Sunday, December 17, 2006 10:22:43 AM
Sunday, December 17, 2006
The Hidden Truth About The Pope's Middle East Crusade
Greg Szymanski, Dec 15, 2006
Sunday, December 17, 2006 10:22:43 AM
Unknown Israeli author tells
you everything you wanted to know about the war but
were never told.
uthor of Vatican Assassins Eric Phelps has always tried
to find the truth and speak from the heart, his meticulous
research uncovering the purposely hidden Vatican and Jesuit
Order's duplicitous role as the real spiritual controllers of
the New World Order.
Concerning the Middle East conflict, he doesn't miss words or
pull any punches either, recently uncovering "the greatest
analysis of the war I have ever read."
"Written by an unknown Israeli," said Phelps, "it is a must read
for anyone who wants to know the real truth behind the Pope's
war. Added to the fact that the Black Pope controls the US via
the Council on Foreign Relations, and controls Britain via the
Royal Institute of International Affairs, we now know the source
and purpose for the continuing conflict.
Eric Jon Phelps
"The leaders of both sides are minions of the Jesuit General. (
For example, previously Arafat has had EIGHT MEETINGS with Pope
John Paul II since the Oslo Accord.) Those who do not "play
ball" - like Anwar Sadat of Egypt, King Fiesal of Iraq and
Yitzak Rabin of Israel are eliminated through the Black Pope's
unified International Intelligence Community. That Community
is directly controlled, organized and overseen by the Pope's
Crusaders, the Sovereign Military Order of Malta.
"Notice that the mentor and immediate master of Ariel Sharon is
none other than CFR Henry Kissinger. Masonic Kissinger, the
intimate associate of Knight of Malta Alexander Haig, Jr., is
without question a Jesuit Temporal Coadjutor, as the Order began
to admit the Pope's "Court Jews" to the Company in 1946 - about
the time of the stoking of the Middle East conflict.
Pope Benedict XVI
"Further, it has been learned that the former head of NATO and
key figure in the governing of the Pope's Zionist government of
Israel is a Franciscan priest - Javier Solana - the intimate
friend of the "King of Jerusalem," King Juan Carlos of Spain,
whose immediate master is the Grandmaster of the SMOM, Fra
"Further, the reason why the Order has used the Federal Reserve
Bank's American Military Industrial Complex to arm every Arab
nation in the Middle East is not to destroy the Pope's
Zionist-controlled Israel, remembering that sixty percent of all
the land in Jerusalem is owned by the Vatican - including the
Temple Mount. The purpose is to be able to use these arms
against the present American/British-led Papal Crusade having
been planned over thirty years ago, prior to the deliberately
faulty construction of the WTC (the "X" bracing being only
bolted and not welded to the buildings) back in the 1980s. It
was Cardinal Cooke's Knight of Malta and director of the CIA's
counterintelligence branch manning both "the Israeli desk" and
"the Vatican desk" within the Agency, James "Jesus" Angleton,
who advocated a "Crusade" against the Moslem peoples way back in
the mid 1970s."
According to a reviewer the
writings of the unknown Israeli are "a truly objective analysis
of this subject, without the baggage Jews and Arabs have been
fed via their national leaderships, reveals that the Middle East
conflict would have ended decades ago had foreigners not kept it
alive. The continuation of the conflict serves their interests-
i.e., oil supplies, recycling petrodollars, or multi-billion
dollar weapons sales. The Palestinian-Israeli "situation" is
thus merely a fig leaf for the FE, allowing their other agendas
can be pursued undetected.
We need to devise a solution
based on the actual cause for the continuation of the conflict,
and not accept solutions presented via the mainstream media.
Peter-Hans Kolvenbach (The Black Pope)
The hatred between the two
peoples doesn't come from the hearts of Middle Eastern Arabs and
Jews; it is created and stoked from abroad. Arabs and Jews must
see through the propaganda and understand that this conflict is
being created for them. Every time it looks like it is coming to
an end, foreigners breathe new life into it by insisting that
they have a "new peace initiative" which they claim will bring
peace. It never does.
