Suez Canal and the shorter sea route to India.

Now the same thing is happening again. Last year Richard Perle organized a briefing in which a speaker proposed war not only on Iraq, but on Saudi Arabia and Egypt as well, in order to secure the world's oil heartland. Iraq, he asserted, was only the pivot. One of the justifications for this design is the need to defend Israel.

To bet on our life?

Seemingly, all this is good for Israel. America controls the world, we control America. Never before have Jews exerted such an immense influence on the center of world power.

But this tendency troubles me. We are like a gambler, who bets all his money and his future on one horse. A good horse, a horse with no current competitor, but still one horse.

The neo-cons will cause a long period of chaos in the Arab and Muslim world. The Iraqi war has already shown that their understanding of Arab realities is shaky. Their political assumptions did not stand the test, only brute force saved their undertaking.

Some day the Americans will go home, but we shall remain here. We have to live with the Arab peoples. Chaos in the Arab world endangers our future.

Wolfowitz and Co. may dream about a democratic, liberal, Zionist and America-loving Middle East, but the result of their adventures may well turn out to be a fanatical and fundamentalist region that will threaten our very existence.

The partnership of the neo-cons and the Christian fundamentalists may engender counter-forces in Washington. And if Bush is defeated in the next election, like his father after his victory in the first Gulf War, this whole gang will be thrown out.

The Bible tells us about the kings of Judea, who relied on the then world power, Egypt. They did not appreciate the rise of forces in the east, Assyria and Babylon. An Assyrian general told the king of Judea: "Behold, thou trustest upon the staff of this bruised reed, upon Egypt, on which if a man lean, it will go into his hand and pierce it." (II kings 18, 21).

Bush and his gang of neo-cons is not a bruised reed. Far from it, he is now a very strong reed. But should we bet our whole future on this?

Uri Avnery is an Israeli journalist. His essays are included in The Other Israel: Voices of Refusal and Dissent.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE NEXT CRUSADES
By Uri Avnery – March 5, 2005

http://www.gush-shalom.org/archives/article346.html

http://www.counterpunch.org/avnery03072005.html

Many years ago, I read a book called "The Quiet American" by Graham Greene. Its central character is a high-minded, naive young American operative in Vietnam. He has no idea about the complexities of that country but is determined to right its wrongs and create order. The results are disastrous.

I have the feeling that this is happening now in Lebanon. The Americans are not so high-minded and not so naive. Far from it. But they are quite prepared to go into a foreign country, disregard its complexities, and use force to impose on it order, democracy and freedom.

Civil war: Lebanon. Lebanon is a country with a peculiar topography: a small country of high mountain ranges and isolated valleys. As a result, it has attracted throughout the centuries communities of persecuted minorities, who found refuge there. Today there are, side by side and one against the other, four ethno-religious communities: Christians, Sunnis, Shi ' ites and Druze. Within the Christian community, there are several sub-communities, such as Maronites and other ancient sects, mostly hostile to each other. The history of Lebanon abounds in mutual massacres.

Such a situation invites, of course, interference by neighbors and foreign powers, each wanting to stir the pot for its own advantage. Syria, Israel, the United States and France, the former colonial master, are all involved.

Exactly 50 years ago a secret, heated debate took place among the leaders of Israel. David Ben-Gurion (then Minister of Defence) and Moshe Dayan (the army Chief-of-Staff) had a brilliant idea: to invade Lebanon, impose on it a "Christian major" as dictator and turn it into an Israeli protectorate. Moshe Sharett, the then Prime Minister, attacked this idea fervently. In a lengthy, closely argued letter, which has been preserved for history, he ridiculed the total ignorance of the proponents of this idea in face of the incredibly fragile complexity of the Lebanese social structure. Any adventure, he warned, would end in disaster.

At the time, Sharett won. But 27 years later, Menachem Begin and Ariel Sharon did exactly what Ben-Gurion and Dayan had proposed. The result was exactly as foreseen by Sharett.

