THE REAL ENEMY OF ISRAEL:
IT'S NOT WHO YOU THINK!
November 4, 2000
By: S.R. Shearer
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth
is a revolutionary act."
- George Orwell
[Information for much of this report was derived from
articles by Joseph Churba, David Shipler, Charles Krauthammer,
and Jay Shapiro of Arutz Sheva Israel National Radio; finally,
we want to thank Sean Mayfield for his invaluable research.]
[This is the first in a series of articles dealing with the
fighting in the Middle East; this particular article - Part I
- deals with the question of who the REAL enemy of Israel is in
the Middle East, and it is not the Palestinians, as you will see.
Part II will deal with the Scriptural basis of what's happening
there today. These two parts will then form the basis for
all the articles that will follow. We urge you, therefore,
to study this article and the one to follow carefully. If
you don't, you will most assuredly lose your way in the articles
that follow them.]
(The Olive Tree)
"Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto
all the people round about, ... And in that day will I make
Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves
with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth
be gathered together against it." (Zech. 12:2-3)
What's occurring today in the Middle East is the climax of an "End
Game" that has been going on since 1948. It signals
the end of a long, 2,000-year period of time in which the Church has
had history to itself; re-inserts Israel as a "player" on
the world's stage; and introduces a coming age (i.e., the Millennium
and eventually, even Eternity) in which both Israel and the Church (as
separate, distinct, and independent entities) are destined to hold the
stage together. This "End Game" is now
reaching its climax in the fighting over Jerusalem. David Shipler of
the New York Times gives a brief overview of how this "EndGame"
is proceeding and how intractable the facts on the ground are between
the two antagonists that are presently involved. He writes:
"The Israelis and Palestinians are now being pulled violently
toward the black hole of their conflict. They have been there
before - a place so dense in passion that it emits no light by which
they can truly see the other's legitimacy as a people. If
they get there again, they will be back at the core of the battle.
This has always been a clash of two nationalisms trying to defy the
law of physics by occupying the same space at the same time.
The problem was visible a few weeks after the 1993 Oslo accords that
launched the peace process when nine Palestinian teenagers gathered
in a West Bank classroom to reconsider their attitudes toward Israeli
Jews. Born and raised in the caldron of Israeli occupation,
they now faced a confusing moment of hopeful skepticism. Seeing
into the negative stereotypes were new, admiring images. Israeli
Jews were violent, but educated, the students said, controlling but
industrious, morally corrupt but more protective than Arabs of women's
"On one point, however, the ambivalence evaporated. The
Jews, said a high school senior named Fahed, had faked their ancient
history in Jerusalem and surroundings. 'They created the ruins
(i.e., the Temple Mount, Joseph's Tomb, etc.) to prove that it was
their land', he declared. The Jews don't belong here, a
girl added. Did that mean the Jews should leave, they were asked.
The answer came in a chorus: 'No!' 'Israelis don't have any
other place to go', another girl conceded.
"This revealed the adult blend of realism and fantasy that still
drives the struggle. Conceding that the Israelis are there
to stay does not overcome the power of denying their historical right
to do so. Yasser Arafat, chairman of the Palestinian
Authority, and Hosni Mubarak, president of Egypt, have reportedly
made private remarks dismissing Jews' ties to the Temple Mount in
Jerusalem, where the Temple stood until destroyed by the Romans
in A.D. 70. The denial touches the deepest Israeli fear, that
no peace agreement will render them authentic inhabitants in the eyes
JERUSALEM - A CUP OF TREMBLING
analysis above gives an idea of how tempestuous and "fouled up"
perceptions are as to what's occurring in the Holy Land. While
"peaceniks" on both sides - "moderate Jews" and
"moderate Muslims" (like the three "moderate" Muslim
students Shipler cites above) - are appalled at all the blood that has
been shed in recent days over the question of Jerusalem, their perceptions
as to which group has a legitimate right to the Holy Land, and most
particularly Jerusalem, are written in stone. And it is precisely
this inflexibility that is inexorably leading both sides (and the other
nations of the region - and, indeed, the world) down the path towards
war, fulfilling the prophecy of Zechariah,
"Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the
people round about, ... And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome
stone for ALL people ..." (Zech. 12:2a-3a)
I WILL NOT BE FLEXIBLE
As hard as it is for most American evangelicals to grasp, the fact
of the matter is, Arafat and Mubarak actually believe that the Israelis
have "created history" in order to legitimize their presence
in the Holy Land! They (i.e., Arafat and Mubarak) really believe that
the history surrounding the Temple Mount is a figment of the Jews' imagination!
- and, of course, if they think that, then where is there any possibility
for a compromise? There is none! The Jews are interlopers; they
have no historical claim to the Holy Land, and that's the end of it!
There is no Temple Mount! There is only the "Dome of the
Rock," and "Al-Aqsa." That's all. Nothing
more! And it is precisely for this reason that at Camp David in July,
Arafat balked at any solution for Jerusalem that denied him FULL
SOVEREIGNTY over the Temple Mount and all of eastern Jerusalem,
saying that otherwise he feared a Muslim assassin's bullet. The
PLO chief warned,
"... there will be no peace and no stability in the Middle East
region if [Jerusalem] does not return to its legitimate owners."
Then, as if to make sure his hearers understood what he meant, Arafat
"I will NOT be flexible concerning the holy places.
They are Palestinian, Arab ... and Muslim holy places, and everyone
must respect it."
Palestinian Authority (PA) cabinet secretary Abed el-Rahman expanded
on what Arafat had just said,
"If the thieving Israelis continue holding on
to our lands, another intifada awaits them - and worse things as well."