The FE's intervention in the
affairs of the Middle East has been a tragedy for the Arab
peoples - socially, economically, and politically. Arabs and
Jews of the Middle East need to admit that they are both victims
of the foreigners. By working together, they can remove the
cancer of foreign intervention that keeps the conflict alive.
The following are the first two
chapters of a collection of observations compiled to help Jews
and Arabs understand why the Middle East conflict continues to
fester. The intention of the writer is to promote the
realization that these two peoples are not each other's worst
enemy; a third player, the Foreign Elite (FE), is why the Middle
East remains unstable.
The core and essence of the Middle East conflict
For more than 75 years, western diplomats have been coming up
with "peace initiatives" to solve the Arab - Israeli conflict.
Yet they always fail.
Why? What keeps the Middle East conflict going?
If we are going to devise a solution, we must first understand
why the conflict continues to exist. To do this, we have to view
the situation from the top down, rather than from the bottom up.
Granted, this is completely opposite to the way most Jews and
Arabs have been conditioned to look at "the situation." Jews
focus on the damage Arab/Palestinians cause, and believe that
damage to be the cause of the conflict, when it is really only a
result of it. They view the conflict and its origins from the
bottom up. Arabs/Palestinians concentrate on the damage Israel
causes and believe this to be the cause of the conflict, when it
is really only a result of it. They too relate to the situation
from the bottom up.
To understand what really causes the Middle East conflict to
continue, one must look at the issue from the top down.
To get a more accurate picture of what lies behind the continued
existence of the conflict, let's acknowledge these five factors
which serve to perpetuate - rather than solve - the problem:
1)The vested interests of the Foreign Elite (FE): There is a
"third entity" in the conflict in addition to the Israelis and
the Arabs: the foreigners (in order of importance, the US,
Britain, China, France, Germany). Without them, there would be
no Middle East conflict because it is the foreign influence that
keeps the "situation" from being resolved. Unfortunately, both
Palestinian Arabs and Israeli Jews believe they are each other's
worst enemy - without considering the third element - the
foreigners - that is the enemy of both. The thing that Arabs and
Jews have most in common is this common enemy, yet the leaders
on both sides (not being legitimate or independent) tell their
people that the other side is their number one enemy. Hence the
2)Control of Middle East oil: The foreigners interfere in the
Arab-Israeli conflict in order to exploit and control the vast
petroleum resources in the region. If there were no oil, there
would be no petrodollars to recycle; the foreigners would have
no reason to dominate the region.
3) Weapons sales: If there was a worldwide ban on arms sales to
the Middle East, there would be no more "radical Arab dictators"
with modern arms. If the foreigners stopped selling advanced
weaponry to nations of the Middle East, the conflict would end.
4)The mainstream media: If the mainstream media in the West
stopped reporting on the "search for peace in the Middle East,"
peace would soon be found. By keeping the region's "unstable"
image alive, the media, as the sole source of information by
which people can formulate their perceptions, provide an excuse
for the foreigners to interfere, and at the same time serve to
convince everyone that these western nations want peace, despite
the fact that they have been "seeking" it for over 50 years, in
vain. The media never question the intentions or agendas of the
FE. The media thus provide the glue which keeps the conflict
going. Without the mainstream media constantly reporting on the
conflict, there would be peace, as everyone would forget that
the Middle East is "unstable" and thus in need of "stabilizing"
via new "peace initiatives."