Anyone who follows the American and Israeli (there is no difference) media, gets the impression that the present situation in Lebanon is simple: there are two camps, "the supporters of Syria" on the one side, the "opposition" on the other. There is a "Beirut Spring". The opposition is a twin sister of yesterday's Ukrainian opposition, and loyally imitates all its methods: demonstrations opposite the government building, a sea of waving flags, colorful shawls, and, most importantly, beautiful girls in the front row.

But between the Ukraine and Lebanon there exists not the slightest similarity. The Ukraine is a "simple" country: the east tends towards Russia, the west towards Europe. With American help, the west won.

In Lebanon, all the diverse communities are in action. Each for its own interest, each plotting to outfox the others, perhaps to attack them at a given opportunity. Some of the leaders are connected with Syria, some with Israel, all are trying to use the Americans for their ends. The jolly pictures of young demonstrators, so prominent in the media, have no meaning if one does not know the community which stands behind them.

Only thirty years ago these communities started a terrible civil war and all of them massacred each other. The Christian Maronites wanted to take over the country with the help of Israel, but were defeated by a coalition of the Sunnis and Druze (the Shi ' ites played no significant role at that time). The Palestinian refugees, led by the PLO, who formed a kind of fifth "community", joined the battle. When the Christians were in danger of being overrun, they called on the Syrians for help. Six years later, Israel invaded, with the aim of evicting both the Syrians and the Palestinians and imposing a Christian strongman (Bashir Gemayel).

It took us 18 years to get out of that morass. Our only achievement was to turn the Shi ' ites into a dominant force. When we entered Lebanon, the Shi ' ites received us with showers of rice and candies, hoping that we would throw out the Palestinians, who had been lording it over them. A few months later, when they realized that we did not intend to leave, they started to shoot at us. Sharon is the midwife of Hizbullah.

It is difficult to foresee what will happen if the Syrians accede to the American ultimatum and leave Lebanon. There is no indication that the Americans are concerned with the creation of a new fabric of life for the Lebanese communities. They are satisfied with babbling about "freedom" and "democracy", as if a majority vote could create a regime acceptable to all. They do not understand that "Lebanon" is an abstract notion, since for almost all Lebanese, belonging to their own community is vastly more important than loyalty to the state. In such a situation, even an international force will be of no help.

The re-ignition of the bloody civil war is a distinct possibility.

Civil war: Iraq. If a civil war breaks out in Lebanon, it will not be the only one in the region. In Iraq, such a war - if almost secret - is already in full swing.

The only effective military forces in Iraq, apart from the occupation army, are the Kurdish "Peshmerga" ("Those who face death"). The Americans use them whenever they are fighting the Sunnis. They played an important role in the battle of Fallujah, a big town that was totally destroyed, its inhabitants killed or driven out.

Now the Kurdish forces are waging a war against the Sunnis and Turkmens in the north of the country, in order to take hold of the oil-rich areas and the town of Kirkuk, and also to drive out the Sunni settlers who were implanted there by Saddam Hussein.

How can such a war be practically ignored by the media? Simple: everything is swept under the carpet of the "war against terrorism". But this small war is nothing compared to what may happen in Iraq, once the time comes for deciding the future of the country. The Kurds want complete autonomy, or independence by another name. The Sunni would not dream of accepting the rule of the Shi ' ite majority, which they despise, even if came about in the name of "democracy". The outbreak of a full-fledged civil war may only be a question of time.

Civil war: Syria. If the Americans succeed, with our discreet help, in breaking the ruling Syrian dictatorship, there is no assurance at all that it will be replaced by "freedom" and "democracy".

Syria is almost as splintered as Lebanon. There is a strong Druze community in the south, a rebellious Kurdish community in the north, an Alawite community (to which the Assad family belongs) in the west. The Sunni majority is traditionally divided between Damascus in the south and Aleppo in the north. The people have resigned themselves to the Assad dictatorship out of fear of what may happen if the regime collapses.

It is not likely that a full-scale civil war will break out there. But a prolonged situation of total chaos is quite likely. Sharon would be happy, though I am not sure that it would be good for Israel.

Religious fervor: Iran. The main American objective is, of course, the overthrow of the Ayatollahs in Iran. (It is a little bit ironic that at the same time the Americans are helping to install the Shi ' ites in power in neighboring Iraq, where they insist on introducing Islamic law.)