Arafat ended the week (the 15th of October, 2000) on the same abrasive
note, telling CNN:
"You have to remember, you are speaking to Yasser Arafat. I
will continue to liberate all the Islamic and Muslim holy places.
I can't betray my people. I can't betray the Arabs ... I can't betray
Mubarak echoes Arafat's fear. He too is afraid of what could
happen to him if he were to yield to Israel on the question of Jerusalem,
believing that if he becomes a party to a compromise, he will invite
on himself the endless wrath of Muslim extremists and possibly murder
at the hands of his own people.
Ultimately, what Arafat wants is to declare a state by raising the
Palestinian flag over a "liberated" Temple Mount. What
he and Mubarak are willing to settle for in the interim - and what Arafat
actually suggested to Clinton - is that the Temple Mount be transferred
to "Islamic sovereignty," entrusted to Egypt, Saudi Arabia
and Morocco, but with Palestinian administrative control. It was
an option Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak quickly ruled out.
TECHNICALITIES VERSES REALITIES
Technically, the Oslo Accords are supposed to guarantee access to the
Temple Mount area to the Jews as well as to the Arabs, a right which
the Jews have always claimed, but have never exercised [other than demanding
access to the so-called "Western Wall" (which is, in reality,
not part of the Temple Mount complex itself, but is merely an old "retaining
wall" below the actual Temple Mount which was built after the construction
of Herod's Temple to prevent erosion to the Temple's foundation)].
Because they have failed to exercise their "right of access"
to the Temple Mount itself over the years (LARGELY AT THE INSISTENCE
OF THE U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT), many Israelis now fear they
will lose that right altogether - not only on a de facto level, but
on a de jure basis as well.
Reality in the Middle East is based more on perception than on fact
- and if the Jews continue to absent themselves from the Temple Mount
area (and continue to confine themselves merely to the so-called "Western
Wall."), then control of the actual Temple Mount itself will invariably
pass to the Arabs not only on a practical level, but also as a matter
of law - and all this regardless of what the Oslo Accords mandate.
These mandates are, after all, not written in stone. Indeed,
there are growing numbers of Jews who believe that these guarantees
(i.e., right of access to the Temple Mount area and other sacred spots)
are even now not worth the paper they are written on.
SHARON'S VISIT TO THE TEMPLE MOUNT
It was precisely for this reason that Likud chairman Ariel Sharon decided
to put the Oslo guarantees to a test by visiting the Temple Mount on
the eve of Rosh Hashana - a visit that Sharon advertised in advance
as a "simple pilgrimage" to Judaism's holiest site, a "pilgrimage"
which was supposedly guaranteed to the Jews by law. Sharon reasoned
that if such a "pilgrimage" could not be undertaken now at
a time when ultimate authority over the Temple Mount still rests with
Israel, what would happen if this authority were to pass to the Arabs
- either directly or indirectly?
What occurred is probably exactly what Sharon had expected: the
promises contained in the Oslo Accords amounted to nothing on the ground!
The morning after Sharon's visit, over 20,000 enraged Muslim radicals
converged at the Al Aqsa mosque to hear the Grand Mufti, Sheikh Ibrahim
Ekrima, refer to Sharon as the "Jewish butcher of Muslims"
who was "challenging more than one billion Muslims all over the
world" by his DESECRATING presence the previous evening
on the Temple Mount. The Mufti appealed for a pan-Islamic Jihad (holy
war) "TO ERADICATE THE JEWS FROM PALESTINE."
In case one still didn't get the message, Voice of Palestine radio began
playing patriotic war songs and Arafat closed the schools; called a
general strike; and urged everyone to "take their wrath to the
streets." Since then, more than 130 people have been killed
and nearly 2,200 wounded, mostly Palestinians.
PA minister Abed Rabbo warned,
"Trying to touch or to play with the issue of Al-Aqsa (i.e.,
the Temple Mount) will lead to a religious war which would last for
generations. Any attempt to touch even a stone in the Aqsa mosque
will provoke more than a billion Muslims all over the world."
And all this ruckus because Sharon decided to exercise a right of pilgrimage
that was presumably guaranteed to him by the Oslo Accords? This
doesn't say much for these guarantees - especially in light of the fact
that the world press has all but called for Sharon's lynching for exercising
these supposed rights. Indeed, Molly Ivins, a well-known columnist
closely tied to the Clinton government in the United States suggested
in a syndicated article that appeared on October 17th, that Sharon be
"charged with treason" for putting the Oslo guarantees regarding
Jewish access to the Temple Mount to such an open test. In light
of all this, one should excuse average Jews for believing that the Oslo
guarantees are worthless.
TWO NATIONALISMS TRYING TO OCCUPY THE SAME SPOT
What then do we have here? Exactly what Shipler has said: two
nationalisms trying to defy the law of physics by occupying the same
space at the same time. Where is there any room for compromise
here? There is none. Israelis must give up their claim to the
Temple Mount and all of East Jerusalem if there is going to be peace.
Otherwise, there will be war! - and make no mistake about it, if
it comes to war, the world will hold Israel responsible!
A frustrated Charles Krauthammer, another syndicated columnist in the
United States and a friend of Israel, writing in the Washington Post
on Friday, October 6, 2000, remarked cynically on the unbelievable naivet�of
the Israeli "peaceniks" for trying to negotiate a peace with
the Arabs in light of this kind of intransigence,
"The (Israeli) doves are stunned. Avraham Burg, speaker of the
Israeli parliament and one of the architects of the Labor government's
bend-over-backward peace proposals, writes perplexedly: 'Do
we really understand what is going on? After everything was given,
there are still demands on the other side'."