5) Corrupt national leadership of both sides: It isn't peace
between Arabs and Jews that interests the FE, but rather the
continuation of the conflict. The way they do that is by
corrupting/controlling the national leaders of both sides. The
reason why legitimate, popular leaders are not at the helms of
countries in the Middle East is because the FE will topple any
leader who doesn't cater to their desires before the needs of
their own people. If Middle East leaders are selected and deemed
popular by their own people, the FE will demonize them as
"radicals/extremists," "terrorist leaders" or "enemies of
peace," and thus de-legitimize them in the world arena. How can
genuine co-existence take hold if the leaders of both sides are
more interested in pleasing their foreign masters than their own
Unless these five basic factors are understood, the true causes
that extend the conflict will never be understood. Instead, each
side will go on blaming the other - seeking to take the high
moral ground and convince their own people and those from abroad
that they are right, and the other side is wrong. This will
lead only to more death and destruction.
The technique is called "divide and rule," and it has been a
favorite of the FE for decades.
Why Is There A The Middle East Conflict?
Let's deconstruct the conflict and look at all its parameters:
1) The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is how the pro-Arab camp
refers to it. It claims Israel is oppressing the Palestinians
and that, as a result, the entire Middle East remains unstable,
and will continue to be unstable unless the Palestinians have
their own state.
2) The Arab-Israeli conflict is how Israel defines the
situation. Until the Oslo process began, Israel claimed the
conflict existed because: "The Arabs don't recognize Israel's
right to exist." Now Israel says the conflict continues because
the Palestinian leaders "support terrorism."
These conclusions are fed to the Arab and Israelis peoples so as
to enable them each to take the high moral ground and focus
their hatred on each other. And this in turn directs their
attention away from their number one enemy: the foreigners.
By having the Arabs believe Israel is at fault for "oppressing"
the Palestinians, while having Israelis believe the conflict
exists because the Arabs fail to recognize the Jewish state or
seek its destruction ( i.e. support terrorism) the foreign
interests succeed in hiding the bigger picture: what the
foreigners are doing when it comes to controlling the Arab
nations' only natural resource, and how they are selling massive
amount of weapons to the oil-producing regimes.
To keep up this fraud, the foreign elements must control the
national leaders of both peoples, and ensure that the mainstream
media don't stray too far from the cover stories: "Israel is
acting immorally against the Palestinians" or "Palestinian
leaders support terrorism."
Creating either a viable Palestinian state or peace between
Arabs and Jews is not the goal of the foreigners. Whether stated
publicly or not, their intention is to extend the Middle East
conflict, not resolve it. Unless this basic truth is understood
by Arabs and Jews, the foreign elements, via the mainstream
media, will continue to manipulate the perception of both sides
as to why the conflict continues.
Taking the high moral ground in the Middle East conflict
The only way the foreigners can sustain the conflict is to have
each side blame the other for its continuation. In this way
neither side can discover the real causes, which are the oil and
arms deals made between the rich oil states and the foreign
powers. One aspect of the conflict serves as convenient
camouflage for the other.
To keep this fraud in place, the "moral argument" is employed to
have the world focus on the "morality" of the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict. In this way, everyone is forced to
take a side. The pro-Arab side claims Israel is morally flawed,
while the pro-Israel side claims the Arabs are morally flawed.
Thus any public discussion is structured in such a way that the
peoples in the region and those abroad are forced to believe one
side's claim or the other. The pro-Israel version is that the
Arabs want to destroy Israel and are employing terrorism to
reach this goal. The pro-Arab side claims Israel 's actions
against the Palestinians are immoral because they violate the
Palestinians' right to self-determination and their human rights
and dignity. In short, the parameters of the debate consist of
choosing sides. No other option is given. No other participant
in the conflict is presented.
In spite of all the vested foreign interests at work in the
region, namely oil and arms, the entire discussion of the
conflict centers on one of these two positions: either you are
pro-Israel or pro-Arab.
This moralizing is the way the foreigners control the debate so
that the actual causes are never allowed to surface. Israel's
national leaders can moralize about how inhumane Arab suicide
bombers are; Palestinian leaders can moralize about how horrible
Israel's treatment of the Palestinians is. The US State
Department can moralize about Israel's human rights record. The
Jews in America are morally aligned with Israel; the countries
of the Third World identify with the Arabs. The Europeans are
perceived to be anti-Israel. The Christian fundamentalists in
the US support Israel for moral reasons. The Israeli Left takes
the high moral ground when it publicly condemns its own
government for its treatment of the Palestinians. The Israeli
Right waves a finger at Yasser Arafat and proclaims: "Arafat is
not doing enough to stop terrorism." The Palestinians claim
Sharon is not "serious about peace" .
