Bin Laden – Bush Serve The Same Master


Bin Laden – Bush Serve The Same Master

by Henry Makow Ph.D.

The headquarters of Islamic terrorism is London, England, where the Anglo-American Establishment sponsors the radical “Muslim Brotherhood” in order to advance its long-term goal of plutocratic global dictatorship.

These globalists have fabricated a bogus “war on terror” to crush the remaining vestiges of nationalism and democracy in both Muslim countries and the West. Expect more incitements like the current “Miss World ” imbroglio to convince both sides the other endangers its way of life.

In a comprehensive report, the perceptive Hawaii-based researcher Peter Goodgame concludes:

“Osama bin Laden is not, nor has he ever been, the leader of the international Islamist movement which is directed by the International Muslim Brotherhood.”

Goodgame continues:

“Osama bin Laden has been used effectively as a figurehead for the Brotherhood’s militant branch to take responsibility for its atrocities, but he is not the mastermind… By the same token, the Muslim Brotherhood is a tool by the British-based Globalists whose main objective is to overthrow the established world order and create a new one-world system of global governance.”

Goodgame cites former British Intelligence Officer, Dr. John Coleman, who says the Muslim Brotherhood is a secret freemason order set up by the great names of British Middle East Intelligence, T.E. Lawrence, Bertrand Russell and St. John Philby to “keep the Middle East backward so its natural resource, oil, could continue to be looted.”

The Muslim Brotherhood has been used to check nationalist movements led by such figures as Nasser, Bhutto and the Shah of Iran who tried to develop their countries.

Without the British,

“radical Islam would have remained the illegitimate, repressive minority movement that it has always been, and the Middle East would have remained stable and prosperous,” Goodgame says.

The Muslim Brotherhood is now a powerful faction in the global oligarchy. Goodgame cites Robert Drefuss, author of “Hostage to Khomeini” (1980):

“The real Muslim Brothers are … the secretive bankers and financiers who stand behind the curtain, the members of the old Arab, Turkish, or Persian families whose genealogy places them in the oligarchic elite, with smooth business and intelligence associations to the European black nobility and, especially, to the British oligarchy.


And the Muslim Brotherhood is money. Together, the Brotherhood probably controls several tens of billions of dollars in immediate liquid assets, and controls billions more in …everything from oil trade and banking to drug-running, illegal arms merchandising, and gold and diamond smuggling. By allying with the Muslim Brotherhood, the Anglo-Americans are not merely buying into a terrorists-for-hire racket; they are partners in a powerful and worldwide financial empire…”

By fabricating a bogus war between Islamic fundamentalism and the West, the globalists are able to attack their real enemy, humanity. Pulling the strings, they will ensure that both Western and Muslim states are degraded and finally completely subjugated to their odious rule.

The globalists have long been using wars to subvert, demoralize and destroy Western civilization.

  • They backed the Nazis and the Soviets in World War Two.

  • They created the Punch and Judy show that was the Cold War.

  • They tied U.S. hands while backing Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam.

Who are they?

Also called the Illuminati, they represent a recrudescence of the alliance of Rothschild finance and European aristocracy secretly coordinated by a Satanic dogma hidden in freemasonry.

They plan a new feudalism that will impoverish the middle classes, depopulate and enslave the masses, and leave only the rich served by a technocracy. The whole world will resemble a repressive third world country governed by the IMF, UN and World Bank.

The globalists are headquartered in London and centered on the Rothschild-dominated Bank of England, MI-6 and the secretive Round Table society, which spawned the Royal Institute of International Affairs. The American branches include the Council on Foreign Relations, CIA and the Rockefeller foundations which all ensure the American people continue to finance and enforce one-world tyranny. The Bush family has owed its prominence to this cabal ever since grandfather Prescott Bush helped arrange financing for Nazism.

Zionism is supposed to represent the “West” in this sham war with Islam. Americans are being groomed to become like Israelis, victims of daily acts of “Muslim terror.”

Last week, when another suicide bomber struck in Jerusalem, Benjamin Netanyahu said,

“Whether the explosion takes place in Bali, Moscow, New York or Jerusalem we are all united in a war against a common terrorist enemy.”

According to Swiss journalist Richard Labeviere (“Dollars for Terror: The United States and Islam” 2000) radical Islam is an essential “complementary enemy” to Zionism, which also seeks regional hegemony. According to the “Yinon Memorandum” (1982) Israel intends to splinter the Arab countries into several small cantons along ethnic lines. None of these will be able to challenge Israel, which, like the US is a disposable implement of the globalist agenda. (207)

The Palestinian terrorist “Hamas” movement is a product of the Muslim Brotherhood. According to Labeviere, it serves the interests of the Israeli right wing, and has received secret financial support from the Israeli “Shin Beth.” (203-205). Thus, Palestinian suicide bombers play straight into Ariel Sharon’s hand.

Meanwhile, back in the USA, “Muslim terrorist attacks” are an excuse to lay the foundations of a police state. These attacks, which could become nuclear or biological, might serve as a pretext to declare martial law, suspend elections and round up dissidents, i.e. anyone who is not buying the lie.

This may seem incomprehensible to Americans now when the economy is still being propped up. Once the US has done the globalist’s dirty work, interest rates could rise and debt ridden Americans could be stripped of their assets, as they were in the Depression.

The Homeland Security Act is designed to control all US law enforcement agencies so that elements in the CIA and Mossad can target Americans with impunity, like they did on Sept. 11. American agencies were designed to remain independent so they could serve as a check on each other.

The Act is also designed to allow George W. to place his henchmen in positions of control. Remember, he is a product of a secret Satanic cult, the “Skull and Bones.” This sounds gruesome but the Twentieth Century provided many precedents. The Illuminati was behind both Nazi and Communist mass slaughter and terror.

Our position is akin to the European Jews who disbelieved warnings of the holocaust.

  • There is even a provision in the Homeland Security Act against whistle blowers. Why?

  • Another provision allows mandatory vaccinations while giving vaccine manufacturers immunity from prosecution. Why?

  • The “Total Information Awareness” program will “red flag” troublemakers by monitoring all personal communications and financial transactions, even your library records. You didn’t attack the WTC. Why are you targeted?

What is the justification for this destruction of freedom, which Bush supposedly protects?

In 14 months since Sept.11, 2001, there has been not one Muslim terrorist attack in the US despite the bloody American invasion of Afghanistan. If “Al Queda” were capable of pulling off Sept. 11, don’t you think it would have planned an encore?

Don’t get me wrong: I am grateful to the Mossad and CIA for sparing us. But Americans simply don’t deserve freedom if they accept this obvious ruse and its ominous consequences.

In conclusion, mankind is in the clutches of a diabolical multi generational conspiracy. A Satanic, criminal cartel has subverted all social institutions and is slowly crafting a brutal global dictatorship. Our political and cultural leaders are witting and unwitting pawns. They are fabricating a phony war between Islam and the West in order to accomplish the degradation of both.

I realize this vision seems incredibly bleak. The mass media holds us in a powerful illusion of normalcy.

However, expecting the worst means you will never be disappointed. If you are wrong, you are relieved. If you are right, you are prepared.

 

Israel nuked Yemen, period. This is hard fact that has been 100% confirmed.


Israel nuked Yemen, period. This is hard fact that has been 100% confirmed.

Target arm - Livermore Nuclear Labs

…by Jeff Smith, with Gordon Duff and Ian Greenhalgh

By now, every reader will be aware that Israel dropped a neutron bomb on Yemen on behalf of their Saudi allies. A billion Arabs also know this truth, every Arabic media outlet picked up the VT story as have the Russian outlets Pravda, Russia Today and Sputnik News. This story is too big to die, it is worldwide.

Israel nuked Yemen, period. This is hard fact that has been 100% confirmed.

Just watch the video, the scintillating pixels are caused by particles from the nuclear explosion hitting the camera’s sensor, there can be no other explanation; note the white hot ball of plasma seen briefly before the huge detonation.

The camera never lies

Until mobile phones with cameras and small video cameras were developed, small florescent lights were used as emergency nuclear explosion/radiation detectors.  Now, phones and CCD video cameras have become dependable “slam dunk” nuclear detectors.

The next few words are the technical explanation of why we are absolutely certain we are dealing with a nuclear event, with no questions whatsoever.  This is information available to all member of the press, the military, the scientific community and the general public.  This means, of course, that anyone in “denial” of our assertion, proven with this much certainty, is defective as to mental function or suffers from moral degeneracy.

The combination of the cameras plastic lens and the photoelectric effect produced in the cameras CCD pick up chip (because it is basically a very large array of photo diodes) allows them to act as very good detectors of high level ionizing radiation. Low level radiation in this case is not of concern because it will not immediately kill you or have long term negative health effects.

fff_156

By simply pointing the camera at an explosive event it will immediately determine if it is nuclear or not. When the camera’s CCD pick up chip is overloaded by excess radiation it will pixelize showing white sparkles all over the picture of the fireball or blast image area.