"'Suddenly we discovered', he (i.e., Burg) continues plaintively,
'that what we mean by peace - which is mutual reconciliation - is
not being met by the other side'."
JAY SHAPIRO AND "HOW TO BOIL A LOBSTER"
Jay Shapiro of Arutz Sheva Israel National Radio in a broadcast on
Oct. 19, 2000 went a long way in finding an answer to Avraham Burg's
pitiably morose question, "Do we really understand what's going
on?" He said,
"Now that Oslo seems to be in its death throes, it may be valuable
to take a step back and reflect on the psychology that got us into
this mess in the first place.
"Do you know how to boil a lobster? Those of us raised in kosher
homes don't; our mothers were busy with chicken soup and chopped liver.
But several years ago, an acquaintance of mine taught me how to boil
lobsters because he thought it would be an important contribution
to my general education.
"There are some people who try to cook lobsters by throwing
live ones into a pot of boiling water. This generally doesn't work
because the lobsters carry on terribly and start jumping out of the
pot. In order to do this properly, you have to take into account the
nature and character of the lobsters. There are two facts about lobsters
that are crucial: First, they are cold-blooded creatures; this means
that they assume the temperature of whatever environment they happen
to be in. Second, and contrary to the conventional wisdom, lobsters
are very clever and they can only be beaten by cunning.
"What you have to do is take a pot of water at room temperature
and place it on an unlit stove. Then you place the lobster gently
inside and allow it time to settle in and get comfortable. Then, very
quietly and stealthily, you reach over and light the burner under
the pot. It has only to be a small fire. Then you wait a while. The
lobster will sense the slight change in temperature and rearrange
his internal temperature accordingly. After a while you quietly raise
the fire somewhat and, again, wait. The lobster will again make the
proper adjustment. You continue to do this in little steps and, after
a while, the lobster begins to notice that it is getting uncomfortable
and more difficult to make the necessary internal changes. However,
the lobster, being a clever creature, begins to reason with itself.
"It is getting uncomfortable here," it says to itself, "but
it used to be quite nice and maybe it will be again. Besides, why
should I jump out and maybe find out what is causing all this trouble
and put a stop to it. I don't know what is outside and maybe it is
worse out there than in here? So there is no alternative other than
to get used to this situation."
"After a while, the temperature has gotten pretty high and there
are bubbles coming up from the bottom of the pot. But the lobster,
continuing to reason with itself the same way, pretends not to notice
them. Then, finally, the temperature reaches a point where the lobster
can no longer make the internal changes - and it is boiled.
"That's how you cook a lobster.
"That's also how you cook a Jewish State."
THE PEACE PROCESS; GETTING ISRAEL USED TO THE HEAT
Shapiro then explained exactly what he meant insofar as the present
predicament Israel finds itself in:
"First, you make an agreement with a terrorist organization
dedicated to the destruction of the State. This is done preferably
in some quiet, out-of-the-way place - say, like Oslo, Norway. The
State gets comfortable with this new environment, especially when
any aroused suspicions are overshadowed by an impressive ceremony,
like on the lawn of the White House, with all kinds of dignitaries
"Then, after a while, you bring the terrorist leader and his
accomplices to some place where no one really knows or cares - like
Gaza. And, stealthily, you let him and his friends also take over
another place that's off the beaten track - like Jericho. The State
gets used to this and even looks upon it as a blessing since it really
wanted to get rid of those locations anyhow.
"Then, you allow the terrorist to bring thousands of his friends
into the area and you even arm them and turn over military institutions
to their army and secret police. No one really notices this since
most people are busy with their own problems and don't want to be
bothered. There really isn't much time to think about these things
which, anyway, are the kinds of problems that the government gets
paid to worry about.
"After a while, the terrorists kill a few innocent people. And
the State reasons that, what the heck, this used to happen before
so there is really no viable alternative. Besides, each person figures
that it can't happen to him and his family so why bother. Then, the
terrorists say that they want half of the capital city. And the State
figures that most people don't go there anyway so why not?
"Then the government allows the terrorist secret police to kidnap
and kill Arabs who cooperated with the State. And everyone says, I
don't know those guys anyway. Besides, they probably deserve it. While
all this is taking place, the news media keep talking about the wonderful
peace partners and all the nice things that are happening since the
agreement was signed at Oslo and how all the terrorists have nice
titles like "Doctor this" or "General that" and
they seem like such nice smiling people on television. And they speak
English so nicely and dress so well. Then a settler is murdered but,
the State reasons, it wouldn't have happened if he wasn't there. Besides,
the Prime Minister has explained that defending the settlers is a
strain on the budget and the army so who really cares? Then, the government
turns all the areas near the major urban centers over to the terrorists
who then bring all their armed friends there from outside the country
Shapiro continues by describing the circular logic of Israel's "peaceniks,"
as they enthusiastically embraced the "Oslo Process,"
"In this regard, it must be kept in mind that the Oslo process
was not based on facts. It was based on an ideology, which, like religion,
is a matter of belief, and any facts that disagreed with that belief
were simply hidden or overlooked. The media in Israel share the blame
with the politicians for hiding the facts that disagreed with their
ideology. In events reminiscent of the Yom Kippur War, the leadership
and the media were caught in a conceptual trap of their own making.
The Oslo process began, and continued - because Peres and Rabin were
intent on creating their "New Middle East" despite the facts.