"The Palestinians must learn they will never achieve anything
through violence," says one group. "The Palestinians deserve
their own state," declares another
Yet with all this "morality" flying around, nobody ever points a
finger at the foreign countries or accuses them of acting
immorally by selling arms to Middle East dictators and
exploiting the natural resources of the region.
Instead, people around the globe are told what to believe
regarding the reason for the continuation of the Arab-Israeli
conflict, as if their opinions and feelings are actually
relevant to what is happening on the ground.
This long-distance exercise in morality is what the media focus
on when nothing much is happening in the region, to point out
how important "peace in the Middle East" is for everyone. Yet
the only thing about such stories that can be believed is that
the continuation of the conflict is important to the media.
Why the Middle East conflict never gets solved
Everyone in the world is morally bound up with the Arab Israeli
conflict. Yet can it be possible that the entire conflict is
based on the lack of morality of one side or the other? Can all
that has happened in the region over the past half century be
the result of one people not behaving nicely toward the other?
What other regional conflicts are defined in this way? What
other regional conflicts continue for more than a half a
century, look like they are finally being solved, and then come
roaring back in the way the Middle East conflict has?
Let's think for a moment, and ask: Do regional wars and
conflicts continue for seven decades because one side isn't
acting nicely toward the other? Is the conflict's existence
merely due to the actions of each or both sides - the 5 million
Jews and the 4 million Arabs - who simply don't like each other?
Can that really be the answer?
That is certainly the way the mainstream press and the academic
world present it. Oil and arms sales are never part of the
explanation. How could so many newspapers and TV stations miss
out on this side of the region's affairs and focus solely on
"new peace initiatives"?
One could argue, with justification, that the Israelis are not
acting nicely toward the Palestinians - that they oppress them,
restrict their movements, blow up their houses, etc. But that
alone still doesn't account for the continuation of the
conflict. The Israelis are right when they argue that the
Palestinian Authority is corrupt and the Palestinian leadership
hasn't done enough to crack down on terrorism, but that too
doesn't explain why this 75-year-old conflict is still with us.
And while it may even be true that the Arabs don't recognize
Israel's right to exist, Israel doesn't stop existing because of
that. The refusal of the Arabs to recognize Israel's existence
is not the reason why the Middle East still festers.
So why has this conflict been going on for nearly a century?
Not only does the Middle East conflict continue to exist, it
actually gets worse decade after decade. What other regional
conflict actually looks like it is being solved, and then, 10
years later, returns to a state much worse than before?
What is special about the Middle East?
One unique thing about the Middle East conflict is that it is
Think of the annual budgets for all the organizations whose sole
purpose is to do " Middle East moralizing." How much does it
cost to fund all the activist organizations, the lobby groups,
the news publications, the charities, the think tanks which
exist solely to cast blame on either the Israeli or Arab side?
The Middle East conflict is a "cottage industry" in the US and
Europe. It isn't that way with other regional conflicts. Why is
it that way with this one?
The pro-Israel camp has its lobbies, organizations, think tanks,
magazines, support groups, Internet user groups, etc. which put
out one simple message: "The Arabs are wrong; we're right. We
are more morally upstanding than them." The pro-Arab camp has
its lobbies, organizations, think tanks, magazines, support
groups, and Internet user groups which put out one simple
message: "The Israelis are wrong; we're right. We are more
morally upstanding than them."
Both sides are basically saying the same thing to the other
side: "you're morally deficient, you're not acting nicely, and
it is because of you that we don't have a solution."What is
incredible is that each side is right, and for the most part,
each side's argument is valid. Each side does do terrible things
to the other, and both are morally deficient. Yet that still
doesn't account for the continued existence of the conflict.
