Israel in Lebanon.

[J @ M @ L]

Israel in Lebanon: Pushing Out Arabs

Lebanese PM Fuad Siniora says Israel’s premeditated attack will “push Lebanon back 50 years.” I believe Mr. Siniora has underestimated—the attacks will push Lebanon back more than a hundred years to a time before electricity, modern plumbing, water and sewage treatment.

Lebanon will suffer the fate of Iraq—and will likely see a repeat of its bloody civil war, as planned—as will eventually other Arab and Muslim nations, most notably and immediately Syria, later Iran, and anybody else standing in the way of Greater Israel.

The concept of Greater Israel is not an anti-semitic contrivance, but a well-established fact. For the Likudites, it includes the West Bank and Gaza, and for the Betar and Revisionist Zionist fascists it encompasses all of Palestine, Jordan, the Sinai, and part of Syria (see this map).

However, in 1918, Ben-Gurion described the boundaries of Israel as follows:

    to the north, the Litani river [in southern Lebanon], to the northeast, the Wadi ‘Owja, twenty miles south of Damascus; the southern border will be mobile and pushed into Sinai at least up to Wadi al-’Arish; and to the east, the Syrian Desert, including the furthest edge of Transjordan…

Here is another map, submitted by the Word Zionmist Organization after World War I. Note how the Zionists have long coveted a big chunk of Lebanon, all the way to Sidon, including the long sought after Litani River. As to the latter, Laura Zittrain Eisenberg writes (from her book, My Enemy’s Enemy):

    Zionists suggested that if God and man had been less than precise about where the border should be, mother nature offered the Litani river as a natural frontier. Aaron Aaronsohn, a Palestinian Jew and internationally respected agronomist, surveyed the northern reaches of Palestine and concluded that the Litani river was essential for the irrigation and cultivation of the Galilee. The independent engineering firm of Fox and Partners, commissioned by the Zionist Organization to survey the economic potential of Palestine, confirmed his analysis. Its report reiterated that the northern frontier of Palestine must include the Litani, adding that while “the Litani will in the future be of great benefit to Palestine, it is of no value to the territory to the north”. This permitted the Zionists to argue that giving the river to Palestine was only natural and would not deprive Lebanon of any resource. In the proposals submitted to the Peace conference, however, the Zionist Organization was careful to note that with proper management, the waters in question could “be made to serve in the development of the Lebanon as well as of Palestine”. David Ben-Gurion expressed the same concern for the water resources of a future Jewish state and similarly concluded that its northern border should run along the Litani.

In negotiations with British colonialists, the Zionists failed to realize their desire to steal prime Lebanese real estate. The diplomacy of British prime minister David Lloyd George “ultimately lost the Litani for Palestine. According to his biblical atlas, the Sykes-Picot line had been too generous to Palestine in the northwest, at Lebanon’s expense. The ministers agreed that it was only fair to compensate by leaving the Litani totally in Lebanon.”

As we now know, this defeat did not dissuade the Zionists:

    Although disappointed at losing a critical natural resource for the Jewish homeland, Zionist thinkers did not dwell on establishing a physical presence in Lebanon. If they could not possess the Litani, perhaps they could find a Lebanese partner with whom to exploit the river’s resources for the mutual development of northern Palestine and Lebanon.

Or possibly invade the country all the while claiming to eliminate a terrorist threat and thus steal the river under false pretense.

In the 1950s, Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Sharett recorded in his diaries that Moshe Dayan’s plan for the control of the Litani River was to “‘enter Lebanon, occupy the relevant territory’ then the ‘territory south of the Litani will be annexed to Israel and everything will fall into place’” (see Ronald Bleier’s Israel’s Appropriation of Arab Water: An Obstacle to Peace, Middle East Labor Bulletin, Spring 1994).

Bleier cites Dr. Hussein A. Amery, of the Department of Geography, Bishop’s University, Quebec. “Amery’s analysis suggests that Israel’s interest in Lebanon is—along with its political goals—to maintain and/or establish control over as much of Lebanese water as possible. Amery notes that since 1985 former Defense Minister Ariel Sharon has been calling for an enlarged ’security zone’ in Lebanon that stretches to the Awali River (north of the Litani).”

