Sunday, March 4, 2012

Le néocon juif Eliot Cohen serait conseiller de Romney pour le Moyen-Orient

Eliot Cohen Returns as Romney’s Man on Iran

By Max Blumenthal

In 2005, a group of graduate students at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced and International Studies (SAIS) participated in the school’s annual diplomatic simulation. The high pressure scenario required the students to negotiate a resolution to a standoff with a nuclear-armed “Republic of Pakistan.”Mara Karlin, a student known for her hawkish politics on Israel and the Middle East, played president of the U.S.A.
Though most of the participants were confident they could head off amilitary conflictwith diplomatic measures,Ms. Karlin jumped the gun. According to a former SAIS student, not only did Ms. Karlin order a nuclear strike on Pakistan, she also took the opportunity to nuke Iran. Her classmates were shocked. It was the first time in 45 years that a simulation concluded with the deployment of a nuke.
That year, Ms. Karlin received a plum job in the Bush administration’s Department of Defense where, according to her bio, she was “intimately involved in formulating U.S. policy on Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Israel-Palestinian affairs.” Lebanon was a special area of focus for Ms. Karlin. She claims to have helped structure the Lebanese armed forces and coordinated relations between the U.S. and Lebanese militaries.
According to the former SAIS student, Ms. Karlin was a favorite of Eliot Cohen, an ultra-hawkish professor of strategic studies at SAIS, which is regarded in American foreign policy circles as a training ground for the neo-conservative movement.
Today, Cohen is among Republican presidential front-runner Mitt Romney’s top campaign advisers.
He is the primary author of Romney’s foreign policy white paper, which attacks Obama for “currying favor with [America’s] enemies” and “ostentatiously shunning Jerusalem.”
The paper urges a policy of regime change in Iran including possible coordination with Israel on military strikes, allegedly to prevent the Iranian regime from developing a nuclear weapon. It is an aggressive Republican election season document presenting a concoction of post-9-11 unilateralism and unvarnished imperialism as the antidote to a sitting president Cohen accused of “unilateral disarmament in the diplomatic and moral sphere.” More importantly, it suggests that a Romney administration’s foreign policy might look remarkably similar to—and perhaps more extreme than—that of the Bush administration.
Cohen rose through the ranks of the Republican foreign policy elite as a protégé of Paul Wolfowitz, the former assistant secretary of defense who is credited with playing a central role in the push for invading Iraq. Stephen Walt, a professor of international affairs at Harvard University’s School of Government who has been on the receiving end of aggressive attacks by Cohen, called Cohen “a classic neo-conservative.” Walt said: “He is constantly fretting about alleged U.S. vulnerabilities, consistently supportive of increased defense spending and generally inclined to favor U.S. intervention in other countries. Second, like virtually all neo-conservatives, he is also deeply attached to Israel, as well as to the United States.”
Despite Cohen’s deep Israeli ties, he has proved extremely sensitive to critiques of the connection.When Walt and John Mearsheimer, the latter a professor of International Relations at the University of Chicago, published their widely debated paper on the Israeli lobby in 2006,* Cohen authored one of the first attempts to discredit their thesis about a loose coalition of individuals and organizations creating political pressure to move U.S. foreign policy in a pro-Israeli direction. In an op-ed in The Washington Post, Cohen accused the authors of “kooky academic work” and “obsessive and irrationally hostile beliefs about Jews.”
“Cohen’s rather hysterical reaction to our work was both typical and easy to explain,” Walt remarked.
“Given that he and other neo-conservatives had played a key role in convincing George Bush to invade Iraq in 2003, he was understandably upset when we pointed this out and provided extensive documentation of their role in the run-up to this disastrous war.
He could not refute our logic or our evidence, however, so he chose tomisrepresent our views and smear us falsely as anti-Semites and conspiracy theorists.”
With the last battalions of U.S. troops preparing to redeploy from Iraq to other conflict zones, Cohen is homing in on Iran. In a September 2009 editorial for The Wall Street Journal, he dismissed diplomacy and sanctions as feasible means of curbing Iran’s alleged nuclear ambitions.
“The choices are now what they ever were: an American or an Israeli strike, which would probably cause a substantialwar, or living in aworldwith Iranian nuclear weapons, which may also result in war, perhaps nuclear, over a longer period of time,” he wrote.
As tensions between Israel and Iran rise to unprecedented levels, and Israel’s leaders beseech the U.S. to join a military strike, Cohen’s visions of regime change seem closer to realization than ever.
For him and the neo-conservative policy elite, a Romney victory in November might deliver the next “big prize.”
——
* Walt and Mearsheimer’s book The Israel Lobby & U.S. Foreign Policy (hardcover, 484 pages $30 plus $6 S&H) is available from AFP.Send order to AFP, 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite. 100, Washington,D.C. 20003. To order by major credit card, call toll free 1-888-699-NEWS.
——
Max Blumenthal is an independent journalist who maintains the popular news and commentary website maxblumenthal.com.



Report: Gingrich benefactor Sheldon Adelson may shift support to Romney

In GOP Debate, Romney Reiterates Lies on Iran

Romney blasts Obama on Israel, Iran

Romney Tied to Terrorism GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney looked like a deer caught in the headlights when he was asked if he supported an international, anti-American terrorist organization with a bloody record for killing innocent civilians thousands of times worse than al Qaeda. This “expert on international affairs” claimed he never had heard of them. Then, like a lying politician, he promised: “I’ll take a look at the issue.” Video taken at a town hall meeting in New Hampshire shows Romney quickly waving the issue aside and hurrying on to another question.



 Le général Richard Myers et Eliot Cohen. 
COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS



Cabal of Rabid Warhawks Advising Mitt Romney

The American media is strangely silent about Mitt Romney’s shadow National Security Council, the 50-plus madmen Romney has surrounded himself with as “foreign policy advisers”—many of whom helped push the U.S. into the disastrous war against Iraq. Romney had the chutzpa to name his foreign policy after the Project for a NewAmerican Century, the neo-con dream of a new Pearl Harbor that was fulfilled on 9-11. Several include:

MICHAEL HAYDEN: On CNN (2010), former CIA director and prominent torture advocate, Michael Hayden said attacking Iran over its nuclear program might not be a bad idea. “In my personal thinking . . . I have begun to consider that [nuclear war] may not be the worst of all possible outcomes.”

ELIOT COHEN: Insanely used the 9-11 attacks to advocate war with Iran. Cohen, director of the strategic studies program at Johns Hopkins University, said either we attack Iran, or it gets nukes. “The choices are now what they ever were: an American or an Israeli strike, which would probably cause a substantial war.”

ERIC EDELMAN: Former aide to Vice President Dick Cheney. Earlier this year in an article in the Council on Foreign Relations’s publication Foreign Affairs, Edelman, along with two other co-authors, said that the U.S. will either have to attack Iran or contain its nuclear weapons capability. “The military option should not be dismissed because of the appealing but flawed notion that containment is a relatively easy or low-risk solution to a very difficult problem,” they wrote.

NORM COLEMAN: Former Republican senator from Minnesota. Said that if Israel ever attacks Iran, the United States should join in. Coleman said: “The United States is going to be part of that.”

KIM HOLMES: The Heritage Foundation’s Kim Holmes worried that negotiating with Iran over its nuclear program might be preventing the U.S. from using military force to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. Holmes called peace a “serious mistake.”
Should Mitt Romney become president, get ready for more undeclared war, bigger government and a further expansion of the police state.


Irving Kristol, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Elliott Abrams Lewis, Douglas Feith



La liste des contributeurs au document du PNAC "Reconstruire les défenses americaines" ("Rebuilding America's Defenses") compilé en 2000, qui a appelé à un "nouveau Pearl Harbor": Roger Barnett, du US Naval War College, Alvin Bernstein, de la National Defense University, Stephen Cambone, de la National Defense University, Eliot Cohen, de la Nitze School of Advanced International Studies de la Johns Hopkins University, Devon Gaffney Cross, du Donors' Forum of International Affairs, Thomas Donnelly, du Project for the New American Century (PNAC), David Epstein, du Bureau du Secrétaire de la Défense, Net Assessment, David Fautua, Lieutenant Colonel de l'armée américaine, Dan Goure, du Center for Strategic and International Studies, Donald Kagan, de l'Université Yale, Fred Kagan, de l'Académie militaire américaine de West Point, Robert Kagan, du Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Robert Killebrew Colonel américain (à la retraite ), William Kristol du journal The Weekly Standard, Mark Lagon de la Commission sénatoriale des affaires étrangères, James Lasswell de la GAMA Corporation, I. Lewis Libby de Dechert Price & Rhoads, Robert Martinage du Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessment, Phil Meilinger du US Naval War College, Mackubin Owens du US Naval War College, Steve Rosen de l'Université Harvard, Gary Schmitt du PNAC, Abraham Shulsky de RAND Corporation, Michael Vickers du Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessment, Barry Watts Northrop Grumman Corporation, Paul Wolfowitz Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University, et Dov Zakheim de System Planning Corporation, comprend une proportion relativement élevée de noms juifs. Il y a beaucoup plus d'individus associés au PNAC. (...)



http://rackjite.com/graphics/neocons.jpg
John Bolton, Eliot Abrams, Robert Kagan, Michael Ledeen, William Kristol, Frank Gaffney Jr.



Organized Jewry, The Inciter of Global War and Genocide


War is a Jewish racket


by ZionCrimeFactory
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, we have been fed a crock of Jewish/Zionist dung-heap about the Second World War. Our governments, beholden to Jewish money and political influence, have been peddling fantasy stories as “truth”, fairy tales as “fact”, and preposterous fables as “history”, for seventy years straight. Our criminal governments have been lying to us and manipulating us into fighting senseless, catastrophic wars with the sole purpose of vanquishing the enemies of International Jewry, and thus paving the path for the Jewish takeover of the entire planet.
WWII — A Bloodbath For Jewish Benefit
It is a very difficult thing for Americans, Canadians, Brits, Australians, Frenchmen, and other Westerners, to come to terms with the fact that i) WWII was a senseless bloodbath that served no purpose other than to benefit the Jewish Power Elite in various ways, ii) that we were fighting on the wrong side, and iii) Hitler was right about everything. Call it pride, cognitive dissonance, or some combination of both — nobody likes to admit they were hoodwinked.