And Rabin, "Mr. Security," we were told, would never do
anything to weaken Israel! "Alas, Israeli governments over the
past seven years did not wish to complain about Palestinian incitement
and violence, since that might have slowed down the Oslo process.
The tone for this stupid and blind approach to the Oslo process was
set by Rabin and Peres back in 1995. At that time, a cassette was
made available to the Israeli government, containing a speech made
by Arafat at a mosque in Johannesburg, South Africa. In his speech,
Arafat said that the whole Oslo process was simply a tactic to weaken
the Jews. It was like the agreements that Mohammed had made with
tribes that were stronger than him. As soon as he had enough power,
he simply violated the agreements and destroyed his enemies. When
this cassette was played to Rabin, his comment was: "If this
is true, it's very bad." Of course it was true - it was a recording
of Arafat! But Rabin and Peres could not be bothered with the truth
because it disagreed with their theory."
Shapiro goes on by explaining the futility of trying to base one's
arguments on facts when those who disagree with you don't want to hear
any facts that might contradict stands they have already taken.
Facts in such instances are "hindrances to progress."
"When Barak went to Sharm-a-Sheikh (to meet with Clinton and
Arafat to try to end the fighting between Israelis and Palestinians
in Jerusalem and elsewhere), he took along a special group of so-called
experts to explain the Israeli position to the foreign press. The
people whom Barak sent to run around Europe and explain our (i.e.,
the Israeli) position are the same ones who were fully aware that
the Palestinian Authority was, for some time, training children to
fight and kill Jews; they kept the information quiet since it would
upset their concept of the "peace process." Now,
they are trying to explain why so many Palestinian children are being
shot by Israeli soldiers defending themselves against the stone-throwing
mobs. One of the main tricks of the Palestinians is to send children
first to throw stones while behind these mobs they dispatch snipers
who shoot at our soldiers. Many of these Arab kids spent the summer
at terrorist training camps and are now in schools that utilize PLO
textbooks that teach them to hate Jews and promote the destruction
of the State of Israel."
In this kind of process, of course, there is no way that the Israelis
can win the "public relations" battle. They've been
"SET UP" to take the "FALL" - and they have been
"SET UP" in a very deliberate and purposeful manner.
But by whom? - that's the question.
WHO'S BEHIND THE PEACE PROCESS?
Shapiro's analysis as to what has been occurring insofar as the "Oslo
Process" is concerned is very precise - as far as it goes.
Indeed, most Israelis by now would probably concur in Shapiro's explanation.
But he leaves unanswered the question as to who's really behind the
process; what forces are driving it - maybe because it's too difficult
for him to acknowledge.
The fact is, however, what most Israelis hardly dare admit - except
for those at the extreme right and the extreme left of the Israeli political
system - is that it's the Americans (specifically, the American elites)
who are driving this very dangerous process, a process that is, with
each passing month, taking on a decided anti-Israeli tone. That's
a difficult thing for most Israelis to come to grips with - both Hawks
and Doves. Why? - because if the Americans are against them who do they
have left in this world to trust?
Now this isn't to say that average Israelis aren't aware that the Americans
are deeply involved in the "Oslo Process," they're certainly
cognizant of that fact. But what they don't know - or at least
what they don't want to admit to themselves - is that the American elites
themselves are the ones behind the anti-Israeli tone that has taken
hold on the Oslo Process in recent months, and that they fully realize
that, in the end, the process could very well prove to be SUICIDAL
for Israel - at least insofar as Israel's chances of remaining a
JEWISH state are concerned.
Moreover, what's infinitely worse for Israel, is the fact that not
only do the American elites realize that the process may be suicidal
for Israel, they embrace this prospect with some degree of enthusiasm
- and so much so that it's probably not too much to say that it's no
longer just the Palestinians that are attempting to boil the Israeli
lobster, but the American elites as well. In the end, all the
Palestinians may be doing is acting as America's "go-fer"
in this process. Significantly, even the power in Washington of the
Jewish establishment has not been enough to prevent America's tilt in
favor of its anti-Jewish policy insofar as the Oslo Accords are concerned.
THE AMERICAN ELITES AND THE JEWS
The fact of the matter is, as we have indicated in previous articles,
the American elites who are driving the "Oslo Process" have
a very checkered history insofar as Israel and the Jewish community
are concerned, and when James Baker, one of Ronald Reagan's key advisors
and George Bush's Secretary of State (and a card-carrying member of
the American elite), said, "F-ck the Jews," it was not merely
a slip of the tongue; he was simply giving expression to the traditional
feelings the American elite has had for the Jewish community.
[Please see The Secret War Against the Jews by John Loftus and
Mark Aarons, pg. vii.]
The truth is, the social class out from which most of America's elite
(including Baker et. al.) has sprung has historically been saturated
with a very profound and deep anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism was
(and, if the truth were really known, still is) one of those "markers"
for people of "good breeding" and forms, even today, a kind
of "in-house" philosophy among the upper-class who are attracted
to the U.S. diplomatic service. Today, of course, all this is
carefully hidden behind a "front" or "facade" of
"political correctness," and it is true that many Jews have
managed to scramble up the State Department's bureaucracy to some very
lofty heights. Indeed, Madeline Albright, the current Secretary of State,
is a Jew - still, it's not something that she admits to readily (she
just found out about it). Indeed, she seems to be quite
embarrassed by it, and there is nothing more anti-Semitic than
a self-loathing Jew. All this, of course, doesn't say much as
to the depth that "political correctness" has sunk its roots
in America's foreign policy establishment.
But there is much more than raw anti-Semitism at work in the American
elite that predisposes it against Israel: it's the life-blood of the
elite that, in the end, inclines it against the Jewish state - MONEY!