At the time of Amery’s analysis, according to a Lebanese newspaper, Israel was in the process of establishing “a larger security zone” by “depopulating and flattening 30 … villages that border the zone,” an extension of a long-running process that led directly to the formation of Hezbollah by disenfranchised and terrorized Shi’ites in southern Lebanon.

Avraham Katz-Oz, Israel’s negotiator on water, said in the 1990s, while Israel occupied southern Lebanon: “The mountains do not own the water that fall on them. It’s the same with Canada and the United States. It’s the same all over the world.” Of course, the United States has yet to invade Canada, or vice versa, over water disputes.

It should be noted that Israel does not accept the Lebanese border, so crossing over it and stealing land (or bombing for that matter) is not an issue for the Israelis.

“The Declaration of the State of Israel on 14 May 1948 did not identify the borders of the state,” writes Nizar Sakhnini. “The Zionist leadership was hoping for territorial expansion in the future whenever an opportunity may be seized. Such an opportunity came during the Suez Canal crisis in 1956. Israeli intentions and designs for Lebanon and the whole area were clearly specified in their meeting with the French at the Sévres Conference in 1956. In that conference, Ben-Gurion proposed a plan for settling all the issues in the Middle East. His proposals for Lebanon included annexing southern Lebanon up to the Litani River…. The adamant stand of Eisenhower prevented Ben-Gurion plans from being realized. This did not stop the Zionist leadership from keeping its plans alive waiting for a new opportunity.”

Bush is no Eisenhower and Congress is snugly in the pocket of AIPAC. Our Congress critters, essentially little more than bought and paid for whores, are turning somersaults to defend Israel’s aggression.

“Both chambers of the US congress were working on drafts of resolutions expressing support for Israel in its war against the Hizbullah. The House of Representatives was expected to vote Wednesday on their version of the resolution, which is sponsored by majority leader John Boehner (R-OH) and minority leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA),” reports the neocon-infested Jerusalem Post. “Several lawmakers expressed reservations over the pro-Israeli lean of the resolution, but most of both Republican and Democratic members of Congress are showing support for the resolution…. The resolution was sponsored by Senate majority leader Bill Frist (R-TN) and minority leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and was approved by unanimous consent.”

In an article critical of the cheerleader role of the corporate media in Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, Kazinform, a news website in Kazakhstan, writes: “An American reporter once reminded me that we cannot blame the American people for their limited, one-sided understanding of what is happening in the Middle East. It is the American media that must be chastised for its disproportionateness.”

True enough, although millions of Americans, intellectually lazy and incurious, have not bothered to research the real reasons behind Israel’s murderous invasion of Lebanon.

Hezbollah has to be eliminated because it stands between Israel and not only the Litani River, but also represents a vexatious kink in the entire Zionist Master Plan for the Middle East. Hezbollah and Hamas must be liquidated. However, as the Israelis understand, this will not be an easy process, as the more Arabs killed by Israelis, the more people either join the resistance outright or support it at arm’s length.

In 1948, Irgun Zwei Leumi and other Zionist terrorist groups conducted the Deir Yassin massacre and other atrocities in an effort to push Palestinians off the land. More than 300,000 inhabitants were evicted from their homes and the emerging state of Israel snapped up the land, declaring no right of return for Palestinians.

Now, in Lebanon, Israel is attempting to repeat this brutal process, bombing southern Lebanon to push the residents out so they can set up a “security zone,” or water and natural resource thievery zone.

Only Hezbollah stands in the way.

[Don Rizzle]

it maybe what they want but even with americas support i can't see it happenning

[REGIME MOB 510]

fuck these jews, all they wanna do is steal Muslim land.  Honestly, Hitler knew what he was doing, he shoulda obliterated all of these assholes, but it is what it is.  Israel already said they lost the war with Hezbollah, so they're bitter, it's gonna be a long war with a lot of casualties, sad to say, but a lot of people are gonna die, for essentially, stolen land on behalf of the jews.

[Don Rizzle]

I just read in the news Ohmert planned the invasion 4 days after taking over from Sharon.........

[J @ M @ L]

Israel has always in the past driven out the population before stealing the land (Palestine, Golan Heights,)... they forgot to do that in 1982 (and the 18 year stay also rather unnecessary)... which is why we saw what what we saw happen.