Jews fired the first shot in 1933.
Despite popular belief, WWII did not start in September of 1939 with the British and French declaration of war against Germany; it actually started in 1933. In 1933, organized Jewry initiated a subversive economic war against Germany; a boycott of German goods designed to weaken and destroy Hitler’s National Socialist government.  The March 24, 1933, edition of England’s Daily Express newspaper ran the headline “Judea Declares War on Germany“. The article reported: “The Israeli people around the world declare economic and financial war against Germany. Fourteen million Jews stand together as one man, to declare war against Germany. The Jewish wholesaler will forsake his firm, the banker his stock exchange, the merchant his commerce and the pauper his pitiful shed in order to join together in a holy war against Hitler’s people.”
International Jewry formally declared its “holy war” against Germany long before Hitler began restricting the rights of Germany’s Jews. Jewry’s war declaration against Germany was issued by Samuel Untermeyer of the World Jewish Federation who said, in the New York Times of 7 Aug. 1933, that it would be means of an “economic boycott that will undermine the Hitler regime and bring the German people to their senses by destroying their export trade on which their very existence depends.” The Toronto Evening Telegram, February 26, 1940, quoted Rabbi Maurice L. Perlzweig of the World Jewish Congress telling a Canadian audience that “the World Jewish Congress has been at war with Germany for seven years.” The Jewish desire for war was admitted to by Rabbi Felix Mendelsohn in the Chicago “Sentinel” of 8 Oct. 1942 where he states: “The Second World War is being fought for the defense of the fundamentals of Judaism.” 
Vladimir Jabotinsky (founder of the Jewish terrorist group, Irgun Zvai Leumi) in Mascha Rjetsch, January, 1934 (also quoted in “Histoire de l’Armée Allemande” by Jacques Benoist-Mechin, Vol. IV, p. 303) said: “For months now the struggle against Germany is waged by each Jewish community, at each conference, in all our syndicates, and by each Jew all over the world. There is reason to believe that our part in this struggle has general value. We will trigger a spiritual and material war of all the world against Germany’s ambitions to become once again a great nation, to recover lost territories and colonies. But our Jewish interests demand the complete destruction of Germany. Collectively and individually, the German nation is a threat to us Jews.” In Les Nouvelles Litterairres, February 10, 1940, Schalom Asch is quoted as saying: “Even if we Jews are not physically at your side in the trenches, we are morally with you. This war is our war and you fight it with us.”
Chaim Weizmann, the late chairman of the World Zionist Organization and first president of Israel, made clear the genocidal Jewish intention to destroy Germany. In a letter to British PM Winston Churchill dated September 10, 1941, Weizmann spoke about how the Jews of the United States pulled the nation into the first World War, and he promised they could do it again, given that Britain fulfilled Zionist demands regarding Palestine. Weizmann wrote: “It has been routinely acknowledged by British statesman that it was the Jews who, in the last war, effectively helped to tip the scales in America in favour of Great Britain. They are keen to do it — and may do it — again.” In a Speech on December 3, 1942, in New York, Weizmann stated: “We are not denying and are not afraid to confess that this war is our war and that it is waged for the liberation of Jewry… Stronger than all fronts together is our front, that of Jewry. We are not only giving this war our financial support on which the entire war production is based, we are not only providing our full propaganda power which is the moral energy that keeps this war going. The guarantee of victory is predominantly based on weakening the enemy forces, on destroying them in their own country, within the resistance. And we are the Trojan horses in the enemy’s fortress. Thousands of Jews living in Europe constitute the principal factor in the destruction of our enemy. There, our front is a fact and the most valuable aid for victory.”
The 24 July, 1942, edition of the American Hebrew Magazine made it plainly clear who brought America into the war when it declared that “whenever an American or a Filipino fell at Bataan or Corregidor or at any other of the now historic spots where MacArthur’s men put up their remarkable fight, their survivors could have said with truth: the real reason that boy went to his death was because Hitler’s anti-semitic movement succeeded in Germany.”
Further proof Jews were behind the push for war on both sides of the Atlantic came in the form of a diary entry made by James Forrestal, who later became U.S. Secretary of Defense in the Truman administration. In his diary of 27 Dec. 1945 Forrestal notes that he played golf with Joseph Kennedy (father of JFK), FDR’s ambassador to Britain, who told him that ex-Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain “stated that America and the world Jews had forced England into war.” In 1949, Forrestal was fired by President Truman and within two months was murdered (ruled a “suicide”) for his opposition to Zionism and the nascent state of Israel.

Likewise, Roosevelt was guided into the war by Jews. On 9 February 1938, the Polish Ambassador in Washington, Count Jerzy Potocki, reported to the Foreign Minister in Warsaw on the Jewish role in shaping American foreign policy. His secret reports said such things as:
“The pressure of the Jews on President Roosevelt and on the State Department is becoming ever more powerful …
… The Jews are right now the leaders in creating a war psychosis which would plunge the entire world into war and bring about general catastrophe.
…the Jews have also created real chaos: they have mixed together the idea of democracy and communism and have above all raised the banner of burning hatred against Nazism.
In conversations with Jewish press representatives I have repeatedly come up against the inexorable and convinced view that war is inevitable. This international Jewry exploits every means of propaganda to oppose any tendency towards any kind of consolidation and understanding between nations.
The American public is subject to an ever more alarming propaganda which is under Jewish influence…
…Propaganda is mostly in the hands of the Jews who control almost 100 percent radio, film, daily and periodical press.”
Roosevelt was surrounded by Jew advisers — rabid anti-German hatemongers and warmongers of the worst sort — such as Bernard Baruch, S. I. Rosenman, Sidney Weinburg, Sidney Hillman, Henry Morgenthau Jr., and Felix Frankfurter.
As Dr. Stephen Sniegoski points out in his book review of The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State:
“Jews also played a significant role in getting the United States into World War II to destroy their Nazi nemesis. And they worked actively to undermine popular noninterventionist resistance to war. For example, the Anti-Defamation League “employed investigative agents who secretly penetrated isolationist and anti-Semitic organizations and collected potentially damaging or incriminating information” which it turned over to the FBI and other federal agencies. (p. 110) Ginsberg does not develop this point, but given the fact that the overwhelming majority of “isolationists” were not enemy agents and were simply exercising their constitutional right to oppose a policy, it is apparent that activist American Jews have been quite willing to crush the civil liberties of others in order to advance their own goals. Jews also played a critical part in turning the media toward a prowar stance. (That was quite an achievement, since the American mood in the 1930s was strongly antiwar and “isolationist.”) In Hollywood, Jewish film makers concentrated on producing anti-Nazi propaganda films to prepare the masses for a crusade against evil.”
So, as has been clearly demonstrated, WWII was provoked by Jews and the blame for this catastrophic bloodbath of sixty million human beings lays squarely at the feet of International Jewry. Hitler did not start the war nor did he want war. To the contrary, Hitler made it clear that he was opposed to such a war, having witnessed first hand the hell of the first catastrophic world war. In 1945 Hitler stated: “It is untrue that I or anyone else in Germany wanted war in 1939. It was wanted and provoked solely by international statesmen either of Jewish origin or working for Jewish interests. Nor had I ever wished that after the appalling first World War, there would ever be a second against either England or America.”
In fact, Jew lackey British PM Winston Churchill — who was a self-professed Zionist, a warmonger, a terrorist, and mass murderer –  flatly rejected peace offers from Hitler in 1939, 1940 and 1941. When Hitler’s number two man, Rudolf Hess, made his miraculous flight to Britain (having to crash land in Scotland) in 1941 to make peace and end the war, Churchill had him arrested and imprisoned for life. Undeniably it was the Jews, and their puppet politicians in America, France and Britain, who wanted war, and did everything they could to instigate and then prolong it.
Jews throughout the world often screamed that National Socialist Germany was intent on ruling the world. The Jewish-controlled US press collectively referred to Germans as war-like barbarians and “Huns”. The Jew Theodore Kaufman, in his diabolical anti-Germanic hate screed, Germany Must Perish! (published in 1941), accused the Germans of pursuing a policy of world dominion and therefore advocated their complete annihilation and the territorial dissection of their nation. Kaufman chillingly wrote: “For it must be patent by now that while all the Germans may not approve of the means being employed by the Nazis in achieving German-world-dominion, they are practically unanimous in agreeing that that goal must, now or in the future, be definitely achieved by Germany. Were the German nations to win this war, not one German would hesitate laying claim to a share in the loot … Yet defeat will on no account erase their desire to conquer and rule the world. There is only one way to frustrate such a desire: the goal of world-dominion must be removed from the reach of the German and the only way to accomplish that is to remove the German from the world!” (Kaufman, Theodore. “Germany Must Perish!”, Argyle Press. 1941)
This is a classic case of Jewish psychological projection, considering that it has always been the chief objective of the Jewish religion to rule the earth and acquire all earthly treasures and possessions; thereby making all Gentiles into subservient slaves to the Jews. It is the Jews, not the Germans, who desire world domination, as the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion have made perfectly clear. Not only is Jewish world dominion elucidated in the Protocols (which have undoubtedly proven to be authentic, despite endless Jewish kvetching to the contrary) but in all ancient Judaic religious texts — the Torah, Talmud, books of the Zohar and Kaballah. Prominent Jewish rabbis from Israel are quite open about their sinister desire to murder and enslave non-Jews.
The Zionist Hand Behind Middle-East Wars