And in this regard, one must remember that if money is the life-blood
of the American elite, then oil is at the heart of the elite's "net
worth." As we have said previously, the elite is inextricably
tied to "Big Oil" - from George Bush (and, indeed, the entire
Bush family) to Al Gore and his family as well; from Dick Cheney to
George Schultz; from James Forestal to Cap Weinberger; from James Baker
to, well, ad nauseum. "BIG OIL IS THE AMERICAN ELITE"
(or at least the heart and soul of the American elite), and once one
understands this fact, then it's not too difficult to measure the elite's
(and, ipso facto, the American government's) REAL disposition
WHAT AMERICA IS REALLY UP TO
The sad truth is, while America (or at least the elite that governs
America) has been posturing as Israel's champion for the past fifty-five
years, it has at the same time been secretly working to destroy it.
This is the conclusion of John Loftus and Mark Aarons in their book,
The Secret War Against The Jews. And, again, why is that?
- OIL! The Arabs have it and the Jews don't
- and if one is going to pump oil out of a region whose inhabitants
despise the Jews, some consideration to the passions of the region must
be displayed if one doesn't want his project to go up in flames.
It's a given fact that as far as the Arabs are concerned, whoever opposes
the Jews in the Middle East is their friend; and whoever evinces sympathy
for Zionism is their enemy. For the oil companies who want to
pump oil out of the Middle East, it's a "no brainer" - and
for this reason the oil companies have been anti-Zionist from the very
beginning, fighting the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948
through their minions at the State Department and the Department of
Defense (i.e., George Marshal and James Forestal), and failing that
(largely because of Truman's intervention) seeking since then to hinder
and "neutralize" Israel at every turn of the way.
THE OIL ELITES AND AMERICAN
FOREIGN POLICY VIS A VIS THE JEWS
As difficult as it is for most American evangelicals to come to
grips with, the elites with whom they have made their bed in the United
States (and we have reference here most particularly to those elites
connected to the Republican Party) DESPISE Israel.
The fact is, to deny that the oil companies are anti-Zionist is tantamount
to looking at the color black and calling it white. And, furthermore,
to say that the oil elites don't call the shots insofar as American
foreign policy in the Middle East is concerned is absolute nonsense.
The experience of Joseph Churba, who was the Middle East Intelligence
Estimator for Maj-Gen. George Keegan, then Chief of US Air Force Intelligence
in the mid-1970s is illustrative of this fact. Churba recounts a December
1972 National Intelligence Estimate meeting he once attended which was
devoted to the Middle East in which representatives from the oil companies,
all in observer capacity, actually outnumbered the participating officials.
Churba was shocked by his experience. He relates, "Here
was blatant evidence of an incestuous relationship between the CIA (and
the American foreign policy establishment) on the one hand, and the
oil companies on the other. The oil firms were allowed to provide
crucial data, and to actually oversee the members of the intelligence
community in the performance of their estimating task. Invariably the
estimates that emerged were in concord with the prevalent interests
and views of the oil industry. That was my introduction to 'independent'
US government policy formulation." [Please see Joseph Churba, The
Washington Compromise, 1995]
And nothing has changed since - and so much so that, according to Churba,
the CIA continues to insist on using data provided by the oil industry
as the foundation for their National Intelligence Estimate for that
part of the world. The very real fact of the matter is, since
the end of the Second World War, U.S. policy formulation insofar as
the Middle East is concerned has been strongly influenced, if not dominated,
by the interests and positions of the key oil companies operating there.
Indeed, according to Churba, the grip of the main U.S. oil companies
and their Arab partners in the innermost U.S. decision-making process
as it relates to the Middle East has never been successfully challenged
by anyone, anywhere, at any time.
WHAT ABOUT THE ISLAMIC TERRORISTS?
But what about the Islamic terrorists? What about the Mujahedin?
What about Hamas? What about HizbAllah? Surely
the virulent anti-Americanism of these Islamic terrorist organization
would place the United States squarely in the Israeli camp?
But such a question betrays a very profound ignorance of America's
relationship with these radical Islamic organizations. And why's
that? - because, the fact is, for the past twenty years or so, American
foreign policy objectives in the Middle East have been inextricably
bound up with these organizations, and in some cases, even their creation.
Take the Mujahedin of Afghanistan, for example. Since the late
1970s and all during the 1980s, the US played a major role in the creation
(at least in its present form) and the sustenance of this
organization. The primary U.S. objective in doing so, of course,
was to prevent the USSR from reaching the oil resources of the Persian
Gulf, and wresting control of these resources from the American elites
which control them - and in order to prevent this from happening, the
U.S. elite was more than willing to ally itself with the devil, something
that for the U.S. is not a particularly difficult thing to do.
The same is true of America's involvement with the Islamic resistance
to Russia in the Caspian Basin and Central Asia where the United States
has played a central role in supporting the irregular Islamist forces
fighting the Russians in Chechnya, while at the same time providing
a strategic and diplomatic umbrella for Turkey in its effort to revive
radical Islamic militancy in the Caucasus.
And this is true not only of Afghanistan, the Caspian Basin and the
Caucasus, but it's also true insofar as America's support for radical
Islamic forces in the Balkans, even to the point of allowing so-called
Mujahedin "freedom fighters" to penetrate the Balkans
through the U.S. blockade of the region in order to strengthen Muslim
forces in Bosnia and Kosovo - and so much so that today the de facto
governments in control of both Bosnia and Kosovo are RADICAL
Islamic ones allied with the Mujahedin.