The demonstration video still was taken in Yemen this month.  It is perhaps the best single demonstration image of ionizing radiation hitting a CCD receptor.  It is as perfect a demonstration of a nuclear explosion as detected using mobile phone or CCD camera technology, as explained above, as might be possible.

We are contacting scientists and physicists throughout the Middle east and Ukraine; we are distributing software that will allow us to detect not just nuclear weapons but radioactive threats of all kinds including polonium poisons; we are training teams to collect soil samples; preparing packages to allow medical personnel to screen for radioactive poisoning and we are offering materials for civil defence and decontamination efforts.

There has thus far been zero denial or refutation (other than by wingnuts and conspiracy theorists) of this having been a nuclear event nor has there been any effective denial of the pair of F-16A/Bs shot down over Yemen this week; planes which can only have belonged to Italy, Portugal or Israel, otherwise it came out of the mothballed stockpiles in the US southwest.

Russia speaks out

As stated in Pravda today, the world’s scientific community is aghast that ‘the Saudis have begun to wipe Yemen off the map’, they get straight to the point by telling us that ‘shocking video reveals proton bombardment from a neutron bomb’ and that  ‘forbidden strikes have brought about a storm of worldwide protest’ and might I add, this wave of protest isn’t going to be silenced by a handful of internet trolls and unemployed Haifa housewives.

‘Obama has recently offered military assistance to any external threat the rich Arab Gulf States may face’ according to Pravda. Russia is not only certain after viewing the evidence, that this is a nuclear attack but they believe that the United States is fully complicit in it; where other sources have cited the Israeli-Saudi nexus, highest level Russian sources believe this irresponsible move is the result of Washington kow-towing to both Saudi Arabia and The Gulf States.

Here come the trolls

There is a truism that one catches the most flak when one is over the target; being attacked by shills, stooges, trolls and other assorted disinfo entities is always a good indicator that one has written something that exposes a truth that the bad guys really don’t want people finding out about.

We know that our article exposing the Israeli use of a neuron bomb in Yemen has upset the applecart in Tel-Aviv and elsewhere because we are seeing a slew of videos and posts appearing online attacking VT and ridiculing the Yemeni nuke story.

One video I found particularly objectionable was posted by one of David Icke’s sycophantic supporters; a loud-mouthed, obnoxious type who looks like a third Milliband brother shouts at us that Yemen wasn’t nuked, that neutron bombs don’t exist and warns that VT is a disinfo op. Oh, and just to make sure you know who he is working for, he gets in three or four ‘fuck Israel’ outbursts.

David Icke personally, has run the other way to get as far away from this nuke issue as he can; while at the same time tasking his pack of attack trolls with attacking VT and the existence of neutron bombs – further confirmation of his disinfo agent status and a clear indicator of who he works for, what agenda he is trying to further. The fact that Icke is tasked with specific assignments such as covering up the nuking of Yemen shows us that he is an active agent.

Personally, I never had any doubt that Icke was a disinfo scumbag, I remember all too well the days in the early 90s when he appeared on the Terry Wogan chat show claiming to be the son of God and wearing a turquoise shellsuit because that colour held some mystical power. Icke has always been full of it and working against the best interests of mankind.

You just outed yourself David, you have made it plain for all to see that you are nothing more than a foetid outlet for the lies and disinfo of Israel. We knew this all along of course, but now we have confirmation. What we have to ask ourselves though is why have they chosen to employ David Icke on this issue, rather strange because the timing makes it very clear that Icke is taking the grubby Shekel to do the bidding of Israel. This has the effect of ‘burning’ him as an asset – after this his credibility is gone, he is no longer an asset, just a spent, discredited force. But why burn one of your best assets?

The answer is both simple and gratifying – VT’s breaking of the Yemeni nuke story has done real damage, we hit the mark and drew blood; they have responded by turning one of their major assets against us with full knowledge this will burn the asset; this shows just how much they want to keep this nuclear warfare a secret.

Thank you so much, you just handed us a gift from heaven; proof positive that Israel really doesn’t want people to know they nuked Yemen; hence they have unleashed their moronic hordes of stooges, shills, trolls, whatever name you prefer to use for these lying pieces of faecal matter in human form; these disgusting, completely amoral creatures who gladly take the Shekel as reward for their attempts to run cover for the mass murder of innocent people and the use of horrific weapons of mass destruction to commit war crimes.

It is too late to put the cat back in the box, the word is out – Israel is using nukes to kill innocent civilians.

Where are the other big names in the so-called ‘truth movement’? Where are Alex Jones and Christopher Bollyn? They are certainly nowhere near this oh so important nuke issue and you can bet your last cent they won’t be going near it unless it is to spread disinfo and tell outright lies.

Note that all these nay-sayers have no credentials other than being pro-Israeli or suspiciously aligned to groups such as the ADL, SPLC or AIPAC which are nothing more than fronts for Israeli interests.

Take note of the reaction to this very serious issue of the Israeli use of nukes. Anyone who tries to claim there was no nuke dropped on Yemen or apply a derogatory label to those who seek to get the truth about this most heinous of war crimes out to a wide audience must be viewed as a stooge for Israel.

The worldwide spread of the true story of Israel’s nuking of Yemen has got the perpetrators very worried; the truth is one of the things these people fear most.


Appendix I

A scintillator is a material that exhibits scintillation — the property of luminescence when excited by ionizing radiation. Luminescent materials, when struck by an incoming particle, absorb its energy and scintillate, (i.e., re-emit the absorbed energy in the form of light). Sometimes, the excited state is metastable, so the relaxation back down from the excited state to lower states is delayed (necessitating anywhere from a few nanoseconds to hours depending on the material): the process then corresponds to either one of two phenomena, depending on the type of transition and hence the wavelength of the emitted optical photon: delayed fluorescence or phosphorescence, also called after-glow.

A scintillation detector or scintillation counter is obtained when a scintillator is coupled to an electronic light sensor such as a photomultiplier tube (PMT), photo-diode, or silicon photomultiplier. PMT’s absorb the light emitted by the scintillator and re-emit it in the form of electrons via the photoelectric effect. The subsequent multiplication of those electrons (sometimes called photo-electrons) results in an electrical pulse which can then be analyzed and yield meaningful information about the particle that originally struck the scintillator. Vacuum photo-diodes are similar but do not amplify the signal while silicon photo-diodes, (CCD cameras) on the other hand, detect incoming photons by the excitation of charge carriers directly in the silicon. Silicon photo-multipliers consist of an array of photo-diodes which are reverse-biased with sufficient voltage to operate in avalanche mode, enabling each pixel of the array to be sensitive to single photons.

History

The first device which used a scintillator was built in 1903 by Sir William Crookes and used a ZnS screen.The scintillations produced by the screen were visible to the naked eye if viewed by a microscope in a darkened room; the device was known as a spinthariscope. The technique led to a number of important discoveries. Scintillators gained additional attention in 1944, when Curran and Baker replaced the naked eye measurement with the newly developed PMT. This was the birth of the modern scintillation detector.

Applications for scintillators

Scintillators are used by the American government as Homeland Security radiation detectors. Scintillators can also be used in neutron and high energy particle physics experiments, X-ray security, nuclear cameras, computed tomography and gas exploration. Other applications of scintillators include CT scanners and gamma cameras in medical diagnostics, and screens in older style CRT computer monitors and television sets.

The use of a scintillator in conjunction with a photomultiplier tube or a CCD camera finds wide use in hand-held survey meters used for detecting and measuring radioactive contamination and monitoring nuclear material. Scintillators generate light in fluorescent tubes, to convert the ultra-violet of the discharge into visible light. Scintillation detectors are also used in the petroleum industry as detectors for Gamma Ray logs. ( Note small compact fluorescent light bulbs can also be used in an emergency to detect radiation bursts from a nuclear event. They will flash or glow under radiation exposure).

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

 

Plastic scintillators and the CCD camera, cell phone connection.

Plastic scintillators are the most common type of radiation detectors found in everyday CCD video cameras, cell phone cameras and home security cameras. With little or no modification at all they can be used as simple radiation detectors for emergency self protection from nuclear blasts and high background radiation levels or to document nuclear detonations. The combination of the cameras plastic lens and the photoelectric effect produced in the cameras CCD pick up chip (because it is basically a very large array of photo didoes) allows them to act as very good detectors of high level ionizing radiation. Low level radiation in this case is not of concern because it will not immediately kill you or have long term negative health effects.
By simply pointing the camera at an explosive event it will immediately determine if it is nuclear or not. When the cameras CCD pick up chip is overloaded by excess radiation it will pixelize showing white sparkles all over the picture of the fireball or blast image area. If you are looking to protect yourself  from high level ionizing radiation produced by depleted uranium anti tank rounds or after a nuclear blast this will work. For lower level radiation effects usually just putting black electrical tape over the cameras lens is sufficient enough to detect lower radiation levels. Once the background radiation level has drooped off after an explosion. Usually after about 3 hours or more excluding ground zero where levels will remain higher for a longer period of time the  CCD cameras may not be sensitive enough to detect these lower levels of radiation and a better detector will be required. However for emergency use this this process altho crude will work.