Zionist butcher, Ariel Sharon, puppeteered America's military forces like a marrionette to crush his enemies.
The genocidal destruction that has rained down on the middle-east for the past decade was launched at the behest of a small cadre of conniving Jewish-Zionist ideologues who call themselves “neoconservatives.” The brainchild of three Jewish Communists (“Trotskyites”) Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz and Leo Strauss, neoconservatism is — and has always been — a Jewish movement, led by Zionist motivations and for Zionist gain.
An article written by Gal Beckerman in the Jewish daily news magazine, The Forward, opined: “Acknowledging the Jewishness of neoconservatism has always triggered the red, flashing lights of antisemitism, especially since the start of the Iraq War (with extra points if it’s Pat Buchanan doing the acknowledging). But there is some truth to the suspicion. If there is an intellectual movement in America to whose invention Jews can lay sole claim, neoconservatism is it. It’s a thought one imagines most American Jews, overwhelmingly liberal, will find horrifying. And yet it is a fact that as a political philosophy, neoconservatism was born among the children of Jewish immigrants and is now largely the intellectual domain of those immigrants’ grandchildren.
Jewish political scientist, Benjamin Ginsberg, acknowledged that neoconservatism was essentially a product of Jewish tribalism: “One major factor that drew them inexorably to the right was their attachment to Israel and their growing frustration during the 1960s with a Democratic party that was becoming increasingly opposed to American military preparedness and increasingly enamored of Third World causes [e.g., Palestinian rights]. In the Reaganite right’s hard-line anti-communism, commitment to American military strength, and willingness to intervene politically and militarily in the affairs of other nations to promote democratic values (and American interests), neocons found a political movement that would guarantee Israel’s security.”
Irving Kristol, the Jewish “godfather” of the neoconservative movement let slip the Israeli-centric agenda of his nefarious ideology when, in 1973, he stated: “Senator McGovern is very sincere when he says that he will try to cut the military budget by 30%. And this is to drive a knife in the heart of Israel… Jews don’t like big military budgets. But it is now in the interests of the Jews to have a large and powerful military establishment in the United States… American Jews who care about the survival of the state of Israel have to say, no, we don’t want to cut the military budget, it is important to keep that military budget big, so that we can defend Israel.”
Fellow neoconservative godfather Norman Podhoretz has made similar statements about using American military prowess to protect Israel. Leo Strauss, also a Jewish Zionist and early neocon “intellectual,” advocated the perpetual deception of the public by those in power for a “greater good.” This “greater good” that he spoke of was what was good for the Jews, not the Gentiles among whom they live. Noam Chomsky has argued that Strauss’s theory is a form of Leninism, in which society should be led by a group of elite vanguards, whose job is to protect liberal society against the dangers of excessive individualism, and creating inspiring myths to make the masses believe that they are fighting against anti-democratic and anti-liberal forces. Journalists, such as Seymour Hersh, have opined that Strauss endorsed noble lies, “myths used by political leaders seeking to maintain a cohesive society.”
Jewish neocon genocidists like to speak in public about “global crusades for democracy,” but this is just a clever ruse to deceive the “Goyim” about their real agenda which is to bolster the hegemonic status of Israel in the middle-east ensemble. The Jew William Kristol (son of Irving Kristol), editor of the Weekly Standard, explained the real reason for the disingenuous rhetoric about global democracy to the Jerusalem Post (27th July 2000): “I’ve always thought it was best for Israel for the US to be generally engaged and generally strong, and then the commitment to Israel follows from a general foreign policy.”
Two of Leo Stauss’s more notable protégé’s were none other than Jewish Iraq war architect, Paul Wolfowitz, and Abram Shulsky. Shulsky was the Jewish Straussian who was appointed head of the Office of Special Plans by fellow Jewish neocon Douglas Feith (then Under Secretary of Defense for Policy in the Pentagon). This office supplied the major portion of the fraudulent “intelligence” that was used by the Bush administration to justify the war against Iraq. It has been proven that the Zionist propaganda entity embedded within the Pentagon, the Office of Special Plans, worked closely with Israel to cook up the “Iraq WMD threat to America” hoax.
The phony “threat” of Iraq possessing or attempting to possess and wield “weapons of mass destruction” was cunningly contrived by Israel and its vast network of Jewish “sayanim” operatives in America who formed a tight conglomeration of neoconservative “think tanks”, such as the Project for a New American Century, American Enterprise Institute, Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, among many others, who were behind all of the propaganda, conjecture and lies that led to the disastrous Zionist proxy war to behead the Iraqi nation for Israel’s benefit in 2003.
Israel’s sayanim operatives had also burrowed their way into the top echelons of the Bush Administration and the Pentagon — namely Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, David Wurmser, Eliot Abrams, Abram Shulsky, Lewis Libby, Ari Fleischer, David Frum, Eliot Cohen, Joshua Bolten, Marc Grossman and many others — thus enabling these inhuman Zionist war-hawks to set US foreign policy at the drop of a dime. In fact, the Bush Administration was infested with dual Israeli-American citizens; forty-two of them to be exact. Many of these Jews had extensive links to the Jewish-Israeli lobby (AIPAC, AJC, ADL, ZOA, etc) and to the Sharon regime in Israel.
It’s not exactly a secret that the neocons are mostly Jews whose loyalty lies with the Zionist state, not America. Ari Shavit, a writer for Israel’s Haaretz Daily News Service, proudly proclaimed that:
“The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservatives, most of them Jewish, who are pushing President Bush to change the course of history.”
It’s incredible to see some people still trying to deny this.
This lunatic Zionist agenda for mid-east destruction goes back much further than many people realize. In 1996, a militarist Israeli “thank tank” called the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (IASPS), authored a policy paper for the incoming Israeli Likud Prime Minister, the crazed Arab-hating war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu, entitled “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm“. Within this damnable Zionist strategy paper we find the overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi Ba’athist regime being advocated as an “important Israeli strategic objective”, as well as calls for the toppling of the governments of Iran and Syria. Their grand strategy was aimed at replacing the governments of these countries with Israel-friendly stooges. Three of the authors of this warmongering paper were none other than Richard Perle, Douglas Feith and David Wurmser — all of whom became top ranking members of the Bush Administration in 2001 eagerly pushing for an American war with Iraq. The Clean Break paper was essentially a continuation of an earlier proposal by Zionist extremist Oded Yinon called “A Strategy for Israel in the 1980s” (published in 1982). Yinon wickedly suggested that the Arab States should be destroyed from within by exploiting their internal religious and ethnic tensions. These cold-blooded Israeli Geo-political strategists envisioned that by weakening Israel’s external enemies they could thereby weaken Israel’s internal enemies, i.e. the native Palestinians.

Some of the subversive Jews behind the Iraq War.
The ultra-militaristic Project for a New American Century group — which many people suggest was the prime mover in shaping the post-9/11 American-led war agenda in the middle-east — was essentially an offshoot of the Israeli IASPS, and was headed by Jewish neocon heavyweights William Kristol and Robert Kagan. In one of the group’s deranged “studies” in September of 2000, PNAC released a report entitled, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategies, Forces, and Resources For a New Century”, which called for a “New Pearl Harbor” in order to galvanize the American masses behind illegal wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and a broader war against the entire Arab/Muslim world. It chillingly stated, “the process of transformation is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic catalyzing event — like a New Pearl Harbor.” At least half the members of the PNAC group were Jewish. The Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs and the American Enterprise Institute were also instrumental in the deceptive propaganda campaign that led to the war in Iraq. Both groups were Jewish-financed and run operations.
Another important piece to this Zionist puzzle is the Jonathan Institute, a maniacal Zionist “think tank” set up in 1979 by former and current Israeli prime minister’s Menachem Begin (terrorist/mass murderer, former head of the Irgun) and Benjamin Netanyahu. This group of Israeli terror planners held a series of conferences throughout the 1980s and derived its name from Bibi Netanyahu’s late brother Jonathan Netanyahu, who was killed in the Israeli raid on Entebbe airport in Uganda in the 1970s. This coterie of Zionist crooks endeavored to promote their genocidal fantasies of a “clash of civilizations” between the West and Israel’s Arab/Islamic adversaries and also effectively publicized their desire for Western powers to adopt their espoused doctrine of “preemptive retaliation,” the Israeli policy of killing those designated as “terrorists” before they can act. Begin, Netanyahu and other international Jewish terror masters, attempted to seduce Western leaders to join their sadistic effort to fragment and destabilize the middle-east so as to make it safer for Israel and ripe for Israeli plundering.

