1979 [ negative ]
Jimmy Carter began large-scale US sponsorship of antisemitic
Islamist terrorists, especially in Afghanistan
and Saudi Arabia.
____________________________________________________________
The Carter administration began an effort, in tandem with the
Islamist Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and the Islamist president of Pakistan (Zia
ul Haq), to fund an Islamist terrorist force in Afghanistan, which effort
Reagan later intensified.The point of this was to suck the Soviet Union into a
quagmire, and it succeeded. One of the consequences of this policy was that
these Islamist terrorists spawned an international underground mercenary
movement known as the 'mujahedin,' as well as international terrorist
organizations that mobilize Muslim hatred of Jews, such as Osama bin Laden's al
Qaeda.
Carter also
began at this time a secret buildup of Saudi Arabia's military, which
Reagan also continued, and which made this country
"ultimately...the
largest beneficiary of U.S.
weapons sales in the entire world [and] one of the most heavily armed countries
in the world."
We are
speaking, of course, of the country that funds the Palestinian extremists and
which stirs antisemitic Islamism all over the globe; a country whose minister
of the interior is charged with looking after the health of the Palestinian
terrorist movement;a country whose government-sponsored clerics daily recommend
the slaughter of Jews in their sermons.
The year
after this US military buildup of Saudi Arabia began, Saudi King Fahd explained
in public what he meant by jihad:
“In 1980,
King Fahd of Saudi Arabia gave a clear definition: ‘What is meant by jihad is a
united, comprehensive, integrated Arab-Islamic confrontation in which we place
all our resources and our spiritual, cultural, political, material and military
potential in a long and untiring ‘Holy War’ against Israel, of course, who
else?’”
Given that
the US has made this country
"the largest beneficiary of U.S.
weapons sales in the entire world," whose side is the US on? Israel's? Some will say, "But Saudi Arabia is buying its weapons; this is not
a US
handout." Yes, however, there is no such thing as 'just business,' here, because
the Saudis mean to destroy Israel.
If you call yourself my friend and you sell a gun to someone you know has been
hired to kill me, the fact that the hired assassin paid for the gun will not
work as a defense for your behavior.
Others will
say, "But the US ruling elite is doing this for cheap oil." Emperor's
Clothes has produced much analysis to show that US foreign policy is not
conducted primarily to obtain cheap oil, as many claim.But even if we were to
accept the "it's for oil" hypothesis, we are left with the fact that
the US ruling elite wants cheap oil badly enough to turn itself into an
effective enemy of Israel, arming more than any other country in the world a
state committed to the extermination of the Israeli Jews. Whether or not the US ruling elite produces a policy out of a
specific animosity against the Israeli Jews or because of some other interest,
the question that matters is this: What are the material consequences - for Israel - of US foreign policy? If the
consequences of this policy are that Israel
ends up destroyed, will it matter if the US did it to get cheap oil?
Something
else that happened in the year 1979 is that Jimmy Carter set in motion the
Iranian 'hostage crisis,' partly in order to raise the prestige of the PLO:
"[George W.] Bush's family
knew a lot about the Nazis. And guess what? Far from being enraged by Hitler's
ambitions, they actively endorsed them. GW's grandfather, Prescott, was married
to the daughter of George Herbert Walker, president of the Union Banking Corporation.
Through this organisation, both men helped German industrialists consolidate
Hitler's political power. In 1942, the Roosevelt
administration seized all the corporation's shares, including those held by
Prescott Bush (by now a board member) under the Trading With The Enemy Act. The
government made clear that huge sections of this business had operated on
behalf of Nazi Germany and had greatly assisted its war effort."
Apologists for Prescott Bush
will say, for example, that "Bush had [only] one share" in the Union
Banking Corp., and that "The documents do not show any evidence Bush
directly aided that effort [to assist the Nazis]." This suggests to the
reader that Prescott Bush is guilty only if his aid to the Nazis brought him
considerable profits in the form of dividends from his shares, and suggests
also that to blame him for helping the Nazis we need to find his fingerprint in
these particular documents! But why? The Bank was involved in helping the Nazis
in a significant way, and "Prescott Bush was one of seven directors of
Union Banking Corp." [All the quotes in this paragraph taken from:
"Bush Ancestor's Bank Seized by Gov't"; By Jonathon D. Salant;
Associated Press; Friday 17 October 2003]
[1b] “Henry Ford, who was so
impressed by the efficient way meat packers slaughtered and dismantled animals
in Chicago, made his own unique contribution to
the slaughter of people in Europe. Not only
did he develop the assembly-line method that Germans used to kill Jews, but he
launched a vicious anti-Semitic campaign that helped make the Holocaust happen.
In the early 1920s Ford’s
weekly newspaper, the Dearborn Independent, published a series of articles
based on the text of The
Protocols of the Elders of Zion, an anti-Semitic tract that had been
circulating in Europe. Ford published a
book-length compilation of the articles entitled The International Jew, which
was translated into most of the European languages and was widely disseminated
by anti-Semites, chief among them the German publisher Theodor Fritsch, an
early supporter of Hitler. Thanks to a well-financed publicity campaign and the
prestige of the Ford name, The International Jew was hugely successful both
domestically and internationally. The International Jew found its most
receptive audience in Germany
where it was known as The Eternal Jew. Ford was enormously popular in Germany. When
his autobiography went on sale there, it immediately became the country’s
number one bestseller. In the early 1920s The Eternal Jew quickly became the
bible of the German anti-Semitism, with Fritsch’s publishing house printing six
editions between 1920 and 1922.
[19a] Half a Loaf, The Jerusalem Post,
November 28, 1997, Friday, FEATURES; Pg. 8, 4322 words, Abraham Rabinovich
[19c] Source: Howard M Sachar, A History of Israel: From
the Rise of Zionism to Our Time, (New York: Knopf, 1979), p. 333
[19cc] U.S. ASKED TO LIFT EMBARGO ON ARMS;
Special to THE NEW YORK TIMES; New York Times (1857-Current file); Jan 17,
1948; ProQuest Historical Newspapers The New York Times (1851 - 2001); pg. 4.
http://www.hirhome.com/israel/embargo.pdf
[19dd] Josiah Wedgwood is quoted in: Rapoport,
Louis. 1999. Shake heaven and earth: Peter Bergson and the struggle to
rescue the Jews of Europe, Gefen, Jerusalem
and New York.
(p.18)
If you wish to read about how
how the British instigated anti-Jewish Arab riots, you will find the most
complete documentation here:
“HOW DID THE
‘PALESTINIAN MOVEMENT’ EMERGE? The British sponsored it. Then the German Nazis,
and the US.”; Historical and Investigative Research; 13 June 2006; by Francisco
Gil-White.
http://www.hirhome.com/israel/pal_mov4.htm
Some of this
material was originally published here:
“Anti-Semitism,
Misinformation, And The Whitewashing Of The Palestinian Leadership”; Israel
National News; May 26, '03 / 24 Iyar 5763; by Francisco J. Gil-White
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/article.php3?id=2405
[19f] To read about how (1) the Mufti Hajj
Amin al Husseini created the Palestinian movement, (2) led Adolf Hitler's Final
Solution, (3) mentored Yasser Arafat, and (4) grandfathered Al Fatah, the organ
that controls the PLO, go here, where you will find the most complete
documentation:
“HOW DID THE
‘PALESTINIAN MOVEMENT’ EMERGE? The British sponsored it. Then the German Nazis,
and the US.”; Historical and Investigative Research; 13 June 2006; by Francisco
Gil-White.
http://www.hirhome.com/israel/pal_mov4.htm
Some of this
material was originally published here:
“Anti-Semitism,
Misinformation, And The Whitewashing Of The Palestinian Leadership”; Israel
National News; May 26, '03 / 24 Iyar 5763; by Francisco J. Gil-White
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/article.php3?id=2405
“HOW DID THE
‘PALESTINIAN MOVEMENT’ EMERGE? The British sponsored it. Then the German Nazis,
and the US.”; Historical and Investigative Research; 13 June 2006; by Francisco
Gil-White.
http://www.hirhome.com/israel/pal_mov4.htm
Some of this
material was originally published here:
“Anti-Semitism,
Misinformation, And The Whitewashing Of The Palestinian Leadership”; Israel
National News; May 26, '03 / 24 Iyar 5763; by Francisco J. Gil-White
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/article.php3?id=2405
[51] The Associated Press, July 22, 1977, AM
cycle, 426 words, GENEVA, Switzerland
[51a] The New Republic, June 16, 1986 v194
p20(4); “The Waldheim file: complete and unexpurgated”; by Peter Lubin.
[51b] SECURITY COUNCIL NAMES WALDHEIM TO
SUCCEED THANT, BY HENRY TANNER; Special to The New York Times
New York
Times 1857-Current; Dec 22, 1971; ProQuest Historical Newspapers The New York
Times (1851 - 2001); pg. 1
London Times calls massive incentives for
terrorism... 'heroic generosity'!
A 2002
article by the London Times carried the following heading:
"In a three-day TV marathon, Saudi citizens donated Pounds
70 million, including expensive cars and gold jewellery, to the families of
Palestinian suicide bombers."(1)
This was not
a bake sale - on the contrary, it was a massive effort, and organized from the
very top. The Saudi Interior Minister, Prince Naif, no less, is officially in
charge of such things.
"The grand total across the [Persian
Gulf] region could surpass Pounds 150 million. In Saudi Arabia,
the money was officially raised in the name of the Saudi Committee for the
Support of the al-Quds Intifada, a group set up to support the Palestinian
uprising...
The head of the committee [is] Prince Naif bin Abdul Aziz, the
Interior Minister...
The appeal, launched by King Fahd, was backed from the very top
of Saudi society, as one might expect (state-run television is directly controlled
by the Ministry of Information)."
Now, this
money does not go exclusively "to the families of Palestinian suicide
bombers," but also to the making of explosives, paying the salaries of
terrorist leaders, and so forth. I will address that further below.
Here,
however, let us imagine for a moment that the money really does go exclusively
"to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers." In such a case the
London Times' heading would be appropriate, but it would then be necessary in
the body of the article to make a comment.
What comment?
The London
Times should explain to its readers that a Saudi fund-drive for the families of
suicide bombers is part of a massive incentive program to murder innocent
Jewish civilians. Why? Because,
1) Palestinian Arab children are
indoctrinated from an early age, in the schools run by Yasser Arafat's
Palestinian Authority, to believe that they should hate Jews and should also
look forward to slaughtering them by becoming suicide 'martyrs.'(2)
2) And then Palestinian Arabs hear
officially sponsored Islamist clerics on Yasser Arafat's Palestinian Authority
TV - not every once in a while, but every day - exhorting "Blessings to
whoever put a belt of explosives on his body or on his sons and plunged into
the midst of Jews crying: 'Allah Akbar, praise to Allah'". They are also
told of heavenly rewards - sexual and otherwise - for their acts of murder.(3)
Thus, when on
top of all this they hear that their own families will be generously rewarded
with money, this becomes an extra inducement for these young men (and some
women!) to go murder Israeli children while destroying their own tender lives.
That's the
minimal interpretation of the Saudi fund-drive - as a massive incentive program
for terror. But the London Times never makes this obvious point. Instead, the
London Times tries hard to elicit sympathy for the Saudi terrorist fund-drive
by dramatizing the donations as selfless sacrifices - we are told that
"Newlywed couples pledged their savings, fathers gave away their daughters'
dowries." The Times then lauds these Saudis for "their eagerness to
give, and to give generously, to their brethren suffering under the onslaught
of the Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon."
Not content
with this, the London Times actually goes out of its way to qualify as
'unsurpassable generosity' a donation made explicitly in the hopes that it will
lead to the murder of Israelis:
"...few of the people who turned up at the Riyadh offices of Saudi state television
could surpass the generosity of 26-year-old Mohamed al-Qahtani. He had come to
offer his car to the cause. 'I hope it will reach the Palestinian areas,' he
announced proudly, 'so a Palestinian fighter can use it to blow up a military
barracks and kill soldiers.'"
Now, it is
not exactly easy to elicit sympathy for terrorism. Widespread antisemitism
makes it easier, in this particular case, but still... terrorism is simply
awful. So the Times is careful, as we saw above, to refer to Palestinians Arabs
as besieged underdogs "suffering under the onslaught of the Israeli Prime
Minister, Ariel Sharon."
And yet that
is still not quite enough to convey that Saudis who give their passionate
millions to an antisemitic terrorist cause are 'good guys,' whereas Israeli
Jews who will be the victims of this terror are 'bad guys.' Why not? Because
Israeli children who die in suicide attacks obviously cannot be responsible for
any onslaught by Sharon,
real or imagined. So to prevent compassion for such children to 'pollute' its
readers minds, the Times must tell its readers that the only imaginable
reply of an allegedly oppressed Palestinian people is to slaughter innocent
Jews. This "what else can they do?" argument is actually put forward
in so many words, and twice:
"Raid Qusti, a Saudi writer...thinks suicide bombers are
misunderstood by people in the West... 'A suicide bomber is so oppressed that
he feels the only way to fight is to blow himself up. Is it up to the West to
judge where the money should go?'
...Abdul Rahman, 19'...[says]... 'They are desperate. What would
you do in their situation? They are at war...They are right to attack the
Israelis in this way. There is nothing else they can do.'
These people
were quoted with no comment from the London Times.
The money
also goes to making explosives, etc.
Much of the
money raised in these fund-drives - perhaps the bulk - goes directly to the
terrorist organizations of the Palestinians, not to the families of suicide
bombers. How do we know this? Because the money is sent to the Palestinian
Authority (PA), and the supreme authority at the PA, who therefore controls the
disbursement of funds, is Yasser Arafat, the man who runs the Palestinian
terrorist movement.(4)
And the
Saudis are not the only ones sending money, as the London Times also informs
us:
"In Jerusalem last week, the
US
Secretary of State Colin Powell noted the dire situation in some Palestinian
towns and announced a $30 million US contribution to the UN Relief and Works
Agency [UNRWA] on top of the $80 million already contributed annually.
None of that, of course, will end up paying for
explosives."
Of course?
What is the London Times, a newspaper? Or the joint US-PLO propaganda office?
It is child's
play to show that much of the UNRWA money goes to making explosives. Well, I
say it is child's play for a researcher. The ordinary readers of the
London Times will simply assume that the 'free press' is telling them the truth
and go on about their day. For such readers - the overwhelming majority - a
fictitious reality is constructed with matter-of-fact lies. But here below is
what 20 minutes of research revealed.
The first
item of interest is that the people who work at the UN refugee camps get their
salaries from UNRWA.
"UNRWA has the largest operational presence in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in terms of the financial
resources it makes available, the services it provides, the infrastructure it
has set up, and the staff it employs. The 1.2 million Palestine
refugees represent 49 per cent of the population in the West
Bank and Gaza Strip.
The Agency's 1996 budget for West Bank and Gaza is $ 136 million. It employs 8,500
staff, the majority of whom are themselves refugees."(5)
Suppose -
just for the sake of argument - that these refugee camps are being used as
terrorist bases. If so, then UNRWA money is going to terror, because the people
who staff these camps - most of them Palestinian Arab refugees - are all
salaried by UNRWA. This therefore makes it quite interesting that on 31 March
2003, the Simon Weisenthal Center
made precisely this allegation: that "UNRWA is complicit in terrorism
because it turns a blind eye to militant activity in 'its' camps."
The wording
above is the UNRWA's own, from a document where it defended itself against
these allegations.(6) This is why the crucial word, 'its', appears in quotes.
What is the UNRWA's point? That they wash their hands of any terrorism being
organized in the camps, because these are not their camps [i.e.
the UNRWA's]. They don't even run them. Here is their explanation on this
point:
"UNRWA does not run refugee camps. It is a UN agency with a
clearly defined mandate, in accordance with which it provides health, education
and other humanitarian services to refugees, only one third of whom live in
refugee camps. The Agency has never been given any mandate to administer,
supervise or police the refugee camps or to have any jurisdiction or
legislative power over the refugees or the areas where they lived. The Agency
has no police force, no intelligence service and no mandate to report on
political and military activities. This responsibility has always remained with
the host countries and Israel,
who maintained law and order, including within refugee camps."(6)
If the UNRWA
is not responsible for what happens at those refugee camps upon which, as
"largest operational presence in the West Bank
and Gaza Strip in terms of the financial resources," it lavishes its
considerable millions, then who is? Well, whoever runs the camps, says UNRWA.
And who is that? The UNWRA clarifies:
...based on Israel's bilateral agreements with the Palestinian
Authority and the terms of the Oslo Accords, responsibility for security and
law and order in area "A" (including all eight camps in Gaza and 12
of those in the West Bank) was passed to the Palestinian Authority...(6)
Thus, many of
the Palestinian refugee camps are under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian
Authority, which is run by the terrorist Yasser Arafat.
So how are
these refugee camps, which Arafat controls, run?
In February
2002 BBC reporters were taken inside the Jenin UN refugee camp and reported
seeing a secret "bomb-making factory" and a "weapons making
factory." This makes it not too surprising that
"Jenin, just a few miles from the Israeli town of Afula, has become one of
the most important bases from which suicide attacks are launched."(7)
Now, which
terrorists are these, who had their bomb-making and weapons-making factories in
"the most secret location of all, in the heart of Jenin," in the UN
refugee camp? The BBC explains: "We are with the Al-Aqsa brigade, the
military wing of Yasser Arafat's Fatah organisation." By the way, Al-Aqsa
is considered "the deadliest Palestinian militia."(8) So Arafat, who
runs many UN refugee camps, is using them to hide the activities of his worst
terrorists.
What does
this mean?
That the
London Times assertion - "None of that [UNRWA money], of course, will end
up paying for explosives" - is contradicted by a little bit of research
showing that, in fact, quite a lot of UNRWA money was going to what the
BBC, in February 2002, called a "bomb-making factory" in the UN
refugee camp at Jenin. What is truly incredible is that the London Times should
have matter-of-factly denied this - adding "of course" - in April
2002. That is, just two months after the BBC piece appeared.
This is how
propaganda works, not how news is reported. Joseph Goebbels could hardly have
been more blatant in his denial of the truth.
The
Jenin-brewed terrorism is what made it necessary for the Israeli Defense Forces
(IDF) to ferret out the terrorists in the UN refugee camp. The UN took no
responsibility for the violence that had been coming from Jenin. On the
contrary, when the IDF took matters into its own hands, the UN (with the help
of the Western media) tried to accuse Israel of having committed a
massacre at Jenin. Of course, the IDF did not. You may read documentation on
that here:
Notes for this footnote:
(1) April 23, 2002, Tuesday, Features,
1563 words, The blood donors, Scott Parkes and Nick Day
Isreal and
Parlestinia should live as one state,but this will only happen when the eveil
hand of the United states of
America is cut off from the middle
east.CHAMAKHE MAURIENI.
CHAMAKHE MAURIENI IS A MOROCCAN BORN FREELANCE WRITER,ENTERPRENEUR,AND AUTHOR.ADD HIM ON FACEBOOK:
www.facebook.com/chamakhe.maurieni
HIS LATEST BOOK IS TITLED
FACEBOOK IS DECEPTION_- VOLUME ONE AND
VOLUME TWO