Iran is a much harder nut to crack. Unlike Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, this is a homogenous society.

Israel is now openly threatening to bomb the Iranian nuclear installations. Every few days we see on our TV screens the digitally blurred faces of pilots boasting of their readiness to do this at a moment's notice.

The religious fervor of the Ayatollahs has been flagging lately, as happens with every victorious revolution after some time. But a military attack by the "Big Satan" (the US) or the "Little Satan" (us) may set fire to the whole Shi ' ite crescent: Iran, South Iraq and South Lebanon.

And here, too. Israel, too, has recently witnessed a tiny civil war.

In the Galilean village Marrar, where a Druze and an Arab Christian community have been living side by side for generations, a bloody incident suddenly erupted. It was a full-fledged pogrom: the Druze fell upon the Christians, attacking, burning and destroying. By a miracle, nobody was killed. The Christians say that the Israeli police (many of whose members are Druze) stood aside. The immediate reason for the outbreak: some doctored nude pictures on the Internet.)

It is easy to ignite a civil war, whether out of fanaticism or out of intolerable naivete. George Bush, the (not-so-)Quiet American, runs around the world hawking his patent medicines, "freedom" and "democracy", in total ignorance of hundreds of years of history. Hard to believe, but he draws his inspiration from a book by our own Nathan Sharansky, a very small genius, to say the least.

Every human being and every people has a right to freedom. Many of us have shed their blood for this aim. Democracy is an ideal that every people has to realize for itself. But when the banners of "freedom" and "democracy" are hoisted over a crusade by an avaricious and irresponsible super-power, the results can be catastrophic.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Uri Avnery is an award-winning Israeli journalist and author, a three-time member of Israel's parliament, and a peace activist with the Gush Shalom center. Some of his writing appears in the recently-published work, The Other Israel: Voices of Refusal and Dissent.

Alpha

K.Nimmo: US & Israel want civil war in Lebanon

http://www.kurtnimmo.com/blog/

March 12, 2005
Syria and Lebanon: Big Time Double Standards

If you were a Syrian, what would you think? Here's the United Nations, specifically envoy Terje Roed-Larsen, a Norwegian, telling Bashar Assad to get out of Lebanon and be quick about it, or face “economic isolation,” as the Washington Post puts it. Roed-Larsen used UN. Resolution 1559 like a stick against Assad. “If he doesn't deliver, there will be total political and economic isolation of his country. There is a steel-hard consensus in the international community,” warned another UN official.

Meanwhile, several hundred miles to the south, the outlaw state of Israel has violated literary dozens of UN resolutions (see this list). Israel has racked up violations of international law for raids on Gaza and the West Bank, raids against Syria, raids against Jordan, raids against Lebanon, raids against Iraq, raids against Tunisia, expulsions of Palestinians, annexation of Syria's Golan Heights, and violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

You may remember Roed-Larsen's comment last year about the “deterioration of law and order in Palestinian areas,” a comment deputy Israeli ambassador Arye Mekel agreed with. If you were a Palestinian, you might be angry with this European bureaucrat for taking the Palestinian Authority to task while Israelis settlers and soldiers murder Arab school children, bulldoze homes (with people still inside), and assassinate your leaders.

If you were a Syrian, you might think there is a double standard at work here. Terje Roed-Larsen has not threatened Ariel Sharon with “total political and economic isolation.” If you were Syrian, you might wonder why the hell some European white man is threatening your country. The last time the United Nations talked like this against Arabs, 500,000 Iraqi children died. If you were a Syrian, you might remember a little bit of history, for instance the fact Lebanon was at one time considered part of Syria—that is until the French arrived and started carving things up in their own interest and against the interests of the Syrians. If you were Syrian, you might realize that in fact most of the borders in the Middle East were contrived by white Europeans for their benefit and when the Arabs refused to pay along with this nonsense thousands of them were slaughtered. Winston Churchill made no bones about it: recalcitrant Arabs should be gassed. Some eighty years after Churchill said this, the United States used mustard gas against the people of Fallujah. For Arabs, nothing much has changed over the last century or so.

