Are People Really That Stupid? (Zionism 102)

Published on October 7, 2015

ARE PEOPLE REALLY THAT STUPID?

Are people really that stupid that they can not piece together or understand that the trouble in the Middle East is directly related to the Zionist abomination know as the Greater Israel Project. Are people that blind that they cannot see what’s going on.

All roads (wars) lead not to Rome, but to the Rothschild’s Self-Proclaimed Jewish State. WWI, (Balfour Declaration) WWII, (The Transfer Agreement) The War On Terror/9/11, ISIS (Oden Yinon Plan Of Destabilization) were/are manipulations, and contrivances in order to create Greater Israel.

Are people really that stupid that they can’t see that what is going on in the Middle East was in the works since the late 1800’s.

“According to the founding father of Zionism Theodore Herzl, “the area of the Jewish State stretches: “From the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates.” According to Rabbi Fischmann, “The Promised Land extends from the River of Egypt up to the Euphrates, it includes parts of Syria and Lebanon.”

“When viewed in the current context, the war on Iraq, the 2006 war on Lebanon, the 2011 war on Libya, the ongoing war on Syria, not to mention the process of regime change in Egypt, must be understood in relation to the Zionist Plan for the Middle East. The latter consists in weakening and eventually fracturing neighboring Arab states as part of an Israeli expansionist project.”

“A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm (commonly known as the “Clean Break” report) is a policy document that was prepared in 1996 by a study group led by Richard Perle for Benjamin Netanyahu, the then Prime Minister of Israel. The report explained a new approach to solving Israel’s security problems in the Middle East with an emphasis on “Western values.” It has since been criticized for advocating an aggressive new policy including the removal of Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and the containment of Syria by engaging in proxy warfare and highlighting its possession of “weapons of mass destruction”.

“The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was a neoconservative think tank based in Washington, D.C. that focused on United States foreign policy. It was established as a non-profit educational organization in 1997, and founded by William Kristol and Robert Kagan. The PNAC’s stated goal was “to promote American global leadership”. The organization stated that “American leadership is good both for America and for the world,” and sought to build support for “a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity”.

“Of the twenty-five people who signed the PNAC’s founding statement of principles, ten went on to serve in the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush, including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz. Observers such as Irwin Stelzer and Dave Grondin have suggested that the PNAC played a key role in shaping the foreign policy of the Bush Administration, particularly in building support for the Iraq War.”

“Shortly after the September 11, 2001 attacks, the PNAC sent a letter to President George W. Bush, advocating “a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq”, or regime change. The letter suggested that “any strategy aiming at the eradication of terrorism and its sponsors must include a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq,” even if no evidence surfaced linking Iraq to the September 11 attacks. The letter warned that allowing Hussein to remain in power would be “an early and perhaps decisive surrender in the war on international terrorism.” From 2001 through the invasion of Iraq, the PNAC and many of its members voiced active support for military action against Iraq, and asserted leaving Saddam Hussein in power would be “surrender to terrorism.”

“Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.” from PNAC’s Rebuilding America’s Defenses page 51 (September 2000).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXYq2AIwhNA

This video has been mirrored for safe keeping.

(Editor’s note:  I had the pleasure of meeting and talking with veteran journalist Helen Thomas in the Dulles Airport in Washington, DC on my way to Columbus, Ohio (Borden Chemical Y2K project).

**

The Yinon Plan, “Greater Israel”, Syria, Iraq, and ISIS: the Connection

January 15, 2017

by The Times of Pol

In Archive, Egypt, Iraq, Israel, News, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Syria, Zionism on January 17, 2015

The Zionist Plan for the Middle East, also known as the Yinon Plan, is an Israeli strategic plan to ensure Israeli regional superiority. It insists and stipulates that Israel must reconfigure its geo-political environment through the balkanization of the surrounding Arab states into smaller and weaker states.

When viewed in the current context, the war on Iraq, the 2006 war on Lebanon, the 2011 war on Libya, the ongoing war on Syria, not to mention the process of regime change in Egypt, must be understood in relation to the Zionist Plan for the Middle East. The latter consists in weakening and eventually fracturing neighboring Arab states as part of an Israeli expansionist project. 

“Greater Israel” consists in an area extending from the Nile Valley to the Euphrates.

Israeli strategists viewed Iraq as their biggest strategic challenge. This is why Iraq was outlined as the centerpiece to the balkanization of the Middle East and the Arab World. In Iraq, on the basis of the concepts of the Yinon Plan, Israeli strategists have called for the division of Iraq into a Kurdish state and two Arab states, one Shiite and the other Sunni.

The Atlantic, in 2008, and the U.S. military’s Armed Forces Journal, in 2006, both published widely circulated maps that closely followed the outline of the Yinon Plan. Aside from a divided Iraq, the Yinon Plan calls for a divided Lebanon, Egypt, and Syria. The Yinon Plan also calls for dissolution in North Africa and forecasts it as starting from Egypt and then spilling over into Sudan, Libya, and the rest of the region.

“Greater Israel” requires the breaking up of the existing Arab states into small states. The plan operates on two essential premises. To survive, Israel must

  1. become an imperial regional power, and
  2. must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states.

Small here will depend on the ethnic or sectarian composition of each state. Consequently, the Zionist hope is that sectarian-based states become Israel’s satellites and, ironically, its source of moral legitimation… This is not a new idea, nor does it surface for the first time in Zionist strategic thinking. Indeed, fragmenting all Arab states into smaller units has been a recurrent theme.

Viewed in this context, the war on Syria is part of the process of Israeli territorial expansion. Israeli intelligence working hand in glove with the US, Turkey and NATO is directly supportive of the Al Qaeda terrorist mercenaries inside Syria.

The Zionist Project also requires the destabilization of Egypt, the creation of factional divisions within Egypt as instrumented by the “Arab Spring” leading to the formation of a sectarian based State dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Richard Perle

Similarly, although tweaked, the Yinon Plan is in motion and coming to life under the Clean Break”. This is a policy document written in 1996 by Richard Perle and the Study Group on “A New Israeli Strategy Towards 2000″ for Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel at the time.

Like many in the neoconservative movement, Perle had long been an advocate of regime change in Iraq. In 1998 Perle led an effort known as the Project for the New American Century with close neoconservative allies Wolfowitz, Woolsey, Elliott Abrams, and John Bolton. The Project culminated in a letter sent to US President Bill Clinton calling for the military overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s regime.

Prior to and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Perle held several exclusive meetings in his home where he discussed issues regarding American foreign policy on Iraq. In an effort to help fund their goals, Ahmed Chalabi an Iraqi-born businessman and founder of the Iraqi National Congress, helped Perle secure millions of dollars from the U.S. government in 1990. Chalabi was one of the key figures driving the war in Iraq and helped transmit important “information” to U.S congress and the public that would successfully help sell the war effort.

One might remember that it was PNAC that also published the now infamous documentRebuilding Americas Defenses” in which the following statement was made:

Further, the process of transformation [of the military], even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor”.

Finally, as mentioned above, the Armed Forces Journal published an article in 2006 entitled: “Blood Borders”.

What follows are maps based upon the description in the article. One is the Middle East as it currently exists, and the other is the Middle East according to the suggestions in the article:

Blood Borders Before and After

Blood borders: before and after.

You will note how congruent these divisions are with both the Yinon Plan and “Clean Break”.

You might also note that the advance of ISIS in Iraq, thus far, is congruent with all three documents. They are not engaging the Kurds and have stopped North of Baghdad, thus effectively dividing Iraq into three states as pictured on the map: Free Kurdistan, Sunni Iraq, and the Arab Shia State.

Only time will tell whether ISIS attempts to push into Baghdad, or whether the city, itself, is divided along sectarian lines. As you can see in the image, Baghdad is right on the border of “Sunni Iraq” and the “Arab Shia” State.

Here is a map of recent movements of the ISIS insurgency:

ISIS Advance

Recent ISIS advances:  The Latest From Iraq – The Complete Troop Movements

You will notice, by comparing them to the map above that they have control over the area depicted as “Sunni Iraq”. With the exception of Kirkuk, you will notice that the territory that they control aligns roughly with the borders of the proposed “Sunni Iraq” in the Blood Borders image above.

The following image is an overlay of the map of ISIS controlled territory over the map of the newly proposed borders of the Middle East to make it easier to see the congruity between ISIS movements and the Yinon plan:

Recent advances of ISIS, overlaid with borders proposed by Yinon plan.

While there are various conceptions of the borders of “Greater Israel” (Eretz Israel HaShlema), here is an overlay of the image of “Greater Israel” (above) on the map of the newly proposed borders of the Middle East to give a sense of the area of balkanized Arab states that Israel would have in its sphere of influence if the Yinon Plan is successfully implemented:

“Greater Israel” overlaid over the proposed borders.

Either the Yinon Plan is actually being implemented, using the sectarian animosity within the Muslim community as the vector or it is phenomenally coincidental that from Sudan, to Egypt, Libya, Syria, and Iraq the essential tenets of the Yinon Plan are being implemented.

It would certainly explain many of incongruities that we see in US foreign policy, especially with regard to our decision to arm and fund radical Islamic groups in Syria.

Source:  The Yinon Plan, “Greater Israel”, Syria, Iraq, and ISIS: the Connection

**

See also:  Egypt, Kuwait & Saudi Arabia Are Run By Jews

America’s Jews Are Driving America’s Wars – CIA Whistleblower Phil Giraldi

CIA Whistleblower Ray McGovern – Does Israel act like a U.S. ally?

 

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


WordPress spam blocked by CleanTalk.