Consider. The Arabs say: "The media in America is controlled by
the Zionists and our side never gets a proper hearing," while
the pro-Israel camp says, "The media is anti-Israel." Both
claims have a basis of truth, yet they cancel each other out.
The same is also true when the Palestinians claim that Israel is
"denying the Palestinians a state." The Israeli version is "The
Arabs don't recognize the Jewish state." Two completely balanced
arguments serve to keep the claims of both sides in perfect
The media are responsible for promoting this "morality" aspect.
If a politician in the US or Europe says: "I am disturbed by
Israel's treatment of the Palestinians," that becomes a media
item, even though the statement had nothing to do with what
happens on the ground.Thousands of kilometers away, in Europe
and the US, the Middle East conflict has a life of its own. The
obsession that the mainstream media have about anything and
everything to do with the Middle East proves that the mainstream
media are responsible for sustaining it. The conflict would have
faded away long ago, if it weren't for this media attention.
This is important because, before we can look for a solution to
the Middle East conflict, we need to determine why it exists in
the first place.
Why should we support the establishment of a Palestinian state
as a way to bring peace to the region if the lack of such a
state is not the reason for the conflict? While it may be
desirable to the Arabs to have a viable Palestinian state, and
while the Palestinians certainly deserve their own national
territory, we must ask ourselves: "Does the conflict exist just
because the Palestinians don't have their own state?"
Perhaps all those on the pro-Arab side should think about what
would happen if a Palestinian state is created, yet doesn't lead
to prosperity and stability? The mere existence of a Palestinian
state will not solve the regional conflict. Thus perhaps the
absence of a Palestinian state is not the reason why peace does
not exist today.
If the foreigners were truly interested in peace, and believed
the creation of a Palestinian state would serve that goal, they
would have forced Israel to accept it decades ago. They didn't,
and not because Israel controls the US political process, as
some Arab intellectuals believe, but because they don't want
peace in the Middle East. That is why Arafat was allowed to
funnel most of the $4 billion in foreign aid the Palestinian
Authority received from 1993-2000 into 17 different security
forces, rather than using the money for socio-economic
Compared to other regional conflicts caused by wrongs committed
by one side on the other, the continued existence of the Middle
East situation makes no sense. By now it should have either been
resolved or have petered out.
Why does this problem never get solved?
Israel is not the number one enemy of the Arabs
While Israel may be perceived as a threat to the Arab world, the
actual threat comes from the foreigners who for decades have
been corrupting Arab leaders and exploiting their nations'
natural resources. The foreigners are the reason the
Palestinians has had such a miserable 50 years. Sometimes the
foreigners keep Arabs and Palestinians oppressed via Israel,
sometimes they do it on their own; the end result is the same -
the Arabs get screwed.
It is foolish to blame Israel for the continued existence of the
conflict. Israel had no reason to want to enflame the conflict
with the first intifada, or the second one. The last thing
Israel wants is for the whole world to be talking about how
Israel must create a state for the Palestinians. Thus Israel has
no reason to ignite the conflict.
Israel doesn't keep the Arab-Israeli conflict simmering, and
thus can't be blamed for the instability in the Middle East.
While what Israel may do to the Palestinians is wrong and
harmful, it is not the reason the conflict continues.
So by blaming Sharon or the Likud party, the Arabs are playing
right into the hands of the foreigners. The foreigners want all
Arabs to focus their anger at Israel so they won't catch on as
to how the foreigners are controlling their nations' resources
and corrupting their leaders. The Middle East conflict began
long before Sharon, the Likud or the West Bank settlements came
into the picture. By having the Arabs focus on Israel as the
culprit, nobody will look at the foreigners and realize the
If Arabs want to know who their number one enemy is, they have
to go right back to the beginning, when the foreigners first
started to colonize the Middle East. While the formation of
Israel was part of that colonizing effort, the Jews weren't the
ones who put the deal together. The Jewish people have also been
used and exploited by the foreigners, but in different ways.