If you were Lebanese, no doubt you'd be afraid of the future. “Lebanon confronts nightmare today. As the Syrian army begins its withdrawal from the country this morning, after mounting pressure from President George Bush—whose anger at the Syrians has been provoked by the insurgency against American troops in Iraq—there are growing signs that the Syrian retreat is reopening the sectarian divisions of the 1975-1990 Lebanese civil war,” writes Robert Fisk. “Have we forgotten 150,000 dead? Have we forgotten the Western hostages? Have we forgotten the 241 Americans who died in the suicide bombing of 23 October 1983? This democracy, if it comes, will be drenched with blood–but the blood will be that of the Lebanese who live here, not that of the foreigners who wish to bestow freedom upon them… in the absence of these ’sisterly’ Syrian soldiers, civil conflict might suddenly—mysteriously—return to Lebanon.”

This is precisely what the Bushcons and the Likudites in Israel want—a return to civil strife and ethnic conflict in Lebanon. As Nasser H. Aruri writes in the foreword to Livia Rokach's Israel's Sacred Terrorism, the 1982 invasion of Lebanon was “calculated to produce results deemed beneficial both to American strategic interests and to Israeli expansionist goals. The interests of the Reagan administration and Israel's Likud government coalesced around three objectives: the destruction of the Palestinian infrastructure in Lebanon, the redrawing of the political map in Lebanon, and the reduction of Syria to manageable proportions.” More than 20 years later, not much has changed, except the diminishment of radical Palestinian elements in Lebanon. “The 1982 ‘operation,’ as well as its predecessor, the ‘Litani Operation’ of 1978, were part of the long-standing Zionist strategy for Lebanon and Palestine,” writes Aruri. “In fact, that strategy, formulated and applied during the 1950s, had been envisaged at least four decades earlier, and attempts to implement it are still being carried out three decades later. On November 6, 1918, a committee of British mandate officials and Zionist leaders put forth a suggested northern boundary for a Jewish Palestine ‘from the North Litani River up to Banias.’ In the following year, at the Paris peace conference, the Zionist movement proposed boundaries that would have included the Lebanese district of Bint Jubayl and all the territories up to the Litani River. The proposal emphasized the ‘vital importance of controlling all water resources up to their sources.’”

Juat about everybody who lives in the Middle East knows what the Zionists are all about—stealing land and water and reducing the Arabs—especially Muslim Arabs—into third class citizens in their own countries. As Hezbollah demonstrated in 2000, when they ran the IDF out of southern Lebanon, this will no longer be as simple as it once was and this is why the Zionists have included the Bushcons in the operation. France and the United States believe they can “moderate” Hezbollah and eventually convince it to disarm and demobilize its militias. It's not going to happen so long as Israel has a military presence on the border and occupies Shebaa Farms and periodically attacks Lebanese villages and Beirut.

Lebanese, Syrians, and Palestinians are not stupid. They know the problem is not Hezbollah or even Hamas, but the Americans and the Israelis. “For 30 years, America has tolerated—even supported—Syria's military presence in Lebanon. In 1976, both the Israelis and the Americans wanted Syrian troops in Lebanon—because they would be able to ‘control’ the 300,000 Palestinian refugees in Lebanon–but now Mr Bush's real concern is Syria's supposed support for the insurgency in Iraq,” writes Robert Fisk. “The irony is extraordinary: 140,000 American troops occupy Iraq—we shall leave the Israeli occupation forces in Palestinian lands out of this equation—while their President demands the withdrawal of 14,000 Syrian troops from Lebanon. Democracy indeed!”

As almost any Syrian or Lebanese can tell you, democracy has nothing to do with it. The Arab and Muslim Middle East “with its ethnic minorities, its factions and internal crises, which is astonishingly self-destructive, as we can see in Lebanon, in non-Arab Iran and now also in Syria, is unable to deal successfully with its fundamental problems and does not therefore constitute a real threat against the State of Israel,” Oded Yinon wrote in the 1980s.