If you have an Android or Apple smart phone there are several APPS that will allow you to use your phone as a simple radiation detector/ Geiger counter. Some work better than others and several are actually fake or toy apps so user be ware make sure the APP really works.

 

Types of scintillators

Plastic scintillators

The term “plastic scintillator” typically refers to a scintillating material in which the primary fluorescent emitter, called a fluor, is suspended in the base, a solid polymer matrix. While this combination is typically accomplished through the dissolution of the fluor prior to bulk polymerization, the fluor is sometimes associated with the polymer directly, either covalently or through coordination, as is the case with many Li6 plastic scintillators.

Polyethylene naphthalate has been found to exhibit scintillation by itself without any additives and is expected to replace existing plastic scintillators due to higher performance and lower price.

The advantages of plastic scintillators include fairly high light output and a relatively quick signal, with a decay time of 2–4 nanoseconds, but perhaps the biggest advantage of plastic scintillators is their ability to be shaped, through the use of molds or other means, into almost any desired form with what is often a high degree of durability. Plastic scintillators are known to show light output saturation when the energy density is large ( Birks’ Law).

Bases

The most common bases are the aromatic plastics, polymers with aromatic rings as pendant groups along the polymer backbone, amongst which polyvinyltoluene (PVT) and polystyrene (PS) are the most prominent. While the base does fluoresce in the presence of ionizing radiation, its low yield and negligible transparency to its own emission make the use of fluors necessary in the construction of a practical scintillator.

Aside from the aromatic plastics, the most common base is polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), which carries two advantages over many other bases: high ultraviolet and visible light transparency and mechanical properties and higher durability with respect to brittleness.

The lack of fluorescence associated with PMMA is often compensated through the addition of an aromatic co-solvent, usually naphthalene. A plastic scintillator based on PMMA in this way boasts transparency to its own radiation, helping to ensure uniform collection of light. Other common bases include polyvinyl xylene (PVX) polymethyl, 2,4-dimethyl, 2,4,5-trimethyl styrenes, polyvinyl diphenyl, polyvinyl naphthalene, polyvinyl tetrahydronaphthalene, and copolymers of these and other bases.

Fluors.

Also known as luminophors, these compounds absorb the scintillation of the base and then emit at larger wavelength, effectively converting the ultraviolet radiation of the base into the more easily transferred visible light. Further increasing the attenuation length can be accomplished through the addition of a second fluor, referred to as a spectrum shifter or converter, often resulting in the emission of blue or green light.

Gas.

Gaseous scintillators consist of nitrogen and the noble gases helium, argon, krypton, and xenon, with helium and xenon receiving the most attention. The scintillation process is due to the de-excitation of single atoms excited by the passage of an incoming particle. This de-excitation is very rapid (~1 ns), so the detector response is quite fast.

Coating the walls of the container with a wavelength shifter is generally necessary as those gases typically emit in the ultraviolet and PMTs respond better to the visible blue-green region. In nuclear physics, gaseous detectors have been used to detect fission fragments or heavy charged particles.

Glass.

The most common glass scintillators are cerium-activated lithium or boron silicates. Since both lithium and boron have large neutron cross-sections, glass detectors are particularly well suited to the detection of thermal (slow) neutrons. Lithium is more widely used than boron since it has a greater energy release on capturing a neutron and therefore greater light output.

Glass scintillators are however sensitive to electrons and γ rays as well (pulse height discrimination can be used for particle identification). Being very robust, they are also well-suited to harsh environmental conditions. Their response time is ≈10 ns, their light output is however low, typically ≈30% of that of anthracene.

Response to various radiations

Heavy ions

Scintillation counters are usually not ideal for the detection of heavy ions for three reasons:

  1. the very high ionizing power of heavy ions induces quenching effects which result in a reduced light output (e.g. for equal energies, a proton will produce 1/4 to 1/2 the light of an electron, while alphas will produce only about 1/10 the light;
  2. the high dE/dx also results in a reduction of the fast component relative to the slow component, increasing detector dead-time;
  3. strong non-linearities are observed in the detector response especially at lower energies.

The reduction in light output is stronger for organics than for inorganic crystals. Therefore, where needed, inorganic crystals, e.g. CsI(Tl), ZnS(Ag) (typically used in thin sheets as α-particle monitors), CaF2(Eu), should be preferred to organic materials. Typical applications are α-survey instruments, dosimetry instruments, and heavy ion dE/dx detectors. Gaseous scintillators have also been used in nuclear physics experiments.

Electrons

The detection efficiency for electrons is essentially 100% for most scintillators. But because electrons can make large angle scatterings (sometimes backscatterings), they can exit the detector without depositing their full energy in it. The back-scattering is a rapidly increasing function of the atomic number Z of the scintillator material.

Organic scintillators, having a lower Z than inorganic crystals, are therefore best suited for the detection of low-energy (< 10 MeV) beta particles. The situation is different for high energy electrons: since they mostly lose their energy by bremsstrahlung at the higher energies, a higher-Z material is better suited for the detection of the bremsstrahlung photon and the production of the electromagnetic shower which it can induce.

Gamma rays

High-Z materials, e.g. inorganic crystals, are best suited for the detection of gamma rays. The three basic ways that a gamma ray interacts with matter are: the photoelectric effect, Compton scattering, and pair production. The photon is completely absorbed in photoelectric effect and pair production, while only partial energy is deposited in any given Compton scattering.

The cross section for the photoelectric process is proportional to Z5, that for pair production proportional to Z2, whereas Compton scattering goes roughly asZ. A high-Z material therefore favors the former two processes, enabling the detection of the full energy of the gamma ray.

Neutrons

Since the neutron is not charged it does not interact via the Coulomb force and therefore does not ionize the scintillation material. It must first transfer some or all of its energy via the strong force to a charged atomic nucleus. The positively charged nucleus then produces ionization. Fast neutrons (generally >0.5 MeV) primarily rely on the recoil proton in (n,p) reactions; materials rich in hydrogen, e.g. plastic scintillators, are therefore best suited for their detection.

Slow neutrons rely on nuclear reactions such as the (n,γ) or (n,α) reactions, to produce ionization. Their mean free path is therefore quite large unless the scintillator material contains nuclides having a high cross section for these nuclear reactions such as 6Li or 10B. Materials such as LiI(Eu) or glass silicates are therefore particularly well-suited for the detection of slow (thermal) neutrons.

Jihadists in the Service of Imperialism


Jihadists in the Service of Imperialism

By Thierry Meyssan

zah17767_10204208225667618_1819890931390779576_n

Cheikh Youssouf al-Qaradawi, the Muslim Brotherhood’s star preacher and tele-Coranist on al-Jazeera. He blesses the jihadists in Syria and Iraq, and affirms, deadpan, that if Mohammed was alive today, he would be a NATO ally.

Western governments no longer hide the fact that they’re using jihadists – NATO overthrew Mouamar el-Kadhafi by using al-Qaïda as its only ground forces; Israël displaced the UN Forces to Golan, and replaced them with al-Nosra; the international anti-Daesh Coalition allowed Palmyra to fall in order to cause more problems for Syria. But while we can understand Western interests, we fail to grasp why and how the jihadists can serve Uncle Sam in the name of the Quran.

We often ask ourselves how the Pentagon and the CIA manage to manipulate millions of Muslims and send them off to fight for Uncle Sam’s interests. Of course, it’s true that certain leaders are paid agents, but all jihadists believe that they’re fighting and dying in order to gain access to Paradise. The answer is childishly simple – using the rhetoric of the Muslim Brotherhood as a start, it’s possible to evade human reality and send them to kill anyone you like as long as you wave a red flag at them.

Officially, the Islamic Emirate no longer recognises the authority of Ayman al-Zawahiri, and has therefore left al-Qaïda. Nonetheless, in many places, like the Qalamun mountains, it is still impossible to distinguish between them, since the same jihadists claim allegiance to both flags at once.

Of course, one could argue that this is only a personal quarrel – Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi simply wants to replace the current leader. But while the two organisations have exactly the same practices, they develop very different dialogues.

They share the slogans of the Muslim Brotherhood – « The Quran is our Constitution », « Islam is the solution ». A life of holiness is therefore very simple. It doesn’t really matter if the Creator has made us all intelligent, we must, in all cases, apply the Word of God like a machine. And when the situation is not dealt with in the Book, we should just smash it to pieces. The result is obviously catastrophic, and nowhere have these organisations been able to set up even the beginnings of the perfect society that they hope for.