In all three cases, the U.S. has sought to intervene and manipulate
geo-strategic forces in the Middle East to its advantage in order to
ensure the American elite's control over regional oil and gas resources
- and in every instance that it has done so, the US intervention
has always been on the side of MILITANT Islam.
Moreover, in each case the U.S.'s primary objective has been to deny
Russia access to the region's oil and gas resources by breaking Russia's
grip on first, Afghanistan, then the Caspian Basin, and finally the
Balkans - and all this despite the fact that most of these Islamic
forces have been as virulently anti-US as they have been anti-Israeli
The fact is, the ascendance of America's oil elite in U.S. foreign
policy vis a vis the Middle East means the dominance of "Muslim
interests" in that region, in addition to the Balkans and the Caucasus.
Hence, the American government has done its utmost to ensure that Bosnia-Herzegovina
would become a radicalized Muslim state, bombed the civilian-economic
infrastructure of Yugoslavia to ensure the domination of Kosovo by the
Muslim Albanians and risked the alienation of Russia to Cold War levels
in order to empower the Chechens.
PLAYING A DOUBLE GAME
You say that this doesn't make sense? But it does if one keeps
his eye on what America is really up to in the Middle East, specifically,
control of Middle Eastern oil. You must remember that the subservient
situation of the nations of the Middle East to the will of the United
States is no different than the situation that Colombia suffers under
(or for that matter, Guatemala, or El Salvador, or Nicaragua, etc.).
The status of the countries of the Middle East as "client
states" (albeit very important and specialized ones) in America's
"New World Order" System is the same as any other in America's
"New World Order" System; as such, these countries (i.e.,
America's "client states" in the Middle East) are INHERENTLY
UNSTABLE. What renders them unstable, of course, is the fact
that "client states" in the "American System" enjoy
very little popular or mass support. As a result, they are "congenitally"
beset by civil disturbances and popular unrest.
Because of this, the United States intelligence community is in the
habit of maintaining clandestine liaison with opposition forces throughout
its "client state" system in order to ensure that should unrest
reach a point where the indigenous government can no longer control
events, the U.S. can simply switch sides, reach an accommodation with
the new elite, and carry on as if nothing had occurred. This is
exactly what it did when Marcos was overthrown in the Philippine Republic;
when Pinochet was ousted in Chili; when the military junta in Argentina
was overturned; when Mobutu was thrown out of Zaire (now the Congo);
when Suharto was toppled in Indonesia, ad nausium.
This is, as we indicated in an earlier article on Colombia, precisely
what was behind the President of the New York Stock Exchange Richard
Grasso's visit to the jungles of southern Colombia (along with representatives
of Morgan-Stanley, CitiBank, Chase-Manhattan, etc.) to meet with the
fatigue-clad, gun-totting representatives of Colombia's rebels?
THE WHOLE EPISODE REVEALED HOW UTTERLY LACKING IN IDEOLOGY OR MORALITY
AMERICA'S FOREIGN POLICY IS. THE PURSUIT OF MONEY IS WHAT AMERICA'S
FOREIGN POLICY IS ALL ABOUT. THAT'S IT! THERE IS NOTHING
ELSE! The whole thing would have been laughable if it hadn't
been so tragic - it was akin, as we indicated in our Colombia article,
to the presidents of these elite institutions sitting down and talking
with the Gambino crime family and other members of the New York Mafia
about how to divide New York City up among themselves to their mutual
But then this is the American elite's modus operandi!! - the
American way of doing things!! First, co-opt the opposition;
second, corrupt it; third, replace the old elite with
the new (and now co-opted and corrupted elite); and, fourth, carry
on as before. As a result of this modus operandi,
the U.S. views terrorist groups like the Mujahedin, Hamas,
HizbAllah, etc. as future indigenous elites that it may someday
have to co-opt and enlist as an indigenous "client state"
elite with which it can do business to each group's mutual benefit.
THE PLO AS AN AMERICAN "CLIENT STATE" ELITE
Sometimes, of course, it doesn't work - as in the case of countries
like Iran and Cuba where the new elites cannot so readily be co-opted
and corrupted; but normally, it does; and when it doesn't, the U.S.
isolates the "offending" state, and cuts it off from the rest
of the so-called "world community" until it finally caves
in and cries, "Uncle."
This is, after all, exactly what the U.S. did with Yasser Arafat's
PLO. There was, after all, a time when the PLO was viewed by average
Americans with as much horror as the Mujahedin, Hamas,
and HizbAllah are viewed today. The PLO, it should be remembered,
is the same terrorist organization which slaughtered American and Israeli
civilians indiscriminately in the 1970s and early 80s, to wit:
- LOD AIRPORT - May 30, 1972: PLO attacks Puerto
Rican pilgrims. Thirty killed; seventy-three wounded.
- MUNICH - September 5, 1972: PLO terrorists attack
the Olympic Village; twelve Israeli athletes slaughtered; one wounded.
- GREECE - September 9, 1974: TWA plane crashes into
the sea. All eighty-eight men, women, and children killed.
PLO claims responsibility.
- MA'ALOT, ISRAEL - May 15, 1974: PLO terrorists
attack school; twenty -eight killed, including twenty-one innocent
children; sixty-five are injured.
- BEIRUT, LEBANON - June 16, 1976: U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon,
Francis E. Miller, Jr., and two aides are kidnapped and murdered.
PLO claims responsibility.
- TEL AVIV, ISRAEL - March 11, 1978: terrorists seize two buses.