How things change. Both Hezbollah and the persistent resistance in Iraq pose serious threats to the Zionist plan for the Middle East. Bush may push a “Cedar revolution” in Lebanon—hoping for an engineered democracy that will eventually “mainstreamize” Hezbollah and flat line its radical appeal—but this will not happen, as between 500,000 and over a million Lebanese indicated earlier this week: Hezbollah represents resistance to Pax Americana and Pax Israelica. Backing Syria in a corner and threatening to bomb Iran will not change this. In fact, if the United States attacks Iran, this will catalyze Shia radicalism. As an example of how this works, consider how the French and US military headquarters were razed by Islamic Jihad suicide bombers, slaughtering more than 300 servicemen after US warships shelled Muslim areas of Lebanon in support of Amin Gemayel, a Falangist (i.e., fascist) Maronite Christian and Israeli sock puppet.

Alpha

Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 15:01:38 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: Fisk has cancelled his visit (Escalating tension in Lebanon with three US aircraft carrier battle groups arriving)

Mimi,

You and I are so very much on the same page with each other.. I just received that email from Jeff Blankfort mentioning that Fisk's visit has been cancelled due to escalating tension in the Lebanon.. All in accordance (apparently) with that 'A Clean Break' agenda that James Bamford conveys in 'A Pretext for War' ( http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2005/02/11/a-clean-break-from-james-bamford-s-a-pretext-for-war.php ) .. Thank you forwarding the WorldNetDaily article below as it matches what I read earlier via the following article:

Converging U.S. Navy aircraft carrier groups in Middle East

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2005/03/12/converging-u-s-navy-aircraft-carrier-groups-in-middle-east.php

Mimi wrote:

Just got this msg from MECA in the Bay area....who were hosting his visit up in northern Cal...
do you know if it might be related to what's going on in the Med right now?
Am attaching an article I just received from worldnetdaily...a source I dont read/respect..

mimi

***************************************
Robert Fisk Cancelled

Dear Friends,
Robert Fisk has just called from Lebanon to cancel the April 9 event. He must stay in Lebanon to cover the news there
and will not be able to come speak in the U.S.
We apologize for the inconvience and we will reschedule with him as soon as possible.

If you have already purchased tickets please call MECA at 510- 548-0542 or email meca@mecaforpeace.org to arrange for a refund.

*************************************************************************************************************************************************************
Worldnetdaily.....an unworthy news source -- the voice of the Reich wing ----
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43437 (march 23)
Showdown: Battle groups head for Mideast
Three carrier battle groups are converging on the Persian Gulf. The aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson has departed Singapore and is currently crossing the Indian Ocean, en route to the Middle East. The aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt is also on the move, crossing the Atlantic Ocean, reportedly headed toward the Mediterranean.

Reports are also circulating that the U.S. Navy has dispatched ships containing nuclear armaments to reinforce the battle groups. This will be the first time since February 2004 that the U.S. has had three major carrier groups stationed on or around the Middle East.

Each of the carrier groups are armed with 85 aircraft capable of delivering precision-guided munitions. The air refueling capabilities of the aircraft allow them to operate from long distances. Each carrier battle group will include nuclear submarine protective cover. The battle groups can act independently and can stay on station indefinitely.

The U.S. military air bases in Turkey, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia, not to mention those recently established in Iraq and Afganistan, give the U.S. formidable muscle in the area. In addition, we have more than 150,000 battle-hardened Army and Marine forces on the ground in the region, capable of responding to any threat we face.

What's going on? Looks like it's showdown time with both Iran and Syria. President Bush has said in words of one syllable that Iran will not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. He has also demanded that Syria completely withdraw its military and intelligence forces from Lebanon. Nor will George W. Bush rest quietly until the mullahs quit funding Hezbollah.

How many times do the president and the secretary of state need to say that we have not taken the military option off the table? The world by now should be getting the point. The president has also repeatedly said that he will respect Israel's right to protect itself. Vice President Cheney has said very clearly that Israel could be expected to attack Iran the minute Israel decides that the mullahs have reached the "point of no return" and have everything they need to make an atomic bomb.

Neither the president of the United States nor the prime minister of Israel want to find out that the mullahs have nuclear weapons by seeing a mushroom cloud over Tel Aviv. On 9-11, we all had that type of rude awakening when we saw the second plane crash into the World Trade Center. The president must have privately sworn his own form of "never again" in pledging that he would not permit the U.S. to find out our enemies had shipped an improvised nuclear device into America by waking up one fine day to see a mushroom cloud over New York City or Washington, D.C.