Zionist parasite Netanyahu, the architect of 9/11 and the global "war on terror" crusade of Zionist mayhem and chaos.
Netanyahu published a book in 1986 entitled, Terrorism: How the West Can Win, which was a collection of essays from himself and like-minded Zionist gangsters who harbored grandiose dreams of the annihilation of Arabs and Muslims who get in the way of the Likud Party’s strategic objectives. Netanyahu’s book basically lays out the frame-work for what is now generally known as the “war on terror”, and contains all of the vocabulary and discourse that didn’t enter our lexicon until after the suspicious events of 9/11. This book is undoubtedly a key piece of evidence that the “war on terror” is a Zionist-engineered scam for global Jewish hegemony.
The Jewish Neocons — who had been lurking over capital hill like hawks for decades, running their sleazy Zionist propaganda outfit magazines and periodicals such as The Weekly Standard and The New Republic — had for years been unsuccessful in their ceaseless pursuit to drag America into another war in the middle-east, following the first Persian-Gulf war in 1991. Nobody was buying their lies that Iraq posed an imminent danger to America. But that all changed on September 11, 2001.
The catalyst for this current state of perpetual warfare between the West and Israel’s Islamic enemies was, of course, 9/11; the “new pearl harbor” event that the PNAC Zionists had been lusting for to realize their wet-dreams of endless warfare.
Pitting the West against the Islamic Middle-East in a prolonged battle was something that Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak and the then Israeli PM Ariel Sharon publicly called for within an hour of the terrorist spectacle that struck America on that fateful day; a testament to the true authors of the day’s horrific events. An event that Benjamin Netanyahu mockingly proclaimed was a “good thing for Israel … will bring immediate sympathy [for Israel's cause].” An event that genocidaire, Ariel Sharon, dubbed Israel’s “Hanukkah miracle.” An event which Israeli political analyst Ehud Sprinzak candidly described as “the most important public relations act ever committed” in favor of the Jews and Israel.
Of course, for those of us who have actually studied the subject of 9/11, we know who the real perpetrators were. The former head of Pakistan’s ISI intelligence service (Hamid Gul), the 25 year German SPD parliamentarian and author of several books on the secret operations of intelligence agencies (Andreas Von Bulow), the former President of Italy (Francesco Cossiga), as well as the former director of studies of the US Army War College (Dr. Alan Sabrosky), all unanimously concur that the Israeli Mossad conducted 9/11 as a false-flag attack to kick-start this long-planned “clash of civilizations” that Zionists had been so zealously lobbying for, for decades.
(For more information about the Jewish origins and Zionist machinations of the neoconservative movement that engineered the Iraq War, see Michael Collins Piper’s book, The High Priests of War, and Dr. Stephen Sniegoski’s book, The Transparent Cabal. Also recommended are the two excellent documentaries, “War By Deception” and “Missing Links“, which comprehensively expose the Zionist cabal behind 9/11 and the 9/11 wars.)
Jewish Neocons and the HoloHoax
There is an interesting connection between Jewish neoconservatism and the fictitious ‘Holocaust’ religion. The Jewish Mafia’s preposterous anti-German conspiracy theory — known to the world as The Holocaust™ — is central to neoconservative thinking.
Jewish journalist Gal Beckerman had this to say about the motivations of Jewish neoconservatives:
“It was Podhoretz, however, who gave neoconservatism its most explicitly Jewish cast. The August 1968 issue of Commentary featured Emil Fackenheim’s famous essay, “Jewish Faith and the Holocaust: A Fragment,” which included Fackenheim’s contention that after Auschwitz, Jews had a moral responsibility to defend Jewish interests so as not to hand Hitler a “posthumous vic-tory.” By February 1972, Podhoretz himself wrote a piece titled, without irony, “Is It Good for the Jews?”
Holocaust consciousness was growing in the 1970s, as was a renewed sense of threat to Jews and a feeling that, as Podhoretz put it, the postwar “statute of limitations” on anitisemitism had run out. Israel’s security, threatened in the Six Day War and the Yom Kippur War — both events that gave Jews existential pause — suddenly became a top American Jewish concern. Podhoretz came to identify more and more with the defense of Jews, and by the 1980s, half his articles on international affairs focused on Israel and threats to the Jewish people.”
As that article demonstrates, one of the main motivating factors behind the policies advocated by neoconservative ideologues was protecting the Jews from “another holocaust.” Of course, what this article won’t tell you is that the alleged ‘holocaust’ of Jews during WWII did not, and could not have scientifically, mathematically, possibly ever occurred. Nor did any of the dozens of other “holocausts” or “imminent holocausts” of “six million Jews” that Jewish-Zionist and Jewish-Communist propagandists had been incessantly promoting in the press dating back to the late 19th century.
Interestingly, the main Zionist architect of the savage Iraq War, Paul Wolfowitz, was heavily influenced by the fraudulent mythology of Holocaustianity. According to Shelemyahu Zacks, Paul Wolfowitz’ father, Jacob Wolfowitz, “fought … for the liberation of Soviet Jewry. He was a friend and strong supporter of the state of Israel, AIPAC member and had many friends and admirers there.” Paul Wolfowitz’s wikipedia article asserts that he was, “Strongly influenced by his father, Paul Wolfowitz became “a soft-spoken former aspiring-mathematician-turned-policymaker … [whose] world views … were forged by family history and in the halls of academia rather than in the jungles of Vietnam or the corridors of Congress … [His father] … escaped Poland after World War I. The rest of his father’s family perished in the Holocaust.” Wolfowitz may have lost some family in WWII, as did tens of millions of other people, but his relatives certainly didn’t die in a “homicidal gas chamber” because such claims are a tissue of fabrication.
Wikipedia tells us that Wolfowitz read about the HoloHoax and Hiroshima as a boy and calls them “the polar horrors”. Speaking of the influence of the HoloHoax on his views, Wolfowitz said: “That sense of what happened in Europe in World War II has shaped a lot of my views … It’s a very bad thing when people exterminate other people [except, of course, when Jews exterminate Palestinians or when Allied troops exterminated Germans or when Jewish Communists exterminated Russians and Ukrainians or when American troops exterminate Arabs and Muslims on behalf of Israel -- ZCF], and people persecute minorities. It doesn’t mean you can prevent every such incident in the world, but it’s also a mistake to dismiss that sort of concern as merely humanitarian and not related to real interest.”
Another key architect of the Iraq War, sleazeball Zionist genocidist Richard Perle, is seen in this BBC documentary titled “The War Party”, saying how the HoloHoax has shaped his worldview and is essentially the motivating factor that drives his insidious warmongering on behalf of Israel. At the 16:49 mark of the video, Perle says: “the defining moment of our history was certainly the holocaust. It was destruction, a genocide of a whole people, and it was the failure to respond in a timely fashion to a threat that was clearly gathering. We don’t want that to happen again. When we have the ability to stop totalitarian regimes we should do so because when we fail to do so the results are catastrophic.”
It is supremely axiomatic that the “big lie” of “Iraqi WMD” that was used to justify the war against Iraq was conjured up by, in essence, the same caliber of cunning Jew propagandists that conned the world into believing in the “big lie” of “German WMD” (the gas-chambers myth). The shared mindset of people like Perle, Wolfowitz, and other Jewish neocons, is that the HoloHoax justifies Israel’s existence, it justifies US support for Israel, and it justifies endless wars against Arab/Muslim nations for Israel’s “security.”

Little children are mesmerized by HoloHoax propaganda films from the outset of their childhood. No wonder they believe it so much.
The Zionist-trumpeted myth of ‘Iraqi WMD’ has been dismantled and is believed by very few people today (with the possible exception of Sean Hannity). However, the myth of ‘German WMD’ (gas-chambers lie) is still very much believed by the majority of the mind-controlled Western populace, because that propaganda has been so relentless and intensively force-fed to people since a young age. Not only that, but it is actually illegal to challenge the claims of the HoloHoax in a dozen countries in Europe — no wonder so many people believe it, in many countries they are forced to by law! Europeans who bravely refuse to blindly accept and adhere to the conformist dogma of this hoax run the risk of heavy fines and even imprisonment! Truth doesn’t need laws to protect it from scrutiny, but lies do.
Once the holocaust myth is finally dismembered on a wide scale, then all of the fraudulent justifications Jewish Neocons give to generate support for Israel and global Jewry in all of their villainous endeavors, will collapse like a house of cards.
The First Gulf War, Atrocity Propaganda and the HoloHoax

Zionists Steven Solarz and Tom Lantos masterminded the push for American intervention in the first Persian-Gulf war using lies and deceit.
There is also an interesting correlation between the first Gulf War, atrocity propaganda and the HoloHoax.
The late American-Jewish congressman Tom Lantos, a Hungarian “HoloHoax survivor” and rabid Zionist, was the mastermind behind another series of atrocity lies which led the US down the path of endless wars in the middle-east on behalf of Israel. Tom Lantos’ Congressional Human Rights Caucus held a hearing after the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq in 1991. Lantos’ Human Rights Caucus presented “(lie)witnesses” who spoke about alleged atrocities committed by Iraqi soldiers in Kuwait. It was revealed months after this hearing successfully pushed America into the first Gulf War, that the whole thing was a scripted hoax! The entire saga was concocted with the help of the public relations firm, Hill and Knowlton.
The testimony that clinched the war resolution that barely passed in the Senate in a 52-47 vote, was delivered by a young Kuwaiti girl who appeared anonymous at the hearing, known to the public only as “Nayirah”. She claimed to have witnessed Iraqi troops come into a Kuwaiti hospital with guns, who then proceeded to remove dozens of babies from their incubators — stole the incubators — and left the babies to die on the cold floor. This never happened. “Nayirah” spoke perfect American English (likely lived in the US her whole life) and turned out to be the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States. This disgraceful and corrupt young woman was nothing less than a paid actor, coached in the art of deception, who tearfully recited a rehearsed pro-war propaganda script prepared for her by her Zionist paymasters. This hoax atrocity story was widely publicized by mainstream media outlets and Kuwaiti officials repeated these lies at the United Nations in their campaign to elicit Western intervention in their struggle with Saddam Hussein.
The “Kuwaiti incubators hoax” essentially provided the casus belli for American intervention in the first Gulf War. Evidently, child atrocity stories are an effective pro-war propaganda tool because of their ability to garner anger from the public, which is why Jews are so fond of telling grotesque tall tales of Nazis ripping babies in half with their bare hands. Is it any surprise that Lantos (being the experienced liar that he is) was one of the highlighted stars of Steven Spielberg’s Holocaust Hoax documentary, “The Last Days”? A counter-documentary which exposes the lies of Spielberg’s hate film was released earlier this year titled “The Last Days of the Big Lie“; I encourage everyone to watch it.

Zionists attempted second twentieth century "gas chambers" hoax in 1991; this time maligning Iraqis with this ridiculous 'blood libel'. Click to enlarge.
It is hardly surprising that during the first Zionist-contrived Gulf War deceitful Jews laughably attempted to resurrect the WWII “homicidal gas chambers” myth and project it onto Iraq. The New York based Jewish Press, then calling itself “the largest independent Anglo-Jewish weekly newspaper,” wrote on its title page on February 21, 1991: “IRAQIS HAVE GAS CHAMBERS FOR ALL JEWS” The front cover announcement of volume 12, number 1 (spring 1991), of Response, a periodical published by the Jewish Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles and distributed in 381,065 copies, was: “GERMANS PRODUCE ZYKLON B IN IRAQ (Iraq’s German-made gas chamber)”
Nobody took those claims seriously, and they obviously weren’t true. But it illustrates the reckless disregard Jews have for historical truth and accuracy. Time and time again we see mendacious Jews carelessly trying to elicit sympathy from the public using lies, even resorting to resurrecting past false propaganda narratives to malign their new enemies (the Arabs and Muslims) with. It’s been over 60 years since WWII, you’d think these scoundrels would have come up with some new lies and slanders by now. It seems that any time the Jews want to demonize someone they march up to the old “attic of Jewry” where they keep all the atrocity propaganda albums and highlight reels, lift off the shelf the first ancient Aggadah fable they can find, dust it off, and use it once again. If it doesn’t work the first time, they try again and again until it finally sticks. I guess the Jews aren’t as sophisticated as some might think.
Conclusion
Countless times, non-Jews — mesmerized by subversive propaganda — have been duped into going to war against the Jews’ enemies. Unmistakeably, the main tool of the Jew to accomplish his sinister ends is the power of propaganda and mass persuasion through atrocity lies. The television and news-media is their greatest weapon because with those elements under their firm control they are able to shape what the public thinks and feels; thereby shaping what people do. Multitudinous millions of Gentiles have fought, killed and died in wars instigated by International Jewry, aided and abetted by Gentile pawns and stooges who sell out their own people for short-term monetary gain and political power.
Ostensibly, the Jews have attained their current position as global hegemon and world dictator through the instigation of wars and revolutions — pitting Gentiles against Gentiles. As we are busy killing each other, the Jews merrily count their shekels all the way to the bank. In the end, it is people’s innate naivety, as well as their susceptibility to be deceived and misled by emotive atrocity stories, that affords the Jews a smooth ride to world supremacy. Ladies and gentlemen, it’s time to wake up and smell the coffee before it’s too late. Either accept the truth now, and inform others about it, or face slavery!


