July 19, 2006
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:
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
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):
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
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
As we now know, this defeat did not dissuade the Zionists:
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.
possibly invade the country all the while claiming to eliminate a
terrorist threat and thus steal the river under false pretense.
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).
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.
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.
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
True enough, although millions of
Americans, intellectually lazy and incurious, have not bothered to
research the real reasons behind Israel’s murderous invasion of
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
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.