If the role of the foreigners in the Middle East was exposed,
the Arabs could then choose between one of the other two sides:
Israel or the foreigners.
Before making that decision, all Arabs, and especially the
Palestinians, should remember that from 1948-1967, Israel was
responsible for huge rises in the standard of living of the
Israeli Arabs, just as it was with the West Bankers and Gazans
from 1967-1992. Despite all the wrongs Israel may have
committed against the Palestinians, then and now, the fact
remains that the Israelis were the only non-Arab population
interested in raising their standard of living and quality of
The foreigners - with all of their aid, peace plans,
initiatives, road maps and UN refugee agencies - were never able
to do that. For 50 years the Palestinian refugee problem
remained unsolved because the foreign powers did not want it
solved. Certainly Israel would have been in favor of putting the
refugees in permanent homes, and would have done so if they had
been permitted to. The foreigners didn't let Israel do that, and
instead had the UN administer the needs of the refugees so that
the refugee problem would remain unsolved - all in order to keep
the conflict alive.
So who is the true friend of the Arabs of Palestine, and who
portrays themselves as such but keep the tragedy going, year in,
year out? With which religion do Arabs have more in common,
Judaism or Christianity? Who is better equipped to help the
Palestinians develop their economy, Israelis or the foreigners?
To solve the conflict, both Arabs and Jews must realize that
they are not each other's number one enemy, and that a third
element is the reason the regional conflict continues. If we
want to solve this seemingly never-ending human tragedy we must
first understand where it comes from, and why it is still here.
Then we can prescribe a remedy.
To get that ball rolling, the Arabs must see that Israel isn't
responsible for creating the tension and hostility in the Middle
East. It isn't Israel which is keeping radical Arab leaders in
business; Israel isn't that powerful. The foreigners are bigger
and stronger than Israel. If they wanted Israel to stop all
settlement activity and withdraw to the 1967 border, they would
have long ago forced Israel to do that. The existence of the
settlements is the foreigners' guarantee that there will always
be a reason to shake a finger at Israel.
The foreigners never get tough with Israel because solving the
conflict is not their end goal. If the western countries
boycotted Israel economically, broke off diplomatic relations,
and cut off foreign assistance, the Israeli national leadership
would do anything the foreigners demanded. This doesn't happen
because the foreigners want the conflict to continue.
When Arabs accept the argument that "we hate America because of
America's support for Israel," they are serving the foreign
agenda. Arabs should hate America for what America has done to
them directly - for corrupting Arab leaders, for keeping the
Arab masses socially and economically backwards, for exploiting
the Middle East's natural resources, and for wasting the Arab
nations' financial resources on arms instead of regional
Jews and Arabs must realize that despite what
foreign leaders say in public, the last thing they desire is
peace in the Middle East. Since the first intervention by the
British in the first decade of the 20th century, the primary
cause of strife is the foreign elements and their desire to
control the region's natural resources.
The Arabs are not a threat to the State of Israel
For the entire history of the Arab-Israeli conflict the Israeli
public has been told two lies: that the Arabs in general - and
the Palestinians in particular - are a threat to the continued
existence of the Jewish state, and that the reason there is no
peace in the region is because the Arabs don't "recognize"
Why would any country call its own existence into question by
insisting that its neighbors acknowledge that it exists?
What it really means is that if an Arab country does acknowledge
Israel's right to exist, it can expect something in return. So
if Israeli diplomatic strategists had been smart, decades ago
they would have announced that, the Israeli government doesn't
acknowledge the existence of any Arab country. Then, if an Arab
country decided to acknowledge Israel's existence, and asked
what Israel would give it in return, Israel could say, "Israel
will acknowledge your country's existence." Instead, Israeli
leaders called their own nation's legitimacy into question by
asking the Arabs to grant it legitimacy.