History demonstrates their differences. From 1979 to 1995, in other words, from the CIA operation in Afghanistan to the Popular Arab and Islamic Congress in Khartoum, Oussama Ben Laden’s mercenaries fought the Soviet Union with public aid from the United States. From 1995 to 2011, in other words, from the Congress in Khartoum to operation « Neptune’s Spear », al-Qaïda took position against « Jews and Crusaders » while continuing its struggle against Russia in Yugoslavia and Chechnya. And since 2011, in other words, since the « Arab Spring », it has supported NATO in Libya and Israël at the Golan frontier. Generally speaking, Western public opinion has not kept up with this evolution. It remains convinced of the danger of a mythical Russian expansionism, persists in blaming the jihadists for the attacks of September 11th, has not realised what happened in Libya and at the Israeli frontier, and maintains the false idea that al-Qaïda is an anti-imperialist terrorist organisation. As for the Arabs, they do not base themselves on facts, but choose, according to the situation, between reality and Western propaganda so as to invent a romantic narrative for themselves.

From its side, the Islamic Emirate is moving away from the Quran and closer to the neo-conservatives. It claims that the main enemies are other Muslims – the Chiites and their allies. It has clearly forgotten the Bosnian episode during which Ben Laden’s Arab Legion were supported both by the United States, Saudi Arabia and Iran. But who are the allies of the Chiites? The Syrian Arab Republic (secular) and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (Sunnite). In other words, the Islamic Emirate is fighting in priority against the Axis of Resistance to imperialism. De facto, it confirms that it is an objective ally of the United States and Israël in the « Greater Middle East », even though, theoretically, they are the enemy.

The malleability of these two organisations resides in their basic ideology, that of the Muslim Brotherhood. It is therefore logical that almost all of the jihadist leaders, at one time or another, have been members of one branch or another of the Brotherhood. By the same token, it is logical that the CIA has not only supported the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, since their reception at the White House by President Eisenhower in 1955, but also all its foreign branches and all the dissident groups. Finally, the califat that Hassan el-Bana dreamed about and that Ayman al-Zawahiri and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi pretended to want, is not the reproduction of the Golden Age of Islam, but the reign of obscurantism.

This was confirmed by Laurent Fabius in 2012, in other words, before the split between al-Qaïda and Daesh, when he declared: « On the ground, they’re doing a good job! »

The Zionist Plan for the Middle East


The Zionist Plan for the Middle East

Translated and edited by Israel Shahak

 

 The Israel of Theodore Herzl (1904)
and of Rabbi Fischmann (1947)

 


In his Complete Diaries, Vol. II. p. 711, Theodore Herzl, the founder of Zionism, says that the area of the Jewish State stretches: “From the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates.”

Rabbi Fischmann, member of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, declared in his testimony to the U.N. Special Committee of Enquiry on 9 July 1947: “The Promised Land extends from the River of Egypt up to the Euphrates, it includes parts of Syria and Lebanon.”


 

From Oded Yinon’s:

“A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties”

Published by the
Association of Arab-American University Graduates, Inc.
Belmont, Massachusetts, 1982
Special Document No. 1
(ISBN 0-937694-56-8)

Publisher’s Note

1

The Association of Arab-American University Graduates finds it compelling to inaugurate its new publication series, Special Documents, with Oded Yinon’s article which appeared in Kivunim (Directions), the journal of the Department of Information of the World Zionist Organization. Oded Yinon is an Israeli journalist and was formerly attached to the Foreign Ministry of Israel. To our knowledge, this document is the most explicit, detailed and unambiguous statement to date of the Zionist strategy in the Middle East. Furthermore, it stands as an accurate representation of the “vision” for the entire Middle East of the presently ruling Zionist regime of Begin, Sharon and Eitan. Its importance, hence, lies not in its historical value but in the nightmare which it presents. 

2

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.

3

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. 

4

The first massive Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1978 bore this plan out to the minutest detail. The second and more barbaric and encompassing Israeli invasion of Lebanon on June 6, 1982, aims to effect certain parts of this plan which hopes to see not only Lebanon, but Syria and Jordan as well, in fragments. This ought to make mockery of Israeli public claims regarding their desire for a strong and independent Lebanese central government. More accurately, they want a Lebanese central government that sanctions their regional imperialist designs by signing a peace treaty with them. They also seek acquiescence in their designs by the Syrian, Iraqi, Jordanian and other Arab governments as well as by the Palestinian people. What they want and what they are planning for is not an Arab world, but a world of Arab fragments that is ready to succumb to Israeli hegemony. Hence, Oded Yinon in his essay, “A Strategy for Israel in the 1980’s,” talks about “far-reaching opportunities for the first time since 1967″ that are created by the “very stormy situation [that] surrounds Israel.”

5

The Zionist policy of displacing the Palestinians from Palestine is very much an active policy, but is pursued more forcefully in times of contlict, such as in the 1947-1948 war and in the 1967 war. An appendix entitled “Israel Talks of a New Exodus” is included in this publication to demonstrate past Zionist dispersals of Palestinians from their homeland and to show, besides the main Zionist document we present, other Zionist planning for the de-Palestinization of Palestine. 

6

It is clear from the Kivunim document, published in February, 1982, that the “far-reaching opportunities” of which Zionist strategists have been thinking are the same “opportunities” of which they are trying to convince the world and which they claim were generated by their June, 1982 invasion. It is also clear that the Palestinians were never the sole target of Zionist plans, but the priority target since their viable and independent presence as a people negates the essence of the Zionist state. Every Arab state, however, especially those with cohesive and clear nationalist directions, is a real target sooner or later.

7

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

1

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: 

2

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. 

3

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. 

4

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.

5

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.

1

At the outset of the nineteen eighties the State of Israel is in need of a new perspective as to its place, its aims and national targets, at home and abroad. This need has become even more vital due to a number of central processes which the country, the region and the world are undergoing. We are living today in the early stages of a new epoch in human history which is not at all similar to its predecessor, and its characteristics are totally different from what we have hitherto known. That is why we need an understanding of the central processes which typify this historical epoch on the one hand, and on the other hand we need a world outlook and an operational strategy in accordance with the new conditions. The existence, prosperity and steadfastness of the Jewish state will depend upon its ability to adopt a new framework for its domestic and foreign affairs. 

2

This epoch is characterized by several traits which we can already diagnose, and which symbolize a genuine revolution in our present lifestyle. The dominant process is the breakdown of the rationalist, humanist outlook as the major cornerstone supporting the life and achievements of Western civilization since the Renaissance. The political, social and economic views which have emanated from this foundation have been based on several “truths” which are presently disappearing–for example, the view that man as an individual is the center of the universe and everything exists in order to fulfill his basic material needs. This position is being invalidated in the present when it has become clear that the amount of resources in the cosmos does not meet Man’s requirements, his economic needs or his demographic constraints. In a world in which there are four billion human beings and economic and energy resources which do not grow proportionally to meet the needs of mankind, it is unrealistic to expect to fulfill the main requirement of Western Society,1 i.e., the wish and aspiration for boundless consumption. The view that ethics plays no part in determining the direction Man takes, but rather his material needs do–that view is becoming prevalent today as we see a world in which nearly all values are disappearing. We are losing the ability to assess the simplest things, especially when they concern the simple question of what is Good and what is Evil. 

3

The vision of man’s limitless aspirations and abilities shrinks in the face of the sad facts of life, when we witness the break-up of world order around us. The view which promises liberty and freedom to mankind seems absurd in light of the sad fact that three fourths of the human race lives under totalitarian regimes. The views concerning equality and social justice have been transformed by socialism and especially by Communism into a laughing stock. There is no argument as to the truth of these two ideas, but it is clear that they have not been put into practice properly and the majority of mankind has lost the liberty, the freedom and the opportunity for equality and justice. In this nuclear world in which we are (still) living in relative peace for thirty years, the concept of peace and coexistence among nations has no meaning when a superpower like the USSR holds a military and political doctrine of the sort it has: that not only is a nuclear war possible and necessary in order to achieve the ends of Marxism, but that it is possible to survive after it, not to speak of the fact that one can be victorious in it.2

4

The essential concepts of human society, especially those of the West, are undergoing a change due to political, military and economic transformations. Thus, the nuclear and conventional might of the USSR has transformed the epoch that has just ended into the last respite before the great saga that will demolish a large part of our world in a multi-dimensional global war, in comparison with which the past world wars will have been mere child’s play. The power of nuclear as well as of conventional weapons, their quantity, their precision and quality will turn most of our world upside down within a few years, and we must align ourselves so as to face that in Israel. That is, then, the main threat to our existence and that of the Western world.3 The war over resources in the world, the Arab monopoly on oil, and the need of the West to import most of its raw materials from the Third World, are transforming the world we know, given that one of the major aims of the USSR is to defeat the West by gaining control over the gigantic resources in the Persian Gulf and in the southern part of Africa, in which the majority of world minerals are located. We can imagine the dimensions of the global confrontation which will face us in the future.