Sur ce blog:

Michele Bachmann est comme Sarah Palin: plus sioniste que les sionistes

Rick Santorum, le nouveau candidat sioniste le plus en vue aux États-Unis, représente un grave danger pour la liberté d'expression

Sheldon Adelson: "je suis le juif le plus riche au monde"

Selon Frank J. Gaffney (PNAC), les Frères Musulmans ont infiltré et contrôlent l'administration Obama

'A CLEAN BREAK': un document incontournable du gvt israélien pour comprendre le projet du Grand Israël et les agressions impérialistes au Moyen-Orient

La Judée déclare la guerre à Ron Paul

11 septembre et tout le reste: c'était pas les musulmans!

Le mouvement juif Néo-conservateur : du trotskisme au bellicisme sioniste

Les fauteurs de guerres

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

AL QAÏDA, ISRAËL: MÊME COMBAT!




Al Qaida et les sionistes abondent dans le même sens: il faut "intervenir" en Syrie et juger Assad pour crimes contre l'humanité.

À noter: comme Saddam Hussein et Kadhafi, Assad fait la guerre à Al Qaida et aux terroristes musulmans fanatiques du même genre.

Joe Lieberman and Al-Qaeda, United on Syria (and other wars of ‘Muslim liberation’)

In a post entitled “Washington and Al-Qaeda, United on Syria,” Antiwar.com’s John Glaser observes that “influential members of Congress” and al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri are both advocating the arming of the Syrian opposition. Continues Glaser:
Oddly enough, this is not the first time in recent memory that the leadership in the U.S. has explicitly advocated merging U.S. policy with al-Qaeda’s goals. From early on in the NATO mission to aid the Libyan rebels and oust Muammar Gadhafi, it was known that many of those so-called “freedom fighters” had ties to al-Qaeda. In fact, U.S. intelligence found that al-Qaeda fighters had swarmed to Libya and tried to “drum up extremist activities.” After Gadhafi was killed, an al-Qaeda flag was raised in the center the rebel stronghold of Benghazi. Following that, al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) publicly called themselves the “main beneficiaries” of the instability caused by the NATO war, noting specifically their receipt of weapons.
Aside from all of the terror and abuse the newly empowered National Transitional Council has brought the people of Libya in the form of murder, theft, torture and thuggery, they and their varied militias have also been imposing a harsh brand of militant Islam on Libyans, as opposed to the democratic paradise Obama predicted.
I’m not suggesting a conspiracy theory, just plain stupidity. As I’ve explored elsewhere, while I’m no stranger to Imperial Grand Strategy, I think the system operates in a way such that backward policies are carried out even when many elites recognize they’re against the “national interest.” The real question is how nobody is calling them out on it. Joe Lieberman has just recently called the Syrian rebels “brave freedom fighters” almost synchronous with Ayman al-Zawahiri. How is this not headline news?
Of course, Libya (2011) was not the first time that Lieberman et al. were united with al-Qaeda on foreign policy goals. Bosnia (1992-95) and Kosovo (1997-98) are two of the more obvious instances of this alliance on the wars of “Muslim liberation” that William Kristol and Paul Wolfowitz celebrated last year in The Weekly Standard. One doesn’t have to be a “conspiracy theorist” either to realize that almost everything al-Qaeda says or does seems to coincide with Israeli interests. Remember those “dancing Israelis” and Netanyahu’s admission that 9/11 was “very good.”




Lieberman: US should arm Syrian opposition


https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEja9c3SJRzjx0YuzdEhCWKnPHtVZvnW6XEz_OD9BDkzJ3WGOfKAw1pkt0JImGO_C4vUjjlpkKVO8HtzDffc9k-zqGujMsynR6g3wD_mBP2lz8BX5PhkzybRbLdCL1ZnMjR5c1AGuV8lBIo/s1600/Syria+Israel+map+BU.jpg



VIDEO - RT: ‘US backs Al-Qaeda to mutually destroy Syria’

VIDEO - Le chef d’Al-Qaida soutient la rébellion en Syrie

Israel doesn’t fear regime change in Syria

L’Armée syrienne libre, représentant légitime du peuple syrien?

Israel’s Favourite Arab Proposes ‘A Kosovo Model for Syria’

US debates arming Syrian opposition as “defense strategy”

Zionists Use al Qaeda to Attack Syria

Foreign Policy: Israel partisans (and a few token turncoat Arabs) consider Syria next steps

The Israel Lobby’s Role in Pushing for Regime Change in Syria

VIDEO - Israël annonce avoir des contacts avec l’opposition syrienne

Le rapport de la Ligue Arabe donne des preuves de l’implication de la CIA, du MI6 et du Mossad derrière les violences en Syrie


Mossad vs Assad? 'CIA death squads behind Syria bloodbath'

Et comme c'est arrivé à Hussein et Kadhafi, les accusations de "massacrer son propre peuple". C'est le scénario de la Libye qui est repris intégralement... "On a des images... il massacre son propre peuple, ce tyran, ce dictateur immonde! les révoltes sont légitimes (même si on les fomente et même si on les arme)"

'Images show Assad cruelty'   US releases satellite images showing 'horrible kinds of weaponry' used against Syrian people

Lizzie Phelan: Western Media Fabricated Mass Killings of Syrian Peaceful Demonstrators

Al-Qaeda infiltrating Syrian opposition, U.S. officials say il y a des nonos qui disent que al qaida existent pas: ils font juste répéter ce que les médias alternatifs racontent. Il y a des gens qui font des attaques et se réclament d'al qaida, al qaida existe et c'est pas des agents sionistes, la question c'est qui est-ce qui manipule ces musulmans terroristes.

VIDEO - US, Israel conspiracies will fail in Syria'

Europe blindly following Israeli interest on Syria

Friendly advice: France, UK to command ousting of Assad?

Officiers turcs arrêtés : le Mossad de plein pied dans l’insurrection en Syrie.

C'était l'objectif de ces révoltes du "printemps arabe" fomentées par les sévices secrets sionistes: justifier le sentiment d'insécurité permanente d'Israel, justifier qu'il se "défende...Le sionisme c'est la guerre. Sans guerre, Israël ne peut survivre.

40 agents secrets turcs entraînés par le Mossad capturés en Syrie

Arming Al-Qaeda: US to pump weapons into Syria warzone? 

Syrian Rebels Captured With Israeli Weapons

State Department quietly warning region on Syrian WMDs

With Friends Like ‘Friends of Syria’…

Israel Partisans Prefigure ‘Arab Spring’ at 2009 FPI Forum on ‘Democracy Promotion’

VIDEO - CIA / Mossad Snipers in Syria and the Arab States

VIDEO - US, Israel plot to topple al-Assad Govt'

Asma Al-Assad, Diana of the Middle East: Syria's First Lady on Gaza

Syrian opposition wish to “be friends” with Israel

MK Herzog: Syrian rebels want peace with Israel

VIDEO - Syria – The CIA and NATO Exposed

VIDEO - Imperialists and their Islamists in Syria: Interview with Aijaz Ahmad

Syria: coup engineers used the same sniper tactic to incite Venezuelans in 2002

Qatar goes public on its arming of “peaceful” Syrian uprising

Lieberman says ‘Israel ready to provide aid to wounded Syrians’

Canada sanctions Syria, McCain calls for air strikes: John Baird, Canada's Foreign Minister, closes embassy, says "Assad must go"; McCain says US should lead int'l strikes.

McCain calls for airstrike on Syria Statement is as much a critique of President Barack Obama as a rallying call for an international military campaign, accusing the president of being too soft on Assad.

McCain Calls for Bombing Syria 'We Should Have Learned From Libya'

Selon BHL : "il faut, maintenant, une intervention en Syrie"

In Syria, al Jazeera’s Credibility Implodes

Canada bans all dealings with Syrian central bank, closes Syria embassy

Israel’s No.1 asset [John McCain] in the Senate calls for airstrikes against Syria

Israel mulls ‘charity concert’ for Syrian insurgents





JINSA: Strengthening Israel by promoting Syrian ‘Chalabi’
By Maidhc Ó Cathail
The Passionate Attachment
February 20, 2012
On February 17, subscribers to the mailing list of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) received a message entitled “Want to Know What’s Going On in Syria?” inviting them to a special conference call briefing from Farid Ghadry, co-founder of The Reform Party of Syria. The invitation from the hawkish Israel lobby think tank — whose half-accurate motto is “Securing America, Strengthening Israel” — to the February 22 briefing reads:

In October of 2001, Mr. Ghadry, along with several Syrian-Americans, formed the Reform Party of Syria. A constitution was written and a constructive and comprehensive program has been put in place to bring regime change to Syria. Today, the party is enjoying the tacit support from many organizations and people in the U.S. administration and think tanks in Washington.
Mr. Ghadry and the other co-founders of RPS are hoping to return to Syria one day to rebuild the country on the basis of principles of real economic and political reforms that will usher democracy, prosperity, freedom of expression, and human rights in addition to lasting peace with open borders with all of Syria’s neighboring countries.
Not mentioned but well-understood by the men from JINSA is that the well-connected Syrian “reformer” has been groomed to facilitate that unlikely democratic utopia by leading Iraq war architect Richard Perle, a prominent member of JINSA’s advisory board until a few weeks ago. But as the Prince of Darkness’s biographer wrote in a 2007 Los Angeles Times article:
Unfortunately for Perle, Ghadry is seen in many quarters as a front man for Israel. Not only is he a dues-paying member of the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, the most powerful Israeli lobby in Washington, but a recent column on his Web site, titled “Why I Admire Israel,” seems to play right into the hands of those who believe the Bush administration’s obsession with regime change in the Middle East is really all about protecting Israel. Did Perle, the savviest of Washington power players, believe that Ghadry’s tub-thumping for Tel Aviv would make him more popular in Syria?
“No,” Perle replied. “I don’t. But he’s his own man. I don’t always understand what he’s doing and why he’s doing it.”
So, in his quest for idealistic dissidents to do in the Middle East what the Walesas and Havels achieved in Eastern Europe, Perle and his acolytes have tapped the discredited Ahmad Chalabi for Iraq, the suspect Amir Abbas Fakhravar for Iran and the allegiance-challenged Fahrid Ghadry for Syria. They’re just not making heroes like they used to.
Perhaps Farid Ghadry’s pro-Israel image problem is why there appears to be no mention of his conference call briefing on the JINSA website. There is, however, one rather revealing reference to Perle’s Syrian Chalabi. In its Events & Programs section, under “New York Cabinet Meetings 2009, 2010 & 2011,” there is the following brief entry:
“The Role of Syria in the Middle East: Friend of Iran, Host to Hamas, and Patron of Hizbullah” – Farid Ghadry, President, Reform Party of Syria
To put all this into the broader context of the supposedly Israel-threatening “Arab Spring” — which the LA Times reference to Perle’s “quest for idealistic dissidents to do in the Middle East what the Walesas and Havels achieved in Eastern Europe” seems to prefigure — a seminal event, which I have previously written about, was held almost five years ago that brought together Israel partisans concerned with “rolling back Syria” among other regional rivals and their native collaborators:
Under the direction of Natan Sharansky, the former Israeli minister who resigned his cabinet seat in 2005 in protest over Ariel Sharon’s Gaza disengagement plan, the [Adelson Institute for Strategic Studies] held a “Democracy and Security” conference in Prague in 2007. It brought together Israeli officials; their American neoconservative sympathizers with their favourite Middle Eastern dissidents in tow — most notably, Richard Perle’s Israel-admiring Syrian protégé Farid Ghadry; and the newly-installed Eastern European democrats swept to power in the wake of a wave of neocon-backed “color revolutions,” the latter group presumably serving to inspire the Arab and Iranian participants to emulate them.
So, if you want to know what’s going on in JINSA’s road to regime change in Damascus, please RSVP to jcolbert@jinsa.org or call 202-667-3900, Ext. 224.
Maidhc Ó Cathail has written extensively on Israel’s push for regime change in Syria.


Is there a difference between Bahrain and Syria?

Mohamed Omar, a Swedish freelance writer, has written an interesting piece on the difference between the “Arab Spring” unrest in two very different countries:
The opposition in Bahrain is a genuine popular movement against an unpopular US and Zionist backed tyrant while the opposition in Syria can be divided in to two main parts. A genuine part which is peaceful, against foreign interference and for democratic reforms and a not so genuine part which is militant, dominated by not so democratic Wahhabi fanatics and Muslim Brotherhood activists, funded and armed by foreign powers, including the Saudi and Qatari Wahhabi dictatorships. This part of the opposition is completely opposed to dialogue and democratic reforms.
Some elements within this disingenuous opposition, which does not seem to have the welfare of the Syrian people as its first priority, are reaching out to the Zionist enemy. Yitzhak Herzog, an alternate on Israel’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee who has previously held ministerial posts, has said the Syrian opposition wants to be friends with Israel.
Zionist media has been working around the clock to demonize the Syrian government while at the same time ignoring the Bahraini uprising and the Saudi crackdown and invasion. It is quite clear which of the two, Assad and Al-Khalifah, the Zionists prefer.
But is it so clear? While the Israel lobby has not surprisingly led the push for regime change in Damascus, they haven’t exactly ignored the opposition in Bahrain either. Fikra Forum, which describes itself as an “online community that aims to generate ideas to support Arab democrats in their struggle with authoritarians and extremists,” features articles sympathetic to the Bahraini opposition, such as “How Saudi Arabia Thwarted Uprisings in Yemen and Bahrain,” “Bahraini Reform and the Saudi Veto,” and “Invading Bahrain is an Old Saudi Objective.” The forum is closely associated with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a think tank created by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee “to do AIPAC’s work but appear independent.” One could say that Fikra Forum was created by the Washington Institute to do WINEP’s work but appear independent. Contrary to the conventional wisdom, WINEP’s work appears to involve supporting unrest not only in countries hostile to Israel, but throughout the Middle East.



Sur ce blog:

Après la Libye, la Syrie?

"De la dictature à la démocratie"

L'ancien responsable de l'Unité de traque de Ben Laden à la CIA estime que l'Islam radical est une menace imaginaire

Al Qaida ou Al Mossad?

Les menaces d'Adam Pearlman (Gadahn), gracieuseté de l'organe de propagande sioniste SITE Intelligence Group

Le nouveau leader d'al Qaida est-il Israélien?

Un Cohen dans les rangs d'al Qaida?

Les attentats revendiqués par al-Qaida... sur un site israélien de propagande

Incroyable! "al-Qaida" dément les théories du complot, défend Israël et attaque l'Iran et le Hezbollah!

Le croisé anti-terrorisme Lieberman lié à un groupe pro-terrorisme

Joe Lieberman parle au nom des États-Unis d'Amérique (rien de moins): "Les USA sont prêts à attaquer l'Iran"

McCain et Lieberman: "bombardez la Libye"

Wiesel, Lieberman et Dershowitz se joignent à Hagee pour présenter une pétition visant l'inculpation d'Ahmadinejad pour 'incitation au génocide'

La soif de sang frénétique de John McCain: après la mort de Kadhafi, les "dictateurs" comme Assad, Poutine, les Chinois doivent avoir peur...

Un esclave des Bronfman-Rothschild, John McCain, menace Poutine: "Cher Vlad, le #printemps arabe s'en vient dans un quartier près de chez vous"

Wednesday, February 8, 2012

DEVOIR DE MÉMOIRE, DEVOIR DE VITRIFIER L'IRAN

"PLUS JAMAIS ÇA!": LA GRANDE LEÇON DE L'HISTOIRE JUSTIFIE DE PACIFIER L'IRAN PAR TOUS LES MOYENS



http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/2d0ca10afa98e0ad41e7070363dd9b80.jpg
http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/b19919cb77206899e93f2ff92a59e8fd.jpg
http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/176e0d1166646c68156d2256a9a701d5.jpg

Israël: l'option d'une attaque contre l'Iran se précise - "Pour éviter une nouvelle Shoah"

Les Israéliens débattent surtout de la nécessité d'informer l'allié américain avant de frapper les sites nucléaires.



La guerre que se livrent en secret Israël et l'Iran a connu lundi un nouvel épisode. Benyamin Nétanyahou a accusé Téhéran d'avoir manigancé deux attentatsvisant des voitures des ambassades de l'État hébreu à New Delhi et en Géorgie, qui ont fait un blessé. «L'Iran, qui est derrière ces attaques, est le plus grand propagateur du terrorisme dans le monde», a lancé le premier ministre.
Ces déclarations illustrent l'extrême tension actuelle entre les deux pays. La probabilité de frappes militaires contre l'Iran n'est plus mise en doute par grand' monde en Israël. L'inconnue porte plutôt sur le calendrier, la grande question étant de savoir si l'État hébreu peut se permettre d'attaquer seul les installations nucléaires iraniennes, sans le feu vert au moins tacite de Barack Obama.
En attendant, les deux pays fourbissent leurs armes. Téhéran affirme que le Mossad, l'agence de renseignements israélienne, serait à l'origine de l'assassinat en deux ans, sur le territoire iranien, de cinq savants atomistes et d'un général responsable du programme de développement de missiles à longue portée. L'État hébreu est également montré du doigt pour une campagne de sabotage informatique, qui aurait permis de mettre hors service des centaines de centrifugeuses utilisées pour enrichir l'uranium. Selon des experts étrangers, le Mossad, en attaquant sur plusieurs fronts, aurait permis de retarder de plusieurs années le programme nucléaire iranien.

Éviter une «nouvelle Shoah»

Mais tous les responsables israéliens admettent qu'il ne s'agit que d'une tactique de «retardement». Autrement dit, malgré tous les «incidents» et des sanctions internationales de plus en plus dures, les Iraniens devraient produire leurs premières bombes atomiques d'ici à un an environ. Selon les médias,Benyamin Netanyahou et Ehoud Barak, son ministre de la Défense, estiment, dans ces conditions, qu'Israël doit attaquer pour éviter une «nouvelle Shoah».
Cette position ne fait pas l'unanimité. Pour lancer une attaque, le chef du gouvernement doit obtenir le soutien de la majorité des 14 membres du cabinet de sécurité, ce qui n'est pas acquis pour le moment. Autre condition: l'appui sans réserve du chef d'état-major, le général Benny Gantz. Or, dans ce cas aussi, il ne semble pas que le premier ministre soit totalement sûr de son fait. Seule certitude: le précédent patron de l'armée, le général Gaby Ashkenazi, était hostile à une offensive qu'Israël mènerait seul.
Les commentateurs sont également très partagés. Les «modérés» redoutent une crise avec le grand allié américain si l'État hébreu décide d'agir sans en informer au préalable Washington. De plus, les responsables militaires prévoient qu'en cas d'attaque contre l'Iran, Israël doive s'attendre à devenir la cible de milliers de roquettes et de missiles tirés à la fois par les islamistes palestiniens du Hamas, à partir de la bande de Gaza au sud, et par le Hezbollah libanais, voire la Syrie de Bachar el-Assad au nord.
Pour tenter de calmer le jeu et éviter de paniquer l'opinion publique, Benyamin Nétanyahou a ordonné la semaine dernière à ses ministres et aux généraux de faire silence dans les rangs à propos de l'Iran. Sa consigne a été respectée. Mais ce mutisme officiel ne rend les préparatifs guerriers que plus crédibles.
Le Figaro - 14/02/12
Résumons : Le Mossad assassine 5 savants iraniens, c'est normal. L'Iran attaque, selon Israël, deux ambassades, fait 1 seul blessé, c'est un Etat terroriste qui veut organiser une "shoah". Il faut sans doute être israélien pour trouver cela logique...(via rivarol blog)

 