Thirty-four are killed; eighty-two are injured. PLO claims
- JERUSALEM, ISRAEL - June 2, 1978: bomb blast kills six and
injures nine on city bus. PLO claims responsibility.
But that was then, and this is now. The PLO is now working for
the Americans. It has been co-opted, "cleaned up" (at
least insofar as its "press image" is concerned) and is now
acting as a "new" elite in the service of U.S. interests in
that part of the world. You might say, Where is the morality here? -
there is, of course, none!
There is NO morality in money - and there is, as a result,
no morality in the way America conducts its foreign policy in the Middle
East - and that should say something to those evangelicals who think
that America is doing God's will in the Middle East insofar as Israel
The fact is, so "cleaned up" has the PLO become under the
impress of the corporately-controlled American media that one could
today be excused in thinking that the PLO is nothing more than a humane
and gentle company of "angels" bent on liberating the Holy
Land from the oppression of the Jews, people that the same corporately-controlled,
elite press is coming dangerously close to portraying as Nazis bent
on the merciless subjugation of an "inferior race" (i.e.,
The Jews as Nazis and the Palestinians as Jews - now that's the kind
of propaganda coup Joseph Goebbles, Hitler's Propaganda Minister, would
have been proud of!
THE SECULARIZATION OF THE JEWISH STATE
Ultimately, what the U.S. elites have been aiming at over the past
several years in Israel is the "secularization" of the Jewish
state. THE AMERICAN ELITES ARE MORE THAN COGNIZANT THAT NO
ACCOMMODATION WITH ISRAEL OVER JERUSALEM AND THE OTHER "HOLY SITES"
IS POSSIBLE WITH A JEWISH STATE WHERE RELIGION PLAYS AN IMPORTANT ROLE
IN THE CULTURE OF THE PEOPLE. This is why both Republican and Democratic
administrations in the United States have in recent years supported
Labor governments, even to the point of interfering in Israeli elections
to a degree that would be considered absolutely illegal in this country
- i.e., sending millions and millions of dollars to Israel in order
to ensure a Labor victory over the more hawkish Likud, and even sending
U.S. experts at "voter manipulation" like James Carville to
Israel in order to doubly guarantee a Labor win.
And there can be no doubt about it, the American elites have had much
to show in recent years for their efforts - especially in strengthening
the secularization process in Israel, and increasing the strength of
those on the far left of Barak's government like the Deputy Speaker
of the Israeli Knesset who seems to favor "peace at any price;"
the same Deputy Speaker who declared herself last month to be in favor
of a "SECULAR REVOLUTION" which would make Israel
a "secular state" like "all the other nations of the
West" and one which, presumably, would give Islam the same rights
in the Jewish state that Judaism holds today.
BENNY MORRIS, AVI SHLAIM & TOM SEGEV
As in the United States, those who favor "secularization"
as a political and social policy in Israel are particularly clustered
around the Israeli educational establishment. In recent years
this cabal of secularists have had a profound affect on attitudes in
Israel through the publication of such books as Benny Morris's Righteous
Victims: A History of the Zionist-Arab Conflict, 1881-1999; Avi
Shlaim's The Iron Wall: Israel and the Arab World; and, in Hebrew,
Tom Segev's The Days of the Poppies: Palestine Under the British.
The kind of anti-Zionism that these books have engendered in Israel
among Jews has been quite shocking - especially as it
has impacted Israeli schools. Many liberal Jews in the United
States support and applaud this process. Take Ethan Bonner of
the New York Times, an advocate of the secularization of Israeli
society, for example; in a recent editorial dealing with the secularization
of Israeli high school textbooks, Bonner wrote:
"(Israeli) school-children have long been taught that the Jews
have always been surrounded by enemies and that their victory over
five Arab armies in the 1948 War of Independence was a near miracle
of David-and-Goliath proportions ... (But) the new books say that
it was the Israelis who had the military edge in the War of Independence
(and) that many Palestinians left their land because they were afraid,
and in some cases expelled by Israeli soldiers. The books freely
use the word "Palestinian" to refer to a people and a nationalistic
movement, unheard of in the previous texts. They refer to the Arabic
name for the 1948 war - the nakbah, or catastrophe - and they
ask the pupils to put themselves in the Arabs' shoes and consider
how they would have felt about Zionism. Finally, the books no
longer separate Jewish and Israeli history from events around the
world but weave them into a single tapestry ... 'Only ten years ago
much of this was taboo', reflected Eyal Naveh, a history professor
at Tel Aviv University and the author of one of the new ninth-grade
textbooks. 'We were not mature enough to look at these controversial
problems. Now we can deal with this the way Americans deal with
the Indians and black enslavement. We are getting rid of certain myths'."
Bonner's editorial in the Times was dated August 14, 1999 and
came out under the title, "Israel's History Textbooks Replace Myths
With Facts." The editorial was enthusiastically embraced by many
in the liberal Jewish establishment in the United States who thought
in doing so they were doing nothing more than pushing the same secularization
process in Israel that had worked so well for them in the United States.
In doing so, they believed that they were being consistent on a principled
basis by accepting the same secularization for themselves (really, for
their co-religionists in Israel) that they had so vigorously pushed
in America insofar as the Christian community was concerned. Secularization
in America had brought peace and acceptance for Jews here; couldn't
the same process in Israel bring acceptance and peace for Jews in the
SECULARIZATION OF THE JEWISH STATE
ULTIMATELY MEANS THE ISLAMIZATION OF ISRAEL
This, of course, is what many in the Palestinian community say they
are pushing for - a secularized Israel - i.e., AN ISRAEL THAT HAS
BEEN "CUT OFF" FROM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, ISAAC, AND JACOB
- where both Jews and Muslims can live in peace together in one state.
But in the long run, to Arafat and his cohorts it appears that all secularization
is, is a short "way station" along the road to the total Islamization
of the Holy Land - a step that would be easy enough to achieve once
Muslims outnumbered Jews in Israel. Secularization, as Arafat
said in Johannesburg, South Africa, is just another tactic to weaken
the Jews -
"... like the agreements that Mohammed made with tribes that
were stronger than him. As soon as he had enough power, he simply
violated the agreements and destroyed his enemies."
But an Israeli state where the Jewish religion was just one of many
other religions? An Israel "free" of its Jewish roots?
An Israel that had turned its back on its founding principle to be a
"safe haven for Jews the world over?" An Israel that
repudiated the words of its own national anthem "HaTikvah"
which say: "... to be a free nation in our (Jewish) Land?"
As the thought has begun to take root in the minds of many otherwise
liberal and secular Israelis, they have been revolted by it - and not
only among Jews in Israel, but also among growing numbers of secularized
Jews in this country that have at last begun to seriously count up the
cost of what the "End Game" of the Oslo Accords might be all
ISRAEL AND THE CHURCH HAVE ONE THING IN COMMON IN
THIS LIFE: THE AMERICAN ELITE AS THEIR PRINCIPAL ENEMY
And, again, who is pushing this decidedly anti-Jewish process?
Can there be any doubt that it's the Americans. This is exactly
what Carville was doing in Israel prior to Israel's last election -
the one that brought the Barak government to power. What Carville
was attempting to do was make secularization an acceptable process to
the Jewish community, or at least to those Jews allied with Barak and
the "peace party" - even to the point of making palatable
to Jews in the "peace party" an alliance with Israeli Arabs
designed to neutralize the "natural majority" against the
Oslo Accords in the Jewish community itself.
And make no mistake about it, the Republicans are as involved in selling
secularization to the Israelis as the Democrats are. There's no
difference here. The Republicans are as willing to "sell
out" the Israelis as the Democrats are, their alliance with the
evangelical community notwithstanding.
NOW STOP AND THINK ABOUT ALL THIS FOR A MINUTE! ISN'T THIS THE EXACT
SAME ELITE - THE ONE THAT IS AIMING TO DESTROY ISRAEL AS A JEWISH
STATE (i.e., THE AMERICAN ELITE) - THAT WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT
FOR MORE THAN A YEAR INSOFAR AS THE CHURCH IS CONCERNED? - SURELY
IT IS!! Isn't this the same elite that is seeking the destruction
of the church, at least the true church? - surely it is! What
does this say then?
It says very simply that - ISRAEL AND THE CHURCH ARE CONFRONTING
THE SAME ENEMY: THE AMERICAN ELITE! I say again, ISRAEL
AND THE CHURCH ARE CONFRONTING THE SAME ENEMY: THE AMERICAN ELITE!
PLEASE UNDERSTAND THIS - IT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT THAT YOU "GET
Doesn't all this say something to you? Do you think that all
this is just "happen-stance?" A coincidence? If you
do, you are a very, very naive person. These people - i.e., the
elites - the same people who are pretending to be both Israel's friends
and the church's friends (but who in reality are seeking the destruction
of both) are UTTERLY wicked and THOROUGHLY
evil people. THEIR GOD IS THEIR MONEY, and they have been
TOTALLY corrupted by it. As we said in our Colombia
article, these people are people who HURT other people;
the kind that "drown men in destruction ..." (1 Tim. 6:9);
who "... walk after the flesh ... and despise government"
(i.e., who despise being told what to do, though they revel in the fact
that they are able to tell others what to do); "... presumptuous
are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of ... (divine
things)" (2 Pet. 2:10); "they are wells without water,
clouds that carry themselves around as if in a tempest ..." (2
Pet. 2:17); "... they speak great swelling words of vanity
... (and) allure (disciples to themselves) through the lusts of the
flesh" (2 Pet. 2:18); they are "... raging waves of the sea
... wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for
ever." (Jude 1:13).
God help both Israel and the church to free themselves from such people,
for while they (i.e., the elites, and most particularly the American
elite) pretend to be the friends of both, they are in reality doing
everything in their power to destroy them. These men serve a system
that is UNALTERABLY opposed to both the church and Israel,
and when such people come bearing either Israel or the church gifts
or alliances of any kind, one should be cognizant of the fact that it
is not meant for their good, but for their ruin.
More next time!
God bless all of you.
We need your help to spread the word concerning Antipas Ministries and the
eschatological viewpoint it represents; WE NEED YOUR
HELP BECAUSE WE DO NOT "LINK" WITH OTHER SO-CALLED "CHRISTIAN"
WEBSITES which are, for the most part, "in the tank"
insofar as their loyalty to the United States is concerned
- a loyalty that has made them partners in the BLOODY
trail the American military has left in its TERROR-RIDDEN
rampage throughout the world, as well as making them partners
in the abject poverty that American corporations have
imposed on the peoples and nations the American military
machine has ravaged - A BLOODY, TERROR-RIDDEN RAMPAGE
THAT HAS TO A LARGE DEGREE BEEN CARRIED OUT IN THE NAME
OF THE "PRINCE OF PEACE." [Please see our articles,
"The Third World
as a Model for the New World Order," Inside
the American New World Order System" and "The
American Empire: The Corporate / Pentagon / CIA / Missionary
YOU CAN HELP BY EMAILING
THIS ARTICLE TO
YOUR FRIENDS AND