5

The Gorshkov doctrine calls for Soviet control of the oceans and mineral rich areas of the Third World. That together with the present Soviet nuclear doctrine which holds that it is possible to manage, win and survive a nuclear war, in the course of which the West’s military might well be destroyed and its inhabitants made slaves in the service of Marxism-Leninism, is the main danger to world peace and to our own existence. Since 1967, the Soviets have transformed Clausewitz’ dictum into “War is the continuation of policy in nuclear means,” and made it the motto which guides all their policies. Already today they are busy carrying out their aims in our region and throughout the world, and the need to face them becomes the major element in our country’s security policy and of course that of the rest of the Free World. That is our major foreign challenge.4 

6

The Arab Muslim world, therefore, is not the major strategic problem which we shall face in the Eighties, despite the fact that it carries the main threat against Israel, due to its growing military might. This world, 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 in the long run, but only in the short run where its immediate military power has great import. In the long run, this world will be unable to exist within its present framework in the areas around us without having to go through genuine revolutionary changes. The Muslim Arab World is built like a temporary house of cards put together by foreigners (France and Britain in the Nineteen Twenties), without the wishes and desires of the inhabitants having been taken into account. It was arbitrarily divided into 19 states, all made of combinations of minorites and ethnic groups which are hostile to one another, so that every Arab Muslim state nowadays faces ethnic social destruction from within, and in some a civil war is already raging.5 Most of the Arabs, 118 million out of 170 million, live in Africa, mostly in Egypt (45 million today).

7

Apart from Egypt, all the Maghreb states are made up of a mixture of Arabs and non-Arab Berbers. In Algeria there is already a civil war raging in the Kabile mountains between the two nations in the country. Morocco and Algeria are at war with each other over Spanish Sahara, in addition to the internal struggle in each of them. Militant Islam endangers the integrity of Tunisia and Qaddafi organizes wars which are destructive from the Arab point of view, from a country which is sparsely populated and which cannot become a powerful nation. That is why he has been attempting unifications in the past with states that are more genuine, like Egypt and Syria. Sudan, the most torn apart state in the Arab Muslim world today is built upon four groups hostile to each other, an Arab Muslim Sunni minority which rules over a majority of non-Arab Africans, Pagans, and Christians. In Egypt there is a Sunni Muslim majority facing a large minority of Christians which is dominant in upper Egypt: some 7 million of them, so that even Sadat, in his speech on May 8, expressed the fear that they will want a state of their own, something like a “second” Christian Lebanon in Egypt. 

8

All the Arab States east of Israel are torn apart, broken up and riddled with inner conflict even more than those of the Maghreb. Syria is fundamentally no different from Lebanon except in the strong military regime which rules it. But the real civil war taking place nowadays between the Sunni majority and the Shi’ite Alawi ruling minority (a mere 12% of the population) testifies to the severity of the domestic trouble.

9

Iraq is, once again, no different in essence from its neighbors, although its majority is Shi’ite and the ruling minority Sunni. Sixty-five percent of the population has no say in politics, in which an elite of 20 percent holds the power. In addition there is a large Kurdish minority in the north, and if it weren’t for the strength of the ruling regime, the army and the oil revenues, Iraq’s future state would be no different than that of Lebanon in the past or of Syria today. The seeds of inner conflict and civil war are apparent today already, especially after the rise of Khomeini to power in Iran, a leader whom the Shi’ites in Iraq view as their natural leader.

10

All the Gulf principalities and Saudi Arabia are built upon a delicate house of sand in which there is only oil. In Kuwait, the Kuwaitis constitute only a quarter of the population. In Bahrain, the Shi’ites are the majority but are deprived of power. In the UAE, Shi’ites are once again the majority but the Sunnis are in power. The same is true of Oman and North Yemen. Even in the Marxist South Yemen there is a sizable Shi’ite minority. In Saudi Arabia half the population is foreign, Egyptian and Yemenite, but a Saudi minority holds power.

11

Jordan is in reality Palestinian, ruled by a Trans-Jordanian Bedouin minority, but most of the army and certainly the bureaucracy is now Palestinian. As a matter of fact Amman is as Palestinian as Nablus. All of these countries have powerful armies, relatively speaking. But there is a problem there too. The Syrian army today is mostly Sunni with an Alawi officer corps, the Iraqi army Shi’ite with Sunni commanders. This has great significance in the long run, and that is why it will not be possible to retain the loyalty of the army for a long time except where it comes to the only common denominator: The hostility towards Israel, and today even that is insufficient.

12

Alongside the Arabs, split as they are, the other Muslim states share a similar predicament. Half of Iran’s population is comprised of a Persian speaking group and the other half of an ethnically Turkish group. Turkey’s population comprises a Turkish Sunni Muslim majority, some 50%, and two large minorities, 12 million Shi’ite Alawis and 6 million Sunni Kurds. In Afghanistan there are 5 million Shi’ites who constitute one third of the population. In Sunni Pakistan there are 15 million Shi’ites who endanger the existence of that state.

13

This national ethnic minority picture extending from Morocco to India and from Somalia to Turkey points to the absence of stability and a rapid degeneration in the entire region. When this picture is added to the economic one, we see how the entire region is built like a house of cards, unable to withstand its severe problems.

14

In this giant and fractured world there are a few wealthy groups and a huge mass of poor people. Most of the Arabs have an average yearly income of 300 dollars. That is the situation in Egypt, in most of the Maghreb countries except for Libya, and in Iraq. Lebanon is torn apart and its economy is falling to pieces. It is a state in which there is no centralized power, but only 5 de facto sovereign authorities (Christian in the north, supported by the Syrians and under the rule of the Franjieh clan, in the East an area of direct Syrian conquest, in the center a Phalangist controlled Christian enclave, in the south and up to the Litani river a mostly Palestinian region controlled by the PLO and Major Haddad’s state of Christians and half a million Shi’ites). Syria is in an even graver situation and even the assistance she will obtain in the future after the unification with Libya will not be sufficient for dealing with the basic problems of existence and the maintenance of a large army. Egypt is in the worst situation: Millions are on the verge of hunger, half the labor force is unemployed, and housing is scarce in this most densely populated area of the world. Except for the army, there is not a single department operating efficiently and the state is in a permanent state of bankruptcy and depends entirely on American foreign assistance granted since the peace.6 

15

In the Gulf states, Saudi Arabia, Libya and Egypt there is the largest accumulation of money and oil in the world, but those enjoying it are tiny elites who lack a wide base of support and self-confidence, something that no army can guarantee.7 The Saudi army with all its equipment cannot defend the regime from real dangers at home or abroad, and what took place in Mecca in 1980 is only an example. A sad and very stormy situation surrounds Israel and creates challenges for it, problems, risks but also far-reaching opportunities for the first time since 1967. Chances are that opportunities missed at that time will become achievable in the Eighties to an extent and along dimensions which we cannot even imagine today.

16

The “peace” policy and the return of territories, through a dependence upon the US, precludes the realization of the new option created for us. Since 1967, all the governments of Israel have tied our national aims down to narrow political needs, on the one hand, and on the other to destructive opinions at home which neutralized our capacities both at home and abroad. Failing to take steps towards the Arab population in the new territories, acquired in the course of a war forced upon us, is the major strategic error committed by Israel on the morning after the Six Day War. We could have saved ourselves all the bitter and dangerous conflict since then if we had given Jordan to the Palestinians who live west of the Jordan river. By doing that we would have neutralized the Palestinian problem which we nowadays face, and to which we have found solutions that are really no solutions at all, such as territorial compromise or autonomy which amount, in fact, to the same thing.8 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. 

17

In the course of the Nineteen Eighties, the State of Israel will have to go through far-reaching changes in its political and economic regime domestically, along with radical changes in its foreign policy, in order to stand up to the global and regional challenges of this new epoch. The loss of the Suez Canal oil fields, of the immense potential of the oil, gas and other natural resources in the Sinai peninsula which is geomorphologically identical to the rich oil-producing countries in the region, will result in an energy drain in the near future and will destroy our domestic economy: one quarter of our present GNP as well as one third of the budget is used for the purchase of oil.9 The search for raw materials in the Negev and on the coast will not, in the near future, serve to alter that state of affairs. 

18

(Regaining) the Sinai peninsula with its present and potential resources is therefore a political priority which is obstructed by the Camp David and the peace agreements. The fault for that lies of course with the present Israeli government and the governments which paved the road to the policy of territorial compromise, the Alignment governments since 1967. The Egyptians will not need to keep the peace treaty after the return of the Sinai, and they will do all they can to return to the fold of the Arab world and to the USSR in order to gain support and military assistance. American aid is guaranteed only for a short while, for the terms of the peace and the weakening of the U.S. both at home and abroad will bring about a reduction in aid. Without oil and the income from it, with the present enormous expenditure, we will not be able to get through 1982 under the present conditions and we will have to act in order to return the situation to the status quo which existed in Sinai prior to Sadat’s visit and the mistaken peace agreement signed with him in March 1979.10 

19

Israel has two major routes through which to realize this purpose, one direct and the other indirect. The direct option is the less realistic one because of the nature of the regime and government in Israel as well as the wisdom of Sadat who obtained our withdrawal from Sinai, which was, next to the war of 1973, his major achievement since he took power. Israel will not unilaterally break the treaty, neither today, nor in 1982, unless it is very hard pressed economically and politically and Egypt provides Israel with the excuse to take the Sinai back into our hands for the fourth time in our short history. What is left therefore, is the indirect option. The economic situation in Egypt, the nature of the regime and its pan-Arab policy, will bring about a situation after April 1982 in which Israel will be forced to act directly or indirectly in order to regain control over Sinai as a strategic, economic and energy reserve for the long run. Egypt does not constitute a military strategic problem due to its internal conflicts and it could be driven back to the post 1967 war situation in no more than one day.11

20

The myth of Egypt as the strong leader of the Arab World was demolished back in 1956 and definitely did not survive 1967, but our policy, as in the return of the Sinai, served to turn the myth into “fact.” In reality, however, Egypt’s power in proportion both to Israel alone and to the rest of the Arab World has gone down about 50 percent since 1967. Egypt is no longer the leading political power in the Arab World and is economically on the verge of a crisis. Without foreign assistance the crisis will come tomorrow.12 In the short run, due to the return of the Sinai, Egypt will gain several advantages at our expense, but only in the short run until 1982, and that will not change the balance of power to its benefit, and will possibly bring about its downfall. Egypt, in its present domestic political picture, is already a corpse, all the more so if we take into account the growing Moslem-Christian rift. Breaking Egypt down territorially into distinct geographical regions is the political aim of Israel in the Nineteen Eighties on its Western front

21

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.15 

24

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.16

25

Jordan constitutes an immediate strategic target in the short run but not in the long run, for it does not constitute a real threat in the long run after its dissolution, the termination of the lengthy rule of King Hussein and the transfer of power to the Palestinians in the short run. 

26

There is no chance that Jordan will continue to exist in its present structure for a long time, and Israel’s policy, both in war and in peace, ought to be directed at the liquidation of Jordan under the present regime and the transfer of power to the Palestinian majority. Changing the regime east of the river will also cause the termination of the problem of the territories densely populated with Arabs west of the Jordan. Whether in war or under conditions of peace, emigrationfrom the territories and economic demographic freeze in them, are the guarantees for the coming change on both banks of the river, and we ought to be active in order to accelerate this process in the nearest future. The autonomy plan ought also to be rejected, as well as any compromise or division of the territories for, given the plans of the PLO and those of the Israeli Arabs themselves, the Shefa’amr plan of September 1980, it is not possible to go on living in this country in the present situation without separating the two nations, the Arabs to Jordan and the Jews to the areas west of the river. Genuine coexistence and peace will reign over the land only when the Arabs understand that without Jewish rule between the Jordan and the sea they will have neither existence nor security. A nation of their own and security will be theirs only in Jordan.17

27

Within Israel the distinction between the areas of ’67 and the territories beyond them, those of ’48, has always been meaningless for Arabs and nowadays no longer has any significance for us. The problem should be seen in its entirety without any divisions as of ’67. It should be clear, under any future political situation or mifitary constellation, that the solution of the problem of the indigenous Arabs will come only when they recognize the existence of Israel in secure borders up to the Jordan river and beyond it, as our existential need in this difficult epoch, the nuclear epoch which we shall soon enter. It is no longer possible to live with three fourths of the Jewish population on the dense shoreline which is so dangerous in a nuclear epoch.

28

Dispersal of the population is therefore a domestic strategic aim of the highest order; otherwise, we shall cease to exist within any borders. Judea, Samaria and the Galilee are our sole guarantee for national existence, and if we do not become the majority in the mountain areas, we shall not rule in the country and we shall be like the Crusaders, who lost this country which was not theirs anyhow, and in which they were foreigners to begin with. Rebalancing the country demographically, strategically and economically is the highest and most central aim today. Taking hold of the mountain watershed from Beersheba to the Upper Galilee is the national aim generated by the major strategic consideration which is settling the mountainous part of the country that is empty of Jews today.l8

29

Realizing our aims on the Eastern front depends first on the realization of this internal strategic objective. The transformation of the political and economic structure, so as to enable the realization of these strategic aims, is the key to achieving the entire change. We need to change from a centralized economy in which the government is extensively involved, to an open and free market as well as to switch from depending upon the U.S. taxpayer to developing, with our own hands, of a genuine productive economic infrastructure. If we are not able to make this change freely and voluntarily, we shall be forced into it by world developments, especially in the areas of economics, energy, and politics, and by our own growing isolation.l9

30

From a military and strategic point of view, the West led by the U.S. is unable to withstand the global pressures of the USSR throughout the world, and Israel must therefore stand alone in the Eighties, without any foreign assistance, military or economic, and this is within our capacities today, with no compromises.20 Rapid changes in the world will also bring about a change in the condition of world Jewry to which Israel will become not only a last resort but the only existential option. We cannot assume that U.S. Jews, and the communities of Europe and Latin America will continue to exist in the present form in the future.21

31

Our existence in this country itself is certain, and there is no force that could remove us from here either forcefully or by treachery (Sadat’s method). Despite the difficulties of the mistaken “peace” policy and the problem of the Israeli Arabs and those of the territories, we can effectively deal with these problems in the foreseeable future.


Conclusions – by Israel Shahak

1

Three important points have to be clarified in order to be able to understand the significant possibilities of realization of this Zionist plan for the Middle East, and also why it had to be published. 

2

The Military Background of The Plan

The military conditions of this plan have not been mentioned above, but on the many occasions where something very like it is being “explained” in closed meetings to members of the Israeli Establishment, this point is clarified. It is assumed that the Israeli military forces, in all their branches, are insufficient for the actual work of occupation of such wide territories as discussed above. In fact, even in times of intense Palestinian “unrest” on the West Bank, the forces of the Israeli Army are stretched out too much. The answer to that is the method of ruling by means of “Haddad forces” or of “Village Associations” (also known as “Village Leagues”): local forces under “leaders” completely dissociated from the population, not having even any feudal or party structure (such as the Phalangists have, for example). The “states” proposed by Yinon are “Haddadland” and “Village Associations,” and their armed forces will be, no doubt, quite similar. In addition, Israeli military superiority in such a situation will be much greater than it is even now, so that any movement of revolt will be “punished” either by mass humiliation as in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, or by bombardment and obliteration of cities, as in Lebanon now (June 1982), or by both. In order to ensure this, the plan, as explained orally, calls for the establishment of Israeli garrisons in focal places between the mini states, equipped with the necessary mobile destructive forces. In fact, we have seen something like this in Haddadland and we will almost certainly soon see the first example of this system functioning either in South Lebanon or in all Lebanon.

3

It is obvious that the above military assumptions, and the whole plan too, depend also on the Arabs continuing to be even more divided than they are now, and on the lack of any truly progressive mass movement among them. It may be that those two conditions will be removed only when the plan will be well advanced, with consequences which can not be foreseen.

4

Why it is necessary to publish this in Israel?

The reason for publication is the dual nature of the Israeli-Jewish society: A very great measure of freedom and democracy, specially for Jews, combined with expansionism and racist discrimination. In such a situation the Israeli-Jewish elite (for the masses follow the TV and Begin’s speeches) has to be persuaded. The first steps in the process of persuasion are oral, as indicated above, but a time comes in which it becomes inconvenient. Written material must be produced for the benefit of the more stupid “persuaders” and “explainers” (for example medium-rank officers, who are, usually, remarkably stupid). They then “learn it,” more or less, and preach to others. It should be remarked that Israel, and even the Yishuv from the Twenties, has always functioned in this way. I myself well remember how (before I was “in opposition”) the necessity of war with was explained to me and others a year before the 1956 war, and the necessity of conquering “the rest of Western Palestine when we will have the opportunity” was explained in the years 1965-67.

5

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. A good example is the very persistent belief in the non-existent writing on the wall of the Knesset of the Biblical verse about the Nile and the Euphrates. Another example is the persistent, and completely false declarations, which were made by some of the most important Arab leaders, that the two blue stripes of the Israeli flag symbolize the Nile and the Euphrates, while in fact they are taken from the stripes of the Jewish praying shawl (Talit). The Israeli specialists assume that, on the whole, the Arabs will pay no attention to their serious discussions of the future, and the Lebanon war has proved them right. So why should they not continue with their old methods of persuading other Israelis?

6

In the United States a very similar situation exists, at least until now. The more or less serious commentators take their information about Israel, and much of their opinions about it, from two sources. The first is from articles in the “liberal” American press, written almost totally by Jewish admirers of Israel who, even if they are critical of some aspects of the Israeli state, practice loyally what Stalin used to call “the constructive criticism.” (In fact those among them who claim also to be “Anti-Stalinist” are in reality more Stalinist than Stalin, with Israel being their god which has not yet failed). In the framework of such critical worship it must be assumed that Israel has always “good intentions” and only “makes mistakes,” and therefore such a plan would not be a matter for discussion–exactly as the Biblical genocides committed by Jews are not mentioned. The other source of information, The Jerusalem Post, has similar policies. So long, therefore, as the situation exists in which Israel is really a “closed society” to the rest of the world, because the world wants to close its eyes, the publication and even the beginning of the realization of such a plan is realistic and feasible.

Israel Shahak
June 17, 1982
Jerusalem

Notes

1. American Universities Field Staff. Report No.33, 1979. According to this research, the population of the world will be 6 billion in the year 2000. Today’s world population can be broken down as follows: China, 958 million; India, 635 million; USSR, 261 million; U.S., 218 million Indonesia, 140 million; Brazil and Japan, 110 million each. According to the figures of the U.N. Population Fund for 1980, there will be, in 2000, 50 cities with a population of over 5 million each. The population ofthp;Third World will then be 80% of the world population. According to Justin Blackwelder, U.S. Census Office chief, the world population will not reach 6 billion because of hunger.

2. Soviet nuclear policy has been well summarized by two American Sovietologists: Joseph D. Douglas and Amoretta M. Hoeber, Soviet Strategy for Nuclear War, (Stanford, Ca., Hoover Inst. Press, 1979). In the Soviet Union tens and hundreds of articles and books are published each year which detail the Soviet doctrine for nuclear war and there is a great deal of documentation translated into English and published by the U.S. Air Force,including USAF: Marxism-Leninism on War and the Army: The Soviet View, Moscow, 1972; USAF: The Armed Forces of the Soviet State. Moscow, 1975, by Marshal A. Grechko. The basic Soviet approach to the matter is presented in the book by Marshal Sokolovski published in 1962 in Moscow: Marshal V. D. Sokolovski, Military Strategy, Soviet Doctrine and Concepts(New York, Praeger, 1963).

3. A picture of Soviet intentions in various areas of the world can be drawn from the book by Douglas and Hoeber, ibid. For additional material see: Michael Morgan, “USSR’s Minerals as Strategic Weapon in the Future,” Defense and Foreign Affairs, Washington, D.C., Dec. 1979.

4. Admiral of the Fleet Sergei Gorshkov, Sea Power and the State, London, 1979. Morgan, loc. cit. General George S. Brown (USAF) C-JCS, Statement to the Congress on the Defense Posture of the United States For Fiscal Year 1979, p. 103; National Security Council, Review of Non-Fuel Mineral Policy, (Washington, D.C. 1979,); Drew Middleton, The New York Times, (9/15/79); Time, 9/21/80.

5. Elie Kedourie, “The End of the Ottoman Empire,” Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 3, No.4, 1968.

6. Al-Thawra, Syria 12/20/79, Al-Ahram,12/30/79, Al Ba’ath, Syria, 5/6/79. 55% of the Arabs are 20 years old and younger, 70% of the Arabs live in Africa, 55% of the Arabs under 15 are unemployed, 33% live in urban areas, Oded Yinon, “Egypt’s Population Problem,” The Jerusalem Quarterly, No. 15, Spring 1980.

7. E. Kanovsky, “Arab Haves and Have Nots,” The Jerusalem Quarterly, No.1, Fall 1976, Al Ba’ath, Syria, 5/6/79.

8. In his book, former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin said that the Israeli government is in fact responsible for the design of American policy in the Middle East, after June ’67, because of its own indecisiveness as to the future of the territories and the inconsistency in its positions since it established the background for Resolution 242 and certainly twelve years later for the Camp David agreements and the peace treaty with Egypt. According to Rabin, on June 19, 1967, President Johnson sent a letter to Prime Minister Eshkol in which he did not mention anything about withdrawal from the new territories but exactly on the same day the government resolved to return territories in exchange for peace. After the Arab resolutions in Khartoum (9/1/67) the government altered its position but contrary to its decision of June 19, did not notify the U.S. of the alteration and the U.S. continued to support 242 in the Security Council on the basis of its earlier understanding that Israel is prepared to return territories. At that point it was already too late to change the U.S. position and Israel’s policy. From here the way was opened to peace agreements on the basis of 242 as was later agreed upon in Camp David. See Yitzhak Rabin. Pinkas Sherut, (Ma’ariv 1979) pp. 226-227.

9. Foreign and Defense Committee Chairman Prof. Moshe Arens argued in an interview (Ma ‘ariv,10/3/80) that the Israeli government failed to prepare an economic plan before the Camp David agreements and was itself surprised by the cost of the agreements, although already during the negotiations it was possible to calculate the heavy price and the serious error involved in not having prepared the economic grounds for peace.

The former Minister of Treasury, Mr. Yigal Holwitz, stated that if it were not for the withdrawal from the oil fields, Israel would have a positive balance of payments (9/17/80). That same person said two years earlier that the government of Israel (from which he withdrew) had placed a noose around his neck. He was referring to the Camp David agreements (Ha’aretz, 11/3/78). In the course of the whole peace negotiations neither an expert nor an economics advisor was consulted, and the Prime Minister himself, who lacks knowledge and expertise in economics, in a mistaken initiative, asked the U.S. to give us a loan rather than a grant, due to his wish to maintain our respect and the respect of the U.S. towards us. See Ha’aretz1/5/79. Jerusalem Post, 9/7/79. Prof Asaf Razin, formerly a senior consultant in the Treasury, strongly criticized the conduct of the negotiations; Ha’aretz, 5/5/79. Ma’ariv, 9/7/79. As to matters concerning the oil fields and Israel’s energy crisis, see the interview with Mr. Eitan Eisenberg, a government advisor on these matters, Ma’arive Weekly, 12/12/78. The Energy Minister, who personally signed the Camp David agreements and the evacuation of Sdeh Alma, has since emphasized the seriousness of our condition from the point of view of oil supplies more than once…see Yediot Ahronot, 7/20/79. Energy Minister Modai even admitted that the government did not consult him at all on the subject of oil during the Camp David and Blair House negotiations. Ha’aretz, 8/22/79.

10. Many sources report on the growth of the armaments budget in Egypt and on intentions to give the army preference in a peace epoch budget over domestic needs for which a peace was allegedly obtained. See former Prime Minister Mamduh Salam in an interview 12/18/77, Treasury Minister Abd El Sayeh in an interview 7/25/78, and the paper Al Akhbar, 12/2/78 which clearly stressed that the military budget will receive first priority, despite the peace. This is what former Prime Minister Mustafa Khalil has stated in his cabinet’s programmatic document which was presented to Parliament, 11/25/78. See English translation, ICA, FBIS, Nov. 27. 1978, pp. D 1-10. According to these sources, Egypt’s military budget increased by 10% between fiscal 1977 and 1978, and the process still goes on. A Saudi source divulged that the Egyptians plan to increase their militmy budget by 100% in the next two years; Ha’aretz, 2/12/79 and Jerusalem Post, 1/14/79.

11. Most of the economic estimates threw doubt on Egypt’s ability to reconstruct its economy by 1982. See Economic Intelligence Unit, 1978 Supplement, “The Arab Republic of Egypt”; E. Kanovsky, “Recent Economic Developments in the Middle East,” Occasional Papers, The Shiloah Institution, June 1977; Kanovsky, “The Egyptian Economy Since the Mid-Sixties, The Micro Sectors,” Occasional Papers, June 1978; Robert McNamara, President of World Bank, as reported in Times, London, 1/24/78.

12. See the comparison made by the researeh of the Institute for Strategic Studies in London, and research camed out in the Center for Strategic Studies of Tel Aviv University, as well as the research by the British scientist, Denis Champlin, Military Review, Nov. 1979, ISS: The Military Balance 1979-1980, CSS; Security Arrangements in Sinai…by Brig. Gen. (Res.) A Shalev, No. 3.0 CSS; The Military Balance and the Military Options after the Peace Treaty with Egypt, by Brig. Gen. (Res.) Y. Raviv, No.4, Dec. 1978, as well as many press reports including El Hawadeth, London, 3/7/80; El Watan El Arabi, Paris, 12/14/79.