Un dirigeant sioniste français veut "vitrifier" l'Iran

VITRIFIER L’IRAN…

[Mercredi 29/02/2012 18:26]
Parmi tous les dangers qui guettent Israél et parmi tous les ennemis qui œuvrent à sa destruction ou en rêvent, l’Iran est certainement le péril le plus menaçant. Sa volonté désormais avérée même pour les sceptiques d’acquérir le nucléaire militaire, impose à Israël et à ce qui reste éventuellement du monde civilisé, une action défensive et préventive. Certains théoriciens voudraient nous faire croire que l’équilibre de la terreur permet d’éviter toute confrontation. C’était peut être le cas d’une certaine façon entre l’Occident et le bloc soviétique où l’équilibre créé par des armes de destruction massive était dissuasif pour les deux parties. Cette logique n’est pas applicable pour un pays musulman où n’existe aucune rationalité et où l’esprit d’analyse est embué par une religion-idéologie de conquête et de guerre. Les musulmans peuvent trouver dans l’islam la volonté de devenir tous des martyrs et de déclencher une destruction catastrophique qui sera une « guerre sainte ». Ils peuvent estimer, et d’ailleurs ils en sont persuadés, que la mort de centaines de milliers de « shahid » pour prix de la destruction d’Israël reste une opération viable. Une fois disparu le rempart que représente Israël pour la défense d’un occident émasculé et inconscient, l’invasion de l’islam pourra régler le sort de l’Europe anciennement judéo-chrétienne.
Il est évident et les impuissances occidentales le répètent à longueur de discours, qu’il faut empêcher l’accession de l’Iran à la capacité nucléaire militaire. Ils le répètent mais ne feront rien comme ils n’ont rien fait de réel jusqu’à maintenant. L’Europe qui est née à Munich n’est pas morte à Auschwitz. Elle perdure et son histoire est parsemée de compromissions et de renoncements.
Daladier a laissé son empreinte et les métastases du quai d’Orsay ont rongé ce qui restait de sain à l’Elysée.
Les sanctions…
Les sanctions économiques ont eu l’effet d’une piqûre de moustique sur un missile blindé et n’ont même pas ralenti la progression iranienne. Seul un virus venu à point nommé et le taux de mortalité curieusement élevé parmi les ingénieurs iraniens ont permis de ralentir la marche vers l’apocalypse islamique.
L’Europe continuera à pondre des déclarations creuses, inutiles et surtout inefficaces, Obama continuera de tout faire pour freiner Israël et permettre ce qui pourrait être son véritable dessein de doter l’Islam d’une puissance nucléaire.
Le peuple juif, dans sa partie consciente, sait le tribut payé pour ne pas avoir cru de suite aux menaces à son encontre. Ne pas avoir cru aux discours tenus à Berlin a causé au peuple d’Israël un holocauste et au monde un cataclysme sanglante et effroyable.
Ne pas croire aux imprécations de l’Adolf de Téhéran ne pas écouter la traduction de ses discours, ignorer ses promesses et ses menaces, oublier les foules en délire dans les rues iraniennes vociférant contre Israël et l’Occident, risque de nous mener au désastre.
La presse ne cesse de décrire les difficultés que représenterait une attaque aérienne israélienne pour détruire l’infrastructure nucléaire iranienne. Un nombre impressionnant d’avions de chasse et de bombardiers, le ravitaillement en vol, les bombes capables de percer les bunkers enfouis au plus profond, les radars et la défense anti-aérienne, les réactions des alliés iraniens dans la région ! Tout cela sans oublier les dizaines et centaines de milliers de missiles, roquettes et obus aux mains des terroristes du Hezbollah, du Hamas et de l’OLP. Tout cela sans discourir sur la cinquième colonne et ces arabes qui se jucheront sur les toits pour espérer voir pleuvoir les obus sur Israël.
Supposons qu’Israël ait assez de cerveaux, assez de volonté et d’expérience militaire pour pouvoir accomplir une attaque indispensable. Toutes ces théories et ces exposés des difficultés inhérentes à la destruction du potentiel létal iranien, ne font que refroidir les ardeurs et servir les intérêts des défenseurs de l’Iran et de ces pacifistes toujours prêts à être vaincus.
L’arme nucléaire…
Il existe pourtant un autre langage que nous pourrions utiliser. Imaginons un instant qu’Israël soit doté de l’arme nucléaire !
Il est évident que l’utilisation d’une bombe atomique serait parfaitement concevable en cas de danger mortel planant sur Israël.
Imaginons encore une déclaration de source « autorisée » affirmant que, si Israël disposait de l’arme nucléaire, il l’utiliserait contre l’Iran. Mieux encore, il l’utilisera contre l’Iran.
Apres tout, vitrifier l’Iran serait dans la lignée de la destruction justifiée de Hambourg et Dresde aux mains des nazis, de la destruction d’Hiroshima et Nagasaki aux mains des alliés japonais du Reich.
Gageons qu’une telle « fuite » aurait des effets bénéfiques immédiats.
« Mein Kampf » et le Coran…
Tout d’abord le rat de Téhéran irait se terrer dans le puits le plus profond emportant avec lui son livre de chevet « Mein Kampf » avec le Coran et la photo de Khomeiny à Neauphle-le Château.
Les puissances occidentales, après avoir condamné Israël et tenté de lui lier les mains, commenceront vraiment à agir pour éliminer le péril atomique iranien de manière concrète. Non pas pour le salut d’Israël mais pour éviter un embrasement qui leur fait peur. Il est même probable que les avions israéliens se verraient ouvrir certaines bases plus rapprochées de la cible et qui lui restent fermées pour le moment à condition d’oublier toute option nucléaire. L’Onu et ses Ban ki Moon voteront des résolutions déclarant que l’usage de la bombe atomique sera condamné. Autant les déclarations belliqueuses et antisémites d’Ahmedindjad (ou d’un Mahmoud Abbas) ne provoquèrent quasi aucune réaction car il est « concevable » de vouloir détruire le peuple juif quand on est arabe ou musulman, autant cette petite phrase israélienne suscitera un tollé général. Et pourtant, la vitrification de l’Iran doit être prise en compte et si nécessaire pour notre existence, doit être effectuée.
L’Occident a toujours eu à choisir entre un arabe fanatique et barbare et un bon juif civilisé et sage. Le choix était évident pour gagner la tranquillité d’esprit : calmer le barbare. Mais si le choix sera entre ce même barbare et un Juif furieux, déchainé et capable de prouesses technologiques, on peut estimer que les chancelleries choisiront de calmer le plus dangereusement efficace.
Si seulement l’Etat d’Israël avait une bombe atomique…et des dirigeants capables d’exploiter son existence !
Bien sûr, la meute des loups hurlera.
Et le silence se fera quand le Lion de Juda rugira.
Jacques Kupfer.

Le juif Jacques Kupfer veut vitrifier l’Iran

C’est ce qu’on apprend dans cet article paru dans Novopress:

11/03/2012 –
JÉRUSALEM (NOVOpress) –
Dans un récent article, “Vitrifier l’Iran” paru dans Israël7, Jacques Kupfer, co-président du Likoud mondial et membre de l’exécutif de l’Organisation sioniste mondiale, énonce ce qui lui parait une évidence : “L’Adolf de Téhéran” (comprendre Ahmadinedjad) est en train de se doter de l’arme nucléaire. Selon Kupfer, les sanctions économiques ont eu “l’effet d’une piqûre de moustique sur un missile blindé“, et si “un virus venu à point nommé et le taux de mortalité curieusement élevé parmi les ingénieurs iraniens ont permis de ralentir la marche vers l’apocalypse islamique“, il ne saurait être question d’en rester là. Mais, toujours selon l’auteur, un bombardement classique par l’aviation israélienne des infrastructures nucléaires iraniennes n’est en rien la solution finale au danger mortel que représenterait le nucléaire iranien.
C’est donc tout naturellement que le co-président du Likoud mondial propose l’utilisation massive de l’arme atomique contre la République islamique. ” Après tout, précise Kupfer, vitrifier l’Iran serait dans la lignée de la destruction justifiée de Hambourg et Dresde aux mains des nazis, de la destruction d’Hiroshima et Nagasaki aux mains des alliés japonais du Reich.”
Dans cet article “Vitrifier l’Iran” le co-président du Likoud mondial fait un “rêve” : “Si seulement l’Etat d’Israël avait la bombe atomique…“. Gageons que pour la quatrième puissance nucléaire du monde, ce rêve est déjà réalité.
http://fr.novopress.info/109512/vitrifier-liran-jacques-kupfer-co-president-du-likoud-mondial/

Notre ami de Novopress oublie certains points de l’article qui valent leur pesant de zyklon B. En parlant de la politique d’équilibre de la terreur le juif Kupfer explique que: «Cette logique n’est pas applicable pour un pays musulman où n’existe aucune rationalité et où l’esprit d’analyse est embué par une religion-idéologie de conquête et de guerre. Les musulmans peuvent trouver dans l’islam la volonté de devenir tous des martyrs et de déclencher une destruction catastrophique qui sera une « guerre sainte ». Ils peuvent estimer, et d’ailleurs ils en sont persuadés, que la mort de centaines de milliers de « shahid » pour prix de la destruction d’Israël reste une opération viable. Une fois disparu le rempart que représente Israël pour la défense d’un occident émasculé et inconscient, l’invasion de l’islam pourra régler le sort de l’Europe anciennement judéo-chrétienne». Sympas le Jacques! Le salut de la race blanche décandente passe par le sionisme, ben voyons! rappelons que la colonisation de la Palestine est allé de paire avec la colonisation de l’Europe. (…)
«L’Europe qui est née à Munich n’est pas morte à Auschwitz. Elle perdure et son histoire est parsemée de compromissions et de renoncements». Monsieur est trop bon!
ttp://www.israel7.com/2012/02/vitrifier-liran/

February 07, 2012 | 27 comments

 

Israel Can’t Go It Alone on Iran Nuke Threat - Using Holocaust Guilt to Pressure World Into War

Dual US and Israeli journalist and Atlantic writer Jeffrey Goldberg uses the tried and true justification for the US to go to war on behalf of world Jewry: the persecution of Jews by the Nazi regime.