Is it too late for diplomacy? No. But it is too late for more lies by the mullahs. Yes, the Europeans can continue their diplomacy. Yet the president has demanded more than words. If the mullahs do not intend to build an atomic bomb, then let them destroy their centrifuges and their heavy-water plant. The only purpose of the centrifuges is to enrich uranium to weapons grade. The only point of the heavy-water plant is to produce weapons-grade plutonium. Anything else the mullahs say is just another attempt by them to play the world for a fool.

George Bush is no fool. Nor does he have infinite patience. The president would clearly prefer to see freedom come to Iran and Lebanon by peaceful means. But, if all else fails, we have three nuclear-armed carrier battle groups in the region that are more than capable of resolving the problem.

Alpha · Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2005 12:25 am Post subject: NO MORE WARS FOR ISRAEL

Bring Our Troops Back Home:

http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/review/article_full_story.asp?service_ID=7691

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jewish Neocons use 'democracy and freedom/liberty' propaganda to mask their long desired war for Israel agenda:

http://www.vdare.com/misc/macdonald_neoconservatism.htm

Whose War?:

http://www.amconmag.com/03_24_03/cover.html

http://www.nowarforisrael.com

http://www.nogw.com/warforisrael.html

http://student.cs.ucc.ie/cs1064/jabowen/IPSC/articles/article0005345.html

A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties
by Oded Yinon (with a foreword by, and translated by Israel Shahak)

Foreword
The following essay represents, in my opinion, the accurate and detailed plan of the present Zionist regime (of Sharon and Eitan) for the Middle East which is based on the division of the whole area into small states, and the dissolution of all the existing Arab states. I will comment on the military aspect of this plan in a concluding note. Here I want to draw the attention of the readers to several important points:

1. The idea that all the Arab states should be broken down, by Israel, into small units, occurs again and again in Israeli strategic thinking. For example, Ze'ev Schiff, the military correspondent of Ha'aretz (and probably the most knowledgeable in Israel, on this topic) writes about the "best" that can happen for Israeli interests in Iraq: "The dissolution of Iraq into a Shi'ite state, a Sunni state and the separation of the Kurdish part" (Ha'aretz 6/2/1982). Actually, this aspect of the plan is very old.

2. The strong connection with Neo-Conservative thought in the USA is very prominent, especially in the author's notes. But, while lip service is paid to the idea of the "defense of the West" from Soviet power, the real aim of the author, and of the present Israeli establishment is clear: To make an Imperial Israel into a world power. In other words, the aim of Sharon is to deceive the Americans after he has deceived all the rest.

3. It is obvious that much of the relevant data, both in the notes and in the text, is garbled or omitted, such as the financial help of the U.S. to Israel. Much of it is pure fantasy. But, the plan is not to be regarded as not influential, or as not capable of realization for a short time. 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. Those aims, especially the division of the existing states, were carried out in 1939-1941, and only an alliance on the global scale prevented their consolidation for a period of time.

The notes by the author follow the text. To avoid confusion, I did not add any notes of my own, but have put the substance of them into this foreward and the conclusion at the end. I have, however, emphasized some portions of the text.

Israel Shahak
June 13, 1982
A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties
by Oded Yinon
This essay originally appeared in Hebrew in KIVUNIM (Directions), A Journal for Judaism and Zionism; Issue No, 14--Winter, 5742, February 1982, Editor: Yoram Beck. Editorial Committee: Eli Eyal, Yoram Beck, Amnon Hadari, Yohanan Manor, Elieser Schweid. Published by the Department of Publicity/The World Zionist Organization, Jerusalem.

SNIPPED.......please use LINK at top of page to retrieve the rest of this fascinating read...
Mimi

War Without End

The global war against terror, news about the illegal invasion of Iraq, the corporate puppet presidents, the war criminal Tony Blair, September 11th 2001, the USS Liberty and New World Order crimes against humanity.

Converging U.S. Navy aircraft carrier groups in Middle East