13. As for religious ferment in Egypt and the relations between Copts and Moslems see the series of articles published in the Kuwaiti paper, El Qabas, 9/15/80. The English author Irene Beeson reports on the rift between Moslems and Copts, see: Irene Beeson, Guardian, London, 6/24/80, and Desmond Stewart, Middle East Internmational, London 6/6/80. For other reports see Pamela Ann Smith, Guardian, London, 12/24/79; The Christian Science Monitor 12/27/79 as well as Al Dustour, London, 10/15/79; El Kefah El Arabi, 10/15/79.

14. Arab Press Service, Beirut, 8/6-13/80. The New Republic, 8/16/80, Der Spiegel as cited by Ha’aretz, 3/21/80, and 4/30-5/5/80; The Economist, 3/22/80; Robert Fisk, Times, London, 3/26/80; Ellsworth Jones, Sunday Times, 3/30/80.

15. J.P. Peroncell Hugoz, Le Monde, Paris 4/28/80; Dr. Abbas Kelidar, Middle East Review, Summer 1979; Conflict Studies, ISS, July 1975; Andreas Kolschitter, Der Zeit, (Ha’aretz, 9/21/79) Economist Foreign Report, 10/10/79, Afro-Asian Affairs, London, July 1979.

16. Arnold Hottinger, “The Rich Arab States in Trouble,” The New York Review of Books, 5/15/80; Arab Press Service, Beirut, 6/25-7/2/80; U.S. News and World Report, 11/5/79 as well as El Ahram, 11/9/79; El Nahar El Arabi Wal Duwali, Paris 9/7/79; El Hawadeth, 11/9/79; David Hakham, Monthly Review, IDF, Jan.-Feb. 79.

17. As for Jordan’s policies and problems see El Nahar El Arabi Wal Duwali, 4/30/79, 7/2/79; Prof. Elie Kedouri, Ma’ariv 6/8/79; Prof. Tanter, Davar 7/12/79; A. Safdi, Jerusalem Post, 5/31/79; El Watan El Arabi 11/28/79; El Qabas, 11/19/79. As for PLO positions see: The resolutions of the Fatah Fourth Congress, Damascus, August 1980. The Shefa’amr program of the Israeli Arabs was published in Ha’aretz, 9/24/80, and by Arab Press Report 6/18/80. For facts and figures on immigration of Arabs to Jordan, see Amos Ben Vered, Ha’aretz, 2/16/77; Yossef Zuriel, Ma’ariv 1/12/80. As to the PLO’s position towards Israel see Shlomo Gazit, Monthly Review; July 1980; Hani El Hasan in an interview, Al Rai Al’Am, Kuwait 4/15/80; Avi Plaskov, “The Palestinian Problem,” Survival, ISS, London Jan. Feb. 78; David Gutrnann, “The Palestinian Myth,” Commentary, Oct. 75; Bernard Lewis, “The Palestinians and the PLO,” Commentary Jan. 75; Monday Morning, Beirut, 8/18-21/80; Journal of Palestine Studies, Winter 1980.

18. Prof. Yuval Neeman, “Samaria–The Basis for Israel’s Security,” Ma’arakhot 272-273, May/June 1980; Ya’akov Hasdai, “Peace, the Way and the Right to Know,” Dvar Hashavua, 2/23/80. Aharon Yariv, “Strategic Depth–An Israeli Perspective,” Ma’arakhot 270-271, October 1979; Yitzhak Rabin, “Israel’s Defense Problems in the Eighties,” Ma’arakhot October 1979.

19. Ezra Zohar, In the Regime’s Pliers (Shikmona, 1974); Motti Heinrich, Do We have a Chance Israel, Truth Versus Legend (Reshafim, 1981).

20. Henry Kissinger, “The Lessons of the Past,” The Washington Review Vol 1, Jan. 1978; Arthur Ross, “OPEC’s Challenge to the West,” The Washington Quarterly, Winter, 1980; Walter Levy, “Oil and the Decline of the West,” Foreign Affairs, Summer 1980; Special Report–“Our Armed Forees-Ready or Not?” U.S. News and World Report 10/10/77; Stanley Hoffman, “Reflections on the Present Danger,” The New York Review of Books 3/6/80; Time 4/3/80; Leopold Lavedez “The illusions of SALT” Commentary Sept. 79; Norman Podhoretz, “The Present Danger,” Commentary March 1980; Robert Tucker, “Oil and American Power Six Years Later,” Commentary Sept. 1979; Norman Podhoretz, “The Abandonment of Israel,” Commentary July 1976; Elie Kedourie, “Misreading the Middle East,” Commentary July 1979.

21. According to figures published by Ya’akov Karoz, Yediot Ahronot, 10/17/80, the sum total of anti-Semitic incidents recorded in the world in 1979 was double the amount recorded in 1978. In Germany, France, and Britain the number of anti-Semitic incidents was many times greater in that year. In the U.S. as well there has been a sharp increase in anti-Semitic incidents which were reported in that article. For the new anti-Semitism, see L. Talmon, “The New Anti-Semitism,” The New Republic, 9/18/1976; Barbara Tuchman, “They poisoned the Wells,” Newsweek 2/3/75.

Putin’s opposition to the Cabal’s “unipolar world” Code name for NWO is now not only obvious: but more than likely credible.


Putin’s opposition to the Cabal’s “unipolar world” Code name for NWO is now not only obvious: but more than likely credible.

 

The illuminated Cabal are desperate to start a world war, not only to white wash their scams worldwide so that Wall Street can keep the $40 trillion they stole from us and steal another $20 trillion or more on the Day the Dollar Dies but it’s also to try and stop the public from ever finding out about our true history that has suffered 2,000 years of corruption.
Putin’s opposition to the Cabal’s “unipolar world” Code name for NWO is now not only obvious: but more than likely credible.
Russia is under constant attack by the globalists who wish to exploit internal divisions to destabilize Russia and install a Zionist lap dog leader like they have in so many places as was the case with Ukraine.
On the 17 of July 2014 Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 was either shot down or blown up
Close to the border of Ukraine and Russia.
There are now strong speculations that an assassination attempt on Putin’s life was connected to the bringing down of flight 17:
Vladimir Putin was going to travel to South America for the last game of the World Cup and for the Bric’s Conference in Brazil which is a direct attack on the Rothschild-headed Global Banking Cartel’s power over the global economy and financial system.
According to Russia’s Interfax News Agency, the Presidential State Aircraft IL-96 and a similar sized Boeing 777 (Flight MH17) were traveling along the same route over Poland on the way back from South America.
Putin’s plane and the Malaysian Boeing intersected at the same point and the same echelon. That was close to Warsaw on 330-m echelon at the height of 10,100 meters. “The contours of the aircrafts are similar, linear dimensions are also very similar, as for the colouring, at a quite remote distance they are almost identical”,
But taking the Russian State Aircraft down presented a number of problems. If it were downed over the open ocean, fingers would point at America as the superpower capable of global military action. Host nations did provide considerable security to Putin and his aircraft while he was in their nations and airspace. What better place to attack the IL-96 than over Russian airspace near the Ukraine, shortly after it had left Polish airspace.
As I have mentioned earlier in part one, The Russians have recently developed a new stealth technology or should I say re- development of stealth technology thousands of years old.
Yes you heard correctly thousands of years old.
Russian engineers devised a way to ‘stealth’ existing non-stealthy aircraft using a plasma system. This system has no doubt been copied by various western powers.
However, no such system is perfect and highly advanced electronic systems can usually detect a stealth aircraft.
They are now working on the black hole project in which the aircraft will disappear completely.
ECM stands for “electronic counter measures”.
The Presidential Russian ECM aircraft can spoof things by turning off or changing its ID squawking and a nearby large aircraft, the Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777 Flight MH17 was spoofed to cover its normal ID code and replace it with the IL-96 code, that probably led to the deaths of 295 people on Malaysian Airlines Flight.
The Russians at this stage have no advantage to ‘outing’ the true story.
Another conspiracy going around is that the plane was filled up with dead bodies due to the composing of body parts.
Let me tell you if a plane explodes at 33,000 feet and people are plunging down at that altitude they would turn blue and look bloated from the freezing temperatures and the impact.
Interesting to note Malaysian high court finds Israel guilty of war crimes against humanity.
The US/Zionist/Globalist supported and funded coup against the elected Ukraine government and the resulting conflict was a calculated effort to draw Russia into a war over the Ukraine and thereby tie it down in order to allow Netanyahu a free hand to create his long-sought General Middle East War. Putin has proven to be a brilliant strategist and not easy to trap.
Now once again the world wide Cabal owned media has put the blame on Putin as the bogey man.

PART TWO