*****

‘To Never Forget’

"A photograph of the Auschwitz flyover hangs today in offices across the Israeli defense establishment. In the Ministry of Defense in Tel Aviv, the photos I saw were signed by General Eliezer Shkedi, who was the air force commander at the time. The inscription on these photos read, “To remember. To never forget. To rely on no one but ourselves.”

This past weekend, Eshel was appointed commander of the Israeli air force. It will fall to him to plan and execute the attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, should Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu order him to do so. Senior U.S. officials think that Netanyahu is preparing to launch such an attack in the coming months.

Netanyahu has never kept hidden his feelings about Iran. This is what he told me three years ago: “You don’t want a messianic apocalyptic cult controlling atomic bombs. When the wide-eyed believer gets hold of the reins of power and the weapons of mass death, then the entire world should start worrying.”

Iran represents the definitive, post-Nazi Jewish nightmare: a regime that openly argues for the destruction of Israel and is seeking nuclear weapons. The Iranian supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said just last week, “The Zionist regime is a cancerous tumor that should be removed and will be removed, God willing.” The regime seems bent on building weapons that could actually bring about the obliteration of Israel and its six million Jews."


By conjuring the Holocaust, Netanyahu brought Israel closer to war with Iran
Netanyahu compared Iran to Nazi Germany, its nuclear facilities to death camps, and his current trip to the White House to a desperate plea to former U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt by the U.S. Jewish community to bomb Auschwitz. (...) It was the same reason former Prime Minister Menachem Begin used to bomb the Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1981: preventing the possibility that Jewish children would face the peril of another Holocaust. Now it’s the turn of his successor, Netanyahu, to remove the danger hovering over the heads of Jewish children. (...) The Holocaust talk has but one meaning: they force Israel to go to war and strike the Iranians. The justifications against an attack, weighty as those may be, turn to fumes when put up against the Warsaw Ghetto, Auschwitz, and Treblinka. No calculus of missiles falling on Tel Aviv, rising oil prices and economic crisis can hold water when compared to genocide.


Why Israel must strike Op-ed: Main Shoah lesson is that active anti-Semites must be stopped when they're small











Un pas de plus vers la guerre entre Israël et l'Iran

Un pas de plus vers la guerre, et encore le prétexte de la Shoah, alors que l'Iran ne menace absolument pas Israël... la situation est inverse, en réalité.

Lu dans Le Nouvel Observateur :

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Le discours pugnace prononcé par Benjamin Netanyahu devant le lobby pro-israélien Aipac à Washington a convaincu l'opinion publique israélienne qu'une guerre avec l'Iran est désormais plus qu'une hypothèse.

Le Premier ministre israélien a notamment fait référence à l'Holocauste, citant une lettre de 1944 par laquelle les Etats-Unis rejetaient une demande de responsables juifs de bombarder le camp de concentration d'Auschwitz. Le message était clair: Israël ne peut compter que sur lui-même pour se défendre.

"En tant que Premier ministre d'Israël, je ne laisserai jamais mon peuple vivre sous la menace de l'anéantissement", a dit Benjamin Netanyahu à l'Aipac après son entretien avec Barack Obama à la Maison blanche.

"Nous avons donné du temps à la diplomatie, nous avons laissé du temps aux sanctions. Nous ne pouvons plus attendre davantage", a-t-il dit.

Ce discours n'est pas passé inaperçu en Israël, où analystes, commentateurs et anciens responsables militaires ont noté le durcissement de ton de Benjamin Netanyahu à l'égard de l'Iran, que l'Etat juif accuse de chercher à se doter de la bombe atomique.

"Le pistolet n'est pas seulement chargé, son cran de sécurité a été enlevé", a déclaré à Radio Israël Uzi Dayan, ancien général et conseiller à la sécurité nationale.

Israël a maintes fois répété qu'il ne laisserait pas Téhéran se doter de l'arme nucléaire et cherché à convaincre Washington d'accroître la pression sur l'Iran pour qu'il renonce à son programme.

Pour les experts israéliens, les sanctions économiques imposées par les Etats-Unis et l'Union européenne ne seront efficaces que si elles sont couplées à une menace sérieuse de frappe militaire.

"OBTENIR" OU "DÉVELOPPER"?

Certains Israéliens ont longtemps pensé que les déclarations va-t-en guerre de leurs dirigeants, qui se sont dits prêts par le passé à bombarder l'Iran avec ou sans l'aide des Américains, étaient une menace en l'air.

Aujourd'hui, les mêmes estiment que Benjamin Netanyahu est allé trop loin dans la surenchère verbale pour rester les bras croisés si Téhéran ne renonce pas clairement à ses ambitions.

"Netanyahu a renvoyé l'image d'un homme qui a pris sa décision", écrit l'éditorialiste David Horovitz sur son site internet, TimesOfIsrael.

Barack Obama a appelé Israël à laisser les sanctions porter leurs fruits et s'il a redit pendant son entretien avec Benjamin Netanyahu que toutes les options étaient sur la table, les mots choisis par les deux hommes traduisent une nette différence d'approche qui pourrait avoir de lourdes conséquences sur le calendrier.

Le président américain a ainsi parlé d'empêcher l'Iran d'"obtenir" la bombe atomique; le Premier ministre israélien de l'empêcher de la "développer".

Cela signifie qu'Israël n'entend pas permettre à Téhéran de se doter des équipements nécessaires à l'assemblage d'une bombe, expliquent des officiels israéliens. En d'autres termes, Tsahal pourrait juger nécessaire de frapper militairement l'Iran beaucoup plus tôt que l'armée américaine.

"Nous voulons que l'Iran soit privé de la capacité à développer une bombe, pas seulement qu'il renonce à son programme nucléaire", dit un responsable sécuritaire sous le sceau de l'anonymat.

"DOCTRINE BEGIN"

L'approche israélienne est fidèle à la "doctrine Begin", du nom de l'ancien Premier ministre Menachem Begin, qui avait fait bombarder en Irak la centrale nucléaire d'Osirak en 1981 sur la seule suspicion qu'elle pourrait un jour servir à produire du plutonium pour des têtes nucléaires.

Ce raid aérien avait été présenté comme une démonstration qu'Israël "ne permettrait en aucune circonstance à un ennemi de développer des armes de destruction massive menaçant le peuple israélien".

Le discours de Benjamin Netanyahu devant l'Aipac est, à ce jour, le témoignage le plus explicite de son adhésion à cette doctrine de frappe préventive.

Reste néanmoins au Premier ministre israélien à convaincre son opinion publique du bien-fondé d'une guerre. Un sondage a montré la semaine dernière que moins d'un Israélien sur cinq est favorable à ce que Tsahal bombarde l'Iran seule.

"L'Israël d'aujourd'hui ne souscrit pas (à la doctrine Begin)", souligne Uri Dromi, ancien porte-parole de feu le Premier ministre Yitzhak Rabin, qui compare l'escalade verbale entre Israéliens et Iraniens à l'atmosphère qui avait précédé le début de la Première Guerre mondiale.

"Il (Netanyahu) nous prépare à la guerre mais je ne suis pas sûr qu'on y soit prêts. Ce n'est pas un calcul, c'est un pari", dit-il.

Beaucoup d'Israéliens doutent que leur pays soit préparé aux conséquences d'une guerre, qui se traduirait très certainement par des représailles de l'Iran et, peut-être, de ses alliés du Hezbollah au Liban.

Cela ne tient donc pas du hasard si, quelques heures après le discours de Benjamin Netanyahu à Washington, le ministre de la Défense civile, Matan Vilnai, a envoyé ce message par sms: "Israël a la capacité opérationnelle d'intercepter des missiles d'où qu'ils viennent. Aujourd'hui, chaque citoyen sait qu'il a la responsabilité de se préparer à faire face à une situation d'urgence."








Voyez encore, le cas de Elie Wiesel qui a convaincu Bush de faire péter l'Irak et Saddam Hussein:

The Nobel Peace Prize laureate who persuaded Bush to invade Iraq
From a Voice of America review of George W. Bush’s book Decision Points:
Another person who had a deep impact on his war decision was holocaust survivor and Nobel Peace Prize recipient, Elie Wiesel.
“There was passion in his 74-year-old eyes when he compared Saddam Hussein’s brutality to the Nazi genocide,” the former president remembered.
“Mr. President,” Wiesel said, “You have a moral obligation to act against evil,” Bush wrote.



Debunking Anti-Iran Propaganda: The Myth of the "New Holocaust"

The Holocaust is a good reason, not a bad excuse, for attacking Iran

Terror in the Shadow of the Holocaust When four Iranian dissidents were murdered by Iranian agents in Berlin, a group of courageous Germans, driven in part by Holocaust guilt, fought to bring the perpetrators to justice.

Does AIPAC want war? If a bill pushed by Lieberman passes, it could give the US “political authorisation for military force” against Iran.

Lieberman Edges US to War with Iran

Iran is not Auschwitz Bombing Iran, not Iran's bomb, could destroy Israel.

Kristol instructs “American friends of Israel” to persuade Obama “to stand arm in arm” with Israel on Iran

Israel's non-stop Iran spite puts ties with US in firing line

Iran: Insane Israeli Hypocrisy and Iraq-Style WMD Lies

Netanyahu v Obama – What next?

Le Mossad et la CIA sont d’accord: L’Iran ne cherche pas à fabriquer des armes nucléaires
American and Israel Intel Services agree–Iran not building Nukes

Millions of Evangelical Christians Want to Start WWIII to Speed the “Second Coming”…






Sur ce blog:

“Ils menacent de sanctions et de représailles militaires tous ceux qui émettent des doutes sur la Shoah et le 11 septembre" -- Président Ahmadinejad

Inversion accusatoire : l'empire israélite accuse l'Iran d'être "la plus grave menace pour la paix dans le monde"

L'Iran ne croit pas la fable convenue du 11 septembre ; les États-Unis en mal de casus belli l'accusent d'avoir monté le coup
Pendant que les partis nationalistes européens pourfendent l'Islam et accueillent l'immigration à bras ouverts, le Hamas dénonce l'escroquerie de l'Holocauste
Guerres sionistes vers la délivrance ultime

Ça commence à sentir la fin

S'ils vont en enfer ils nous emportent avec eux

L'option Samson comme justice ultime

La Grande-Bretagne craignait qu'Israël n'utilise la bombe atomique


The Jewish War of Survival


À lire