Israel is, therefore Israel is, and no recognition from any
country - Arab or otherwise - is needed to confirm that fact. It
matters not at all if Tunisia, Bahrain, Oman, Yemen, Libya,
Syria or Iraq fails to acknowledge Israel's existence. In the
past half century, not only has Israel survived without her
existence being acknowledged by the majority of the Arab world,
it has flourished.
The claim that the Arabs threaten Israel 's existence is also
wrong. Even if the Arab world wanted to destroy Israel, this
doesn't mean it can. Israel has the seventh largest military
infrastructure in the world, and is technologically light years
ahead of the Arab world. Despite Israel's clear military
superiority, its national leadership keeps the Israeli public
focused on the "Arab threat" so that the Israelis will continue
to believe they are embroiled in a conflict with the whole Arab
To dispel the notion that the Arabs are a threat to Israel, take
a close look at any Arab country. They are usually
overpopulated, undereducated, economically undeveloped, and led
by a dictatorship. No Arab country is able to produce its own
weapons. No Arab country possesses any significant technological
abilities, or has any real political or economic influence in
So why should Israelis be afraid of Arab nations?
The only reason why Arab dictators are feared by the Israeli
public is because the world's media present these dictators as
"radicals" and "disturbers of regional peace" when in fact their
nations are helpless, powerless, poor and weak.
Why should Israel fear that Arab dictators like Saddam Hussein
could destroy or seriously harm the Jewish state when we know
that all the weapons and military technology Iraq has acquired
is from companies in the US, Britain, France, and Germany? If
Israelis were to fear for their security, they should point a
finger at these countries and accuse them of trying to destroy
Israel by supplying military technology and weapons to
"unstable" Arab dictators.
But that isn't what the Israeli national leadership tells its
citizenry. It tells them "Arabs want to destroy Israel" rather
than direct their collective anger at the western countries that
approved these weapons sales. By doing so, it keeps the Israeli
public convinced that the Arabs are the reason why the conflict
Another falsehood presented by Israel's leaders - particularly
those on the Right - is that if a Palestinian state were created
it would promote terrorism and those terrorists would threaten
the security of Israel. While terrorism is a problem for Israel,
it doesn't pose a threat to her existence.
And while the Palestinian Authority definitely promoted
terrorism right from the start of the Oslo Accords, the
terrorism never came anywhere near destroying the Jewish state.
Since the early 1980s, Israel's leaders have been warning that
Iran is "five years away from attaining nuclear weapons." Twenty
years later, on June 5, 2003, Israel's foreign minister declared
that "Iran would have Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) by
Why do Israeli national leaders try to scare the Israeli public
into thinking the Arabs are a much bigger threat than they
Oslo and beyond
One of the enigmas about the Oslo Accords is why the Israeli
government agreed to allow the Palestinian Authority to maintain
armed security forces, and why Israel even armed those security
personnel with Israeli weapons? We were told that the
Palestinian Authority needed those weapons to keep radical
Palestinian groups in check. Yet from the very beginning, when
Hamas began its suicide bombing in l994, the Palestinian
Authority never cracked down on the organization. While the
Israelis complained to all who would listen that this was
happening, no foreign entity ever criticized Arafat for not
stopping the rise of Hamas in the West Bank and Gaza.
Israel's leaders at the time knew full well that the result was
going to be a terrorist state, yet they agreed to this because
that is what the foreigners wanted from Oslo - to strengthen the
Palestinian side and weaken the Israeli side so the conflict
could continue. The goal of Oslo's planners was never peace and
stability; it was further bloodshed. That is why Oslo and Hamas
came on the scene at the same time.
As for the reasons why the second intifada broke out, the
mainstream press told us Arafat "was pissed because at Camp
David in August 2000 Barak and Clinton didn't give him enough
honor and respect" and thus Arafat was "posturing." The
mainstream media also gave us another version - that because
Sharon dared walk around on the Temple Mount, this "enflamed"
That it could have been arranged (and thus didn't have to
happen) never enters into the debate. Nobody asks whether Arafat
thought he could really win a war against Israel. No western
leader criticized Arafat for reneging on an international
agreement which he signed with Israel never to return to war.
