The Jewish Plan For The Middle East and Beyond

[Indus Falcon]

The Jewish Plan For The Middle East and Beyond
by Gilad Atzmon
Friday, June 13th, 2014

Surely, what’s happening now in Iraq and Syria must serve as a final wakeup call that we have been led into a horrific situation in the Middle East by a powerful Lobby driven by the interests of one tribe and one tribe alone.

Back in 1982, Oded Yinon an Israeli journalist formerly attached to the Israeli Foreign Ministry, published a document titled‘A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties.’

This Israeli commentator suggested that for Israel to maintain its regional superiority, it must fragment its surrounding Arab states into smaller units. The document, later labelled as ‘Yinon Plan’, implied that Arabs and Muslims killing each other in endless sectarian wars was, in effect, Israel’s insurance policy.

Of course, regardless of the Yinon Plan’s prophesies, one might still argue that this has nothing to do with Jewish lobbying, politics or institutions but is just one more Israeli strategic proposal except that it is impossible to ignore that the Neocon school of thought that pushed the English-speaking Empire into Iraq was largely a Jewish Diaspora, Zionist clan.

It’s also no secretthat the 2ndGulf War was fought to serve Israeli interests - breaking into sectarian units what then seemed to be the last pocket of Arab resistance to Israel.

Similarly, it is well established that when Tony Blair decided to launch that criminal war, Lord Levy was the chief fundraiser for his Government while, in the British media, Jewish Chronicle writers David Aaronovitch and Nick Cohen were busy beating the drums for war.

And again, it was the exact same Jewish Lobby that was pushing for intervention in Syria, calling for the USA and NATO to fight alongside those same Jihadi forces that today threaten the last decade’s American ‘achievements’ in Iraq.

Unfortunately, Yinon’s disciples are more common than you might expect. In France, it was the infamous Jewish ‘philosopher’ Bernard Henri Levy who boasted on TV that ‘as a Jew’ campaigning for NATO intervention, he liberated Libya.

As we can see, a dedicated number of Jewish Zionist activists, commentators and intellectuals have worked relentlessly in many countries pushing for exactly the same cause – the breaking up of Arab and Muslim states into smaller, sectarian units. But is it just the Zionists who are engaging in such tactics? Not at all.

In fact, the Jewish so-called Left serves the exact same cause, but instead of fragmenting Arabs and Muslims into Shia, Sunnis, Alawites and Kurds they strive to break them into sexually oriented identity groups (Lesbian, Queer, Gays, Heterosexual etc’)

Recently I learned from Sarah Schulman, a NY Jewish Lesbian activist that in her search for funding for a young ‘Palestinian Queer’ USA tour, she was advised to approach George Soros’ Open Society institute. The following account may leave you flabbergasted, as it did me:

“A former ACT UP staffer who worked for the Open Society Institute, George Soros’ foundation, suggested that I file an application there for funding for the tour. When I did so it turned out that the person on the other end had known me from when we both attended Hunter [College] High School in New York in the 1970s. He forwarded the application to the Institutes’s office in Amman, Jordan, and I had an amazing one-hour conversation with Hanan Rabani, its director of the Women’s and Gender program for the Middle East region. Hanan told me that this tour would give great visibility to autonomous queer organizations in the region. That it would inspire queer Arabs—especially in Egypt and Iran…for that reason, she said, funding for the tour should come from the Amman office” (Sarah Schulman -Israel/Palestine and the Queer International p. 108).

The message is clear, The Open Society Institutes (OSI) wires Soros’s money to Jordan, Palestine and then back to the USA in order to “inspire queer Arabs in Egypt and Iran(sic).”

What we see here is clear evidence of a blatant intervention by George Soros and his institute in an attempt to break Arabs and Muslims and shape their culture. So, while the right-wing Jewish Lobby pushes the Arabs into ethnic sectarian wars, their tribal counterparts within George Soros’s OSI institute, do exactly the same – attempt to break the Arab and Muslims by means of marginal and identity politics.

It is no secret that, as far as recent developments in Iraq are concerned, America, Britain and the West are totally unprepared. So surely, the time is long overdue when we must identify the forces and ideologies within Western society that are pushing us into more and more global conflicts.

And all we can hope for is that America, Britain and France may think twice before they spends trillions of their tax payers’ money in following the Yinon Plan to fight ruinous, foreign wars imposed upon them by The Lobby.

The Jewish Plan For The Middle East and Beyond | Veterans Today​

 

[Indus Falcon]

The Back-Room Deal That Explains The Chaos In Iraq

• ARMIN ROSEN

• JUN. 13, 2014,

In late 2010, Iraq was mired in a political stalemate after ambiguous parliamentary elections left the country without a government for ten months. At the same time, the U.S. was negotiating with the country's leadership to figure out the levels and legal status of U.S. troops that would remain in Iraq after combat operations ended the next year.
These twin impasses were solved through a behind-the-scenes deal brokered by the head of Iran's covert foreign operations that was readily accepted by the U.S. The agreement, which the New Yorker's Dexter Filkins described in detail in a September 2013 piece in the magazine, left Nouri al-Maliki, a pro-Iranian Shi'ite with despotic and sectarian tendencies, in charge of the country. It deepened Iran's meddling with the fragile politics of its western neighbor, and sent Iraq on the path to state failure.

As Filkins explained, Qassem Suleimani, the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard's Qods Force, used "a complex array of enticements," partly involving a proposed Iraq-Syria oil pipeline, to get Shi'ite and Kurdish leaders onboard with Iran's preferred government in Iraq.

This government installed Jalal Talabani, "a longtime friend of the Iranian regime" as president. And as part of the deal, Maliki and his allies would "insist that all American troops leave the country."

According to Filkins,

The Americans knew that Suleimani had pushed them out of the country but were too embarrassed to admit it in public. “We were laughing at the Americans,” [a] former Iraqi leader told me, growing angry as he recalled the situation. “**** it! **** it!” he said. “Suleimani completely outmaneuvered them, and in public they were congratulating themselves for putting the government together.”

The deal meant that Ayad Allawi, a pro-American secularist whose party won the most parliamentary seats, wouldn't become Prime Minister. In Filkins's telling, "the Americans pushed him aside in favor of Maliki" as Suleimani's government came into shape. Writes Filkins,

[Allawi] told me that Vice-President Joe Biden called to tell him to abandon his bid for Prime Minister, saying, 'You can’t form a government.' Allawi said he suspected that the Americans weren’t willing to deal with the trouble the Iranians would have made if he had become Prime Minister. They wanted to stay in Iraq, he said, but only if the effort involved was minimal. “I needed American support,” he said. “But they wanted to leave, and they handed the country to the Iranians. Iraq is a failed state now, an Iranian colony.”

Nine months after Filkins' article was published, Iraq really would start looking like a failed state, withSunni Jihadists controlling much of the north, andmultiple Iranian Revolutionary Guard brigadesreinforcing the Shi'ite south.

From one point of view, the Obama administration knew in late 2010 it had to pull most of its troops out of Iraq, and wanted to leave the country with something resembling a government that could keep the place stable. The administration might honestly have seen the Iranian-brokered deal as the best among a series of bad options, especially given the then-unsettled future of the U.S.'s military presence in Iraq.

It's also possible the administration never really planned on investing its energy in a deal with the Iraqi government that would have left large numbers of American troops in the country — not with Obama's campaign promises and anti-war bona fides on the line. So, it let the new Iraqi government form knowing the U.S. was leaving soon anyway. After all, just a couple years earlier, Americans had elected Obama partly out of a desire to end the war in Iraq.

There's some irony to the latter possibility. As the crisis escalates, Obama hasleft open the possibility he could call in airstrikes in support of the Iranian government in its fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and The Levant.

By wanting to get out of Iraq for good, the administration might have contributed to a situation that could have exactly the opposite result.

A former CIA operative described Qassem Suleimani, the head of Iran’s Quds Force, as the “most powerful operative in the Middle East today.”



The Back-Room Deal That Explains The Chaos In Iraq - Business Insider