Instead, the Middle East conflict was once again ignited,
serving the foreigners while causing more death and destruction
for the people who live in the region.
Sharon plays his part by remarking after every Hamas suicide
bombing attack that Arafat is to blame, even though we are told
the PA can't control Hamas. Then Bush throws the "moral card"
out there and accuses Arafat of not doing enough to stop
terrorism, so we are led to believe that Arafat is being morally
irresponsible by initiating terrorism against Israel.
Presto. The Middle East conflict has been recharged. Israel's
high moral ground is that "Arafat is behind the terrorism" and
the Arabs' "high moral ground" is that Israel is "oppressing the
Palestinians." Both claims are true, yet neither is the reason
why the conflict continues. Such a scenario - whether by design
or not - keeps the "you're wrong. No, you're wrong" structure of
the conflict in place.
Like most things that happen between Israelis and Arabs,
anything the Israelis do will be held up by the Arab side as
proof that "Israel isn't serious about peace" ( i.e. they are
morally flawed), and by the same token, anything the
Palestinians/Arabs do is held up by Israel as proof that "you
see, the Arabs are not serious about peace" (i.e. they are
morally deficient). This is the basic configuration of the
conflict. Each side blames the other while the real culprits
remain in the shadows.
Back in the early 1990s the only way to keep the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict alive was to re-energize Arafat -
arm his henchmen, and provide the PLO with a base of operations
close to Israel. So if the Palestinian Authority supports
terrorism it is with the complete knowledge and consent of
Israel's leaders. Blaming Arafat merely serves the goal of the
foreigners, which is to keep the conflict from dying out and to
give the Israeli public an enemy to blame.
Therefore it really makes no sense for Israelis to continue to
blame the Palestinians for the conflict not being solved, as
neither Arafat nor anyone else in the Palestinian Authority has
any real political or economic power. They aren't pulling any of
the world's strings, so why concentrate on whether Arafat does
or does not really want to put an end to terrorism? Whatever
Arafat or any other Palestinian leader does or doesn't do will
not have any impact on whether the conflict remains alive. The
Palestinians/Arabs don't have the power required to keep the
Middle East conflict alive. Only foreign elements do. The
continued attempt to brainwash the Israeli public into thinking
that the Arabs are a threat to Israel's security and survival is
one reason why the conflict continues. If you want to have a
conflict, you have to convince both sides that the other is to
blame, always and forever. This is the way the Arabs and Jews
have been pitted against each other.
Instead of rational explanations for why Middle East leaders do
what they do, we are handed "morally-inspired" rationale. For
instance, President Bush declared that Arafat had to be made
"irrelevant" because, according to the US leader, he
"disappointed him by not doing enough to stop terrorism." Having
taken the high moral ground, Bush then began yet another Middle
East peace initiative with the Roadmap. Once again, the
mainstream media failed to present the picture as anything other
than a moral crusade of the President to put his weight behind
the peace process.
The public was told that the American plan envisioned a
Palestinian state being created by 2005 (18 months from then)
without any media source presenting the alternative view that
such a plan was unreasonable and unlikely to take place. Instead
of presenting the public with quality information and analyses,
the media served the foreign interests and the Middle East
conflict kept right on rolling.
Greg also has his own daily show on the
Genesis Communications Network. Go to www.gcnlive.com Greg
Szymanski is an independent investigative journalist and his
articles can been seen at www.LewisNews.com. He also writes for
his own site www.arcticbeacon.com
Listen to my Radio Broadcast live Monday night at 8pm Pacific
time on LewisNews, returning Jan. 1 2006 Radio http://webs.lewisnews.com/radio/index.htm.
Greg is also regular on Rense.com the first Thursday of every
month at 9-10 pm pacific time.
page may contain copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been
specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material
available in my efforts to advance understanding of environmental,
political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice
issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted
material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In
accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -